Saturday, March 29, 2014

The Knowledge of the Holy: Who's Entitled?

It is interesting that this phrase only appears in two places in scripture, both in the book of Proverbs (9:10; 30:3).


  • The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding.


  • I neither learned wisdom, nor have the knowledge of the holy.


The first proverb was spoken by Solomon (1:1 ff.) and the second by Agur to Ithiel and Ucal (Prov. 30:1).

These two references to the knowledge of the holy appear in a book dealing with practical matters. Note in 1:7 and 9:10 that one's conduct is determined by one's estimation of God.  The fear of God is fundamental to spiritual knowledge and wisdom (cf. Job 28:28) which affect one's entire life.  So holiness is directly related to practical matters, since it influences them and is manifest in them.  

Note also the difference between the two men who mention the knowledge of the holy.  One is the great King Solomon, the wisest man who ever lived next to Jesus Christ (1 Kings 4:31).  The other is an obscure figure named Agur the son of Jakeh (Prov. 30:1), who prophesies the material in Prov. 30 to two other obscure men, and is never mentioned again in scripture.  Here is a comforting truth:  not only can the great and the wise have the knowledge of the holy, but also the mean and obscure.  It depends on your heart condition before God.  Note Agur's humility in vv. 2-3.  He actually disclaims the knowledge that he manifestly has, as shown by his magnificent prophecy.  People who have the knowledge of the holy don't claim to have it.  Solomon didn't either.  He merely describes what it is in Prov. 9:10.  His heart condition, at this point in his life, might be illustrated by 1 Kings 3:7-9, "...I am but a little child...I know not...Give...thy servant an understanding heart..."  Very similar to Agur's.

So the knowledge of the holy is hid from the proud and those who do not fear God, but generously shared with the humble believer who trembles before God, regardless of his station in life.  Glory to God!


Friday, March 21, 2014

Directions for Singing (The Methodist Hymnal, 1966)

Hope that you enjoy these as much as I did!


------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Learn these tunes before you learn any others; afterwards learn as many as you please.

II. Sing them exactly as they are printed here, without altering of mending them at all; and if you have learned to sing them otherwise, unlearn it as soon as you can.

III. Sing all. See that you join with the congregation as frequently as you can. Let not a slight degree of weakness or weariness hinder you. If it is a cross to you, take it up, and you will find it a blessing.

IV. Sing lustily and with a good courage. Beware of singing as if you were half dead, or half asleep; but lift up your voice with strength. Be no more afraid of your voice now, nor more ashamed of its being heard, than when you sung the songs of Satan.

V. Sing modestly. Do not bawl, so as to be heard above or distinct from the rest of the congregation, that you may not destroy the harmony; but strive to unite your voices together, so as to make one clear melodious sound.

VI. Sing in time. Whatever time is sung be sure to keep with it. Do not run before nor stay behind it; but attend close to the leading voices, and move therewith as exactly as you can; and take care not to sing too slow. This drawling way naturally steals on all who are lazy; and it is high time to drive it out from us, and sing all our tunes just as quick as we did at first.

VII. Above all sing spiritually. Have an eye to God in every word you sing. Aim at pleasing him more than yourself, or any other creature. In order to do this attend strictly to the sense of what you sing, and see that your heart is not carried away with the sound, but offered to God continually; so shall you singing be such as the Lord will approve here, and reward you when he cometh in the clouds of heaven.

                                      From John Wesley’s preface to Sacred Melody, 1761

Sunday, March 16, 2014

The Grace of Gentleness (2 Cor. 10:1-2)

(Transcript of a Bible study taught at Landmark Baptist Church on 16 March 2014; landmarkbaptistga.com)

In this study, I would like to survey the biblical references to gentleness in its three forms (gentle, gentleness, and gently). My inspiration for this study came partly from a greeting card that I bought on a business trip to Tempe, Arizona, last fall (2013). I stopped in a gift shop at the Phoenix airport specializing in American Indian collectibles and was delighted to find some wholesome greeting cards. One group of them had various Indian proverbs on the covers, and one of them startled me with its biblicity: “Gentleness is the greatest strength.” My mind went to the scriptures, and I thought of some that support this principle, which I would like to look at in more detail in this study for our edification.


INTRODUCTION
By way of introduction, let’s take a quick look at the statistics concerning usage of this word and its forms in the scriptures and establish a definition of gentleness.

• Usage. This word and its forms occurs 11 times in the scriptures, four in the old testament (OT) and seven in the new testament (NT). So it’s a more prevalent theme in the NT than in the OT. It’s also noteworthy that five of the seven NT references are in the Pauline epistles, which I don’t think is a coincidence. The mystery age, more than any other is characterized by gentleness, and we’ll see why later on when we look at each of the references.

• Definition. In Is. 40:11, we read of the Lord GOD “gently lead[ing]” his flock, Israel, “like a shepherd.” This reminded me of Jacob’s sly proposal to Esau in Gen. 33:14 to precede him so that he can “lead on softly” with his cattle and children. So to gently lead is to softly lead, and gentleness can be defined by the scriptures, I think, as softness in manners. It’s related to meekness, as we’ll see, but not exactly the same.

• Gentleness does not preclude masculinity; on the contrary, masculinity includes gentleness. Some think that gentleness only pertains to women, but that just shows their ignorance of God and his book. Only one reference to gentleness in the scriptures pertains to women (1 Thes. 2:7—a nurse’s manner with children), but the others are masculine or general.

o Gentleness does not indicate effeminacy. On the contrary, the scriptures and real life portray effeminate men, or “them that abuse themselves with mankind” (1 Tim. 1:10) as having great proclivity toward violence. Consider the sodomites’ behavior toward Lot and his angelic guests and the violent death of the Levite’s concubine at the hands of the men of Gibeah (Judg. 19:25-28). These “effeminate,” as Paul refers to them in 1 Cor. 6:10, are anything but gentle, and they abuse the poor concubine “all the night until the morning” (19:25), which we can be sure would have been the same treatment Lot’s daughters and even the angels themselves would have received from them.

o Also, gentleness is not same as being “genteel.” One could be that on the outside and still not be truly gentle in his heart. Richard “Beau” Nash was a social celebrity and master of ceremonies at the fashionable resort of Bath in Wesley’s day. According to Christian History magazine (Vol. 1, No. 2), Nash “lived high, gambled with great stakes, and had very bad luck confronting John Wesley. Nash told Wesley that he did not like Wesley’s preaching. Wesley asked if Nash had heard any. Nash had not but kn[ew] of Wesley’s preaching through the reports of others. Wesley then asked whether he should judge Nash only by others’ reports of him. Nash was silenced by this rebuke, and one old woman rubbed salt in the wound by telling Nash to leave alone the man who could give them all God’s word.” Nash may have been genteel, but he was anything but gentle with Wesley.

ATTRIBUTE OF GOD
So with these statistics and definition in hand, the first thing to note about gentleness is that it is an attribute of God. Most people, even those who don’t know God, would agree that gentleness is a virtue and desirable. When groups of people are addressed, it’s customary to address them as “ladies and gentlemen,” implying that it’s the norm for men to be gentle. Any desirable human behavioral trait (kindness, fidelity, patience, etc.) can be traced back to the ultimate good, which is God. Small wonder, then, that, along with references to human gentleness in the scriptures, we find references to divine gentleness.

It’s striking to see that gentleness is clearly ascribed to each member of the Godhead.

• Father. David ascribes gentleness to the Father in Psalm 18:35 and its companion passage in 2 Sam. 22:36. The reference to “thy gentleness” is aimed at God (cf. v. 32), i.e. the Father, in the context.

• Son. Paul ascribes gentleness to Christ in 2 Cor. 10:1, and he beseeches the Corinthians in its spirit not to question his authority (vv. 8-9), rather than try to scare them into submission.

• Spirit. When Paul lists the ninefold fruit of the Spirit in Gal. 5:22-23, one aspect of it is gentleness, affirming the gentleness of the third member of the Godhead as well.

So gentleness is found to be one aspect of the nature of God, with clear reference to its presence in each member of the Godhead. When James characterizes heavenly wisdom in James 3:17, one aspect of it, like the fruit of the Spirit, is gentleness. Godly wisdom does not bring hardness but gentleness. Note the easy treatment that comes from it, along with peace, mercy, impartiality, and sincerity. Gentleness is one aspect of the glory and holiness of God: glorious in him, but also latent and desirable in us, because of his indwelling.

KINGDOM GRACE
All of the references to gentleness in the prophetic/kingdom scriptures are connected with David, a very gentle man and a type of the Lord Jesus Christ. David mentions God’s gentleness toward him in 2 Sam. 22 and Ps. 18, as above. He can appreciate gentleness, because he himself is gentle (cf. 2 Sam. 3:39). If you appreciate God’s holiness, it’s a pretty good indicator that you are holy yourself. People who are filthy have no appreciation for purity. Paul said in Tit. 1:15, “Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled.” It’s the pure that appreciate purity and see things purely. So David praised God’s gentleness because it was present in his own life.

o He was a gentle man in his dealings, actually to a fault. Note his soft manner toward Mephibosheth, grandson of his archenemy, King Saul. Note also his gentleness toward Absalom, his upstart son who would have killed him (2 Sam. 17:2—what Ahithophel proposes). He charges his generals—Joab, Abishai, and Ittai—to deal gently with Absalom (2 Sam. 18:5), who really did not deserve it, and did not receive it from God in the end. He got his just deserts, according to the fourth commandment (Ex. 20:12).

o Here is an important principle re: the graces, though. There is a godly, righteous gentleness, but there is also a worldly gentleness, like David shows here, that is not righteous. He’s actually showing partiality, which James said is not an aspect of godly wisdom, as we saw earlier.

So gentleness has its place, a godly gentleness that is. A saint must be careful, however, to avoid gentleness where it would not be righteous to show it, as in the case of David and Absalom. God overruled David’s partiality, and Absalom reaped for his capital crime.

MYSTERY GRACE
If the Godhead is living its life out through members of the body of Christ, as Paul affirms in Rom. 8:10 (Spirit), Gal. 2:20 (Christ), and Phil. 2:13 (Father), of course gentleness should characterize our walk and ministry.

1. Walk. Titus 3:2. Our overall manner of life should be gentle, not violent, and meek, or submissive (context is obeying earthly powers; cf. 1 Pt. 3:4-5 for a fine definition of meekness as a spirit of submission—meek and quiet spirit = being in subjection). Gentlemen settle their differences with words, not fisticuffs. If you strike the first blow, you’ve lost the argument. I have a book at home entitled, How to Raise a Gentleman, and there’s an earlier book on How to Be a Gentleman. It’s a dying art in these last days, but should still characterize the lives of Christians, if nobody else. No one likes a bully, folks. Roughness proves nothing but carnality. The “rich answereth roughly” (Prov. 18:23), when he ought to “shew himself friendly” (v. 24). He’s rough because he’s carnal. Some macho men may deem our faith effeminate, and nowadays culture and apostasy have made many saints just that, but Christ, Paul, and David were all men’s men and they were gentle. Satan would love for you to be rough, uncouth, offend people unnecessarily, and ruin your testimony. Granted, you can’t please everyone, and the Corinthians accused the gentle Paul of being “rude in speech” (2 Cor. 11:6). Some believers have latched onto that as support for rudeness, but they’re wrong. The thin-skinned Corinthians mistook the plainness of Paul’s speech (2 Cor. 3:12) for rudeness, but there was nothing about it that could be justly condemned, like jesting, minced oaths, or profanity (Titus 2:8).

2. Ministry. 1 Thes. 2:7; 2 Tim. 2:24. Paul said that he and his fellowlabourers treated the Thessalonians gently upon their conversion to Christ, and this is an important example for ministers to take note of. Young converts need to be handled gently, due to their lack of knowledge and infirmities. But per 2 Tim. 2:24, gentleness should characterize our ministry as a whole, since young converts are not the context here, but a minister’s dealings with “all men,” saved and lost. This goes right along with our calling as “ambassadors for Christ” in 2 Cor. 5:20. Ambassadors are not belligerent but gentle and peaceful. The presence of an embassy in a country means peaceful intentions, and in our case God is using us to help sinners be make peace with him through our Lord Jesus Christ (Rom. 5:1 etc.). We should not strive with anyone in a carnal way, only in a spiritual, and the key to keeping them separate is meekness, or a spirit of submission, even when dealing with unbelievers.

CONCLUSION
Gentleness is an attribute of the Godhead and is manifest in the lives of saints in both the kingdom and mystery programs. The scriptures show Father, Son, and Holy Ghost all to be gentle by nature, and King David and Paul and his company were gentle. Pretty good role models, wouldn’t you say? A man after God’s own heart (in the OT) is gentle (1 Sam. 13:14; Acts 13:22). To follow Christ and Paul in the NT is to be gentle (1 Cor. 11:1; 2 Cor. 10:1). Rather than making him a pipsqueak, wimp, or effeminate, David said that God’s gentleness made him great. You could look at this two ways. In context, it’s saying that God, in his gentleness, made David great. God was tenderfully merciful toward David, and David appreciated it. On the flip side, to make a free spiritual application, gentleness will set you apart as a saint. Truly great saints are invariably gentle saints. If you’re not gentle, you’re not a great saint. I’d like to close with an anonymous old poem, based on Psalm 15, that supports the thought that gentleness, and not roughness, is the mark of a great saint.

A Gentleman (Psa. xv)

‘Tis he whose every thought and deed
By rule of virtue moves;
Whose generous tongue disdains to speak
The thing his heart disproves.

Who never did a slander forge
His neighbor’s fame to wound;
Nor hearken to a false report
By malice whispered round.

Who vice in all its pomp and power
Can treat with just neglect;
And piety, though clothed in rags,
Religiously respect.

Who to his plighted word of truth
Has ever firmly stood;
And, though he promised to his loss,
Still makes his promise good.

Whose soul in usury disdains
His treasure to employ;
Whom no reward can ever bribe
The guiltless to destroy.

(from Mudge's Poems with Power to Strengthen the Soul)
Now that’s a gentleman, folks, and a great man. It’s not might or power that make one great, but one’s submission to God and kind treatment of others. The world may call that weakness or effeminacy, but that’s what God is looking for in this age of grace, and it will determine the power he gives you to exercise over others in the ages to come. “I…myself beseech you by the meekness and gentleness of Christ…”

Sunday, March 9, 2014

Rethinking Adam's Salvation

I would like to offer some possible evidence from the scriptures that Adam was not ultimately saved. I think that it’s a common assumption that he was, since God immediately moved to cover his sin and Eve’s after the fall (Gen. 3:15, 21-24). As I’ve pondered this question over the years, however, I’ve come across a few things that make me doubt that Adam was saved.

1. The most disturbing thing that I noticed was that, even though Adam and Enoch were contemporaries (www.arksearch.com/nabefore.htm), Enoch was said to walk with God (Gen. 5:22, 24), not Adam. Furthermore, if Adam died in 3070 B.C. at 930 years old (Gen. 5:5), then Enoch walked with God for 243 years while Adam was still alive, if Enoch was born in 3378 B.C. and began to walk with God 65 years later, as scripture says that he did (Gen. 5:21-22). Also, during this time, Enoch was prophesying of God’s coming judgment, as recorded in Jude 14-15.

2. In Hebrews 11, the “Hall of Faith” begins with creation then skips to Abel (Heb. 11:3-4). What about Adam? Wasn’t he the first faithful one? (Note also that God skips from Abel to Enoch (what about Seth?) and then from Enoch to Noah (what about Lamech?)). So it appears that all of the Sethite patriarchs were not godly; only a few of them were (i.e. Abel, Enoch, and Noah).

3. In Mt. 23:35, where Christ refers to the righteous bled shed since the foundation of the world (Luke 11:50-51), he begins with Abel, not Adam. The context in Mt. 23, compared with Luke 11:50-51 shows that Christ is referring to the prophets, but why is Abel listed and not Adam? Didn’t Adam prophesy? Apparently not. Three righteous men before the flood are mentioned: Abel, Enoch, and Noah, and all of them are said or implied to be prophets, or at least preachers (cf. Jude 14-15 re: Enoch and 2 Pt. 2:5 re: Noah; Noah likely prophesied of coming judgment like Enoch before him).

One might argue that the covering with skins (Gen. 3:21) and expulsion from the garden (Gen. 3:22-24) prove that Adam was saved, but I think that this view doesn’t consider an important truth about salvation in the old testament. Whereas believers in Christ are promised eternal security due to their position in him (Rom. 8:28-39; Eph. 4:30; Col. 3:3; 2 Tim. 1:12, 4:18; etc.), no such promise is made to saints in any other dispensation, past or future. Saints in these ages are expected to have faith and persevere in good works (e.g. Ezek. 18:24; Mt. 24:13; Heb. 3:6, 11; James 2:21-24; etc.). Hence God’s admonition to Cain in Gen. 4:7, “If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? And if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door…” So Cain’s standing before God had something to do with what he did, not just what he believed (cf. Rom. 10:5). His works, though not meritorious in and of themselves (Is. 64:6; Rom. 3:20; Tit. 3:5), figured in his salvation, to perfect his faith (Jas. 2:22; 1 John 3:12). He refuses to obey a clear command of God (blood sacrifice for sins) and ends up lost (note Jude 11: all three men are lost; cf. Jude 13; 2 Pt. 2:15-17; Num. 16:31-32). He does not persevere in good works like Abel did.

In light of points #1-#3 above, I’m doubtful that Adam preserved in good works either, but he may have turned away from God, despite the Lord’s mercy and grace toward him after he fell. In a way it seems appropriate, in a way, that the rebellious head of mankind and ruler of all the earth, who knew that he was just that (Gen. 1:28; 2:19-20; Ps. 8:4-8), should end up lost, though he did not have to (Gen. 4:7; 1 Tim. 2:6). Adam freely chose to rebel against God, and he hopefully chose to obey God the rest of his life, but the evidence does not seem to support this. After Adam’s expulsion from the garden, the only other references to him are his siring of Seth and his death (Gen. 5:1-5. In light of all the evidence above, it may be that the head of fallen mankind ended up in perdition, while the head of redeemed mankind ends up in glory (Rom. 5:12-21; 1 Cor. 15:21-22; Col. 3:4; 1 Tim. 3:16).

Sunday, March 2, 2014

The Glorious Godhead

Father
--God of glory (Acts 7:2)
--Father of glory (Eph. 1:17)

Son
--Lord of glory (1 Cor. 2:8)
--Lord of glory (Jas. 2:1)

Spirit
--the spirit of glory and of God (1 Pt. 4:14) [since "spirit" is lowercase here, it may refer to divine influence vs. the person of the Holy Spirit]
--indirect reference: (1) Eph. 3:16, "That he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner man"; (2) Col. 1:11, "Strengthened with all might, according to his glorious power..."  i.e. the power of the Spirit (per Eph. 3:16); I think that both of these Pauline references show that the Spirit is glorious, though in a subtler way than the other two members of the Godhead, which is no surprise, since his aim is to glorify them rather than himself (Luke 1:67-68; John 16:14).

The Ten "Northern" Tribes?

Text: 1 Kings 11:29-37


It is commonly taught that when Israel was divided in two in Rehoboam’s reign that the ten tribes that followed Jeroboam were all northern tribes. The purpose of this study is to present an evidence to counter this assumption. Let’s begin with the prophecy regarding the schism of Israel (10 tribes) and Judah (two tribes: Judah and Benjamin) in 1 Kings 11:29-37.

29 And it came to pass at that time when Jeroboam went out of Jerusalem, that the prophet Ahijah the Shilonite found him in the way; and he had clad himself with a new garment; and they two were alone in the field: 30 And Ahijah caught the new garment that was on him, and rent it in twelve pieces: 31 And he said to Jeroboam, Take thee ten pieces: for thus saith the LORD, the God of Israel, Behold, I will rend the kingdom out of the hand of Solomon, and will give ten tribes to thee: 32 (But he shall have one tribe for my servant David's sake, and for Jerusalem's sake, the city which I have chosen out of all the tribes of Israel:) 33 Because that they have forsaken me, and have worshipped Ashtoreth the goddess of the Zidonians, Chemosh the god of the Moabites, and Milcom the god of the children of Ammon, and have not walked in my ways, to do that which is right in mine eyes, and to keep my statutes and my judgments, as did David his father. 34 Howbeit I will not take the whole kingdom out of his hand: but I will make him prince all the days of his life for David my servant's sake, whom I chose , because he kept my commandments and my statutes: 35 But I will take the kingdom out of his son's hand, and will give it unto thee, even ten tribes. 36 And unto his son will I give one tribe, that David my servant may have a light alway before me in Jerusalem, the city which I have chosen me to put my name there. 37 And I will take thee, and thou shalt reign according to all that thy soul desireth , and shalt be king over Israel.

The “one tribe” mentioned in this passage (vv. 32, 36) is not specified until 1 Kings 12:20-21. Judah and Benjamin continue as allies, despite the defection of the ten other tribes. It’s assumed that all of these tribes are north of Judah and Benjamin, but let’s see if that’s indeed the case. Levi is excluded since their cities were located throughout the entire country (Josh. 21).

1. Asher—yes
2. Naphtali—yes
3. Zebulun—yes
4. Manasseh—yes
5. Issachar—yes
6. Ephraim—yes
7. Gad—yes
8. Dan—yes
9. Reuben—actually east of Judah and Benjamin
10. Simeon—per Josh. 19:1-9, encompassed within Judean territory (fulfilling Jacob’s prophecy in Gen. 49:7)

So, in the case of Reuben and Simeon, it would be incorrect to refer to them as “northern” tribes. This is a common reference used to distinguish the two divisions of the tribes, but the Bible doesn’t use it. The ten tribes, including Reuben, are referred to as “Israel.” Reuben’s part in the kingdom of Israel (vs. Judah) is not emphasized until later:

2 Chron. 15:9—And he (Asa) gathered all Judah and Benjamin, and the strangers with them out of Ephraim and Manasseh, and out of Simeon: for they fell to him out of Israel in abundance, when they saw that the LORD his God was with him.

2 Chron. 34:5-7—And he (Josiah) burnt the bones of the priests upon their altars, and cleansed Judah and Jerusalem. 6 And so did he in the cities of Manasseh, and Ephraim, and Simeon, even unto Naphtali, with their mattocks round about. 7 And when he had broken down the altars and the groves, and had beaten the graven images into powder, and cut down all the idols throughout all the land of Israel, he returned to Jerusalem.

In 2 Kings 10-17, the ten tribes are gradually judged for their sins and deported to Assyria (2 Kings 10:32-33, etc.). This may have included Simeon, although I can’t find it explicitly stated. Consider 2 Kings 17:18, “Therefore the Lord was very angry with Israel, and removed them out of his sight: there was none left but the tribe of Judah only” (includes Benjamin; cf. 2 Chron. 34:22—Benjamin remains in the land until the Babylonian captivity). It’s possible that the Simeonites were carried away in the Judean captivity, since some of their cities remained in Josiah’s day (2 Chron. 34:6).

Whatever the time of Simeon’s deportation to Assyria and/or Babylon, they were considered part of the ten tribes constituting “Israel,” so the reference to it as a “northern tribe” isn’t exactly correct, though they are indeed allied with the northern tribes, as was Reuben.