sign in sign up
<<
Home , Esther, Psalms

For Such A Time As This

A Study of ’s Providence

H. Carl Shank Esther: For Such A Time As This A Study of God’s Providence

Copyright © 2017 by H. Carl Shank. All rights reserved. ISBN 978-1-387-16894-1

Permission is given to photocopy any portion of this book for ministry purposes. Photocopy include copyright credits as stated above.

Scripture references are taken from the Holy , New International Version, NIV, © 1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by The Zondervan Corporation, as well as the ESV Bible, © 2001 by Crossway, a ministry of Good News Publishers. All references used by permission from the publishers. All rights reserved.

First printing Summer 2017

Printed in the United States of America

2 About the Author In addition to his M.Div. and Th.M. (systematics) work, H. Carl Shank has been a youth, associate, solo, staff and lead pastor in over forty years of church ministry, pastoring beginning and established congregations in Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia and New York state. His passion for leadership development has resulted in mentoring numerous pastors, teaching in a number of local Bible institutes as well as serving as an adjunct faculty member of The King’s College, and training InterVarsity leaders on the East Coast. Carl has been regularly sought out for his acknowledged gifts of discernment and in dealing with church issues. He had been serving as the Executive Pastor of Pequea Church south of Lancaster, PA, as well as a church health consultant through NCDAmerica. He is recently retired. Besides numerous seminars and church related articles, his written contributions include “Qoheleth’s World and Life View As Seen in His Recurring Phrases,” Westminster Theological Journal, 37 (1974), 57-73, More of , Mack Publishing, 1973, A Faith Journey: Steps of Faith from Here to God, 2009 (www.blurb.com), The Two- Talent Church: Truths for Health and Growth, Upfront and Indepth: Deeper Devotional Studies on , Making Work: Letters and Lessons on Leadership, Theology and the Church, Living Life God’s Way: Reflections from the Psalms, Study Guide and Leader’s Guide, Romans: The Glory of God As Seen in the of God, and : A Reluctant Messenger, A Needy People, and God’s , most available from Amazon and other booksellers. Carl is married to his wonderful wife, Nancy, and has three grown, married children, Stephen, Jeremy and Heidi. He lives in the Marietta, PA area and can be reached for consulting, seminars or leadership and mentoring development at [email protected] www.carlshankconsulting.com 3 4

hat does the story of Esther, a Jewish girl and a Jewish story, have to do with Christians and the Christian faith? Isn’t this account just for ? WWhy is the story in the Bible except to promote a Jewish feast and holiday () that Christians largely ignore? As Joyce Baldwin notes, “It has often been pointed out that the name of God does not occur in the . A superficial reaction to this omission is to question the book’s inclusion in the Bible. The great expositors, Luther and Calvin, left no commentaries on Esther, and those who write the history of the Old Testament period rarely refer to this book. This is because its claim to be a factual report of events tends to be treated with scepticism. Why then should Christians study it today?”1 To many people, the story of Esther and the saving of the then Jewish people is one of ancient political intrigue, a play with historical roots, but an extended tragedy that resolves itself much through the efforts of a Jewish girl. Esther happened to be a Jewish girl with a good figure and outstanding beauty. Through a series of chance happenings, according to some, she was chosen to be the queen of a wicked Persian emperor. Then you have the coincidences of her guardian being at the right places at the right times, the wicked being promoted to second in command, the plot to exterminate the scattered Jews and then their deliverance. It “just so happened” that way in ancient Persia. We live in a time where “coincidences” are all around us. We hear the phrases from many, “It just so happened,” or “As luck would have

5 it.” Rarely do we hear how God is involved in the happenings of our daily lives. And if He is, it is a “Deist” God who has some time in the past just wound up the world and retreated from its oversight, leaving it to spin, sometimes out of control, to whatever end we choose. I would contend that the story of Esther was not inserted into the Bible just because of Jewish desires to have a celebration time of their Jewishness. I would contend, as many Christian commentators have noted, that God and his providence are written all through the events of Esther. Nothing, good or bad, happened by chance, by accident, by luck of the draw. In application to our own day, I would also contend that the same sovereign God of providence is actively and powerfully at work. Nothing happens by chance or just the machinations of our so-called free will. There is much to learn and digest from the story of Esther. Let us once again learn to pray and trust the sovereign God, as did the early believers in the initial progress of the — “Sovereign Lord, who made the heaven and the earth and the sea and everything in them . . . for truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant , whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the and the peoples of , to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place.” (Acts 4:24-28)

Carl Shank 2017

Notes 1. Joyce G. Baldwin, Esther, Tyndale Old Testament Commentary, IVP, 1984, quoted in the New Bible Commentary, by Gordon J. Wenham (Editor), J. Alec Motyer (Editor), Donald A. Carson (Editor), R. T. France (Editor), IVP, 1994.

6 Facts About Esther “This is what happened during the time of Xerxes, the Xerxes who ruled over 127 provinces stretching from India to Cush.” (:1 NIV)

ike and , Esther lived among the scattered Jews (called the ) of the Persian Empire after Cyrus (550 – 529 bc) and Darius 1 (521 – 486 bc) had conquered Land organized much of the lands under their rule. (called by the Jews) (485 – 465 bc) is now the king. The story opens with Xerxes giving a 180 day extravaganza for his nobles and officials and then a seven day culminating banquet in (modern day Shusˉh in SW ). The history can be accurately traced, even though written documents of the period are wanting. Esther was the ward of Mordecai, “a Jew in Susa the citadel, the son of Jair, son of Shimei, son of Kish, a Benjaminite, who had been carried away from among the captives carried away with Jeconiah king of Judah, whom Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon had carried away. He was bringing up Hadassah, that is Esther, the daughter of his uncle, for she had neither father nor mother. The young woman had a beautiful figure and was lovely to look at, and when her father and her mother died, Mordecai took her as his own daughter.” (:5–7) Mordecai kept tabs on Esther when she was recruited to be part of the king’s harem (2:8, 9). Esther was favored by the king and became the queen. Mordecai uncovered a conspiracy to assassinate King Xerxes (2:21f), and told Esther who reported it to the king, giving the credit

7 to Mordecai. Haman later enters the scene as second in command to Xerxes (chapter 3), and enraged that Mordecai would not bow down to him, designed a way to destroy him and all the Jews of the period (3:8, 9). Mordecai finds out about the decree and persuades Esther to intercede with the king for the lives of her people, the Jews. Esther plans a banquet where the king and Haman would be present to uncover Haman’s evil plot. During this time, the king could not sleep and reads the book of the chronicles about how Mordecai earlier had saved his life (chapter 6). The King honors Mordecai and uses embarrassed and surprised Haman to do so. Esther at the banquet reveals Haman’s plot against the Jews. The king is enraged, and Haman is hanged (chapter 7). The edict against the Jews is rescinded by the king issuing another decree that the Jews could fight and defend themselves against Haman’s decree and plan (chapter 8). The Jews on the day that they were to be annihilated end up defensively conquering those who came against them in the empire. They designated the day of their victory a day of feasting and joy, called Purim (chapter 9). Mordecai was raised to second in command, held in high esteem by his fellow Jews (chapter 10). Purim was established as a yearly requirement among the Jews. Esther has been traditionally seen as a “historical novel,” though modern thinking has it as a Jewish play establishing the background and ritual of Jewish Purim.1 Whatever the linguistic notes may say, there is enough Persian history available to verify that this story is true history. There was an Esther, a Mordecai, a Haman, and a King Xerxes. Extra biblical resources confirm much of the book’s references as historical.2 For modern day Jews, the story of Esther remains as a divine encouragement that God is not dead or silent. As Frederic Bush notes, Ever since the destruction of Jewish life in Judea by the Romans in the first and second Jewish revolts, the Jews have known only a diaspora existence, at least until the 8 establishment of the state of Israel. Second, one of the two major themes of the book is to show how the leadership of Mordecai and Esther and the providence of God delivered Jews of the diaspora world from the worst of all the evils that world contains, the threat of annihilation. Throughout their existence, but especially in the last one hundred years in the Western world, the Jews have known and experienced the propensity for evil resident in their diaspora world, extending from discrimination, subtle and blatant, through persecution of various kinds, to pogroms that have involved the extensive loss of property and life.3 For Christ-followers, Esther is a story about the sovereignty of God in providence. Although the Name of God is never mentioned, his handiwork is all over the story. “What the writer of Esther has done is to give us a story in which the main actor is not so much as mentioned—the presence of God is implied and understood throughout the story, so that these mounting coincidences are but the by-product of his rule over history and his providential care for his people.”4 An outline of the book would be: 1:1-22 King Xerxes deposes his queen 2:1-18 Esther is chosen to be queen 2:19-23 Mordecai uncovers a conspiracy 3:1-15 Haman plots against the Jews 4:1-17 Esther agrees to intercede 5:1-8 Esther takes the lead 5:9-14 Haman plots against Mordecai 6:1-14 The king honours Mordecai 7:1-10 The king has Haman hanged 8:1-17 Haman’s edict is reversed 9:1-19 The Jews are seen to triumph 9:20-32 The origin of Purim 10:1-3 The success of Mordecai5

9 Discussion 1. Read through Esther at least three times, noting how the story unfolds and the “coincidences” of the story. 2. What strikes you as relevant for this day and age?

Notes 1. This is essentially the position of Dr. Frederic W. Bush,- Esther, Volume 9, Word Biblical Commentary, Allen Hubbard, Glenn W. Barker, John D. W. Watts, Ralph P. Martin, eds. , Zondervan, 2015. “Purim” is a yearly Jewish festival (9:18– 10:3). The name of the festival derives from the Akkadian word pur, “” (3:7), and refers to the lots cast by Haman. 2. “Classical and cuneiform sources by and large demonstrate the author’s familiarity with Persian mores and court life. Herodotus, a Greek historian (490–425 BC) portrays Xerxes as an ill- tempered, impatient monarch with a wandering eye for women (Yamauchi 1980, 104). Herodotus also confirms that the Persian monarch was advised by seven counselors (1:13–14; cf. Ezra 7:14). A cuneiform tablet from Borsippa near Babylon identifies one Marduka as a civil servant or minister at the court of Susa in the early years of Xerxes; some have identified this individual with Mordecai.. . . Excavations also confirm the lavish extent of the Persian palace.” . . . However, the identy of Queen Esther has been in question, and there are “a number of other difficulties in reconciling details of the book with extrabiblical sources; however, these are all comparatively minor and even border on pettifogging.” (Tremper Longman III and Raymond B. Dillard, An Introduction to the Old Testament, Zondervan, 2nd Edition, 2006, pp. 216, 217) 3. Bush, ibid. 4. Longman and Dillard, p. 221. 5. New Bible Commentary, eds. D. A. Carson, R. T. France, J. A. Motyer, G. J. Wenham, InterVarsity Press, April 1994 edition.

10 The Providence of God “For if you keep silent at this time, relief and deliverance will rise for the Jews from another place, but you and your father’s house will perish. And who knows whether you have not come to the kingdom for such a time as this?” (:14)

he story of Esther radiates the sovereign presence of God in the unfolding events. But we begin this study asking the question, What is the providence of God? A rather Tcomplete defintion or description of the providence of God has been enshrined in the Westminster Confession of Faith, a confession completed by and Nonconformists in England in 1646.1 It has been a long-standing confessional document for conservative Presbyterian churches worldwide. Chapter Five of the Confession states that “God the great Creator of all things does uphold, direct, dispose, and govern all creatures, actions, and things, from the greatest even to the least, by His most wise and holy providence, according to His infallible foreknowledge, and the free and immutable counsel of His own will, to the praise of the glory of His wisdom, power, , goodness, and mercy.” Verses that demonstrate or prove these assertions, and are included as footnotes, in order, are Hebrews 1:3, 4:34, 35, :6, Acts 17:25-28, 38–41, Matthew 10:29–31, Proverbs 15:3, :24, 145:17, Acts 15:18, :8–11, Ephesians 1:11, :10, 11, 63:14, Ephesians 3:10, Romans 9:17, Genesis 45:7, and :7. I have referenced these verses for the to look up and research on his or her own. The Westminster divines thought these verses sufficient to prove their assertions on divine providence. 11 A bit of unpacking is helpful. The Westminster divines are concerned that the glory of God is upheld in all matters. They approach history and our lives through a prism that says God is in absolute, undeniable, and uncontrovertible control of all things. Nothing is out of his sovereign oversight and power. This is why the phrase, “according to His infallible foreknowledge, and the free and immutable counsel of His own will.” Evil is not absolute, nor in control of what happens in the universe. “Foreknowledge” is not God looking forward in history and time to see what humans would do and then act. It is rather God knowing beforehand and sovereignly ordering his universe. While such an absolutistic view seems out of place in our world today, it is the context of divine providence that the Westminster divines used to write this confession. But what about our responsiblity or freedom to choose? The writers addressed these concerns this way: “Although, in relation to the foreknowledge and decree of God, the first Cause, all things come to pass immutably, and infallibly; yet, by the same providence, He orders them to fall out, according to the nature of second causes, either necessarily, freely, or contingently. God, in His providence, makes use of means, yet is free to work without, above, and against them, at His pleasure.” (Chapter Five, Sections 2 and 3) Consequently, Longman and Dillard point out, “This doctrine of divine sovereignty is fundamental to the book of Esther, but it is not a kind of fatalism. For where God’s actions and purposes are not transparent, the importance of human obedience and faithfulness becomes the more apparent. In this respect, Esther 4:13–14 joins a number of other biblical texts that wonderfully integrate human responsibility and divine providence (e.g., 2:32 [MT 3:5]; Matt. 26:24; Acts 2:23; 3:18–19).”2 Esther, Mordecai, Haman, King Xerxes, and all the actors in the story of Esther made free choices in their actions and thoughts. Those actions were responsible, but they were not determinative of the eventual outcomes. God’s providence covers not merely good things, but also the evil that happened in the story of Esther. God is obviously not the author 12 of and evil, but He rules and overrules it for his own glory and honor. “God hates sin and will judge sinners. God is not the author of sin, He does not tempt anyone to sin (James 1:13), and He does not condone sin. At the same time, God obviously allows a certain measure of sin. He must have a reason for allowing it, temporarily, even though He hates it. . . . God allowed Judas to , deceive, cheat, steal, and finally betray the Lord Jesus into the hands of His enemies. All of this was a great wickedness, and God was displeased. Yet, at the same time, all of Judas’s plotting and scheming led to a greater good: the of mankind. Jesus had to die at the hands of the Romans in order to become the sacrifice for sin. If Jesus had not been crucified, we would still be in our . How did God Christ to the cross? God providentially allowed Judas the freedom to perform a series of wicked acts. Jesus plainly states this in Luke 22:22: “The will go as it has been decreed. But woe to that man who betrays him!”3 The actions of Xerxes, Mordecai, Esther, and even Haman are all covered under the providence of God. Such a view of God’s providence should give comfort and assurance to all Christ followers. “For Jews at the author’s own time, and for all readers of the story in the centuries and millennia since, this story of divine providence and election has provided a message of comfort and assurance. God’s actions in history may be hidden; they are certainly not transparent to all. Yet in spite of our inability to understand divine purpose in all that transpires, none of it is beyond the reach of his hand.”4 God’s incomprehensibility does not mean God is not in control.5 It simply means we cannot exhaustively understand or delineate all that God has decreed and is doing in history and in our lives. In the chapters that follow we will explore the providence of God in Esther and lessons we can apply to our own lives. 13 Discussion 1. Does this understanding of divine providence encourage or frustrate you? Why? 2. How could God allow a Pharaoh or a Haman or a Hitler to oppress God’s people? 3. Look up the referenced verses in the description of the providence of God. Are they convincing or not of God’s sovereignty and control of all things?

Notes 1. The Confession of Faith and the Larger and Shorter Catechisms with the Scripture Proofs at Large together with The Sum of Saving Knowledge, The Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland, 1967. 2. Tremper Longman and Raymond Dillard, An Introduction to the Old Testament, Zondervan, 2006 edition, p. 221. “MT” in the reference means “Massoretic Text,” the original Hebrew text of Esther. 3. “What is divine providence?” Got Questions Ministries, accessed August 2017, [https://www.gotquestions.org/what-is-divine- providence?] 4. Longman and Dillard, p. 221. 5. Dr. Robert Morey, “The Incomprehensibility of God, Part 1,” Chapter Five, Exploring the Attributes of God, 2008.

14 Where Is God? “Then Haman said to King Ahasuerus, ‘There is a certain people scattered abroad and dispersed among the peoples in all the provinces of your kingdom. Their laws are different from those of every other people, and they do not keep the king’s laws, so that it is not to the king’s profit to tolerate them. If it please the king, let it be decreed that they be destroyed.’” (:8, 9a)

here is God in the mindless disasters that seem to confront us almost daily? Where is God in the massive suffering of the peoples of North Korea, or the Gaza Strip,W or pick any hot spot today? Or in acts of senseless and almost random killing of innocents? Where is God in the abortion-on- demand practices of today? In other words, where is God when the innocent suffer, when sincere Christian believers’ rights are being limited, when tragedies hit close to home? Where is God when it counts? Another question: How does God work in a hostile and growing unChristian environment? One of the books I am recommending to you to read and reflect upon is David Kinnaman, UnChristian: What a New Generation Really Thinks about Christianity…and Why It Matters.1 Peter, a gay man Kinnaman’s team interviewed for the book, said, “Many people in the gay community don’t seem to have issues with Jesus but rather with those claiming to represent him today. It’s very much an ‘us-versus-them’ mentality, as if a war has been declared. Of course each side thinks the other fired the opening shot.”2 That same opinion has been expressed in our local Sunday 15 newspaper in recent weeks. The moral perception of outsiders about us is devastating — Evangelical, born-again Christians are judgmental, bigoted, sheltered, right-wingers, hypocritical, insincere and uncaring.3 How should we respond? What should be our actions and attitudes as “displaced” people? The Jews of Esther’s day were of the “diaspora.” They were in exile as “resident aliens” of the Persian society they inhabited. The big truth according to the Bible is that Christians are “resident aliens.” The Bible says in 1 Peter 2:11, “Dear friends, I urge you as aliens and strangers in the world, to abstain from sinful desires…” You may not presently feel “displaced,” but that feeling will grow as our society retreats further and further from God’s Word and Christian standards of behavior. One of the places we find some biblical answers to questions like these is in the Old Testament book of Esther. The book is, of course, named after its heroine, a Jewish girl, who became a Persian Queen in the time of Xerxes I, sometime in the fourth century bc. Esther had been raised by her foster father, an older cousin, Mordecai, who was posted as a gatekeeper in the royal palace at Susa, which was about 150 miles east of the Tigris River in modern day Iran. In Jewish history, Esther is the book that shows the beginnings of the Jewish Feast of Purim. Where Esther comes into play in addressing these concerns is that without even naming God, or making any direct religious references, the story displays how God works in a totally secular environment. This gives us a context for the lessons we are about to uncover in this story. The Bible notes God as actively involved in a world hostile toward Him and His values. God does not operate on a limited time frame. He is a “24/7” God! “For if you keep silent at this time, relief and deliverance will rise for the Jews from another place, but you and your father’s house will perish. And who knows whether you have not come to the kingdom for such a time as this?” (Esther 4:14) Instead of being subject to the whims of time, God rules over time. 16 He is Lord of time. He orders and ordains all things in time for His glory and to accomplish his purposes. God himself has orchestrated this situation and this environment to show His glorious purposes. We call this the providence of God. What is “providence?” Read the preceding chapter for a thorough description. Here, a good, working definition would be: “God’s working out his eternal decree or plan in time, usually by means of ordained second causes,” like natural law. Much of our problem today in understanding our world and its suffering is tied to a superficial understanding or even a misunderstanding of God and how He works in His creation. We tend to either treat God as a superhero, who fails us when He doesn’t miraculously intervene in injustices we experience, or we conclude He’s just not bothered by what humankind does. Many Christians believe God will indeed finally clean up and right the wrongs at the end of this age when Jesus Christ returns. However, we just have to sort of “suffer through” the way things are now. In great contrast to this, the Bible teaches that God as Sovereign King, through His Son Jesus Christ, rules over all things in the here-and-now. He is actively involved! We must reject the views of deism and pantheism. Deism teaches that even if God created the world, the day-to-day mundane events of time, space and history are cut off from His active presence. He has stepped back from active involvement and wound up the world like a giant clock, and it is running on borrowed time. Pantheism, on the other hand, has God so intimately involved in the world that He becomes fused with creation. So, according to New Age proponents and others, God is in the wind that blows, the sea whose waves foam, and the grasshopper that springs from one leaf to another. God is totally identified with His creation, so much so that there is no transcendence. In contradistinction to these philosophies, the Scriptures teach us God is actively involved in His world. In Psalm 104, God laid the foundation of the earth; He determined boundaries for the oceans; 17 He causes grass to grow; He determines the life-span of all created things. Colossians 1:17 tells us “He (Jesus Christ) is before all things and in him all things hold together (cohere).” The wisdom of Proverbs says, “In his heart a man plans his course, but the Lord determines his steps.” (Proverbs 16:9) :10 says that even “the wrath of man brings God praise,” so that God is somehow honored even in humankind’s worst actions. What we will learn from this story of Esther is that God indeed does govern and control all events, from the most insignificant to the most dangerous and evil, and causes them to fulfill His perfect plan. The Bible also teaches us that God is eternal. :2 notes that “before the mountains were born, or you brought forth the earth and the world, from everlasting to everlasting, you are God.” 3:6 states, “For I am the Lord, I change not, therefore you sons of are not consumed.” God tells us in the letter of 2 Peter not to give in to the trap of unbelief and scoffing at God’s time frame, asking “Where is this coming He promised?” “Do not forget this one thing, dear friends, With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.” (2 Peter 3:8,9) God’s providence also requires our responsible faithfulness. The biblical teaching of providence is not “fatalism” or “escapism.” Both Mordecai and Esther are integrally involved in their roles in the rescue and deliverance of the Jewish population. Mordecai must go into mourning, rightfully, for his people: “When Mordecai learned all that had been done, Mordecai tore his clothes and put on sackcloth and ashes, and went out into the midst of the city, and he cried out with a loud and bitter cry.” (Esther 4:1) Esther needs to take concrete, even life threatening action, to appeal to the king to reverse Haman’s evil edict: “Go, gather all the Jews to be found in Susa, and hold a fast on my behalf, and do not eat or drink for three days, night or day. I 18 and my young women will also fast as you do. Then I will go to the king, though it is against the law, and if I perish, I perish.” (Esther 4:16) To go into the king’s presence without being summoned could invite the penalty for her. How do we apply these lessons on providence to our lives and in our day and age? Ask yourself these questions: Is God “Lord” of your life on a “24/7” basis? Is his timing right for you? How will you show quiet trust, and courageous determination in God’s plan for you in these days? The discussion questions below will help you in your answers.

Discussion Read the book of Esther. Read David Kinnaman, UnChristian, Chapters 1 & 2.

1. “Providence” has been defined as “God’s working out of His eternal decree or plan in time, usually by means of ordained second causes, like natural law.” It is God’s preserving and governing all created things, in infinite power and wisdom, for His glory. • Read Acts 17:28; Colossians 1:17; Psalm 104; Matthew 10:29, 30 • How do I usually see God in my world? • Do I have a view of God that is “24/7”? • How is God both “transcendent” and yet “personal?” 2. Kinnaman says that young adults (16–29) (24 million of them!) view God and Christianity much differently than we do. • Respond to the following observations: “Christianity has become bloated with blind followers who would rather repeat slogans than actually feel true compassion and care. Christianity has become marketed and streamlined into a juggernaut of fearmongering that has lost its own heart.” – An unChristian from Mississippi, p. 15

19 “Christians have become political, judgmental, intolerant, weak, religious, angry, and without balance. Christianity has become a nice Sunday drive. Where is the living God, the Holy Spirit, an amazing Jesus, the love, the compassion, the holiness? This type of life, how I yearn for that.” – A 35-year old believer from California, p. 35. 3. Reflect on and sing what I would call, “Esther’s Song” — “I Heard the Bells on Christmas Day” — I heard the bells on Christmas day Their old familiar carols play, And wild and sweet the words repeat Of peace on earth, good will to men.

I thought how, as the day had come, The belfries of all Christendom Had rolled along th’unbroken song Of peace on earth, good will to men.

And in despair I bowed my head: “There is no peace on earth,” I said, “For hate is strong and mocks the song Of peace on earth, good will to men.”

Then from each black accursed mouth, The canons thundered in the south. And with the sound the carols drowned Of peace on earth, good will to men.*

It was as if an earthquake Rent the hearthstones of a continent, And made forlorn the households borne Of peace on earth, good will to men.*

20 Then pealed the bells more loud and deep: “God is not dead, nor doth he sleep; The wrong shall fail, the right prevail, With peace on earth, good will to men.”

Till, ringing, singing, on its way, The world revolved from night to day, A voice, a chime, a sublime, Of peace on earth, good will to men! (Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, 1807–1882, *Additional verses from Bluefish TV, Iraq War)4

Notes 1. David Kinnaman with Gabe Lyons, UnChristian: What a New Generation Really Thinks about Christianity…and Why It Matters,” Baker Books, 2012. 2. Kinnaman, p. 105. 3. Kinnaman, p. 92. 4. “BlueFish TV is a non-profit Christian video publishing company based in Richardson, Texas. Bluefish TV works with well-known Christian speakers and authors like Erwin McManus, Don Miller, Margaret Feinberg, Doug Fields, Jars of Clay, MercyMe, Les Parrott, Louie Giglio, Third Day, and Chris Tomlin to produce small group studies and video illustrations that help people teach in their church.” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BlueFish_TV)

21 22 No Guarantees “Go, gather all the Jews to be found in Susa, and hold a fast on my behalf, and do not eat or drink for three days, night or day. I and my young women will also fast as you do. Then I will go to the king, though it is against the law, and if I perish, I perish.” (Esther 4:16)

he trouble with many people today is that they have not found a God big enough for modern needs. While their experience of life has grown in a score of directions, and their Tmental horizons have been expanded to the point of bewilderment by world events and by scientific discoveries, their ideas of God have remained largely static.”1 The story of Esther contains a number of lessons on how God governs and controls all events and causes them to fulfill His perfect plan, which we call divine providence. The first lesson we surveyed in the preceding chapter is that God does not operate on man’s limited time frame. He is actively involved on a “24/7” basis. Nothing happened in the court of the Persian emperor Xerxes I that was either out of God’s control, or a surprise to his overriding power, love and grace. It was not “chance” that Esther had been raised by Mordecai, nor chance that she was a beautiful Jewish girl, nor chance that she won the favor of the King. It was not a lucky coincidence that Mordecai overheard two scheming assassins of the king, and reported it to Esther, who reported it to the king. It was not a fluke of nature that one night King Xerxes kept awake, not a stroke of luck or coincidence that he got out the chronicles of the time and read about how Mordecai had saved his life in the past. And it was not chance that Haman, 23 an enemy of the Jews and all goodness, was exalted to second in command, nor chance that he connived and persuaded the king to issue an annihilation decree against the Jewish race. While it is doubtless the writing of a Jewish scribe some years after these events took place, and a predisposition to paint the events from a Jewish point of view, what is recorded and what happened fell under God’s sovereign providence. The second lesson is that God’s providence requires our responsible, sometimes courageous, faithfulness. Esther was rightly scared to go before the king with Mordecai’s request and cry for Jewish relief. It was not a democratice process where she would be automatically invited into the king’s presence. It was not a forgone conclusion she would be welcome in the royal court. Esther took her life into her hands going into the king’s chambers. “If I perish, I perish,” was not an overstatement or drama by an emotionally distraught woman. God’s providence requires our decision making, our faithfulness in following the course of action that is right and true. This brings us to our third lesson about God’s providence in Esther. God sometimes throws obstacles in the path of obedience, instead of clearing the way. Read Esther 4:14 – 5:8. There is no divinely given guarantee of security in exchange for allegiance to God. Submission and obedience to God are required, irrespective of the outcome. Such obedience and faithfulness reminds us of the Jewish lads who refused to bow before the golden image of King Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel 3. Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego were resolute in their defiance of bowing before a false idol of God. Note their brave words: “O Nebuchadnezzar, we have no need to answer you in this matter. If this be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and he will deliver us out of your hand, O king. But if not, be it known to you, O king, that we will not serve your gods or the golden image that you have set up.” (Daniel 3:16-18) Furious that these three Jewish boys would not do obeisance to 24 the king, he order the fire in the furnace of death to be made seven times hotter than usual. He then took these three Jews, robes and all, tied them up and ordered them thrown into the fire. Even the strong soldiers who did this, and got close enough to experience the heat were killed. Yet, God intervened in a miraculous way and not merely spared their lives, but “the hair of their heads was not singed, their cloaks were not harmed, and no smell of fire had come upon them.” (Daniel 3:27) Esther had no such guarantee of safety or God’s intervention in her going before the king. “And when the king saw Queen Esther standing in the court, she won favor in his sight, and he held out to Esther the golden scepter that was in his hand. Then Esther approached and touched the tip of the scepter.” (:2) Maybe the king had a good day, or he felt particularly gracious, or he was so madly in love with Esther that he would give her anything she wanted. None of these explanations will do. He was providentially led to allow her into his presence and then make this offer: “What is it, Queen Esther? What is your request? It shall be given you, even to the half of my kingdom.” (Esther 5:3) Perhaps she had magical qualities about her, or charms she used to get her way with the king. I think not. God’s behind-the-scenes actions are written all over this event. I believe, rather, that she was willing to die, if need be, to ask for the deliverance of her people, the Jews. Interestingly, Esther does not just blurt out that she wants Haman’s decree to be overturned. Rather, “Esther said, “If it please the king, let the king and Haman come today to a feast that I have prepared for the king.” (Esther 5:4) This is wisdom beyond her years in the royal court. Why the request for Haman and the king to be present at the banquet, and why restate the request (Esther 5:7, 8)? Dr. Frederick Bush suggests: Unmistakably, with Esther’s subtle restatement of the invitation, the king’s future compliance (which he can hardly now refuse) has become virtually a public pledge to grant her unstated request! This careful and subtle development in 25 the two dialogues demonstrates that Esther is not stumbling blindly in the dark, inexplicably inviting the king to two unneeded banquets, dangerous because of the time they consume, and it demonstrates that the narrator has not clumsily introduced a development that leaves his readers stumbling blindly in the dark, wondering what is going on. Esther is shrewdly and subtly pursuing a well-designed plan, by which she has maneuvered the king into committing himself in advance.2 What is important to note here is that Esther was not just some giddy, love infatuated Jewish girl somehow surprisingly raised to the level of queen. She learned how to function in royal society and how to strategically engineer Haman’s just penalty for his outrageous decree. The fourth lesson in providence in Esther is that God never wastes anything done under His sight. Mordecai’s discovery of the plot to assassinate the king (2:21, 22) seemed to have little to do with any future action to save the Jewish race. But God used that incident to honor Mordecai later, and to use Haman, the enemy of the Jews, to do it! () This is how God works in providence. Nothing is forgotten. Nothing is too little or insignificant for God to overlook. God does not forget. God sees and remembers all. The Scriptures point this out — “But even the hairs of your head are all numbered.” (Matthew 10:30) “Look at the birds of the air: they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them Are you not of more value than they? But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which today is alive and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will he not much more clothe you, O you of little faith?” (Matthew 6:26, 30) “Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? And not one of them will fall to the ground apart from your Father. Fear not, therefore; you are of more value than many sparrows.” (Matt. 10:29, 31) These providential events in Esther raise some important practical questions for all of us — Is God vividly present in your thoughts and considerations of day to day events? Has God been 26 speaking to you lately in the events of your life? Are you listening?!

Discussion Study Esther 2:19-23; 4:14-5:8; Ch. 6 Read David Kinnaman, UnChristian, Baker Books, 2007, Chapter 3.

1. There appears to be a “hesitation” in Esther’s request in Esther chapter 5. Instead of asking the King for her petition at the first banquet, she defers to a second banquet. Why? 2. Instead of dealing with Hamaan’s wickedness immediately after the first banquet, God puts several providential events in place. What are they? 3. Kinnaman says that “as Christians, we should articulate the reality of a situation [for instance, having children outside of marriage], but we must be careful to choose the appropriate time and manner to address it. . . The way we react to people and to their life circumstances is also a measure of our spiritual maturity.” (Ch. 3, p. 59) What can we learn from Esther about “timing” and “response” in a totally secular environment? How is God at work in our environments today – at our job, at school, at play? 4. Kinnaman quotes Jud Wilhite, pastor of Central Christian Church in Las Vegas as saying: “In Las Vegas, where I live, the culture war is over. We [Christians] lost. Let me repeat: WE LOST. Now our calling is to love and accept people one-to-one, caring for them where they are . . .We’re trying to flip the perception of hypocrisy by being honest and straightforward about our faults and our hope of transformation in Jesus.” (Ch. 3, p. 62) Are we losing the “culture war” in your part of the country? What should be our response to increasing secularity?

27 Notes 1. J. B. Phillips, Your God is Too Small, Macmillan, 1967. 2. Dr. Frederic W. Bush, Ruth-Esther, Volume 9, Word Biblical Commentary, David Allen Hubbard, Glenn W. Barker, John D. W. Watts, Ralph P. Martin, eds. , Zondervan, 2015.

28 “In Spite Of” Providence “Saying that the king allowed the Jews who were in every city to gather and defend their lives, to destroy, to kill, and to annihilate any armed force of any people or province that might attack them, children and women included, and to plunder their goods” (:11)

ust trust God! How many times have you heard or used that phrase? If we were honest with ourselves and others today, how many times did it sound hollow or meaningless for the Jkind of tragedy or difficulty we were facing? Many in our society would consider these words a waste of time and effort. Once I was visiting a very ill parishioner in a hospital in Northern Virginia. The nurse in charge blocked my to the room with the question, “Why do you want to see him?” I answered that I was his pastor, and that I wanted to have some with him, to which she responded, “What good will that do?!” For her and for many others in our society if God does exist, and if faith does matter, they only matter “in church” or “for religious purposes.” Many secular people, and I believe many church-going people, really don’t see how God can be trusted in the messy, daily, nitty-gritty situations of real life. Two kinds of problems surface here. First, the problem of a steadily declining God-consciousness or awareness. In the 1960s, liberal thought posited a “God-is-dead” movement. It took thirty or so years to move that philosophy from the academia of Germany to America, but the result is that God has been taken out of the picture for many main stream people, or He has been relegated to an out- 29 dated extension of the human psyche. Secondly, there is a problem of a “too human” God unable to meet the demands and needs of messy and complicated up-to-date situations. Luther in the 16th century, in one of the famous debates of the Reformation, said to Erasmus, “Your God is too human.” It was not that he meant that God did not care for us, or that God did not come to us in the Person of his Son Jesus Christ, but that God is still gloriously sovereign and Creator Lord. As Jesus once said to a Samaritan woman, “God is Spirit, and they who worship him must worship in spirit and in truth.” God is not a “locationally” defined entity or deity! Esther shows us how God works in messy, secular, godless and difficult times. We have discovered four wonderful and transforming lessons in what we call the providence of God. First, God is actively and sovereignly involved on a “24/7” basis in our lives. God’s providence requires our responsible, sometimes courageous, faithfulness. Third, God sometimes throws obstacles in the path of obedience instead of clearing the way. And, God never wastes anything done under His sight. Let’s reconsider this fourth point once again. The Bible tells us that our God “numbers the hairs on your head” (Matthew 10:30); “counts the number of stars and names them” (:4); “feeds the birds of the air” (Matthew 6:26); knows when a sparrow dies (Matthew 10:29, 31), “clothes the grass and lilies of the field” (Matthew 6:30) and, get this, likes to be called “Daddy” by his followers! “For you did not receive a spirit that makes you a slave again to fear, but you received the Spirit of sonship/adoption. And by him we cry, Abba (Daddy), Father” (Romans 8:15) This God of the universe who has thrown the galaxies into existence comes close, and he wants us to come close to him on a 24/7 basis. This confronts a two-fold problem in my mind. For too many, God is either a “far-away” deity or just “selectively involved” in the affairs of life. An old Country & Western song, “From a Distance” views God as “out there” somewhere, watching us, but still “at a 30 distance.” The incisive Christian writer, A.W. Tozer, has rightly pointed out that many people, including many Christian people, have a serious problem in their definition or description of God. He said the problem is not belief in the of God (God is everywhere at once), but in the manifest presence of God. The book of Esther tells us that God is unmistakeably present in the details of life, and not just the “big” things. We can trust the God of daily details! So, for the final lesson of Esther — God accomplishes His will in spite of, and often through, our defective lives and plans. In all the major players in the book of Esther, God works this way. Look at the major characters. Xerxes — God uses a drunken, wicked, self-absorbed king who dismisses his previous Queen, on a whim, to marry Esther. This marriage was not based on her noble character, or heritage or upbringing, but simply and only because she was “hot!” Her natural, God-given beauty caught his eye and his lust, I might add. God used this to accomplish his will and eventually frustrate the evil plans of his vice-regent, Haman. God uses what man exalts and sinfully misuses to cause people to obey his will and fulfill his purposes. Haman — the Hitler of his day. His evil, superstitious and inflated ego is used by God for his undoing. He hated Mordecai, and all that this Jew stood for. He is proud, evil, ruthless and yet tremendously “religious!” Look at Esther 3:7 where he “casts lots.” He consults his horoscope to find the “right” month to commit genocide of the Jews. We are reminded here of Proverbs 16:4: “The Lord works out everything for his own ends, even the wicked for the day of disaster.” “The lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the Lord.” (Proverbs 16:33) “In his heart a man plans his course, but the Lord determines his steps.” (Proverbs 16:9) Even the “good” people of the story are not exempt. Mordecai is at fault for not bowing before the King’s appointed regent. The Scriptures tell us in Romans 13:7 to give “honor to whom honor is due,” not based on character qualities, but position and rank. 31 Notably, this lack of respect took place before Haman’s decision to exterminate the Jews in Persia. It was not a matter of worshipping Haman, but a matter of civil obedience and respect. Esther — she sinned against God by marrying a heathen king. “Do not intermarry with them. Do not give your daughters to their sons or take their daughters for your sons.” (Deuteronomy 7:3) This is reiterated in the New Testament in 2 Corinthians 6:14: “Do not be yoked together with unbelievers.” We can make excuses. We can say Esther had no choice. Well, that’s not true. If she was such a godly woman, she could have refused the king. She might have been killed, but she could have said “no.” Perhaps Mordecai rationalized they could better serve God from a place of royal advantage. Esther and Mordecai engaged in what we call “situation ethics” to justify, and then ask God for help! The greatest possible good never justifies the least deviation from God’s Word and commandments. Yes, God used their sin for His purposes, but we must never excuse or overlook their faults either. The second edict for the Jews “who were in every city gto gather and defend their lives, to destroy, to kill, and to annihilate any armed force of any people or province that might attack them, children and women included, and to plunder their goods,” (Esther 8:11) led to the killing of five hundred in the city of Susa (9:5) and 75,000 in the provinces (9:16). And then they had a party called the Purim! Bush says this was only “defensive” killing, noting that the Jews did not “lay their hands on the plunder” (9:10, 15).1 The point for me is that God, and God alone, gets all the glory and praise in the story, the historical account of Esther. We can learn three very practical lessons from “in spite of” providence here. First, God gives stability in unsettled times. This is the comfort of having and knowing a God of sovereign providence. He is there watching out and watching over us and our situations and lives. Then, we need to keep to right goals and purposes in the midst of godless misdirection. Just because we are in the midst of evil and cruel times does not give us a right to forsake God and his Word and 32 laws. My Jewish friends who read this will say they have a God-given right to defend themselves, to have a Jewish State, to go to war against their oppressors, anywhere and in any way. To say this is God’s will for the Jewish nation is stretching the truth of Scripture, and does not accord with the teaching of Jesus. Finally, we learn thankfulness and hope in the midst of hopelessness. “And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose.” “For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.” (Romans 8:28, 38, 39)

Discussion Study Esther 3:8-15; 8:7-9:15 Read UnChristian, Chapter 6 on “Sheltered”

1. Kinnaman quotes a 22 year-old who says that “Christians enjoy being in their own community. The more they seclude themselves, the less they can function in the real world. So many Christians are caught in the Christian ‘bubble’.” What do you think? Are we–are you–in a Christian “bubble?” 2. Mordecai and Esther were sincere Jews caught in a vastly godless and wicked society. They were put in perilous situations that perhaps compromised their faithful obedience to the true God. Review their lives and situations for yourself. What would you have done? 3. Why didn’t the edict issued by Mordecai reversing Haman’s edict (ch. 8) automatically stop Haman’s edict (Read Ch. 9)?

Notes 1. “This victory of the Jews has frequently been interpreted in a very negative light. Paton interprets 9:5 to mean that “all that 33 were known to be hostile to the Jews were hunted out and killed” (283). Pfeiffer voices the opinion that the author contemplates “a massacre of defenseless Gentiles on a given day, within a great peaceful empire, with the connivance of the central government” (Introduction, 741; cf. also Driver, Introduction, 485–86). Anderson, for all his helpful analysis of the theological meaning of the book, yet can aver that the “Jews, in their actions, are not essentially different from the heathen. Mordecai and Esther merely put Haman’s plan into reverse” (JR 30 [1950] 41). But this is a complete misreading of the actions of the Jewish forces in the narrative. The Jews’ actions are strictly defensive. They do not instigate the fighting, for they attack “those who sought to do them harm” (v 5). They do take offensive action, but such action would [vol. 09, p. 464] have been necessary against an enemy acting upon a decree that licensed their complete extermination (see the discussion of Clines’ views in the Comment on vv 1–5 above). As Fox demonstrates (220–26), their actions were necessary, defensive, and justified.” (Dr. Frederic W. Bush, Ruth-Esther, Volume 9, Word Biblical Commentary, David Allen Hubbard, Glenn W. Barker, John D. W. Watts, Ralph P. Martin, eds. , Zondervan, 2015.)

34 Postscript

35 36 Postscript Let God Be God!

od saves sinners! This statement no evangelical would deny or attempt to refute. It is held in highest esteem and deepest conviction among conservative Christians of whatever theologicalG persuasion. And yet it is precisely this statement that fuels the theology behind the providence of God. Historic simply seeks to state the foundations of the gospel as it applies to the eternal salvation of God’s people. Perhaps the most precise and penetrating summary of this salient point has been made by J.I. Packer: For to Calvinism there is really only one point to be made in the field of soteriology: the point that God saves sinners. God–the Triune Jehovah, Father, Son and Spirit; three Persons working together in sovereign wisdom, power and love to achieve the salvation of a chosen people, the Father electing, the Son fulfilling the Father’s will by redeeming, the Spirit executing the purpose of Father and Son by renewing. Saves–does everything, first to last, that is involved in bringing man from death in sin to life in glory: plans, achieves, and communicates redemption, calls and keeps, justifies, sanctifies, glorifies. Sinners–men as God finds them, guilty, vile, helpless, powerless, unable to lift a finger to do God’s will or better their spiritual lot. God saves sinners– and the force of this confession may not be weakened by disrupting the unity of the work of the Trinity, or by dividing the achievement of salvation between God and man and

37 making the decisive part man’s own, or by soft-pedalling the sinner’s inability so as to allow him to share the praise of his salvation with his Saviour.1 This is a formidable exposition of the meaning of the gospel. Those with another theological viewpoint are limited to defending what I would say is a “lower” view of God or, to put it another way, a “higher” view of humankind than the Bible paints. Some see Packer’s statement as “boxing” God in, making men and women mere “puppets,” mere playthings in a universe already conceived, planned and whose end is already set. There is no room for human creativity, human accomplishment, human ingenuity, human will. Men and women are players on the stage of life pre-ordained and merely serving out their God-defined destinies. And many would say how limiting, how negative, how futile it all seems to be if the Calvinistic description of God and salvation are true.

Why does God save people anyway? So then, why does God save anybody? To me, this is the “continental divide” in Christianity. For the non-Calvinist, God saves people primarily because of his love. It is his vast, unbounded, great and gracious love that men and women see, especially in the sacrifice of Christ, and many therefore choose to follow Him. A catalog of sermons in the evangelical world would show a preponderance of the “love of God” in them. There is little doubt this is the defining theology of salvation in their conceptions, sermons, writings, blogs, emails and social networks. On the other hand, if Calvinists are true to their theology, God saves people primarily for Himself! God transforms lives for his own glory, honor, praise and worship. To be sure, He obviously loves people He chooses to save. He draws them with cords of love; out of love, He has given them his own Son as a sacrifice of atonement and life. He loves them, not because He must, but because He wants to in an unconditional way. But He does all of this for Himself. And this is what God as God must do, since there is no other or higher motive 38 or power or force. Non-Calvinists would pay lip service to the glory of God, but it is not the defining force of salvation for them. This is a problem not merely of theological insight but of perception. All Christians perceive God to be who they think He is. So, God cannot condemn infants and children dying before a certain age, not because of any Scripture verse that definitively says so, but because of our perception of God. I am not suggesting or even hinting at making a theological point here about infants or children dying young,2 but rather to say that our view of God is “bottom up” in many cases rather than “top down.” Instead of submitting to God as He defines or describes himself, we gravitate to what we think is fair, or just, or loving, or holy, or great, or good. The early church certainly did not view God this way. As the early believers were praying about the news recently shared by Peter and John about Jewish threats against preaching the resurrected Jesus, they began with “Sovereign Lord” (Acts 4:24). The term used here means “despot” or absolute ruler.3 They began their prayer not with their situation, not with Peter and John’s safety, not with their desire for gospel success, but with the name, the glory, the power and the pre-eminence of God Himself. They were God-centered in their attitudes, desires and plans. In Acts 16 Paul and Silas are in prison, not bemoaning their state of captivity, but “praying and signing to God” (Acts 16:25). They were more interested in pleasing God, in serving God, in honoring God and spreading the gospel than in their own personal safety and deliverance. They had a God-centered point of view and approach to ministry. God wonderfully saved the jailor and his family (Acts 16:31–34). They let God be God in their situations. What has changed through the ages is not God. What has changed has been our view of God, our approach to God and our declaration of God to our world. We have succumbed to man-centered views of God and his gospel. We have attempted to make God more “palatable” to seekers and in the process have stripped God of his glory, power and ability to reach into cultures and situations. 39 The character of God In their book, Why I Am Not A Calvinist, Jerry Walls and Dongell maintain that who God is stands at the heart of the division between Calvinists and non-Calvinists: Although we would agree that a portion of the dispute swirls around the topic of sovereignty and human freedom, we contend that the truly fundamental dispute is not over power but rather over God’s character. Our motivation for writing this book is not our desire to present a case for human liberty. . . . The fundamental issue here is which theological paradigm does a better job of representing the biblical picture of God’s character: which theological system gives a more adequate account of the biblical God whose nature is holy love?4 They go on to say the issue is not the power of God but rather “what it means to say he is perfectly loving and good.”5 Because God is perfect love, and genuine love demands true freedom, what God could have done with human beings is not what He would do given his character. Because his nature is love, “he genuinely loves all persons and genuinely invites them to share his love (Jn. 3:16; 14:19–21, 23; 1 Jn. 2:2; 4:7–12).”6 God’s love is the supreme attribute, in other words, and must never be subjugated to God’s will, as he believes Calvinists have done. The breathtaking vision of God’s trinitarian love is obscured by the Calvinist claim that God passes over persons he could just as easily save and thereby consigns them to eternal misery. The exhilarating message of the gospel that should be good news to all sinners is muted by the Calvinist claim that only the elect are truly able to join the dance. . . . When love is subordinated to will, then the fatherhood of God, which is emphasized in the Trinity (Mk 1:11; Jn 1:18; 5:19–20; 17:20– 26; 20:17; 1 Cor 15:20–28), takes a back seat to the image of God as King or Ruler. God’s essential relational nature as a being who exists in three persons becomes secondary to the notion that God is a sovereign monarch whose will cannot 40 be thwarted.7 So, instead of the question “How does a sovereign God love?” the real question, according to these authors is, “How would a God of perfect love express his sovereignty?”8 The problem, however, with these authors and others who write in the same vein is that they do not really biblically prove their point! Their philosophical problems with limitation of human freedom taint their view of God and his sovereignty. Biblical declarations of who God is are not only too narrowly defined by “God is love” (1 John 4:8), but also by a complete biblical-theological misunderstanding of the compassionate, yet sovereign, God who is “compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, abounding in love” (:8). Let’s unpack this further. First, the “God is” statements in the Bible. In the New Testament, “God is” not only love, but also “light” (1 John 1:5), “consuming fire” (Hebrews 12:29 quoting Deuteronomy 4:24), “just” (2 Thessalonians 1:6; Hebrews 6:10), “faithful” (1 Corinthians 10:13; 2 Corinthians 1:18), “spirit” (John 4:24), and “truthful” (John 3:33). In the Old Testament, God’s nature as “love” is fused with His character as “truthfulness” (Numbers 23:19), holy “jealousy” (Deut. 4:24), the “faithful, God” (Deut. 7:9), “mighty” and “awesome” (Deut. 10:17; cf. Job 36:5), a “righteous judge” (:11), the “king of all the earth” (:7; cf. Daniel 5:21), and “holy” (:9). Sovereign, creative strength and justice aligned with mercy, grace and faithfulness to His people characterize the God of the Bible. To claim “love” as the predominant character trait of God is to do injustice to His other attributes. Then there is the biblical-theological problem with Walls and Dongell and others who exalt God’s love as primary. God’s primary relationship to His creation and His people is that of a “covenant Lord” – “Know therefore that the Lord your God is God; he is the faithful God, keeping his covenant of love to a thousand generations of those who love him and keep his commands. But those who hate him he will repay to their face by destruction . . .” (Deuteronomy 7:9, 10; 32; cf. Exodus 34; 31:31). God acts as covenant 41 Lord over His people, not just over Israel of old, but over His people everywhere and in every time and culture. That covenant-kingship includes judgment as well as love, discipline and rebuke as well as mercy and encouragement. This overriding and unifying biblical theme is often missed in discussions on the character of God.9 To re-use Walls and Dongell’s own words, God is a “sovereign monarch whose will cannot be thwarted!” His covenantal character demands such a primary description. God is relational, but relational as my Creator-Lord, over me, ruling me, guiding me, and doing what is best for me, even if that means rebuke, discipline and re-direction. And, those who are not His people, not walking in covenantal obedience, He will ultimately judge and condemn.

Tracing our problem Why are we so subjectively oriented in such a discussion of God and His character? How did we go from an objective, absolute standard of God to a “personal” view of God? Why do we think about God so differently than our biblical forefathers? To answer these questions we must trace the history of thought and discussions about God. To discuss this subject in any depth is beyond the purpose of this booklet, but a summary can be helpful. Our Reformation forefathers of the faith thought of God in sovereign, Creatorship terms and actions. Creatures, such as we are, must “think God’s thoughts after him.”10 He alone defines the standards and sets the truth in order. He is the Potter; we are the clay. We have no right to question Him, or to put his attributes to the test or pit them against each other. God is a just, holy, powerful, loving, merciful Being whose sovereign will is something we submit to gladly. As the Westminster Confession summarized it, There is but one only, living, and true God, who is infinite in being and perfection, a most pure spirit, invisible, without body, parts or passions; immutable, immense, eternal, incomprehensible, almighty, most wise, most holy, most free, most absolute; working all things according to 42 the counsel of His own immutable and most righteous will, for His own glory; most loving, gracious, merciful, long-suffering, abundant in goodness and truth, forgiving inquity, transgression, and sin; the rewarder of them that diligently seek Him; and withal, most just, and terrible in His judgments, hating all sin, and who will by no means clear the guilty.11 God is totally independent of his creation, but humankind is totally dependent upon God. Matter is not eternal but created by an all- wise, all-powerful Creator God. Time is not meaningless chance occurrences but directed by God. Reasoning moved from God- the-Creator to God-the-Controller to God-the-Consummator (cf. Romans 11:36; See Diagram 1).

God the Creator “of Him”

The Christian’s Circular Reasoning God the (Romans 11:33-36) God the Consummation Controller “to Him” “through Him”

Diagram 1 Thus, the majority orthodox understanding of the nature of God held Him to be revelatory, knowable and absolute. To be sure, there were variations in theological understanding among orthodox writers, but most agreed as to the high view of God described in this postscript. Theological Germany, however, became more and more “liberalized” by Enlightenment rationalistic thinking. Gladdened by the availability of the Bible in the common language and availability of texts of the New Testament, theological scholarship began to dispute the orthodox understanding of the text of the Bible. “Higher criticism” replaced biblically defined categories and

43 standards.12 Major thinkers in the steps of Immanuel Kant, Friedrich Schleiermacher and Søren Kierkegaard moved God out of the realm of the definable, knowable, objective categories of thought and belief to an anthropocentric projection or encounter.13 The supernatural was either denied or relegated to an unreachable and unknowable realm of thought and life (See Diagram 2). In America, the social gospel replaced the “faith once delivered to the saints” (Jude 3).1

My projection (of “God”) “of me” The nonChristian’s Circular Reasoning I ultimately (”I think, I determine benefit therefore I am.”) my destiny “to me” “through me”

Diagram 2 Pietistic reactions to this rejection of God-revealed truth emphasized holy living and devotional warmth toward God. C.I. Scofield, J. Gresham Machen and others sought to defend the biblical faith and absolute truth.15 As the evangelical world moved toward separatism from mainline denominationalism and from their anti- supernatural rationalism, others sought to either defend the Bible or eclipse the whole argument by focusing on spiritual gifts and intimacy with God. The charismatic movement erupted onto the scene in many churches and denominational settings. Devotional writers talked about closeness to God, experiencing God, sensing God and subjective spiritual renewal. Many Christians consequently went from a highly objectifiable, definable view of God and his character to a subjective, highly emotional viewpoint. Discussions as to the knowability of God degenerated into “how to’s” – how to live for God, how to experience God, how to get close to God, how to connect with God. Thus the shift from “how does a sovereignly defined and described God love 44 human beings” to “how does a loving God express his sovereignty over human beings.” The focus had shifted. Modernism had done its nasty work. God had become de-throned. Postmodernism added to the mix a rejection of absolute, objective truth about God to “my” truth about God, what God means to me, not what He means over me. Spirituality was no longer a biblically defined category but a “human” category in which I define what it means to be spiritual. God was not only de-throned but stripped of his revelatory status. And the beat goes on. Today, fundamentalist Christians have retreated into their safe cocoons of separatism shielded from the discussions and debates on the nature of God. Many other evangelicals are no longer interested in defending and delineating the character of God. Congregations and individual Christians end up seeing God vastly differently than their forefathers of the faith did. Rather than declaring a sovereign God, we end up seeking to make Him subjectively palatable to the modern mind. Our problem, consequently, in discussing God is us! Instead of “thinking God’s thoughts after Him,” we think His thoughts for Him! I am reminded of what we have discovered in the Letter to the Romans, namely at the pervasive, me-centered, sinful nature of the human heart. It’s still the same sin-soaked heart at work when we discuss the nature of God. We have much to learn of what the legendary John Bunyan once said, “There, but for the grace of God, go I.”

Footnotes LET GOD BE GOD

1J.I. Packer, Introductory Essay to John Owen’s The Death of Death in the Death of Christ, Monograph reprint, Essay found in the “Introduction” to John Owen, The Death of Death in the Death of Christ: A Treatise in Which the Whole Controversy about Universal Redemption is Fully Discussed, Banner of Truth, 1959, p. 6. 2True to their consistency, The Westminster Confession of Faith writers deal with this issue in the following way: “Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated,

45 and saved by Christ, through the Spirit, who worketh when, and where, and how He pleaseth: so also are all other elect persons who are uncapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word (cf. Luke 18:15, 16; Acts 2:38, 39; John 3:3, 5; 1 John 5:12; Romans 8:9; John 3:8; 1 John 5:12; Acts 4:12),” The Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter X, “Of Effectual Calling,” Section III, The Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland edition, 1967. 3The Greek word is despot, meaning master, ruler, slave owner – “one who owns and/or controls the activities of slaves, servants, or subjects, with the implication of absolute, and in some instances, arbitrary jurisdiction,” Johannes P. Louw and Eugene A. Nida, eds., Greek English Lexicon of the New Testament, United Bible Societies, 1988, 1989. 4Jerry L. Walls and Joseph R. Dongell, Why I Am Not A Calvinist, InterVarsity Press, 2004, p. 8. 5Walls and Dongell, p. 217. 6Walls and Dongell, p. 219. 7Walls and Dongell, pp. 220 and 219. 8Walls and Dongell, p. 219. 9Such an understanding contradicts a simplistic division of Old Testament versus New Testament and a more or less Dispensational understanding of segmented periods or dispensations of God’s dealings with his people. For a thorough understanding of the unity of the Bible and how we understand God as the covenant-keeping sovereign of his people, see Geerhardus Vos, Biblical Theology: Old and New Testaments, Banner of Truth, 1975 reprint; Meredith Kline, The Structure of Biblical Authority, Wipf & Stock, 1997 reprint; Scott J. Hafemann and Paul R. House, eds, Central Themes in Biblical Theology: Mapping Unity in Diversity, InterVarsity Press, 2007. 10While historically attributed to Johannes Kepler, the phrase “think God’s thoughts after Him” acquired its truest meaning via the fully Reformational doctrines of God and of man. The Reformational ideal was best carried into the twentieth century by Cornelius Van Til, who made liberal use of this phrase. He explains, for example: “The system that Christians seek to obtain may be said to be analogical. By this is meant that God is the original and that man is the derivative. God has absolute self-contained system within himself. What comes to pass in history happens in accord with that system or plan by which he orders the universe. But man, as God’s creature, cannot have a replica of that system of God. He cannot have a reproduction of that system. He must, to be sure, think God’s thoughts after him; but this means that he must, in seeking to form his own system, constantly be subject to the authority of God’s system to the extent that this is revealed to him.” (Cornelius Van Til, A Christian Theory of Knowledge, Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1969, p. 16) 11The Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter 2, “Of God and of the Holy Trinity,” Section 1, The Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland edition, 1967.

46 12“Higher criticism” refers to the “work of German biblical scholars of the Tübingen School. After the path-breaking work on the New Testament by Friedrich Schleiermacher (1768–1834), the next generation – which included scholars such as David Friedrich Strauss (1808–74) and Ludwig Feuerbach (1804–72) – in the mid-19th century analyzed the historical records of the Middle East from Christian and Old Testament times in search of independent confirmation of events related in the Bible. These latter scholars built on the tradition of Enlightenment and Rationalist thinkers such as John Locke, David Hume, Immanuel Kant, Gotthold Lessing, Gottlieb Fichte, G. W. F. Hegel and the French rationalists.” Such criticism often has repudiated the supernaturally inspired view of the Scriptures to which most evangelicals adhere. Higher criticism is to be distinguished from “lower criticism,” or , in which the biblical are examined according to ancient documents to seek to obtain the reading closest to the original Greek or Hebrew. Thus, the variant readings in the footnotes of many New Testament Greek are there to seek to establish the text without prejudice or theological position. (See “Higher Criticism,” Wikipedia article, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higher_criticism.) 13These three thinkers negatively affected conservative, or orthodox, theological scolarship in the nineteenth century. Schleiermacher (1768–1834) “was a German theologian and philosopher known for his attempt to reconcile the criticisms of the Enlightenment with traditional Protestant orthodoxy. He also became influential in the evolution of Higher Criticism. His work also forms part of the foundation of the modern field of hermeneutics. Because of his profound impact on subsequent Christian thought, he is often called the ‘Father of Modern Liberal Theology.’” (See article in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Schleiermacher) Kierkegaard (1813–1855) “primarily discussed subjectivity with regard to religious matters. He argues that doubt is an element of faith and that it is impossible to gain any objective certainty about religious doctrines such as the existence of God or the life of Christ. The most one could hope for would be the conclusion that it is probable that the Christian doctrines are true, but if a person were to believe such doctrines only to the degree they seemed likely to be true, he or she would not be genuinely religious at all. Faith consists in a subjective relation of absolute commitment to these doctrines.” (See http://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Søren_Kierkegaard) Immanuel Kant (1724–1804), a German philosopher, postulated that “because of the limitations of argumentation in the absence of irrefutable evidence, no one could really know whether there is a God and an afterlife or not. For the sake of society and morality, Kant asserted, people are reasonably justified in believing in them, even though they could never know for sure whether they are real or not.” (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanuel_Kant) Kant proposed a “noumenal” world where God might exist if He exists at all, and a “phenomenal” world of sense and experience. The problem is that there is an uncrossable “line” between the worlds. Consequently, “God” cannot objectively influence or speak into the world of sense and experience. No one can really know for sure if there is a God

47 and an eternity. “With regard to morality, Kant argued that the source of the good not in anything outside the human subject, either in nature or given by God, but rather is only the good will itself. A good will is one that acts from duty in accordance with the universal moral law that the autonomous human being freely gives itself. This law obliges one to treat humanity – understood as rational agency, and represented through oneself as well as others – as an end in itself rather than (merely) as means to other ends the individual might hold. These ideas have largely framed or influenced all subsequent philosophical discussion and analysis.” (ibid) 14An overview of the social gospel and its ethics can be found in Gary L. Dorrien, Social Ethics in the Making: Interpreting an American Tradition, Wiley- Blackwell, 2010 and Charles Hopkins, The Rise of the Social Gospel in American , 1865-1915 (Yale Studies in Religious Education), 1967. A modern evangelical interpretation has been offered by Tim Suttle, An Evangelical Social Gospel? Finding God’s Story in the Midst of Extremes, Cascade Books, 2011. 15These two conservative evangelical leaders, at opposite poles theologically, sought to stem the rising tide of liberalism in America. J. Gresham Machen repudiated the growing liberalism of Princeton Seminary and founded Westminster Theological Seminary (Philadelphia). He wrote an important work at the time, Christianity and Liberalism, Eerdmans, 2009 (revised edition, originally published in 1923). C.I. Scofield, author of the Scofield Study Bible, in which he outlined the major points of fundamentalist dispensationalism, vigorously defended the orthodox faith against liberalism in the Congregational churches of New England and others.

48 Other Titles by the Author

49 50 Jonah: A Reluctant Messenger, A Needy People, and God’s Amazing Grace, A Bible Study, 2017. A Bible study and discussion guide on the Old Testament story of Jonah. Grace transforms everything it touches. It does not discriminate, based on race, tradition, church experience, selectability, preference, timing or worth. There is no sin so great that grace cannot conquer and transform. There is no life so lost that grace cannot fi nd and reclaim it. There is no one so wicked or unworthy that grace cannot totally change and renovate. This study of Jonah shows God’s amazing, mighty and magnifi cent grace. Available from lulu.com, amazon.com and other booksellers.

51 Romans: The Glory of God As Seen in the Righteousness of God, A Thematic Bible Study, 2017. A Bible study book on Romans with Leader’s Notes. The study is arranged according to the themes of Paul’s Letter to the Romans. “Righteousness From A Sovereign God,” “Universal Guilt,” “Gospel Benefi ts,” “Sanctifi cation: God’s Picture of Righteousness In Our Lives,” “Sovereignty: God’s Sovereignty Leads to Grateful Praise and Gospel Love,” “Understanding God’s Sovereign Purposes,” “God Is Not Through With Israel,” “Living Sacrifi ces,” “The Politically Correct Christian,” and “Liberty Not License.” Available from amazon.com and other booksellers.

52 Making Christianity Work: Letters and Lessons on Leadership, Theology and the Church, 2012. Insights shared by the author from letters, emails and various mentoring situations involving a number of lay and professional ministry leaders over an almost forty year span. Sections include “Feelings About God and Life,” “Knowing God Better,” “Faith and Culture,” “On Church Health and Growth,” “On Church Diffi culties,” “On Preaching and Teaching,” and “On Theology.” Available from amazon.com and other booksellers.

53 Upfront and Indepth: Deeper Devotional Studies on Psalm 119, 2010. This little exposition of Psalm 119 unlocks some of the deeper truths of the longest Psalm recorded in the Bible. Not for the tame, or for a quick read, this devotional study will challenge you to personally go places you have never visited within your own walk with God. Available from amazon.com and other booksellers.

54 Daily Insights: Daily Devotional Comments for Christian Leaders and Workers, 2010. A selection of daily devotionals for Christians wanting to know how to go deeper with God on very practical matters such as character, leadership and spirituality. Gleaned from the author’s daily devotionals. Available from lulu.com and amazon.com and other booksellers.

55 The In-Between Book for Church Leaders: What You Need to Know and Do To Get To Where You Want To Be, 2013. For leaders of smaller to mid-sized churches seeking to go from where they are to where they may want to be. Sections include “Fighting the Three Ds,” “Attending to the Five Cs,” “Is This What God Really Wants?,” “The Role of Godly Complaining,” “Intentional Patience,” “Mentoring Not Modeling,” and “Stop Whining!” Available from lulu.com and amazon.com and other booksellers.

56 Living Life God’s Way: Re ections from the Psalms, 2016. This is a study guide for selected Psalms from the Bible. It’s fi ll-in-the blanks format is perfect for a small group study, or even a personal study of the Psalms. It references 67 of the most read Psalms and includes a special study of . A selection of “Psalms for Christmas” is included in the study. Available from lulu.com and amazon.com and other booksellers. A Leader’s Guide is also available.

57 58