Misreading the Bible because we are Western

By Scot McKnight 11/1/2012

     I speak, of course, only of Westerners. Ah-ha moments in Bible reading come to all of us, and perhaps you can remember one and tells us about it, but I can remember a few: when I realized the Bible’s writers and characters were ancient Jews and not modern American (Baptists), that they spoke Hebrew and Aramaic and Greek and Latin, that contemporary Jewish texts shed light constantly all over the Bible,  that Paul’s letters were written before the Gospels, that the Gospels grew over time, that Isaiah was not written by the same author all at once … and then there was the colossal realization that Western senses of self, freedom, and individualism just don’t compute with ancient Jewish, Greek or Roman perceptions. That our theological issues are not theirs. That those folks cared lots about purity — and purity doesn’t mean to us what it meant then. That capitalism was unknown to the Bible. That young adults didn’t fall in love, date, and then choose the one they wanted to marry. That marriage itself didn’t mean to them quite what it means to us. I could go on…

     What many of us have come to realize is that we get in the way at times when we are reading the Bible. That we impose, many times unintentionally and unconsciously, our world on the Bible and need to work at hearing the Bible in terms of the ancient world.

     What are your best lessons in Bible reading? What were some of your ah-ha moments? When did you realize the gulf or gap between our culture and the Bible’s culture? When did you learn, or how did you learn, the Bible was not American, or European, or Australian, or whatever your culture is?

     So I’ve got a book recommendation for you by E. Randolph Richards and Brandon J. O’Brien called Misreading Scripture with Western Eyes: Removing Cultural Blinders to Better Understand the Bible [if IVP can split infinitives I guess it doesn’t matter anymore?]. As I read through this book I kept asking myself if this was a 9-poster book or a one-poster and I’ve decided to keep it at one and hope you will consider purchasing it and using it in your own Bible reading.

     Scot McKnight is a recognized authority on the New Testament, early Christianity, and the historical Jesus. McKnight, author or editor of more than fifty books, is the Julius R. Mantey Professor of New Testament at Northern Seminary in Lombard, IL.  Dr. McKnight has given interviews on radios across the nation, has appeared on television, and is regularly speaks at local churches, conferences, colleges, and seminaries in the USA and abroad. Dr. McKnight obtained his Ph.D. at the University of Nottingham (1986) and has been a professor for more than three decades.

     Scot McKnight is a member of the Society of Biblical Literature and the Society for New Testament Studies. He is the author of the award-winning The Jesus Creed: Loving God, Loving Others, which won the Christianity Today book of the year for Christian Living. His books include Embracing Grace: A Gospel for All of Us, The Story of the Christ, Praying with the Church: Following Jesus Daily, Hourly, Today, The Real Mary: Why Evangelical Christians Can Embrace the Mother of Jesus, A Community Called Atonement (Living Theology). He broadened his Jesus Creed project in writing a daily devotional: 40 Days Living the Jesus Creed. His studies in conversion were expanded with his newest book, Finding Faith, Losing Faith: Stories of Conversion and Apostasy, a book he co-authored with his former student Hauna Ondrey. Other books are The Blue Parakeet: Rethinking How You Read the Bible and Fasting: The Ancient Practices, as well as A Fellowship of Differents: Showing the World God's Design for Life Together and Kingdom Conspiracy: Returning to the Radical Mission of the Local Church.

     McKnight wrote a commentary on James (The Letter of James (The New International Commentary on the New Testament)), a book on discipleship (One.Life: Jesus Calls, We Follow), and a Jesus Creed book for high school students (with Syler Thomas and Chris Folmsbee) called The Jesus Creed for Students: Loving God, Loving Others. His research on gospel was published in the Fall of 2011 in a book called The King Jesus Gospel: The Original Good News Revisited. Along with Joe Modica, McKnight co-edited Jesus Is Lord, Caesar Is Not: Evaluating Empire in New Testament Studies. Also he published an e-book affirming the importance of the doctrine of perseverance in a book called A Long Faithfulness: The Case for Christian Perseverance. His most recent commentary is Sermon on the Mount (The Story of God Bible Commentary). In the Fall of 2015 his book on heaven appeared: The Heaven Promise: Engaging the Bible's Truth About Life to Come, and he has a book appearing in 2017 The Hum of Angels: Listening for the Messengers of God Around Us.

     He co-wrote with his daughter a Jesus Creed book for children: Sharing God's Love: The Jesus Creed for Chldren.

     McKnight’s current projects is a commentary on Colossians (Eerdmans) as well as a book on the Holy Spirit.

     Other books include Who Do My Opponents Say That I Am?: An Investigation of the Accusations Against the Historical Jesus (The Library of New Testament Studies), Jesus and His Death: Historiography, the Historical Jesus, and Atonement Theory, Light Among the Gentiles: Jewish Missionary Activity in the Second Temple Period by Scot McKnight (1991-04-02), A New Vision for Israel: The Teachings of Jesus in National Context (Studying the Historical Jesus), Turning to Jesus: The Sociology of Conversion in the Gospels, Galatians (The NIV Application Commentary) and Galatians (The NIV Application Commentary), Interpreting the Synoptic Gospels (Guides to New Testament Exegesis), and he is a co-editor with J.B. Green and I.H. Marshall of the award-winning Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels (The IVP Bible Dictionary Series) as well as the co-editor, with J.D.G. Dunn, The Historical Jesus in Recent Research. He regularly contributes chapter length studies to dictionaries, encyclopedias, books and articles for magazines and online webzines. McKnight’s books have been translated into Chinese, Korean, Russian, and Portuguese.

     Scot McKnight was also ordained by Bishop Todd Hunter to the Diaconate in Churches for the Sake of Others, a segment of Anglican Churches of North America. He and Kris are active in their church, Church of the Redeemer.

     McKnight blogs at Jesus Creed.

     Scot McKnight was elected into the Hall of Honor at Cornerstone University in honor of his basketball accomplishments during his college career. He and his wife, Kristen, live in Libertyville, Illinois. They enjoy traveling, long walks, gardening, and cooking. They have two adult children, Laura (married to Mark Barringer) and Lukas (married to Annika Nelson), and two grandchildren: Aksel and Finley.

Misreading Scripture with Western Eyes

By Robert Letham 4/24/2013

     Randolph Richards, dean of the School of Ministry and professor of biblical studies at Palm Beach Atlantic University, and his former student, Brandon O’Brien, editor at large for Leadership Journal and a doctoral student at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, together address the problem of cultural self-awareness in readers of Scripture. This is a common problem in reading ancient texts or interpreting the work of others. Richards brings to the task years of experience as a missionary in Indonesia, where cultural norms and mores are often radically different than in the West. The main thesis of Misreading Scripture with Western Eyes is that those living in Western societies are frequently blind to the cultural nuances those living in other cultures take for granted. As a result, Westerners may often miss the point of a biblical passage, whether narrative or didactic. In its tone and contents Misreading Scripture with Western Eyes: Removing Cultural Blinders to Better Understand the Bible is addressed largely, though not necessarily exclusively, to a lay readership living in the United States. It’s intended to enable readers to understand themselves in their cultural differences as a prelude to approaching and reading the biblical text.

     Richards and O’Brien identify nine areas where interpretive problems commonly arise. Some cultural differences are obvious, others lurk beneath the surface, while a third class is extremely difficult to detect and thus poses the greatest danger to the reader of Scripture. The point is that most of these differences go unsaid, being implicit rather than clearly expressed. The first group, explained in chapters one to three, consists of cultural mores, the copious scriptural references to race and ethnicity in Scripture—with the overtones and undertones conveyed to the original readers—and varying significance given to different literary genres. In the second group, Richards and O’Brien contrast the rampant individualism of American society with the corporate and collectivist cultures that prevail in the East. They devote a chapter to the honor-shame nature of the Oriental world in contrast to the dominance of individual conscience and guilt in the West (following Augustine). Indeed, there are radical differences between the two worlds. In the final section, attention turns to the prominence of rules in the West vis-à-vis relationships in the East, to the concepts of virtue and vice, and to a Western obsession with individual, personal relevance that assumes Scripture was written directly to and for me.

     There is much in Misreading Scripture with Western Eyes that will be of value to its intended readership, and its main purpose is both necessary and laudable. If it succeeds in convincing persons that, in order to grasp what Scripture is saying to our generation, we must first uncover what it said to its original readers, then it will have achieved a great gain. Moreover, there are a number of insights that make a valuable contribution. The chapter on race and ethnicity is a case in point; the divisions in Corinth may have arisen, it is proposed, from these factors, with Alexandrian Jews looking to Apollos, Aramaic speakers lining up behind Cephas (note: not Peter!), and others being ethnic Corinthians. Richards and O’Brien’s treatment of individualism is also likely to be of value in a culture to which the corporate categories of both the Old and New Testaments are alien. Talk of sin and salvation as a matter of being in Adam or in Christ doesn’t drip readily off American preachers’ lips, nor does the household nature of covenantal administration fit the rugged individualism of the frontier.

     At the same time, however, there are a number of significant weaknesses. I shall pinpoint four main areas.

     Robert Letham is a lecturer in systematic and historical theology at Wales Evangelical School of Theology in Bridgend, Wales.

How Significant Books Become Good Friends

By Richard Foster 5/1/2017

     Writing this article was spiritually dangerous for me, for underlying such a task was the subtle but persistent temptation to impress rather than to help. (And I am not at all sure I have successfully avoided that temptation.)

     When, however, I realized the assignment was not actually to list “My Choice of Books” but to honestly record the books that have profoundly influenced my life, the temptation lost its power, for while I wish I could tell you how deeply influenced I was as a child by reading Dostoyevsky and Tolstoy, Shakespeare and Milton, such was not the case. So I will share simply something of the pilgrimage of my mind and soul.

     Soon after my conversion as a teenager, I was particularly drawn to the Book of Romans, which I studied for two years. I read the rest of the Bible too, but always I came back to Romans. Why? I’m not sure except that a youth pastor encouraged me. It wasn’t stuffy and academic to me as it was to some—to the contrary, every verse seemed to throb with intensity and fire. It worked theology into me more profoundly than anything before or since.

     As a college student I wanted to understand what a life of faith and prayer looked like in practice. Hudson Taylor’s Spiritual Secret best represents those years of seeking. Taylor’s life and faith moved me profoundly. Shadow of the Almighty was another book that helped me immensely—I read it perhaps twelve times in those years, memorizing several passages. Biographies of Adoniram Judson, C. T. Studd, George Muller, William Carey, David Livingstone, Francis Asbury, and David Brainerd all helped to flesh out the meaning of faith.

     About Richard Foster

Books by Richard Foster
Celebration of Discipline: The Path To Spiritual Growth
Prayer: Finding the Heart's True Home
Spiritual Classics: Selected Readings on the Twelve Spiritual Disciplines
Freedom of Simplicity: Finding Harmony in a Complex World
Life with God: Reading the Bible for Spiritual Transformation
Sanctuary of the Soul: Journey into Meditative Prayer
The Challenge of the Disciplined Life: Christian Reflections on Money, Sex, and Power
Prayers from the Heart
Prayer: Finding the Heart's True Home
Longing for God: Seven Paths of Christian Devotion (Renovare Resources)
Money, Sex and Power

How Do We Understand and Reach Generation Z?

By Sean McDowell 2/2/2017

     For the past few months I have been reading every study I can find on Generation Z, (those born between 1995-2010). With the help of a graduate student who did some research for me, I found over 350 pages of research on Gen Z, which took me dozens of hours to carefully digest.

     But then last week I came across Meet Generation Z, by James Emery White. Had I found this book earlier, it would have saved me a ton of time! It is an easy-to-read, documented, and insightful look at how to understand and reach the newest generation of students.

     Here are three interesting cultural insights that White notes before delving into some specifics of Generation Z. They help provide some of the backdrop for understanding young people today:

1. Theological controversies of the past included Christology, the Holy Spirit, revelation and more, but the big issue today is the doctrine of humanity (in light of human cloning, transsexualism, and stem cell research).
2. The heart of secularism is functional atheism, which is not rejecting God, but simply ignoring Him.
3. Of the 85 percent of American adults who were raised Christian, nearly a quarter no longer identify with Christianity.

Sean McDowell, Ph.D. is a professor of Christian Apologetics at Biola University, a best-selling author of over 18 books, an internationally recognized speaker, a part-time high school teacher, and the Resident Scholar for Summit, California. Follow him on Twitter: @sean_mcdowell and his blog: seanmcdowell.org.Books By Sean McDowell

Books By Sean McDowell

Is God Just a Human Invention? And Seventeen Other Questions Raised by the New Atheists
A New Kind of Apologist: *Adopting Fresh Strategies *Addressing the Latest Issues *Engaging the Culture
The Beauty of Intolerance: Setting a Generation Free to Know Truth and Love
Same-Sex Marriage: A Thoughtful Approach to God's Design for Marriage (Thoughtful Response)
ETHIX: Being Bold in a Whatever World
More Than a Carpenter

Read The Psalms In "1" Year

Psalm 46

1 God is our refuge and strength,
a very present help in trouble.
2 Therefore we will not fear though the earth gives way,
though the mountains be moved into the heart of the sea,
3 though its waters roar and foam,
though the mountains tremble at its swelling. Selah

4 There is a river whose streams make glad the city of God,
the holy habitation of the Most High.
5 God is in the midst of her; she shall not be moved;
God will help her when morning dawns.
6 The nations rage, the kingdoms totter;
he utters his voice, the earth melts.
7 The LORD of hosts is with us;
the God of Jacob is our fortress. Selah

Are All Sins Equal to God?

By Michael Patton 1/23/2017

     During my ordination, one of the questions that I was asked by a seminary professor was “Are all sins equal in the sight of God?” I hesitated. Not because I did not have a strong opinion on this, but because I was not sure what the answer was that he was looking for. Are all sins equal in the sight of God? My ordination may have depended on the answer.

     It is very common within popular evangelicalism to answer this question in the affirmative. This was one of the main assumptions in a book that I just recommended last week. Most find this theological concept very appealing and accept it, I am afraid to say, without doing much homework.

     I think this tendency to assume that all sins are equal in the sight of God comes by means of three influences.

     1) A reaction by Protestants against the Roman Catholic distinction between mortal sins (sins that kill justifying grace) and venial sin (sins of a lesser nature that do not kill justifying grace).
     2) A tendency within our evangelistic church culture to express common ground with unbelievers—i.e., if all sins are equal in God’s sight, then your sin is not worse than any other. This way we are not coming across as judgmental or condescending.
     3) Some biblical passages that have been interpreted in such a way (discussed below).

     I don’t believe, however, that all sin is equal in God’s sight. I believe that telling people all sins are equal to God does serious damage to people’s understanding of the character of God and of the seriousness of sins. There are many reasons for this, but let me start with a reductio ad absurdum and them move to a biblical argument.

A Practical Test

A Biblical Test

Proverbs 6:16-19 There are six things that the LORD hates,
seven that are an abomination to him:
17 haughty eyes, a lying tongue,
and hands that shed innocent blood,
18 a heart that devises wicked plans,
feet that make haste to run to evil,
19 a false witness who breathes out lies,
and one who sows discord among brothers.   ESV

Why Do Some Christians Believe that All Sins Are Equal

The Absurdity of Such Thinking

A Better Way to Put It

• Stand to Reason
• Michael Kruger
• J. I. Packer
• John Piper
• Sean McDowell
• R.C. Sproul

     About Michael Patton | Th.M. Dallas Theological Seminar, president of Credo House Ministries, best latte maker at Credo House (when I am the only one working), author of Now that I'm a Christian (Crossway, 2014) Increase My Faith (Credo House, 2011), and The Theology Program (Reclaiming the Mind Ministries, 2001-2006), and primary blogger here at Parchment and Pen. But, most importantly, husband to a beautiful wife and father to four awesome children.

Did Jesus Get “This Generation” Wrong?

By Nate Sala 2/20/2017

     “What answer would you guys give to those who question Matt 24:34 and say, ‘See? They’re dead, it’s not real!’ I know that even C.S. Lewis struggled with it and while I’ve been studying this, the best rebuttals I’ve seen would be ‘translation’ because some say ‘…this age’ or ‘…this people’. Or, to interpret it as Jesus speaking to ‘the last generation’ before his return. However, I think most skeptics would shrug off those explanations. I mean, I would if I were a skeptic. I’d be like, ‘Really? That’s all you got?’ So, I was curious, what do you guys think about Matt 24:34 and what’s the best way to defend it?” – Misty Callahan

     Nate: Hi Misty! Thanks very much for the question and the opportunity to respond. The passage you’re referring to is in the Olivet Discourse where Jesus is talking about the signs of His coming and the end of the age. In v. 34 he concludes His prophetic descriptions with:

     “TRULY I SAY TO YOU, THIS GENERATION WILL NOT PASS AWAY UNTIL ALL THESE THINGS TAKE PLACE.” \ So then the obvious question arises: Who is the generation? As you pointed out, C.S. Lewis struggled with this passage. As a matter of fact, he called it the most embarrassing verse in the Bible because, taken in a straightforward sense, it appears that Jesus is making a prophecy that is applicable only to the generation alive in His day. But the generation Jesus was speaking to is long dead now and He has not physically returned yet. So what’s the deal with that??

     I’m not sure if C.S. Lewis was aware of this but there are different schools of thought when it comes to the Olivet Discourse and the Book of Revelation. Laying all of them out would be a task in and of itself. I’m just going to give a brief explanation and sketch of how I understand Jesus in this passage. I take the preterist position[1] that Jesus was speaking to His original hearers about the coming destruction of the temple in Jerusalem. Therefore, the answer to the skeptic here is that there is no problem with an unfulfilled prophecy. It’s already been fulfilled.

     English and Forensics Teacher. B.Sc., M.Ed. University of Nevada Las Vegas. Lives in Las Vegas with his wife, two sons, and dogs.

What Will You Do When the End Comes?

By John Piper 8/30/2016

     “An appalling and horrible thing
     “has happened in the land:
     “the prophets prophesy falsely,
     “and the priests rule at their direction;
     “my people love to have it so,
     “but what will you do when the end comes? (Jeremiah 5:30–31)

     This is a plea that pastors, evangelists, teachers, parents, and friends warn those they love that, if they do not repent, they will be speechless, helpless, and hopeless when the end comes.

     I say this as a Christian Hedonist — as one who believes, down to his toenails, that joyless compliance with God’s commands is useless in the last day — that without satisfaction in God himself, all repentance is vain.

     For there is no such thing as repentance without satisfaction in God. This is the essence of sin — being more satisfied with anything above God (Romans 1:23). Joyless repentance is an oxymoron, because the sin we must repent from is finding little joy in God.

     What was this “appalling and horrible thing” that Jeremiah said had happened in the land? “Prophets prophesy falsely.” Priests fall in line with the falsehood. And the people “love to have it so.” They love it — love it.

     John Piper is founder and teacher of desiringGod.org and chancellor of Bethlehem College & Seminary. For 33 years, he served as pastor of Bethlehem Baptist Church, Minneapolis, Minnesota. He is author of more than 50 books, including Reading the Bible Supernaturally: Seeing and Savoring the Glory of God in Scripture.

Come, Lord Jesus

By Matthew Westerholm 4/17/2016

     “I recently compared two large selections of worship songs. The first was the most commonly sung congregational songs in the United States since the year 2000; the second was the most commonly published congregational songs from 1730–1850. Among many similarities, one difference was striking: Our churches no longer sing about Christ’s second coming as much as we used to.

     Perhaps this makes some sense. Among other things, it can be embarrassing to Christians when people publically conjecture regarding the time of Christ’s return. Their speculation begins with certainty on a precise date, but ends with ridicule on the local news.

     Jesus himself warned us against this type of conjecture (Mark 13:32; Acts 1:7). The apostle Paul warned that Christ’s return wasn’t a topic for speculation, but for preparation (Romans 13:11–12). But Paul also disapproved of a reactionary stance that minimized the believer’s longing for Christ’s second coming.

     Encourage One Another | In his letter to the church in Thessalonica, Paul instructs believers concerning the return of Christ, the resurrection of deceased believers, and the reunion of all believers with the King. He concludes, “Therefore encourage one another with these words” (1 Thessalonians 4:18).

     Christians ought to encourage each other with words and songs about Christ’s return. One easy way to be encouraged by the reality of Christ’s return is found at the end of the Bible. It is a four-word prayer in Revelation 22:20 that ought to regularly be on the lips of every follower of Jesus — and a theme to restore to its rightful place in our corporate worship: “Amen. Come, Lord Jesus.”

     Matthew Westerholm (@mwesterholm) serves at Bethlehem Baptist Church as a pastor for worship and music. He lives in Minneapolis with his wife and three sons.

The Closing Ceremonies and the End of History

By Ed Uszynski 2/22/2014

     “The opening and closing ceremonies of the Olympic Games have become events themselves, bookends to the highly anticipated competitions they bracket. Given the estimated billion people who watched both the Beijing and London opening ceremonies, the pre- and post- event spectacles arguably attract larger followings than the competitions themselves.

     During these non-competitive portions of the games, we experience national pride in our “home team” combined with the collective joy that accompanies a veritable international carnival, along with the aura of seemingly indestructible confidence radiating from human bodies at their physical peak. As delivered through our televisions, everyone gathered in the stadium appears to be friends, and once again we’re reminded of the humanistic spirit behind the modern Olympics — the creation of the “why can’t we all just get along?” vibe that arrives the moment the first team enters the venue.

     Is This the True Peace? | The five interlocking rings which brand each Olympic gathering contain symbolism toward this noble goal of world peace, “represent[ing] the union of the five continents and the meeting of athletes from throughout the world at the Olympic games.” For athletes from Africa, the Americas, Asia, Europe, and Oceana, the two-week window of competition attempts to temporarily transcend the social and political realities facing them at home, offering a “union” that illustrates the humanistic hope of a life lived in peace under the global sun.

     Occasionally, however, even amid heavily armed security — its presence alone an ironic counter to the pretense of a manufactured global peace — social and political turmoil still force their way into the Olympic narrative. Recalling as examples the tragedies of the 1972 Israeli murders in Munich, the 1996 park bombing in Atlanta, and the mutual boycotting of the games by the United States and the USSR in 1980 and 1984, we are reminded that the message of peace created by sporting events and choreographed harmony is a constantly frustrated mirage, a hope that cannot be satisfied in this life.

     The Day Is Coming | Nevertheless, the ceremonies offer a beautiful, yet distorted, shadow of another envisioned spectacle, where the nations gather together once again and the hope of peace is finally and fully realized. The writer of Revelation describes a reoccurring futuristic scene, saying,

     Ed Uszynski Ed Uszynski (PhD in American Culture Studies) works with Athletes in Action, the sport ministry of Cru, and is an elder at Emmanuel Baptist Church in Xenia, Ohio. He and his wife, Amy, have four children. He works out his salvation as a long-suffering fan of Cleveland sports teams.

Numbers 14

By Don Carson 5/6/2018

     Another day thinking about rebellion — this time the rebellion displayed by the people at Kedesh Barnea, when they forfeited the opportunity to enter the Promised Land because of their sin (Num. 14).

     (1) Just as in the previous chapter the ten spies who gave a negative report were responsible for discouraging the people, so the people are responsible to decide to whom they will give heed. They simply go with the majority. If they had adhered to the covenant to which they had pledged themselves, if they had remembered what God had already done for them, they would have sided with Caleb and Joshua. Those who side with the majority voice and not with the word of God are always wrong and are courting disaster.

     (2) To doubt the covenantal faithfulness of God, not the least his ability and his will to save his own people and to do what he has said he will do, is to treat God with contempt (14:11, 23). Virtually all perpetual grumbling partakes of such contempt. This is a great evil.

     (3) People often hide their own lack of faith, their blatant unbelief, by erecting a pious front. Here they express their concern that their wives and children will be taken as plunder (14:3). Instead of admitting they are scared to death and turning to God for help, implicitly they blame God for being less concerned for their wives and children than they are themselves.

     (4) The punishment exacted therefore precisely suits the crime: that adult generation, with a couple of exceptions, dies out in the desert before their children (the very children about whom they profess such concern) inherit the land almost forty years later (14:20-35).

     (5) There is a kind of repentance that grieves over past failures but is not resolved to submit to the word of God. The Israelites grieve — and decide to take over the Promised Land, even though God has now told them not to attempt it, since he will no longer be their bulwark and strength. Moses rightly sees that this is nothing other than further disobedience (14:41). Inevitably they are beaten up for their pains (14:44-45).

     These five characteristics of this terrible rebellion are not unknown today: a popular adherence to majority religious opinion with very little concern to know and obey the word of God, an indifferent dismissal of God with contempt stemming from rank unbelief, pious excuses that mask fear and unbelief, temporal judgments that kill any possibility of courageous Christian work, and a faulty and superficial “repentance” that leaves a meeting determined to make things right, and yet is still unwilling to listen to the Word of God and obey him. God help us all.

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).

By Gleason Archer Jr.

Habakkuk

     The name Ḥabaqquq is an unusual one of uncertain meaning; possibly it signified ardent embrace, from ḥabaq, “embrace” (Eiselen in ISBE). Some have suggested that it was the name of a garden plant which the Assyrians called ḫambaqūqu, but which cannot as yet be identified.

     The theme of this prophecy concerns the problems of faith in the face of apparent difficulties hindering the fulfillment of God’s promises. These difficulties are grappled with and solved in the light of God’s continuing revelation, and the prophet closes in a psalm of joyous trust.

Outline of  Habakkuk

I. Problems of faith,  1:1–2:20

     A. How can a holy God permit unholiness to go unchecked?  1:1–12
          1. Oppression unchecked in Judah,  1:2–5
          2. The Chaldeans as God’s scourge,  1:6–12
     B. How can God permit a wicked nation to triumph over His covenant people?  1:13–2:20
          1. Ruthless cruelty and crass idolatry of the Chaldeans,  1:13–17
          2. The believer to wait humbly, trustingly for God’s answer,  2:1–4
          3. Judgment of God will smite the Chaldeans because of their five sins,  2:5–9
          4. God’s continued sovereignty over His earth,  2:20

II. Doubts all settled: the prayer of faith and unshakable trust,  3:1–19

     A. Prayer for revival,  3:1–2
     B. Past judgments of the Lord a sure token for the future,  3:3–16
     C. The believer’s joy in God alone, assured of vindication of God’s holiness,  3:17–19

Habakkuk: Authorship and Time of Composition

     Habakkuk seems to have performed his ministry in the reign of Jehoiakim, since the Chaldeans are mentioned as already well known and of formidable reputation ( 1:6–10 ). This would best agree with a time subsequent to the fall of Nineveh in 612, and perhaps even after Nebuchadnezzar had achieved his triumph at the battle of Carchemish in 605. It is fair to conclude that the prediction of the Chaldean subjugation of Palestine was intended for fairly speedy fulfillment. (Whether it referred to Nebuchadnezzar’s first invasion in 605 or the second invasion in 597, it is hard to say.)  Habakkuk 1:2–4 points to an outbreak of rapacious exploitation of the poor on the part of the Judean nobility; this might imply a time after the death of Josiah (609). It is therefore reasonable to conclude that  Habakkuk delivered his message somewhere around 608 or 607 B.C.

     Some critics are disinclined to refer  1:2–4 to native Jewish oppressors, but prefer to identify them with the Egyptians (thus dating it at 608, during the brief ascendancy of Necho) or even with the Assyrians (which would make it prior to 612, or perhaps as early as the reign of Ashurbanipal, who died in 626). But there is no good evidence in the text of  1:2–4 that heathen invaders are referred to; the manipulation of the law courts to favor the wealthy points to a domestic evil between Jewish litigants ( 1:4 ).

     Some critics feel that the material in chapters  1 and  2 has been rearranged by a later editor, even though a pre-exilic  Habakkuk may have been the author of each portion. But liberal critics uniformly challenge his authorship of chapter  3 on the ground that it is a psalm rather than a prophetic utterance, and that it mentions musical terms in its first and last verses. On these grounds Pfeiffer dates this chapter in the fourth or third century B.C. But such an argument assumes the validity of the supposition that the musical terms in the Davidic  Psalms are late, and that despite  Amos 6:5 and similar references, King David had nothing to do with music or song, since he was a man of war. But for those who take seriously the biblical tradition that David was very much concerned with the writing and singing of psalms, such musical terms constitute no evidence of late authorship. Nor is there any compelling reason why a prophet would have been incapable of composing a psalm of thanksgiving and praise to the Lord. Large portions of the prophetic writings are highly poetic in character, as the critics themselves are swift to point out.

     Some scholars have made much of the fact that the  Habakkuk Commentary from the First Qumran Cave omits the third chapter. Millar Burrows, however, remarks: “Its absence from the scroll is consistent with this theory, but does not prove it. It does not even prove that the  third chapter was unknown to the Judean covenanters. Being a psalm, it does not lend itself to a prophetic pesher as readily as the earlier chapters. It is even possible that the Commentary was never finished. The Septuagint has all three chapters, but whether this particular part of the Septuagint is older than the  Habakkuk Commentary is another question.” The  Habakkuk pesher from Qumran Cave One does in fact include a sizable space for a column of text which was never written out.

Message of Habakkuk

A Survey of Old Testament Introduction

The Continual Burnt Offering (Daniel 7:27)

By H.A. Ironside - 1941

May 6

Daniel 7:27  And the kingdom and the dominion
and the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven
shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High;
his kingdom shall be an everlasting kingdom,
and all dominions shall serve and obey him.’   ESV

Daniel 7:14  And to him was given dominion
and glory and a kingdom,
that all peoples, nations, and languages
should serve him;
his dominion is an everlasting dominion,
which shall not pass away,
and his kingdom one
that shall not be destroyed.

Jesus shall reign where’er the sun
Does his successive journeys run;
His kingdom stretch from shore to shore,
Till moons shall wax and wane no more.
--- Isaac Watts

The Institutes of the Christian Religion

Translated by Henry Beveridge

     CHAPTER 24.

ELECTION CONFIRMED BY THE CALLING OF GOD. THE REPROBATE BRING UPON THEMSELVES THE RIGHTEOUS DESTRUCTION TO WHICH THEY ARE DOOMED.

The title of this chapter shows that it consists of two parts,--I. The case of the Elect, from sec. 1-11. II. The case of the Reprobate, from sec. 12-17.

Sections.

1. The election of God is secret, but is manifested by effectual calling. The nature of this effectual calling. How election and effectual calling are founded on the free mercy of God. A cavil of certain expositors refuted by the words of Augustine. An exception disposed of.

2. Calling proved to be free, 1. By its nature and the mode in which it is dispensed. 2. By the word of God. 3. By the calling of Abraham, the father of the faithful. 4. By the testimony of John. 5. By the example of those who have been called.

3. The pure doctrine of the calling of the elect misunderstood, 1. By those who attribute too much to the human will. 2. By those who make election dependent on faith. This error amply refuted.

4. In this and the five following sections the certainty of election vindicated from the assaults of Satan. The leading arguments are:1. Effectual calling. 2. Christ apprehended by faith. 3. The protection of Christ, the guardian of the elect. We must not attempt to penetrate to the hidden recesses of the divine wisdom, in order to learn what is decreed with regard to us at the judgment-seat. We must begin and end with the call of God. This confirmed by an apposite saying of Bernard.

5. Christ the foundation of this calling and election. He who does not lean on him alone cannot be certain of his election. He is the faithful interpreter of the eternal counsel in regard to our salvation.

6. Another security of our election is the protection of Christ our Shepherd. How it is manifested to us. Objection 1. As to the future state. 2. As to perseverance. Both objections refuted.

7. Objection, that those who seem elected sometimes fall away. Answer. A passage of Paul dissuading us from security explained. The kind of fear required in the elect.

8. Explanation of the saying, that many are called, but few chosen. A twofold call.

9. Explanation of the passage, that none is lost but the son of perdition. Refutation of an objection to the certainty of election.

10. Explanation of the passages urged against the certainty of election. Examples by which some attempt to prove that the seed of election is sown in the hearts of the elect from their very birth. Answer. 1. One or two examples do not make the rule. 2. This view opposed to Scripture. 3. Is expressly opposed by an apostle.

11. An explanation and confirmation of the third answer.

12. Second part of the chapter, which treats of the reprobate. Some of them God deprives of the opportunity of hearing his word. Others he blinds and stupefies the more by the preaching of it.

13. Of this no other account can be given than that the reprobate are vessels fitted for destruction. This confirmed by the case of the elect; of Pharaoh and of the Jewish people both before and after the manifestation of Christ.

14. Question, Why does God blind the reprobate? Two answers. These confirmed by different passages of Scripture. Objection of the reprobate. Answer.

15. Objection to this doctrine of the righteous rejection of the reprobate. The first founded on a passage in Ezekiel. The passage explained.

16. A second objection founded on a passage in Paul. The apostle's meaning explained. A third objection and fourth objection answered.

17. A fifth objection--viz. that there seems to be a twofold will in God. Answer. Other objections and answers. Conclusion.

1. But that the subject may be more fully illustrated, we must treat both of the calling of the elect, and of the blinding and hardening of the ungodly. The former I have already in some measure discussed (chap. 22, sec. 10, 11), when refuting the error of those who think that the general terms in which the promises are made place the whole human race on a level. The special election which otherwise would remain hidden in God, he at length manifests by his calling. "For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son." Moreover, "whom he did predestinate, them he also called; and whom he called, them he also justified," that he may one day glorify (Rom. 8:29, 30). Though the Lord, by electing his people, adopted them as his sons, we, however, see that they do not come into possession of this great good until they are called; but when called, the enjoyment of their election is in some measure communicated to them. For which reason the Spirit which they receive is termed by Paul both the "Spirit of adoption," and the "seal" and "earnest" of the future inheritance; because by his testimony he confirms and seals the certainty of future adoption on their hearts. For although the preaching of the gospel springs from the fountain of election, yet being common to them with the reprobate, it would not be in itself a solid proof. God, however, teaches his elect effectually when he brings them to faith, as we formerly quoted from the words of our Savior, "Not that any man has seen the Father, save he which is of God, he has seen the Father," (John 6:46). Again, "I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world," (John 17:6). He says in another passage, "No man can come to me, except the Father which has sent me draw him," (John 6:44). This passage Augustine ably expounds in these words: "If (as Truth says) every one who has learned comes, then every one who does not come has not learned. It does not therefore follow that he who can come does come, unless he have willed and done it; but every one who has learned of the Father, not only can come, but also comes; the antecedence of possibility [504] the affection of will, and the effect of action being now present," (August. de Grat. Chr. Cont. Pelag., Lib. 1, c. 14, 31). In another passage, he says still more clearly, "What means, Every one that has heard and learned of the Father comes unto me, but just that there is no one who hears and learns of the Father that does not come to me? For if every one who has heard and learned, comes; assuredly every one who does not come, has neither heard nor learned of the Father: for if he had heard and learned, he would come. Far removed from carnal sense is this school in which the Father is heard and teaches us to come to the Son," (August. de Prædes. Sanct. c. 8). Shortly after, he says, "This grace, which is secretly imparted to the hearts of men, is not received by any hard heart; for the reason for which it is given is, that the hardness of the heart may first be taken away. Hence, when the Father is heard within, he takes away the stony heart, and gives a heart of flesh. Thus he makes them sons of promise and vessels of mercy, which he has prepared for glory. Why then does he not teach all to come to Christ, but just because all whom he teaches he teaches in mercy, while those whom he teaches not he teaches not in judgment? for he pities whom he will, and hardens whom he will." Those, therefore, whom God has chosen he adopts as sons, while he becomes to them a Father. By calling, moreover, he admits them to his family, and unites them to himself, that they may be one with him. When calling is thus added to election, the Scripture plainly intimates that nothing is to be looked for in it but the free mercy of God. For if we ask whom it is he calls, and for what reason, he answers, it is those whom he had chosen. When we come to election, mercy alone everywhere appears; and, accordingly, in this the saying of Paul is truly realized, "So then, it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy," (Rom. 9:16); and that not as is commonly understood by those who share the result between the grace of God and the will and agency of man. For their exposition is, that the desire and endeavor of sinners are of no avail by themselves, unless accompanied by the grace of God, but that when aided by his blessing, they also do their part in procuring salvation. This cavil I prefer refuting in the words of Augustine rather than my own: "If all that the apostle meant is, that it is not alone of him that willeth, or of him that runneth, unless the Lord be present in mercy, we may retort and hold the converse, that it is not of mercy alone, unless willing and running be present," (August. Enchir. ad Laurent., c. 31). But if this is manifestly impious, let us have no doubt that the apostle attributes all to the mercy of the Lord, and leaves nothing to our wills or exertions. Such were the sentiments of that holy man. I set not the value of a straw on the subtlety to which they have recourse--viz. that Paul would not have spoken thus had there not been some will and effort on our part. For he considered not what might be in man; but seeing that certain persons ascribed a part of salvation to the industry of man, he simply condemned their error in the former clause, and then claimed the whole substance of salvation for the divine mercy. And what else do the prophets than perpetually proclaim the free calling of God?

2. Moreover, this is clearly demonstrated by the nature and dispensation of calling, which consists not merely of the preaching of the word, but also of the illumination of the Spirit. Who those are to whom God offers his word is explained by the prophet, "I am sought of them that asked not for me: I am found of them that sought me not: I said, Behold me, behold me, unto a nation that was not called by my name," (Isaiah 65:1). And lest the Jews should think that that mercy applied only to the Gentiles, he calls to their remembrance whence it was he took their father Abraham when he condescended to be his friend (Isaiah 41:8); namely, from the midst of idolatry, in which he was plunged with all his people. When he first shines with the light of his word on the undeserving, he gives a sufficiently clear proof of his free goodness. Here, therefore, boundless goodness is displayed, but not so as to bring all to salvation, since a heavier judgment awaits the reprobate for rejecting the evidence of his love. God also, to display his own glory, withholds from them the effectual agency of his Spirit. Therefore, this inward calling is an infallible pledge of salvation. Hence the words of John, "Hereby we know that he abideth in us by the Spirit which he has given us," (1 John 3:24). And lest the flesh should glory, in at least responding to him, when he calls and spontaneously offers himself, he affirms that there would be no ears to hear, no eyes to see, did not he give them. And he acts not according to the gratitude of each, but according to his election. Of this you have a striking example in Luke, when the Jews and Gentiles in common heard the discourse of Paul and Barnabas. Though they were all instructed in the same word, it is said, that "as many as were ordained to eternal life believed," (Acts 13:48). How can we deny that calling is gratuitous, when election alone reigns in it even to its conclusion?

3. Two errors are here to be avoided. Some make man a fellow-worker with God in such a sense, that man's suffrage ratifies election, so that, according to them, the will of man is superior to the counsel of God. As if Scripture taught that only the power of being able to believe is given us, and not rather faith itself. Others, although they do not so much impair the grace of the Holy Spirit, yet, induced by what means I know not, make election dependent on faith, as if it were doubtful and ineffectual till confirmed by faith. There can be no doubt, indeed, that in regard to us it is so confirmed. Moreover, we have already seen, that the secret counsel of God, which lay concealed, is thus brought to light, by this nothing more being understood than that that which was unknown is proved, and as it were sealed. But it is false to say that election is then only effectual after we have embraced the gospel, and that it thence derives its vigor. It is true that we must there look for its certainty, because, if we attempt to penetrate to the secret ordination of God, we shall be engulfed in that profound abyss. But when the Lord has manifested it to us, we must ascend higher in order that the effect may not bury the cause. For what can be more absurd and unbecoming, than while Scripture teaches that we are illuminated as God has chosen us, our eyes should be so dazzled with the brightness of this light, as to refuse to attend to election? Meanwhile, I deny not that, in order to be assured of our salvation, we must begin with the word, and that our confidence ought to go no farther than the word when we invoke God the Father. For some to obtain more certainty of the counsel of God (which is nigh us in our mouth, and in our heart, Deut. 30:14), absurdly desire to fly above the clouds. We must, therefore, curb that temerity by the soberness of faith, and be satisfied to have God as the witness of his hidden grace in the external word; provided always that the channel in which the water flows, and out of which we may freely drink, does not prevent us from paying due honor to the fountain.

4. Therefore as those are in error who make the power of election dependent on the faith by which we perceive that we are elected, so we shall follow the best order, if, in seeking the certainty of our election, we cleave to those posterior signs which are sure attestations to it. Among the temptations with which Satan assaults believers, none is greater or more perilous, than when disquieting them with doubts as to their election, he at the same time stimulates them with a depraved desire of inquiring after it out of the proper way. (See Luther in Genes. cap. 26). By inquiring out of the proper way, I mean when puny man endeavors to penetrate to the hidden recesses of the divine wisdom, and goes back even to the remotest eternity, in order that he may understand what final determination God has made with regard to him. In this way he plunges headlong into an immense abyss, involves himself in numberless inextricable snares, and buries himself in the thickest darkness. For it is right that the stupidity of the human mind should be punished with fearful destruction, whenever it attempts to rise in its own strength to the height of divine wisdom. And this temptation is the more fatal, that it is the temptation to which of all others almost all of us are most prone. For there is scarcely a mind in which the thought does not sometimes rise, Whence your salvation but from the election of God? But what proof have you of your election? When once this thought has taken possession of any individual, it keeps him perpetually miserable, subjects him to dire torment, or throws him into a state of complete stupor. I cannot wish a stronger proof of the depraved ideas, which men of this description form of predestination, than experience itself furnishes, since the mind cannot be infected by a more pestilential error than that which disturbs the conscience, and deprives it of peace and tranquillity in regard to God. Therefore, as we dread shipwreck, we must avoid this rock, which is fatal to every one who strikes upon it. And though the discussion of predestination is regarded as a perilous sea, yet in sailing over it the navigation is calm and safe, nay pleasant, provided we do not voluntarily court danger. For as a fatal abyss engulfs those who, to be assured of their election, pry into the eternal counsel of God without the word, yet those who investigate it rightly, and in the order in which it is exhibited in the word, reap from it rich fruits of consolation.

Let our method of inquiry then be, to begin with the calling of God and to end with it. Although there is nothing in this to prevent believers from feeling that the blessings which they daily receive from the hand of God originate in that secret adoption, as they themselves express it in Isaiah, "Thou hast done wonderful things; thy counsels of old are faithfulness and truth," (Isa. 25:1). For with this as a pledge, God is pleased to assure us of as much of his counsel as can be lawfully known. But lest any should think that testimony weak, let us consider what clearness and certainty it gives us. On this subject there is an apposite passage in Bernard. After speaking of the reprobate, he says, "The purpose of God stands, the sentence of peace on those that fear him also stands, a sentence concealing their bad and recompensing their good qualities; so that, in a wondrous manner, not only their good but their bad qualities work together for good. Who will lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is completely sufficient for my justification to have him propitious against whom only I have sinned. Every thing which he has decreed not to impute to me, is as if it had never been." A little after he says, "O the place of true rest, a place which I consider not unworthy of the name of inner-chamber, where God is seen, not as if disturbed with anger, or distracted by care, but where his will is proved to be good, and acceptable, and perfect. That vision does not terrify but soothe, does not excite restless curiosity but calms it, does not fatigue but tranquilizes the senses. Here is true rest. A tranquil God tranquilizes all things; and to see him at rest, is to be at rest," (Bernard, super Cantic. Serm. 14).

5. First, if we seek for the paternal mercy and favor of God, we must turn our eyes to Christ, in whom alone the Father is well pleased (Mt. 3:17). When we seek for salvation, life, and a blessed immortality, to him also must we retake ourselves, since he alone is the fountain of life and the anchor of salvation, and the heir of the kingdom of heaven. Then what is the end of election, but just that, being adopted as sons by the heavenly Father, we may by his favor obtain salvation and immortality? How much soever you may speculate and discuss you will perceive that in its ultimate object it goes no farther. Hence, those whom God has adopted as sons, he is said to have elected, not in themselves, but in Christ Jesus (Eph. 1:4); because he could love them only in him, and only as being previously made partakers with him, honor them with the inheritance of his kingdom. But if we are elected in him, we cannot find the certainty of our election in ourselves; and not even in God the Father, if we look at him apart from the Son. Christ, then, is the mirror in which we ought, and in which, without deception, we may contemplate our election. For since it is into his body that the Father has decreed to ingraft those whom from eternity he wished to be his, that he may regard as sons all whom he acknowledges to be his members, if we are in communion with Christ, we have proof sufficiently clear and strong that we are written in the Book of Life. Moreover, he admitted us to sure communion with himself, when, by the preaching of the gospel, he declared that he was given us by the Father, to be ours with all his blessings (Rom. 8:32). We are said to be clothed with him, to be one with him, that we may live, because he himself lives. The doctrine is often repeated, "God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life," (John 3:16). He who believes in him is said to have passed from death unto life (John 5:24). In this sense he calls himself the bread of life, of which if a man eat, he shall never die (John 6:35). He, I say, was our witness, that all by whom he is received in faith will be regarded by our heavenly Father as sons. If we long for more than to be regarded as sons of God and heirs, we must ascend above Christ. But if this is our final goal, how infatuated is it to seek out of him what we have already obtained in him, and can only find in him? Besides, as he is the Eternal Wisdom, the Immutable Truth, the Determinate Counsel of the Father, there is no room for fear that any thing which he tells us will vary in the minutest degree from that will of the Father after which we inquire. Nay, rather he faithfully discloses it to us as it was from the beginning, and always will be. The practical influence of this doctrine ought also to be exhibited in our prayers. For though a belief of our election animates us to involve God, yet when we frame our prayers, it were preposterous to obtrude it upon God, or to stipulate in this way, "O Lord, if I am elected, hear me." He would have us to rest satisfied with his promises, and not to inquire elsewhere whether or not he is disposed to hear us. We shall thus be disentangled from many snares, if we know how to make a right use of what is rightly written; but let us not inconsiderately wrest it to purposes different from that to which it ought to be confined.

6. Another confirmation tending to establish our confidence is, that our election is connected with our calling. For those whom Christ enlightens with the knowledge of his name, and admits into the bosom of his Church, he is said to take under his guardianship and protection. All whom he thus receives are said to be committed and entrusted to him by the Father, that they may be kept unto life eternal. What would we have? Christ proclaims aloud that all whom the Father is pleased to save he has delivered into his protection (John 6:37-39, 17:6, 12). Therefore, if we would know whether God cares for our salvation, let us ask whether he has committed us to Christ, whom he has appointed to be the only Savior of all his people. Then, if we doubt whether we are received into the protection of Christ, he obviates the doubt when he spontaneously offers himself as our Shepherd, and declares that we are of the number of his sheep if we hear his voice (John 10:3, 16). Let us, therefore, embrace Christ, who is kindly offered to us, and comes forth to meet us: he will number us among his flock, and keep us within his fold. But anxiety arises as to our future state. [505] For as Paul teaches, that those are called who were previously elected, so our Savior shows that many are called, but few chosen (Mt. 22:14). Nay, even Paul himself dissuades us from security, when he says, "Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall," (1 Cor. 10:12). And again, "Well, because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not high-minded, but fear: for if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee," (Rom. 11:20, 21). In fine, we are sufficiently taught by experience itself, that calling and faith are of little value without perseverance, which, however, is not the gift of all. But Christ has freed us from anxiety on this head; for the following promises undoubtedly have respect to the future: "All that the Father giveth me shall come to me, and him that comes to me I will in no wise cast out." Again, "This is the will of him that sent me, that of all which he has given me I should lose nothing; but should raise it up at the last day," (John 6:37, 39). Again "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: and I give unto them eternal life, and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father which gave them me is greater than all: and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand," (John 10:27, 28). Again, when he declares, "Every plant which my heavenly Father has not planted shall be rooted up," (Mt. 15:13), he intimates conversely that those who have their root in God can never be deprived of their salvation. Agreeable to this are the words of John, "If they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us," (1 John 2:19). Hence, also, the magnificent triumph of Paul over life and death, things present, and things to come (Rom. 8:38). This must be founded on the gift of perseverance. There is no doubt that he employs the sentiment as applicable to all the elect. Paul elsewhere says, "Being confident of this very thing, that he who has begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ," (Phil. 1:6). David, also, when his faith threatened to fail, leant on this support, "Forsake not the works of thy hands." Moreover, it cannot be doubted, that since Christ prays for all the elect, he asks the same thing for them as he asked for Peter--viz. that their faith fail not (Luke 22:32). Hence we infer, that there is no danger of their falling away, since the Son of God, who asks that their piety may prove constant, never meets with a refusal. What then did our Savior intend to teach us by this prayer, but just to confide, that whenever we are his our eternal salvation is secure?

     Christian Classics Ethereal Library / Public Domain      Institutes of the Christian Religion