Leighton Wilson’s Find & Evolution
Wilson’s more than five-hundred pages making up Western Africa describes the region in detail by providing history, accounts of colonization (both by nations and for relocating freed slaves), a catalog of natural resources, descriptions of the indigenous peoples, observations of the fauna and flora, and of course, an account of his ministry bringing the light of the Gospel to the Africans. It may be surprising that Wilson would be interested in sciences such as botany and zoology, however science was the up-and-coming discipline in the antebellum nineteenth century, so educated individuals including ministers, found scientific books and discoveries interesting.
John Leighton Wilson (1809-1886) was born, raised, and schooled in Sumter County, South Carolina, then completed his formal education at Union College, Schenectady, before studying for the ministry in the first graduating class of Columbia Theological Seminary. He was ordained by Harmony Presbytery to be a missionary to Africa with the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions (ABCFM). He worked first at Cape Palmas then the Gaboon region for a total of nineteen years before returning to the United States. He was Secretary of the Board of Foreign Missions for the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America, Old School, 1853-1860, and then he held the corresponding position for the Presbyterian Church in the United States (PCUS), 1861-1885. He was a respected missionary, minister, scholar, author, and linguist. His most significant work for readers of English is likely Western Africa: Its History, Condition, & Prospects, 1856; New York: Harper Brothers, 1856, London 1856.
Wilson’s more than five-hundred pages making up Western Africa describes the region in detail by providing history, accounts of colonization (both by nations and for relocating freed slaves), a catalog of natural resources, descriptions of the indigenous peoples, observations of the fauna and flora, and of course, an account of his ministry bringing the light of the Gospel to the Africans. It may be surprising that Wilson would be interested in sciences such as botany and zoology, however science was the up-and-coming discipline in the antebellum nineteenth century, so educated individuals including ministers, found scientific books and discoveries interesting. Wilson’s observations published in Western Africa were beneficial not only for orienting new missionaries about their fields of service but also because they provide information for other readers curious about the Dark Continent. David Livingstone’s first book about Africa would not be published until a year after Wilson’s.
One item of scientific importance Wilson talks about in Western Africa, 366-67, concerns his discovery of some skulls. He says—
“But the most formidable of all animals in the woods of Africa is the famous, but recently discovered, Troglodytes Gorilla, called, in the language of the Gaboon, Njena. The writer was the first to call the attention of naturalists to this animal. Toward the close of 1846 he accidentally came across the skull of one, which he knew at once, from its peculiar shape and outline, to belong to an undescribed species. After some searching a second skull was procured, but of smaller size. No other portion of the skeleton could be procured for some time afterward. The natives, however, seemed to be perfectly familiar with the habits and character of the animal, gave minute accounts of its size, its ferocity, and the kind of woods which it frequented; they also gave confident assurances that in due time a perfect skeleton should be produced. In the meantime, impressions were taken in this country where the two heads were procured, and all the information that could be obtained from the natives was published, and served to awaken the liveliest interest among naturalists. Since then perfect skeletons have been taken to England and France, and brought to this country, so that scientific men have sufficient knowledge of the subject to assign this animal its proper place in natural history. It belongs to the orang-outang, or chimpanzee family, but is larger and much more powerful than any other known species. The writer has seen one of these animals after it was killed. It is almost impossible to give a correct idea, either of the hideousness of its looks, or the amazing muscular power which it possesses. Its intensely black face not only reveals features greatly exaggerated, but the whole countenance is but one expression of savage ferocity. Large eyeballs, a crest of long hair, which falls over the forehead when it is angry, a mouth of immense capacity, revealing a set of terrible teeth, and large protruding ears, altogether make it one of the most frightful animals in the world. It is not surprising that the natives are afraid to encounter them even when armed. The skeleton of one, presented by the writer to the Natural History Society of Boston, is supposed to be five feet and a half high, and with its flesh, thick skin, and the long, shaggy hair with which it is covered, it must have been nearly four feet across the shoulders. The natives say it is ferocious, and invariably gives battle whenever it meets a single person. I have seen a man the calf of whose leg was nearly torn off in an encounter with one of these monsters, and he would probably have been torn to pieces in a very short time if his companions had not come to his rescue. It is said they will wrest a musket from the hands of a man and crush the barrel between their jaws, and there is nothing, judging from the muscles of the jaws, or the size of their teeth, that renders such a thing improbable” (pp. 177-78)
-
The Apostle Paul and the Jews
We who are Gentiles ought to learn the lesson, that if God did not spare the natural branches, there is no reason why He should spare the wild branches. This means that we are required to stand by faith (v.20) – to humbly trust the grace of God and to fear Him. Some have said that it is unworthy for Christians to fear God, but that is not what God says (see Heb.4:1). God is merciful and gracious, true, but He is also severe (Rom.11:22). He is gracious to sinners who repent, but severe towards those who do not. Complacency is the most dangerous spiritual attitude of all. What happened to Israel could happen to any Gentile church (vv.21-22b).
Any Christian with a touch of sensitivity knows that it is difficult these days to respond to the Jews. We live in the aftermath of the Holocaust, and the collective Western guilt felt over the ill-treatment of the Jews down through the ages. It is fair to say that the prevailing response to such events is that the way of peace is served by not interfering with any other people’s belief system. In some politically correct circles, even to suggest evangelising Jews is to run the risk of being accused of advocating literal or cultural genocide. Scholars such as Rosemary Radford Ruether and Samuel Sandmel have even accused the New Testament of being anti-Semitic.[1]
Then we have the complicating factor of the re-establishment of the state of Israel in 1948. President Clinton himself – hardly a wild-eyed premillennial fundamentalist – declared in 1994 that ‘it is God’s will that Israel, the biblical home of the people of Israel, continue for ever and ever.’[2] Fundamentalist Christians, especially in the United States, often support Israel because they believe that Christ will come and reign literally from Jerusalem for a thousand years. And to top it all off, we have the interpretation of Romans 11 – does Paul teach that God will reclaim the people of Israel, that Jews in massive numbers will become Christians?
It is thus an apt time to ask: What was the attitude of the apostle Paul to the Jews? Jesus had said that the kingdom would be taken from the Jews and given to others (Matt.21:43). Because of the sin of rejecting their Messiah the Jews fell under the judgment of God. So Paul writes:
For you, brethren, became imitators of the churches of God which are in Judea in Christ Jesus. For you also suffered the same things from your own countrymen, just as they did from the Judeans, who killed both the Lord Jesus and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they do not please God and are contrary to all men, forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they may be saved, as always to fill up the measure of their sins; but wrath has come upon them to the uttermost (1 Thess. 2:14-16).
A scholar as cautious and as generally conservative as F. F. Bruce winces at this, and declares such sentiments to be ‘incongruous’ and probably unauthentic. That conclusion is based on sentiment, not evidence. Granted its authenticity, do we then interpret Paul as an anti-Semite? By no means! The evidence is clear.
Paul Preached to the Jews First
It is common to think of Paul as the apostle to the Gentiles – rightly so (Acts 9:15; Gal.2:7-8; Eph.3:8) – but it is clear that he sought to reach the Jews first with the gospel. This was his declared aim (Rom.1:16). And this was his invariable practice as recorded in the book of Acts. Paul would go to the synagogue first, preach the gospel to the Jews, and when trouble came, as it invariably did, Paul would form a fledgling church which consisted largely of those members of the synagogue who had become convinced that Jesus of Nazareth is indeed the Messiah (Acts 13:14-15; 14:1; 16:13; 17:1, 10; 18:4; 19:8-9).
Only when the Jews as a whole rejected this message did Paul go to the Gentiles (Acts 13:46; 18:6). This was not just something which Paul thought was a good idea. He was divinely commissioned to go to the Jew first. Paul told the Jews at Pisidian Antioch: ‘It was necessary that the word of God should be spoken to you first’ (Acts 13:46). It was God’s plan that Paul go to the synagogue first, then the market-place or the philosophers’ hill. So for Paul there was a divine priority that the gospel go first to the people of the old covenant.
Paul Preached That Jesus Fulfilled the Old Testament
To the Gentiles, Paul preached first that God is the creator, sustainer and judge of all the world, who has revealed Himself in the man Jesus whom He raised from the dead (Acts 17:22-34). To the Jews, Paul preached that Jesus fulfils the whole of the Old Testament. In the synagogue in Antioch ‘towards Pisidia’ Paul proclaimed that ‘God raised up for Israel a Saviour – Jesus’ (Acts 13:23). He identified with his fellow Jews but also challenged them: ‘Men and brethren, sons of the family of Abraham, and those among you who fear God, to you the word of this salvation has been sent. For those who dwell in Jerusalem, and their rulers, because they did not know Him, nor even the voices of the Prophets which are read every Sabbath, have fulfilled them in condemning Him’ (Acts 13:26-27). Paul cites Old Testament references to the coming Messiah (Acts 13:33-35). That is the pattern for preaching to the Jews. God has revealed Himself in the Old Testament. The man Jesus fulfils that Old Testament, and this proves that He is both Lord and Christ.
I once taught English at a high school, and there was a Jewish woman on staff. One day she gave me a lift into Sydney University, and on the way, I asked her what she made of Isaiah 53. At first she said that it could have referred to Jeremiah who suffered greatly. When I raised my eyebrows, and pointed out that Jeremiah could not be said to bear the iniquity of us all, she finally admitted that the passage fitted Jesus of Nazareth better than anybody else. However, she was quick to add: ‘But I don’t like to think about it.’ She made it clear that the conversation was thereby ended. Towards the end of the year 2000, I was talking to a converted Jew, and he said that as a Jew he refused to even look at the New Testament, but as he was reading the Old Testament, he came to Isaiah 53. This chapter gripped him, and he became a Christian.
The Old Testament is not the holy book of Judaism. The Old Testament, rightly understood, is a Christian book – it points infallibly to Jesus as the Christ (Luke 24:25-27, 44). Paul knew this, and used the Jewish holy book in the way it was meant to be used – to proclaim the Messiah. Christianity is the fulfilment of Judaism; a true Jew is a Christian.
Paul Loved the Jews
We often miss out here; we do not love as we should. Paul longed to see Israel saved (Rom.9:1-2; 10:1). Paul is very solemn here and eager that people believe him. He speaks the truth in Christ and in the Holy Spirit. He is deeply sorrowful because, for the most part, Israel does not believe in Jesus as the Messiah. People talk about having a burden for the lost, but few have equalled the intensity of Paul. In fact, Paul uttered the extraordinary declaration: ‘I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh’ (Rom.9:3). Martin Luther comments that this is ‘the strongest and utmost kind of love: utter self-hatred becomes the sign of the highest love for another.’ Many people think that Paul was a hard-hearted man who only preached judgment and hellfire, and delighted in such a message. Not so – Paul knew what he was saying here. Paul was saying that he was prepared to be accursed from Christ or ‘anathema’ (‘forever damned’ – Living Bible) provided that Israel was saved. Paul knew what the word ‘anathema’ meant (he uses it in 1 Corinthians 12:3; 16:22; Galatians 1:8-9).
Paul also knew that it could not happen (he had just written Romans 8:38-39). To that extent, what he said was hypothetical. But it shows us the heart of a man who loved his people (see Gen. 44:33; Ex.32:31-32; 2 Sam.18:33). So great was Paul’s love that he was prepared to forfeit his own salvation for the sake of his fellow-countrymen. Compared to Paul, we are so cold in our evangelism. It is such a burden to us. We hardly appreciate what it means to be saved and what it means to be lost. At the very least, we must say with Robert Haldane that ‘No man can be a Christian who is unconcerned for the salvation of others.’ Edward Elton put it more strongly in 1653: ‘we are bound to love and honour the Jews, as being the ancient people of God, to wish them well, and to be earnest in prayer to God for their conversion’.[3]
To evangelise the Jews is not to be anti-Semitic. Paul stood firmly against the Judaizers who distorted the gospel of free grace (the ‘dogs’ of Philippians 3:2, the ‘mutilators’ of Galatians 5:12), but it is clear that the great apostle, ‘a Hebrew of the Hebrews’, as he called himself (Phil.3:5), loved the Jewish people intensely. It is noteworthy that the Galatian churches which were embracing a Judaizing gospel were originally Gentiles (Gal.4:8-9). In opposing the Judaizers, Paul was, in Galatia at least, opposing Gentiles who wanted to be more Jewish than the Jews!
Precisely because of this intense, self-sacrificing love, Paul could be very flexible on secondary issues – hence Paul circumcised Timothy in order that he might proclaim Christ to the Jews (Acts 16:1-3). He sought to present the whole counsel of God, without any compromise, in a way that did not needlessly offend any, Jew or Gentile (cf. 1 Cor. 9:19-23; 10:32-33). He was flexible without compromising, and intelligent without relying on his own wisdom. To keep the peace at Jerusalem, Paul was prepared to enter the temple to make sacrifices for four men who had taken vows (Acts 21:23-26; see too Acts 18:18). As F. F. Bruce comments on Paul: ‘Where the principles of the gospel were not at stake he was the most conciliatory of men.’[4]
The Church at her best loves the Jews. Handley Moule referred to Charles Simeon’s work for the Jews as ‘perhaps the warmest interest of his life’.[5] On behalf of the Jews, Simeon visited the Continent twice – Holland in 1818 and France in 1822. Even as he lay dying in 1836, Simeon dictated a paper on the conversion of the Jews. In 1838-9 Robert Murray M’Cheyne and three other Church of Scotland ministers visited Palestine. Early in his career, ‘Rabbi’ Duncan worked as a missionary amongst the Jews at Budapest.
As Anti-Semitism gained an increasing hold over much of Europe in the latter part of the nineteenth century, Franz Delitzsch produced a Hebrew translation of the New Testament, and declared that ‘those who do not show love to the People who gave birth to Him have no true love for Jesus himself.’[6] When this Anti-Semitism took hold in Germany, in the midst of the terrible battle with Nazism and the Nazified German Christians, Dietrich Bonhoeffer spoke up: ‘No one has the right to sing the Gregorian chants unless by the same voice he shouts for the Jews.’[7] Salvation is of the Jews, says the Lord Himself (John 4:22).
Paul Preached One Gospel and One Church for All
We have seen that Paul’s heart desire and prayer for Israel was that they would be saved (Rom.10:1). In Christ, there is neither Jew nor Greek (Gal.3:28). Anti-Semitism was far removed from Paul’s character; Paul was in fact one of the most passionate lovers of the Jewish people that history has ever seen. In this he revealed the heart and mind of Christ who wept over Jerusalem, and yearned that God’s ancient people might know the salvation to be wrought by their Messiah (Matt.23:37-39; Luke 19:41-44).
Because there is one God, one Christ, and one gospel, there is but one body of Christ. (Ephesians 2:14-18). There cannot be one church for Gentiles and another church for Jews (Eph.3:6). To have two churches would ultimately mean to have two gospels, and imply two Christs. That cannot be, so Paul is adamant on this point. The reconciliation is not only with God but between His people, all those who have repented of sin and put their whole-hearted trust in Christ. The Church is therefore the Israel of God (Gal.6:16). There is not one covenant with Israel and one with the Church. There is one new covenant which fulfils all that the old covenant promised. And there is one new covenant people of God, not two or more.
Paul Expected That God Would Turn Many Jews to the Messiah
Tom Wright says: ‘Romans 9-11 is as full of problems as a hedgehog is of prickles.’[8] True enough, but for all that, there is no need to invent problems, as Wright is prone to do. Romans 9-11 raises the questions: Where does Israel stand in relation to God? And how is God faithful when His people have fallen away? God is one who cannot lie, and who must keep His covenant promises, so how do we explain the sad spiritual condition of Israel?
Salvation is of the Jews (John 4:22), and Israel possessed God’s covenant privileges (Rom.9:4-5). But where did Israel stand before God in the New Testament period? From Romans 9:30-10:21 one might draw the conclusion that God is finished with Israel. God has not failed Israel, but Israel has failed God. Yet this is not the end of the story. Hence Romans 11:1a: ‘I say then, has God cast away His people? Certainly not!’ Paul is very decided in his answer – God has not rejected Israel completely. God is by no means finished with Israel. Paul begins then to unfold the mystery of Israel.
a. Paul the Israelite, and the Situation in Elijah’s Day
Paul’s point in 11:1b is that if God were finished with Israel, Paul himself would not be an apostle. The New Testament tells us that most Jews rejected Jesus as the Christ, but it also tells us that much of the early Church was made up of Jews. All of the apostles, for example, were Jews. Paul, the great apostle to the Gentiles, had impeccable Jewish credentials, and that shows that Israel was not completely rejected (note 2 Cor.11:21-22; Phil.3:3-8).
Paul then goes on to give a history lesson (vv.2-4). ‘His people’ here are not the foreknown and predestined elect of Romans 8:29 but the covenant people of God. The story is found back in 1 Kings 19. Elijah was emotionally drained and depressed. He was not thinking too clearly, and he convinced himself that he was the only faithful person left – an easy trap to fall into in times of declension. But God corrected him: ‘Elijah, there are 7,000 men who have not bowed the knee to Baal.’ With women and children, there may have been a remnant of about 25,000 – not a huge number but a lot more than what Elijah thought. God will never allow His cause to sink without a trace. There will always be a remnant who are close to His heart and who belong to Him. That was true of Israel in Elijah’s day and it was true also in Paul’s day.
b. Salvation Is by the Election of Grace, Not of Works
This is stated in Romans 11:5-6. In Paul’s day there was a remnant according to the election of grace. God chose a remnant and kept them to the end. If it were of works, then grace would not be grace. If it is of our works, we would be our own saviours and salvation would not be of grace. Here the contrast with works is not faith – as it is in Romans 3-4 – but election.
Read More
Related Posts: -
The Story of Esther Was Never Really About Esther
Esther’s heart posture is reflective of one who loves the Lord and would risk everything, including her life, for obedience to Him. Paul expressed a similar sentiment in his letter to the Philippians when he said, “For to me, to live is Christ and to die is gain.” Love for God and His people more than oneself is indicative of a genuine believer. Esther was never motivated by selfish gain. She never saw herself as empowered because of her position as Queen. She simply was a humble servant of Christ.
Often, when pondering the story of Queen Esther, it is common for immature Christians to idolize her as a symbol of feminism. Some in the egalitarian sect point to her as proof that women should preach. After all, God saw so much value in Esther that surely He would bless a woman behind a pulpit. This is a frequent twisting of Scripture to justify women who rebel against God’s Word, and so much is missed from the story of Esther when viewed through the lens of women’s empowerment.
Consider this quote from a well-known female Bible teacher who often preaches from the pulpit:
“There is a destiny hidden in you, and it is not your external value. It is the hidden person of your heart. That is where the Esther is in you, and that is where the Esther is in me.”
Only a person who believes that the story of Esther was about Esther herself would believe that the reader should find the “Esther” within themselves. To the contrary, the story of Esther isn’t about us — and it wasn’t about Esther either. Even Esther, in all of her influence, knew that her reign was not about her. Rather, it was about God and His sovereign plan to protect and preserve His people.
Esther’s story is an illustration of God’s providence.
All of the events in the book of Esther lead to the end goal of rescuing the Jewish people from evil rulers, and the orchestration of these events by the hand of God is evident.
Of all the women in the kingdom the king could have chosen to replace Queen Vashti, God led him to find favor with Esther, an orphaned Jew who was living in the capital of Persia under the care of her uncle, Mordecai. Of all the high officials in the court of the king, God gave Queen Esther the courage to intervene on behalf of the Jews.
Instead of a peaceful rest, God caused the king to suffer from insomnia. Instead of attempting to sleep, the king was led by God to review royal records which exposed Mordecai’s role in thwarting an assassination plot against the king and resulted in the king finding favor with Mordecai. Instead of allowing Haman to continue with his plot to kill and plunder Mordecai and the Jewish people, God extended His wrath on him by the king’s hand.
Read More
Related Posts: -
Let’s Study the Beatitudes! Part 1, Introduction
The Beatitudes, as a whole, share with us the Christian life. They communicate what is already true but what is not yet consummated. For example, notice how the first and the last Beatitude (vv. 3, 10) are in the present tense. And then notice how the middle six Beatitudes (vv. 4-9) are in the future tense. We are in possession of salvation but the consummation is yet to be. This is the already but not yet of the Christian life.
Some passages of Scripture are better known than others. How can they not be? The Lord’s Prayer is recited across the landscape of Christendom along with the Twenty-third Psalm and the Ten Commandments. But there are others. In fact, it’s interesting how the popular conception of a passage can leave a scar on the psyche for years! Who can forget the book called The Be Happy Attitudes? I’ve never read it but the title is emblazoned on my mind! It’s like when someone hums a song out of tune and then you can’t get the corruption out of your head. But I digress.
The Beatitudes are another well-known and well-worn passage among Christians. It should be. It has that gravitas. It has that ability to summarize a good deal of Christian teaching in a very small nucleus of words. It was spoken to be remembered. And on Theology for Everyone we are going to take a look at those Beatitudes. We are going to unpack them and their meaning for the Christian life. However, before we do, I want us to get the lay of the land. I want to give you a guided tour through some obvious and some not so obvious points that give the scope of the beatitudes.
First, the Beatitudes are part of a sermon, the Sermon on the Mount. In fact, they are the introduction to the Sermon on the Mount. The Sermon is prefaced by Matthew 5:1, which tells us that Jesus went up on the mountain, sat down and opened his mouth to teach his disciples. The Sermon ends with chapter 7:28. There Jesus finished his sermon, got up from his seat and went down the mountain. What is more, the sermon is a beautifully structured message. Too often we think of it as a stream of consciousness or the wise statements of a sage sprinkled about like seed on the ground. However, that is a serious misunderstanding. But the structure of the Sermon is for a later time.
Second, these Beatitudes form a bridge between what has been said and what will be said. What has been said? Well, a lot has been said in the first four chapters of Matthew but the thing to notice is the baptism. There John objects to baptizing Jesus. But Jesus tells him, “Let it be so now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.” We then find Jesus entering into temptation wherein He, as the Second Adam, did what the first Adam failed to do. He obeyed. He fulfilled the righteous requirement of the law. So, why did Jesus undergo a baptism for repentance? He did so as a representative substitute for the people He would save. Notice, the fourth beatitude, those who hunger and thirst for righteousness will be filled. By whose righteousness will they be filled? Obviously, by Christ who came to satisfy the righteous requirements of the law for his people that once forgiven they may an alien righteousness imputed to them.
Third, the Beatitudes, as a whole, share with us the Christian life. They communicate what is already true but what is not yet consummated. For example, notice how the first and the last Beatitude (vv. 3, 10) are in the present tense. And then notice how the middle six Beatitudes (vv. 4-9) are in the future tense. We are in possession of salvation but the consummation is yet to be. This is the already but not yet of the Christian life. And the Beatitudes speak about that life and we are eager to listen.
Read More
