You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Protestant’ category.
The three-year Lectionary that many Catholics and Protestants hear in public worship gives us a great variety of Holy Scripture.
Yet, it doesn’t tell the whole story.
My series Forbidden Bible Verses — ones the Lectionary editors and their clergy omit — examines the passages we do not hear in church. These missing verses are also Essential Bible Verses, ones we should study with care and attention. Often, we find that they carry difficult messages and warnings.
Today’s reading is from the English Standard Version Anglicised (ESVUK) with commentary by Matthew Henry.
The death of Abraham
25 Abraham had taken another wife, whose name was Keturah. 2 She bore him Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak and Shuah. 3 Jokshan was the father of Sheba and Dedan; the descendants of Dedan were the Ashurites, the Letushites and the Leummites. 4 The sons of Midian were Ephah, Epher, Hanok, Abida and Eldaah. All these were descendants of Keturah.
5 Abraham left everything he owned to Isaac. 6 But while he was still living, he gave gifts to the sons of his concubines and sent them away from his son Isaac to the land of the east.
—————————————————————————————————————————————–
Last week’s post discussed Shem’s family line all the way to Abram, whom God renamed Abraham.
Now we come to the final years of Abraham, our father in faith, who was completely obedient to God.
Abraham took another wife, Keturah (verse 1) following Sarah’s death (Genesis 23:1-2):
23 Sarah lived to be a hundred and twenty-seven years old. 2 She died at Kiriath Arba (that is, Hebron) in the land of Canaan, and Abraham went to mourn for Sarah and to weep over her.
Matthew Henry explains why (emphases mine):
He had buried Sarah and married Isaac, the two dear companions of his life, and was now solitary. He wanted a nurse, his family wanted a governess, and it was not good for him to be thus alone. He therefore marries Keturah, probably the chief of his maid-servants, born in his house or bought with money. Marriage is not forbidden to old age.
Keturah bore Abraham six sons: Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak and Shuah (verse 2).
Henry posits that this was further evidence of the promise God made to Abraham of numerous descendants for generation after generation:
… the great increase of his posterity was in part fulfilled, which, it is likely, he had an eye to this marriage. The strength he received by the promise still remained in him, to show how much the virtue of the promise exceeds the power of nature.
Jokshan’s sons were Sheba and Dedan; Dedan’s descendants were the Ashurites, the Letushites and the Leummites (verse 3).
Midian’s sons were Ephah, Epher, Hanok, Abida and Eldaah; all these were descendants of Keturah (verse 4).
Abraham left everything he owned to Isaac (verse 5), his son by Sarah.
While he was still alive, he gave gifts to his sons by his concubines and sent them away from Isaac to the land of the east (verse 6).
Henry tells us why Abraham’s was a fatherly model to follow:
After the birth of these sons, he set his house in order, with prudence and justice. 1. He made Isaac his heir, as he was bound to do, in justice to Sarah his first and principal wife, and to Rebekah who married Isaac upon the assurance of it, ch. 24 36. In this all, which he settled upon Isaac, are perhaps included the promise of the land of Canaan, and the entail of the covenant. Or, God having already made him the heir of the promise, Abraham therefore made him heir of his estate. Our affection and gifts should attend God’s. 2. He gave portions to the rest of his children, both to Ishmael, though at first he was sent empty away, and to his sons by Keturah. It was justice to provide for them; parents that do not imitate him in this are worse than infidels. It was prudence to settle them in places distant from Isaac, that they might not pretend to divide the inheritance with him, nor be in any way a care or expense to him. Observe, He did this while he yet lived, lest it should not be done, or not so well done, afterwards. Note, In many cases it is wisdom for men to make their own hands their executors, and what they find to do to do it while they live, as far as they can. These sons of the concubines were sent into the country that lay east from Canaan, and their posterity were called the children of the east, famous for their numbers, Judg 6 5, 33. Their great increase was the fruit of the promise made to Abraham, that God would multiply his seed. God, in dispensing his blessings, does as Abraham did; common blessings he gives to the children of this world, as to the sons of the bond-woman, but covenant-blessings he reserves for the heirs of promise. All that he has is theirs, for they are his Isaacs, from whom the rest shall be for ever separated.
Next week, we find out what happened to Isaac after Abraham’s death.
Next time — Genesis 26:6-11
Yesterday’s post has the readings for the Seventh Sunday of Easter, Exaudi Sunday, for Year B, the exegesis for the First Reading and the exegesis for verses 6 through 12 of today’s Gospel.
Today’s post concludes with John 17:13-19, our Lord’s prayer for His disciples, the eleven remaining Apostles in particular (emphases mine):
17:13 But now I am coming to you, and I speak these things in the world so that they may have my joy made complete in themselves.
17:14 I have given them your word, and the world has hated them because they do not belong to the world, just as I do not belong to the world.
17:15 I am not asking you to take them out of the world, but I ask you to protect them from the evil one.
17:16 They do not belong to the world, just as I do not belong to the world.
17:17 Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth.
17:18 As you have sent me into the world, so I have sent them into the world.
17:19 And for their sakes I sanctify myself, so that they also may be sanctified in truth.
Commentary comes from Matthew Henry and John MacArthur.
Jesus prayed, saying that He would be returning to His Father, so He spoke these things in the world so that they — His disciples — may have His joy complete in themselves (verse 13).
John MacArthur explains this joy, alluding to the Holy Trinity:
We don’t ever hear about Jesus laughing, but the Scriptures clearly tell us He wept. There was joy set before Him. And it’s the same with us; the joy is ahead of us. There are tastes of it here, but full joy, “My joy made full,” that is the joy that is equal to Christ in its fullness, that is future.
In chapter 16, you might look also at verse 20, “Truly, truly, I say to you – ” Jesus said, “ – you will week and lament, you will weep and lament. The world will rejoice, they’ll be happy to persecute you. You’ll weep and you’ll cry, but your grief will be turned into joy. Whenever a woman – it’s like a woman in labor. She has pain because her hour has come; but when she gives birth to the child, she’s no longer remembering the anguish because of the joy that a child has been born into the world. Therefore, you too have grief now. But I will see you again, and your heart will rejoice, and no one will take your joy away from you.” Verse 24 he adds, “Until now you’ve asked for nothing in My name. Ask and you’ll receive, so that your joy may be made full.”
The answers to prayer that the Lord gives us, the answers to prayer continue to elevate our joy. When we see the Holy Spirit – and He’s referring to the Holy Spirit there – come and take up residence in our heart, and give us love, joy, peace, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, self-control – all the fruit of the Spirit, we have a taste of heavenly joy. But the full joy is yet in the future, it’s yet in the future.
Please notice He says “My joy – ” in chapter 17, “ – that My joy may be made full in them.” In chapter 14, verse 27, He gave us what He called “My peace.” In chapter 16, He gave us “My Spirit.” He says several times that “I give unto them life – ” verse 3, this is eternal life, “ – that you may know the only true God and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.”
We have His life, we have His peace, we have His Spirit, we have His joy … All of that is ours because we are in Him, we are in Christ, understanding the promises, understanding the protection, understanding all that He has for us in the future, and all that He does for us in the present secures our joy. And all of this is ours at the highest divine level because we are in Christ.
This is a stunningly wonderful realization. They’ve heard the Lord make all these promises, and now they hear the Lord praying for them to the Father to secure their eternal glory, to make them one, and to fill them with His own joy, joy based not on the present but on the promises of God in the future. We have His life, we have His love, we have His joy, we have His peace, because we are in Him and He is in us. We talked about that last time. We’ve literally been drawn into the life of the Trinity, and it’s all motivated by love, it’s all motivated by love, motivated by love. And so He intercedes for us, for our spiritual security, our unity, our felicity, or our joy.
Matthew Henry gives us a practical application:
We are here taught, [1.] To found our joy in Christ: “It is my joy, joy of my giving, or rather joy that I am the matter of.” Christ is a Christian’s joy, his chief joy. Joy in the world is withering with it; joy in Christ is everlasting, like him. [2.] To build up our joy with diligence; for it is the duty as well as privilege of all true believers; no part of the Christian life is pressed upon us more earnestly, Phil 3 1; 4 4. [3.] To aim at the perfection of this joy, that we may have it fulfilled in us, for this Christ would have.
Jesus said that He had given His disciples God the Father’s word and, as such, the world has hated them because they do not belong to the world, just as He does not belong to the world (verse 14).
Henry gives us gems of wisdom here:
Here we have,
(1.) The world’s enmity to Christ’s followers. While Christ was with them, though as yet they had given but little opposition to the world, yet it hates them, much more would it do so when by their more extensive preaching of the gospel they would turn the world upside down. “Father, stand their friend,” says Christ, “for they are likely to have many enemies; let them have thy love, for the world’s hatred is entailed upon them. In the midst of those fiery darts, let them be compassed with thy favour as with a shield.“ It is God’s honour to take part with the weaker side, and to help the helpless. Lord, be merciful to them, for men would swallow them up.
(2.) The reasons of this enmity, which strengthen the plea. [1.] It is implied that one reason is because they had received the word of God as it was sent them by the hand of Christ, when the greatest part of the world rejected it, and set themselves against those who were the preachers and professors of it. Note, Those that receive Christ’s good will and good word must expect the world’s ill will and ill word. Gospel ministers have been in a particular manner hated by the world, because they call men out of the world, and separate them from it, and teach them not to conform to it, and so condemn the world. “Father, keep them for it is for thy sake that they are exposed; they are sufferers for thee.” Thus the psalmist pleads, For thy sake I have borne reproach, Ps 69 7. Note, Those that keep the word of Christ’s patience are entitled to special protection in the hour of temptation, Rev 3 10. That cause which makes a martyr may well make a joyful sufferer. [2.] Another reason is more express; the world hates them, because they are not of the world. Those to whom the word of Christ comes in power are not of the world, for it has this effect upon all that receive it in the love of it that it weans them from the wealth of the world, and turns them against the wickedness of the world, and therefore the world bears them a grudge.
Jesus prayed that God not take believers out of the world but to protect them from the evil one (verse 15) — Satan.
Jesus repeated that His followers do not belong to the world, just as He does not belong to it (verse 16).
MacArthur says:
He prays for our immunity – or if you like safety better. You could even use the word “invincibility.” But let’s say immunity because we know what that means. That means to be impervious to some threat. The threat? A powerful threat, verses 14-16: “I have given them Your word; and the world has hated them, because they’re not of the world, even as I am not of the world. I do not ask You to take them out of the world, but to keep them from the evil one. They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.” He prays that we would be immune to the deadly, damning threats of Satan. “I have given them Your word. I have spoken only divine truth to them, which the world rejected.”
Chapter 1, verse 11, “He came to His own, His own received Him not.” He was in the world, the world was made by Him, the world knew Him not.” The world has rejected all the way along. We see that repeatedly in chapter 5 where our Lord says, “You are of your father, the devil; and so when I speak the truth, you reject the truth because there’s no truth in you, and you follow your father who’s a liar. But I have given them, these who are Yours and you gave to me, these who have heard and understood and believed the truth, I have given them Your word. The result is the world has hated them because they’re not of the world, even as I’m not of the world. They’re treated like Me.”
That statement, “They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world,” is repeated in verse 16. “They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.” This is amazing. Another way to say that would be, “They are as I am.”
When we talk about being in Christ, we are talking about something that just seems to have an endless amount of rich possibility. And here’s another one: “They are as I am.” What a statement. “They are as I am righteous, because they’re in Me. They are as I am at peace, because they’re in Me. They are as I am filled with joy, because they’re in Me. They are as I am, hated by the world, because they’re in Me.” That’s why Paul said his wounds, essentially, were the marks of Christ. People were trying to bruise and beat Christ. He wasn’t here, so they do it to those who are His.
Henry has more:
Observe, [1.] That Jesus Christ was not of this world; he never had been of it, and least of all now that he was upon the point of leaving it. This intimates, First, His state; he was none of the world’s favourites nor darlings, none of its princes nor grandees; worldly possessions he had none, not even where to lay his head; nor worldly power, he was no judge nor divider. Secondly, His Spirit; he was perfectly dead to the world, the prince of this world had nothing in him, the things of this world were nothing to him; not honour, for he made himself of no reputation; not riches, for for our sakes he became poor; not pleasures, for he acquainted himself with grief. See ch. 8 23. [2.] That therefore true Christians are not of this world. The Spirit of Christ in them is opposite to the spirit of the world. First, It is their lot to be despised by the world; they are not in favour with the world any more than their Master before them was. Secondly, It is their privilege to be delivered from the world; as Abraham out of the land of his nativity. Thirdly, It is their duty and character to be dead to the world. Their most pleasing converse is, and should be, with another world, and their prevailing concern about the business of that world, not of this. Christ’s disciples were weak, and had many infirmities; yet this he could say for them, They were not of the world, not of the earth, and therefore he recommends them to the care of Heaven.
Jesus prayed that God would sanctify His disciples in the truth, for God’s word is truth (verse 17).
Henry explains what this short verse means:
He desires they may be sanctified,
1. As Christians. Father, make them holy, and this will be their preservation, 1 Thess 5 23. Observe here,
(1.) The grace desired—sanctification. The disciples were sanctified, for they were not of the world; yet he prays, Father sanctify them, that is, [1.] “Confirm the work of sanctification in them, strengthen their faith, inflame their good affections, rivet their good resolutions.” [2.] “Carry on that good work in them, and continue it; let the light shine more and more.” [3.] “Complete it, crown it with the perfection of holiness; sanctify them throughout and to the end.” Note, First, It is the prayer of Christ for all that are his that they may be sanctified; because he cannot for shame own them as his, either here or hereafter, either employ them in his work or present them to his Father, if they be not sanctified. Secondly, Those that through grace are sanctified have need to be sanctified more and more. Even disciples must pray for sanctifying grace; for, if he that was the author of the good work be not the finisher of it, we are undone. Not to go forward is to go backward; he that is holy must be holy still, more holy still, pressing forward, soaring upward, as those that have not attained. Thirdly, It is God that sanctifies as well as God that justified, 2 Cor 5 5. Fourthly, It is an encouragement to us, in our prayers for sanctifying grace, that it is what Christ intercedes for for us.
(2.) The means of conferring this grace—through thy truth, thy word is truth. Not that the Holy One of Israel is hereby limited to means, but in the counsel of peace among other things it was settled and agreed, [1.] That all needful truth should be comprised and summed up in the word of God. Divine revelation, as it now stands in the written word, is not only pure truth without mixture, but entire truth without deficiency. [2.] That this word of truth should be the outward and ordinary means of our sanctification; not of itself, for then it would always sanctify, but as the instrument which the Spirit commonly uses in beginning and carrying on that good work; it is the seed of the new birth (1 Pet 1 23), and the food of the new life, 1 Pet 2 1-2.
2. As ministers. “Sanctify them, set them apart for thyself and service; let their call to the apostleship be ratified in heaven.” Prophets were said to be sanctified, Jer 1 5. Priests and Levites were so. Sanctify them; that is, (1.) “Qualify them for the office, with Christian graces and ministerial gifts, to make them able ministers of the New Testament.” (2.) “Separate them to the office, Rom 1 1. I have called them, they have consented; Father, say Amen to it.” (3.) “Own them in the office; let thy hand go along with them; sanctify them by or in thy truth, as truth is opposed to figure and shadow; sanctify them really, not ritually and ceremonially, as the Levitical priests were, by anointing and sacrifice. Sanctify them to thy truth, the word of thy truth, to be the preachers of thy truth to the world; as the priests were sanctified to serve at the altar, so let them be to preach the gospel.” 1 Cor 9 13, 14. Note, [1.] Jesus Christ intercedes for his ministers with a particular concern, and recommends to his Father’s grace those stars he carries in his right hand. [2.] The great thing to be asked of God for gospel ministers is that they may be sanctified, effectually separated from the world, entirely devoted to God, and experimentally acquainted with the influence of that word upon their own hearts which they preach to others. Let them have the Urim and Thummim, light and integrity.
Jesus said that, just as God sent Him into the world, so He has sent His disciples into the world (verse 18).
MacArthur tells us that Jesus was speaking of the Great Commission:
Our Lord is saying, “Look, the world has hated them, they’re not of the world, I’m not of the world. I’m not asking you to take them out of the world. Can’t do that, can’t take them out of the world.” Why? Verse 18, “Because as You sent Me into the world, I’ve sent them into the world.”
You can’t take them out of the world because people can’t believe unless they hear; and they can’t hear unless there’s a preacher, and they’ve got to fulfill the Great Commission, right, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature.”
Henry elaborates:
Now here,
(1.) Christ speaks with great assurance of his own mission: Thou hast sent me into the world. The great author of the Christian religion had his commission and instructions from him who is the origin and object of all religion. He was sent of God to say what he said, and do what he did, and be what he is to those that believe on him; which was his comfort in his undertaking, and may be ours abundantly in our dependence upon him; his record was on high, for thence his mission was.
(2.) He speaks with great satisfaction of the commission he had given his disciples “So have I sent them on the same errand, and to carry on the same design;” to preach the same doctrine that he preached, and to confirm it with the same proofs, with a charge likewise to commit to other faithful men that which was committed to them. He gave them their commission (ch. 20 21) with a reference to his own, and it magnifies their office that it comes from Christ, and that there is some affinity between the commission given to the ministers of reconciliation and that given to the Mediator; he is called an apostle (Heb 3 1), a minister (Rom 15 8), a messenger, Mal 3 1. Only they are sent as servants, he as a Son. Now this comes in here as a reason, [1.] Why Christ was concerned so much for them, and laid their case so near his heart; because he had himself put them into a difficult office, which required great abilities for the due discharge of it. Note, Whom Christ sends he will stand by, and interest himself in those that are employed for him; what he calls us out to he will fit us out for, and bear us up in. [2.] Why he committed them to his Father; because he was concerned in their cause, their mission being in prosecution of his, and as it were an assignment out of it. Christ received gifts for men (Ps 68 18), and then gave them to men (Eph 4 8), and therefore prays aid of his Father to warrant and uphold those gifts, and confirm his grant of them. The Father sanctified him when he sent him into the world, ch. 10 36. Now, they being sent as he was, let them also be sanctified.
Jesus concluded this portion of His intercessory prayer for the disciples by saying that He was sanctifying Himself for their sakes, so that they might be sanctified in truth (verse 19).
Henry explains the significance of Christ’s words:
Here is, (1.) Christ’s designation of himself to the work and office of Mediator: I sanctified myself. He entirely devoted himself to the undertaking, and all the parts of it, especially that which he was now going about—the offering up of himself without spot unto God, by the eternal Spirit. He, as the priest and altar, sanctified himself as the sacrifice. When he said, Father, glorify thy name—Father, thy will be done—Father, I commit my spirit into thy hands, he paid down the satisfaction he had engaged to make, and so sanctified himself. This he pleads with his Father, for his intercession is made in the virtue of his satisfaction; by his own blood he entered into the holy place (Heb 9 12), as the high priest, on the day of atonement, sprinkled the blood of the sacrifice at the same time that he burnt incense within the veil, Lev 16 12, 14. (2.) Christ’s design of kindness to his disciples herein; it is for their sakes, that they may be sanctified, that is, that they may be martyrs; so some. “I sacrifice myself, that they may be sacrificed to the glory of God and the church’s good.” Paul speaks of his being offered, Phil 2 17; 2 Tim 4 6. Whatever there is in the death of the saints that is precious in the sight of the Lord, it is owing to the death of the Lord Jesus. But I rather take it more generally, that they may be saints and ministers, duly qualified and accepted of God. [1.] The office of the ministry is the purchase of Christ’s blood, and one of the blessed fruits of his satisfaction, and owes its virtue and value to Christ’s merit. The priests under the law were consecrated with the blood of bulls and goats, but gospel ministers with the blood of Jesus. [2.] The real holiness of all good Christians is the fruit of Christ’s death, by which the gift of the Holy Ghost was purchased; he gave himself for his church, to sanctify it, Eph 5 25, 26. And he that designed the end designed also the means, that they might be sanctified by the truth, the truth which Christ came into the world to bear witness to and died to confirm. The word of truth receives its sanctifying virtue and power from the death of Christ. Some read it, that they may be sanctified in truth, that is, truly; for as God must be served, so, in order to this, we must be sanctified, in the spirit, and in truth. And this Christ has prayed for, for all that are his; for this is his will, even their sanctification, which encourages them to pray for it.
May all reading this enjoy a blessed Sunday as we look forward to remembering the first Pentecost in a week’s time.
The Seventh Sunday of Easter is May 12, 2024.
This particular day is also referred to traditionally as Exaudi Sunday, so called because of the traditional Introit, taken from Psalm 17:1. The two first words in Latin are ‘Exaudi Domine’ — ‘Hear, Lord’.
Because it follows Ascension Day, when Jesus physically leaves His disciples, I have read that it is a sad Sunday in the Church year. The faithful recall the forlorn disciples, among them the Apostles, who saw Christ’s ascent into Heaven and then awaited the arrival of the Holy Spirit.
Readings and exegeses for Ascension Day, which this year was on Thursday, May 9, are as follows:
Readings for Ascension Day (same regardless of Lectionary year)
Readings for Exaudi Sunday, Year B, can be found here.
The exegesis for the First Reading, Acts 1:15-17, 21-26, is here; the disciples cast lots for a replacement for Judas. Matthias was chosen over Joseph called Barsabbas, who was also known as Justus.
We do not know much about St Matthias. Some historians say he preached in Ethiopia and died there. Others say he died of old age in Jerusalem. Another group of scholars believe he was martyred in Jerusalem: stoned then beheaded.
Whatever the case, Matthias remains a popular name in France and Germany.
St Matthias is venerated in Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican and Lutheran churches, each of which has a different feast day for him.
The Gospel reading is as follows (emphases mine):
John 17:6-19
17:6 “I have made your name known to those whom you gave me from the world. They were yours, and you gave them to me, and they have kept your word.
17:7 Now they know that everything you have given me is from you;
17:8 for the words that you gave to me I have given to them, and they have received them and know in truth that I came from you; and they have believed that you sent me.
17:9 I am asking on their behalf; I am not asking on behalf of the world, but on behalf of those whom you gave me, because they are yours.
17:10 All mine are yours, and yours are mine; and I have been glorified in them.
17:11 And now I am no longer in the world, but they are in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, protect them in your name that you have given me, so that they may be one, as we are one.
17:12 While I was with them, I protected them in your name that you have given me. I guarded them, and not one of them was lost except the one destined to be lost, so that the scripture might be fulfilled.
17:13 But now I am coming to you, and I speak these things in the world so that they may have my joy made complete in themselves.
17:14 I have given them your word, and the world has hated them because they do not belong to the world, just as I do not belong to the world.
17:15 I am not asking you to take them out of the world, but I ask you to protect them from the evil one.
17:16 They do not belong to the world, just as I do not belong to the world.
17:17 Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth.
17:18 As you have sent me into the world, so I have sent them into the world.
17:19 And for their sakes I sanctify myself, so that they also may be sanctified in truth.
Commentary comes from Matthew Henry and John MacArthur.
John 17 is comprised of the prayers that Jesus prayed after the Last Supper while He awaited His arrest. John’s is the only Gospel with such a detailed account, not only of these prayers, but in the accounts of our Lord’s final discourse from John 13 through John 16.
Many commentators, including both Henry and MacArthur, call this chapter ‘The Lord’s Prayer’ because only Jesus as the Great High Priest was able to pray it. What we consider The Lord’s Prayer — ‘Our Father, which art in heaven’ — is the prayer Jesus gave to us.
Henry describes the intercessory prayers in John 17 for us:
This chapter is a prayer, it is the Lord’s prayer, the Lord Christ’s prayer. There was one Lord’s prayer which he taught us to pray, and did not pray himself, for he needed not to pray for the forgiveness of sin; but this was properly and peculiarly his, and suited him only as a Mediator, and is a sample of his intercession, and yet is of use to us both for instruction and encouragement in prayer. Observe, I. The circumstances of the prayer, ver 1. II. The prayer itself. 1. He prays for himself, ver 1-5. 2. He prays for those that are his. And in this see, (1.) The general pleas with which he introduces his petitions for them, ver 6-10. (2.) The particular petitions he puts up for them [1.] That they might be kept, ver 11-16. [2.] That they might be sanctified, ver 17-19. [3.] That they might be united, ver 11 and 20-23. [4.] That they might be glorified, ver 24-26.
… Sursum corda was anciently used as a call to prayer, Up with your hearts, up to heaven; thither we must direct our desires in prayer, and thence we must expect to receive the good things we pray for.
The exegesis for verses 20 through 26, in which Jesus prays for all believers, can be found here; these are read on the Seventh Sunday of Easter, Exaudi Sunday, in Year C.
MacArthur says:
From beginning to end, this chapter is the Lord’s Prayer; He prayed it. It is pure prayer, and it is for us, it is for us. It is the Lord Jesus praying for us, praying for His people. And because it is for us, it is an incomprehensible privilege to have this prayer written down in Scripture. The eleven disciples heard Him pray these words. But in the purposes of God, they were written down so all believers through all time could also hear. This is a firsthand opportunity to hear what’s on the Lord’s heart for His people. This prayer was prayed deep into Friday morning in the darkness as the disciples walked toward the garden of Gethsemane where our Lord would pray, and be tempted, and overcome that temptation, and then be arrested by a crowd led by Judas; and later on that Friday, He would be crucified.
These are the last hours before the cross, and this is when He prays that prayer. He has said everything He wanted to say to the disciples in the upper room earlier on Thursday night when they were celebrating Passover and when He was instituting the Lord’s Table, and then He said even more things as they left the upper room and walked through Jerusalem and beyond Jerusalem, headed toward the garden of Gethsemane. He’s now through speaking, and what He’s been saying – recorded in 13, 14, 15, and 16 of John – is promises; promise, after promise, after promise, after promise: promises of peace, promises of joy, promises of blessing, promises of persecution, promises of death, promise of all promises – the Holy Spirit would come, and the Holy Spirit would fulfill in them all the promises that our Lord gave.
The legacy of Jesus is given to His disciples and to us in chapters 13 through 16. And now in chapter 17, He prays that God the Father will fulfill all these promises, and fulfill them in an ultimate way by bringing His own to heaven. These are the Lord’s final words to the eleven before His death, and what we have here is a preview of His new heavenly ministry which is about to begin.
In today’s verses, Jesus prays for His disciples, particularly the eleven remaining Apostles, Judas having left already. We will see a reference to him in verse 12.
Jesus prayed to His Father that He had made His Father’s name known to those whom He was given from the world; Jesus acknowledges that they were His Father’s people, that God gave those people to Him and that they have kept His word (verse 6).
Henry explains:
Whom he did pray for; not for angels, but for the children of men. 1. He prays for those that were given him, meaning primarily the disciples that had attended him in this regeneration; but it is doubtless to be extended further, to all who come under the same character, who receive and believe the words of Christ …
1. The charge he had received concerning them: Thine they were, and thou gavest them me (v. 6) …
Now,
(1.) This is meant primarily of the disciples that then were, who were given to Christ as his pupils to be educated by him while he was on earth, and his agents to be employed for him when he went to heaven. They were given him to be the learners of his doctrine, the witnesses of his life and miracles, and the monuments of his grace and favour, in order to their being the publishers of his gospel and the planters of his church. When they left all to follow him, this was the secret spring of that strange resolution: they were given to him, else they had not given themselves to him. Note, The apostleship and ministry, which are Christ’s gift to the church, were first the Father’s gift to Jesus Christ. As under the law the Levites were given to Aaron (Num 3 9), to him (the great high priest of our profession) the Father gave the apostles first, and ministers in every age, to keep his charge, and the charge of the whole congregation, and to do the service of the tabernacle. See Eph 4 8, 11; Ps 68 18. Christ received this gift for men, that he might give it to men. As this puts a great honour upon the ministry of the gospel, and magnifies that office, which is so much vilified; so it lays a mighty obligation upon the ministers of the gospel to devote themselves entirely to Christ’s service, as being given to him,
(2.) But it is designed to extend to all the elect, for they are elsewhere said to be given to Christ (ch. 6 37, 39), and he often laid a stress upon this, that those he was to save were given to him as his charge; to his care they were committed, from his hand they were expected, and concerning them he received commandments. He here shows,
[1.] That the Father had authority to give them: Thine they were. He did not give that which was none of his own, but covenanted that he had a good title. The elect, whom the Father gave to Christ, were his own in three ways:—First, they were creatures, and their lives and beings were derived from him. When they were given to Christ to be vessels of honour, they were in his hand, as clay in the hand of the potter, to be disposed of as God’s wisdom saw most for God’s glory. Secondly, They were criminals, and their lives and beings were forfeited to him. It was a remnant of fallen mankind that was given to Christ to be redeemed, that might have been made sacrifices to justice when they were pitched upon to be the monuments of mercy; might justly have been delivered to the tormentors when they were delivered to the Saviour. Thirdly, They were chosen, and their lives and beings were designed, for him; they were set apart for God, and were consigned to Christ as his agent. This he insists upon again (v. 7): All things whatsoever thou hast given me are of thee, which, though it may take in all that appertained to his office as Mediator, yet seems especially to be meant of those that were given him. “They are of thee, their being is of thee as the God of nature, their well-being is of thee as the God of grace; they are all of thee, and therefore, Father, I bring them all to thee, that they may be all for thee.”
[2.] That he did accordingly give them to the Son. Thou gavest them to me, as sheep to the shepherd, to be kept; as patients to the physician, to be cured; children to a tutor, to be educated; thus he will deliver up his charge (Heb 2 13), The children thou hast given me. They were delivered to Christ, First, That the election of grace might not be frustrated, that not one, no not of the little ones, might perish. That great concern must be lodged in some one good hand, able to give sufficient security, that the purpose of God according to election might stand. Secondly, That the undertaking of Christ might not be fruitless; they were given to him as his seed, in whom he should see of the travail of his soul and be satisfied (Isa 53 10, 11), and might not spend his strength, and shed his blood, for nought, and in vain, Isa 49 4. We may plead, as Christ does, “Lord, keep my graces, keep my comforts, for thine they were, and thou gavest them to me.“
2. The care he had taken of them to teach them (v. 6): I have manifested thy name to them ... Observe here,
(1.) The great design of Christ’s doctrine, which was to manifest God’s name, to declare him (ch. 1 18), to instruct the ignorant, and rectify the mistakes of a dark and foolish world concerning God, that he might be better loved and worshipped.
(2.) His faithful discharge of this undertaking: I have done it. His fidelity appears, [1.] In the truth of the doctrine. It agreed exactly with the instructions he received from his Father. He gave not only the things, but the very words, that were given him. Ministers, in wording their message, must have an eye to the words which the Holy Ghost teaches. [2.] In the tendency of his doctrine, which was to manifest God’s name. He did not seek himself, but, in all he did and said, aimed to magnify his Father. Note, First, It is Christ’s prerogative to manifest God’s name to the souls of the children of men. No man knows the Father, but he to whom the Son will reveal him, Matt 11 27. He only has acquaintance with the Father, and so is able to open the truth; and he only has access to the spirits of men, and so is able to open the understanding. Ministers may publish the name of the Lord (as Moses, Deut 32 3), but Christ only can manifest that name. By the word of Christ God is revealed to us; by the Spirit of Christ God is revealed in us. Ministers may speak the words of God to us, but Christ can give us his words, can put them in us, as food, as treasure. Secondly, Sooner or later, Christ will manifest God’s name to all that were given him, and will give them his word, to be the seed of their new birth, the support of their spiritual life, and the earnest of their everlasting bliss.
3. The good effect of the care he had taken of them, and the pains he had taken with them, (v. 6): They have kept thy word, (v. 7) they have known that all things are of thee (v. 8); they have received thy words, and embraced them, have given their assent and consent to them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and have believed that thou didst send me. Observe here,
(1.) What success the doctrine of Christ had among those that were given to him, in several particulars:—
[1.] “They have received the words which I gave them, as the ground receives the seed, and the earth drinks in the rain.” They attended to the words of Christ, apprehended in some measure the meaning of them, and were affected with them: they received the impression of them. The word was to them an ingrafted word.
[2.] “They have kept thy word, have continued in it; they have conformed to it.” Christ’s commandment is then only kept when it is obeyed. Those that have to teach others the commands of Christ ought to be themselves observant of them. It was requisite that these should keep what was committed to them, for it was to be transmitted by them to every place for every age.
[3.] “They have understood the word, and have been sensible on what ground they went in receiving and keeping it. They have been aware that thou art the original author of that holy religion which I am come to institute, that all things whatsoever thou hast given me are of thee.” All Christ’s offices and powers, all the gifts of the Spirit, all his graces and comforts, which God gave without measure to him, were all from God, contrived by his wisdom, appointed by his will, and designed by his grace, for his own glory in man’s salvation. Note, It is a great satisfaction to us, in our reliance upon Christ, that he, and all he is and has, all he said and did, all he is doing and will do, are of God, 1 Cor 1 30. We may therefore venture our souls upon Christ’s mediation, for it has a good bottom. If the righteousness be of God’s appointing, we shall be justified; if the grace be of his dispensing, we shall be sanctified.
MacArthur adds that it is interceding for us that marks Jesus Christ out from any other priest, since they all die. Yet, Jesus lives and reigns at the right hand of God the Father and intercedes for us always, throughout history, thereby making him the great High Priest:
Now, I want to say something that you may at first not understand. We look at His cross work, the work on the cross, and we elevate that, and rightly we should. We look at the resurrection and we exalt Him for His resurrection, and rightly we should. But He has a more glorious work. It is the work of intercession that is the truest and fullest expression of the atonement …
Yes, Christ died to pay our debt of sin; but even more importantly, He lives to bring us to glory. He lives to make intercession. Hebrews 7:25, “He ever lives to make intercession for His people.”
The apostle Paul understood that intercession was more than atonement. Look at Romans, chapter 5. Romans, chapter 5 – familiar words – verse 8, “God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.”
Then notice the next phrase: “Much more then.” Wait a minute. How can anything be more than that? How can anything be much more than that? But he says, “Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be being saved from the wrath of God through Him. For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be being saved by His life.”
What is much more than His death? His life. His death provides the sacrifice for sin, but He ever lives to make intercession for us to bring us to glory. That’s the much more. That’s the much more. He goes on interceding for us.
Jesus continued, saying that the disciples know that everything that He has been given comes from His Father (verse 7).
Jesus said that the words God the Father gave Him He gave to them; they received those words and know, in truth, that He came from the Father, and they believed that God sent Him (verse 8) to the world.
MacArthur tells us what this means:
That essentially is what ministry is about. That is our Lord giving us a model of ministry. He came so that they would know the truth, so that they would receive the truth, so that they would understand the truth and believe the truth. This is a model of how ministry should be. They believed.
They believed that Jesus worked by the power of God. They believed that Jesus had come from God. They said, “We know You’re the Holy One of God.”
They believed that everything He did was according to the will of God, everything He said was the Word of God. They believed that His miracles were done by the power of God, and they were full of the compassion of God. They believed that everything He ever taught had divine authority because it was from God. They believed that Jesus was holy, that every day He ministered to sinners and yet never sinned. They believed that He had regular constant communion with God the Father, and that everything He did expressed the will of the Father. They believed that He was the divine Son of the Father, and they heard the Father give that testimony at the transfiguration and at the baptism.
They knew that everything He possessed was from God. His nature was from God, His words were from God, His works were from God. They received, therefore, all His words as true; and they understood, therefore, His divine origin that He came from the Father; and they believed in His divine mission up to now. They believed that He had been sent by the Father, that He came from heaven, that He is the eternal Son of God. They believed that.
Jesus then made a specific intercession, asking on His disciples’ behalf and not on behalf of the world but only for those whom God gave Him because they are God’s (verse 9).
Here we have the Doctrine of Election, or predestination. Not everyone is destined to be saved. That said, we do not know who is to be saved, therefore, we must go and preach the Gospel in whatever way we are called to do.
Jesus said that all of His people are God’s people and all of God’s people are His people, and He — Jesus — has been glorified in them (verse 10).
Henry elaborates:
All mine are thine, and thine are mine. Between the Father and Son there can be no dispute (as there is among the children of men) about meum and tuum—mine and thine, for the matter was settled from eternity; all mine are thine, and thine are mine. Here is,
(1.) The plea particularly urged for his disciples: They are thine. The consigning of the elect to Christ was so far from making them less the Father’s that it was in order to making them the more so. Note, [1.] All that receive Christ’s word, and believe in him, are taken into covenant-relation to the Father, and are looked upon as his; Christ presents them to him, and they, through Christ, present themselves to him. Christ has redeemed us, not to himself only, but to God, by his blood, Rev 5 9, 10. They are first-fruits unto God, Rev 14 4. [2.] This is a good plea in prayer, Christ here pleads it, They are thine; we may plead it for ourselves, I am thine, save me; and for others (as Moses, Exod 32 11), “They are thy people. They are thine; wilt thou not provide for thine own? Wilt thou not secure them, that they may not be run down by the devil and the world? Wilt thou not secure thy interest in them, that they may not depart from thee? They are thine, own them as thine.”
(2.) The foundation on which this plea is grounded: All mine are thine, and thine are mine. This bespeaks the Father and Son to be, [1.] One in essence. Every creature must say to God, All mine are thine; but none can say to him, All thine are mine, but he that is the same in substance with him and equal in power and glory. [2.] One in interest; no separate or divided interests between them. First, What the Father has as Creator is delivered over to the Son, to be used and disposed of in subserviency to his great undertaking. All things are delivered to him (Matt 11 27); the grant is so general that nothing is excepted but he that did put all things under him. Secondly, What the Son has as Redeemer is designed for the Father, and his kingdom shall shortly be delivered up to him. All the benefits of redemption, purchased by the Son, are intended for the Father’s praise, and in his glory all the lines of his undertaking centre: All mine are thine. The Son owns none for his that are not devoted to the service of the Father; nor will any thing be accepted as a piece of service to the Christian religion which clashes with the dictates and laws of natural religion. In a limited sense, every true believer may say, All thine are mine; if God be ours in covenant, all he is and has is so far ours that it shall be engaged for our good; and in an unlimited sense every true believer does say, Lord, all mine are thine; all laid at his feet, to be serviceable to him. And what we have may be comfortably committed to God’s care and blessing when it is cheerfully submitted to his government and disposal: “Lord, take care of what I have, for it is all thine.“
5. He pleads his own concern in them: I am glorified in them—dedoxasmai. (1.) I have been glorified in them. What little honour Christ had in this world was among his disciples; he had been glorified by their attendance on him and obedience to him, their preaching and working miracles in his name; and therefore I pray for them. Note, Those shall have an interest in Christ’s intercession in and by whom he is glorified. (2.) “I am to be glorified in them when I am gone to heaven; they are to bear up my name.” The apostles preached and wrought miracles in Christ’s name; the Spirit in them glorified Christ (ch. 16 14): “I am glorified in them, and therefore,” [1.] “I concern myself for them.” What little interest Christ has in this degenerate world lies in his church; and therefore it and all its affairs lie near his heart, within the veil. [2.] “Therefore I commit them to the Father, who has engaged to glorify the Son, and, upon this account, will have a gracious eye to those in whom he is glorified.” That in which God and Christ are glorified may, with humble confidence, be committed to God’s special care.
Jesus then prayed about His future: the Crucifixion, the Resurrection and the Ascension.
He asked that, as He was no longer in the world but on His way to the Father, yet His disciples would continue to be in the world, that God protect them in His name, so that they may be one just as He and the Father are one (verse 11).
There we have the Doctrine of the Trinity, even if the Holy Spirit is not mentioned in that verse.
MacArthur says:
The Father loves the Son infinitely and eternally; and because we are in the Son, He loves us infinitely and eternally. We are as accepted as the Son is accepted: “This is My beloved Son in whom I am well pleased.” And we are in Him, loved as He is loved. That is our justification, that is our sanctification, and that is our glorification. How amazing is it to be loved by God as He loves His own Holy Son.
And let me stop and just say something about Christianity that you need to understand. You might not think that the Trinity is an important doctrine, but it is absolutely foundational to everything that is true about God. John says in 1 John, “God is love.” If God was only a solitary, singular person, that could not be a part of His eternal nature, because there would be no one to love.
… the triune God is eternal love, and has loved eternally within the Trinity.
If Jesus was a created being, God would love us like He loved Jesus, another created being. But Jesus is not a created being. He is the eternal Son, the eternal second member of the Trinity. God loves us like He loves His Son. This is a love beyond anything that any creature will ever experience.
With that infinite, holy, perfect love, He loves His Son, and He loves us in His Son. This is salvation fullness. This is life. This is blessing. This is glory. So when Christ goes into the heavenly Holy of Holies and comes before the Father, as He does continually, we are there in the throne room with Him. We are there in Him.
Henry discusses the world and our Lord’s prayer that His disciples be preserved in it as they go about His work:
Now the first thing Christ prays for, for his disciples, is their preservation, in these verses, in order to which he commits them all to his Father’s custody. Keeping supposes danger, and their danger arose from the world, the world wherein they were, the evil of this he begs they might be kept from. Now observe,
I. The request itself: Keep them from the world. There were two ways of their being delivered from the world:—
1. By taking them out of it; and he does not pray that they might be so delivered: I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world; that is,
(1.) “I pray not that they may be speedily removed by death.” If the world will be vexatious to them, the readiest way to secure them would be to hasten them out of it to a better world, that will give them better treatment. Send chariots and horses of fire for them, to fetch them to heaven; Job, Elijah, Jonah, Moses, when that occurred which fretted them, prayed that they might be taken out of the world; but Christ would not pray so for his disciples, for two reasons:—[1.] Because he came to conquer, not to countenance, those intemperate heats and passions which make men impatient of life, and importunate for death. It is his will that we should take up our cross, and not outrun it. [2.] Because he had work for them to do in the world; the world, though sick of them (Acts 22 22), and therefore not worthy of them (Heb 11 38), yet could ill spare them. In pity therefore to this dark world, Christ would not have these lights removed out of it, but continued in it, especially for the sake of those in the world that were to believe in him through their word. Let not them be taken out of the world when their Master is; they must each in his own order die a martyr, but not till they have finished their testimony. Note, First, The taking of good people out of the world is a thing by no means to be desired, but rather dreaded and laid to heart, Isa 57 1. Secondly, Though Christ loves his disciples, he does not presently send for them to heaven, as soon as they are effectually called, but leaves them for some time in this world, that they may do good and glorify God upon earth, and be ripened for heaven. Many good people are spared to live, because they can ill be spared to die.
(2.) “I pray not that they may be totally freed and exempted from the troubles of this world, and taken out of the toil and terror of it into some place of ease and safety, there to live undisturbed; this is not the preservation I desire for them.” Non ut omni molestia liberati otium et delicias colant, sed ut inter media pericula salvi tamen maneant Dei auxilio—Not that, being freed from all trouble, they may bask in luxurious ease, but that by the help of God they may be preserved in a scene of danger; so Calvin. Not that they may be kept from all conflict with the world, but that they may not be overcome by it; not that, as Jeremiah wished, they might leave their people, and go from them (Jer 9 2), but that, like Ezekiel, their faces may be strong against the faces of wicked men, Ezek 3 8. It is more the honour of a Christian soldier by faith to overcome the world than by a monastical vow to retreat from it; and more for the honour of Christ to serve him in a city than to serve him in a cell.
2. Another way is by keeping them from the corruption that is in the world; and he prays they may be thus kept, v. 11, 15. Here are three branches of this petition:—
(1.) Holy Father, keep those whom thou hast given me.
[1.] Christ was now leaving them; but let them not think that their defence was departed from them; no, he does here, in their hearing, commit them to the custody of his Father and their Father. Note, It is the unspeakable comfort of all believers that Christ himself has committed them to the care of God. Those cannot but be safe whom the almighty God keeps, and he cannot but keep those whom the Son of his love commits to him, in the virtue of which we may by faith commit the keeping of our souls to God, 1 Pet 4 19; 2 Tim 1 12. First, He here puts them under the divine protection, that they may not be run down by the malice of their enemies; that they and all their concerns may be the particular care of the divine Providence: “Keep their lives, till they have done their work; keep their comforts, and let them not be broken in upon by the hardships they meet with; keep up their interest in the world, and let it not sink.” To this prayer is owing the wonderful preservation of the gospel ministry and gospel church in the world unto this day; if God had not graciously kept both, and kept up both, they had been extinguished and lost long ago. Secondly, He puts them under the divine tuition, that they may not themselves run away from their duty, nor be led aside by the treachery of their own hearts: “Keep them in their integrity, keep them disciples, keep them close to their duty.” We need God’s power not only to put us into a state of grace, but to keep us in it. See, ch. 10 28, 29; 1 Pet 1 5.
[2.] The titles he gives to him he prays to, and them he prays for, enforce the petition. First, He speaks to God as a holy Father. In committing ourselves and others to the divine care, we may take encouragement, 1. From the attribute of his holiness, for this is engaged for the preservation of his holy ones; he hath sworn by his holiness, Ps 89 35. If he be a holy God and hate sin, he will make those holy that are his, and keep them from sin, which they also hate and dread as the greatest evil. 2. From this relation of a Father, wherein he stands to us through Christ. If he be a Father, he will take care of his own children, will teach them and keep them; who else should? Secondly, He speaks of them as those whom the Father had given him. What we receive as our Father’s gifts, we may comfortably remit to our Father’s care. “Father, keep the graces and comforts thou hast given me; the children thou hast given me; the ministry I have received.“
(2.) Keep them through thine own name. That is, [1.] Keep them for thy name’s sake; so some. “Thy name and honour are concerned in their preservation as well as mine, for both will suffer by it if they either revolt or sink.” The Old Testament saints often pleaded, for thy name’s sake; and those may with comfort plead it that are indeed more concerned for the honour of God’s name than for any interest of their own. [2.] Keep them in thy name; so others; the original is so, en to onomati. “Keep them in the knowledge and fear of thy name; keep them in the profession and service of thy name, whatever it cost them. Keep them in the interest of thy name, and let them ever be faithful to this; keep them in thy truths, in thine ordinances, in the way of thy commandments.” [3.] Keep them by or through thy name; so others. “Keep them by thine own power, in thine own hand; keep them thyself, undertake for them, let them be thine own immediate care. Keep them by those means of preservation which thou hast thyself appointed, and by which thou hast made thyself known. Keep them by thy word and ordinances; let thy name be their strong tower, thy tabernacle their pavilion.”
(3.) Keep them from the evil, or out of the evil. He had taught them to pray daily, Deliver us from evil, and this would encourage them to pray. [1.] “Keep them from the evil one, the devil and all his instruments; that wicked one and all his children. Keep them from Satan as a tempter, that either he may not have leave to sift them, or that their faith may not fail. Keep them from him as a destroyer, that he may not drive them to despair.” [2.] “Keep them from the evil thing, that is sin; from every thing that looks like it, or leads to it. Keep them, that they do no evil,” 2 Cor 13 7. Sin is that evil which, above any other, we should dread and deprecate. [3.] “Keep them from the evil of the world, and of their tribulation in it, so that it may have no sting in it, no malignity;” not that they might be kept from affliction, but kept through it, that the property of their afflictions might be so altered as that there might be no evil in them, nothing to them any harm.
Jesus said that He had protected those whom God had given Him, guarding them (as would the Good Shepherd), and not one of them was lost except for the one destined to be lost — Judas — so that Scripture might be fulfilled (verse 12).
MacArthur explains, also referring to verse 11, with our Lord’s plea for the Apostles’ preservation:
Back in the 10th chapter of John and verse 27, there’s a reminder of this in some of the most familiar words of our Lord: “My sheep – ” My sheep, My sheep “ – hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand.” “They’re Mine and they’re Yours. You owned them; they were Yours; You gave them to Me. I have held them. Now, Father, You hold them; You guard them; You keep them. You and I are one. While I was with them – ” He says “ – on earth, I was keeping them. The ones that belonged to You, and now to Me, I was keeping them.” Keep means “to watch over protectively.” We’re going to see an illustration of that in chapter 18 that may be the most remarkable illustration of that promise or that purpose of Christ in the whole of the gospels.
When in chapter 18, they come to arrest Jesus, they want also to arrest the disciples. The Lord never lets that happen; He protects them from that, because theoretically, it could have destroyed their faith. But He will never let anything that could do that happen. We’ll see that in chapter 18.
He is about to suffer. He is about to come under the weight and burden of sin, and take His hands away from His disciples; and the Father needs to guard them for those hours. And then when He comes back to heaven, the Father needs to continue to guard them, which He promises to do through the Holy Spirit, whom He gives to every believer.
“I guarded them,” He says in verse 12. That’s phulass, it means “to protect from outside threats.” It’s used in Luke 11 of a strong man guarding a house. It’s used in Acts 28 of soldiers guarding Paul. “I guarded them; I kept them. I now need You, Father, to take over and guard them. And by the way, while I was guarding them – ” He said “ – none of them perished.”
Now, if the sentenced ended there, we’d have a problem: “None of them perished.” We’d all be saying, “Wait, wait a minute. There’s only eleven here. There’s Judas. What about Judas? What about Judas? Isn’t Judas proof that a disciple, a visible associate of Jesus, a preacher for God, can be lost? Isn’t Judas the prototype of a believer who is saved and then loses salvation because he turns and rejects the Lord he once confessed?”
If our Lord didn’t say anything here about Judas, we would have a serious dilemma. So to make sure that never happens, He injects into this otherwise magnificent and beautiful prayer, this one ugly, dark, black note in the whole prayer; it’s the only one. “I guarded them, and not one of them perished.”
Not one of what? Not one of whom? “None of the ones You have given Me perished. None of them. None of the ones who were Your and now are Mine perished but the son of perdition, so that the Scripture would be fulfilled.” Judas was never a son of God, he was always a son of perdition.
Son means “nature.” Perdition is the word for “destruction, waste, ruin.” He was a son of ruin. It’s used in Matthew 7:13, “The broad road leads to destruction.” He is a son of destruction, not a son of God. He is an outsider.
Back in the 6th chapter of John at the end of the chapter, Jesus us with the disciples, and Peter says, “‘Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. We have believed and have come to know that You are the Holy One of God.’ Jesus answered them, ‘Did I Myself not choose you, the twelve, and one of you is a devil?’ He meant Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot, for he was one of the twelve that who was going to betray Him.”
There was a devil there from the beginning, a son of perdition, never a son of God. You say, “Well, isn’t this a terrible blight on the plan?” No. This was the plan so that the Scripture would be fulfilled.
Back in chapter 13 on that very same evening in the upper room, Jesus said, “I do not speak of all of you – ” 13:18 “ – I know the ones I have chosen. I know the ones I have chosen. I know the ones – ” in 17 “ – the Father has given Me; but it is that the Scripture may be fulfilled – ” Psalm 41:9 “‘ – He who eats My bread has lifted up his heel against Me.’ From now on I’m telling you before it comes to pass, so that when it does occur, you may believe that I am, that am God, because I know about Him what you don’t know, and I know what he will do. He is a son of perdition, he is a devil.”
That same night in the upper room, Satan entered into Judas. Judas was nonetheless treated with love by the Lord that same night. Chapter 13, Judas was treated as the honored guest, given the first piece of bread to dip in the sop, as they called it, the meal. Judas is guilty on his own. The fact that Scripture prophesied he would do this is not a determinism, he did what he chose to do.
Listen to Matthew 26:24, “‘The Son of Man is to go, just as it is written of Him; but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been good for that man if had not been born.’ And Judas, who was betraying Him said, ‘Surely it is not I, Rabbi?’ Jesus said to him, ‘You have said it yourself.’” So our Lord says, “I’ve guarded them. None of them has been lost, none of them have perished but the son of perdition, so that the Scripture would be fulfilled.”
Part 2, covering verses 13 through 19, continues tomorrow.
The three-year Lectionary that many Catholics and Protestants hear in public worship gives us a great variety of Holy Scripture.
Yet, it doesn’t tell the whole story.
My series Forbidden Bible Verses — ones the Lectionary editors and their clergy omit — examines the passages we do not hear in church. These missing verses are also Essential Bible Verses, ones we should study with care and attention. Often, we find that they carry difficult messages and warnings.
Today’s reading is from the English Standard Version Anglicised (ESVUK) with commentary by Matthew Henry and John MacArthur.
From Shem to Abram
10 This is the account of Shem’s family line.
Two years after the flood, when Shem was 100 years old, he became the father[a] of Arphaxad. 11 And after he became the father of Arphaxad, Shem lived 500 years and had other sons and daughters.
12 When Arphaxad had lived 35 years, he became the father of Shelah. 13 And after he became the father of Shelah, Arphaxad lived 403 years and had other sons and daughters.[b]
14 When Shelah had lived 30 years, he became the father of Eber. 15 And after he became the father of Eber, Shelah lived 403 years and had other sons and daughters.
16 When Eber had lived 34 years, he became the father of Peleg. 17 And after he became the father of Peleg, Eber lived 430 years and had other sons and daughters.
18 When Peleg had lived 30 years, he became the father of Reu. 19 And after he became the father of Reu, Peleg lived 209 years and had other sons and daughters.
20 When Reu had lived 32 years, he became the father of Serug. 21 And after he became the father of Serug, Reu lived 207 years and had other sons and daughters.
22 When Serug had lived 30 years, he became the father of Nahor. 23 And after he became the father of Nahor, Serug lived 200 years and had other sons and daughters.
24 When Nahor had lived 29 years, he became the father of Terah. 25 And after he became the father of Terah, Nahor lived 119 years and had other sons and daughters.
26 After Terah had lived 70 years, he became the father of Abram, Nahor and Haran.
——————————————————————————————————————————–
Last week’s post was about the sons and descendants of Shem, who was the father of the Semites.
Today’s verses give us more information about some of them, and John MacArthur explains why (emphases mine):
Now, in chapter 10, you have … the genealogy of all three of Noah’s sons given. If you glance back at the chapter, it begins with the generations, the toledoth of Shem, Ham, and Japheth. And then it goes on, in verse 2, “The sons of Japheth,” and it goes on to list them. Verse 6, “The sons of Ham,” and it goes on to list them. “The sons of Shem,” down in verse 21.
So, you have this general listing of the genealogies that flow from the sons of Noah. As we come, however, to chapter 11 and verse 10, the focus is again on Shem, but not in a broad sense as it is in chapter 10. The focus on Shem in chapter 10, just shows all the various people groups that came, whereas in chapter 11, it narrows down to focus on one line – the line of election, we could call it. The line of Shem that goes directly to Abram who is the father of Israel and, next to Jesus, the most important man in the history of redemption.
We are told that this is the account of Shem’s family line; two years after the Flood, Shem was 100 years old and became the father of Arphaxad (verse 10). As MacArthur pointed out, only the line of election is involved here.
MacArthur calls the history of humanity thus far ‘paganism versus promise’:
As we see throughout the Genesis record, and we’ll see it here, the story is an ongoing continuum of paganism versus promise. And we saw that at the very outset; we saw that in the conflict between Cain and Abel. We saw that in the society that was built in the time of Lamech. We saw that in the society that was developed before the flood – where paganism dominated, and there were only a few who accepted God at His word and believed His promise – one family who survived that horrifying holocaust. Even after the flood, it is still that ongoing contrast of paganism and promise – the people of paganism and the people of promise.
The scripture from Genesis to Revelation diagnoses man and sort of drops him into those categories. Since the fall, which is recorded in the third chapter of Genesis, all men are sinful, wicked, and in constant rebellion against God. Man is a rebel; he is opposed to God; he is dead in sin, bound in the grip of paganism deep within his nature.
Romans 3 is probably the most concise description of the sinfulness of man. And I know you’re familiar with Romans 3. I just want to call one thing to your attention. As you notice Romans 3:10 through 18, “There is none righteous, not even one; there is none who understands, there is none who seeks for God; all have turned aside, together they have become useless; none who does good, not even one.
“Their throat is an open grave, with their tongues they keep deceiving, the poison of asps is under their lips; whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness; their feet are swift to shed blood, destruction and misery are in their paths; the path of peace they have not known. There is no fear of God before their eyes.”
You notice, if you have that kind of Bible that does that, that that is all in quotes and caps because every one of those statements is taken from the Old Testament. That is not a New Testament diagnosis; that is an Old Testament diagnosis. Better yet, that is a universal diagnosis of the wretchedness of man.
Man is defined as wicked and sinful and rebellious and opposed to God. Every way you can define Him, that’s how it comes out.
So, the story of man is a story of paganism. It’s a story of rebellion. But it is also a story of promise. We found that back in chapter 3 – you can look at it for just a moment, a brief review. In chapter 3 and verse 15, right in the middle of cursing the serpent and cursing the man and the woman, cursing the ground and cursing the environment around them – right in the middle of all those curses, verse 15 produces a promise, “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, and you shall bruise him on the heel.” Right in the middle of this section in which everything is cursed is the first revelation of God’s promise to crush the serpent. The first promise that God is going to deliver sinners from the power of their great adversary.
It is true man chose Satan’s word over God’s, Satan’s worldview over God’s, Satan’s leadership over God’s, Satan’s will over God’s, Satan’s friendship over God’s. And man became the enemy of God who hid from God, who distrusted God, who rebelled against God, who rejected God.
But it is also true that man was not fixed irretrievably and forever in that disastrous condition. Unlike the angels who fell and could never be redeemed, man is granted a promise that one will come and will crush the head of Satan. Satan may well have thought that if he could bring about the fall of man, man would be as irredeemable as his demons; he was wrong …
… the seed of a woman, a virgin-born son would someday come and crush Satan’s head. That’s the first prophecy in the Bible. It is the first time that the great reality that where sin abounds grace much more abounds can be applied …
And so, it would be through Noah now that the seed would come to bruise the serpent’s head. And of Noah’s sons, it would be through Shem. And of Shem’s progeny, it would be through Abram, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, or Judah that the Messiah would come. And so, the record moves inexorably toward the revival of Messiah.
Genesis 11 begins with the story of the tower of Babel, with Babel eventually becoming Babylon. God thwarted the plan that everyone would speak a common language as they progressed in paganism.
MacArthur says:
I think formal pagan religion was sort of launched at Babel. And then the religion that was formalized at Babel in the ziggurat, which was a form of pagan worship probably identified with astrology, when people were scattered all over the world, they took their religion with them. It was a hybrid of some of the truth of the true and living God twisted and perverted by whatever form of paganism had developed at Babel. It flowed out across the whole world. But God had a plan to bring about a nation who would be a witness nation to go to the world and tell them about the true and living God whom they had forgotten.
So, when you come into chapter 11, it’s really important to see the genealogy. You go from Shem, in verse 11 = or verse 10 – all the way down to Abram who appears toward the end of this genealogy for the first time in verse 26.
MacArthur introduces today’s verses with Shem’s offspring Arphaxad:
… this genealogy that we’re going to look at, verse 10, begins 2 years after the 40-day flood.
After Shem became the father of Arphaxad, Shem lived 500 years and had other sons and daughters (verse 11).
Note that Shem’s lifespan is about 400 years less than Adam’s and his immediate descendants, bar Abel.
MacArthur tells us more:
Now, let me give you little numbers to think about. Noah was 500 when his first son was born, chapter 5, verse 32. He was 500 years old when he had his first son. His first son, by the way, was Japheth. Shem was likely born 2 years later, because ancient – in ancient times, mothers generally nursed their babies for about 24 months or up to 24 months so they wouldn’t be able to conceive for that amount of time that they were nursing their children. So, it would be maybe she nursed for a year – a year-and-a-half, and sometime in the era she became pregnant again, and Shem was born two plus years, let’s say, after Japheth. So, Shem would have been 100 years old 2 years after the 40-day flood. And that’s what it says, “He was 100 years old and became the father of Arpachshad two years after the flood,” which means that he wasn’t the firstborn – we know that because the firstborn was born when Noah was 100, and he wasn’t 100 until 2 years after the flood. “Shem lived five hundred years after he became the father of Arpachshad, had other sons and daughters,” – a total of 600 years. His father lived 950 years. So, we see something beginning to happen rather immediately. Right? Lifespan is shortening significantly. The effects of the flood on the world, the universe, the atmosphere, as well as the effect of sin passing down from generation to generation.
When Arphaxad was 35 years old, he became the father of Shelah (verse 12).
After he became the father of Shelah, Arphaxad lived another 403 years and had other sons and daughters (verse 13).
MacArthur calls our attention to Arphaxad’s lifespan:
At 35 he fathered Shelah. He lived another 403 years for a total of 438 years. So again, the lifespan is dropping.
Before we find out more about Shelah, there is a footnote from Bible Gateway with an alternative verse 13:
13 And after he became the father of Cainan, Arphaxad lived 430 years and had other sons and daughters, and then he died. When Cainan had lived 130 years, he became the father of Shelah. And after he became the father of Shelah, Cainan lived 330 years and had other sons and daughters
MacArthur explains that verse:
… if you go to Luke 3:36, you will read another name stuck in there … the name Cainan appears – C-A-I-N-A-N is the way it’s transliterated. It appears in the genealogy in Luke. And the question is why? Why? This genealogy in the Old Testament, right here in Genesis 11, is repeated one other place. It’s repeated in 1 Chronicles 1. And in the genealogy here, the name Cainan is not recorded. And in the genealogy of 1 Chronicles 1, Cainan is not recorded either.
The Masoretic scribes who knew the Hebrew well didn’t put it in any of their texts. But the name Cainan does appear in the Septuagint, which is a Greek translation of the Old Testament. It is likely that some scribe in – at some point, copying Luke’s gospel, and being familiar with the Septuagint, picked up Cainan out of the Septuagint – which isn’t in the Hebrew text, the Septuagint not – it being a translation, not an inspired original – and stuck it into Luke’s account. It is better than when you see the word Cainan in Luke’s account to understand it as an addition made at a later time. Also, the Septuagint convolutes the order of the names as well and so is not precisely reliable as a primary source. So, just in case you come across the name Cainan, the best understanding of that would be that it was added later by someone who thought it should be there because they picked it up in the Septuagint version.
MacArthur tells us that Shelah was an important male name for generations afterwards:
Shelah became a very common name for families in Judah. Chapter 38 it’s mentioned a number of times; chapter 46, verse 12; Numbers 26:20; 1 Chronicles 2; 1 Chronicles 4, Shelah becomes a very common name.
When Shelah had lived 30 years, he became the father of Eber (verse 14).
After he became the father of Eber, he had other sons and daughters and lived another 403 years (verse 15).
MacArthur tells us that Eber is significant:
… Eber, from which the word “Hebrew” comes …
When Eber was 34, he became the father of Peleg (verse 16). Afterwards, he fathered other sons and daughters and lived 430 more years (verse 17).
In case anyone is wondering why the repetition about ‘other sons and daughters’ appears in these verses, MacArthur says:
That’s just to tell you that the world is expanding in terms of its population, even in this very important line of people.
We discovered last week that the name Peleg means ‘divided’. It is possible that he was born during the ill-fated tower of Babel project. Recall that Eber also had another prominent son, Joktan (Genesis 10:25-28):
25 Two sons were born to Eber:
One was named Peleg,[d] because in his time the earth was divided; his brother was named Joktan.
26 Joktan was the father of
Almodad, Sheleph, Hazarmaveth, Jerah, 27 Hadoram, Uzal, Diklah, 28 Obal, Abimael, Sheba, 29 Ophir, Havilah and Jobab. All these were sons of Joktan.
MacArthur explains Joktan’s absence in Genesis 11’s account:
We remember in verse 25 the name of one son of Eber – Peleg – because in his days the Earth was divided. His name means divided. And that very likely signals that he was born at the time of the scattering at Babel. This particular son of Eber is the chosen line. His brother Joktan fathered Arab tribes, but Peleg fathered the people of God.
At the age of 20, Peleg fathered Reu (verse 18); afterwards, he fathered more sons and daughters, living another 209 years (verse 19).
MacArthur calls our attention once again to the reducing lifespans seen here:
He lived a total of 239 years. His father lived 464. And so, time continues to diminish. Father 464, grandfather 433, and he’s dead 200 years sooner.
Note also that these men are becoming fathers at what we would consider the usual age today.
When Reu had lived for 32 years, he became the father of Serug (verse 20). After that, Reu lived another 207 years, having had other sons and daughters (verse 21).
When Serug had lived for 30 years, he fathered Nahor (verse 22). After Nahor’s birth, Serug fathered other sons and daughters and lived another 200 years (verse 23).
MacArthur points out:
He lives for 230 years and fathers other children. You also notice that they’re having children younger now.
When Nahor had lived for 29 years, he fathered Terah (verse 24). After Terah’s birth, Nahor lived for another 119 years, fathering other sons and daughters (verse 25).
MacArthur says:
So, Nahor lives only 148 years. Actually, Abram lived only 175 years. So, you can see it’s beginning to shorten even more.
And Nahor, just a handful of generations down from Shem, only lives a quarter of the time of Shem’s life. So, the impact of sin, the impact of the flood on the environment is shortening life. This, then – the man Nahor – is Abram’s grandfather …
There is no other ancient near eastern material available that forces gaps into this genealogy. So, we take it at its face value. This is the way it really was.
After Terah had lived for 70 years, he became the father of Abram, Nahor and Haran (verse 26).
MacArthur tells us more about Terah:
Terah begins the Abrahamic record. By the way, there are names of people in the Old Testament and in this genealogy that are also the names of places, because very often they use names that were used both for towns and for people; that’s not hard to understand. Towns were named after people. They still are in some parts of the world. So that Terah, the name of Abram’s father, was also a place in the northwestern upper Mesopotamian valley.
Now, “Terah lived seventy years” – follow this very closely – “Terah lived seventy years, became the father of Abram, Nahor, and Haran.” Now, I want you to understand something here; you’re going to be confused when you read other parts of the Scripture. He didn’t become a father till he was 70. That’s kind of unusual now, because people are having their sons earlier. But when it tells us that he had three sons when he was 70, it doesn’t mean that they were triplets. It means that he began to have these sons at the age of 70. And if you look at the biblical record, Abraham was not the firstborn son. He was born 60 years later, when Terah was 130 years old … How do we know that?
Well, in chapter 11, verse 32, it says the days of Terah were 205 years and he died. In chapter 12, verse 4, “Abram was seventy-five years old when he departed from Haran.” After his father died, he left. That’s what Acts 7:4 says. He didn’t leave till his father died. So, if his father died at 205, and he was 75, then he was born when his father was 130. Right?
And so, when he had his son at 70, it wasn’t Abram. He was born in the hundred and thirtieth year of his father. He’s not the firstborn son, but why is he listed first? Because he’s important. Similar to the listing of Noah’s sons: Shem, Ham, and Japheth. The birth order was Japheth, Shem, and Ham. But Shem is mentioned first because of his priority.
Of this genealogy, Matthew Henry also notes the reduced lifespans but differs somewhat with MacArthur on why they are so. Although he attributes man’s sin, he says that there was no fault of nature, whereas MacArthur has said in the past that the Flood introduced rain and storms:
… laying these three genealogies together, we shall find that twice ten, and thrice fourteen, generations or descents, passed between the first and second Adam, making it clear concerning Christ that he was not only the Son of Abraham, but the Son of man, and the seed of woman. Observe here, 1. Nothing is left upon record concerning those of this line but their names and ages, the Holy Ghost seeming to hasten through them to the story of Abram. How little do we know of those that have gone before us in this world, even those that lived in the same places where we live, as we likewise know little of those that are our contemporaries in distant places! we have enough to do to mind the work of our own day, and let God alone to require that which is past, Eccl 3 15. 2. There was an observable gradual decrease in the years of their lives. Shem reached to 600 years, which yet fell short of the age of the patriarchs before the flood; the next three came short of 500; the next three did not reach to 300; after them we read not of any that attained to 200, except Terah; and, not many ages after this, Moses reckoned seventy, or eighty, to be the utmost men ordinarily arrive at. When the earth began to be replenished, men’s lives began to shorten; so that the decrease is to be imputed to the wise disposal of Providence, rather than to any decay of nature. For the elect’s sake, men’s days are shortened; and, being evil, it is well they are few, and attain not to the years of the lives of our fathers, ch. 47 9. 3. Eber, from whom the Hebrews were denominated, was the longest-lived of any that was born after the flood, which perhaps was the reward of his singular piety and strict adherence to the ways of God.
MacArthur emphasises that paganism dominates here:
… as I told you, Terah was not a believer in the true God. Joshua 24:2 says he served other gods. He was an idolatrous pagan. So, these three boys – Abram, Nahor, and Haran – mentioned there in verse 26, were born into a pagan family. And I want you to understand something about their paganism. Influenced by the astrology of Babel, it appears that they worshiped the moon god. Terah has been related, by Hebrew scholars, to the Hebrew word yarea, which is the word for moon. And it indicates that he was actually named, perhaps, for the moon god by his father Nahor, who was perhaps a worshiper of the moon god as well.
It is also interesting to note that the birthplace of Abram, the town of Ur, was known and is known, by archeologists and historians, as the major center of the worship of the moon god in ancient Mesopotamia.
The name Nahor pops up again in verse 26, which is in the Lectionary, but MacArthur tells us this is not the same person:
That’s Abram’s brother named after this grandfather, which may indicate that he was the firstborn son and was given the name of his grandfather.
MacArthur tells us more about Abram and his immediate family, including Nahor from verse 26:
Now, Abram – later Abraham in chapter 17, verse 5 – Abram means “exalted father.” But Abraham means “father of many nations.” He was named “exalted father.” He ended up being named the “father of many nations” by God.
Nahor was named after his grandfather. And that’s why I kind of think he may have been the first one born. And there’s more about his family in chapter 22. I won’t tell you the whole story. But chapter 22 indicates that Nahor had 12 sons. Twelve sons. All of them, then, would be Abraham’s nephews. Right? His brother’s sons. One of his brother’s sons was Bethuel, the father of – are you ready for this? – Rebekah, who married Abraham’s son Isaac and became the mother of Jacob and Esau. It’s a small, small world in ancient times. Marrying your second cousin was certainly in order.
The third one named, besides Abram and Nahor, was Haran. Haran is also the name of a town in Moab – Beth-haran – mentioned in Numbers 32:36 and Joshua 13:27. It may have been where he had an influence or settled or just may be coincidental.
Now, all three of these names are well known in Jewish history. They all appear in the biblical record, as you go through Genesis, and so they are noted for us here. Abraham lived for 175 years. He died, as I said, just a couple of years after the death of Noah and was likely – listen to this – survived by Shem outliving Abram. He was probably survived by Shelah and also by Eber.
But Abram is the key person here, because Abram believed in the true God. God in glory appeared to him, as I read for you from Acts chapter 7. Let me read just further down the book of Genesis to chapter 15 for a moment. It isn’t to say that at that time Abram was a regenerate, justified man. It is in chapter 15 that God says, “‘Look toward the heavens, count the stars, if you’re able to count them.’ He said to him, ‘So shall your descendants be.’ Then he believed in the Lord; and He reckoned it to him as righteousness.” His actual justification is there described.
But Abram was a believer in the true God, apparently, and the glory of God appeared to him. Romans 4:3 says, “Abram believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness.” I think that actual conversion of Abram came at the time there described in the fifteenth chapter of Genesis.
But I’m convinced that when God approached this man, when he was still down in Ur – you can go back to Genesis at this point – he was one who was certainly at least seeking to worship the true God.
So, starting in verse 27, you have a new toledoth, a new generation, the generations of Terah. They culminate the generations of Shem. They inaugurate the generations of Terah. Verse 27, he repeats, “He became the father of Abram, Nahor, and Haran” – and this is an interesting note – “Haran became the father of Lot.” Why introduce one son? Why pick Haran and mention that he had a son named Lot? Why is he the only son mentioned?
Well, read the next verse, “Haran died in the presence of his father” – literally died in his father’s face, died while his father was alive. And because this – one of the three sons – died, his son had to take his place in the line of primogenitor. He had to take his father’s place. And so, Lot is mentioned because he takes the place of his father who dies. He, then, is treated more like a son than a grandson. In fact, Abram himself, who is his uncle, takes him under his wing, doesn’t he? Takes him into the land of Canaan with him. So, since Haran died before his father Terah died, his son Lot took his place as if he were a son.
MacArthur tells us more about Ur of the Chaldeans, or the Chaldees:
Now, notice at the end of verse 28, all this is going on in a town called Ur. Ur – we are familiar with that if we know anything about the Bible, Ur of the Chaldees – a familiar name, a familiar place. The best location archeologically – at least the one that I would lean toward – is that Ur is located on the northwest corner of the Persian Gulf. If you were to go south from the land of Israel and east down toward the Persian Gulf – you know, the top of the Persian Gulf has kind of a straight line from west to east. The northwest corner of the Persian Gulf, just a little up from there would be the location of ancient Ur in the southern Mesopotamian valley.
It was one of the most important centers of Sumerian culture – ancient culture. In the year 1922, there was discovered there a place called Tell el-Muqayyar, an Arabic name for a tell. A tell is a mound that reveals a location where civilization has been. One civilization on another, on another, on another, on another creates a tell as they build and build and build, and one goes out of existence, and they build on it; and another one goes, and they build – that’s what they call a tell or a mountain. That tell was excavated from 1922 to 1933, is believed to be the ancient location of Ur.
Some archeologists feel that at the time of Terah and the birth of his sons, it had reached its zenith and was starting to decline as a great city. And that may explain why Terah and his family wanted to leave. But that would be a very human explanation. It is called Ur of the Chaldeans even though technically, at the time of Abraham, it wouldn’t have been Ur of the Chaldeans. Moses, remember, is reading Genesis to the children of Israel, who are entering the Promised Land. This is a long time after these events take place. And they know it as Ur of the Chaldeans. Chaldean tribes, through its history, were later associated with it. And so, it was that way known to Moses’ people. Terah and his family lived there, and it was known – and archeologists have supported this – as a center for the worship of the moon god.
Genesis 12, which is in the Lectionary, covers Abram’s initial encounter with God and his sojourn into Egypt with Sarai, his wife.
Genesis 13 tells us about the quarrelling that occurred between Abram and Lot; they eventually split up and moved apart from each other.
Next time — Genesis 25:1-6
The Sixth Sunday of Easter is May 5, 2024.
Readings for Year B can be found here.
The Gospel is as follows (emphases mine):
John 15:9-17
15:9 As the Father has loved me, so I have loved you; abide in my love.
15:10 If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commandments and abide in his love.
15:11 I have said these things to you so that my joy may be in you, and that your joy may be complete.
15:12 “This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you.
15:13 No one has greater love than this, to lay down one’s life for one’s friends.
15:14 You are my friends if you do what I command you.
15:15 I do not call you servants any longer, because the servant does not know what the master is doing; but I have called you friends, because I have made known to you everything that I have heard from my Father.
15:16 You did not choose me but I chose you. And I appointed you to go and bear fruit, fruit that will last, so that the Father will give you whatever you ask him in my name.
15:17 I am giving you these commands so that you may love one another.
Commentary comes from Matthew Henry and John MacArthur (as indicated below).
Today’s reading continues last week’s, John 15:1-8, in which Jesus spoke of Himself as the vine, His Father as the vinegrower and us as the branches.
He warned that those who do not abide in Him are like withered or dead wood on the vine; they are good for nothing but burning.
This was to explain to the eleven remaining Apostles that Judas had betrayed Him, which came as a surprise to them because they thought that Judas was one of them. However, he was not.
Jesus said (John 15:5):
15:5 I am the vine, you are the branches. Those who abide in me and I in them bear much fruit, because apart from me you can do nothing.
It is worthwhile discussing this more before examining today’s verses. John MacArthur preached five sermons on today’s verses but they also clarify what went before.
MacArthur addresses fruitfulness in the Christian life, which is an obligation to our Lord:
Yes, we all bear the fruits of righteousness, but we don’t all have much fruit, and we all need to have more fruit.
We say, “How do you do that?” Well, it’s not a matter of human effort. It’s about abiding in Christ. Now, let me make a simple point out of this. The more you focus on Christ, the more fruitful you become. The more you focus on yourself, the less fruitful you become. Lose yourself in the glory of Christ. That’s 2 Corinthians 3:18. As you gaze at His glory, you move from one level of glory to the next to the next to the next by the Holy Spirit, until you literally become like Him.
In his next sermon, MacArthur says that the way we focus on Christ is by abiding in Him the way He abides in us:
Abide: I know that is kind of an old word and it sort of has spiritual overtones. It’s simply the Greek verb men, don’t walk away from Christ. Stay; remain. Don’t leave. Don’t defect. Don’t become an apostate. This is His word to the 11 remaining disciples: “Continue to believe. Continue to be faithful.”
This is a call to anyone and everyone who is attached to Christianity and could be in danger of departing. If it happens, 1 John 2:19 says, “They went out from us because were not of us.” Don’t do that; don’t defect.
Hebrews 10 says, “The severest punishment in hell will belong to those who were close to Christ and turned their back on Him because they trampled underfoot the blood of the covenant and counted it an unholy thing.” If you’re in any sense like Judas, connected to Christianity, don’t walk away. Many had done that. Chapter 6, there was a wholesale exodus of people who were called disciples who walked no more with Him. Judas is no solitary figure, even in the gospel of John, but he is the archetypal defector.
… He gives promises to those who stay. What is the value of abiding? Why should I stay? Well, the passage starting in verse 4 and going down to verse 11 lists a series of promises to those who remain, who stay, and they’re basic.
… This is kind of Christianity 101. The first benefit … is salvation, salvation, eternal life. “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have – ” what? “ – eternal life” …
What is salvation? It is having the life of God in you, the eternal life of God. The eternal life of God is not separate from God, and so salvation is stated in that 4th verse in these words: “Abide in Me, and I in you, and I in you.” Or, in verse 5, the abiding branch: “I in him.” “I in you.”
… the Trinity lives in a believer. The Trinity takes up residence in a believer.
… So when somebody asks you, “What does it mean to be a Christian?” you tell them it means that “the triune God of the universe – Father, Son, and Holy Spirit – has taken up residence in me.”
… Bottom line: only as you abide in Him and He abides in you can you bear much fruit, much fruit.
This fruit then, according to verse 8, becomes the proof that you’re a disciple. That’s what verse 8 says: “My Father is glorified by this, that you bear much fruit, and so prove to be My disciples.” So that is the only way we know that we are disciples of Christ that are genuine, that we are branches connected to the vine. Our Lord said on another occasion, “By their fruit, you will know them. A good tree doesn’t produce bad fruit; a bad tree doesn’t produce good fruit. Good tree, good fruit.”
MacArthur then describes the characteristics of good Christian fruit:
First of all, fruit is genuine repentance, based on Matthew 3:8. Fruit is genuine repentance – a genuine, honest, penitence concerning sin. Sorrow over sin, not sorrow over the consequences of sin. There is that kind of sorrow. But sorrow over the reality of sin. A true and real sorrow over sin – the sorrow of repentance. That, of course, is a very foundational fruit. If the Lord is at work in you, if you are connected to Christ, if His life is flowing through you, there will be an honest repentance.
Now, we are told to bear fruit in this section, to bear more fruit, and that God is glorified when we bear much fruit. There is a progression here that is very important for us to understand …
… As we abide in Christ, and as we yield to Christ, and as we increase in the knowledge of Christ, our fruitfulness increases. By every means of grace, by every means of grace, our abiding is deeper and wider and higher and richer, and we become more fruitful …
Secondly, spiritual attitudes. Another kind of fruit – first repentance – another kind of fruit: spiritual attitudes. Galatians 5:22, “The fruit of the Spirit is – the fruit of the Spirit who dwells in us is – ” this is the product, this is the manifestation of the life of the Trinity in us, “ – love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control.”
Those are attitudes, are they not? Those are attitudes. Those aren’t acts, those aren’t behaviors, they’re what’s behind behaviors. So here, clearly, fruit is virtuous, spiritual attitudes. And, by the way, all of them, all of them were perfectly manifest in Jesus Christ. So we could say it is fruit in us to manifest the very characteristics of Christ – not in the perfection with which He possessed them, but those same virtues we pursue.
In Ephesians 5:9 it says, “Fruit is all goodness and righteousness and truth.” That’s internal: a love for goodness – being good to people; a love for righteousness – honoring God. A love for truth as revealed in Scripture …
Thirdly, another kind of fruit – and I’m just taking you to scriptures that demonstrate this – a third and very important aspect of fruit: go to the 13th chapter of Hebrews for just a moment; Hebrews, chapter 13, verse 15. Here is instruction that, “Through Him – ” that is through Christ. Without Him we can do nothing, right? Again, it’s, “Through Him.” He is mentioned in verse 12 as “the one who sanctified His people through His own blood.” “Through Him – ” who lives in us, the true vine from which we draw our life. “Through Him then, let us – ” once in awhile, every Sunday? “ – continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that give thanks to His name.”
That’s worship …
You can’t worship until you’ve been redeemed. You can’t worship until you’ve repented and been saved …
“So let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that give thanks to His name.” See that little phrase “give thanks”? That’s probably not the best translation of the Greek. The Greek is the word homologe. Logeó is a Greek verb meaning “to speak” or “to say,” from which we get logos. Homo, H-O-M-O in English means “the same,” the same. Homogeneous, the same.
So what it’s saying is this: “Offer God a sacrifice of praise, the fruit of lips that save the same, to His name.” What does that mean? What do we do in worship? We give back to God the very same things that He has reveals to us about Himself. This is what worship is. It is saying back to God everything that He has revealed to us as being true about Himself. All of that is in Scripture.
… True praise then is saying back to God all His attributes as revealed in Scripture. You go through the Scripture from beginning to the end; the attributes of God are scattered all across the pages of Holy Scripture. The more you know the Bible, the more you know about the nature and character and essential being of God. The more you know who He is and what His attributes are, the more you can say back to Him, “God, you are the Creator, You are the Sustainer, You are the Redeemer. You are all-wise, all-knowing, all-sufficient, all-powerful. You are unchanging. You are gracious, loving, kind. You are just, holy, pure” …
The second thing is to say back to God not only what He has revealed about His nature, but what He’s revealed about His works. So when you go through the psalms, you read things like, “You are the God who did this. You are the God who brought Your people out of Egypt. You are the God who parted the Red Sea. You are the God who led Israel through the wilderness. You are the God who brought us into the Promised Land. You are the God who protected us at the Passover,” et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
You come into the New Testament: “You are the God who has redeemed us through the offering of Your Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, whom You put on the cross and then raised from the dead.” In other words, that is the sum and substance of praise. It is to say back to God with a grateful, thankful heart, all that God has revealed He is and all that He’s revealed He has done; that’s praise. So your praise then is essentially confined by the divine revelation. The more you know about the Word of God, the more you know about God and what He’s done. And the more you know about what He is and what He’s done, the purer your praise is. That’s fruit. That’s the fruit of your lips – worship …
Let me give you another component, a fourth – Philippians, chapter 4 – and this just kind of digs down a little deep in a more specific way. In Philippians, chapter 4, the apostle Paul was obviously in need, very difficult times for him, and dear friends sent him gifts. They sent him supplies, food; and he was extremely grateful. In fact, in verse 16 of Philippians 4, he reminds them that when he was in Thessalonica, they sent a gift more than once for his need. They were very, very generous and loving toward him …
He saw that gift, that expression of love, as spiritual fruit produced through them by the indwelling God. It is the similar significance of chapter 15 of Romans: “Macedonia and Achaia – ” 15:26 “ – have been pleased to make a contribution for the poor among the saints in Jerusalem.” These Gentile churches were sending money to Jerusalem for poor believers. They were pleased to do so. They’re indebted to them; for if the Gentiles have shared in their spiritual things, they’re indebted to minister to them also in material things.
In other words, the gospel came through the Jews and came first to them, and then through them; and so the Gentiles are sending a gift. Verse 28: “Therefore, when I have finished this, and have put my seal on this fruit of theirs, I’ll go on my way to Spain.” He saw the Gentiles sending money to poor Jews in Jerusalem as spiritual fruit. So we could add something else to the list: spiritual fruit is contributions to those in need, contributions in those in need …
Then we give you a fifth element of fruit: 1 Corinthians 14, 1 Corinthians 14. Yeah, you know what’s going on in 1 Corinthians 14 – some of you do – chaos in the Corinthian church with tongues and all kinds of chaos, as everybody was doing whatever they wanted in the services. Paganism had encroached in the worship, and so Paul wants to call a halt to all this nonsense, all this meaningless talk. So he says in verse 14, “If I pray in a language, another language, my spirit prays, my mind is unfruitful. If I’m praying in a language I don’t know, my mind is not engaged” …
So you want to be fruitful, say things that edify. That’s another kind of fruit – communication that edifies, communication that blesses, communication that instructs. It may be in a prayer, it may be in a teaching environment, it may be in a conversation, it may be in a counseling or discipling setting.
Now, another one [sixth] … pure conduct, pure behavior.
… Philippians 1:11, “Being filled with the fruit of righteousness which comes through Jesus Christ.” Or, Colossians 1:9-10. It says essentially the same thing, “so that you will walk in a manner worthy of the Lord, to please Him in all respect, bearing fruit in every good work, bearing fruit in every good work.”
One final one [seventh]: bringing people to Christ – that’s fruit, that’s fruit – bringing people to Christ …
The apostle Paul wanted to go to Rome, in Chapter 1 of Romans, for one purpose – Romans 1:13, “that I may obtain some fruit among you, even as among the rest of the Gentiles. And I’m under obligation to the Gentiles, barbarians, wise, foolish. For my part, I am eager to preach the gospel to you who also are at Rome because I’m not ashamed of the gospel. It is the power of God unto salvation to everyone who believes, the Jew first, and also the Gentile” …
That is, I think the most wonderful fruit because it’s the end product of everything else. If you live a life that resents and resists sin, if you live a life that pursues holiness, if you live a life of worship, if you live a life with the right kind of spiritual attitudes, if you live a life that does good to others, shows love to them and manifests general righteousness, your life will have a powerful testimony. And when you say the triune God lives in you, there will be something to support that claim. That makes the gospel attractive, and the Lord will use you to lead others to salvation …
“If these qualities are yours – ” 2 Peter 1:8 “ – and are increasing, they render you neither useless nor unfruitful in the true knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. If you lacked these things, you’re blind, short-sighted, forgotten your purification from your former sins. So be diligent, brethren, all the more, to make certain about His calling and choosing you. And as long as you practice these things, you will never stumble; but you will know that an entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ will be abundantly supplied to you.”
In his next sermon, MacArthur discusses answered prayer (John 15:7):
15:7 If you abide in me, and my words abide in you, ask for whatever you wish, and it will be done for you.
MacArthur says:
There are two qualifiers here. Qualifier Number One: “If you abide in Me,” if you are a true believer, if you are a true branch, if you have a permanent union with Jesus Christ in which His life is coming through you …
… second condition, verse 7 “ – and My words abide in you, and My words abide in you” …
Why does He say that? Because to be a believer, you have access to God. To be a believer, you have the promise your prayers will be answered. But also to know that your prayer is going to be answered, you have to know something about God. You have to pray within the framework of God’s revelation.
So Jesus says that second condition is that – to borrow Paul’s language in Colossians 3, “that the word of Christ dwells in you richly.” You understand from Scripture who God is, what He desires.
… You’re asking in the framework of the name of Christ, the name of God, the purposes of God …
So, I remind you that this is an incredible, incredible promise from the Lord that whatever you ask consistent with His person, purpose, and plan, He will do. Your prayer should demonstrate, 2 Corinthians 10:5 that “every thought has been taken captive to the obedience of Christ.” You pray within the framework of divine purpose.
You might even say this: “Father, this I ask because this could be what You desire for Your glory, this could be what You desire for Your kingdom, this could be what You desire to exalt Your Son, this could be what You desire to show the power of Your Holy Spirit.” That’s the principle, always with a view to the divine name, the divine plan, the divine purpose, the divine person. This is what James calls “the prayer of a righteous man.”
MacArthur then gives us a concrete example of assurance, promised in John 15:8:
15:8 My Father is glorified by this, that you bear much fruit and become my disciples.
MacArthur says:
The hardworking vinedresser finds His glory in the fruitful vine.
I remember meeting a gentleman, a nearly 90-year-old gentleman who grows grapes up in the Central Valley and he wanted to show me his operation – one of the largest grape growers in California – and I thought he would take me to an office and show me whatever. I got up there, got in a pickup truck, bounced along through some ruts and ended up ankle-deep in dirt, walking down one row, after another, after another, while he reached in and pulled out the grapes. He showed me the fruit of his labor by showing me the grapes, and he explained to me every kind of grape. He found that if I wanted to know about him, I didn’t need to see his pickup truck and I didn’t need to see his office, I needed to see his fruit; and then I needed to eat it, which was an incredibly wonderful experience.
This is what the Father does. The Father is glorified when He goes down the rows of His children and when He sees the fruit. God’s glory is in the display of His own fruitfulness through us. God is gloried when we bear fruit. It’s like Matthew 5:16, “Let your light so shine before men.” It’s a different metaphor, same idea. “Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works and – ” do what? “ – glorify your Father who’s in heaven.” That glory goes to God.
It’s a simple as this: for a believer, for a true believer, you are not the explanation for your life, you’re not it. People may poke around to try to figure out why you are the way you are. There isn’t a human answer. There isn’t a human answer. There’s no human explanation for me being who I am. I am not the explanation of my life. God in me is the explanation of my life …
Now, the benefit of this, incredible benefit, just an incredible benefit – back to that same verse, verse 8, “and so prove to be My disciples.” The benefit is I know I’m a believer. How do I know I’m a believer? How do I know that? Because I can’t explain my life. I can’t explain my love. I can’t explain my peace, my joy, my knowledge, my wisdom, my understanding, my usefulness. I can’t explain me humanly – can’t. I can’t. Something is going on in me that has no explanation on a human level. So I look at my life and I have assurance that I’m a true branch because I see all this fruit ...
Go to 2 Peter 1. Peter talks about virtue here. First of all in verse 4, 2 Peter 1:4, he says, “We have become partakers of the divine nature, escaping the corruption in the world by lust.” So we’ve been transformed. We’re out of the corrupt, into the incorruptible. We have become partakers of the divine nature. That’s God in us, the eternal life in us. And as a result of that, as a result of that, we have been delivered from the corruption in the world by lust …
What do we do? We cultivate that in us. And the result? If that happens, “if these qualities – ” look at verse 8 “ – are yours and are increasing – ” more fruit, much fruit, “ – they render you neither useless nor unfruitful in the true knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.” You look at your life, and you go out and you do ministry, and you’re diligent in testing your faith, and stepping out on faith, and being morally pure and excellent and having sound knowledge, and exercising self-control, and persevering in the truth, and obedience and godliness and brotherly kindness and love. If you pursue those things, you will be neither useless nor unfruitful; and so you will look at your life and you’ll say, “Look at my life: look at the usefulness, look at the fruitfulness.”
With that, we move on to today’s verses, where Jesus talks about abiding in Him and obedience to Him through the commandment to love one another.
He said that, as the Father loved Him, so I have loved you — in reality, beyond all human comprehension — therefore, abide in that love (verse 9).
Jesus then said that we abide in His love when we obey His commandments, just as He Himself obeyed His Father’s commandments and abides in His love (verse 10).
Matthew Henry explains:
Christ, who is love itself, is here discoursing concerning love, a fourfold love.
I. Concerning the Father’s love to him; and concerning this he here tells us, 1. That the Father did love him (v. 9): As the Father hath loved me. He loved him as Mediator: This is my beloved Son. He was the Son of his love. He loved him, and gave all things into his hand; and yet so loved the world as to deliver him up for us all. When Christ was entering upon his sufferings he comforted himself with this, that his Father loved him. Those whom God loves as a Father may despise the hatred of all the world. 2. That he abode in his Father’s love, v. 10. He continually loved his Father, and was beloved of him. Even when he was made sin and a curse for us, and it pleased the Lord to bruise him, yet he abode in his Father’s love. See Ps 89 33. Because he continued to love his Father, he went cheerfully through his sufferings, and therefore his Father continued to love him. 3. That therefore he abode in his Father’s love because he kept his Father’s law: I have kept my Father’s commandments, as Mediator, and so abide in his love. Hereby he showed that he continued to love his Father, that he went on, and went through, with his undertaking, and therefore the Father continued to love him. His soul delighted in him, because he did not fail, nor was discouraged, Isa 42 1-4. We having broken the law of creation, and thereby thrown ourselves out of the love of God; Christ satisfied for us by obeying the law of redemption, and so he abode in his love, and restored us to it.
II. Concerning his own love to his disciples. Though he leaves them, he loves them. And observe here,
1. The pattern of this love: As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. A strange expression of the condescending grace of Christ! As the Father loved him, who was most worthy, he loved them, who were most unworthy. The Father loved him as his Son, and he loves them as his children. The Father gave all things into his hand; so, with himself, he freely giveth us all things. The Father loved him as Mediator, as head of the church, and the great trustee of divine grace and favour, which he had not for himself only, but for the benefit of those for whom he was entrusted; and, says he, “I have been a faithful trustee. As the Father has committed his love to me, so I transmit it to you.” Therefore the Father was well pleased with him, that he might be well pleased with us in him; and loved him, that in him, as beloved, he might make us accepted, Eph 1 6.
MacArthur says:
His love is poured out on us, and that the deluge basically is connected to our obedience. The more you obey, the more you are lavished with divine love. And who is the example of obedience? Verse 10: “Just as I have kept My Father’s commandments and abide in His love.” Jesus perfectly obeyed the Father, and the Father poured out perfect divine love on Him. The more like Christ we are, the more of God’s love we experience. The more we follow the obedience of Christ, the more lavish the love of God becomes on us.
Jesus said that He told the Apostles these things so that His joy would be in them and that their joy would be made complete (verse 11).
MacArthur tells us about the blessing of joy:
“These things – ” meaning everything He’s just said in the previous ten verses. “These things I have spoken to you so that My joy may be in you and your joy may be made full. If there’s any love in me, it’s Christ’s love. If there’s any peace in me it’s His peace. If there’s any joy in me, it’s His joy, because I’m a partaker of the divine nature. “I’m saying all these things to you so that you may have My joy and that your joy may be made full.” That’s good news for the eleven.
… This is living, as the Scripture says, “with joy unspeakable, joy unspeakable – joy that can’t even be articulated.” He says in chapter 16, verse 22, “You have grief now – ” to them he says, “ – but I’ll see you again and your heart will rejoice, and no one will take your joy away from you.”
All these things are permanent: a permanent salvation, a permanent sanctification, permanent access to the throne of God for all that is necessary, permanent assurance, permanent love, permanent joy. John picked up on that when he wrote his first epistle, chapter 1, verse 4, he said, “These things I write that your joy may be full.”
Jesus then gave the remaining Apostles — and us — His commandment: to love one another as He has loved us (verse 12).
MacArthur says that this love comes from holy example:
The Father loves the Son, the Son loves the Father. The Father and the Son love us. We are to love them and love each other. Love defines this relationship.
Jesus went on to define this holy love, which is a demanding love, one which He showed us on the Cross: ‘No one has greater love than this, to lay down one’s life for one’s friends’ (verse 13).
Today, the only time this is really demonstrated is in the military. It is no wonder that infantrymen refer to themselves as a ‘band of brothers’. Furthermore, they obey their superiors’ commands. Christian love operates on that same type of obedience.
MacArthur gives us a real life example:
This is an extreme friendship. It is an extreme friendship. You say, “By what definition?” By the definition of verse 13 – look at that: “Greater love has no one than this, than one lay down his life for his friend.” That’s extreme. You say, “I’m your friend? Okay, let’s see how far you go with that. You’re going to die for me? You’re going to push me off the tracks and let the train run over you? It’s that kind of friendship?”
I’m reading an interesting book. Part of it’s about a man that I’ve known through the years who was a Green Beret in Vietnam, and I wanted to read more of his story; and in reading this book, one of the main characters in the book, it takes us back to the Vietnam War, and the horrors and the slaughters that were going on there. There’s a story of a man named Benavidez who would, by all accounts seemed a very insignificant individual, but whose heroism was just absolutely beyond comprehension.
On one occasion when his friends who were part of his unit were trapped in the jungle, trapped by a massive force of Vietcong, and when all rescue attempts had been forwarded and helicopters had crashed and men were dying all over the place, he asked to jump onboard with a final effort to go in. And didn’t have a weapon – nothing but a little dagger. And this kind of non-descript little guy from Texas only grabbed one thing. And he heard that his friends – some of them – there were 12 of them to start with: 5 were dead, 7 were left, and they were all wounded. And he had heard that they were wounded because a radio report came out. And he grabbed the nearest thing, which was a medical pack. They couldn’t put him down because they were afraid to lower the helicopter down to the gunfire. So he said, “That’s okay.” And the side of the helicopter with the open door, he threw out the bag and then he jumped out all alone without a weapon, and went searching for his buddies to deliver medical aid to them in the middle of an unbelievable firefight.
The rest of the story you’ll have to read for yourself. The heroism is epic obviously. We get that, we honor that, we respect that, and we know that’s what our Lord’s saying. This is axiomatic, right? “Greater love as no man than this, that he lay down his life for his friends.” We get that. That’s not a spiritual truth, that’s just reality, right? That’s axiomatic; that’s a self-evident truth. That’s the most you can do for somebody is give your life. I mean we get excited when we hear about somebody who wants to give up a vital organ to save the life of somebody else; we get that sacrifice. We read about these kinds of things throughout history.
I’m sorry to say we read about them seemingly less and less in the world in which we live, but we get that. That’s an extreme form of friendship. So it’s one thing for you to say you’re my friend, you know, “I’m your friend, but don’t ask me to, you know, change my schedule really.” Okay, there’s a kind of friendship; I’ll buy that, I can accept that, you know. Send me a Christmas card, that’s okay. It doesn’t go beyond that.
But we’re talking extreme terminology here. This is an extreme slavery where we do everything that our commander tells us to do; we do it joyfully. This is an extreme kind of friendship where we literally are willing to give our lives. Look, that’s what Jesus said, right, “If any man will come after Me, let him deny himself and take up his – ” what? “ – his cross.” That’s an execution. It might be that.
Paul said, “Look, in my life, I die daily. Every day could be my last day getting the gospel to people. My life is always on the line.” So the Lord says this is an extreme relationship that we have with Him. It is an extreme kind of slavery where we obey everything, and extreme kind of friendship where we give up our lives. And He’s our model – go back to verse 10: “If you keep My commandments, you’ll abide in My love just as I have kept My Father’s commandments and abide in His love.” He’s the model of perfect obedience. He did everything the Father willed Him to do. He’s the perfect model of obedience.
He’s also the perfect model of sacrifice. Go down to verse 13: “Greater love had no one than this, than one lay down his life for his friends.” And that is exactly what He does. That’s exactly what He does. He gives His life for us. He is our model. He didn’t give His life only as an example, He gave His life as an atonement; but it was an example.
Jesus then said that the Apostles — and we — are His friends if we do as He commands us to do (verse 14).
Both our commentators refer here to what was known in ancient times as ‘the king’s friend’, a trusted servant. In the Roman world, this person would have been a very high-ranking slave.
Henry tells us:
“If you approve yourselves by your obedience my disciples indeed, you are my friends, and shall be treated as friends.” Note, The followers of Christ are the friends of Christ, and he is graciously pleased to call and account them so. Those that do the duty of his servants are admitted and advanced to the dignity of his friends. David had one servant in his court, and Solomon one in his, that was in a particular manner the king’s friend (2 Sam 15 37; 1 Kings 4 5); but this honour have all Christ’s servants. We may in some particular instance befriend a stranger; but we espouse all the interests of a friend, and concern ourselves in all his cares: thus Christ takes believers to be his friends. He visits them and converses with them as his friends, bears with them and makes the best of them, is afflicted in their afflictions, and takes pleasure in their prosperity; he pleads for them in heaven and takes care of all their interests there … he is a friend that loves at all times.
MacArthur tells us about ancient Rome:
Well, at the court of Roman emperors … there were some slaves who had risen very high, and they had become friends of the king, friends of the emperor, friends of Caesar. Everybody understood that.
Look, kings need slaves. There were slaves who had access to the king because they were so trusted, because they were so faithful. They had so much fidelity; they were so dutiful. They were so concerned to do what they were told to do, they had risen through the social ranks until they were trusted enough to be made the intimate friends of the king. We read about these slaves that they had the right to enter the king’s bed chamber so that they were the last ones to see him at night and the first ones to see him in the morning. They cared for his most intimate needs at a very personal level. They were so well-acquainted with him that they literally were trusted with his life, with his life. They had become protectors of his life. They would know his fears because they were intimately acquainted with him in all informal situations. They would know his thoughts. They would know his hopes, his joys, his ambitions.
Very likely, they would know his plans. They would know far more about this king than anybody who met him on a formal level. Any statesman, any politician, any noble, or any general wouldn’t know what these intimate friends of the king knew. These slaves who took his sandals off and put on his bedclothes, and were there in the morning to bring him out of bed, to help him prepare for the day. They knew more than his wives knew, because marriage was a convenience, and concubines were only for sexual pleasure, and children were not necessarily given the attention of their important fathers anyway.
One could say that these were the intimate people in the life of a monarch. They were the closest, most personal, private people in his world; and they had to be trusted. They had to be trusted with his life. They had to be trusted with his thoughts. They had to be trusted with his plans. They had to be trusted with his goals and objectives. And if you were a friend to the king, if you were a slave who was a friend, you were of all men most specially favored; and you can understand why.
By the way, the word “friend” in the Greek is philos. It’s from the Greek verb phile which means “to love, to love, to have affection for.” Jesus says, “You are My friends – slaves who are loved. You are slaves who know Me most intimately.”
Jesus then referred to servanthood.
MacArthur says that there is evidence that the original Bible manuscripts used the word ‘slave’ rather than ‘servant’:
Now, when we talk about slaves who are friends, we’re entering into a concept that is alien to even the evangelical world. It was back in 2010 that I wrote a book, and the title of the book was Slave. Some of you’ve seen that book; maybe some of you have looked at it – Slave. I had a hard time getting the publisher to accept the title. I had an even harder time getting them to accept the fact that I was going to expose a cover-up, a long-standing cover-up – a cover-up of centuries, trying to cover up the fact that Christians are slaves. I wrote the book to expose the cover-up, the effort that had gone on for centuries to hide this essential reality that we as Christians are slaves of Christ – slaves who are very intimate friends of the King …
The true reality of Christ’s lordship has been all but obscured and eclipsed through the centuries by the translators of the New Testament, and even the Old, who have tampered with the word “slave.” It really is an amazing cover-up – amazing, amazing. But let’s start with “Jesus is Lord.” That is the Christian confession. It is the word kurios, kurios. That’s the word “lord.” It means “one who has power, ownership, and absolute authority; one who has power, ownership, and absolute authority.” That’s a lord. It’s used 750 times in the New Testament, and its meaning is not in question.
There is a synonym to kurios. The synonym is despots, despots, which means “absolute ruler,” from which you get the English word “despot.” We use it as an adjective. Somebody’s a despotic ruler, we mean they are a unilateral dictator. That’s what despotés means. Jesus, in the little book of Jude, is called “Master and Lord – ” verse 4 “ – despotés and kurios.”
When the New Testament refers to Jesus, it primarily refers to Him as Kurios, Lord. For example, our Lord is referred to 94 times in the book of Acts; 92 of the 94, He is called Lord; 2 He is called Str, Savior. The lordship of Christ is clearly declared throughout the entire New Testament. He is kurios, sovereign ruler. He is despotés, absolute ruler. So when you say, “Jesus is Lord,” you’re not identifying Him merely as deity – although He is that. You’re not identifying Him in some sort of abstract way as the most important religious figure. When you say “Lord,” that’s slave talk, that’s slave talk. You are saying, “He is the Master with absolute power and absolute dominion.” That word would be used to describe a slave owner: “He is Lord” …
… verse 24 of Luke 9, “Whoever wishes to save his life will – ” what? “ – lose it.” You let go of all of it. You’re not in charge anymore. You’re not in control; that is most basic. Lord, despotés – master, lord, ruler. Very bold, very strong words. A master and a sovereign with absolute dominion; that is slave talk.
And by the way, wherever there was a kurios, there were slaves. Wherever there was a despotés, a master, there were slaves. If you were lord, then you were lord because you had slaves. And if you were a slave, you were a slave because you had a lord, or a master. One axiomatically implies the other.
No one is lord over nobody, and no one is a slave of no one. If Jesus is Lord and you call Him Lord, then He has a right to ask you the question of Luke 6:46, “Why do you call Me, ‘Lord,’ and do not what I say?” because Lord means absolute monarch. So Point Number 1: Jesus is Lord, Kurios – 750 times again that is used in the New Testament. It is inescapable what it means. It means He’s in charge. That’s Point 1.
Point 2: Christians are slaves. Christians are slaves. We are slaves to our Lord. Again, I remind you, the Bible doesn’t condone slavery. It doesn’t establish slavery. It doesn’t condemn slavery. It recognizes that it is and has been a social construct, and it assaults every unrighteous abuse of every kind of relationship, including that one. But the recognition, however, that that may be, for some people, the best of all possible relationships because you are bought and owned, and cared for, and protected, and provided for, and rewarded, and loved. There’s a security in that that doesn’t exist outside of that. But in the case of the spiritual reality, Jesus is Lord Kurios.
We are slaves, doulos. Have you heard that, doulos? What does doulos mean? Slave. It’s all it means. Please, that’s all it means. Doulos means slave. It appears 130 times in the New Testament; 130 times the word “slave” appears in the New Testament.
Now, I know you’re going to run to your New Testament, you’re going to look for all 130. I want to warn you, you won’t find them. You will not find them. You can get your concordance out and you’re not going to find them. Why? Because almost all of those are translated by a different word. They are translated “servant” or “bondservant.” Why? The word means “slave.” That’s all it means; that’s all it’s ever meant.
A slave is someone who is bought and owned. A slave was somebody who had no personal rights, no legal standing, couldn’t go to court, couldn’t own property – no freedom, no autonomy. That’s very different than being a servant. A servant is someone who does something – serves. A slave is someone who is something.
There are six words in the Greek language for servant, and they describe all kinds of functions that people do. A non-slave could serve; a slave could serve. Service doesn’t talk about the reality of your situation, it only talks about your function. But when you use doulos, if they wanted to translate servant in the New Testament in English Bibles or any other, they could translate servant six different ways because how the word is used kind of described its character.
One word for servant is diaknos which means “a table waiter.” Another word for servant is huprets which means an under rower, somebody who pulled oars in a ship. It could be used metaphorically for people who served. But doulos does not describe any function, it describes a relationship …
A slave is somebody who is dependent, obligated, subject to an alien will other than his own. It is not the word “servant.” Doesn’t describe a function. But sad to say, I don’t care what version you have – even up to the ESV, NAS, whatever – starting way back with the Geneva Bible, way back with the Geneva Bible, way back in the Middle Ages, there was a certain stigma about slavery. So translators sort of moved away from slave to servant; had less stigma.
One very interesting article in a theological journal back in 1966 says this: “By the end of the 13th century, slavery disappeared from northwestern Europe. Slavery, therefore, was known to the 17th century Englishmen, at least at the beginning of that century, not as an intimate accepted institution, but rather as a remote phenomenon. Slavery in their minds evoked the extreme case of a captive in fetters or chains, so they doubtless wanted to avoid the implication of cruelty inherent in that imagery. But in so doing, they have unwittingly diminished the force of the actual biblical term.”
So they decided to play fast and loose with a word that means slave, and you will find doulos translated slave as we found it in John 15 because here, it is referring to an actual slave as an illustration. Whenever it refers to an actual slave, or an illustration of a slave, or an inanimate kind of slavery – like slavery to sin or slavery to God, Romans 6 – they’ll translate it “slave.”
Whenever it refers to a believer, there’s an equivocation on that and it ends up being usually some form of servant. Sometimes, some have translated it bond-slave, but it’s all arbitrary. So what has happened is you read through your New Testament and you get the idea that we are servants of God, we are servants of the Lord, we are servants of the Lord – that’s how we think.
Truth is, we are what? Slaves, slaves. I did my very best with a long, drawn out plea with the translators of the ESV, the newest translation, to please translate doulos “slave,” plain and simple.
To show you how embedded this idea is in the Old Testament, which is Hebrew, there’s a Hebrew word ebed. It is a word for slave. It appears 800 times in the Old Testament, 800 times. In the King James Version, once translated slave. There’s just this running away from the reality of the idea of slavery. But slavery is what God wanted to communicate through those words because it describes our relationship to Christ.
I’m not free under Christ, am I? My freedoms are defined by Him. My duties are defined by Him. My convictions are defined by Him. My words are defined by Him. My actions are defined by Him. My relationships are defined by Him. Everything in my life is defined by Him. I have yielded up – when I said, “Jesus is Lord,” I have yielded up unqualified submission to the control and commands of the Lord.
Jesus said that He did not call the Apostles servants any longer because the servant does not know what the master is doing; therefore, He has called them friends, because He had made known to them everything that He had heard from His Father (verse 15).
Henry explains the verse, using the word ‘servant’, which, as MacArthur says, is in the KJV:
Christ loved his disciples, for he was very free in communicating his mind to them (v. 15): “Henceforth you shall not be kept so much in the dark as you have been, like servants that are only told their present work; but, when the Spirit is poured out, you shall know your Master’s designs as friends. All things that I have heard of my Father I have declared unto you.” As to the secret will of God, there are many things which we must be content not to know; but, as to the revealed will of God, Jesus Christ has faithfully handed to us what he received of the Father, ch. 1 18; Matt 11 27. The great things relating to man’s redemption Christ declared to his disciples, that they might declare them to others; they were the men of his counsel, Matt 13 11.
Then Jesus mentioned the Doctrine of Election, saying that the Apostles — and we — did not choose Him but that He chose them and us; furthermore, He appointed the faithful to go and bear fruit, lasting fruit, so that the Father will give them whatever they ask in His name (verse 16).
That statement recalls the aforementioned John 15:7.
Addressing the election of the faithful, MacArthur refers to the master and slave relationship involved:
… if you are a slave and a friend, and you have the privilege of this extreme slavery and extreme friendship, let me tell you something: you didn’t choose this. It’s against everything in your nature – everything, against everything. It’s not a voluntary organization, and that is why in verse 16 you read so unambiguously, “You did not choose Me, but I chose you.”
Now anybody who doesn’t understand that is not trying. That’s not obscure. And it’s very extensive. “What do you mean, chose me for what?” “Chose you to be slave and friend. Chose to disclose everything I heard from My Father so that you would be an intimate friend and there would be no secrets.” In other words, salvation. “I chose you,” that’s the Greek verb ekleg, from which we get the word “elect.” It’s the doctrine of election. “I chose you to be My slaves who are friends, and I made known to you all the truth.” That is salvation. But it doesn’t end there.
Then He says this: “And appointed you that you would go.” This is not just salvation, this is a commission, this is a commission. “I appointed you that you would go.” It’s the Greek verb tithmi, to set, to establish, to fix, to ordain. Very strong. In other words, when you were chosen to be a slave who is an intimate friend, when you were chosen to this extreme slavery, extreme friendship, it was with a view to fulfilling a commission; and it is a commission to go.
This is like a preview of the Great Commission, isn’t it? It’s a preview of the Great Commission: “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature.” “I appointed you that you that you would go.” And then also, to make sure that you would have everything you need – end of verse 16: “Whatever you ask of the Father in My name, He may give it to you. So I have chosen you for salvation, I have chosen you for a commission, I have chosen you for a provision; and with that salvation and that commission and that provision, your life will have an eternal impact.”
Henry elaborates on asking the Father for something in His Son’s holy name:
Probably this refers in the first place to the power of working miracles which the apostles were clothed with, which was to be drawn out by prayer. “Whatever gifts are necessary to the furtherance of your labours, whatever help from heaven you have occasion for at any time, it is but ask and have.” Three things are here hinted to us for our encouragement in prayer, and very encouraging they are. First, That we have a God to go to who is a Father; Christ here calls him the Father, both mine and yours; and the Spirit in the word and in the heart teaches us to cry, Abba, Father. Secondly, That we come in a good name. Whatever errand we come upon to the throne of grace according to God’s will, we may with a humble boldness mention Christ’s name in it, and plead that we are related to him, and he is concerned for us. Thirdly, That an answer of peace is promised us. What you come for shall be given you. This great promise made to that great duty keeps up a comfortable and gainful intercourse between heaven and earth.
Jesus concluded by saying that He was giving those commands so that the Apostles — and we — may love one another (verse 17).
Henry refers us back to verse 12 to emphasise the importance of this commandment:
We must keep his commandments, and this is his commandment, that we love one another, v. 12, and again, v. 17. No one duty of religion is more frequently inculcated, nor more pathetically urged upon us, by our Lord Jesus, than that of mutual love, and for good reason. 1. It is here recommended by Christ’s pattern (v. 12): as I have loved you. Christ’s love to us should direct and engage our love to each other; in this manner, and from this motive, we should love one another, as, and because, Christ has loved us. He here specifies some of the expressions of his love to them; he called them friends, communicated his mind to them, was ready to give them what they asked. Go you and do likewise. 2. It is required by his precept. He interposes his authority, has made it one of the statute-laws of his kingdom. Observe how differently it is expressed in these two verses, and both very emphatic. (1.) This is my commandment (v. 12), as if this were the most necessary of all the commandments. As under the law the prohibition of idolatry was the commandment more insisted on than any other, foreseeing the people’s addictedness to that sin, so Christ, foreseeing the addictedness of the Christian church to uncharitableness, has laid most stress upon this precept. (2.) These things I command you, v. 17. He speaks as if he were about to give them many things in charge, and yet names this only, that you love one another; not only because this includes many duties, but because it will have a good influence upon all.
This reading has given us much to ponder in the days ahead.
Incidentally, Eastertide is soon coming to an end. Ascension Day is this coming Thursday, and Pentecost follows ten days later.
The three-year Lectionary that many Catholics and Protestants hear in public worship gives us a great variety of Holy Scripture.
Yet, it doesn’t tell the whole story.
My series Forbidden Bible Verses — ones the Lectionary editors and their clergy omit — examines the passages we do not hear in church. These missing verses are also Essential Bible Verses, ones we should study with care and attention. Often, we find that they carry difficult messages and warnings.
Today’s reading is from the English Standard Version Anglicised (ESVUK) with commentary by Matthew Henry and John MacArthur.
The Hamites
6 The sons of Ham:
Cush, Egypt, Put and Canaan.
7 The sons of Cush:
Seba, Havilah, Sabtah, Raamah and Sabteka.
The sons of Raamah:
Sheba and Dedan.
8 Cush was the father[a] of Nimrod, who became a mighty warrior on the earth. 9 He was a mighty hunter before the Lord; that is why it is said, ‘Like Nimrod, a mighty hunter before the Lord.’ 10 The first centres of his kingdom were Babylon, Uruk, Akkad and Kalneh, in[b] Shinar.[c] 11 From that land he went to Assyria, where he built Nineveh, Rehoboth Ir,[d] Calah 12 and Resen, which is between Nineveh and Calah – which is the great city.
——————————————————————————————————————————-
Last week’s post discussed the sons and descendants of Japheth, who travelled to and settled the lands of Indo-European peoples.
Now we look at Ham’s sons and descendants, one of whom was Canaan, upon whom Noah put a curse. This was because of his unbelief. Whether it was apparent at the time or whether Noah prophesied it, we do not know. Canaan was also the name of the Israelites’ Promised Land; as part of the curse, God directed them to battle the Canaanites for it.
Ham had four sons: Cush, Egypt, Put and Canaan (verse 6).
Cush’s sons are named: Seba, Havilah, Sabtah, Raamah and Sabteka, as are Raamah’s: Sheba and Dedan (verse 7).
Next week’s reading will return to those verses but, for now, John MacArthur discusses Ham’s son Cush (emphases mine):
Ham had four sons: Cush, Mezraim, Put, and Canaan. Cush has five sons and two grandsons from Raamah, named Sheba and Dedan … From Cush come five sons, two grandsons …
Now, just a couple of things. Cush is the Bible’s name for Ethiopia. So, Ham’s people went south … Who populated Africa? Who populated the southern part of the Middle East and east of that? … There was also a Cush in Arabia.
All the sons of Cush went east. How do you know that? If you would look at the sons of Cush in verse 7 … all of those names can be identified with places in Arabia … Put is Libya in North Africa, west of Egypt. And Canaan, the fourth son, was the ancestor of the various tribes that settled in the Promised Land. And those various tribes include the Jebusite, the Amorite, the Girgashite, the Hivite, the Arkite, the Sinite, the Arvadite, the Zemarite, the Hamathite, and all those families of Canaanites that were scattered all over everywhere.
So, the Canaanites were people who descended from Canaan, but there were all kinds of families of them. All kinds of families.
Our two commentators put their focus on the verses that follow.
In addition to the sons named in verse 7, Cush also fathered Nimrod, who became a mighty warrior on the earth (verse 8).
In fact, Nimrod was a mighty warrior before the Lord God, and it was even said: ‘Like Nimrod, a mighty hunter before the Lord’ (verse 9).
Matthew Henry provides an excellent biography of Nimrod, beginning with animals and moving on to men, explaining how God saw him:
I. Nimrod was a great hunter; with this he began, and for this became famous to a proverb. Every great hunter is, in remembrance of him, called a Nimrod. 1. Some think he did good with his hunting, served his country by ridding it of the wild beasts which infested it, and so insinuated himself into the affections of his neighbours, and got to be their prince. Those that exercise authority either are, or at least would be called, benefactors, Luke 22 25. 2. Others think that under pretence of hunting he gathered men under his command, in pursuit of another game he had to play, which was to make himself master of the country and to bring them into subjection. He was a mighty hunter, that is, he was a violent invader of his neighbours’ rights and properties, and a persecutor of innocent men, carrying all before him, and endeavouring to make all his own by force and violence. He thought himself a mighty prince, but before the Lord (that is, in God’s account) he was but a mighty hunter. Note, Great conquerors are but great hunters. Alexander and Cesar would not make such a figure in scripture-history as they do in common history; the former is represented in prophecy but as a he-goat pushing, Dan 8 5. Nimrod was a mighty hunter against the Lord, so the LXX; that is, (1.) He set up idolatry, as Jeroboam did, for the confirming of his usurped dominion. That he might set up a new government, he set up a new religion upon the ruin of the primitive constitution of both. Babel was the mother of harlots. Or, (2.) He carried on his oppression and violence in defiance of God himself, daring Heaven with his impieties, as if he and his huntsmen could out-brave the Almighty, and were a match for the Lord of hosts and all his armies. As if it were a small thing to weary men, he thinks to weary my God also, Isa 7 13.
The first centres of his kingdom were Babylon, Uruk, Akkad and Kalneh, in[b] Shinar[c] (verse 10).
Henry continues:
II. Nimrod was a great ruler: The beginning of his kingdom was Babel, v. 10. Some way or other, by arts or arms, he got into power, either being chosen to it or forcing his way to it; and so laid the foundations of a monarchy, which was afterwards a head of gold, and the terror of the mighty, and bade fair to be universal. It does not appear that he had any right to rule by birth; but either his fitness for government recommended him, as some think, to an election, or by power and policy he advanced gradually, and perhaps insensibly, into the throne. See the antiquity of civil government, and particularly that form of it which lodges the sovereignty in a single person. If Nimrod and his neighbours began, other nations soon learned to incorporate under one head for their common safety and welfare, which, however it began, proved so great a blessing to the world that things were reckoned to go ill indeed when there was no king in Israel.
From that initial kingdom — ‘land’ — he went into Assyria, where he built Nineveh, Rehoboth Ir,[d] Calah (verse 11) as well as Resen, which is between Nineveh and Calah – which is the great city (verse 12).
Henry concludes:
III. Nimrod was a great builder. Probably he was architect in the building of Babel, and there he began his kingdom; but, when his project to rule all the sons of Noah was baffled by the confusion of tongues, out of that land he went forth into Assyria (so the margin reads it, v. 11) and built Nineveh, etc., that, having built these cities, he might command them and rule over them. Observe, in Nimrod, the nature of ambition. 1. It is boundless. Much would have more, and still cries, Give, give. 2. It is restless. Nimrod, when he had four cities under his command, could not be content till he had four more. 3. It is expensive. Nimrod will rather be at the charge of rearing cities than not have the honour of ruling them. The spirit of building is the common effect of a spirit of pride. 4. It is daring, and will stick at nothing. Nimrod’s name signifies rebellion, which (if indeed he did abuse his power to the oppression of his neighbours) teaches us that tyrants to men are rebels to God, and their rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft.
MacArthur does not think Nimrod ever hunted animals, only men:
Now, when it says he was a mighty hunter, it doesn’t mean he was a hunter of animals. He was a killer of men. A better way to translate that is he was a mighty warrior. He was a mighty soldier.
Readers can make up their own minds. I rather like the animal bit, because what better way to insinuate oneself into the affections of others than by killing dangerous beasts? Afterwards, one has grateful people acquiescing to whatever one wants.
MacArthur tells us more about Nimrod’s kingdom and Babylon:
This great-grandson of Noah, grandson of righteous Ham, wielded deadly power, ruled ruthlessly right in the middle of the Euphrates valley, and no doubt conquered all kinds of people, and consolidated families and people groups and tribes into his great Babel. Great in power, great in sin, great in idolatry, great in defiance of God. This was the first real city of man in the new world; built for man’s glory. It was a preview of a later city called Babylon, which a preview of a final Babylon that will be built by the Antichrist at the end of human history.
Nimrod built Babel. Nebuchadnezzar, a Nimrod-like man, built Babylon. And the Antichrist will build the final Babylon. By the way, Nimrod’s name in Hebrew? Rebel. Rebel. And all of the places of his kingdom named … verses 10 to 12. See all those names? They stretch from the northernmost point of the Mesopotamian valley at Nineveh, down to the Persian Gulf and the southernmost point at Iraq. And all the area in between. This was a massive kingdom.
The story of the Hamites continues next week.
Next time — Genesis 10:13-20
Privately, many Christians in England celebrated Easter with much joyful reverence.
Publicly, the media covered the greatest feast day in the Church year quite differently. It’s not the media’s fault. They covered only what they saw.
What follows are news items from the last ten days of March 2024.
Ramadan at King’s Cross railway station
On Tuesday, March 19, the display at King’s Cross showed that day’s hadith for Ramadan devotions on the railway station’s departure board:
The Telegraph reported (emphases mine):
A Network Rail spokesman said the publicly owned infrastructure company was marking the Islamic holy month of Ramadan, which stretches from March 10 to April 9 in 2024.
“King’s Cross station is made up of a diverse and multicultural workforce and at times of religious significance, messages such as these are displayed to celebrate the station’s diversity and inclusivity,” they said …
“Throughout the year, messaging at the station also celebrates festivals from other religions including Easter, Christmas, Passover and Diwali to mark the beliefs of our colleagues and passengers.”
When asked by The Telegraph for examples of departure board messages displayed to mark other religious festivals, the spokesman suggested none were available because staff had taken no pictures of them.
Incredible.
Pakistani flag flies over Westminster Abbey
Did we know that the Pakistani flag flies over Westminster Abbey once a year?
It seemed to be the first time the British public had seen a photo of it, which circulated online on March 22. I believed it only when I saw it on GB News.
Pakistan’s The News reported that this takes place annually as the nation is part of the Commonwealth (bold in the original):
LONDON: Pakistan Day Special Memorial Service was held at the Westminster Abbey. In keeping with the past practice, Pakistani flag was also flown on top of the north tower of the Abbey.
As per details, [the] Abbey organized a special Evensong in connection with the National Day of Pakistan. Special prayers were offered for the strengthening of Pakistan-UK friendship and the well-being of the people of the two countries. While the national flag kept flying on top of the north tower of Westminster Abbey the entire day …
Pakistan Day commemorates the passing of Lahore Resolution, under which a separate nation for the Muslims of the British Indian empire demanded by Muslim League was passed on March 23, 1940.
Westminster Abbey has strong links to the Commonwealth and prays for the countries of the Commonwealth throughout its regular pattern of daily services.
Each year, the high commissioners of the Commonwealth countries are invited by the Dean to evensong on or close to their national day. The National Flag is flown on the day when the High Commission is represented at Evensong.
The Cross offends
It has become clear that the Cross offends our betters in Britain.
Radio Times
When I first moved here decades ago, I was heartened to see that the Radio Times, the original and foremost of broadcasting listing magazines, had illustrations of crosses in the margins of their pages for Good Friday and churches on Easter Day.
Unfortunately, the crosses and churches, except for tiny ones, disappeared some years ago. The veteran Christian commentator Catherine Pepinster observed in the Telegraph on Wednesday, March 20, ‘British officialdom treats Christianity with open contempt’:
Christian symbols and spaces are contested, too. Years ago, the Radio Times would have a special border on its pages with programmes for Good Friday, with a cross within the image. This year, the cross – the very thing that denotes Jesus’ crucifixion which is commemorated every Good Friday – is missing and instead there is a gambolling spring lamb and a miniscule church. Perhaps they thought it too distressing or too, well, overtly Christian.
However, that all went by the wayside long before 2024.
Pepinster notes that Good Friday is now viewed as a day of celebration rather than penitence:
… some restaurants have emailed me with an invitation to “celebrate” Good Friday with a slap-up lunch.
Hot cross buns
On March 21, GB News reported that Iceland, one of our supermarket chains, decided to replace the cross on hot cross buns with a tick (checkmark):
Iceland is running a trial where it will sell hot cross buns with a ‘tick’ instead of a ‘cross’ alongside the traditional treats that feature a cross.
However, this has caused fury among some customers and Christian groups as it removes the religious symbol, with some shoppers calling it “craziness” …
Research by Iceland suggested a fifth of customers want to ditch the cross and would prefer a ‘tick’ symbol on their sweet treats instead …
Iceland has made the change as part of a trial to find out which customers prefer and said it hopes to gauge feedback before rolling out further changes.
I can only hope that the traditional hot cross buns outsold those with the tick.
This year saw another hot cross bun change: the extravagant flavour varieties. Traditionally, the hot cross bun is a modest, lightly sweetened roll flavoured with spices to remind us of our Lord’s suffering on Good Friday. The cross on top is not sweet, either; it’s made out of edible paste. Now there are several gourmet varieties of hot cross bun: chocolate, bacon, cheese — you name it. It’s just wrong.
St George’s Cross on football shirts
On March 22, news emerged that the Football Association (soccer) modified the George Cross on the England team’s shirt collars, adding blue to the red.
This did not go down well, either.
The Guardian said:
Perhaps with a little foresight the Football Association could have avoided the unhappiness over the recoloured George Cross on its latest overpriced scratchy nylon replica shirt by suggesting this design detail was related to the fact England v Brazil takes place on the weekend of Palm Sunday, when the cross is traditionally hung with purple, thereby out-sanctifying even the most patriotic of brocade-fondlers.
Not that this would have helped anyone get any closer to the objective truth here. Which is that the flag (and this isn’t The Flag. It’s a flag) is not a protected symbol. Nike’s decision to go with a purple, blue and pink version of the beloved cross may be pointless, gimmicky, and even quite cynical – nobody here does anything without focus-grouping every last chevron and flash: if the response really was unforeseen then the FA and Nike need to sack their entire marketing teams.
I wonder how the shirts will sell.
I am amazed at how offensive decision-makers in any sector of our society find the George Cross when there are several other countries which have it as part of their national flag. Those nations never find it embarrassing or shameful. Why should the English?
Ramadan lights in London
A week after the aforementioned King’s Cross station departure board display, Ramadan lights went up once again in central London. I saw them last year.
They say ‘Happy Ramadan’, yet I thought that Ramadan was supposed to be a time of fasting, prayer and reflection before Eid.
No one says ‘Happy Lent’, do they?
On March 27, Wednesday of Holy Week, The Telegraph reported:
Ramadan lights will be on display in London’s West End over the Easter Weekend …
This year marks the second year that the Muslim celebration has been marked with illuminations in central London.
The lights are funded by the Aziz Foundation, a charity founded by Asif Aziz, a billionaire property developer whose company owns sites including the London Trocadero that occupies much of the block between Piccadilly Circus and Leicester Square.
The lights – wishing a ‘‘Happy Ramadan’’ – have drawn plaudits but prompted a warning from prominent local Conservatives that the council must also support the other major faiths during important festivals.
Last week Network Rail was forced to remove an Islamic message on the departure board at London King’s Cross.
The rail operator faced criticism following its decision to display a “hadith [Islamic epithet] of the day” to celebrate Ramadan, as part of a diversity initiative.
Among the criticisms Humanists UK said it felt public train stations “should not be urging ‘sinners’ to repent”, after the phrase was used in the message.
Paul Swaddle, leader of the minority Tory group on Westminster council, offered full support to the Ramadan lights but questioned why a Ramadan display in the window of Westminster’s city hall offices had not yet been replaced by an Easter one in time for this weekend.
Mr Swaddle said: “The thing I would question is this: there has been a Ramadan celebration in the window of Westminster city hall. But I just wonder if the Easter one is going up very soon? Easter is one of the most important Christian festivals of the year but what are they [the Labour council] doing to celebrate it? I am not aware they are. I suspect the window display is not going to change.”
Not a chance.
Maundy Thursday
For whatever reason, HMP (His Majesty’s Prison) Lewes decided to serve curry to the inmates on Maundy Thursday. The curry made them ill:
Hmm.
BBC drops televised Easter Day broadcast
On Good Friday, the Telegraph informed us that there would be no televised BBC broadcast of an Easter church service this year:
The BBC has been accused of turning its back on Britain’s Christian faith after scrapping its broadcast of the traditional Easter service from King’s College, Cambridge.
The programme has been dropped in favour of religious coverage elsewhere across the corporation’s platforms.
It comes after the BBC decided to invite “confirmed atheist” and humanist campaigner Alice Roberts on the Good Friday edition of Desert Island Discs [BBC Radio 4] rather than a Christian figure …
Critics have said the BBC appeared to be deliberately abandoning the part of its audience that professed the Christian faith.
Andrea Williams, the chief executive of Christian Concern, said: “The BBC’s motto, ‘Nation shall speak peace unto nation’, is Biblical in origin. The more the BBC seeks to forget and minimise the primary role of the Christian faith shaping this nation, the darker all things will become. Easter reminds us of Christ’s victory over death, which is a good-news message for us all.”
But the BBC has rejected claims that it is ignoring the role of Christianity and religion in general after dropping the King’s College Easter service, which was shown on BBC Two last year and had been on television since 2010.
Sad.
Church of England unhelpful
One cannot say that the Church of England has helped to bring the meaning of Lent, Holy Week and Easter to the English consciousness.
On Palm Sunday, the Telegraph reported that a female Church of England cleric, the Ven Miranda Threlfall-Holmes, Archdeacon of Liverpool, wants to ‘smash the patriarchy’ and promote ‘anti-whiteness’:
Dr Threlfall-Holmes wrote on X, formerly Twitter: “I went to a conference on whiteness last autumn. It was very good, very interesting and made me realise: whiteness is to race as patriarchy is to gender.
“So yes, let’s have anti-whiteness, and let’s smash the patriarchy. That’s not anti-white, or anti-men, it’s anti-oppression.”
In response, users of X suggested that if the Cambridge-educated priest wanted “anti-whiteness” then she should “lead by example and resign”.
We all know about the recent questions that ‘conversions’ have raised with regard to those who would like asylum status.
Even more of us know how disappointing the recent Archbishops of Canterbury have been, particularly the present incumbent, Justin Welby.
Just because Easter was on March 31 this year, the earliest in some time, Welby has hoped since 2016 that Easter in the UK would be on a fixed day every year, putting us at odds with the rest of the Christian world outside of the Orthodox churches.
On Good Friday, The Times told us about a law that gained Royal Assent which would do that very thing: ‘How a 96-year-old law could stop Easter hopping around the calendar’.
Oddly enough, the Archbishop of Canterbury at the time, promoted the idea:
The Archbishop of Canterbury at the time, Randall Davidson, supported it and a private member’s bill was introduced by John Simon, the former home secretary and future chancellor. The bill was passed, but all it did was create a mechanism by which the date could be fixed — and that mechanism has still not been triggered.
The 1928 Easter Act:
has lain dormant since the moment it was given royal assent as the conditions for its use have never been satisfied — but a movement could be building to change that.
Welby thinks it’s a great idea:
In recent years the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Most Rev Justin Welby, has expressed support for the idea and Anglican leaders discussed the matter with Catholic and Orthodox Christians. Should there be agreement, the Easter Act 1928 could be triggered and Easter Sunday would have a permanent slot …
… In 2016, Welby said he was talking to other Christian leaders about fixing the date of Easter, adding: “I would expect it to be within five to ten years’ time, as most people have probably printed their calendars for the next five years and school holidays and so on are already fixed and it affects almost everything you do in the spring and summer. I would love to see it before I retire.”
Not surprisingly, secularists support the idea. Planning around the greatest Christian feast day is just too inconvenient:
“It’s ridiculous that almost a century after legislation was passed to fix the date for Easter, businesses, schools and families are still inconvenienced by Easter moving around the calendar,” said a spokesman for the National Secular Society. “Instead of waiting indefinitely for the elusive consensus from church leaders, the government should press on and fix the date so the rest of us can benefit from the certainty of a fixed spring break.”
In 2021, the Conservative government said it has no plans to bring forward a statutory instrument (SI) to make this happen:
Paul Scully, then the small business minister, told the National Secular Society that he appreciated their case but that there was as yet no intention to trigger the Easter Act until Christians gave their assent.
That would have to be all Christian communities, not just the CofE:
… it would never happen without clear assent from the Christian communities.
Let’s hope it stays that way.
Easter Day
Meanwhile, there are vicars up and down the country who are doing their best to preach the Gospel and manage local church finances rather than focus on identity politics. One of them is the Revd Greg Smith, a husband to wife Fran, father of four and grandfather to three youngsters. The Revd and Mrs Smith live in Shropshire.
On Easter Day, the Telegraph related his story in ‘How Britain lost faith in the Church of England’:
On Sunday, the Reverend Greg Smith, rector of St George’s in the small south Shropshire market town of Pontesbury, will be leading services in three of the six far-flung churches that make up the benefice – or extended parish – that he heads.
Two other clergy will assist him with the rest, one of them St Luke’s, Snailbeach, now designated a “festival church”, meaning usage is so low it is only open on holy and high days.
“I’ve got a 6.30am, a nine o’clock and a 10.30am,” says Smith. “That is going to be a lot of running around in the car, rushing out of one church and into the next, never spending time with people, not able to prepare properly” …
The impression created that the rural ministry of the Church of England is on its knees is not one accepted by Greg Smith, who in whatever spare time he has when not driving around in his car between churches, running a food bank, two community cafes for young people and a bereavement service, is compiling a report on the subject for his local bishop …
The life he leads is, he agrees, relentless. There are currently 72 clergy in the diocese of Hereford in which Pontesbury sits, shouldering the burden of parish work in 406 churches, with nine vacancies, so it is doing better than Truro [the thinly-stretched diocese in Cornwall]. But three quarters of those priests in the diocese licenced to officiate at services are over 50 years of age.
And the workload on them isn’t made any easier when 90 per cent of the churches in the diocese are listed buildings. “It’s a challenge to care for one listed building, but I’ve got five and all have big bills round the corner,” reports Smith.
In St George’s, there is one pending for £250,000 for repairs to the stained glass at the east end of the church. Holy Trinity in Minsterley, the next village along, needs a similar sum.
“There are some grants available, but it’s a lot of paperwork that never stops.”
In the past, some of that form filling would have fallen to the church wardens, volunteers from the congregation, often with professional expertise. Yet a report earlier this month revealed that a quarter of all CofE parishes no longer have even a single church warden.
England’s Anglican churches need money to survive, yet:
A high-profile panel has urged an increase from £100 million to £1 billion in the fund already earmarked by the Church Commissioners to atone for Anglicanism’s historical involvement in the slave trade.
If the recommendation of the panel, whose chairman is Bishop Rosemarie Mallett of Croydon, is accepted, the cost would substantially reduce the Commissioners’ ability to give local churches the boost they are crying out for right now to keep things going.
As history tells us, the Church of England was prominent in the abolition of the slave trade in the 19th century, but let’s not allow facts to get in the way of identity politics.
Justin Welby’s acquiescence to close churches during the pandemic did not help, either.
Smith himself says of CofE wokery:
I’m not saying these things are not important but what I can say is that these are not conversations I am having locally. The only people who have spoken to me about reparations for slavery are other clergy.
People are much more exercised about keeping the [church] building warm and getting children, the younger generation, in to worship with us. The national church can feel a million miles away.
Another vicar has had the same experience, albeit in south London:
Like Greg Smith in Shropshire, the Reverend Ruth Burge-Thomas, vicar at Holy Spirit Church in Clapham since 2012, experiences the daily struggle to make the Church relevant to her local community in 2024.
A local girl whose mother grew up on one of the council estates in the parish, she argues that as vicar, “you are owned by the community. Whenever I go out, a five-minute walk often takes me 45 minutes because so many people stop me to talk about what is troubling them.”
I wish both vicars — and others like them — abundant blessings in their respective ministries.
On a church-related note, one happy event was King Charles’s walkabout outside of Windsor Castle on Easter morning. The Telegraph told us:
The King has re-emerged into public life for the first time since his diagnosis with cancer, in a walkabout with 56 handshakes, a homemade card, and a promise that he is “doing his best”.
He was “very touched” to see people there for him, he said, smiling broadly and thanking members of the public as their hopes that he “get well soon”, “keep going strong” and “never give in” rolled in.
At Windsor Castle, after the Easter Matins service which was his first public appearance since Christmas Day, the King was in his element after his doctors agreed he could resume the walkabouts he loves.
His mother would have been pleased, to say the least.
Well, while England’s Easter in 2024 might not have been the brightest and best in living memory, the remnant of believers holds fast to that which is good: the Gospel message — and the Resurrection.
Palm Sunday is March 24, 2024.
Readings for Year B’s Liturgy of the Palms can be found here. The Lectionary editors give us a Psalm and the choice of one of two Gospels.
My post also includes several posts explaining the importance of what happened on Palm Sunday.
I wrote an exegesis on John 12:12-16 in 2021.
As for an Epistle, may I suggest Philippians 2:5-11, which my Anglican church is using (emphases mine):
Philippians 2:5-11
5 In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:
6 who, being in very nature[a] God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
7 rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature[b] of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
8 And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death –
even death on a cross!
9 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.
The alternative Gospel is as follows:
Mark 11:1-11
11:1 When they were approaching Jerusalem, at Bethphage and Bethany, near the Mount of Olives, he sent two of his disciples
11:2 and said to them, “Go into the village ahead of you, and immediately as you enter it, you will find tied there a colt that has never been ridden; untie it and bring it.
11:3 If anyone says to you, ‘Why are you doing this?’ just say this, ‘The Lord needs it and will send it back here immediately.’”
11:4 They went away and found a colt tied near a door, outside in the street. As they were untying it,
11:5 some of the bystanders said to them, “What are you doing, untying the colt?”
11:6 They told them what Jesus had said; and they allowed them to take it.
11:7 Then they brought the colt to Jesus and threw their cloaks on it; and he sat on it.
11:8 Many people spread their cloaks on the road, and others spread leafy branches that they had cut in the fields.
11:9 Then those who went ahead and those who followed were shouting, “Hosanna! Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the Lord!
11:10 Blessed is the coming kingdom of our ancestor David! Hosanna in the highest heaven!”
11:11 Then he entered Jerusalem and went into the temple; and when he had looked around at everything, as it was already late, he went out to Bethany with the twelve.
Commentary comes from Matthew Henry and John MacArthur.
As long as they are scriptural, I always enjoy reading different perspectives on our Lord’s life and ministry.
John MacArthur’s 2011 sermon does not disappoint. It shows that, as flawed and human as the crowds were, they played a part in God’s plan for His Son:
The week begins with His arrival in Jerusalem. The year is 30 A.D. by the best chronology, the month is the first Jewish month, Nisan, and the arrival is on the tenth, and the crucifixion is on the fourteenth; and that all matters, because God has established a very firm time table. Importantly, it is the Passover week of that year, and Friday will be the day when tens of thousands of Passover lambs will be slain, none of which can take away anyone’s sin. However, on this Passover, there will be one sacrifice made for sin that will take away the sins of all who have ever believed through all of human history, and it will be the sacrifice of the true Lamb.
The week begins with a very strange event. It begins with what would have to be considered a bizarre event. We call it the triumphal entry; but that is really not an appropriate title to capture what’s going on. I don’t want you to think that this is anything really official. It isn’t official in a Jewish sense, it isn’t official in an earthly sense, and it isn’t official in a heavenly sense.
That is why I’ve titled the message, “The False Coronation of the True King.” There really is no question about Christ, that He is the Messiah, that He is the promised King, that He is the son of David, that He is the one with a right to reign. His lineage checks out, His mother and father both in the line of David. He has all the qualifications. He is the Son of Man, He is the Son of God. He has demonstrated His deity and His full humanity throughout His ministry. He is the true King, but this is a false coronation.
That’s why it’s such a strange event. It is not a true expression of faith. It is not a true expression of praise. It is not a true expression of a claim. And it certainly isn’t God’s coronation any more than it is a true human coronation. What did happen on this day was an odd, bizarre event, not like any other coronation of any king …
Coronations aren’t humble, they aren’t unexpected. They aren’t unplanned. They aren’t unofficial. They aren’t spontaneous. They aren’t superficial. They aren’t temporary. But this one was all of those.
Coronations are not to be reversed in a few days so that the one exalted and elevated becomes rejected and executed, like this one. This was no real coronation. Let it be said, Jesus is the real King, deserving of all exaltation, all honor, all worship, and all praise. So this is the false coronation of the true King.
The true coronation of Christ has two parts: one has already happened, and one has not. The first phase of the coronation of Christ, the true coronation, occurred at His ascension, when He left this earth, as described in the first chapter of Acts, and ascended into heaven. We are told, by the writer of Hebrews, that He took His seat at the right hand of God. This was His first coronation and it was a heavenly coronation. Philippians 2 says that when He arrived, He not only took His seat at the right hand of God, but He was given a name; and the name that He was given is the name Lord which is the name above every name, and everyone in existence bows to that name. He has already had His heavenly coronation. He is reigning at the right hand of the throne of God. He is the sovereign of heaven and the universe. But He’s not yet had His earthly coronation.
Philippians 2 describes His heavenly coronation, Revelation 19 and 20 describe His earthly coronation …
This is neither the heavenly coronation of Christ, nor is it the earthly coronation of Christ. It is not a coronation of Christ at all, it is a mock coronation, it is a false coronation, it is a fraud. There are no formalities here in this coronation. There are no dignitaries. There is no regalia. There is no fanfare …
Now up to this point, Jesus had never allowed such an occasion as this. He had never allowed an open, public demonstration declaring Him to be the Messiah. He had never allowed anything like it. In Galilee on one occasion when there were some people who wanted to press Him into sort of taking authority and acting like a king, He fled the scene, because He knew the implications. And the implications were not positive. It was not the way that He would want to establish His purpose, not by taking authority, wielding power, and establishing the kingdom. That would come, and it will come when He returns. This time He came to die.
He didn’t allow this thing to happen, and the reason is because it would precipitate the aggressive action of the leaders who already wanted Him executed. Understand, from the beginning of His ministry the Jewish leaders wanted to kill Him. It started out that way, because the first act that He did when He got to Jerusalem three years before this was go into the temple and attack the place and dismantle it, and discredit their entire religious system. And then He spent three years discrediting their theology, and undermining their interpretations, misinterpretations of Scripture. It was an all-out assault on false apostate Judaism. They despised Him, they wanted Him dead.
Any kind of massive demonstration that made them think His popularity was expanding would then be a threat to the leaders and would only hurry up their act of murder against Him. So He never let it happen. But here He lets it happen. Here the real planner by divine providence is God, because this is the week He must die; and therefore, their desire to kill Him must be escalated to its fever pitch.
They weren’t really prepared to execute Him on the Passover. In fact, the New Testament tells us they didn’t want to arrest Him and execute Him on the Passover because they were afraid of the people. But they didn’t have a choice. They were so fearful of His escalating power that they sped up their murderous intent, which is exactly the way God wanted it, so that on Friday on the Passover, He would be the Passover Lamb.
This is a false coronation for a purpose that none of them would ever have understood. It is strangely designed by God, not as a legitimate exaltation, but to inflame His enemies at exactly the precise time to get things moving so there would be time for a trial and an execution on exactly the right day. He wanted this display with the greatest possible mass of people, the largest crowd possible, so that His enemies would be severely threatened and would execute Him on the divine schedule.
It is estimated that as many as two million people would be in Jerusalem at a Passover even in ancient days. And one of the ways we get at that is ten years after this, 40 A.D., there’s a record in Jewish history that two hundred and sixty-thousand lambs were slain at that Passover – over a quarter of a million. Usually there was one lamb per ten people. That would put it at 2.6 million people possibly. It was a massive crowd. The crowd around Him must have been in the hundreds of thousands. This was the time and this was the place to allow this to agitate His enemies so that He would die in God’s perfect timing.
Mark tells us that when Jesus and the disciples were approaching Jerusalem, at Bethphage and Bethany, near the Mount of Olives, He sent two of them (verse 1), to the village ahead of them and, immediately upon entry they would find a colt that had never been ridden; they were to untie it and bring it (verse 2).
John MacArthur recaps our Lord’s ministry up unto this point, which culminated in His raising Lazarus from the dead:
The ministry in Galilee finished. The ministry in Judea finished. Final ministry in Perea on the east side of the Jordan completed, a few weeks in Perea. He crosses the Jordan near Jericho, comes through the town of Jericho, which is the base of the mountain from Jerusalem down into the area of the Dead Sea; and from Jericho, the road ascends to Jerusalem. So He passes through Jericho, heals two blind men, one named Bartimaeus; saves them spiritually. Brings into His kingdom the most hated man in town, Zacchaeus the tax collector.
Having gathered those souls to Himself in Jericho, He then ascends the twenty-five hundred-plus feet up into Jerusalem for Passover week. He is accompanied by His apostles and His disciples, and an entourage of people that has been growing, because He is, after all, the miracle worker, and He’s proven that by what happened in Jericho. He is compressed in the middle of a crowd; they’re in front of Him and behind Him and all sides of Him.
The word has circulated throughout that area and will continue to circulate throughout Jerusalem that He raised one, Lazarus, from the dead. And that is a true miracle, because there was plenty of evidence that he was dead. They held his funeral, he had been dead for days, and there’s plenty of evidence that he’s now alive because he lives in Bethany. So the escalation of this information about the miracle worker of Jesus, led by the miracle of raising Lazarus from the dead, has this crowd excited, and they’re following Him. They’re enthusiastic as they ascend the hill, because the Passover is the great event of the year. And they approach Jerusalem. And that’s how Mark begins this final week.
MacArthur gives us the meanings of the names of the two towns:
Bethany is that town, that village two miles east, down the slope from Jerusalem. The old name they think means “house of dates.” Bethphage, on the other hand, is a smaller little tiny village we don’t know anything about. Some people think it means “house of figs,” but it speaks of the agricultural life of the area. Both of them very near the Mount of Olives, which is directly east of the temple mount in Jerusalem. You come up from those villages over the Mount, and then you see Jerusalem. When you’re behind the Mount on the downslope, you can’t even see the eastern part of the city, or any of the city for that matter. So these little towns near the Mount of Olives are the location for this event.
Both our commentators point out the continuing humility that so characterised our Lord’s earthly life.
MacArthur says:
This really is very similar to His birth. In His birth, His mother arrives in Bethlehem in humble obscurity riding on a donkey; here, He arrives in Jerusalem riding on a donkey. Yes, He is the true King, King of kings, Lord of lords, Son of Man, Son of God, Messiah, Savior, and no monarch in all human history remotely compares to the Lord Jesus Christ. There is none so magnificent, powerful, wise, sovereign, just, pure, and holy; and all the elite and all the monarchs of all human history collectively together stacked on top of each other wouldn’t go high enough to touch the hem of His all-glorious garment.
Matthew Henry looks at the fact that Jesus borrowed and did not own things:
This colt was borrowed too. Christ went upon the water in a borrowed boat, ate the passover in a borrowed chamber, was buried in a borrowed sepulchre, and here rode on a borrowed ass. Let not Christians scorn to be beholden one to another, and, when need is, to go a borrowing, for our Master did not.
Jesus gave His designated disciples the following instruction (verse 3), ‘If anyone says to you, “Why are you doing this?’ just say this, ‘The Lord needs it and will send it back here immediately.”’
Note that Jesus returned what He borrowed.
That said, Henry tells us that, even in this simple, humble scene, Jesus shows His power, including omniscience:
… there were several rays of Christ’s glory shining forth in the midst of all this meanness. 1. Christ showed his knowledge of things distant, and his power over the wills of men, when he sent his disciples for the colt, v. 1-3. By this it appears that he can do every thing, and no thought can be withholden from him. 2. He showed his dominion over the creatures in riding on a colt that was never backed. The subjection of the inferior part of the creation to man is spoken of with application to Christ (Ps 8 5, 6, compared with Heb 2 8); for to him it is owing, and to his mediation, that we have any remaining benefit by the grant God made to man, of a sovereignty in this lower world, Gen 1 28. And perhaps Christ, in riding the ass’s colt, would give a shadow of his power over the spirit of man, who is born as the wild ass’s colt, Job 11 12. 3. The colt was brought from a place where two ways met (v. 4), as if Christ would show that he came to direct those into the right way, who had two ways before them, and were in danger of taking the wrong.
MacArthur posits that Jesus knew the colt’s owner believed in Him:
… it does assume one thing, that Jesus knows that whoever is in charge of this animal or owns this animal knows who the Lord is. This must be a believer. This must be someone who has put His trust in the Lord. He doesn’t even give them an explanation, “Just say, ‘The Lord has need of it,’ and immediately he’ll send it back here.”
He knows he’ll respond. He knows where the animal is. He knows who the man is. He knows what the man believes, and He knows what the man will do. That’s divine omniscience. That’s miraculous.
The disciples went away and found a colt tied near a door, outside in the street; as they were untying it (verse 4), some bystanders asked why they were untying the colt (verse 5).
The disciples told them what Jesus had said and allowed them to take the young beast of burden (verse 6).
Meanwhile, MacArthur reminds us that John’s Gospel says that the hard-hearted Jewish hierarchy plotted to kill Lazarus. They could not bear the fact that Jesus resurrected him:
But in John 12, it says, “A large number of Jews came to Bethany the next day.” So on Sunday a large number of Jews came to Bethany. And it says, “They came to see Jesus and Lazarus, whom He had raised from the dead.” Now you get the story. The city is swelling with Passover pilgrims. The word is spreading about this guy that was raised from the dead. He is a curiosity. So people are walking the easy two miles because they want to see this man and they want to see Jesus.
This is a problem for the leaders. So John 12 tells us the chief priests took counsel – get this – to kill Lazarus. I mean, how hard-hearted are you when you don’t even deny that the guy was raised from the dead, you just try to kill him again?
Continuing with our reading, the disciples returned to Jesus with the colt and threw their cloaks on it; our Lord sat on the colt (verse 7).
MacArthur reminds us of similar verses from the Old Testament:
And didn’t David ride a mule? And wasn’t Solomon riding a mule even, in 1 Kings chapter 1, on his coronation? Is this supposed to connect Jesus with Solomon and David as a son of David?
Even so, MacArthur says that the main point lies elsewhere — in Zechariah’s prophecy:
But that’s not the main point. Mark doesn’t really tell us why this happened, but Matthew does. Okay? Turn to Matthew 21, Matthew’s parallel account. Matthew tells us why it happened, and it’s not vague.
Verse 4, Matthew 21. Verse 3 says, “If anyone asks you anything, just say, ‘The Lord has need of it.’” Then verse 4, “This took place to fulfill what was spoken through the prophet.” What prophet? Zechariah. Five hundred years before, Zechariah 9:9, Zechariah said, “Say to the daughter of Zion, ‘Behold your king is coming to you gentle and mounted on a donkey,’ – not even a donkey, but – ‘even on a colt, the foal of a beast of burden, the foal of a donkey.’”
He will come in fulfillment of prophecy. That’s why I love to call this a faithful, a faithful arrival, a faithful arrival. He comes faithful to the prophet’s words five hundred years, as I said, before the prophet had said, “The people of Jerusalem would hail their Messiah riding on a donkey’s colt.” This is not His true coronation, but this is that event that happened that day in Jerusalem. He comes humbly on a donkey’s colt, because He comes not to reign, He comes to die. He comes not as a sovereign, but as a suffering servant and a Savior.
Many people spread their cloaks on the road, and others spread leafy branches that they had cut in the fields (verse 8).
Henry looks at the humble scene, which he says is the example for us to follow as Christians:
The persons that attended, were mean people; and all the show they could make, was, by spreading their garments in the way (v. 8), as they used to do at the feast of tabernacles. All these were marks of his humiliation; even when he would be taken notice of, he would be taken notice of for his meanness; and they are instructions to us, not to mind high things, but to condescend to them of low estate. How ill doth it become Christians to take state, when Christ was so far from affecting it!
On the other hand, MacArthur explains that throwing cloaks or greenery on the ground signified the people’s submission. That would all change by the end of the week, of course, but in that moment:
Why would they spread their coats in the road? That was an old, ancient gesture, a custom that showed submission. “You can walk on me, you can step on me; I’m below your feet.”
Kings were always elevated and people were under their feet. And this was a way to symbolize that: “You can walk all over me; I am submissive to you.” You see it in the coronation of Jehu in 2 Kings chapter 9. “We place ourselves under your authority.” This is an affirmation, at least superficially, “You’re our King. You’re our sovereign” …
They show their fealty to Him by spreading leafy branches under Him. John 12:13 says, “They were palm branches.” And palm branches in the Scripture can be symbols of salvation joy, as they are in Revelation 7:9. Throwing down these branches was a symbol of joy. “You are our deliverer. You are our source of joy.”
They misunderstood our Lord’s purpose in coming to earth to save us from sin:
Their hope for the kingdom was really high; but they had their own view: “Attack the Romans; throw out the Romans. Give us our place in the world, and fulfill all the promises of the Old Testament to us.” And they were all superficial and earthly.
Similarly, MacArthur says that John’s Gospel tells us that our Lord’s disciples understood this scene only later, not at the time:
And His disciples didn’t get it. Did they get the omniscient part? I think they did. Did they get the prophetic part? No. John 12 says, in writing of this very event, John 12:16, “These things His disciples didn’t understand at first; but when Jesus was glorified after His ascension, then they remembered that these things were written about Him, and that they had done these things to Him.” The details, all recorded in the Old Testament, they didn’t understand at the time; but later they understood. This is a faithful arrival, He is fulfilling prophecy.
Jesus also fulfilled a prophecy from the Book of Daniel:
In Daniel 9 we’re given a really important prophecy, Daniel 9:24 to 27, that it’ll be four hundred and eighty three years, sixty-nine weeks of years – sixty-nine times seven, four hundred and eighty three – four hundred and eighty-three years from the decree of Artaxerxes to rebuild Jerusalem, which was in 445 B.C., four hundred and eighty-three years to the arrival of Messiah. If you do the calendar work on that, four hundred and eighty-three years from the decree of Artaxerxes lands you on this day when Jesus came into the city. God’s timing is perfect, down to the clearest detail. It was a faithful arrival, faithful to the divine purpose, prophecy, and timetable.
Continuing with our reading, those ahead of Jesus and those following Him shouted (verse 9), ‘Hosanna! Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the Lord!’ Also (verse 10), ‘Blessed is the coming kingdom of our ancestor David! Hosanna in the highest heaven!’
Henry says that this was all part of God’s plan:
It was God that put it into the hearts of these people to cry Hosanna, who were not by art and management brought to it, as those were who afterward cried, Crucify, crucify. Christ reckons himself honoured by the faith and praises of the multitude, and it is God that brings people to do him this honour beyond their own intentions.
MacArthur tells us what ‘Hosanna’ means in Psalm 118:
That’s an exclamatory plea that means, “Save now. Save now. Deliver us now.” And they’re talking about an earthly, political, military deliverance. They’re shouting Psalm 118, verse 26, a psalm of salvation, sometimes called “the conqueror’s psalm,” which a hundred years before, the Jews shouted at Maccabeus because he was triumphing over the Syrians.
Matthew adds, “They said, ‘Hosanna, save now, to the Son of David.’” That’s the most common messianic title. So they were identifying Jesus as the Messiah: “Save now, Messiah. Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord.” That’s the Psalm 118, verse 26, “Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the Lord.”
They said, “Blessed is the coming kingdom of our father, David. Hosanna in the highest.” All these are messianic accolades; and they’re shouting at the top of their voice. Luke adds that they even said, “Peace in heaven, and glory in the highest.”
This is mob hysteria. They know that these things relate to the kingdom. The kingdom will be a kingdom of salvation. The kingdom will be a kingdom over which the son of David rules. The kingdom will be the kingdom promised to David with all those promises fulfilled. The kingdom will be a kingdom of peace, and the kingdom will be a kingdom of glory. Everything shouted is true, scriptural, borrowed out of the Old Testament, accurate. This is God’s King, but this is not God’s time.
Mark ends his account by saying that Jesus entered Jerusalem and went into the temple but, as it was already late, He and the Apostles went out to Bethany (verse 11), where Lazarus, Mary and Martha lived.
Henry gives us this analysis. It was the following day when Jesus overturned the moneychangers’ tables, which is what follows in Mark’s Gospel:
Christ, thus attended, thus applauded, came into the city, and went directly to the temple. Here was no banquet of wine prepared for his entertainment, nor the least refreshment; but he immediately applied himself to his work, for that was his meat and drink. He went to the temple, that the scripture might be fulfilled; “The Lord whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, without sending any immediate notice before him; he shall surprise you with a day of visitation, for he shall be like a refiner’s fire, and like fuller’s soap,“ Mal 3 1-3. He came to the temple, and took a view of the present state of it, v. 11. He looked round about upon all things, but as yet said nothing. He saw many disorders there, but kept silence, Ps 50 21. Though he intended to suppress them, he would not go about the doing of it all on a sudden, lest he should seem to have done it rashly; he let things be as they were for this night, intending the next morning to apply himself to the necessary reformation, and to take the day before him. We may be confident that God sees all the wickedness that is in the world, though he do not presently reckon for it, nor cast it out. Christ, having make his remarks upon what he saw in the temple, retired in the evening to a friend’s house at Bethany, because there he would be more out of the noise of the town, and out of the way of being suspected, a designing to head a faction.
MacArthur says similarly:
He entered Jerusalem, came into the temple, and looked around at everything. What’s He doing? I’ll tell you what He’s doing. He’s casing the place. He’s planning a strategy for the next day.
And what happened on the next day? Verse 15: “He entered the temple, began to drive out those who were buying and selling in the temple, overturned the table of the money changers, the seats of those selling doves. He wouldn’t permit anyone to carry merchandise through the temple. He began to teach and say to them, ‘Is it not written, “My house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations”? You have made it a robber’s den.’ The chief priests and the scribes heard this, began seeking how to destroy Him; for they were afraid of Him, for the whole crowd was astonished at His teaching.”
They’ve got a problem now. He’s attacked them at the very heart, and He’s got this massive crowd all stirred up. All this by God’s design to precipitate His death on Friday. No, He’s just checking it out. He’s just developing the strategy for the next day when He goes in and assaults the place.
When Jesus came to Jerusalem, they were ready to hail Him as their Messiah if He did for them what they wanted. Okay? And when He didn’t, they turned on Him and cried for His blood. He left the end of that day and He went back to His friends at the time of dusk, because once it was dark, there was nothing to be done, and it was late in the day; and He left. But He had made His appraisal of the horrific corruption of the temple religion.
MacArthur concludes with an explanation of the people’s fickleness and a contemporary example of a false coronation:
It wasn’t the Romans He would attack, it was the Jews. It wasn’t pagan idolatry He would attack, it was the worship of Judaism, whose religion had been corrupted, whose praise was selfish and superficial.
Did the people know He had the credentials of Messiah? Yeah; born of the line of David, miracle worker, heal sick people, cast out demons, raises dead people. How could they possibly decide to crucify Him? I’ll give it to you real simple: if Jesus doesn’t do what the sinner wants Jesus to do, the sinner will turn on Him.
Can I tell you something? False coronations like this go on every day, all the time. Just turn on your television to some charismatic TV station and watch all the hoopla about Jesus, and watch all the swaying and groaning and moaning and singing and praising, and then listen to the people say, “Jesus will make you rich. Jesus will heal you. Jesus will give you all your dreams. Jesus will fulfill all your desires.” And I will tell you all the praise and the hoopla will go on until Jesus doesn’t deliver the goods that the fallen sinner wants; and they’ll turn on Him.
That’s a very deadly thing to do and very dishonoring to the Lord. That’s why the prosperity message is so dangerous, it lies. It promises the sinner what the fallen sinner already wants in his corrupt condition. What a true believer wants is what will glorify God, honor Christ, and increase His attractiveness to the people around him. The sinful heart can be very interested in Jesus. The sinful heart can be very, very religious until Jesus attacks that false religion.
MacArthur gives us the correct way to approach Jesus:
… when you crown Christ the true King, when you put your trust in Him, you will, as a true believer, say, “Lord, give me what You would want me to have. Reign in my life according to Your will, not mine”…
May all reading this have a blessed Palm Sunday.
The three-year Lectionary that many Catholics and Protestants hear in public worship gives us a great variety of Holy Scripture.
Yet, it doesn’t tell the whole story.
My series Forbidden Bible Verses — ones the Lectionary editors and their clergy omit — examines the passages we do not hear in church. These missing verses are also Essential Bible Verses, ones we should study with care and attention. Often, we find that they carry difficult messages and warnings.
Today’s reading is from the English Standard Version Anglicised (ESVUK) with commentary by Matthew Henry and John MacArthur.
6 When Seth had lived 105 years, he became the father[a] of Enosh. 7 After he became the father of Enosh, Seth lived 807 years and had other sons and daughters. 8 Altogether, Seth lived a total of 912 years, and then he died.
9 When Enosh had lived 90 years, he became the father of Kenan. 10 After he became the father of Kenan, Enosh lived 815 years and had other sons and daughters. 11 Altogether, Enosh lived a total of 905 years, and then he died.
12 When Kenan had lived 70 years, he became the father of Mahalalel. 13 After he became the father of Mahalalel, Kenan lived 840 years and had other sons and daughters. 14 Altogether, Kenan lived a total of 910 years, and then he died.
——————————————————————————————————————————–
I have made a huge mistake over the past several weeks.
I will blame it on having been going back and forth to hospital during that time. That said, I should have been much more careful.
Everything I have written about during that time is actually in the Lectionary!
My sincerest apologies to my regular readers — especially to Pooka who has been amazed that these are not in the Lectionary. Well, friend, they are there, and I have prefaced the entries as being part of the Creation Story.
Again, I am very sorry.
Let me recap from the end of Genesis 4 into Genesis 5 (emphases mine):
25 Adam made love to his wife again, and she gave birth to a son and named him Seth,[h] saying, ‘God has granted me another child in place of Abel, since Cain killed him.’ 26 Seth also had a son, and he named him Enosh.
At that time people began to call on[i] the name of the Lord.
From Adam to Noah
5 This is the written account of Adam’s family line.
When God created mankind, he made them in the likeness of God. 2 He created them male and female and blessed them. And he named them ‘Mankind’[a] when they were created.
3 When Adam had lived 130 years, he had a son in his own likeness, in his own image; and he named him Seth. 4 After Seth was born, Adam lived 800 years and had other sons and daughters. 5 Altogether, Adam lived a total of 930 years, and then he died.
Picking up the narrative with today’s verses, when Seth, which means settled, had lived 105 years, he became the father of Enosh, or Enos (verse 6), which is another name for ‘man’.
Matthew Henry explains:
To Seth was born a son called Enos, that general name for all men, which bespeaks the weakness, frailty, and misery, of man’s state. The best men are most sensible of these, both in themselves and their children. We are never so settled but we must remind ourselves that we are frail.
After he became the father of Enosh, Seth lived 807 years and had other sons and daughters (verse 7). Altogether, Seth lived a total of 912 years, then he died (verse 8).
That, as we have discovered, was the normal lifespan for that era.
John MacArthur says:
And then, verse 6. And Seth lived a hundred and five years and became the father of Enosh. Same pattern. Then Seth lived eight hundred and seven years after he became the father of Enosh, and he had other sons and daughters. So all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years, and he died.
When Enosh had lived 90 years, he fathered Kenan (verse 9). After he fathered Kenan, Enosh lived 815 years and had other sons and daughters (verse 10). Altogether, Enosh lived a total of 905 years, then he died (verse 11).
Henry points out:
It is implied in the numbering of the years of their life that their life, when those years were numbered and finished, came to an end; and yet it is still repeated, and he died, to show that death passed upon all men without exception, and that it is good for us particularly to observe and improve the deaths of others for our own edification.
When Kenan had lived 70 years, he became the father of Mahalalel (verse 12). After he fathered Mahalalel, he lived for 840 years and had other sons and daughters (verse 13). Altogether, Kenan lived a total of 910 years, then he died (verse 14).
Henry says:
That which is especially observable is that they all lived very long; not one of them died till he had seen the revolution of almost eight hundred years, and some of them lived much longer, a great while for an immortal soul to be imprisoned in a house of clay. The present life surely was not to them such a burden as commonly it is now, else they would have been weary of it; nor was the future life so clearly revealed then as it is now under the gospel, else they would have been impatient to remove to it: long life to the pious patriarchs was a blessing and made them blessings.
The family tree continues next week.
Next time — Genesis 5:15-24
The Third Sunday in Lent is March 3, 2024.
Readings for Year B can be found here.
The exegesis for the Gospel, John 2:13-22, can be found here.
The Epistle is as follows:
1 Corinthians 1:18-25
1:18 For the message about the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.
1:19 For it is written, “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart.”
1:20 Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?
1:21 For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, God decided, through the foolishness of our proclamation, to save those who believe.
1:22 For Jews demand signs and Greeks desire wisdom,
1:23 but we proclaim Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles,
1:24 but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.
1:25 For God’s foolishness is wiser than human wisdom, and God’s weakness is stronger than human strength.
Commentary comes from Matthew Henry and John MacArthur.
We know in our own time that unbelievers find the Cross foolish. What sort of Saviour dies a humiliating death? Surely, a real King is one of pomp and power?
Hence, Paul says that the message about the Cross is foolishness to those who are perishing — in unbelief — yet, to those of us being saved, it represents the power of God (verse 18).
It is useful to include verse 17 as a prelude, wherein Paul describes his own manner of preaching.
Matthew Henry explains how Paul rejected both his Pharisaical training and Greek philosophy:
The manner in which Paul preached the gospel, and the cross of Christ: Not with the wisdom of words (v. 17), the enticing words of man’s wisdom (ch. 2 4), the flourish of oratory, or the accuracies of philosophical language, upon which the Greeks so much prided themselves, and which seem to have been the peculiar recommendations of some of the heads of the faction in this church that most opposed this apostle. He did not preach the gospel in this manner, lest the cross of Christ should be of no effect, lest the success should be ascribed to the force of art, and not of truth; not to the plain doctrine of a crucified Jesus, but to the powerful oratory of those who spread it, and hereby the honour of the cross be diminished or eclipsed. Paul had been bred up himself in Jewish learning at the feet of Gamaliel, but in preaching the cross of Christ he laid his learning aside. He preached a crucified Jesus in plain language, and told the people that that Jesus who was crucified at Jerusalem was the Son of God and Saviour of men, and that all who would be saved must repent of their sins, and believe in him, and submit to his government and laws. This truth needed no artificial dress; it shone out with the greatest majesty in its own light, and prevailed in the world by its divine authority, and the demonstration of the Spirit, without any human helps. The plain preaching of a crucified Jesus was more powerful than all the oratory and philosophy of the heathen world.
Paul goes on to cite Isaiah 29:14, ‘I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart’ (verse 19).
John MacArthur gives us the context:
… let me hasten to help you to interpret that. That can have a very general, ultimate fulfillment. There is coming a day when all of the philosophies of men will be swept away, right? Christ will reign as King of Kings. When all of man’s wisdom becomes ashes … It had a very interesting meaning at the time that it was given like so many prophecies. It has an immediate fulfillment and a future fulfillment.
This is what was going on when Isaiah said that. There was a king. His name was Sennacherib and you may have heard of him. He was a very mighty king and he was king over a nation called Assyria. And they wanted to conquer Judah, the land of Israel. And so they decided to attack Judah. God through the prophet Isaiah says to Judah, “Don’t worry. Deliverance will come. Sennacherib will fail in his conquering.” But God said, “It won’t be because of your wise men.” It won’t be the strategy of the political advisers to King Hezekiah who was the king of Israel at the time or the king of Judah. It won’t be because of the political cunning and the secret trickery of these wise advisers. Nope. You’re not going to escape the hand of the Assyrians because of your wisdom. God says, “I will do it myself, because I want to demonstrate to you the impotence and the impermanence of human wisdom. When all of your wisdom has run the gamut I’ll just destroy it all. I’ll put it down to nothing and by myself I will do what all your wisdom couldn’t do.”
Wow, that’s quite a promise. Sennacherib had a huge army. You say, “If God’s going to deal with Sennacherib, boy he’s going to really have to get it together.” He did. You know what he did? He just called over one angel. That’s right. One angel. You say, “What happened?” I’ll read to you what happened. All those wise people in Israel. Oh, all those political advisers who had all the strategy, so smart, all the hosts of the army of Israel; God says, “Say, uh, come here angel.” The angel of the Lord went forth. That’s him, by himself, and he smote in the camp of the Assyrians a 185,000. One angel slew 185,000 and then this is kind of interesting. He says, “And when they arose early in the morning, behold they were dead.”
… What all of the political advisers of Israel couldn’t do, what all of the wisdom and knowledge and acumen of the best of the people couldn’t come up with, God did with one angel. And He says, “I’ll just wipe your wisdom out. I don’t need it.” God always did tell Israel, “I’ll fight for you.” You know, we have the wrong idea. You know, we want to solve everything by our own ingenuity rather than let God do it. So Paul uses that passage and it’s a fantastic thing. Oh, by the way, not only that but later on, Sennacherib went back and dwelled at Nineveh, which was the capital of Assyria and it came to pass as he was worshiping in the house of Nisroch, his god, that Adrammelech and Sharezer, his sons, smote him with a sword, escaped into the land of Ararat and Esarhaddon, his son, reigned in his stead. So even he was killed by his own children.
You see, God didn’t need any of the wisdom of Israel … Paul says, “Look, you know the passage in Isaiah. God never did need human wisdom. God never did need human understanding.”
Paul reinforces his point by asking where is the one who is wise, where is the scribe, where is the debater of the age, culminating with the question (verse 20), ‘Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?’
MacArthur says:
Listen to Jeremiah 8:9, “The wise men are ashamed. They are dismayed and taken.” Now listen to this. “Lo, they have rejected the word of the Lord and what wisdom is in them?” Listen, if you reject revelation, what wisdom is left? There isn’t any. God is set against worldly wisdom. He is set against worldly philosophy, even the philosophy of Israel, Judah. He destroys it. Man’s wisdom is defined, I think, as well as anywhere in the Bible in James 3:15 in a most apt terms. It says this, and maybe you never thought of this definition. Listen to this. “This wisdom descends not from above.” All right, we know which wisdom it is, right? It’s not God’s wisdom, it’s man’s. It doesn’t come from above. It’s just plain old man’s wisdom. Now, listen. “It is earthly, sensual and demonic.” Human wisdom is one, earthly. That is, it never gets beyond the earth. It never really understands supernatural reality. It’s earthly.
Two, sensual. It is based upon human desire and lust. Three, demonic. Its source is Satan. That’s human wisdom. Now that, friends, is set against the wisdom of God, wouldn’t you agree? That’s James 3:15. So he says, “It’s written. It’s in permanent. God’s wisdom is permanent.” Verse 20, he asks some questions. Really, it’s one question with three parts. “Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this age?” Where are all the smart people going to solve all the problems? Aren’t we all yelling about that now?
I mean, we’ve talked so much about how great education is and how we’ve educated ourselves into problems that we can’t solve. Of course, we never could solve them. You know, human wisdom never solved anything. All of our education never really solved anything. You say, “Wait a minute. Wait a minute. We used to be living in the boondocks out there in the bush and now we’re in cities and homes.” That’s right. And we’re just as rotten here as we were there. We haven’t changed. We’re just more comfortable. You know, our immorality isn’t committed out in the woods. It’s committed in fancy hotels. It isn’t any different. We just made our sinning a little more accommodated. Human wisdom throughout history, the history of man, has never solved any real problem. Never.
It just makes us more comfortable with our problems, that’s all. And so God says, “Where are the wise people? Where are all these wise people?” And he quotes here, Isaiah 19:12. And it’s most interesting. Because in Isaiah 19, God was talking to Egypt. And He says, “Egypt, you’ve had it. You’ve gone after false gods and you’ve worshipped false gods and you’ve denied my truth and you’re going to be judged.” And you remember those – that great prophecy against Egypt that the rivers would dry up and the sea wouldn’t give them water anymore? And all the reeds would be broken and Memphis would be destroyed? A great city the capital and all these things. And when that was all done, then Isaiah says, “Now, where are your wise men? Who’s going to offer the solution to the destruction of God?” The answer is there aren’t any left.
And you know what Egypt did? It says in Isaiah 19. They went after the soothsayers and the mediums and the wizards and you know what answers they had? Zilch. None. There aren’t any answers. Now where are the wise? And then in – he says the second question, “Where is the scribe?” “Where is the scribe?” This is the writer. And, in fact, it’s Isaiah 33:18 where you find that statement. And it had to do with the Assyrians again. The Assyrians when they sent their army down, sent scribes along. You know what the scribes were to do? They were to write out all of the things that they took when they took Israel.
They were to list all the booty and they were to record all of the tribute that was to be exacted. They were to write down everything that was taken in the victory. Do you know what happened? They didn’t take a victory. And the scribes had nothing to write. And so Isaiah says, “Where are the scribes?” There aren’t any. Then he says, “Where is the disputer of this age?” And this, I don’t think has an Old Testament counterpart. The word disputer here is the very Greek word used for arguing about philosophy. Where are your philosophical arguments now? Look, where are the people versed in philosophy? Where are the people versed in literature, the scribes? Where are the people versed in rhetoric? Where are they when you need them? All their wisdom is folly.
Paul says that, since the world did not know God through God’s own wisdom, God decided that, through the foolishness of the proclamation of the Cross, to save those who believe (verse 21).
MacArthur directs us to the word ‘since’:
They were left without the one thing they needed most and that was the knowledge of God. They never knew God, because it was only in God that these things could be found. Peace, joy, forgiveness, freedom from guilt, meaning the life, eternal hope and all of human philosophy never met God. That’s what Paul says. It all just came out moronic. They thought the cross was stupid. It was their philosophy that was stupid.
So God moves in to do what human wisdom could never do and that takes us to second point and we’ll just look at the first verse of the second point. Paul says, “God’s wisdom is superior to men’s because of its permanence and secondly its power. It is able to do what man’s wisdom never did.” Look at verse 21. “For since” – the word is since. “For since in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God. It pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.”
Now notice this. He says, “The world with all of its wisdom never knew God.” It never reached the ultimate goal of man to know God. And so since man’s wisdom couldn’t do it, God did it through the cross. The world of men with all their wisdom. Just think of it. We have had philosophers and sages for ages. And what do they know and what have they offered? Wars increase, crime increases, injustice increases, hate, cruelty, problems, mental breakdowns, drugs, alcohol, problems, problems, problems, problems. Never ever change.
We haven’t solved any problems, not with human philosophy. Because men cannot obtain salvation, they cannot have a transformed nature. They cannot know God by their own wisdom. And even religion doesn’t make it. All the philosophy of the world comes up bankrupt. Now God says, “It shall please me to do with something as basic and silly and stupid and moronic in their sight as the death on the cross to accomplish what they couldn’t accomplish with the complexities of their philosophies throughout the ages.” Is that beautiful?
Simple. Chapter 3, verse 18 says the same thing. “Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seems to be wise in this age” – you think you really got your philosophy – “let him become a fool that he may be wise.” You better come down to the level of the cross. You better really come off your high horse that you may truly be wise. “For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God.” He takes the wise and their own craftiness. The next verse says, “The Lord knows the thoughts of the wise, they are vanity.”
Now you’ll notice this interesting phrase at the beginning of verse 21. What does it say? “Since in the wisdom of God, the world-” In other words, that this is the wise plan of God that He allowed the world to go on in its own wisdom. In the wisdom of God He permitted the world to follow its own path. Man exists surrounded by the wisdom of God. And in the midst of the wisdom of God, the world by wisdom what? Knew not God. Here, we are surrounded by God’s wisdom and ignorant of it. To me that’s Romans 1. “That which may be known of God is in them.” Right? And it’s around them. The invisible things of God can be seen by the creation. But, men did not like to retain God in their knowledge. They turned from God, turned His truth into a lie, worshiped the creature more than the creator, began to worship images. Here is man surrounded by the wisdom of God. Every time he looks at a mountain, every time he looks at his hand he sees the wisdom of God. At the stars, at the intricacies of nature, he sees God’s wisdom. And he applies his own wisdom, rejects God’s wisdom and never knows God.
You think about it. The astronomer looks through his telescope and sees stars, but no God. The natural scientist studies his biology and his botany and whatever else and he comes up with evolution without a source. Religion creates a god who is no god and then bows to the no god. You know, it’s like the Greeks just sum it up. The Greek philosophy was centered in one great city. What was that city? Athens. The pinnacle of Athens was the Areopagus, great Mars Hill.
Paul walks up to Mars Hill where all the Greek philosophers gathered and there was a great altar there. He walked up to it. This is what it said. “To the unknown god.” Isn’t that interesting? With everything that they knew, the one thing they didn’t know was the one thing that was the most obvious. God. “In the midst of the wisdom of God” – verse 21 – “the world by its own wisdom did not know God.” They applied the wrong thing. Instead of accepting revelation, they took their own wisdom and they didn’t know God. Human wisdom doesn’t make it. Oh, I love this part. “It pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believed.”
You see, God really – God just – that to me is the greatest possible blow against all the complexity of human wisdom. God just did something so simple and by the very simplest thing that God did, He accomplished what all of the philosophers and wise men of the ages never could do. Now that puts it in perspective, doesn’t it? The wisest of the wise men are stupid compared to the simplest of a wise God.
The foolishness of preaching. The stupidity of kērugmatos. Now notice the word preaching. That’s a poor translation. It isn’t the word euaggelizō, to preach the gospel in the Greek. It isn’t the word, kērussō, to proclaim. It is the word, kērugmatos. It has nothing to do with the act of preaching. But it is the content of the message. The kērugma, the message. The content. What it’s saying is this: it pleased God by the stupidity of the gospel. The content of the cross to save them that believed. Preaching isn’t the – it isn’t the idea that preaching is foolish. Some preaching is foolish. I would agree with that, but that’s not the point. The point here is the foolishness of the gospel itself. Something so silly, something so low, something so uncomplicated, something so distasteful.
Then we have Paul’s statement about Jews and Greeks; the former look for signs and the latter for wisdom (verse 22). Paul lays both those perspectives aside and says that he proclaims Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles (verse 23).
Henry has an excellent analysis of the verses:
It is to the Jews a stumbling-block, and to the Greeks foolishness; but unto those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God, v. 23, 24. 1. Christ crucified is a stumbling-block to the Jews. They could not get over it. They had a conceit that their expected Messiah was to be a great temporal prince, and therefore would never own one who made so mean an appearance in life, and died so accursed a death, for their deliverer and king. They despised him, and looked upon him as execrable, because he was hanged on a tree, and because he did not gratify them with a sign to their mind, though his divine power shone out in innumerable miracles. The Jews require a sign, v. 22. See Matt 12 38. 2. He was to the Greeks foolishness. They laughed at the story of a crucified Saviour, and despised the apostles’ way of telling it. They sought for wisdom. They were men of wit and reading, men that had cultivated arts and sciences, and had, for some ages, been in a manner the very mint of knowledge and learning. There was nothing in the plain doctrine of the cross to suit their taste, nor humour their vanity, nor gratify a curious and wrangling temper: they entertained it therefore with scorn and contempt. What, hope to be saved by one that could not save himself! And trust in one who was condemned and crucified as a malefactor, a man of mean birth and poor condition in life, and cut off by so vile and opprobrious a death! This was what the pride of human reason and learning could not relish. The Greeks thought it little better than stupidity to receive such a doctrine, and pay this high regard to such a person: and thus were they justly left to perish in their pride and obstinacy. Note, It is just with God to leave those to themselves who pour such proud contempt on divine wisdom and grace. 3. To those who are called and saved he is the wisdom of God, and the power of God. Those who are called and sanctified, who receive the gospel, and are enlightened by the Spirit of God, discern more glorious discoveries of God’s wisdom and power in the doctrine of Christ crucified than in all his other works. Note, Those who are saved are reconciled to the doctrine of the cross, and led into an experimental acquaintance with the mysteries of Christ crucified.
Fortunately, those who are called — both Jew and Greek — find Christ the power of God and Christ the wisdom of God (verse 24).
For God’s foolishness is wiser than human wisdom, and God’s weakness is stronger than human strength (verse 25).
Henry reminds us of Christ’s Apostles in this regard:
A few fishermen were called out, and sent upon this errand. These were commissioned to disciple the nations: these vessels chosen to convey the treasure of saving knowledge to the world. There was nothing in them that at first view looked grand or august enough to come from God; and the proud pretenders to learning and wisdom despised the doctrine for the sake of those who dispensed it. And yet the foolishness of God is wiser than men, v. 25. Those methods of divine conduct that vain men are apt to censure as unwise and weak have more true, solid, and successful wisdom in them, than all the learning and wisdom that are among men: “You see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called, v. 26, etc. You see the state of Christianity; not many men of learning, or authority, or honourable extraction, are called.” There is a great deal of meanness and weakness in the outward appearance of our religion. For, (1.) Few of distinguished character in any of these respects were chosen for the work of the ministry. God did not choose philosophers, nor orators, nor statesmen, nor men of wealth and power and interest in the world, to publish the gospel of grace and peace. Not the wise men after the flesh, though men would apt to think that a reputation for wisdom and learning might have contributed much to the success of the gospel. Not the mighty and noble, however men might be apt to imagine that secular pomp and power would make way for its reception in the world. But God seeth not as man seeth. He hath chosen the foolish things of the world, the weak things of the world, the base and despicable things of the world, men of mean birth, of low rank, of no liberal education, to be the preachers of the gospel and planters of the church. His thoughts are not as our thoughts, nor his ways as our ways. He is a better judge than we what instruments and measures will best serve the purposes of his glory. (2.) Few of distinguished rank and character were called to be Christians. As the teachers were poor and mean, so generally were the converts. Few of the wise, and mighty, and noble, embraced the doctrine of the cross. The first Christians, both among Jews and Greeks, were weak, and foolish, and base; men of mean furniture as to their mental improvements, and very mean rank and condition as to their outward estate; and yet what glorious discoveries are there of divine wisdom in the whole scheme of the gospel, and in this particular circumstance of its success!
May all reading this enjoy a blessed Sunday!
Churchmouse Campanologist 