Does Psa 51:5 apply to David or to all of us? Does it apply to Christ?

“Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me” (KJV).

“Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me” (RSV).

“Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me” (NIV).

I believe the first phrase refers to David’s birth, and the last phrase refers to his conception. But was it David’s mother who was “in sin”, as KJV and RSV imply, or was it David himself who was “sinful”, as NIV implies? Surely the latter.

The title of Psa 51 testifies that it has to do with the sin of David with Bathsheba; like Psalms 6, 32, 38, 102, 130, and 143, it is a psalm of profound penitence.

Is David making an excuse in verse 5 — ie, “I can’t help myself; I was conceived and born in sin!” In view of the abject admissions of sin elsewhere in the psalm, this doesn’t seem reasonable.

Is David blaming his mother for his own sin — ie, “I was conceived out of wedlock; therefore it is my mother’s fault that I am a sinner!” Again, this doesn’t make sense in view of his other admissions of his own sin.

Or… is David simply describing the legacy of “sin” in his own human nature, not as an irresistible impulse to do evil, as something which he was powerless to resist, but as an inclination toward evil which he failed to resist? (I would think this must be the case.)

In the same sense we are all “sinful at birth, sinful from the time [our] mothers conceived [us]”.

Was this also true of Jesus? Of course. “Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? There is not one” (Job 14:4).

“How then can man be righteous before God? How can he who is born of woman be clean? Behold, even the moon is not bright and the stars are not clean in his sight; how much less man, who is a maggot, and the son of man, who is a worm!” (Job 25:4-6). Can such words properly be applied to Jesus? He applies similar words to himself, if we understand Psa 22 as his words prophetically: “But I am a worm, and no man; scorned by men, and despised by the people” (v 6).

“Now Joshua (surely a type of Jesus?) was standing before the angel, clothed with filthy garments. And the angel said to those who were standing before him, ‘Remove the filthy garments from him.’ And to him he said, ‘Behold, I have taken your iniquity away from you, and I will clothe you with rich apparel’ ” (Zech 3:3,4). Jesus as the true high priest was clothed in, symbolically, “filthy garments”, which are equated with “iniquity”; when were these “filthy garments” taken away? At his resurrection, both literally and figuratively.

Was Jesus, like all of us, conceived in “sin”, and born in “sin”? Of course. How else explain the offerings for cleansing from childbirth? Or the ceremonial “uncleanness” of menstruation — unless it be connected with childbirth? Or the need for circumcision, along with another offering, even for the baby Jesus? Or, for that matter, the need for baptism: “Thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness…”? Or, again, the need for the high priest to offer for himself as well as the sins of the people whom he represents?

But how could Jesus be connected with the confessions of sin committed which we find in Psa 51 (eg, vv 2,3,5,7,9)? He can, in the sense that he shared the weaknesses and temptations of human nature (‘tempted in all points like we are…compassed with infirmity…learned obedience…”: Heb 4:15; 5:2,3; etc.), and in the sense that such words were prophecies of his bearing the burden of human sin (cp John 1:29; 2Co 5:21; 1Pe 2:22,24; Rom 8:3; Heb 2:14,15). From this point of view, all the verses in Psa 51 listed above are truly Messianic.

Of course, the verses of confession in Psa 51 need to be read regarding Jesus with a different slant from what David meant when writing about himself, or from what we mean when praying about ourselves. But this is a normal characteristic of Messianic prophecy. For example, the “leprosy” expressions of Isa 53 have an obvious figurative meaning with reference to Jesus and the sin-disease, but they fit Hezekiah, the prototype, in a strictly literal fashion.

There are, in fact, quite a number of psalms with Scripturally-attested Messianic application, in which “sin” and “iniquity” are associated with the subject. Some examples:

1. Psa 40: Vv 6-8 are cited as prophetic of Christ in Heb 10:7-9. But v 12 reads: “Mine iniquities have taken hold of me.”

2. Psa 41: V 9 is applied to Christ in Mark 14:18 and John 13:18. But v 4 reads: “I have sinned against thee.”

3. Psa 69: Vv 4,8,9,21,22, and 25 all have NT Messianic citations. Yet v 5 speaks of “my foolishness… my sins.”

Here are three undeniably Messianic psalms. Yet each contains phrases that seem at first glance inappropriate to a sinless Messiah. How should we deal with such “problems”? Some might argue, for example, that Psa 69:1-4 and Psa 69:6-36 are all Messianic (surely they are!), but that Psa 69:5 alone out of the whole psalm applies only to David. But is this really a satisfactory or satisfying way of handling Scripture? Does it not in fact create more problems than it solves?

This approach (ie, of applying the terms “sin” and “iniquity” in such passages to the nature Christ bore) was regularly followed by the earliest Christadelphian expositors. John Thomas, as an example, wrote the following:

“Sin, I say, is a synonym for human nature. Hence, the flesh is invariably regarded as unclean. It is therefore written… [here JT quotes Job 25:4; 14:4; 15:14-16; 2Co 5:21; Rom 8:3]… Sin could not have been condemned in the body of Jesus, if it had not existed there. His body was as unclean as the bodies of those for whom he died; for he was born of a woman, and ‘not one’ can bring a clean body out of a defiled body; for ‘that,’ says Jesus himself, ‘which is born of the flesh is flesh’ (John 3:6)…

“Speaking of the conception and preparation of the Seed, the prophet as a typical person, says, ‘Behold I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me’ (Psa 51:5). This is nothing more than affirming that he was born of sinful flesh; and not of the pure and incorruptible angelic nature” (“Elpis Israel” 127,128).

Psalms Patterns

First of all, a look at the patterns in the major divisions of the Psalms.

Book	Psalms	Closes with…
1	1-41	Benediction; double “Amen” (41:13).
2	42-72	Benediction; double “Amen” (72:18-20).
3	73-89	Benediction; double “Amen” (89:52).
4	90-106	Benediction; “Amen; “Hallelujah” (106:48).
5	107-150	Last 5 psalms, each beginning and ending with “Hallelujah”.

1. The first 2 “Books” are predominantly by and about David (at least 55 of 72).

2. But the last 3 “Books” have very few psalms which are definitely by and about David (18 of 78).

3. Notice, however: The word “of” in the titles (as in “of the sons of Korah” or “of Asaph”, etc) may mean “for”. Thus, a Psalm [composed by David… or by someone else] would be designated as being written for the use of the sons of Korah, or Asaph, etc [the temple musicians, or servants].

The 5 “Books” were probably compiled at different times, and then later joined together in one large volume. With this we might compare the development of a hymnbook by a community (not being written necessarily in order, but composed at different times by different authors, and then at a later date — or dates — being compiled into its final form).

This would explain:

• Why Psa 72:20 says: “The prayers of David are ended“, when others of his psalms appear later in the Book.

• Why some psalms are virtually exact duplicates of others (14/53; 57 and 60/108).

• …And why there are so few of David’s psalms in the last half of the whole Book.

Pro 25:1 suggests that Hezekiah (perhaps along with Isaiah?) supervised much of the compilation of the Proverbs. And Isa 38:9,20 suggests that at least some (and possibly many) of the Psalms are songs of Hezekiah. (Other Talmudic writers refer to traditions to the effect that Hezekiah was also responsible for compiling and editing the books of Isaiah, Song of Songs, and Ecclesiastes.) This all suggests that, along with David, Hezekiah is a primary subject of the Psalms.

---

Who are the Psalms about?

Many of the Psalms are cited in the New Testament as being prophetic of the life and work and sacrifice of the Lord Jesus. But many others are not directly quoted in the New Testament. The question is: how do we read those psalms? Do they have any New Testament application?

First of all, a little work with marginal references or the like — with cross-references and parallels between psalms — will suggest that even those psalms not linked by direct quote to Jesus Christ could still be considered, generally, to be about him!

But of course the Psalms were, in the first instance, about the experiences of the individual writers and composers. The writer of many psalms was David, “the sweet psalmist of Israel”; other psalms were probably written by Hezekiah (and others). So we ought to remind ourselves of the basic outlines of the lives of David (and Hezekiah) — especially with regard to their suitability as types of the Messiah.

David as a type of the Messiah

1. The shepherd boy who laid down his life for his sheep.
2. The young man anointed king by a great prophet.

3. The brave warrior who went down into the “valley of death” and slew the great giant who enslaved his people — when all Israel cowered in their tents.

4. The man who, because of his great deeds and sterling character, was envied and hated by the reigning king.

5. The “criminal” who was chased and persecuted, and his life threatened, because he was God’s Anointed.

6. The man who at last emerged in triumph from a cave to be crowned head over all Israel.

7. The man who gathered many faithful Gentiles, and later gave them positions of great authority in Israel.

8. The king who expanded his kingdom in all directions, until it won the allegiance of all surrounding nations and became a great empire.

9. And the king who received the promise of a “Son” [not Solomon!] who would sit on his throne forever.

Hezekiah as a type of the Messiah

(Much of this outline may be derived from a study of the Book of Isaiah. Read in its historical context, the book is first of all a commentary on the life and times of Hezekiah, and his role in the salvation of Judah from the Assyrian invasion. It is in the particulars of his life — the primary fulfillment of Isaiah, if you will — that the pattern is established for understanding the ultimate fulfillment of the Book in Jesus Christ.) {The student who wishes to read more about this theme is directed to Hezekiah the Great or Isaiah, by Harry Whittaker, or The Songs of Degrees, by George Booker.]

1. A child of promise (“Immanuel”), his great work was prophesied beforehand.

2. He came to a nation estranged from God.
3. He cleansed the temple of God, and sanctified the priests for renewed worship.

4. He called worshipers from the north and from Jerusalem to keep a new Passover.

5. Even the defiled were accepted through his faith and merits and prayers.

6. He offered sacrifices for himself and for the people.

7. He provided living water (“Siloam”, Hezekiah’s Conduit) to a people ready to perish.

8. He was afflicted with an incurable sickness (possibly leprosy — the “sin-disease”), and was in danger of dying without a “seed”.

9. But by a mighty manifestation of the Glory of the Lord, he was miraculously healed on the third day.

10. The great Invading Adversary was destroyed, and Israel was saved, through his faith.

11. Afterward, the Land was freed from its enemies, the captives and exiles were restored…

12. …And the king was acknowledged as the Anointed of Yahweh by all nations.

Introduction

The outlines now help us to appreciate a basic point: if a man, in the fundamental outlines of his life, is seen to be a type or pattern of Jesus Christ, then it follows, reasonably, that his writings — about his experiences and feelings, and even his prayers — are part of that overall pattern. So, if David slaying the giant Goliath is interpreted in the New Testament as Christ’s victory over sin (and it is!), then the psalms composed by David commemorating that event must also be prophetic of Christ. Or… if Hezekiah’s being smitten with leprosy and healed the third day is typical of Jesus Christ being raised from the dead on the third day (as it surely is!), then the psalms composed by or about Hezekiah at that time must also be typical of Jesus Christ.

So — when we read history in this way — the last step in Psalms study is surely obvious: The Psalms are not just about David (or Hezekiah)… and certainly not just about you and me. They are ESPECIALLY about Christ.

Indeed, the Psalms are a sort of “fifth gospel”; whereas Matthew, Mark, Luke and John record the external, observable facts of the life of Jesus, the Psalms are his “internal” biography. The first four “gospels” tell us what he did and said, but the fifth “gospel” very often tells what he thought. And this is an indispensable perspective for those who are commanded to develop the mind of Christ (Phil 2:5). The Psalms, being also prophetic, can tell us what Christ will do.

The following outline uses the typical guidelines of the lives of David and Hezekiah in the Psalms, and thereby seek to explain and amplify, on a Biblical basis, the story of our Saviour’s life, death, resurrection, priesthood, and second coming and kingdom.

---

I SAW THE SON

I heard what they said, So politically correct, so properly right: But I saw not him of whom they spake, And I wondered.

I heard the others who spoke and sang, Deliberately warm and moving, But shallowly repetitious. Of him I saw but little, And I wondered.

I went to the Palace of the Psalms, And there he was! Clearly to be seen, and audible. By the far-seeing eyes of the prophets I saw him as a babe with his mother; And as a young, old Man, I heard the voice of his Father.

I saw the son in obedient beauty. Living and radiant in the glory of his Father. I heard him in prayer, moving, wholly submissive, Even in reproach and consuming sorrow, Yet triumphant. The Amen.

I went to the Tomb Where they buried sin and death And learned that though he slept, He was supremely guarded against corruption. And I wept tears of boundless joy.

I saw him rise, Wonderfully Father-like, And heard him speak to his brethren.

I saw him ascend And arrive at the right hand of Power, In everlasting joy, Regal and priestly.

I saw him return, To reign amongst his enemies Until the earth was filled with his Father’s glory. There was another with him: His Bride, redeemed And with a beauty that was both his and hers. And I wondered.

In the Palace of the Psalms I prayed and worshiped Until there was no longer “I” but only he.

“Titus” (The Christadelphian, Dec, 1998)

---

BEGINNINGS

Luke 1:26-38: The story of the conception and birth of Christ might be appreciated in the light of Psa 139: “For thou didst form my inward parts, thou didst knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise thee, for thou art fearful and wonderful. Wonderful are thy works! Thou knowest me right well, my frame was not hidden from thee, when I was being made in secret, intricately wrought in the depths of the earth. Thy eyes beheld my unformed substance; in thy book were written, every one of them, the days that were formed for me, when as yet there was none of them. How precious to me are thy thoughts, O God! How vast is the sum of them!” (Psa 139:13-17, RSV).

The phrases” knit together” and “intricately wrought” are the same words used of the woven pattern on the veil of the Tabernacle, and the embroidery of the door hangings, the coat of the High Priest, and the veil of the Most Holy (Exo 26:31,36; 27:16; 28:39; 36:37; 38:18; 39:29; cp Heb 10:20).

Christ is the true tabernacle, or temple of God (Mat 12:6; John 1:14; 2:19; Col 2:9; Heb 8:2; 9:7,8,11). Even as the fabrics were specially selected, and specially worked, until the desired effect was achieved in the curtains and furnishings and priestly garments of tabernacle and temple — so that God Himself might be exalted, and eternal principles taught in figurative language — so out of the “fabric” of human nature, the Master Craftsman skillfully selected and wove together… the perfect “tabernacle”, the perfect “temple” — His Son!

Modern science has begun to penetrate into the mysteries of DNA, the genetic code imprinted on the human chromosome, and to see — as through a glass darkly — the building blocks of human life. Surely we may stand in awe at the amazing complexity, and the supreme design, in such a system. And especially may we be brought to our knees in admiration — for the intricate “design” that became God’s Only-begotten Son. “Fearfully and wonderfully made” indeed!

Other references in Psalms to the Virgin Birth:

1. Psa 22:9,10: The AV mg has: “kept me safe”. This was fulfilled in Mat 2:13-16.

2. Psa 69:8: “My brethren” = “my mother’s children”, but not “my father’s children” — implying that Jesus had no human father!

3. Psa 71:6: “You brought me forth, or upheld me from the womb!”

4. Psa 86:16 / Psa 116:16: Cp with Luke 1:38,48: Mary is the “handmaiden” of the LORD, and in these words she gives her consent which is necessary for the conception of the unique child in her womb.

5. Psa 89:26,27: “I will appoint him my firstborn”. Cp Col 1:15,18. The “first Adam” and “last Adam”: referring to the one who is “firstborn” not just by his birth, but by his special selection by his Father, and especially by his overcoming of sin and death.

6. Psa 110:3: Why does David call him “Lord”? Because, though born after David, Jesus is greater than he — being the son of the Most High. See v 3: “From the womb before the morning I begat thee” (LXX).

7. Psa 132:11: “From your belly” (AV mg) — ie, not “loins” (as of paternal origin), but “womb” (maternal origin). This is the same word in 2Sa 7:12. Cp with Luke 1:42.

---

Mat 1:20,21: “Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins.” With this compare Psa 130:1-8; 131:1-3 (RSV: “as a child quieted at its mother’s breast”). Psa 130:8 is especially apt: “He himself will redeem Israel from all their sins.”

---

Mat 2:1,2,9-11: A (not necessarily “the”!) fulfillment of Psa 72:9-11,15? Surely the preeminent fulfillment of Psa 72 is in the Kingdom Age. But in the meantime notice how beautifully the coming of the “wise men” fits the psalm: there are kings from the east (from Arab countries), bringing gifts to God’s special King, including gold.

---

Luke 2:40-49: The boy (or young man) realizes that his place is “in my Father’s house”. Alongside this, consider the passages in the Psalms expressing the cherished desire to dwell in the house of God: Psa 27:4; 48:1-3,12,13; 63:1-3; 84:1-4; 122:1-4,6,7.

---

Matt 3:13-17; 4:1: Jesus is baptized, and immediately taken by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted. Compare this with Moses’ Psa 90:5-12: his commentary about the generation that was first “baptized” in the Red Sea, and then afterward perished in the wilderness. Secondly, compare this with Joshua’s (this is a guess) Psa 91:1-7: a commentary about the generation that survived the wilderness to enter the Promised Land. Other points of comparison:

• Compare the 40 years there with the 40 days here.

• Psa 91:11,12 refers to the temptation of Jesus in the wilderness.

• Psa 91:13: Cp with Mark 1:13 (Psa 8:6,7; Gen 1:28: Jesus exercises dominion over the wild beasts).

---

Jesus under the law of condemnation because of his sinful flesh: First of all, generally: Jesus had not committed sin — so why the need to be baptized (as described in the section above)? The answer: because he possessed “sinful nature”. Thus Mat 4 (his wilderness temptation) explains Mat 3:13-17 (his baptism).

Christ’s nature is seen in the accounts of his conception, his birth, his baptism, and his wilderness temptation (1Pe 2:24; 2Co 5:21; Gal 4:4; Rom 8:3; Heb 2:14).

Many of the psalms mention, in passing, the sin and/or weakness of the psalmist. Whereas, on first glance, this would appear to have nothing to do with Jesus (who of course committed no sin), it is quite possible to see such passages — at least some of them — as “roundabout” allusions to the weak, sin-prone human nature which beset Jesus, for which he sought the help of his Heavenly Father to overcome: Psa 6:2,6-8; 18:23; 25:7,11,18 (cp vv 5,15); 38:2-10; 40:12 (cp vv 6-8); 41:4 (cp v 9); 69:5 (cp vv 4,8,9,21,22,25); 51:5 ; 89:50.

(The sin-nature of Christ is dealt with extensively in Psalms Studies, by George Booker, Vol 1, pp 47, 48, 108, 154, 155, 184, 220, 229, 230, 297, 298, 397, and 398; and Vol 2, pp 532 and 598.)

---

Psa 40:6-8 is quoted in Heb 10:7-9: “Mine ear you have digged” (Exo 21:5,6; Deu 15:16,17) becomes “a body prepared” (Heb 10:5). Why? See Rom 6:6; 7:24; 8:23; Rev 18:13; Jude 9. In Greek, “body” may be a way of describing a “slave”.

Psa 40:8: “I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart.” This leads to a consideration of Jesus as the word of God (Deu 17:18-20)…

---

JESUS AS “THE WORD OF GOD”

First of all, it should be mentioned that — in the New Testament — the Greek “ktisis” (“creation”) quite often refers to the NEW “creation” in Christ. How is this NEW “creation” brought about? By the spoken, written, or proclaimed “word of God” — even as the original “creation” of Genesis was set in motion by “And God said!”

But especially is the NEW “creation” called into being by the “Word of God” made flesh (John 1:14) — Jesus Christ. Jesus is the greatest “Word of God” (John 1:1,14; 1Jo 1:1,2; Heb 4:12,13; Rev 19:11,13). By him were all things (ie, all things in God’s New Creation) created (John 1:3,4 — see how this is improved by a repunctuation:

“Through him (ie Christ himself) all things were made. Without him (Christ) nothing was made. What has been made was ‘life in him’, and that life was the light of men.”

Read this way, it may be seen that John’s focus is unequivocally on the spiritual creation (‘life in him’) and not the earlier, physical, creation of Genesis.

Other passages where Jesus Christ is the “creator” of God’s new “creation”: Col 1:15-18 (cp 2:12; 3:1,10); 1Co 8:6; Heb 1:1-3.

Certain passages in the Psalms can be read in this light:

• Psa 33:6,9,10,11: Notice how “a new song” (v 3) is closely connected with the “New Creation” (cp Psa 40:3; 96:1; 98:1; 144:9; 149:1; Isa 42:10; and esp Rev 5:9). Here, cp v 6 (“with the breath of his mouth”) with John 20:22: “And with that he breathed on them and said, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit’.”

• Psa 107:20: God’s Word, sent to heal men (John 1:9-12). Cp also Luke 7:7: the centurion’s servant. The Son of man can heal with a word only, even at a distance.

• Psa 147:15,18: The Kingdom Age: “He sends his command to the earth; his word runs swiftly.” Even as the prophets “ran swiftly” to bring the “word of God” to Israel (cp Hab 2:2; Dan 12:4; Gal 2:2; 2Th 3:1; Pro 25:11), so the “word” of command from the greatest “prophet” Jesus (who is himself the “Word of God”) will run swiftly through the earth, proclaiming peace and righteousness in the Kingdom of his Father.

---

Jesus in Psalm 119:

Psalm 119 is the preeminent psalm extolling “the word of God” — surely, then, it speaks to the mind and character of the man who was preeminently the “word of God” made flesh (John 1:14)!

Probably written (or compiled) by Hezekiah, Psalm 119 runs the gamut of all the Hebrew letters. Each of the 22 letters of the Hebrew alphabet is represented by a stanza of 8 verses, in an “acrostic” form in which each of the 8 verses begins with that particular Hebrew letter. Thus, at 176 verses (22 times 8), Psalm 119 is the longest “chapter” in the whole Bible.

Key features of Psalm 119, pointing to Jesus Christ:

1. The man of Psalm 119 is sorely tried, but in his trials he recognized his Father’s loving discipline for his good (vv 50,67,71,75,107,153).

2. He has to suffer contempt (vv 22,39,42) and even ill-treatment (vv 121,134) because of his adherence to the law.

3. He is despised and persecuted by the authorities (vv 23,161).

4. He is mocked, lied against, and opposed by men of position and power, whom he designates as “the proud” or “the wicked” (vv 51,61,68,78,84,85,86,95,122,150,157).

5. He is in danger of his life (vv 87,109).

6. He is confronted by laxity and apostasy (vv 113,126,158), and also by evil example calculated to draw him from his faith into the way of evil (vv 29,37,115), but he resists all such temptations.

7. The indifference of others to God’s Law arouses in him burning indignation (v 53) and profound sorrow (v 136).

8. Surrounded by difficulties of many kinds, he seeks refuge in prayer, looking for a fuller understanding of God’s will, for strength to keep the law, and for relief from the distressing circumstances that threaten to destroy him.

---

MINISTRY

John 2:13-17: Jesus’ early cleansing of the Temple. “Zeal for your house will consume me” is a citation of Psa 69:9. The “for” at the beginning of Psa 69:9 — linking it with v 8 (“I am a stranger to my brothers”) — suggests that this consuming passion for the things of God was the reason for Jesus’ early alienation from his family (Mark 3:21,31-35; Mat 10:36; cp also Psa 27:10).

Compare also Psa 146:9: “He frustrates the ways of the wicked”: “frustrates” signifies “to turn upside down”, and suggests Jesus overturning the tables of the moneychangers.

---

John 4:14 / 7:37,38 / 19:34: References to “springs” of living waters invokes such passages as Psa 36:9; 46:4; 87:7. Also, Isa 12:1; Zech 13:1; Eze 47:1-5; Rev 22:1. (The latter two Psalms passages probably referred, in the first instance, to Hezekiah’s Conduit, and the Gihon spring.)

---

Continual plots against the life of Jesus: Saul’s attempts on David’s life — the background of many of the Psalms — provide the pattern for the continual plots against the life of Jesus. These psalms include, among others: Psalms 34, 52-54, 56, 57, 59, and 140.

---

Sermon on the Mount: Just as the Sermon of the Mount contains the “Beatitudes” (or blessings), so the Psalms contain an extensive list of “Beatitudes” or blessings: Psalms 1:1; 2:12; 32:1,2; 33:12; 34:8; 40:4; 41:1; 65:4; 84:4,5,12; 89:15; 94:12; 106:3; 112:1; 118:26; 119:1,2; 128:1,4.

In addition, the whole of Mat 5-7 proves to be an extended commentary on Psalm 15:

Psalm 15	Matthew 5-7
1. Who shall dwell?	5:3-12. Principles of blessedness
2. Walketh uprightly	5:13-16. Walks in the light
2. Worketh righteousness	5:17-20. Righteousness exceeding that of the Pharisees.
2. Speaketh truth in heart	5:21-6:34. An extended contrast between outward forms and religion practiced in the heart
2. Backbiteth not	7:1-5. Teaching of mote and beam
3. Nor doeth evil	5:43-48. Love your enemies
2. Who condemns the vile person	7:15-23. By their fruits ye shall know them
4. Sweareth to his own hurt, and changeth not	5:33-37. Let your communication be ‘Yea, yea; Nay, nay’
1. Putteth not money to usury	5:38-42. Gives without expecting a reward
5. He that doeth these things shall never be removed	7:24-27. Doeth… build on a rock… fall not

---

Luke 7:36-50: Cp another combination of “tears” and a “bottle” in Psa 56:8. Here is a story to be worked out in some beautiful detail — a story of sin and repentance, tears and remembrance, forgiveness and renewal.

---

Mark 4:37-41; 5:1-16: First, the storm at sea (Psa 107:23-31); then, the “storm” in the mind of Legion. He who can calm the one can calm the other! The “troubled sea” of Isa 57:20 and Rev 13:1 becomes the “sea of glass” in Rev 4:6; 15:2; 21:18. The Psalms portray a God who can calm the storms, of the nations and of the lives of individual believers — and this is what His Son does in the Gospels: cp Psalms 65:7,8; 89:9; 93:3,4.

---

The feedings of the multitudes (Mat 14:13-21; 15:32-39; cp John 6:1-15,22-59): Here is Israel, fed once again by “manna” in the “wilderness”. Christ, not Moses, provides the true “bread of life”:

Psalm 78		John 6
7,32	Believe his wondrous works	28,29
9,41,57	Turned back	66
11	Forgot his works / Not because of the miracle	26
17-19	Provoked; “Can God furnish a table in the wilderness?”	30,31
20	Water, bread, flesh	35,52
22	Believed not	36
23	Opened the doors of heaven / Comes down from heaven	33,41,58
24,25	Rained down manna from heaven / Bread of god… comes down from heaven	33,58
31	The wrath of God / Your fathers died	49
36,37	Heart not right / Evermore give us this bread	34
39	Flesh, a wind / Spirit, flesh	63
41	The Holy One of Israel	69 (RV)
56-72	Greatly abhorred Israel, chose David / “Him hath God the Father sealed”	27

---

John 8:46; 10:32: David’s protests of innocence were only relatively true of him, but they were absolutely true of Jesus. Examples: Psa 7:1-11; 59:3.

---

Jesus as the Good Shepherd (John 10:1-21): Jesus’ description of himself as the Good Shepherd plainly invokes Psa 23: where Jesus is typically foreshadowed, first as the Lamb; and then, as the Shepherd! Also cp Psa 95:7; 100:3 — and Psa 8: where the Shepherd lays down his life to save his “flock” from that beast of prey, Goliath!

---

“I and my Father are one” (John 10:30-38): Jesus quotes Psa 82 to prove that mortal men (including the Messiah) may be referred to as Elohim, “God” or “gods” (Psa 82:1,6,7; cp Psa 58:1; 97:7; 138:1).

---

Luke 10:17-24: The return of the 70:

Luke 10	Psalm 8
17. Subject unto us through thy name	2. How excellent is thy name 6. All things under his feet
18. I saw Satan fall 19. Tread on serpents and scorpions (v. 3: wolves; 9:58: foxes)	6-8. All… beasts of the field… under his feet 2. To still the enemy
20. Your names written in heaven	1. Thy glory upon the heavens
21. Lord of heaven and earth 21. Babes	Heavens… all the earth 2. Babes and sucklings
22. All things are delivered to me 22. The Son	6. All things under his feet 4. Son of man
24. Prophets and kings	David: both prophet and king

---

THE LAST WEEK

John 11:35: The death of Lazarus provokes the tears of Jesus. Jesus’ tears also flow for the prospect of Jerusalem’s sufferings (Luke 19:41), and in the stress of the temptation in Gethsemane (Heb 5:7). The tears of Jesus in the Psalms: Psa 6:6; 39:12; 42:3; 56:8; 69:10; 116:8.

Luke 18:18-24: Jesus talks with the rich young ruler: “One thing you lack!” — that is, Jesus as your Shepherd (Psa 23:1). Thus, “Come, follow me”… as the sheep follows the Shepherd.

Mat 19:28: The apostles sitting upon twelve thrones is the subject of Psa 122:5. (The twelve tribes of Israel are alluded to in Psa 122:4.)

Mat 26:12: “She has anointed me for my burial” – the high priest’s anointing of Psa 133. This psalm also suggests the anointing of the high priest preparatory to his entering the most holy place on the Day of Atonement.

This anointing was also done in anticipation of his resurrection (cp Psa 45:6-8,11).

Mat 21:12-16 / Mark 11:15-19 / Luk 19:45: Here is the second temple cleansing (cp Psa 69:9 again). The other sacrifices are driven away; Christ is soon to become the one true sacrifice… and so “the zeal for your house has consumed me” (as though he were an offering on the altar).

Mark 12:28-37: Jesus uses Psalm 110: “The Lord said to my Lord… ” “And afterward they asked him no more questions.”

Mat 23:38: “Your house is left unto you desolate” (Psa 69:25). The singular fulfillment is that of Judas; the plural fulfillment is that of the whole house of Israel.

Mat 24:2: “Not one stone upon another.” Cp the extended warning of Psa 49 (vv 6,7,11-15). This warning was directed against Egypt in the first place. But now, in the eyes of the Lord, Israel has become the new “Egypt”!

Luke 21:28: “Lift up your heads… your redemption draweth nigh”. Even as David brought the Ark of God’s Glory into Jerusalem, Jesus recreated this scene on “Palm Sunday” — when he entered the city of Jerusalem in the triumphal procession of a conquering king:

Luke 21	Psalm 24
25. The sea and the waves roaring	2. The sea and the floods
36. Stand before the Son of Man	3. Stand in his holy place
13:34. Commanded the porter to watch	7,9. Lift up your heads, O ye gates (ie, gate-keepers).
28. Your redemption draws nigh	5. Righteousness from the God of his salvation
Mat 24;32. He shall send his angels to gather his elect	10. The Lord of hosts.

Other psalms portray this same scene: Psalms 15, 30, 68, 87, and 132.

The Passover in the upper room: The thoughts of Jesus at the Last Supper may be extracted from the Psalms:

1. Psa 102 in detail: this is a “Passover” psalm (vv 13,15,18-20).
2. From the “Passover Hallel” (Psa 113-118): consider especially Psa 116:3,12-19; 118:10,14,17,19,22-27.

John 15:18-25: “They hated me without a cause”: Psa 35:11,12,19; Psa 69:4.

Jesus in Gethsemane: David — in his great trial — left Jerusalem and passed over Kedron (and Jordan: 2Sa 17:22), fleeing from Absalom (Psa 42; 43). Fulfilling this pattern, we see Jesus passing over Kedron to Gethsemane (cp Psa 42:5,11; 43:5 with Mat 26:38.

A number of other psalms seem to be based on the “Absalom” experiences of David, and thus point to the same New Testament scenario: Psalms 3; 4; 11; 23; 28; 31; 35; 38; 39; 41; 55; 61; 64; 69; 71; 84; 88; 94; 109; 140; 141.

Consider especially Psa 55:2-7,13,14,21; Psa 88 (all!); Psa 94:16-23.

---

ARREST AND TRIAL

John 18:2-6: “They [those who came to arrest Jesus] drew back and fell to the ground”: compare Psa 9:3; 27:2.

John 18:12: “Sorrows of death” (Psa 18:4,5) = “cords of death” (AV mg, RV); cp Psa 116:3 (sw) and Psa 118:27 — a figure for sacrifice: “Bind [the sacrifice] with cords… [and carry it] to the horns of the altar…”

The imprecations of Psalm 109: Would David (or Christ!) utter such imprecations (curses; invocations of evil or judgment) even upon his enemies?

Consider one example (Psa 109): Vv 1-5 = “they”; vv 6-19 = “he… him”; and vv 20-29 = “they” again! If the word “saying” is added in v 5, then vv 6-19 may be read as the curses thrown at David by his enemies (“they” = Shimei, Ahithophel, and/or Absalom). But such curses rebounded upon the enemies themselves (cp v 29: “Let them cover themselves with their own confusion”; also cp Psa 7:15,16; 915; 35:8).

Was it the same with David’s “son” Jesus? First, vv 6-19 can be read as the curses upon Christ spoken by his enemies (Caiaphas, the Pharisees, and/or Judas). Then, secondly, as the same curses returning, by God’s providence, upon their own heads. As to Jesus, see esp v 6 (“stand at right hand” suggests a trial!), vv 7,8,13. As to Judas, see esp v 8 (Acts 1:20), vv 16,17,18 (Acts 1:18). Far from wishing the destruction of Judas, Jesus must have felt intense grief for him (cp Psa 35:14 with vv 8,11,12,19) — a detail not readily apparent in the Gospels themselves.

Mark 14:55-57: The false witnesses brought against Jesus are suggested by Psa 27:12; 35:11,12,19; 64:8. (Note: why were the witnesses confused and contradictory of one another? Because, when the key witness — Judas — refused to testify, the whole prosecution strategy fell apart! In the hasty scramble to find and “coach” new witnesses, confusion resulted, and was easily brought out — probably by cross-examination by someone like Nicodemus or Joseph of Arimathea.)

Mark 14:61,62: ‘You will see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power’ – this is Psa 110:1! In the great Day to come, Jesus tells them, our roles will be reversed: I will be the Judge, and YOU will be the JUDGED!

Jews and Gentiles participate together in the trial and death of Jesus: (1) Jews: Annas, Caiaphas, Herod, Judas; (2) Gentiles: Pilate, Roman soldiers. This is the counterpart of Jew (Saul) and Gentile (Doeg) joining forces against David (Psa 52, title; 53:1-3 quoted in Rom 3:10-12; and Psa 10:7 quoted in Rom 3:14). See also Psa 2:1 (quoted in Acts 4:24-28).

Mat 27:26: The scourging of Jesus (cp Isa 50:6; 53:5). See Psa 129:3: notice how Jesus identifies with the very land of Israel — ravaged and plowed under by its enemies.

---

CRUCIFIXION

Psalm 8: First, David’s victory over Goliath — which in turn prefigured Jesus’ victory over “Sin” — thus explaining the use of Psa 8 in Heb 2:5-15.

What happened to the robe of Jesus (John 19:23-25)? Was it purchased back from the Roman soldiers, washed, and then left for him in the tomb? ‘He will need this later.’ See Psa 30:11 (“you removed my sackcloth and clothed me with joy”); and cp Zech 3:3,5: Joshua the high priest exchanges his filthy clothes for clean.

Also, Psa 133 offers the robes of the High Priest as a symbol of unity, and of the whole body of believers. Why? Because, as the high priest entered the most holy place on the Day of Atonement, he went there as the representative of the whole house of Israel, bearing along with his official garments the stones, or insignias, which symbolized the twelve tribes of Israel. In like fashion, the special robe of Jesus — without seam — signified the whole house of Israel which HE represented. [Compare the words of the soldiers, almost “prophetic” in their significance: “Let’s not tear (Greek “schizo”, ie, make a schism!) it”: v 24.]

“Natural” phenomena at the Crucifixion: Clouds, darkness, earthquake, storm: Psa 18:7-15 (cp vv 4-6,49,50); Psa 29:3-9.

The thoughts (and words) of Christ on the cross (Matt 27:46 / Mark 15:34; John 19:30): From “Eli… Eli” to “It is finished!”. This is Psa 22:1-21 (Christ in darkness: cp Matt 27:45), and Psa 22:22-31 (Christ in light).

Luke 23:46: “Into thine hands I commit my spirit”: Christ’s last words seemingly refer to Psa 31:5.

Putting this together with the previous paragraph, the question is suggested: did Jesus recite all of Psa 22:1 through 31:5 while on the cross?

The reasonableness of this suggestion must be tested by a review of the actual psalms. Consider, for examples, the fitness of these verses to the circumstances of the crucifixion: Psa 23:4; 24:3-5; 26:2,6; 27:2,3,5,6; 29:3-9 (darkness and storm); Psa 30:5,9,11; 31:5.

The AV puts this verse (Psa 31:5) in the past tense: “Thou HAST redeemed me…” In the light of v 5a {“Into your hands I commit my spirit”), these words (along with Psa 30:1-3) may be read as the first words spoken by our Lord when he came to life again in the tomb. (So the first half and the last half of Psa 31:5 were quoted by Christ in order, yet almost three days apart, and on either side of the great gulf of death!)

John 19:31-36: “Not a bone broken” is Passover language, referring to the lamb: Psa 6:2; 22:14; 34:20; 35:10.

But how does this square with Psa 51:8? Possibly, “broken bones” in Psa 51 should be seen not as literal, but as figurative — considered as simply parallel to “broken spirit” and “broken heart” of v 16.

Mat 27:57-61: The burial of Jesus, in the rock-hewn tomb: Psa 57:1 (notice the Passover imagery: vv 1,2,3,6,8) echoes this burial.

Jesus was first of all in a virgin womb; and now, finally, he is in a “virgin” tomb — where no body had ever been laid (John 19:41). With this may be compared Psa 139:13 (“you knit me together in my mother’s womb”), and Psa 139:15 (“I was woven together in the depths of the earth”: the tomb?) — as though Jesus had two “births”: the first from his mother’s virgin womb, and the last from the “virgin” tomb.

---

RESURRECTION

While many Psalms passages might be cited here — eg, those that speak of victory and blessing and divine care and protection, etc — only a few will be mentioned:

1. Psa 2:7: “This day have I begotten thee.” To which day does this refer? How is this verse used in Heb 1:5 and 5:5? In Heb 5:5 it is connected with Christ being made a High Priest. Thus it is more reasonable to see “this day” as being the day of his resurrection rather than the day of his birth.

2. Psa 16:8-11: God’s Son is made so as “not to see corruption” (John 19:41). In Psa 16, the “path of life” = “the way to the tree of life” (Gen 3:24; cp John 14:6). And “God’s right hand” = the place of blessing and authority (cp Psa 110:1,4; Heb 12:2,3).

3. Psa 126:5,6: Those who weep now will rejoice in time of harvest, when the “seed” that has been planted (Jesus, buried) will bring forth new life: cp with John 16:21,22; 12:24.

---

THE “NEW CREATION” IN CHRIST

Again, as above, many Psalms passages might be cited — specifically those that have to do with:

1. the blessing of a faithful remnant, through the work of a faithful individual;

2. God’s saving His people out of bondage in Egypt, into a new life as His nation;

3. the blessing of children;
4. a song (or a “new” song) of praise to Yahweh.

Only a few will be highlighted here:

•         Psa 22:30,31: “A seed shall serve him” (cp Isa 53:10). The man who dies without a generation or descendants will nevertheless have a ‘seed” that will live and serve and worship him.

•         Psa 87: “Born in Zion”! Those who were born elsewhere will, through their faith, be treated as though they have been “born” (or reborn!) in Zion, or Jerusalem. They will be the “children of Jerusalem” because they are the children of God.

•         Psa 127:3-5: “Children” are the LORD’s heritage… they speak with the enemies in the “gate”. The “gate” is, generally, the place of meeting and settling legal matters; here, specifically, it may refer to the gate of Christ’s enemy (death!), which would be the great stone rolled away from the door of his tomb (cp Gen 22:17; Rev 1:18).

•         Psa 128:3,6: “Olive shoots around your table… your children’s children… peace upon Israel. “For example, Peter’s converts at Pentecost and after (Acts 2:41; 5:14; etc.).

Other “New Creation” passages in the Psalms: 102:18; 103:22; 104:30 (see John 20:21,22); Psa 145:9,10.

---

ASCENSION

Mark 16:19: Cp Psa 16:11; 110:1. Psa 110:1 became the standard Ascension passage of the early church; it is used in Acts 2:34-36; 7:55,56; Rom 8:34; Eph 1:19-22; 2:6. Compare 1Ti 3:16 and 1Pe 3:22 with Mark 16:19.

Also, see Psa 68:18: “You ascended on high.”

---

PRIESTHOOD

Psa 110 again (and v 4 especially): Verse 1 is cited in Rom 8:34 — where Paul adds: “who also makes intercession for us”, thus alluding to Christ’s role as a Melchizedek high priest (see Psa 110:4): see also Heb 5:6; 7:1-24; 10:12,13.

The “sit down” of Psa 110 emphasizes that the sacrificial work of Jesus Christ was a one-time, once-and-for-all, perfect sacrifice — not the ongoing continual offering of many sacrifices which characterized the Law of Moses. “But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God. Since that time he waits for his enemies to be made his footstool” (Heb 10:12,13). The footstool alluded to here is also mentioned in Psa 99:5; 132:7 — where the glorified and exalted Christ rules over his former enemies.

Psa 65 — a psalm for the Day of Atonement — pictures the congregation waiting outside the Temple for the appearance of the high priest (v 1; cp Heb 9:24-28); cp also v 4: the man who approaches unto God. A similar view is also found in Psa 67:1 and Psa 85:2,8.

---

SECOND COMING

Psa 2:1-4,9: “Shepherd them” (LXX): cp Rev 2:27. The One who is a Shepherd will also be a King: a “Shepherd-King”. (The “shepherd-king” motif is developed, rather exotically, in the Song of Songs; there, it would seem the young woman falls in love with a shepherd, only to learn — somewhat later — that her beloved is also the king!)

Psa 9 (all): Especially read vv 7-10,17-20.

Psa 29: “Voice” occurs seven times in this psalm (cp seven-fold trumpet blast of Rev 8; 9).

Psa 47 (all): The trumpet points to resurrection!

Where will the Judgment Seat be?

1. 50:4,5: The saints will be gathered to judgment.
2. 87:5: Saints “reborn” in Jerusalem: the rebirth of resurrection and glorification.

3. 133:3: “There (mount Zion) the Lord commands the blessing of life for evermore.” Cp with Gal 4:24-27 — where Sinai is contrasted with Zion!

4. 1:4; 35:5: The “chaff” is separated from the wheat at the “threshing floor” (Psa 72:16). Where was the threshing floor? At the property of Ornan the Jebusite, on Mount Zion or Mount Moriah: 2Sa 24:18. To carry this figure further, the good grain is gathered into God’s granary of the Kingdom, while the chaff is burned up in “Gehenna” (literally located right next to the Temple Mount).

One of Christ’s first tasks when he returns will be to save the remnant of Israel from the hands of their Arab enemies: Psa 60:8,9/108:9,10; Psa 83 (all).

Revelation 11 echoes Psalm 79:

Psalm 79		Revelation 11
1	The heathen are come into thine inheritance… they have defiled	2
2	The dead bodies of thy servants	8,9
2	The flesh of thy saints… the beasts of the earth	7
3	None to bury them	9
4	A reproach to our neighbors, a scorn and a derision	10
5.	How long, O LORD?	11
6	Pour out your wrath upon the heathen	18 (and 16:1)
11	Let the sighings of your prisoners come before you	11
12	Render sevenfold… into their bosom	The 7 vials of Rev 16
13	We will give thee thanks for ever	17

---

THE KINGDOM

All passages in the Psalms that speak of material blessings, of peace and prosperity, and of the nations acknowledging the rule of Yahweh may, of course, be considered Kingdom passages. From those we select:

•         “THE LORD REIGNETH”: See all of Psalms 93, 97, 99, and 145. The songs of joy, and songs of praise, call to mind the Lamb and the 144,000 on Mount Zion.

•         “Coronation” hymns such as Psalms 20 and 21 were probably composed on the occasion of David’s ascension to the throne of Israel, and are easily seen as prophetic types of Christ ascending to the throne prepared for him by God.

•         The last part of Psalm 22 (vv 22-31) is a vision of the King in his Glory. It was this vision that sustained the Lord Jesus on the cross: “For the joy set before him [he] endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God” (Heb 12:2):

Psalm 22	Revelation 19
22. In the midst of the congregation will I praise thee	4. The four and twenty elders
23. Ye that fear the Lord, praise him	5. Praise our God, all ye servants
25. In the great congregation	6. The voice of a great multitude
22. I will declare Thy name unto my brethren	6. Alleluia, for the Lord God Omnipotent reigneth
26. The meek shall eat and be satisfied	7,9. The marriage supper of the Lamb

•         Psalm 45 is a miniature Song of Songs. Both Scriptures describe the marriage of a great “king” to a special “bride”. The righteous King (vv 2,7), taken from among his fellows (v 7), but now elevated above all them to sit on God’s throne (v 6), celebrates a great marriage (vv 9-11). This is of course “the marriage of the Lamb” (Rev 19:7-9), with his “Bride” taken out of the Gentiles (vv 11,12)! This King is also a great high priest (cp Isa 61: 1,2,10: “as a bridegroom adorns his head like a priest”), for (as also in the Song of Songs) he is described in imagery reminiscent of the temple and its services. It is because of the surpassing sacrifice that the King-Priest has offered that his prospective Bride has been cleansed, and prepared for him (Eph 5:25-27, citing Song 4:7; cp Song 6:8,9).

•         Psa 46:4: Compare with Eze 47:1-5 (the living waters); Zech 14:8; and Rev 22:1.

•         Psa 134 pictures the immortalized saints (cp Psa 133) congregating with Christ on mount Zion (cp Rev 14).

•         Gentiles especially will praise the LORD in that day. This is the theme of all of Psa 117, as well as Psa 57:9; 67:2,4; 72:11,17; 96:3,10; 98:2; 108:3.

Consider parallels with Psalms:

Mat 27:45,46 and Mar 15:34 // Psa 22:1.

Then, later, Joh 19:30 // Psa 22:31.

Therefore, Jesus must have recited all of Psa 22 on the cross.

Were these the very last words of Christ on the cross?

What about Luk 23:46 // Psa 31:5?

Did Jesus recite ALL of Psa 22:1 through Psa 31:5 while on the cross?

Consider: Psa 23:4; 26:2,6; 27:2,3,5,6; 29:3-5 (storm and darkness of Mat 27:45?); Psa 30:5,9,11; 31:5a…

And, finally (3 days later!)… Psa 31:5b!

Most of the present historical anniversaries that the world keeps are ghostly hangovers from the time when the Mother of Harlots held undisputed sway over “times and seasons,” and the “bodies and souls of men.” AND many of them were borrowed by the Catholic Church from paganism.

Many, of course, are now only unfamiliar names to most of us: Candlemass, Epiphany, St. Stephen’s, Michaelmass, All Saints, Whitsuntide, Shrove Tuesday, Ash Wednesday, Plough Monday, Twelfth Night, and scores of others. But some still remain prominent, as grim relics of an age of gross and incredible superstition.

“SAINT” VALENTINE, for instance, was a romantically-minded bishop of the third century, martyred (at least according to legend) for performing “christian” marriages against the laws of the Emperor.

“SAINT” PATRICK converted Ireland to Catholicism and immortalized the shamrock by using it to demonstrate the superstition of the triple unity of the “Trinity”.

EASTER is named from a pagan Saxon goddess of spring. Many ancient heathen nations revered the egg as the symbol of the beginning of life: it is from Teuton mythology that rabbit-laid eggs appear among Easter superstitions. Dressing up in new clothes for Easter goes back to Constantine’s time. The Encyclopedia Britannica says —

“The name Easter is a survival from the old Teutonic mythology. It is derived from Eostre or Ostara, the Anglo-Saxon goddess of spring… There is no indication of the observance of the Easter festival in the New Testament, or in the writings of the apostolic Fathers. The sanctity of special times was an idea absent from the minds of the first Christians.”

HALLOWEEN: Of this, the Encyclopedia Britannica says —

“Hallowe’en long antedates Christianity. History shows that the main celebrations of Hallowe’en were purely Druidical [ancient Britain]. The Druids believed in the calling together of certain wicked souls on Hallowe’en by Saman, lord of death. Upon the Druidic ceremonies were grafted some of the characteristics of the Roman festival in honor of Pomona [pagan Italian goddess of fruits and gardens] held about November 1st, in which nuts and apples, representing the winter store of fruits, played an important part.”

And this became the Roman Catholic “All Hallows”, or “Festival of All Saints,” and was so passed on to a besotted world. The Encyclopedia Americana says —

“Hallowe’en is associated in the popular imagination with the prevalence of supernatural influences, and is clearly a RELIC OF PAGAN TIMES.”

CHRIST-MASS, too, we find is fundamentally of “religious” origin (if superstitious paganism can be called “religion”), but it is FAR from exclusively, or even principally, “Christian.” Most of its innumerable customs, traditions, and superstitions are of pagan origin. But the mystery-working of the Catholic Church has greatly complicated them by the addition of priests and madonnas and holy waters, and signs of the cross.

We must recognize the whole corrupt Babylonian system as a total unit, all equally part of the same Apostasy. The better we perceive, the less we will desire to have any part in heathen customs. When, by study, we come to perceive fully, we shall be shocked and revolted at the idea of having anything to do with it. We shall find it repulsive. We shall want to get as far away from it as we possibly can. Anyone who GROWS in the Truth must inevitably come to this conviction. The tragedy is that many never grow.

We find, above all things, that “Christ-Mass” has come to us in its present form as basically and primarily a Roman Catholic institution. To this great system of iniquity it owes its consolidation, establishment, permanence and popularity.

THE TIME OF THE YEAR

For the period of the year in which it is held, it is indebted to pagan sources. This time of the year — following the harvest, and centering about the winter solstice (shortest day of the year), when the days again begin to lengthen — has almost universally been a period of festivity and religious significance in the northern hemisphere ages before the spread of Christianity.

Regarding the date, most commentators agree that from many points of view, no date could be more unlikely to be that of Christ’s birth. There is no month in the year in which respectable ecclesiastical authorities have not confidently placed the birth of Jesus. The date is undeniably pagan: even Catholic authorities admit that. The Encyclopedia Britannica (1949, article “Christmas”) says —

“CHRISTMAS (the ‘Mass of Christ’) … Clement of Alexandria (about 200 AD) mentions several speculations on the date of Christ’s birth, and condemns them as superstitious… The exact day and year of Christ’s birth have never been satisfactorily settled. When the Fathers of the Church in AD 340 decided upon a date to celebrate the event, they wisely (!) chose the day of the Winter Solstice, which was firmly fixed in the minds of the people, and which was their MOST IMPORTANT FESTIVAL.”

The Encyclopedia Americana (1946, article “Christmas”) says the same —

“CHRISTMAS, the ‘Mass of Christ’… In the 5th century the Western Church ordered it to be celebrated forever on the day of the old Roman feast of the Birth of Sol (the Sun)… Among the German and Celtic tribes, the Winter Solstice was considered an important point of the year, and they held their chief festival of Yule to commemorate the return of the burning-wheel (the sun).”

And Everyman’s Encyclopedia says —

“CHRISTMAS (the Mass of Christ)… It is certain that the time now fixed could not by any possibility have been the period of Jesus’ birth. The choice of this season was probably due to the general recognition that the Winter Solstice was the turning point of the year.”

THE PAGAN FOUNDATIONS

It was during the period of the ascendancy of the Roman Empire that Christ-Mass originated. Consequently we find that pagan Roman customs played the major part in fixing its date and characteristics. Its general season, however, was later found to coincide with important religious superstitions of the north European barbarians (who also worshipped the Sun and marked the Solstice), and this too played a large part in its development. Alfred Hottes, Christmas Fact and Fancy —

“The roots of Christmas observance go deeply into the folklore of the Druids, Scandinavians, Egyptians and Romans.”

The Chambers Encyclopedia records —

“Many of the beliefs and usages of the Old Germans, and also of the Romans, relating to this period, passed over from heathenism to Christianity.”

R.J. Campbell, in The Story of Christmas, declares —

“There are not a few popular observances associated with the Christmas season which have NOTHING TO DO with the Christian religion and the birth of Jesus. Most of these observances are older than Christianity, and some of them — it must be confessed — are NOT OF VERY ELEVATED ORIGIN.”

William Auld, in Christmas Traditions, notes —

“There are the green garlands, the marvelous trees, the mystic fire and lights, and customs many…still clustering about the great midwinter feast — all of which descend to us from the PAGAN CHILDHOOD OF THE RACE.”

T.G. Crippen, in Christmas and Christmas Lore, confesses —

“The Feast of the Nativity rather incorporated than supplanted various heathen festivals. It was therefore only natural that RELICS OF HEATHEN PRACTICE should survive as traditional customs.”

The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics confirms this —

“MOST of the Christian customs [related to Christmas] now prevailing in Europe, or recorded from former times, are HEATHEN customs which have been absorbed or tolerated by the Church. The Christian feast has inherited these customs from two sources: Roman and Teutonic PAGANISM.”

And the Catholic Encyclopedia (note the source) admits —

“There is NO DOUBT that the original Christian nuclei attracted PAGAN accretions.”

The Schaff-Herzog Religious Encyclopedia similarly says —

“There were non-Christian elements present in the origin of Christmas. The giving of presents was a Roman custom. The Yule-tree [modern ‘Christmas Tree’] and the Yule-log are remnants of old Teutonic NATURE WORSHIP.” All these sources, bet it noted, are friends of Christmas. They are not exposing its corrupt background: they are rather glorying in it. They regard its heathen-Catholic origin as a delightful and intriguing asset. We find exactly the same picture in standard, independent reference books. The Encyclopedia Britannica says —

“Many current customs date back to pre-Christian origins: among them are Christmas decorations. The Romans ornamented their temples and homes with green boughs and flowers for the Saturnalia [Dec. 17-23] … The Druids gathered mistletoe and hung it in their homes; the Saxons used holly and ivy.”

The Everyman’s Encyclopedia declares —

“The practice of decorating churches is pagan in its origin.” And this is from the Encyclopedia Americana —

“The holly, the mistletoe, the Yule log and the wassail bowl are relics of pre-Christian times…The Christmas tree has been traced back to the Romans.”

ORIGINALLY BABYLONIAN

Alexander Hislop, in his monumental Two Babylons, goes even further back —

“The Christmas tree, now so common among us, was equally common in pagan Rome and pagan Egypt… The festivals of the Roman Church are innumerable, but five of the most important may be singled out for elucidation, viz:

CHRISTMAS, Lady-day, Easter, the Nativity of St. John, and the Feast of the Assumption. Each and all of these can be proved to be Babylonian.

“It is admitted by the most learned and candid writers of all parties that, within the Christian Church, no such festival as Christmas was ever heard of till the third century, and that not till the fourth century was far advanced did it gain much observance…

“This tendency on the part of Christians to meet Paganism half way was very early developed. We find Tertullian, even in his day, about the year 230, bitterly lamenting the inconsistency of the disciples of Christ in this respect, and contrasting it with the strict fidelity of the pagans to their own superstitions. ‘By us’, he says, ‘the feasts of January, the Brumalia, and the Matronalia are now frequented, gifts are carried to and fro, and sports and banquets are celebrated with uproar. Oh, how much more faithful are the heathen to their religion, who take special care to adopt no solemnity from the Christians.’

“Upright men (continues Hislop) strove to stem the tide, but in spite of all their efforts the Apostasy went on till the Church, with the exception of a small remnant, was submerged under pagan superstition… THAT CHRISTMAS WAS ORIGINALLY A PAGAN FESTIVAL IS BEYOND ALL DOUBT.”

SATURNALIA: CLIMAX OF ROME’S YEAR

This period of the year was one of great festivity for the pagan Romans. First came the celebrated Saturnalia, beginning Dec. 17. This feast of the god Saturn, the Roman deity of seed and sowing, finds much mention in all commentaries on Christ-Mass. One says —

“The Roman Saturnalia was characterized by processions, singing, lighting candles, adorning houses with laurels and green trees, giving presents.” Again from the Religious Encyclopedia —

“The Saturnalia provided the model for most of the merry customs of Christmas. The time was one of general mirth. All classes exchanged gifts, the commonest being candles and dolls. Christmas inherited the general merriment: games, giving of gifts, abundance of sweetmeats, and — as to the more ceremonious elements — the burning of candles.”

The Encyclopedia Britannica relates similarly —

“Christmas customs are an evolution from times that long antedated the Christian period: a descent from seasonal, pagan, religious, and national practices … The god Saturn’s great festival was the Saturnalia. Business, public and private, was at a standstill, schools closed, presents were exchanged, the traditional ones being candles and dolls.”

Likewise the Encyclopedia Americana —

“At the commencement of this festival, a great number of candles were lighted in the temple of Saturn… no business was transacted, schools kept holiday, law courts were closed. Jests and freedom everywhere prevailed, and all ceased from their various occupations.”

Campbell, in The Story of Christmas, further says —

“The Romans adopted from earlier folk-customs the rituals which appear in their Saturnalia which have been CARRIED OVER INTO THE OBSERVANCE OF MODERN CHRISTMAS. There was giving of presents, feasting, drinking, and decorating with evergreens.”

Auld says again, in his Christmas Traditions —

“Much of the spirit of this old Roman festival of the Saturnalia passed into Christmas celebration. The early Puritans, witnessing the jolly antics of grotesque fools (the ‘Lords of Merry Disport’), never had any doubt in the matter… That transient [that is, shallow and passing] feeling which blossoms at Christmastime OWES AS MUCH TO THE KIND GOD SATURN as to the loving Son of Man… This is the Christmas which — mixed with a LITTLE, sentimental Christianity, lies so pleasantly in the genial pages of Dickens.”

BUFFOONERY AND BLASPHEMY

A major feature of the pagan Saturnalia festival was the reversal of all order and dignities: a mock turning everything upside-down. This was carried to great lengths at Christmastime in the Church in the Middle Ages. In England it was customary to appoint a “Lord of Mirule” or “Abbot of Unreason” who presided over the blasphemous foolery. The Encyclopedia Britannica says —

“Merrymaking came to have a share in Christmas observance, even while emphasis was on the religious phase… A Lord of Misrule and his jester directed the revels, and kept them uproarious.”

The Schaff-Herzog Religious Encyclopedia adds this —

“In England an ‘Abbot of Misrule’ was chosen in every large household; in Scotland, and ‘Abbot of Unreason’. During the term of the festival he was the master of the house.”

We discover, with shock and surprise, that it was quite customary for even the clergy to let down all barriers of restraint within the Church itself at the Christmas season. Crippen relates (which seems almost unbelievable) —

“At Vespers [the evening prayers], at the end of the Magnificat [hymn of praise to God], the whole service was turned into burlesque. Dice were cast, and black puddings [blood sausage] were eaten, on the alter, ludicrous songs were sung, and old leather was burned as mock incense. In some places an ass was led into the Church, in whose honor a mock hymn was chanted, with a bray for a refrain.”

The Encyclopedia Americana confirms this, saying —

“On St. Nicholas’ Day, a ‘Boy Bishop’ was elected, who exercised a burlesque episcopal jurisdiction, and parodied ecclesiastical functions and ceremonies.”

Such is the height and stability and value of a religion grounded on sentiment and superstition. Auld adds —

“All through the Middle Ages the two rivers of RIOT and RELIGION flowed together.”

SIGALLARIA AND BRUMALIA

Following the Saturnalia in Rome was the Sigallaria, or Doll Festival, another obvious link with modern Christmas. Then on the great day, December 25th itself, came the Brumalia (from bruma: “shortest day”) — the religious observance of the sun-worshipers. This was known also as Natalis Solus Invicti: the “Birth of the Unconquerable Sun” — the date when the day began again to lengthen. It is significant that the Catholic Encyclopedia itself says —

“The well known solar feast of Natalis Invicti, celebrated on Dec. 25, has a strong claim for the responsibility of our Christmas date.”

On this point, the Encyclopedia Americana says —

“In the fifth century the Western Church ordered Christmas to be celebrated forever on the day of the old Roman feast of the birth of Sol.” And Everyman’s Encyclopedia declares —

“The observance which especially influenced the Christian Church was probably the Roman festival of the Winter Solstice, celebrated on Dec. 25.”

Then came the Kalends of January, and finally the Juvenalia (Children’s Festival), both of which have contributed their share to the modern Christ-mass. With very odd logic, but typical of the thinking of the flesh, Crippen remarks —

“Surely it was well that all these should be COMBINED IN ONE GREAT CHRISTIAN FEAST, and their ancient significance transferred in the light of the Gospel. Many customs obtained a new lease of life. In Egypt, as in Rome, the new festival would coincide with the birthday of the Sun-God. And the northern barbarians would find it practically coincident with their own Yule. It seems to have been the festival of the god Thor.”

Again from Auld —

“After the barbarians were Christianized, all the customs and SUPERSTITIONS which had belonged from time immemorial to their own Yuletide began to CLUSTER ABOUT CHRISTMAS. When the season calls up in the mind crackling fires on the hearth, lighted candles, rooms adorned with evergreens, bright berries and flowers, feast and frolic — these are the GENUINE PAGAN ELEMENTS.”

WHEN THE CATHOLICS INVENTED CHRISTMAS

Regarding the period when Catholicism originated Christmas, the Catholic Encyclopedia says it was NOT among the early festivals of the Church, because Ireneus and Tertullian, at the end of the second century, omit it from their list of feasts. The first evidence of any observance of the birth of Christ (says this same authority) appears about 200 AD in Egypt. It was not earlier than 330 AD that Dec. 25 was chosen by any “Pope”, and it was not universally accepted till long after that — for the position and authority of the “Pope” was then still far from established. In the Schaff-Herzog Religious Encyclopedia, we are told —

“From the beginning of the fourth century, when the restless searchings of the nature and persons of Christ drove men’s minds into many singular errors, the Eastern Church began to feel the importance of emphasizing the actual birth of Christ by a separate festival…The date once fixed, Christmas gradually became one of the three great annual festivals of the Church.”

And from the Abbott-Conant Dictionary of Religious Knowledge —

“Christmas seems to have first appeared in the Roman Church after the middle of the fourth century. At a somewhat later period it spread into Eastern Asia. It was not received with equal readiness by all the churches. Some denounced it as an innovation… It was not till the sixth century that anything like unanimity prevailed as to the day to be observed.

“The manner in which this festival came to be observed in the Romish Church, and through it to the other churches, is as follows: In this season of the year, a series of heathen festivals occurred, the celebration of which was in many ways closely interwoven with the whole civil and social life of the Romans.

“These festivals had an import which easily admitted of being spiritualized, and transformed into a Christian sense. First came the Saturnalia, which represented the Golden Age, and abolished for a while the distinction of ranks.

“Then came the custom, peculiar to this season, of making presents, afterwards transferred to the Christmas festival.

“After the Saturnalia came the Festival of Infants [Juvenalia], at which the children were presented with images.

“Next came a festival still more analogous to Christmas, that of the shortest day [Brumalia], the Winter Solstice, the Birthday of the New Sun, about to return once more toward the earth… Hence the celebration of the Nativity of Christ was transferred to December 25.

“In the Romish Church, Christmas is a very high festival.”

HOW THE EARLY CHRISTIANS FELT

Regarding the attitude of early Christians toward such things, Auld says —

“As for the first believers, they had NOT THE SLIGHTEST INTEREST IN ANYTHING OF THE KIND. Hope in the Lord’s imminent return from heaven in great power and glory was the flame that fired their devotion.”

In the book, The Customs of Mankind, we read —

“Christmas was originally a festival of the Winter Solstice. It was customary to hold great feasts in honor of the HEATHEN GODS. The early teachers of Christianity PROHIBITED THESE FESTIVALS as unsuited to the character of Christ. Yet the symbols and customs of the old festivals are adapted to the new, and so we find Christmas patterned with many customs of pagan origin.

“To the mind of the Puritans, Christmas smelled to heaven of idolatry… The Puritans abolished Christmas as a hateful relic of Popery.”

Tertullian — who wrote (says Encyclopedia Britannica) “in a period when a LAX SPIRIT OF CONFORMITY had seized the churches”: about 200 AD — says regarding decorating with evergreens and ceremonial candles —

“Let those who have no Light, light their lamps, let them affix to their posts laurels. YOU [Christians] are the Light of the World, a tree ever green. If you have renounced temples, make not your own gate a temple [by heathen wreaths].”

Crippen says —

“At the time of persecution, Christians were detected by NOT decorating their houses at the Saturnalia.”

Some conformed to the heathen customs to avoid suspicion, and to appear like their neighbors, so they would not be looked on as odd and different. This practice was strongly condemned by the early church. And Campbell relates —

“There can be no doubt that [some of] the early Christians also frequently shared in the frolics of their heathen neighbors; and the fathers of the Church had considerable difficulty in prevailing on their members to refrain from such unedifying pastimes.

“The early Christians discouraged the use of evergreen decorations in Christian homes and assemblies, because their display had long been associated with heathen festivals. Bishop Martin of Braga forbade the use of all greenery and ‘other dangerous Kalend customs’.”

Crippen remarks —

“So long as heathenism was in full vigor, the ancient Christians were puritanically jealous of anything that might seem like coquetting with idolatry. But when heathenism was declining, there was a disposition to adopt its customs. What had been heathenish became rich with Christian (!) symbol.”

Note that last statement. Auld too betrays the same perverted outlook —

“The use of evergreens is one of the happy (!) contributions which PAGANISM made to the Christian festival. At first the Church frowned upon this intrusion of paganism into the sacred season. But altogether, the ancient Church was wisely tolerant (!) in her attitude to heathen IDEAS and customs … hence the curious and interesting MIXTURES of IDEAS — pagan and Christian — which became charmingly (!) entwisted.”

After unsuccessfully fighting the adoption of pagan customs, says Campbell —

“The clergy endeavored to transform the heathen revels into amusements which — if not really more spiritual in character — had at least the merit of recognizing the authority of the Church.”

The Encyclopedia Britannica confirms this —

“As Christianity spread among the peoples of pagan lands, many of the practices of the Winter Solstice were blended with those of Christianity, because of the liberal ruling of Pope Gregory I and the cooperation of the missionaries.”

That is, instead of teaching the converts to abandon their old superstitions, and to start a clean new life solely according to the Way of God, the Church found it more practical and profitable to give the old superstitions new names, and mix Christianity with paganism.

And such was the slow but deadly course by which what was originally the faithful and holy Ecclesia of Christ exchanged purity for pleasure, and the friendship and Way of God for the friendship and ways of the world.

REFORMATION… THEN DECLENSION

In times of reformation, and attempted return to Bible ways, there have been periodic revolutions against these heathen corruptions, but they have not endured. In 529 AD, the Emperor Justinian decreed that no one should work on the Catholic festival of Christmas. At the Reformation, one thousand years later, the revulsion against the Catholic superstitions was such that laws were made against not working on Christ-mass. Crippen says —

“The leaders of the Reformation in Scotland thought the Roman Church was too bad to be mended. In their view, it must be ended, and a new beginning made strictly on the model of the New Testament.

“Now certainly the New Testament MADE NO MENTION OF ECCLESIASTICAL FESTIVALS. So the new beginning included the sweeping of them all away. On Dec. 26, 1583, the Glasgow Kirk Session put 5 persons to public penance for keeping the ‘superstitious day called YULE’.”

The early Puritan settlers of America were of the same mind. Christmas, they declared, “smelt to heaven of idolatry,” and they abolished it as a “relic of Popery” [and it certainly is] . In Massachusetts in 1659, a law was passed that-

“Whosoever shall be found observing any such day as Christmas, either by forbearing of labor, feasting, or in any other way, shall be fined 5 shillings.”

In their earlier, sounder days, when they valued the Bible as the Word of God, and were trying to be guided by it, the Presbyterians and Baptists were similarly opposed to these superstitious observances, on the same grounds, but they have long since drifted back to the “ways of the heathen.” In England in 1644, at a time of respect for the Word, and of revulsion against Catholicism, the observance of Christmas was forbidden by an act of Parliament.

WHEN THE CATHOLICS INVENTED CHRISTMAS

Regarding the period when Catholicism originated Christmas, the Catholic Encyclopedia says it was NOT among the early festivals of the Church, because Ireneus and Tertullian, at the end of the second century, omit it from their list of feasts. The first evidence of any observance of the birth of Christ (says this same authority) appears about 200 AD in Egypt. It was not earlier than 330 AD that Dec. 25 was chosen by any “Pope”, and it was not universally accepted till long after that — for the position and authority of the “Pope” was then still far from established. In the Schaff-Herzog Religious Encyclopedia, we are told —

“From the beginning of the fourth century, when the restless searchings of the nature and persons of Christ drove men’s minds into many singular errors, the Eastern Church began to feel the importance of emphasizing the actual birth of Christ by a separate festival…The date once fixed, Christmas gradually became one of the three great annual festivals of the Church.”

And from the Abbott-Conant Dictionary of Religious Knowledge —

“Christmas seems to have first appeared in the Roman Church after the middle of the fourth century. At a somewhat later period it spread into Eastern Asia. It was not received with equal readiness by all the churches. Some denounced it as an innovation… It was not till the sixth century that anything like unanimity prevailed as to the day to be observed.

“The manner in which this festival came to be observed in the Romish Church, and through it to the other churches, is as follows: In this season of the year, a series of heathen festivals occurred, the celebration of which was in many ways closely interwoven with the whole civil and social life of the Romans.

“These festivals had an import which easily admitted of being spiritualized, and transformed into a Christian sense. First came the Saturnalia, which represented the Golden Age, and abolished for a while the distinction of ranks.

“Then came the custom, peculiar to this season, of making presents, afterwards transferred to the Christmas festival.

“After the Saturnalia came the Festival of Infants [Juvenalia], at which the children were presented with images.

“Next came a festival still more analogous to Christmas, that of the shortest day [Brumalia], the Winter Solstice, the Birthday of the New Sun, about to return once more toward the earth… Hence the celebration of the Nativity of Christ was transferred to December 25.

“In the Romish Church, Christmas is a very high festival.”

HOW THE EARLY CHRISTIANS FELT

Regarding the attitude of early Christians toward such things, Auld says —

“As for the first believers, they had NOT THE SLIGHTEST INTEREST IN ANYTHING OF THE KIND. Hope in the Lord’s imminent return from heaven in great power and glory was the flame that fired their devotion.”

In the book, The Customs of Mankind, we read —

“Christmas was originally a festival of the Winter Solstice. It was customary to hold great feasts in honor of the HEATHEN GODS. The early teachers of Christianity PROHIBITED THESE FESTIVALS as unsuited to the character of Christ. Yet the symbols and customs of the old festivals are adapted to the new, and so we find Christmas patterned with many customs of pagan origin.

“To the mind of the Puritans, Christmas smelled to heaven of idolatry… The Puritans abolished Christmas as a hateful relic of Popery.”

Tertullian — who wrote (says Encyclopedia Britannica) “in a period when a LAX SPIRIT OF CONFORMITY had seized the churches”: about 200 AD — says regarding decorating with evergreens and ceremonial candles —

“Let those who have no Light, light their lamps, let them affix to their posts laurels. YOU [Christians] are the Light of the World, a tree ever green. If you have renounced temples, make not your own gate a temple [by heathen wreaths].”

Crippen says —

“At the time of persecution, Christians were detected by NOT decorating their houses at the Saturnalia.”

Some conformed to the heathen customs to avoid suspicion, and to appear like their neighbors, so they would not be looked on as odd and different. This practice was strongly condemned by the early church. And Campbell relates —

“There can be no doubt that [some of] the early Christians also frequently shared in the frolics of their heathen neighbors; and the fathers of the Church had considerable difficulty in prevailing on their members to refrain from such unedifying pastimes. The early Christians discouraged the use of evergreen decorations in Christian homes and assemblies, because their display had long been associated with heathen festivals. Bishop Martin of Braga forbade the use of all greenery and ‘other dangerous Kalend customs’.”

Crippen remarks —

“So long as heathenism was in full vigor, the ancient Christians were puritanically jealous of anything that might seem like coquetting with idolatry. But when heathenism was declining, there was a disposition to adopt its customs. What had been heathenish became rich with Christian (!) symbol.”

Note that last statement. Auld too betrays the same perverted outlook —

“The use of evergreens is one of the happy (!) contributions which PAGANISM made to the Christian festival. At first the Church frowned upon this intrusion of paganism into the sacred season. But altogether, the ancient Church was wisely tolerant (!) in her attitude to heathen IDEAS and customs … hence the curious and interesting MIXTURES of IDEAS — pagan and Christian — which became charmingly (!) entwisted.”

After unsuccessfully fighting the adoption of pagan customs, says Campbell —

“The clergy endeavored to transform the heathen revels into amusements which — if not really more spiritual in character — had at least the merit of recognizing the authority of the Church.”

The Encyclopedia Britannica confirms this —

“As Christianity spread among the peoples of pagan lands, many of the practices of the Winter Solstice were blended with those of Christianity, because of the liberal ruling of Pope Gregory I and the cooperation of the missionaries.”

That is, instead of teaching the converts to abandon their old superstitions, and to start a clean new life solely according to the Way of God, the Church found it more practical and profitable to give the old superstitions new names, and mix Christianity with paganism. And such was the slow but deadly course by which what was originally the faithful and holy Ecclesia of Christ exchanged purity for pleasure, and the friendship and Way of God for the friendship and ways of the world.

REFORMATION .. THEN DECLENSION

In times of reformation, and attempted return to Bible ways, there have been periodic revolutions against these heathen corruptions, but they have not endured. In 529 AD, the Emperor Justinian decreed that no one should work on the Catholic festival of Christmas. At the Reformation, one thousand years later, the revulsion against the Catholic superstitions was such that laws were made against not working on Christ-mass. Crippen says —

“The leaders of the Reformation in Scotland thought the Roman Church was too bad to be mended. In their view, it must be ended, and a new beginning made strictly on the model of the New Testament. Now certainly the New Testament MADE NO MENTION OF ECCLESIASTICAL FESTIVALS. So the new beginning included the sweeping of them all away. On Dec. 26, 1583, the Glasgow Kirk Session put 5 persons to public penance for keeping the ‘superstitious day called YULE’.”

The early Puritan settlers of America were of the same mind. Christmas, they declared, “smelt to heaven of idolatry,” and they abolished it as a “relic of Popery” [and it certainly is]. In Massachusetts in 1659, a law was passed that-

“Whosoever shall be found observing any such day as Christmas, either by forbearing of labor, feasting, or in any other way, shall be fined 5 shillings.” In their earlier, sounder days, when they valued the Bible as the Word of God, and were trying to be guided by it, the Presbyterians and Baptists were similarly opposed to these superstitious observances, on the same grounds, but they have long since drifted back to the “ways of the heathen.” In England in 1644, at a time of respect for the Word, and of revulsion against Catholicism, the observance of Christmas was forbidden by an act of Parliament.

SANTA CLAUS — CHRISTMAS TREE

The name “Santa Claus” is clearly recognizable as derived from the good Bishop “Saint Nicholas,” patron saint of beggars and thieves. In the Middle Ages, thieves were known as “clerks of St. Nicholas.” In Europe he travels about in all his bishop’s regalia riding a white horse (which he inherited through amalgamation with Scandinavian mythology from the god Wodin, who was engaged in exactly the same activities at that period of the year). His descent down the chimney is traceable to similar habits of the Norse goddess Hertha. Auld writes about St. Nicholas-

“The names and attributes of the mysterious purveyors of gifts disclose a most CONFUSED MIXTURE OF PAGAN AND CHRISTIAN NOTIONS. All kinds of bugbears and bogies figure in the European Christmas. By their names they suggest a loose connection with St. Nicholas, but by their activities they betray unmistakable relationship with the weird beings of pagan mythology.”

We have seen how the Christmas tree is traced clearly to ancient paganism. Virgil, the Roman poet, speaks of decorating pine trees in honor of Bacchus, the god of drinking and revelry. Hislop connects similar customs with Egyptian cults. And — in a strange, latter day reversal — pagan Russia has borrowed back the pagan “Christmas”‘ tree. The Moscow News reports that Moscow alone has 10,000 of such trees. Colored pictures show these “New Year”‘ trees, with all their tinsel and bright baubles and lights, to be indistinguishable from “Christmas” trees, except there are no “Christian” symbols, and the crowning Star at the top is red. And Russia’s genial “Grandfather Frost” associated with these trees, with his jolly face, and bushy white beard, and suit of red: who can distinguish him from St. Nick? He is St. Nick, stripped of his adopted Catholicism, and returned to his pagan origin. Mistletoe, of course, is well-known as inherited — and introduced into Christmas — from the Druid priesthood of ancient heathen Britain. For centuries the Church forbade its use because of the superstitions attached to it. It was so sacred a talisman that enemies meeting beneath it laid down their arms. (The world still has a relic of this heathen superstition).

Miscellaneous Christmas superstitions are far too numerous to mention. Campbell, in summing up, comes surprising close to the truth —

“There is really NOTHING IN COMMON between the mystery of the Word made flesh for man’s salvation, and the orgies of eating and drinking and horseplay associated with the paganism of pre-Christian times, and PERPETUATED AT THE CHRISTMAS SEASON in our own as well as earlier generations.

“There’s goodwill in both, but one is CARNAL, and the other SPIRITUAL.”

How do we — called out to be holy sons and daughters of the Lord — stand in relation to these confused and corrupt Catholic-Pagan things of the world? Admittedly, it all appeals powerfully to the flesh. It is “pretty”, it is exciting, it is the popular way of the crowd, it is pleasant to the senses. It is all tinsel, and hoopla, and music, and glistening stars, and twinkling lights. It has everything that attracts the shallow, juvenile, fleshly mind. The Christmas songs and Christmas stories are concocted and executed by consummate actors for the fullest emotional effect. Doubtless the children of Israel, indulging in the “pretty” Canaanite religious customs, said to themselves (or in self-excuse to others), “There really isn’t any harm. Of course I do not really mean it in a religious way. It really means nothing to me, and it is all so pretty and pleasant. I really serve the Lord, but I just like a little fun and relaxation. Why do we have to be so different?”

There is absolutely nothing scriptural about Christ-mass. Nothing like it, or leading to it, or justifying it, is ever mentioned in the Bible, or even in early “Christian” records. We have seen that it is a “religious,” blasphemous Catholic-Pagan abomination. Why should holy brethren and sisters of Christ ever want to have anything to do with such things of the Apostasy? Surely we desire holiness!

We cannot really say what part of this fleshly mixture — the Pagan part or the Catholic part — is the more objectionable to God, but either one alone should be enough to keep a child of God from having anything to do with it.

(In large part, from GVG)

Surely, in our quest for deeper understanding of the man Jesus and his message, something is to be learned from the people with whom he frequently came in contact. It is fair to say that these were not usually such as would have graced the finer synagogues of his day; nor, we might add, would their modern counterparts be immediately welcome in many of our ecclesial halls. This comes across rather impressively in catalogue form:

• Lepers: “And there came a leper to him, beseeching him and kneeling down to him…. ‘If thou wilt, thou canst make me clean’ ” (Mar 1:40). “The leper, in accord with the strict conditions of the law, should not have been so close. With torn garments and dishevelled hair he should have gone around crying ‘Unclean! Unclean!’ (Lev 13:44,45), and he should have dwelt alone. The stern requirements of hygiene caused the Israelites to deny their camp in the wilderness to those in this condition (Num 5:2). That the man came so close is a mark, not of callous disregard of the law, but of the supreme confidence which knew that he would do no injury to the Lord, while the Lord could, if he would, confer cleansing on him. Jesus, on his part, accepted the position without embarrassment, and acted with the same assurance. To touch a leper was to contract defilement; but for the Lord to do so was to bring cleansing without himself suffering any harm” (NMk 21).

• The Samaritan woman and her neighbors (Joh 4:1-42): Even the woman at the well recognized that the Jews customarily had no dealings with the Samaritans (v 9). To the legalistically devout this was all too literally true; the gospel record finds an exact parallel in the well-reported sayings of the rabbis: “May I never set eyes on a Samaritan!” or “May I never be thrown into company with him!” It was said that to partake of their bread was like eating swine’s flesh (A Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, Vol. 1, p. 401). Most Israelites, in traveling between Judea and Galilee, went miles out of their way, circling through Perea, to avoid traversing the loathsome land of Samaria. How this gives weight by contrast to the statement of John, that Jesus “must needs go through Samaria” (v 4). Not only did Jesus disregard the traditional proscriptions of the land of the Samaritans, but also it was necessary that he go there! And necessary that he wait at the well, and necessary that he ask drink of the woman (unthinkable to a Pharisee), and necessary that he remain in their city two days (v 40) to bring to their thirsty lips the true water of life.

• The infirm man at the pool of Bethesda (Joh 5:1-9): “High on the hill of Zion the immaculately robed priests observed the temple ritual, aloof and impersonal. In the shadows of its walls the halt, the blind and the withered waited for the movement of the water” (MP 86,87). Among them was a certain man with an infirmity of 38 years’ duration (v 5). By the law such a man, if a descendant of Aaron, would be prohibited from all official duties (Lev 21:17-23). Extreme body blemishes would exclude any Israelite from the congregation of the Lord (Deu 23:1). And so the “pure and undefiled” of Israel went their way to the Temple services, oblivious of the poor, suffering scraps of humanity who clung superstitiously to the hope of healing at the pool. Where did the Master’s steps turn, upward to the beautiful ritualized service of Herod’s house, or downward to the miserable exiles of Bethesda? The true scene of his ministry was not among the subtle analysts of the law but in the midst of suffering, diseased, afflicted mankind, those who needed a redeemer.

• The harlot, “a woman in the city, which was a sinner” (Luk 7:37): So astounding was Jesus’ acceptance of this harlot’s approach and service, that his host Simon the Pharisee thought surely he could not be a prophet or else he would push her away and revile her for her sins (v 39). He knew so little of the spirit of the Saviour! Do we know more?

• The lunatic (Mar 5:1-21; Mat 8:28-34; Luk 8:26-40): Christ and his disciples came to the shore at Gergesa, on the east side of the Sea of Galilee, in Decapolis. And there met them out of the tombs a man with an unclean spirit. Here was a man expelled from all society by his condition (insanity), his appearance (nakedness), and his abode (the tombs); yet Jesus approached him, spoke to him, even bearing with his fantasies, healed him, and gave him of his own garments (an unproven suggestion, but quite probable, and filled with wonderful typical significance)! So impressed, however, were those of the neighborhood that they begged him to leave (Mar 5:17); a man who consorted with such men as “Legion” could certainly be no friend of theirs.

• The woman with the issue of blood (Mar 5:25-34): Here was another condition which, like leprosy, rendered the sufferer unclean (Lev 15:19-30). As Jesus went on his way, she pushed her timid way through the crowd: “If I may touch but his clothes, I shall be whole.” This was the reverse of the legal restriction, which should have been: ‘If I touch his garment, he will be unclean also.’ How great was her faith! She knew what manner of man Jesus was: a man who could touch the unclean, and yet remain pure; a man whose law superseded that of Moses; a man to whom mental impurity was far worse than legal defilement.

• Gentiles: Of several examples, we note here the case of the Syrophoenician woman (Mar 7:25,26; Mat 15:21-28). Coming on the heels of the Lord’s discourse about the true source of defilement (Mar 7:1-23; Mat 15:1-20), and in disregard for the traditions of the elders, this incident in which Jesus heals the daughter of the Gentile woman thus carries extra significance. Though the woman was not a Jewess, her faith exceeded by far that of Jesus’ countrymen. As in the other cases we have noted, an external condition of separation was of no consequence to him who came to save the “world” and to call sinners to repentance.

• Publicans: Two of this hated class figure prominently in the gospels: Zaccheus, “chief among the publicans” (Luk 19:2), and one of the twelve, Matthew (Mat 10:3; Luk 5:27). These servants of the Roman oppressors were held in such low esteem generally that the word “publican” had become practically synonymous with “sinner” (Mat 9:11; Mar 2:16; Luk 5:30). Yet Jesus found friends among this class; perhaps some real-life publican was the model for the Lord’s account of contrasting prayer styles, for the admonition of those who “trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others” (Luk 18:9-14). On the opposite side, we have the rabbinical attitude toward the publicans: They were excluded from being judges and witnesses in legal affairs. They were seen as a criminal race, to which Lev 20:5 applied (about those who committed “whoredom with Molech”). It was said that there never was a family which numbered a tax-collector in which all did not become such. And they were seen as so evil that it was permissible for the righteous to lie to them to protect their property from taxation (Edersheim, op cit, p 516).

• The dead (Mar 5:35-43; Joh 11:1-46; Luk 7:14): Here was the ultimate defilement, the dead body (Lev 21:1; 22:4; Num 5:2; 9:6,10); even from this Christ did not shrink. We know he could raise the dead by a word, as he did with Lazarus. But he did not hesitate to take the dead daughter of Jairus by the hand (Mar 5:41). His was the “personal touch” of sincere love. As always, it seems, the consequences of legal “uncleanness” were ignored as irrelevant beside the greater issues of his ministry. The Lord of life came near to death, partaking of mortality, bearing the burdens of those who grieved and the curse of the law, “tasting death” on behalf of all men.

By contrast with all of the above, we find the Lord, so kind and gentle on most occasions, becoming openly aggressive in censuring the moral defilement of those who were most scrupulous to avoid legal defilement. Surely, we are tempted to think, this very “religious” (even if misguided) class deserved more diplomatic treatment at his hands. But no figure of speech was too drastic for Christ to use: They were whited sepulchres, full of dead men’s bones (Mat 23:27,28; Luk 11:44); cups clean on the outside, but filled with extortion and rapacity (Mat 23:25; Luk 11:39). The reason? It may be said there are many, for the list of charges against the Pharisees is long and varied (Mat 23:3-7,16-18,25-29,34), but certainly one reason is this: that it is dangerous to find satisfaction in any physical separation from “defilement”. “I thank thee, God, that I am not as other men” (Luk 18:11) is no basis on which to build one’s faith.

To go about preoccupied with the “sins” of others, ever mindful of how their shortcomings may reflect upon us by association, is to fight a “paper tiger”, while the true enemy goes free. “Let a man examine himself” (1Co 11:28). Those things which are outside the man cannot defile him, but that which comes out of the man, from a self-righteous heart, defiles the man (Mar 7:18,20).

How far are we really removed from the foolish prejudices and traditions of the Pharisees? Have we altogether reversed Christ’s standards, downplaying his emphasis on moral defilement — in a slow drift into the world’s thinking — and seeking to cover our inadequacies by an undue concern for legal “defilement”? We vicariously associate, through television and other media, with the worst the “world” has to offer by way of movie “stars”, sports “heroes”, and rock musicians; and, unconsciously perhaps, we absorb the spirit of this licentious and materialistic age. Then we dress in our finest clothes and drive our new automobiles to places of worship on Sunday morning, where we meticulously draw our “skirts” about us and withhold the Bread and Wine from someone who is just slightly too “sinful” or not quite well enough “informed” for our standards (‘We thank thee, Lord, that we are not like these other men’), and somehow we feel that in this we are doing God service.

We must be careful that the means by which all believers are commanded to remember the Lord’s death until he returns does not become a ritual, with supposed efficacy in the object itself, by which we establish our “purity” in a negative sense. “Negative holiness” can save no man. Neither can the proximity of a “sinner”, even one so close as to partake of the same cup, endanger our “fellowship” with one who was ever and always the friend of “sinners”, who embraced lepers and lunatics, harlots and dead bodies — yet in the best sense was still “holy, harmless, and undefiled” (Heb 7:26).

An exhortation delivered on the final day of an American Bible School.

“And when the cloud was taken up from the tabernacle, then after that the children of Israel journeyed… at the commandment of the Lord the children of Israel journeyed” (Num 9:17,18).

Brothers and sisters, for this past week we have been resting and refreshing ourselves in the presence of the Lord. We have pitched our tents together as the camp of Israel in this place. But now, as we knew it would, the time has finally come for us to go. The “cloud” has been taken up from the tabernacle, and once more we must begin our journey.

How often have we heard it said, “Oh, if only the Bible School could go on forever!” If only we just didn’t have to leave here, but could remain in this quiet, secluded place indefinitely.

Peter’s Dilemma

Peter said much the same thing one time. Once he climbed a mountain with Jesus, and there he beheld him speaking with Moses and Elijah. Peter was overcome with emotion:

“Master, it is good for us to be here!” And he was right!

This week we have stood on the “mountain” with Jesus and the Apostle Paul and Elijah and Joshua the captain of Israel. And it has been good for us to be here with Jesus, to catch a glimpse of the glory that is his, and that will be Peter’s and Paul’s and ours also.

But it would not have been good for Peter and James and John to build three tabernacles and camp indefinitely on that mountain. There was work to do, down on the plains. They had to come down from the mountain, to leave that private place of sweet fellowship with God, and to go out into the world again.

If Peter had remained on that mountain, contemplating that glorious vision, the Jews assembled at Jerusalem would never have heard his words, “Repent and be baptized!”

If Peter had remained on that mountain, the lame man would have lain daily at the gate of the Temple until he died, never having felt the powerful hand of healing.

If Peter had remained on that mountain, Cornelius and his house would never have heard the gospel call, and the door of hope would never have been flung open to the Gentiles.

Why We Must Leave

Brothers, and sisters, if we all remained here, how many of our families and friends would never have a chance to enjoy the same privilege that we have had this week, this “feast of fat things”? How good it would be, not that we remain here, but rather that we leave here with a firm resolve that, if Christ remain away, we will try our best to bring someone new back to this wonderful place next year!!

And there is another reason why we cannot remain on this spiritual “mountain”, why we cannot continue to pitch our tents in peace around the tabernacle of the Lord: Peter had to come down off the mountain in order to follow Jesus in the way. He had to leave that wonderful retreat in order to fail, and in that failure to find greater strength through the forgiveness of sins that only his Master could provide. Peter had to go back into the world before he could meet the resurrected Christ, before he could be a partaker of his Lord’s sufferings so that he might be a partaker of his glory.

And the children of Israel had to resume their wilderness trek if they, and their children, and their children’s children were to have any hope of reaching the Promised Land with Joshua.

Disciples of Christ are not made by sitting in the peaceful shade, but by struggling along the “rugged pathway”. Here, in this place, we may be well-instructed. But only out there, in the bustle and turmoil and frustrations of the world about us, can we become by experience true disciples. Only out there can we begin to put into practice, and to prove the efficacy of, the lessons we have learned this week.

And, besides, why shouldn’t we continue our journey? … because, for all we know, just over the next hill, or around the next bend, we might find ourselves in the presence of Christ, in God’s Kingdom. “The Bridegroom cometh”; we must go out to meet him!!

“The Lord is my Shepherd “

We read that God “made His own people to go forth like sheep, and guided them in the wilderness like a flock… and led them on safely, so that they feared not” (Psa 78:52,53). His pillar of cloud and fire led them on through a dangerous land, and through treacherous enemies, on their way toward the Kingdom. It is here and now, as we prepare to leave this place of peace and spiritual plenty, and resume our “wilderness journey”, that the familiar words of Psalm 23 can be to us most meaningful:

“The Lord is my shepherd…”

not just “our” shepherd collectively, but “mine” individually. Each one of us might say these words. Wherever I go, He will be there to guide me. Though all men forsake me, “and days are dark and friends are few”, yet the Lord will shepherd me. And even when I stumble and fall — especially then — He will be there to lift me up and set my feet on the path.

“I shall not want…”

True, I may lack many things that I would naturally desire, but I will lack nothing that I really need for my spiritual development. All things have been provided for my salvation, and even the lack of some things have been designed by God for my ultimate benefit (Rom 8:28). And though I have “nothing” now, as the world might count treasure, yet in Paul’s words “I possess all things” because the Lord of heaven and earth is my Shepherd, my Guide and my Savior.

“He maketh me to lie down in green pastures; He leadeth me beside the still waters; He restoreth my soul…”

Here we have rested and drunk of still waters; our “soul”, our “inner man” has been refreshed and strengthened. But now we must stand again. Now we must follow Christ in the path of righteousness. Now we must walk through the valley of the shadow of death, so that we can learn to trust in God rather than ourselves, and so that we can (as did Paul) rejoice in deliverances past, present, and future (2Co 1:9,10). When our problems are small, then we are scarcely even conscious of our need for a Savior. But when those problems, and the doubts and fears that accompany them, mount up in our lives… then we can seek — and find!! — a Savior who will bless us abundantly above all we might ever imagine. Then he will be a Savior who is as great as our trials, who delights to bless us in a myriad of ways, and whose strength finds perfection only along side our weakness.

If our lives were altogether pleasant… if there were never trials, or illnesses, or pain, or failure, or death… would we still desire the Kingdom? Why should we? It follows therefore that God tries us because He loves us. It is the mercy of God that leads us out of our idleness and into the valley of tears. For it is there only, in the “world”, that we can truly find God. It is through “tribulation” — trial, pressure, stress — that we must enter the Kingdom (Acts 14:22). These “stresses” and “pressures” are the “rod” and “staff” of the Divine Shepherd, which discipline and even “hurt” us, yet at the same time strengthen and direct us in the right paths. And thereby are we “comforted”.

Even in the dreary wilderness, with the “wild beasts”, our Shepherd prepares us a table, as He did for our fathers who came out of Egypt — causing waters to run down like rivers and raining down manna from heaven (Psalm 78:16,24). We must not complain or doubt. We must never ask, as did they, “Can God provide a table in this wilderness?” (v 19). He can, and He does! Here before us on this table are the emblems of a body dedicated and blood poured out. Here as sheep we feed on the pasture provided by the Good Shepherd. And even while the beasts of prey circle menacingly, and the shadows lengthen, we are fed in hope, the words echoing in our ears:

“Fear not, little flock, it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom.”

What comfort there is, what encouragement, in these words! They keep in our minds the beautiful vision of our destination. The cloud has been taken up from the tabernacle. Let us arise! Let us pack our bags and gather our children about us. Let us renew our journey through the wilderness.

Out of 25 occurrences of “nephele”, all but three plainly mean the Cloud of the Shekinah Glory. The student should work his way through the entire list. Acts 1:9 and 1Th 4:17 are specially instructive.

But there are three of the twenty-five which do not so readily conform to this general usage:

In 2Pe 2:17, false teachers are referred to as “clouds carried with a tempest”. Jud 1:12 (ref to the above) calls them “clouds without water”. In each of these instances the Shekinah Glory idea is not out of sight. Here were men claiming divine authority for their message (as Ezekiel with his Eze 1), but in fact they were not borne along by the Holy Spirit (2Pe 1:19) but by a tempest, sweeping them away to their own destruction. Differently, Jude’s “clouds without water” implies that these men brought no true Holy Spirit blessing.

But what is to be said about the words of Jesus?: “When ye see a cloud rise out of the west, straightway ye say, There cometh a shower; and so it is.” Besides the simple literal meaning, a commonplace experience in the Holy Land, Jesus may have meant allusion to the Holy of Holies at the western end of the sanctuary enclosure (cp Psa 103:12) — the Shekinah Glory of God appearing there would be the certain herald of heavenly blessing: “a shower”.

It is important to observe that the “so great cloud of witnesses” (Heb 12:1), referring to the multitude of the faithful in Heb 11, uses a different word: “nephos”. Thus, it is not permissible to use this passage to interpret 1Th 4:17.

Author: Paul

Time: AD 61

Summary: The letter to Colosse was written in response to heresy that had been brought to Paul’s attention. The major errors that had crept into the church seemed to have been: (1) the exaltation of angels or other “elemental spirits”; (2) the emphasis on ascetic or liturgical practices thought to produce spirituality; and (3) claims to a special knowledge beyond that found in the Gospel of Christ. Paul states that these are philosophies based on human tradition and are therefore worthless. He teaches love, humility, submission to authority, and finally prayer to establish a believer in the wisdom of God.

Key verse: “See, to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ” (Col 2:8).

Outline

1. Introduction: Col 1:1-14
2. The supremacy of Christ: Col 1:15-23

3. Paul’s labor for the church: Col 1:24 — 2:7
4. Freedom from human regulations through life with Christ: Col 2:8-23

5. Rules for holy living: Col 3:1 – 4:6

6. Final greetings: Col 4:7-18