I Hasten and Do Not Delay—Psalm 119:60
The grace granted to us by our King does not negate our obedience but fuels it. The man who has had his shameful, sin-stained face lifted up and washed clean by the blood of Christ no longer sees His commands as burdensome. Rather, when we look upon the loveliness of our King, our heart cries out within us, “What does the king command?”
I hasten and do not delay
to keep your commandments.
Psalm 119:60 ESV
This verse immediately flows from the previous one, which is made evident by the ESV’s decision to conclude verse 59 with a semi-colon rather than a period. In that verse, the psalmist noted that as he considered his ways he also turned his feet toward God’s testimonies. In other words, as he examined his way of life, he consciously and deliberately set his face toward the Word of God as the path for his feet. Yet having turned his feet toward obedience is not obedience itself. Thankfully, that is where this verse comes in. For with feet set upon following God’s testimonies, now he declares: “I hasten and do not delay to keep your commandments.”
We have already seen that the psalmist views himself as God’s servant, which also implies that he sees God as his King. This pledge of quick and immediate obedience to God’s commandments also reflects the prompt and willing submission of a servant to his king.
Related Posts:
You Might also like
-
What Is Transgenderism?
The modern invention of transgenderism reframes sinful deeds and desires of the flesh in worldly or therapeutic terms. This betrays the power of God’s election, Christ’s redemption, and the Spirit’s comfort. It rewrites the gospel, entangles the church in foolish debates, and confuses our young people. This is the situation in which we find the evangelical church today.
Transgenderism is such a new concept that the 1973 Oxford English Dictionary that sits open on my desk has no entry. According to etymonline.com, the word came into existence in 1974 as an adjective referring to “persons whose sense of personal identity does not correspond with their anatomical sex.” This word combines two older words. The first is “trans,” which is derived from part of a Latin verb that means to bring across or over, to transfer, to cause to cross, to extend across, or to convert. The second is “gender,” which derives from the French word for genre and the Latin word for genus, meaning kind, sort, or class. “Transgendered” became “transgender” after 2015 to indicate the new idea: that transgenderism is ontological, or something that is true of a person’s very essence. Today, the psychological condition where a person feels like their personal identity does not match their anatomical sex is called gender dysphoria. And there is a strong push in our culture to agree with the transgendered movement that when one’s gender, defined as their feelings of being male or female, conflicts with the biological markers of maleness or femaleness, the feelings are determinative.
Throughout most of human history, however, gender meant being male or female. There was no distinction made between one’s biological sex and one’s gender. It wasn’t until 1963 that gender began to refer to social attributes that differed from biological sex. This new definition was used by Second Wave Feminists, such as Kate Millet and Simone de Beauvoir, to miscategorize gender as the cultural manifestation of biology. Second-wave feminists argued that patriarchal society contrived gender roles merely to degrade women, thereby rejecting the biblical understanding that God created man and woman from a godly pattern for a creational purpose. Transgenderism emerged from this feminist political rejection of the creation ordinance that says God made human beings male and female, so their biological sex and not their internal feelings determines their maleness or femaleness. Transgenderism, instead, argues that our internal sense of self is what makes us men or women.
Ultimately, that feeling of disconnect between one’s body and one’s sense of gender are a consequence of the fall and its effect on our hearts, minds, and bodies. In some cases, the feeling is driven chiefly by a biological problem related to genetics or hormones. From a biblical perspective, someone with a severe hormonal imbalance or chromosomal abnormality has a physical health problem, not an identity problem. Godly help for the gender dysphoric person includes biblical counseling and potentially medical treatments that restore normative hormonal balance. Godly support for the gender dysphoric individual understands medical problems as part of the fall of man. Such trials can be serious, difficult, and lifelong.
Read More
Related Posts: -
Another Jesus
Written by Andrew W.G. Matthews |
Thursday, October 27, 2022
If the contemporary church is going to abandon all its theological territory and take a final stand for Jesus Christ, it better be for the real Christ. Be done with this palatable and tamed jesus and introduce the world to the real Lord Jesus Christ: the eternal Son of God sent into the world to save and rule the world, crucified, dead, and buried, but risen and exalted; the One who receives sinners and makes them saints. The Christ who created and sustains all things and will return once again to judge his enemies and make all things new. Any Christ less than this is not worth knowing.For if someone comes and proclaims another Jesus than the one we proclaimed, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or if you accept a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it readily enough! 2 Corinthians 11:4
As the evangelical Christian church has been pummelled by secular critics for being hateful for her biblical views on ethics, many church leaders have responded by shifting the focus from ethics to “Jesus.” They say that the main thing is “To know Jesus and make him known,” and not get broiled down in controversial ethical issues. To know Jesus Christ and make him known to the outside world is certainly a laudable goal. But as they keep name-dropping “Jesus” I start wondering, “Who is this ‘Jesus’ guy they keep talking about?” The more they talk about him the less I recognise him. It has made me question if we are thinking about the same person. I have this sneaking suspicion that many churches are promoting “another Jesus” than the one that is revealed in the New Testament (2 Cor. 11:4).
Taking a stand on the person of Jesus Christ ought to be the ultimate apologetic of every Christian for Christ is at the epicentre of our faith. Yet in our day simply alluding to the name of ‘Jesus’ is not enough of a witness to this world. We need to have a theologically sound understanding of the Lord Jesus Christ (Christology). Unfortunately, the “Jesus” that is being bandied about in the modern church has become a poor substitute for the true and glorious Son of God. How so? I see a few errors.Name in Vain
What’s in a name? Many Christians seem to be on a first-name basis with Jesus. It’s always, “Jesus, Jesus, Jesus.” Why do Christians simply call their Lord and King, “Jesus”? If you were invited to Buckingham Palace would you say, “Good to meet you, Charles”? Consider the offence of not addressing or referring to the present king of England as “Your Majesty.” Terms like “Majesty” and “King” are titles appropriate to the office. If you would never disrespectfully address an earthly king, how much more should you reverently address the King of kings and Lord of lords?
After Jesus died, rose, and was exalted to the right hand of God the Father, he was anointed and was bestowed titles such as “Christ,” “Son of God,” and “Lord.” The apostles, who intimately knew him, consistently refer to Jesus Christ as “the Lord,” “the Lord Jesus,” “Jesus Christ,” “Christ Jesus,” “Christ,” or “the Son of God,” but they almost never call him “Jesus.” It is true that the Gospels use the name “Jesus” in their accounts of his earthly ministry and that the apostles referred to “Jesus” when explaining the significance of Christ’s ministry to their contemporaries (see Acts 2:36, Heb. 12:2), but believers should by their naming of Christ acknowledge his exalted, authoritative position over them. When people flippantly allude to “Jesus” it may betray an attitude that Jesus is simply your friend and equal. Christ is not our buddy or our mate, he is our Lord and God (John 20:28).
Demoted King
The misuse of Christ’s name is inexorably tied to the church’s failure to recognise the majestic rule of Christ over this world. Christians who regularly refer to just “Jesus” emphasise his incarnation and humiliation during his past life and ministry on this earth to the detriment of acknowledging his present kingdom and ministry from heaven as the Lord Jesus Christ. Christ’s suffering during his incarnation certainly enabled him to sympathise with all our weaknesses, but he no longer lives in that humiliated state. He retains the experience of his former weakness, but rules now with his present power.
Read More
Related Posts: -
Job: The Suffering Prophet (9): “I Know My Redeemer Lives”
As Job is beginning to understand, God may indeed have a purpose in his suffering which does not fit with Eliphaz, Bildad and Zophar’s insufficient grasp of the situation. As the dialogue progresses, Job’s heart is now stirred and moves him to confess his faith in a coming redeemer, even through tears of pain, doubt, and fear! Job knows that his redeemer lives! Job knows his redeemer will one day stand upon the earth. And Job knows that he will see that redeemer with the eyes of a resurrected body! In the midst of his terrible circumstances, the suffering prophet nevertheless confesses “for I know that my Redeemer lives, and at the last he will stand upon the earth.”
Job’s Faith Is Re-Kindled
Despite all appearances to the contrary, and despite the cruel counsel coming from his friends (most recently Eliphaz), Job still expects vindication. Job knows that God is good, keeps his promises, and that some how and in some way, his ordeal will end and it will be clear to all that Job is not hiding some secret sin.
As the dialogue between Job and his friends continues to unfold, in Job 16:18-17:3, the glowing embers of Job’s faith reappear. With this hope arises, as Job calls out his erst-while friends for their cruel and self-righteous counsel. He calls them “mockers.”O earth, cover not my blood, and let my cry find no resting place. Even now, behold, my witness is in heaven, and he who testifies for me is on high. My friends scorn me; my eye pours out tears to God, that he would argue the case of a man with God, as a son of man does with his neighbor. For when a few years have come I shall go the way from which I shall not return. `My spirit is broken; my days are extinct; the graveyard is ready for me. Surely there are mockers about me, and my eye dwells on their provocation. Lay down a pledge for me with you; who is there who will put up security for me?’
Job now realizes that the answer to the “why?” question (which he has asked of YHWH), along with his personal vindication before his friends, might not come until after his own death. But yes, Job will get his answer. He will be vindicated—if not in this life, then certainly in the next. His friends do not understand nor, apparently, do they care to.
Because of this glimmer of hope and because Job still has faith in the God of the promise (however, weak that faith may be under the circumstances), Job knows his friends cannot help him. He sees their efforts are futile, if not cruel. There is nowhere else to go. Job’s only hope is in God. Yet, his mood still swings wildly, bringing him right up to the point of despair. But in the balance of Job 17, Job possess enough of his prior faith to continue to call out his friends for their faithless response.My spirit is broken; my days are extinct; the graveyard is ready for me. Surely there are mockers about me, and my eye dwells on their provocation. `Lay down a pledge for me with you; who is there who will put up security for me? Since you have closed their hearts to understanding, therefore you will not let them triumph. He who informs against his friends to get a share of their property— the eyes of his children will fail. `He has made me a byword of the peoples, and I am one before whom men spit. My eye has grown dim from vexation, and all my members are like a shadow. The upright are appalled at this, and the innocent stirs himself up against the godless. Yet the righteous holds to his way, and he who has clean hands grows stronger and stronger. But you, come on again, all of you, and I shall not find a wise man among you. My days are past; my plans are broken off, the desires of my heart. They make night into day: ‘The light,’ they say, ‘is near to the darkness.’ If I hope for Sheol as my house, if I make my bed in darkness, if I say to the pit, ‘You are my father,’ and to the worm, ‘My mother,’ or ‘My sister,’ where then is my hope? Who will see my hope? Will it go down to the bars of Sheol? Shall we descend together into the dust?
Not only is Job giving back as good as he is getting from Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar, but only a man who has done nothing wrong will fight so hard to be vindicated–as Job is now doing.
Bildad’s Second Speech—More “Belly Wind”
As Bildad makes his second speech one thing is becoming clear–Job, the suffering prophet, is longing to probe deeper into the mysteries of God’s providence, while Job’s friends focus entirely on the their distorted views regarding the suffering of the wicked. Bildad is clearly resentful of Job’s low estimate of his three friends’ theological abilities.[1] Whereas Eliphaz tried to moderate his second speech, Bildad is much more cantankerous. In verses 1-4 of Job 18, Bildad responds to Job with words which reflect the former’s growing frustration and anger. “Then Bildad the Shuhite answered [Job] and said: `How long will you hunt for words? Consider, and then we will speak. Why are we counted as cattle? Why are we stupid in your sight? You who tear yourself in your anger, shall the earth be forsaken for you, or the rock be removed out of its place?” Bildad’s challenge is that if the law of divine retribution is immutable (God must punish wrong-doing), and if Job refuses to repent, he will foolishly continue to throw himself against the fixed law that God must punish all sin.[2] How dare Job think that he is above the fixed laws of YHWH’s sovereign will!
As Bildad sees it, the moral order of the universe is set in stone. Since God will punish the wicked for their sins, in the balance of the chapter, Bildad recites a catalogue of the troubles of the wicked, all designed to appeal to Job’s conscience so that he is convicted of sins. The problem with Bildad’s speech is that Job’s conscience is clean. Says Bildad,Indeed, the light of the wicked is put out, and the flame of his fire does not shine. The light is dark in his tent, and his lamp above him is put out. His strong steps are shortened, and his own schemes throw him down. For he is cast into a net by his own feet, and he walks on its mesh. A trap seizes him by the heel; a snare lays hold of him. A rope is hidden for him in the ground, a trap for him in the path. Terrors frighten him on every side, and chase him at his heels. His strength is famished, and calamity is ready for his stumbling. It consumes the parts of his skin; the firstborn of death consumes his limbs. He is torn from the tent in which he trusted and is brought to the king of terrors. In his tent dwells that which is none of his; sulfur is scattered over his habitation. His roots dry up beneath, and his branches wither above. His memory perishes from the earth, and he has no name in the street. He is thrust from light into darkness, and driven out of the world. He has no posterity or progeny among his people, and no survivor where he used to live. They of the west are appalled at his day, and horror seizes them of the east.
Job’s Speech — He Knows His Redeemer Lives
With that, we come to one of the most remarkable speeches in all the Bible (Job 19:25-27). Job’s words inspired Handel when writing the Messiah, and they continue to profoundly move all who read them. Job’s speech is so profound because it is not as though Bildad’s words contain no truth. Yes, God will punish the wicked. But Bildad’s cold and formulaic “canned” answer does not fit the facts at hand. This may be true of the wicked when they suffer. But what about the righteous? They suffer too. Thus the issue is not what fixed moral law Job has broken. For Job, the issue is “why has God turned his back on him?”
Read More