Author Archives: preacherwin
Sing a Psalm to God
“Sing a song to Him; sing a psalm to Him!
Speak loudly of all His miraculous works!”
(Psalm 105:2)
How shall we praise God? One of the most fundamental ways to do so is to sing to Him of his wonderful, or miraculous works. Those who object to Christian faith see this as an indication that God is needy, like a self-conscious child that needs people to offer empty platitudes to tell him that he has done well. With God, though, this could not be further from the truth.
No, we sing of God’s miraculous works not to make God feel better; we sing of God’s miraculous works for two primary reasons. The first is a reminder that we are paying attention to the works that God is doing and that we are giving Him His due. Thus, when we see something miraculous, we do not count it as a matter of chance or unexplainable providence; we see His hand at work. The second reason we sing of God’s miraculous works is that it reminds us of who we are worshipping. Sometimes it is easy to fall into a trap of going through the motions in our worship (both public and private). Sometimes it is easy to despair when things just don’t seem to be going the way they ought. But, when we engage in worship and remind ourselves of these works of God, we remember who He is and ought to be made more confident in what we have been called to do. As Asaph writes, he despaired until he came into the sanctuary of the Lord (Psalm 73:17). Worship has a remarkable way of putting things into perspective — giving us a heavenly perspective.
Commonly, English translations of the first portion of this verse will render the text: “sing to Him; sing praises to Him.” While that is a perfectly legitimate translation, in our text here, I wanted to highlight something taking place within the language. In Hebrew, there are many words that can be translated as “sing” or “sing praises,” which is a testimony to the importance of singing in worship — God commands it! Yet, some words are present to help us understand what we ought to be singing when we gather in worship.
In the Greek translation of the Hebrew psalter, there are three general categories of psalms that can be found: psalms, hymns, and odes. Some of the psalms are one or the other (see, for instance, Psalms 4, 5, and 6 are respectively described as a song, a psalm, and a hymn. Some psalms fill multiple categories. For instance, Psalms 66 and 75 are described as “a Psalm, a Hymn, and an Ode.”
How does this help us to understand our text? In the first portion of the first line, the Hebrew word שׂיר (siyr) is used. This is the verbal form of the Hebrew word that is translated as an “ode” or a “song.” In the second half of the first line we see the Hebrew word זמר (zamar) being used. Again we have a verbal root, but this time it is the Hebrew wroot for the word we translate as “psalm.” What is the implication of this? Hebrew uses parallel ideas to add force or clarification to what has been previously stated. So, what is conveyed, David is saying, “sing a song to God! What kind of song? Sing Him a Psalm.” Even the final clause is helpful to understand the full thrust of the command. “What kind of Psalm? One that tells of His mighty deeds!”
David is ushering a command in these words: sing psalms that tell of God’s power and might. They put life in perspective (we are small and God is mighty!). They also give you confidence when you see the wicked prospering (at least in a worldly sense). God is enthroned on high; we should worship like it! Further, this psalm will give us an example of exactly what that looks like.
Honor God
“Show favor to Yahweh, call in His name!
Make known to the peoples His deeds!”
(Psalm 105:1)
Psalm 105 is a psalm of praise to God for all He has done. In the Greek translation of the Old Testament, it is what is called an “Alleluia Psalm” and is clearly the basis for the festival hymn found in 1 Chronicles 16, which joins this psalm along with Psalm 96, which dates this psalm back to the Davidic reign. Often, people ask me, “Why not sing some of the other songs found in the Bible?” Yet, given that these other songs have commonly either been drawn from a psalm or are the basis for a psalm, why bother when the psalms serve the same purpose?
This is one of nine psalms (9,75,105,106,107,111,118,136,138) that begins with the word ידה (yadah), which, in the Hiphil stem, means to show favor or honor to someone (typically to God). Thus, this is a psalm of praise to be sung by the people to show their love and honor to God. And, what is the content of this psalm? The mighty works of God. In other words, one of the ways in which we show honor to God is by honoring His works, praising Him for his good providence, and worshipping Him for His faithfulness to His covenant.
But, you will notice something. It is not just that the people of God are to praise God for His works. The people of God are to call out to the peoples of the earth — to the pagan nations — and call upon them to praise God for His works. Even though the wicked, the reprobate, those dammed to eternal destruction, have no hope of grace, it is good and proper for them to give God honor for His faithfulness to us — to His people. This is a theme that we find throughout the psalms (Psalm 117 is a good example), but it is also something that should shake our practice in life.
Thus, the Christian can say to the idolater, “You should honor my God. My God has been faithful throughout the generations and your god can do nothing. So, repent and believe, but also praise Him. And praise Him even if you never repent and believe!” It is a gutsy way of speaking in our modern culture, but we basically are saying that the one we worship has been faithful to us; has the one you worship been faithful to you? In the end, false gods will always leave you wanting and lost. The God of creation will deliver His elect. The rest, He leaves to their own condemnation. He leaves them under His own wrath to demonstrate His power (Romans 9:22-23).
So, give God glory and honor by telling those you meet of the great and faithful deeds of our God.
Kings and Magistrates
“In the mornings I will bring to ruin all the wicked in the land,
To cut off from the city of God all who make a practice of iniquity.”
(Psalm 101:8)
What is the role of the King? What is the role of a magistrate? Biblically, their role can be summed up by the notion of rewarding those who live righteously and punishing those who are wicked (2 Peter 2:14; Romans 13:3-4). How does one do that? One of the ways that one does so is that he works to bring ruin to the wicked in the land.
One of the reasons that God hates corrupt judges so much is that they fail to do just this (Proverbs 24:23-25; Deuteronomy 27:25). Thus, as we look around our own land, how God must be burning with rage over how many of our judges, governors, and magistrates abuse the law for their own gain and ambition. People pursue an agenda that benefits themselves, their party, and their power, often ignoring the people they have been called to serve.
Worse yet is when the Elders, essentially human magistrates in the church, use their position to preserve their own influence or establish their personal agenda in the life of the church. How rarely we see men leading with Peter’s instruction before them, to exercise oversight without compulsion (1 Peter 5:2). At best, those of us who serve in such a capacity are under-shepherds, serving in the name of the Great Shepherd, Jesus Christ. He will call us to account and we will be he will hold us doubly accountable for how we have handled our responsibility.
The final words of this psalm speak of a practice that is altogether rare in the church of Jesus Christ — that is: excommunication. What shall he leaders do with the wicked who refuse to repent? In the end, the answer is to remove them from the body so that they do not infect others with their sin. And so, just as in ancient times, those who practice iniquity will be cut off from the blessings and protections of the city (as well as the central worship in the temple), so too, those who practice iniquity should be cut off from the means of grace and corporate worship. This is the heart of what Jesus teaches in Matthew 18:15-20. Truly, the goal of church discipline is the repentance of the sinner, but it is also for the preservation of the “weaker brother,” who might be drawn into the sin the wicked practice.
Such was Solomon’s job. Such was the job of the king. The historical records demonstrate how poorly the kings and judges practiced Solomon’s counsel. To what end? God cut them off from the land through exile. Yet, what will happen in the church when they fail to submit to and practice God’s law? Jesus’ words to the church in Ephesus should have a particular sting as he warned that their lamp stand will be removed from its place (Revelation 2:5). In other words, they too will be cut off from the land. How many churches fall into that category today, who make themselves arbiters and kings rather than submitting to the Kingship of Christ?
False Witness in our Midst
“No one who dwells in the midst of my house shall practice deceit or utter lies.
No such one shall be fixed before my eyes.”
(Psalm 101:7)
How commonly do we take for granted the notion that people will lie to us? In addition, how commonly do we dismiss it? Too often, we permit lies in our midst because they seem easier or perhaps because we don’t want to feel bad about our own lies. And, sometimes, we are guilty not only of lying to our children, family members, employees, etc…, but we are also guilty of lying to ourselves.
Yet, for the man who would govern his home wisely, for the man who would genuinely meditate on the mercy and justice of God, lying must not be tolerated. It violates the ninth commandment, which is condemnable in its own right. In addition, it violates the trust given to us. As we mentioned before, many have seen this psalm as David’s instructions to the magistrates. If our judges tolerate lies, justice will quickly flee from the courtrooms.
As I view the state of our own legal system in America as well as the system of politics that uses the legal system for their own gain, I think that all involved need to hear these words of King David. We must not tolerate lies in the midst of our houses of government on any level. We must not tolerate judges and other officials in the courts of law to lie or manipulate the truth for their own gain. Yet, that will mean little if we also cannot eliminate lying from our homes and from our churches. Will you covenant with me to never lie and never tolerate a lie in your presence? This, indeed, is where it must begin.
The Path that is Perfect
“My eyes are on the faithful of the land who dwell with me:
Those who walk in the path that is perfect.
They will continually serve me.”
(Psalm 101:6)
In contrast to those who are worthless and who slander, which David will destroy, David says that he will gather to himself those who are faithful. What constitutes faithfulness? The second line of this verse exists to explain the first. The faithful are those whose walk — their life and their practice — is on the path that is perfect. Note, faithfulness does not require perfection. None but God is perfect and lives with perfect righteousness. No, the path may be perfect, we will only walk on it imperfectly. The question, though, is whether we are walking on that path!
What is that path, then? It is a path defined by obedience to the word of God. Our salvation may be a work of God’s complete and infinite grace to us, but we demonstrate our gratitude to God by being faithful to walk on the path that He has laid before us in His word. To walk a path is like following directions on a map. It requires that one be intentional and careful to not be led astray from the path laid before you. God’s Word lays down that path. The question is whether or not we are striving to live according to the path laid out before us by God. Typically, we prefer to make our own way. But our own way is not God’s way.
What will David do with people who walk this perfect path? He will draw these people to himself as ministers and servants. The term that David employs here is שָׁרֵת (sharath). What is interesting is that this word is used in three contexts in the Bible. The first deals with those who are servants and ministers of the King in an official sense. The second deals with those who fulfill a priestly function. The third are those who serve God in an official capacity. Here, then, we find a parallel. Who does David call to serve as his ministers and servants? Those who are faithful. Likewise, who does it please God to use in His service? Those who are faithful and who walk on the path that is perfect. It should give us all pause to examine the path that we allow our feet to tread.
I will not Tolerate this!
“Those slandering their neighbor in secret,
I will silence —
Those with an arrogant eye and a greedy heart.
I will not tolerate.”
(Psalm 101:5)
The structure of this verse is a little irregular. Ordinarily, we would expect to see a couplet where the second half of the couplet either compliments or reinforces the first half. At first glance, when translated in English, this verse seems to carry that same structure. The problem is that when one looks at the ancient Hebrew, something a little different is seen. In this case, Hebrew verses contain a series of accent marks. Some tell you how to pronounce words, others tell you how words group together (for public reading).
The “atnack” is an accent mark that indicates where the logical center of the verse happens to be. In other words, this accent tells you where the idea break is between the parallel ideas. In this case, the atnack falls after the word “heart.” That breaks up the parallel nature of the verse. One must be clear that the system of accents found in the Old Testament is not part of the inspired text, yet they are one of the most ancient tools in place to help preserve the integrity of the Hebrew text. So, the question remains, then, why this irregular placement of the accent? To some degree, we are entering into speculation as we cannot go back and ask David specifically why he structured the verse as he did. At the same time, in poetry, whenever changes from a set form are made, they are typically used to set off and emphasize an idea…namely the final idea in the verse: “I will not tolerate.”
If we presume that David is emphasizing the last clause, then we can interpret the first clause as a kind of heightening of his anger at those who practice injustice (remember, David is pondering God’s justice and mercy). What injustice does he most condemn here? He condemns those who slander their neighbor in secret. Why does he hate such injustice? It is because such injustice stems from a person whose eye is arrogant and whose heart is greedy. If we read the text in that way, with the third line being the formal cause of the first line, then we can see a certain degree of unity in all three initial lines that leads up to David’s final declaration that he will not tolerate this.
As King, David functioned not only as the primary leader of the armies, but he was also the supreme judge of the people, applying the law of God to questions that were set before him. The ancient Hebrews referred to this psalm as “the Mirror for Magistrates” and Luther similarly referred to this psalm as “David’s Mirror for Magistrates.” How does a judge look into the mirror to examine his heart? The judge must do so by looking at his judgments. Indeed, every Christian can and should do the same as we examine the actions we have taken.
A few other notes of interest. I have translated the second line: “I will silence.” Many of our English Bibles will render this as “I will destroy.” While destroy (or bring to ruin) is the most common rendering of the word צָמֵת (tsamat), the term communicates the notion that the object of destruction will no longer be able to commit the actions that caused them to be under wrath. In the context of the passage, then, to silence the tongues of such people is the notion being communicated, hence my choice of terms.
Finally, we arrive at the last line, which is the thrust of David’s statement. Literally it renders: “I am not able.” In Hebrew, the idea of ability conveys not just the notion of ability to participate in an action, but it also communicates the inability to comprehend (or justify) said action. David is essentially stating that there is no excuse for secret slandering and he will not hear anyone’s vain attempt to do so. In a world that is marked by excuses for everything under the sun, King David’s words are a welcome reminder that there is no place in the life of a believer for such things. The Greater David, our Lord Jesus Christ, makes it clear: slandering defiles the person and makes one impure (Mark 7:20-23). Indeed, such is and has always been the Law of God (Leviticus 19:16).
The Twisted Heart
“A twisted heart will be separated from me;
Evil, I will not know.”
(Psalm 101:4)
Of what is David speaking when he speaks of a “twisted” heart? In Hebrew, the notion of עִקֵּשׁ (‘iqqesh), or twisted, is used to describe those who are corrupt (Deuteronomy 32:5), unjust (Isaiah 59:8), and devious (Proverbs 2:15). A man with a twisted heart will not discover what is good (Proverbs 17:20) and is an abomination to the Lord (Proverbs 11:20). Indeed, as Solomon would later write:
Better is a poor person who walks in his honesty
Than one who is twisted of lip [speech] and is a fool.
(Proverbs 19:1)
Never once does the Bible state anything positive about one whose life is twisted. Yet, notice what David says. He does not simply say that he will avoid those whose hearts are twisted. He states that a twisted heart will be removed from him. In other words, David recognizes the twisted nature of his own heart and that one of the benefits of meditating on the justice and mercy of God is that the twisted heart he has will be restrained and, little by little, removed from his life.
It is often easy to point to the twisted hearts of others. Yet, how often our own hearts remain twisted in ways or with respect to certain sins to which we cling. The heart is deceitful above all things, Jeremiah writes (Jeremiah 17:9) and it is incurable (at least by Human medicine). Hence, we do not allow our hearts to lead our paths. We ask that God guides our souls and instructs our minds in the things that are righteous, just, and true that we might not be an abomination to Him. Then, when the twisted heart is rejected, we will also strive also to reject the knowledge of evil.
One must confess, though, that we live in a twisted generation…and thus, in a generation that is an abomination to God. Unrighteousness is not only practiced, it is flaunted and evil is made the plaything of children and the source of entertainment. What shall a young man do to keep his way pure (see Psalm 119:9)? In this case, David says to meditate and ponder the character of God — ponder His justice that will be poured out against the wicked and ponder His mercy which has been given to you.
Useless Men
“I will not set my eyes upon anything that is useless.
The work of transgressors I hate;
It will not cling to me.”
(Psalm 101:3)
To begin with, some clarity needs to be given to the language of setting your eyes on a thing. The psalmist is not saying that he will never see something that is useless. That would be impossible to control as useless things are often thrust in our face while we are unaware. Who can control a casual glance? What David is stating is that he will never fix his attention on things that are worthless. He will never ponder such things. He will never give his eyes over to the study of such useless things. Why? He is preoccupied with the things of God. The point is simple; one of the best ways to control our actions and thoughts so we can focus on eternal things is to control what we give our attention to.
But of what does David speak when he mentions “useless” things? The Hebrew word in question is בְלִיַּעַל (beliyya’al). In Hebrew, it means to be “good for nothing” or to be prone to mischief and evildoing. It refers to things or people that are nothing but troublemakers. For instance, the sons of Eli were referred to as “worthless men” because they abused the power of their priestly position for their own ends (1 Samuel 2:12). When Jezebel sought to steal Naboth’s vineyard for her husband, she hired worthless men to condemn him of cursing God and the king (1 Kings 21:10). At the end of his life, David would later say that such worthless men are like thorns to be thrown away (2 Samuel 23:6).
By the time we get to the Greek New Testament, בְלִיַּעַל (beliyya’al) had taken on a life of its own, as it were, and was often personified as a demon. Hence we get the word Βελιάρ (Beliar), which is most commonly translated as Belial (see 2 Corinthians 6:15). So, the demonic symbol of unbelief derives from the notion of that which is worthless and good for nothing. Indeed, much of the destruction and perversion of society can be attributed to unbelief. David is committing that he will guard his eyes from contemplating anything that would lead to such worthless destruction.
What is the result of keeping guard against unbelief? He hates the work of sinners — or he hates the work done in sin. Paul will write that whatever does not proceed from faith is sin (Romans 14:23). The corollary to that, then, is that we should hate all works that do not an cannot proceed from faith. Yet, how often do we allow ourselves to be given to such matters? And, what is the result? The work of the wicked tends to stick to us, at least metaphorically. In our contemporary age, we sometimes use the phrase: “garbage in — garbage out.” If we consistently feed our lives with worldly things, our lives will develop a worldly character. If we set our attention on worthless things, we will grow worthless. Yet, if we set our minds on the things of God, we will grow in godliness. David says that he will meditate on the things of God so that he does not become like the worthless men who bring nothing but destruction.
Preoccupied with the Eternal
“I will contemplate the path that is perfect;
When will you come to me?
I will go about with purity of heart in the midst of my house.”
(Psalm 102:2)
So how does the believer live? What does he love and what does he hate? David begins with the profound statement that he will contemplate the path that is perfect. The Hebrew word used in this context is שָׂכַל (sakal), which means to ponder something, to meditate upon an idea, or to gain insight from it. Whose way is perfect? Indeed, that belongs to God and to God alone. And thus, he is saying to us much the same as is Paul in Romans 12:2, when he speaks of learning to discern the will of God: “What is good and acceptable and perfect.”
That may sound good to our ears, but the real question is as to whether we really strive to do this as Christians. We are bombarded by the thoughts of the world and our attention is often drawn to things earthly rather than to eternal things. Indeed, we do have obligations and responsibilities in this world, but it is very easy for us to let priority be given to the temporal. David is saying “no” to this kind of thinking. Instead of going about life thinking on worldly responsibilities (and David had many), we should be going about life thinking about eternal matters. Instead of taking a break from worldly things to think about God (worship, Bible study, etc…), we should spend the majority of our energy thinking about the Eternal One.
That does not mean that we shirk our temporal and physical responsibilities. What it does mean is that when we are laboring to fulfill our earthly duties, we always do so from an eternal perspective. And, when we have time to rest, rest in thoughts of the eternal. We should have an eternal preoccupation that governs our work, our pleasure, our rest, our worship — that governs the entirety of our lives. Too often people come to church expecting the service to meet their needs; but church is not about our needs. It is about God’s glory (for He needs nothing). Church is only properly understood when we approach it as one preoccupied with God and His will. Yet, such is also true for the entirety of our existence. It only makes sense from a Divine perspective, not from a human one. So, contemplate the path that is perfect and, as the psalmist concludes this verse, strive to live it out in all that you do.
The language of this verse is designed to take your mind back to Deuteronomy 6:4-9. How are we to express the reality that we belong to God? We are to love Him with the totality of our being? What does this look like? We talk of God when we are in the house and when we are on our way, when we are at work and when we are at rest, we write his Word down and set it before our eyes so that we might not forget it and we order our steps so that we may obey His commands. We contemplate it in our hearts in the midst of our homes (with the implication that such contemplations will guide and affect all who dwell in our homes.
There is one little clause in this verse that causes consternation amongst some of the commentators. What does David mean when he writes: “When will you come to me?” It seems somewhat out of place when it comes to the line of thought in the first and last portion of this verse. Commonly, commentators connect these words with a plea for deliverance from his enemies. While there is great truth in that, I think that remembering that this psalm was written by David helps us to understand more deeply what he is crying out with these words.
Theologians often like to use the Latin phrase Athanasius Contra Mundum (Athanasius against the world) to describe the period of time when Athanasius stood alone defending the divinity of Christ against the Arians who had taken power in the church. At one point, Athenasius wrote: “If the world be against the truth then I will be against the world.” It was a period of time when he could only have found solace in the words of our Lord: “If the world hates you, know that it hated me before it hated you” (John 15:18).
If one could speak of Athenasius as being against the world, one certainly can apply that phrase to David. The surrounding nations opposed him; the descendants of Saul opposed him, members of his own family opposed him. He spent much of his life on the run in fear for his life. He penned numerous psalms during these times of crisis, trusting in God to deliver him. Yet, it is not just deliverance that David sought from God. It was comfort. And we see this in psalm after psalm, but the words of Psalm 27:4 drive the notion home in a familiar way:
“One thing I have asked from Yahweh —
This I continually seek:
That I may dwell in the house of Yahweh all the days of my life
And to gaze with pleasure on the kindness of Yahweh
And to study his temple.”
Remember, David was not a priest and the physical temple had yet to be built. Thus these are not words of a hope found in the physical world, but in the presence of God eternally.
David’s understood that without the nearness of God we cannot cope in this world and we cannot stand against the waves of foes that our enemies will launch in our direction. He understood that God’s closeness is our only source of strength and hope for tomorrow. David was a man after God’s own heart (1 Samuel 13:14) because he was truly a man preoccupied with God. Shall we not do the same?
Singing of the Mercy and Justice of God
“A Psalm of David.
Of mercy and justice I will sing;
To you, Yahweh,
I will continually sing praises.”
(Psalm 101:1)
While singing is not the only way we praise our God, it is an essential aspect of our praise. God not only provides us resources for our singing in the psalms, but he commands that we use them for His glory and honor. In fact, Hebrew contains a wide variety of words that reflect different aspects of our sung praises, two of which are contained in this verse.
In the first phrase, we have the Hebrew word שׁיר (syr), which simply refers to singing a song — or a spiritual song (see Colossians 3:16). This is one of the major divisions of psalmody, with thirty-two psalms being classified as שׁיר (syr) within their superscriptions. In the latter clause, the word זמר (zamar) is used, which typically means to sing music that is accompanied by an instrument, for God has done gloriously (Isaiah 12:5). We should also note that זמר (zamar) is found here in the “Piel” stem, which indicates that this is to be a repeated and continual action. Just as we are to pray without ceasing (1 Thessalonians 5:17) and the Apostle Paul sets before us a model of praying for the church without ceasing (Romans 1:9-10), the psalmist is instructing us that he sings praises without ceasing.
Of what does the psalmist sing? He tells us that he sings about the mercy and the justice of God. The word we translate here as mercy is the Hebrew term חסד (chesed), which refers to the covenant faithfulness of God despite our covenant unfaithfulness in return. The term we translate as justice is the Hebrew term מִשְׁפָּת (mishpat), which is a legal term that refers to the commandments, judgments, rules, or laws of God. In Hebrew, מִשְׁפָּת (mishpat) provides the essential standards by which the life of the faithful was to be measured (in light of this, even what we would call the blueprints for a building in Hebrew were called mishpat).
So, why has the psalmist joined these two ideas in psalm? The most natural reading of this text is that when we spend time reflecting on the judgments and commands of God, our natural response should be to think about how merciful God has been to us. Indeed, we deserve to be struck down immediately for the wide range of sins we pursue in life, yet God does not do so. We deserve to be condemned to Hell for our actions and for the wicked nature of our heart; but God redeems us from the pit. And thus, these two ideas, mercy and justice, go hand in hand. One will never understand how deep the mercy of God is until they come face to face with the condemnable nature of their own sin.
In the verses that follow, the psalmist holds out the contrast between mercy and justice while also setting before us a model for how we are to think about the unjust things that take place all around us. Indeed, we commonly dismiss certain sins. Sometimes it is because these are pet sins that we hold to; sometimes it is because these sins have not affected us or our families directly. Regardless of the reason, the David reminds us that we are to look upon sin as God looks upon sin while also singing praise for the mercies and the laws of God.
Fruit of the Church
“And as they did not study to have knowledge of God, God delivered them to a worthless mind to do what is not lawful, being filled with all kinds of unrighteousness, wickedness, greediness, and evil. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, and meanness. They are gossipers, slanderers, and haters of God. They are insolent, proud, boastful, inventors of evil, and disobeyers of parents. They are without understanding, covenant breakers, without affections, and without mercy. They know the decrees of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do them, but also approve of those who do them.”
(Romans 1:28-32)
If one is to judge a tree by its fruit (Matthew 7:16), then the fruit of idolatry in a culture is unrighteousness, wickedness, greediness, evil, envy, murder, strife, deceit, meanness, gossip, slander, hatred of God, insolence, pride, boasting, inventing evil, disobeying of parents, lacking understanding, covenant breaking, lacking affections, lacking mercy, and approving of these things in others. As to our culture: guilty as charged. As to much of the church in America: guilty as charged. The fruit of our culture is bad enough but when the fruit of the church reflects the fruit of the culture we have a major problem that needs to be rectified. And, while at times, reform can be brought from within, there is also a point in time when one must “come out of her lest you take part in her sins” (Revelation 18:4, alluding to Isaiah 48:20).
The Belgic confession drives this point home in Article 28, where it reads: “It is the duty of all believers, according to the Word of God, to separate themselves from all those who do not belong to the Church and to join themselves to this congregation [namely the True Church], wheresoever God has established it.” The True Church, in principle, is referred to in this article as “the assembly of those who are saved.” How can light have fellowship with darkness, Truth with error, righteousness with evil? For the wellbeing of our souls, we must align ourselves with Christ’s church and not with the parodies of it that are so prevalent in society.
Remaining in such a place is at best to content oneself with spiritual mediocrity for the same of what? Tradition? A fancy building to which you are partial? Habit? Safety? Friendships? Fancy dinners? Personalities? All of these are likely answers that would have been given by the people of Laodicea. Yet, when the years of accumulated dust of the false church is finally kicked off the feet, one will discover just how encumbered we were while wearing those old muddy boots. In doing so, one can leave behind the stench of the rotten food described above and taste (maybe for the first time!) fruit that is healthy, good, ripe, and in season for the church. And, while it is true that even the True Church has to face its problems when sin raises its ugly head; when said sin is pointed out, it will be confessed, repented of, and put away; such is not the case of the False Church.
So, as Peter says, judgment begins with the household of God (1 Peter 4:17). Start with self-judgment so that you may not be judged (1 Corinthians 11:31) and separate yourself from the fruit of idolatry that is so prevalent in the pseudo-church all around us.
Breaking Covenant: A Separation from the Body
“And as they did not study to have knowledge of God, God delivered them to a worthless mind to do what is not lawful, being filled with all kinds of unrighteousness, wickedness, greediness, and evil. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, and meanness. They are gossipers, slanderers, and haters of God. They are insolent, proud, boastful, inventors of evil, and disobeyers of parents. They are without understanding, covenant breakers, without affections, and without mercy. They know the decrees of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do them, but also approve of those who do them.”
(Romans 1:28-32)
One of the many results of worshiping the creation rather than the creator is that people become “covenant breakers.” The word in question is ἀσύνθεστος (asunthestos) and is often translated as “faithless” or “untrustworthy” in our English Bibles. Like many words in this particular passage, ἀσύνθεστος (asunthestos) begins with the “alpha primitive,” meaning that it is the negation of the word συντίθημι (suntithemi), which refers to working our an agreement in good order, typically in the form of a contract or a covenant. Thus, those who are ἀσύνθεστος (asunthestos) are those people who either break said contracts or who otherwise ignore them.
While the making and breaking of contracts is something found all over in the business world, one ought not expect it within the church — covenant breaking of this sort is the result of idolatry! Nevertheless, a brief survey of the American church will reveal that it is rampant within the walls of God’s house today. People commonly see the vows they take as mere conventions rather than as a life and death covenant before the Living God in the presence of witnesses.
Thus, when attendance is lagging, people will respond by saying, “Well, you know that I have just been busy.” When they are not teaching their children the Christian faith, they say, “Well, I want them to make their own decisions.” When people are not growing in their faith and understanding of God’s Word, they say, “Well, theology is for the pastor and those who go to seminary” (which, by the way, is the death-knell of a church!). When churches do not practice church discipline, leaders say, “Well, if we do, they will just be offended and attend the church down the street.” And when unBiblical ideas find themselves in church services through the songs that are sung or the ideas that are addressed, people say, “Well, cultural views have changed.”
Cultural views have indeed changed, but not God’s views. And a vow is meant to transcend culture. One takes them before the Living God and asks God himself to hold you accountable to said vows. This is indeed true in our marriages, but it is also true with the vows we take to our local church (and in the case of pastors and Elders, to the denomination). As long as that church remains a True Church, one is bound to abide under that church’s authority. When a church descends into teaching false doctrine, failing to practice the Sacraments as Jesus instituted them, or stops disciplining its members, then one is free from one’s covenant to the church because the church has broken and nullified it…not you as an individual. And the church will be judged by God.
Nevertheless, what we find in much of the visible church today are groups of people who care little about the vows they make and care even less about holding others to their vows. Discipline has almost disappeared from the church…and sadly, when discipline is practiced, it is often practiced with a vindictive spirit rather than with a spirit that seeks reconciliation. This again is a mark of the culture’s desire to worship the creation rather than the creator — a culture that seeks to please itself in worship rather than pleasing God.
Anti-Regulation: The Church’s Rejection of God’s Decrees
“And as they did not study to have knowledge of God, God delivered them to a worthless mind to do what is not lawful, being filled with all kinds of unrighteousness, wickedness, greediness, and evil. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, and meanness. They are gossipers, slanderers, and haters of God. They are insolent, proud, boastful, inventors of evil, and disobeyers of parents. They are without understanding, covenant breakers, without affections, and without mercy. They know the decrees of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do them, but also approve of those who do them.”
(Romans 1:28-32)
Simply spoken, many in the western church today assume that the church is a kind of democracy — or perhaps a democratic republic for those who practice presbyterian forms of government. In a democracy, people have the right to vote or the privilege of voting (depending on the structure of said government). In some cases, voting may need to be earned, but the principle remains the same: the people have a say in the decisions that are made by the body and majority rules. Similarly, in a democratic republic, the citizens elect representatives who, in turn, vote on behalf of those who elected them into office. Contrary to much of the rhetoric in America, our country is structured as a democratic republic, not as a democracy.
Yet, while the church does have elected officers who are charged with various roles and tasks, she is not, nor has ever been, a democracy or a republic. The church is a monarchy with Christ as the King. The role of those elected Elders and Deacons in the church is not to rule but to serve (Acts 20:28; 1 Peter 5:1-5). Indeed, there is a reason that Elders are called ἐπισκόποι (episkopoi) or “overseers,” for an overseer has the responsibility to safeguard a task or a group of people so that things are done in accordance with the wishes of the King.
One of the important descriptive uses of the term ἐπίσκοπος (episkopos — the singular of episkopoι) is found in the Greek translation of 2 Kings 11:18. In context, after the death of King Ahaziah of Judah, his mother, Athaliah, ordered that all of Ahaziah’s sons were to be killed, allowing her to assume the throne. Joash, one of Ahaziah’s sons was rescued by his aunt and his nurse and hidden away for six years, until the priest Jehoiada could organize the temple guard and anoint the young Joash to be the King. There is much more to the story than this, as court intrigue fills the pages of the history of the Israeli monarchy, nevertheless, these temple guards (who were mature Levitical priests) played an essential role in protecting Joash (as well as the Temple) and then seeing that temple reforms took place (like the destruction of the altars of Ba’al).
After the coronation of Joash and the execution of his grandmother, the priest, Jehoiada made a covenant between God, the King, and the people that committed the people once again to being “the Lord’s” (2 Kings 11:17). When the altars of Ba’al were torn down, “watchmen” — episkopoi were posted over the house of the Lord. Further, in 2 Kings 12:11, it is to these same watchmen that the offerings for the temple repairs needed were given and it was by these same men that those funds were dispersed. Thus, what was the role of these overseers? It was not to rule in the manner that they saw fit. Nor, was it to rule in a democratic fashion. They were called upon to protect and facilitate the worship of God. Is that not what Elders in the Christian church are called upon to do? Is this not why Elders are to be able to instruct in sound doctrine and rebuke those who contradict said doctrine (Titus 1:9)? And note, the doctrine that they protect is not simply that which they happen to like, but it is that doctrine that has been decreed by the King of the Church…namely by Christ Jesus himself. If a church’s Elders are not capable theologians and apologists in their own right, how will the church sail a straight path through the storms brought about by antichrists in this world (Ephesians 4:11-15)? If church Elders simply exist to manage the business of the church, how are they fulfilling their Biblical task?
Friends, if you desire as I do, that the church be a transformative influence on the world around us, as it was during the first three centuries and as it was during the Reformation and the century thereafter, then the church must repent of its worldliness. It must repent of functioning more like a country-club or a civic organization. It must repent of convenience and it must repent of its comfort. It must be willing to obey Christ in each and every manner that the Scriptures set forth and it must call its people to do the same. It must stop thinking like a business and it must start thinking like a military outpost in enemy territory. It must stop worrying about its programs and activities and start asking, “how do these programs and activities prepare us for worship?” They must stop telling people that God loves them just the way they are and start telling people to “repent and believe.” They must begin caring more about God and his decrees and be willing to put self to death.
Indeed, Elders — real, Biblical Elders, must gird up the loins of their mind not just to refute the errors found in the world, but also those errors found in the church and her worship. Like in the days of Joash, the idols need to be torn down and Biblical worship needs to be rebuilt. Then, maybe, just maybe, the church will stop rejecting the decrees and commands of God, start honoring God in worship (not self), and finally become relevant.
Ecclesiastical Anti-Nomianism: The Church’s Rebellion
“And as they did not study to have knowledge of God, God delivered them to a worthless mind to do what is not lawful, being filled with all kinds of unrighteousness, wickedness, greediness, and evil. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, and meanness. They are gossipers, slanderers, and haters of God. They are insolent, proud, boastful, inventors of evil, and disobeyers of parents. They are without understanding, covenant breakers, without affections, and without mercy. They know the decrees of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do them, but also approve of those who do them.”
(Romans 1:28-32)
Having been delivered up to a “worthless mind,” those who worship the creation rather than the creator do what is not lawful, the end result is that they do those things that are not lawful. One might expect this to be the case with those who live outside of the church, but sadly, it is common to see lawlessness within the church itself, most commonly in the context of Christian worship.
If lawlessness is the result of a “worthless mind,” then perhaps we must ask the question as to what constitutes a worthless mind — or perhaps, more idiomatically translated, a “worthless worldview.” The term in question is the Greek word ἀδόκιμος (adokimos), which is the word δόκιμος (dominos) with the “alpha-primitive.” The alpha simply turns the word into its negative, like “theist” and “atheist” or “moral” and “amoral.” If you have followed along with the essay on anti-gnosis, you will recognize the verbal form of the word in question: δοκιμάζω (dokimazo). Thus, δόκιμος (dominos) refers to something that has been tested and found to be true, reliable, or otherwise genuine. In turn, ἀδόκιμος (adokimos) refers to that which has been examined and found to be false, unreliable, and inauthentic.
How can a worldview such as that be tested? Shall we not judge a tree by its fruit (Matthew 7:15-20)? In the passage above, Paul gives us an extensive list of bad fruit that comes out of a mind that is worthless. These things, in the context of the passage, are things that are unlawful in the eyes of God. Now, when speaking of the law, the Greek word we usually expect to see is νόμος (nomos), hence the word “antinomian” above. In church history, antinomians are those who have rejected the Law of God and have abused Christian liberty as a form of license, permitting any behavior about which their conscience does not condemn in them.
In the text before us, Paul chooses a different, but related term. Here he speaks of that which is μὴ καθήκοντα (me kathekonta) or that which is “not appropriate” or “not befitting” for a person to do. The nuance is slightly different in that it almost exclusively deals with one’s conduct (where law often extends far beyond conduct to principle). Nevertheless, how does one examine conduct to discover whether it is appropriate or befitting of persons? It is (and must always be) that we go to the law. As Paul will write later in Romans, he did not know that certain things were sins were the Law not to have instructed him (Romans 7:7). One might suggest that these things that are “not appropriate” are more of a reflection of cultural norms and should not be seen as a reflection of God’s Law. Paul puts this notion to rest in the last verse of this passage when he states that those who do things such as that which he has listed are worthy of death. Only Law is capable of assigning capital punishment for its infractions. If we betray a cultural norm, at worst, we shall be looked down upon as an outsider, a persona non grata, or a pariah. Talking too loudly, putting your feet on one’s table, failing to take your shoes off, or eating with your hands may be considered uncouth in many places, but not something worth being put to death. Law, on the other hand, has the power to demand your life in nearly every civilized society.
Notice, though, in Paul’s writing here that it all stems back to worship. People have chosen to worship the creation rather than the creator and thus, their worldview is corrupted and they refuse to obey the Law. In fact, not only do they do such things as Paul has listed, but they encourage others to do them. They promote lawlessness.
Since Paul’s focus is on worship, we ought to turn our attention back toward the church. Truly, everything that has breath is called upon to praise the Lord, but the church, having been given the Scriptures, is in a unique position to instruct the world in what worship ought to look like. At heart, that means he church most model said worship. David writes that in being forgiven from sin, the proper response is to teach others the ways of God so that they turn back to Him as well (Psalm 51:13). David also writes that when God sends out his light and truth to us, the response is worship as well (Psalm 43:3-4 — note, that as Psalm 43 does not have a superscript of its own in the Hebrew text, but the LXX assigns it Davidic authorship). How shall the world know what worship “in Spirit and in Truth” happens to look like if the church shall not practice such worship itself?
That raises the question as to what constitutes worship in Spirit and in Truth. Sadly, were one to take a poll of pastors from across the United States or even the world, answers would vary greatly. Many people have bought into the notion that worship is a subjective experience that is designed to make them feel closer to God. And, while right worship ought to draw us closer to God, to treat it as a subjective matter makes worship about the individual and not about the God who we are supposed to be worshipping. Further, if worship is about God, then we ought to go to God’s Word to determine what ought to be part of worship and then constrain ourselves to those things.
When the delegates to the Westminster Assembly gathered to tackle this question, they prayerfully searched the Scriptures to determine those things that God commands to be a part of his worship. Their conclusion is that the Scriptures instructs us to worship with six, very specific elements (WCF, Chapter 21). First, we are to pray with thanksgiving as helped by the Holy Spirit. Second, the Scriptures are to be read with godly fear. Third, the Word is to be clearly preached — in the word of many Puritans, the congregation is the “schoolroom of Christ.” Fourth, the preaching is to be heard with understanding; in other words, we are to pay attention to the Word as it is preached so that we may put it into practice in our lives. Fifth, the psalms are to be sung with a grace-filled heart. And sixth, the sacraments are to be practiced as instituted by Christ. Certainly, a window is left open for occasional vows, oaths, fasts, and special thanksgivings, but they were seen as being used (as with Paul’s collection for those suffering in Jerusalem) as necessity dictates.
All other things, though they might be done with a clear conscience during the normal activities of our week, are not worship and thus, do not belong to the congregational practice when we gather on the Sabbath Day for worship. Reformed theologians refer to this as “the regulative principle of worship,” reflecting on the notion that God orders our worship and regulates it by His word and not by our preferences. Or, to put it another way, God’s Law governs everything we do…especially our worship.
And thus, those who seek to mold worship after their own preferences or likes, those who incorporate elements into worship that do not fit neatly into these categories commanded by Scripture, and those who would incorporate practices found in heathen worship are fighting against the Law of God. They are “ecclesiastical antinomians” and are rebelling against the God of Heaven even as they try and worship that very same God.
And so, the church faces the criticism from the anti-theist of existing to serve its own needs — being greedy for money and providing opium for the masses. When we worship the way we want and the way that makes us feel good, rather than how God commands, how can we blame the anti-theists for their castigation? More importantly, what will be said to God when those who promote this entertainment and human-centered worship stand before His castigation? That ought to make one’s knees tremble. That ought to drive us to the repentance from those elements we have introduced and to embrace those elements we have ignored. Peter insists that judgment begins at the household of God (1 Peter 4:17). Paul encourages us though, that if we would judge ourselves truly (with the Scriptures as our rule!) then we would not be judged (1 Corinthians 11:31).
If we wish to have a compelling witness in this unfaithful world, shall we not begin with the examination of our worship? Shall we not begin by ordering our worship according to God’s Word rather than according to our preferences? Nevertheless, there will be many who will not be able to let go of the idols they have created — to their art, their drama, their therapeutic sermons, their entertainment, their singing of human songs rather than inspired psalms, their movie-screens, and the glitz and glamor of performance because they are comfortable. And, in doing so, our witness will remain uncompelling, suspect, and without authority.
Anti-Gnosis: The Plight of the Church
“And as they did not study to have knowledge of God, God delivered them to a worthless mind to do what is not lawful, being filled with all kinds of unrighteousness, wickedness, greediness, and evil. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, and meanness. They are gossipers, slanderers, and haters of God. They are insolent, proud, boastful, inventors of evil, and disobeyers of parents. They are without understanding, covenant breakers, without affections, and without mercy. They know the decrees of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do them, but also approve of those who do them.”
(Romans 1:28-32)
Peter writes that judgment must begin with the household of God (1 Peter 4: 17), which means, when salt and light does not pervade a culture where the church is immanent, there is a problem. And the source of that problem stems from within the church. If salt loses its saltiness, of what good is it? And, when light can no longer be distinguished from the darkness around, is it truly light any longer or has its lamp-stand been removed? There is no question that churches are present within communities throughout the United States, most of which proclaim themselves to be Christian. So, where is the salt and light?
It is my fear that three things have taken place. First, many churches that proclaim themselves to be “Christian” are not Christian by any meaningful sense of the term. They have rejected historic Christian Creeds and Confessional statements and have embraced ideas that have been condemned by the Councils of the Christian church going back to the first Century AD. Secondly, many professing Christians are more interested in a promise of heaven than they are interested in what it means to live out an authentic Christian faith. Many assume that they can live however they choose and worship in whatever way they prefer, so long as they have their “Get Out of Hell Free” pass promised by a person who preaches niceties to them on Sunday morning. Third, many Christians have become so busy with life that they presume that knowledge of the things of God is something for pastors and seminary students only. In fact, many are so used to this notion, that they are hostile to the notion that all Christians are commanded to study and learn the things of God.
Psalm 111:2 boldly proclaims, “Great are the works of Yahweh, studied by all who delight in them.” Do you delight in the things that God has done? Then the way you show your delight is by studying them. In fact, it could be argued that you most eagerly study those things in which you most delight. Billy Graham used to say, “If you want to know where a man’s priorities are, just look at his checkbook.” I say, “If you want to know what a man loves, look at those things that most occupy his mind and thought.
Paul writes here in Romans that one of the results of people seeking to worship the creation rather than the creator is that they do not “study to have the knowledge of God.” The Greek word in question here is δοκιμάζω (dokimazo), which conveys the idea of examining something to see whether it is right or true and then drawing conclusions about said things on the basis of what has been tested and examined.
Conceptually, this is a powerful notion. For without such careful and detailed examination, upon what does one base their Christian belief? Too many professing Christians simply claim that faith is enough, but is faith not something that ought to be substantiated? Without examination, how is our faith in God any different than the heathen’s superstitious faith in their totems and idols? Is not faith a conviction (ἕλεγχος — elegchos — the act of presenting evidence as in a court case — Hebrews 11:1) of things that are not seen? Is not the faith that results in praise and glory and honor at the revealing of Christ a faith that is examined (δοκιμάζω — dokimazo — 1 Peter 1:7)? If God tests our hearts (1 Thessalonians 2:4) shall we also not test every spirit (1 John 4:1) — δοκιμάζω (dokimazo)? How can we make a reasoned defense of the faith if we have first not examined what we believe (ἀπολογία — apologia — 1 Peter 3:15)?
Yet, not only do many (if not most) never bother applying their reason to the faith they possess, many pastors seek to dissuade their flock from doing so. Perhaps they feel as if the reasoned examination will detract from the passion of their worship. Perhaps they do not wish to face such questions themselves. Perhaps they too are blindly following the example of a superstitious faith set for them by others. Worse yet, perhaps they feel intimidated at the idea that someone, upon examination, might discover that the faith and practice inculcated at their church might prove fraudulent and empty.
If this is the state of the American church, then why should we be surprised when the world sees our practice as unintelligent, superstitious, undesirable, and irrelevant to life? They reject the salt and light of the church because the church has lost its saltiness and its light has become so dimmed as to be imperceptible from any other expression of religion or faith? The church in the first centuries did not have a vague witness. They boldly proclaimed Christ’s resurrection from the dead and were happy to have their testimony examined by even the most hostile and critical foes. Shall we not do the same? Yet, we cannot, until we are ready to examine the faith we profess. If we do not do so, then the church will continue to fall into the morass of sin that Paul describes in this passage — indeed, do not many of these sins describe the church of our day (envy, strife, deceit, meanness, slander, gossip, etc…).
How will Christ be pleased with the playacting that many supposed Christian churches practice week in and week out when the faith therein is never tested? On what basis will Christ say, “well done,” if there is no basis for that statement other than one’s personal preferences? Indeed, many will be expecting to hear the words, “well done,” yet will only hear, “I never knew you.” If the church will not repent of its foolishness, then the lamp-stand will be removed and Christ will spit them out of his mouth. To be ignorant in the church is one thing if one is a new believer. To be ignorant in the church, though one has been in the church for years, is lazy. But to be opposed to the careful examination of the things of God is the work of antichrists (1 John 2:18-19) and should be condemned with the strongest language — indeed, they are preaching a gospel of another kind than what is plainly taught in Scripture (Galatians 1:6-10).
Antitheism: as a Worldview
“And as they did not study to have knowledge of God, God delivered them to a worthless mind to do what is not lawful, being filled with all kinds of unrighteousness, wickedness, greediness, and evil. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, and meanness. They are gossipers, slanderers, and haters of God. They are insolent, proud, boastful, inventors of evil, and disobeyers of parents. They are without understanding, covenant breakers, without affections, and without mercy. They know the decrees of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do them, but also approve of those who do them.”
(Romans 1:28-32)
In discussions of Christian worldview and various forms of non-Christian thought, we usually focus on the two categories of agnosticism and atheism. In this author’s manner of thinking, addressing the first is mostly a matter of convincing a person to take time from their busy schedule to examine the question. In terms of the latter, it is a matter of convincing the person to examine the question on the basis of logic, whether that be through logical proofs or through the evidence in the world around us which points to God. In both cases, it seems to me, that they suffer from the presupposition that God is either not worth knowing or that he is not able to be known.
Yet, there are other categories by which those who are against Christian thought may be classified. One of which is “anti-theism.” This is not simply a question of whether God can or cannot be known, but this is a view that the knowledge of God is harmful to both individuals and to society. Such a view is more than a rejection of the knowledge of God; it is a rejection of those who acknowledge God, and there is a difference.
For instance, in the west, the majority of children are raised with the belief that a large, rotund, sprite from the North Pole sneaks into their home (though a chimney or otherwise) to deliver gifts on the night of December 24th. Were one simply agnostic to this view, they might simply say, “to each their own.” Were one in rejection of this view, one might simply say, “That is a foolish notion” and then shake their head at the silliness of others while not practicing the tradition. Yet, for the “Anti-SantaClausian,” the practice would not only be viewed as wrong, but harmful to practice. Such parents would not only train their children up that Santa Clause was a myth, but would actively encourage other parents to do the same. Indeed, they might even look down on other parents for lying to their children at least once a year, for if they will lie on this matter, what other matters will they lie about?
In this passage from Romans 1, Paul is addressing a wide variety of character traits that are manifested in individuals and societies that reject the worship of the One True God. In other words, they will not study or evaluate the arguments for the existence of God (both atheism and agnosticism fall into this category), but in refusing to do so, God has punished them by giving them over to a clouded mind and debased passions. They know the Law of God, but refuse to obey it.
Over the years, there has been a rise in atheism, not just in terms of a philosophical position, but in terms of those who actively consider theism in any form to be harmful. The late Anthony Flew described such people essentially as those who evangelize atheism (as if atheism could ever be labeled as “good news”). Richard Dawkins and the late Christopher Hitchens are examples of those who hold such a view. They have made a study of the Bible (though usually from atheistic presuppositions) and they have rejected it (along with the Q’ran, the various Buddhist texts, etc…). Further, they see the presence of those with a theistic worldview as one that hinders the development of society.
The point is that the normal approaches of apologetics are not well suited for those who hold to an anti-theistic worldview. They are not interested in examining the evidence on the basis of the evidence itself nor are they interested in having a rational dialogue about the reasonableness of theistic claims. They are militantly against these things. For an anti-theist, a balanced dialogue about the theist’s claims is as irrational as a balanced dialogue over whether Santa, the Easter Bunny, or the Tooth-fairy exists. It is a waste of time and energy.
My proposition is that apologetics training needs to be re-evaluated in light of the presence of the anti-theist. While I am certainly not advocating the elimination of the many tools of apologetics that are available to us today, I think that we need to improve the toolbox. As we are in a spiritual war, perhaps a better analogy is that we need to improve our apologetics arsenal in light of anti-theism. Too often, we equip our children with little more than a pellet gun when they are sent onto the battlefield of a thoroughly anti-religious, anti-Christian, and anti-theistic world.
The Last Word Has Been Heard
“The last word as the whole has been heard: God you shall fear and his commandments you shall keep, for this is the whole of man. For every work, God will bring into judgment along with every hidden thing — if it is good and if it is evil.”
(Ecclesiastes 12:13-14)
And so, Solomon brings this book to a close with these familiar words: fear God and obey his commandments. Why shall we fear? Solomon reminds us that it is God who is in the position to judge — not man. We may act in the best of intentions by our own standards, but it is God’s standards that we will be held to in judgement: sobering, isn’t it?
In modern times, we don’t much like the notion of fear is one that is rather unpopular. Why would we fear one we love and who loves us? Does not a father often instill a sense of fear in the children? Is this not a good thing? If children do not fear their father, they will not obey his instructions and will run amok with their lives. They will behave toward the father as if he is a peer rather than as their father. Further, they will never accept his discipline or instruction. It is no different with people and God. Look at those churches and denominations that have downplayed the fear of the Lord and ask yourself, “How do these people approach God? Do they approach him as one would approach the creator of the universe and the judge of their souls or do they approach him as they might approach a longtime pal?” Which view is more consistent with the teachings of Scripture?
And so, we end our reflections on this book with a reminder that we will all stand in judgment at one point in history. Our works will not save us, but will they not show a great deal about the state of our hearts? Will they not show the things that were meaningful to us in life? Will they not show the extent of our gratitude to a God who saved us? Will these works define us as a disciple of Jesus or as a reckless and undisciplined child? May it be the former and not the latter for each of us.
Exhausting the Flesh
“Over and above this, my son, be warned. Of the making of many books there is no end and of much study there is exhaustion of the flesh.”
(Ecclesiastes 12:12)
For the record, Solomon is not saying that study is unfruitful, though that is sometimes how this passage is interpreted. He states that it will exhaust you physically (don’t miss the “to the flesh”). For indeed, as we have already seen in Solomon’s writings, there is profit in learning and in growing in one’s understanding so long as that learning remains in the context of the Word of God. Such is the significance of the first phrase found within this passage — do not go beyond “these things.” What are the things to which Solomon points? He is pointing toward the collected sayings and the words of the wise.
And so, there is a principle set before us — set the word of God before you, study it and dig into its depth even if it is wearisome to the flesh. The infinite depth of the word is a testimony to the fact that Scripture is of God; were it not, we would have long ceased to have anything to say about it. Yet, as it is, every generation will add to the corpus of knowledge and understanding of the inspired Word. Study these two, just do not go beyond the Canon of the Bible.
Can you study secular books then? Yes. At the same time, use the Scriptures as a lens by which you view these secular books. Use the Scriptures as a rule and guide to evaluate such things. So, be warned, though you may find yourself weary in your flesh, your mind and spirit will grow to maturity on the basis of such things…just be warned not to go outside of the collected sayings and words of the wise contained in God’s Holy Scripture.
One Shepherd
“The words of the wise are like goads — like fixed nails are the gathered sayings; they are given by one Shepherd.”
(Ecclesiastes 12:11)
This is perhaps one of my favorite verses in all of Ecclesiastes. Words and sayings form ideas in our lives and these ideas sometimes prod us to action (the work of a goad) and they sometimes fix us in place when we are challenged (the work of a nail). How essential these fundamental ideas are to a person in general, but especially so to a Christian. Yet, Solomon does not end with this observation. He ends with the observation that all of these words and sayings ultimately come from one Shepherd — the Good Shepherd himself, our God. Here is just one more testimony to the inspiration of Scripture — the Word of God is the testimony of one Shepherd though it was written through many individuals.
A question sometimes comes up as to the phrase, “collected sayings.” The word used here for “sayings” is בַּאַל (ba’al), which is most commonly a reference to a lord or master in the Old Testament (hence the Baals that the people worshiped). The word, though, has a pretty broad usage and we should think about it this way. Do not guiding principles essentially act as lords over our lives? Indeed, they do (and should!). And thus, to speak of them as lords or masters should not bother us too greatly.
The question we really ought to be asking, though, is which sayings? Certainly we are all filled with little proverbs and wise sayings that we have heard over the years, but do they all come from the One Shepherd? If not, they are likely not reliable and will not goad you or fix you in place when you need them to do so. One must be wise as to the source of such sayings and ensure that they indeed do come from the One true Shepherd.
Writing Honestly
“The Preacher sought to acquire words of delight and so he wrote honestly words of truth.”
(Ecclesiastes 12:10)
“I shall not be biased toward a man nor to a man will I give flattery because I do not know how to flatter else in a moment I would be taken away by my maker.” — Elihu
(Job 32:21-22)
Flattery may excite for a moment and lying words may inflate the ego, but truth delights not only God, our Maker, but the ears of a wise man. The bottom line is that if we are going to seek out words that delight, they are only found in one place — the Truth. True, at times, these may not be the words we most want to hear, but they are indeed the words that will be of the most value to us as we grow and they will be the words that produce maturity in our souls.
How often people collect around themselves those who will simply tell them what they most want to hear. In business, we call them “Yes-Men” or “Sycophants,” but they are nothing more than people who refuse to offer an opinion for fear of losing their place. Their loyalty may sound like it is to you, but it is really only ever to themselves. The man or woman who comes alongside of you and who speaks truth, even those truths that are difficult to hear, so long as it is in love, are those men and women who are truly loyal. These are the ones we all most need in our confidence and when things go well because of their insight, you will delight.
Today, though, people seem so insecure that they are almost afraid to receive criticism — constructive or otherwise. Are we so insecure as a culture that we would prefer to speak into a vacuum than to engage human beings with differing ideas? Have our teachers failed so miserably that we genuinely think that an attack against a person’s character is a legitimate form of debate? I fear that the answer to both of those questions is “yes.” Woe to us as a culture, for this is not the mindset that built the great nations of the western world. If we would be “Great Again” (to borrow from a popular slogan), we must recapture what it means to engage with ideas and to recognize that true words are and ought to be delightful, no matter from where they come.
One of my professors in seminary, Jack Williamson, repeated a phrase over and over again to us as we were in class. “Be hard on ideas,” he said, “But be soft on people.” What he meant by that, of course, was to speak truth in love — to attack an idea with great vigor, but do not attack the person bringing the idea. His heart was to see this take root in our churches; but what if we could nurture that idea in our communities, our nations, and our world as well? Then, and only then, will we really appreciate Solomon’s words here.
Balancing Proverbs
“The preacher was more than wise, teaching knowledge to the people, but he balanced and straightened many proverbs.”
(Ecclesiastes 12:9)
At the beginning of our reflections on Ecclesiastes, we discussed the proofs of Solomon’s authorship; here is just one more proof of the same. Who, but Solomon, organized the Proverbs that we have? Indeed, if the preacher here in Ecclesiastes is the same teacher as who organized the Proverbs, it can be no one other than Solomon who has authored this text. Not that this should be a hard sell, but simply a reminder of the trustworthiness of the tradition behind King Solomon’s authorship.
But what does it mean when the text says he “balanced and straightened” the proverbs? One must recall that the proverbs are not just words that were written by Solomon, but he accumulated wise sayings from his generation and from the generations before him. In addition, he grouped and ordered them in a useful fashion and further, it can be supposed, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, he corrected the statements that were skewed somewhat because they originated in a pagan culture. That is the work of balancing and straightening in this context.
And so, what is Solomon’s crowning achievement? Most of the time people think of the Temple or of his wealth — both rightly attributed. Yet, Solomon’s crowning achievement was neither of these things — it was his role in teaching wisdom to the people, in his case, through three books of the Bible and two Psalms (72 & 127). Other things are important, but this is the most important aspect of his life — and in these aspects, Solomon points us toward Christ.
How often, the goal of the pastor is to build an empire for himself — leave a reputation behind as a great preacher or as a faithful caregiver to the sick and dying. And while these are very important roles in the life of the pastor, his first job is to faithfully teach wisdom to the people of God. Sadly, this is sometimes the least appreciated aspect of his ministry simply because this is what he ordinarily does week in and week out in all of his interactions. Paul instructs Timothy that he is to strive to “rightly handle the Word of Truth”… Qoheleth (the Preacher) does…may that be said of those of us who pastor and of those who are our pastors. Let our names be forgotten and our empires never emerge from the dirt, but let us teach wisdom to the children of God who are eager to listen and learn.
The Silver Cord
“Until the silver cord is broken and the golden bowl crushed — until the jar is smashed at the spring and the wheel is broken at the cistern — and dust returns to the earth just as it was — and the spirit returns to the God which gave it — vanity of vanity says the preacher, all is vanity.”
(Ecclesiastes 12:6-8)
Solomon completes the poetic digression here in verse 8 with the familiar refrain and much of what was said of the above passage applies well here to these words. Yet I wanted to set these words apart to make an important point about the dangers of speculative theology.
We have already mentioned how this passage deals with the decline and then the death of a man — make the most of your days and learn wisdom in your youth so that when the difficult times of being an old man arrive you are well-prepared. We have also discussed how some of the imagery in this passage was understood metaphorically by Rabbinic leaders to speak about the body of a man (the strong man bent over and the caper not doing its job, etc…). Again, that is a little further than I am willing to take the text, but it is not too hard to see the allegories that they are making.
There are some, though, that have taken these words significantly further and created an entire mystical set of beliefs based on the idea of the silver cord mentioned above. This is called “Sutratma” and is built on the belief that the body is tied to the spirit with a silver cord (when it snaps, you die) and people who follow such beliefs are supposed to be able to engage in things like “astral projection” where their spirits can move about apart from their bodies so long as the silver cord remains intact. For fans of the recent Marvel movies, this is one of the activities practiced by the character, Dr. Strange. All of this ties back to these verses in Ecclesiastes.
The problem here, of course, is context. Solomon is not speaking of mystical abilities or of separation of spirit from body for short periods of time, Solomon is speaking of death and is using largely metaphorical language to illustrate his point in a poetic way. Perhaps think about it this way. In Shakespeare’s classic play, Hamlet, the title character discovers the skull of Yorick (a former court jester) in the graveyard. For Hamlet, this is a point that helps provide him perspective on both life and death and is a significant turning point for the character. Yet, the skull, though symbolic of the fact that all die, is nothing more than a skull. Hamlet is not alluding to mystical powers that come from such artifacts, its discover simply provides him the instance to reflect on the reality that all men, great and small, return to dust. Solomon is doing much the same.
Friends, you may be thinking to yourself, “Okay, Pastor Win, we understand — it is a poetic figure of speech and we should not allegorize it or go off and create an entire theology/philosophy based on it, but we were not likely to do so in the first place.” True. Maybe. Here’s the thing. Any time you take a verse out of its context and try to use that verse to prove an idea, you are guilty of doing the same thing as what people have done with the silver cord. Take care in how you use the Word of God and do not take passages out of context. If you do take it out of context, this preacher will echo the words of Solomon… “vanity of vanity says the preacher…”
Remember Your Creator
“Remember your creator in the days of your youthfulness — before the days of evil come and the years drawn near in which you will say, ‘There is nothing of pleasure in them’ — before the sun and the light of the moon and stars are darkened — and the clouds return after the rain — in the days when the guardians of the house tremble and the men of strength are bent over — when the women who grind cease to do so because they are few and the ones who look through the lattice are dimmed — when the doors in the street are shut — when the sound of the mill is low — when one rises to the sound of the bird and all the daughters of song are bowed down — also, they fear what is high and the terrors in the way — the almond blossoms and the grasshopper bears a load — the caper fails because man is going to his eternal home. Around the street are mourners.”
(Ecclesiastes 12:1-5)
There is a lot going on in these verses, but they contain a single train of thought, contrasting the days of our youth, when everything seemed bright and exciting, with the days of our waning years, when things seem dark and foreboding. Isn’t it interesting that almost every generation looks back to the “good old days”… but if we are honest, those days weren’t always all very good. To the young who are enjoying life, Solomon says, “do not neglect your creator.” Why is this so important? Simple. Spiritual maturity grows slowly and it is only spiritual maturity that prepares you for the dark days and for those days leading up to your death. So, in other words, the earlier you begin to develop that spiritual maturity, the better off you will be when the times of trial enter into your life.
The Rabbi Akabia ben Mahalalel (late first and early second century) wrote that there are three things you need to know in life: from whence you came, to where you are going, and before whom you must stand in judgment. In some ways, these words address at least the final two questions and allude to the first. We are born into this world in an ordinary way, but do not think that the God of creation does not have a hand in our individual creation — he is not just a creator in general senses, but he is a creator who functions as a potter, forming each of us in our mother’s wombs and placing within each one of us a soul designed after his plan and for his purposes. Further, unless our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, returns within our lifetimes, we will all go to the grave, our bodies being held in-trust within the ground for that day of resurrection. And finally, it is before God that we will be made to give an account of all we have and have not done when the books are opened before his great white throne.
The Hebrews often treated some of this language figuratively (the strong man bent over reminding us of how age and a deteriorating spine bend down with age, the almond blossoms as one’s hair goes from dark to grey, and the caper (used for the vitality of the libido) is not doing its job. And, certainly, the the context of a poetic passage, that reading is not unfair, though it is a little further than I am comfortable going. Such as it is, this is filled with idioms and figures of speech that do not lend themselves to a word-for word translation. Again, such should be no surprise within a poetic passage such as this.
Rejoice in Your Youth
“Rejoice, young man, in your youth and let your heart please you in the days of your youth. Walk in the way of your heart and by the sight of your eyes. Know that God comes to you with judgment in all these things. Turn aside from the vexation in your heart for youth and dark hair are vanity.”
(Ecclesiastes 11:9-10)
“Youth and dark hair”? Literally the Hebrew word toward the end of verse 10 is שַׁחֲרוּת (shacharuth) means “blackness.” Yet, in Hebrew, it is a figure of speech that refers to the dark, black hair of someone at the prime of their youth — before the grey streaks begin to show up. Of course, in the Hebrew culture, Grey hair is a crown of glory gained by a righteous life (Proverbs 16:31), so again, you have a contrast between the wisdom of the old and the folly of the youth. Our various English translations tend to render this idiom in a variety of ways, but in each case, the idea that Solomon is talking about the vanity of youth is meant to be conveyed.
So, what is Solomon saying? There is a tongue-in-cheek tone to these words. He (almost sarcastically) says, “go and enjoy the foolishness of your youth because God will judge you for it.” We might expect him to say, “No young man, turn back from those things,” and this is something that he has already said. Yet, as he wraps up the book he begins driving the point home and saying, “If you insist on this foolishness, in spite of what I told you, go do it, but then you will face the judgment of God.”
How often God permits us to do some things that are unwise. They may be wastes of time, money, energy, or resources, but God does not bring us into direct judgment for them. Indeed, we will have to answer to God, though, for our folly in the time of judgment. In the end, those foolish things we do are vanity — empty. So, does that mean we ought to never do frivolous things in our youth? The reality is, that won’t happen. We are sinners and we have not yet grown to maturity to understand what we ought an ought not do. The sad thing is when old men with the grey hair of age live in the folly of youth rather in the maturity of their peers.
In the end, though, the call upon is to learn to turn away from those things that vex and antagonize our hearts — don’t run into situations in a fit of anger and don’t rush to attack everything with which you disagree around you. Pick and choose your battles and grow in the wisdom that suits the grey hairs forming on your head.
Rejoicing in the Years
“Thus, if man exists for a great number of years, in all of them he should rejoice. Yet, let him remember the days of darkness for they will be many — all that comes is vanity.”
(Ecclesiastes 11:8)
Depending on how you read the word הָאָדָם (ha’adam) — literally, “the man” will determine how you understand the practical application of this proverb. For example, if you read this as most translations seem to render it — as “a man” — then this fits many of the themes we have seen throughout this book. No matter how many years you live — great or small — rejoice in all of them because there are many years of darkness and hardship that you will have to face. If life is just lived for the sake of living, then, everything is vanity.
If, however, you translate this more literally, as “the man,” meaning a reference to mankind, then the take away is a little different. Mankind’s days on the earth are limited; they began with Adam about 6,000 years ago and they will continue until the return of Jesus. And, as Solomon very accurately points out, the days of darkness are many. There are wars and plagues and disasters to face that affect not just the individuals, but cultures as a whole. So, what are we to do in light of this reality? We are to rejoice in that which is “rejoice-worthy.”
What or whom gives us reason to rejoice in the ultimate sense? Jesus. He is our hope beyond this world of dark days and vanity. We do not know how many more years or millennia he might tarry, but nevertheless, in Him is our only true and lasting hope. In Him we can rejoice in the dark years as well as in the years of peace. And, whether you take this as a reference to the individual or to the race, the application is still the same. Rejoice in Christ all of the years of your life knowing that there will be many difficult years ahead but even in them Christ will give you hope.
The Preacher's Study 