Exploring The Bible

[Resource Manager]

With guiding principles such as these, there is no reason why you should not reach out beyond your already well-established boundaries of Bible understanding.

 

But it would be a mistake to assume that this must mean spending your time and effort in the more enigmatical parts of Scripture such as the book of Job, the prophecies of Ezekiel, the complexities of Revelation. When Jesus, unrecognised, walked to Emmaus with two of his disciples, “beginning from Moses and from all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself”. But Moses and the prophets from which Jesus began covers all the Scriptures known in those days (Luke 16:29, 31; Acts 26:22 and 28:23). The words, then, seem to imply that first Jesus made a rapid survey, quickly touching on the more obvious places where scarcely any explanation was called for, and that then he began again, explaining more fully in the places where detailed exposition was called for.

 

The effect of all this was: “Did not our heart burn within us... while he opened to us the scriptures?” (In Acts 17:3 the second Greek verb probably means “setting side by side” of prophecies and the facts fulfilling the prophecies).

 

Doubtless many of the Old Testament passages which Jesus alluded to were already well known to those two wayfarers. As he began to quote, they would be able to finish the quotation. Yet only now for the first time in their lives was the veil withdrawn and they saw the truth which had been there all the time. The fog had been in their minds, not in the Scripture.

 

All students of the Word of God have this Emmaus experience. With some it happens often. Therefore, never assume that you have fully understood any passage in the Bible, no matter how familiar you may be with it, no matter how much time you have spent poring over it, no matter how profound the teaching you have already found in it. There may still be further instruction awaiting you there.

 

Take three simple examples of single verses which you already know and understand.

 

The curse on the serpent in Eden included also a promise of a Redeemer: “And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed, and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel” (Genesis 3:15). You already understand, doubtless, that here is a prophecy of the conflict between Jesus the Seed of the Woman, and the serpent power of Sin. The bruise in the heel symbolizes what Jesus suffered and recovered from in the course of the fight. The blow in the head indicates the utter destruction of the power of Sin in the world. All this you know. Yet is it possible that there is more than this?

 

The verse has three pairs of balanced phrases

 

(1) Thee (the serpent)                        The Woman

(2) Thy seed                                       Her Seed

(3) Thy head bruised                          by her Seed

(4) The heel of her Seed                    bruised by the Serpent

 

Another scrutiny reveals that they are not really balanced phrases. The third and fourth are out of balance. On the basis of the first two one would expect:

 

The head of thy seed (serpent’s seed) shall be bruised by the Seed of the Woman; 

 

and

 

Thy seed (the seed of the serpent) shalt bruise the Seed of the Woman in the heel.

 

Why, then, does the second half of the verse not follow the pattern of the first half? The answer is surely this: It was necessary to indicate the victory of Christ not only in himself and in his own time but in all generations right from Adam. In other words the merits of the sacrifice of Jesus are efficacious to cover all sin from the very beginning. He bruised not only the seed of the serpent, but he utterly vanquished the Serpent itself.

[Resource Manager]

This same truth concerning the power of Christ’s sacrifice to cover “sins done aforetime”, a truth so vitally important to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and all who died in faith before the appearing of Christ, is emphasized also in the New Testament: Rom. 3:25, Heb. 9:15. And here, surely, is the explanation of the mystery of the resurrection along with Jesus of disciples who had died during his ministry (Matt. 27:52, 53). This marvellous happening was needful to emphasize the all-embracing timeless scope of the Lord’s work of sacrifice as being not only prospective as far even as this generation, but retrospective also, as far back as to Adam. That it was done by means of such a prodigious miracle is a measure of the importance of the principle involved.

 

Here is yet another illustration of this need for an unflagging assumption that even the most familiar Scripture may have more instruction to impart: “There shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse...” (Isa. 11:1). How many pause to ask why in this majestic prophecy Messiah, the Son of David, should be referred to as “out of the stem of Jesse”?—Jesse, about whom nothing is known except that he was the father of David. So many of the Messianic prophecies speak of the coming King as Son of David. Then why not “out of the stem of David”? Kay, the prince of Victorian commentators, put his finger on the answer: “Out of the (hewn down) stock of Jesse indicates that Messiah was to come at a time when the once ennobled line of David had sunk to the level of common life. The royal house of Zion had fallen back upon the family domain in Bethlehem.” (Hence also Micah 5:2, where the same truth is implied.) This was true of Jesus in his first advent—the Davidic line existed, but without royalty; and at his coming again there will be no royal line established in Jerusalem, even though there be a state of Israel in existence. His kingship will be as much a new beginning as was the exaltation of David, son of Jesse.

 

Yet another familiar prophecy where the overtones can be all too easily missed: “The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool” (Psa. 110:1).

 

It is a Psalm of David, in spite of what the critics may say, because Jesus said so, and David is the prototype. Only once is David himself described as sitting in the presence of Jehovah, and that was when he went into the sanctuary to offer prayer and praise for the great Promise which had just been made to him through the prophet Nathan (2 Sam. 7:18). Now he writes of one greater than himself sitting at God’s right hand— for what purpose if it be not for prayer, like David his forefather? No wonder, then, that the psalm goes on to describe this Davidic Messiah as also “A priest after the order of Melchizedek”, a king-designate praying for his people.

 

There can never be an end to this kind of searching. The most familiar passages are liable to take on an altogether fresh appearance at any moment. So on the occasions when an almost too familiar Scripture—Gen. 3; Psa. 72; Acts i; 2 Peter 3; 2 Tim. 3—is being read in the course of a Sunday evening meeting, this should in no wise be taken as a gratuitous opportunity for mind-wandering, but rather as a challenge to discover, in readings with which you are over-familiar, some new thought or instruction. It can happen more often than you think.

 

But this experience of unfolding truth comes to those who hunger and thirst for it. “In the sweat of thy face shall thou eat bread”—but first there must be sweat. “Much food is in the tillage of the poor”—but there must be tillage. “The statutes of the Lord... are sweeter than honey and the honey comb”— but there must be a palate that can properly appreciate such a delicacy.

[Resource Manager]

So be alert for any signs in yourself of boredom or weariness. When the disciples shared out the bread at the feeding of the multitude, the more they distributed, the more it multiplied. The widow’s cruse of oil kept on pouring as long as there was a vessel to receive it. Jesus discoursed to Mary because it was she who sat at his feet. With the best intentions in the world and a sense of service that was wholly praiseworthy Martha could not lay on for him as good a meal as Mary did, for the eagerness with which Mary received his word imparted a stimulus to Jesus which, one may be sure, far outlasted the benefits of Martha’s kitchen. And what Mary received that day was hers for ever.

 

Is it not appropriate, then, at this point to remind readers of a simple and extremely worthwhile device by which iron may sharpen iron?

 

During the drab days of the Second World War there were often held in the Midlands of England what, for want of a better term, might be called Bible parties. Ten or fifteen Bible students would foregather at the home of one of them. The programme could hardly be less elaborate. Each brother was expected to come prepared to talk for (say) three to ten minutes about his latest enthusiasm in Scripture, the most recent product of his Bible study (it was, of course, tacitly assumed that each of the brethren was addicted to real Bible study and would have some treasure to display). It was all done in most informal style. After each contribution there would be a few minutes for discussion and questions. Then on to the next. In those sombre days of tight rationing there often had to be a pooling of resources out of the kitchen as well as the study, so that the gatherings might also be cheered by the sharing of another sort of food. But the fellowship at those Bible parties was, first and last, a fellowship in the truth of the Word.

 

It seems a great pity that such wholesome and profitable times came to an end. Will no one make an effort to get them going again?

[Resource Manager]

22. CHRIST IN ALL THE BIBLE

 

“The scriptures spring out of God, and flow unto Christ, and were given to lead us to Christ, Thou must therefore go along by the scripture as by a line, until thou come at Christ, which is the way’s end and resting place.” WILLIAM TYNDALE.

 

Whatever part of the Bible your reading takes you to, one of your foremost preoccupations must be a constant look-out for two people—Jesus Christ and yourself. This chapter is primarily about the former, and although as chapters go it will be reasonably short, it could with little trouble be filled out to the size of a very large volume.

 

There can be no doubt at all that the work of Jesus, in one of its many aspects, is to be read all through the Old Testament as well as in the New Testament—by direct prophecy, which cannot possibly apply to any but Jesus; by prophecy which was occasioned by the circumstances of the prophet’s own day; in the form of “apocalyptic” (to appropriate a bit of modern theological jargon); in legal enactment or moral principle; in the symbolism of tabernacle and temple, and in the unique ordinances associated with them; in type and shadow. “Divers manners”, truly; the phrase of Heb. 1:1 is eloquent.

 

It is necessary then, first of all, to warn against an approach to the Old Testament on these lines: There are places in the Bible here and there where Christ is foretold very clearly (e.g. Psalm 22; Jer. 23; Isa. 9 and 53; Daniel 9), but those are in a category to themselves; they are about Christ, and the rest is not, but is about the people and circumstances of the time when the books were written.

 

Such a point of view is woefully inadequate. It badly underestimates the place which Christ has had and does have in the divine programme. If he was “foreordained before the foundation of the world” and if he has “in all things the pre-eminence”, it is only reasonable to expect that God’s purpose in him will appear in all aspects of the divine handiwork.

 

In the world of Nature this is true—for there is no part of Genesis chapter I which is not given some symbolic reference to Jesus in the New Testament. Similarly the acts of God in the history of Israel, and the revelation imparted through Israel, can fairly confidently be expected to find their highest meaning when read as having relevance to the main idea—the redemption of the human race through Christ, and the glory of God in him.

 

There are, admittedly, parts of the Old Testament where you will not be able to maintain this thesis as fully as you could wish. However, perhaps already this volume has supplied one or two reasons for believing that Christ as the theme of all Scripture is somewhat more credible than you originally thought. It is a wholesome attitude of mind to believe that Holy Scripture contains many profound teachings which at present you are quite unable to appreciate. Isaac Newton regarded his own epoch-making discoveries in mathematics and science as just one or two beautiful pebbles found on the shore of a limitless ocean. The same humble recognition of one’s own limited outlook on the Bible most becomes the seeker of God’s Truth. Better than to say “I have found it” is to say “Alas, what a lot there must be which I haven’t found! Lord, open Thou mine eyes to perceive...”

 

It is something of an eye-opener as to the relationship of Christ to the Old Testament to consider the book of Genesis. The following list may be in the nature of a revelation to some readers.

[Resource Manager]

Genesis as a foreshadowing of God’s Purpose in Christ:-      

 

1-3                         Adam.

3:15                       Promise of the Seed.

4:1-16                    Abel and Cain (?)

6                            Noah.

7                            The Flood.

9:26-27                  The Blessing of Noah.(?)

12,13,17,22           The Promise of the Seed to Abraham.

14                          Melchizedek.

16                          Hagar and Sarah.

18, 19                    Destruction of Sodom.

22                          Offering of Isaac.

24                          Marriage of Isaac (?)

28                          Bethel, and the Promise to Jacob.

31                          Jacob’s return to the Land.

32                          Jacob’s wrestling with the angel.

37-45                     The story of Joseph.

38                          Judah and Tamar.

48                          Joseph’s two sons.

49                          Jacob’s prophecies.

 

For all except those marked (?) there is definite warrant elsewhere in Scripture for a typical or prophetic interpretation over and above the ordinary literal meaning.

 

It is deliberately left to the reader as an exercise in Bible-searching, using marginal references and concordance, to find the Messianic interpretations which other Scriptures supply.

 

It would be very surprising if this catalogue were exhaustive. But even as it stands, it is not a little impressive. One of its remarkable features is this—a big proportion of these places in Genesis which the Bible itself (mostly the New Testament) uses with reference to Christ would never have been given that kind of meaning by modern readers, if the Bible itself had not led the way. From which fact again it is surely wise to learn how widely different are the best methods of Bible interpretation from those which come naturally to a twentieth-century reader. Our modern education and knowledge are not unmixed blessings.

 

But you may be saying to yourself: “This kind of argument is hardly fair, for a book has been deliberately chosen where there are lots of Messianic anticipations. It is not like this all through the Old Testament.” The objection is a reasonable one. Then instead let two other very unlikely books of the Old Testament be considered—2 Kings and Jeremiah. These have been selected without two minutes’ prior thought. And before any start is made in examination of these, it must be admitted that comparatively few Bible readers would deem either of these books rich in Messianic material.

[Resource Manager]

Christ in 2 Kings

 

1:2, 3 These verses show the fantastic nature of the charge against Jesus in Matt. 10:25. Baalzebub could only bring a man to death, not to health (verse 4).

 

1:10 Marginal references take one to Luke 9:54, 55 and thence to Heb. 12:29; 2 Thess. 1:9; whilst 2 Tim. 1:16, 17 R.V. margin may even be an allusion to this place.

 

2:9 Elisha’s double portion is found to express itself in sixteen recorded miracles as against eight of Elijah’s. And since Elijah is a figure of John the Baptist (Matt. 17:12), who does the greater and less austere Elisha foreshadow? (cp. “that prophet”: John 1:21); cp. verse 15 with Mark 9:15, after the Transfiguration.

 

Ch. 3 Suggests Joel 3:12.

 

Ch. 4 There is surely something typical here. Gehazi goes before with the rod, but cannot heal.  The woman puts her faith in Elisha himself. When he comes, he stretches himself (and yet contracts himself) upon the child, adds his intercession, and at his second coming resurrection takes place. And again (verse 33-44), there is a dearth in the Land, the wild vine is gathered, a means of death to many;  but the food is made wholesome by Elisha’s meal; then loaves and corn are miraculously supplied.

 

Ch. 5 The Gentile cleansed and the unworthy servant punished with an outlawing disease (which is later cured; ch. 8) suggest the grace of God to Gentiles and Jews. Some of the details are very impressive.

 

Ch. 6:1-7 Another type here probably.

 

Ch.6:13-23; Compare Paul’s experiences—persecution, the vision of the Glory, blindness, led into the city, sight restored, food and drink, enmity ceased. Rom. 8:31 and 12:20, 21.

 

Need one go further? And the reign of Hezekiah (so much maligned through misunderstanding of Isaiah 39:8) is the prototype upon which the Messianic prophecies of Isaiah and of many of the Psalms are based.

 

The details concerning Hezekiah provide a framework round which much more Messianic detail can be built;

 

His birth and glory foretold.

His re-consecration of the temple.

His re-institution of the Passover.

His call to those afar off to join in the Passover.

His mediation on behalf of the unclean.

His personal suffering, as a leper, for the sins of the nation.

His miraculous “resurrection” on the third day.

His personal intercession in the Divine presence.

The destruction of the great Enemy through faith in him.     

The great year of Jubilee.

The restoration of captive Judah.

The honour paid him by kings of the earth.

[Resource Manager]

Christ in the prophecy of Jeremiah:

 

The mind goes at once to the great prophecy of the Lord our Righteousness in chapter 23:1-8, and the three superb and detailed chapters (31-33) about the New Covenant and the restoration of Israel, with their appealing pictures of moral regeneration which disallow for ever Jeremiah’s title to the nickname. “The gloomy prophet”.

 

The ultimate regathering of the spiritual Jew, the New Covenant in Jesus Christ and the free forgiveness of sins in him, his abiding Melchizedek priesthood and kingship, the gracious character of his Kingdom—all of these are set forth in three winsome chapters which are mostly honoured with neglect. These are already anticipated in the stirring section: chapter 16:14-21.

 

Chapter 25:15-33 foretells with matchless power and vigour the mighty work of judgment on the nations in the last days; and this is expanded in chapters 46-51 with details of God’s judgments against individual nations. Doubtless these prophetic dooms had a good deal of relevance to the times of Jeremiah. But there are nevertheless indications of further fulfilments yet to come (chapters 48:47 and 49:6, 39), whilst chapters 50, 51 —unmatched anywhere for sustained intensity and unrelieved hostility—supply one figure after another for the grim picture of the apocalyptic overthrow of Babylon in the day of Messiah’s triumph (Rev. 17, 18).

 

But besides all these, which in themselves make Jeremiah one of the most Messianic of the prophets, there are also numerous other more subtle touches which are only to be appreciated against a background of detailed knowledge of the gospels.

 

There is the close resemblance between the circumstances and personal experiences of Jeremiah and Jesus; note on this 1:5, 9 and 11:18, 19 and 37:15 and 38:13, and his attempts to reform a cynical, grasping priesthood, to cleanse the temple of a multitude of abuses, and to renew a spirit of true religion in a people filled with superstitious dependence on formalism.

 

There are also clusters of subtle connections between prophet and gospel. For example: “Is this house, which is called by my name, become a den of robbers in your eyes? Behold, even I have seen it, saith the Lord... They have healed the hurt of the daughter of my people, saying, Peace, peace, when there is no peace... In the time of their visitation, they shall be cast down... No grapes on the vine, nor figs on the fig-tree... Why is not the health of the daughter of my people recovered?... Oh that my head were waters, and mine eyes a fountain of tears, that I might weep day and night for the slain of the daughter of my people... Oh ye women, teach your daughters wailing, and everyone her neighbour lamentation... For death is come up... to cut off the children from without” (chapters 7:11; 8:11, 12, 13, 22; 9:1, 20, 21; cp. Mark 11:15-17; Luke 19:41-44; 20:10; 23:38; Mark 5:26, 41).

 

From the point of view now being considered, the Book of Psalms calls for special attention.

 

Certain of the Psalms are outstanding in their Messianic anticipations and in the interpretation which is given to them in the New Testament. Psalms 2, 3, 16, 18, 22, 40, 41, 45, 69, 72, 109, 110, 116, 118, 133 come readily to mind as falling into this category. But what about the rest? Are they to be read as having no direct association with Christ and his work? Is it that the psalmist, whoever he was, was sometimes inspired to “look into the future, far as eye could see”, whilst at other times he wrote with concentration on his own relation to God or about the glory and majesty of Jehovah, without reference to any particular occasion?

[Resource Manager]

It is a big and complex subject. Here it is only possible to give a few brief suggestions as guidance for a profitable approach.

 

Many of the psalms were certainly written by David (the psalm titles can generally be accepted as authentic). A big proportion of the rest belong almost certainly to the reign of Hezekiah and may have been written by him or by Isaiah (the verbal contacts between Psalms and Isaiah are often quite astonishing). It seems not at all unlikely that the Psalter was completed before the Babylonian Captivity. (This comment is made with knowledge of, but little esteem for, the arguments for dating some psalms to the Babylonian Captivity and the time of the Maccabees.)

 

If this view is correct, that the psalms mainly cluster round the experiences of David and Hezekiah, there is seen to be a big additional reason (besides the natural devoutness of these two kings) why the psalter should be their work: among all the kings of Judah, these two stand out as quite remarkable types of the Messiah in the experiences that befell them. Thus many a psalm can be studied twice over—first, as an expression of the feelings of David or Hezekiah, as the case may be, in circumstances which are often identifiable; and then as a prophecy of Messiah foreshadowed by the experience of a royal forefather. Acts 2:30, 31 (“he seeing this before”) strongly suggests that David knew himself to be rehearsing beforehand in a shadowy way the things that were to come upon “David my servant”, the Messiah.

 

Psa. 41 provides an excellent illustration of how this works out. The circumstances which gave birth to it were, almost certainly, Absalom’s rebellion and the traitorous behaviour of Ahithophel, David’s chief counsellor. Everything in the psalm fits neatly into this framework, especially David’s confession of sin and recognition that these things came upon him in retribution for his own evil deeds—as they doubtless did; in his “Undesigned Coincidences” Blunt shows the chain of circumstances linking Absalom’s rebellion directly to David’s sin with Bathsheba.

 

E.g. read Psalm 104 as his commentary on Isaiah 6:3 R.V. margin; and Psalm 98 is a mosaic of phrases characteristic of Isaiah.

 

But at the Last Supper Jesus appropriated the words of Psalm 41, and applied them to his own betrayal by Judas: “Mine own familiar friend, in whom I trusted, which did eat of my bread, hath lifted up his heel against me” (John 13:18). Again the details fall neatly into place with the big exception of the awkward verse 4: “Lord, be merciful unto me: heal my soul; for I have sinned against thee.” Is this a prophecy of Christ?

 

The same feature crops up in other psalms which the New Testament likewise refers to Jesus: Psa. 40:12; 69:5; 31:10. The explanation of this, which has been a stumbling block to many, is ready to hand in a multitude of scriptures which emphasize that there can be no disowning of the sin of the community of which one is a unit. Daniel confessed the sins of Israel as though they were his own. So also did Nehemiah, Ezra, Jeremiah. No matter how strange this might appear to modern thinking, it is not to be evaded by Bible believers (Dan. 9:5-19; Neh. 1:6, 7; Psa. 106:6; Joshua 6:25, 26; 7:1, 24; 22:20, 18; 24:6, 7; 1 Chron. 15:13; 21:13; Ezra 9:6; 2 Sam. 21:1; Lev. 4:3; 26:40; Isa. 59:8, 9; Jer. 3:25; 10:24; Matt. 18:25; 23:35, 36; Acts 9:4; Rom. 5:12-21).

[Resource Manager]

Hence, then, the apparent incongruity of Messianic prophecies including confessions of sin. It is the Bible’s emphatic teaching that Jesus truly shared the nature of those whom he came to save, and that “the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all”. And if it be asked why these prophecies should state this truth in what might be thought to be misleading language, the primary application of the psalm to David (or Hezekiah, or whoever) supplies the explanation. In the primary sense of the words, it was the literal personal sin of the psalmist. In the more important Messianic sense it was the sin which the Christ came to bear and take away, the sin which was the very reason for his coining into the world, and to which his own nature was so intimately related.

 

It is strongly recommended that as many as possible of the “personal” psalms be studied in this way, as relevant first to the psalmist’s own experiences, and then—in the light of the historical background thus discerned—with reference to Jesus. But it is important to keep clear in mind from the outset that, fascinating though the historical setting of the psalms (and other prophecies) may be, the thing that really matters is the prophetic meaning concerning Jesus.

 

It has been well said that there is another Life of Christ in the Psalms besides the four gospels. One day some one will take this study really seriously and compile a Psalmist’s Life of Christ. It would be a revealing document, and would materially add to present knowledge of the days of his flesh, especially of his own mental struggles about which the gospels say almost nothing, and it would fill out present understanding and appreciation of his future glory. But this could only be done by taking all the psalms, and not merely a handful, as belonging to Christ. Is this a step which the present generation fears to take? Yet it would prove itself as the work went on.

[Resource Manager]

23. “LORD, IS IT I?”

 

“We go to the Bible to be learners, and learners only. We may not even choose our subject; for we go to the Bible in order to learn this very thing, viz. what are the subjects to which Almighty GOD would have us direct our attention.” JOHN WILLIAM BURGON.

 

“And if these lessons be not written in thine heart, then is all the scripture shut up as a kernel in the shell, so that thou mayest read it, and commune of it, and rehearse all the stories of it, and dispute wittily, and he a profound sophister, and yet understand not one jot thereof.” WILLIAM TYNDALE.

 

In the gospels the disciples of Jesus do not always show up in a good light, but one of the most revealing and satisfying glimpses of their collective character is in the account of the Last Supper. When Jesus began to warn them that he was to be betrayed by one who sat with him at the table, the first reaction was: “Lord, is it. I?” Only later did they “look one on another, doubting of whom he spake”. And only after that did they “begin to enquire among themselves, which of them it was that should do this thing”. It was later still that the question was put to Jesus point blank: “Lord, who is it?”

 

So, then, your second question in any piece of Bible study (after the one considered in the previous chapter) is: “Lord, is it I?” Or, when you are reading of Judas: “There, but for the grace of God, go I?” Or, if you are reading of Paul the dauntless: “There, by the grace of God. go I?”

 

Everywhere, in all Bible study, the personal impact of Scripture must be allowed. Indeed, it must be encouraged, for the human heart does not take kindly to the incisive probings of the Holy Spirit, and will never be reluctant to erect its own defences against the Bible’s efficient soul-searching. “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God”; but it is all too easy, in the pursuit of mere knowledge, to miss the most essential aspect of all: “... and it is profitable for...”

 

In the staff-room of a school in Sheffield, the teaching of Scripture by members of the different departments or faculties was a long-standing joke. The geography man had his class draw a map of Palestine with physical features and notes on climate. The English staff required lists of Biblical figures of speech or the re-writing of the parable of the prodigal son as a three-scene play. A modern languages teacher put the French version of the Good Samaritan on the blackboard and had it turned into modern English. The mathematics teacher set about computing the weight of bread needed for the feeding of the five thousand and how far Philip’s two hundred pence would go, whilst the scientist explained laboriously that there was really no miracle at all, and then gave a lesson on how “Mother Nature” does the same thing every year.

 

Such futility!—and all in the sacred name of education and culture.

 

To a less degree the same danger exists in your own Bible study. You are considering the storm on Galilee. How will you go about it?

[Resource Manager]

You will doubtless wish to ascertain whence and where the ship of Jesus was going. You will be curious, no doubt, about this phenomenon of sudden storms of exceptional violence on a small inland lake. You may be interested in the three separate gospel records of this incident as a facet of the Synoptic Problem (the inter-relation of Matthew, Mark, Luke). In a different direction you will have a stimulating time exploring the Old Testament connections of this incident. Getting nearer to the heart of it, you will perhaps give special attention to the character of the disciples as it is revealed in the details here.

 

But if you get up from this study without having asked yourself time and again: “What is the lesson of faith for me in this incident?” you will have masticated the rind and thrown the good of the fruit away. When hit by a cyclone in the vicissitudes of life—and these experiences come to all sooner or later—what is to be your reaction? Will it be: “Save, Lord, we perish”; or differently: “Carest thou not that we perish?” Or yet again: “Jesus is in this ship. Then will God let it sink?” It is in this kind of approach that the simple gospel story proves its worth most of all. You may even turn it to account for the benefit of others by considering that those experienced fishermen might have argued plausibly: “Jesus does not know this lake as we do, or he would not want to cast off now. Let us be sensible, and wait until the danger of a storm has passed. It is not reasonable to ask us to set sail just now.” True enough, if the apostles had refused to sail when Jesus bade them, they would not have had to endure a very frightening experience, but neither also would they ever have seen “the works of the Lord, and his wonders in the deep” and been led to “praise the Lord for his goodness, and for his wonderful works to the children of men”.

 

This little incident is God’s answer to your own problem of evil in a nutshell. But not if you study it as geography or as literature. Always then, and everywhere in the Bible, take your own personal problems with you.

 

You will observe that Jesus sent out his canvassers and preachers in two’s. “The Lord’s ideal team for the job”, was the gruff practical comment of an experienced campaigner, “and the Lord’s ideal committee, too”, he added.

 

You will pause a little longer over the familiar words of Jesus about the cup at the Last Supper being “the new covenant in his blood for the remission of sins”, and will wake up suddenly to the fact that it means your sins, the very things you have done during these past few days which have been such a cause of shame and misery to you. And you will go down to your house justified, and with more comfort to your soul than you would have thought possible.

 

You will read again, with a little more imagination than sometimes, the story of the captive maid daring to tell her mistress that the cure for her master’s leprosy lay with a prophet of a foreign God. And you will ask yourself: Did this wisdom come tripping from her tongue instinctively because she thought so much about these things and spoke them unselfconsciously? Or was her word hesitatingly said, with nervous mien and palpitating heart and only after hours of desperate attempts to muster the needful courage? And whichever way it was, what sort of example does she set to me, and what are the comparable circumstances today when I may be in a position to help by a word of advice or of good cheer?

[Resource Manager]

You will patiently piece together the records of Peter’s denials of his Lord, to find that each of them was itself a vociferous reiteration that Jesus of Nazareth meant nothing to him. And you will probe for an answer to your mystification as to why Peter should ever have risked his own life so far, and after the renewed danger signals and the first cock-crow should still go back again and thrust his head into the jaws of the lion. You will doubtless take special note that it was the presence and look of Jesus which changed the entire situation; it was that which caused Peter to remember too late. And if you have really-entered into Peter’s experience there, you will know that as he went out weeping bitterly, he castigated his wretched soul with the reproach: “Why did I not remember his word of warning earlier? Then I would have been saved all this!” And then you will realize with a feeling of shame that your own denials of your Lord have followed exactly the same pattern—a cocksure playing with fire, and for a plausible enough reason; a gradual change of perspective, with Christ out of sight, and the world all round you and within; and when you are ashamed of your own disloyalty and shut up to your own wretchedness and self-contempt, the thought of the risen Lord’s special message to Peter (Mark 16:7), and his special appearance to him alone (1 Cor. 15:5), will give you heart to believe that one defeat does not make a disaster if only the lesson can be learned. And that lesson is that the man who faces temptation confident of his own powers is bound to fail no matter how high his motive, but the one whose confidence is in the grace of Jesus Christ will rise from his old failures forgiven and reinvigorated for greater achievement than he would have thought possible.

 

Once you have reached the conviction that the men and women who meet you on the pages of Scripture are the same flesh and blood as yourself, with the same kind of impulses and ambitions and weaknesses, you will begin to find your own experiences written beforehand large as life. For this reason the study of Bible characters is not only fascinating in itself but a vast accumulation of examples and warnings set down on the printed page for your benefit.

 

But take care that you do not fall into the common error of confusing a catalogue of facts about king Saul with the developing tragedy of his character. The story of Ruth is not the same as the character of Ruth. If you are to get real benefit from records such as these, you will need to read and read again until each separate episode is as vivid before your mind’s eye as if it came to you on television. You will need to pause and pry into the motive behind every action. Only in this way will these men and women who sleep in dust come to life for your lasting benefit. They will enter into your life as your guides, examples and warnings only in so far as you enter into theirs.

 

You will find that you are identifying yourself with the timidity of Timothy, and will then realize that Paul’s admonitions to his son in the faith are his admonitions to you. You will admire the staunch loyalty of Epaphroditus, and then wake up to the fact that there has been little to match it in your own easy-going existence. You will enter into the bewilderment of John, languishing in prison, as he puzzled over the big disappointment that Jesus of Nazareth, whom he had proclaimed to the nation as the Lamb of God who should take away the sin of the world and as the divine Judge burning up the chaff with unquenchable fire, was showing no sign of fulfilling either of these roles but instead was become a popular preacher and healer drawing vast crowds from all parts of the country. And from John’s dilemma you will learn patience for your own affairs when God’s sense of the fitness of things does not square with your own.

[Resource Manager]

You will sympathize with poor Hosea, tied by divine fiat to a harlot wife whose unfaithfulness left him with three motherless children and—later on—the unpalatable duty of redeeming her from promiscuity and a slave market back to the love of a husband prepared to bury the past. And if it sets you praying God never to test your faith with hardships of this kind, it will perhaps teach you something more of divine grace that God was prepared to do all these things for faithless disloyal Israel.

 

Hosea himself had this knack of seeing the application of Scripture to others besides those actually mentioned in the page of holy writ: “God found him (Jacob) in Bethel, and there he spake with us” (12:4). That pronoun is a plain intimation that Hosea read Genesis 28 as God’s word to himself and his contemporaries—a lesson for the nation about to go into Assyrian captivity, even as it was for Jacob going forth from home to a hard life in that same Assyrian land.

 

This, then, must be an integral part of the equipment of every Christadelphian in the study of the Bible—a constant readiness to relate that which he reads to that which he lives, a faculty for bringing the wisdom, counsel and example of the Word to bear on the affairs, big and small, of everyday life. The professional theologian comes to the Bible with a detached, dispassionate and often critical mind. He is studying a text. For you, “upon whom the revenues of the ages are come” (1 Cor. 10:11), such an approach is near to blasphemy. God has given you this Book not merely to supply information but to mould and fashion your life to the glory of His Name.

 

Harry Whittaker, 1965

[Resource Manager]

APPENDICES

 

A1. BURGON’S QUESTIONS ON GENESIS 1 (see Ch.1)

 

(1)    On which of His creatures is it related that God bestowed names?

(2)    What about the creation of the waters?

(3)    Rehearse in order the works of Creation.

(4)    Describe exactly the food assigned to man.               

(5)    In what terms is the origin of fowls described?

(6)    Are any of God’s works singled out for special commendation?

(7)    How are the names of the sun, moon, and stars introduced?

(8)    Is it said concerning the work of every day, that “God saw that it was good”?

(9)    What is there peculiar in the employment of that sentence concerning the works of the six days?

(10)  What is said (of that kind) concerning the creation of man?

(11)  Over what part of Creation did God first assign to man the dominion?

(12)  Is man’s “dominion”  spoken of before,  or after,  his creation?

(13)  How is Adam mentioned, and out of what is he said to have been created?

(14)  Is Eve alluded to?

(15)  Which divisions of the vegetable kingdom are enumerated, as the work of the third day?

(16)  Is the Creator distinctly said to have pronounced a blessing on Man? on the beasts of the earth? on the fishes of the sea? on the fowls of the air?

(17)  What divisions of time are here mentioned?

(18)  What is said of the food of beasts? fishes? birds? creeping things?

(19)  What is the Earth said to have first brought forth?

(20)  Judging from the italics employed in the KJV, how much of that statement, “He made the stars also”, exists in the Hebrew?

[Resource Manager]

A2. HINTS AND SUGGESTIONS ON EXOD. 2:11-15

 

Suggested answers to the questions on page 39 about Exodus 2:11-15.

 

(a.)  Acts 7:22, 23 fills out the picture. Ex. 2:11 (Heb. and LXX) is literally: “Moses became great.” Heb.11:24 suggests a big occasion when Moses was to be designated heir to the throne of Egypt, and deliberately (and publicly?) refused the honour.

(b.)  Thanks to his mother’s faithful guidance, there would be no time when he did not think of himself as Israelite rather than Egyptian.

(c.)  Amazing humility (Num. 12:3) that he was thus prepared to thrust aside Egyptian honours and think himself one with a race of slaves.

(d.)  The Hebrew word suggests ch. 1:11.

(e.)  Isa. 59:16 and 63:5 suggest: “no man to deliver”, but “looked this way and that way” suggests “no man to hinder”. Which?

(f.)   Adversity makes comrades, not enemies.

(g.)  Quarrelling over the claim of Moses to be their God-sent Deliverer. This is surely right, but there is no proof except by arguing back from Moses being a type of Jesus.

(h.)  “Jehovah” is the correct answer here (see answer to next question). But “appointed by Pharaoh” or “self-appointed” are possible answers, either of which might have been in this Hebrew’s mind. Other examples: Joseph and Jesus, of course.

(i.)   The answer of the three passages is clear-cut and definite: “God was giving them deliverance” through Moses, and they sinned in refusing it. The more usual view that Moses, with the impatience of youth (at 40!), was not prepared to wait God’s good time, is definitely wrong, and a serious slander against the character of Moses. See answer (o).

(j.)   No contradiction. Two different occasions. Heb. 11:27 refers to Ex. 12:37 and 13:17, 18.

(k.)  Pharaoh’s reaction is a clear intimation that Moses’ deed was an open demonstration of an all-out intention to lead Israel to freedom.

(l.)   Very probably Pharaoh attempted this in person in the palace.

(m.) “Fulfilled” suggests a prophecy. Did Moses flee because he was bidden do so by God, and told to stay away for forty years?

(n.)  He dwelt or settled there.   It is surely a mistake to think of him sitting there weary and travel-stained. Other evidence (4:20) suggests his marriage to Zipporah near the end of the forty years.

(o.)  The reproach which Christ himself was to suffer centuries later—rejection by the very people who should have welcomed his leadership.

(p.)  Literally, “he looked away unto the recompense of the reward”. His eyes were not on Egyptian splendour and prosperity, but on the remote Land of Promise (2 Cor. 4:18).

[Resource Manager]

A3. WORTHWHILE BOOKS

 

It has already been said in this volume and it must be said again. There is no Bible study to compare with what you do for yourself. Yet in spite of this, the truth of which every competent Bible student will vouch for, many rush to acquire big collections of books as an easy substitute for personal effort.

 

This Appendix, then, is included with some reluctance, and only because the writer has been badgered many a time with the enquiry: What are the best books to get?

 

It is assumed here that you have already had that question answered for you, and have already equipped yourself with a shelf-full of Christadelphian classics. It is a good idea always to keep one of these going as part of your normal reading. “Two pages a day, year in, year out” is the valuable prescription of a well-read Christadelphian veteran.

 

Personal judgment and enthusiasm vary so considerably that any student’s compilation is likely to provoke a good deal of disagreement from others both as regards titles included and titles omitted.

 

One finds with experience that it is not titles or topics that matter most but authors. Once you become acquainted with a good writer or expositor, the best plan is to lay hands on as many of his works as possible.

 

Most Christadelphian students of the Word are agreed that the modern commentators are by no means as helpful or stimulating as the Victorians. The reason is simple: The Victorians believed the Bible to be the Word of God, the modernists do not. This is not to say that modern scholars are useless. But it is certainly true that you will learn a more wholesome approach to the Bible from the Victorians (and the Puritans) than you will from most of the 20th century authorities.

 

For the Christadelphian, then, the prince of Bible commentators is William Kay, of Lincoln College, Oxford. His “Isaiah” and “Hebrews” in the “Speaker’s” Commentary, his “Psalms” and “Corinthians” are all close-packed, and full of dependable scholarship. These are not works for beginners to browse in. Only when you have done a lot of Bible study for yourself do these books begin to have their true value.

 

By all means comb over any old issues of “The Christadelphian” and “The Testimony” which you may have access to. But read with discrimination. The oldest are not necessarily the best. You must certainly give concentrated attention to the miscellaneous articles by John Carter. If he had written in a more readable style, he would have been a world-beater.

 

But what other books?

[Resource Manager]

There is no attempt here to catalogue the titles which you simply must have. The list would become endless and not necessarily useful, for all students of Holy Scripture do not have the same approach, the same bent. The following are almost random suggestions, dictated largely by the present writers own personal taste.

 

First, a few standard books of reference.

 

Josephus, of course. It used to be possible to pick up a good copy for a shilling. But, alas, those palmy days are gone for ever.

 

You cannot do without a really good Bible Atlas and also a well laid-out Harmony of the Gospels (that published by Black is perhaps the best).

 

One or two detailed volumes on Bible Archeology should be acquired; e.g. Pleiffer’s “Cyclopoedia of Biblical Archeology” and “Documents from Old Testament Times” by D. Winton Thomas. That wee book: “Modern Discovery and the Bible”, by Rendle Short, is full of good material.

 

John William Burgon, preaching at St. Mary’s, Oxford, in the middle of last century, begat some competent spiritual children, among them, C. H. Waller, Griffith Thomas, and Harrington Lees. Any books of theirs are worth getting hold of. The first of these was a contributor to Ellicott’s Commentary. So also, very copiously, was Plumptre, Dean of Canterbury, whose articles in Smith’s Bible Dictionary are also worth careful attention.

 

Fausset was another stimulating expositor of that period. His study of Judges, lately re-printed in America, is the best that has been done on that subject. He also wrote a book on Psalms, and was responsible for half (much the better half) of the Portable Commentary, done in appallingly small print.

 

Here are a few more miscellaneous names to look out for.

 

Ramsey’s “Paul the Traveller” is really good, but his other books don’t compare in quality.

 

The best commentary on Acts is by Rackham. He did nothing else worth talking about.

 

Beginners will enjoy David Smith’s “The Days of His Flesh”, but later on will realise how that volume suffers from neglect of the Old Testament. His “Life and Letters of Paul” is useful, but a bit superficial.

 

Farrar, Dean of Westminster, was a man of astonishing scholarship. All his New Testament work makes useful contributions (especially in the footnotes), but his exposition of Daniel is appalling.

[Resource Manager]

Instead, on Daniel and Isaiah, get Boutflower - if you can.

 

There is lots of good scholarship in Pusey’s “Minor Prophets” and also in his “Daniel”, but this isn’t so good.

 

Some of the volumes in the Cambridge Bible are worthwhile (e.g. Farrar on Luke; Moule on Romans), but there is also a lot of rubbish. Can any good thing come out of Cambridge? Well, now and then.

 

The Tyndale Commentaries are another patchy collection, but anything with Kidney’s name on it (Genesis, Psalms, Proverbs) is worth going for.

 

Don’t look for a decent commentary on Psalms. There isn’t one. Do your own. And indeed, as you progress and increasingly mean business, regarding large areas of both Old and New Testaments you will be driven to this expedient of self-reliance and hard labour.

 

Plummer on any of the gospels is useful, but a bit dull. Trench on Miracles and Parables is wordy but with lots of ideas. On the Sermon on the Mount, Martyn Lloyd-Jones is another wordy writer, but easy to read, whilst our own L. G. Sargent (“Teaching of the Master”), who was never appreciated at his true value, is too compressed and therefore hard work. “Two pages a day!”

 

One or two other general works which are worth a place on your bookshelves:

 

Get acquainted with the Apocrypha. It will fill you in fairly dependably between the Testaments, and will provide much other informative and stimulating reading. Also, an Apocryphal New Testament, if only to learn the sudden and shouting difference between the inspired New Testament and the palpably uninspired stuff that followed.

 

Angus’s “Bible Handbook” is a mine of handy information. Edersheim (especially “The Temple”) and Girdlestone are both very useful. Bullinger’s “How to enjoy the Bible” would be even more enjoyable if he had developed a more exhilarating style of writing.

 

And of course J.J. Blunt’s “Undesigned Coincidences” (reprinted as ‘Undesigned Scriptural Coincidences’) goes without saying.

 

Where does this name-dropping stop?

 

Page Index

Included in File Download

 

ExploringTheBibleWhittaker.pdf