Verse of the Day

Saturday, October 31, 2015

Scripture Study Seminar Session 15 announcement

Scripture Study Seminar

Session 15 is scheduled for 
7:00 PM on Wednesday, November 18, 2015 at 
Faith Baptist Fellowship Church
1397 Easton Turnpike
Lake Ariel, PA
http://faithbaptistfellowshipch.com/

The subject for this session will be:

"Romans 7: Carnality and the Christian"

The notes from the previous 14 sessions have been posted to the Wayside Gospel Chapel blog at  http://waysidegospelchapel.blogspot.com/search/label/Scripture%20Study%20Seminar.

Scheduling conflicts for me on the 4th, and the church on the 11th give you extra time to consider this chapter!

The Study of the Scriptures - Session 14: Wednesday, 21 October 2015 at Faith Baptist Fellowship Church, Lake Ariel, PA - Romans 7 Considered in Context and Covenant

The Study of the Scriptures
Session 14, Wednesday 21 October 2015
Faith Baptist Fellowship Church
Lake Ariel, PA

Romans 7 Considered
in Context and Covenant

Outline:

I. A Classification of the Views of the Identity and Nature of the Subject in Romans 7

II. Introductory Considerations for Analyzing the Relative Merit of Views on Romans 7

III. Romans 7 in the Diatribe of Romans

IV. Romans 7-8; Jeremiah 31; and Ezekiel 36 —
The Explication of the Fulfillment of the New Covenant Promise of Jeremiah 31:33 in Romans 7:7-25 as Unpacking Romans 2:15; and The Explication of the Fulfillment of the New Covenant Promise of Ezekiel 36:26-27 in Romans 8:1-27 as Unpacking Romans 2:26, 29

V. An Outline of Romans: Paul’s Defense of the Gospel of the Administration of the New Covenant During the Inter-Advent Period

VI. Select Resources

1  Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth? 2 For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. 3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man. 4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God. 5 For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death. 6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.

7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet. 8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead. 9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. 10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. 11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me. 12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.

13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful. 14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin. 15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I. 16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good. 17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. 18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not. 19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do. 20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. 21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me. 22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: 23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. 24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? 25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

Questions to be considered in studying “Romans 7 Considered in Context and Covenant”

1. What is there about Romans 7 that is not inspired since not included in the original manuscripts?

2. What is the nature of Romans 1-11? Specifically, what type of literary format is Paul following that distinguishes these chapters in this epistle from his other epistles?

3. What contexts should be considered when studying Romans 7?

4. What major parts of Romans 7 should be observed, and how do they relate to one another?

5. Why is this chapter such a problem and source of disagreement for so many Bible students?

6. What is almost entirely neglected in studies of Romans 7, and, in fact, of the entire book of Romans?

7. What would you consider to be the key verse in Romans 7 for testing the legitimacy of the various views that have been put forth for who is in view here?

I. A Classification of the Views of the Identity and Nature of the Subject in Romans 7

All of the views on this chapter may not be subsumed under the tags “regenerate” versus “unregenerate.” A thorough reading of Moo and Schreiner on this passage, for example, should serve to disabuse any of the notion that all of the work on this passage in the history of the Church may be laid under those two banners. See Doug Moo, Romans 1-8, Wycliffe Exegetical Commentary, pp. 433-499; and The Epistle to the Romans, NICNT, pp. 409-467; and Thomas R. Schreiner, Romans, BECNT, pp. 343-394. Complicating this question concerning the spiritual condition of the subject is the identity of the “I” under discussion, the first person singular. This has been seen variously as Paul, Israel, Adam in the Garden, the “Adam” in all of us, existential, personal, typical, corporate, fictive, a rhetorical figure of speech with no autobiographical reference (W. G. Kummel, 1929), and even combinations of these. Cranfield distinguishes “at least seven possibilities.” Romans, ICC, I:344. Therefore, some would well ask, “Regenerate or unregenerate who?” Or, even, “Why not all of the above?”

Please understand that not all who survey the literature agree with categorizing specific authors under the following categories. There are especially some differences of opinion with the placement of those under views 2 and 3 below.

1. The regenerate man - “an important aspect of normal Christian experience” (Moo) - “...the Latin Fathers generally, the Reformers especially on the Calvinistic side...” (Sanday and Headlam, Romans, ICC, pg. 185), Ambrose, Ambrosiaster, Aquinas, Augustine's later view, Barrett, Karl Barth, Herman Bavinck, Louis Berkhof, G. C. Berkouwer, F. F. Bruce, John Calvin, D. H. Campbell, C. E. B. Cranfield, Dockery, J. D. G. Dunn, Espy, James Fraser, Fung, D. B. Garlington, William Hendriksen, Charles Hodge, Laato, R. C. H. Lenski, Martin Luther, Methodius, Philip Melancthon, Leon Morris, Mounce, John Murray, Anders Nygren, J. I. Packer, John G. Reisinger, Alan F. Segal, and D. Wenham 
- see Cranfield, Romans, ICC, I:345-346; Moo, Romans 1-8, Wycliffe Exegetical Commentary, pg. 473; The Epistle to the Romans, NICNT, pg. 447; Murray, Romans, NICNT, pp. 256-257; Schreiner, Romans, BECNT, pg. 379.

2. The unregenerate man - most of the early Church Father's (“Origen and the mass of Greek Fathers” - Sanday and Headlam, Romans, ICC, pg. 184), Michael W. Adams, Paul Achtemeier, Augustine's early view, C. H. Dodd, Frederic Godet, Hans Hubner, Robert Jewett, Franz Leenhardt, Heikki Raisanen, Sanday and Headlam, Geoff Volker, and John Wesley.

3. The in between/halfway/pre-regenerate/pre-Christian man - Althaus, J. C. Beker, J. A. Bengel, Bornkamm, Bultmann, Byrne, D. Davies, Gordon Fee, J. A. Fitzmeyer, A. H. Francke, E. Fuchs, Gundry, Hoekema, Ernst Kasemann, K. Kertelge, Kummel, Kuss, Jan Lambrecht, D. M. Lloyd-Jones, B. L. Martin, P. Meyer, Douglas Moo, Herman Ridderbos, Schnackenburg, Peter Stuhlmacher, Gerd Theissen, Ulrich Wilckens, and J. T. Ziesler 
- see esp. Thomas R. Schreiner, Romans, BECNT, pp. 384-385, note 22; also Moo, Romans 1-8, Wycliffe Exegetical Commentary, pg. 470; The Epistle to the Romans, NICNT, pg. 444.


4. “...any man, whether regenerate or unregenerate, who relies upon the law and his own efforts for sanctification.” - W. H. Griffith-Thomas, et al.
- see Murray, Romans, NICNT, pp. 256-257, note 19; also Moo, Romans 1-8, Wycliffe Exegetical Commentary, pg. 474; and The Epistle to the Romans, NICNT, pg. 447.

5. “a refinement of Kümmel’s position” - a “parody of existence under the Torah” - Gary S. Shogren.

II. Introductory Considerations for Analyzing the Relative Merit of Views on Romans 7

Many exegetes and expositors seem well aware of the problems with Romans 7, along with the pros and cons of the arguments for the various views. However, there still appear to be significant factors which are not being considered that should shed light on a solution.

1. There were no chapter divisions in the original epistle, and their presence may obscure the seamless flow of the Pauline teaching.

2. The nature of the majority of the epistle is a diatribe, indeed, the greatest document utilizing this style of writing ever produced. Consideration must be given to where this diatribe format begins and ends in the epistle, and what is involved with the progressions in the development of the diatribe.

3. Many readers would be quite comfortable if chapter 7 was not there. In other words, if they were to read from 6:23 immediately to 8:1, they would not experience any traumatic “hiccup” in their reading. If the truth were told there are some who might admit they wish that this chapter either were not there at all, or were somewhere else in the epistle. A consideration of both the contents and location of the chapter followed by a consideration of its absence would be in order to answer the following question: “What effect would the lack of chapter 7 have on the development of the Pauline diatribe?

4. It might not be unfair, in other words, it may be quite fair to assert that many conclusions are drawn concerning chapter 7 without connecting it to the previous chapter, or to what follows in the next chapter.

5. It might be necessary for some to consider that the bridge between chapter 7 and chapter 6 is found in 7:1-6. This transitional paragraph and its function in the context between the end of chapter 6 and then what follows in 7:7-8:1 is an important key for understanding what develops next as Paul places the next point of his diatribe on “the table.” 7:1-6 should not be disconnected from either what precedes or what follows. Understanding this in an exegetically tenable manner should make it very difficult indeed to see what is going on in 7:7-25 as foreign to either the flow of chapter 6 or chapter 8.

6. This seamless flow in the Pauline diatribe between at least chapters 6 and chapter 8, or perhaps 5:12 to 8:39 — or 3:21 to 8:39 — is often ignored, or dismissed in treatments of chapter 7.

7. The regenerate are understood as in view from 3:21 on at least to the end of chapter 6, and then again in chapter 8. It should be beyond argument that what is found in 7:1-6 is also distinctive of the normal Christian or regenerate person. Therefore, to imagine that Paul is now going to revert to what was already dealt with in 1:18-3:20 should neither be expected nor imagined. The burden of proof would then be on anyone considering that the person in view in chapter 7 is not identical to those in view in chapters 6 and 8.

8. One glaring failure at this point is to even entertain any notion that this has anything to do with the New Covenant. The very function of the book of Romans in Scripture, positioned providentially as it is following the book of Acts, is to answer questions regarding the nature of the Gospel of the New Covenant raised by in Acts. Romans lays a foundation for the rest of the New Testament, and indeed for the rest of the inter-Advent period, in unpacking how the New
Covenant promises and prophecies are to be fulfilled. While this may be more implicit than explicit, that was also the case often in the exposition of the Old Covenant by the prophets from Moses to Christ. The Covenant is woven through the warp and the woof of their preaching and teaching, and is understood as the foundation for it. So it is with the New Covenant and the Pauline epistles, especially Romans.

9. Chapter 2 of Romans is not often considered when it comes to how chapters 7 and 8 relate to one another. What is introduced for another reason early in the diatribe in Romans 2:15 is then unpacked in Romans 7. What is introduced in Romans 2:26 and 29 is then unpacked in Romans 8. The two sides of the coin concerning the reality of New Covenant Gentiles in Romans 2 becomes the two sides of the same coin for all regenerate believers in Romans 7 and 8 as exemplifying two aspects of normal Christianity in the fulfillment of the New Covenant promises and prophecies.

III. Romans 7 in the Diatribe of Romans 1-11

“Schaeffer pointed out that, until recently, Romans was studied in American law schools in order to teach students the art of presenting an argument. A reasoned case is made for a foundational proposition. Counter statements are considered one by one, and refuted. Romans is not about a leap of faith but presents a comprehensive argument for the central proposition...”

Udo W. Middlemann, “Introduction,” in Francis A. Schaeffer, The Finished Work of Christ: the Truth of Romans 1-8 (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 1998), pp. viii-ix; on Westminster Books at http://www.wtsbooks.com/common/pdf_links/9781433531545.pdf [accessed 21 OCT 2015]; cited by James M. Rochford, “Introduction to Romans,” on evidence unseen at http://www.evidenceunseen.com/bible-difficulties-2/nt-difficulties/romans-2/introduction-to-romans/ [accessed 21 OCT 2015].[1]

1. Key indicators of the style known as diatribe

1. “Diatribal pronominal expressions”[2] — Dialogue with “an imaginary interlocutor,”[3] in the second-person singular, — an “…authorial device of turning from the audience to an imaginary individual….known in Paul’s time as speech-in-character.”[4] This “turning from the audience” is referred to as an “apostrophe,” and in the diatribe style is often introduced by addressing the fictitious person in the vocative, e.g., “O man” (Rom. 2:1).[5]

2. Rhetorical questions, especially when responded to with μὴ γένοιτο  (“mē genoito”) as in 3:4, 6, 31; 6:2, 16; 7:7, 13; 9:14; 11:1, 11 —

Translations of this expression:

AV: “God forbid.”
NASB: “May it never be!”
ESV: “By no means!”
HCSB: “Absolutely not!”
NIV: “Not at all!”
NLT: “Of course not!”
NKJV: “Certainly not!”

Other examples of this expression in a diatribal style:

1 Cor. 6:15 — Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid.

Gal. 2:17 — But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid.

Gal. 3:21 — Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.

Usages of this expression in a non-diatribal style is found in Lk. 20:16 and Gal. 6:14.

2. Sources on Diatribe and Paul’s use of diatribe style in Romans

C. K. Barrett, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, Harper’s New Testament Commentaries, gen. ed. Henry Chadwick (New York: Harper & Row, 1957), pp. 43, 61, 86, 121, 140, 172, 185-186, 218.[6]

A. J. Malherbe, “MH ΓENOITO in the Diatribe and Paul,” Harvard Theological Review 73:1-2 (JAN-APR 1980), pp. 231-240.[7]

Douglas J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, The New International Commentary on the New Testament, gen. eds. Ned B. Stonehouse, F. F. Bruce, and Gordon D. Fee (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), pp. 14-15, 125-126, 356, 589-590, 600.[8]

Leland Ryken, A Complete Handbook of Literary Forms in the Bible (Wheaton: Crossway, 2014), s.v. “Diatribe.”[9]

Leland Ryken, Literary Introductions to the Books of the Bible (Wheaton: Crossway, 2015).

Thomas R. Schreiner, Romans, BECNT (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 1998), pp.
Steven Coxhead, “The Significance of Paul's Diatribe in Romans 2” (7 MAR 2010), on Berith Road at http://berithroad.blogspot.com/2010/03/pauls-diatribe-in-romans-2.html [accessed 19 OCT 2015], pp. 23-25, 24n52, 105-106, 127, 147, 150n6, 200, 247n3, 265-266, 303-304, 358, 472n9, 505, 513, 535, 607n8, 718n13.

Changwon Song, Reading Romans as a Diatribe, Studies in Biblical Literature 59 (New York: Peter Lang International Academic Publishers, 2004).[10]

Stanley Kent Stowers, The Diatribe and Paul's Letter to the Romans, Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series 57 (Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1981); on Amazon at [accessed 16 OCT 2015].

Stanley K. Stowers, A Rereading of Romans: Justice, Jews, and Gentiles (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1997), pp. 11, 15, 100-104, 144-150, 153, 160-175, 231-237.

IV. Romans 7-8; Jeremiah 31; and Ezekiel 36 —
The Explication of the Fulfillment of the New Covenant Promise of Jeremiah 31:33 in Romans 7:7-25 as Unpacking Romans 2:15; and The Explication of the Fulfillment of the New Covenant Promise of Ezekiel 36:26-27 in Romans 8:1-27 as Unpacking Romans 2:26, 29

Verses 1-6 of Romans 7 stand together with the marriage and adultery metaphor related to life and death and spirit and letter.  The last two verses, 24-25, set up chapter 8.

A key verse for me — that I use to set up critiques of how folks handle this chapter — is verse 9, “...when the commandment came...”  

The temporal scenario Paul sets up is as follows:  
1) Sin was dead and I was alive. 
2) the commandment “came.” 
3) Sin revived and I died.  

The question that must be addressed is, “When did the commandment come?”  One corollary question that must be asked is, “In what sense could he have been alive prior to the coming of the commandment?”  Then another: “In what sense did he die subsequent to the “coming of the commandment”? None of the answers I have found in the standard works satisfy, that is, if they even give consideration to these questions at all.  

I continue to insist that: 
1) He was quite dead in trespasses and sins prior to the coming of the commandment.
2) His “aliveness” was only in his ignorance and personal perception, rather than in reality. 
3) The commandment “came” when the Spirit of God wrote it on his heart via regeneration. This would be seen to be the case especially when the internal nature of the sin of coveting is considered (vss. 7-8!) coordinate with the nature of the fulfillment of the New Covenant promise in Jeremiah 31:33. 
4) He then “died,” or was brought to realize his deadness in sin and provoked to cry out to Christ in faith for deliverance (vss. 24-25). This should be the response of the repentant believer under conviction of sin throughout the process of sanctification this side of glory.

I see the development in verses 7-25 as unpacking Rom. 2:15 regarding the impact of the fulfillment of the New Covenant promise in Jer. 31:33.  Verse 6 sets up the New Covenant linkage for this development - “newness of spirit, and not in oldness of the letter” - that is explicitly comparable to 2 Cor. 3.  This must be coordinated with the next chapter, Romans 8, which unpacks Rom. 2:26, 29, regarding the impact of the fulfillment of the New Covenant promise of Ezek. 36:26-27.

I would suggest that the goodness, holiness, justness, or spirituality of the Law (7:12, 14) is inherent regardless of its consequent positive or negative effects.  In fact, in this context it would appear that the intent of the Law is being contrasted to its consequent effects. The finger of Scripture is tracing out the root of this contradiction, and pointing at the carnality of the sinner revealed in the mirror of the Law now inscribed on the heart of the regenerate via the indwelling Spirit of Christ.[11]

Certain truths that must be kept in mind as background in order to get this chapter right:

1. The Old Covenant Law (Mosaic Code) cannot be divided into tripartite “chunks” as in moral/civil/ceremonial.

2.  The Old Covenant Law (Mosaic Code) in its entirety has been nailed to the Cross, and no longer has covenantal jurisdiction or significance. That the New Covenant believer no longer has any covenantal relationship to the Old Covenant Law is explicit in Romans 7:1-6.

3.  The Old Covenant Law (Mosaic Code) is nevertheless still Scripture, and as such along with all other Scriptures has just as much profit for the New Covenant believer by way of doctrine, reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness.

4.  The New Covenant promise of Jer. 31 has been fulfilled, and as Paul makes clear elsewhere (2 Cor. 3) the indwelling Spirit in the regenerate writes the nature of Christ within.

5.  The fulfillments of the coordinate New Covenant promises of Jer. 31 and Ezek. 36 concerning the Law and the Spirit must be seen as linked in 2 Cor. 3, and therefore it must be considered that Rom. 7 and Rom. 8 do the same. Therefore these chapters must not be contrasted but coordinated.

6.  The significance of verse 9 for getting this section right cannot be overestimated.

7.  At the end of the day what is developed in this middle section of the chapter leading up to the last two verses has everything to do with the "internalization" of the lessons of the Law. This cannot be about the “Law out there” as a separate entity in tablets of stone from the entity of the sinner. Rather, the Law viewed as: 1) internalized in the Spirit's indwelling, 2) “fleshed” out in Christ, and, 3) effecting the humbling of the sinner in recognition of his utter inability due to the absolute failure of the flesh. As such it must be the ongoing lessons learned and experience of every child of God so long as we continue to dwell in the flesh this side of resurrection glory.

V. An Outline of Romans: Paul’s Defense of the Gospel of the Administration of the New Covenant During the Inter-Advent Period

Ch
Point Concerning or Promise/Prophecy of the New Covenant
O.T. Ref
1:18-32
The world’s need of the New Covenant

2
The Jew’s need of the New Covenant, with parenthetical mention of Gentiles reception of the blessings of the New Covenant (2:15, 26, 29)

3:1-20
The universal condition as the basis of the necessity for the New Covenant for reconciliation regardless of ethnic or national distinctions

3:21-6:23
“And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD; for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.”
Jer. 31:34
7
“But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.”
Jer. 31:33
8
“A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.”
Ezek. 36:26-27
9-11
“Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:….Thus saith the LORD, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, which divideth the sea when the waves thereof roar; The LORD of hosts is his name: If those ordinances depart from before me, saith the LORD, then the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me for ever. Thus saith the LORD; If heaven above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth searched out beneath, I will also cast off all the seed of Israel for all that they have done, saith the LORD.”

“Nevertheless I will remember my covenant with thee in the days of thy youth, and I will establish unto thee an everlasting covenant. Then thou shalt remember thy ways, and be ashamed, when thou shalt receive thy sisters, thine elder and thy younger: and I will give them unto thee for daughters, but not by thy covenant. And I will establish my covenant with thee; and thou shalt know that I am the LORD: That thou mayest remember, and be confounded, and never open thy mouth any more because of thy shame, when I am pacified toward thee for all that thou hast done, saith the Lord GOD.”
Jer. 31:31-32, 35-37;
and
Ezek. 16:60-63
(also Ezek. 37)
12-16
“…and will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD;”
Jer. 31:33d-34c

VI. Select Resources

Sinclair B. Ferguson, John Owen on the Christian Life (Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth, 1987); 
on Westminster Bookstore at http://www.wtsbooks.com/john-owen-on-christian-life-sinclair-ferguson-9780851515038 [accessed 10 AUG 2015].
Note: Only available on Amazon at full list price at http://www.amazon.com/John-Owen-Christian-Sinclair-Ferguson/dp/0851515037/ref=sr_1_1 [accessed 10 AUG 2015].
Note: Not currently available on Christianbook.

Anthony Hoekema, The Christian Looks at Himself (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975); 
Note: Not currently available on Westminster Books.

David Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Romans 7:1-8:4: The Law, Its Functions and Limits (Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth, 1973);
on Amazon at http://www.amazon.com/Romans-Functions-Limits-Exposition-Chapter/dp/0851511805/ref=sr_1_1 [accessed 10 AUG 2015];
on Christianbook at http://www.christianbook.com/romans-the-law-its-functions-limits/d-lloyd-jones/9780851511801/pd/1511805 [accessed 10 AUG 2015];
on Westminster Bookstore at http://www.wtsbooks.com/romans-7-d-martyn-lloyd-jones-9780851511801 [accessed 10 AUG 2015].

Kris Lundgaard, The Enemy Within: Straight Talk about the Power and Defeat of Sin (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian & Reformed, 1998);
on Amazon at http://www.amazon.com/Enemy-Within-Straight-about-Defeat/dp/0875522017/ref=asap_bc [accessed 10 AUG 2015];
on Christianbook at http://www.christianbook.com/enemy-within-straight-about-power-defeat/kris-lundgaard/9780875522012/pd/42017 [accessed 10 AUG 2015];
on Westminster Bookstore at http://www.wtsbooks.com/the-enemy-within-kris-lundgaard-9780875522012 [accessed 10 AUG 2015].

Douglas J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996);
on Amazon at http://www.amazon.com/Epistle-Romans-International-Commentary-Testament-ebook/dp/B00EP71I5A/ref=la_B000AQ6VXE_1_2 [accessed 10 AUG 2015];
on Christianbook at http://www.christianbook.com/epistle-romans-new-international-commentary-testament/douglas-moo/9780802823175/pd/2371X [accessed 10 AUG 2015];
on Westminster Bookstore at http://www.wtsbooks.com/the-epistle-to-the-romans-douglas-moo-9780802823175 [accessed 10 AUG 2015].

John Owen, Mortification of Sin, abridged ed., ed. Richard Rushing (Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth, n.d.; 2004 reprint);
on Amazon at http://www.amazon.com/The-Mortification-Sin-Puritan-Paperbacks/dp/0851518672/ref=pd_sim_14_5 [accessed 10 AUG 2015];
on Christianbook at http://www.christianbook.com/the-mortification-of-sin/john-owen/9780851518671/pd/518670 [accessed 10 AUG 2015];
on Westminster Bookstore at http://www.wtsbooks.com/the-mortification-of-sin-john-owen-9780851518671 [accessed 10 AUG 2015].

J. C. Ryle, Holiness: Its Nature, Hindrances, Difficulties, and Roots (Carlisle, PA: Banner of Truth, n.d.; reprint) - Note: this is a hardbound edition, but paperback editions are in print also;
on Amazon at http://www.amazon.com/Holiness-J-C-Ryle/dp/1848715064/ref=sr_1_1_twi_3_har [accessed 10 AUG 2015];
on Christianbook at http://www.christianbook.com/holiness-j-c-ryle/9781848715066/pd/715066 [accessed 10 AUG 2015];
on Westminster Bookstore at http://search.wtsbooks.com/?FullText=ryle+holiness [accessed 10 AUG 2015].

Thomas R. Schreiner, Romans, BECNT (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 1998);
on Amazon at http://www.amazon.com/Romans-Baker-Exegetical-Commentary-Testament/dp/0801021499/ref=pd_sim_14_5 [accessed 10 AUG 2015];
on Christianbook at http://www.christianbook.com/romans-baker-exegetical-commentary-new-testament/thomas-schreiner/9780801021497/pd/21499 [accessed 10 AUG 2015];
on Westminster Bookstore at http://www.wtsbooks.com/romans-thomas-schreiner-9780801021497 [accessed 10 AUG 2015].

Sola Scriptura, Soli Deo Gloria,

John T. “Jack” Jeffery
Pastor, Wayside Gospel Chapel
Greentown, PA




End Notes:

[1] Middlemann has been the President of the Francis A. Schaeffer Foundation since 1988, and “…holds degrees in both law (LLM from Freiburg University, Germany) and theology (BD and MA from Covenant Theological Seminary, St. Louis, MO, USA).” Wingshadow On the River at http://www.wingshadowministries.org/Home/middleman-retreat/udo-short-bio [accessed 21 OCT 2015].

[2] Changwon Song, Reading Romans as a Diatribe, Studies in Biblical Literature 59 (New York: Peter Lang International Academic Publishers, 2004), pg. 108.

[3] Stanley K. Stowers, A Rereading of Romans: Justice, Jews, and Gentiles (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1997), pg. 100.

[4] Stowers, op. cit., pg. 11.

[5] Stowers, op. cit., pp. 11, 101; C. K. Barrett, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, Harper’s New Testament Commentaries, gen. ed. Henry Chadwick (New York: Harper & Row, 1957), pg. 43.

[6] See esp. pg. 43.

[7] Abstract available on Harvard Theological Review at http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0017816000002121 [accessed 21 OCT 2015]:
“Rudolf Bultmann's dissertation is still the best general description of diatribal style and remains the authority on the subject for most NT scholars. Bultmann draws attention to the dialogical element in the diatribe in which a speaker or writer makes use of an imaginary interlocutor who asks questions or raises objections to the arguments or affirmations that are made. These responses are frequently stupid and are then summarily rejected by the speaker or writer in a number of ways, for example by οὐδαμῶς (“by no means”), οὐ πάντως (“not at all”), οὐ μὰ Δία (“indeed not”), or minime (“by no means”). The limited purpose of this paper is to examine the way in which μὴ γένοιτο (“by no means”) is widely used in the diatribal literature, usually thought to be represented in Greek by the Dissertation of Epictetus, certain Moralia of Plutarch, various works of Philo, and by Bion, Teles, Musonius, Dio Chrysostom, Lucian, and Maximus of Tyre. In fact, however, this particular rejection, as it appears as a response in a dialogue without being part of a larger sentence, is unique to Epictetus and Paul. Bultmann's interpretation of the diatribe is heavily dependent on Epictetus despite the latter's peculiar development of the style, and the generalization about the use of μὴ γένοιτο in the diatribe is made on the basis of Epictetus.”

[8] See esp. pp. 14-15, and 125-126.

[9]DIATRIBE An important New Testament genre that the writers of the Epistles took over from their surrounding Greek and Roman culture. Scholars do not completely agree about the details of this genre. The consensus is that the diatribe was a form of teaching, street preaching, and oratory. The most important literary aspect of the diatribe is that it is a form of satire, meaning that it is an attack on vice or folly. As in all satire, there is an object of attack or rebuttal. Additionally, the diatribe implies an aggressive putdown of the person or position being attacked. The diatribe is a vigorous and combative form of discourse. The author’s energy is embodied in such motifs as: dialogue with imaginary questioners or opponents; question-and-answer constructions, sometimes catechismlike in effect; questions or hypothetical objections used as a transition to the next topic; rhetorical questions; use of famous and representative figures from the past as examples; use of analogy as a rhetorical device; and aphoristic (memorable) style. This list immediately alerts us that the Epistles (especially those of Paul) make continuous use of these techniques. The passage in which James attacks the idea that faith without works is acceptable (James 2:14–26) is an example of a diatribe.”

[10] “This book illustrates how the macro-structure of the «body» of Romans essentially follows that of the diatribes in Epictetus’s Discourses. As in Discourses, the diatribe in Romans begins with the thesis (1.16-17), then follows an indictment (1.18-32) and dialogues with a fictitious second-person singular in chapter two. Arguments with the mē genoito formula dominate the middle part of the diatribe. In the middle of chapter eleven, the phase changes back to dialogues with the second-person singular. The ending of the diatribe Romans also, like Discourses, includes cynic and hyperbolic statements (14.21 and 14.23). Thus, the «body» of Romans should not be read as a real letter, but as a diatribe that was distributed in Paul’s schoolroom and later appropriated as a letter. This teaching was not directed to a specific group of people, viz., the Christians in Rome, but rather intrinsically universalized. Therefore, its message is intrinsically more powerful for us.”
Op. cit., back cover; on Amazon at http://www.amazon.com/Reading-Diatribe-Studies-Biblical-Literature/dp/0820468177 [accessed 16 OCT 2015].
See especially pp. 108ff. in this book for the author’s treatment of the significance of this literary style for Romans 7, “Reading Romans 7 by Means of the Diatribal Pronominal Expressions.”
Song’s definition of  diatribe is cited by Leland Ryken in his Literary Introductions to the Books of the Bible (Wheaton: Crossway, 2015), s.v. “Romans.”

[11]God promises to put His laws in our hearts and write them on our minds. That's sanctification in principle or sanctification that's begun.” Jerry Bridges, tweet 14 OCT 2015 @BridgesWisdom (accessed 15 OCT 2015).

Pastor's Sermon Notes: Ecclesiastes (series), #3 - Been There. Done That. (Ecclesiastes 2:1-11)

Series: Ecclesiastes
Sermon #3: Been There. Done That.
Ecclesiastes 2:1-11



1 I said in mine heart, Go to now, I will prove thee with mirth, therefore enjoy pleasure: and, behold, this also is vanity. 2 I said of laughter, It is mad: and of mirth, What doeth it? 3 I sought in mine heart to give myself unto wine, yet acquainting mine heart with wisdom; and to lay hold on folly, till I might see what was that good for the sons of men, which they should do under the heaven all the days of their life. 4 I made me great works; I builded me houses; I planted me vineyards: 5 I made me gardens and orchards, and I planted trees in them of all kind of fruits: 6 I made me pools of water, to water therewith the wood that bringeth forth trees: 7 I got me servants and maidens, and had servants born in my house; also I had great possessions of great and small cattle above all that were in Jerusalem before me: 8 I gathered me also silver and gold, and the peculiar treasure of kings and of the provinces: I gat me men singers and women singers, and the delights of the sons of men, as musical instruments, and that of all sorts. 9 So I was great, and increased more than all that were before me in Jerusalem: also my wisdom remained with me. 10 And whatsoever mine eyes desired I kept not from them, I withheld not my heart from any joy; for my heart rejoiced in all my labour: and this was my portion of all my labour. 11 Then I looked on all the works that my hands had wrought, and on the labour that I had laboured to do: and, behold, all was vanity and vexation of spirit, and there was no profit under the sun.

Introduction:

Correction from last week’s sermon:

The double introduction that I mentioned last week as 1:3-11 and 1:12-18 is actually contained within 1:12-18.
On this see especially Walter C. Kaiser, Jr., Ecclesiastes: Total Life, in Everyman’s Bible Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1979), pg. 52.

Outline:

I. What the Preacher Purposed (2:1-3)
II. What the Preacher Accomplished (2:4-8)
III. What the Preacher Gained (2:9-10)
IV. What the Preacher Concluded (2:11)

Transition:

Reminder about the relative significance of the “hook” in 1:2

The connections between this section and the Prologue in 1:3-11

The key lies at the end, not at the door!
Cp. the conclusion of this section in 2:24-26.
On this see especially Walter C. Kaiser, Jr., Ecclesiastes: Total Life, in Everyman’s Bible Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1979), pp. 43-47.

The verses we are to consider are loaded with first person personal pronouns including subjective, objective and possessive forms.

I. What the Preacher Purposed (2:1-3)

1 I said in mine heart, Go to now, I will prove thee with mirth, therefore enjoy pleasure: and, behold, this also is vanity. 2 I said of laughter, It is mad: and of mirth, What doeth it? 3 I sought in mine heart to give myself unto wine, yet acquainting mine heart with wisdom; and to lay hold on folly, till I might see what was that good for the sons of men, which they should do under the heaven all the days of their life.

1. I said in mine heart, Go to now, I will prove thee with mirth, therefore enjoy pleasure: and, behold, this also is vanity.

2:1 is the summary statement introducing the next ten verses

monologue: cp. Ps. 42:5, 11; 43:5; Lk. 12:19
On this see Walter C. Kaiser, Jr., Ecclesiastes: Total Life, in Everyman’s Bible Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1979), pg. 55.

Cp. 1:16; 3:17, 18
Tremper Longman III, The Book of Ecclesiastes, New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), pg. 83, s.v. 1:16.

2. I said of laughter, It is mad: and of mirth, What doeth it?

Toronto “Holy Laughter” Blessing/Revival?

“Holy laughter is a term used within charismatic Christianity that describes a religious behaviour in which individuals spontaneously laugh during church meetings. It began in the early 1990s in Neo-charismatic churches and the Third Wave of the Holy Spirit.
Practices similar to holy laughter were observed in the 1800s in Holiness Christian meetings on the American West. John Wesley encountered uncontrollable laughter in his meetings, but viewed it as an act of the devil. It also occurred in Signs and Wonders meetings run by John Wimber in the 1980s. The practice came to prominence in meetings led by the South African evangelist Rodney Howard-Browne in 1993 at the Carpenter's Home Church in Lakeland, Florida and was often accompanied by the "Slain in the Spirit" phenomena. The laughter ranges from very quiet to loud convulsive hysterics, which are said to be accompanied by temporary dissociation. It was also observed in meetings held at Oral Roberts University. The phenomena was then popularized by Charisma and the Trinity Broadcasting Network, and became controversial within charismatic Christianity.
Though primarily found in Protestant churches, it was observed in some parts of the Catholic Charismatic Renewal, as well. The practice spread to the Association of Vineyard Churches, most notably to the Toronto Airport Christian Fellowship in 1994. Religious revival meetings at the church became very popular, drawing 75,000 visitors that year. Many attendees at the meetings spent time laughing loudly while lying on the floor.”

Source: Wikipedia at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_laughter [accessed 16 OCT 2015].

How about the “canned laughter” on television shows?

Are people laughing their way to eternal perdition?

Did you ever notice what the Yuppie generation finds hilarious on late night TV?
Is everything funny?
Is nothing sacred?
What do they take seriously?

Judge Bork’s title may be an underestimation of the current state of our nation!
Robert H. Bork, Slouching Towards Gomorrah: Modern Liberalism and American Decline (New York: ReganBooks, 1996).

They laughed at Jesus! Imagine that! Each of the Synoptic Gospels records an incident when “they laughed him to scorn.”

Mt. 9:24 (18-26) — He said unto them, Give place: for the maid is not dead, but sleepeth. And they laughed him to scorn.
Mk. 5:40 — And they laughed him to scorn. But when he had put them all out, he taketh the father and the mother of the damsel, and them that were with him, and entereth in where the damsel was lying.
Lk. 8:53 — And they laughed him to scorn, knowing that she was dead.

Who will be laughing when Jesus returns?

Lu:6:21: Blessed are ye that hunger now: for ye shall be filled. Blessed are ye that weep now: for ye shall laugh.
Lu:6:25: Woe unto you that are full! for ye shall hunger. Woe unto you that laugh now! for ye shall mourn and weep.

Jas:4:9: Be afflicted, and mourn, and weep: let your laughter be turned to mourning, and your joy to heaviness.

He Who laughs last laughs best!

“He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.” (Ps. 2:4)

3. I sought in mine heart to give myself unto wine, yet acquainting mine heart with wisdom; and to lay hold on folly, till I might see what was that good for the sons of men, which they should do under the heaven all the days of their life.

“under the heaven”

II. What the Preacher Accomplished (2:4-8)

4 I made me great works; I builded me houses; I planted me vineyards: 5 I made me gardens and orchards, and I planted trees in them of all kind of fruits: 6 I made me pools of water, to water therewith the wood that bringeth forth trees: 7 I got me servants and maidens, and had servants born in my house; also I had great possessions of great and small cattle above all that were in Jerusalem before me: 8 I gathered me also silver and gold, and the peculiar treasure of kings and of the provinces: I gat me men singers and women singers, and the delights of the sons of men, as musical instruments, and that of all sorts.

The Health and Wealth “gospel”?

6 I made me pools of water, to water therewith the wood that bringeth forth trees:

According to J. Stafford Wright the estimate of the capacity of these pools is 40,000,000 gallons.

“Three pools near Bethlehem are said to be constructed by him. They dam the Urtas Valley, and each of the first two can overflow into the pool below it. It is claimed that altogether these pools hold over forty million gallons.”

J. Stafford Wright, “Ecclesiastes,” in Psalms-Song of Songs, Vol. 5 of The Expositor's Bible Commentary, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1991), pg. 1156.

However, based on the dimensions of these “pools” as reported by Kaiser their capacity would be more than double that amount. See Walter C. Kaiser, Jr., Ecclesiastes: Total Life, in Everyman’s Bible Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1979), pp. 56-57.

Upper = 380’ long x 236’ wide x 25’ deep = 2,242,000 cubic feet = 16,771,325 gallons;
Middle = 423’ long x 250’ wide x 39’ deep = 4,124,250 cubic feet = 30,851,532 gallons;
Lower = 582’ long x 207’ wide x 50’ deep = 6,023,700 cubic feet = 45,060,405 gallons;
Total = 12,389,950 cubic feet = 92,683,262 gallons.

For purposes of comparison Olympic size pools measure:
50 metres long, 25 metres wide, and a minimum of 2 metres deep. (25m x 50m x 2m = 2,500m3; 1L = 0.001m3 so 2,500 x 1000 = 2,500,000L)
and contain 660,430 gallons of water (2,500,000 litres or 2.5 megalitres).

Length
50 m (164 ft 1 in)
Width
25 m (82 ft 0 in)
Depth
FR 2 Swimming Pools:
minimum 1.35 m (4 ft 5 in) between 1 m and 6 m from ends;
minimum of 1.0 m (3 ft 3 in) elsewhere
FR 3 Swimming Pools for Olympic Games and World Championships:
minimum 2.0 m (6 ft 7 in); recommended 3.0 m (9 ft 10 in)
Volume
Based on a nominal depth of 2 m, this is 2,500,000 L (550,000 imp gal; 660,000 US gal)
or, in terms of cubic volume, 2,500 m3 (88,000 cu ft), as is commonly quoted.

Source: Wikipedia at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic-size_swimming_pool [accessed 17 OCT 2015].

8 I gathered me also silver and gold, and the peculiar treasure of kings and of the provinces: I gat me men singers and women singers, and the delights of the sons of men, as musical instruments, and that of all sorts.

There is a translation issue with a hapax legomena in verse 8. This is a word found nowhere else in the Scriptures. Most modern translations include a note indicating that the meaning is either unknown or uncertain. The modern consensus seems to be that it should be rendered “concubines,” and comparison is made to 1 Kings 11:1-3 —

But king Solomon loved many strange women, together with the daughter of Pharaoh, women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians, and Hittites;
Of the nations concerning which the LORD said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall not go in to them, neither shall they come in unto you: for surely they will turn away your heart after their gods: Solomon clave unto these in love.
And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines: and his wives turned away his heart.

On the translation of this Hebrew word see the following:

William D. Barrick, Ecclesiastes: The Philippians of the Old Testament, Focus on the Bible series (Fearn, Ross-Shire, Scotland: Christian Focus, 2012), pp. 51-52;
Michael A. Eaton, Ecclesiastes: An Introduction and Commentary, Vol. 16, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity, 1983), pg. 79;
Duane A. Garrett, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Vol. 14, New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman, 1993), pg. 292, note 40;
Tremper Longman III, The Book of Ecclesiastes, New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), pg. 92;
Roland Edmund Murphy, Ecclesiastes, Vol. 23A, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, 1992), pg. 17; and,
J. Stafford Wright, “Ecclesiastes,” in Psalms-Song of Songs, Vol. 5, Expositor's Bible Commentary, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1991), pp. 1156-1157.

III. What the Preacher Gained (2:9-10)

9 So I was great, and increased more than all that were before me in Jerusalem: also my wisdom remained with me. 10 And whatsoever mine eyes desired I kept not from them, I withheld not my heart from any joy; for my heart rejoiced in all my labour: and this was my portion of all my labour.

What is the difference between “portion” (2:10) and “profit” (2:11)?

IV. What the Preacher Concluded (2:11)

11 Then I looked on all the works that my hands had wrought, and on the labour that I had laboured to do: and, behold, all was vanity and vexation of spirit, and there was no profit under the sun.

“vanity and vexation of spirit”

“no profit”

“under the sun”

Conclusion:

Where do folks go for meaning or profit or joy?
What does that get them?
How long has this been going on?
How is that working out for them?

You don’t have to!
You don’t have to go there!
You know better!
You don’t need to put it to the test!
You have God’s Word for it!

[Sermon preached 18 OCT 2015 by Pastor John T. “Jack” Jeffery at Wayside Gospel Chapel, Greentown, PA.]