Did Christianity Borrow from the Mystery Religions?

By Pat Zukeran 05/24/15

     Pat Zukeran examines the myths from mystery religions which are sometimes argued to be the source of our Gospel accounts of Jesus. He finds that any such connection is extremely weak and does not detract from the reliability of the gospel message.

     One of the popular ideas being promoted today especially on the internet is the idea that the miracle stories of Jesus were borrowed from ancient pagan myths. Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy write in their book The Laughing Jesus, “Each mystery religion taught its own version of the myth of the dying and resurrecting Godman, who was known by different names in different places. In Egypt, where the mysteries began, he was Osiris. In Greece he became Dionysus, in Asia Minor he is known as Attis, in Syria he is Adonis, in Persia he is Mithras, in Alexandria he is Serapis, to name a few.”{1}

     Proponents of this idea point out that there are several parallels between these pagan myths and the story of Jesus Christ. Parallels including a virgin birth, a divine Son of God, the god dying for mankind, resurrection from the dead, and others are cited. Skeptics allege that Christianity did not present any unique teaching, but borrowed the majority of its tenets from the mystery religions.

     Indeed, some of the alleged parallels appear to be quite striking. One example is the god Mithras. This myth teaches that Mithras was born of a virgin in a cave, that he was a traveling teacher with twelve disciples, promised his disciples eternal life, and sacrificed himself for the world. The god Dionysius miraculously turns water into wine. The Egyptian god Osiris is killed and then resurrects from the dead.

     This position was taught in the nineteenth century by the History of Religions School, but by the mid-twentieth century this view was shown to be false and it was abandoned even by those who believed Christianity was purely a natural religion.{2} Ron Nash wrote, “During a period of time running roughly from about 1890 to 1940, scholars often alleged that primitive Christianity had been heavily influenced by Platonism, Stoicism, the pagan religions, or other movements in the Hellenistic world. Largely as a result of a series of scholarly books and articles written in rebuttal, allegations of early Christianity’s dependence on its Hellenistic environment began to appear much less frequently in the publications of Bible scholars and classical scholars. Today most Bible scholars regard the question as a dead issue.”{3}

Click here to go to source

Dr. Patrick Zukeran is one of the world’s premiere apologists today. He is an author, speaker, world traveler. He is on staff with Probe Ministries and hosts a nationally syndicated radio show Evidence and Answers. He was raised in Hawaii. There is a Chinese Proverb which says, “The person who says it cannot be done should not interrupt the person doing it.” The ministry of apologetics (the defense of the Christian faith…giving answers to skeptics, or those who challenge the validity of Christian beliefs and foundations) is no small task. But when done with skill and precision, it is beautiful.

Guidelines for Interpretation of Prophecy

By John F. Walvoord

     The interpretation of prophecy has its own peculiar problems of interpretation when prophecy reveals some future event or is couched in figurative or apocalyptic form. In some instances it is difficult to determine the precise meaning of the text because there is no corroborative comparison with history. In general, however, prophecy is factual. Because so many prophecies have already been literally fulfilled, the nature of this fulfillment provides guidelines for the interpretation of prophecy which is yet unfulfilled. In addition to the general rules of interpreting the Bible, certain additional guidelines assist the interpretation of prophecy.

     1. As is true in the interpretation of all Scripture, it is most important to determine the meaning of significant words in the interpretation of prophecy. Often these words have a historical background that will help in understanding the reference.

     2. One of the important decisions necessary in the interpretation of prophecy is the determination of whether the prophecy concerns the present or the future, that is, whether it refers to a situation now past or present or is prophetic of future events. A biblical prophet, especially in the Old Testament, often delivered contemporary messages that dealt with current problems which were not necessarily futuristic in their revelation. This problem is compounded by the fact that many times prophecy was given in the past tense, where the writer of Scripture took a position of looking back on the prophecy as if it were already fulfilled. Normally, however, it is possible to determine quickly whether the prophecy deals with the past, present, or the future.

     3. Many prophecies of Scripture were fulfilled shortly after their revelation.  At least half of the prophecies of the Bible have already been fulfilled literally.  Such fulfillment confirms the fact that unfulfilled prophecy will also be literally fulfilled. Fulfilled prophecy is an important guide in interpreting unfulfilled prophecy and generally confirms the concept of literal interpretation of a prophecy.

     4. Prophecies may be conditional or unconditional. This becomes an important aspect of the conclusion that may be reached from the revelation of the prophecy. If a prophecy is conditional, it is possible it will never be fulfilled. If it is unconditional, then it is certain to be fulfilled, regardless of human response. This is an area of confusion in the interpretation of prophecy, as some have assumed that prophecy is conditional when there is no supporting data that indicates this.

     5. Prophecies sometimes have more than one fulfillment. This is referred to as the law of double reference. It is not unusual in Scripture for a prophecy to be partially fulfilled early and then later have a complete fulfillment. Accordingly, what seems to be a partial fulfillment of a prophecy should not be assumed to be the final answer as the future may record a more complete fulfillment.

     6. One of the most important questions in the interpretation of prophecy is whether a prophecy is literal or figurative. As discussed earlier, early in the history of the church, especially in the third century, a school of prophetic interpretation arose in Alexandria that attempted to interpret all the Bible in an allegorical or a nonliteral sense. The influence of this school was one of the major reasons why premillennialism in the early church faded and a form of amillennialism became dominant.

      Though the Alexandrian school of theology is labeled by all theologians as heretical, the effect of nonliteral interpretation on prophecy was rendered acceptable by the theological writings of Augustine who applied allegorical interpretation only to prophecy and not to other forms of Scripture revelation. This influence continued through the Protestant Reformation to the present day.

     Among conservative interpreters of the Bible, the issue of literal versus figurative or allegorical interpretation is a major issue because on it hangs the question as to whether the Bible teaches a future millennial kingdom following the second advent, or whether it does not. Because the church is divided on this issue, full attention should be given to the interpretation of prophecy as this unfolds in the Bible to see what the Scriptures themselves indicate concerning literal versus nonliteral interpretation.

     Confusion also reigns in terminology that sometimes contrasts the literal to the spiritual or the literal to the typical. The nonliteral interpretation of the Bible is not necessarily more spiritual than the literal. The consideration of types in this connection is another confusing aspect. Types, however, depend on the historical fact which is then used as an illustration of a later truth, but it is not prophetic in the ordinary sense. Though it may be demonstrated that most prophecy should be interpreted literally, this does not rule out figurative revelation, allegories, apocalyptic Scriptures, or other forms of nonliteral prophecy. Though it is difficult to deal with these things in the abstract, when studying a particular Scripture, it is not too difficult to determine to what extent it is literal.

     7. Apocalyptic literature is in a place all by itself because all agree that this is not, strictly speaking, literal in its revelation. Outstanding examples, of course, are the books of  Daniel, Ezekiel, and  Revelation. The fact that such revelation is not literal, however, does not deny it reveals specific facts. Here, skill in interpretation is most necessary, and careful comparison of Scripture with Scripture is essential in determining the actual meaning. This will be illustrated as prophecies of Scripture are interpreted.

     As in reading all other types of literature, it may be presumed in studying prophecy that a statement predicting a future event is factual and literal unless there are good reasons for taking it in another sense. Here, the good judgment of the interpreter and avoidance of prejudice and preconceived concepts are most important to let the passage speak for itself.

Head Knowledge vs Heart Knowledge

By Mike Mobley

     “Self-salvation through good works may produce a great deal of moral behaviour in your life, but inside you are miserable. You are always comparing yourself to other people, and you are never sure you are being good enough. You cannot therefore, deal with your hideousness and self-absorption through the moral law, by trying to be a good person through an act of the will. You need a complete transformation of the very motives of your heart.” – Tim Keller, The Reason for God

     When you hear about Jesus, what comes to mind? Who is Jesus to you? Depending on where you live, chances are you might have heard the Gospel before. Even now as you read this you might be saying to yourself “bla bla bla, yes I know the Gospel…move on to the next topic.” When it comes to Jesus, do you know Him in your head or in your heart?

(Pr 3:5–6) 5  Trust in the LORD with all your heart,
and do not lean on your own understanding.
6  In all your ways acknowledge him,
and he will make straight your paths. ESV

Click here to go to source

Evidence for the Unique Inspiration of the Bible

By Gleason Archer Jr.

     BEFORE COMMENCING a higher critical study of the Old Testament, it is appropriate for us to come to terms with the basic question of what kind of book it is. If it is merely a product of human genius, like many other documents upon which religions have been founded, then the data which it presents must be handled in one specific way. That is, these holy writings must be dealt with in purely literary terms, and naturalistic explanations must be found for every feature which appears to be supernatural (such as fulfilled prophecy). If, on the other hand, the thirty-nine books of the Old Testament are inspired by God, employing human instruments to record the truth He revealed to man, then the data must be handled in a quite different fashion. That is to say, everything which might appear to be inconsistent with that standard of accuracy and truth which divine inspiration presupposes  (1)  must be carefully investigated in order to arrive at a satisfactory reconciliation of apparent discrepancies.  Thus the whole line of investigation is profoundly influenced by the premise with which we start.

     This is not the place to enter into a thorough treatment of Christian evidences; that is the province of textbooks on apologetics. But it is appropriate to suggest here, at least in a cursory way, why it is reasonable and proper to start with the premise that the Old Testament is a collection of books inspired by God.

     In the first place, there is significant unity which underlies the entire collection of thirty-nine books in the Old Testament, betraying an organic interconnection which carries through the many centuries during which it was being composed. These books exhibit a remarkable singleness of purpose and program, most reasonably explained as the operation of a single mind, the mind of the divine Author Himself. (2)  (A classic discussion of this aspect of Scripture is found in chap. 2 of James Orr’s Problem of the Old Testament I am adding that 1906 book, James Orr’s Problem of the Old Testament, to Lean-Into-God It begins directly below this.. Though he published this work in 1906,  Orr’s line of argument has never been successfully refuted and is still valid today. 

     Second, of all world religions, only the Hebrew-Christian offers a logically defensible epistemology (science of religious knowledge). The end result of four thousand years of human investigation and philosophic inquiry has, apart from the Bible itself, been hopeless disagreement and confusion in the whole area of religion. Some theorists have urged the manufacturing of a system of ethics and vague theism which they call a world religion. But the fact remains that the tensions between Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Islam are just as sharp today as they ever have been, even though milder methods of propagation or protection are usually employed today than in earlier ages. They still give entirely different answers to the question, “What must I do to be saved?”

     Contrast the situation which prevails in the realms of medicine and science. The many centuries of experimentation and research have resulted in general agreement among all civilized nations as to the basic laws of chemistry and physics. To be sure, the emergence of new data makes necessary the constant revision of the theories and conclusions which scientists publish from year to year; but by and large, the scientific world remains in substantial agreement the world over.

     In the case of religion, however, which deals with questions of the greatest importance for mankind, there has appeared no consensus whatsoever. It often happens that two men who have been reared as brothers in the same home, have enjoyed the same educational advantages, and possess the same degree of intelligence, may hold views of religion which diametrically oppose each other. If it were possible for the tools of human reason and scientific research to lead to valid results in the realm of metaphysics, men of equal education and enlightenment would surely come to some measure of agreement (just as they do in philology or science). Nothing, however, could be further from the case so far as religion is concerned. We are scarcely any nearer to agreement today than our ancestors were four thousand years ago; perhaps even less so, for they had not yet invented atheistic naturalism at that early period. It logically follows that human investigation, even with the most careful and scientific methodology, can lead to nothing more p 23 solid than mere conjecture when it comes to the destiny of the soul and the meaning of life. Man by his own searching cannot find out God; at best he can only conjecture. A guilty defendant before the court can hardly be objective about himself.

     How then can we know God or His will for our lives?  Only if He reveals Himself to us!  Unless He Himself tells us, we can never know for sure the answers to those questions which matter most to us as human beings. At this point it is important to observe that the Bible presents itself to us as the written revelation of God. This purports to be a book in which God gives us the answers to the great questions which concern our soul, and which all the wisdom and science of man are powerless to solve with any degree of certainty. The Bible asserts of itself that it is the special revelation from God; it must therefore be acknowledged as claiming to be the right kind of source from which to derive a trustworthy knowledge of religious truth.  (3)  It comes to us with the claim that the words are from God Himself: “Thus saith the Lord.” If there be a God, and if He is concerned for our salvation, this is the only way (apart from direct revelation from God to each individual of each successive generation) that He could reliably impart this knowledge to us. It must be through a reliable written record such as the Bible purports to be.  (4) 

A Survey of Old Testament Introduction

31 questions to ask for a more Christ-centered 2018

By Don Whitney 1/2018

     Once, when the people of God had become careless in their relationship with Him, the Lord rebuked them through the prophet Haggai. “Consider your ways!” (Haggai 1:5) he declared, urging them to reflect on some of the things happening to them, and to evaluate their slipshod spirituality in light of what God had told them.

     Even those most faithful to God occasionally need to pause and think about the direction of their lives. It’s so easy to bump along from one busy week to another without ever stopping to ponder where we’re going and where we should be going.

     The beginning of a new year is an ideal time to stop, look up, and get our bearings. To that end, here are some questions to ask prayerfully in the presence of God.

     1. What’s one thing you could do this year to increase your enjoyment of God?

     2. What’s the most humanly impossible thing you will ask God to do this year?

     3. What’s the single most important thing you could do to improve the quality of your family life this year?

     4. In which spiritual discipline do you most want to make progress this year, and what will you do about it?

     5. What is the single biggest time-waster in your life, and what will you do about it this year?

     6. What is the most helpful new way you could strengthen your church?

     7. For whose salvation will you pray most fervently this year?

     8. What’s the most important way you will, by God’s grace, try to make this year different from last year?

     9. What one thing could you do to improve your prayer life this year?

     10. What single thing that you plan to do this year will matter most in ten years? In eternity?

     In addition to these ten questions, here are twenty-one more to help you “Consider your ways.” Think on the entire list at one sitting, or answer one question each day for a month.

     11. What’s the most important decision you need to make this year?

     12. What area of your life most needs simplifying, and what’s one way you could simplify in that area?

     13. What’s the most important need you feel burdened to meet this year?

     14. What habit would you most like to establish this year?

     15. Who is the person you most want to encourage this year?

     16. What is your most important financial goal this year, and what is the most important step you can take toward achieving it?

     17. What’s the single most important thing you could do to improve the quality of your work life this year?

     18. What’s one new way you could be a blessing to your pastor (or to another who ministers to you) this year?

     19. What’s one thing you could do this year to enrich the spiritual legacy you will leave to your children and grandchildren?

     20. What book, in addition to the Bible, do you most want to read this year?

     21. What one thing do you most regret about last year, and what will you do about it this year?

     22. What single blessing from God do you want to seek most earnestly this year?

     23. In what area of your life do you most need growth, and what will you do about it this year?

     24. What’s the most important trip you want to take this year?

     25. What skill do you most want to learn or improve this year?

     26. To what need or ministry will you try to give an unprecedented amount this year?

     27. What’s the single most important thing you could do to improve the quality of your commute this year?

     28. What one biblical doctrine do you most want to understand better this year, and what will you do about it?

     29. If those who know you best gave you one piece of advice, what would they say? Would they be right? What will you do about it?

     30. What’s the most important new item you want to buy this year?

     31. In what area of your life do you most need change, and what will you do about it this year?

• 1     Spiritual Disciplines for the Christian Life
• 2     Praying the Bible
• 3     Family Worship
• 4     Ten Questions to Diagnose Your Spiritual Health
• 5     How Can I Be Sure I'm a Christian?: What the Bible Says About Assurance of Salvation (LifeChange)
• 6     Spiritual Disciplines within the Church: Participating Fully in the Body of Christ
• 7     Simplify Your Spiritual Life: Spiritual Disciplines for the Overwhelmed
• 8     The Call to Ministry
• 9     A God Entranced Vision of All Things: The Legacy of Jonathan Edwards
• 10     Spiritual Disciplines for the Christian Life/Ten Questions to Diagnose Your Spiritual Health
• 11     10 Questions to Diagnose Your Spiritual Health [10 QUES TO DIAGNOSE YOUR S -OS]
• 12     The Pure Flame of Devotion: The History of Christian Spirituality
• 13     Finding God in Solitude: The Personal Piety of Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758)
• 14     Onward, Christian Soldiers: Protestants Affirm the Church (Reformation Theology Series)
• 15     By Donald S. Whitney - Family Worship: In the Bible, in History & in Your Home (1905-07-13) [Paperback]

The Synoptic Gospels Explain John

By Lydia McGrew

     1. “He was before me” | The prologue to the Gospel of John is a part of the heritage of the Christian church. Read every Sunday as the “last Gospel” in Catholic and Anglican churches, John 1.1– 14 shows the author of the fourth Gospel at his theologically most profound.

     The prologue is studded with references to John the Baptist, with whom the narrative of the Gospel begins in verse 19. As early as verse 6, the evangelist breaks off his theological discourse to mention a man sent from God whose name was John, who came to bear witness of the light. He then returns in verse 9 to teaching about the true light who lightens all men. John the Baptist comes up again parenthetically in verse 15, immediately after the famous declaration, “The Word was made flesh.”

(Jn 1:14–18) 14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. 15 (John bore witness about him, and cried out, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me ranks before me, because he was before me.’ ”) 16 For from his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace. 17 For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known. ESV

     The words of John the Baptist, emphasized here in an aside, are repeated in due course in the narrative at verse 30.

     Why does the evangelist pause and emphasize those particular words at that point in his discourse? 2 Evidently he takes it that those words of John the Baptist support the points he is making. Why those words, rather than, say, John the Baptist’s statement that Jesus is the Lamb of God or that Jesus would baptize with the Holy Ghost?

     Theologically, the answer does not seem hard to find: John the evangelist seems to be taking John the Baptist’s words “he was before me” to be an assertion of, or at least an allusion to, Jesus’ pre-existence, which he has been teaching in the prologue. But if one looks at the Gospel of John alone, it is not clear why those words should mean that. Could they not mean that Jesus was literally older than John the Baptist? John’s Gospel says nothing to the contrary.

     When one looks at the Gospel of Luke, the significance and the almost pun-like nature of John the Baptist’s words are made clear. Luke 1.26ff is explicit that John the Baptist, the son of Elizabeth, the cousin of Mary, was conceived six months before the angel Gabriel appeared to the virgin Mary to announce that she would conceive and bear the child Jesus. Hence, Jesus came after John the Baptist both in the sense that his ministry began later and also in the human sense that he was six months younger. But he “was before” John the Baptist, if one accepts the doctrine of the Incarnation, in the sense that his existence did not begin with his human conception.

(Lk 1:26–28) 26 In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, 27 to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David. And the virgin’s name was Mary. 28 And he came to her and said, “Greetings, O favored one, the Lord is with you!” ESV

     Could the author of John have counted on his audience’s familiarity with the point about the ages of Jesus and John the Baptist? What if some members of his audience had not read the Gospel of Luke? There are two relevant points here, one of which confirms Luke and one of which confirms John: First, John’s pointed insertion of those words of John the Baptist at that place in his theological argument supports the conclusion that John knew as a fact that Jesus was biologically younger than John the Baptist. This provides confirmation to Luke. A skeptical scholar might conjecture that Luke made up the respective ages of Jesus and John the Baptist in his narrative, or that it was a legendary addition that he copied down, and that it became accepted on that basis, but that is to add an unnecessary layer of explanation. There is no particular theological reason in Luke for making John the Baptist six months older. It simply comes out in the course of the story. The simplest explanation for John’s pointed, theological use of the words of John the Baptist that Jesus “was before him” is that the Gospel author knew that Jesus was biologically younger than John the Baptist and hence that these words could not have referred to biological age.

     On the other side, the fact that John could not be sure that all of his readers would know that John the Baptist was humanly older than Jesus supports at least to some degree the accuracy of his own account of John the Baptist’s words. Suppose, instead, that he made up those words, “He was before me,” and put them into the mouth of John the Baptist for his own theological purposes. His use of them in the prologue makes it clear that he thinks that they do serve his theological ends. But in that case, why would he leave it to chance as to whether his intended audience would get the point? Why be subtle about it? If one considers only John’s Gospel, the point of John the Baptist’s words is theologically unclear and leaves the reader wondering why this is being emphasized just here in this way. It is implausible that an author would go to the trouble to invent words that John the Baptist never said while leaving their point obscure, requiring for their understanding an historical data point that the inventing author does not even mention in his own account. But if John was recounting what John the Baptist actually said, happening to remember it, noting its significance to himself, and mentioning it as a brief aside before getting back to his own theological argument, he may well not have stopped to think about whether all of the relevant background had been fleshed out for his readers.

Hidden in Plain View: Undesigned Coincidences in the Gospels and Acts

Read The Psalms In "1" Year

Psalm 1

1 Blessed is the man
who walks not in the counsel of the wicked,
nor stands in the way of sinners,
nor sits in the seat of scoffers;
2 but his delight is in the law of the LORD,
and on his law he meditates day and night.

3 He is like a tree
planted by streams of water
that yields its fruit in its season,
and its leaf does not wither.
In all that he does, he prospers.
4 The wicked are not so,
but are like chaff that the wind drives away.

5 Therefore the wicked will not stand in the judgment,
nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous;
6 for the LORD knows the way of the righteous,
but the way of the wicked will perish.

Between Two Gardens

By Michael Andres 10/18/2016

     The Bible begins and ends with a garden. In the biblical narrative, God’s story, the garden is a holistic, sacred space of communion and cultivation.

     “In the beginning God created…” (Gen. 1:1). God speaks the world into existence. Everything is made out of nothing. First there is silence, stillness, nothing. Then the divine creative word is uttered, the curtain is opened, and a chorus of comets and quasars, seas and volcanoes, and oaks and toads comes forth. He makes a wonderfully diverse biological community. God is a community – Father, Son, and Holy Spirit – and we, too, are communal by nature, built to live together in harmony. Eden is a community garden.

     God calls creation “good” (Gen. 1:31). Material creation is affirmed. The Creator cares about our physical well-being, as well as our spiritual state. He is the God of soil and skin, as well as souls. The creation is characterized by shalom and justice, well-being and harmony; things are the way they are supposed to be. There is no scarcity, only abundance for everyone. With no lack, no conflict, and no pain, Eden is a peaceful garden.

     In this garden, there is perfect communion between male and female, humans and other creatures, God and all his creation. God walks in the cool of the garden. He relocates from heaven to walk with his people and creation. But there is a unique communion between God and humanity. A relationship has begun, humanity is made in God’s image, demonstrated by God’s communication to the first pair: “Do not eat…” The garden models this communion between human and divine. Eden is a lover’s garden.

     Since the Creator weaves human creatures in his own image, they, too, are designed for creative work. This is a garden, not a wilderness. God is the first gardener, cultivating it to make it blossom. Cultivate means “tillage; improvement; increase of fertility; the bestowing of labor and care upon a plant, so as to develop and improve its qualities.” God develops his creational community. God may be the first gardener, but then humanity is called to cultivate the earth and “to work the ground” (Gen. 2:5). Fruitful labor is part of God’s plan, welfare is not. Eden is a cultivated garden.

     “Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth” (Rev. 21:1). In the new creation, God remains committed to his creation and garden. Fulfilling the eschatological vision of a “beloved community,” in the New Jerusalem (Rev. 21:2, 10-21), God will dwell with His zillions of people, as promised to Abram, in the heavenly Jerusalem, as promised to David. Heaven will be communal, not individualistic. Cities embody culture — town squares, gardens, music, and the arts. The new earth will be a community garden.

     Inhabitants will corporately be the bride at the sumptuous wedding feast of the Lamb (21:2, 9), fulfilling the promise of communion with Immanuel (21:3). We will live in the intimate presence of our covenant God, and sweet, perfect communion is restored. We will be his people, and he will be our God. The new earth will be a lover’s garden.

     For all those who have suffered much oppression and injustice, God will wipe away all their tears. There will be no more death, no more mourning, no more pain (21:4). No pettiness, no abuse, no more lies. No cemeteries or hospitals or psych wards. There will be no disease, no dementia. No more predatory lenders or shotgun houses. For the old order has passed away, the new has come. The new earth will be a peaceable garden.

     Finally, we will return to the garden with its tree of life and where there is no more curse (Rev. 22:1-5). The cursed wildernesses of the sharecropper’s fields are gone. We will once again enjoy the sweet fragrance of the Edenic flowers and trees, taste of its succulent fruits, and lie down in its grassy meadows. The new earth will be a cultivated, restored garden.

     The Bible begins and ends with a garden. But between two gardens lies a fallow field; it is a cursed garden, a cornfield full of pesticides, disputed land between immigrant neighbors, between family farm and corporate agribusiness. It is a sharecropper’s field, a plantation. Between Eden and the new earth, there is the cursed land of thorns, thistles, flooded fields, meth, racial tension, and produce prices and wages too low to live on, marked by the pain, toil and sweat of those afflicted with injustice. This is the ravaged garden we dwell in at present in our lands and towns.

     But in between these two gardens lies a tree, the cross of Jesus Christ. Jesus connects the Garden of Eden with the Garden of Gethsemane and the garden tomb, and, finally, with the restored Garden of the New Earth. By his death and resurrection, reconciliation with God and people is possible, thus restored rural communities. By his death and resurrection, peace and love are possible, as reconciled and reconciling gardeners furrow the ground of their rural spaces and small towns.

     This is Christian community development: cultivators between the two gardens who labor, pray, and bleed alongside those dwelling in the land, our rural and urban communities, know that by the grace of Christ we are cultivating and developing God’s garden. We know what the original plan was, and dare to believe the promise that the garden will flourish once again. We are not there yet. But we are called to cast a compelling vision of creation and new creation, by word and deed, for all God’s people to see. A vision for our churches and communities, and all the weak and vulnerable in our midst, that right now God is cultivating a new garden and new people, and that we can participate as his faithful gardeners.

Click here to go to source

The Inspired Order of the Bible 1

By Dr. Judd W. Patton

     The Bible contains 66 books, thirty-nine in the Old Testament and twenty-seven in the New Testament. While there is no doubt or question that the Bible is complete, the entire Word of God, nevertheless there is a question about the actual number of books and their arrangement or order.

     Would God design His Word with the mark of man on it? That is, man was created on the sixth day of creation week. Six is the mark of man. This theomatic design is seen throughout the Bible. Six and especially sixty-six, which amplifies the element of man, seems, therefore, an unlikely number of books for God to include in His Word.

     Sixty-six books, however, is just a hint of a possible problem. The evidence from the Bible itself is that there are in fact forty-nine books of the Bible arranged in seven divisions. No scripture is lost, or added, by counting them as God does, so don’t get shook up!

     The most dramatic concern is that many of the books of the Bible have been “scrambled,” so to speak, from the order or arrangement as originally canonized and seen in the earliest manuscripts.

     These truths may seem shocking, but they are easily proven. God has, for His own purposes and reasons, permitted this re-arrangement to occur. Nevertheless, the historical evidence and most importantly, the internal evidence of the Bible itself, irrefutably demonstrate the actual number of Bible books and the God-ordained order or sequence of those forty-nine books.

     Again, to state our conclusion up front, there are forty-nine books in seven divisions in a God inspired order. God has put each book in a special position. He did not flip a coin, for example, to decide which book was to be the final one in the Old Testament or which book was to be the first in the New Testament! God could not have designed His Word in a haphazard manner!

     That is because God is not the author of confusion ( 1 Corinthians 14:33 ). The traditional arrangement of the books of the Bible, when contrasted to the Inspired Order, as the author likes to phrase it, will be seen as just that – confusing. The Bible is indeed fitly joined together, God breathed and ordered.

     Throughout this paper the author will refer to the contemporary arrangement of the Bible that all of us are familiar with as the Traditional Order and the original God-ordained order as the Inspired Order.

     This paper seeks to demonstrate and prove this Inspired Order by letting the Bible itself speak about its own order and principles for arrangement. When the correct book order is restored, we’ll discover a marvelous and eye-opening series of insights and a series of connected subjects and organizational logic from Genesis to Revelation. All of the teachings in the Bible become clearer and plainer.

The Influence of Jerome

     The man most responsible for what became our traditional Bible of sixty-six books was the Catholic theologian, Jerome. His Latin Vulgate translation, written between A.D. 382 and 405, with his “new” arrangement of the books for both the Old and New Testaments, became the standard for Protestant scholars and translators. Of a truth once a tradition becomes established, it is difficult to change. Yet Jerome knew better. He had a rationale, a wrong rationale, for making these changes! Regardless, the Tradition lives on today.

     In A.D. 391 Jerome said the following, “As, then, there are twenty-two elementary characters by means of which we write in Hebrew … so we reckon twenty-two books, by which, as by the alphabet of the doctrine of God, a righteous man is instructed…” (1) Yes, Jerome understood that the Hebrew Old Testament contained 22 books coinciding with the 22 letters in the Hebrew alphabet, not 39. And to this day the Jewish translations contain 22 Old Testament books. The books and arrangement or order of the books has never been lost. Even Josephus, in Book 1, Section 8 of his famous work, Antiquities of the Jews, recognized “only 22 books.”

     Concerning the New Testament, E.W. Bullinger in his Companion Bible made this bold statement: “Our English Bibles follow the order as given in the Latin Vulgate. This order, therefore, depends on the arbitrary judgment of one man, Jerome. All theories based on this order rest on human authority, and are thus without any true foundation.” 2 Dr. Bullinger has hit the nail on the head!

     The scholar, now deceased, who has done the most research, in the author’s assessment, on the issue of Bible book order, is Earnest Martin. His 1994 book entitled, Restoring the Original Bible, is the most systemic, documented, referenced and scholarly work on the Inspired Order of the Bible. It used to be available for $24 from his Web site: http://www.askelm.com.

The Continual Burnt Offering (Exodus 29:42)

By H.A. Ironside - 1941

     In Exodus 29:42 we read of a “continual burnt offering” which was ever to be ascending to God from the brazen altar, where the people drew near to meet with the Lord as worshipers, to offer their praises and thanksgiving. Morning by morning and evening by evening a new burnt offering was placed on the altar that there might be no interruption in that which was intended to set forth the adoration of Israel to Him who had redeemed them.

Exodus 29:42 It shall be a regular burnt offering throughout your generations at the entrance of the tent of meeting before the LORD, where I will meet with you, to speak to you there. 43 There I will meet with the people of Israel, and it shall be sanctified by my glory.   ESV

     There is no longer any material altar, nor need of any repetition of the sacrifice of the cross toward which all the oblations of old pointed, but we are exhorted to offer the sacrifice of praise continually. This book of daily meditations has been prepared with that goal in view.

     It is not intended to take the place of daily Bible reading, but rather to offer suggestive helps by focusing the attention on particular passages and offering simple comments designed to move the heart to a deeper sense of responsibility to God and devotion to our Lord Jesus Christ. The notes are mine, some new and others selected from my own books. The poems have been gathered from many sources. --- H.A. Ironside - 1941

January 1

The Maker of the universe
As Man, for man was made a curse.
The claims of Law which He had made,
Unto the uttermost He paid.

His holy fingers made the bough
Which grew the thorns that crowned His brow.
The nails that pierced His hands were mined
In secret places He designed.

He made the forest whence there sprung
The tree on which His body hung.
He died upon a cross of wood,
Yet made the hill on which it stood.

The sky that darkened o’er His head
By Him above the earth was spread.
The sun that hid from Him its face
By His decree was poised in space.

The spear which spilled His precious blood
Was tempered in the fires of God.
The grave in which His form was laid,
Was hewn in rocks His hands had made.

The throne on which He now appears
Was His from everlasting years,
But a new glory crowns His brow,
And every knee to Him shall bow.
--- F. W. Pitt

The Vision Of Creation  Genesis 1:26-2:3

By Alexander MacLaren 1826-1920

     And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in His own image: in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them. And God blessed them: and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so. And God saw every thing that He had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

     Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. And on the seventh day God ended His work which He had made; and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had made. And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it; because that in it He had rested from all His work which God created and made. Genesis 1:26-2:3

     We are not to look to Genesis for a scientific cosmogony, and are not to be disturbed by physicists' criticisms on it as such. Its purpose is quite another, and far more important; namely, to imprint deep and ineffaceable the conviction that the one God created all things. Nor must it be forgotten that this vision of creation was given to people ignorant of natural science, and prone to fall back into surrounding idolatry. The comparison of the creation narratives in Genesis with the cuneiform tablets, with which they evidently are most closely connected, has for its most important result the demonstration of the infinite elevation above their monstrosities and puerilities, of this solemn, steadfast attribution of the creative act to the one God. Here we can only draw out in brief the main points which the narrative brings into prominence.

1.     The revelation which it gives is the truth, obscured to all other men when it was given, that one God in the beginning created the heaven and the earth.' That solemn utterance is the keynote of the whole. The rest but expands it. It was a challenge and a denial for all the beliefs of the nations, the truth of which Israel was the champion and missionary. It swept the heavens and earth clear of the crowd of gods, and showed the One enthroned above, and operative in, all things. We can scarcely estimate the grandeur, the emancipating power, the all-uniting force, of that utterance. It is a worn commonplace to us. It was a strange, thrilling novelty when it was written at the head of this narrative. Then it was in sharp opposition to beliefs that have long been dead to us; but it is still a protest against some living errors. Physical science has not spoken the final word when it has shown us how things came to be as they are. There remains the deeper question, What, or who, originated and guided the processes? And the only answer is the ancient declaration, In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.'  As for me, in 2023, I know these things to be absolutely true in every detail.

2.     The record is as emphatic and as unique in its teaching as to the mode of creation: God said . . . and it was so.' That lifts us above all the poor childish myths of the nations, some of them disgusting, many of them absurd, all of them unworthy. There was no other agency than the putting forth of the divine will. The speech of God is but a symbol of the flashing forth of His will. To us Christians the antique phrase suggests a fulness of meaning not inherent in it, for we have learned to believe that all things were made by Him' whose name is The Word of God'; but, apart from that, the representation here is sublime. He spake, and it was done'; that is the sign-manual of Deity.

3.     The completeness of creation is emphasised. We note, not only the recurrent and it was so,' which declares the perfect correspondence of the result with the divine intention, but also the recurring God saw that it was good.' His ideals are always realised. The divine artist never finds that the embodiment of His thought falls short of His thought.

     What act is all its thought had been? What will but felt the fleshly screen?

     But He has no hindrances nor incompletenesses in His creative work, and the very sabbath rest with which the narrative closes symbolises, not His need of repose, but His perfect accomplishment of His purpose. God ceases from His works because the works were finished,' and He saw that all was very good.

4.     The progressiveness of the creative process is brought into strong relief. The work of the first four days is the preparation of the dwelling-place for the living creatures who are afterwards created to inhabit it. How far the details of these days' work coincide with the order as science has made it out, we are not careful to ask here. The primeval chaos, the separation of the waters above from the waters beneath, the emergence of the land, the beginning of vegetation there, the shining out of the sun as the dense mists cleared, all find confirmation even in modern theories of evolution.  (In 2023 any thinking person who is not afraid of the truth, when many are, knows that evolution is a sad Satanic ruse. But the intention of the whole is much rather to teach that, though the simple utterance of the divine will was the agent of creation, the manner of it was not a sudden calling of the world, as men know it, into being, but majestic, slow advance by stages, each of which rested on the preceding. To apply the old distinction between justification and sanctification, creation was a work, not an act. The Divine Workman, who is always patient, worked slowly then as He does now. Not at a leap, but by deliberate steps, the divine ideal attains realisation.  I disagree, no slow progress, but I have the benefit of over a hundred yeaars.

5.     The creation of living creatures on the fourth and fifth days is so arranged as to lead up to the creation of man as the climax. On the fifth day sea and air are peopled, and their denizens blessed,' for the equal divine love holds every living thing to its heart. On the sixth day the earth is replenished with living creatures. Then, last of all, comes man, the apex of creation. Obviously the purpose of the whole is to concentrate the light on man; and it is a matter of no importance whether the narrative is correct according to zoology, or not. What it says is that God made all the universe, that He prepared the earth for the delight of living creatures, that the happy birds that soar and sing, and the dumb creatures that move through the paths of the seas, and the beasts of the earth, are all His creating, and that man is linked to them, being made on the same day as the latter, and by the same word, but that between man and them all there is a gulf, since he is made in the divine image. That image implies personality, the consciousness of self, the power to say I,' as well as purity. The transition from the work of the first four days to that of creating living things must have had a break. No theory has been able to bridge the chasm without admitting a divine act introducing the new element of life, and none has been able to bridge the gulf between the animal and human consciousness without admitting a divine act introducing the image of God' into the nature common to animal and man. Three facts as to humanity are thrown up into prominence: its possession of the image of God, the equality and eternal interdependence of the sexes, and the lordship over all creatures. Mark especially the remarkable wording of verse 27: created He him male and female created He them.' So neither is the woman without the man, nor the man without the woman.' Each is maimed apart from the other. Both stand side by side, on one level before God. The germ of the most advanced' doctrines of the relations of the sexes is hidden here. In 2023 we think there are many genders and that a man can have a baby. Are we idiots? Yes we are.

The Problem Of The Old Testament

By James Orr 1907

IN 1879, the late William Bross of Chicago, lieutenant-governor of Illinois in 1866–1870, desiring to make some memorial of his son, Nathaniel Bross, who had died in 1856, entered into an agreement with the “Trustees of Lake Forest University,” whereby there was finally transferred to the said Trustees the sum of Forty Thousand Dollars, the income of which was to accumulate in perpetuity for successive periods of ten years, at compound interest, the accumulations of one decade to be spent in the following decade, for the purpose of stimulating the production of the best books or treatises “on the connection, relation, and mutual bearing of any practical science, or history of our race, or the facts in any department of knowledge, with and upon the Christian Religion."

In his deed of gift the founder had in view “the religion of the Bible, composed of the Old and New Testaments of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, as commonly received in the Presbyterian and other evangelical churches.” His object was “to call out the best efforts of the highest talent and the ripest scholarship of the world, to illustrate from science, or any department of knowledge, and to demonstrate, the divine origin and authority of the Christian Scriptures; and, further, to show how both Science and Revelation coincide, and to prove the existence, the providence, or any or all of the attributes of the one living and true God, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable in His being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness and truth.”

At the close of the Trust Agreement, the donor expressed the hope that, by means of this fund, the various authors might, “every ten years, post up the science of the world and show how it illustrates the truth of the Bible, and the existence of God,” and that thereby “the gospel of our blessed Saviour, Jesus Christ, and the glories of His sacrifice and plan of salvation,” might be preached “to the end of time.”

The books or treatises procured by either of the methods described below are to be published as volumes of what is to be known as “The Bross Library.”

The gift thus contemplated in the original agreement of 1879 was finally consummated in 1890. The first decade of the accumulations of interest having closed in 1900, the Trustees of the Bross Fund began at that time the administration of this important trust.

The Trust Agreement prescribes two methods by which the production of books of the above-mentioned character is to be stimulated:—

A. The Trustees of the Bross Fund are empowered to select able scholars, from time to time, to prepare books, upon some theme within the terms of the Trust Agreement, that would “illustrate” or “demonstrate” the Christian Religion, or any phase of it, to the times in which we live.

Ordinarily, the authors of these books are requested to deliver the substance of such books in the form of lectures before Lake Forest College, and any of the general public who may desire to attend them, such courses to be known as The Bross Lectures.

In pursuance of the first method, two writers have already been specially appointed:—

(1) The Reverend President Francis Landey Patton, D.D., LL.D., of the Princeton Theological Seminary, whose lectures on “Obligatory Morality,” delivered in Lake Forest in May, 1903, are being revised and enlarged by the author and will be published in due time by the Trustees of the Bross Fund;

(2) The Reverend Professor Marcus Dods, D.D., of New College, Edinburgh, whose lectures on “The Bible: Its Origin and Nature,” delivered in May, 1904, have already been published as a volume of the Bross Library.

B. The second method for securing books for the Bross Library is as follows:—

One or more premiums or prizes are to be offered during each decade, the competition for which was to be thrown open to “the scientific men, the Christian philosophers and historians of all nations.”

Accordingly, in 1902, a prize of Six Thousand Dollars ($6,000) was offered for the best book fulfilling any of the purposes described in the foregoing extracts from the Trust Agreement, the manuscripts to be presented on or before June 1, 1905.

The following were appointed a Committee of Judges to make the award: the Reverend George Trumbull Ladd, D.D., LL.D., Professor of Moral Philosophy, Yale University; Alexander Thomas Ormond, Ph.D., LL.D., Professor of Philosophy, Princeton University, and the Reverend George Frederick Wright, D.D., LL.D., Professor of the Harmony of Science and Revelation, Oberlin College.

The authorship of the various essays was not known to the judges until after the award was made, the undersigned having been the custodian of the sealed envelopes containing the names of the writers of the respective manuscripts.

The Committee of Judges has unanimously awarded the Bross Prize of 1905 to the essay entitled “The Problem of the Old Testament,” which is now issued as Volume III of the Bross Library.

The next Bross prize will be offered about 1915, and will be announced in due time by the Trustees of the Bross Fund.

The Trust Agreement requires that once in every thirty or fifty years (according as the Trustees of the fund may decide at the time) the entire sum of simple interest accumulated during the previous decade is to be offered as a single premium or prize for a competition similar to the one which has just been completed.

RICHARD D. HARLAN,
President of Lake Forest College.

LAKE FOREST, ILLINOIS,
NOVEMBER, 1905.

The Problem of the Old Testament

Origin Of All The Basic Entities Of The Universe And Of Life

By Henry M. Morris March 1976

(1) Origin of the universe
The Book of Genesis stands alone in accounting for the actual creation of the basic space-mass-time continuum which constitutes our physical universe. Genesis 1:1 is unique in all literature, science, and philosophy. Every other system of cosmogony, whether in ancient religious myths or modern scientific models, starts with eternal matter or energy in some form, from which other entities were supposedly gradually derived by some process.

Only the Book of Genesis even attempts to account for the ultimate origin of matter, space, and time; and it does so uniquely in terms of special creation.

(2) Origin of order and complexity
Man’s universal observation, both in his personal experience and in his formal study of physical and biological systems, is that orderly and complex things tend naturally to decay into disorder and simplicity. Order and complexity never arise spontaneously—they are always generated by a prior cause programmed to produce such order. The Primeval Programmer and His programmed purposes are found only in Genesis.

(3) Origin of the solar system
The earth, as well as the sun and moon, and even the planets and all the stars of heaven, were likewise brought into existence by the Creator, as told in Genesis. It is small wonder that modern scientific cosmogonists have been so notably unsuccessful in attempting to devise naturalistic theories of the origin of the universe and the solar system.

(4) Origin of the atmosphere and hydrosphere
The earth is uniquely equipped with a great body of liquid water and an extensive blanket of an oxygen-nitrogen gaseous mixture, both of which are necessary for life. These have never “developed” on other planets, and are accounted for only by special creation.

(5) Origin of life
How living systems could have come into being from nonliving chemicals is, and will undoubtedly continue to be, a total mystery to materialistic philosophers. The marvels of the reproductive process, and the almost-infinite complexity programmed into the genetic systems of plants and animals, are inexplicable except by special creation, at least if the laws of thermodynamics and probability mean anything at all. The account of the creation of “living creatures” in Genesis is the only rational explanation.

(6) Origin of man
Man is the most highly organized and complex entity in the universe, so far as we know, possessing not only innumerable intricate physico-chemical structures, and the marvelous capacities of life and reproduction, but also a nature which contemplates the abstract entities of beauty and love and worship, and which is capable of philosophizing about its own meaning. Man’s imaginary evolutionary descent from animal ancestors is altogether illusory. The true record of his origin is given only in Genesis.

(7) Origin of marriage
The remarkably universal and stable institution of marriage and the home, in a monogamous, patriarchal social culture, is likewise described in Genesis as having been ordained by the Creator. Polygamy, infanticide, matriarchy, promiscuity, divorce, abortion, homosexuality, and other corruptions all developed later.

(8) Origin of evil
Cause-and-effect reasoning accounts for the origin of the concepts of goodness, truth, beauty, love, and such things as fundamental attributes of the Creator Himself. The origin of physical and moral evils in the universe is explained in Genesis as a temporary intrusion into God’s perfect world, allowed by Him as a concession to the principle of human freedom and responsibility, and also to manifest Himself as Redeemer as well as Creator.

(9) Origin of language
The gulf between the chatterings of animals and the intelligent, abstract, symbolic communication systems of man is completely unbridgeable by any evolutionary process. The Book of Genesis not only accounts for the origin of language in general, but also for the various national languages in particular.

(10) Origin of government
The development of organized systems of human government is described in Genesis, with man responsible not only for his own actions, but also for the maintenance of orderly social structures through systems of laws and punishments.

(11) Origin of culture
The Book of Genesis also describes the beginning of the main entities which we now associate with civilized cultures—such things as urbanization, metallurgy, music, agriculture, animal husbandry, writing, education, navigation, textiles, and ceramics.

(12) Origin of nations
All scholars today accept the essential unity of the human race. The problem, then, is how distinct nations and races could develop if all men originally were of one race and one language. Only the Book of Genesis gives an adequate answer.

(13) Origin of religion
There are many different religions among men, but all share the consciousness that there must be some ultimate truth and meaning toward which men should strive. Many religions take the form of an organized system of worship and conduct. The origin of this unique characteristic of man’s consciousness, as well as the origin of true worship of the true God, is given in Genesis.

(14) Origin of the chosen people
The enigma of the Israelites—the unique nation that was without a homeland for nineteen hundred years, which gave to the world the Bible and the knowledge of the true God, through which came Christianity and which yet rejects Christianity, a nation which has contributed signally to the world’s art, music, science, finance, and other products of the human mind, and which is nevertheless despised by great numbers of people—is answered only in terms of the unique origin of Israel as set forth in the Book of Genesis.

The Book of Genesis thus is in reality the foundation of all true history, as well as of true science and true philosophy. It is above all else the foundation of God’s revelation, as given in the Bible. No other book of the Bible is quoted as copiously or referred to so frequently, in other books of the Bible, as is Genesis.

The Genesis Record: A Scientific and Devotional Commentary on the Book of Beginnings

The Institutes of the Christian Religion

Translated by Henry Beveridge

__________________________________________________________________

[149] See Calvin Adv. Theolog. Parisienses, Art. 2. These two rocks are adverted to by Augustine, Ep. 47, et in Joannem, cap. 12.

[150] The French is, "Laquelle toutefois nous cognoistrons etre très-utile et qui plue est, etre un des fondemens de la religion;"--which, however, we shall know to be very useful, and what is more, to be one of the fundamentals of religion.

[151] The French adds, "pour en dire franchement ce qu en est;"--to speak of them frankly as they deserve.

[152] The French adds the explanation, "Assavoir ceux qui concernoyent la vie celeste;"that is to say, those which concern the heavenly life.

[153] Orig. De Principiis, Lib. 3. It is given by Lombard, Lib. 2 Dist 24 Bernard. de Grat. et Liber Arbit Anselm, Dialog. de Liber. Arbit. cap. 12, 13 Lombard, Lib. 2 Dist. 24 sec. 5.

[154] The French adds ("qu'en attribue ? St Ambroise");--which is attributed St. Ambrose.

[155] August. Lib. 1 cont. Julian. For the subsequent quotations, see Homil. 53, in Joannem; Ad Anast. Epist. 144; De Perf. Just; Eucher. ad Laur. c. 30; Idem ad Bonifac. Lib. 3 c. 8; Ibid. c. 7; Idem ad Bonifac. Lib 1 c. 3; Ibid. Lib. 3 cap. 7; Idem. Lib. de Verbis Apost. Serm. 3; Lib. de Spiritu et Litera. cap. 30.

[156] See August. de Corrept. et Grat. cap. 13. Adv. Lib. Arbit. See also August. Epist. 107. Also the first and last parts of Bernard's Treatise De Gratia et Libero Arbitrio.

[157] August. de Prædest. Sanct. Idem ad Bonifacum, Lib. 4 et alibi. Eucher. Lib in Genesin. Chrysost. Homil. in Adventu.

[158] The French adds, "Ancien evesque de Lion;" ancient bishop of Lyons.

[159] The French has, "Au commencement de ce traité;" at the commencment of this treatise.

[160] The French adds, "Si c'est parole diabolique celle qui exalte homme en soy'mesme, il ne nous lui faut donner lieu, sinon que nous veuillins prendre conseli de nostre ennemi;"--if words which exalt man in himself are devilish, we must not give place to them unless we would take counsel of our enemy.

[161] Chrysost. Homil. de Perf. Evang. August. Epist. 56 ad Discur. As to true humility, see infra, chap. 7 sec. 4, and lib. 3 c 12, sec. 6, 7.

[162] The French is, "Demosthene orateur Grec;"--the Greek orator Demosthenes.

[163] August. Homil. in Joann. 49, lib. de Natura et Gratia, cap. 52.; and in Psalms 45. set 70

[164] The French adds, "de ce que l'ame savoit avant qu'etre mis dedlans le corps;"--of what the soul knew before it was placed within the body.

[165] The French adds, "Or l'entendement humaiu a eté tel en cest endroit. Nous appercevons donques qu'il est du tout stupide;" now, the understanding has proved so in this matter. We see, therefore, that it is quitestupid.

[166] Calvin, in his Commentary on the passage, says, "Lost in part or appearance, or deserved to lose."

__________________________________________________________________

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

How Sin Came In  Genesis 3:1-15

By Alexander MacLaren 1826-1920

     Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know, that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened; and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat; and gave also unto her husband with her, and he did eat. And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig-leaves together, and made themselves aprons. And they heard the voice of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God amongst the trees of the garden. And the Lord God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou? And he said, I heard Thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself. And He said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat And the man said, The woman whom Thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat. And the Lord God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? and the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat. And the Lord God said onto the serpent. Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field: upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life. 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 3:1-15

     It is no part of my purpose to enter on the critical questions connected with the story of the fall. Whether it is a legend, purified and elevated, or not, is of less consequence than what is its moral and religious significance, and that significance is unaffected by the answer to the former question. The story presupposes that primitive man was in a state of ignorant innocence, not of intellectual or moral perfection, and it tells how that ignorant innocence came to pass into conscious sin. What are the stages of the transition?

1.     There is the presentation of inducement to evil. The law to which Adam is to be obedient is in the simplest form. There is restriction. Thou shalt not' is the first form of law, and it is a form congruous with the undeveloped, though as yet innocent, nature ascribed to him. The conception of duty is present, though in a very rudimentary shape. An innocent being may be aware of limitations, though as yet not knowing good and evil.' With deep truth the story represents the first suggestion of disobedience as presented from without. No doubt, it might have by degrees arisen from within, but the thought that it was imported from another sphere of being suggests that it is alien to true manhood, and that, if brought in from without, it may be cast out again. And the temptation had a personal source. There are beings who desire to draw men away from God. The serpent, by its poison and its loathly form, is the natural symbol of such an enemy of man. The insinuating slyness of the suggestions of evil is like the sinuous gliding of the snake, and truly represents the process by which temptation found its way into the hearts of the first pair, and of all their descendants. For it begins with casting a doubt on the reality of the prohibition. Hath God said?' is the first parallel opened by the besieger. The fascinations of the forbidden fruit are not dangled at first before Eve, but an apparently innocent doubt is filtered into her ear. And is not that the way in which we are still snared? The reality of moral distinctions, the essential wrongness of the sin, is obscured by a mist of sophistication. There is no harm in it' steals into some young man's or woman's mind about things that were forbidden at home, and they are half conquered before they know that they have been attacked. Then comes the next besieger's trench, much nearer the wall—namely, denial of the fatal consequences of the sin: Ye shall not surely die,' and a base hint that the prohibition was meant, not as a parapet to keep from falling headlong into the abyss, but as a barrier to keep from rising to a great good; for God doth know, that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods.' These are still the two lies which wile us to sin: It will do you no harm,' and You are cheating yourselves out of good by not doing it.'

2.     Then comes the yielding to the tempter. As long as the prohibition was undoubted, and the fatal results certain, the fascinations of the forbidden thing were not felt. But as soon as these were tampered with, Eve saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes.' So it is still. Weaken the awe-inspiring sense of God's command, and of the ruin that follows the breach of it, and the heart of man is like a city without walls, into which any enemy can march unhindered. So long as God's Thou shalt not, lest thou die' rings in the ears, the eyes see little beauty in the sirens that sing and beckon. But once that awful voice is deadened, they charm, and allure to dally with them.

     In the undeveloped condition of primitive man temptation could only assail him through the senses and appetites, and its assault would be the more irresistible because reflection and experience were not yet his. But the act of yielding was, as sin ever is, a deliberate choice to please self and disobey God. The woman's more emotional, sensitive, compliant nature made her the first victim, and her greatest glory, her craving to share her good with him whom she loves, and her power to sway his will and acts, made her his temptress. As the husband is, the wife is,' says Tennyson; but the converse is even truer: As the wife is, the man is.

3.     The fatal consequences came with a rush. There is a gulf between being tempted and sinning, but the results of the sin are closely knit to it. They come automatically, as surely as a stream from a fountain. The promise of knowing good and evil was indeed kept, but instead of its making the sinners like gods,' it showed them that they were like beasts, and brought the first sense of shame. To know evil was, no doubt, a forward step intellectually; but to know it by experience, and as part of themselves, necessarily changed their ignorant innocence into bitter knowledge, and conscience awoke to rebuke them. The first thing that their opened eyes saw was themselves, and the immediate result of the sight was the first blush of shame. Before, they had walked in innocent unconsciousness, like angels or infants; now they had knowledge of good and evil, because their sin had made evil a part of themselves, and the knowledge was bitter. The second consequence of the fall is the disturbed relation with God, which is presented in the highly symbolical form fitting for early ages, and as true and impressive for the twentieth century as for them. Sin broke familiar communion with God, turned Him into a fear and a dread,' and sent the guilty pair into ambush. Is not that deeply and perpetually true? The sun seen through mists becomes a lurid ball of scowling fire. The impulse is to hide from God, or to get rid of thoughts of Him. And when He is felt to be near, it is as a questioner, bringing sin to mind. The shuffling excuses, which venture even to throw the blame of sin on God (the woman whom Thou gavest me'), or which try to palliate it as a mistake (the serpent beguiled me'), have to come at last, however reluctantly, to confess that I' did the sin. Each has to say, I did eat.' So shall we all have to do. We may throw the blame on circumstances, weakness of judgment, and the like, while here, but at God's bar we shall have to say, Mea culpa, mea culpa.'

     The curse pronounced on the serpent takes its habit and form as an emblem of the degradation of the personal tempter, and of the perennial antagonism between him and mankind, while even at that first hour of sin and retribution a gleam of hope, like the stray beam that steals through a gap in a thundercloud, promises that the conquered shall one day be the conqueror, and that the woman's seed, though wounded in the struggle, shall one day crush the poison-bearing, flat head in the dust, and end forever his power to harm. Known unto God are all his works from the beginning,' and the Christ was promised ere the gates of Eden were shut on the exiles.