Faithful Ministry: Speaking Truth to Power

Posted on August 24, 2018 by The Editor

2 Chronicles 18:6,7

Jehoshaphat said, Is there not here a prophet of the LORD besides, that we might enquire of him?

And [Ahab] the king of Israel said unto Jehoshaphat, There is yet one man, Micaiah the son of Imlah, by whom we may enquire of the LORD: but I hate him; for he doth not prophesy good concerning me, but evil. And Jehoshaphat said, Let not the king say so.

MATTHEW HENRY (1662-1714): Jehoshaphat and Ahab were attended with a crowd of flattering prophets, that could not think of prophesying anything but what was very sweet and very smooth to two such glorious princes now in confederacy. Those that love to be flattered shall not want flatterers.

JOHN TRAPP (1601-1699): Great ones love it, they must hear pleasing things; or if told of their faults, it must be done with silken words.

C. H. SPURGEON (1834-1892): Surely Ahab does not need Micaiah to prophesy smooth things to him, for there are already four hundred prophets of the groves who are flattering him with one consent.

WILLIAM GURNALL (1617-1679): The false prophets’ pleasing words, with which they clawed Ahab’s proud humour, could by no means be brought to fit good Micaiah’s mouth…Micaiah was made a scorn because he would not tune his pipe to Ahab’s ear, nor join with the whole college of his flattering chaplains in their judgment.

CHARLES SIMEON (1759-1836): As soon as Micaiah has delivered his message from the Lord, Ahab is filled with rage against him, and orders him to be put in prison, and to be fed with the bread and water of affliction.

ROBERT HAWKER (1753-1827): Depend upon it, faithful dealing must bring reproach.

MATTHEW HENRY: Faithful reproofs, if they do not profit, usually provoke; if they do not do good, they are resented as affronts, and they that will not bow to the reproof, will fly in the face of the reprover and hate him, as Ahab hated Micaiah.

J. C. RYLE (1816-1900): We need not wonder at this. When men and women have chosen their line, and resolved to have their own wicked way, they dislike anyone who tries to turn them. They would rather be let alone. They are irritated by opposition. They are angry when they are told the truth. The prophet Elijah was called a “man that troubled Israel.” The prophet Micaiah was hated by Ahab, “because he never prophesied good of him, but evil.”

MATTHEW POOLE (1624-1679): Micaiah was purely God’s instrument in all his messages; and whatsoever evil he threatened, Ahab himself was the cause and procurer of it.

JOHN TRAPP: Hugh Latimer dealt no less faithfully with King Henry VIII in his sermons at court. And being asked by the king how he dared to be so bold to preach after that manner, he answered that duty to God and to his prince had enforced him to it; and now that he had discharged his conscience, his life was in his Majesty’s hands…Among others of his rank that gratified King Henry VIII with a new year’s gift, according to the custom, Latimer presented him a New Testament, with a napkin having this written upon it: “Whoremongers and adulterers God will judge,” Hebrews 13:4. The Scriptures, he knew, would deal plainly with him, and tell him that which others dared not.

J. W. ALEXANDER (1804-1859): The fearless tongue of John Knox, even against princes, has been noted as fully by foes as friends.

ALEXANDER MacLAREN (1826-1910): The consciousness that they were servants of the living God was the very secret of the power of these men.

THOMAS COKE (1747-1814): Micaiah now appears before the kings and courtiers, alone, indeed, but not unsupported; God was with him, therefore could he not be moved.

JOHN TRAPP: He would not budge as other timeservers did, for any man’s pleasure or displeasure, and there is a wonderful sympathy between kings and court parasites, as was between Ahab and the false prophets… Flattery gets friends, but truth hatred. But truth must be spoken, however it be taken.

ADAM CLARKE (1760-1832): Man-pleasing professors would endeavour to escape all this disgrace and danger by getting into the favour of the great, the worldly, and the irreligious.

C. H. SPURGEON: There is no need whatever that you and I should be chaplains of the modern spirit, for it is well supplied with busy advocates.

CHARLES SIMEON: All idea of pleasing men must be utterly abandoned: for if we please men, or seek to do so, we cannot be the servants of Jesus Christ, Galatians 1:10.

HUGH  LATIMER (1483-1555): The minister must reprove without fearing any man, even if he be threatened with death.*

J. R. MILLER (1840-1912): It is not enough just to put on a bold face and compel ourselves to be brave, or appear brave. It will not do merely to try to make ourselves think there is no danger, when we know very well that there is danger. The true secret of confidence and fearlessness in danger is faith in the divine keeping, not in thinking there is no peril. “In the world ye have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world.” The great truth to be learned by all who would acquire true moral courage is the reality of God’s care for His people in all their dangers. Psalm 121 describes this care: “The Lord is thy keeper;” “The Lord shall keep thee from all evil;” He that keepeth thee will not slumber.”

JOHN CALVIN (1509-1564): The knowledge of this ought to overcome our fears, that we may speak boldly in the midst of dangers.

CHARLES WESLEY (1707-1788): In the church, while preaching, I have no superior but God; and shall not ask man leave to show him his sins.

WILLIAM GURNALL: Man-pleasing is both endless and needless. If thou would, thou could not please all; and if thou could, there is no need, so thou please One that can turn all their hearts or bind their hands.

A. W. PINK (1886-1952): Whatever may be the present gain of pleasing men at the expense of displeasing God, the future loss will be immeasurably greater: prayerfully ponder Mark 8:38, “Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.”

C. H. SPURGEON: We stand in a very solemn position, and ours should be the spirit of old Micaiah.**

MARTYN LLOYD-JONES (1899-1981): It would be dishonouring to God if we were to act in any other way.

______________________________________

*EDITOR’S NOTE: Martyred during the persecuting reign of king Henry VIII’s daughter Queen Mary, Hugh Latimer’s ministry was faithful unto death. Before being burned at the stake, Latimer turned to his fellow martyr, Nicholas Ridley, and said, “Be of good comfort, master Ridley, and play the man. We shall this day light such a candle, by God’s grace, in England, as I trust shall never be put out.”

**EDITOR’S NOTE: The Scriptures abound with faithful ministers who stood before kings, and spoke truth to power, as did Micaiah. For examples, see Elijah to Ahab (1 Kings 17:1); Moses to Pharaoh (Exodus 5:1,2); Nathan and Gad to King David (2 Samuel 12:1-12 & 24:11-13); John the Baptist to Herod (Mark 6:17-20).

 

Posted in Preaching & Ministry | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Faithful Ministry: Speaking Truth to Power

Trusting Our Lord’s Wisdom & Mercy Under the Rod

Posted on August 17, 2018 by The Editor

2 Samuel 24:1-4, 8-14

The anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah. For the king said to Joab the captain of the host, which was with him, Go now through all the tribes of Israel, from Dan even to Beersheba, and number ye the people, that I may know the number of the people. And Joab said unto the king, Now the LORD thy God add unto the people, how many soever they be, an hundredfold, and that the eyes of my lord the king may see it: but why doth my lord the king delight in this thing?

Notwithstanding the king’s word prevailed against Joab, and against the captains of the host. And Joab and the captains of the host went out from the presence of the king, to number the people of Israel…So when they had gone through all the land, they came to Jerusalem at the end of nine months and twenty days. And Joab gave up the sum of the number of the people unto the king…

And David’s heart smote him after that he had numbered the people. And David said unto the LORD, I have sinned greatly in that I have done: and now, I beseech thee, O LORD, take away the iniquity of thy servant; for I have done very foolishly.

For when David was up in the morning, the word of the LORD came unto the prophet Gad, David’s seer, saying, Go and say unto David, Thus saith the LORD, I offer thee three things; choose thee one of them, that I may do it unto thee. So Gad came to David, and told him, and said unto him, Shall seven years of famine come unto thee in thy land? or wilt thou flee three months before thine enemies, while they pursue thee? or that there be three days’ pestilence in thy land? now advise, and see what answer I shall return to him that sent me.

And David said unto Gad, I am in a great strait: let us fall now into the hand of the LORD; for his mercies are great: and let me not fall into the hand of man.

A. W. PINK (1886-1952): We are not left in any doubt that on this occasion David committed a grave fault, yet wherein lay the evil of it is not so certain.

ROBERT HAWKER (1753-1827): David’s sin seems plainly to have been the sin of presumption, in trusting more to an arm of flesh than in the LORD GOD of his salvation; yet, it must be confessed, that both in the sin, and in the proposed punishment, we have not so clear marks to form our conclusions as to speak with certainty.

G. CAMPBELL MORGAN (1863-1945): The spirit of vainglory in numbers had taken possession of the people and the king, and there was a tendency to trust in numbers and forget God.

CHARLES SIMEON (1759-1836): It is manifest that David was actuated by pride, in wishing to know the extent of the population he governed; and that he was indulging confidence in an arm of flesh, instead of trusting in God only. That he was faulty in these particulars was visible even to so wicked a man as Joab, who expostulated with him on the subject, and warned him that he was bringing guilt and punishment upon the whole nation.

MATTHEW HENRY (1662-1714): While the thing was in doing, during all those nine months, we do not find that David was sensible of his sin, for had he been so he would have countermanded the orders he had given; but, when the account was finished and laid before him, that very night his conscience was awakened.

MATTHEW POOLE (1624-1679): His conscience discerned his sin, and he was heartily sorry for it. And the occasion of his repentance was God’s message by the prophet Gad.

MATTHEW HENRY: David is told to choose what rod he will be beaten with―God, by putting him thus to his choice, designed, first, to humble him the more for his sin, which we would see to be exceedingly sinful when he came to consider each of these judgments as exceedingly dreadful. Or, second, to upbraid him with the proud conceit he had of his own sovereignty over Israel. He that is so great a prince begins to think he may have what he will. “Come then,” says God, “which wilt thou have of these three things?” Or, third, to give him some encouragement under the correction, letting him know that God did not cast him out of communion with himself, but that still his secret was with him, and in afflicting him he considered his frame and what he could best bear. Or, fourth, that he might the more patiently bear the rod when it was a rod of his own choosing.

A. W. PINK: To these we would add, Fifth―to try out his heart and give opportunity for the exercise and exhibition of his faith.

CHARLES SIMEON: Years of famine, or three months of unsuccessful warfare, or three days of pestilence: a painful choice indeed! But David wisely preferred the falling into the hands of God, and not into the hands of man. “David said unto Gad, I am in a great strait: let us fall now into the hand of the Lord; for His mercies are great: and let me not fall into the hand of man.”

JOHN CALVIN (1509-1564): It was as if David had said, “Lord, since I have so often experienced Thee to be a merciful God, I will trust to and repose in Thy mercies for ever.”

MATTHEW HENRY: But some think that David, by these words, intimates his choice of the pestilence.*

JAMES DURHAM (1622-1658): God knows best what is suitable.

WILLIAM JAY (1769-1853): We must confide in the judgment of God, and distrust our own. We are short-sighted creatures, and easily imposed upon by appearances, and know not what is good for us in this vain life which we spend as a shadow. But He cannot be mistaken. A wise father will choose far better for his infant, than the infant can choose for himself.

A. W. PINK: Even when the Lord is sorely chastening us for our faults, He is infinitely more gracious, more faithful, more deserving of our trust than is any creature.

MARY WINSLOW (1774-1854): What a mercy it is that He takes His own way, and not ours!

ROWLAND HILL (1744-1833): Nothing is by blind chance, all is under the management of infinite wisdom. I would therefore take all things as coming from God, that they may lead me to God. The rod of affliction which He uses is made up of many twigs, but they are all cut from the same tree.

C. H. SPURGEON (1834-1892): Every sin has one twig in God’s rod appropriated to itself.*

_____________________________

*EDITOR’S NOTE: If David had chosen the pestilence, it would have been a presumption of his own wisdom once again. David’s wisdom was not to choose, and to let God choose, which demonstrated his repentance by his complete faith in the Lord’s judgment, wisdom and mercy. And God selected the most appropriate twig from His rod to deal with both the people and David their king: famine would have chastened the people, but not touched king David in his palace; but David being chased by his enemies would have left most of the people untouched. However, with the pestilence, David and all the people were in equal mortal danger, and equally defenceless, which meant that every single offender had to trust in God’s mercy alone for survival.

 

Posted in Guidance & Wisdom | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on Trusting Our Lord’s Wisdom & Mercy Under the Rod

The Numbers & Powers of Angels

Posted on August 10, 2018 by The Editor

Hebrews 13:22; Zechariah 6:1-6

Ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels…

And I turned, and lifted up mine eyes, and looked, and, behold, there came four chariots out from between two mountains; and the mountains were mountains of brass. In the first chariot were red horses; and in the second chariot black horses; and in the third chariot white horses; and in the fourth chariot grisled and bay horses.

Then I answered and said unto the angel that talked with me, What are these, my lord?

And the angel answered and said unto me, These are the four spirits of the heavens, which go forth from standing before the Lord of all the earth. The black horses which are therein go forth into the north country; and the white go forth after them; and the grisled go forth toward the south country. And the bay went forth, and sought to go that they might walk to and fro through the earth: and he said, Get you hence, walk to and fro through the earth.

JOHN MILTON (1608-1674): Millions of spiritual creatures walk the earth

Unseen, both when we wake and when we sleep.

JOHN CALVIN (1509-1564): We know that myriads of angels are ever ready to render service to God; but He chooses this or that to do His business as He pleases.

MARTYN LLOYD-JONES (1899-1981): You remember our Lord saying, when His disciples would have defended Him, that they needn’t do that, that if He chose, He could command twelve legions of angels to defend Him and protect Him, Matthew 26:53.

MATTHEW POOLE (1624-1679): A Roman legion consisted of twelve thousand five hundred soldiers.

A. A. HODGE (1823-1886): What do the Scriptures teach concerning the number and power of angels?

MARTYN LLOYD-JONES: How many angels are there? The answer of the Scriptures is that they are very great, that they are countless in number. You remember that we are told that the shepherds at His birth heard “a multitude of the heavenly host,” suggesting almost an innumerable company, Luke 2:13. And indeed, the fifth chapter of the book of Revelation tells us that such is the case, for “the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands,”―a great mighty host, a myriad of these angelic beings.

JOHN TRAPP (1601-1699): Chariots, the angels are called in many places, 2 Kings 2:11, 2 Kings 6:17, Habakkuk 3:8, but especially Psalm 68:17: “The chariots of God―in the Hebrew it is chariot, in the singular, to note the joint service of all the angels.

JOHN GILL (1697-1771): Like chariots of war, they are the strength and protection of the Lord’s people; and because of their swiftness in doing His work; and because they are for His honour and glory: they are the chariots of God, in which He rides about the world doing His will.

MARTYN LLOYD-JONES: And that brings me to the whole question of their power. And the Bible is very explicit about this, that they are very great in power; we are told of them that they “excel in strength,” Psalm 103:20―the “mighty angels,” 2 Thessalonians 1:7.

A. A. HODGE: Concerning their power, the Scriptures teach that it is very great when exercised both in the material and in the spiritual worlds—their power, however, is not creative power.

JOHN CALVIN: Under the name יהוה Jehovah, God teaches that He is the only Creator.

MATTHEW HENRY: Good angels vastly exceed us in all natural and moral excellences, in strength, understanding, and holiness too.

MARTYN LLOYD-JONES: Their power is undoubtedly greater than the power of men; they’re not only superior to men in dignity, and in status, but superior to him altogether in power.

MATTHEW HENRY: The greatest numbers cannot stand before them: one angel shall, in one night, lay a vast army of men dead upon the spot, when God commissions him so to do, Isaiah 37:36―here are 185,000 brave soldiers in an instant turned into so many dead corpses. See how great, in power and might, the holy angels are, when one angel, in one night, could make so great a slaughter.

JOHN GILL: A prodigious slaughter indeed!

JOHN CALVIN: That no one may ascribe the miracle to natural causes, it is expressly added, that so great a multitude was slain by the hand of the angel.

MATTHEW HENRY: Angels are employed, more than we are aware of, as ministers of God’s justice, to punish the pride and break the power of wicked men. The greatest men cannot stand before them: of Sennacherib, “the great king, the king of Assyria” (2 Kings 18:28), looks very little when he is forced to return, not only with shame, because he cannot accomplish what he had projected with so much assurance, but with terror and fear, lest the angel that had destroyed his army should destroy him.

ADAM CLARKE (1760-1832): In Jude 9, the archangel Michael is said to have disputed with the devil about the body of Moses…In Revelation 12:7, it is said: “Michael and his angels fought against the dragon and his angels.”

JOHN GILL: The issue of which was, that the latter were conquered, and cast out into the earth.

JOHN CALVIN: “And there came two angels to Sodom,” Genesis 19:1. At length the angels declare for what purpose they came, and what they were about to do―they declare, that they are come to destroy the city, because the cry of it was waxen great. By which words they mean, that God was provoked, not by one act of wickedness only, but that, after He had long spared them, He was now, at last, almost compelled, by their immense mass of crimes, to come down to inflict punishment. For we must maintain, that the more sins men heap together, the higher will their wickedness rise, and the nearer will it approach to God, to cry aloud for vengeance.

ANDREW BONAR (1810-1892): No doubt, at the sight of Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, and Zeboim destroyed, angels saw cause to rejoice and Sing, “Hallelujah.”

JOHN GILL: So it will be at the end of the world.

JOHN BUNYAN (1628-1688): This judgment to come is a warm thing to be thought of, an awakening thing to be thought of; it is called the eternal judgment, because it is and will be God’s final conclusion with men. This day is called the “great and notable day of the Lord,” Acts 2:20; the day “that shall burn like an oven,” Malachi 4:1—the day in which the angels shall gather the wicked together, as tares, into bundles, to burn them; but the rest, into his kingdom and glory, Matthew 13:37-43.

CHARLES SIMEON (1759-1836): What a wonderful, but awful separation will there then be! The angels are represented by our Lord as His angels; and these He will use as His reapers. He will endue them with wisdom to discern the characters of all, and will guide them infallibly in the execution of His will.

MATTHEW HENRY: They shall be employed, in the great day, in executing Christ’s righteous sentences, both of approbation and condemnation, as ministers of His justice, Matthew 25:31. The angels are skilful, strong, and swift, obedient servants to Christ, holy enemies to the wicked, and faithful friends to all the saints, and therefore fit to be thus employed.

 

Posted in Angels | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on The Numbers & Powers of Angels

Lessons From the Life of Lot Part 6: Lot’s Wife

Posted on August 3, 2018 by The Editor

Luke 17:32; Genesis 19:26

Remember Lot’s wife.

His wife looked back from behind him, and she became a pillar of salt.

C. H. SPURGEON (1834-1892): It seems to me that Lot had married a heathen woman―Call your attention to her, who, in this case, is “his worse half.”

MATTHEW HENRY (1662-1714): She looked back from behind him. This seemed a small thing, but we are sure, by the punishment of it, that it was a great sin, and exceedingly sinful.

A. W. PINK (1886-1952): Though she had outwardly left Sodom, yet her heart was still there.

C. H. SPURGEON: Lot’s wife could not tear herself away from the world. She had always been in it and had loved it and delighted in it. Though associated with a gracious man, when the time came for decision, she betrayed her true character! Flight without so much as looking back was demanded of her, but this was too much—she did look back and thus proved that she had sufficient presumption in her heart to defy God’s command and risk her all—to give a lingering loveglance at the condemned and guilty world.

MATTHEW HENRY: Probably she hankered after her house and goods in Sodom, and was loth to leave them. Christ intimates this to be her sin; she too much regarded her stuff, Luke 17:31, 32.

C. H. SPURGEON: Lot’s wife had shared in her husband’s errors. It was a great mistake on his part to abandon the outwardly separated life, but she had stayed with him in it and perhaps was the cause of his so doing.

D. L. MOODY (1837-1899): Lot was one of those characters who are easily influenced―and I think, perhaps, that is just the key to his character…So long as he stayed with Abram he got on very well. His mistake was in leaving him.

C. H. SPURGEON: I should not wonder if Lot’s wife influenced him in that way. He was a man of weak mind and while his uncle had him under his wing, he was right enough, except that even then he had what a writer calls, “a lean-to religion”—he did not stand alone, but leaned upon Abraham. When he was married it is probable that his wife assumed the ruling place and guided the way of his life. She began to think that it was a pity that the family should live in such separation, so unfashionable, so rigid, so peculiar and all that.

JOHN ANGELL JAMES (1785-1869): How insidious is the influence of a husband or a wife in decoying the other from the paths of godliness—and into the ways of the world! And in some cases how systematic, persevering, and successful they have been.

C. H. SPURGEON: She tossed her head and cried, “Really! People must mix with society and not keep up old-fashioned, strait-laced ways! You might as well be dead as be shut out from life.” When her husband had an opportunity of getting out of that rigid style by leaving his uncle, she said she would like to go down Sodom way because it would be nice for the girls and give them a taste of something liberal and refined. The old style was all very well for such an antiquated couple as Abraham and Sarah, but Lot and herself belonged to a younger generation and were bound to get into a little society and find eligible matches for their young people. It would be well for them to dress better than they could learn to do if they always kept roaming about like gypsies. You see, Abraham’s people did not study the fashions at all and were a very vulgar sort of shepherds who had no ideas of refinement and politeness. And it was pity that people in Lot’s station in life should always associate with mere sheep-shearers, drovers and the like.

H. A. IRONSIDE (1876-1951): An imperious, dominating woman will drive her husband further from God instead of drawing him to Christ.

C. H. SPURGEON: Nag, nag, nagging, is very, very fagging.

MATTHEW HENRY: It is “a continual dropping,” that is, a continual vexation, Proverbs 27:15.

C. H. SPURGEON: If they got to Sodom there would be nice parties, dances and all sorts of things! Of course the people were a little loose and rather fast—they went to plays where modesty was shocked and gathered in admiration around performers whose lives were openly wanton—but then you see one must be fashionable and wink at a good deal! We cannot expect all people to be saints and, no doubt, they have their good points. By some such talk Mrs. Lot gained her husband over to her way of thinking. They did not mean to actually go into the worst society of Sodom, but they intended to make a careful selection and go only a little way.

R. C. CHAPMAN (1803-1902): It is the nature of sin to obtain great power by little beginnings.

C. H. SPURGEON: Surely they could be trusted to know where to stop. So they pitched the tent towards Sodom where it was within an easy walk of the town—a little separated, but not far. If anything did happen that was very bad they could move away and no harm would be done. It was no doubt wise, they said, to go and see Sodom and know the people, for it would be ridiculous to condemn what they had not seen! They would therefore try it and give the young people some idea of what the world was like.

THOMAS MANTON (1620-1677): Many think to stop after they have yielded a little; but when the stone at the top of a hill begins to roll downward, it is hard to stop it, and you cannot say how far you will go.

C. H. SPURGEON: I think I am not mistaken in the conjecture that Mrs. Lot’s influence brought her husband there and when there, introduced him to the best families and found suitors for the daughters who had been fully imbued with the liberal ideas of the place.

D. L. MOODY: You would have found Mrs. Lot, perhaps, and her daughters, at the theaters and in most places of amusement, and there is the family, just moving in the very highest circles in that city.

C. H. SPURGEON: Very sweet the city life became. The free and easy ways of Sodom came to be enjoyable. Not the gross part of Sodom life—Lot could not bear that—and it made Mrs. Lot a bit uncomfortable at times, but the liberal spirit, the fine free bearing of the people, their gaiety and artistic culture were quite to her mind and so she was right glad when her husband put away the old tent, had a sale of the sheep and lived as a retired grazier in the west end of the city.

A. W. PINK: Finally, we see him an alderman of Sodom, seated in its “gate,” and his daughters wedded to men of Sodom, Genesis 19:1 & 14.

C. H. SPURGEON: Lot ought to have been firmer, more steadfast, more thorough. He had no business going to Sodom―Lot was not to do evil to please his wife.

 

Posted in Lessons from the Life of Lot | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on Lessons From the Life of Lot Part 6: Lot’s Wife

Paul’s Persuasion

Posted on July 27, 2018 by The Editor

2 Timothy 1:12

I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day.

CHARLES SIMEON (1759-1836): It will be profitable to consider the point of which the Apostle was persuaded.

C. H. SPURGEON (1834-1892): The point which the Apostle expressly mentions is the power of Christ—“I am persuaded that He is able.” He had a solemn conviction of the ability of the Lord Jesus, who is able to save unto the uttermost. Let us hope that no believer here has any doubt about the power of Christ―there is no lack of sufficiency or ability in Him.

JOHN GILL (1697-1771): And what might induce the apostle―and so any other believer―to conclude the ability of Christ to keep the souls of those that are committed to Him?

C. H. SPURGEON: Paul knew that the Lord Jesus Christ, to whom he trusted his soul, was now adorned with all the glory of heaven and clothed with all the omnipotence of the mighty God…Paul felt that such power was worthy of boundless confidence and, therefore, he said, “I know Whom I have believed.”

JOHN GILL: He knew Whom he had believed―His proper deity; He, having all the fulness of the Godhead, or the perfections of deity dwelling in Him; His being the Creator and upholder of all things; His having accomplished the great work of redemption and salvation, by His own arm; His mediatorial fulness of grace and power; and His being trusted by His Father with all the persons, grace, and glory of the elect, to whom He has been faithful.

CHARLES SIMEON: The offices of Christ may also be considered as justifying an assured hope of final perseverance. For our Lord did not assume the priestly, prophetic, and kingly offices merely to put us into a capacity to save ourselves; but that His work might be effectual for the salvation of all whom the Father had given to Him. And at the last day He will be able to say, as He did in the days of His flesh, “Of those whom thou hast given me I have lost none.” If He is ever living on purpose to make intercession for them, and is constituted Head over all things to the Church on purpose to save them, then He will keep them; none shall ever pluck them out of His hands.

C. H. SPURGEON: Will the Lord utterly and finally reject those who are His own, and suffer them to be the objects of His contemptuous reprobation, His everlasting cast-offs? This Paul was persuaded could not be.

THOMAS SCOTT (1747-1821): He was assured that the Lord would guide him in wisdom through life, and at death “receive” him to glory.

CHARLES SIMEON: God never yet lost one whom he had undertaken to keep: He never suffered “one of his little ones to perish,” Matthew 18:14. “None was ever plucked out of His hand,” John 10:28,29; not the “smallest grain of wheat, however agitated in the sieve, was ever permitted to fall upon the earth.” Amos 9:9. The gates of hell have never been able to prevail against His Church. Then, says the Christian, “I will trust, and not be afraid.” My Saviour, in the days of his flesh, “lost none that had been given him,” John 18:9. “Whom he loved, he loved to the end,” John 13:1; and therefore I am persuaded He “will perfect that which concerneth me,” Psalm 138:8, and “complete in me the good work He has begun,” Philippians 1:6.

OCTAVIUS WINSLOW (1808-1878): He is faithful to His promises and faithful to His saints.

CHARLES SIMEON: Paul does not merely presume upon God’s sufficiency: he is well persuaded of it―Did God create my soul, and can He not uphold it? Did He form my enemies also, and can He not restrain them? Has He numbered even the hairs of my head, and will He overlook the concerns of my soul?

G. CAMPBELL MORGAN (1863-1945): Who are the foes? Who are the accusers? Who are the separators? In answer to the first, the apostle declared, “God is for us.” In answer to the second, he declared that God justifies us. In answer to the third, he declared that none of the terrible things through which we pass to glory can separate us.

JOHN CALVIN (1509-1564): “Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through Him that loved us,” Romans 8:37. This one sentence sufficiently proves, that the Apostle speaks not here of the fervency of that love which we have towards God, but of the paternal kindness of God and of Christ towards us.

CHARLES SIMEON: The stability of the covenant, which God has made with us in Christ Jesus, warrants an assurance, that all who are interested in it shall endure to the end. The immutability of God is another ground of assured faith and hope. Wherefore did God originally set His love upon us? Was it for our own goodness, either seen or foreseen? Alas! we had no existence but in God’s purpose: and, from the moment we began to exist, we have never had one good thing in us which we did not first receive from God. If then God loved us simply because He would love us, and not for any inherent loveliness in us, will He cast us off again on account of those evil qualities which He well knew to be in us, and which He Himself has undertaken to subdue? This would argue a change in His counsels: whereas we are told that, “with Him there is no variableness neither shadow of turning,” James 1:17; and that “His gifts and calling are without repentance,” Romans 11:29.

ROBERT HAWKER (1753-1827): Can there be anything like a yea and nay Gospel, in these solemn assurances of Jehovah? And can an assurance that He, who hath saved, and called from the first, without works, will cause His grace to be doubtful as to the end?

JOHN CALVIN: As He is faithful and just, He will not disappoint us.

C. H. SPURGEON: Paul was fully persuaded of this great truth of God. Paul also knew the character of Jesus whom he trusted. His perfect character abundantly justified the Apostle’s implicit trust.

ROBERT HAWKER: Must not every man, taught as Paul was, and through grace brought into the same views, and confirmed in the same truths, declare, that he knows Whom he hath believed?

C. H. SPURGEON: Well, this is my persuasion: “I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord,” Romans 8:38,39—If any enquire of us in Glory, “How did you get here?” we will answer, “He brought us here.” “Now unto Him that is able to keep us from falling, and to present us faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy, to Him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.”

 

Posted in Assurance & Communion | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Paul’s Persuasion

Dead Flies

Posted on July 20, 2018 by The Editor

Ecclesiastes 10:1

Dead flies cause the ointment of the apothecary to send forth a stinking savour: so doth a little folly him that is in reputation for wisdom and honour.

JOHN TRAPP (1601-1699): A great many flies may fall into a tarbox, and no hurt done. A small spot is soon seen in a swan, but not so in a swine.

J. R. MILLER (1840-1912): It is sad to see how some strong and noble characters are marred by little, yet grievous faults and blemishes. One man is generous, but he desires always to have his charity praised. Another is disposed to be kind and helpful, but by his manner hurts or humiliates the one he befriends. Another is unselfish and devout, but is careless of promises and engagements; he makes appointments and never thinks of them again; he borrows money, and does not repay it.

C. H. SPURGEON (1834-1892): A Christian’s character is spoilt by the omission of any one virtue―that “but” spoils it all―it is the dead fly which has got into a very good pot of ointment and made the whole of it stink.

ADAM CLARKE (1760-1832): Any putrefaction spoils perfume; and so a foolish act ruins the character of him who has the reputation of being wise and good.

JOHN GILL (1697-1771): A good name is like precious ointment, valuable and fragrant.

C. H. SPURGEON: You may be in the Church and yet you may not have a good name as a member of it. I mean as to your own personal character as a Christian, for some professors are in the pot of ointment, but I wish we could pick them out, for they are flies and they spoil everything! There are such in this Church—oh that they had gone elsewhere! If only they would have flown into a pot of the world’s honey, or something of that kind! For them to get into the Church’s ointment is a great pity.

J. R. MILLER: One writes, “Our greatest failures often happen in the little things of life.”

C. H. SPURGEON: Some get a name in the Church for quarrelling and fault-finding. “Oh,” people say, “if anybody can pick a hole in the sermon, I know who it is.” You need only have half-a-dozen words with this crab apple critic and you surely and speedily lose what enjoyment you have had during the service. Alas, that many Christian women have not a good name, for they are addicted to gossiping.

J. R. MILLER: Carelessness and thoughtlessness are themselves such serious moral blemishes that they make impossible any excuse for delinquencies resulting from them. We need to look to the infinitesimals that make perfection or mar it. No fault is too small to be worth curing, and no fragment of beauty is too small to be worth setting the mosaic of character.

MARTIN LUTHER (1483-1546): Every one ought so to live that nothing evil can be said of him, and that he give offence to no one.

CHARLES SIMEON (1759-1836): There is a sanctity about the Christian character which should be kept inviolate. If you are sons of God, you should be “blameless and harmless in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, shining among them as lights in the world,” Philippians 2:15. I pray you, then, walk circumspectly, and in a way “worthy of your high calling,” yea, “worthy also of Him who hath called you unto his kingdom and glory.”

ADAM CLARKE: Alas! alas! in an unguarded moment how many have tarnished the reputation which they were many years in acquiring!

JOHN TRAPP: Fine linen is sooner and deeper stained than coarse canvas.

JOHN ANGELL JAMES (1785-1869): You can ruin your reputation. After building up with great care your good name, for some years, and acquiring respect and esteem from those who knew you, in one single hour, by yielding to some powerful temptation, you may permanently fix a dark stain upon your character, which no tears can ever wash away, or repentance remove—but which will cause you to be read and known of all men, until the grave receives you out of their sight. You may render yourself an object of the universal disgust and abhorrence of the pious—and be the taunt and scorn of the wicked.

JOHN GILL: Sin, which is folly, is like a dead fly; not only light and mean, and base and worthless, but hurtful and pernicious, deadly, and the cause of death; and what may seem little, a peccadillo, or, however, one single act of sin may injure the character of a wise and honourable man, and greatly expose him to shame and contempt, and cause him to stink in the nostrils of men; and to be reproached by men, and religion and government to be reproached for his sake. Thus the affair of Bathsheba and Uriah, what a slur did it bring on the character of David, so famous for wisdom and honour, and for religion and piety?―and the idolatry of Solomon, the wisest of men; Jehoshaphat, that good king, entering into affinity with Ahab; and pious Josiah going to war with the king of Egypt, contrary to the word of the Lord; with many other instances.

JOHN TRAPP: If Jacob deals deceitfully, the banks of blasphemy will be broken down in a profane Esau thereby. If his unruly sons falsify with the Shechemites, he shall have cause to complain, “Ye have made me to stink among the inhabitants of the land, ” Genesis 34:30…If Samson go down to Timnah, the Philistines will soon have it, “told” it will be “in Gath, published in the streets of Askelon,” 2 Samuel 12:14—the enemies of God will soon compose comedies out of the Church’s tragedies, and make themselves merry in her misery.

THOMAS COKE (1747-1814): The world will make no allowances for human infirmity, or the force of temptation; but, looking with envy on superior excellence, are happy to seize every shadow of abuse to degrade to their own level those who excel them, and to triumph that they are no better than themselves.

H. A. IRONSIDE (1876-1951): People on the outside say, “What! Is that one of your Christians? Does he belong to Christ and yet do thus and so?”

JOHN GILL: How careful men eminent for gifts and grace should be of their words and actions; since the least thing amiss in them is easily discerned, and soon taken notice of, as the least speck in a diamond, or spot in fine linen, clean and white. And there are wicked and envious persons enough watching for their halting, glad to have an occasion against them, and improve everything to the uttermost.

CHARLES BRIDGES (1794-1869): Indeed in a path, where every step is strewed with snares, and beset with enemies, great need have we of the caution, “See then that ye walk circumspectly, not as fools, but as wise,” Ephesians 5:15.

MATTHEW WILKS (1746-1829): Did you ever see a tom cat walking on the top of a high wall that was covered with bits of broken glass bottles?  If so, you had just then an accurate illustration of what is meant by the injunction, “See that you walk circumspectly.”

 

Posted in Sanctification & Holiness | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Dead Flies

Is Capital Punishment Justified?

Posted on July 13, 2018 by The Editor

Romans 13:1-4

Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: for he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.

MARTYN LLOYD-JONES (1899-1981): The question of capital punishment—this is certainly a very contemporary question. There are those who say that killing, in any shape or form, is always wrong…The Old Testament makes it perfectly plain and clear that that is not the case.

WILHELMUS à BRAKEL  (1635-1711): God has commanded this: “Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made He man,” Genesis 9:6.

A. W. PINK (1886-1952): It needs emphasizing today that capital punishment as the penalty for murder was ordained by God Himself long before the giving of the Mosaic law, and, since it has never been repealed by Him, that precept is binding until the end of time. It is important to observe that the reason for this law is not here based upon the well-being of human society, but is grounded upon the fact that man is made “in the image of God.”

MATTHEW POOLE (1624-1679): Murder is not only an offence against man, but also an injury to God, and a contempt of that image of God which all men are obliged to reverence and maintain.

C. H. SPURGEON (1834-1892): But there is also a strong feeling in the mind of many that the severity of the punishment is questionable. There are some who pronounce authoritatively that the murderer’s blood must be shed for murder. But there are some who think the Christian dispensation has ameliorated the law and that now it is no longer, “eye for eye, tooth for tooth.”

MATTHEW HENRY (1662-1714): Paul was willing to abide by the rules of the law, and to let that take its course. ―“If I be an offender, or have committed any thing worthy of death, I refuse not to die,” Acts 25:11.

ROBERT HALDANE (1764-1842): Would the Apostle Paul have in this way sanctioned this punishment, allowing its justice, if it have been contrary to the law of God?

MARTYN LLOYD-JONES: The Christian’s view of the state; you’ve got to start with that. The state is the representative of God; the state is “the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.”

JOHN CALVIN (1509-1564): Let us consider, first, what is the function of the magistrate? As Paul clearly declares that he is “the minister of God to us for good,” we thereby understand that he was so ordained of God.

CHARLES SIMEON (1759-1836): The office of magistrates is to do all in their power for the suppression of iniquity, and for the promotion of universal happiness. It is for these ends alone that power is put into their hands. They are to be “a terror to the workers of iniquity.”

JOHN CALVIN: What is the extent of his power?

JOHN GILL (1697-1771): The “sword” is an emblem of the power of life and death.

MARTYN LLOYD-JONES: So the power of the sword that the state has, is a power that God Himself has delegated to the state. Why has He done so? Well, surely the answer of the whole of the Old Testament is this: God is the Author of life. It is the greatest gift that He gives to man. And as God is sole Author of life, He alone has a right to take life. It is at that point you see the enormity of murder. That’s why murder is a very special and unique crime. It is the thing which makes it the most terrible crime of all; that a man should take it upon himself to take another man’s life!―this is the most precious of all that man possesses.

THOMAS COKE (1747-1814): Murder is the summit of human wickedness.

JOHN CALVIN: When the murder is proved, God sternly requires, and commands that it should not remain unpunished.

A. W. PINK: This law of judicial retaliation ought to be upon our statute books today and impartially and firmly enforced by our magistrates. But alas, so foolish and effeminate is the present generation that an increasing number are agitating for the abolition of capital punishment.

MARTYN LLOYD-JONES: But then says somebody, “Doesn’t the commandment say, Thou shalt not kill? And what about turning the other cheek?” And the answer to those is that all those commandments are to the individual―the individual is not to kill; the individual is to turn the other cheek. However, we are now dealing with the power of the state to take life in the form of capital punishment. So, it’s no use quoting one of those ten commandments, or the teaching of the sermon on the mount—they are addressed to the individual, and not to the state.

C. H. SPURGEON; Sometime ago a lady sought an interview with me, with the object of enlisting my sympathy upon the question of “Anti-Capital Punishment.” I heard the excellent reasons she urged against hanging men who had committed murder, though they did not convince me. She proposed that when a man committed murder, he should be confined for life. My remark was, that a great many men who had been confined half their lives were not a bit the better for it. “Ah,” she said, “that is because we have been all wrong about punishments. We punish people because we think they deserve to be punished. Now, we ought to show them that we love them; that we only punish them to make them better.”

“Indeed, madam,” I said, “I have heard that theory a great many times, and I have seen much fine writing upon the matter, but I am no believer in it. The design of punishment should be amendment, but the ground of punishment lies in the positive guilt of the offender. I believe that when a man does wrong, he ought to be punished for it.”

JOHN GILL: He that is guilty of wilful murder shall surely be put to death by the order of the civil magistrate. “Moreover ye shall take no satisfaction for the life of a murderer, which is guilty of death: but he shall be surely put to death,” Numbers 35:31.

MARTYN LLOYD-JONES: It is the positive duty of the state to use the sword.

MATTHEW POOLE: No intercession nor ransom shall be accepted to save his life, or procure him a pardon.

WILHELMUS à BRAKEL: He who forgives a murderer is opposed to the commandment of God and is an accomplice to the murder.

THOMAS WATSON (1620-1686): A felon having committed six murders, the judge may be said to be guilty of five of them, because he did not execute the felon for his first offence.

MARTYN LLOYD-JONES: There is nothing, in other words, that should so teach us the sacredness, and the sanctity of life, so much as the execution of capital punishment.

 

Posted in Doctrine & Practice | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Is Capital Punishment Justified?

Does the Sixth Commandment Forbid All Killing?

Posted on July 6, 2018 by The Editor

Exodus 20:13

Thou shalt not kill.

D. L. MOODY (1837-1899): First, let us see what this commandment does not mean. It does not forbid the killing of animals for food and for other reasons. Millions of rams and lambs and turtledoves must have been killed every year for sacrifices under the Mosaic system. Christ Himself ate of the Passover lamb, and we are told definitely of cases where He ate fish and provided it for His disciples and the people to eat.

WILHELMUS à BRAKEL  (1635-1711): This commandment neither applies to the vegetative life of trees and herbs, nor to animal life, for God has given both to the benefit of man. The killing of animals may, however, not proceed from cruel motives. The killing which is forbidden here pertains to human life, which is the most precious thing that man possesses.

JOHN CALVIN (1509-1564): “Thou shalt not kill.” The words are better rendered, ‘thou shalt do no murder.’

D. L. MOODY: It does not forbid the killing of burglars or attackers in self-defense.

THOMAS WATSON (1620-1686): The commandment, ‘Thou shalt not kill,’ requires that we should preserve our own life and soul. It is engraven upon every creature that he should preserve his own natural life.

WILHELMUS à BRAKEL: The slaying of one’s neighbour out of self-protection is also not included in the forbidden homicide. This occurs when either a murderer, a person who is in a fit of wrath, or a demented person attacks someone in order to slay him―he either must permit himself to be killed, or he must in self-defense kill the attacker. If he kills him, he is not guilty of bloodshed; rather, this is referred to as self-defense. One is obligated to preserve his life and this is the only objective here. If this culminates in the death of the other person, the attacker is guilty, and not the person being attacked.

D. L. MOODY: Directly after the giving of the Ten Commandments, God laid down the ordinance that if a thief be found breaking in and be smitten that he die, it was pardonable, Exodus 22:20. Did not Christ justify this idea of self-defense when He said: “If the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up,” Matthew 24:43?

WILHELMUS à BRAKEL: The killing of an enemy in a lawful war also is not included in the homicide which is forbidden. A war is lawful when enemies conspire to attack a nation that has not offended them, but which dwells quietly and peacefully—these enemies robbing them of their goods and making the people their bond servants. If the government of such a country then arms itself against such enemies, resists violence with violence, punishes them, and renders them incapable of returning, this is a righteous undertaking whereby the wicked are punished, and good persons are protected both personally as well as relative to their religion and belongings.

C. H. SPURGEON (1834-1892): The wars in which David was engaged were honest wars for the defense and deliverance of the country, in which God had helped him, and yet even the best war is bad in God’s esteem. When blood is shed, God delights not in it.

WILHELMUS à BRAKEL: The legality of such wars is not only abundantly evident in the Old Testament, where God commanded them and prescribed the time and manner of attack, as well as promising to deliver up the enemy.

MARTYN LLOYD-JONES: But now, of course, immediately the pacifist brings up an argument against this teaching; “But that’s only the Old Testament teaching.” Now, there are those who say that fighting is always wrong, the “taking of life” they say, is “always wrong.” They therefore argue that no state should ever go to war, that war is always wrong, for every state, and every country.

THOMAS COKE (1747-1814): Though war is exceeding far from being desirable, it is not always unlawful.

ARCHIBALD ALEXANDER (1772-1851): There is no excuse for war but dire necessity. As long as possible, every nation should avoid war; but a state of warfare may be forced upon a nation.  Self defence is the first law of our nature, and is a duty.  On the contrary principle, the lawless and violent would have everything in their own hands, and the virtuous and peaceable would be the prey of the wicked.

MARTYN LLOYD-JONES: For a state to go to war, it must be regarded as a part of the duty of the state in certain circumstances; it is as an extension of the duty and the function of the magistrate, Romans 13:1-6―That as the magistrate has to maintain law and order within the state, he is also called by God to do the same in the external relationships of the state…If another state from the outside, is attempting to interfere with the life of this state in an evil sense, then it is the duty and the business of the magistrate to protect the interests of the citizens of the state. And I think there can be no question about this at all. Once you see that it is but an extension of the duty of the magistrate, the governing power within the state, this then follows by a logical necessity.

JOHN TRAPP (1601-1699): War is not rashly to be undertaken.

MARTYN LLOYD-JONES: This must always be the last resort. Every other effort must have failed. Every other possibility must have been exhausted. The state only goes to war when all its endeavours to prevent war, and to right the wrongs, have completely failed. And that leads me to my third point, which is this: that when the state does go to war, she must be able to show that she’s doing so in a just cause. Now, throughout the centuries, there has been great discussion on this matter in the church―the just war, a righteous war.

CHARLES SIMEON (1759-1836): There is not a nation under heaven where the art of war is not cultivated…Under these circumstances it is not optional with a nation whether they will have a military force: they are compelled to maintain armies, and to preserve their lives and liberties by the same means that others use to subjugate and overwhelm them―and if there were any one nation determined to cultivate peace to the uttermost, it would still be necessary for them to learn the art of war, in order that they might be ready, when attacked, to repel aggression, and to maintain their liberties.

MARTYN LLOYD-JONES: Well, now, that’s the point at which we’ve arrived, and we come now to the next problem, which of course, is very closely related to that last one―the question of capital punishment.

ALEXANDER MacLAREN (1826-1910): This commandment was not intended to touch the questions of capital punishment or of war. These were allowed under the Jewish code, and cannot therefore be supposed to be prohibited here. How far either is consistent with the deepest meaning of the law, as expanded and reconsecrated in Christianity, is another question.

C. H. SPURGEON: I shall not enter into the question of the rightness of capital punishment. I have my opinion upon it, but this is not exactly the place to state it.

MARTYN LLOYD-JONES: Very well, we’ve got to leave it at that.

 

Posted in Doctrine & Practice | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Does the Sixth Commandment Forbid All Killing?

Empathy

Posted on June 29, 2018 by The Editor

Galatians 6:2; Romans 12:15

Bear ye one another’s burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.

Rejoice with them that do rejoice, and weep with them that weep.

CHARLES BRIDGES (1794-1869): The gospel does not shut us up in our own private interests, as if we had no sympathy with our neighbour. It is an universal brotherhood of love.

A. W. PINK (1886-1952): If the love of God has been shed abroad in my heart—then I shall sympathize with His children in their varied trials and troubles, be ready to counsel and comfort, and assist them so far as lies in my power. Only thus shall I fulfill the law of Christ’s precepts and the law of His example (John 13:14,15), for He enjoins us to be compassionate to others, and is Himself “touched with the feeling of our infirmities,” Hebrews 4:15.

JOHN NEWTON (1725-1807): Such a compassionate disposition, which excites our feelings for the afflicted, is an eminent branch of the mind which was in Christ.

A. W. PINK: Christ was tender, sympathetic, and full of compassion.

MATTHEW HENRY (1662-1714): This obliges us to a mutual forbearance and forgiveness, to sympathy with and compassion towards each other―agreeable to His pattern and example, which have the force of a law to us. He bears with us under our weaknesses and follies, He is touched with a fellow-feeling of our infirmities; and therefore there is good reason why we should maintain the same temper towards one another.

JOHN CALVIN (1509-1564): “Be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ’s sake hath forgiven you,” Ephesians 4:32. And as this virtue will never reign in us, unless attended by compassion, He recommends to us to be tender-hearted. This will lead us not only to sympathize with the distresses of our brethren, as if they were our own, but to cultivate that true humanity which is affected by everything that happens to them, in the same manner as if we were in their situation.

MATTHEW HENRY: Compassion is a debt owing to those that are in affliction. The least which those that are at ease can do for those that are pained and in anguish is to pity them—to manifest the sincerity of a tender concern for them, and to sympathize with them―to take cognizance of their case, enquire into their grievances, hear their complaints, and mingle their tears with theirs—to comfort them, and to do all they can to help and relieve them.

JOHN CALVIN: Concern, undoubtedly, produces sympathy.

C. H. SPURGEON (1834-1892): Some people listen but do not hear. You tell them your story, but it does not help you a bit because their minds are no more moved by your case than if they were far away. They are just saying to themselves, “We will hear this poor old lady’s story; it will please her.” But it does not please her because she perceives that they have no sympathy, no feeling for her. The kind of person you like to tell your story to is one who weeps with you—who is really afflicted with your affliction. It is greatly comforting to have a person with you who feels just as you feel.

JOHN CALVIN: No act of kindness, except accompanied with sympathy, is pleasing to God.

C. H. SPURGEON: A comforter without sympathy would be a strange being, indeed—he would be a mocker of human woes!―Other people’s pity is the pity of inaction. “Oh, I do pity you very much!” says a person to a sick woman, “your husband is dead, your children have to be supported and you have to work hard. Well, my good Woman, I pity you very much, but I cannot afford to give you anything. I have so many who call upon me.” How much pity there is of that kind in the world!

CHARLES BRIDGES: It is not pity in words and looks. It is when our neighbour’s trouble descends into the depths of our hearts, and draws out thence bowels of kindness and practical sympathy.

JOHN CALVIN: There are many apparently liberal, who yet do not feel for the miseries of their brethren.

C. H. SPURGEON: Men who are wrapped up in their own glories are not sympathetic. Is it not a fine thing to spend life in contemplating one’s own magnificence? Those who are amazed at their own greatness have no thought to spare for the suffering. “No,” says the man, “the masses must obey the laws of supply and demand and get on as well as they can. Let them do as I have done. I might have been as poor as they are if I had shown as little push and enterprise as they do.” The gentleman talks on a great scale and he has no sympathy for the small woes of common life. His sympathy is needed at home and his charity begins there—and is so satisfied with its beginning that it never goes any further.

CHARLES SIMEON (1759-1836): If it be true respecting those who sympathize not with others in their bodily necessities, that “they have not the love of God in them,” 1 John 3:17—much more is it true, that they who “shut up their bowels of compassion from a brother” under the pressure of spiritual troubles, can possess but little knowledge of that mystery which unites all in one body, and causes every member to participate in the feelings and necessities of the whole body.

JOHN CALVIN: We, as much as possible, ought to sympathize with one another, and that, whatever our lot may be, each should transfer to himself the feeling of another, whether of grief in adversity, or of joy in prosperity. And, doubtless, not to regard with joy the happiness of a brother is envy; and not to grieve for his misfortunes is inhumanity. Let there be such a sympathy among us as may at the same time adapt us to all kinds of feelings. Therefore while we have time, let us learn to exercise humanity, to sympathize with the miserable, and to stretch out our hand for the sake of giving assistance.

MATTHEW HENRY: Inhumanity is impiety and irreligion.

CHARLES SIMEON: The very essence of Christianity is love: and it is by bearing one another’s burdens that we very principally fulfil the law of Christ. But how can we fulfil that law, if we do not “rejoice with them that rejoice, and weep with them that weep?” Or how can we possess “true and undefiled religion,” if we do not “visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction,” James 1:27, and endeavour, according to our ability, to “lift up the hands that hangs down, and the feeble knees, and to make straight and smooth paths” for “the feet of those who are ready to slip?” (Hebrews 12:12,13). It was peculiarly characteristic of our blessed Lord, that “He would not break the bruised reed, or quench the smoking flax, till he should bring forth judgment unto victory,” Isaiah 42:3, and, if we do not resemble Him in His compassionate regard for His afflicted saints, whatever we may profess, we have not “the mind that was in Christ Jesus,” Philippians 2:5.

 

Posted in Love | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Empathy

Jesus Christ, An Everlasting Father to His Children

Posted on June 22, 2018 by The Editor

Isaiah 9:6,7

For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end.

J. C. RYLE (1816-1900): All these, and many more, are names given to Christ in Scripture. Each is a fountain of instruction and comfort for everyone who is willing to drink of it. Each supplies matter for useful meditation.

THOMAS COKE (1747-1814): The fourth name is “Everlasting Father,” or “Father of Eternity.”

JOHN GILL (1697-1771): The Septuagint renders the clause “the Father of the age,” or “the world to come;” and hence mention is made in the Jewish writings of “the world to come of the Messiah.”

JOHN CALVIN (1509-1564): In my opinion, the translation is correct, for it denotes eternity, unless it be thought better to view it as denoting “perpetual duration,” or “an endless succession of ages,” lest any one should improperly limit it to the heavenly life, which is still hidden from us, Colossians 3:3. True, the Prophet includes it, and even declares that Christ will come, in order to bestow immortality on His people; but as believers, even in this world, “pass from death to life,” this world is embraced by the eternal condition, John 5:24; 1 John 3:14.

A. W. PINK (1886-1952): The “everlasting Father.” This name has puzzled many.

CHARLES SIMEON (1759-1836): This title respects not Christ’s relation to the Deity, for with respect to that, He is the Son and not the Father.

JOHN GILL: The “everlasting Father” does not design any relation of Christ in the Godhead. There is but one Father in the Godhead, and that is the first Person; indeed Christ and the Father are one, and the Father is in Him, and He is in the Father, and He that has seen the one has seen the other, and yet they are distinct.―Christ is a Father with respect to chosen men who were given Him as His children and offspring in covenant; who are adopted into that family that is named of Him, and who are regenerated by His Spirit and grace. And to these He is an “everlasting Father.”

A. W. PINK: Christ is the “everlasting Father” because from everlasting He has had “children!”―“Behold I and the children which God hath given Me,” Hebrews 2:13. Those whom God hath given to Christ were referred to by Him, again and again, during His public ministry. “All that the Father giveth Me shall come to Me,” John 6:37. “I have manifested Thy name unto the men which Thou gavest Me out of the world: Thine they were, and Thou gavest them Me…I pray not for the world, but for them which Thou hast given Me,” John 17:6-9. They were given to Christ before the foundation of the world. These “children” are God’s elect, sovereignly singled out by Him, and from the beginning chosen unto salvation, 2 Thessalonians 2:13.

ROBERT HAWKER (1753-1827): And of all these it must be said, that every individual of Christ’s seed was in Christ from all eternity, for they were chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world. And all the purposes and grace designed for the Church in time, with the sure hope of eternal life in the world to come, were all given to every individual of the Church, before the world began, 2 Timothy 1:9; Titus 1:2. Of Christ’s whole seed, it may be truly said, as was said by the Holy Ghost of Levi being in the loins of his father Abraham, when Melchizedeck met him; so all of Christ’s seed were in Him, and He their everlasting Father from all eternity, Hebrews 7:10.

THOMAS COKE: As Adam was the first man that God created, so he was the first father and progenitor of all other men, who are every one born in his image as they come into the world of nature, and breathe the vital air. Just so, from Jesus Christ, the everlasting Father, all who come into the world of grace derive their spiritual being; His image they bear, I Corinthians 15:49, and from Him “the whole family in heaven and earth is named,” Ephesians 3:15. So, all the saints are descendants from Jesus Christ, their everlasting Father.

JOHN GILL: These bear His name, and are called “Christians” from Him.

THOMAS GOODWIN (1600-1679): He is ‘the everlasting Father;’ a father to beget His likeness in us, and everlasting to maintain it ever, when it is begun once.

JOHN GILL: And Christ is a Father to these unto everlasting; He will never die, and they shall never be left fatherless; He and they will ever continue in this relation; He, as such, supplies them with everlasting provisions, He clothes them with everlasting raiment, He gives them an everlasting portion, promotes them to everlasting honour, saves them with an everlasting salvation, bearing an everlasting love to them.

MATTHEW HENRY (1662-1714): He is the Author of everlasting life and happiness to them, and so is the Father of a blessed eternity to them. It was “from everlasting” in the counsels of it, and will be “to everlasting” in the consequences of it.

JOHN TRAPP (1601-1699): This “everlasting Father” shall have an endless government.

MATTHEW POOLE (1624-1679): “The mercy of the LORD is from everlasting to everlasting upon them that fear him,” Psalm 103:17. As God’s mercy was from eternity exercised in gracious purposes, so it will be continued unto eternity in that future and endless life.

CHARLES SIMEON: “Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, today, and forever,” Hebrews 13:8. How far back does this “yesterday” go?

ROBERT HAWKER: What “yesterday?” In all the eternity past. Set up from everlasting in His Mediator character, Proverbs 8:23. “The Lamb slain from the foundation of the world,” Revelation 13:8.

JOHN GILL: He existed not only as the eternal Word, the everlasting “I AM,” but as the Saviour and Redeemer of His people—and He is “today” under the Gospel dispensation, in His person as the God-man, and in His offices as Prophet, Priest, and King: and will be so “forever:” He will never die more; His kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and His priesthood an unchangeable one.

ROBERT HAWKER: The oneness between Jesus and His people, gives a right of interest in all that belongs to Him, as the Head and Mediator of His redeemed. He hath said Himself, “Because I live, ye shall live also,” John 14:19.

JOHN GILL: “His seed also will I make to endure forever,” Psalm 89:29. His seed and offspring, shall endure forever―the “enduring” of these “forever” may denote the final perseverance of particular believers; which may be concluded from the relation of Christ, as an everlasting Father to them, who therefore must continue as His children.

 

Posted in Attributes of God, Jesus Christ | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Jesus Christ, An Everlasting Father to His Children