Welcome!
Here is a digest of Christian comment from an evangelical perspective.
Some of the material posted here is based on preaching or teaching I have done as a Reader at Holy Trinity Church, Norwich. Other stuff is related to my study of Scripture or my reading of Christian writers old and new.
A sort of ‘map’ of some of my interests and concerns can be found here.
I’m gradually compiling a set of Bible Study Notes, comprising
Jonathan Mason
Thomas Watson on Adoption 3
Adoption and Obedience
The first sign of adoption is obedience. A son obeys his father. ‘I set before the sons of the house of the Rechabites pots full of wine, and cups, and said unto them, Drink ye wine. But they said, We will drink no wine: for Jonadab the son of Rechab our father commanded us, saying, Ye shall drink no wine.’ Jer 35:5. So, when God says drink not in sin’s enchanted cup, an adopted child says, my heavenly Father has commanded me, and I dare not drink. A gracious soul not only believes God’s promise, but obeys his command. True child-like obedience must be regular, which implies five things:
1. It must be done by a right rule
Obedience must have the word for its rule. Lydius lapis [This is the touchstone]. ‘To the law and to the testimony.’ Isa 8:20. If our obedience be not according to the word, it is offering up strange fire; it is will worship; and God will say, Who has required this at your hand? The apostle condemns worshipping of angels, which had a show of humility. Col 2:18. The Jews might say that they were loath to be so bold as to go to God in their own persons; they would be more humble, and prostrate themselves before the angels, desiring them to be their mediators to God. Here was a show of humility in their angel worship; but it was abominable, because they had no word of God to warrant it; it was not obedience, but idolatry. Child-like obedience is that which is consonant to our Father’s revealed will.
Thomas Watson on Adoption 2
To what does God adopt us?
1. He adopts us to a state of excellence
It were much for God to take a clod of dust, and make it a star; it is more for him to take a piece of clay and sin, and adopt it for his heir.
2. God adopts us to a state of liberty
Adoption is a state of freedom; a slave being adopted is made a free man. ‘Thou art no more a servant but a son.’ Ga 4:7. How is an adopted son free? Not to do what he lists; but he is free from the dominion of sin, the tyranny of Satan, and the curse of the law. He is free in the manner of worship. He has God’s free Spirit, which makes him free and cheerful in the service of God; he is ‘joyful in the house of prayer.’ Isa 56:7.
Thomas Watson on Adoption 1
1 Jn 3:1 How great is the love the Father has lavished on us, that we should be called children of God! And that is what we are!
The wonder of God’s love in adopting us will appear the more if we consider these six things:
1. That God should adopt us when he had a Son of his own
Men adopt because they want children, and desire to have some to bear their name; but that God should adopt us when he had a Son of his own, the Lord Jesus, is a wonder of love. Christ is called ‘God’s dear Son.’ #Col 1:13. A Son more worthy than the angels. ‘Being made so much better than the angels.’ #Heb 1:4. Now, since God had a Son of his own, and such a Son how wonderful God’s love in adopting us! We needed a Father, but he did not need sons.
2. Consider what we were before God adopted us
We were very deformed; and a man will scarce adopt him for his heir that is crooked and ill-favoured, but rather him that has some beauty. Mordecai adopted Esther, because she was fair. When we were in our blood God adopted us. ‘When I saw thee polluted in thy blood, it was the time of love.’ #Eze 16:6,8. God did not adopt us when we were bespangled with the jewels of holiness, and had the angels, glory upon us; but when we were black as Ethiopians, diseased as lepers, was the time of his love.
Quotes on Adoption
Adoption gives us the privilege of son, regeneration the nature of sons. (Stephen Charnock)
Adoption is the highest privilege that the gospel offers. (Packer)
Since God has a Son of his own, and such a Son, how wonderful God’s love in adopting us! We needed a Father, but he did not need sons. (Thomas Watson)
The Aaronic Blessing
‘The LORD said to Moses, ”Tell Aaron and his sons, ‘This is how you are to bless the Israelites. Say to them: ”‘”The LORD bless you and keep you; the LORD make his face shine upon you and be gracious to you; the LORD turn his face towards you and give you peace.”’ (Numbers 6:22-26)
The Aaronic Blessing is very ancient. ‘In 1979, two small silver scrolls from the seventh century BC were unearthed in Jerusalem. They were found to contain the words of Nu. 6:24-26 in a form almost identical to the Hebrew text.’
The blessing is in poetic form, having three lines each with two parts.
1. The Lord bless you. The ‘bless’ sums up the totality of covenant benefits. ‘Sons would expect a blessing from their father (e.g. Gn. 27:27-29, 38; 49:1-28). God’s blessing was given to Adam, whom Luke calls ‘the son of God’ (Gn. 1:28; 5:1-3; Lk. 3:38). Through Adam’s fall the curse came in (Gn. 3:14-19), but blessing was promised again to Abraham and his descendants (Gn. 12:1-3). Blessing entails fruitfulness (descendants, flocks, harvests), but these benefits are tokens of the true blessing, the relationship with the Lord. Only if God is our Father are we truly blessed (Gn. 17:16; 22:17-18; Lv. 26:3-13; Dt. 28:2-14).’
2. And keep you. ‘The purpose of the protection was to keep Israel in covenant relationship with God. The Lord was Israel’s keeper (Ps. 121:7-8; cf. Heb. 13:6). Christ, the good shepherd, kept his sheep and lost none except for Judas Iscariot (Jn. 6:37-40; 10:11-16; 18:9).’
3. The Lord make his face shine upon you. ‘His face means his presence, revealed in the cloud of fire (Ex. 40:34ff.); shine upon you means that God takes pleasure in his people and saves them (Pr. 16:15; Pss. 31:16; 67:1f.; 80:3, 7, 19).’
4. And be gracious to you. ‘The outcome of God’s pleasure is his grace; his covenant mercy. It is fundamental to salvation that God’s favour is unmerited. It is not deserved in any way; rather God shows mercy because of his own love and faithfulness to his oath (Dt. 7:7-8). This principle can be traced throughout Scripture (Ezek. 16:1ff.; Rom. 5:1-11; 9:10-13, 18; 11:5; 1 Cor. 1:26ff.).’
5. The Lord turn his face toward you. ‘This is more emphatic and asks that God might pay attention to Israel. It may reflect the fact that he had chosen them and not other nations. If God hid his face, Israel would suffer and perish (Pss. 30:7; 44:24; 104:29).’
6. And give you peace. ‘Peace means completeness and well-being. This has long been recognized as covenant language. Covenants were made to secure peace through a right relationship. But when God gives peace, it extends to the whole of life; even human enemies are quiet (Lv. 26:6; Pr. 16:7). These words were later seen as a promise of the Messiah, the ‘Prince of Peace’ (Isa 9:6), and find their true depths in Christ (Jn. 14:27; Eph. 2:14-18).’
Of the blessing as a whole, it has been noted that ‘the influence of these words runs through the Bible (Pss. 67; 121; 122; 124; 128). Paul’s letters begin with a greeting which always uses the words ‘grace’ and ‘peace’ (e.g. Rom. 1:7; 1 Cor. 1:3; and 2 Tim. 1:2 adds ‘mercy’). In most cases Paul says the grace and peace are from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, and without doubt he is taking up the priestly blessing.’
(New Bible Commentary)
Silence
The Dictionary of Biblical Imagery has a thought-provoking summary of biblical teaching on silence.
Silence communicates. It is a basic feature of human relationships, for we must often interpret the silence of others. And by its very nature silence can express a wide variety of things. Usually it is not hard to interpret-the rebellious sullenness of a child, the hush as the school principal or head teacher enters. But sometimes silence is hard to interpret.
It is not surprising, therefore, that silence in the Bible expresses a wide range of emotions, attitudes and states: attentiveness, {De 27:9 Job 33:31 Ac 19:33} restraint, {1Sa 10:27 Ps 50:12 Jer 4:19} respect and awe, {Job 29:21 Hab 2:20} loyalty, {Isa 36:21} deep thought, {Ac 15:12} acceptance of guilt, {Job 13:19 Ro 3:19} rest after tumult or suffering, {Ps 46:10 Mr 4:39} fear of saying something wrong, {Ps 39:2} even wisdom; {Job 13:5 Pr 17:28} more negatively, it can express faithlessness, {Es 4:14} fear, {Job 31:34 Ac 18:9} deep pain, {Job 2:13 La 2:10} rebellion, {Ps 32:2 Mr 3:4} defeat or destruction, {Ps 101:5 143:12 Isa 47:5} and supremely death. {Ps 31:17-18 94:17 115:17} Significantly, there is one Hebrew verb (used, e.g., in Ps 18:40,101:5 La 3:53) that means both “to destroy” and “to keep silent.”
The biblical writers also occasionally exploit the “openness” of silence-for instance, Aaron’s silence in Le 10:3 (grief? rebellion? submission?), the silence of God, {Ps 44:23 83:1} the silence of Jesus at his trial (Mr 14:61; cf. Isa 53:7) or the silence in heaven in Re 8:1. Also worth mentioning here are significant absences of speech where we might expect something (for instance, from Nicodemus after Joh 3:21). In all these cases, we the readers have to supply the meaning of the silence, which acts as a metaphor or parable.
Oral Tradition and the Historical Reliability of the Gospels
Craig Blomberg has written extensively on the historical reliability of the Gospels. In the relevant article in the Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, he identifies a number of factors that support the probability that the Gospels faithfully preserve the oral traditions on which they are based.
1. Jesus was perceived by his followers as one who proclaimed God’s Word in a way which demanded careful retelling.
2. Over ninety percent of his teachings has poetic elements which would have made them easy to memorize.
3. The almost universal method of education in antiquity, and especially in Israel, was rote memorization, which enabled people accurately to recount quantities of material far greater than all of the Gospels put together.
4. Oral story-telling often permitted a wide range of freedom in selecting and describing details but required fixed points of a narrative to be preserved unchanged.
5. Written notes and a kind of shorthand were often privately kept by rabbis and their disciples, despite a publicly stated preference for oral tradition.
6. The lack of teachings ascribed to Jesus about later church controversies (e.g., circumcision, speaking in tongues) suggests that the disciples did not freely invent material and read it back onto the lips of Jesus.
7. The degree to which Jesus emphasized his imminent return, that is, to the exclusion of envisioning the establishment of an ongoing community of followers, has been exaggerated. Hence, the claim that the disciples would have had no interest in preserving the Gospel tradition until the second generation of Christianity is doubtful.
Quotes on Forgiveness
Forgiveness has not always been valued. Nietzsche, who denounced Christianity as a religion of pity, saw forgiveness as immoral because it glorifies weakness. Others have regarded it as an insipid response to the complexities of responsibility, power and justice. The Briefing #202 (May 1998)
Someone has called forgiveness ‘the most healing force in the world.’
’It would tire the hands of an angel to write down all the pardons God bestows upon true penitent believers. (William Bates)
Where we went with our vicious sins, there we must go with our soiled virtues.’ (W.E. Sangster)
We are most like beasts when we kill. We are most like men when we judge. We are most like God when we forgive.
Everyone says forgiveness is a lovely idea, until he has something to forgive. (C.S. Lewis)
Restorative Justice
I’ve been scratching my head about what it means to forgive and to be forgiven. We hear of people who, after having been terribly wronged, say, “I forgive that person.” We hear of others who say, “I can never forgive that person.” And what of the other person, the person who is considered to be ‘in the wrong’? Do they need to ‘accept’ the forgiveness in order for it to work? What of the person who refuses to believe that they are in the wrong? What of the person who says, “I can never forgive myself”?
And then there are the questions of punishment and restoration. Which brings me to an interesting little story reported recently in the local news.
A 13-year-old girl who was caught stealing two bottle of orange juice from a village shop has been allowed to make amends by selling Remebrance Day poppies. The decision was agreed by the shopkeeper and the girl herself, along with her parents. The girl was also required to pay back the value of the stolen goods and to agree not to enter the shop for the next two months.
Police Community Support Officer (PCSO) Sally Calaby said:-
Restorative justice gives young people, who are starting to get involved in crime or anti-social behaviour the chance to work with police and their own community to understand the consequences of their actions and to make amends for them, without automatically heading into the criminal justice system.
I rather like it. It reminds me that wrongdoing, in order to be resolve, often requires at least the following steps: (a) a confession that wrong has been done; (b) sincere contrition (which might be in the form of an apology); (c) restoration where possible and where appropriate; (d) a determination not to repeat the offence.
Significance of Names in the Bible
In biblical times, a name often had a significance far deeper than that of a mere personal label.
1. A name was given by a person in a position of authority, Ge 2:18 ff.
2. The giving of a name signified the appointment of the person to a specific function or relationship, Ge 35:17-18.
3. The giving of a name sometimes expressed a hope, Ge 29:32-35, or prophecy, Ho 1:4.
4. Often, names were given as a result of some circumstance at birth, Ge 10:25 19:22 25:30. In some case, this circumstance was itself prophetic, and described the character of the person to be, Ge 25:26.
5. When a person gives his name to another, this signifies their joining to each other in the closest unity, Isa 4:1 De 28:9-10.
6. In the NT, to ‘baptise into the name’ signifies identification, new ownership, union, loyalty, and fellowship.
7. The Scripture, the name frequently stands for the person himself, and the idea of total personal extinction is expressed by ‘cutting off’, ‘destroying’, ‘taking away’, or ‘blotting out’, the name. To ’forget’ the name is to forget the person, Jer 23:27.
8. God’s name often stands for his manifested attributes. Thus, his name is holy, because he is holy. To declare God’s name is to tell of his character and deeds, Ps 22:22; cf Mt 6:9.
9. God’s name is often suggestive of his active presence, 1Ki 18:24.
10. To go or speak in someone’s name is to go or speak with his authority – as if he were personally present and active.
Mortification
Paul writes in Romans 8:13, ‘if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live.’
This introduces the important but neglected subject of ‘mortification’.
’Mortification,’ says J.I Packer in God’s Words, ‘is war.’ Four steps are involved in this warfare:-
1. We must know our enemy
We fight, not just sins, but the sinful nature which lies behind all instances of sinful actions. The unbeliever is a slave to sin, Ro 6:16-23. But the believer has had a change of heart and mind; he has renounced sin, and is determined to crucify the flesh and its lusts, Ga 5:24. But sin remains as a kind of devilish alter ago. The Christian therefore finds a conflict within himself, Ga 5:17. He wants to be perfect, but he never is, Ro 7:19-20.
‘Neither is it expressible with what vigour and variety sin acts itself in this matter. Sometimes is proposeth diversions, sometimes it causeth weariness, sometimes it finds out difficulties, sometimes it stirs up contrary affections, sometimes it begets prejudices, and one way or another entangles the soul, so that it never suffers grace to have an absolute and complete success in any duty.’ (Owen)
Guides to Commentaries
I wouldn’t presume to tell other lay preachers how to prepare their sermons, or how to use commentaries. But here’s the first in what might turn out to be an occasional series of posts on my own approach.
The best one-sentence defense of biblical commentaries I have seen comes from the excellent C.H. Spurgeon:-
There are four published guides I am acquainted with:-
1. Commentary and Reference Survey, by John Glynn, published by Kregel (10th edition, 2007). As a catalogue of biblical and theological literature, it is very comprehensive. It offers little by way of evaluation of the works cited, but it does classify works in the following kinds of ways: (a) there are separate listings for technical and expositional works (although the distinction between the two is sometimes slightly unclear); (b) recommended works are listed in Bold typs; (c) each commentary is designated as ‘Evangelical’, ‘Evangelical/Critical’, ‘Conservative/Moderate’, or ‘Liberal/Critical’ (but this classification is based primarily on the authors’ supposed attitude towards inerrancy, which is rather limiting). It is overwhelmingly slanted in favour of contemporary literature. For Romans, for example, there is not only no mention of Calvin or Hodge, but not even Murray.
2. Old Testament Commentary Survey, by Tremper Longman III, published by IVP (3rd edition, 2003). This provides brief descriptive/evaluative comments on each work cited, uses a five-star system to indicate its quality, and identifies it as suitable for a Layperson, Minister, or Scholar. I would give this Survey 3 stars (out of a possible five) for usefulness. It not only ignores older works, but also neglects some contemporary commentaries too. The failure to mention the works by Dale Ralph Davis on the historical books of the Old Testament is inexcusable.
3. New Testament Commentary Survey, by D.A. Carson, published by Baker Academic (6th edition, 2007). Carson is, of course, a well-known evangelical scholar and speaker. His opinions are wise and well-balanced, even if – with so much ground to cover – they are sometimes expressed with such brevity as scarcely begins to do justice to the works being evaluated. Although Carson focuses mainly on contemporary literature, he does mention some of the older, classic commentaries.
4. Commenting and Commentaries, by C.H. Spurgeon, published by the Banner of Truth Trust (orginally published in 1876). Especially in view of the general neglect of older works in the three guides mentioned above, Spurgeon’s work is invaluable. He has an amazing gift for summing up the value of a work in a memorable phrase or two. When evaluating works of lesser usefulness to the preacher, he gives reign to his celebrated wit. For example, of one set of expository sermons, he writes, ‘They will not make the hearers lie awake at nights, or cause them palpitations of heart through excess of original and striking thought.’ A commentary by one Thomas Pyle is described as, ‘a pile of paper, valuable to housemaids for lighting fires.’
More importantly, he expresses an infectious enthusiasm for the works of Calvin, Matthew Henry, John Trapp, and a host of Puritan and more recent commentators, and his comments on suc works have kept the memory (and the reading) of these men very much alive in more recent years.
Of Matthew Henry, Spurgeon says, ‘He is most pious and pithy, sound and sensible, suggestive and sober, terse and trustworthy. You will find him to be glittering with metaphors, rich in analogies, overflowing with illustrations, superabundant in reflections…Every minister ought to read Matthew Henry entirely and carefully through once at least.’
Spurgeon recommends the commentaries of John Calvin as being ‘worth their weight in gold. Of all commentators I believe John Calvin to be the most candid. In his expositions he is not always what moderns would call Calvinistic; that is to say, where Scripture maintains the doctrine of predestination and grace he flinches in no degree, but inasmuch as some Scriptures bear the impress of human free action and responsibility, he does not shun to expound their meaning in all fairness and integrity.’
And Spurgeon is very fair. Of a book by a high churchman (John Mason Neale), he says, ‘These sermons smell of popery, yet the savour of our Lord’s good ointment cannot be hid. Our Protestantism is not of so questionable a character that we are afraid to do justice to Papists and Anglicans, and therefore we do not hesitate to say that many a devout thought has come to us while reading these “sermons by a Priest of the Church of England”.’