Catena Aurea
Mar 1:14-15

Bede: John being put in prison, fitly does the Lord begin to preach: wherefore there follows, “Preaching the Gospel, &c.” For when the Law ceases, the Gospel arises in its steps.

Bede: Let no one, however, suppose that the putting of John in prison took place immediately after the forty days’ temptation and the fast of the Lord; for whosoever reads the Gospel of John will find, that the Lord taught many things before the putting of John in prison, and also did many miracles; for you have in his Gospel, “This beginning of miracles did Jesus;” [Joh_2:11] and afterwards, “for John was not yet cast into prison.” [Joh_3:24]

Now it is said that when John read the books of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he approved indeed the text of the history, and affirmed that they had spoken truth, but said that they had composed the history of only one year after John was cast into prison, in which year also he suffered. Passing over then the year of which the transactions had been published by the three others, he related the events of the former period, before John was cast into prison.

Theophylact: Or else, the Lord means that the time of the Law is complete; as if He said, Up to this time the Law was at work; from this time the kingdom of God will work, that is, a conversation according to the Gospel, which is with reason likened to the kingdom of heaven. For when you see a man clothed in flesh living according to the Gospel, do you not say that he has the kingdom of heaven, which “is not meat and drink, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost?” [Rom_14:17] The next word is, “Repent.”

Pseudo-Jerome: For he must repent, who would keep close to eternal good, that is, to the kingdom of God. For he who would have the kernel, breaks the shell; the sweetness of the apple makes up for the bitterness of its root; the hope of gain makes the dangers of the sea pleasant; the hope of health takes away from the painfulness of medicine.

They are able worthily to proclaim the preaching of Christ who have deserved to attain to the reward of forgiveness; and therefore after He has said, “Repent,” He subjoins, “and believe the Gospel.” For unless ye have believed, ye shall not understand.

Bede: “Repent,” therefore, “and believe;” that is, renounce dead works; for of what use is believing without good works? The merit of good works does not, however, bring to faith, but faith begins, that good works may follow.

John Calvin
Mar_1:14.Preaching the Gospel of the kingdom of God.Matthew appears to differ a little from the other two: for, after mentioning that Jesus left his own city Nazareth, and departed to Capernaum, he says: from that time Jesus began to preach.Luke and Mark, again, relate, that he taught publicly in his own country. But the solution is easy; for the words which Matthew employs, ἀπὸ τότε, from that time, ought to be viewed as referring, not to what immediately precedes, but to the whole course of the narrative. Christ, therefore, entered into the exercise of his office, when he arrived at Galilee. The summary of doctrine which is given by Matthew is not at all different from what, we have lately seen, was taught by John: for it consists of two parts, — repentance, and the announcement of grace and salvation. He exhorts the Jews to conversion, because the kingdom of God is at hand: that is, because God undertakes to govern his people, which is true and perfect happiness. The language of Mark is a little different, The kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the Gospel. But the meaning is the same: for, having first spoken of the restoration of the kingdom of God among the Jews, he exhorts them to repentance and faith.

But it may be asked, since repentance depends on the Gospel, why does Mark separate it from the doctrine of the Gospel? Two reasons may be assigned. God sometimes invites us to repentance, when nothing more is meant, than that we ought to change our life for the better. He afterwards shows, that conversion and “newness of life” (Rom_6:4 ) are the gift of God. This is intended to inform us, that not only is our duty enjoined on us, but the grace and power of obedience are, at the same time, offered. If we understand in this way the preaching of John about repentance, the meaning will be:” The Lord commands you to turn to himself; but as you cannot accomplish this by your own endeavors, he promises the Spirit of regeneration, and therefore you must receive this grace by faith.” At the same time, the faith, which he enjoins men to give to the Gospel, ought not, by any means, to be confined to the gift of renewal, but relates chiefly to the forgiveness of sins. For John connects repentance with faith, because God reconciles us to himself in such a manner, that we serve him as a Father in holiness and righteousness.

Besides, there is no absurdity in saying, that to believe the Gospel is the same thing as to embrace a free righteousness: for that special relation, between faith and the forgiveness of sins, is often mentioned in Scripture; as, for example, when it teaches, that we are justified by faith,(Rom_5:1.) In which soever of these two ways you choose to explain this passage, it still remains a settled principle, that God offers to us a free salvation, in order that we may turn to him, and live to righteousness. Accordingly, when he promises to us mercy, he calls us to deny the flesh. We must observe the designation which Paul gives to the Gospel, the kingdom of God: for hence we learn, that by the preaching of the Gospel the kingdom of God is set up and established among men, and that in no other way does God reign among men. Hence it is also evident, how wretched the condition of men is without the Gospel.

Adam Clarke
Mar 1:14
Repent – Μετανοειτε. This was the matter of the preaching. The verb μετανοεω is either compounded of μετα, after, and νοειν to understand, which signifies that, after hearing such preaching, the sinner is led to understand, that the way he has walked in was the way of misery, death, and hell. Or the word may be derived from μετα after, and ανοια, madness, which intimates that the whole life of a sinner is no other than a continued course of madness and folly: and if to live in a constant opposition to all the dictates of true wisdom; to wage war with his own best interests in time and eternity; to provoke and insult the living God; and, by habitual sin, to prepare himself only for a state of misery, be evidences of insanity, every sinner exhibits them plentifully. It was from this notion of the word, that the Latins termed repentance resipiscentia, a growing wise again, from re and sapere; or, according to Tertullian, Resipiscentia, quasi receptio mentis ad se, restoring the mind to itself: Contra Marcion, lib. ii. Repentance, then, implies that a measure of Divine wisdom is communicated to the sinner, and that he thereby becomes wise to salvation. That his mind, purposes, opinions, and inclinations, are changed; and that, in consequence, there is a total change in his conduct. It need scarcely be remarked, that, in this state, a man feels deep anguish of soul, because he has sinned against God, unfitted himself for heaven, and exposed his soul to hell. Hence, a true penitent has that sorrow, whereby he forsakes sin, not only because it has been ruinous to his own soul, but because it has been offensive to God.

The kingdom of heaven is at hand – Referring to the prophecy of Daniel, Dan_7:13,Dan_7:14, where the reign of Christ among men is expressly foretold. This phrase, and the kingdom of God, mean the same thing, viz. the dispensation of infinite mercy, and manifestation of eternal truth, by Christ Jesus, producing the true knowledge of God, accompanied with that worship which is pure and holy, worthy of that God who is its institutor and its object. But why is this called a kingdom? Because it has its laws, all the moral precepts of the Gospel: its subjects, all who believe in Christ Jesus: and its king, the Sovereign of heaven and earth. N. B. Jesus Christ never saved a soul which he did not govern; nor is this Christ precious or estimable to any man who does not feel a spirit of subjection to the Divine will.

But why is it called the kingdom of Heaven? Because God designed that his kingdom of grace here should resemble the kingdom of glory above. And hence our Lord teaches us to pray, Thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven. The kingdom of heaven is not meat and drink, says St. Paul, Rom_14:17; does not consist in the gratification of sensual passions, or worldly ambition; but is righteousness, peace, and joy, in the Holy Ghost. Now what can there be more than this in glory? Righteousness, without mixture of sin; peace, without strife or contention; joy, in the Holy Ghost, spiritual joy, without mixture of misery! And all this, it is possible, by the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, to enjoy here below. How then does heaven itself differ from this state? Answer. It makes the righteousness eternal, the peace eternal, and the joy eternal. This is the heaven of heavens! The phrase, kingdom of heaven, מלכות שמים malcuth shamayim, is frequently used by the rabbinical writers, and always means, the purity of the Divine worship, and the blessedness which a righteous man feels when employed in it.

It is farther added, This kingdom is at hand. The dispensation of the glorious Gospel was now about to be fully opened, and the Jews were to have the first offers of salvation. This kingdom is also at hand to us; and wherever Christ crucified is preached, there is salvation to be found. Jesus is proclaimed to thee, O man! as infinitely able and willing to save. Believe in his name – cast thy soul upon his atonement, and enter into rest!

A.T. Robertson
Mar 1:14
Jesus came into Galilee (elthen ho Iesous eis ten Galilaian). Here Mark begins the narrative of the active ministry of Jesus and he is followed by Matthew and Luke. Mark undoubtedly follows the preaching of Peter. But for the Fourth Gospel we should not know of the year of work in various parts of the land (Perea, Galilee, Judea, Samaria) preceding the Galilean ministry. John supplements the Synoptic Gospels at this point as often. The arrest of John had much to do with the departure of Jesus from Judea to Galilee (Joh_4:1-4).

Preaching the gospel of God (kerusson to euaggelion tou theou). It is the subjective genitive, the gospel that comes from God. Swete observes that repentance (metanoia) is the keynote in the message of the Baptist as gospel (euaggelion) is with Jesus. But Jesus took the same line as John and proclaimed both repentance and the arrival of the kingdom of God. Mark adds to Matthew’s report the words “the time is fulfilled” (peplerotai ho kairos). It is a significant fact that John looks backward to the promise of the coming of the Messiah and signalizes the fulfilment as near at hand (perfect passive indicative). It is like Paul’s fulness of time (pleroma tou chronou) in Gal_4:4 and fulness of the times (pleroma ton kairon) in Eph_1:10 when he employs the word kairos, opportunity or crisis as here in Mark rather than the more general term chronos. Mark adds here also: “and believe in the gospel” (kai pisteuete en toi euaggelioi). Both repent and believe in the gospel. Usually faith in Jesus (or God) is expected as in Joh_14:1. But this crisis called for faith in the message of Jesus that the Messiah had come. He did not use here the term Messiah, for it had come to have political connotations that made its use at present unwise. But the kingdom of God had arrived with the presence of the King. It does make a difference what one believes. Belief or disbelief in the message of Jesus made a sharp cleavage in those who heard him. “Faith in the message was the first step; a creed of some kind lies at the basis of confidence in the Person of Christ, and the occurrence of the phrase pistuete en toi euaggelioi in the oldest record of the teaching of our Lord is a valuable witness to this fact” (Swete).

Adam Clarke
Mar 1:15
The time is fulfilled – That is, the time appointed for sending the Messiah; and particularly the time specified by Daniel, Dan_9:24-27. Here are four points worthy of deep attention, in the preaching of the Son of God.

1. Every thing that is done is according to a plan laid by the Divine wisdom, and never performed till the time appointed was filled up.

2. That the kingdom and reign of sin are to be destroyed, and the kingdom of grace and heaven established in their place.

3. That the kingdom of God, and his reign by grace, begins with repentance for past sins.

4. That this reign of grace is at hand; and that nothing but an obstinate perseverance in sin and impenitence can keep any soul out of it; and that now is the accepted time to enter in.

Albert Barnes
Mar 1:15
Repent ye – Repentance implies sorrow for past offences 2Co_7:10; a deep sense of the evil of sin as committed against God Psa_51:4; and a full purpose to turn from transgression and to lead a holy life. A true penitent has sorrow for sin, not only because it is ruinous to his soul, but chiefly because it is an offence against God, and is that abominable thing which he hates, Jer_44:4. It is produced by seeing the great danger and misery to which it exposes us; by seeing the justice and holiness of God Job_42:6; and by seeing that our sins have been committed against Christ, and were the cause of his death, Zec_12:10; Luk_22:61-62. There are two words in the New Testament translated “repentance,” one of which denotes a change of mind, or a reformation of life; and the other, sorrow or regret that sin has been committed. The word used here is the former, calling the Jews to a change of life, or a reformation of conduct. In the time of John, the nation had become extremely wicked and corrupt, perhaps more so than at any preceding period. Hence, both he and Christ began their ministry by calling the nation to repentance.

The kingdom of heaven is at hand – The phrases kingdom of heaven, kingdom of Christ, kingdom of God, are of frequent occurrence in the Bible. They all refer to the same thing. The expectation of such a kingdom was taken from the Old Testament, and especially from Daniel, Dan_7:13-14. The prophets had told of a successor to David that should sit on his throne 1Ki_2:4; 1Ki_8:25; Jer_33:17. The Jews expected a great national deliverer. They supposed that when the Messiah should appear, all the dead would be raised; that the judgment would take place; and that the enemies of the Jews would be destroyed, and that they themselves would be advanced to great national dignity and honor.

The language in which they were accustomed to describe this event was retained by our Saviour and his apostles. Yet they early attempted to correct the common notions respecting his reign. This was one design, doubtless, of John in preaching repentance. Instead of summoning them to military exercises, and collecting an army, which would have been in accordance with the expectations of the nation, he called them to a change of life; to the doctrine of repentance – a state of things far more accordant with the approach of a kingdom of purity.

The phrases “kingdom of God” and “kingdom of heaven” have been supposed to have a considerable variety of meaning. Some have supposed that they refer to the state of things in heaven; others, to the personal reign of Christ on earth; others, that they mean the church, or the reign of Christ in the hearts of his people. There can be no doubt that there is reference in the words to the condition of things in heaven after this life. But the church of God is a preparatory state to that beyond the grave – a state in which Christ pre-eminently rules and reigns and there is no doubt that the phrases sometimes refer to the state of things in the church; and that they may refer, therefore, to the state of things which the Messiah was to set up his spiritual reign begun in the church on earth and completed in heaven.

The expression “the kingdom of heaven is at hand” would be best translated, “the reign of God draws near.” We do not say commonly of a kingdom that it is movable, or that it approaches. A reign may be said to be at hand; and it may be said with propriety that the time when Christ would reign was at hand. In this sense it is meant that the time when Christ should reign, or set up his kingdom, or begin his dominion on earth, under the Christian economy, was about to commence. The phrase, then, should not be confined to any period of that reign, but includes his whole dominion over his people on earth and in heaven.

In the passage here it clearly means that the coming of the Messiah was near, or that the time of the reign of God which the Jews had expected was coming.

The word “heaven,” or “heavens,” as it is in the original, means sometimes the place so called; and sometimes it is, by a figure of speech, put for the Great Being whose residence is there, as in Dan_4:26; “the Heavens do rule.” See also Mar_11:30; Luk_15:18. As that kingdom was one of purity, it was proper that the people should prepare themselves for it by turning from their sins, and by bringing their hearts into a state suitable to his reign.

Catena Aurea
Mar 1:16-20
Theophylact: As the Evangelist John relates, Peter and Andrew were disciples of the Forerunner, but seeing that John had borne witness to Jesus, they joined themselves to him; afterwards, grieving that John had been cast into prison, they returned to their trade. Wherefore there follows, “casting nets into the sea, for they were fishers.”

Look then upon them, living on their own labours, not on the fruits of iniquity; for such men were worthy to become the first disciples of Christ; whence it is subjoined, “And Jesus said unto them, Come ye after Me.”

Now He calls them for the second time; for this is the second calling in respect of that, of which we read in John. But it is shewn to what they were called, when it is added, “I will make you become fishers of men.”

Bede, in Marc., 1, 6: Now fishers and unlettered men are sent to preach, that the faith of believers might be thought to lie in the power of God, not in eloquence or in learning. It goes on to say, “and immediately they left their nets, and followed Him.”

Theophylact: For we must not allow any time to lapse, but at once follow the Lord. After these again, He catches James and John, because they also, though poor, supported the old age of their father.

Wherefore there follows, “And when He had gone a little farther thence, He saw James, the son of Zebedee, &c.”

But they left their father, because he would have hindered them in following Christ. Do thou, also, when thou art hindered by thy parents, leave them, and come to God. It is shewn by this that Zebedee was not a believer; but the mother of the Apostles believed, for she followed Christ, when Zebedee was dead.

Bede: It may be asked, how he could call two fishers from each of the boats, (first, Peter and Andrew, then having gone a little further, the two others, sons of Zebedee,) when Luke says that James and John were called to help Peter and Andrew, and that it was to Peter only that Christ said, “Fear not, from this time thou shalt catch men;” [Luke 5:!0] he also says, that “at the same time, when they had brought their ships to land, they followed Him.”

We must therefore understand that the transaction which Luke intimates happened first, and afterwards that they, as their custom was, had returned to their fishing. So that what Mark here relates happened afterwards; for in this case they followed the Lord, without drawing their boats ashore, (which they would have done had they meant to return,) and followed Him, as one calling them, and ordering them to follow.

Theophylact: We must know also, that action is first called, then contemplation; for Peter is the type of the active life, for he was more ardent than the others, just as the active life is the more bustling; but John is the type of the contemplative life, for he speaks more fully of divine things.

Adam Clarke
Mar 1:16
Andrew his brother – Instead of the common reading, αδελφον αυτου, his brother, the best MSS. and versions have αδελφου του Σιμωνος, the brother of Simon, which should be received into the text. The most eminent critics approve of this reading.

Simon called Peter, and Andrew his brother – Why did not Jesus Christ call some of the eminent Scribes or Pharisees to publish his Gospel, and not poor unlearned fishermen, without credit or authority? Because it was the kingdom of heaven they were to preach, and their teaching must come from above: besides, the conversion of sinners, though it be effected instrumentally by the preaching of the Gospel, yet the grand agent in it is the Spirit of God. As the instruments were comparatively mean, and, the work which was accomplished by them was grand and glorious, the excellency of the power at once appeared to be of God, and not of man; and thus the glory, due alone to his name, was secured, and the great Operator of all good had the deserved praise. Seminaries of learning, in the order of God’s providence and grace, have great and important uses; and, in reference to such uses, they should be treated with great respect: but to make preachers of the Gospel is a matter to which they are utterly inadequate; it is a, prerogative that God never did, and never will, delegate to man.
Where the seed of the kingdom of God is sowed, and a dispensation of the Gospel is committed to a man, a good education may be of great and general use: but it no more follows, because a man has had a good education, that therefore he is qualified to preach the Gospel, than it does, that because he has not had that, therefore he is unqualified; for there may be much ignorance of Divine things where there is much human learning; and a man may be well taught in the things of God, and be able to teach others, who has not had the advantages of a liberal education.

Men-made ministers have almost ruined the heritage of God. To prevent this, our Church requires that a man be inwardly moved to take upon himself this ministry, before he can be ordained to it. And he who cannot say, that he trusts (has rational and Scriptural conviction) that he is moved by the Holy Ghost to take upon himself this office, is an intruder into the heritage of God, and his ordination, ipso facto, vitiated and of none effect. See the truly apostolic Ordination Service of the Church of England.

Fishers – Persons employed in a lawful and profitable avocation, and faithfully discharging their duty in it. It was a tradition of the elders, that one of Joshua’s ten precepts was, that all men should have an equal right to spread their nets and fish in the sea of Tiberias, or Galilee. The persons mentioned here were doubtless men of pure morals; for the minister of God should have a good report from them that are without.

Albert Barnes
Mar 1:16
Sea of Galilee – This was also called the Sea of Tiberias and the Lake of Gennesareth, and also the Sea of Chinnereth, Num_34:11; Deu_3:17; Jos_12:3. Its form is an irregular oval, with the large end to the north. It is about 14 miles in length, and from 6 miles to 9 miles in width. It is about 600 feet lower than the Mediterranean, and this great depression accounts for some of its special phenomena. There is no part of Palestine, it is said, which can be compared in beauty with the environs of this lake. Many populous cities once stood on its shores, such as Tiberias, Bethsaida, Capernaum, Chorazin, Hippo, etc. The shores are described by Josephus as a perfect paradise, producing every luxury under heaven at all seasons of the year, and its remarkable beauty is still noticed by the traveler. “Seen from any point of the surrounding heights, it is a fine sheet of water a burnished mirror set in a framework of surrounding hills and rugged mountains, which rise and roll backward and upward to where hoary Hermon hangs the picture on the blue vault of heaven.” The lake is fed mainly by the Jordan; but besides this there are several great fountains and streams emptying into it during the rainy seasons, which pour an immense amount of water into it, raising its level several feet above the ordinary mark. See The Land and the Book (Thomson), vol. ii. p. 77. Lieutenant Lynch reports its greatest ascertained depth at 165 feet. The waters of the lake are sweet and pleasant to the taste, and clear. The lake still abounds with fish, and gives employment, as it did in the time of our Saviour, to those who live on its shores. It is, however, stormy, probably due to the high hills by which it is surrounded.

Simon called Peter – The name “Peter” means a rock, and is the same as “Cephas.” See the Mat_16:18 note; also Joh_1:42 note; 1Co_15:5 note.

Albert Barnes
Mar 1:20
With the hired servants (meta ton misthoton). One hired for wages (misthos), a very old Greek word. Zebedee and his two sons evidently had an extensive business in co-operation with Andrew and Simon (Luk_5:7, Luk_5:10). Mark alone has this detail of the hired servants left with Zebedee. They left the boat and their father (Mat_4:22) with the hired servants. The business would go on while they left all (Luk_5:11) and became permanent followers of Jesus. Many a young man has faced precisely this problem when he entered the ministry. Could he leave father and mother, brothers and sisters, while he went forth to college and seminary to become a fisher of men? Not the least of the sacrifices made in the education of young preachers is that made by the home folks who have additional burdens to bear because the young preacher is no longer a bread-winner at home. Most young preachers joyfully carry on such burdens after entering the ministry.

Catena Aurea
Mar 1:21-22
Theophylact: For this end the Law commanded them to give themselves up to rest on the sabbath day, that they might meet together to attend to sacred reading. Again, Christ taught them by rebuke, not by flattery as did the Pharisees; wherefore it says, “And they were astonished at His doctrine; for He taught them as one having power, and not as the Scribes.”

He taught them also in power, transforming men to good, and He threatened punishment to those who did not believe on Him.

Bede: The Scribes themselves taught the people what was written in Moses and the Prophets; but Jesus as the God and Lord of Moses, himself, by the freedom of His own will, either added those things which appeared wanting in the Law, or altered things as He preached to the people; as we read in Matthew, “It was said to them of old time, but I say unto you.” [Mat_5:27]

A.T. Robertson
Mar 1:21
And taught (edidasken). Inchoative imperfect, began to teach as soon as he entered the synagogue in Capernaum on the sabbath. The synagogue in Capernaum afforded the best opening for the teaching of Jesus. He had now made Capernaum (Tell Hum) his headquarters after the rejection in Nazareth as explained in Luke 4:16-31 and Mat_4:13-16. The ruins of this synagogue have been discovered and there is even talk of restoring the building since the stones are in a good state of preservation. Jesus both taught (didasko) and preached (kerusso) in the Jewish synagogues as opportunity was offered by the chief or leader of the synagogue (archisunagogos). The service consisted of prayer, praise, reading of scripture, and exposition by any rabbi or other competent person. Often Paul was invited to speak at such meetings. In Luk_4:20 Jesus gave back the roll of Isaiah to the attendant or beadle (toi huperetei) whose business it was to bring out the precious manuscript and return it to its place. Jesus was a preacher of over a year when he began to teach in the Capernaum synagogue. His reputation had preceded him (Luk_4:14).

John Calvin
Mar 1:22
And they were astonished at his doctrine. The meaning of the Evangelists is, that the power of the Spirit shone in the preaching of Christ with such brightness, as to extort admiration even from irreligious and cold hearers. Luke says, that his discourse was accompanied with power, that is, full of majesty. Mark expresses it more fully, by adding a contrast, that it was unlike the manner of teaching of the Scribes. As they were false expounders of Scripture, their doctrine was literal and dead, breathed nothing of the power of the Spirit, and was utterly destitute of majesty. The same kind of coldness may be now observed in the speculative theology of Popery. Those masters do indeed thunder out whatever they think proper in a sufficiently magisterial style; but as their manner of discoursing about divine things is so profane, that their controversies exhibit no traces of religion, what they bring forward is all affectation and mere drivelling: for the declaration of the Apostle Paul holds true, that the kingdom of God is not in word, but in power, (1Co_4:20.) In short, the Evangelists mean that, while the manner of teaching, which then prevailed, was so greatly degenerated and so extremely corrupted, that it did not impress the minds of men with any reverence for God, the preaching of Christ was eminently distinguished by the divine power of the Spirit, which procured for him the respect of his hearers. This is the power, or rather the majesty and authority, at which the people were astonished.

John Gill
Mar 1:22 And they were astonished at his doctrine,…. The nature and importance of it, it being what they had not been used to hear; only at best the doctrine of the law, and sometimes only the traditions of the elders, or an allegorical and traditional sense of the Scriptures, and things very trifling and unedifying: and also they were amazed at the manner of his preaching, which was with so much gracefulness, gravity, and majesty, and was attended with so much evidence and power:

for he taught them as one having authority, and not as the Scribes; or “their Scribes”, as the Syriac, Persic, and Ethiopic versions read. He did not go about to establish what he said by the authority of the Rabbins, as the Scribes did; saying, Hillell says so, or Shammai says thus, or such a doctor says thus and thus; but he spoke as from himself, as one sent of God, that had an authority from him, and was independent of man; and this was what they had not observed in others, and wonder at it; See Gill on Mat_7:28. See Gill on Mat_7:29.

Albert Barnes
His doctrine – His teaching.

As one having authority, and not as the scribes – The scribes were the learned people and teachers of the Jewish nation, and were principally Pharisees. They taught chiefly the sentiments of their Rabbis, and the traditions which had been delivered; they consumed much of their time in useless disputes and “vain jangling.” Jesus was open, plain, grave, useful, delivering truth as “became” the oracles of God; not spending his time in trifling disputes and debating questions of no importance, but confirming his doctrine by miracles and argument; teaching “as having power,” as it is in the original, and not in the vain and foolish manner of the Jewish doctors. He showed that he had authority to explain, to enforce, and to “change” the ceremonial laws of the Jews. He came with authority such as no “man” could have, and it is not remarkable that his explanations astonished them.

A.T. Robertson
Mar 1:22
They were astonished (exeplessonto). Pictorial imperfect as in Luk_4:32 describing the amazement of the audience, “meaning strictly to strike a person out of his senses by some strong feeling, such as fear, wonder, or even joy” (Gould).

And not as their scribes (kai ouch hos hoi grammateis). Luk_4:32 has only “with authority” (en exousiai). Mark has it “as having authority” (hos echon exousian). He struck a note not found by the rabbi. They quoted other rabbis and felt their function to be expounders of the traditions which they made a millstone around the necks of the people. By so doing they set aside the word and will of God by their traditions and petty legalism (Mar_7:9, Mar_7:13). They were casuists and made false interpretations to prove their punctilious points of external etiquette to the utter neglect of the spiritual reality. The people noticed at once that here was a personality who got his power (authority) direct from God, not from the current scribes. “Mark omits much, and is in many ways a meagre Gospel, but it makes a distinctive contribution to the evangelic history in showing by a few realistic touches (this one of them) the remarkable personality of Jesus” (Bruce). See note on Mat_7:29 for the like impression made by the Sermon on the Mount where the same language occurs. The chief controversy in Christ’s life was with these scribes, the professional teachers of the oral law and mainly Pharisees. At once the people see that Jesus stands apart from the old group. He made a sensation in the best sense of that word. There was a buzz of excitement at the new teacher that was increased by the miracle that followed the sermon.

Catena Aurea
Mar 1:23-28
Bede, in Marc., 1, 7: Since by the envy of the devil death first entered into the world, it was right that the medicine of healing should first work against the author of death; and therefore it is said, “And there was in their synagogue a man, &c.”

Pseudo-Chrys., Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc.: The word, Spirit, is applied to an Angel, the air, the soul, and even the Holy Ghost. Lest therefore by the sameness of the name we should fall into error, he adds, “unclean.” And he is called unclean on account of his impiousness and far removal from God, and because he employs himself in all unclean and wicked works.

Augustine, City of God, 21: Moreover, how great is the power which the lowliness of God, appearing in the form of a servant, has over the pride of devils, the devils themselves know so well, that they express it to the same Lord clothed in the weakness of flesh. For there follows, “And he cried out, saying, What have we to do we Thee, Jesus of Nazareth, &c.”

For it is evident in these words that there was in them knowledge, but there was not charity; and the reason was, that they feared their punishment from Him, and loved not the righteousness in Him.

Bede: For the devils, seeing the Lord on the earth, thought that they were immediately to be judged.

Pseudo-Chrys., Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc.: Or else the devil so speaks, as if he said, ‘by taking away uncleanness, and giving to the souls of men divine knowledge, Thou allowest us no place in men.’

Pseudo-Chrys., Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc.: As if he said, Methinks that Thou art come; for he had not a firm and certain knowledge of the coming of God. But he calls Him “holy” not as one of many, for every prophet was also holy, but he proclaims that the was the One holy; by the article in Greek he shews Him to be the One, but by his fear he shews Him to be Lord of all.
Augustine: For He was known to them in that degree in which He wished to be known; and He wished as much as was fitting. He was not known to them as to the holy Angels, who enjoy Him by partaking of His eternity according as He is the Word of God; but as He was to be made known in terror, to those beings from whose tyrannical power He was about to free the predestinate.He was known therefore to the devils, not in that He is eternal Life, [see 1Jo_5:20, Joh_17:3] but by some temporal effects of His Power, which might be more clear to the angelic senses of even bad spirits than to the weakness of men.

Pseudo-Chrys., Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc.: Further, the Truth did not wish to have the witness of unclean spirits.

Wherefore there follows, “And Jesus threatened him, saying, &c.” Whence a healthful precept is given to us; let us not believe devils, howsoever they may proclaim the truth. It goes on, “And the unclean spirit tearing him, &c.”

For because the man spoke as one in his senses and uttered his words with discretion, lest it should be thought that he put together his words not from the devil but out of his own heart, He permitted the man to be torn by the devil, that He might shew that it was the devil who spoke.

Theophylact: That they might know, when they saw it, from how great an evil the man was freed, and on account of the miracle might believe.

Bede: But it may appear to be a discrepancy, that he should have gone out of him, tearing him, or, as some copies have it, vexing him, when, according to Luke, he did not hurt him. But Luke himself says, “When He had cast him into the midst, he came out of him, without hurting him.” [Luk_4:35] Wherefore it is inferred that Mark meant by vexing or tearing him, what Luke expresses in the words, “When He had cast him into the midst;” so that what he goes on to say, “And did not hurt him,” may be understood to mean that the tossing of his limbs and vexing did not weaken him, as devils are wont to come out even with the cutting off and tearing away of limbs. But seeing the power of the miracle, they wonder at the newness of our Lord’s doctrine, and are roused to search into what they had heard by what they had seen. Wherefore there follows, “And they all wondered, &c.”

For miracles were done that they might more firmly believe the Gospel of the kingdom of God, which was being preached, since those who were promising heavenly joys to men on earth, were shewing forth heavenly things and divine works even on earth. For before (as the Evangelist says) “He was teaching them as one who had power,” and now, as the crowd witnesses, “with power He commands the evil spirits, and they obey Him.” It goes on, “And immediately His fame spread abroad, &c.”

Adam Clarke
Mar 1:23
A man with an unclean spirit – This demoniac is only mentioned by Mark and Luke, Luk_4:33. It seems the man had lucid intervals; else he could not have been admitted into the synagogue. Unclean or impure spirit – a common epithet for those fallen spirits: but here it may mean, one who filled the heart of him he possessed with Lascivious thoughts, images, desires, and propensities. By giving way to the first attacks of such a spirit, he may soon get in, and take full possession of the whole soul.

Albert Barnes
Much difficulty exists, and much has been written respecting those in the New Testament said to be possessed with the devil. It has been maintained by many that the sacred writers only meant by this expression to denote those who were melancholy or epileptic, or afflicted with some other grievous disease. This opinion has been supported by arguments too long to be repeated here. On the other hand, it has been supposed that the persons so described were under the influence of evil spirits, who had complete possession of the faculties, and who produced many symptoms of disease not unlike melancholy, madness, and epilepsy. That such was the fact will appear from the following considerations:

1. Christ and the apostles spoke to them and of them as such; they addressed them, and managed them, precisely as if they were so possessed, leaving their hearers to infer beyond a doubt that such was their real opinion.

2. Those who were thus possessed spake, conversed, asked questions, gave answers, and expressed their knowledge of Christ, and their fear of him things that certainly could not be said of diseases, Mat_8:28; Luk_8:27.

3.The devils, or evil spirits, are represented as going out of the persons possessed, and entering the bodies of others, Mat_8:32.

4. Jesus spake to them, and asked their name, and they answered him. He threatened them, commanded them to be silent, to depart, and not to return, Mar_1:25; Mar_5:8; Mar_9:25.

5. Those possessed are said “to know Christ; to be acquainted with the Son of God,” Luk_4:34; Mar_1:24. This could not be said of diseases.

6. The early fathers of the Church interpreted these passages in the same way. They derived their opinions probably from the apostles themselves, and their opinions are a fair interpretation of the apostles’ sentiments.

7. If it is denied that Christ believed in such possessions, it does not appear why any other clearly-expressed sentiment of his may not in the same way be disputed. There is, perhaps, no subject on which he expressed himself more clearly, or acted more uniformly, or which he left more clearly impressed on the minds of his disciples.

Nor is there any absurdity in the opinion that those persons were really under the influence of devils. For:

1. It is no more absurd to suppose that an angel, or many angels, should have fallen and become wicked than that so many people should.

2. It is no more absurd that Satan should have possession of the human faculties, or inflict diseases, than that people should do it a thing which is done every day. What is more common than for a wicked man to corrupt the morals of others, or, by inducing them to become intemperate, to produce a state of body and mind quite as bad as to be possessed with the devil?

3. We still see a multitude of cases that no man can prove not to be produced by the presence of an evil spirit. Who would attempt to say that some evil being may not have much to do in the case of madmen?

4. It afforded an opportunity for Christ to show his power over the enemies of himself and of man, and thus to evince himself qualified to meet every enemy of the race, and triumphantly to redeem his people. He came to destroy the power of Satan, Act_26:18; Rom_16:20-21.

A.T. Robertson
Mar 1:23
With an unclean spirit (en pneumati akathartoi). This use of en “with” is common in the Septuagint like the Hebrew be, but it occurs also in the papyri. It is the same idiom as “in Christ,” “in the Lord” so common with Paul. In English we speak of our being in love, in drink, in his cups, etc. The unclean spirit was in the man and the man in the unclean spirit, a man in the power of the unclean spirit. Luke has “having,” the usual construction. See Mat_22:43. Unclean spirit is used as synonymous with

demon (daimonion). It is the idea of estrangement from God (Zec_13:2). The whole subject of demonology is difficult, but no more so than the problem of the devil. Jesus distinguishes between the man and the unclean spirit. Usually physical or mental disease accompanied the possession by demons. One wonders today if the degenerates and confirmed criminals so common now are not under the power of demons. The only cure for confirmed criminals seems to be conversion (a new heart).

Adam Clarke
Mar 1:24
What have we to do with thee – Or, What is it to us and to thee? or, What business hast thou with us? That this is the meaning of the original, τι ημιν και σοι, Kypke has sufficiently shown. There is a phrase exactly like it in 2Sa_16:10. What have I to do with you, ye sons of Zeruiah? מה לי ולכם בני צרויה ma li v’lacem beney Tseruiah, What business have ye with me, or, Why do ye trouble me, ye sons of Tseruiah? The Septuagint translate the Hebrew just as the evangelist does here, τι εμοι και υμιν; it is the same idiom in both places, as there can be no doubt that the demoniac spoke in Hebrew, or in the Chaldeo-Syriac dialect of that language, which was then common in Judea. See on Mat_8:29 (note).

Art thou come to destroy us? – We may suppose this spirit to have felt and spoken thus: “Is this the time of which it hath been predicted, that in it the Messiah should destroy all that power which we have usurped and exercised over the bodies and souls of men? Alas! it is so. I now plainly see who thou art – the Holy One of God, who art come to destroy unholiness, in which we have our residence, and through which we have our reign in the souls of men.” An unholy spirit is the only place where Satan can have his full operation, and show forth the plenitude of his destroying power.

Albert Barnes
Mark 1:24
Let us alone – Though only one impure spirit is mentioned as possessing this man, yet that spirit speaks also in the name of others.

They were leagued together in the work of evil, and this one knew that if he was punished, others would also share the same fate.

What have we to do with thee? – See the notes at Mat_8:29. By this the spirit meant to say that, if Jesus cast him out, he would use an improper interference. But this was untrue. The possession of the man was a direct assault upon God and his works. Jesus came to destroy the works of the devil, and Jesus had a right, therefore, to liberate the captive, and to punish him who had possessed him. So Satan still considers it an infringement of his rights when God frees a “sinner” from bondage and destroys his influence over the soul. So he still asks to be let alone, and to be suffered to lead people captive at his will.

Art thou come to destroy us? – Implying that this could not be the intention of the “benevolent” Messiah; that to be cast out of that man would, in fact, be his destruction, and that therefore he might be suffered still to remain. Or it may imply, as in Mat_8:29, that the time of their destruction had not come, and that he ought not to destroy them before that.

I know thee who thou art – Evil spirits seem to have been acquainted at once with the Messiah. Besides, they had learned from his miracles that he was the Messiah, and had power over them.

The Holy One of God – The Messiah. See Dan_9:24. Jesus is called “the Holy One of God” because:

1. Jesus was eminently pure.

2. Because Jesus was the only begotten Son of God – equal with the Father. And,

3. Because Jesus was anointed (set apart) to the work of the Messiah, the mediator between God and man.

George Haydock
Mar 1:25 Christ would not suffer the devils to be produced as witnesses of his divinity; the author of truth could not bear the father of lies to bear testimony of him. Hence Jesus threatened him, in order to teach us never to believe or put our trust in demons, whatever they may foretell. (St. John Chrysostom)

Matthew Poole
Mar 1:25
Ver. 25,26. It is both here and in many other places observable, that when the devils made a confession of Christ, yet neither Christ nor his apostles would ever take any notice of it. Truth is never advantaged from the confession of known liars, as the devil was from the beginning. Christ needed not the devil’s testimony, either to his holiness, or his being the Son of God, nor would he have people allow the least faith to the devil’s words. Nor was he to be imposed upon by the devil’s good words; he was to make no truce with him, but to destroy him and his works, he therefore charges him to hold his peace, and to come out.

Albert Barnes
Mar 1:25
And Jesus rebuked him – Chided him, or commanded him, with a threatening.

This was not the man that Jesus rebuked, but the spirit, for he instantly commanded the same being to come out of the man. In all this, Jesus did not once address the man. His conversation was with the evil spirit, proving conclusively that it was not a mere disease or mental derangement – for how could the Son of God hold converse with “disease” or “insanity?” – but that he conversed with a “being” who also conversed, reasoned, cavilled, felt, resisted, and knew him. There are, therefore, evil spirits, and those spirits have taken possession of human beings.

Hold thy peace – Greek, “Be muzzled.” “Restrain thyself.” “Cease from complaints, and come out of the man.” This was a very signal proof of the power of Jesus, to be able by a word to silence an evil angel, and, against his will, to compel him to leave a man whom he delighted to torment.

A.T. Robertson
Mar 1:25
Hold thy peace (phimotheti). First aorist passive imperative of phimoo. “Be quiet,” Moffatt translates it. But it is a more vigorous word, “Be muzzled” like an ox. So literally in Deu_25:4, 1Co_9:9; 1Ti_5:18. It is common in Josephus, Lucian, and the lxx. See Mat_22:12, Mat_22:34. Gould renders it “Shut up.” “Shut your mouth” would be too colloquial. Vincent suggests “gagged,” but that is more the idea of epistomazein in Tit_1:11, to stop the mouth.

Albert Barnes
Mar 1:26
And when the unclean spirit … – Still malignant, though doomed to obey – submitting because he was obliged to, not because he chose – he exerted his last power, inflicted all the pain he could, and then bowed to the Son of God and came out.

This is the nature of an evil disposition. Though compelled to obey, though prevented by the command and providence of God from doing what it “would,” yet, in seeming to obey, it does all the ill it can, and makes even the appearance of obedience the occasion for increased crime and mischief.

A.T. Robertson
Mar 1:26
Tearing him (sparaxan auton). Margin, convulsing him like a spasm. Medical writers use the word for the rotating of the stomach. Luk_4:35 adds “when the demon had thrown him down in the midst.” Mark mentions the “loud voice” (phonei megalei), a screech, in fact. It was a moment of intense excitement.

A.T. Robertson
Mar 1:27
They questioned among themselves (sunzetein autous). By look and word.

A new teaching (didache kaine). One surprise had followed another this day. The teaching was fresh (kaine), original as the dew of the morning on the blossoms just blown. That was a novelty in that synagogue where only staid and stilted rabbinical rules had been heretofore droned out. This new teaching charmed the people, but soon will be rated as heresy by the rabbis. And it was with authority (kat’ exousian). It is not certain whether the phrase is to be taken with “new teaching,” “It’s new teaching with authority behind it,” as Moffatt has it, or with the verb; “with authority commandeth even the unclean spirits” (kai tois pneumasin tois akathartois epitassei). The position is equivocal and may be due to the fact that “Mark gives the incoherent and excited remarks of the crowd in this natural form” (Swete). But the most astonishing thing of all is that the demons “obey him” (hupakouousin autoi). The people were accustomed to the use of magical formulae by the Jewish exorcists (Mat_12:27; Act_19:13), but here was something utterly different. Simon Magus could not understand how Simon Peter could do his miracles without some secret trick and even offered to buy it (Act_8:19).

Adam Clarke
Mar 1:28
And immediately his fame spread abroad – The miracle which he had performed was -

1. great;

2. evidenced much benevolence in the worker of it; and

3. was very public, being wrought in the synagogue.

The many who saw it published it wherever they went; and thus the fame of Christ, as an incomparable teacher, and unparalleled worker of miracles, became soon spread abroad through the land.

The word, ευθεως, immediately, occurs more frequently in this evangelist than in any other writer of the new covenant: it is very often superfluous, and may often be omitted in the translation, without any prejudice to the sense of the passage in which it is found. It seems to be used by St. Mark, as our ancient writers used forsooth, and such like words.

Catena Aurea
Mar 1:29-31
Bede, in Marc., 1, 7: First, it was right that the serpent’s tongue should be shut up, that it might not spread any more venom; then that the woman, who was first seduced, should be healed from the fever of carnal concupiscence. Wherefore it is said, “And forthwith, when they were come out of the synagogue, &c.”

Theophylact: He retired then as the custom was on the sabbath-day about evening to eat in His disciples’ house. But she who ought to have ministered was prevented by a fever. Wherefore it goes on, “But Simon’s wife’s mother was lying sick of a fever.”

Pseudo-Chrys., Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc., 1, 32: But the disciples, knowing that they were to receive a benefit by that means, without waiting for the evening prayed that Peter’s mother should be healed. Wherefore there follows, “who immediately tell Him of her.”

Bede: But in the Gospel of Luke it is written that “they besought Him for her.” [Luk_4:38] For the Saviour sometimes after being asked, sometimes of His own accord, heals the sick, shewing that He always assents to the prayers of the faithful, when they pray also against bad passions, and sometimes gives them to understand things which they do not understand at all, or else, when they pray unto Him dutifully, forgives their want of understanding; as the Psalmist begs of God, “Cleanse me, O Lord, from my secret faults.” [Psa_19:12] Wherefore He heals her at their request; for there follows, “And He came and took her by the hand, and lifted her up.”

Theophylact: By this it is signified, that God will heal a sick man, if he ministers to the Saints, through love to Christ.

Bede, in Marc., 1, 6: But in that He gives most profusely His gifts of healing and doctrine on the sabbath day, He teaches, that He is not under the Law, but above the Law, and does not choose the Jewish sabbath, but the true sabbath, and our rest is pleasing to the Lord, if, in order to attend to the health of our souls, we abstain from slavish work, that is, from all unlawful things. It goes on, “And immediately the fever left her, &c.”

Bede, in Marc., 1, 8: The health which is conferred at the command of the Lord, returns at once entire, accompanied with such strength that she is able to minister to those of whose help she had before stood in need.

Again, if we suppose that the man delivered from the devil means, in the moral way of interpretation, the soul purged from unclean thoughts, fitly does the woman cured of a fever by the command of God mean the flesh, restrained from the heat of it concupiscence by the precepts of continence.

John Calvin
Mar 1:29
They came, with James and John, into the house of Simon and Andrew.There is reason to conjecture, that Matthew does not relate this history in its proper order: for Mark expressly states, that there were only four disciples who attended Christ. Besides, when he left the synagogue, he went straight to Peter’s house; which also shows clearly, that Matthew did not observe, with exactness, the order of time. The Evangelists appear to have taken particular notice of this miracle; not that, in itself, it was more remarkable, or more worthy of being recorded, than other miracles, — but because, by means of it, Christ gave to his disciples a private and familiar illustration of his grace. Another reason was, that the healing of one woman gave occasion to many miracles, so that they came to him in great numbers, from every direction, to implore his assistance. A single word, in Luke’s narrative, presents to us more strikingly the power which Christ displayed; for he says, that Simon’s mother-in-law was held by a GREAT fever. It was a clearer and more affecting proof of divine power, that, in a moment, and by a single touch, he removed a strong and violent disease. He might have done it by the slightest expression of his will; but he touched her hand,(Mat_8:15 ,)either to mark his affection, or because he was aware that this sign was, at that time, advantageous: for we know, that he freely used outward signs, when the time required them.

George Haydock
Mar 1:30 It appears from St. Mark and St. Luke, that the cure of Peter’s mother-in-law and the other sick, here mentioned, happened after the preceding narrative, and probably on the same day. But St. Matthew does not observe this order; for having related that Jesus, after the sermon on the mount, entered Capharnaum, and healed the centurion’s servant, he hence takes occasion to mention this and the other miracles, which he had omitted, and which Jesus had wrought at his first coming to Capharnaum. (Rutter)

Further Thoughts on the Manhattan Declaration and a Response to Frank Beckwith

11/25/2009 – James White

I returned from a very enjoyable jaunt up and down South Mountain with my wife (on bicycles, of course) to discover that Southern Seminary President Albert Mohler had tweeted a link to my comments on the Manhattan Declaration. I am very thankful Dr. Mohler felt them worthy of notice. I said recently Dr. Mohler is the smartest Southern Baptist alive, and I gain much from listening to his podcasts (again while slowly cranking along on my quest to finish my second trip around the earth at the equator—only 2800 miles away now!).

Of course, one of the main questions I have received since posting my thoughts (and referring to those of John MacArthur) has to do with Dr. Mohler’s defense of his signing the document. It has never been my intention to excite that spectrum of folks who exist on the fringes of meaningful apologetics who are constantly looking for a new conflict, a new battle. Yes, I had read Dr. Mohler’s comments on why he signed the document prior to writing my article. I appreciate his position, but I beg to differ. I am thankful Dr. Mohler does not view the document as a theological manifesto requiring him to abandon a biblical view of the gospel. But as I and others have pointed out, it is difficult, if not impossible, to speak of what Christians should do, and in fact, must do, in the face of an ever increasingly hostile secularism, without doing so in the context of the gospel itself. In other words, a Christian who believes in the God-centeredness of the gospel of grace will respond differently to secularism than one who embraces a much more man-centered, works-oriented “gospel.” And given the long history of Rome’s violation of biblical teachings regarding the gospel (not just on the matter of sola fide, but the entire complex of doctrines that forms Rome’s sacramental system, including its rejection of sola scriptura, its sacerdotal priesthood, and its perfection-denying doctrine of the Mass as a propitiatory sacrifice), I, and others, find it impossible to speak in unison with a Church that claims to define “Church,” embody “Church,” all the while perverting the gospel of Christ. Our social duties are not separate from the gospel. They are defined by it. Now I accept that Dr. Mohler honestly believes the following words are true, and as a result, signed the document:
 

To Cont. Reading

I am working on a series of posts about why “I’m a Southern Baptist” and I came across this article from Bro. Tom Ascol. I thought I’d let this be kind of a intro into my series. Plus I wanted to put it on here before I forgot about it.

“Over the last several months I have repeatedly been asked why I support the Great Commission Resurgence Task Force (GCRTF) and the broader impetus that led to its formation. A full explanation would include some necessary nuances and caveats that transcend the limits of a blog post, but the main reasons can at least be summarized here. These are, quite obviously, my opinions.”

I believe:

1. The SBC is unhealthy to the point that if it does not significantly change, it will become irrelevant beyond recovery within a few years.
2. There are many who share my concerns–some of whom have already checked out of convention life while others are headed that way if things don’t change for the better.
3. The SBC represents loads of potential for being an instrument of great good in the kingdom of God. It has been such in the past, and still is in some degree at present, but the potential is greater than anything we have seen thus far.
4. There are some in the SBC whose vision for what the convention should be is theologically naive and missiologically counterproductive.
5. There are others in the SBC who don’t think about theology and missiology at all.
6. There are still over 6000 unreached people groups in the world–2000 years after our Lord commissioned His church to make disciples of all peoples.
7. The leaders who are at the helm of the call for a GCR are trustworthy men. I disagree with them on some doctrinal issues. But I do agree with them on the most important points of doctrine and I believe them to be men of integrity who will not kowtow to political pressure, even if it causes them to stand against men they esteem and love.
8. The GCRTF could–and should–come back with radical, convention-shocking recommendations that are rooted in a vision to marshal our resources to reach the nations.
9. The call for a GCR could be the greatest hope of this generation to unite churches around the gospel, under the sovereignty of God, to give our utmost energies to making disciples of the nations .Read the rest of the article here.

The Troubling Aspects of the Manhattan Declaration

11/23/2009 – James White

Because we honor justice and the common good, we will not comply with any edict that purports to compel our institutions to participate in abortions, embryo destructive research, assisted suicide and euthanasia, or any other anti life act; nor will we bend to any rule purporting to force us to bless immoral sexual partnerships, treat them as marriages or the equivalent, or refrain from proclaiming the truth, as we know it, about morality and immorality and marriage and the family. We will fully and ungrudgingly render to Caesar what is Caesar’s. But under no circumstances will we render to Caesar what is God’s.

These words conclude the Manhattan Declaration, promulgated November 20, 2009. There is much in this document that any serious-minded Christian not only can agree with, but simply must agree with. There is no question that the forces of secularism are moving quickly, under the guise of “social advancement” and “equal rights,” to attack, denigrate, and, in their highest hopes and aspirations, relegate the Christian worldview to the trash heap of history. Evil men, and women, hold positions of power in Western societies, and since it is inevitably true that the Christian witness enrages those who love the darkness (John 7:7), they are doing all they can to subvert and silence that witness which so exposes their consciences. The general statements of the document relating to life, abortion, marriage, sexuality, and religious liberty, are well stated and timely. There is something reassuring in realizing that the concerns we have had are shared across a broad spectrum.

But there are a number of troubling things that I cannot get past in examining this document and considering its implications. When I see some of the leading ecumenists in the forefront of the documents’ production, I am made uneasy, and for good reason. Great damage has been done to the cause of Christ by those who have sought to promote the Kingdom by compromising the gospel, the only power given to the church that can change hearts, and hence change societies. By relegating the gospel to a matter of opinion and difference, but not something that defines the Christian faith, these ecumenists have left their followers with a cause without power, a quest without a solution. And though their open-mindedness fits better with our current post-modern culture, from a biblical perspective, they have truly betrayed the apostolic example.

This document presents a Christianity ostensibly based upon bare Trinitarianism. I listened to Chuck Colson speak on the Hugh Hewitt program this afternoon. He made it very clear that this is, in fact, a theological document, despite the assertions of others that it is not. He was asked why Jews, Mormons, and others, were not invited to sign the document. He said they were not asked because this is a specifically Christian statement, quoting from the Christian scriptures. Once again we are led to the inevitable conclusion that “Christian” then is “Trinitarianism plus agreed upon historical truths such as the crucifixion and resurrection, but, most importantly, without any gospel content.” It does no good to muddle this discussion with “Well, what about the medieval church” questions, since we are talking about a day and age when the issues are well known. We are not talking about a dark period of biblical ignorance. There is more light available today than ever before. And for many, the gospel is simply no longer part of the “non-negotiables.”

But I am left confused by the inconsistency of the document. Mormons are not invited. Understandable, given that the LDS faith is the most polytheistic faith I’ve ever encountered. Trinitarians only need apply. I can fully understand that. So…why are we told toward the end of this Declaration that Martin Luther King, Jr., wrote from an explicitly Christian perspective? A brief visit to Martin Luther King’s writings will reveal he was hardly orthodox even using the limited definition utilized by this Declaration. For example, writing in a paper while in seminary, Martin Luther King, Jr. said:

The orthodox attempt to explain the divinity of Jesus in terms of an inherent metaphysical substance within him seems to me quite inadaquate. To say that the Christ, whose example of living we are bid to follow, is divine in an ontological sense is actually harmful and detrimental. To invest this Christ with such supernatural qualities makes the rejoinder: “Oh, well, he had a better chance for that kind of life than we can possible have.” In other words, one could easily use this as a means to hide behind behind his failures. So that the orthodox view of the divinity of Christ is in my mind quite readily denied.

So why put forth King as explicitly Christian, but not invite the Jehovah’s Witnesses, who would “quite readily deny” the deity of Christ as well? Perhaps a document that identifies Papal actions as explicitly Christian actions can be excused for its inherent self-contradiction.

There is no question that all believers need to think seriously about the issues raised by this declaration. But what is the only solution to these issues? Is the solution to be found in presenting a unified front that implicitly says “the gospel does not unite us, but that is not important enough to divide us”? I do not think so. What is the only power given to the church to change hearts and minds? United political power? Or the gospel that is trampled under foot by every Roman Catholic priest when he “re-presents” the sacrifice of Christ upon the Roman altar, pretending to be a priest, an “alter Christus”? Am I glad when a Roman clergyman calls abortion murder? Of course. But it exhibits a real confusion, and not a small amount of cowardice, it seems, to stop identifying the man’s false gospel and false teaching simply because you are glad to have a few more on the “right” side of a vitally important social issue.

This takes me back to my original response to the ECT document. I have seen so many re-organize their priorities in light of having made “common cause” with those who have a false gospel all in the name of doing social good. I am glad Rome retains elements of God’s truth and morality. But when did being good or moral bring one salvation, as if anyone is ever truly good, or truly moral?

These are the matters that truly concern me about the Manhattan Declaration. Why does God have the right to determine human sexuality, marriage, and to define life itself? It all goes back to the gospel, does it not? If we are going to give a consistent, clear answer to our culture, we dare not find our power in a false unity that overshadows the gospel and cripples our witness.

I’m currently reading Southern Baptist Identity, a collection of essays edited by Dr. David Dockery. Dr. Timothy George has an essay in this book entitled Is Jesus a Baptist? In the essay Dr. George quotes from a sermon delivered in 1843 by Jacob R. Scott. The sermon was called, “The Dangers of Denominational Prosperity.” As I read the extended quote, I could not help but think how relevant this sermon would have been at any one of our recent State Convention meetings across the SBC. The quotation confronts the triumphalism which, sadly,  has come to characterize our denomination. Read it and evaluate it for yourself.

 And when we, my brethren, show symptoms of elation, in consequence of the great prosperity with which the Lord has crowned us, when we, as a denomination, or as separate churches, begin to boast of the great numbers in our ranks, the wealth, the talents, the respectability, the influence, that have been added to our communion, when we begin to lose that spirit of simple, lowly, unsophisticated piety, which characterized us in the days of our fewness and contempt, it will be high time for us to begin to tremble also. We may expect the withering frown of Jehovah, and the tide of our prosperity will be turned backward. We may rejoice indeed, that the Lord has blessed us; and let us be glad; but let us exult only because in our success, we see the advancement of truth, which is the cause of God, and essential to the enfranchisement, the glory, and the felicity of our race. It cannot be doubted, brethren, that with the enlargement of our denomination, there has come a tendency to this vain-glorying. I say it with regret, I fear the indications of this tendency have already made their appearance. What means the boastful parade so often made in our publications, or our superiority in numbers over other denominations? And especially of any inroads we may chance to have made on their ranks? Let us beware of this spirit. Let us see to it that we be not puffed up with arrogance. The devil cannot be better gratified than to witness this. Let us take heed lest we make shipwreck here, and it be left for us merely to furnish a beacon to some remoter generation, who, thus warned of the rock on which they are most likely to split, shall safely bear the holy trust now in our hands, into the port to which we had had the honor of bearing it but for our folly.

These are some of my notes for Sunday, November 29, 2009 in the Lifeway Explore the Bible series.

The books referenced in these notes are:

1. Psalms vol 3: Psalms 90-150, Baker Commentary on the Old Testament Wisdom and Psalms, Baker Academic, 2008 by John Goldingay

2. Psalms: Revised Expositor’s Commentary by Willem Van Gemeren

Ps 119:1-16

The longest of the psalms, an alphabetical acrostic of twenty two stanzas of eight verses each, Psalm 119 is classified a wisdom psalm, not least because it uses no less than eight words for God’s law throughout much of it’s one hundred seventy-six verses. (Van Gemeren)

Ps 119:1
This opening verse parallels Ps 1:1.

Happy/blessed: Hebrew asre, a state that is a gift from God, and being “happy” as asre is often translated is only a part of the blessedness. “Blessed” is an ANE expression for wisdom teaching as far back as the Egyptian Pyramid Texts up to the Beatitudes. “Blessed” in the Beatitudes is the Greek makarios, the word used to translate the Hebrew asre in the Greek OT version of the Psalms. The blessed are those actively seeking godly wisdom. Goldingay translates asre as “good fortune”. He differentiates this “blessed” from that of the Hebrew barak “bless, make fruitful”. Goldingay’s “blessed” are those whose whole lives work out well, because God gives them all good things in the positive, while delivering the blessed from trouble and preserving them through crises in the negative. (Van Gemeren, Goldingay)

Blameless, undefiled: Hebrew tamim, tam. More positive than “blameless” but less than “sinless”. Defines persons with a basic orientation toward doing what is right. Life with God is not just an inward attitude, but outer action as well, a continual staying on the right path as defined by God.(Goldingay)

Ps 119:2
Decrees/testimonies: Hebrew edut “solemn statements of God’s expectation”.(Goldingay)

seek: Hebrew daras, baqas “seek help from”, “treat someone as a source of guidance and help”. “Seek” misleads since it has religious connotations of “yearn for, search out”, which is not the proper meaning.(Goldingay)

Heart: Hebrew leb, labab. The heart in ancient thought is closer to the modern notion of “mind”, the place where thought occurs and decisions are made. The bowels were the ancients’ idea of the seat of emotion in the body.(Goldingay)

This verse speaks of unity in seeking God’s aid in both right behavior and right thought. One must be right in thought and deed, and God teaches us to be so.(Goldingay)

Ps 119:3
Wrong/iniquity should be defined here not in abstract terms of right and wrong, but failing to follow the ways of God, which mean both imitating God and following His instruction on how to live. (Deu 8:6, 10:12; 1 Kgs 2:3)(Goldingay)

Ps 119:4
Precepts: Hebrew piqqudim, “things appointed”, here by God. God has given orders on how men are to behave “you commanded”. Man must follow these orders to live properly, not make their own minds up. (Goldingay)

Ps 119:5
Statutes: Hebrew hoq or huqqa, something prescribed, like a decree or a law. The verse says that one may desire to be obedient at one level, yet disobedient at another.

Ps 119:6
Shaming is part of the negative counterpart to v. 1’s happy/blessed. In ancient cultures one’s stand with his fellows was supremely important. Obedience to God’s statutes creates prosperity and public honor; disobedience creates trouble and shame among one’s fellows, a terrible thing in more group-oriented ancient times. In OT contexts shame is abandonment by God and the inevitable ruin that follows.(Goldingay, Van Gemeren)

Ps. 119:7
Praise: Hebrew yada or toda. “Praise or give thanks” is one aspect of the Hebrew, people expressing appreciation for God’s action(s) on their behalf. “Confess” is also a good translation, because yada is normally used of public testimony, about things both good or bad.(Goldingay)

Ps 119:8
Verse 5’s “desire” is now remade into this verse’s commitment.

To be abandoned by God is to be faced with terrible forces, even death.

“Utterly”, Hebrew ad meod, is literally “too much”, and is likely better translated as “never, not at all” as in HCSB.(Goldingay)

Ps 119:9
A rhetorical question, but with a point. The question here supposes both that one wishes to be pure, but also that one has trouble or some opposing lack of desire to be pure.(Goldingay)

Purity is a relative thing, for compared to God no one is pure (Job 15:14, 25:4). But Isaiah (Is 1:16) tells people to purify themselves. Thus one might reason one is to strive to be as pure as he can. How? By following God’s word, Hebrew dabar, which mixes the meanings of both command (119:17) and promise (119:49)(Goldingay)

Ps 119:10
The dichotomy between what we want and what we actually do continues here, as the first line speaks of personal responsibility, while the second portion asks God’s aid in not wandering from God’s way.

Even more difficult, the Hebrew behind “let wander” can be interpreted “make” or “force” someone to stray (Greek OT : do not “cast” or “thrust” me away from your commands). If one reads the text that way, v.10 might be read as “I will stay on the path, do not therefore act against me.”(Goldingay)

Ps 119:11
If “with all my heart” speaks of effort and commitment, “in my heart” speaks about depth of sincerity, of conforming the individual’s life and thought to God’s word.(Goldingay)

Ps 119:12
Praised/Blessed: When God is the subject, Hebrew barak means to bless as in “make fruitful”. When God is the object,a s here, barak likely derives from the noun berek “knee”, and signifies bending the knees in honor of someone.(Goldingay)

The second portion verb teach (Hebrew lamad) mixes the personal responsibility and divine aid necess for man to follow God’s laws.(Goldingay)

Ps 119:13
Proclaim/declared has a neat correspondence with judgments from God’s mouth. The verse also shows the psalmist working out his commitment to God’s law, when he speaks of them to his fellows. To not do as he proclaims would shame the psalmist before his fellows. (Goldingay)

Ps 119:14
The psalmist declares that he derives as much pleasure from following God’s decrees as he would if he had all the wealth he could want.(Goldingay)

Ps 119:16
Delight: Hebrew shaa, it conveys a sense of childish enthusiasm for something.(Goldingay)

Julie Pennington-Russell

Cu ceva timp in urma, Conventia Baptista de Sud (SBC) a primit sugestia de a crea o baza de date centralizata cu aceia dintre slujitorii ei care au fost acuzati de abuzuri sexuale, mai ales contra minorilor. Liderii SBC au respins cu oroare sugestia, replicind ca principiul autonomiei bisericii locale impiedica amestecul birocratiei SBC in chestiunile bisericilor locale in care slujesc clericii SBC.

In 15 noiembrie conducerea sectiunii SBC din Georgia a anuntat ruperea relatiilor cu Biserica Baptita din Decatur (cu peste 2.700 de membri, din pricina refuzului acesteia de  renunta la slujirea ca pastor in acea biserica a Rev. Julie Pennington-Russell, care pastoreste cu succes acea biserica din august 2007 (vezi detalii AICI).

Interesant. Iata ca in acest caz autonomia bisericii locate nu mai functioneaza. Cam aici se opreste consecventa in SBC. Cititi AICI citeva comentarii pe aceasta tema.

First, we are concerned with ZOEINCARNATE’S absurd notion that “God is a recovering practitioner of violence.” We agree with our fellow Absolute Truth Warrior and Discernmentalist John 14:6 :

Your blasphemy and those of your ilk apparently knows no bounds.

“By this he means that God used to think violence was a good idea, but then gave up on it.”

Are you people serious? What God is this that you claim to follow? A fallible deity who learns from his own mistakes!

Repent of these heretic, man-centered imaginations!

An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, — Proverbs 6:18

Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ; — 2 Cor 10:5

Strawman do not position make. Funny how quoting the Bible leads heretics to the accusation that “you alone know blah blah blah”.

It has nothing to do with me. It has everything to do with Holy Scripture. To even entertain the idea that God is a “recovering” anything promotes a position of fallibility to the INFALLIBLE. That is heresy.

You are the created, lest you forget. And you are seeking to assign human frailties and shortcomings to the Creator. That is, also, heresy. God is not like you, get over it.

For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. – Isa 55:8

Holy God recovers from nothing. His ways are not our ways. Humble yourself and repent for this heretical thinking.

How many more times will emergents, liberals, and progressive hid behind “cast the first stone”. Are you to utter this to Holy God when you stand before Him? What will you say then, when all your noble thinking, philosophy, and bludgeoning of God’s Holy Word are laid before you and you are found guilty?

I pray for all of you amazing lost people. You truly are promoting high things that exalt themselves against the knowledge of God. Does Scripture tells us God “recovered” from violence? It does not, so put this thought away and repent.

We also pray for Mike Morrell’s unregenerate and non-elect reprobated soul—we pray that God’s Absolute Sovereign Glory is shown when Mike gets cast away like all those other heretics, sinners and unsaved non-Elect heathens:

We also assert the Biblical Truth that God’s very nature is violence against sinners, for God hates sinners with a holy passion. In fact, He hates them so much that He chose from the foundation of the world to only save  Johh Calvin, John MacArthur, some other guys named John, Phil Johnson, Al Mohler, Charles Spurgeon, James White, Todd Friel, Will Kinney and 137,000 other Elected and Predestined Calvinist saints including we of God’s Only Inerrant Party and the Online Discernmentalist Mafia—the rest of humanity then is going to hell because God chose to destroy them before even creating humanity.

Also we wish to point out these 9 other propositions of Biblical Absolute Truths that we know with Absolute Certainty:

1. God never changes. (Malachi 3:6)

2. Therefore God never changes His mind about anything. [ie. Law vs. Grace, Old vs. New Covenants, repented that He made humanity, promised no more Noah type floods, sacrifice vs. mercy, walks with Adam and Eve in Eden vs. unseen in Heaven vs. incarnated Jesus vs. the unseen Risen Lord Jesus of faith, etc. (Genesis 6:6;  Gen. 9:8-17; Hosea 6:6, Matthew 9:13, Matthew 12:7; etc).

3. As change sounds too much like evilution.

4. Therefore change is evil in and of itself

5. As all is Absolute, black and white and in stone.

6. Evilution is a human invention.

7. So therefore God has nothing whatsoever to do with humanity not even in His incarnated form (the fully human-fully God—Jesus).

8. Also God is Absolute.

9. And therefore has nothing whatsoever to do with change aka. evilution.

We also agree with John 14:6 ’s namesake: “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” Indeed we are not  the way, the truth, and the life: so that no man cometh unto the Father, but by us and our discernmentalizations, for we hold the Absolute Truth the King James Bible AV1611 in our hands (instead of God/Jesus the Absolute Truth holding us in His hands). Therefore since we do not hold  the Absolute Truth in our hands, we do not have the rite/right to judgementalize others who do not hold to our opinions of truth the Absolute Truth, ‘for we  alone have a direct line to God in the King James Bible AV1611—the literal words and mind of God. For the King James Bible AV1611 is literally Jesus/God:  

We alone do not have the one true interpretation of scripture as first established by our Final Prophet John Calvin—the perfect exegete whose fruits were nothing but Pure. Afterall, John Calvin is not the Holy Spirit incarnate—the Advocate and Comforter promised in the Bible—the final word on all Christianity:

The doctrine of the work of the Holy Spirit is a gift from John Calvin to the Church of Christ.  He did not, of course, invent it. The whole of it lay spread out on the pages of Scripture with a clearness and fullness of utterance which one would think would secure that even he who ran should read it; and doubtless he who ran did read it, and it has fed the soul of the true believer in all ages.

We alone—the True Chosen Elect of God are not Pure enough in our ontological certainty to go casting the first stone and hurling accusations of missives and discernmentalizations that  correct and refute the errors of non-blasphemy and non-heresy.’

Because I stay a week ahead doing Sunday School Notes, I had to go ahead and order some reference books for next quarter. For those interested, my commentary sources will be:

Mark: NIV Application Commentary by David Garland

Gospel of Mark: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary by Ben Witherington III

Gospel of Mark: New International Greek Testament Commentary by R.T. France

Also featured will be:

Rabbinic Commentary on the New Testament: Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke by Samuel T. Lachs

New Testament Text and Translation Commentary by Philip Comfort

The Source New Testament by Ann Nyland

These, together with the usual antique sources and perhaps some things from archive dot org and google books. Be prepared for much longer notes than in the Psalms.

Okay, so I have allowed one week for myself to feel bad about the whole letting go thing. Now, it’s back to work for me. SRSLY.

Yesterday though, I was able to eat 3 times in one day for the first time since the whole problem happened over a week ago. Although, it still cannot be compared to my usual eating habits and how much I eat. I know I love food and I have to eat to survive, but I just can’t put something on my mouth without looking over the seat right next to me or across me, imagining that HE used to be right there. But I have to stop those thoughts or else they will only break me more.

And to my success, I have been able to survive a whole 24 hour period without having a tear escape from my eyes. Although there was one moment where I was having a flashback. But it didn’t hurt that much anymore. I just keep reminding myself of the things he told me the last time we saw each other.

Anyway! I had a really good day yesterday. I felt much better after the whole mess. And it probably had something to do with the fact that I was feeling like more of my old “fashionista” self. I went with my sister and her boyfriend to Greenbelt and first we had lunch at Recipes. I missed their Adobo Flakes! so I ordered them [unable to finish it though].

Walking in Shangri La Makati

Then my sister took me to a hidden nail haven in Greenbelt 5 [not a secret now] called Dashing Diva which is located inside the Beauty Bar. They will truly treat you like a diva! And they even have the very first nail dryer in the country. You no longer have to sit around and wait for your nails to dry!

Dashing Diva, Beauty Bar, Greenbelt 5

With Dashing Diva, they will let you place your fingers or toes into a partition which has its own air blowing to your hands and feet. After just a few minutes, you can reach into your bag and pay the service without having to worry about ruining your manicure!

Bubot enjoying her manicure

Then I went to Coffee Bean & Tea Room to work while my sister finished up her pedicure. All the while I was thinking, getting the Swirl card has been so beneficial to me! Even though I am more of a Seattle’s Best Coffee girl, I am now enjoying Coffee Bean & Tea Room since they have unlimited free Wi-Fi if you have their Swirl card. Whereas with SBC, they will only give you a free one hour access if you reach the minimum of P150.

When my sister finished, we were deciding where to go: either Manila Peninsula or Shangri La Makati. We decided to try Shang since we have just been to Manila Pen.

[I gave Ronnie a short lesson on the forks, knives and why they were placed that way]

Although their food can be a bit pricey, they were so good! I got the Tuna Nicoise Sandwich.

Shangri La Circles Restaurant’s Tuna Nicoise Sandwich

And look, we even got to take home these adorable little babies!!!

Mr. Ketchup & Mrs. Mayonnaise

As we left, we passed by the Pastry counter where their cakes reminded me of Angel’s designs.

It has been a week and I have given myself enough time to mope and feel bad. But now, I’m feeling much better. Although I cannot deny the fact that I wish YOU were still around, I do agree that I think it’s better this way.

John Calvin
Psa 119:1
1Blessed are they who are upright In these words the prophet sets forth the same paradox which we met with at the commencement of the Book of Psalms. All men naturally aspire after happiness, but instead of searching for it in the right path, they designedly prefer wandering up and down through endless by-paths, to their ruin and destruction. The Holy Spirit deservedly condemns this apathy and blindness. And but for man’s cupidity, which, with brutish impetuosity, hurries him in the opposite direction, the meaning of the words would appear quite plain to him. And the further a man wanders from God, the happier does he imagine himself to be; and hence all treat, as a fable, what the Holy Spirit declares about true piety and the service of God. This is a doctrine which scarcely one among a hundred receives.

The term way, is here put for the manner, or course and way of life: and hence he calls those upright in their way, whose sincere and uniform desire it is to practice righteousness, and to devote their life to this purpose. In the next clause of the verse, he specifics more clearly, that a godly and righteous life consists in walking in the law of God If a person follow his own humor and caprice, he is certain to go astray; and even should he enjoy the applause of the whole world, he will only weary himself with very vanity. But it may be asked, whether the prophet excludes from the hope of happiness all who do not worship God perfectly? Were this his meaning, it would follow that none except angels alone would be happy, seeing that the perfect observance of the law is to be found in no part, of the earth. The answer is easy: When uprightness is demanded of the children of God, they do not lose the gracious remission of their sins, in which their salvation alone consists. While, then, the servants of God are happy, they still need to take refuge in his mercy, because their uprightness is not complete. In this manner are they who faithfully observe the law of God said to be truly happy; and thus is fulfilled that which is declared in Psa_32:2, “Blessed are they to whom God imputeth not sins.”

Adam Clarke
Psa 119:1
Blessed are the undefiled in the way – אשרי תמימי דרך ashrey temimey darech, “O the blessedness of the perfect ones in the way.” This Psalm begins something like the first, where see the notes Psa_1:1-6 (note). By the perfect, which is the proper meaning of the original word, we are to undertsand those who sincerely believe what God has spoken, religiously observe all the rules and ceremonies of his religion, and have their lives and hearts regulated by the spirit of love, fear, and obedience. This is farther stated in the second verse.

Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown
Psa 119:1
Psa_119:1-176. This celebrated Psalm has several peculiarities. It is divided into twenty-two parts or stanzas, denoted by the twenty-two letters of the Hebrew alphabet. Each stanza contains eight verses, and the first letter of each verse is that which gives name to the stanza. Its contents are mainly praises of God’s Word, exhortations to its perusal, and reverence for it, prayers for its proper influence, and complaints of the wicked for despising it. There are but two verses (Psa_119:122, Psa_119:132) which do not contain some term or description of God’s Word. These terms are of various derivations, but here used, for the most part, synonymously, though the use of a variety of terms seems designed, in order to express better the several aspects in which our relations to the revealed word of God are presented. The Psalm does not appear to have any relation to any special occasion or interest of the Jewish Church or nation, but was evidently “intended as a manual of pious thoughts, especially for instructing the young, and its peculiar artificial structure was probably adopted to aid the memory in retaining the language.”

Aleph. (Psalm 119:1-8).

undefiled — literally, “complete,” perfect, or sincere (compare Psa_37:37).

in — or, “of”

the way — course of life.

walk — act

in the law — according to it (compare Luk_1:6).

law — from a word meaning “to teach,” is a term of rather general purport, denoting the instruction of God’s Word.

John Calvin
Ps 119:2
In the second verse, the same doctrine is confirmed more fully, by pronouncing blessed, not. such as are wise in their own conceit, or assume a sort of fantastical holiness, but those who dedicate themselves to the covenant of God, and yield obedience to the dictates of hits law. Farther, by these words, he tells us that God is by no means satisfied with mere external service, for he demands the sincere and honest affection of the heart. And assuredly, if God be the sole judge and disposer of our life:, the truth must occupy the principal place in our heart, because it is not sufficient to have our hands and feet only enlisted in his service.

Albert Barnes
Psa 119:2
Blessed are they that keep his testimonies – His commandments or laws, considered as what he bears witness to concerning that which is just, wise, good. Every law of a parent is to his children a testimony on his part of what is wise and right and good; and so every law of God is his solemn testimony as to what is right and good for man. See Psa_19:7, note; Psa_25:10, note.

And that seek him with the whole heart – With a sincere desire to know his will and to do it; without hypocrisy or guile; with no selfish or sinister aims. As God knows the heart, all other modes of “seeking” him must be in vain. It is impossible for man to impose on him by appearances.

John Calvin
Psa 119:3
3.Surely they do not work iniquity The statement, that they who follow God as their guide do not work iniquity, may seem to be a mere common-place, and universally admitted truth. The prophet has two reasons for making it; first, to teach us that our life must be entirely under the direction of God; and, secondly, that we may more diligently and carefully attend to his doctrine. It is acknowledged by every one, that those who render obedience to God are in no danger of going astray, and yet every one is found turning aside to his own ways. Does not such licentiousness or presumption palpably demonstrate that they have a greater regard for their own devices than for the unerring law of God? And after all, as often as a man happens to fall, is not the plea of inadvertence instantly alleged, as if none ever sinned knowingly and voluntarily; or as if the law of God, which is an antidote to all delinquencies, because it keeps all our vicious propensities in check, did not furnish us with sufficient wisdom to put us upon our guard? The prophet, therefore, very justly declares, that those who are instructed in the law of God, cannot set up the plea of ignorance when they fall into sin, seeing they are willfully blind. Were they to attend carefully to God’s voice, they would be well fortified against all the snares of Satan. To strike them with terror, he informs them in the fourth verse, that God demands a rigid observance of the law; from which it may be gathered, that he will not suffer the contemners of it to escape with impunity. Besides, by speaking to God in the second person, he places him before our eyes as a Judge.

Matthew Poole
Psa 119:3
Do no iniquity; or, are not workers of iniquity, i.e. do not knowingly, and resolvedly, and industriously, and customarily continue in sinful courses. So this phrase is understood Job_31:3 34:8 Psa_5:5 6:8 125:5 Pro_10:29 Luk_13:27; otherwise there is not a just man upon earth that sinneth not, Ecc_7:20.

They walk: this is their constant practice, and the general course of their lives, which is commonly signified by walking, as Psa_1:1, and every where.

In his ways; in the paths which God hath prescribed to them.

Albert Barnes
Psa 119:3
They also do no iniquity – See the notes at 1Jo_3:9. The meaning is, that they are righteous; their character is that they do that which is right. It cannot mean that all persons who are religious are actually and absolutely perfect – for no man would hold this opinion; no one does hold it. It is general language such as is commonly used to describe an upright or righteous man. The declaration is true of all who are the friends of God – or, who are truly; religious – in the following senses:

(1) That they are habitually and characteristically righteous;

(2) That they intend to do right – for a man who deliberately purposes to do wrong – to lead a life of sin and disobedience, cannot be a pious man.

(3) That when they do err, it is not the result of intention, or the design of their life, but because they are tempted; are overcome with passion; are led by the power of their native corruption of heart to act contrary to their better judgment and their true character.

See Rom_7:14-17. On the other hand, it is true that a man who is not characteristically righteous; who is not an upright man in his dealings; who is not true, and honest, and temperate, and just, and benevolent, cannot be a child of God and heir of heaven. No exactness of orthodoxy, and no fervour of emotion, and no zeal in the cause of religion, can constitute true piety without this.

They walk in his ways – Habitually; constantly; characteristically. They are not merely honest, upright, and just in their dealings with men, but they walk in the ways of God; they are religious.

Adam Clarke
Psa 119:4
Thy precepts diligently – מאד meod, “superlatively, to the uttermost.” God has never given a commandment, the observance of which he knew to be impossible. And to whatsoever he has commanded he requires obedience; and his grace is sufficient for us. We must not trifle with God.

Albert Barnes
Psa 119:4
Thou hast commanded – All this is here traced to the command of God; to the fact that he has required it. It is not mere human prudence; it is not mere morality; it is not because it will be for our interest; it is because God requires it. This is the foundation of all true virtue; and until a man acts from this motive it cannot be said that he is in the proper sense a righteous man.

To keep thy precepts diligently – Hebrew, “very much;” that is, to do it constantly; faithfully. Each one of his laws is to be observed, and to be observed always, and in all circumstances.

John Calvin
Psa 119:5
5I wish that my ways may be directed The original word כון, kun, is sometimes rendered to establish, and, accordingly, it may seem as if the prophet were soliciting for himself the virtue of perseverance. I am rather inclined to understand it as signifying to direct; for, although God’s plainly instructing us in his law, the obtuseness of our understanding, and the perversity of our hearts, constantly need the direction of his Spirit. Our main desire, therefore, ought to be for an understanding wisely regulated by the law of God, and also for a docile and obedient heart.

Albert Barnes
Psa 119:5
O that my ways were directed … – Indicating the desire of the pious heart. That desire – a prevailing, constant, uniform desire – is to keep the law of God. It is the aim of the life; it is the supreme purpose of the soul; it is the ruling wish of the man, thus to keep the law of God. He in whose bosom this is not the constant wish cannot be a pious man. The Hebrew particle used here, and rendered “O that,” is a particle denoting a wish, or an earnest desire. The word “ways” denotes the course of life. The whole is expressive of an earnest desire to live in accordance with the law of God. It implies also a sense of dependence on God.

John Calvin
Ps 119:6
Next, he adds, if a man carefully observe the law of God, he need be under no apprehension that he will ever regret what he has done or undertaken to do. The word respect intimates, that we must not be influenced by our own designs, nor decide, according to Carnal reason, what we are to do, but must at once come to the determination, that they who turn not aside, either to the right hand or the left, from the observance of God’s commandments, are indeed in the right path. They who reverently respect his law, may not escape the censure of the great bulk of mankind, yet the prophet declares, that They shall not be ashamed, because they have a good conscience in the presence of God and the angels, and, with the approval of this celestial assembly, they are well satisfied and contented; for if they depended upon the opinion of the world, their courage would presently fail. He says, all thy precepts, intimating, that among the snares of Satan, amid such thick darkness and so great insensibility as ours, the utmost vigilance and caution are necessary, if we would aim at being entirely exempted from blame. Wherefore, in all that we do, we must endeavor to have the law before us, to keep us from falling.

Adam Clarke
Psa 119:6
Then shall I not be ashamed – Every act of transgression in the wicked man tends to harden his heart; and render it callous. If a man who fears God is so unhappy as to fall into sin, his conscience reproaches him, and he is ashamed before God and man. This is a full proof that God’s Spirit has not utterly departed from him, and that he may repent, believe and be healed.

Unto all thy commandments – God requires universal obedience, and all things are possible to him whom Christ strengthens; and all things are possible to him that believes. Allow that any of God’s commandments may be transgressed, and we shall soon have the whole decalogue set aside.

Albert Barnes
Psa 119:6
Then shall I not be ashamed – On the word ashamed, see Job_6:20, note; Psa_25:2-3, note. The meaning here is, that he would not have occasion to be ashamed; he would not be disappointed; all his hopes would be realized. He would have full evidence of piety; he would enjoy the comforts which he sought in religion; he would feel assured of ultimately obtaining eternal life.

When I have respect unto all thy commandments – literally, “In my looking at all thy commandments.” That is, in his regarding them; in his feeling that all were equally binding on him; and in his having the consciousness that he had not intentionally neglected, violated, or disregarded any of them. There can be no true piety except where a man intends to keep all the commands of God. If he makes a selection among them, keeping this one or that one, as may be most convenient for him, or as may be most for his interest, or as may be most popular, it is full proof that he knows nothing of the nature of true religion. A child has no proper respect for a parent if he obeys him only as shall suit his whim or his convenience; and no man can be a pious man who does not purpose, in all honesty, to keep All the commandments of God; to submit to his will in everything.

John Calvin
Psa 119:7
7.I will praise thee He affirms it to be a singular instance of the loving-kindness of God, if a person has made considerable proficiency in his law. As a token and testimony of this, he here puts the giving of thanks to God; as if he should say, Lord, thou wilt confer upon me an inestimable blessing, if thou instruct me in thy law. It follows, therefore, that nothing in this life is more to be desired than this; and my fervent prayer is, that we may be fairly and fully convinced of the truth of it. For while searching carefully after such things as we deem advantageous to us, we do not overlook any earthly convenience, and yet we neglect that which is of most importance. The phrase, the judgments of thy righteousness, is the same with the commandments, in which perfect righteousness is comprehended; and thus the prophet commends God’s law on account of the thorough perfection of the doctrine contained in it. From this verse we learn, that none will praise God unfeignedly and cordially but he who has made such proficiency in his school as to mold his life into subjection to him. It is vain to make a pretense of praising God with the mouth and the tongue if we dishonor him by our life. Hence the prophet very justly here makes the fruit of genuine piety to consist in celebrating the praises of God without hypocrisy.

Albert Barnes
Psa 119:7
I will praise thee with uprightness of heart – With an upright and sincere heart.

When I shall have learned – Hebrew, “In my learning.” In the practice or act of learning them. His own experience of their nature, influence, and value would lead him to sincere praise. He had no doubt of finding that they were worthy of his praises, and of seeing in them more and more occasion to glorify and honor God. The more we know of God, the more shall we see in him to praise. The larger our acquaintance and experience, the more our hearts will be disposed to magnify his name. This remark must extend to all that there is in God to be learned; and as that is infinite, so there will be occasion for renewed and more elevated praise to all eternity.

Thy righteous judgments – Margin, as in Hebrew, “Judgments of thy righteousness.” The laws or statutes which God, as a righteous or just God, appoints to be the rule of conduct to his creatures.

John Calvin
Psa 119:8
8 I will observe thy statutes In these words he avers it to be his intention to observe the law of God, but, conscious of his own weakness, he utters a prayer that God would not deprive him of his grace. The term forsake is susceptible of two interpretations, either that God withdraws his Spirit, or that he permits his people to be brought low by adversity, as if he had forsaken them. The latter interpretation agrees best with the context, and is most in accordance with the phrase immediately subjoined, very far. The prophet is not altogether averse to the trial of his faith, only he is apprehensive lest it might fail were the trial to be too long protracted, and therefore he desires to be treated with tenderness in his infirmity.,’ O God! thou sees my frame of mind, and, as I am but a man, do not conceal too long from me the tokens of thy favor, or defer helping me longer than is proper for me, lest, imagining myself to be forsaken of thee, I turn aside from the direct pursuit of godliness.”

Adam Clarke
Psa 119:8
O forsake me not utterly – עד מאד ad meod, “to utter dereliction;” never leave me to my own strength, nor to my own heart!

Albert Barnes
Psa 119:8
I will keep thy statutes – Thy commands; thy laws. This expresses the firm purpose of the psalmist, He meant to keep the law of God; he could confidently say that he would do it – yet coupled with the prayer which follows, that God would not forsake him.

O forsake me not utterly – Hebrew, “To very much;” so as to leave me to myself. His confidence that he would keep the commandments of God was based on the prayer that God would not leave him. There is no other ground of persuasion that we shall be able to keep the commandments of God than that which rests on the belief and the hope that He will not leave us.

John Calvin
Psa 119:9
9.Wherewith shall a young man cleanse his way? In this place he repeats, in different words, the same truth which he formerly advanced, That, however much men may pique themselves upon their own works, there is nothing pure in their life until they have made a complete surrender of themselves to the word of the Lord. The more effectually to excite them to this, he produces, in an especial manner, the example of children or youths. In mentioning these, he by no means gives an unbridled license to those who have arrived at mature years, or who are aged, as if they were competent to regulate their own life, and as if their own prudence served as a law to them; but because youth puts men where two ways meet, and renders it imperative for them to select the course of life which they mean to follow, he declares that, when a person sets about the regulation of his life, no advice will prove of any advantage, unless he adopts the law of God as his rule and guide. In this way the prophet stimulates men to an early and seasonable regulation of their manners, and not to delay doing so any longer, agreeably to the words of Solomon, “Remember thy Creator in thy youth, ere the days of trouble come, and the years which shall be grief unto thee,” Ecc_12:1 They who defer from time to time become hardened in their vicious practices, and arrive at mature years, when it is too late to attempt a reformation. There is another reason, arising from the fact, of the carnal propensities being very powerful in youth, requiring a dortble restraint; and the more they are inclined to excess, the greater is the necessity for curbing their licentiousness. The prophet, therefore, not without reason, exhorts them particularly to attend to the observance of the law. We may reason from the greater to the less; for if the law of God possesses the power of restraining the impetuosity of youth, so as to preserve pure and upright all who take it for their guide, then, assuredly, when they come to maturity, and their irregular desires are considerably abated, it will prove the best antidote for correcting their vices. The reason, therefore, of so much evil prevailing in the world, arises from men wallowing in their own impurity, and being disposed to yield more to their own inclination than to heavenly instruction. The only sure protection is, to regulate ourselves according to God’s word. Some, wise in their own conceit, throw themselves into the snares of Satan, others, from listlessness and languor, live a vile and wicked life.

Adam Clarke
Psa 119:9
A young man cleanse his way – ארח orach, which we translate way here, signifies a track, a rut, such as is made by the wheel of a cart or chariot. A young sinner has no broad beaten path; he has his private ways of offense, his secret pollutions: and how shall he be cleansed from these? how can he be saved from what will destroy mind, body, and soul? Let him hear what follows; the description is from God.

1. He is to consider that his way is impure; and how abominable this must make him appear in the sight of God.

2. He must examine it according to God’s word, and carefully hear what God has said concerning him and it.

3. He must take heed to it, לשמר lishmor, to keep guard, and preserve his way – his general course of life, from all defilement.

Albert Barnes
Psa 119:9
Wherewithal – This begins the second portion of the psalm, extending to Psa_119:16, in which all the verses begin with the second letter of the Hebrew alphabet (ב b), indicated in our translation by the word Beth. These names of the letters, inserted for convenience, are no part of the psalm, as it is not so marked in the original. This mode of indicating the divisions of the psalm is special to our version. It is not in the Septuagint, the Latin Vulgate, or the German versions. The word wherewithal means “by what” (Hebrew); that is, What means shall a young man adopt by which he may “cleanse his way?” it indicates a state of inquiry. The case supposed is that of a young man pondering the question how he may be saved from the corruptions of his own heart, and escape the temptations to which he is exposed in early years, and lead a pure and upright life. There can be no more important inquiry for one just entering on the journey of life; there can be found nowhere a more just and comprehensive answer than is contained in this single verse. All the precepts of ancient and modern wisdom, all the teachings of pagan morality and religion, and all the results of the experience of mankind, could furnish nothing in addition to what is here suggested. The world has no higher wisdom than this by which to guide a young man, so that he may lead a holy life.

Shall a young man – The remark here might be applied also to those who are in middle life, or even to those who are in more advanced years, but it is applied here especially to the young, because it may be supposed that in the other cases the matter may be regarded as settled by experience; because to the young, as they commence life, the inquiry is so momentous; and because it is a question which it may be supposed will come up before the mind of every young man who has any right aspirations, and any proper conception of the dangers which encompass his path.

Cleanse his way? – Make his course of life pure and upright. The language does not necessarily imply that there had been any previous impurity or vice, but it has particular reference to the future: not how he might cleanse himself from past offences, but how he might make the future pure. The inquiry is, how he might conduct himself – what principles he could adopt – under what influence he could bring himself – so that his future course would be honest, honorable, upright.

By taking heed thereto … – The word “thereto” is not in the original. The Hebrew is, “To keep according to thy word;” or, “in keeping according to thy word.” Prof. Alexander supposes that this means “to keep it (his way) according to thy word;” and that the whole is a question – “How may a young man so cleanse his way as to keep it according to thy word?” – and that the answer to the question is to be found in the general strain of the psalm, or in the general principles laid down in the psalm. But it is clear that the answer to the question must be found in the verse, or not found at all; and the most natural construction is that in our translation. So DeWette renders it: “How can a young man walk guiltless? If (or, when) he holds (or, keeps) himself according to thy word.” The meaning clearly is If he governs himself according to the law of God – if he makes that law the rule of his life and conduct, he would be enabled to do it. All other things might fail; this rule would never fail, in making and keeping a man pure. The more principles of common honesty, the principles of honor, the considerations of self-interest, the desire of reputation – valuable as they may be – would not constitute a security in regard to his conduct; the law of God would, for that is wholly pure.

John Calvin
Psa 119:10
10.With my whole heart Conscious of the integrity of his heart, the prophet still implores the help of God, that he might not stumble by reason of his infirmity. He makes no boast of self-preparation, as if he had spontaneously begun to inquire after God, but in praising the grace which he had experienced, he at the same time aspires after steadfastness to persevere in walking in his ways. It is folly on the part of the Papists to seize upon this and similar passages, as if the saints, of their own free will, anticipated the grace of the Holy Spirit, and afterwards were favored with his aid. The prophet does not make a division between God and himself, but rather prays God to continue his work till it is completed, agreeably with what we are generally taught, to keep God mindful of his benefits until he accomplish them.

In the meantime, there is good cause for presenting our supplication to God, to stretch out his hand towards us when he sees our minds so settled, that we are solicitous of nothing so much as acting uprightly. And as he elevates us with confidence to ask the gift of perseverance, when he inspires our hearts with proper affection towards him, so also does he entreat us for the future not to sink into a careless and languid state like soldiers who have been discharged, but seek to be constantly directed by the spirit of wisdom, and to be sustained by the principles of fortitude and virtue. David here, from his own example, points out to us a rule, that by how much a man finds himself succored by God, by so much ought he to be induced the more carefully and earnestly to implore the continuance of his aid; for unless he restrain us, we will instantly wander and go astray. This sentiment is more explicitly stated in the original word תשגני, tashqeni, which is in the passive voice, and signifies, to be led astray From the import of the term, I do not mean to establish the doctrine that God secretly incites us to commit sin, but only to let my readers know, that such is our liability to err, that we immediately relapse into sin the instant he leaves us to ourselves. This passage also admonishes us that the man who swerves but a little from God’s commandments is guilty of going astray.

Adam Clarke
Psa 119:10
With my whole heart have I sought thee -
4. He must seek God, make earnest prayer and supplication to him for Divine light, for a tender conscience, and for strength to walk uprightly.

5. His whole heart; all his affections must be engaged here, or he cannot succeed. If he keep any affection for the idol or abomination; if his heart do not give it before the Lord, he may make many prayers, but God will answer none of them.

6. He must take care to keep in the path of duty, of abstinence and self-denial; not permitting either his eye, his hand, or his heart to wander from the commandments of his Maker.

John Calvin
Psa 119:11
11.I have hid thy word in my heart.This psalm not being composed for the personal and peculiar use of the author only, we may therefore understand, that as frequently as David sets before us his own example, under this model he points out the course we ought to pursue. Here we are informed that we are well fortified against the stratagems of Satan when God’s law is deeply seated in our hearts. For unless it have a fast and firm hold there, we will readily fall into sin. Among scholars, those whose knowledge is confined to books, if they have not the book always before them, readily discover their ignorance; in like manner, if we do not imbibe the doctrine of God, and are well acquainted with it, Satan will easily surprise and entangle us in his meshes. Our true safeguard, then, lies not in a slender knowledge of his law, or in a careless perusal of it, but in hiding it deeply in our hearts. Here we are reminded, that however men may be convinced of their own wisdom, they are yet destitute of all right judgment, except as far as they have God as their teacher.

Matthew Poole
Psa 119:11
I have not contented myself with bare hearing or reading thy word, but have received it in the love of it, have diligently pondered it, and laid it up in my mind and memory like a choice treasure, to be ready upon all occasions, to counsel, or comfort, or quicken, or caution me, as need requires; that by a diligent and affectionate consideration of thy precepts, and promises, and threatenings, I might be kept from sinful courses, against which these are the best antidote.

Albert Barnes
Psa 119:11
Thy word have I hid in mine heart – Compare the notes at Psa_37:31. The word rendered “hid” means properly to conceal, so that a thing may be secret, private, inaccessible; then, to lay up in private, to treasure up. to hoard – as money or jewels – commonly “hidden” from public view. Job_20:26; Psa_17:14. Then it means to lay up in one’s heart, as a secret, inaccessible place; to hide one’s thoughts; purposes, designs; or to lay up knowledge or wisdom in the heart as a treasure, Job_10:13; Pro_2:1; Pro_7:1. The meaning here is, that he had “treasured” up the word of God, as the most valuable thing, in his heart; it was “there,” though unseen; it constituted the secret power by which he was governed; it was permanently deposited there, as the most valuable of his treasures.

That I might not sin against thee – That it might protect me from sinning against thee. That I might be continually guided by its precepts; that I might be admonished of duty; that I might be deterred from going astray.

John Calvin
Psa 119:12
12.Blessed art thou, O Jehovah! Such had been the prophet’s proficiency, that he was not only one of ‘God’s disciples, but also a public teacher of the Church. Nevertheless, acknowledging himself and all the upright to be only one their journey till they arrive at the close of life, he fails not to ask for the spirit of understanding. This passage informs us generally, that if God do not enlighten us with the spirit of discernment, we are not competent to behold the light which shines forth from his law, though it be constantly before us. And thus it happens, that not a few are blind even when surrounded with the clear revelation of this doctrine, because, confident in their own perspicacity, they contemn the internal illumination of the Holy Spirit. Farther, let us learn from this passage, that none are possessed of such superiority of intellect as not to admit of constant increase. If the prophet, upon whom God had conferred so honorable an office as a teacher of the Church, confesses himself to be only a disciple or scholar, what madness is it for those who are, greatly behind him in point of attainments not to strain every nerve to rise to higher excellence? Nor does he depend upon his own merits for obtaining his requests; he beseeches God to grant them from a regard to his own glory. This appears from the phraseology by which he introduces his request, Blessed art thou, O Jehovah! intimating, that his confidence of success originated in God’s being fully entitled to all praise on account of his unbounded goodness, justice, and mercy.

Albert Barnes
Psa 119:12
Blessed art thou, O Lord – Blessed art thou as the author of such a law. This language of benediction or doxology is an outbreak of feeling or adoration in view of such a law – so good, so holy, so suited to direct and guide man. The mind is full of the subject; and the lips give vent to the feeling of gratitude and joy that such a law had been revealed to people.

Teach me thy statutes – Make me more and more acquainted with a law so pure, so rich, so valuable.

John Calvin
Psa 119:13
13.With my lips In this verse he declares that the law of God was not only deeply engraven on his own heart, but that it was his earnest and strenuous endeavor to gain over many of his fellow-disciples into subjection to God. It is indeed a heartless matter to speak of the law of God abstractly, as we see hypocrites do, who talk very fluently about the whole doctrine of godliness, to which they are entire strangers. What the prophet noticed above, respecting the affection of the heart for God’s law, he now likewise applies to the lips.

Albert Barnes
Psa 119:13
With my lips have I declared – That is, I have openly and publicly made thy words known to others; I have defended and vindicated them.

All the judgments – The word judgments here means the same as statutes or laws: and the idea is, that he had been on the side of those laws, and had endeavored by argument and persuasion to bring others under their influence. How he had done it we are not informed; but we have no reason to suppose that the author of the psalm was a minister of religion, and if not, then we have here an example of what a man who does not claim to be a public teacher may do, and should do, in making known and defending divine truth. Every man is as much bound to do this in his sphere as the minister of religion is in his; and private member’s of the church have often an opportunity of doing this to more advantage than the ministers of the gospel possess.

Of thy mouth – With my mouth I speak those things which have proceeded from thine. I speak in thy name; I declare thy truth. It is not my own; it is thine.

John Calvin
Ps 119:14 And, immediately afterwards, he again establishes the truth of what he had asserted about his cordial and unfeigned endeavors to instruct others; by saying, that he derived no less pleasure from the doctrine of God than from all the riches of the world. He indirectly contrasts his holy love for the law, with which he was inflamed, with the unholy avarice which has taken possession of almost all the world. “As wealth attracts to itself the hearts of mankind, so I have taken more exquisite delight in the progress which I make in the doctrine of godliness, than if I abounded in all manner of riches.”

Adam Clarke
Psa 119:14
I have rejoiced – 11. He must consider it his chief happiness to be found in the path of obedience, giving his whole heart and strength to God; and when enabled to do it, he should rejoice more in it than if he had gained thousands of gold and silver. O how great is the treasure of a tender and approving conscience!

John Calvin
Psa 119:15
15.In thy precepts That to which I formerly adverted must not be forgotten — the prophet’s not making a boast of his own acquirements, but setting before others an example for their imitation. We are aware that the majority of mankind are so much involved in the cares of the world, as to leave no time or leisure for meditating upon the doctrine of God. To meet this callous indifference, he very seasonably commends diligence and attention. And even were we not so ensnared by the world, we know how readily we lose sight of the law of God, in the daily temptations which suddenly overtake us. It is not therefore without reason that the prophet exhorts us to constant exercise, and enjoins us to direct all our energies to the subject of meditation on God’s precepts. And as the life of men is unstable, being continually distracted by the carnality of their minds, he declares that he will consider attentively the ways of God.

Adam Clarke
Psa 119:15
I will meditate -
12. He should encourage self-examination and reflection; and meditate frequently on God’s words, works, and ways – and especially on his gracious dealings towards him.

13. He should keep his eye upon God’s steps; setting the example of his Savior before his eyes, going where he would go, and nowhere else; doing what he would do, and nothing else; keeping the company that he would keep, and none else; and doing every thing in reference to the final judgment.

John Calvin
Ps 119:16 Subsequently, he repeats the exquisite pleasure he took in this pursuit. For our proficiency in the law of God will be small, until we cheerfully and heartily set our minds upon it. And, in fact, the commencement of a good life consists in God’s law attracting us to him by its sweetness. By the same means the lusts of the flesh, too, are subdued or mitigated. In our natural state, what is more agreeable to us than that which is sinful? This will be the constant tendency of our minds, unless the delight which we feel in the law carry us in the opposite direction.

Adam Clarke
Psa 119:16
I will delight myself – The word is very emphatical: אשתעשע eshtaasha, I will skip about and jump for joy.

14. He must exult in God’s word as his treasure, live in the spirit of obedience as his work, and ever glory in God, who has called him to such a state of salvation.

15. He must never forget what God has done for him, done in him, and promised farther to do; and he must not forget the promises he had made, and the vows of the Lord that are upon him. Any young man who attends to these fifteen particulars will get his impure way cleansed; victory over his sin; and, if he abide faithful to the Lord that bought him, an eternal heaven at last among them that are sanctified.

Dr. James White writes:

I have been saying for years, homosexuals do not want equal rights. They want uber-rights. They want to silence anyone who would identify their sexual perversion as sin. Why? Romans 1 tells you. Suppressing the truth is tiring, and for the homosexual, it is a full-time job. They cannot silence their conscience, but they can try to silence anyone who would remind them of it. And so, they seek to force us, by rule of law, to honor, or admire, in the words of President Obama, their sin. Note this article from the UK:

Homosexual activists are lobbying to change the law hoping that, in the future, churches may be forced to host gay civil partnership services.

At present the gay lobby group Stonewall is seeking an amendment to the Equality Bill which will allow churches to host the services if they wish.

But Ben Summerskill, head of Stonewall, said: “Right now, faiths shouldn’t be forced to hold civil partnerships, although in ten or 20 years, that may change.”

Mr Summerskill said his organisation was working with the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement (LGCM) and the Metropolitan Community Church.

Rev Sharon Ferguson of the LGCM told Pink News, a gay news website, she wanted “equality” for civil partnerships and marriage.

This is why there is no protection at all in the addition of “free speech” protections in hate crimes laws, etc. We need to realize they are taking things one step at a time: get the law in place, then whittle away at the protections until you accomplish your goal. Do it slowly enough not to raise too loud an alarm, but never, ever give up. And given that these people define themselves by their deviancy, they will dedicate themselves each and every day to their task.

As I have said before this battle was lost nearly forty years ago when the idea of open homosexuality was first embraced by the U.S. culture. The path of incrementalism, often known as the slippery slope, is exactly what Dr. White has stated it as being. When leading spokes-figures for the Southern Baptist Convention, like Rick Warren, endorse homosexual partnerships while at the same time denouncing homosexual marriage, one must wonder. When the Convention will not take action against him for his pro-homsexuality, when money speaks louder than convictions, the snowball has already reached the bottom. How then will the SBC stand against a government that will gag its pulpits if it is not speaking as a unified voice already? Is it now allowed to speak out in foreign countries? Does the SBC adhere to the new sharia in the EU? And if it does, what will be its defense when it comes to the United States?

Time will tell if the so bold when no one is pointing a gun at them Southern Baptist conservative resurgents, when they see their mansions, fat salaries and rich benefits and golf tourneys theatened, will then find the backbone they so brag of having had when they stood up against other encroachments of liberalism. Even though they would throw non-consequential churches out for a breach of the SBC Constitution, they will not even begin to question those whose wallets are fat, whose concessions in public pronouncements to the liberal, politically correct, culture are far more influential.

Now is the time to speak loud and clear, far and wide, and to be relentless. Not in the way of the fat-boy figures of the Moral Majority and its cultic political expressions of manifest destiny. But, now is the time for publication as a unified voice against the diseases producing the cultual malaise. Not for political gain, not for enshrinement in history, but the glory of God and his Christ, it should be done. That is unlikely when pop SBCer’s show up to endorse the Obamasiah, in one venue or another, when they campaign on his behalf, when they take phony appointments to showpiece commissions.

The SBC is in the throws of finding its idendity (such a pop-psych thing to do). Some myopic fundamentalist, obscuratist reactionaries within it find pushing a “Fundamentalist” pseudo-orthodoxy (Peter Lumpkins and the BI Movement faction) more to their liking, attempting to erect a Southern Baptist Ecclesium that is removed from SBC roots. It is true the SBC lost its center, but that was when the first BIMmers found their way along a so called Trail of Blood (a cultic assertion within Southern Baptistism).

The real fight, though, is standing against and condemning the corruptions of all that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, and preaching a clear Gospel that convicts of sin and commands repentance everywhere. That is also unlikely to happen since the idea of a great commission lacks the necessary requisite among most in the SBC of knowing what the Gospel is. For the most part, the SBC has embraced the liberalism of the semi-Pelagian and free-will teaching of the apostate Roman Catholic Church. It is a theology rejected by the Protestant movement and the reformers afterward and reintroduced through by kind of theological liberals who are for the most part, Arminians.

It has been more than a century since this creaping vine of Romanism began to grow in the SBC along with its pragmatism and social gospelism. When will they learn? When will they reject the American plush-life consummerism which they so idolize as their Providence? Or can they even recognize the difference anymore?

Much good work can be found among those who are being attacted within. There is a part of the SBC that is doing the job of fighting the good fight of faith and not fighting for membership first, or to have statues erected to themselves. Among that work is that which is being produced by the likes of Al Mohler. At the same time he and others who see the fight for what it is are being undermined by the weak doctrines of the “Nons” factions within the SBC, some of whose legalisms are not far removed from Rome. Among the Nons are also those who refuse to define themselves. Like good emergents and other post-moderns, they find solace in their faux humility. As Timmy Brister has recently said (though, I think he doesn’t understand that the agenda of the Nons is to remove his kind from the SBC):

On the other hand, if I may, let me speak to Ashford, Akin, and my other “non-Calvinist” friends about cooperation with Calvinists. In numerous ways and at various times, the call has been made for Calvinists to “put their theological cards on the table” and be up front with churches with what they believe. (While all Calvinists should be transparent and clear with what they believe, this assumes that those with whom they are talking about understand exactly what Calvinism is. But that is besides the point.) I want to encourage my non-Calvinist friends to do the same. You are defining yourself in the context of cooperation with a nondescript label. You are what you are not. Okay. That could mean anything. Arminian? Amyraldian? Semi-Pelagian? Biblicist? “Cal-minian”? Who knows?

The desire for revival, the desire to see a Great Commission Resurgence, cannot center around sectarian infighting, especially that which is driven by the liberalism of conservatives that claims that two opinions can stand in oppostition to one another in the same pulpit. Until the SBC settles the issue of authority- just what the inerrant word of God means -there is no chance that they will be able to stand when the winds of war come to their shore.

E cá está o video do Vitor!!
Eu gostei muito do resultado! Coloquei umas coisinhas novas….e acho que ficou bem bacana.

Vejam:

These are some of my notes for Sunday, November 22, 2009 in the Lifeway Explore the Bible series.

The books referenced in these notes are:

1. Psalms vol 3: Psalms 90-150, Baker Commentary on the Old Testament Wisdom and Psalms, Baker Academic, 2008 by John Goldingay

2. Psalms: Revised Expositor’s Commentary by Willem Van Gemeren

Ps 116: The fourth of the Egyptian Hallel songs, and part of the collection of songs sung during annual feasts, in particular Passover. Ps 113-114 before the meal and 115-118 after it.(Van Gemeren)

This psalm is an individual’s thanksgiving or testimony of being afflicted in the past, praying, and God responding by delivering him.(Goldingay)

Ps 116:1-2
“I love”: Hebrew ahabti, this starts the pslam, the LORD the implied object. The psalmist’s reason for emotion is in the second part, “he heard my voice”, the “appeal for mercy”. A similar relationship is found in 1Jn 4:19 NET. We love because he loved us first. (Van Gemeren)

Goldingay translates the Hebrew aheb (“love” in most versions) as “dedicate”, based on the word’s usage as an act of will in places like Ps 122:6(Goldingay)

Appeal: Hebrew tepilla. Palil is “judge” in Hebrew, thus tepilla here speaks of someone throwing themselves on the mercy of the court. (Goldingay)

In v.2 God’s attentiveness is restated. This attentiveness encourages the psalmist to call out to/upon God for the rest of his life, because God leaned down to hear him, figuratively. (Van Gemeren, Goldingay)

Ps 116:3
The reason for gratitude is more colorfully explained here, with language of death and the grave/Sheol used, personified as hunters using ropes or chains or nets to ensnare people. Torments/pains Hebrew mesare “straits, distress, anguish”. The KJV’s “sorrows of death” come from the Greek OT, which read the consonantal Hebrew text differently than the later Masoretic scribes who gave us our standard Hebrew text of today. (Van Gemeren, Goldingay)

Ps 116:4
In the awful situation the psalmist used his final hope, to call upon the very name of the LORD. A name can be simply an ID, but it also often indicates character, and has a secondary sense of reputation. Thus to call upon the name of God is not merely a summons, but an invocation of His character, “God save me because of who You are”.(Van Gemeren, Goldingay)

Ps 116:5
The psalmist knows God is the one to call upon in distress, for God is gracious, righteous, and compassionate. Gracious in forgiving and sustaining His people, righteous in keeping His covenant even when Israel and individuals break it, which shows His compassion, allowing for the frailties of mankind. Righteous, Hebrew saddiq, sedeq, sedaqa is doing the right thing, but in service of a relationship, not merely a standard of morality.(Van Gemeren, Goldingay)

Ps 116:6
Here the psalmist returns to the horrible situation of v.3-4. The LORD promises to be with His people, but even so the psalmist shows wonder at God’s salvation.(Van Gemeren)

“Simple” or “child” is not just a reference to age or quality of intellect. It can also be a character trait, as in “simple faith”, “straightforward belief”. (Goldingay)

Ps 116:7
Because he has known God’s goodness, His capacity to save, the psalmist can tell himself to be calm, because God has already shown His goodness to him personally.(Van Gemeren)

Ps 116:8-9
Only God can change death, tears, and stumbling to a “walk before the LORD”.

“Walk before”: Proceed in normal life.(Goldingay)

“before the LORD”:Literally, to God’s face, a face turned toward one showing the other person’s interest in you. To be before God is to live, as He is the giver of life, and it is also to be under His care. Land of the lviing is likely a green, summery contrast to the dark, dusty and desolate land of the dead, Sheol.(Goldingay)

Ps. 116:10-11
The psalmist knows the true lesson of faith: maintaining belief even in difficulty, which the HCSB brings out:
Psa 116:10 HCSB I believed, even when I said, “I am severely afflicted.”

Afflicted is the Hebrew ani, anaw. Not so much sick as weak, powerless, without family or friends. Helpless, lacking influence.(Goldingay)

The psalmist learned human limitations in his crisis which lead him to say “all men are liars”, Hebrew kozeb “lying” or perhaps “unreliable”. A comparison of human frailty to God’s character, in which humans come out short, being inconsistent, undependable. (Van Gemeren, Goldingay)

Ps 116:12-19
A final section concerning the proper response to God’s act of salvation. The question of v.12 leads to a statement of intent in v.13-14. Verses 15-17 are almost the speech the psalmist plans to make at the temple. Verses 18-19 repeat the psalmist’ intent, and and a final note of praise.(Goldingay)

Ps 116:12
This is a rhetorical question really, for what can one pay God, who is all sufficient in Himself?(van Gemeren)

Ps 116:13-14
What is left to the psalmist is to publicly acknowledge his debt to God, by bringing a thanks offering.(116:17) and the drink offering he calls the “cup of salvation”. He calls on the name of God again, but this time to thank and praise Him for his rescue. The public offering is in fulfillment of vows made while in distress. OT saints often made such vows, esp. in difficult times.(Van Gemeren)

The “cup of slavation” is the liquid offering made in several worship occasions, or perhaps the cup passed around during festive meals, such as Passover. If a thanks offering, it is only properly made with two actions, the pouring of the liquid and the public proclamation of thanks and/or praise of God for His action on the sacrificer’s behalf.(Goldingay)

Some question the genuiness of v. 14 because it is not in the Greek OT and repeats v. 18. More likely than being illegitimate is that it was deleted from some family of the text (The OT having multiple versions coming down to us, thanks to, among other things, simple errors of hand copying.)behind the Greek OT while retained in the family behind our Masoretic Hebrew text that lies behind most English bible OT.(Van Gemeren)

Ps 116:15-16
These verses may be seen as the psalmist’s public confession of his salvation by God. The psalmist notes God doesn’t entertain the death of His saints lightly, and what is true for them is true for the psalmist, who in v. 16 establishes that he is a servant of God from a family of servants of God “son of your handmaid”. God has freed him from his difficulty (loosened my bonds).(Van Gemeren)

“Precious” might not be the best translation here. “Heavy, grievous, burdensome” might convey the sense better. The idea in any case is that God values his faithful too highly to allow them to die, as the psalmist’s experience has shown.(Goldingay)

V. 16 shows that the psalmist is not only not a recent believer who turned to God in desperation, but a child of a beleiving family, the son of a servant. In this servanthood is both the servant’s commitment to the master, but also the master’s protection and provision for the servant. (Goldingay)

Ps 116:17-19
Verse 17 is a variation of v. 13, a repetition for effect, as v. 18 is a repeat of v. 14. V. 19’s addition ties the promised offering in with the priestly law for such things.(Van Gemeren)

SEBTS president Danny Akin and SECWF dean Bruce Ashford make a clear, concise, heartfelt argument over at Between the Times for Baptists to stop fighting over, in the words of Akin and Ashford, Calvinism and Arminianism. Their argument can be summed up with the excellent closing line:

For the sake of the billions who have never heard the gospel, we must rid ourselves of fundamentalist infighting that distracts from, and contradicts, the proclamation of the gospel.

To that end, I most heartily agree.

At the same time, few in the SBS seem to want to say what exactly it means to preach the gospel in a biblical way. Southern Baptists just want to assume that, if a church and its pastor(s) sign The Baptist Faith and Message, they must necessarily understand and preach a faithful gospel.

Sadly, this is not the case.  Another post could be added to expand this point, but preaching any kind of man-centered gospel, ones which put the emphasis on the commands of God and our duty to obey them as greater than the mercy of God in the cross of Christ, is not gospel preaching.  It doesn’t present the good news in an identifiably biblical way. 

So, I would ask my dear professors and teachers Drs. Akin and Ashford, if a Southern Baptist were to preach a gospel of works, what would that look like? Would the rest of the convention agree to work with this person or church? Would we try to shelter them under the name of “unity” and “liberty of conscience,” or would we call out their false teaching for what it is?

The talk of unity for the sake of the nations is all well and good, but it would be ignorant and misleading to say that the gospel is well understood among Southern Baptists. Clarifications, Doctors, are needed more than occasionally, as you imply. They are needed all the time. We don’t want agreement without the gospel – only with it.

Pena de Bernal, two ladies taking a break in pm

Ah what a mess all those codes…  Looking at those two ladies chatting on a public bench in a park located in Pena de Bernal, I am sure their subject of conversation is not about all those banks codes…

I have spent the day, trying to establish my credential with banks here and to conclude that I am getting too old for that garbage.  I love technology and everything that is attached to it but as I grow more mature not to say old, there is limitiation in my life to the stupidity of evolution.  Sometime, I believe we should just let it go and go back to the starting line.

Establishing my credit is one of the worst down side to been an expat and moving all the time, from country to other country.  My worst time to date was when I did not spend enough time in the USA to establish my name (stayed 13 months and it took 8 months to become somebody) and because of this short time, I moved to Mexico without much of a past and with a hole of 13 months not been somebody.  So I am back to square one with my banks now.

This is the joy of being expat.  I either accept the fact that I am a nobody or I give it all the cold shoulder and move back to my comfort zone in my small country home.

But still, I would bet anything that those two ladies in the picture above, don’t even know what an ATM card is and don’t care much about knowing it! 

Where did we go wrong here?

Mocahete

Well, lets just appreciate this town of Pena de Bernal where I still find the best mocahete con carne on this side of the land.

The Mocahete comes out with a sizzling collection of meat, cheese, cactus, etc… garnish with cilantro and serves with homemade tortillas. 

Extraordinary taste, you forget that you have problems with banks when you eat one of those!

Over at Between the Times, Drs. Danny Akin and Bruce Ashford have continued their excellent series on “Seven Crucial Aspects of Our Mission” (which is broken down in true Puritan style of multiple sub-points and cases) with an article focusing on cooperation between Calvinists and non-Calvinists.  As you know, this issue has been with us for a very long time, and during the more heated moments in recent SBC life, I was documenting all the events, articles, and commentary that was taking place.

Having been involved in Southern Baptist discourse for the past 6-7 years (I know, I’m young), I would argue that the relations between Calvinists and non-Calvinists is the best that it has been.  The rhetoric and caricatures are rare, and the conversation between those with soteriological differences has increased, especially with the advent of Twitter.  I know it’s crazy, but Twitter as a social-networking platform has interconnected Southern Baptists in a form of internet community that would otherwise not exist in real life.  I’m not sure as to why or how this has happened, but perhaps “following” each other has allowed us to see that those with whom we disagree are not as bad as we think they are.  They love Jesus, desire to honor Him in faithfully preaching His Word, and are genuinely seeking to make a difference for the glory of God.  Having the opportunity to see glimpses into the lives of people who otherwise would be a faceless name or distant interlocutor makes you think twice before lobbing bombs at one another.  We are not enemies.  We are brothers in the trenches seeking to advance the kingdom against our common enemy, the devil.

Over the years that I have been blogging, I believe it can be said that I have matured, those with whom I have disagreed have matured, and hopefully my fellow Calvinist friends have matured as well.  That maturity does not mean a compromise in our convictions but rather a more gracious disposition to hope all things in love rather than criticize all things in spite.  The appeal that Akin and Ashford make for Southern Baptists to cooperate is one that I urge all my Calvinist friends to heed.  At one point when I was a convinced non-Calvinist, I had a determined Calvinist friend who sat me down at a state convention and said, “Unless you become a five-point Calvinist, you will never be effectively used in ministry.”  I won’t ever forget that, and God by His grace drew me to an understanding of the doctrines of grace in spite of, not because of, such comments.  To my Reformed friends, don’t be that guy.

On the other hand, if I may, let me speak to Ashford, Akin, and my other “non-Calvinist” friends about cooperation with Calvinists.  In numerous ways and at various times, the call has been made for Calvinists to “put their theological cards on the table” and be up front with churches with what they believe.  (While all Calvinists should be transparent and clear with what they believe, this assumes that those with whom they are talking about understand exactly what Calvinism is.  But that is besides the point.)  I want to encourage my non-Calvinist friends to do the same.  You are defining yourself in the context of cooperation with a nondescript label.  You are what you are not.  Okay. That could mean anything.  Arminian? Amyraldian? Semi-Pelagian? Biblicist? “Cal-minian”? Who knows?

If there is to be genuine cooperation, let’s put the expectations and responsibilities on both sides.  You call for Calvinists to cooperate with non-Calvinists, but that could very well mean to cooperate with anyone in the Southern Baptist who is not a Calvinist without soteriological or confessional warrant.  You might argue the Baptist Faith & Message 2000 as the confessional parameters, but how many churches and pastors of the 50,000 that exist in the SBC could articulate even a superficial understanding of what it says?  Even worse, should there be given an opportunity to query about what is the gospel and how one becomes a Christian, is there an assumption that non-Calvinists would have a consensus to say the same thing?  I have reason to think not.  Therefore, the premise that Calvinists should prima facie cooperate with non-Calvinists is fraught with difficulty, much of which could be eliminated if the same standard and expectations would be applied to non-Calvinists in the manner it has been for Calvinists.

Akin and Ashford argue,

It is our opinion that the areas of disagreement between Southern Baptist Calvinists and non-Calvinists are usually not even secondary, but tertiary. Calvinists should be able to recognize that non-Calvinists are preaching “the gospel” even if they disagree on the particulars.

Questions regrading the extent of the atonement, predestination, and the like I agree are tertiary, but there are some doctrines intricately related to the gospel that, should they be given up, would alter the gospel altogether.  Primary doctrines that address the questions of  “What is the gospel?” and “How does one become a Christian?” are essential and fundamental, “particulars” where disagreement we should all be able to recognize as unfortunately jeopardizing cooperation.

For instance, if Charles Finney were alive today and working as an itinerant revivalist in the Southern Baptist world, I (and I would imagine most Calvinists) could not cooperate with him.  His understanding of the gospel, conversion, work of the Holy Spirit in salvation, and the nature and state of man would all be particulars that are not secondary or tertiary but primary.  You might respond, “Well, of course.  Finney was semi-Pelagian.  That would be an extreme example.”  Okay. Now let me put it into contemporary vernacular because I believe that spirit and methodology (that flowed from his theology) is alive and prevalent today.  If the response to the gospel message is to “ask Jesus into your heart” or “pray this prayer after me” or “walk down this aisle” rather than repentance towards God and faith in the Lord Jesus, then that is a primary difference in how one becomes a Christian.  If the gospel is truncated, watered down, or altered so as to not offend, then we have a real problem.

The younger generation of Southern Baptists in the Biblebelt is in a modern-day burned-over district which some have called “the boneyard of the South.”  How did this happen?  In these places where the churches are so many and the culture so lost, how did we get here?  Where there is no marked difference in the lives of Christians than non-Christians, the problem is not sanctification or a discipleship process.  It is justification.  It is the gospel.  If Southern Baptist churches are going to rise from the ashes, and if Southern Baptists are going to embrace a Great Commission Resurgence, then we must not assume the differences between Calvinists and non-Calvinists are merely on tertiary grounds.

The future of Southern Baptists in cooperation around the Great Commission will not only be determined by how far we go on mission but also how well we know our message.  When we are not saying the same thing and are not handling the souls of men in the same way, this is no small matter.  I’m not talking about the finer points that are debated in coffee shops.  I’m talking about the essence of the gospel and what it means to be a Christian that is demonstrated in our rescue shops to reach a lost world.

My heart’s desire is to see exactly what Ashford and Akin are calling for–genuine cooperation of Southern Baptists with Calvinists and “non-Calvinists” alike–who teach the gospel, preach the gospel, live out the gospel, and plant the gospel in the areas where Christ is not named.  There is much work to be done, not only in expanding the mission but also expounding on our message.  May God help us together to get it right.  May God help us together to shine as lights.  May God help us together to fight for the souls of men and the advancement of the kingdom of Christ.

For some time I’ve noticed a disturbing tend with some of these Purpose Driven and Emergent guys substituting the phrase Christ Follower in the place of Christian. Chris of Fighting of the Faith does excellent job picking part this methodology in the sermon review here.

November 19, 2009

No Christians Allowed??

•  
  •  
    •  

      • • Seeker Driven Pastor Answers the Question, “Are Mormons Christians?”
        • Archbishop of Canterbury Claims Higher Taxes Would Be Good for Society
        • The Parable of the Talents is NOT About Time Management
        • Sermon Review, “No Christians Allowed” by Bill Maye of Brick City Community Church, Sanford, NC

—

Please Support This Important Radio Outreach