Menu

The Value of the Hymn Book

A number have been commenting on my purpose for writing about hymns. In that regard, I came across the following statement of John Wesley’s dated 1779. About the hymn book, he wrote:

In what other publication have you so distinct and full account of scriptural Christianity; such a declaration of the heights and depths of religion, speculative and practical; so strong cautions against the most plausible errors, particularly those now most prevalent; and so clear directions for making your calling and election sure; for perfecting holiness in the fear of God? [The latter phrases being taken from II Pet. 10:1 and II Cor. 7:1.]

Not all of our traditional hymns and gospel songs quite live up to Wesley’s lofty description, and we must be careful to base our theology on the Word of God, not on our hymns. Still, this statement beautifully reflects the Bible’s exhortation to be “teaching and admonishing one another” with our congregational singing (Col. 3:16).

About a century after Wesley, Bishop J. C. Ryle commented:

Good hymns are an immense blessing to the church of Christ. I believe the last day alone will show the world the real amount of good they have done. They suit all, both rich and poor. There is an elevating, stirring, soothing, spiritualizing, effect about a thoroughly good hymn, which nothing else can produce. It sticks in men’s memories when texts are forgotten. It trains men for heaven, where praise is one of the principal occupations. Preaching and praying shall one day cease for ever; but praise shall never die. 

Twentieth-century pastor and influential author A. W. Tozer said this:

I say without qualification, after the Sacred Scriptures, the next best companion for the soul is a good hymnal….To read or sing a true hymn is to worship with a great and gifted soul [meaning the author] in his moments of intimate devotion….Every Christian should have laying beside his Bible a copy of some standard hymn book.

Men such as Wesley, Ryle and Tozer were convinced that sacred music should be used not only for praise and worship, but for instruction and testimony, to the edifying of the body of Christ. And that the hymns and gospel songs of the church have a place in personal and family devotions as well. I enthusiastically agree! And the hymn book gives us a shared vocabulary with which to do that.

Hymns and the Bible

Hymns and the Bible go together like lightning and thunder, like spring and springing flowers. Or they should. (A couple of weeks ago, I woke up to see the ground covered with snow. Snow! In mid-May! What should go together doesn’t, always!) Anyway, back to my point. In Christianity, the Bible and the hymn book are closely associated. And a biblical faith is a singing faith.

  • Psalms, the longest book in the Bible, is actually an ancient hymn book. The Psalms were written to be sung.
  • Over 400 times in our English Bibles words such as music and singing are used–and “praising” God often means singing His praises.
  • Nine times in the Bible we are told that believers have a “new song” to sing. (Not necessarily meaning that it was written recently. The idea seems to be that it expresses a fresh experience with God.)
  • Singing will be an eternal occupation of God’s people. The book of Revelation pictures the scene in that coming day, saying, “They sang as it were a new song before the throne [of God]” (Revelation 14:3).

About Church Music

The early church was given some important instruction with regard to singing. Colossians 3:16 says:

Let the word of Christ [God’s Word, the Bible] dwell in you richly in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing [exhorting, urging] one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace [or thanksgiving] in your hearts to the Lord.

Notice several things there:

  • Our singing in church makes use of different kinds of music. (In a later blog we’ll go into the difference between “psalms and hymns and spiritual songs.”)
  • Our singing is aimed in two directions at once. We’re singing to “one another,” and we’re singing “to the Lord.”
  • Our singing is to be instructional and motivational, as we urge each other forward in our life and service for Christ.
  • Our singing is also to be an expression of worship and praise to God, in gratitude for all He’s done for us.
  • Our singing is to be Bible-based, rooted in the richness of insight gained from our meditation on the Scriptures.

The Most Important Thing

This brings us back to the connection between hymns and the Bible. There may be lots of reasons church congregations sing, and many different styles of singing. (Some of them worthy, and some that definitely need to be challenged!) But Colossians 3:16 tells us what God is looking for.

Our first concern about our hymnody (our sacred songs) should not be: Is this the newest on the market? Is it sung by such-and-such a recording star?  Is it popular? Does it have a great beat? Is it fun to sing? Does it show what good singers we are?

Our first concern must be: Is it biblical? Does it clearly communicate the truths of the Word of God? And is the setting (the tune and the musical arrangement) suitable to support and enhance the biblical message? Lord willing, these crucial tests will be at the heart of any discussion of what songs we will use in the services of the church.

Confessions of an Idiot (An Answer to a Critic)

I get relatively few negative comments–either sent to this site, or to my blog on hymns (wordwisehymns.com). When I do, I try to answer any sensible objections that are raised. The rest, I usually just ignore.

However, I decided to respond to this gentleman. (His entire comment is below.) It’s not clear exactly what article(s) he’s so disturbed about, but I hope my response will at least help to restore some balance to his thinking.

His comment: Did you know you are an idiot? It is WRONG for you to presume to speak for God. Your are a mere mortal, and a confused one at that! I read through as much of your site as I could stomach. I am a Christian that follows Jesus, and his teachings of love. It is persons like you that chase many people from the churches, with your hatred and foolishness.

My Response: Well! I’m not sure where to begin on your comments. But let’s start with the word “idiot.” Checking the dictionary, I see that it means: an utterly foolish or senseless person.

At first, I was inclined to protest that appellation. As pastor-teacher, a college professor for many years, and a published author, the description didn’t seem to fit. (search committees and publishers are hesitant to waste their time and money on fools.)

Further, I’m definitely not among those who say there is no God (Ps. 14:1), or those who don’t have the wisdom to prepare for eternity (Lk. 12:19-20)–both extremely foolish things.

But then I realized that the Apostle Paul calls himself a fool (ironically) several times in Second Corinthians 11 and 12. And both the Lord Jesus and Paul were accused of being madmen (Jn. 10:20; Acts 26:24), so maybe I’m in good company.

Also, God has been pleased to use “the foolishness of preaching” (I Cor. 1:21, KJV), or “the [seeming] foolishness of the message preached (NKJV) to save those who believe.” It’s a matter of perspective. The unbelieving world may view the gospel as foolishness, but in truth it is “the power of God to salvation” (Rom. 1:16).

Perhaps there’s another point of view regarding what you deem to be idiocy. As Paul declared to the Roman governor of Judea, “I am not mad, most noble Festus, but speak the words of truth and reason” (Acts 26:24).

Regarding your statement, “It is wrong for you to presume to speak for God,” that is incorrect. In fact, it’s precisely what Christians are commanded by the Lord to do (Matt. 28:20; cf. II Tim. 4:2; I Pet. 3:15).

Paul is an example of one who did that (Acts 20:20), sharing with others “the whole counsel of God,” all that God wanted them to know (vs. 27). He also urged Timothy to teach “faithful men who will be able to teach others also” (II Tim. 2:2).

Before God, as far as I’m able to discern my inner motivations, I don’t believe I “hate” anyone. However, I do my best to speak out against sin and error. Does that “chase many people” away? Not in most cases. Rather, through over fifty years of ministry, I find folks more often thirsting for the truth, and eager to hear more.

But if the preaching of God’s Word does repel some, again, I find myself in good company. It happened to the Lord Jesus Christ (Jn. 6:66). Even telling one man to use his worldly goods to help the poor drove him away from the Lord (Matt. 19:21-22). It happened to Paul too (II Tim. 4:10, 16).

Sometimes such a departure from those who preach the truth, or from the company of believers, indicates that those who leave are not true believers at all. As John puts it, “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us” (I Jn. 2:19). Also, it is a characteristic of the last days before Christ’s return that “some will depart from the faith [apostolic doctrine]” (I Tim. 4:1; cf. II Thess. 2:3; II Tim. 4:4).

You say that you are “a Christian that follows Jesus, and His teachings of love.” That’s great! We are exhorted by the Lord to “love one another,” as He has loved us (Jn. 13:34). It’s the mark of a true disciple (vs. 35).

However, the love of which He speaks must not be confused with some kind of mushy, sentimental tolerance that is unwilling to deal strongly with what is wrong in God’s sight. Not only did the Lord Jesus speak against wrong. So did John the Baptist (e.g. Matt. 3:7), and Paul (e.g. I Cor. 3:1-3).

The Bible says that “God is angry with the wicked every day” (Ps. 7:11), and Christ was certainly angry with some in His time (Mk. 3:5). In a lengthy and sternly worded series of accusations, He repeatedly called the Pharisees hypocrites, and blind fools, as well as “whitewashed tombs” (Matt. 23:13-36).

In another place Christ declares, “I did not come to bring peace but a sword” (Matt. 10:34), meaning that any time the truth is proclaimed it’s going to cause a division between those who are willing to accept it, and those who aren’t.

When He returns, it will be “in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ” (II Thess. 1:7-9). So, “love,” yes. But there’s definitely another side too. As has been pointed out many times, while He was on earth, the loving Lord Jesus had more to say about hell than He did about heaven.

You say, “I read through as much of your site as I could stomach.” H-m-m… If I had to guess, I’d say you likely came across an article that spoke against something that you are doing, or against something that you hold dear, and that was as far as you got.

But there are hundreds of articles and Bible studies on the site, with more being added as time goes by. Some about love, some about heaven; articles and studies giving help to the discouraged, offering encouragement to those who are suffering, and so on. I do my best to maintain a balanced approach.

I have prayed for you, that the Lord will continue to teach you, and open your heart to more of His Word. Meantime, thanks for writing, and may God bless you richly.

Seeds of Thought On The Passion

,

With the Easter season almost upon us, pastors and Bible teachers will be expounding again the fearful yet wonderful story of the death of Christ and its victorious aftermath. Here are some thoughts on a few verses, mainly from Matthew’s Gospel, ideas that may be useful in sermons, Sunday School lessons, or devotionals.

crown of thorns

Matt. 26:24

There is, in this verse, a balancing of the two paradoxical elements, the sovereignty of God and the free will of man. Judas is held responsible for his choices, and yet the cross was a part of God’s foreordained plan. We are not asked (or expected) to resolve the apparent contradiction between these two.

Matt. 26:26

Those who insist Jesus means, “This turns into my literal body” must be consistent and handle the second command the same way (cf. Lk. 22:20; I Cor. 11:25). “This cup is the new covenant…” to anyone using common sense means, “This represents the New Covenant established by the shedding of My blood.” There is undoubtedly a close connection between the symbol and the reality.

  1. Not that the symbol becomes the reality…
  2. Not that the symbol is invested with power to bless as though it were the reality…
  3. But that the symbol has value as a vehicle to communicate truth about the reality. Since His body was still there before them, the disciples without doubt understood Jesus to mean, “This symbolizes My body,” and likewise, “This symbolizes My blood.”

During the Passover, the head of the home would take up the bread and say, “This is the bread of affliction which our fathers ate in the land of Egypt” (meaning this represents it). All Jesus did was shift the focus of the symbol from the type to the antitype, instituting a service of remembrance. (Compare: Jesus’ use of the same formula in Luke 8:11, “The seed is the word of God,” and Paul’s adoption of the formula in using Hagar in an allegorical illustration– “This Hagar is Mount Sinai” (Gal. 4:25).

All through Scripture the Lord jealously guards the rituals He institutes. Severe punishment is meted out upon those who would carelessly misuse or abuse them, thereby distorting the truth God intends them to convey (cf. Num. 20:7-12; I Cor. 11:17-22, 29-30).

Matt. 26:38

“My soul is deeply grieved [emphatic] (NASB). “My soul is encircled and overwhelmed with grief, so much so that I am very close to dying” (Wuest). “My heart is breaking with a death-like grief” (Phillips). This is none other than the sorrow for sin (infinitely magnified) which should strike every heart. Sin grieves the heart of God (Isa. 63:10; Eph. 4:30). And any who view it from God’s perspective are likewise touched with grief (Ps. 38:3-8). How would one feel whose life had never been tainted with the minutest wrong, yet who suddenly bore the guilt of all mankind’s sin to its most foul depths? We shall never understand the half of His grief.

Think of sitting at the bedside of someone you dearly love, watching him or her die of a terminal illness and knowing that the end will bring terrible pain. That heartache, that helpless feeling, that longing wish that things could be different from what they must be, that almost unbearable inward pain that echoes the pain in the other, all of that is a parable of sin’s grief. It is one reason why God has allowed physical suffering to continue. Without the analogy of physical suffering we would miss great lessons on the grief and pain in the heart of God because of this destructive thing called sin.

Matt. 26:39

As John Walvoord points out in his commentary Thy Kingdom Come, there is an overwhelming impression of loneliness here. Jesus left the world behind in the upper room and was deserted by Judas. Then he left eight of the disciples on the borders of Gethsemane (vs. 36). Then even Peter James and John were left behind. Finally, at the cross, there was the consciousness that His fellowship with the Father was broken because of His bearing of the world’s sin. The prayer in the garden was:

  1. A private prayer. Though He had told His disciples to pray too (Lk. 22:40, 46), this prayer had to be His own. In the same way, there will be certain of our prayers that must be for the Father’s ears alone.
  2. It was a humble prayer, and yet one in which He claimed His relationship with God. “[He] fell on His face and prayed…’O My Father…’” Similarly, we must approach God first with a recognition of who He is, by nature and by right, and then with an appreciation of who we are, by grace.
  3. It was a persistent prayer (vs. 39, 42, 44) and yet always a submissive prayer–“as You will…Your will be done.” It is not wrong to keep asking, as long as we leave God the right to answer as He wills. William MacDonald says, “Jesus was saying, in effect, ‘My Father, if there is any other way by which ungodly sinners can be saved than by My going to the cross, reveal that way now! But in all of this I want it known that I desire nothing contrary to Your will.’” The silence of heaven at this point is eloquent proof that there is no other way.

Matt. 27:4

  1. His own betrayer confesses the innocence of Christ
  2. As does Pilate (vs. 24)
  3. And Pilate’s wife (vs. 19)
  4. Also the thief on the cross (Lk. 23:4)
  5. The centurion beneath the cross implies the same (vs. 54).
  6. Even His accusers speak not out of a conviction of His guilt, but from “envy” of His power–a fact well known to Pilate (vs. 18). They are forced to seek false witnesses against Him (26:59-60).
  7. Herod also confesses Jesus’ innocence (Lk. 23:13-15).

Matt. 27:6

How scrupulous they are of the fine points of the Law, while they plot to crucify the Lord of glory! They decide to use the money to purchase a burial ground for “foreigners” (vs. 7)– meaning Gentile proselytes to Judaism, whom they considered of lower status than themselves. F. W. Grant comments, “Phariseeism remained true to itself!”

Matt. 27:24

Pilate declares Jesus’ innocence, but he tries to relinquish any responsibility for His death. It could not (and cannot) be done. We must not think we can evade our responsibilities by simply saying, “I will not be held responsible”! Pilate yielded to the pressure of the world; Peter succumbed to the perversity of the flesh (26:41, 74-75); Judas was ensnared by the persuasion of the devil (26:47-50; cf. Lk. 22:3-6).

Compare John’s account of Jesus’ trial before Pilate. The latter tries to quell the crowd’s growing unrest with:

  1. An appeal to LAW (Jn. 19:4). Is this really just? Is it legally proper? “I find no fault in Him.” But Christ’s legal position in cosmic terms is that He bore the guilt of our sins.
  2. An appeal to LOVE and compassion (Jn. 19:5)–“Behold the Man!” Jesus had been abused and crowned with thorns. Pilate hopes an appeal to pity will change their minds. But the “love” is not on their side but on His. For love of us all He suffered.
  3. An appeal to LOYALTY (Jn. 19:14)– “Behold your King!” He has claimed to be their King. Will they respond as loyal subjects? No (vs. 15). But all will recognize His sovereign right one day (Phil. 2:9-11).

The dramatic difference between Pilate and Christ is exemplified in two basins of water. One is found here, the other in Jn. 13:5.

  1. Pilate’s action was self-serving; Jesus served others.
  2. Pilate sought to evade responsibility; Jesus seized it willingly.
  3. Pilate’s actions were typical of man trying somehow to obliterate his own guilt; Jesus’ actions symbolize the true cleansing from sin that only He can provide.
  4. History records that three times in his career Pilate handled the Jewish populace badly. He was recalled to Rome where he apparently committed suicide. Jesus, after His death, rose again in victory and is our coming King.

Matt. 27:25

The Jews readily accepted responsibility for Christ’s death. One can only dismiss as ludicrous the following explanation of their words. In 1990, the people of Oberammergau were preparing to enact their three century old Passion Play. The Jews objected that it was anti-Semitic in that it blamed them for Christ’s death. The focus of attention with this verse. There was some discussion of dropping it from the script. It was retained by a narrow vote. At this point the director, Otto Huber, offered his interpretation of the words, citing some radical theologians. He said the words are really a reference to the saving power of Christ’s death, a sign of the New Covenant in the same sense as “washed in the blood of the Lamb.” This is utter nonsense. (Source: TIME Magazine, June 4, 1990).

Matt. 27:27-31

Emblems of royalty:

  1. A royal robe (vs. 28; cf. Rev. 19:13)
  2. A royal crown (vs. 29; cf. Rev. 19:12)
  3. A royal sceptre (vs. 29; cf. Rev. 19:15)
  4. A royal entourage (vs. 29; cf. Rev. 19:14)
  5. A royal title (vs. 37; cf. Rev. 19:16).

Conspicuous by their absence:

  1. A royal prerogative (the sovereign right to act as He wills). We see Christ utterly submissive and acted upon in Matthew (vs. 26, 27, 28, 30, 31), whereas in Revelation He takes kingly action (Rev. 19:11).
  2. A royal pronouncement or declaration. In Matthew, Christ says nothing during this abuse (cf. Isa. 53:7), but in Revelation, “Out of His mouth goes a sharp sword” (Rev. 19:15). This visionary image likely depicts His word of judgment on His enemies.

Matt. 28:6

“He is risen!” That announcement, coupled with the one recorded in John 19:30, “It is finished,” proclaims the legal letter and the living power of the gospel. The work of redemption is accomplished, and its sign and seal is the empty tomb. Now we wait expectantly for one more grand pronouncement, “The Bridegroom cometh” (25:6).

“Come, see.” Compare vs. 7, “Go…and tell.” As it was for the resurrection, so it is for all of God’s truth. First come and see. There is a commitment of the will and an involvement of the senses, aided by spiritual perception. Unstated, there is a presumption of satisfaction with what is seen. That becomes part of the motivation to go and tell. That which is received is to bear fruit. That which has been received freely is to be given likewise (10:8). This continues the propagation of the good news.

Lord’s Day Meditation – The Work of the Lord

There’s a hymn by Isaac Watts that begins:

Sweet is the work, my God, my King,
To praise Thy Name, give thanks and sing,
To show Thy love by morning light
And talk of all Thy truth at night.

On this Lord’s day, let us consider the “sweetness” of the work of the Lord, the delightful privilege that is ours to be His servants. The Word of God discusses the nature and motivation for our service in the following passage.

“Therefore, my beloved brethren, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that your labour is not in vain in the Lord” (I Corinthians 15:58).

  • Therefore–because we know God will give the ultimate victory through Christ (vs. 57).
  • My beloved brethren–my dear fellow-Christians. In the body of Christ we are part of a loving family relationship with other believers.
  • In the work of the Lord–doing the will of God. Jesus said, “I will build My church” (Matt. 16:18). We assist Him in that work as we call others to faith in Christ (evangelism), and build them up in the faith (edification). It is also a part of our calling to praise and worship God (exaltation).
  • Be steadfast–it’s in a continuous tense in the Greek language Paul used: keep on being steadfast (firm, settled, strong in purpose).
  • Be…immovable–a continuous tense again: keep on being firmly persistent, standing your ground.
  • Be…always abounding–overflowing, exceeding the bare minimum, excelling in what you do for Christ.
  • Knowing that your labour [your service] is not in vain [not empty or purposeless, never wasted or futile] in the Lord [in the cause of Christ].

Sticking at it is sometimes difficult, especially if we take too short-sighted a view. We need an eternal perspective which involves a belief in the resurrection (Paul’s theme in First Corinthians 15). Our labours might sometimes appear to be “in vain” within temporal limits. But let’s ask the Lord to help us see the Big Picture, so we can begin to understand how what we do for Him contributes to the eternal purposes of God.

“Carnal” – “Flesh” – “Old Man”

,

Question: Richard asks, “What’s the difference, if any, in the terms ‘carnal’, ‘flesh’ and ‘old man’?”

Answer: Thanks for the good question, Richard. The terms you have listed certainly are related, though not necessarily synonymous. And we could add some others, such as worldly, sensual, the natural man, and the Adamic nature. These words and phrases represent key spiritual truths about the desperate plight of the unsaved, and the dangerous potential for believers who are not living as they should. Let’s see if we can sort it all out a bit.

1) The Natural or Sensual Person

“The natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned” (I Cor. 2:14). (“Natural” translates the Greek word psuchikos, from which we get our word psychology. It refers to the soul–the mind will and emotions–of the person, as opposed to his God-energized spirit. We could call this individual a soulish person.) The natural man is one who was born naturally (i.e. physically) but who has never been born again, and therefore is still “dead in trespasses and sins” (Eph. 2:1, 5). He is severely limited when it comes to understanding and applying spiritual truth, since this ability is given to those indwelt and taught by the Holy Spirit (vs. 12-13).

The word “sensual” is also used to translate psuchikos. It refers to that which pertains to the old, unregenerate nature. “The apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ…told you there would be mockers in the last time who would walk according to their own ungodly lusts, these are sensual [psuchikos, or soulish] persons, who cause divisions, not having the Spirit” (Jude 1:17-19). And if they do not have the Holy Spirit indwelling them, they are not Christians (Rom. 8:9). But it is possible for a born-again believer to yield to temptation and sometimes act in a soulish way. James warns, “If you have bitter envy and self-seeking in your hearts, do not boast and lie against the truth. This wisdom does not descend from above, but is earthly, sensual [psuchikos], demonic” (Jas. 3:14-15, and see the context, vs. 13-18).

2) The Old Man

The Old Man is an expression used three times in the New Testament. (It is sometimes described as the Adamic Nature by theologians.) These terms speak of the corrupt fallen nature we inherited from Adam. When we put our faith in Christ, the “old man” is considered to have been crucified in Christ. “Our old man was crucified with Him” (Rom. 6:6). “You died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God….You have put off the old man with his deeds” (Col. 3:3, 9).

As to our legal position (or standing) before God, the old man has been dealt with. But as to our condition (or state) in daily experience, the old man or Adamic nature continues to be an active force that can only be controlled as we reject its promptings and walk in the Spirit. Each Christian has a responsibility to “Put off…the old man…and be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and…put on the new man which was created according to God, in true righteousness and holiness” (Eph. 4:22-24; cf. Rom. 12:2).

This conflict in the Christian between the old Adamic nature, and the new nature energized by the Holy Spirit, will continue until we go to be with Christ and are transformed into His likeness (I Jn. 3:2; cf. Col. 1:27). The struggle is captured in Paul’s words, “What I am doing, I do not understand. For what I will to do, that I do not practice; but what I hate, that I do” (Rom. 7:15). “The flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; and these are contrary to one another; so that you do not do the things that you wish” (Gal. 5:17).

The answer, if the Christian is to live a victorious life, is submitting to the ministry of the indwelling Holy Spirit. This is described by the twin terms of walking in the Spirit, and being filled with the Spirit.

¤ “Walk in the Spirit and you will not fulfil the lust of the flesh” (Gal. 5:16). This “walk” refers to daily and habitual steps of faith and obedience toward God. That is our responsibility, by His enabling grace.

¤ The word “filled” is perhaps better translated “fulfilled”–another meaning for the Greek word pleroo. (Cf. “He who loves another has fulfilled [pleroo] the law,” Rom. 13:8.). Thus, “Be filled with the Spirit” (Eph. 5:18) could be paraphrased, “Be being fulfilled by the Spirit, allowing Him to fulfil His sovereign purpose in you, by His divine power.”

These two realities of the Christian life are expressed in a little different way in Philippians 2:12-13. “Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling [live out what God has equipped you to be, by an ongoing walk of faith and obedience], for it is God who works in you [filling and fulfilling] both to will and to do for His good pleasure.”

3) Flesh and Carnal

The Greek word (sarx) is most often translated “flesh,” though occasionally it is rendered “carnal.” Sometimes physical flesh and blood (the physical body) necessarily is in view. (For example, we are told that Christ “was born of the seed of David according to the flesh,” Rom. 1:3.) But when it is used in an ethical or theological sense, it refers to the human nature, or earthly nature of man, apart from God’s intervention and influence. The flesh in that sense is spiritually impotent, and prone to sin. Further, it tends to be self-centred and opposed to God. Paul recognizes that when he says, “In my flesh nothing good dwells” (Rom. 7:18).

When we are saved, through faith in Christ, we are no longer living in the sphere of the flesh but in the sphere of the Spirit (Rom. 8:9). However, the flesh (the old, sinful human nature) is still within us, and we have a choice whether to respond to the flesh, thus walking according to the flesh, or to respond to the Holy Spirit, walking in the Spirit. This is the difference between a spiritual Christian and a “carnal” (sarx) Christian. To be saved is to be rightly related to Christ. To be a spiritual Christian is to be rightly related to the Holy Spirit. “Walk in the Spirit [controlled and guided by the Holy Spirit], and you shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh” (Gal. 5:16; cf. Rom. 8:4).

Paul condemns some in the church at Corinth because of their carnality. He does not deny that they are born again, but labels their behaviour as spiritually infantile. “I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual people but as to carnal, as to babes in Christ [i.e. as to those who are still spiritually immature]. I fed you with milk and not with solid food; for until now you were not able to receive it…for you are still carnal. For where there are envy, strife, and divisions among you, are you not carnal and behaving like mere men [i.e. acting as unsaved individuals would]?”(I Cor. 3:1-3).

4) World, Worldy

This is another word (kosmos in Greek) that can be used in a physical or spiritual sense. It can refer to the earth, or to the people living on our planet (“God so loved the world… ” Jn. 3:16). But in the spiritual and ethical sense, it speaks of this corrupt world system, dominated by Satan. In that usage we are warned, “Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world–the lust of the flesh [sarx], the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life–is not of the Father but is of the world. And the world is passing away, and the lust of it; but he who does the will of God abides forever” (I Jn. 2:15-17). Instead, we should be those who, “denying ungodliness and worldly lusts…live soberly, righteously, and godly in the present age” (Tit. 2:12).

Debate: Jephthah’s Vow

,

Question: In the book of Judges, a judge named Jephthah makes a vow that seems to result in him offering up his daughter as a burnt offering! Did he actually do that?

Answer: Jephthah called upon God to give him and the Israelites victory over the Ammonites. He rashly vowed that if they were victorious he would offer up whatever came out of the door of his house first. The relevant text is, “Whatever comes out of the doors of my house to meet me…I will offer it up as a burnt offering” (Jud. 11:31), and “he carried out his vow” (vs. 39).

Some commentators seek to soften the outcome, suggesting the girl was, instead, committed to lifelong virginity, and devoted to ministry in the tabernacle–the way Anna later served in the temple (Lk. 2:37; cf. Exod. 38:8). But this is not the most natural reading of the text. Martin Luther’s opinion was, “The text is too clear to admit of this interpretation.”

That being said, there are points which seem to support one side or the other. And there will likely never be a satisfactory resolution to the question of whether Jephthah actually killed his daughter. Arguments against it can be explained, and those for it are inconclusive. My personal view is that the human sacrifice did take place–though it was certainly not done with God’s approval.

It is important to keep the promises we make to God (Deut. 23:21). However, if a vow was foolish–and, therefore, possibly sinful to make–we are not under obligation to keep a vow that would involve us in sinning further against God. That would simply add one sin to another! In my view, we should seek God’s gracious forgiveness for our foolish pledge (I Jn. 1:9), and determine to be more careful in making such promises in the future.

Here are the counterarguments regarding Jephthah’s vow, discussed, one by one.

1) The Law forbad human sacrifice (Lev. 18:21; 20:2-5). And Jephthah appears to have had some knowledge of the Law (vs. 12-28).

¤ But these were lawless days, not always characterized by Law-keeping (17:6; 21:25). This weakens the argument that no priest would ever officiate at a human sacrifice.

2) There was an option in the Law of monetary redemption of human beings devoted to God (cf. Exod. 13:11-16; Num. 3:44-48).

¤ But Jephthah may not have known the Law well, since he grieved that he must do as he had said (vs. 35).

3) His vow was, clearly, that he was going to offer up something as a burnt offering (vs. 31). Surely he intended it to be an animal.

¤ (But see #4) There is no law or precedent for commuting such a vow to tabernacle/temple service, and we read “he carried out his vow” (vs. 39).

4) Animals may have been kept in the courtyard. In some ancient homes, they were even brought into the house itself, especially overnight, to protect them from thieves. And Jephthah must have had good reason to believe his daughter was elsewhere at this time (perhaps visiting a friend).

¤ But he was horribly mistaken. His daughter was at home.

5) Some suggest that God would not give victory on the basis of such a vow.

¤ But there was nothing intrinsically wrong with the vow itself. Jephthah did not vow to offer up his daughter.

6) Others object that there would hardly be an annual commemoration of a gross sin (vs. 40).

¤ But the memorial was of the death of Jephthah’s daughter, not of his sin in sacrificing her.

7) Jephthah’s daughter “bewailed her virginity” for two months–that it meant she could give her father no heir (vs. 38). That is what concerned them. Later, four days of mourning for her became an annual practice (vs. 40).

¤ But the memorial was rather an extreme measure to remember one who had simply gone to serve the Lord at the tabernacle (and could likely visit with her father from time to time). If such service was the custom in Israel, as it may have been (cf. I Sam. 2:22), it hardly seems to merit the extreme reaction of vs. 35-40.

8) What saddened her father was not her death, but the fact that she would remain childless, and his family line would come to an end (she being his only child, vs. 34).

¤ But her death would also mean she died childless!

9) The idea of child sacrifice was surely repugnant to the Israelites.

¤ But child sacrifice happened many times in Israel, certainly later (II Kgs. 3:27; 16:3; 17:17; II Chron, 33:6; Jer. 7:31; 19:5; 32:35). Jephthah, the son of a prostitute (vs. 1), lived in a semi-pagan environment, in a time of great lawlessness, and he was associated with a band of “worthless men” (vs. 3). This kind of “honour code” is what we might expect from cruel and violent men.

10) Jephthah had a measure of faith in God (cf. Heb. 11:32), and the Spirit of God is said to have worked through him (vs. 29).

¤ But the same can be said for immoral Samson whom God used.

The Traveller’s Psalm

Psalms 120 to 134 are known as Songs of Ascent, or Pilgrim Psalms. It is believed they were sung as pilgrims journeyed to Jerusalem for the holy festivals or feast days of Israel. (Since the city had a higher elevation than the surrounding terrain, people talked of going up (or ascending) to the holy city.)

The lovely 121st Psalm speaks of the travellers looking to the surrounding hills. That is where wild animals and thieves were lurking. Where could they look for help? (The second half of vs. 1 is likely a question, not a statement as the Authorized Version has it.) No help there. Only unknown dangers. But fortunately, the Creator of all was watching over His people, and He is ever-vigilant (vs. 2-4).

Though we may go through difficult times, we can be sure that nothing touches our lives as believers that God has not permitted, and that He will not ultimately turn to our good, and His eternal glory.

God protects His children…

  1. From all enemies (vs. 1-2)
  2. At all times (vs. 3-4)
  3. In all circumstances (vs. 5-6)
  4. For all time (vs. 7-8)

Life’s Great Occupation

Have you ever been asked, “What do you do for a living?” As Christians, there is more than one way of answering that! Yes, most of us likely have some kind of gainful employment, unless we are retired. But in the opening verses of Psalm 106 we see described what is to be our true vocation through all of life, whatever job we have taken on to earn a living.

clocks

The psalm begins: “Oh, give thanks to the Lord! Call upon His name; make known His deeds among the peoples! Sing to Him, sing psalms to Him; talk of all His wondrous works! Glory in His holy name; let the hearts of those rejoice who seek the Lord! Seek the Lord and His strength; seek His face evermore! Remember His marvellous works which He has done, His wonders, and the judgments of His mouth, O seed of Abraham His servant, you children of Jacob, His chosen ones!” (vs. 1-6)

Here is a summons to Israel to do several important things that will strengthen their relationship with Jehovah God. And these four things are not dispensationally limited. That is, they are not just for Israelites living under the Mosaic Covenant. They are worthwhile for each of us in the Church Age to engage in, day by day, as well. And the four can be pictured as a kind of God-centred cycle. As we meditate upon (Ponder) the things of God, we are led once more to Praise Him, and then to Pray, and so on. We are called:

  1. To Praise: We are to worship God for who and what He is, rejoicing in, and expressing thanksgiving for what He has done. (“Give thanks to the Lord….Sing to Him, sing psalms to Him….glory in His holy name…let the hearts of those rejoice who seek the Lord.”)
  2. To Pray: We are to seek the fellowship of God, and call upon Him for His help. (“Call upon His name…seek the Lord and His strength…seek His face evermore.”)
  3. To Proclaim: We are to bear witness to one another as believers, and beyond the community of believers, to the goodness of the Lord. (“Make known His deeds among the peoples…talk of all His wondrous works.”)
  4. To Ponder: We are to meditate upon the words and works of God, saturating our minds with what He has said and done. (“Remember His marvellous works which He has done, His wonders, and the judgments of His mouth.”)

Consider in this regard Thomas Ken’s great 1674 hymn. He says to himself, “Awake, my soul, and with the sun / Thy daily stage of duty run; / Shake off dull sloth, and joyful rise, / To pay thy morning sacrifice. / Thy precious time misspent, redeem, / Each present day thy last esteem, / Improve thy talent with due care; / For the great day thyself prepare. / By influence of the Light divine / Let thy own light to others shine. / Reflect all heaven’s propitious ways / In ardent love, and cheerful praise.”

Then, Thomas Kenn adds this prayer, concluding with the familiar Doxology: “Direct, control, suggest, this day, / All I design, or do, or say, / That all my powers, with all their might, / In Thy sole glory may unite. / Praise God, from Whom all blessings flow; / Praise Him, all creatures here below; / Praise Him above, ye heavenly host; / Praise Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.” That is our divine calling!

Thoughts on Psalm 81

There is some refreshing food for the soul in this psalm, as well as lessons on the nature and purpose of language, related to vs. 5. The latter three stanzas (vs. 8-16) describe a definite and instructive progression, reminiscent of some aspects of the father-son relationship in the parable of the Prodigal Son (Lk. 15:11-32).

  1. God’s Appeal–“Hear, O My people” (vs. 8). If they would listen, turn from their idols, and return to the Lord, all would be well. They would find that He would meet their needs as no false god ever could (vs. 8-10). Like baby birds excited by the mother bird returning to the nest with food, they would discover the truth of the promise, “Open your mouth wide, and I will fill it.”
  2. The People’s Response–“But My people would not heed My voice” (vs. 11). As a result, the Lord “gave them over to their own stubborn heart, to walk in their own counsels” (vs. 12). Sometimes, God’s corrective discipline involves letting us have our own way, so we can discover firsthand the folly of it!
  3. God’s Heart-desire–“Oh, that My people would listen to Me” (vs. 13). The door is still open for repentance. And if the people would willingly turn to Him again, He would put down their enemies, and meet their needs in an abundantly satisfying way (vs. 13-16). In every age and time, the inability to live in victory accompanies self rule, and a dependance on the flesh instead of on the Lord.

Vs. 5. This He established in Joseph as a testimony, when He went throughout the land of Egypt, where I heard a language I did not understand.
(Cf. Ps. 114:1) The reference here is to the time of Israel’s bondage in Egypt. Though the family of Jacob moved there, in the providence of God, to meet their need during a time of famine, they stayed there for over a century, during which time the family grew into a small nation of people. But something else was going on that was not good. As the years went by, the Hebrew people began to worship the gods of Egypt, forsaking the Lord (cf. Lev. 17:7; Josh. 24:14; cf. 5:2-5, 9; and see Ezek. 20:5-9, 32; 23:3). Their cruel bondage at the hands of the Egyptians was God’s chastening to turn them back to Him.

It is a prime effect of sin, and judgment for sin, that there will be a breakdown in fellowship and communication. As the Lord told Israel, “Your iniquities have separated you from your God” (Isa. 59:2). That was experienced first in Eden, after Adam and Eve disobeyed (Gen. 3:8-9). And it was a part of the judgment of God at Babel, where He dealt with rebellion by “[confusing] their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech,” thus driving the rebels apart (Gen. 11:1-9). A common language is the bridge that connects us. Without it, there is division and social fragmentation.

It was a prophesied judgment upon Israel, if they forsook God: “The Lord will bring a nation against you from afar…as swift as the eagle flies, a nation whose language you will not understand” (Deut. 28:49). This is likely a reference to the invasion of the Babylonians around 605 B.C. (cf. Hab. 1:6-8, where they are called Chaldeans). Nearer to the time, this warning of judgment was repeated: “Behold, I will bring a nation against you from afar [Babylon]…a nation whose language you do not know, nor can you understand what they say” (Jer. 5:15). And a similar judgment had fallen earlier (in 722 B.C.) on the rebel Northern Kingdom, at the hands of the Assyrians–“For with stammering lips and another tongue He will speak to this people…yet they would not hear” (Isa. 28:11-12).

That is also the explanation for the confusion of languages at Pentecost (Acts 2:1-13). It was a sign of judgment. When the church was born, we read that “they [possibly meaning the twelve apostles, cf. Acts 1:26]…began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance” (Acts 2:4). To some, what they said seemed like mere drunken babble (vs. 13). But many were in Jerusalem from other nations (vs. 9-11), who exclaimed, “We hear, each in our own language in which we were born…the wonderful works of God (vs. 8, 11).

Israel had rejected her Messiah-King, and had Him crucified. In judgment, the Lord turned from His unbelieving people, and prepared to extend the gospel to other nations. In commenting on the purpose of this miraculous gift, the Apostle Paul quotes from Isaiah 28:11-12 referenced above, explaining, “Therefore tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe but to unbelievers” (I Cor. 14:21-22). The miracle demonstrated that the Lord, for a time, was setting aside His program for faithless Israel.

But we must note the element of grace in this. Though it was a judgment upon the Jews, it was an opportunity for the Gentiles to hear the gospel of grace. Compare what happened at Babel. It was a judgment, in that the confusion of languages drove the rebellious community apart. But there was grace in it too. Being united in their evil purpose, they would have sinned more and more, bringing destruction upon themselves (Gen. 11:6). By separating them, the Lord slowed the advance of sin’s corruption, and also fulfilled His original intent of populating the earth (cf. Gen. 9:1; 11:4, 9).

Concerning the millennial kingdom we read, “Then I will restore to the peoples a pure language, that they may all call upon the name of the Lord, to serve Him with one accord” (Zeph. 3:9). Some take the prophecy of Zephaniah to indicate that a universal language will be restored in the Millennium. Though others see this promise simply as a picturesque way of referring to the spiritual renewal experienced by all, it is logical to suppose that barriers of communication that separate earth’s peoples today will be removed, just as the curse upon nature will be removed (Gen. 3:17-19; cf. Isa. 35:1; 51:3), when Christ comes to reign.

Vs. 10. I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt; open your mouth wide, and I will fill it.
There is a great deal in this simple statement. Here we see, concerning the Lord:

  1. God’s faithfulness–looking back to earlier times will show we can count on Him;
  2. God’s power–He is able to do what He pledges He will do;
  3. God’s abundant grace–we will be filled to our capacity to receive His blessings. And concerning man we see:
  4. Man’s dependence–the faith in God’s promise by which we are led to open our lives to Him;
  5. Man’s obedience–the required action on our part to receive and assimilate what the Lord offers us;
  6. Man’s expectation–hope’s assurance of fullness at the hand of God.

Vs. 12. So I gave them over to their own stubborn heart, to walk in their own counsels.
It is typical of childish immaturity to push for independence. For a parent with a child, at times, the best discipline is to allow that independent spirit to flourish for a while. The result may well prove not to be as pleasant as was anticipated (cf. the Prodigal Son)! Here, matters are more serious, as what is involved is disobedience and rebellion against God (vs. 11). And He judges His people’s transgressions by giving them up to the results of their sinful ways (cf. Ps. 106:13-15; the same principle is applied to God’s dealings with the unregenerate, Rom. 1:18-32).

Vs. 16. He would have fed them also with the finest of wheat; and with honey from the rock I would have satisfied you.
Honey from the rock (cf. Deut. 32:13). One time I had a student in Bible college who mocked the old gospel song, “There’s Honey in the Rock, My Brother.” He preferred contemporary religious music to those silly old-fashioned songs–until he learned, somewhat abashed, that the symbol was taken from Scripture! The land of Canaan had many wild bees, and they would sometimes build their hives in unlikely places (cf. Jud. 14:8). Here, the bees have found a home in a rocky crevice.

The point of the poetic image is that God is able to bring blessings out of some very barren and difficult situations, if we will but trust in Him. Hard times, unyielding obstacles, coldness, and even death–all of these might be pictured by the rock. But sweetness and soul-refreshing nourishment can be found, even there, by the child of God, as he looks to his gracious heavenly Father.

“O my brother, do you know the Saviour, / Who is wondrous kind and true? / He’s the “Rock of your salvation!” / There’s Honey in the Rock for you. / Oh, there’s Honey in the Rock, my brother, / There’s Honey in the Rock for you; / Leave your sins for the blood to cover, / There’s Honey in the Rock for you” (Frederick Arthur Graves, 1895).

Load More