Proverbs 8:1-11

Proverbs 8:1-11

One commentator said, “Chapter 8 is the most difficult and profound chapter in the book.”[1] This has to do with verses 22ff. Chapter 8 is nonetheless the culmination of the previous chapters. Another writer says that this is the “summit of Old Testament discipleship.”[2] It is the final call; Wisdom once again cries out in the streets.

 

8:1-3 — Does not wisdom call? Does not understanding raise her voice? 2 On the heights beside the way, at the crossroads she takes her stand; 3 beside the gates in front of the town, at the entrance of the portals she cries aloud:

Wisdom is in the third person in these verses. Wisdom already cried out (1:20-33) in the streets and once again she does the same — “wisdom does call. She shouts, in fact. She cares too much to keep silent.” (Hubbard) She appeals to all the simple ones in their every day lives, at the crossroads, at the gates, that is, “at the entrance of the portals” (v. 3). “Hers is not a private word of inner piety alone. It sounds from the hilltop like watchman’s warning; it rings from the junctions of the main roads where merchants, travelers, pilgrims, farmers, and soldiers salute each other; it echoes in the gates of the city where deals are struck, political decisions made, and judicial verdicts rendered.” (Hubbard) Wisdom must emerge in all the important decisions, both private and public. The gates in front of the town represent that truth.

 

8:4-11 — “To you, O men, I call, and my cry is to the children of man. 5 O simple ones, learn prudence; O fools, learn sense. 6 Hear, for I will speak noble things, and from my lips will come what is right, 7 for my mouth will utter truth; wickedness is an abomination to my lips. 8 All the words of my mouth are righteous; there is nothing twisted or crooked in them. 9 They are all straight to him who understands, and right to those who find knowledge. 10 Take my instruction instead of silver, and knowledge rather than choice gold, 11 for wisdom is better than jewels, and all that you may desire cannot compare with her.

Wisdom is in the first person and addresses men as fools and simpleminded (v. 5). Men & the children of men are the simpletons; we are all capable of being fools. “Every human being has great capacity for simpleminded foolishness. The address is not specifically to a group of naïve or wicked persons but to all of us who carry the constant potential of foolish conduct.” (Hubbard)

Wisdom tells the naïve all that she has to offer, her self-evident moral excellence (cf. Kidner). She will give an autobiography in vv. 12-31. In verse 5, she calls men to learn “prudence” which means an “ability to use reason, in context and under the fear of God, to navigate the problems of life.” (Longman)

Verses 6-9 tell us that she is reliable. We can bank on her words (unlike madam folly). They are right, noble, righteous, straight, etc. She will not mislead — not twisted or crooked (v. 8). As one writer noted, “Concretely, that means that they avoid speech characterized as gossip, rumor; slander; and lies.” (Longman)

Verses 10-11 teach us to prize wisdom above the most precious metals and jewels. Why? Because all that we desire “cannot compare with her.” (v. 11) “Material success was undoubtedly a high ambition of the ‘Yuppies’ of antiquity. Wisdom claims, with cogency that our materialistic generation needs to hear, to be of infinitely more value than any material goods.” (Hubbard)

Wisdom will not mislead since she is excellent and incomparable. Unless we are convinced of this, we will not pursue her. If wisdom is better than gold and silver, then “if it were put to our choice whether to be rich or holy, we ought not for a moment to hesitate in deciding.” (Lawson) We quote Lawson’s words one more time:

If we are resolved at any rate to be rich; if we value the means of enriching ourselves with gold above the means of grace; if we grudge the necessary expense that may attend the means of religious instruction; then we receive gold, and not wisdom. …Silver and gold are good things, under the direction of wisdom. But they must not be the chief object or our esteem; for if any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. (Lawson)



[1] Longman, 197.

[2] Hubbard, 117.

Proverbs 7:21-27

Proverbs 7:21-27

7:21-23 — 21 With much seductive speech she persuades him; with her smooth talk she compels him. 22 All at once he follows her, as an ox goes to the slaughter, or as a stag is caught fast 23 till an arrow pierces its liver; as a bird rushes into a snare; he does not know that it will cost him his life.

“The proposition, so slickly put, so piously argued, so winsomely supported, gained the response she had in mind (vv. 21-22).” (Hubbard) The trap was set, the seduction accepted, and now the young man’s life ruined — “it will cost him his life.” (v. 23) The outcome was not what she advertised, the end was not what his sensual heart envisioned. Here is an interesting point: “It is her talk, not her beauty, that does the trick. Her flattery appeals to his vanity, and he goes after her.” (Longman)

Immorality always ends in death; there is no other outcome. It is the deceitful nature of sin that masks this. The deception came through the adulteress’s mouth but it can come through other means. If we are not aware of the pitfalls before the temptation, then we will surely fall. “The bedroom was a slaughterhouse and the lad a dumb ‘ox’ who walked blandly into the butcher’s knife (v. 22) or a stag who pranced gleefully to the hunter’s noose only to feel the bite of an ‘arrow’ in his ‘liver’… or a ‘bird’ flitting into the ‘snare’ that spells its doom.” (Hubbard)

To the morally astute, this outcome is easy to see. The connection between immorality and death is evident. “Stupid animals see no connection between traps and death, and morally stupid people see no connection between their sin and death (cf. 1:17-18; Hos. 7:11).” (Waltke)

 

7:24-27 — 24 And now, O sons, listen to me, and be attentive to the words of my mouth. 25 Let not your heart turn aside to her ways; do not stray into her paths, 26 for many a victim has she laid low, and all her slain are a mighty throng. 27 Her house is the way to Sheol, going down to the chambers of death.

From one son to a group, the father appeals to all his sons to listen to him. The only solution is to not turn aside to her. It starts with the heart. It is important to note that all who have flirted with this woman have been destroyed — “many a victim has she laid low, and all her slain are a mighty throng.” It is sheer folly and arrogance for a young man to think he is so unique that he will escape Sheol.  Her bed chambers are “chambers of death” and we must avoid it by embracing wisdom. This palace of pleasure is actually the place of death — wisdom says to avoid it at all cost.

 

Some Lessons

1. Falling into sexual immorality will easily come to the thoughtless. The trap is set for the gullible. We must remember that this sin can ruin us. If we do not guard ourselves against it, then we will most certainly fall.

2. Wisdom alone can protect us from such a death (vv. 1-5). That is the point of this chapter; wisdom will guard us. But this wisdom must be cherished (not tolerated or casually embraced).

3. Caution is required. It is not “legalism” or “prudishness” to fear this and take extreme measures to avoid it. What the father witnessed should compel us to take action.

4. “Trace this sad end to its beginning. Was not idleness the parent of this mischief? (2 Sam. xi. 2.) The loitering evening walk; the unseasonable hour (Job, xxiv.15. Rom. xiii. 12, 13); the vacant mind — all bring the youth into contact with evil company (chap. xiii. 20. 1 Cor. xv. 33) — was not this courting sin, tempting the tempter? ‘The house was empty,’ and therefore ready for his reception, and soon altogether in his possession. (Matt. xii. 44, 45.) How valuable are self-discipline, self-control, constant employment, active energy of pursuit, as preservatives under the Divine blessing from fearful danger!” (Bridges, 69)

Proverbs 7:1-20

Proverbs 7:1-20

7:1-5 — 1 My son, keep my words and treasure up my commandments with you; 2 keep my commandments and live; keep my teaching as the apple of your eye; 3 bind them on your fingers; write them on the tablet of your heart. 4 Say to wisdom, “You are my sister,” and call insight your intimate friend, 5 to keep you from the forbidden woman, from the adulteress with her smooth words.

Just like 6:20-35, the father exhorts the son to treasure his words of instruction. In 6:24, it is “to preserve (לִ֭שְׁמָרְךָ) you from the evil ( רָ֑ע) woman, from the smooth tongue of the adulteress.” Similarly, in 7:5, it is also “to keep (לִ֭שְׁמָרְךָ) you from the forbidden ( זָרָ֑ה) woman, from the adulteress with her smooth words.” The purpose in both chs. 6 and 7 is the same — that is, to keep (same verb in both verses) his son from the kind of women that will destroy his soul (the two verses contain minor differences).

The way to keep from falling into this wicked woman’s arms is to cultivate an intimate relationship with wisdom — “Say to wisdom, ‘You are my sister,’ and call insight your intimate friend.” (v. 4) To relish her is to resist the adulteress. One cannot resist the temptation simply by denying it; the young man must also pursue something. Pursue lady wisdom and flee from the licentious wench.

 

7:6-9 — 6 For at the window of my house I have looked out through my lattice, 7 and I have seen among the simple, I have perceived among the youths, a young man lacking sense, 8 passing along the street near her corner, taking the road to her house 9 in the twilight, in the evening, at the time of night and darkness.

Here, the father recounts a scene (perhaps he saw it — yet, we can all easily imagine such a scenario) that describes the situation he wants his son to avoid. Observation and experience come to the aid of wisdom. Here is a naïve young man walking along, perhaps haphazardly or with some intent. Either way, he should have known better. The point is not over the actual intent of the young man but the real actions of the young man. Whether purposeful or not, he walks on dangerous ground.

Hubbard notes that he leaves the group (“among the youths”) and walks into an area that only invites trouble: “The bad choice began with the impulse to leave the group and venture out alone into an evening so ‘black’ and ‘dark’ that it seemed to offer anonymity and obscurity. The thirst for illicit adventures, untried experiences, is part of the deceptiveness of immorality. It was as though the teacher could have predicted what the youth had only subliminal hankerings for.” (Hubbard) This suggests that the young man kind of sensed it wasn’t the best idea but more or less tempted himself into it. “I wasn’t looking for this woman; she came to me.” But what did he expect to find walking around aimlessly at night around a domicile that housed a woman of ill repute? It was not a wise course of action. [Can we not hear some say, “What was wrong with walking around at night? It wasn’t his fault.”] “The gullible here exhibits his fundamental flaw; he is dull and incautious, unaware of the danger of making his way through the darkening streets in her domain.…He is not a downright immoral fellow…because she has to find him and seduce him, but a dimwit who needs some powerful persuasion to get him into bed with the unchaste wife.” (Waltke)

Another commentator succinctly portrays the young naïve “victim”: “Young, inexperienced, featherbrained, he is the very sort to need arming with borrowed wisdom. He wanders into temptation, where place (8) and time (9) can join forces against him; and if he is aimless, his temptress is not.” (Kidner)

Basically, this gullible fellow was at the wrong place at the wrong time and ran into the wrong woman. If he is a victim, he is one by foolish decisions. Some people just tend to make wrong decisions all the time and what befalls them is only inevitable. Wisdom would have asked, “What good can come from walking alone in the dark late at night?” Folly says, “There is no harm in walking around at night.” The fool calls the wise, “Legalist!” The wise knows what end holds.

 

7:10-20 — 10 And behold, the woman meets him, dressed as a prostitute, wily of heart. 11 She is loud and wayward; her feet do not stay at home; 12 now in the street, now in the market, and at every corner she lies in wait. 13 She seizes him and kisses him, and with bold face she says to him, 14 “I had to offer sacrifices, and today I have paid my vows; 15 so now I have come out to meet you, to seek you eagerly, and I have found you. 16 I have spread my couch with coverings, colored linens from Egyptian linen; 17 I have perfumed my bed with myrrh, aloes, and cinnamon. 18 Come, let us take our fill of love till morning; let us delight ourselves with love. 19 For my husband is not at home; he has gone on a long journey; 20 he took a bag of money with him; at full moon he will come home.”

The young naïve fool is no match for this woman. This woman’s attire gives her away — she is wily of heart, loud, and always in the streets (vv. 11b-12). She plays her part by forcing  herself upon him (v. 13). It is not mere sensuality that wins the day; her speech is used to persuade and seduce the gullible.

Several things can be noticed here: she is unabashed in her intentions (v. 13); she gives a noble twist to perverse intentions (“I had to offer sacrifices…”) (v. 14); she flatters him by singling him out (“I have come out to meet YOU, to seek YOU eagerly, and I have found YOU”) (v. 15) — but surely Waltke is right, “In fact he is the right one because he looks brainless.”; she presents the perfect sensual vision and circumstance (vv. 16-17); she is unreserved and explicit about her intentions and desires (v. 18); all possible dangers in this encounter are removed — no reason to hold back (vv. 19-20— her husband is physically (v. 19) and temporally (v. 20) removed). In this last point, she is suggesting that the encounter could well be for more than one evening.

The point here is simple to see. A gullible thoughtless young man will be no match for a sensual conniving adulteress. If wisdom is not our intimate friend, then we will eventually fall prey to this evil forbidden woman. If Lady Wisdom is not cherished then Madam Folly will seduce us.

Proverbs 6:20-35

Proverbs 6:20-35

Once again, wisdom addresses the topic of sexual temptations. He spoke of it early on in 2:16-19 and ch. 5. The son’s entire future could be ruined in this area if he does not follow. That is why it is mentioned so often in these six (actually seven) chapters. The young man could be permanently damaged by going after the wrong woman. How many have we known whose future was wrecked because of mistakes in this area?

 

6:20-22 — 20 My son, keep your father’s commandment, and forsake not your mother’s teaching. 21 Bind them on your heart always; tie them around your neck. 22 When you walk, they will lead you; when you lie down, they will watch over you; and when you awake, they will talk with you.

In these verses, the father exhorts his son to maintain the parent’s instruction or command (vv. 20-21). Like Deut. 4:4-9, the son is to bind them to his heart. Why? Because the exhortations are called “teaching, instruction, command (תֹּורַ֥ת)”  and “instruction or command (מִצְוַ֣ת)” (vv. 20, 23) “conveying the father’s belief that the behavior he is prohibiting carries the weight of divine law.” (Longman) What he has to say will guide the son in everything he does (walk, lie down, awake in v. 22). The benefits are not just for his waking moments but for his lying down (or sleeping hours) as well.

 

6:23-24 —23 For the commandment is a lamp and the teaching a light, and the reproofs of discipline are the way of life, 24 to preserve you from the evil woman, from the smooth tongue of the adulteress.

Light and life are promised to those who follow in this matter. But it is not easy; “reproof of discipline” (often used with reference to hard work, corporal punishment, etc.) means that it is going to be hard. “One’s natural propensity would be to give in to the strong temptations that lead one to leave the right path, so the parents remind the son that it takes work.” (Longman)

The father has addressed this before. In 5:7ff., the fathers warns against going near the woman’s door (5:8). In this, the father seems to warn his son against a sensual woman’s advances. Illegitimate sexual relationships are forbidden by God (seventh commandment, Ex. 20:14). In v. 24, her smooth tongue (smoothness, slipperiness) will seek to seduce the young man.  If the matter is not settled in the heart, her smooth words will nestle deeply there.

 

6:25-26 — 25 Do not desire her beauty in your heart, and do not let her capture you with her eyelashes; 26 for the price of a prostitute is only a loaf of bread, but a married woman hunts down a precious life. 27 Can a man carry fire next to his chest and his clothes not be burned? 28 Or can one walk on hot coals and his feet not be scorched?

A young man may know it is wrong to pursue an adulteress but still desire or lust for her. If his heart desires her, then her glance and beauty will captivate him. If her words were ineffective (v. 24), then her looks will easily seduce him. Here, we must remember to keep our eyes to ourselves. Wandering eyes with an unsettled heart can easily fall prey to such women. Of course the principle applies to both young men and women. The smooth words of a young man and his attempt to captivate her may be more than she can handle. The matter must be settled first in the heart — “Do not desire her beauty in your heart…”

Two kinds of women are to be avoided. The evil woman (or prostitute as in v. 26) and a seductive woman or adulteress (vv. 24, 26). “The point seems to be that the prostitute will sap material resources, but when one sleeps with a married woman, one must reckon with her jealous husband, who will have the support of the law behind him as he seeks revenge.” (Longman)

No one who commits adultery by taking another man’s wife will be safe. Verses 27-28 tell us that he will inevitably be burned. Both kinds of women are wrong but the latter is worse. The prostitute may cost him his money but a relationship with an adulteress may cost him his life. One cannot get away unscathed; it is inescapable punishment. “The danger of sleeping with a woman other than one’s wife is comparable to scooping hot coals in one’s lap.” (Longman)

The NT teaches the same. Hebrews 13:4 says, “Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous.” Too often in our culture, adultery is seen as a bad but tolerable sin. Men excuse other men and politicians believe all will be forgotten. God will hold such men accountable; it is one of those sins specially listed in Heb. that promises God’s punishment. Remember, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.” In 1Cor. 6:15-20, Paul exhorts us to “flee from sexual immorality” (v. 18; cf. Acts 15:29) and that we are not to be joined to a prostitute.

 

6:29-36 29 So is he who goes in to his neighbor’s wife; none who touches her will go unpunished. 30 People do not despise a thief if he steals to satisfy his appetite when he is hungry, 31 but if he is caught, he will pay sevenfold; he will give all the goods of his house. 32 He who commits adultery lacks sense; he who does it destroys himself. 33 Wounds and dishonor will he get, and his disgrace will not be wiped away. 34 For jealousy makes a man furious, and he will not spare when he takes revenge. 35 He will accept no compensation; he will refuse though you multiply gifts.

As relationship with another man’s wife is doubly heinous, so wisdom explains it in greater detail here. The argument here is more practical than ethical. One could readily understand why a hungry thief might still but he will still pay for it when he is caught (vv. 31-32)— he can be pitied as well as punished. But adultery is not spawned by necessity but by folly. The hungry thief can learn but an adulterer will only destroy himself. No pity will be given to an adulterer. “But the sin of the adulterer claims no sympathy. His plea is not the cry of hunger, but of lust; not want, but wantonness; not the lack of bread, but of understanding.” (Bridges)

First of all, he will be punished and disgraced (v. 33). He will be publicly exposed; everyone will know of his folly. This will mark his life “his disgrace will not be wiped away.” Do we not remember King David? Do we not know of fallen “evangelists”? Pleasure for an hour will yield shame for a lifetime.

In an adulterous situation, two marriages are damaged. The jealous husband will not be satisfied until he avenges the adulterer. No amount of money can give way to the jealous man’s anger. In Deut. 22:22, death was the penalty for both the man and the woman. There seems to be some suggestion that certain offences could be commuted into monetary fines (cf. Ex. 21:30) but in this situation, the jealous husband will not be satisfied.

Both the OT and the New view sexual sins as being heinous and damaging (spiritually and physically). Are STDs God’s way of dealing with a society that tolerates rampant sexual sins? Why are sexual sins so rampant in the church? Who here has never heard of it in the church? I scarcely know of a church that has not been impacted one way or another in this area. It is not legalism to warn against these things; it is folly if the church does not. Are we better than wisdom? Are we wiser than God?

ONE — It is important that we instruct our children in these matters. That is what the wise father does. Prudishness without instruction will surely ruin our children.

TWO — We must also speak of the practical repercussions of such sins. Such concrete examples may persuade the heart.

THREE — We must remind them of the inevitability of punishment on account of these sins. God will not idly sit by.

FOUR — We must not believe any of our children are “beyond” these instructions. It is God’s Word for all our children. Let none of our children think that they are “beyond” such things: “Self-confidence sees and fears no danger. ‘I can look to myself; I need not go too far, and I shall get no harm.’ But the temptation sets upon a congenial nature like fuel, not water, on the fire.” (Bridges)

FIVE — Though Proverbs does not highlight the redemption in Christ, we must also remember that Christ is merciful to all sinners. He rescued and cleansed the sexually immoral, adulterers, homosexuals, etc. — “And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of God.” (1Cor. 6:11) Our Lord can and has redeemed and cleansed the sexually immoral.

SIX — For all of us, “Let us learn to seek Divine strength to ‘watch and pray’ continually; and, while we ‘think we stand, to take heed lest we fall.’” (1 Cor. x. 12)

Larger Catechism, #74, pt. 2

The Larger Catechism

Question 74

74.       Q. What is adoption?

A. Adoption is an act of the free grace of God,[307] in and for his only Son Jesus Christ,[308] whereby all those that are justified are received into the number of his children,[309] have his name put upon them,[310] the Spirit of his Son given to them,[311] are under his fatherly care and dispensations,[312] admitted to all the liberties and privileges of the sons of God, made heirs of all the promises, and fellow-heirs with Christ in glory.[313]

PART 2

His Name and Spirit

To be received into the number means that the children of God “have his name put upon them, the Spirit of his Son given to them…” We are legally His children; we have His name. “And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.” (2Cor. 6:18) As He calls us His sons and daughters, we are also promised that He “will write upon [us] the name of my God” (Rev. 3:12). But we His people are already called by His name as God refers to His people as “my people who are called by my name” (2Chron. 7:14). What does this mean? God is legally our Father and we are members of His glorious household. “So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God…” (Eph. 2:19) In this verse, Paul mentions two privileges, we are citizens in God’s kingdom and family members in His household. “In Christ Gentiles are not only fellow-citizens with Jewish believers under God’s rule; they are also children together in God’s own family.”[1] A believer may not feel himself to be a child of God yet the translation from being a child of Satan to being a child of God is binding and permanent. The name is on him. Fisher offers a helpful illustration: “as the wife’s name is sunk unto her husband’s, so the former name of the adopted is sunk unto Christ’s new name, Rev. iii. 12, ‘I will write upon him my new name.’”[2] God is our Father and we His children; His name is upon us forever!

The latter phrase “the Spirit of his Son given to them” adds a very necessary dimension to the nature of our adoption. The new name, the new family status, is legal, external, and permanent. But God did not stop there. The Spirit of God’s Son is given to us who enables us to cry Abba, Father. Because we are indeed God’s children by adoption, God gives us the Spirit (“And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, ‘Abba! Father!’” Gal. 4:6). The logic here is unmistakable. Because we are indeed God’s sons, Paul says, God therefore sends the Spirit into our hearts. The German liberal commentator actually explains this verse very well. “God bestows on us not only the status of sons [through the sending of his Son] but also the character and knowledge of sons [through the sending of the Spirit]. And he bestows on us the character and knowledge of sons because we are already in the status of sons.”[3] That is, the Holy Spirit who comes to us through the mediation of Christ enables us to respond as genuine sons. Notice how the verse states that the Spirit is sent into our hearts (εἰς τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν).

It is not uncommon to meet adopted children who don’t feel like they are part of the family or that their adoptive parents are really their own. The new parents may bend over backwards to reach out to their adopted son but they cannot put a filial spirit into him. That he feels himself to be a part of their family or that at his gut level he is indeed their beloved son are dispositions the parents cannot impart. Yet this sad dilemma will not occur for genuine believers. The Holy Spirit actually enables us to instinctively (and therefore ‘naturally’) cry out to God as our heavenly father. That instinct, that filial disposition, that family feeling, etc. come out of us because of the Holy Spirit. We have received “the Spirit of adoption as sons” (Rom. 8:15). Therefore the legal status of adoption with God’s name upon us includes the Holy Spirit who enables us to look to our heavenly father. A child of God is not “trained” by man to call upon God; he is enabled by the Holy Spirit to cry out to His heavenly father.

Under the Father’s Care

The privileges of being adopted include God’s fatherly care: “are under his fatherly care and dispensations.” The verses used to support this phrase are interesting. Our heavenly Father’s pity or compassion from Ps. 103:13 is mentioned (“As a father shows compassion to his children, so the LORD shows compassion to those who fear him.”) along with the privilege of being able to take refuge in Him in Prov. 14:26 (“In the fear of the LORD one has strong confidence, and his children will have a refuge.”). The great promise of Mt. 6:32 that our heavenly Father is well aware of our needs is also mentioned (“For the Gentiles seek after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them all.”).

All these privileges are wonderful as well as comforting. God cares for us; He is concerned and is compassionate towards us. Good fathers feel the pain of their sons and daughters; their compassion or pity go out towards their children. If they can wisely relieve their children in their distress, they would. Yet, their compassion is not matched by their power. They may weep on account of their son’s struggle but is powerless to do anything about it. Our heavenly fatherly is not so limited. If he does not relieve, it is not because he does not care or that he is unable to take care of the problem. Our father has wisely chosen not to intervene though his bowels of compassion are moved. Furthermore, we are reminded that because He cares for us, we can take refuge in Him (Prov. 14:26). We can be safe in Him because of He is a strong tower. Like an earthly father, he cares for us. Yet, he cares for us far better than we deserve.

Most of the writers who explain the Catechisms and Confession mention God’s fatherly discipline (Ridgeley, Beattie, Fisher, Green, etc.). The LC states that we are under God’s dispensations. This means we are under our heavenly father’s government, his order, control, oversight, etc. It would include chastening as our Confession states. The WCF states that we are “pitied, protected, provided for, and chastened by him, as by a father…” (12.1). Though the verses cited for the LC do not list Heb. 12:6 like the WCF, yet the truth of the point can easily be seen. We are under our father’s care and government; we are under his special dealings with us as our father which would at times include discipline. Whatever we need, we will receive from our Father, even discipline because He loves us: “For the Lord disciplines the one he loves, and chastises every son whom he receives” (Heb. 12:6). We are illegitimate children and not sons if we are not disciplined by Him (Heb. 12:8). What the divines seem to be teaching is that we are under the father’s care and that includes whatever we might need (both positive and negative [though they are ultimately all positive]) as his children. Ridgeley summarized it this way:

As God’s children are prone to backslide from him, and so have need of restoring grace, he will recover and humble them, and thereby prevent their total apostasy. This he sometimes does by afflictions, which the apostle calls fatherly chastisements, and which he reckons not only consistent with his love, but evidences of it. ‘Whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth;’ and ‘if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.’ The apostle speaks here, of afflictions, not as considered absolutely in themselves, but as proceeding from the love of God, as designed to do them good, and as adapted to the present state, in which they are training up for the glorious inheritance reserved for them in heaven, and need some trying dispensations which may put them in mind of that state of perfect blessedness which is laid up for them. These afflictions are rendered subservient to their present and future advantage. In the present life, they ‘bring forth the peaceful fruits of righteousness’ to them; and when they are in the end perfectly freed from them, they will tend to enhance their joy and praise.[4]

The difficulties in life come to us “under his fatherly…dispensations.” They are not to crush us but to correct us; they are not given to destroy us but to demonstrate his love to us as His children. “Thus, many of the ills of this life may turn out to be blessings in disguise, while the chastisement itself is a proof of the love of God, and of their adoption into his family.”[5] Because we are His children, our heavenly Father brings difficulties into our lives: “It is for discipline that you have to endure. God is treating you as sons.” (Heb. 12:7)

Liberties and Privileges

The last thing listed in the answer is that we are “admitted to all the liberties and privileges of the sons of God, made heirs of all the promises, and fellow-heirs with Christ in glory.” Rather than listing everything that could pertain to our adoption, the divines simply summarize the point as being admitted to all the liberties and privileges.  Part of that liberty of course is that as children, we are free from the law (as a means of salvation and from its condemning power). Paul says, “For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery.” (Gal. 5:1) The privileges include access to the throne of grace (Heb. 4:16), we have “access in one Spirit to the Father” (Eph. 2:18). Paul’s statement reveals so much. It is not just that we have access to God per se (that we have in Christ) but we have access to the Father — that is the language of sonship, adoption, and God’s fatherhood.

The privilege underscored in the LC is our inheritance. We are exhorted to persevere “through faith and patience” to “inherit the promises” (Heb. 6:12). The great privilege of sonship is that we will inherit all that God has promised to us in Christ. We cited this before but it is a helpful reminder: “And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.” (Rom. 8:17) The divines used this verse to come up with “and fellow-heirs with Christ in glory.”

Conclusion

1. Calvin said, “For until men recognize that they owe everything to God, that they are nourished by his fatherly care, that he is the Author of their every good, that they should seek nothing beyond him— they will never yield him willing service.” (Institutes, 1.1.1, p. 41) This is the essence of piety. Are you convinced of God’s fatherly care? Do you believe you are actually nourished by his fatherly care? If not, you will never yield him willing service.

2. One of the implications of adoption is as our Confession teaches that when we are chastised, we are “never cast off, but sealed to the day of redemption; and inherit the promises, as heirs of everlasting salvation.” God will never disown his children. May we find encouragement in this!

3. Earthly fathers can and will fail us but our heavenly Father will not. To know the love of the Father is to look at the cross, “But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.” (Rom. 5:8, NASB)


[1] Peter T. O’Brien, The Letter to the Ephesians (PNTC; Accordance electronic ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 211-212.

[2] James Fisher, The Assembly’s Shorter Catechism Explained, By Way of Question and Answer. In Two Parts. (Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd, nd), 168.

[3] H. Schlier, Galater, 197 cited in F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Galatians: a Commentary on the Greek Text (NIGTC; Accordance electronic ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982), 198.

[4] Thomas Ridgley, A Body of Divinity, Volume 2 (New York: Robert Carter & Brothers, 1855), 136.

[5] Beattie, The Presbyterian Standards, 215-6.

Larger Catechism, #74, pt. 1

The Larger Catechism

Question 74

74.       Q. What is adoption?

A. Adoption is an act of the free grace of God,[307] in and for his only Son Jesus Christ,[308] whereby all those that are justified are received into the number of his children,[309] have his name put upon them,[310] the Spirit of his Son given to them,[311] are under his fatherly care and dispensations,[312] admitted to all the liberties and privileges of the sons of God, made heirs of all the promises, and fellow-heirs with Christ in glory.[313]

Scriptural Defense and Commentary

[307] 1 John 3:1. Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not. [308] Ephesians 1:5. Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will. Galatians 4:4-5. But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. [309] John 1:12. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name. [310] 2 Corinthians 6:18. And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty. Revelation 3:12. Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name. [311] Galatians 4:6. And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. [312] Psalm 103:13. Like as a father pitieth his children, so the LORD pitieth them that fear him. Proverbs 14:26. In the fear of the LORD is strong confidence: and his children shall have a place of refuge. Matthew 6:32. (For after all these things do the Gentiles seek:) for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things. [313] Hebrews 6:12. That ye be not slothful, but followers of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises. Romans 8:17. And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.

Introduction

1. Adoption in Reformed Theology[1]

Many theologians have written on the doctrine of adoption in the last fifty years. The most popular and influential is J. I. Packer who argued that adoption “has been little regarded in Christian history.” He noted that R. S. Candlish (The Fatherhood of God) and R. A. Webb (The Reformed Doctrine of Adoption) gave attention to this doctrine in the nineteenth century but apart from them, he concluded that nothing else has been written since the Reformation.[2] He suggested that the Puritans were deficient in this area. Against this, Joel Beeke shows convincingly that the Puritans wrote extensively on this.[3] Many have noted that our Confession and Catechisms were the first to include a separate chapter and questions on this doctrine (WCF XII; LC #74; SC #34). Francis Beattie was surprised that so few Presbyterian theologians treated this doctrine separately: “In view of this fact it seems a little strange that some of our leading theologians should give no distinct place to adoption in their systems, and many of them devote but little attention to it.”[4] R. A. Webb complained that Charles Hodge was silent on this topic and that Breckenridge and Shedd also said nothing on this.[5]

Theologians now recognize that this doctrine must be given a separate treatment. It used to be viewed as a second element of justification. For example, John Dick, though giving a whole lecture on the doctrine, stated that the doctrine of adoption “appears to me to be virtually the same with justification, and to differ from it merely in the new view which it gives of the relation of believers to God…”[6] Dabney says the same (following Turretin and Owen), “Adoption cannot be said to be a different act or grace from justification.”[7] This way of treating adoption has pretty much vanished in the latter twentieth century.[8] This doctrine is distinct from justification and regeneration. As Ferguson says, “Undoubtedly the New Testament never separates justification and adoption, but neither does it confuse them.”[9] It does not confuse the two but it also assumes it. In fact, Beattie says that adoption assumes “election, effectual calling, regeneration, faith, and justification.”[10]

2. Adoption and Sonship[11]

Contemporary believers have probed this doctrine and attempted to draw out some of its practical benefits. Though many have sung its praises, this movement has garnered criticisms as well. I am talking about Jack Miller’s Sonship courses (which are very popular in our present geographical surroundings). Without going into this too deeply, I want to make one observation. Though the emphasis is on Sonship is wonderful, we must realize that the doctrine of adoption is one of the several benefits that flow from our union with Christ (LC #69). One is always in danger of imbalance when he or she clings to only one doctrine. Perhaps the revised courses have improved on some of the things raised by their critics but it is far better to embrace the whole counsel of God instead of using one doctrine as a prism to the whole Christian life.

3. Its Necessity

Frame states, “Adoption is God’s remedy for our second great need. Justification meets our need for a new legal status. Adoption meets our need for a new family.”[12] This may be a fair and accurate statement but we need to consider this carefully. Our need does not determine the remedy but rather the remedy from God reveals our need. Adoption corresponds to that but we must be careful at this point. Adoption is necessary not because we deserve it or have an inherent right to it — in that sense, it is not a need. However, given our spiritually bankrupt condition, to be in God’s family would be a gift of amazing grace.

Some assume we are all children of God. Adoption is not really needed because God cannot adopt his own children.[13] — we simply need to recognize we have a heavenly father who loves us and we merely need to turn to him. John Bickford Heard said that “all men are originally, and by their very birth into the world, and as beings breathing thoughtful breath, entitled to look and address God as Abba, Father… Every day we meet with men living below their privileges, heirs but outcasts, and we only pity them the more when we contrast what they are with what they ought to be.”[14] This is a grievous and sad error. Without some divine act, we are alienated from God and are not his children. We can only become His children through His free act of grace.

A more popular contemporary expression exists in the 21st century. Oprah Winfrey’s magazine encourages people to see children “as children of God, as Christs, or Buddhas.”[15] Mormons believe that we are all children of God.[16] All these things may “feel” good but it is not the biblical truth. We either have God as our heavenly Father by His sovereign grace (of regeneration and adoption) or have the devil as our father (cf. Jn. 8:44; Eph. 2:1ff.).

Adoption is an Act of God’s Free Grace for Christ’s Sake

What then is adoption? The answer states that “adoption is an act of the free grace of God, in and for his only Son Jesus Christ.” Adoption is nothing we could have expected. The verb “act” is important in this answer. “You will observe that adoption is called an act, because it is perfected at once. As soon as a believer is vitally united by faith to Christ, the head of God’s family, and the elder brother of every saint, he is from that moment, an adopted child of God.”[17] It is not a process but the immediate act of God’s grace. This transition from family (of Satan) to family (of God) is instantaneous. It is a supernatural work of God’s free grace and in a moment the sinner believes, he becomes a child of God!

Though adoption is connected with justification, it is distinct from it (as we already noted). God could have pardoned us and simply left us as justified creatures. Joel Beeke carefully delineates the difference: “Justification involves a legal relationship; adoption, a personal relationship.”[18] Similarly, Thomas Watson said, “[I]t is a mercy to redeem a slave, but is more to adopt them.”[19] So the distinct act of adoption is a superb additional blessing flowing to us on account of our union with Christ.  The apostle John exclaims, “See what kind of love the Father has given to us, that we should be called children of God; and so we are” (1Jn. 3:1). Notice John’s statement. It is a wonder that we should be called the children of God; that is in fact a wonderful blessing but lest we conclude they are only words, John says “and so we are” (καὶ ἐσμέν). John’s astonishment indicates the wonder of this blessing. It is indeed an act of the free grace of God — He didn’t have to do it. Thomas Watson summarizes this point quite well: “Adoption is a mercy spun out of the bowels of free grace; all by nature are strangers, therefore have no right to sonship, only God is pleased to adopt one, and not another, to make one a vessel of glory, another a vessel of wrath. The adopted heir may cry out, ‘Lord, how is it, that thou wilt show thyself to me, and not unto the world.”[20]

This free grace of God flows to us in and for his only Son Jesus Christ.” We have already touched on this point in LC #39 but a few other points should be added. We read in Eph. 1:5 that God predestined us “for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ” (εἰς υἱοθεσίαν διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ). That was God’s purpose in Christ, to adopt us. Redemption enabled adoption (Gal. 4:4-5). [21] Paul mentions “adoption” in Eph. 1:5 (a Graeco-Roman term that enabled the childless patron or a patron endeared with someone not his child to inherit the privileges of his new father). We are redeemed to inherit (Eph. 1:7) and adoption enables us to inherit all things in Christ. Notice how Paul argues this point in Rom. 8:17, “if children, then heirs—heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ…” Calvin explains this well in his commentary, “It is for children that inheritance is appointed: since God then has adopted us as his children, he has at the same time ordained an inheritance for us.”

Now coming back to the point, our adoption comes to us “in and for his only Son Jesus Christ.” The inheritance we jointly receive with the Lord comes to us because we are united to Him. There is no adoption without Christ; it is a redemptive mercy conferred upon us. No one is a child of God except in his union with Christ (“in”) and he is God’s child on account of Christ (“for”— “Behold, I and the children God has given me.” Heb. 2:13; cf. Is. 8:18). That is why John 1:12, 13 states it this way, “But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right (ἐξουσίαν) to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.” Faith in Christ, relationship with Him through faith automatically translates us into the status of sonship — they have a right or authority to their sonship in Christ. Leon Morris says, “John does not say that they achieve or attain or merit membership in God’s family, as though they make their own way in. He says that they are given the right. The right is God’s gift. Receiving this gift, they ‘become’ members of the family. They were outside the family; they did not belong. Now they have been given the right to become members; they do belong.”[22]

Before moving on to the next clause in the LC, we must consider the significance of what we just noted. There is no sonship, no adoption without Christ. A person must receive Christ, consciously and surely. He may not remember when he did (as a covenant child) but he personally believes and receives Christ offered to him in the gospel. How do you know whether you are a child of God? Have you believed in Christ? What does it mean to believe in Him? It is to place your personal faith in Him and to follow Him. Faith assumes a responsive life. One’s sense of belonging to God as His child is directly and intimately related to one’s own faith in Christ. The “right” to be a child of God, this privilege and gift, comes to you as you believe in Christ. It is not from natural birth because “flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit” (Jn. 3:6). When the Bible says “not of blood” it means not of natural descent (heritage, race, etc.); “nor of the will of the flesh” means not of human decision; “nor of the will of man (ἀνδρὸς)” means that it is not dependent upon the husband’s decision. To be a child of God is a gift. It comes through faith in Christ — “for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith” (Gal. 3:26). And this birth comes from God (“but of God”). Are you “born of God” (Jn. 1:13 TNIV) or “born of the Spirit” (Jn. 3:8)?

Received into the Number

Only the justified are adopted. Notice how this is phrased, “whereby all those that are justified…  As we noted above, adoption comes through Christ and Christ is ours through faith. In believing in him, we are justified. In the order of our salvation (logically considered), adoption springs from justification. The two are related but are also distinct. Ferguson said, “In human terms it is quite possible to imagine a man being justified without the remotest thought of his being adopted.”[23] Yet in Christianity, that is not the case. Believing in Christ entitles [gives the right to] the sinner to become a child of God. Pardoned justified sinners become pardoned justified sons of God.

The first element of adoption needs some explanation: “whereby all those that are justified are received into the number of his children…” The idea of being received into the number of his children is not commonly used. The WCF says something similar when it says “taken into the number” (12.1) while the SC #34 has, “whereby we are received into the number.” This phrase simply means each believer becomes one of the many children of God. The number of God’s elect is finite (“their number are certain and definite, that it cannot be either increased or diminished” [WCF 3.4]) and consequently, the number of God’s children is also certain and definite. God, as it were, is the ultimate family planner. He planned the “number of his children” and he knows exactly how many He will have and who they are. To be received into this number means we fit into His eternal family plan. Remember, God “predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ…” (Eph. 1:5) and “The Lord knows those who are his” (2Tim. 2:19).



[1] The title seems a bit pretentious since we will only highlight a few historical points. It is at best a super mini micro small overview and abridged!

[2] J. I. Packer, Knowing God (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1973), 207. He should have mentioned Crawford, Lidgett, and Girardeau.

[3] Joel R. Beeke, Heirs with Christ: The Puritans on Adoption (Grand Rapids: Reformation Heritage Books, 2008), 1ff., esp. pp. 10-14.

[4] Francis R. Beattie, The Presbyterian Standard (1894; reprint, Greenville, SC: Southern Presbyterian Press, 1997), 212.

[5] R. A. Webb, The Reformed Doctrine of Adoption (reprint, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1947), 17. Webb is actually incorrect about Breckenridge. Breckenridge gives a full chapter to this doctrine, see his The Knowledge of God, Subjectively Considered: Being the Second Part of Theology Considered as a Science of Positive Truth, Both Inductive and Deductive (New York: Robert Carter & Brothers, 1859), 178ff. (Ch. X: Adoption: Its Grounds, Nature, and Fruits). Surprisingly, the earlier twentieth-century Baptist theologian gives a chapter to this doctrine as well. See Edgar Young Mullins, The Christian Religion in Its Doctrinal Expression (Philadelphia; Boston; St. Louis; Los Angeles; Chicago; New York; Toronto: Roger Williams Press, 1917), 401ff.

[6] John Dick, Lectures on Theology (New York: M. W. Dodd, 1850), 2:224.

[7] Robert L. Dabney, Systematic Theology (1871; repr., Carlisle, PA: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1985), 627. Regarding Turretin and Peter Martyr, Bavinck says, “Sometimes the adoption as children was mentioned as the second part of Justification [e.g. Turretin] but others, such as Peter Martyr, preferred to consider this a fruit of Justification.” See Herman Bavinck, John Bolt and John Vriend, Reformed Dogmatics, Volume 4: Holy Spirit, Church, and New Creation (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008), 224.

[8] The little book by Beeke (Heirs with Christ) gives a very helpful and up to date bibliography on this doctrine.

[9] Sinclair Ferguson, Know Your Christian Life (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1981), 82.

[10] Beattie, The Presbyterian Standard, 214.

[11] On this, see Chad Van Dixhoorn’s “The Sonship Program for Revival: A Summary and Critique,” WTJ 61:2 (Fall 1999): 227ff.

[12] John M. Frame, Salvation Belongs to the Lord: An Introduction to Systematic Theology (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed, 2006), 205-206.

[13] Cf. Berkhof, Systematic Theology, 515. Albrecht Ritschl did not teach universal fatherhood of God though he is often viewed as one who taught it, see James Orr, The Ritschlian Theology and the Evangelical Faith (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1897), 221 fn; 226. I’m having some difficulty pinning down proponents who taught this. One author who maintained it called it “New Theology” and he happily dispensed with Candlish’s view of God’s Fatherhood (Old Theology), see John Bickford Heard, Old and New Theology: A Constructive Critique (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1885), 82ff. This book assumes the existence of this new teaching but is not its source.

[14] Heard, Old and New Theology, 84.

[15] http://www.oprah.com/relationships/Show-Empathy-Emotional-Intimacy

[16] http://mormonwoman.org/2011/05/15/mormons-believe-we-are-all-children-of-god/

[17] Ashbel Green, Lectures on the Shorter Catechism, 2 vols. (Philadelphia: Presbyterian Board of Publication and Sabbath School Work, 1841), 1:404.

[18] Beeke, Heirs with Christ, 31.

[19] Thomas Watson, A Body of Divinity (London: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1958), 162.

[20] Watson, A Body of Divinity, 161.

[21] We dealt with the historical biblical theological flow of this doctrine from Gal. 4:5 in our study of the LC #39.

[22] Leon Morris, Expository Reflections on the Gospel of John (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1988), 12. Sometimes the word is translated as “power.” The word dunamis (power) is not used (cf. C. K. Barrett) in John; one is not enabled to become a child of God by some invested power within him (Calvin addresses the RC view that seems to appeal to Jn. 1:12 to prove human merit and power).

[23] Cited in Beeke, Heirs with Christ, 32.

Luke 19:11-27, The Parable of the Ten Minas (Annotations)

Luke 19:11-27

The Parable of the Ten Minas

This is clearly a separate parable from Matthew’s parable of the talents (Mt. 25:14-30). “It is more likely that Jesus made more than one use of the basic idea.” (Morris) In Matthew, Jesus focuses on the stewardship given according to each one’s ability (Mt. 25:15, “to each according to his ability”). In Luke, one mina is given to see if they are fit for larger tasks. Hence the statement, “you have been faithful in a very little.”

19:11 — The reason our Lord gave this parable is “because he was near to Jerusalem, and because they supposed that the kingdom of God was to appear immediately.” This came after the previous account (“As they heard these things…”).

The parable illustrates the stewardship required in the interim. Many perhaps thought the imminent return precluded activity and diligence. Nevertheless, this interim period is the time in which we are to be faithful.

19:12 — The “nobleman” clearly represents Christ. This nobleman was to receive his kingship (and not just some static kingdom). The departure meant that an interim period required stewardship. “Two interesting historical analogies may have provided background for this allusion. Both Herod the Great in 40 B.C. and his son Archelaus in 4 B. C. went to Rome to receive confirmation of their rule. Herod received the kingship of Judea, Samaria, and Idumea. Archelaus received not ‘kingship’ but only the title ‘Ethnarch.’” (Stein)

19:13 — Minas “is a much smaller amount than Matthew’s talents. A mina was worth about a sixteenth of a talent or about one hundred drachmas, i.e., about three months’ wages.” (Stein) The nobleman gives clear direction to his servants. There is no doubt what he is requiring. This is particularly important when we read of the third servant’s response. Presumably, each servant received one mina with which to work.

19:14 — Jesus adds to this the story to make it the example very similar to his. These citizens did not wish to have the nobleman rule over them. The Jews likewise did not wish to have Christ rule over them. Both reject their Lord. “Jesus is the perfect King and nothing can interfere with his kingship. But we should not miss the point that people rebel against all he stands for.” (Morris)

19:15  — The nobleman has received his kingdom and has returned as Lord. This parallels what will happen to Jesus who will be exalted as Lord and will one day return.

19:16-19 — The servant recognized that the minas was not his and that the Lord’s mina had earned ten more or 1000%. There is no boasting here.  He is one of the three who is mentioned out of the ten. The nobleman rewards the faithful servant with ten cities. Interestingly, he says that the servant had been “faithful with very little.” If he can show that much industry from such a small amount, then he is a trustworthy servant who can handle more. More importantly, like Adam would have been rewarded (had he obeyed), the servant will receive far more than his deed; the reward was greater than the work! It is what Augustine called “rewards of grace.”

The second servant produced 500% for which he will receive five cities. No commendation is made like the first. But it is clear that the reward of grace means that he has his master’s approval. “Here the master shows both his generosity and his fairness, since the servants all received the same amount of capital to trade with, yet some have worked harder than others.” (Milne) “The reward is not rest, but the opportunity for wider service.” (Morris)

“All Christians will be saved by Christ, yet their work for Christ is another matter, it may pass muster or suffer loss in the fire of Christ’s testing examination (1 Cor. 3:11-15). Their special responsibilities in the future kingdom will depend in some way on the quality of their service for Christ in the present kingdom.” (Milne) This author also rightly summarizes two important truths that must guide our understanding of our future standing. One, “No servant deserves to be in Christ’s employment; everything is due to Christ’s pity and generosity (Matt. 20:1-6).” Two, “No servant deserves a reward since no one ever lives up to what Christ has the right to ask of us (Luke 17:7-10).” (Milne) But a third truth should be mentioned. No servant should highlight what he did; let his master do so (see below in “Lost in Translation”). They do not say, “I did this for you.” Rather, “Your mina produced this.”

19:20-21 — This third servant simply gives back what was given to him. He had not heeded the command, “Engage in business until I come.” (v. 13) Not only had he failed to heed the command, he is now blaming his failure on his master’s harshness. “In his defense the wicked servant sought to paint a negative picture of the character of the nobleman.” (Stein) “Taking up what one did not put down and reaping what one did not sow are evidently proverbial expressions for making gain through other people’s efforts.” (Morris) Bock says, “The king takes from others what he did not work for.” (Bock) Plummer states the dilemma in these words: “If I earn money, you will take it; if I lose it, you will hold me responsible.” (Plummer)

His assessment is certainly not true. The master rewarded his servants disproportionately to their labor. They received far more than what they did. The nobleman was generous and not severe.

Basically there are two classes listed in this parable, those who were faithful and those who were not. This man sufficiently portrays unfaithfulness. “The third servant stands for all those people throughout Christendom who have enjoyed an outward relationship to the church and the gospel. Yet these individuals have never made any return on these privileges and opportunities by trusting, loving and serving Christ personally. They are like land that has received the fructifying rain, but only produces thorns and weeds.” (Milne)

We learn how one’s prejudice and wrong understanding of who Jesus is will impact our behavior. Some view his as this wicked servant; others view him as indulgent and soft. Either way, they both misunderstand him and respond accordingly to their spiritual condemnation.

19:22-23 — “The nobleman judged the wicked servant on the basis of his own presuppositions.” (Stein) The logic of his response is quite penetrating. “If you indeed knew I was that way, then why in the world did you not fear and do something?” Not only did this man lie, he also was foolish. He failed to act on his pretended understanding. The minimal effort to invest would have been sufficient. Even that was neglected.

19:24 — The one who served faithfully will even be more blessed. Once again, the nobleman’s generosity is evident, contrary to the worthless servant’s mischaracterization.

19:25-26 — This interjection raises the question of the nobleman’s generosity and sense of equity. Yet, he will reward them disproportionately to reveal his generosity. “The smallest gift must be put to good use. In the Christian life we do not stand still. We use our gifts and make progress or we lose what we have.” (Morris)

19:27 — Jesus has dealt with those who profess to be his disciples, now he will address his enemies. “We may be horrified by the fierceness of the conclusion; but beneath the grim imagery is an equally grim fact, the fact that the coming of Jesus to the world puts every man to the test, compels every man to a decision. And that decision is no light matter. It is a matter of life and death.” (T. W. Manson) Bock says, “When Jesus returns, which category each person falls into will be revealed—and there will be no counterarguments.” (Bock)

 

Lost in Translation

Most translations offer everything we need to accurately study the Bible; they are trustworthy and faithful. But in a paraphrase rendition of this passage, the writer missed a significant point. When the servants came to their Lord, they stated something quite clear and emphatic. In v. 16, the servants stated first and foremost that it was “YOUR” mina (vv. 16, 18, 20). It was not their mina but the Lord’s. This is something we all can easily recognize in the translation. The verb however is very important to these verses. To highlight its significance, let me offer the difference between the ESV translation and the MESSAGE paraphrase:

ESV, “Lord, your mina has made ten minas more.”

MESSAGE, “Master, I doubled your money.”

The Grk. is very clear. The verb is in the third person (προσηργάσατο) and not the first. “Your mina, IT (that is, your mina) made ten minas more.” The MESSAGE changes it to the first person, “I doubled your money.” The original [which the ESV (and most translations) rendered correctly] emphasizes YOUR MINA; that is first in position in the sentence after acknowledging the “Lord” (Κύριε, ἡ μνᾶ σου δέκα προσηργάσατο μνᾶς.).

The first person is not used by the first two servants; they do not refer to themselves — they do not mention “I”. The first person comes out in the third servant. Yet, even he acknowledges it is the Lord’s mina (your mina, v. 20). Then he then states what HE did, “I kept laid away in a handkerchief…” This response by contrast is quite stark. He mentions himself and thus the contrast highlights something important. There is something to be learned here.

The first two servants reveal something of their humility. Their Lord’s gift produced the work; they do not highlight what they did. They dare not mention or boast about what they did — the Lord’s gift worked and their Lord must get the glory. The third servant either by way of excuse or by way of boast, mentions what he himself did. Believers must not do that; they must say what the first two servants said. They must say with Paul, “it was not I, but the grace of God that is with me” (1 Cor. 15:10). We don’t want to overreach and make too much of the grammar here but I believe what we have highlighted is warranted from the text. We love to highlight what we do. “I did this, I did that!” How often I find myself sinning like this. Should we not say, “Lord, you have blessed me and gifted me in such and such area and look what you have done — you have enabled me to do such and such. Lord, I should have done more but what good has been done has been your work of grace and I dare not take credit!” “Lord, your mina has made more minas. May YOU be praised! We are unworthy servants; we have only done what was our duty. [Lk. 17:10]”

[NOTE: These annotations come from the notes I kept on the gospel when I preached through Luke a few years ago. I have posted this portion because I recently noticed the translation issue and added to the document the portion entitled “Lost in Translation.” Portions of this file have been given to a few people in our church; it is my desire to get the entire file uploaded over the years. These annotations were for personal use and study to serve as the basis for my sermons on Luke.]

 

Proverbs 6:16-19

Proverbs 6:16-19

Remember, these are instructions of a father to his son (6:1; cf. 6:20). Serious descriptions are given to warn the son. What he began in v. 12 he continues in this. Not only will worthless men be broken beyond healing (v. 15b), God also hates them do such things.

I think Hubbard is correct about these two passages: “If we are right in seeing ‘discord’ (v. 19) as the heart of the passage and in finding frivolous or malicious litigation as a chief expression of that discord, then we may see a contentious note in each of the first six rungs in the ladder by which we ascend to the climax of the final clause (v. 19b).” (Hubbard, 102) That is, each one of these abominations will serve to advance discord.

 

6:16-17 — 16 There are six things that the LORD hates, seven that are an abomination to him: 17 haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,

Seven abominations are listed here.[1] These are the things that the Lord hates. They are an abomination to him. God is not ashamed to state that He hates these things and because His displeasure or hatred against them is so clear, we must be careful to give our attention to what they are. “Man conceives of God in his heart as ‘such a one as himself’ (Ps. 1.21), looking with indifference at sin.” (Bridges) But God is not a man that He can look upon wickedness with favor (see Hab. 1:13; Ps. 5:4-5). This is the way God looks at these offenses.

The first abomination is “haughty eyes. ” The first four are tied to a body part. “Haughty (or lifted up) eyes denote a demeanor shaped by pride…pride does not allow a person to be self-critical. Thus, such people perpetuate bad behavior.” (Longman) The haughty demeanor can never bring concord; the haughty man must take first place and he will be reckoned with — if not, the unfortunate person will suffer his personal wrath. “Arrogance means self-exaltation over another person and violates the fundamentally equal honor of each individual (cf. 8:13; 16:5; 29:23).” (Waltke)

The second is “a lying tongue.” This man will play loose with the truth (cf. Hubbard) and it may have in view a legal court situation. God hates a lying tongue though it is greatly permitted and tolerable in our culture. Haughty eyes express contempt for others and a lying tongue will show contempt for their reputation and name.

The third abomination listed here is the one who is swift to shed innocent blood. If one has contempt for another then one will utilize whatever means possible to show contempt for innocent life. Here, it must be noted that shedding blood is not itself forbidden but instead, shedding innocent blood is in view. One who is haughty may not be able to murder someone but his heart is enraged against the other person (a murderous heart) and would do so if tolerated (cf. Haman in Esther).

 

6:18 — a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that make haste to run to evil,

We are brought back into the heart of the man. This is the fourth thing God hates, viz., those who devise wicked plans. Perhaps they could not lay hands upon the one on whom they look down. They can only devise a wicked plan to get them. How many people have done this in the church? In their beds, in their homes, with their brethren, they’ve devised ways to spring their wicked plan which their wicked hearts hatched. This too the Lord hates.

Fifthly, not only do they devise a wick plan, they are quick to see it come to pass. They “make haste to run to evil.” They are not reluctant victims; they are calculating perpetrators. They are zealous about their evil: “The verset ‘catches the note of urgency involved in the crime — no step spared, no second wasted, no base left uncovered in the execution of the plot.” (cited in Waltke, 347)

 

6:19 — a false witness who breathes out lies, and one who sows discord among brothers.

The sixth thing is the willingness to speak a lie in a legal context. Body parts are no longer mentioned. Not only lying (e.g. second abomination) but lying under oath is abominable to the Lord.

The last thing is what we already mentioned. Discord is sown! The six abominable things will produce discord. All these can stand on their own but in this passage, they can easily be connected to lead to “discord among brothers.” [or relatives, kinsmen, or something broader] “If the heavenly ‘dew descends upon the brethren that dwell together in unity’ (Ps. cxxxiii.), a withering blast will fall on those, who, mistaking prejudice for principle, ‘cause divisions’ for their own selfish ends. …Fearful is the Lord’s mark upon them — ‘sensual, having not the Spirit.’ [Jude 19; 1 Cor. 3:3, 4]

The sower of discord among brethren, are worse than those who set fire to the houses of their neighbours. They kindle flames which burn with unrelenting fury, and set on fire families and provinces, and sometimes even nations themselves. They not only sin, but, like Jeroboam the son of Nebat, they cause multitudes of sin, destroying that charity which is the soul of every commandment, and disseminating those corrupt passions, which prove incentives to all the works of mischief. The God whose commandments are all included in love, and who sent his Son to be our peace, cannot but abhor these sons of Belial. Surely he will make their mischiefs to recoil with an awful vengeance upon their own heads. (Lawson)

ERGO — we learn the value of instructing others in the way God will treat iniquitous people (v. 15) and how He hates their ways (v. 16). It is not merely the father pointing out what his son should avoid; he is saying that God hates these things as well.

Furthermore, we must realize the serious nature of causing discord. Unless it is for God and His truth, we should humbly do all that we can to live in peace with all men, especially with our brethren in the faith. The Gospel itself causes divisions; we ought not to instigate it with our own wicked hearts. It is an abomination to our God.


[1] “The seven together present another concise and vivid description of the troublemaker; no other type of person satisfies the description.” (Waltke, 345)

Proverbs 6:12-15

Proverbs 6:12-15

One characteristic unifies this and the following passage (vv. 14 & 19): sowing discord.[1] Previously, the father urged his pupil not to be lazy. Now he describes what a worthless person looks like.  The contrast between the passage above and this one is quite stark (in the words of Charles Bridges): “What a contrast between the inactivity of the sluggard and the unwearied diligence of the naughty person!” (Bridges)

6:12 — A worthless person, a wicked man, goes about with crooked speech,

He is a worthless person (literally “man of Belial” in Hebrew, אָדָ֣ם בְּ֭לִיַּעַל) The word “denotes one who is implacably wicked and who agitates against all that is good.” (Waltke). His speech is crooked (or fraudulent speech) — one who “distorts the truth on which a straight and sound society is built” (Waltke).

 

6:13 — winks with his eyes, signals with his feet, points with his finger,

In summary, “With a hint here, and a wink or a gesture there, the troublemaker can sow discord at will—until God’s hour strikes for him.” (Kidner) The point is not we ought not to wink but these gestures should not be used to advance wickedness. Waltke and others note that these gestures may be expressions of superiority, condescending attitude, etc. “By his devious and invidious motions he attempts to derogate others and thereby to lower their status in the eyes of associates. In turn, a troublemaker feels superior, and this ego satisfaction is his ultimate desire and goal.” (Waltke, citing Pault).[2]

 

6:14 — with perverted heart devises evil, continually sowing discord;

Similar to the way Paul describes the various facets of one’s body to teach the doctrine of total depravity, so the father describes how a worthless fellow oozes out wickedness. His speech eyes, feet, finger and now the heart are listed. The man of Belial devises evil in his heart; it is not just external behavior — it comes from the heart. “The heart is the core of a person from which emanate all actions, motives, and speech. The heart of an evil person is bent on evil.” (Longman)

The end result of these expressions of worthlessness and wickedness is that it sows discord. “All their choices (‘heart’) are malicious, because discord among the people, disruption of community consensus and family unity, are their aim. Such discord may even carry them into court to try to give legal expression of the contentiousness…” (suggested from the Hebrew word for discord – a judicial term). (Hubbard)

 

6:15 — therefore calamity will come upon him suddenly; in a moment he will be broken beyond healing.

Such a person will come to ruin; God will see to it. “They may seem as though they are getting away with their actions, but they will ultimately be ruined; that ruin will come suddenly and will not be reversible.” (Longman) “Sudden destruction is probably a sign of divine wrath and indirectly incorporates the troublemaker among the ranks of the wicked (see 3:25).” (Waltke)

ERGO — We are warned against living this kind of life. Being a sluggard is one thing; being a wicked troublemaker is another. Wickedness cannot live alone; it must spread and it will do what it can to express itself. What is interesting about this “worthless man” is that the ultimate expression of his iniquity is discord. That vice is once again highlighted in the next passage.

How does one sow discord in the church? Will it always appear to be malevolent and vindictive? This passage views sowing discord as the culmination of a wicked man. Why does the church and our culture not view this as a serious vice (or does it)?


[1] “…the climatic line of each is ‘sows discord’ (vv. 14, 19).” (Hubbard)

[2] Some have suggested that these gestures may be ancient expressions of sorcery (cf. McKane) or simply restless expressions of inner disquietude (cf. Longman).

Proverbs 6:6-11

Proverbs 6:6-11

The father has spoken about finances in some measure in vv. 1-5. Now he urges his son to be industrious. The father is concerned about the way his son uses his money and time. These two things (along with what follows after) greatly affect a man.

6:6-8 — 6 Go to the ant, O sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise. 7 Without having any chief, officer, or ruler, 8 she prepares her bread in summer and gathers her food in harvest.

Though we may know more than the beasts, yet the smallest of insects can teach us.  The young sluggard is bidden to go to the ant to learn. The ants have no one goading them on and yet they get all their work done and acquire all their necessities (30:25, “… the ants are a people not strong, yet they provide their food in the summer…”). If we reflect on their behavior and heed their industry, we will be wise (“consider her ways, and be wise”).

The father addresses a pupil who is perhaps not a sluggard but one who may easily become one (Hubbard). Remember, we can lose all that we have by chasing a wicked woman (5:7-10) as well as putting up security for someone (6:1-5). The other way we can come to impoverishment is sheer laziness.

 

6:9-11 — 9 How long will you lie there, O sluggard? When will you arise from your sleep? 10 A little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to rest, 11 and poverty will come upon you like a robber, and want like an armed man.

Not only must the sluggard consider the God’s creatures but he is also exhorted to awake from his slumber. It is said by some that the most unproductive tend to sleep the most. Sleeping too long is often a symptom of laziness (all things being equal). Lawson says,  “It is a shame for men to give up to sleep a third part of their time, but it is not less so to spend our waking hours in doing nothing, or in doing what is as unprofitable.” (Lawson)

Verse 10 is the sage’s observation. A little bit of all of these things can only lead to one thing. The sluggard may defend his “little” sleep, slumber, and folding of his hands to rest. This may be his response to the question of How long? Just a little bit more! “The lazy person says they just want a ‘little sleep,’ but we suspect that little nap will become a long sleep to avoid work necessary to sustain life.” (Longman)

This indolence has consequences. Poverty will come upon them quickly. The phrase “armed man” may better be translated as “beggar” or “insolent man.” “The house of the sluggard is the haunt of poverty, and it comes not like an invited guest, whose visit is expected, but like a traveler, whose approach is unforeseen. It comes like an armed man, and gains an easy victory over the naked and slumbering sluggard.” (Lawson) “The doom of the sluggard travels swiftly and is inevitable. While he slumbers inertly, Poverty is coming on apace, drawing nearer to him every moment; and when it comes, it falls upon him like an armed man…from whom there is no escape.” (Perowne)

The opposite of this is hard work; to be busy and productive.  “Hard work ought to be the normal routine of us who serve a carpenter-Christ, who follow the lead of a tentmaker-Apostle, and who call ourselves children of a Father who is still working (John 5:17).” (Hubbard)

 

Some Lessons

1. Believers should be busy and productive. Our culture is too preoccupied with pleasure and entertainment. TV, internet, games, outings, etc. may all have their legitimate place but they must not take a large part of our time or impede the proper and productive use of our time.

2. This is not arguing against legitimate sleep.

3. Christians have been known to be productive. It has been said that Christ’s work in the hearts of men and women have often freed men from their waste (drunkenness, gambling, prostitutes, sinful entertainment, etc.)

4. “The idle man is bad, but the mischievous man is still worse; but indeed it generally happens, that he who is enslaved by the one of these vices, becomes in process of time the slave of the other also.” (Lawson)

5. “Laziness is a breach of love. It refuses to carry its own weight let alone help with the loads of the rest of us who plod along supporting our young, our aged, our infirm. We have no surplus energy to carry those who can walk and will not.” (Hubbard)

 

On the Sluggard and Hard Work in Proverbs[1]

Proverbs has strong words against laziness. Laziness leads to poverty (10:4) and at best, it will lead him to forced labor (12:24). His worthless pursuits (or frivolity) show that he lacks sense (12:11) and they will lead him to poverty (28:19). Not only worthless pursuits but mere talk will also lead to poverty (14:23) and hunger (19:15). This suggests that the man may be busy and talk much about all that he is doing and intends to do but at bottom, he is bone lazy and wants a quick gain — it can only lead to poverty because it is without wisdom and not God’s way. His way is “like a hedge of thorns” (15:19) and is a “brother to him who destroys” (18:9).

Sleeping when he should work will bring shame (10:5) and his slothfulness “casts into a deep sleep” (19:15). They should not love sleep (20:13) but as it is, “As a door turns on its hinges, so does a sluggard on his bed.” (26:14) He will not plow when he needs to (20:4) though he will look for food in the harvest but will find nothing (20:4). Yet, he is “wiser in his own eyes than seven men who can answer sensibly.” (26:16)

The sluggard is so lazy that he “buries his hand in the dish” and won’t “even bring it back to his mouth” (19:24) for “it wears him out to bring it back to his mouth” (26:15). His hand refuses to work (21:25). The sluggard won’t even roast his game (12:27) nor will he get what he desires (13:4). He will have all kinds of excuses and says things like, “There is a lion outside! I shall be killed in the streets!” (22:13; 26:13). Indeed, “the desire of the sluggard kills him” (21:25).

24:30-34, “I passed by the field of a sluggard, by the vineyard of a man lacking sense, and behold, it was all overgrown with thorns; the ground was covered with nettles, and its stone wall was broken down. Then I saw and considered it; I looked and received instruction. A little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to rest, and poverty will come upon you like a robber, and want like an armed man.” (cf. 6:6-11)

But we are strongly encouraged to work hard. The wise gathers (10:5) and opens his eyes instead of sleeping (20:13). Working our land will allow us to have what we need (12:11) and hard work can lead to wealth (“…the hand of the diligent makes rich.” [10:4; cf. 12:27; 13:4; 28:19]) and may enable the person to rule (12:24). His diligence and skill will elevate him: “Do you see a man skillful in his work? He will stand before kings; he will not stand before obscure men.” (22:29)

We are taught that “in all toil there is profit” (14:23). Though we may not become rich through diligence, careful planning, etc. we will have enough. This principle must be fixed in our minds. We are to be like the woman in Proverbs 31. “She looks well to the ways of her household and does not eat the bread of idleness.” (31:27) We will have enough when we work (because the Lord does not let the righteous go hungry, 10:3). The same principle and encouragement can be found with greater clarity in 27:23-27: “Know well the condition of your flocks, and give attention to your herds, for riches do not last forever; and does a crown endure to all generations? When the grass is gone and the new growth appears and the vegetation of the mountains is gathered, the lambs will provide your clothing, and the goats the price of a field. There will be enough goats’ milk for your food, for the food of your household and maintenance for your girls.” One commentator says this: “It may well be a warning not to let the pressures of urbane activities and the lure of get-rich-quick schemes seduce attention from the enduring and indispensable tasks of feeding and clothing one’s household and providing ‘nourishment’ for one’s helpers.” (Hubbard) Waltke adds, “To involve himself fully and personally with his sources of income will take the energy, discipline, kindness, shrewdness, and other virtues bestowed by wisdom.”

That is the point of all this — wisdom shows itself in a person’s industrious ways. Though we are exhorted not to trust in riches (11:28) yet we are also taught that diligence will make rich (10:4). God blesses the efforts of the righteous and adds no sorrow to it (10:22, more on this when we come to it). But how does one do this? Wisdom enables one to be industrious and helps the person to prepare. These things do not simply come to us — in Proverbs, they are the expressions of wisdom as well as the effects of wisdom in a person’s life. He has a proper view of work and wealth (not like 18:11, “A rich man’s wealth is his strong city, and like a high wall in his imagination.”) The point of these verses is not, “Just work hard. Do it!” Rather, show wisdom (rooted in our Lord) in the area of your vocation. Proverbs teaches us what wisdom looks like when it comes to work and planning. Mere work is not the expression of wisdom; rather, work done with an eye to God’s glory is wisdom at work.

 

Some Questions

•Do these verses teach that all who are poor brought it upon themselves?

•Does it teach us that some of the poor brought it upon themselves?

•What does this teach about sleep? Leisure?

•Our generation fears being a “workaholic.” Do these verses have anything to say?

•It is easy to accuse the “other” person who is in a desperate situation of being slothful (that is, their “sloth” or folly brought it upon themselves). Where does compassion come in?

•Are all industrious people wise? Explain. Or, are all poor people fools?

•Is “poverty” related to morality? To wisdom? Explain.


[1] The list of these verses can be found in Longman, 561-562.