| Back to Home Page | Back to Book Index
|
Jeremiah
Chapter Thirty-five
Jeremiah 35
Chapter Contents
The obedience of the Rechabites. (1-11) The Jews'
disobedience to the Lord. (12-19)
Commentary on Jeremiah 35:1-11
(Read Jeremiah 35:1-11)
Jonadab was famous for wisdom and piety. He lived nearly
300 years before
2 Kings 10:15. Jonadab charged his posterity not
to drink wine. He also appointed them to dwell in tents
or movable dwelling:
this would teach them not to think of settling any where in this world. To keep
low
would be the way to continue long in the land where they were strangers.
Humility and contentment are always the best policy
and men's surest
protection. Also
that they might not run into unlawful pleasures
they were to
deny themselves even lawful delights. The consideration that we are strangers
and pilgrims should oblige us to abstain from all fleshly lusts. Let them have
little to lose
and then losing times would be the less dreadful: let them sit
loose to what they had
and then they might with less pain be stript of it.
Those are in the best frame to meet sufferings who live a life of self-denial
and who despise the vanities of the world. Jonadab's posterity observed these
rules strictly
only using proper means for their safety in a time of general
suffering.
Commentary on Jeremiah 35:12-19
(Read Jeremiah 35:12-19)
The trial of the Rechabites' constancy was for a sign; it
made the disobedience of the Jews to God the more marked. The Rechabites were
obedient to one who was but a man like themselves
and Jonadab never did for
his seed what God has done for his people. Mercy is promised to the Rechabites.
We are not told respecting the performance of this promise; but doubtless it
was performed
and travellers say the Rechabites may be found a separate people
to this day. Let us follow the counsels of our pious forefathers
and we shall
find good in so doing.
── Matthew Henry《Concise Commentary on Jeremiah》
Jeremiah 35
Verse 1
[1] The
word which came unto Jeremiah from the LORD in the days of Jehoiakim the son of
Josiah king of Judah
saying
The word —
This is another evidence that the prophecies of this book are not left us in
that order wherein they were delivered; for those which we had in the two or
three foregoing chapters being in the time of Zedekiah
must needs be ten or
eleven years after this.
Verse 2
[2] Go unto the house of the Rechabites
and speak unto them
and bring them
into the house of the LORD
into one of the chambers
and give them wine to
drink.
Rechabites —
These Rechabites had their name from Rechab their father
descended from
Hemath
a Kenite
who is also called Hobab
Judges 4:11
or Jethro the father in law of
Moses.
Verse 4
[4] And
I brought them into the house of the LORD
into the chamber of the sons of
Hanan
the son of Igdaliah
a man of God
which was by the chamber of the
princes
which was above the chamber of Maaseiah the son of Shallum
the keeper
of the door:
Igdaliah — A
prophet.
The princes —
The chamber were the princes were wont to meet.
Verse 6
[6] But
they said
We will drink no wine: for Jonadab the son of Rechab our father
commanded us
saying
Ye shall drink no wine
neither ye
nor your sons for
ever:
Jonadab —
Jonadab of whom we read
2 Kings 10:15
was the father
that is the
progenitor of the Rechabites
at three hundred years distance.
Verse 7
[7] Neither shall ye build house
nor sow seed
nor plant vineyard
nor have
any: but all your days ye shall dwell in tents; that ye may live many days in
the land where ye be strangers.
That ye may live —
Jonadab cautions his sons by a thrifty
sober
laborious life
to which they
had been bred
in keeping flocks
to avoid any thing which might expose them to
the envy or hatred of the people amongst whom they were come to sojourn.
Verse 10
[10] But
we have dwelt in tents
and have obeyed
and done according to all that Jonadab
our father commanded us.
Tents —
Moveable habitations
which they could with little labour remove to feed their
flocks.
Verse 19
[19]
Therefore thus saith the LORD of hosts
the God of Israel; Jonadab the son of
Rechab shall not want a man to stand before me for ever.
For ever —
For ever here signifies the ever of the Jewish state
or church.
── John Wesley《Explanatory Notes on Jeremiah》
35 Chapter 35
Verses 1-19
Go unto the house of the Rechabites
and speak unto them
and
bring them into the house of the Lord
into one of the chambers
and give them
wine to drink.
The Rechabites
Did the Lord make a proposal to total abstainers to drink
wine? Did he send for them to a kind of wine festival? Is this the meaning of
the Lord’s Prayer
“Load us not into temptation”? Is not the Lord always thus
leading men into temptation?--not in the patent and vulgar sense in which that
term is generally understood
but in a sense which signifies drill
the
application of discipline
the testing of principles and purposes and
character? Is not all life a temptation? The Lord tries every man. There need
be no hesitation in offering the prayer
“Lead us not into temptation.” People
have tried to soften the words. They have said instead of “lead” “leave us not
in temptation”; but these are the annotations of inexperience and folly
or
superficiality. We are not men until we have been thus moulded
tried
qualified. We can do little for one another in that pit of temptation. We must
be left with God. There is one Refiner; He sits over the furnace
and when the
fire has done enough He quenches the cruel
flame. Think it no strange thin that
temptation hath befallen you; yea
think it not strange that God Himself has
given you opportunities by which you may be burned. He never gives such an
opportunity without giving something else. Alas
how often we see the
opportunity and not the sustaining grace! The drinking of wine in this case was
to be done in “the house of the Lord.” Now light begins to dawn. Mark the
limitations of our temptation. The Lord is never absent from His house. Let God
tempt me
and He will also save me; let Him invite me into His own house
that
there
under a roof beautiful as heaven
He may work His will upon me
and
afterwards I shall stand up
higher in nature
broader in manhood
truer in the
metal of the Spirit. Observe the details of this mysterious operation. The men
who were taken were proved men (verse 3). When the Lord calls for giants to
fight His battle and show the strength of His grace
they are chosen men. All
these men were conspicuous witnesses for the truth: they were identified with
the faith of Israel; they were the trustees of the morality of society. It is
so in all ages. There are certain men whom we may denominate our stewards
trustees
representatives; as for ourselves
we say
it is not safe to trust
us; we are weaker than a bruised reed; we cannot stand great public ordeals; we
were not meant to be illustrations of moral fortitude: spare us from the agony
of such trial! There are other men in society whom God Himself can trust. What
did the sons of Rechab say? Herein is a strange thing
that children should
obey the voice of a dead father. Yet this is a most pleasing contention; this is
an argument softened by pathos. The men stood up
and did not speak in their
own name; they said
We be the sons of a certain man
who gave a certain law
and by that law we will live
and ever will live. The trial took place in the
chamber of the sons of Hanan
the son of Igdaliah
a man of God
which was
above the chamber of Maaseiah. The father of Maaseiah was Shallum
who was the
husband of Huldah the prophetess
who had taken an active part in the
reformation wrought in the reign of Josiah. So all these were so many
guarantees of probity
and strength
and success. There will be no evil wrought
in that chamber I Not only are the Rechabites there
but their fathers are with
them in spirit. Though our fathers
physical and spiritual
be dead
yet they
may live with us in the spirit
and may go with us and sustain us in all the
trials and difficulties of life. “We will drink no wine.” Note the definiteness of the
answer. No inquiry is made about the kind of wine. Men are saved by their
definiteness. A strong
proud
decisive answer is the true reply to all
temptation. An oath that strikes as with a fist of iron
a denial that is like
a long
sharp two-edged sword
--these must be our policies and watchwords in
the time of danger. The reason is given (verse 6). It is a filial argument.
Good advice is not always thrown away; and men should remember that though
exhortation may be rejected for a long time
yet there are periods when it may
recur to the memory and come upon the whole life like a blessing sent from God.
The argument is a fortiori. The Lord has shown how the sons of
Jonadab can refuse wine: now He will take this example and apply it to the
whole host of Judah
and He will say
See what one section of your country can
do; if they can do this
why cannot you be equally loyal and true? why cannot
you be equally obedient to the spirit of righteousness? for three hundred years
this bond has been kept in this family; never once has it been violated: if one
family can do this
why not a thousand families? if one section of the country
why not the whole nation? This was God’s method of applying truth to those who
needed it. Thus we teach one another. One boy can be obedient; why not all
boys? One soul can be faithful; why not all souls? God in His providence says:
See what others can do
and as they toil and climb and succeed in reaching the
highest point
so do ye follow them: the grace that made them succeed will not
fail you in the hour of your trial and difficulty. (J. Parker
D. D.)
We will drink no wine: for
Jonadab the son of Rechab
our father
commanded us.
The Rechabites
St. Austin says of the Syrophenician woman
who was both hardly
spoken of by our Saviour at first
and anon commended highly before her face;
she that took not her reproach in scorn
would not wax arrogant upon her
commendation; so these Rechabites who lived with good content in a life full of
neglect
may the better endure to have their good deeds scanned
without fear
of begetting ostentation. And therefore I will branch out my text into four
parts
in every of which they will justly deserve our praise
and in some our
imitation. First
when the prophet Jeremiah did try them with this temptation
whether they would feast it and-drink wine
they make him a resolute denial
a
prophet could.
draw them to no inconvenient act. Some are good men of
themselves
but easily drawn aside by allurements; such are not the Rechabites.
He that will sin to please another
makes his friend either to be a God that
shall rule him
or a devil that shall tempt him. Three things
says Aristotle
do preserve the life of friendship.
1. To answer love with like affection.
2. Some similitude and likeness of condition.
3. But above either
neither to sin ourselves
nor for our sakes to
lay the charge of sin upon our familiars.
No
he is too prodigal of his kindness
that giveth his friend
both his heart and his conscience. I may not forget how Agesilaus’ son behaved
himself in this point toward his own father: the cause was corrupt wherein his
father did solicit; the son answers him with this modesty: Your education
taught me from a child to keep the laws
and my youth is so inured to your
former discipline
that I cannot skill the latter. Here let rhetoricians
declaim Whether this were duty or disobedience. But let us examine the case by
philosophy. I am sure that no man s reason is so nearly conjoined to my soul as
my own appetite
although my appetite be merely sensitive. And must I
oftentimes resist my own appetite
and enthral it as a civil rebel: and have I
not power much more to oppose any man’s reason that Persuades me unto evil
his
reason being but a stranger unto me
and not of the secret council of my soul!
Yes
out of question. How it pities me to hear some men say
that they could
live as soberly
as chastely
as saintlike as the best
if it were not for
company! Fie upon such weakness: says St. Austin
If thy mother speak thee
fair
if the wife of thy bosom tempt thy heart
beware of Eve
and think of
Adam. The serpent was a wise creature (Genesis 3:1-24)
and Eve could not but
take his word in good manners. Fond mother of mankind
so ready to believe the
devil
that her posterity ever since nave Dean slow to believe God. Never can
there be a better season for nolumus
for every Christian to be a
Rechabite
than when any man reacheth out a cup of intemperance unto us
to say
boldly
We will not drink it. Now I proceed to the second part of my text
which hath a strong connection with the former; for why did they resist these
enticements
and disavow the prophet (verse 8)? Their obedience is the second
part of their encomium
they will obey the voice of Jonadab their father. The
name of father was that wherewith God was pleased to mollify our stony hearts
and bring them into the subjection of the fifth commandment. Surely as a
parricide
that killed his father
was to have no burial upon the earth
but
sewed in an ox hide and east headlong into the sea; so he that despiseth his
father deserves not to hold any place of dignity above others
but to be a
slave to all men. For what are we but coin that hath our fathers’ image stamped
upon it? and we receive our current value from them to be called sons of men.
And yet the more commendable was the obedience of the Rechabites
that their father
Jonadab being dead
his law was in as good force as if he had been living.
Concerning this virtue of obedience
let us extend our discourse a little
further
and yet tread upon our own ground. Obedience is used in a large sense
for a condition
or modus
annexed unto all virtues. As the magistrate may
execute justice dutifully under his prince
the soldier may perform a valiant
exploit dutifully under his captain; but strictly
and according to the pattern
of the Rechabites
says Aquinas. It is one peculiar and entire virtue
whereby
we oblige ourselves
for authority’s sake
to do things indifferent to be done
or omitted; for sometimes that which is evil may be hurtful prohibito to
the party forbidden: as the laws forbid a man to murder himself: sometimes a
thing is evil prohibenti
so treasons
adulteries
and thefts are
interdicted: but sometimes the thing is no way in itself pernicious to any
but
only propounded to make trial of our duty and allegiance
as when Adam was
forbid to eat the apple; and this is true obedience
not to obey for the
necessity of the thing commanded
but out of conscience and subjection to just
authority. Such obedience
and nothing else
is that which hath made the little commonwealth of
bees so famous: for are they not at appointment who should dispose the work at
home
and who should gather honey in the fields? they flinch not from their
task
and no creature under the sun hath so brave an instinct of sagacity. Let us gather up this
second part of my text into one closure: we commend the Rechabites for their
obedience
and by their example we owe duty to our parents
natural and civil
those that begot us
those that govern us. We owe duty to the dead
after our
rulers have left us in the way of a good life
and changed their own for a
better. We owe duty to our rulers in all things honest and lawful; in obeying
rites and ceremonies indifferent
in laws civil and ecclesiastical. But where
God controls
or wherein our liberty cannot be enthralled
we are bound ad patiendum
and happy if we suffer for righteousness’ sake. Now that the obedience of
the Rechabites was lawful and religious
and a thing wherein they might
profitably dispense with freedom and liberty
the third part of my text
that
is their temperance
will make it manifest
for in this they obeyed Jonadab. To
spare somewhat which God hath given us for our sustenance
is to restore a part
of the plenty back again; if we lay hands upon all that is set before us
it is
suspicious that we expected more
and accused nature of frugality. And though
the vine did boast in Jotham’s parable
that it cheered up the heart of God and
man
though it be so useful a creature for our preservation
that no Carthusian
or Caelestine
monk of the strictest order did put this into their vow to drink no wine
yet
the Rechabites are contented to be more sober than any
and lap the water of
the brook
like Gideon’s soldiers. Which moderation of diet did enable them to
avoid luxury and swinish drunkenness
into which sin whosoever falls makes
himself subject to a fourfold punishment. First
The heat of too liberal a
proportion kindles the lust of the flesh. Lot
who was not consumed in Sodom
with the fire of brimstone
drunkenness set him on fire with incestuous lust in
Zoar. What St. Paul hath coupled (2 Corinthians 6:1-18.)
let us not
divide; lastings go first
then follows pureness and chastity. Secondly
How
many brawls and unmanly combats have we seen? Thirdly
Superfluity of drink is
the draught of foolishness. Such a misery
in my opinion
that I would think
men had rather lose their right arm than the government of their reason
if
they knew the royalty thereof. Lastly
Whereas sobriety is the sustentation of
that which decays in man
drunkenness is the utter decay of the body. The
Rechabites had encouragement to take this vow upon them for three reasons:
1. As being but strangers to the true commonwealth of Israel.
2. To make the better preparation for the captivity of Babylon.
3. To draw their affections to the content of a little
and the
contempt of the world.
Now I follow my own method to handle the second consideration of
this vow
that these circumstances were not only well foreseen
but that the
conditions of the thing vowed are just and lawful. Not to tumble over all the
distinctions of the schoolmen
which are as multiplicious in this cause as in
any; of vows
some are singular
which concern one man and no more
as when
David vowed to build an house unto the Lord
this was not a vow of many
associated in that pious
work
but of David only. Some are public when there is a unity of consent in
divers persons to obtest the same thing before the presence of God. And such
was this vow in my text
it concerned the whole family of the Rechabites. That
this vow was of some moment in the practice of piety
appears by God’s
benediction upon them. For as it was said of Socrates’ goodness
that it stood
the common wealth of Athens in more stead than all their warlike prowess by sea
and land
so that religious life of the Rechabites was the best wall and
fortress to keep Judah in peace and safety. And almost who doth not follow
Christ rather to be a gainer by Him than a loser. Behold
we have left all and
followed Thee; that was the perfection of the apostles
that was the state of
the Rechabites; not simply all
everything that belonged to the maintenance of
a man
and so to live upon beggary
they have learned to ask nothing but a
gourd to cover their head
a few flocks of sheep to employ their hands
the
spring water to quench their thirst. They that must have no more
have cut off
superfluous desires
that they can never ask more. And so piety and a godly
life were chiefly aimed at in the vow of the Rechabites. The end and last part
of all is this: That forasmuch as God was well pleased with these abstemious
people that would drink no wine
therefore promise unto the Lord
and do the
deed; for that is my final conclusion
that a vow justly conceived is to be
solemnly performed. When we have breathed out a resolved protestation before
God
it is like the hour we spake it in
past and gone
and can never be
recalled. Says David
“I have poured out my soul in prayer
” as if upon his
supplication it were no longer his
but God s for ever. Surely if our soul be gone from us in our
prayers
then much more in our vows they are flown up to Heaven
like Lazarus
to the bosom of Abraham
they cannot
they should not return to earth again. He
that changed his sex in the fable is not so great a wonder
as he that changeth
any covenant which is drawn between God and his conscience. He that hath
consecrated himself to God
doth
as it were
carry heaven upon his shoulders.
Support your burdens in God’s name
lest if you shrink the wrath of God press
you down to the nethermost pit. I will give a brief answer to one question. Is
Christ so austere that He doth reclaim against all dispensation? no
says
Aquinas
you are loose again
if the thing in vow be sinful
nay if it be
unuseful
nay if it cross the accomplishment of a greater good. This is good
allowance
and well spoken. The careful pilot sets his adventure to a certain
haven
and would turn neither to the right hand nor to the left
if the winds
were as constant as the loadstone
but they blow contrary to his expectation.
Suppose a Rechabite protesting to drink no wine
had lived after the
institution of our Saviour’s Supper
when He consecrated the fruit of the
grape
and said
Drink ye all of this
would it pass for an answer at the Holy
Communion to say
We will drink no wine? No more than if he had sworn before
not to eat a paschal lamb
or any sour herbs
quite against the institution of
the passover. There is enough in this chapter to stride over this doubt if you
mark it. Jonadab indented with God
that he and his seed should live in
tabernacles for ever; and in tabernacles they did live for three hundred years.
Then comes the king of Babylon with an army into the country to invade the
land. It was dangerous now to live in tabernacles; there was no high priest
I
assure you
to absolve them; no money given to the publicans of the Church for
a dispensation: but they said
“Come and let us go to Jerusalem for fear of the
army of the Chaldeans and Syrians
and let us dwell at Jerusalem.” The vow was
unprofitable
tabernacles dangerous
and so the bond is cancelled. Yet
do not
take all the liberty due unto you
if I may advise you: there are two things
which you may choose to untie the knot of a vow. The peremptory rejecting of a
bad vow
and that is lawful
and the changing thereof into some other vow
and
that is more expedient
that God may have some service done unto Him
by way of
a vow. (Bishop Hacket.)
Obedience to parental authority
The first and principal commandment of the moral law
Honour thy
father and thy mother
begins with obedience to parents; but must of course be
interpreted in a wider sense so as to apply to all who have a right to
obedience--the persons to be honoured in that famous and excellent summary of
the Catechism are the King
and all in authority under him
my governors
teachers
spiritual pastors and masters
and last of all “my betters”; the
falling into disuse of such an instructive word is a fact of very great
significance and needs no comment. But duty to parents comes clearly first
which an old writer has called “the band and firmament of Commonwealths”; for
society is near its dissolution when this obligation is loosened or weakened in
any way. The stability of an empire like that of China is an illustration in
point
and I was struck some time ago by hearing a missionary of long
experience select this one virtue of reverence for parents as that which has for so many
centuries preserved the cohesion of that people. Affection may indeed be
missing
but obedience and respect for authority are
I believe
universal. So
it has come to pass that a nation that we despise outdoes us in the discharge
of one of the most elementary moral duties; not that Confucius is a better
teacher than Moses
or made any advance upon him
but that we are somehow
drifting from a commandment of God
and seem powerless to enforce it. To arrest
the widespread mischief we must go back to first principles
and seek to
re-establish authority in the family
in the elementary schools
in places of
higher education
and perhaps in the university itself. Authority must be
taught to be a trust delegated by God to some for the good of the whole body
and the applications
of the Christian precept: “All of you be subject one to another
” in its
several relations
must be laid down fearlessly and with distinctness by
teachers and preachers as the safeguard of society. To revert to filial
reverence. It was once
I believe
a characteristic of Englishmen
for even as
late as the last century sons would address their fathers by the reverential
title of “sir.” The virtue is not exotic
it can stand our rude climate
and it
must not be thought for a moment to be a poor sickly plant
that has no root in strong and
masculine natures. On the contrary
take a specimen of it from the most robust of our own countrymen.
To most of us is known the compunction of Dr. Johnson which has formed the
subject of an historical picture. He has related of himself
how when a young
man he refused to stand at his father’s stall to sell books; it was
he says
through pride he disobeyed
a trivial circumstance to a less sensitive man
but
it was a burden to him for fifty years
until on the very day he went to the
very spot where his father’s stall used formerly to be
and on a day of
business stood in Uttoxeter market
bareheaded
for an hour exposed to the
gibes of the passers-by
and the inclemency of the weather. “This was a penance
by which I trust I have propitiated heaven for the only instance I believe of
contumacy to my father.” Upon which Mr. Leslie Stephen
by no means a
sentimental writer
remarks: “The anecdote cannot be read without emotion
and
if it illustrates a touch of superstition in Johnson’s mind
it reveals too
that sacred depth
of tenderness which ennobled his character.” To both parents we are debtors. Mothers
are to be esteemed as highly as fathers
and dutiful obedience rendered to
them. Take care you despise them not in their old age or in lonely widowhood.
Value them all the more if they are alone. Do not think that you have outgrown
their wisdom
for in his mature years Solomon could stamp his own maxims with
the authority of his mother’s mint
and give them currency as the words which his mother
had taught him. The wishes of parents are also to be attended to
for wise
fathers dealing with grown-up children will not burden them with commands
but
will leave them to act upon what their sons know they would wish done. In a
book that furnished my vacation reading I lighted upon a passage in the undergraduate
life of Dr. Corrie that will interest some of us. “When he first came up
his
father
knowing his son’s great love for horses
and fearing the scenes of
temptation into which this taste might lead him
expressed a strong desire that
he would not go to Newmarket. This injunction was faithfully respected. Though
he was fully aware that his father would never ask him whether his wish had
been observed
his loyalty would not permit him to trifle with the confidence
thus placed in him.” A characteristic anecdote of a man who was known as the soul of honour
who if
he lacked sons of his own
was looked up to and reverenced by hundreds of
pupils and others
who felt their own principles of duty strengthened by his
unswerving fidelity to old traditions. Obedience to a father’s law is the whole idea of the
incarnation. Not to please Himself at all
but to surrender Himself wholly to
the Divine will
runs through all Christ’s life. When He cometh into the world He
saith
“I am come to do Thy will
O God
” and when He is about to leave the
world in that great fight of conflicting emotions the thought of submission
alone rules His prayer
“Not My will
but Thine be done.” Not only as a son
but as a citizen
as a member of the Jewish synagogue and nation
He is obedient to the
law
to every ordinance of man
for His Father’s sake. Conscious of His
Divinity
of His real relation to God at twelve years old
He goes meekly home
to be subject to earthly parents and to learn His trade. When the time of His
manifestation has come
He allows John to baptize Him
to fulfil an ordinance
of God
and by His obedience He approves John’s commission in the eyes of the people. Though
as Son
of God
He is free from the temple tax
yet He works a miracle to pay the due
that He might give no offence to the rulers who sat in Moses’ seat. He even
acknowledges that the civil power of the Roman Governor is of God. Under the terms of the new
covenant we are no mere
slaves but sons
and can claim the spirit of adoption
the will to wish all
things in conformity with God’s will
and the power to perform the same. I have
heard myself from the lips of those whose whole life has been most wilful and
contrary such a confession as this
“I love now as much to do things for God as
at one time I did everything against God
” for the love of Christ converts and
subdues a stubborn temper
which to its harm would kick against the pricks into
a service where there is no heavy burden
no galling yoke
but all is perfect
freedom. (C. E. Searle
D. D.)
The obedient Rechabites
I. The authority
of the family. The power of human descent and family tradition in moulding a
career is well illustrated in the case of the Rechabites.
1. It controlled the natural tastes. Its members must renounce
pleasure
comfort
and fixed habitation; their inheritance was the loss of
those very things which sons expect
and parents delight to bequeath. But with
the loss came a better gain
--health of body
purity of morals
loyalty of
conscience. They had that best possession
--noble character.
2. The authority of the family also controlled their external
alliances; those entering it by marriage must accept its obligations. A man may
leave father and mother to cleave unto his wife
but may not leave truth and
virtue.
3. In the same way the family tradition proved superior to
surrounding influences. They were as faithful in the city as in the country
as
loyal among strangers as where well known. So from lonely farmhouses among the
hills
young men and young women have gone to seek an easier fortune in the
great city
or in the lawless West
and been delivered from evil by the abiding
influence of their sanctified homes.
4. The faithfulness of the Rechabites displays the normal influence
of the family in transmitting a tendency to virtue
and confirming that
inherited disposition by congenial surroundings and careful training. This is
what God means the family to be
--His surest and mightiest agency for spreading
righteousness on the earth.
II. This higher
authority of God. If human descent and family tradition exert authority over
the individual
the Divine Creator and Governor holds a far higher claim upon
him. Whatever depravity sin may breed into the race
virtue is always its
normal life
holiness its ideal. The Scriptures describe man as directly
connected with God in his origin. “And God said
Let us make man in our image
after our likeness.” When the clay was shaped
He “breathed into his nostrils
thy breath of life
and man became a living soul.” The characteristics of our
Divine origin are as discernible as the marks of our human descent. Our
intellect is made after the likeness of the Divine mind
else the universe
would be to us an insoluble mystery. In our tastes we can trace kinship with
Him who has adorned the earth with beauty. Pure human affection gives us our
worthiest conception of the Divine love. Misfortune cannot turn it
ingratitude
cannot chill it
death itself cannot overcome it
The Heavenly Father uses this
earthly tie to symbolise His own regard; the Saviour describes His fostering
care and close union with the Church by naming it His “bride.” Our moral nature
is plainly Divine in origin. Conscience is the voice of God in man. He who
obeys it is lifted to the plane of Divine action
is made a co-worker with God.
Over this lordly realm
crowned its regent by the Creator Himself
is the
Personal Soul
the “Self
” the “I.” Self-consciousness is its throne
self-determination its sceptre. By this solemn conviction “I am
” “I will
” man
separates himself from all the universe around him; through this he balances
his soul against the whole world and weighs it down; with it he faces eternity.
He is his own
something for which the Infinite asks
and he may give. It is
here that man’s Divine origin finds its explanation; for the glad choice of God
all
the dignity of human nature was given; to this end converge the constant
teachings of the revealing universe
the open instructions of the inspired
Word
the solemn persuasions of the Holy Spirit. Lessons--
1. The responsibility of parents. One writer on heredity declares
that the dispositions of Bacon and Goethe were formed by the simple addition of
the dispositions of their ancestors. We know that passionate temper
fretfulness
and despondency may be inherited. Let a parent beware how he sins.
2. The responsibility resting upon the child of godly parents. When
one who has had a virtuous ancestry seeks out vice and courts godlessness
he
has not long to
wait before every red drop in his veins will turn against him and curse him
traitor. There is something back of his own will
--an authority he knows not
how to resist and cannot defy.
3. The ultimate responsibility of each soul to God. When Samuel J. Mills was struggling
against the convictions of the Spirit
he exclaimed
“I wish I had never been
born!” His mother replied
“But you are born
my son
and can never escape your
accountability to God.” The glad choice of the holy God is the highest exercise
of the created will. (C. M. Southgate.)
The obedience of the Rechabites
I. Wherein it
resembles christian obedience.
1. It was total. They did not consult their preferences or their
“affinities.” They did not proceed upon any law of “natural selection.” They
did not show punctilious fidelity with reference to one commandment
and great
laxity concerning another. This is one essential characteristic of Christian
obedience. It is total. If we can make choice of such commands as we feel like
obeying and disregard the rest
what are we but masters instead of subjects
dictating terms instead of receiving orders?
2. It was constant. It kept an unbroken path. It bore the stress of
storms and tests. And herein it was marked by another essential characteristic
of Christian obedience--a beautiful constancy. Enlistment in the Lord’s army is
for life
and there is no discharge in that war.
II. Wherein this
Rechabite obedience was unlike Christian obedience.
1. The Rechabites obeyed Jonadab: Christians obey God. This is a
substantive difference. And we must not confound things that radically differ.
The source of a command has a great deal to do with the value of obedience to
it. The lower relation must give way to the higher when the two conflict.
2. Jonadab’s commands
so far as we know
were for temporal and
material ends
in the interests of a rugged manhood and a sturdy independence.
God’s commands are for spiritual ends
for good of soul
and they stand vitally
connected with those higher interests that relate not only to the life that now
is
but to that which is to come. Rechabite obedience
therefore
conserves
temporal good; Christian obedience conserves eternal good.
3. Rechabite obedience was not necessary to salvation; Christian
obedience is indispensable.
III. Wherein it
shames Christian disobedience.
1. These Rechabites are obedient to their father Jonadab
a mere man
who had been dead nearly three hundred years
while Judah is in open and
flagrant disobedience to the Most High God.
2. Jonadab commanded but once
and he had instant and constant heed
generation upon generation
for centuries. “But I
” saith the Lord of hosts
the God of Israel--“I have spoken unto you
rising early and speaking. I have
also sent unto you
” &c.
3. Obedience to Jonadab was at a cost
and it brought at the best
only power to endure
and the spirit of independence. It left the Rechabites poor and homeless.
Obedience to God was also at a cost
but it gave His people assured
possessions
peace of conscience
protection from their enemies
and all the
exceeding riches of an eternal inheritance in God’s kingdom of grace and glory.
Yet the Rechabites obeyed Jonadab with a beautiful constancy
while Judah
hearkened not to the voice of the Lord.
Practical suggestions--
1. The very essence of Christian fidelity is obedience.
2. A true obedience has two infallible signs. It will have no
reservations
and it will never cry “Halt!”
3. See the shame and guilt of disobedience under the Gospel.
4. In respect to one particular in this Rechabite obedience
namely
abstinence from wine--three things are clear.
Wine-drinking is a sin “for that man who drinks with offence” (Romans 14:20). Wine-drinking is a sin for
that man who by it “puts a stumbling-block or an occasion to fall in a brother
s way (Romans 14:15). When wine-drinking wounds
a weak conscience” it is “as in against Christ” (1 Corinthians 8:12). (H. Johnson
D. D.)
The obedience of the Rechabites
Jonadab saw that his people were but a handful among a more
powerful people
and likely soon to be swallowed up by their neighbours
and he
hit upon a happy method of preserving their independent existence. He enjoined
them “not to drink wine”; this was to save them from luxury and intemperance
which would prey upon them from within
and make them ripe for destruction; and
he also commanded them “not to till the ground
nor to have any houses
nor to
dwell in cities”; this was in order that they might have no riches to tempt
others to make war upon them; and thus
to use his own words
“they might live
many days in the land wherein they were strangers.” Luxury and wealth are the
bane of nations
and by keeping his tribe a simple
pastoral people
pure in
their habits
and destitute of property
he accomplished his wishes for them.
I. The obedience
of the Rechabites contrasted with the disobedience of Israel to God. An
ancestor of that family
who had been dead nearly three hundred years
had
issued his commands
and they were still obeyed; but the living God had spoken
repeatedly to Israel
by His prophets
yet they would not hear. The commands of
Jonadab
too
were very arbitrary. There could be no sin in cultivating the
fields
or in living in houses
whatever moral worth there may have been in the
precept to drink no wine: but still
because Jonadab commanded it they obeyed.
The complaint of God has still an application. It is a fact
that among
sinners
any and every law
precept
or tradition
of mere human authority
is
better obeyed than the laws of God Himself. See
in a few instances
how this
has been verified. Mahomet arose
a sensualist
an adulterer
a breaker of
treaties
and a robber
and issued his commands
which for centuries have been
religiously obeyed. At the cry of the muezzin
and the hour of prayer
every
follower of his
whether in the desert
on board the ship
in the city
or the
field
suspends his labour
his pleasures
and even his griefs
and casts
himself upon his knees in prayer. But the blessed Jesus
pure
peaceful
and
glorious
speaks
and even those who acknowledge Him as Lord over all
and own
the goodness of His commands
can listen to such words as
“This do in
remembrance of Me
” and obey them not. The founder of some monkish order
again
has enjoined upon all his fraternity certain rules and austerities
and
he is obeyed. Day after day
and year after year
the same tedious round of
ceremonies is gone through with
as though salvation depended upon it
and the
deluded ones will rise at the midnight hour to inflict stripes upon themselves
or to offer prayer. But Christ may enjoin the reasonable duty of praying to our
Father in spirit and in truth
and multitudes can suffer days and years to
pass
and pray not. The commander of the order of Jesuits can place his
inferior priests in any country of the world
and whether the mandate be to act
as father confessor in some palace
or to Penetrate to China or Paraguay
there
is no more resistance for apparent regard for the sacrifices to be made than in
the machinery which is moved by mechanic power. Christ commands His disciples
to “go preach the Gospel to every creature
” but only here and there one goes
forth. The heathen priest bids the worshippers of idols to cast their children
rote the fire or the water
and it is done. Jesus says
“Suffer little children
to come to Me
” and has appointed a sacrament in which they may be received
but men will admit the duty
and yet neglect the baptism of their children. The
Rechabites of modern times
and Sons of Temperance
may institute a vow of
temperance
and it is kept; or command one of their number to minister to the
sick
and it is done; or provide well for their poor; but Christ says
that “no
drunkard shall enter heaven
” and enjoins charity to the sick and the
destitute
while many heed Him not.
II. The rewards of
obedience. Modern travellers
moreover
state that the Rechabites are still in
existence. Mr. Wolf
the famous Jewish missionary
asserts this as his belief.
“And another traveller who visited a tract to the south of Judea
which has
been unexplored for centuries
met there a native who claimed to be a
Rechabite
and when an Arabic Bible was shown to him
turned to this chapter and
read from it the description of his People
and said that it was still true of
them
and that they still kept the precepts of Jonadab
their father. Over
three thousand years have passed away since that family of the Kenites came
with Israel into Canaan
and for two thousand years no traces of them were
preserved; but now
after so long a lapse of time
recent discoveries have
brought them to light
retaining their name
and glorying in their
independence. Though surrounded by Mohammedan Arabs
they conform to the law of
Moses yet maintaining that they are not Israelites; and are much hated by the
Mussulman.” This account was given by a traveller so late as 1832
and is
confirmed by English residents at Mocha
and from other sources. No doubt every
promise of God’s Word is as abundantly fulfilled. We may not always be able to
trace out the literal accomplishment of every one as strikingly as in this
case
but we never could prove one promise in all the Bible false; and the more
light we have the more abundantly do we see that all have been yea and amen.
Let us rest upon God’s Word. Exceeding great and precious promises are given to
us in the sacred book. They are like good notes from a prompt paymaster
falling due at different times. We may sometimes question their worth
or may
even forget in the multitude of cares that we have such securities treasured
up
but the time of their payment will come
and we shall find all redeemed. (W.
H. Lewis
D. D.)
The Rechabites
Their record was an honourable one
and reached far back into the
early days of Hebrew history. When Israel was passing through the wilderness of
Sinai
the tribe of the Kenites showed them kindness; and this laid the
foundation of perpetual friendliness between the two peoples. They seem to have
adopted the religious convictions of Israel
and to have accompanied them into
the Land of Promise. Retaining their integrity as s pastoral people
the
Kenites maintained these friendly relations with Israel during the intervening
centuries; and it was of this tribe that the Rechabites
for such was the name
of this strange tent-loving people
had sprung ( 4:17-24; 1 Samuel 15:6; 1 Chronicles 2:55). About the time
of Elijah
and perhaps largely influenced by him
the sheikh or leader of one
branch of the Kenites was Jonadab the son of Rechab. He was dismayed at the
abounding corruption of the time
and especially of the northern kingdom
then
under the fatal spell of Jezebel’s and Ahab’s influence; and resembled some
rank jungle in whose steamy air
heavy with fever and poison
noisome creatures
swarm
and foul pestilences breed. In his endeavour to save his people from
such a fate
this noble man
who afterwards become Jehu’s confederate in
extirpating idolatry
bound his people under a solemn pledge to drink no wine
for ever; neither to build houses
nor sow seed
nor plant vineyards
but to
dwell in tents.
I. Jeremiah’s test
of the Rechabites. So soon as their arrival was noised abroad
and had come to
the ears of Jeremiah
he was seized by a Divine impulse to derive from them a
striking object-lesson for his own people. With an inventiveness which only
passionate love could have suggested
the prophet caught at every incident
and
used every method to awaken his people to realise their true position in the
sight of God. Probably a little group of Jews
arrested by the prophet s
association with these strange-looking men
followed them in to watch the
proceedings. They were curious witnesses of the prophet’s action
as he caused
bowls of wine to be set before the tribesmen
and cups to be offered them
that
they might dip them in and drink. They also heard the blunt unqualified refusal
of these quaint old-fashioned Puritans
“We will drink no wine
” followed
by an explanation of the solemn
obligation laid on them centuries before. The moral was obvious
Hero were men
loyal to the wish of their ancestor
though he was little more than a name to
them
and refusing the offered sweets in which so many freely indulged. How
great a contrast to the people of Jerusalem
who persistently disregarded the
words of the living God perpetually remonstrating against their sins! The prohibitions of
Jonadab were largely arbitrary and external; whilst those of Jehovah were
corroborated by the convictions of conscience
and consonant with the deepest
foundations of religion and morality. The voice of Jonadab was a cry coming
faintly from far down the ages; whilst Jehovah was ever speaking with each new
dawn
and in the voice of each fresh messenger whom He rose early to send. Such
devotion to principle; such persistent culture of simplicity
frugality
and
abstinence; such literal adherence to the will of the father of their
house--not only carried within them the assurance of perpetuity to the people
who practised them
but must receive the signature and countersign of the
Almighty. “Therefore thus saith the Lord of hosts
the God of Israel Jonadab
the son of Rechab
shall not want a man to stand before Me for ever.” This
phrase had a very profound significance. It suggested
of course
obviously
that the tribe should not cease to exist. The phrase is often used in Scripture
of priestly service. And may we not infer that where we meet that devotion to
principle
and that detachment from the world
which characterised these men
there will always be a strong religious tone
a knowledge of God
a power in
prayer and intercession
which are the essential characteristics of the
priests?
II. This elements
of a strongly religious life. Oh
to stand always before Him
on whose face the
glory of God shines as the sun in his strength! But if this is to be something
more than a vague wish
an idle dream
three things should be remembered
suggested by the words of the Rechabites.
1. There must be close adhesion to great principles. Many superficial
reasons might have suggested to the Rechabites compliance with the prophet s
tempting suggestion. The wine was before them; there was no sin against God in
taking it; the people around had no scruples about it; and the prophet himself
invited them. In contrast to this
it is the general tendency amongst men to
ask what is the practice of the majority; what is done by those in their rank
and station; and what will be expected of them. We drift with the current. We
allow our lives to be settled by our companions or our whims
our fancies or
our tastes. We make a grave mistake in supposing that the main purpose of our
life is something different from that which reveals itself in details. What we
are in the details of our life
that we are really and essentially. The truest
photographs are taken when we are unprepared for the operation. And
indeed
when we consider the characters of the early disciples of Jesus
or those of
saints
martyrs
and confessors
must we not admit that they were as scrupulous
in seeking the will of God about the trifles of their life
as the Rechabites
were in consulting the will and pleasure of the dead Jonadab? The thought of
God was as present with the one as of Jonadab with the other. And was not this
the secret of their strong and noble lives? What a revolution would come to us
all if it became the one fixed aim and ambition of our lives to do always those
things that are pleasing in His sight!
2. Abstinence from the spirit of the age. It was an immense gain in
every way for the Rechabites to abstain from wine. Wine was closely associated
with the luxury
corruption
and abominable revelries of the time (Isaiah 28:1-8). Their abstinence was not
only a protest against the evils which wore honeycombing their age
but was a
sure safeguard against participation in them. In these days the same principles
apply. Surely
then
we shall do well to say with the Rechabites
whoever may
ask us to drink
“We will drink no wine.” But wine may stand for the spirit of
the age
its restlessness
its constant thirst for novelty
for amusement
for fascination; its feverish
demand for the fresh play
the exciting novel
the rush of the season
the
magnificent pageant. It is easier to abstain from alcohol than from this
insidious spirit of our time
which is poured so freely into the air
as from
the vial of some demon sorceress.
3. We must hold lightly to the things around. The Rechabites dwelt in
tents. They drove their vast flocks from place to place
and were content with
the simple life of the wandering shepherd. It was thus that the great
patriarchs had lived before them (Hebrews 11:9; Hebrews 11:13). It is difficult to say
what worldliness consists in. What would be worldly to some people is an
ordinary part of life’s circumstances to others. But all of us are sensible of
ties that hold us to the earth. We may discover what they are by considering
what we cling to; what we find it hard to let go; what we are always striving
to augment; what we pride ourselves in. (F. B. Meyer
B. A.)
The Rechabites
I. Their
principles are tried. Three features mark this trial.
1. They were offered wine. After s family record of three hundred
years’ abstinence
the evil thing is set before them
free of cost. As they
fortunately had no experience of its power by reason of former habits of
intemperance
they could look upon the enemy without fear or danger.
2. Wine was offered them by a good man. Jeremiah was the generous
host. Surely
God’s prophet would not offer them an evil thing
or tempt them to do wrong! A
great many well-meaning people place the tempting cup before their guests
and
their guests are not the sturdy sons of Jonadab
and much evil is wrought.
3. Wine was offered in the Lord’s house. They were in the chamber of
good men
on “holy ground
” and in strict privacy. Under such circumstances
might they not suspend their stringent rules of life? They had broken one vow
in coming into Jerusalem
might they not yield another point
and adopt one of
the ways of city
people? Life is full of opportunities for testing principles and character.
II. Their
principles are triumphant.
1. It was prompt and definite. They reasoned not “with flesh and
blood
” nor did they offer any compromise.
2. It was complete. Their pledge was a comprehensive one
involving
dwelling in tents
and living a very unworldly life (verses 6-10). Total abstinence
was not enough. Their father’s commandment
was broad. Sobriety is not
salvation.
3. It was general. “We
our wives
our sons
our daughters” (verse
8). The domestic peace had not been broken by faithlessness and sin. A blessed
unity in principle and in practice.
4. It was constant. Three hundred years had passed since they
received these injunctions
and they still regarded them as binding and sacred.
III. Their actuating
motive.
1. It was filial love. “For Jonadab our father commanded us” (verse
6) was the only defence they cared to offer for their singular conduct. A pious
ancestry is an invaluable blessing; but the filial spirit must turn that boon
to practical account.
2. Men live after death. “He being dead
yet speaketh.” Time cannot
impair the power of a good life.
IV. The exemplary
meaning of their conduct. They were not tried for their own sake
but for the
good of others.
1. Conduct makes personal influence. “No man liveth unto himself.”
The end of our trials may concern others more than ourselves. The Jews were to
be instructed by the behaviour of the Rechabites.
2. The sobriety of one condemns the drunkenness of the other. If one
life can be good
other lives can too.
3. It was a contrast of privilege. In obedience to an earthly father
who had been dead three centuries
the sons of Jonadab had kept their pledges.
The Jews had received Divine commands
all the prophets had spoken to them
and
yet they disobeyed (verses 14
16).
4. It justified Divine judgment. “Therefore . . . I will bring upon
Judah
” &c. (verse 17). The abstinence of Rechab condemns inebriate Judah.
5. National intemperance is a swift destroyer.
6. Personal drunkenness makes up the national sin. The units make the
million.
V. The rechabites
reward.
1. Divine approval Jeremiah assured them of God’s benediction.
2. Divine preservation. Jonadab promised his sons long life
“many
days in the land where ye be strangers” (verse 7)
and that promise God
ratified. Medical and statistical science have come to Jonadab’s view.
3. Divine honour. “Jonadab
the son of Rechab
shall not want a man
to stand before Me for ever” (verse 19). Standing before God has reference to a
priestly relationship and service. (R. W. Keighley.)
A reason for total abstinence
The late Frances E. Willard once asked the greatest of inventors
Thomas A. Edison
if he were a total abstainer; and when he told her that he
was
she said
“May I inquire if it was home influence that made you so?” and
he replied
“No; I think it was because I always felt that I had a better use
for my head. Who can measure the loss to the world if that wonderful instrument
of thought that has given us so much of light and leading in the practical
mechanism of life had become sodden with drink
instead of electric with
original ideas!
Obedience to human authority
1. Premise that complications are apt to arise
unless we remember--
2. What right had Jonadab to enjoin upon his descendants the
observances specified? His injunctions were those of a founder and legislator.
3. To proceed
then
we have--
I have spoken unto you
rising early and speaking; but ye hearkened not unto Me.--
The aggravated nature of disobedience
I. Look at the
authority of God--the right He has to be obeyed and hearkened to. “I have
spoken unto you
” saith God. We must lay a stress upon that “I.” We must
contrast it with the name of Jonadab. It is as much as to say
What is Jonadab
compared with Me? What is his authority compared with Mine?
II. We must lay a
stress also upon the manner in which the Lord hath given His directions to us.
“I have spoken unto you
” saith He--how? “rising early and speaking.” Oh!
wonderful expression! spoken
indeed
in accommodation to man’s language; but
how affecting! how significant! Jonadab
perhaps
laid down his rules but once
and was readily obeyed. But again and again hath the Great Jehovah sent abroad
His invitations
and renewed His offers
and repeated His commands.
III. The nature of
the Lord’s directions. Look over Jonadab’s injunctions
and assuredly you will
pronounce them harsh and strict in the extreme. He laid an embargo on the very
gifts of providence
and bade his family abstain from them. Now contrast with
this the gentle
gracious precepts of the Gospel of Christ Jesus--surely His
yoke is easy and His burthen is light! But before He gives His precepts He
sends His invitations (Matthew 11:28). Pardon and grace are
first proposed before duties are required. (A. Roberts
M. A.)
The reasonableness of hearkening to God’s voice and submitting
ourselves to Him
1. As we are His creatures (Malachi 1:6; Hebrews 12:9).
2. As He is our benefactor (Isaiah 1:2-3; Romans 12:1).
3. As He has engaged Himself to support and deliver such (Romans 8:28
&c.).
4. As He forbids only what is hurtful
and commands only what is good
(Romans 7:12; Deuteronomy 10:12-13).
5. The wisest and best of men have acted thus (Hebrews 12:1).
6. It is its own reward (Psalms 19:11).
7. The reward He sets before us is infinitely great (2 Corinthians 4:17-18).
8. Disobedience exposes to His wrath (Romans 1:18; Romans 2:8-9). (H. Foster.)
Disobedience to God condemned
I. Let us consider
this complaint. There is at this day--
1. The same regard for the commands of men.
2. The same disregard for the commands of God. But let us consider
the complaint more minutely--
II. With its
attendant aggravations.
1. The authority from which the different commands proceeded.
2. The commands themselves.
3. The manner in which they were enforced. Address--
Return ye now every man
from his evil way.--
Sinners admonished to return to God
I. What the
exhortation presupposes.
1. That there has been a departure from God.
2. This departure is universal (Romans 3:10; Romans 3:19-23).
3. This departure is flagrantly wicked. “Evil way.” Evil in its
nature
in its influence
in its consequences.
II. To what reforms
the exhortation points.
1. Deep conviction of the evil and dangerous nature of a wicked
career.
2. Contrition of heart
and confession of sin to God.
3. The renunciation of every evil way.
4. Supreme love and loyalty to God.
III. Compliance with
this request is urgent.
1. Life is short and uncertain.
2. Sin is hardening and deceitful.
3. You will escape the greatest evils and realise the most exalted
pleasures.
4. The longer you delay the less probability there is that you will
ever return.
5. The present is the only time in which we are authorised to tell
you you can be saved.
IV. The happy
result of returning to God.
1. The Israelites entered Canaan--a faint type of heaven to which
believers are called.
2. “Ye shall dwell” there in fulness of joy
and at God’s right hand.
Your “sun shall no more go down.” (Helps for the Pulpit.)
Amending one’s ways a great work
Sir Thomas Burnet
the third son of Bishop Burner
led at one time
a dissipated life. At last he took a serious turn
and one evening his father
observing him to be very thoughtful
asked what he was meditating. “A greater
work
” replied he
“than your lordship’s ‘History of the Reformation.’” “Ay
” said
the bishop
“what is that?” “The reformation of myself
” said the young man. He
fulfilled his promise
and he afterwards became one of the best lawyers of his
time; and in 1741 one of the judges in the Court of Common Pleas.
Verses 1-19
Go unto the house of the Rechabites
and speak unto them
and
bring them into the house of the Lord
into one of the chambers
and give them
wine to drink.
The Rechabites
Did the Lord make a proposal to total abstainers to drink
wine? Did he send for them to a kind of wine festival? Is this the meaning of
the Lord’s Prayer
“Load us not into temptation”? Is not the Lord always thus
leading men into temptation?--not in the patent and vulgar sense in which that
term is generally understood
but in a sense which signifies drill
the
application of discipline
the testing of principles and purposes and
character? Is not all life a temptation? The Lord tries every man. There need
be no hesitation in offering the prayer
“Lead us not into temptation.” People
have tried to soften the words. They have said instead of “lead” “leave us not
in temptation”; but these are the annotations of inexperience and folly
or
superficiality. We are not men until we have been thus moulded
tried
qualified. We can do little for one another in that pit of temptation. We must
be left with God. There is one Refiner; He sits over the furnace
and when the
fire has done enough He quenches the cruel
flame. Think it no strange thin that
temptation hath befallen you; yea
think it not strange that God Himself has
given you opportunities by which you may be burned. He never gives such an
opportunity without giving something else. Alas
how often we see the opportunity
and not the sustaining grace! The drinking of wine in this case was to be done
in “the house of the Lord.” Now light begins to dawn. Mark the limitations of
our temptation. The Lord is never absent from His house. Let God tempt me
and
He will also save me; let Him invite me into His own house
that there
under a
roof beautiful as heaven
He may work His will upon me
and afterwards I shall
stand up
higher in nature
broader in manhood
truer in the metal of the
Spirit. Observe the details of this mysterious operation. The men who were
taken were proved men (verse 3). When the Lord calls for giants to fight His
battle and show the strength of His grace
they are chosen men. All these men
were conspicuous witnesses for the truth: they were identified with the faith
of Israel; they were the trustees of the morality of society. It is so in all
ages. There are certain men whom we may denominate our stewards
trustees
representatives; as for ourselves
we say
it is not safe to trust us; we are
weaker than a bruised reed; we cannot stand great public ordeals; we were not
meant to be illustrations of moral fortitude: spare us from the agony of such
trial! There are other men in society whom God Himself can trust. What did the
sons of Rechab say? Herein is a strange thing
that children should obey the
voice of a dead father. Yet this
is a most pleasing contention; this is an argument softened by pathos. The men
stood up
and did not speak in their own name; they said
We be the sons of a
certain man
who gave a certain law
and by that law we will live
and ever
will live. The trial took place in the chamber of the sons of Hanan
the son of
Igdaliah
a man of God
which was above the chamber of Maaseiah. The father of
Maaseiah was Shallum
who was the husband of Huldah the prophetess
who had
taken an active part in the reformation wrought in the reign of Josiah. So all
these were so many guarantees of probity
and strength
and success. There will
be no evil wrought in that chamber I Not only are the Rechabites there
but
their fathers are with them in spirit. Though our fathers
physical and
spiritual
be dead
yet they may live with us in the spirit
and may go with us
and sustain us in all the trials and difficulties of life. “We will drink no
wine.” Note the definiteness
of the answer. No inquiry is made about the kind of wine. Men are saved by
their definiteness. A strong
proud
decisive answer is the true reply to all
temptation. An oath that strikes as with a fist of iron
a denial that is like
a long
sharp two-edged sword
--these must be our policies and watchwords in
the time of danger. The reason is given (verse 6). It is a filial argument.
Good advice is not always thrown away; and men should remember that though
exhortation may be rejected for a long time
yet there are periods when it may
recur to the memory and come upon the whole life like a blessing sent from God.
The argument is a fortiori. The Lord has shown how the sons of
Jonadab can refuse wine: now He will take this example and apply it to the
whole host of Judah
and He will say
See what one section of your country can
do; if they can do this
why cannot you be equally loyal and true? why cannot
you be equally obedient to the spirit of righteousness? for three hundred years
this bond has been kept in this family; never once has it been violated: if one
family can do this
why not a thousand families? if one section of the country
why not the whole nation? This was God’s method of applying truth to those who
needed it. Thus we teach one another. One boy can be obedient; why not all
boys? One soul can be faithful; why not all souls? God in His providence says:
See what others can do
and as they toil and climb and succeed in reaching the
highest point
so do ye follow them: the grace that made them succeed will not
fail you in the hour of your trial and difficulty. (J. Parker
D. D.)
We will drink no wine: for
Jonadab the son of Rechab
our father
commanded us.
The Rechabites
St. Austin says of the Syrophenician woman
who was both hardly
spoken of by our Saviour at first
and anon commended highly before her face;
she that took not her reproach in scorn
would not wax arrogant upon her
commendation; so these Rechabites who lived with good content in a life full of
neglect
may the better endure to have their good deeds scanned
without fear
of begetting ostentation. And therefore I will branch out my text into four
parts
in every of which they will justly deserve our praise
and in some our
imitation. First
when the prophet Jeremiah did try them with this temptation
whether they would feast it and-drink wine
they make him a resolute denial
a
prophet could.
draw them to no inconvenient act. Some are good men of
themselves
but easily drawn aside by allurements; such are not the Rechabites.
He that will sin to please another
makes his friend either to be a God that
shall rule him
or a devil that shall tempt him. Three things
says Aristotle
do preserve the life of friendship.
1. To answer love with like affection.
2. Some similitude and likeness of condition.
3. But above either
neither to sin ourselves
nor for our sakes to
lay the charge of sin upon our familiars.
No
he is too prodigal of his kindness
that giveth his friend
both his heart and his conscience. I may not forget how Agesilaus’ son behaved
himself in this point toward his own father: the cause was corrupt wherein his
father did solicit; the son answers him with this modesty: Your education
taught me from a child to keep the laws
and my youth is so inured to your
former discipline
that I cannot skill the latter. Here let rhetoricians
declaim Whether this were duty or disobedience. But let us examine the case by
philosophy. I am sure that no man s reason is so nearly conjoined to my soul as
my own appetite
although my appetite be merely sensitive. And must I
oftentimes resist my own appetite
and enthral it as a civil rebel: and have I
not power much more to oppose any man’s reason that Persuades me unto evil
his
reason being but a stranger unto me
and not of the secret council of my soul!
Yes
out of question. How it pities me to hear some men say
that they could
live as soberly
as chastely
as saintlike as the best
if it were not for
company! Fie upon such weakness: says St. Austin
If thy mother speak thee
fair
if the wife of thy bosom tempt thy heart
beware of Eve
and think of
Adam. The serpent was a wise creature (Genesis 3:1-24)
and Eve could not but
take his word in good manners. Fond mother of mankind
so ready to believe the
devil
that her posterity ever since nave Dean slow to believe God. Never can
there be a better season for nolumus
for every Christian to be a
Rechabite
than when any man reacheth out a cup of intemperance unto us
to say
boldly
We will not drink it. Now I proceed to the second part of my text
which hath a strong connection with the former; for why did they resist these
enticements
and disavow the prophet (verse 8)? Their obedience is the second
part of their encomium
they will obey the voice of Jonadab their father. The
name of father was that wherewith God was pleased to mollify our stony hearts
and bring them into the subjection of the fifth commandment. Surely as a
parricide
that killed his father
was to have no burial upon the earth
but
sewed in an ox hide and east headlong into the sea; so he that despiseth his
father deserves not to hold any place of dignity above others
but to be a
slave to all men. For what are we but coin that hath our fathers’ image stamped
upon it? and we receive our current value from them to be called sons of men.
And yet the more commendable was the obedience of the Rechabites
that their
father Jonadab being dead
his law was in as good force as if he had been
living. Concerning this virtue of obedience
let us extend our discourse a
little further
and yet tread upon our own ground. Obedience is used in a large
sense
for a condition
or modus
annexed unto all virtues. As the magistrate
may execute justice dutifully under his prince
the soldier may perform a
valiant exploit dutifully under his captain; but strictly
and according to the
pattern of the Rechabites
says Aquinas. It is one peculiar and entire virtue
whereby we oblige ourselves
for authority’s sake
to do things indifferent to
be done
or omitted; for sometimes that which is evil may be hurtful prohibito
to the party forbidden: as the laws forbid a man to murder himself:
sometimes a thing is evil prohibenti
so treasons
adulteries
and
thefts are interdicted: but sometimes the thing is no way in itself pernicious
to any
but only propounded to make trial of our duty and allegiance
as when
Adam was forbid to eat the apple; and this is true obedience
not to obey for
the necessity of the thing commanded
but out of conscience and subjection to
just authority. Such obedience
and nothing else
is that which hath made the little commonwealth of
bees so famous: for are they not at appointment who should dispose the work at
home
and who should gather honey in the fields? they flinch not from their
task
and no creature under the sun hath so brave an instinct of sagacity. Let us gather up this
second part of my text into one closure: we commend the Rechabites for their
obedience
and by their example we owe duty to our parents
natural and civil
those that begot us
those that govern us. We owe duty to the dead
after our
rulers have left us in the way of a good life
and changed their own for a
better. We owe duty to our rulers in all things honest and lawful; in obeying
rites and ceremonies indifferent
in laws civil and ecclesiastical. But where
God controls
or wherein our liberty cannot be enthralled
we are bound ad patiendum
and happy if we suffer for righteousness’ sake. Now that the obedience of
the Rechabites was lawful and religious
and a thing wherein they might
profitably dispense with freedom and liberty
the third part of my text
that
is their temperance
will make it manifest
for in this they obeyed Jonadab. To
spare somewhat which God hath given us for our sustenance
is to restore a part
of the plenty back again; if we lay hands upon all that is set before us
it is
suspicious that we expected more
and accused nature of frugality. And though
the vine did boast in Jotham’s parable
that it cheered up the heart of God and
man
though it be so useful a creature for our preservation
that no Carthusian
or Caelestine
monk of the strictest order did put this into their vow to drink no wine
yet
the Rechabites are contented to be more sober than any
and lap the water of
the brook
like Gideon’s soldiers. Which moderation of diet did enable them to
avoid luxury and swinish drunkenness
into which sin whosoever falls makes
himself subject to a fourfold punishment. First
The heat of too liberal a
proportion kindles the lust of the flesh. Lot
who was not consumed in Sodom
with the fire of brimstone
drunkenness set him on fire with incestuous lust in
Zoar. What St. Paul hath coupled (2 Corinthians 6:1-18.)
let us not
divide; lastings go first
then follows pureness and chastity. Secondly
How
many brawls and unmanly combats have we seen? Thirdly
Superfluity of drink is
the draught of foolishness. Such a misery
in my opinion
that I would think
men had rather lose their right arm than the government of their reason
if
they knew the royalty thereof. Lastly
Whereas sobriety is the sustentation of
that which decays in man
drunkenness is the utter decay of the body. The
Rechabites had encouragement to take this vow upon them for three reasons:
1. As being but strangers to the true commonwealth of Israel.
2. To make the better preparation for the captivity of Babylon.
3. To draw their affections to the content of a little
and the
contempt of the world.
Now I follow my own method to handle the second consideration of
this vow
that these circumstances were not only well foreseen
but that the
conditions of the thing vowed are just and lawful. Not to tumble over all the
distinctions of the schoolmen
which are as multiplicious in this cause as in
any; of vows
some are singular
which concern one man and no more
as when
David vowed to build an house unto the Lord
this was not a vow of many
associated in that pious
work
but of David only. Some are public when there is a unity of consent in
divers persons to obtest the same thing before the presence of God. And such
was this vow in my text
it concerned the whole family of the Rechabites. That
this vow was of some moment in the practice of piety
appears by God’s
benediction upon them. For as it was said of Socrates’ goodness
that it stood
the common wealth of Athens in more stead than all their warlike prowess by sea
and land
so that religious life of the Rechabites was the best wall and fortress
to keep Judah in peace and safety. And almost who doth not follow Christ rather
to be a gainer by Him than a loser. Behold
we have left all and followed Thee;
that was the perfection of the apostles
that was the state of the Rechabites;
not simply all
everything that belonged to the maintenance of a man
and so to
live upon beggary
they have learned to ask nothing but a gourd to cover their
head
a few flocks of sheep to employ their hands
the spring water to quench
their thirst. They that must have no more
have cut off superfluous desires
that they can never ask more. And so piety and a godly life were chiefly aimed
at in the vow of the Rechabites. The end and last part of all is this: That
forasmuch as God was well pleased with these abstemious people that would drink
no wine
therefore promise unto the Lord
and do the deed; for that is my final
conclusion
that a vow justly conceived is to be solemnly performed. When we
have breathed out a resolved protestation before God
it is like the hour we
spake it in
past and gone
and can never be recalled. Says David
“I have
poured out my soul in prayer
” as if upon his supplication it were no longer
his
but God s for ever. Surely if our soul be gone from us in our prayers
then much more
in our vows they are flown up to Heaven
like Lazarus to the bosom of Abraham
they cannot
they should not return to earth again. He that changed his sex in
the fable is not so great a wonder
as he that changeth any covenant which is
drawn between God and his conscience. He that hath consecrated himself to God
doth
as it were
carry heaven upon his shoulders. Support your burdens in
God’s name
lest if you shrink the wrath of God press you down to the
nethermost pit. I will give a brief answer to one question. Is Christ so
austere that He doth reclaim against all dispensation? no
says Aquinas
you
are loose again
if the thing in vow be sinful
nay if it be unuseful
nay if
it cross the accomplishment of a greater good. This is good allowance
and well
spoken. The careful pilot sets his adventure to a certain haven
and would turn
neither to the right hand nor to the left
if the winds were as constant as the
loadstone
but they blow contrary to his expectation. Suppose a Rechabite
protesting to drink no wine
had lived after the institution of our Saviour’s
Supper
when He consecrated the fruit of the grape
and said
Drink ye all of
this
would it pass for an answer at the Holy Communion to say
We will drink
no wine? No more than if he had sworn before not to eat a paschal lamb
or any
sour herbs
quite against the institution of the passover. There is enough in
this chapter to stride over this doubt if you mark it. Jonadab indented with
God
that he and his seed should live in tabernacles for ever; and in tabernacles
they did live for three hundred years. Then comes the king of Babylon with an
army into the country to invade the land. It was dangerous now to live in
tabernacles; there was no high priest
I assure you
to absolve them; no money
given to the publicans of the Church for a dispensation: but they said
“Come
and let us go to Jerusalem for fear of the army of the Chaldeans and Syrians
and let us dwell at Jerusalem.” The vow was unprofitable
tabernacles
dangerous
and so the bond is cancelled. Yet
do not take all the liberty due
unto you
if I may advise you: there are two things which you may choose to
untie the knot of a vow. The peremptory rejecting of a bad vow
and that is
lawful
and the changing thereof into some other vow
and that is more expedient
that God may have some service done unto Him
by way of a vow. (Bishop
Hacket.)
Obedience to parental authority
The first and principal commandment of the moral law
Honour thy
father and thy mother
begins with obedience to parents; but must of course be
interpreted in a wider sense so as to apply to all who have a right to
obedience--the persons to be honoured in that famous and excellent summary of
the Catechism are the King
and all in authority under him
my governors
teachers
spiritual pastors and masters
and last of all “my betters”; the
falling into disuse of such an instructive word is a fact of very great
significance and needs no comment. But duty to parents comes clearly first
which an old writer has called “the band and firmament of Commonwealths”; for
society is near its dissolution when this obligation is loosened or weakened in
any way. The stability of an empire like that of China is an illustration in
point
and I was struck some time ago by hearing a missionary of long experience
select this one virtue of reverence for parents as that which has for so many
centuries preserved the cohesion of that people. Affection may indeed be
missing
but obedience and respect for authority are
I believe
universal. So
it has come to pass that a nation that we despise outdoes us in the discharge
of one of the most elementary moral duties; not that Confucius is a better
teacher than Moses
or made any advance upon him
but that we are somehow
drifting from a commandment of God
and seem powerless to enforce it. To arrest
the widespread mischief we must go back to first principles
and seek to
re-establish authority in the family
in the elementary schools
in places of
higher education
and perhaps in the university itself. Authority must be taught
to be a trust delegated by God to some for the good of the whole body
and the applications
of the Christian precept: “All of you be subject one to another
” in its
several relations
must be laid down fearlessly and with distinctness by
teachers and preachers as the safeguard of society. To revert to filial
reverence. It was once
I believe
a characteristic of Englishmen
for even as
late as the last century sons would address their fathers by the reverential
title of “sir.” The virtue is not exotic
it can stand our rude climate
and it
must not be thought for a moment to be a poor sickly plant
that has no root in strong and
masculine natures. On the contrary
take a specimen of it from the most robust of our own countrymen.
To most of us is known the compunction of Dr. Johnson which has formed the
subject of an historical picture. He has related of himself
how when a young
man he refused to stand at his father’s stall to sell books; it was
he says
through pride he disobeyed
a trivial circumstance to a less sensitive man
but
it was a burden to him for fifty years
until on the very day he went to the
very spot where his father’s stall used formerly to be
and on a day of
business stood in Uttoxeter market
bareheaded
for an hour exposed to the gibes
of the passers-by
and the inclemency of the weather. “This was a penance by
which I trust I have propitiated heaven for the only instance I believe of
contumacy to my father.” Upon which Mr. Leslie Stephen
by no means a
sentimental writer
remarks: “The anecdote cannot be read without emotion
and
if it illustrates a touch of superstition in Johnson’s mind
it reveals too
that sacred depth
of tenderness which ennobled his character.” To both parents we are debtors. Mothers
are to be esteemed as highly as fathers
and dutiful obedience rendered to
them. Take care you despise them not in their old age or in lonely widowhood.
Value them all the more if they are alone. Do not think that you have outgrown
their wisdom
for in his mature years Solomon could stamp his own maxims with
the authority of his mother’s mint
and give them currency as the words which his mother
had taught him. The wishes of parents are also to be attended to
for wise
fathers dealing with grown-up children will not burden them with commands
but
will leave them to act upon what their sons know they would wish done. In a
book that furnished my vacation reading I lighted upon a passage in the
undergraduate life of Dr. Corrie that will interest some of us. “When he first came up
his
father
knowing his son’s great love for horses
and fearing the scenes of
temptation into which this taste might lead him
expressed a strong desire that
he would not go to Newmarket. This injunction was faithfully respected. Though
he was fully aware that his father would never ask him whether his wish had
been observed
his loyalty would not permit him to trifle with the confidence
thus placed in him.” A characteristic anecdote of a man who was known as the soul of honour
who if
he lacked sons of his own
was looked up to and reverenced by hundreds of
pupils and others
who felt their own principles of duty strengthened by his
unswerving fidelity to old traditions. Obedience to a father’s law is the whole idea of the
incarnation. Not to please Himself at all
but to surrender Himself wholly to
the Divine will
runs through all Christ’s life. When He cometh into the world He
saith
“I am come to do Thy will
O God
” and when He is about to leave the
world in that great fight of conflicting emotions the thought of submission
alone rules His prayer
“Not My will
but Thine be done.” Not only as a son
but as a citizen
as a member of the Jewish synagogue and nation
He is obedient to the
law
to every ordinance of man
for His Father’s sake. Conscious of His Divinity
of His real relation to God at twelve years old
He goes meekly home to be
subject to earthly parents and to learn His trade. When the time of His
manifestation has come
He allows John to baptize Him
to fulfil an ordinance
of God
and by His obedience He approves John’s commission in the eyes of the people. Though
as Son
of God
He is free from the temple tax
yet He works a miracle to pay the due
that He might give no offence to the rulers who sat in Moses’ seat. He even
acknowledges that the civil power of the Roman Governor is of God. Under the terms of the new
covenant we are no mere
slaves but sons
and can claim the spirit of adoption
the will to wish all
things in conformity with God’s will
and the power to perform the same. I have
heard myself from the lips of those whose whole life has been most wilful and
contrary such a confession as this
“I love now as much to do things for God as
at one time I did everything against God
” for the love of Christ converts and
subdues a stubborn temper
which to its harm would kick against the pricks into
a service where there is no heavy burden
no galling yoke
but all is perfect
freedom. (C. E. Searle
D. D.)
The obedient Rechabites
I. The authority
of the family. The power of human descent and family tradition in moulding a
career is well illustrated in the case of the Rechabites.
1. It controlled the natural tastes. Its members must renounce
pleasure
comfort
and fixed habitation; their inheritance was the loss of
those very things which sons expect
and parents delight to bequeath. But with
the loss came a better gain
--health of body
purity of morals
loyalty of
conscience. They had that best possession
--noble character.
2. The authority of the family also controlled their external
alliances; those entering it by marriage must accept its obligations. A man may
leave father and mother to cleave unto his wife
but may not leave truth and
virtue.
3. In the same way the family tradition proved superior to
surrounding influences. They were as faithful in the city as in the country
as
loyal among strangers as where well known. So from lonely farmhouses among the
hills
young men and young women have gone to seek an easier fortune in the
great city
or in the lawless West
and been delivered from evil by the abiding
influence of their sanctified homes.
4. The faithfulness of the Rechabites displays the normal influence
of the family in transmitting a tendency to virtue
and confirming that
inherited disposition by congenial surroundings and careful training. This is
what God means the family to be
--His surest and mightiest agency for spreading
righteousness on the earth.
II. This higher
authority of God. If human descent and family tradition exert authority over
the individual
the Divine Creator and Governor holds a far higher claim upon
him. Whatever depravity sin may breed into the race
virtue is always its
normal life
holiness its ideal. The Scriptures describe man as directly
connected with God in his origin. “And God said
Let us make man in our image
after our likeness.” When the clay was shaped
He “breathed into his nostrils
thy breath of life
and man became a living soul.” The characteristics of our
Divine origin are as discernible as the marks of our human descent. Our
intellect is made after the likeness of the Divine mind
else the universe
would be to us an insoluble mystery. In our tastes we can trace kinship with
Him who has adorned the earth with beauty. Pure human affection gives us our
worthiest conception of the Divine love. Misfortune cannot turn it
ingratitude
cannot chill it
death itself cannot overcome it
The Heavenly Father uses this
earthly tie to symbolise His own regard; the Saviour describes His fostering
care and close union with the Church by naming it His “bride.” Our moral nature
is plainly Divine in origin. Conscience is the voice of God in man. He who
obeys it is lifted to the plane of Divine action
is made a co-worker with God.
Over this lordly realm
crowned its regent by the Creator Himself
is the
Personal Soul
the “Self
” the “I.” Self-consciousness is its throne
self-determination its sceptre. By this solemn conviction “I am
” “I will
” man
separates himself from all the universe around him; through this he balances
his soul against the whole world and weighs it down; with it he faces eternity.
He is his own
something for which the Infinite asks
and he may give. It is
here that man’s Divine origin finds its explanation; for the glad choice of God
all
the dignity of human nature was given; to this end converge the constant
teachings of the revealing universe
the open instructions of the inspired
Word
the solemn persuasions of the Holy Spirit. Lessons--
1. The responsibility of parents. One writer on heredity declares
that the dispositions of Bacon and Goethe were formed by the simple addition of
the dispositions of their ancestors. We know that passionate temper
fretfulness
and despondency may be inherited. Let a parent beware how he sins.
2. The responsibility resting upon the child of godly parents. When
one who has had a virtuous ancestry seeks out vice and courts godlessness
he
has not long to
wait before every red drop in his veins will turn against him and curse him
traitor. There is something back of his own will
--an authority he knows not
how to resist and cannot defy.
3. The ultimate responsibility of each soul to God. When Samuel J. Mills was struggling
against the convictions of the Spirit
he exclaimed
“I wish I had never been
born!” His mother replied
“But you are born
my son
and can never escape your
accountability to God.” The glad choice of the holy God is the highest exercise
of the created will. (C. M. Southgate.)
The obedience of the Rechabites
I. Wherein it
resembles christian obedience.
1. It was total. They did not consult their preferences or their
“affinities.” They did not proceed upon any law of “natural selection.” They
did not show punctilious fidelity with reference to one commandment
and great
laxity concerning another. This is one essential characteristic of Christian
obedience. It is total. If we can make choice of such commands as we feel like
obeying and disregard the rest
what are we but masters instead of subjects
dictating terms instead of receiving orders?
2. It was constant. It kept an unbroken path. It bore the stress of
storms and tests. And herein it was marked by another essential characteristic
of Christian obedience--a beautiful constancy. Enlistment in the Lord’s army is
for life
and there is no discharge in that war.
II. Wherein this
Rechabite obedience was unlike Christian obedience.
1. The Rechabites obeyed Jonadab: Christians obey God. This is a
substantive difference. And we must not confound things that radically differ.
The source of a command has a great deal to do with the value of obedience to
it. The lower relation must give way to the higher when the two conflict.
2. Jonadab’s commands
so far as we know
were for temporal and
material ends
in the interests of a rugged manhood and a sturdy independence.
God’s commands are for spiritual ends
for good of soul
and they stand vitally
connected with those higher interests that relate not only to the life that now
is
but to that which is to come. Rechabite obedience
therefore
conserves
temporal good; Christian obedience conserves eternal good.
3. Rechabite obedience was not necessary to salvation; Christian
obedience is indispensable.
III. Wherein it
shames Christian disobedience.
1. These Rechabites are obedient to their father Jonadab
a mere man
who had been dead nearly three hundred years
while Judah is in open and
flagrant disobedience to the Most High God.
2. Jonadab commanded but once
and he had instant and constant heed
generation upon generation
for centuries. “But I
” saith the Lord of hosts
the God of Israel--“I have spoken unto you
rising early and speaking. I have
also sent unto you
” &c.
3. Obedience to Jonadab was at a cost
and it brought at the best
only power to endure
and the spirit of independence. It left the Rechabites poor and homeless.
Obedience to God was also at a cost
but it gave His people assured
possessions
peace of conscience
protection from their enemies
and all the
exceeding riches of an eternal inheritance in God’s kingdom of grace and glory.
Yet the Rechabites obeyed Jonadab with a beautiful constancy
while Judah
hearkened not to the voice of the Lord.
Practical suggestions--
1. The very essence of Christian fidelity is obedience.
2. A true obedience has two infallible signs. It will have no
reservations
and it will never cry “Halt!”
3. See the shame and guilt of disobedience under the Gospel.
4. In respect to one particular in this Rechabite obedience
namely
abstinence from wine--three things are clear.
Wine-drinking is a sin “for that man who drinks with offence” (Romans 14:20). Wine-drinking is a sin for
that man who by it “puts a stumbling-block or an occasion to fall in a brother
s way (Romans 14:15). When wine-drinking wounds
a weak conscience” it is “as in against Christ” (1 Corinthians 8:12). (H. Johnson
D. D.)
The obedience of the Rechabites
Jonadab saw that his people were but a handful among a more
powerful people
and likely soon to be swallowed up by their neighbours
and he
hit upon a happy method of preserving their independent existence. He enjoined
them “not to drink wine”; this was to save them from luxury and intemperance
which would prey upon them from within
and make them ripe for destruction; and
he also commanded them “not to till the ground
nor to have any houses
nor to
dwell in cities”; this was in order that they might have no riches to tempt
others to make war upon them; and thus
to use his own words
“they might live
many days in the land wherein they were strangers.” Luxury and wealth are the
bane of nations
and by keeping his tribe a simple
pastoral people
pure in
their habits
and destitute of property
he accomplished his wishes for them.
I. The obedience
of the Rechabites contrasted with the disobedience of Israel to God. An
ancestor of that family
who had been dead nearly three hundred years
had
issued his commands
and they were still obeyed; but the living God had spoken
repeatedly to Israel
by His prophets
yet they would not hear. The commands of
Jonadab
too
were very arbitrary. There could be no sin in cultivating the
fields
or in living in houses
whatever moral worth there may have been in the
precept to drink no wine: but still
because Jonadab commanded it they obeyed.
The complaint of God has still an application. It is a fact
that among
sinners
any and every law
precept
or tradition
of mere human authority
is
better obeyed than the laws of God Himself. See
in a few instances
how this
has been verified. Mahomet arose
a sensualist
an adulterer
a breaker of
treaties
and a robber
and issued his commands
which for centuries have been
religiously obeyed. At the cry of the muezzin
and the hour of prayer
every
follower of his
whether in the desert
on board the ship
in the city
or the
field
suspends his labour
his pleasures
and even his griefs
and casts
himself upon his knees in prayer. But the blessed Jesus
pure
peaceful
and glorious
speaks
and even those who acknowledge Him as Lord over all
and own the
goodness of His commands
can listen to such words as
“This do in remembrance
of Me
” and obey them not. The founder of some monkish order
again
has
enjoined upon all his fraternity certain rules and austerities
and he is
obeyed. Day after day
and year after year
the same tedious round of
ceremonies is gone through with
as though salvation depended upon it
and the
deluded ones will rise at the midnight hour to inflict stripes upon themselves
or to offer prayer. But Christ may enjoin the reasonable duty of praying to our
Father in spirit and in truth
and multitudes can suffer days and years to
pass
and pray not. The commander of the order of Jesuits can place his inferior
priests in any country of the world
and whether the mandate be to act as
father confessor in some palace
or to Penetrate to China or Paraguay
there is
no more resistance for apparent regard for the sacrifices to be made than in
the machinery which is moved by mechanic power. Christ commands His disciples
to “go preach the Gospel to every creature
” but only here and there one goes
forth. The heathen priest bids the worshippers of idols to cast their children
rote the fire or the water
and it is done. Jesus says
“Suffer little children
to come to Me
” and has appointed a sacrament in which they may be received
but men will admit the duty
and yet neglect the baptism of their children. The
Rechabites of modern times
and Sons of Temperance
may institute a vow of
temperance
and it is kept; or command one of their number to minister to the
sick
and it is done; or provide well for their poor; but Christ says
that “no
drunkard shall enter heaven
” and enjoins charity to the sick and the
destitute
while many heed Him not.
II. The rewards of
obedience. Modern travellers
moreover
state that the Rechabites are still in
existence. Mr. Wolf
the famous Jewish missionary
asserts this as his belief.
“And another traveller who visited a tract to the south of Judea
which has
been unexplored for centuries
met there a native who claimed to be a
Rechabite
and when an Arabic Bible was shown to him
turned to this chapter
and read from it the description of his People
and said that it was still true
of them
and that they still kept the precepts of Jonadab
their father. Over
three thousand years have passed away since that family of the Kenites came
with Israel into Canaan
and for two thousand years no traces of them were
preserved; but now
after so long a lapse of time
recent discoveries have
brought them to light
retaining their name
and glorying in their
independence. Though surrounded by Mohammedan Arabs
they conform to the law of
Moses yet maintaining that they are not Israelites; and are much hated by the
Mussulman.” This account was given by a traveller so late as 1832
and is
confirmed by English residents at Mocha
and from other sources. No doubt every
promise of God’s Word is as abundantly fulfilled. We may not always be able to
trace out the literal accomplishment of every one as strikingly as in this
case
but we never could prove one promise in all the Bible false; and the more
light we have the more abundantly do we see that all have been yea and amen.
Let us rest upon God’s Word. Exceeding great and precious promises are given to
us in the sacred book. They are like good notes from a prompt paymaster
falling due at different times. We may sometimes question their worth
or may
even forget in the multitude of cares that we have such securities treasured
up
but the time of their payment will come
and we shall find all redeemed. (W.
H. Lewis
D. D.)
The Rechabites
Their record was an honourable one
and reached far back into the
early days of Hebrew history. When Israel was passing through the wilderness of
Sinai
the tribe of the Kenites showed them kindness; and this laid the
foundation of perpetual friendliness between the two peoples. They seem to have
adopted the religious convictions of Israel
and to have accompanied them into
the Land of Promise. Retaining their integrity as s pastoral people
the
Kenites maintained these friendly relations with Israel during the intervening
centuries; and it was of this tribe that the Rechabites
for such was the name
of this strange tent-loving people
had sprung ( 4:17-24; 1 Samuel 15:6; 1 Chronicles 2:55). About the time
of Elijah
and perhaps largely influenced by him
the sheikh or leader of one
branch of the Kenites was Jonadab the son of Rechab. He was dismayed at the
abounding corruption of the time
and especially of the northern kingdom
then
under the fatal spell of Jezebel’s and Ahab’s influence; and resembled some
rank jungle in whose steamy air
heavy with fever and poison
noisome creatures
swarm
and foul pestilences breed. In his endeavour to save his people from
such a fate
this noble man
who afterwards become Jehu’s confederate in
extirpating idolatry
bound his people under a solemn pledge to drink no wine
for ever; neither to build houses
nor sow seed
nor plant vineyards
but to
dwell in tents.
I. Jeremiah’s test
of the Rechabites. So soon as their arrival was noised abroad
and had come to
the ears of Jeremiah
he was seized by a Divine impulse to derive from them a
striking object-lesson for his own people. With an inventiveness which only
passionate love could have suggested
the prophet caught at every incident
and
used every method to awaken his people to realise their true position in the
sight of God. Probably a little group of Jews
arrested by the prophet s
association with these strange-looking men
followed them in to watch the
proceedings. They were curious witnesses of the prophet’s action
as he caused
bowls of wine to be set before the tribesmen
and cups to be offered them
that
they might dip them in and drink. They also heard the blunt unqualified refusal
of these quaint old-fashioned Puritans
“We will drink no wine
” followed
by an explanation of the solemn
obligation laid on them centuries before. The moral was obvious
Hero were men
loyal to the wish of their ancestor
though he was little more than a name to
them
and refusing the offered sweets in which so many freely indulged. How
great a contrast to the people of Jerusalem
who persistently disregarded the
words of the living God perpetually remonstrating against their sins! The prohibitions of
Jonadab were largely arbitrary and external; whilst those of Jehovah were
corroborated by the convictions of conscience
and consonant with the deepest
foundations of religion and morality. The voice of Jonadab was a cry coming
faintly from far down the ages; whilst Jehovah was ever speaking with each new
dawn
and in the voice of each fresh messenger whom He rose early to send. Such
devotion to principle; such persistent culture of simplicity
frugality
and
abstinence; such literal adherence to the will of the father of their
house--not only carried within them the assurance of perpetuity to the people
who practised them
but must receive the signature and countersign of the
Almighty. “Therefore thus saith the Lord of hosts
the God of Israel Jonadab
the
son of Rechab
shall not want a man to stand before Me for ever.” This phrase
had a very profound significance. It suggested
of course
obviously
that the
tribe should not cease to exist. The phrase is often used in Scripture of
priestly service. And may we not infer that where we meet that devotion to
principle
and that detachment from the world
which characterised these men
there will always be a strong religious tone
a knowledge of God
a power in
prayer and intercession
which are the essential characteristics of the
priests?
II. This elements
of a strongly religious life. Oh
to stand always before Him
on whose face the
glory of God shines as the sun in his strength! But if this is to be something
more than a vague wish
an idle dream
three things should be remembered
suggested by the words of the Rechabites.
1. There must be close adhesion to great principles. Many superficial
reasons might have suggested to the Rechabites compliance with the prophet s
tempting suggestion. The wine was before them; there was no sin against God in
taking it; the people around had no scruples about it; and the prophet himself
invited them. In contrast to this
it is the general tendency amongst men to
ask what is the practice of the majority; what is done by those in their rank
and station; and what will be expected of them. We drift with the current. We
allow our lives to be settled by our companions or our whims
our fancies or
our tastes. We make a grave mistake in supposing that the main purpose of our
life is something different from that which reveals itself in details. What we
are in the details of our life
that we are really and essentially. The truest
photographs are taken when we are unprepared for the operation. And
indeed
when we consider the characters of the early disciples of Jesus
or those of
saints
martyrs
and confessors
must we not admit that they were as scrupulous
in seeking the will of God about the trifles of their life
as the Rechabites
were in consulting the will and pleasure of the dead Jonadab? The thought of
God was as present with the one as of Jonadab with the other. And was not this
the secret of their strong and noble lives? What a revolution would come to us
all if it became the one fixed aim and ambition of our lives to do always those
things that are pleasing in His sight!
2. Abstinence from the spirit of the age. It was an immense gain in
every way for the Rechabites to abstain from wine. Wine was closely associated
with the luxury
corruption
and abominable revelries of the time (Isaiah 28:1-8). Their abstinence was not
only a protest against the evils which wore honeycombing their age
but was a
sure safeguard against participation in them. In these days the same principles
apply. Surely
then
we shall do well to say with the Rechabites
whoever may
ask us to drink
“We will drink no wine.” But wine may stand for the spirit of
the age
its restlessness
its constant thirst for novelty
for amusement
for fascination; its feverish
demand for the fresh play
the exciting novel
the rush of the season
the
magnificent pageant. It is easier to abstain from alcohol than from this
insidious spirit of our time
which is poured so freely into the air
as from
the vial of some demon sorceress.
3. We must hold lightly to the things around. The Rechabites dwelt in
tents. They drove their vast flocks from place to place
and were content with
the simple life of the wandering shepherd. It was thus that the great patriarchs
had lived before them (Hebrews 11:9; Hebrews 11:13). It is difficult to say
what worldliness consists in. What would be worldly to some people is an
ordinary part of life’s circumstances to others. But all of us are sensible of
ties that hold us to the earth. We may discover what they are by considering
what we cling to; what we find it hard to let go; what we are always striving
to augment; what we pride ourselves in. (F. B. Meyer
B. A.)
The Rechabites
I. Their
principles are tried. Three features mark this trial.
1. They were offered wine. After s family record of three hundred
years’ abstinence
the evil thing is set before them
free of cost. As they
fortunately had no experience of its power by reason of former habits of
intemperance
they could look upon the enemy without fear or danger.
2. Wine was offered them by a good man. Jeremiah was the generous
host. Surely
God’s prophet would not offer them an evil thing
or tempt them to do wrong! A
great many well-meaning people place the tempting cup before their guests
and
their guests are not the sturdy sons of Jonadab
and much evil is wrought.
3. Wine was offered in the Lord’s house. They were in the chamber of
good men
on “holy ground
” and in strict privacy. Under such circumstances
might they not suspend their stringent rules of life? They had broken one vow
in coming into Jerusalem
might they not yield another point
and adopt one of
the ways of city
people? Life is full of opportunities for testing principles and character.
II. Their
principles are triumphant.
1. It was prompt and definite. They reasoned not “with flesh and
blood
” nor did they offer any compromise.
2. It was complete. Their pledge was a comprehensive one
involving
dwelling in tents
and living a very unworldly life (verses 6-10). Total
abstinence
was not enough. Their father’s commandment
was broad. Sobriety is
not salvation.
3. It was general. “We
our wives
our sons
our daughters” (verse
8). The domestic peace had not been broken by faithlessness and sin. A blessed
unity in principle and in practice.
4. It was constant. Three hundred years had passed since they
received these injunctions
and they still regarded them as binding and sacred.
III. Their actuating
motive.
1. It was filial love. “For Jonadab our father commanded us” (verse
6) was the only defence they cared to offer for their singular conduct. A pious
ancestry is an invaluable blessing; but the filial spirit must turn that boon
to practical account.
2. Men live after death. “He being dead
yet speaketh.” Time cannot
impair the power of a good life.
IV. The exemplary
meaning of their conduct. They were not tried for their own sake
but for the
good of others.
1. Conduct makes personal influence. “No man liveth unto himself.”
The end of our trials may concern others more than ourselves. The Jews were to
be instructed by the behaviour of the Rechabites.
2. The sobriety of one condemns the drunkenness of the other. If one
life can be good
other lives can too.
3. It was a contrast of privilege. In obedience to an earthly father
who had been dead three centuries
the sons of Jonadab had kept their pledges.
The Jews had received Divine commands
all the prophets had spoken to them
and
yet they disobeyed (verses 14
16).
4. It justified Divine judgment. “Therefore . . . I will bring upon
Judah
” &c. (verse 17). The abstinence of Rechab condemns inebriate Judah.
5. National intemperance is a swift destroyer.
6. Personal drunkenness makes up the national sin. The units make the
million.
V. The rechabites
reward.
1. Divine approval Jeremiah assured them of God’s benediction.
2. Divine preservation. Jonadab promised his sons long life
“many
days in the land where ye be strangers” (verse 7)
and that promise God
ratified. Medical and statistical science have come to Jonadab’s view.
3. Divine honour. “Jonadab
the son of Rechab
shall not want a man
to stand before Me for ever” (verse 19). Standing before God has reference to a
priestly relationship and service. (R. W. Keighley.)
A reason for total abstinence
The late Frances E. Willard once asked the greatest of inventors
Thomas A. Edison
if he were a total abstainer; and when he told her that he
was
she said
“May I inquire if it was home influence that made you so?” and
he replied
“No; I think it was because I always felt that I had a better use
for my head. Who can measure the loss to the world if that wonderful instrument
of thought that has given us so much of light and leading in the practical
mechanism of life had become sodden with drink
instead of electric with
original ideas!
Obedience to human authority
1. Premise that complications are apt to arise
unless we remember--
2. What right had Jonadab to enjoin upon his descendants the
observances specified? His injunctions were those of a founder and legislator.
3. To proceed
then
we have--
I have spoken unto you
rising early and speaking; but ye hearkened not unto Me.--
The aggravated nature of disobedience
I. Look at the
authority of God--the right He has to be obeyed and hearkened to. “I have
spoken unto you
” saith God. We must lay a stress upon that “I.” We must
contrast it with the name of Jonadab. It is as much as to say
What is Jonadab
compared with Me? What is his authority compared with Mine?
II. We must lay a
stress also upon the manner in which the Lord hath given His directions to us.
“I have spoken unto you
” saith He--how? “rising early and speaking.” Oh!
wonderful expression! spoken
indeed
in accommodation to man’s language; but
how affecting! how significant! Jonadab
perhaps
laid down his rules but once
and was readily obeyed. But again and again hath the Great Jehovah sent abroad
His invitations
and renewed His offers
and repeated His commands.
III. The nature of
the Lord’s directions. Look over Jonadab’s injunctions
and assuredly you will
pronounce them harsh and strict in the extreme. He laid an embargo on the very
gifts of providence
and bade his family abstain from them. Now contrast with
this the gentle
gracious precepts of the Gospel of Christ Jesus--surely His
yoke is easy and His burthen is light! But before He gives His precepts He
sends His invitations (Matthew 11:28). Pardon and grace are
first proposed before duties are required. (A. Roberts
M. A.)
The reasonableness of hearkening to God’s voice and submitting
ourselves to Him
1. As we are His creatures (Malachi 1:6; Hebrews 12:9).
2. As He is our benefactor (Isaiah 1:2-3; Romans 12:1).
3. As He has engaged Himself to support and deliver such (Romans 8:28
&c.).
4. As He forbids only what is hurtful
and commands only what is good
(Romans 7:12; Deuteronomy 10:12-13).
5. The wisest and best of men have acted thus (Hebrews 12:1).
6. It is its own reward (Psalms 19:11).
7. The reward He sets before us is infinitely great (2 Corinthians 4:17-18).
8. Disobedience exposes to His wrath (Romans 1:18; Romans 2:8-9). (H. Foster.)
Disobedience to God condemned
I. Let us consider
this complaint. There is at this day--
1. The same regard for the commands of men.
2. The same disregard for the commands of God. But let us consider
the complaint more minutely--
II. With its
attendant aggravations.
1. The authority from which the different commands proceeded.
2. The commands themselves.
3. The manner in which they were enforced. Address--
Return ye now every man
from his evil way.--
Sinners admonished to return to God
I. What the
exhortation presupposes.
1. That there has been a departure from God.
2. This departure is universal (Romans 3:10; Romans 3:19-23).
3. This departure is flagrantly wicked. “Evil way.” Evil in its
nature
in its influence
in its consequences.
II. To what reforms
the exhortation points.
1. Deep conviction of the evil and dangerous nature of a wicked
career.
2. Contrition of heart
and confession of sin to God.
3. The renunciation of every evil way.
4. Supreme love and loyalty to God.
III. Compliance with
this request is urgent.
1. Life is short and uncertain.
2. Sin is hardening and deceitful.
3. You will escape the greatest evils and realise the most exalted
pleasures.
4. The longer you delay the less probability there is that you will
ever return.
5. The present is the only time in which we are authorised to tell
you you can be saved.
IV. The happy
result of returning to God.
1. The Israelites entered Canaan--a faint type of heaven to which
believers are called.
2. “Ye shall dwell” there in fulness of joy
and at God’s right hand.
Your “sun shall no more go down.” (Helps for the Pulpit.)
Amending one’s ways a great work
Sir Thomas Burnet
the third son of Bishop Burner
led at one time
a dissipated life. At last he took a serious turn
and one evening his father
observing him to be very thoughtful
asked what he was meditating. “A greater
work
” replied he
“than your lordship’s ‘History of the Reformation.’” “Ay
”
said the bishop
“what is that?” “The reformation of myself
” said the young
man. He fulfilled his promise
and he afterwards became one of the best lawyers
of his time; and in 1741 one of the judges in the Court of Common Pleas.
Verse 16-17
I will bring upon Judah and upon all the inhabitants of Jerusalem
all the evil that I have pronounced against them: because I have spoken unto
them
but they have not heard; and I have called unto them
but they have not
answered.
Condemned by our virtues
How did the obedience of the Rechabites prove inexcusable
and
therefore worthy of the severest punishment
the disobedience of the Jews?
Their obedience was the obedience of children to their father
and sufficiently
showed that even in a matter which crossed their natural inclinations men were
capable of acting on a parental command and practising self-denial. The Jews
then could not plead that they had no power of hearkening unto God. The
Rechabites were witnesses against them. If Jonadab were obeyed because he was a
father
had not Jehovah a right to expect to be obeyed
seeing that He was a
father unto Israel? If the Rechabites could obey
obey as children
the
Israelites might have obeyed
obeyed as children. Thus the instance or example
of the Rechabites rose up in the sternest condemnation of the Jews
and in the
clearest vindication of the judgments with which God was about to visit their
transgressions. Now let us extend the argument
and exhibit it in such shape as
may make it applicable to ourselves. It is a very hard doctrine which we have
to enforce
when we press on your attention the utter worthlessness
so far as
our procuring favour with God is concerned
of those virtues and excellences
which are so much admired in society. There is something so graceful
and
beautiful
and beneficial around a man of unblemished morals
of high
rectitude
of large generosity--the dutiful son
the affectionate husband and
parent
the loyal subject
the staunch friend--that you seem to shrink
instinctively from statements which go to the bringing him to a level with
those whom you abhor as the hardened and the injurious
and to the declaring
him possibly as far off from the kingdom of heaven as though he lived a
dissolute life
or were dishonourable in his dealings. But the statements are
not the less true because they may jar with your feelings; and the minister
cannot
without the worst dishonesty
soften down facts on which Scripture is
most explicit
and which even experience sufficiently establishes--the facts
that there may be as thorough enmity to God beneath the aspect which is most
attractive
as beneath that which is most repulsive
and that the virtues which
shed a blandness over domestic life
and a dignity over commercial
transactions
and a strength over political relations
may as well coexist with
complete want of the religion of the heart
as those vices which break up the
peace of families
and outrage all the decencies of a neighbourhood. But the
principle involved in the text requires us to go even further than this
and to
maintain
not only that there is no justifying power in these virtues
hut that
there is even a condemning power--that they may be brought up as witnesses
against their possessors
and used as proofs of their being without excuse in their
neglect of God and disobedience to His Gospel. The man of great native
kindliness of heart has evidently even less excuse than one of worse nature for
withholding from God the offerings of thankfulness. Where there is a fine
generosity
a gushing sensibility
a quick appreciation of what is noble and
disinterested
what shall extenuate indifference to the Gospel
with all its
holy story of love and condescension and conquest? We have thus engaged you
with the general argument
rather than with the particular case presented by
our text. You will
probably
however
understand the argument better
if we
now confine ourselves to the relation which subsists between parent and child;
for it is on this that God grounds His complaint against the Jews. Now there is
no more beautiful and graceful affection of our nature than that which subsists
between parents and children. We cannot but admire this affection
even as
exhibited amongst inferior animals; and no passage in natural history is so
attractive as that which tells how tenderly the wild beast of the forest will
watch over her young
or with what assiduousness the fowls of the air will tend
their helpless brood. But with the inferior animals the affection is but an
instinct which lasts for a time
just long enough to ensure attention to the
offspring whilst yet unable to provide for themselves; when this time is past
the tie is for the most part altogether broken; there is no keeping up of the
relationship; however exquisitely the beast of the field and the fowl of the
air may have nourished their young during their weeks of helplessness
they
become afterwards as strangers to them
and seem not to distinguish them from
others of their tribe. There is for a time a great exhibition of parental
affection
but comparatively little of filial; there is apparently no
reciprocity
for when the offspring has reached an age at which the kindness
might be returned
the connection seems at an end
and the offspring goes away
from the parent
though
becoming a parent itself
it displays the very
instinct of which it has been the object. But in the human race the connection
goes beyond this; if not so very intense at the first
it is abiding and
reciprocal; the love of a parent for a child does not terminate when the child
has grown into strength and asks no further help--it continues through life
increasing
for the most part
rather than diminishing
so that though the
child may have been long absent from his home
wandering in foreign lands
or
domesticated among strangers
yet can he always reckon that the hearts of his
father and mother are beating kindly towards him
and that he has only again to
present himself at their door
to unlock a tide of rich sensibilities
and be
folded in an ardent embrace
and welcomed with deep gratulations. But whilst
parents are thus abidingly and profitably actuated by affection for their
children
children entertain an affection towards their parents which is
scarcely less graceful and scarcely less advantageous. Of course there are exceptions
but they provoke unmingled reprobation
as though all the feelings of a
community rose up against that unnatural being
a thankless child
and prompted
the fitness of ejecting him from its circles. It is comparatively but seldom
that children show themselves void of affection towards a father and a mother
when that father and that mother have done their part as parents; on the
contrary
whether it be in the highest or the lowest families of the land
there is generally a frank yielding to its heads of that respect and that
gratitude which they have a right to look for from their offspring. And from
this fact
illustrated in the particular case of the Rechabites
God proceeds
in our text to justify His complaint against the Jews. We stay not to demonstrate
to you the paternal character of God; it is the character which pervades the
whole of revelation
and is outlined by the whole of providence. The question
is not as to whether God acts towards us as a father--it is only whether we act
towards God as children; and here comes the melancholy contrast between men as
members of particular families
and men as members of the universal family. The
very beings who can recognise most cordially the claims of earthly parents
who
can manifest themselves a reverence and a homage which give to the domestic
picture an exquisite moral beauty
and who would show themselves monstrously
indignant at any tale of filial disobedience or unthankfulness
have only to be
viewed as children of God
and presently they would be convicted of all that
unnaturalness
all that ingratitude
and all that baseness
on which they are
so ready to pour unmingled reprobation. You cannot for a moment profess to
deny
that in the heart which is all alive to filial emotions
and which beats
with so true an affection towards a father and a mother
that the whole
strength is gathered in the showing them respect and ministering to their
comfort
there may be an utter indifference towards the heavenly Parent--ay
no
more practical remembrance of Him “in whom we live
and move
and have our
being
” than if it were the heart of one of those blots upon our race
in which
all the family charities appear to have been extinguished
or never to have
grown. Then do ye not further perceive how thoroughly self-condemned must all
of us stand
if we act faithfully the part of a child toward an earthly parent
but utterly fail to act that part towards a heavenly? It will be demonstrable
from our own actions that we were quite without excuse
as members of the universal
family; we shall be put to shame by our very excellence as members of
individual families. (H. Melvill
B. D.)
A wilful rejection of salvation
Mr. Spurgeon has said
“To me it is especially appalling
that a man should perish through wilfully rejecting the Divine salvation. A
drowning man throwing away the life-belt
a poisoned man pouring the antidote
upon the floor
a wounded man tearing open his wounds--any of these is a sad
sight. But what shall we say of a soul refusing its Saviour and choosing its
own destruction?” (R. Venting.)
──《The Biblical Illustrator》