Vol. 11, 1956

Transcription

Vol. 11, 1956

BLUE BANNER FAITH AND LIFE
J. G. VOS, Editor and Manager
Copyright © 2016 The Board of Education and Publication
of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America
(Crown & Covenant Publications)
7408 Penn Avenue • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15208
All rights are reserved by the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America and its Board of
Education & Publication (Crown & Covenant Publications). Except for personal use o f one
digital copy by the user, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval
system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means—electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or otherwise— without the prior written permission of the publisher.
This project is made possible by the History Committee o f the Reformed Presbyterian Church of
North America (rparchives.org).
B LU E
BANNER
FAITH
AND
L IF E
VOLUME 11
t
j
|
1
[
(
1
f
u—
.—
n t u —
JANUARY-MARCH, 1956
f
—
t—
n—
—
u
»
h
»
h
t
—
..m
NUMBER 1
o »
i.—
n—
m»
mm
i t
»
u—
A
Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and
persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against
you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad:
for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted
they the prophets which were before you.
•
Matthew 5:11,12
l
A Q u arterly Publication Devoted to Expounding, D efending and A pplying the
System of Doctrine set forth in the W ord of God and Sum m arized in th e Standards
of the Reformed P resbyterian (C ovenanter) Church.
Subscription $1.50 per year postpaid anyw here
3408 7th Avenue
J. G. Vos, Editor and M anager
Beaver Falls, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.
E ditorial Committee: M, W. D ougherty, R. W. Caskey, Ross L atim er
Published by
T h e Board of Publication of th e Synod of th e R eform ed P resbyterian Church of
N orth A m erica
Agent for B ritain and Ireland: The Rev. A dam Loughridge, B.A.,
Glenm anus Manse, P ortrush, County A ntrim , N orthern Ireland
Agent for A ustralia and New Zealand: The Rev. A lexander B arkley, B.A.,
20 Fenwick St., Geelong, Victoria, A ustralia
P rin ted in the U nited States of Am erica
Eye Hath Not Seen
By Christina G. Rossetti
Our feet shall tread upon the stars
Less bright th an we.
The everlasting shore shall bound
A fa ire r sea
Than th a t w hich cold
Now glim m ers in the sun like gold.
If but the thought of P aradise
Gives joy on earth,
W hat shall it be to enter th e re
Through second birth?
To find once m ore
O ur dearest treasures gone before?
Oh good, oh blest! b u t who shall say
How fair, how fair,
Is the light-region w here no cloud
D arkens the air,
W here w eary eyes
Rest on the green of Paradise?
To find the Shepherd of the sheep,
The Lamb once slain,
Who leads His own by living stream s —
Never again
To thirst, or need
A ught in green pastures w here they feed.
T here com eth not the w ind nor rain
Nor sun nor snow:
The Trees of Know ledge and of Life
Bud there and blow,
T heir leaves and fru it
Fed from an undecaying root.
B ut from the a lta r comes a cry
Awful and strong
From m artyred Saints: ‘How long,’ they say,
‘O Lord, how long,
Holy and True,
Shall vengeance for our blood be due?’
T here Angels flying to and fro
A re not m ore w hite
Than P enitents some w hile ago,
Now Saints in light:
Once soiled and sad —
Cleansed now and crowned, fulfilled and glad.
Then the Lord gives them robes of w hite
And bids them stay
In patience till the tim e be full
For the last day —
The day of dread
W hen the last sentence shall be said;
Now yearning through the perfect rest
P erhaps they gaze
E arthw ards upon th e ir best-beloved
In all e a rth ’s ways:
Longing, b u t not
W ith pain, as used to be th e ir lot.
W hen heaven and earth shall flee aw ay,
And the great deep
Shall render up h er dead, and ea rth
H er sons th at sleep,
And day of grace
Be hid for ever from T hy face.
The hush of th a t beatitude
Is ages long,
Sufficing Virgins, Prophets, Saints,
Till th e new song
Shall be sent up
From lips w hich drained the b itte r cup.
Oh hide us, till Thy w rath be past,
O ur grief, our shame,
W ith P eter and w ith M agdalene,
And him whose nam e
No record tells
Who by Thy promise w ith Thee dw ells.
I Look for the Lord
O ur w ealth has w asted all away,
O ur pleasures have found wings;
The night is long u n til th e day;
Lord, give us b e tte r things —
A ra y of light in th irsty night
A nd secret w ater-springs.
Our house is left us desolate,
Even as Thy Word hath said.
Before our face the w ay is great;
Around us are the dead.
Oh guide us, save us from the grave,
As Thou Thy saints h ast led.
Our love is dead, or sleeps, or else
Is hidden from our eyes:
O ur silent love, w hile no m an tells
O r if it lives or dies.
Oh give us love, O Lord, above
In changeless Paradise.
Lead us w here pleasures everm ore
And w ealth indeed are placed,
And home on an eternal shore,
And love th at cannot w aste:
Where joy Thou a rt unto the h eart,
And sweetness to th e taste.
VOLUME 11
JANUARY-MARCH, 1956
NUMBER 1
The Reformed Faith and Evangelism
By The Rev. Joseph A. H ill
Is an evangelistic Calvinist a clerical contra
diction? T he Calvinist is seldom pictured as an
evangelist. H e is m ore often pictured as a theo
logical h e rm it engrossed in th e study of highsounding doctrines and having little concern for
lost souls in th e w orld outside of his study. The
C alvinist is th e m an who defends predestination,
w h ile th e evangelist preaches Christ. One is a
theological preacher, the other a missionary preach
er. S uch are the distinctions often made betw een
th e C alvinist and the evangelist.
A re such distinctions valid? Cannot a Calvin
ist be an evangelist, and an evangelist a Calvinist?
L uke w as an h istorian w hen he w rote his Gospel,
b u t he was also an evangelist; and the Reform ed
p reach er is a theologian who is a t the same tim e
an evangelist.
Calvinism and Evangelism not Contradictory
The R eform ed faith and evangelism are not
related antithetically. They are not m utually ex
clusive factors in Christianity, but ra th e r one is
an application of the other. The Reformed faith
is the tru e evangel; evangelism is the w o rk of
p ropagating it. To set Calvinism in antithesis to
evangelism is as unreasonable as it would be to
reg ard jou rn alism as antithetical to the w ork of
publication. J u s t as journalism includes the p u b
lishing of new s of cu rren t events, so Calvinism
includes th e publishing of the good new s of
C hristianity.
T he Calvinistic or Reform ed faith is an evan
gelistic faith. Calvinism is centered about the
glory of G od as m an’s chief end, and this provides
th e stim ulus for Calvinism ’s evangelistic ta sk of
proclaim ing th e Gospel, to th e end th a t men m ight
be saved to the service and glory of God. E van
gelism is v ital to tru e Calvinism. Calvinism w ith
out evangelism is like faith w ithout works. C al
vinism w ith o u t evangelism is a dead Calvinism.
B ut tru e C alvinism includes a lively evangelism.
Calvinistic Evangelists
Some of th e greatest evangelists of history
have been Calvinists, and some of the greatest
C alvinists have been great evangelists.
Jo h n C alvin him self was a zealous evangelist.
Those who know Calvin as an austere scholar in
terested only in theological studies do not really
know th is m an of God. Calvin w as not a recluse
who w ithdrew from society into his own little
doctrinal world. He w ent out into the w orld and
preached the Gospel to all classes of people. Cal
vin was first and forem ost an evangelist. He
preached Jesus C hrist w hen h e w rote his pastoral
letters. He preached C hrist w hen as a theologian
he lectured to his classes in the Academy a t Ge
neva. He preached C hrist w hen he stood in the
p ulpit of St. P e te r’s Church. He preached C hrist
w hen he sat at his table and penned his theologi
cal w ritings. It m akes v ery little difference
w here you tu rn in Calvin’s Institutes, you find on
every page the w ork of an evangelist. O p e n in g
the volume at random , my eyes fall upon this
sample of Calvin’s evangelistic th ru st: “Now, i f
we doubt w hether C hrist has received us into his
charge and custody, he obviates this doubt, by
freely offering him self as our Shepherd, and de
claring th a t if w e h e ar his voice, w e shall be num
bered among his sheep. We therefore em brace
Christ, thus kindly offered to us and advancing
to m eet us; and he w ill num ber us w ith his sheep,
and preserve us enclosed in his fold” (Book HI,
chapter XXIV.6). Such w ords flow from the
h eart of a soulwinner.
Not only was C alvin an evangelist himself,
b u t he trained others fo r this w ork. In his tow n
of Geneva there w ere in 1544 tw elve pastors.
Schaff inform s us th a t in his association w ith
these colleagues “Calvin gradually train ed a corps
of enthusiastic evangelists” (History of the Chris
tian Church, Vol. VIII, sec. 96).
The greatest evangelistic revival in post
reform ation history was spurred by a Calvinist.
The M ethodist C hurch began in this revival. The
first and chief actor in this revival, how ever, w as
not W esley b u t G eorge W hitefield, an uncom
prom ising Calvinist. It 'w as W hitefield who en
listed John and Charles Wesley in the evangelistic
m ovement. The Wesleys w ere strongly prejudiced
against th e idea of preaching anyw here but in a
church building, and only w ith great difficulty did
W hitefield persuade them to engage w ith him in
the field movem ent. It was not the W esleys but
W hitefield the C alvinist who w as the real leader
of this stirring Gospel revival w hich sw ept over
England and the colonies in th e first half of th e
eighteenth century.
A nother great Calvinist who w as also a great
evangelist is Jonathan Edw ards. A fter serving
an established congregation w ith b rillian t zeal fo r
4
nearly a q u a rte r of the eighteenth century, he
m oved to hum bler surroundings in Stockbridge,
M assachusetts, w here he becam e a m issionary to
the Indians. Jo n ath an E dw ards was a keen
theologian, y e t his serm ons b reathed the w arm
appeal of th e Gospel. M any who know Jonathan
E dw ards only from his serm on on “Sinners in the
Hands of an A ngry G od” judge him as “a stern,
h arsh C alvinist”. B ut m any of his sermons still
glow w ith ithe intense passion of a soulwinner.
Listen to the ringing phrases of his serm on on
“The Excellency of C h rist”, in w hich he gives ithe
invitation of the Gospel in the w ords of Christ,
“Come unto me, all ye th a t labor and are heavy
laden, and I w ill give you rest,” etc. — “O thou
poor distressed soul, w hoever thou art, th a t a rt
afraid ithat you shall never be saved, consider
this th a t C hrist m entions is your very case, w hen
h e calls them th a t labor, and are heavy laden!
A nd how he repeatedly prom ises you re st if you
come to him . . . ‘I w ill give you re st’ . . . ‘Ye shall
find rest to y our souls.’ This is w h at you w ant.
This is th e thing ithat you have been so long in
vain seeking after. O how sw eet would rest be
to you, if you could but obtain it! Come to Christ,
and you shall obtain it.” (Jonathan Edwards, by
F aust and Johnson, A m erican Book Co., 1935, p.
128). This is a typical sam ple of the oft-repeated
appeals to accept and receive the salvation of
C hrist th a t w ere m ade by this ard en t soulw inning
Calvinist. U nder his preaching thousands re p en t
ed of th e ir sins and sought th e salvation of Christ.
Jo n ath an E dw ards w as a rigid Calvinist, and he
w as an effective evangelist.
C harles H. Spurgeon w as another notew orthy
C alvinistic evangelist. It is highly significant th at
one of S purgeon’s m ost stirrin g evangelistic se r
mons was a serm on on th e doctrine of election,
at the close of w hich he m ade a h earty appeal to
his h earers to accept Jesus C h rist as th eir Savior.
■His w ords a re still alive w ith hope to lost sin
n ers — ” . . . Take courage, take hope, O thou
sinner, th a t th ere is election! So fa r from dis
p iriting and discouraging thee, it is a v ery hope
fu l and joyous thing th a t th ere is an election . . .
T here is a m u ltitu d e of elect, beyond all counting
— a host th a t no m o rtal can num ber. Therefore,
take heart, thou poor sin n er . . . . Then, not only
tak e h eart, b u t go and try th e m aster . . . . O
sinner, come to the throne of electing m ercy . . . .
Go to God . . . . If thou goest to him, and askest
him, thou sh alt receive; for he h as never spurned
one yet! Is th a t not hope fo r you? . . . L et your
hope re st on th e cross of Christ. T hink n o t on
election, b u t on C hrist Jesus. Rest on Jesus —
Jesus first, m idst, and w ithout end.” H ere is tru e
evangelism from th e lips of a thoroughgoing
Calvinist. L et no one th in k thait th e doctrines of
th e Reform ed fa ith are inim ical to tru e evangelism.
W herever they have been defended and propagat
ed, m en have been won to C hrist and heaven.
Reformed Evangelism
The Reform ed faith is the tru e evangel; evan
gelism is the w ork of propagating it. The Re
form ed faith and evangelism belong together. R e
form ed evangelism is the task of all who love the
tru e evangel. F ar from being alien to tru e evan
gelism, the doctrines of the R eform ed faith are
the most effective m eans of soulw inning. The
first great C hristian revival, in w hich three
thousand were converted to Christ, occurred in
Jerusalem under the preaching of P eter, who said;
“Him, being delivered by the determ inate coun
sel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and
by w icked hands have crucified and slain” (Acts
2:23). T hat is C alvinism rigid enough. B ut it
proved to be tru e evangelism th a t m oved a m u lti
tude to repentance and a steadfast life of fa ith in
Jesus Christ.
The preaching task of the church should not
be thought of as an altern atin g betw een C alvin
ism and evangelism, a shifting back a n d fo rth
from the “deep” doctrines of th e Reform ed faith
to the simple fa ith of the Gospel. R ather, the
preaching task of the church should be u n d er
stood as the propagation of the deep tru th s of the
Gospel, simply stated, in harm ony w ith the Re
form ed faith. In P ete r’s preaching a t Pentecost
in the second chapter of Acts, th e tru th of foreordination and the Gospel of C hrist crucified are
one and the same thing. So in the preaching of
the churoh, the message and the ta sk are identical,
sim ply because the evangel and evangelism are
inseparable. The church m ust never tr y to strike
a “balance” betw een C alvinism on the one hand,
and evangelism on the other, as though C alvin
ism and evangelism w ere com petitive factors in
the program of the church. Evangelistic preach
ing is doctrinal preaching in its highest and best
form.
In both public and personal evangelism the
gospel offer of salvation is w holly consistent w ith
the doctrines of the R eform ed faith. The C alvin
istic doctrines of unconditional election and p a r
ticular redem ption do not stand in the w ay of our
preaching the good new s th a t “whosoever w ill”
m ay come and receive th e Gospel prom ise of sal
vation. U nderlying Calvinism ’s offer of salvation
to all men is the Reform ed doctrine of divine
sovereignty. God has a sovereign claim on every
man, woman and child. He is th e ir C reator and
Preserver. All men are u n d er solem n obligation
to Him. All men ought to acknowledge, love and
serve Him. All are u n d e r u rg e n t obligation to
repent of th eir sins and to believe on C hrist the
Savior. And the R eform ed preach er is under
u rgent obligation to press this claim hom e to his
hearers, w hether in public or in private.
I have not set fo rth here th e basic principles
of Reformed evangelism or the full content of its
message. My purpose is only to affirm th a t evan
5
gelism is not inconsistent w ith the Reform ed
faith. T he Reform ed faith calls for a decisive
preaching of (the Gospel of the grace of God. The
R eform ed p reach er as an evangelist m ust u n
h esitatin g ly com pel men, in th e nam e of the
sovereign God, to m ake a firm decision to accept
salvation th ro u g h faith in Jesus Christ. F or it is
th e sovereign God, speaking by the preached
W ord and acting by His Spirit, who renew s th e
sin n er’s h e a rt and calls forth his decision. The
decision is th e sinner’s reply to the voice of the
speaking God. It is his response to the w ork of
th e electing God.
We should realize, of course, th at conversion is
fa r m ore th a n a decision. It is fundam entally a
change of h e a rt which God along can give and
does give to His people in His own time. A nd we
should also realize th a t a decision to accept Christ
does not m ean “going forw ard” or raising the
hand during an altar-call. The real decision is
m ade in the secret places of the heart. Finally,
we m ust rem em ber th a t tru e evangelism is the
propagation of tru th . It is tru e to God’s W ord
at every point. The evangelist who says, “If you
do not accept salvation, God cannot save you,” is
not propagating tru th . Such appeals a re not in
harm ony w ith God’s Word, or the Reform ed faith,
or tru e evangelism . The Reform ed faith is truth,
and the propagation of the Reformed faith is true
evangelism.
Sketches of the Covenanters
By J. C. M cFeeters
Chapter XVII
High Ideals by the Covenanted Fathers —
A. D. 1643.
The Solem n League and Covenant of Scot
land, England, and Ireland is the high-w ater m ark
in th e m oral progress of nations. But the flood of
D ivine glory, which then covered these three
kingdom s, quickly subsided and has rem ained
ever since fa r below th a t conspicuous m ark. God
h onored th e se nations w ith the greatest privilege
accorded to Civil society, and brought them into
th e m ost blessed relation to himself. B ut they
lightly esteem ed th e favor and revolted from the
C ovenant. He therefore hid His countenance, w ith
d raw ing th e assistance and protection w hich they
so g ratefu lly accepted in distress, but deceitfully
rejected w hen prosperity returned. The relapse
th rew th em suddenly into direful conditions of
m isrule, oppression, and profuse bloodshed, which
continued n early half a century.
The C ovenant of the three kingdoms, though
shortlived in its beneficent effect, was of immense
valu e to th e w orld. Like the morning star, it
h earld ed the coming of a bright day to all nations.
T he sta r m ay be hidden by thickening clouds, but
th e sun w ill not fail to rise. This Covenant stands
as a pledge of th e u ltim ate condition of all nations,
points th e w ay into the shining heights of God’s
favor, and w arn s against th e aggravated sin of
b reak in g relatio n w ith th e Lord. It was the first
b last of th e tru m p et th a t w ill one day announce
th e subm ission of the kingdoms of the w orld to
th e L ord Jesu s Christ.
T he Scottish fathers evidently regarded Cove
n an ted union as the norm al relation existing be
tw een God and man, God and the Church, God
and all th e nations. Any thing less than this was,
in th e ir estim ation, sub-norm al, im perfect, u n
w orthy, dangerous, disastrous to man, and of
fensive to God. They loved th eir Covenant, flew
to it in tim e of danger as doves to the clefts of the
rock, and reproached them selves for lightly es
teem ing the inestim able privilege.
These Covenanters took th eir position at the
throne of the Lord Jesus, and contem plated w ith
rap tu ro u s delight His m any crow ns and the m ag
nificence of His kingdom. T heir vast horizon
took in heaven and earth, tim e and eternity, God
and man. In th e ir eyes th e affairs of the w orld
fell into subordinate relations, while the interests
of the C hurch loomed up in over-aw ing propor
tions.
The high ideal for nations entertained by the
Covenanters of Scotland w ill hardly be excelled
w hile the w orld lasts. The Lord gave them a
vision of w hat th eir country should be: enlighten
ed w ith the Gospel, governed in righteousness, pro
tected by Omnipotence, adorned w ith churches, a
school in every parish, and a college in every city.
The land in th a t vision was m arried to the Lord—
Beulah w as her name. A ll destroying vices had
fled, all public evils w ere rooted out. The heavens
w ere beneficent, the soil yielded its increase, busi
ness was prosperous, th e arm ies w ere victorious,
the ru lers w ere God’s m inisters, the homes w ere
filled w ith peace and plenty, and resounded w ith
the m elody of praise. Such was th eir conception
of the blessed nation whose God is the Lord.
All this was em bodied in the Solemn League
and Covenant. By analyzing th a t international
bond w e find th a t it expresses o r implies the fol
lowing:
Nations originate w ith God, are dependent on
His w ill, subject to His authority, and accountable
a t His throne.
6
They are placed u n d er Jesu s C hrist to be em
ployed by Him to the glory of God the F ather.
The chief end of Civil G overnm ent is to sup
press wickedness and prom ote righteousness, and
thus prepare the way for the coming of the king
dom of our Lord.
Civil rulers are G od’s m inisters, and as such,
should serve the L ord Jesus C hrist by conserving
tru e religion.
Civil ru lers should be in terested in the union
of the Churches, in D octrine, W orship, Discipline,
and G overnm ent, according to the Scriptures.
Civil G overnm ent should suppress in Church
and S tate all featu res of society th a t are openly
crim inal o r publicly injurious.
The people should en ter into a solemn Cove
nan t w ith th e ir ru lers and w ith God, to place
them selves and th e ir possessions in readiness to
sustain th e governm ent in its legitim ate work.
The nation th a t keeps C ovenant w ith God
shall dwell in safety, grow in pow er, and enjoy
enduring prosperity.
Such was the Solem n League and Covenant.
Have th e principles of Civil governm ent ever
had an enunciation so candid and heroic, so su b
lim e and com prehensive, so ennobling to m an and
honoring to God? These principles w ere not
flashes of a high-w rought im agination; they w ere
practical. The C ovenanted fath ers reduced them
to practice. These nations em bodied them . The
tim e was short, y et long enough for a dem onstra
tion.
W hat dignity rests on the S tate th a t is fed
erally and loyally connected w ith the em pire of
the Lord Jesus Christ! How g reat the security and
excellence of the governm ent th a t abides under the
banner of Christ! How pow erful and happy the
people who a re exalted into favor w ith heaven
by a Covenant th a t binds God and man! Such
was the ideal en tertain ed by th e Scottish fathers;
and by heroic self-sacrificing effort, they exalted
the th ree kingdom s into th e u ntrodden heights.
These nations caught glim pses of the glory, basked
for a season in th e brilliancy, tasted th e sweetness
of the banquet, b reathed th e ex h ilarating air, then
fell back. By th e perfidy of m an the vision was
sh attered and th e idealization w recked.
We shu d d er at the loss incurred by these king
doms in th eir decline from th e ir C ovenant. W hat
would h av e been th e ir em inence among nations
had the term s of the C ovenant been fulfilled?
W hat would have been th e ir pow er and prestige
had they, by keeping th e ir Covenant, been sh elter
ed for the last two and a h alf centuries from the
ravages of ru m and Rome, m isrule and tyranny,
th e violence of unscrupulous m en and the w rath
of the offended Lord? Whait num erous posterity!
w hat fru itfu l fields! w hat prodigious w ealth; w hat
industrial prosperity! w hat educational in stitu
tions! w hat unparalleled progress! w h a t in ex
haustible resources for developm ent at hom e and
achievem ents abroad! E njoying the glorious
m iiennium two hundred an d fifty years ahead of
the rest of the w orld — w hat such a s ta rt would
have done for the B ritish Isles is p ast finding out.
Priest-ridden Ireland failed because at th at
tim e h er best blood was soaking ithe roots of her
green meadows; the m assacre of h er P rotestants
by the Romanists had left h er low. H alf-hearted
England failed because treach ery w as lurking in
h er ranks from the beginning. B ut Scotland! Oh,
Scotland, w herefore didst thou doubt? W here
fore turned ye back, ye sons of the m ighty, lack
ing neither bows nor other arm s? Heroes of the
Covenant, why fainted ye in the day of battle?
Shame on Scotland. The high places of the field,
where once the banner for C hrist’s Crow n and
Covenant trium phantly waved, testify ag ainst ithy
treason.
But the S tandard u n furled by the Covenanters
of Scotland has not been altogether forsaken. A
devoted band of C hrist’s soldiers still rem ain u n
derneath its waving folds. Few , y et fearless, they
hold the ground. T here they sustain, day and
night, the attacks of the w orld, the flesh, an d the
devil. Their position is ridiculed as im practical;
they are galled by the fire of deserters; they are
assailed by the argum ents of statesm en; they are
reproached by th eir own breth ren ; th ey a re shell
ed by S atan’s heaviest guns. A thousand voices
are shouting, “A bandon your im practible position.
Come down; ye men of the Covenant, come dow n.”
But the reply is returned in u n faltering tones, “We
w ill not; we cannot. These heights of righteous
ness have once been reached by th ree kingdoms;
they w ill yet re tu rn to th e Lord and renew th eir
Covenant, leading other nations in triu m p h al p ro
cession. They are coming; they a re coming. ‘All
the kings of the earth shall praise thee O Lord,
when they hear the w ords of thy m outh; yea, they
shall sing in the ways of the Lord: for g re at is the
glory of the Lord.’ ”
A lexander Henderson, who w rote the Solem n
League and Covenant, displayed th erein states
m anship of the highest order. G re at m en are
scarce who can be com pared w ith H enderson to
advantage. Wellington, Nelson, H ow ard, G lad
stone, and Livingstone; these form a brillian t
constellation; but Henderson is b rig h t as a m orning
star. He set the pace for th e fu tu re statesm en,
who w ill yet lead the nations to God in C ovenant
and place the crown of national hom age on the
head of Jesus Christ.
The Covenanter who abides by his C ovenant
is the tru est patriot. The greatest service th a t
can be rendered to the country is the presentation
of God’s ideal for nations.
Points for the Class
1. How long did the Solemn League and Cove
n a n t rem ain in force?
2. W hat is its perm anent use to the nations?
3. W hat w as the Covenanters’ ideal for n a
tions?
4. G ive the substance of th e Solem n League
and Covenant.
5. W hat caused these nations to abandon the
Covenant?
6. Is the Covenant position still held by any?
7. How is tru est patriotism best displayed?
Psalm Eleven
A Vision of Judgment upon Those Who Would
Destroy the Righteous From the Earth
By the Rev. F rank D. F razer
D avid w as a prophet, th a t is, a seer. He was
aw ake w ith eyes open to see not only w hat is com
ing b u t w h at is going on now. He was also a
psalm ist, and w ro te down, in ithe poetry of the
Psalm s, w h at God showed him. He w rote this
psalm of faith after he had found security in the
refuge of Jehovah — security even in the m idst
of a w orld of enemies, of snares and traps, of
danger, darkness, deceit, and ram pant wickedness.
As a p ro p h et he was m oved by th e S pirit of J e
hovah, w ho spoke by him, whose w ord was on his
(tongue. He h ere recounts his reply to certain ones
w ho h ad trie d to frighten him and so induce him
to flee from th e place where, under God’s care and
protection, he was doing w hat God had p u t him
th ere to do. H e was G od’s servant, messenger,
an d w itness.
Some of those w ho approached him w ith re
g ard to his peril, m ay have been would-be friends,
fain t of heart, and little of faith, but they w ere
ill-advised, or allowing them selves to be used as
tools for doing th e w ork of crafty enemies, who,
in o rd er to destroy righteousness from the earth,
w ere determ ined to get rid of every righteous
m an. David w as one of those to whom God had
given His righteousness through faith.
His rep ly is bold, w ithout a trem or of fear,
“I have taken refuge in Jehovah,” or, “I have put
my trust in Jehovah.” He was not w anting a safer
place. “How then say ye to my soul (w hat is said
to th e tim id little birds, when hunters are near,)
“Fly in fright to your mountains, little birds!”
The m ountains afford m any hiding places for se
cu rity an d points of vantage not found elsewhere.
H ence are often indicated in Scripture as the
refuge fo r m en. God also provided refuge for
H is little birds in the m ountain ranges. To them
He gave a strong instinct of fear, and wings to
get away. The usual course of flight of little birds
is not in straig h t lines, but up and down, to and
fro. So here, th e w ord translated “Flee,” is a
w ord th a t indicates th a t kind of movement, flight
in trepidation, zig-zag, now th is way, now that,
not to be followed easily.
“For, Look, the wicked have bent the bow.
They have fixed the arrow on the string, To shoot,
under cover, at the upright in h eart” (vs. 2.)
“Have bent the bow,” literally, “have set foot
against the bow.” The large bow was held in
vertical position, w ith one end on the ground, and
one foot planted against it. W ith the arrow in
place, all was ready to shoot. B etter hurry! th ere
is no tim e to tarry .
B ut David is a serv an t of Jehovah. He is not
taking orders from men. H e w ill rem ain w here
he is u n til his assignm ent th ere is finished. There
m ay come a tim e to flee, b u t His God w ill le t him
know w hen it comes, and w ill go w ith him. He
is not now afraid “fo r the te rro r by night, nor for
the arrow th a t flieth by day.” I t was necessary
for him to flee repeatedly from king Saul. It
becam e necessary for him to flee from his son
Absalom. B ut the place of obedience to God a l
ways proved to be his place of safety.
It m ay become necessary for the righteous to
flee w hen God is about to send His judgm ents
upon the wicked. A t one tim e God told Israel,
“Flee ye out of the m idst of Babylon, and save
every m an his life; be not cut off in h e r iniquity;
for it is the tim e of Jehovah’s vengeance; He w ill
render unto h er a recom pense.” (Jer. 51:6.) Jesus
w arned His disciples, “W hen ye see Jerusalem
compassed w ith arm ies . . . th en let them th a t
are in Ju d ea flee unto the m ountains.”
W hile the first of the Herods, H erod the Great,
was king of Judea, Jesus w as born in Bethlehem .
B ut Joseph was w arned of God, “Arise and take
the young child and his m other, and flee into
Egypt, and be thou th ere u n til I tell thee; for
Herod w ill seek the young child to destroy him .”
L ater on, Jesus, according as He could best ac
complish the w ork He came to do, sometimes hid
Himself from His enemies; sometimes dum b
8
founded them by His fearless presence. W hile He
w as still teaching and perform ing His m ighty
w orks in G alilee, certain Pharisees came to Him
saying, ‘'G et thee out, and go hence, for Herod
(H erod A ntipas, te tra rc h of G alilee,) is w anting
to kill thee.” (Lk. 13.31-33.) He answered, “Go
tell th a t fox, Behold, I cast out demons, and p e r
form cures today and tom orrow , and the day fol
lowing I finish m y course. N evertheless, I m ust
go on m y w ay today and tom orrow and the day
following, fo r it cannot be th a t a prophet perish
out of Jerusalem .”
R em em ber N ehem iah w hile he was in charge
of rebuilding th e w all of Jerusalem . (Neh. 6:1-19.)
His enemies, enem ies of God and of Jerusalem ,
trie d various devices to m ake him afraid, using
false rum ors, and even prophets and priests as
th eir tools to induce him to flee for his life, and
come to th em for a “conference.” B ut he, putting
his tru st in God, replied, “Should such a m an as
I flee? I am doing a g reat w o rk ”. “I cannot
come”. “I w ill not go”. So th e w all was finished,
for he d w elt in th e secret place of the Most High,
and was delivered from the snares of the fowlers.
The psalm ist, fu rtherm ore, answ ers the jibe,
“When the foundations are being destroyed, The
righteous man, — what hath he done?” (vs 3).
E vidently m eant to discourage the righteous from
any fu rth e r efforts tow ard preventing o r repairing
the breaches. W hat have they ever done? W hat
can they do? — out-num bered and overw helm ed
as a helpless m inority. T heir w ord is unheeded.
T heir pow er tu rn e d back. So w hat can one m an
do against such odds? He m ight b etter flee. This
sounds like w ise advice, b u t every righteous m an
has a w ork to do for his Lord, and u n til th a t is
done, h e is safe w here he is. One w ith God is a
m ajority!
The w ord h ere tran slated “foundations” is al
so tran slated “pillars”. I t is derived from a word
m eaning “to set”, “be set”, “to be put in place”,
as for th e stab ility of a building, an institution.
It refers to th e foundation principles of law and
order; the standards of rig h t conduct and also to
th e persons in positions of auth o rity and power.
See Is. 19:10-15 RV.
In th e beginning God H im self laid the founda
tions and set u p th e pillars for every institution
He ordained for m ankind. These, being vested
in the L ord Jesu s Christ, th e Living W ord of God,
are indestructible and unchangeable. “O ther
foundation can no m an lay than th a t is laid, which
is Jesus C hrist.” — “The sam e yesterday, and to
day, and forever.” “He was before all things, and
in Him all things stand to g e th e r”, — “stand to
gether”, once for all, perm anently, as the tense
of the G reek verb asserts, Col. 1:17. B ut when
m en tu rn th e ir back to God and build for them
selves according to th e ir own plans and specifi
cations, they re je c t the Rock which God p u t in
place. It is to them “a stone of stum bling an d
rock of offense”. They m ake o th e r foundations,
counterfeits and substitutions, w hich outw ardly
may appear beautiful to m en; o th e r pillars th a t
outw ardly m ay appear righteous to men, but lack
stability. They, of course, use some good sub
stantial m aterials, b u t w ithout th a t in which and
by which they are held to gether and stand to
gether, — without Jesus Christ. W hatever is b u ilt
w ithout the Lord Jesus C h rist in the holiness and
fulness of His being can be destroyed by w icked
men, or will crum ble and fall in tim e and w eather.
“Except the Lord build th e house, they labor in
vain that build it.”
The m odernist argum ent is th a t th e righteous
stand in the w ay of progress, feebly resisting
“destiny” and the irresistible forces of “evolution”.
The old foundations must be destroyed to give
place for the new. So today we see the founda
tions still being destroyed; th e pillars still being
broken down. The w icked prosper. They get by
w ith th eir evil deeds w ith little or no interference
or punishm ent from men. If convicted and sen
tenced to punishm ent, th ey m ay be paroled or
pardoned to go free to rep eat th e ir crim es, for
laws are m ade to nullify and defeat th e righteous
laws which God gave. Those in positions of power,
parents in the home, officials and courts in church
and state are failing to m aintain righteousness.
But w ithout C hrist they can do nothing. Even
a W orld Church w ith all its boasted millions and
superior organization and resources can do nothing
without the Christ who is; w ithout C hrist in His
essential deity as King, Law giver, and Judge, in
His real hum anity, in His atoning sacrifice of
Himself for sinners, in His resurrection and as
cension to His eternal throne of alm ighty pow er
and universal dominion, and in His coming again
to judge every man. “Ye shall not be afraid of
the face of man; for th e judgm ent is God’s”.
“Vengeance belongeth to m e; I w ill repay, saith
the Lord.” W hat have righteous m en ever done?
W hat can they do, whose righteousness, if they
have any at all, is of God and in C hrist. T here
is nothing done about th e destruction of w icked
ness and sin unless God does it. H e has done it,
is doing it now, and shall continue u n til sin is
taken aw ay and the w orks of the devil destroyed.
T here is only ONE RIGHTEOUS; only ONE
HOLY. The positive and conclusive answ er to
the question. W hat h a th the righteous done? now
follows. It is the answ er of faith in th e ONE who
is able.
Jehovah is in His holy temple; Jehovah, — His
throne is in the heavens: His eyes behold, His eye
lids try the children of men. Jehovah trieth the
righteous; but the wicked and him that loveth
violence His soul abhors.” (Vss 4, 5). W hat hath
THE RIGHTEOUS ONE done? THE HOLY ONE,
w hat is He doing?
Let us take the case of Sodom w hich Scrip
9
tu re p oints to as a typical exam ple. The alm ost
unbelievable num ber of hom osexualists in high
places today, and th e general perversion of m ens’
m inds, from early youth, to all sorts of godless
ness and law lessness are ominous signs of our
tim es.
First, Jehovah,—His throne is in the heavens,
—‘ h u m b leth Him self to look a t the things in
heaven and on the earth ”. (Ps. 113: 5, 6). He
g ath ers th e facts of the situation by His own
first h an d observations, unm oved by hearsay or
th e opinions of others. As He told Abraham , “Be
cause th e cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great,
an d th e ir sin very grievous, I w ill go down now
an d see w h e th e r they have done altogether ac
cording to th e cry of it which is come to me;
an d if not I w ill know.” (Gn. 18: 20, 21.) Clouds
and d arkness are round about Him: righteous
ness and justice are th e foundations of His throne.
A fire goeth before Him . . .” (Ps. 99: 2, 3).
“His eyes behold, His eyelids test the children of
m en”, both righteous and wicked, according to
th e fixed obligations of the Everlasting Covenant,
w hich everyone m ay know, if he will, — both its
curse and its blessedness. His eyes behold the
w icked to do them exact justice. His eyes be
hold th e righteous to do them good in th e ir la tte r
end. (Dt. 8: 16). “His eyelids” are m entioned,
th a t m en m ay understand, since in the case of
hu m an eyes, for a searching, penetration look,
th e lids are instinctively d raw n to the point of
clearest focus. Jehovah puts th e righteous to the
te st of His fire th a t th e pure m ay be separated
from th e vile. “H e sits as a refiner and pu rifier
of silver; . . . and they shall offer unto Jehovah
offerings in righteousness.” (Mai. 3: 3).
Then, after the trial, comes the judgm ent.
“Upon the wicked He raineth snares;” so th at
every one is caught in his own trap. “Fire and
brimstone and burning 'wind are the portion of
their cup.” The desolations of Sodom stan d for
all tim e as a w arning to all m en everyw here. B ut
God w ill not destroy the righteous w ith th e w ick
ed. The Judge of all the ea rth w ill do right.
“F or Jehovah is righteous; He loveth righteous
ness.” God saw some righteousness in Lot, and
delivered him out of Sodom, even though he
“lingered” and was slow to obey the command,
“Escape to the m ountain, lest thou be consumed.”
(Gn. 18:16, 30). He preserved Noah, a preacher
of righteousness, w ith seven others. A nd to every
righteous man, God says w hat He said to Noah,
“I will establish my covenant w ith th e e ;. . . Come
thou and all thy house into the ark: fo r thee
have I seen righteous before m e in this genera
tion.” “Come thou into th e a rk of the covenant”
is still open to all who w ill enter, tru stin g to the
tru th and faithfulness of His prom ise and w illing
to keep His commands w hich are all righteous.
The blessing is sure to follow.
“The upright shall behold His face.” This
expresses the “full assurance of hope unto the
end, th a t ye be not slothful b u t im itators of them
who through faith and patience in herit the
promises.” (Heb. 6:11,12). “W hen H e h ath tried
m e”, said Job, “I shall come fo rth as gold.” “Bless
ed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.”
“A nd they shall see His face, and His nam e shall
be on th eir foreheads.” “A nd w e shall be like
Him, for we shall see Him even as He is.”
God’s Great Plan
By the Rev. J. G. Vos
“The purpose of him w ho w orketh all things
a fte r the counsel of his own w ill” Eph. 1:11.
A college classmate once asked me: “Say, Vos,
does anybody still believe in the old-fashioned
doctrine of predestination?” He evidently classed
predestin atio n along w ith alchem y and th e Holy
Rom an E m pire, and was quite surprised w hen
inform ed th a t one of his own classmates believed
in it. It is com mon today to represent the doctrine
of predestination as an outw orn belief, a m ere
curiosity of a too-credulous past. B ut if w e take
th e Bible seriously, we cannot dispose of predes
tin atio n so easily.
A ll intellig en t w ork involves previous plan
ning. B efore th e great allied invasion of N orm andy
on D-Day in 1944, m any m onths had to be spent in
p rep arin g th e most detailed and com prehensive
plans. W ithout those elaborate plans the invasion
would certainly have failed. E verything had to be
thought of and provided for in advance so th a t
co-ordination w ould be achieved. If a com prehen
sive, and detailed plan is needed for a m ilitary
operation, should we be surprised to find th a t the
Bible speaks of God having a com prehensive and
detailed plan for His great operation — “O per
ation H istory?”
All hum an planning is necessarily lim ited and
im perfect because all hum an planners are lim ited
and im perfect. T here are always some factors
th at m an cannot foresee or control th at m ay en ter
the situation and change everything. A fter m onths
of planning, G eneral Eisenhow er and his staff al
most had to postpone the N orm andy invasion be
cause of unfavorable w eather. They could control
*0
ships, planes, troops and am m unition b u t they
could not control the w eather, nor even predict it
w ith absolute certainty. B ut as God is the infinite,
perfect and alm ighty Being, th ere are no factors
beyond His control th a t can fru stra te His plan.
His planning is not only all-inclusive and perfect
but it is n ever fru strated ; it is alw ays p u t into
execution, to th e sm allest detail, w ithout deviation
o r failure.
The Bible teaches us th a t God’s plan is an
etern al plan. It is eternal because God is eternal.
W hat we call “tim e” — the distinction betw een
past, present and fu tu re — is a p art of God’s crea
tion. Time applies to God’s creatures, but not to
God Himself. God Himself lives above time, in
an eternal present; past, present and future are
all equally p resent to God. He th in k s of these dis
tinctions of tim e only in relation to His creatures,
not in relation to Himself. W hen we say th a t
God’s plan is an eternal plan, we m ean th a t it is
above, or prior to, everything th a t exists in tim e
and space. Time, space, and everything in them,
are God’s execution of the great plan.
Because it is an eternal plan, it is also an u n
changeable plan. H um an planners sometimes
have to stop and change th eir plans after the
plan has been p a rtly p u t into operation. A t the
tim e of the Pearl H arbor attack, a g reat ship was
being b u ilt to be a luxurious passenger liner. In
a few m onths it would have been completed. Then
orders arriv ed from W ashington, and the de luxe
furnishings w hich had been installed w ere re
moved. T he ship w as stripped of all luxury equip
m ent, and com pleted as a troop tran sp o rt. U n
foreseen events forced a change in th e plan after
p art of the plan had been put into operation.
But th a t can n ev er happen to God’s plan, be
cause it is an eternal plan, and it includes every
thing th a t w ill ever happen in th e created uni
verse. So th ere are no unforeseen events. Every
event th a t w ill ev er happen is already a p art of
th e great plan of God. It includes even w hat we
sometimes call “chance” happenings (Proverbs
16:33), for th ere is no such thing as “chance”
from God’s point of view. It also includes all the
decisions and actions of hum an beings, even to
th e sinful acts of wicked m en (Acts 2: 23; 4: 27-28).
This tru th th a t God has a great eternal plan
w hich includes all th a t ever comes to pass is very
plainly and em phatically tau g h t in th e Bible. It
is really involved in the Bible idea of God. If God
does not have such a perfect plan, He is not really
Crod in the tru e sense of the term “God.”
Many people have raised objections to this
doctrine. Among the m ain objections raised are
claims (1) th a t predestination is contrary to be
lief in n a tu ra l law, such as th e law of gravity;
(2) th at it is contrary to hum an freedom and r e
sponsibility; (3) th a t it m akes God responsible
for Sin and evil; (4) th a t itr is co n tra ry to the
Scripture promise th at w hosoever believes on
C hrist shall be saved. We shall consider p a rt of
these objections in the presen t article, and p a rt
of them, D. V., in an article to b e published in
our next issue.
IS PREDESTINATION CONTRARY TO
NATURAL LAW?
The doctrine of predestination (also called
foreordination) is based upon tex ts of Scripture.
We do not believe it because it is reasonable,
though it is, but because G od’s W ord teaches it.
The Bible, not hum an reason, is our au thority for
faith and life. The first question w e m u st face
is not “Is it reasonable?” b u t “Does the Bible
teach it?” If the Bible teaches it, th a t settles the
m atter for a Christian; he m ust accept it on the
authority of God’s Word. Once we have m ade up
our mind to accept the teachings of G od’s W ord in
humble, childlike faith, it m ay be helpful to us to
consider some of the objections th a t have been
raised against the doctrine of predestination, and
to note how these objections can be answ ered.
There is not space in this article for a fu ll
presentation of the Bible d ata on th is subject. This
doctrine is stated in outline form in The West
minster Confession of Faith, C hapter III, w here
60 passages of Scripture are cited. We shall m en
tion just a few passages here.
God’s foreordination includes all th a t ever h a p
pens, Eph. 1:11. It was decreed in eternity, be
fore the creation. Eph. 1:4; 1 P e te r 1:20. It in
cludes the choice of p a rticu la r individuals to
eternal life. Psalm 65:4; M ark 13:20; Jo h n 6:37-39;
17:2. It includes the determ ination of “chance”
events, Proverbs 16:33. It includes the foreordina
tion of the sinful acts of m en, Genesis 45:8; Acts
2:23; 4:27, 28.
Failure to look at the w hole picture is the
cause of a common objection to th e doctrine of
predestination. The objector says: “It is raining
today, not because God foreordained today’s
w eather, but because of n a tu ral causes w hich pro
duce rain.” A nother objector says: “A braham L in
coln died on A pril 15, 1865, not because God had
foreordained his death, b u t because he w as fatally
wounded by an assassin’s b ullet.”
W hat these objectors fail to realize is th at
God’s foreordination includes not only the final
result, but th e whole series of events and causes
which produce th at result. If it is rain in g today,
God has from all eternity foreordained ju st those
conditions of tem perature, air pressure, hum idity,
wind, etc., w hich would produce today’s rain. God
not only foreordained Lincoln’s d eath on A pril
15, 1865, but He also foreordained all the factors
and circum stances which combined to produce this
result. For instance, God foreordained the dis
covery of how to make gunpow der, the invention
of firearm s, th e discovery of A m erica by Columbus,
th e w hole process of politics by which Lincoln be
cam e President, and the p articular circumstances
which led Lincoln to attend F o rd ’s T heater on the
n ig h t w hen he was shot.
W hat w ould we think of a farm er who would
say: “If I am going to have a good w heat crop,
then I am going to have a good w heat crop. T here
fore I need not bother to p lan t any seed.” Or
w hat w ould w e think of a business man who would
say: “If I am going to be in New York next Mon
day I shall be th ere w hether I go or not; therefore
I need not tak e the tra in .” In all our common
affairs we realize th at ends are attained by the
use of appropriate means. How foolish it is, then,
to th in k of God as foreordaining the final results
only, w ithout foreordaining the means by which
those resu lts are to be accomplished!
F oreordination is not contrary to n atu ral law;
it includes th e w hole fabric of natural causes and
effects. N atu ral law does not exist of itself; it was
created by God for His plans and purposes, and He
controls and directs all its functioning. The p e r
son who objects to foreordination thinks of n atu ral
law as som ething outside of God’s great plan. B ut
really th e re is nothing outside of that plan. God
has foreordained all th a t comes to pass, including
ad equate m eans to accomplish all the ends He
has purposed.
Many people who have never taken the trouble
to le a rn w h at the doctrine of predestination re a l
ly is, have this childish idea th a t it m eans the
foreordination of the final results apart from any
causes o r m eans w hich could accomplish those
final results. The Bible does not teach any such
absurd idea, n o r has the C hurch ever held such a
notion. God, th e g reat P lanner, has decreed both
th e ends and th e means which are to produce
them .
T he old story of the lifeboat illustrates this
principle th a t God has foreordained the m eans as
w ell as th e fin al result. A ship had been w recked
on rocks off the coast of England. A lifesaving
crew was about to launch a lifeboat in an attem pt
to rescue those in peril on the doomed ship. B ut
one m em ber of the lifesaving crew objected:
“T here is no need for us to launch this lifeboat. If
God h a s foreordained th at they are to be saved,
they w ill be saved; and if God has foreordained
th a t they a re to be drowned, they w ill be drowned.
If He has foreordained th a t they are to be saved,
th e lifeboat is unnecessary; if He has foreordained
th a t they a re to be drowned, the lifeboat w ill be
useless.” B ut another m em ber of the crew an
sw ered: “Perh ap s God has foreordained th a t they
are to be saved from drowning by means of this
lifeboat. Therefore let us launch it w ithout de
lay!”
T his sam e tru th is brought out by the story
of a shipw reck which is recorded in the Bible
(A cts 27). The ship on which the apostle Paul
was a passenger w as w recked in a furious storm.
God had foreordained th a t every one of the 276
persons on board would get safely to land (verses
22-24, 37). B u t God’s plan also included appropri
ate m eans by w hich this was to be accomplished.
The sailors w ere to be prevented from leaving the
ship prem atu rely (30-32). The people w ere to be
strengthened by partaking of food after th eir long
fast (33-36). The ship was to ru n aground a t a
point n ea r the shore (39-41). Those who could
swim w ere to m ake use of this ability (43); the
re st w ere to avail them selves of planks or pieces
of the ship (44). “And so it came to pass, th a t
they all escaped safe to land.” God’s foreordina
tion included all these m eans by which the in
tended result was accomplished.
IS OUR FREEDOM REAL?
A few years ago two students in Chicago, Leo
pold and Loeb, w ere on tria l for the m urder of a
child nam ed Bobbie Franks. The defendants re
tained the famous crim inal law yer, Clarence Darrow, to plead th e ir cause. D arrow adm itted th a t
his clients had indeed killed Bobbie Franks. B ut
he argued th at they should not be held responsible
for th eir deed. D arrow said th a t these' tw o stu
dents came from a poor background, they had
been under-privileged, th e y had grow n up among
bad social conditions. In short, they w ere victim s
of bad heredity and bad environm ent. Therefore,
argued Darrow , the ju ry should not hold Leopold
and Loeb responsible for the m urder of Bobbie
Franks. The jury, however, thought differently,
and both defendants w ere convicted.
C ertainly we are affected by the heredity and
the environm ental factors w hich, in the providence
of God, are ours. We are exactly w hat God, in
His wise plan, has decreed and provided th a t we
shall be. A nd even our acts and decisions, the
Bible plainly teaches, are all p art of the w orking
out of G od’s great eternal plan. Does this m ean
th a t our freedom is only an illusion, th a t w e are
m ere pieces of m achinery, m ere robots, w ithout
real freedom to m ake decisions w hich are tru ly
our own decisions?
The objector comes and says th at if God has
foreordained our decisions and actions, then we
cannot really be free, nor can we be responsible
for our acts. The objector feels th at he m ust
choose betw een G od’s foreordination and m an’s
freedom. Being hum an himself, he decides in
favor of m an’s freedom, and denies th a t God has
fore-ordained w hatsoever comes to pass.
The charge of “fatalism ” is constantly being
brought against the Bible tru th of foreordination
by people who insist on looking at the problem as
an “either . . . o r” alternative: either God’s fo re
ordination, or m an’s freedom. Fatalism is the no
tion th a t everything is decided by a blind, re le n t
12
less, im personal fate, quite regardless of all our
decisions and actions. B ut the Bible tru th of fore
ordination is certainly not fatalism . We do not be
lieve th a t events are determ ined by a blind, im per
sonal fate, b u t by the w ise plan of the personal
God, our H eavenly F ather. C hristianity has no
room fo r either “fate” o r “luck” ; ra th e r, it teaches
th a t there is an infinitely wise divine plan.
The “either . . . or” altern ativ e is wrong. Ac
cording to th e Bible it is re a lly a “both . . . and”
situation. My decisions and actions are both fore
ordained by God, and they are tru ly m y own free
acts, for w hich I am responsible. My freedom is
real, certainly, b u t th ere is som ething out beyond
it. I t is real, b u t it operates w ithin a larger
fram ew ork, nam ely, the etern al plan of God. O ur
decisions are tru ly our own, b u t w e are not the
ultim ate source of them . I m ake up m y mind, ac
cording to m y own m otives and for m y own re a
sons to buy a new hat, eat m y d in n er or mow the
lawn. B u t I did not really originate th a t decision;
it was in the m ind of God before it was form ed
in m y mind.
It was in th e m ind of God from
eternity.
Thomas Edison invented th e phonograph, yet
he did not really originate th e idea of the phono
graph, for before the idea occurred to Edison, it
w as in the m ind of God. God planned it from
eternity. We hum ans do not really orginate any
thing. W hat is original to us is alw ays old to God.
B ut the objector says: “If m y decisions and
acts are to be really my own, they m ust be new
to God as w ell as to me. I cannot be responsible,
if God planned m y decision before I m yself m ade
it.” This sounds plausible, b u t it am ounts to
throw ing aw ay th e Bible idea of God. According
to the Bible, it is in God th a t w e “live, and move,
and have our being” (Acts 17:28). Did you ever
think w hat th a t verse really means? God w ith
His great plan is the larger fram ew ork in which
your personal freedom operates. God created you
to be th a t kind of a creatu re—a c re a tu re whose
actions would be foreordained by God and y et they
would be free, they would be tru ly your ow n p er
sonal actions. You say you can’t und erstan d this?
Of course you can’t. T hat is because God is God.
If you could understand God and God’s w orking,
you would no longer be in your p roper relation
to God; if you could u n d erstand G od you would
be equal w ith God, you would be divine.
The objector insists th a t he m ust choose be
tween God and man. E ither God is th e au th o r of
my actions, or I am the au th o r of them . B ut ac
cording to the Bible, w e m ust not m ake this
choice. The Bible teaches th a t God’s foreordina
tion and m an’s freedom are both true. This in
volves an insoluble m ystery. The Bible does not
give the answ er to it. We cannot solve it, nor do
we need to solve it.
The only safe and right course is to believe in
both God’s foreordination and m an’s freedom . If
we give up God’s foreordination, w e are le ft w ith
a God who is not in control of th e universe, th a t
is, a finite God. If we give up m an ’s freedom , we
are left as m ere robots or m achines, w ithout re
sponsibility for our acts. The m ystery of how our
actions can be foreordained and y et free is one of
God’s secrets. He has not revealed the answ er to
us. Instead of trying to explain this m ystery away,
we should be filled w ith awe a n d w onder a t the
infinite greatness and wisdom of God.
Note: The foregoing article is rep rin ted from
THE GOAL POST, 1952, and is used by perm is
sion. As published in THE GOAL POST the m a
terial was divided into th re e short articles, which
appeared in the March, May and Ju ly issues of
1952. — Ed.
What is Calvinism?
By B. B. Warfield, D. D.
Calvinism is evangelicalism in its pure and
only stable expression, and w hen we say evan
gelicalism w e say sin and salvation. It m eans
u tte r dependence on God for salvation. It implies
therefore need of salvation and a profound sense
of this need, along w ith an equally profound sense
of helplessness in th e presence of this need and
u tte r dependence on God for its satisfaction. Its
type is found in th e publican, w ho sm ote his breast
and cried, “God, be m erciful to me a sinner!” No
question there of saving himself, or of helping
God to save him , or of opening the w ay to God
to save him. No question of anything b u t
“I am a sinner, and all m y hope is in God my
Saviour!” This is Calvinism, not ju st som ething
like Calvinism or an approach to Calvinism, but
Calvinism in its vital m anifestation. W herever
this attitude of heart is found and is given e x
pression in direct and unam biguous term s, there
is Calvinism. W herever this a ttitu d e of m ind
and h eart is fallen aw ay from, in how ever small a
measure, there Calvinism has become impossible.
For Calvinism, in this soteriological aspect
of it, is ju st the perception and expression
and defence of the u tte r dependence of the
soul on the free grace of God for salvation.
All its so-called hard features — its doctrine of
original sin; yes, speak it rig h t out, its doctrine
of total depravity and the entire inability of the
13
sinful w ill to good; its doctrine of election, or
to p u t it in th e w ords everyw here spoken against,
its doctrine of predestination and preterition, of
rep ro b atio n itself — m ean ju st this and nothing
m ore. Calvinism w ill not play fast and loose w ith
th e free grace of God.
It is set upon giving to
God, and to God alone, the glory and all the
glory of salvation. T here are others th an Cal
vinists, no doubt, who would fain m ake the same
g reat confession. But they m ake it w ith reserves;
or they pain fu lly ju stify the making of it by
some tenuous theory which confuses nature and
grace. They leave logical pitfalls on this side or
th at; and th e difference betw een logical pitfalls
and other pitfalls is th a t the w ayfarer m ay fall
into the others, but the plain man, just because
his is a sim ple mind, m ust fall into those. Cal
vinism w ill leave no logical pitfalls, and will
m ake no reserves. It w ill have nothing to do w ith
theories w hose function it is to explain aw ay
facts. It confesses, w ith a h eart full of adoring
gratitude, th a t to God and to God alone belongs
salvation an d th e whole of salvation; th at He it
is, and He alone, who w orks salvation in its whole
reach. A ny falling aw ay in the slightest m easure
from this g reat confession is to fall away from
C alvinism . A ny intrusion of any hum an m erit,
or act, or disposition, or power, as ground or
cause or occasion, into the process of divine sal
vation, — w h e th e r in the w ay of pow er to resist
o r of ability to im prove grace, of the opening
of the soul to the reception of grace, or of the
em ploym ent of grace already received — is a
breach w ith Calvinism.
Calvinism is the casting of the soul wholly
on the free grace of God alone, to whom alone
belongs salvation.
The C alvinist is the m an who has seen God,
and who, having seen God in His glory, is filled,
on the one hand, w ith a sense of his own unw orth
iness to stand in God’s sight, as a creature, and
much m ore as a sinner, and, on the other hand,
w ith adoring w onder th a t nevertheless this God
is a God who receives sinners. He who believes
in God w ithout reserve, and is determ ined th a t
God shall be God to him , in all his thinking,
feeling, w illing — in the en tire compass of his
life activities, intellectual, m oral, spiritual —
throughout all his individual, social, religious re
lations — is, by the force of th a t strictest of all
logic which presides over the outw orking of p rin
ciples into thought and life, by the very necessity
of the case, A Calvinist.
Note: The above article by the late Dr.
B enjam in B. W arfield is reprinted here from a
booklet entitled “I don’t like Calvinism!” publish
ed by th e Sovereign Grace Union, London, Eng
land, — Ed.
People and Places in the Psalms
TYRE. 45:12; 83:7; 87:4. A great ancient sea
p o rt and com m ercial city of Phoenicia. The
Phoenicians w ere the outstanding navigators and
tra d e rs of th e O ld T estam ent period. Tyre was a
city fam ous for its great w ealth and prosperity.
In P salm 45:12 “the daughter of T yre” is re p re
sented as bringing a gift to th e m arriage of the
K ing’s Son. This is interpreted as m eaning th at
th e w orld of commerce shall pay trib u te to C hrist’s
Kingdom . In Psalm 83:7 Tyre' is referred to as
one of th e nations confederate against Israel,
against w hich the help of the Lord is implored.
In P salm 87:4 T yre is m entioned as a renow ned
city, w hich m en w ould count it an honor to have'
as th e ir birthplace; m uch more, therefore, is it an
honor to have been born in Zion, the C ity of God.
ZALMUNNA. 83:11. Z alm unna w as one of
th e tw o M idianite kings p u t to death by Gideon.
The history is recorded in Judges chapter 8. In
P salm 83:11 Z alm unna is cited as a specimen of
th e defeated and destroyed enemies of God and
of G od’s Kingdom. The im port of the m ention
of Z alm unna in the Psalm , therefore, is th at the
kingdom of evil, and all those perm anently identi
fied w ith it, shall be destroyed by the almighty,
redem ptive pow er of God.
ZEBA. 83:11. Zeba w as one of the M idianite
kings killed by Gideon (Judges 8). See note on
Zalm unna, above, for fu rth e r comment.
ZEBULUN. 68:27. Z ebulun was the tenth
son of Jacob, and his six th son by Leah. The
trib e of Zebulun, descended from the individual
Zebulun, was located in n o rth ern Palestine, n o rth
w est of the C arm el range and east of the Sea of
Galilee, though sep arated from the la tte r by the
trib e of N aphtali. Z ebulun is m entioned along
w ith the tribes of N aphtali and B enjam in in Psalm
68:27 as participating in the solemn worship of
God at the tem ple in Jerusalem (verses 24, 32). The
m eaning w ould seem to be th a t even the m ore
d istant tribes a re essential p arts of the nation of
Israel; as the apostle P au l says concerning the
C hristian Church, “the body is one, and hath m any
m em bers, and all the m em bers of th at one body,
being many, are one body: so also is Christ. For
by one S pirit are w e all baptized into one body
. . . ” (1 Cor. 12:12,13). The corporate u n ity of
the C hurch a s the body of C hrist is implied.
ZEEB. 83:11. Zeeb w as a Midianite prince
who w as captured and executed by Gideon
(Judges 7). F or fu rth e r comment, see the note on
Zalm unna, above.
14
ZION. 2:6. T otal occurrences in the Psalms,
38. Zion, som etim es spelled Sion, w as first of all
a geographical designation of a place, then the
designation of a religious concept, and finally a
symbolic expression for th e transcendent, ideal
fulfilm ent of religious hope and promise. In the
first sense, Zion w as originally one of the hills on
w hich Jerusalem w as built. David captured it
from th e Jebusites, an d placed th e ark of the
covenant on th is hill. L a te r the a rk w as rem oved
to nearby M ount M oriah, w here Solomon built
the tem ple; a fte r this, th e nam e Zion came to be
used to include not only th e actual hill of Zion,
b u t also th e tem ple area. S till later, the nam e
Zion is applied to th e city of Jeru salem as a whole.
In the second sense, th e term Zion w as used to
designate th e Israelite church and nation as it ex
isted in covenant w ith God. It is thus used, for
example, in P salm 126:1 and 129:5. Finally, in
the New T estam ent, Zion is spiritualized and used
as a sym bol for th e transcendent, ideal fulfilm ent
of religion, th a t is, for heaven: H ebrew s 12:22;
Rev. 14:1. As th e C hristian C hurch is the true
continuation of th e Old T estam ent Israel, to the
C hristian of today Zion m eans the Church.
ZOAN. 78:12, 43. Zoan was a city of ancient
Egypt, located in th e eastern p a rt of the Nile delta.
The references in Psalm 78 show th a t Zoan was
the place w here Moses m et w ith P h a ra o h during
the period of the ten plagues w hich preceded
Israel’s escape from Egypt. The Psalm speaks of
the mighty m iracles w rought by th e pow er of God
at Zoan. This serves to rem ind us, as we sing
the Psalms, th at God’s plan of redem ption involves
deliverance of His people from an objective realm
of evil. Today we are m uch in danger of forgetting
this, or failing to realize it a t all. S alvation is too
often represented today pu rely in psychological
terms, as equivalent to “integration of person
ality,” as if the C hristian idea of salvation w ere
that of a purely subjective ad ju stm en t or integ ra
tion of factors w ithin an individual’s personality.
Actually, of course, salvation involves trem endous
changes in a person’s relations w ith objective
reality. It includes getting into a rig h t relation
to God, and the breaking up of the person’s re la
tion to the realm of evil, w hich th e Bible always
regards as objectively real, not m erely subjective
ly real. (By “objectively re a l” w e m ean really
existing outside of our own personality). S alva
tion involves deliverance by the alm ighty, su per
natural pow er of God from som ething outside of
ourselves, not m erely a read ju stm en t of w hat is
inside of our personality.
The E nd
Some Noteworthy Quotations
No one is m ade strong by God b u t he who
feels him self w eak of his ow n self.
— A ugustine of Hippo
The grace of God does not find men fit for
salvation, but m akes them so.
— A ugustine of Hippo
D eal gently and tend erly w ith your uncon
verted friends. R em em ber you w ere once as blind
as they.
— R obert M urray McCheyne
From G od’s election com eth faith; from a
lively faith do good w orks spring, in w hich the
elect continuing and going forw ard not only m ake
th eir ow n election sure, as St. P e te r doth teach
(2 P e te r 1:11) b u t also give a testim ony of it to
others, before w hom th e ir good w orks do shine.”
— John Knox
Take as m any to heaven w ith you as ye are
able to draw . T he m ore ye draw w ith you, ye
shall be th e w elcom er yourself.
— Sam uel R utherford
Sure I am it is b e tte r to be sick, providing
C hrist come to th e bedside a n d draw by the cu r
tains, and say “C ourage, I am th y salvation,” than
to enjoy health, being lusty and strong, and never
to be visited of God.
— Sam uel R utherford
A child of God m ay p ray and not be heard,
because at th a t tim e he m ay be a child of anger.
If any sin lie unrepented of, w e a re n o t in a case
fit to pray.
— R ichard Sibbes
There are m any am ong us w ho seem to live
in u tte r ignorance of th e ir lost condition, who
plead the innocence of th e ir lives even w hen
D eath is laying his cold han d upon them . There
are some poor souls who seem to die w illing to be
judged by the law. I have lived a decent life,
they w ill say; I have been a harm less quiet-living
man; and I can see no reason w hy the w rath of
the great God should ever come upon me. Oh!
brethren, if this is your case, it is v e ry plain you
have never had a divine aw akening. The pow er
of God alone could aw aken you to flee.
— R obert M urray M cCheyne
Christians are called sp iritual persons because
they are born of the Spirit, and because of the in
dwelling and holy influences of the S p irit of God
in them.
—Jo n a th an Edw ards
15
A ll th e p a rts of m an’s n atu re have suffered
each th e ir ow n peculiar in ju ry by the catastrophe
of th e Fall, b u t it is those parts th a t have more
im m ediately to do w ith God and His revealed w ill
th a t have suffered most. And no p a rt has suffer
ed such a shock and h u rt as the will. I t is now
b y n a tu re an d in every u nregenerate m an tu rn e d
aw ay from God, and in bondage to sin and evil.
I t is not th a t m an w ould do good, would re tu rn
to G od if he could; it is not th a t he cannot, he
w ill not. “Ye w ill not come unto m e th at ye m ight
h av e life.” T here was no h and holding them
back, no cord binding them b u t th e bands of th e ir
evil w ill. T his is w hat is m eant w hen learned
divines tre a t o f th e bondage and inability of the
w ill.
— A lexander W hyte
God w ill not be 'honored w ith exceptions, nor
w ill H e allow us to cut off from His law w h at is
less pleasing to us. It is not said of a p a rt of the
law , “This is th e way, w alk ye in it.”
— John Calvin
A m an is spotted though he have only one
stain; a cup is broken, if only th e top be broken;
one disease w ill m ake a m an sick; and th ere are
a h u n d red w ays to w ander in, but only one to
life and im m ortality.
— Jerem y Taylor
The solidarity of the law is such, th a t it does
not adm it of being broken in one point, and yet
in the whole.
— H enry A lford
The K ingdom of God am ong men is nothing
else than a restoration to a happy life; or, in other
words, it is tru e and everlasting happiness.
— Jo h n Calvin
The beginning of tru e nobility comes w hen a
m an ceases to be interested in the judgm ent of
men, and becomes interested in th e judgm ent of
God.
— J. G resham M achen
Open communion logically leads to open
church m em bership, and a church m em bership
open to all, w ithout reference to the qualifications
required in Scripture, o r w ithout exam ination on
th e p a rt of the church as to th e existence of these
qualifications in those w ho unite w ith it, is
virtu ally an identification of th e church w ith the
world, and, w ithout p rotest from S cripturally con
stituted bodies, w ould fin ally resu lt in its actual
extinction.
— A ugustus Hopkins Strong
Religious Terms Defined
PARADISE. O riginally, a p ark or garden.
The S ep tu ag in t (earliest G reek translation of the
Old T estam ent) calls the G arden of Eden the
P arad ise of Eden (Gen. 2:8). In the New T esta
m ent, th e w ord Paradise means heaven, as shown
by 2 Cor. 12:4 com pared w ith 12:2, and Rev. 2:7
com pared w ith 22:2.
PARDON. The forgiveness o r remission of
sin. It is a m istake to use th e term pardon as
equivalent to justification, as is often done. Ju sti
fication is a bro ad er term and includes m ore than
pardon. P ard o n includes only the remission of
sins; justificatio n includes also th e im putation of
righteousness to th e person.
PA SSIO N O F CHRIST. A term designating
th e sufferings of C hrist as our Saviour, especially
His d eath on th e cross and the sufferings w hich
sh o rtly preceded this.
PELAGIANISM . A heresy named after
Pelagius, a B ritish m onk of the fourth century.
P elagianism denied the doctrines of original sin
and to tal depravity, and held th at man is saved,
n ot by th e sovereign grace of God, b u t by his own
free will. This ancient heresy is akin to the
m odem heresy of Arminianism.
PENTATEUCH.
The first five books of the
Bible, o r the Books of Moses, namely, Genesis,
Exodus, Leviticus, N um bers an d Deuteronomy.
PERFECTIONISM. The doctrine th a t it is
possible for a C hristian, in this life, to reach a
state w here he no longer com m its sin. P erfection
ists alm ost invariably define w hat they m ean by
“perfection” as som ething short of th e absolute
m oral ideal w hich God requires m an to live up to.
Thus they low er the m oral standard of th e Bible, in
order to hold th a t the C hristian can attain it. In
other words, perfectionism teaches th a t it is
possible to reach an im perfect perfection.
PERSEVERANCE OF THE SAINTS. The
B iblical doctrine th a t those w ho are tru ly regen
erated by the Holy S p irit can neither totally nor
finally fall aw ay from the grace of God, b u t shall
be preserved therein by the pow er of God and
shall certainly in h erit etern al life.
POSITIVISM. The system of philosophy
w hich holds th a t th e only real know ledge is
knowledge of phenom ena, th a t is, know ledge of
facts obtained by our senses. This philosophy
teaches th a t it is impossible to have real knowledge
of God or of th e hum an soul.
PRE-ADAMITES. A prehistoric race Of
hum an beings held by some to have existed before
16
th e creation of A dam and Eve. T here is no B ibli
cal basis fo r such a n idea, and the Biblical data
w hich are alleged to support it have, w hen
legitim ately interpreted, no such im plication.
PROBATION. A tria l or test of someone or
something. T he situation in w hich God placed
A dam and Eve, com monly called the C ovenant of
L ife o r C ovenant of W orks, was essentially a test
o r probation w ith reg ard to th e ir obedience to God.
PROPITIATION. A satisfaction of th e violat
ed holiness of God by th e sacrifice of a Substitute
provided b y and acceptable to God. C hrist by
His death on th e cross is th e propitiation for our
sins.
PROVIDENCE. “God’s w orks of providence
are, his m ost holy, wise, and pow erful preserving
and governing all his creatures, and all th eir ac
tions” (S.C. 11). P rovidence is God’s constant
support and control of th e universe and a ll it con
tains so th a t G od’s etern al purpose for the whole
an d for every p a rt is infallibly accomplished.
PURITANS. The nam e given to those English
P rotestants of th e seventeenth century who sought
a m ore com plete an d radical reform ation of the
C hurch of E ngland th a n h ad y et been attained.
REFORMED FAITH. T hat interp retatio n of
C hristianity which gives fu ll recognition to the
absolute sovereignty of God and to m an’s absolute
dependence upon God for every factor of his faith,
salvation and life. Also called Calvinism.
REFORMED THEOLOGY. The theology w hich
sets forth the R eform ed F aith, or Calvinism.
REGENERATION. The act of God the Holy
S pirit by which a hum an person, previously dead
in trespasses and sins, is su p e rn atu ra lly m ade
spiritually alive. Logically considered, fa ith in
C hrist is the effect, not th e cause, of regeneration,
though in point of tim e th e tw o m ay b e alm ost
simultaneous.
SATAN. The head and ru le r of the kingdom
of evil, also called the devil. T he Bible teaches
the real existence and personality of Satan.
SELFISHNESS. One Of the form s o r m ani
festations of sin, by w hich a person seeks to please
himself w ithout regard to th e needs o r rig h ts of
others. It is sometimes stated th a t selfishness is
the essence of sin, b u t this is an error. The es
sence of sin is not selfishness, b u t enm ity to God.
An act m ay be unselfish, and y et sinful, as for
exam ple w hen someone gives his life as a m a rty r
for a false religion.
The Act of Saving Faith
A good deal of confusion, and not a little
heart-burning, m ust re su lt from the tendency of
B ible teachers these days to m ake sharp distinc
tions w ith in th e realm of saving faith, involving
relationships to C hrist th a t change w ith the pro
gress of th e sp iritu al life. This is often put, as
Dr. G raham Scroggie p u t it in his opening address
a t K esw ick this year, in some such form as: “We
can receive H im (C hrist) as Saviour and reject
Him as M aster.” T he sam e speaker elaborated
th is them e at g re a te r length and in even bolder
term s as K esw ick last year, w hen he set out to
prove th a t “one m ay be ju stified and not yet ex
p erim entally sanctified,” and th a t one is “a child
of God by fa ith and a frien d of God by obedience.”
We th in k these and sim ilar distinctions, so
m isleading to young C hristians, can be shown to
have no foundation in S cripture teaching and none
a t all in Biblical theology. They arise from an
incorrect apprehension of the m eaning and action
of faith and from a confused conception of the
offices of C hrist in relation to th e believing sinner.
Too often th e offices of Christ are referred to as
if they functioned at d ifferen t and closely-defined
periods of our L ord’s life, and as if, as Dr. Scrog
gie teaches, C h rist m ay be accepted in one of His
offices and rejected in th e others.
W hen w e speak of an “office” of C hrist we
m ean a certain relation th a t H e bears to th e tru s t
ing soul, and it is custom ary to recognize C hrist
in three distinct offices, P rophet, P rie st and King,
meeting the three realities of sin, its ignorance, its
guilt, and its power. Though these offices are dis
tinct, they are not, how ever, separable, and th ey
do not refer to different periods of C hrist’s life.
He w as a Prophet revealing God and proclaim ing
His tru th w hile He w as offering H im self as a
sacrifice for the w orld’s sin; H e w as P rie st w hile
He w as cleansing the tem ple and exercising divine
authority; and He was K ing w h eth er teaching on
the m ount or offering His life on C alvary.
This being so, faith deals w ith C hrist in all
three offices if it is saving and appropriating faith,
and w ithout the exercise of these offices of our
Lord faith could not be saving Taith. W ithout His
revelation and illum ination w e should know noth
ing of God or of ourselves; w ithout His sacrifice
we should not experience reconciliation and peace;
and w ithout the exercise of His royal pow er w e
could not break w ith sin and tu rn to God in new
obedience. And all this undoubtedly happens in
the experience of conversion, or, to p u t it o ther
wise, in the exercise of 9aving faith.
We believe th a t m uch of this confusion has
arisen through a conception of fa ith th a t restricts
it to the intellectual sphere. W hen m en tal assent
17
to a certain statem en t of tru th is accepted as suf
ficient evidence of faith, th ere is the possibility of
being grossly led astray. It is possible th a t this
in adequate conception of faith lies behind m uch
of th e “decisions” fo r C hrist th a t a re pressed for
in after-m eetings and are, all too often, regarded
as th e sum to tal of conversion.
W hile th e re is undoubtedly an intellectual ele
m en t in faith, its action does not rest finally in the
realm of th e intellect. Its roots go down into the
m oral and sp iritu al realm . W ith the enlighten
m en t of th e m ind in th e know ledge of tru th , th ere
is th e aw akening of the conscience to desire p a r
don an d peace, and the renew al of the w ill to en
able it to em brace Christ. T here are thus in tel
lectual, em otional and volitional elem ents e n te r
ing into every act of saving faith: th e intellectual
elem ent involving knowledge and understanding;
th e em otional involving conviction that not only
accepts th e tru th b u t claims a personal interest in
it; an d th e volitional elem ent involving the tru st
by w hich th e soul acts in th e direction indicated
b y its new -found know ledge and conviction.
T hus in th e acts of saving faith there is a go
ing fo rth of th e entire m an to Jesus Christ: it is
an act of th e w hole com plex being of m an by
w hich faith goes out to its object and em braces
Him. F a ith th u s tak es toll of th e whole m an and
deals w ith th e w hole Christ. It is, in its v ery es
sence, a receptive act w hereby C hrist is appropri
ated in His fulness as Prophet, P riest and King,
or, if it be preferred, as Teacher, Saviour, and
Lord. A t th a t point the entire w ork of salvation
has begun and th e soul enters into the new rela
tionship of justification, adoption and sanctifica
tion.
F o r this reason, faith is most commonly re p re
sented in S cripture as qualitative ra th e r th an
quantitative in its essence. It is not so m uch a
m atter of great faith, as of faith in a great Saviour.
This finds confirm ation in th e request of His
disciples, “Lord, increase our faith ” ; and His
answ er: “If ye had faith as a grain of m ustard
seed.” If th a t be so, it is m isleading to speak of
degrees of faith or of variations of faith, a t one
tim e accepting C hrist as Saviour, at another as
Lord. F aith if it be saving m akes contact w ith
C hrist in His fulness and receives out of th at fu l
ness the grace it needs. In other words, faith em
braces a living Saviour, and not m erely any theory
about the Saviour, how ever orthodox it m ay be.
This will seem very elem entary instruction to
those who know th eir B ibles and have been in
doctrinated in the theology of the S horter C ate
chism, b u t it is tru th th a t is not firm ly grasped by
those who lead our evangelistic campaigns and in
struct our converts. A nd ignorance of it leads to
foolish speculation as to the perseverance of p ro
fessing converts. If conversion m eans m erely our
intellectual assent to certain statem ents of Scrip
ture, it w ill not stand unless it develops and pene
trates into th e m oral and sp iritual consciousness.
B ut w here there is an act of saving faith w hereby
Christ in all His life and fulness is appropriated,
there is a regeneration of th e in n er being, and a
conversion of th e entire life and character th a t
w ill stand the test of the years. In such a case,
it is not the perseverance of the believer th a t is
in view, b u t the perseverance of the living C hrist
whom the believer’s faith has accepted as Saviour
to enlighten, to pardon, and to rule.
Note: F or the foregoing tim ely and instructive
article w e are indebted to The Monthly Record of
the Free Church of Scotland. — Ed.
The Letter and the Spirit
By the Rev. W. R. McEwen
How often are th e words quoted or referred
to, “th e le tte r killeth, b u t th e spirit giveth life”
(2 Cor. 3.6), as if they m eant, “It is the sp irit of
the law w hich m atters, th e m inute details have
little significance.” No doubt th ere is some tru th
in this statem ent. One m ay be very strict about
observing “th e le tte r of the law ” and yet break it
in spirit. The Pharisees did th a t w hen they tithed
m in t a n d anise and cum m in and passed over the
w eightier m atters of the law, judgm ent, m ercy
and faith. A nd it is still possible to be strictly
legal an d yet, dishonest, to observe the law o u t
w a rd ly y et b reak it in spirit. It is quite tru e th at
exclusive atten tio n to pariculars of the law may
shriv el an d deaden the soul, w hereas real sym
p ath y w ith th e spirit of the law may give tru e
lib erty in th e observing of it. Yet th at is not w hat
P aul m eant. To use this te x t to indicate some
thing so obvious is to miss th e real m eaning of
P au l’s teaching.
Paul and the Law
Some w ould go even farth e r and in terp re t
Paul as teaching th a t w e should take th e law
w ith a grain of salt, as though he m eant th a t the
Old T estam ent was not tru e throughout and m ust
be modified in the light of th e New Testam ent,
and especially the teaching of Jesus. They m ain
tain th a t P aul tau g h t th a t strict attention to th e
precepts of th e Old T estam ent is deadly, b u t th a t
w e should ra th e r follow its general religious
teaching and be content w ith that, as if he said,
“the lette r of the law k illeth b u t the sp irit of the
law giveth life.”
18
It would be very strange if Paul m eant an y
thing like that. F or Paul had a very high esti
m ate of th e Old Testam ent. He certainly did not
minim ise its authority. He declared th a t “the
law is holy and ju s t and good.” He quoted the
law as saying, “C ursed is everyone th at continueth
not in all things th a t are w ritten in the law to do
them .” According to P aul the law is not some
thing from w hich w e can pick and choose w hat
we like to obey an d w hat we wish to disobey.
Y et th a t is how m any tre a t th e law of God, and
some w ould appeal to P aul to ju stify th e ir diso
bedience.
Again, some w ould say th at Paul is condem n
ing th e externalism of the cerem onial law and
advocating th e blessings of spiritu al worship. I t
is quite tru e th a t Paul tau g h t th a t th e cerem onial
ordinances of th e Old T estam ent w ere done aw ay
by C hrist through His fulfilling them in His m edia
torial work. A nd P aul protested m ost strongly
against th e Ju d aisers who insisted on the observ
ance of Jew ish ritu alistic practices as essential to
salvation. He recognised the tru th , w hich C hrist
taught th e Women of Sam aria, th a t th e tim e had
come w hen not in any special place but w herever
people w orshipped in spirit and in tru th th ere m en
tru ly w orshipped th e F ather, Who is a spirit. C er
tainly to reintroduce the O ld T estam ent symbolism
into the w orship of th e New Testam ent church
is deadening. We are no longer u nder the burden
of th e w eak and beggardly elem ents of Judaism ,
and should rejoice in th e liberty of the sp irit
of New T estam ent worship.
Y et th a t is not w hat P aul m eant here. He is
not contrasting th e le tte r of th e law w ith the
spirit of th e law a t all. He is contrasting the law
of God w ith th e S p irit of God. Such a contrast is
w orth studying, for it takes us into th e very heart
of the Gospel and of P au l’s teaching.
The Bane of the Law
The law of w hich P au l speaks here is not
specially th e cerem onial law, b u t th e whole law
of God in all its m ajesty and authority. Indeed,
he is specially referrin g to th e highest m oral
aspects of th a t law. T hat law w as prom ulgated
am id th e th u n d ers of Sinai. B ut it was revealed
to the h e a rt of m an before that. Even the heathen
who have no w ritte n revelation, are not w ithout
law. They are, as P au l says, “a law unto them
selves.” This does not m ean, as it is often quoted
as m eaning, th a t they m ay do w hat they like w ith
out being accountable to th e au thority of God.
I t ra th e r m eans th a t even they cannot get away
from th e reign of law w hich is everyw here present.
A nd th is law of God is a “letter.” It is w rit
ten. It w as w ritten on th e tables of stone by the
finger of God. It is w ritten also in th e con
sciences of th e heathen. It is w ritte n in the Old
Testam ent, b n t also in th e New, as, for example,
in the Sermon on the M ount. E veryw here it
stands over against m an, w ith its high and holy
requirem ents, reflecting the perfect w ill of God
for man. Throughout the Old T estam ent God is
ever represented as the law giver, m aking know n
His will which m an is obligated to obey. God,
the great m oral governor, issues commands. “Thou
shalt,” “Thou shalt not.” W ith absolute au th o r
ity He lays down His com m andm ents.
T hat same au thority is show n in th e New
Testament. In the sam e tone as in th e Old T esta
m ent Jesus says, “I say unto you.” He did not
come to destroy the law or low er its requirem ents
Indeed, He interpreted its inw ard application and
insisted on its continued obligation. The law still
stands in all its solem n grandeur, w ritten as in
letters of fire.
B ut “the le tter killeth.” P au l knew th at from
his own experience. T he com m andm ent which
was unto life he found to be u n to death. T he law
had declared th a t the m an th a t doeth these things
shall live by them, b u t had also pronounced the
terrible alternative, “The soul th a t sinneth it shall
die,” “not the hearer of the law shall be ju st b e
fore God, but the doer of the law shall be ju sti
fied.”
And Paul, after strenuous efforts to es
tablish his own righteousness, cam e to realise th at
he was not a doer, and ju stly cam e u n d er the con
dem nation of a righteous law.
And we are all, by n a tu re and practice, u n der
the sam e curse and condem nation. F o r all have
sinned and come short of th e glory of God as re
flected in His holy law. T he hand-w riting of
ordinances is against us. The sentence has gone
forth. The law insists th a t it shall be carried out.
That is w hat Paul m eant w hen h e said, “th e lette r
killeth.” In this one phrase h e sum s u p his great
argum ent in the first th re e chapters of his le tte r
to the Romans. “As m any as are u n d e r th e law
are under the curse.”
The Blessing of the Spirit
Certainly, then, view ed from th e position of
the law, our situation is hopeless. T he law sets
out God’s holy requirem ents to w hich w e have
not attained, and then pronounces sentence upon
our guilt. So we m ay w ell cry out w ith Paul,
“O w retched m an th a t I am! who shall deliver me
from the body of this d eath ?” (Rom. 7: 24). B ut
Paul does not stop there. H e goes on, “I thank
God through Jesus C hrist o u r Lord . . . for the
law of the Spirit of life in C hrist Jesus h a th m ade
me free from the law of sin and d eath” (Rom. 7:
25; 8: 2). The law ’s sentence of condem nation was
borne for us by C hrist W ho was m ade sin for us
and suffered the penalty in our stead. He was
made un d er the law, and th a t fearful handw riting
of ordinances w hich w as against us—th a t d read
ful letter of which P aul speaks—w as nailed to
the Cross. Because of th at, w hen He arose and
19
ascended on high He sent His Holy Spirit, the
th ird P erson in th e Blessed T rinity, Who gives
life to dead souls. He produces new life by the
new b irth w hich is His new creation in the soul.
T hus th e law is w ritten afresh on o u r hearts and
w e are given a fresh sta rt and a new pow er on
th e p ath of holiness.
T h at is th e covenant which God prom ised
th ro u g h Jerem iah and to w hich P au l refers. “A f
te r those days, saith th e Lord, I w ill put m y law
in th e ir in w ard p arts and w rite it in their hearts.”
T h at is th e contrast which Paul emphasises.
T he law is external. It gives the command, b u t
it has no pow er to see th at it is obeyed. And w hen
it is disobeyed it m ust insist on punishm ent. So
it brings eternal death because of its transgression.
B ut God’s S pirit brings life. For H e quickens
the soul to newness of life', and enables it to lay
hold by fa ith on the Lord Jesus C hrist as He is
offered in the Gospel. Thus the m erit of His
w ork is credited to the believer and he is also
given the pow er to keep the law of God and walk
in the w ay of life. T ruly “the lette r killeth, b u t
th e S pirit giveth life.”
Note; For the above article, which brings out
clearly the m eaning and im portance of an often
m isunderstood passage of scripture, w e a re in
debted to Evangelical Action (A ustralia; F ebruary
1, 1955 issue). — Ed.
Studies in the Book of Genesis
LESSON 98
III. History of the Covenant People from Abraham
to Joseph. 11:27 to 50:26, cont.
however, the m atter m ust be settled if the pro
posed pact is to rest upon a firm basis. A braham
therefore calls the m a tte r to Abimeledh’s atte n
2.
History of Abraham after leaving; Hr. 12:1 tion, w hich he perhaps should have done earlier.
to 25:12, cont.
Abim elech replies protesting his innocence of
The n e x t incident recorded in Genesis is th at
the
whole
affair. He claim s th a t he knows n o th
concerning A braham and Abimelech. It is not
ing w hatever about it, a n d seems alm ost resen t
know n w h eth er or not this Abimelech was the
ful th a t A braham had n o t told him about it b e
sam e as th e one in chapter 20, nor is it certainly
fore (21:26). There is no reason for doubting the
know n w h eth er “Abimelech” is a personal nam e
tru th of th is claim on the p a rt of Abimelech.
or a n official title. The w ord means literally
Doubtless
the violent seizure of the w ell w as done
“fa th e r of th e king.” It is regarded as probable,
by
servants
who w ould h esitate to rep o rt th eir
how ever, th a t th e Abimelech of chapter 21 and
action to Abimelech lest they be reproved for it.
th e one in chap ter 20 w ere the sam e person, “king
This does not relieve Abim elech of all responsi
of G erar”. G erar was an ancient city on the
bility, b u t it does clear him of intentionally in
so u th ern b o rd er of P alestine not fa r from Gaza.
ju rin g A braham .
Abim elech, w ith Phicol the com m ander of his
This m a tte r of th e w ell having been cleared
arm y, seeks an alliance of friendship with A bra
up,
a covenant is m ade betw een A braham and
ham . It is so obvious th a t A braham is being di
Abim
elech (21:27). It is not entirely clear from
vinely blessed and favored th a t even pagan chiefs
the
record
w hether the sheep and oxen m entioned
and ru lers tak e notice of th e fact.
in 21:27 w ere offered as a sacrifice or w ere sim ply
A bim elech and the chief officer of his arm y
a gift from A braham to Abimelech. L eupold holds
th erefo re approach A braham requesting the es
th a t the sheep and oxen (except the additional
tablishm ent of a m utual pact of friendship. We
seven ewe lam bs m entioned in verse 28) w ere to
note th a t A bim elech understands the meaning of an
be killed as a way of establishing the covenant.
oath and regards it as binding. He claims to have
Calvin held th at the sheep and oxen w ere a sim ple
tre a te d A braham well, and asks the promise of
gift to Abimelech, w hereby A braham honored
kind tre a tm e n t fo r him self and his posterity.
this local king and sought to preserve peace and
A braham agrees, saying, “I w ill sw ear” (21:24).
friendship. As the record does not state th a t the
anim als w ere killed, b u t does state th a t A braham
H ow ever, th e re was a m atter which had to be
“gave them unto Abim elech,” it would seem th at
atten d ed to before such an agreem ent could
C alvin’s in terp retatio n is to be preferred.
p ro p erly be m ade. A braham ’s servants have dug
a w ell of w ater, which has been “violently taken
The question m ay be raised w hether this w as
aw ay” by th e servants of Abimelech. A pparently
a civil or a religious bond. W hile Abimelech b e
th is h a d been done some tim e previously, but
lieves in God, th ere is no reason to hold th a t he
A braham had n ev er reported the m atter to Abim e
was a m onotheist, believing in th e One tru e God
lech, n o r com plained about it, until this time w hen
only, as was the case w ith A braham . A lthough
A bim elech asks for a pact of friendship. Now,
th e oath w as sw orn in the nam e of God, the con
20
te n t of the agreem ent concerned w orldly or civil
m atters — the covenant is a m u tu al pledge to keep
th e peace and avoid “dealing falsely” (verse 23).
We believe th erefore th a t this w as a civil pact,
com parable to A braham ’s p act w ith th e A m orite
chiefs M amre, Eshcol and A ner (14:13,24). Though
th e pact concerned civil m atters, and did n o t im
ply an y religious union, y et it w as confirm ed by
a religious sanction (“sw ear unto m e h ere by God,”
21:23).
Follow ing this A braham takes seven ewe
lam bs and places them ap art by them selves. S ta t
ing to A bim elech th a t these seven lam bs are an
additional gift to him “th a t they m ay be a w itness
unto me, th a t I have digged this well.” Thus
A braham takes every possible step to preserve
peace betw een his own clan and th a t of Abimelech.
The question has been raised as to how A bra
ham could th u s honor a king in th e land of C anaan
w hen God had prom ised A braham th a t the whole
land was to be inherited b y his posterity. Calvin
answ ers th is by saying th a t the tim e fo r entering
into possession of the land had not y et arrived,
and A braham is still a pilgrim or tem porary so
jo u rn e r in th e land. U ntil God’s appointed tim e
would come, A braham and his descendants m ust
be regarded as living in th e land by concession on
th e p a rt of th e people already established there.
“In short, u n til he should be placed, b y the hand
of God, in legitim ate au th o rity over the land, he
did not scruple to tre a t w ith the inhabitants of
the place, th at he m ight dw ell am ong them by per
mission, or by the paym ent of a price” (C alvin).
Questions:
1. W here was G erar located?
2. W hat is the literal m eaning of Abimelech?
3. W hat problem exists concerning th e in te r
pretation of “A bimelech”?
4. W ith w hat request did A bim elech approach
Abraham?
5. W hat reply did A braham make?
6. W hat m atter req u ired settlem ent before
Abimelech’s request could properly be carried out?
7. How did Abimelech explain the m atte r of
which A braham complained?
8. W hat gift did A braham give to Abimelech?
9. Was the covenant betw een A braham and
Abimelech a civil or a religious bond?
10. W hy did A braham give A bim elech seven
ewe lambs?
11. In view of the fact th a t God had prom ised
the whole land to A braham , w hy w as it proper
for A braham to enter into a n agreem ent im plying
recognition of the au thority o f Abimelech?
LESSON 99
2. History of Abraham after leaving Ur. 12:1
to 25:12, cont.
We now come to C hapter 22, which gives the
history of A braham offering Isaac as a sacrifice.
This constituted th e suprem e test of A braham ’s de
votion and obedience to God. This chapter, which
contains im portant lessons of tru th , has caused
needless difficulty to m any people. The present
w riter recalls reading a child ren ’s vacation Bible
school lesson on this incident, issued several years
ago by a larg e publisher of religious education
m aterials. T he au th o r of the' lesson stated th at
of course w e could not possibly believe th a t God
really com m anded A braham to offer his son Isaac
as a sacrifice. W hat really happened, she said,
w as th a t A braham im agined th a t he had heard the
voice of God com m anding h im to offer his son as
a sacrifice. Believing th a t God h ad actually com
m anded him to do this, A braham in a com m end
able spirit of devotion to th e Lord proceeds to ex
ecute the! command, and is only prevented a t the
last m om ent by th e intervention of God.
Such a reconstruction of th e story not only
falsifies the d ata given in th e S cripture record, but
is also q u ite unnecessary. T here is no reason to
doubt th at God actually com m anded A braham to
offer Isaac as a b u rn t offering. It w as not, how
ever, the purpose of G od th a t this command
should be actually carried out to the ex ten t of k ill
ing Isaac. God intended from th e beginning to
prevent the death of Isaac, though this w as not re
vealed to A braham u n til the last m om ent. In or
der to grasp the real m eaning of th e incident we
have to look a t the whole picture, not ju st at one
part.
Some Bible critics, w ho do not believe th a t
Genesis is a genuine book of Moses, have held
th at this story in Gen. 22 reflects the attitu d e of
the great prophets, centuries later, in opposing
hum an sacrifices such as those offered to Moloch.
There is no reason for such a supposition w h a t
ever. Scholars who reject th e doctrine of the sub
stitutionary atonem ent, calling it “blood theology”
and regarding it as prim itive and barbarous, are
ready to reject or explain aw ay th e statem ents of
Genesis 22, claiming th a t God could not really
have commanded any such thing.
Over against these denials of the real tru th of
the record, we believe th a t God actually com m and
ed A braham to offer Isaac in sacrifice. T he ob
jections raised against God com m anding A braham
to do this, would be eq u ally valid as objections
21
against th e substitutionary sufferings and death of
Jesus C hrist — th a t is, these objections would not
be valid a t all.
T he Bible teaches th a t sin can only be can
celed by th e sacrifice of life. God could require
the life of the person who has sinned, b u t in His
sovereignty He is w illing to accept the sacrifice
of th e life of a substitute, therefore it is possible
for Jesu s C hrist to die for sinners. This tru th of
a sub stitu tio n ary sacrifice is clearly im plied in the
n a rra tiv e of Gen. 22, as w e shall see.
T he com m and to offer Isaac as a sacrifice was
a difficult one for A braham to obey, not only be
cause Of his love for his son, but even m ore b e
cause it seem ed to contradict the promises which
God h a d made. God has given A braham these
promises, including th e promise th a t through
A braham ’s seed all th e fam ilies of the earth shall
be blessed. H e has been told th a t it is through
Isaac th a t these promises shall be realized (17:19).
Now he is comm anded to kill Isaac. If he obeys
th is com m and, how can the divine promises be
fulfilled? So fa r as hum an reason can discern,
it w ould be impossible for the promises to come
tru e if Isaac does not continue to live.
We gain some light on this m atter from the
New Testam ent. H ebrew s 11:17-19 says: “By
faith A braham , w hen he was tried, offered up
Isaac; and he th a t had received the promises of
fered u p his only begotten son, of whom it was
said, T hat in Isaac shall thy seed be called: ac
counting th a t God was able to raise him up, even
from th e dead . . . ” . H ere w e are told th at
A braham believed th a t God was able to raise Isaac
from the dead. This how ever indicates an am az
ing faith on A braham ’s part. We m ust rem em ber
th a t no instances of the dead being raised are re
corded in S cripture prior to this point. It was not
as if A braham could call to m ind the Shunam m ite
w om an’s son (2 Kings 4) or the daughter of Jairu s
or L azarus of Bethany, and then been able to b e
lieve th a t th e same kind of m iracle would take
place in th e case of Isaac. The test of A braham ’s
faith was m uch m ore severe than this. W hat he
believed, he believed by sheer inference from two
facts about God which he knew to be true, namely,
(1) God’s pow er, and (2) God’s reliability. He
knew th a t God is Almighty, and he knew th at God
is faith fu l to His own word. P u ttin g this know
ledge alongside of the command to kill Isaac, he
believed th a t God could and would raise Isaac from
th e dead in order th a t the promises should be fu l
filled th ro u g h him.
A braham is commanded to offer his son Isaac
upon one of th e m ountains in the land of Moriah.
The m eaning of the nam e M oriah is unknow n.
Davis’ B ible D ictionary states th a t the land of
M oriah w as probably th e region surrounding the
hill on w hich Solomon’s tem ple was later built.
It has been suggested by some Bible scholars th at
the place w here A braham was commanded to of
fer his son links this event w ith the late r offer
ing of sacrifices in the Jerusalem tem ple (G. Vos,
Biblical Theology, p. 108). It is highly probable
th a t this connection is intended by the sacred
record. O therw ise w hy should A braham have
been directed to go to a distant region, and to offet
his son upon a p articu lar m ountain? The only
plausible answ er is th a t this p articular m ountain
was to be of outstanding im portance in the later
history of redem ption.
It is w orthy of note th a t w hen this difficult
command w as given to A braham he set about
obeying it w ithout delay. A braham did not say,
“This is a serious m atter, which calls for m uch
prayer. I w ill call m y household together for a
ten-day season of prayer, th at we m ay'know w hat
the will of God is.” Some m odern-day believers
use p ray er as an escape from obedience. W hen
confronted w ith a clear alternative between rig h t
and wrong, they w ill try to postpone m aking a
decision by praying for “guidance.” The present
w riter has know n of C hristians who prayed for
guidance as to w h eth er they should leave a cor
rupt, apostate denom ination and join one' th a t is
tru e to the Bible; he has know n others w ho p ray
ed for guidance as to w hether they should ren d er
the things of God to C aesar by applying for a p e r
m it for the church to exist u n d er a wicked, totali
tarian law w hich constituted a pagan em peror the
head of the church. W hen the w ill of God is
know n to a person, w h at is called for is not prayeT
b u t action. P ra y e r is a duty, and one th a t is too
often neglected or slighted; b u t th ere are times
w hen p ray e r is a sin. P ra y e r is a sin w hen we
m ake it an escape ro ute to avoid m aking a pain
ful, unpleasant or em barrassing decision. P rayer
is a sin w hen it becomes a substitute for obedietice.
A braham did not delay his decision under the
plea of praying fo r divine guidance. He Obeyed
prom ptly, w ithout delay or evasion. “And A bra
ham rose up early in th e m orning, and saddled his
ass, and took tw o of his young men w ith him , and
Isaac his son, and clave the wood fo r the b u rn t
offering, and rose up, and w ent unto the place Of
w hich God had told him ” (22:3).
Questions:
1. W hat objection has been raised by unbe
lieving scholars against the story contained in
chapter 22?
2. How can this objection
answ ered?
to the
story be
3. W hat do scholars w ho reject the substitu
tionary atonem ent hold to be the real m eaning of
the story in Gen. 22?
4. W hat does the Bible teach about how sin
can be canceled?
5. W hy w as the command to sacrifice Isaac
difficult fo r A braham to obey?
6. W hat New T estam ent passage sheds light
on this narrative?
know to be true, which had a bearing on w hat
would be the outcome of Isaac’s death?
7. According to th e New Testam ent, w hat did
A braham believe to be the solution of the apparent
contradiction betw een G od’s prom ises and God’s
command?
9. W here was the land of M oriah located?
10. Why was the region and the p articular
m ountain im portant?
11. When is prayer sinful?
8. W hat tw o facts about God did A braham
LESSON 100
for the sins of men. This is proved by Jo h n 10:17,
18, where Jesus says: “T herefore doth m y F ather
love me, because I lay down m y life, th a t I m ight
2.
History of Abraham after leaving Ur. 12:1 take it again. No m an ta k eth it from m e, but I
to 25:12, cont.
lay it down of myself. I have pow er to lay it down
and I have power to take it again. This com
The place w here Isaac was to be offered was
m andm ent have I received from m y F ath e r.” In
evidently some distance from the place w here
these w ords we see two tru th s: (1) Jesus w as not
A braham h ad been living. On th e th ird day A bra
compelled against His w ill to suffer and die; (2)
ham lifted up his eyes and saw th e place afar off
there was absolute harm ony and u n ity of purpose
(22:4). The tw o servants a re com m anded to wait,
between God the F ather and God the Son. Sim ilar
w hile A braham proceeds fu rth e r w ith Isaac. He
ly,
Isaac was not compelled against his w ill to sub
tells the servants “I and the lad will go yonder
m it to being offered as a sacrifice; and it is also
and worship, and come again to you” (22:5). This
clear th at there was com plete harm ony and unity
statem ent of A braham is definitely in harm ony
of
purpose betw een A braham and Isaac. It would
w ith the explanation given in H ebrew s 11, namely,
have been extrem ely difficult, if n o t impossible,
th at A braham believed Isaac would be m iraculous
for A braham to bind Isaac against the la tte r’s will.
ly raised from the dead.
IK. History of the Covenant People from Abraham
As they proceed to w ard the m ountain, Isaac
asks a very em barrassing question: “W here is the
lam b for a b u rn t offering?” (22:7). A braham re
plies, “My son, God w ill provide him self a lamb
for a b u rn t offering.” This answ er certainly pro
ceeded from A braham ’s fa ith in God’s pow er and
reliability. A braham leaves everything in the
hands of God. In th e light of w h at followed, A bra
ham ’s statem ent seem s prophetic. W e m ay con
clude th a t by divine guidance, th e p atriarch spoke
a deeper and g re a te r tru th than h e him self u n d er
stood at this point.
Isaac has not y et been inform ed of w hat is to
be done. B ut w hen they h av e arrived at the ap
pointed place, this can no longer be w ithheld from
Isaac. A lthough Isaac is described as a “lad” he
w as not a m ere child. The Jew ish historian
Josephus suggests th a t Isaac w as about 25 years
old at th is tim e. It is obvious th a t Isaac could
have escaped from A braham if he had desired to
do so. T he fact th a t he m ade no attem pt to escape
indicates th a t he w illingly offered him self to be
bound and laid upon th e a lta r by A braham . This
rem inds us of th e tru th th a t o u r Lord Jesus Christ
w illingly offered H im self to b e a r th e sins of the
world. U nbelievers and m odernists have objected
to the orthodox doctrine of the substitutionary
atonem ent, saying th a t it w ould be u n ju st for God
th e F ath er to compel His Son to suffer and die for
the sins of the w orld. This is of course a m ere
travesty of the orthodox doctrine of the atone
m ent. It is not a case of God the F a th er com pel
ling His unw illing Son to b ear the sins of the
world. R ath er C hrist w illingly laid down His life
The fact th a t Isaac w illingly subm itted to be
ing bound for sacrifice is often overlooked w hen
this chapter is read, while the w hole em phasis is
placed upon A braham ’s heroic faith. The incident
shows a m agnificent faith and devotion on Isaac’s
part also.
W hen A braham is actually on the point of k ill
ing his son w ith the knife he had brought along for
the purpose, he is checked by the voice of the
angel of the Lord calling to him from heaven.
“God knew th a t the hand th a t had the courage to
pick up the knife would not have hesitated to p e r
form the sacrifice” (Leupold). The test of A bra
ham’s faith need go no fu rth e r. I t has been
dem onstrated th at God comes first in A braham ’s
life. W hile God did not w an t the actual sacrifice
of Isaac to take place, still He did w a n t A braham
to m ake the sacrifice in his heart. We should realize
that God demands suprem e devotion of every one
of His children, not only of A braham . Even though
He does not put every one to such a suprem e test,
still He demands the same absolute spiritual de
votion of every believer. God claim s absolute
priority in m an’s life. To the ex ten t th a t we fail
to give God th at place in our lives, we are idol
aters.
A braham had proved th at he feared God. Many
people say th at they fear God, or believe in God,
or serve God, yet all the w hile they are living for
self or the world. In our own day people will
flagrantly violate the com m andm ents of God, yet
self-righteously claim th a t they have done no
wrong. We recently read an argum ent which
23
claim ed th a t it is right for a certain commercial
m otion p ictu re th eatre to operate on the L ord’s
Day, inasm uch as th e proprietor, projector oper
ators and m any of the patrons are Christian people!
It is to be feared th a t this is a common attitude,
not an isolated case. Today a m ere nominal p ro
fession of devotion to God is often regarded as if
it w ere th e real thing. A braham not only claimed
th a t he feared God; he proved th a t he feared God.
In the New Testam ent (Jam es 2:21,22) we
read: “Was not A braham our fa th e r justified by
works, w hen he had offered Isaac his son upon
the altar? Seest thou how faith w rought w ith his
w orks, an d by works was faith made perfect?”
H ere w e have an inspired statem ent th a t A bra
ham ’s offering of Isaac was a proof of the reality
of his faith.
“A nd A braham lifted up his eyes, and looked,
and behold behind him a ram caught in a thicket
by his horns: and A braham w ent and took the ram
and offered him up for a b u rn t offering in the
stead of his son” (22:13). “A braham is asked by
God to offer life, th a t which in point of life is
d earest to him, his only son. A t the same tim e it
is declared by the interposition of the Angel and
th e pointing out of the ram in the thicket, th a t the
su bstitution of one life for another life w ould be
acceptable to God” (G. Vos, Biblical Theology, p.
107).
T he principle of substitutionary sacrifice is
tau g h t by th e offering up of the ram caught in the
thicket. This ram is offered in the stead of Isaac.
This principle of substitution is the very core of
th e B iblical doctrine of redem ption. A person who
does not believe in this is rejecting, not some little
point of doctrin e out on the circum ference of the
circle, b u t th e very cen ter of th e circle itself. Such
a person is rejecting the main thing th a t m akes
C hristian ity w hat it is. The w rite r once knew a
m an who said he accepted all the teachings of
evangelical C hristianity except for one m inor de
tail. Upon being asked w hat th a t one point was
he replied th a t it was the substitutionary atone
m ent. H e thought it degrading for man to depend
on th e d eath of C hrist for salvation; it would be
m ore in keeping w ith hum an self-respect for a
m an to stan d on his own feet before God. This, of
course, was ju s t another way of saying th at he did
n ot consider him self a sinner, felt no need of a
Saviour and therefore was not a Christian. The
fact th a t he was a m em ber of a w ell-known “evan
gelical” ch u rch denom ination did not alter the
fact th a t he was essentially an unbeliever.
I t is w o rth noting
th at the apostle P au l in
Romans 8:32 in speaking of the sacrifice of Christ
for our sins uses language which is strongly
rem iniscent -of God’s message to A braham in Gen.
22:12: “He th at spared not H is own Son, b u t de
livered Him up for us all . . . ” ; “thou hast not
w ithheld thy son, thine only son from me.”
Both A braham and Isaac m ust have been deep
ly moved by the outcome of th eir trip to the land
of Moriah. The Genesis record deals w ith the
event objectively, saying nothing about th e em o
tional reactions of A braham and Isaac. T h at A bra
ham w as very deeply im pressed is indicated by his
nam ing the place Jehovah-jireh, m eaning “Jehovah
w ill provide.” Moses in w riting Genesis adds th a t
even in his day the proverbial statem ent, “In the
m ount of th e Lord it shall be seen (p ro v id ed )”,
was in use, indicating the deep im pression m ade
on people’s m inds and memories.
Questions:
1. W hat light does the Epistle to th e H ebrew s
throw on the history of A braham offering Isaac?
2. How did A braham answ er his son’s ques
tion about a lamb?
3. How old m ay Isaac have been a t this time?
4. W hat is show n by the fact th a t Isaac m ade
no a ttem p t to escape?
5. W hat tru th concerning C hrist is suggested
by Isaac’s conduct upon this occasion?
6. W hat does Jo h n 10:17,18 teach about C hrist,
and in w h at w ays is this parallel to the situation
in Genesis 22?
7. W hat place does God claim in every hum an
life?
8. W hat had A braham proved concerning his
own life?
9. W hat is the difference betw een m ere nom
inal profession and real fear of God?
10. W hat does the Epistle Of Jam es say about
A braham ’s offering of Isaac on the altar?
11. W hat principle of redem ption was involved
in the sacrifice of the ram found in th e thicket?
12. Why can a person w ho rejects the su b sti
tutionary atonem ent not be a C hristian?
13. W hat nam e did A braham give to th e place
w here he had bound his son and laid him on the
altar?
14. W hat is the m eaning of this name?
15. W hat proverb came into use through this
event?
LESSON 101
Im m ediately after A braham had m et the su
prem e test of being w illing to offer his son as a
2.
History of Abraham after leaving Ur. 12:1 sacrifice to God, a fu rth e r revelation w as granted
to him. The angel of the L ord calls to him o u t of
to 25:12, cont.
HI. History of the Covenant People from Abraham
24
heaven the second tim e (22:15). The great
promises are repeated, this tim e w ith an oath on
th e p a rt of God. “By m yself have I sw orn, saith
the L ord . . . ” (22:16). The New T estam ent com
m ents (H ebrew s 6:13,14): “F or w hen God m ade
prom ise to A braham , because he could sw ear by
no greater, he sw are by him self, saying, Surely
blessing I will bless thee, and m ultiplying I w ill
m ultiply thee,” adding th e explanation: “F or m en
verily sw ear by the g reater: an d an oath fo r con
firm ation is to them an end of all strife” (Heb.
6:16). A n oath is stronger th an a m ere statem ent;
it is used in m atters of the g reatest im portance,
and has a ch aracter of finality, or of settling a
m a tte r perm anently. W anting to give A braham
the strongest possible kind of assurance at this
point in his life, God not only repeats the prom ises
but actually confirm s th em by an oath. E ssential
ly an oath is an appeal to God to w itness the
tru th of w h at one is saying, o r one’s sincere p u r
pose to carry out w hat he is prom ising. Men sw ear
by God because He is th e g reatest of all beings;
there is no g reater by whom th e y could swear.
F or the sam e reason, w hen God sw ears, He can
only sw ear by H im self; th ere is none g reater th an
Him self to whom He can appeal.
The prom ises given in chapter 22 are essential
ly identical w ith those previously given (chaps. 12,
15, 17), y et th ere are some differences of detail in
the wording. “Blessing I w ill bless th ee” is a
H ebrew idiom, w hich m ay be tran slated “I w ill
very g reatly bless thee;” and so also in th e case
of the prom ise, “m ultiplying I w ill m u ltiply thee.”
Com pare the w ords of Gen. 2:17, “thou shalt su re
ly die,” w hich in the H ebrew is literally “dying
thou shalt die.”
“A nd thy seed shall possess the gate of his
enem ies” (22:17). The w ord “g ate” o r “g ates” is
used in S crip tu re to m ean the pow er of som ething;
thus in M atthew 16:18 the expression “th e gates of
hell” m eans th e greatest possible pow er of evil.
A braham is assured th a t his seed shall possess the
gate of his enemies. As Leupold points out, this
does not a t all m ean th a t Israel is to gain posses
sion of th e w orld by m ilitary conquest, b u t only
states w h at th e outcome w ill be w hen Israel is a t
tacked by o th er nations; m oreover this prom ise
to A braham ’s seed is conditioned by Israel’s obedi
ence to God. We know th a t as long as Israel re
mained faith fu l to God the nation w as delivered
from attacks by enem y nations; b u t w hen they b e
came u n faith fu l to God, God punished them by de
livering them up into th e hands of pow erful
enemies, as happened several tim es in the period
of the Judges; and as w hen the n o rth ern kingdom
was destroyed by A ssyria in 721 B. C., and Je ru sa
lem was destroyed b y th e Babylonians in 586 B. C.
Of th e prom ises g ran ted to A braham the
greatest and m ost im p o rtan t is “A nd in th y seed
shall all th e nations of th e earth be blessed” (22:
18). L iterally the H ebrew says “In thy seed shall
all the nations of the earth bless them selves.” This
promise is of course a prophecy of the coming of
Jesus C hrist and of the success of His redem ptive
work. We should note the universal elem ent th a t
is prom inent here. It is not m erely the physical
descendants of the patriarch A braham th a t are to
be blessed through His Seed, b u t all th e nations of
the earth. God called A braham an d m ade a cove
nant w ith him so th a t from his seed C hrist could
be born, and the real purpose of this was not m ere
ly to bring blessing to Israel, b u t to b rin g bless
ing to the world. If the operations of God’s sav
ing grace w ere confined to the narrow channel of
Israel for some two thousand years, this was not
because God’s ultim ate purpose w as to bless Israel,
but ra th e r His ultim ate purpose w as th a t the riv er
should overflow the channel and brin g blessing to
“all the nations of the ea rth .” The Jew s of our
Lord’s day and of the apostle P a u l’s day had fo r
gotten this tru th ; they insisted upon regarding the
narrow channel of the Mosaic system as perm a
nently valid, as if it existed for its ow n sake and
not for a purpose greater th a n itself. So they stoned
Stephen and hated Paul.
We m ay pause at this point to note th a t th e
promise of a Redeem er is becom ing m ore definite
and explicit as history m oves on. F irs t it w as a
promise th a t th e seed of th e w om an w ould finally
crush the serpent’s head (Gen. 3:15); then it is
im plied th at the R edeem er shall be descended
from Shem (Gen. 9:26); now it is revealed th at
the Redeem er shall be descended from A braham
and shall bring blessing to th e w orld.
Following the reception of this divine rev ela
tion, A braham and Isaac re tu rn to th e point w here
the two young men and the ass had been left
(22:19, compare verse 5). The reunited p a rty re
tu rn s to Beersheba (“the w ell of the oath” ) in the
south of Palestine.
The last few verses (20-24) of ch ap ter 22 con
tain genealogical inform ation about A braham ’s
kindred in Mesopotamia. N ahor was A braham ’s
brother, as w e know from 11:27. N othing is said
in chapter 11 about N ahor em igrating from U r of
the Chaldees, but we learn from 24:10 th a t he
moved to upper M esopotamia a t some tim e in his
life. The airline distance betw een A braham ’s
abode in southern P alestine and the place w here
his kindred w ere living in up p er M esopotamia was
perhaps 400 miles, b u t by any practicable route of
trav e l it would be m uch g rea ter th a n that. C er
tainly the distance w as too great, at th a t period of
history, for any freq u en t contact. As a m atter
of fact there had been no contact betw een A bra
h am and Nahor, so far as w e know , since A bra
ham left U r of the C haldees m any years previous
ly. Now for the first tim e A braham receives news
about his relatives, “It w as told A braham , saying
. . . ” (22:20) — th at is, someone brought him news.
Who this someone was, w e are n o t told. I t may
25
have been a trav eler in some caravan of m er
chants. B u t new s is brought to Abraham , and it
is accurate new s too for it includes the nam es of
children. N ahor and his w ife M ilcah have eight
children, one of whom is B ethuel the fath e r of
Rebekah, who la te r became the w ife of Isaac. This
inform ation about N ahor and his descendants w as
probably inserted by Moses at this point because
of its im portance in connection w ith the m arriage
of Isaac (ch ap ter 24).
Questions:
1. W hat experience did A braham have im
m ediately a fte r offering the ram in place of his
son Isaac?
2. W hat is rem arkable about the way God’s
prom ises to A braham are repeated in chapter 22?
3. W hat does the Epistle to the H ebrews say
about th e purpose and effectiveness of an oath?
4. W hy do m en sw ear by the name of God?
5. W hy did God sw ear by Himself?
6. W hat is th e m eaning of
bless thee”?
“Blessing I w ill
7. W hat is m eant by the prom ise th at A bra
ham ’s seed shall possess the gate of his enemies?
8. W hat condition w as im plied in this promise
about possessing the gate of the enemies?
9. W hat was the most im portant of the prom is
es given to A braham ?
10. W hy did God call A braham and m ake a
covenant w ith him?
11. W hat was the e rro r of the Jew s of P a u l’s
day as to the purpose of the nation of Israel?
12. W hat new s was brought to A braham a fte r
this?
13. Who w as N ahor and w here did he live?
14. W hat person descended from N ahor w as
im portant for the fam ily of Abraham ?
LESSON 102
In confessing him self a stranger and sojourner
in the L and of Prom ise, A braham expressed a
profound sp iritual tru th , as is clearly brought out
2.
History of Abraham after leaving Ur. 12:1
by the E pistle to the H ebrew s ("11:13-16). We are
to 25:12, cont.
told in H ebrew s th a t A braham sought “a b etter
country, th a t is a heavenly.” T herefore A braham
C hap ter 23 records th e death and bu rial of
did not regard C anaan as his tru e home, nor as
S arah, th e w ife of Abraham . S arah died a t the
the ultim ate, absolute fulfilm ent of th e prom ise
age of 127 years, a t K irjath-arba, a place w hich
of an inheritance. M any Bible readers are too
w as e a rlie r and la te r called Hebron, located some
free to discount the Old Testam ent, as if these
20 m iles southw est of Jerusalem . It has been
ancient m en of God such as A braham w ere th in k
noted th a t S arah is the only woman of the Bible
ing chiefly of earth ly and m aterial fulfilm ent of
w hose age at the tim e of h er death is recorded.
God’s promises. The Bible indicates th a t w hile
A t th e close of chapter 22 A braham w as liv
expecting the earth ly fulfilm ent, the patriarchs
ing a t B eersheba, the traditional southern lim it of
w ell understood th a t th a t w as not the real fulfil
C anaan. Now he has m oved n o rth and east as
m ent, th a t is, it w as not to be the absolute, u lti
fa r as H ebron. Moses adds th at Hebron is “in the
m ate fulfilm ent. T heir hope stretched fa r out in
land of C anaan,” doubtless to rem ind his readers
to the future, even beyond the farth est horizon of
th a t it w as in th e Prom ised Land th a t S arah died.
history — into the eternal future. A nd if th e
It is possible th a t A braham was aw ay from home
patriarchs regarded the real fulfilm ent of th eir
on some business at the tim e of Sarah’s death, as
hope and God’s prom ise as beyond history, C hris
indicated by th e statem ent of verse 2 th a t he
tians of today surely should have th e same in
“came to m ourn for Sarah.” If he had been there
sight. It is a bad sign of th e deterioration of re
w hen she died, he would not have needed to
ligion w hen C hristians look for the ideal fulfil
“com e” to m ourn for her.
m ent of religion w ithin history.
It w as custom ary in the Holy Land to bury
The local H ittites first offer A braham the use
th e dead alm ost im mediately. Abraham, however,
of th eir sepulchres w ithout paym ent (23:6). A bra
is a sojourner dw elling in tents, who does not
ham how ever declines this offer. The negotiation
hold title to a single acre of real estate. A ccording
carried on betw een A braham and the H ittites is
ly he negotiates w ith the sons of Heth, th a t is, the
typical O riental, b u t th ere is no reason to think
H ittites, w ho w ere in control of the area, w ith a
th a t the H ittites w ere insincere in th eir offer to
view to purchasing a piece of land for a burying
A braham . R ather, the record indicates th a t they
place. D escribing him self as “a stranger and a
regarded A braham very highly indeed and m ade
sojourner w ith you,” A braham desires possession
the offer in good faith.
of a b u ry in g place; th a t is, he desires unquestion
able ow nership of the land in question perm a
A braham how ever w ishes to acquire a burying
nently.
place w hich can be held w ith unquestionable and
HI. History of the Covenant People from Abra
ham to Joseph. 11:27 to 50:26, cont.
26
perm anent ow nership. He therefore m entions the
cave of M achpelah in a field belonging to a H ittite
nam ed E phron (23:8,9), requesting th a t the H ittite
chiefs or leaders w ith w hom he is speaking ap
proach th e ow ner of the field on A braham ’s b e
half. It so happened th a t E phron w as present —
a fact w hich m ay have been unknow n to A braham
—therefo re no such indirect approach is necessary;
E phron speaks for him self a t once. He states th a t
he w ill give th e field and th e cave to A braham
as a gift.
This offer of E phron m ust be in terp reted in
its setting of typically O riental courtesy. In th at
setting, th e offer w ould be understood by all
p resen t as a g esture of politeness, n o t an offer
th a t w as intended actually to be accepted. E uro
peans and A m ericans m ay regard such a gesture
as hypocritical or insincere; to the O riental m ind
it is ju st good m anners. A braham evidently u n
derstood perfectly th a t it w ould be im proper to
accept such an offer. He therefore, w ith due
form ality, offers to pay E phron the v alue of the
field.
of the day. They could not therefore a ttrib u te
A braham ’s readiness to pay the fu ll am ount to
ignorance of local customs. T here w ould be no
other possible inference to be d raw n except th at
A braham stands on a higher ethical level th a n the
Hittites. A braham thus gave a testim ony to the
H ittites th a t he was not a m an ru le d by love of
money.
The money has been paid, and the entire
transaction is publicly certified before witnesses
(23:17,18). Note th a t not only the field an d the
cave are mentioned, b u t also the trees in the field.
It was im portant th a t the trees be m entioned ex
pressly; otherw ise the sale of th e field w ould not
necessarily include the sale of the trees.
Following this transaction, A braham buried
S arah in the cave of M aohpelah.
Questions:
1. How old w as S arah w hen she died?
2. W here was S arah w hen she died?
It soon becomes evident th a t E phron expects
to be paid fo r th e field, for in verse 15 he nam es
its value as 400 shekels of silver. H ad it really
been his intention to tra n sfe r th e field to A bra
ham as a gift, he w ould not have specified its p re
cise value. S till E phron m anages to nam e his
price and at th e sam e tim e to keep up the form s
of O riental courtesy: “My lord, h eark en unto me:
th e land is w o rth fo u r h u n d red shekels of silver;
w hat is th a t betw ixt m e and thee? b u ry th e re
fore thy dead” (23:15).
O bviously E phron expected th is to be follow
ed by th e custom ary prolonged haggling over the
price. Leupold points out th a t th e nom inal value
of 400 shekels of silver w ould be about $260, but
as the silver probably had about tw en ty tim es as
m uch purchasing pow er then as now, Ephron was
actually asking th e equivalent of over $5000 for
an acre or tw o of land containing a cave. It is
common in O riental countries for the m erchant or
seller to nam e an outrageously high price at first,
expecting finally to get about h alf of w hat he first
asked. T he final sale price would be reached
through a long draw n out process of bids and
offers. Such bargaining is keenly enjoyed by
O rientals, and affords som ething of the satisfaction
of a gam e o f chess.
A braham , how ever, is m ourning th e loss of
S arah and he is in no mood to en ter into a b a r
gaining session w ith th e H ittites. A ccordingly he
w eighs out th e fu ll 400 shekels of silver w ithout
protest. No d oubt E phron and his H ittite friends
w ere am azed at this developm ent. They knew
A braham w ell enough to know th a t he w as not
sim ple or ignorant of th e common business m ethods
3. W hat indication is th e re th a t A braham was
not present w hen Sarah died?
4. W hat was the custom
burial?
as to th e tim e of
5. From whom does A braham seek to purchase
a burying place?
6. How did A braham describe him self to the
local inhabitants?
7. W hat tru th does th e E pistle to th e H ebrew s
point out in connection w ith A braham ’s descrip
tion of himself?
8. W hat offer did the H ittites first m ake to
Abraham?
9. How should E phron’s offer to give the field
to A braham be understood?
10. W hat fact indicates th a t E phron really ex
pected paym ent?
11. How m uch w ould 400 shekels of silver be
in money today?
12. How m uch m ay it have represented in real
purchasing pow er today?
13. W hy did A braham im m ediately pay the
price asked w ithout bargaining fo r a low er price?
14. How was the sale of the p ro p e rty certified?
15. W hy w ere the trees m entioned as included
in the sale?
27
LESSON 103
~
middle of the nineteenth century. B enjam in of
Tudela, a Jew ish trav eller who lived about 800
years ago left an interesting account of his visit
2.
History of Abraham after leaving Ur. 12:1 to the cave. B enjam in states th a t the real sepul
to 25:12, cont.
chre of the patriarchs w as not shown to ordinary
travellers, b u t th at in the case of rich Jew s, an
Som e critics of the O ld Testam ent have claim
iron door w hich had been there since ancient
ed th a t th e record of Genesis m ust be false, for
times w as opened. T hrough this iron door the
th e re cannot have been H ittites living in southern
visitor descended through tw o em pty caves to a
P alestin e at th is period of history. However there
th ird cavern which contained six sepulchres, nam e
is no reason to question the tru th of the Biblical
ly those of Abraham , Isaac, Jacob, Sarah, Rebekali
record. M oreover, confirm ation has been found
and Leah. According to B enjam in’s account, on
in one of th e Tell-el-A m arna letters (discovered
each sepulchre w as an inscription such as “This
in E gypt) w hich speaks of H ittites dwelling in the
is the sepulchre of our fa th e r A braham , upon
south of th e land of Canaan and participating in
whom be peace,” and so on.
an expedition against Jerusalem (about 1400 B.C.).
T his is considerably later th an th e time of A bra
A re the m ortal rem ains of the patriarchs and
ham , y e t if H ittites w ere living th ere in 1400 B.C.
th eir wives still in the cave of M achpelah aw ait
th ey could h av e lived there 500 years earlier also.
ing the resurrection day? We do not know, b u t
it is certainly possible, if not probable, th a t they
The cave of M achpelah is one of the com para
are. U ntil scientific archaeologists are perm itted
tively ferw sacred spots on Palestine concerning
to exam ine the site thoroughly, and also another
the identification of which th ere is little doubt.
possible site a m ile to the west, the question can
T he cave h as been und er the control of M oham
not b e positively answ ered.
m edans fo r centuries and today a Moslem mosque
stands over it. In m odern tim es v ery few C hris
The New T estam ent (Acts 7:16) speaks Of
tian s have ever been perm itted to enter the cave.
Jacob
being buried in a tom b w hich A braham p u r
In 1862 th e P rin ce of Wales w as allowed in, and in
chased
from the sons of H am or in Shechem.
1869 th e C row n P rince of Prussia was given th e
Genesis 50:15, however, speaks of Jacob being
sam e privilege. In 1882 tw o B ritish princes, one
buried in the cave of M achpelah which A braham
of w hom la te r becam e King George V, were allow
bought of E phron the H ittite. This constitutes an
ed to e n te r and m ake a brief examination. None
apparent contradiction in the Bible, fo r w hich
of these visitors w ere able to exam ine the in terior
some
explanation m ust be sought. If w ill be noted
carefully. D uring th e first W orld War, w hen the
th at Genesis 50:15 is speaking of the burial of
B ritish forces u n d er G eneral A llenby w ere cam
Jacob only, w hereas Stephen in his speech in Acts
paigning th ro u g h Palestine against the Turks, a
7:15,16, is speaking of Jacob and others also: “So
B ritish arm y officer entered th e mosque in search
Jacob w ent down into E gypt and died, he, and our
of a T u rk ish official. Not finding the man he w as
fathers, and w ere carried over into Sychem, and
seeking, this B ritish officer left again, w ithout
laid in the sepulchre th a t A braham bought for a
realizing w h at an opportunity he had missed. The
sum of m oney of the sons of Em m or the fa th e r of
officer described his experience later. He passed
Sychem
.” The explanation given in The New Bible
through a door in th e rock interio r of the mosque,
Commentary (Davidson, Stibbs and K evan), p.
slid dow n a steep passageway and found th a t he
908, is as follows: “Jacob w as buried in the cave
was in a larg e cave, some tw enty feet square, in
of
M achpelah at H ebron (Gen. 49:29ff.); Joseph
th e m iddle of w hich was a large block of stone
was buried a t Shechem (Josh. 24:32) . . . . A bra
six b y th re e b y three feet in size. L ater w hen
ham bought the cave of M achpelah from the
perm ission w as sought to en ter th e cave again and
H ittites (Gen. 23:16); Jacob bought the land a t
exam ine the interior, the request was refused.
Shechem w hich he gave to Joseph (and w here
Davis’ B ible D ictionary states th a t there w as once
Joseph w as buried) from th e sons of H am or
an ancient C hristian church w here the mosque
(Josh. 24:32). Not only separate quotations . . .
stands today, and th a t inside the present mosque
b u t separate incidents are conflated in L uke’s
th e re is a ro u n d opening in the floor about one
sum m ary of Stephen’s speech.” T hat is, Stephen
foot in diam eter. Looking through this hole the
in recounting the history of his people condensed
observer sees a shaft 12 feet square and fifteen
or telescoped it so th a t tw o purchases and b u rials
feet deep, at th e fa r end of w hich is a door is said
are spoken of in a single statem ent as if they w ere
to provide entran ce to a still deeper cavern. T here
only one. This does not really contradict the
are tw o m ore entrances to the cave m arked in the
Genesis record; it m erely cites it in a very con
pavem ent of th e mosque, b u t they are sealed by
densed or sum m ary form.
th e pavem ent.
W. M. Thom son’s book The Land and the Book
(pages 579-582) gives a detailed account of w h at
w as know n about the cave of M achpelah in the
Questions:
1. .On w h at ground have some critics claim ed
28
th a t the reco rd of A braham ’s purchase of the field
from H ittites m ust be false?
have at the cave of
War I?
2. How is th e tru th of th e Biblical record con
firm ed by archaeology?
6. W hen did B enjam in of Tudela live, and
what did he relate about th e cave of M achpelah
in his day?
3. Who has control of the cave of M achpelah
today?
7. W hat difficulty exists concerning Stephen’s
reference to a burial place purchased by A bra
ham?
4. How m any Europeans have been perm itted
to en ter th e cave in m odern times?
5. W hat experience did a B ritish arm y officer
M achpelah
during
W orld
8. W hat solution can be offered fo r th is diffi
culty?
LESSON 104
in . History of the Covenant People from Abraham
at his death exceeded A braham ’s by five years,
possibly due to Isaac’s quieter m ode of living.
2.
“And A braham was old, and w ell strick en in
to 25:12, cont.
age: and the Lord had blessed A braham in all
things" (24:1). A lthough A braham actually lived
C hapter 24 presents th e story of Isaac’s m a r
35 m ore years, he of course did n o t know th a t this
riage to Rebekah, w hich is universally regarded
would be the case; at th e age Of 140 he n atu rally
as one of th e m ost beautiful stories in th e Bible.
did not expect to live a great deal longer. God
Leupold calls this ch ap ter th e record of “an act of
has blessed him in all things. T here is one im
faith w hich transform s th e ordin ary experiences
portant m atter th at A braham wishes to m ake sure
of life.” T h ere are m any lessons of tr u th in this
of attending to before he dies, nam ely, th e m a r
chapter. Among other things it shows how faith
riage of Isaac his son. Isaac m ust m a rry — th a t
in th e L ord led A braham to act according to p rin
is necessary for the continuation of th e covenant
ciple, not according to convenience, how G od’s
people — b u t a m arriage w ith a w om an of the
providence controls even the details of w h at
Canaanites m ust be avoided at all costs.
comes to pass, and how p ray er began to be answ er
ed even before th e p ra y e r w as completed. O ther
lessons tau g h t are th e inviolability of an oath, the
d u ty of prom ptness in carrying out the L ord’s will,
and how th e spontaneous w illingness of a young
wom an to do some h a rd w ork above and beyond
th e call of d u ty led to h e r gaining an honored
place in history and becoming one of th e ancestors
of th e Messiah.
Isaac is a ra th e r m inor ch aracter in th e history
of th e p atriarchs, being im portant chiefly as the
lin k betw een A braham and Jacob. He is pictured
as a m editative m an, less active th an A braham
and Jacob. H e represents the passive ra th e r th an
th e active side of religion. His experiences are
largely repetitions of experiences of A braham his
father. Isaac’s relatively passive role in the history
of th e patriarch s ren d ers him specially suitable as
a type of th e passively suffering C hrist — som e
thing also suggested by th e com m and to A braham
to offer Isaac as a b u rn t offering on M ount Moriah.
A t th e tim e of his m arriage to R ebekah, Isaac
is already fo rty years old (25:20). W hile this
would perhaps be regarded as ra th e r la te in life
for m arriage, w e m ust rem em ber th a t Isaac lived
to th e age of 180 years (35:28), th erefore at the
age of forty he w as still in th e first q u a rte r of his
life. T he situation is parallel to a m an w ho lives
to th e age of 70 m arry in g a t th e age of 16. A t the
tim e of Isaac’s m arriage, A braham w as 140 years
old (21:5 com pared w ith 25:20), and still had 35
years to live (25:7). We note also th a t Isaac’s age
From the secular or w orldly point of view, a
m arriage betw een A braham ’s fam ily and the
Canaanites would have been highly advantageous.
Not only would it have been fa r m ore convenient
to arrange than the obtaining of a b rid e from
another country, b u t it w ould have given the clan
of A braham and Isaac increased prestige and
social standing, as w ell as economic advantages
and opportunities. All this, how ever, m eans n o th
ing to A braham in com parison w ith th e spiritual
issues th at w ere involved. W hen th e m arriage of
his son is to be arranged, A braham th in k s first of
God — God’s honor, God’s plan of redem ption,
God’s requirem ent of absolute devotion — not of
money, popularity or convenience. How often
Christian people of the presen t day p u t w orldly
considerations first in a m atte r of this kind!
Accordingly, A braham calls fo r “his eldest se r
v an t of his house.” This expression does not
necessarily m ean the oldest se rv a n t in point of
years, nor even the oldest in seniority of service.
It m ay also m ean the highest in rank. It is pos
sible, but not at all likely, th a t this “eldest ser
v an t” is identical w ith th e E liezer of Damascus
m entioned in 15:2. I t is unlikely th a t they are
the same individual, n o t only because in chapter
24 the “eldest servant” is n o t nam ed, b u t also b e
cause about 60 years have passed since th e events
of chapter 15. Eliezer h a d evidently been in
A braham ’s employ some’ considerable tim e before
th e tim e m entioned in ch a p ter 15; it is h ard ly lik e
29
ly, therefore, th a t he w ould still be in the sam e
position in ch ap ter 24. Probably he had died or
re tire d from active service and another m an had
tak en his place as the business m anager of A bra
h am ’s establishm ent.
purity or com plete separation from idolatry. How
ever they would have some knowledge of Jehovah,
the living and tru e God, and would be fa r above
the degraded heathenism of th e C anaanites.
The “eldest servant” is called for and is re
q uired to sw ear an oath “by the Lord, the God of
heaven, and th e God of the earth” (24:3). The
p a rtic u la r m an n er of taking this oath iwas by the
serv an t placing his hand under A braham ’s thigh.
The serv an t is required to sw ear th a t he w ill not
tak e a w ife for Isaac from th e daughters of the
C anaanites, b u t w ill go to Mesopotamia and take
a w ife for Isaac from A braham ’s kindred.
Questions:
We m ay inquire into the reason for this re
quirem en t on A braham ’s part. The C anaanites of
course w ere m ostly Hamites, so we might suppose
th a t A braham ’s concern w as to preserve the
Sem itic racial p u rity of his descendants. This may
indeed have been in his m ind as a minor concern
b u t we do not believe it was his m ain reason for
objecting to a m arriage w ith th e Canaanites. The
Biblical concept of “the seed of A braham ” was
n ev er dependent strictly on racial descent. T here
w ere notable exceptions to Semitic racial purity,
even am ong godly Israelites of later times. F or
exam ple, Joseph m arried an Egyptian wife (41:45)
w ho no d oubt becam e a believer in Jehovah, and
w h o becam e th e ancestor of the tribes of Ephraim
and M anasseh; R ahab of Jericho was a C anaanite
who becam e an Israelite and an ancestor of K ing
D avid and of Jesus C hrist (Josh. 6:25; M att. 1:5).
It appears, therefore, th a t A braham ’s chief
concern w as fo r religious ra th e r than m erely
racial purity. W hat is required is th at Isaac’s wife
shall come from a background and fam ily which
is religiously as pure and tru e as possible. We
know from Joshua 24:2, 15 th a t th e ancestors of
A braham w orshipped false gods in U r of the C hal
dees. As U r w as a great center of moon w orship it
is possible th a t they had been moon worshippers.
We know also th a t A braham ’s kindred in Meso
potam ia w ere n o t entirely free from idolatry, as
is proved by Rachel’s th eft of h er fath er L aban’s
gods (31:30, 34; com pare 35:2-4). It was not th e re
fore to be expected th a t the descendants of N ahor
in M esopotam ia would be entirely on a p a r w ith
A braham , S arah and Isaac in point of religious
1. W hat are some of the
chapter 24?
lessons
taught in
2. How does Isaac com pare w ith A braham
and Jacob as to his prom inence and activities in
the p atriarchal history?
3. How old was Isaac at the tim e of his m a r
riage? W hat portion of his life was already past?
4. How old w as A braham a t the tim e of Isaac’s
m arriage?
5. How m uch longer did A braham live?
6. W hat im portant m atte r did A braham wish
to get settled before his ow n death?
7. W hat advantages w ould have accrued to
A braham ’s fam ily from a m arriage w ith the
Canaanites?
8. W hat kind of considerations did A braham
regard as suprem ely im portant in this situation?
9. W hat m ay be the m eaning of the expression
“the eldest servant”?
10. W hy is it unlikely th a t this servant w as
th e Eliezer of Dam ascus m entioned in ch apter 15?
11. How did A braham adm inister an oath to
his servant?
12. W hat was the se rv an t required to sw ear?
13. W hy is it unlikely th a t A braham objected
to m arriage w ith the C anaanites chiefly on racial
grounds?
14. If racial p u rity w as not A braham ’s chief
concern in arranging for Isaac’s m arriage, w hat
was his chief concern?
15. W hat was th e
A braham and Nahor?
religious
background Of
16. To w h a t ex te n t w ould the descendants of
N ahor differ religiously, a t this time, from th e
Canaanites?
LESSON 105
servant then to take Isaac back to Mesopotamia?
A braham im m ediately w arns against this in the
strongest term s (24:6). To take Isaac to Meso
2.
History of Abraham after leaving Ur. 12:1 potam ia would be a backw ard step and w ould ru n
to 25:12, cont.
counter to the revealed purpose of God. Such a
thing is therefo re u n d er no circum stances to be
A braham ’s serv an t raises a possible objection
done. A braham ra th e r assures his serv an t th a t
to th e req u irem en t th a t he get Isaac a w ife from
the God who has called him and given him
N ahor’s descendants. P erhaps th e woman w ill
prom ises w ill w ork things out: “H e shall send
not be w illing to m ake the trip to Canaan. Is the
30
his angel before thee, and thou shalt take a wife
unto my son from thence” (24:7). However, if
the w om an refuses h er consent, then the servant
w ill have discharged his sw orn obligation and w ill
not be responsible for th e refusal; only u n d er no
circum stances is Isaac to re tu rn to M esopotamia.
The serv an t is now clear as to ju st w h at he is
sw earing to, and sw ears th e oath as required by
A braham (24:9).
N ext comes th e serv an t’s action in fulfilling
his obligation u n d er th e oath. Through all the
re st of th e ch ap ter w e get an im pression th a t the
servant is anxious to discharge his obligation w ith
out delay. It is not actually stated th a t verse 10
followed im m ediately a fte r th e oath sw orn in
verse 9, b u t th a t im pression is given, for nothing
else is m entioned betw een th e two. L ate r in th e
story w e find the serv an t anxious to re tu rn to
Canaan w ith o u t undue delay (note verses 33, 54
and 56); even th e custom ary O riental m ethod of
approaching such business through long draw nout ceremonious m aneuvering m ust give w ay to
th e urgency of tran sactin g th e L ord’s business
w ithout delay.
A braham ’s servant sets out w ith a caravan of
ten camels. T hat other servants accompanied
him is show n by his use of the p lu ral pronoun
“us” in verse 23. The camels w ould be loaded
not only w ith supplies fo r th e journey, b u t also
w ith the rich gifts w hich ap p ear la te r in the story.
The trip to th e city of N ahor is m ade w ithout
trouble. T he destination is reached tow ard eve
ning and th e servant m akes th e cam els kneel near
a w ell of w ater. A t th is point he seeks the' L ord’s
blessing in p rayer.
The se rv a n t’s p ray er (24:12-14) is m arked by
reverence, fa ith and direct, pointed petition w ith
out vain repetitions. The serv an t has reached the
region w hence he is to take a w ife for Isaac, b u t
he can proceed no fu rth e r w ithout special guidance
from God. In his p ray er he proposes th a t w hen
th e young girls of th e city come to d raw w ater,
he shall ask one of them for a drink, and the one
who answ ers “D rink, and I w ill give thy cam els
drink also” shall be th e one appointed to be the
bride of Isaac. We should Of course not suppose
th a t this m an is dictating to God w hat is to be
done; he is praying in subm ission to the sovereign
counsel of God; indeed w e should say th a t it was
God w ho led him to p ra y this prayer.
The test or sign specified by th e servant in his
p ra y e r w as not an easy one th a t could come tru e
by m ere coincidence'. T en th irsty camels could
d rin k a g reat deal of w ater. It w ould m ean m any
trip s down th e stairs in to th e w ell an d up again
w ith a ju g o f w a te r before th e cam els w ould be
satisfied. As L eupold points out, w illingness to
d raw w ater for th e cam els w ould im ply also such
qualities as cheerfulness, courtesy, unselfishness,
and a strong, h ealth y body. It was th erefore not
an easy o r trivial favor th a t w as to be volunteered.
Except by the w orking out of the special provi
dence of God it would n o t happen.
A braham ’s servant has n o t actually finished his
silent prayer, w hen Rebekah, th e d au ghter of
Bethuel th e son of N ahor approaches th e place
with a w ate r jug on her shoulder. Moses states
that she was very beautiful, “a virgin, n eith er had
any m an know n her” (24:16). A braham ’s serv an t
“ran to m eet h e r” w ith th e planned request: “L et
me, I pray thee, drink a little w ate r of th y pitch
er.” Rebekah lowered h e r pitcher upon her hand
and gave him a drink. He is w aiting to see if
his p ra y er w ill be answ ered as he expected. Then
Rebekah adds: “I w ill draw w a ter fo r th y camels
also, u n til they have done drinking” (24:19).
Then while Rebekah m akes m any trips dow n to th e
w ater and up again, the serv an t stands silently
“w ondering a t h e r”. The answ er to h is prayer
has been so m arvellously fu ll and clear th a t he
stands in astonishm ent. One m ore th in g rem ains
to be ascertained: Is this young w om an of A bra
ham ’s kindred or not?
A braham ’s servant takes gifts from his bag
gage for Rebekah — a gold rin g w eighing h alf a
shekel, and a pair of gold bracelets w eighing ten
shekels. The word “earrin g ” in th e K ing Jam es
Version is a m istranslation; it actu ally m eans a
nose ring. A shekel of gold w as approxim ately a
half of an ounce. T he nose ring, then, would
weigh about a q u arter of an ounce; the pair of
bracelets would weigh five ounces. A t th e present
price of gold in the U nited S tates these gifts
would be w orth about $183.75 as gold, n o t count
ing any artistic value.
The servant th en asks, “W hose daughter a rt
thou? te ll me, I pray thee: is th ere room in th y
father’s house for us to lodge in?” On hearing
the reply th a t she is th e g ran d d au g h ter of N ahor
and th a t there is room fo r lodging in h e r fa th e r’s
house, the servant of A braham bows his head
again in worship, thanking an d praising th e Lord
for His m ercy and faithfulness. I t is alm ost too
good to be tru e — “the L ord led m e to th e house
of my m aster’s b reth ren .” T his m an has a high
idea of God. He believes in G od’s active provi
dential control of hum an events.
M eantime Rebekah, doubtless extrem ely sur
prised and highly pleased w ith th e gold nose rin g
and bracelets, has ru n hom e to te ll h e r fam ily
w hat has happened.
Questions:
1. W hat possible objection does A braham ’s
servant m ention before sw earing th e oath?
2. W hat course does the serv a n t suggest as a
possibility in case the w om an w ill n o t come to
Canaan?
3. How does A braham answ er this objection?
31
4. W hy m ust Isaac not retu rn to Mesopotamia?
5. W hat verses show th e servant’s eagerness
to discharge his obligation as soon as possible?
6. How do w e know th at o th er m en besides
A b rah am ’s “eldest servant” w ent along?
7. W as it rig h t for A braham ’s servant to pray
th e k in d of p ra y e r he did? Would it be rig h t for
us today to ask God such a sign?
8. W hat reason can be
suggested w hy the
se rv a n t specified willingness to w ater the camels
as the sign to be provided?
9. W hat other qualities of personality or ch ar
acter would willingness to draw w ater fo r the
camels show?
10. W hat gifts did the servant give R ebekah
at the well?
11. W hat is the correct m eaning of the w ord
tran slated “earring”?
12. How m uch did the gifts weigh, and w h a t
would be the present value of the gold in them ?
LESSON 106
herds, silver and gold, m enservants and m aidser
vants, cam els and asses. A braham and S arah had
a son in th e ir old age, and to this son A braham
2.
History of Abraham after leaving Ur. 12:1 has bequeathed all his possessions. Then follows
to 25:12, cont.
th e story, w ith w hich w e are already fam iliar, of
A braham ’s concern about Isaac’s m arriage, the
A t this point R ebekah’s b rother Laban enters
oath he had required his eldest servant to sw ear,
th e h isto ry (24:29). A t once we catch a glimpse
the trip from C anaan to Mesopotamia, th e p ra y er
of L ab an ’s acquisitive nature, which appears quite
at the well, R ebekah’s response to th e request for
prom inently la te r in his dealings w ith Jacob.
a drink of w ater, h e r voluntary draw ing w a te r
A b rah am ’s serv an t is still standing a t the w ell out
for the camels, the question whose daughter she
a t the edge of th e town. L aban, having h e ard
was, the gift of nose ring and bracelets, th e p ray
R ebekah’s story and seen the costly jew elry w hich
e r of g ratitu d e to God for His providential guid
R ebekah h as received, is duly impressed. H av
ance. This recital takes up verses 34-48. H aving
ing ru n to th e w ell he addresses A braham ’s ser
finished his story, the servant asks: “A nd now,
v a n t thus: “Come in, thou blessed of the Lord;
if ye w ill deal kindly and tru ly w ith my m aster,
w herefore stan d est thou without? for I have p re
tell me: and if not, tell me; th a t I m ay tu rn to
p ared the house, and room for the camels.” L aban
th e right hand o r to th e left” (24:49).
feels th a t a m an who can give valuable gold jew elry
aw ay is w o rth cultivating and entertaining hospi
B ethuel and his fam ily now have th e facts
tality. So A braham ’s servant is invited to enter
on which to base a decision. The servant has not
L aban’s house as a guest. Bethuel, Rebekah’s
actually m ade any request. He lets his story,
fath er, is still living, as w e learn from verse 50.
w ith its im plied request, speak for itself. The
H ow ever, L aban, Rebekah’s b ro th er takes as ac
facts as related are a challenge to th e ir religious
tive a p a rt in th e negotiations as th e father does
faith. A nd Laban and B ethuel recognize this, for
— perhaps a m ore active part. This may have
they reply: “The thing proceedeth from the Lord:
been because B ethuel was old, or the reason may
w e cannot speak unto thee bad or good” (24:50).
be th a t according to custom Laban, as full bro th er
This statem ent of B ethuel and L aban should not
of Rebekah, had an equal right w ith the fa th er
be in terp reted as m eaning “We cannot m ake any
to decide w h a t w as to be done.
decision, eith er favorable or unfavorable.” F o r
in the very n ex t verse they add “Behold, R ebekah
The se rv a n t has entered BebHuel’s household;
is before thee; tak e her, and go . . .
T herefore
th e cam els have been attended to; w ater for w ash
ing th e guests’ feet has been provided according
th e statem ent “w e cannot speak unto thee bad or
good” m u st have some other meaning. Evidently
to th e common custom of ancient O riental hospi
tality. A m eal has been p repared and the guests
“bad” and “good” are m entioned here as tw o e x
are invited to p artak e of food. But a t this point
trem es covering all possibilities betw een the two.
th e im portance and urgency of the business in
The m eaning then is: “God has already spoken
h and tak e p rio rity over age-old O riental custom.
all th a t can be spoken on this m atter; w e cannot
The se rv a n t refuses to eat until he has stated w hat
add anything to w h at God has already spoken by
his business is. We can w ell im agine the intense
His providence. ” B ethuel and fam ily, therefore,
in terest and curiosity w ith which Bethuel’s house
have granted consent for Rebekah to become Isaac’s
hold w ould h e a r th e story told by A braham ’s
wife. The servant understands this perfectly, and
servant.
responds by w orshipping th e Lord, bowing him
self to th e e a rth (24:52).
F irst he identifies him self as “A braham ’s
serv an t.” T hen he proceeds to relate the blessings
Next, costly gifts of silver, gold and clothing
are given to Rebekah. These constitute th e
w hich th e L ord has bestowed upon A braham —
he is a g re a t an d w ealthy m an, w ith flocks and
custom ary w edding gift given by th e bridegroom
III. History o f the Covenant People from Abraham
to Joseph. 11:27 to {50:26, cont.
32
to the brid e at the tim e of bethrothal. The giving
and acceptance of such gifts w ould be regarded
as evidences of good faith on the p a rt of th e two
parties. Thus the agreem ent would be regarded
as sealed or pledged. Leupold rig h tly points out
th a t th e re is no h in t h ere of the heathenish custom
of purchasing a brid e from h e r fath er or h e r fam
ily, a p ractice unknow n among th e Israelites.
G ifts, literally “costly articles,” a re likew ise
bestow ed on R ebekah’s b ro th er and h e r m other.
The fa th e r is not m entioned b u t w as perhaps re
garded as included w ith th e m other in the gifts
given.
T he m arriage agreem ent having been duly a r
ranged, a m eal follows. T he n e x t m orning A bra
ham ’s se rv a n t proposes to leave for C anaan im
m ediately (24:54). R ebekah’s fam ily, how ever,
propose a delay of te n days to allow them to be
come used to th e idea of R ebekah leaving. A fter
all, th ey could not expect to see th eir daughter
and sister again in th is w orld; th e separation
would be perm anent. We can only sym pathize w ith
th e feelings of R ebekah’s fam ily. T he servant,
how ever, evidently realizes th a t delay w ill m ake
it even h a rd e r to p art w ith Rebekah. Did he p e r
haps fear th a t they would change th e ir m ind about
granting perm ission fo r h er to m arry Isaac? A t
any ra te th e serv an t disregards th e common
O riental custom of taking plen ty of tim e for things
of this kind, and requests th a t he be allow ed to
leave a t once. His plea is based on th e fact th a t
God’s purpose is involved: “H inder m e not, see
ing th e L ord h a th prospered m y w ay; send m e
aw ay th a t I m ay go to m y m aster” (24:54). A t
this point th e fam ily propose th a t th e decision be
left to Rebekah herself. She is called and asked,
“W ilt thou go w ith this m an?” and she answ ers,
“I w ill go.” The answ er evidently im plied read i
ness to go im m ediately, w ith o u t th e ten days’ de
lay. So th e m a tte r is regard ed as settled.
No doubt th ere w ere busy preparations, w hich
how ever are not m entioned in the narrative. Re
bekah’s nurse is sent w ith her, and also her
damsels, th at is, a num ber of girls of about her
own age who would not only be h er m aids but
would also help to keep h e r from becom ing too
homesick in a strange country. A solem n bless
ing is pronounced upon Rebekah: “Thou a rt our
sister; be thou the m other of thousands of millions,
and let thy seed possess th e gate of those' w hich
hate them ” (24:60). This blessing h as been lite r
ally fulfilled, which m ay explain w hy it is record
ed in the Bible.
Questions:
1. W hat tra it of L aban’s ch aracter is seen al
most as soon as he enters the story?
2. W hat hospitality w as accorded to A bra
ham ’s servant in the household of B ethuel?
3. W hat does the serv an t Insist on doing b e
fore partaking of food?
4. W hat impression did th e
produce upon Rebekah’s fam ily?
se rv a n t’s story
5. W hat is the probable m eaning of the sta te
m ent “We cannot speak unto thee bad o r good”?
6. W hy did the servant give additional gifts
to Rebekah?
7. To whom besides R ebekah did the servant
give presents?
8. Why did A braham ’s serv an t w ish to re tu rn
to Canaan im m ediately?
9. Why did R ebekah’s fam ily w ish for a few
days’ delay?
10. How was this difference settled?
11. Who accom panied R ebekah
potam ia to Canaan?
from Meso
12. W hat blessing was pronounced upon R e
bekah just before h er departure?
LESSON 107
Canaan called the Negeb. A fter his re tu rn from
B eer-lahai-roi Isaac goes out into the fields to
m editate in the evening time. Some have thought
2.
th
at Isaac was still m ourning fo r his m other Sarah.
to 25:12, cont.
However Sarah had been dead th re e years, as is
The carav an trip to C anaan is accom plished
shown by comparison of 21:5, 23:1 and 25:20. We
w ithout incident. Isaac is on his w ay back from
may infer, therefore, th a t Isaac’s purpose in going
th e place called B eer-lahai-roi. The w ord “beer”
to the fields was religious m editation and pray er
m ean ‘Svell.” T he place re fe rred to w as nam ed
rath er th a n a m ere nu rsin g of grief. Leupold
B eer-lahai-roi because of H agar’s experience there.
comments th at at this point w e see Isaac’s tru e
(16:7-14). T he m eaning of th e nam e was explain
piety. Who can say how m uch Isaac’s p ray ers had
ed in a previous lesson, on ch ap ter 16. This w ell
to do w ith the success of A braham ’s serv an t in his
was evidently regarded as a sacred spot on account
trip to Mesopotamia and back? I t is w hile in the
Of the divine revelation g ranted to H agar there.
fields for m editation th a t Isaac sees a caravan of
Moses adds th e explanatory note th a t Isaac “dw elt
camels on the horizon. As th e caravan approaches
in the south country,” th a t is, in th e portion of
nearer, Rebekah sees Isaac, and inquires of the
33
serv an t as to who this m an is. On being inform ed
th a t it is h e r fu tu re husband, Rebekah dismounts
from h er cam el and veils herself (24:65). The
dism ounting from the camel w as a common token
of courtesy. The veil was worn as a sign of
m odesty and respect. Leupold rem arks th a t w hile
R ebekah w as courageous, she was not bold.
T he caravan having reached its destination,
A braham ’s serv an t reports to Isaac on the details
of th e trip. How intensely fascinating this w ould
be to Isaac! If he has been praying for God’s
blessing on th e erran d to Mesopotamia, now he
know s how rem arkably his prayers w ere answ er
ed.
“A nd Isaac brought h e r into his m other
S a ra h ’s tent, and took Rebekah, and she became
his w ife; and h e loved her: and Isaac was com
fo rted a fte r nis m other’s death” (24:67). Isaac
show ed tactful courtesy in conducting Rebekah
im m ediately to a tent, and he showed h e r honor
by giving h e r th e tent which had been th a t of his
m other Sarah. Isaac’s m arriage to R ebekah fol
lowed. We m ay say th a t this w as a m arriage
m ade in heaven, and entered into on earth in the
fe a r of God. I t is no w onder, therefore, th a t the
union was a happy one, and th a t it was cem ented
by love. E ven though Isaac and R ebekah had
been stran g ers before m arriage, love followed
th e ir m arriage. Moses adds th a t Isaac w as com
forted a fte r his m other’s death. It is probable
th a t S a ra h ’s death had caused him intense grief.
C hap ter 25 takes up A braham ’s second m a r
riage and his death. A braham lived to th e age
of 175 years. A t th e tim e of his death his gran d
sons Jacob and Esau w ere 15 years old. T hat w as
35 y ears afte r th e m arriage of Isaac and Rebekah.
A braham is 140 years old a t the tim e of
Isaac’s m arriage. A t this point A braham m arries
again. This m ay seem strange to us in view of
th e fact th a t th e b irth of Isaac when A braham
w as 100 years old was a great w onder. We m ight
suppose it w ould be out of the question for him
to beget m ore children a fte r reaching th e age of
140 years. This seeming difficulty can be solved
by supposing th a t A braham , by the power of God,
w as reju v en ated so th a t he could be the fath e r of
Isaac, and th is rejuvenation w as not m erely
tem p o rary b u t lasted for m any years, as if A bra
ham h ad actu ally been m ade young again by super
n a tu ra l pow er.
A braham ’s second wife is K eturah. T here is a
Jew ish story th a t K eturah was identical w ith
H agar, w hom A braham is said to have m arried
a fte r S a ra h ’s death. T here is no basis for this
idea, how ever. As to who K eturah was — her
race and background — we know nothing. She
presum ably w as o r became a believer in Jehovah.
It w as through A braham ’s m arriage to K eturah
th at the prom ise th a t h e should be “fath e r of a
m ultitude of nations” w as to be fulfilled.
The descendants of A braham and K etu rah are
listed in 25:2-4. T he persons nam ed becam e the
fathers of A rabian tribes. A braham gave each a
settlem ent of property during his own lifetim e and
sent each aw ay tow ard the east, th a t is, tow ard
T ransjordan and A rabia. A braham was a wise
m an and he realized th a t the covenant promises
depended on Isaac. If these descendants of
K eturah w ere left to claim a share of the fam ily
property a fte r A braham ’s own death, trouble
m ight follow. He therefore adopted the wise plan
of giving each a portion during his ow n lifetim e.
The portions w ere no doubt generous ones, w hich
w ould enable th e various sons to get a good sta rt
in building up an estate for themselves.
B ut the establishm ent of A braham as a w hole
—w hich w ould be by fa r the greater share of the
property, as w ell as the position of headship of
th e clan — w as reserved for Isaac, the divinely
appointed h e ir of th e covenant promises of re
dem ption.
Questions:
1. F rom w h a t place had Isaac ju st retu rn e d
w hen he first saw Rebekah?
2. F or w h at purpose did Isaac go out into th e
fields tow ard evening.
3. How long a fte r S arah’s death w as th e m a r
riage of Isaac and Rebekah?
4. W hat w as im plied by Rebekah’s actions of
dism ounting and veiling herself?
5. W hat living q u arters w ere assigned to R e
bekah on h er arrival in Canaan?
6. How old w as A braham a t the tim e of Isaac’s
m arriage?
7. How can we explain th e seeming difficulty
about A braham begetting children m any years
after th e b irth of Isaac?
8. How m any descendants of A braham and
K etu rah are listed in 25:2-4?
9. W hat provision did A braham m ake for the
sons of K eturah?
10. In w h at direction did A braham send them
aw ay during his lifetim e?
11. W hat provision did A braham m ake for his
son Isaac?
34
LESSON 108
lU . History of the Covenant People from Abraham
3.
25:12-18
Abraham’s descendants through Ishmael.
Though the m ain subject of G enesis and of
2.
the
Bible
is the descendants of A braham through
to 25:12, cont.
Isaac — the line of people through w hom the
covenant promises descended and w ould be fu l
C hapter 25 verses 7 to 10 record the death and
filled — nevertheless at this point in the record
b urial of A braham . F irst w e a re inform ed th a t
a section is inserted by Moses on the descendants
he lived to th e age of 175 years. T he expression
of A braham through Ishm ael. “Now these are the
"gave up th e ghost” m eans “drew his last breath .”
The statem en t th a t A braham died “full of years”
generations of Ishm ael . . . ” (25:12). T his form
of expression, as we have already had occasion to
does not m ean th a t he w as w eary of life, b u t
observe, is a sort of caption or heading, introduc
ra th e r th a t all his desires and w an ts h a d been
satisfied.
ing a new subject or a new division of a subject.
I t m ay be paraphrased: “The follow ing is an ac
“And w as g athered unto his people” (25:8).
count of the history of Ishm ael.” T his heading
U nder th e circum stances th is is a rem arkable
containing the w ord “generations” (toledoth) oc
statem ent. We would perhaps n atu rally tend to
curs ten times in the Book of Genesis, each time
take it as m eaning “he w as b u ried w here his an
clearly m arking the beginning of a new section of
cestors w ere buried.” B ut this cannot be the
the book. As the descendants of Ishm ael are not
m eaning, for A braham w as b u ried in th e cave of
those through whom the plan of redem ption is to
M achpelah n ear H ebron in C anaan w hereas his
be w orked out, they are tre ated only briefly and
ancestors w ere buried in o r n ear U r of the C hal
then dropped. Isaac’s descendants, on th e other
dees. T here m ust th erefo re be some other m ean
hand, are not dropped, for it w as from them th a t
ing. We believe th e tru e in terp retatio n is th a t
the Christ would be born.
this statem en t indicates faith in a life after death.
W hile S crip tu re has n o t spoken, u p to this point,
Twelve sons of Ishm ael are listed in verses
of personal im m ortality, it is evident th a t the
13 to 15. It is then stated in verse 16 th a t these
patriarch s believed in th e survival of hum an p er
men were “tw elve princes according to th e ir n a
sonality, no doubt basing this faith on an infer
tions.” The words “towns” and “castles” should
ence from w hat they knew of th e character of
ra th er be translated by som ething like “settle
God. In this connection, com pare the statem ents
m ents” and “encam pm ents” (Leupold). As these
of H ebrew s 11:13-16. T he concepts of personal
men w ere evidently tent-dw ellers of th e desert
im m ortality and bodily resurrection are revealed
the term “castles” is misleading. W e shall not take
gradually in th e Bible, and are fully revealed in
time to consider the sons of Ishm ael in any detail,
th e New Testam ent. Y et th e re are hints, such as
but we m ay recall the prom ise of God to A braham
Gen. 25:8, th a t godly people believed in im m ortal
recorded in 17:20 concerning Ishm ael: “Behold, I
ity from th e beginning of th e hu m an race.
have blessed him, and w ill m ake him fruitful, and
w ill m ultiply him exceedingly; tw elve princes
A braham ’s m ortal rem ains w ere b uried in the
shall he beget, and I w ill m ake him a great n a
cave of M achpelah, w h ere th e body of S arah had
tion.” Also w e should recall th e prom ise of God
already been laid to rest. On th e cave of M ach
to Hagar concerning Ishm ael, recorded in 21:18:
pelah, see the discussion in Lesson 103.
“I will m ake him a great nation.”
Note th a t th e fu n eral arrangem ents w ere made
T he descendants of Ishm ael seem to have
by A braham ’s son Isaac and Ishm ael. This is in
lived to th e southeast of the regions held by the
contrast to th e earlier enm ity betw een the two
sons of K eturah. The nam es of the sons of Ish
(21:9). A t w h at tim e a reconciliation was effect
mael are also in some cases nam es of places
ed betw een Isaac and Ishm ael w e do not know.
where they o r th eir descendants lived. This is
Possibly w ith th e m a tu rity of ad u lt life the old
only natural, for it was v ery com m on to nam e a
bitterness w as forgotten; possibly the death of
place after th e people w ho lived there, or after
A braham drew th e tw o h alf-b ro th ers together.
the ancestor of the clan or trib e w hich settled in
Follow ing the death of A braham , Isaac con
the area.
tinues to live in the Negeb o r extrem e south of
Canaan, m aintaining his dw elling at B eer-lahai-roi
In general it may be said th a t th e descendants
(25:11). The m ost im p o rtan t fact about Isaac,
of A braham through Ishm ael (as also his des
however, is th e fact th a t God’s blessing continued
cendants through th e sons of K eturah, and the
to rest upon him. This w ould be obvious to ob
descendants of A braham ’s nephew L ot) are today
servers of his w ay of life and of his m aterial
represented by the people of A rabia. Of course
prosperity. T here w ere of course also spiritual
there has been m uch in term arriag e betw een
tribes or clans during th e p ast fo u r thousand
blessings, b u t they are n o t specifically m entioned
a t this point.
years, so th at w e should not expect to fin d these
35
various fam ilies of A braham ’s day represented by
p a rtic u la r A rabian trib es of the present day, al
though th e m odern A rabs do m ake genealogical
distinctions, especially distinguishing those de
scended from Ishm ael from those descended from
Jo k ta n (Gen. 10:26-30).
Ishm ael died a t the age of 137 years; thus his
life w as m uch shorter than the lives of A braham
(175 y ears), Isaac (180) and Jacob (147).
It is also said of Ishm ael th at he “was g ather
ed unto his people” (25:17). We take this sta te
m en t of Moses as im plying belief in personal im
m ortality, b u t not as im plying anything as to
w h eth er Ishm ael was saved o r not. It is of course
possible th a t Ishm ael, through the influence of his
godly fa th e r A braham , m ay have been personally
a believer in th e Lord all his life. For a fu rth e r
discussion of th is question, the reader is referred
to th e B lue B anner Question Box in the OotoberD ecem ber 1955 issue of this magazine (pages
185-6).
T he general region of the habitation of the
descendants of Ishm ael is stated to be “from
H avilah u n to Shur, th a t is before Egypt, as 'thou
goest tow ard A ssyria” (25:18). H avilah is thought
to be the sandy desert east of Egypt; Shur was
som ew here along the border betw een Egypt and
C anaan. A ssyria is of course w ell known, located
in th e u p p e r Tigris-Euphrates valley. The de
scription given, then, would include the SyrianA rabian desert, east of Syria and Palestine, be
tw een E gypt an d Assyria.
Questions:
1. W hat is the m eaning of
“gave up the ghost”?
the
expression
2. W hat is im plied in the statem ent th a t A bra
ham died “full of years”?
3. How should the statem ent th a t A braham
“was gathered unto his people” be understood?
4. W here w as A braham ’s body buried?
5. Who m ade the arrangem ents for A braham ’s
burial?
6. W here did Isaac live
Abraham?
after
the death of
7. W hat is the m eaning of the form ula “These
are the generations of . . . ”?
8. How m any tim es does this form ula occur
in Genesis?
9. W hy are Isaac’s descendants so m uch m ore
im portant th an Ishm ael’s?
10. How m any sons of Ishm ael are listed?
11. W hat prom ises of God to A braham and
H agar w ere fulfilled by Ishm ael’s sons?
12. Who are the descendants of Ishm ael to
day?
13. How old was Ishm ael a t the tim e of his
death? How does this com pare w ith the length
of life of A braham , Isaac and Jacob?
14. W hat can be said about the question of
w h eth er Ishm ael was saved?
15. W hat general area was occupied by the
descendants of Ishm ael in ancient tim es?
LESSON 109
sons w ill be born and th at two nations shall be
descended from them . It is fu rth e r revealed th a t
“the one people shall be stronger than the other
4.
The history of Isaac, Jacob and Esau. 25:19 people; and the elder shall serve the younger”
to 35:29
(25:23). T h at the one nation should be stronger
th an the o ther would occasion no surprise; but
A gain we m eet the expression “These are the
the prediction th a t the elder should serve the
generations of . . . ” (25:19) indicating the be
younger w ould cause wonder, because it runs con
ginning of a new subject o r section of the book.
tra ry to n atu re and custom. H ere in this history
This tim e it is the generations of Isaac. In 37:2
of Rebekah we see a profound tru th disclosed. In
w e m eet th e statem ent “These are the generations
God’s dealings w ith m ankind, grace is m ore im
of Jacob.” This m ay seem ra th e r strange for
p o rtant th an nature', and takes priority over it.
th ere is m uch m ore about Jacob than about Isaac
God’s purpose of redem ption is a sovereign p u r
in th e section called “The generations of Isaac.”
pose and cannot be lim ited to natural, reasonable
The explanation is evidently that th e early parts
and custom ary channels. God in His sovereignty
of Jaco b ’s life w ere dom inated by the influence
chooses and decides as He pleases and no being
of Isaac, th erefo re they are included as p a rt of
in the universe has a rig h t to challenge His de
th e history of Isaac.
cisions. C ontrary to n a tu re an d hum an custom
T he first new fact stated in the history of
God has chosen the younger in preference! to th e
Isaac is his p ra y e r to the Lord on behalf of his
elder.
w ife Rebekah, w ho had borne no children. The
This revelation to R ebekah is developed later
L ord answ ered th is p ray er of Isaac (25:21) and
in the Bible. In M alachi 1:2, 3 we read: “Was
so R ebekah is soon to become a mother. She is
not Esau Jacob’s brother? saith the Lord: y et I
to be th e m o th er of twins, and before they are
loved Jacob, and I hated Esau . . . ”. Then in the
b o m th e re comes a revelation from God to R e
New Testam ent the apostle P au l comments on it
bek ah (25:22,23). It is said to Rebekah th at tw in
36
in Romans 9:10-13, “A nd not only this; b u t when
Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our
fa th e r Isaac: (for th e children being not y et born,
neith er having done any good or evil, th a t the
purpose of God according to election m ight stand,
not of w orks b u t of h im th at calleth;) it was said
unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. As
it is w ritten , Jacob have I loved, b u t Esau have
I hated.”
The apostle P au l points ouit th at this dis
crim ination on th e p a rt of God was sovereign, not
based on any m erit of Jacob over against Esau, as
proved by the fact th a t the discrim ination was
m ade before th e children w ere born, or had done
anything good or evil. We m ay pause a m om ent
h ere -to observe th a t P au l’s argum ent holds good
against th e m odern sophistry th a t God’s election
is based on foreseen faith and repentance. C lear
ly the apostle’s concern is to show th a t G od’s
choice was a sovereign one, not based on anything
in the life of Jacob and Esau themselves. If P aul
had believed, as some people do today, th at God
chose Jacob because H e foresaw th a t Jacob would
la te r of his own free w ill rep en t and believe in
the Lord, then th e choice w ould have been based
on w orks a fte r all — foreseen w orks, b u t still
works. B u t P au l definitely says th a t it was “not of
works, b u t of him ithat calleth,” as proved by the
fact th a t th e decision was m ade before the sons
w ere born. The m odern sophistry of election b e
ing based on foreseen repentance and faith had
not y e t been invented in P a u l’s time, b u t in any
case it is clear th a t such a schem e cannot possibly
be fitted into th e apostle’s statem ents in Romans
9:10-13. T he notion of election being based on
foreseen repentance and faith does not really come
from exegesis of the Scriptures, buit from a p e r
sistent desire to m ain tain m an’s free w ill and
m oral ab ility over against God’s sovereignty. This
m odern notion has been quite fairly described as
th e notion th a t “God elects those who elect them
selves.”
God chose the younger in preference to the
elder, then, not because of a m oral difference be-
tween the two sons (actual or foreseen) b u t b e
cause it was God’s good pleasure so ito decide1.
This is not to say th at God had no reasons; it is
only to say th a t God’s reasons w ere not grounded
in the superior m erit or m oral ch aracter of the
one brother over against the other. The oftquoted saying of A ugustine is relevant here: “The
grace of God does not find m en fit fo r salvation,
but makes them so.” In o th e r w ords, th e tru th
is not that God chose Jacob because Jacob w as
going to become a good m an; b u t rath er, Jacob
finally became a good m an because God had
chosen him. For our part, w e w ill take the
theology of Augustine in preference to the popular
man-pleasing A rm inianism of the p rese n t day.
Questions:
1. A t w hat point in th e book do “the genera
tions of Isaac” begin?
2. How can we explain the fact th a t a large
p a rt of the section designated as “th e generations
of Isaac” actually deals w ith Jacob?
3. W hat special p ray e r of Isaac is m entioned
in 25:21?
4. Whait revelation of th e L ord w as granted
to Rebekah?
5. W hat Biblical tru th is exem plified by this
revelation to Rebekah?
6. How does the prophet M alachi re fe r to this
revelation to Rebekah?
7. In w hat book and ch apter of th e w ritings
of th e apostle Paul is th e revelation to R ebekah
cited and commented upon?
8. W hat inference does P au l draw from th e
fact th at the revelation cam e to R ebekah before
h er two sons w ere born?
9. How can we answ er the claim th a t G od’s
election is based on foreseen repentance and faith?
10. Whait statem ent of A ugustine is relevant
to the revelation given to Rebekah?
f 110
in. History
of the Covenant People from Abraham
twins. This is therefore tw enty years after his
m arriage to Rebekah.
As the boys grow to m aturity, th ey develop
4.
The history of Isaac, Jacob and Esau. 25:19
to 35:29, cont.
along quite different lines. Esau becomes a sk ill
ful hunter, “a m an of <the field” — an outdoor
R ebekah’s tw in sons are born. Esau, the
man, rugged and accustom ed to a rough and diffi
elder, is ru d d y and h airy even from birth. Jacob’s
w ell-know n grasping n a tu re seem s to be illu stra t
cult life. Jacob, on th e o th er hand, is described
ed even from b irth by his grasping of his b ro th
as a “plain” m an th at is, a m an of quiet or peace
e r’s heel. In itself th is w ould seem to be unim
ful habits and m anner of life, no doubt m uch like
portant, b u t Moses includes it in th e record, ob
his father Isaac in this respect. He is also describ
viously regarding it as symbolic of th e character
ed as a tent-dw eller. It w ould seem th a t in the
which Jacob developed as he grew up. Isaac is
early part of his life Jacob was a lover of ease
sixty years of age at th e tim e of th e b irth of th e
and comfort; later as a shepherd w orking for his
37
uncle L aban he learned to struggle against h a rd
ships (31:40).
this, of course, we cannot say anything positively,
for the record is silent on it.
“A nd Isaac loved Esau, because he did eat of
his venison: but R ebekah loved Jacob” (25:28).
This p a rtia lity on the p a rt of th e parents was bad,
and iit was m ade worse by th e obvious w ays in
w hich th e p aren ts m anifested th eir attachm ents.
It has often been observed th a t people ten d to be
attracted , not to those most like them selves, but
to those whose traits are opposite to th e ir own.
This w as tru e, certainly, in this family. The
quiet, contem plative Isaac is attracted to the ac
tive, rugged Esau; th e active, energetic Rebekah,
on th e oth er hand, is attracted to the quiet dis
position of Jacob. The g reat m istake of th e p a r
ents, of course, lay in m aking th e ir preferences so
obvious th a t th e sons could not avoid noting them.
As for Jacob, we m ay w onder w hat his m otive
was. Was he thinking m ostly of m aterial ad
vantages, or w as he concerned about the spiritual
opportunities and advantages? No doubt both
brothers knew of the great covenant promises
m ade to A braham and Isaac. Very probably, too,
R ebekah had told Jacob about the revelation th at
had been granted to h er before the tw ins w ere
born. She would tell Jacob, we m ay suppose, th at
as the younger he was destined to a g reater destiny
than his older brother. This recalling of the
revelation of the divine choice would easily lead,
in the m inds of m other and son, to the idea th a t
it w as incum bent on them to take steps to bring
the divine purpose to pass. And this in tu rn
could very easily lead to th e idea th at som ething
in itself unethical could properly be done to help
accomplish the divine purpose; in other words,
th at the end justifies th e means.
Som e have referred to Jacob as a soft or
“sissy” type of personality at this early stage of
his life, a boy who stayed around the w om en’s
tents and learn ed how to cook, w hereas Esau is
pictured as a strongly masculine type, as evi
denced by his outdoor life as a hunter. However
this m ay be, w e need not hold Jacob’s learning
how to cook against him, for Esau also learned
how to cook; if Jacob cooked pottage of lentiles,
E sau cooked venison.
N ext comes ithe story of Esau selling his b irth ,
rig h t to Jacob. Esau retu rn s from a hunting trip,
perhaps not having been successful, feeling very
fa in t and hungry. Jacob is ju st putting the fin
ishing touches on a cauldron of red pottage of
lentiles. T he steam ing vegetable soup w ould have
an appetizing sm ell, w hich Esau probably recog
nized w ith eager anticipation even before he en
tered the tent. Esau quite understandably asks
for a bow l of the pottage.
Jacob, how ever, w ill not feed his brother
sim ply out of b ro th erly kindness. He m akes a
dem and first: “Sell me this day th y b irthright.”
A ccording to th e m uch later law of Moses (Deut.
21:17) th e b irth rig h t involved a double portion of
th e inheritance; th a t is, the son w ith the b irth
rig h t received itwice as m uch of the property as
any o th er heir. W hether this same rule w as the
custom in p atriarch al tim es we do not know.
P resum ably, a t any rate, there would be distinct
m aterial advantages involved in the possession of
th e b irth rig h t.
It seem s probable th a t Jacob’s dem and for
tra n sfe r of th e b irth rig h t was not the first tim e
this subject has been talked about by the two
b rothers. V ery possibly it has been the subject
of continued discussion and disagreem ent — p er
haps even of q u arrel or dispute. Leupold suggests
th a t perhaps Esau had on some previous occasion
m ade some slighting rem ark about the value of
th e b irth rig h t, or even intim ated that h e w ould
be w illing to p a rt w ith it some time. Concerning
Esau, still fain t and hungry, replies: “Behold,
I am at the point to die: and w hat profit shall
this birth rig h t do to m e?” (25:32). This sta te
m ent of Esau has been in terp reted in tw o ways.
First, it has been held to mean: “I am on th e point
of dying of starvation; w hat use w ill th e b irth
right be to me if I actually starve to death?” This
is an im probable interpretation, however. It is
very unlikely th a t Esau w as th a t near to death
from starvation. If he had been th at near death he
would not have been able to w alk into the tenit
from the field. The other suggested in te rp re ta
tion is th a t Esau m eant: “I am a m an w ith a
dangerous occupation; in m y occupation as a
h u n te r I am faced w ith the danger of death every
day. How can a m an w ith a hazardous life like
mine m ake long-range plans for the future? I
have no certainty of living to enjoy th e benefits
of this b irthright.” This in terp retatio n we believe
to be the correct one. It indicates Esau’s lack of
appreciation of spiritual values. Esau here ap
pears as a w orldly-m inded m aterialist.
Jacob, ben t on taking steps to m ake th e divine
prom ise come true, requires Esau to sw ear a
solemn oath tran sferrin g the b irth rig h t to his
brother, w hich Esau aotually does. Then Jacob
feeds Esau w ith bread and pottage of lentiles;
Esau having eaten his m eal and feeling better,
rises up and goes his way. “Thus Esau despised
his b irth rig h t” (25:34).
The New T estam ent (H ebrew s 12:16) com
m ents on this incident and in doing so pronounces
Esau to be “a profane person” because h e sold his
b irth rig h t fo r a common meal. “Profaneness” is
not the same thing as “profanity” ; the la tte r m eans
taking God’s nam e in vain, and related violations
of the th ird com m andm ent; “profaneness” means
regarding w h at is sacred as if it w ere common.
Esau w as profane because h e did n o t regard the
38
b irth rig h t as a sacred possession. In the same
way, the m odern-day secularist is profane, for he
has no regard for w h at is spiritu al and sacred, b u t
thinks only of pleasures, money, w orldly profit
or success, and th e like.
I t has been said th a t Esau ate the m ost ex
pensive d in n er ever eaten b y m an, w hich is tru e
if we allow an exception for th e fru it of the tree
of the know ledge of good and evil eaten by Adam
and Eve. F o r Esau paid a high price for his din
n e r of bread and pottage of lemtiles. I t cost him
his place in th e history of redem ption and the
Kingdom of God. This is tru e even though the
choice of Jacob h ad been revealed by G od to R e
bekah m any years before, even p rio r to the' b irth
of th e tw ins. Esau cannot blam e his destiny on
God, for it was tru ly the product of his ow n de
cision, m ade w ithout constraint, actuated by his
own sinful motives.
Questions:
1. W hat characteristics of Esau and Jacob w ere
evident from th e tim e of th e ir birth?
2. How long a fte r th e m arriage of Isaac and
R ebekah w ere th e tw ins bom ?
3. W hat differences appeared in th e tw o boys
as they grew to m aturity?
4. How can w e explain the fact th a t Isaac
loved Esau w hereas R ebekah loved Jacob?
5. Does Jacob’s learning how to cook prove
that he was a person lacking in m anliness?
6. According to the law of Moses, w h a t bene
fits did the b irth rig h t include?
7. W hat may have been th e m otive o f Jacob
in seeking the transfer of th e birth rig h t?
8. How should w e u n d erstan d E sau’s state
ment “I am at the point to die: and w h at profit
shall this b irth rig h t do to m e”?
9. W hat does the Epistle to the H ebrew s say
about Esau?
10. W hat is the difference betw een profanity
and profaneness?
11. W hat does Esau’s decision show about his
character?
12. W hat did Esau’s m eal of b read and pottage
cost him?
(To be continued)
Reviews of Religious Books
The favorable review ing of a book here is not to be u n d e r
stood as necessarily im plying an endorsem ent of everything con
tained in it. W ithin the lim its of the editorial policy of Blue B an
n e r F a ith and Life each review er is solely responsible fo r th e
opinions expressed in his reviews. Please purchase books from
your book dealer or direct from th e publishers; do not send orders
to the m anager of this magazine.
450 TRUE STORIES FROM CHURCH H IS
TORY, by J. V ernon Jacobs. Wm. B. Eerdm ans
Pub. Co., G rand Rapids 3, Mich. 1955, pp. 147.
$2.50.
This is an age of ‘Digests’ and condensed
volumes. T hat is p a rtly due to the fact th a t people
have little tim e fo r reading in th e busy bustle of
daily life and partly , no doubt, to th e fact th a t
m any readers are m entally lazy and have no ap
petite for th e longer detailed studies. This little
volume u n d er review w ill appeal to those w ho
like to know th e facts of history w ithout having
to m ake a detailed study of its course. It w ill also
recall to m em ory interesting details of great ch ar
acters in th e history of the C hristian Church. The
book is not so m uch history as a collection of popu
lar anecdotes and illustrations from C hurch H is
tory and biography. T hey have been w ell chosen,
and as th e publishers suggest, th e use of these
stories w ill m ake drow sy students come to atte n
tion in college class rooms, give sparkle to o th e r
wise dry serm ons an d m ake th e S abbath School
lessons so interesting th a t pupils w ill w an t to
come back for more. A t the close of each story
there is an indication of the source from w hich
the m aterial has been taken. In m any instances
the excerpts have come from v aluable books and
documents th a t are no longer in p rin t and from
monumental w orks th at are now little read. The
book has a very good double index, one dealing
with subjects illustrated and the o ther w ith the
persons about whom the stories are' told.
— A dam Loughridge.
THE DIVINE ECONOMY: A STUDY IN
STEWARDSHIP, by A. C. Conrad. Wm. B. E erd
mans Pub. Co., G rand Rapids 3, Mich. 1954, pp.
169. $2.50.
A new study of C hristian S tew ardship should
appeal to Covenanters who are know n for th eir
acceptance and application of the S crip tu ral p rin
ciple of the Tithe. The author, A. C. Conrad, P ro
fessor at Bethel College an d Sem inary, St. Paul,
39
M innesota, w as first draw n to a study of the sub
ject, w hen in his early days as pastor of a con
gregation, he becam e aw are th a t there w as very
little m aterial dealing w ith th e theological aspect
of stew ardship. Most of the books and pam phlets
on th e subject dealt w ith the tith e as a scrip tu ral
and practical w ay of financing th e w ork of the
C hurch and m eeting C hurch budgets. He felt that
w hile th e practice was good and commendable,
th ere w as not a sufficiently clear understanding
of its m eaning in relation to the fundam ental doc
trines of th e C hristian faith. He accepted the
challenge to investigate the whole question of
S tew ardship and as he progressed in his studies,
he w as convinced th at the principle was a basic
one in th e doctrine and th a t it ought to apply in
ev ery d ep artm en t of life. The book, which is the
re su lt of this study, does not deal specifically w ith
the practical aspects of stew ardship, because the
au th o r feels th a t this has been adequately covered
by others. H e attem pts to give a theological in
terp retatio n of C hristian Stew ardship.
In a cle a r and practical introduction, the
au th o r defines his term s and outlines the whole
m a tte r of Stew ardship. It is the ‘law of the house’,
the principle of the adm inistration of the p roper
ty of others. P au l uses the w ord 'OIKONOMIA’
to describe his responsibility as a preacher of the
Gospel, (1 C orinthians 9:17), to illustrate his w ork
in the fu lfilm en t of th e divine p lan fo r the
C hurch (E phesians 3:2) and to dem onstrate the
m eans by w hich God, as M aster of a great house
hold, adm inisters His wise rule over it. Subsequent
chapters deal w ith the stew ardship of the F ather,
th e Son and th e Holy Spirit. We quote from the
au th o r’s sum m ary of his treatm ent of the subject.
“From th e stew ardship of God th e Father, the be
liev er derives his concept of purpose and his
tru steesh ip and responsibility. From the stew ard
ship of G od the Son, the believer derives his in
sight into God’s grace which restores him into fel
low ship w ith God and which awakens in him the
desire to be a p a rtn e r w ith C hrist in fulfilling
His purpose. From the stew ardship of God the
H oly S pirit, th e believer derives an understanding
of a living faith w hich bears fru it in obedient and
dedicated service. The believer’s faith in God the
F a th e r establishes stew ardship as God’s w ork. The
b eliever’s faith in God the Son establishes the
basis of stew ardship upon whioh redeem ed men
can do God’s work. And the believer’s faith in
God th e H oly S pirit consecrates him to be a
stew ard in fulfilling God’s w ork.” The motive for
this w ork is love, the method is evangelism, the
m eans a re the m aterial resources of creation. Time
is th e o p portunity for advancing God’s purpose,
and th e goal is th e coming of the Kingdom.
T he book is w ell w ritten, the author m akes
use of a w ide bibliography, and the reader is chal
lenged on every page to consecrate him self fully
to His L ord and M aster.
_
— Adam Loughridge.
AN EXPOSTITION O F HEBREWS, by A rth u r
W. Pink. Bible T ruth Depot, Swengel, Pa. 1954,
3 vols., pp. 504, 414, 405. P e r set, $17.95.
The Epistle to the H ebrews has claimed the
attention of great Com m entators for centuries and
the volum e of w ork on this epistle th at is Scriptu rally orthodox is above average. In our study
of this most precious portion of the Word, we can
draw on the rich resources of John Calvin, John
Owen, A lbert Barnes, Adolph Saphir, John Brown,
T. C. Edw ards and others. We m ight w ell ask
then, Is there a place for a fu rth er Exposition?
Can anything th a t is fresh and helpful and in
spiring be added to the w ealth of com m ent al
ready in our hands? T hat is our first reaction as
we open the three volum e Com m entary by the
late A. W. Pink. And to be fair to the A uthor and
to the tru th he puts in our hands, w e m ust agree
th at he has m ade a w orthy contribution to scholar
ship and to evangelical lite ra tu re by a w ork th at
m ust have taken years and effort and patience to
produce. It is the early w ork of a prolific w riter
and teacher w ho m atured greatly in thought and
sp irit in his la te r years. The expositions original
ly appeared in his m onthly magazine, Studies in
the Scriptures.
T hrough th e w ork, it is obvious th a t the
author is a m an of deep spirituality of m ind w ith
a g reat love for the Word of God and a desire to
honour Him, who is the A uthor of the Word, by an
honest in terp retatio n and a sincere application of
tru th . This approach to the task compensates for
any possible lack of technical ability in u n d e rtak
ing such a work.
O ur first com m ent and criticism concerns the
ra th e r unbalanced arrangem ent of the exposition.
Volume I deals w ith the first 8% chapters of
Hebrews, Volume II, w ith 2% and Volume III w ith
the la st tw o chapters of the Epistle. It m ust be
adm itted, however, th a t there are an extra 100
pages in Volum e I, th a t does not remove the feel
ing th a t one has, th at the w ork could have been
m uch condensed w ithout losing in quality and ef
fectiveness. The style is som ew hat ponderous.
L engthy quotations, even though they illu strate
th e point and bring before us such famous nam es
as Calvin, Owen, Brown, S aphir etc, are apt to
become a little tedious. The author is guilty of
num erous digressions into the realm s of theologi
cal controversy, w hich though accurate and in
form ative are not strictly w ithin the expositor’s
sphere. There are also contradictions. In one
place he affirm s th a t the elect are very few, in
another th a t the redeem ed are many.
R eaders are forced to adm ire Mr. P in k ’s
fo rth rig h t conclusions. He has no hesitation in
saying th a t the Epistle is the w ork of P aul even
though th ere has been a difference of opinion on
this subject. He quotes as proof of Pauline au th o r
ship P e te r’s reference in the second Epistle, chap
40
te r 3, verse 15 “—the longsuffering of God is our
salvation, even as our beloved b ro th er P au l also
according to the wisdom given unto him has
w ritten unto you.”
Thei au th o r proceeds to deal w ith the whole
epistle clause by clause. A b rief quotation from
volume I, giving a sum m ary of h is exposition of
the w ell know n w ords of C hapter 7 verse 25 m ay
serve to illu strate his style, linking the tex t to
its context. “ ‘W herefore’ — because of the oath
of His consecration (V. 20), because of the im
m utability of th e F a th e r’s purpose (He w ill not
repent) V. 21, because of th e b e tte r covenant of
which He is ‘S urety ’, (V. 22), and because H e contin u eth ever an unchanging P riest (v. 24), — ‘He
is able to save them unto the u tte r most! This,
we take it, is the connection betw een verse 25 and
its context.” In addition to his detailed exposition,
th e author excels in skilful practical application.
F or instance, after com m enting on th e 28th verse
of the ninth chapter, he has these w ords of appli
cation on the phrase “U nto them th a t look for
H im ”: — th a t is, all the redeem ed, the m any
whose sins He bore. Five things are included in
this w ork “look fo r”. F irst, th e steadfast fa ith of
his appearing, resting w ith im plicit confidence on
H im prom ise in John 14:2,3. Second, a real love
unto it; 2. Tim. 4:8. Third, an a rd en t longing after
it, so th a t they cry, “Even so come, L ord Jesus”,
Rev. 22:20. Fourth, a p atien t w aiting for it, in
the m idst of m any discouragem ents: Jam es 5:7,8.
Fifth, a personal p rep aratio n for it: M att 25:10
L uke 12:35-37.
No few er th an 250 pages are devoted to the
expostition of the fam iliar eleventh chapter. In
such an exhaustive treatm en t, v ery little is over
looked and the exposition is really a series of ser
mons o r articles on the lives of these great saints
of God. H e sets before us tru e Calvinism as he
declares m an’s total inability, God’s sovereign
grace, the fact th a t th e re is no m erit in th e act
of faith w hen a sinner comes to a saving know
ledge of C hrist. O ccasionally th ere is a trace of
u ltra or hyper Calvinism as w hen h e says th at
th e m ajority of p resent day C alvinists deny a
common grace to all m en, and insist in distin
guishing grace to the elect only.
Som etim es too we find th a t his exposition is
som ew hat fanciful. He rig h tly speaks of the w ork
of common grace as a p rim ary operation of the
S pirit th a t elevates th e n a tu ra l faculties of man,
b u t does not regenerate them . He proceeds to
call it an inferior call of God through the Gospel
th a t produces a crow d of unreg en erate professors
whom he likens to the leaves on a tree th a t are
v ery helpful in protecting th e fru it, very orna
m ental to th e tree, b u t not fit for th e table.
It is im possible to tak e note of all the ex
cellencies or defects of such a large w ork in such
a b rief review , and m any things have no doubt
escaped the review er’s notice. B ut fo r th e Bible
lover and student who has the m oney to spend,
(the price is very high), and the tim e to dig deep
ly into the contents of the book, th ere is abundant
m aterial to rew ard his efforts and to refresh his
soul.
— A dam Loughridge.
HOW T O A C H I E V E
PERSONALITY
THROUGH PRAYER, By Simon Blocker. Wm.
B. Eerdm ans Publishing Co., G ran d Rapdis 3,
Mich. 1954, 121 pp. $2.00
At first glance this title m ight suggest a liberal
psychological aproach to prayer, b u t such is not
the case. R ather this book is an exposition of
Colossians 1:9-12 in the hope th a t both individuals
and churches m ay advance on th e ir knees. Blocker
states th a t P aul’s “p ray e r for the Colossian C hris
tians m ade know n to them on w h at specific aim s
they w ere to concentrate in pray er and effort.”
This prayer of P aul suggests to the author
seven m ajor prayer goals w hich in tu rn are the
subject of most of the chapters of his book. They
are as follows: a satisfying C hristian Creed, e x
em plary C hristian Conduct, a tru e C hristian C har
acter, adequate C hristian Capacity, dynam ic C hris
tian Competence, attractiv e C hristian Charm , and
enduring C hristian C oncentration.
The danger of becom ing com placent and
monotonous in our pray er life is a constant th re at
to our grow th and service for C hrist. I t’s not so
much a question of not p raying as it is a lack of
progress and dependence in prayer. “Petitions
lack scrutiny, definiteness, luster, an d significance.
Requests are too vague . . . A C hristian m ay eke
out some kind of C hristian life by G race at meals,
a ‘Now I lay m e’ at bedtim e o r an ejaculatory
pray er if a fast d river alm ost ru n s him over. Com
pared to the possibilities, this is sm all business
w ith scant returns, how ever sincere th e prayers.
Consciousness of the goals of p ra y e r w ill help to
overcome this lack of p ra y e r pow er and develop
m ent.”
Perhaps the purpose of this volum e m ay best
be expressed in the au th o r’s ow n w ords, “W hen
a soldier of Jesus C hrist tu rn s his back on a life
of prayer, he becomes a deserter on the spot.
This book is w ritten to serve as a w a rra n t of his
arrest.”
— B ruce C. Stew art
MISSIONS AT THE CROSSROADS, by T.
Stanley Soltau, Van K am pen Press, W heaton, Ill
inois. 1954, pp. 183. $2.50.
This book is not one w hich can be read and
enjoyed by everyone. F o r those w ho are at ease
in Zion; for those who have perfect peace of m ind
and tranquility of spirit; for those w ho are com
41
pletely satisfied w ith the status quo, Missions a t
the Crossroads, would only tend to be a source of
irritatio n . B ut on th e other hand, for those who
a re w illing to have th e ir own little w orld dis
ru p te d in order th at C hrist’s Kingdom m ight be
advanced h ere on the earth, this book w ill be
v ery stim u latin g and challenging.
ta u states his case in simple, straightforw ard
language. One does get the feeling as he reads
the second h alf of the book, however, th at there
is too little progression of thought. The second
h alf of the book m ight have been incorporated into
the first fourteen chapters w ith an even more
forceful argument..
F o r tw enty-five years, Dr. Soltau was a pastor,
evangelist an d educator in th e Am erican P resby
te ria n Mission in Korea. Because of this almost
all of th e exam ples w hich he uses to explain his
points are experiences which he had in the F ar
E ast. N evertheless, Dr. Soltau also speaks w ith
a p p a re n t understanding of problem s w hich arise
in o th er countries such as Moslem countries. He
does not say th at since these m ethods w orked
they are right. R ather he shows th a t the m ethods
of m ission w ork which he presents have w orked
w ith w onderful results and they are rig h t be
cause they a re Bibical.
This book surely deserves serious and openm inded consideration by every C hristian of the
Reform ed Faith. Most especially should it be con
sidered by all of our foreign missionaries and by
all w ho have any authority in the m anagem ent of
our foreign fields.
Dr. Soltau w rites: “Missions a t the Cross
roads! Yes, they are at the crossroads and the
question as to w hat th e fu tu re holds for C hris
tia n m issions is one which concerns every intelli
gent believer today. From almost every country
come disquieting reports.” So far as it is hum anly
possible to see, the day of th e foreign m issionary
is rap id ly coming to a close. Therefore, Dr. Soltau
gives as th e sub-title to his book: “The Indigenous
C hurch—A Salution for the Unfinished Task.”
The purpose of C hristian Missions is stated
clearly in th e very first chapter: “The aim of
C hristian m issions is the proclaim ing of the gospel
to th e unconverted everyw here, according to the
com m and of Christ, w ith th e view to the estab
lishing of an indigenous church.” In this book,
Dr. S oltau takes up the various problems which
arise m ainly from th e last p art of this great p u r
pose of missions, namely, “the establishing of an
indigenous church.” These problem s are discuss
ed from th e M issionary’s point of view, from the
Home B oard’s point of view, and from the Home
C hurch’s point of view.
In reading this book, one gets the feeling th a t
Dr. Soltau believes th a t C hrist’s kingdom w ill
triu m p h h ere on the earth through the w ork of
th e Holy S p irit although he does not say this in
so m any words. He is not one who would snatch
as m any souls as possible from the burning fire;
nor is he one who would reform the w orld to a
W estern w ay of life; ra th e r his plea is for a foreign
mission program such as th a t which was carried
on u n d er th e leadership of the Apostle Paul.
The book itself has good print, wide margins,
an d each ch ap ter contains bold sub-titles so th at
it is easily and rapidly read. Following each chap
te r questions for discussion are given so th a t it
m ight be suitable for use in Missionary Societies,
etc. F or th is type book, it is very well w ritten in
th a t it can be understood w ithout study. Dr. Sol
— Thomas J. Wilson
THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION, by
Jam es Buchanan.
B aker Book House, G rand
Rapids 6, Mich., 1955, pp. x, 514. $4.95.
This scholarly volum e contains the Cunning
ham Lectures delivered at New College, Edin
burgh, Scotland, w here the author was Divinity
Professor a century ago. We are fortunate to be
able to study this re p rin t volume, first published
in 1867, and thus to sit a t the feet of a great
scholar. Jam es B uchanan was one of a num ber
of g reat lights in a period of florescence in th e
history of Reform ed theology. He shows his
color as a doctrinal historian and also as an able
exegete. The w ork is divided into two m ain parts:
the H istory of the D octrine of Justification in the
Church, and its Exposition from Scripture. The
rep rinting of such a m asterful piece of w ork is
fully justified, for it is doubtful th a t anything
has ev er been w ritte n on the doctrine of justifi
cation th a t can m atch it fo r thorough treatm ent,
elegant style and precise expression.
The author is a m aster of the a rt of m aking
tru th lucid by contrasting it w ith error. He places
under the searchlight of the W ord all the various
shades of e rro r w hich have corrupted the pure
doctrine of Justification by grace and turned
m ultitudes aw ay from the Gospel of the grace of
God to a different gospel.
I t is to be lam ented th a t the tru th of Ju stifi
cation, th e keystone of Protestantism , has again
d rifted into obscurity and is practically unheard
of today in large sections of Protestantism . It is
highly significant th a t w hile the term s “Gospel”,
“Cross”, “grace”, etc. are constantly on the lips of
P ro testan t clergym en, other im portant term s such
as “justification”, “im puted righteousness”, “obedi
ence of C hrist”, are seldom mentioned. The form er
term s, how ever have no definite m eaning apart
from the latter. Preaching about “the Gospel” does
not necessarily m ean preaching the Gospel itself.
The Gospel of the grace of God cannot be tru ly
preached unless the doctrine of Justification be
preached. A p art from the tru th of Justification,
evangelism can only resu lt in confusing people’s
m inds w ith erroneous o r inadequate views of God’s
42
w ay of salvation. The recovery in our day of the
doctrine of Justification by faith on the ground of
C hrist’s obedience and im puted righteousness
would be a rem edy for m uch of th e vagueness
which clouds the tru th of th e Gospel at the pres
ent time.
The doctrine of Ju stification has no appeal to
those who welcome every strange w ind of doctrine
as som ething original and existential. B ut the
tru th set forth in unam biguous language by Dr.
Buchanan alm ost a century ago is timeless. It
w ill be loved and preached and believed long
after the contem porary theology has been fo r
gotten.
—• Joseph A. Hill
something like crossw ord puzzles, yet not the
same. Those of our readers who a re fam iliar w ith
the puzzle book entitled Bible Anacrostics by Miss
Rose A. Huston w ill know w h at the present book
is like, for the idea of the puzzles is the sam e. A
Bible text is given w ith one w ord om itted. There
are spaces to indicate the num ber of le tters in the
word. U nder each" space is a num ber. T he child
is to fill in the missing w ord by looking up the
text in the Bible (references a re given), then
transfer the letters thus supplied to num bered
blank squares in the puzzle form on th e opposite
page. The puzzles are easy to w ork and should
provide children w ith considerable pleasant oc
cupation on Sabbath afternoons, w hile a t th e same
tim e teaching them texts from the W ord of God.
— J. G. Vos
HANDBOOK OF BIBLE HISTORY: BOOK I
— OLD TESTAMENT FROM CREATION TO THE
KINGDOM O F DAVID, by George Stob. Wm. B.
Eerdm ans Pub. Co., G rand Rapids 3, Mich. 1955,
pp. 137, pap er cover. $1.00.
This book by a m inister of th e C hristian Re
form ed C hurch “is intended to serve as a study
book in Bible H istory for th e children as well as
the adult m em bers of th e congregation” (Preface).
The m aterial is divided into tw enty-six chapters
of five or six pages each. Each chapter closes
w ith three sets of questions: (1) a set of factual
questions for children up to fifth grade age; (2)
a set of factual and thought questions for children
of grades six to eight; (3) a set of questions in
tended to form a basis for discussion, dealing w ith
“the theology and ethics and the1p articu lar revelational teaching of the S cripture reading.”
The book is very w ell w ritte n and should
prove a useful help in religious w ork. T he re
view er is disappointed, how ever, th a t nothing is
said about th e possibility th a t the six days of
creation m ay not be literal days, and th a t the
book states th a t “A bout 365 years had gone by
since th e Flood” w hen God called Abram. In
these days w hen archaeological investigation has
pushed th e civilization of th e low er Euphrates
valley back as fa r as 4,000 B. C. and perhaps even
earlier, (M errill F. Unger, Archeology and the Old
Testament, p. 44) the view th a t th ere w ere only
some 365 y ears betw een th e Flood and A braham
involves serious difficulty, and it w ould seem th at
a book intended for youth and adults as w ell as
for children should at least point out th at a
problem exists.
— J . G. Vos
PUZZLE FUN W ITH BIBLE CLUES, by W.
P. Keasbey. W. A. W ilde Co., 131 C larendon Street,
Boston 16, Mass. 1955, pp. 116, paper cover. No
price stated.
This little book
contains
52 Bible puzzles
GOD’S PLAN AND MAN’S DESTINY, by
Viola M. Cameron. The P resb y te ria n and R e
form ed Publishing Co., P. O. Box 185, N utley 10,
N. J. 1955, pp. 160, paper cover. $1.80.
The first edition of this book w as review ed
in the January-M arch 1953 issue of this magazine
(pages 46-48). We are glad to note th a t a second
edition has appeared, this tim e being published
by the P resbyterian and R eform ed Publishing
Company. The first edition was v ery w ell r e
ceived in Calvinistic circles. The book w as tra n s
lated and published in C hinese by th e R eform a
tion Translation Fellowship.
On the cover the book is described as “A
digest of the Bible from P aradise lost to Paradise
regained." The contents of the book m easure up
to this description very well. The book is a study
of the Bible as an organism of revelation and re
demption. Thoroughly tru e to the full inspira
tion and authority of the Bible as the W ord of
God, the author has avoided the piecem eal, atom
istic, non-organic type of treatm e n t w hich vitiates
so m uch Fundam entalist Bible study m aterial. In
Miss Cam eron’s book the Bible is not treated as a
vast collection of texts from w hich some precious
gems m ay be selected, b u t as an organism all
parts of which are fitted to g ether and in ter-related
in one harm onious whole.
The new edition contains a new P reface w rit
ten by Dr. Cornelius V an Til, Professor of Apolo
getics in W estm inster Theological Sem inary,
Philadelphia, who also provided a P reface for the
first edition. Dr. Van T il characterizes th e book
as “a simple and com prehensive statem en t of the
Christian Faith, which recognizes God’s rev ela
tion in nature, in history and in th e W ord,” add
ing th a t “It w ill serve adm irably fo r a basis of
group discussion, and the general rea d er w ill feel
richly rew arded for his perusal of it.” We fully
endorse this com m endation of th e book.
— J. G. Vos
43
TITHING, b y A rth u r W. Pink. Bible T ruth
Depot, Swengel, Pa. No date, pp. 32, pocket size,
p ap er cover. 10 cents.
which requires proof, nam ely th at tithing in the
Law of Moses was a m oral and not a cerem onial
requirem ent.
In th is booklet the late Mr. P ink sets forth
B iblical teaching about the tithe, together w ith
some m aterial on objections th a t have been raised
against tithing, and also som ething on the bless
ings of tith in g and some practical suggestions.
Lest any read er draw unw arran ted inferences
from the preceding paragraph, the review er m ust
hasten to add th a t he believes in tithing and has
practiced it for m any years. We believe in it on
the general ground th a t the New Testam ent be
liever should reach a t least as high a stand ard of
consecration to the Lord as was expected of the
Old T estam ent saints.
T he au th o r avoids the absurd claims which
have ren dered some tithing literatu re worthless,
such as th e claim th at the sin of Cain was failure
to tithe. He fran k ly adm its th a t Scripture records
no positive com m and to tithe until the tim e of
Moses. H e infers, however, from the practice of
A braham and Jacob tithing, th at th ere m ust have
been a divine com m and which gave rise to the
practice, ju s t as it is commonly held that a divine
com m and, not recorded in Scripture, m ust have
la in back of th e beginning of th e institution of
sacrifice.
We a re not in agreem ent w ith the author’s
statem en t (p. 9) th a t one-tenth of our gross in
come belongs to the Lord. This w e believe to be
a m isin terp retatio n of S cripture and also unw ork
able in practice. In some businesses w here the
pro fit on a single article or transaction is small,
on e-ten th of th e gross income m ight be m ore than
th e entire n et income o r profit. U nder m odern
conditions of m ass production the profit to the
m an u factu rer on an article w hich brings a dollar
of gross incom e m ay be only five or six cents, or
even less. If th e gross income w ere to be tithed,
th e tith e r w ould soon be bankrupt. We believe
th a t th e only realistic w ay to tith e is to tithe one’s
n e t income, ju st as the G overnm ent imposes taxes
upon a m an’s n e t income, not upon his gross in
come.
On page 15 th e author states th a t the nam e
“M elchizedek” m eans “peace,” which is incorrect,
fo r it m eans “K ing of righteousness.” The author
by an argum ent based on the typology of A b ra
ham and M elchizedek seeks to show th a t the
C hristian is u n d er obligation to pay tithes to
C hrist, th e an tity p e of Melchizedek.
Tihe rev iew er is not convinced by the author’s
citation of C h rist’s reference to the practice of
tithing: “These ought ye to have done, and not to
leave th e o th e r undone” (p. 12). C hrist here
states th a t th e requirem ents of th e Mosaic law
concerning tith in g a re binding. B ut it m ust be
rem em bered th a t this was still in the Old Testa
m en t period of religion; not only tithing, b u t also
circum cision, th e passover and anim al sacrifices
w ere still obligatory. To assume w ithout proof
th a t a th in g enjoined by C hrist then is therefore
binding now is to bypass the crucial question of
w h eth er th e thin g in question w as part of the
m oral law or p a rt of the cerem onial law. We are
not assertin g th a t the author is m istaken, b u t only
th a t it is n o t p ro p er to assume the very thing
The rest of Mr. P in k ’s booklet contains excel
lent, pointed and very practical m aterial. Tithing
is show n to be an antidote against covetousness,
and the solution of the C hurch’s financial problems,
as well as the key to great advance in foreign
missions. We a re glad to recom m end the booklet.
— J. G. Vos
THE EVANGELICAL LIBRARY BULLETIN,
published by T he Evangelical Library, 78a Chilte rn Street, London, W. 1, England.
The Evangelical L ib rary is an institution in
England w hich is doing a very commendable work.
As stated a t the heading of its Bulletin, its task
is “P reservation, Inform ation, Circulation.” E van
gelical and Reform ed litera tu re is perm anently
preserved and also le n t out to readers. The P resi
dent of the G eneral C om m ittee is Dr. D. M artyn
Lloyd-Jones, who is know n either personally or
through his published w ritings to a good m any
readers of Blue B anner F aith and Life.
The B ulletin appears tw ice yearly, and each
issue contains a brief and readable b u t scholarly
article on some im portant suject. The review er
at this tim e of w riting has before him two issues
of the B ulletin, No. 14 (A utum n, 1954) and No. 15
(Spring, 1955). One of these contains an article
on “The R eform ation and the Gospel” by the Rev.
Philip E. Hughes, M.A., B.D., accompanied by por
traits of the English m arty rs L atim er and Ridley.
The other issue contains an article entitled
“Thom as Jones of C reaton,” by the Rev. J. S.
Reynolds, B. Litt., M.A., this being a sketch of the
life of a W elsh m inister w ho was born in 1752.
The article describes the “apostolic life and
labours” of Thom as Jones. The story of the good
accomplished in one lifetim e by this saint of the
Lord is tru ly stirring.
Each issue of th e B ulletin also lists new books
recently received by the L ibrary, w ith titles and
nam es of authors. Several large and well-know n
A m erican publishers are listed as having contrib
u ted books to the Library. The L ibrary contains
some 20,000 books a t present. This is certainly a
m ost com m endable enterprise.
— J. G. Vos
44
Books Received
T he announcem ent of the books listed below should not be
construed as a recom m endation. A review of those found in this
list w hich we regard as having value for our readers w ill be given
in a later issue.
Publications of Wm. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co.,
Grand Rapids 3, Mich.
THE SELF-DISCLOSURE OF JESUS,
G eerhardus Vos. 1954, pp. 311. $4.00.
by
ANCHOR OF HOPE, by Preston J. Stegenga.
1954, pp. 271. $3.50.
PHILOSOPHY OF REVELATION, by H erm an
Bavinck. 1953, pp. x, 348. $3.50.
THE CHRISTIAN VIEW OF SCIENCE AND
SCRIPTURE, by A. C. Conrad. 1954, pp. 368. $4.00.
LOVE THE LORD THY GOD, by H erm an
Hoeksema. 1955, pp. 290. $3.00.
THE GO SPEL OF THE SPIRIT, by Sam uel E.
Pierce. 1955, pp. 104. $1.50.
THE EPISTLES OF PAUL TO THE PH IL IPPIANS AND TO PHILEMON, by J. J. M ueller.
1955, pp. 200. $3.50.
BY GRACE ALONE, by H erm an ICuiper.
1955, pp. 165. $2.50.
THE PARABOLIC TEACHING OF SCRIP
TURE, by G. H. Lang. 1955, pp. 400. $3.50.
LOVE THY NEIGHBOR FOR GOD’S SAKE,
by H erm an Hoeksema. 1955, pp. 195. $2.50.
THESE ALSO SUFFER, by W illiam Goulooze. 1955, pp. 86. $1.75.
CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE FOR BEGINNERS,
by H enry Baker, 1954, pp. 32, pocket size, paper
cover. 20 cents.
Publications of Sovereign Grace Book Club,
446 South First Street, Louisville, Kentucky.
SONGS OF SOVEREIGNTY: THREE SER
MONS EXTOLLING THE SOVEREIGNTY OF
CHRIST, by John Owen. 1955, pp. 119. No price
stated.
EXPOSITION OF THE EPISTLE TO THE
ROMANS, Vol. I (Chaps. 1-3; Vol II (Chaps. 4-7),
by Robert Haldane. 1955, pp. 159, 310. Each volume,
$ 2 .00 .
PRAYER, by John B unyan; THE RETURN
OF PRAYERS, by Thomas Goodwin, 1955, pp. 60,
paper cover. $1.00.
KEEPING THE HEART, by Jo h n Flavel. 1955,
pp. 96, paper cover. 75 cents.
Publications of the Presbyterian and Reform
ed Publishing Co., P. O. Box 185, Nutley 10, N. J.
THE HOLY SPIR IT OF GOD, by W. H. G rif
fith Thomas. 1955, pp. xv, 303. $3.00.
CHRISTIANITY AND EXISTENTIALISM , by
J. M. Spier. 1953, pp. 140. $3.00.
HOLY FIELDS: AN INTRODUCTION TO
THE HISTORICAL GEOGRAPHY OF THE HOLY
LAND, by J. H ow ard K itchen. 1955, pp. 160. $2.50.
THE DEFENSE OF THE FAITH, by C. Van
Til. 1955, pp. viii, 436. $4.95.
Publications of Baker Book House, Grand
Rapids 6, Mich.
DEVOTIONS AND PRAYERS OF JOHN
CALVIN, ed.. by Charles E. Edw ards. 1954, pp. 120,
pocket size. $1.00.
THE CHURCH IN THE ROMAN EMPIRE, by
W illiam M. Ramsey. 1951, pp. 510. $4.20.
CHRISTIANITY IN THE APOSTOLIC AGE,
by George T. Purves. 1955, pp. xx, 343. $3.00.
I AND II THESSALONIANS, by W illiam
H endriksen. 1955, pp. 214. $4.50.
LEADERS OF ISRAEL: A BRIEF HISTORY
OF THE HEBREW PEO PLE, by George L. Robin
son. 1955, pp. x, 216. $2.75.
THE SECRET OF THE LORD, by W illiam M.
Clow. 1955, pp. 353. $2.95.
SEVEN WORDS OF LOVE, by G. H all Todd.
1955, pp. 71. $1.50.
CHRISTIANITY AND IDEALISM, by C. Van
Til. 1955, pp. 139, paper cover. $1.80.
Publications of W. A. Wilde Co., 131 Claredon
St., Boston 16, Mass.
MISSION ON MAIN STREET, by Helga Ben
der Henry. 1955, pp. 200. $2.75.
THE LIVING BIBLE CHAPTER BY CHAP
TER, by Amos R. Wells. 1955, pp. 343. $2.00,
THROUGH THE BIBLE IN A YEAR, by Amos
R. Wells. 1955, pp. 127. $1.50.
PROTESTANT BIBLICAL INTERPRETA
TION, by B ernard Ramm. 1950, pp. 197. $2.50.
Publications of Other Firms
SCHEEBEN’S DOCTRINE OF DIVINE ADOP
TION, by Edwin H. P alm er. J. H. K ok, N.V.,
Kampen, N etherlands. 1953, pp. xi, 202, paper
cover. Florins 5.90.
45
THE FREE OFFER OF THE GOSPEL, by John
M urray and Ned B. Stonehouse. Lewis J. G rotenhuis, B elvidere Road, Phillipsburg, N.J. 1955, pp.
27, pocket size, p ap er cover. 25 cents.
IOR LEADERS, by A nna P. McKelvy. 1954, pp.
60. 8% x 11 inches, plastic binding, paper cover.
O rder from C hester R. Fox, 209 N inth St., P itts
burgh 22, Pa.
THE FIVE POINTS OF CALVINISM, by Ed
w in H. Palm er. The Men’s Society of the C hris
tian R eform ed Church, 422 E. Exchange St., Spring
Lake, Mich. 1955, pp. 88, paper cover. $1.00.
PREDESTINATION: ITS MEANING, ITS
BLESSINGS, ITS EVIDENCES, ITS IMPLICA
TIONS, by G eorge B. Fletcher. Bible T ruth Depot,
Swengel, Pa. No date, pp. 24, pocket size, paper
cover. 15 cents; 2 for 25 cents.
TAUGHT O F THE LORD: HELPS FOR JU N
Blue Banner Question Box
Readers are invited to subm it Biblical, doctrinal and practical
questions for answ er in this departm ent. Names w ill not be pu b
lished w ith questions, b u t anonymous com m unications w ill be dis
regarded.
Question:
A m in ister who professes to be a Calvinist told
m e recently th a t God has not decreed that any one
should rem ain in sin; th at the decree concerning
th e rep ro b ates was not a positive decree. W hat is
y our view on this subject?
Answer:
F irst of all let us note w hat historic orthodox
C alvinism holds concerning the decree of God, as
stated in th e W estm inster Confession of Faith,
C hapter III, Section 1: “God from all eternity
did, by th e m ost wise and holy counsel of His own
w ill, freely, and unchangeably ordain w hatsoever
comes to pass: yet so, as thereby neither is God
th e au th o r of sin, nor is violence offered to the
w ill of th e creatures, nor is the liberty o r con
tingency of second causes taken away, b u t ra th e r
established.”
A. A. Hodge in his Outlines of Theology (Chap.
X ) states: “God’s decree determ ines only the cer
ta in fu tu ritio n of events, it directly effects or
causes no event. B ut the decree itself provides in
every case th a t the event shall be effected by
causes acting in a m anner perfectly consistent w ith
th e n a tu re of th e event in question. Thus in the
case of every free act of a m oral agent the decree
itself provides at the same tim e — (a) T hat the
agent sh all be a free agent, (b) That his ante
cedents and all the antecendents of the act in
question shall be w hat they are. (c) T hat all the
p resen t conditions of the act shall be w hat they
are. (d ) T h at th e act shall be perfectly spontan
eous and free on the p a rt of the agent, (e) That
it shall be certainly fu tu re.”
Hodge continues: “God’s purposes relating to
all events of every kind constitute one single, allcom prehensive intention
com prehending all
events, th e free as free, the necessary as necessary,
tog eth er w ith all th eir causes, conditions and re
lations, as one indivisible system of things, every
lin k of w hich is essential to the integrity of the'
w hole.”
In the above statem ents Hodge is seeking to
guard in th eir integ rity the tw in truths: (a) That
God has decreed all th a t ever comes to pass; (b)
T hat m an is a free agent whose acts are tru ly
his own. A dm ittedly the relation betw een these
two tru th s (both of w hich are clearly taught in
S cripture) is a m ystery or paradox which hum an
reason cannot solve. We do not believe it is any
solution of the problem to say th at God’s decree
concerning the sinful acts of m en is “not a positive
decree.” E ither God has foreordained all th a t
comes to pass, or H e has not. If He has foreor
dained all th a t comes to pass, then His decree
renders it absolutely certain th a t w hat H e intend
ed shall come to pass. If w e say He has not fore
ordained all th a t comes to pass, then we have
abandoned Calvinism.
The Scriptures definitely teach th a t the sin
ful acts of w icked m en are foreordained by God.
For exam ple, Joseph’s b ro th ers in selling him to
be sent to Egypt com m itted a sinful act. Yet
Joseph him self states th a t th is act was intended
by God (Gen. 45:7,8; 50:20). Judas, th e Sanhedrin,
Herod and P ilate sinned in p u tting Jesus to death,
yet S cripture plainly declares th a t this sin was
foreordained by God (Acts 2:23; 4:27,28; 13:29).
M oreover the Bible teaches th a t th e sin of unbe
lief, or rejecting C hrist (or as the question under
discussion states it, “th a t any one should rem ain
in sin” ) is foreordained by God: 1 P e te r 2:8, “And
a stone of stum bling, and a rock of offence, even
to them w hich stum ble a t the word, being diso
bedient: w hereunto also they w ere appointed.”
Again in Revelation 17:17 a fearful course of sin
ful conduct is stated to be a fulfilm ent of the divine
purpose: “F or God h a th put in their hearts to fu l
fill his will, and to agree, and to give th eir king
dom unto the beast, u n til the w ords of God shall
b e fulfilled.” Again, Psalm 17:13,14 speaks of the
sinful acts of w icked men as fulfilling the purpose
of God: “. . . the wicked, w hich is thy sword . . .
m en w hich are thy hand, O L ord . . . m en of the
46
w orld
10:5 and 15.
Note also th e statem ents of Isaiah
To sum th e m a tte r up: (1) God has decreed
ALL th a t comes to pass. (2) His decree m akes it
absolutely certain th a t it shall come to pass. (3)
This includes the sinful acts of men, including
th eir rejection of C hrist and rem aining in un b e
lief. (4) This decree in no w ay interferes w ith
m an being a free m oral agent and responsible for
his acts. (5) The relation betw een God’s fore
ordination and m an’s freedom and responsibility
is a m ystery fo r w hich n eith er S cripture nor reason
provide a solution.
— J. G. Vos
Question:
W hat are we to th in k of the use of the lot in
aw arding attendance prizes at m eetings? Is this
gambling? Is it proper for C hristians to register
for these prizes?
Answer:
C hristian people a re being m ore and more
faced w ith situations such as th a t reflected in the
above question. T he g reat m ajority seem ready
to follow th e popular tren d of th e tim es w ithout
asking any questions for conscience’ sake. We
are glad th a t some C hristians realize th a t a ques
tion of conscience is involved and are concerned
to act in accordance w ith sound principles.
The Synod of th e Reform ed P resbyterian
C hurch of N orth A m erica in 1951 in answ er to a
p aper subm itted by th e session of a congregation,
adopted the following statem ent:
“God’s law forbids all form s of gam bling in
these w ords: ‘Thou sh alt not steal.’ Gam bling is
included am ong th e ‘u n ju st or sinful ways of ta k
ing or w ithholding from our neighbor w hat be
longs to him, or of enriching ourselves’ and the
‘w asteful gam ing’ forbidden in this com m and
m ent. (L arger C atechism 142).
“In th e answ ers to the L arger Catechism
questions (No. 105, 142, 148) as to w h a t is forbid
den in th e 1st, 8th, and 10th com m andm ents are
principles w hich w ould forbid all form s of gam b
ling from large scale betting to playing m arbles
for keeps and including bingo, ‘b ank nights’ at the
movies, all sorts of raffles, lotteries, drawings,
playing w ith ‘chance’ slot machines, ‘bookies,’
‘Pools’ and such like.
“G am bling is dishonoring to God in th a t w hat
is called chance is not chance b u t an appeal to God
in an irrev e re n t m anner. W hen th e lot was
properly cast during th e Old T estam ent dispen
sation, it w as done w ith a re v e re n t appeal to God
to decide and show His will. If it is ever right
to use th e lot today it should be done in the same
spirit. The Bible tells us th a t ‘the lot is cast into
the lap; b u t the whole disposing thereof is of the
L ord’ (Prov. 16:33).
“When m erchants offer chance tickets it does
not change the principle of gam bling. The evil
does not consist alone in m oney or goods th a t are
gotten for nothing but in an irrev e re n t appeal to
w hat is called chance.
“C hrist’s tru e followers have been w arned,
and should be w arned again by th eir pastors and
sessions, th at they who tem pt the L ord and take
such risks, or m ake such v en tures as are incon
sistent w ith faith in Him, a re guilty of actual
violations of His m oral law, and thus endanger
their soul’s salvation.”
We believe th at the above answ er, taken from
the Minutes of Synod, 1951, page 139, adequately
covers the question asked by our correspondent.
We would add th a t the trem endous increase of
all sorts of raffles, lotteries, draw ings of chance
tickets, etc., seems to us a sym ptom of a disease
which is seriously affecting the A m erican people.
We heard an elder speak of this new A m erican
disease as Jackpotitis. A part from th e irrev ere n t
appeal to “chance” w hich is involved, it seems to
us a sign of m oral decay th a t so m any of the
A merican people are ready to grasp at th e “chance”
to get som ething for nothing. On one occasion
the w riter was unable to find a place to p a rk his
car in a town of some five thousand population.
The town was unusually crow ded w ith people, and
on inquiry it was learn ed th a t th irty silver
dollars and some other aw ards w ere to be given
away by the m erchants th a t afternoon to the
holders of lucky num ber tickets. The idea today
seems to be to get w hat you can b y alm ost any
method, regardless of w h eth er you have really
earned it or not.
— J. G. Vos
Question:
W hat is your opinion, on the basis of S crip
ture, about playing games such as the now popu
lar game of “Scrabble,” in w hich th ere seems to
be an elem ent of chance?
Answer:
The w riter is not fam iliar w ith th e gam e of
Scrabble. We m ay be able to publish a m ore ade
quate answ er in our n ex t issue. In general, it m ay
be said th at there is an element of chance in a l
most every game. For exam ple, th e re is certain
ly an elem ent of w hat is called chance in basket
ball, yet this is only incidental, and the' game is
essentially one of skill. I t is th e w rite r’s belief
th at games which are essentially gam es of chance
should never be played for any gain, prize or
award. W hether such games as A uthors, Lotto,
Monopoly, and the like, w hen played m erely for
recreation are im proper, is a question w hich we
believe is in need of fu rth e r discussion.
— J. G. Vos
47
Question:
In a R eform ed publication the statem ent was
m ade (1) th a t th e Bible contains m uch repetition;
(2) th a t th e Bible often begins a subject w ith a
general statem ent, and then gives details. W hat
is y o u r opinion of these m atters?
Answer:
We a re in agreem ent w ith the statem ents cited.
As fo r th e first, it is obvious th a t th e Bible does
indeed contain m uch repetition. F or example, the
Ten Com m andm ents are found in Exodus and
again in alm ost identical form in Deuteronomy.
B iblical genealogies are often repeated. The record
of the Feeding of the Five Thousand is found in
all fo u r of th e Gospels. Many other exam ples
could easily be cited. Even though a m atter is
seldom rep eated in exactly the sam e form, still
th e re is a large elem ent of repetition. Psalm 14
differs only v ery slightly from Psalm 53.
W ith reg ard to th e second statem ent, w e are
in agreem ent w ith it also. It is a common practice,
especially in the Old Testam ent, to start the ac
count of a subject w ith a sort of sum m ary or topic
sentence w hich covers the subject as a whole b rief
ly, then to go over the subject in detail from be
ginning to end. M any instances of this phenomenon
could easily be cited. For instance, II Samuel 24
sta rts out w ith the general statem ent: “And again
th e anger of th e L ord was kindled against Israel,
and he m oved D avid against them to say, Go, num
b e r Israel and Ju d a h .” This is the general state
m en t or topic sentence. It is followed by a de
tailed account of w hat happened, occupying verses
2-25. Again, consider Judges 6, which starts out:
“And th e child ren of Israel did evil in the sight
of the Lord: and the Lord delivered them into the
hand of M idian seven years”. This is followed by
a detailed account of w hat the M ldianites did to
Israel, in verses 2-6. In I Sam uel 31:1 we read:
“Now th e Philistines fought against Israel: and
th e m en of Israel fled from before the Philistines,
and fell dow n slain in m ount Gilboa.” This is the
topic sentence w hich states th at th ere was a battle
betw een Israel and the Philistines, in which Israel
was defeated. Then the rest of the chapter gives
the details of the battle, w hich included the death
of Saul and his sons.
— J. G. Vos
Question:
A re we ever justified in praying directly to
the Holy Spirit? Some recent helps for fam ily
w orship and religious teaching have included
suggested prayers addressed to the Holy Spirit.
W hat should be our attitu d e tow ard this?
Answer:
We shall quote som ething
Body of Divinity, p. 942:
from
John Gill,
“God in his T hree Persons is the proper ob
ject of prayer; F ather, Son, and Spirit; who are
th e one tru e God; and it is law ful to address either
of them in prayer, though not one to the exclusion
of the others . . . . (Page 943) The th ird Person,
the Spirit of God, is also som etim es singly prayed
to, and as distinct from the F ath er and Son, 2
Thess. 3:5.” The verse cited by G ill reads: “And
the Lord direct your h earts into the love of God,
and into the p atien t w aiting for C hrist.” We are
not at all sure th at this verse substantiates the
statem ent m ade by Gill; he evidently understood
“the L ord” as m eaning “the Holy S pirit” in dis
tinction from the F ath er and the Son. We be
lieve it is sounder exegesis to take “the L ord” as
m eaning the Lord Jesus Christ.
A t any rate, it is quite clear that the norm al
m anner of pray er is to pray to God (either the
F ath er or all T hree Persons w ithout distinction),
in the nam e of the Son, by the help of the Holy
Spirit. W hile pray er addressed directly to the
Holy Spirit m ay be held on theological grounds
to be proper, it seem s strange th at not a single
clear instance of such pray er can be found in the
Bible. If any of our readers can furnish fu rth e r
light on this subject, please send the inform ation
to the editor of this magazine.
— J. G. Vos
Christ in You
By the Rev. Philip W. M artin
Colossians 1:26, 27
“Even th e m ystery which h ath been hid from
ages and from generations, but now is made m ani
fest to his saints: To whom God would m ake
know n w h at is th e riches of the glory of this
m ystery am ong th e Gentiles; which is Christ in
you, th e hope of glory.”
A g reat m ystery happened on the road to
Damascus. T he m an who had been a persecutor
of th e C hristian church became one of its greatest
ad h eren ts and missionaries. From that tim e on
w ard he spent the energies of his life proclaim ing
the great m ystery w hich is sum m ed up in the
words, “C hrist in you, the hope of glory.”
Even a h u rried reading of the New Testam ent
shows Who Paul m eans when he speaks of Christ.
He proclaim s Him as the E ternal Son of God Who
gave up His home in glory and came into this
world, w as born of the Virgin M ary and was m ade
un d er the law th at He m ight save His people from
th eir sins. He was m ade under the law th at He
m ight keep the law perfectly for His own. He
was tem pted in all points like as we are, yet w ith
out sin. At the end of His sinless life He w ent to
48
C alvary’s Cross and there, by His death, perform
ed the suprem e sacrifice th a t He m ight redeem us
from the guilt and pow er of sin. P aul explains
th a t there, God in the Person of C hrist Jesus bore
th e w rath of God for us poor sinners. He fu rth e r
points out th a t C hrist rose from th e dead on the
th ird day for th eir justification. He also proclaim s
th a t C hrist’s ascension proves th a t none can lay
anything to the charge of God’s elect.
It is this C hrist Who in a m ysterious w ay
dwells in th e h e a rt of every child of God. H e is
not m ixed w ith the old hum an natu re b u t He
enters and unites us to God. C hrist is the E ternal
Son of God and has all the attrib u tes of the infinite
God. We are of another descent and become sons
of God by adoption.
We cannot understand this great m ystery but
th ere are several things revealed in S cripture
which we should understand. First, Jesus betroths
us unto H im self th a t we m ight become pure and
holy. He does not dem and th a t we first go and
p urify ourselves and obtain g reat riches th a t we
m ight be His bride. In His love for us He unites
us to Him self and casts his m antle of perfect
righteousness upon us and endows us w ith His
riches. He w ashes all our sins aw ay in His own
blood and m akes us clean.
N ext w e should see th e tim e a t w hich He
unites us to Himself. In th e great Council of
Peace held by th e T rinity before the foundation
of the w orld God chose each of His people in
C hrist Jesus. Then they w ere all united to Him.
In the fulness of tim e C hrist cam e th a t He m ight
w eave the robe of righteousness for us. At th at
tim e we w ere each u nited to H im and w e each
w ere in Him in His d eath and resurrection. A t
God’s appointed time th e Good News of Salvation
w as preached to each of God’s children. A t th eir
regeneration God begins in them His su p ern atu ral
w ork of redem ption. In His own D ivine wisdom
the Holy Spirit causes us to exercise conscious
faith by draw ing us to C hrist and enables us to
receive Jesus Christ into our hearts. By this a c t
of faith we become conscious of our union w ith
C hrist and His W ord becomes our only ru le of
faith and life. A t the tim e of our death our spirits
are ushered into the presence of our S aviour and
the union is consum m ated for th en w e shall be
like Him for we shall see H im as He is.
O ur union w ith our S aviour is a reality
peculiar to itself w hich w e cannot understand. It
is a m ystery akin to life itself. This union is vital,
like the branches in the vine. All our C hristian
life flows from Christ w ith Whom w e are united.
This union also escapes all our senses yet in our
inner being God gives us to know th a t we are His.
It is God Who has caused us to believe in Jesus
Christ thus giving us full assurance of salvation.
Paul tells us th at this g reat union w ith Christ
is our hope of glory. Hope is a confident tru st in
God. Believing His Word, C hrist and His finished
w ork is the ground of our hope of eternal heaven.
Because w e are united w ith C hrist in this m yster
ious and vital way we know th a t w hen w e depart
this life we shall be ushered into th e presence of
God our Saviour and be w ith H im in heaven
throughout all eternity.
Is this hope yours? If not, in His Word, He
says “Him th a t cometh unto Me, I w ill in no wise
cast out.”
— The Covenanter Pastor
Announcement
You can share in the w ide w itness of Blue
B anner Faith and Life to Bible tru th by con
trib u tin g to th e expense of publishing the m aga
zine. Less th an half of the am ount required is ob
tained from subscriptions and sales of back issues.
F or the balance we are dependent on contributions.
N um bered receipts are sen t prom ptly for all con
tributions. Financial reports are subm itted to the
Board of Publication of the Synod of the R e
form ed P resb y terian C hurch of N orth Am erica
quarterly.
Sets of back issues for the years 1952, 1953 and
1955 are available at $1.00 for each year, postpaid.
The supply of back issues of all other years is
exhausted. Pressboard binders w hich w ill con
veniently preserve two years’ issues are available
at 75 cents each, postpaid. Subscriptions for 1956
are $1.50 for single subscriptions and $1.00 for each
subscription in clubs of 5 or m ore to be m ailed to one
address. All subscriptions m ust begin w ith a J a n
uary-M arch issue and ru n to the end of a calendar
year. We regret th at w e cannot do th e ex tra cler
ical w ork involved in having subscriptions sta rt
and stop at different tim es through the year. W hen
subscriptions are received during the year, the
back issues beginning w ith the January-M arch
issue of th at year will be sent.
The Agent for B ritain and Irelan d is the Rev.
Adam Loughridge, B.A., G lenm anus Manse, P ortrush, County A ntrim , N o rthern Ireland. A nnual
subscription rate for B ritain and Irelan d is 7s. 6d.
The Agent for A ustralia and New Zealand is
the Rev. A lexander B arkley, B. A., 20 Fenw ick
Street, Geelong, Victoria, A ustralia. A nnual su b
scription rate for A ustralia and New Z ealand is
10 shillings.
J. G. Vos, Editor and M anager, 3408 7th
Avenue, Beaver Falls, Pennsylvania, U. S. A.
Printed in U.S.A. by the Linn-Palmer Record, Linn, Kansas
BLUE
BANNER
FAITH
AND
L IF E
VOLUME 11
APRIL-JUNE, 1956
NUMBER 2
Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings
and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Be
hold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than
the fat of rams. For rebellion is as the sin of witch
craft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry.
1 Samuel 15:22, 23
A Q u arterly Publication Devoted to Expounding, D efending and A pplying the
System of D octrine set forth in the W ord of God and Sum m arized in th e Standards
3408 7th Avenue
E ditorial Committee: M. W. D ougherty, R. W. Caskey, Ross L atim er
P ublished by
T he Board of Publication of th e Synod of the Reform ed P resbyterian C hurch of
N orth America
A gent for B ritain and Ireland: The Rev. Adam Loughridge, B.A.,
G lenm anus Manse, P ortrush, County A ntrim , N orthern Ireland
A gent for A ustralia and New Zealand: The Rev. A lexander B arkley, B.A.,
20 Fenw ick St., Geelong, Victoria, A ustralia
P rinted in the U nited States of A m erica
A pplication for Second Class E ntry Pending at the Postoffice in Linn, K ansas
We*11 Guard the Day o f
Rest
In His great Name who gave it
A t e a rth ’s unfolding morn,
His prim al gift of m ercy
To millions yet unborn;
In faith th a t He who m ade us
Can judge our need the best —
For health, for peace, for blessing,
W e’ll g uard the Day of Rest!
In hallow ’d, glad rem em brance,
His Church through ages long
Has linked her Sabbath-keeping
W ith resurrection song.
F or w orship and for witness,
And for com m union blest,
And thoughts to heav’n uplifted,
We’ll guard the day of rest.
For earth-ties, sacred, tender,
F or love and hom e’s sw eet sake,
’Midst toil, and stress, and hurry,
T here comes God’s blessed break.
By all we hold m ost precious
W e hail His w ise behest;
And for ourselves and others,
W e’ll guard the Day of Rest!
(A uthor unknow n; from “Happy G reetings”
(1953), L ord’s Day O bservance Society, London)
He Giveth His Beloved
Sleep
Of all the thoughts of God th a t are
Borne inw ard into souls afar
Along the Psalm ist’s music deep,
Now tell me if th e re any is
For gift and grace surpassing this:
“He giveth His beloved sleep” —?
W hat would w e give to our beloved?
The hero’s heart to be unm oved,
The poet’s star-tuned h arp to sweep,
The patriot’s voice to teach and rouse;
The m onarch’s crown to light the brow s?—
“He giveth His beloved sleep."
W hat would we give to o u r beloved?
A little faith all undisproved,
A little dust to over weep.
And b itte r m em ories to m ake
The whole earth blasted fo r o u r sake?—
“He giveth His beloved sleep.”
“Sleep soft, beloved,” we som etim es say,
Who have no tu n e to charm aw ay
Sad dream s th at through th e eyelids creep:
But never doleful dream again
Shall break the happy slum ber w hen
He giveth His beloved sleep.
— Elizabeth B a rre tt Brow ning
A t the Close o f Day
Help Me to Live
Help me to live th a t oth er lives m ay see
Some slight reflection of my Lord in me.
I would not blaze before the world, a sta r
S tream ing its radiance on th e earth afar:
I w ould not lift m y head so very high
T hat m en could say I sought to touch the sky
In my am bitious efforts to be know n;
I would b u t seek Thy smile, and T hine alone,
And at T hy feet in sw eet subm ission prove
The richness and the com fort of T hy love;
F or love alone can tu rn o u r life to light
And m ake us lum inous in God’s own sight.
(A uthor unknow n)
The camel at the close of day
Kneels down upon the sandy plain
To have his burden lifted off •—
And rest again.
My soul, thou too shouldst to thy knees,
W hen daylight d raw eth to a close,
And let thy M aster lift th y load —
And grant repose.
Else how couldst thou tom orrow meet,
W ith all tom orrow ’s w ork to do,
If thou thy burden all th e night
Dost carry through?
The camel kneels at break of day
To have his guide replace his load,
Then rises up anew to take
The desert road.
So thou shouldst kneel at m orning’s daw n
T hat God m ay give thee daily care,
Assured th at He no load top great
Will m ake thee bear.
(A uthor unknow n)
VOLUME 11
APRIL-JUNE, 1956
NUMBER 2
Roadblocks Limiting Church Effectiveness
A Series o f Four A rticles
By J. G. Vos
Note: T he four articles of this series, of which
th e first appears in this issue, w ere originally d e
livered as lectures a t the W hite Lake C hristian
W orkers’ Conference, New York, in 1953. L ater
they w ere published in a num ber of installm ents
in T he C ovenanter W itness during 1953 and 1954.
They are now being rep rin ted in Blue B anner
F aith and Life by request. The m aterial is r e
produced from The C ovenanter W itness by p er
mission, for w hich thankful acknow ledgm ent is
hereby expressed. — Ed.
/. Roadblock of Ignorance, Plain and Sophisticated
Christianity Involves a Definite Body of Truth
In th e New Testam ent four great words stand
re la te d to each other. These w ords are: T ruth,
D octrine, Knowledge, U nderstanding. We live in
an age w hich tends to depreciate the use of the
m ind in connection w ith religion. The im portance
of tru th , belief, know ledge and understanding, is
constantly being minimized. The great fallacy of
th e p resen t day is the notion th a t m en can gather
figs of thistles—th a t ignorance and unsound doc
trin e can produce salvation and a good life.
Knowledge of Truth is Essential
T he B ible lends no countenance to this foolish
notion. On th e contrary, the Bible emphasizes the
im portance of knowledge. It commands us to use
o u r m inds: “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God . . .
with all thy mind:” We are commanded, not
m erely to believe the tru th , but also to know, u n
d erstan d and love the tru th . We cannot really
believe it w ith o u t first of all knowing w h at it is.
A nd w e cannot know w hat it is unless w e learn
w h a t it is. T he C hristian religion involves a body
of inform ation th a t has to be know n before it can
b e accepted and lived.
The Fallacy of “Ideals” and “Values”
God redeem s the w orld not by abstract ideas
or principles, b u t by historical events w hich take
place a t p a rtic u la r tim es and places. The ancient
G reeks thou g h t of religion as a m atter of abstract
principles, such as justice, goodness, beauty, order,
and so forth. Many people today cherish the sam e
m istaken idea. A m an is quoted as saying: “My
religion is just-goodness, tru th and beauty. T hat
is a good enough religion for any m an!” B ut
goodness, tru th and beau ty are ju st abstract ideas.
To say th at our religion is goodness, tru th and
b eauty w ill not m ake us good, tru e and beautiful.
On the contrary, w e w ill still be the sam e m iser
able, inconsistent, selfish people th a t w e always
were.
Y et m any people — even professing Christians
— th in k of religion as ju st a m atter of certain
principles or ideals w ith a perm anent value. These
they call “spiritual values.” If they study the
Bible, they take the history of Abraham , fo r ex
ample, not as som ething uniquely im portant in
God’s historical plan of redem ption, b u t ju st as
one exam ple of the operation of a tim eless law.
A braham is tak en as one exam ple of the principles
of “faith ” and “unselfishness.” All Bible events
are sim ilarly treated, thus becoming m ere in
stances of th e operation of timeless laws. The real
m eaning and im portance of any p articular event
is cancelled. They become m ere illustrations or
sam ples of ideals or values. W e could ju st as w ell
pick our exam ples from ancient G reece o r China.
W hen som eone says, “The Golden R ule is
enough religion for m e,” he is really saying th a t
religion is a m atte r of ideals, not a m a tter of his
torical facts or events. He is really saying th a t h e
does not need a Saviour, b u t only an ideal.
“Creeds” that are not Really Creeds
From tim e to tim e various organizations issue
so-called “creeds,” and w hen you read one of these
“creeds,” you find th a t it is not a creed at all, b u t
only a list of ideals. It is not a statem ent of facts
th a t people are to believe, b u t m erely a statem ent
52
of abstract ideals th a t they consider valuable or
w orthw hile. “I believe in honesty, I believe in u n
selfishness, I believe in service . . —so runs the
“creed.” B ut such a “creed" it not a creed at all
in th e C hristian sense. A creed is not a m ere
statem ent of ideals. I t m ust contain facts to be a
real creed. The g reat C hristian creeds contain
facts, such as God’s w ork of creation, th e in carn a
tion of Christ, His crucifixion, resurrection, ascen
sion and second coming.
God Redeems by Facts of History
God’s plan of redem ption is not by ideals or
values, b u t by facts of history. God has stepped
into the history of this w orld and done certain p a r
ticular things at certain p articu lar tim es and
places. He com m anded Noah to build the ark; He
called A braham out of U r of the Chaldees; He
delivered the children of Israel from E gypt by the
hand of Moses. And especially, God sen t His Son
to be born in Bethlehem , to live in Ju d ea and G ali
lee, to be crucified outside th e city w all of Je ru sa
lem, to rise from th e dead the th ird day, to m eet
w ith His disciples during 40 days, and to ascend
to heaven from a p articu lar spot of latitude and
longitude on this planet. The redem ption of the
w orld is accom plished by these definite, specific,
p articu lar events, all of them so v ery “local,” so
very “dated.” W hat happened outside Jerusalem
on a p articu lar day, at p articu lar hours, some 1900
years ago, has done m ore for th e redem ption of
th e w orld th an all th e ideals and values th a t men
ever dream ed of.
Christianity a Story, Doctrine, Experience
God has given us the Bible, th e record of His
actions in hu m an history, and th e divine in te rp re
tation of the m eaning of those actions. The Bible
is a very large book. It is full of inform ation; it
is packed w ith historical facts and divinely reveal
ed interpretation of those facts — w ith facts and
doctrines not m erely ideals and values. The facts
constitute the story of God’s w ork of redem ption.
The doctrines constitute God’s interpretation of
this story. On th e basis of th e facts as interp reted
by th e doctrines, C hristian experience is founded.
C hristianity is a story, a doctrine and an experi
ence. The experience is dependent on the doctrine,
and the doctrine is dependent on the story, th at
is, on th e historical facts, th e B iblical revelation.
W here th e sto ry and th e doctrines are u n
known, C hristianity cannot exist. W here the story
and the doctrines are despised and minimized,
C hristianity cannot exist except in a dw arfed and
unhealthy form . To be a C hristian one m ust be
lieve th e doctrines of C hristianity. This m eans w e
m ust know th e facts and th e divinely-revealed
m eaning of th e facts. T here is m ore to being a
C hristian th an ju st know ing certain facts and th eir
m eaning, b u t th a t is th e basis of being a Christian,
th at is the foundation. T here is m ore to a house
than the foundation; but, a fte r all, w hat is a house
without a foundation?
There Exisits Gross Ignorance of Christian
Truth Today
The great trouble today is th a t so m any people
vainly im agine th at they can have the house w ith
out any foundation; they vainly im agine th a t they
can have Christian experience w ithout know ing
the facts of C hristianity and w ith o u t believing its
doctrines. The u tte r tragedy today is th a t we have
in the churches — to say nothing of th e world
outside — a generation of people who are grossly
ignorant of the facts and doctrines of C hristianity.
This is not ignorance about m inor details only; it
is a gross ignorance about the m ain things. The
result is th a t real C hristian experience is becom
ing m ore and more rare.
Examples of Present-Day Ignorance
We face today in th e church and in th e com
munity around the church a p rev alen t and pow er
ful anti-intellectual bias, coupled w ith gross ignor
ance of even the m ost elem entary tru th s of the
Christian faith. There are ad u lts w ho have been
communicant church m em bers fo r years w ho can
not find a place in the Bible. O thers cannot tell
which lived first, A braham o r John th e B aptist.
Such people have not th e slightest idea of even
the general plan and stru ctu re of th e Bible. They
have only the vaguest ideas of w h a t C hristianity
is all about.
Once in China a recently converted Chinese
Christian asked m e w hether the S aul w ho perse
cuted David was the same individual as the Saul
who was converted On the road to Damascus. His
ignorance was understandable and excusable in
view of the fact th a t he w as a new convert to
Christianity. B ut I venture the opinion th a t there
are communicant church m em bers in Am erica who
could not answ er this question correctly if th e ir
life depended on it.
Two Forms of Religious Ignorance
Religious ignorance exists today in tw o forms,
which we m ay designate the plain an d th e sophisti
cated. Plain ignorance is th e com m on garden
variety, the kind exem plified by th e Chinese con
vert m entioned above. This kind of ignorance is
deplorable, b u t it can be rem edied w ith o u t great
difficulty. We should expect it in new converts
on foreign mission fields. B ut in th e church m em
bers of years’ standing such ignorance is a dis
grace and a shame.
The other kind of ignorance w e m ay designate
as sophisticated ignorance. This kind is m uch
more of a problem in A m erican churches at the
53
p resen t day. This is a self-conscious, deliberate
type of ignorance. It is vastly m ore serious than
th e plain or w ild type. Sophisticated ignorance is
like a cu ltivated inbred hybrid — it is deliberately
intensified ignorance. The sophisticated ignorant
person prefers to be ignorant. He not only lacks
know ledge, he positively despises knowledge. He
fancies know ledge to be w orthless in the sphere of
religion. He reg ard s a professed ignorance as m uch
b e tte r an d w o rth ier and m ore spiritu al th an w h at
he depreciatingly calls “theology,” or, w ith added
disdain, “theological hair-splitting.”
This phrase is a bogey-m an of the sophisticat
ed religious ignoram us. By “theological h a ir
sp littin g ” he m eans any definite, exact tru th or
know ledge in th e sphere of religion. This state of
m ind m ay rig h tly be described as people glorying
in th e ir sham e. We face today a deep-seated con
tem p t for know ledge in the sphere of religion. This
p resen t-d ay contem pt for know ledge is w rong and
is co n trary to th e Bible. Contem pt for knowledge
in religion reached its peak during the period be
tw een the F irst and Second W orld Wars. Today
th e re is some sign of a tu rn of the tide, b u t the
contem pt for knowledge, the contem pt for C hris
tia n doctrine, still continues strong.
Are Doctrinal Sermons “Too Deep”?
A p asto r said to me th a t people in some of the
congregations w here he had preached complained
th a t his serm ons w ere “too deep.” I told him not
to w o rry ab o u t th at —- th a t the people who said
th a t about his serm ons would say the same thing
about any tru ly Biblical preaching. It w as not
th a t this p astor w as preaching on subtle theological
problem s or profound and baffling m ysteries; not
at all; it w as sim ply th a t his preaching had a
definite con ten t of inform ation. It contained facts
and doctrines, not m erely Ideals and values; th ere
fore those accustom ed to thinking of Christianity
in vague, general term s as a m ere set of “spiritual
v alues” objected to his preaching as “too deep."
A ny preaching w hich required them to think
w ould be rejected as “too deep.”
This contem pt for knowledge, this objection to
any solid doctrinal inform ation as “too deep,”
arises from a m isunderstanding as to the essential
n a tu re of C hristianity. C hristianity is first of all
a sto ry of things th a t happened — it is a body of
specific inform ation; and if w e have contem pt for
inform ation, th en we have contem pt for rea l B ibli
cal C hristianity, and th a t means, ultim ately, con
tem p t for th e God of C hristianity.
The Tragedy of Religious Illiteracy
T here are church m em bers who have not
learn ed a single new item of tru th in the last ten
years. T hey a re intellectually a t a standstill, in
tellectu ally frozen stiff. Their Christian know
ledge is static — a very small quantity of w hat are
called “essential tru th s.” Go into th eir hom e and
you m ay find no C hristian literatu re to read, ex
cept perhaps a Bible collecting dust on a shelf, or
covered w ith a heap of w orldly m agazines or cheap
comic books. Talk w ith them and you w ill soon
find th a t you are dealing w ith people whose know
ledge of God’s W ord is on a par w ith th at of chil-.
dren in the Ju nior Society. You have to be care
ful all the tim e for fe a r you m ight use a word
they will not know the m eaning of.
The tragedy of such lives is not m erely their
appalling ignorance of C hristian tru th , b u t the
fact th a t they them selves are u tterly unaw are of
this ignorance, and see no need w hatever for ac
quiring any knowledge. They raised th eir hand
or signed th eir nam e in some m eeting years ago.
They “joined the church,” answ ering a few easy
questions at the time. They attend Sabbath School
and Church sporadically, perhaps once or twice a
m onth. As the years pass, they learn nothing.
W hen they come to die, they w ill go out into
eternity not know ing one iota m ore about God and
His tru th than they did the day they “joined the
church” years ago.
Such a state of affairs is tragic indeed. Yet
this situation exists; it is not im aginary, as every
pastor know s only too well. It is one of the re a
sons for the deadly w eakness of the C hurch a t the
present day. “Israel doth n o t know; m y people
doth not consider.”
Minimum Knowledge Not Enough
The C hristian aim is not for a m inim um of
knowledge, b u t th e m axim um . We should seek,
not to go to heaven w ith as little know ledge as
possible, b u t to gain as m uch know ledge as pos
sible about God and His Word. We should know
m ore at the end of every Sabbath th a n w e did b e
fore. If w e have not learned som ething new from
God’s Word, w e have m ade no real progress in
knowledge. We m inisters an d church leaders
should be like the scribe described by Jesus, who
brings out of the treasu re house of God’s W ord
“things new a n d old.”
“O how love I th y law! I t is m editation all
the day!” “How sw eet are th y w ords unto m y
taste! Yea, sw eeter than honey to my m outh!”
Intolerance of Truth Today
T here exists today an indifference to tru th , an
intolerance of tru th , even an antipathy to tru th ,
in large sections of th e P ro testan t Church. A nd
all churches have been affected by this tendency
to some extent. None can claim absolute im m un
ity to this disease. T here is a prevalent, subcon
scious assum ption in people’s m inds — an assum p
tion th a t tru th is not of the essence of C hristianity,
and therefore need not be learned. T here is a
real intolerance of doctrine, coupled w ith a de
m and th a t sermons be m ade w holly “inspirational”
54
or “evangelistic,” or th a t they deal exclusively
w ith w hat is called “applied C hristianity.”
People w ho cannot give a clear statem ent of
w hat C hristianity is, would like th eir pastors to
preach on “C hristianity and Psychology” or “C hris
tian ity and th e L abor P roblem ” o r sim ilar sub
jects. W hat this boils down to is, th a t they w ant
the fru it b u t they have no patience w ith the tree
th a t produces th e fruit. This notion of “inspira
tion” and “evangelism ” w ithout a foundation of
sound Biblical doctrine underneath is a disintegrat
ing force, and if it gains the victory in any church,
th a t church w ill cease to be a tru ly C hristian
Church and w ill rem ain a m ere em pty shell, a
m ere m onum ent to the glories of the past.
Something is Seriously Wrong
Lack of conviction of th e im portance of tru th ,
or doctrine, is also revealed by the free and easy
way in w hich people leave one denom ination to
join another. The churches joined may vary from
slight unsoundness to radical m odernism . H ardly
ever is the factor of orthodoxy considered; the real
factors contributing to the decision are ra th e r con
venience, popularity, and the personality of the
pastor of the church joined.
In m any fam ilies the entire younger genera
tion on reaching the age of 21 years or soon after,
w ill forsake th e p u re and faithful church in which
they w ere brought up, and join some other m ore
popular, less dem anding church, leaving only their
aged parents to continue alone and forlorn in the
old church. And this happens even in the fam ilies
of deacons, elders and m inisters. Som ething is
seriously wrong.
People Inhibited from Learning Facts
All of this is p a rt of the picture of presentday intellectual decadence in religion. By and
large, people a re unable to give an ordered and
intelligent account of th eir faith, and they consider
it unnecessary to do so. This anti-intellectual bias
results in a serious inhibition on the p a rt of the
very people who need religious know ledge and in
doctrination th e most. By th e ir foolish and childish
prejudice they are inhibited from ever acquiring
th e know ledge they lack. Like a child who is so
sure th a t w hole-w heat bread tastes bad th a t he
w ill not even eat one slice to find out w h at it re al
ly tastes like, th e person w ho is prejudiced against
doctrine w ill not even listen to one sample of it
w ith an open m ind th a t he m ight find out w hether
it is really as unpalatable and indigestible as he
assumes. This person is the victim of his own
prejudice. He is inhibited from acquiring the
very thing he requires for a healthy religious life
and growth.
The Roadblock Must be Removed
I t is a commonplace
am ong
m inisters- and
church leaders today th a t indoctrination is needed.
Resolutions of synods and general assem blies call
for indoctrination. B ut w hat people fail to realize
is th at there is a trem endous "toadblock in the way
of indoctrination. You cannot indoctrinate people
who have buried in th eir m ind an assum ption th at
doctrine does not m atter. The m inister who would
indoctrinate his people m ust first cope w ith the
roadblock. There is a great stone on the door of
the m inds of m any of his people. T hat stone m u st
be rolled away first of all. O therw ise w hen the
m inister starts to instruct the people in C hristian
truth, th eir m inds w ill click shut. An im penetra
ble curtain drops into place. A fter th a t all they
hear is words. The w ords do not register.
No doubt m any m inisters have had the ex
perience I have had, of having some person ask an
intelligent question on some point of C hristian
truth, and the question asked concerns som ething
which was preached on in a recent sermon. It
may be th a t the question w as thoroughly discussed
and answ ered in the lig h t of Scripture, and the
person inquiring was th ere and h eard th e sermon.
But somehow it ju st didn’t register. He is u n
conscious of ever having heard the m atter dis
cussed before. For he had an inhibition against
Christian doctrine w hich p revented th e sermon
from registering in his m ind. F irst the inhibition
against knowledge m ust be rem oved; then the lack
of knowledge can be dealt w ith.
The roots of sophisticated ignorance
The plain or common type of ignorance has no
special roots. A person recently converted from
paganism is ignorant of C hristian tru th because of
his pagan background and his previous lack of
opportunity to learn the tru th . M any people in
America, too, are ignorant of C hristian tru th , not
because of a perverse disinclination to learn any
thing, b u t because of th e ir very lim ited opportun
ities. It may be th a t the only church or religious
teaching th a t reaches them brings a non-doctrinal
type of message; consequently they do not and
cannot really learn anything.
Ignorance Didn’t Just Happen
But the cultivated or sophisticated type of ig
norance is som ething quite different. This kind
does not rise from m ere lack of opportunity to
learn. I t has deeper, m ore sinister roots. This
sophisticated type of ignorance did not ju st h a p
pen. It has been prom oted, it has been “put over”
on th e C hristian world. By deliberate, prem edi
tated action, th e contem pt for doctrine has been
instilled in people’s m inds by religious “experts”
and leaders.
Basically, the an ti-intellectual bias of the
present day, and the contem pt fo r doctrine which
exists in the P rotestant Church, h as resulted from
the life and w ork of th ree m en. These m en all
55
lived m ore th an 100 years ago. They are Im m an
uel K ant, F riedrich Daniel E rnst Schleierm acher,
a n d A lbrecht Ritschl. All Germ ans, they all dis
counted th e intellect in religion, and emphasized
th e em otions or the w ill in place of the intellect.
It is a stran g e paradox th a t these th ree m en them
selves w ere intellectual giants, yet they discount
ed th e im portance of the intellect in religion and
em phasized som ething else instead.
M illions of people who have never heard the
nam es of K ant, Schleierm acher and Ritschl, are
y et v ery m uch u nder the influence of these three
men. M any people in the churches are unconscious
ly influenced by this dom inant trend of the times.
Truth Supplanted by “Experience”
Im m anuel K ant, of course, laid the ground
w ork fo r divorcing religious tru th from “m eta
physics,” th a t is, from the ultim ate reality beyond
w h a t can be know n by th e senses. Schleierm acher
and R itschl followed K ant and put his philosophy
to w ork in the realm of religion. Schleierm acher
lived 1768 to 1834. He has been called “th e fath er
of m odern theology.” The son of a Prussian arm y
chaplain of th e Reform ed confession, he earnestly
studied th e w ritings of K ant. Schleierm acher’s
chief theological w ork was “T he Christian F aith
A ccording to th e Basic Principles of the Evangel
ical C hurch,” first published in 1821, b u t late r r e
vised and re-published. In this famous book
S chleierm acher held th a t th e real essence of C hris
tia n ity is n o t to be found in the creeds of the
church, b u t in religious feeling- — the feeling of
dependence on God, com municated by C hrist
through the church. This puts religious feeling
in place of Biblical tru th . Schleierm acher held
th a t th e content of preaching is to be obtained
from th e religious consciousness of the preacher.
Though called “the fath er of m odern theology,”
S chleierm acher really destroyed theology and put
in its place a study of the religious consciousness
of m an. The object of know ledge is no longer God
as revealed in Scripture, but man as a religious
being. Schleierm acher stressed method ra th e r
th a n content; he rejected tru th an d knowledge in
fav o r of feeling; he substituted subjective religious
experience fo r objective divine revelation in th e
Bible. It is not too m uch to say th a t Schleierm ach
er w as th e real founder of modernism.
Truth Supplanted by “Spiritual Values”
A lbrecht Ritschl lived 1822 to 1889. He w as
th e son of an Evangelical pastor in Berlin, G er
m any. R itschl aim ed to free religion from w hat
h e considered th e ty ran n y of philosophy. He lim it
ed theological know ledge to w hat he considered
th e bounds of m an’s need. Ritschl was not in te r
ested in God, b u t only in w hat God can do for
m an. It w ould not be unfair to say that Ritschl
w as concerned w ith the usefulness of God ra th e r
th an the glory of God. He w as interested in re
ligion, not in theology; in experience, not in truth.
H e was concerned w ith “value” ra th e r than w ith
doctrine.
R itschl rejected all “forensic” ideas of C hris
tianity, th a t is, the idea of C hrist’s atonem ent as a
satisfaction fo r the broken law of God, and ju sti
fication as im puting to the believer the perfect
righteousness of Christ. Instead of these truths,
he stressed chiefly the idea of the fam ily or fa th e r
hood of God. R itschl stands for the false antithesis
betw een theology and “m etaphysics,” th at is, b e
tw een C hristian doctrine and absolute truth. Ac
cording to Ritschl, the im portant question is not
who or w h at C hrist is, b u t w hat is His “value” to
us. If Schleierm acher m ay be called the founder
of m odernism , Ritschl is the real fath er of th a t
perversion of C hristianity w hich regards it as
p rim arily a set of “spiritual values.”
Sophisticated ignorance in the church is not
to be explained sim ply by neglect. It is the logical
and inevitable resu lt of a definite philosophical
and theological point of view w hich has been de
liberately prom oted by the “experts.”
The Effect of Revival Movements
A nother root of sophisticated ignorance is
found in th e revival m ovem ents in A m erican
C hristianity in the 18th and 19th centuries. The
various revival movements, from the G reat A w ak
ening down to the present day, have been a m ix
tu re of good and evil, a m ix tu re of the real w ork
of th e Holy S pirit w ith m uch th at w as m erely h u
m an and even contrary to God’s will.
Jo n ath an Edw ards gave a very careful ap
praisal of the revival m ovem ent of his day. He
regarded it as a genuine w ork of th e Holy Spirit.
Yet h e came to see th a t th ere was another side to
the m atter. The G reat A w akening had an afterm ath. In 1741 the revival was at the peak. Ju st
a few years later, as early as 1744-1748, in E d
w ards’ own congregation at N orthham pton, M assa
chusetts, the church was u tte rly dead, according
to E dw ard’s ow n admission. H e states th at during
the four years 1744-1748 there was not a single
conversion in the parish.
C harles G. Finney is often spoken of as a very
great leader of A m erican Christianity. The unsoundness of Finney on some of the doctrines of
the Bible is seldom m entioned. B ut th at m u lti
tudes responded to F inney’s preaching and th a t
m any w ere converted to C hrist cannot be denied.
However, again there w as an afterm ath. This is
very interestingly described in the late Dr. B en
jam in B. W arfield’s second volume on “P erfection
ism,” pages 25-27. W arfield quotes from an ac
count of F inney’s w ork w hich was published in
1835: “The w riter entertains no doubt, th a t m any
tru e conversions have occurred under the system
56
to which he is referring. B ut as w ith the ground
over w hich the lightning has gone, scorching and
w ithering every green thing, years m ay pass away
before th e arid w aste of the church w ill be grow n
over by th e living herbage.” W arfield adds: “F in
ney came back in 1855 to Rome (N. Y.), the scene
of one of his g reatest trium phs in 1826. Now, how
ever, his preaching elicited no response. He has
him self told us of it . . .
The Mirage of “Inspiration”
The g reat revivals w ere p a rtly of God, cer
tainly, b u t th ere was an adm ixture of evil, too.
They w ere not an unm ixed blessing. F or from the
history of A m erican revivalism th ere has come
down to our own day the false antithesis betw een
revival and sound doctrine.
We see this reflected today in those who would
stress only evangelism as the rem edy fo r the
church’s troubles, an d who cannot see th a t for a
real and effective evangelism th ere m ust be a
m uch g reater em phasis on tru th , on knowledge, on
doctrine.
We see it, too, in th e idolatrous w orship of
w hat is w rongly called “inspiration,” w hich really
means, all too often, m erely a pow erful stim ula
tion of th e religious emotions, w ithout an accom
panying know ledge and conviction of tru th . R e
vivalism th a t stresses th e em otions and the w ill
a t th e expense of th e intellect leads to sophisti
cated ignorance in th e churches in the end. It has
been proved so tim e and again.
How Can we Cope with the Roadblock of
Ignorance?
It is easier to diagnose this disease than to
prescribe an effective rem edy. Y et th ere m ust be
a remedy, though it m ay be1a slow and painful one.
F irst of all, pastors and religious teachers
m ust have a strong and clear conviction of the
absolute im portance and relevance of C hristian
doctrine. D octrine is not a luxury; it is an abso
lu te necessity. It is to C hristianity w hat bones
are to th e hum an body. It is n o t relatively im
portant; it is absolutely Im portant. It is of the
essence of C hristianity. W ithout it th ere can be
no real C hristianity. Unless th e leadership is ab
solutely clear and convinced on this proposition
th ere can be no real progress.
Preach What People Really Need
In th e second place, m inisters should abso
lutely refuse to compromise w ith or cater to the
dem and for a non-doctrinal type of message. It
is a tem ptation to com prom ise w ith this demand.
M inisters m ay be pow erfully tem pted to ca te r to
th e lust fo r a non-doctrinal message. They should
count th e cost and say No!
We are th e L ord’s servants; o u r commission is
from Him, not from our congregations. We are
to be tru e to Scripture at any cost. This m eans
more than avoiding denials of Biblical tru th . It
means setting ourselves a long-range program of
constructively preaching the contents of th e Bible
in th eir tru e m eaning and relationships.
Sinful Lust for “Inspiration”
The lust for “inspiration” w ithout inform ation
is sinful. It is one of the g reat sins of the C hurch
of our day. A large p a rt of the religious press
caters to it, as do the pulpits of m any popular
denominations. But it Is sinful. “Thou shalt love
the Lord thy God w ith all th y m ind.”
We should absolutely refuse to bend on this
issue. If we lose our job w e a re no w orse off
than the tru e prophets of old. We should have
the courage to stand up, plainly and pointedly, for
the real nature of the C hristian message, in spite
of th e fact th a t the skim m ed m ilk diluted w ith
lim ew ater w hich appears in some p o p u lar unde
nom inational religious publications m ay appeal
strongly to some of our people.
Try Hard to Make Doctrine Interesting
In the th ird place, doctrine should be made
as interesting as possible. T he notion th a t the
tru th is dull an d dry is unfounded. I t w ill of
course alw ays be dull to th e unconverted. To the
Greek it w ill be foolishness and to th e Jew a
stumblingblock. B ut it need not bore th e sp irit
ually awakened. It takes w o rk to m ake doc
trinal sermons interesting, b u t it can be done.
We cannot please everyone in a congregation
— even our Lord did n o t accom plish th a t w hen
He was on earth in the flesh — b u t we can preach
so as to please God, and accom plish His real p u r
pose in our preaching. That, a fte r all, is w h at we
are in the m inistry for.
Preaching doctrine does not m ean preaching
only form ally doctrinal sermons. The m inister who
has C hristian doctrine in his m ind and h e a rt can
bring it out in biographical, historical, expository
and o th er types of sermons. None of these, if
truly Biblical, can be divorced from t'he doctrinal
content of the Bible.
Also, doctrine should be served up in very
m oderate doses at first. People’s capacity to di
gest it has become so w eakened during the past
generation or two th a t heavy doses w ill be likely
to cause acute indigestion. “Easy does it.” Line
upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and
there a little — b u t it m ust be the genuine article,
not the popular counterfeit th a t consists only of
“ideals” and “values.”
The Fruits of Doctrinal Preaching
M inisters who preach th e doctrinal system of
the Bible w ill have this satisfaction, from tim e to
57
tim e, of seeing another m em ber of th eir congrega
tion gaining doctrinal consciousness, and sudden
ly com ing to a clear realization of w h at C hristian
ity is really about. T hat m akes one more m em ber
who w ill never again scoff a t doctrinal preaching
as “too deep” or “theological hair-splitting.” That
m akes one m ore m em ber who w ill be a real asset
to th e C hurch and not a m ere dead w eight or lia
b ility religiously. And it constitutes one more
proof to th e m inister th a t his labor is not in vain
in th e Lord.
I believe, too, th a t we should do all we can
to aw aken in the m em bership of the Church an
appetite for good C hristian literature. Lend good
books, recom m end good books, quote from good
books. Not all books are equally suited to all
Christians. Books have to be m atched to people’s
progress and capacity. B ut re al C hristian litera
tu re can play a great p a rt in m aking people awake
and alert to the tru th of God’s Word.
Sketches o f the Covenanters
By J. C. McFeeters
Chapter XVIII
The Westminster Assembly — A. D. 1643.
T he C ovenanted Church is much indebted to
th e W estm inster Assembly, for its m agnificent
contributions to the Reformed religion. P resby
te ria n C hurches of every nam e have reaped rich
h arvests from the seed sown b y this Assembly.
N othing has done more, if the Covenants be
excepted, to give th e Covenanted Church decision,
stability, perm anence, spiritedness, and undecaying strength, th an the superlative form ulas of
tru th produced by this illustrious Assembly. O ur
inheritance received from th eir hands should
aw aken our adm iration for the men and our in ter
est in th e ir w ork.
Origin.
This Assem bly came into existence in peculiar
tim es and for a rem arkable purpose. England
was goaded to desperation by th e despotism of
K ing Charles. As king of th at nation and head
of th e Episcopal Church, he attem pted to stifle
lib erty and conquer conscience, He clashed w ith
his p arliam en t in London. A great aw akening had
suddenly spread over all England. New ideas of
life electrified th e people, and they arose in the
m ajesty of th e ir inalienable rights to realize their
ideals. The action and reaction became terrible.
T he king and th e parliam ent called out th eir
arm ies each against the other. England was plung
ed into a h o rrib le civil w ar. The parliam ent, p e r
ceiving th a t Episcopacy was th e bulw ark of the
kin g ’s ty ra n n y and hostile to the interests of the
people, attem p ted to abolish th at system of Church
governm ent. B ut this destructive act necessitated
a constructive w ork. Accordingly parliam ent, by
an ordinance, created an Assembly for “settling
th e G overnm ent and L iturgy of th e Church of
E ngland.”
Character of the Members.
T he ordinance provided for an Assembly of
“learned, Godly, and judicious divines.” Milton,
w hile not in sym pathy w ith th e ir work, called
this “The Select Assem bly.” B axter, another dis
approving contem porary, said, “th at in his judg
m ent the world, since the days of the apostles, had
never a Synod of m ore excellent divines th an this
and th e Synod of D ort.” A bundant evidence cer
tifies th at in W estm inster Hall, in those days was
seen a ra re com bination of native talent, classic
learning, sanctified conscience, spiritual illum ina
tion, and devotion to the tru th as revealed in the
W ord of God.
Enrollment.
The com plete num ber of m em bers was 174, of
w hich 142 w ere m inisters, and 32, elders. Of this
num ber, four m inisters and two elders w ere com
m issioners from Scotland. T he Scottish delegation
of divines w ere m en m ighty in the Scriptures and
pow erful in debate. T heir influence in m aking
Scripture tru th s lucid, and thereby directing the
Assembly to right conclusions, was deeply felt and
cordially acknowledged. They declined to sit as
regular m em bers of the Assembly, content w ith the
hum bler position of consultative members. They
would not by incorporation become responsible,
personally o r representatively, for the deliverances
of an Assembly selected and erected by parliam ent.
These Scotch m inisters form a brilliant constella
tion; let th e ir nam es be w ritten in capitals:
ALEXANDER HENDERSON
ROBERT BAILLIE
SAMUEL RUTHERFORD
GEORGE G ILLESPIE
“A nd they th a t be w ise shall shine as the bright
ness of th e firm am ent, a n d they th at tu rn m any
to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever."
The Scottish elders w ere Jo h n M aitland and A rch
ibald Johnston. M aitland in afte r years renounced
the C ovenant and becam e a pow erful foe of the
C ovenanters.
Organization.
The Assem bly m et according to th e call, July
1, 1643, in th e C hurch of W estm inster. Dr. W illiam
58
Twisse, President, preached th e opening sermon
from C hrist’s precious promise, “I w ill not leave
you com fortless.” These w ords w ere as apples of
gold in pictures of silver, in those days of woeful
distraction. One w eek later they m et again, when
th e oath w as adm inistered to every m em ber p re
sent, in th e follow ing words:
“I , _________ _________, do seriously and sol
em nly protest, in th e presence of A lm ighty God,
th a t in this Assembly, w hereof I am a mem ber, I
w ill not m aintain anything in m atters of doctrine,
b u t w h at I th in k in m y conscience to be tru th ; or
in point of discipline, b u t w hat I shall conceive to
conduce m ost to th e glory of God, and the good
and peace of His C hurch.”
This oath was read every M onday m orning
to refresh m em ory and revive conscience. These
m en w ere w orking for th e K ingdom of C hrist, in
the presence of th e g reat w hite Throne; its b rig h t
ness was flashing constantly upon th eir eyes.
The Work.
The w ork, to w hich th e Assembly gave its
attention, as specified by parliam ent, was “ (1) A
Confession of Faith, (2) A Catechism, (3) A P la t
form of G overnm ent, (4) A D irectory for all P arts
of Public W orship.”
The Confession of F aith: The first attem pt
was to revise the old creed of the Church of Eng
land. This w as abandoned at the F ifteenth A r
ticle. A New Confession w as then p repared hav
ing T hirty -T h ree A rticles, all of which are pillars
of tru th , ev ery one ponderous, polished, and p re
cious, revealing th e q u a rry out of w hich they were
hewn, an d th e skill of th e w orkm en by whom they
w ere chiseled. H enderson has been credited w ith
th e honor of prep arin g th e first draft..
The Catechism s: T he S ho rter Catechism was
prepared as a sum m ary of Biblical instruction, ap
pealing even by its lite ra ry construction and ele
gance to th e h e a rt and m em ory for lodgm ent.
This golden chain is an ornam ent of grace th a t
should be w orn by every son and d aughter of the
Covenant. R uth erfo rd seems to have been the
original w riter. T he L arg er Catechism is an ex
pansion of the Shorter.
The Form of C hurch G overnm ent: The Divine
rig h t of P resbyterianism occasioned m uch discus
sion. The adoption of this principle was a deadly
blow struck at th e theory of Episcopacy — offi
cial ranks, tie r above tier, in pyram idal form w ith
the people b eneath th e pyram id. Equal authority
of m inisters in the adm inistration of th e Gospel of
Christ, and equal au th o rity of m inisters and elders
in adm inistering governm ent in th e House of
God — these w ere th e great tru th s announced by
th e Assem bly w ith clearness and solem nity, as
th e voice of God speaking in th e holy Scriptures.
The D irectory for P ublic W orship:
This Di
rectory superseded the Liturgy. The L iturgy had
been condemned for “giving encouragem ent to an
idle and unedifying m inistry, who had chosen
rath er to confine them selves to form s, m ade to
their hands, than to ex ert them selves in the gift
of prayer, which our S av io u r furnishes all those
He calls to th a t office.” A w arm discussion arose
concerning the mode of receiving the L o rd ’s S up
per. “The com m unicants orderly and gravely sit
ting round the table,” was the expression adopted.
Successive tables received sanction from this ex
pression.
Psalmody.
Sir Francis Rouse, a m em ber of the English
Parliam ent, had recently produced his M etrical
Version of the Psalms. It was fresh and fra g ra n t
and greatly admired. The Assem bly a fte r a care
ful revision adopted it. Five years later, having
passed through the purifying furnace of revision
at the hands of the G eneral Assem bly of Scotland,
it was authorized as “The only paraphrase of the
Psalms of David to be sung in the K irk of Scot
land.” The New Version superseded th e Old and
took its place in Divine w orship on May I, 1650,
the day appointed for its introduction by the As
sembly.
The W estm inster A ssem bly convened Ju ly 1,
1643, and adjourned F eb ru ary 22, 1649, covering 5
years, 6 months, and 2'2 days, having held 1,163
sessions. They m et at nine o’clock in the m orning
and sat till three in the afternoon. Each m em ber
received four shillings a day, and w ere fined one
shilling for absence. T hey k e p t a solem n fast
monthly, at which occasionally a single prayer
lasted two hours. These m en knew how to pray.
They became absorbed in p ra y e r and talked w ith
God while He strengthened them to stand in His
presence and receive His answ er.
Such was the famous Assem bly of W estm in
ster divines. The m agnitude of th e ir w ork can
never be measured. T heir building is im perish
able. Fam iliarity w ith these m anuals of doctrine
will deepen, broaden, strengthen, and exalt the
hum an mind. H erein the tru th of C hrist appears
in the sym m etry, significance, m agnitude, and
omnipotence of a com plete system . One tru th may
take us to heaven, b u t the system of tru th tre a su r
ed up in the heart, w ill b rin g heaven to us. Let
us study the system.
1. W hat event
sembly into being?
called the W estm inster As
2. W hat was the character of the m embers?
3. How m any w ere enrolled?
4. Who were the Scottish commissioners?
5. W hat was the oath of m em bership?
59
6. W hat w as the w ork assigned
sem bly?
to the As
8.
W hat benefit derived
these m anuals?
7. How long did the Assembly sit?
from the
study of
(To be continued)
The Reformed Faith and Arminianism
By the Rev. Joseph A. Hill
T hree hun d red fifty years ago a D utch m in
iste r nam ed Jacobus H arm ensen taught theology
in th e U niversity of Leyden. According to the
fashion of th e tim es his nam e was Latinized and
h e becam e know n as Jam es Arminius. P rio r to
his career as a professor of theology A rm inius
had been a preacher in A m sterdam for about
fo u rteen y ears and during this tim e had held
view s co n trary to the principles of the Reform ed
faith, th e official faith of his church.
W hen he received his appointm ent to the
ch air of divinity, however, A rm inius made a pub
lic avow al of his loyalty to the Reformed faith
and pledged th a t he would teach nothing which
w as in any way subversive of the doctrinal
standards to w hich the university and the churches
of th e N etherlands w ere subscribed. But A rm in
ius ignored his pledge and w ent about su rrep ti
tiously propagating false teachings m eant to u n
d erm ine and destroy the Calvinistic faith. By
m eans of personal talks w ith the students and the
secret circulation of m anuscripts he soon had a
larg e p a rty behind him. As the movement gained
in m om entum a sh arp conflict arose all over the
N etherlands betw een those who had been infected
■with A rm inian teachings and those who stood by
th e Calvinistic faith of the church.
T he teachings of A rm inius w ere a revival of
th e old heresies of Pelagius, in modified form.
P elagius w as a B ritish m onk who lived in the fifth
cen tu ry a fte r Christ. He denied the biblical doc
trin e of th e fall and original sin. He also denied
the necessity of divine grace for salvation, holding
th a t salvation depends upon hum an m erit and
ability. The errors of Pelagius w ere com batted
by A ugustine, whose theological w ritings w ere, the
first defin ite exposition of the doctrines which
form th e system of theology form ulated by Cal
vin eleven centuries later.
Follow ing the heretical teaching long since
refu ted , A rm inius stressed hum an free w ill as the
controlling factor in the salvation of each person.
This w as in sh a rp conflict w ith the Calvinistic
teaching of salvation by grace alone. The con
tro v ersy centering around this vital question last
ed for fifteen years. A rm inius died in the m idst
of this period of conflict, but his followers carried
on a fte r his death, hoping eventually to have the
Confession of F aith of the Dutch churches — the
Belgic Confession — revised in such a w ay as to
elim inate its Calvinistic teaching. They drew up
a petition called a “R em onstrance”, w hich set
fo rth the A rm inian position in the form of five
articles.
W hen all attem pts to reconcile the two parties
had failed, a general Synod was called to deal
w ith the issues at stake. This was an international
Synod, m eeting a t D ordt in 1618 w ith delegates
from G erm any, the Palatinate, Sw itzerland and
England as w ell as from the Netherlands. This
Synod m ade a careful study of the w hole m atter,
m eeting alm ost every day for m ore th a n five
m onths and holding 136 sessions in all. This body
of soholarly divines exam ined the five articles ad
vanced by th e “R em onstrants” and com pared them
w ith the teaching of Scripture. Failing to
reconcile th e five articles w ith th e W ord of God
they unanim ously rejected them . In reply they
drew up “The Canons of the Synod of D ordt” —
w hich are p a rt of the doctrinal standards of sever
al R eform ed churches of the present day. These
“Canons” are a clear statem ent of th e teaching of
S cripture on the five points in question, as con
tra sted w ith th e errors of th e A rm inian party.
The five Heads of D octrine contained in the Canons
have been know n ever since as "the five points of
Calvinism ”.
These five doctrines are easy to rem em ber if
w e use the w ord “tulip” as a mnemonic device,
each le tte r — t-u-l-i-p — being the first le tte r of
one of the doctrines, thus:
Total inability
U nconditional election
Lim ited atonem ent
Irresistible grace
Perseverance of the saints
However, w e m ust not th in k th a t the so-called
“five points of Calvinism ” are a brief sum m ary of
Calvinism. These five doctrines are only the
m ain points a t w hich C alvinism is in conflict w ith
A rm inianism . If w e w ere to show the difference
betw een Calvinism
and L utheranism
other
“points” w ould have to be draw n up; if w e w ere
com paring Calvinism w ith the cu rrently popular
dialectical theology, Neo-orthodoxy, still other
points of difference w ould have to be devised. The
idea th a t Calvinism is sum m ed up in the “five
points” has led to th e prev alen t notion th a t C al
vinism is chiefly concerned w ith the question Of
predestination w hereas in reality Calvinism em
60
bodies the whole system of tru th contained in the
Bible. Hence w e m ust stress the fact th a t “the
five points of C alvinism ” are concerned only w ith
Calvinism ’s doctrine of salvation. The five points
together form th e Calvinistic doctrine of salvation
as over against th e A rm inian doctrine of salva
tion. The basic point at issue here is w hether sal
vation is a w ork of God alone or w h eth er m an can
at some point take the initiative in the m atte r of
his salvation. O therw ise expressed, Calvinism
does w hile A rm inianism does not hold th a t God
by his counsel controls w hatsoever comes to pass.
In considering this basic question w e are not
dealing w ith a dead issue tak en from a m usty old
theological volum e; w e a re not concerned only
w ith certain heretics who have been dead for m ore
than th ree centuries. F or th e erro rs they propa
gated did not die w ith them . Indeed, these errors
are h eld m ore w idely today th an ever before and
together w ith m odern liberalism alm ost com pletely
dom inate th e religious thought of the p resent day.
Common “evangelical” C hristianity is predom
inantly A rm inian in character; for this reason
non-Calvinistic P ro testan ts are freq u ently called
Evangelicals.
The evangelistic m ovem ent w hich is sweeping
th e country is effectively spreading th e false
teachings of A rm inius. Billy G raham , th e chief
spokesm an for Evangelical Protestantism , is an
A rm inian evangelist. In all his preaching and
w riting B illy G raham insists th a t in th e -last
analysis it is m an’s decision th a t determ ines
w hether he w ill be saved. God has provided sal
vation for all m en, b u t each person m ust decide
w hether or not he w ill accept it.
A t this point someone w ill say: “B ut isn’t th a t
w hat all C hristians believe an d isn’t th a t w hat the
Bible teaches? I alw ays ju st supposed th at God
has m ade salvation through C hrist available for
everybody who w ill believe on him .” H ere we
come to th e h e a rt of the m atter. For it is at this
point th a t th e difference betw een th e Reform ed
view of m an’s w ill and th e A rm inian notion of
free w ill comes into th e picture. A ccording to
Calvinism and th e Bible m en as sinners will not
believe on C hrist. They are dead in trespasses and
sin and are u nable to believe or accept salvation.
Jesus him self m ade this point clear w hen he said
to th e Jew s, “Ye will not come to me th a t ye m ight
have life” (Jo h n 5:40). T h at Jesus believed in the
total inability of m en to take the initiative in the
m a tte r of th e ir salvation is also evident from his
own w ords in John 6:44 — “No m an can come u n
to me except th e F a th e r which h a th sent m e draw
him .” Jesu s says th a t God m ust decide all the
issues w ith respect to m en’s salvation. B illy G ra
ham says th a t men can decide to repent, believe
on C hrist and be born again. Jesus believed th a t
th e w hole n a tu re of th e sinner — intellect, em o
tions an d w ill — is in bondage to sin. B illy G ra
ham believes th at p a rt of m an’s n atu re — the
will — has not been disabled by sin. He says, “It
is actually the will th a t m akes the final and last
ing decision” (Peace With God, p. 131).
Thus we see th at A rm inianism has too high a
view of the unregenerate self-consciousness. The
Arm inian view of the n atu re of m an is essentially
the same as the Roman C atholic view as w orked
out by the Rom anist theologian Thom as A quinas
in the thirteen th century. Thom as ta u g h t th a t
m an w as created as an autonom ous being; th a t is,
m an w as free to plan fo r him self, independently
of the plan of God. This autonom y is p a rt of
m an’s m akeup as a creatu re of God and is es
sential to his manhood. B illy G raham w rites from
this Roman Catholic view -point w hen he says:
“We do not know Christ through the five physical
senses, b u t w e know him through the sixth sense
that God has given to every m an — Which is the
ability to believe” (Peace With God, New York,
Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1953, p. 146. This
book is a fairly typical sam ple of th e Evangelical
type of theology). H ere w e see th a t B illy G raham
differentiates betw een the physical senses and be
lieving as a “spiritual” sense, b u t it is clear th at
for him believing is a natural ability in th e same
sense th a t hearing and seeing are n a tu ra l abilities
of m an as a creature of God. H earing, seeing and
believing are all essential aspects of m an’s m ake
up. In this, Billy G raham confuses things m eta
physical and ethical. True, th e re is a kind of faith
which does belong to the n a tu re of m an as m an
— th a t is, for example, the certain ty th a t the
sounds we hear and the objects w e see are not
m ere illusions, but are real sounds and real ob
jects. This psychological certa in ty is a m eta
physical aspect of faith and is correlative to the
m etaphysical “senses”. B u t religious fa ith is an
ethical bias and w hen we speak of this aspect of
faith we m ust not consider m an as a creature of
God m erely, b u t a fallen creature.
It is tru e th a t w hen m an was created he had
faith in God. Belief in God w as p a rt of m an’s
“natu re” in paradise, before the fall. B ut even in
paradise this “ability to believe” w as not a n atu ral
function like seeing and hearing. Even in the p er
fect state m an’s faith w as im parted to him supernaturally. W hen m an sinned against God his sin
caused an ethical (but not a m etaphysical) break
in the believing-relationship of m an to God. A f
ter the fall m an was still a m an and he could still
think and “believe”, b u t his thinking and believ
ing w ere now pointed away from God. It was the
ethical aspect of man’s fa ith th a t w as destroyed by
sin. In sinning against God m an did n o t lose his
natural “ability to believe” th a t 2 x 2 equals 4 or
th at the sun rises in the east, b u t he lost his abil
ity to believe in God to the saving of his soul. It
is this “ability” th a t m ust be restored through re
generation before m an can find h is w ay back to
God. If the natural man has the ability to be
61
lieve on C h rist then he does not need supernatural
“h elp ” in o rd er to become a Christian. If he has
th e n a tu ra l ab ility to believe then he can believe
on C hrist without regeneration. He can become
a full-fledged C hristian if only he w ill convert his
intellectu al faith into religious faith. “Let th at
intellectual faith, th a t historical faith th a t you
m ay now have, yield itself to C hrist in full su r
ren d er, earn estly desiring His salvation, and upon
th e au th o rity of the Word of God you become a
child of G od” (op. cit., p. 149.). H ere Billy G ra
ham , in agreem ent w ith Romanism, mixes tem por
al and etern al categories.
A ccording to Billy G raham and all A rm inians
m an as a fallen creature has not lost the ability to
exercise his faith in God. He does not need to be
b orn again in order to believe. He is born again
when he believes. “You m ust open your h e art and
le t Him (C hrist) come in. A t th a t precise m om ent
th e Holy S p irit perform s the m iracle of the new
b irth ” (p. 108). H ere we touch the pivotal point
of th e A rm inian scheme of salvation. According
to A rm inianism regeneration depends upon and
follows th e action of m an in perm itting God to
p erform his w ork. Man first acts by his “free
w ill” ; th en G od gets his chance to act. “T he whole
m a tte r or receiving new life (regeneration) is like
a coin. A coin h as heads and tails. The receiving
of new life has a divine side and a hum an side.
We h av e seen the hum an side in o u r chapter on
conversion, we have seen w hat m an m ust do (th a t
is, rep en t and believe, JA H ). Now let’s see w hat
God does” (p. 136). In line w ith this order of
God’s w o rk following m an’s decision, the chapters
in G raham ’s book entitled “R epent” and “F aith ”
precede th e chapter on “The New B irth” because
in th e A rm inian scheme of salvation one can re
p ent and believe w ithout the new birth. One
must rep en t and believe before he can be reborn.
B ehind all this is the basic assumption of
Rom anist-Evangelical theology th at man has abso
lu te freedom o r self-determ ination. This m eans
th a t in som e areas a t least m an is wholly inde
p endent of th e p lan of God. Conversely this means
th a t God does not control w hatsoever comes to
pass. T here a re some facts over which God has
no control. On this view God makes salvation
“possible” for everybody b u t does not m ake sal
vation absolutely certain for anybody. I t is man
and not God who makes the final and lasting de
cision in th is m atter. God is not absolutely
sovereign in his decree but is lim ited by m an’s de
cision.
This am ounts to a denial of God’s incom m un
icable a ttrib u te s of aseity or independence, im
m u tab ility and eternity; for in th e A rm inian
schem e God’s decree m ust depend upon m an’s de
cision, it m ust be adjusted to m an’s will, and it
m ust wait upon m an’s choice in time. This places
G od on a p a r w ith m an and reduces the being of
God to an aspect of the universe.
finite God.
God is then a
Of course, m ost A rm inians do not follow this
line of reasoning, b u t it is nevertheless im plied in
th eir basic assum ption of hum an autonomy. Billy
G raham w ould not directly deny the absoluteness
of God’s attributes. In his preaching he some
tim es speaks of the “m ighty” God. B ut a God
who does not control all th a t comes to pass in time
b u t has to adjust him self to w hat m an w ill do is
not the alm ighty God of C hristianity. The A rm in
ian view is th at God does not elect p articular men
to eternal life. The u ltim ate decision is m ade by
each person for him self. This implies th a t (a)
God has a lim ited sovereignty, since there are
some facts over w hich he has no control and (b)
m an has a m easure of sovereignty alongside of
God, since he is in some w ay independent of the
counsel of God.
The point we m ust stress is th at if you have
a non-biblical view of man you cannot have a bib
lical view of God. If you hold th at m an has ab
solute freedom in any area of life, you cannot at
the same tim e believe in the God of C hristianity
who by his counsel controls w hatsoever comes to
pass. It is the non-biblical, non-C hristian view of
m an as autonom ous th a t dom inates th e Roman
Catholic an d Evangelical theology and evangelism.
If we are to be consistent C hristians w e m ust
have a view of free w ill th a t is taken from the
Bible. As Reform ed C hristians w e believe th at
God by his counsel controls w hatsoever comes to
pass. We stress this point w hen w e speak of the
Bible doctrine of divine sovereignty. Only if we
also take our doctrine of m an from th e Bible can
we have a view of hum an free w ill th a t is con
sistent w ith o u r view of divine sovereignty. It is
b e tte r not to speak of free w ill unless you u n der
stand th at m an’s w ill is free only in the sense th a t
it acts freely according to the ethical bias of his
personality. This m eans th a t the n atu ral m an
chooses sin freely and w illingly because h e de
lights in it, b u t is not free to choose to love God
o r believe on C hrist because ihis w ill is also in
bondage to his sinful nature. This is w hat Billy
G raham and all A rm inians deny, how ever loudly
they m ay talk about sin as “the thing God hates.”
Man is not free to do the impossible. According
to the Bible it is impossible fo r the n atu ra l m an
to love God since God is “the thing m an hates” as
a sinner. The carnal m ind is enm ity against God.
How then can it be a t “peace w ith God” unless it
first be renew ed unto know ledge (Col. 3:10)? Billy
G raham says, “You m ust open your h e a rt and let
C hrist come in.” The Bible w ay of salvation is
exactly the reverse of this. Lydia, for exam ple, is
spoken of as one “whose h e a rt the Lord opened to
give heed unto the things w hich w ere spoken by
P a u l” (Acts 16:14). B illy G raham ’s persistent ap
peal to people to m ake a “decision” for C hrist is
62
based on his own belief th a t m an as a sinner is
able to do of his own ability w hat the Bible says
m an cannot do except he first be born anew by
th e S pirit w ho w orks independently of m an (John
3:6-8).
Can we as Reform ed C hristians agree w ith
B illy G raham w hen he says, “You can decide right
now th a t you w an t to be born again. You can de
cide rig h t now to w ipe out y our sinful past and
m ake a new start, a fresh start, a rig h t sta rt” (p.
133-4)? We can agree w ith B illy G raham on this
point only if w e also agree w ith him th a t m an has
not fallen as fa r in sin as th e Bible says he has
and th a t m an has a m easure of sovereignty over
against th e “m ighty” God.
The point has ju st been stressed th at we can
not hold a Reform ed or biblical view of divine
sovereignty and an A rm inian o r non-biblical view
of free will. M any C hristian have not clearly u n
derstood this. D uring m y days in college I heard
th e w ife of a Fundam entalist pastor explain th eir
church’s position thus: “We take the best out of
Calvinism and th e best out of A rm inianism and
combine them .” M ore recently a m inister of a
Reform ed church stated th a t although we m ust al
ways emphasize God’s sovereignty, we can at least
learn som ething about m an’s responsibility and
free w ill from th e A rm inians. These statem ents
are v irtu ally th e same and both are based on the
assum ption th a t th e difference betw een Calvinism
and A rm inianism is only a m a tte r of emphasis —
th a t Calvinism em phasizes divine sovereignty
while Arm inianism em phasizes hum an responsi
bility. If this w ere true, th en of course th e tru th
would lie somewhere betw een C alvinism and A r
minianism, and to have th e w hole tru th w e would
have to hold both Calvinism and A rm inianism .
Actually, Arm inianism im plicitly denies divine
sovereignty and thereby also falsifies its own doc
trine of hum an responsibility and free will. For
how can m an be responsible to a God w ho is not
sovereign, and how can m an determ ine his own
salvation if salvation is only a “possibility”? Cal
vinism, on the other hand, not only em phasizes di
vine sovereignty b u t also includes hum an responsi
bility. The whole tru th is to be found in C alvin
ism and need not, indeed cannot, be supplem ented
by any elem ent of tru th th a t m ight be supposed to
be found in Arminianism.
Salvation is actually impossible on the A rm in
ian principle. For unless th e plan and therefore
the w ork of God is back of all th a t takes place in
the life of man, he could never be su re th a t his
decisions would have any relation to the “facts” of
Christianity — the incarnation, death, resu rrec
tion of Christ, etc. F or th en Chance would be
suprem e in the universe. The “facts” o f C hris
tianity would only give m en a chance to be saved.
Nothing can be certain in a w orld ru n by Chance.
Hence it is only because C alvinism is tru e and
Arm inianism is not tru e th a t m en a re saved. I t is
because the plan of salvation is not w h a t the A r
minian says it is, a m a tter of chance, an d is w h at
the Calvinist says it is, a plan w holly controlled by
God, th a t A rm inians them selves a re saved.
Psalm Twelve
God’s Judgment on Deceivers: His Mercy to Keepers
o f the Truth
By the Rev. Frank D. Frazer
THE ENTREATY OF A RIGHTEOUS MAN
“Save, O Jehovah! for the godly man has pass
ed away; For the faithful have disappeared from
among the children of men.”
T his is not th e com plaint of a pessim ist; it
is a p ra y e r of faith. It speaks the tru th made
ominous by p resent conditions in society; the very
tru th of m any w ords of God as written. “There is
none th a t doeth good (as th e holy law of God re
quires), no, not so m uch as one.” (Ro. 3:9-18).
“They speak lies, every one to his neighbor:
Smooth lips speak from a double heart.” “For
out of th e abundance of th e h e a rt th e m outh
speaketh.”
The double h e a rt is the source of all duplicity,
the “double talk ” and th e “double dealing”, so
prevalent today in popular religion and m orals;
in church and state; in business and in politics;
not only in the frivolities of entertainm ent, b u t in
the m ethods and content of so-called “progressive
education” ; not only in d a rk places of th e earth,
but in the m arkets, on the streets, and w herever
men gather together th ere is the propaganda of de
ceit confusing and corrupting all hum an relation
ship, ignoring and denying the W ord of God.
It was by deceitful w ords th a t our first p a r
ents fell into this state of confusion, fo r w hen a
deceitful w ord is shot, as an arrow , into the m ind
and is allowed to stay, it quickly produces a cor
ru p t thought; the corrupt th ought produces a lust
in th e h ea rt; then “lu st w hen ‘it h a th conceived
63
b rin g eth fo rth sin, and sin w hen it is finished
b rin g eth fo rth death,”
The deceiver is first of all an enemy of the
G od of tru th , of the C hrist who is the T rue and
F aith fu l W itness; then of m ankind, w hich God
created in His own im age and for His own glory.
H ence th e effect of deceitful w ords appears first
in religion, in m atters of hum an relationship w ith
God. T he fa ta l w orkings of deceit are accomplish
ed a t th e foundations of society, and there the de
ceiver’s purpose to destroy th e hum an race, be
cause God created it, is plainly in evidence.
Since ev ery m an has a h e a rt that is “deceit
ful above all things and desperately w icked” w hich
h e is u nable to change in him self or in another,
and since he has a tongue th at “no m an can tam e;
a n u n ru ly evil, full of deadly poison”, w hat can
an y m an do to help him self or to help society?
H e can p ray to A lm ighty God who is able to save
to th e utterm ost. “Let Jehovah cut off all those of
deceitful lips”, literally, “all those who are smooth
of lip s”, “sm ooth as b u tte r”, “soft as oil”, slippery,
to cause th e fall of all who are not aw are of the
danger. (L et Jehovah cut off all those) “of a
tongue that speaketh great things”, — “vile conceits
in pom pous w ords expressed”. “The tongue is a
little m em ber, and boasteth great things . . . and
th e ton g ue is a fire . . . set on fire by hell.” (Jas.
3:2-12).
O ut of th e confusion there comes the assum p
tio n th a t th ere is no standard of tru th and right.
L e t e v e ry m an m ake th e law for himself. Let him
speak an d do as he pleases. The Ecum enical
C hurch today speaks great things and exalts it
self am ong th e children of men. I t m ay say th a t
“C hrist is God and Saviour”, if th a t serves its p u r
pose, but w ith th e proviso th a t every m an m ay
in te rp re t these words according to his own con
ceptions of God, and of w hat he needs of a Savior.
I t know s of no other stan d ard by which they can
be m easured, for the w ritten W ord of God is re
jected as outw orn and unsuited for this gener
ation. Yet, if you so choose, you may have the
W ord of God, provided you do not insist th at
y o u r neighbor accept it as true. He has a rig h t to
his ow n opinion w ithout reference to your God.
Such is th e w o rld ’s interpretation of freedom of
religion and freedom of speech, w hereby they
p u sh o u t of th e w ay and persecute all who p ro
claim th e W ord of God as th e tru th , and testify
against them .
“Who have said, With our tongue we will pre
vail; Our lips are our own: Who is lord over us?”
No h ig h er pow er than th eir own is acknowledged.
T h e ir aim is to rule, to coerce and crush all op
position; to u su rp the governm ent of church and
state; to ta k e aw ay a m an’s rig h t to w ork for the
support o f him self and his fam ily; an em ployer’s
rig h t to h ire whom he chooses; to control every
line of business, and every activity of society.
But, “P ride goeth before destruction, and a haugh
ty sp irit before a fall.”
JEHOVAH ANSWERS
“Because of the oppression of the poor; be
cause of the groaning of the needy; Now will
I arise, saith Jehovah; I will set him in safety:
he longeth for it.” L iterally, “he b reath eth for it”,
“he p an teth for it”, in the intensity of his effort
to get aw ay from th e pow er of evil, he spends the
very b reath of his life. He pours out th e deep de
sires of his soul to his God and Savior for things
agreeable to His will. Such prayer God hears and
answers. “He saveth from the sw ord of their
m outh, even the needy from the hand of the
m ighty. So th e poor h a th hope; and iniquity stoppeth h er m outh.” (Job 5:15, 16). “L et th e lying
lips be dumb, w hich speak against th e righteous
insolently, w ith pride and contempt. Oh how
great is Thy goodness, w hich Thou hast laid up
fo r them th a t fear Thee, w hich Thou h ast w rought
for them th a t take refuge in Thee, before the chil
dren of men! In th e covert of Thy presence Thou
w ilt hide them from th e plottings of m an: Thou
w ilt keep them secretly in a pavilion from the
strife of tongues.”
God is ready and w aiting to save now all who
call upon Him in tru th ; b u t His cutting-off in
judgm ent, He leaves, in long-suffering mercy, to
give fu rth e r opportunity to repent, u n til th e day
He has appointed for it. So He does not prom ise
to cut off th e deceitful lips im m ediately. He w ill
atte n d to th a t in His ow n time. B ut He w ill save
now in the refuge He has provided fo r all those
who put th e ir tru st in Him; He gathers them u n
der the shadow of His wings. “The Lord know eth
how to deliver the godly out of tem ptation, and
to keep th e unrighteous u n d er punishm ent unto
th e day of judgm ent.” (2 Pet. 2:9). A nd God, in
His wisdom and goodness, has another purpose
for His own people and His ow n glory, in p erm it
ting the deceiver to continue his nefarious w ork
fo r a “little w hile”. It is for providing the gen
uineness of His people’s faith in Him. So, “for
a little w hile, if need be, ye have been p u t to grief
in m anifold trials, th a t th e proof of your faith,
being m ore precious th a n gold th a t perisheth,
though it b e proved by fire, m ay be found unto
praise and glory and honor at the re-appearance of
Jesus C hrist.” (2 Pet. 1:3-12).
T here is a law of the Kingdom of God w hich
reads, “The m outh of them th a t speak lies shall be
stopped.” (Ps. 63:11). This law has been publish
ed to the w orld, “to th e end th a t every m outh
m ay be stopped and all th e w orld brought under
th e judgm ent of God.” (Ro. 3:19). For, “By thy
w ords thou shalt be justified, and by th y w ords
thou shalt be condemned,” It was the Lord Jesus
C hrist, to w hom all judgm ent had been com m itted,
who pronounced th e seven terrib le woes of M at
thew 23 on the religious and national leaders of
Israel, for th eir hypocrisy in false teaching and
64
corrupt living in defiance of the law of God w hile
professing to honor and teach it to others. This
w as His m erciful w arning to those high in the
councils of church and state of th a t generation,
th a t they m ight rep en t before it was too late. They
paid no heed to Him, and th e execution of ju d g
m ent came w hen they w ere not looking for it. The
law s of God do not change w ith th e generations
of men. Therefore, le t all w ho would be leaders
and teachers of this generation lay to h e art the
w ords of Christ.
JEHOVAH’S ANSWER GIVES ASSURANCE
AND COURAGE TO HIS PEOPLE
They know th a t “The words of Jehovah are pure
words; As silver purified in a furnace on the
earth: Refined seven times.” — th a t is, perfectly
pure, w ithout th e m inutest flaw, o r least trace
of any im purity. They constitute th e absolute
stan d ard of tru th to be depended on by every one
who desires to know of His saving grace; of His
m ercy now, and of His judgm ent to come. “THOU
JEHOVAH, Thou wilt keep them: Thou wilt pre
serve them from this generation forever.”
He certain ly w ill preserve the w ords of His
C ovenant from perversion and suppression by this
generation. He certainly w ill preserve His own
people from coercion of th e liberalism of this
generation; and He w ill do so as long as this gen
eration lasts, “This generation” w hich keeps re
producing itself, as it has done since the first en
tran ce of sin. In th e days of C hrist on earth, He
called it “a generation of vipers” for it was the
sam e as th a t of D avid’s time. “They sharpened
th e ir tongue like a serpent; adder’s poison is u n
d er th e ir lips.” (Ps. 140:3).
F or ourselves and for our children, for our
C hurch an d o u r nation, w e surely need to m ake
th e p ray er of this P salm o u r p ray er today. We
are not to ask to be tak en out of this world, for
we have been sent into this w orld w ith a message
fo r this generation. Who w ill deliver C hrist’s
message to this generation, if we do not? In order
to fulfil o u r m ission we m ust ask th a t we be kept
from the evil one; from th e sham, h alf-truths, and
compromises of this “wicked and adulterous gen
eration” of foul and vicious men. For, “The wick
ed will continue to push themselves forward on
every side, As long as vileness is made honorable
among the children of men.” — as it is today, w hen
we have it coming into our hom es by new spapers,
magazines, and books; through radio and televi
sion receivers, m aking our ch ildren and ourselves
so accustomed to it th at w e become unconcerned,
then off guard, th en snared in th e m eshes of the
lie. “Vice is a m onster of so frig h tfu l mien, As to
be hated needs b u t to be seen. Y et seen too oft,
fam iliar w ith her face, We first endure, th en pity,
then em brace.” If w e do not w an t this to happen
to us, w e should not let ourselves see it except from
God’s point of view, neither let ourselves hear it
except from th e refuge in C hrist and His Word.
“A ll w ho would live godly in C hrist Jesus
shall suffer persecution. B ut evil m en shall w ax
worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived.
But abide thou in the things w hich thou hast le arn
ed and hast been assured of, know ing of whom
thou hast learned them, a n d th a t thou hast know n
the Holy Scriptures w hich a re able to m ake thee
wise unto salvation through faith w hich is in
Christ Jesus”. (2 Tim. 3:12-17).
Again, this last verse of our P salm is n o t some
doubter’s re tu rn to his gloom, b u t a fact of th e
righteous m an’s experience which, by faith, he
has been able to understand, and to go on w ith
his w ork w ith hope undim m ed.
Rem em ber th at Christ said, “In the w orld ye
shall have tribulation; b u t be of good cheer, I have
overcome the w orld.” (Jn. 16:33). “If th ey perse
cuted me, they w ill persecute you; if th ey kept
my w ord they w ill keep yours also. B ut all these
things w ill they do unto you fo r m y nam e’s sake,
because they know not H im th a t sent m e.” (Jn.
15:20, 21). “Blessed are ye w hen m en shall re
vile you and persecute you, and say all m anner of
evil against you falsely, fo r m y sake. Rejoice
and be exceeding glad: for g reat is your rew ard
in heaven, for so persecuted th ey th e prophets
which w ere before you.” (Mt. 5:11,12),
Reviews o f Religious Books
The favorable review ing of a book here is not to be u n d e r
stood as necessarily im plying an endorsem ent of everything con
tained in it. W ithin the lim its of the editorial policy of Blue B an
n e r F a ith an d Life each review er is solely responsible fo r the
y our book dealer or direct from the publishers; do not send orders
to th e m anager of this magazine.
THE WORLD’S COLLISION, b y C harles E.
Pont. W. A. W ilde Co., 131 C larendon St., Boston,
Mass. 1956, pp. 298. $3.50.
The dust jacket of this volum e inform s us th a t
it concerns th e atomic age, the one w orld idea in
the light of the Bible, and W orld W ar in. The
author’s view point is P rem illennialism of the P retribulation R apture type, w ith a very strong em-
65
phasis on the literal fulfilm ent of Old T estam ent
prophecies concerning Israel or the Jews. As the
rev iew er is basically in disagreem ent w ith this
view point concerning Biblical prophecy, it is in
evitable th a t he m ust disagree w ith a large p o r
tion of the contents of the book.
The idea th a t Old Testam ent prophecies con
cerning Israel m ay really refer to Christians and
th e C hristian Church, the au th o r rejects as sp ir
itualizing and “Scripture-tw isting.” We w ill not
apply the la tte r term to his (we think greatly e r
roneous) m ethod of interpretation of Old T esta
m en t prophecy. W hy cannot those C hristians
w ith w hom w e disagree about m atters of in te r
p retatio n be sim ply adjudged mistaken, w ithout
reflections on th e ir motives or th eir sincerity in
h andling th e W ord of God?
T he a u th o r’s whole m ethod of handling Old
T estam ent prophecy concerning Israel, we believe,
errs by reason of an im proper assumption, nam e
ly, th e assum ption th a t the gracious promises of
th e Old T estam ent are addressed to the literal o r
physical descendants of A braham . The contrary
proposition, w hich the review er believes to be
S crip tu ral, h as been argued a t some length in a
previous issue of this m agazine (A pril-June, 1952,
Vol. 7, pp. 85-88), to w hich th e read er is referred
fo r a statem en t on the subject. We believe th at
th e gracious prom ises of the Old Testam ent are
addressed to th e genuine Israel, an d th a t the
Bible, Old T estam ent and New, clearly teaches
th a t believing C hristians are th e genuine Israel.
G alatians 3:7 and 3:29 are tw o verses w hich w e
believe prove this point, though m any more pass
ages relev an t to the m atter m ay be cited.
In short, w e believe th a t the author of this
book, in common w ith th e prophetic school w hich
he represents, has followed a basically erroneous
m ethod of in terp retin g th e Bible, w hich has led
him to num erous unsound conclusions.
T h ere are indeed things in the book w ith
w hich w e are in h earty agreem ent. For exam ple,
th e au th o r’s polem ic against the idea of a single
w orld governm ent impresses us as Scriptural. The
rev iew er believes th a t division into m any nation
al sovereignties is one of God’s w ays of lim iting
and controlling hum an sinfulness, and th a t the
T ow er of B abel incident in Genesis shows God
break in g u p an attem pted false unity of the race
upon a secular o r hum anistic basis. Those who
today advocate w o rld governm ent based on faith
in m an a re try in g to build the Tow er of Babel
over again. T he only tru e u n ity of the hum an
race can be none other th an th a t based on the
Lord Jesu s C hrist as King.
A p art from th e
te rp re ta tio n of th e
to p o in t o u t one or
m ethod of w ritin g
proper.
au th o r’s basic principle of in
concept of “Israel,” w e w ish
two tendencies of the au th o r’s
w hich w e believe to be im
First, in stating highly debatable propositions,
concerning which Bible'-believing Christians dif
fer radically, the author habitually uses such
strongly confident expressions as “undoubtedly,”
“clearly, “of course,” “it appears certain.” We
shall cite one exam ple of each of these: “Every
reference in Ezekiel to nam es in the Rosh train
undoubtedly refer to Russian ‘republics’ or satel
lites” (p. 211); “A study of Daniel 7, 9 and
Revelation 17, 19, clearly shows th at the revived
Roman Em pire w ill be a political system, first
controlled by an ecclesiastical system, the latte r
soon being rendered lifeless by the political sys
tem ” (p. 232); “Everything un d er these four
headings refers of course to th a t tim e know n as
th e seventieth w eek of D aniel” (p. 236); “I t ap
pears certain th a t in Gog’s train, every nation
from P ersia to G erm any has been included, either
voluntarily or by compulsion, w ith the prince of
Rosh leading them all, ‘com m anding’ them a ll”
(p. 215). These are typical of the author’s tooconfident statem ents on highly debatable m atters.
The fact is th at these interpretations are rejected
by a great m any believing Bible scholars, th e re
fore such positive expressions as “undoubtedly”
are hard ly in order.
Secondly, the author m anifests a tendency to
tre a t opinion as if it w ere proof. F o r instance,
the author “proves” th a t m odern G erm any is
identical w ith the Biblical Gomer by citing a
series of authors, none of w hich affords anything
m ore th an an expression of opinion on th e sub
ject (pp. 212, 213). A t no point is any real evi
dence given to prove th a t G erm any is Gomer.
Again, the author “proves” th a t Cush, o r th e riv er
Gihon, or some other Biblical geographical feature,
was located in a particu lar place, by citing the
m aps in the Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edi
tion). The1 fact th a t the Scofield Bible’s maps
have Cush or Gihon in a p articu lar place proves
nothing a t all — it is m ere opinion, w hich m ay
or m ay not be correct. The fact is th a t the lo
cation of th e Cush and Gihon of Genesis 2 is u n
known.
In the th ird place, the1 au th o r seems to us to
e rr frequently by confusing th e interpretation of
a prophecy w ith its fulfilment. This is a very
common erro r in th e school w hich the author
represents. The in terpretation or m eaning of a
prophecy is one thing; its fulfilm ent is another.
To confuse o r identify these two is a fru itfu l cause
of error. F or instance, it m ay be held th a t R eve
lation 13 predicts th e rise and career of a ty ra n
nical w orld-dictator who w ill b itte rly persecute
C hristianity. T hat is an in terpretation of the1
prophecy, and concerns its meaning. B ut w hen
someone says, “Napoleon (o r Mussolini, o r H itler,
or Stalin, or some y et-fu tu re Russian leader) is
th e dictator,” h e is no longer dealing w ith the
m eaning of the prophecy b u t w ith its fulfilment.
As long as w e are dealing only w ith the m eaning
G6
of prophecy, we have only the inspired W ord of
God to in terp ret. B ut w hen w e begin to deal in
th e fulfilm en t of prophecy, w e h av e to deal also
w ith fallible hum an reports of history and cu rren t
events, hence th ere is a great possibility of hum an
e rro r opened. Those who thought the K aiser or
H itler or S talin m ight be th e an tichrist predicted
by Scripture, w ere try in g to n ail dow n the fu l
fillm ent and w ere evidently m istaken in th eir
opinion about it. B ut the au th o r of th e book u n
d er review does this so rt of thing frequently. We
shall quote a p arag rap h from the au th o r’s in te r
p retation of Ezekiel 39:
“The le a d e r of the north ern invaders w ill be
buried b y th e Jew s. We a re not inform ed as to
who he is. It could be Nikolai Bulganin, o r Zhu
kov, but m ost likely w ill be his successor, a m an
even m ore ruthless and anti-Sem itic th an Stalin.
Gog him self is b uried in Palestine w hich indicates
th a t he w as not going to m iss one h o u r of the
great show of wiping o u t th e children of Israel.
H e was going to be in the fro n t row. So the Jew s
b u ry him in P alestine, w ith ‘all his m u ltitude’
(Ezekiel 39:11).” (P. 241).
Again and again th e pow er m entioned in
Ezekiel 38 and 39 is said to be Soviet Russia. The
author states: “In Joel 2:20 w e are told th a t God
w ill drive th e Red arm ies into a b arren area be
tw een th e M editerranean and Dead Seas. A nd
th ere H e w ill create his stin k ” (p. 242). All this
is to confuse th e m eaning of prophecy w ith the
fulfilm ent of prophecy. The m eaning can be
know n by sound exegetical study of the S cripture
text; th e fulfilm ent cannot be known, certainly
and in p articulars, u n til God causes it to come to
pass. How m any O ld T estam ent prophecies a re
declared in th e New T estam ent to have been fu l
filled by p articu lar events of th e Gospel record,
w here w e could n ev er have guessed, on th e basis
of the Old T estam ent alone, th a t such w ould be
th e fulfilm ent? Who w ould have thought, on the
basis of th e Old T estam ent prophecy alone, th at
Jerem iah 31:15 w ould be fulfilled by th e event
described in M atthew 2:16-18? In this case, cer
tainly, th e m eaning of th e prophecy was u n d er
standable by Jerem iah an d others of his day; b u t
th e tim e and circum stances of th e fulfilm ent w ere
probably unknow n u n til H erod actually ordered
th e m assacre of the infants of Bethlehem .
We hope th a t th e present review w ill lead
some w ho tend to accept the statem ents of w riters
on prophecy ra th e r uncritically, to dig deeper and
to exam ine the assum ptions and th e principles
of in terp retatio n upon w hich the stru ctu re has
been built. — J. G. Vos
PREDESTINATION: ITS MEANING, ITS
BLESSINGS, ITS EVIDENCES, ITS IM PLICA
TIONS, by George B. Fletcher.. Bible T ruth Depot,
Swengel, Pa. No date, pp. 24, pocket size, paper
cover. 15 cents; 2 for 25 cents.
If you are not too clear on this question of
predestination, if you are a bit hazy about God’s
passing by some sinners and leaving them to suf
fer etern al punishm ent, th en do send for this little
pocket size book in th e n ex t mail. I t is w orth a
dollar, b u t you can get eight of them for your
dollar and do a bit of w itnessing by passing the
“bonus” out to your neighbors. Or if you w ant to
do a good work, get a supply of them for the
tract rack at th e church.
R ead it two or three tim es — you w ill find it
delightfully interesting — and stu d y the chart
th at makes the whole schem e so clear and you
will never have another doubt about the tru th of
predestination.
Pastors, if w e w ill endeavor to present the
gospel of electing love to o u r people as a ttra ctiv e
ly as it is presented here, w e w ill get som ew here
w ith those who “ju st can’t see it.” I plan to use
the good illustrations given by Mr. F letcher in my
own preaching.
— Joseph A. H ill
CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE FOR BEGINNERS,
by H enry Baker. B aker Book House, G rand Rapids
6, Mich. 1954, pp. 32, pocket size, paper cover. 20
cents.
“In this booklet the Rev. H enry B ak er dem
onstrates th at doctrine can be m ade und erstan d
able to young children. H e here presents in
simple form those Biblical tru th s w hich, w hen u n
folded and developed, constitute an organized
system of Scripture know ledge” (quoted from the
cover). This is a catechism -type stu d y containing
tw enty-four lessons suitable for use in S ab b ath
School classes and Ju n io r societies, and for S ab
b ath afternoon instruction in th e fam ily. If this is
properly used as an outline fo r developing a pic
tu re of the Bible as a w hole in young minds, th e
parent w ill soon find th a t it is the children who
are asking the questions.
Covenant keeping in the hom e is the real
solution to th e problem of “how to keep our young
people in church.” This kind of sound instruction
in the home is the place to begin. If in this w ay
our covenant children are securely tied to th eir
moorings they w ill not d rift w ith the c u rren t of
our times.
— Joseph A. Hill
THE DEFENSE OF THE FAITH, by Cornelius
Van Til. The P resb y terian and Reform ed P u b
lishing Co., P.O. Box 185, N utley 10, N.J. 1955, pp.
viii, 436. $4.95.
Dr. Cornelius Van Til is Professor of Apolo
getics at W estm inster Theological Sem inary in
Philadelphia. He is a thoroughgoing and consis
te n t Calvinist. In this m ajo r w ork on C hristian
Apologetics he seeks to presen t an apologetic th a t
is consistent w ith the R eform ed faith and th e re
67
fore w ith biblical Christianity. He contends th a t
if we are to be consistent Calvinists we m ust have
a R eform ed m ethod of apologetics as w ell as a
R eform ed system of theology. This m eans th a t
w e are not only to hold the doctrines of C hris
tian ity as they are set forth, for example, in the
W estm inster Confession of F aith, but we m ust also
have a R eform ed way of presenting the doctrines
of C hristianity to non-believers.
The au th o r shows th a t the traditional m ethod
of apologetics among Reform ed theologians —
w ith th e exception of m en like A braham K uyper
and H erm an Bavinck — has been essentially the
sam e as th e apologetic m ethod employed by A rm
inian theologians. The apologetics taught at “Old
P rin ceto n ” u n d er Benjam in B. Warfield, W illiam
B renton G reene, Jr. and others was essentially no
differen t from th a t which is set forth by B utler
th e A rm inian in his famous Analogy. These theo
logians, w hile holding to the Reformed faith, em
ployed a m ethod of defending the faith th a t was
m ore in line w ith A rm inianism than w ith Cal
vinism.
F acing this fact, Van T il had to choose be
tw een th e inconsistent apologetic method of “Old
P rin ceto n ” and the m ore consistently Reformed
m ethod of th e A m sterdam theologians, K uyper
and Bavinck. He chose in favor of the latter.
Then at several points w here K uyper and Bavinck
deviated from generic Calvinism, Van Til differs
from them in favor of Calvinism. Because of his
d e p a rtu re at certain points from these classical
represen tativ es of the Reform ed faith, Van T il’s
critics have called him a “Reconstructionist”. The
tru th is th a t V an Til in differing w ith these great
Reform ed th in k ers has not rem olded the Reformed
faith b u t has sought to “im prove” the traditional
Reform ed thought by rem oving certain elem ents
th a t are inconsistent w ith generic Calvinism.
V an T il points out th a t m any present day
C alvinists are also inconsistent w ith the Reform ed
faith in th e ir m ethod of defending the faith. J.
O liver Buswell, Jr., E dw ard J. Carnell, W ilbur M.
S m ith and m any others a re inconsistent Calvin
ists in th a t th e ir w ay of presenting C hristianity
involves th e controlling principle of Roman C ath
olic and A rm inian theology.
Rom anism and A rm inianism are essentially
th e sam e in th e ir basic assumptions. U nderlying
th e Rom anist-Evangelical theology is the assum p
tion of hu m an ultim acy or self-dependence. The
Rom anist and Evangelical (A rm inian) theolo
gians assum e th a t the n atu ral m an can know
m uch about th e universe and God by m eans of
n a tu ra l reason w ithout th e light of Christianity.
Based upon this assumed autonom y of hum an
reason the Rom anist-Evangelical method of de
fending C hristianity is to exam ine the facts and
law s of n atu re, etc., to see w hether God exists
and C hristian ity is true.
In contrast to this m ethod, Reform ed apolo
getics holds th a t only since God does exist and
C hristianity is tru e are the facts and law s of n a
tu re w h at they are. Unless w e pre-suppose the
existence of God and the tru th of C hristianity as
a whole the facts and law s of n atu re cannot even
be intelligible. If God did not exist and C hristian
ity w ere not tru e th ere w ould be no facts and
laws of natu re; all would be chaos in a universe
of Chance.
The au th o r shows th at the Reformed m ethod
of apologetics is “consistent w ith the n a tu re of
C hristianity” w hile the Rom anist-A rm inian m ethod
involves the controlling principles of non-believ
ing science and philosophy. “These principles are
(a) th a t m an is not a creatu re of God b u t ra th e r
is ultim ate and as such m ust properly consider
him self instead of God th e final reference point
in explaining things; (b) th a t all other things be
side him self are non-created but controlled by
Chance; and (c) th a t th e pow er of logic th a t he
(th e non-believer) possesses is the m eans by
w hich he m ust determ ine w h at is possible o r im
possible in the universe of Chance” (p. 350).
Since the Rom anist and A rm inian assume th a t
the non-believer is rig h t w ith respect to these
basic principles, th ey have no way of telling the
non-believer ju st how C hristianity differs from
his ow n position and w hy he should accept Jesus
C hrist as his Savior (p. 335). In o th er words, the
Rom anist-Evangelical type of apologetics offers no
challenge to unbelieving thought and can present
no effective w itness for the tru th of C hristianity.
Dr. Van Til exposes the fallacy in th e notion
th a t Evangelical C hristianity is tru e C hristianity
m inus the “five points of Calvinism ”. It is com
m only supposed am ong Reform ed C hristians th a t
w e need only to add th e ‘'distinctively Calvinistic doctrines” to Evangelical C hristianity in or
der to have full-orbed C hristianity. The impos
sibility of this construction of C hristianity is seen
w hen w e realize th a t Evangelical C hristianity
rests on the foundation of Roman Catholic theol
ogy. Romanism deals w ith theism first and w ith
C hristianity afterw ards. It seeks to prove the
existence of God by m eans of reason unaided by
Scripture. T herefore the God th a t Romanism
proves cannot be the God of revelation. Y et h av
ing proved this theistic Something, Romanism is
bound to construct a C hristianity th at w ill fit on
to th e deform ation of theism it has “proved”. This
m eans th a t every C hristian doctrine presented by
Rom an Catholics or Evangelicals is falsified by
th e ir assum ption of hum an ultim acy or autonomy.
Take the doctrine of atonem ent for example. The
A rm inian conception of the atonem ent of Christ
is distorted b y its view of “free w ill” as autono
mous or independent of the plan of God. Accord
ing to th e A rm inian view, the effectiveness of the
atonem ent does not depend wholly upon God b u t
68
p artly upon man. The A rm inian doctrine of the
atonem ent is not th e sam e as th e Reform ed doc
trin e of th e atonem ent.
I t w ill be readily seen th a t the question of
apologetic m ethod has a bearing on the subject of
“evangelical cooperation” and on the question of
interdenom inational relationships as a whole. Van
T il m akes it clear th a t since Reform ed C hristians
cannot cooperate w ith Evangelicals in building
th e stru ctu re of C hristianity, n e ith e r can they
cooperate w ith them in presenting th e doctrines
of C hristianity. If w e are not to p articipate in a
false kind of w itnessing for the existence of God
and the tru th of C hristianity, w e m ust cultivate
fra te rn a l and cooperative relations w ith Reform ed
Churches ra th e r th an Evangelicals.
On th e o th er hand, as Reform ed C hristians we
cannot use th e R om anist-Evangelical approach
w hen w itnessing to unbelievers. We are not to
appear as a C hristian first, and la te r as a R eform
ed C hristian. We are not to seek to defend theism
first in o rd er a fte r th a t to defend C hristianity.
We are not to seek to w in non-believers to a
“sim ple” (Evangelical) C hristianity first, and
afterw ards try to w in them to Calvinism. If we
are to w in m en to C hristianity at all we m ust have
a distinctively Reform ed w ay of presenting every
doctrine of the C hristian faith.
This is one of th e m ost im portant books th at
have been published in recent years. O ur church
cannot afford to ignore th e w hole question of Re
form ed apologetics as it exam ines “the doctrinal
and creedal bases of th e church’s ta sk ” and as it
fulfills its task of w itnessing to an unbelieving
generation.
— Joseph A. Hill
THE FIV E POINTS OF CALVINISM, by Ed
w in H. Palm er. The M en’s Society of the C hris
tia n Reform ed Church, 422 E. Exchange St., Spring
Lake, Mich. 1955, pp. 88, paper cover. $1.00.
This is a series of easy-to-understand sermons
on th e Calvinistic doctrine of salvation by a pas
to r in the C hristian Reform ed Church. In p artic
u la r it is a study of the five points a t w hich the
C alvinistic doctrine of salvation has been p eren
n ially denied by A rm inian or Evangelical C hris
tians. These five Calvinistic doctrines are: total
depravity, unconditional election, lim ited atone
m ent, irresistible grace and perseverance of the
saints. Evangelical C hristianity in general denies
these doctrines, even though the w hole debate cen
tering around them was settled for th e church of
Jesus C hrist m ore th an th ree hund red years ago
at th e in tern atio n al Synod of D ordt. These doc
trin es are not popular today, b u t they are true.
These “five points” a re all clearly tau g h t in our
doctrinal standards as p a rt of th e official fa ith of
our church. Also, th e corresponding errors of
Evangelical C hristianity a re rejected by th e Re
form ed P resb y terian Testim ony; for exam ple, the
error “that he (m an) can w ill or act independent
ly of the purpose or th e providence of God”
(Chapter II, E rror 3); and the e rro r “th a t God
created any thing w ithout determ ining w hat
should be its final end and condition” (C hapter
VI, E rror 1); and the e rro r “th a t C hrist died eq u al
ly for all m ankind” (C hapter X, E rro r 3), etc.
We should realize th a t the m ass-evangelism
th at is currently popular is based upon these
errors.
I would suggest th at sessions obtain copies of
this neat little book and use it as the basis of a
six o r twelve weeks’ study in the m id-w eek prayer
meeting. The elders w ill find stim ulating ques
tions on each chapter to help them in leading the
meetings.
— Joseph A. Hill
THE CHRISTIAN APPROACH TO THE OLD
TESTAMENT, by F. F. Bruce.
Inter-V arsity
C hristian Fellowship, 39 B edford Square, London
W. C. 1, England. 1955, pp. 20, paper cover. 6d.
In U. S. A.: The Inter-V arsity C hristian Fellow
ship, 1444 N. Astor, Chicago, 111.
This Presidential A ddress delivered a t the
Inter-V arsity Conference, A pril, 1955, is a clear,
truly Scriptural exposition of the C hristian’s use
of the Old Testam ent, W ritten by a recognized
authority in the field of Biblical H istory and L it
erature in simple, every-day language fo r the nontheological student, it is a valuable aid to all lay
leaders in the church in helping youth to u n d er
stand and appreciate and use th e Old T estam ent
more effectively.
Subjects discussed are T he Old T estam ent’s
W itness to Christ, Divine R evelation in th e Old
Testament, and M an’s Response in th e Old Testa
m ent (a) in Words (b) in Deeds.
The section of M an’s Response in W ords has an
especially good and interesting discussion of the
meaning and use of the poetical w orks of th e Old
Testament. Having shown th a t th e Psalm s are
the inspired words “in w hich a m an of God re
sponds (underlining indicates au th o r’s italics) to
the revelation he has received,” he adds, “and be
cause they are w ords of inspiration th ey serve to
express our response to God as well, although we
have to come to know Him th ro u g h His perfect
revelation in C hrist.” pp. 11 & 12.) N aturally the
Christian fills the words of the Psalm ist w ith a
deeper, C hristian meaning, as the au th o r explains.
A few quotations w ill indicate the m erits of
the work. “The whole Bible sets fo rth the gospel
of our redem ption, and the Old T estam ent is m uch
more than a preface to this gospel; it is itself the
first p a rt of the saving history.” (p. 7) “The n a r
rative p arts of the Old T estam ent provide a broad
canvas on w hich the revealed character of God is
portrayed in His dealings w ith men, m ore particu
larly w ith His people Israel.” (p. 17) “To ap
69
proach th e Old Testam ent in the light of C hrist’s
fu lfilm en t of all its p arts is to approach it aright;
th is is th e C hristian approach to the Old T esta
m ent.” (p. 20).
— E. C. Copeland
LOVE THE LORD THY GOD, by H erm an
H oeksem a (Vol. V III of Exposition of The H eidel
berg C atechism ). Wm. B. Eerdm ans Pub. Co.,
G rand Rapids 3, Mich. 1955, pp. 290. $3.00.
T he appearance of this exposition of the Cate
chism at th is tim e is a tim ely rem inder to the
church of h e r responsibility to bring up h e r chil
d ren in th e n u rtu re and adm onition of the Lord
th ro u g h clear, system atic instruction in th e doc
trin es of th e W ord of God. Sad indeed it is th at
even in Evangelical circles catechising and in
doctrination are too generally looked upon as nonBiblical, divisive methods are ra th e r than a stead
fast continuation in the teaching of the Apostles
w hich w as characteristic of th e church in the
early days a fte r Pentecost.
The H eidelberg Catechism takes up doctrine
in th e o rder of experience of the Christian, w here
as th e W estm inster Catechism approaches the same
doctrines from th e order of revelation. I t is also
so arran g ed as to provide a w eek’s assignm ent at
a tim e for th e m astery of the congregation. These
divisions are called Lord’s Day I, II, in, etc.
This volum e is an exposition of p art three of
the! C atechism w hich deals w ith the reasons for
g ratitu d e to God for the deliverance He has
w rought for m an through the redem ption p u r
chased by Christ. It describes th e perfect free
dom of m an u n d er God’s sovereignty, regenera
tion, th e n a tu re of th e New m an and the death
of the Old, th e n atu re and place of Good Works
in th e life of th e Christian, the law and the C hris
tian, and th e n a tu re of God and of His worship.
The1 R everend Hoeksema is a very practical,
lucid w riter. His w ork reads as m uch in th e n a
tu re of a story as of a doctrinal treatise. It would
be a valuable addition to church libraries to as
sist pastors, S ab b ath School teachers and others in
p resenting th e solid fram ew ork of the C hristian
life in clear, accurate, and attractive form.
— E. C. Copeland.
THE CAMBRIDGE SEVEN, by J. C. Pollock.
In ter-V arsity Fellowship, 39 Bedford Square, Lon
don W. C. 1, England, 1955, pp. 112, paper cover.
3s. 6d. In U.S.A.: The Inter-V arsity C hristian
Fellow ship, 1444 N. Astor, Chicago, 111.
This is a tim ely biographical w ork sub-titled
A Call to C h ristian Service. It recalls the sp irit
u al rev iv al th a t began a t Cam bridge and sw ept
th ro u g h B ritish U niversities in th e 1880’s. These
seven w ere all men of high social and political
ra n k who “forsook all and followed” C hrist to
serve in the China Inland Mission, among them
the famous cricketer, C. T. Studd.
One factor th a t greatly influenced the m ove
m ent was th e Moody Mission in Cambridge U ni
versity in 1882 conducted at th e invitation of the
Students’ C hristian Union. This book comes from
the press ju st as another mssion is being conduct
ed th ere (Nov. 6-13, 1955) this tim e by Dr. Billy
Graham . The Prologue ends w ith this prayerful
paragraph: “The Cam bridge Seven em erged when
B ritish universities had been stirred to the depths
by the w ork of D. L. Moody, the A m erican evan
gelist. T hat seventy years later, in sim ilar cir
cumstances, God m ay call fo rth sim ilar bands is
the p ray er of m any."
These sketches of the seven (M ontagu H. P.
Beauchamp, W. W. Cassels, D. E. Hoste, A rth u r
T. Polhill-T urner, Cecil H. P olhill-T um er, Stan
ley P. Smith, C. T. Studd) describe th e ir lives at
the tim e of th e ir conversion and th e ir individual
and united influence on the spiritu al aw akening
in the universities up to th e ir departure fo r China
as a group on 5th February, 1885. A brief epilogue
states the m ain features of th e individual lives
after arriv al in China.
This is another challenging w ork to p u t in
the hands of young people.
— E. C. Copeland
IN UNDERSTANDNG BE MEN, by T. C.
Hammond. Inter-V arsity Fellowship, 39 Bedford
Square, London W. C. 1, England. 1954, pp. 208.
7s. 6d. In U.S.A.: The Inter-V arsity C hristian F el
lowship, 1444 N. Astor, Chicago, 111.
This “H andbook on C hristian D octrine for
Non-Theological Students” has gone through five
editions and seven rep rints since March, 1936. It
is designed as a study guide of th e salient doctrines
of the C hristian fa ith for all Evangelical Chris
tians regardless of denom ination. Following an
Introductory Study of the Im portance of Doctrine,
th ere are seven parts: F inal A uthority in M at
ters of Faith; The Godhead; Man and Sin; The
Person and W ork of Christ, w ith an appendix:
The D octrine of the A tonem ent; T he Holy Spirit;
The Corporate Life of the C hristian; The L ast
Things.
Each section is divided into appropriate sub
sections. Each sub-section is briefly, clearly dis
cussed. There is a list of S cripture references for
study. T here are questions for discussion; and
th ere is a good bibliography. A ny church group
w ill find it to be a very interesting, instructive,
and inspirational guide to a firm er foundation in
the basic things of o u r faith.
W ritten by an A rchdeacon of the C hurch of
England it expounds the Calvinistic faith as set
fo rth in the T hirty-nine A rticles and the W est
m inster Confession of Faith. It is w ritte n w ith
70
all evangelicals in mind, and leaves m atters of
differences in adm inistration for individual study
w ith appropriate suggestions in m any cases. It
takes u p th e basic doctrines listed in a tru ly R e
form ed fashion w ith no hedging or soft-pedaling
of S crip tu ral teaching on such things as the
authority of th e clergy or the n atu re and m eaning
of th e sacram ents. F o r exam ple, in discussing th e
characteristics of the tru e church, Apostolicity is
defined as “ ‘its being b u ilt on th e foundation of
the A postles and P rophets’ and in p erpetual ad
herence of its m em bers to th e Apostolic teaching
as recorded in th e New Testam ent. W hat it cer
tainly does not m ean is a continuous succession of
leadership preserved in a reg u lar transm ission of
‘O rders’ from Bishops w ho can trace a lin
age back to th e Apostles. This is disproved by
Scripture and b y history . . . .” (p. 163). “O rdi
nation is not to any power over th e church; it is
an official recognition, com m endation and setting
ap art of one w hom God has previously endow ed.”
(p. 169).
T here a re th ree sections th a t m ade a special
im pression on th e review er. In th e section on
“F inal A uthority in M atters of F aith ” th e com
parison betw een Reason, th e Church, and the
Scriptures is especially clear in describing the
rig h t place of each. The section dealing w ith th e
Holy S p irit’s w ork in th e salvation of m an w ould
steer evangelists, personal w orkers, etc. from the
e rro r of “decisionism”. The section on “The Cor
p orate life of th e C hurch" very clearly an d ac
curately describes th e n atu re of the visible church,
and so should help to clarify th e S criptural doc
trin e of church unity, a pressing issue in our day.
The church is bound to be strengthened and
stirre d u p b y such studies. T he discussions are
m ost refreshing and thought provoking in this
presentation. P astors w ill find it very helpful
in fresh presentation of these doctrines in ser
mons, com m unicant classes, a t the adm inistration
of th e sacram ents. The w o rk is m ost h eartily
recom m ended.
— E. C. Copeland.
STYLISTIC CRITERIA AND TH E ANALY
SIS OF THE PENTATEUCH, by W. J. M artin.
The T yndale Press, 39 Bedford Square, London
W. C. 1, England. 1955, pp. 23, paper cover. Is.
6d. In U. S. A.: T he In ter-V arsity C hristian F el
lowship, 1444 N. Astor, Chicago, 111.
This M onograph by th e R ankin L ecturer in
H ebrew and Sem etic Languages in the U niversity
of Liverpool is a study of the principle and m eth
odology of criticism . From th e tim e of the French
Revolution th e critics of ancient literatu re have
based th e ir criticism of style and authorship on
th e appearance and frequency of th e w ords used.
W olf in studying th e w orks of Homer, Driver,
W ellhausen, and others in studying Biblical lite ra
tu re have all agreed th a t H om er and the Septua-
gint w ere collections of fragm entary w orks by
earlier w riters or legends. Moses and H om er w ere
either the pirates of the w orks of the common
people or they have been w rongly attrib u ted to
them. (See p. 6.) This m ethod, of course, is high
ly subjective and im aginative. Even th e v erifi
cation of sources in a docum ent w ould not neces
sarily indicate different hands as th e w ork of J. L.
Lowes on Coleridge so rem ark ab ly shows, (p. 20.)
Dr. M artin calls for scholars “to sit close to
the facts and to eschew inferences th a t lack com
pletely any objective substantiation. We deal,
not w ith w hat was not w ritten, not w ith some
m ythical torso, but w ith w hat actually lies before
us.” (p. 21). He m aintains th a t from the study of
th e style of the P entateuch th ere is sufficient evi
dence of its u n ity as com ing from one source,
and th a t th at source is Moses, (p. 23.)
This is a very w orth-w hile article for the one
who is interested in a scholarly reply to the u n
tenable theories of Old T estam ent criticism .
— E. C. Copeland.
RECENSIONS OF THE SEPTUA GINT PE N
TATEUCH, by D. W. Gooding. T he Tyndale
Press, 39 Bedford Square, London W. C. 1, E ng
land. 1955, pp. 24, paper cover. Is. 6d. In U. S. A.:
The Inter-V arsity C hristian Fellow ship, 1444 N.
Astor, Chicago, 111.
The Tyndale Old T estam ent Lecture, 1954, is
a study of the variations th a t exist in th e Septuagint Pentateuch in an effort to unfold th e story of
the developem ent of the S eptuagint m anuscripts.
It is clear th a t th ere have been various attem pts to
revise the Septuagint.
O rigen’s revision and
Lucian’s revision are considered and some others
are mentioned. The study of Septuagintal tex tu al
criticism is fu rth er com plicated by the fact th a t it
is a translation and therefore involves a study of
the Hebrew T extual m anuscripts in an effort to
account for the variations in th e G reek. T here are
8 pages of illustrations of th e variations.
This article w ill be of in terest to th e linguist
and critic.
— E. C. Copeland.
THE APOSTOLIC PREACHING O F THE
CROSS, by Leon Morris. Wm. B. E erdm ans Pub.
Co., G rand Rapids 3, M ichigan; T he Tyndale Press,
39 Bedford Square, London W. C. 1, England. 1955,
pp. 296. $3.50 or 15 shillings.
Dr. Morris, the V ice-Principal of R idley Col
lege, Melbourne, here presen ts a v ery discerning
study w hich will no doubt becom e a p a rt of the
classical Reform ed lite ra tu re expounding the w ork
of our Lord.
This w ork is an attem p t to u n d erstan d w h at
exactly was in the m inds of th e apostles w hen
they used such w ords as “redeem ,” “covenant,”
“propitiate,” “reconcile.” “ju stify ,” etc. Dr.
71
M orris studies them in the light of Old Testam ent
teaching, tak in g up all the related Hebrew words.
G reek w ords a re exam ined as they are used in the
S eptuagint as w ell as in th e New Testam ent and
in contem porary literature. He also exam ines
th e m aterial to be found in ancient Rabbinic lite r
atu re. The w ork is also carefully documented
w ith m any footnote references to m odern w orks.
A t th e end th e re is an index of Greek words, a
general index, and an index of Scripture passages.
These are valuable aids to the use of such a w ork.
This is th e w ork of a sound Reform ed
theologian, thoroughly done in a m asterly fashion.
It is a v aluable source book for the pastor’s study.
It is highly recommended.
—E. C. Copeland
SONGS OF SOVEREIGNTY: THREE SER
MONS EXTOLLING THE SOVEREIGNTY OF
CHRIST, b y Jo h n Owen. Sovereign G race Book
Club, 413 S. E. F irst Street, Evansville, Indiana.
1955, pp. 120. No price stated.
Dr. Jo h n Owen should not req u ire any in tro
duction to those of Reform ed persuasion. In this
little volum e th ere are eight discourses on five
tex ts of S cripture, some texts having two serm ons
assigned to them . The serm ons a re grouped in
th re e sections, the first containing five sermons,
th e second, one, and the third, two.
In th e first section th e sovereignty of God is
show n in th e defeat of hum an pow er and in the
prev ailin g n a tu re of the Divine pow er of th e Gos
pel. T he second section deals w ith the sovereign
po w er of God as m anifested in the steadfastness
of th e prom ises. This serm on preached before
P arlia m e n t on F ebru ary 28, 1649, voiced a m uch
needed w arn in g against th e sinfulness of stagger
ing a t th e prom ises as it applies to the political
sphere. T he last two sermons deal w ith the sov
ereig n ty of God as m anifest in the doctrine of the
everlastin g Covenant.
Though preached over three hundred years
ago th ese serm ons have a vital message for the
nation, th e church and th e individual believer
of o u r day. The style is not modern, b u t any
person w ith an average knowledge of English will
h av e no difficulty in understanding these dis
courses. U nlike the popular type of preaching so
p rev alen t today, Dr. Owen deals w ith the tex t
and applies it w ith num erous parallel passages
of S crip tu re to th e needs of the nation or th e in
dividual. A t th e sam e tim e th e attention of the
re a d e r is k ep t focussed on the all-im portant doc
trin e of th e Covenant of Grace as it em braces
regeneration, justification and sanctification.
A volum e such as this should prove of value
to every thoughtful student of the Bible, and espe
cially to sem inary students and young m inisters.
A table o f contents and an index would add
to th e usefulness of th e book.
— A lexander Barkley
ROMANS, by R obert H aldane. Vol. I, being an
exposition of Romans chap. 1-3. Sovereign G race
Book Club, 413 S. E. F irst S treetl Evansville
Indiana. 1955, pp. 159. $2.00.
This com m entary w as first published during
the years 1835-39. The author, R obert Haldane,
w as born in 1764 of noble parentage in Scotland.
Owing to the death of his fath er his m other had
the task of training the children from th e ir early
years. The two sons later testified th a t it was
through the instrum entality of this saintly woman
th a t they w ere show n the way of life.
The Exposition on Rom ans was largely the
outcome of eight m onths spent by R obert H aldane
in Geneva. In th a t historic city he gathered
around him a com pany of students and gave them
lectures on the Epistle to th e Romans. These
students who had been receiving the husks of
A rian and Socinian doctrine from th e ir profes
sors, welcom ed H aldan’es expositions. Among th e
converts w ere M erle D’Aubigne, L. G aussen and
Caesar Malan. R obert H aldane was not a m inis
te r and does not claim to be a scholar, yet this
com m entary m anifests intellectual acum en and
pow ers of spiritual discernm ent fa r beyond the
average. Dr. C halm ers described it as “a wellb u ilt com m entary” and recom m ended it to the
students of theology.
Dr. A lexander W hyte m aintained th a t the
statu s of any com m entator on Romans m ust be
determ ined by his analysis of chapter 7 of the
Epistle. T here is another test just as effective and
th a t concerns the m eaning of the expression “the
righteousness of G od” w hich appears in 1:17 and
3:21, 22. These w ords contain the key to the whole
Epistle and Mr. H aldane devotes some tw elve
pages to the exposition of them . On page 131 he
w rites: “No explanation of the expression, ‘the
righteousness of God,’ will at once suit th e phrase
an d the situation in w hich it is found in th e pas
sage before us, b u t th a t w hich m akes it th a t
righteousness, or obedience to the law, both in its
penalty and requirem ents, w hich has been yielded
to it by our Lord Jesus C hrist. This is indeed the
righteousness of God, for it has been provided by
God, and from first to last has been effected by
His Son Jesus C hrist, who is the m ighty God and
th e F a th e r of eternity.”
In the course of the Exposition attention is
directed to th e grievous errors of th re e other
com m entators: M acKnight, Moses S tuart, and Tholuck; the first a Scottish P resbyterian; th e second
an A m erican Independent, and the th ird a G erm an
L utheran. In contrast to th e cold, critical and
unreliable assertions of these w riters H aldane
holds fo rth the genuine doctrines of grace w ith
due emphasis, and shows how every aspect of the
D ivine dealing w ith m an contributes to th eir il
lustration.
72
The reissuing of this com m entary is w orthy
of com m endation. E very devout student of the
Epistle to th e Romans w ill find in it m any gems of
theology, and m uch th a t w ill add to his u n d er
standing of an E pistle described by Calvin as “so
methodical, th a t the very entrance of it is fram ed
according to a rt.”
— A lexander B arkley
YOU ARE GREATER THAN YOU KNOW,
b y Lou Austin. The P artn ersh ip Foundation,
W inchester, Va. 1955, pp. 206. $3.00.
This book, th e contents of w hich are certainly
striking and unusual, presents a concept of re
ligion w hich cannot be reconciled w ith Biblical
C hristianity. H ere is a type of religion w hich is
com pletely subjective, lacking the objective his
torical redem ption w hich is so prom inent in the
Bible. T he position of th e author, in general, is
sim ilar to th a t of th e Q uakers o r Society of
Friends, ra th e r th an th a t of historic Biblical
C hristianity. The au th o r’s position also resem bles
q u ite strongly in some respects th a t of th e m ove
m ent associated w ith th e nam e of G lenn Clark,
and th a t of th e m ovem ent associated w ith the
nam e of F ra n k N. D. Buchm an (form erly called
“F irst C entury C hristian Fellow ship” but now
know n as “M oral R earm am ent” ).
The book sets fo rth m ysticism of a pantheizing type, which sees no need of, and leaves no
room for, God’s historical plan of redem ption
through Christ. To th e author, C hrist is a speci
m en or exam ple of “the P artn ersh ip Life” ra th e r
th a n th e Saviour who bore the guilt of our sins
b y His substitutionary sufferings and death on
th e cross.
2. The book confuses physical or m aterial con
cepts w ith those th at are ethical and spiritual.
The author speaks of “breathing out ego, b reath
ing in God” as if God w ere a m aterial substance
like air. But m an cannot rid him self of egotism,
nor can he attain spiritual com m union w ith God,
by any act or process th a t can be com pared to
breathing (see page 83).
3. The book confuses C hrist’s unique re la
tionship to God the F a th e r w ith a “P a rtn e rsh ip ”
concept which is regarded as being attain ab le by
any hum an being. The Bible represents C hrist’s
relationship to God the F a th e r as absolutely
unique. No other hum an being can ever be one
with the F ath er in the sam e sense th a t C hrist is.
Mr. Austin, however, evidently believes the con
trary to be true.
4. This book com pletely lacks any idea of
hum an sin as something involving objective guilt
before God — something w hich can only be fo r
given on the basis of a su bstitutionary atonem ent
provided by God. The Bible says th a t C hrist died
for our sins, but Mr. A ustin holds th a t C hrist
died to teach us th at God is w ithin us and m ani
fests Himself through us (page 173, top).
5. The book confuses the redemptive relation
ship of Christians to God w ith th e natural re
lationship of all human beings to God. T exts of
Scripture which speak of C hristian believers, th e
author of this book represents as speaking of man
as such, or people in general.
The harm which th is thoroughly unsound
book m ay do w ill only be increased by th e m ani
fest earnestness and sincerity of th e author. M ys
ticism such as this book p resents is not a v arian t
form of Biblical C hristianity, b u t ra th e r an e n tire
The m ain differences betw een this book and
ly different type of religion w hich grow s from a
Biblical C hristianity m ay be briefly sum m arized
different root. Such m ysticism is evidently on
as follows:
the increase at the present tim e. It seems to
1.
T he book confuses and breaks down the appeal especially to people who feel th e need of
vital religious experience b u t w ho lack a clear
distinction betw een God and man, w hich is always
grasp of the doctrinal stru c tu re of Biblical C hris
k ep t clear and sharp in th e Bible. God is spoken
tianity. Those who are so doctrinally naive th a t
of as being “in ” man, and m an is v irtu ally re g ard
they do not realize th at in tru e Biblical C hristian
ed as a p a rt of God. Note, for exam ple, th e state
ity subjective experience is rooted and grounded
m ents on pages 68-9: “. . . th ere is no such
in objective redem ption, tend to b e easily capti
thin g as an individual. Each person is an indi
vated by religious m ysticism such as th a t exem
vidual p artn ersh ip w ith me. I have integrated my
plified by the book u n der review .
S p irit w ithin each hum an being. .
The
— J. G. Vos
Bible, on th e oth er hand, never regards God and
m an as becoming integrated. They are always
WE ARE THE LORD’S, by Jean Vis. Society
clearly distinct in th e Bible, though ethical and
for Reform ed Publications, G rand Rapids, M ichi
religious union and com munion m ay be establish
gan. 1955, pp. 175, $2.50.
ed betw een th e two. W here the Bible speaks of
ethical and religious union w ith God, the author
This fine book is a short, lucid explanation
of th e book u nder review understands m etaphysi
of the Heidelberg Catechism. To one who is com
cal “in tegration” or u n ity of essential being b e
m itted to and a lover of th e W estm inster S ta n d
tw een God and m an. He looks at God’s tra n s
ards, this is a welcome and fascinating book. Its
cendence and His im m anence disjunctively, as an
emphasis is Reformed throughout.
either-or alternative, and rejects th e form er w hile
In the compass of only 175 pages th e author
affirm ing th e latter.
73
cannot give an intensive or exhaustive study of
such an im p o rtan t Church Standard. However,
this is a reliab le and welcome aid to the u n d er
standing of th e Reform ed faith as it is expressed
in th e H eidelberg Catechism. The A uthor has
w ell arra n g e d this book so th a t it could be used
as devotional reading, or as an individual or class
study book w ith a num ber of thought, research,
or discussion questions at th e close of each short
chapter. Such a volum e w ill be of value to every
C hristian, b u t especially to young people and
m inisters.
H ere w e have a welcome antidote for the
m odern “entertaining serm on.” Jean Vis is a
m in ister in th e Reform ed Church in America. This
in form ative book is arranged to help in the m in
istry or doctrinal preaching th at the people m ight
be in stru cted in the rig h t w ay of the Lord.
These are a few quotations:
“H ence w e m ust learn to know, trust, love and
glorify God alone, com m itting ‘even the least
th in g ’ to his care. And there we all stand con
dem ned.” p. 132.
“The young convert is asked: Do you believe
in Jesu s C h rist as your Saviour? Seldom th e
question is added: Do you su rren d er your soul and
body to your Lord? The new disciple needs m uch
guidance in this direction. W hen this is lacking
or m inim ized he does not practice his religion in
ev ery a re a of life, and has little joy and less en
thusiasm in his discipleship.” p. 46.
“T hus th e law still stands for them th a t are
saved by grace. In the light of th a t law w e see
o u r im perfections; w e learn m ore and m ore to
know our sinful n atu re and we pray for th e grace
of th e H oly S pirit to strive for perfection. Its
obedience now is not by reason of an outw ard
force b u t b y an inw ard compulsion.” p. 129.
“1. Jesus suffered the pains of hell, during all
his suffering, b u t especially on the cross, w hen he
said: ‘My God, m y God, w hy hast thou forsaken
m e?’ To be forsaken of God is hell.” p. 62.
These a re ju st samples of the good things of
this book.
— Philip W. M artin
STAND FAST, by John Arnold. The Society
fo r R eform ed Publications, 1519 East Fulton
S treet, G rand Rapids, Michigan. 1955, pp. 31, 35
cents p er copy, 3 copies $1.00.
The Rev. Mr. A rnold has served as a C hap
lain in th e U.S.N.R. and has w ritten this book for
young people in th e arm ed forces of our Nation.
T he ch ap ter headings are all from army life, be
ginning w ith “Reveille” and ending w ith “Taps”
and “F arew ell.” W hile this booklet is w ritten for
m em bers of th e arm ed forces, it is a good one to
place in th e hands of any young person, especial
ly those w ho are leaving home for any reason.
The em phasis on the sovereignty of God over
all is striking and encouraging. “We serve no
ordinary leaders, but ra th e r God’s Son, Jesus
Christ, King of kings and L ord of lords.” p. 11.
‘ O ur first allegiance is to Him and to His kingdom.
It is im perative th a t w e know our leader and all
His qualifications for such a com m and” (p. 10).
‘'B ut always rem em ber th a t we are to be judged
by God’s standards, not by w h at the crow d d o es..
.. Be a man, do w hat you know is right, and re
fuse to be led around like a puppet by the crowd”
(p. 22). “Take each step w ith your saviour and
He w ill safely guide you through all the dangers
which surround you on every side” (p. 23). May
our God m ake each of our young people brave
and keep them tru e to our Covenant God.
WHAT JESU S MEANS TO ME and COM
FORT FOR THE SORROWING, by W illiam
Goulooze. T he C hurch Press, 180 W. 26th St.,
Holland, Michigan, 1955. Each contains 24 pages
and is priced a t 25 cents; ten or more, 20 cents
each; one hundred or more, 15 cents each.
The Rev. Mr. Goulooze, ThD., D. D. has suf
fered m uch through several years of lingering ill
ness and pain. These sufferings have brought
him closer to the Lord in fellowship. W hile these
booklets are w ritten p rim arily for those in sor
row and pain, yet they are good reading for all.
They are w ritten in the form of short m editations
and contain m uch Scripture, num erous poems and
testimonies. T here is a healthly emphasis on th e
rich promises of our Saviour, Who suffered so
m uch for our sins.
We are sorry th a t the author has so-called
“pictures of Jesus” on the fro n t covers. No m an
or church has the pow er o r authority to repeal
the second commandment.
THERE IS NO PURGATORY, by G eorge C.
Douma. The C hurch Press, 180 W. 26th St., Hol
land, Michigan 1955, pp. 24, 25 cents per copy, 8
copies for $1.00, $10.00 per hundred.
This is a rep rin t of a serm on preached by the
pastory of C alvary Reform ed Church, 1513 E. F u l
ton Street, G rand Rapids, Michigan, O ctober 30,
1955. A ll the tenderness and fairness w hich could
be m ustered is used to prove th e statem ent of the
them e of this sermon. P astor Douma has quoted
from the approved Roman C hurch Catechism and
from the Douay version of th e Bible and A pocry
phal books. The au th o r conclusively proves his
point by showing th a t th e re is no evidence in
S cripture for a purgatory, b u t ra th e r th a t the
Bible teaches th a t th ere is no such place. This is
a good booklet for all, especially for those w ho
w ork among Roman Catholics.
74
UNDERSTANDING THE PU PIL: PART I —
THE PRE-SCHOOL CHILD, by M arjorie E. Soderholm. B aker Book House, G rand Rapids 6, Michi
gan. 1955, pp. 65, p ap er cover, plastic binding.
$1.00.
This little book is a help for teachers of very
young children in th e C hurch School or S abbath
School. T he au th o r is In stru cto r in C hristian
Education at T rin ity Sem inary and Bible College,
Chicago. A ttractively illu strated w ith photo
graphs of young children engaged in various ac
tivities, th e booklet presents a nice appearance.
The au th o r’s view point is th a t of Biblical C hris
tianity. T he book is filled w ith relev ant inform a
tion and excellent practical suggestions, and
should prove useful to anyone w ho w orks w ith
little children in th e Church.
— J. G. Vos
VACATION BIBLE SCHOOL MATERIALS:
BEGINNER, PRIMARY, JU N IO R AND INTER
MEDIATE. G reat Commission Publications, 728
Schaff Building, 1505 Race S treet, Philadelphia 2,
Pa. Prices of m aterials as follows:
B eginner T eacher’s M anual _______________ 75c
B eginner P u p il’s W orkbook _______________ 20c
B eginner W orksheets for one p u p i l _________ 8c
P rim ary T eacher’s M a n u a l_________________ 75c
P rim ary P upil’s W o rk b o o k _________________ 20c
P rim ary W orksheets for 4 p u p i l s ___________ 25c
Ju n io r T eacher’s M anual _________________ 75c
Ju n io r P u p il’s W orkbook _________________ 20c
Ju n io r W orksheets for 4 p u p ils _____________ 25c
Interm ediate T eacher’s M anual ___________ 75c
Interm ediate P u p il’s W orkbook ___________ 20c
Interm ediate W orksheets for 4 p u p ils _______ 25c
Flannel-M ap Set _______________________ $3.25
In the course of m any years of experience in
Vacation Bible School w ork the review er has
nev er seen a b e tte r set of helps th an these pu b
lished b y the Com m ittee on C hristian Education
of the O rthodox Presb y terian Church. From the
technical standpoint these m aterials are of high
quality. T he prin tin g an d p aper are goodi the
illustrations and m aps w ell done, and the whole
appearance attractive. M ore im portant th an such
considerations, however, is th e m a tte r of the theo
logical view point of the contents. The review er
has used some V acation Bible School helps from
o th er publishers w hich w ere m ost attractively
gotten up, b u t w ere m arred by the presence of A r
m inian, D ispensational and o th er form s of error.
In one case th e story of A braham offering his son
Isaac on M ount M oriah was reconstructed so th a t
A braham only im agined th a t God w anted him to
offer Isaac; it w as all a te rrib le m istake on A bra
ham ’s part. In o th er cases the A rm inian doctrine
of universal atonem ent, and related A rm inian
concepts, w ere im bedded in th e m aterial. The
A rm inian notion th a t salvation depends w holly on
a “decision” w hich th e sin n er has pow er to m ake
was sometimes prom inent. Of course, such m a
terials can be used and the erro rs counteracted or
corrected, but it is not easy to offset the influence
of erroneous theology in m aterials placed in the
hands of pupils and teachers. The tem ptation is
always to be satisfied w ith m aterials th a t are
relatively sound in th a t they are based on ac
ceptance of the Bible as true, and a re “evangeli
cal” in viewpoint, even though they are not tru ly
in harm ony w ith the system of doctrine to which
w e as a Church are bound by covenant vows.
It is a pleasure to recom m end the set of m a
terials now under review, because th ey are tru ly
in harm ony w ith the R eform ed F aith which we
are bound by covenant vows to hold and to p ro
mote. Teachers and pupils w ill not find in these
helps any false antithesis betw een th e Old T esta
m ent and th e New, nor betw een law and grace.
Nor w ill they find the A rm inian theology w hich
exalts m an and his powers. T hey w ill find in
these m aterials the system of tru th set fo rth in
the W estm inster Confession of F a ith and the
Shorter Catechism. The Biblical m aterial is ac
curately presented, too, in keeping w ith tru ly
sound exegesis. There are suitable applications
to the lives of the pupils.
The B eginner them e is “The C hildren’s
Savior”, w ith the following daily subjects: Jesus
the Savior is Born; Jesus Forgives Sin; Jesus,
Lord of Heaven and E arth ; Jesus, Lord of Life;
Jesus Loves Children; Loving Jesus Most; Jesus,
the Lowly King; Two Men D eny Jesus; Jesus
Keeps His Prom ise; Jesus Goes to Heaven. All th e
m aterials are prepared for use in a tw o-w eek
school w ith ten sessions.
The P rim ary them e is “F ath ers and Sons.”
This takes up Adam, Noah, A braham , Isaac, Jacob
and Esau, Jacob and Laban, Joseph, Joseph’s
Brothers. The Ju n io r them e is “The Ten Com
m andm ents,” w ith illustrative an d story m aterial
tak en from various p a rts of th e Bible. The In
term ediate them e is “The Exodus,” w hich includes
Biblical m aterial from the call of Moses to Israel’s
entrance into Canaan. In the In term ed iate W ork
book there is a p articularly good outline m ap
(tw o-page spread in m iddle of book) of Egypt,
the Sinai Peninsula and southern Canaan. U n
like m aps found in some helps, this one is large
enough th a t pupils can see every th in g clearly and
easily, and can w rite in it w ithout crow ding. The
same w orkbook also has some draw ings tak en
from archaeological sources illu stratin g life in
ancient Egypt which are excellent.
Each of the pupil’s w orkbooks contains tw o
or three hym ns at the back of the book. We do
not approve of this as w e a re com m itted to the
principle of exclusive use of th e inspired Psalm s
in worship. The review er was glad to note, how
ever, th a t a portion of th e 19th Psalm (four stan
75
zas w ith chorus) taken from the United P resby
te ria n P sa lte r of 1916 is included in the Junior
an d In term ed iate books.
Those w ho are looking for sound Vacation
Bible School helps of high quality and thoroughly
usable w ould do w ell to send for a sam ple set of
these m aterials.
— J. G. Vos
Books Received
The announcem ent of the books listed below should not be
list w hich we regard as having value for our readers w ill be given
in a later issue.
TO THE MESSIAH, by A lfred Edersheim . 1901,
rep rin ted 1955, pp. xxiv, 391. $3.75.
G eerhardus Vos. 1954, pp. 311. $4.00.
by
W illiam M. Ramsay. 1954, pp. 510. $4.20.
MAN OF SORROWS, by H erm an Hoeksema.
1956, pp. 129. $2.00.
by George T. Purves. 1955, pp. xx, 343. $3.00.
REDEMPTION ACCOMPLISHED AND A P
PLIED, by Jo h n M urray. 1955, pp. 236. $3.00.
1954, pp. 271. $3.50.
PHILO SO PH Y OF REVELATION, by H erm an
Bavinck. 1953, pp. x, 349. $3.50.
SCRIPTURE, by B ernard Ramm. 1954, pp. 368.
$4.00.
THE GOSPEL OF THE SPIRIT, by Sam uel
E. Pierce. 1955, pp. 104. $1.50.
THE EPISTLES OF PAUL TO THE PH IL IPPIA N S AND TO PHILEMON, by J. J. M ueller.
1955, pp. 200. $3.50.
BY GRACE ALONE, by H erm an K uiper. 1955,
pp. 165. $2.50.
TURE, by G. H. Lang. 1955, pp. 400. $3.50.
THE HOLY SPIRIT OF GOD, by W. H. G rif
fith Thomas. 1955, pp. xv, 303. $3.00.
LAND, by J. H ow ard Kitchen. 1955, pp. 160. $2.50.
Publications of Baker Book House,
Rapids 6, Mich.
Grand
DEVOTIONS AND PRAYERS OF JO H N
CALVIN, ed. by Charles E. Edwards. 1954, pp.
120, pocket size. $1.00.
THE EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS, by
R obert Johnstone. 1875, rep rin ted 1955, pp. xii.
490. $3.95.
PROPHECY AND HISTORY IN RELATION
I AND II THESSALONIANS,
H endriksen. 1955, pp. 214. $4.50.
by
W illiam
OF THE HEBREW PEOPLE, by George L. Robin
son. 1955, pp. x, 246. $2.75.
Clow. 1955, pp. 353. $2.95.
1955, pp. 71. $1.50.
THESE ALSO SUFFER, by W illiam Goulooze.
1955, pp. 86. $1.75.
Publications of Sovereign Grace Book Club, 413
S. E. First St., Evansville, Indiana
ROMANS, by R obert Haldane. Vol. II (Chap. 47), pp. 310. $2.00. Vol. HI, pp. 160. $2.00.
THE SAINTS’ EVERLASTING REST, by
Richard B axter. Photo re p rin t of 1840 edition, pp.
176. No price stated.
PRAYER, by Jo h n B unyan; THE RETURN
OF PRAYERS, by Thom as Goodwin. 1955, pp. 60,
paper cover. $1.00.
K EEPING THE HEART, by John Flavel. 1955,
Publications of The Presbyterian and Re
formed Publishing Co., P.O. Box 185, Nutley 10,
N. J.
VOICES FROM HEAVEN AND HELL, by J.
M arcellus Kik. 1955, pp. 192. $2.50.
CHRISTIANITY AND EXISTENTIALISM, by
J. M. Spier. 1953, pp. 140. $3.00.
Til.
CHRISTIANITY AND IDEALISM,
1955, pp. 139, paper cover. $1.80.
by V an
76
Publications of W. A. Wilde Co., 131 Claren
don St., Boston 16, Mass.
325 pages, paper covers, plastic binding.
stated.
MISSION ON MAIN STREET, by
B ender H enry. 1955, pp. 200. $2.75.
THE SATISFACTION OF CHRIST, by A r
thur W. Pink. Bible T ru th Depot, Swengel, Pa.
1955, pp. 313. $3.95.
Helga
TER, by Amos R. Wells. 1955, pp. 343. $2.00.
R. Wells. 1955, pp. 127. $1.50.
TION, by B ernard Ramm. 1950, pp. 197. $2.50.
BIBLE DOCTRINE: UNIT ONE BOOKS ONE
AND TWO, by D orothy P artington. Com m ittee
on C hristian Education of the O rthodox P resb y
te ria n Church. 728 Schaff Building, 1505 Race St.,
P hiladelphia 2, Pa. 1955, tw o volumes, total about
No price
TION, by Edwin H. Palm er. J. H. Kok, N. V.,
THE FREE OFFER O F THE GOSPEL, by
John M urray and Ned B. Stonehouse. Lewis J.
Grotenhuis, Belvidere Road, P hillipsburg, N. J.
1955, pp. 27, pocket size, p ap er cover. 25 cents.
TAUGHT OF THE LORD: HELPS FOR JU N
60. 8 % x ll inches, plastic binding, paper cover.
Order from Chester R. Fox, 209 N inth St., P itts
burgh 22, Pa.
Jesus I know, and P au l I know; b u t I do not
know any m an w ho sets them aside.
— Joseph P a rk e r
L et m e speak to C hristless persons who a re
a t ease. Many of you h earing m e know th a t you
a re in a C hristless state; an d y et you know th a t
you are at ease and happy. W hy is this? It is
because you hope to be b rought to C hrist before
you die. You say, another day w ill do as well,
and I w ill h e a r th ee again of this m atter; and
th erefore you tak e y our ease now. B ut this is
v ery unreasonable. It is not w o rth y of a rational
being to act in this w ay. God has now here
prom ised to bring you to C hrist before you die.
God h as laid H im self u n d er no m an n er of obliga
tion to you. He has now here prom ised th a t you
shall see tom orrow , or th a t you shall h ear another
sermon. T here is a d ay n e a r a t h and w hen you
shall not see a tom orrow . If this be not the last,
th e re is a serm on y et to be preached w hich w ill
be th e last you w ill ev er hear.
— R obert M urray McCheyne
The startin g -p o in t of every m otive in religion
is God and not m an. Man is th e in strum ent and
m eans, God alone is h ere th e goal, th e point of
d ep artu re an d th e point of arriv al, th e fountain
from w hich th e w aters flow, and at th e sam e tim e
the ocean into w hich they finally retu rn .
— A braham K uyper
God regenerates us, — th a t is to say, H e re
kindles in our h e a rt th e lam p sin h ad blow n out.
T he necessary consequence of this regeneration
is an irreconcilable conflict betw een th e in ner
w orld of our h e a rt and th e w orld outside, an d this
conflict is ever the m ore intensified th e m ore the
regenerative principle pervades o u r consciousness.
Now, in the Bible, God reveals, to th e regenerate,
a w orld of thought, a w orld of energies, a w orld
full of beautiful life, w hich stands in direct op
position to his ordinary w orld, b u t w hich proves
to agree in a w onderful w ay w ith th e new life
that has sprung up in his h eart.
— A braham K uyper
All organized comm unities, civil a n d ecclesi
astical, have a common responsibility, a m oral
personality in the sight of God, and are dealt w ith
accordingly, rew arded or punished according to
their conduct, as such. As th e ir organized ex
istence is confined to this w orld, so m ust th e r e
tributive dispensations of God respecting them be.
— C harles Hodge
It is the radical principle of th e Bible, and
consequently of all tru e religion, th a t God is all
and in all; th a t of Him, and through Him, and to
Him, are all things. It is th e tendency of all
tru th to exalt God, and to hum ble th e creature;
and it is characteristic of tru e p iety to feel th a t
all good comes from God, and to desire th a t all
glory should be given to God.
— C harles Hodge
I t is the duty of C hristians to receive kindly
their brethren, and to aid them in every w ay w ith
in th eir power, and to do th is from religious mo
tives and in a religious m anner, as becom eth
saints.
— C harles Hodge
I t is the duty of C hristians to be constantly
17
w atchful over the peace and p u rity of the Church,
and not to allow those who cause divisions and
scandals, by departing from the tru e doctrines, to
p u rsu e th e ir course unnoticed. W ith all such w e
should b reak off every connection w hich eith er
sanctions th e ir opinions an d conduct, or gives
them facilities for effecting evil.
— Charles Hodge
False teach ers have ever abounded in the
C hurch. A ll th e apostles w ere called upon earn
estly to oppose them . W itness the epistles of
P aul, John, P eter, and Jam es. No one of the
apostolical epistles is silent on this subject. Good
m en m ay indeed hold erroneous doctrines; b u t th e
false teachers, th e prom oters of heresy and di
visions, as a class, are characterized by P au l as
not influenced by a desire to serve Christ, b u t as
selfish in th e ir aims, and plausible, flattering, and
deceitful in th e ir conduct.
— Charles Hodge
C hristians should unite th e harm lessness of
th e dove w ith th e wisdom of the serpent. They
should be careful n eith er to cause divisions or
scandals them selves, nor allow others to deceive
and beguile th em into evil.
— Charles Hodge
H ow ever m uch th e Church m ay be distracted
and troubled, erro r and its advocates cannot fi
n ally prevail. S atan is a conquered enemy w ith a
lengthened chain; God w ill ultim ately bruise him
u n d er th e feet of His people.
— Charles Hodge
The v eracity of God, and not the reasonable
ness of any doctrine, is th e ground of our faith.
It is the w ork of the Gospel to cast down reason
ings against the knowledge of God, and bring into
captivity every thought unto the obedience of
Christ.
— R. P. Testimony, IV.4
The Lord Jesus, as K ing and Head of His
Church, h a th therein appointed a governm ent, in
the hand of C hurch officers, distinct from th e
civil m agistrate.
— The W estm inster Confession of Faith, X X X .l
The L ord Jesus C hrist hath instituted Church
Discipline, in order to rem ove scandals, and p re
vent th eir unhappy effects; and no C hurch can,
w ithout the faithful and spiritual application of
it, hope for His countenance and blessing.
— R. P. Testimony, XXXI.3
The trouble w ith the paganism of ancient
Greece, as w ith the paganism of m odem times,
was not in th e superstructure, w hich w as glorious,
b u t in the foundation, w hich w as rotten.
F aith is being exalted so high today th a t m en
are being satisfied w ith any kind of faith, ju st so
it is faith.
A t the very root of the m odern liberal m ove
m ent is th e loss of the consciousness of sin.
Paganism is optim istic w ith regard to unaided
h um an nature, w hereas C hristianity is th e r e
ligion of the broken heart.
SEM IPELAGIANISM . A theological system
of th e M iddle Ages, essentially th e same as the
A rm inianism of the present day. Sem ipelagianism
tau g h t: 1. T h at w hat God does tow ard saving any,
He does equally for all. 2. T hat Christ died for
all m en. 3. T hat man, before receiving divine
grace, can have faith in C hrist and holy desires.
4. T h a t m an ’s free will, by which he accepts divine
grace, has not been rendered im potent by sin. This
system is pro p erly called Cassianism, after Cassian, its prom oter.
SLANDER. U ttering false speeches against
o u r neighbor, to th e prejudice of his fame, safety,
w elfare; and th a t out of malignity, vanity, ra sh
ness, ill n a tu re or bad design. (Buck’s Theologi
cal D ictionary).
SOUL. T h at elem ent of the hum an personali
ty w hich is n o t composed of m aterial substance,
which cannot die, w hich m akes m an different
from th e anim als, and w hich is the seat of the
im age of God in man. The soul is also called th e
sp irit a n d the mind, w ith em phasis on its various
characteristics.
SYNERGISM. A heresy of the Reform ation
period w hich held th a t the salvation of sinners is
p artly accomplished by divine pow er and partly
by hum an power. T he term literally m eans
“w orking together.” Synergism is opposed to
M onergism, w hich holds th at the salvation of sin
ners is accomplished by divine power alone, sinful
m an having no pow er of his ow n to w ill o r do
w h at is spiritually good.
TABERNACLE. The portable ten t sanctuary
constructed by the Israelites in the w ilderness in
the tim e of Moses, w hich w as used as th e center
78
of th eir religious w orship until th e Tem ple was
built by Solomon. No stru ctu re used for C hristian
w orship should ever be called either a tabernacle
or a tem ple, for th e typical w orship associated
w ith both belonged to the Old T estam ent period
of figures and shadows only.
TALMUD. A collection of Jew ish w ritings,
composed a fte r the tim e of C hrist (about A.D. 270500), constituting an explanation of and com m en
tary on th e te x t of th e Old Testam ent.
TARGUMS. A collection of p araphrases of
the H ebrew Old T estam ent in th e A ram aic lan
guage, m ade in th e th ird an d fo u rth centuries af
te r Christ. T he Targum s w ere read by those who
could read A ram aic b u t n o t Hebrew.
TOLERATION. T he act of a governm ent or
ru le r in perm itting som ething w hich is not fully
approved. Religious to leration differs from r e
ligious lib erty in th a t th e fo rm er is based upon
th e assum ption th a t th e S tate has jurisdiction over
the sphere of religion, (whereas th e la tte r is based
upon th e assum ption th a t th e S tate does not have
jurisdiction over th e sphere o r religion. I t is
therefore a m istake to reg ard toleration as equiv
alent to liberty.
TRANSUBSTANTIATION. T he Roman Catho
lic erro r concerning th e L ord’s Supper, which
holds th a t the bread and w ine are m iraculously
changed into th e real body and blood of Christ,
w hile retaining only th e qualities of bread and
wine.
TRENT, COUNCIL OF. The R om an Catholic
council w hich m et a t in terv als from 1545 to 1563
to decide th e issues raised by th e P ro te stan t
Reform ation. The decrees of th e Council of T rent
constitute basic dogma of th e Rom an Catholic
C hurch today, and m ark th a t body as apostate
from B iblical C hristianity.
UNIVERSALISM. T he d octrine th a t all h u
m an beings shall finally be saved unto eternal
life. Those who hold this doctrine base it upon
general considerations such as th e goodness of
God. It is, how ever, d irectly co n trary to num er
ous statem ents of Scripture.
VISION. 1. A mode of divine revelation in
Bible times, in which a visual im pression was
made upon the hum an consciousness w hile the
person was awake. 2. A m ore general term m ean
ing supernatural divine revelation, as in Dan.
9:24. (The common m odern usage of “vision” as
meaning intelligent aw areness of th e fu tu re pos
sibilities of something, is not found in th e Bible).
WESTMINSTER. A p a rt of London, England,
in which is located W estm inster Abbey, the m ost
renowned church building in the B ritish Common
w ealth and Empire. T he spelling “W estm inister”
which is sometimes seen is incorrect and rests up
on th e m istaken notion th a t the nam e has som e
connection w ith the w ord “m in ister” m eaning a
clergyman. Actually, “m inster” is derived from
the Latin w ord for “m onastery.”
WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY. The historic
special synod called by the English P arliam en t
during the reign of C harles I to se ttle th e govern
ment, liturgy and doctrine of th e C hurch of E ng
land. This synod m et first in 1643 and continued
several years.
WESTMINSTER STANDARDS. T he historic
doctrinal and adm inistrative stan d ard s of w orld
Presbyterianism , produced by the W estm inster
Assembly about the m iddle of th e 17th century.
These standards include th e W estm inster Confes
sion of Faith, the L arger Catechism , th e S h o rter
Catechism, a Form of C hurch G overnm ent and a
D irectory for W orship.
WILL-WORSHIP. W ays of w orshipping God
not appointed in His W ord, b u t derived from h u
man reason, preference, or tradition. W ill-w orship is sinful even though th e m otive prom pting
it m ay be a pious one.
WORKS, GOOD. Those acts of a regenerate
person which are com m anded in S cripture and are
perform ed w ith a m otive of love to God.
WRATH OF GOD. God’s absolutely righteous
anger at sin, and His infliction of deserved p u n
ishm ent upon those guilty of sin.
Studies in the Book o f Genesis
LESSON 111
m . History of the Covenant People from Abra
for his son Jacob soon comes to occupy the center
of attention. The ch aracter of Isaac as portrayed
4.
The history of Isaac, Jacob and Esau. 25:19 in Genesis is ra th e r passive th an active; in this
respect Isaac form s a contrast to his fa th e r A b ra
to 35:29, cont.
ham. Also, there is little th a t is original in the life
We now come to ch ap ter 26 of the Book of
of Isaac; most of the recorded events are p arallel to
Genesis. This ch ap ter deals w ith events in the
sim ilar events in the life of A braham (the b a r
life of Isaac, and portray s th e only scenes w e have
renness of his wife, danger in G erar, trea tm e n t
in w hich Isaac is the m ost prom inent character,
by Abimelech, two sons of each p atriarch differ
79
ing sh arp ly in character). This passive an d u n
original ch aracter of Isaac serves to bring out a
principle of God’s plan of redem ption and rev ela
tion. “T he redeem ing w ork of God passes by its
v ery n a tu re through th ree stages. Its beginnings
a re m ark ed by a high degree of energy and p ro
d u ctivity; they are creative beginnings. The m id
dle stage is a stage of suffering an d self-surrender,
an d is therefo re passive in its aspect. This in tu rn is
follow ed b y th e resum ed energy of the subjective!
transform ation, characterizing the third stage.
Now th e m iddle one of these stages is represented
by Isaac. T he principle finds expression, how
ever, n o t m erely in the general lack of originality,
b u t m ore positively also in th e account of th e d e
m anded sacrifice of Isaac” (G. Vos, Biblical
Theology, p. 106). The stru ctu re of the plan of
redem ption and revelation ju st described finds its
fu llest realization, of course, in th e Biblical stru c
tu re of th e h isto ry of redem ption. The p re p a ra
to ry period from Adam to C hrist (“creative b e
ginnings”) is represented by th e active life of
A braham ; th e period of C hrist’s earthly m inistry
and passion (“suffering and self-surrender” ) is
rep resen ted b y th e quiet, passive' life of Isaac; th e
period o f application, from C hrist’s resurrection
to th e end of tim e (“resum ed energy of subjective
tran sfo rm atio n ” ) is represented by the life of
Jacob w ith its new activity and subjective tra n s
form ation.
The' common m ethod of treatm en t Of the h is
to ry of th e patriarchs, as seen countless tim es in
S abbath School lesson helps and the like, errs, w e
believe, in placing th e chief emphasis on the p e r
sonal ch aracter of these men. T heir character is
not th e m ost im portant thing; w hat is m ost im
p o rta n t is th e ir place and function in th e divine
plan. “In the1 history of revelation, character is
not to be regard ed as an ultim ate datum ; the rev e
lation does not spring from th e character; on the
contrary, th e ch aracter is predeterm ined by the
necessities of th e revelation” (G. Vos, Biblical
Theology, p. 106). This m eans th a t A braham ,
Isaac and Jacob w ere not vehicles of revelation
because th e ir character fitted them to be such, b u t
on th e c o n trary th a t th eir character became w h at
it w as because God had chosen them to be ve
hicles of revelation. It w as not a case of God find
ing men fit to be channels of revelation, b u t of God
m aking them such. In oth er words, th eir ch ar
acter w as th e product, not th e source, of th eir
place in th e divine structure of redem ption-revelation. O ur religiously m an-centered age tends to
th in k of ch aracter ra th e r than of redem ption, and
of ethics ra th e r than theology.
The first incident recorded in chapter 26 is a
fam ine in th e land of Canaan. This was about a
cen tu ry since the fam ine in A braham ’s tim e
(12:10). Isaac w ent to G erar, in the Philistine
coun try along th e southw est coast of Palestine.
T he k in g of th e Philistines is called Abimelech.
I t is u n certain w h eth er th is is a personal nam e,
or a title of all P hilistine kings, like “P haraoh”
in E gypt and “C aesar” in Rome. In any case, the
A bim elech of ch ap ter 26 w as probably not the
sam e individual as the one in chapter 20.
W hile Isaac is living a t G erar, th e Lord ap
pears to him and w arns him not to en ter Egypt.
It is possible th a t Isaac w as planning to go to
Egypt, as A braham had done. B ut God forbids
this, and the w ord to Isaac is: “dwell in the land
w hich I shall tell thee of.” This m eans th at Isaac
is to dw ell w herever God m ay direct him to from
tim e to time. H e is to sojourn in th e lan d of
Canaan, and God w ill be w ith him, and w ill bless
him.
Next, th e divine prom ises to A braham a re re
new ed to Isaac. T he oath sw orn by God to A bra
ham shall certainly be perform ed. The promises
are th ree in num ber: (1) th e inheritance of the
land; (2) num erous posterity; (3) blessings to
come to all the nations of the earth through Isaac’s
seed. The statem en t of the promises is followed
by the statem ent: “Because th a t A braham obeyed
m y voice, and kep t m y charge', m y com m and
m ents, m y statutes, and m y laws.” This is a
strong em phasis on A braham ’s faithful obedience
to God. Y et th e basis of the prom ises is not m an’s
faithfulness b u t Jehovah’s oath, as seen by th e last
clause of verse 3; th e basis Of the prom ises is not
hum an w orks b u t divine grace. “Moses does not
m ean th a t A braham ’s obedience w as the reason
w hy th e prom ise of God w as confirm ed and ra ti
fied to him ; b u t from w h a t has been said before,
(chap. 22:18), w h ere w e have a sim ilar expres
sion, w e learn, th a t w h at God freely bestows upon
th e faith fu l is sometimes, beyond th e ir desert,
ascribed to them selves; th a t they, know ing th e ir
intention to be approved by the Lord, m ay th e
m ore ardently addict and devote them selves en
tire ly to his service: so he' now commends the
obedience of A braham , in o rd er th a t Isaac m ay be
stim ulated to an im itation of his exam ple” (C al
vin).
As Isaac continues to dw ell a t G erar, he re
peats A braham ’s sin of untruthfulness, telling the
m en of G erar th a t his w ife is his sister. I t is
strange th a t Isaac had not learned from th e h is
to ry of his fa th e r the w rongness and folly of such
conduct; but, as L eupold comments, sin is never
logical. T he lib eral critics, of course, allege th a t
this incident is ju st an o th er version of th e “leg
end” about A braham in ch apter 20. B ut this is
show n to be u n tru e by th e clear differences be
tw een th e two accounts. In ch apter 20 there' w as
no fam ine; in chap. 26 th ere is one. In chap. 20
S arah w as actually taken, b u t in chap. 26 Re
bekah is not tak en by th e Philistines. In chapter
20 God intervened to solve th e problem, b u t in
chap. 26 the discovery is accidentally m ade by
A bim elech th a t R ebekah is Isaac’s w ife not his
sister. M oreover, in chap. '20 A braham is given a
lavish gift, b u t in chap. 26 th e re is no m ention of
80
such a transaction. Clearly, then, the two ac
counts, though they have th e ir m ain them e in
common, d iffer g reatly in circum stances and d e
tails. C ertainly th ere is no reason for identify
ing the tw o or regarding eith er of them as a m ere
“legend” as th e critics ten d to do. The critics fail
to realize th a t history repeats itself; they reason
as if the sam e k in d of sin can be com m itted only
once in a given fam ily line.
“A nd it cam e to pass, w hen he had been
th ere a long time, th a t A bim elech king of the
Philistines looked out a t a w indow , and saw, and,
behold, Isaac w as sporting w ith R ebekah his
w ife” (26:8). T he w ord “sporting” L eupold
tran slates as “caressing.” Obviously this w as not
th e w ay a m an w ould tre a t his sister; therefore,
the king concludes, she m ust be his wife. Isaac
is sum m oned and charged w ith u n truthfulness. It
is certainly a sham e to the covenant people of
God w hen th e people of th e w orld can justly
charge them w ith being unethical. Isaac m ust
have been te rrib ly ashamed. H aving no real
excuse, all he can say is th a t he feared death on
account of R ebekah being his wife.
Isaac is duly reb u k ed by Abimelech, who
possibly rem em bers h earing about th e incident
concerning A braham
(chap. 20). Thereupon
Abim elech issues strict orders to his people th a t
n either Isaac n o r Rebekah is to be molested, on
penalty of death (26:11). In this history w e can
see not only th e sham eful lapse of Isaac into sin,
b u t also th e common grace of God at w ork among
th e Philistines.
Even w here salvation is not
found, God’s com m on grace operates restraining
sin and prom oting civic righteousness. A bim e
lech was not, like Isaac, h eir to redem ptive prom
ises of God; b u t h e is used by God to restrain
hum an sinfulness and m aintain law, order and
justice in hum an society.
Questions:
1. How may the ch aracter of Isaac as por
trayed in Genesis be described?
2. How can we explain the fact th a t Isaac
appears as a ra th e r passive character, lacking in
originality?
3. How are the successive stages or periods of
God’s historical w ork of redem ption illustrated
by the history of A braham , Isaac and Jacob?
4. Which is m ore im p o rtan t in th e history of
the patriarchs, th eir character or th e ir function in
the divine plan? Why?
5. How long after the fam ine of A braham ’s
day was the fam ine in Isaac’s day?
6. W hy did Isaac not en ter E gypt in th e tim e
of famine?
7. W hat divine promises a re renew ed to Isaac?
8. W hat is the basis or ground of these prom
ises?
9. W hy is A braham ’s obedience strongly
stressed by the Lord im m ediately a fte r giving the
promises to Isaac?
10. W hat view do lib eral critics take of the
incident of Isaac representing Rebekah as his
sister?
11. Why was this incident p articu larly sham e
ful on Isaac’s part?
12. How is God’s common grace shown in
this account?
LESSON 112
him” (26:13,14). We know th a t A braham was a
rich man (13'r2), but evidently Isaac’s m aterial
w ealth far surpassed th a t of his father. We may
4.
The history of Isaac, Jacob and Esau. 25:19 note in passing th at the Bible never represents
to 35:29, cont.
m aterial w ealth as an evil in itself. It is not sin
ful to possess w ealth th a t has been honestly gain
“Then Isaac sowed in th a t land, and received
ed. W hat is sinful is ra th e r (a) acquisition of
in th e sam e y e a r a hundredfold: and th e Lord
w ealth by dishonest m eans, and (b) godless and
blessed him ” (26:12). Isaac is the first of the
selfish use of wealth.
patriarchs to engage in any form of agriculture,
so fa r as is show n by th e record. T here is no
The possession of w ealth, how ever, m ay cre
record of A braham planting seed or harvesting
ate problems, and in Isaac’s case it created a prob
crops. This, therefore, is at least one elem ent
lem in th a t the Philistines cam e to envy his
of originality in th e life of Isaac. Isaac stands on
great
prosperity. This envious attitu d e on the
th e borderline betw een nom adic life and settled
part of the Philistines, m oreover, led to lawless
life. The bountiful h arv est reaped was due, we
action on th eir part: they filled in th e w ells w hich
are inform ed, to th e blessing of th e Lord.
the servants of A braham h a d dug. In a country
w here w ater supply is so critically im portant, this
“A nd th e m an w ax ed great, and w ent forw ard,
was a very provocative act. M oreover, this w as
and grew till he becam e v ery great: fo r he had
an act m otivated by pure spite. To cut off Isaac’s
possession of flocks, and possession of herds, and
w ater supply would certain ly n o t benefit the
g reat store of servants: and th e P hilistines envied
81
P hilistines in any way. If the Philistines had
m erely claim ed the w ells as th eir own and refused
Isaac’s servants access to them , th eir action,
though still lawless, could be regarded as m otivat
ed b y need for w ater. B ut once th e wells w ere
filled in w ith earth they would be of use to no
one — n e ith e r to Isaac nor to the Philistines.
F inally the Philistines add insult to in jury
and te ll Isaac “Go from us; for thou a rt m uch
m ightier th a n w e” (26:16). As Leupold rem arks,
this com m and w as a com bination of an ungracious
attitu d e w ith flattery. Isaac is a m an who seeks
peace and pursues it. He therefore peaceably
w ith d raw s from the im m ediate locality and moves
his establishm ent fa rth e r up the valley (southeast
of G erar). If th e statem ent of the Philistines was
tru e, th a t Isaac was m uch m ore pow erful th an
they, he could have forced th e issue and insisted
on his rights. He prefers, instead, to avoid strife
by not insisting upon his law ful rights.
In th e new location, Isaac patiently un d er
takes th e re-digging of some of the old wells
originally dug by Abraham , w hich the Philistines
had filled in w ith earth. These wells are p re
sum ably not th e sam e ones as those nearer G erar,
w hich w ere m entioned in verse 15. The n arra tiv e
seems to im ply th a t Isaac abandoned some of the
old w ells, m oved to a new location, and th en p ro
ceeded to re-d ig other old wells to ensure a w ater
supply. We should realize th at Isaac’s large'
flocks and h erd s w ould range over a large tract
of coun try an d a g reat m any wells w ere probably
involved. Isaac re-nam es the re-opened wells, u s
ing th e original nam es given to them by A bra
ham , th u s establishing his rightful claim to them.
T he new digging operations occasioned fu r
th e r tro u b le w ith the Philistines, however. Dig
ging in th e valley, Isaac’s servants find a w ell of
springing w ater, th a t is, running water. Obvious
ly this new w ell belonged to Isaac, as his servants
h ad dug it. Y et th e Philistines claim it as theirs.
So th e w ell w as nam ed Esek, which means con
tention.
A gain Isaac shows his great-hearted forb ear
ance by abandoning th e new (and valuable) w ell
ra th e r th an le t it be an occasion of strife. A nother
location is decided on; another w ell is dug; and
again th e Philistines claim it. Did they think
Isaac w as soft, or did they think he was really
afraid of them ? The arrogant and aggressive never
u n d erstan d th e tru e m otive of those w ho love
peace and a re w illing to sacrifice for it. T hey re
gard th e m an of forbearance as an easy m ark, to
be fu rth e r imposed upon. Isaac calls the new
well Sitnah (hostility), abandons it to the Philis
tines, and tries in another location.
“A nd he m oved from thence” (26:22a). This
presum ably m eans th a t Isaac m oved his entire es
tablishm ent to a m ore distant location — a m atter
involving a good deal of w ork and trouble. A noth
er w ell is dug, “and for th a t they strove not.”
The reason for this absence of strife is not stated.
P erhaps it was the m ere distance from G erar; per
haps the Philistines w ere finally sham ed into a
m easure of hum an decency. Isaac calls this last
well Rehoboth, w hich m eans “Sufficient room.”
He states: “Now the Lord h a th m ade room for
us, and we shall be fru itfu l in the land” (26:22b).
The statem ent about fruitfulness probably refers
to num erical increase of th e fam ily (note verse
4).
Questions:
1. W hat new activity is ascribed to Isaac in
26:12?
2. W hat w as the rate of increase obtained by
Isaac?
3. To w h at is this productivity attrib u ted by
the record?
4. W hat w as the economic status of Isaac at
this time?
5. W hat is the Bible’s attitu d e
possession of w ealth?
6. W hat problem arose
w ealth?
from
tow ard the
Isaac’s
great
7. W hat lawless action was p erpetrated by the
Philistines?
8. W hat m otive led the Philistines to act as
they did?
9. How did the Philistines add insult to in
jury?
10. W hy did Isaac not insist upon his legal
rights?
11. How did Isaac notify th e public of his law
ful claim to the new ly re-dug wells?
12. W hat is the m eaning of the words Esek,
Sitnah and Rehoboth?
13. W hat m ay have been the reason or reasons
w hy the Philistines did not strive for the posses
sion of the last well?
LESSON 113
III. History of the Covenant People from Abra
4.
to 35:29, cont.
N ext, Isaac w ent up to Beersheba. This place,
which form ed th e traditional southern lim it of
Palestine, is said to be actually of low er altitude
th an G erar. It seem s th a t “the general expres
sion for approaching any p a rt of Palestine from
the southw est is to ‘go up’ ” (Leupold).
82
“A nd th e L ord appeared unto h im th e same
n ig h t” (26:24a). This is th e second and last tim e
th a t the L ord is said to have appeared to Isaac
(th e first tim e w as in 26:2). J u s t w hat the mode
of this appearance was, w e a re not informed. We
m ay be sure th a t a very deep im pression w as p ro
duced upon Isaac.
The covenant relationship is confirm ed: “I
am the God of A braham th y fath er: fe a r not, for
I am w ith thee, and w ill bless thee, and m ultiply
th y seed for m y servant A braham ’s sake” (26:24),
We should note h ere the divine initiative and the
unconditional ch aracter of this covenant promise.
It is not an agreem ent betw een God and Isaac, by
w hich God w ill do certain things if Isaac does
certain things; rath er, it is an absolute, uncon
ditional statem en t of fact (“I am th e God of A bra
h am th y fa th e r . . . I am w ith th ee”) and of
prom ise (“I w ill bless thee, an d m ultiply thy
seed”). This is to be done “for m y servant A bra
ham ’s sake,” th a t is, because of God’s gracious
prom ise and oath to A braham . The B iblical idea
of a covenant betw een God and m an is often ob
scured a t th e p resen t day b y speaking of this re
lationship as an “agreem ent” o r a “com pact”
w ithout a t th e sam e tim e bringing Out clearly
th a t the initiative is w ith God, all the pow er is of
God, and all the term s are specified by God. Man
is th e recipient of th e covenant relationship; God
and m an a re n ev er regarded as equals o r negoti
ating parties. It is p articu larly im portant in our
day to em phasize th e sovereignty of God in th e
covenant relationship, because th e overw helm ing
tendency of th e day is to em phasize m an — his
decisions, activities, pow ers — ra th e r th a n God.
Isaac responds to G od’s appearing to him, by
building an a lta r a t th e place, and solem nly w or
shipping th e L ord th ere (“called upon th e nam e
of the L ord”) (26:25). The offering of sacrifice
on the a lta r is n o t specifically m entioned, b u t is
implied. A n a lta r h a d no oth er use th an to offer
sacrifices on it. T he m odern m etaphorical use of
th e term “a lta r”, as fo r exam ple in such expres
sions as “th e fam ily a lta r” (m eaning the practice
of fam ily w orship in th e hom e) is unknow n in th e
Bible. A n a lta r in S cripture is a lite ra l object on
w hich lite ra l sacrifices w ere offered. O nly in the
N ew T estam ent E pistles (H ebrew s 13:10) is the
concept of “an a lta r” spiritualized to re fe r to the
benefits purchased by C h rist’s death on the cross.
Som ething can be said fo r a re tu rn to the old term
“fam ily w orship” in place of th e m ore recently
popular expression “fam ily a lta r.”
Isaac shows his devotion to th e L ord by pitch
ing his te n t a t or n e a r th e spot w here the Lord
appeared to him. A gain his servants dig a well,
th is one being n e a r th e a lta r and Isaac’s tent.
The n e x t developm ent is th e establishm ent of
a covenant betw een Isaac an d the Philistines. The
initiative in this w as tak en by Abim elech and his
officers (26:26). I t is possible th a t Phicol w as a
standard Philistine title for th e com m ander of the1
army. Isaac seems surprised th a t th ey approach
him, and rem arks th at th e ir action is inconsistent.
They hate him, and have driven him away; yet
they come seeking to establish a pact of friend
ship w ith him. It is quite u n derstandab le th at
Isaac should rebuke them in this m anner. They
well deserved it after th e w ay th ey had treated
Isaac.
The Philistine leaders then state th e ir reason,
which is th at it is obvious th a t Isaac and his es
tablishm ent are being specially blessed by the
Lord. This being the case, th ey consider it ad
visable to be on good term s w ith him . Accord
ingly, they propose a pact in th e form of a cove
nant ratified w ith an oath. Isaac is asked to
pledge him self to do the Philistines no h u rt. They
add in support of this plea, “as w e hav e done
thee nothing b u t good, and have sen t th ee aw ay
in peace.” In view of the high-handed action of
the Philistines in the disputes over the wells, this
is a rem arkable claim, to say the least. Leupold
suggests th a t Abim elech and Phicol m ay have
been indeed innocent of th e m a tte r about the
wells. This, however, cannot excuse them , for
the covenant which is sought is not to be betw een
Isaac and these men as individuals, b u t betw een
him representing his clan an d them representing
th eir nation. In this self-righteous claim of the
Philistine leaders w e have a specim en of the easy
going falsification of facts to w hich diplom atic
negotiators are peculiarly liable. Someone has
rem arked th at an am bassador is a m an sent
abroad to tell lies fo r his country. W hile this is
of course an exaggeration, y e t diplom atic negoti
ations have often been characterized by distortion
and suppression of the tru th .
Isaac no doubt realizes th a t the claim of
Abimelech and Phicol (“w e have done unto thee
nothing but good” ) cannot be en tirely sincere.
However, argum ent over th e m a tte r w ould be use
less, so the peace-loving Isaac does not dispute
th eir claim, but agrees l o th e ir req u est fo r a
covenant.
“And he m ade them a feast, and th ey did eat
and drink. A nd th ey rose u p betim es in the
morning, and sw are one to another: and Isaac sen t
them away, and they d ep arted from him in peace”
(26:30,31). According to the usual custom of the
day in such m atters, Isaac p repares a feast for
his guests. E arly the follow ing m orning the oaths
are sworn by the tw o parties, a fte r w hich Isaac
lets them depart from him in peace. We see h e re
in Isaac’s readiness to do all in h is pow er for the
sake of peace. A fter the w ay th e P hilistines had
treated him, he m ight have refused to have any
dealings w ith them. B u t instead of this, he over
looks past wrongs and seeks a stable peace for
the future.
It is w orthy of note th a t the Philistines b e
lieve th a t Isaac w ill reg a rd an oath as binding and
83
w ill keep his oath. O therw ise it would not have
been w o rth w hile seeking an oath-bound covenant
w ith him . T heir dislike of Isaac did not keep
them from recognizing th a t his religion involved
a high ethical standard.
The pact betw een Isaac and the Philistines is
to b e reg ard ed as a civil bond only and did not
involve any compromise on Isaac’s part w ith the
religion of th e Philistines, n o r an y religious fel
low ship betw een the tw o parties. W hether th e
P hilistine leaders swore by the nam e of Jehovah
or by th e nam e of th eir own gods is not stated.
A t all events th ere is no evidence th a t Isaac
raised any questions about this point.
Questions:
1. W hat place was the traditional southern
lim it of Palestine?
2. W hat experience did Isaac have a t this
place?
3. W hat is m eant by “the divine initiative of
th e covenant prom ise”?
4. W hat is m eant by the “unconditional ch ar
ac te r” of th e covenant promise?
5. How does the common use of the term s
“agreem ent” an d “compact” tend to obscure the
B iblical idea of a covenant betw een God and
man?
6. W hat w as Isaac’s response to God’s ap
pearing to him?
7. W hat is a n altar?
8. W hat should be thought about the common
use of the term “fam ily a lta r” to m ean the prac
tice of fam ily worship?
9. W hat inconsistency did the Philistine lead
ers m anifest in approaching Isaac?
10. W hy did the P hilistines consider it ad
visable to be on good term s w ith Isaac?
11. W hat claim did the P hilistine leaders
m ake concerning th e ir past treatm e n t of Isaac?
12. W hy can this claim not be regarded as en
tirely sincere?
13. W hat request did the Philistines m ake of
Isaac?
14. W hat was Isaac’s response to th e ir re
quest?
15. W hat does Isaac’s response show concern
ing his character?
16. W hat w as the n a tu re of the bond betw een
Isaac and the Philistines?
LESSON 114
A t this point Esau is m entioned. A t th e age
of fo rty years he m arried tw o H ittite women,
4.
The history of Isaac, Jacob and Esau. 25:19 nam ely Ju d ith the daughter of Beeri, and Basem ath the d aughter of Elon. Moses states th a t
to 35:29, cont.
these H ittite w ives of Esau “w ere a grief of m ind
“A nd it cam e to pass the same day, th a t
unto Isaac and to R ebekah” (26:34, 35). This
Isaac’s serv an ts came, and told him concerning
double m arriage w ith women of alien race and
th e w ell w hich they had digged, a n d said unto
pagan religion indicates E sau’s lack of concern
him, We have found w ater. And he called it
fo r sp iritual things. This is quite in keeping w ith
S hebah: th erefo re the nam e of th e city is BeerEsau’s attitu d e in despising his birthright. Esau
sheba unto th is day” (26:32, 33). The happy o u t
has a godly background b u t he is interested in
come of th e search for w ater, on th e very sam e
the things of the w orld, not in the things of God.
day th a t th e covenant had been sworn betw een
W hile presum ably claim ing to be a believer in
Isaac an d th e Philistines, was of course not the
Jehovah, Esau is one of those people w ho do n o t
re su lt of chance, but th e product of divine provi
intend to let th e ir religion get in th e ir w ay. H e
dence. This w as a special blessing from God to
is a specimen of those w ho profess to serve God,
Isaac w ho h ad certainly gone “th e second m ile” in
b u t actually conform th eir lives to th e w orld’s
seeking a peaceable existence. Isaac called the
standards.
new w ell “S hebah”. This w ord m eans “seven” or
“an oath.” B eer-sheba properly means “w ell of
W hat w as it about Esau’s H ittite w ives th a t
seven.” T here was apparently some connection
caused grief of m ind to Isaac and Rebekah?
betw een th e idea of “seven” and the idea of “an
Among other things, Esau’s polygam y m ay have
oath.” N ote Gen. 21:30-32, w here A braham called
grieved his parents. A part from that, it was
th e sam e place B eer-sheba ("w ell of the seven” )
doubtless th e co rru p t pagan religious and m oral
because A bim elech had accepted seven ewe lam bs
standards of these women. T here is no reason to
from A braham as a witness th a t A braham had
suppose th a t these H ittite women becam e believ
dug th e w ell. Isaac in his tim e renam ed th e place,
ers in Jehovah, nor th a t Esau w as inclined to seek
using th e nam e given it by his fath er A braham
th e ir conversion to th e Lord. M ixed m arriages
m any y ears previously.
betw een believers and unbelievers a re forbidden
84
in th e W ord of God. A part from th e fact th at
th ey are w rong because forbidden by God, such
m arriages a re open to the m ost serious objection
because of th e w ell-know n fact th a t the alm ost
invariable re su lt is th a t the believer is influenced
by the standards of th e unbeliever, ra th e r than
vice versa.
C h ap ter 27 opens w ith Isaac in advanced age,
his eyesight failing — if indeed he w as not al
ready to tally blind. T he p atriarch ’s age at this
point is com puted as 137 years (cf. 25:26; 31:38;
41:46; 47:9). A t this sam e tim e Jacob w as about
77 years old, and Esau of course w as of th e sam e
age. T he common idea th a t Jacob at the tim e of
his going to L aban was a m ere you th in his teens
is therefore co n trary to th e facts.
Isaac evidently feels th a t his d e a th is ap
proaching. It is possible th a t he was influenced
by th e fact th a t his h alf-b ro th er Ishm ael had died
a t the age of 137 y ears (25:17). As a m a tte r of
fact, Isaac lived 43 m ore years, and died at the
age of 180 years (35:28, 29). B u t the p a tria rc h of
course did not know th a t he still had 43 years to
live. Som e com m entators have supposed th a t
Isaac had been sick and th a t th is led him to sup
pose th a t his d eath w as near.
Believing th a t he would soon die (27:2) Isaac
calls fo r his son Esau, w ho seem s to have been his
favorite. E sau is com m anded to tak e his bow and
arrow s and shoot a deer, th a t he m ay prepare
venison such as Isaac loved. Isaac w ill eat th e
venison and bless Esau before h e dies.
This raises th e problem how Isaac could p ro
pose to give th e blessing to Esau, know ing as he
did th a t G od had chosen Jacob (25:23). True,
Isaac’s action is overruled by God, and Jacob gets
th e blessing, b u t still w e cannot u n d erstand how
as godly a m an as Isaac could disregard so clear
a revelation of God’s purpose as 25:23. Leupold’s
comment is perhaps the best explanation possible:
“He th a t knows the duplicity and treach ery of the
hum an heart w ill not fin d it difficult to u n d er
stand how a m an w ill circum vent a w ord of God,
no m atter how clear it be, if his h e a rt is really
set on w hat is at variance w ith th a t w ord” (Leupold, Exposition of Genesis, II, p. 736).
Questions:
1. W hat happy event occurred th e same day
that Isaac m ade a covenant w ith Abimelech?
2. W hat is the lesson ta u g h t by this event?
3. W hat is the m eaning of Shebah? Of B eersheba?
4. Whom did Esau m arry a t the age of forty
years?
5. W hat was the effect of Esau’s m arriage on
Isaac and Rebekah?
6. W hat does Esau’s m arriag e show concern
ing his character and standards?
7. W hat objections can be urged against m ixed
m arriages betw een believers and unbelievers?
8. How old w as Isaac a t the opening o f C hap
ter 27?
9. How old w as Jacob at this sam e time?
10. W hat was Isaac’s physical condition at the
time?
11. W hat may have led him to th in k he would
die soon?
12. How can w e explain Isaac’s p referential
treatm en t of Esau w hen h e kn ew th e divine
revelation of 25:23?
LESSON 115
m . History of the Covenant People from Abra
could regard them as equivalent to a prayer. B ut
the blessing which Isaac proposed to pronounce
upon his son involves m ore th a n this. I t involves
4.
The History of Isaac, Jacob and Esau. 25:19
a supernatural factor and is really a prophecy.
to 35:29, cont.
We m ay say th at it is not m erely a wish or a
Isaac’s req u est for venison rem inds us th at
prayer for the blessing, b u t a conferring of the
conditions have changed vastly in P alestine since
blessing. God w ould honor it and it w ould come
the days of th e P atriarchs. T here is little or no
tru e in due time. T h at th e blessing w as reg a rd
forest in P alestin e today except th e ran k jungle
ed as being su pernaturally effective is proved by
a t the bottom of th e Jo rd a n Valley. In P a tr i
Isaac’s statem ent in 27:33 ( “I have blessed him.
archal tim es, how ever, a large p a rt of th e country
Yea, and he shall be blessed” ).
w as still wooded. T he w atershed ridge' and the
The question has been asked, W hy did Isaac
w estern slope w ere heavily forested (Unger,
w ant to p artak e of specially prep ared venison be
Archeology and the Old Testam ent, p. 113).
fore pronouncing the p atriarch al blessing? Some
It seem s to have been a custom of those tim es
have suggested th at he needed this to get bodily
th a t pious m en should pronounce a form al bless
strength to pronounce a good blessing. O thers
ing upon th e ir sons before th e ir death. In the
have' supposed th a t it w as needed for a psycho
case of ord in ary godly people, such blessing would
logical reason, to get Isaac in th e pro p er mood
be the expression of pious wishes, or perhaps w e
for the occasion. Leupold rejects both of these
85
ideas, holding th a t the probable reason w as th at
a festive m eal would im part solem nity to the oc
casion.
T he expression “th at m y soul m ay bless th ee”
req u ires som e explanation. W hile th e word “soul”
is often used w ithout any distinctive m eaning, be
ing sim ply th e equivalent of “I” or “me,” still in
th e p resen t case m ore seem s to be m eant th an
m erely “th a t I m ay bless thee.” T he use of the
w o rd “soul” h ere seems to im ply th a t Isaac’s in
n e r or deepest personality would participate in
im p artin g the blessing on his son.
Esau, as instructed, has gone off to the hills
to h u n t deer. M eantime, R ebekah becomes active.
S he w as eavesdropping w hen Isaac gave his in
structions to Esau. Im m ediately she form s a
schem ing plot to gain the blessing for Jacob, h e r
favorite son, instead of Esau. The story of how
R ebekah conspired w ith Jacob to deceive Isaac
is too w ell know n to req u ire long discussion. Goat
m eat is to be prep ared as im itation venison; Jacob
is to be fitted out w ith goat-skin to m ake him
resem ble his h airy b ro th er Esau; Jacob is to im
p ersonate E sau and gain the blessing by deceiving
his blind fa th e r as to his identity.
As to th e cleverness of this scheme th e re can
be no question. Its cleverness is shown by th e
fact th a t it w orked. The ethics of R ebekah’s
clever p lan are how ever open to serious question.
C alvin in his C om m entary on Genesis is v ery o u t
spoken as to th e w rongness of Rebekah’s action:
“A nd surely th e stratagem of R ebekah w as not
w ith o u t fau lt; for although she could not guide
h e r h u sb an d b y salu tary counsel, y e t it was not
a legitim ate m ethod of acting, to circum vent him
b y such deceit. For, as a lie is in itself culpable,
she sinned m ore grievously still in this, th a t she
desired to sport in a sacred m a tte r w ith such
w iles. She knew th at the decree by which Jacob
h ad been elected and adopted was im m utable;
w hy th en does she not patien tly w ait till God shall
confirm it in fact, and shall show th a t w h at he
had once pronounced from heaven is certain?
Therefore, she darkens the celestial oracle by h e r
lie, and abolishes, as fa r as she w as able, th e grace
prom ised to h er son.” Calvin goes on to say th a t
R ebekah’s m otive w as a good one, even though
her m ethod w as wrong. She was actuated by
faith in the revealed prom ise of God.
Jacob, instructed by his m other, cooperates
in h e r plan. The im itation venison is prepared;
the rough goat skins are placed upon Jacob’s
smooth hands and neck. Thus prepared and coach
ed by his m other, "he e n te r’s his blind fa th e r’s
presence in ten t upon obtaining th e patriarchal
blessing by deceit.
Questions:
1. How m uch of Palestine was forested in
patriarch al times?
2. How m uch of Palestine is forested at the
present day?
3. W hat custom is reflected in Isaac’s desire
to bless his son?
4. How did the blessing pronounced by Isaac
differ from th e blessing any godly fath er m ight
invoke upon his son?
5. W hat m ay have been Isaac’s reason for
w ishing to p arta k e of venison before blessing
Esau?
6. W hat is im plied by th e use of th e word
“soul” in the expression “th a t my soul m ay bless
thee”?
7. W hat was R ebekah’s scheme for getting the
patriarch al blessing for Jacob?
8. W hat can be said about the ethics of Re
bekah’s scheme?
9. W hat was C alvin’s view of R ebekah’s ac
tions?
LESSON 116
4.
The History of Isaac, Jacob and Esau. 25:19
to 35:29, cont.
W hen R ebekah’s scheme was first proposed
to h e r son Jacob, he raised an objection: “Behold,
Esau m y b ro th e r is a h airy man, and I am a
sm ooth m an: m y fath er peradventure w ill feel
me, and I shall seem to him as a deceiver; and I
shall bring a curse upon me, and not a blessing”
(27:12). It should be noted h ere th at Jacob is
not objecting to the use of deceit on the ground
th a t it is w rong, but because of th e probability
of getting caught. H e does not shrink from sin,
b u t only from th e consequences of sin. This shows
us how fa r sh o rt Jacob fell at this tim e from G od’s
standard of m oral uprightness. He is not w orried
about th e sin of deceiving h is father, b u t only
about th e difficulty of doing so successfully.
As for his m other Rebekah, h e r aim w as
clearly to obtain th e covenant blessing fo r h er
son Jacob. T hat Jacob w as destined to have this
blessing was already a certainty, from th e divine'
revelation and prom ise of 25:23. B ut R ebekah
feels th at she m ust do som ething to help m ake
the prom ise come true, and she does not hesitate
to use m eans w hich are sinful to accomplish her
purpose. R ebekah in this situation is therefore
doing evil th a t good m ay come. This w as over
ru led by God and all w orked out tow ard th e ac
com plishm ent of the re al divine plan. B ut c er
tainly this history, w ith its use of unethical means,
should serve to rem ind us th a t God’s election is
86
hot based upon m an’s character and conduct b u t
upon the' sovereign grace of God. God did not
choose these people because they w ere m orally
upright; on th e contrary, they finally became u p
rig h t because God had chosen them.
The fact th a t all th is history w as the w orking
out of th e purpose of God, of course in no w ay
excuses th e hum an sin th a t w as involved. God
m akes th e w ra th of m an to praise Him, it is true,
b u t m an is g uilty nonetheless. Nor can unethical
methods, such as th e use of deceit, be excused be
cause they are used w ith the intention of ac
com plishing a good purpose.
In addition to th e goat skin disguise, Jacob
w as also dressed in Esau’s clothes (27:15). These
w ere “goodly garm ents”, th a t is, they w ere Esau’s
b e tte r clothes, w hich he w ould w ear on special
occasions. Thus Rebekah overlooks nothing th a t
m ight help to deceive h e r husband.
The im itation venison is read y a t last, and
Jacob, fu lly disguised, takes th e m eat, w ith bread,
to his fa th e r Isaac. In the n ex t few m inutes Jacob
tells one lie a fte r another (verses 19, 20, 24).
P articu larly outrageous is Jacob’s lie in answ er
to th e question how he had killed a deer so quick
ly (verse 20): “Because th e L ord thy God brought
it to me.” Leupold calls th is “alm ost th e m ost
flag ran t instance of abuse of th e divine nam e re
corded anyw here in th e S criptures.” Jacob a t
trib u tes to God’s providence w hat in reality w as
only his own deceit.
A lthough Isaac is som ew hat suspicious, es
pecially because “the voice is Jacob’s voice”
(27:22), he finally decides th a t th e w eight of the
evidence shows th a t it is Esau th a t he is dealing
w ith. A ccordingly, he eats the venison and drinks
the w ine which Jacob has brought, and then pro
ceeds to pronounce the p a tria rc h al blessing upon
him.
“A nd his fath er Isaac said unto him , Come
near now, and kiss me, m y son. A nd he cam e
near, and kissed him. . . ” (27:26, 27). T his is the
first occurrence in the Bible of the kiss as a token
of love. Jacob does not h esitate to use this token
of love as a p a rt of his p rogram of deceit. We
recall the treachery of Jo ab (2 Sam. 20:9, 10) and
the base act of Ju d as in betraying our L ord w ith
a kiss (Luke 22:47, 48).
Questions:
1. W hat objection did Jacob raise to his m oth
er’s scheme?
2. W hat w as Jacob seeking to avoid?
3. Why is it w rong to do evil th a t good may
come?
4. W hat does this story, w ith its use of u n
ethical means, show concerning God’s election?
5. W hy is not sin excusable on th e ground
that it accomplishes God’s purpose in the end?
6. W hat disguise did Jacob use in addition to
goat skin on his hands and neck?
7. How m any lies did Jacob te ll a fte r entering
his fath e r’s presence?
8. Why is Jacob’s lie recorded in 27:20 p a r
ticularly flagrant?
9. W hat w as sham eful in Jacob’s kissing his
father?
10. W hat parallels exist in the Bible to Jacob’s
misuse of the kiss?
LESSON 117
4. The history of Isaac, Jacob and Esau. 25:19
“Cursed be every one th a t curseth th ee — and
blessed be he th a t blesseth thee.”
4. The History of Isaac, Jacob and Esau. 25:19
to 35:29, cont.
Sometimes the second m em ber of a p arallel
ism expresses the same thought as the first m em
ber, sometimes a sim ilar b u t slightly different
thought, and sometimes a contrasting thought.
The blessing w hich Isaac pronounced upon
Jacob is recorded in 27:27-29. The language used
is poetical, as show n both by poetic H ebrew w ords
and by th e p arallel stru ctu re. W hile H ebrew
poetry is devoid of rhym e and does not have
m etre as w e th in k of it, it is m arked by p arallel
ism, th a t is, by expressing th e sam e thought over
again in different words. N ote th e parallels
w hich occur in these th re e verses:
“God give thee of th e dew of heaven — and
th e fatness of the earth .”
"Let people serve th ee — and nations bow
down to thee.”
“Be lord over th y b re th re n — and le t thy
m other’s sons bow dow n to thee.”
Isaac has caught th e sm ell of fra g ra n t herbs
from Esau’s clothes w hich Jacob is w earing. He
uses this thought to suggest the blessings which
will come to Jacob from the Lord: “See, the
smell of my son is as the sm ell of a field w hich
the Lord h ath blessed” (27:27). N atu rally th e
good sm ell of e arth and fields calls to m ind th e
kindness of God. The blessings m entioned by
Isaac are partly natural, and p a rtly social or polit
ical. F ertile soil, abundant harv ests — these are
the n atu ral blessings. The social and political
are expressed in verse 29. Jacob (w hom Isaac
supposes to be Esau) is to be lo rd over his b re th
ren. Besides this, those w ho cu rse him shall be
87
cursed, and those who bless him shall be blessed.
Isaac’s blessing pronounced upon Jacob is re
m ark ab le for w h at it leaves out as well as for
w h a t it contains. To understand this w e m ust
keep in m ind th e fact th a t Isaac thinks he is bless
ing Esau. The missing elem ent is the redem p
tiv e or M essianic promise. In Gen. 12:3 th e Lord
says to A braham , “And I w ill bless them th a t
bless thee, and curse him th a t curseth thee: and
in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.”
This last prom ise, of course, implies th at the Saviour
of th e w orld shall be born from the seed of A bra
ham . L a te r it w as revealed to A braham th a t this
M essianic or redem ptive prom ise should be tra n s
m itted to th e fu tu re through Isaac: “In Isaac shall
th y seed be called” (21:12b). Still later, divine
revelation g ran ted to Rebekah had made it clear
that- th e M essianic prom ise is to be transm itted
th ro u g h Jacob, not through Esau (Gen. 25:23; Mai.
1:2, 3; Rom. 9:11-13). Isaac of course knew th at
th e fu tu re of God’s redem ptive program w as tied
to Jacob, not Esau. He n atu rally does n o t dare
d isregard th e revelation of Gen. 25:23. If he had
know n th a t he was blessing Jacob, it -would have
been an o th er m atter. B u t as m atters stood, Isaac
th in k s he is pronouncing a blessing upon Esau.
E sau is his favorite an d he w ants to give him the
best possible blessing, short of actually co ntra
dicting th e -re v e a le d purpose of God. This m ay
explain w hy th e Messianic prom ise of 12:3b is
n o t found a t th e close of 27:29. In 28.4, w here
Isaac know s th a t he is dealing w ith Jacob not
Esau, he does n o t hesitate to invoke “the blessing
of A braham ” ■ upon Jacob. This “blessing of
A b rah am ” is of course the special covenant bless
ing w hich included th e Messianic promise.
It was a fine blessing th a t Jacob received,
even though it did not include the “blessing of
A braham ” and even though it was m arred by the
unethical m anner in w hich Jacob and Rebekah
had acted in connection w ith it. A ll of this
w ould be overruled by God fo r the accom plish
m ent of His redem ptive purpose. And by the
grace of God Jacob w ould eventually become
honest and upright in his character and conduct.
As Augustine said, the grace of God does not find
m en fit for salvation, b u t m akes them so.
Questions:
1. How is the poetical character of the blessing
w hich Isaac pronounced on Jacob shown?
2. How does H ebrew poetry differ from Eng
lish poetry?
3. W hat is m eant by “parallelism ” in H ebrew
poetry?
4. W hat instances of parallelism can be seen
in the blessing?
5. W hat did the odor of Esau’s clothing, being
w orn by Jacob, call to Isaac’s mind?
6. In the blessing pronounced upon Jacob,
w h at two elem ents can be distinguished?
7. W hat elem ent is conspicuously absent from
th e blessing w hich Isaac pronounced upon Jacob?
8. W hy w ould Isaac hesitate to pronounce the
Messianic or redem ptive blessing upon Esau?
9. W hat w as included in the “blessing of A bra
ham ”?
LESSON 118
Jacob. A t th e sam e tim e it would quickly daw n
on his m ind th a t God’s purpose was operative in
w h at had happened. He h ad know n fo r a long
4.
The history of Isaac, Jacob and Esau. 25:19 tim e th a t the divine redem ptive prom ise w ould be
to 35:29, cont.
for Jacob not for Esau. Now Isaac realizes th a t
h e has blessed Jacob in spite of him self — his own
Isaac h as barely finished blessing Jacob
plan of blessing Esau has only resulted in the
(w hom he supposes to be E sau), an d Jacob has
plan of God being fulfilled. So he concludes,
barely w ith d raw n from his fa th e r’s tent, w hen
“Yea, and he shall be blessed” (27:33b).
th e real E sau appears (27:30), having p repared
Esau, realizing th a t Jacob has obtained th e
real venison fo r his fath er to enjoy. Isaac is
blessing by deceit, m akes a desperate attem p t to
n a tu ra lly surprised, and w hen th e new arriv al
get the blessing after all. H e cries w ith “a great
em phatically asserts th a t he is Esau, “Isaac
and exceeding b itte r cry ” (27:34). In th e New
trem b led v ery exceedingly” (27:33). If h e had
Testam ent w e are told th a t Esau “found no place
previously h ad some (suspicions, they are now con
of repentance, though he sought it carefully w ith
firm ed by a ru d e and sudden shock. In his in
te ars” (Heb. 12:17). This verse is m ore accurate
ten se em otional shock, he asks “Who?” B ut it
ly tran slated in the A m erican Revised Version
could not have taken m ore th an a m om ent for
(1901) as follows: “F or ye know th a t even w hen
Isaac to realize th a t th ere could be only one a n
he afterw ard desired to in h erit the blessing, he
sw e r to his question “W ho?” Jacob is th e only
was rejected; for h e found no place for a change
person in th e w orld who could have im person
of m ind in his father, though he sought it dili
ated E sau and obtained his fa th e r’s blessing by
gently w ith tears.” The w ord “repentance” here
trick ery . So before the end of verse 33 it is clear
th a t Igaac realizes th at he has. been deceived by
m eans ''change of m ind” and the reference is to
88
Isaac, not to Esau. Esau could not g et Isaac to
change his mind, though he im plored h is fath er
w ith tears. T he sam e New T estam ent passage de
clares th a t Esau w as a profane person, who for
one m orsel of m eat sold his b irth rig h t. This m akes
it clear th a t th ere w as a necessary connection be
tw een th e b irth rig h t and th e blessing. W hen
Esau sold the one, he lost his rig h t to claim the
other. His readiness to p a rt w ith th e b irth rig h t
m arks h im as a profane person — a person who
regards sacred things as common.
As a m a tte r of fact, therefore, Esau has no
ground to stan d on in his w eeping plea to his fa th
er. He volu n tarily renounced th e b irth right, and
w ith it th e claim to th e blessing, in exchange for
a common m eal. His air of in ju red innocence on
discovering w h at Jacob has done is the fru stra
tio n of a m an w hose own deeds have caught up
w ith him, ra th e r th a n a genuine sense of outrage
a t real injustice.
F o r th e deceit and conspiracy h a d n o t all
been practiced by Jacob and Rebekah. The fact
is th a t E sau and Isaac have been having a so rt of
conspiracy of th e ir own, w ith th e intention of
gaining th e blessing for Esau in spite of the divine
revelation of 25:23 and in spite of E sau’s own sale
of th e b irth rig h t to Jacob. “Isaac and Esau, though
n o t adm itting th a t it was so, w ere conspiring to
deflect to Esau a blessing both knew he had fo r
feited, in fact, w as n ev er destined to h ave” (L eu
pold). F o r it is alm ost incredible th a t Isaac could
have been ignorant of th e sale of th e birth rig h t.
In view of th e facts, Esau really has no basis
fo r his charge in verse 36: “Is not h e rig h tly nam ed
Jacob? fo r he h a th supplanted m e these tw o
tim es: he took aw ay m y b irth rig h t; and, behold,
now he h a th taken aw ay m y blessing.” This
casual reference to th e b irth rig h t, w ithout ex
planation, indicates th a t Isaac already knew about
it. B ut E sau’s charge th a t Jacob “took aw ay” the
b irth rig h t w as false, and is c o n tra ry to the in
spired statem ents of S cripture on the m atter. The
tru th was, Esau h ad v o lu n tarily sold the b irth
rig h t to Jacob. S crip tu re tells us th a t Esau
despised his b irth rig h t (Gen. 25:34).
T herefore,
even though he may have reg rette d th e sale of
the birthright, he is w rong in charging Jacob w ith
taking it away. And the “taking aw ay” of the
blessing w as subordinate to th e bargain about the
birthright, as H ebrew s 12 implies.
In Esau’s attitude, therefore, w e see the com
mon tendency of sinful m an to justify him self and
blame others w hen things go wrong. Instead of
adm itting any guilt him self, Esau roundly accuses
Jacob of wrongdoing. I t is an old p a ttern , going
clear back to th at early day w hen A dam trie d to
place the blam e for his disobedience to God on
Eve.
Questions:
1. W hat w as Isaac’s reaction w hen the real
Esau came into his presence?
2. W hat did Isaac realize concerning God’s
working, w hen he found th a t he had blessed Jacob
instead of Esau?
3. W hat was Esau’s reaction to the discovery
that Jacob had obtained th e blessing before him?
4. W hat does the New T estam ent tell us about
Esau’s conduct on this occasion?
5. W hat is the correct tran slatio n of “found
no place of repentance”?
6. W hat is m eant b y the statem en t th a t Esau
was a profane person?
7. Why is it tru e th a t Esau had no ground to
stand on in his tearful plea to his father?
8. W hat m ust be the tru e explanation of Esau’s
a ir of injured innocence?
9. Besides the conspiracy of R ebekah and
Jacob, w hat conspiracy had been going on?
10. W hy was Esau’s charge th a t Jacob “took
away” the b irth rig h t a false charge?
11. W hat common p a tte rn of sinful m an is
exhibited by Esau on this occasion?
LESSON 119
blessing for m e?” (27:36). W hile realizing th at
the special blessing he had w anted is gone and
4.
The history of Isaac, Jacob and Esau. 25:19 cannot be regained, he hopes to get a t least some
to 35:29, cont.
thing o u t of the situation. Isaac replies, enum er
ating th e good things w hich have been conferred
Isaac’s m ind cannot be changed, ju st because
upon
Jacob (27:37). W ith fu rth e r w eeping Esau
th e purpose of God cannot be changed. Isaac
implores his fath er to give him also a blessing.
“trem bled v ery exceedingly” w hen he suddenly
Leupold comments th a t h e re E sau’s attitu d e
realized how th e m ysterious w orking of God’s
seems to be superstitious; h e is overvaluing the
providence h ad fru stra te d his Own desires and ac
blessing, as though everything in life depended
com plished God’s desires.
on it alone. Esau did n o t appreciate spiritual
Esau, how ever, does not drop th e m atter. He
things, and as for w orldly success, his life tu rn ed
still seeks a blessing: “H ast thou n o t reserved a
out to be quite successful w ithout th e blessing
w hich Jacob had gained. Still, Essau is b itterly
disappointed. No doubt during the hunting trip
w hile out huntin g deer he had felt quite optim istic
about his prospects for gaining th e paternal bless
ing and so o utw itting Jacob after all. B ut now
all his hopes have been frustrated, and he feels
very sorry for himself.
Finally, Isaac pronounces a blessing on Esau
also. B u t it is a second-rate blessing (27:39,40);
in fact, it is m ore a prophecy than a blessing. We
a re to reg ard this, as in the case of the blessing
on Jacob, as u ttered under prophetic inspiration
of th e Holy Spirit. W hat God had planned and
foreordained, He also announced beforehand
th ro u g h these prophetic utterances on the p a rt of
th e p a tria rc h Isaac. The rem arkable m anner in
w hich both utterances have been fulfilled down
th ro u g h th e centuries of history is sufficient to
show us th a t th ere is here som ething m uch deeper
th a n a m ere expression and some pious wishes of
Isaac.
E sau’s dw elling shall be the fatness of the
earth , and of th e dew of heaven from above. The
“of” w hich occurs twice in verse 39 may be tra n s
lated “aw ay from ” (so Am erican Revised Version
m arg in ). T his transaction “aw ay from ” is probably
correct and m akes Isaac’s utterance much easier
to u nderstand. The m eaning w ould then be: “B e
hold, th y dw elling shall be aw ay from th e fatness
of th e earth , and aw ay from the dew of heaven
from above”. T hat is, the hom eland of Esau and
his descendants is to be the desert, not th e fertile
lan d of C anaan. As a m atter of fact it turned
out th a t way. Esau’s descendants w ere the Edom
ites who are represented today by some of the
A rabs.
“A nd by thy sword shalt thou live” (27:40a)
— th is is a prophecy of a life of conflict and
strife. A nd in spite of the pow er of Esau’s sword,
he shall serve his b ro th er (the meaning, of course,
is th a t E sau’s descendants shall serve Jacob’s
descendants). This came to pass, for from th e tim e
of K ing D avid th e land of Edom was subject to
Israel. E ventually, about 126 B. C., th e Jew s com
p letely conquered the Edom ites (or Idum eans)
an d com pelled them to receive circumcision. The
notorious H erod fam ily, some of whose m em bers
a re p ro m in en t in the New Testam ent, w ere Edom
ites or Idum eans who had become Jews.
“A nd it shall come to pass w hen thou shalt
have the dominion, th at thou shalt break his
yoke from off th y neck” (27:40b). H ere Esau is
prom ised th at eventually his descendants shall
become free from the dom inion of the descendants
of Jacob. If w e inquire w hen this was fulfilled,
the year 63 B. C., w hen the Jew s became subject
to Rome, m ay be mentioned. A fter th at date the
Jew s w ere not tru ly independent b u t w ere under
the pow er of Rome. In 70 A. D. Jerusalem was
destroyed by th e Romans and the Jew ish state
com pletely liquidated. In the 7th century after
C hrist the new religion of M ohammedanism or
Islam appeared, and the A rab peoples increasing
ly dom inated the life of the N ear East. So it is
clear th a t Esau has indeed throw n off Jacob’s
yoke.
Questions:
1. W hat m ay have been the cause of Isaac’s
violent trem bling?
2. W hat new plea does Esau m ake to his
father?
3. W hat w as Isaac’s answ er to his son’s te a r
ful plea?
4. Is it correct to say th a t Esau overvalued
the blessing?
5. How can w e explain Esau’s sudden dis
appointm ent?
6. W hat is the character of the blessing which
Isaac finally pronounces upon Esau?
7. How can w e know th a t these blessings
w ere uttered by prophetic inspiration and w ere
not m erely hum an wishes?
8. How should the statem ents of verse 39
about Esau’s dw elling be translated?
9. How has the prophecy
historically fulfilled?
of verse 39 been
10. W hat is m eant by th e statem ent th a t Esau
w ould live by his sword?
11. W hat is m eant by th e prediction th a t Esau
would serve his brother?
12. How was this prediction fulfilled in later
history?
13. How has the prediction of Esau breaking
Jacob’s yoke off his neck been historically fu l
filled?
LESSON 120
4.
The
to 35:29, cont.
“A nd E sau
ing. w h erew ith
Esau said in his h eart, The days of m ourning for
m y fa th e r are at hand; then w ill I slay m y b ro th er
Jacob” (27:41). In Esau’s a ttitu d e tow ard his
history of Isaac, Jacob and Esau. 25:19 b ro th e r Jacob we have fu rth e r evidence th a t he
was indeed “a profane person.” T hat Esau was
hated Jacob because of the bless
displeased by th e w ay things had turned out is
understandable, b u t th a t h e should give w ay to
his fath er had blessed him: and
90
b itte r h atred and plan to m u rd e r his bro th er
shows th a t he was not actuated by fear of
God. T hinking th a t Isaac’s death cannot be
v ery fa r in th e future, Esau proposes to bide
his tim e. He w ill not b reak th e old fa th er’s h ea rt
by killing Jacob during Isaac’s lifetim e. B ut once
Isaac is dead, Esau proposes to m u rder Jacob.
O ur Lord Jesu s C hrist said “he th a t h a te th his
b ro th er is a m urderer." Esau first hated his
brother, then planned to m u rd er him. As a m a tte r
of fact, this m urderous intention was never ca r
ried out, b u t th a t does not lessen Esau’s guilt for
his h atred and evil intention.
Esau evidently did not keep this plan of
m urd erin g Jacob to himself, for som eone reported
Esau’s w ords to Rebekah. Possibly Esau relieved his
feelings som ew hat by talking to others and telling
w h at he intended to do to his deceitful, supplant
ing brother. H erein we see E sau’s foolishness.
If he had k ep t quiet h e m ight have been able to
kill Jacob, although of course it was m any years
before Isaac died. A m an who is planning a
m u rd er should be m ore careful about talking
about it in advance of th e deed. B u t Esau talked,
and Rebekah learned of his intentions, and she
in tu rn inform ed Jacob: “Behold, th y bro th er
Esau, as touching thee, doth com fort himself,
purposing to kill th ee” (27:42). This is a grim
kind of “com fort” but no doubt it is psychologic
ally tru e to life. R ebekah w arns Jacob, in order
to fru stra te Esau’s design. S he tells Jacob to
flee to h e r b ro th er Laban in M esopotamia, and
“ta rry w ith him a few days” u n til Esau’s m u r
derous anger could cool off. Then Rebekah would
send for Jacob to come home again..
From Jacob’s point of view this was undoubt
edly a w ise plan. H ow ever th e “few days” m en
tioned by R ebekah tu rn ed out to be tw enty years
or more. As a m a tte r of fact, Jacob and his m other
n ev er saw each other again a fte r his d ep a rtu re to
Mesopotamia, so fa r as can be know n from the
record.
“Why should I be deprived also of you both
in one day?” (27:45b). If Esau should succeed in
killing Jacob, it w ould be highly probable th a t an
“avenger of blood” w ould soon kill Esau, and
thus Rebekah w ould lose both of h e r sons.
Rebekah’s plan has been disclosed to Jacob,
who ap parently agreed to it w ithout question.
Now the m a tte r m ust be presented to Isaac in
such a w ay as to w in his approval. We m ay as
sum e th a t Isaac was som ew hat provoked by
Jacob’s recent conduct in obtaining the blessing
by deceit. Even though Isaac w ell knew th a t this
w as really th e plan of God, still he would pro b
ably feel some resentm ent against the son who
•had tak en such a sham eless advantage of his
aged, blind father. Therefore Rebekah presents
th e m a tte r to Isaac in as favorable a lig h t as
possible.
'•
'I t would not do, of course, to tell Isaac the
real reason w hy she w anted Jacob to leave horns.
So Rebekah very subtly m entions an o th er reason
entirely. She says: “I am w eary of m y life be
cause of the daughters of H eth: if Jacob take a
wife of the daughters of H eth, such as these which
are of the daughters of th e land, w h at good shall
m y life do m e?” (27:46). R ebekah’s statem ent
about the H ittite women no doubt reflects h er
bad im pression of Esau’s H ittite w ives m ention
ed at the end of chapter 26. Even though R ebekah
had good reason for h er a ttitu d e tow ard the
“daughters of H eth,” still h e r use of this as a
reason for sending Jacob to M esopotamia, w ith
out telling her real reason to Isaac, involves an
elem ent of insincerity and lack of frankness. There
is evidently something less th an perfect sym pathy
and understanding betw een Isaac and Rebekah.
She gives a reason which would have been a suf
ficient reason, b u t as a m atte r of fact it was not
h e r rea l reason.
Did Isaac know th a t Esau was planning to kill
Jacob? It is possible th a t he did, eith er at this
time or later; how ever th ere is no evidence th a t
he knew. If he had known, he could perhaps have
done something to restrain Esau. A t any rate,
Isaac readily agrees to R ebekah’s proposal, which
indeed appeared very pious and praisew orthy.
Accordingly, Jacob is sum m oned to his father’s
tent and there told to avoid m arriage w ith the
Canaanite women, b u t instead to journey to
Padanaram to the house of his g ran d fath e r B ethuel, to obtain a w ife from th e d au g h ters of Laban
his m other’s brother.
“And God A lm ighty bless thee, and m ake
thee fruitful, and m ultiply thee, th a t thou m ayest
be a m utitude of people; and give th ee the bless
ing of A braham , to thee, and to th y seed w ith
thee; th a t thou m ayest in h erit th e land w herein
thou a rt a stranger, w hich God gave unto A bra
ham ” (28:3,4). The te rm here tran slate d “God
Alm ighty” is El Shaddai (cf. 17:1; 35:11; 48:3; Ex.
6:3). This divine nam e stresses the sovereignty
and pow er of God. Salvation and all blessings
depend ultim ately upon the fact th a t God is al
mighty. W ithout the alm ighty pow er of God
there could be no C hristianity. N ote here how
God is regarded as the source of all good and the
one who takes the initiative and carries out the
redem ptive purpose. God is th e A gent of redem p
tion; m an is only the recipient of redem ption. So
everything is ascribed to God. I t w ould be an
anachronism to call Isaac a Calvinist, yet C al
vinism is precisely th a t system w hich ascribes all
our salvation and good solely to the pow er and
grace of God. The R eform ed or Calvinistic th e
ology is deeply rooted in th e Biblical conception
of God, w hich is so clearly exem plified by such
passages as the one we are considering.
Questions:
1. W hat was Esau’s a ttitu d e tow ard Jacob
91
w hen he found th a t Jacob had succeeded in ob
taining th e blessing?
6. How did Rebekah gain Isaac’s consent for
Jacob’s journey?
2. W hat does Esau’s attitude show concerning
his real character?
7. W hat m ay be said about the ethics of Reb ekah’s w ay of gaining Isaac’s consent?
8. W hat is the H ebrew term for God which
is tran slated as “God A lm ighty” in verse 3?
3. Was Esau really a m urderer?
4. H ow did Rebekah know w hat Esau was
plan n in g to do?
5. W hat course of action does Rebekah enjoin
upon Jacob?
9. W hat does this divine nam e em phasize
concerning God?
10. W hat is the relation of the idea of God
represented by this nam e to the Biblical doctrine
of salvation?
LESSON 121
III.
History of the Covenant People from Abra Canaan. B ut Esau is spiritually dull and stupid;
he is spiritually obtuse. His covenant standing
m eans nothing to him; h e cannot see any reason
4.
The history of Isaac, Jacob and Esau. 25:19 w hy the people of God should be different from
to 35:29, cont.
th e world.
The blessing now given to Jacob on the oc
casion of his d eparture to go to Mesopotamia is
“th e blessing of A braham ” (28:4). Therefore it
includes th e specifically Messianic element. Isaac is
now no longer seeking to give th e m ain blessing to
Esau co n trary to the plan of God. He now w ill
ingly and freely invokes th e Messianic blessing
on Jacob. This promise includes a num erous
posterity and th e possession of th e land of Canaan.
By im plication it includes w hat God had prom is
ed in addition to Abraham , nam ely th a t in his
seed all th e fam ilies of the earth should be bless
ed—th a t is, th a t the redem ption of th e w orld
from sin w ould finally come through one descend
ed from A braham , Isaac and Jacob.
F inally realizing th a t his H ittite wives w ere
not pleasing to his parents, Esau tries to rem edy
th e situation, b u t not in a w ay th a t w ould do any
real good. He takes a th ird wife, this tim e not
from the H ittites, b u t from the stock of Ishm ael.
H ad Esau been in the least spiritually a le rt and
sensitive h e w ould have realized th a t this w as no
real rem edy fo r the w rongness of his m arriage to
H ittite women. P erhaps a wom an of th e Ishm aelite
stock m ight be b e tte r th an the H ittites o r other
Canaanites, b u t Esau’s action was still not really
in line w ith God’s requirem ents. As Leupold
points out, Esau allow s the previous evil to con
tinue “and m erely adds som ething th a t m ay be
h alf rig h t” (Exposition of Genesis, II, 770).
T hus blessed by his fath er Jacob leaves home
for P a d an -aram w here his uncle Laban lived.
“A nd Jacob w ent out from Beer-sheba, and
w ent tow ard H aran ” (28:10). The last clause
m ay be tran slated "and came to H aran.” The
verse exem plifies som ething th a t is common in
the Old Testam ent, nam ely the use of a topic
sentence w hich briefly states th e w hole m atter,
after w hich th e details are given in follow ing
sentences.
T he n e x t few verses te ll about the fu rth e r
profaneness of Esau (28:6-9). The m ore w e see
of E sau th e clearer it becomes th a t th e re is a
radical sp iritu a l difference betw een him and those
w ho tru ly know th e Lord. He is a sam ple of
those w ith a covenant background and environ
m ent w ho tu rn to the ways of the world and com
m it sin w ith o u t conscientious scruples.
E sau m ust have known, of course, th a t Jacob
w as being sent aw ay to a foreign country to get
a wife. H e m ust have known, also, th a t his
g ra n d fa th e r A braham would not allow a m arriage
w ith a C anaanite wom an to be arranged for Isaac.
H e doubtless also knew th a t Isaac h ad com m anded
Jacob n o t to m a rry a C anaanite woman (28:1),
fo r it is recorded th a t he observed Jacob’s obedi
ence to th is com m and of his fath er (verses 6, 7).
B esides all this, Esau has become aw are th a t “the
dau g h ters of C anaan pleased not Isaac his fa th
e r” (verse 8), although he him self had already
m arried tw o of them (26:34, 35). We m ight su p
pose th a t Esau w ould have realized long before
w h a t w as objectionable about th e women of
“A nd he lighted upon a certain place, and
ta rrie d there all night” (28:11). The common
notion th a t this w as Jacob’s first stopping place
afte r leaving home is w ithout foundation. This
“certain place” w as the locality originally called
Luz, and la te r nam ed Bethel. It w as a good 70
miles or m ore from Beer-sheba. Obviously Jacob
could not have travelled th a t fa r in a single day.
The record does not state th a t he w as travelling
on foot, n o r on the o ther hand does it m ention
his riding a donkey or other beast. Even if m ount
ed, how ever, he could not cover the 70 m ile dis
tance in one day. M oreover, th ere w as no need
fo r u rg en t haste. Esau’s plan w as not to m u rd er
Jacob at once, b u t Only after the death of Isaac.
So w e m ay conclude th a t the night at Bethel,
w here Jacob had his vision of the ladder, was
92
perhaps his th ird or fo u rth
home.
night
aw ay
from
Questions:
1. W hat was included in the blessing invoked
on Jacob on th e occasion of his d ep artu re from
home?
2. W hat w as Esau’s reaction to Jacob’s de
p a rtu re to obtain a w ife in M esopotamia?
3. W hat does this rev eal concerning Esau’s
character?
4. From w hat people does Esau tak e his th ird
wife?
5. How should Esau’s th ird m arriage be re
garded, in the light of God’s standards?
6. W hat lite ra ry device common in the Old
Testam ent is exem plified by 28:10?
7. How may the last clause of verse 10 be
translated?
8. How fa r was the “certain place” m entioned
in verse 11 from Beer-sfieba?
9. How long m ay this have been a fter Jacob’s
departure from home?
LESSON 122
To these great covenant prom ises th ere is
now added another w hich specifically prom ises
divine guidance and protection to Jacob: “A nd
4.
The history of Isaac, Jacob and Esau. 25:19 behold, I am w ith thee, and w ill keep thee in all
to 35.29, cont.
places w h ith er thou goest, and w ill b rin g thee
again into this land; for I w ill not leave thee, u n
Jacob has reached a “certain place” (w hich
til I have done th a t w hich I have spoken to thee
w e later learn w as called Luz, la te r called B ethel),
of” (28:15).
and because th e sun h ad set, he stops th ere all
night. No doubt Jacob w as accustom ed to a
shepherd’s outdoor life and w ould not hesitate to
We should note the sovereign, gracious, u n
sleep u n d er th e stars w ith a stone for a head
conditional character of these prom ises m ade to
rest. It is said th a t shepherds in P alestine and
Jacob. God takes the in itiativ e and undertakes
S yria often do th e sam e a t th e p resen t day.
to bring all these things to pass. The prom ises
are not m ade contingent upon Jacob’s faith fu l
D uring th a t nig h t Jacob dream s a dream of
ness; rath er, th ey proceed from God’s faith fu l
a ladder set up on th e earth, the top of w hich
ness. This divine initiative and m onergism (it
reaches heaven, and th e angels of G od are seen
all starts w ith God and all the pow er is of God)
ascending and descending on it. This is the first
is the very h e art of w h at is know n as C alvinism
know n divine revelation g ranted to Jacob, b u t
or the Reform ed Faith. C alvin did not invent
by no m eans th e last. The lad d er seen in the
this theology; neither did A ugustine or th e Apostle
dream w as alluded to by o u r L ord in his sta te
Paul. It is deeply im bedded in the Scriptures,
m ent to N athanael (Jo h n 1:51). In view of this
and in the Old T estam ent no less th an in the
statem ent of our Lord, w e m ay say th a t th e la d
New. Calvinism does not depend upon a special
d er seen b y Jacob represents C hrist, th e M ediator
interpretation of a few selected tex ts; it is the
betw een God and m an, who bridges th e gap be
very w arp and woof of th e Bible, it is w oven into
tw een heaven and earth.
its very texture and b u ilt into its v ery structure.
W hat Jacob saw in his dream wgs accom
panied b y w h at he heard. “And, behold, th e Lord
It has been held by som e com m entators th a t
stood above it, and said, I am th e L ord God of
Jacob m ust have repented of his m isdeeds and
A braham th y fath er, and th e God of Isaac. . . ”
wrong attitudes before th is revelation of God
(28:13). God reveals H im self to Jacob, n o t sim ply
could have been granted to him. If h e had re
as God, b u t as Jehovah, th e God of A braham and
pented already, there is no m ention of it in the
Isaac — th e God, therefore, of th e gracious cove
passage. The only thing th a t could in anyw ay
n a n t promises.
suggest it is the fact th a t h e obeyed his fath er
and m other in leaving hom e. B ut this does not
These gracious prom ises are now repeated
necessarily im ply any sp iritual change on Jacob’s
and confirm ed to Jacob. W hat w as im plied in
part. To leave home w as the sensible thing to
th e “blessing of A braham ” invoked upon the de
do, in view of the fact th a t Esau w as planning to
p artin g Jacob by Isaac, is now specifically prom
kill him. W hether Jacob w as a t this point tru ly
ised to Jacob b y God Himself. As in the case of
repentant and tru ly in a rig h t subjective relatio n
A braham , th ree g reat prom ises are included: (1)
ship to God, we cannot say. B ut a t any ra te we
th e prom ise of inheritance of th e lan d; (2) the
are safe in saying th a t his receiving a revelation
prom ise of a v ery num erous posterity; and (3)
from God does not im ply th a t h e w as already re
th e prom ise th a t in Jacob and his seed shall all
pentant. It can w ith equal plausibility be argued
th e fam ilies of th e earth be blessed. We have
that Jacob’s repentance w as th e resu lt of his hav
already considered th e m eaning of these prom ises
ing been granted this revelation.
in a previous lesson on th e history of A braham .
93
Questions:
6. W hat three great promises w ere confirm ed
to Jacob?
1. W hy w ould it not be a g reat hardship for
Jacob to sleep u n d er th e stars w ith a stone for a
head-rest?
7. W hat special additional prom ise was given
to him?
8. W hat is m eant by the diving initiative and
monergism ?
2. W hat did Jacob see in his dream?
3. W hat statem ent of C hrist contains an al
lusion to Jaco b ’s dream?
4. W hat m ay th e ladder have symbolized?
5. How did God introduce Himself to Jacob?
9. W hat is m eant by saying th a t the prom ises
m ade to Jacob w ere sovereign, gracious and u n
conditional?
10. W hat can be said about th e question of
w h eth er Jacob had repented of his sins before
he received this revelation from God?
LESSON 123
H im self as Jehovah, the God of redem ption. And
surely such a spot w ould be regarded as holy
ground. F or God m ight reveal Him self there
4.
The history of Isaac, Jacob and Esau. 25:19 again; or a t any rate, it w ould be a suitable spot
to 35:29, cont.
fo r w orshipping God and offering sacrifices to
Him.
“A nd Jacob aw aked out of his sleep, and he
In th e m orning, Jacob set up th e stone th at
said, S u rely th e Lord is in th is place; and I knew
he had used for a head-rest as a m ark er to identi
it not. A nd he w as afraid, and said, How dread
fy th e spot. He poured oil on the top of it, as a
fu l is th is place! this is none other but th e house
sign th a t it w as m arked as sacred and special.
of God, an d th is is the gate of heaven” (28:16, 17).
Possibly th e oil m ay be regarded as a so rt of
Jaco b ’s reaction to the divine revelation is a re
token sacrifice (cf. 35:14), though this is not cer
v ere n tia l awe. Jacob’s statem ent, “th e Lord is in
tain.
th is place, an d I knew it not,” m ust not be tak en
as im plying th a t Jacob thought of God as lim ited
Jacob nam ed the place Bethel, w hich m eans
to a p a rtic u la r locality. The H ebrew patriarchs
“House of God” ( “B eth” m eans “house” and “E l”
kn ew m ore about God th an m odem critical
m eans “G od”). Moses adds th a t the nam e of the
scholars a re w illing to concede to them. Jacob
city was originally Luz. Presum ably Jacob had
m ust have h a d some know ledge of th e spirituality
slept out in th e open country. The city m ention
and om nipresence of God. God is everyw here,
ed, if it had already been built, m ust have been
H e fills all things (this is som etim es called the
located som ew here not fa r aw ay; or it is possible
cosmic presence of God). B ut God does not m ani
th a t it w as b u ilt by the C anaanites betw een the
fest H im self everyw here as th e Lord, Jehovah,
tim e of Jacob and th e tim e of Moses, and called
th e covenant God of grace and redem ption and
Luz by the C anaanites, though the site w as called
revelation. Jaco b ’s statem ent, “the Lord is in
B ethel by Jacob (and, of course, by the later
th is place, and I knew it not" m eans “This is a
Israelites).
place w h ere God m anifests Him self as Jehovah;
I h ad not realized th a t before.”
N ext w e read of Jacob’s vow. This is p a rt
of his response to the divine revelation w ith its
“How d read fu l is this place!” Jacob is filled
gracious promises. Since God has prom ised him
w ith aw e and w onder. This sense of aw e and
safety, protection and everything needful, so th a t
w onder seem s to be largely lacking from the
he is assured of retu rn in g hom e to his fa th e r’s
popu lar religion of our own day. Many people —
house in peace, Jacob confesses “th en shall the
som etim es even m inisters in th e ir public prayers
Lord be m y God.” Spurgeon once preached a
— seem o verly fam iliar in th e ir approaches to
rem arkable serm on upon th e brief phrase “My
God. W hereas th e Bible speaks constantly of the
God” w hich occurs m any tim es in the Scriptures.
fear of God, people today p refer to speak of re
To possess God as “m y God” in the tru e sense' is
ligion as “a personal relationship to God” or “ac
to have the sum total of all good — forgiveness,
cepting C h rist” — modes of expression which tend
salvation, e tern al life, all are included in this
to obscure th e divine m ajesty, and to regard God
covenant relationship to the living God. God has
and m an as m ore o r less equal p artners in a pro
granted gracious prom ises to Jacob. Jacob re
ject.
sponds by declaring th a t Jehovah shall be his
God.
“This is none other b u t th e house of God, and
th is is th e g ate of heaven” (28:17b). It w as “the
This confession of Jehovah as “his God” w ill
house of God” and “th e gate of heaven” because
be outw ardly m anifested in two ways. First, the
in th a t spot God had supernaturally revealed
stone w hich has been set up shall rem ain as a
94
m arker of a spot dedicated to the w orship of J e
hovah; and secondly, of all th a t God gives Jacob,
he w ill surely give th e te n th p a rt back to God.
fy our curiosity. It tells us w h at w e need to
know, not all th a t we w ould like to know .
The “if” in verse 20 should be understood in
the sense of “since” or “because” — “inasm uch
as”. Jacob is not bargaining w ith God and tr y
ing to obtain blessings on a com m ercial basis. The
blessings have already been prom ised him upon
an absolutely unconditional an d gracious basis,
w hich Jacob doubtless understood. In verses 2022 Jacob is not bargaining w ith God; he is re
sponding to God’s gracious promises. God w ill
tak e care of Jacob; th erefo re th e L ord shall be
Jacob’s God and this w ill not be a m ere profes
sion, form al and em pty, b u t it is to be m anifested
in Jacob’s daily life.
1. W hat was Jacob’s reaction to th e divine
revelation th a t had been gran ted him ?
This is th e second referen ce to th e tith e in
th e Bible, th e first being in th e history of A bra
ham (14:20). N othing is said as to th e disposition
of Jacob’s tithes. Possibly th ey w ere to be used
to m aintain B ethel as a sacred place unto the
Lord. Obviously in th a t day w hen religion was
constituted upon a p atriarch al basis and th ere
w as neither tem ple nor tabernacle, priesthood nor
m inistry, hom e m issions n o r foreign missions,
Jacob’s tithes could not be expended for objects
sim ilar to those for w hich th e tith es of God’s
people are expended today. This is one of th e
m atters concerning w hich th e B ible does not satis
6. W hat m ay have been the m eaning of pour
ing oil on the stone?
Questions:
2. W hat did Jacob m ean by his statem ent,
“The Lord is in this place, and I knew it not”?
3. W hat evidences are th e re th a t th e sense of
awe and w onder at th e greatness of God is lack
ing in present-day popular religion?
4. W hat did Jacob m ean by saying th a t the
place w here he had had his dream w as the house
of God and the gate of heaven?
5. How did Jacob m a rk the spot?
7. W hat is the m eaning of th e nam e “B ethel”?
8. W hat vow did Jacob m ake in response to
God’s promises?
9. How was Jacob’s allegiance to God to be
m anifested in his daily life?
10. W hat m ay have been the use to w hich
Jacob’s tithes w ere put?
(To be continued)
R eaders are invited to subm it Biblical, doctrinal and practical
questions fo r answ er in this departm ent. Names w ill not be pu b
lished w ith questions, b u t anonymous communications w ill be dis
regarded.
Question:
W hat does th e C hristian C hurch consider
m ore im portant, th e ab stract beliefs of religion
or the actual practice of good m orals?
Answer:
The C hristian C hurch does not hold and
teach ab stract beliefs. The C hurch creeds are
concrete an d specific. This is tru e of th e Apostles’
Creed, th e N icene C reed and also of th e W est
m inster Confession of F aith and th e other creeds
of th e R eform ation period. N either a re th ey
tau g h t abstractly, i.e., as a body of tru th to be
believed w ith o u t a practical application of such
to one’s life. They a re confessed and proclaim ed
so as to set a stan d ard for C hristian life and con
duct. The faith and th e life of th e C hristians are
com plem entary. T here is such a v ita l relatio n
ship betw een one’s belief and one’s life th a t I
cannot see how anyone can place fa ith and life
over against one another, or say th a t one is m ore
im portant than the other. I t is tru e th a t w hat one
believes has a m arked influence on one’s m anner
of life, and hence it is v ery im p o rta n t th a t one’s
beliefs be based upon G od’s Word. A Biblical
creed is absolutely necessary for salvation, b u t a
creed, no m atte r how orthodox, in itself is not
sufficient. It m ust fru ctify in a C hristian life.
“Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing
them in the nam e of the F ather, and th e Son, and
the Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all
things w hatsoever I have com m anded you.” “If
ye love me, keep m y com m andm ents.”
— R obert P a rk
Question:
W hat is your view of the w ords, “It is h ard
for thee to kick against the pricks”? I have heard
it preached th at Saul w as pricked by his con
science w hile persecuting the church, b u t if th a t
is the case, hoyf then are such portions of Scrip
tu re as: Acts 26:9; A cts 23:1; Philippians 3:6, to
be. understood?
. . ..
95
Answer:
I t is m y opinion th a t the expression does refer
to P au l being troubled in conscience. This is the
opinion of a num ber of com m entators whose
w orks I have studied on this experience of Paul.
In fact I do n o t see how it can be explained to
m ean anything else. W hile P au l was very zealous
in persecuting his fellow Jew s who believed th a t
Jesu s w as th e Messiah, he1 was touched by th e ir
sp irit and noble lives, especially the testim ony
an d th e heroic death of Stephen in w hich h e had
such a prom inent part. It practically accounts
for his sudden about face after he m eets Jesus
on th e road to Damascus. Such a state of h e art
is possible even though one tries to do his best
to w ipe out such convictions. A nd w hile Paul
w as tro u b led in conscience he w as strenuously
striv in g to be v ery zealous in th e service of God.
In P a u l’s speech before th e Sanhedrin (Acts
23:1) — “I have lived in all good conscience be
fore God u n til this day” — he is stating a p rin
ciple by w hich he lived as a conscientious Jew .
T h a t w ord he used — “lived” — is a G reek term
used to describe the life of a citizen as a citizen
in th e G reek com m onwealth. P au l tried to live
such a life in the commonwealth of God. He
looked upon his fellow Jew s who believed on
Jesu s as th e Messiah and Lord as blasphem ers and
according to Jew ish law w orthy of death. A fter
his conversion he saw th e law of God in a far
d ifferen t light and lived according to th at enlight
enm ent.
In P a u l’s speech before Agrippa (Acts 26:9)
—“I verily tho u g h t w ith m yself th a t I ought to do
m any things contrary to th e' nam e of Jesus of
N azareth ” — he adm its that, thqjigh he w as con
scientious in his attack upon th e followers of
Jesus, he was m istaken, and w hen Jesus revealed
H im self to him he saw his terrib le m istake. This
statem en t does not at all nullify th e fact th a t
w hile in th a t conscientious attack upon believers
he h a d thoughts w ithin th a t disquieted hfe m ind
and, a t tim es, m ade him question the rightness
of his procedure.
In P a u l’s le tte r to the Philippians (Phil. 3:6)
h e is w arn in g the Christians of Philippi not to be
led aw ay into e rro r by a misapplication of teach
ings about th e law. T here was a time w hen he
p u t confidence in th e flesh, in an outw ard obe
dience to th e law, and could w ell boast, if there
w ere an y efficacy in such a life. It is in this con
nection th a t he says, “touching the righteousness
w hich is in th e law, blam eless.” He would have
th e P hilippians bew are of such righteousness for
even though he had lived outw ardly according to
th e law a “blam eless” life, now he finds th at “w hat
th in g s w ere gain for me, those I counted loss for
C hrist.” Paul, m ore than any oth er New T esta
m en t w riter, uses th e w ord “conscience.” It is
fo u n d tw enty-one tim es in his letters. It is a r e
flection, I believe, of the period of a troubled
conscience th at he him self had w hen during all
his persecuting zeal and self-righteous living he
w as not a t peace in his own conscience.
— Robert P a rk
Question:
Is belief in “theistic evolution” or “creative
evolution” consistent w ith acceptance of the
doctrinal standards of the Reform ed Presbyterian
Church?
A nsw er:
Belief in “theistic evolution” or “creative evo
lution” is not consistent w ith the doctrines of the
R eform ed P resb y terian Church. A false theory
or interp retatio n of God’s w ork of creation can
not be corrected or nullified by labeling it w ith
a label of th e tru th . Those who claim to be
“theistic” o r “creative” evolutionists hold v irtually
to th e sam e basic ideas and claims as the D ar
w inian evolutionists. I shall give several ex
cerpts from a recent book by Ralph S adler Meadowcroft, pastor of an Episcopalian congregation
in Charleston, South Carolina and from all evi
dences a “theistic” evolutionist. In his book,
“Postlude to Skepticism ,” on page 11 he w rites:
“The liberal calls fo r the right of increasing know
ledge. According to him, the first sentence of
Genesis is true, ‘In the beginning God m ade,’ but
the explanation w hich then follows is the ancient
B abylonian m yth, the best explanation of the
creation process know n by the H ebrews at th at
tim e of w riting. If, how ever, a m odern theologian
w ere w riting th e account he would use the same
opening words, ‘In the beginning God m ade,’ but
w ould follow th a t sentence w ith a contem porary
scientific explanation of sun-spots, star-dust and
heat, w hile m an would em erge not out of dust and
breathe, b u t as the clim ax of a tediously long
evolution. Y et th e liberal w ould not dem and th a t
his explanations become sacrosanct. On the con
tra ry , h e anticipates th a t th ree thousand years
hence m en m ay have other explanations of cre
ation th a t our know ledge w ill then seem as im
p o rta n t as w e consider the G arden m yth to be.”
Now another excerpt from the same on page
125: “F o r m any centuries the Genesis m yth of
hum an creation was accepted as a correct account.
A ctually the only religious fact in th e first three
chapters of th e Scriptures is contained in the
first phrase, ‘In the beginning God,’ for so far as
religious tru th goes, it does not m atter how cre
ation occurred. Y et m any religious people rose
up in great indignation w hen D arw in’s theories
gained p o pular attention: and among religious
groups it is still averred th a t if evolution is ac
cepted as a factual account of hum an origin, the
w hole stru c tu re of belief w ill come tum bling
down, w hich is palpably ridicudous.”
Now one m ore quotation to reveal the m ind of
96
th e “theistic” evolutionist, and this quotation is
on the origin of sin (page 141):
“The origin of sin is not traceable to an event
in hum an history, b u t ra th e r is born out of the
conflicting tensions (D arw in’s survival of the
fittest) w hich compose the life of m ankind. To
account fo r m an’s d ep rav ity by th e m ythical fall
of Adam, by w hich A dam ’s descendants inherited
the sam e fallen nature, is to m ake th e first m an
in a sense responsible for all th e hum an evil
w hich has occurred through history. In so doing,
m en in history cease to be equally responsible
w ith A dam fo r th e sins they commit. Such a
conclusion m ust also m ean th a t m an is less tru ly
hum an th a n his original parent. . . . If, however,
th e fall of Adam is understood as a representative
condition w hich occurs inevitably in the life of
every individual, the responsibility and the fu l
ness of hu m an n a tu re are alike th e property of
all m en.”
These excerpts m ay w ell rep resen t the teach
ing of those who call them selves “theistic” evolu
tionists.
Now le t us quote several statem ents from the
Constitution of the Reformed Presbyterian Church
of North America to show w h a t our C hurch be
lieves concerning th e creation of m an and the
fall and d ep rav ity of m an. On page 11: “A fter
God had m ade all oth er creatures, He created
m an, m ale and fem ale, w ith reasonable and im
m ortal souls, endued w ith know ledge, righteous
ness and tru e holiness, a fte r His ow n image; h av
ing the law of God w ritte n in th e ir hearts, and
pow er to fulfil it: and yet u n d er a possibility of
transgressing, being left to th e lib erty of th e ir
own w ill, w hich w as subject unto change. Besides
this law w ritte n in th e ir h earts they received a
com m and not to eat of the tree of th e know ledge
of good and evil, w hich w hile th ey kept, they
w ere happy in th e ir com m union w ith God, and
h ad dom inion over th e creatures.” On pages
130-1 a re answ ers to several questions in th e
S h o rter Catechism . “O ur first parents, being
le ft to th e freedom of th e ir ow n w ill, fell from
th e estate w herein th ey w ere created, by sinning
against God.” Gen. 3:6, 7, 8, 13. “The sin w here
by o u r first p aren ts fell from th e estate w herein
th ey w ere created, was th e ir eating th e forbidden
fru it.” Gen. 3:6, 12. “The covenant being m ade
w ith Adam, not only for him self, b u t for his pos
terity, all m ankind, descending from him by o r
d in ary generation, sinned in him , an d fell w ith
him in his first transgression.” Gen. 3:16, 17.
Rom. 5:12. 1 Cor. 15:21, 23.
No one can consistently hold these tw o op
posite beliefs concerning creation, th e origin of
sin, and th e consequences of sin. One could go
on and show th a t th ere is ju st as g reat an incon
sistency in relationship to all th e g reat doctrines
of the Faith.
— R obert P a rk
Question:
W hat should be our attitu d e tow ard th e pres
ent-day faith healing m ovem ent? Can a C hristian
be sure of divine healing if he has real faith?
Answer:
T here are two questions here. The history
of the C hristian Church from the Apostolic Age
until today does not reveal any such m ovem ents
as at present is rife in th e w orld, especially, I
believe, in America. The great evangelists from
W hitefield and Wesley dow n to B illy G raham
have carried on great cam paigns w ithout any
claims to be able by the help of God or th e direct
action of God to heal the sick. T here are a large
num ber of free-lance evangelists w ho seem to be
unattached to any denom ination who p u t forth
great claim s to be able to be used of God to heal.
We have one such evangelist now in B eaver Falls
who is carrying on in an old th e a tre w hich h e has
placarded w ith appeals fo r C hristians of all
churches to come and see the w onderful w orks of
God in healing. I heard him m ake the same plea
over the radio and m ake th e claim th a t God w as
w orking w onders in our m idst. I have know n of
several cases w here the h e aler claim ed to have
been able to heal, b u t in n o t too long a space of
time the sick died of th e disease of w hich they
had claim ed to have been healed.
I
think it best to heed th e S crip tu re in this
m atter of healing. In th e Acts w e have the record
of m any being healed and th e lam e m ade to w alk.
The three nam ed in this w ork are P eter, Philip the
Evangelist, and Paul. These m iracles gave a t
testation to the people of th e ir day th a t th e ir
testim ony concerning the fact of th e resurrection
of Jesus was true, and m any cam e to believe.
Peter o r Paul never m ade any advance claim s nor
advertised th a t they w ould hold a m eeting for
healing the sick or perform any m iracles. F u r
therm ore, neither of them in all th e ir w ritings
say anything about faith healing o r ever offer
any assurance th at God th ro u g h them w ould be
able to heal. Jam es m akes one statem en t w hich
is his advice to his fellow C hristians w ho m ight
be sick: “Is there any sick am ong you? let him
call for the elders of th e church: and le t them pray
over him, anointing him w ith oil in th e nam e of
the Lord: and the p ra y er of faith shall save th e
sick, and the Lord shall raise him up.” This is a
fa r cry from the present bom bast of so-called
“faith healers.” The L ord m ay use them to heal,
b u t I th ink it w ell to keep aloof from them .
The advancem ent in present-day m edicine
and the care and service the sick and w ounded
receive in hospitals by train ed nurses and skillful
physicians and surgeons rem ove very m any from
needing to follow Jam es’ injunction. I believe
God expects us to use all legitim ate m eans avail
able for the care of th e sick, asking His blessing
upon those w ho are responsible fo r w ise and
97
scientific treatm en t. I th in k in addition it is rig h t
a n d a duty, w h ere the hum an factor is unable to
help, to re st solely upon God and seek His pow er
if i t is in accord w ith His will th a t the life be
spared. I believe th a t p ray er w as m ade for
Jam es the apostle ju st as w ell as fo r P e te r w hile
in th e hands of a Herod, b u t Jam es w as b e
headed and P e te r ■w as m iraculously spared fo r
m any years of service.
— R obert P a rk
Keeping Our Vows to God
“A nd th e inh ab itan ts of Jerusalem did ac
cording to th e covenant of God, the God of th e ir
fa th e rs”.
2 Chron. 34:32b.
care of th e physical rep a ir of church buildings,
b u t w ould provide fo r th e p roper support, in p ro
portion to our re al ability, of the w hole program
of the C hurch and the K ingdom of God.
Jo siah was king of Ju d ah 639-608 B.C., on the
v erge of th e Babylonian Captivity. During his
reign th e re occurred the last religious revival b e
fore th e captivity. A t the age of 16, having been
king 8 years, Josiah undertook the religious
refo rm atio n of his kingdom. When a king and
his people se t th e ir h eart on consistently living
according to God’s will, God m et them w ith help
an d blessing, and prospered th e ir efforts. T here
w as a sp irit of zeal, unanim ity and spontaneous
eagerness in th e ir service of God. This was noth
ing m echanical o r artificially w orked up. It w as
real, it cam e from their hearts by the w ork of
th e Holy Spirit.
God’s w ork req u ires not m erely money, but
m oney w illingly given by a people w ho have set
th e ir h e a rt on th e tru e progress and w elfare of
God’s C hurch and Kingdom.
FALSE RELIGION CLEARED AWAY
Read 2 Chron. 34:3-7. The idolatrous religion
w as ancient, custom ary and deeply embedded in
th e life of th e people. Only a king and people
u n ited in honestly turning to God could elim inate
it. It is v ery difficult to change th a t w hich has
th e sanction of antiquity, custom, long usage and
popularity. H ere in Josiah’s reform we see the
victory of principle over popularity — som ething
m uch needed today. W hen w e get a revival like
th a t, th ere w ill be sweeping changes in religious
life, custom s and worship. The unscriptural w or
ship of centuries will be swept away w ith a retu rn
to th e reign of Scriptural principles.
GOD’S HOUSE WAS REPAIRED
F o r long years this has been neglected, b u t
a people w ith a m ind to re tu rn to God soon put
th e tem ple in re p a ir again. The workm en w rought
faithfully. It w as not necessary to audit th eir
accounts for they w orked conscientiously. A sim
ila r revival in our own day would not only take
ATTENTION GIVEN TO THE WORD OF GOD
2
Chron. 34:14-28. F o r years the W ord of
God had been lost and neglected. The roll of the
Book found was perhaps one lost o r hidden d u r
ing M anasseh’s reign, o r one placed in a co rn er
stone w hen the tem ple w as b u ilt by Solomon. A t
any rate, w hen found it produced a trem endous
effect. Those people really took Scripture se r
iously. To them the W ord of God w as not a m ere
ornam ent or form ality. It m ade a profound im
pression on king and people. This w ould be tru e
in a sim ilar revival today. It may be questioned
w hether the present revival m ovem ent in A m eri
ca is producing a real re tu rn to Scripture. The
a ttitu d e tow ard S crip tu re seems still to be a
form al and conventional one in m any cases.
In Josiah’s day, covenant vows w ere solemnly
taken by king and people (2 Chron. 34:29-33).
Divinely appointed w orship, long neglected in
whole or in part, was once m ore observed in an
adequate and S criptural m anner (35:1, 2 17-19).
In this revival, conscientious devotion to God
overcam e (1) popular false worship and p rac
tices; (2) gross ignorance of God’s w ill; (3) long
continued neglect of divinely appointed worship.
T he revival America needs is along the sam e
lines. How can we help? Not by doing some
thing dram atic or spectacular, b u t by doing w hat
Josiah is recorded as doing in 2 Chron. 34:2, 3.
If we w ill be faithful and consistent in keeping
o ur covenant vows to God, He will w ork in a
m ysterious w ay His w onders to perform.
— J. G. Vos
98
Linger Not
By H oratius Bonar
The tim e is short!
If thou w ould’s t w ork for God it m ust be now;
If thou w ould’st w in th e garland for thy brow,
Redeem th e time!
W ith His rew ard
He comes; He tarries not: H is day is near;
When m en least look fo r H im w ill He b e here.
Prepare for Him!
Shake off e a rth ’s sloth!
Go forth w ith staff in h and w hile y et ’tis day;
Set out w ith girded loins upon th e w ay;
Up! L inger not!
Let not the flood
Sweep the firm feet from th e etern al rock;
Face calmly, solemnly, the billow ’s shock,
Nor fear the storm.
Fold not thy hands!
W hat has th e pilgrim of the cross and crown
To do w ith lu x u ry or couch of down?
O Pilgrim , on!
W ithstand the foe!
Die daily, th at thou m ay’st forev er live;
Be faithful unto death: th y L ord w ill give
The crown of life.
Go in Peace
By C. G. Rossetti
Can peach renew lost bloom,
Or violet lost perfum e,
O r sullied snow tu rn w hite as overnight?
M an cannot compass it, yet never fear:
T he leper N aam an
Shows w hat God w ill and can.
God who w orked there is w orking here;
W herefore let sham e, not gloom, betinge thy
brow.
God who w orked then is w orking now.
Announcement
You can share in the w ide w itness of Blue
B anner F aith and Life to Bible tru th by con
trib u tin g to the expense of publishing the m aga
zine. Less than h alf of th e am ount required is
obtained from subscriptions and sales of back
issues. F o r th e balance we are dependent on con
tributions. N um bered receipts are sent prom ptly
for all contributions. Financial rep o rts are sub
m itted to th e B oard of Publication of th e Synod
of the Reform ed P resb y terian C hurch of N orth
A m erica q u arterly .
Sets of back issues for th e y ears 1952 and
1955 are available at $1.00 for each year, postpaid.
The supply of back issues of all o th e r years is
exhausted. Pressboard binders w hich w ill con
veniently preserve tw o y ears’ issues are available
are $1.50 for single subscriptions and $1.00 fo r
each subscription in clubs of 5 or m ore to be
m ailed to one address. All subscriptions m ust b e
gin w ith a January -M arch issue and ru n to the
end of a calendar year. We reg ret th at we cannot
do the extra clerical w ork involved in having
subscriptions sta rt and stop at different tim es
through the year. W hen subscriptions a re r e
ceived during the year, the back issues beginning
w ith the January-M arch issue of th a t y e a r w ill be
sent.
The A gent for B ritain and Irelan d is the Rev.
Adam Loughridge, B. A., G lenm anus Manse,
Portrush, County A ntrim , N o rthern Ireland. A n
nual subscription rate for B ritain and Ireland is
7s. 6d.
The Agent for A ustralia and New Zealand is
the Rev. A lexander B arkley, B. A., 20 Fenw ick
Street, Geelong, Victoria, A ustalia.
A nnual
subscription ra te for A ustralia and N ew Zealand
is 10 shillings.
J. G. Vos, Editor and M anager, 3408 7th
Avenue, Beaver Falls, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.
Frinted in U. S. A. by the Linn-Falmer Record, Linn, Kansas
BLU E
BANNER
FAITH
AND
L IF E
VOLUME 11
—
-------------------------------
NUMBER 3
JULY-SEPTEM BER, 1956
1
—
-1 -
—
—
T
1---------------------------
The Church of Jesus Christ may never traffic in the
truth. The least compromise of Gospel principle is
treason against the King of heaven. . . . The truth of
the Lord Jesus, which cost His blood in its purchase and
the blood of martyrs in its defence, should be maintained
to the very last shred, with the tenacity of unconquerable
faith.
J. C. McFeeters
A Q u arterly Publication Devoted to Expounding, D efending and Applying the
System of D octrine set forth in th e W ord of God and Sum m arized in the Standards
of th e Reformed P resbyterian (C ovenanter) Church.
Subscription $1.50 p er year postpaid anyw here
3408 7th Avenue
Editorial Committee: M. W. D ougherty, R. W. Caskey, Ross L atim er
Published by
The Board of Publication of the Synod of the Reform ed Presbyterian Church of
N orth A merica
Agent for B ritain and Ireland: The Rev. Adam Loughridge, B.A.,
G lenm anus Manse, P ortrush, County A ntrim , N orthern Ireland
A gent for A ustralia and New Zealand: The Rev. A lexander B arkley, B.A.,
Publication Office, Linn, Kansas, U.S.A.
A pplication for Second Class E ntry Pending at the Postoffice in Linn, Kansas
The Glass
The Coming Creed
“Now we see through a glass, d a rk ly ” — 1 Cor.
13:12
By Horatius Bonar
By M. W. Dougherty
The glass is dim!
’Tis frosted o’er
By chilling unbelief
T hat lurks continually
In little niches of m y heart.
In tim es of trial it clouds th e glass
Through w hich I look for comfort,
And for Him.
The glass is dim!
It is befogged by doubt,
The close companion of m y unbelief.
It scurries back and forth
Upon the glass w ith g reat u n certainty;
W ith dim ness less intense
Than lack of faith, it none the less
O bscures m y view of yonder hom e
T hat’s m ade by Him.
The glass is dim!
By grief of loss;
We fear to face the path
T hat I m ust w alk, b ereft
Of fellow ship and words.
Though dim m ed by tearful streaks,
It hinders, as I try to find the hand
Held out by Him.
The glass is dim!
All th is I know,
And Oh! the turm oil of the soul
It brings. B ut this
I also know, th ere is a tim e
W hen w hat I faintly see
W ith hindered view, will all be clear,
Made so by Him.
The glass is dim!
B ut by the flam e of faith
The frost is cleared.
A gentle voice gives courage,
A nd m y tears of grief
A re gently w iped away
W ith tenderness. He grasps my hand,
I w alk w ith Him.
The creeds have gone, so speaks the age,
The era of the sects is past.
Forw ard! In spite of saint or sage,
T rue freedom has begun a t last.
The C hrist of God is now
The C hrist of m an now
The cross is p a rt of m ystic
The resurrection m orn
no m ore;
sits suprem e;
lore,
a dream .
The age’s progress fears no God,
No righteous law, no Ju d g e’s throne;
Man bounds along his new -found road,
And calls the universe his own.
Not faith in God, b u t faith in m an
Is pilot now, and sail, and oar;
The creeds are shrivelled, cold, and wan;
The Christ th a t has been is no more.
Old tru th , w hich once stru ck deep in hearts,
Fights hard for life, b u t fights in vain;
Old erro r into vigor starts,
And fable comes to life again.
Old mischief now becomes e a rth ’s creed;
The falsehood lives, the tru th has died;
Man leans upon a broken reed,
And falls in helplessness of pride.
He spurns the hands th a t would have led,
The lips th at w ould have spoken love;
The Book th at w ould his soul have fed,
And taught the w isdom from above.
The ever-standing cross, to him,
Is but a Hebrew relic vain;
The w ondrous b irth a t Bethlehem
A fiction of the w andering brain.
He w ants no Saviour and no light;
No teacher but him self he needs;
He knows not of a hum an night,
Save from the darkness of the creeds.
E ternal Light, hide not T hy face:
E ternal Truth, direct our w ay;
E ternal Love, shine fo rth in grace;
Reveal our darkness and THY day.
“The veracity of God, and not th e reasonableness of any doctrine, is the ground of our faith. It is th e
w ork of the gospel to cast down reasonings against the knowledge of God, and bring into captivity every
thought unto the obedience of C hrist.”
Reformed P resb y terian Testim ony, IV.4
VOLUME 11
JULY-SEPTEMBER, 1956
NUMBER 3
By J. G. Vos
n. THE ROADBLOCK OF SECULARISM, OR REGARDING GOD AS INCIDENTAL
Secularism is Characteristic of Present-Day
American Culture
T he w ord “secular” comes from the L atin for
“age.” It is defined as “of or pertaining to things
not religious, sacred or spiritual; tem poral; w orld
ly.” Secularism , then, is th a t view of life w hich
reg ard s life as non-religious. According to the
secu lar philosophy of life, hum an life as a whole
is non-religious, but w ithin this totality of hum an
life th e re m ay be one sector or com partm ent
w hich is called “religion” and which concerns
m an ’s relatio n to God. Secularism confines re
ligion to th is one section of hum an life, w hile the
re st—by fa r the m ajor portion—of hum an life is
reg ard ed as u n related to religion, and unaffected
by it. A ccording to secularism, God is relev an t
only fo r a sm all fraction of hum an life. W ith r e
g ard to all th e rest, God does not m atter. It is
h eld th a t God has no m eaning for the ordinary,
ev eryday life of man.
Religion Regarded as Incidental
S ecularism is th e intern al d ry rot of the
churches. It is th e tacit assum ption that religion
is only a m inor incident in hum an life, th a t re
ligion concerns b u t a sm all fraction of hum an life
and activity. Secularism is characteristic of pres
en t-d ay A m erican and European culture. O ur
m odern w estern cu ltu re has come to regard itself
as self-sufficient and able to get along on its own;
it no longer feels any g reat need of God. This
a ttitu d e tow ard religion is exemplified by Time
Magazine, w h e re “Religion” is treated as one de
p a rtm e n t of life, and is sandw iched in betw een
o th er d ep artm en ts such as “Cinema’’ and “Sport.”
God Regarded as a Luxury
N eedless to say, this secular philosophy of life
is very d ifferen t from the belief of our forefathers.
I t is not only d ifferen t from the belief of Christian
people of a few generations ago; it is even differ
en t from th e belief of a large p art of the popula
tion a few generations ago. The cultural p atte rn
has been changed from one th a t regarded God as
relev an t to one th a t regards God as irrelevant. The
c u ltu ra l p a tte rn of w estern civilization has been
changed from a theistic p attern to a secular p a t
tern . G od is now regarded as a luxury, ra th e r
th a n as a necessity. For th e m ost part, people
th in k they can g e t along w ithout God p retty well.
They do not give Him a thought most of the time.
Of course, if people get in bad enough trouble
and everything else fails, they will still perhaps
tu rn to God as a sort of last resort. People on
board an ocean lin er m ay spend th eir tim e eating
and drinking, dancing and playing cards; but if
the ship hits a m ine and is about to sink, m any of
them w ill presently a ttem p t to pray. A culture
w hich has om itted God finds God useful in em er
gencies as a la st resort.
God Limited to a Fraction of Man’s Life
A nd secularism is w illing to concede to God
His relevance in one sm all departm ent of life,
nam ely, religious feelings and worship. That, ac
cording to secularism , is G od’s domain. He be
longs there, and He had b ette r stay w here He be
longs. Even secularism cannot deny th a t there is
such a thing as religion and th a t m an is a religious
animal. T here m ust be some recognition of a
H igher Pow er or God. So th e spere of religion
is m arked off as a special area and th ere God is
recognized.
Those w ho have no use for God in th e ir daily
lives, who never in th eir life dream ed of living
for the glory of God, or m aking the K ingdom of
God th e goal and aim of th e ir life, still feel th a t
they need God occasionally to forgive th e ir sins.
So they reta in God as a dispenser of forgiveness.
According to th eir philosophy, th a t is w h at God is
for—to forgive people’s sins. God Is not to m ake
any dem ands on people’s lives, b u t H e is to be
ready to forgive th e ir sins w hen asked to do so.
F or the rest, God is politely bowed to the sidelines
and regarded as no longer necessary. M an feels
th a t he can stand on his ow n feet and does not
need God.
If w e inquire as to the roots of this m odern
secular culture w e w ill, I think, find th a t it goes
deeper than w e m ight at first suppose. It cannot
be explained sim ply on the basis of people’s lazi
ness, selfishness and desire to have th eir own way.
It has philosophical roots. We m ight say th a t
m odern secular culture has grow n from th e tw in
roots of m odern science and m odern philosophy.
Science Gives Man a Sense of Power
To speak of science first, m odern science and
technology has m ade m an feel very pow erful and
102
im portant.
R egarding everything as controlled
solely by n a tu ra l law —w ith no thought of any di
vine providence back of n a tu ra l law —m odern m an
no longer sees the hand of God in th e w orld of
nature.
M an who can build g reat hydro-electric plants,
who can fly faster th an the speed of sound, who
can split the atom w ith devastating results—w hy
should such a being need God? M odern science
has u n d ertak en to explain everything w ithout
God, and this has trem endously bolstered m odern
m an’s confidence in himself. His ego is trem end
ously inflated. He feels th a t m an can do anything.
Even flights to th e m oon are regarded as w ithin
the realm of possibility.
Only occasionally does som ething happen to
rem ind m odern m an of his real helplessness and
dependence on God — such as a tornado or an
earthquake. A ccordingly, such events a re legally
designated as “acts of God,” w hile th e ordinary
conduct and course of life is reg ard ed as inde
pendent of God. In short, m odern science and
technology, w ith its great success in dealing w ith
m aterial things and physical forces, has given
m odern m an “th e big head.” He is inflated w ith
vainglorious hum an pride, a state of m ind u tte rly
contrary to hum ble fa ith in God.
Modern Philosophy Omits God
The o th e r root of m odern secular cu ltu re is
m odern philosophy. W e m ay reg ard m odern
philosophy as beginning w ith Im m anuel K ant.
Since K an t philosophy has veered fa rth e r and
fa rth e r aw ay from faith in God and from re g ard
ing God as relev an t fo r hu m an life as a whole.
The resu lt is th a t over against th e theistic phil
osophy of th e B ible we have today a secular
philosophy w hich recognizes no need, place or use
for God (except in th e n arro w area of religious
feelings and w orship.) O r if m odern philosophy
does indeed use th e w ord “God” at all, it is not
speaking of the God of the B ible and of historic
C hristianity, b u t of a pantheistic “God” w ho is
really only an aspect of th e universe, a projection
of th e hum an mind.
M odern A m erican Pragm atism is the o u t
come of th e m odem developm ent of philosophy.
Pragm atism holds th a t anything is tru e if it
“works.” Pragm atism , of course, h as really no
place fo r God. He is le ft outside of this system.
We live in an age w hen th e “grass roots” cul
tu re is affected and determ ined by th e “experts”
as never before. M any people today w ho have
never tak en a course in philosophy or opened a
book on philosophy are nevertheless deeply in
fluenced by th e tren d s of th e philosophy of the
day. This is evidenced w ith special clearness in
o u r educational system , w hich has been deeply
influenced by the p rag m atist teachings of John
Dewey and others. So th e view s of th e philoso
phers and “experts” percolate rig h t down to the
kindergarten and first grade of our public schools.
Secularism Surrounds us Today
This secular philosophy is all around us. I t is
everyw here; it is pervasive. Som etim es it is explicity stated, but m uch m ore often it is assumed,
it is taken for granted. I t is the unvoiced m ajor
prem ise lurking in the back of m en’s minds. You
see it everyw here. You do n o t have to search for
it. You cannot w alk around in the A m erica of
1956 w ithout bum ping into it. It is in the Reader’s
Digest, the Ladies’ Home Journal, the Woman’s
Home Companion, Time Magazine, Life, y our daily
new spaper, the radio, the television, your parentteacher association, the U nited N ations, and—last
but not least—in the governm ent of the U nited
States of America and in our state and local gov
ernm ents down to the local tow nship. A ll along
the line m an feels able to get along all rig h t w ith
out God. It is not so m uch th a t m an is opposed
to God as th a t he just om its God. God is not r e
garded as bad; He is ju st regarded as superfluous
and unnecessary.
One thing th at m akes it a ttractiv e to be a
foreign m issionary is th at on the foreign field you
m eet the forces of evil and of S atan head-on in
open conflict. A m an is e ith e r a C hristian or a
non-Christian, and it is not h a rd to decide w hich
he is. Society is out and out pagan; The C hris
tian Church is a little nucleus of a different type
of society — a society in w hich God is central.
B ut in America it is different. H ere it is hard to
tell w here a m an stands. H e m ay be a m em ber
or even an officer of a church, and y et he m ay
regard God as irrelevant for nin e-ten th s of his life.
Secularism Taken For Granted
This secular view of life is tak en for granted;
it is an assum ption in th e back of people’s minds.
They are hardly conscious of it, b u t it is there.
If people would come out and say it plainly, it
would be m uch easier to cope w ith it. B ut only
the b latant atheist comes out and calls a spade a
spade. The rest profess to believe in God w hile
in nine-tenths of their life they ignore and disre
gard Him.
This is w hat we are up against in A m erica to
day. This is w hat evangelism is up against. This
is w hat C hristian education is up against. This is
w hat the Church is up against. A nd this is w hat
the individual C hristian is up against—a society
and a culture th a t regards God as w ithout m ean
ing for most of hum an life.
Secularism has Deeply Infiltrated the Churches
in Present-Day America
It is inevitable th a t C hristian people w ill be
affected by th eir environm ent. W hen C hristian
people live in a secular environm ent such as th at
103
of present-day America, they cannot but be pro
foundly influenced by it. The Am erican church
has absorbed the secular view of life from the
secularism of m odern culture.
C hristian people are still hum an. They read
th e Reader’s Digest and other popular magazines,
and unconsciously they absorb the point of view
from w hich these magazines are edited. They see
m otion pictures, they listen to the radio, they view
television program s, they hold m em bership in
com m unity organizations of one sort or another.
I t is inev itab le th a t C hristian people will be in
fluenced by all these contacts.
A Subtle, Gradual Influence
are deeply affected by it, they do not think of
challenging it.
No church has com pletely escaped the infec
tion of this deadly virus — not the purest church,
not the strictest, not the m ost faithful. Show me
a church whose m em bers do not read new spapers
or magazines nor listen to radio program s, and
whose children do not attend the public schools,
and I w ill grant th at such a church m ay be com
paratively uninfluenced by secularism. B ut there
is no such church. The existing churches have all
been influenced — some more, some less; some
very passively, others w ith a decided reaction
against secularism. B ut influenced they have
been and it cannot be denied.
The trouble is th a t the influence of secular
ism is slow, gentle and gradual. If it had come
as a sudden revolution from the theistic (Godcentered) view of life held by previous genera
tions, p erhaps C hristian people m ight have sensed
th e danger and reacted to it. B ut the influence
of secularism is so gentle, so slow, so gradual and
y et so pervasive and continuous, th at C hristian
people have absorbed it w ithout noticing any real
change of view point.
This infiltration of secularism is certainly one
of the m ajor causes of the churches’ present
fru stration and helplessness. It is one of the
m ajor elem ents of the' churches’ present weakness
and lack of influence. Therefore it is im portant
th a t we understand this present-day phenomenon,
for if w e do not understand its real nature wecannot hope to cope w ith it.
W hen you go to a different community, aw ay
from home, you m ay notice th a t the drinking
w a te r tastes different from w h a t you are ac
custom ed to. You notice the difference because
th e change is sudden, abrupt. B ut the drinking
w a te r of y our own home city probably does not
ta ste exactly the same at all times. It has season
al v ariatio n s in taste and chemical content. B ut
you do not notice these changes because they come
v ery gradually.
Secularism affects the m em bership of pure
and faithful churches w hich recognize it for w hat
it is and are trying to com bat it. It affects the
m em bership of competing churches, which tolerate
it w ithout challenge. A nd it affects the public
we' are attem pting to reach w ith the Gospel of
Christ. Every evangelistic effort is up against the
fact of secularism. In the m inds of all these
people, w ith ra re exceptions, there lurks the p er
verse assum ption th a t religion is a m ere fractional
incident in hum an life, or even th a t God is a m ere
m eans to m an’s happiness and w elfare.
So it has come to pass th at m odern secular
ism has in filtrated the churches. It is not so m uch
th a t th e churches preach and teach secularism,
as th a t they tak e it for granted and they tolerate
it. It is assum ed as legitim ate; it is not challeng
ed, it is not analyzed, it is not criticized. B ut this
shift from a theistic view of life to a secular view
of life, though it has come gradually, represents
a m ajor change from the attitu d e of our fo refath
ers. They did not believe in religion as one of a
n u m b er of co-ordinate interests in life. They did
not place God on a reservation and expect Him to
stay there. They regarded God as the real aim
and purpose of hum an life. The Bible regards
m an as existing for God; m odern culture regards
God as existing for m an and at m an’s disposal.
A nd m odern cu ltu re does not w ant God to get in
its way.
Many Churches Have Been Affected
This notion of religion as an incidental con
cern — one hum an interest among m any others —
is characteristic of m any churches of the present
day. T hey to lerate it, they have made th eir
peace w ith it, they have compromised w ith it, they
The Plight of Faithful Churches
A pure and faithful church is surrounded by
com peting churches w hich are dom inated by the
philosophy of secularism . These churches are con
stan tly trying to gain m em bers at the expense of
the sm aller, p u re r denom inations w hich they dis
dainfully call “splinter groups.” It is passing
strange th a t the advocates of ecumenical peace and
harm ony and brotherly love have, apparently, no
qualm s of conscience w hatever about sham elessly
stealing m em bers from sm aller and w eaker de
nominations. “A ll’s fair in love and w a r” seems
to be th e ir practical attitude, w hatever th eir verbal
professions of u n ity and harm ony m ay be. Con
sequently every pure and faithful church of the
present day is really “up against it.” I t is being
preyed upon; its m em bers are being enticed away
from it, often by very w orldly forms of bait.
Why should a person belong to a church th at
m akes sw eeping dem ands concerning his daily life,
his social life, his business life, w hen he can easily,
at any time, join a large, popular and respectable
church w hich m akes no dem ands w hatever upon
him except th at of form al m em bership and pro
104
fession? Y ielding to such reasoning as this, per
haps w ithout full consciousness of its implications,
m em ber a fte r m em ber leaves the pure and faith
fu l church of his forefathers and joins one of the
large, “to leran t” churches of the community.
Secularism Nullifies Christian Profession
The secularistic assum ption lies in the back
of people’s m inds even w hile they are standing
up in church to m ake a public profession of th eir
faith in C hrist and th eir obedience to Him. They
publicly profess allegiance and obedience to Christ
as th eir Lord, b u t too often in the back of th eir
m inds there lu rk s th a t tacit assum ption, th a t subtle,
subconscious m ental reservation — C hrist is to be
the Lord of th e ir religious life only, not of th eir
life as a whole. This secularistic assum ption is
the unvoiced m ajor prem ise of th e transaction in
the minds of such people. It cancels the m eaning
of any profession, it nullifies all vows, it contra
dicts every C hristian testim ony.
W hy is it th a t church m em bers often attend
church only sporadically w hen they happen to
feel like it or find it convenient? I t is the as
sum ption of secularism in the back of th eir minds.
W hy is it th a t a church w ith 100 m em bers w ill
have a p ra y e r m eeting attended by perhaps a
dozen or two? It is for the sam e reason. W hy is
it th a t it is so h ard to get people to practice con
sistent C hristian stew ardship? W hy is it th a t
people w ill spend money lavishly on luxuries and
will, too often, dole it out w ith a m iserly hand for
th e extension of God’s Kingdom? The answ er is
secularism.
W hy is it th a t people w ill publicly take
solemn vows, and then b reak them th e following
Sabbath? W hy w ill people prom ise to keep the
S abbath holy and then a few days or w eeks later
attend a big fam ily reunion picnic on the L ord’s
Day, or sta rt a vacation trip on the Sabbath m orn
ing, or ju st stay hom e from church and loaf?
Secularism , again.
Why People Change Churches Easily
Why is it th a t people so easily change from
one church to another, w ith no investigation or
study of the denom ination they are joining? W hy
th e steady u n rem ittin g d rift from the pure and
faithful churches to the broad, popular and in
clusive ones? It is because of secularism. In
such people’s m inds is the assum ption th a t r e
ligion is ju st a special in terest to be confined to a
reservation. In th e ir m inds is the assum ption th a t
religion m ust not be allowed to in terfere in any
w ay w ith th e ir own plans, am bitions, conveni
ence, activities, preferences, or projects. They
w ant God, b u t they do not w ant God to interfere
w ith th eir lives.
A person m ay accept any term s of communion,
any vows, any confession of faith, any covenant,
but if the assumption of secularism lu rk s in his
mind, it m eans exactly nothing. Secularism is
like a chlorine bleach. It takes the real color out
of everything.
Biblical Religion is the Antithesis of Modern
Secularism.
“In the beginning God . . .” These opening
words of Holy W rit give us the keynote of the
Bible’s philosophy of life: In the beginning God.
Of Him and through Him and to Him are all
things. In Him we live and move and have our
being. W ith Him is the fountain of life, and in
His light shall w e see light. A ccording to Scrip
ture, God is relevant for hum an life at every point.
And, moreover, God him self is the great purpose
of hum an life. “Man’s chief end is to glorify God
and to enjoy Him forever” ; th a t is not a quota
tion from the Bible but the th ought is Biblical and
can be supported from Scripture.
Religion the Real Purpose of Life
“Aiming to live for the glory of God as our
chief end . . .”—thus starts our Young People’s
Pledge. T hat form of statem ent, taken from the
Covenant of 1871, is based, not on secularism , but
on the Biblical view of hum an life.
According to the Biblical view, life is for re
ligion, not religion for life. We do not have a re
ligion because it enriches our life; on the contrary,
we are alive because it serves the purpose of r e
ligion for us to be alive. E verything else in life
is to serve the ends of our religion—th a t is the
Christian view of life.
God is the great fact and end of life. The
m eaning of everything depends on God. W ithout
God life is blank and m eaningless and ends in a
whirlpool of blind chance or fate. W ithout God,
life is a series of ciphers w ith no rea l num ber plac
ed before them. If we do not sta rt w ith faith in
the God of the Bible, th ere is nothing in the u n
iverse th a t can have a real m eaning to us. Life
has m eaning only because back of life is God, the
infinite God whose sovereign counsel determ ines
all created being. Facts have a m eaning only be
cause back of them th e re is the infinitely wise
counsel of the sovereign God who has determ ined,
from all eternity, w hat th eir m eaning shall be.
Modern Thought is Man-Centered
Modern secular thought and life, on the other
hand, are dom inated by a radically different faith.
Modern thought starts w ith m an, and assum es th at
m an is sufficient unto himself. M odern thought
brings in God—not the God of the Bible, but a socalled “God” of its own m aking—later, when, as
and w here needed, if needed a t all. M odern
thought regards God as a convenience, or at best
as a support or sanction for the m oral life of man.
It does not regard God as the source and end of
all things. This is because m odern th o ught is re al
105
ly based, not on the revelation given in the Bible,
b u t on th e speculations of hum an philosophy, and
especially on th e m an-centered view of things
w hich is derived from the G erm an philosopher
Im m anuel K ant.
We Must Frankly Reject Secularism
If w e are going to adhere to th e Biblical view
of life, w e w ill have to challenge secularism and
re je c t it root and branch. No halfw ay m easures
can be effective. We w ill have to recognize th a t
w e a re a d ifferen t and separated people, and th a t
only in G od’s light can we really see light. By
God’s grace, let us dare to look the m odern w orld
in th e face an d declare th at we accept and adhere
to th e Biblical, G od-centered view of the w orld
and of hum an life, w ith all our h eart and w ith all
our soul.
By th u s adhering to the Biblical view of life
w e w ill im m ediately m ake ourselves the objects of
ridicule and reproach. We w ill be called “n a r
row ,” “in to leran t,” “behind the times,” “obscuran
tist,” “stuck hopelessly in the backw aters of fu n d
am entalism ,” and so forth. We need not fear this
reproach, for it is really th e reproach of Christ.
So long as w e are able to give a reason fo r the
fa ith th a t is in us, we should hold up our heads
and w itness fo r the God of the Bible w ithout com
prom ise o r apology.
What can be Done to Counteract Secularism
No real C hristian has any rig h t to be a d e
featist. As long as God lives and His prom ises
hold tru e, w e m ust have faith and face the bleak
outlook w ith courage.
The first thing th a t can be done about secul
arism is to recognize it for w hat it really is and
call it by its rig h t name. The church has no busi
ness playing a gam e of m ake-believe and p reten d
ing th a t everything is all rig h t when everything
certain ly is not all right. Secularism should be
plainly, boldly, courageously nailed down and
challenged. N ot only should th e false view of
secularism be pointed out, b u t the Biblical view of
hu m an life should be placed sharply in antithesis
to it. It is no use to beat around the bush; it is
no use to p re te n d th a t there is no deep gulf b e
tw een Biblical C hristianity and m odern American
culture. It is tim e to aw ake to th e fact th a t
th ere is a yaw ning chasm betw een th e two
A m erican secular culture will take over the
church if it can. It has already taken over a good
m any of th e churches, which now subm it passively
to the dem ands of a m an-centered culture and
nev er challenge this or react against it.
Calvinism can Challenge Secularism
Secularism can be successfully challenged only
on th e basis of real Biblical Christianity, sometimes
called C alvinism or th e Reform ed Faith. Only a
totalitarianism can really cope w ith secularism.
Consistent Biblical C hristianity—the Reformed
Faith or Calvinism —is th a t totalitarianism . All
m ediating and halfw ay system s have th e seeds of
disintegration in them and are bound to fail. Cal
vinism contains steel and granite, and will su r
vive.
Over against the assum ption of m odern secular
culture th at God is to be placed on a reservation,
we m ust place the full tru th of the Bible, th a t
m an’s life and everything in it exists for God’s
glory. This is the very antithesis of secularism.
No message w hich aims only a t the salvation
of souls can counteract secularism. We m ust aim
a t the salvation of people’s lives and at the abso
lute consecration of those lives to the glory of God.
In short, w e m ust p u t God and God’s glory first
in all our preaching and w itnessing. Even m an’s
salvation is subordinate to the glory of God. To
combat secularism, w e m ust give God His rightful
place all along the line. No narrow er message
can do it.
As to practical procedures to be adopted in
com bating secularism , I can claim no special suc
cess above others, b u t I shall present some ideas
for w hatever they m ay be w orth. P erhaps they
m ay help to rem ove this roadblock of secularism
w hich is th rottling the effectiveness of the church.
Real Christian Education Needed
First, the crying need of the hour is th e need
fo r real C hristian education. The D utch C alvin
istic churches, in H olland and in America, have
pioneered in this, and th ey have profited im
m ensely by it. Yes, I believe in the Bible in the
public schools, and I believe in "released tim e,”
and I believe in Vacation Bible Schools, and I b e
lieve in Sabbath Schools. B ut add them all to
gether and they w ill still not solve this problem
of C hristian education. W hat is needed is not a
secular system of education w ith some C hristian
features added on, b u t an educational system
which puts God first and honors God all along
th e line—not m erely the Bible and religion tacked
onto the rest, b u t the en tire curriculum and pro
gram unified by the Bible view of life and the God
of the Bible.
Schools and teaching inspired by the phil
osophy of John Dewey do not become C hristian by
having some Bible reading, or even some Bible
lessons, added on to the rest. T hat is at best a
m akeshift, a palliative. W hat we need is real
C hristian education from A to Z. It has been tried
in H olland and the C hristian people there are
reaping trem endous benefits from it. It has been
trie d in America, and it is the real backbone of
the churches th at do it. True, it costs terrifically.
I t calls for heroic sacrifices. B ut they are people
of heroic convictions and they w illingly m ake the
sacrifices in order th a t their covenant children
m ay be educated in G od-centered schools. And
106
they reap the benefits. This is w orth looking
into, and we should be big enough to lay aside all
jealousies and prejudices and look into it w ith
an open mind.
Maintain High Membership Standards
In the second place, I believe w e should have
a m uch h igher stan d ard in receiving m em bers
from the w orld, and in the case of our own youth
being adm itted as com m unicant m em bers. This,
of course, is easy to say b u t h ard to do. P robably
our formal requ irem en ts are high enough. I t is
th e practical p a rt th a t needs to be raised higher.
We are so eager to gain a few m em bers th a t we
ten d to hesitate, perhaps, to ta lk as plainly w ith
them as we should.
I th in k -we should get down to brass tacks in
this m a tte r of receiving m em bers. We should ask
people pointedly, do they intend to atten d church
faithfully, or only w hen they feel like it? A re
they really going to practice C hristian stew ard
ship, or do they intend to rob God? Will they
really keep th e Sabbath holy, o r are they ju st
saying th a t to fool th e preacher and the elders?
W hen it comes to an issue betw een th e interests
of th e K ingdom of God and th e ir own private
plans and am bitions, w ill th ey really p u t the
Kingdom of God first? To be concrete, will they
be w illing to sacrifice financial gain in order to
keep them selves and th eir fam ily w here they can
a tte n d and support th e church they conscientiously
believe in?
It w ill tak e courage to adopt such a program
as that. I am not sure I have th e courage to try
it myself. The trouble is, It is extrem ely difficult
to s ta r t som ething like that, because the people
you a re talking to know perfectly w ell th a t th ere
a re m em bers already in the church who do not
m ake any a ttem p t to live according to such a
high standard.
In receiving m em bers from the w orld, and in
adm itting o u r covenant children to com m unicant
m em bership, th e auth o rity of th e pastor and the
session is terrib ly w eakened by the fact th a t ev ery
one knows th a t there are m em bers of long sta n d
ing who have m ade exactly th e sam e profession
and taken exactly the same vows, y e t are b rea k
ing them, and nothing is done about it.
I have heard women in C hina th rea ten their
children by telling them they w ill cut th e ir ears
off. The impression produced on th e children is
exactly zero. They have been told hundreds of
times th at th eir ears w ill be cut off, b u t they
know very well th a t nobody’s ears are going to be
cut off, so they go on doing as they please. And in
the same way, secularism has a free course in the
churches and among the m em bers, and all the
vows and professions th at are taken do not m ake
any difference. I do not say, of course, th a t none
are sincere, b u t I do say th a t too m any have a
secularistic m ajor prem ise hanging on a hook in
the back of th eir mind. They take the vows, but
they intend to break the Sabbath, rob God, stay
home from church, and so on, if they feel like it.
They feel th at God has no rig h t to m eddle w ith
their private lives.
Scriptural Church Discipline Needed
Therefore, I feel, the th ird thing necessary to
combat the inroads of secularism is a re tu rn to
the exercise of S criptural church discipline.
Church discipline has alm ost vanished from the
life of the churches today. If a m an ru n s aw ay
with someone else’s wife, I suppose som ething w ill
be done about it. B ut in th e o rd in ary and very
common cases of flagrantly broken vows and p ro
fessions, nothing w hatever is done about it and
everyone knows th a t nothing w ill be done about
it. B ut church discipline is a subject in itself, and
I propose to leave th at fo r th e n e x t lecture.
Note: The four articles of this series, of which
the second appears above, w ere originally de
livered as lectures at the W hite L ake C hristian
W orkers’ Conference, N ew York, in 1953. L a ter
they w ere published in a num ber of installm ents
in The Covenanter W itness during 1953 and 1954.
They are now being rep rin te d in B lue Banner
Faith and Life by request. The m aterial is re
produced from The C ovenanter W itness by p e r
mission, for w hich th an k fu l acknow ledgem ent is
hereby expressed. — Ed.
(To be continued)
Sketches o f the Covenanters
By J. C. McFeeters
Chapter XIX
Division in the Covenanted Ranks — A. D.
1648.
The 1638 C ovenant produced gratifying results
in the P resb y terian C hurch of Scotland. She w as
revived, enlarged, strengthened, consolidated, and
fortified beyond precedent. Ten years of m arv el
ous prosperity followed, and y et she h a d no easy
road to travel. She w as still beset by dangers;
enemies w ere plotting h er overthrow ; w ars w ere
convulsing the country; the e x te rn a l conditions
w ere extrem ely adverse; y e t she grew , w axed
m ighty, and became irresistib le in the w ork of
the Gospel. The C hurch honored the Lord in His
holy Covenant, and He honored h er w ith grow th,
107
success, and victory in the presence of her foes.
He was a w all of fire round about her, and the
glory in th e m idst thereof. These w ere years of
phenom enal pow er and splendor unto the Cove
nan ted Church.
T hen follow ed the gloaming. The evening of
th a t prosperous day grew very dark; the darkness
increased for forty years; ten thousand m idnights
seem ed to h av e condensed th e ir h orrid blackness
upon Scotland and h er prostrated Church. A t
length th e storm of fire and blood exhausted i t
self, b u t not till a whole generation had w asted
aw ay in the anguish of th at protracted persecu
tion. The steps th a t led to the Church’s p ro stra
tion and decimation, we m ay trace w ith profit;
b u t as it is crim soned w ith th e blood of the
brave, and m arked w ith m any a m arty r’s grave,
th e eye w ill oft be m oist and the h eart sick.
W hile th e C hurch stood to h er Covenant, she
w as like an im pregnable fortress, or an invincible
arm y. W hile she held the tru th tenaciously in h e r
G eneral Assembly, presbyteries, and sessions, and
applied it effectively, she spread forth h e r roots
like Lebanon. But w hen doubt and fear, plans
and policy, compromise and tem porizing entered
into h e r councils, h er gold becam e dim and h er
sw ord pew ter. The Lord w ent not w ith h e r
arm ies into th e battle, and they fainted and fell
on th e field. A b rief review is necessary to u n d er
stand th e situation.
The Solem n League and Covenant, in 1643,
gave th e Covenanted Church of Scotland a m ighty
im petus in th e rig h t direction, b u t its effect for
good w as brief. The League united the kingdom s
of Scotland, England, and Ireland; and the Cove
n a n t placed them u nder obligations to one another
and to God. These kingdoms w ere thereby ex
alted beyond m easure in privilege. The sacred
bond had been prepared by the Jo in t Commission
th a t rep resen ted England and Scotland, the initial
step having been taken by the English Parliam ent.
The king and th e parliam ent w ere then a t strife.
T he dom inating spirit of Charles, w hich harassed
Scotland h ad provoked hostility in England; the
s tre n g th of th a t kingdom was nearly equally di
vided betw een th e tw o parties. The people of
England, w ho aspired after liberty and felt the
th ro b of nobler manhood in th eir pulse, had ask
ed Scotland to combine forces against the op
pressor. The outcom e was the Solemn League
and C ovenant w hich united th e ir arm ies for the
conflict.
This sacred bond was adopted by the G eneral
A ssem bly of Scotland, th e English Parliam ent, and
th e W estm inster Assembly of divines. A fterw ard
it received a prodigious num ber of signatures by
th e people in public and private life, and became
q u ite popular. These kingdom s were thereby
placed u n d e r solem n obligation conjointly to con
serve th e R eform ed religion in Scotland, to re
form the religion of England and Ireland, and to
root out all system s of evil in C hurch and State.
Scotland w as fa r in advance of the other two
kingdom s in enlightenm ent and liberty. The
C ovenanted C hurch h a d exalted the Lord Jesus
as h e r Head, and He had exalted her as the light,
life, and glory of Scotland. The vine had spread
its branches from sea to sea. The two sisters w ere
far behind. She undertook to lift them up; the
burden was too heavy; they dragged h e r down.
She was unequally yoked, and the yoke pushed
h er astray. Doubtless there w ere reasons th at
justified the course she had taken, but th at course
led h e r into a “w aste and how ling w ilderness.”
Scotland sent h er arm y to help the English
Reform ers in th eir fight for liberty. The soldiers
coming from Covenanted homes, m arched, as was
th eir custom, u n d er the b anner emblazoned w ith
the inspiring words:
FOR CHRIST’S CROWN AND COVENANT
They w ere led by G eneral Leslie. Victory follow
ed victory until K ing Charles, overw helm ed w ith
defeat, rode into Leslie’s camp in disguise and
su rren d ered as his prisoner.
W hat now shall be done w ith the royal cap
tive? This w as the question w hich called fo r the
wisdom of both nations. The Covenanters urged
him to subscribe the C ovenant and re tu rn to his
throne. H e refused. They pleaded, promising
th a t th eir flag w ould lead the forces of Scotland
in his support. He yet refused. They prayed and
en treated him w ith te ars to accept the Covenant
and continue his reign. He would not. W hat
could they then do, b u t deliver him up to the
English arm y, whose battles they w ere fighting?
G eneral Leslie led his command back to Scot
land. I t w as disbanded, fo r the lan d again had
rest. The suspense, however, concerning the king
was painful. The Scottish h ea rt y et loved
Charles. Though he was false, cruel, treacherous,
and tyrannical, th e Covenanters w ere still devoted
to him as th e ir own king. They prayed, took
counsel, se n t delegates, did everything in th e ir
pow er to have him restored. All they asked was
his adherence to th e Covenant, th eir national
C onstitution of governm ent. L et him subscribe
to this, and Scotland’s brav est sons w ill rally
around him ; th e B lue B anner w ill w ave over him
in bold defiance of every foe. B ut he would not
yield.
The king w as now a prisoner in England.
W hile h e lay at C arisbrooke Castle, the E arl of
Lauderdale', a C ovenanter of some eminence, ac
com panied by the E arl of L anark, was stealthily
adm itted into his presence. These men succeeded
in m aking a compromise. Lauderdale and L anark
agreed to raise an arm y to bring the king back. The
king in tu rn agreed to confirm Presbyterianism
fo r th ree years: th e perm anent form of Church
108
G overnm ent to be then determ ined by an assembly
of divines, assisted by tw en ty com m issioners to be
appointed by th e king. T his p riv ate tre aty is
know n in history as “The Engagem ent.” It con
tained the elem ents of a base an d disastrous su r
ren d er of principle. P resb y terian ism on proba
tion! B uilt upon the rock of tru th , it lasts w hile
the rock endures. P resb y terian ism to be succeed
ed by an uncertainty? How could the C hurch en
tru st the governm ent of God’s house to the king’s
commissioners?
5. How did the Covenanters tre a t th eir captive
king?
W hen “The E ngagem ent” becam e public, the
Covenanted C hurch was plunged into a debate
th a t w rought havoc. The peaceful sea was struck
w ith a storm ; th e angry w aves lashed every shore.
The compromise failed, b u t th e C hurch w as in
fected, w eakened, re n t in tw ain, and fo r forty
years was unable to stan d in th e presence of h er
enemies. H enceforw ard th ere w e re tw o parties;
those who held to the Covenant, in its clearness,
fulness, p ungent energy, and logical deductions;
and those who trim m ed, m odified, and com pro
m ised divine tru th , fo r th e sake of num erical
strength and tem poral advantage. One p a rty was
governed by principle; th e other by expediency.
The entering wedge w as followed by other w ed
ges, until th e G lorious C hurch of Scotland w as
chopped and split, and th ro w n about into endless
disorder,
Chapter XX
“As wood w hich m en do cu t and cleave
Lies scattered on the ground.”
The Church of Jesus C hrist m ay n ever traffic
in the tru th . T he least comprom ise of Gospel
principle is treason against th e K ing of heaven.
The term s offered to the w orld, w hile in rebellion
against C hrist, should b e those embodied in G en
eral G ran t’s fam ous dem and — “U nconditional
S urren d er.” A nything less th a n this is treachery.
The tru th of the L ord Jesus, w hich cost His blood
in its purchase and the blood of m artyrs in its
defence, should be m aintained to th e very last
shred, w ith th e ten acity of unconquerable faith.
U nfaithfulness in th e least degree m ay resu lt in
greatest disaster. Once a ship w as cast upon the
rocks, and th e lives of th e passengers w ere
jeopardized sim ply because th e compass varied, it
was said, a m illioneth p a rt of an inch. It re
quires “h air-sp littin g ” to m easure a m illioneth
p a rt of an inch, and in certain cases it is w orth
while.
1. W hat reaction follow ed th e ten prosperous
years after th e C ovenant of 1638?
2. T race the cause of th e g reat distress th at
befell th e Church.
3.
army?
Why did Scotland aid E ngland w ith h er
4. W hat w ere the resu lts of th e w ar?
6. W hat was the agreem ent know n as “The
Engagem ent?”
7. How did it divide the C ovenanted Church?
8. W hat dangers arise from the su rre n d e r of
truth?
Crowning the Prince. — A. D. 1651.
The reign of Charles I. cam e to an unkindly
end. The w ar betw een him and the English
P arliam ent resulted in his u tte r defeat. He de
livered him self up as a prisoner, and “because he
m ercy m inded not but persecuted still,” m ercy
refused to spread her w hite w ings over his guilty
soul. He was tried for treason by th e B ritish
P arliam ent and sentenced to death. The tria l con
tinued one week, during w hich th e recital of his
m isrule and cruel deeds m ust have intensely h a r
rowed his soul. He yielded up his life by laying
his head upon the block to receive the execution
er’s axe. One stroke did the fa ta l w ork.
The death of the king was n o t w ith th e con
sent of the Covenanters: to them it w as a poignant
grief. W ith all his faults they loved him still as
their king. Had he accepted the Solem n League
and Covenant when a prisoner in th e ir hands,
they w ould have been at his service to restore
his power and kingdom. T hey still hoped fo r his
reform ation, entreated him to tak e th e C ovenant,
and pointed him to a trium phal en try into E din
burgh. They pleaded w ith the E nglish P arliam en t
to spare his life, and sent com m issioners to p re
vent his execution. T hrough his obstinacy they
failed. But th at obstinacy he accounted kingly
dignity and inviolable honor. T he C ovenanters
upon hearing of his tragic d eath hastened to pro
claim his eldest son king in his stead, granting
him the throne on condition of accepting the
Solemn League and Covenant, and ru ling the
kingdom according to its term s. He w as a young
man of nineteen years; “a prince of a comely
presence; of a sweet, but m elancholy aspect. His
face was regular, handsom e, and ju stly propor
tioned; and, being of a m iddle statu re, he was
capable of enduring the greatest fatigue.”
Charles II. w hile em erging from his teens
faced a golden future. T he providence of God
spread before him prospects of greatness, honor,
and success, which the m ost exalted on earth
m ight have envied. His h e a rt in his highest asp ir
ations had not yet dream ed of the m oral grandeur
and kingly possibilities, th a t w ere gran ted him
w hen the Covenanters called him to ru le th eir
kingdom. Even Solomon, accepting a crown at
the same age, was not m ore highly favored. Scot
109
land at this tim e was exalted into close relation
w ith heaven; the National Covenant had lifted
th e kingdom into alliance w ith God; the people
had been em ancipated from darkness, Papacy, and
P relacy; th e Gospel of Jesus C hrist had over
spread the land w ith light. The Covenanted
C hurch had flourished m arvelously during the
last decade, notw ithstanding the storms th at
sw ept h er borders; her branches veiled the m oun
tains, and h er fru it overhung the valleys; every
parish was adorned w ith a schoolhouse, and the
cities w ith colleges. W hat sublim e possibilities
for a king at th e head of such a nation! Oh, th a t
th e young prince m ight have a dream in the
slum bers of th e night and see God! Oh, for a
vision, a pray er, and a gift, th a t will fit him for
th e glory-crested heights of privilege and power
to w hich he has been advanced! Charles II. fail
ed, and fell from these heavens like Lucifer.
T he young king was crowned by the Cove
n an ters Ja n u a ry 1, 1651. T he Crown of Scotland,
spark lin g w ith precious stones deeply set in purest
gold, w as his splendid New Y ear’s gift. B ut the
gift w as m ore th an a crown of gold and precious
stones; it w as a symbol of the nation’s power,
w ealth, people, Covenant, honor, and high rela
tion to God, en tru sted to his keeping.
The coronation took place in the dead of w in
ter. T he country was gowned like a bride in
w hite. B ut th e w h ite on this occasion was not the
em blem of p u rity ; ra th e r was it the pallor of icy
death. The rigorous storm s seemed to prophesy
of trouble; th e very w inds w ere rehearsing a dirge
to be plaintively sung over m ountains and moors
in the com ing years.
A large assem bly of Covenanters m et in
Scone for th e crow ning of the new king. There
w as m uch enthusiasm , y et beneath it all there
flow ed a deep undercu rren t of doubt and fear.
Rev. R obert Douglas preached the coronation ser
mon. The king listened to deep, penetrating
words from the Book of God. The Solemn League
and C ovenant w as read. He gave his assent to it
w ith an overflow of vehemence. Archibald Cam p
bell, the M arquis of Argyle, a prom inent Cove
n a n te r and statesm an, then took the crown in both
hands, and, liftin g it above the prince with great
solem nity, placed it upon his head, accompanying
the act w ith an appropriate exhortation. While
th e o ath of office was being adm inistered, the
prince kneeled in apparent hum ility, and lifted up
his rig h t h an d in a solemn appeal to God. A t
th is point he u tte re d the aw ful vow in the pres
ence of th e people: “By the E ternal and Alm ighty
God, who liveth and reigneth forever, I shall ob
serve and keep all th a t is contained in this oath.”
He also said: “I w ill have no enemies, b u t the
enem ies o f th e Covenant — no friends, b u t the
friends of th e Covenant.” Thus K ing Charles II.
becam e a radical C ovenanter by profession and
protestation in the m ost solemn m anner.
proved his guilty duplicity.
Time
The English P arliam ent, after the execution
of Charles I., had passed an act m aking it treason
to proclaim this prince king. The Covenanters,
having thus elevated Charles to the throne, m ust
now settle accounts w ith E ngland on the b a ttle
field.
O liver Crom well invaded Scotland with a
strong force, determ ined to unseat Charles. The
Covenanters rallied in defence of their king. A lex
ander Leslie w as once m ore in command. The two
arm ies w ere soon facing each other, but hesitated
to strike. Both arm ies w ere m ade up of soldiers
of the cross; both had fought for the Solemn
League and Covenant; p ra y er ascended habitually
from both camps; the singing of Psalm s aroused
the heroic sp irit in each. W hat w onder if they
feared the shock of battle! A t length Leslie m ov
ed down from his advantageous position, and
Crom well ordered an attack. The Covenanters
w ere put to flight w ith te rrib le slaughter.
Had the sw eet singer of Israel been on the
field a fte r the clash of arm s, doubtless he would
have repeated his wail: “How are the m ighty
fallen, and the w eapons of w ar perished!” The
Covenanters defeated! How! Why! Ah, there was
an Achan in the camp. The king was already
perfidious in the Covenant. His perfidy had
blighted the nation, and sm itten the arm y. H ither
to God had led the arm ies of the Covenanters;
they had w on easy victories, and sometimes blood
less trium phs. B ut now the Lord tu rn s His back
upon th e b an n er unfurled for His Crown and
Covenant.
The dread disaster sent a wail through all
Scotland. The grief was g reat and the penitential
searchings deep. T he pious and prayerful inquir
ed of the Lord to know the cause of His w rath
and the w ay of deliverance. The' eyes of many
w ere opened to see the shadow of greater calam i
ties approaching. Argyle, Johnston, R utherford,
Gillespie, and others of kindred spirit, saw in the
last battle the stroke of the L ord for the sins of
the nation. The w ra th of God, like a bolt of
lightning, had stru ck th a t field and thousands lay
dead. G reater retrib u tio n s w ere coming; re
pentance alone could save the country.
The king attem pted to ra lly his shattered
forces. H e raised his standard a t Stirling. His
arm y was sm all; he w anted m ore men. H itherto
the arm y had been recru ited from the homes of
Covenanters; the ran k and file w ere the resolute
sons of the Covenant. The Scottish P arliam ent
in by-gone years had m ade a law called the “Act
of Classes”, by w hich only those who had taken
the C ovenant w ere eligible to office in the govern
m ent, or position in the arm y. The statesm anship
of the Scottish fath ers w as profound; th eir m ili
ta ry wisdom w as from above. Civil governm ent
is God’s gift to m an. W hy e n tru st it to other than
110
His people? The m ilitary pow er is to guard this
trust. W hy com m it th e guardianship to any but
the loyal serv an ts of the L ord Jesus Christ?
The king had the Act of Classes repealed th at
he m ight increase his arm y. He m ultiplied his
regim ents, b u t forgot “The sw ord of the Lord, and
of Gideon.” T hree h u n d red m ay be b e tte r th a n
th irty thousand. He accepted b attle once more
w ith Crom well, suffered a te rrib le defeat, escaped
from the country and rem ained an exile nine
years. A ll honor to Gen. Leslie, and other faith
ful officers, who refused to serve after the ranks
h ad been filled w ith m en who feared n o t God nor
regarded His Covenant!
Can w e h ere find a lesson to lay upon our
hearts? C ovenanting w ith God is, possibly, the
highest privilege on earth ; C ovenant-breaking is,
possibly, th e m ost dangerous sin. W hat can be
worse? The C ovenant-breaker destroys m uch
good; brings w rath upon him self, and defeat, sor
row, and distress upon those w hom he represents.
1. How was the reign of K ing C harles I. end
ed?
2. W hat was the effort on the p a rt of the Cove
nanters to secure a successor?
3. W hat w ere the prospects
prince?
of
the young
4. W hat brought ru in upon him?
5. W hy w ere the C ovenanters now com pelled
to m eet the English in battle?
6. W ith w hat results?
7. W hat was the “A ct of Classes”?
8. Why was it repealed?
9. W hat w as the effect?
10. W hat heinousness lies in C ovenant-break
ing?
(To be continued)
Psalm Thirteen
What Means The Hiding of His Face?
The w icked are still stru ttin g about on every
side in insolent contem pt of God, and delighting
to vent th e ir m alice by persecuting godly men. The
vilest form s of sin are uncondem ned, and gaining
popularity. It seems as if God has forgotten; th a t
He has hid His face from it all. Surely He does
not see w h at is going on. T he w icked are em
boldened to say, “E veryone th a t doeth evil is good
in the sight of Jehovah, and He delighteth in
them ; or, W here is th e God of justice?” (Mai.
2:17b). And, on th e oth er hand,
I. The Righteous Man is Troubled, (vs. 1, 2).
“How long? O Jehovah, wilt Thou forget me
completely?
“How long wilt Thou hide Thy face from me?
“How long shall I take counsel in my soul, —
Sorrow being in my heart all the day?
“How long shall mine enemy be exalted over
me?”
How long? is not h e re a question of doubt or
com plaint, b u t it is a cry of trouble, of anguish of
soul, in bew ilderm ent because of th e lim itations
of hum an know ledge an d understanding, and w ith
a trem bling desire to know , w ith in God’s will, the
reason, Why? “Thou th a t a rt of p u re r eyes than
to behold evil, and th a t canst not look on p e r
verseness, wherefore lookest Thou upon them th a t
deal treacherously, and boldest Thy peace w hen
th e w icked sw allow eth up the m an th a t is m ore
righteous th a n h e?” I t is a cry th a t has been re
peated by the people of God th roughout the ages
of hum an history, “How long? O Jehovah, w ilt
Thou be angry forever?” “O Jehovah of hosts,
how long w ilt Thou not have m ercy on Jeru sa
lem ?” “Jehovah, how long shall the w icked, how
long shall the w icked triu m p h ?” To Isaiah’s
question, “Lord, how long?” the answ er w as given,
“U ntil cities be w aste w ithout inhabitant, and
houses w ithout man, and th e lan d be u tte rly
desolate,” — only the stum p of a tre e rem aining
which shall be “for a holy seed.” T h at is, u n til
the tem poral judgm ents of God have com pleted
th eir p a rt in His plan, then the fulfillm ent of His
promises shall also be com pleted. This hum an
cry on earth is continued even in heaven by those
who, as m artyrs for Jesus, had been faith fu l unto
death. “How long, O M aster, th e Holy One and
True, dost Thou not judge and avenge o u r blood?
. . . And there was given them , to each one, a
w hite robe; and it was said to them th a t they
should rest for a little w hile” — u n til th e ir b re th
ren in tribulation should also be delivered as they
were, for, “not one of them shall perish.”
To save sinners from th e ir sin is difficult,
complicated, entangled. The w ay w as found only
by infinite wisdom, patience, love, at infinite cost.
“Seek Jehovah, and ye shall live.” (Amos 5.4-9).
“Seek ye Jehovah while He m ay be found; call
upon Him w hile He is near: let the wicked fo r
sake his w ay, and the unrighteous m an his
thoughts; and le t him re tu rn unto Jehovah, and
He w ill have m ercy upon him ; and to our God,
I ll
for He w ill abundantly pardon. F or My thoughts
are not y our thoughts, n eith er are your w ays My
ways, saith Jehovah. For as th e heavens are
higher than the earth, so are My w ays higher than
your w ays.” (Is. 55:6-9.)
“As fo r God, His w ay is perfect.” T here is
only one way, therefore there are no short cuts.
The hiding of His face is p a rt of His perfect plan.
“V erily, Thou a rt a God th a t hidest Thyself.” He
says, “Seek ye My face.” But, if His face w ere
not hidden a t tim es and places, from individuals
and peoples, would any m an need to “seek” His
face? “If you seek Him, He w ill be found of you,;
b u t if you forsake Him, He will forsake you.”
“W ith th e m erciful Thou w ilt show Thyself m erci
ful; w ith the perfect Thou w ilt show Thyself p e r
fect; w ith the pure Thou w ilt show Thyself pure;
b u t w ith th e perverse Thou w ilt show Thyself
fro w ard .”
G od’s judgm ents of w rath are as certain as
His prom ises of grace. But, in His longsuffering
m ercy, His judgm ents are restrained until the ap
pointed day of w rath. If th e w icked are allowed
to continue, and th eir wickedness to prosper, God
is using them for His own gracious purposes. For
one thing, th a t they m ay have fu rth e r opportunity
to repent; th a t everyone whom God has chosen
m ay be tu rn e d to seek His face. F or another, th at
th e righteous m ay have th e conditions necessary
to th e ir grow th in grace and in the knowledge of
o u r L ord and Saviour Jesus Christ. “The Lord
know eth how to deliver the godly out of tem pta
tion, and to reserve the unrighteous under punish
m ent to the day of judgm ent.” Tem ptations, a f
flictions, and chastisem ents w ith th e rod of the
wicked, p u t to th e test and p urify the integrity
and fid elity of the righteous, and provide the a t
m osphere in which faith is brought to fu ll de
velopm ent. In these tem ptations and punish
m ents of th e present, God sometimes hides His
face; som etim es reveals it w ith startling effect.
“C ount it all joy, my b rethren, w hen ye fall into
m anifold tem ptations; knowing th at the proving
of y o u r faith w orketh patience. And let patience
have its p erfect w ork.” (Jas. 1:2-4.)
A gainst all tru e and faithful evangelism there
are “m any adversaries,’’ who m ake urgent the
need, and w hen God opens the door for the
preaching, they can do nothing to th w art His p u r
pose. R em em ber Elymas, the false prophet, who
trie d to tu rn the governor of Cyprus from the
faith th a t P au l preached. He was suddenly punised w ith blindness, w hich event helped to give the
governor such a realization of God’s presence and
pow er, th a t h e believed th e gospel to be w h at it
is, th e W ord of God.
T he hiding of God’s face keeps man from see
ing God, b u t it does not keep God from seeing all
m en in w h atev er condition they m ay be. It gives
m en a fo retaste and w arning of w hat final separa
tion from God m ust mean. This Psalm has its
place in the present group of judgm ent Psalm s,
revealing the ju st judgm ents of God upon all who
attem pt to crush the tru th and destroy the rig h t
eous from the earth, or forget God’s hatred of sin.
The hiding of God’s face leaves a m an in d a rk
ness and deep distress. “How long shall I take
counsel in m y soul?” — seeking a reason for my
trouble and some w ay of escape, “sorrow being in
my h eart all the day.” W hatever may have been
D avid’s experiences th at fitted him to w rite this
Psalm , those of D avid’s Son w ere im m easurably
m ore fearful and painful because He knew the
sin th a t is in m an. The reason for the hiding of
God’s face is SIN to be found in every place de
prived of His light. His sufferings w ere spiritual
in the depths of His pure and holy soul; almost
nothing is recorded of His physical sufferings.
“My soul is exceeding sorrow ful even unto death”
said Jesus in Gethsem ane. A nd on the cross in
the darkness, th ere w as w rung from H im th at
most profound and agonized expression of His
real hum anity, “My God, m y God, w hy hast Thou
forsaken m e?” He knew and w e know the reason
was th a t He carried our sin in His own body.
The record adds a t least th ree other occasions
in w hich Jesus was sorely troubled: “He had in
dignation in His sp irit and was troubled” at the
grave of Lazarus, w hen He saw the hypocrisy and
unbelief of the w eeping Jew s. Again, w hen the
Greeks cam e asking to see Jesus, He realized
afresh th a t to gain the harvest of the nations, He
like th e grain of w heat, m ust die. The great
crisis loomed before His hum an n atu re w ith indescribale terro r. “Now is m y soul troubled, and
w hat shall I say?” Then, as Godet punctuates,
(Shall I say) “F ather, save m e from this hour?
But for this cam e I to this hour.” (No! I w ill say)
“F ather, glorify th y nam e.” Instantly answ er
cam e in th u n d er tones out of heaven, saying, “I
have both glorified it, and w ill glorify it again.”
And, w hen th e tim e had come for Him to reveal
one of the tw elve as th e traito r, “Jesus was
troubled in the spirit, and testified and said, as
He gave Ju d as another appealing opportunity to
rep en t of his perfidy, “V erily, verily, I say to you,
one of you shall b etray m e.”
“How long shall m ine enem y be exalted over
m e?” Joshya said, “Alas, O Lord Jehovah,
w herefore hast Thou brought this people over
Jo rd a n to deliver us into th e hand of the A m orites
to destroy us? . . . W hat shall I say w hen Israel
tu rn e th th eir backs before th e ir enem ies?” “Get
thee up, w herefore liest thou thus on thy face?
Israel h a th sinned; yea, th ey have transgressed
my covenant w hich I com m anded them .”
“W hat doest thou here E lijah?” “I have been
very jealous for Jehovah, the God of hosts; for
the children of Israel have forsaken thy covenant,
throw n down thine altars, and slain t h y prophets
w ith the sword; and I, even I only am left; and
they seek m y life to take it away.” “Go, retu rn
113
on thy w ay." — the w ay assigned thee; do as I
bid thee. “T u rn us again, O God of hosts, cause
Thy face to shine, and we shall be saved.’’
11. He Took His Trouble in Prayer to God. (vs.
3, 4.)
“Consider; give me answer, O Jehovah, my
God.
“Enlighten mine eyes lest I sleep the sleep of
death;
“Lest mine enemy say, I have prevailed over
him;
“(Lest) mine adversaries exult when I am
shaken.”
He pleads on covenant ground, “O Jehovah
my God.” For, being in covenant w ith God, he
has a rig h t to th e prom ises.
“The secret of J e
hovah is for them th a t fear Him, and His cove
n a n t to m ake them understan d .” (Ps. 25:11.) “E n
lighten m ine eyes, lest I fall asleep. Enable m e
to see and u n derstand w h a t is taking place, lest
I fail to act m y p a rt to the praise of the glory of
Thy grace. L est m ine enem y boast of victory
w hen I fall, and all m ine adversaries trium ph
w hen I am shaken. Thou are m y God, and I am
one of T hy people. T h eir victory over m e would
be a victory against God, against T hy covenant,
and against Thy people. “A nd being in an agony
he prayed m ore earnestly, and his sw eat became
as it w ere g reat drops of blood falling dow n upon
the ground.” T h ree tim es He prayed, then “—
Thou hast answered me.” (Ps. 22:21.) The answ er
cam e full, satisfying and strengthening. “And
w hen He rose from His p rayer, He cam e to the
disciples and found them sleeping for sorrow, and
said to them , W hy sleep ye? Rise and pray, lest
ye en ter into tem ptation.” Im m ediately, He H im
self faced th e mob of m urd erers w ithout a quiver,
and w ent w ith them th e re st of the w ay of
obedience to God, unto death, even the death of
th e cross: and on to glory.
“If thou seest the oppression of the poor, and
the violent taking away of justice and righteous
ness in a province, m arvel n o t a t the m atter; for
One higher than the highest regardeth; and there
are higher than they.” (Eccles. 5:8.) Things are not
always w hat they seem to hum an perception. “The
dark shadow w arriors on th e w all by the fire
light, vanish in the light of the sun.” “A nd it
shall come to pass that, before they call, I will
answer; and while they are y et speaking I w ill
hear.” “He shall call upon me, and I w ill an
swer him ; I w ill be w ith him in trouble: I w ill de
liver him and honor him .”
III. Now He is Singing Praises to God for His
Wonderful Grace, (vs. 5,6)
“But I, even I had put my trust in Thy loving
kindness; (Now) my heart rejoices in Thy sal
vation. I am singing to Jehovah because He hath
dealt bountifully with me.”
“Saith Jehovah thy R edeem er, F or a brief
m oment did I forsake thee; b u t w ith great mercies
will I gather thee. In overflow ing w ra th I hid my
face from thee for a m om ent; b u t w ith everlast
ing kindness I w ill have compassion on thee.”
“But as for me, m y feet w ere alm ost gone; my
steps had well nigh slipped. . . So b ru tish was I,
and ignorant; I was like a beast before Thee.” I
had almost forgotten the Rock on w hich m y feet
had been set, and the safety in w hich I had been
kept. B ut God never forgets, and now, “I w ill
declare Thy nam e to my b reth ren : in th e m idst of
the assembly I will praise Thee . . . F o r He hath
not despised the affliction of the afflicted; neither
hath He hid His face from him, b u t w hen he cried
unto Him, He heard.”
“Beloved, think it not strange concerning the
fiery tria l among you, w hich com eth upon you
to prove you, as though a strange thing happened
to you: but inasmuch as you a re p a rta k e rs of
C hrist’s suffering, rejoice, th a t at the revelation of
His glory, you also m ay rejoice w ith exceeding
joy.”
The favorable review ing of a book here is not to be understood
as necessarily im plying an endorsem ent of everything contained in
it. W ithin the lim its of the editorial policy of Blue B anner F aith
an d Life each review er is solely responsible for the opinions ex
pressed in his reviews. Please purchase books from your book
d ealer or direct from the publishers; do not send orders to the
m anager of this magazine.
M ISSION ON MAIN STREET, by Helga B end
er Henry. W. A. W ilde Co., 131 Clarendon Street,
Boston 16, Mass. 1955, pp. 200. $2.00.
This book by Mrs. H enry is, as Dr. W ilbur M.
Sm ith w rites in the Preface, “th e resu lt of m onths
of careful research in the histories of Los Angeles,
and in the files of the Union Rescue Mission. . . and
the narrative is most carefully balanced — the
dark periods and the disturbing experiences which
the mission suffered from tim e to tim e are set
down w ith the same thoroughness as the b righter
days of the tru ly great achievem ents of the in sti
113
tu tio n .” It is a thrilling story of more th a n 60
y ears of C hristian service.
The function of the Mission can perhaps be
best expressed in the ‘creed’ of one of its most
dynam ic presidents, Joseph Berkley: “No law
b u t love, and no C hrist but the Son of God: I
believe in soup, soap and salvation. . .” “The
Union Rescue Mission organization,” he declared,
“is a com pany of fisherm en, fishing in the great
pool of hum anity, seeking to help the helpless and
save th e lost.” No less significant is the quota
tion of Rev. Jo h n B. N ield’s definition of a rescue
mission. “It is a soul saving plac>?; a place w here
hum an w reckage is salvaged through the m aking
over of lives by the Gospel’s power. It is an
oasis in a desert of despair; a haven of hope for
th e hom eless and heavy-hearted; the salvage de
p a rtm e n t of th e church; the churcii at work dow n
tow n every nig h t of the year. . . By the grace of
God, it is able not only to put a new suit on a
m an, b u t m uch m ore im portant, to p u t a new m an
in th e suit.”
In this story, so simply and yet so compellingly told, we have the answ er to those w ho have
m ade th e criticism th a t an evangelicial C hristian
ity has been so concerned w ith saving the souls of
m en th a t it has had no thought for their bodily
needs; here, too, is the antidote for those whose
fa ith w ould som etim es doubt the power of the
grace of God. H ere is a record of answ ered
pray er, of spiritu al and physical transform ation,
of consecrated Christian witness and service in
a field w h ere the difficulties seem insuperable,
th a t can only stir the h eart to thanksgiving and
to th e declaration: “This is the Lord’s doing, and
it is m arvellous in our eyes.”
— H ugh J. B lair
by G eorge T. Purves, B aker Book House, G rand
Rapids 6, Mich. 1955, pp. xx, 343. $3.00.
This is a m ost adm irable book, first printed
m ore th a n fifty years ago. The Preface to the
1955 edition describes the author, Dr. George T.
P urves, Professor of New Testam ent L iterature
and Exegesis in Princeton Theological Sem inary
from 1892-1900, as “a conscientious scholar, a
skillful exegete, careful in his judgm ents and con
clusions, zealous for tru th . He had a rem arkable
gift of clarity, orderliness and (w hen appropriate)
conciseness of expression. He could condense
th e resu lts of scholarly investigations in a non
technical b u t thoroughly accurate fashion, pro fit
ab le for laym en as w ell as for m inisters and
scholars.” This book abundantly confirms such an
estim ate of his ab ility and work.
Beginning w ith the Rise of Christianity in
Jeru salem , Dr. P urv es shows how the C hristian
faith h ad w ithin it elem ents which made in ev it
able a b reak w ith the Judaism in which it was
n u rtu re d , an d th a t it was destined to become a
universal and com plete message to m ankind; and
the reader passes easily and n atu rally to the
second section in w hich the E arly Expansion of
C hristianity as depicted in Acts is vividly out
lined. The chapters on th e Apostle P aul and on
the developm ent of the church’s organization from
the organization and w orship of the synagogue
are particularly valuable.
The third section of the book, Judaic C hrist
ianity, traverses less fam iliar ground and shows
a great deal of original thought, throw ing v alu
able light on the situation lying behind th e Coun
cil of Jerusalem , the Epistle of Jam es and the
Epistle to the H ebrew s — a most stim ulating
study, showing th a t Judaic C hristianity was des
tined ultim ately to perish in giving birth to a
universal faith.
The rem aining sections, Expansion of C hristi
anity u n der Paul, and Progress of C hristianity to
the Apostolic Age, trace th e fu rth e r history of
C hristianity in the Apostolic Age by most adequate
and excellent sum m aries of th e New T estam ent
Epistles, set in the environm ent of new situations
and in some cases of heretical teachings.
Dr. Purves shows him self a scholar who is well
aw are of the problem s of N ew T estam ent in te r
pretation, b u t his clarity of exposition m akes his
book clearly intelligible and em inently readable.
Sometimes it m ay be th a t lim itations of space
compel him to discard w ithout discussion views
w hich deserve fu rth e r exploration, and occasion
ally to appear to sta te his conclusions m ore dog
m atically th a n th e evidence w arran ts. F o r e x
ample, he gives th e destination of th e Epistle to
the H ebrew s as Jerusalem , though m any scholars
feel th at the reference in ii. 3 implies th a t the re a d
ers had not been hearers of the Lord. As a rule,
however, he does discuss altern ativ e possibilities,
how ever briefly, and then m akes up his m ind
clearly and decisively. H e shows a full know ledge
of the w ork of other scholars, b u t is never afraid
to tak e his ow n line in m atters th a t are open to
debate. Though the ‘southern’ theory of the des
tination of the epistle to the G alations has steadily
grow n in favor since Ram say strenuously affirm
ed it, Dr. P urves finds m uch to incline him to ad
here to the ‘n o rth ern ’ theory.
This review er found the reading of the book
an intensely stim ulating and rew arding experience
and commends it heartily to all students of the
New Testam ent.
One very m inor source of purely personal ir
ritation is the superfluous num bering of p a ra
graphs as w ell as pages. This m ay be of some
value for classroom study, b u t since paragraph
num bers are seldom referred to in the text, and the
references in the excellent index are to pages and
not to paragraphs, it could w ell have been dis
pensed w ith. B ut th a t is no real criticism of w h at
is an excellent book.
— H ugh J. B lair
114
OF THE HEBREW PEOPLE, by George L. Robin
son. B aker Book House, G rand Rapids 6, Mich.
1955, pp. x, 246. $2.75.
Someone has said th a t w hen a new book is
published he proceeds to read an old one. The
B ak er Book House are by no m eans so cynical
about the value of recen t w ritings, but they realize
th e need for keeping constantly available w ritings
of an earlier day w hich have proved th eir useful
ness. This book, therefore, is a re p rin t of a w ork
first published in 1906, w hen its author was P rofes
sor of Old T estam ent L ite ra tu re and Exegesis a t
th e P resb y terian Theological Sem inary in Chicago.
Beginning w ith Thom as Carlyle’s dictum th a t
“th e history of th e w orld is composed of the
biographies of its g reat m en,” Professor Robinson
gives a concise and adequate account of the his
tory of th e people from th e earliest tim es to the
dow nfall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.
The book fulfils in an effective w ay the p u r
pose w ith w hich it was w ritten. It m ight be des
cribed as a m ost useful vade mecum fo r Bible stu
dents, for, as the author stresses in th e preface to
the first edition, it m ust be read w ith the Bible in
hand. Useful sum m aries and revisions, diagram s
and m aps, and practical questions for discussion
and devotional use m ake it p articu larly serviceable
fo r Bible study, either by individuals or groups.
The book should, how ever, be used w ith care,
for, w hile th e au th o r in his preface to the 1955
edition declares his conviction th a t the critical
view s o f W ellhausen, Robertson Sm ith, etc., “are
not standing th e test,” and th a t “faith is not en
gendered o r strengthened through radical dis
section,” th ere are tim es w hen he is prepared to go
fu rth e r w ith such critics th an the present review er
considers wise. Thus, for exam ple, he quotes with
approval, (p. 42), D riv er’s statem en t th a t “A b ra
ham , Isaac and Jacob are, in outline, historically
tru e, b u t th e ir characters are idealized and th e ir
biographies in m any respects colored by the feel
ings an d associations of a la te r age.” The ques
tions of the authorship of the P entateuch and of
Isaiah 40-66, are dism issed as m ore or less irrelevent; speaking of Isaiah 40-66, Professor Robinson
says, “O ne cares little about the origin of these
prophecies, how ever, w hen he has once felt their
pow er.”
T he questions for discussion and devotional
study a re for th e m ost p a rt helpful, though there
a re h appier links w ith m odern events than the
question asked on p. 184 in connection w ith J e re
m iah’s w ritings, “W hat fam ous m odern historian
lost all his valuable M SS?”
P resum ably Professor Robinson was lim ited
by his ow n declared plan of study w hen he camo
to the New T estam ent period and described Jesus,
(p. 238), as “the G reatest of Israel’s L eaders:” one
would have liked some indication
uniqueness as Savior and Lord.
of C hrist’s
But, w hile noting some w eaknesses in this
book, the review er would com m end it as a most
useful companion to Bible study, and w ould sug
gest th a t anyone who w orks th ro u g h it w ith Bible
in hand will have a clear and ordered picture of
the fascinating history of Israel, acquired w ith the
help and guidance of one who was obviously a
teacher par excellence.
— H ugh J. Blair
THE EVANGELICAL DOCTRINE OF THE
LAW, by E. F. Kevan. The T yndale Press, 39 B ed
ford Square, London, W. C. 1, England. 1956, pp.
28, paper cover. Is. 6d. In U.S.A.: The Inter-V arsity C hristian Fellowship, 1444 N. A stor, Chicago
10 , 111.
This m onograph was the 1955 T yndale Biblical
Theological Lecture delivered before th e Tyndale
(G raduate) Fellowship for Biblical Research, by
the principal of London B ible College.
Principal K evan reflects m uch of Reform ed
thought past and present on the subject of the
law and its relation to th e C hristian. His thesis is
that the law of God is the expression of the person
ality of God w ritten on th e conscience of m an, and
especially revealed (p articu larly through Moses)
“to grapple w ith w rong doing and to direct the
moral life of m an” (p. 12). ‘T h e Law (as given to
Israel) is to be regarded as a rule of life for those
who have been brought into saving relations w ith
God” (p. 13) i.e. a relation of grace and faith (p.
16). “Any change in relatio n to L aw th a t occurs
in C hristianity is not in th e L aw b u t in the b e
liever. Law is the same all th e tim e: it still con
demns and it still commands. To say th a t C hris
tian conduct is now governed by holy principles
is a convenient expression if it is th e m otives of the
C hristian life to w hich atten tio n is to be draw n,
but it is incorrect to em ploy it as if it m eant any
w ithdraw al or m odification of the law. The b e
liever’s joyous use of the Law is consistent w ith
the highest ideas of ethics, b u t it does not change
Law into ‘not-law ’.” (p. 25). He concludes w ith
a brief discussion of the th ree reasons for the giv
ing of the Law as stated in the F orm ula of Con
cord, 1576: (1) th at a certain e x te rn a l discipline
m ight be preserved and w ild and in tractab le m en
m ight be restrained; (2) th a t by the Law m en
m ight be brought to a n acknow ledgem ent of th e ir
sins; and (3) th a t reg enerate m en, to all of whom,
nevertheless, much of the flesh still cleaves, for
th at very reason may have some certain ru le a fter
which they m ay and ought to shape th eir life.”
All this is practical and stim ulating.
There is, unhappily, a confused and confusing
adverse criticism of Covenant Theology. The
au th o r says h e agrees w ith the m ain positions of
Covenant Theology, b u t th a t he finds it h ard to
accept “the concept of th e Law as a ‘covenant of
115
w orks’ ” (p. 14.) He says he cannot find a cove
n a n t of w orks’ in the original relation betw een
God and m an. He sees Adam as already possess
ing life, n o t in need of receiving it through obedi
ence. C ovenant Theology does not conceive of
A dam as receiving life for perfect obedience, but
as being confirm ed in the eternal possession of it
for him self and his posterity through perfect
obedience.
T h ere is an exegesis of “another law ” (Rom.
7:23) and “th e law of sin” (v. 25) as being id en ti
cal w ith th e “holy, ju st and good” com m andm ent
of verse 12 in w hich the inner m an delights (v. 22).
These a re explained to be expressive of a differ
ence of function of law in the unsaved and the
saved m an: “In the experience which the grace
of God brings to the believer, th e Law of God as
‘th e law of sin and death’ gives w ay to the Law
of God a s ‘the law of the S pirit of life in Christ
Jesu s’: th e one is displaced by the other.” Though
P a u l does call th e Law of God ‘the law of sin and
d eath ’ (8:2. See Hodge’s com m entary), it is quite
co n trary to th e context of chapter 7 to identify
‘the law of sin’ and ‘another law ’ with the ‘holy,
ju s t an d good’ comm andm ent. For they are dis
tin ctly placed in contrast, not as functions of law,
b u t as of diverse origin. They are descriptive of
th e b attle going on betw een the flesh and the
S p irit as stated in Gal. 5:17. T he folly of this
exegesis as sum m arized in the quotation above w ill
also be seen w hen one proceeds to verse th ree of
th e eighth chapter. It leaves it w ithout m eaning.
T he M onograph Series are very profitable
publications.
Though unable always to agree
fu lly w ith every w riter, one w ill find them a
v aluable m eans of keeping inform ed on serious
evangelical an d reform ed thought of the day, es
pecially in B ritain.
— E. C. Copeland
REDEM PTION — ACCOMPLISHED AND
A PPLIED , by Jo h n M urray. Wm. B. E erdm ans
P ub. Co., G ran d Rapids 3, Mich., 1955, pp. 236,
$3.00.
T he charge has occasionally been laid against
theologians th a t they tend to substitute “dead
d octrines” for th e living Christ, and offer m en a
creed in place of a Savior. W hile this charge m ay
b e tru e of certain kinds of theological teaching,
a n d characteristic of a decadent church, th e fact
rem ains th a t tru ly Biblical doctrine and theology
point constantly in one direction — to a personal,
glorified Redeem er. H ere we have an excellent
dem onstration of this tru th , in a stim ulating study
on th e A ccom plishm ent of Redemption, and its
application to th e believer. Its au th o r is professor
of system atic theology in W estm inster Sem inary,
P hiladelphia.
Professor M urray declares th a t
“th e essence of saving faith is to bring the sinner
lost and dead in trespasses and sins into direct
personal contact w ith the Savior himself, contact
w hich is nothing less than th at of self-com m itm ent
to him in all the glory of his person and perfection
of his w ork, as he is freely and fully offered in
the Gospel. . . . The specific character of faith
is th a t it looks aw ay from itself and finds its
whole interest and object in Christ. He is the
absorbing preoccupation of faith.” (p. 139)
As the title suggests, this book is divided into
two parts. P a rt I — “Redem ption Accomplished”
— deals first w ith the necessity of the atonem ent,
and then w ith its nature, perfection, and extent.
P a rt II — “R edem ption A pplied” — includes chap
ters on effectual calling, regeneration, faith and
repentance, justification, adoption, sanctification,
perseverance, union w ith Christ, and glorification.
The m any S criptural passages w hich are referred
to throughout these studies have been skillfully
exegeted, and reflect an honest and thorough
handling of the Word. Professor M urray’s system
of outlining contributes a g reat deal to the clar
ity of his writings.
This book very clearly presents the Reform ed
view of God’s plan of redem ption, and shows it
to be solidly founded upon the Scriptures. In
insisting th a t regeneration m ust come before
faith, and not as a result of faith, the au th o r points
out sim ply th a t as sinners w e a re dead in tre s
spasses and sins. Faith is a whole-souled act of
loving tru st a n d self-com m itm ent, of which w e are
incapable u n til renew ed by the Holy Spirit.
C hrist testified to this fact w hen he said th a t no
one could come unto Him except it w ere given
u nto him of the F ath e r and except th e F ath er
draw him. (John 6:44, 65)
A t the same time, Professor M urray em pha
sizes the place of hum an responsibility and activi
ty in the application or redem ption. He correlates
regeneration to faith by saying th at regeneration
is th e act of God and of God alone; b u t faith is
not the ac t of God. It is by God’s grace th a t a
person is able to believe b u t faith is an activity on
the p a rt of the person. “In salvation God does
not deal w ith us as m achines; he deals w ith us as
persons and therefore salvation brings the whole
range of our activity w ithin its scope.” (p. 133)
The fact th a t regeneration is the prerequisite of
faith does not in any w ay relieve us of the respon
sibility to believe nor does it elim inate the price
less privilege th a t is ours as C hrist and his claims
are pressed upon us. In a sim ilar vein, it is pointed
out in the study on sanctification th a t w hile w e
m ust realize our com plete dependence upon the
Holy S pirit w e m ust not forget th a t our activity
is enlisted to the fullest ex ten t in the process of
sanctification. And again, in discussing th e p e r
severance of the saints, the author m akes some
objection to th e expression, “eternal security of
the believer” and m uch prefers to speak of per
severance, because it m eans the engagem ent of
our persons in the m ost intense and concentrated
devotion to those m eans w hich God has ordained
for the achievem ent of his saving purpose.
116
It is a pleasure to recom m end this book as one
w hich reveals m ost forcibly the w arm th and the
full em phasis of th e Reform ed F aith, as it glories
in th e redem ption purchased by Christ.
The pagan associations of C hristm as are
brought out in a m anner th a t seem s to this r e
viewer quite unansw erable. The last two p a ra
graphs read as follows:
— John M. McMillan
“L et no one reply th a t the celebration of
Christ’s b irth engenders piety and devotion. True
piety is only th at w hich flows from the W ord into
our hearts. A piety w hich stem s from our own
invention, preserved by tradition, is nothing but
a strong delusion.
THE EVANGELICAL LIBRARY BULLETIN,
Spring 1956; ADDRESSES a t the A nnual M eeting
of The Evangelical L ibrary, 1955. The E vangel
ical L ibrary, 78a C hiltern St., London, W .l, E ng
land. No price stated.
These tw o booklets rem ind us of the splendid
w ork being done by The Evangelical L ibrary of
London, England. The B ulletin, though brief, as
usual contains a high quality of m aterial. This
issue includes an account of th e life of the P u rita n
R ichard Sibbes. The other booklet contains tw o
addresses delivered at th e annual m eeting (1955)
of The Evangelical L ibrary. One of these is by
the P resident, Dr. D. M artyn Lloyd-Jones; the
other is by th e Founder, Mr. G eoffrey W illiams.
Both bring out the g reat usefulness of The E van
gelical L ib rary and the high character of w ork
being done by this institution.
E arly in 1955 fire broke out in the L ib rary ’s
prem ises and destroyed or dam aged some books,
b u t in th e Providence of God it was extinguished
before extensive dam age had been done. It is
reported th a t m any of the b u rn t books have now
been replaced. The L ib rary now has over eighty
branches in B ritain and overseas. It lends out
sound C hristian books by mail. It is clear th a t
th e L ibrary is very discrim inating as to the type of
books placed on its shelves, lim iting these to
sound, orthodox w orks w hich w ill build up C hris
tian faith ra th e r than b reak it down. This splendid
w ork is su rely w orthy of our com m endation and
support.
— J. G. Vos
SHOULD CHRISTIANS CELEBRATE THE
BIRTH OF CHRIST? by Joseph P. Duggan. The
Society for S crip tu ral F aith and W orship, 1 East
C learfield Road, H avertow n, Pa. 8-page folder,
pocket size. 30c p er dozen; $2.00 p e r 100.
“It is tim e th at P rotestants, who condem n the
Roman Church for compromising w ith paganism ,
set th eir own house in order.”
This booklet is h eartily recom m ended to our
readers.
— J. G. Vos
CHILDREN OF BELIEVING PARENTS, by
John L. Fairly. P resbyterian Book Store, Box
1176, Richmond 9, Va. 6-page folder, pocket size.
$3.00 per 100.
This is a very good tract, from a Southern
Presbyterian source, on the b irth rig h t church
mem bership of children of C hristian parents. The
error of the common m an n er of speaking of chil
dren of C hristian homes “joining th e church” is
very effectively exposed. T he fact of children’s
birthright church m em bership, and its S criptural
basis, are clearly and convincingly set forth. O ver
against the individualistic tendency w hich is so
strong at the present day, th e tra c t sets forth
clearly the covenantal conception of the fam ily
and the church, as w ell as th e bearing of this on
baptism. The im plications of th is view fo r C hris
tian parents are also stressed. In o u r day w hen it
seems alm ost hopeless to try to get professed b e
lievers in the Reform ed F aith to th in k of th e ir
children as church m em bers from birth , and to
stop using the m isleading expression “joining the
church” of those who w ere baptized in infancy,
this tract is a very significant piece of literature.
It would be an excellent tra c t to place in q u an ti
ties in church tract racks. P astors should give a
copy to every fam ily w ith children, and especial
ly to parents w hen th e ir infants are baptized.
— J. G. Vos
This tra c t on th e question of th e religious ob
servance of C hristm as takes a point of view w hich
is extrem ely unpopular at the p resent day. The
author, how ever, is not seeking popularity; he has
a higher ideal, nam ely, conform ity to the w ill of
God revealed in th e Scriptures. T aking the high
and historically Reform ed view th a t in the w or
ship of God, all elem ents th a t are not commanded
in the W ord are autom atically forbidden and to be
excluded, th e au th o r clearly shows th a t the ob
servance of C hristm as is now here appointed in
S cripture as a p a rt of th e w orship of God. He
shows th a t pious intentions do not ju stify a p ra c
tice in w orship; w h a t is required is an objective
w arran t from th e W ord of God.
THE TEXT, CANON, AND PR IN C IPA L VER
SIONS OF THE BIBLE, by E lm er E. Flack, Bruce
M. Metzger, and others.
B aker Book House,
Grand Rapids 6, Michigan. 1956, pp. 63. $1.50.
This little volume contains a group of articles
selected from the T w entieth C entury Encyclopedia
of Religious Knowledge. It is w ell p rin ted in
double columns, encyclopedia style. A great
amount of im portant inform ation is m ade readily
available in these 63 pages.
Among the articles on th e te x t of the Bible is
one on the Dead Sea Scrolls by Dr. M illar B u r
rows of Yale U niversity. This gives the m ain facts
117
concerning the discovery of the scrolls and th eir
contents, tog eth er w ith an opinion as to th eir
probable date and an appraisal of their signif
icance.
W hile th e contents of th e book show great
learning, they are not consistently orthodox in
view point. F or exam ple, the article on The Canon
of S crip tu re (O ld Testam ent) by Elm er E. Flack,
states th a t th e Pentateuch (first five books of the
Bible) “ap p aren tly . . . was com plete by the tim e
of N ehem iah (432 B. C.) ___”. W hile of course
th is is lite ra lly true, it seems to indicate th a t the
a u th o r does not believe th a t the P entateuch was
w ritte n b y Moses about a thousand years before
th e tim e of N ehem iah. The same author speaks
of “late sections in some prophecies” (p. 23) and
affirm s th e existence of “the Second Isaiah”
(p. 23).
The m aterial on versions of the Bible is in
terestin g and inform ative, b u t fa r from complete.
F o r exam ple, th e Septuagint is the only ancient
G reek version of the Old Testam ent mentioned;
the im portant versions of Onkelos, Theodotion,
Sym m achus and others are om itted.
The article on A nnotated Bibles, by H oward
Tillm an Kuist, lists the extrem ely dispensational
Scofield Reference Bible and Pilgrim Edition of
the Holy Bible, and the m odernistic Interpreter’s
Bible and Westminster Study Edition of the Holy
Bible, w ithout any w arning concerning the doc
trin al unsoundness of these w orks. The descrip
tions of these and other annotated Bibles are pure
ly form al and m echanical, and furnish no guid
ance as to the doctrinal position of the w orks be
ing described. This fact reduces the article to
com parative w orthlessness, for the im portant
thing about an annotated B ible is not the type of
m arginal references and paragraphing, b u t the
doctrinal view point w hich it represents.
This volum e is recom m ended for those who
have sufficient know ledge and discernm ent to be
able to w eigh its statem ents and reject w h a t is
unsound.
— J. G. Vos
Books Received
The announcem ent of the books listed below should not be
list which we regard as having value for our readers w ill be given
in a la te r issue.
THE HOLY SPIR IT O F GOD, by W. H. G rif
fith Thomas. 1955, pp. xv, 303. $3.00.
G cerhardus Vos. 1954, pp. 311. $4.00.
LAND, by J. H ow ard K itchen. 1955, pp. 160. $2.50.
by
MAN OF SORROWS, by H erm an Hoeksema.
1956, pp. 129. $2.00.
1954, pp. 271. $3.50.
PH ILO SO PH Y OF REVELATION, by H erm an
Bavinck. 1953, pp. x, 349. $3.50.
SCRIPTURE, by B ernard Ramm. 1954, pp. 368.
$4.00.
THE G O SPEL OF THE SPIRIT, by Sam uel
E. Peirce. 1955, pp. 104. $1.50.
WITH JESU S ON THE NAVAJO ROAD, by
Jacob and C hristina Bolt. 1956, pp. 120. $2.00.
THE TEACHING OF THE EPISTLE TO THE
HEBREWS, by G eerhardus Vos. 1956, pp. 124.
$ 2 . 00 .
Publications
Rapids 6, Mich.
of Baker Book House,
Grand
DEVOTIONS AND PRAYERS OF JOHN
CALVIN, ed. by C harles E. Edw ards. 1954, pp.
120, pocket size. $1.00.
THE EPISTLES OF PAUL TO THE PH ILIP
PIA N S AND TO PHILEMON, by J. J. Mueller.
1955, pp. 200. $3.50.
THE EPISTLE TO THE PH ILIPPIA N S, by
R obert Johnstone. 1875, rep rin ted 1955, pp. xii,
490. $3.95.
BY GRACE ALONE, by H erm an K uiper. 1955,
pp. 165. $2.50.
TO THE MESSIAH, by A lfred Edersheim. 1901,
rep rinted 1955, pp. xxiv, 391. $3.75.
TURE, by G. H. Lang. 1955, pp. 400. $3.50.
THE CHURCH IN THE ROMAN EMPIRE,
by W illiam M. Ramsay. 1954, pp. 510. $4.20.
I AND II THESSALONIANS,
H endriksen. 1955, pp. 214. $4.50.
by
W illiam
118
Clow. 1955, p. 353. $2.95.
1955, pp. 71. $1.50.
THESE ALSO SUFFER, by W illiam Goulooze. 1955, pp. 86. $1.75.
THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES, by David
Thomas. 1955, pp. 493. $3.95.
V?
GLORY AW AITS ME, by W illiam Goulooze.
1956, pp. 112. $2.00.
Publications of Sovereign Grace Book Club,
413 S. E. First St., Evansville, Indiana.
ROMANS, by R obert H aldane, Vol. II (Chap. 4-7),
pp. 310. $2.00. Vol. I ll, pp. 160, $2.00.
THE SA IN TS’ EVERLASTING REST, by
R ichard B axter. Photo re p rin t of 1840 edition,
pp. 176. No price stated.
PRAYER, by Jo h n B unyan; THE RETURN OF
PRAYERS, by Thom as Goodwin. 1955, pp. 60,
p aper cover. $1.00.
K EEPIN G THE HEART, by John Flavel. 1955,
BIBLE DOCTRINE: UNIT ONE, BOOKS ONE
AND TWO, by Dorothy P artington. 1955, two vol
umes, total about 325 pages, paper covers, plastic
binding. P upil’s W orkbook, $1.25.
T eacher’s
Manual, $1.50.
THE FREE OFFER OF THE GOSPEL, by
John M urray and Ned B. Stonehouse. 1955, pp.
27, pocket size, paper cover. 25 cents.
CONFESSING CHRIST, by C alvin K. Cum
mings. 1955, pp. 62, paper cover. 35 cents.
DO YOU BELIEVE,
1954, pp. 37, paper cover.
by E dw ard J. Young.
25 cents.
ARE YOU A CHRISTIAN? by Law rence R.
Eyres. 1954, pp. 38, paper cover. 25 cents.
A MESSAGE TO THOUGHTFUL INQUIR
ERS, by H enry W. Coray. 1954, paper cover. 15
cents.
ARE YOU A BIBLICAL BAPTIST? by
George W. M arston. 1955, pp. 27, p ap er cover. 15
cents.
THE ORDAINED LAMPSTAND, by E dw ards
E. Elliott. 1955, pp. 11, pocket size, p ap er cover.
10 cents.
Publications of other Firms
Publications of The Presbyterian and Re
formed Publishing Co., 147 North 10th St., Phila
delphia 7, Pa.
THE SATISFACTION OF CHRIST, by A rth u r
W. Pink. Bible T ru th Depot, Sw engel, Pa. 1955,
pp. 313. $3.95.
M arcellus K ik. 1955, pp. 192. $2.50.
J. M. Spier. 1953, pp. 140. $3.00.
CALVIN AND AUGUSTINE, by B enjam in B.
W arfield. 1956, pp. 507. $4.95.
JESU S OF YESTERDAY AND TODAY, by
Sam uel G. Craig. 1956, pp. 186. $2.75.
WHAT PRESBYTERIANS BELIEVE: AN
EXPOSITION OF THE WESTMINSTER CON
FESSION, by G ordon H. Clark. 1956, pp. 130,
paper cover. $2.00.
Publications of W. A. Wilde Co., 131 Claren
don St., Boston 16, Mass.
TER, by Amos R. Wells. 1955, pp. 343. $2.00.
R. Wells. 1955, pp. 127. $1.50.
TION, by B ern ard Ramm. 1950, pp. 197. $2.50.
Publications of the Committee on Christian
Education of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church,
Belvidere Road, Phlllipsburg, N. J.
TAUGHT OF THE LORD: H ELPS FOR JU N
60. 8 Y2 x 11 inches, plastic binding, paper cover.
O rder from C hester R. Fox, 209 N inth Street, P itts
burgh 22, Pa. $1.25.
THE REFORMED PU L PIT (SYM POSIUM ),
VOLUME I. Society fo r R eform ed Publications,
1519 East Fulton St., G rand Rapids, Mich. 1955,
pp. 145. $2.00.
WHAT IS CHRISTIAN BAPTISM ? by M.
Eugene Oesterhaven. Society for R eform ed P u b
lications, 1519 E. Fulton St., G rand Rapids, Mich.
1956, pp. 59, paper cover. 50 cents.
NEW TESTAMENT MANUAL FOR HIGH
SCHOOL BIBLE STUDY, by W. C. R arick and C.
R. Maxam. The S tandard Publishing Co., C in
cinnati, Ohio. 1927, pp. 61, p ap er cover. 40 cents.
CLOSER TO CHRIST VIA THE QUIET
HOUR, by Caroline K. Sapsford. Inter-C ounty
Leader Publishers, Frederic, Wisconsin. 1952, pp.
81, paper cover. 75 cents.
CHRIST’S BRETHREN, by Cecil J. Low ry.
The Tabernacle Book Room, 425 10th St., Oakland,
Calif. 1950, pp. 60, paper cover. 50 cents.
119
W HITHER ISRAELI? MOSAIC RESTORATIONISM EXAMINED, by Cecil J. Lowry. The
T abernacle Book Room, 425 10th St., Oakland,
THE KING JAMES VERSION DEFENDED!
A CHRISTIAN VIEW OF THE NEW TESTA
MENT MANUSCRIPTS, by Edw ard F. Hills. The
C hristian Research Press, 5011 Hickm an Road, Des
Moines, Iowa. 1956, pp. 158, paper cover. $1.00.
LUKE THE PHYSICIAN, by W illiam M. Ram
say. B aker Book House, G rand Rapids 6, Mich.
1956 re p rin t of 1908 printing, pp. 418. $4.50.
Reminder to Book Reviewers
We have failed to receive reviews of a con
siderable num ber of books from various persons
w ho prom ised to w rite them. Some of these books
have alread y been in the hands of the review ers
for m any m onths. It would be much appreciated
if th e b re th re n concerned would make a special
effo rt to com plete the review s and send them in
soon. The deadline for the O ctober-December
issue is Septem ber 1; fo r the January-M arch 1957
issue it is D ecem ber 1, 1956. It is desirable to get
the large backlog of “Books Received” cleared up
soon if possible. We w ish to express h earty ap
preciation to all who have helped by review ing
books in the past and to all who have kindly
prom ised to review books in the foregoing list.
— Editor
Financial Help Needed
As stated in every issue, Blue Banner Faith
and Life is partly dependent on voluntary contri
butions to meet necessary expenses of publication.
At present (June 13) we are about $550.00 short
of the amount needed to complete publication for
1956 without a deficit. The Board of Publication
of the Reformed Presbyterian Church has author
ized an appeal for contributions to meet this need.
If you have found Blue Banner Faith and Life
helpful, will you help the magazine to meet ex
penses? All contributions are welcome, no matter
how small. Numbered receipts are sent promptly
to all donors. If more than the needed amount
is received, the surplus will be used for publica
tion in 1957. If less than the needed amount is
received, a second appeal will be published in the
October-December issue stating the status of the
matter at that time. Please make remittances
payable to Blue Banner Faith and Life and mail
them to 3408 7th Avenue, Beaver Falls, Pa.
— J. G. Vos, Manager
Church Discipline
By the Rev. William Heynen
Note: The following article on a very im
p o rta n t subject was originally published in the
S eptem ber, 1952 issue of Reformed Review (New
Y ork C ity). It is reproduced here by perm ission,
for w hich th an k s are hereby expressed. The term
consistory, w hich occurs repeatedly in the article,
is equ iv alen t to the term session as used in Pres
b y terian C hurches of Scottish origin. It refers to
th e governing body in a congregation of the
C hurch, in w hich th e m inister and elders exercise
th e au th o rity com m itted to them by the Lord
Jesu s C hrist. — Ed.
The follow ing article had its genesis as a se r
m on preached to the Third C hristian Reform ed
C hurch of P aterso n in M arch of 1952. The ser
m on was preached on the basis of M atthew 18:1518; and L ord’s Day XXI, Question 85, of the H eid
elberg Catechism . It has been recast som ew hat
for th e sake of this w ider publication, b u t if it
still carries a b it of the atm osphere of a sermon,
it is due to the discipline of a pastor-preacher u n
der w hich the w riter lives and moves so constant
ly and w ith hum ble gratitude'.
C hurch discipline is a m atter of concern not
ju st for the officers of the Church, but for every
m em ber of the Church. W henever anyone makes
public profession of faith in the Reform ed
Churches, he solem nly pledges before God and
His Church th a t if he should become delinquent
eith er in doctrine or in life he will subm it to the
adm onition and the discipline of the Church. As
such already the discipline of the Church becomes
a very real thing for every C hurch mem ber. B ut
even beyond th a t C hurch discipline is som ething
in w hich every m em ber of th e Church plays an
active p art; at least he should if h e is a faithful
m em ber of the Church. F o r th a t very reason (the
participation of the en tire congregation in C hurch
120
discipline) it becomes very essential th a t every
confessing C hristian also have a very clear u n d e r
standing of w hat C hurch discipline is and w hat
its faithful exercise implies.
Three aspects of this im portant subject de
m and our atten tio n at this tim e: Its Necessity, Its
Object, and Its Responsibility.
ITS NECESSITY
We can say w ithout fear of contradiction th a t
the Bible teaches th e necessity and the urgency
of C hristian discipline — o r Church discipline.
P erm it me to re fe r to a few of the m any passages
w hich couuld be cited: M atthew 16:19, John 20:23;
M atthew 18:17. In these passages the C hurch is
given the keys of the kingdom , including the key
of Church discipline. Paul, in w riting to T itus
(T itus 3.10, 11) also very strongly exhorts Titus
th a t he should m ake use of those keys, and in
w riting to th e C orinthians (I Cor. 5) he again
stresses th a t those who w ere evil doers and those'
who refused to repent should be put out of the
Church. In II Thessalonians, the th ird chapter,
we read, “A nd if any m an obeyeth not our word,
note th at m an th a t you have no company w ith
him, to the end th a t he m ay be asham ed.” And
so at the outset m ay I say v ery em phatically th a t
the S cripture abundantly teaches and urges the
necessity of C hurch discipline.
P erm it m e to tak e th is ju st a step farther,
however. Ju s t w h a t are the objectives or purposes
of Church discipline? Ju st w hy should w e excercise C hurch discipline? I am sure th a t w hen w e
exam ine these ju st a little bit m ore closely the
urgency of discipline w ill become even m ore clear.
Jo h n Calvin, o u r g reat Reform ed church fa th
er, outlines th e objectives of C hurch discipline as
being these three: th a t the nam e of God m ay not
be blasphem ed, to safeguard the Church, and to
bring sinners to sham e and to repentance. One
of our g reat D utch theologians, Dr. F. L. Rutgers,
reverses th e order in his presentation, and I would
like to do th a t also.
The first objective — th e m ain objective I
would even dare say — the basic objective — the
very th ru st of Church discipline, of C hristian dis
cipline is to b rin g sinners to repentance. This is
alw ays th e purpose and th e goal of C hurch disci
pline. A ll too freq u en tly this is m isunderstood.
T here are m any people w ho are u nder the im
pression th a t the goal of C hurch discipline is to
get rid of someone. T hat isn’t tru e at all! The
purpose of C hurch discipline is not to get rid of
people b u t to keep them . The purpose of Church
discipline is not to p u t people out of the Church
b u t to bring them to repentance and to God. Our
w hole system of C hurch discipline is geared to
and set up in th a t direction and to th a t purpose.
This is tru e Of discipline no m a tte r w here it
is carried on. We don’t discipline our children
in the home because we w an t to get rid of them,
but because we w ant to keep them as loyal,
obedient children. In the school the child is not
disciplined w ith the idea of pu ttin g him out, but
he is disciplined w ith the idea of m aking a good
scholar out of him. And so in the Church, a p e r
son is not disciplined w ith the idea of rem oving
him, but w ith the idea of m aking a loyal and a
faithful and a consistent C hurch m em ber of him
as a true child of God and a loyal follow er of the
Lord Jesus Christ. Church discipline, therefore,
in its basic th ru st has a v ery gracious and a very
saving purpose. It is p a rt of the saving m inistry
of the Church; it is p a rt of th e helping m inistry
of the Church.
The Roman Em peror, Theodosius the G reat,
w ent to Thessalonica during one of his w ars, and
on a w him killed thousands of innocent citizens
w ith no reason w hatsoever. He retu rn ed to the
city of Milan and the nex t S abbath m orning was
going to go to Church. A t the door of the Church
Bishop Ambrose m et the E m peror and he barred
his way to the church. A fter som e discussion the
Em peror confessed his sins in te a rs and w as ac
cepted into the church. T h a t’s th e purpose of
Church discipline — to b rin g sinners to rep e n t
ance. And isn’t th a t ju st exactly w h a t the C hurch
is here for — to bring sinners to repentance?
Isn’t th a t the burden of the m inistry of the
Church? A ren’t we told th a t th ere is joy among
the angels in heaven over one sin n er th a t repenteth? Therefore, we m ust exercise Church
discipline.
The second objective of C hurch discipline is
the w elfare of the Church. As Calvin p u t it, “Lest
those who are disobedient and w ayw ard lead o th
ers to sin and to destruction.” A nyone who w ants
to take a very honest and fra n k look at the history
of the Church, and especially th e history of the
American Church, will have to concede th a t a
sacrifice of the exercise and principles of Church
discipline has invariably been one of the initial
steps to the downfall of the Church. M any illu
strations could be cited to verify th a t point. A
faithful exercise of C hurch discipline stim ulates
loyalty and faithfulness to the Church. It puts
us on guard against sin and the devil, and it
charges us w ith very solemn and very holy obli
gations to our fellow C hurch m em bers.
A faithful exercise of C hurch discipline, m ore
over, unites the Church in a p ray e rfu l struggle
against everything th a t stands over against the
Lord Jesus Christ. W hen the Lord Jesus, speaking
to John on the Island of Patm os, gives His m ess
age to the seven Churches in Asia M inor, we find
some very interesting things. In several cases we
find th at Jesus says, “I have this against you.” And
invariably it was th at they w ere p erm ittin g w ith
in the C hurch certain practices and teachings
which should not be perm itted. All of the con
demnations and judgm ents w hich Jesus pro
121
nounced upon the churches of Asia Minor could be
sum m ed u p in one concept. “You are not faith
fu lly exercising discipline. T hat’s w h at I have
against you.” If the blessing of th e Lord Jesus
C hrist is to re st upon the Church, if His favor is
to sm ile upon us, and if the Church is to
prosper, discipline m ust be faithfully exercised.
On the other hand, the surest w ay to sell out the
C hurch to th e evil one is to grow w eak on this
business of C hurch discipline.
A nd th ird ly , the glory of God demands it —
“th a t th e nam e of God be not profaned.” People
often speak in a very ridiculous w ay about C hurch
discipline. The Church is the Church of the Lord
Jesu s C hrist. It belongs to Him, and He is the
head of th e Church. It is not ju st a group of
people. I t is n o t a democratic organization w here
fne m ajo rity rules. The Church is th e body of the
L ord Jesu s C hrist, and th e only w ay you can be a
m em ber of th e Church of the Lord Jesus C hrist
in th a t tru e spiritual sense is to be united to
C hrist in a living and in a consistent life of faith
and obedience. T hat being the case, Church dis
cipline becom es a m a tte r of loyalty to C hrist, not
loyalty first of all to the consistory or to the m in
ister, or to th e re st of the Church members. T hat’s
w h ere th e em phasis m ust be placed. Jesus, in
Revelation, says, “Repent, therefore, or I w ill
come to thee quickly and w ar against thee w ith
th e sw ord of m y m outh.” L et’s never forget th a t
Jesus sets His standards high and th a t He dem ands
absolute lo y alty and th a t C hrist had no tim e for
those who said, “Lord, Lord,” but w ere not w illing
to pay th e price of being Christians. If w e do
not intend to live a C hristian life, and if we not
inten d to be obedient to th e Lord Jesus Christ,
th en for C h rist’s sake we should not be hypocrites.
If w e as churches are not w illing to bow to the
obedience of th e Lord Jesus C hrist, then let’s not
call ourselves th e Church of Christ. The calling
of th e Church is to exalt the nam e of our Saviour,
and by th a t v ery token the calling of the Church
is to fight against everything th a t degrades His
nam e. I t is in this fram ew ork th a t Church disci
pline becom es not a m atter of choice, not a m atter
of som ething th a t w e m ay do, but something
w hich is dem anded of the Church — something
w hich w e m ay not neglect.
are a m em ber of the C hurch of the Lord Jesus
Christ, you can’t believe w hat you please. Paul
says th a t even though an angel from heaven should
come and preach any other Gospel, let him be
accursed. To Tim othy he w rites about Hymenaeus
and Philetus, who tau g h t false doctrines, “They
m ust be delivered unto S atan.” John — oh, you
know people like to ta lk about John as the great
apostle of love — b u t it was John who said, “If
anyone denieth th at Jesus is the Christ, he is not
of God.” P e te r stresses the great th re at of false
teachers, and so does C hrist in Revelation. This
doesn’t m ean th a t some little insignificant point
of doctrine is going to become a m atter of Church
discipline, b u t w hen basic tru th s of th e C hristian
faith are denied, th e discipline of the Church m ust
come into play.
Secondly, there a re those who are ungodly in
w alk o r in life. It is not m y intention to catalogue
sins w hich are censurable. We have the law and
C hrist’s sum m ary of th a t law. We have our Bibles
in which th at law is interpreted. Paul, in I Cor
inthians 6, gives us a long list of those who shall
not in h erit the kingdom . God’s unchanging W orld
gives us the principles by w hich we as Christians
m ust live. A nd if w e d epart from these principles
and do not w alk according to them, discipline
m ust be exercised.
W ho become objects of Church discpline? In
o u r H eidelberg Catechism, and I think th a t is
justified by Scripture, a distinction is made be
tw een tw o classes of people who fall under C hurch
discipline: those who hold and teach un-C hristian
doctrines, and those who are ungodly in walk.
B ut there is som ething else. We never ex e r
cise form al C hurch discipline because of some
specific sin th a t has been committed. T hat may
sound strange to you. May I repeat that? We
never exercise form al C hurch discipline because
of the specific sin w hich has been committed.
C hurch discipline comes into play w hen those who
have com m itted a sin refuse to rep en t of th a t sin.
This is very carefully expressed in th e words of
our H eidelberg Catechism, and in our Church
Order, and in our w hole procedure of Church
discipline. This is basic. T here may be a man
w ho is a condem ned m urderer, who w ill spend
the rest of his life in jail, b u t he m ay be a m em ber
in good and regular standing in the C hurch if he
has sincerely repented of his sin and confessed it
to God and before His Church. On the other hand,
th ere m ay be a m an who has done no more than
say an evil w ord to his neighbor, but if he refuses
to repent of it and confess th a t sin, he may u lti
m ately be placed outside of the kingdom of Christ.
It is not th e n a tu re of the sin th a t determ ines it,
it is th e repentance or the lack of repentance th a t
determ ines it. I th in k th a t can stand a good deal
of emphasis. Even the sm allest sin unrepented
and unconfessed is fa r m ore serious than th at
most gross sin hum bly and sincerely confessed
and repented of.
F irst of all, then, those who are w ayw ard in
doctrine. T h at m ay sound a bit strange to some
people in th is day of doctrinal indifference. Today
people say, “I can believe w hat I please — nobody
can tell m e w h at I have to believe.” Well, if you
Church discipline — m ay I say it again, is
exercised not because of the n a tu re of the sin but
because of lack of repentance of th a t sin, and th a t
is abundantly evident in all of the announce
m ents which a re m ade in the exercise of Church
discipline. It is also abundantly evident in the
ITS OBJECTS
122
form for excom m unication (C hristian Reform ed).
In the form for excom m unication, the n ature of the
sin isn’t even mentioned. A person is not disci
plined because he neglects th e m eans of grace, or
because he commits adultery, o r because he com
m its some oth er sin, b u t he is disciplined because
he does not rep en t of th a t sin. C hurch discipline
alw ays aims to bring the sinner to repentance.
ITS RESPONSIBILITIES
Now then, finally, a w ord on the responsibili
ties. F irst of all th e responsibilities of C hurch
discipline re st upon th e congregation as a whole.
M atthew 18 m ust be re fe rred to in this connection.
Even before any p a rtic u la r offense becomes a
consistory m atter, it is th e responsibility of every
single person who calls him self a C hristian to be
a disciplinarian in th e Church. “If y our brother
sin” — an d by th e w ay in the original it doesn’t
necessarily m ean if he sins against you — “ If your
b ro th er sins, go to him and tell him his fa u lt be
tw een thee and him alone.” T h at’s my business
and your business as C hurch m em bers. T hat’s
th e duty of every single m em ber of the Church.
To be sure w e like to pass this responsibility on
to someone else. We say, “L et the consistory go
see him ,” or, “L et th e m inister do it.” Jesus m akes
it so ab un d an tly clear, how ever, th a t if you are
aw are of someone living in sin, it is your business
to go to him and tell him his fau lt betw een thee
an d him and seek to gain the brother. If you don’t
do it — m ind you — if you don’t do it you become
co-guilty. Thus this m a tte r of discipline becomes
a very solem n responsibility fo r every single con
fessing C hristian. We become m utually responsi
ble to each o th er — I to you and you to me.
I
m ight say in th a t connection th a t failure to ex er
cise th e principles of M atthew 18 is in itself a
censurable sin.
P erm it m e to m ention in passing th a t I can
see no reason w hy the m inister and the consistory
should not be included in this exercise of M atthew
18. If a m em ber of th e C hurch is convinced th at
th e m inister or th e consistory are in error, it would
seem to be clear, on th e basis of Scripture, th at it
is not his privilege to g ather a little group of
friends and s ta rt agitation in the Church. T hat in
itself w ould be a censurable sin. Such a m em ber
of th e Church w ould have one responsibility and
one privilege only, and th a t would be to go to the
consistory and tell them of th e ir error.
M oreover, a fte r official Church discipline once
goes into action, and the first announcem ent is
made, it definitely becomes the responsibility of
th e en tire congregation. A lready in the first an
nouncem ent the congregation is urged to pray
for th e errin g one. A nd as th e announcem ents
proceed the congregation is urged to exhort him,
to speak to him, to seek to lead him to repentance;
not to encourage him in w hat he has done, not
to go to him and say, “I t’s too bad th a t the con-'
sistory is getting so rough w ith you.” It has not
been unknow n th at m em bers of the C hurch have
gone to those who were u n d er censure and have
stirred them up against th e Church, have sym pa
thized w ith them , and hard en ed them in th eir
sin. This is sinful! The solem n responsibility of
the m em ber of the Church, as a m em ber of the
body of Christ, is to assum e the responsibility of
Christian discipline. We rem ind you once again
that the Church as a w hole exercises discipline,
and to underm ine the official program of disci
pline of the Church is a definite act of disloyalty
to the Church and to Christ.
Being a m em ber of the body of C hrist brings
upon us solemn responsibilities. We m arch as the
Arm y of the Lord Jesus C hrist to w ar, and it de
mands th at each one of us as soldiers m ust be w ill
ing to shoulder his w eapons and to fight for th a t
which is tru th and th a t w hich is right. If we are
not willing to do that, w e have no place in the
army!
And now coming to official C hurch discipline,
just a few comments. Official C hurch discipline
is always to be exercised in th e sp irit of love and of
concern for souls. This doesn’t om it firm ness, of
course, b u t never m ust it be done in a spirit of
bitterness. Jesus says, “th a t you m ay gain the
brother.” Paul says, “T h a t he m ay be som ew hat
spared th at although his body m ay be condem ned
th at his soul m ay yet be saved.” T h at loving de
votion to bringing souls to repentance m ust alw ays
be the deep m otivation behind the discipline of
the Church, w hether th a t be the consistory, or by
individual members. A lw ays go to them in love,
pleading w ith them, urging them fo r the sake of
Christ to repent and to tu rn to obedience and life.
Discipline m ust be exercised faithfu lly and
diligently. I t’s difficult work. It dem ands selfsacrifice. In this connection m ay I encourage our
elders as they shoulder the b u rd en of the solemn
responsibility of C hurch discipline. I know th a t
it is difficult, but for the sake of the Lord Jesus
Christ we m ust do it.
And finally, the S cripture is our only guide.
We may not be arb itrary in this w ork We m ay
not discipline each other ju st because we don’t
happen to like the w ay som ebody looks or acts.
The Bible rem ains our standard, the W ord of God
rem ains our criterion of judgm ent, and w ith the
Bible in our hands we m ove fo rw ard to strengthen
each other in the Lord Jesus C hrist. One of the
most beautiful pictures w e have of the C hurch is
th at of the body of C hrist. P aul establishes th at
organic relationship betw een m em bers of the
Church. No m em ber of the Church, who is loyal
an d faithful, can ignore the re st of the body. My
hand can’t ignore m y eye, nor m y eye m y hand.
And so each m em ber of the C hurch is bound w ith
a living bond to every other m em ber of the C hurch
and has a solemn responsibility tow ards him. We
are one body in Christ, and as such we have m u-
123
tu a l responsibilities to each other. And it is only
as w e all face and accept those responsibilities
sincerely, hum bly, and faithfully, th a t the body
of C hrist can be united in tru e C hristian love and
fellow ship.
We share our m utual woes,
o u r m utual burdens bear;
A nd often for each Qther j lows
_
.
T he e m p a th iz in g tear.
O ur faith, and all rig h t w orship of God, de
pend, in no sm all degree, upon our knowledge of
th e doctrine of predestination.
— M artin L u th er
useful and effectual, as a rule or standard of faith
and practice, th an m en commonly suppose or ex
perience.
— W illiam Cunningham
I do m aintain th a t the S horter Catechism, w ith
its m arvellous com prehensiveness and its faithful
ness to S cripture, w ith its solem nity and its ten d
erness, is the tru e st and noblest sum m ary of w hat
th e B ible teaches th a t I have ever seen.
— J. G resham Machen
It is an evidence th a t w e are gracious m en if
w e can look upon the lives of others th a t are b et
te r th a n we, and love and esteem them glorious.
— R ichard Sibbes
We a re indebted to God for the good w orks
w e do, and not He to us.
— The Belgic Confession
The highest privilege of New Testam ent
saints is to be p artak ers of the inheritance prom is
ed to A braham .
— Charles Hodge
T here is little we touch but we leave the p rin t
of our fingers behind.
— Richard B axter
I see m ustering w ithin the ranks of the
C hurch of God m en who say they hate all creeds,
m eaning th a t they despise all tru th , m en who
w o u ld fain be m inisters am ongst us and yet tread
u n d e r foot all th a t we hold sacred, not teaching
a t first the fulness of their infidelity, but little by
little g ath erin g courage to vent th eir unbeliefs and
heresies. Credophobia is m addening many. They
ap p ear to fear lest they should believe anything,
an d to hope th a t there is som ething good to be
found in A theism , or devil worship, — indeed in
a ll religions except the only tru e one.
— Charles H. Spurgeon
L et us have comfort, for despite all th at can
be done by m en and devils not one elect soul shall
be lost, not one soul redeem ed by blood shall be
snatched out of th e R edeem er’s hand. Christ shall
not lost so m uch as a grain of glory, neith er in
e a rth n o r in heaven.
— Charles H. Spurgeon
C hurch m em bership today often m eans n o th
ing m ore, as has w ell been said, than a vague ad
m iratio n for th e m oral character of Jesus; the
C hurch in countless com m unities is little m ore
th a n a R otary Club.
— J. G resham Machen
The B ible is fitted and intended, when rightly
used and im proved, to be fa r m ore extensively
S p iritu al convincing is not total in this life,
b u t alw ays leaves in the h e a rt some dregs of
doubting. As a ship th a t rides at anchor is tossed,
b u t the anchor holds it, so it is w ith fhe soul th at
is convinced w eakly; it is sure of the main, y et it
is tossed w ith m any doubts and fears, b u t the
anchor is in heaven.
— Richard Sibbes
Every sin is a kind of cursing God in the h eart
(Jo b 1:5), an aim a t the destruction of the being
of God, not actually, b u t virtually; not in the in
tention of every sinner, b u t in the n atu re of every
sin. T h at affection w hich excites a m an to break
His law , w ould excite him to annihilate His being
if it w ere in his power. A m an in every sin aims
to set up his own w ill as his rule, and his own
glory as th e end of his actions, against the will and
glory of God; and could a sinner attain his end,
God would be destroyed. God cannot outlive His
w ill an d His glory; God cannot have another rule
than His own will, nor another end than His
honor.
— Stephen Charnock
The Lord Jesus C hrist h a th instituted Church
Discipline, in o rd er to rem ove scandals, and p re
vent th eir unhappy effects; and no Church can,
w ithout th e faith fu l and spiritual application of
it hope for His countenance and blessing.
— R. P. Testimony
The im partial and p ru d e n t exercise of Church
Discipline is useful for vindicating the honor of
Jesus Christ, m aintaining the dignity of His ordi
nances, preserving th e p u rity of the Church, av ert
ing th e judgm ents of God, and for the benefit of
the offender himself, th a t b y the adm inistration of
this ordinance of C hrist, through grace, he may
be hum bled and recovered.
— R. P. Testimony
Experience shows th a t the neglect of disci
pline is speedily followed by corruption of worship,
of doctrine and of governm ent.
— R. P. Book of Discipline
124
RATIONALISM. The doctrine th a t the hum an
faculty of reason is th e suprem e authority for
faith and life.
MYSTICISM. T he belief th a t God and His
w ill can be know n by a direct intu ition of the
hum an soul, and th a t religion therefore is inde
pendent of historical facts, an d both historical re
velation and historical redem ption a re unneces
sary.
REVELATION. A n activity of God by w hich
He com m unicates tru th to men.
NATURAL REVELATION. God’s com m uni
cation of tru th to m en through th e w orld of nature,
including th e hum an h e a rt and conscience. Also
called G eneral Revelation.
SUPERNATURAL REVELATION. God’s com
m unication of tru th to m en directly, ap a rt from
His n a tu ra l revelation. Also called Special Re
velation.
INSPIRATION. A n activity of God the Holy
S p irit by w hich the w riters of the books of the
Bible w ere so influenced th a t the product of th eir
w riting is tru ly the W ord of God.
VERBAL INSPIRATION. T he doctrine th a t
th e actual w ritte n w ords of th e Bible, in the
genuine te x t of the original H ebrew and Greek,
are them selves all tru ly th e W ord of God. Also
called P len ary (F u ll) Inspiration.
INERRANCY OF SCRIPTURE.
th a t the Bible is free from errors.
The doctrine
INFALLIBILITY OF SCRIPTURE. The doc
trin e th a t it is im possible for th e B ible to contain
any errors.
RULE OF FA ITH AND
God, w hich is contained in
Old and New T estam ents, is
us how w e m ay glorify and
LIFE. “The W ord of
th e S criptures of the
th e only ru le to direct
enjoy him .” (S.C. 2).
CANON OF SCRIPTURE. The list of the
books w hich a re recognized as Scripture.
ILLUMINATION. An activity of God the
Holy S p irit in th e m ind of a hum an being, by
which th e la tte r is enabled to u n derstand the
tru e m eaning of the Scriptures.
EXEGESIS. D raw ing out th e m eaning of a
te x t or portion of S crip tu re by a painstaking, ac
curate study of its words, context and historical
setting.
ANALOGY OF SCRIPTURE. T he teaching
of the Bible as a whole, on any subject, considered
as a key to th e in terp retatio n of a p articu lar por
tion of Scripture.
TEXTUAL CRITICISM. T h at science which,
by a m ethodical com parison of m anuscripts and
other ancient evidence, seeks to elim inate errors
which have occurred in the process of copying, and
thus to determ ine the genuine te x t of the Hebrew
and G reek Scriptures.
GOD. “God is a Spirit, infinite, eternal, and
unchangeable, in his being, wisdom, pow er, holi
ness, justice, goodness, and tru th .” (S.C. 4).
ATHEISM.
God.
The denial of the existence of
MATERIALISM. The false doctrine th a t noth
ing exists except m aterial substance and physical
energy (a form of atheism ).
POLYTHEISM.
Belief in m any gods.
PANTHEISM. The false system w hich holds
th at everything is divine, o r th a t God is the soul
of the universe, and th a t God attain s personality
and self-consciousness only in man.
HUMANISM. The false system w hich re
gards the hum an race as existing for its own sake,
consider’s m an’s chief end to be his own w elfare,
and looks upon God and religion as m eans for
prom oting the progress of hum anity.
DEISM. The false system w hich holds th at
God created the universe and then le ft it to func
tion autom atically w ithout divine providential
control.
THEISM. The tru th th a t th ere is a personal,
alm ighty God, who is th e C reato r and R uler of
all things and is distinct from th e universe.
SELF-EXISTENCE OF GOD. The tru th th a t
God exists of Himself, independently of all other
beings, w ithout a cause, w ithout an origin, and
w ithout a purpose outside of Himself. (The same
tru th is sometimes expressed by saying th a t God
is a self-contained Being).
PERSONALITY OF GOD. T he tru th th a t God
is a Being possessing freedom and self-consciousness, who can call H im self “I” and whom we can
call “Thou.”
TRANSCENDENCE OF GOD. The tru th th at
God is not only distinct from the universe, b u t
also fa r above, behind and beyond it, and th a t
there is absolutely nothing beyond God. (The
Bible expresses this by saying th a t God dw ells on
high).
IMMANENCE OF GOD. The tru th th a t God is
everyw here in the universe, and th a t absolutely
nothing great or sm all could exist w ithout His con
tinual presence in it.
UNITY OF GOD. The tru th th a t th ere is only
one living and tru e God.
TRINITY OF GOD. The tru th th a t the one
God exists in three Persons, the F ath er, the Son
125
and th e H oly Spirit, the sam e in substance, equal
in pow er an d glory.
SOVEREIGNTY OF GOD. The absolute, unchallengable au th o rity of God over the entire u n i
verse, by w hich He orders everything for His own
glory, according to the counsel of His own will.
ATTRIBUTES OF GOD. Those qualities of
God’s n a tu re w hich m ake Him th e kind of Being
H e is.
INCOMMUNICABLE ATTRIBUTES OF GOD.
Those attrib u tes of God w hich God alone can
possess, such as to be alm ighty, infinite, u n
changeable.
COMMUNICABLE ATTRIBUTES OF GOD.
Those a ttrib u te s of God w hich can be bestowed
on angels and m en, such as wisdom, holiness,
goodness, love.
LESSON 124
ham to Joseph. 11:27 to 50.26, cont.
shepherds spoke th e sam e language, o r at any
ra te th a t his language and theirs w ere close enough
th a t th ey could u n d e rstan d each other w ithout
4.
difficulty. Doubtless Jacob w as surprised to learn
to 35:29, cont.
that~Ke had a rriv ed a t h is exact destination. He
inquires w h eth er L aban is w ell, and is told th at
We h av e now come to chapter 29, which n a r
such is th e case. In addition, Jacob is told th at
rates Jaco b ’s a rriv a l a t th e hom e of his uncle
Rachel, L aban’s daughter, is soon to arriv e w ith
L aban. “T hen Jacob w ent on his journey, and came
a flock of sheep. V ery likely Jacob m ay have
into th e la n d of the people of th e east” (29:1).
w ished th a t th e shepherds w ould w ate r th e ir
This expression, “the- land of th e people of the
sheep and m ove on, w hile they on th e ir p a rt w a n t
east,” as used here, evidently m eans the area b e
ed to be present to w itness th e m eeting of Jacob
tw een P alestin e and Mesopotamia. Nothing fu rth e r
and Rachel.
is said ab o u t Jacob’s journey through “the lan d
of th e people of th e east.” In verse 2 he has a l
P resen tly R achel arriv ed w ith h e r fath er’s
read y a rriv e d a t Mesopotamia w here his k indred
sheep. Jacob first looks at Rachel, th en at the
lived.
sheep. Rachel, of course, w as his first cousin, the
dau ghter of his m other’s brother. Jacob th en by
Two w ords in verse 2 — “behold” and “lo” —
indicate th a t th e fact stated in the verse is a re
his ow n unaided stre n g th rem oves the great
stone from the top of the w ell, and w aters Rachel’s
m ark ab le one, nam ely th a t J a c o b h a d reached the
flock of sheep, no doubt to th e su rprise of th e
v e ry locality w here his kindred Jiv e d , Jacob has
oth er shepherds w ho w ould be accustom ed to
reach ed a 'w e ll w h ere flocks of sheep w ere re g u la r
m ove th e stone by th e un ited stren g th of tw o or
ly w atered . “A g reat stone w as upon the w ell’s
th re e men.
m onth.” D iscoveries in Bible lands indicate th a t
such w ells ordinarily w ere not springs of “living
r F irst Jacob kisses Rachel, th en tells h e r w ho
w a te r” b u t r a th e r supplies of stored-up w ater. The
he_js. We m ight th in k it w ould have been m ore
n a rra tiv e explains th a t it was the custom to w ait
pro p er for him to disclose his id e n tity 'firs th a n d
u n til a ll th e flocks of the various shepherds .w ere
kiss h e r a fte r th a t, w h en she knew he was her
assem bled, th en open the well, w ater the sheep,
cousin.- Rachel m ust have been ra th e r surprised
an d cover th e w ell again. In verse 7 Jacob ex
a t ’being kissed by a total stranger. T he record
presses su rp rise th a t they should be w aiting
does n o t indicate w h e th er this w as “love a t first
th e re w ith sheep long before evening, thus losing
sight” or only Jacob’s joyous surprise a t m eeting
tim e th a t could be spent in grazing, b u t he is told
one of his kindred. Jacob w as evidently a .m an
th a t th e sheep cannot be w atered until all have
of pow erful emotions, fo r having kissed his_cousin,
arriv ed . T his ap p aren tly m eans that_JJierg_was
h e “lifted u p his voice, anH 'w ept” (29:11). A fter
a com mon custom or agreem ent th a t the w ell wjis
this, Jacob tells Rachel th a t he is “h e r fath e r’s
to~be"opened b u t once, for all the flocks together^
b ro th e r”, th a t is, h er fa th e r’s relative or kinsm an,
and some shepherds w ould arriv e early in the hope
the son of Rebekah. Rachel in tu rn ru n s — ap
of being firs t to w ater th eir sheep; then they
paren tly leaving th e flock of sheep at the w ell —
w ould h av e to w ait th ere in idleness u n til the
to tell the new s to h e r father.
/
re s t h a d arrived.
Jacob inquires of the shepherds as to w hence
th e y a re an d is told th a t they are of H aran. A sked
w h e th e r th e y know L aban the son of Nahor, they
rep ly th a t th e y do. It seems th a t Jacob and these
W e h av e m et L aban e a rlie r in th e book of
Genesis. ’ I t w as in ch ap ter 24 w h ere he as Rebek ah ’s b ro th e r topk.a. leading p a rt in th e jie g o tiations for. th e m arriag e of R ebekah to Isaac. In
lao
th e sam e chapter L ab an ’s acquisitive n a tu re w as
b rought out, w hen having noted th e valuable gold
nose-ring and bracelets displayed by his sister, he
said to A brah am ’s servant, “Come in, thou blessed
of the L ord; w herefore stan d est thou w ithout?”
(24:31). As w e shall soon see, L aban has. n o t
changed in c h aracter b u t continues tru e to form.
L aban ru n s to th e w ell to m eet Jacob, greets
him according to custom, and brings him to the
fam ily hom e as a guest. Jacob th e n gives L aban a
rep o rt of him self, including no doubt how he
cam e to m eet w ith Rachel, and perhaps also his
reasons fo r leaving his home.
would ra th er have his daughter m arry Jacob than
some other “man. The offer is th erefore accepted
and Jacob serves the seven years th a t he has
promised in order to m arry Rachel. “A nd they
semed unto him but a few days, for the love he had
to h e r” (29:20). Jacoby is looking fo rw ard to m a r
riage w ith his beloved Rachel, quite unsuspecting
of the m ean trick his uncle L aban is planning-to
play on him.
Questions:
1. W hat is m eant by “the lan d of the people of
the east"?
L aban treats Jacob as a w elcome guest, say
in g “S u rely thou a r t m y l^fiPe an d m y flesh”
(29:14), th a t is, a n e a r relativ e w ho w ould have a
special claim to hospitality. Jacob rem ains th ere
as a guest in th e household fo r one m onth.
2. W hat kind of well, probably, w as the well
which Jacob came to?
N ext L ^ban proposes a m ore p erm anent a r
rangem ent. H e recognizes th a t Jacob w ill m ake a
com petent shepherd, and proposes th a t he, Laban,
shall em ploy him at w ages to be agreed upon.
This proposal of L aban m ay have been in good
faith, even though w e know th a t L aban was a
selfish and trick y person in his dealings w ith
others.
4. W hat explanation of this was given him by
the shepherds?
The record states th a t L aban had tw o daugh
ters, of w hich th e elder w as L eah and the younger
Rachel. L eah m eans “w ild cow,” w hile Rachel
m eans “ewe.” L eah w as “tender-eyed,” Leupold
in his com m entary states th a t this does not im ply
any diseased condition nor even defective vision,
b u t m erely th e lack of “th a t clear-cut brilliance
an d lu stre th a t "the O rientals love” (Leupold, E x
position of Genesis, II, p. 793). Rachel, on the
o th er hand, is described as “beautiful and wellfavored,” th a t is, beautiful in form and looks
(L eupold). Jacob definitely p refers Rachel, and
proposes to L aban th a t he serve him seven years
fo r his younger d au g h ter Rachel. We should r e
m em ber th a t w hen this proposal w as made, Jacob
had been living in L aban’s household for a m onth
already, therefo re this was not exactly a sudden
proposal of m arriage.
Laban agrees to Jacob’s offer, saying th at he
3. W hy was Jacob surprised at th e gathering
of the shepherds at the w ell long before evening?
5. W hat did Jacob do im m ediately after
m eeting Rachel?
6. W hat is strange about the circum stances of
Jacob’s kissing Rachel?
7. W here in the Book of Genesis have we a l
ready m et Laban?
8. W hat tra it of his ch aracter w as revealed
there?
9. How did Laban welcom e Jacob, and w hat
hospitality was given him?
10. W hat arrangem ent does L aban propose
to Jacob?
11. W hat is the m eaning of th e nam es Leah
and Rachel?
12. W hat, probably, is im plied by the sta te
m ent th a t Leah was tender-eyed?
13. W hat agreem ent w as m ade betw een Laban
and Jacob?
14.
Rachel?
W hat fact indicates
Jacob’s
love for
LESSON 125
go in unto h er” (29:21). This is a ra th e r short
and plain-spoken demand. It m ay be regarded as
an indication th at Jacob has already sized up
4.
The history of Isaac, Jacob and Essau. Laban’s character and realizes th a t he will not
25:19 to 35:29, cont.
do the honorable thing w ith o u t some pressure.
The seven years th a t Jacob prom ised to w ork
for his m arriag e to R achel have passed. The
pro p er thing a t this point w ould have been ?or
Laban to tak e th e in itiativ e and arran ge for the
m arriage feast. B ut th e tru e character of Laban
is suggested b y th e fact th a t he neglects to do so,
th ereb y forcing Jacob to dem and th a t Laban keep
his agreem ent. “A nd Jacob said unto Laban, Give
m e m y wife, for m y days are fulfilled, th a t I m ay
Upon Jacob’s dem and, L aban prep ares a m arriage feast. I t is to be a com m unity affair: “And
Laban gathered together all the m en of the place,
and m ade a feast” (29:22). L aban’s tricky c h ar
acter here comes m ore fully to light. W hile it
was probably custom ary to invite th e public to a
m arriage feast, still, as L eupold points out, this
fitted in exactly w ith w h at L aban w as secretly
plotting. W hen Jacob finally finds him self m a r
127
ried to .Leah by fraud, the fact th a t there w ere
m any guests p resent at the feast will m ake it
difficult and em barrassing for him to reject Leah.
L aban, of course, is deceitfully plotting to get
his elder d au g h ter Leah m arried off.
“And it cam e to pass in the evening, th a t he
took L eah his daughter, and brought h er to him;
and he w ent in unto h e r” (29:23). This was in
deed a m ean, dishonorable and shamefuF Trlpk
to play on a m an. Jacob’s m ean decejving^pf his
aged fa th e r Isaac is coming home to him now in
personal experience. He is learning by bitter ex
perience how it feels to be deceived by a jnear
relativ e in a suprem ely im portant personal m atter.
Some have w ondered how Laban could de
ceive Jacob successfully. It has even been sug
gested th a t Jacob m ust have been drunk a t the
tim e, or th a t L aban had intentionally gotten him
drunk. This supposition is quite unnecessary,
and th ere is nothing in the n arrativ e to support it.
W hile it w ould indeed be quite impossible to
palm off th e w rong woman on a bridegroom at
an A m erican w edding of the present day, things
w ere d ifferen t in Mesopotamia th ree thousand and
m ore y ears ago. Leupold in his com m entary suggtests several considerations w hich adequately
explain how Laban could successfully deceive
Jacob. F or exam ple, it was already d ark w hen
L eah was b rought to Jacob. Probably there was
no artificial illum ination in the tent. Leah would
be heavily veiled, according to the prevailing
custom "of th e day. V ery likely the two sisters
differed only in facial appearance, not in size or
height. Presum ably, too, conversations would be
w hispered during th a t night, and the bride would
n a tu ra lly be reticent. Also betrothed persons did
not associate closely prior to m arriage as is custom
a ry today. T hese and other considerations th a t
can be suggested seem quite sufficient to account
fo r th e possibility of Jacob having been success
fu lly deceived b y his uncle Laban.
The guilt of this sham eful deceit rested p ri
m arily upon Laban, but p art of the blame m ust be
borne by Leah. Even allow ing for the w eight of
p aren tal au th o rity in those days, Leah’s conniyance^in h e r fa th e r’s plan cannot be excused. It
was a clear-cut issue of rig h t and wrong. It is
unquestionable th a t Leah m ust have realized this.
T he only rig h t courge would have been to refuse
to be a p a rty to such disgraceful deception. Leah
could have refused w hen the m atter was first pro
posed to h e r by h er father. Or she could have
revealed h e r tru e identity to Jacob as soon as she
was b rought to his tent. But she did not, and
th ereb y she becam e guilty along w ith Laban of the
sin th a t w as com m itted. As to Leah’s motives,
th e record gives us no inform ation. She m ay have
been secretly in love w ith Jacob; she m ay have
been jealous of h er younger sister; she m ay have
reg ard ed this as h er last an d only chance to get a
hxrstaarnir"
Laban at the sam e tim e gives Leah Zilpah his
m aid for a m aidservant. Leah is treated Jess gener
ously th an R ebekah had been, for Rebekah on the
occasion of leaving home for m arriage to Isaac
had received both a nurse and a group of dam
sels (24:59, 61). The stingy character of Laban
becomes m ore and m ore evident.
The nex t m orning, of course, Laban’s out
rageous deceit is discovered. We can only imagine
the shock th a t this m ust have been to Jacob. A fter
patiently w orking seven years for Rachel, the
unw anted L eah has been palm ed off on him by
base trickery. The feelings of disillusionm ent,
anger arid disgust m ust have been mingled in
Jacob’s mind.
Jacob im m ediately takes Laban to task for his
deceit. “W hat is this th a t thou hast done unto
me? did I not serve w ith thee for Rachel? w here
fore then hast thou beguiled m e” (29:25). Jacob
thus charges L aban not only w ith deceit, but w ith
breaking his agreem ent.
Laban’s rep ly is ap p arently based on the no
tion th a t “a poor excuse is b ette r th an none.” He
lam ely states th at the common custom of the com
m unity requires th at the elder daughter be m ar
ried before the younger. This may, of course,
have been true. If so, the tim e for Laban to m en
tion it would have been at the tim e of m aking the
original agreem ent, not a fte r Jacob has served
seven years for the younger daughter. On the
other hand, Laban m ay have been lying o r a t any
ra te distorting the tru th . It is possible th a t there
was only a certain am ount- of public opinion in
favor of the elder daughter m arrying first, ra th e r
than a hard and fast custom th at am ounted prac
tically to law. If Laban is n o t actually lying, he
m ay be exaggerating a good deal in his statem ent
to Jacob about the local customs.
Questions:
1. How w as the stingy and base character of
Laban evidenced at th e end of Jacob’s seven
years of service?
2. W hat action was Jacob forced to take to
obtain his rights?
3. W hat preparation did Laban m ake for the
m arriage feast?
4. Why m ay Laban nave w anted to have a
large num ber of guests?
5. W hat event in Jacob’s earlier life is sim ilar
to L aban’s treatm en t of him?
C. How can we explain L aban’s success in de
ceiving Jacob?
7. Why can Leah not be excused for her share
in the deceit?
8. W hat m ay possibly have been Leah’s mo
tives?
128
9. W hat feelings m ust Jacob have experienced
w hen he discovered how his uncle had deceived
him?
11. W hat reply did Laban m ake to Jacob’s
charges?
10. W hat accusations dirt Jacob m ake against
Laban?
12. How can it be show n th a t L aban’s reply
was insincere?
LESSON 126
HI. History of the Covenant People from Abra
expostulate only mildly to Laban concerning the
la tter’s outrageous conduct.
4.
Laban was probably som ew hat su rg jised th at
to 35:29, cont.
Jacob did not become violently angry. Perhaps
Having blam ed his deceitful conduct on the
customs of th e country, L aban n e x t says to Jacob:
‘T hilfil h er week, and we w ill give thee this also
for the service which thou sh alt serve w ith me
y et seven other y ears” (29:27). This statem ent
of Laban has som etim es been m isunderstood, as
if th e statem ent “Fulfil h er w eek” was a re fe r
ence to the additional seven years of service
necessary if Jacob was to m arry Rachel. The idea
of this in terp retatio n is th a t the term “w eek”
m eans a period of seven years. It is, however,
highly im probable th a t this is th e correct in te rp re
tation. Much m ore probable is the view th a t “her
w eek” refers to the w eek-long festivities accom
panying Jaco b ’s m arriage to Leah. T hat is, Laban
is asking Jacob to keep up appearances as if
everything w e re all rig h t as to his m arriage w ith
Leah, through the w eek-long m arriage feast.
It w ill be realized th a t if Laban has gotten
Jacob into a tig h t spot, it is also tru e th a t Jacob
has Laban in a tight spot. If Jacob now backs
out of his m arriage to Leah oh th e ground th a t
fle~has been im posed upon by fraud, he will be a
laughingstock of the entire com m unity. On the
other hand, if Jacob backs out of the m arriage to
Leah, Leah herself w ill be a laughingstock to the
com m unity and a p erm anent em barrassm ent to
h er fath er Laban. If Jacob refuses to keep her as
his wife, certainly no one else w ill w ant to m arry
her. Therefore n eith er Jacob nor L aban is in a
position to act freely as he m ay please. Both men
are under considerable pressure of circumstances.
Jacob is not in a position to insist upon his strict
legal rig h tsrb e c a u se if he does he will appear as
a fool to th e com m unity. Laban, on the other
hand, cannot v en tu re to press Jacob too hard, for
fear th at Jacob m ay rep u d iate L eah regardless of
the consequences. U nder these circum stances
Laban m akes a plea an d a proposal w hich Jacob
decides to accept.
U nder the circum stances, Jacob’s attitude to
w ard Laban seems rem arkably meek. It is pos
sible th at this is p artly caused by Jacob’s guilty
conscience concerning th e som ew hat sim ilar de
ceit which he had p erp etrated upon his aged fath er
Isaac. Perhaps Jacob sees the justice of God in
the fact th a t he, th e erstw hile deceiver, is now the
victim of deceit. This m ay have led Jacob to
LabSn, noting the ra th e r m eek and m ild character
of Jacob’s reaction to the fraud, decides to be as
reasonable as possible, and let Jacob have Rachel
after all. However, the stingy m eanness of Laban
comes to light in this also. He proposes to give
Rachel to Jacob, but only on condition th at Jacob
shall serve an additional seven years for Rachel.
In view of the fact~that Jacob has already served
seven years for Rachel, according to agreem ent,
and never did w a n t Leah, and has been grievously
tricked into m arrying the unw anted Leah, it would
seem th at this latest proposal of Laban involved
a rem arkable am ount of “cheek” or “nerve." One
would think th at the p roper thing w ould have
been for Laban to apologize hum bly for his de
ceitful conduct, beg Jacob to keep Leah as a m at
ter of grace, and im m ediately give him Rachel
w ithout dem and for fu rth e r service. B ut it is not
in Laban to do anything out of sheer justice, let
alone anything out of generosity. So, even though
in a sense Jacob has him in a tig h t place, L aban
proceeds to drive an additional h a rd bargain.
Jacob can have Rachel, b u t to obtain h e r he m ust
first go through the w eek’s feast of L eah’s m ar
riage, and then he m ust agree to_work seven more
years for Rachel. Jacob, u n der the circum stances,
agrees to this proposal.
,—' The question has been raised as to w hether
; Jacob m arried Rachel before or a fte r the second
; seven years of service. It has som etim es been
; assumed th a t the m arriage TcT Rachel did not take
! place until the second seven years of service had
been actually rendered — in o th er w ords that
j Jacob really had to serve Laban for fourteen
j years before he could m arry Rachel. T he prob| ability is th at this view is incorrect, and th at
i Rachel was given to Jacob im m ediately a fte r the
’ completion of the w eek’s festivities of the m arriage
to Leah. This is Leupold’s view of the m atter,
j He states: “Then, not w aiting till th e second
I period of seven years’ service w as term inated,
| Laban at once gave Rachel to Jacob. V ery likely,
\ Laban sensed th at Jacob w ould be adam ant in
; insisting on his right, at least on this one point,
: and so Laban conceded w hat could not be avoid! ed” (Exposition of Genesis, II, p. 799).
An ethical question m ay be raised as to the
moral rightness of Jacob continuing to keep Leah
129
as his wife, and also as to the m oral rightness of
Jacob being a polygamist. In law a m arriage
brought about by fraud is not valid and can be
“annulled by a court order. Jacob had been tric k
ed into m arry in g Leah by fraud. He could have
rejected h er as soon as the fraud was discovered
withou,t guilt. Originally the m arriage betw een
Jacob an d L eah w as not a true m arriage because
it w as not based upon free consent betw een the
p arties. L ater, _however, it seems clear th a t real
lgve, an d th erefore consent, came to exist b e
tw een Jacob and Leah. As to the m oral rightness
of a polygam ous m arriage, it m ust be pronounced
w rong in th e sense of being out of accord w ith
th e original institution of m arriage as ordained
by God. However, polygam y was an evil w hich
existed as a ’"m atter'o f fact in the Old T estam ent
period, ~an3'~while not sanctioned or condoned by
God, it w as_tem porarily tolerated until in the
course of tim e I t would be elim inated by the
g re a te r religious enlightenm ent and progress of
th e people of Israel. It is w ith this consideration
in view th a t the conduct of Jacob should be ap
praised.
Questions:
1. How has L aban’s request to Jacob, “Filfil
h er w eek,” often been m isunderstood?
2. W hat is probably the tru e m eaning of La
ban’s request to Jacob to “F ulfil her w eek”?
3. W hat em barrassing situation has Laban
gotten Jacob into?
4. W hy w as Laban not in a position to act
w ith com plete freedom?
5. W hat m ay be the reason for Jacob’s m eek
ness in dealing w ith Laban?
6. How does the m ean, stingy character of
Laban come to light in his n e x t proposal?
7. W hat would have been the proper thing for
Laban to do un d er the circumstances?
8. W hy did L aban probably give Rachel to
Jacob at the beginning ra th e r than the end of the
second seven years of service?
9. W hat can be said about the m oral rig h t
ness of Jacob’s continuing the m arriage to Leah?
10. W hat is the status of polygam y in the Old
Testam ent?
LESSON 127
and h er im patient dem and th at she too become a
m other, are understandable, b u t not excusable,
4.
The history of Isaac, Jacob and Esau. 25:19 for they involve an elem ent of distrust of the w is
dom and providence of God. The record is calcu
to 35:29, cont.
lated to im press upon our m inds th e tru th th at
“A nd Jacob did so. and fulfilled h e r week;
the fulfilm ent of the redem ptive prom ise depends
an d he gave him Rachel his daughter to w ife also”
upon“"th e'so v ereig n ty of God, not upon hum an
(29:28). Jacob thus agrees to L aban’s rath e r hard
plans or desires. As a m a tte r of fact, the Saviour
bargain, it being the best he can do u n der the
of the w orld w as to"be'3escended from Leah, not
circum stances. The week of festivities connected
from Rachel. A nd in the period of the kingdom,
w ith L eah ’s m arriage being completed, Jacob
it was the trib e of Judah, descended from Leah,
thereupon m arries Rachel in addition. The seven
that proved com paratively faithful to God, while
y ears of added service presum ably sta rt from this
the tribes of Ephraim and M anasseh, descended
point.
from Rachel, becam e notoriously apostate. We
m ust pronounce R achel’s attitu d e sinful. L ater in
The n ex t item in the record is the inform a
the history w e have an account of conduct of
tion th a t Laban gave his handm aid B ilhah to
Rachel w hich was not very ethical, to say the
Rachel to be h e r m aidservant. The nam e of Zilleast (31:30-35).
pah, L eah’s m aidservant, m eans “dropping” o r “a
d ro p ”; the nam e of Bilhah, Rachel’s m aidservant,
“A nd Jacob’s anger w as kindled against
m eans p erhaps “bashfulness” (Davis Bible Dic
Rachel; and he said, Am I in God’s stead, who hath
tion ary ) or “te rro r” (Leupold).
w ithheld from thee the fru it of the wom b?”
(30:2). H ere w e see th a t Jacob has a tru e r re
F rom this point we have an account of the
ligious
faith th an Rachel. Jacob believes in the
increase of Jaco b ’s fam ily and also of the re m ark
P rovidence of God w hich controls w hat comes to
able increase of his m aterial w ealth. This is the
pass. He is angry because Rachel looks a t the
fu lfilm en t of th e Lord’s prom ise to Jacob to be
m atte r as if it w ere a m erely hum an problem and
w ith him and to bless him. The b irth of L eah’s
does not see the hand of God in the situation.
sons Reuben, Simeon, Levi and Ju d ah is first re
Jacob
has a practical, not m erely theoretical, faith
corded (29:31-35). This evidently occupied a
in the sovereignty of God.
period of several years, during all of which tim e
Rachel rem ained childless.
fiacjiel jiext proposes an expedient sim ilar to
N atu rally R ^ j^e l was grieved and disappoint
the union of A braham and H agar. J b a t Jacob
ed by this state of affairs, and she “pnvied hpr sisagreed to this doubtful expedient chows th a t his
own faith, though b e tte r th an th a t of Rachel, w as_
tecll (30:1). R achel says to Jacob, ‘“G ive.m e chil
dren, or else I die.” R achel’s jealousy of Leah,
rea lly w eak and inadequate. Instead of repeating
130
th e m ethod used in the case of A braham and
Hagar, Jacob should have rem em bered the attitude
and conduct of his own fa th e r Isaac under sim ilar
circum stances: “Isaac en treated th e Lord for his
wife, because she w as b arren : and the Lord was
entreated of him, and R ebekah his wife conceived”
(25:21). Instead of yielding to Rachel’s im proper
proposal, Jacob should have tried p rayer. It is
clear th a t Jacob is still spiritually im m ature,
though he has a tru e faith.
The course advocated by Rachel is actually
adopted, and Jacob m arries JJilh ah , R achel’s m aid
servant, w ith the understanding, of course, th a t
the children th a t m ay be born shall be reckoned
as R achel’s. A lthough it is evident th a t this was
a common enough expedient in the ancient N ear
Eagt, and involved no social stigm a nor public
disapproval, still from th e standpoint of the divine
institution and law of m arriage, such prgcticos
cannot be justified. W hat Jacob did was doubt
less “legal” in th e sense th a t th e custom s and
public opinion of the day sanctioned it, b u t it was
n ot really rig h t in th e sight of God.
The union betw een Jacob and Bilhah results
in the b irth of tw o sons, Dan and N aphtali. It
w ill be noted th a t B ilhah bears the sons, but
Rachel rejoices over them and nam es them.
Next, Leah im itates the exam ple set by
Rachel’,'a n d gives h e r m aidservant Z ilpah to Jacob
as his wife. From this union are born Gad and
Asher. As in th e case of Bilhah and Rachel, the
m aidservant bears the sons, b u t the m istress does
the rejoicing and th e nam ing of them.
Questions:
1. Why did Jacob agree to L aban’s h ard b a r
gain?
2. W hat may be the m eaning of the nam es
Zilpah and Bilhah?
3. W hat promise of God to Jacob began to be
rem arkably fulfilled at this point?
4. W hat sinful attitude was Rachel guilty of?
5. In w hat w ay w as R achel’s religious faith
defective?
6. In w hat respect did Jacob have a b etter
faith than Rachel?
7. Why did Jacob become angry w ith Rachel?
8. W hat expedient did Rachel propose as a
solution of her problem?
9. A t w hat previous point in the history had
a sim ilar plan been adopted?
10. W hat fact about the life of his parents
should Jacob have rem em bered w hen Rachel pro
posed her plan?
11. W hat should be said about the m oral rig h t
ness of Jacob’s act of m arry in g his w ife’s m aid
servant?
12. W hat sons were born to Jacob and Bilhah?
Who nam ed them?
13. W hat sons w ere born to Jacob and Zilpah?
14. How m any children did Jacob have by
this time?
LESSON 128
not im ply th a t the Bible endores this idea as true.
It is evident, though, th a t Leah and Rachel held
this notion; otherw ise they w ould not have dis
4.
The history of Isaac, Jacob and Esau. puted so bitterly over the m andrakes. R euben has
25:19 to 35:29, cont.
given the m andrakes to his m other. Rachel is
naturally still concerned about h e r ow n sterility,
“And Reuben w ent in the days of w heat h a r
and asks Leah for some — not all — of the m an
vest, and found m andrakes in th e field, and
drakes. The result is a b itte r o u tburst on Leah’s
brought them unto his m other Leah. Then Rachel
part, in which she very unfairly accuses Rachel
said unto Leah, G ive me, I p ray thee, of thy son’s
of alienating her husband’s affections. “Is it a
m andrakes” (30:14). The story h ere shows some
small m atter th at thou hast taken m y hu s
of the evils of polygam y, w ith its inevitable strifes
band. . . ?” (30:15). Rachel, w ishing to preserve
and jealousies.
peace, yields to Leah. “The fra n k n arrativ e of .
the Scriptures on this point m akes us blush w ith i
The reference to the w h eat h arv est shows
sham e at the indelicate bargaining of the sisters /
th a t th e clan of Laban practiced agriculture and
— one of the fruits' of a bigam ous connection”
w ere not m erely shepherds and cattlem en. R eu
(Leupold, Exposition of Genesis, II, p. 812).
ben was perhaps four y ears old a t this time, “ju st
old enough to toddle into th e field after the re ap
Next we are inform ed of the b irth of Leah’s
ers” (Leupold, II, 811). He brings home some
sons Issachar and Zebulun. T h at Leah, in spite
yellow berries, called “m anS rakes” in th e King
of h e r bitter riv alry of Rachel, also had some
Jam es version. In those days it was commonly
faith in God is shown by h e r statem ents in verses
believed th a t this fru it h ad th e pow er of stim u
18 and 20, in w hich she recognizes th a t it is by
lating sexual desire and of increasing fertility.
the gift of God th a t she has children, and the
The m ention of the incident in the Bible does
statem ent of verse 17, “A nd God hearkened unto
131
Leah. .
The statem ent th a t “God hearkened”
im plies th a t it was an answ er to prayer.
had blessed him for Jacob’s sake; it was a clear
fact th at could easily be discerned.
A fter recording the b irth of Zebulun, the
record states th a t a d aughter was born to Jacob
an d Leah, nam ed Dinah. T hat Dinah was not
Jaco b ’s only daughter is known from 37:35 and
46:7, 15, w hich m ention Jacob’s “daughters". in the
plyfal. Y et D inah is the only one of the daugh
ters whose nam e we know. Obviously she is
m entioned b y nam e to prepare for the events re
corded in chapter 34. The other daughters are left
unnam ed, presum ably because th ere was nothing
special to record about them in the later history.
Laban does not w an t Jacob to depart; th e re
fore he says, “A ppoint m e th y wages, and I w ill
give it” (30:28). W hile this sounds reasonable
an d even generous, the tru th is th at Laban is a
selfish man, and he now m akes w hat seems to be
a generous offer only because this is the only w ay
he can hope to reta in Jacob’s services.
Jacob now has ten sons, besides one daughter
w hose n am e is known. The ten sons include nnm
six
born of Leah, two born of Zilpah and t w<j> born
of Bilhah. R achel .is still w ithout children of her
own. “A nd God rem em bered Rachel, and God
h eark en ed to h e r” (30:22). A son is born to Jacob
and Rachel, an d is nam ed Joseph. Rachel’s other
son, B enjam in, was not born until after the re tu rn
of th e fam ily to the land of Canaan (35:16-20).
W e should note th at Rachel gives the glory to God,
show ing an a ttitu d e som ew hat changed from her
ap p aren tly haughty attitude of earlier days. The
statem en t of 30:24, “The Lord shall add to me
an o th er son” m ay be b etter translated, “May the
L ord add to m e another son.” It is to be regarded
as a p ra y e r ra th e r than a prophecy.
A t this point in the n arrative, Jacob m akes
his first proposal to Laban th a t they p art company
and Jacob re tu rn to his own country. “Send me
aw ay, th a t I m ay go unto m ine own place, and to
m y country. Give me m y wives and my children,
fo r whom I have served thee, and let me go: for
thou know est m y service which I have done thee”
(30:25, 26). This proposal was apparently made
a t th e expiration of the fourteen years of service
w hich Jacob had prom ised to ren d er in re tu rn for
th e privilege of m arrying L aban’s daughters. jt_
was not u n til the second seven years of service
had been com pleted th at Jacob could call the en
tire fam ily his own in th e strict sense. Laban
is now asked to recogrtize th a t the previously ex
isting obligation has been“ satisfied. Jacob claims
to have ren d ered honest and faithful service
th ro u g h th e w hole period of fourteen years: “Thou
know est m y service which I have done thee.”
L aban, how ever, is quite unw illing to have
Jacob'T eave. V ery respectfully does he en treat
Jacob to rem ain. He says “I have learned by ex
perience th a t th e Lord hath blessed me for thy
sak e” (30:27). The clause, “I have learned by
experience” is m ore accurately translated “I have
consulted th e omens.” How Laban “consulted the
om ens” is not explained, but the statem ent in
dicates a heathenish superstition which was cer
tain ly incom patible w ith the faith of Jacob. Leu
pold states th a t L aban is practically m arked as an
idolater. He adds th a t Laban would not have
needed to consult any omens to discover th a t God
Jacob replies, in verses 29, 30, recounting
how faithfully he had served Laban, and rem ind
ing the la tte r th a t a tim e m ust come w hen he will
provide for his ow n estate. Jacob is careful to
give the credit to God: “foe Lord h ath blessed
thee since m y coming.” A pparently Jacob’s a r
rival was followed by a m arked increase in
L aban’s m aterial w ealth. We should keep in
mind, of course, th a t in those days, among such
people, w ealth consisted largely if not almost ex
clusively of livestock.
Jacob nam es his own term s. Realizing th at
Laban is a stingy m an a t heart, he says, “Thou
shalt not give me any thing.” Jacob does not
w ant anything of value from Laban at the outset.
No doubt he realizes th a t if Laban, in response to
a demand, w ere to give him a certain num ber of
sheep and goats im m ediately, he would soon
change his m ind and w ant them back, and would
try to find ways to get them back. Instead, Jacob
proposes a plan by w hich a proportion of the
flocks shall be his. He w ill go at once through
Laban’s flocks, rem oving all those which are ab
norm ally colored.
These abnorm ally colored
specimens are to be rem oved by Laban. TJliey are
to be Jacob’s flock, b u t for the tim e being under
the care of Laban. W hat w ould be left w ould be
the norm ally colored specimens, nam ely white
sheep and black goats. These, though belonging to
Laban, would be u n der the care of Jacob. Any
norm ally colored specim ens (solid w hite sheep
o r solid black goats) w hich m ight be produced in
the fu tu re from Jacob’s flock (w hich w ould be
un der L aban's care) w ere to belong to Laban.
On the other hand, any abnorm ally colored speci
m ens (speckled, etc.) w hich m ight be produced
from L aban’s flock (w hich w ould be under Jacob’s
care) w ould rightfully belong to Jacob. The pro
posed arrangem ent im plied re-sorting the flocks
from tim e to time, perhaps twice a year, £he
speckled, etc., being placed under Laban’s care
(b u t belonging to Jacob), and the solid-colored
being placed un d er Jacob’s care (but ^belonging to
L aban). Jacob claims only the abnorm ally colored
fraction (present and fu tu re ) as his hire (30:32).
This is an act of faith on Jacob’s part, which leaves
the am ount of his w ages in the hand of God, for
the proportion of abnorm ally colored specimens
to be produced in th e fu tu re would r\pt be subject
to hum an calculation or control. Laban agrees to
Jacob’s proposal, probably thinking it very ad
vantageous to himself.
132
Questions:
1. W hat fact about th e clan of Laban is indi
cated by th e m ention of “w heat h arv est” ?
8. How m any of these w ere sons of Leah?
How m any of Bilhah? How m any of Zilpah?
9. W hat son was born to Jacob and Rachel?
2. W hat w ere the “m andrakes” m entioned
in 30:14?
10. W hat statem ent of Rachel indicates th a t
she had faith in God?
3. W hat popular belief existed concerning
m andrakes? Does th e Bible endorse this belief as
true?
11. How long had Jacob been w orking for
Laban w hen he first proposed to leave his service
and retu rn home?
4. W hat statem en t in the record indicates
th a t Leah had faith in God?
12. W hat is the correct translation of L aban’s
statem ent, “I have learned by experience th a t the
Lord hath blessed me for th y sake”?
5. W hat w as the nam e of the d aughter born
to Jacob and Leah?
6. How do w e know th a t Jacob had other
daughters?
7. How m any sons did Jacob have a t this
point of the story?
13. W hat change had tak en place in the fo r
tunes of Laban after Jacob’s arrival?
14. W hat plan did Jacob propose for fu tu re
paym ent of wages to him by Laban? How does
this show Jacob’s faith in God?
LESSON 129
from the high level of faith w hich he had previous
ly occupied. Perhaps his aw areness of .L aban’s
suspicions led hlm to use these devices, taking
4.
The history of Isaac, Jacob and Esau. m atters into his own hands as it w ere, instead of
25:19 to 35:29, cont.
leaving this issue sim ply in the hands of God.
The proposal w as th a t Jacob go through L a
Two questions arise in our m inds as to the
b an’s flocks, separating th e abnorm ally colored
m easures taken by Jacob (related in 30:37-42).
specimens from th e rest. Laban has accepted
In the first place, is it scientifically possible to in
Jacob’s term s, b u t w hen it cam e to carrying the'
fluence the color of the offspring of anim als by
agreem ent out, L aban evidently did not fully
such methods? In the second place, was Jacob
tru st Jacob to do it honestly. F or in verses 34-36
morally justified in doing w h at he did?
Laban is the subject of the sentences, doing the
actions m entioned. This m eans th a t Laban him
W ith regard to the first question, tw o things
self^ w ent th ro u g h th e flocks, separating the ab
may be said. First, th ere seem s to have been, in
norm ally colored specim ens, w hich he handed over
both ancient and m odern tim es, a strong belief
to His sons to tak e care of. “His sons” m ust m ean
in the possibility of influencing the offspring by
L aban’s sons, not Jacob’s sons. L aban w ith his own
such methods. Leupold says: “The observations
sons and th e abnorm ally colored flocks n ex t re
of the ancients, backed by experience of m any
m ove th re e days’ journ ey from Jacob, who re
moderns, seems to confirm th e practicability of
m ains w here he had been, tending the rest of L a
the device here described” (Exposition of Genesis,
b an ’s flocks (th e n o rm ally colored m ajority).
II, p. 824) The New Bible C om m entary (D avid
son, Stibbs and K evan), says “A physiological
These last actions of L aban not only indicated
principle is here employed by Jacob. This kind of
d istrust of Jacob, b u t w ere actually insulting. The
device is adopted for obtaining certain colours of
m eanness of L ab an ’s c h aracter is m ore and more
horses and dogs. W hite lam bs, even now, are se
obvious. The n a rra tiv e im plies th a t L aban, if he
cured by surrounding th e troughs w ith w hite ob
had been in Jacob’s place, w ould have tried to
jects" (p. 98). Though the w rite r of these notes
do som ething dishonest; consequently he assumes
hesitates to contradict two such excellent com
th a t Jacob w ill m ake such an attem pt, and so he
m entaries, he m ust reg ister his dissent. The
suspects him of it. P u ttin g a space of th ree days’
m odern science of genetics know s nothing of any
journey betw een th e now separated abnorm ally
such influence of environm ent on the color of the
colored flocks an d th e ones left under Jacob’s
offspring. Acquired characteristics cannot be'
care was a positive insult. Jacob instead of being
inherited, and the color, etc., of the offspring is
treated as a p a rtn e r in th e enterprise is treated
determ
ined by the heredity-bearing factors know n
as if he w ere a paroled thief. H ad it not been for
as genes which exist in th e germ cells of th e p a r
Jacob’s hum ble, p atien t faith in th e Lord, he m ight
ents. Except for occasional changes know n as
have resented L ab an ’s attitu d e so strongly th a t he
“m utations” the color of the offspring is d e te r
would have left his service im m ediately.
mined by the heredity tran sm itte d by the parents,
which combines according to M endel’s laws. The
TJext .we a re told of the strange devices used
by Jacob to influence th e processes of genetics.
present w riter does not believe th a t th ere is any
scientific explanation for the results w hich Jacob
This seems to be a step dow n on Jacob’s p a rt
133
is recorded as having obtained by the m ethods
w inch he employed. We do not question the re a li
ty of th e results, b u t a ttrib u te lh e m en firely ’to the
o verruling providence of God, not a t all to the
effectiveness of w hite rods or other such objects
placed w here th e flocks could see them.
As to..the m oral rightfulness of Jacob’s actions,
we are com pelled to question this. When Jacob
m ade his a g reem ent witjx, .Laban, obviously the
p lain m eaning of th e term s agreed upon was th a t
th e abnorm ally colored specimens bor$ under nor
mal circumstances were to be Jacob’s. P erhaps
L ab an ’s suspicious attitu d e and actions led Jacob
to feel th a t he was justified in taking m atters
into his own hands anif attem pting to influence
th e norm al processes of n atu re by his w hite rods,
etc. We m ust reluctantly pronounce Jacob’s ac
tion to~Ee ufiYIghteous,' even though we have al
ready said th a t only by the overruling providence
of God could th e m ethod be affective.
On the oth er hand, it may be said that God in
His sovereignty chose to bless Jacob's actions, in
sgjje of th e ir unethical character, in order to give
th e advantage, in this ra th e r unequal contest, to
th e m an who on th e whole was righteous and
pleasing to God. This does not justify Ja^pb in
his actions b u t it cJoeS1*explain how Cfbd could
bless him in spite of his ethically doubtful m eth
ods.
To sum th e m a tte r up, as tim e passes Jacob
increases 'g reatly in w ealth. His flocks are large
an d vigorous. He is fast catching up w ith his
uncle L aban in w ealth. “And the m an increased
exceedingly, an d had m uch cattle, and m aid
servants, and m enservants, and camels, and asses”
(30:43). Jacob has come a long w ay since the
time, some tw enty years earlier, w hen he had
arriv ed alone at L aban’s household.
Questions:
1. W hat proposal did Jacob make to Laban as
to his wages?
2. W hat change did Laban m ake w hen it
came to carrying out the term s?
3. Who is the speaker in verses 34-36?
4. Whose sons a re m eant by “his sons” a t
the end of verse 35?
5. W hat attitu d e of Laban tow ard Jacob was
indicated by L aban’s conduct?
6. W hy did Jacob not become angry and leave
L aban at once?
7. W hat should be thought of Jacob’s attem pt
to influence the processes of genetics, so fa r as
faith in God is concerned?
8. W hat should be thought of Jacob’s a ttem p t
ed m ethod of influencing the color of sheep and
goats to be bom , as to the scientific possibility of
doing this successfully?
9. If w e hold th a t it is scientifically impossible
to influence the offspring by such devices as
Jacob used, how can we account for the fact th at
the desired results w ere actually obtained?
10. W hat should be thought about the m oral
rightfulness of Jacob’s m ethods?
11. If we say th a t Jacob’s actions w ere u n
ethical, how can we account for the fact th a t God
blessed his actions?
12. To w h at ex te n t had Jacob’s w ealth in
creased by the end of ch apter 30?
LESSON 130
and joining another. The criticism was on the
ground th a t since he had received a salary from
the first denom ination for several years, he really
4.
owed everything he had to th at denom ination and
to 35:29, cont.
had no right to leave it to join another, for any
C hapter 31 brings us to Jacob’s escape from
reason w hatever. This type of tw isted thinking
h is uncle L aban, fallow ed b y "the settlem ent of
is not infrequently m et w ith. If a m inister earns
thg dispute betw eenT he tw o men. Trouble began
his salary, it becomes his ow n and no longer be
by a statem en t of Laban’s sons reaching the ears
longs to the church w hich has paid it. Sim ilarly,
of Jacob. L ab an ’s sons w ere saying: “Jacob h ath
w h at Jacob possessed, he owned by reason of hard
tak en aw ay all th a t was our fath er’s; and of th a t
w ork accom panied by the blessing of God. B e
w hich w as o u r fa th e r’s h ath he gotten all this
sides this, it is ap p aren t th a t Ijaban. him self w as
g lory” <31:1). T he injustice and falsity of this
m uch richer a fte r Jacob had been w ith him tw enty
charge are obvious. W hat Jacob had, he had ob
years th a n he had been before that. But, as some
tained law fully. Laban’s sons speak as if Jacob
one has w isely rem arked, sin is never logical; and
w ere u n d er an obligation to w ork for Laban w ith
envy being a sin, we cannot “expect it to be logical.
o ut any com pensation. W hen a m an has earned
So L aban’s sons illogically and very unjustly say
som ething by discharging stipulated obligations,
th a t Jacob has taken w ealth th a t rightly belongs
w h at he has earn ed belongs to him , not to th e
to th e ir father.
em ployer who has hired him. We once h eard a
m in ister criticized for leaving one denom ination
As for Laban himself, he is a bit more cau
134
tious than his sons and does not come out in the
open and accuse Jacob of anything. B ut he says
by his looks and m anner w hat he does not say
w ith words. “A nd Jacob beheld the countenance
of Laban, and, behold, it w as not tow ard him as
before” (31:2). Laban h ad once appeared friend
ly, though we m ay question the depth and genu
ineness of his friendship w ith Jacob. B ut now he
eyes Jacob w ith suspicious eyes. Jacob cannot
help noticing this fact, and is concerned about it.
Then a r evelation from the L ord comes to
Jacob, com m anding him to re tu rn to the land of
Canaan and to his kindred, and prom ising th at
the Lord will be w ith him (31:3). Thus the
prom ise m ade by God to Jacob years before at
B ethel is renew ed. F or a m an of Jacob’s faith
and obedience to God, this settles the m atter. He
determ ines to leave Laban.
Jacob calls his tw o w ives Leah and Rachel
ou t into th e fields in order to talk w ith them . The
reason for his calling them to th e fields is not
stated, b u t probably it w as for th e sake of privacy.
In those days th e only sure w ay of obtaining
privacy for a secret conversation w as to get out
into the open fields w here one could see a good
distance around him in all directions and be sure
th a t there w ere no eavesdroppers w ithin earshot.
We recall how David arran g ed to m eet Jon ath an
in an open field in o rd er to have a strictly confi
dential ta lk w ith him. Jacob has to m ake sure of
secrecy so he calls L eah and R achel to m eet him
in the open. Note th a t B ilhah and Z ilpah are
not called, nor are any of th e children.
J acob te lls Leah and Rachel th a t th e ir fath er
Laban is no longer favorable tow ard him, b u t he
a d d s 'rrthie God of m y fa th e r h a th been w ith m e”
(31:5). This is follow ed by a recital of the doubledealing of Laban tow ard him. Jacob sum s it up
by saying: ‘Thus God h ath tak en aw ay the cattle
of your father, and g'Tven them to m e” (31:9).
From these statem ents of Jacob we learn some
thing new, nam ely th a t the original arrangem ent
w ith L aban had repeatedly been changed on
Laban’s initiative, b u t all w ithout favorable result
for Laban. The statem en t “God h ath taken aw ay
the cattle of y our fath er, and given them to m e”
m ust not be in terp reted so literally as to m ean
th a t Jacob now possessed all the flocks and Laban
none a t all. It only m eans th a t the relative in
crease of Jacob's flocks had been decidedly greater
than th a t of L aban’s.
Next Jacob tells R achel and Leah of a dream
he had had. He does not state w hen he had this
dream. Some critics have tended to discount this
dream , or a ttem p t to explain it p u rely psycholog
ically; they reason th a t Jacob’s brooding over the
m atter induced th e dream , and th a t God had noth
ing to do w ith it. B ut Jacob being a m an of de
vout faith, w e cannot ta k e such a view of the
m atter. As tru ly as the dream of the ladder at
Bethel, this dream m ust be regarded as a real
revelation from God to Jacob.
In the dream, Jacob was w atching the flocks
during the breeding season. The dream concerned
the breeding of the animals. It w as intended, not
to teach Jacob how to bargain effectively w ith
Laban the next time, but ra th e r to reassure Jacob
and rem ind him th at the w hole m atte r was under
the providential control of God. This, incidental
ly, accords w ell w ith our view th a t none of Jacob’s
own devices can sufficiently explain the increase
of the abnorm ally colored specim ens in the flocks,
but th a t the only adequate explanation is the over
ruling providence of God.
In the dream, Jacob is told to w atch the
speckled, grizzled and rin g -streak ed ram s. The
Lord adds: “I have seen all th a t L aban doeth u n
to thee. I am the God of B ethel, w here thou
anointedst the pillar, and w here thou vow edst a
vow unto me: now arise, get thee from out this
land, and retu rn to the land of th y k indred”
(31:12, 13).
Rachel and Leah im m ediately and unquestioningly agree to accompany Jacob to th e land, of
Canaan. They say: “Is th ere yet any portion or
inheritance for us in our fa th e r’s house? A re we
not counted of him strangers? for he hath sold us,
and hath quite devoured also our m oney. F or all
the riches w hich God h ath taken from our father,
th at is ours, and our children’s: now then, w h a t
soever God hath said unto thee, do” (31:14-16).
In these words of R achel and Leah — doubt
less a condensed sum m ary of w h at th ey actually
said — there is betrayed m ore th an a trace of b it
terness tow ard their fa th e r L aban. A pparently
Laban’s stingy m eanness did not please even his
own daughters. The w ords of Rachel and Leah
also indicate bitter resentm ent at the term s on
which their father had arranged th e ir m arriage to
Jacob. Even in those days th e re w as a b e tte r w ay
of arranging for one’s d au ghter’s m arriage, and
they of course realized this. They resented the
fact th at Laban had “sold” th e n T in exchange for
seven years of w ork for each. M oreover, a gen
erous and high-m inded fa th e r w ould have used
anything received from his prospective son-inlaw to provide a dowry for his daughter, instead
of selfishly “devouring our m oney” as Rachel and
Leah accuse Laban of having done. The b itte r
ness of years of grievance come to the surface at
last in the words of Rachel and Leah. They m ust
now choose betw een th e ir fa th e r and th eir h u s
band, and w ithout hesitation they choose the latter.
Questions:
1. W hat statem ent of L aban’s sons reached
the ears of Jacob?
2. W hy w as the charge of L aban’s sons false
and unjust?
135
3. Why can envy not be expected to be logical?
4. W hat new revelation of God came to Jacob
at this point?
8. W hy can Jacob’s dream not be regarded as
m erely psychological?
9. W hat did the dream indicate concerning
Jacob’s problem s?
10. W hat was the reaction of Rachel and Leah
to Jacob’s proposal to go to the land of Canaan?
5. W hat did Jacob resolve to do?
6. W here did Jacob talk w ith Rachel and
Leah? Why there?
11. W hat bitterness against Laban is revealed
by the w ords of Rachel and Leah?
7. W hat new inform ation about Laban’s deal
ings comes to light in the words of Jacob to
R achel and Leah?
12. W hat was w rong w ith the type of arrange
m ents Laban had m ade for the m arriage of his
daughters?
LESSON 131
Three _days have passed since Jacob’s de
p arture. Suddenly Labanls sheep-shearing and
accom panying festivities are rudely in terrupted
4.
The history of Isaac, Jacob and Esau. 25:19 by the new s th a t Jacob and fam ily are gone. L a
to 35:29, cont.
ban at once assembles a p a rty of his relatives and
starts out in pursuit. In the m ountains of Gilead
Jacob n ex t seizes a good opportunity to escape
Laban overtakes Jacob. A t this point God in ter
from Laban. He does this at a tim e w hen Laban
venes directly,*w arning L aban in a dream : “Take
is ex trem ely busy w ith shearing his sheep. S hear
heed th at thou speak not to Jacob either good or
ing the sheep would not only keep Laban and
bad” (31:24). Laban has been warned, b u t he
his fam ily busy, but would probably involve a big
does not heed the w arning.
feast and a good deal of entertaining. It was a
good tim e for Jacob to get aw ay w ithout any form al
The m eeting of the tw o men is m arked by
farew ells: Assem bling all his livestock and house
angry accusations on Laban’s part. Why has Jacob
hold goods, w ith - his w ives and children and ser
stolen aw ay w ithout form al farew ell, taking L a
vants, he “stole aw ay unaw ares,” w ithout notiban’s daughters as if they w ere prisoners of war?
fying L aban of his departure. Some may question
W hy did Jacob not give Laban an opportunity to
th e rightness of this act. We believe that, under
give a grand farew ell party, w ith music and feast
th e circum stances, Jacob was fully justified. As
ing and general rejoicing. W hy has Jacob not
th e sequel showed, Laban^ would never have given
even allow ed L aban to kiss his daughters good
his consent voluntarily for Jacob and fam ily to
bye?
depart.
Laban w as very angry, and anger, like envy,
A long w ith th e possessions which rightly be
is nev er logical. Most of L aban’s charges suggest
longed to Jacob and his fam ily, Rachel stole “the
th eir own answ er. Jacob has not forced Laban’s
im ages th a t w ere h er fa th e r’s”, These “images”
daughters to accompany him ; they are doing it of
w ere teraphim, apparently a kind of local house
th eir own free will. As fo r the farew ell party
hold gods. It is possible, and th ere seems to be
w ith music and m irth, Laban was too stingy a
some evidence to suggest this, th a t the possession
m an to spend very m uch on th a t sort of thing;
of these household gods had something to do w ith
instead, he would have taken m easures to try to
th e inheritance of the fam ily nam e and property.
prevent Jacob’s departure. As to the m atter of
O r it is possible th a t Rachel w anted the images
not letting him kiss his daughters >— probably he
sim ply out of her own tendency tow ard super
had jio t bothered to kiss them for the past several
stition and idolatry. As Leupold suggests, she
years, w hen they w ere living near him ; why
m ay have been a believer in Jehovah, and yet inshould he suddenly w an t to kiss them now? His
■'cbftsistently believed th at the teraphim would
treatm en t of them was m ercenary, and showed
bring a person good luck. The th eft of the te ra
little paternal love. B ut now, in his anger, he
phim was, of course, unknow n toTacob. Perhaps
m akes an issue of all these m atters.
Rachel did not d are to tell him w hat she was
Laban goes on: “It is in th e pow er of my hand
doing, realizing th at he would not approve of it.
to do you h u rt: but the God of your father spake
W hat Jacob thought of the teraphim comes to light
unto me yesternight, saying, Take heed th a t thou
la te r (35:2-4) w hen we are told that Jacob buried
speak not to Jacob either good or bad” (31:29).
them , w ith other objects, u nder an oak tree.
L aban’s claim th at it is in his pow er to harm
Jacob and his household m ake a clean getaw ay
Jacob is an arro g an t boast. He as m uch as a d
and succeeded in crossing the Euphrates River.
m its that he does not dare to do anything to h u rt
From th ere th e objective is “the m ount Gilead,”
Jacob, for he repeats the divine w arning given
th a t is, th e highlands on the east side of the
him . W e repeat, anger is never logical. If Laban
Jo rd a n River.
had been cool and logical, he would have realized
136
th a t the w arning from God which he had re
ceived, m eant th a t Jacob w as rig h t and Laban
w as wrong. If God is protecting Jacob, then
Laban’s w ild charges m ust be w ithout real justifi
cation.
2. Why was sheepshearing alw ays a specially
busy time?
Finally T.ahan m entions the m a tter of the
stolen idols. “W herefore h ast thou stolen my
gods”? (31:30). J a cob re plies, quite truthfully,
th a t he had been afraid th a t Laban w ould not
allow him to tak e Rachel an d Leah aw ay w ith
him. As for th e.., m issing images, “W ith whom
soever thou findest th y gods, let him not live: be
fore our b reth ren discern thou w hat is thine w ith
me, and tak e it to th ee” (31:32). Jacob, as is
stated in th e last p a rt of verse 32, is unaw are of
the fact th a t Rachel had stolen the images.
4. W hat theft was p erp etrated by Rachel on
the eve of departure?
Jacob, of course, should n ever have conceded
th a t fHe~ person guilty of stealing the images
should suffer th e d eath penalty. B u t Jacob was
doubtless agitated at th e m om ent. Laban u n d er
takes a system atic search, going through Jacob’s
tent, L eah’s tent, B ilhah’s tent, Z ilpah’s ten t —
all w ithout finding w hat he was looking for —
and finally coming to R achel’s tent. Now Rachel
proves herself to be not only a th ief b u t also a
lijtc. H aving concealed the idols in the cam el’s
fu rn itu re, she sits on them and falsely tells h e r
fa th e r th a t she is ill and cannot rise up to honor
him as h e enters th e tent. W hile she m ay have
been ill, still h e r statem en t to h e r fa th e r was .a
lie because it was intended to deceive him into
believing th a t the images w ere not in the tent.
Questions:
3. Was Jacob justified in stealing aw ay w ith
out notice to Laban?
5. W hat may have been R achel’s m otive in
this theft?
6. W hat disposition did Jacob finally m ake of
w hat Rachel stole?
7. W hat great river did Jacob cross on his
way to Canaan?
8. How fa r had Jacob gotten before Laban
overtook him?
9. How much tim e had elapsed w hen Laban
learned th a t Jacob was gone?
10. W hat w arning came to Laban from God?
11. W hat accusations did Laban m ake on m eet
ing Jacob?
12. To w hat extent w ere L aban’s charges
justified?
13. W hat em pty boast did L aban m ake in
speaking w ith Jacob?
14. W hat rash prom ise did Jacob m ake to
Laban concerning the unknow n person guilty of
stealing Laban’s images?
15. W hat act of Rachel showed h e r to be u n
1.
W hat opportunity did Jacob seize for es
truthful as w ell as dishonest?
caping from Laban?
LESSON 132
the household effects of Jacob’s fam ily, b u t has
found nothing th a t belonged to him . Loudly and
boldly Jacob challenges Laban to lay before th eir
4.
The history of Isaac, Jacob and Esau. 25:19 brethren w hatever he has found. Of course Laban
to 35:29, cont.
has found nothing, but this gives all th e more
effect to Jacob’s dem and th a t the kinsm en serve
Up to this point it has been L aban th a t was
as a ju ry to decide m atters betw een th e two men.
angry. Tjjyy, after L aban’s unsuccessful search of
Laban, of course, could n o t reply a w ord to all
the tents for his teraphim , Jacob becomes angry
this.
and berates L aban for his ungenerous and unfair
conduct. ‘‘And Jacob was w roth, and chode w ith
Following this, Jacob rehearses the history pf
L aban” (31:36). F or years Jacob has kep t his
his
relations
w ith Laban. H e has served L aban
tem per u n d er control, so fa r as we have any
faithfully and w ith the m ost scrupulous honesty.
record. Now, at last, he has had m ore th an he can
He, Jacob, has personally borne th e loss of sheep
take. He lets go, and the angry w ords pour out,
torn of beasts; he has strictly refrained from
one statem ent on top of another. We m ust re
butchering
for the use of his fam ily anim als th a t
member, of course, th a t Jacob does not yet know
belonged
to
Laban. He has served L aban tw enty
th a t Laban was rig h t about the th eft of the idols;
years, suffering hardships by day and by night —
he does not y et know th a t his beloved Rachel had
fourteen years for L aban’s tw o daughters, and six
stolen them .
years for livestock — during w hich tim e Laban has
A ngrily protesting his innocence, he charges
changed his contract “ten tim es”.
L aban w ith having “hotly pursu ed ” after him.
Laban has chased after Jacob as if Jacob w ere an
Last of all, Jacob ascribes all his ow n success
escaped crim inal. L aban has searched through all
and prosperity to the blessing of God: “Except
137
th e God of m y father, the God of Abraham , and
the fear of Isaac, had been w ith me, surely thou
h ad st sent m e aw ay em pty. God hath seen mine
affliction and the labor of my hands, and r e
buked thee y esternight” (31:42). It is clear th at
Jacob does n o t believe a w ord of Laban's loud
p rotestations of love and friendship. He ascribes
his success solely to the providence and in ter
v ention of God.
It w ould seem th at th ere really was nothing
th a t L aban could say in reply to this speech of
Jacob (31:36-42). A t -th e end of Jacob’s speech
L aban does m ake a reply, but it is in a greatly
subdued tone as compared w ith his previous a r
rogance. He m akes one last claim that “These
daughters a re m y daughters”, etc., and th en con
fesses that, as th e y are in fact his own daughters,
of course he w ill not harm them : ’’And w hat can
I do this day unto these my daughters, or unto
th e ir children w hich they have borne”? (31:43).
A fter all, a m an does not wish to injure his own
children and grandchildren.
These w ords of Laban in verse 43 we take to
be m ere b lu ff and bluster. He has been decisively
beaten in the argum ent; the justice of Jacob’s
defence is evident to all; b u t in order to avoid
“losing face,” Laban continues his blustering
claim s a b it longer. Then he subsides, a n d ^ r o poses a peaceful settlem ent: “Now therefore come
thou le t us m ake a covenant, I and thou; and let it
be for w itness betw een me and thee” (31:44).
K now ing him self to be definitely in the wrong,
and p erh ap s fearing th a t Jacob m ay at some fu
tu re tim e seek revenge, Laban seeks a covenant
betw een Jacob an d himself. It is notew orthy th at
L aban evid en tly believes th a t Jacob is a m an who
w ill keep a covenant once he has made it.
Laban proposed the covenant; it was he th at
needed it r a th e r than Jacob. B ut it w as Jacob
who set up a stone for a pillar, and called upon
his b re th re n to gather stones to build up a heap.
This indicates Jacob’s love of peace. He is not
seeking revenge against Laban; he only w ants "to
be able to d ep art to his own country and kindred
in peace. So Jacob takes th e initiative in setting
up th e p illar and building the heap of rocks.
T he heap of rocks built, the assem bled
com pany sat dow n upon it to partake of a meal.
T his feast w as regarded as necessary to m ake the
covenant b etw een the two men fully binding.
“A nd L aban called it Jegar-sahadutha: b u t
Jacob called it G aleed” (31:47). This interesting
item is included by Moses in the narrative. Laban
spoke A ram aic, the language of Mesopotamia;
Jacob spoke H ebrew , the language of Canaan.
Jacob, of course, having lived tw en ty years in
M esopotam ia m u st have been able to speak and
u n d erstan d th e A ram aic language. But in this
sacred m a tte r of a covenant he uses the language
of C anaan, the land of promise. The two names,
in A ram aic and H ebrew , m ean approxim ately the
sam e thing: “heap of testim ony” or “heap of w it
ness.”
Leupold comments at this point on the in te r
esting fact th a t the ancestors of the H ebrew nation
w ere of a stock th a t originally spoke Aram aic,
but in Palestine gave up Aram aic for H ebrew .
H ebrew was th e ir language for m any centuries,
only to be replaced by Aram aic after all, follow
ing the Babylonian Captivity of the sixth century
before Christ. In the tim e of Christy Asam aic was
the spoken language of the Jew s of Palestine.
This brings out the interesting fact th at the la n
guage ordinarily spoken by Jesus was th a t of
Laban, not th a t of Jacob, though Jesus certainly
was able to read and understand Hebrew.
“A nd Laban said, This heap is a w itness b e
tw een me and thee this day” (31:48a). Moses com
ments. “Therefore was the nam e of it called
| Galeed, and ^Mizpah; for he said, The L ord w atch
( betw een m e and thee, w hen w e a re absent one
from another” (31:48, 49). Mizpah m eans “w atch”
o r “w atch-station”. From this verse the so-called
M izpah Benediction is derived. Often used as a
prayer or benediction at the close of religious
meetings, it is alm ost never correctly quoted. The
w rite r has heard it so used probably hundreds of
tim es and cannot recall hearing it correctly quoted
a single time.
The incorrect form in w hich it is
commonly quoted is "The Lord w atch betw een me
and thee, while we a re absent one from the other”,
instead of “ The Lord w atch betw een me and thee,
w hen w e are absent one from another.” The
differences are slight and verbal, of course, b u t
w hen w e quote the words of Scripture we should
quote them w ith precision.
A part from the common incorrect quotation,
w e m ay com m ent th a t it is a strange exam ple of
accomodation of S cripture th a t this verse has ever
come to be used as a blessing in religious m eet
ings. P robably the C hristian Endeavor m ovem ent
popularized it. As commonly used, it m eans some
thing like this: “The Lord tak e good care of us
all, until we m eet again nex t Sabbath evening or
at some fu tu re tim e.” B ut as used by Laban it had
no such im plication of blessing. The saving w as
not Jacob’s, and i t .i a .M L S i ..HPkirj&^ss
and sni.<ipii-inn The obvious m eaning is: “The
L ord w atch to see th a t neith er of us breaks the
term s of this covenant by harm ing th e other.” It
is an invocation of God to stand guard betw een
two men, n eith er of wjigm really trusts the other.
Leupold is correct in saying th a t the common use
of the verse as a benediction “almost am ounts to
a wicked perversion of Scripture” (Exposition
of Genesis, II, p. 856). A b etter character th an
Laban, should be chosgn frpm , Scripture w hen we
are looking for a form of benediction to use.
Questions:
1.
A t w h at point in
Jacob become angry?
the proceedings did
13*
2. W hat fact was unknow n to Jacob at the
tim e when he becam e an g ry a t Laban?
3. W hat challenge to L aban did Jacob utter?
4. W hat accusations did Jacob bring against
Laban?
5. To w h at did Jacob ascribe his own pros
p erity and success?
6. W hat was the real character of Laban’s
reply to Jacob’s speech?
11. W hat language
What by Jacob?
was spoken by Laban?
12. Which was the original language of the
ancestors of the Hebrew nation?
13. Which was their language in the tim e of
Christ?
14. Which was th eir language
greater p a rt of their history?
during
the
15. W hat is the m eaning of the nam e Mizpah?
7. W hat proposal did L aban m ake for a final
settlem ent of th e dispute?
16. How is the “Mizpah B enediction” often in
correctly quoted?
8. W hat action w as tak en by Jacob to estab
lish the settlem ent?
17. W hat is m eant
Scripture”?
9. How w as the covenant ratified?
10. W hat was the purpose
stones th a t w as built up?
of the heap of
by
“accom m odation of
18. Why is the common use of the “M izpah
Benediction” an instance of accom m odation of
Scripture?
LESSON 133
sinuations, Laban solem nly calls upon “the God
of A braham , and the God of N ahor, th e God of
their fath er” to act as judge betw een him self and
4.
The history of Isaac, Jacob and Esau. 25:19 JScob. We m ust rem em ber th a t the m an who is
to 35:29, cont.
thus solemnly pronouncing th e nam e of “the God
of Abraham ,” etc., is the sam e m an who a little
Laban continues his adm onitions to Jacob:
while before was com plaining because someone
“If thou shalt afflict m y daughters, or if thou
had stolen his idols. It is possible th a t by “the
shalt take other wives beside m y daughters, no
God of N ahor” Laban m eans a d ifferen t deity
m an is w ith us; see, God is w itness betw ixt m e
from
“the God of A braham .” In fact, this seems
and thee” (31:50). Here^ L aban suddenly shows
to be indicated by the fact th a t the verb “judge”
an unusual concern for th e w elfare of his daugh
in the Hebrew is in the plural, n o t the singular
ters. He casts a reflection on Jacob’s character
number. Laban evidently believes in m ore than
by suggesting the possibility th a t Jacob m ay tre a t
one god; he is a polytheist; if deities a re to be
L eah and Rachel badly, or m ay even m arry new
called
upon, Laban app aren tly thinks, th en the
wives in addition to those he already had. This
more the better.
insinuation of Laban, w e m ust say, is entirely
uncalled for. As a m a tte r of fact, Jacob had never
Jacob, on his part, sw ears “by th e fe a r of his
really w anted m ore th an one wife. It w as, in
father Isaac.” It is possible th a t this form of the
fact, L aban’s own fau lt th a t he had two. As for
name of God was deliberately chosen by Jacob in
the addition of the m aidservants B ilhah and 2ilorder to avoid use of the form em ployed by Laban,
pah, Jacob was not p rim arily to blam e for th at
inasmuch as Laban seem ed to be identifying the
either; he h a d yielded to th e w ishes of Rachel and
God of A braham w ith his own God (Leupold,
Leah, b u t th e idea had not been his in the first
Exposition of Genesis, II, p. 858).
place. So for Laban at th is tim e to insinuate th at
Jacob m ay be an abandoned and unprincipled
“Then Jacob offered sacrifice upon the mount,
polygamist, and perhaps also likely to tre a t his
and called his brethren to eat bread: and they did
wives cruelly, w as really adding insult to injury.
eaf~bread, and tarried all night in th e m ount”
Solemnly L aban calls- upon God to' be a w itness
(31:54). Note th at it does not say th a t Jacob and
betw een him self and Jacob if this (p u rely hypo
Laban offered' sacrifice jointly. This w as not a
thetical) situation should ever arise. Laban is
union service. It was an act of w orship on the
here try in g to save his own face and maEe~himpart of Jacob, who certainly w ould not participate
self appear righteous by casting slurs upon a b et
in the offering of sacrifice w ith a know n idolater
ter m an than himself.
such as his uncle Laban was. The eating of bread
Next, L aban suggests th a t Jacob m ight at
which is m entioned in the la tte r p a rt of verse 54,
some fu tu re tim e re tu rn w ith an expedition to
therefore, is to be regarded as som ething separate
take revenge. The heap of stones is to be a w it
from the actual offering of the sacrifice itself. Or
ness betw een him self and Jacob, th a t n e ith er parpossibly the “b reth ren ” w ho a re m entioned in
ty is to advance beyond this spot to do th e other
cluded only the men of Jacob’s establishm ent, not
h arm. To add a color of piety to his insulting inLaban and his party.
139
“A nd early in the m orning Laban rose up,
and kissed his sons and his daughters, and blessed
them : and Laban departed, and returned unto
his place” (31:55). rQie “sons” here m entioned
are, of course, L aban’s grandsons. TJhe “daugh
te rs’* w ould Jbe both his granddaughters and his
actual, daughters. This m arks the exit of Laban
from .the_history.
A ttem pts have been made to identify the site
of th e heap of stones built by Jacob and called
G aleed o r M izpah. The only thing th at is certain
about th e location is th a t it m ust be som ew here
in T ran sjo rd an n orth of the Jabbok River. As to
th e actual site, it is unknow n. It is unlikely th at
it wiTT~ever be discovere'37 for the record m en
tions no identifying features such as an inscrip
tio n :' O bviously any great heap of stones in the
arlfa m ight be th e rig h t one, but there is no w ay
of determ ining which it is.
4. W hat m ust be regarded as Laban’s real
reason for casting slurs on Jacob?
5. W hat action did Laban insinuate Jacob
m ight take at some fu tu re time?
6. Upon w hat God or deities did Laban call to
ratify the agreem ent?
7. Why was L aban’s calling upon “the God of
A braham ” out of place and inconsistent on his
part?
8. W hat may Laban have m eant by “the God
of N ahor”? W hat w ord in the H ebrew suggests
this?
9. By w hat nam e of God did Jacob sw ear his
oath?
10. Who offered sacrifice upon the mount?
W hy are we w arranted in saying th a t this was not
a union service?
Questions:
11. W hat did Laban do early the nex t m orn
1. How did Laban cast an unnecessary reflec
tion on Jaco b ’s character?
2. W hy was this reflection on Jacob’s ch ar
a c te r uncalled for?
3. How m any wives did Jacob really w ant?
ing?
12. W hat was the general location of the heap
of stones called Mizpah and Galeed?
13. W hy can the exact location of the heap
not be known?
LESSON 134
A nother question concerns w hether the angels
w ere seen by Jacob alone, or by all in his com
pany. This cannot be positively answered, though
4.
it is possible, perhaps probable, th at Jacob alone
to 35:29, cont.
saw them. C ertainly Jacob was the only one
Jacob is now alm ost home. “A nd Jacob w ent
present who possessed, so fa r as we know, any
real spiritual m aturity.
on his way, and the angels of God m et him. A nd
w hen Jacob saw them , he said, This is God’s host:
and he called th e nam e of th at place M ahanaim ”
The__appearance of the, angels is followed by
(32:1, 2). It is upon Jacob’s entrance to the
Jacob s careful preparations for m eeting his b ro th
P rom ised L and th a t he encounters the angels of
er Esau. Jacob sends m essengers to Esau in ad
God. It is possible th at angels had been accom
vance, to the land of Seir, the country of Edom.
panying Jacob all the w ay, but th a t at this point,
This is the re gion directly south of the Dead Sea.
as he again tread s on the sacred soil of the
It is some distance from the Jabbok R iver w hich
P rom ised Land, they are visibly m anifested. In
Jacob is now approaching, perhaps about 75 miles.
any case, th is su pernatural m anifestation would
It w ill be recalled th a t Jacob’s m other, R ebekah,
serve th e necessary purpose of reassuring Jacob.
prom ised to send for Jacob to come home w hen
H e has now safely escaped from his uncle Laban,
Esau’s anger had cooled off (27:44, 45). B ut the
but an o th er tro u b le looms on the horizon — soon
prom ise has not been kept. Jacob is returning
he m ust m eet his b rother Esau. The last tim e he
home w ithout having been sent for. The im plica
th e la tte r was “comforting ’ h im s e lf’
tion would seem, in his m ind, to be th a t Esau is
w ith plans to k ill Jacob. The appearance of angels
still angry, and therefore th a t Esau still plans to
betokened th e n e a r presence and special protection
kill him. As a m atter of fact, E sau||^m m 'derous
and favor of God. Jacob nam es the spot M ahan
w rath has cooled and he is no longer planning to
aim. This H ebrew noun is the dual num ber and
m u rd er Jacob, b u t Jacob of course has no w ay of
m eans “tw o cam ps” or “two hosts”. The “two hosts”
know ing this. Therefore h e carefully plans and
would be th e host of angels, and the host of Jacob’s
carries out conciliatory m easures. The m essengers
com pany. As in the case of Mizpah, the location of
are to find Esau, th en they are to convey a m ess
M ahanaim is unknow n today. It is, however, r e
age from Jacob to him. Esau is to be addressed
peatedly m entioned in the historical books of the
j s “My lord Esau” and J a c o b is to be referred to
Old T estam ent, so the location m ust have been
as "thy servant Jacob.” Esau is to be inform ed
know n long a fte r the tim e of Jacob.
th a t Jacob has sojourned w ith his uncle Laban
H«
until now; th a t Jacob now is a m an of property,
\ possessing oxen, asses, flocks, m enservants and
’w om enservants; and th a t Jacob en treats his favor,
w ishing to find grace in his sight. It is a very
diplomatic procedure, calculated to w in the good
will of Esau (32:3-5).
The m essengers have carried out th eir com
mission. They have found Esau and have con
veyed the message. They also bring a reply.
Esau is coming in person to m eet Jacob, accom pan
ied by four hund red men. (It is possible th a t the
m essengers did not have to travel all the way to
Edom. Esau m ay have received advance news of
Jacob’s im m inent arriv al and have already set out
to m eet him. The m essengers m ay have m et Esau
w hen but a couple of days’ journey from Jacob’s
cam p). In any case, Esau has not sent a favor
able reply. He has not replied th a t Jacob has
found grace in his sight. Instead, he is coming
in person. The m ention of four h u n d red men ac
com panying Esau w ould n atu rally alarm Jacob.
People on peaceful and friendly erran d s do not
usually trav el accom panied by 400 men. Not u n
n atu rally , Jacob feels dismayed. He was “greatly
afraid and distressed” (32:7).
T aking precautionary m easures, Jacob first
divides his entire p a rty into tw o bands — both the
people and the anim als. If Esau destroys one
band, at least the other band m ay escape. Next,
Jacob resorts to prayer, a very earnest p ra y er for
protection from the malice of Esau (32:9-12). Some
m ay be inclined to criticize Jacob for resorting to
action first and leaving p ray er until afterw ards.
We do not feel th a t w ay about it. W hile it sounds
pious to say th a t p ray er should alw ays come first,
the tru th is th a t in em ergencies som etimes action
is our first duty. Action can be perform ed in the
spirit of p ray er even w hen our whole attention is
necessarily absorbed by th e action. If our house
is on fire, it is our duty to devote all our energies
to putting the fire out first; p ray er properly comes
afterw ards.
In Jacob’s prayer, note th a t he addresses God
as “God of m y fa th e r A braham , and God of my
fath er Isaac.” This does not m ean th a t he fails
to recognize God as his own God, but ra th e r th at
he pleads for like covenant m ercies and blessings
for himself, as had been given to A braham and
Isaac. Jacob pleads God’s prom ises and his own
need. He disclaims any personal w orthiness, but
m entions past blessings received from God. Com
ing directly to the point, he pleads for divine de
liverance from his b ro th er Esau, adding “for I
fear him, lest he w ill come and sm ite me, and the
m other w ith th e children.” Finally, he recalls the
covenant prom ise of God which had been given
to him (28:13, 14).
The critics have taken this p ray er of Jacob
to pieces and raised various objections against it.
In spite of the critics, we believe it to be a gen
uine prayer of Jacob and a splendid exam ple of
believing prayer in tim e of need. To the charge
that this pray er contains no confession or sense
of sin, it is sufficient to reply th a t Jacob professed
u tte r unw orthiness over against God. As Leupold
points out, the thing that m akes us unw orthy is
just sin.
S pending the night at th a t spot, Jacob as
sembles a present for his b ro th er Esau, calculated
to pacify his w rath if it is indeed in w ra th th a t
Esau is approaching. The gift w as a lavish and
costly one, such as m ight be expected to influence
a man like Esau and w in his favor. The total
num ber of anim als set ap a rt and sent on to Esau
is 580, so the value m ust have been correspond
ingly great. It indicates som ething of the great
w ealth of Jacob th at he w as in a position to send
such a rich gift to his brother. T he droves, one
kind of anim als in each drove, are properly spaced
and sent on ahead at intervals. Esau, of course,
would be duly surprised w hen the first drove
reached him, and his astonishm ent w ould m ount
as drove followed drove. Tljere w ere five droves
in all. The servants who convey th e droves to
Esau are to state th at the anim als are a present
from Jacob to Esau, and th a t Jacob him self is
following them. They are to rem em ber to address
Esau as “my lord Esau” and to speak of Jacob as
Esau’s “servant.” Thus th e costly presen t has
been dispatched to Esau’s hands. “So w en t the
present over before him ; and him self lodged th a t
night in the com pany” (32:21).
Questions:
1. W hat su p ern atu ral m anifestation w as
granted to Jacob a t the tim e of his re-entrance to
the Promised Land?
2. W hat purpose would
supernatural visitation?
be
served by this
3. Why would Jacob specially need reassu r
ance a t this time?
4. W hat had been E sau’s attitu d e tow ard
Joseph when the two brothers had last seen each
other?
5. W hat is the m eaning of the nam e M ahanaim? W hy did Jacob choose this nam e for the
place?
6. W hat preparations
meeting Esau?
did Jacob m ake for
7. How far was Edom from the Jabbok River?
8. W hat fact w ould lead Jacob to conclude
that Esau was still angry a t him?
9. How are Jacob’s m essengers to address
Esau? How are they to re fe r to Jacob?
10. W hat kind of rep ly did the m essengers
bring back to Jacob?
141
11. W hy was Jacob “greatly afraid and dis
tressed”?
14. How can we answ er the charge th at Jacob’s
p rayer contains no confession of sin?
12. W hat special precautionary m easure did
Jacob take as soon as he learned of the approach
of Esau?
15. W hat gift did Jacob send to Esau to con
ciliate him?
13. Was Jacob justified in taking action first,
and leaving p ray er until afterw ards?
16. How w as the arrangem ent and tim ing of
the gift calculated to im press Esau and win his
favor?
LESSON 135
ed: he wept, and m ade supplication unto him: he
found him in Bethel, and th ere he spake w ith us;
even the Lord of hosts; the Lord is his m em orial.”
4.
The history of Isaac, Jacob and Esau. 25:19 H ere the “m an” is called th e “angel,” and w hat
to 35:29, cont.
follows implies th a t this “angel” is not an ordi
nary
angel b u t is a theophany, a m anifestation of
A t th e end of the last lesson we learned th at
God
Himself.
Jacob, having dispatched his rich gift to Esau,
h im self “lodged th a t night in the com pany”
Jacob has been up against strong opposition
(32:21). A pparently, however, it was only for
for years. Having finally gotten clear of his uncle
p a rt of the night. For during the night he took
Laban, he is still concerned and anxious about the
fu rth e r action. “And he rose up th a t night, and
coming m eeting w ith his bro th er Esau. By his
took his tw o wives, and his two wom enservants,
own admission, Jacob is afraid of Esau. His
and his eleven sons, and passed over the ford Jabprevious actions on this m ight show th a t the
bok. A nd he took them , and sent them over the
problem of m eeting Esau w as upperm ost in his
brook, and sent over th at he had. And Jacob w as
mind. Jacob regards his relationship to Esau as
left alone. . . ” (32:22-24).
his great problem. B ut Jacob needs to learn the
lesson th at his greatest problem is not his rela
Obviously it would be foolhardy to allow
tionship to his b ro th er but his relationship to God.
Esau to m eet him w hile his establishm ent is in
Really th a t is everyone’s greatest problem — it is
volved in th e difficult m atter of crossing a stream ;
a problem which, w hen faced and solved, furnishes
therefo re Jacob u ndertakes to get this m atter over
the key to the solution of all other problems.
w ith in advance. Jacob now rem ains alone on the
Jacob, then, needs to realize th a t his greatest and
n o rth side of th e Jabbok.
»
deepest concern m ust be, not about Esau, b u t
about God.
The Jab b o k is a stream w hich flows into the
Jo rd a n from th e east. In its last few miles before
Jacob’s conflict w ith this m ysterious stran g er
enterin g th e Jo rd a n it flows through a deep gorge.
on the bank of the Jabbok is m arked by distinct
T he stream is said to be about th irty feet wide,
stages. The first stage is th a t m entioned in verse
th e d ep th of th e w ater varying w ith the season,
24, the w restling through the night u n til the
b u t clearly not being too deep for fording a t the
break of day. The "point of this p a rt is th a t by
tim e.
reason of his heroic persistence Jacob obtained
the blessing from the stran g er in the end. Jacob
We h ave now come to the study of one of the
persevered and overcame w hat seemed to be an
stran g est, .m ost m ysterious incidents recorded in
insurm
ountable
obstacle.
Jacob’s
persistent
th e Bible —^Jacob’s w restling w ith “a man” u n til
w restling w ith the stran g er — really w ith God —
t.hp hrpafc nf Hay This incident is so strange and
has been com pared to C hrist’s encounter w ith the
m ysterious th a t some scholars have pronounced it
Syro-Phoenician woman. The woman persisted
m y thical r a th e r than historical. Those who r e
in the face of apparent rejection by C hrist, until
gard it as a m yth, however, do not agree among
she obtained the blessing which she sought.
them selves as to w hat idea the story is intended
to represent. O ver against the view that this ex
It should be noted th a t the record does not
perience of Jaco b is m ythical, w e hold th at it is
m erely state th a t Jacob w restled w ith the stra n
historical and, m oreover, th a t it was not a m erely
ger, but th a t the stran g er w restled w ith Jacob.
sp iritu al o r subjective experience, b u t involved
The stran g er’s w restling w ith Jacob is w h at is
re a l w restling w ith a person who was objectively
prim arily im portant in the’ incident. “We m ust,
p resen t and w as m anifested in a bodily form.
therefore, take into account the elem ent of divine
“A nd Jacob was left alone; and there w restled
displeasure Jacob had to overcome, alw ays r e
a m an w ith him u n til the breaking of the day”
m em bering th at this entered into the w hole tra n s
(32:24). T h at th is “m an” w as not really a hum an
action from beginning to end. A nd this fact
bgimS-is proved by a reference in the book of the
colored the fram e of m ind in w hich the p atriarch
pro p h et Hosea (12:2:5), which states of Jacob:
prayed, and m akes his experience an exam ple for
“Yea, he had pow er over the angel, and prevail
us of prayer, not so m uch in general, b u t of a
142
specific kind. It is p ray er for forgiveness of sin
and the rem oval of divine displeasure on account
of sin th a t w e h ere find illustrated. A nd in
consonance w ith this the blessing craved and re
ceived was th e blessing of pardon and a re tu rn
to norm al relations w ith God. The event tau g h t
Jacob th a t inheritance of the prom ises can rest
on forgiveness of sin and a purified conscience
only” (G. Vos, Biblical Theology, pp. 113, 114).
The second stage of th e encounter begins at
the point w here th e m ysterious stranger touches
the hollow of Jacob’s thigh, puttin g his thigh out
of joint. Jacob thus learns th a t in th e real con
flict of life, the tru e victory is th a t of su rren d er
to th e w ill of God. God seems to be our adver
sary as w e struggle in p rayer, b u t as God prevails
in our life and our w ill is surrendered to the w ill
of God, we gain th e real victory. Jacob m ust a l
w ays rem em ber this experience, therefore a
physical disability is placed upon him as a re
m inder. In_ la te r life Jacob’s lim p w ill rem ind
him of the night on the b ank of the Jabbok where)
he w restled w ith God and finally by persistence
won the victory.
As day is breaking, th e stran g er asks to be let
go. Jacob, how ever, refuses, saying, “I w ill not
let thee" go, except thou bless me.” This is a tru ly
heroic faith, a tru ly heroic persistence in prayer.
So fa r from being presum ptuous or im proper on
Jacob’s part, as some have held, it is highly com
m ended and indicates his re a l victory in the con
flict. Jacob holds on to the v ery last, he does not
give up even w hen there seems to be good reason
for giving up. His thigh is out of joint; the day
is breaking; yet JacoETkeeps on and w ill not give
up until th e blessing has been granted.
Before departing, the stran g er changes Jacob’s
nam e to Israel. “F or as a prince hast thou pow er
w ith God and w ith m en, and h ast prevailed”
(32:28). This verse proves th a t Jacob’s continued
struggle was com m endable, not blam ew orthy. He'
is declared to have won the victory. The change
of nam e indicates a change of character. Jacob
m eans “S u p p lan ter” — a nam e w ell fitted to
Jacob’s past history and character. Israel m eans
“he who strives w ith God” — a nam e su ited to
Jacob’s new life and character. It should be ob
served th a t in the Old T estam ent both names,
Jacob and Israel, continue to be used interchange
ably. We m ay say th a t “Jacob” stands for Jacob’s
old nature, w hile “Israel” stands for his new n a
ture. B ut in his previous life Jacob h ad real faith
in God as his Saviour, and in his later life h e was
not perfect b u t w as still involved in some evil.
T herefore it w as fittin g th a t both nam es should
be used, even after his experience by the Jabbok.
“As before, side by side w ith Jacob’s perversity,
th ere h ad been an elem ent of sp irituality, so also
afterw ards, side by side w ith th e now m atured
spirituality, th ere rem ained traces of the old n a
ture. Hence God continued to subject the p a tri
arch to discipline of affliction even to his old age”
(G. Vos, Biblical Theology, p. 114). T h at is to
say, though Jacob is now in a rig h t relation to
God, and can properly be called “Israel,” he is
not yet com pletely sanctified, nor has his old
“Jacob” n a tu re been com pletely eradicated;
therefore he can also properly be called “Jacob.”
Questions:
1. Why did Jacob send his household across
the Jabbok by night?
2. How large a stream is the Jabbok? W here
is it located?
3. W hat view of Jacob’s w restling w ith a
mysterious stranger is held by some scholars?
4. Why should this incident be regarded as
historical fact?
5. W hat Scripture te x t proves th a t the “m an”
who w restled w ith Jacob w as n o t a hum an being?
6. W hat was the real id en tity of the stran g er
who w restled w ith Jacob?
7. W hat did Jacob reg ard as his greatest
problem a t this time?
8. W hat was really Jacob’s greatest problem at
this time?
9. W hat was the first stage of Jacob’s con
flict on the bank of the Jabbok?
10. To w hat New T estam ent incident has
Jacob’s w restling been com pared?
11. W hat kind of p ray er is represented by
Jacob’s struggle?
12. At w hat point did the second stage of
Jacob’s struggle begin?
13. Why was a physical disability placed upon
Jacob?
14. W hy was Jacob’s refusal to give up u n til
he received the blessing com m endable?
15. W hat victory did Jacob win?
16. W hat is the m eaning of the nam e “Jacob”?
Of “Israel”?
17. W hat fact concerning Jacob’s life was in
dicated by the change of nam e?
18. Why was the nam e “Jacob” used along
w ith “Israel” in the Old T estam ent from this
point onwards?
143
LESSON 136
in. History of the Covenant People from Abra
of the thigh, unto this day; because he touched
the hollow of Jacob’s thigh in the sinew th at
sh ran k ” (32:32). “Unto this day” means, of course,
4.
The history of Isaac, Jacob and Esau. 25:19 unto the tim e w hen Moses w rote the Book of G en
to 35:29, cont.
esis. How m uch longer this custom was observed
the Bible does not state.
“A nd Jacob asked him, and said, Tell me, I
p ray thee, thy name. And he said, W herefore is
This abstinence from eating a specific p art
it th a t thou dost ask after my name? And he bless
of the flesh of anim als was not commanded by
ed him th e re ” (32:29). Jacob seem s to be still not
God. It was ra th e r a m ere custom which the
absolutely sure of the identity of the m ysterious
Israelites observed spontaneously. In their ob
stran g er w ho has been w restling w ith him. He
servance of this custom w e see a recognition, on
asks to be told his nam e, th a t is, his identity. The
th e ir part, of the im portance and significance of
re p ly is a refusal to tell the nam e. We m ay w on
Jacob’s strange experience th a t night by the J a b
der about th e reason for this refusal. L uther held
bok.
th a t th e failu re to disclose the nam e left an atm os
Obviously Jacob m ust have told the story
p h ere of m ystery about th e whole transaction,
him self. He had been alone w ith God by the J a b
w hich w ould lead Jacob to continued reflection
bok. The n ex t m orning as the sun rose he limped
upon it. “In sp iritual experiences there is and
across the stream and rejoined his fam ily on the
m ust be th e challenge of th e m ysterious. A sp ir
southern side of the river. His wives, children and
itu al experience so lucid th a t a man sees through
servants w ould of course instantly note th a t Jacob
and is able to analyze every p art of it m ust be
was limping. N atu rally they would inquire as to
ra th e r shallow ” (Leupold, Exposition of Genesis,
w h at had happened.
W e can only im agine the
II, p. 880). F urtherm ore, Jacob can really know
w onder w ith which they w ould hear the story of
th e id en tity of th e stranger from the statem ent
th a t strange night as it was told by the patriarch.
th a t he (Jacob) has pow er w ith God, and has p re
B ut from his telling of the story th ere arose the
vailed. Also, the blessing w hich is conferred in
custom as to eating w hich is m entioned in verse
v erse 29 could really come only from God. As
32.
a m a tte r of fact, Jacob realized th at it was God
h e h a d been w restling with, for in verse 30 he
states, “I have seen God face to face, and m y life is
Questions:
preserved.”
1. W hy did Jacob ask the m ysterious stranger
for his name?
“A nd Jacob called th e nam e of the place
P eniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my
2. W hat m ay have been th e reasons for the
life is p reserv ed ” (32:30). Peniel means “face of
stran g er’s refusal to disclose the name?
God.” (P eniel is usually spelled Penuel in the Old
3. W hat statem ent in the record indicates th at
T estam ent; th e m eaning is the same).
Jacob realized th a t his opponent was God?
“A nd as he passed over Penuel the sun rose
4. W hat nam e did Jacob give to the place
upon him, and he halted upon his thigh” (32:31).
w here he had th is strange experience?
The in ju re d thig h rem inded him of th e experience
of th e previous night —i of his hours of struggle
5. How is Peniel usually spelled in the Old
w ith God, ending in spiritual victory. The rising
Testam ent?
sun, w e m ay suggest, symbolized the new day
6. W hat is the m eaning of the nam e Peniel?
d aw ning in Jaco b ’s life — his real and tru e life,
for w hich his previous life was only a preparation.
7. W hat purpose would the injured thigh serve
We a re w a rra n te d in suggesting this symbolic
in Jacob’s later life?
significance b y the mention of the sunrise in the
n arrativ e. It seem s to be m entioned as signifi
8. W hat m ay be the symbolic significance of
cant. T he sun rises every day and we take the
the statem ent th a t the sun rose as Jacob crossed
d aily sunrise for granted w ithout special comment.
over Peniel?
The m ention of it here is exceptional and suggests
9. How could Jacob now regard the problem
sym bolic m eaning. Jacob has crossed the Jabbok,
of m eeting Esau?
b u t he has crossed m ore th an the Jabbok. He has
e n te re d a new life, he is a new creature; old 'things
10. W hat custom concerning food among the
h av e passed aw ay; a ll things have become new.
Israelites had its origin in Jacob’s experience at
T he m a tte r of m eeting Esau can now be view ed in
Jabbok?
its p ro p er perspective. No longer need it loom
high as th e suprem e problem of his life.
11. How w ould the Israelites know the story
of w hat had happened to Jacob by th e Jabbok?
“T herefore th e children of Israel eat not of
th e sinew w hich shrank, which is upon the hollow
(To be continued)
144
Readers- are invited to subm it Biblical, doctrinal and practical
questions for answ er in this departm ent. Names will not be p u b
lished w ith questions, b u t anonym ous communications will be dis
regarded.
Question:
Does th e original form of th e verb translated
“perish” in Jo h n 10:28 literally support the Re
form ed doctrine of th e P erseverance of the Saints
against the A rm inian doctrine of uncertainty?
Answer:
Yes, em phatically and unequivocally. Speakning of “m y sheep” who “h ear m y voice, and I
know them , and they follow me,” Jesus said, “I
give to them etern al life, and they shall never
perish, and no one shall snatch them out of my
hand.”
The te x t of Nestle (1927) is w ell established.
T here are no v arian t readings w orth mentioning.
The verb tran slated “p erish” is unm istakably in
th e form of th e G reek M iddle Voice. “The only
difference betw een th e active and m iddle voices
is th a t the m iddle voice calls special attention to
the subject. In th e active voice th e subject is
m erely acting; in th e m iddle th e subject is acting
in relation to him self som ehow ” (Robertson, Gram.
G reek N. T., p. 804). H ere th e “relation” is p e r
fectly clear from th e context. This verb, in the
active voice, m eans “destroy” ; in th e m iddle
voice, all th e lexicons give “perish:” B ut here
“perish,” though suitable in a general way, is a m
biguous to th e ex ten t th a t w hile it includes selfdestruction, it does not give any clear expression
of th e in trinsic m eaning of th e m iddle voice.
Bengel, in his “Gnomon of the N. T.” (I.e.),
calls atten tio n to the m iddle form, an d translates,
“they shall not destroy them selves, i.e., they shall
not destroy them selves internally.” H ere Bengel’s
editor and tran slato r, Fausset of T rinity College,
Dublin, adds a footnote, “By th eir own corruptions
within.”
Jesus continued, “and no one shall snatch
them out of m y hand.” He w ill baffle every ex
ternal enemy.
Bengel w as a G erm an L utheran, and in some
passages adopts the A rm inian view; but, he was
a real scholar, and em inently tru e to the exact
w ords of S cripture. H ere he has accurately in te r
preted th e w ritte n w ords of Christ, and we are in
debted to him as fa r as he w ent, though he stopped
short of m aking the obvious application of them
against A rm inianism .
T his in terp retatio n is confirm ed by th e whole
context, as w ell as by m any other texts. We
take space h ere to m ention only th e im m ediate
context of th e verb — th e w ords m eaning “fo r
ever” or “ev er” th a t follow, and the G reek double
negative th a t precedes. (“Not ever” is “n ever” ).
This double negative has the effect of m aking the
negative very emphatic, and does so by its com
bined external and- internal force. It is composed
of two little tw o-letter w ords, the first being the
objective (absolute) negative, and th e second the
subjective negative. The m eaning of th e la tte r is
th at the subject, or subjects, of the verb, possess
ing C hrist’s gift of eternal life, have no desire, nor
any other prevailing tendency within them, to de
stroy themselves, to fall, b rea k away, or to “snatch
themselves out of the S hepherd’s h and,” as A r
minians say. The eternal life given by C hrist, ac
cording to its essential n ature, m anifests itself
only in righteousness, and enables one to “keep
himself,” to “guard him self.” Hence th e command,
“Keep yourselves.” Com pare 1 Jo h n 5:18, 21 w ith
John 17:11, 12. Also Ju d e 1, 20, 21, 24.
The w ords of Jesus C hrist before us plainly
reveal th at the glory and honor of God are in
volved (are at stake, so to speak) as w ell as the
salvation of His people. Should any one to whom
Christ gives eternal life, finally perish, w hether
by an outside enemy, or by som ething w ithin him
self, w hat would become of “the praise of the
glory of His grace”? W hat, for us, w ould become
of “the hope of the Gospel”? Can th e Scripture
be broken? B ut w hy trouble about im possibili
ties?
— F. D. Frazer
Question:
I would like your opinion on singing the
Lord’s Prayer. Is it ever right? If so, w hen and
where?
Answer:
We believe, on w hat we consider S criptural
grounds, th at only the Psalm s of the Bible are to
be sung in the w orship of God. If the Lord’s
Prayer could be sung otherw ise th an in the w o r
ship of God, it could properly be sung. B ut inasm uch
as the Lord’s P ray er is a prayer, obviously it can
not rightly be used except as a w ay of w orshipping
God. To use the Lord’s P ra y e r otherw ise th a n in
worship would be to m isuse it. A p ra y er can
rightly be used only as a prayer. W hen the L ord’s
P rayer is sung it seems to be used as a m eans of
entertainm ent or displaying m usical ta le n t ra th e r
than as a sincere draw ing near to God’s throne
of grace. For these reasons we do not believe th a t
it is proper to use the L ord’s P ra y e r as a song.
— J. G. Vos
Question:
W hat do you th in k of C ovenanters partici
pating in the singing of “The M essiah” on a w eek
day?
145
A nsw er:
If “T he Messiah" is sung on a week day and
is clearly not intended as a way of w orshipping
God, o r as a substitute fo r the w orship of God,
w e believe th a t it m ay be proper to participate
in th e singing of this composition. T he position
h eld by th e Reform ed Presbyterian C hurch is
th a t only Psalm s are to be sung in the w orship
o f God. T h e singing of oth er religious compo
sitions on o th e r occasions is not necessarily ru led
o ut by this principle. To this it may be objected
th a t singing is eith er (1) w orship or (2) e n te rtain
m ent. In reply, the present w riter would say
th a t th is is too sim ple an analysis of possible
situations. Besides these tw o there may be a th ird
possibility, nam ely artistic culture, w hich may
p ro p erly include religious elem ents provided the
d istinction betw een this and w orship is kep t clear
an d carefully guarded. If any one has a doubt as
to th e p ro p riety of participating in such a p e r
form ance, he should refrain from it, in accordance
w ith the principle enunciated in Romans 14:23.
— J. G. Vos
Question:
W hat does Hodge m ean in his com m ent on
Rom ans 10:4 w hen he says, “He has abolished the
law as a ru le of justification, or covenant of
w orks. . . ’’? Was th e law ever a “covenant of
w orks” in the sense th at m en w ere to be justified
by obedience to it except during Adam’s proba
tion?
Answer:
T he reference is to C harles Hodge’s Com
m en tary on the Epistle to the Romans. Hodge is
com m enting on Romans 10:4, ‘T o r C hrist is the
end of th e law for righteousness to every one
th a t believeth.” It would seem th at the state
m ent quoted in the above query from Hodge’s
C om m entary is, to say the least, ambiguous and
unguarded, an d liable to serious m isunderstanding.
T hat Hodge did not really mean to imply th a t the
law was ever, since A dam ’s probation, a possible
w ay of justification, is shown by one of his doc
trin a l notes a t the end of the same chapter of the
C om m entary, w here he states: “The legal method
of justification is, for sinners, as im practicable as
clim bing up into heaven or going down into the
abyss.” Since th e people of Israel under the Old
T estam ent w ere certainly sinners, justification by
th e law w as impossible for them. As a m atter of
fact th e O ld T estam ent law, both m oral and cere
m onial, w as itself a p a rt of the system of grace,
an d as a principle was subordinate to the principle
of grace. T his is really visible throughout the
Old T estam ent. For example, in the Ten Com
m andm ents w e have redemption as the preface
to th e dem and for obedience: “I am the Lord th y
God, w hich have brought thee out of the land of
Egypt, out of the house of bondage.” Israel was
to be a people saved by grace, and in token of
g ra titu d e w as to live in obedience to the law.
Israel entered th e Prom ised Land by an act of
divine grace — the alm ighty pow er of God ex
erted in th e destruction of Jericho. They did not
e n ter C anaan by w orks, but by grace. Jericho
w as to be left in ruins — never to be reb u ilt —
because it w as to be G od’s m emorial, to rem ind
Israel th a t it w as not by w orks b u t by grace th a t
th eir forefathers had entered the rest of the
Prom ised Land.
I t is abundantly clear from num erous other
statem ents in Hodge’s w ritings th a t he did not
believe th a t anyone, a fte r Adam ’s fall, could ever
be justified by w orks of the law. He was fa r r e
m oved from the crude notion som etim es heard at
th e present day in such statem ents as: “The Old
Testam ent w as for the Jew s: the New Testam ent
is for Christians. T he Jew s w ere saved by works;
C hristians are saved by grace.” The superficiality
and non-Biblical character of such statem ents
should be obvious to everyone w ithout argum ent.
In o rd er fu rth e r to clarify the m atter a t issue,
w e shall quote a few sentences from Biblical
Theology, by G. Vos (pages 142-3):
“It is true, certain of the statem ents of the
P entateuch and of the O. T. in general may on the
surface seem to favor the Judaistic position. T hat
the law cannot be kept is now here stated in so
m any words. A nd not only this, th a t the keep
ing of the law w ill be rew arded, is stated once
and again. Israel’s retention of the privileges of
the berith (covenant) is m ade dependent on
obedience. It is prom ised th at he who shall do
the com m andm ents shall find life through them.
C onsequently w riters have not been lacking, who
declared that, from a historical point of view,
th eir sym pathies w ent w ith the Judaizers, and
not w ith Paul. O nly a m om ent’s reflection is
necessary to prove th a t this is untenable, and th a t
precisely from a broad historical standpoint Paul
had fa r m ore accurately grasped the purport of
the law th an his opponents. The law w as given
after the redem ption from Egypt had been ac
complished, and th e people had already entered
upon the enjoym ent of m any of the blessings of
the berith (covenant). P articu larly th eir taking
possession of th e prom ised land could not have
been m ade dependent on previous observance of
th e law, for during th e ir journey in the w ilder
ness m any of its prescripts could not be observed.
It is plain, then, th a t law -keeping did not figure
a t th a t ju n ctu re as th e m eritorious ground of lifeinheritance. The la tte r is based on grace alone,
no less em phatically than P aul him self places sal
vation on th a t ground. But, w hile this is so, it
m ight still be objected, th a t law-observance, if
not th e ground for receiving, is yet m ade the
ground for retention of th e privileges inherited.
H ere it can not, of course, be denied th a t a real
connection exists. B ut th e Judaizers w ent w rong
in inferring th a t the connection m ust be meritor
ious, that, if Israel keeps th e cherished gifts of
Jehovah through observance of His law, this m ust
be so, because in strict justice they had earned
146
them . The connection is of a totally different
kind. It belongs not to th e legal sphere of m erit,
b u t to the sym bolico-typical sphere of appropri
ateness of expression. As stated above, the abode
of Israel in C anaan typified th e heavenly, p e r
fected state of God’s people. U nder these circum
stances th e ideal of absolute conform ity to G od’s
law of legal holiness had to be upheld. Even
though they w ere not able to keep the law in the
Pauline, sp iritu al sense, yea, even though they
were unable to keep it e x tern a lly and ritu ally ,
the requirem ent could not be low ered. W hen
apostasy on a general scale took place, they could
not rem ain in the prom ised land. W hen th ey dis
qualified them selves for typifying th e sta te of
holiness, they ipso facto disqualified them selves
for typifying th a t of blessedness, and had to go
into captivity.” (C opyright 1948 by Wm. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., G rand Rapids, Mich.).
— J. G. Vos
Book Review
Note: The following book review is in addi
tion to the review s found in an earlier p a rt of this
issue. It w as not possible to get it in the reg u lar
book review section. R ath er th an delay it u n til
the O ctober-D ecem ber issue w e are publishing
it separately here. — Ed.
Jesus of Yesterday and Today, by Sam uel G.
Craig. The P resb y terian and Reform ed P ublish
ing Co., 147 N. 10th St., P h iladelphia 7, Pa. 1956,
pp. $2.75.
Dr. Sam uel Craig now m akes his hom e in
Princeton, New Jersey a fte r being engaged as
editor of the “The P resb y terian ” and la te r as
editor of “C hristian ity Today.” He also served
for tw elve years in th e pastorate'. F irst as pastor
of th e F irst P resb y terian C hurch of Ebensburg,
Pa. and la te r as p astor of th e N orth P resbyterian
C hurch of P ittsb u rg h , Pa. He is a g raduate of
Princeton U niversity and of Princeton Theological
Sem inary, and later studied at the U niversity of
B erlin. Dr. Craig is the au th o r of Christianity
Rightly So Called.
Sensing the tide of lukew arm ness w hich has
almost com pletely engulfed th e C hristian C hurch
today, Dr. Craig has succeeded in pin-pointing
the source of this apathy. The p resent day C hris
tian Church lacks boldness in taking God a t His
word. T he Church has failed to claim God’s
promises. It is content to m erely except the doc
trines and principles w hich Jesus tau g h t b u t it
shuns the pow er w hich Jesu s has prom ised to give.
Dr. C raig’s thesis is th a t “Jesus C hrist IS the
sam e yesterday and today, yea and for ever.” In
the le tte r to the H ebrew s th e Apostle P aul pointed
out this sam e tru th to the early Christians. Jesus
C hrist lived on this earth som e tw o thousand
y ears ago. W e read in th e Bible of the great
pow er w hich Jesu s possessed. T he pow er to
transform lives, to heal th e sick in body, and to
forgive th e sinner. We know Him to be a h isto r
ical personage b u t do w e know Him as our p e r
sonal friend and redeem er? Do w e know the
person Jesu s and the pow er of His resurrection?
Is the Jesus th a t we know th e same as the one
w hich is revealed in Scripture, or do w e w orship
a C hrist who has been disrobed of His pow er by
hum an pride and self-satisfaction? We are not
true C hristians unless w e w orship Jesu s C hrist as
revealed in the Bible. O ur lives m ust be com
pletely consecrated to th e one w ho is th e sam e
yesterday and today, yea and fo r ever.
Dr. Craig rem inds th e read er th a t Jesus is
the sum total of C hristianity. H e sets fo rth the
idea th at Jesus is the “object” of o u r w orship and
not the “subject.” By this he m eans th a t Jesus
Christ is the one whom w e are to praise and glori
fy. The one to whom every knee m ust bow. By
logical reasoning the au th o r destroys th e m odern
concept th at Jesus is m erely th e “subject” of our
C hristian thought. Jesus w as a m an b u t h e w as
more than m an — He is God w h o becam e man.
Jesus is our exam ple b u t not to th e e x ten t th at
our salvation depends on com plete im itation of
Jesus’ perfection. This thought is m ore developed
in the C hapter entitled “Jesus as our Exam ple.”
Following is a list of the topics w hich a re dis
cussed concerning the Jesus of our C hristian faith:
1. Was Jesus a C hristian? 2. W hence C am e Jesus?
3. W hy Jesus Came 4. Jesus as Lord 5. Jesus
as Redeem er 6. Jesus as th e R egenerator of C har
acter 7. Jesus as O ur E xam ple 8. Jesus as a
Man and as a Friend 9. Jesus as a T eacher 10.
Jesus and M iracles
11. Jesu s as a Social Re
form er 12. Jesus as Judge 13. Jesus and His
Place in the Cosmos
This book is not to be read as a textbook in
Theology or Christology b u t is a treatise on the
person and w ork of Jesus C hrist in relationship
to the sinner and the w orld. T he au th o r logically
defends a faith in the historical Jesus. T he reader
gains a deeper insight into the person of Jesus
•by logical reasoning and not by em otional foroe.
It is by rational thought and not sw eet wooing
words w hich moves the re a d e r to a closer relation
ship w ith his saviour and friend.
E very m inister of the Gospel should read this
book and not hide it on th e bookshelf, b u t pass
it along to the elders and to other church officers.
The usage of words is relatiy ely sim ple w ith
few if any technical term s.
Any person who desires a closer understanding
of his or h er saviour should read this book w ith
out delay.
— M arion L. M cFarland
B LU E
BANNER
FAITH
AND
L IF E
VOLUME 11
j
I
i
|
OCTOBER-DECEMBER, 1956
NUMBER 4
Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden,
and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and
learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye
shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy,
and my burden is light.
{
L__
Matthew 11:28-30
_______________ ____________
A Q uarterly Publication Devoted to Expounding, D efending and A pplying the
System of D octrine set forth in the W ord of God and Sum m arized in the S tandards
J . G. Vos, Editor and M anager
3408 7th Avenue
B eaver Falls, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.
Editorial Committee: M. W. Dougherty, R. W. Caskey, Ross L atim er
Published by
T he Board of Publication of the Synod of the Reform ed P resbyterian C hurch of
N orth Am erica
Agent for B ritain and Ireland: The Rev. Adam Loughridge, B.A.,
Glenm anus Manse, P ortrush, County A ntrim , N orthern Ireland
Agent for A ustralia and New Zealand: The Rev. A lexander B arkley, B.A.,
Publication Office, Linn, Kansas, U.S.A.
E ntered as Second Class M atter in the Postoffice a t Linn, Kansas
Our M artyrs9 Answer
By Owen F. Thompson
The stones of Scotland m ark our rest;
Not laid in row s nor tended well,
But scattered over hill and dell.
Like w ind-blow n flow ers w e fell. We fell
B eneath His banner, gave our best.
We stood the test!
Yes, w e have died. Among th e dead
We lie. O Christ, we died for Thee!
We died fo r men, to m ake them free!
Oh, m ay o u r dying fru itfu l be
To rear a race w ho’ll hold instead
C hrist’s kingly banner o’e r our head.
All dead are we? Nay, spirits live;
And of our spirit to you we give.
Be true, ye coming race, be true!
Ye soldiers of the Crown, be true! . . .
O Covenant dust, in Scotland’s hills,
We hear thy call. God g rant our w ills
May falte r not, nor pass th e call.
O Lord, our Christ, we offer ALL!
A nd m ay our fathers’ vow of old
Be now OUR Covenant — let it hold!
Ye cloud of witnesses, be near!
We need your presence w ith us here.
A nd Christ, our King, for whom ye died,
Leave not Thy place a t our right side.
And in thy strength w e’ll carry on,
Till all the kings of ea rth are won;
And kingdoms of the w orld shall be
One mighty kingdom unto Thee.
Then from all lands a w ondrous throng
Shall give eternal praise in song.
Not a w ord or look
I affect to own
B ut by book,
And Thy Book alone.
Safe w here I cannot die yet
Safe w here I hope to lie too,
Safe from the fum e and the fret;
You, and you,
Whom I never forget.
Though I fail, I weep;
Though I halt in pace.
Yet I creep
To the throne of grace.
Safe from the fro st and the snow
Safe from the storm and the sun,
Safe w here the seeds w ait to grow
One by one,
And to come back in blow.*
’ blow: bloom
George H erbert
— C. G. Rossetti
Till the Perfect Day
We still believe, though oft seems baffled
F aith ’s noble, age-long fight;
F or right w e stand, though gloom the scaffold
W ith shadows to affright;
F or tru th we strive, though still be raffled
His seamless robe of light.
F aith ’s goodly fight w ill we m aintain,
A ssured th a t righteousness shall reign.
His tru th is mighty, though its pow er
To m an’s rash h e art seem slow;
His grace shall fruit, though oft its flow er
Seems frayed w hile tem pests blow;
And hope, though th reaten in g clouds m ay lower,
T heir frowns spans w ith a bow.
Undaunted, still we w atch and pray
Till C hrist bring in the perfect day.
(A uthor unknow n)
VOLUME 11
OCTOBER-DECEMBER, 1956
NUMBER 4
By J. G. Vos
III.
THE ROADBLOCK OF ANARCHY, OR CONTEMPT FOR THE GOVERNMENT AND
DISCIPLINE OF THE CHURCH
The governm ent and discipline of the C hristian
C hurch are of divine institution and authority.
B ack of them is the command and authority of
th e L ord Jesus Christ, the great Head of the
Church, w hich means, of course, ultim ately, the
au th o rity of God. Therefore any disintegration
of th e governm ent and discipline of th e church
m ust be view ed w ith alarm . It is the disintegra
tion of som ething w hich is of divine authority
and therefo re of the greatest im portance for the
w ell-being and futu re of the Kingdom of God in
th e w orld.
We live in an age of relativism and ex
pediency, w hen h ardly anything is regarded as
an absolute m a tte r of principle, a clear-cut issue
of rig h t and wrong, any more. So it comes to
pass th a t not only is there the greatest diversity
of opinion and practice concerning church gov
ern m e n t an d discipline, b u t also th at the whole
sub ject seem s to be falling into neglect and de
cadence, ap p aren tly w ith th e tacit approval of
m ost C hristian people and most churches.
dom and God’s Kingdom, of the w orld and the
church.
A braham w as com m anded by God to leave
U r of th e Chaldees. The m an who was to be
the nucleus of the church could not rem ain in an
environm ent dom inated by the w orld. God p u t
a difference betw een Israel and the Egyptians.
Again, God insisted upon strict separation be
tw een the covenant people of Israel and the races
of Canaan. And today God requires an antithesis
and a separation betw een th e church and the
world.
The world must be kept out of the Church.
T he requirem ent th at the w orld be kept out
of the church is obviously Biblical and necessary.
B ut how can this be accom plished? In some
countries of Europe w here an official or state
church exists th ere is hard ly any distinction be
tw een citizens and church m embers. Citizenship
v irtu ally includes church m em bership. T here are
of course exceptions in the case of Roman C ath
olics and Jew s, as w ell as o th e r m inority groups;
Church discipline is a Scriptural ordinance.
b u t a p a rt from these, church m em bership seems
I
shall speak chiefly of church discipline, to be practically autom atic for th e mass of the
population.
though of course church governm ent and church
discipline go together, and cannot really be sep
arated. They are separate functions, but they are
The Puritan Attempt to Exclude the World
inseparably connected and interrelated. W ithout
It is often w rongly supposed th a t the criterion
ch u rch governm ent th ere cannot be any real
of
church
m em bership is regeneration. We are
church discipline. Church governm ent is the au
told th at the church should exclude all who are
th o rity w hich adm inisters church discipline. A
not born again. Y ears ago in M anchuria a Chi
n on-existent or im potent governm ent cannot en
nese evangelist said to me: “Pastor, in this
force anything. On the other hand, church gov
church, le t us baptize only those who are tru ly
ern m en t w ith o u t church discipline is futile and
born again.” I replied, “Well, Mr. Chang, th a t
useless. It is like the governm ent of a nation
is a high aim. B ut tell me, how are we going to
w hich does not even attem pt to enforce the laws
decide w ith certainty w hich are really born again
and ad m inister justice w ithin th e realm. Church
and w hich are not?” To w hich Mr. Chang re
governm ent w ithout church discipline becomes a
plied: “Oh, th a t w ill be very simple. I w ill tell
m ere p ap er governm ent, a m ere m atter of form,
you which they are, and you can baptize them .”
serving no tru e purpose.
B ut it turned out la te r th a t some whom the
The follow ing Scriptures, among many others,
evangelist had approved w ere not tru ly born
prove th a t church discipline is a divine ordinance
again, so far as we w ere able to judge.
in the C hristian Church: M att. 18:15-20; 1 Cor.
It was the e rro r of the early P u ritan churches
5:11-13; 1 Jo h n 2:18, 19; Rev. 3:18-23.
of New England th a t church m em bership is based
The church is in the w orld but it is not of the
on proof of regeneration, or, as they called it in
w orld. Since A dam ’s fall, th ere has been an a n ti
those days, “real saintship.” The applicant ap
thesis betw een tw o kinds of people in this w orld—
peared before the church and related his religious
th e antithesis of Cain and Abel, of Satan’s k in g
experience, and if the congregation or elders
150
judged him tru ly converted he w as adm itted to
m em bership. This theory broke down in practice,
however. M any who had a good co m m aci of the
English language w ere able to convince the church
th a t they w ere tru ly regenerate, w hen as a m atter
of fact they w ere only good salesmen. A nd m any
others, who no doubt w ere tru ly the Lord’s, did
not have th e boldness to m ake such claims for
them selves, and rem ained outside of com m unicant
m em bership in the visible church. This in tu rn
led to th e u n scrip tu ral system know n as the
“half-w ay covenant,” by which ad h erents of the
church who had been baptized b u t had never
them selves m ade a public profession of faith or
p artaken of th e L ord’s Supper, w ere nevertheless
allow ed to have th e ir children baptized, and so on,
from one generation to th e next, w ithout any p er
sonal profession of faith.
Proof of Being Born Again not Required
The w hole idea, how ever, is w rong and un
scriptural. It is interesting to note th a t this old
controversy is reflected in th e Testimony of the
Reformed P resb y terian C hurch (adopted 1806),
w hich rejects as an e rro r the proposition “That
saintship is th e criterion of church-m em bership,
so th a t the visible church m ay not, w ithout guilt,
receive any who is not really a saint, or exclude
any who is reg en erated ” (Chap. X X II, E rror 3;
in Constitution of R. P. Church, page 191).
According to th e Bible an d sound Reform ed
theology the tru e criterion of church m em ber'
ship is n o t “saintship” or proof of regeneration,
b u t a credible profession of faith and obedience.
Simon the sorcerer w as baptized and a church
m em ber, b u t clearly he w as not regenerate. P ete r
told him th a t he was in th e gall of bitterness and
the bond of iniquity. Sim ilarly, those m entioned
in 1 John 2:19, w ho w ent out from the church
because they w ere not tru ly of it, w ere obviously
form er m em bers who had once been received to
the church’s fellow ship; otherw ise, they could
not have “gone out from ” the church. The true
criterion, therefore, is a credible profession of
faith in C hrist and of obedience to Him.
A Credible Profession of Faith and Obedience
A “credible” profession m eans a profession
th a t it is possible to accept a t face value. It does
not m ean a profession th a t compels acceptance.
The applicant does not have to prove th at he is
converted. His profession is to be taken at face
value unless th ere is evidence to th e contrary.
The burden of responsibility is on the applicant,
not on th e church, to decide w h eth er he is tru ly
born again.
A credible profession — a profession th a t it
is possible to accept — is a profession th at is ade
quate in content (not ignorant) and th a t is ac
com panied by a consistent life (not scandalous).
The church, of course, m ust decide w hat consti
tutes such a profession, and m ust w eigh the pro
fession of the individual applicant for m em ber
ship to determ ine w hether it is indeed a credible
profession; th a t is, the church m ust satisfy itself
that the applicant is neither ignorant nor scanda
lous. By m aintaining this Biblical stan d ard for
adm itting m em bers to the status of com m unicant
mem bership in the church, the w orld is kept out
of the church.
Bible Standards Often Ignored Today
It is notorious, however, th a t this standard
is commonly violated today. M any denom inations
have virtually open m em bership, open baptism
and open communion. Thus th e dividing line be
tween the church and the w orld is b lu rre d or
effaced. It is reported th a t a U nitarian Church
had a wayside signboard bearing the nam e of the
church and the added statem ent: “A ll who be
lieve in the good life are welcome h ere.” I su p
pose th a t even the devil him self believes in the
good life, if he be allowed to define in his own
way w hat he means by “good.” W here open
church m em bership exists, or w here v irtually
open church m em bership exists, th e gates are
throw n open for the w orld to e n te r the church.
Only by insistently m aintaining Biblical stan d
ards can the w orld be kep t o u t of th e church.
Needless to say, this m ust be done in th e sight
of God and u tte rly w ithout respect of persons.
Who a person is related to has absolutely nothing
to do w ith his or her rig h t to be a com m unicant
m em ber of the Church of Jesus C hrist. Only
those are to be adm itted w ho really m ake a cred
ible profession of faith, accom panied by a cor
responding life. The ignorant and the scandalous
m ust be kept out at any cost.
The Church Must be Kept from Becoming
Like the World.
The Bible standard of fa ith and life m ust also
be insisted on in the case of those who are al
ready m em bers of the church. It should not be
easier to rem ain a m em ber th a n it is to become a
member.
I
understand th a t the U. S. Customs Service
has a list of books w hich cannot be legally im
ported into the United States. These books, for
one reason or another, are excluded. B ut the
strange thing is th at m any of these sam e books
are freely printed and sold by publishers in the
United States. They cannot get in, b u t they can
be in and stay in. A stran g e situation, certainly.
Yet it is not unlike th e situation w hich exists
when a church tries to m aintain high Biblical
standards in adm itting new m em bers from the
world, yet tolerates serious evils and abuses among
those who are already m em bers, and have been
m em bers for years. C ertainly it should not be
easier to stay in than to get in.
Discipline a Duty of the Whole Church
The officers of the church are to w atch over
the members to see th a t the Bible standard of
151
faith and life is m aintained. This task, however,
cannot be placed w holly an d solely upon the m in
isters an d elders. It is also the duty of the church
as a whole, and of each and every m em ber of the
church. It is, indeed, first of all the duty of
m em bers as such. M embers are to have a care
for one another, to admonish one another, and so
forth. O nly w hen all this has failed of its p u r
pose, m u st official action be taken by the courts
of the church.
W hen th e duty of m utual adm onition and
discipline is taken seriously by both the m em ber
ship an d th e officers, then th e church w ill be
k ep t from becom ing like the world. Scandals
an d troubles w ill be nipped in the bud, before
they becom e extrem e and desperate cases. T rou
bles w ill be cured before they become incurable.
B ut both m em bers and officers are often ex
trem ely relu c ta n t to undertake this task. We a ll
tend to be like Cain, who asked, “Am I my b ro th
e r’s k eep er?” It m ay be, we fear, a bit u n
pleasan t or em barrassing — it may, indeed, be ex
trem ely unp leasan t and highly em barrassing — so
we tend to p u t it off, if not to neglect it alto
gether.
T hen things drift along from one thing to
an o th er u n til by and by some m em ber is so far
off th e rig h t track th a t it seems almost impossible
to reclaim him . A nd finally, after he has become
to tally in d ifferen t and has perhaps not attended
public w orship for several years, his nam e is
dropped from th e roll, to the accom paniment of
a pious re m a rk about the travel fund. B ut this is
not S crip tu ral church discipline; this is certainly
not w h a t th e B ible requires us to do.
W hen people begin to get off the track, the
others should note this an d restore them in a
sp irit of m eekness. They should rem onstrate w ith
them and urge them to do right. The real p u r
pose of church discipline is not to take a name off
th e roll a fte r all other action has already become
hopeless, b u t to prevent things from becoming
hopeless by doing som ething about them in time.
What Kind of Conduct Requires Discipline?
In general, any conduct on account of which a
pei-son could be kept from becoming a m em ber
is p roper ground for action in th e case of one who
is alread y a m em ber. Scandal is not everything
w hich is sinful, or w hich displeases someone else,
b u t som ething so im portant th a t if committed by
one not a m em ber, it would be sufficient to debar
him from m em bership until duly repented of.
See th e very sound and S criptural sum m ary of the
subject of chu rch discipline in the Testimony of
th e R eform ed P resb y terian Church, Chap. X XXI
(found in Constitution of R. P. Church, pages 210,
211. To th is should be added the statem ents of
th e Book of Discipline, C hapter I, especially p a ra
graphs 3 and 8 (Constitution of R. P. Church, pages
279-281). We should note w ell th a t the Testimony
says th a t w ithout the faithful and spiritual ap
plication of church discipline no church can hope
fo r C hrist’s countenance and blessing. And the
Book of Discipline adds th a t “Experience shows
th a t the neglect of discipline is speedily followed
by corruption of w orship, of doctrine and of gov
ernm ent.” These statem ents are certainly true,
and they have the sanction of the W ord of God.
Church Discipline has Almost Vanished
In view of these facts, it m ust be regarded
as a m ost ex trao rd in ary th in g that, even in
churches w hich regard them selves as pure and
faithful, church discipline has all b u t vanished
from the life of the church. The statem ents of
the Testimony and of the Book of Discipline on
this subject are v irtu a lly a dead lette r today. In
all b u t the m ost extrem e and shocking cases,
nothing is done and everyone knows th at nothing
w ill be done. B ut it is not such extrem e and
shocking cases th a t are ruining the church today.
It is the common cases of neglect of the m eans of
grace, th e cases of openly violated covenant vows,
the cases of disregard of the Sabbath, of neglect
of baptism , of needless and habitual absence from
the ordinances of w orship, of gossip, slander and
evil speaking, of m iserly refusal to ren d er due
financial support to the church — it is cases such
as these th a t cry aloud for S criptural action, and
yet seldom is anything done about them u n til it is
too late.
John Calvin on Church Discipline
The Reform er John Calvin at Geneva regarded
church discipline as so im portant th at when m at
ters came to a head betw een him self and the city
council and assem bly of Geneva, he absolutely
refused to com prom ise on this issue. He was
w illing to yield on several o th e r m atters which
did not involve vital m atters of principle, but
w ith regard to church discipline h e absolutely
refused to yield. T here m ust be S criptural church
discipline; it m ust be in th e hands of law ful
church officers w ithout interference by the civil
m agistrates; it m ust d eb ar th e ignorant and
scandalous from the L ord’s Supper; and it must,
if and w hen all other m easures failed, term inate
in the sentence of excom m unication.
This was too m uch for the pleasure-loving,
w orldly-m inded people of Geneva. B ut Calvin
would not compromise, and n eith er w ould the
citizens yield. Instead, they voted to banish
Calvin from th eir city, and h e w ent reluctantly
into exile, u n til in the providence of God the city
of Geneva w as constrained to call him back again.
Church Discipline is not a Method of Getting
Rid of People
T here exists a common misconception of
church discipline, w hich reg ard s it as m erely a
legal m ethod of getting rid of people whose nam es
are an em barrassm ent on the church’s m em ber
ship roll.
15*
Discipline is more than “Purging the Roll”
;
I
Bring up a discussion of church discipline in
a meeting of presbytery sometime, and see if
within a few minutes some of the delegates are
not using the expression “purging the roll” as
equivalent to church discipline. The only kind
of discipline many people know is the final
erasure of a person’s name after all other
measures have become hopeless. Things have been
allowed to drift for years; all truly Scriptural dis
cipline has been avoided and neglected. Finally
matters become desperate and the session decides
to “purge the roll” — a surgical operation in
which perhaps twenty or thirty names are simply
stricken off the roll of communicant members in
good standing. There are no charges, no trial, no
admonition, no patient dealing with the parties.
They may be sent a letter informing them that
they have been “purged,” or perhaps they may
not even be informed of the session’s action.
Thus Biblical discipline is corrupted into a last
resort for getting rid of “dead wood.”
Discipline is not a Method of Saving Money
There is still another view of church discipline
which is even worse in my humble judgment,
than the view which regards it as merely a m atter
of “purging the roll.” This worse view is the
view which regards church discipline exclusively
from the financial point of view. This is not only
common, but even prevalent.
Bring up the m atter of church discipline in
a meeting of session, and see if one or more elders
do not almost immediately offer the comment
that by removing the names of such-and-such
members, the congregation could save so-and-so
much on the travel fund of presbytery and Synod.
It is true, of course, that a congregation pays its
travel fund according to its membership as shown
in the public statistics. And it is true that the
elimination of names will reduce the amount that
the congregation is required to pay to the travel
funds. Yet this is the merest sidelight on the
subject of church discipline. Suppose that a con
gregation could save, say, twenty dollars a year
by “purging the roll,” still, I say, this would be
the merest by-product of the exercise of church
discipline.
It strikes me as truly shocking that in a mat
ter involving the immortal souls of men and
women, some church officers cannot seem to see
any other aspect than the money aspect of the
matter. If a member of your family were very
sick, would you sit down w ith paper and pencil
and figure up how much you could save on your
annual grocery bill if he were to die? It is truly
shocking when the subject of church discipline is
approached chiefly, if not exclusively, from the
standpoint of church finances. And yet I can as
sure you that this is commonly done. This im
presses me as really profane. A m atter which
concerns the honor of Jesus Christ, the spiritual
welfare of His Church, and the eternal weal or
woe of men’s souls, is discussed from the stand
point of the treasurer’s ledger. The honor of
Christ and the recovery of erring members are
the real objects of the church discipline—not a
saving of dollars and cents on the travel fund.
Scriptural Discipline a Continuous Process
It is a great mistake to think of church dis
cipline as limited to the final step of church dis
cipline, namely, removing a person’s name from
the roll. Scriptural church discipline is a long,
continuous process, not just a w ay of getting rid
of a name from the roll. The steps in church
discipline are graded steps. The process moves
from one to another. These steps are admoni
tion, rebuke, suspension, deposition (in the case
of church officers), and excommunication. At
each stage of the process there is renewed oppor
tunity for the person to repent, renewed prayer
on the part of the church that he will repent, re
newed dealing with the person that he may re
pent. When this is faithfully done by the church,
it will be accompanied by an increasing pressure
of the Holy Spirit on the offending member’s
conscience, which will result, eventually, in his
repentance and restoration, or if resisted to the
end, in his complete hardening, his becoming
“like a heathen man and a publican.”
The common practice of “purging the roll” is
not really discipline at all. It really concerns
only the church’s own records and statistics. It
makes no real effort to deal spiritually w ith the
offending member. Instead, it simply takes the
ultimate step of erasing names from the roll, very
much as the names of those who 'have died are
erased from the roll. This is something very dif
ferent from the church discipline required by the
Bible and set forth in the historic church
standards.
Only One Sin Justifies Excommunication
There is really only one sin which can proper
ly result in the final sentence of excommunica
tion. That sin is not m urder, nor theft, not
drunkenness, nor perjury, not adultery, not Sab
bath-breaking, not blasphemy, nor any other such
sin. The one and only sin for which a person
can properly be excommunicated, or put out of
the church, is the sin of stubborn refusal to re
pent. Where there is repentance, all other sins
are forgiven, and the person can be a member
in good standing in the church, even though he
may be in prison under sentence to be hanged
for murder. But the person who stubbornly re
fuses to repent when he is exhorted and com
manded to do so, cannot be a member in good
standing in the church. It makes no difference
whether the sin that he refuses to repent of is
a “big” sin or a “little” sin. It may be telling a
lie, or making a mean, slanderous rem ark about
153
some other member. If he refuses to repent, in
the end, after all other measures have been faith
fully tried and have failed, he must be excom
municated. Our Lord Jesus Christ said so—if
he will not hear the church, he is to be treated
as a heathen man and a publican, as an unsaved
sinner who needs the gospel just as much as the
heathen on the foreign mission fields need it. The'
apostle Paul said so — he said to the Corinthian
church, “P ut away that wicked person from
among yourselves.” But when that wicked man
later repented, Paul also directed that he be re
stored to membership in the church.
family B and family C, who are closely related
to Mr. A, will leave the church in a huff.
It cannot be denied that such situations exist.
But what shall we reply? Whether church disci
pline is to be applied to Mr. A is a question of
right and wrong to be decided on its merits. What
families B and C will think about it has nothing
whatever to do with the question. We are op
posed to corruption in our civil courts; what about
improper influences in church courts? The old
Latin proverb said Fiat Justitia, ruat coelum
(“Let justice be done, though the heavens fall”).
It is not our job to keep the heavens in place by
corrupting justice.
Forms of Contempt for Church Discipline To
day
If anything is characteristic of the Church to
day it is contempt for Scriptural church discipline.
We see today not merely neglect of church disci
pline, but actually contempt for church discipline.
There is a relativistic attitude in people’s minds
today which causes them, when this subject is
brought up, to discuss, not what is right but what
will in their opinion be likely to have desirable
results. People are concerned not so much with
w hat God requires in His Word, as with what they
think will be likely to “win friends and influence
people.”
When church discipline is regarded from the
standpoint of expediency, and people weigh the
probable results before they are willing to take
any action, then church discipline is regarded
wrongly; it is regarded with contempt; it is re
garded as of merely human authority, not of di
vine authority.
The real question about church discipline is not
w hether it is wise and prudent, nor w hether
people will like it, but whether it is right —
w hether God commands His Church to do it.
“Relativity” Causes Contempt for Discipline
Another form of contempt for church disci
pline exists where the session is unwilling to ex
ercise necessary discipline because of "relativity.”
People in a congregation may be closely related
by ties of blood or marriage. If the session could
find someone who is not related to anybody, they
might be willing to exercise Scriptural discipline;
but when a person is closely related to three or
four of the most prominent families in the con
gregation, including some of the elders them
selves — that is another matter. Under such cir
cumstances sessions rarely exercise Scriptural
discipline even when it is clearly called for.
Carnal Fear of Consequences
Another form of contempt for church disci
pline arises from a carnal fear of consequences.
It is feared that if Mr. A, who is a communicant
mem ber but has not attended church for eleven
years, is dealt with by church discipline, then
And what about families B and C? Well, if
their loyalty to Christ and His Church is so super
ficial and flimsy that they can be kept in the
Church only by a policy of appeasement which
handles them and all their relatives with kid
gloves, then they are no asset to the Church. If
families B and C can be kept in the Church only
by calling black white, then families B and C are
a liability to the Church, and if they leave, the
Church will gain in spiritual power and purity
what it loses in membership statistics.
Threats to “Leave the Church”
Another form of contempt for church dis
cipline is the threat to “leave the church” if dis
cipline is applied. This is far from imaginary;
it has been carried out in practice only too often.
Mr. X is a flagrant Sabbath-breaker. He
goes on long auto trips in the interests of his
worldly business, using the Lord’s day for his
travelling time. Now if the session so much as
mention this to Mr. X — let alone taking any real
action or pronouncing any real censure — if the
session so much as speak to Mr. X about his Sab
bath-breaking, what will he do? In nine cases
out of ten such a person will become very angry,
will announce loudly to all and sundry that he
w ill not be a member of a church that interferes
with his business, and will before the next com
munion season ask for his letter of standing and
join a “tolerant” church which will make no de
mands whatever upon his life. That church will
receive him with open arms and may even honor
him by making him an officer.
Discipline Blocked by “Christian Love”
Another obstacle in the way of exercising
Scriptural church discipline arises from the atti
tude of those church officers who object to the
exercise of discipline on the ground that it is
contrary to Christian love for the erring brothe'r.
A false antithesis is set up between discipline and
love. These are regarded as mutually exclusive1
— it is held that we can exercise either discipline
or love, but not both at the same time. Discipline
is regarded as ruled out by the duty of Christian
love.
154
This kind of obstacle in the way of Scriptural
church discipline has been observed again and
again in church courts. The plea of Christian
love is put up in a very plausible and appealing
manner by brethren who are universally honored
and respected. This results in putting those who
call for Scriptural discipline in a very bad light.
They are regarded as lacking in Christian love.
Sometimes, indeed, those who call for Scriptural
discipline are openly declared to be actuated by
a desire for revenge. The call for Scriptural dis
cipline has even been represented as a demand for
“a pound of flesh.” Thus the plea of love for
the offending brother results in a very unloving
imputation of bad motives to the brethren who
call for discipline.
Sometimes the plea is that the m atter — w hat
ever it may be — be dropped altogether. More
often, perhaps, it is conceded that the time may
come when discipline must be exercised, but it
is pleaded that that time has not yet come. Disci
pline should be postponed in the interest of love.
The time when Scriptural discipline can be ex
ercised, like Felix’s “convenient season,” never
arrives.
All of this of course results from the false
antithesis between discipline and love. Scriptural
discipline is not to be regarded as a manifestation
of hatred or desire for revenge. On the con
trary discipline itself should be regarded as an
expression of love — not only love for the truth
and love for the Church as a whole, but even love
for the offending brother. It is no kindness to
an offending brother to leave him unrebuked in
his sin. The truest love will seek to apply the
remedy appointed in God’s Word that he may be
humbled and recovered.
Congregation should Support Session’s Acts
Still another form of contempt for Scriptural
church discipline is found in the attitude of
many church members who instead of backing up
the session’s actions with real moral support, will
rather commiserate the disciplined member, tell
him it is “too bad” that the m inister and elders
“cracked down” on him, that the session certain
ly had no business doing so, and so forth..
Thus church discipline is regarded merely as
a private m atter of the session — the m inister
and the elders. The other members tend to dis
sociate themselves from it, to deplore it, to lament
it, and to comfort the unfortunate person who has
been dealt with by the session. The person is
told by other members that they would not stand
for it themselves, and they don’t see why he
stands for it.
Needless to say, this sort of thing breaks
down and destroys the effectiveness of all church
discipline, just as in the homg when one parent
disciplines a child and the other parent comforts
the child and tells him it is a pity he was treated
so harshly, all parental discipline is broken down
and destroyed.
Actually, pf .course, discipline is the act of the
whole congregation. It ip carried out by the ses
sion, but the session acts in the name of the whole
congregation. The entire congregation should
back up the session’s action with m oral force.
They are not to count the disciplined person as
an enemy, but they are to make it plain, when
occasion arises, that they approve of the session’s
action and they hope and pray that the offending
member will repent.
Every member who is admitted to communi
cant membership has promised to submit to
Scriptural church discipline. He has promised
“due subordination in the Lord” to the courts of
the Church. How many take this promise ser
iously? How can we explain the fact that people
will leave the Church in anger if their sins are
even mentioned to them? It is to be feared that
many have taken their vows as a mere formality,
with no serious intention of keeping them.
Church Discipline and Revival
There is much discussion of revival today.
But real revival will never come until the church
becomes serious again about drawing a clear di
viding line between itself and the world. That
dividing line is a credible profession of faith and
obedience, maintained by proper exclusion of those
lacking such a profession, and proper discipline
of those who violate their profession after be
coming members.
A Matter of Honesty
Church discipline is really a m atter of honesty.
Just plain honesty requires that the dividing
line between the church and the world be drawn
and maintained. God is an honest God, and He
requires honesty of His people and His servants.
When that dividing line is faithfully drawn and
faithfully maintained, we will receive spiritual
blessings that we can never get by programs,
drives and campaigns.
Church discipline is a m atter of honesty; it is
a matter of facing realities. God will honor and
bless honesty in His church and people.. Without
honesty we cannot expect God’s blessing and we
have no right to pray for revival. If the treasurer
of a congregation were to report to Synod that
he had paid the pastor $100 more than he had
really paid him, that would be dishonest. All
right-minded people would object to it and would
call for correction of the false statement. But for
a session to report to Synod that there are, say,
150 communicant members on the roll, when the
real truth is that several of them are “paper”
members only and could not be considered in
good standing by any stretch of the imagination,
is also dishonest. It is really an untruth; it gives
a false impression of the facts.
155
We m ust m aintain honesty even if half of the
members become angry and leave the church. We
do not glorify God nor accomplish His purposes
by dealing in dishonesty and untruth.
Suppose that half the members do become
angry and leave the church. That would in itself
be a great calamity. But there would also be
something gained. The name and honor of Christ
would have been vindicated, and the purity of
His Church safeguarded. The dividing line be
tween the church and the world would have been
faithfully maintained.
God Will Bless His Own Ordinance
Church discipline is an ordinance of God, in
stituted for these purposes. Where it is faithfully
and honestly used, God will honor and bless it.
Sometimes the attem pt to exercise discipline is
objected to on the plea that “It won’t do a bit of
good.” But how do we know that it won’t do a
bit of good? Remember, it is an ordinance of God,
commanded in His Word. Then how dare we say
that it won’t do a bit of good? Do we not have
faith in the Word and promises of God? If we
do what God commands, He will honor His own
Word and bless His Church.
This involves stepping out on faith. But there
is no other way. We have to step out by faith,
counting on God to honor His Word. Those de
nominations that m aintain Scriptural church dis
cipline, such as the Missouri Synod Lutheran
Church and the Christian Reformed Church, have
proved in actual practice that God honors and
blesses this divine ordinance. Of course, they
have lost some members; but they have been
greatly strengthened spiritually at the same time.
And they have reclaimed many, many erring
members over the years.
Scriptural Discipline Necessary for Revival
The prevalent prayer for revival, in the face
of neglect of Scriptural church discipline, is dis
honest and hypocritical. God will not bless it, for
it disregards His own Word and commands.
P rayer for revival when the church is unwilling
to exercise Scriptural discipline is hypocrisy and
escapism.
There is much talk today about the need for
more prayer, for more revival, and for more evan
gelism. We can readily agree that there is need
for much more of all of these. But prayer is no
substitute for obedience to the revealed will of
God. I fear that many people today regard prayer
as a substitute for the action that God calls them
to do.
When God called Abraham to offer his only
son Isaac as a burnt offering on Mount Moriah,
Abraham did not say: “This is a difficult situa
tion. We need more prayer. I will call a prayer
meeting.” He already knew what God required
of him, and he went about doing it.
When the children of Israel at the shore of
the Red Sea were paralyzed with fear because Of
the pursuing Egyptians, the Lord said to Moses:
“Wherefore criest thou unto me? speak unto the
children of Israel, that they go forward” (Ex.
14:15).
There is no Substitute for Obedience
When God has clearly revealed His will in
His Word, He requires us to obey it. Nothing
else will take the place of obedience to the re
vealed will of God. P rayer will not do it; revival
will not come without it; evangelism will not
serve as a substitute. The first requirement for
real evangelistic advance is the integrity of the
church itself. An army honeycombed with dis
loyalty, disobedience, threatened desertion, and
contempt for discipline, is in no shape to face the
enemy and win any battles. Simply to give the
order, “Forward, march!” without first making
sure of the soundness and loyalty of our army, is
not faith but foolhardiness, and will lead to dis
aster and disillusionment rather than to success
and victory.
There is a crying need for more evangelism.
I grant it. I believe it. But the first essential for
true and successful evangelism is the moral and
spiritual integrity of the church itself. Without
that, evangelism will be a mere flash in the pan,
and its anticipated benefits will prove a mere
mirage.
Note: The four articles of this series, of
which the third appears above, were originally
delivered as lectures at the White Lake Christian
Workers’ Conference, New York, in 1953. Later
they were published in a num ber of installments
in The Covenanter Witness in 1953 and 1954. They
are now being reprinted in Blue Banner Faith
and Life, with slight changes, by request. The
material is reproduced from The Covenanter Wit
ness by permission, for which thankful acknow
ledgment is hereby expressed. — Ed.
(To be continued)
Sketches of the Covenanters
By J. C. McFeeters
Chapter XXI
A Sifting T im e_A. D. 1653
We now enter the most serious period in the
history of the Covenanters. Hitherto we have
been on the skirmish line. All we have yet reviewed has been leading up to the desperate and
sanguinary struggle, which lasted twenty-eight
15G
years, costing treasures of blood and indescrib
able suffering, yet finally resulting in the wealthy
heritage of liberty, enlightenment, and religion,
which we now enjoy.
Oliver Cromwell, having defeated King
Charles, ruled Scotland five years. He was titled
“Lord Protector,” but in reality was a Dictator.
The government was centered more than ever in
one man. Many strange qualities blended in this
austere autocrat, some of which command our
admiration. He was stern and painfully severe,
yet much sagacity and justice characterized his
administration. During his sway of power the
Reformed Churches in his own realms and on the
Continent were by him heroically defended. He
became, in the hand of the Lord, “the shadow of
a great rock in a weary land.” The persecuted
found shelter under his shadow, in the providence
of the Lord. He avenged the massacre of the
Protestants in Ireland, halted the persecution of
Christians on the Continent, and gave Rome the
alternative, to cease the work of slaughter, or
listen to the thunder of his legions at her gates.
The Church of the Covenanters however had
strange experience at the hands of Cromwell. In
a ruthless and despotic manner he dissolved the
General Assembly, put the Supreme Court of
God’s House out of existence to appear no more
for thirty-five years. The meeting previous to
this act of violence had been held in the mid
summer of 1653. The ministers and elders had
come from all parts of Scotland, to sit in counsel,
or rather in debate, concerning the kingdom of
the Lord Jesus Christ. The salubrious air and
genial sky of Edinburgh united with the sacred
and exhilarating interests of the Gospel to arouse
all that was noble and divine in every heart. The
Moderator reverently led the Assembly in prayer
and constituted the court most solemnly in the
name of Jesus Christ. Such a prayer should over
whelm the soul with God’s presence, burden the
conscience with responsibilities, make the spiritual
world dreadfully visible, and bring God’s servants
close to His throne of judgment.
The Assembly had met last year in this pray
erful and solemn manner, but the business of the
Lord Jesus soon degenerated into an acrid, harm
ful discussion, that lasted two weeks and ended
in confusion. The debate evidently was now to
be renewed with the additional bitterness and
vehemence that had accumulated during the en
suing year. The m inisters and elders having con
vened, the regular business was under way, when
suddenly the Assembly witnessed what was un
expected — a regiment of soldiers in the church
yard. Cromwell had Sent them. The soldiers, in
bright uniform and bristling with swords and
guns, struck amazement into the hearts of the
delegates. The colonel ordered them to leave the
house. They walked out in front of the soldiers
and, being escorted beyond the city limits, were
sent home, not to return, under pain of punish
ment.
The General Assembly had fallen into a state
of bitter strife — the snare of Satan. There were
two parties and these w ere quite well balanced.
Their power for good was greatly neutralized by
one another; their influence for harm was incal
culable; the baneful effect spread like a w ither
ing shadow over the land. The two parties, at
the beginning, chiefly differed in the methods
employed to accomplish the same end. The one
was governed by expediency; the other by prin
ciple. Expediency drew the m ajority; principle
held the remainder. The m ajority discounted the
obligations of the Covenant; the minority held to
the spirit and letter of the sacred bond. The
party in power precipitated the direful conditions.
This they did by repeated breaches of the Cove
nant. The responsibility for the disgraceful pro
ceedings, and the shameful term ination of the
Assembly, must be attached to those who made
the discussion a moral necessity.
The first shadow that darkened the General
Assembly was the discussion of “The Engage
ment.” Two unscrupulous men — one of them a
Covenanter — had made a secret engagement
with Charles I in his captivity. They had promised
to seat him, if possible, again on his throne; he
in turn had engaged to favor Presbyterianism
three years. The Engagement aroused earnest
and violent discussion in the Assembly. The
element of strife had now entered the Supreme
Court of God’s House, and the downward trend
was deplorably rapid.
The next vexation was the abolition of “The
Act of Classes.” The Act of Classes guarded all
places of trust in the government and army. None
but those who expressed sym pathy with the Na
tional Covenant were eligible to places of trust.
Here was an unparalleled state of civil affairs;
the world had never seen the like. This was a
marvelous stride toward the Millennium. The
fathers are worthy of all praise for this unprece
dented effort to build the national government
upon the true foundation of God’s will, and ad
m inister it by men in Covenant with Jesus Christ,
the King of Kings. This was the first attem pt to
erect a Christian government, in which the fear
of God should pervade every departm ent and
characterize every official. The abolition of the
Act of Classes involved a great moral issue which
the General Assembly had to meet. Strangely,
the Assembly was divided in the discussion; the
debate waxed vehement and bitterly passionate.
The majority favored abolition, thus opening the
flood-gates of moral laxity in official stations.
These were called “Resolutioners”, because they
offered the resolution to this effect, and support
ed it; the minority were called “Protesters,” be
cause they protested against it.
The discussion continued year after year till
157
all other interests in the General Assembly were
overshadowed. The voice of the Church, once
powerful in guiding public issues, was now
despised; the tones were guttural, sepulchral,
alarming, m aking the blood run in chills. Then
came Cromwell and snuffed the Assembly out
like a candle. It was sending forth ill-odored
smoke and but little light. Are we surprised that
God perm itted him to quench the noisome spark?
The Protesters stood for all that the Cove
nant embodied. The Covenant lay heavy upon
their conscience; they trembled at its violation.
They saw in the breach of the Covenant the
w rath of God against themselves, against the
Church, and against the nation. They believed
th at nothing could compensate for the loss in
curred by forsaking the Covenant. They trusted
in God with absolute faith; would not resort to
expediency for any purpose; temporized with no
principle, no, not for greatest advantages. They
knew th at God could send peace, victory, and
prosperity to their country through the Cove
nant; and that He would send defeat, distress, and
desolation through the breach of it.
The Resolutioners grew more and more lax.
They may have dreaded to be termed narrow
minded; they may have sought to be reputed
broad and charitable. They weakened in morals
and influence, and lost power and position when
tried by the fires of persecution. They finally
melted away and disappeared among the enemies
of the Covenant, as snowflakes falling on the
mire.
The Protesters were the Covenanters who
continued w ith the Lord Jesus Christ in His
tem ptation. When the Covenant called for
m artyrs, they were the martyrs. When the cause
of Christ demanded witnesses, they were the
witnesses. They gave their testimony with a clear
voice, and sealed it with their blood. These are
they whose crimson path we will now follow, our
Lord Jesus permitting, till we come to the last
of Scotland’s honored roll — the pleasant, youth
ful, innocent Jam es Ren wick.
God requires His Church to receive, proclaim,
and defend the truth, the whole truth, and noth
ing but the truth, as it is in the Lord Jesus Christ.
This obligation is weighty, and the duty is diffi
cult, yet no release is granted. The Church that
holds most tru th should draw most people;
the Church that abandons any truth for any
reason m ust be unsatisfying to honest souls.
The organization that embodies the largest
measure of God’s Word is the largest Church;
that which contains the smallest is the least.
“Whosoever therefore shall break one of these
least commandments, and shall teach men
so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of
heaven.” These are the words of Jesus. In His
sight a Church is measured, not by the num ber
enrolled, but by the truth professed, incarnated,
and proclaimed.
1. How long did Oliver Cromwell rule Scot
land?
2. How did he deal
Church?
w ith the Covenanted
3. How had the General Assembly previously
deteriorated?
4. Give the downward steps.
5. What two parties henceforth in the Church?
6. By whom was the truth preserved?
7. What principle governs the true followers
of Christ?
8. W'hat distinguishes the largest Church?
Chapter XXII
An Illustrious Martyr — A.D. 1660
Archibald Campbell, the Marquis of Argyle,
was the first m artyr to suffer at the hand of King
Charles II. Twenty-two years had this illustrious
nobelman been in special training for the honors of
a m artyr. He became identified with the Cov
enanters at the General Assembly of 1638. From
that time he brought his influence, wealth, power,
and office into the service of his Covenant Lord,
and grew mighty in the cause of God. He ripen
ed early in convictions and hallowed experiences,
which won for him the highest distinction con
ferred upon mortals — martyrdom. He was in the
prim e of his years, at the summit of his earthly
career, when he gave his life for the cause of
Christ. He was a true warrior; every drop of his
blood was electrified with heroism. In meeting
death he felt the m ilitary spirit throb, but sup
pressing it he calmly said, “I could die as a Roman,
but choose to die as a Christian.”
This was a cedar of Lebanon, a choice tree
of God, distinguished for its grace, strength, and
height, towering above the trees of the forest.
Therefore the first blast struck it with such deadly
force. Then descended the terrific storm upon
the lesser trees, and the mountain of God’s house
was strewn with them. The next twenty-eight
years were filled with lamentation, and mourning,
and woe. Let us look a t the condition of the
Covenant Church, as this age of horror settles
down upon Scotland.
When Cromwell had reduced Scotland, he
attem pted to convert the Covenanted Church to
Congregationalism. Though he possessed some
amiable qualities, yet this ignoble work was a t
tempted in the spirit of a Turk — with the Bible
in one hand and the sword in the other. A resolu
tion in favor of Congregationalism was introduced
in the General Assembly of 1652. This was voted
down. The m ilitary suppression of the Assembly
at its next meeting was Cromwell’s bitter revenge.
158
Yet we m ust not fail to see the hand of God in the
overthrow of the Supreme Court of His House.
As with the Temple at Jerusalem before its de
struction, this Temple was already desolate; the
glory had departed ere the storm of Divine w rath
smote it. The resolution of the “Resolutioners,”
some years previous, favoring the repeal of the
“Act of Classes,” was a gross violation of the Cov
enant, and the proceedings in the Assembly had
thereby degenerated into bitter debate. The As
sembly had lost its power for good and, there
fore, its right to exist; this part of the golden
candlestick had exhausted its oil and God re
moved the useless part.
The Church did not seem to be seriously af
fected by the abolition of the Assembly. The
process was more like the removal of a tumor than
of a vital organ. God can do without the most
excellent parts of the Church’s organization, when
they become diseased and endanger the system
with blood poisoning. During the rule of Crom
well, the subordinate courts were mostly un
molested. The synods flourished; the presbyteries
were uninterrupted in their work; the congrega
tions enjoyed quietness and refreshing. The strife
th at existed in the Church was chiefly among the
shepherds, not among the sheep. There were 14
synods, 68 presbyteries, and 900 congregations,
when the persecution began under King Charles
II.
During Cromwell’s administration the land
had rest; unusual quietness prevailed among the
clans; there was a great calm. The four angels
were holding the four winds of the earth, till the
servants of God were sealed in their foreheads.
The people were diligent in waiting upon the
Lord; the Holy Spirit fell upon them w ith power,
they became intensely interested in the ordinances
of grace. They clustered around the family altar,
through the House of God, hallowed the Sabbath,
observed the Sacraments, and tarried much in
secret prayer. Thus they were unwittingly p re
paring to enter the dreadful cloud. The vine was
taking deep root, anticipating the storm that was
in the air.
When Cromwell died the public mind ex
perienced a strange reaction. The politicians of
the two kingdoms, Scotland and England, revert
ing from severe discipline of the “Protector,”
launched into every excess of luxuriousness and
dissipation. A cry for the return of the profli
gate king swept the country from London to Edin
burgh. Even the Covenanters were loud in calling
for the banished monarch. They determined not
to be last in bringing back the King. They would,
however, renew their allegiance to him only on
condition that he would renew the Covenant with
them. From France, where he had found an asy
lum, came his captivating reply, “I am a Cov
enanted king.” He was received with enthusiastic
demonstrations.
King Charles organized his government in
Scotland by immediately placing in power the
most virulent enemies of the Covenanters. Within
one month they were ready to execute whomso
ever they would. The Earl of Middleton was the
official. When off his guard by indulging in drink,
he divulged the king’s secret instructions, con
fessing that he had been commissioned to do three
things: (1) Rescind the Covenant; (2) Behead
Argyle; (3) Sheath every m an’s sword in his
brother’s breast.
Argyle in those days was one of the great
men of Scotland, if not the greatest. He was rec
ognized in the Council as overshadowing his as
sociates, in personal excellence, public-spirited
ness, trustworthiness, and executive ability. He
was a fine scholar, m asterly statesman, wealthy
landlord, brave soldier, and faithful Covenanter.
His magnificent estate lay in Argyleshire, where
the mountains are fringed with lochs in the most
picturesque manner. The scenery is charming.
One summer evening as our ship passed along the
broken coast, a sunset of surpassing beauty scat
tered its blending colors in rich profusion over
clouds, hills, vales, and lochs. The scenery was
panoramic and enchanting. But greater gorgeous
ness than a thousand sunsets fell upon the out
look, at the remembrance of the famous Argyle,
himself and his wife and children; his home,
hearth, altar, Covenant, and martyrdom. What
incomparable grandeur where such hallowed as
sociations throw their colors!
When Charles had first been placed on the
throne, ten years previous, Argyle had the honor
of setting the crown upon his head. The king at
that time feigned great friendship and respect for
him. He sought, and received, counsel from A r
gyle in apparent meekness and with evident ap
preciation. On one occasion he remained nearly
all night with him in prayer, for preparation and
fitness to rule the kingdom. He even sought Argyle’s daughter in marriage. Such was the former
intimacy of the king with Argyle. But once
again on the throne, he determ ined to crush the
Covenanters, and Argyle was his first victim.
When Cromwell was conquering Scotland, A r
gyle fought him till further resistance was useless.
He even then refused to sign the declaration of
submission, but agreed to keep peace. The agree
ment with Cromwell was the main charge pre
ferred against Argyle. He was tried and con
victed. The sentence was passed upon him on
Saturday; he was executed the following Monday.
He eloquently defended himself. It was a scene
highly tragical — this calm, innocent, dignified
man, looking into the face of his accusers and
over-awing them with his bold vindication, and
pathetic appeal for justice. Kneeling down he
received his sentence, which was death by de
capitation, his head to be placed above one of the
city gates, as a gruesome warning to all Cov
enanters. Argyle arose from his knees and, look
ing upon his judicial murderers, calmly said, “I
had the honor to set the crown on the king’s head,
159
and now he hastens me to a better crown than
he owns.” The real cause of his death was his de
votion to the Covenant, and the solemn admoni
tions he had tendered the king.
His wife, hearing of the decree of death,
hastened to his prison. “They have given me till
Monday to be with you,” said he. The stricken
woman was overcome. “The Lord will require it;
the Lord will require it;” said she in tumultuous
grief. “Forbear, forbear!” replied Argyle, “for I
truly pity them; they know not what they do.”
He was filled with inexpressible joy at the thought
of honoring Christ with his blood. The fear of
death was gone. Heaven was so near; glory was
ready to break upon him; the Lord was soon to
be seen face to face. He went to his execution
like a prince to his coronation. This was the
Stephen of that age, and this was the persecution
that scattered the Covenanters.
We are soft and puny for lack of hardships.
The difficult places and dreaded conditions,
through which Christians pass, make life strong,
Some Notewo
There is an impassable gulf fixed between
those who hang the efficacy of Christ’s work up
on the “free” action of m an’s will, and those who
ascribe it all to God’s free grace. They are of
different religions.
— Benjamin B. Warfield
Give me the evidence that I am saved from
the punishm ent of sin by saving me from its
power.
— Thomas Chalmers
sublime, trium phant, fruitful in good work, re
sourceful in the Holy Spirit, and glorifying to
God.
1. Who was the Marquis of Argyle?
2. What service had he formerly rendered the
king?
3. Describe the return of the king from ban
ishment.
4. How did the Covenanters receive him?
5. What was the nature of the government he
established?
6. What was his attitude toward the Cove
nanters?
7. Who was his first victim?
8. Describe Argyle’s trial and execution.
(To be continued)
iy Quotations
tion of moderate Calvinists. We believe the
whole Calvinism of the Canons of the Synod of
Dort, and of the Confession of the Westminster
Assembly, and we are willing to attem pt to ex
pound and defend, when called upon, the whole
doctrine of these symbols, to show that it is all
taught or indicated in Scripture. We have been
only confirmed in our Calvinism by all the study
we have given to this subject.
— William Cunningham
The greatest argument of the Saviour’s power
is His patience.
— Stephen Chamock
The grace of God does not find men fit for
salvation, but makes them so.
— Augustine of Hippo
Lip-homage paid to all religions is the virtual
denial of each.
— R. A. Vaughn
If faith has not for its basis a testimony Of
God to which we must submit, as to an authority
exterior to our personal judgment, and inde
pendent of it, then faith is no faith.
— Adolphe Monod
The secret of holy living lies in the doctrine
of the union of the believer with Christ.
— Charles Hodge
It is an inexpressible grief to me to see the
church spending its energies in a vain attem pt
to lower its testimony to suit the ever-changing
sentim ent of the world about it.
Taking the line of least resistance makes
rivers and men crooked.
— Anonymous
Love will stammer rather than be dumb.
— Robert Leighton
For ourselves, we do not affect the designa-
It may sometimes seem difficult to take our
stand frankly by the side of Christ and His
apostles. It will always be found safe.
The more I study the Scriptures, the example
of Christ, and the history of my own heart, the
more I am convinced, that a testimony of God,
placed without us and above us, exempt from
all interm ixture of sin and error which belong
to a fallen race, and received with submission on
the sole authority of God, is the true basis Of
faith.
— Adolphe Monod
You may read your Bible, and pray over it
160
till you die; you may wait on the preached Word
every Sabbath day, and sit down at every sacra
ment till you die; yet, if you do not find Christ
in the ordinances, if He does not reveal Himself
to your soul in the preached Word, in the broken
bread and poured-out wine, if you are not
brought to cleave to Him, to believe in Him, to
cry out w ith inward adoration: “My Lord, and
my God”; “How great is His goodness! How
great is His beauty!” — then the outward ob
servance of the ordinances is all in vain to you.
You have come to the well of salvation, but have
gone away w ith the pitcher empty; and however
proud and boastful you may now be of your
bodily exercise, you will find in that day that it
profits little, and that you will stand speechless
before the King.
— Robert M urray McCheyne
Oh, if ye got but a view of the saints on
Mount Zion, clothed with righteousness, even that
of Christ, and a sight of the terror of God, ye
would know that it is a bitter thing to depart
from the living God; ye would abhor nothing like
sin! Where there is so little ha'fred of sin it is
an evidence that ye will not come to Him who is
the propitiation for sin; even Him who came to
be a propitiation for those that are sick and
diseased with sin.
— Richard Cameron
Death to me is as a bed to the weary.
— Jam es Renwick
DECREES OF GOD. “The decrees of God are,
his eternal purpose, according to the counsel of
his will, whereby, for his own glory, he hath fore
ordained whatsoever comes to pass.” (S. C. 7)
PROVIDENCE. “God’s works of providence
are, his most holy, wise, and powerful preserving
and governing all his creatures, and all their ac
tions.” (S.C. 11).
FOREORDINATION.
God’s determination,
from all eternity, of every fact in the universe,
including every event that takes place in time.
PREDESTINATION.
God’s determination,
from all eternity, of the final destiny of every in
dividual among angels and men.
ORDINARY PROVIDENCE. God’s preserv
ing and governing His creatures by the use of
means, or second causes.
ELECTION. God’s sovereign choice of par
ticular angels and men to eternal life and glory.
REPROBATION.
God’s sovereign act of
passing by those angels and men not elected to
eternal life, and His act of ordaining them to
dishonor and w rath to be inflicted for their sin.
CREATION. “The work of creation is God’s
making all things of nothing, by the word of his
power, in the space of six days, and all very good.”
(S. C. 9).
UNIVERSE. The sum total of all that God
has created; all that exists excepting God Him
self.
ANGELS. Intelligent, purely spiritual beings
created by God for His service.
MAN. A special creature of God consisting
of body and soul united in a single personality,
distinguished from all other creatures in this
world by being created in the image of God, thus
being originally a perfect, though finite, replica
of the Godhead.
EVOLUTION. The false biological theory
that all forms of life have developed, by inherent
natural forces, from earlier and simpler forms,
implying that one species may develop into
another, and that the human race has descended
from a non-human ancestry.
MIRACULOUS PROVIDENCE. God’s pre
serving and governing His creatures and their
actions without, above or against the use of means
or second causes.
SPECIAL PROVIDENCE. Those acts of
God’s providence which are especially directed
toward the care and welfare of His Church. (Cf.
Confession of Faith, V-7).
MIRACLE. A supernatural event, which is
not the product of any cause except the will of
God.
ORIGINAL RIGHTEOUSNESS. The real,
but untested and changeable righteousness of
mankind as created by God, before the Fall.
COVENANT OF WORKS. A covenant made
by God, at the dawn of human history, with
Adam as the representative of the hum an race, ac
cording to which Adam’s obedience to a specific
revelation of God’s will would bring unchange
able righteousness and eternal life to the entire
human race, whereas his disobedience would re
sult in the fall of mankind into an estate of sin,
misery, and subjection to the w rath and curse
of God, both here and hereafter.
THE FALL. The radical change which came
upon the human race as the result of Adam’s
first sin, whereby m ankind lost “original right
eousness and communion with God, and so be
came dead in sin, and wholly defiled in all the
faculties and parts of soul and body.” (C. of F.,
VI. 2).
161
SIN. “Sin is any want of conformity unto, or
transgression of, the law of God.” (S!C. 14).
ORIGINAL SIN. The guilty and depraved
condition in which we are born, as the result of
our representative, Adam, having broken the
Covenant of Works.
ELEMENTS OF ORIGINAL SIN. “The sin
fulness of th at estate whereinto man fell consists
in the guilt of Adam’s first sin, the want of
original righteousness, and the corruption of his
whole nature, which is commonly called original
sin . . .” (S. C. 18).
IMPUTATION. God’s act of reckoning right
eousness or guilt to a person’s credit or debit.
IMPUTATION OF ADAM’S FIRST SIN. God’s
act, in accordance with the terms of the Covenant
of Works, of reckoning the guilt of Adam’s sin of
eating the forbidden fruit to every human being
(except Jesus Christ) so that the whole world
became guilty before God.
GUILT. Liability to the just w rath and
punishm ent of God.
WRATH OF GOD. God’s righteous hatred of
sin and His anger against sinners, which require
th at sinners suffer just punishment.
DEATH. The “wages,” or divinely appointed
penalty, of sin.
PHYSICAL DEATH. The separation of soul
and body, and the dissolution of the body which
follows thereupon.
SPIRITUAL DEATH. Separation from the!
favor of God, and subjection to His wrath.
ETERNAL DEATH. Everlasting separation
from the favorable presence of God, and condem
nation to the endless sin and suffering of hell.
(Also called the second death).
CORRUPTION OF NATURE. The depraved,
ungodly character or “heart” which became the
natural condition of all descendants of Adam (ex
cept Jesus Christ) as the result of the guilt of
Adam’s first sin being imputed to them.
TOTAL DEPRAVITY. A term used to de
scribe hum anity’s sinful corruption of nature, in
dicating (a) that in the “natural m an” there is
nothing spiritually good; and (b) that there is no
part of our hum an nature that has not been
throughly corrupted and spoiled by sin.
ACTUAL TRANSGRESSIONS. Sins which
a person commits himself personally, in distinction
from original sin which is the condition in which
the sinner comes into this world and which is the
root of all actual transgressions.
INABILITY. The spiritual helplessness of the
sinner, which results from his corruption of
nature, and by reason of which he cannot origin
ate a love for God and for holiness in his own
heart, nor initiate the process of his own salva
tion from sin.
Psalm Fourteen
To a World of Wicked Fools and Ravening Persecu
tors, Who Will Bring Salvation?
I. A World Lying in Wickedness (verses 1-3)
“The fool hath said in his heart, There Is no
God. They have acted wickedly; they have done
abominable deeds; There is none that doeth good.
Jehovah looked down from heaven upon the chil
dren of Adam, To see if there was any man of
understanding, seeking for God. All are turned
away; together they are become corrupt; There
is none that doeth good; no, not one.”
This Psalm, with a few variations, is repeat
ed as Psalm 53. Repetition in Scripture is for
emphasis. The central truth of all Scripture, con
cerning SIN and JUDGMENT, and concerning
SALVATION by a personal divine SAVIOUR, is
put in a nutshell in each of these two Psalms for
more frequent use — lest we forget.
“As a man thinketh in his heart, so is he.” If,
in his heart, he says, There is no God, all his
thoughts, words and deeds are evil. These three
verses are quoted in Romans 3:10-12 as proving
the universal apostasy and corruption of man
kind. All are “under sin,” under its power and
guilt, and consequently under the condemnation
of God. All are fools. There is not one wise man
among them. There is not even a beginning of
wisdom, for there is neither knowledge nor pro
per fear of God.
Positively, all have acted wickedly; all have
done deeds of godlessness; all have turned away
from God; together they are depraved, corrupt.
162
Negatively, “There is none that doeth good”
(this, from verse 1, is, in Romans, rendered,
“There is none righteous;” from verse 3, “There
is none that doeth deeds of kindness”). Not one
has understanding; not one has the moral in
telligence to attend to the highest privileges and
duties of human life, or even to realize the present
state of the race; not one is seeking for God.
There is not even one solitary exception.
The world by its wisdom knows not God. It
refused His revelation of Himself. Its way of life
is in rebellion against God. Sin is in every heart.
It colors and distorts everyone’s conception of
God and view of life; blights all he is and all he
does. “There is not a righteous man on earth,
that doeth good and sinneth not” (Eccles. 7:20).
As Jehovah did before the Flood, before the
Confusion of Tongues, before the Destruction of
Sodom, so again and again He looks from heaven
to see what JUDGMENT is required. His cove
nant curse for broken law shall be executed. But
what of His covenant promise of blessing?
To understand the rest of this Psalm, we must
keep in mind w hat is not explicitly mentioned in
it, that the Covenant of Grace contains a promise
of life to all who believe and repent. It offers a
refuge of safety amid judgments that are sure to
fall. Some have believed that God is, that He is
true, and will do all that He has said. Though
children of Adam, they have been “born again”
and become “children oi God.” They have been
convinced of sin, of righteousness, and of judg
ment to come. They have laid hold of the
promise; put their trust in Jehovah, and fled to
the refuge He provides. There is a “generation
of the righteous” (verse 5). But they have been
taken “out of the world,” “rescued from the
power of darkness and translated into the King
dom of the Son of His love, in whom we have our
redemption, the forgiveness of our sins” (Col.
1:13, 14). Then they are sent “into the world”
to be God’s witnesses of His salvatfon. They are
“in the world” but not “of Ihe world;” hence,
they are not included in the condemnation of the
world. They are saved by prevenient grace.
II. A World Afraid of Judgment (verses 4-6)
“Is it not so that all workers of iniquity have
no knowledge? Always devouring my people,
they have eaten bread; On Jehovah they have not
called. Then were they in great terror. For God
is in the generation of the righteous. The coun
sels of the oppressed you would put to shame.
But God is his refuge.”
This is a Psalm of David, who himself had
found refuge in God, as he so often testifies. He
had entered into the Everlasting Covenant (2 Sam.
23:5), and looks out on the folly and wickedness
of the world with clear and well-informed vision.
He here appeals to common experience and obser
vation, that the foregoing is a true indictment of
mankind. “Is it not so that all workers of iniquity
have no knowledge, no understanding?” Anyone
can see the foolishness of others, even though he
cannot see his own. The evidence is not far to
seek. It is here in Israel. In verse 4, he testifies
to what he had seen, and suffered. They are “al
ways eating my people.” Even of the rulers of
Jerusalem it was afterw ards said, “Her princes
are roaring lions; her judges are evening wolves”
(Zeph. 3-3). “The workers of wickedness, con
tinually eating my people, have eaten bread,” that
is, “satisfied their lust.” Their m eat is to do their
own perverted will. David identifies himself
with the victims. He often called them “my
people” (e.g., 1 Chron. 28:2; 29:14), for he and
all Israel had made a covenant that he would be
their king, and they his people.
The word “eating” is often used for devour
ing, consuming, destroying, and the word “bread”,
figuratively, for various things consumed. This
usage is especially frequent in the Hebrew, where
the word for “bread" was, appropriately, derived
from a root meaning to kill, destroy. For the
bulk of man’s food is organic, requiring the de
struction of living things, vegetable and animal.
Those “whose god is their belly, whose glory
is in their shame;” those hypocrites who “de
vour widows’ houses, and for a pretence make
long prayers” (with themselves), “called not on
Jehovah” — a clause in the Scripture indictment
of many nations. They neither prayed to Je
hovah, nor praised Him, nor gave Him thanks.
Professing themselves to be wise, they became
fools. They coveted, they robbed; they hated,
they killed. Like dumb brutes, their chief oc
cupation is eating, trampling down and defiling
what they do not eat.
Nevertheless, when they had killed and eatep
Snd were filled to the full, they were suddenly
seized with terror. “Then w ere they in great
terror.” Literally, “they feared a fear.” What
were they afraid of? They were afraid of the
judgment of God, for somehow they were made
aware of the fact that God was near, even in the
generation of the righteous they had tried to
destroy. They had eaten the flesh and blood of
the saints whom God had set apart ror His own
purposes. They were afraid, as Adam was, after
he had eaten what God had forbidden him. He
tried to hide himself from God. “I heard thy
voice in the garden, and was afraid because I was
naked,” — had no covering for my sin. “The
wicked man travaileth with pain all his days . . .
Distress and anguish make his afraid, because he
hath stretched out his hand against God, and biddeth defiance to the Almighty” (Job 15:24,25).
God is always near. He makes His voice to be
heard in the generation of the righteous. “I will
dwell among the children Of Israel, and will be
their God. And they shall know that I am Je
163
hovah their God, who brought them forth out of
the land of Egypt (the land of darkness and wick
edness) that I might dwell among them.” He
makes His presence felt in power. “And when
He is come (to them) He will convict the world
of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment.”
In verse 6, David challenges the destroyers
of his people with their evil purpose and its de
feat. “The counsels (aims and plans) of the poor
man (the oppressed and afflicted) YOU would put
to shame, but Jehovah is his refuge.” Strong and
sure is that refuge. He shall never be ashamed.
“Though an host should encamp against me, my
heart shall not fear; though wa~ should rise
against me, even then will I be confident” (Psalm
27:3).
III. Israel Looking for the Saviour (verse 7)
Since all are not Israel who are of Israel after
the flesh, ‘•Israel" here stands for the true Israel,
who receive the blessing from Jehovah, even
righteousness from the God of their salvation;
that is, “the generation of the righteous,” being
heirs of the righteousness that is by faith.
“Zion” is the place which Jehovah chose,
where He dwells to be the refuge of His people.
“This is my resting-place forever; here will I
dwell; for I have desired it” (Psalm 132). Since
Jehovah is there, salvation can come only from
Zion.
“WHO will give, from Zion, salvation to
Israel?” The answer is, Jehovah Himself, when
He turns back the captivity of His people, who,
as children of Adam, have been in bondage,
slaves of Satan and of Satan’s agents. For,
“Every one who committeth sin is the slave of
sin.”
Jehovah remembers His covenant promise
forever. “I have spoken, I will also bring it to
pass, I have purposed, I will also do it . . . I
bring near my righteousness, it shall not be far
off, and my salvation shall not tarry; and I will
give salvation in Zion for Israel my glory” (Isa.
46:11-13). When Jehovah delivers His people
from captivity, He executes judgments upon their
cruel oppressors. They shall not afflict them any
more. “Say ye to them that are of a fearful
heart, Be strong, fear not: behold your God will
come with vengeance, with the recompence of
God; He will come and save you” (Isa. 35:4).
“WHO will give, from Zion, salvation to Is
rael?” The verb “will give” is singular, third per
son, masculine.
The interrogative “WHO?”,
therefore, asks for one particular PERSON. Ac
cording to the covenant promise, the aSEED” of
the woman shall crush the serpent’s head, and
give salvation; later on this one is revealed to be
the “SEED” of Abraham, then the “SEED” of
David, (not “seeds”, but ONE SEED, Gal. 3:16),
the Prince of Peace, who is the Son of God.
This unmistakable reference, of David’s
Psalm, to the personal, divine Saviour has been
obscured in our English versions (except that of
the English Prayer Book), by “free” translations
that ignore the pointed question of the Hebrew
original, and turn it into an indefinite longing for
salvation. Such defect should be corrected, and
particularly in our version for singing.
“And thou shalt call his name JESUS, for it
is he who shall save his people from their sins”
(Matt. 1:21). “He shall be great, and shall be
called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord
God shall give unto him the throne of his father
David; and he shall reign over the house of Jacob
fotever; and of his kingdom there shall be no
end” (Luke 1:32, 33).
And when He is come, “Jacob shall rejoice,
and Israel shall be glad.” The name “Jacob” here
stands for what God’s people were once; “Israel’’
for what they become when delivered from cap
tivity, sharing in the victory of their Saviour.
“WHO will give, from Zion, salvation to Israel?
When Jehovah turns back” — or better, “In Je
hovah’s turning back the captivity of His people,
Jacob shall rejoice; Israel shall be glad.” This
answer comprehends the whole history of re
demption from its beginning to its glorious con
summation.
“And a highway shall be there, and a way,
and it shall be called the Way to Holiness; the un
clean shall not pass over it; but it shall be for
them (the redeemed); the wayfaring men, though
fools, shall not go astray. No lion shall be there,
nor any ravenous beast go thereon; they shall not
be found there: but the redeemed shall walk
there: and the ransomed of Jehovah shall return,
and come with singing to Zion; and everlasting
joy shall be on their heads: they shall obtain
gladness and joy, and sorrow and sighing shall
flee away” (Isa. 35:8-10).
“Now we know that the Son of God is come,
and hath given us understanding that we may
know him that is true, and that we are in him
that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This
is the true God, and eternal life” (I John 5:20).
Note: Mr. Frazer’s studies in the Psalms will
be continued, D.V., in the next issue of this pub
lication. — Ed.
164
LESSON 137
than hostile. “And Esau ran to meet him, and
embraced him, and fell on his neck, and kissed
him: and they wept” (33:4). That this is to be
4.
The history of Isaac, Jacob and Esau. 25:19 regarded as a special answer to prayer appears
from the fact that Esau is accompanied by four
to 35:29, cont.
hundred men. The guard of 400 men indicates
We have reached the beginning of chapter 33
that Esau’s intentions on leaving home were not
in the Book of Genesis. This chapter relates,
necessarily peaceful or friendly to Jacob. It
first, the meeting of Jacob with Esau, and his re
might be argued, of course, that Esau was actually
conciliation w ith him; and after that, the settle
afraid of Jacob and is accompanied by 400 men
ment of Jacob and his family in the land of
for self-defence. But in that case, why should
Canaan.
Esau have left home at all? The narrative seems
to indicate that Esau started out with hostile, or
Jacob has spent the night wrestling with God
at least mixed, intentions, but on actually m eet
on the bank of the Jabbok River. As the sun
ing Jacob, he has become friendly toward him.
rose, he has crossed the Jabbok and joined his
This, we repeat, can be regarded as nothing but a
family, enjoying a new consciousness of the favor
special answer to prayer. In it we see, too, the
and blessing of God as he limps on his injured
grace of God toward the unworthy. Jacob did
thigh.
not deserve good treatm ent at the hands of Esau,
“And Jacob lifted up his eyes, and looked, and,
but God graciously brings it about that Esau is
behold, Esau came, and with him four hundred
friendly to him.
men” (33:1). As we have previously observed,
a man does not ordinarily go on a peaceful errand
When Jacob had left home twenty years be
accompanied by a bodyguard of four hundred
fore he was unmarried. Now he is accompanied
men. So the sight of this large company would
by four women, eleven children and a company
naturally cause Jacob to be on guard against
of servants. Naturally Esau inquires as to the
danger. Jacob takes the only precautionary m ea
identity of these women and children: what is
sure that is possible under the circumstances. He
their relation to Jacob? Jacob replies that they
divides the company of his people up into separ
are the children which God has graciously given
ate groups, taking care to place his beloved Rachel
him. Following this, the handmaidens approach,
and Joseph last so that if Esau actually attacks,
with their children, and bow respectfully to Esau;
possibly Rachel and Joseph can escape. We do
then Leah and her children, and finally Rachel
not know the exact age of Joseph at this time but
and Joseph. It is a strange fact that in verse 7
it may have been about six years.
Joseph is mentioned before his m other Rachel; the
reason for this is unknown.
In verse 3, the statem ent that Jacob “passed
over before them ” does not refer to crossing the
The formal introductions and greetings hav
river, for that had already been done. Rather, the
ing been attended to, Esau next inquires as to
the droves of livestock which he has received from
meaning is that Jacob went forward to the head
Jacob’s servants, The servants, it will be recalled,
of the procession, passing the various groups of
were to present these animals saying “It is a
his establishment as he did so. Coming at last
present sent unto my lord Esau” from Jacob. Esau
into the presence of his brother Esau, Jacob cere
inquires as to the meaning or reason for the pres
moniously bows deeply seven times. This is a
ent. To this Jacob replies: “These are to find
typically Oriental manifestation of formal cour
tesy. It does not imply that Jacob recognized
grace in the sight of my lord.” “A gift in secret
pacifieth anger: and a rew ard in the bosom, strong
Esau as his superior or his master, but only that
he wishes to display the greatest respect toward
w rath” (Prov. 21:14). Jacob realizes that if he
Esau. After the way Jacob had treated Esau
can get Esau to accept a valuable gift, it will prove
twenty years previously, an informal brotherly
the reality and permanence of Esau’s reconcilia
greeting would have been out of place. Leupold
tion to him. If Esau accepts the present, he will
calls attention to the fact that such multiple bow
be bound by the obligation of honor to drop any
ing is mentioned repeatedly in the Tell-el-Amarna
antagonism against Jacob which he may have been
tablets.
cherishing. A gentleman cannot accept a hand
some gift and then tu rn and attack the giver. To
Esau’s reaction is very different from what
do so would be to violate his code of honor — es
Jacob had feared. “When a man’s ways please
pecially in an Oriental society.
the Lord, he maketh even his enemies to be at
Oriental politeness and “face” require, more
peace with him” (Prov. 16:7). Jacob’s earnest
prayers are now answered. Esau, whom he has
over, that such a gift be accepted only after a
feared so greatly, turns out to be friendly rather
great show of reluctance and protest. Accord
in . History of the Covenant People from Abra
165
ingly, Esau protests: “I have enough, my brother;
keep th at thou hast unto thyself” (33:9). No
doubt Esau is by this time a rich man. The fact
th at he can command a guard of 400 men proves
this. So Esau protests that he has enough and
Jacob should keep the animals.
Jacob, however, earnestly begs Esau to accept
the gift. He pleads that acceptance on Esau’s
part will be the token or evidence that he, Jacob,
has found grace in Esau’s sight. It will demon
strate th at Esau is really favorable toward him
and not at enmity with him. “For therefore I have
seen thy face, as though I had seen the face of
God, and thou wast pleased with me” (33:10).
Thus Jacob confesses that Esau’s favor is a m ani
festation of the favor of God to himself. It was
God’s gracious working which changed Esau’s
hostile attitude to a friendly and favorable one.
Questions:
1. Where and how did Jacob spend the night
before his meeting with Esau?
2. What fact indicates that Esau had started
out from home with an unfriendly attitude toward
Jacob?
3. What precautionary measure
adopt just before meeting his brother?
did Jacob
4. What is meant by the statem ent that Jacob
“passed over before them”?
5. How did Jacob honor
meeting him?
his
brother
upon
6. What was Esau’s attitude when he actually
met Jacob?
Jacob further confesses that all that he has,
he owes to the blessing of God: “God hath dealt
graciously with me, and I have enough.” Here the
word "enough” is really "everything.” And it
is true that Jacob, possessing God as his portion,
does indeed possess everything. “Nearly the same
words are on the tongues of all; but there are
few who truly ascribe to God what they possess:
the greater part sacrifice to their own industry.
Scarcely one in a hundred is convinced, th at w hat
ever is good flows from the gratuitous favor of
God; and yet by nature this sense is engraved
upon our minds, but we obliterate it by our in
gratitude. It has appeared already, how laborious
was the life of Jacob: nevertheless, though he
had suffered the greatest annoyances, he cele
brates only the mercy of God” (Calvin).
gift?
Following this earnest plea on Jacob’s part,
Esau finally consents to accept the present.
14. To w hat does Jacob attribute all the good
that he possesses?
7. How can the change in Esau’s attitude be
accounted for?
8. What question did Esau address to Jacob?
9. What was Esau’s second question to Jacob?
10. Why was Esau reluctant to accept Jacob’s
11. Why was Jacob insistent that the gift be
accepted?
12. What fact in the record proves that Esau
was a rich man?
13. To w hat does Jacob attribute Esau’s favor
able attitude?
LESSON 138
did have just reason for fearing Esau, neverthe
less his anxiety was excessive. He adds that the
excuses presented by Jacob were true in them
4.
The history of Isaac, Jacob and Esau. 25:19 selves, yet they were not his real reasons for be
to 35:29, cont.
ing unwilling to accept his brother’s proposal.
Leupold, on the other hand, holds that Jacob was
Next Esau proposes that the two brothers and
completely sincere and that the reasons alleged
their companies proceed together: "Let us take
were indeed his real reasons. He states that the
our journey, and let us go, and I will go before
long, hard trip in escaping from Laban must have
thee” (33:12). Jacob declines, stating that “the
involved driving the livestock “to the limit,” and
children are tender” and that the flocks and herds
th a t therefore “caution must be used lest they be
w ith young will die if overdriven one day. Jacob
overdriven.” With regard to this question, the
proposes, instead, that Esau go on ahead, while
present w riter believes that Leupold is correct
Jacob w ith his household follows at a slower
and Calvin mistaken. There seems to be no suf
pace, as the children and the animals are able to
ficient ground for questioning the sincerity of
bear.
Jacob at this point.
We m ust face the question of the sincerity of
Jacob’s proposal is that he and his establish
this proposal on the part of Jacob. Some, includ
ment will proceed slowly “until I come unto my
ing Calvin, have held that Jacob is insincere and
lord unto Seir.” The fact that the book of
th at the real reason he does not wish to proceed
Genesis does not record such a journey of Jacob
together w ith Esau is that he still does not trust
to Mount Seir is held by some to indicate that he
him fully. Calvin comments that although Jacob
166
never made the journey. This, however, is ob
viously unsound reasoning. It is perfectly possible
that Jacob did go to Mount Seir, even though the
Scripture does not record the trip; it is also pos
sible that a t the time of speaking with Esau,
Jacob sincerely intended to join his brother at
Seir, but later was providentially prevented from
doing so. The fact that the New Testament does
not state that Paul visited Spain, is no proof that
the Apostle never did so. The argument from
silence is a very precarious one. We believe
Jacob should be credited with being honest and
sincere, in the absence of proof to the contrary.
Finally, Esau proposes to leave with Jacob
part of his 400 men, to serve as a guard for pro
tection, no doubt. That this was a kind and wellintentioned offer w e need not doubt. Neverthe
less, Jacob declines his brother’s offer. Jacob
simply says “What needeth it?” w ithout giving
any explanations or reasons. We can only guess
what his reasons may have been. Perhaps he
wished to preserve his own independence ,and to
avoid giving anyone the impression that he was
in any way dependent on Esau for his wealth or
well-being. With Jacob’s refusal of Esau’s offer,
the m atter is dropped.
'
Some have raised the question of the spiritual
state of Esau at this time. W hether Esau when
’.ie finally came to die was a saved man we can
not say; in the nature of the .case only God can
know the answer to such a q u estio n as that. But
does Esau at the time we are studying give evi
dence of being a saved man? M artin Luther held
the affirmative. But as Leupold points out, the
evidence points the other way. “Had his faith ac
cepted what the Lord had ordained, he would have
held to Jacob as the possessor of the divine
promise. His failure to do this seems to indicate
that the true spiritual values were not grasped
nor understood by him. This prevents his being
classed as a man of faith, though in the end the
spiritual truth communicated by Isaac may have'
turned his heart to the Lord” (Leupold, Exposi
tion of Genesis, 11.893).
“So Esau returned that day on his way to
Seir” (33:16). Seir is another name for the land
of Edom, located south of the Dead Sea. Esau
here drops out of the narrative and does not re
appear until 35:29 where he joins Jacob in bury
ing the body of their father Isaac.
By gradual stages Jacob and his household
proceed to Succoth. This was located in Trans
jordan not fa r from Peniel. Because of a bend
in the river, a second crossing of the Jabbok
would be necessary. The word “Succoth” in
Hebrew means “booths,” and the narrative states
that the place was named Succoth because Jacob
made booths there, that is, shelters for his live
stock. It is also stated that Jacob built a house
for himself at Succoth. This implies residence
there for a considerable period of. time,: perhaps
softie years.
Next, Jacob arrives at Shalem, “ a city of
Shechem.” This was on the west side of the Jo r
dan, therefore Jacob and his family have crossed
the Jordan River, even though that fact is not
mentioned in the text. (It is possible th at “Sha
lem” is not to be taken as a proper noun, but as
meaning “safely” or “safe and sound.” See the
American Revised Version (1901) which in the
text reads “in peace” but in the m argin “Shalem.”
Although he had built a house at Succoth, on
arrival at Shechem Jacob is again a tent-dweller,
thus holding to the patriarchal pattern, the sig
nificance of which is explained in.H ebrew s 11:9,
10. However, he purchases “a parcel of a field”'
from the local inhabitants as a place to pitch his
tent, for “a hundred pieces of money”. The word
translated “pieces of money” here is “kesiitas,” a
word which occurs only here in the Old Testa
ment. The value of this unit is not known. It is
presumable, however, that w hat Jacob purchased
for 100 kesitas was not a large estate, but only a
small field, and that it was done in order to main
tain peace with the local inhabitants, and obviate
complaints.
On the piece of land which he had purchased,
Jacob erects an altar, and names it El-EloheIsrael, which means “God, the God of Israel.” We
have previously read of Abraham and Isaac
building altars for the worship of God. Calvin
states that they were careful to adhere strictly to
the divinely prescribed pattern of worship which
had been handed down to them from Noah and
Shem. “And not only does he (Jacob) worship
God in the secret feeling of his mind; but" he ex
ercises himself in ceremonies which are useful
and commanded by God. For he knew that men
want helps, as long as they are in the flesh, and
that sacrifices were not instituted w ithout reason.
He had also another purpose; namely, th at his.
whole family should worship God with the same
sense of piety. For it behoves a pious father of a
family diligently to take care that he has no pro
fane house, but rather that God should reign
there as in a sanctuary. Besides, since the in
habitants of that region had fallen into many
superstitions, and had corrupted the true worship
of God, Jacob wished to make a distinction be
tween himself and them. The Shechemites and
other neighboring nations had certainly altars of
their own. Therefore Jacob, by establishing a dif
ferent method of worship for his household, thus
declares that he has a God peculiar to him self,.and has not degenerated from the holy fathers,
from whom the perfect and genuine religion had
proceeded. This course could not but subject him
to reproach, because the Shechemites and other*
inhabitants would feel that they were deSpised: but the holy man deemed anything preferable to '
mixing himself with idolaters” (Calvin).
167
Jacob in naming the altar El-Elohe-Israel —
“God, the God of Israel” — of course does not
mean that a structure of stones and earth is a
visible representation of God. Rather, as Calvin
points out, this altar is intended as a memorial
and pledge of the revelations and promises of God
which Jacob has received in times past. When he
sees this altar, he will remember God. “Jacob
wished to testify that he worshipped no other
God than him who had been manifested by cer
tain oracles, in order that he might distinguish
Him from all idols . . . . Moreover Jacob had re
spect to his posterity; for since the Lord had ap
peared to him, on the express condition, that he
would make with him the covenant of salvation,
Jacob leaves this monument, from which, after his
death, his descendants might ascertain that his re
ligion had not flowed from a dark or obscure
well, or from a turbid pool, but from a clear and
pure fountain; as if he had engraved the oracles
and visions, by which he had been taught, upon
the altar” (Calvin).
This single altar, built by Jacob at or near
Shechem, was perhaps the only center, in all the
world of that day, of the pure worship of the true
God. All nations had their shrines and temples,
but this altar, doubtless a very simple erection of
stones and earth, stood apart and alone as dedi
cated to the living and true God. However, as
Isaac was still living at this time, we must sup
pose that an altar to the true God was in existence
and in use at or near his habitation also.
4. What view should we take as to Jacob’s
sincerity in declining to accompany Esau?
5. What can be said about the question Of
whether Jacob later visited Esau at Mount Seir?
6. What may have been Jacob’s reason for de
clining Esau’s offer to provide a guard?
7. What can be said about the spiritual state
of Esau a t this time?
8. Where was Seir located? What other name
was used for the region?
9. Where was Succoth located?
called Succoth?
Why was it
10. What question exists concerning the mean
ing of the word Shalem in 33:18?
11. What, according to the Epistle to the He
brews, was the significance of the patriarchs’
dwelling in tents instead of houses?
12. What may have been Jacob’s reason for
purchasing a field near Shechem?
13. How much did Jacob pay for the field?
Why is it impossible to know how much this was
in term s of present-day money?
14. What is the meaning of the phrase ElElohe-Israel?
15. What probably were Jacob’s reasons for
building an altar?
Questions:
1. What proposal
journey from Peniel?
3. What was Calvin’s opinion as to the sin
cerity of Jacob in this m atter?
did Esau make
as to the
16. What would be the natural attitude of the
local inhabitants to Jacob’s altar?
2. On what grounds did Jacob decline Esau’s
proposal?
17. In w hat way was Jacob’s altar unique,
or nearly unique, in the world of that day?
LESSON 139
in. History of the Covenant People from Abra
4.
to 35:29, cont.
Chapter 34, to which we have now come, re
cords the scandalous events which followed upon
the act of Dinah, daughter of Jacob and Leah,
in venturing away from home “to see the daugh
ters of the land.” The birth of Dinah is recorded
in 30:21. It is probable that at the time of the
events recorded in chapter 34 she was 14 or 15
years old.
Many w riters have undertaken to place the
blame upon Dinah for occasioning the scandals
of this chapter. However, the record does not
necessarily imply that she was at fault. As to
w hat her motive may have been, and to what
extent she was at fault, we are not informed and
can only guess.
The inhabitants of Shechem are called Hivites,
but in 48:22 they are referred to as Amorites.
This is to be explained by the fact that the term
“Amorites,” like the term “Canaanites,” was some
times used as a blanket designation of the nonIsraelite inhabitants of Canaan.
We shall not dwell on the sordid details of
this story, but only note and comment on the main
facts. Dinah is seduced and violated by Shechem,
a Hivite prince. Following this, Shechem seeks
to m arry her. From his point of view, under the
circumstances, this would be the honorable thing
to do.
Negotiations follow between the father of
Shechem and the family of Dinah. The sons of
Jacob agree to the proposed marriage, but only on
one condition, namely, that all the males of the
Shechemites be circumcised. This proposal, as
it turns out later, is not made in good faith by
168
the sons of Jacob, but with an intention of treach
ery.
the facts objectively, leaving it to the reader to
form an ethical judgment upon them.
The Shechemites agree to the proposal of the
sons of Jacob, reasoning that by complying they
will ultimately be able to absorb the family of
Jacob and to possess all their property. They
are one and all circumcised. Thereupon Simeon
and Levi, two of Jacob’s sons, take advantage of
the incapacitated condition of the Shechemites
and attack them suddenly, massacring all the
males of the city. Taking all the wealth of the
city as spoil, and the women and children as
captives, they return home. Jacob their father,
be it said to his credit, does not approve of this
lawless massacre. He accuses his sons: “Ye have
troubled me to make me to stink among the in
habitants of the land” (34:30). They in turn
reply, “Should he deal with our sister as with a
harlot?’’
This scandalous history may serve to bring out
two things that are sometimes forgotten in studies
of the Old Testament.
The question naturally arises, how did it hap
pen that Jacob allowed his sons to carry on the
negotiations with the Shechemites? Why did not
Jacob handle the m atter himself? Possibly Jacob
placed too much confidence in his sons; probably,
too, they concealed from their father what their
real intentions were.
In the second place, those who are horrified
at the presence of such stories in the Bible should
realize that they are in the Bible just because the
Bible is a book of truth. It portrays people as
they really were, without idealizing them and
without eliminating their bad deeds. A scoffer
once said to the present w riter that he would
not leave a Bible where children or young people
could see it, as the immoral stories in the Bible
are (he claimed) worse than anything in the w rit
ings of the Italian author Boccaccio. This skeptic
completely mistook the real point and purport of
these so-called “immoral stories” in the Bible.
They are not in the Bible as an example for us,
or as a pattern for us to copy, but rather to show
the real nature of sin and of sinners — to show
what man is really like w ithout the grace of God,
and to show the judgm ent of God upon such
wickedness.
We shall give Calvin’s comments on the in
excusable conduct of Jacob’s sons recorded in this
chapter:
“Moses shows that, not content with simple
revenge, they fly together to the spoil. . . . Be it,
that they were blinded with anger in shedding
blood; yet by what right do they sack the city?
This certainly cannot be ascribed to anger. But
these are the ordinary fruits of human intem per
ance, that he who gives himself the rein in per
petrating one wickedness, soon breaks out into
another. Thus the sons of Jacob, from being m ur
derers, also become robbers, and the guilt of avar
ice is added to that of cruelty. The more anxious
then should be our endeavors to bridle our desires;
lest they should mutually fan each other, so that
at length, by their combined action, a dreadful
conflagration should arise; but especially, we must
beware of using force of arms, which brings with
it many perverse and brutal assaults. Moses says
that the sons of Jacob did this, because the She
chemites had defiled their sister; but the whole
city was not guilty. Moses, however, only states
in w hat way the authors of the slaughter are af
fected: for although they wish to appear just
avengers of the injury, yet they pay no respect
to what was lawful for them to do, and make no
attempt to control their depraved affections, and
consequently set no bounds to their wickedness.”
Whatever may have been the guilt of the
Shechemites, in this chapter the sons of Jacob —
the covenant people of God — appear upon an
even lower ethical level than the men of Shechem.
Nothing, absolutely nothing, can be said to excuse
the conduct of Simeon and Levi and that of all
the sons of Jacob in this chapter. Moses records
In the first place, the very existence of such
a narrative is evidence on the face of it that it
is historical, not legendary as some critics have
claimed. No people would form legends, and
preserve them in their sacred writings, which
place their own ancestors in such an extremely
bad light. Here are the sons of Jacob, the honored
ancestors of the tribes of Israel, represented as
lawless m urderers and robbers. What nation
would make up such a story about their founders
and national heroes? The only explanation of
the existence of such a story in the Hebrew w rit
ings is that it is historically true.
Just because the Bible is a book of truth, it
must tell the real truth about sin and sinners. If
the Bible were merely the word of man, it would
tone down sin and wickedness or cover it up. But
because it is the Word of God, it tells the plain,
terrible truth about sin and sinners. So far from
such chapters as Genesis 34 being an argument
against the divine character of the Bible, they
are in fact a strong argum ent in favor of the
truth that the Bible is the inspired and infallible
Word of God.
Questions:
1. Why did Dinah venture away from home?
2. By what two tribal names are the inhabi
tants of Shechem called in Genesis?
3. Which of the sons of Jacob took the lead
in attacking the people of Shechem?
4. What should be our judgm ent as to the con
duct of Jacob’s sons?
5. What can be said about the bearing of this
chapter on the question of w hether the history of
the patriarchs is legendary or historical?
169
6. W hat mistake is made by people who use
stories like that of Genesis 34 as an argument
against the Bible?
7. What does the presence of such incidents as
those of Gen. 34 in the Bible really show as to the
origin and character of the Bible?
LESSON 140
Shechem probably brought idolatry with them.
With what we know of the moral standards of
Jacob’s family, we have little reason to suppose
4.
The history of Isaac, Jacob and Esau. 25:19 that their religious standards — except in the case
to 35:29, cont.
of Jacob himself — w ere very high. Therefore we
must conclude that Jacob’s call for a cleaning out of
Chapter 35 opens with the command of God
idols and idolatry was very necessary at the time.
to Jacob to go to Bethel: “Arise, go up to Bethel,
(The term “strange gods” is literally “gods of the
and dwell there: and make thee there an altar
foreigner”). We note that the clearing out of
unto God, that appeared unto thee when thou
idolatry was complete — “they gave unto Jacob
fleddest from the face of Esau thy brother”
ALL the strange gods which were in their hand.
(35:1). The time has come for Jacob to fulfil his
. . ” (35:4).
vow of 23:22, “And this stone, which I have set
Idolatry having been cleaned out, the house
for a pillar, shall be God’s house . . . ”. The com
hold moves toward Bethel. “And the terror of
mand of God for Jacob to build an altar at Bethel
God was upon the cities that were round about
makes clear to us the meaning Jacob had in mind
them, and they did not pursue after the sons of
in m aking the vow some twenty years before; by
Jacob” (35:5). This is God’s favorable response
“God’s house” he clearly meant a religious shrine
to Jacob’s act of purifying his clan of idolatry.
or sanctuary, of which, of course, the principal
God’s restraining hand prevents the Canaanites
feature would be an altar.
from harming the family of Jacob. The text im
The command of God to Jacob to “dwell” at
plies a miracle or supernatural act of God in re
Bethel does not imply a requirement of permanent
straining the Canaanites, and this in turn implies
residence there. The Hebrew verb may be trans
that there had been some kind of plan or inten
lated “tarry,” implying no more than living there
tion to interfere with or harm the family of Jacob.
long enough to carry out God’s instructions con
By His almighty power God terrified the local
cerning the altar.
cities and tribes so that they did not dare to carry
out their plan of harming Jacob’s can. Here
Jacob at once realizes that for real obedience
again we see exemplified the truth that “when a
to the command of God a rededication of himself
man’s ways please the Lord, he m aketh even his
and all his household to God is needed. Accord
enemies to be at peace w ith him.” Note, too,
ingly he says to his household, “and to all that
that this is grace on God’s part, for surely Jacob
were with him, P ut away the strange gods that
and his family did not really deserve such wonder
are among you, and be clean, and change your
ful divine protection, especially after the scandal
garments. And let us arise, and go up to Bethel;
ous sins recorded in chapter 34.
and I will make there an altar unto God, who
answered me in the day of my distress, and was
“So Jacob came to Luz which is in the land
with me in the way which I went” (35:2,3). The
of Canaan, that is, Bethel, he and all the people
result of this was that the members of the estab
that were with him” (35:6). As we have already
lishment turned their idols and idolatrous papaseen at 28:19, the original (Canaanite) name of
phernalia over to Jacob, who buried them under
this city was Luz, but Jacob named it Bethel,
the terebinth tree at Shechem. (The word “oak”
which means “house of God.” Jacob, of course,
in the King James version is an incorrect transla
would always remember his wonderful experience
tion). No doubt the idols now buried included
at Bethel when God had appeared to him and
the images which Rachel had stolen from her
confirmed to him the great covenant promises
father Laban at the time of departure from Meso
originally given to Abraham (28:13-15). Prob
potamia.
ably Jacob, even after more than twenty years,
was able to locate the exact spot where he had
If we are surprised that there should be idols
slept and received the vision.
in Jacob’s company, we should realize that apart
At Bethel the altar is built, and the spot is
from the special grace of God the tendency of re
named El-bethel (“God of Bethel”), in commemorligion is always to deteriorate. From Joshua 24:2
aton of the revelation of God given to Jacob when
we know th at the ancestors of Abraham served
he was fleeing from his brother Esau. The town
false gods in Ur of the Chaldees. Besides Rachel
or city was named Bethel, but the spot where the
having her father’s images, it is highly probable
altar was built was named El-bethel. So Jacob’s
that some of the servants may have been idolaters,
vow of twenty years before is carried out in ac
at least secretly. Also the women added to the
tion.
clan at the time of the massacre of the men of
170
A t this point we are informed that Deborah,
Rebekah’s nurse, died, and was buried near Bethel
under an oak, which came to be called Allonbachuth (“Oak of Weeping”). This is the first
time that we are told that Rebekah’s nurse was
named Deborah. She has appeared previously at
24:59, where, however, her name is not given.
But how does it happen that Deborah, Rebekah’s
nurse, is a member of the household of Jacob?
Certainly she did not accompany him when he
fled from Esau, for we are explicitly told that he
went alone (32:10). Nor is there any record of
her joining Jacob’s household at any time after
his departure from Laban. In view of the silence
of the record w e can only guess at the facts.
Probably Rebekah died during Jacob’s long ab
sence from home. This may explain the fact that
he finally left Laban without being sent for by
his mother as she had promised (27:45). The
record is also silent as to the time and circum
stances of the death of Rebekah, though we are
told in 49:31 that she was buried in the cave of
Machpelah near Hebron. It would seem probable
that following the death of Rebekah, when De
borah learned that Jacob had returned to Canaan,
she left the establishment of Isaac and joined
that of Jacob. We should note that the sacred re
cord regards the death and burial of this humble
woman servant as im portant enough to w arrant a
place in the narrative. The weeping which is men
tioned indicates that Deborah was highly respect
ed and greatly loved.
Questions:
1. What command of God to Jacob is found at
the beginning of chapter 35?
2. What vow of Jacob must now be fulfilled?
3. What does this new command of God show
us concerning the original meaning of Jacob’s
vow?
4. What is meant by the command of God to
Jacob to “dwell” at Bethel?
5. How did Jacob prepare his household for
worshipping God at Bethel?
6. How can we explain the fact that members
of Jacob’s household were idolatrous?
7. What was God’s response to Jacob’s act of
cleansing his household of idolatry?
8. What had the local Canaanite cities evi
dently intended to do to the clan of Jacob?
9. What was the original name of the city of
Bethel?
10. What is the meaning of the name Bethel?
11. What is the meaning of the phrase Elbethel?
12. How may the presence of Rebekah’s nurse
Deborah in Jacob’s household perhaps be explain
ed?
LESSON 141
all divine revelation as subjective, or in some
sense a product of the consciousness of the human
subject. Thus present-day w riters tell us that the
4.
The history of Isaac, Jacob and Esau. 25:19 Old Testament prophets “felt” this, and “dis
cerned” that, they “realized” th at something was
to 35:29, cont.
true and they "recognized the value” of some
At this point a new theophany (appearance
thing else — all of which they sold to the public
of God) is granted to Jacob. This is stated to have
under the label “Thus saith the Lord.” Very
been “when he came out of Padan-Aram ” because
different is the Bible’s own view of divine reve
Jacob is still regarded as enroute home. It is not
lation. God REALLY appeared to men and
until 35:27 that he actually returns to his father’s
REALLY spoke to men — not only through men,
residence at Mamre (cf. 28:21, “So that I come
but to men. The source of revelation was out
again to my father’s house in peace. . . ”). The
side of and distinct from the human consciousness.
change of his name from Jacob to Israel, which
It is folly to try to psychologize the supernatural
had already been revealed at Peniel (32:28) is now
works of God. What leads men to attem pt it is,
repeated and confirmed (35:10).
we believe, a deep antipathy to the supernatural
ism of the Bible.
This is followed by a repetition of some of
the great covenant promises originally given to
Jacob is deeply impressed by his experience.
Abraham, especially as concerns numerous pos
He repeats his actions of more than tw enty years
terity and inheritance of the land. “And God
before, setting up a stone for a pillar and pouring
went up from him in the place where he talked
oil on it to consecrate it to God. This transaction
w ith him” (35:13). The language her used indi
is not to be identified or confused with that re
cates that this theophany or manifestation of God’s
corded in chapter 28. It is a repetition and yet a
presence was not merely in Jacob’s mind but was
distinct act in which a new pillar is consecrated
objectively real and visible. As Leupold states
to God.
it, “His visible ascent occurred in a plainly vis
ible fashion.” It is popular in our day to regard
Needless to say, there is not the slightest
HI, History of the Covenant People from Abra
ham to Joseph. 11:27 to 50:26.
I ll
hint of anything idolatrous or superstitious in
Jacob’s setting up such a pillar and consecrating
it to God, as some critics have claimed. These
stone pillars were not images nor were they wor
shipped. Nor was the libation of oil an offering
to the dead as some have asserted.
“And Jacob called the name of the place
where God spake with him, Bethel” (35:15).
Though this is a repetition of an act of twenty
years before, there is an important difference, for
the first time only Jacob alone, a single person,
was there; now it is a large family or clan, with
many people, who are involved.
Next we are told of the birth of Benjamin and
the death of Rachel (35:16-20). Rachel dies in
giving birth to her second son, and “as her soul
was departing” she calls his name Ben-oni (“son
of my sorrow”, but Jacob later called him Ben
jam in (“son of the right hand”). “And Rachel
died, and was buried in the way to Ephrath,
which is Bethlehem.” Rachel was, therefore, not
buried in the cave of Machpelah where the mortal
bodies of Abraham, Sarah, Isaac and Rebekah,
Jacob and Leah were laid to rest to await the
resurrection day (49:30-32; 50:13).
“And Jacob set a pillar upon her grave: that
is the pillar of Rachel’s grave unto this day”
(35:20). “Unto this day” means, of course, unto
the time of Moses’ writing the book of Genesis.
Rachel’s tomb was long known. It is mentioned
in the time of King Saul, 1 Sam. 10:2. Davis’ Dic
tionary of the Bible states that in the fourth
century of the Christian era it was claimed that
the location was known. Davis also gives a draw
ing of the present-day structure on the reputed
site of the tomb; thus structure, however, is of
Mohammedan origin and not ancient. It is two
miles north of Bethlehem.
“And Israel journeyed, and spread his tent
beyond the tower of Edar” (35:21). Edar is usu
ally spelled Eder in the Old Testament. The
exact location of this tower is unknown. The
phrase “tower of Edar” means literally “tower of
the flock” and it is possible that a lookout tower
of shepherds on the southwest hill of Jerusalem
may be meant (cf. Micah 4:8).
If this is the correct location of the tower of
Edar, it was only a few miles from the place
w here Rachel died and was buried.
In 35:22 we read of an additional scandal in
volving one of Jacob’s sons — Reuben, his first
born, who committed adultery with Bilhah, who
was originally Rachel’s maidservant and who be
came Jacob’s concubine. It is recorded “and Israel
heard it.” This must have been an additional
grief to Jacob.
Next the twelve sons of Jacob are listed
(35:22-26) — first the sons of Leah, then those
of Rachel; then those of Bilhah, and last those of
Zilpah. Although the text gives the general
statem ent that these twelve sons were born to
Jacob in Padan-aram, the fact is that the young
est, Benjamin, was bom in the land of Canaan.
“And Jacob came unto his father unto Mamre,
unto the city of Arba, which is Hebron, where
Abraham and Isaac sojourned” (35:27). We may
wonder that Jacob had not hastened to see his
aged father as soon as possible after his return
to the land of Canaan. We must remember that
the scene of this history is not modern America
but the ancient Near East; people took life more
slowly and deliberately in those days. Leupold
calculates that Isaac was 168 years old at the
time of Jacob’s return to Mamre. Since Isaac
died at the age 180, Jacob was still able to be
with his father twelve years before the latter’s
death (cf. Leupold, Exposition of Genesis, II. 929).
“Isaac gave up the ghost, and died, and was
gathered unto his people, being old and full of
days: and his sons Esau and Jacob buried him”
(35:29). The expression “was gathered unto his
people” is not a reference to his burial, which is
mentioned separately immediately afterwards.
Rather, it is an intimation of faith in a personal
immortality beyond the death of the body. The
same expression is used of Abraham, who was
buried hundreds of miles from the graves of his
ancestors. This expression, “was gathered unto
his people”, while it is not yet the clear daylight
of the New Testament revelation concerning the
future life, nevertheless expresses a real faith in
a personal immortality beyond the grave.
“And his sons Esau and Jacob buried him.”
Possibly this was the first meeting of Esau and
Jacob aiter their separation by the banks of the
Jabbok; possibly not. The record does not say.
We may consider it probable, on general grounds,
that the two men may have met several times
during the interval, but we cannot be sure.
Questions:
1. What is meant by the term “theophany”?
2. Why is this theophany, which occurred in
Canaan, declared to have been “when he came out
of Padan-Aram”?
3. What promises were confirmed to Jacob at
this time?
4. What statem ent in the record shows that
God was really and visibly present to Jacob?
5. What action of twenty years before was
repeated by Jacob on this occasion?
6. What is the meaning of the name Ben-oni?
Of the name Benjamin?
7. Where was Rachel buried?
8. How long was the location of Rachel’s tomb
certainly known?
172
9. What may have been the location of the
tower of Eldar?
11. How many years did Jacob probably live
with his father Isaac before the latter’s death?
10. Which of Jacob’s sons was involved in a
new scandal at this point?
12. What is meant by the expression “was
gathered unto his people”?
LESSON 142
History of the Covenant People from Abra
tit
5. Isaac’s descendants through Esau. 36:1-43
“Now these are the generations of Esau, who
is Edom” (36:1). As we have already noted, this
formula — “these are the generations of . . . ” — is
the standard way, in the Book of Genesis, of in
troducing a new subject or a new division of a
subject. The new subject taken up on chapter 36
is the descendants of Esau. The history of Isaac
having been completed by the recording of his
death, the book follows its usual pattern in first
disposing of the less im portant history of the de
scendants of Esau, before proceeding to the more
im portant history of the descendants of Jacob.
The data given in this chapter, while not of pri
mary importance for the history of God’s plan of
redemption, are nevertheless of importance for the
history and descent of the Edomites, one of Israel’s
near neighbors and a kindred nation.
The chapter may be divided into several
sections. The first section includes 1-8 and deals
with Esau’s wives and children, and their settle
ment in the land of Edom or Seir.
A difficulty appears in the fact that the names
of Esau’s wives as given in chapter 36 differ from
those given in 26:34 and 28:9. 26:34 speaks of two
wives, Judith and Bashemath, both of them being
Hittites; 28:9 adds Mahalath, who is an Ishmaelite. In 36:1-3 the Ishmaelite wife is called
Bashemath, and the two H ittite wives are called
Adah and Aholibamah. Moreover 36:2 speaks of
the father of one of these women as a Hivite, not
a Hittite. While we are not able fully to resolve
this complex of problems, we should not regard
the facts as proving that the Bible contradicts
itself. The New Bible Commentary (Davidson,
Stibbs & Kevan) states concerning these problems:
“The discrepancies are not real, but arise out of
the fluid use of names in oriental custom.” Leu
pold says: “Such changes of names need surprise
no one, for Orientals commonly go under several
names, especially the women, who frequently re
ceive a new name at m arriage” (Exposition of
Genesis, 11.934). With regard to the problem of
the father of one of Esau’s wives being called
both a H ittite and a Hivite, this is probably to be
explained by the well known fact that “Hittites,”
like “Canaanites” and “Amorites,” was sometimes
used as an inclusive general term for the nonIsraelite inhabitants of the land of Canaan, and
at other times in the stricter sense designating
the Hittites specifically in distinction from other
tribes. Thus the man in question could be a Hivite
in the strict sense, and still could be called a H it
tite in the more general sense.
“And Esau took his wives, and his sons, and
his daughters, and all the persons of his house,
and his cattle, and all his beasts, and all his sub
stance, which he had got in the land of Canaan;
and went into the country from the face of his
brother Jacob. For their riches were more than
that they might dwell together; and the land
wherein they were strangers could not bear them
because of their cattle. Thus dwelt Esau in mount
Seir: Esau is Edom” (36:6-8). The question which
confronts us here is whether this separation of
Esau from the land of Canaan took place before
Jacob’s return from Padan-aram
or after
that return. Prior to Jacob’s return, the flocks
and herds of Isaac consisted partly of those which
would eventually belong to Jacob and partly of
those which would eventually belong to Esau. As
the possessor of the birthright Jacob would be
heir to the larger portion. It is possible that Esau,
with his household and possessions remained at
home with his father Isaac until Jacob’s return
from Mesopotamia added such a large amount of
livestock that a prompt separation became inevit
able. On this view, Esau’s removal to Edom took
place after Jacob’s arrival home. On the other
hand, the narrative (32:3; 33:14,16) seems to imply
that Esau was already living in Mount Seir, or
Edom, prior to Jacob’s return. This, however,
need not be regarded as an insoluble problem.
Prior to Jacob’s homecoming, Esau may have been
living south of the Dead Sea (Edom) from time
to time, and he may have pastured part of his
flocks and herds there while the rest were kept in
southern Canaan w here Isaac lived. The state
ment of 36:8, “Thus Esau dwelt in Mount Seir”
may mean no more than that from that point of
time he made Edom his sole and permanent
dwelling place.
As to how the clan of Esau occupied the
country of Edom, we cannot say definitely. It
may be that the land was taken from the former
inhabitants by m ilitary conquest; on the other
hand it is possible that the occupation was more
peaceful and merely involved moving in among
the previous inhabitants, followed by interm ar
riage with them. Statem ents in chapter 36 suggest
that there was considerable interm arriage be
tween the descendants of Esau and the previous
inhabitants of the land of Edom.
Verses 9-14 concern the sons of Esau and his
grandsons. Among these we note the name of
Amalek, a son of Esau and a concubine named
Timna. Amalek is the ancestor of the Amale-
173
kites, a nomadic people of importance in the later
history of the Israelites.
Verses 15-19 list the chiefs of the Edomites.
These are called “dukes” in the King James Ver
sion. This is obviously an improper translation,
for the word “duke” has associations w ith the
feudal system of medieval Europe which are quite
foreign to these ancient nomadic Semitic tribes.
The Hebrew word may mean “ruler of a thou
sand”, though of course “thousand” may be taken
as a round num ber and need not be understood
literally. On these verses Leupold comments that
they show “how at a comparatively early date
Esau’s descendants advance to positions of prom
inence and honor” (Exposition of Genesis, II.
940-1).
Verses 20-30 present the Horite chiefs. These
Horites formed the other main component of the
Edomite stock. The historical Edomites were a
combination of Horites and descendants of Esau.
Archaeological evidence seems to indicate that
the Biblical Horites were identical with an ancient
people known as the Hurrians. The discoveries
of Ugarit (Ras Shamra) in Syria and Nuzi (east
of the Tigris River) and elsewhere have revealed
the existence of the Hurrians and many facts
about them. They were important in the fifteenth
century B. C. — about the time of Moses. The
word “Horites” means “cave-dwellers.” It is possibse th at the Horites were identical with, or
closely related to, the Hivites.
We note that in 36:28 a man named Uz is
mentioned. This calls to mind the opening verse
of the Book of Job, where we are told that Job
lived in the land of Uz. Whether there was a real
connection between the two, and if so just where
“the land of Uz” was located, we ao not know.
The chiefs of the Horites enumerated in
verses 20-30 may have ruled successively, but it
seems more probable that part of them, at least,
were simultaneous. The passage affords no in
formation on this point.
Verses 31-39 present “the kings that reigned
in the land of Edom, before there reigned any
king over the children of Israel” (36:31). Some!
critics have held that Moses could not have w rit
ten verse 31 because (they say) it must have been
w ritten after there was a king in Israel, i.e., in
the time of Saul or later. We do not agree with
this claim of the critics. Moses definitely looked
forw ard to the time when Israel would have a
king (Deut. 17:14-20), so it would be quite natur
al for him to speak of the Edomites having kings
before there was any king in Israel, Of course
the same critics also reject the genuineness of
Deuteronomy, holding that it is a forgery pro
duced in the time of Josiah about 800 years after
the time of Moses. We believe there are very
good reasons for siding with Moses against the
modern critics.
Eight Edomite kings are listed, and of three
of them it is said that they had cities, which are
named. The others are not stated to have had
cities. It is evident that the kingship in Edom
was not hereditary, for none of these Edomite
kings is said to be the son of any other of them.
In verses 40-43 we have another list of
Edomite chiefs. Some of these have already been
mentioned in verses 15-19. The im portant thing
to note in verses 40-43 is the phrase “after their
places” in verse 40. This is a listing by geograph
ical location. The word “duke” is of course im
proper and misleading here as in 15-19. The
word “chief” is a preferable translation. Some
of the names in verses 40-43 may be geographical
rather than personal names. Thus Leupold trans
lates: " . . . the chief of Timna, the chief of Alvah”, etc. If these are names of places, some of
them can be identified today, others not.
Questions:
1. What is the meaning of the formula “these
are the generations of . . ”?
2. What difficulty exists concerning the names
of Esau’s wives?
3. What may be the solution of this problem?
4. How can we explain the fact that the fath
er of one of Esau’s wives is called both a Hivite
and a Hittite?
5. W hither did Esau move from Canaan?
6. What can be said on the question of when
Esau made this move?
7. What may have been the method of Esau’s
clan occupying Edom?
8. What son of Esau gave his name to a
nomadic people which w ere important in later
Old Testament history?
9. What may be the literal meaning of the
Hebrew word translated “dukes” in the King
Jam es Version?
10. Why are the Horite chiefs listed in this
chapter?
11. Wh&t does modern archaeological evidence
indicate concerning the Horites?
12. What is the literal meaning of the name
“Horites”?
13. Why do some critics claim
could not have w ritten 36:31?
14. How can
answered?
this
claim
that Moses
of the critics be
15. How can it be shown that kingship among
tht Edomites was not hereditary?
174
LESSON 143
6. The early life of Joseph. 37:1-36
The descendants of Isaac through Esau having
been discussed, the narrative now turns to the
main subject, the descendants of Isaac through
Jacob. The history of Joseph is told in great
detail and occupies the greater part of thirteen
chapters. In other words the history of this one
man’s life is given more space in the book of
Genesis than the entire history of the world prior
to the time of Abraham (11 chapters). As the
Book of Genesis approaches closer to the time of
Moses, its human author, it naturally deals with
its subject m atter in greater detail.
Verse 1 calls us back from Edom to the land
of Canaan. In contrast w ith Esau and his de
scendants, Jacob dwelt in Canaan. We should
realize that although Isaac’s death is given in the
record at the end of chapter 35, the evidence indi
cates that he lived twelve years after Jacob’s re
turn to Mamre, and therefore that Isaac was still
living when Joseph was sold into Egypt by his
brothers.
The chapter opens with Joseph at the age of
17, helping to pasture his father’s flocks, along
with the sons of Bilhah and Zilpah. “And Joseph
brought unto his father their evil report” (37:2).
From what we know of Jacob’s sons from chapter
34, there was probably plenty of bad conduct on
the part of his brothers for Joseph to report to
his father. Some have held that Joseph was a
“tattle-tale” with a self-righteous attitude in re
porting the bad deeds of his brothers to his fath
er. It is not necessary to regard the m atter thus.
If their actions were to any degree sim ilar to
what is recorded in chapter 34, then it was
Joseph’s duty to report the m atters to his father.
However, Joseph’s acting the part of an in
former naturally would not increase his popular
ity with his brothers. Regardless of the right or
wrong involved, they would naturally tend to
hate the one who reported their evil deeds. This
is the first root of the brothers’ opposition to
Joseph.
The second root of the brothers’ hatred of
Joseph lay in Jacob’s partiality toward him. Jacob
loved Joseph more than all his children, “because
he was the son of his old age” (37:3). It is easy
to discern other reasons for Jacob’s partiality.
Joseph was the son of Rachel, the wife whom he
loved best. Also Joseph seems to have been the
only one of the brothers — during this period, at
least — who had any real spiritual sensitivity and
religious kinship with his father.
We cannot blame Jacob for his feeling of
partiality toward Joseph, but we should blame
him for a most unwise way of manifesting his af
fection — by bestowing upon Joseph a special
'“coat of many colors.” Leupold points out that
the Hebrew means “he used to make,” implying
that when one such coat was worn out Jacob pro
vided another to replace it. He also suggests that
the coat was a symbolic token of a position of
leadership. Naturally, Joseph’s being distinguish
ed in this way fills the brothers with jealousy.
They cannot help noticing their father’s attitude
to Joseph. The result is that “they hated him,
and could not speak peaceably unto him ” (37:4).
We have noted two sources of the brothers’
antipathy to Joseph. A third arose from Joseph’s
dreams. Though the dreams certainly came from
God, as shown by the rem arkable m anner in
which they were fulfilled in later years, this did
not w arrant Joseph’s telling them to his brothers
as he did. The brothers hated him "for his
dreams, and for his words” (37:8). The dream of
the sheaves was so obvious in meaning that the
brothers could not miss the point. Naturally
enough, they are indignant and express their in
dignation forcefully.
Joseph’s second dream was that of the sun,
moon and eleven stars bowing down to him. This
one he tells not only to his brothers, blit also to
his father. Jacob, the father, of course instantly
recognizes the import of the dream. He rebukes
Joseph, evidently for his pride in telling the
dream. In the dream, the moon, of course, re
fers to Joseph’s mother. Rachel, however, was
already dead; therefore the reference may be to
Leah who no doubt took the place of Rachel as
Joseph’s mother after his real m other’s death.
“And his brethren envied him; but his father
observed the saying” (37:11). The attitude of
the brothers was a jealous hatred, th at of the fath
er, thoughtful wonder concerning the future.
The brothers have gone to pasture their fath
er’s flock in Shechem. We may wonder that they
would venture back there after their outrageous
conduct there in chapter 34. The explanation may
be that the brothers were bold men with no fear
of danger. At any rate, Jacob sends Joseph to
Shechem to find out how his brothers are getting
along, and bring word back to his father again.
Joseph accordingly sets out from “the vale of
Hebron” and reaches Shechem. This would be a
journey of about 45 miles “as the crow flies,” but
of course somewhat longer than that by any road
or path. We note that there is no indication in
the record that either Jacob or Joseph suspected
that the brothers might harm Joseph. As Joseph
was only 17 years old we can readily see how he
could fail to realize the full wickedness of his
brothers; but we can hardly fail to be a little sur
prised that Jacob seems so trustful and unsuspect-
115
ing, especially in view of the known past conduct
of his sons.
2. How should we regard Joseph’s bringing
his father the evil report of his brothers?
Joseph has reached Shechem, but is unable
to find his brothers. A stranger who sees him
wandering in a field provides the information that
the brothers have gone to Dothan. On going there,
Joseph locates them. Dothan was about 12 miles
north of Shechem.
3. What were the three main roots of the
brothers’ antagonism to Joseph?
Seeing and recognizing Joseph while he is yet
at a distance — no doubt by his coat of many
colors — the brothers conspire together to m urder
him. They propose to dispose of his body by
dropping it into a pit, and to report to their father
that some wild animal has killed him. But Reu
ben, the oldest of the brothers, who apparently
had no part in the plan to kill Jacob, succeeds in
rescuing the lad from their hands, proposing to
drop him into a pit and leave him there to die.
The idea was that this would avoid the guilt of
bloodshed, although of course a murder is a m ur
der regardless of the precise method employed.
But Reuben’s secret intention is to get Joseph
back home safely to Jacob again. As the oldest
brother, Reuben seems to have some feeling of
moral responsibility which the others lack. Yet
we know that Reuben was not truly a godly man,
as is shown by his committing adultery as re
corded in 35:22. Of course it is possible th at in
the interval Reuben has repented but there is
nothing in the record to indicate this.
5. What may have been the symbolic mean
ing of Joseph’s coat of many colors?
4. What reasons can be assigned for Jacob’s
partiality toward Joseph? What reason does the
Scripture give for it?
6. What fact shows that Joseph’s dreams were
of God?
7. Why was it unwise for Joseph to tell his
dreams to his brothers and his father?
8. What was the reaction of the brothers on
hearing the dreams?
9. What
dreams?
was
Jacob’s
attitude to Joseph’s
10. Where did Jacob send Joseph to find out
about his brothers? How far away was this place?
11. How old was Joseph at this time?
12. Where did Joseph finally locate his broth
ers?
13. What plot to m urder Joseph did the broth
ers form?
14. Which of the brothers prevented the m ur
der?
Questions:
15. Why would this brother feel a greater re
1.
How many chapters of Genesis are devoted sponsibility than the others?
mainly to the life of Joseph? How does this com
16. What secret intention did this brother
pare w ith the number of chapters devoted to the
have?
entire period of world history prior to Abraham?
LESSON 144
111. History of the Covenant People from Abraham
to Joseph. 11:27 to 50:26, cont
6. The early life of Joseph. 37:1-36, cont.
“And it came to pass, when Joseph was come
unto his brethren, that they stripped Joseph out
of his coat, his coat of many colors that was on
him; and they took him, and cast him into a pit:
and the pit was empty, there was no water in it”
(37:23, 24). Calvin comments on the hypocrisy of
the brothers in supposing that they would be less
guilty of their brother’s death if they dropped him
into a pit and left him to starve than if they kill
ed him with a knife or sword: “As if, indeed, it
made any difference, whether they ran their
brother through with a sword, or put him to
death by suffocation. . . . It was a barbarous
thought, that they should not touch his life, if
they did not embrue their hands in his blood;
since it was a kind of death, not less violent,
which they wished to inflict by hunger.”
The brothers, having cast Joseph into the pit,
sit down to eat their meal. How hardhearted
these men were is shown by the fact that they
were able to eat food immediately after such a
wicked deed as they had done. It has been ob
served by some w riters that very likely Simeon
was the one who actually manhandled Joseph.
What suggests this is not only Simeon’s wickedness
shown in chapter 34 but especially Joseph’s treat
ment of Simeon years later in Egypt (42:24).
Next a caravan of merchants is seen on the
horizon. These are called Ishmaelites in verse 25
but in verse 28 they are called Midianites. This
involves the problem of how the same group of
people could be called both Ishmaelites and Midi
anites. One possible explanation is that there
were members of both tribes in the caravan. We
know from other places in the Bible that the
Midianites and the Ishmaelites were closely con
nected. Both Ishmael and Midian were sons of
Abraham, the former being born of Hagar and the
176
latter of K eturah (16:15; 25:2). In Judges 8:24
the Midianites which were defeated by Gideon
are cailed Ishmaelites. In view of the close con
nection between the two tribes we need not won
der that the caravan in Gen. 37 is called by both
names.
This caravan of traders is coming from Gilead,
that is the country east of the Jordan and op
posite the northern part of Canaan. With their
camels they are carrying spices, balm and m yrrh
to Egypt for sale. These products were various
kinds of aromatic gums for which the region of
Gilead was famous, and which were greatly in de
mand in Egypt, where they w ere used both for
medicine and for embalming the dead.
At this point Judah makes a proposal. (It is
evident from verse 29 that Reuben, the oldest
brother, was not present at this time). Judah
proposes that instead of leaving Joseph to die in
the pit, they sell him to the passing merchants.
“What profit is it that we slay our brother, and
conceal his blood” (37:26). We should note that
this question asked by Judah involves an admis
sion th at leaving Joseph to die in the pit is moral
ly equivalent to shedding his blood.
Though some have praised Judah’s proposal
as a noble effort to save Joseph’s life, it seems
that he does not deserve such praise. He appeals
to their desire for profit — “W hat profit is it?” —
rather than to their conscience. And certainly a
proposal to sell one’s own brother to a foreign
country to be a slave is a brutal and hardhearted
proposal. If Judah really wanted to do what was
right he should have come out boldly and insisted
that Joseph be set free.
The brothers agree to Judah’s proposal. Joseph
is drawn out of the pit and sold to the merchants
for twenty pieces of silver. Note that the word
“pieces” is in italics in the King Jam es Version,
indicating that it is not found in the Hebrew but
was supplied by the translators. Coined money
was not used at this period; the money was
weighed. In Leviticus 27:5 we find 20 pieces of
silver as the valuation of a boy from 15 to 20 years
of age. The Law of Moses fixed compensation for
the death of a full-grown slave at 30 pieces of sil
ver (Ex. 21:32).
From a later chapter in Genesis we know that
Joseph did not submit to this treatm ent without
protest, but on the contrary implored his brothers
not to do it. This is seen in 42:21 where the
brothers are in the presence of Joseph in Egypt,
but are not aware that it is Joseph nor that he
can understand the language they are speaking.
“And they said one to another, We are verily
guilty concerning our brother, in that we saw the
anguish of his soul, when he besought us and we
would not hear; therefore is this distress come
upon us.”
Later Reuben returns to the pit, expecting to
find Joseph in it, and on finding the pit empty,
he rends his clothes, the sign of extrem e emotional
stress. Reuben returns to the other brothers and
says: “The child is not; and I, w hither shall
I go?” (37:30). Perhaps the others did not even
answer Reuben; at any rate, no answ er is re
corded. But inevitably Reuben must soon have
learned the truth about that which had happened
to Joseph.
The wicked hardheartedness of the brothers
is further seen in their plan to lie to their father.
After making Joseph’s coat bloody w ith goat’s
blood, they present it to Jacob with the lie: “This
have we found” followed by the suggestion:
“Know now whether it be thy son’s coat or no”
(37:32). Not one of the brothers is willing to tell
Jacob the truth. Jacob of course recognizes the
garment as Joseph’s and at once concludes that a
wild beast has killed and devoured Joseph.
Perhaps the brothers did not realize that
Jacob would take the loss of Joseph so hard. For
he proves inconsolable. Rending his clothes, he
puts on sackcloth and mourns for his son many
days. The brothers and their sisters become
alarmed. This is worse than they had expected.
So a concerted effort is made to comfort him,
“but he refused to be comfo-ted; and he said, For
I will go down into the grave unto my son mourn
ing. Thus his father wept for him.” They rose
up to comfort him — but what hypocritical com
fort, based as it was on a conspiracy of lies! Not
one has enough love and pity to tell Jacob the
truth. If they had only told him the truth, it
might have been possible to send someone to
Egypt to buy Joseph back. If a slave can be sold,
he can also be bought. But the brothers are more
concerned about concealing their own guilt than
about consoling their grief-stricken father or get
ting their brother back home safely.
“And the Midianites sold him into Egypt unto
Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh’s, and captain of
the guard” (37:36). This prelim inary information
about Joseph’s situation in Egypt prepares the
way for the more detailed story which follows
in chapter 39.
Questions:
1. What hypocrisy was involved in the broth
ers’ decision to drop Joseph into the pit?
2. What action after they dropped Joseph into
the pit shows the callousness of the brothers?
3. On what ground has it been supposed that
Simeon was the one who actually dropped Joseph
into the pit?
4. How can we explain the fact that the m er
chants are called both Ishmaelites and also Mid
ianites?
5. Where was Gilead? For w hat kind of prod
ucts was it renowned?
6. What proposal was made by Judah?
177
7. Is Judah’s proposal praiseworthy or not?
Why?
8. At what price was Joseph sold?
9. How do we know that Joseph did not sub
m it to being sold without protest?
10. What was Reuben’s reaction upon finding
the pit empty?
11. What did Jacob conclude upon seeing the
bloody coat?
12. What was the effect of this shock upon
Jacob?
13. Why was the effort of his sons and daugh
ters to comfort him hypocritical?
LESSON 145
for the specific mention of the fact that Potiphar
was “an Egyptian.”
7. The scandalous sinfulness of the family of
Judah. 38:1-30
“And the Lord was with Joseph, and he was
a prosperous man; and he was in the house of his
m aster the Egyptian” (39:2). What a contrast
Joseph forms to his brothers, especially Reuben
and Judah! They fell deeply into sin even while
at home under the favorable influence of their
father; Joseph maintains his uprightness even
when away from home, unjustly treated and in a
wholly unfavorable environment. All through
the history of Joseph we see the blessing of God
resting upon a man who chooses to suffer wrong
rather than to commit wrong. All that Joseph
knew of the true God and His way of salvation he
learned before he reached the age of 17 when
he was sold into Egypt. His religion and his
moral code stood him in good stead and proved
sufficient for building a life upon — one of the
greatest lives of all history. Joseph was not like
a hot-house plant but like a sturdy oak, by the
grace of God. Certainly he was not like some
church members of the present day who have to
be constantly encouraged and exhorted and cater
ed to in order to get them to maintain even a
passable outward show of a Christian profession.
This chapter records the lamentable decline of
part of the family or clan of Jacob to the low
moral standards of the Canaanites. Some of the
deeds recorded in this chapter are so morally
offensive and so shocking to modesty and good
taste th at the present w riter would hesitate to use
the chapter as material for class discussion. At
the same time it must be realized that this chap
ter belongs in the Bible and is there for a good
purpose. “All Scripture is given by inspiration
of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof,
for correction, for instruction in righteousness”
(2 Tim. 3:16). The devout Bible student can gain
very worth-while lessons from this chapter. W ith
out taking up the details of the chapter we may
suggest the following implications of its contents:
1. Apart from the special grace of God even
the covenant children of godly parents may fall
very deeply into heinous sin.
2. There is need for constant watchfulness
lest the moral standards of God’s people be lower
ed to the level of the world.
3. God is a God of grace who forgives even
great sin. He does not save people because they
are good, but in order that they may become good.
4. All the actions and relationships of men
are subject to the moral judgment of God.
5. Practices which are not considered sin at
all by the world may be grievious sins when view
ed in the light of the will of God.
8. The history of Joseph continued. 39:1 to
50:26
Joseph has been taken to Egypt and sold to
Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh, captain of the
guard. The record specifically states that Poti
phar was “an Egyptian” (39:1). It is highly prob
able that this was during the period of Hyksos
domination of Egypt. The Hyksos were Semitic
invaders who gained control of Egypt and held it
for some hundreds of years. Being Semites from
southwestern Asia, the Hyksos were distantly
related to the Hebrews and distinct from the
genuine Egyptians, who were descended from Ham
rath er than from Shem. The fact of the Hyksos
reign in Egypt at this period may be the reason
We are told that Joseph was in the house of
his master the Egyptian. This implies th at he
was not living in the (doubtless much poorer)
servants’ quarters but actually in the building oc
cupied by Potiphar and his family. This must
have been in marked contrast to the rather humble
tent dwellings he had been accustomed to in
Canaan, even though we must remember that
his father was a rich man.
Even Potiphar, though not himself a wor
shipper of the true God, saw that Joseph’s success
and prosperity in all he undertook m ust be at
tributed to the Lord being with him (39:3). As
time passes Potiphar is more impressed by Jacob’s
character and attainments; Joseph “found grace
in his sight” and is promoted to be business m an
ager or steward of the entire household estab
lishment. The record indicates that Potiphar be
came increasingly aware by degrees or stages, of
the fact that the blessing of the Lord was upon
Joseph and upon all that he did, both “in the house
and in the field.” “The Lord blessed the Egyp
tian’s house for Joseph’s sake” (39:5). This ex
emplifies a truth taught by the Bible and often
observed in history, namely that blessings come
to the world and worldly people because of their
178
connection w ith the people of God, or the pres
ence of the people of God among them. God
would have spared Sodom for the sake of ten
righteous persons among the inhabitants. In this
sense Christians are the salt of the earth.
So complete is Potiph-ar’s confidence in Joseph
that he fully entrusts all his possessions to him.
Joseph takes full charge of everything. Apart
from eating his pieals, Potiphar does not need to
pay any attention to anything that belongs to him.
As Potiphar was a high officer of the Egyptian
government, very likely he was more than busy
w ith his official duties and was glad to be re
lieved of all responsibilities for the management
of his household.
Verse 6 adds the information that “Joseph
was a goodly person, and well favored.” This is
stated at this point, perhaps, to prepare the way
for w hat comes next, the infatuation of Potiphar’s
wife with Joseph. Incidently, it has been ob
served th at Scripture speaks of very few men as
handsome or good looking. We may call to mind
Saul, David and Absalom.
“And it came to pass after these things, that
his m aster’s wife cast her eyes upon Joseph; and
she said, Lie with me” (39:7). No doubt Joseph
was not only good looking, but also handsomely
dressed, as befitted his rank in Potiphar’s house
hold. She makes a shameless and lawless proposal
to Joseph, which he, however, instantly and com
pletely refuses, on the two grounds th at to comply
w ith her wishes would be (1) a breach of the
trust his master has placed in him, and (2) a wick
ed sin against God (39:8, 9). Presumably Poti
phar’s wife was a believer in the common idola
trous religion of Egypt; yet even so, Joseph’s m en
tion of a sin against God could not be m isunder
stood. For adultery is recognized and condemned
as sin even by corrupt and pagan faiths.
Joseph’s refusal however did not end the evil
desires of Potiphar’s wife. We are given to under
stand that the temptation was continued over a
considerable period of time (“day by day”, verse
10). Joseph consistently refuses to pay attention
to her advances.
Finally Potiphar’s wife wickedly attem pts
to trap Joseph in such a way that even if not
guilty he is sure to appear guilty to others. Tak
ing advantage of a time when none of the servants
are present, and when Joseph is in the house
attending to his necessary business, she takes
hold of his garment and repeats her lawless solici
tation. Joseph, realizing that the situation is
serious, leaves the coat in her hands and flees.
The Hebrew indicates that he fled not merely into
another part of the house, but actually out of
doors or into the street.
Now Potiphar’s wife is angry with Joseph
because he has spurned her advances. To remove
suspicion from herself and pin it on Joseph she
immediatly makes a great outcry, summoning the
men of the house and accusing Joseph of attem pt
ing to attack her. We may doubt th at all the
servants believed Potiphar’s wife. Surely some of
them, at least, must have realized something of
her true character and also m ust have sensed
Joseph’s moral integrity.
Possibly Potiphar’s wife indulges in an appeal
to racial prejudice when she says, “See, he hath
brought in a Hebrew unto us to mock us” and
again refers to Joseph, not by name, but as “the
Hebrew servant.” At any rate, with a great show
of injured innocence Potiphar’s wife displays
Joseph’s coat. On the face of it, this would seem
to be evidence of Joseph’s guilt, however different
the real facts might be. It is not recorded that
the men of the house made any reply. As Leu
pold comments, “They may not have been unduly
impressed by her protestations of innocence”
(Exposition of Genesis, II. 1000).
Questions:
1. Why are m atters such as those found in
chapter 38 included in the Bible?
2. What is the universal tendency of all moral
standards apart from the grace of God?
3. What is the probable reason why the record
specifically states that Potiphar was an Egyptian?
4. Who were the rulers of Egypt at this time?
5. How is Joseph’s life in contrast to that of
Reuben and Judah?
6. How old was Joseph when he was sold into
Egypt?
7. What is implied by the statem ent that
Joseph was in the house of his m aster the Egyp
tian?
8. What was Potiphar’s attitude to Joseph?
9. What benefits came to Potiphar because of
Joseph’s presence?
10. What is meant by the statem ent that the
people of God are the salt of the earth?
11. To what extent did Potiphar entrust his
household and property to Joseph?
12. What information does the Bible give about
the personal appearance of Joseph?
13. On what two grounds did Joseph refuse
the proposal of Potiphar’s wife?
14. By what evidence did Potiphar’s wife
attempt to prove Joseph guilty?
179
LESSON 146
had noted Joseph’s rem arkable combination of
ability and reliability, so the warden of the prison
notes that this man is different from other prison
8.
The history of Joseph continued. 39:1 to ers. Soon tasks and duties are assigned to Joseph
50:26, cont.
by the warden, and he is entrusted w ith more and
more responsibilities until he is business manager
Evidently Potiphar was away from home at
of the prison as he had been business manager of
the time of the alleged assault upon Potiphar’s
Potiphar’s household. “And whatsoever they did
wife, for “She laid up his garment by her, until
there, he was the doer of it. The keeper of the
his lord came home” (39:16). Perhaps Potiphar’s
prison looked not to any thing that was under his
official duties required him to be away from home
hand; because the Lord was with him, and that
a good deal of the time, and his wife may have
which he did, the Lord made it to prosper” (39:22,
felt lonely and neglected. However the Scripture
23). In all but name, Joseph has become the real
record pictures her as a brazen and shameless
warden of the prison. The official warden has an
woman. At any rate, when Potiphar returns home
easy, carefree life because everything is being
his wife trium phantly displays Joseph’s coat and
properly attended to by Joseph. If the warden
repeats her false accusation of Joseph.
had placed such complete confidence in anyone
except Joseph, the results might have been disas
Naturally, Potiphar’s w rath was kindled
trous; but in Joseph’s hands everything is done
(39:19). It should be noted that the record does
honestly, efficiently and safely.
not say th at Potiphar was angry with Joseph,
though of course he may have been. As Leupold
During all this time the aged Jacob is griev
suggests, it is possible, at least, that Potiphar was
ing and mourning the loss of his son Joseph, and
angry principally because the whole incident was
the brothers are brazenly facing it out, none of
a vexation to him. He may well have doubted
them being willing to tell their father the truth
his wife’s word, but naturally he had to take his
about Joseph because that would involve an ad
wife’s word against that of a servant, when it was
mission of their own guilt. Years pass, and Jacob
a choice between the two. However, if Potiphar
is still left to believe that Joseph was killed and
knew anything of his wife’s real character he may
eaten by a wild beast somewhere between Mamre
well have doubted the truth of her accusation.
and Shechem. Yet God has not forgotten either
A t any rate, he adopts the easy and obvious
Jacob or Joseph. The providence of God seems
remedy and removes Joseph from his household,
to us to work slowly, but it is working all the
putting him in prison. In view of the fact that
time.
the usual penalty for adultery in ancient times
was death, it would appear that Joseph was treat
“And it came to pass after these things” —
ed rath er leniently. This may reflect doubt in
how
long after we do not know — “that the butler
Potiphar’s m ind as to his real guilt, or provoca
of the king of Egypt and his baker had offended
tion th at he had been deprived of the services of
their lord the king of Egypt” (40:1). What the
a highly competent steward.
offence of these men was we do not know. As
The prison in which Joesph is confined is
chief butler and chief baker (cf. verse 2) they
described as “a place where the king’s prisoners
held very responsible positions. Having control
were bound” (39:20). Whether “the king’s prison
over the king’s food and drink, his health and
ers” means political offenders or merely persons
even his life depended on their integrity and
imprisoned — for whatever reason—on the king’s
watchfulness. There is a Jewish account to the
orders, we do not know. At any rate, “the king’s
effect that the chief butler and the chief baker
prisoners” m ust have been people of some im
had been involved in a plot to poison the king.
portance, as is shown by the fact that the chief
This is very improbable, as the penalty for such
butler and chief baker of the royal palace were
an offence would have been immediate death
later placed in the same prison. This was, there
rather than imprisonment. Much more likely is
fore, not a common jail for petty thieves and the
the supposition that these two men, being prom
like. Prom inent people were committed to it.
inent persons at the king’s court, had been in
volved in some political plot or intrigue which
“And he was there in the prison” (39:20).
had been discovered, on account of which they
This seems to imply the passing of a considerable
were
put in prison.
period of time. From 41:1 we know that Joseph
IIL History of the Covenant People from Abraham
was in prison over two years.
Yet even in prison God has not forsaken
Joseph, nor has Joseph’s faith in God weakened.
“But the Lord was- with Joseph, and showed him
mercy, and gave him favor in the sight of the
keeper of the prison” (39:21). Just as Potiphar
“And he put them in ward in the house of the
captain of the guard, into the prison, the place
where Joseph was b'ound” (40:3). From 39:1 we
know that “the captain of the guard” was none
other than Potiphar himself. It would seem,
therefore, that Joseph is still in Potiphar’s service,
180
even thou'ugh it is in his prison rather than in his
household.
times, how severe was Potiphar’s punishm ent of
Joseph?
“And the captain of the guard charged
Joseph with them, and he served them; and they
continued a season in ward” (40:4). It is evident
from this verse that the king’s butler and baker
were considered im portant people, and even in
prison they are “served” or waited on in accord
ance with their rank and position. The expres
sion “a season” is quite indefinite, but may even
mean a period of years.
5. What may have been the reason or reasons
for Potiphar’s comparatively lenient treatm ent of
Joseph?
6. To what prison was Joseph committed?
7. How long was Joseph in prison?
8. What was the attitude
Joseph?
of the
warden to
9. What change came in Joseph’s life in the
prison?
Questions:
1. What fact indicates that Potiphar was away
from home at the time of Joseph’s alleged assault
upon Potiphar’s wife?
2. What may have been the cause of Potiphar’s
wrath?
3. Why would Potiphar believe his wife ra th
er than Joseph?
4. In view of the laws and customs of those
10. Why would the king’s chief butler and
chief baker be regarded as im portant persons?
11. What may have been the offence
chief butler and chief baker?
of the
12. Who, apparently, was the “captain of the
guard” mentioned in 40:3,4?
13. What new responsibility was committed
to Joseph after the chief butler and chief baker
were committed to prison?
LESSON 147
promise to interpret the dreams, but quite evi
dently he feels that it is possible th at God may
enable him to interpret them, therefore he does
8.
The history of Joseph continued. 39:1 to not hestitate to ask that the dream s be told him.
50:26, cont.
In speaking of “God,” Joseph of course meant
the Lord, the true God, even though inevitably
From chapter 40 verse 5 we have the account
the two Egyptians would have a distorted idea of
of the dreams of the chief butler and chief baker,
his meaning.
and Joseph’s interpretation of the dreams. In
times before the completion of the Bible, one of
The chief butler tells his dream first (40:9-11).
God’s ways of revealing Himself and His will was
In his dream he stood by a grape vine with three
by dreams. As a general rule — though there
branches; as he stood there the vine budded,
may be some exceptions — revelation in dream
blossomed, and produced ripe grapes; he pressed
form came to persons in a relatively low spiritual
the juice into Pharaoh’s cup and handed the cup
state. When persons were in a higher spiritual
to Pharaoh to drink. All these things could not
state, and living in close fellowship with God,
happen so rapidly in real life, of course, but in
more direct modes of revelation were ordinarily
dreams the sense of tim e is often distorted and
employed.
what in real life would take weeks or months
The two prisoners — the chief butler and the
chief baker — both have dreams in the same
night. Moreover these were not common dreams,
but dreams w ith a meaning, for it is "said that
they dreamed “each man according to the inter
pretation of his dream ” (40:5). Ordinary dreams
may be the product of something in the sub
conscious mind of the person and may be explain
ed by psychology, but these dreams were differ
ent. They were a vehicle of divine revelation.
In the morning Joseph notes that both men
look sad, and inquires as to the reason for their
sadness. They in turn reply that they have
dreamed, but lack an interpreter. Joseph then
says, “Do not interpretations belong to God? tell
me them, I pray you” (40:8). Joseph does not
seems to happen in a few moments.
"And Joseph said unto him . .
(40:12). The
record does not state th at Joseph gave the in
terpretation of the dream immediately. Certainly
it is possible and even probable that Luther is
correct in his supposition that at this point Joseph
retired to seek the Lord in prayer. In any case,
Joseph is infallibly guided by God in interpreting
the dream. He brings out clearly the meaning of
its main features. The three Branches stand for
three days. The handing the cup to Pharaoh signi
fies a restoration to the butler’s former functions
and duties. Therefore the dream means that
within three days the chief butler will be released
from prison and restored to his form er position.
Joseph adds a personal plea to the chief but
181
ler: “But think on me when it shall be well with
thee, and show kindness, I pray thee, unto me,
and make mention of me unto Pharaoh, and bring
me out of this house: for indeed I was stolen away
out of the land of the Hebrews: and here also
have I done nothing that they should put me into
the dungeon” (40:15). Joseph is telling the truth
to the chief butler, who will be even more con
vinced of Joseph’s truthfulness after three days
when the interpretation of the dream will be ful
filled. The simplicity and lack of elaboration of
Joseph’s statem ent has the ring of truth.
oil and corn, while they exclaimed loudly against
the holy prophets, because they let fall nothing but
threatenings . . . yet it was the duty of the
servants of the Lord, who had been sent to de
nounce vengeance, to proceed with severity, al
though they brought upon themselves hatred and
danger.” (Calvin). We can readily realize the ap
plication of this truth to our own day, when many
people want only preachers who will proclaim a
“popular” type of message—a message that makes
people feel comfortable and peaceful while they
are still in their sins and unreconciled to God.
Next the chief baker tells his dream, hoping
for as favorable an interpretation as the chief but
ler received. It is not surprising that the chief
baker expected a good interpretation, for his
dream was in some respects quite similar to the
chief b utler’s. In his dream he stood with three
baskets of baked goods stacked on his head, con
taining many kinds of bread and cakes for P har
aoh to eat. Then the birds swooped down and
ate the food out of the baskets that were on his
head. As Leupold points out, the chief baker
himself failed to note the most important thing in
this dream, nam ely the fact that in the dream,
when the birds swooped down to eat the baked
foods, the chief baker was helpless to drive them
off; they ate without interference.
“And it came to pass the third day, which
was Pharaoh’s birthday, that he made a feast unto
all his servants: and he lifted up the head of the
chief butler and of the chief baker among his
servants. And he restored the chief butler to his
butlership again; and he gave the cup into P har
aoh’s hand: but he hanged the chief baker; as
Joseph had interpreted to them” (40:20-22). Thus
Joseph’s interpretations are verified by coming to
pass. It is well known that in ancient times
kings frequently celebrated their birthdays not
only by banquets (Mark 6:21) but also by pardon
ing selected offenders. The history recorded here
is therefore very true to life.
No doubt Joseph would have liked to give the
chief baker as favorable an interpretation as he
had given the chief butler. But as he had him
self said, interpretations belong to God. Joseph
is only a servant of God; it is not in his power to
decide w hat the interpretation shall be; his func
tion is only to declare it. So it occurs that hon
esty and faithfulness require Joseph to im part
bad news to the chief baker. He informs him
that the three baskets stand for three days, after
which Pharaoh will punish the chief baker by
having him beheaded; following that, his body
will be hanged on a tree, and the birds will eat
the flesh from his bones. Though this was an un
pleasant interpretation, it was the truth, and
Joseph did not shrink from disclosing it.
Calvin comments on this passage by stating
that the m ajority of religious teachers and preach
ers, “In desiring to yield to the corrupt wishes of
the world, adulterate the word of God. W here
fore, no one is a sincere minister of God’s word,
but he, who despising reproach, and being ready,
as often as it may be necessary, to attack various
offences, will fram e his method of teaching ac
cording to the command of God. Joseph would,
indeed, have preferred to augur well concerning
both; b u t since it is not in his power to give a
prosperous fortune to any one, nothing remains
for him but frankly to pronounce whatever he
has received from the Lord. So, formerly, al
though the people chose for themselves prophets
who would promise them abundance of wine and
“Yet did not the chief butler remember
Joseph, but forgat him” (40:23). No doubt Joseph
hoped to be released from prison soon. Very like
ly he thought that the chief butler would be so
happy about being released from prison and re
stored to his position that he would be only too
glad to intercede with Pharaoh for Joseph. But
it did not happen. The chief butler ungratefully
forgets Joseph, who is left to languish in prison.
As a m atter of fact, two full years pass, and
Joseph remains in prison. “Therefore, we are all
taught, in his person, that nothing is more im
proper than to prescribe the time in which God
shall help us; since He purposely, for a long sea
son, keeps His own people in anxious suspense,
that, by this very experiment, they may truly
know what it is to trust in Him” (Calvin). We
believe that there was a special purpose of God
involved in the chief butler’s forgetting Joseph.
It was for the further development of Joseph’s
faith and patience. On the other hand, this does
not at all excuse the chief butler, who was guilty
of ingratitude in forgetting Joseph. Moreover it
is hard to believe that the chief butler could have
forgotten Joseph accidentally or unintentionally.
From time to time, at least he must have remem
bered Joseph and recalled the interpretation of
the dream which had been so wonderfully ful
filled. But either because he thought the time
was not opportune, or for some other reason, he
neglected to carry out Joseph’s request. Possibly he
just preferred to “let well enough alone” rather
than become involved in the case of another
prisoner which might have bad results for him
self.
182
Questions:
1. To w hat class of people did God usually re
veal Himself by dreams in Bible times?
2. How do we know that the dreams of the
chief butler and baker were not caused by their
own subconscious mind?
3. Why did Joseph ask the chief butler and
baker to tell their dreams to him’?'
7. What important point in the chief baker’s
dream was unnoticed by the dreamer?
8. Why did Joseph interpret the chief baker’s
dream as bad news for the chief baker?
9. What is the bearing of Joseph’s interpreta
tion of the chief baker’s dream on the duty of
ministers of God’s Word today?
10. How did kings in ancient times often cele
brate their birthdays?
4. What was the meaning of the chief butler’s
dream?
11. What purpose of God was involved in the
chief butler’s forgetting Joseph?
5. What personal request did Joseph make of
the chief butler?
12. Could the chief
Joseph accidently?
6. What argument did Joseph use in making
his request of the chief butler?
13. What may have been the chief butler’s
reasons for failing to carry out Joseph’s request?
butler
have
forgotten
LESSON 148
Again, the seven well-filled ears of grain on a
single stalk would be no uncommon sight in
Egypt, which was renowned as the granary of the
8.
The history of Joseph continued. 39:1 to Mediterranean world. With the Nile River con
tinually restoring fertility to the fields in its flood
50:26, cont.
plain and supplying water, it is no wonder that
As chapter 41 opens, two full years have pass
Egypt produced immense crops of wheat and Other
ed, and Joseph is still in prison. Again dreams
grain. Nor would the seven thin ears, blasted by
enter into the history of Joseph. This time it is
the hot east wind, be a strange sight in Egypt.
Pharaoh, king of Egypt, who dreams. As in the
The hot, dry east wind blowing from the desert is
previous instances, the dreams are not ordinary
said to wilt and blast vegetation at the present day
dreams but are revelations of the purpose of God.
in Egypt. But contrary to w hat could happen in
As in Joseph’s own boyhood experience, there are
real life, the seven thin ears eat up the seven fat
two dreams w ith the same meaning. The first is
ones. Again Pharaoh awakes and realizes th at he
the dream of the seven fat and seven lean cows;
has been dreaming.
the second is the dream of the seven full and seven
thin ears of grain. Following each dream, it is
In the morning Pharaoh, being convinced that
recorded, Pharaoh awoke. The fact that divine
these strange dreams m ust have a special meaning,
revelation came to Pharaoh in the form of dreams,
summons his experts, including, perhaps, profes
rather than by a more direct method, confirms the
observation made in a previous lesson that dreams
sional dream analysts, and relates the dreams to
were the mode of revelation to those not living in
them. But they are unable to interpret the dreams.
close contact w ith God. Pharaoh, as an Egyptian,
It is remarkable that Pharaoh’s wise men and
was of course a pagan and an idolater. His idea
magicians did not attem pt to m ake up an inter
of God would inevitably be distorted by the false
pretation of the dreams, for it would not have been
religion of Egypt.
difficult to arrive at a plausible meaning by guess
work. As everyone knew, the Nile River was (and
Pharaoh’s dreams are a strange combination of
is) Egypt’s source of fertility, and the cow was
features that are entirely natural and appropriate
worshipped as a symbol of the productive power of
in Egypt, with things that could never happen at
nature. The dreams, then, were framed in term s
all in real life, whether in Egypt or anywhere else.
of ideas familiar to every Egyptian, and we are
The river, the meadow by the riverside, the cattle
almost surprised that the wise men of Egypt were
grazing in the meadow — all this fits the Egyptian
unable to discern the meaning. “Apparently, the
scene perfectly. Doubtless Pharaoh and every
hand of God was upon the interpreters, making
Egyptian had gazed on just such a scene many a
their own devices of no effect, in order that the
time. Moreover there would be nothing out of the
revelation might come by His own chosen instru
ordinary in both fat and lean cattle being seen, for
ment” (Leupold, Exposition of Genesis, II. 1023).
Egypt might have either kind, according to the
Something can be said, too, for the honesty of the
season and the abundance of pasture. But the thin
Egyptian wise men. Though devotees of a false
cattle eating up the fat cattle is something that
religion and no doubt largely involved in the
could only happen in a dream. No doubt it was
study of pseudo-science, they do not consciously
this very strange feature that caused Pharaoh to
and deliberately attem pt to satisfy the king by the
awake and ponder the dream.
use of falsehood.
183
The wise men and magicians having failed to
interpret the king’s dreams, the chief butler speaks
up: “I do remember my faults this day” (41:9).
Well he may remem ber his faults — he has basely
“forgotten” Joseph for two full years, whileJoseph remains unjustly imprisoned. The chief
butler relates his experience and that of the chief
baker, and tells how the interpretations given by
Joseph in each case came true. The result of this
is th at Pharaoh summons Joseph to the royal
palace.
The record states that Joseph was brought
“hastily” out of the prison. But first he must
be shaved and properly attired. This does not
imply th at in the prison Joseph has been living in
a dirty or unkem pt condition, but merely that
there were special requirements for a person to be
presented before the ruler of Egypt. After these
m atters have been attended to, Joseph is brought
into the presence of Pharaoh in order to interpret
the king’s dreams. Joseph humbly replies, “It is
not in me: God shall give Pharaoh an answer of
peace. Here Joseph displays the mark of .every
tru e servant of God, in that he gives all the credit
to God and takes none to himself.
Questions:
1. How much time passed while Joseph re
mained in prison?
2. What were the two dreams of Pharaoh?
3. What is implied by the fact that God’s re
velation came to Pharaoh in the form of dreams
rather than some other form?
4. What features of Pharaoh’s dreams were
things natural and common in the land of Egypt?
5. What features of the king’s dreams were
things that could not happen in real life?
6. What was Pharaoh’s first attem pt to learn
the meaning of his dreams?
7. Why is it surprising that the Egyptian wise
men were not able to interpret the dreams?
8. How can we explain the wise men’s failure
to interpret the king’s dreams?
9. What confession did the chief butler make?
10. What preparation was necessary before
Joseph could be presented at the court of Pharaoh?
11. What statem ent of Joseph indicates th at he
was a humble and true servant of God?
LESSON 149
pose of God. First, Pharaoh’s dreams are God’s
way of getting His servant Joseph out of prison.
Secondly, Pharaoh’s dreams proceed from the
8.
The history of Joseph continued. 39:1 to compassion of God on the people of Egypt and
50i:26, cont.
neighboring countries. There are to be seven years
of famine, but in the mercy of God these will be
Pharaoh repeats his dreams to Joseph (41:17preceded by seven good years; and in the mercy
24), adding the statem ent “I told this unto the
of God this is revealed to the king of Egypt in
magicians, but there was none that could declare
advance so that wise preparations can be made
it to me.” Joseph at once proceeds to give the in
and the suffering of the seven bad years somewhat
terpretation of the dreams. In Joseph’s speech,
mitigated.
we note the emphasis placed on God as the revealer of tru th and the controller of events. W hat
Thus in the affairs of Egypt and the dreams of
ever may be Pharaoh’s original idea of God or
Pharaoh, as these proceed from the providence of
gods, he cannot fail to note in what Joseph says
God, we see both God’s general compassion on His
the idea of one God who holds absolute control
creatures, and His special favor to His elect. Both
over all things, including the forces of nature and
God’s compassion on human suffering and His
the events of the future.
special redemptive purpose connected with the
First of all Joseph lays down the proposition
th at “the dream is one,” that is, Pharaoh’s two
dreams have but a single meaning. Later he adds
(verse 32) that the reason for Pharaoh having two
dreams rather than just one, is for emphasis on the
absolute certainty of the thing coming to pass, and
th at soon.
The interpretation is that there shall be a
succession of seven specially good years in Egypt,
in which there shall be plentiful harvests, follow
ed by a succession of seven years of famine. The
years of famine will be so severe that the plenty
of the seven good years will be forgotten.
So much for the meaning of the dreams. We
may note in the fact of these dreams a double pur
seed of Abraham are seen at work in this history.
The immediate purpose is to prevent or mitigate
suffering in Egypt; the long-range (redemptive)
purpose is to preserve alive that portion of the
human race from which the Messiah, the Seed of
the woman, must finally come.
Having declared the meaning of the dreams to
Pharaoh, Joseph adds some wise counsel (41:3336). He proposes that a “discreet and wise” man
be found and appointed as food administrator of
the land of Egypt, to have supervision over officers
who shall collect and store one-fifth of the crops
of grain during the seven good years, so th at this
surplus can be rationed out to the people during
the seven years of famine which are sure to fol
low, “that the land perish not through the famine.”
184
“And the thing was good in the eyes of
Pharaoh” (41:37). Apparently neither Pharaoh
nor his advisors thought of questioning the truth
of Joseph’s interpretation of the dreams, nor the
divine source of the dreams themselves. In con
nection with this, no doubt the testimony of the
chief butler to the reliability of Joseph’s inter
pretation of dreams carried much weight. Yet
beyond this, we may see a special operation of
God. Did no Egyptian official become jealous of
the honor and prominence about to be bestowed
upon a foreigner just removed from prison? Did
none of the Egyptian magicians and wise men be
come irritated by their own lowered prestige in
comparison with that of this newcomer? Ap
parently not. We can see in this the special work
ing of God, who brings His purposes to pass w ith
out fail. It is truly astonishing that a foreign
slave, just out of prison where he had been put
for alleged crime, should suddenly be entrusted
with the highest and most responsible position in
the kingdom, subordinate only to Pharaoh himself.
And that this should occur, as it seems to have,
without delay or opposition, is an even stronger
proof of the wondrous working of God. We would
naturally expect the Egyptian magicians, wise men
and politicians to be intensely jealous. Yet there
is no indication of the slightest opposition to
Joseph. We can only wonder w hat Potiphar’s
wife may have thought of the turn of events!
ingly, Pharaoh provides for this too. Joseph is
given an Egyptian name, Zaphnath-Paaneah. The
meaning of this name is uncertain. It may mean
“abundance of life” or some related idea. For
his wife Joseph is given a lady of high rank,
Asenath, daughter of Potiphera, priest of On. On
was the city where the worship of the sun-god was
centered. Both the names, Asenath and Potiphera,
seem to have idolatrous connotations. But we
may certainly suppose that following her marriage
to Joseph Asenath was converted from the errors
and superstitions of Egyptian paganism to faith
in the one true God, the Lord, whom Joseph wor
shipped. Leupold suggests that Joseph’s marriage
to the daughter of such an im portant and promi
nent Egyptian was calculated to neutralize w hat
ever prejudice may have existed against him as a
foreigner.
The proposal is not only good in the eyes of
Pharaoh, but also “in the eyes of all his servants”
(41:37). Pharaoh decides that no person can be
found better qualified than Joseph himself to be
the food adm inistrator of Egypt, clothed with al
most unlimited powers to carry out his program
of conserving grain during the good years and
rationing it out during the years of famine.
5. What counsel did Joseph give to Pharaoh
after interpreting the dreams?
“Thou shalt be over my house, and according
to thy word shall all my people be ruled: only in
the throne will I be greater than thou. . . See, I
have set thee over all the land of Egypt” (41:40,
41). This grant of authority is symbolized by the
transfer of Pharaoh’s ring from his own hand to
Joseph’s hand. This would be a signet ring used
for authenticating documents — a sort of “power
of attorney” granted to Joseph, so that his acts
and decrees will be of the same authority as those
of Pharaoh himself. To the ring are added cloth
ing of fine linen, and a gold chain about his neck.
Moreover Joseph is made to ride in the second
chariot of Egypt, while runners ahead of him
cry “Bow the knee!” Pharaoh adds that without
Joseph shall no man lift up his hand or foot in all
the land of Egypt, implying that absolute powers
have been conferred upon him. What a change in
the circumstances of Joseph from the day when his
brothers stripped him of his coat of many colors
and dropped him into a pit to starve to death,
and later sold him to a caravan of merchants for
twenty pieces of silver!
For Egyptian social standing it was also nec
essary that Joseph be a married man. Accord
Questions:
1. What special emphasis is found in Joseph’s
interpretation of Pharaoh’s dreams?
2. Why did God reveal the future to Pharaoh
by two dreams rather than by just one?
3. What was the
dreams?
meaning
of
Pharaoh’s
4. What two purposes of God can be discerned
in Pharaoh’s dreams?
6. How can we explain the fact that there
seemed to be no prejudice against Joseph or op
position to his appointment?
7. What powers did Pharaoh confer upon
Joseph?
8. What symbols of authority w ere given to
Joseph?
9. What Egyptian name was given to Joseph?
What may its meaning be?
10. Why was it necessary, from the Egyptian
point of view, for Joseph to be a m arried man?
11. Who became Joseph’s wife?
12. What may we suppose as to her religion
before and after her m arriage to Joseph?
(To be continued)
Lord, grant us eyes to see, and ears to hear
And souls to love, and minds to understand,
And confidence of hope, and filial fear. . . .
Lord, grant us what Thou wilt, and what Thou wilt
Deny, and fold us in Thy peaceful fold;
Not as the world gives, give to us Thine own;
Inbuild us where Jerusalem is built
With walls of jasper, and with streets of gold,
And Thou, Thyself, Lord Christ, the corner-stone.
— Christina G. Rossetti
185
The favorable reviewing of a book here is not to be under
stood as necesssarily implying an endorsement of everything con
tained in it. Within the limits of the editorial policy of Blue B an
ner Faith and Life each reviewer is solely responsible for the
your book dealer or direct from the publishers; do not send orders
to the manager of this magazine.
PROGRESSIVE CALVINISM, p u b l i s h e d
monthly by Progressive Calvinism League, 366
East 166th St., South Holland, 111. Annual sub
scription rate: students, $1.00; others, $2.00.
This little magazine is now in its second year.
Published by a private organization, the Progres
sive Calvinism League, its background is orthodox
Calvinism of Dutch antecedents. The founders of
the Progressive Calvinism League are members
of the Christian Reformed Church. The contents
of the magazine, however, are not limited to m at
ters of particular concern to that denomination,
but include discussions of basic issues which
should be m atters of concern to those who pro
fess the Reformed Faith, in whatever denomina
tion they may hold membership.
Progressive Calvinism is a serious call to hard
thinking. It challenges positions that may often
be held on merely traditional grounds. To quote
from a recent issue:
“A young Calvinist who, as the result of his
religious education, has affection for Calvinism
can well take as his goal the thorough study and
systematic re-examination of Calvinism, and its
restatem ent in modern terms. What he needs for
th at purpose is some ability; a capacity for hard
work in religion and in all of the sciences, es
pecially the praxeological sciences
(social
sciences). What he needs above all is honesty
and intellectual integrity. He must be more than
a repeater of what Calvinists in a previous age
have taught. There is not, in fact, anything that
Calvin himself taught that should not be re-ex
amined . . . . Progressive Calvinism also has that
general aim, namely, to analyze systematically
every important Calvinist problem. What we
shall do will at best be only a small fragment of
the work that should be done” (April, 1956, pp.
98-9). Another recent issue states that the maga
zine is devoted to liberty and noncoercion and
meekness (May, 1956, p. 129).
This statement
gives w hat may be regarded as the keynote
of the magazine’s viewpoint with regard to the
field of government or the state: it stands op
posed, on Biblical grounds, to “big government,”
arbitrary power and coercive infringement by the'
state of the proper liberty of the individual, the
family and other spheres of human society.
To give our readers some idea of the con
tents, we shall comment briefly on some of the
articles in recent issues. The April, 1956 issue
contains a significant two-page article on The
Decline of the Ministry. After stating and illustrat
ing the proposition that the Protestant ministry
“is not presently in such great repute as it was
formerly” and adding that the condition of the
churches is one of “m ental confusion and faith
lessness”, the article submits “for consideration
as true” several ideas as to the reason for the
present “decline of the ministry.” These are: (1)
“That most of what the churches have been ac
cepting from the ‘world’ has hurt the churches.”
(2) “That the churches have largely become mere
sounding boards or megaphones for ideas not de
rived from Scripture.” (3) “That the churches do
not testify to any significant extent against the
real evils in the world but against trifling or even
spurious evils or evils perpetrated by the weak.”
(4) “That the churches do not understand the
structure of modern society and that therefore
their social ideas are erroneous.” (5) “That the
churches m ust have a new reformation, if they
wish to become influential again.” These alleged
reasons for the decline of the ministry are ob
viously controversial, but an article such as this
is provocative in the best sense; it challenges
people’s m ental complacency and stirs them up to
think seriously.
Another article in the same issue is entitled
Polygyny in Nigeria (“polygyny” is sometimes
called “polygamy”). This article discusses a prac
tical problem existing in the African mission
field of the Christian Reformed Church. The
article criticizes church leaders and makers of
mission policy for regarding polygyny in Nigeria
as a problem in itself, without serious attem pt to
analyze the social causes of the practice and to
change them. “We are not convinced that a gen
uinely Biblical approach has been made to the
polygyny problem in Nigeria. We consider the
existing solution in Nigeria to be a defective solu
tion; the thing to do is to alter the circumstances
that superinduce polygyny . . . . Take away the
reason for polygyny and the institution will die
a natural death. Why talk about the sin of poly
gyny or excuse it as ignorance when there is no
real attem pt made to reduce infant mortality?”
(April, 1956, p. 121).
The May, 1956 issue is divided between a dis
cussion of Academic Freedom at Calvin College
and an article entitled Sex is Not Sin. In the
186
former it is argued that in a private school con
trolled by parents for the benefit of minor chil
dren, academic freedom can exist only by the con
sent of the parents and to the extent that they
deem proper. The second article undertakes to
present a rational discussion of Biblical teaching
on the ethics of sex. The position taken is that
sexual desire and activity, being based on the
Creation and not on the Fall of man, cannot be
sinful in themselves; they are sinful only when
used in a m orally irresponsible manner. Scripture
makes the parties to a m arriage responsible to
each other and to society. Where the law of the
State does not insist that sex activity must be re
sponsible in this sense, the law is contrary to
Scripture and harmful to society, and should be
disregarded by the Church, which must always
obey God rather than men.
The June, 1956 issue is wholly devoted to a
discussion of the subject of money. Starting with
a profession of belief in the doctrine of total de
pravity, the magazine argues for the sanctity of
the gold standard for currency, and against the
manipulation of currency by the government. The
devaluation of the American dollar is held to be
basically immoral, and the United States Govern
ment is held to be guilty of violation of the moral
law by tampering with the value of the dollar.
The reviewer wishes to commend the Pro
gressive Calvinism League for its manifest loyal
ty to Scripture, which is truly radical (in the best
sense of the term ) and for its courage in facing
difficult and sometimes embarrassing problems.
Certainly a publication such as this which seeks
to face serious problems of our day with light
rather than w ith heat is performing a real service
in the Kingdom of God. It is not to be expected
that the reader of a magazine which deals large
ly in controversial issues will agree with every
position taken or with the implied exegesis of
every text of Scripture that is cited. But every
serious reader will be challenged to think hard
about beliefs and positions which he may have
accepted uncritically in the past, and to hold fast
that which is found to be truly based upon the
Word of God.
— J. G. Vos
THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS, by
Joseph Parker. Baker Book House, Grand Rapids
0, Michigan. 1956 reprint, pp. 272. $2.75.
Joseph Parker, the author of this book, was
an English Nonconformist divine who lived 18301902. Prom inent in English Congregationalist
circles, he exerted an immense influence as the
preacher of the City Temple of London. His
sermons and expositions of Scripture are charac
terized by originality of presentation and a sort of
rapid colloquial eloquence which are very striking.
The volume we are reviewing is not a com
mentary on the Epistle to the Ephesians, nor can
it properly be called an exposition of the Epistle.
Rather, it is a series of meditations upon selected
statements of the Epistle, in which many teach
ings of Ephesians are omitted altogether or given
only the barest passing mention. For example,
the author starts his study at chapter 1, verses 22
and 23, with the theme of “the Church, which is
His body.” Thus the very strong emphasis on
predestination and salvation by grace which is
found in chapter 1 verses 1-21 is omitted complete
ly.
The book makes fascinating reading, and con
tains many true and helpful teachings of a very
practical nature. As a specimen we shall quote
a few sentences from pages 256-7, where the
author is speaking about the use of “the whole
armor of God”:
“The enemy stopped my prayer yester m orn
ing, but I got it back in the evening; the Lord
was more than the enemy. My soul’s opponent
endeavoured to tempt me to commit myself to
false principles and hazardous issues, and just
whilst I was thinking w hether on the whole it
might not be better just to give way in this in
stance, the Lord swept the devil and his tricks
out of my road, and I came to church, the sanc
tuary, and the altar, and it was well with me.
And it will be well with you, suffering brother.
You have your difficulties at home, in your bus
iness, in your church, and principally in your own
heart. Be strong in the Lord; never try to stop
the inrushing stream of fire which shoots from
the volcano of hell with the last tract on secu
larism, socialism, agnosticism, and the various
other little inventions of irresponsible minds.
Understand that you are now hearing a man speak
who has been through the whole case, who has
suffered, so far as man may have suffered on
this earth, the torments of the lost, and who has
had to fight the enemy at midnight, and who
found out soon that he could not fight that enemy
with straws, but only with the steel of Heaven,
the panoply of eternity. The Lord knows, there
fore, what we are doing. He says in the first in
stance, ‘Withstand’ — be obstinate, do your very
best, uttermost, that, having done all, you may get
away from ‘withstand’ into ‘w ithstand’ without the
‘with’ — and having done all may stand. We owe
everything, under God, to the men who have fol
lowed that policy.”
In view of the obvious good in this book, the
reviewer is truly sorry that it is seriously m arred
by unsound tendencies. First of all, a couple of
heretical statements should be noted. On page
109 the author states: “Children are so good that
we baptize them; we receive them into our arms
with this certificate, w ritten in light and perfumed
in the incense of the morning, ‘Of such is the king
dom of God,’ and we baptize them with the dew
of the morning." Needless to say, this sentence
cannot be reconciled with the orthorox doctrines
of infant baptism and original sin. Children are
not baptized because they are “so good”; they are
baptized because they are sinners, but by God’s
187
covenant of grace entitled to receive the outward
sign and seal of the covenant relationship. When
the Bible speaks of children and says “Of such
is the kingdom of God” it is not the goodness of
children that is referred to — they are not good,
they are sinful — but their unsophisticated,
trustful attitude toward their parents.
Again, on page 74 there are found the follow
ing sentences: “Emerson said that when Dr. Lyman
Beecher got to heaven, and found Dr. Channing
there, he would say, ‘Why, Channing, are you
here?’ And Channing would answer, ‘Why, Beech
er, are you here?’ There is one faith, and until we
realize the faith, rather than the creed, we shall
have divisions and alienations and controversies,
out of which livelihoods are made.”
It would be difficult to compose two sentences
th at would more totally deny the importance of
doctrinal orthodoxy and more completely assert
the modern notion that it does not really m atter
w hat a man believes. Emerson was a Unitarian
preacher, a denier of the Deity of Jesus Christ,
who gave up his pastorate because he did not be
lieve that Christ appointed the Lord’s Supper as
a perm anent sacrament. Channing was also a
Unitarian, a leading opponent of the doctrine of
the Trinity, and a rejecter of the inspiration of the
Scriptures and the Deity of Christ. Lyman Beech
er was alternately a Congregationalist and a
Presbyterian. He was an opponent of Unitarianism, though he himself was tried for heresy in
1836, but acquitted. Dr. P arker’s sentences cited
above seem to imply that the doctrinal differences
between these men are of no importance — they
had different creeds, but they had the same faith,
and of course all went to heaven when they died.
Throughout the book there is a most unfor
tunate polemic against creeds and exact doctrinal
orthodoxy. “When we are more anxious about
the faith than about the creed we shall have a
real Church in the country” (p. 73). This false
antithesis between “faith” and “creed” occurs
repeatedly in the book. We might ask, how can
anyone have “faith” without believing something
definite about something or someone? As soon
as we say what we believe, we have a creed.
Faith without creed is a mere abstraction.
The author’s remarkable ability in handling
the English language has often led him to deal in
pyramided bursts of rhetoric without careful at
tention to the exact statements of the text of
Scripure. Exegesis is here too often washed aside
in a flow of marvellous language. The author is
evidently aw are of this and even glories in it.
For example, he says on page 107, “We are reading
in P aul’s Epistle to the Ephesians. It is more like
walking through a forest than dallying in a garden.
We m ust in any case give up his grammer and
acquaint ourselves with the music of his soul.”
On this the reviewer would comment: We must
in any case NOT give up Paul’s grammar. The
Bible is the verbally inspired Word of God. God
has revealed his truth to men in words, which are
connected according to grammar. We will never
grasp the message of God, nor even the music of
Paul’s soul, except by a careful, exact study of
his words and grammar.
Possibly the “dead orthodoxy” of Parker’s
day stimulated his antipathy to creeds and to
exact study of the text of Scripture. But such
an emphasis is terribly unfortunate at the present
day. What we need today is not less emphasis on
creeds and exact Biblical scholarship, but more —
much more. The antithesis between “faith” and
“creed” is a false one; so is the antithesis between
“gram m ar” and “music.” It is a pity that the good
in this volume is so largely neutralized by this
type of false antithesis.
— J. G. Vos
BY GRACE ALONE, by Herman Kuiper. 1955,
Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids
3, Michigan, pp. 165. $2.50.
This book by Professor Kuiper of Calvin Sem
inary is a study in Soteriology, the doctrine of
salvation. The title accurately indicates the theme
of the book, that every step of the way of salvation
is taken by means of divine grace. “It is God
and God alone who saves. In every element of
the saving process it is God’s almighty power
which makes this process efficacious unto actual
salvation” (p. 10).
The importance of this study is realized when
we note how prone Christians are to magnify
the work of man in salvation. The Bible doctrine
of sola gratia has never been a popular teaching.
“There have always been many and there still
are many who, while adm itting that a sinner can
not attain salvation wholly apart from divine
grace, nevertheless hold that it is man who steps
in at the most crucial point, and determines his
own salvation” (p. 11).
A chapter on the history of the doctrine of
salvation gives us a helpful sketch of the various
views of the way of salvation that have been held,
from those of the early church fathers down to
the current teachings of the crisis theologians,
B arth and Brunner.
Following this is a chapter on The Ultimate
Basis of Salvation. The source of all saving
graces in the life of the believer is said to be the
believer’s vital union w ith Christ; but the ultimate
basis of salvation is the plan or covenant of re
demption, including the divine counsels of elect
ing love.
Emphasis is placed throughout the book on
the ordo salutis, that is, the correct order of the
various steps of the process by which God applies
the blessings of salvation to sinners. The question
of order is of crucial significance to a true proc
lamation of the salvation message. Most Protes
tant evangelism is based on the notion that the new
birth, regeneration, depends upon and follows the
decision-act of man’s faith and conversion, while
188
the Reformed doctrine of grace alone reverses
this order and makes regeneration the prerequisite
to saving faith, conversion, justification, sancti
fication, etc. Otherwise stated, popular Christian
ity holds that sinners are born anew because they
embrace Christ as their Savior, while biblical
Christianity holds that men are enabled to em
brace the Savior because by God’s free grace alone
they have been born anew unto salvation.
This is not to say, however, that there is little
place in the divine scheme of salvation for ener
getic faith on m an’s part. On the contrary, faith
occupies a central place in the way of salvation
(p. 92). The author constantly stresses the neces
sity of faith as the appropriating organ by which
we come into personal possession of the righteous
ness of Christ in both justification and sanctifi
cation. While faith is the prerequisite or condition
of justification, the ground of justification is the
satisfaction and righteousness of Christ. Nor is
justification mere pardon on the basis of Christ’s
merits. It also includes the imputing of the right
eousness of Christ to the sinner, by which he is
declared just before the holy God. Both of these
aspects of the doctrine of justification by faith,
as the author has set them forth, need fuller em
phasis in present day evangelical preaching.
The common notion that sanctification is a
joint work of God and m an is rejected. “God
and God alone is the author of sanctification”
(p. 121). Although man is called to exercise
faith and put forth strenuous effort in the way
of holiness, the power to proceed comes from the
Spirit of God who dwells in the believer’s heart.
The chapter on sanctification includes a good
discussion of the part played by faith in sancti
fying grace (pp. 125-128), and in addition, several
pages dealing with the question of sinless perfec
tion in the present life.
In keeping with his theme of grace alone, Dr.
Kuiper prefers to speak of “presevation” rather
than “The perseverance of the saints”. While it
is true that God keeps Christians, through faith,
unto salvation, it is also true that Christians per
severe, by grace, unto the end. Human responsi
bility and activity is as vital here as in the ele
ments of faith, conversion and sanctification.
Hence some Reformed theologians prefer the term
“perseverance”, as employed in the Westminster
Confession of Faith, because it denotes the en
gagement of our lives in a strenuous and per
petual devotion to those means which God has
ordained for the accomplishment of his saving
purpose.
The last step in salvation, glorification, sets
before us the complete realization of salvation,
namely, final deliverance from the power and
presence of sin and evil and entrance into the
realm of glory. It is a glorious hope which the
author has set before his readers.
The theology presented here is not speculative
but is fully attested by Scripture. A textual
index contains references to more than 225 pas
sages of Scripture, and most of these are quoted in
full in the text of the book — a very helpful
feature.
The author writes in a non-technical style
for the most part and in term s easily understood
by most adult Christians. This is a popular work
on an important division of systematic theology.
At the present time when there are so many con
fusing voices representing American Protestantism
and all claiming to be true Christianity, this should
prove a very helpful study.
— Joseph A. Hill
KEEPING THE HEART, by John Flavel (Vol
ume I). 1955, pp. 96, paper cover. 75 cents.
PRAYER, by John Bunyan; THE RETURN
OF PRAYERS, by Thomas Goodwin (Volume II).
1955, pp. 42, 60, paper cover. $1.00. Sovereign
Grace Book Club, 413 S.E. First St., Evansville,
Ind.
These Puritan Classics rem ain a p art of the
church’s great devotional literature. Although the
style is somewhat archaic, the tru th s expressed
are timeless. The series of reprints of which
these are the first two volumes includes works by
Richard Baxter, Jonathan Edwards, John Owen,
Charles H. Spurgeon and other notable divines.
Such devotions, if reserved for Sabbath afternoon
meditation, would sanctify the day and make it a
delight.
Keeping the Heart is a detailed exposition and
application of Proverbs 4:23: “Keep thy heart
with all diligence, for out of it are the issues of
life.” The author gives directions for acquiring
and maintaining purity of heart through diligent
attention to the duties of holy devotion. The
theme which is treated exhaustively is as follows:
“The keeping and right managing of the heart in
every condition, is one great business of a Chris
tian’s life” (p. 3) The author names several sea
sons in which it is especially needful for Chris
tians to keep the heart free of im pure motives, de
sires, attitudes, etc. Among them are, the time of
prosperity, when providence smiles upon us; the
time of adversity, when providence frowns upon
us; the time of Zion’s troubles, when the church
is oppressed; the time of danger and distraction;
the time of outward wants; the season of duty; at
times when we receive injuries and abuses from
men; in times of great trials, temptations, doubt
ing and spiritual darkness; suffering for the faith;
in sickness and the shadow of death.
In our day when so many are turning to re
ligion as a way out of personal problems, it is well
to remind ourselves th at the chief duty of Chris
tians is that of holy living as the means of glorify
ing God. Many are turning to Christ as the
Savior from the consequences of sin without tu rn
ing from their sins. While Christianity is not a
means of escape from difficulties, we believe that
189
the Christian practice of keeping the heart is the
cure for much of the personal trouble in human
life. For it is in the heart that each person’s re
lationship to God is centered, and It is in the
heart that all the issues of life are settled. We
recommend Keeping the Heart to all who are
seeking a richer, happier Christian life.
The treatise on Prayer, dated 1660, comes from
the heart and pen of the author of Pilgrim’s
Progress. It is evident that John Bunyan knew
how to pray. Yet it is not only from personal ex
perience but principally from the Scriptures that
he teaches us to pray.
His creedlike definition of prayer is worth
memorizing: “Prayer is a sincere, sensible, affec
tionate pouring out of the heart or soul to God,
through Christ, in the strength and assistance of
the Holy Spirit, for such things as God hath
promised, or according to the Word for the good
of the Church, with submission, in faith, to the
will of God” (p. 1).
After enlarging upon this Bunyan expounds
1 Corinthians 14:15, “I will pray with the Spirit,
and I w ill pray with the understanding also.” The
emphasis in these sections is on the work of the
Holy Spirit in enabling the believer to pray ef
fectually and intelligently. Following this is
“The Application” containing practical considera
tions and hortatory remarks — a form of discourse
that is all too frequently omitted in present day
sermonizing.
The Return of Prayers, by Thomas Goodwin,
is a full discussion of the Christian’s duty to ex
pect and recognize the answers to his petitions. It
is our duty (and privilege) not only to pray, but
also to observe how our prayers are answered.
We should follow the example of Habakkuk, who
offered a prayer against the tyranny of Nebuchad
nezzar; and having ended it, he begins the second
chapter thus: “I will stand upon my watch tower,
and see w hat he will answer me.”
The author would place the praying saint in
the position of a merchant ordering goods from
afar, who having every reason to expect them,
awaits their arrival and checks off each item in
his ledger. Likewise the praying Christian
should take account of each petition and mark
how it is answered. There are ten excellent chap
ters dealing with a commonly neglected area of
Christian duty. The chapters are subdivided, so
th at it could easily be used for family readings
after meals. The reader will be impressed by the
author’s constant appeal to the Scriptures for ex
amples of answered prayer and of patient waiting
for answers to prayer.
Studies of this type will do much to help us
cultivate the gift of prayer, so that our prayers,
instead of being stereotyped and full of “vain
repetition”, are informed by Scripture and ground
ed in the promises of the covenant. These little
volumes represent the highest type of devotional
literature.
— Joseph A. Hill
THE “EVILS OF CALVINISM”, by Frank B.
Beck. Published by the author, Millerton, N. Y.
8-page booklet. 10 cents; $1 per dozen.
The author of this booklet Is a Baptist pastor
who is a convinced Calvinist. He correctly states
that the Reformer John Calvin did not originate
the system of truth called Calvinism: “Calvin got
it from St. Augustine, as well as from Scripture,
and Augustine got it from Paul the Apostle, and
Paul received it, not of man, but of God” After
stating some of the distinctive doctrines of Calvin
ism, the author calls attention to the common er
ror of calling those who believe these' doctrines
“hyper-Calvinists” when they are simply Calvin
ists.
The alleged evils of Calvinism which the
author discusses, and which he shows to be simply
the teachings of the Bible, are as follows: 1. Cal
vinism abases man. 2. Calvinism exalts God. 3.
Calvinism honors Christ’s death. 4. Calvinism
recognizes the power of the Holy Spirit. 5. Cal
vinism magnifies the grace of God. 6. Calvinism
gives eternal assurance to believers. 7. Calvin
ism gives the right enthusiasm to evangelism. The
discussion is Biblical and convincing.
Finally, the author mentions some evils that
can never be laid at the door of Calvinism. These
are: 1. The denial of m an’s moral responsibility.
2. Destroying evangelistic zeal. 3. Belief in sal
vation by works. 4. Belief in a defeated God or
Christ who tries to save men but fails.
This booklet is commended to our readers as
a good discussion of an important subject. It
would be a good tract to place in church tractdisplay racks.
— J. G. Vos
HOW TO PREACH (?) AND FOOL THE
PEOPLE, by Frank B. Beck. Published by the
author, Millerton, N. Y. 4-page folder; no price
stated.
This tract presents a strong contrast between
true and false preaching of the Gospel. A faith
ful and clear warning is issued against rationalists
who deny the supernatural features of the Bible,
and against those evangelicals who preach only
on selected subjects which are palatable to their
hearers, while omitting such unpopular themes
as hell and predestination. Over against these
types is placed the faithful m inister of the Word
of God, who not only believes the whole Bible but
preaches its whole message consistently and fear
lessly.
The style seems rather colloquial and in places
190
even flippant, which is unnecessary and seems to
detract from the impact of this tract on a serious
subject. “Jonah,” “shouldest,” and “stingily”
are misprinted.
— J. G. Vos.
IMMORTALITY, by Loraine Boettner. Wm.
B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., Grand Rapids 3, Mich. 1956,
pp. 159. $2.50.
This experienced w riter in the field of theol
ogy, in which he specialized at Princeton under
Dr. Hodge, has w ritten a book in popular yet
impeccable style on one of the most im portant of
doctrines, that is a delight to read because of its
excellent English style, and at the same time a
delight to the heart of every Christian theologian,
expressing Calvinism well and distinctly. Dr.
Boettner deserves even greater fame than he has,
representing as he does the tradition of true Cal
vinism, and the tradition of good style that once
characterized most of the utterances of our fore
most preachers and scholars. It is refreshing to
read through this book of 159 pages, so crammed
full of good sense, good logic, and apt expression.
It is not unnatural that I should be especially
interested in his most able treatm ent of Spiritual
ism (pp. 137-159), since my parents had at one time
fallen into his pernicious error, and I was brought
up in close association with various “mediums”
and fortune-tellers. His quotation from Evange
list Biederwolf did me much good: “There is good
reason to believe that all of the spiritualistic
phenomena is produced by the mediums them
selves or by their helpers. Even the most famous
mediums have been detected in fraud, and some
of them have been exposed time and again as
morally bad characters. And if they cheat some
times, how do we know that they do not cheat
all the time?” He also quotes to good effect from
that genuine expert, Houdini, who saw these
fakers as w hat they are. On the stage these
tricks have the name of “mentalism,” and are
well recognized as part of the magician’s stock in
trade. Dr. Boettner does not hesitate to say that
Spiritualism violates the moral code of Christian
ity, which of course it does.
Dr. Boettner’s excellent logic readily disposes
of such unchristian dogmas as purgatory. He
supports Calvinism ably by both Scripture and
logic, and also by selections from men like Charles
Hodge, William C. Robinson and Louis Berkhof,
as well as John Calvin and a carefully selected
quotation from John Wesley.
Readers of all sorts, from seminary professors
to the ordinary Christian, will find great delight
in this book. With the neat simplicity of his
style all will be pleased, for it is both correct and
unstilted; and since his m atter is biblical, no
orthodox Christian can properly take exception
to it. Altogether, it is a book worth room on
anyone’s shelf.
— John Burton Thwing
THE STORY OF STEWARDSHIP IN THE
U.S.A., by George A. E. Salstrand. Baker Book
House, Grand Rapids 6, Mich. 1956, pp. 169. $3.50.
To the statistically-minded, this may prove a
valuable reference work; it treats of the subject of
stewardship (primarily of possessions) histori
cally, spreading its research over many if not
most of the “important” denominations, the pres
ent-day Covenanters being omitted.
Dr. Salstrand, for what reason I am not sure,
acts in an obscurantist m anner regarding doc
trinal matters, glossing over, in his account of
the “progress” of the Presbyterian Church, the
whole controversy that centered about Dr. Machen
and the ordination of men who would not affirm
belief even in the bare essentials of the Christian
religion; yet he quotes Dr. “Spear” (Robert E.
Speer) quite freely enough on the subject of
missionary giving. In accounting for a diminution
in giving in that church, he is silent about the
“mandate” of its General Assembly which de
clared that each person m ust give through its
mission board, if he were not to be adjudged
guilty of an offence equal to that of refusing the
communion. Many indeed were those for whom
this oppressive, though quite illegal, “act” of the
General Assembly was the last straw in causing
their giving through the “regular” channels of
that denomination to cease.
Needless to say, the Orthodox Presbyterian
Church, born of the struggle of those times, is not
even so much as mentioned. It is really noJ hard
at all to form a suspicion as to where the w riter
stands, especially after his favorable opinion con
cerning the General Council. The nearest he
comes to frankness in this m atter is in his refer
ence to the New World Movement, which failed
for hundreds of thousands of dollars, all of which
was paid for later by individual denominations and
donors. The “fundamentalist-modernist contro
versy,” he imagines, or seems to imagine, was con
fined to the “W atchman-Examiner” and other
Baptist publications and institutions, and occurred
incidentally in the “N orthern” Presbyterian de
nomination. He (it seems) carefully skirts all
mention of the personalities involved among the
Presbyterians, though he mentions the names of
Massee and van Osdel among the Baptists. The
manner in which he deals with it makes the whole
controversy seem like a very mild tempest in a
very small teapot. Yet it left eventually two
more denominations added historically to the al
ready large roll of Presbyterian denominations;
and the withdrawal of many, and the uncertainty
of many more regarding the use of their gifts to
missions, must have had a considerable effect upon
the distribution of the tithe. As a m atter of fact,
I think Dr. Salstrand could be safely challenged
to prove that it did not have some effect. It is
certain that the approximately quarter of a million
dollars left by Dr. Machen’s will to the Indepen
dent Board for Presbyterian Foreign Missions was
not sent through channels of the Presbyterian
191
Church in the U.S.A.; and the known utterances
of Dr. Machen give us an unmistakable reason
for this fact; he, like many others of less wealth,
completely m istrusted the Board of Foreign Mis
sions of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A.,
and had actually taken part in an attempt to
change its membership only a few short years
before his death of pneumonia while as Moderator
of the General Assembly of the Orthodox Pres
byterian Church he was on a visit to home mission
fields in South Dakota.
In spite of the fact that she has since become
a well-known secular author, Mrs. Pearl Buck
is not even so much as mentioned in this pains
taking work on tithing; yet she was a prominent
figure in the controversy, Dr. Machen claiming
(and proving) that she was heretical in her teach
ing under the Mission Board. Being a Christian
gentleman, he omitted all mention of her character
or life; but the newspapers have not been thus
considerate of her.
Nor is H arry Emerson Fosdick, who, in a
m anner of speaking, touched off the whole con
flagration given space for his name. Yet there
is no doubt th at when the whole story is told,
there will be space for both these heretics’ names.
On the surface, because of the wide coverage
of denominations, it might seem that Dr. Salstrand
is quite fair in his treatm ent of the subject; but
appearances are not always indicative of the truth.
I know nothing of Dr. Salstrand except w hat his
book tells; but I cannot recommend it to the gen
eral public as an honest, complete picture of “The
Story of Stewardship in the U.S.A.”
— John Burton Thwing
GLORY AWAITS ME, by William Goulooze,
B aker Book House, Grand Rapids 6, Mich. 1956,
pp. 111. $2.00.
The author of this book has fought a losing
battle w ith cancer since 1946. He was released
from his suffering September 5, 1955 and received
the glory that awaited him. Through his suffering
he wrote several books and booklets on suffering.
This book was dictated during the months
preceding his death and published afterwards as
a memorial to him. While this book was w ritten
especially for those who are suffering or are near
the end of their earthly pilgrimage, it is one which
could be read with profit for every child of God.
In these days of materialism we need such a
book to aw aken us to the glory which awaits us
in heaven.
Meditations on ten texts make up the ten
chapters of this book. They are meditation at
its best, for the author is constantly teaching. He
is not just presenting sentimental thoughts, but is
instructing out the Word of God. A few quota
tions will show the high value of this book.
“In our struggle many people never see the
full glory of being children of God. Our text
w riter tries to tie these together when he says,
‘We know that, when he shall appear, we shall
be like him, for we shall see him as he is.’ He
does not answ er all the questions concerning our
coming heavenly existence. He does not unfold
for us the full riches of that glory and the full
meaning of its physical and spiritual significance.
Even John does not know these details; but he does
know that when Christ shall appear we shall be
like Him and we shall see Him as He is. This is
enough for the Apostle John. This ought to be
enough for us. This should be enough for us.
This should create in us an awareness of the re
ality of the glory that now is ours, and anticipation
of that which shall be complete when life is fin
ished” (p. 16).
“Yet there is one purpose and one desire that
all of us should seek to cultivate. We should make
our living and our dying, our funeral and our
possible memorial a God-glorifying reality, so
that to Him may be given all praise, honor and
glory. . . . There is hope for our loved ones and
hope for us. The grave is not our goal, there is
much that awaits us beyond. And this glory
should not be considered one that is only blessing
and strength to the individual who passes. It is
a glory in which God is in the center and man
His worshipper enlightened by His grace and
glory. . . . ‘The word of God abideth forever’ ”
(p. 52).
“Let us take courage and let us receive new
enthusiasm from the Lord. Let us be assured of
the fact that each one of us can say, ‘Glory Awaits
Me.’ This should be a present reality for all of
life, because of our present standing and the hope
of our future relationship to Jesus Christ in all
eternity” (p. 108).
It is regrettable that there are a few glaring
errors in printing. We trust that there will be a
wide circulation for this fine book.
— Philip W. Martin
THE SAINTS’ EVERLASTING REST, by
Richard Baxter. Sovereign Grace Book Club, 413
S. E. First St., Evansville, Ind. Photo reprint of
1840 edition, pp. 176. No price stated.
It has been said of Richard Baxter “that if he
had lived in prim itive times he had been one of
the fathers of the church.” He was born in 1615
and died in 1691. He lived during days of trouble
for the church in England. His works were var
ious. Dr. Bates, preaching at bis funeral, stated
“that his books, for the num ber and variety of
m atter in them, make a library.” The Saints’
Everlasting Rest was w ritten at a time when Bax
te r’s health was in a languid condition. He was
only 34 years of age and it manifests the m arvel
lous m aturity of his spiritual growth at that time.
This treatise is based on the text “There rem aineth therefore a rest to the people of God”
(Heb. 4:9). The author deals with the meaning
192
of the term and then goes on to discuss the char
acter of those for whom such rest is intended, the
misery of those who lose the saints’ rest, and the
assurance of a title to such rest. Practical sug
gestions are given as to how a Christian should
live a heavenly life upon earth, and emphasis is
laid upon the necessity of cultivating a serious
contemplation of heavenly realities.
While Baxter has been accused of endeavour
ing to steer a middle course between Calvinism
and Arminianism there is nothing to fear in read
ing this work. Typical of the age in which it was
written, the style is verbose and repetition
abounds. There is much to rew ard the person
who patiently and thoroughly studies this Puritan
classic, and we commend this effort on the part
of the Sovereign Grace Book Club, in making it
available in such attractive volumes.
— Alexander Barkley
ROMANS, by Robert Haldane. Vol. II (Chap.
4-7), pp. 310. $2.00. Vol. Ill (Chap. 8), pp. 160.
$2.00. Sovereign Grace Book Club, 413 S. E. First
St., Evansville, Ind.
In Vol. II there is an exposition of chapters
4, 5, 6 and 7, while Vol. Ill deals with chapter 8.
The same high standard of analysing the teaching
of each verse is maintained, and much helpful de
votional m aterial is provided. Haldane’s sympa
thy for the Baptist position of total immersion is
evidenced in his exposition of chap. 6. “The rite
of baptism,” he states, “exhibits Christians as dy
ing, as buried, and as risen with Christ.” Little
effort is made to deal with the expression “Bap
tized into Jesus Christ” and its theological impli
cations. Chap. 7 is interpreted as referring to the
experience of the believer in the course of sancti
fication.
Almost the whole of Vol. Ill is devoted to the
exposition of chap. 8. “This chapter,” he writes,
“presents a glorious display of the power of the
Divine grace and of the provision which God has
made for the consolation of His people.” Included
in this volume there is an excellent treatise on the
“Sanctification of the Sabbath.”
This is a useful and suggestive commentary
for those who are not acquainted with the Greek.
THE GOSPEL OF THE SPIRIT, by Samuel
Eyles Pierce. Wm. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., Grand
Rapids 3, Mich. 1955, pp. 104. $1.50.
This is a work of a Biblical scholar of the
early nineteenth century. There are two parts.
P art I consists of three chapters on “The Person
and Office of the Holy Spirit.” In these chapters
the author deals with the Scriptural proofs for the
personality of the Holy Spirit, His love to the
elect and His work in the church.
P art II deals with “the Work of the Holy
Spirit in the Redeemed” and embraces such doc
trines as “The Holy Spirit in the Covenant of
Grace” and the work of the Spirit in Regenera
tion, Conversion, Sanctification, Perseverance,
Prayer and Preparation for Death.
Throughout this little volume the appeal is
constantly to the Scriptures, both the Old Testa
ment and the New. The influence of the Bible
is reflected in the style and the book is easy to
read.
The so-called Keswick movement has resulted
in widespread Arminian teaching regarding sancti
fication and the Spirit-filled life. It is therefore
gratifying to read such a work of intrinsic ex
cellence. It is in a treatise like this that the cor
rective can be found for the error that is so wide
ly propagated. For young Christians seeking
earnestly to grow in grace, this book is worthy
of commendation.
THE HOLY SPIRIT OF GOD, by W. H. G rif
fith Thomas. Wm. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., Grand
Rapdis 3, Mich. 1955, pp. xv, 303. $3.00.
These lectures were first delivered on the L.
P. Stone Foundation at Princeton Theological
Seminary in 1913. Dr. Griffith Thomas in his con
clusion states, “It is adm itted by all that we are
living in difficult and solemn days. The outlook
depresses the earnest soul, for w herever he turns
he is conscious of elements of evil and trouble,
and of strange conditions in the Church and in the
world. Callousness becomes more defined; in
difference more widespread; the love of many
waxes cold; universal charity tends to tolerate
many forms of false teaching, and as a result the
clear witness of the Church to Christ is hindered”
(p. 270). If this was true in 1913 it is just as
descriptive of conditions in 1956. This is a time
ly reproduction of a useful and im portant book
It is not an exhaustive study of the subject, but
it is comprehensive and abounds w ith suggestions
for those wishing to read more widely.
The contents are arranged in four sections,
dealing respectively w ith the Biblical Revelation,
Historical Interpretation, Theological Formulation
and Practical Application of the doctrine of the
Holy Spirit. Many quotations are given from
various writers including Swete, Smeaton, Moberly, Walker, Garvie, Moule, Forsyth, Denney, etc.
Some of these writers held liberal views in the
realm of Biblical criticism and in doctrine. While
the quotations on the whole are sound there is'no
distinction made between the general views of the
scholars quoted. The appearance of numerous
quotations does not make reading tedious, for Dr.
Thomas has shown skill in the choice of such.
The reader, therefore, is enriched by these brief
but suggestive introductions to some of the more
im portant works on the Holy Spirit.
193
In a series of notes attention is directed to a
large num ber of subsidiary topics such as “The
Fulness of the Spirit,” “Baptism of the Spirit,”
etc., and references are given to books in which
these questions are m ore fully considered. The
usefulness of the volume is also enhanced by the
provision of an index of subjects, an index of
authors and an index of texts.
Many publications from Dispensational, A r
minian and Pentecostal sources are in wide circu
lation with resultant confusion regarding the doc
trine of the Holy Spirit. It is with gratitude that
we welcome the third edition of this important
series of lectures by a scholar widely known for
his devotion to the Scriptures and the depth of
his spiritual experiences.
CHRIST’S BRETHREN, by Cecil J. Lowry.
The Tabernacle Book Room, 425 10th St., Oakland,
The author of this polemic against “the heresy
of ultra-dispensationalism” was himself once in
th at school and wrote a book, “God’s Plan for the
Ages,” in defence of it. He therefore writes from
conviction brought upon him by the Spirit as he
thought he did God service. His repudiation of
his former associates is m arked by courtesy to
them.
Mr. Lowry defends the traditional view of the
church as the one body of God’s redeemed in both
dispensations against the dispensational view that
Old Testament prophecy has not a word to say
about the church. Christ’s brethren are those who
love Him and do His will, not the racial stock of
Israel. This is shown to be the belief of the
Church from the Apostles down to the present
time, except for the dispensational school arising
about a century and a half ago.
At one point the author makes a rather puzz
ling statem ent: “We now approach the end of the
second day of the Messiah” (p. 36). The context
does not shed any light on whether this is some
new “dispensationalism.”
The work contains a great amount of informa
tion on the subject, including many quotations
from many sources.
— E. Clark Copeland
toral Epistles against the “Fictional Approach” of
F. C. Baur, H. J. Holtzmann and M artin Dibelius;
and the “Fragm ent Approach” of Credner, P. N.
Harrison and B. S. Easton. The author’s investi
gation is limited to the psychological factors in
volved in the problem, and results in clear evi
dence that the Pastorals are undoubtedly the work
of the m ature mind and experience of the author
of the other ten Pauline Epistles, not of second or
third century church leaders seeking to give
authority to their teachings by writing over Paul’s
signature.
Among other things, in examining the vo
cabulary, doctrine, style and content determining
the psychological factors, the author presents four
valuable word charts to support his analysis, two
of them being compiled, ironically enough, from
P. N. Harrison’s work in support of the “Frag
ment Approach.”
The work is, of course, a technical one, but it
is w ritten in plain language with a simple style
that an interested layman may well grasp. Such
studies are most valuable in keeping pastors and
laymen abreast of the theological thought of our
day. The Graduate Fellowship of England is to
be congratulated on its fine work in conducting
these lectures and printing them for those of us
who cannot hear them delivered.
SOME MODERN RELIGIONS, by J. Oswald
Sanders and J. Stafford Wright. The Tyndale
Press, 39 Bedford Square, London, W.C. 1, Eng
land. 1956, pp. 61, paper cover. 2 shillings. In
U.S.A.: The Inter-Varsity Christian Fellowship,
1444 North Astor, Chicago 10, 111.
The purpose of this work is to give the basic
information necessary to compare the claims of
some of the modern cults with the doctrines of
evangelical Christianity. Christian Science, Sev
enth-Day Adventism, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Spir
itualism, Christadelphianism and Theosophy each
have a chapter devoted to them. An appendix
gives brief notes on Anthroposophy, Baha’ism,
Cooneyites, I AM Cult, Mormonism, New Thought,
Swedenborgianism, Unitarianism and the Unity
School of Christianity.
THE PASTORAL EPISTLES AND THE
MIND OF PAUL, by D. Guthrie. The Tyndale
Press, 39 Bedford Square, London, W.C.l, England.
1956, pp. 44, paper cover. Is. 6d. In U.S.A.: The
Inter-Varsity Christian Fellowship, 1444 N. Astor,
Chicago 10, 111.
A very brief historical sketch is given of each
cult, followed by quotations from their own books
presenting the doctrine taught concerning such
things as God, the Trinity, Christ, Creation, the
Atonement, the way of Salvation; then there is a
general discussion of the cult. This is a most
excellent method to follow as it presents their
doctrines in their own words with Scripture set
down beside them. For this we most heartily
recommend it.
The author of this 1955 Tyndale New Testa
m ent Lecture is Tutor in New Testament at Lon
don Bible College. The lecture is a clear, scholar
ly defense of the Pauline authorship of the Pas
The reviewer finds the general discussion of
Seventh-Day Adventism very weak for the follow
ing reason: It presents a false antithesis between
law and grace. The Sabbath as a part of the
194
decalogue was limited, it is said, to the Jewish
nation and the land of Palestine in its application.
The claim is made that the Sabbath was an inte
gral part of a law which “disappeared” when
Christ nailed it to His cross (Col. 2:14). It fails
to make the proper distinction between the
Christian’s obligation to perform all the revealed
will of God and salvation by works. Though it
is shown that the Seventh Day has been super
seded by the First Day, a false conception is
given: “we do not observe the Lord’s Day be
cause we must, but because we may. We do so
gladly and willingly from love to Him, and not
because of legal restraint." Such half-truths are
dangerous. Thus this section fails to present
sound reasons for rejecting the Seventh-Day Ad
ventist cult, though the former section gives a
clear picture of their unscriptural views in gen
eral.
With this reservation, we recommend the
w ork especially for Sabbath School teachers and
youth workers who need to be able to point out
clearly the pitfalls of the many vigorously propa
gated isms of our day.
MISSION FIELDS TODAY, A BRIEF WORLD
SURVEY, edited by A. J. Dain. The Inter-Varsity
Fellowship (The Tyndale Press), 39 Bedford
Square, London, W.C. 1, England. 1956, pp. 126,
paper cover. 4 shillings. In U.S.A.': The InterVarsity Christian Fellowship, 1444 North Astor,
Chicago 10, 111.
The British Co-Secretary of the World Evan
gelical Fellowship has done a valuable service
to the Christian world in publishing this survey
of the position of the main mission fields of the
world today. The object of the work is to set forth
as nearly as possible an up-to-date picture of the
impact of the church and the task of the mission
ary. As the factors affecting the missionary and
the young churches are very rapidly changing
in these post-war years, the editor faced a most
difficult task. He has so succeeded as to provide
a most interesting and challenging work.
The editor gives a concrete picture of the situ
ation through a num ber of statistical tables show
ing population, ratio of missionaries to popula
tion, size of local church, number of local workers,
etc. Most of these statistics are taken from the
World Christian Handbook for 1952. One wishes
later figures had been available.
The short paragraph on Cyprus is of interest
in that it is said that “in Nicosia, the capital,
there is an American Academy, where, so it was
reported, the Holy Spirit has been working among
girl students, and where some of the Christians
have been used in child evangelism” (p. 86). It is
not known who provided the m aterial on Cyprus.
This booklet should prove a challenging
study for missionary societies and youth groups,
especially. It certainly stirs one w ith the sense of
the vast unevangelized masses in comparison to
the few laborers, and the many adversaries in the
way.
— E. C lark Copeland
Tracts and Booklets published by the Com
mittee on Christian Education of the Orthodox
Presbyterian Church, Belvldere Road, Phillipsburg, N. J.
All of these works are attractively bound,
printed on good quality paper, presented in simple
language, thoughtful and reasoned in approach,
inviting attentive use. The Committee is to be
commended for its splendid work in the presenta
tion of the Reformed Faith.
THE ORDAINED LAMPSTAND, by Edwards
E. Elliott. 1955, pp. 11, pocket size, paper cover.
10 cents.
In a day when much of the evangelistic mes
sage is focused on the individual, this tract is a
timely statement of the nature and form of the
visible church and her responsibility to maintain
a corporate witness in confession and life for the
glory of God. Pastors would do well to see that
a supply of this tract is on hand for distribution
to their congregations and passed on when read.
ARE YOU A BIBLICAL BAPTIST? by George
W. Marston. 1955, pp. 27, pocket size, paper cover.
15 cents.
A brief, yet exceptionally clear, statem ent of
the Scriptural bases of infant baptism by sprink
ling. The conclusions are that the meaning of the
word “baptism” is not “immersion,” but that it
stands for spiritual union with Christ. No New
Testment incident describes immersion as the
mode of baptism; on the contrary, the New Testa
ment term concerning the application of the blood
of Christ for cleansing is “sprinkling” (Heb.
9:10-23), taken from the Old Testament. Baptism
is the seal of the Covenant of Grace, given by
Christ in place of the previous seal, circumcision.
The application of Baptism is determ ined by the
terms of the Covenant of Grace. This clearly in
cludes the children of believers both in the New
Testament and in the Old Testament. Infant
baptism is one of the many things clearly taught
in the New Testament, but not directly command
ed in it. We heartily recommend this statement
for the confirmation of Covenant parents and the
persuasion of others.
DO YOU BELIEVE? by Edward J. Young.
1954, pp. 37, paper cover. 25 cents.
This excellent tract is designed to lead an
unbeliever to Christ. Dr. Young begins by con
fronting the sinner w ith his sinful attem pt to
suppress the knowledge of God that he has by the
195
light of nature and the Scriptures. From the
outset the reader cannot escape the fact that he
is a sinner of such a nature that he cannot be
saved except by the wholly unmerited, free grace
of God, and that no action or condition in him
self brings God to save him. It ends with the often
neglected, yet truly Scriptural, injunction that
the person who has confessed faith in Christ
should seek membership in the church as the
necessary expression of his confession and means
of his growth in grace.
This tract will serve a very valuable purpose
especially among Covenant young people who
have come to the saving knowledge of Christ. A
bit briefer statem ent might have wider use among
the unchurched. We would like to see more tracts
of this type.
A MESSAGE TO THOUGHTFUL INQUIR
ERS, by Henry W. Coray. 1954, pp. 11, paper cover.
15 cents.
A truly Reformed Gospel tract for the un
saved, so interestingly w ritten as to stimulate
inquiry into the way of salvation. Mr. Coray’s
vivid style, interesting illustrations and Reformed
presentation of the Gospel challenge the reader
to listen earnestly and with open mind to God’s
plea to come to Him. This tract is most heartily
recommended.
CONFESSING CHRIST, by Calvin K. Cum
mings. 1955, pp. 62, paper cover. 35 cents.
The author calls his book a primer of the Re
formed Faith to be used w ith communicant classes.
There are six chapters whose titles describe the
contents and unity of the course: 1. The Bible —
the Basis of our Confession. 2. Christ — The One
We Confess. 3. Repentance and Faith — Require
ments of a True Confession. 4. The Christian Life
— Living our Confession. 5. The Church — Unit
ing with Others in our Confession. 6. The Sacra
ments and Prayer — Means of Grace for the Chris
tian Confession.
The simple language and style, references,
questions and topics for discussion make it a fine
pupil’s book as well as a pastor’s book. It will
not w ear out with the completion of the communi
cant’s Class.
(End of booklets pub. by Comm, on Christian
Education)
by Herman Hoeksema. Wm. B. Eerdmans Pub.
Co., G rand Rapids 3, Mich. 1955, pp. 195. $2.50.
This is the 9th volume of an Exposition of the
Heidelberg Catechism. It covers the Catechism’s
treatm ent of the second table of the Law in a
very satisfactory and comprehensive way. One or
two general criticisms may be made at the outset.
While the argum ent is always quite clear, the
language is sometimes clumsy and does not give
the sense very definitely. The author has an un
qualified hatred of the doctrine of Common Grace,
and takes every opportunity to attack the principle.
Indeed, w ithout attem pt at proof, he says cate
gorically in page 123, “There is no common grace.”
He holds that the commandments have no appli
cation to man in general, but are to be preached
only to those who love the Lord. And even then
he fears lest preaching the law becomes merely a
m atter of civic righteousness.
Readers of the book, however, will find a
wealth of m aterial of the finest spiritual kind and
will readily accept the author’s unhesitating de
nunciation of many of the sins and errors that are
common today. He underlines the mutual re
sponsibilities of parents and children, and shows
that obedience in the home and in other spheres
of life represents our part in the Covenant. He
shows in the comment on the sixth Command
ment that the Reformed Confessions all allow
war, and never taught Pacifism, and in a day when
many nations, Britain included, are abandoning
the practice of Capital Punishment, he shows that
the punishment of m urderers by death is ac
cording to the Law of God.
His treatm ent of m arriage and divorce is some
what unusual. He deals with marriage as a posi
tive contract and affirms that the tie cannot be
broken. For him, divorce is merely the separation
of two people who have become unfaithful to one
another. The tie cannot be dissolved, they are
still married, so that the remarriage of the divorc
ed parties, w hether they have been innocent or
guilty, is not possible. Hoeksema contends that
there is no difference between the innocent and the
guilty as far as divorce is concerned, and takes
his stand with the Roman Catholic Church, against
the m ajority of the Reformed Confessions, by de
claring that rem arriage of one who has been ad
judged the innocent party in divorce, is just adul
tery.
In dealing with the tenth Commandment, the
author shows that covetousness illustrates the cor
ruption of m an’s whole nature. He denounces many
modern views of Perfectionism and the Antinomianism that is prevalent in many evangelical
circles.
Readers will be rewarded by a study of this
volume in which the law of God is searchingly
applied to hum an conduct and social relation
ships.
— Adam Loughridge
THESE ALSO SUFFER, by William Goulooze.
Baker Book House, Grand Rapids 6, Mich. 1955,
pp. 86. $1.75.
196
Here are ten short stories of men and women
who have sought to glorify God in the midst of
trial and sorrow. The author himself was, until
his decease, a m an who bore the cross of afflic
tion, and who by the w ritten and spoken word en
deavoured to m inister the consolation of the Gospel
to troubled hearts. There is something in the
little volume to cheer and encourage those who
have burdens to bear. In it we meet Anna Marie
Weidner, paralyzed, in great pain, bereft of p ar
ents, and sister Gabrielle in a European concen
tration camp, who sought not only resignation to
God’s will, but acceptance of it in humble faith. We
are humbled as we hear the story of Carolyn
Ghysels Ettervold, who finds joy and comfort in
the presence of God though she m ust spend much
of her life in an iron lung. We hear of Mrs. Marie
Messinga, a child of God who lost her four children
in a fire that destroyed her home, and who later
became completely blind.
Here are stories, rich in interest and appeal,
that should prove an encouragement to many.
They give us a refreshing antidote on the one
hand to present-day teaching on “divine healing”,
and on the other hand to that spirit of rebellion
that questions God’s purposes by asking, “Why do
men suffer?” They illustrate clearly how “All
things work together for good to them that love
God, to them who are called according to His pur
pose,” and how the grace of God is sufficient for
all His children who are sorely afflicted. The
book is well w ritten and neatly produced.
— Adam Loughridge
SEVEN WORDS OF LOVE, by G. Hall Todd.
Baker Book House, Grand Rapid’s 6, Mich. 1955,
pp. 71. $1.50.
The seven sayings of Christ on the cross have
been the subjects of sermons by preachers through
the ages. They have been the basis of much of
our devotional reading, and it takes a bold man
to add to the already long list of works from pens
as famous as those of W. M. Clow, C. H. Spurgeon,
A. A. Bonar, Hugh M artin and A. W. Pink.
The seven brief studies in this volume, how
ever, have a certain m erit in that they are fresh
and original and demonstrate in a rather striking
way the Spirit of Christ our Saviour. They are
well illustrated from events in history and from
the author’s personal experience, while his use of
sacred poetry adds to the spirit and tone of the
addresses.
Dr. Todd has interpreted the texts in a truly
Scriptural and practical way, while, like all good
preachers, he has enforced the truth he proclaims
in a very personal and pointed way. It is evident
as one reads the sermons that the author has a re
gard for the doctrines of the Reformed Faith for
he makes regular quotations from the Westminster
Shorter Catechism, and in a m anner that seems
to indicate his approval of its teaching. The
studies are inspiring and suggestive m aterial for
the preacher and Bible student.
— Adam Loughridge
TAUGHT OF THE LORD: HELPS FOR JUN
IOR LEADERS, by Anna P. McKelvy. Published
by the Women’s Synodical Missionary Society of
the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North
America. Order copies from Chester R. Fox, 209
Ninth St., Pittsburg 22, Pa. 1954, pp. 60. SVixll
inches, plastic binding, paper cover. $1.25.
Here are fifty-two attractive and helpful
Bible lessons for Junior classes of the Sabbath
School. They have been used and already blessed
by the Holy Spirit in bringing the children to
Christ, and the author sends them out with the
prayer that they may be so used again. The sub
jects are chosen in a very topical way and are ap
propriate to the seasons of the year. Scripture
passages are selected to make a special appeal at
the New Year, at spring-cleaning time, fishing,
Synod, Thanksgiving Day, harvest, Communion,
etc.
Important doctrines like Baptism, the Lord’s
Supper, Prayer, the Sabbath Day, are dealt with
in an interesting way, while there are such strik
ing titles as God’s Jewel Case, The Golden Gloves
and The Bible Squadron.
It is quite obvious that the author has a first
rate grasp of the child-mind, and the stories that
illustrate the lessons are carefully chosen and well
told. The book contains a num ber of pictures and
designs for the children to use and to cut out for
use in class, while there are various suggestions
as to how the children might be made to use their
hands as well as their heads in preparing the
lesson for the day.
Throughout the series of studies, the w riter
is diligent to commend the doctrine, the worship
and the discipline of the Reformed Presbyterian
Church, and all the hints given to teachers should
be most helpful in making the class work of a
high and profitable standard. The key text is
Isaiah 54:13, “And all thy children shall be taught
of the Lord; and great shall be the peace of thy
children.”
— Adam Loughridge
R. Wells. W. A. Wilde Co., 131 Clarendon St.,
Boston 16, Mass. 1955, pp. 128. $1.50.
The author makes an appeal to Bible lovers to
read the Bible through at least once. “You should
do it,” he says, “if you care for your mind and if
you care for your soul.” The volume contains a
course in Bible reading, completing the Bible in
one year, with a portion for each day and with
daily suggestions for meditation and for further
study. It encourages the reading of the Word in
a regular, systematic way. The plan suggests, on
an average, two or three chapters a day according
197
to length. Genesis is covered in seventeen days.
Each book of the Bible is introduced by a brief
sum m ary of its contents.
The plan has been found useful and practical
by many Christians in all parts of the world, and
the author, who lays no claim to scholarship, but
who w rites devotionally as a Bible lover, has
summarised beautifully his own experience in the
m atter of Bible reading, in his well known poem,
“When I Read the Bible Through.”
(Editor’s Note: We hope to be able to publish
this poem, D.V., in the next issue of this maga
zine.)
— Adam Loughridge
TER, by Amos R. Wells. W. A. Wilde Co., 131
Clarendon St., Boston 16, Mass. 1955, pp. 343. $2.00.
This is a most interesting and most valuable
book, and possibly the best value for the money
available today. It covers the whole Bible, a
chapter a day, with devotional meditation of a
personal kind on each of the chapters. It was pub
lished originally in serial form, covering a period
of three years.
The author has used the word “My” in the
title for each chapter comment, and has thus
related the teaching of the chapter to the be
liever's experience in every day life. The chief
aim of the colume is to promote communion with
the Most High, and some illustrations drawn at
random will show how well the author achieves
his aim. The comment on Exodus 31 he entitles
“My Sabbaths” and says, “They shall be a per
petual covenant, it seems. A token of my fidelity
to God. A token of God’s love to me, days of
Communion, days of partnership, days of friend
ship. If I break away from them, am I not break
ing away from God? Ah, let me make my Sab
bath a delight! Let me love its every hour, be
cause I love its God.”
Isaiah 53 he calls “My Saviour,” and he
writes, “He was a man of sorrows, that I might
be a man of joy. He was wounded and heavy
laden, that I might walk unburdened and unhurt..
He was dumb that I might speak. He was smitten
that I might be healed. Ah, shall He not see of
the travail of His soul and be satisfied in me?”
Or take a third illustration from Mark 12,
entitled “My Mite.” “Let me give as the poor
widow gave. If I give as she gave, I shall have
nothing left. If I give as she gave, I shall have all
things gained. She entered bearing her whole
livelihood. She w ent away, bearing life, which is
better than livelihood.”
— Adam Loughridge
Books Received
The announcement of the books listed below should not be
construed as a recommendation. A review of those found in this
list which we regard as having value for our readers will be given
in a later issue.
Publications of Baker Book House, Grand
Rapids 6, Mich.
LUKE THE PHYSICIAN, by William M.
Ramsay. 1908, reprinted 1956, pp. 418. $4.50.
DEVOTIONS AND PRAYERS OF JOHN CAL
VIN, ed. by Charles E. Edwards. 1954, pp. 120,
pocket size. $1.00.
THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS, translated and
edited by J. B. Lightfoot. 1891, reprinted 1956, pp.
288. $3.95.
THE EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS, by
Robert Johnstone. 1875, reprinted 1955, pp. xii,
490. $3.95.
Publications of William B. Eerdmans Publishing
Co., Grand Rapids 3, Mich.
TO THE MESSIAH, by Alfred Edersheim. 1901, re
printed 1955, pp. xxiv, 391. $3.75,
William M. Ramsay. 1954, pp. 510. $4.20.
I AND II THESSALONIANS, by William
Hendriksen. 1955, pp. 214. $4.50.
THE SECRET OF THE LORD, by William M.
Clow. 1955, pp. 353. $2.95.
THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES, by David
Thomas. 1955, pp. 493. $3.95.
OUR REASONABLE FAITH, by
Bavinck. 1956, pp. 568. $6.95.
Herman
PHILIPPIANS: THE GOSPEL AT WORK, by
Merrill C. Tenney. 1956, pp. 102. $2.00.
MARK’S SKETCHBOOK OF CHRIST, by
Helen J. Tenney. 1956, pp. 110, size 7x11 inches,
paper cover. No price stated.
THE TRIUMPH OF GRACE IN THE
THEOLOGY OF KARL BARTH, by G. C. Berkouwer. 1956, pp. 414. $4.95.
THE TEACHING OF THE EPISTLE TO THE
HEBREWS, by Geerhardus Vos. 1956, pp. 124.
$ 2 .00 .
198
WITH JESUS ON THE NAVAJO ROAD, by
Jacob and Christina Bolt. 1956, pp. 120. $2.00.
LAND, by J. Howard Kitchen. 1955, pp. 160. $2.50.
TURE, by G. H. Lang. 1955, pp. 400. $3.50.
THE EPISTLES OF PAUL TO THE PHILIPPIANS AND TO PHILEMON, by J. J. Mueller.
1955, pp. 200. $3.50.
SCRIPTURE, by Bernard Ramm. 1954, pp. 368.
$4.00.
PHILOSOPHY OF REVELATION, by Herman
Bavinck. 1953, pp. x, 349. $3.50.
1954, pp. 271. $3.50.
MAN OF SORROWS, by Herman Hoeksema.
1956, pp. 129. $2.00.
THE SELF-DISCLOSURE OF JESUS, by
Geerhardus Vos. 1954, pp. 311. $4.00.
Publications of Presbyterian and Reformed Pub
lishing Co., 147 North 10th St., Philadelphia 7, Pa.
WHAT PRESBYTERIANS BELIEVE: AN
EXPOSITION OF THE WESTMINSTER CON
FESSION, by Gordon H. Clark. 1956, pp. 130, paper
cover. $2.00.
CALVIN AND AUGUSTINE, by Benjamin B.
Warfield. 1956, pp. 507. $4.95.
J. M. Spier. 1953, pp. 140. $3.00.
Marcellus Kik. 1955, pp. 192. $2.50.
Publications of Committee on Christian Education
of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, Belvidere
Road, Phillipsburg, N. J.
ARE YOU A CHRISTIAN? by Lawrence R.
Eyres. 1954, pp. 38, paper cover. 25 cents.
THE FREE OFFER OF THE GOSPEL, by
John M urray and Ned B. Stonehouse. 1955, pp. 27,
pocket size, paper cover. 25 cents.
BIBLE DOCTRINE: UNIT ONE, BOOKS ONE
AND TWO, by Dorothy Partington. 1955, two
volumes, total about 325 pages, paper covers, plas
tic binding. Pupil’s Workbook $1.25. Teacher’s
Manual $1.50.
Publications of Society for Reformed Publications,
1519 East Fulton St., Grand Rapids, Mich.
THE REFORMED PULPIT (SYMPOSIUM),
VOLUME I. 1955, pp. 145. $2.00
WHAT IS CHRISTIAN BAPTISM? by M. Eu
gene Osterhaven. 1956, pp. 59, paper cover. 50
cents.
THE KING JAMES VERSION DEFENDED!
A CHRISTIAN VIEW OF THE NEW TESTA
MENT MANUSCRIPTS, by Edward F. Hills.
Christian Research Press, 5011 Hickman Road,
Des Moines, Iowa. 1956, pp. 158, paper cover.
$1.50.
CLOSER TO CHRIST VIA THE QUIET
HOUR, by Caroline K. Sapsford. Inter-County
Leader Publishers, Frederic, Wisconsin. 1952, pp.
81, paper cover. 75 cents.
NEW TESTAMENT MANUAL FOR HIGH
SCHOOL BIBLE STUDY, by W. C. Rarick and
C. R. Maxam. Standard Publishing Co., Cincin
nati, Ohio. 1927, pp. 61, paper cover. 40 cents.
Kampen, Netherlands. 1953, pp. xi, 202, paper
EXPOSITORY DISCOURSES ON FIRST
PETER, by John Brown. Sovereign Grace Book
Club, 413 E. First St., Evansville, Ind. 1956, 3 vol
umes, total pages 1411. P er set $11.95.
THE SATISFACTION OF CHRIST, by A r
thur W. Pink. Bible T ruth Depot, Swengel, Pa.
1955, pp. 313. $3.95.
TION, by Bernard Ramm. W. A. Wilde Co., 131
Clarendon St., Boston 16, Mass. 1950, pp. 197. $2.50.
WHITHER ISRAELI? MOSAIC RESTORATIONISM EXAMINED, by Cecil J. Lowry. The
Tabernacle Book Room, 425 10th St., Oakland,
Reminder to Book Reviewers
Since publishing a “Reminder to Book Re
viewers” in the July-Septem ber issue, we have
received a considerable num ber of book reviews,
making it possible to publish reviews of 29 books
in the present issue, and reducing the backlog of
unreviewed books from 56 to 41. We appreciate
this cooperation and wish to express thanks to
those who responded to the appeal in the last
issue. In particular we wish to express hearty
thanks to overseas reviewers who have helped
most generously in this departm ent of Blue Ban
ner Faith and Life.
199
We still have a large backlog of reviews to be
published. All of the books in the foregoing list
have been assigned to reviewers who have (with
one or two exceptions) kindly promised to review
them. Some of the books, however, have been
in the hands of reviewers for many months, and
In some cases as long as two years. It would be
much appreciated if those who have had books a
long time would make a special effort to review
them soon so that this backlog can be cleared.
Brief notices will be very acceptable in case re
viewers prefer not to attem pt longer reviews.
— Editor
Thanks for Financial Help
In response to the appeal published on page
119 of the July-September issue we have received
to date (September 7) 18 contributions totalling
$382.50. Some money was also received from sub
scriptions and sales of back issues. About $50.00
is still needed to complete publication for 1956
■without a deficit. We wish to express hearty
thanks to all who have helped in this m atter.
Contributions are always welcome, whether the
amount is large or small. Numbered receipts are
sent promptly to all donors. In sending contribu
tions please make remittances payable to Blue
Banner Faith and Life and mail them to 3408 7th
Avenue, Beaver Falls, Pa.
— J. G. Vos, Editor & Manager
Readers are invited to submit Biblical, doctrinal and practical
questions for answer in this department. Names will not be pub
lished with questions, but anonymous communications will be dis
regarded.
Question:
A pastor of another denomination said that
Calvinism and Arminianism are both true. He
held that each of them is half of the tru th and
you have to take them together to get the whole
truth. What should be thought of this idea?
Answer:
The type of thinking suggested in the above
query is often met with. Those who hold such an
idea are obviously unfamiliar with the history of
the controversy between Calvinism and Arm inian
ism, and do not have a clear understanding of
what the teachings of Calvinism are.
The differences between these two systems
w ere sharply defined at the Synod of Dort in
1618-19. At the points of difference between
them, each of these systems is a flat contradic
tion of the other. It is therefore very foolish and
misleading to say that they are BOTH true and
m ust be taken together to get the whole truth. The
famous “Five Points of Calvinism” are contra
dictions of the five Arminian doctrines against
which they were framed. When two propositions
are m utually contradictory, one or the other must
be true, but they cannot both be true. Columbus
discovered America in 1492, or he did not discover
America in 1492. Who would be so foolish as to
hold that these contradictory statements must be
combined to get the real truth about Columbus?
Similarily. God either is or is not absolutely
sovereign over His creatures, man either is or is
not totally depraved, Christ’s atonement either is
or is not intended by God to save every human
being that ever lived, the saving grace of God
either is or is not irresistible, and those who are
truly in Christ either are or are not sure to per
severe unto eternal life. Calvinism holds one side
of these alternatives, Arminianism holds the oth
er. But who can hold both at the same time?
The person who says that Calvinism and
Arminianism are both true — that they are m ut
ually complementary aspects of truth — is always
a person who does not have a clear and correct
understanding of w hat the teachings of Calvinism
are. The argument is put up in some such form
as the following: Calvinism teaches the sovereign
ty of God, and Arminianism teaches the responsi
bility (or freedom) of man. We should follow
Calvin in his emphasis on God’s sovereignty, and
Arminius in his stress on man’s responsibility.
This type of statement, however, overlooks
the fact that Calvinism stresses the responsibility
of man just as strongly as Arminianism does —
indeed, more strongly. The Arminian stresses the
responsibility of man alone; the Calvinist stresses
the sovereignty of God AND the responsibility of
man. Everything that is true in Arminianism is
also taught by Calvinism. What really dis
tinguishes the Arminian is not his stress on the
responsibility of man but his denial of the
sovereignty of God.
200
Arminians can be Christians and be saved
only because they are inconsistent and do not real
ly believe in Arminianism all the way. If they
followed Arminian principles consistently to the
end of the road they would have to believe that
man is his own saviour. But by a happy incon
sistency they are kept from this. An Arminian
will say insistently that everything depends on
the sinner. A famous evangelist is quoted as hav
ing said, “God’s hands are tied. He can only wait
for you to make the decision.^ If consistently be
lieved, this would be faith in autonomous man
and a limited God. But the Arminian evangelist
does not really believe it. Immediately after fin
ishing his sermon he will pray fervently for the
Holy Spirit to work in the hearts of the people
that they may be saved. We approve of such
prayer, but we should realize that it is incon
sistent with Arminian principles. If “God’s hands
are tied” and if everything depends on a decision
of man which God does not control, what can be
the use of praying to God for the salvation of sin
ners? It would seem that the prayer should be
addressed to the sinners, on whose free will
everything is said to depend.
What w e are trying to show is that the
Arminian does not really believe his Arminian
principles. He does not believe them consistently,
for however much he may say th at everything
depends on man’s free will, if he is a Christian,
he still realizes in the bottom of his heart that
after all everything depends on the power of God’s
Holy Spirit.
Calvinism is simply Biblical Christianity. It
accepts the whole teaching of God’s Word. It is
not guilty of the denial of man’s moral responsi
bility which is often charged against it.
— J. G. Vos
Question:
Who decided what books should be included
in the New Testament, and on w hat basis was
the decision made?
Answer:
God the Father gave all authority in heaven
and earth to the God-man, His Son Jesus Christ
(Matt. 28:18-20). Jesus Christ appointed the
twelve apostles and delegated authority to them
for the establishment and organization of the
Visible Church (Matt. 18:18; John 20:21). The
apostles and some men associated w ith them
wrote the books which form the New Testament.
These writings were imposed on the Church by
the apostles. They are divinely inspired and
therefore they are “Scripture” (see Rev. 1:1-3;
22:18, 19; 2 Peter 3:15, 16; 1 Cor. 14:37). The
Early Church decided, on the basis of the evi
dence, which books had been w ritten or sanc
tioned by the apostles. Because these books were
known to be apostolic, the Church recognized
them as inspired Scripture.
Because the Church recognized them as in
spired Scripture, the Church included them in
the “canon” or list of books of the New Testament.
The only question that the Church had to answer
concerning a particular book was: “Was this book
either written or sanctioned by an apostle?”
The 27 books in the New Testam ent were
able to pass this test, and accordingly they were
admitted to the canon; a num ber of other books
failed to pass the test, and accordingly were re
jected. The Church had no choice of its own in
the m atter; its function was simply to pass judg
ment on the evidence for or against the apostolic
authorship or sanction of the books.
It should not be supposed, of course, that this
function of the Church in connection with the
New Testament books was exercised wholly a t
one definite time and place. Rather, the process
of sifting the evidence took place over a period of
many years. There was doubt about a few of the
books in some sections of the Church for some
time. In the course of time, however, the Church
as a whole came to agreement as to which books
had been w ritten or sanctioned by the apostles,
and therefore should be included in the New
Testament.
— J. G. Vos
What Hath God Wrought!
The shout of a King is among them.
One day may I be
Of that perfect communion of lovers
Contented and free
In the land that is very far off, and
Far off from the sea.
The shout of the King is among them.
One King and one song,
One thunder of manifold voices
Harmonious and strong,
One King and one love, and one
Shout of one worshiping throng.
Index o f Blue Banner Faith and Life for 1956 -- Vol. 11
ABSTRACT BELIEFS, 94
ACT OF SAVING FAITH, THE, 16
ACTUAL TRANSGRESSIONS, 161
ADAM’S FIRST SIN, IMPUTATION OF, 161
ANALOGY OF SCRIPTURE, 124
ANGELS, 160
Exposition of the Epistle to the Romans, Vol.
II and III (R. Haldane), 192
Five Points of Calvinism, The (E. H. Palmer),
68
450 True Stories from Church History (J. V.
Jacobs), 38
Glory Awaits Me (W. Goulooze), 191
ARMINIANISM, 199
God’s Plan and Man’s Destiny (Viola Cam
eron), 42
ATHEISM, 124
Handbook of Bible History (G. Stob), 42
ATTRIBUTES OF GOD, 125
Holy Spirit of God,
Thomas), 192
BOOKS RECEIVED, LISTS OF, 44, 75, 117, 197
BOOKS REVIEWED
Apostolic Preaching of the Cross, The (Leon
Morris), 70
The
(W. H.
Griffith
How to Achieve Personality Through Prayer
(S Blocker), 40
How to Preach (?) and Fool the People (F. H.
Beck), 189
A re You a Biblical Baptist? (G. W. Marston),
194
Immortality (L. Boettner), 190
By Grace Alone (H. Kuiper), 187
In Understanding be Men (T. C. Hammond),
69
Cambridge Seven, The (J. C. Pollock), 69
Children of Believing Parents (J. L. Fairly),
116
Christian Approach to the Old Testament,
The OF. F. Bruce), 68
Christianity in the Apostolic Age (G. T. Purves), 113
Christian Doctrine for Beginners (H. Baker),
66
Christ’s Brethren (C. J. Lowry), 193
Comfort for the Sorrowing (W. Goulooze), 73
Confessing Christ (C. K. Cummings), 195
Defense of the Faith, The (C. Van Til), 66
Divine Economy, The (A. C. Conrad), 38
Jesus of Yesterday and Today (S. G. Craig),
146
Keeping the Heart (J. Flavel), 188
Leaders of Israel: A Brief Survey of the
Hebrew People (G. L. Robinson), 114
Living Bible Chapter by Chapter, The (A. R.
Wells), 197
Love the Lord thy God (H. Hoeksema), 69
Love thy Neighbor for God’s Sake (H. Hoek
sema), 195
Message to Thoughtful Inquirers, A (H. W.
Coray), 195
Mission Fields Today, a Brief World Survey
(A. J. Dain), 194
Doctrine of Justification, The (J. Buchanan),
41
Mission on Main Street (H. B. Henry), 112
Do You Believe? (E. J. Young), 194
Ordained Lampstand, The (E. E. Elliott), 194
Epistle to the Ephesians, The (J. Parker), 186
Evangelical Doctrine of the Law, The (E. F.
Kevan), 114
Evangelical Library Bulletin, The, 43, 116
“Evils of Calvinism”, The (F. H. Beck), 189
Missions at the Crossroads (T. S. Soltau), 40
Pastoral Epistles and the Mind of Paul, The
(D. Guthrie), 193
Prayer (J. Bunyan), 188
Predestination (G. B. Fletcher), 66
Exposition of Hebrews, An (A. W. Pink), 39
Progressive Calvinism (Progressive Calvinism
League), 185
Exposition of the Epistle to the Romans, Vol.
I (R. Haldane), 71
Puzzle Fun with Bible Clues (W. P. Keasbey),
42
202
Recensions of the Septuagint Pentateuch (D.
W. Gooding), 70
Redemption Accomplished
M urray), 115
and Applied (J.
CREATION, 160
DEATH, 161
DECREES OF GOD, 160
Return of Prayers, The (T. Goodwin), 188
DEISM, 124
Saints’ Everlasting Rest, The (R. Baxter), 191
ELECTION, 160
Seven Words of Love (G. H. Todd), 196
Should Christians Celebrate the
Christ? (J. P. Duggan), 116
Birth of
ETERNAL DEATH, 161
EVOLUTION, 160
Some Modern Religions (J. O. Sanders & J.
S. W right), 193
EVOLUTION, THEISTIC, 95
Songs of Sovereignty (John Owen), 71
FAITH HEALING, 96
Stand Fast (J. Arnold), 73
Story of Stewardship in the U. S., The (G. A.
E. Salstrand), 190
EXEGESIS, 124
FALL, THE, 160
FOREORDINATION, 45, 160
Stylistic Criteria and the Analysis of the
Pentateuch (W. J. M artin), 70
GAMBLING, 46
Taught of the Lord: Helps for Junior Leaders
(A. P. McKelvy), 196
GOD’S GREAT PLAN, by J. G. Vos, 9
Text, Canon, and Principal Versions of the
Bible, The (E. E. Flack), 116
HOLY SPIRIT, PRAYER TO THE, 47
There is No Purgatory (G. C. Douma), 73
These Also Suffer (W. Goulooze), 195
GOD, DEFINITION OF, 124
GUILT, 161
HUMANISM, 124
ILLUMINATION, 124
IMMANENCE OF GOD, 124
Through the Bible in a Year (A. R. Wells), 196
IMPUTATION, 161
Tithing (A. W. Pink), 43
INABILITY, 161
Understanding the Pupil: P art I: The PreSchool Child (M. E. Soderholm), 74
INCOMMUNICABLE ATTRIBUTES OF GOD, 125
Vacation Bible School Materials, 74
INERRANCY OF SCRIPTURE, 124
INFALLIBILITY OF SCRIPTURE, 124
We are the Lord’s (Jean Vis), 72
INSPIRATION, 124
What Jesus Means to Me (W. Goulooze), 73
INSPIRATION, VERBAL, 124
World’s Collision, The (C. E. Pont), 64
KEEPING OUR VOWS TO GOD, by J. G. Vos, 97
You are Greater than You Know (L. Austin),
72
LAW AND GRACE, 145
CALVINISM, 199
LAW AND JUSTIFICATION, 145
CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT, 200
LETTER AND THE SPIRIT, THE, by W. R. McEwen, 17
CANON OF SCRIPTURE, 124
LORD’S PRAYER, SINGING OF, 144
CHANCE, GAMES OF, 46
LOT, USE OF THE, 46
CHRIST IN YOU, by Philip W. Martin, 47
MAN, 160
CHURCH DISCIPLINE, by William Heynen, 119
MATERIALISM, 124
CHURCH DISCIPLINE, 119, 149
“MESSIAH, THE”, SINGING OF, 144
COMMUNICABLE ATTRIBUTES OF GOD, 125
MIRACLE, 160
CORRUPTION OF NATURE, 161
MYSTICISM, 124
COVENANT OF WORKS, 160
NATURE, CORRUPTION OF, 161
203
NEW TESTAMENT CANON, 200
PROVIDENCE, 16, 160
ORIGINAL RIGHTEOUSNESS, 160
PROVIDENCE, MIRACULOUS, 160
ORIGINAL SIN, 161
PROVIDENCE, ORDINARY, 160
PANTHEISM, 124
PARADISE, 15
PARDON, 15
PASSION OF CHRIST, 15
PELAGIANISM, 15
PENTATEUCH, 15
PROVIDENCE, SPECIAL, 160
PSALM ELEVEN: A VISION OF JUDGMENT, by
F. D. Frazer, 7
PSALM FOURTEEN: TO A WORLD OF WICK
ED FOOLS AND RAVENING PERSECU
TORS, WHO WILL BRING SALVATION, by
F. D. Frazer, 161
PSALM THIRTEEN: WHAT MEANS THE HID
ING OF HIS FACE, by F. D. Frazer, 110
PEOPLE AND PLACES IN THE PSALMS, 13
PERFECTIONISM, 15
PSALM TWELVE: GOD’S JUDGMENT ON DE
CEIVERS, by F. D. Frazer, 62
PERSEVERANCE OF THE SAINTS, 15, 144
PURITANS, 16
PERSONALITY OF GOD, 124
QUESTION BOX, 45, 94, 144, 199
PHYSICAL DEATH, 161
QUOTATIONS, SOME NOTEWORTHY,
123, 159
POEMS AND POETICAL QUOTATIONS
At the Close of Day, 50
Eye Hath not Seen (C. G. Rossetti), 2
Go in Peace (C. G. Rossetti), 98
He Giveth His Beloved Sleep (E. B. Brown
ing), 50
Help Me to Live, 50
I Look for the Lord (C. G. Rossetti), 2
14, 76,
RATIONALISM, 124
REFORMED FAITH, THE, 16
REFORMED FAITH AND ARMINIANISM, THE,
by J. A. Hill, 59
REFORMED FAITH AND EVANGELISM, THE,
by J. A. Hill, 3
REFORMED THEOLOGY, 16
REGENERATION, 16
Linger Not (H. Bonar), 98
RELIGIOUS TERMS DEFINED, 15, 77, 124, 160
Not a Word or Look (G. Herbert), 148
REPETITION IN BIBLE, 47
Our M artyrs’ Answer (O. F. Thompson), 148
REPROBATION, 45, 160
Safe Where I Cannot Die Yet (C. G. Rossetti),
148
REVELATION, 124
The Coming Creed (H. Bonar), 100
REVELATION, SUPERNATURAL, 124
The Glass (M. W. Dougherty), 100
RIGHTEOUSNESS, ORIGINAL, 160
Till the Perfect Day, 148
We’ll Guard the Day of Rest, 50
ROADBLOCKS LIMITING CHURCH EFFEC
TIVENESS, by J. G. Vos, 51, 101, 149
What Hath God Wrought! (C. G. Rossetti), 200
RULE OF FAITH AND LIFE, 124
REVELATION, NATURAL, 124
POLYTHEISM, 124
SATAN, 16
POSITIVISM, 15
SCRABBLE, GAME OF, 46
PRAYER TO HOLY SPIRIT, 47
SECULARISM, 101
PRE-ADAMITES, 15
SELF-EXISTENCE OF GOD, 124
PREDESTINATION, 45, ICO
SELFISHNESS, 16
PROBATION, 16
SEMI-PELAGIANISM, 77
PROPITIATION, 16
SIN, 161
204
SINGING THE LORD’S PRAYER, 144
TOTAL DEPRAVITY, 161
SKETCHES OF THE COVENANTERS, by J. C.
McFeeters, 5, 57, 100, 155
TRANSCENDENCE OF GOD, 124
SKILL, GAMES OF, 46
TRENT, COUNCIL OF, 78
SLANDER, 77
TRINITY OF GOD, 124
SOUL, 77
UNITY OF GOD, 124
SOVEREIGNTY OF GOD, 125
TRANSUBSTANTIATION, 78
UNIVERSE, 160
SPIRITUAL DEATH, 161
UNIVERSALISM, 78
STUDIES IN THE BOOK OF GENESIS (Series of
Bible Lessons), 19-39, 78-94, 125-143, 164-184
VISION, 78
WESTMINSTER, 78
SYNERGISM, 77
WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY, 78
TABERNACLE, 77
WESTMINSTER STANDARDS, 78
TALMUD, 78
TARGUMS, 78
WHAT IS CALVINISM? by B. B. Warfield, 12
TEXTUAL CRITICISM, 124
WILL-WORSHIP, 78
THEISM, 124
WORKS, COVENANT OF, 160
THEISTIC EVOLUTION, 95
WORKS, GOOD, 78
TOLERATION, 78
WRATH OF GOD, 78, 161
Announcement
You can share in the wide witness of Blue
Banner Faith and Life to Bible truth by con
tributing to the expense of publishing the maga
zine. Less than half of the amount required is
obtained from subscriptions and sales of back
issues. For the balance we are dependent on con
tributions. Numbered receipts are sent promptly
for all contributions. Financial reports are sub
mitted to the Board of Publication of the Synod
of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North
America quarterly.
Sets of back issues for the years 1955 and 1956
are available at $1.00 for each year, postpaid.
The supply of back issues of all other years is
exhausted. Pressboard binders which will con
veniently preserve two years’ issues are available
are $1.50 for single subscriptions and $1.00 for
each subscription in clubs of 5 or more to be
mailed to one address. All subscriptions must be
gin with a January-M arch issue and run to the end
of a calendar year. We regret that we cannot do
the extra clerical work involved in having sub
scriptions start and stop at different times during
the year. When subscriptions are received during
the year, the back issues beginning w ith the
January-M arch issue of that year will be sent.
The Agent for Britain and Ireland is the Rev.
Adam Loughridge, B.A., Glenmanus Manse, Portrush, County Antrim, N orthern Ireland. Annual
subscription rate for Britain and Ireland is 7s. 6d.
The Agent for Australia and New Zealand is
the Rev. Alexander Barkley, B.A., 20 Fenwick
Street, Geelong, Victoria, Australia. Annual sub
scription rate for Australia and New Zealand is 10
shillings.
J. G. Vos, Editor and Manager, 3408 7th
Avenue, Beaver Falls, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.

Vol. 11, 1956

Transcription

Similar documents

debut ep “a piece of me” available on itunes

LOVE - Iesodo

Mandolin in Choro - marilynn mair mandolin

Survey on student welfare azrsa`y: sySjfct tzjus`

Making the Connection

View the Article Here - Miami Design District

Summer Vacation! - Edwardsburg Intermediate School

n e v a, ^pril gth, 1932 To the Secretary

Curious George

THE GEAR - Theta Tau Archives