Contra Mundum

Creeds and Confessions, A Defense, Part 6

2013-06-17T10:30:00.000-07:00

6. Generally speaking, the most ardent opposers of creeds and confessions have been latitudinarians, if not heretics.

This is not to say that the use of creeds or confessions has never been opposed by people who were substantially orthodox. But it is to say that such a rejection of the use of creeds and confessions is a relatively recent circumstance. We have no example of it in earlier church history. Neither is this to say that heretics have not formed and maintain their own corrupt creeds. Church history abounds with examples of this as well. But what we are asserting is this, as a general fact the most ardent and loud opponents of creeds have been those who held corrupt opinions. This should not strike us as a fortuitous occurrence. This is exactly what we should expect. This is exactly what the underlying principle should logically develop into.

In the early 19^th century, the loudest opponent of the use of creeds and confessions was the denomination of the Unitarians. Is it any wonder that those who hold doctrines which are demonstrably un-scriptural should refuse to accept a formula which tends to make visible the line of distinction between truth and error? It has often been observed that men are seldom found to oppose creeds until the creeds and become opposed to them.

If we look a little into church history, especially within the last 200 years we find this strikingly exemplified. Whenever we find a group of men beginning to slide away from orthodoxy, they generally try to conceal their fall by speaking against creeds and confessions. And that is because it is these documents that will expose how far they have deviated from sound doctrine.

Creeds and Confessions, A Defense, Part 5

2013-06-13T10:30:00.000-07:00

5. The Church's experience in all ages has found creeds and confessions to be indispensable.

Even in the days of the Apostles, there were those who were peddling a 'false gospel.' How did the Church respond to such a situation? Paul, inspired by the Holy Spirit, wrote that Christians should not be content with a mere profession of belief in Christ, but that teachers should be examined to ascertain whether their doctrine accorded with the “form of sound words,” which he had taught them. Paul adds to this the fearful warning of a curse on the head of anyone who brings a message other than the one they had received from him.

What we have here is, in effect, an instance – with Divine warrant, I might add – of employing a creed as a test of orthodoxy. A naked profession of belief in God or the Bible was insufficient. It had to be determined in what sense they understood the Gospel. The peculiar situation of the Church in that early age probably required a short and concise confession, but a confession nonetheless. Whether the confession Paul sought agreement with had one article or 100 is irrelevant; the principle is the same.

When we come to the 2^nd Century, in the writings of Irenaeus, or the 3^rd Century, in the writings of Tertullian, Origen, Cyprian, and Gregory Thaumaturgus, we find creeds and confessions occupying a prominent place in the Church as a safe-guard against error. This is especially important when we remember that by this very standard, large swathes of both Tertullian's and Origen's works were ruled unorthodox by their contemporaries and later generations.

By the time we get to the 4^th Century, the exigencies of the Arian heresy forced the Church to respond at the Council of Nicaea with the Nicene creed, a standard of orthodox Trinitarianism which has stood both the test of time and the ravaging winds of theological innovation.

With Arius, a creed turned out to be an indispensable tool. Arius was exceptionally crafty. It was extremely difficult to pin him down theologically. He almost always resorted to the actually words used in Scripture when pressed for an explanation of his teaching, but it was always evident that something was still awry. Whenever the members of the Council attempted to pin him down on the question of what he believed to Bible to teach, or, in what sense did he understand the language of Scripture, he was found to equivocate and evade the questions put to him. As long as he was permitted to hide behind a veneer of general profession, his errors were not readily apparent. The solution was to draw up a statement of what the Fathers believed to be the Scripture's teaching on the deity of Christ. When Arius was confronted with this and asked to subscribe to it, he was flushed out as the heretic that he was. The Council was proven correct in their judgment of him, for by his refusal to subscribe to the creed, he showed that he understood the Scriptures in an entirely different sense than the rest of Christendom. This has repeatedly been case throughout history.

Creeds and Confessions, A Defense, Part 4

2013-06-10T10:30:00.000-07:00

4. A further argument in favor of creeds and confessions is that they promote the study of Christian doctrine.

The only way in which those who fundamentally differ from each other concerning the doctrines of Scripture can have any harmony in ecclesiastical fellowship is by becoming indifferent to the truth. If Christians are indifferent to the truth will they not then be apt today neglect the study of truth? And if the study of truth is neglected, will not ignorance eventually prevail? The simple fact is this: when men love the truth of the gospel enough to study it, they soon learn to evaluate it adequately. And only then will they be disposed to contend for it against its enemies.

If a professing believer entertains the notion that creeds and confessions are un-scriptural (and therefore unlawful), he is half a step from concluding that all contending for doctrine is useless and even sinful. It is easy to see from this how small the transition is to abandoning of the study of doctrine. The enemies of creeds and confessions assume a principle, which, if carried to its logical conclusion, would discourage all zeal in maintaining the purity of the doctrines of the Gospel. If the pulpiteers of the average church in Evangelicalism had it as a goal to make their hearers indifferent about understanding and studying the fundamental doctrines of Scripture, they could adopt no better plan than to do as they actually do in their rejection of creeds and confessions by crying, “Matters of opinion are between God and a man's own conscience. No one else should meddle with that.” Isn't this just another way of saying, “Believe whatever you want; it doesn't matter anyway.” This, of course means that serious study of the doctrines of Scripture is both a waste of time and not conducive to so-called “unity.” No self-respecting minister would actually assert this, but who cares if his practice works on the same underlying framework? Either the doctrines of Scripture are important and should be studied, or they are not important and need not be studied. If we would have churches with Biblically-literate members, nothing is more conducive to this than a creed or confession of faith, which lays out in an orderly and systematic way the cardinal doctrines of the Christian faith.

Creeds and Confessions, A Defense, Part 3

2013-06-06T10:30:00.000-07:00

3. Creeds and confessions of faith are simply the truth and candor that every Christian church owes to the other churches and to the world around her.

Let us imagine a hypothetical believer, a devout and religious man, who wants to form a deep in spiritual bond to a body of believers of like mind. Before he joins any church, he will want to know something of their faith, their government, and their general character. He will also want to know their doctrine. How will he find any of this out? It will certainly not be by going from church to church within a 50 mile radius of his house trying to ascertain from what he hears from the pulpit what that particular church holds for Bible truth. This would require an impossibly long amount of time and effort which no one can afford. And even supposing he had the time to spend in such an endeavor, he would never hear enough of the doctrine of anyone church to be able to decide what the universal and uniform character of that particular church was. He would have no way of knowing whether what he saw and heard on any given Sunday was standard procedure or a mere fluke.

But supposing that this hypothetical inquirer finds that we have a published creed or confession of faith, which declares how we understand the Scriptures, and further details the great truths which we have agreed to unite in maintaining, he can ascertain in a very short time without even leaving his own living room, what we profess to believe, and how far his views accord with our published confession.

Creeds and confessions therefore, rather than alienating and embittering Christians and churches who think merely alike, in fact make them better acquainted with each other while laying the foundation for mutual confidence in harmony as fellow believers and members of the church of God. Whole denominations exist, whose doctrinal standards are virtually identical, yet no one would know how far they are agreed without these standards being published and subscribed to in a public manner.

The aforementioned hypothetical believer merely presents us with one half of the equation. But the same logic applies with regard to our witness to the world around us. Do not churches and denominations owe the world around them an honest and candid presentation of their beliefs? Surely no one would dispute this. This is precisely what creeds and confessions do.

Creeds and Confessions, A Defense, Part 2

2013-06-03T10:30:00.000-07:00

2. Another argument for the importance of creeds and confessions appears from considering what the church was established to be, namely a depository, a guardian, and a witness of the truth.

Scripture represents Christians, collectively as well as individually, as witnesses for God. They are exhorted to contend earnestly for the faith and to hold fast to the form of sound words which they have received and to strive together for the faith of the Gospel.

Surely this implies taking effective measures to distinguish between truth and error. Surely this implies the duty of drawing a line between those who profess to believe the Bible, while in reality denying its essential doctrines, and those who humbly receive the truth.

There is only one way that this can be done. The only way a distinction can be made between those who deny the essential doctrines of Scripture and those who embrace them – while both professing to receive and believe the Bible – is by ascertaining and explicitly declaring how the church understands and interpret the Bible. In other words the church must extract articles of faith from the Scriptures and compared those articles with the professed belief of those whom she suspects to be heretics. But what is this if not a creed or Confession of faith? To this point, Samuel Miller writes, “It does really appear to me that those orthodox brethren, who admit that the church is bound to raise her voice against error, and to 'contend earnestly' for the truth; and yet denounce creeds and confessions, are, in the highest degree inconsistent with themselves.” A truer sentence was never written.

Demanding a church members and her ministers uphold a truth, while refusing to give them the tools to do it, beyond a naked “I believe in the Bible,” is like the Egyptian taskmasters sending the Israelites to their brickwork without supplying down the necessary materials to meet their quota. There really is no other alternative. You must either have “a form of sound words” (2 Tim. 1:13), or you can have no security that any two decisions about the faith will be made on the same basis.

Creeds and Confessions, A Defense, Part 1

2013-05-30T10:30:00.000-07:00

I have recently read two books by the late Samuel Miller, one on Infant Baptism and the other on the importance of Creeds and Confessions. Inspired by the latter, we are going to begin a series of posts addressing the importance of creeds and confessions of faith. This series of posts will begin by delineating the importance of creeds and confessions. We will then attempt to respond to several of the key objections urged against the use of creeds and confessions. Finally, we will conclude by looking at some of the practical ramifications of the arguments we have made and the objections we have refuted. Right at the outset, I wish to acknowledge how indebted I am to Miller’s lecture which was published in 1821.

Perhaps to start with what we should do is define what we mean by a creed, or confession of faith. Simply put, a creed or a confession is a presentation in human language of the great doctrines which are believed by its framers to be taught in the Scriptures. These are drawn out in regular order for the purpose of determining how far those who wish to unite in church fellowship are really agree in the fundamental principles of Christianity. It should be obvious from that statement that we do not claim creeds or confessions to be the law of the house of God, but rather summaries extracted from the Scriptures of the great and principal doctrines of the Gospel.

To this end, I would like to submit a number of arguments for the importance of the use of both creeds and confessions of faith.

1. Without a creed explicitly adopted it is impossible to show how the ministers and members of any particular church, and more especially, of a large denomination of Christians, can maintain unity among themselves.

It appears to me to be impossible to overstate the importance of this point. As Samuel Miller points out, if every Christian were a mere insulated individual who acted for himself alone, no creed would be necessary for his advancement knowledge or holiness. He could simply sit down with his Bible, open it, and read it, and have everything needed for his own edification. But the case is far different in fact. The church is a society. The church is a body. No matter how extended it is, it is one body in Christ and all who are members of it are members of one another. Scripture commands members of that church to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. They are also commanded to stand fast in one spirit with one mind. We are further commanded to all speak the same thing and be of one accord and of one mind. If the unity of the Spirit is as important as Scripture says he is, one must then ask, “How can two walk together unless they be agreed?” Is it really possible to have unity amongst a body of believers composed of Calvinists, Arminians, Pelagians, Arians and Modalists? How could such a body pray? How could such a body preach and attend the sacraments together with such disparate views of every essential doctrine of the Christian faith?

Directly linked to this is the 2^nd issue, namely: How is a church to avoid the guilt of harboring and countenancing heresy? We all know it is not sufficient to make everyone say, or accept when everyone says, “I believe in the Bible.” The real question is not whether you believe in the Bible, but what do you believe the Bible to be teaching when you say you believe it. There is no question but that there are countless people who call themselves Christians and profess to take the Bible as their guide, who hold opinions on as far as the east is from the west from other people who equally call themselves Christians and equally profess to take the Bible as their guide. This is precisely what a creed or Confession of faith enables the church and the denomination to do.

Concluding Remarks on Nahum

2013-05-27T10:30:00.000-07:00

Concluding Remarks on the Book of Nahum

The prophecies concerning Nineveh furnish a striking historical evidence of the divine origin of Holy Scriptures. It was certainly one of the greatest and strongest cities in the world – it was the capital of a well organized government space – space the commercial emporium of the world. The Euphrates and Tigris gave access to the ocean; and the city lay in the most direct track for caravans of the East. Yet, as the prophet foretold, it is “empty, and void, and waste.” Lucian, who lived in the 2^nd century after Christ, affirms that “Nineveh was utterly perished; that there was no trace of it remaining; nor could anyone tell where it once was situated.” Opposite to Mosul, which is situated on the western bank of the Tigris, there are, no doubt, extensive ruins; but this is, most probably, the site of the Persian, and not the Assyrian Nineveh. What an invitation to the attentive study of prophecy in the light of history! What a conviction to infidels! What an example to commercial and ambitious nations! What a warning to implement and luxurious rulers! Above all, what a message to the churches of Europe, to be where of the “witchcrafts” of false doctrine, of worldliness and of “covetousness, which is idolatry;” lest the Lord remove their candlestick, and leave them as the 7 churches in Asia, “empty, void and waste.”

Reflections on Nahum 3

2013-05-23T10:30:00.000-07:00

Reflections on Chapter 3

Enormous wickedness ordinarily attends great confluences of men. And curses, shame, contempt, and destruction, are the certain and final issue. Little reason than have been to be proud of what can be so quickly taken from them, or rendered their plague. But if our companions in guilt or grandeur have been ruined, it is time for us to take warning and repent. And if God be against us, who can be for us! Useless are all means of preservation in the day of His wrath. Unstable are the most exalted stations on earth. And they, who have rendered others miserable, will certainly be themselves reduced to misery at last.

Reflections on Nahum 2

2013-05-20T10:30:00.000-07:00

Reflections on Chapter 2

Alas, what fearful punishment do injuries done to God’s people incur! And at what expense and labor demand destroy one another! But terrible are the weakest nations when God animates them; and pitiful and dastardly the most mighty and numerous when he fights against them. Unavailing are honor, wealth, number, or valor, in the day of his wrath. And it is terrible to have our consciences laden with guilt in an evil day, in which everything dear is taken from us. Awful is it for men to damn their souls by fraudulent attempts to aggrandize themselves and families: and dreadful is the case of oppressors, murderers, and blasphemers, when God rises up to punish them, and death and hell shut their mouths.

Reflections on Nahum 1

2013-05-16T10:30:00.000-07:00

The devotional reflections in the next 3 posts, on Nahum, Chapters 1-3 respectively, as well as the concluding observations are from the Self-Interpreting Bible, by John Brown of Haddington (1722-1787). My copy was printed in 1855.

Reflections on Chapter 1

It is terrible to have God as our enemy; but infinitely happy to have Him as our friend. Great and daring provocations of Him, and injuries done to His people, will certainly issue in men’s great and irresistible destruction; yea, nothing more plainly presages their ruin than carnal security and self-confidence: and their plots against Him but hasten it upon themselves and families. Men’s pride always lays them low; and shameful sins bring on shameful punishments: but God’s people shall be delivered from all their oppressors at last. And in this, but chiefly in the other world, they shall have blessed opportunities of celebrating the praises, and performing the solemn services, of Jehovah their gracious Deliverer. And great is the mercy to a land when Gospel ordinances have free course and are glorified.

Nahum 3:8-19 (Part 3)

2013-05-13T10:30:00.000-07:00

8 Are you better than Thebes that sat by the Nile, with water around her, her rampart a sea, and water her wall? 9 Cush was her strength; Egypt too, and that without limit; Put and the Libyans were her helpers. 10 Yet she became an exile; she went into captivity; her infants were dashed in pieces at the head of every street; for her honored men lots were cast, and all her great men were bound in chains. 11 You also will be drunken; you will go into hiding; you will seek a refuge from the enemy. 12 All your fortresses are like fig trees with first-ripe figs—if shaken they fall into the mouth of the eater. 13 Behold, your troops are women in your midst. The gates of your land are wide open to your enemies; fire has devoured your bars. 14 Draw water for the siege; strengthen your forts; go into the clay; tread the mortar; take hold of the brick mold! 15 There will the fire devour you; the sword will cut you off. It will devour you like the locust. Multiply yourselves like the locust; multiply like the grasshopper! 16 You increased your merchants more than the stars of the heavens. The locust spreads its wings and flies away. 17 Your princes are like grasshoppers, your scribes like clouds of locusts settling on the fences in a day of cold— when the sun rises, they fly away; no one knows where they are. 18 Your shepherds are asleep, O king of Assyria; your nobles slumber. Your people are scattered on the mountains with none to gather them. 19 There is no easing your hurt; your wound is grievous. All who hear the news about you clap their hands over you. For upon whom has not come your unceasing evil?

Let’s ask a crucial question: How is the foregoing message a representation of the Gospel? Nahum 1:15 as quoted by Paul in Romans 10, call is euanggelion, i.e., the Gospel. This is why I have repeatedly read Christ’s statements in Luke 24. We have it on no less authority than Christ’s own that all of Scripture regards Him. Hence we are misreading this book if we read it in a way that is not Christocentric.

Next week we will do a devotional survey of each chapter individually. Then on the 30^th, I’d like to wrap this semester up by defending our method. In other words, I want to consider why we must read and exegete Scripture in a covenantal and Christocentric way – and why any other way is both deficient and erroneous. But before we get side-tracked let’s get back to the subject at hand and just consider two final thoughts.

Looking over this passage as a whole we see two important lessons:

I. Nineveh already had examples of nations who had behaved as she had and were no longer in existence.

II. Confidence placed in anything or anyone but God is ill-placed trust.

A. Nineveh trusted their own strength

B. Nineveh trusted their natural defenses

C. Nineveh trusted their great population

D. Nineveh trusted their great walls and gates

E. Nineveh trusted their kings and princes

F. Nineveh trusted their ability to recover

G. Nineveh trusted their false gods.

Nahum 3:8-19 (Part 2)

2013-05-09T10:30:00.000-07:00

The 2^nd detail I find interesting is the reference to being hidden or hiding. There are scholars who see here a prediction remarkably fulfilled in the state in which the ruins of Nineveh were found. Centuries past in which there was no visible record at such a place as Nineveh ever even existed. And I have reference this fact several times during our study that skeptical scholars doubted the existence of Nineveh, and therefore doubted the veracity of Scripture. And it was only in the mid-19^th century when Nineveh was in fact discovered. Nonetheless, it is very likely that the reference to being hidden or hiding predicts the fact that Nineveh will seek help from political allies in much the same way Thebes sought help from her political allies when she was attacked by Nineveh.

Verse 12. We have in verse 12 indication of how easy the fall of Nineveh will be. It is compared to a tree with ripe figs they can simply be shaken and fruit will fall off the tree. It seems to be the consensus among scholars that the reference to the first ripe figs expresses the rapidity and ease of the capture of Nineveh. We seem to have an indication of this from other passages, such as Isaiah 28:4 and Revelation 6:13.

Verse 13. Earlier I mentioned the underlying sarcasm in the passage, and in verse 13 this is very clearly seen. The passage reads, “Behold, your troops are women in your midst.” This is an archaic way of saying, “You throw like a girl!” By comparing their soldiers to women a prophet is insulting the city. It is a very snarky way of saying, “you have no one up to the challenge.” This language appears in other passages of Scripture as well (Isa. 19:16; Jer. 50:37; 51:30).

You will recall that several weeks ago I mentioned that the Assyrian king, rather than be captured by the enemy and subjected to who knows what humiliation, chose to burn himself and his family alive along with all his treasures. This effectively set the gates of the city on fire and this is a fact attested to by ancient historians.

The sarcasm is ramped up in verses 14, 15 and 16. Here we find Nineveh being told to get their act together and put up a fight. Yet they are told that nothing they will do will be of any avail. You’ll notice in this passage several references to locusts. If you have ever seen any documentaries or read anything about the devastation which locusts have wreaked upon him of the African nations you will understand how poignant this language is. In the ancient world nothing was feared more than a horde of locusts. In fact, the Hebrew language has 10 words for locust. You’ll remember that one of the devastating plagues in Egypt was a plague of devouring locusts. They travel in swarms numbering in the hundreds of millions. They have been measured in densities up to 500 tons of locusts per square mile. Swarms like this can travel hundreds of miles eating every leaf in their path. In 1954 a series of 50 swarms of locusts invaded Kenya. The largest of the Kenyan swarms covered 200 km² and had an estimated population of 10 billion individual locusts. In total hundred thousand tons of locusts descend upon the nation of Kenya covering an area of 1000 km². We’re talking a locust population in excess of 50 billion. What is interesting in this passage is that Nineveh is being warned that even if she were to multiply herself to such gigantic proportions this will avail her nothing. She will fall and she will fall hard. Not only will she fall, but it will be easy. A 2^nd reference to locusts deals with the way the swarm mysteriously vanishes after taking its fill. In the days before Doppler radar, a swarm of locusts could descend upon an area and move on, and no one knew where it had gone. Nahum tells us that this is what the nobility of Nineveh will look like. They will be there one day and gone the next and no one will know where they have gone.

Nahum 3:8-19 (Part 1)

2013-05-06T10:30:00.000-07:00

Thebes is actually No-Amon in Hebrew. It is the Egyptian name for Thebes in Upper Egypt, named after the Egyptian sun-god Amun. The prefix “No” means “belonging to.” The Egyptian god, Amon, was represented as a human figure with the Rams head (Jer. 46:25; Eze. 30:14-16). The defeat of Thebes at the hands of Assyria, described in Nahum 3:10 was a picture to Assyria of what she would experience at the hands of Babylon. The Received Text has the word, “populous.” If this is correct, as I assume it to be, it is a further warning to Nineveh that Thebes’ large population did not save her from destruction anymore then Nineveh’s large population would save her from destruction.

Thebes was located near channels where the Nile divides thus the city lay on both sides of the Nile River. It is mentioned in Homer’s Iliad, with special attention given to its hundred gates [Iliad, 9.381]. The ruins of the city as now found in Egypt still fill a location with a circumference of about 27 miles. There are many temples in this location, Luxor and Carnac being the most famous. On one wall in the temple of Carnac there is an engraving which represents the expedition of the Pharaoh Shishak against Jerusalem during the reign of Rehoboam (1 Kings 14:25; 2 Chron. and 12:2-9).

When the text mentions its rampart being the sea, this would probably be nothing more than a repetition of the previous clause. The Nile is what is spoken of here, and it is called a sea most likely because of its appearance during the annual floods (Isa. 19:5).

Verse 9. The passage says, “Cush” in the Hebrew, which is the Jewish name for Ethiopia. It is believed by scholars that Ethiopia was in league with Upper Egypt at the time under question. When the text says “Egypt,” is referring to the southern tribes residing in the area we now know is Egypt.

Put, or Phut (Gen. 10:6), was a descendent of Noah’s son Ham (Ezekiel 27:10). The name comes from a root word which means a bow and historical records tell us that these men were famous archers. The Libyans mentioned in the text were probably the wandering tribes which the Jews called the Ludim. In Scripture and in history the Ludim are always connected with the Egyptians and Ethiopians which means they are probably distinct from the people we know today as Libyans they were probably first wandering tribes who later settled in the area around Carthage under the name Libyans.

Verse 10. We are told in verse 10 that despite all of the strength, population, political allies, and natural defenses, Thebes was destroyed, its people went into captivity and its noble class were sold into slavery.

The mention of these details is particularly poignant because Nineveh is being told that the measure she measured out upon Thebes is going to be measured back upon herself. I mentioned a few weeks ago the underlying sarcasm of this passage. And I compared it to the 10 plagues of Egypt. Each one of those 10 plagues was a direct face on attack against a specific Egyptian deity. Nineveh had delighted in her violent, abusive treatment of other nations, cities and peoples, and most recently, her crushing blow against Thebes. In this passage, the very treatment she had subjected Thebes to, she was going to have dealt back to her. On more than one occasion in Scripture, not merely the Exodus, does God appear to delight in flouting the weaknesses of the false gods of the nations. One recalls the confrontation between Elijah and the prophets of Baal. After the prophets of Baal had failed to elicit a response, Elijah began to mock them, going so far as to suggest that their God might be sitting on the toilet. That is what is meant by the Hebrew idiom “covering his feet.”

Verse 11. The details in verse 11 to details of verse let us stand out to me in particular. The first is the reference to being drunk. We all know from Scripture that this is always a reference to facing the wrath of God. Isaiah 51:17 says, “Wake yourself, wake yourself, stand up, O Jerusalem, you who have drunk from the hand of the LORD the cup of his wrath, who have drunk to the dregs the bowl, the cup of staggering.” Verse 21 continues the motif saying, “… hear this, you who are afflicted, who are drunk, but not with wine…” In Jeremiah 25:15 reads “Thus the LORD, the God of Israel, said to me: “Take from my hand this cup of the wine of wrath, and make all the nations to whom I send you drink it.” However, the notion of drinking a cup of the wrath of God is most prominent when Christ faces it on the cross. And we must remember that all references to judgment, God’s wrath and destruction in the Old Testament are merely types and shadows of what we see in the final outpouring of wrath in the New Testament. This is a two-fold outpouring, mind you: for the people of God the wrath of God was poor out upon Christ; he suffered in their stead. He bore the punishment that their sins deserved. For everyone else, there remains the anticipation of the great and final Day of Judgment in which God’s wrath will be poured out upon all who are outside of Christ and they must bear the full brunt of it eternally because it is infinite eternal wrath against sin -sin which will never be atoned for because it was never atoned for and once a person is in hell he’s there eternally forever separated from the saving efficacy of the substitutionary atonement of Christ.

Nahum 3:1-7 (Part 3)

2013-05-02T10:30:00.000-07:00

1 Woe to the bloody city, all full of lies and plunder—no end to the prey! 2 The crack of the whip, and rumble of the wheel, galloping horse and bounding chariot! 3 Horsemen charging, flashing sword and glittering spear, hosts of slain, heaps of corpses, dead bodies without end—they stumble over the bodies! 4 And all for the countless whorings of the prostitute, graceful and of deadly charms, who betrays nations with her whorings, and peoples with her charms. 5 Behold, I am against you, declares the LORD of hosts, and will lift up your skirts over your face; and I will make nations look at your nakedness and kingdoms at your shame. 6 I will throw filth at you and treat you with contempt and make you a spectacle. 7 And all who look at you will shrink from you and say, Wasted is Nineveh; who will grieve for her? Where shall I seek comforters for you?

5.-7 There can be no more frightening words than, “‘I am against you,’ declares the LORD of Hosts.” This is sort of the inverse of Romans 8:31 (If God be for us, who can be against us). We could indeed ask the question, “Who can be for you, and what good would that do anyway, if God be against you? It is noteworthy that God uses the term Lord of hosts in this passage. Hosts, in biblical terms means ‘armies.’ Whether we understand this to mean that God has His own armies of heaven (which would be an obvious formality since He accomplishes anything He wills simply by willing it) or whether it is intended to express God’s sovereignty over the affairs of men (by applying said sovereignty to armies – which represent the strength of the nations) is immaterial. God either has His own army or He uses men’s armies to accomplish His plans for the betterment of His covenant people, whether it be to chastise them for disobedience of to rescue them from enemies once the discipline has had the desired effect.

We mentioned before how some of the imagery of Chapter 2 (stripping the queen and her handmaidens) was particularly poignant for cultures were women were secluded. This irony is heightened here. Nakedness in Scripture is a constant metaphor for shame. The actual word ‘nakedness’ is mentioned 40 times in the Pentateuch alone, and in each occasion the ideas of shame, weakness and vulnerability are implied, if not directly asserted. Nakedness is mentioned 14 more times in the rest of the Old Testament and the same implications are present every time. (Isaiah 47:3 - Thy nakedness shall be uncovered, yea, thy shame shall be seen) The obvious implication is that the hidden inner corruption of Nineveh will be seen by her attackers, giving them a much-needed edge. Think about the sense of disappointment you feel when you find out that someone you have admired is guilty of some gross sin…

Verses 6-7 should remind us of the false beauty of the world. The only things it offers as enticements are things which are intentionally designed to appeal to the proclivities of our sinful nature. Strip back all the pomp and circumstance, all the gilding and decoration, and the world is a seething mass of vile, degenerate, iniquitous, God-hating wickedness and depravity. It is worse than a gold-plated pile of manure. The appeal of the world to us is an indication of how deep the personal depravity of each and every one of us runs. It should serve as a reminder, not of how evil the world is (which is no doubt true), but of how evil we are to be attracted by such filth and degradation.

For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, slanders. These are what defile a person. Matthew 15:19-20a NASB

One thinks of Deuteronomy 4:5-8 which says, "See, I have taught you statutes and rules, as the LORD my God commanded me, that you should do them in the land that you are entering to take possession of it.Keep them and do them, for that will be your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the peoples, who, when they hear all these statutes, will say, ‘Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.’ For what great nation is there that has a god so near to it as the LORD our God is to us, whenever we call upon him? And what great nation is there, that has statutes and rules so righteous as all this law that I set before you today?"

If God's people only kept in view their blessedness as the people of the one true God, how great His mercy is, and how deep was the sin and misery out of which He saved them, the world would never have any appeal whatsoever.

Nahum 3:1-7 (Part 2)

2013-04-29T10:30:00.000-07:00

Verse 4. Compare to Revelation 17:2 and 18:3. Also compare with Revelation 2:14-15.

with whom the kings of the earth have committed sexual immorality, and with the wine of whose sexual immorality the dwellers on earth have become drunk.”

For all nations have drunk the wine of the passion of her sexual immorality, and the kings of the earth have committed immorality with her, and the merchants of the earth have grown rich from the power of her luxurious living.”

But I have a few things against you: you have some there who hold the teaching of Balaam, who taught Balak to put a stumbling block before the sons of Israel, so that they might eat food sacrificed to idols and practice sexual immorality. So also you have some who hold the teaching of the Nicolaitans.

The relationship which may exist between the mention of the Nicolaitans (Rev. 2:15) in close association with Balaam (Rev. 2:14) has also been noted. The two names (Nicolaitans, Balaam) have very similar meanings in their respective languages: Balaam is derived from two Hebrew words, בָּלַע [bālaʿ] (‘he swallows’) and עָם [ʿām] (‘people’). Interestingly, according to the derivative meanings of the names, the two groups troubling this church [Pergamos] were ‘swallowers of the people’ (i.e., the Balaamites) and ‘conquerors of the people’ (i.e., the Nicolaitans). If the similar meaning of their names is significant and their mention in adjoining verses in the letter to Pergamos is intended to show a relationship, then it is thought that the licentious tendencies of the Nicolaitans might be understood in light of the doctrine of Balaam.

Richard Trench writes: “Was there, in the first place, any sect existing at the time when these words were uttered, which actually bore this name? I believe not. The key to the right understanding of it is given us at Rev. 2:14-15; where those ‘that hold the doctrine of Balaam’ (Rev. 2:14) are evidently identical with those ‘that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans’ (Rev. 2:15). It may be observed that his name [Balaam], according to the best etymology, signifies ‘Destroyer of the people’ (from בֶלַע [ḇelaʿ] and עָם [ʿām]; and Νικόλαος (νικα̃ν τὸν λαόν) is no more than a Grecizing of this name. The Nicolaitans are the Balaamites - those who in the New Testament repeated the sin of Balaam in the Old, and sought to overcome or destroy the people of God by the same temptations whereby Balaam had sought to overcome them before.” Trench, Richard Chenevix. Commentary on the Epistles to the Seven Churches in Asia, Wipf and Stock Publishers. 1861.

Now let me insert here briefly that I am not straying off into speculation for the sake of looking smart. The sins mentioned in these Revelation passages are the sins for which God criticizes His people constantly throughout the Old Testament period. And in this segment of Nahum, it is clear that their spiritually defiling influence of God’s covenant people is the primary impetus for God’s judgment against them.

Before expounding this notion and the sin in question, let me briefly defend the position I have taken by appealing to a feature of John’s writings which I take as a key to understanding this passage. It is a motif of juxtaposing Hebrew/Aramaic words and their Greek equivalents. This motif of setting Hebrew/Aramaic words side by side with their Greek equivalents is common in John’s writings. Revelation 1:7; 22:20 nai/amen; 9:11 Abaddon/Apollyon; Cephas/Peter John 1:42; Thomas/Didymus in John. In three places (John 11:16, 20:24 and 21:2) he is given the name Didymus (Δίδυμος), the Greek word for a twin. In fact, "the Twin" is not just a surname, it is a translation of "Thomas". The Greek Θωμᾶς — Thōmâs — comes from the Aramaic tômâ, "twin". Therefore, rather than two personal names, Thomas Didymus, there is a single nickname, the Twin. John 20:16 gives Rabboni/Master. John also does this with Golgotha, Gabbatha and the Pool of Bethesda. Suffice it to say that this is common in John’s writings, so it would seem to be the easiest way to handle the Balaamite/Nicolaitan connection.

The sin, or sins, under question were twofold. One the part of Balaam, as 2 Peter 2:15 says, it was a desire for gain even when it meant disobeying what one clearly knows to be God’s will. Balaam was hindered by God from pronouncing a curse against Israel, but he still wanted Balak’s money, so he devised another way to get them cursed, namely to get them to fall into gross sin and incur the rod of God for their disobedience. In contemporary Evangelical circles, we have countless “ministers” who are not accountable to anyone leading people into gross theological error because they can make a quick buck off of their audience’s credulity.

Last year, a pastor named Ed Young, did an event with an accompanying sermon, book, and a host of other related media materials called: “The Sexperiment.” For 24 hours, he and his wife had a sleep-in, not unlike John and Yoko’s. They lay in a bed on the roof of the church, all the while streaming themselves over the internet as they took questions from viewers about sex. Never mind the obvious tomfoolery of such a gimmick, let’s consider the logical inconsistency of what they did. First of all, the stunt was intended combat our society’s promiscuous treatment of sex. It is not something that anyone can have any time they want it. It is a private, intimate issue strictly confined within the bonds of marriage. Yet, this private intimate thing was broadcast over the internet from the roof of the church! We always interpret actions through the underlying assumptions exposed by the acts themselves. Will anyone in their right mind deduce from such a public display that to Christians sexual relations are guarded with the utmost vigilance? No. They will think that we treat it as tritely as the rest of our society does. The live event, as well as the whole glut of materials related to it made the Youngs a small fortune.

One also thinks of the book, The Prayer of Jabez. This book was a runaway best seller. The author must’ve made a fortune from this book alone. As if that weren’t enough, the publishers came out with a dozen editions of it for every imaginable demographic. There was The Prayer of Jabez for men; The Prayer of Jabez for women; The Prayer of Jabez for teens; The Prayer of Jabez for dads; The Prayer of Jabez for moms; The Prayer of Jabez for fly fishing enthusiasts, ad nauseum. The central feature of the book was a Gnostic claim to secret knowledge to unlocking wealth and success, which could be yours for the low price of $14.95. And if you call in the next 5 minutes, we’ll double the offer.

One the part of the people it was a perversion of God’s worship by eating food sacrificed to idols and by engaging in sexual immorality. Adultery is a constant Scriptural metaphor for spiritual infidelity to God or syncretistic worship. The sin which is being rebuked at Pergamos is lax morality due to far too casual interaction with the pagan world around them. They were desensitized by their interaction. This is not a call for monasticism, but a reminder that we are to be in the world, but not of it.

Pagan rituals were often rife with sexual perversions and blatant immorality. A Christian could eat the food sacrificed to this deity, who was in fact a non-entity, without being spiritually defiled, as Paul clearly argues in 1 Corinthians 8. The problem is when one assumes that since the idol is not real, one can show his spiritual strength by actually attending these pagan rites. By the very act of being present, the Christian is exposing himself to the conscience-defiling immorality associated with these rites. Simply consider that sexual promiscuity as it is practiced in and endorsed by our society is based upon a philosophy of atheistic naturalism, the pagan deity has been replaced by self-worship, and at bottom, what we see is just another, more subtle version of the same religious use of sexuality.

The same can be said of the pervasive violence of our culture, especially as it is embodied in the discussions about abortion and euthanasia. In both instances, men deify themselves and thumb their noses at the Godhood of God and His right over life and death, usurping to themselves that over which only God has authority.

Nahum 3:1-7 (Part 1)

2013-04-25T10:30:00.000-07:00

1-3 Compare verse 1 with Habakkuk 2:12 and Ezekiel 24:6-14, which is addressed to Babylon, Assyria’s successor. We have already discussed the fact that Assyria was incredibly violent, even by contemporary standards. What is interesting here is that the language of verses 2 and 3 is exactly like the Assyrian boasts recorded on the clay tablets of Sennacherib’s chronicles. Again we have God turning sinners’ boasts on their heads and causing the arrogant to fall into the pit they have dug for others.

Albert Barnes comments: “It is all full of lies and robbery - Better, ‘it is all lie; it is full of robbery’ (plunder). ‘Lie’ includes all falsehood, in word or act, denial of God, hypocrisy; toward man, it speaks of treachery, treacherous dealing, in contrast with open violence or plunder. The whole being of the wicked is one lie, toward God and man; deceiving and deceived; leaving no place for God who is the Truth; seeking through falsehood things which fail. Man ‘loves vain words and seeks after lies’ (Psalm 4:2). All were gone out of the way. There were none in so great a multitude, for whose sake the mercy of God might spare so great a city. It is full, not so much of booty as of rapine and violence. The sin remains, when the profit is gone. Yet it ceases not, but perseveres to the end; ‘the prey departs not;’ they will neither leave the sin, nor the sin them; they neither repent, nor are weary of sinning. Avarice especially gains vigor in old age, and grows by being fed. ‘The prey departeth not,’ but continues as a witness against it, as a lion's lair is defiled by the fragments of his prey.”

Another interesting feature of this passage is the use of words like ‘horses’ and ‘chariots,’ which to any Jew would hearken them back to the Exodus. There is no doubt in my mind that this is intentional. All temporal judgments are merely foretastes of the great Day of Judgment which looms over the heads of all who reject God.

Nahum 2:7-13 (Part 3)

2013-04-22T10:30:00.000-07:00

7 its mistress is stripped; she is carried off, her slave girls lamenting, moaning like doves and beating their breasts. 8 Nineveh is like a pool whose waters run away. “Halt! Halt!” they cry, but none turns back. 9 Plunder the silver, plunder the gold! There is no end of the treasure or of the wealth of all precious things. 10 Desolate! Desolation and ruin! Hearts melt and knees tremble; anguish is in all loins; all faces grow pale! 11 Where is the lions’ den, the feeding place of the young lions, where the lion and lioness went, where his cubs were, with none to disturb? 12 The lion tore enough for his cubs and strangled prey for his lionesses; he filled his caves with prey and his dens with torn flesh. 13 Behold, I am against you, declares the LORD of hosts, and I will burn your chariots in smoke, and the sword shall devour your young lions. I will cut off your prey from the earth, and the voice of your messengers shall no longer be heard.

Another passage of Scripture which speaks to the same event is the following:

Zephaniah 2:13-15 And he will stretch out his hand against the north and destroy Assyria, and he will make Nineveh a desolation, a dry waste like the desert. Herds shall lie down in her midst, all kinds of beasts; even the owl and the hedgehog shall lodge in her capitals; a voice shall hoot in the window; devastation will be on the threshold; for her cedar work will be laid bare. This is the exultant city that lived securely, that said in her heart, “I am, and there is no one else.” What a desolation she has become, a lair for wild beasts! Everyone who passes by her hisses and shakes his fist.

This theme runs all throughout the Scriptures. Note:

Proverbs 21:18 - The wicked is a ransom for the righteous, and the traitor for the upright.

Isaiah 43:3 - For I am the LORD your God, the Holy One of Israel, your Savior. I give Egypt as your ransom, Cush and Seba in exchange for you.

Barnes writes, ”The argument is, that if he had suffered Egypt, Ethiopia, and Seba to be desolated and ruined instead of them, or in order to effect their deliverance, they had nothing to fear from Babylon or any other hostile nation, but that he would effect their deliverance even at the expense of the overthrow of the most mighty kingdoms. The word rendered 'ransom' here is כפר kôpher. It is derived from כפר kâphar - means literally to cover; to cover over; to overlay with anything, as pitch, as in Genesis 6:14. Hence, to cover over sins; to overlook; to forgive; and hence, to make an expiation for sins, or to atone for transgression so that it may be forgiven Genesis 32:21;Exodus 30:15; Leviticus 4:20; Leviticus 5:26; Leviticus 11:24; Leviticus 16:6; Psalm 65:4; Psalm 78:38; Proverbs 16:14; Jeremiah 18:25; Ezekiel 45:20; Daniel 9:24. The noun (כפר kôpher) means: A ransom; a price of redemption, or an expiation; so called because by it sins were covered over, concealed, or removed Exodus 29:36; Exodus 30:10, Exodus 30:16. In such an expiation, that which was offered as the ransom was supposed to take the place of that for which the expiation was made, and this idea is distinctly retained in the versions of this passage.”

God’s judgment of the wicked and His saving of His people are two sides of the same coin. If we don’t see this, we will misread most of the Old Testament and large portions of the New. Revelation 6:9-11 comes to mind. The souls of martyrs cry out before the throne of God for justice while they await the rest of their brethren who will die for the faith also. The separation of the ‘sheep and the goats’ in Matthew 25 is another picture.

And I will punish Bel in Babylon, and take out of his mouth what he has swallowed. The nations shall no longer flow to him; the wall of Babylon has fallen. “Go out of the midst of her, my people! Let every one save his life from the fierce anger of the LORD! (Jeremiah 51:44-45 ESV)

Zechariah 9:9-16 – The Triumphant Entry of Christ signals the inauguration of judgment against God’s enemies and the salvation of His people.

then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trials, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment until the day of judgment, (2 Peter 2:9 ESV)

But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly. (2 Peter 3:7 ESV)

The message of Nahum is the message of the Gospel: God saves His people. He saves them from their sins and from His just wrath upon it. The wrath of God against sin must either fall on us or upon Christ for us. The God-man was named Jesus because He would save His people from their sins! This is perhaps the most overlooked aspect of the Gospel. We, with our incessant reliance on the broken Covenant of Works, obsess over our infractions of God’s law, as if this will put us out of His favor, or as if Christ did not atone for this. We should rather think of God as a “father who pities His children” (Ps. 103:9-13). Our sins are either atoned for or they are not. If they are not, then let’s revert to Romanism, where at least we can offer Mass for our continued forgiveness of our sins. If they are, then we must rest in Christ’s perfect obedience and know that nothing can separate us from the love of God. God does not punish us for our sins, because He punished Christ for them. He chastises us from them, not for them. And there is a world of difference between the words “for” and “from!”

The power of the Gospel is not contingent upon your performance, but on Christ’s. And as long as you see performance as the pivot or hinge upon which everything turns, you will never see the Gospel in the Old Testament.

How were pious persons saved before the coming of Christ? By believing in a Savior to come. How did they show their faith? By offering sacrifices on God's altar. What did these sacrifices represent? Christ, the Lamb of God, who was to die for sinners. This is the core of the Gospel and it is the pillar upon which rests all of God’s dealings with His people in the Old Testament. To miss this is to miss everything.

Nahum 2:7-13 (Part 2)

2013-04-18T10:30:00.000-07:00

"Nineveh was laid waste as ruthlessly and completely as her kings had once ravaged Susa and Babylon; the city was put to the torch, the population was slaughtered or enslaved, and the palace so recently built by Ashurbanipal was sacked and destroyed. At one blow Assyria disappeared from history. Nothing remained of her except certain tactics and weapons of war ...The Near East remembered her for a while as a merciless unifier of a dozen lesser states; and the Jews recalled Nineveh vengefully as 'the bloody city, full of lies and robbery.' In a little while all but the mightiest of the Great Kings were forgotten, and all their royal palaces were in ruins under the drifting sands. Two hundred years after its capture, Xenophon's Ten Thousand marched over the mounds that had been Nineveh, and never suspected that these were the site of the ancient metropolis that had ruled half the world. Not a stone remained visible of all the temples with which Assyria's pious warriors had sought to beautify their greatest capital. Even Ashur, the everlasting god, was dead." (Will Durant, Our Oriental Heritage, pp. 283, 284). 1935

What can we learn from Nineveh? Matthew Henry summed it up when he wrote: "About a hundred years before, at Jonah's preaching, the Ninevites repented, and were spared, yet, soon after, they became worse than ever. Nineveh knows not that God who contends with her, but is told what a God he is. It is good for all to mix faith with what is here said concerning Him, which speaks great terror to the wicked, and comfort to believers. Let each take his portion from it: let sinners read it and tremble; and let saints read it and triumph. The anger of the Lord is contrasted with his goodness to his people. Perhaps they are obscure and little regarded in the world, but the Lord knows them. The Scripture character of Jehovah agrees not with the views of proud reasoners."

2:10 Buqa, Mebuqa, Mebulaqa, “Desolate! Desolation and ruin!” The Hebrew wording creates and intensifying of the gloominess by alliteration and growing length of the words used, along with rhyme. To create something of the proper atmosphere, you’d probably have to say this in a Transylvanian accent or something to make it sound sufficiently eerie.

2:11-13 Lions played a huge part in Assyrian iconography. All of the royal reliefs are full of lion imagery. It carried both a royal and religious significance. The mention of lions, cubs and lionesses here is clearly sarcastic.

In ancient Assyria, lion hunting was a sport reserved for kings. These hunts were symbolic of the ruling monarch’s duty to protect and fight for his people. Reliefs found in a former palace in Nineveh dating from about 645 BC in the British Museum in London show King Ashurbanipal hunting lions. The Assyrian Kings were famous hunters. They would often go lion hunting for political and religious purposes. They thought that if they were good at hunting, the gods would favor them, which would help them later. These kings are often portrayed on the plains of Syria, but there were no lions there so they were imported from Africa. To get the lion out of his cage and onto the Syrian plains, a servant would raise a door and start running. Then the lion would get beaten by dogs and beaters, so that the lion would go to the king. The king would kill the lion from a chariot with his bow and arrow or spear. Sometimes the king would kill it on foot with a sword. He would do this by holding it by the mane and then thrusting the sword into the lion's throat. Then, when the lion was killed, the king would pour a libation over it and give a speech to the city’s god to thank him, so the lion's evil spirit wouldn't come back and haunt him. The pictures of these hunts were usually hung in the king's tomb. Expert spearmen and archers would protect the king, but this wasn't really needed because the kings were expert hunters.

The lion hunting was part of the religious life of Assyria; hence it was an idolatrous practice. God singles out this imagery with an obvious sense of irony. This is reminiscent of the 10 Plagues of Egypt. By the plagues, God took direct shots at 10 Egyptian deities. By destroying Nineveh, God did so in a way that flouted the nonexistence of the Assyrian gods and goddesses.

Gushkin-banda – god of gold

Ea - god of the waters

Qingu - battle leader

Ishtar - goddess of love, procreation, and war

Siduri - barmaid

Nusku - god of fire

Gerra - god of fire

Ishum - god of fire

There is no God but the Lord and He delights in showing His glory by proving the nothingness of the gods of the nations.

Nahum 2:7-13 (Part 1)

2013-04-15T10:30:00.000-07:00

2:7 Our ESV has “mistress” in verse 7 for the Hebrew word “Huzzab,” which older English translations take as a proper noun and simply transliterate. The root of the Hebrew word implies one who stood beside the king, so it is seen likely to be a reference to the queen. It may also signify Nineveh personified as a queen – one who had long stood in the most supreme power and prosperity. Being carried off into exile is detailed and depicted in the language of the stripping and public humiliating of a woman. This was a powerful metaphor for a culture whose women were secluded. Compare this with Isaiah 47: 2, 3 where the same image of a woman with her face and legs exposed is used of a city that has be taken captive and dismantled, which can also be compared to 3:5 of this book. The people will be carried off, or as the Hebrew has it, “brought up,” (a synonym for captivity).

Many interpreters think “huzzab” to be the name of the queen. Hence, we are told that the queen is gone into exile. I agree with Calvin that this view is a bit too strained. Nothing in the text indicates that this is a proper noun. It seems correct rather to say that this word is a personification of the whole empire. The root of the word means ‘to stand’ or ‘to be fixed in place,’ hence as a personification it is particularly poignant because we are told that she who thought she was immovable is going to be moved.

If we prefer the notion that this refers to the queen personally, then the meaning would be much the same: the queen, who before sat in the midst of her pleasures, shall be violently drawn into exile, and carried away to another country. And it may even be probable that Nahum does refer to the queen, as a personification of the whole empire, thus conflating both views, because it immediately follows, Her handmaids lead her as with the voice of doves, and smite on their breasts; that is, her maids, who before flattered her, shall laments and with sighing and tears, and mourning, shall lead away, as a captive, their own mistress. Thus the context would harmonize.

Nineveh has been compared to a dishonored and dethroned queen, so here the image is intensified with the mention of her handmaidens mourning and moaning like doves. The coo of a dove sound forlorn and sad, hence it is an apt analogy for sighing and weeping. The handmaidens are likely, as Jerome (347-420) understood it, the minor cities and surrounding areas that were totally dependent on Nineveh for their sustenance and prosperity. It is easy to forget that Nineveh was the capital of the Assyrian Empire, and although, the whole Empire’s prosperity was not dependent purely upon Nineveh’s economy, it was dependent upon Nineveh’s power. Once the capital of an Empire goes down, the whole empire quickly fragments back into its former territories, only now there are ill-equipped for autonomy. Hence widespread economic ruin ensues.

2:8 Many of Nahum’s details have been verified, even incidentally, by archaeology. Skeletons in armor have been exhumed from rubble; 20,000 clay tablets written in cuneiform have been discovered from Sargon’s library; walls have been unearthed; and contemporary records have been found which include details which would have been unknown otherwise.

Nahum’s prophecy lists the following items as part of Nineveh’s destruction:

An "overflowing flood" would "make an utter end of its place" (Nah. 1:8)

Nineveh would be destroyed while her inhabitants were "drunken like drunkards" (Nah. 1:10)

Nineveh would be unprotected because "fire shall devour the bars of your gates" (Nah. 3:13)

Nineveh would never recover, for their "injury has no healing" (Nah. 3:19)

The downfall of Nineveh would come with remarkable ease, like figs falling when the tree is shaken (Nah. 3:12)

In 612 B.C. Nabopolassar united the Babylonian army with an army of Medes and Scythians and led a campaign which captured the Assyrian citadels in the North. The Babylonian army laid siege to Nineveh, but the walls of the city were too strong for battering rams, so they decided to try and starve the people out. A famous oracle had been given that "Nineveh should never be taken until the river became its enemy. After a three month siege, "rain fell in such abundance that the waters of the Tigris inundated part of the city and overturned one of its walls for a distance of 12,600 feet (2.38 miles). Then the King, convinced that the oracle was accomplished and despairing of any means of escape, to avoid falling alive into the enemy's hands, locked himself and his entire family (wives, concubines, eunuchs, children) in the palace and built a huge funeral pyre, placed on it his gold and silver and his royal robes, and died with his family in the blaze. Nineveh was pillaged and burned, and then razed to the ground so completely that as to evidence the implacable hatred enkindled in the minds of subject nations by the fierce and cruel Assyrian government." (Lenormant and E. Chevallier, The Rise and Fall of Assyria) , Great Events by Famous Historians, Volume 1, 1905.

The Assyrian Empire was known for its cruelty. "Judged from the vaunting inscriptions of her kings, no power more useless, more savage, more terrible, ever cast its gigantic shadow on the page of history as it passed on the way to ruin. The kings of Assyria tormented the miserable world. They exult to record how 'space failed for corpses'; how unsparing a destroyer is their goddess Ishtar; how they flung away the bodies of soldiers like so much clay; how they made pyramids of human heads; how they burned cities; how they filled populous lands with death and devastation; how they reddened broad deserts with carnage of warriors; how they scattered whole countries with the corpses of their defenders as with chaff; how they impaled 'heaps of men' on stakes, and strewed the mountains and choked rivers with dead bones; how they cut off the hands of kings and nailed them on the walls, and left their bodies to rot with bears and dogs on the entrance gates of cities; how they employed nations of captives in making brick in fetters; how they cut down warriors like weeds, or smote them like wild beasts in the forests, and covered pillars with the flayed skins of rival monarchs." (Farrar, The Minor Prophets, pp. 147,148). 1831

Nahum 2:3-6 (Part 3)

2013-04-11T10:30:00.000-07:00

The shield of his mighty men is red; his soldiers are clothed in scarlet. The chariots come with flashing metal on the day he musters them; the cypress spears are brandished. The chariots race madly through the streets; they rush to and fro through the squares; they gleam like torches; they dart like lightning. He remembers his officers; they stumble as they go, they hasten to the wall; the siege tower is set up. The river gates are opened; the palace melts away; (Nahum 2:3-6 ESV)

If we were to read this description in any other context we would be very likely feel sympathy for the people experiencing what is described in this passage. It speaks of soldiers covered in blood, spears brandished on every side, chariots rushing wildly through the city square, walls being destroyed, and protective barriers of water being crossed, palaces being demolished, people being stripped and carried away, groaning, moaning, and beating on their breasts.

2:6 Nineveh had moats on three sides of the city and the Tigris River on the west side, with gates, like sluices, that opened to fill the moats. The river wall on the western side was 4,530 yards long. These served as a protective barrier around the city. The weakest side, which was the east side, had a double rampart with a moat 200 feet wide between the two parts, cut into the rocky ground. Any enemy that attacked always knew that they were going to have to overcome this obstacle. Previous enemies had partially succeeded at times because they dug trenches to re-route the water out of the moats.

Accounts of the era inform us that Nineveh had an underground waterway which allowed them to sneak supplies in and out of the city even while they were under siege. We are also told that some sort of natural event, a natural disaster, flooded this system allowing the enemies to gain access to the city. Thus, the prophecy of Nahum was fulfilled in exact detail. There is no doubt that much of the language here is poetic. Because the language is poetic it is intended to evoke strong emotions. But just because it is poetic and just because it is meant to evoke strong emotions does not mean that it is not accurate.

It is important remember that we are not supposed to feel sympathy for these people. When Nahum wrote this, he was not being blindly patriotic. He was declaring the impending destruction of God’s enemies. It is precisely at this point that Nahum has an application to us. All of redemption history has been fulfilled. We are now living in the era in which we are commanded by Christ to occupy till he come. When Christ does return, he will return as the Judge seated on the throne of the universe. And this must be part of our gospel presentation. When Paul stood before Felix, we are told that Paul’s gospel presentation was a reasoned argument about righteousness, self-control, and of the coming judgment. To feel sympathy for Nineveh would be like feeling sympathy for the goats whom Christ sends into eternal hell.

What does the destruction of Nineveh teach us about the coming judgment? To answer this question, we can look at the prevalent sins of Nineveh. At the top of this list was their barbaric violence. Now, violence is a difficult subject to handle as a Christian because not all violence is created equal, yet this is the popular view. I can’t imagine that any of us consider an act of violence in the defense of our wives and children to be on par with an act of violence while robbing a bank. Not all wars are created equal.

Our society has such an aversion to violence that we find it very hard to see anything to rejoice about in the scenario described in this passage. Our society’s aversion to violence, of course, is hypocritical to the nth degree. I recently read of a famous movie director (whose films are always replete with violence, especially gun violence), and an actor (who has made millions portraying killers without heart or conscience), protest that the conservative defense of the Second Amendment is to blame for the recent shooting at the school in Newport, Connecticut. Movie stars and celebrities without number shed great big crocodile tears at the fact that so many “innocent” children were killed in this shooting. But none of them shed a tear at the fact that millions of children are murdered in the womb every year. This is a hypocrisy which defies description. The cardinal virtue of our generation seems to be niceness or kindness, and we somehow think that God will give us a free pass on all of our vices simply on account of our virtue of niceness. During the Middle Ages, people behaved in a very barbaric way, but they excelled in chastity. Do we think that God will give them a free pass on their violence because they were chaste? Do we think that God will overlook our unchastity simply because we’re not barbarically violent? In spite of all of our pretence of niceness, our society is addicted to violence. The very news programs that deplore violence make their fortune by constantly reporting violence: violence sells.

Mind you, I’m not advocating violence for violence’s sake. I’m simply saying that we must always look at the context. I used to work at a Christian bookstore which also rented Christian movies. We have very large selection of animated Bible stories. I remember a mother returning a video set one time, angrily protesting the fact that we even carried such a video. She complained that the video was violent because it depicted war. I asked her what the video is about, and she replied, “The Conquest of Canaan.” Here was someone who evidently had a higher moral standard than God. She was offended that a Bible story should tell about a war or battle. You can read the book of Joshua from cover to cover, without ever finding a single verse of which it may be said that it glorifies violence. The conquest of Canaan, all the battles, sieges and ambushes, were, despite all our modern sensibilities, God’s ordained way to both punish the wicked and fulfill his covenant promise to his people. I recall a quote by Matthew Henry, “God is either your best friend or your worst enemy.” There is no possibility for ambivalence.

I would like to ask a few questions regarding what has been addressed so far in our look at Nahum, and especially in regard to the subject of the last few posts.

1. Why does the Church stay away from teaching on books like Nahum?

2. How can its value be communicated?

3. Who are some of God’s enemies?

4. How do we handle those who oppose God’s kingdom and its values?

5. How does the message of Judgment affect your view of sin and of the unregenerate?

Nahum 2:3-6 (Part 2)

2013-04-08T10:30:00.000-07:00

In this passage we see God proclaiming to Nineveh a “fate worse than death,” as the saying goes. The second half of verse one is actually addressed to Israel. They are being told to prepare for their restoration. This raises another interesting point, something which is spoken of prominently among all American Christians who are saddened by the moral and spiritual decline of our nation. Much talk is abroad about national restoration and it is spoken of as if it were in man’s hands if he could only get the right man in office. But Scripture uniformly portrays restoration, especially spiritual restoration, which is the only restoration of interest to the people of God, as undertaken first and foremost by God. Once God begins the great work, then man is moved by the Spirit to partake of the grace of what is efficaciously already at work. Neither does the extent of the damage sustained by God’s people present a problem to him. One need only to look at the history of Israel and the spiritual degradation of the nation during the time of the Judges. Think for instance of the story, the vile, despicable, deplorable story recorded in Judges 19 of the Levite and his concubine. This story has all the obscene, horrid iniquity and profane behavior one would expect to read in the story of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. Yet this story takes place in Israel. Imagine the shock of reading an account of the villainous iniquity of Nero, only to find out that it was not Nero but someone who is supposedly a Christian! That is what we are supposed to feel when we read Judges 19. The Hebrew text of Judges 19 is striking when placed side-by-side with Genesis 19. The author of Judges has copied verbatim several pertinent lines from Moses’ account of Sodom and Gomorrah with the obvious intent of startling us by attributing to God’s people the very sins which brought down such fiery wrath against the Sodomites. Compare this deplorable state of affairs with the latter history of Israel during the reign of King David.

Those familiar with church history will also know how deplorable the state of the United Kingdom was, as well as the American colonies around the time of the First Great Awakening. This knowledge should be a cause of rejoicing among those of us who, as I said earlier, are troubled by the devastation we see at work in our society and in the church. The Church is God’s peculiar people and whenever he deigns to restore and revive her, no amount of devastation is too much for God’s power to overcome.

The Northern Kingdom had been chastised by God with the Assyrian rod, and the Southern Kingdom of Judah had been repeatedly threatened by them. If God had chastised Israel, favored by Him as they were (Psalm 47:4), how much more would God fatally punish Nineveh, an idolatrous, bloodthirsty heathen people?

2:3-6 At this point the chapter takes a decidedly dark turn. Nahum now begins to describe in very lucid detail the destruction of Nineveh. The whole tenor of the passage becomes very somber and gloomy. Remember, this is not written to Nineveh, but to Judah. Nineveh is never given the opportunity to repent. This is reminiscent of what Jesus says about Sodom not seeing the signs Bethsaida and Capernaum saw. God does not owe anyone the opportunity to repent.

2:3 The mighty men of V 3 are no doubt the Medo-Babylonian generals attacking Nineveh. The red shields and scarlet attire may be one of a couple of options: It could be that they are blood-stained, which is very likely. It is also possible that they were painted red to create the illusion of bloodiness to frighten the Ninevite enemies or to disguise the Medes’ and Babylonians’ own blood so that their soldiers wouldn’t be disheartened or the Ninevites emboldened. The Greek historian Xenophon of Athens (430-354 B.C.) actually mentions that the Medes were fond of red attire.

2:4 I am going to go off-topic for just a moment because of something I see in verse 4. Several years ago when I was a young kid, I remember reading a book by some self-proclaimed prophecy expert who prided himself on his ability to read Scripture literally and mocked those whom he thought were guilty of spiritualizing the text. I don’t really remember much about the book, I couldn’t even tell you the title, but I do remember that the author prided himself on being able to see the modern world described in the ancient prophecies of the Old Testament. For instance, he explained how automobiles were foretold of by the Old Testament prophets and he cited verse 4 as his proof. You don’t need to be a rocket scientist to see that this is a ridiculous reading of the passage, especially considering the fact that he prided himself on his ability to read Scripture literally. This is the same type of guy, while priding himself on his literal reading of the Bible, will say that the locusts in the book of Revelation are prophetic portrayals of Huey helicopters. So I hope they pardon me when I take their expertise with a grain of salt. These self-appointed prophecy experts have done a great disservice to the church by their weird methods of interpreting Scripture. They have virtually destroyed any meaningful attempt at studying Old Testament prophecy.

One of the great principles of the Reformation was what is called the perspicacity of Scripture. Unfortunately that word is not very perspicacious. It means the understandability of Scripture. The Reformers never denied that there are obscure parts or passages of Scripture. They merely stated that whenever we find a part or passage of Scripture we should always interpret the more obscure passage in the light of the passages which are clearer. This is the Reformation principle of Scripture interpreting Scripture. What these self-appointed prophecy experts have done is turn perspicacity on its head. By taking a passage such as this which is clearly referring to the destruction of Nineveh in 612 BC, and seeing in it a reference to cars driving around on the streets with their headlights on, they have taken an otherwise clear passages Scripture and made it obscure, if not impossible, to understand. When the average Joe Christian opens his Bible and reads of the siege of Nineveh and clearly understands it to be a description of the destruction of Nineveh, only to find out that it’s actually talking about motorcars the 21^st century, how is he to ever have confidence that he can read Scripture on his own without the help of the expert who has the secret code. This is no different than the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church with regard to Scripture. For centuries Rome forbade Christians to read the Bible for themselves. They said that because the Scriptures were so hard to understand it was safer to leave the reading and interpreting of it in the hands of the Pope and the Magisterium, which is the official teaching office of the Roman Catholic Church. You need not bother reading the Bible and running the risk of misunderstanding it and thereby endangering your soul; it is much safer to leave this all in the hands of the Pope and let him and his Cardinals tell you what to believe.

Now, let’s get back on track. The scene Nahum is describing here is one of pure chaos as God poured out destruction upon Nineveh. Chariots are depicted as running every which way, people are running around confusedly, the nobles stumbling; the soldiers – though prepared to march – are unprepared for this. The mantelet, that is the covering used in a siege, provided no protection, nor do the city’s great walls. You’ll remember that we discussed how big the city walls actually were. The walls of Nineveh were so thick that chariots could pass each other without falling off. Chariot races on top of the walls were actually a common occurrence. In some places the walls were reputed to be as high as 100 feet. But everything described in these verses was completely fulfilled when Nineveh fell. Its inclusion in Scripture serves as a demonstration of God’s all-encompassing sovereignty, his omniscience, his justice and his love for his people.

Nahum 2:3-6 (Part 1)

2013-04-04T10:30:00.000-07:00

In the following study, I would like to do two things: answer the question: “Where is Christ in Nahum?” And secondly try to derive some sort of practical lesson from the message of this prophecy. First of all, I will be the first to admit that finding Christ in this book is no easy task. But we know that Jesus himself told us that he is the central focus of all of Scripture, therefore we should not doubt that he is here. I do not wish to be reaching at fictions of my own imagination nor grasping at straws. But neither do I wish to ignore Christ’s own declarations about himself. As Augustine said, it is better to find Christ in Scripture when He is not there then to not find Him when He is there.

The book of Nahum contains no direct Messianic prophecies. By direct Messianic prophecies, I am, of course, referring to prophecies regarding Christ’s First Advent. The expectations of judgment against Nineveh and of salvation for God’s faithful people are things which are ultimately fulfilled by Christ. Jesus and his apostles declared salvation for God’s people and judgment against his enemies. In fact, Christ began His judgment and salvation in His First Advent (Jn. 5:22-30). The spiritual battle in which the church is engaged (Mat. 16:18; Eph. 6:10-17) continues this process to this day. When Christ returns in glory he will destroy all opposing powers and hand over the kingdom to his Father “so that God may be all in all” (1 Cor. 15:24-28) Furthermore, Paul cites Nahum 1:15 (and its twin passage, Isaiah 52:7) as fulfilling God’s promise to Abraham to include the Gentiles in the Covenant of Grace (Romans 10:15).

The message of judgment is a fairly central idea in Scripture. According to the Westminster Confession of Faith 33.3, “Christ would have us to be certainly persuaded that there shall be a day of judgment, both to deter all men from sin; and for the greater consolation of the godly in their adversity (Luke 21:27-28; Rom. 8:23-25; 2 Cor. 5:10-11; 2 Thess. 1:5-7; 2 Pet. 3:11, 14)”.

If we take the time to work through these ideas we will see the applicability of the book to our lives, as Christ will defeat all His enemies. “Christ executes the office of a king in subduing us to himself, in ruling and defending us, and in restraining and conquering all his and our enemies.” (WSC, 26). We must remember that these enemies are spiritual (Eph. 6:12). While it is true that Christ has already defeated them (Col. 2:14, 15), there yet remains a day when that defeat will be ultimately completed (1 Cor. 15:25-26; Rev. 20:7-15). We live in the already-not yet tension of Christ’s kingdom; He is restraining them and will one day completely defeat them. We experience battles and trials in varying degrees in life, but Christ will defeat them and bring His kingdom in its fullness!

The 2^nd thing which I proposed to do was to derive a biblically balanced practical application of the prophecy before us. To do so, I’d like to ask the following question: “What inspiring example/warning example does the Holy Spirit set before me? How can I obtain/avoid this?” (Thanks to rev. Arnould T. Vergunst of the Reformed Congregations of New Zealand for the study bookmark that contains this question.)

Nahum 1:15 - 2:2 (Part 3)

2013-04-01T10:30:00.000-07:00

Behold, upon the mountains, the feet of him who brings good news, who publishes peace! Keep your feasts, O Judah; fulfill your vows, for never again shall the worthless pass through you; he is utterly cut off. The scatterer has come up against you. Man the ramparts; watch the road; dress for battle; collect all your strength. For the LORD is restoring the majesty of Jacob as the majesty of Israel, for plunderers have plundered them and ruined their branches.

You will note that the second half of verse 1 is addressed to Judah. They are being told to prepare for their restoration. This raises another interesting point, something which is spoken of prominently among all American Christians who are saddened by the moral and spiritual decline of our nation. Much talk is abroad about national restoration and it is spoken of as if it were in man’s hands if he could only get the right man in office. But Scripture uniformly portrays restoration, especially spiritual restoration, which is the only restoration of interest to the people of God, as undertaken first and foremost by God. Once God begins the great work, then man is moved by the Spirit to partake of the grace of what is efficaciously already at work. Neither does the extent of the damage sustained by God’s people present a problem to him. One needs only to look at the history of Israel and the spiritual degradation of the nation during the time of the Judges. Think for instance of the story, the vile, despicable, deplorable story recorded in Judges 19 of the Levite and his concubine. This story has all the obscene, horrid iniquity and profane behavior one would expect to read in the story of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. Yet this story takes place in Israel. Compare this deplorable state of affairs with the latter history of Israel during the reign of King David. Those of us were familiar with church history will also know how deplorable the state of the United Kingdom was, as well as the American colonies around the time of the First Great Awakening. This knowledge should because rejoicing among those of us who, as I said earlier, are troubled by the devastation we see at work in the church. The church is God’s peculiar people and whenever he deigns to restore and revive her, no amount of devastation is too much for God’s power to overcome.

Now we to ask where this prophecy, and the events it foretells, fits into the history of redemption. We spent some time on this point last week. Paul takes 1:15 as part of the complex of OT passages that foretell God’s faithfulness to His promise to Abraham to include Gentiles in the Covenant of Grace.

To begin to answer this we need to first consider what the promise of the Covenant of Grace is. Primarily the narrative of Scripture is: God saves His people from their enemies. We have this theme even before the Exodus, just not as dramatic. We have it in the crossing of the Jordan. We have it repeated cyclically in Judges. The story of Judges is more about God’s faithfulness to His covenant than it is about Israel’s faithlessness. Judah’s deliverance from Sennacherib and their subsequent return from their Babylonian Exile are repetitions of this theme. This is the whole message of the NT. What is fascinating to me is that Paul considers this theme of God saving His people to run concurrent with the promise to Abraham to bring Gentiles into the Covenant of Grace.

So when the language is repeated in Isaiah 52:7, it becomes clear that even in the OT, Israel’s plight (problems with Egypt, Assyria and Babylon) was seen as typical of spiritual truths about the deliverance of God’s covenant people from sin and God’s wrath against it. Comparing Nahum 1:15 with Isaiah 52:7 we see something very interesting. Isaiah’s typical “good news” is the return of God’s people from their Babylonian exile. Nahum’s “good news” is the destruction of Nineveh, which relieved God’s people from the fear of Assyrian oppression. What is fascinating about these passages is the (1) Babylon rises to world prominence only after the “good news” Nahum predicts of Nineveh’s downfall. (2) Isaiah was written first. (3) Both are viewed by the New Testament as typical of God’s deliverance of His people from their sins by the Atonement. The Exodus of Israel from Egypt, the fall of Nineveh, the return of the exiles from Babylon are all literally true factual, historical events; yet they are not ends in themselves: they point to a deeper, yet equally true spiritual meaning about God’s salvation of His people. So what if God merely provides temporal, sociological salvation from political enemies? Eternal salvation from sin and the wrath of God is what we truly need. These ‘salvations,’ while completely factually real, are intended to point our attention and hope forward to the true deliverance God has worked for His people in Christ.

The context of Isaiah 52 is the return of the exiles out of Babylon, which must be taken as typical as well because that is how Paul cites it. The same Holy Spirit who breathed out Isaiah 40:9, 52:7 and Nahum 1:15 also breathed out Romans 10:15. Since the New Testament expounds the Old, we understand that the salvation of the Church is what is ultimately in view behind all these figures. On Isaiah 52:7 Matthew Henry writes, “The removal of the Jews from Babylon to their own land again is here spoken of both as a mercy and as a duty; and the application of verse 7 to the preaching of the gospel (by the apostle, Romans 10:15) plainly intimates that that deliverance was a type and figure of the redemption of mankind by Jesus Christ, to which what is here said of their redemption out of Babylon ought to be accommodated.

Nahum 1:15 - 2:2 (Part 2)

2013-03-28T10:30:00.000-07:00

Nineveh is depicted in the following verses as being driven out into exile. Exile, as a form of humiliating a defeated enemy, consisted primarily in capturing the king, the nobility, the rich, upper-crust members of society, marching them back to the capital of the victorious kingdom, then selling these people off as slaves. The poor people were generally left behind. Israel can testify that perhaps the worst fate a people can do or, except for total annihilation, is exile. For at least 2000 years there has been a Diaspora of Jews. Exile of individuals, as well as hordes of defeated enemies was a practiced that lasted for centuries. After the Battle of Adrianople during the episcopate of Ambrose (378) countless victims were displaced and families separated. Ambrose sold the church’s gold plates and other possessions in order to raise enough money to buy these exiled people out of slavery and send them back home.

Under these circumstances a people have only two choices: 1) Blend in, assimilate and be practically erased; 2) persist as Israel did as a separate people wherever they live. This procedure has always brought down the wrath of the state and only God’s protection in the case of Israel has saved them from planned eradication by the state. No other nation has been so fortunate. On the other hand, no other nation has ever tried to live as a separate people within another nation. Countless cultures throughout the world have been practically eliminated, not so much by foreign enemies as much as by simple assimilation with the surrounding culture.

For Christians, the options are exactly the same. Jewish ‘resistance’ has generally been of a somewhat mixed character, partly political, partly religious. But Christians’ ‘resistance’ must be purely religious. The current lawsuits against the government with regard to forcing religious organizations to provide free birth control and abortions is but one of several fronts on which this battle will be waged. Homosexual marriage is another.

I’d like to quote two paragraphs from a anonymous work entitled The Epistle to Diognetus, which best estimates date to circa 130 A.D.

“For the Christians are distinguished from other men neither by country, nor language, nor the customs which they observe. For they neither inhabit cities of their own, nor employ a peculiar form of speech, nor lead a life which is marked out by any singularity. The course of conduct which they follow has not been devised by any speculation or deliberation of inquisitive men; nor do they, like some, proclaim themselves the advocates of any merely human doctrines. But, inhabiting Greek as well as barbarian cities, according as the lot of each of them has determined, and following the customs of the natives in respect to clothing, food, and the rest of their ordinary conduct, they display to us their wonderful and confessedly striking method of life. They dwell in their own countries, but simply as sojourners. As citizens, they share in all things with others, and yet endure all things as if foreigners. Every foreign land is to them as their native country, and every land of their birth as a land of strangers. They marry, as do all [others]; they beget children; but they do not destroy their offspring. They have a common table, but not a common bed. They are in the flesh, but they do not live after the flesh. They pass their days on earth, but they are citizens of heaven. They obey the prescribed laws, and at the same time surpass the laws by their lives. They love all men, and are persecuted by all. They are unknown and condemned; they are put to death, and restored to life. They are poor, yet make many rich; they are in lack of all things, and yet abound in all; they are dishonoured, and yet in their very dishonour are glorified. They are evil spoken of, and yet are justified; they are reviled, and bless; they are insulted, and repay the insult with honour; they do good, yet are punished as evil-doers. When punished, they rejoice as if quickened into life; they are assailed by the Jews as foreigners, and are persecuted by the Greeks; yet those who hate them are unable to assign any reason for their hatred.

“To sum up all in one word--what the soul is in the body, that are Christians in the world. The soul is dispersed through all the members of the body, and Christians are scattered through all the cities of the world. The soul dwells in the body, yet is not of the body; and Christians dwell in the world, yet are not of the world. The invisible soul is guarded by the visible body, and Christians are known indeed to be in the world, but their godliness remains invisible. The flesh hates the soul, and wars against it, though itself suffering no injury, because it is prevented from enjoying pleasures; the world also hates the Christians, though in nowise injured, because they abjure pleasures. The soul loves the flesh that hates it, and [loves also] the members; Christians likewise love those that hate them.” Epistle to Diognetus 5-6 (ca. 130)

Nahum 1:15 - 2:2 (Part 1)

2013-03-25T10:30:00.000-07:00

There are three ways that this passage has generally been understood. Some have considered the plunderer to be Sennacherib, others Nebuchadnezzar. If this were referring to Sennacherib, the gist of the passage would be something like this: (a) Judah need not worry about Sennacherib, because while he is busy threatening you someone is preparing to attack him. Sennacherib will not attack you (God will restore your majesty…) because he is going to be attacked. (b) With the larger picture in view God is telling Judah that she may do all the guarding and preparing she wants, but this will all be of no avail because God will raise up someone else, after Nineveh, to teach rebellious Judah the same lesson Nineveh has been used of God to teach Israel.

(c) The third view is that this is addressed to Nineveh, in which can the plunderer would be Nebuchadnezzar. According to these interpreters, Nahum is proclaiming the ruin of Assyria like this, “Your destroyer is on the rise." The Assyrians would have viewed such a warning with disdain. 1:13 informs us that Assyria was at the height of her power when this prophecy was given. It was only after Assurbanipal retired from nearly a dozen military campaigns (one of which was against Thebes) did he return to Nineveh and gradually become indolent. It was then that the burgeoning unrest among his subjects the Babylonians and Medes break out into open rebellion. This is another factor that helps us date the book to the earlier part of the 50-year window between 663 BC and 613 BC. Nahum would be saying to Nineveh, “It won’t be how you’d expect it. The plunderer will not come secretly, but right in your face. You can guard the fortresses, watch the roads, and be as ready as you’d like, it will all be to no avail.” If this is the correct view, it will be confirming what has already been said that God had now determined to destroy Nineveh and the whole Assyrian Empire. Calvin takes issue with this view because if it were intended then something else should be stated to make it plain, such as -- that God now designed to destroy Nineveh and its monarchy, because it had humbled more than necessary his people, the kingdom of Judah, as well as the ten tribes.

But we don’t find this necessary clarifier, so we can’t really consider this a viable interpretation. Of course the greater weakness of this last option is that the prophecy is addressed to Judah, hence this view would run contrary to what the prophecy has been all along. Plus 2:1-2 are set up with 1:15 which rules this view off of bounds right out of the blocks.