Foreword:
The following exerpt is taken from The Ten
Commandments by Arthur W. Pink
(BAKER BOOK HOUSE, 1994 GRAND RAPIDS, MI)
In this blog series I will work through this very
important article a paragraph at a time – asking my reader comprehension style
questions at the end. In our day, when people who identify themselves as
Christians are so sensitive to any accusation of legalism that they tend to
swing all the way out to antinomianism (that is lawlessness), it is perhaps now
more than ever that we ought to prayerfully re-examine the Ten Commandments –
and few do it better than Arthur Pink (1886 - 1952). I found
this article to be very convicting as I first worked through it. And, lest we
think we the church are not in need of this labour, let us be reminded that
those whom Jesus will reject on the last Day even though they did many mighty
works in his name, were accused by our Lord of not just having no intimate
relationship with him (‘I never knew you’), but also that they were accused as
workers of lawlessness by our Lord. The Law of God does not save, nor does it keep
one saved – none the less we are called to obedience to it who are saved – but
enough of me – here is Arthur Pink…
“Sixth, we consider their division. As God never acts
without good reason we may be sure He had some particular design in writing the
Law upon two tables. This design is evident on the surface, for the very
substance of these precepts, which together comprehend the sum of
righteousness, separates them into two distinct groups, the first respecting
our obligations Godward, and the second our obligations manward, the former
treating of what belongs peculiarly to the worship of God, the latter of the
duties of charity in our social relations. Utterly worthless is that
righteousness which abstains from acts of violence against our fellows while we
withhold from the Majesty of heaven the glory which is His due. Equally vain is
it to pretend to be worshippers of God if we refuse those offices of love which
are due to our neighbors. Abstaining from fornication is more than neutralized
if I blasphemously take the Lord's name in vain, while the most punctilious
worship is rejected by Him while I steal or lie.
Nor do the duties of Divine worship fill up the first table
because they are, as Calvin terms them, "the head of religion," but
as he rightly adds, they are "the very soul of it, constituting all its
life and vigor," for without the fear of God, men preserve no equity and
love among themselves. If the principle of piety be lacking, whatever justice,
"mercy, and temperance men may practice among themselves, it is vain in
the sight of Heaven; whereas if God be accorded His rightful place in our
hearts and lives, venerating Him as the Arbiter of right and wrong, this will
constrain us to deal equitably with our fellows. Opinion has varied as to how
the Ten Words were divided, as to whether the fifth ended the first table or
began the second. Personally, we incline decidedly to the former: because
parents stand to us in the place of God while we are young; because in
Scripture parents are never regarded as "neighbors"--on an equality;
and because each of the first five commandments contain the phrase "the
Lord thy God," which is not found in any of the remaining five. “
1) The two categories of the Decalogue – Godward and
manward obligations – although distinct are nonetheless co-dependant. Consider
how many false religions would wholeheartedly agree with the manward laws and
strenuously teach and insist on them in various ways – but despise and reject
the Godward laws and replace them with false gods, idols and blasphemous
rituals. Or how many modern atheists are highly moral in their manward dealings
– insisting on peace, love, charity and emancipation – but of course hate the
very idea of God’s exsistence and preach vehemiantly against it. Pink is here
teaching that without doing the manward obligations for the right reasons these
obediences – though outwardly righteous are empty and indeed offensive to God.
Consider Isaiah 64:6:
All of us have become like one who is unclean,
and all our righteous acts are
like filthy rags;
we all shrivel up like a leaf,
and like the wind our sins sweep
us away.
Or consider what Jesus said in Matthew 23:23.
Similarly Pink is here telling us that pious devotion in
thought and word to God that is not accompanied by a practical love for his
creatures – particularly the ones he died for that he made in his own image –
is both empty and offensive. To which of these two trends do you tend to err?
Are you predomionantly Godward or manward in your obedience? Do you pray for
balance? Repentance and wisdom in this issue?
2) “Without the fear of God, men preserve no equity and
love among themselves.” Why is this statement true? How does it apply to
private or hidden actions (both positive and negative, loving and wicked)
towards our neighbours?
3) In your own words why does Pink believe the fifth
commandment – honour your parents – fit in the “Godward” category. Do you
agree with him?
No comments:
Post a Comment