Comprehending Pink’s Commandments Part 15

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…

THE FIRST COMMANDMENT PART III

In pointing out the duties required by this Commandment we cannot do better than to quote the Westminster Confession of Faith. They are "the knowing and acknowledging of God to be the only true God, and our God (1 Chron. 28:9; Deut. 26:17, etc.); and to worship and glorify Him accordingly (Psa. 95:6, 7; Matt. 4:1O, etc.), by thinking (Mal. 3:16), meditating (Psa. 63:6), remembering (Eccl. 12:1), highly esteeming (Psa. 71:19), honouring (Mal. 1:6), adoring (Isa. 45:23), choosing (Josh. 24:15), loving (Deut. 6:5), desiring (Psa. 73:25), fearing of Him (Isa. 8:13), believing Him (Ex. 14:31), trusting (Isa. 26:4), hoping (Psa. 103:7), delighting (Psa. 37:4), rejoicing in Him (Psa. 32:11), being zealous for Him (Rom. 12:11), calling upon him, giving all praise and thanks (Phil. 4:6), and yielding all obedience and submission to Him with the whole man (Jer. 7:23), being careful in all things to please Him (1 John 3:22), and sorrowful when in anything he is offended (Jer. 31:18; Psa. 119:136), and walking humbly with Him (Micah 6:8)."
Those duties may be summarized in these chief ones. First, the diligent and lifelong seeking after a fuller knowledge of God as He is revealed in His Word and works, for we cannot worship an unknown God. Second, the loving of God with all our faculties and strength, which consists of an earnest panting after Him, and deep joy in Him, and a holy zeal for Him. Third, the fearing of God, which consists of an awe of his majesty, supreme reverence for His authority, and a desire for His glory: as the love of God is the motive-spring of obedience, so the fear of God is the great deterrent of disobedience. Fourth, the worshipping of God according to His appointments, the principal aids to which are these: study of and meditation upon the Word, prayer, and putting into practice what we are taught.


The most important question a professing christian must regularly ask themselves is: “is my faith real?” or “am I truly saved?”
2 Corinthians 13:5 states:
“Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves. Do you not realize that Christ Jesus is in you--unless, of course, you fail the test?”
“We are saved by faith alone, but the faith that saves is never alone.” (Martin Luther) – true faith produces works (James 2:14-26). There is an empty confessional Christianity, which many profess, which is based on a decision to acknowledge the cross but which bears no fruit. If someone recites the sinner’s prayer or walks the aisle or raises their hand at an evanglical meeting and calls themselves a Christian and yet lives in open unashamed rebellion against the laws of God – are they a real Christian? Can you think of times in scripture where Jesus himself preached against such a path? What of the writings of Paul or John? The first commandment is a remedy against such a path if it leads us to the four precepts or duties of the true beleiver as summarized by Pink above. Can you state these in your own words? Can you honestly say they describe your Chirstian walk? If not, will you pray to God that He would help you with each duty? Lastly bear in mind that none of us performs our duty perfectly all the time – even the apostle Paul called himself a wretched man. It is not your record of duty that saves you (it is Christ’s which he has impiuted to you – hallelujah!), but if your heart yearns to live for God, if you wish you were able to be perfect, if you hate your sin because it offends God, if the real you wants to honour and worship the real God in the way that He prescribes – then you can be assured that your faith is not in vain. We must examine and test ourselves because the human heart is so deceitful and history is cluttered with examples of outwardly pious Christians who then fell away from faith thereby showing that they never were true believers at all (1 John 2:19). What is the overall direction of your life, the tenor or tone? Let the words of Pink and/or the quote of the Westminster Confession of Faith he gives be a fire that purifies you (read them again). Invite the heavenly Gardener to prune you – to add and subtract what is needed so that you might glorify his name, love the saints and live in true assurance of your election to eternal life.

Comprehending Pink’s Commandments Part 14

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…

THE FIRST COMMANDMENT PART II

"Thou shalt have no other gods before Me" (Ex. 20:3) is the first Commandment. Let us briefly consider its meaning. We note its singular number: "thou" not "ye," addressed to each person separately, because each of us is concerned therein. "Thou shalt have no other gods" has the force of, thou shalt own, possess, seek, desire, love or worship none other. No "other gods"; they are called such not because they are so, either by nature or by office (Psa. 82:6), but because the corrupt hearts of men make and esteem them such--as in "whose god is their belly" (Phil. 3:19). "Before Me" or "My face," the force of which is best ascertained by His word to Abraham, "Walk before Me and be thou perfect" or "upright" (Gen. 17:1)--conduct thyself in the realization that thou are ever in My presence, that Mine eye is continually upon thee. This is very searching. We are so apt to rest contented if we can but approve ourselves before men and maintain a fair show of godliness outwardly; but Jehovah searches our innermost being and we cannot conceal from Him any secret lust or hidden idol.

Let us next consider the positive duty enjoined by this first Commandment. Briefly stated it is this: thou shalt choose, worship and serve Jehovah as thy God, and Him only. Being who He is--thy Maker and Ruler, the Sum of all excellency, the supreme Object of worship--He admits of no rival and none can vie with Him. See then the absolute reasonableness of this demand and the madness of contravening it. This commandment requires from us a disposition and conduct suited to the relation in which we stand to the Lord as our God, who is the only adequate Object of our love and the only One able to satisfy the soul. It requires that we have a love for Him stronger than all other affections, that we take Him for our highest portion, that we serve and obey Him supremely. It requires that all those services and acts of worship which we render unto the true God be made with the utmost sincerity and devotion (implied in the "before Me"), excluding negligence on the one hand and hypocrisy on the other.

1) Consider “whose god is their belly" (Philipians 3:19) – can you think of other gods people make in this world in this way? Which man-made god/s are you most prone to obey in your past and at present?

2) "Before Me" or "My face," – Can you see why, if God is omnipresent, the making, obeying or worshipping other gods is  a terrible affront to him? We should always strive to live before the face of God (Latin: Corem Deo) – note the imperative in the scripture:

Nothing in all creation is hidden from God’s sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give account. (Hebrews 4:13)

 “I am God Almighty[a]; walk before me faithfully and be blameless.

 (Genesis 17:1b).

How does remembering that God is always with us not only encourage us but curb us when we are tempted to sin?

3) R C Sproul when asked what the biggest problem in the Christian church today was replied: “we do not know God”. What is the reasonableness of obeying the first commandment and the madness of disobeying it?

4) Can you explain what Pink means by “excluding negligence on the one hand and hypocrisy on the other.” Express these two poles in your own words and as a prayer.

Comprehending Pink’s Commandments Part 13

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…

THE FIRST COMMANDMENT PART I

"And God spake all these words, saying, I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage" (Ex. 20:1, 2). This Preface to the Moral Law is to be regarded as having equal respect to all the Ten Commandments (and not to the first one only), containing as it does the most weighty arguments to enforce our obedience to them. As it is the custom of kings and governors to prefix their names and titles before the edicts set forth by them, to obtain the more attention and veneration to what they publish, so with the great God, the King of kings, being about to proclaim a Law for His subjects, that He might affect them with a deeper reverence for His authority and make them the more afraid to transgress those statutes which are enacted by so mighty a Potentate and so glorious a Majesty, blazons His august Name upon them.

What has just been pointed out above is clearly established by those awe-inspiring words of Moses to Israel: "That thou mayest fear this glorious and fearful name, THE LORD THY GOD" (Deut. 28:58). "I am the Lord thy God." The word for "Lord" is "Jehovah," who is the Supreme, Eternal and Self-existent One, the force of which is (as it were) spelled out for us in "which was, and is, and is to come" (Rev. 4:8). The word for "God" is "Elohim," the plural of Eloah, for though He be one in nature yet is He three in His Persons. And this Jehovah, the Supreme Object of worship, is "thy GOD," because in the past He was thy Creator, in the present He is thy Ruler, and in the future He will be thy judge. In addition, He is the "God" of His elect by covenant relationship and therefore their Redeemer. Thus, our obedience to His Law is enforced by these considerations: His absolute authority, to beget fear in us--He is "the Lord thy God"; His benefits and mercies, to engage love--"which brought thee out of the (antitypical) house of bondage."

1) What was the most weighty argument given by God to enforce the Israelite’s obedience to the Ten commandments? What house of bondage have we who are alive today been bought out of by the Lord? How did He do this?

2) Imagine that everytime you were about to sin you not only had such a good grasp of scripture as to think the very words that God has given that forbid your imminent sin; but then also imagine that these were prefaced with God’s mighty titles and a description of what He has done for you (created you, sustained you and forgiven you through the death of His Son). Surely this is the very idea behind scriptures like:

“Blessed is the one

    who does not walk in step with the wicked

or stand in the way that sinners take

    or sit in the company of mockers,

but whose delight is in the law of the Lord,

    and who meditates on his law day and night.

That person is like a tree planted by streams of water,

    which yields its fruit in season

and whose leaf does not wither—

    whatever they do prospers.

(Psalm 1:1-3) and …

I have hidden your word in my heart

    that I might not sin against you.

(Psalm 119:11) and …

The law of his God is in his heart; His steps do not slip.

(Psalm 37:31) and …

I delight to do Your will, O my God; Your Law is within my heart."

(Psalm 40:8)

Therefore, knowing that the believer is free from the consequence of the Law, how can the law contribute to our growth – our sanctification?

Comprehending Pink’s Commandments Part 12

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…

"And tenth and finally, we consider (the Decalogue’s) interpretation. "Thy commandment" said the Psalmist "is exceeding broad" (119:96). So comprehensive is the Moral Law that its authority extends to all the moral actions of our lives. The rest of the Scriptures are but a commentary on the Ten Commandments, either exciting us to obedience by arguments, alluring us by promises, restraining from transgressions by threatenings, or spurring us to the one and withholding us from the other by examples recorded in the historical portions. Rightly understood the precepts of the New Testament are but explications, amplifications, and applications of the Ten Commandments. It should be carefully observed that in the things expressly commanded or forbidden there is always implied more than is formally stated. But let us be more specific. First, in each Commandment the chief duty or sin is taken as representative of all the lesser duties or sins, and the overt act is taken as representative of all related affections. Whatever specific sin be named, all the sins of the same kind, with all the causes and provocations thereof, are forbidden, for Christ expounded the sixth commandment as condemning not only actual murder, but also rash anger in the heart. Second, when any vice is forbidden, the contrary virtue is enjoined, and when any virtue is commanded, the contrary vice is condemned. For example, in the third God forbids the taking of His name in vain, so by necessary consequence the hallowing of His name is commanded. And as the eighth forbids stealing, so it requires the contrary duty-earning our living and paying for what we receive (Eph. 4:28)."

1) What does the psalmist mean by “exceeding broad”? How did Jesus exaplain this concept in more detail when talking of murder and adultery (see Matthew 5:21 and 5:27)?

2) It is breathtaking how consistent the Lord is. His character is revealed throughout scripture and it is the same. Look at Pink’s correct observation: “in each Commandment the chief duty or sin is taken as representative of all the lesser duties or sins, and the overt act is taken as representative of all related affections”. So here we see that the way God instructs is to highlight the highest degree of an issue or make the greatest possible demand so that all the lesser possibilities are covered. Consider the following scriptures therefore:

a)      “Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.” (Ephesians 5:25) – conclusion – be prepared to die for your wife o husband but surely then there are lesser things than dying which should be done – like housework or paying attention or keeping your sexual fidelity.

b)      “Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.” (Ephesians 5:24) – conclusion – the church obeys, adores and serves Christ, does it not? Therefore wives should do likewise or at the very least let the husband lead and support his decisions in humble submission. Does the church nag or complain about Jesus?

c)      “So if you who are evil know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him!" (Luke 11:13) and also: “He who did not spare His own Son but gave Him up for us all, how will He not also, along with Him, freely give us all things?” (Romans 8:32) – conclusion – if even fallen man knows how to look after his own children and God the Father was willing to give up his Son, do we even need to question or doubt what the eternal future with Him will be like? Should we be anxious that he will neglect us in any way? Should we fret over the details of the eternal state?

3) “Whatever specific sin be named, all the sins of the same kind, with all the causes and provocations thereof, are forbidden”. How does this truth obliterate any argument made by people who want to promote homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle within the Christian church? Since God defines what marriage is in scripture then the seventh commandment covers every act of sexuality outside of biblical marriage and condemns it. Do you agree? How does the Bible define marriage?

4) “…when any vice is forbidden, the contrary virtue is enjoined, and when any virtue is commanded, the contrary vice is condemned”. Consider the list of commandments below. Can you reword each to highlight its complimentary or reflex commandment? For example: “You shall not covet” could become “you shall be satisfied and grateful for God’s provision in your life now because you bear an eternal promise.”

1 You shall have no other gods before Me.

2 You shall not make idols.

3 You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain.

4 Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.

5 Honor your father and your mother.

6 You shall not murder.

7 You shall not commit adultery.

8 You shall not steal.

9 You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

          10 You shall not covet.

Arthur will detail these complimentary commands further in future paragraphs.

Comprehending Pink’s Commandments Part 11

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…

"Ninth, we consider its (the Decalogue’s) sanctions. Not only has the Lord brought us under infinite obligations for having redeemed us from sin's slavery, not only has He given His people such a sight and sense of His awe-inspiring majesty as to beget in them a reverence for His sovereignty, but He has been pleased to provide additional inducements for us to yield to His authority, gladly perform His bidding, and shrink with abhorrence from what He forbids, by subjoining promises and threatenings, saying, "For I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate Me; and showing mercy unto thousands of them that love Me, and keep My commandments." Thus we are informed that those who perform His bidding shall not labor in vain, just as rebels shall not escape with impunity."

1) Wikipedia defines sanctions thusly: “penalties or other means of enforcement used to provide incentives for obedience with the law, or with rules and regulations.”

a) What “incentives for obedience” did the Lord present directly to the Israelite generation around the time the Decalogue was given?

b) What “incentives for obedience” are given directly in the scripture itself (for example look at the wording of the fifth commandment: “Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee” (Exodus 20:12))

c) What “incentives for obedience” do you have as a believer in Christ?

2) Is the Lord God obliged to give his creatures “incentives for obedience”? What does this tell us about God’s character?

3) What was the first command God gave to a man and what was its sanction? Did the Lord follow through with this sanction? Are all people under this sanction now? How do we escape this severe sanction?

Comprehending Pink’s Commandments Part 10

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…

"Eighth, we consider their office. The first use of the Moral Law is to reveal the only righteousness which is acceptable to God, and at the same time to discover to us our own unrighteousness. Sin has blinded our judgment, filled us with self-love, and wrought in us a false sense of our own sufficiency. But if we seriously compare ourselves with the high and holy demands of God's Law, we are made aware of our groundless insolence, convicted of our pollution and guilt, and made conscious of our lack of strength to do what is required of us. Calvin, in his Institutes of the Christian Religion (Book II, Chapter 7, Section 7), says, "Thus the Law is a kind of mirror. As in a mirror we discover any stains upon our face, so in the Law we behold, first, our impotence; then, in consequence of it, our iniquity; and, finally, the curse, as the consequence of both." Its second use is to restrain the wicked, who though they have no concern for God's glory and no thought of pleasing Him, yet refrain from many outward acts of sin through fear of its terrible penalty. Though this commends them not to God, it is a benefit to the community in which they live. Third, the law is the believer's rule of life, to direct him, and to keep him dependent upon Divine grace."

1) What does the Law reveal about God?

2) What does the Law reveal about ourselves?

3) Considering the above two questions and their answers, how can the Law be used to present to the lost the bad news of God’s wrath in order to convict them of their guilt and sin before revealing to them the good news of Christ’s work of atonement on the cross? Do we too often present the good news (the Gospel) without the bad first?

4) What does the Law do to the wicked (unbelievers) and how does it do this?

5) What does the Law do to the believer and in what two ways does it do this?

6) Imagine what the world might look like if everyone obeyed all ten commandments perfectly all the time? Now imagine what it would be like if no-one ever obeyed even one of the commandments. Do you agree that even an unsaved person would much rather live in a Law bound world than a lawless world. Oh that the final trumpet would now sound and bring creation into its final state of eternal sinlessness. Amen?

Comprehending Pink’s Commandments Part 9

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…

“Seventh, let us consider their spirituality. "The Law is spiritual" (Rom. 7:14), not only because it proceeds from a spiritual Legislator, but because it demands something more than the mere obedience of external conduct, namely, the internal obedience of the heart to its uttermost extent. It is only as we perceive that the Decalogue extends to thoughts and desires of the heart that we discover how much there is in ourselves in direct opposition to it. God requires truth "in the inward parts" (Psa. 51:6) and prohibits the smallest deviation from holiness even in our imaginations. The fact that the Law takes cognizance of our most secret dispositions and intentions, that it demands the holy regulation of our mind, affections, and will, and that it requires all our obedience to proceed from love at once demonstrates its Divine origin. No other law ever professed to govern the spirit of man, but He who searches the heart claims nothing less. This high spirituality of the Law was evidenced by Christ when He insisted that an unchaste look was adultery and that malignant anger was a breach of the sixth commandment. “

1) How would you explain “the Law is spiritual” to a non-believer?

2) Almost all other world religions give laws that are externally verifiable – laws that can be seen by others to have been obeyed. For example: going to mass, lighting a candle, praying towards mecca, presenting sacrifices to idols, going door to door, wearing certain clothing etc. The Law of God has many external components as well (can you think of examples of these?) but Jesus holds mankind to a much higher standard – not only what you do counts but what you think (your attitude or heart’s desire) actually counts. As Ralph Waldo Emerson correctly observed:  “Sow a thought and you reap an action; sow an act and you reap a habit; sow a habit and you reap a character; sow a character and you reap a destiny.”  These scriptures show how important a good thought-life is:

Watch over your heart with all diligence, For from it flow the springs of life. (Proverbs 4:23)

The good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth what is good; and the evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth what is evil; for his mouth speaks from that which fills his heart. (Luke 6:45)

"For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed the evil thoughts, fornications, thefts, murders, adulteries, (Mark 7:21)

Finally, brothers and sisters, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things. (Philippians 4:8)

All too often we sow thoughts which have death as their ultimate destiny. It is not harmless to imagine sinning - to fantasize doing that which the scripture prohibits. Which one of the ten commandments most expresses this idea of a righteous thoughtlife – of guarding your thoughts?

3) “It is only as we perceive that the Decalogue extends to thoughts and desires of the heart that we discover how much there is in ourselves in direct opposition to it.” Who is the ‘we’ that Pink is referring to here? All mankind or beleivers? If you love God and are trusting in Christ for your eternal destiny but find so much of yourself persistently in opposition to His Law which was given in love, what is the only response warranted? What is the only attitude which makes sense? Where can we find hope? In scripture and in prayer and ultimately in the perfect record of Jesus gifted to us who are his. Consider what Paul says in the following scripture and please note the pronouns – here we have perhaps the greatest Christian who ever lived referring to himself (how much more then do these things apply to ourselves):

“We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin. 15 I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. 16 And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. 17 As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. 18 For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. 19 For I do not do the good I want to do, but the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. 20 Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.

21 So I find this law at work: Although I want to do good, evil is right there with me. 22 For in my inner being I delight in God’s law; 23 but I see another law at work in me, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within me. 24 What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body that is subject to death? 25 Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord!

So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God’s law, but in my sinful nature a slave to the law of sin.” (Romans 7:14-25)

The devil fishes

Comprehending Pink’s Commandments Part 8

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?

Join me for the next installment …

God Never Learns

Good and Bad - no change

And best of all - God through Jesus and the Holy Spirit can change people - and He will do it.
j

Comprehending Pink’s Commandments Part 7

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…

“Fifth, we pass on to say a word upon the number of the commandments of the Moral Law, ten being indicative of their completeness. This is emphasized in Scripture by their being expressly designated "the Ten Words" (Ex. 34:28 margin), which intimates that they formed by themselves an entire whole made up of the necessary, and no more than the necessary, complement of its parts. It was on account of this symbolic import of the number that the plagues upon Egypt were precisely that many, forming as such a complete round of Divine judgments. And it was for the same reason that the transgressions of the Hebrews in the wilderness were allowed to proceed till the same number had been reached: when they had "sinned these ten times" (Num. 14:21) they had "filled up the measure of their iniquities." Hence also the consecration of the tithes or tenths: the whole increase was represented by ten, and one of these was set apart for the Lord in token of all being derived from Him and held for Him.”

1) How would the ‘completeness’ of the Decalogue as highlighted by Pink here be expressed or supported by James 2:10  “For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it.”

2) Consider the Ten Commandments:

1 You shall have no other gods before Me.

2 You shall not make idols.

3 You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain.

4 Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.

5 Honor your father and your mother.

6 You shall not murder.

7 You shall not commit adultery.

8 You shall not steal.

9 You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

          10 You shall not covet.

Take any pair and see if you can identify the link that makes breaking one breaking the other and therefore all. For example breaking 10 is a breaking of 2 is it not? In similar fashion how are 8 and 1 related? How is commiting 6 a type of 8?and so on…

3) Having undertaken the previous exercise consider any other exhortation or command given in both the new and old testament – how do most of these become mere clarifications or further detailings of the Ten Commandments?

For example:

a) relate Hebrews 10:25 (…not giving up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing etc) to commandment 4.

b)relate Romans 13:12 (…lay aside the deeds of darkness and put on the armor of light) to commandment 9.

c) relate Titus 3:1 (Remind them to be subject to rulers, to authorities, to be obedient…) to commandment 5.

d) relate Micah 6:8  (…act justly … love mercy and … walk humbly with your God) to commandments 1, 6 and 9.

e) relate Ephesians 4:29 (Let no unwholesome word proceed from your mouth…) to commandment 3.

… and so on…

Sin meme

What, where, when, how, why and who...

Mass

Comprehending Pink’s Commandments Part 6

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…

“Fourth, let us consider their (the ten commandments) perpetuity (state or quality of lasting forever). That the Decalogue is binding upon every man in each succeeding generation is evident from many considerations. First, as the necessary and unchanging expression of God's rectitude (morally correct behaviour or thinking; righteousness), its authority over all moral agents becomes inevitable: the character of God Himself must change before the Law (the rule of His government) can be revoked. This is the Law that was given to man at his creation from which his subsequent apostasy could not relieve him. The Moral Law is founded on relations which subsist wherever there are creatures endowed with reason and volition. Second, Christ Himself rendered to the Law a perfect obedience, thereby leaving us an example, that we should follow in His steps. Third, the Apostle to the Gentiles specifically raised the question "Do we then make void the Law through faith?" and answered, "God forbid: yea, we establish the Law" (Rom. 3:31). Finally, the perpetuity of the Law appears in God's writing it in the hearts of His people at their new birth (Jer. 31:33; Ezek. 36:26, 27).”

1) In your own words give the four reasons why the ten commandments are perpetually important according to Pink.

2) Was Cain innocent of murder because the Ten Commandments had not yet been given?Was Abraham’s lies to the king of Egypt and to Abimelech excuseable because they were told before Moses was born? Was the Sabbath made holy during the exodus or the creation? Other pre-law examples can be given to show that the Law of God has always existed as has the consequences for breaking it. Since God does not change (Malachi 3:6; Numbers 23:19; Hebrews 13:8; James 1:17) are the laws somehow irrelevant after the cross? What did Paul say about this in Romans 7:7

“What shall we say, then? Is the law sinful? Certainly not! Nevertheless, I would not have known what sin was had it not been for the law. For I would not have known what coveting really was if the law had not said, “You shall not covet.”” – Does Paul really mean that he would know nothing of sin without the Law? Since we know that those who lived before the giving of the ten commandments were judged as sinners it is clear that Paul is not talking about basic knowledge but intimate knowledge of sin – a knowledge of the extent of sin, the detail of sin, the offense of sin – this is what the law reveals to us. As we grow in faith and mature as Christians we tend sin less but our sins tend to weigh more. Can you examine your walk with Christ and see this occuring?

3) “The Decalogue is binding upon every man in each succeeding generation” – the law is binding but not saving. The legalist tries to save themselves by obeying the law (pharisees for example), the lawless antinomian in their reaction against legalism (or perhaps more often in their rebellion against God and their desire to sin freely or specifically – e.g. homosexuality in the church) tries to excuse themselves from being bound to the Law of God. But we have learned that Law is for our good and is given in love. Consider then-

-         Why should we obey the Law of God?

-         Will we perfectly succeed?

-         What gives us hope when we fail?

-         According to Micah 6:8 what does the Lord require of us and is perfect law keeping on the list?

-         What desired resultant attitude is fostered in the child of God who wants to obey but often fails and confesses and repents?

Join me for the next installment …

Comprehending Pink’s Commandments Part 5

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…

"Third, let us consider their springs, which is love. Far too little emphasis has been placed upon their Divine preface: "And God spake all these words, saying, I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage." Whatever of awful grandeur and solemn majesty attended the promulgation of the Law, nevertheless, it had its foundation in love. The Law proceeded from God as a clear expression of His character as both the gracious Redeemer and righteous Lord of His people. The obvious conclusion and all-important principle that must be drawn from this understanding is this: redemption necessitates conformity to God's character and order in those who are redeemed. Not only was God's giving of the Decalogue an act of love, but love was the basis upon which it was received by His people, for only thus could there be a conformity, an essential likeness, between a redeeming God and a redeemed people. The words at the close of the second commandment, "showing mercy unto thousands of them that love Me and keep My commandments," make it crystal clear that the only obedience which God accepts is that which proceeds from an affectionate heart. The Savior declared that the requirements of the Law were all summed up in loving God with all our hearts and loving our neighbors as ourselves."

1. The Decalogue can be divided into two parts

A) the Laws concerning our relationship to God

1 You shall have no other gods before Me.

2 You shall not make idols.

3 You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain.

4 Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.

B) the Laws concerning our relationship towards one another.

5 Honor your father and your mother.

6 You shall not murder.

7 You shall not commit adultery.

8 You shall not steal.

9 You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

10 You shall not covet.

Consider each of these two lists – how do they express love for God? And for our fellow humans? One way you could do this is to reword each law as a question:

Do I love God enough to –

-         have no other gods before him?

-         have no idols* in my life?

-         never use his name or titles without honour and reverence?

-         worship him one day of each week?

(In other words do I love God with all my heart, soul, mind and strength?)

Do I love my fellow human beings enough to -

-         honour them when they are my parents, gandparents, guardians and authorities over me?

-         not kill them or commit lesser crimes like hating them, slandering them, being angry with them and not forgiving them?

-         reserve my sexual activity for only one of them and give all of that exclusively and only to that one special person?

-         respect their property and right to ownership by not stealing both physical things and immaterial things like time and energy?

-         never slander or tell lies about or tell lies to another person.

-         not compare what I have to them or desire inordinately what they have or deny others my time, money or effort because I want something another has that I do not rerally need.

(In other words do I love others as I love myself?)

If you are honest in this appraisal you must answer that there seems to be practically no love in you at all according to these standards – or you may feel extreemly inconsistent and impoverished in your love. But take heart – Chirst was perfect in his love and he has gifted his perfect record to you. Still, we do well to honour him by obeying his law as a testimony to the love with which it was given.

Join me for the next installment…

* Gotquestions.org defines idols thusly: “The definition of idolatry, according to Webster, is “the worship of idols or excessive devotion to, or reverence for some person or thing.” An idol is anything that replaces the one, true God. The most prevalent form of idolatry in Bible times was the worship of images that were thought to embody the various pagan deities. Idolatry extends beyond the worship of idols and images and false gods. Our modern idols are many and varied. Even for those who do not bow physically before a statue, idolatry is a matter of the heart—pride, self-centeredness, greed, gluttony, a love for possessions and ultimately rebellion against God.”

Comprehending Pink’s Commandments Part 4

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…

“Second, let us consider their (the Ten Commandment’s) uniqueness. This appears first in that this revelation of God at Sinai, which was to serve for all coming ages as the grand expression of His holiness and the summation of man's duty, was attended with such awe-inspiring phenomena that the very manner of their publication plainly showed that God Himself assigned to the Decalogue peculiar importance. The Ten Commandments were uttered by God in an audible voice, with the fearful adjuncts of clouds and darkness, thunders and lightnings and the sound of a trumpet, and they were the only parts of Divine Revelation so spoken--none of the ceremonial or civil precepts were thus distinguished. Those Ten Words, and they alone, were written by the finger of God upon tables of stone, and they alone were deposited in the holy ark for safekeeping. Thus, in the unique honor conferred upon the Decalogue, we may perceive its paramount importance in the divine government.”

1) How did God make the revelation of the Ten Commandments stand out above his other instructions given to the prophets throughout the ages? 

2) Why did he make the Ten Commandments more important than all the others? What distinguishes them from ceremonial and civil precepts in terms of relevance for Christians today, in the eternal kingdom to come, what they can teach us of God’s love and holiness, and finally how they convict the unsaved when presenting the Gospel.

3) Since God has so set his Ten Commandments apart, are we too quick to lump them in with his other decrees such as the prohibition of eating certain animals (e.g. pork and shellfish) and disregard them – claiming we are free of stricture because we are now under God’s Grace? But in 1 John 3:4 we read: “Everyone who sins breaks the law; in fact, sin is lawlessness.” John is not talking about the law of the land but the Ten Commandments. Matthew 13:41-42 is very clear:  “The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil. They will throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”

4) But none of us can consistently keep these commandments and according to James 2:10 even breaking one is as good as breaking them all. Truly honest people will abjectly admit that they break God's laws all the time. If only there was one person numbered among men who lived a perfect life – never breaking a single command even once – and his perfect record was given to each one of us who would receive it – as a gift. Also – if sin must be punished with death (Romans 6:23) – if only there was someone who was willing to die for each one of our sins. But praise be to God, for the man who lived perfectly did come and he also willingly died for our sins.  That man was God himself – Jesus Christ. Have you gratefully received his gift? And if yes, then is it appropriate to live as he instructed – and not only following the letter of the Law but the Spirit behind it (we will explore this concept further with Arthur Pink)? Do you obey because you are saved and trust that he knows what is best? I pray that you do.

Join me for the next installment…