Whilst preparing to preach through the Old Testament books of Samuel I engaged a number of authors to fill out my understanding of the history and background to the books. During this time I was able to also do a more careful reading of the text itself and a number of things stood out to me. One significant point was the likely time that the final, canonical books were written and compiled. Although they contain contemporaneous records of events during the life of Samuel, Saul and David there are also smatterings of editorial comments and explanations that lend to a much later date for the final composition before being included in what we call the Old Testament canon.

I am intrigued by the authorial intent (human and divine!) of the books as that will provide the greatest insight into understanding the message both for the original audience and what application or implication it has for today’s reader.

It is with this in mind that I refer to the Introduction of The Meaning of the Pentateuch by John Sailhamer. He raises some important points about understanding the Pentateuch that are equally valid in approaching the other Old Testament historical narratives. Substituting “1 & 2 Samuel” for “Pentateuch” and “Samuel, David and Saul” for “Abraham and Moses” provides a very good basis with which to approach 1 & 2 Samuel.

To whom was the Pentateuch written as the norm of biblical faith? For whom was it intended to be normative when first written? Who was its audience? What did it have to say to that audience then, and what, if any, claims does it make on its readers today?

…

Is the Pentateuch written only for the ancient people of Israel? Is its intention primarily the descriptive task of understanding Israel’s religion under the Sinai covenant? Or was the Pentateuch written to confront its readers now, as then, with the imperative to live a life of faith exemplified by Abraham’s walk with God in the Pentateuch? Is it a “shout out” for Abraham, the believing prophet (Gen 15:6; 20:7), or for Moses, the priest who in the wilderness failed to exhibit his faith (Num 20:12)? How can anyone today read and understand its meaning for his or her life? How can a laws and religious rites as something that must be obeyed?

…

How can anyone today read and understand its meaning for his or her life?

…

The goal of a theological study of the Pentateuch is the biblical author’s intent as realized in the work itself. The (human and divine) authors’ intent is the “verbal meaning” of the book. The author’s intent is what his words say as part of the book. When talking about the meaning of the words of the Pentateuch, one should be careful to distinguish this from the “things” that the words point to in the real world. The Pentateuch is about real historical events, that is, “things that have happened” (res gesta) in the real world. Words are not the things themselves. Words only point to things and tell us about things. In speaking about historical events (things), one may easily confuse what an author says about these events with the events themselves. As important as history and archaeology are for understanding the “things” that the Bible points to and talks about, they sometimes get in the way of understanding the “words” of Scripture. The Pentateuch may be compared to a Rembrandt painting of real persons or events. We do not understand a Rembrandt painting by taking a photograph of the “thing” that Rembrandt painted and comparing it with the painting itself. That may help us understand the “thing” that Rembrandt painted, his subject matter, but it will not help us understand the painting itself. To understand Rembrandt’s painting, we must look at it and see its colors, shapes and textures. In the same way, to understand the Pentateuch, one must look at its colors, contours and textures. To understand Rembrandt’s painting, one must study the painting itself. To understand the Pentateuch, one must study the Pentateuch itself.

Courtesy of BGEA

During the RESOLVED series in January, we discussed the Biblical Principles and Priorities of Generosity.

Generosity is a work of the grace of God in our lives. We are only able to be generous towards others because God has first been generous towards us.

Unfortunately, mention of generosity and finances immediately arouses suspicion and hesitation.

Jesus said, in Matthew 6:21, “For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.”
That which you invest time, money and resources is that which you treasure. So long as my personal comforts take priority, then God’s priorities will never be my concern. After all, someone else can take care of things, besides, shouldn’t Christian Workers, Ministers and Missionaries be trusting God instead of me?!

Paul said, in 1 Timothy 6:10, “the love of money is a root of all kinds of evils” and in Colossians 3:5, “Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: sexual immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry.”

Greed (aka covetousness) is equal in disgust as a host of sensual sins that we would not tolerate amongst Christians. Greed is so strong a force in our lives that it forces our affections away from God and onto ourselves – this is why it is called “idolatry”.

A practical way we can develop and model unselfishness for our Children is through habitual generosity; sacrificial, selfless, unrequited generosity.

As a Church our commitment is to God and His Glory. We seek to achieve that through proclamation, publication and promotion of the Gospel, the good news that Jesus Christ, through his obedience to God and sinless life, death on the cross in our behalf and physical resurrection from the dead, has conquered Satan, sin and death and provided our forgiveness, restoration, redemption and reconciliation to God as our Heavenly Father. Therefore we prioritise our generosity so that we can achieve this objective, here in Kogarah, throughout Sydney and Australia and to as many as possible where ever possible.

To that end, over the next few weeks, we are providing an opportunity for gifts to be given to some missionaries. These are people and families that, like the Pastors at GCCC, have sacrificed the opportunity to “build bigger barns” so that others are able to hear the gospel.

This will be done via an additional offering at the time of the main collection during the morning service.The main offering goes towards operational expenses, such as the Ministers stipend, utility costs, materials used in Sunday School and Youth Group etc. Additional collections received go towards specific/designated “mission” gifts.

• On February 7 additional funds will go to George Kwek from AIM Ministries serving the people of Myanmar.
• On February 28 additional funds will go to Lawrence and Liling Tan from SIM, serving in Medical Missions in Bolivia
• On March 28 additional funds will go to Tracy Lam who is the NSW Coordinator for Overseas Missionary Fellowship and our primary liaison with Susan Chong in Japan.

Please consider how generous you can be towards these families and individuals.

So you have an opinion that disagrees with something stated plainly in scripture? You thus reason that your education, culture, (post)modern refinement, or evolved sensibility has given you a higher, more tolerant, loving perspective? Evidently not!

Thus is one of the simplest statements of Sola Scripture I’ve read recently at Pryomaniacs Blog by Dan Phillips. “Sola” not “solo”. Sola Scripture doesn’t mean the Bible is the only authority – it means it is the highest and final – God has the last word not me and mine. But enough rambling… read on this reproduced post from Dan on the matter.

Our family has homeschooled for many years. My dear wife and I both always have carried differing classes. At first, I did most of the teaching; for years now, that’s been her ministry, with me picking up other classes such as English and Bible. But when I’m taking on a new course, I always ask that Valerie get the teacher’s guide to the course. Primarily I need it because it’s a big time-saver. They aren’t inerrant, of course; sometimes I have to correct their answers. But on balance it is a huge help.

You know right where I’m going with this: in the Bible, we have the Teacher’s Guide. Literally. Is it not so?

• Blessed are you, O LORD; teach me your statutes! (Psalm 119:12)
• When I told of my ways, you answered me; teach me your statutes! (Psalm 119:26)
• Put false ways far from me and graciously teach me your law! (Psalm119:29)
• The sum of your word is truth, and every one of your righteous rules endures forever. (Psalm 119:160)
• So Jesus said to the Jews who had believed in him, “If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” (John 8:31-32)
• Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth. (John 17:17)
• All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work. (2 Timothy 3:16-17)

There are countless ramifications of this, literally countless. But I want to stay at the universal level, the level of principle.

We’ve been handed the Teacher’s Guide, so to speak. What this means is that Christianity isn’t the conclusion of a series of deductions leading to open conclusions, per se. It isn’t the conclusion of a syllogism. It is revelation, and the Christian starts his thinking with that revelation. If it isn’t covered by the revelation (“Wonder what the trout are biting on today?”), he works it out. But if it is (“Wonder if I should cheat on my wife today?”), then he knows what’s in the Teacher’s Guide.

That means that, if I’m working on a dandy, shiny, impressive, lovely theory or hypothesis, and then get T-boned by the clear teaching of Scripture, I bail on my theory. No matter how much I loved it, what admiration it would earn me, what applause and kudo’s — I bail on it. No matter how much the world would prefer it to the old Christian answer — I bail on it. No matter how much better-feeling sense it made to me that the Biblical position — I bail on it.

What’s so bemusing is when a man or woman professes to be a Christian — which is to say, someone who agrees with Jesus that the Bible is the Teacher’s Guide — approaches issues like a non-Christian.

You have an idea or attitude about something, but you find the Bible doesn’t reflect it. What you shoulddo is say “Rats, I see the answer’s different than mine. I must have worked it through wrong. Better start over.”

All but two of you are nodding. You’re thinking of safe things, and you’re right. For instance, if a professed Christian says, “Because of X, Y and Z, I just don’t see why women can’t be pastors.”

So here’s where Christian thinking — the thinking of a disciple (= student), of a slave — would note the answer in the teacher’s guide: they can’t. And here is where Christian thinking would say, “Evidently not. I must have done the math wrong. Start over.” And a Christian would work it through until his answer matched the answer in the Teacher’s Guide, knowing that in this case the TG is in fact inerrant.

Ditto homosexuality. Ditto the moral imperative of wives to subordinate themselves to their husbands, of children to their parents; of parents to love, train, discipline their children. Ditto church-attendance. Ditto the Gospel. Ditto eschatology. Ditto ecclesiology, anthropology, geohistory, abortion, and on and on.

Before we close in prayer, though: don’t feel too safe about this. Again and again on this blog we’ve had commenters, confronted with some Biblical teaching they don’t like, say “Because of ABC, I think Blort.” To which the Christian answer would be, “Evidently not.” With such intelligent reasons, often it’s “Because of ABCDEFGHIJ, I think Ba-zink.” Still, the answer should be, “Evidently not.”

Take the thread I linked above. I am absolutely positive that, reading this, many folks’ reaction was, “Because of [my very complicated theories of Christian living], I think we shouldn’t talk about slavery and obedience to commands and such.” One fellow left a church I pastored for that very reason: his theory of Christian living did not allow for apostolic commands being apostolic commands which God expects us to obey.

So, rather than revising his position to match the one in the Teacher’s Guide, he ran off to find another church.

Confronted with a Biblical phenomenon that doesn’t match our theory, the Christian response should be, “Evidently not.” That is, in this case — as I pointed out in that post and many other times — clearly God the Holy Spirit has no problem whatever moving apostles to issue commands to Christians, and calling Christians to obey. That’s in the Teacher’s Guide.

So if a Christian sees that phenomenon, and sees it clashes with his theories of Christian living, he should say, “Evidently I did the math wrong. Start over!” And he should re-work it until his answer matches the Teacher’s Guide.

So in closing I say: do that.

Many are inspired by William Henley’s poem Invictus. Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma bomber quoted it before his execution. It features regularly in songs, movies and television series. Most recently, in the 2009 Eastwood film of the same name, as an inspiration for Nelson Mandela and the South African Rugby captain Francios Pienaar. The last two lines of the poem are perhaps the most well known:

I am the master of my fate:
I am the captain of my soul.

The poem is captivating. The steadfast refusal of the narrator to bow to anything, and to rise, even when crushed, to fight any opposition. It is the ode of the underdog, the hymn of the oppressed and tortured, a testimony to the beautiful yet, belligerent, endurance of the human soul, created in the image of almighty God unable to be defeated so long as it choses not to surrender to circumstance.

James Cameron gave a similar voice to the protagonist Sarah Conner in his Terminator movies where the character’s motto becomes; “No fate but what we make”. Though you be the proverbial David in the face of Goliath’s torment, persecution, disease or death the strength of the human spirit is indomitable. A monologue of Shakespeare’s Hamlet carried the same theme:

What a piece of work is a man, how noble in reason,
how infinite in faculties, in form and moving,
how express and admirable in action, how like an angel
in apprehension, how like a god!

In all these man is subject to none except those to whom he choses to yield. As such he cannot be defeated, or conquered.

Such is the resilience of Christ, in the face of the cross, he determined to achieve our redemption and forgiveness, regardless of the cost. The writer of Hebrews said he endured it with joy and furthermore, his resilience is our example. Regardless of hostility and struggle do not grow weary, just as those before you, who stopped the mouth of lions, quenched the power of fire, escaped the edge of the sword … put foreign armies to flight and others who suffered mocking, flogging, chains, imprisonment and death. Yet there is massive difference between Christ and the heroes of the book of Hebrews and those who have cited Invictus.

In Christ we are compelled to sacrifice and serve God because he has conquered all foes of Satan, sin and death and we are already victors – not by the might of our will, but by the strength of God’s Spirit at work in us through faith. When faced with opposition, with malign and ridicule of the message of faith, hope, forgiveness and reconciliation with our Creator God we stand, in his strength, knowing that HE is our captain and that fate is at His beckoning for He alone is sovereign. We do not endure suffering, and mistreatment because our soul is unconquerable, but because He is. Mordecai knew that God is the determinative factor of victory. If we refuse to serve Him then another will be raised in our place. Our choice is to see God’s hand in placing us in this place at this time for His purpose and glory. Your job, life, and location are part of God’s mission. Do you see that or do you focus on your possessions and achievements? Who is your captain?