There’s More to Being a Dragon Slayer Than Simply Slaying Dragons

By J. Warner Wallace 2/14/2018

     Forgive me as I step outside my apologetics “box” for a minute and post my thoughts on one aspect of what it means to be a man. Maybe this post isn’t all that removed from my usual efforts to make a case for the Christian worldview, particularly with all the recent talk in the blogosphere related to the egalitarian / complementarian debate. I do have some observations related to “Christian masculinity”, and these ideas came to mind recently in a conversation with my son.

     It’s probably no surprise that so much literature has been devoted to the fairy tale relationship between princes and princesses. As my daughters were growing up, we watched many Disney movies featuring a princess of one nature or another. In all of these tales, a prince rescued the princess, and most of these princes had to overcome some type of “dragon”. There is a universal need, it seems, to locate and identify ourselves within this narrative. We are either princes or princesses, and all of us have an innate need to rescue or be rescued. This classic form of storytelling reflects our human identity and condition. There is much we can learn from studying its nuances.

     I am an older guy with thirty-three years of experience as a would-be dragon slayer (I met my wife Susie in 1979). I’ve tried to be very thoughtful about my approach to my marriage; I’ve learned a few things about the nature of princes in my own meager attempt to be a good one. My chief observation is this: there’s more to being a dragon slayer than simply slaying dragons. In fact, the dragon slaying part is really not what ought to define or motivate us as princes. We are dragon slayers not because we can kill the dragon, but because we have a princess to rescue. It’s our relationship to this princess that truly defines us, and at the end of the day, we can only call ourselves successful if our princesses know that they were the focus of our efforts. Our princesses must know that they were important enough to be saved and that we, as their dragon slayers, were committed to that effort.

     I’ve known a lot of police officers over the years. They were all excellent dragon slayers, but not all of them were excellent men or husbands. In fact, it seemed like many of them had been through more than their fair share of marriages and struggled deeply in their personal relationships. Some of them believed that their ability to slay the dragon was all that was necessary to define themselves as good men. They were good cops, tough and courageous, but seldom thought about what made them valuable to their wives. Dragon slaying was enough at first, but along the way they lost their focus and desire to lay down everything to save their princesses. They continued to be tough and courageous in one aspect of their lives but forgot to be tender and sacrificial in the most important area of their lives. Without a princess to save, none of us can truly call ourselves dragon slayers.

     Christian complementarianism maintains that God created men and women with the same essential (innate) dignity and personhood, but with different and complementary functions within their marital and relational settings and within the setting of God’s family (the Church). Some find this view troubling and sexist (especially when it comes to church leadership). But the Christian call to husbands and wives is the same. It is to “submit to one another” (Ephesians 5:21). This looks a bit different for each of us as, depending on whether we are a husband or a wife. Some of my Christian brothers are fond of focusing primarily on those portions of Paul’s letter to the Ephesians that deals with a wife’s submission to her husband, but the important call for all of us as dragon slayers is found in Ephesians 5:25…

James "Jim" Warner Wallace (born June 16, 1961) is an American homicide detective and Christian apologist. Wallace is a Senior Fellow at the Colson Center for Christian Worldview and an Adjunct Professor of Apologetics at Biola University in La Mirada, California. He has authored several books, including Cold-Case Christianity, God’s Crime Scene, and Forensic Faith, in which he applies principles of cold case homicide investigation to apologetic concerns such as the existence of God and the reliability of the Gospels.

• Cold-Case Christianity: A Homicide Detective Investigates the Claims of the Gospels

• God's Crime Scene: A Cold-Case Detective Examines the Evidence for a Divinely Created Universe

• Alive: A Cold-Case Approach to the Resurrection

• Cold-Case Christianity for Kids: Investigate Jesus with a Real Detective

• Keeping Your Kids on God's Side: 40 Conversations to Help Them Build a Lasting Faith

• Forensic Faith: A Homicide Detective Makes the Case for a More Reasonable, Evidential Christian Faith

The Most Insidious Sin

By Lenny Esposito 10/16/15

The Bible warns against the sin of pride quite a bit. God tells Jeremiah, "Let not the wise man boast in his wisdom, let not the mighty man boast in his might, let not the rich man boast in his riches, but let him who boasts boast in this, that he understands and knows me, that I am the Lord who practices steadfast love, justice, and righteousness in the earth" (Jer. 9:23-24). James reminds us "God opposes the proud, but gives grace to the humble" (James 4:6), and Proverbs declares "Everyone who is arrogant in heart is an abomination to the Lord; be assured, he will not go unpunished." (Prov. 16:5).

     Sexual failings are pretty much guaranteed to grab attention. Even in local churches, people who have fallen to sexual sin, be it adultery, homosexuality, or pregnancy outside of wedlock will cause people to talk. We tend to think sins like these are "major;" ones that carry a stigma unlike lying or addiction. Even as the culture becomes more and more sexually charged, sexual sins are held to almost a different standard. But there is a sin that is more problematic in the church than abusing sexual desire, one that no one points and whispers about: the sin of pride.

     The Leaven of Puffing Up | How much do you think about the sin of pride? How do you guard against it? While there are ministries that offer filtering of pornography for your internet connection, what filters are there for one's pride? As an apologist, I know first-hand just how easy it is to fall into pride. Anyone in a position where he or she is teaching or leading others can almost effortlessly fall into this sin. As the Bakkers built their Heritage USA center, it should have been obvious that they were no longer doing ministry toward others but constructing a monument to themselves.

     Pastors and apologists can fall into the same trap. They are trying to do God's work. They preach, they witness, and they defend the faith which is good and important work. TI truly is ministry. However, when one begins to believe the ministry is so important that they don‘t have time to sit and listen to people or their calling has a higher value than another's, they've begun to elevate not God's blessing upon them but their won self-worth. That's why I believe pride is the most insidious of sins; it is the leaven that corrupts by puffing up an individual from the inside. It replaces one's reliance on God with a reliance on one's own ability.

     The Bible warns against the sin of pride quite a bit. God tells Jeremiah, "Let not the wise man boast in his wisdom, let not the mighty man boast in his might, let not the rich man boast in his riches, but let him who boasts boast in this, that he understands and knows me, that I am the Lord who practices steadfast love, justice, and righteousness in the earth" (Jer. 9:23-24). James reminds us "God opposes the proud, but gives grace to the humble" (James 4:6), and Proverbs declares "Everyone who is arrogant in heart is an abomination to the Lord; be assured, he will not go unpunished." (Prov. 16:5).

Click here to go to source

A Survey Of Old Testament Introduction

By Gleason Archer Jr.

Aramaisms as a Criterion for Lateness

     The architects of the Documentary Hypothesis assumed that the presence of an Aramaic word in a biblical text was an indication of post-exilic origin. It was not until the Babylonian captivity that the Jews began to abandon their ancestral Hebrew and adopt the more widely spoken Aramaic language, which was used in commerce and international correspondence throughout a large portion of the Persian empire from the Tigris to the Nile. By  Ezra’s time (according to  Neh. 8:8 ), the Hebrew Torah required interpreters for the congregation to understand its import, and very likely this explanation was given in Aramaic, which was now the household speech of the Jewish populace. Prior to the Exile, however, only the well-educated nobility and civil servants understood Aramaic, as we may gather from the incident in 701 B.C. when the Assyrian Rabshakeh was urged to keep his remarks in Aramaic, lest the Jewish soldiers nearby might understand his Hebrew (  2 Kings 18:26 ). Consequently it is unthinkable, argued the Wellhausians, that any authentic pre-exilic Hebrew would have contained Aramaisms.

     But this assumption of the preservation of Hebrew and Aramaic in watertight compartments prior to the captivity has been quite discredited by more recent archaeological discoveries. For instance, the inscription of King Zakir of Hamath composed about 820 B.C. (Lidzbarski’s Ephemeris fur Semitische Epigraphik 3:3) shows a most remarkable admixture of Canaanite (or Hebrew) in its Aramaic text. For example, it uses the Hebrew ʾš for “man” rather than the usual Aramaic ʾnš; it employs the Hebrew nsʾ for “lift up” rather than the Aramaic nṭl. Likewise also the Panammu Inscription from the first half of the eighth century, composed in the north Syrian principality of Ya’udi, shows the same intrusion of Hebrew or Canaanite forms; for example, ʾnk instead of ʾn for “I,” ntn instead of yhb for “give,” šm instead of tmʾ for “there,” and yšb instead of ytb for “sit, dwell.”

     It should be noted that these Hebraisms in Aramaic cannot be accounted for as peculiarities of Jewish Aramaic, since these inscriptions were composed by non-Jews in regions fairly remote from Palestine. That this intermingling of Canaanite and Aramaic was of very early origin is indicated by the Ugaritic literature of fifteenth century Ras Shamrah. Ugaritic was a dialect of West Semitic closely related to Hebrew, and yet as early as the time of Moses we find such an intrusion of Aramaisms as to give some scholars grounds for arguing that Ugaritic was basically an Aramaic dialect which had absorbed many Canaanisms.

     The  Genesis record makes it clear that Aramaic influences were at work in Hebrew from its earliest stages. After his long sojourn in Aramaic-speaking Haran, Abraham and all his household must have been very fluent in that language before they migrated to Canaan and gradually adopted the tongue of its inhabitants. Isaac’s bride, Rebekah, came to him from Aramaic-speaking Padan-aram; likewise both of Jacob’s wives, Leah and Rachel. When Jacob’s uncle Laban overtook him at Gilead, we are told in  Gen. 31:47 that Laban called the witness cairn Yegar-śāhedūtā (“the heap of witness”), whereas Jacob called it by the same thing in Canaanite: Gal˓ēd (“Gilead”). In the period between the Conquest and the reign of Saul (1400–1010 B.C.) the contacts with Aramaic-speaking peoples were doubtless minimal, but with the extension of Hebrew power under David and Solomon to the borders of Hamath and the west bank of the Euphrates, there must have been a rich exchange of cultural influences and linguistic contacts with Aramaic speaking Damascus, Hadrach, Zobah, and Hamath. These would have been particularly noticeable in the dialect of the northern Hebrew tribes contiguous to these Syrian principalities. During the United Monarchy, there would very naturally have been a broadening of Hebrew vocabulary to include Aramaic and North Israelite terms or grammatical traits, particularly in the language of poetry. Hence the comparative frequency of Aramaisms in some of the later Davidic  Psalms and in  Ecclesiastes and  Song of Solomon.

     These considerations furnish a good basis for concluding, first, that the presence of an Aramaism is no decisive evidence for assigning a post-exilic date to a biblical document in which it occurs; second, that the literary genre makes a difference as to the frequency with which Aramaisms may occur in a given text. Of course if in narrative prose there is a consistent and sustained Aramaic influence at work, extending even to idioms and grammatical formations, then it may be validly deduced that the Hebrew author was equally at home in Aramaic. Yet such a situation is demonstrable only in books which purport to be exilic or post-exilic, such as the Hebrew section of  Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, and (to a certain extent) in  Esther. (Interestingly enough, no such Aramaic influence is demonstrable for post-exilic prophets, such as  Haggai, Zechariah, and  Malachi. For some reason they adhered to a relatively pure Hebrew diction, despite the prevalence of Aramaic in their day. They were probably so steeped in the language of the Torah that they were consciously biased in favor of Mosaic purity as they spoke in the name of the Lord.)

     On the other hand, it should be emphasized that Documentarian critics have tended to exaggerate the Aramaic elements discoverable in the Hebrew Scriptures. A great number of Hebrew words which they have classified as Aramaisms turn out, on closer examination, to have a very good claim to the status of authentic Hebrew words, or else to be derivable from Phoenician, Babylonian, or Arabic dialects, rather than from Aramaic. For example, many critics have carelessly assumed that Hebrew nouns ending in -ôn are necessarily Aramaic because the -ān ending is so common in Aramaic. Yet the fact of the matter is that this ending is also found with fair frequency in Babylonian and Arabic, and further proof is necessary to demonstrate that it could not have been native in Hebrew from Canaanite times; and that it was derivable only from Aramaic and not from Babylonian (Akkadian) or Arabic. Of the sixty-three nouns ending in -ôn or -ān in the Pentateuch (and which are therefore asserted to be Aramaic) the Aramaic Targum of Onkelos renders only twelve by the same nouns ending in -n; it renders the remaining fifty-one by other nouns entirely (and most of them without any ending in -n). At the same time, in the entire Targum of the Torah, Onkelos exhibits only sixty-three nouns in -n, whereas the Hebrew original itself has the same number, sixty-three. This seems to be rather tenuous evidence for the proposition that -n is indigenous only to Aramaic and necessarily an Aramaism in Hebrew! (Cf. Wilson, SIOT, pp. 147–48.)

A Survey of Old Testament Introduction

A Dozen Book Favorites, Part 2

By Kenneth Richard Samples 1/9/2018

     As I wrote in part one of this series, only human beings are readers. The ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle thought the distinguishing feature of people is their ability to use language. And humans use their unique language ability to think, speak, write, and read.

     From a historic Christian viewpoint, the idea of human uniqueness is grounded in the biblical truth that people are made in the image of God (Genesis 1:26–27). This imago Dei endowment makes people capable of hunting and gathering truth. And since Christians affirm a propositional (words, statements) revelation from God in the Bible, they join with the Jewish tradition as People of the Book. Thus, reading is a great gift and privilege, but one may also argue that it is a responsibility according to our exalted created nature.

     12 Book Favorites | This is part two of a three-part series on some of my favorite books. (See here for part one.) The topics cover theology, philosophy, apologetics, and education. I also note how the books have been helpful to me. The books are listed in alphabetical order, not order of preference:

     5. Mere Christianity by C. S. Lewis

     In the preface of this work, Lewis presents the idea of “mere Christianity,” which reflects far more than a book title. This term refers to a group of essential and “agreed, or common, or central” Christian doctrines (such as the Trinity, the incarnation, and the atonement) that all branches of historic Christendom affirm. Thus, the book carefully explains and defends the central beliefs and values of common Christianity. Mere Christianity was the first Christian book that I ever read, and it powerfully impacted my thinking.

Philosopher and theologian Kenneth Richard Samples has a great passion to help people understand the reasonableness and relevance of Christianity's truth claims. Through his writing and speaking as senior research scholar at Reasons to Believe (RTB), he encourages believers to develop a logically defensible faith and challenges skeptics to engage Christianity at a philosophical worldview level.

     An intellectual even at a young age, Kenneth's journey to faith in Christ began in earnest during his teenage years as he wrestled with a deep sense of longing and restlessness. His older brother's suicide spurred his efforts to seek answers to life's "big questions." Eventually, he began reading the Bible and attending church, but it was his sister's gift of Mere Christianity by C. S. Lewis that helped Kenneth to truly understand the Christian Gospel and to accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. From then on, he pursued an intellectually satisfying and deeply personal faith.

     Today, Kenneth focuses on demonstrating the unique compatibility of Christianity's great doctrinal truths with reason and logic. He is the author of several books, including God Among Sages, Christian Endgame, 7 Truths That Changed the World, A World of Difference, and Without a Doubt. He leads RTB's Straight Thinking podcast and also writes Reflections, a weekly blog dedicated to exploring the Christian worldview. Kenneth has spoken at universities and churches around the world on such topics as religion and worldview, the identity of Jesus, and Christian apologetics. He also makes frequent guest appearances on radio programs such as The Frank Sontag Show, Issues Etc., and Stand to Reason, lectures as an adjunct professor at Biola University, and teaches adult classes at Christ Reformed Church in Southern California.

     An avid student of American history, Kenneth earned a BA in social science with an emphasis in history and philosophy from Concordia University and an MA in theological studies from Talbot School of Theology. Prior to joining RTB in 1997, Kenneth worked for seven years as senior research consultant and correspondence editor at Christian Research Institute, where he regularly cohosted The Bible Answer Man, a popular call-in radio program founded by renowned apologist Dr. Walter Martin. In addition, Kenneth's articles have been published in Christianity Today, Christian Research Journal, and Facts for Faith, and he holds memberships in the Evangelical Philosophical Society, the Evangelical Theological Society, and the International Society of Christian Apologetics.

     Kenneth lives in Southern California with his wife, Joan. They have three children.

• 1     God among Sages: Why Jesus Is Not Just Another Religious Leader
• 2     A World of Difference: Putting Christian Truth-Claims to the Worldview Test (Reasons to Believe)
• 3     God among Sages: Why Jesus Is Not Just Another Religious Leader
• 4     Christian Endgame: Careful Thinking about the End Times
• 5     Christianity's Most Dangerous Idea (Ebook Shorts)

Read The Psalms In "1" Year

Psalm 21

8 Your hand will find out all your enemies;
your right hand will find out those who hate you.
9 You will make them as a blazing oven
when you appear.
The LORD will swallow them up in his wrath,
and fire will consume them.
10 You will destroy their descendants from the earth,
and their offspring from among the children of man.
11 Though they plan evil against you,
though they devise mischief, they will not succeed.
12 For you will put them to flight;
you will aim at their faces with your bows.

13 Be exalted, O LORD, in your strength!
We will sing and praise your power.

Genesis 50; Luke 3; Job 16-17; 1 Corinthians 4

By Don Carson 2/17/2018

     THE LAST CHAPTER OF GENESIS includes a section that is both pathetic and glorious (Gen. 50:15-21).

     Everything that is sad and flawed in this family resurfaces when Jacob dies. Joseph’s brothers fear that their illustrious sibling may have suppressed vengeful resentment only until the death of the old man. Why did they think like this? Was it because they were still lashed with guilt feelings? Were they merely projecting onto Joseph what they would have done had they been in his place?

     Their strategy involves them in fresh sin: they lie about what their father said, in the hope that an appeal from Jacob would at least tug at Joseph’s heartstrings. In this light, their abject submission (“We are your slaves,” 50:18) sounds less like loyal homage than desperate manipulation.

     By contrast, Joseph weeps (50:17). He cannot help but see that these groveling lies betray how little he is loved or trusted, even after seventeen years (47:28) of nominal reconciliation. His verbal response displays not only pastoral gentleness – “he reassured them and spoke kindly to them,” promising to provide for them and their families (50:21) – it also reflects a man who has thought deeply about the mysteries of providence, about God’s sovereignty and human responsibility. “Don’t be afraid,” he tells them. “Am I in the place of God? You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives” (50:19-20).

     The profundity of this reasoning comes into focus as we reflect on what Joseph does not say. He does not say that during a momentary lapse on God’s part, Joseph’s brothers sold him into slavery, but that God, being a superb chess player, turned the game around and in due course made Joseph prime minister of Egypt. Still less does he say that God’s intention had been to send Joseph down to Egypt in a well-appointed chariot, but unfortunately Joseph’s brothers rather mucked up the divine plan, forcing God to respond with clever countermoves to bring about his own good purposes. Rather, in the one event – the selling of Joseph into slavery – there were two parties, and two quite different intentions. On the one hand, Joseph’s brothers acted, and their intentions were evil; on the other, God acted, and his intentions were good. Both acted to bring about this event, but while the evil in it must be traced back to the brothers and no farther, the good in it must be traced to God.

     This is a common stance in Scripture. It generates many complex philosophical discussions. But the basic notion is simple. God is sovereign, and invariably good; we are morally responsible, and frequently evil.

Click here to go to source

Don Carson is research professor of New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School in Deerfield, Illinois, and co-founder (with Tim Keller) of The Gospel Coalition. He has authored numerous books, and recently edited The Enduring Authority of the Christian Scriptures (Eerdmans, 2016).

A Bright and Burning Light: Robert Charles Sproul, February 13, 1939-December 14, 2017

By Dr. R. Albert Mohler Jr. 12/14/2017

     Most merciful Father, who hast been pleased to take unto thyself the soul of this thy servant; Grant to us who are still in our pilgrimage, and who walk as yet by faith, that having served thee with constancy on earth, we may be joined hereafter with thy blessed saints in glory everlasting; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
--- The Book of Common Prayer

We cannot determine truth by counting noses.

–R.C. Sproul

     For me, the story begins as a teenager stuck in a desperate struggle with huge theological questions in the 1970s. Of course, R.C. Sproul, with firm conviction and a friendly smile, would rightly insist that the story begins in the gracious will of our sovereign, eternal, and omnipotent God. Actually, those were some of the big theological questions that had me by the throat.

     I had been confronted by teachers in high school who had declared their own atheism and ridiculed theism. I was surrounded by a culture of increasing moral relativism and the first wave of what would later be called post-modernism. I knew Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord and I wanted to be faithful to him. But how?

     My struggle was spiritual and moral, but it was also irreducibly intellectual. How could I know and defend the Christian faith? I did not even know where to begin. At home and at church, I was surrounded by sweet Christians who loved me and invested their lives in me. But I had big questions they could not answer. Questions that gnawed at me and kept me awake at night. Questions that I feared could not be answered. Questions that I had no idea Christians had grappled with for centuries.

     Thankfully, I found help. I found other Christians who were struggling with the same questions, and some of them passed to me cassette tapes. At that time, the cassette was a recent invention. For me, these tapes were a lifeline – bringing me expository preaching from Dr. John MacArthur and lectures from this strangely infectious and compelling teacher at an oddly named center in Western Pennsylvania. The teacher was R.C. Sproul.

     Those tapes from R.C. Sproul were not my own. They had been passed to me after several others had listed to them. They squeaked. Nevertheless, I pounced on them like a hungry tiger. I received the tapes out of sequence. No matter – I just gained confidence and understanding with every tape.

The Problem Of The Old Testament

By James Orr 1907

III. DIFFICULTIES OF CRITICAL THEORY ON AGE AND ORIGIN

We now approach the central problem of the age and origin of the book. Was the Book of  Deuteronomy, as the critics, with nearly united voice, allege, a production of the age of Josiah, or of one of his immediate predecessors? If not, what were the circumstances of its origin? It is extremely important to observe that for most of the critics this question is already settled before they begin.  Deuteronomy is universally allowed to presuppose, and to be dependent on, the laws and history contained in JE, and, these writings being brought down by general consent to the ninth or eighth century B.C., a later date for  Deuteronomy necessarily follows. We decline to bind ourselves in starting by this or any similar assumption. It may well be that the result of the argument will rather be to push the date of JE farther back, than to make  Deuteronomy late. Reasons for the late date are found in the narrative of the finding of “the book of the law” in  2 Kings 22, in statements of  Deuteronomy itself, and in the character of its laws, compared with the earlier code, and with the history. It seems to us, on the other hand, that, under these very heads, insoluble difficulties arise, which really amount to a disproof of the critical theory. Reversing the usual procedure, it will be our aim, first, to set forth these difficulties which call for a revisal of the current view, then to weigh the force of the considerations adduced in its support.

1. Investigation naturally begins with the narrative of the finding of “the book of the law” in the eighteenth year of the reign of Josiah (B.C. 622), which criticism holds to be the first appearance of  Deuteronomy . The story, in brief, is that, during repairs in the temple, Hilkiah the high priest found a book, identified and described by him as “the book of the law.” He announced his discovery to Shaphan the scribe, who, after reading the book himself, presented and read it to the king. Josiah was extraordinarily moved by what he heard, confessed the guilt of the “fathers” in not hearkening to the words of this book, sent to inquire of Jehovah at the prophetess Huldah, finally, after the holding of a great assembly, and the renewal of the nation’s covenant with God on the basis of the book, instituted and carried through the remarkable “reformation” connected with his name. There is no reason to doubt that the book which called forth this reformation, embraced, if it did not entirely consist of, the Book of  Deuteronomy. The critical theory, in its usual form, is, that the book was composed at or about this time, and was deposited in the temple, with the express design of bringing about just such a result. Is this credible or likely?

(1) Now, if anything is clear on the face of the narrative above summarised, it surely is, that this finding of the book of the law in the temple was regarded by everybody concerned as the genuine discovery of an old lost book, and that the “book of the law” of Moses. This is evident as well from the terms in which the book is described (“the book of the law,” “the book of the covenant,” “the law of Moses”), as from the profound impression it produced on king and people, and from the covenant and reformation founded on it. Hilkiah, who announced its discovery in the words, “I have found the book of the law in the house of Jehovah,” the king, who was vehemently distressed “because our fathers have not hearkened to the words of this book,” Huldah the prophetess, who confirmed the threatenings of the book, had no other idea of it. There is not a whisper of doubt regarding its genuineness from any side — from priests at the temple, whose revenues it seriously interfered with, from prophets, on many of whom it bore hardly less severely, from the people, whose mode of life and religious habits it revolutionised, from priests of the high places, whom it deposed, and whose worship it put down as a high crime against Jehovah. The critics themselves do not dispute, but freely allow, that it was taken for a genuinely Mosaic book, and that it was this fact which gave it its authority. The last thing, we may be certain, that would enter the minds of Josiah or of those associated with him, was that the book which so greatly moved them was one newly composed by prophetic or priestly men of their own circles. This was a point, moreover, on which we may be sure that king and people would not be readily deceived. People at no time are easily deceived where their own interests or privileges are concerned, but in this case there were special difficulties. A new book, after all, does not look like an old one; and if high priest, scribe, king, prophetess, were misled into thinking that they were dealing with an old Mosaic book, when the parchment in their hands was one on which the ink was hardly dry, they must have been simpletons to a degree without parallel in history. On the other hand, assume the book to have been old, mouldy, defaced, and what are we to say of its recent origin? Did its authors, as Oettli asks, disfigure the book to make it look old?

(2) To these objections, there is but one plain answer, if the Josianic origin of the book is to be upheld, and that is an answer which the more influential leaders of the new school do not hesitate to give — the book was a result of pious fraud, or of a deliberate intention to deceive. It was a “pseudograph”; in popular speech, a “forgery.” This, without any disguise, is the view taken of the matter by Reuss, Graf, Kuenen, Wellhausen, Stade, Cornill, Cheyne, etc., as by Colenso, and many older critics. Many believing scholars, to their credit, repudiate it, but their scruples are treated by the real masters of the school as the result of timidity and weak compromise. Yet, as Klostermann says, in criticising it, “What a swallowing of camels is here!” It is a view which, despite the excuse attempted to be made for it by talk about the “less strict” notions of truth in those days, shocks the moral sense, and is not for a moment to be entertained of a circle to which the prophet  Jeremiah, with his scathing denunciations of lying and deceit, and of the “false pen of the scribes” that “wrought falsely,” belonged. Not that even on this supposition the difficulty of the transaction is removed. Hilkiah might be a party with prophets and priests in an intrigue to palm off a “book of the law” on the unsuspecting king; but how should he be able to use such language to Shaphan as, “I have found the book of the law”? or how should Josiah speak of the disobedience of the “fathers” to commandments which he must have been aware were not known to them? Is it not apparent that, though “the book of the law” had long been neglected, disobeyed, and allowed to become practically a dead letter, men still knew of the existence of such a book, and had sufficient idea of its contents to be able to recognise it when this old temple copy, which had evidently been left to lie covered with its dust, one does not know how long, in some recess, was suddenly brought to light. It is nothing to the point to urge, in answer, that, had  Deuteronomy existed earlier, there could not have been that long course of flagrant violation of its precepts which Josiah deplores. The whole condition of Jerusalem and Judah at this time, as described in  2 Kings 23 , was in flagrant violation of far more fundamental statutes than that of the central sanctuary in  Deuteronomy . Let one read, e.g., the account of the state of things under Manasseh, or in Josiah’s time, alongside of such a sentence as the following from Dr. Driver: “Now if there is one thing which (even upon the most strictly critical premises) is certain about Moses, it is that he laid the greatest stress upon Jehovah’s being Israel’s only God, who tolerated no other God beside Him, and who claimed to be the only object of the Israelite’s allegiance.” And are there no parallels in history, both to the condition of neglect into which the book of the law had fallen, and to the startling effect of the timely rediscovery of a book long forgotten?

(3) In light of these facts, it is not a little singular that Dr. Driver, in repelling the charge that “if the critical view of  Deuteronomy be correct, the book is a ‘forgery,’ the author of which sought to shelter himself under a great name, and to secure by a fiction recognition or authority for a number of laws ‘invented’ by himself” — should not make it clearer than he does that this opinion — represented by him as a groundless “objection” of opponents — is, so far as the pseudographic character of the work is concerned, precisely and explicitly that of the heads of the school with which “the critical view” he defends is specially associated. It is the theory also, we cannot help agreeing, to which we are logically brought, if it is assumed that  Deuteronomy is really a product of the age of Josiah, in which it was found. Dr. Driver himself, however, and, as already said, most believing scholars, separate themselves from this obnoxious hypothesis of deceit, and, to explain the “discovery” of the book by Hilkiah, commonly suppose that it belongs to a somewhat earlier period — e.g., to the reign of Manasseh, or that of Hezekiah, or the age immediately before Hezekiah. The moral qualms which lead to these theories are to be respected, but those who adopt them now labour under the disadvantage that, having cut themselves away from the age of Josiah, they have no fixed principle to go by, and, apart from a priori assumptions in regard to the course of development, there is no particular reason why they should stop where they do, and not carry the date of  Deuteronomy much higher still. They find themselves exposed also to the attacks of the advocates of the Josiah date, who point out the unsuitability of  Deuteronomy to Manasseh’s gloomy reign (“the calm and hopeful spirit which the author displays, and the absence even of any covert allusion to the special troubles of Manasseh’s reign”); but, above all, urge what Kuenen calls “the great, and in my opinion fatal objection,” “that it makes the actual reformation the work of those who had not planned it, but were blind tools in the service of the unknown projector.” It would, indeed, be strange procedure on the part of anyone composing a work in the spirit of Moses, yet not desiring to pass it off as other than his own, to deposit it secretly in the temple, there to lie undiscovered for perhaps a century — finally, in the irony of history, on its coming to light, to be accepted as a work of Moses, and continuously regarded as such by the Jewish and Christian world for over two millenniums! “Fatal” objections thus seem to lie at the door of all these hypotheses, and we are driven to ask whether some other explanation is not imperative.

(4) It may be added that the critics are seriously at variance on another point, viz., whether the author of  Deuteronomy in Josiah’s — or an earlier — age is to be sought for among the prophets or the priests. It seems a curious question to ask, after starting with the view that  Deuteronomy was a “prophetic” programme; yet it is one of no small importance in its bearings on origin, and the reasons against either view, on the critical premises, seem extremely strong. If a prophet, why, unlike the practice of other prophets, did he adopt this device of clothing his message in the form of addresses of Moses, and whence the strength of his interest in the sanctuary, its worship, and its feasts? As Kuenen, who favours the view of the priestly origin, points out: “It is obvious from  Deut. 24:8, and still more from chaps.  17:18, 31:9, that the Deuteronomist had relations with the priesthood of Jerusalem. In chap.  14:3–21 he even incorporates a priestly torah on clean and unclean animals into his book of law.” But then, on the other hand, if a priest, how account for the remodelling of the older laws in a direction inimical to the prerogatives of the Jerusalem priesthood? The last thing one would look for from a priest would be the concocting of ordinances which meant the sharing of his temple perquisites with all Levites who chose to claim them. The idea, again, of a joint composition by prophets and priests is not favoured by the conditions of the age, and is opposed to the unity of style and spirit in the book. This apparent conflict of interests, so difficult to harmonise with the time of Josiah, seems to point to an origin far nearer the fountainhead.

The Problem of the Old Testament

The Pilgrim's Progress From This World To That Which Is To Come;
Delivered Under The Similitude Of A Dream

By John Bunyan 1678

THE TENTH STAGE

Now I saw in my dream, that by this time the pilgrims were got over the Enchanted Ground, and entering into the country of Beulah, whose air was very sweet and pleasant,

Isaiah 62:4–12 You shall no more be termed Forsaken,
and your land shall no more be termed Desolate,
but you shall be called My Delight Is in Her,
and your land Married;
for the LORD delights in you,
and your land shall be married.
5 For as a young man marries a young woman,
so shall your sons marry you,
and as the bridegroom rejoices over the bride,
so shall your God rejoice over you.

6 On your walls, O Jerusalem,
I have set watchmen;
all the day and all the night
they shall never be silent.
You who put the LORD in remembrance,
take no rest,
7 and give him no rest
until he establishes Jerusalem
and makes it a praise in the earth.
8 The LORD has sworn by his right hand
and by his mighty arm:
“I will not again give your grain
to be food for your enemies,
and foreigners shall not drink your wine
for which you have labored;
9 but those who garner it shall eat it
and praise the LORD,
and those who gather it shall drink it
in the courts of my sanctuary.”

10 Go through, go through the gates;
prepare the way for the people;
build up, build up the highway;
clear it of stones;
lift up a signal over the peoples.
11 Behold, the LORD has proclaimed
to the end of the earth:
Say to the daughter of Zion,
“Behold, your salvation comes;
behold, his reward is with him,
and his recompense before him.”
12 And they shall be called The Holy People,
The Redeemed of the LORD;
and you shall be called Sought Out,
A City Not Forsaken.   ESV

Song 2:10–12 My beloved speaks and says to me:
“Arise, my love, my beautiful one,
and come away,
11 for behold, the winter is past;
the rain is over and gone.
12 The flowers appear on the earth,
the time of singing has come,
and the voice of the turtledove
is heard in our land.   ESV

the way lying directly through it, they solaced themselves there for a season. Yea, here they heard continually the singing of birds, and saw every day the flowers appear in the earth, and heard the voice of the turtle in the land. In this country the sun shineth night and day: wherefore this was beyond the Valley of the Shadow of Death, and also out of the reach of Giant Despair; neither could they from this place so much as see Doubting Castle. Here they were within sight of the city they were going to; also here met them some of the inhabitants thereof; for in this land the shining ones commonly walked, because it was upon the borders of heaven. In this land also the contract between the Bride and the Bridegroom was renewed; yea, here, “as the bridegroom rejoiceth over the bride, so doth God rejoice over them.” Here they had no want of corn and wine; for in this place they met with abundance of what they had sought for in all their pilgrimage. Here they heard voices from out of the city, loud voices, saying, “Say ye to the daughter of Zion, Behold, thy salvation cometh! Behold, his reward is with him!” Here all the inhabitants of the country called them “the holy People, the redeemed of the Lord, sought out,” etc.

     Now, as they walked in this land, they had more rejoicing than in parts more remote from the kingdom to which they were bound; and drawing near to the city, they had yet a more perfect view thereof: It was builded of pearls and precious stones, also the streets thereof were paved with gold; so that, by reason of the natural glory of the city, and the reflection of the sunbeams upon it, Christian with desire fell sick; Hopeful also had a fit or two of the same disease: wherefore here they lay by it a while, crying out because of their pangs, “If you see my Beloved, tell him that I am sick of love.”

     But, being a little strengthened, and better able to bear their sickness, they walked on their way, and came yet nearer and nearer, where were orchards, vineyards, and gardens, and their gates opened into the highway. Now, as they came up to these places, behold the gardener stood in the way; to whom the pilgrims said, Whose goodly vineyards and gardens are these? He answered, they are the King’s, and are planted here for his own delight, and also for the solace of pilgrims. So the gardener had them into the vineyards, and bid them refresh themselves with the dainties,

Deut. 23:24 “If you go into your neighbor’s vineyard, you may eat your fill of grapes, as many as you wish, but you shall not put any in your bag. 25 If you go into your neighbor’s standing grain, you may pluck the ears with your hand, but you shall not put a sickle to your neighbor’s standing grain.   ESV

he also showed them there the King’s walks and arbors where he delighted to be: And here they tarried and slept.

     Now I beheld in my dream, that they talked more in their sleep at this time than ever they did in all their journey; and, being in a muse thereabout, the gardener said even to me, Wherefore musest thou at the matter? It is the nature of the fruit of the grapes of these vineyards, “to go down so sweetly as to cause the lips of them that are asleep to speak.”

Song 7:and your mouth like the best wine.
She
It goes down smoothly for my beloved,
gliding over lips and teeth.   ESV

     So I saw that when they awoke, they addressed themselves to go up to the city. But, as I said, the reflection of the sun upon the city (for the city was pure gold,

Rev. 21:18 The wall was built of jasper, while the city was pure gold, like clear glass.   ESV

was so extremely glorious, that they could not as yet with open face behold it, but through an instrument made for that purpose.

2 Cor. 3:18 And we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another. For this comes from the Lord who is the Spirit.   ESV

So I saw, that as they went on, there met them two men in raiment that shone like gold, also their faces shone as the light.

     These men asked the pilgrims whence they came; and they told them. They also asked them where they had lodged, what difficulties and dangers, what comforts and pleasures, they had met with in the way; and they told them. Then said the men that met them, You have but two difficulties more to meet with, and then you are in the City.

     Christian then and his companion asked the men to go along with them: so they told them that they would; But, said they, you must obtain it by your own faith. So I saw in my dream, that they went on together till they came in sight of the gate.

     Now I further saw, that betwixt them and the gate was a river; but there was no bridge to go over, and the river was very deep. At the sight, therefore, of this river the pilgrims were much stunned; but the men that went with them said, You must go through, or you cannot come at the gate.

     The pilgrims then began to inquire if there was no other way to the gate. To which they answered, Yes; but there hath not any, save two, to wit, Enoch and Elijah, been permitted to tread that path since the foundation of the world, nor shall until the last trumpet shall sound. The pilgrims then, especially Christian, began to despond in their mind, and looked this way and that, but no way could be found by them by which they might escape the river. Then they asked the men if the waters were all of a depth. They said, No; yet they could not help them in that case; for, said they, you shall find it deeper or shallower as you believe in the King of the place.

     Then they addressed themselves to the water, and entering, Christian began to sink, and crying out to his good friend Hopeful, he said, I sink in deep waters; the billows go over my head; all his waves go over me. Selah.

     Then said the other, Be of good cheer, my brother: I feel the bottom, and it is good. Then said Christian, Ah! my friend, the sorrows of death have compassed me about, I shall not see the land that flows with milk and honey. And with that a great darkness and horror fell upon Christian, so that he could not see before him. Also here he in a great measure lost his senses, so that he could neither remember nor orderly talk of any of those sweet refreshments that he had met with in the way of his pilgrimage. But all the words that he spoke still tended to discover that he had horror of mind, and heart-fears that he should die in that river, and never obtain entrance in at the gate. Here also, as they that stood by perceived, he was much in the troublesome thoughts of the sins that he had committed, both since and before he began to be a pilgrim. It was also observed that he was troubled with apparitions of hobgoblins and evil spirits; for ever and anon he would intimate so much by words.

     Hopeful therefore here had much ado to keep his brother’s head above water; yea, sometimes he would be quite gone down, and then, ere a while, he would rise up again half dead. Hopeful did also endeavor to comfort him, saying, Brother, I see the gate, and men standing by to receive us; but Christian would answer, It is you, it is you they wait for; for you have been hopeful ever since I knew you. And so have you, said he to Christian. Ah, brother, (said he,) surely if I was right he would now arise to help me; but for my sins he hath brought me into the snare, and hath left me. Then said Hopeful, My brother, you have quite forgot the text where it is said of the wicked, “There are no bands in their death, but their strength is firm; they are not troubled as other men, neither are they plagued like other men.”

Psa. 73:4-5 For they have no pangs until death;
their bodies are fat and sleek.
5 They are not in trouble as others are;
they are not stricken like the rest of mankind.   ESV

These troubles and distresses that you go through in these waters, are no sign that God hath forsaken you; but are sent to try you, whether you will call to mind that which heretofore you have received of his goodness, and live upon him in your distresses.

     Then I saw in my dream, that Christian was in a muse a while. To whom also Hopeful added these words, Be of good cheer, Jesus Christ maketh thee whole. And with that Christian brake out with a loud voice, Oh, I see him again; and he tells me, “When thou passest through the waters, I will be with thee; and through the rivers, they shall not overflow thee.”

Isa. 43:2 When you pass through the waters, I will be with you;
and through the rivers, they shall not overwhelm you;
when you walk through fire you shall not be burned,
and the flame shall not consume you.   ESV

Then they both took courage, and the enemy was after that as still as a stone, until they were gone over. Christian, therefore, presently found ground to stand upon, and so it followed that the rest of the river was but shallow. Thus they got over.

     Now, upon the bank of the river, on the other side, they saw the two shining men again, who there waited for them. Wherefore, being come out of the river, they saluted them, saying, We are ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for those that shall be the heirs of salvation. Thus they went along towards the gate. Now you must note, that the city stood upon a mighty hill; but the pilgrims went up that hill with ease, because they had these two men to lead them up by the arms: they had likewise left their mortal garments behind them in the river; for though they went in with them, they came out without them. They therefore went up here with much agility and speed, though the foundation upon which the city was framed was higher than the clouds; they therefore went up through the region of the air, sweetly talking as they went, being comforted because they safely got over the river, and had such glorious companions to attend them.

     The talk that they had with the shining ones was about the glory of the place; who told them that the beauty and glory of it was inexpressible. There, said they, is “Mount Sion, the heavenly Jerusalem, the innumerable company of angels, and the spirits of just men made perfect.”

Heb. 12:22–24 22 But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to innumerable angels in festal gathering, 23 and to the assembly of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, 24 and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel.   ESV

You are going now, said they, to the paradise of God, wherein you shall see the tree of life, and eat of the never-fading fruits thereof: and when you come there you shall have white robes given you, and your walk and talk shall be every day with the King, even all the days of eternity.

Rev. 2: He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To the one who conquers I will grant to eat of the tree of life, which is in the paradise of God.’   ESV

Rev 3:4-5 4 Yet you have still a few names in Sardis, people who have not soiled their garments, and they will walk with me in white, for they are worthy. 5 The one who conquers will be clothed thus in white garments, and I will never blot his name out of the book of life. I will confess his name before my Father and before his angels.   ESV

Rev 22:5 And night will be no more. They will need no light of lamp or sun, for the Lord God will be their light, and they will reign forever and ever.   ESV

There you shall not see again such things as you saw when you were in the lower region upon earth; to wit, sorrow, sickness, affliction, and death; “For the former things are passed away.”

Rev. 21:4 He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away.”   ESV

You are going now to Abraham, to Isaac, and Jacob, and to the prophets, men that God hath taken away from the evil to come, and that are now “resting upon their beds, each one walking in his righteousness.” The men then asked, What must we do in the holy place? To whom it was answered, You must there receive the comfort of all your toil, and have joy for all your sorrow; you must reap what you have sown, even the fruit of all your prayers, and tears, and sufferings for the King by the way.

Gal. 6:7-8 7 Do not be deceived: God is not mocked, for whatever one sows, that will he also reap. 8 For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life.   ESV

In that place you must wear crowns of gold, and enjoy the perpetual sight and vision of the Holy One; for “there you shall see him as he is.”

1 John 3:2 Beloved, we are God’s children now, and what we will be has not yet appeared; but we know that when he appears we shall be like him, because we shall see him as he is.   ESV

There also you shall serve him continually with praise, with shouting and thanksgiving, whom you desired to serve in the world, though with much difficulty, because of the infirmity of your flesh. There your eyes shall be delighted with seeing, and your ears with hearing the pleasant voice of the Mighty One. There you shall enjoy your friends again that are gone thither before you; and there you shall with joy receive even every one that follows into the holy place after you. There also you shall be clothed with glory and majesty, and put into an equipage fit to ride out with the King of Glory. When he shall come with sound of trumpet in the clouds, as upon the wings of the wind, you shall come with him; and when he shall sit upon the throne of judgment, you shall sit by him; yea, and when he shall pass sentence upon all the workers of iniquity, let them be angels or men, you also shall have a voice in that judgment, because they were his and your enemies. Also, when he shall again return to the city, you shall go too with sound of trumpet, and be ever with him.

1 Thess. 4:14–17 14 For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep. 15 For this we declare to you by a word from the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16 For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord. 18 Therefore encourage one another with these words.   ESV

Jude 14-15 14 It was also about these that Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied, saying, “Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of his holy ones, 15 to execute judgment on all and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness that they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things that ungodly sinners have spoken against him.”   ESV

Dan. 7:9-10 9 “As I looked,
thrones were placed,
and the Ancient of Days took his seat;
his clothing was white as snow,
and the hair of his head like pure wool;
his throne was fiery flames;
its wheels were burning fire.
10 A stream of fire issued
and came out from before him;
a thousand thousands served him,
and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him;
the court sat in judgment,
and the books were opened.   ESV

1 Cor. 6:2-3 2 Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world is to be judged by you, are you incompetent to try trivial cases? 3 Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How much more, then, matters pertaining to this life!   ESV

     Now, while they were thus drawing towards the gate, behold a company of the heavenly host came out to meet them: to whom it was said by the other two shining ones, These are the men that have loved our Lord when they were in the world, and that have left all for his holy name; and he hath sent us to fetch them, and we have brought them thus far on their desired journey, that they may go in and look their Redeemer in the face with joy. Then the heavenly host gave a great shout, saying, “Blessed are they that are called to the marriage-supper of the Lamb.”

Rev. 19:9 And the angel said to me, “Write this: Blessed are those who are invited to the marriage supper of the Lamb.” And he said to me, “These are the true words of God.”   ESV

There came out also at this time to meet them several of the King’s trumpeters, clothed in white and shining raiment, who, with melodious noises and loud, made even the heavens to echo with their sound. These trumpeters saluted Christian and his fellow with ten thousand welcomes from the world; and this they did with shouting and sound of trumpet.

     Pilgrim's Progress (Illustrated): Updated, Modern English. More than 100 Illustrations.

The Continual Burnt Offering

By H.A. Ironside - 1941

February 17

Jesus, these eyes have never seen
That radiant form of Thine;
The veil of sense hangs dark between
Thy blessed face and mine.

I see Thee not, I hear Thee not,
Yet art Thou oft with me;
And earth hath ne’er so dear a spot
As where I meet with Thee.

Yet though I have not seen, and still
Must rest in faith alone;
I love Thee, dearest Lord, and will,
Unseen, but not unknown.

When death these mortal eyes shall seal,
And still this throbbing heart,
The rending veil shall Thee reveal,
All glorious as Thou art.
--- Ray Palmer

The Institutes of the Christian Religion

Translated by Henry Beveridge

     CHAPTER 16.

HOW CHRIST PERFORMED THE OFFICE OF REDEEMER IN PROCURING OUR SALVATION. THE DEATH, RESURRECTION, AND ASCENSION OF CHRIST.

This chapter contains four leading heads--I. A general consideration of the whole subject, including a discussion of a necessary question concerning the justice of God and his mercy in Christ, sec. 1-4. II. How Christ fulfilled the office of Redeemer in each of its parts, sec. 5-17. His death, burial, descent to hell, resurrection, ascension to heaven, seat at the right hand of the Father, and return to judgment. III. A great part of the Creed being here expounded, a statement is given of the view which ought to be taken of the Creed commonly ascribed to the Apostles, sec. 18. IV. Conclusion, setting forth the doctrine of Christ the Redeemer, and the use of the doctrine, sec. 19.

Sections.

1. Every thing needful for us exists in Christ. How it is to be obtained.

2. Question as to the mode of reconciling the justice with the mercy of God. Modes of expression used in Scripture to teach us how miserable our condition is without Christ.

3. Not used improperly; for God finds in us ground both of hatred and love.

4. This confirmed from passages of Scripture and from Augustine.

5. The second part of the chapter, treating of our redemption by Christ. First generally. Redemption extends to the whole course of our Saviour's obedience, but is specially ascribed to his death. The voluntary subjection of Christ. His agony. His condemnation before Pilate. Two things observable in his condemnation. 1. That he was numbered among transgressors. 2. That he was declared innocent by the judge. Use to be made of this.

6. Why Christ was crucified. This hidden doctrine typified in the Law, and completed by the Apostles and Prophets. In what sense Christ was made a curse for us. The cross of Christ connected with the shedding of his blood.

7. Of the death of Christ. Why he died. Advantages from his death. Of the burial of Christ. Advantages.

8. Of the descent into hell. This article gradually introduced into the Church. Must not be rejected, nor confounded with the previous article respecting burial.

9. Absurd exposition concerning the Limbus Patrum. This fable refuted.

10. The article of the descent to hell more accurately expounded. A great ground of comfort.

11. Confirmation of this exposition from passages of Scripture and the works of ancient Theologians. An objection refuted. Advantages of the doctrine.

12. Another objection that Christ is insulted, and despair ascribed to him in its being said that he feared. Answer, from the statements of the Evangelists, that he did fear, was troubled in spirit, amazed, and tempted in all respects as we are, yet without sin. Why Christ was pleased to become weak. His fear without sin. Refutation of another objection, with an answer to the question, Did Christ fear death, and why? When did Christ descend to hell, and how? What has been said refutes the heresy of Apollinaris and of the Monothelites.

13. Of the resurrection of Christ. The many advantages from it. 1. Our righteousness in the sight of God renewed and restored. 2. His life the basis of our life and hope, also the efficacious cause of new life in us. 3. The pledge of our future resurrection.

14. Of the ascension of Christ. Why he ascended. Advantages derived from it.

15. Of Christ's seat at the Father's right hand. What meant by it.

16. Many advantages from the ascension of Christ. 1. He gives access to the kingdom which Adam had shut up. 2. He intercedes for us with the Father. 3. His virtue being thence transfused into us, he works effectually in us for salvation.

17. Of the return of Christ to judgment. Its nature. The quick and dead who are to be judged. Passages apparently contradictory reconciled. Mode of judgment.

18. Advantages of the doctrine of Christ's return to judgment. Third part of the chapter, explaining the view to be taken of the Apostles' Creed. Summary of the Apostles' Creed.

19. Conclusion of the whole chapter, showing that in Christ the salvation of the elect in all its parts is comprehended.

1. All that we have hitherto said of Christ leads to this one result, that condemned, dead, and lost in ourselves, we must in him seek righteousness, deliverance, life and salvation, as we are taught by the celebrated words of Peter, "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved," (Acts 4:12). The name of Jesus was not given him at random, or fortuitously, or by the will of man, but was brought from heaven by an angel, as the herald of the supreme decree; [254] the reason also being added, "for he shall save his people from their sins," (Matt. 1:21). In these words attention should be paid to what we have elsewhere observed, that the office of Redeemer was assigned him in order that he might be our Saviour. Still, however, redemption would be defective if it did not conduct us by an uninterrupted progression to the final goal of safety. Therefore, the moment we turn aside from him in the minutest degree, salvation, which resides entirely in him, gradually disappears; so that all who do not rest in him voluntarily deprive themselves of all grace. The observation of Bernard well deserves to be remembered: The name of Jesus is not only light but food also, yea, oil, without which all the food of the soul is dry; salt, without which as a condiment whatever is set before us is insipid; in fine, honey in the mouth, melody in the ear, joy in the heart, and, at the same time, medicine; every discourse where this name is not heard is absurd (Bernard in Cantica., Serm. 15). But here it is necessary diligently to consider in what way we obtain salvation from him, that we may not only be persuaded that he is the author of it, but having embraced whatever is sufficient as a sure foundation of our faith, may eschew all that might make us waver. For seeing no man can descend into himself, and seriously consider what he is, without feeling that God is angry and at enmity with him, and therefore anxiously longing for the means of regaining his favour (this cannot be without satisfaction), the certainty here required is of no ordinary description,--sinners, until freed from guilt, being always liable to the wrath and curse of God, who, as he is a just judge, cannot permit his law to be violated with impunity, but is armed for vengeance.

2. But before we proceed farther, we must see in passing, how can it be said that God, who prevents us with his mercy, was our enemy until he was reconciled to us by Christ. For how could he have given us in his only-begotten Son a singular pledge of his love, if he had not previously embraced us with free favour? As there thus arises some appearance of contradiction, I will explain the difficulty. The mode in which the Spirit usually speaks in Scripture is, that God was the enemy of men until they were restored to favour by the death of Christ (Rom. 5:10); that they were cursed until their iniquity was expiated by the sacrifice of Christ (Gal. 3:10, 13); that they were separated from God, until by means of Christ's body they were received into union (Col. 1:21, 22). Such modes of expression are accommodated to our capacity, that we may the better understand how miserable and calamitous our condition is without Christ. For were it not said in clear terms, that Divine wrath, and vengeance, and eternal death, lay upon us, we should be less sensible of our wretchedness without the mercy of God, and less disposed to value the blessing of deliverance. For example, let a person be told, Had God at the time you were a sinner hated you, and cast you off as you deserved, horrible destruction must have been your doom; but spontaneously and of free indulgence he retained you in his favour, not suffering you to be estranged from him, and in this way rescued you from danger,--the person will indeed be affected, and made sensible in some degree how much he owes to the mercy of God. But again, let him be told, as Scripture teaches, that he was estranged from God by sin, an heir of wrath, exposed to the curse of eternal death, excluded from all hope of salvation, a complete alien from the blessing of God, the slave of Satan, captive under the yoke of sin; in fine, doomed to horrible destruction, and already involved in it; that then Christ interposed, took the punishment upon himself and bore what by the just judgment of God was impending over sinners; with his own blood expiated the sins which rendered them hateful to God, by this expiation satisfied and duly propitiated God the Father, by this intercession appeased his anger, on this basis founded peace between God and men, and by this tie secured the Divine benevolence toward them; will not these considerations move him the more deeply, the more strikingly they represent the greatness of the calamity from which he was delivered? In short, since our mind cannot lay hold of life through the mercy of God with sufficient eagerness, or receive it with becoming gratitude, unless previously impressed with fear of the Divine anger, and dismayed at the thought of eternal death, we are so instructed by divine truth, as to perceive that without Christ God is in a manner hostile to us, and has his arm raised for our destruction. Thus taught, we look to Christ alone for divine favour and paternal love.

3. Though this is said in accommodation to the weakness of our capacity, it is not said falsely. For God, who is perfect righteousness, cannot love the iniquity which he sees in all. All of us, therefore, have that within which deserves the hatred of God. Hence, in respect, first, of our corrupt nature; and, secondly, of the depraved conduct following upon it, we are all offensive to God, guilty in his sight, and by nature the children of hell. But as the Lord wills not to destroy in us that which is his own, he still finds something in us which in kindness he can love. For though it is by our own fault that we are sinners, we are still his creatures; though we have brought death upon ourselves he had created us for life. Thus, mere gratuitous love prompts him to receive us into favour. But if there is a perpetual and irreconcilable repugnance between righteousness and iniquity, so long as we remain sinners we cannot be completely received. Therefore, in order that all ground of offence may be removed, and he may completely reconcile us to himself, he, by means of the expiation set forth in the death of Christ, abolishes all the evil that is in us, so that we, formerly impure and unclean, now appear in his sight just and holy. Accordingly, God the Father, by his love, prevents and anticipates our reconciliation in Christ. Nay, it is because he first loves us, that he afterwards reconciles us to himself. But because the iniquity, which deserves the indignation of God, remains in us until the death of Christ comes to our aid, and that iniquity is in his sight accursed and condemned, we are not admitted to full and sure communion with God, unless, in so far as Christ unites us. And, therefore, if we would indulge the hope of having God placable and propitious to us, we must fix our eyes and minds on Christ alone, as it is to him alone it is owing that our sins, which necessarily provoked the wrath of God, are not imputed to us.

4. For this reason Paul says, that God "has blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ: according as he has chosen us in him before the foundation of the world," (Eph. 1:3, 4). These things are clear and conformable to Scripture, and admirably reconcile the passages in which it is said, that "God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son," (John 3:16); and yet that it was "when we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son," (Rom. 5:10). But to give additional assurance to those who require the authority of the ancient Church, I will quote a passage of Augustine to the same effect: "Incomprehensible and immutable is the love of God. For it was not after we were reconciled to him by the blood of his Son that he began to love us, but he loved us before the foundation of the world, that with his only begotten Son we too might be sons of God before we were any thing at all. Our being reconciled by the death of Christ must not be understood as if the Son reconciled us, in order that the Father, then hating, might begin to love us, but that we were reconciled to him already, loving, though at enmity with us because of sin. To the truth of both propositions we have the attestation of the Apostle, God commendeth his love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us,' (Rom. 5:8). Therefore he had this love towards us even when, exercising enmity towards him, we were the workers of iniquity. Accordingly in a manner wondrous and divine, he loved even when he hated us. For he hated us when we were such as he had not made us, and yet because our iniquity had not destroyed his work in every respect, he knew in regard to each one of us, both to hate what we had made, and love what he had made." Such are the words of Augustine (Tract in Jo. 110).

     Christian Classics Ethereal Library / Public Domain

     Institutes of the Christian Religion