David and His Nephew Joab – Part 2: A Murder

Posted on July 26, 2024 by The Editor

2 Samuel 3:6-21

And it came to pass, while there was war between the house of Saul and the house of David, that Abner made himself strong for the house of Saul. And Saul had a concubine, whose name was Rizpah, the daughter of Aiah: and Ishbosheth said to Abner, Wherefore hast thou gone in unto my father’s concubine?

Then was Abner very wroth for the words of Ishbosheth, and said, Am I a dog’s head, which against Judah do shew kindness this day unto the house of Saul thy father, to his brethren, and to his friends, and have not delivered thee into the hand of David, that thou chargest me to day with a fault concerning this woman? So do God to Abner, and more also, except, as the LORD hath sworn to David, even so I do to him; to translate the kingdom from the house of Saul, and to set up the throne of David over Israel and over Judah, from Dan even to Beersheba.

And he could not answer Abner a word again, because he feared him.

And Abner sent messengers to David on his behalf, saying, Whose is the land? saying also, Make thy league with me, and, behold, my hand shall be with thee, to bring about all Israel unto thee.

And he said, Well; I will make a league with thee: but one thing I require of thee, that is, Thou shalt not see my face, except thou first bring Michal Saul’s daughter, when thou comest to see my face. And David sent messengers to Ishbosheth Saul’s son, saying, Deliver me my wife Michal, which I espoused to me for an hundred foreskins of the Philistines.

And Ishbosheth sent, and took her from her husband, even from Phaltiel the son of Laish. And her husband went with her along weeping behind her to Bahurim. Then said Abner unto him, Go, return. And he returned. And Abner had communication with the elders of Israel, saying, Ye sought for David in times past to be king over you: Now then do it: for the LORD hath spoken of David, saying, By the hand of my servant David I will save my people Israel out of the hand of the Philistines, and out of the hand of all their enemies. And Abner also spake in the ears of Benjamin: and Abner went also to speak in the ears of David in Hebron all that seemed good to Israel, and that seemed good to the whole house of Benjamin.

So Abner came to David to Hebron, and twenty men with him. And David made Abner and the men that were with him a feast. And Abner said unto David, I will arise and go, and will gather all Israel unto my lord the king, that they may make a league with thee, and that thou mayest reign over all that thine heart desireth. And David sent Abner away; and he went in peace.

JOHN GILL (1697-1771): The recent battle at Gibeon did not end the war; Ishbosheth had reigned two years when it was fought and he reigned five years longer—the war carried on, but “David waxed stronger and stronger,” persons continually coming over to his side from several tribes: and “the house of Saul waxed weaker and weaker,” 2 Samuel 3:1.

THOMAS COKE (1747-1814): Immediately after Abner made himself strong for the house of Saul, Ishbosheth accused him of a criminal intimacy with his father’s concubine. Both these circumstances put together, excite a just suspicion that Abner meant, when he was strong enough to throw off the mask, to set up for himself, and lay Ishbosheth aside.

ADAM CLARKE (1760-1832): This strengthening of himself, and going in to the late king’s concubine, were most evident proofs that Abner wished to seize upon the government.

THE EDITOR: David’s sons, Absalom and Adonijah, later did similar things in their attempts to seize their father’s throne, 2 Samuel 16:20-22; 1 Kings 1:1-7; 1 Kings 2:13-22.

THOMAS COKE: However this might be, Abner was enraged at the charge, and broke out into bitter resentment.

MATTHEW HENRY (1662-1714): Abner knew God had sworn to David to give him the kingdom, and yet opposed it with all his might from a principle of ambition; but now he complies with it from a principle of revenge, under colour of some regard to the will of God, which was but a pretense.

ROBERT HAWKER (1753-1827): He confesses David’s right to the kingdom, as appointed by the Lord: so that he acted contrary to his conscience. It is not said whether the crime Ishbosheth charged him with was true or false. But his resentment was unbounded. Having taken up lshbosheth’s cause, without regard to God’s laws, Abner as easily drops it, without an eye to the Lord’s approbation.

MATTHEW HENRY: Those that are slaves to their lusts have many masters, which drive some one way and some another, and men are violently hurried into self-contradictions. Abner’s ambition made him zealous for Ishbosheth, and now his revenge made him as zealous for David. If he had sincerely regarded God’s promise to David, and acted with an eye to that, he would have been steady and uniform in his counsels, and acted in consistency. But, while Abner serves his own lusts, God by him serves His own purposes, makes even His wrath and revenge to praise Him, and ordains strength to David by it.

THE EDITOR: Pride, rage, revenge, and ambition were the four horsemen driving Abner. He knew Israel would lose the war, but he hoped to remain “captain of the host” by delivering the kingdom to David. Why did David insist that Abner first must deliver his wife to him?

JOHN WESLEY (1703-1791): David demands her, both for the affection he still retained to her, and upon a political consideration that she might strengthen his title to the kingdom.

THE EDITOR: Well, she was Saul’s daughter. But Abner had approached David in Ishbosheth’s name. Therefore David wrote directly to Ishbosheth about it to test Abner’s sincerity, and to determine if Abner actually had sufficient power and influence over Ishbosheth to deliver Israel to him.

MATTHEW HENRY: Abner conducted her to David, not doubting but that then he should be doubly welcome when he brought him a wife in one hand, and a crown in the other.

ROBERT HAWKER: Certainly it was blameable in David to countenance such a traitor as Abner was to Ishbosheth.

THE EDITOR: Now Joab enters the scene. “The servants of David and Joab came from pursuing a troop…and when Joab and all the host that was with him were come, they told Joab, saying, Abner the son of Ner came to the king, and he hath sent him away, and he is gone in peace. Then Joab came to the king, and said, What hast thou done? behold, Abner came unto thee; why is it that thou hast sent him away, and he is quite gone? Thou knowest Abner the son of Ner, that he came to deceive thee, and to know thy going out and thy coming in, and to know all that thou doest,” 2 Samuel 3:22-25. Joab instantly suspected Abner’s motives; both those men were very much alike in their passions of pride, revenge, ambition, and self-interest. And was Joab any less contemptuous of David than Abner was to Ishbosheth?

MATTHEW HENRY: Joab very insolently fell foul upon David for treating with Abner, as if he had the same sway in David’s cause that Abner had in Ish-bosheth’s—he chides David, and reproaches him to his face: What hast thou done? as if David were accountable to him for what he did.

ALEXANDER WHYTE (1836-1921): Notwithstanding their family relationship, David and Joab were of a similar age, and that accounts for a good deal that went on between them.

JOHN GILL: “When Joab was come out from David,” perhaps as soon as he had spoken his mind—he flew out of the room in a great passion, not waiting for the king’s answer; though maybe the king disdained to give him one, or cared not to confer with him until his passion subsided; or chose not to provoke him more, for it is plain Joab had great power over him. Joab sent messengers in David’s name after Abner to fetch him back; it was not done by David’s order, with his consent or knowledge.

THE EDITOR: No doubt, that deceitful act was what Joab did; Abner would never have returned merely at Joab’s behest.

ADAM CLARKE: Joab feared that, after having rendered such essential services to David, Abner would be made captain of the host: he therefore determined to prevent it by murdering the man, under pretense of avenging the death of his brother Asahel.

JOHN GILL: “When Abner was returned to Hebron, Joab took him aside in the gate to speak with him quietly, and smote him there under the fifth rib, that he died, for the blood of Asahel his brother,” 2 Samuel 3:27. This was a public place, where people were continually passing, where judicial courts were held; wherefore Abner might think himself safe here with Joab and have no suspicion at all. It shows how fearless Joab was of God or men.

THOMAS COKE: Envy, and jealousy of Abner’s merit with David in gaining over the tribes to him, were principal motives to this base action, as well as revenge.

MATTHEW POOLE (1624-1679): Thus was Joab’s design; but God had other designs in it, to punish Abner’s manifest wickedness, and particularly his rebellion against David, and against God and his own conscience; and that David might not owe his kingdom to Abner’s revenge and treachery, but wholly to God’s wise and powerful providence.

THE EDITOR: Those are all valid reasons. But the Bible clearly states that Joab’s brother Abishai was his accomplice, and their principle motive was revenge, 2 Samuel 3:30. This reveals another very dangerous aspect of Joab’s character: he waited five years for the most opportune time to exact his revenge—then he struck without a moment’s hesitation.

CHARLES SIMEON (1759-1836): Joab never once reflected on the account which he should one day give of it to God; but with horrid treachery, and deliberate cruelty, he plunged the dagger into Abner.

 

Posted in David & His Nephew Joab | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on David and His Nephew Joab – Part 2: A Murder

David and His Nephew Joab – Part 1: Gibeon

Posted on July 19, 2024 by The Editor

1 Samuel 22:1,2; 1 Chronicles 2:15,16

David, whose sisters were Zeruiah, and Abigail. And the sons of Zeruiah; Abishai, and Joab, and Asahel, three.

David therefore departed thence, and escaped to the cave Adullam: and when his brethren and all his father’s house heard it, they went down thither to him. And every one that was in distress, and every one that was in debt, and every one that was discontented, gathered themselves unto him; and he became a captain over them: and there were with him about four hundred men.

B. W. NEWTON (1807-1899): Among the followers and closest adherents of David, was Joab. He was found early with David in the cave. Whilst Jonathan tarried in the court of Saul, Joab was sharing the hardships and dangers of David in the wilderness.

THE EDITOR: Joab came with his brothers, Abishai and Asahel. Some of David’s brethren rallied to him from love and family loyalty, but others came in “distress,” with motives of personal preservation; they knew Saul’s blood-thirsty paranoia wouldn’t end with destroying David, but it would extend to themselves as part of David’s family. Still others had economic and political reasons—“debt, and discontent.”

ALEXANDER WHYTE (1836-1921): Joab, the son of David’s sister, was a man of the very foremost ability.

B. W. NEWTON: Throughout all David’s subsequent dangers, Joab stood like a lion at his side, and if an extent of outward service were regarded, David perhaps had no such servant as he.

G. CAMPBELL MORGAN (1863-1945): Joab was a strange and rugged character, at once fierce and faithful. His relation to David forms a strange picture of a troublesome friendship. He was a perpetual source of anxiety, and yet his rugged steadfastness naturally appealed to the king.

THE EDITOR: Joab became more prominent in David’s army after the death of Saul and Jonathan, during an unusual battle in Gibeon, which was much like a personal duel, 2 Samuel 2:12-32. Recently, David had been anointed king “over Judah” in Hebron, 2 Samuel 3,4; but Abner, Saul’s cousin, the “captain of Saul’s host,” had taken Saul’s son Ishbosheth and annointed him king “over Gilead, and over the Ashurites, and over Jezreel, and over Ephraim, and over Benjamin, and over all Israel,” 2 Samuel 2:8,9.

MATTHEW HENRY (1662-1714): Abner set up Ishbosheth in competition with David, perhaps in his zeal for the lineal succession, or rather in his affection to his own family and relations, and because he had no other way to secure to himself the post of honour he was in, as captain of the host. See how much mischief the pride and ambition of one man may cause. Ishbosheth would never have set up himself if Abner had not made a tool of him to serve his own purposes.

THE EDITOR: “And Abner the son of Ner, and the servants of Ishbosheth the son of Saul, went out from Mahanaim to Gibeon. And Joab the son of Zeruiah, and the servants of David, went out, and met together beside the pool of Gibeon, and they sat down, the one on the one side of the pool, and the other on the other side of the pool. And Abner said to Joab, Let the young men now arise, and play before us. And Joab said, Let them arise.” 2 Samuel 2:12-14.

MATTHEW HENRY: In this battle, Abner was the aggressor.

THOMAS COKE (1747-1814): Joab, like many, entertained those false notions of honour, according to which he dared not refuse the challenge. They buy honour very dear who purchase it at the expense of their brother’s blood. False notions of honour are among the wiles that Satan employs for the destruction both of men’s bodies and souls.

ADAM CLARKE (1760-1832): This was diabolical play.

STEPHEN CHARNOCK (1628-1680): They accounted the death of men but a sport and interlude.

ROBERT HAWKER (1753-1827): The sinful play, as it is here called, soon became serious work, and terminated in a bloody battle, so that the place of the slain was called Helkath-hazzurim; that is, “the field of hardy men.”

JOHN TRAPP (1601-1699): What a mad sport was that of Joab and Abner!

THOMAS COKE: The men are selected and matched: “Then there arose and went over by number twelve of Benjamin, which pertained to Ishbosheth the son of Saul, and twelve of the servants of David.” 2 Samuel 2:15. Each man instantly seizes his fellow, plunges his sword into the other’s side, and all of them fell down dead together; so lavish are generals often of the lives of their brave soldiers, to gratify their caprice. The general battle hereupon ensues, and Abner and his forces are routed. They who thus stir up strife, often meddle to their own hurt; and it is just in God, to punish the aggressor, and cover those with shame who seek to advance themselves upon their neighbour’s ruin.

THE EDITOR: Joab’s men went after them.

JOHN GILL (1697-1771): Asahel, Joab’s brother, pursued after Abner, ambitious of the glory of taking or slaying the general of the army of Israel; trusting to his swiftness, not considering that the race is not always to the swift, and that he had to do with a veteran soldier, and he but a raw young man, though valiant. He kept his eye upon him and pursued him closely, disregarding persons on the right or left he could have made prisoners. Abner looked behind him, and said, “Art thou Asahel?” for it seems he knew him personally, being well acquainted with his family—they were very near to each other, as to be heard and understood by each other.

ADAM CLARKE: Asahel wished to get the armour of Abner as a trophy; this was greatly coveted by ancient heroes. Abner wished to spare him, for fear of exciting Joab’s enmity.

MATTHEW HENRY: Abner, it seems, either loved Joab or feared him; for he was very loth to incur his displeasure, which he would certainly do if he slew Asahel.

THOMAS COKE: The conduct of Abner appears heroic and amiable. He was very desirous of sparing Asahel, advising him not to engage with an old and experienced officer like himself, but to turn against one of the young men, who would be an easy conquest, and whose armour he might carry off as his spoil, 2 Samuel 2:21. Asahel, however, was not to be persuaded.

ADAM CLARKE: As Asahel was obstinate in the pursuit, and was swifter of foot, Abner saw that he must either kill or be killed—therefore he turned his spear and ran it through the body of Asahel.

ROBERT HAWKER: “And it came to pass, that as many as came to the place where Asahel fell down and died stood still.” The circumstance of everyone that came to the spot whence Asahel died, stopping, seems to have been from the gracious goodness of God, because it thereby retarded the pursuers, and afforded time to Abner’s army to escape.

THE EDITOR: Joab and Abishai, Asahel’s brothers, kept up the pursuit until they found Abner and his men on a hilltop at nightfall. “Abner called to Joab, and said, Shall the sword devour for ever? knowest thou not that it will be bitterness in the latter end? how long shall it be then, ere thou bid the people return from following their brethren?” Joab blew a trumpet to call off the pursuit, because Abner’s defensive position was too strong to be attacked at night, and Joab’s men were tired. Abner withdrew his men, and after walking all night, they crossed over Jordan; meanwhile Joab buried his brother Asahel, and returned to Hebron. Abner had lost 360 men, but Joab only 19—plus Asahel.

A. W. PINK (1886-1952): By temperament, Joab was a daring and energetic man: a bold fighter in lawless times.

THE EDITOR: Joab was a very hard man—definitely not a man to be played with.

 

Posted in David & His Nephew Joab | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on David and His Nephew Joab – Part 1: Gibeon

Eutychus

Posted on July 12, 2024 by The Editor

Acts 20:6-12

And we sailed away from Philippi after the days of unleavened bread, and came unto them to Troas in five days; where we abode seven days.

And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight. And there were many lights in the upper chamber, where they were gathered together. And there sat in a window a certain young man named Eutychus, being fallen into a deep sleep: and as Paul was long preaching, he sunk down with sleep, and fell down from the third loft, and was taken up dead. And Paul went down, and fell on him, and embracing him said, Trouble not yourselves; for his life is in him.

When he therefore was come up again, and had broken bread, and eaten, and talked a long while, even till break of day, so he departed. And they brought the young man alive, and were not a little comforted.

ALEXANDER WHYTE (1836-1921): This Eutychus is the father of all such as fall asleep under sermons. And he well deserves all his fame, for he fell sound asleep under an action sermon of the Apostle Paul. We do not know how much there may have been to be said in exculpation of Eutychus and his deep sleep during that sacrament service.

MATTHEW HENRY (1662-1714):  It was a very long sermon: He “continued his speech until midnight;” for he had a great deal to say, and knew not that ever he should have another opportunity of preaching to them. After they had received the Lord’s Supper, he preached to them the duties they had thereby engaged themselves to, and the comforts they were interested in, and in this he was very large and full and particular…We know some that would have reproached Paul for this as a long-winded preacher, that tired his hearers; but they were willing to hear: he saw them so, and therefore continued his speech. He continued it till midnight; perhaps they met in the evening in conformity to the example of the disciples who came together on the first Christian sabbath in the evening. It is probable he had preached to them in the morning, and yet thus lengthened out his evening sermon even till midnight. We wish we had the heads of this long sermon.

C. H. SPURGEON (1834-1892): Long sermons tend to quench the fire instead of kindling it…Paul’s power in the churches was very great, and yet he was not always able to maintain attention when his sermon was long, for at least one hearer went to sleep under him with serious result.

C. H. MACKINTOSH (1820-1896): This has been viewed by some as a penalty for inattention.

THOMAS MANTON (1620-1677): Mark, though the sermon continued till midnight, and it was a youth that slept, yet he fell down as dead. It was a small sin—a sin of infirmity—a boy’s sin; yet God would leave this warning. I do not criticize too severely upon this infirmity, only give you caution. Yet we are to strive against it, and be sure it may be said of us as of them: “The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak,” Matthew 26:41. Make conscience of avoiding this sin; do not compose yourselves to sleep; do not come to these duties spent with labours and worldly cares, nor clogged with excess of meat or drink.

GEORGE WHITEFIELD (1714-1770): But how regardless are those of this direction, who, instead of hanging on the preacher to hear him, doze or sleep whilst he is speaking to them from God?

H. A. IRONSIDE (1876-1951): This fellow wasn’t the last man to be overpowered by drowsiness in a meeting!

JOHN WESLEY (1703-1791): Woe to many today, when God shall once send out summonses for sleepers.

MATTHEW HENRY: Now this youth was to be blamed, that he presumptuously sat in the window, unglazed perhaps, and so exposed himself; and that he slept, nay, he fell into a deep sleep when Paul was preaching, which was a sign he did not duly attend to the things that Paul spoke of, though they were weighty things. The particular notice taken of his sleeping makes us willing to hope that none of the rest slept, though it was sleeping time and after supper; but this youth fell fast asleep, he was carried away with it—so the word is, which intimates that he strove against it, but was overpowered by it, and at last sunk down with sleep.

JOHN CALVIN (1509-1564): I see no cause why some interpreters should so sore and sharply condemn the drowsiness of the young man, that they should say that he was punished for his sluggishness by death. For what marvel is it, if, seeing the night was so far spent, having striven so long with sleep, he yielded at length? Whereas, against his will, and otherwise than he hoped for, he was taken and overcome with deep sleep, we may guess by this that he did not settle himself to sleep. To seek out a fit place wherein to sleep had been a sign of sluggishness, but to be overcome with sleep, sitting at a window—what is it but without fault to yield to nature?

JOHN GILL (1697-1771): And also from the length of service, and the lateness of the night, all which contributed to bring on this deep sleep. It can hardly be thought that he purposely composed himself to sleep, for he would never have chosen so dangerous a place to sit in as a window, and at so great an height from the ground; but this sleep seemed to come upon him at an unawares; what hand Satan might have had in it, with a view to the young man’s hurt, both as to soul and body, and to bring reproach and scandal upon the church, and the Gospel, it seems evident that the providence of God was in it, which overruled it for a good end, even the greater confirmation of the Gospel, and very probably to the spiritual good of the young man.

C. H. MACKINTOSH: A miracle was wrought by Paul—the young man was raised from a state of death by the power and goodness of God in His servant and the friends were not a little comforted.

C. H. SPURGEON: Under Paul’s preaching, Eutychus went to sleep, and Paul never blamed him.

THE EDITOR: Maybe Paul blamed himself.

MATTHEW HENRY: Paul did not now go on in a continued discourse, as before, but he and his friends fell into a free conversation, the subject of which, no doubt, was good, and to the use of edifying.

C. H. MACKINTOSH: We must add, however, that we do not think the Lord’s table is the place for long sermons.

ALEXANDER WHYTE: Paul did not know when to stop that night. Even after the accident to Eutychus, he was still so full of matter and of spirit, that he went on with his post-communion address till the sun rose on the cups still standing on the table, and on the elders standing beside them, and Paul still pouring out his heart from the pulpit.

C. H. SPURGEON: Send hearers away, not loathing, but longing. Long sermons only make people long for the end of them; the best discourses are those which leave us longing for more.

THE EDITOR: By recording this incident, maybe that’s a lesson the Holy Spirit intended preachers to notice—that they should not weary their people. A young lad once stood looking at an old plaque on the church wall, exhibiting the names of congregation members who had died during the World Wars. “What are those?” the boy asked. “Those are all the names of our church members who died in the service,” explained his pastor. “Oh,” the boy replied, “did they die during the morning or the evening service?”

C. H. SPURGEON: I had many things to say, but I remember Paul’s mistake—and as I could not possibly raise a sleeper from the dead, as Paul did, I will not try the experiment of preaching as long as Paul did!

 

Posted in Preaching & Ministry | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on Eutychus

Psalms Written “for the Sons of Korah”

Posted on July 5, 2024 by The Editor

Psalm 87:1; Psalm 48:1; Psalm 88:1; Psalm 46:1,2

A Psalm or Song for the sons of Korah. His foundation is in the holy mountains.

A Song and Psalm for the sons of Korah. Great is the LORD, and greatly to be praised in the city of our God, in the mountain of his holiness.

A Song or Psalm for the sons of Korah, to the chief Musician upon Mahalath Leannoth, Maschil of Heman the Ezrahite. O LORD God of my salvation, I have cried day and night before thee.

To the chief Musician for the sons of Korah, A Song upon Alamoth. God is our refuge and strength, a very present help in trouble. Therefore will not we fear, though the earth be removed.

ROBERT HAWKER (1753-1827): The title may be justly read, A Psalm or Song for the sons of “miserable man;” for such was Korah: and William Romaine so translated it.

WILLIAM ROMAINE (1714-1795): That is—“fallen man.”

JOHN GILL (1697-1771):  Some are of opinion the word “Mahalath,” may be rendered “the afflicting disease,” either a bodily one, or a soul disorder, being under a sense of divine wrath. “Leannoth” signifies “to answer.” “Maschil,” may be translated “causing to understand.”

J. J. STEWART PEROWNE (1823-1904): The “Korah” whose “sons” are here spoken of, is the Levite who headed the insurrection against Moses and Aaron in the wilderness.

C. H. SPURGEON (1834-1892): Korah, Dathan and Abiram perished because of their presumption—they went down alive into the pit—and the earth closed upon them. They and all that appertained unto them were swallowed up, Numbers 16:32,33. But we are astonished to read, “Notwithstanding, the children of Korah died not,” Numbers 26:11. Why they were spared, we cannot tell.

JOHN TRAPP (1601-1699): They were his sons that died not, “departing,” as it seems, “from their father’s tents,” as all were counselled, Numbers 16:24-26.

MATTHEW POOLE (1624-1679): Or because Moses interceded for them, or because God would glorify His own free mercy in sparing some, while He punished others.

C. H. SPURGEON: I attribute their singular escape to the Sovereign Grace of God who spared them when their kinsmen were destroyed.

J. M. NEALE (1818-1866): Mediæval writers remark how here, as so often, it was the will of God to raise up saints where they could have been least looked for.

WILLIAM KELLY (1821-1906): The people who deserved least of all, as man would have thought, to be exempted from destruction were precisely those for whom God did reserve this special grace—the sons of Korah!—the leader and organiser of the apostasy, from his position as well as in his conduct, above all others most guilty! The sons of Korah were the objects of a most singular deliverance. Is not this the true grace of God? It is the same God whom we now know, the same God from first to last. Grace is no new thing with Him; but where can you find a finer sample of its power and superiority to all circumstances than in the distinguishing grace that saved from destruction the children of gainsaying Korah, the most infamous of those who had conspired against Moses and Aaron, the types of Christ’s royalty and priesthood.

WILLIAM S. PLUMER (1802-1880): Who were “the sons of Korah?”

JOHN GILL: The immediate “sons of Korah,” were Assir, and Elkanah, and Abiasaph, Exodus 6:24.

C. H. MACKINTOSH (1820-1896): But who are these sons of Korah?

MATTHEW HENRY (1662-1714): These sons of Korah were afterwards—in their posterity, eminently serviceable to the church.

JOHN TRAPP: Of them came Samuel the prophet, Heman the music master, and others.

J. J. STEWART PEROWNE: The Korahites were a part of the band who acknowledged David as their chief at Ziklag; warriors “whose faces,” it is said, “were like the faces of lions, and who were—for speed, like gazelles upon the mountains,” 1 Chronicles 12:1,6-8. The Korahites were in David’s time, keepers of the threshold of the tabernacle, 1 Chronicles 9:17-19; and still earlier, in the time of Moses, watchmen at the entrance of the camp of the Levites. We find two branches of this family associated with that of Merari, as guardians of the doors of the Temple, 1 Chronicles 26:1-19; and probably an allusion to this, their office, is in Psalm 84:10, “I had rather be a doorkeeper in house of my God, than to dwell in the tents of wickedness.” The Korahites were also celebrated musicians and singers, 1 Chronicles 6:16-33. The musical reputation of the family continued in the time of Jehoshaphat, 2 Chronicles 20:19, where we have the peculiar doubly plural Hebrew form בּגי הקּרהים, “Sons of the Korahites.”

C. H. MACKINTOSH: Grace upon grace shadowed forth in these sons of Korah. The royal guards of the hidden king—guards of the house, 2 Chronicles 3-5,19. One more privilege of these sons of Korah—sanctified in holiness, they had the happy service of distributing the oblations of the Lord, and the most holy things, 2 Chronicles 31:14-18. They are also thought to have written some of the Psalms. Their names are connected with eleven of them; but their authorship is by no means certain.

THE EDITOR: Eight of those Psalms are addressed “To the Chief Musician, for the Sons of Korah,” as is twice quoted in our opening verses.

WILLIAM KELLY: This is, I think, an important key to the book of Psalms. Every attentive reader will have noticed that the second of the five divisions of the Psalms gives us at its beginning, psalms entitled, “For the sons of Korah,” Psalms 42-49. A few follow in Book 3, Psalms 84-88. These mean the descendants of the men in question.

MATTHEW HENRY: Perhaps they were made to bear his name so long after, rather than the name of any other of their ancestors, for a warning to themselves, and as an instance of the power of God, which brought those choice fruits even out of that bitter root.

C. H. SPURGEON: They who are saved by sovereign grace are the most fit to praise the name of the Lord. The sons of Korah became door-keepers to the house of the Lord. Surely they would sing with peculiar emphasis these words, “Therefore we will not fear, though the earth be removed,” Psalm 46:2. They saw the earth open her mouth and swallow up the offenders of their household while they were preserved by Sovereign Grace. Surely the tears must have stood in their eyes when they sang this verse and thought of the opening gulf at their feet. The circumstance under which a man is saved will influence the rest of his life. To be saved by God from between the teeth of judgment is a rescue so special and vivid that the subject of it learns to sing aloud unto the preserving Lord! Delivered from so great a death, believers learn to trust that the Lord will yet deliver them. When conversion is especially remarkable, the music of gratitude is pitched in a high key and the converts reach notes which are impossible to others.

WILLIAM KELLY: And who were so fit to have such psalms and songs as the sons of Korah?

ANDREW BONAR (1810-1892): “A song upon Alamoth,” in Psalm 46, suggests “a choir of virgins,” as if this virgin-choir were selected to sing a Psalm that tells of perils and fears and alarms abounding, to show that even feeble virgins may sing without dread, because of “The Mighty One” on their side.

C. H. SPURGEON: It is for sons of Korah to sing, “Therefore we will not fear.”

ROBERT HAWKER: Such a Psalm, or Song, was composed for the daily use of the sons of Korah; these miserable sons of fallen nature, who, but for the redemption through the sufferings and soul-travail of Jesus, must have thus groaned forever!

THE EDITOR: As believers in Jesus Christ, saved by grace, we are all “sons of Korah.”

WILLIAM ROMAINE: Every such person is entitled to sing this sacred hymn, and he is called upon to do it.

 

Posted in Worship & Praise | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Psalms Written “for the Sons of Korah”

The Spiritual Significance of God’s Rainbow

Posted on June 28, 2024 by The Editor

Psalm 19:1; Genesis 9:8-17

The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork.

And God spake unto Noah, and to his sons with him, saying, And I, behold, I establish my covenant with you, and with your seed after you; And with every living creature that is with you, of the fowl, of the cattle, and of every beast of the earth with you; from all that go out of the ark, to every beast of the earth. And I will establish my covenant with you; neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of a flood; neither shall there any more be a flood to destroy the earth.

And God said, This is the token of the covenant which I make between me and you and every living creature that is with you, for perpetual generations: I do set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a token of a covenant between me and the earth. And it shall come to pass, when I bring a cloud over the earth, that the bow shall be seen in the cloud: And I will remember my covenant, which is between me and you and every living creature of all flesh; and the waters shall no more become a flood to destroy all flesh. And the bow shall be in the cloud; and I will look upon it, that I may remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is upon the earth.

C. H. SPURGEON (1834-1892): It is not merely glory that the heavens declare—but the “glory of God.”

ADAM CLARKE (1760-1832): God gave the rainbow for a sign to all the descendants of Noah, by whom the whole earth was peopled after the flood. Thus the celestial bow speaks a universal language.

C. H. MACKINTOSH (1820-1896): We do not know the atmospheric conditions of the atmosphere that existed from the time that sin came in the fall of man, until God smelled the sweet savour of Noah’s offering. Indeed, before the fall we read, “the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth…But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground,” Genesis 2:5,6. If the whole face of the ground was covered, and no sunshine, there could be no rainbow…If, for the first time when Noah stepped into the new world, the sun shone out as the rain descended—and the covenant bow appeared, as the offering ascended—it would be a most striking figure of the gloom that settled on this earth through sin, and the future glory of God shining on man through the one offering of Christ.

JOHN CALVIN (1509-1564): I think the celestial arch had before existed naturally, but is here consecrated into a sign and pledge; thus a new office is assigned to it.

ALEXANDER MacLAREN (1826-1910): Now, for the first time, it was made ‘a sign,’ the visible pledge of God’s promise. Mark the emphasis with which God’s agency is declared and His ownership asserted: “I do set My bow.”

MATTHEW HENRY (1662-1714): As the old world was ruined to be a monument of justice, so this world remains to this day, a monument of mercy, according to the oath of God, that the waters of Noah should no more return to cover the earth…God, by flowing seas and sweeping rains, shows what He could do in wrath; and yet, by preserving the earth from being deluged, shows what He can do in mercy, and will do in truth.

C. H. SPURGEON: Partial floods there have been, and parts of provinces have been inundated, but no flood has ever come upon the earth of such a character as that which Noah saw. Therefore the rainbow, every time it is painted upon the cloud, is an assurance to us that God cannot lie.

JOHN NEWTON (1725-1807): See in the rainbow a token of God’s covenant love.

ADAM CLARKE: The rainbow is an illustrious token of mercy and love.

ROBERT HAWKER (1753-1827): Consider, how is the rainbow formed? It is the effect from the sun’s beams upon the watery clouds. And Christ, the Sun of righteousness, forms by His shining, the whole effects of the Covenant of Grace, upon all that is cloudy in our nature.

EDWARD PAYSON (1783-1827): In the sun, see an emblem of Christ, the Sun of righteousness; in the rainbow, behold a token of God’s covenant love; in the showers and dews of heaven, see an emblem of the refreshing influences of divine grace.

C. H. SPURGEON: Observe that the covenant made with Noah was a covenant of pure grace, for “Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord,” Genesis 6:8. The Lord will deal with us, also, according to His grace…The lovely rainbow, while it comfortably reminds us of the Divine faithfulness, is also a memorial of that universal depravity of our race which necessitated a Covenant of Grace to stand as a barrier for our protection, lest the righteous wrath of God should break forth upon us…The rainbow in the clouds is the token of the covenant of preservation which He made with all His works—but when you come to the spiritual covenant, that Everlasting Covenant is made of God in Christ Jesus, with His chosen—and with them only! None but His own believing people can be said to be partakers in the Covenant of Grace, ordered in all things and sure—for the Man, Christ Jesus, was the Representative of those who are His own body, His own brethren, of whom He says, “I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which Thou hast given Me,” John 17:9.

A. W. PINK (1886-1952): But is that all there was to the Noahic covenant?

MATTHEW HENRY: The rainbow has fiery colours in it, to signify that though God will not again drown the world, yet, when the mystery of God shall be finished, the world shall be consumed by fire.

THOMAS COKE (1747-1814): A fire of love to His people, and a fire of wrath to His enemies.

THE EDITOR: What a fearful awakening God’s Day of Judgment will be for those who have turned God’s rainbow, His covenant symbol of mercy and love, into a banner of arrogant pride under which they annually parade sexual perversities which God clearly condemns as “abominations,” Leviticus 18:22; Romans 1:22-27. As our Lord said, “the cry of it, which is come unto me,” Genesis 18:20,21. Such open wickedness will have its recompense, as surely as it did in Noah’s day with a devastating flood, and in God’s fiery judgment upon Sodom.

JOHN CALVIN: “Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness,” Ezekiel 16:49. God says that they began by pride, and surely pride is the mother of all contempt of God.

JOHN GILL: “They declare their sin as Sodom, they hide it not. Woe unto their soul! for they have rewarded evil unto themselves,” Isaiah 3:9. They commit it openly, without fear or shame; glory in it, and boast of it.

THE EDITOR: “They are the enemies of the cross of Christ: whose end is destruction, whose God is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame,” Philippians 3:18,19.

MATTHEW HENRY: Now observe—they had fair warning of the ruin that was coming upon them for their sins. Noah was a “preacher of righteousness” to the old world; so was Lot to the Sodomites. They gave them timely notice of what would be the end of their wicked ways, and that it was not far off. They did not regard the warning given them and gave no credit, no heed to it. They were very secure, and went on in their business as unconcerned as you could imagine; “they did eat, they drank,” indulged themselves in their pleasures, and took no care of any thing else, but to “make provision for the flesh.”

EDWARD PAYSON: Though they had disbelieved God’s threatenings, they soon found, as sooner or later all sinners will find, that their unbelief did not render them false, nor prevent their fulfilment.

JONATHAN EDWARDS (1703-1758): Wicked men who now doubt His truth and dare not trust His Word, will hereafter, in the most convincing, affecting manner, find His Word to be true in all that He has threatened, and will see that He is faithful to His promises in rewarding His saints.

C. H. SPURGEON: The Lord has mercy in His right hand for those who will turn from their sin; but He has a sword in His left hand for those who will abide in their iniquities…Oh, turn, ye heathens—some of you as vile as the inhabitants of Sodom—turn! turn to God!

 

Posted in God's Promises | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Spiritual Significance of God’s Rainbow

Sorcerers Past and Present

Posted on June 21, 2024 by The Editor

2 Timothy 3:1-13

This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.

For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith. But they shall proceed no further: for their folly shall be manifest unto all men, as theirs also was. But thou hast fully known my doctrine, manner of life, purpose, faith, longsuffering, charity, patience, persecutions, afflictions, which came unto me at Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra; what persecutions I endured: but out of them all the Lord delivered me.

Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution. But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.

MATTHEW POOLE (1624-1679): Concerning this resistance of Moses by Jannes and Jambres, the Holy Scripture saith nothing but in this text.

C. H. MACKINTOSH (1820-1896): We should not have known the names of these ancient opposers of the truth of God, had they not been recorded by the Holy Ghost, in connection with “the perilous times” of which the Apostle Paul warns his son Timothy.

JOHN TRAPP (1601-1699): Their names Paul had either by tradition, or out of Jewish records.

ADAM CLARKE (1760-1832): That these names existed in the ancient Jewish records, their own writings show. In the Targum of Jonathan, on Exodus 7:11, they are called Janis and Jambris; and in the Babylonian Talmud they are named Joanne and Mambre, and are represented as chiefs of the sorcerers of Egypt, and as having ridiculed Moses and Aaron for pretending to equal them in magical arts.

THE EDITOR: Targum means “translation.” The Targum of Jonathan is an Aramaic translation of the first five books of the Bible. A Talmud “is a collection of writings that covers the full gamut of Jewish law and tradition.” But it was by the Holy Spirit’s inspiration that Paul recorded their correct proper names for our learning. Jackson’s 1909 Dictionary of Proper Names, suggests that Jannes means “he vexed,” and Jambres, “foamy healer.”

THOMAS COKE (1747-1814): The Greek word translated “seducers,” in verse thirteen, properly signifies sorcerers, magicians, jugglers, witches, or enchanters. Jannes and Jambres were evidently such; impostors who endeavoured to vend a false religion for a true one, and to support it by their incantations.

JOHN CALVIN (1509-1564): The reason why there were two of them may be conjectured to have been that, because the Lord had raised up for His people two leaders, Moses and Aaron, Pharaoh determined to place against them the like number of magicians…Although Paul names two, Jannes and Jambres, it is probable that they were not the only ones, but the chief ringleaders. But I will not dispute this questionable point. The admonition of Paul is more to the purpose, that “as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses,” so also there should always be false teachers, who would oppose Christ’s true ministers, and indeed should “wax worse and worse.”

THOMAS COKE: “But they shall proceed no further” than the magicians did, nor be able essentially and finally to deceive the faithful saints of God—and “their folly shall be manifest unto all men, as theirs also was.”

C. H. MACKINTOSH: Now, mark the nature of this resistance to the truth. The mode in which “Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses” was simply by imitating, so far as they were able, whatever he did. We do not find that they attributed his actings to a false or evil energy, but rather that they sought to neutralise their power upon the conscience, by doing the same things. What Moses did they could do, so that, after all there was no great difference. One was as good as the other. A miracle is a miracle. If Moses wrought miracles to get the people out of Egypt, they could work miracles to keep them in; so where was the difference?

C. H. SPURGEON (1834-1892): You know Satan always works by trying to counterfeit the work of the Spirit. Jannes and Jambres in Egypt could imitate some of the miracles. They “did so with their enchantments,” Exodus 8:7. There is much in true religion which men can successfully counterfeit. But, as in Egypt, a point was reached wherein the magicians were foiled, so that they confessed, “This is the finger of God.” Jannes and Jambres were soon, by the power and wisdom of God, proved to be fools.

C. H. MACKINTOSH: There were only three things in which the magicians of Egypt were able to imitate the servants of the true and living God, namely, in turning their rods into serpents, Exodus 7:12; turning the water into blood, Exodus 7:29; and bringing up the frogs, Exodus 7:8; but, in the fourth, which involved the exhibition of life, in connection with the display of nature’s humiliation, they were totally confounded, and obliged to own, “this is the finger of God,” Exodus 8:16-19. Thus it is also with the latter-day resisters of the truth. All that they do is by the direct energy of Satan, and lies within the range of his power.

THE EDITOR: None but God by His Holy Spirit, through Jesus Christ, can create life; thus Aaron’s rod smote “dust of the land, and it became lice,” Exodus 8:17. That Aaron’s serpent swallowed up their serpents, shows also that there is none other salvation but by Jesus Christ.

C. H. SPURGEON: So in the regeneration of our nature—in the changing the heart—the Lord alone is seen. Who shall pretend to give another a new heart? Of regeneration we may say, “This is the finger of God.”

JOHN TRAPP: Thus Jannes and Jambres were silenced and convinced, but not converted.

A. W. PINK (1886-1952): As Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so these mentioned in 2 Timothy 3:5-6 also resist the truth. This is one of the Divinely-delineated characteristics of the “perilous times.” The reference is to men and women supernaturally endowed by Satan to work miracles. Such are found today, we believe, not only among Spiritualists and Christian Scientists, but also in some leaders of the Faith-healing cults. There are those now posing as evangelists of Christ who are attracting large crowds. Their chief appeal is not the message they bear—but their readiness to “anoint” and pray over the sick. They claim that “Jesus,” in response to their faith, has through them removed paralysis, healed cancers, given sight to the blind. When their claims are carefully investigated, it is found that most of the widely-advertised “cures” are impostures. But on the other hand, there are some cases which are genuine healings, which cannot be explained apart from supernatural agency. So it was with the miracles wrought by the magicians of Pharaoh.

THE EDITOR: Deceptive “lying wonders” and fame are their tools to gain money. Beware of charismatic “faith-healers” and multi-millionaire television “evangelists.” Are they much different from these two Egyptian sorcerers, or Balaam, who used “enchantments,” and desired a reputation as God’s prophet, Numbers 22:15-18; Numbers 24:1? Or Elymas, the sorcerer who resisted Paul, Acts 13:8? Or Simon Magus?

WILLIAM GURNALL (1617-1679): Simon Magus desired the gifts of the Holy Ghost that he might be a man of fame and name, Acts 8:18-21. And do not some labour to bring the gospel to town as an expedient?

H. A. IRONSIDE (1876-1951): Simon Magus “used sorcery and bewitched the people of Samaria, giving out that himself was some great one.”—he claimed to be a miracle worker and by his trickery and so-called magic had deceived the people: “To whom all gave heed, from the least to the greatest, saying, This man is the great power of God,” Acts 8:9,10.

ROBERT HAWKER (1753-1827): What Simon Magus said in answer to Peter, Acts 8:24, is to the same effect as Pharaoh desired Moses, that he would pray for him, Exodus 10:17. But, like Pharaoh, the heart remained hardened. He dreaded the punishment likely to follow, and would have avoided it—but we hear no cry of soul from either, for a change of heart.

 

Posted in Spiritual Warfare, Opposition | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on Sorcerers Past and Present

God the Father Manifested in His Son

Posted on June 14, 2024 by The Editor

John 14:1,6-11

Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me.

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.

Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.

Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father? Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works’ sake.

THOMAS GOODWIN (1600-1679): God is “the Father of glory,” Ephesians 1:17. He is called the “Father of glory” by way of an eminency of fatherhood; there is no such father as He.

JOHN TRAPP (1601-1699): God is the only Father, to speak properly, Matthew 23:9. The Father of all the fatherhood in heaven and earth.

H. A. IRONSIDE (1876-1951): Now it is perfectly true that God may be known through creation. We are told that in the first chapter of Romans—“the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse,” Romans 1:20. So men who deny God, who refuse to believe in a God, who live as if there were no God, are without excuse. But the Fatherhood of God could only be revealed through the Lord Jesus Christ. Nature tells me there is a God, that He must be infinite in wisdom and power, but it does not tell me He has a Father’s heart. I would not know that except from the revelation He has given in His blessed Son.

JOHN GILL (1697-1771): He that has seen the one, must know the other; and indeed, “no one can know the Father, but he to whom the Son reveals Him,” Matthew 11:27. The knowledge of both go together.

MATTHEW HENRY (1662-1714): He is “the only-begotten Son,” John 3:16; and Who so likely to know the Father as the Son? or in whom is the Father better known than in the Son? He is of the same nature with the Father, so that he who hath seen Him hath seen the Father. He is “in the bosom of the Father,” John 1:18. He had lain in His bosom from eternity. When He was here upon earth, yet still, as God, He was in the bosom of the Father, and thither He returned when He ascended.

H. A. IRONSIDE: I love those verses with which the epistle to the Hebrews opens: “God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high,” Hebrews 1:1-3. Those words, “the express image of his person,” might well be rendered the “exact expression of His character.” Everything in the character of Christ tells out that which is in the heart of God: His love for holiness, His delight in righteousness, His interest in men—even unconverted men.

JOHN GILL: “Holy Father,” John 17:11. The epithet “holy” is exceeding suitable, as it perfectly agrees with Him who is essentially so—and “righteous Father,” John 17:25. God is righteous—the Father is righteous, the Son is righteous, and the Holy Spirit is righteous: God is so in His nature; righteousness is a perfection of it; He is so in all His purposes and promises; in all His ways and works of providence and grace; in predestination, redemption, justification, pardon of sin, and eternal glory.

H. A. IRONSIDE: And it is the Holy Spirit Who told us God is love, and the evidence He gave of it was this: “Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins,” 1 John 4:10. Oh, we could have known that God was great, that God was powerful, that God was wise. We might even have known from the abundant provision He has made for His creatures that He is good, but we would never have known that He is love, if Jesus had not come to reveal the Father. “The Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth,” John 1:14. I repeat, we would never have known the Fatherhood of God apart from the revelation given us in our Lord Jesus Christ.

J. C. RYLE (1816-1900): How close and mysterious is the union of God the Father and God the Son! Four times over this mighty truth is put before us in unmistakable words—“If ye had known Me, ye would have known my Father;” “He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father;” “I am in the Father, and the Father in Me;” “The Father that dwelleth in Me, He doeth the works.” Sayings like these are full of deep mystery. We have no eyes to see their meaning fully, no language to express it, no mind to take it in. Let it suffice us to know that the Father is God and the Son is God, and yet that they are one in essence though two distinct Persons.

CHARLES SIMEON (1759-1836): None can know the Father, except they to whom the Son should reveal Him; yet, in these words, He invites all to come and learn of Him the mysterious truths, which, though already recorded in the written word, cannot be apprehended aright, unless He unfold them to us, and enable us to understand them: “Learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart; and ye shall find rest unto your souls,” Matthew 11:29.

J. C. RYLE: These are high things, and we cannot attain to a full comprehension of them. Let us take comfort in the simple truth, that Christ is very God of very God; equal with the Father in all things, and One with Him. He Who loved us, and shed His blood for us on the cross, and bids us trust Him for pardon, is no mere man like ourselves. He is “God over all, blessed forever,” and able to save to the uttermost the chief of sinners. Though our sins be as scarlet, He can make them white as snow. He that casts his soul on Christ has an Almighty Friend—a Friend who is One with the Father, and very God.

C. H. SPURGEON (1834-1892): “This is life eternal, that they might know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent,” John 17:3. By this, then, we can know whether we have eternal life or not. Do we know the Father? Do we know Jesus Christ as the Messiah the Sent One? Are we resting in that blessed knowledge? If so, He has given us eternal life.

H. A. IRONSIDE: Do you say to yourself, “Oh, I wish I understood God better. I wish I could know just how God the Father looks at things, how He feels about things, and what His attitude is toward men in general, and His people in particular.” Well, all you need to do is read the four Gospels and get better acquainted with the Lord Jesus Christ, for He has made the Father known in all His fullness.

J. C. RYLE: The more we know of Christ, the more we know of the Father.

 

Posted in Attributes of God, Jesus Christ | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on God the Father Manifested in His Son

A Preparation for the Lord’s Supper

Posted on June 7, 2024 by The Editor

Philippians 2:3; Matthew 5:21-24

Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves.

Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee; leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.

MATTHEW POOLE (1624-1679): Matthew 5:23-24 is usually applied with reference to communion with God in the Lord’s Supper, but equally extensive to any other part of worship and prayer, 1 Timothy 2:8.

MATTHEW HENRY (1662-1714): When we are addressing ourselves to any religious exercises, it is good for us to take that occasion of serious reflection and self-examination: there are many things to be remembered—and this among the rest, whether “our brother hath aught against us.”

CHARLES SIMEON (1759-1836): Our blessed Lord had declared that a wrathful word was in fact a species and degree of murder: and from thence He takes occasion to inculcate the necessity of exercising in every respect a spirit of love—not only to entertain no anger in one’s own heart against others, but so as not to leave room for the exercise of it in the hearts of others towards us.

C. H. SPURGEON (1834-1892): If we have wronged another, we are to pause, cease from the worship, and hasten to seek reconciliation. We easily remember if we have ought against our brother, but now the memory is to be turned the other way. Only when we have remembered our own wrong doing, and made reconciliation can we hope for acceptance with the Lord.

JOHN TRAPP (1601-1699): “Confess your faults one to another,” saith James—your lapses and offences one against another, and then “pray one for another, that ye may be healed,” James 3:16; as Abraham, after reconciliation, prayed for Abimelech, and the Lord healed him, Genesis 20.

D. L. MOODY (1837-1899): It may be that you are saying, “I do not know that I have anything against anyone.” Has anyone anything against you? Is there someone who thinks you have done them wrong? Perhaps you have not; but it may be they think you have. I will tell you what I would do before I go to sleep tonight; I would go and see them, and have the question settled. You will find that you will be greatly blessed in the very act.

A. W. PINK (1886-1952): Seek to appease the anger of the one who has been offended, obtaining his forgiveness, regaining his favour and friendship, by humbling yourself before him, asking his pardon, and satisfying him for any injury which may have been done to him.

EDWARD PAYSON (1783-1827): I am aware that this is a most disagreeable duty. Nothing can be harder, or more painful to our proud hearts. But it will be far easier to perform it, than to suffer the consequences of neglecting it…Jesus plainly intimates, that God will accept no gift of us, receive no thanks from us, listen to none of our prayers, so long as we neglect to make satisfaction to those whom we have injured.

WILLIAM GURNALL (1617-1679): You will be little in prayer to God, if much in squabbling with your brethren. It is impossible to go from wrangling to praying with a free spirit. And if you should be so bold as to knock at God’s door, you are sure to have cold wel­come. “Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.” God will not have the incense of prayer put to such strange fire; nor will He eat of our leavened bread, taste of any perform­ance soured with malice and bitterness of spirit. First the peace was renewed, and a covenant of love and friendship struck between Laban and Jacob, Genesis 31:44, and then, “Jacob offered sacrifice upon the mount, and called his brethren to eat bread,” Genesis 31:54—and dare we go up to God’s altar, bow our knees to Him in prayer, while our hearts are roiled and swollen with anger, envy, and malice? O God humble us.

MATTHEW HENRY: Many give this as a reason why they do not come to the communion, because they are at variance with some neighbour; and whose fault is that? One sin will never excuse another, but will rather double the guilt. Want of charity cannot justify the want of piety. The difficulty is easily got over; those who have wronged us, we must forgive; and those whom we have wronged, we must make satisfaction to, or at least make a tender of it, and desire a renewal of the friendship, so that if reconciliation be not made, it may not be our fault—Go, and be reconciled to thy brother, be just to him, be friendly with him, because while the quarrel continues, as thou art unfit to come to the table of the Lord—if thou persist in this sin, there is danger lest thou be suddenly snatched away by the wrath of God.

JEREMY TAYLOR (1613-1667): Therefore before every communion especially, we must remember what differences or jealousies are between us and anyone else, and recompose all such disunions, and cause right understandings between each other, offering to satisfy whom we have injured, and to forgive those who have injured us.

ALEXANDER WHYTE (1836-1921): One of our elders on the Sabbath before one communion heard a sermon on the text, “Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way: first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.” Now that elder had long ago had a miserable quarrel with a man whose office was in the same street as his own. And on the Monday before the communion, he left his own office and crossed the street and rang his enemy’s bell. He felt, as he told me himself, that he would almost as soon have faced a lighted cannon as rung that bell. But he did it. And when he stood before his old foe, he did not speak. He only held out his hand. The two estranged men looked at one another. They shook hands and parted without words. But a load of anger and hatred and wickedness that had lain like a mill-stone on both their hearts was from that moment removed. And the two men came to the table next Sabbath reconciled to God and to one another.

JOHN TRAPP: And, as a bone once broken is stronger after well setting, so let love be after reconciliation; that if it be possible, as much as in us lieth, we may live peaceably with all men. Let it not stick on our part howsoever, but seek peace and ensue it.

MATTHEW HENRY: “Walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called, with all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love; endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace,” Ephesians 4:1-3. Peace is a bond, as it unites persons, and makes them live friendly one with another. A peaceable disposition and conduct bind Christians together, whereas discord and quarrelling disunite hearts and affections.

JOHN CALVIN (1509-1564): Thus love, which has been interrupted by our fault, must be restored by acknowledging and asking pardon for the fault—“Forbearing one another in love.” This agrees with what is elsewhere taught, that “love suffereth long and is kind,” 1 Corinthians 13:4. Where love is strong and prevalent, we shall perform many acts of mutual forbearance.

C. H. SPURGEON: In disagreements be eager for peace. Leave off strife before you begin.

 

Posted in Lord's Supper | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on A Preparation for the Lord’s Supper

The Breath of Life

Posted on May 31, 2024 by The Editor

Genesis 2:7; John 20:19-22; 1 Corinthians 15:45-49

And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. And when he had so said, he shewed unto them his hands and his side. Then were the disciples glad, when they saw the Lord. Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost.

And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven. As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.

JOHN HOWE (1630-1705): Adam was at first “a living soul,” God breathed into him the “breath of life,”—that pure, divine, and heavenly breath—and he became “a living soul;” so, then to have asked the question, ‘What is man?’ must have been to receive the answer, ‘He is a living soul: he is all soul, and that soul all life.’ But now, is this living soul buried in flesh, a lost thing to all the true, and great, and noble ends and purposes of that life which was at first given it?

ROBERT HAWKER (1753-1827): When Adam fell, in that fall he spiritually died—he did not die in body: for he lived many years after, and had children. But he died in spirit. He lost all spiritual apprehension of divine things. And all his posterity, are literally born the same. Generation from father to son, is only in nature: and “the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God,” 1 Corinthians 2:14.

JOHN GILL (1697-1771): Nicodemus thought that when the Messiah came, and His kingdom was set up, they should all share in it, they being the descendants of Abraham: but Christ assures him that he must be “born again;” in distinction from, and opposition to his first birth by nature: “Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God,” John 3:3; and, unless a man has this work wrought on his soul, he will never understand divine and spiritual things; nor can he be thought to have passed from death to life, and to have entered into an open state of grace, and the kingdom of it; and that living and dying so, he shall never “enter into the kingdom of heaven,” John 3:5; for unless a man is regenerated, he is not born heir apparent to it.

J. C. RYLE (1816-1900): The action of our Lord, “He breathed on them,” John 20:22, stands completely alone in the New Testament, and the Greek word is nowhere else used. On no occasion but this do we find the Lord “breathing” on any one. Of course it was a symbolical action, and the only question is, What did it symbolize? and why was it used? My own belief is that the true explanation is to be found in the account of man’s creation in Genesis.

FRIEDRICH ADOLPH LAMPE (1683-1729): I think that our Lord breathed on all the disciples at once, and not on each separately.

J. C. RYLE: It is probable that was so. The words, “Receive ye the Holy Ghost,” are almost as deep and mysterious as the action of breathing. They can only signify, “I bestow on you the Holy Ghost.” But in what sense the Holy Ghost was bestowed, is a point that demands attention. Our Lord cannot have meant that the disciples were now to “receive the Holy Ghost” for the first time. They had doubtless received Him in the day when they were first converted and believed. Whether they realized it or not, the Holy Ghost was in their hearts already; “No man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost,” 1 Corinthians 12:3. I believe our Lord taught the disciples, by this action of breathing on them, that the beginning of all ministerial qualification is to have the Holy Spirit breathed into us; until the Holy Ghost is planted in our hearts, we are not rightly commissioned for the work of the ministry. However, I do not feel that this view completely exhausts the meaning of our Lord when He breathed on the disciples.

ADAM CLARKE (1760-1832): In this breathing He evidently alluded to the first creation of man.

J. C. RYLE: I cannot forget that they had all forsaken their Master the night that He was taken prisoner, fallen away from their profession, and forfeited their title to confidence as Apostles. May we not therefore reasonably believe that this breathing pointed to a revival of life in the hearts of the Apostles, and to a restoration of their privileges as trusted and commissioned messengers, notwithstanding their grievous fall?

ALEXANDER MacLAREN (1826-1910): There is a Spirit which gives life, and Christ is the Lord of that Spirit. The whole fullness of the Divine energies is gathered in the Holy Spirit, and this is His chiefest work—to breathe into our deadness the breath of life.

JOHN HOWE: “The first man Adam was made a living soul; the second Adam was a quickening Spirit.” This latter is a great deal more. A living soul signified him to live himself; but a quickening spirit signifies a power to make others live. That the first Adam could not do—he could never have given it, by any power or immediate efficiency of his own, to another. Here, the constitution of the second Adam was far above that of the first, in that he could quicken others—a quickening spirit, not only quickened passively, but quickened actively with such a spirit as could give spirit, and diffuse life.

ALEXANDER MacLAREN: Many other names belong to the Holy Spirit. He is ‘the Spirit of adoption,’ He is ‘the Spirit of Supplication,’ He is ‘the Spirit of Holiness,’ He is ‘the Spirit of Wisdom,’ He is ‘the Spirit of Power and of Love and of a sound mind,’ He is ‘the Spirit of Counsel and Might’; but highest of all is the name which expresses His mightiest work, the ‘Spirit of Life.’

THE EDITOR: And He is “the Spirit of Christ,” Romans 8:9—“But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.” And surely the timing of Christ’s breathing on them has significance; it was in the evening on the day of His resurrection. Therefore, I see Christ’s action as an immediate fruit of His resurrection; it was a re-creation, a symbolic representation of man’s restoration to that spiritual life and communion with God which was lost in Adam’s fall, by the Holy Spirit’s regenerating work, through Jesus Christ our Lord.

ADAM CLARKE: “I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty,” Revelation 1:8; that is, as alpha is the beginning of the alphabet, so omega is the last letter of the alphabet. It is worthy of remark that, in Greek, the union of Α—alpha, and Ω—omega, makes the verb αω, ‘I breathe,’ and may, in such a symbolic book as Revelation, point out Him in Whom we live, and move, and have our being; for having formed man out of the dust of the earth, He breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and he became a living soul; and it is by the inspiration or inbreathing of His Spirit that the souls of men are quickened, made alive from the dead, and fitted for life eternal.

THE EDITOR: Believers are “new creatures in Christ,” 2 Corinthians 5:17; thus, spiritually in Him, we can truly say as did Elihu, “The Spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life,” Job 33:4.

 

Posted in Holy Spirit | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Breath of Life

The Importance of Correct Scripture Terminology

Posted on May 24, 2024 by The Editor

Psalm 12:6; Isaiah 7:14; Matthew 1:23; Luke 1:26,27

The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth, to a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin’s name was Mary.

ADAM CLARKE (1760-1832): It is an article of faith in the Roman Catholic Church, to believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary.

J. C. RYLE (1816-1900): Mary, the mother of our Lord, is never called the “Virgin Mary” in Scripture.

THE EDITOR: “Every Word of God is pure.” Therefore, the correct use of Scriptural terminology is important. It is most obviously recognized when seemingly Scriptural expressions are corrupted into titles. Referring to Mary as the “Mother of God,” contributes to the Roman Catholic deification of Mary, a false doctrine which then leads to a wrong practice of prayer to her as an intercessor to her son Jesus Christ. Now Mary’s virginity at the birth of Jesus is an historical fact in fulfilment of prophecy. But when it is corrupted into a title never used in Scripture, even that phrase “Virgin Mary” adds its connotation of exaltation, and leads into the Roman Catholic false doctrine of Mary’s “perpetual virginity.” What necessarily follows that initial error, is an even greater corruption of Scripture, because other texts must then be wrested from their true meaning to justify it.

JOHN CALVIN (1509-1564): “Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?” Luke 1:34. The conjecture which some have drawn from these words, that she had formed a vow of perpetual virginity, is unfounded and altogether absurd. She would, in that case, have committed treachery by allowing herself to be united to a husband, and would have poured contempt on the holy covenant of marriage; which could not have been done without mockery of God.

ADAM CLARKE: “Then said the LORD unto me; This gate shall be shut, it shall not be opened, and no man shall enter in by it; because the LORD, the God of Israel, hath entered in by it, therefore it shall be shut,” Ezekiel 44:2. This verse has been adduced by the Roman Catholics to prove the “perpetual virginity” of the mother of our Lord; and it may be allowed to be as much to the purpose as any other that has been brought to prove that very precarious point, on which no stress should ever be laid by any man. Our blessed Lord, it is true, was her first born, while she was yet a virgin; but no man can prove that He was her last.

JOHN TRAPP (1601-1699): Whether she continued after this a virgin—that she vowed virginity, as Papists say, we deny: for how could she promise virginity to God, and marriage to Joseph?

ADAM CLARKE: “Is not this the carpenter’s son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? And his sisters, are they not all with us?” Matthew 13:55,56. Would not any person of plain common sense suppose, from this account, that these were the children of Joseph and Mary, and the brothers and sisters of our Lord, according to the flesh?

MATTHEW HENRY (1662-1714): Much has been said concerning the “perpetual virginity” of Mary: Jerome was very angry with Helvidius for denying it. But it is certain that it cannot be proved from scripture.

THE EDITOR: But it’s not just a case of misusing terminology concerning Mary. See the same practical misuse with the adjective “reverend.” It means “worthy of worship,” and the only actual Scriptural usage of that term is in reference to God Himself, “holy and reverend is His name,” Psalm 111:9.

MATTHEW HENRY: Because God’s name is holy—therefore it is “reverend.”

C. H. SPURGEON (1834-1892): How good men can endure to be called “reverend,” we know not! It may be said that the title of reverend is only one of courtesy, but then so was the title of Rabbi among the Jews, yet the disciples were not to be called Rabbi, Matthew 23:7. It is, at any rate, a suspicious circumstance that among mankind no class of persons should so commonly describe themselves by a pretentious title as the professed ministers of the lowly Jesus. Peter and Paul were right reverend men, but they would have been the last to have called themselves so. No sensible person does reverence us one jot the more because we assume the title. This may be a trifle―many no doubt so regard it―why, then, are they not prepared to abstain from it? The less the value of the epithet the less reason for continuing the use of it.

ADAM CLARKE (1760-1832): None of the prophets had ever received this title of rabbi, nor any of the Jewish doctors before the time of Hillel and Shammai, which was about the time of our Lord; and, as disputes on several subjects had run high between these two schools, the people were of course divided; some acknowledging Hillel as rabbi―infallible teacher, and others giving this title to Shammai. The Pharisees, who always sought the honour that comes from men, assumed the title, and got their followers to address them by it.

JOHN WESLEY (1703-1791): The Jewish rabbis were also called father and master, by their disciples, whom they required to believe implicitly what they affirmed, without asking any farther reason; to obey implicitly what they enjoined, without seeking farther authority. Our Lord, therefore, by forbidding us either to give or receive the title of rabbi, master, or father, forbids us either to receive any such reverence, or to pay any such to any but God.

THE EDITOR: The same thing happened with the term “Holy Father,” John 17:11, a phrase used only by our Lord Jesus in prayer to His Father! Roman Catholicism turned it into a title for their Pope, who then claimed infallibility for himself. Religious titles are corruptions of Scripture, the ragged remnants of Popish priestcraft in the exaltation of its “clergy.” Furthermore, exalted titles like Saint so-and-so are designations which also led into false doctrines and wrong intercessory practices. Scripturally, all believers are termed “saints,” and all such usages are directly contrary to the spirit and intention of Christ’s prohibition: “Be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven,” Matthew 23:8,9. Are Protestants exempted to use the term “pastor” as a title? Surely not. Indeed, a “pastor” is a legitimate church office, as is “deacon;” as also “apostle” and “evangelist” were once offices in the early church; but nowhere do we read of “Pastor Paul,” “Deacon Stephen,” “Apostle Peter,” or “Evangelist Philip.” In Scripture, an office is never corrupted into a title to dignify any men above their brethren.

H. A. IRONSIDE (1876-1951): Many are still bound by the grave clothes of tradition, or misunderstanding.

C. H. SPURGEON: If a man were to assume the title of “reverend” for the first time in history, it would look ridiculous, if not presumptuous or profane. Why does not the Sunday-school teacher call himself “the Respectable John Jones,” or the City Missionary dub himself “the Hard-working William Evans?”

THE EDITOR: Surely Protestants ought to be as Elihu, who said to Job, “Let me not, I pray you, accept any man’s person, neither let me give flattering titles unto man. For I know not to give flattering titles; in so doing my maker would soon take me away,” Job 32:21,22.

 

Posted in Doctrine & Practice | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Importance of Correct Scripture Terminology