Introduction

For many of us, the most we know of “burnt offerings” is from the jokes which are told by husbands pertaining to the “burnt offerings” of their wives. The ancient Israelite knew much more about burnt offerings, much thanks to the Book of Leviticus. The burnt offering is the first, and one of the most significant offerings.

The burnt offering, along with the others described in Leviticus 1-7, was offered on the bronze altar of burnt offering, the plans for which God gave Moses in the Book of Exodus:

And you shall make the altar of acacia wood, five cubits long and five cubits wide; the altar shall be square, and its height shall be three cubits. And you shall make its horns on its four corners; its horns shall be of one piece with it, and you shall overlay it with bronze. And you shall make its pails for removing its ashes, and its shovels and its basins and its forks and its fire pans; you shall make all its utensils of bronze. And you shall make for it a grating of network of bronze; and on the net you shall make four bronze rings at its four corners. And you shall put it beneath, under the ledge of the altar, that the net may reach halfway up the altar. And you shall make poles for the altar, poles of acacia wood, and overlay them with bronze. And its poles shall be inserted into the rings, so that the poles shall be on the two sides of the altar when it is carried. You shall make it hollow with planks; as it was shown to you in the mountain, so they shall make it (Exod. 27:1-8; cf. also 38:1-7).

The altar for the burnt offerings was thus made of acacia wood, overlaid with bronze, being nearly 8 feet square and about 4 and a half feet high.²¹ It was a very large altar indeed, but certainly not too large considering the large number of sacrifices and offerings which it was required to facilitate.

As one entered the courtyard of the tabernacle through the gate, the altar of burnt offering would be the first of the tabernacle furnishings to be encountered as one approached the tabernacle proper. To the left of the altar would be the ash heap, where the ashes from the altar were placed (cf. Lev. 1:16). Between the altar and the tabernacle doorway was the bronze laver (30:17-21; 38:8), where Aaron and his sons cleansed themselves. Then, there was the doorway to the tabernacle. Since the altar was located at the approach to the tabernacle, the sacrifices enabled men to draw near to God who dwelt in the tabernacle, and who spoke to Moses from within it (Lev. 1:1).

The purpose of this lesson is to study the first of the sacrifices regulated by chapters 1-7 of Leviticus. We will first make several observations about this sacrifice; then we will attempt to pursue the meaning of the burnt offering for the Israelite, and then we will seek to determine its meaning and application to the New Testament Christian.

As we seek to study the sacrifices of Leviticus, we will focus on two aspects of each. First, we will seek to see the continuity of one sacrifice to the rest. That is, we will seek to learn how a particular sacrifice is like the others. Secondly, we will seek to discern the unique contribution of each sacrifice. That is, we will attempt to determine how each sacrifice is distinct and unique from the others. I believe this two-fold approach will provide us with the key to understanding the sacrifices.

Observations Concerning the Burnt Offerings

The following observations will provide us with the raw material necessary for understanding the significance of the burnt offering of Leviticus chapter 1 (cf. the “law of the burnt offering” in Lev. 6:8-13):

(1) The burnt offering does not originate in Leviticus, but is found early in the Book of Genesis. It is incorrect to suppose that the burnt offering originates in Leviticus. Consulting a concordance will show that the first occurrence of the burnt offering is found in Genesis chapter 8. The first “burnt offering”²² was that offered by Noah after the flood waters had subsided, at which time he offered “burnt offerings” of all the clean²³ animals (Gen. 8:20). God instructed Abraham to offer up Isaac as a “burnt offering” (Gen. 22:2ff.), and so the ram which God in Isaac’s place was offered by Abraham as a burnt offering (Gen. 22:13). When Moses told Pharaoh that Israel must take their cattle with them into the wilderness to worship their God, it was because they needed them to offer burnt offerings (Exod. 10:25-26). Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, offered a burnt offering to God in Exodus chapter 18 (v. 12). The Israelites offered up burnt offerings in conjunction with their meeting with God and receiving His covenant on Mt. Sinai (Exod. 20:24; 24:5, etc.). Unfortunately, when the Israelites worshipped the golden calf they offered up burnt offerings as a part of their false worship (Exod. 32:6).

It is my contention that it is these earlier references to the burnt offering in Genesis and Exodus which provided the Israelites with the key to understanding the meaning and significance of the burnt offering regulated in Leviticus chapter 1. We will demonstrate this fact a little later in this message.

(2) The burnt offering regulated in Leviticus chapter 1 was viewed primarily as a personal offering, done voluntarily by the individual Israelite.²⁴ Elsewhere, the burnt offering is often a corporate offering, but as it is regulated in Leviticus 1 it is viewed as a personal, private offering. Thus, verse 2 reads, “Speak to the sons of Israel and say to them, ‘When any man of you brings an offering to the LORD, you shall bring your offering of animals from the herd or the flock’” (Lev. 1:2). From here on, the personal pronoun “he” is employed, referring to this individual Israelite, who comes with the burnt offering. It is also apparent that it was only the males who could make these offerings to the Lord. It seems that they represented their families (cp. Job 1:5).

(3) The burnt offering is one of the most common offerings, which is offered on a great variety of occasions, often in conjunction with another sacrifice or offering. The major purpose of Leviticus 1 is to instruct the Israelites how the burnt offering is to be offered, but they also needed to know when it should be offered. We find the answer to this question elsewhere in the Pentateuch. I will summarize the occasions on which the burnt offering was appropriate or required.

There were the regularly scheduled times for the burnt offering. Burnt offerings were to be made every day, in the morning and the evening (Exod 29:38-42; Num. 28:3, 6, cf. 2 Chron. 2:4, etc.). An additional burnt offering was to be offered up each Sabbath day (Num. 28:9-10). Also, at the beginning of each month (Num. 28:11), at the celebration of Passover on the 14th day of the 1st month (Num. 28:16), along with new grain offering at Feast of Weeks (Num. 28:27), at the feast of trumpets, on sacred day in the 7th month (Num. 29:1ff.), and for the celebration of the new moon (Num. 29:6).²⁵

A burnt offering was often offered in conjunction with another sacrifice. Among these were the guilt offering (Lev. 5:7, 10, 17-18), the sin offering (cf. Lev. 5:7; 6:25; 9:2-3, 7; 12:6, 8), the votive or freewill offering (Lev. 22:18), the sheaf offering (Lev. 23:12), and the new grain offering (Lev. 23:15-22, esp. v. 18).

There were a number of occasions when a sacrifice was required for cleansing, of which the burnt offering was one of the sacrifices offered. The burnt offering was required in the cleansing of a woman’s uncleanness as a result of child-bearing (both a sin offering and a burnt offering were required, Lev. 12:6-8), of a leper (Lev. 14:19-20), of a man with a discharge (with a sin offering, Lev. 15:14-15), of a woman with an abnormal discharge (with a sin offering, Lev. 15:30), and of a Nazarite who was unintentionally defiled by contact with a dead body (Num. 6:11, 14). When the congregation unwittingly failed to observe one of God’s commands, and was thereby defiled, a burnt offering was required for the purification of the congregation (Num. 15:22-26). A burnt offering was required for the purification and consecration of Aaron (Lev. 16:3, 5, 24), as well as the Levites (Num. 8:12).

In addition to this, there were special times at which the burnt offering was appropriate. Then, there were times when this sacrifice could be offered voluntarily. The bottom line is that this sacrifice was the most common of all sacrifices in Israel:

The reason for describing the burnt offering first is that it was the commonest of all the sacrifices, performed every morning and evening, and more frequently on holy days. … This makes it plausible to suppose that the sacrifices in chs. 1-5 are arranged according to their various theological concepts, so that it is easier to remember their distinctive features. It may be that they were grouped in this way to help the priests learn their tasks.²⁶

(4) The burnt offering was a whole “burnt offering,” which was totally consumed on the altar. Most of the sacrifices benefited the offerer and the priests, in addition to being pleasing to God. Sometimes, the offerer would eat some of the meat of the sacrificial animal, and most often the priest received a portion of it. Thus, when one offered a sacrifice to God, one’s mouth would water, knowing that he would be able to partake of the sacrifice. Not so in the case of the burnt offering, however. Neither the offerer nor the priest partook of any of the meat, for it was all burned in the fire. The hide of the animal was the priest’s only remuneration (cf. Lev. 7:8).

Incidentally, in verse 2 the Hebrew word used for an offering is “corban,” which is referred to by our Lord in Mark 7:11, providing us with an interesting and helpful insight into the evil practiced by the scribes and Pharisees when they called a possession “corban” to keep from having to provide for their parents in their old age.

(5) The regulations for the burnt offering (as well as the other offerings) are very important, and violations are taken very seriously. The way in which one offers any of the sacrifices described in chapters 1-7 must follow God’s regulations precisely. One need only read of the death of Nadab and Abihu in chapter 10 to have this point vividly underscored (cf. also Lev. 17:8-9).

(6) There are three types of animals to sacrifice in the burnt offering.²⁷ The three types of animals, and the specific regulations pertaining to each, provides the structure for chapter 1: (1) Offerings from the herd (bull), vv. 3-9. (2) Offerings from the flock (a sheep or a goat), vv. 10-13. (3) Offerings of birds (turtledoves or pigeons), vv. 14-17. It would seem that the principal reason for providing several sacrificial animals is that the poor could not afford to sacrifice a bull (cf. 14:21-22, 31, where being poor is given as basis for reduction in sacrifice demanded by God).

(7) The animal to be offered in the burnt offering was always to be of the highest quality. A bull, a sheep, or a goat, were all livestock of considerable value.²⁸ With the exception of the birds which could be offered for a burnt offering, the animal must be a male of the flock (v. 10) or the herd (v. 3).²⁹ The animal was to be young, not a old, unproductive, useless creature, fit only for soup or for the proverbial “glue factory.” In fact, it is my impression that the animals were just at the point where they would begin to “pay for their keep.” It truly would be a sacrifice to offer up an animal which one had raised, which was about to be productive, and was thus valuable.

(8) There is an alternation between the activity of the priest and the offerer. As you read the regulations in Leviticus 1 pertaining to the burnt offering you notice an intermingling of involvement between the offerer and the priest(s). While the offering of the birds is somewhat different (it is not nearly so complicated a process), the offerer generally puts the animal to death and cuts it up, while the priest handles the sprinkling of its blood and its burning on the altar of sacrifice. The offerer is much more involved in the process of sacrifice than we might think.³⁰ Sacrifice was, for the offerer, a very personal experience. This was intended, I believe, to make an impression on the Israelite who was making his sacrifice.

(9) The purpose of the burnt offering was to make atonement for the sin of the offerer and thus to gain God’s acceptance. The offerer laid his hands upon the animal, identifying with it.³¹ More specifically, he identified his sins with the animal. Thus, when the animal was slain (by the hand of the offerer) it died for the sins of the offerer. It is not so much for the offerer’s specific sins (which are dealt with by other sacrifices), but rather for the offerer’s general state of sinfulness.³²

The burnt offering was required by, and served to remind the offerer of, his depravity. The burnt offering was thus not so much to gain forgiveness for a particular sin, but to make atonement for the offerer’s sinfulness. It was not just a certain sin which required men to remain separated from God, but the individual’s sinful state. The burnt offering seems to provide a divine solution for man’s fallen condition.

Burnt Offerings and the Ancient Israelite

When we come to the point of trying to discern the meaning of the burnt offering (or any other offering, for that matter) to the Israelites of Moses’ day, we tend to forget a very important fact: they understood this sacrifice in the light of what they already knew about it, not in terms of its future fulfillment. We often impose our viewpoint and interpretation on the Israelites of old by interpreting the meaning of an Old Testament text in the light of the coming of Christ. We must remember, however, that Christ’s coming, life, death, and resurrection is a past event for us, but a future event for the Israelites. They (like Christians today) had to interpret God’s Word in the light of what God had already said and done.

Thus, the key to understanding the meaning of the burnt offering for the ancient Israelite was what had already been revealed about it before the regulations of Leviticus. Leviticus 1 informed the Israelite how the burnt offering was to be offered, not what it meant. I believe that the two major interpretive keys to the meaning of the burnt offering are to be found in the “burnt offerings” of Noah in Genesis 8 and of Abraham in Genesis 22.

In Genesis chapter 8, after the flood has destroyed all life on earth (except for what was in the ark), and after the water has subsided, we read:

Then Noah built an altar to the LORD, and took of every clean animal and of every clean bird and offered burnt offerings on the altar. And the LORD smelled the soothing aroma; and the LORD said to Himself, “I will never again curse the ground on account of man, for the intent of man’s heart is evil from his youth; and I will never again destroy every living thing, as I have done. While the earth remains, Seedtime and harvest, And cold and heat, And summer and winter, And day and night Shall not cease” (Gen. 8:20-22).

The relationship between this text and that of Leviticus can be seen by several lines of correspondence. First, the term “burnt offering” found in Genesis 8:20 is the same as that of Leviticus 1. Second, “clean” animals and birds are offered by Noah (Gen. 8:20). It is Leviticus which defines the difference between what is clean and what is not. Third, the offering is said to be a “soothing aroma” to God (Gen. 8:21), which is an expression similar to that found frequently in Leviticus, and more specifically in Leviticus chapter 1 (vv. 9, 13, 17).

The sacrifice which Noah offered was the basis for the covenantal promise of God that He would never again destroy every living thing by a flood again (Gen. 8:21). This promise was not due to the fact that all sin had been destroyed from the face of the earth. The fact of man’s depravity (as will soon be manifested in Noah and his family) is still present, for God can still say, “the intent of man’s heart is evil from his youth” (Gen. 8:21), a statement very similar to that of Exodus 32:9, where God told Moses, “I have seen this people, and behold, they are an obstinate people.”

The basis for God’s promise to Noah is not the goodness of man, for man’s depravity is specifically stated. This basis for God’s covenant promise is the result of the burnt offering offered up by Noah. Thus, the Israelites saw that the burnt offering was a means of avoiding God’s wrath and of obtaining God’s favor. God’s blessing was the result of a burnt offering, not of man’s good deeds.

The second interpretive key is found in the burnt offering of Abraham in Genesis 22. God summoned Abraham with this command: “Take now your son, your only son, whom you love, Isaac, and go to the land of Moriah; and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I will tell you” (Gen. 22:2).

We know from the account given by Moses that Abraham did as God commanded him. We know from the New Testament accounts that Abraham was willing to sacrifice his only son because he believed that God would raise him from the dead (cf. Rom. 4:19-21; Heb. 11:19). In God’s grace, He stopped Abraham from slaying his son, and provided a ram in his place (Gen. 22:13).

In what way did this account of the offering up of Isaac as a burnt offering instruct the Israelites about the meaning of the burnt offering? I believe that it taught them several important lessons. First, they could have seen that the promise of God’s blessing to all the earth, the promise of the Abrahamic Covenant (Gen. 12:1-3), involved the death and resurrection of Abraham’s offspring. Secondly, the Israelites saw that in the “burnt offering” the sacrificial animal died in place of the man. Isaac didn’t die because God provided an animal to take his place. So when the Israelite place his hand on the head of the sacrificial animal, he should have known that this animal was dying in his place, just as the ram died in the place of Isaac. He should also have seen that something must take place in the future, so that the death of Isaac, which was prevented by the sacrifice of the ram, could be carried out in some greater way.

All of this has become clear to the New Testament saint, but it was obscure to the ancient Israelite, who knew that God was at work in some mysterious and, as yet, unknown way. Until the time when this purpose was made known, the Israelite offered up his burnt offering, so that God’s wrath could be avoided, and so that God’s blessings could be received.

The Burnt Offering and the New Testament Saint

Regardless of what the ancient Israelite understood of the symbolism of the burnt offering in terms of its future fulfillment in Christ, Christ was the ultimate fulfillment, the antitype of the burnt offering. John the Baptist indicated this at the very outset of our Lord’s ministry, when he greeted Him with the words, “Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29).³³

We must agree with the theology of the Book of Hebrews (in particular) and of the New Testament (in general) that now that Christ has come as the Lamb of God and died “once for all” there is no longer any need for the burnt offering, the type of which our Lord is the ultimate and final antitype.

It might seem that if the burnt offering is no longer necessary, we must conclude that the burnt offering is no longer relevant, since the future meaning of that sacrifice has been realized in Christ. There is a sense in which this conclusion is absolutely correct. There is another sense in which this conclusion can be carried too far. Let me press on to show the importance and the applicability of the burnt offering to New Testament saints today.

The burnt offering (and the others, too) was symbolic in the sense that it represented and portrayed, in advance, the ultimate burnt offering, Jesus Christ. The burnt offering also symbolized the Old Testament saint’s faith in God’s provision for his sins, and for his access to God. The burnt offering symbolized the Old Testament saint’s faith in God, and his intention to love God with all his heart, soul, mind, and strength, and to love his neighbor as himself.

The Israelite’s worship often deteriorated to mere ritualism when the sacrifices were offered, but then the faith and obedience which they symbolized did not follow. When this happened, the prophets sternly rebuked the Israelites for their hypocrisy:

With what shall I come to the LORD And bow myself before the God on high? Shall I come to Him with burnt offerings, With yearling calves? Does the LORD take delight in thousands of rams, In ten thousand rivers of oil? Shall I present my first-born for my rebellious acts, The fruit of my body for the sin of my soul? He has told you, O man, what is good; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God? (Micah 6:6-8).

It is my contention that the faith and obedience of the Israelite, which the sacrifice of the burnt offering symbolized, and which was required by God of the Israelites, is the same faith and obedience which the death of Christ is to produce in all who profess Him as Savior, and which God requires of us. These acts of faith and obedience are described by the New Testament writers by the use of the same sacrificial terminology as is employed in the Old Testament.

Christian service, in church and in the community, is compared to sacrifice: “Through him let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God. … Do not neglect to do good and to share what you have, for such sacrifices are pleasing to God” (Heb. 13:15-16; cf. Phil. 4:18; 1 Pet. 2:5). In that the only burnt offering that can atone for sin has been made by Christ, Christians no longer have to bring their lambs to the altar to receive forgiveness of sins. But bringing a sacrifice involved praising God for his grace and declaring one’s intention to love God and keep his commandments. Now that animal sacrifice is obsolete, praise and good works by themselves constitute the proper sacrifices expected of a Christian.³⁴

Thus far, we have seen that the burnt offering and the other Old Testament sacrifices apply in the fulfillment of Christ as the “once for all” sacrifice for sinners, and in the faith and obedience of the offerer which the sacrifices symbolized. There is yet another way in which the sacrifices apply to us. The same principles which the sacrifices were intended to teach the Israelite and those which these sacrifices teach us, these principles still apply today, as much as in the days of the Israelite. Let me identify a few of these principles and suggest some of their practical implications to New Testament saints. As our study of Leviticus continues, we shall pursue these principles in greater detail.

(1) The principle of man’s depravity The burnt offering was not an offering for a specific sin, but was associated with other offerings, and with various occasions, from mourning and repentance, to celebration and joy. The purpose of this sacrifice, I believe, was to be a reminder to the Israelites of man’s depravity. As God Himself put it in Genesis 8:21, “the intent of man’s heart is evil from his youth.” In any instance when an Israelite wanted to approach God, to worship Him, to be accepted by Him, he had to come with a burnt offering, thus acknowledging and making provision for his sinfulness. We ought not forget our own depravity.

The principle applies equally to Christians today. While it is true that Christ died for our sins, once for all, it is also still true that we will not be freed from sin’s presence until we are in the presence of God, with transformed bodies. Our present condition is the reason why we must die, and to enter into heaven in a different form (cf. 1 Cor. 15). Because we are still corrupted by sin, we need to suspect and scrutinize our every motive and action. We need to realize that whether we are witnessing, preaching, or serving, our actions can appear to be pious, but can be prompted by the basest motives. We need to realize that we are in need of the present intercession and mediation of Christ, that we need Him every hour, yes every moment. The only reason why we can approach God is due to the sacrificial work of Christ.

(2) The principle of particularity. If the Israelite learned anything from the meticulous rules and regulations which God laid down for the burnt offering and all of the rest, it was that He is very particular about the way men approach Him. The rebellious nature of fallen man inclines him to want to approach God his own way. The song, “I did it my way,” illustrates this tendency. God did not allow men to approach Him their own way, but rather only in accordance with the means He Himself established. Men could only approach God by means of the tabernacle, the priesthood, and the sacrifices. Today, men can only come to God God’s way, through the person and work of Jesus Christ, who, as the sacrificial lamb, died for our sins, making a way of approach to God. Our Lord conveyed the exclusiveness of His death as the way to God when He said, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me” (John 14:6).

If you wish to approach God, to be assured of the forgiveness of your sins, and to dwell in His presence forever, my friend, you can do so only through faith in the person of Jesus Christ, who came to earth and died in your place. No other way is acceptable with God. In no other way can you be found acceptable in Him.

(3) The principle of acceptance with God. Closely related to this is the principle of acceptance with God. There is a great deal of emphasis these days on self-acceptance, or self-esteem, most of which is wrongly oriented. Contemporary self-esteem looks inward for acceptance, while the Bible tells us that the ultimate acceptance we must seek is God’s. People today want to “feel good about themselves” by looking for the good which is in them, while God’s word tells us that we are not good, in and of ourselves, but must look for God’s favor which is occasioned by something outside ourselves, ultimately in something which we put to death. Today we are told, even from the pulpit, that we must first feel good about ourselves, we must first love ourselves, and then we will be able to love God. The Bible tells us that we cannot, that we should not, accept ourselves until God has accepted us.

The bottom line is that the Bible portrays God’s acceptance as the highest good of all, and that making great sacrifice is worth the price to attain God’s favor. Let us see God’s approval as our highest good, and let us forsake all, including self-seeking and self-love to attain it. It is in our death, in Christ, that God is well pleased. It is in giving up our life that we gain life. And as Christians, no motive should be stronger than that of pleasing God, of hearing Him say to us in that day, “Well done, good and faithful servant.”

(4) The principle of atonement through the shedding of blood. The sinful state of man is dealt with by the shedding of innocent blood, the blood of a sacrificial victim. The burnt offering communicates and illustrates this principle of atonement.

(5) The principle of identification. The one who was to benefit from the death of the sacrificial victim had to identify with that animal. It was, first of all, his animal, one that he had either raised or obtained at a price. Then the offerer placed his hand upon the victim, symbolically identifying himself with the victim, which he killed in his place. Apart from identifying with the sacrificial animal in this way, the sacrifice had no benefit for the individual Israelite.

We, too, are redeemed, and atonement is made, when we identify ourselves with the Lord Jesus Christ in His death, burial, and resurrection. Baptism is the rite which God has established, whereby men identify personally with the work of Christ. Baptism does not, in and of itself, save men, but identification with Christ (which is symbolized and expressed by baptism) is the instrumentality God has ordained so that we may be delivered from the judgment we deserve. Those who have failed to be baptized may either fail in their understanding of the importance and urgency of this public act of identification, or they may not have personally identified with Christ by faith.

(6) The principle of sacrifice. One of the unique contributions of the whole burnt offering is that it illustrates sacrifice in its purest form. A very valuable animal is given up wholly to God. Neither the offerer nor the priest gains much from the offering, other than the benefit of being found acceptable to God, which, in the final analysis, is the ultimate benefit.

This kind of sacrifice is seldom practiced, and even when it is we may wonder at the wisdom of such waste. The widow who gave her last two mites might be criticized today for her lack of prudence in failing to plan and prepare for the future. The woman who poured out her expensive perfume, anointing the feet of the Lord, was accused of wastefulness. And so we tend to give our worn out old things to God, while we keep what is new and best for ourselves. We know little of giving our best to God, with no hope of anything beyond His approval.

But this kind of sacrifice is what God calls for from those who would be true disciples. Disciples are those who give up all to follow Christ. They are to count the cost of discipleship, and then to gladly pay it. When we give ourselves to God, as living sacrifices (Rom. 12:1-2), we are to do so totally, without reserve, so as to be pleasing to Him. May God enable us to practice this kind of sacrifice in our own lives.

---

²¹ “Outside the tent was found the large altar for burnt offerings, 7 ft. 6 inches (2.2 meters) square and 4 ft. 6 inches (1.3 meters) high, which is described in Exod. 27:1-8.” Gordon J. Wenham, The Book of Leviticus (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1979), pp. 52-53.

²² When I refer to the term “burnt offering” here I refer specifically to that offering which is designated by the same Hebrew term as is found in Leviticus chapter one.

²³ It is noteworthy that in this first account of a “burnt offering” the term “clean” appears, a term which is greatly clarified in Leviticus. Also, the sacrifice of the “burnt offering” offered by Noah was said to produce a “soothing aroma” to the Lord (Gen. 8:21), an expression frequently employed (at least in very similar terms) in Leviticus (e.g. 1:9, 17). This suggests that many of the practices which are regulated in Leviticus are not initiated here, but have their origin much earlier in the history of God’s dealings with men.

²⁴ “The following laws deal with offerings made by private persons. The public national sacrifices offered each day and at the festivals are listed in Num. 28-29. But here it is a question of a personal act of devotion or atonement.” Wenham, p. 50.

²⁵ Special times of offering burnt offerings are summarized in 2 Chronicles 8:13: “And did so according to the daily rule, offering them up according to the commandment of Moses, for the sabbaths, the new moons, and the three annual feasts—the Feast of Unleavened Bread, the Feast of Weeks, and the Feast of Booths” (cf. also 2 Chron. 31:3).

²⁶ Wenham, p. 52.

²⁷ Leviticus 1:2 makes it clear that only domesticated animals may be offered, and not wild game, which is (too) easily obtained.

²⁸ “Furthermore, only perfect animals were acceptable in worship (Lev. 1:3, 10; 22:18ff.). Only the best is good enough for God. The prophet Malachi later told those who offered second-rate animals that they were despising the Lord’s name and polluting his table … Meat was a rare luxury in OT times for all but the very rich (cf. Nathan’s parable, 2 Sam. 12:1-6). Yet even we might blanch if we saw a whole lamb or bull go up in smoke as a burnt offering. How much greater pangs must a poor Israelite have felt.” Wenham, p. 51.

²⁹ Wenham agrees that the male species is more highly valued: “Male animals were also regarded as more valuable than females. For example, in the case of purification offerings a ruler had to bring a he-goat, but an ordinary person was expected to offer only a she-goat (4:22-31). Except for the burnt offering and reparation offerings, animals of either sex could be offered: the limitation to male animals shows the high status of these two sacrifices.” Ibid., p. 55.

Harrison, however, disagrees: “Here and in 5:18 alone a male animal is specified for sacrifice. The choice of a male may reflect the dominance of that sex in other than matriarchal societies, but it may well have embraced a more pragmatic purpose also. Where a choice was involved, male animals were more expendable than females in a society in which livestock was equivalent to both capital and income. Fewer males than females were necessary for the survival of the herds and flocks, since the male was utilized only periodically for purposes of breeding. By contrast, the female functioned as a continual provider of milk and its by-products in addition to producing new livestock from time to time.” R. K. Harrison, Leviticus: An Introduction and Commentary (Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity Press, 1980), pp. 43-44.

I find Harrison’s reasoning hard to accept. The rarer animal (the male, by his admission) is the more expensive. Due to his role in the reproduction process, the male could reproduce many offspring, while the female would produce (normally) but one offspring. To give up a female was some loss; to give up the male, great loss. In either case, however, since the animals sacrificed were young, neither had yet produced for its owner. The owner was to sacrifice the animal just at that point in time when the animal was gaining value, after a period of what we might call “negative cash flow.” This really was a sacrifice, then.

³⁰ “The ancient worshipper did not just listen to the minister and sing a few hymns. He was actively involved in the worship. He had to choose an unbelmished animal from his own flock, bring it to the sanctuary, kill it and dismember it with his own hands, then watch it go up in smoke before his very eyes. He was convicted that something very significant was achieved through these acts and knew that his relationship with God was profoundly affected by this sacrifice.” Wenham, p. 55.

³¹ Wenham stresses this when he writes, “Lay is perhaps a rather weak translation of the Hebrew (samak); ‘press’ might be preferable (cf. Isa. 59:16; Ezek. 24:2; 30:6; Amos 5:19). The worshipper was not just to touch the animal; he was to lean on it.” Wenham, p. 61.

³² Wenham seems to agree when he writes, “… the burnt offering makes atonement for sin in a more general sense.” Ibid., p. 57.

³³ The words of John the Baptist are especially relevant, since he did not say, “who takes away the sins (plural) of the world,” but rather, “who takes away the sin of the world.” Christ as the Lamb of God, as the antitype of the burnt offering, deals with the depravity of man, with man’s sinfulness in general, as well as his sinfulness in terms of specific sins.

³⁴ Wenham, pp. 64-65.

2019 春

A ministry of…

作者: Roger Pascoe 博士, 主席,
圣经讲道学会
剑桥, 安省, 加拿大
邮箱: [email protected]

Part I:加强讲解式讲道

“加强例子”

A.为什么使用例子？

1.因为圣经中充满了例子

既然神选择使用故事向我们传达一大部分他的话语，那么这一定也应该成为传道人如何传达神话语的指导。神毫无疑问地使用故事来告诉我们真理，因为故事是一个强有力的媒介，既易被理解又易引起回应。在讲道中不使用例子，不但漏掉了一个已经被神用过而且认可的沟通真理的重要方式，而且没有能够以一个相关的、启示性的方式来传讲真理。

2.因为在例子中 “解释”和“应用”紧密相连。

例子帮助我们能够以相关的、清晰易懂的方式解释和应用真理。因此当我们传讲真理在实际生活中的应用使，你应该能够举例说明！

有些传道人认为，神话语的应用只需留给圣灵，圣灵可以使真理既清楚又与生活相联系。是的，只有圣灵能够使神的话语足够清晰而且有说服力，以至于改变一个人的生活；但是不论怎样，我们不要忘了，圣灵使用讲道作为媒介，把神的话语与生活联系起来而且适于应用；而且圣灵在圣经中已经教给了我们如何使用例子。

我们必须既告诉我们的会众做什么，又要解释怎样做或者一个人的生活怎样被神的话语影响。

3.因为例子帮助克服“那又怎样”的障碍

例子帮助一个传道人跨过听众的注意力，触摸到他们的思想、心灵、意志和良心。例子通常会使一个听众明白他们为什么需要这个讲道；为什么这个讲道适用于他们。

在跨过听众“这和我有什么相干”的问题时，例子通常会成为一个非常有帮助的工具，因为例子没有威胁，没有对抗；它们不会激起听众的反对；它们只是第三方的例子。

B.例子的一些目的和类型

1.使用例子的一些目的

a)使真理清晰

b)使真理简单易懂

c)使真理图像化

d)使真理具体化（比如使真理实际、可见、真实）

e)为了强调真理

f)使信息更权威

g)以一种不同的方式传讲真理

2.例子的一些类型和来源

a)圣经中的叙事、陈述和箴言通常是最好的例子

但是要注意：使用圣经中的故事作为例子要小心。圣经中的故事是为了说明一个要点，而不是为了给后来的传道人提供例子。虽然可以用圣经的故事来说明一个观点，但是一般来说，最好是因为圣经的权威和教导来引用它，而不是阐明一个观点

b) 教会历史、人物传记、见证。

c)世俗的历史、文学、信息。

d)寓言、比喻、反例、故事

e)奇闻、名言、统计结果。

f)个人经历、当代人的见证。最好的例子通常是生活中的一个侧面—一段经历，或者是你的或者其他人的。这些经历之所以是很好的例子，因为…

• 每个人都能从中找到认同
• 它们是“真的”
• 它们是当代的、相关的
• 它们不需要解释就可以应用于生活

使用生活中的一个侧面做例子，要求你观察…

• 人们的伤、愿望、需要、关系、职业以及困难
• 当代的新闻、能触动人们心灵和良知的东西
• 人们谈论什么、想什么、做什么
• 人们怎样谈论、思想、行动和反应、
• 你如何反应、思想、谈论和行动（因此你能够在自己里面找到和其他人认同的地方）。不需要总是特别地谈到自己，通常发生在你身上的事以及你如何行动也同样代表了其他人。

g) 文学手段比如修辞（类比、暗喻、比较和对比）、形象生动的描述、双关语。

h)实物课程比如视觉辅助和幻灯片。

i)当代的新闻、口号、声明、事件。当你看新闻杂志、听广播或看电视的时候，你可以找到这一类的例子—世俗的广播比任何人都知道人们想要什么、哪里受伤以及他们怎么生活。

j)一般的生活观察和经历。

k)大自然中的例子—比如毛毛虫破茧成蝶可能成为基督徒生命被改变的例子。

C.放置例子的地方

1.在整个讲道过程中，它们应该放在那里

决定在讲道的哪个地方使用例子最有益处或者哪个地方最需要例子。并不是你讲道中的每一个点都需要例子来说明。

在哪里使用例子比使用多少例子有更大影响。

然而，这里有几个明显需要你使用例子的地方。

a)介绍。一个好的例子会吸引注意力、提高兴趣、介绍主题以及肯定需要。

b)要点。我并不认为每一个要点都需要举例说明。这样做实际上可能并不理想或者必要。但是在讲道的某个地方，你需要举例说明你在讲的东西，即便没有其他原因，只是为了在讲道的中间给予休息—比如为了给听众一些精神上的放松。

c)如果你能够找到一个合适的例子来结束讲道，会更有影响力而且容易被记住。但是同样地，有时这并不可能，有时不一定是理想的或者必要的。

这里有几个问题帮助你思想在哪里使用例子以及使用例子的次数和类型 [这些问题来自于Ramesh Richard的准备讲解式讲道（Baker）,126]

a) 必须要用例子来澄清或解释讲道的一个要点或部分吗？

b) 例子能够回答听众“怎么样、为什么、什么时候”这种不言而喻的问题吗？

c) 例子使这个要点更可靠、可信、更容易接受吗？

d) 什么样的例子能够帮助听众来理解和应用这个要点？

2.如何在讲道中使用例子？

当你按着下面的步骤使用例子，会有更好的联系、更多的影响：

a)说明要点。

b)过渡到例子。一个过渡式的陈述对顺利过渡到例子非常有帮助—例如“最近当…我发现这一事实”或者一些类似的陈述。

c)解释要点

d)虽然这不是必要的，但可以通过应用或者劝导他们对例子做出反应，而过渡到听众，。

e)再次声明这个重点，或者拓展这个要点，或者过渡到下个重点

D. 20个关于例子的做和不做

1.不要总是使用相同类型的例子

例如一般主要对男性或少数男性有吸引力的运动

2.不要用你自己的家人作为例子

一般而言，不要在讲道中涉及家人。他们已经足有曝光率。虽然他们一般会同意你使用个人做例子，但是他们通常不会考虑后果或者可能的影响，所以不要涉及他们。

3.不要使用你会众中的任何人，除非是为了表扬而且得到他们的同意。

4.永远不要使用保密的事情，即使你所使用的语言没有个人指向，也不可以。那个人会在你的故事中看到他或她自己，你会失去这个人对你的信任。

5.简短地说明你例子的出处

如果说明例子的出处分散了听众对例子本身的注意力或者使听众觉得厌烦，你就失去了影响力。一般情况下，我在我的讲稿中会详细记录下例子的出处，但是讲道的时候我只提及作者的名字或者出处的名字。

如果你不知道出处（或者如果你不想说出来），就简单地说“有人说”或者“我从某处读到”。这样你就说明了出自某处而不会试图让它看起来像你自己的。

公共领域的例子通常不需要确认其出处。

6.不要对相同的听众，重复使用相同的例子

如果你重复使用同一例子，你可能会使听众觉得厌烦。

7.不要让你的例子盖过它所要说明的重点

一定要使每个例子都服务于真理，而不是盖过真理。真理的阐释和应用是我们讲道的焦点—也就是圣灵能够用来改变生命的东西。我们是传道人，这是首要的，而不是讲故事的人。

你想要人们通过例子来记住真理。他们一定会记住例子，但是要确保他们也记住了例子要说明的真理。

8.不要因为是一个好例子，就歪曲这个例子使其适合你的讲道

好例子强而有力，传道人往往想使用它们，而这容易造成不正确和不恰当的使用。改动一个普遍的例子（比如那个小男孩的故事）来适应一个故事是一回事；但是不应该扭曲例子使其适合你的讲道。

9.学习如何更好地使用例子

这是一个学习的艺术。观察听众的反应来看它是否有效。

10.有策略地放置你的例子使其有最大的影响

最有策略的放置是在开始或者结尾—在开始，是为了吸引注意力；在最后，是为了使要点清晰，让听众记住。

11.保持例子简短

例子长了容易分散你想要说明的东西。使用长例子必须一次(一旦你开始就停不了，没有第二次机会)就使用对，并且要达到预期的效果，否则你就会失去听众，看起来很糟糕，而且浪费了宝贵的时间。

而另一方面，如果一个短例子没有达到你想要的影响，你可以继续进行而不会感到尴尬或者浪费时间。而且简短的例子容易被记住，也容易脱稿而讲。脱稿而讲的例子最有影响力。

12.确保你的例子在细节和作者信息上准确

如果你做不到准确，就不可靠。历史数据必须准确。文学引用(如诗歌)必须准确。统计数据必须准确。

13.确保你的例子适合你的听众

要考虑文化问题比如修辞、社会实践、历史关联、幽默等。当你面对与自己文化不同的听众讲道时（例如在国外），这一点非常重要。

通用的例子必须与生活经历、自然、历史等等此类的事情有关联。

14.不要使用太多的例子

如果你的讲道充满了例子，听众会厌烦并且会认为你没有好好准备。最多对每个主要观点举例说明通常就足够了。

15.不要使用不可靠的例子

检验每一个例子；“看它是否可信…是否有逻辑…是否现实？”如果不是，不要使用它（哪怕它是真实的），否则你毁了你的信誉。

16.使用幽默要小心

幽默只有在自然的情况下才应该使用—比如不要开玩笑！如果一个例子或者经历很有趣而且适合你讲道的主题，那么可以使用它。这和开玩笑不同，开玩笑是虚构的场景。记住，有趣但听众却不觉得有趣的事情，只会影响你信息的效果，所以要小心。不要使用任何可能被认为不得体或不合适的幽默(比如任何可能被认为是种族歧视的言论)。

17.不要重复提到你自己

人们通常热爱他们的牧师，这已经足够了。他们想知道的不仅仅是发生在你生活中的事情（比如你小的时候，长大之后以及发生在以前教会的事情等等）。我建议你不要提及你以前的教会。如果你谈到，你的听众会很自然地认为你以后也会在别人面前谈论他们。这样做既不专业、也不必要、不恰当。

18.不要过于生动

我们在这里是要将注意力吸引到神和他的真理，而不是生动的例子。通常，太过绘声绘色的语言或者例子让听众厌烦。

19.不要使用陈旧的例子

不要使用每个传道人都用的例子。要原创的。这需要努力和研究，但却是值得的。

20.确保你的例子说明重点。

有的时候你听一个传道人举例子，会想“这和主题有什么关联？”就像幽默一样，一个例子也必须使人能直观地明白它的意思，以及它是如何说明你试图阐明的观点并与之相联系的。

Part II.能带来改变的领导

“一个基督徒领袖的侧面”

一个基督徒领袖看起来该是什么样的？从个人、性格、能力、态度、生活方式以及属灵等方面，他是怎样一个人？显然，提前3:1-7以及提多1:5-9给出了成为教会领袖属灵方面应具备的最基本要求。但是在我看来，这仅仅是最基本的要求。这并不是一个包含所有的列表，如果一个人满足了，就一定有资格成为教会领袖。我并不认为保罗希望我们把这当做一个清单来用，而不考虑其他的标准和要求。这个列表没有提到品格方面，比如谦卑、勇气或者智慧，而这些也是作为一个教会领袖需具备的重要方面；这里也没有提到领导才能(罗 12:8)，然而一个领袖必须有这方面的属灵恩赐。

所以，你认为还有哪些方面的品格或者个性是一个教会领袖应该具备的？我认为，除了保罗在提前3章提到的标准，在圣经其他经文中也包含了一些作为教会领袖不可缺少的、必须具备的品格和个性。我认为可以将他们分为三类以便于理解：

A.那些看不到的特征，使他们能够一贯地做出好的决定。

B.那些个性特点，能够影响他们所领导的那些人去跟随和服从。

C.那些促使领袖取得成就的“成功”特性，比如自律、坚韧、忍耐。

A.品格特点

这些特点使领袖能够一贯地做出好的决定。我的列表中，排在前面的五个是：智慧、正直、谦卑、勇气和异象。

1.智慧

智慧排在最前面，就像一把大伞一样，其他所有的都包含在它里面。那么“什么是智慧？”这是我的公式：智慧=知识+经验+成熟

a)知识。知识是我们对事实、真理、原则等的认识。知识与学习相关。特殊知识来自于我们对特定领域的专业知识和学习，无论是学术上的还是在工作中的

b)经验。没有经验便不会有智慧。毕竟，智慧是在生活经历中得到和学习的。在生活这所学校中所经历的挫折，使你更有智慧。

虽然经验意味着年龄，但有些人比其他人更快地获得经验，这是由于他们接触到的生活经历，并乐于从这些经历中学习，无论是在家里、学校、工作还是社会中

你可能会说，经验是我们把知识运用到实践中，就像学徒阶段一样。那么说到底，难道整个的生活在一定程度上不就像做学徒一样吗？

c)成熟。使徒保罗说：“在完全（成熟）的人中，我们也讲智慧”（哥前2:6）.那么什么是成熟？成熟是一种很难定义的东西，但是当你看到的时候你会知道。

成熟是行事为人像成年人而不是孩子—例如当你不能按自己的意志行事或者事情出现差错时，不乱发脾气。控制你的情绪。

身体上的成熟很容易辨认，自然发生而不需要我们做任何事。我们只是简单地成长到一定阶段就停止生长，看起来像成年人。

情感和心理上的成熟，不同的人发生在不同时间。有些上了年纪的人从未成熟。六七十岁的时候，他们可能在行为、反应、态度或者言语方面仍然不成熟，而有些更年轻的人可能在这些方面已相当成熟。

成熟与自制、选择以及我们如何表达我们的情绪有关。这是对我们是谁以及和他人之间关系的意识。

成熟关系到为了长期的获得而忍受短期的痛苦。不成熟的人不会如此看待，他们希望自己想要的立刻得到满足。

成熟是使你的话如同契约一般，一致、可靠。

可悲的是，智慧是当今教会领袖相当缺乏的一个特质。而这却是我们教会领导中迫切需要的。注意以下几点：

• 所罗门没有像上帝求财富，而求智慧（王上3:9）
• 耶稣“渐渐长大，强健起来，充满智慧”（路2:40）…和“智慧和身量…都一齐增长”（2:52）
• 使徒行转6章中的领袖“七个有好名声、被圣灵充满、智慧充足的人”（徒6:3）
• 使徒保罗祷告“…愿你们在一切属灵的智慧悟性上，满心知道神的旨意”（西1:9）。
• 谈到基督，保罗说，“所积蓄的一切智慧知识，都在他里面藏着”（西2:3）
• 我们也被劝导“你们要爱惜光阴，用智慧与外人交往”（西4:5）

智慧人通常会咨询别人，自我评估以及反思。智慧的人欢迎富有挑战性的对话，这能激发他们的思考和观点。智慧的人不喜欢唯唯诺诺的人在身边，而是喜欢主动、独立思考的人

2.正直

什么是正直？正直有时被定义为遵守道德和伦理原则。正直表现在…

a)没有偏见。这意味着做决定从不为了取悦于人，而是取悦于神（弗6:6-7;西3:22-23）。做对的事，不论代价如何。这意味着永远不要陷入利益冲突。这意味着无论涉及到谁，都不要偏袒某个人。这可能意味着拒绝某人的善意，使你不亏欠人情。

b)透明。坦率。不要有隐藏的目的，不论结果如何。这并不代表你要把所有你知道的都说出来（智慧和保密可能会互相制约），但是这确实意味着不要虚假，做真实的自己。

c)正义。处事正直。

d)真诚。不要欺骗。不要有不可告人的动机。不要虚伪。不要装模作样。

e)诚实。真实，坦率。没有欺骗和诡诈。

f)可信。为人处事使人们可以相信或者信任你。

g)道德纯洁。这是正直的一部分。“你要谨慎自己”（提前4:16）.为什么？因为除非你在自己的生活中正直且道德纯洁，否则你无法把别人引向信仰，教导别人真理，带领神的子民敬拜或者为别人代求。

一个基督徒领袖必须正直。你的整个生活必须是一个整体—没有缺口，没有不一致，而是一个统一的整体。

3.谦卑

什么是谦卑？谦卑是…

a)谦和。谦和是“不要看你自己过于所当看的”（罗12:3）—例如不傲慢。谦和是“看别人比自己强”（腓2:3）。谦和是“他必兴旺，我必衰微”（约3:30）的态度。谦和是“我原是使徒中最小的，不配称为使徒”（哥前15:9；弗3:8；提前1:15）.

b)犯错的可能性。这是指知道并承认你自己不知道每一件事情。你可能也能够犯错误。你没有所有问题的答案。

c)温柔。不要为了达到自己的目的，而欺压别人。

d)服务。不是成为期待别人奉承的名人，而是服事别人的人

e)自觉。愿意了解自己的弱点和长处。

谦卑是骄傲的反义词。在事工中容易变得骄傲，尤其当你的事工取得一些世俗意义上成功的时候（比如教会会众增加或者一间新教会建成）。讲道尤其容易产生骄傲。人们对你讲道的肯定会冲昏你的头脑。

当我们开始把这些和自己联系起来（我们该得的、我们做得好）的时候，我们就陷入了麻烦。记住“神抵挡骄傲的人，赐恩给谦卑的人”（雅4:6；彼前5:5）。“所以你们要自卑，服在神大能的手下，到了时候，他必叫你们升高”（彼前5:6）。到了时候，他必升高你，而不是你自己。

4.勇气

什么是勇气？勇气不是公然的放肆，不是鲁莽，不是说话生硬，不留情面。勇气是不论别人的看法如何，都做对的事情，不顾反对、后果、批评、失败或挫折。勇气是对正确行动方式的确信并付诸实行。勇气是坚持真理。勇气是，相信在神的帮助下，我们能够做成。

注意：“神赐给我们不是胆怯的心…”（提后1:7）。马丁.路德，在他到Worms去面对（针对他教导的）审问的路上，说：“你可以期待从我这里得到一切，除了恐惧和忏悔。我不会逃跑，更不会退缩。”这就是勇气。

做基督徒领导不容易，需要勇气。

做艰难的决定，需要勇气—不论后果如何，做对的事情。

倚靠神而做出清楚的、好的决定是一个属灵领袖的标志，比如…

• 所多玛事件中的亚伯拉罕以及对罗得的拯救（创14:14f.）
• 摩西，当他决定放弃埃及的享乐和权力的时候（来11:23-28）
• 风暴中的保罗（徒27）

每一次当你面对一个十字路口的抉择时，你要么成为勇气的榜样，要么成为懦弱的榜样。

处理困难的情况，需要勇气—去面对阻碍、攻击、批评以及反对（从人来的，从撒旦来的等等）。当你这一周中遭受了严厉的批评时，讲道需要勇气（参照耶1:17-19）。批评是打倒你的最大敌人之一。它会放大你的不安全感，把你的目光从手边的任务转移到自己身上，耗尽你的能量和热情，使你自我防卫，孤立你。

这就是为什么我认为负面的、破坏性的批评（论断），是撒旦的一个工具。我相信圣经里面讲到的责备、劝戒以及指出（提后4:2），但是破坏性的批评在神的教会中没有立足之地。批评通常是负面的、破坏性的—关于人们喜欢什么而不喜欢什么，并非关于什么荣耀神或者对神的子民有益。批评会歪曲你对你的事工和你所服事的人的看法。

在属灵低落期，需要勇气来坚持—当沮丧来临时，当你认为自己是个失败者的时候，当你努力工作但好像并没有人听或者回应时，要坚持。

记住：神三次告诉约书亚要刚强，大大壮胆。为什么？因为他知道约书亚将要面对的试探和考验可能会使他灰心丧气，在试探中他可能会走捷径。

5.异象

什么是异象？异象不是一个胡思乱想的幻想世界；不是你自己的愿望。异象是…

a)能够看到什么是可能的。

b) “看见那不能看见的主”，像摩西一样（来11:27），以及先祖，虽然他们没有得着所应许的，却从远处望见(来 11:13)。

c)设立现实可行的目标和方向

d)乐观的态度：“我靠着那加给我力量的，凡事都能作”（腓4:13）—比如我能够也愿意去做的事情，我靠着基督加给我的力量来做。

B.个性特点

说到个性，我指的是那些个人特质，能够影响到你所领导的那些人。这是能够激励别人去跟随或者听从你的能力。这有的时候也被称为“人格的力量”。你要么有，要么没有，但是却学不到。它是一种魅力—不是伪装或者表面的，而是真实的、内在的。

C.成功特质

成功特质是指那些能够促使一个领导者取得成就的特点。这些特点包含，比如自制、坚毅、忍耐。哪怕失望，继续坚持，因为你看到前面的目标。鼓励你团队的人坚持。这来自于要改变你生活的内在动力。这关系到你的动机。

结论

这五点品格决定了一个领袖是否能够一贯地做出好的决定，强有力地影响他所领导的人以及驱使他完成目标。

Part III.讲道大纲

如果想听关于这些的英文讲道，请点击链接: Link 1 - 约 20:19-21; Link 2 - 约 20:21-23; Link 3 - 约 20:24-31

题目: 我看到了耶稣

主题: 复活的震撼和现实

要点 #3:耶稣的复活使恐惧变成勇气(19-23)

(要点1和2请看2019冬季版)

1. 耶稣的复活减轻了我们的恐惧(19-20)

a) 他说的话减轻了我们的恐惧 (19)

b) 他所做的减轻了我们的恐惧 (20)

2. 耶稣的复活激发了我们的勇气(21-23)

a) 他激发了我们的勇气去继续从事他的工作 (21)

b)他激发了我们的勇气去带着权柄讲论 (22-23)

要点#4: 耶稣的复活使不信成为信 (24-29)

1.不信不能被二手的见证说服(24-25a)

2.不信需要具体的证据(25b-28)

a) 耶稣说的话是具体的证据 (26)

b) 耶稣所做的是具体的证据 (27a)

3. 具体的证据需要结论 (27b-29)

a)信心的表达证实了信(28)

b) 从耶稣而来的极大的祝福尊贵了信心(29)

i) 看见而信是好的 (29a)

ii) 没有看见就信的更好 (29b)

结论 (30-31)

Introduction

Matthew presents the student of Scripture with several interpretive problems in the second chapter of his Gospel. As we pointed out in lesson 2 of this series, Matthew refers to the Old Testament Scriptures four times in chapter 2. Only one of these references can be viewed as a direct prophecy which is fulfilled by the events surrounding our Lord’s birth. That would be Matthew’s reference to the prophecy of Micah 5:2 in Matthew 2:6. Micah’s prophecy that Bethlehem would be the birthplace of the Messiah was so clear and direct that even the unbelieving religious scholars in Jerusalem recognized it for what it was.

The other three references to the Old Testament in Matthew 2 are not direct prophecy as we would expect. For example, the reference to Hosea 11:1 in Matthew 2:15 is not regarded as a direct prophecy/fulfillment. Matthew regards the return of Jesus from His “exile” in Egypt as the “fulfillment” of Hosea’s words, “I called my Son out of Egypt.” Matthew 2:23 is perhaps the most perplexing Old Testament reference because there is no Old Testament text that indicates Jesus “would be called a Nazarene.” The text we have chosen to focus upon is that of Jeremiah 31:15, cited as being fulfilled by the events of Matthew 2:16-18:⁴⁸

13 After they had gone, an angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph saying, “Get up, take the child and his mother and flee to Egypt, and stay there until I tell you, for Herod is going to look for the child to kill him.” 14 Then he got up, took the child and his mother at night, and went to Egypt. 15 He stayed there until Herod died. In this way what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet was fulfilled: “I called my Son out of Egypt.” 16 When Herod saw that he had been tricked by the wise men, he became enraged. He sent men to kill all the children in Bethlehem and nearby from the age of two and under, according to the time he had learned from the wise men. 17 Then what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet was fulfilled: 18 “A voice was heard in Ramah, weeping and loud wailing, Rachel weeping for her children, and she did not want to be comforted, because they were gone” (Matthew 2:13-18).⁴⁹

Several questions emerge from Matthew’s use of Jeremiah 31:15 in relation to Herod’s slaughter of the infants of Bethlehem. Some of these concentrate upon Matthew’s use of the Old Testament Scriptures. Other questions arise regarding God’s sovereignty and human suffering. How do we explain the suffering that occurred in connection with our Lord’s birth and escape to Egypt? Was this a necessity? Why did God allow it, when it could have been prevented?

How did Matthew intend for his readers to understand the connection between Herod’s slaughter of the infants in 2:16-18 and Jeremiah’s words in 31:15? In some ways, these infants would seem to be about as “innocent” as a person could be. Why, then, did Matthew describe this atrocity as an event that was destined to take place, because God purposed it would happen?

This lesson, while occasioned by the events of Matthew 2:16-18, will seek to find an answer to the problem our text poses from a broader scriptural and theological base. The purpose of this lesson will be to gain a better perspective of suffering and particularly what might be called “innocent suffering.” We shall seek to learn how and why God chooses to include “innocent suffering” in His sovereign will. We will therefore begin our study by looking at other biblical texts, and end by coming back to Matthew’s use of Jeremiah 31:15 in Matthew 2:18.

Suffering is a Part of our Human Experience
Romans 8:18-27

18 For I consider that our present sufferings cannot even be compared to the glory that will be revealed to us. 19 For the creation eagerly waits for the revelation of the sons of God. 20 For the creation was subjected to futility—not willingly but because of God who subjected it—in hope 21 that the creation itself will also be set free from the bondage of decay into the glorious freedom of God’s children. 22 For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers together until now. 23 Not only this, but we ourselves also, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we eagerly await our adoption, the redemption of our bodies. 24 For in hope we were saved. Now hope that is seen is not hope, because who hopes for what he sees? 25 But if we hope for what we do not see, we eagerly wait for it with endurance.

26 In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness, for we do not know how we should pray, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with inexpressible groanings. 27 And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes on behalf of the saints according to God’s will.

Paul has demonstrated that man is sinful and deserving of God’s eternal wrath, whether the standard men fail is the revelation of God in nature (Romans 1), or the revelation of God in the Law of Moses (Romans 2). The Law does not save anyone, but only establishes man’s guilt, because no one is able to live up to the Law’s demands (Romans 3:1-20). Since man cannot earn salvation by his works, God has provided salvation apart from works, through faith in Jesus Christ and His sacrificial death for those who trust in Him (Romans 3:21-31). Salvation by faith is nothing new; it is the way Abraham and every other Old Testament saint was saved (Romans 4).

In Romans 5, Paul spells out some of the benefits of the salvation God brought about in the sacrificial death and resurrection of Christ. It is noteworthy that the first benefit Paul mentions is related to suffering:

1 Therefore, since we have been declared righteous by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, 2 through whom we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in the hope of God’s glory. 3 Not only this, but we also rejoice in sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, 4 and endurance, character, and character, hope. 5 And hope does not disappoint, because the love of God has been poured out in our hearts through the Holy Spirit who was given to us. 6 For while we were still helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. 7 (For rarely will anyone die for a righteous person, though for a good person perhaps someone might possibly dare to die.) 8 But God demonstrates his own love for us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. 9 Much more then, because we have now been declared righteous by his blood, we will be saved through him from God’s wrath. 10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of his son, how much more, since we have been reconciled, will we be saved by his life? 11 Not only this, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received this reconciliation (Romans 5:1-11, emphasis mine).

God’s salvation in Jesus Christ endures all adversity; indeed, we can rejoice in our adversity, knowing that it will only strengthen our faith and assurance of eternal life. This salvation in Christ accomplishes the reversal of Adam’s fall and the curse for every believer. What Adam did, God undid in Christ, and more (5:12-21).

God’s salvation in Christ is no license to sin; indeed, it is the motivation and the basis for godly living. After all, we who have been identified with Christ by faith have thereby died to sin, and thus should no longer live in sin (Romans 6:1-14). We should not only understand that we are free from sins’ former bondage, we should realize that the wages of sin is death, so we certainly don’t wish to continue on that path (6:15-23). In Christ, we have not only died to sin, we have died to the Law, which frees us to live in liberty through the Holy Spirit (7:1-7). The Law is not the root problem, however; sin is. Our flesh (our natural human strength) is not sufficient to overpower sin, so sin always gets the best of us when we strive in our own efforts (7:8-25).

The solution to the power of sin is the power of the Holy Spirit. Those who have trusted in Jesus Christ are no longer under condemnation, and they are no longer to be dominated by sin. They have the power to achieve what could not be done in the flesh (the righteous requirements of the Law being fulfilled in us) but can be done through the Spirit. The very same Spirit that raised the dead body of our Lord from the grave now lives in us, and He can give life to our mortal bodies. Everyone who is a true believer in Christ has the Spirit of God living in him, and furthermore He assures us that we are the “sons of God” (8:1-17).

One might think that when we come to Romans 8:18, Paul is about to tell us that all of life will now be a “bed of roses,” that having the Holy Spirit in us assures us that all pain and suffering will end. Such is not the case. In verses 18-30, Paul does exactly the opposite. He assures us that every human being will experience “suffering and groaning” in this life because of the fall of man and the curse that resulted. The “whole creation groans and suffers together till now,” Paul writes (8:22). The chaos and the curse that came as a result of Adam’s sin will not be removed until the return of our Lord and “the revelation of the sons of God” (8:19). At this time, God will “redeem our bodies and adopt us as sons” (8:23). At that time we will, with all creation, be fully and finally freed from our bondage to corruption (8:21).

If the whole world suffers and groans, the Christian does so even more. It is the Christian who has tasted of eternal life, and who already have “the firstfruits of the Spirit” (8:22). We not only long for the time when God will make all things new, but we agonize over the sin-broken world in which we now live. Nevertheless we are to wait for this day with eagerness and endurance (8:25).

Salvation in Christ and the gift of the Holy Spirit do not keep us from suffering; they keep us through suffering. The Spirit strengthens and sustains us, assuring us of our sonship. The Spirit communicates for us, when we cannot put words to our groanings (8:26-27). The same God who delivered us from the penalty and the power of sin will someday deliver us from the presence of sin. Until that day, His Spirit sustains us in suffering.

To summarize, suffering is the common experience of man, because we live in a sin-cursed world. God has given us all the resources we need to endure the sufferings of life and to bring us to His predetermined goal for our lives. We can endure suffering because God has given us His Holy Spirit, to comfort and to assure us that we are His sons, and to communicate to us and for us. Christians are not exempt from suffering, but because of our new life and eternal hope, we agonize as we “suffer and groan” with all creation, waiting for the day of our Lord’s return. If this kind of suffering does anything for us, it makes us hunger for heaven:

16 Therefore we do not despair, but even if our physical body is wearing away, our inner person is being renewed day by day. 17 For our momentary light suffering is producing for us an eternal weight of glory far beyond all comparison, 18 because we are not looking at what can be seen but at what cannot be seen. For what can be seen is temporary, but what cannot be seen is eternal.

Not All Suffering is the Direct Result of Personal Sin
John 9:1-7

1 Now as Jesus was passing by, he saw a man who had been blind from birth. 2 His disciples asked him, “Rabbi, who committed the sin that caused him to be born blind, this man or his parents?” 3 Jesus answered, “Neither this man nor his parents sinned, but he was born blind so that the acts of God may be revealed through what happens to him. 4 We must perform the deeds of the one who sent me as long as it is daytime. Night is coming when no one can work. 5 As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.” 6 Having said this, he spat on the ground and made some mud with the saliva. He smeared the mud on the blind man’s eyes 7 and said to him, “Go wash in the pool of Siloam” (which is translated “sent”). So the blind man went away and washed, and came back seeing.

We all remember the story of Job and his “comfortless friends.” They counseled Job on the basis of a false assumption: that suffering is always the direct result of sin. Even our Lord’s disciples seemed to buy into this false thinking. As they were walking along, Jesus saw a man who had been blind from birth. I doubt that the disciples would have noticed him if Jesus hadn’t first taken note of this man.⁵⁰ The disciples asked Jesus who had sinned, this man or his parents.⁵¹ It never seems to have occurred to them that this man might not have been suffering because of some sin in his life, or in the lives of his parents.

This was a tempting explanation for human suffering, and perhaps this is why it was so commonly accepted. On the one hand, it made suffering explainable, even tolerable. It is relatively easy to embrace the explanation that says people suffer because they get what they deserve. It rules out the possibility of innocent suffering, the most difficult kind of suffering to explain. On the other hand, it is an easy explanation to accept because it relieves us of the responsibility to help those who are suffering. If those who suffer do so because they have sinned, then suffering is divine judgment for sin. If God is imposing divine punishment on the afflicted, who am I to come to their aid? I would be resisting God’s purposes.

It is hard to imagine how this blind man must have felt, being the subject of this conversation. How well he knew that most people made the same assumption. Jesus responded to His disciples’ question in a way that must have shocked them. He told them that this man’s blindness from birth was not due to sin, not his personal sin, nor the sin of his parents. Instead, Jesus declared that this man’s blindness provided the occasion for God’s works to be revealed through him.⁵² If I was that blind man, my ears would be straining to hear what would happen next. After declaring that He was the “light of the world,” Jesus spit on the ground and took some of this “mud” and placed it on the blind man’s eyes, instructing him to wash in the pool of Siloam. He did just that and came away with his sight.

Let this miracle be a word of instruction and of caution to all of us. Suffering is not always the direct result of personal sin. We certainly know of many instances where sin and suffering go hand-in-hand. This seems to be the case with the paralytic at the pool of Bethesda in John 5. Jesus took the initiative in healing this fellow, and then slipped away. The paralytic made his way home with his mat, thus technically violating the Sabbath. For this he was accosted by the “religious police,” who accused him of breaking the law. When he told them about his healing, they insisted on knowing who had done this – that, too, was “breaking the Sabbath” in their minds. The man did not know who it was who had healed him, so he could not tell them. Jesus then found this man, and said to him,

“Look, you have become well. Don’t sin any more, lest anything worse happen to you.” 15 The man went away and informed the Jewish authorities that Jesus was the one who had made him well (John 5:14b-15).

The man immediately went to the “Jewish authorities” and reported to them that it was Jesus who had healed him. Apparently this man’s suffering was due to sin, and thus our Lord’s warning to him not to persist in his sin. Instead of taking heed and forsaking his sin, he compounded it by reporting that Jesus had healed him.

Sin-related sickness is also mentioned in James 5, where James instructs the one who is sick to call for the elders of the church and to confess his sins (James 5:14-16). Sin is sometimes the cause of our suffering,⁵³ but not always. In the case of the man born blind, suffering provided the occasion for God’s works to be displayed.

God Uses Our Suffering For Our Own Good
2 Corinthians 12:1-10; Philippians 3:7-11; Psalm 119:65-72, 92

1 It is necessary to go on boasting. Though it is not profitable, I will go on to visions and revelations from the Lord. 2 I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago (whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, God knows) was caught up to the third heaven. 3 And I know that this man (whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, God knows) 4 was caught up into paradise and heard things too sacred to be put into words, things that a person is not permitted to speak. 5 On behalf of such an individual I will boast, but on my own behalf I will not boast, except about my weaknesses. 6 For even if I wish to boast, I will not be a fool, for I would be telling the truth, but I refrain from this so that no one may regard me beyond what he sees in me or what he hears from me, 7 even because of the extraordinary character of the revelations. Therefore, so that I would not become arrogant, a thorn in the flesh was given to me, a messenger of Satan to trouble me—so that I would not become arrogant. 8 I asked the Lord three times about this, that it would depart from me. 9 But he said to me, “My grace is enough for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.” So then, I will boast most gladly about my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may reside in me. 10 Therefore I am content with weaknesses, with insults, with troubles, with persecutions and difficulties for the sake of Christ, for whenever I am weak, then I am strong (2 Corinthians 12:1-10).

The Scriptures contain many examples of how God uses suffering in the lives of men for their good. We can see how God used the suffering of the man born blind to bring him to faith (see John 9:35-38). A number of those who came to our Lord for healing went away believing. God also uses suffering in the life of the believer, for his or her good.

In 2 Corinthians, the Apostle Paul continues to wage war against the “false apostles” (cf. 2 Corinthians 11:13) by reluctantly comparing himself with them (see 2 Corinthians 11:21-29). In chapter 12, Paul speaks of being “caught up to the third heaven” (12:2), to paradise, where he heard “things too sacred to put into words” (12:4). These are the kinds of things in which one might glory and come to take pride in, so God gave Paul a “thorn in the flesh.” This affliction ultimately came from God, but was administered through a “messenger of Satan” (12:7). Paul appealed to God, asking three times to be delivered. Each time, God refused Paul’s request, reminding him that “His grace was enough,” because His “power is made perfect in weakness” (12:9).

Paul’s thorn in the flesh not only kept him humble, it kept him humanly weak, so that God’s power would be evident in his life. Suffering kept Paul from the sin of spiritual pride and kept him dependent on the power of Christ through His Spirit. This gave Paul a very different view of his afflictions:

10 Therefore I am content with weaknesses, with insults, with troubles, with persecutions and difficulties for the sake of Christ, for whenever I am weak, then I am strong (2 Corinthians 12:10).

In Philippians 3, Paul speaks of another blessing that God brought him through suffering:

7 But these assets I have come to regard as liabilities because of Christ. 8 More than that, I now regard all things as liabilities compared to the far greater value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things—indeed, I regard them as dung!—that I might gain Christ, 9 and be found in him, not because of having my own righteousness derived from the law, but because of having the righteousness that comes by way of Christ’s faithfulness—a righteousness from God that is in fact based on Christ’s faithfulness. 10 My aim is to know him, to experience the power of his resurrection, to share in his sufferings, and to be like him in his death, 11 and so, somehow, to attain to the resurrection from the dead (Philippians 3:7-11).

Paul had once been a Jewish legalist, a “Hebrew of the Hebrews” and a zealous Pharisee (3:5). His experience on the road to Damascus and subsequent conversion showed him his sin of self-righteousness and his need for salvation by faith, apart from religious works. As a child of God, Paul now had a completely different outlook. He came to see that all the things in which he took pride were really useless – or to use his words, “dung” (verse 9). While he once viewed suffering as God’s curse on the sinner (much like the disciples did in John 9), he now saw suffering as a blessing. Paul now experienced in his sufferings for Christ a fellowship with Christ which enabled him to know Christ more intimately. How many Christians have testified the same thing about their sufferings? They have found in suffering a greater intimacy with Christ, a greater faith, a greater joy than they had previously known in physical ease. Suffering in the life of the saint is designed to draw us nearer to God because of our enhanced fellowship with Christ, whose suffering brought us to God.

Old Testament saints likewise found comfort and growth in their sufferings. We see this in Psalm 119:

65 You are good to your servant,

O Lord, just as you promised.

66 Teach me proper discernment and understanding!

For I consider your commands to be reliable.

67 I used to suffer because I would stray off,

but now I keep your instructions.

68 You are good and you do good.

Teach me your statutes!

69 Arrogant people smear my reputation with lies,

but I observe your precepts with all my heart.

70 They are calloused,

but I find delight in your law.

71 It was good for me to suffer,

so that I might learn your statutes.

72 The law you have revealed is more important to me

than thousands of gold and silver shekels. (Yod)

.

92 If I had not found encouragement in your law,

I would have died in my sorrow (Psalm 119:65-72, 92).

The psalmist found that his suffering was a form of divine discipline in his life, which caused him to give closer heed to God’s Word. This psalmist was not an exception. Asaph testified that his suffering drew him nearer to God, while prosperity only made the wicked arrogant and proud (Psalm 73). Job learned much about God in his affliction. Above all, he learned to trust in God’s wisdom and sovereignty. The writer to the Hebrews informs us that the suffering of divine discipline is evidence that we are His sons (Hebrews 12:1-13).

God Uses Our Suffering for the Good of Others
Genesis 41:46-52; 45:7-11; 50:18-21

We all remember the story of how Joseph’s brothers, prompted by jealousy and hatred toward this favorite son of Jacob, sold their brother into slavery in Egypt. There in Egypt, Joseph continued to experience suffering at the hand of others, not because of sin on his part, but because of his faithfulness to God. When Joseph was elevated to power in Egypt, he named his sons in such a way as to indicate that he saw the good hand of God in his life (Genesis 41:46-52). Thus, when his brothers came to Egypt seeking grain, Joseph was free to deal kindly with them, even though it did not appear this way in the beginning.⁵⁴ When Joseph’s brothers repented of their sin, he revealed his true identity to them. Quite naturally, they were frightened, assuming that he would use his power to get even with them for their sin against him. His brothers did not yet understand God’s good purposes in suffering, even “innocent suffering,” but Joseph did:

7 God sent me ahead of you to preserve you on the earth and to save your lives by a great deliverance. 8 So now, it is not you who sent me here, but God. He has made me an adviser to Pharaoh, lord over all his household, and ruler over all the land of Egypt. 9 Now go up to my father quickly and tell him, ‘This is what your son Joseph says: “God has made me lord of all Egypt. Come down to me; do not delay. 10 You will live in the land of Goshen, and you will be near me—you, your children, your grandchildren, your flocks, your herds, and everything you have. 11 I will provide you with food there, because there will be five more years of famine. Otherwise you would become poor—you, your household, and everyone who belongs to you”‘ (Genesis 45:7-11, emphasis mine).

18 Then his brothers also came and threw themselves down before him; they said, “Here we are; we are your slaves.” 19 But Joseph answered them, “Don’t be afraid. Am I in the place of God? 20 As for you, you meant to harm me, but God intended it for a good purpose, so he could preserve the lives of many people, as you can see this day. 21 So now, don’t be afraid. I will provide for you and your little children.” Then he consoled them and spoke kindly to them (Genesis 50:18-21, emphasis mine).

Therefore, innocent suffering is not only for our good, but also for the good of others.⁵⁵

Some Suffering is Due to the Sin of Others
1 Samuel 21:1—22:11-23; 2 Samuel 12:1-23

In 1 Samuel 21, David is fleeing from King Saul, who is seeking to kill him. David and his men were in need of food so David went to Nob, where Ahimelech the priest was staying. Ahimelech sensed that something must be wrong when David came to him alone. David deceived the priest, telling him that he had come on a secret mission from King Saul, and that no one was to know about it (21:1-2). David asked Ahimelech for bread, and he was given some of the holy bread. Ahimelech also gave David Goliath’s sword, which he had taken from him when he killed him. It so happened that Doeg the Edomite, one of Saul’s men, was there that day and observed what took place. Later, Doeg reported to Saul what he had seen, and as a result, Saul ordered the death of many priests and their families:

16 But the king said, “You will surely die, Ahimelech, you and all your father’s house! 17 Then the king said to the messengers who were stationed beside him, “Turn and kill the priests of the Lord. For they too have sided with David. They knew he was fleeing, but they did not inform me.” But the king’s servants refused to harm the priests of the Lord. 18 Then the king said to Doeg, “You turn and strike down the priests.” So Doeg the Edomite turned and struck down the priests. He killed on that day eighty-five men who wore the linen ephod. 19 As for Nob, the city of the priests, he struck down with the sword men and women, children and infants, oxen, donkeys, and sheep—all with the sword (1 Samuel 22:16-19).

We know from David’s response to this tragedy that he felt responsible for the deaths of the priests and their families (1 Samuel 22:21-23). The guilt was not due to David asking Ahimelech for bread, for our Lord seems to have indicated this was legitimate (see Matthew 12:3-4). It is unclear whether David’s lie was a factor in this tragedy, but it is clear that all these people ultimately died because of Saul’s jealousy. The sin of one man (Saul) and the attempt of another (David) to feed his men led to the death of many “innocent” people.⁵⁶

While David may have been guiltless in the death of the priests of Nob, his sin was the cause of the death of his child in 2 Samuel 11 and 12. While the army of Israel went to war, David stayed at home in Jerusalem (2 Samuel 11:1). As a result, David happened to look down on a young woman while she was bathing and then inquired about her. Even after David learned she was married to one of his faithful soldiers, David summoned her to his palace and slept with her. He then sought to cover his sin by ordering Joab, his commander, to put Uriah in the hottest part of the battle, and then to draw back from him. David was confronted by Nathan for his sin and was told that the child conceived through this illicit union would die. In spite of David’s repentance and petitions, God did take the life of this child. This “innocent” child died as the result of David’s sin. Innocent people sometimes suffer because of the sins of others.

Suffering is Often Due to a Combination of Causes
2 Samuel 24:1-25; 1 Chronicles 21:1-30

I would briefly point out that it is not always possible to assess a single cause of suffering. Life is not that simple, and neither is sin. In 2 Samuel 24 and 1 Chronicles 21, we read of the plague that is sent upon the Israelites because David foolishly numbered the people, even against the counsel of his trusted servants, Joab and the commanders of his army (2 Samuel 24:3-4). On the one hand, we see that 70,000 of David’s men died because of his folly (2 Samuel 24:15). We see also from the account in 1 Chronicles 21 (verse 1) that Satan stood up against Israel, moving David to number Israel. So Satan, too, plays a role in this disaster. But from 2 Samuel 24:1, we learn that the situation was even more complicated than that:

The Lord’s anger again raged against Israel, and he incited David against them, saying, “Go count Israel and Judah” (2 Samuel 24:1).

From these words, we see that God was behind this entire event, which should come as no surprise to the Christian. But what we also learn is that God “incited David” because He was angry with Israel. Thus, the Israelites were not really innocent; they were guilty, and God brought this about to chasten the nation for its sin. Suffering is often the result of a complex set of causes, all of which eventually are rooted in man’s sin.

There Is Only One Innocent Person

It should probably be noted at this point that no one, not even babies, are truly “innocent” in the sense that they are completely free of sin. David said it long ago:

Look, I was prone to do wrong from birth;

I was a sinner the moment my mother conceived me (Psalm 51:5).

Paul reaffirms this by citing Old Testament texts in Romans 3:

10 just as it is written:

“There is no one righteous, not even one,

11 there is no one who understands,

there is no one who seeks God.

12 All have turned away,

together they have become worthless;

there is no one who shows kindness, not even one” (Romans 3:10-12).

The only man who has ever been born free from sin and who has lived a perfect life is our Lord Jesus Christ. He alone could say,

Who among you can prove me guilty of any sin? If I am telling you the truth, why don’t you believe me? (John 8:46)

He alone was the spotless, unblemished Lamb of God, whose shed blood cleanses men of their sins:

17 And if you address as Father the one who impartially judges according to each one’s work, live out the time of your temporary residence here in reverence. 18 You know that from your empty way of life inherited from your ancestors, you were ransomed—not by perishable things like silver or gold, 19 but by precious blood like that of an unblemished and spotless lamb, namely Christ. 20 He was foreknown before the foundation of the world but was manifested in these last times for your sake. 21 Through him you now trust in God, who raised him from the dead and gave him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God (1 Peter 1:17-21).

When we speak of “innocent suffering,” we must therefore do so in a qualified way. Only our Lord suffered innocently. Everyone else who suffers does so as a sinner. When we speak of “innocent suffering,” then, we speak of suffering that is not directly due to personal sin, but sin that is due to the sin of others.

Our Comfort:
God’s Punishment is Just, and He does Not Punish the Innocent
Genesis 18:16-33; Jonah 4:1-11

When it comes to those who suffer in relative innocence, we find great comfort in God’s Word. Consider the conversation between Abraham and God, in reference to the impending judgment of Sodom and Gomorrah:

16 When the men got up to leave, they looked out over Sodom. (Now Abraham was walking with them to see them on their way.) 17 Then the Lord said, “Should I hide from Abraham what I am about to do? 18 After all, Abraham will surely become a great and powerful nation, and all the nations on the earth will pronounce blessings on one another using his name. 19 I have chosen him, so that he may command his children and his household after him to keep the way of the Lord by doing what is right and just. Then the Lord will give to Abraham what he promised him.” 20 So the Lord said, “The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so blatant 21 that I must go down and see if they are as wicked as the outcry suggests. If not, I want to know.” 22 The two men turned and headed toward Sodom, but Abraham was still standing before the Lord. 23 Abraham approached and said, “Will you sweep away the godly along with the wicked? 24 What if there are fifty godly people in the city? Will you really wipe it out and not spare the place for the sake of the fifty godly people who are in it? 25 Far be it from you to do such a thing—to kill the godly with the wicked, treating the godly and the wicked alike! Far be it from you! Will not the judge of the whole earth do what is right?” 26 So the Lord replied, “If I find in the city of Sodom fifty godly people, I will spare the whole place for their sake.” 27 Then Abraham asked, “Since I have undertaken to speak to the Lord (although I am but dust and ashes), 28 what if there are five less than the fifty godly people? Will you destroy the whole city because five are lacking? He replied, “I will not destroy it if I find forty-five there.” 29 Abraham spoke to him again, “What if forty are found there?” He replied, “I will not do it for the sake of the forty.” 30 Then Abraham said, “May the Lord not be angry so that I may speak! What if thirty are found there?” He replied, “I will not do it if I find thirty there.” 31 Abraham said, “Since I have undertaken to speak to the Lord, what if only twenty are found there?” He replied, “I will not destroy it for the sake of the twenty.” 32 Finally Abraham said, “May the Lord not be angry so that I may speak just once more. What if ten are found there?” He replied, “I will not destroy it for the sake of the ten.” 33 The Lord went on his way when he had finished speaking to Abraham. Then Abraham returned home (Genesis 18:16-33, emphasis mine).

God was about to punish Sodom and Gomorrah, but He wanted to share this with Abraham. When Abraham heard that these cities were to be destroyed, he was greatly concerned that there would be no righteous who were punished along with the wicked. He argued that His God would do what is right, and that this would preclude treating the godly and the wicked alike (18:23-25). In the end, he bargained that if there were but ten righteous remaining in the city, God would spare it. We know, of course, that there were not ten left. But even so, God was true to His character. Before God brought down fire upon these wicked cities, He removed Lot and his family (Genesis 19:12-26). Our God is just, and He does not punish the righteous along with the wicked.

This same truth⁵⁷ is also taught in the fourth chapter of Jonah:

3:10 When God saw their actions—they turned from their evil way of living!—God relented concerning the judgment he had threatened them with and he did not destroy them. 4:1 This terribly displeased Jonah and he became very angry. 2 He prayed to the Lord and said, “Oh, Lord, this is just what I thought would happen when I was in my own country. This is what I tried to prevent by trying to escape to Tarshish!—because I knew that you are gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and abounding in mercy, and one who relents concerning threatened judgment. 3 So now, Lord, kill me instead, because I would rather die than live!” 4 The Lord said, “Are you really so very angry?” 5 Jonah left the city, sat down east of the city, made a shelter for himself there, and sat down under it in the shade to see what would happen to the city. 6 The Lord God appointed a little plant and caused it to grow up over Jonah to be a shade over his head to rescue him from his misery. Now Jonah was very delighted about the little plant. 7 So God sent a worm at dawn the next day, and it attacked the little plant so that it dried up. 8 When the sun began to shine, God sent a hot east wind. So the sun beat down on Jonah’s head, and he grew faint. So he despaired of life, and said, “ I would rather die than live!” 9 God said to Jonah, “Are you really so very angry about the little plant?” And he said, “ I am as angry as I could possibly be!” 10 The Lord said, “You were upset about this little plant, something for which you have not worked nor did you do anything to make it grow. It grew up overnight and died the next day. 11 Should I not be even more concerned about Nineveh this enormous city? There are more than one hundred twenty thousand people in it who do not know right from wrong, as well as many animals!” (Jonah 3:10—4:11, emphasis mine)

When Nineveh repented, God relented, and Jonah vented. He was hopping mad! The very thing for which others praised God (“you are gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and abounding in mercy, and one who relents concerning threatened judgment,” verse 2 above)⁵⁸ Jonah protested against. Jonah hated grace,⁵⁹ without seeming to notice that it was the only thing that kept him alive. Jonah wanted to see these guilty sinners pay; he wanted to sit and watch while God poured out His wrath on them, even though they had repented. Jonah failed to see the shade plant as a gift of grace, and he was angry when it was taken away, as though he somehow deserved it.

The depth of Jonah’s sin is seen in relation to the children of Nineveh. He wanted to watch (in the words of Abraham) God “sweep away the innocent⁶⁰ along with the wicked.” God’s justice is seen in contrast to Jonah’s self-righteous anger. It mattered not to Jonah that Nineveh had repented; he wanted to see them all perish. God not only delights to save repentant sinners, God cares about innocent children. He would not punish them even though their parents were evil.

God’s Salvation and the Slaughter of the Infants
Matthew 2:13-18; Jeremiah 31:15

God’s words to Jonah lead us to our problem passage in Matthew 2, verses 13-18:

13 After they had gone, an angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph saying, “Get up, take the child and his mother and flee to Egypt, and stay there until I tell you, for Herod is going to look for the child to kill him.” 14 Then he got up, took the child and his mother at night, and went to Egypt. 15 He stayed there until Herod died. In this way what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet was fulfilled: “I called my Son out of Egypt.” 16 When Herod saw that he had been tricked by the wise men, he became enraged. He sent men to kill all the children in Bethlehem and nearby from the age of two and under, according to the time he had learned from the wise men. 17 Then what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet was fulfilled: 18 “A voice was heard in Ramah, weeping and loud wailing, Rachel weeping for her children, and she did not want to be comforted, because they were gone” (Matthew 2:13-18).

The magi had been divinely instructed to go home another way, and they obeyed (2:12). God then instructed Joseph to take the child and Mary and flee to Egypt because Herod was seeking to kill Jesus. Joseph likewise obeyed. When Herod realized that his plans to kill the infant king had been foiled, he was furious. Having learned the time when the star first appeared to the magi and where the child was born from the experts in the law, Herod knew the age and location of the child, even though he did not know his identity. While Jesus could hardly be two years old, Herod thought that was a good, round number at which to destroy all of the boy babies in Bethlehem. And so, at Herod’s instructions, all boy babies in the Bethlehem vicinity who were two and under were slaughtered.

While estimates of the number of babies killed have sometimes been exaggerated, it is generally thought that no more than 20 or 30 babies actually died. This in no way minimizes Herod’s guilt, or the grief suffered by the parents of these children. One must ask why Matthew chose to include this detail about the slaughter of these infants when he did not go into detail about the death of Herod himself. The reader would tend to find a kind of satisfaction in Herod’s painful death but is distressed at the report of the slaughter of these infant boys. What purpose does this account serve in the Gospel of Matthew?

First, the story of the slaughter of the innocent infants serves to cast a certain dark cloud over the otherwise joyous occasion of Jesus’ birth. We should remember that Jesus came to die at the hands of unbelieving Jews and Gentiles. We encountered the name Jesus in Matthew 1:

She will give birth to a son and you will name him Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins (Matthew 1:21).

The way Jesus would “save His people from their sins” was by dying as an innocent sacrifice, on the cross of Calvary. The birth of our Lord was a joyous occasion, as most Christmas cards convey, but it was the birth of a Savior who would die in Jerusalem. Thus, Matthew sets the scene for his readers early in his Gospel. The people of Jerusalem and its ruler were deeply troubled by the report that “the King of the Jews” had been born in Bethlehem.

We would do well to compare Matthew’s account of the birth of our Lord with that of Luke. While each author chose different occasions, events, and personalities, both prepared the reader for the fact that the One who was born in Bethlehem would die for the sins of His people. Matthew prepares us by reporting the slaughter of the infants; Luke does so through the words of Simeon to Mary:

34 Then Simeon blessed them and said to his mother Mary, “Listen carefully: this child is destined to be the cause of the falling and rising of many in Israel and to be a sign that will be rejected. 35 Indeed, as a result of him the thoughts of many hearts will be revealed—and a sword will pierce your own soul as well!” (Luke 2:34-35, emphasis mine)

If the events of our Lord’s birth were intended to foreshadow the later events of our Lord’s life, and death, then somewhere in the birth account the reader needed to be alerted to the fact that Jesus would die.

There is yet another dimension to the account of the slaughter of the infants that I believe we should at least consider. Some may find my connection a bit of a reach, but I am not entirely alone in my approach. I had to ask myself a very simple question: What was the reason why Herod had the boy babies put to death? The answer, I believe, is both simple and obvious: Herod had these boy babies slaughtered because of their identification with Jesus. Herod did not kill all the 12-year-old girls in Jerusalem; he killed all the boy babies 2 years old and younger in the vicinity of Bethlehem. Why? Because Herod was trying to kill Jesus, the “King of the Jews.” Herod had only those killed who were born where the Messiah was prophesied to be born, and those of the approximate age that the magi gave by telling him when the star first appeared. In one sense, these infants were the first martyrs for Christ.

We must now ask the question: What is the connection Matthew is seeking to draw between the slaughter of these infants and Jeremiah 31:15? Let me begin with several observations about the passage Matthew cites from Jeremiah 31.

(1) The context of Jeremiah 31 is Israel’s captivity and subsequent return and restoration. In particular, God is assuring the Northern Kingdom of Israel of their restoration after their Assyrian bondage. Notice these comments in the Bible Knowledge Commentary on verses 2-6:

God assured the Northern Kingdom that He will restore her. Those who had survived the sword (probably Assyria’s destruction of Israel) will yet experience God’s favor as He leads them into the desert for their new Exodus 16:14-15; 23:7-8; Hosea 2:14-15). The turmoil of their long years of exile will cease when God intervenes to give rest to the nation Israel. ⁶¹

Now notice the comments of the Bible Knowledge Commentary on verses 7-9:

As God leads these people on their new Exodus into Israel He will provide for their every need. He will guide the people beside streams of water (cf. Ex. 15:22-25; Num. 20:2-13; Ps. 23:2) and they will travel on a level path so they will not stumble. God will do all this because of His special relationship to Israel. He is Israel’s father (cf. Deut. 32:6), and Ephraim (emphasizing the Northern tribes of Israel) is his firstborn son (cf. Ex. 4:22). Jeremiah used the image of a father/son relationship to show God’s deep love for His people (cf. Hosea 11:1, 8).⁶²

The “captivity” may very well include the later Babylonian captivity as well. Ramah, we are told, was the staging point from which the people of Judah were sent on their way to Babylon:

Thus Jeremiah was picturing the weeping of the women of the Northern Kingdom as they watched their children being carried into exile in 722 b.c. However, Jeremiah could also have had the 586 b.c. deportation of Judah in view because Ramah was the staging point for Nebuchadnezzar’s deportation (cf. 40:1).⁶³

(2) The mood of this chapter is joyful celebration, because God will bring His people back to the land and restore them, showering His blessings upon them. In this sense, those who weep should weep no longer.

10 Hear what the Lord has to say, O nations.

And proclaim it in the faraway lands along the sea.

Say, “The one who scattered Israel will regather them.

He will watch over his people like a shepherd watches over his flock.”

11 For the Lord will set the descendants of Jacob free.

He will secure their release from those who had overpowered them.

12 They will come and shout for joy on Mount Zion.

They will be radiant with joy over the good things the Lord provides,

the grain, the fresh wine, the olive oil,

the young sheep and calves he has given to them.

They will be like a well-watered garden and will not grow faint and weary any more.

13 The Lord says, “At that time young women will dance and be glad.

Young men and old men will rejoice.

I will turn their grief into gladness.

I will give them comfort and joy in place of their sorrow” (Jeremiah 31:10-13).

(3) The place referred to in Jeremiah 31:15 is Ramah, and the person is Rachel, weeping over her children. We are first of all reminded of the death of Rachel, recorded in Genesis 35:16-19. Rachel has great difficultly giving birth to her son, whom she names, Ben-oni, “son of my sorrow.” In the end, Benjamin (“son of my right hand”) is born, but Rachel dies in childbirth. Rachel is the mother of Joseph (whose sons were Ephraim and Manasseh) and Benjamin. She was looked upon as the “mother of Israel.” She would be very closely associated with the Northern Kingdom of Israel. How easy it was to describe the mourning of the mothers of the Northern Kingdom as “Rachel weeping for her children” when the Assyrians led them away in captivity. The same words would be an apt description of the mothers of the Southern Kingdom mourning as they watched their sons carried off to Babylon.

(4) The context of Jeremiah 31 is also the “new covenant”:

27 “Indeed, a time is coming,” says the Lord, “when I will cause people and animals to sprout up in the lands of Israel and Judah. 28 In the past I saw to it that they were uprooted and torn down, that they were destroyed and demolished. At that time I will see to it that they are built up and firmly planted. I, the Lord, affirm it. 29 “When that time comes, people will no longer say, ‘The parents have eaten sour grapes, but the children’s teeth have grown numb.’ 30 Rather, each person will die for his own sins. The teeth of the person who eats the sour grapes will themselves grow numb. 31 “Indeed, a time is coming,” says the Lord, “when I will make a new agreement with the people of Israel and Judah. 32 It will not be like the old agreement that I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand and led them out of Egypt. For they violated that agreement, even though I was a faithful husband to them,” says the Lord. 33 “But I will make a new agreement with the whole nation of Israel after I plant them back in the land,” says the Lord. “I will put my law within them and write it on their hearts and minds. And I will be their God and they will be my people. 34 “People will no longer need to teach their neighbors and relatives to know me. That is because all of them, from the least important to the most important, will know me,” says the Lord. “All of this is based on the fact that I will forgive their sin and will no longer call to mind the wrong they have done” (Jeremiah 31:27-34, emphasis mine).

I find it especially significant how Jeremiah describes the effect of the New Covenant in verses 29 and 30. His point seems to be that while, under the Old Covenant, children bore the penalty for their parents’ sins, this would no longer be true under the New Covenant. Given these words in such close proximity to Jeremiah 31:15, I would find it difficult to say that the innocent suffering of the baby boys of Bethlehem was due to the sins of their parents. Given the results of our study earlier in this lesson I would also find it difficult to conclude that these infants were somehow under divine condemnation as a result of the death, in a way little different from that of Herod, who also dies in Matthew 2.

How do all these “dots” connect? I believe Matthew is telling us that Jesus is the new Israel. Jesus was subtly linked with Moses, whose life (among others) was sought by Pharaoh, but who God spared. Jesus was like David, who jealous King Saul sought to kill because he was a rival to his throne. Jesus was all that Israel failed to be, so that His journey to Egypt and back could be likened to the exodus, as Hosea referred to it in Hosea 11:1.

Jesus’ journey to Egypt and back was like Israel’s captivity (both the Assyrian captivity of the Northern Kingdom and the Babylonian captivity of the Southern Kingdom). Thus Matthew draws the connection between Rachel’s weeping over the departure of her children. Though she wept, thinking they would never again return, God had promised they would return and would be restored to blessing. Does this not imply that the weeping of the mothers (and fathers) of Bethlehem, whose sons were slaughtered by Herod, would be short-lived as well? And all of this because of Jesus, the new Israel. As these infants were identified with Christ in their death, so I believe they are going to be identified with Christ in His resurrection and return in glory.⁶⁴ Herod died, opposing the “King of the Jews;” these infants died because of their identification with the “King of the Jews.” How different their destinies will be.

Final Thoughts on Suffering From Romans 8

In this lesson, we have seen that there are various causes of human suffering, and there are also varied effects. While we may wish for simple answers to our questions regarding suffering (answers like that of the disciples in John 9, or by Job’s friends), such answers are often not to be found. It was many years before the man born blind learned the reason for his suffering, and he certainly must have concluded that it was worth it all. Job was not given the answer to his suffering. He was simply reminded of who God is, and that was enough for him. While simple, easy answers to our questions regarding suffering may not be available, there are some assurances which enable us to endure in faith. For a summary of these assurances, I would like to return to Romans 8.

(1) Suffering is part of our common experience as human beings (Romans 8:18-25). In 1 Corinthians 10, the Apostle Paul wrote:

13 No trial has overtaken you that is not faced by others. And God is faithful: He will not let you be tried too much, but with the trial will also provide a way through it so that you may be able to endure (1 Corinthians 10:13).

Living in a fallen world means that we must experience some of the after-effects of the fall, and thus suffering is a part of our lot, not just as Christians, but as human beings.

(2) Our Lord is always with us through His Holy Spirit. He assures us that we are God’s children and that we have the certain hope of eternal life. He also communicates for us in our times of suffering. Jesus assured us that He would be with us, even to the end of the age (Matthew 28:20). He told us that He would never leave us or forsake us (Hebrews 13:5). We are never alone in our suffering. Indeed, God often draws us near to Himself through our sufferings (see Psalm 73:21-28).

(3) Christians are assured that any suffering that comes their way has come from the hand of their loving God, for their good, and for His glory:

28 And we know that all things work together for good for those who love God, who are called according to his purpose, 29 because those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that his Son would be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters. 30 And those he predestined, he also called; and those he called, he also justified; and those he justified, he also glorified (Romans 8:28-30).

(4) We can triumphantly face our sufferings, in the light of the fact that Christ, our Savior, suffered infinitely for us, that we might have eternal life:

31 What then shall we say about these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? 32 Indeed, he who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all—how will he not also, along with him, freely give us all things? 33 Who will bring any charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies. 34 Who is the one who will condemn? Christ is the one who died (and more than that, he was raised), who is at the right hand of God, and who also is interceding for us. 35 Who will separate us from the love of Christ? Will trouble, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword? 36 As it is written, “For your sake we encounter death all day long; we were considered as sheep to be slaughtered.” 37 No, in all these things we have complete victory through him who loved us! 38 For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor rulers, nor things that are present, nor things to come, nor powers, 39 nor height, nor depth, nor anything else in creation will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord (Romans 8:31-39).

Praise God that we have a loving, sovereign God, who administers our afflictions for our good and for His glory!

---

⁴⁷ This is the edited manuscript of Lesson 3 in the Studies in the Gospel of Matthew series prepared by Robert L. Deffinbaugh on March 2, 2003.

⁴⁸ I have included verses 13-15 to supply some needed context.

⁴⁹ Unless otherwise indicated, all Scripture quotations are from the NET Bible. The NEW ENGLISH TRANSLATION, also known as THE NET BIBLE, is a completely new translation of the Bible, not a revision or an update of a previous English version. It was completed by more than twenty biblical scholars who worked directly from the best currently available Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts. The translation project originally started as an attempt to provide an electronic version of a modern translation for electronic distribution over the Internet and on CD (compact disk). Anyone anywhere in the world with an Internet connection will be able to use and print out the NET Bible without cost for personal study. In addition, anyone who wants to share the Bible with others can print unlimited copies and give them away free to others. It is available on the Internet at: www.netbible.org.

⁵⁰ I had an experience in India which helps me understand the way many people look at those who are blind or in some other way are infirmed. I was just entering India with my blind friend, Craig Nelson. We were being interviewed by a customs official when he seemed to take note of my friend’s handicap. Turning to me, the official asked, “Is he a sick man?” My friend Craig responded, “I’m not sick; I’m blind.” From that moment on the official refused to look at or to talk with my friend; he only talked to me. It was just as if a blind person did not even exist. No wonder the lame beggar outside the temple in Acts 3 expected to receive something, once he noticed Peter and John looking at him.

⁵¹ This man was born blind, so it would have been hard for him to sin first, and then experience blindness as divine punishment.

⁵² See Luke 4:18-19.

⁵³ See, for example, the healing of the man at the pool of Bethesda. Jesus returned to this man and said, “Look, you have become well. Don’t sin any more, lest anything worse happen to you” (John 5:14).

⁵⁴ Joseph’s harshness was a disguise (Genesis 42:7). His true feelings are revealed by his private tears (42:24; 43:30).

⁵⁵ Note also 2 Corinthians 1:3-7, where Paul teaches that the comfort which we gain in our suffering enables us to comfort others in their affliction.

⁵⁶ It should be noted that the death of these priests may also be related to the curse on Eli’s family, found in 1 Samuel 2:27-36.

⁵⁷ In Genesis, Abraham argued on behalf of the righteous; in Jonah, God argues on behalf of the “innocent” – children and animals.

⁵⁸ See Exodus 34:6; Nehemiah 9:17, 31; Psalm 103:8; 111:4; 112:4; 116:5.

⁵⁹ The one thing self-righteousness despises is grace.

⁶⁰ The reader will note that I have exchanged the word “innocent” for the word “godly,” which Abraham used (Genesis 8:23). The situation here is not identical with Sodom and Gomorrah, but it is similar.

⁶¹ Walvoord, J. F. Zuck, R. B., & Dallas Theological Seminary. 1983-c1985. The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures. Victor Books: Wheaton, IL. Emphasis mine.

⁶² Ibid.

⁶³ Ibid.

⁶⁴ This conclusion is very closely related to my understanding that babies who die go to heaven, a view which I deal with in much greater detail in my sermon on 2 Samuel 12:

Introduction

As you read the Bible you discover that life is not always a bed of roses - things don’t always turn out the way you expect or want. Sometimes it’s because of our own ambition or disobedience. Sometimes life just seems to take a twist in the road. What do you do when that happens? Where do you turn?

Kay Arthur tells the story of her friend’s father while he was deer hunting in the wilds of Oregon. He was following an old logging road, nearly overgrown by the encroaching forest, cradling his rifle in the crook of his arm. It was nearly evening and he was just thinking about returning to camp when a noise exploded in the brush nearby.  Before he even had a chance to lift his rifle, a small blur of brown and white came shooting up the road straight for him. It all happened so fast that he hardly had time to think. He looked down and there was a little brown cottontail rabbit, utterly spent, crowded up against his legs between his boots. It just sat there, trembling all over; it didn’t budge. This was all very strange because wild rabbits are frightened of people and it’s not often that you’d ever actually see one, let alone have one come and sit at your feet.

While he was puzzling over this, another player entered the scene. Down the road, maybe 20 yards away, a weasel burst out of the brush. When it saw the hunter, and its intended prey sitting at his feet, the predator froze in its track, its mouth panting, and its eyes glowing red. That’s when he understood that he had stepped into a little life-and-death drama in the forest. The cottontail was a fugitive on the run, exhausted by the chase, only moments from death. This hunter was its last hope of refuge. Forgetting its natural fear and caution, the little animal instinctively crowded up against him for protection from the sharp teeth of its relentless enemy.

The little creature was not disappointed. The man raised his powerful rifle and deliberately shot into the ground just underneath the weasel. The animal seemed to leap almost straight into the air a couple of feet and then rocketed back into the forest as fast as its legs could carry it. For a while, the little rabbit didn’t stir. It just sat there, huddled at the man’s feet in the gathering twilight while he spoke gently to it. Soon the fugitive hopped away from its protector into the forest.

Where does a fugitive run when the predators of trouble, worry, and fear pursue you? Where do you hide when your past pursues you like a relentless wolf, seeking your destruction? Where do you seek protection when the weasels of temptation, corruption, and evil threaten to overtake you? Where do you turn when your life is full of darkness and you can’t see the light of day (Kay Arthur, Stories for the Heart, 251).

Know this: God turns our darkness into dawn. That’s the theme of this series on the life of Abraham. We’re going to see in the story of “Hagar: The flight of a fugitive” that in the darkest experiences of life, that’s where we discover God. The lesson in this passage is that even when you act in self-will, your life is still controlled by God. Notice first that…

1. When you act in self will, your life is infiltrated by the world (1-6a).

Sarah’s frustration dominates her thinking and actions. Her frustration, combined, I suppose, with a certain fear, stems from the fact that she is childless. As she laments her barren condition, she expresses her frustration: “And Sarai said to Abram, “Behold now, the Lord has prevented me from bearing children” (16:2a). This was a desperate predicament for a woman of that day. To be barren was to be under the judgement of God. For a woman to be infertile was to incur the disfavor of your husband.

Sarah’s frustration produces Sarah’s folly. Without any consultation with God, she proposes a foolish plan. She says to her husband: “Go in to my servant; it may be that I shall obtain children by her” (16:2b). She decides to produce a child through her maid, Hagar. We don’t know anything about Hagar’s family background. We know that she is Egyptian, perhaps an Egyptian slave girl. Most likely Sarah had acquired her when she and Abraham went down to Egypt because of the famine, when Abraham lied about Sarah being his sister (Gen. 12:10-13). Sarah’s logic here is that, “God has promised me a child (Gen. 12:1-3; 15:5), and since I have no child, cannot bear a child, and am too old to have a child, it must be God’s will to use another woman to fulfill his promise.”

Do you see what logic can do to you? It’s so easy to justify your actions of self-will as being God’s will, based on logic, human reasoning, circumstances, feelings, self-justification. Human beings have an enormous capacity to rationalize their decisions, actions, desires, and beliefs. Be very careful when you’re tempted to take matters into your own hands without consulting God. When faced with a dilemma, God should be the first person to turn to for wisdom and direction, not to our own resources.

Sarah’s folly advances to Sarah’s fulfillment. She puts her plan into action. “2cAnd Abram listened to the voice of Sarai. 3 So, after Abram had lived ten years in the land of Canaan, Sarai, Abram’s wife, took Hagar the Egyptian, her servant, and gave her to Abram her husband as a wife” (16:2c-3). She was legally entitled to do this with her servant and she was acting well within the customs and moral standards of the day. But she was acting in self-will, entirely independently of God, and wholly contrary to God’s standards for marriage and sexuality. This was entirely worldly thinking and behavior. This is what can happen when you act in self-will: your life can be infiltrated by the world’s standards, priorities, and values.

How much better it would have been if Sarah had trusted God to carry out his promise to make of Abraham a great nation. She certainly shouldn’t have considered giving a pagan, idolatrous Gentile to her husband to bear God’s promised child. This was a worldly alliance if ever there was one. The shame is that Abraham becomes an accomplice. Rather than exercise his leadership and express his trust in God, he agrees to Sarah’s plan: “And he went in to Hagar, and she conceived” (16:4a).

Abraham should have refused Sarah’s scheme. He should have obeyed God’s law and believed the divine promise. To attempt to produce the promised child through Hagar was lack of faith in God’s power and lack of trust in God’s word. So, be careful who you are influenced by. Abraham was influenced by Sarah, his wife, but her perspective was worldly, humanistic, self-willed. She wasn’t spiritually mature. She was concerned more with having a son than doing God’s will. She wasn’t a very good role model for Abraham to listen to.

Just when the plan seemed to be working, the plot thickens. Sarah hadn’t counted on Hagar’s reaction. Hagar had her own agenda. She used this unholy alliance to further her own interests. Nonetheless, we are somewhat sympathetic to Hagar because she appears to be the innocent victim of Sarah’s scheme. She acts as any worldly, unbeliever might act, with no regard for God’s moral standards and ready to better herself through selfish ambition. The flesh, the world, and the devil play themselves out through her but out of it all she comes to know God as her personal Saviour, her Redeemer.

Now Sarah’s plan began to unravel, because “when (Hagar) saw that she had conceived, she looked with contempt on her mistress” (16:4b). Even before she gave birth, Hagar’s attitude to Sarah changed, from subservience to scorn, from obedience to opposition. She saw that she could do what Sarah could not - i.e. conceive. This made her, in her own estimation, more valuable to Abraham than Sarah.

Hagar had been in this household now for, probably, at least 10 years. For 10 years she had worked as Sarah’s maid. Now she sees an opportunity to get ahead, to become more than just a servant. By having a child by Abraham she would become his wife! If she became his wife, she would have influence, control, freedom, power, and, more importantly, equality with Sarah. Do you see what happens when you fail to rely on God and act in self-will? 

(1) When you act in self-will, the world infiltrates your life. Abraham and Sarah had gone to Egypt 10 years before to satisfy their hunger during the famine instead of relying on God’s provision. And while they were there, the world infiltrated their life when they acquired Hagar - pagan thinking and pagan ways entered their home. Even though they had been back from Egypt for 10 years (16:3), the impact of dabbling with the world still remained.

(2) When you act in self-will, you adopt worldly thinking, like scheming, rationalizing, self-centeredness, selfish ambition.

(3) When you act in self-will, you practice worldly ways. The culture said it was alright for Abraham to have Hagar as a concubine. Everybody was doing it. But whenever a sexual relationship is established on any other basis than God’s plan for marriage, it causes irreparable harm. Abraham’s relationship with Hagar caused an immediate problem not only between Sarah and Hagar but also between Sarah and Abraham.

(4) When you act in self-will, you succumb to worldly ambition. It’s a fearful force in some people’s lives – to get ahead at any cost.

(5) When you act in self-will, you practice the works of the flesh. It’s impossible to live for God in the power of the Spirit when you’re living for self in the works of the flesh. If you act in the flesh you will probably react in the flesh as well.

Sarah certainly reacts in the flesh. She reacts in the flesh by blaming Abraham. “And Sarai said to Abram, ‘May the wrong done to me be on you! I gave my servant to your embrace, and when she saw that she had conceived, she looked on me with contempt’” (16:5a). She says: “Abraham, what were you thinking? I gave Hagar to you to produce a child – that’s all. But instead you’ve turned Hagar against me! Poor me! She hates me now.”

Sarah reacts in the flesh by blaming Abraham and she reacts in the flesh by passing the buck to God. Listen to her phony pious language. She says: “May the Lord judge between you and me” (16:5b). She says: “Let God judge whether I am at fault for suggesting the idea or whether you are at fault for heeding my advice.” Why didn’t she consider God before this? Where was her reliance on God’s judgement when she dreamed up the whole scheme to start with? Religious language is often used as a cover for thoroughly irreligious thoughts, motives, and actions.

Hagar also reacts in the flesh by scorning her mistress, despising the one whom she formerly honored and obeyed.

And Abraham reacts in the flesh by becoming callous and irresponsible. “But Abram said to Sarai, ‘Behold, your servant is in your power; do to her as you please’” (16:6a). He says, “She’s your servant; you deal with the problem.” Whatever happened to all those 10 years of Hagar’s faithful service? Where is the relationship, the compassion and care for this servant? And what happened to taking responsibility for one’s own actions?

How easily we shirk responsibility! We take matters into our own hands and leave God out. Then we don’t like the consequences. One minute we’re acknowledging, like Sarah, that God has done such-and-such, and the next we’re acting independently in self-will. If she acknowledged that “the Lord has prevented me from bearing children”, why didn’t she consult God as to what to do about it? Why not wait on God for guidance? Why not recognize the providential hand of God?

When you mess up you need to repent, not blame somebody else for it, certainly not God! How often do we want to take the easy way out and let someone else deal with the consequences of our actions? How easily we cast people aside with no concern for their welfare, dispense with them like so much household waste.

Sarah’s folly could not be that easily remedied. Do you know that this one act started a rivalry between two people groups (Israelites and Arabs) that has lasted throughout history and which has caused oceans of blood to be shed ever since? All the result of Sarah’s folly.

When you act in self-will, your life is infiltrated by the world. And ...

2. When you act in self-will, your life is turned upside down (16:6b-9).

The folly of Sarah’s misguided plan precipitates Hagar’s flight. “Then Sarai dealt harshly with her, and she fled from her” (16:6b). Previously, Sarah feared being despised by Abraham for her infertility and she misused Hagar to carry out her sordid scheme. Now, Sarah is despised by Hagar and she mistreats Hagar, again. In fact, she mistreats her so badly that Hagar flees as a fugitive. Hagar’s life has gone from riches to rags, from being a maid to the wife of a wealthy man, to a single, pregnant, homeless, despondent woman on the run. All of these conditions are hard and depressing. Being single and pregnant is hard and depressing. Being homeless is hard and depressing. Being on the run is hard and depressing. Being single, pregnant, homeless, and on the run is a recipe for  disaster.

How quickly your life can be turned upside down! One minute you’re living in the lap of luxury; the next, you don’t know where your next meal is coming from. One minute you have a kind boss and good job prospects; the next, you’re cast aside, out on your ear. One minute you’re part of a loving family; the next, you’re caught in the middle of a family feud. One minute you’re single and free; the next, your pregnant and tied down. One minute everything is looking rosy; the next minute your world is dark and bleak.

How do you deal with that? Where do you turn when your life is turned upside down? One thing you don’t do is run away into the wilderness. That’s an act of self-will, taking matters into your own hands. The wilderness is no place to be when you’re in trouble, distressed, desperate; when you’re vulnerable, isolated, despondent. That’s when you need protection, care, support, community.

Hagar flees into the wilderness of Shur where “the angel of the Lord found her by a spring of water in the wilderness, the spring on the way to Shur” (16:7). There are times in our lives when we find ourselves in the wilderness, in a lonely place. Sometimes people act foolishly towards us. Sometimes we act foolishly towards God and other people. And sometimes we react by fleeing as a fugitive, only to find ourselves in the desert, abandoned and alone. When we hit rock bottom, those are the times when God steps in, assuring us of his favor and showing us that he is still in control.

“And (the Lord) said, ‘Hagar, servant of Sarai, where have you come from and where are you going?’” (16:8a). She knows where she came from but she doesn’t know where she’s going. “She said, ‘I am fleeing from my mistress Sarai’” (16:8b). Life for her was full of uncertainty; she didn’t know the future. She had started down a one-way street and now it’s turning out to be a dead-end with nowhere to turn. The only way Hagar can turn with certainty is backwards. “The angel of the Lord said to her, ‘Return to your mistress and submit to her’” (16:9). All that Hagar had and was came from being Sarah’s maid. That was her identity, her position in life. She had left that position without notice or permission and she must return to that position. It wouldn’t be easy to return but it would be right. It was wrong to be rejected, but it was right to go back and face the music. Though Sarah had wronged her, she must not retaliate with another wrong. That’s the result of self-will and personal ambition, not God’s direction. Hagar was as ambitious as Sarah was independent and both character traits lead to trouble.

When you carry out your own independent plans without consulting God, you can expect your life to be turned upside down. When you’re ambitious to improve yourself and get ahead without God’s leading, you may suddenly find yourself in a desert place - lonely, isolated, depressed, desperate. When you act in self-will, the only solution is to repent, turn back to God, and be obedient. It may not be easy but it’s right.

First, then, when you act in self-will your life is infiltrated by the world. Second, when you act in self-will your life is turned upside down. But know this…

3. When you act in self-will, your life is still controlled by God (16:10-14).

After Sarah’s folly and Hagar’s flight, then we see God’s favor. When everything looks black, God turns darkness into dawn. “10 The angel of the Lord also said to her, ‘I will surely multiply your offspring so that they cannot be numbered for multitude.’ 11 And the angel of the Lord said to her, ‘Behold, you are pregnant and shall bear a son. You shall call his name Ishmael, because the Lord has listened to your affliction. 12 He shall be a wild donkey of a man, his hand against everyone and everyone’s hand against him,
and he shall dwell over against all his kinsmen’” (16:10-12).

God is “the One who hears.” That’s what “Ishmael” means. God is the One who cares for and comforts the desperate and the homeless, who pours grace into troubled hearts, who turns darkness into dawn. He pours his grace into Hagar’s heart by giving her a promise of his favor, that she would be the mother of a great nation. Her child would not be the child of the promise made to Abraham, but the child of a promise made directly to her. But there would be consequences to her actions - her son would be a “wild” man.

That which is born of the flesh is flesh; it cannot be controlled. Ishmael was the product of an utterly fleshly, worldly union. He was the product of a blatantly unequal yoke between a believer and an unbeliever. You cannot mix faith and flesh, law and grace, promise and works.

In the midst of our darkness and despair, God is “the One who hears” and God is “the One who sees.” “13 So she called the name of the Lord who spoke to her, ‘You are a God of seeing,’ for she said, ‘Truly here I have seen him who looks after me.’ 14 Therefore the well was called Beer-lahai-roi; it lies between Kadesh and Bered” (16:13-14). God had “heard” Hagar and he had “seen” her. He knew all about her. And Hagar had “seen” God, even in the desert and darkness of her life. No wonder she called the well Beer-lahai-roi, “the well of him who lives and sees me.” This idolatrous, unbelieving Gentile now knew that God was alive and active in her life. He is not the God of the Jews only but of the Gentiles also.

Concluding Remarks

In the darkest experiences of our lives, that’s where we discover God, his constant care and sovereign control. Remember: Even when you act in self-will, your life is still controlled by God. In the deepest extremities of desolation and brokenness, we come face to face with God and we find fellowship, nearness, instruction, comfort, hope, communion, acceptance, and relationship. In the places where we least expect to meet God, he manifests himself to us - he bestows his favor on us; he strengthens us, comforts us, and encourages us to face the hardest and darkest experiences of life; he hears our cry and sees our circumstances. In his presence the desert becomes an oasis where we receive refreshing, spiritual renewal that enables us to go back and face the realities of life. “And Hagar bore Abram a son, and Abram called the name of his son, whom Hagar bore, Ishmael. Abram was eighty-six years old when Hagar bore Ishmael to Abram” (16:15-16).

If you’re not a Christian, you’re in the desert without God. You need God. He  knows all about you and he is in full control of your life. You need God for salvation through Christ.

If you are a Christian, you may also be in a desert place today, but you are not alone. Perhaps you’ve acted in self-will and your life has turned upside down as a result. Perhaps you’re experiencing dark circumstances in your life. You don’t know where to turn. You feel abandoned and desperate. Perhaps you’re facing a health crisis, or financial obligations you can’t meet, or sexual temptations that won’t go away. Perhaps you’re struggling spiritually with your relationship to God, with what the Christian life is about, with what God wants you to do with your life. Perhaps you’re making a heavy decision about a marriage partner or career. Whatever your situation, Christ turns darkness into dawn. He is with you to instruct you and encourage you. The barriers of darkness can be broken today. You can receive Christ’s comfort, strength, encouragement, and care.

If you need to meet with God, why don’t you take this moment to confess that sin that has caused darkness in your life, to cast yourself on the Lord for his direction and protection and provision, to repent of your self-will and neglect of God in your life, to ask God for relief from the dark circumstances of your life, or to pray for friends and family who desperately stand in need of God. Will you do that today?