Did the Gospel Authors Think They Were Writing Scripture?

By Michael J. Kruger 3/13/2017

     One of the most common misconceptions about the New Testament canon is that the authors of these writings had no idea that they were writing Scripture-like books. I dealt with this misconception on a general level here, showing that there was a clear apostolic self-awareness amongst the New Testament authors.

     While this apostolic self-awareness may be easy to show for authors like Paul, what about the gospels which, technically speaking, are formally anonymous? Do their authors exhibit awareness that they were writing something like Scripture? To explore this further, let us just consider just one of our gospels, namely the Gospel of Matthew.

     The first step is to get our expectations clear. We should not expect that Matthew would say something like, “I, Matthew, am writing Scripture as I write this book.” Gospels are a very different genre than epistles, and we would not expect the authors to provide the same type of direct and explicit statements about their own authority as Paul does in his letters. Indeed, the gospel authors are decidedly behind the scenes and only rarely make appearances within the flow of the story.

Click here to go to source

Books by Michael J. Kruger -

Canon Revisited: Establishing the Origins and Authority of the New Testament Books
The Question of Canon: Challenging the Status Quo in the New Testament Debate
A Biblical-Theological Introduction to the New Testament: The Gospel Realized
The Heresy of Orthodoxy: How Contemporary Culture's Fascination with Diversity Has Reshaped Our Understanding of Early Christianity
The Early Text of the New Testament

Do Our Churches Preach Cheap Grace?

By Matthew J. Tuininga 3/14/2017

     The gospel always leads to righteousness. Grace always leads to life. Having been reconciled to God by Jesus’ death, we are enabled to practice love, justice, mercy and peace through the indestructible power of his life.

     Grace that fails to produce such righteousness is what Dietrich Bonhoeffer called “cheap grace.” It rests on the illusion that grace involves endless affirmation and endless forgiveness. It conflates salvation with justification, the gospel with the forgiveness of sins. It seems loving to us, but it expresses the easy kind of love that costs us nothing. It proclaims the comfort of the gospel but robs it of its power to give life.

     Christians often counter the danger of cheap grace by emphasizing that, having been saved through Christ, we are now called to demonstrate our gratitude to God by obeying his law. Yet emphasizing a return to the law merely distorts our understanding of the Christian life. It tempts us to view our practice of righteousness merely as a response to the gospel, rather than as the working of the gospel itself in our lives. It turns the practice of righteousness into a burden, an endless debt of gratitude that we can never possibly repay.

Click here to go to source

     Matthew J. Tuininga: Assistant Professor of Moral Theology at Calvin Theological Seminary in Grand Rapids, Michigan. I received my Ph.D. in Religion, Ethics and Society at Emory University, writing my dissertation on John Calvin’s two kingdoms theory, and my M.Div. at Westminster Seminary California. I formerly served as a counter-terrorism intelligence analyst in the Federal Bureau of Investigation and as a legislative correspondent for Florida Congressman Dave Weldon. I preach and speak regularly and am available for requests via the Contact page on this blog.

     The purpose of this blog is to serve as a way for me to discuss my reflections on public issues of concern to Christians and the Christian church. While I will discuss the tradition of Christian political theological reflection from time to time, much of what I post will simply draw attention to events, problems, and books, suggesting ways to make sense of them. My aim is not to tell my readers what to think. Thoughtful Christians understand that no one has the expertise to provide authoritative interpretations or judgments regarding the complex events in the world around us. My hope, rather, is to offer reflections that serve as a guide, that point readers to the events and issues that matter, and that provide perspective informed by the Reformed and Christian traditions. I welcome feedback. The purpose of this blog is to raise questions and provoke reflection, not to function as an electronic pulpit.

If God knew that Satan would rebel, why did He create him?

By Got Questions.org

     Answer: This is a two-part question. The first part is “Did God know Satan would rebel?” We know from Scripture that God is omniscient, which literally means “all-knowing.” Job 37:16; Psalm 139:2–4, 147:5; Proverbs 5:21; Isaiah 46:9-10; and 1 John 3:19–20 leave no doubt that God’s knowledge is infinite and that He knows everything that has happened in the past, is happening now, and will happen in the future.

     Looking at some of the superlatives in these verses—“perfect in knowledge”; “his understanding has no limit”; “he knows everything”—it is clear that God’s knowledge is not merely greater than our own, but it is infinitely greater. He knows all things in totality. If God’s knowledge is not perfect, then there is a deficiency in His nature. Any deficiency in God’s nature means He cannot be God, for God’s very essence requires the perfection of all His attributes. Therefore, the answer to the first question is “yes, God knew that Satan would rebel.”

     Moving on to the second part of the question, “Why did God create Satan knowing ahead of time he was going to rebel?” This question is a little trickier because we are asking a “why” question to which the Bible does not usually provide comprehensive answers. Despite that, we should be able to come to a limited understanding. We have already seen that God is omniscient. So, if God knew that Satan would rebel and fall from heaven, yet He created him anyway, it must mean that the fall of Satan was part of God’s sovereign plan from the beginning. No other answer makes sense given what we’ve seen thus far.

Click here to go to source

Why was Jesus Born To The Tribe Of Judah?

By One For Israel

     You can choose your friends, as they say, but you can’t choose your family. But actually, God could do exactly that! And that’s what he did. He chose his own family tree, ahead of time. First of all, he chose Abraham to carry his “seed”. He then chose Isaac (Abraham’s second born), and then Jacob (Isaac’s second born). Yet of all Jacob’s twelve sons, for some reason God goes for Judah – the fourth in line. If this seems a bit puzzling to you, you are not alone. The choice of Judah over all the other brothers is a bit of a mystery, and the Bible does not give an explicit reason for it.

     Some have suggested that the first three brothers disqualified themselves by their unrighteous behavior. Reuben, the firstborn, violated his father’s concubine, while Simeon and Levi went on to deceive and kill the men of Shechem in revenge for the rape of their sister; plundering their households. However, there are a few problems with thinking that righteousness “earns” the choice of God, or that lack of righteousness forfeits it. Firstly, their father Jacob was far from pure, yet he was clearly chosen. Secondly, Judah was not someone we could easily equate with righteousness either. Read what he does in Genesis 38… it’s scandalous! He ends up admitting to an unmarried woman with whom he had slept (having thought that she was a prostitute) that she was more righteous than he. Not ideal.

     It is true that we see a change in character for the better as the story progresses. In contrast to his earlier betrayal of Joseph, he later offers his own life as a pledge to his father that he will take care of Joseph’s little brother, Benjamin. In Genesis 44:33, he has to put his money where his mouth is, and offers to take Benjamin’s place when Joseph demands that he stays in Egypt as a slave: “Now therefore, please let your servant remain instead of the boy as a servant to my lord, and let the boy go back with his brothers.” Judah’s self-sacrificial offer was a prelude to the Redeemer who would later take our place of punishment on the cross. Could it be that due to this act, Judah was chosen? But even if we are impressed with Judah’s character growth and see his actions as pointing to the Messiah, surely Joseph outstrips him on both counts!

Click here to go to source

Read The Psalms In "1" Year

Psalm 31

Into Your Hand I Commit My Spirit
31 To The Choirmaster. A Psalm Of David.

9 Be gracious to me, O LORD, for I am in distress;
my eye is wasted from grief;
my soul and my body also.
10 For my life is spent with sorrow,
and my years with sighing;
my strength fails because of my iniquity,
and my bones waste away.

11 Because of all my adversaries I have become a reproach,
especially to my neighbors,
and an object of dread to my acquaintances;
those who see me in the street flee from me.
12 I have been forgotten like one who is dead;
I have become like a broken vessel.
13 For I hear the whispering of many—
terror on every side!—
as they scheme together against me,
as they plot to take my life.

ESV Reformation Study

Why the Muratorian Fragment is a Big Deal and What You Need to Know About It

By Alisa Childers 3/13/2017

     ​In order to diminish the importance and relevance of the Bible, it's common for skeptics to point out that the early Christians didn't even have an official Bible. They claim that what we now call the "New Testament" wasn't compiled until hundreds of years after the life of Christ and the Apostles, when church councils convened to decide which books were "in" and which ones were "out." Famously, Dan Brown, in his best-selling book,The DaVinci Code, even alleged that the Emperor Constantine chose the books at the council of Nicaea in AD 325. (1)

     The Muratorian Fragment is a big deal because its very existence is evidence that these notions are not true.

     Sometimes called the "Muratorian Canon," the fragment is an ancient manuscript that includes a list of New Testament books. While the fragment itself dates from the 7th or 8th century, the list of biblical books it contains dates from around AD 180. (2) Other than a highly abridged collection by the heretic Marcion, it is the oldest list of New Testament books we have, and it affirms 22 out of the 27 books. This is remarkably early to have such a comprehensive canon.

Click here to go to source

     I am currently a member of Grace Chapel Church in Franklin, TN and an artist in residence at Whitewater Crossing Christian Church in Cleves, Ohio.

     Feel free to contact me with any questions or subjects you would like me to write about.

The Institutes of the Christian Religion

Translated by Henry Beveridge

     CHAPTER 5.

OF THE MODES OF SUPPLEMENTING SATISFACTION--VIZ. INDULGENCES AND PURGATORY.

Divisions of the chapter,--I. A summary description and refutation of Popish indulgences, sec. 1, 2. II. Confutation by Leo and Augustine. Answer to two objections urged in support of them, sec. 3, 4. A profane love of filthy lucre on the part of the Pope. The origin of indulgences unfolded, sec. 5. III. An examination of Popish purgatory. Its horrible impiety, sec. 6. An explanation of five passages of Scripture by which Sophists endeavor to support that dream, sec. 7, 8. Sentiments of the ancient Theologians concerning purgatory, sec. 10.

Sections.

1. The dogma of satisfaction the parent of indulgences. Vanity of both. The reason of it. Evidence of the avarice of the Pope and the Romish clergy: also of the blindness with which the Christian world was smitten

2. View of indulgences given by the Sophists. Their true nature. Refutation of them. Refutation confirmed by seven passages of Scripture.

3. Confirmed also by the testimony of Leo, a Roman Bishop, and by Augustine. Attempts of the Popish doctors to establish the monstrous doctrine of indulgences, and even support it by Apostolical authority. First answer.

4. Second answer to the passage of an Apostle adduced to support the dogma of indulgences. Answer confirmed by a comparison with other passages, and from a passage in Augustine, explaining the Apostle's meaning. Another passage from the same Apostle confirming this view.

5. The Pope's profane thirst for filthy lucre exposed. The origin of indulgences.

6. Examination of the fictitious purgatory of the Papists. 1. From the nature of the thing itself. 2. From the authority of God. 3. From the consideration of the merit of Christ, which is destroyed by this fiction. Purgatory, what it is. 4. From the impiety teeming from this fountain.

7. Exposition of the passages of Scripture quoted in support of purgatory. 1. Of the Impardonable sin, from which it is inferred that there are some sins afterwards to be forgiven. 2. Of the passage as to paying the last farthing.

8. 3. The passage concerning the bending of the knee to Christ by things under the earth. 4. The example of Judas Maccabaeus in sending an oblation for the dead to Jerusalem.

9. 5. Of the fire which shall try every man's work. The sentiment of the ancient theologians. Answer, containing a reductio ad absurdum. Confirmation by a passage of Augustine. The meaning of the Apostle. What to be understood by fire. A clear exposition of the metaphor. The day of the Lord. How those who suffer loss are saved by fire.

10. The doctrine of purgatory ancient, but refuted by a more ancient Apostle. Not supported by ancient writers, by Scripture, or solid argument. Introduced by custom and a zeal not duly regulated by the word of God. Ancient writers, as Augustine, speak doubtfully in commending prayer for the dead. At all events, we must hold by the word of God, which rejects this fiction. A vast difference between the more ancient and the more modern builders of purgatory. This shown by comparing them.

1. From this dogma of satisfaction that of indulgences takes its rise. For the pretence is, that what is wanting to our own ability is hereby supplied; and they go the insane length of defining them to be a dispensation of the merits of Christ, and the martyrs which the Pope makes by his bulls. Though they are fitter for hellebore than for argument,--and it is scarcely worth while to refute these frivolous errors, which, already battered down, begin of their own accord to grow antiquated, and totter to their fall;--yet, as a brief refutation may be useful to some of the unlearned, I will not omit it. Indeed, the fact that indulgences have so long stood safe and with impunity, and wantoned with so much fury and tyranny, may be regarded as a proof into how deep a night of ignorance mankind were for some ages plunged. They saw themselves insulted openly, and without disguise, by the Pope and his bull-bearers; they saw the salvation of the soul made the subject of a lucrative traffic, salvation taxed at a few pieces of money, nothing given gratuitously; they saw what was squeezed from them in the form of oblations basely consumed on strumpets, pimps and gluttony, the loudest trumpeters of indulgences being the greatest despisers; they saw the monster stalking abroad, and every day luxuriating with greater license, and that without end, new bulls being constantly issued, and new sums extracted. Still indulgences were received with the greatest reverence, worshipped, and bought. Even those who saw more clearly than others deemed them pious frauds, by which, even in deceiving, some good was gained. Now, at length, that a considerable portion of the world have begun to rethink themselves, indulgences grow cool, and gradually even begin to freeze, preparatory to their final extinction.

2. But since very many who see the vile imposture, theft, and rapine (with which the dealers in indulgences have hitherto deluded and sported with us), are not aware of the true source of the impiety, it may be proper to show not only what indulgences truly are, but also that they are polluted in every part. [375] They give the name of treasury of the Church to the merits of Christ, the holy Apostles and Martyrs. They pretend, as I have said, that the radical custody of the granary has been delivered to the Roman bishop, to whom the dispensation of these great blessings belongs in such a sense, that he can both exercise it by himself, and delegate the power of exercising it to others. Hence we have from the Pope at one time plenary indulgences, at another for certain years; from the cardinals for a hundred days, and from the bishops for forty. These, to describe them truly, are a profanation of the blood of Christ, and a delusion of Satan, by which the Christian people are led away from the grace of God and the life which is in Christ, and turned aside from the true way of salvation. For how could the blood of Christ be more shamefully profaned than by denying its sufficiency for the remission of sins, for reconciliation and satisfaction, unless its defects, as if it were dried up and exhausted, are supplemented from some other quarter? Peter's words are: "To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins," (Acts 10:43); but indulgences bestow the remission of sins through Peter, Paul, and the Martyrs. "The blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin," says John (1 John 1:7). Indulgences make the blood of the martyrs an ablution of sins. "He has made him to be sin (i.e. a satisfaction for sin) for us who knew no sin," says Paul (2 Cor. 5:21), "that we might be made the righteousness of God in him." Indulgences make the satisfaction of sin to depend on the blood of the martyrs. Paul exclaimed and testified to the Corinthians, that Christ alone was crucified, and died for them (1 Cor. 1:13). Indulgences declare that Paul and others died for us. Paul elsewhere says that Christ purchased the Church with his own blood (Acts 20:28). Indulgences assign another purchase to the blood of martyrs. "By one offering he has perfected for ever them that are sanctified," says the Apostle (Heb. 10:14). Indulgences, on the other hand, insist that sanctification, which would otherwise be insufficient, is perfected by martyrs. John says that all the saints "have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb," (Rev. 7:14). Indulgences tell us to wash our robes in the blood of saints.

3. There is an admirable passage in opposition to their blasphemies in Leo, a Roman Bishop (ad Palæstinos, Ep. 81). "Although the death of many saints was precious in the sight of the Lord (Ps. 116:15), yet no innocent man's slaughter was the propitiation of the world. The just received crowns did not give them; and the fortitude of believers produced examples of patience, not gifts of righteousness: for their deaths were for themselves; and none by his final end paid the debt of another, except Christ our Lord, in whom alone all are crucified--all dead, buried, and raised up." This sentiment, as it was of a memorable nature, he has elsewhere repeated (Epist. 95). Certainly one could not desire a clearer confutation of this impious dogma. Augustine introduces the same sentiment not less appositely: "Although brethren die for brethren, yet no martyr's blood is shed for the remission of sins: this Christ did for us, and in this conferred upon us not what we should imitate, but what should make us grateful," (August. Tract. in Joann. 84). Again, in another passage: "As he alone became the Son of God and the Son of man, that he might make us to be with himself sons of God, so he alone, without any ill desert, undertook the penalty for us, that through him we mighty without good desert, obtain undeserved favor," (ad Bonif. Lib. 4, cap. 4). Indeed, as their whole doctrine is a patchwork of sacrilege and blasphemy, this is the most blasphemous of the whole. Let them acknowledge whether or not they hold the following dogmas: That the martyrs, by their death, performed more to God, and merited more than was necessary for themselves, and that they have a large surplus of merits which may be applied to others; that in order that this great good may not prove superfluous, their blood is mingled with the blood of Christ, and out of both is formed the treasury of the Church, for the forgiveness and satisfaction of sins; and that in this sense we must understand the words of Paul: "Who now rejoice in my sufferings, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body's sake, which is the Church," (Col. 1:24). What is this but merely to leave the name of Christ, and at the same time make him a vulgar saintling, who can scarcely be distinguished in the crowd? He alone ought to be preached, alone held forth, alone named, alone looked to, whenever the subject considered is the obtaining of the forgiveness of sins, expiation, and sanctification. But let us hear their propositions. That the blood of martyrs may not be shed without fruit, it must be employed for the common good of the Church. Is it so? Was there no fruit in glorifying God by death? in sealing his truth with their blood? in testifying, by contempt of the present life, that they looked for a better? in confirming the faith of the Church, and at the same time disabling the pertinacity of the enemy by their constancy? But thus it is. They acknowledge no fruit if Christ is the only propitiation, if he alone died for our sins, if he alone was offered for our redemption. Nevertheless, they say, Peter and Paul would have gained the crown of victory though they had died in their beds a natural death. But as they contended to blood, it would not accord with the justice of God to leave their doing so barren and unfruitful. As if God were unable to augment the glory of his servants in proportion to the measure of his gifts. The advantage derived in common by the Church is great enough, when, by their triumphs, she is inflamed with zeal to fight.

     Christian Classics Ethereal Library / Public Domain

     Institutes of the Christian Religion

By Gleason Archer Jr.

Genesis (cont)

      IT IS THE PURPOSE of this chapter to discuss the various passages in  Genesis about which particular question has been raised, other than the matters pertaining to natural origin which have aleady been handled in the previous chapter. In each case the passage to be treated has been used as the basis of a charge of inaccuracy and unreliability leveled at the book as a whole.

The Historicity of Adam and the Fall

      As to the relationship of  Gen. 2 to  Gen. 1, it has already been pointed out that the use of the divine names (Elohɩ̂m and Yahweh) is quite reconcilable with unity of authorship. Since Elohɩ̂m (“God”) was the appropriate title for noncovenantal contexts, Moses (assuming that he was the author of the whole book) could very well have employed it exclusively for the creation account of chapter  1 and then shifted to Yahweh (Elohɩ̂m) (for the most part) in chapter  2, where he dealt with the covenant of works set up between God and Adam.

      Questions have been raised as to how seriously we are to take this whole narrative about Adam and Eve (and the serpent in the Garden of Eden) as literal history. Many prefer to regard it as a mere myth or fable (suprahistory, to use the neo-orthodox term) in which the moral downfall of man is described by a fictitious episode designed to illustrate it. (Yet insofar as man is a fallen creature, a moral agent with an innate sense of guilt, the myth allegedly reflects a sublime truth, even though no such isolated episode actually took place.) No decisive objections, however, have ever been raised against the historicity of Adam and Eve either on historical, scientific, or philosophical grounds. The protest has been based essentially upon subjective concepts of improbability.

      From the standpoint of logic, it is virtually impossible to accept the authority of  Rom. 5 (“By one man sin entered into the world.… By one man’s offense death reigned by one.… By one man’s disobedience many were made sinners”) without inferring that the entire human race must have descended from a single father. In  Rom. 5, Adam is contrasted with Christ. If therefore Christ was a historical individual, Adam himself must have been historical (or else the inspired apostle was in error). Again, Paul takes the details of  Gen. 2 and of the temptation and fall in  Gen. 3 as literal history. In  1 Tim. 2:13–14 he says: “For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.” There can be no question that the New Testament authors accepted the literal historicity of Adam and Eve. The origin of the human race is necessarily a matter of revelation by God, since no written records could extend back to a time prior to the invention of writing. Conceivably the true account of man’s origin could have been handed down by oral tradition (and perhaps it was so handed down until Moses’ time). But apart from revelation, written down as inspired Scripture, there could be no assurance as to which of the bewildering variety of legends of man’s origin known to the many different cultures of earth was the true and reliable account. Here the inspired record tells of a literal Adam and Eve, and gives no indication whatever that the account is intended to be mythical. In this connection note that  Luke 3:38 traces the ancestry of Jesus back to Enos, to Seth, and finally to Adam himself (who must therefore have been as historic an individual as Seth and Enos).  It was certainly taken as historical by Christ and the apostles.

      Some recent writers, such as Alan Richardson, have compared the narrative material in  Gen. 1–11 to the parables of the New Testament. “A parable is a story which may or may not be literally true (no one asks whether the good Samaritan ever literally happened); but it conveys a meaning beyond itself.  I was taught that a parable has no specific names, therefore the story of Adam and Eve, just like the story of Lazarus who laid by the rich man's gate is not a parable. It implies that beyond the words of the story which our outward ears have heard there is a meaning which only our spiritual hearing can detect.” But this comparison with New Testament parables involves the presumption that the author of  Genesis intended the narrative of chapters  1–11 to be a mere analogy or comparison to illustrate some theological truth, and did not mean for his readers to get the impression that these episodes narrated ever took place in actual history. The characteristic introduction to Jesus’ parables was:  “The kingdom of God is like—.” Always there is some doctrinal or ethical teaching which is being explained to the listener, and an illustration is resorted to in order to make the point clear. But the narratives and genealogical lists of  Gen. 1–11 have no such framework. Nowhere is it stated that the beginning of the world or of mankind was like anything analogous. A parable is never to be explained in terms of itself; it always involves an analogy drawn from something else. Just as it would never have been said, “The kingdom of God is like the kingdom of God,” so it could never have been intended to imply, “The beginning of the human race was like the beginning of the human race,” or “The universal flood was like the universal flood.” Hence the parabolic element is completely missing here, and Richardson’s interpretation is scarcely tenable.

Noah’s Ark and the Flood

      As to the great deluge of  Gen. 6–8, some discussion has already been devoted to the specious grounds upon which Wellhausen dissected this account into J and P.4 There it was shown that the entire section consisted of one tightly knit, homogeneous narrative.

      The larger question raised by nineteenth century scholarship was whether such an event as a world-wide flood ever took place. The comparative lack of geologic evidence  ... but there is plenty of evidence now ... remember this book was written in 1916. for a worldwide cataclysm has given rise to doubts as to the universality of the flood. It is alleged that no characteristic or uniform flood-type deposits have been discovered in the sites excavated in the Mesopotamian Valley. The thick flood stratum found by Leonard Woolley at Ur dates from early fourth millennium (ca. 3800 B.C.), but only one other flood stratum from that period has thus far been discovered, that found by Stephen Langdon at Kish (a much shallower deposit, incidentally). The other flood deposits, discovered at Kish, Shuruppak, Uruk, and (possibly) Lagash, represent an inundation of a thousand years later, judging from the archaeological remains and stratigraphical sequence. While the excavations may not in all cases have penetrated low enough to reach the 3800 B.C. level in some of the above mentioned, in Kish, at least, the dig went down to apparently undisturbed virgin soil right below the 2800 B.C. level.

      It is of course true that these few deep excavations are by themselves insufficient for any firm conclusions. But they have led most archaeologists to question the possibility of a general deluge over a more than local area — at least within the period investigated in the excavations themselves — and even staunch conservative apologists as listed by Ramm have defended the theory of a flood restricted to the cradle of the human race in Mesopotamia (or possibly extending up to the Caspian basin).

      George E Wright seems to incline to the possibility that it may have been limited to the Euphrates valley, provided the human race was then restricted to this area and was thus totally destroyed. Yet he also refers to geological evidence for the flood in Egypt, Palestine, Sicily, France, and England (possibly even North America). The Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown Commentary (JFB) indicates that the Hebrew text does not necessarily imply a universal flood. L. M. Davies also conceded that the flood was not necessarily universal, although he pointed to such distant phenomena as the frozen mammoths of Siberia as evidence for a very extensive and sudden inundation. (Unfortunately, however, for this correlation, the latest of the Siberian mammoths is conjectured by paleontologists to be earlier than 30,000 B.C.) J. W. Dawson denies that the Hebrew author had in mind a literally universal flood.

     A Survey of Old Testament Introduction

By James Orr 1907

CHAPTER XI | Archæology and the Old Testament
“Speak to the earth, and it shall teach thee.” — JOB.

“There have been made other and even greater discoveries in Assyrian and Babylonian ruins since Botta’s far-reaching exploration of the mounds of Khorsabad, but there never has been aroused again such a deep and general interest in the excavation of distant Oriental sites as towards the middle of the last century, when Sargon’s palace rose suddenly out of the ground, and furnished the first faithful picture of a great epoch of art which had vanished completely from human sight.” — H. V. HILPRECHT.

“The more I investigate Semitic antiquity, the more I am impressed with the utter baselessness of the view of Wellhausen.” — FR. HOMMEL.

“The result is sufficiently surprising; Meyer himself does not conceal the fact. The documents preserved in the Books of  Ezra and  Nehemiah are (substantially) genuine official documents, and the chronology of the  Chronicles is correct in every particular.” — Prof. A. R. S. KENNEDY, on Ed. Meyer.

“The systematic historical description, the account of the wanderings which is as exact geographically as it is historically, and in which we find a number of small details that would have been valueless and unknown to later writers, and above all else the accurate dating by the sacred lunar periods of an early age, appear to demand as their original basis the existence of written documents contemporaneous with Moses himself.” — Dr. DITLEF NIELSON (Danish archæologist).

IN the Wellhausen school, as we have seen, literary criticism of the Old Testament came under the control of the history of religion and institutions; contemporaneously, however, with the development of this school, a new claimant to be heard has put in its voice in the science of archæology, which bids fair, before long, to control both criticism and history. It is its witness we are now to hear.

I. GENERAL BEARINGS OF MODERN ARCHÆOLOGICAL DISCOVERY

Nothing in the whole course of last century is more remarkable than the recovery of the knowledge of ancient civilisations through the labours of explorers and the successful decipherment of old inscriptions. The early part of the century witnessed the recovery of the key to the ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics, and the middle and close of the century saw the triumph of skill in penetrating the secret of that equally strange and difficult system of writing — the cuneiform. When in the palace of Assurbanipal at Nineveh, brought to light by Sir Henry Layard, syllabaries and other aids to the knowledge of the language were obtained, rapid progress in the decipherment was assured. Scholars are now struggling with imperfect means to wrest their meaning from the puzzling characters on the Hittite monuments. Excavations in Crete are yielding new surprises, and carrying knowledge back to a civilisation in its bloom in the second millennium before Christ.

Such discovery might conceivably have taken place, and abundant light have been thrown on the arts, language, institutions, and religions of such lost civilisations as those of Babylonia, Assyria, and Egypt, and yet little direct illumination have been shed on the Bible.  It must be accounted a wonderful providence of God that, at a time when so much is being said and done to discredit the Old Testament, so marvellous a series of discoveries, bearing directly on matters contained in its pages, should have been made. Few, indeed, who have not given the matter special study, have any idea of how extensive are the points of contact between these explorations and the Bible, and how manifold are the corroborations of Scripture which they afford. In this as in every new study, of course, there has been much to unlearn as well as to learn. Many rash theories and baseless conjectures have been propounded, and not a few supports sought for the Bible have proved to be illusory. But the area of positive knowledge has always been widening, and there is to-day a mass of material available for the illustration and confirmation of Holy Scripture for which we cannot be sufficiently grateful.

Attempts are made, indeed, to minimise this signal contribution of archæology to faith, and to turn its material to uses hostile, rather than helpful, to revealed religion. Already a great change can be perceived in the attitude and tactics of rationalistic critics in relation to these discoveries. Formerly Israel was looked upon as a people belonging to the dim dawn of history, at a period when, except in Egypt, civilisation had hardly begun. It was possible then to argue that the art of writing did not exist among the Hebrews, and that they had not the capacity for the exalted religious ideas which the narratives of their early history imply. Moses could not have given the laws, nor David have written the psalms, which the history ascribes to them. This contention is now rendered impossible by the discovery of the extraordinary light of civilisation which shone in the Tigro-Euphrates valley, and in the valley of the Nile, millenniums before Abraham left Ur of the Chaldees, or Moses led his people out of Egypt. The transformation of opinion is revolutionary. The entire perspective is altered, and it is felt that Israel is now rather to be regarded as a people on whom the ends of the earth had come in respect of civilisation. The world was already old in the times of Jacob and Moses, and the tendency is now to see in the religious ideas and institutions of Israel an inheritance from Babylonia, and to bring in Babylonian influences at the beginning of Israel’s history, rather than at its close. The gain is appreciable in the breaking up of older critical theories, but the attempt to ignore the distinctive features of the Biblical religion, and to resolve the latter into a simple compound of the ideas of other religions, is bound to fail, and is being met with an effective protest from critical scholars themselves.

Unquestionably the most remarkable result that has accrued from the discoveries in Egypt, Babylonia, and Assyria, has been, as just said, the astonishing revolution wrought in our views of the character and literary capabilities of the most ancient civilisations. It had long been known that Egypt was a literary country as early as, and far earlier than, the time of Moses. Now that the books and monuments of that ancient people have been disinterred, and the writing on them made intelligible, our wonder is tenfold increased at the brilliance of their civilisation as far back as the days of their earliest kings. Still more astonishing is the light cast by the monuments on the condition of ancient Babylonia. Here, in the Hammurabi age — which is that of Abraham — and long before, we find ourselves in the midst of cities, books, and libraries; of letters, arts, and laws, in a high state of development; of a people among whom not only a knowledge of letters existed, but a taste for books and reading was widely diffused — in short of a highly advanced and capable literary people. Babylonia had by this time its dynasties of great kings, some of whom were distinguished as founders of libraries and patrons of letters. Sargon I., e.g., whose date is usually put at 3800 B.C., founded a famous library at Accad. The French excavator De Sarzec brought to light a few years since (1893–5) the remains of a great library (30,000 tablets) at Tello, in S. Babylonia, which already existed in the reign of Gudea, about 2700 B.C.2 More recently the Pennsylvania explorers have disinterred the temple library at Nippur, the ancient Calneh. Not only so, but in excavating the foundations of the temple, they came on the abundant remains of an older civilisation, which, from the depth at which the relics were found — 25 to 35 feet below the pavement of Sargon I. and Naram-Sin—must, it is thought, be as old as 6000 or 7000 years B.C. Even if less time should suffice, their antiquity is still immensely remote.

It is beyond our province to enter minutely into what may be called the romance of the rediscovery of ancient Nineveh and Babylon; but one illustration may bring out how from the first light has been shed on the Bible by exploration. In 1843, Emil Botta, French Consul in the district, struck into the mounds of Khorsabad, a little to the north of Nineveh, and soon, to his own surprise, was standing in the midst of an immense palace, which proved to be that of Sargon, the conqueror of Samaria. This was a remarkable discovery. In  Isa. 20:1, we read that “Sargon, king of Assyria, sent his Tartan (or commander-in-chief) to besiege Ashdod.” But who was Sargon? This is the only place in which his name occurs in Scripture, or in all literature. Ancient writers knew nothing of him. He was a mystery: some did not hesitate to deny that he ever existed. Yet the first important discovery made was the palace of this very Sargon. It contained his name and portrait; its walls were covered with his sculptures and inscriptions. Sargon, after being forgotten for twenty-five centuries, is now again one of the best known kings of Assyria. He was the father of Sennacherib. His annals recount the siege of Ashdod mentioned in  Isaiah. This first discovery was followed by others not less brilliant. In 1847 Mr. Layard began work at the mounds of Nimroud and Kouyunjik — the site of Nineveh itself. At the former place he unearthed four large palaces, and at the latter, the palace of Sennacherib, rebuilt by his grandson Assurbanipal, in the débris of which were found the remains of the richly - stored library already referred to.

     The Problem of the Old Testament

The Pilgrim's Progress From This World To That Which Is To Come;
Delivered Under The Similitude Of A Dream (Part 2)

By John Bunyan 1678

THE EIGHTH STAGE

     By this time they were got to the Enchanted Ground, where the air naturally tended to make one drowsy. And that place was all grown over with briars and thorns, excepting here and there, where was an enchanted arbor, upon which if a man sits, or in which if a man sleeps, it is a question, some say, whether ever he shall rise or wake again in this world. Over this forest, therefore, they went, both one and another, and Mr. Great-Heart went before, for that he was the guide; and Mr. Valiant-for-truth came behind, being rear-guard, for fear lest peradventure some fiend, or dragon, or giant, or thief, should fall upon their rear, and so do mischief. They went on here, each man with his sword drawn in his hand; for they knew it was a dangerous place. Also they cheered up one another as well as they could. Feeble-mind, Mr. Great-Heart commanded should come up after him; and Mr. Despondency was under the eye of Mr. Valiant.

     Now they had not gone far, but a great mist and darkness fell upon them all; so that they could scarce, for a great while, the one see the other. Wherefore they were forced, for some time, to feel one for another by words; for they walked not by sight. But any one must think, that here was but sorry going for the best of them all; but how much worse for the women and children, who both of feet and heart were but tender! Yet so it was, that through the encouraging words of him that led in the front, and of him that brought them up behind, they made a pretty good shift to wag along.

     The way also here was very wearisome, through dirt and slabbiness. Nor was there, on all this ground, so much as one inn or victualling-house wherein to refresh the feebler sort. Here, therefore, was grunting, and puffing, and sighing, while one tumbleth over a bush, another sticks fast in the dirt, and the children, some of them, lost their shoes in the mire; while one cries out, I am down; and another, Ho, where are you? and a third, The bushes have got such fast hold on me, I think I cannot get away from them.

     Then they came at an arbor, warm, and promising much refreshing to the pilgrims; for it was finely wrought above-head, beautified with greens, furnished with benches and settles. It also had in it a soft couch, whereon the weary might lean. This, you must think, all things considered, was tempting; for the pilgrims already began to be foiled with the badness of the way: but there was not one of them that made so much as a motion to stop there. Yea, for aught I could perceive, they continually gave so good heed to the advice of their guide, and he did so faithfully tell them of dangers, and of the nature of the dangers when they were at them, that usually, when they were nearest to them, they did most pluck up their spirits, and hearten one another to deny the flesh. This arbor was called The Slothful’s Friend, and was made on purpose to allure, if it might be, some of the pilgrims there to take up their rest when weary.

Luke 9:62 Jesus said to him, “No one who puts his hand to the plow and looks back is fit for the kingdom of God.”   ESV

     I saw them in my dream, that they went on in this their solitary ground, till they came to a place at which a man is apt to lose his way. Now, though when it was light their guide could well enough tell how to miss those ways that led wrong, yet in the dark he was put to a stand. But he had in his pocket a map of all ways leading to or from the Celestial City; wherefore he struck a light (for he never goes without his tinder-box also), and takes a view of his book or map, which bids him to be careful in that place to turn to the right hand. And had he not been careful here to look in his map, they had all, in probability, been smothered in the mud; for just a little before them, and that at the end of the cleanest way too, was a pit, none knows how deep, full of nothing but mud, there made on purpose to destroy the pilgrims in.

     Then thought I with myself, Who that goeth on pilgrimage but would have one of these maps about him, that he may look, when he is at a stand, which is the way he must take?

Psalm 119:105 Your word is a lamp to my feet
and a light to my path.   ESV

     Then they went on in this Enchanted Ground till they came to where there was another arbor, and it was built by the highway-side. And in that arbor there lay two men, whose names were Heedless and Too-bold. These two went thus far on pilgrimage; but here, being wearied with their journey, they sat down to rest themselves, and so fell fast asleep. When the pilgrims saw them, they stood still, and shook their heads; for they knew that the sleepers were in a pitiful case. Then they consulted what to do, whether to go on and leave them in their sleep, or to step to them and try to awake them; so they concluded to go to them and awake them, that is, if they could; but with this caution, namely, to take heed that they themselves did not sit down nor embrace the offered benefit of that arbor.

     So they went in, and spake to the men, and called each by his name, for the guide, it seems, did know them; but there was no voice nor answer. Then the guide did shake them, and do what he could to disturb them. Then said one of them, I will pay you when I take my money. At which the guide shook his head. I will fight so long as I can hold my sword in my hand, said the other. At that, one of the children laughed.

     Then said Christiana, What is the meaning of this? The guide said, They talk in their sleep. If you strike them, beat them, or whatever else you do to them, they will answer you after this fashion; or, as one of them said in old time, when the waves of the sea did beat upon him, and he slept as one upon the mast of a ship,

Prov. 23:34-35 You will be like one who lies down in the midst of the sea,
like one who lies on the top of a mast.
35 “They struck me,” you will say, “but I was not hurt;
they beat me, but I did not feel it.
When shall I awake?
I must have another drink.”   ESV

When I awake, I will seek it yet again. You know, when men talk in their sleep, they say any thing; but their words are not governed either by faith or reason. There is an incoherency in their words now, as there was before betwixt their going on pilgrimage and sitting down here. This, then, is the mischief of it: when heedless ones go on pilgrimage, ’tis twenty to one but they are served thus. For this Enchanted Ground is one of the last refuges that the enemy to pilgrims has; wherefore it is, as you see, placed almost at the end of the way, and so it standeth against us with the more advantage. For when, thinks the enemy, will these fools be so desirous to sit down as when they are weary? and when so like to be weary as when almost at their journey’s end? Therefore it is, I say, that the Enchanted Ground is placed so nigh to the land Beulah, and so near the end of their race. Wherefore let pilgrims look to themselves, lest it happen to them as it has done to these that, as you see, are fallen asleep, and none can awake them.

     Then the pilgrims desired with trembling to go forward; only they prayed their guide to strike a light, that they might go the rest of their way by the help of the light of a lantern. So he struck a light, and they went by the help of that through the rest of this way, though the darkness was very great.

2 Pet. 1:19 And we have the prophetic word more fully confirmed, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts,   ESV

But the children began to be sorely weary, and they cried out unto him that loveth pilgrims, to make their way more comfortable. So by that they had gone a little further, a wind arose that drove away the fog, so the air became more clear. Yet they were not off (by much) of the Enchanted Ground; only now they could see one another better, and the way wherein they should walk.

     Now when they were almost at the end of this ground, they perceived that a little before them was a solemn noise, as of one that was much concerned. So they went on and looked before them: and behold they saw, as they thought, a man upon his knees, with hands and eyes lifted up, and speaking, as they thought, earnestly to one that was above. They drew nigh, but could not tell what he said; so they went softly till he had done. When he had done, he got up, and began to run towards the Celestial City. Then Mr. Great-Heart called after him, saying, Soho, friend, let us have your company, if you go, as I suppose you do, to the Celestial City. So the man stopped, and they came up to him. But as soon as Mr. Honest saw him, he said, I know this man. Then said Mr. Valiant-for-truth, Prithee, who is it? It is one, said he, that comes from whereabout I dwelt. His name is Standfast; he is certainly a right good pilgrim.

     So they came up to one another; and presently Standfast said to old Honest, Ho, father Honest, are you there? Aye, said he, that I am, as sure as you are there. Right glad am I, said Mr. Standfast, that I have found you on this road. And as glad am I, said the other, that I espied you on your knees. Then Mr. Standfast blushed, and said, But why, did you see me? Yes, that I did, quoth the other, and with my heart was glad at the sight. Why, what did you think? said Standfast. Think! said old Honest; what could I think? I thought we had an honest man upon the road, and therefore should have his company by and by. If you thought not amiss, said Standfast, how happy am I! But if I be not as I should, ’tis I alone must bear it. That is true, said the other; but your fear doth further confirm me that things are right betwixt the Prince of pilgrims and your soul. For he saith, “Blessed is the man that feareth always.”

Prov. 28:14 Blessed is the one who fears the LORD always,
but whoever hardens his heart will fall into calamity.   ESV

     VALIANT. Well but, brother, I pray thee tell us what was it that was the cause of thy being upon thy knees even now: was it for that some special mercy laid obligations upon thee, or how?

     STAND. Why, we are, as you see, upon the Enchanted Ground; and as I was coming along, I was musing with myself of what a dangerous nature the road in this place was, and how many that had come even thus far on pilgrimage, had here been stopped and been destroyed. I thought also of the manner of the death with which this place destroyeth men. Those that die here, die of no violent distemper: the death which such die is not grievous to them. For he that goeth away in a sleep, begins that journey with desire and pleasure. Yea, such acquiesce in the will of that disease.

     HON. Then Mr. Honest interrupting him, said, Did you see the two men asleep in the arbor?

     STAND. Aye, aye, I saw Heedless and Too-bold there; and for ought I know, there they will lie till they rot.

Prov. 10:7 The memory of the righteous is a blessing,
but the name of the wicked will rot.   ESV

But let me go on with my tale. As I was thus musing, as I said, there was one in very pleasant attire, but old, who presented herself to me, and offered me three things, to wit, her body, her purse, and her bed. Now the truth is, I was both weary and sleepy. I am also as poor as an owlet, and that perhaps the witch knew. Well, I repulsed her once and again, but she put by my repulses, and smiled. Then I began to be angry; but she mattered that nothing at all. Then she made offers again, and said, if I would be ruled by her, she would make me great and happy; for, said she, I am the mistress of the world, and men are made happy by me. Then I asked her name, and she told me it was Madam Bubble.

     This set me further from her; but she still followed me with enticements. Then I betook me, as you saw, to my knees, and with hands lifted up, and cries, I prayed to Him that had said he would help. So, just as you came up, the gentlewoman went her way. Then I continued to give thanks for this my great deliverance; for I verily believe she intended no good, but rather sought to make stop of me in my journey.

     HON. Without doubt her designs were bad. But stay, now you talk of her, methinks I either have seen her, or have read some story of her.

     STAND. Perhaps you have done both.

     HON. Madam Bubble! Is she not a tall, comely dame, something of a swarthy complexion?

     STAND. Right, you hit it: she is just such a one.

     HON. Doth she not speak very smoothly, and give you a smile at the end of a sentence?

     STAND. You fall right upon it again, for these are her very actions.

     HON. Doth she not wear a great purse by her side, and is not her hand often in it, fingering her money, as if that was her heart’s delight.

     STAND. ’Tis just so; had she stood by all this while, you could not more amply have set her forth before me, nor have better described her features.

     HON. Then he that drew her picture was a good limner, and he that wrote of her said true.

     GREAT. This woman is a witch, and it is by virtue of her sorceries that this ground is enchanted. Whoever doth lay his head down in her lap, had as good lay it down on that block over which the axe doth hang;  and whoever lay their eyes upon her beauty are counted the enemies of God. This is she that maintaineth in their splendor all those that are the enemies of pilgrims.

James 4:4 You adulterous people! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.   ESV

Yea, this is she that has bought off many a man from a pilgrim’s life. She is a great gossiper; she is always, both she and her daughters, at one pilgrim’s heels or another, now commending, and then preferring the excellences of this life. She is a bold and impudent slut: she will talk with any man. She always laugheth poor pilgrims to scorn, but highly commends the rich. If there be one cunning to get money in a place, she will speak well of him from house to house. She loveth banqueting and feasting mainly well; she is always at one full table or another. She has given it out in some places that she is a goddess, and therefore some do worship her. She has her time, and open places of cheating; and she will say and avow it, that none can show a good comparable to hers. She promiseth to dwell with children’s children, if they will but love her and make much of her. She will cast out of her purse gold like dust in some places and to some persons. She loves to be sought after, spoken well of, and to lie in the bosoms of men. She is never weary of commending her commodities, and she loves them most that think best of her. She will promise to some crowns and kingdoms, if they will but take her advice; yet many has she brought to the halter, and ten thousand times more to hell.  The spirit of Demas has ruined many a person.

     STAND. Oh, said Standfast, what a mercy is it that I did resist her; for whither might she have drawn me!

     GREAT. Whither? nay, none but God knows whither. But in general, to be sure, she would have drawn thee into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition.

1 Tim. 6:9 But those who desire to be rich fall into temptation, into a snare, into many senseless and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction.

’T was she that set Absalom against his father, and Jeroboam against his master. ’T was she that persuaded Judas to sell his Lord; and that prevailed with Demas to forsake the godly pilgrim’s life. None can tell of the mischief that she doth. She makes variance betwixt rulers and subjects, betwixt parents and children, betwixt neighbor and neighbor, betwixt a man and his wife, betwixt a man and himself, betwixt the flesh and the spirit. Wherefore, good Mr. Standfast, be as your name is, and when you have done all, stand.

     At this discourse there was among the pilgrims a mixture of joy and trembling; but at length they broke out and sang,

“What danger is the Pilgrim in!
How many are his foes!
How many ways there are to sin
No living mortal knows.

Some in the ditch are spoiled, yea, can
Lie tumbling in the mire:
Some, though they shun the frying-pan
Do leap into the fire.”

     Pilgrim's Progress (Illustrated): Updated, Modern English. More than 100 Illustrations.

The Continual Burnt Offering 2 Chronicles 14:11

By H.A. Ironside - 1941

March 15

2 Chronicles 14:11 And Asa cried to the LORD his God, “O LORD, there is none like you to help, between the mighty and the weak. Help us, O LORD our God, for we rely on you, and in your name we have come against this multitude. O LORD, you are our God; let not man prevail against you.”  ESV

     God’s power is omnipotent and He is prepared to back up the man of faith, no matter how difficult the circumstances that he may have to face. We today are not called to battle with flesh and blood using carnal weapons, but our conflict is with Satanic hosts, who would seek to rob us of the enjoyment of our inheritance in Christ (Ephesians 6:12). But, for faith, the devil is already a defeated foe (Hebrews 2:14). As we meet the enemy in the power of the cross, victory is sure (Galatians 6:14). He who fought for Asa will undertake for us as we rely upon His faithfulness and walk in obedience to His Word. Asa’s prayer is soul-stirring and indicates strong faith and high spirituality. He put God between him and the enemy. It was a case of divine power versus human assumption, the might of Jehovah against mere brute strength and artfulness.

Ephesians 6:12 For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.

Hebrews 2:14 Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil,

Galatians 6:14 But far be it from me to boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world.   ESV

Thanks be to God for Jesus Christ, who turns
Defeat to victory in every heart.
When battles rage and, crushed, the spirit yearns
To “cease from man,” God rends the clouds apart
And sets a banner in the troubled sky—
It is the face of Jesus Christ, and He
Becomes the challenge that we conquer by;
Nay, more than that: He IS the victory.

Thanks be to God for Jesus Christ; the One
Who never lost a battle; who laid down
His life a ransom, and, when that was done,
Arose unvanquished and put on the crown;
Who knows when foes oppress, when eyes grow dim,
When life is hard. Thanks be to God for HIM!
—Helen Frazee-Bower

The Continual Burnt Offering: Daily Meditations on the Word of God