Psalms and Pentateuch

ChristadelphianBooksOnline The Agora Bible Articles and Lessons: P-Q

The Psalms are divisible into 5 books, answering to the 5 books of Moses:

BOOK PSALMS COMMENTS
Book 1 1-41 Genesis: concerning man and his relationship to God. All blessing is bound up in obedience. Closes with a Benediction and a double Amen.
Book 2 42-72 Exodus: concerning Israel as a nation. The counsels of God concerning Israel’s ruin, redeemer, and redemption. Closes with a Benediction and a double Amen.
Book 3 73-89 Leviticus: concerning God’s sanctuary. Closes with a Benediction and a double Amen.
Book 4 90-106 Numbers: concerning Israel in relation to the nations. Closes with a Benediction, Amen, and Hallelujah.
Book 5 107-150 Deuteronomy: concerning God and His Word. Closes with 5 psalms, each beginning and ending with “Hallelujah”.

The last 5 psalms may be seen as an echo of the whole of the five books:

  • Psa 146/Genesis: cp v 4 with Gen 2:7; v 5 with 2:8; v 6 with Gen 1.

  • Psa 147/Exodus: cp v 4 with Exo 1:1; vv 2-20 with Exo 1:7-10.

  • Psa 148/Leviticus: cp v 14 with Lev 10:3.

  • Psa 149/Numbers: cp vv 5-9 with Num 14:21; 24:17-24.

  • Psa 150/Deuteronomy: cp v 2 with Deu 3:24.

The ancient Jewish Sabbath worship incorporated the reading of a portion of the Pentateuch, so that over a 3-year period the whole was covered. A related psalm at the close of each Sabbath service?

It is said that the reading of Gen ended on the 41st Sabbath, Exodus on the 72nd, Lev on the 89th, Num on the 116th, and Deut on the 144th. The 12 extra Sabbaths in a 3-year period [(3 x 52) – 144] were possibly related to the intercalary month (a sort of “leap-year” arrangement by which a 13th month was added periodically to the Jewish calendar). Possible special readings (the final 5 psalms, perhaps) occupied those Sabbaths.

There is then a remarkable association between the Pentateuch and the Psalms, suggesting a plausible reason for the division of the Psalms into 5 books. A reason, also, for the inclusion in the Psalms of almost identical psalms (14 and 53, for example): the same psalm was only very slightly modified for use in 2 different collections.

Prophets

ChristadelphianBooksOnline The Agora Bible Articles and Lessons: P-Q

Prophets were God’s inspired spokesmen. They spoke so that everyone — whether Jew or Gentile, king or peasant, master or servant, farmer or merchant, soldier or slave, man or woman, aged or youth — could hear the word of God and give heed. They also wrote so that their contemporaries and following generations, including our own and beyond, could read and obey.

“For everything that was written in the past was written to teach us, so that through endurance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope” (Rom 15:4).

What the prophets said and wrote had an immediate and significant impact upon the people of their time. But inspired prophetic writings are not limited to local, historical significance. Bible prophecy is equally relevant today.

There are exciting prophecies which deal with the nation of Israel and the political powers of the Middle East. There are unnerving prophecies which predict religious apostasy, economic turmoil, and widespread violence. There are frightening prophecies which foretell worldwide war, famine, and pestilence. For us, however, the most immediately relevant prophecies are those which directly affect our lives now.

Consider first what the apostle Paul preached at Athens:

“The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all men everywhere to repent, because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed, and of this he has given assurance to all men by raising him from the dead” (Acts 17:30,31).

Since the judgment by Christ has yet to come, “all men everywhere” applies to us as well as to the men of Athens. The fact that God “has fixed a day” and “has given assurance” means that the judgment is certain.

Next consider a passage from Paul’s letter to the Romans:

“For Christ will render to every man according to his works: to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; but for those who are factious and do not obey the truth, but obey wickedness, there will be wrath and fury” (Rom 2:6-8).

“Every man” applies equally to us in the twentieth century as it did to men and women of the Roman world. “Eternal life”, or “wrath and fury”….these are the outcomes of Christ’s judgment. These prophecies are unquestionably significant to us, for they speak about our eternal reward or punishment. What could be more personally relevant?

The purpose of Bible prophecy is to make people aware of the plans of God, so that they can take the appropriate action, while there is still time. When a prophet speaks for God:

  • ignorant people are instructed in the Way of the Lord,

  • wayward people are called to repentance,

  • rebellious people are warned of the consequences of their sins, and

  • faithful people are encouraged to continue firm in the Faith.

We are among these people.

The prophets predicted future events so that, when those events took place, we would know that God had spoken. Fulfilled Bible prophecy encourages us to pay attention to what God says. But God does not want us to be so fascinated by prediction that we miss the purpose of prophecy. He wants us to listen to His teaching and become one of His children:

“The prophets who prophesied of the grace that was to be yours, searched intently and with the greatest care, trying to find out the time and circumstances to which the Spirit of Christ in them was pointing when predicting the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glory. It was revealed to them that they were not serving themselves but you, when they spoke of the things that have now been told you by those who have preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven… Therefore gird up your minds, be sober, set your hope fully upon the grace to be given you when Jesus Christ is revealed” (1Pe 1:10-13).

Psalms of the Sanctuary

ChristadelphianBooksOnline The Agora Bible Articles and Lessons: P-Q

“In the beginning”

The purpose of Yahweh may be summarized in the Hebrew titles of the first five books of the Bible. It is not generally known that the titles in our English Bible are based upon the Greek Septuagint; they bear little or no resemblance to the Hebrew titles. Consider the summary below:

English title Hebrew title Translation
1. Genesis “Bereshith” “In the beginning”
2. Exodus “Ve-elleh shemoth” “These (are) the names”
3. Leviticus “Vayyikra” “He (Yahweh) called”
4. Numbers “Be-midbar” “In the wilderness”
5. Deuteronomy “Haddebarim” “These (are) the words”

In each of the above cases, the Hebrew title is the first word or phrase of the book — which serves as a keynote of its message. Carrying the observation one step further, we notice that the five titles, taken in order and supplying the ellipsis, also provide a message. Almost as poetry, they speak eloquently of the Deity and His comprehensive purpose, as Creator, Lawgiver, and Saviour of the world:

“In the beginning these were the names which Yahweh called. In the wilderness these were the words (which Yahweh spoke).”

“He called”

Let us concentrate on Moses’ third book: Here we find a proclamation of God’s purpose with those whom He has called. “I will be glorified… I will be sanctified in those who approach Me!” This is the main theme of Leviticus: God’s sanctuary among men. God has proposed to erect a “house”, in which He may be sanctified. A “house”, Scripturally speaking, may be either a building or a family. But we think most often of the latter, for we realize that God may be worshipped anywhere — He needs not temples made with men’s hands (Acts 7:48).

“Wherever, Lord, Thy people meet, There they behold Thy mercy seat; Where’er they seek Thee, Thou art found, And every place is hallowed ground.”

Thus, when we consider God’s Sanctuary and those who are called to it, we perceive that spiritual sanctification is more Important than physical sanctification — even as our Lord said, “Be ye holy… be ye perfect…”

This rather forbidding book of Leviticus is not a “dead letter”. It has a universal spiritual appeal, to those of all times who constitute the living sanctuary. God has called us all “out of Egypt” and built us up into a spiritual house in the wilderness, having through His Son set us an example of holiness and perfection.

The “Leviticus” Book of Psalms

The Hebrew Psalter is divided into five books, corresponding to the five books of the Pentateuch. Each “book” ends with a benediction, or blessing (41:13; 72:18,19; 89:52; 118:28,29; all of 150). By ancient Hebrew tradition, Leviticus was divided into seventeen Sabbath synagogue readings; the third book of Psalms (Psa 73 through Psa 89) consists of seventeen Psalms. There are strikingly similar arrangements in the other four pairs of Mosaic books and Psalms sections. (For detail, consult The Companion Bible, by Bullinger.)

Ten is the number of ordinal (numerical) perfection; seven, spiritual perfection and God’s covenant. The sum of the two represents a perfection of spiritual order in God’s covenant. In seventeen we see the “beauty of holiness”, the “glory and beauty” of God’s sanctuary, where all services are conducted “decently and in order” (1Co 14:40).

In almost every psalm of the seventeen, the sanctuary or the holy Place or the holy congregation is mentioned. The titles in this section refer to Asaph, Heman, and Ethan (the three “chief musicians” or choir directors) and the “sons of Korah” (doorkeepers in the tabernacle and temple — 1Ch 9:19; Psa 84:10). The three directors stood officially “according to their order” (1Ch 6:32):

Left (1Ch 6:44) Center (1Ch 6:33) Right (1Ch 6:39)
Ethan (Psa 89) or Jeduthun (Psa 76) Heman (Psa 88) Asaph (Psa 73–83)
Of Merari Of Kohath Of Gershom

The group led by each man would play and sing its special hymns in the service of the tabernacle and the temple — a perfection of spiritual order.

The Sanctuary of Yahweh

Certain themes emerge from these “Psalms of the Sanctuary”, which demonstrate the relevance of Leviticus and the sanctuary to our day:

Psalm 73: Yahweh’s sanctuary is the place of enlightenment, a lampstand shining in a dark and frightful world:

“For I was envious at the wicked… until I went into the sanctuary of God; then I understood their end.”

Psalms 74; 79: The enemy is currently enthroned in Yahweh’s sanctuary (Jerusalem and indeed all the earth), and the righteous remnant mourn and pray:

“Thine enemies roar in the midst of the congregation… Thy holy temple have they defiled… How long, Yahweh?”

Psalms 75; 76: But finally Yahweh will arise to cleanse His sanctuary: “God is the judge… in Salem also is His tabernacle, and His dwelling place in Zion… the earth feared and was still, when God arose to judgment…”

Psalms 80; 82: The people of Yahweh are the true and living sanctuary, built up around Christ, the ultimate sanctuary whom the Father strengthened for Himself (Psa 80:15,17):

“God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; He judgeth among the gods.”

Psalms 83; 84: The tents of wickedness will eventually fall, but the sanctuary of Yahweh will stand firm:

“I had rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God, than to dwell in the tents of wickedness.”

Psalms 87; 89: Only one birth is of consequence, and that is the birth, or rebirth, in the sanctuary of Zion:

“Yahweh shall reckon, when He enrolls the people, that this man was born there… in the congregation and assembly of the saints…”

Prov and God

ChristadelphianBooksOnline The Agora Bible Articles and Lessons: P-Q

A critic once remarked with rather cruel sarcasm, that no one ever doubted the existence of God until the theologians attempted to prove it. There is a measure of justice in this reproach. Theologians have attempted to be wise beyond that which is written, and their representation of God has not been successful. It is not surprising that there have been harmful reactions from these excesses.

The proverbs of Solomon differ from proverbs of merely human origin in their continual reference to God. His existence, His supreme wisdom, His power, and His absolute prerogatives, are presented as fundamental truths, needing no demonstration and only in need of reiteration because of the forgetfulness of man. We can only think of one suggestion of an argument in the modern sense of the word; the reference to the seeing eye and the hearing ear, both being the work of God. This argument is more definitely expressed in the words, “He that made the eye, shall he not see? He that made the ear, shall not he hear.” It is the only argument of modern type that we can remember finding in the Scriptures as proof of the existence of God. The reasoning will appeal to all thoughtful people. The organs of sight and hearing are so complex and there are so many external conditions necessary before they can function, that it would be preposterous to imagine that all the essential things came together by chance.

This kind of argument is unusual in Scripture, however. The truth regarding God is presented, not in subtle arguments according to a human conception of wisdom, but in demonstration of the spirit and power. Our conviction of the existence of God is not based upon philosophical arguments, however good they may be, but upon the fact that God has given us messages far beyond the knowledge of man or the power of man to fabricate.

It is strange that some modern writers have lost faith in the Christian religion because they find the universe so much greater than they had supposed. They suggest that the God of Israel was on a level with other divinities each supposed to preside over the destinies of a particular nation, helping them in their wars with others. We could understand the men of Tyre falling into such an error with their external and only partial view of Israelitish affairs. It is probable that Jezebel the Tyrian princess used arguments very similar to those of modern unbelievers. In every land that the men of Tyre visited they would find local divinities quite unrecognized in others parts of the world, but wherever they sailed the sun appeared in the sky, giving warmth and life in every country. Jezebel and her friends would argue that this was the true god visible everywhere and in all the world the giver of food. The people of Israel, however, were given some idea of the greatness of the universe made and sustained by God. They were given the most explicit instructions that they must not worship sun or moon, for these were created things made by the God who had called the Israelites to be a peculiar people for Himself. It was a grievous offence to “limit” the Holy One of Israel. His power was described as infinite and His understanding beyond searching; the earth and all the host of Heaven were made by Him. If men will remember the many divinities of ancient Egypt and Assyria, and then read the contemporary Israelitish description of God in the Psalms, they may begin to appreciate the mighty contrast between the religious conceptions of the most highly cultured of the ancient Gentile nations and the revelations made to Israel.

In these days scientists startle us with their descriptions of distant stars, and some people have actually lost their faith in God through the staggering conception of stars so distant that the light takes thousands of years to reach us. Such figures do not disturb us, for in very early days we were confronted with a problem beyond all comparison more overwhelming. Make the figures as terrifying as you will and it is at least possible to conceive of them so long as there is a limit. Make the universe as old as you will and it is possible to understand such great periods if there was a beginning. Time without beginning and space without end were the ideas that staggered us. In thus contemplating infinity we are faced with two alternatives one of which must be accepted although both seem impossible. In our experience all things must have a beginning, but we are forced to believe that the first cause always existed. In our experience the largest of objects or the greatest of distances are limited, but we are forced to accept the idea that space is unlimited. We could use the language of the popular scientist and talk of light years and light centuries and light millenniums. We could invite him to use his well developed powers to imagine something moving so much faster than light that it could reach his most distant star in a second. Then imagine its speed doubling every second and proceeding with such acceleration out into space for millions of years until all the paper in the world could not find room to express the figure even in light millenniums.

A man might lose his reason trying to grasp the idea of unending space or attempting to imagine how there could possibly be a limit. We cannot understand this matter any more than we can search the mind of God. We are finite beings but we are intelligent enough to grasp the fact that there is infinity around us. We are imperfect beings but we are intelligent enough to form the concept of perfection. This is the true conception of God, infinite and perfect.

The first reference to God in the Proverbs is in the well-known saying, “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge.” This may be regarded as the beginning of the proverbs, for the previous six verses have merely set forth the object of the book, calling upon the wise to hear and understand. The first real proverb, then, is this clear call to fear God. There is no suggestion that it is easy to understand even this. In the second chapter we are told that if we will receive the words of the instructor and lay up his commandments in our minds so that we incline our ears and apply our hearts to wisdom and understanding; if we lift up our voices and cry after understanding, seeking it as if searching for hidden treasure, then shall we understand the fear of the Lord and the knowledge of God (Pro 2:1-5).

There can be no doubt of the enthusiasm with which men will seek for hidden treasure. Even the most indolent of sluggards would dig his garden if he thought that bars of gold and silver were hidden under the soil. This is the manner in which we should seek for wisdom and knowledge that we may understand the fear of the Lord.

The word fear does not refer to that fear that is cast out by love. It is a word signifying reverence. It is the fear that a child may bear toward a good parent. A fear of offending or grieving, a fear of being unworthy, a fear of the reproachful look which may sometimes hurt more than the primitive rod. Using the word fear in this sense we can understand the words of the Psalm: “There is forgiveness with thee, that thou mayest be feared.” It is because God can pity and forgive that He may be revered and feared in this sense.

We are not confused by the use of the same word with different meanings. There is affinity even where there is dissimilarity. There is a fear which goes with hatred, and there is a fear which is only felt by love. A completely brutal man will have no fear of losing the love and respect of his fellows, for these blessings have never been his. He fears physical pain and practically nothing else. The fear of the Lord is a totally different fear which could not even be explained to such a man. Men who can love their friends may perceive a little of the truth, the full understanding is reserved for those who seek for wisdom as for hidden treasure.

The Proverbs tell us to trust the Lord with all the heart, to honour Him with our substance and to be properly exercised by His chastening rod. We are to be in the fear of the Lord all the day, remembering that all things come from Him, and that with Him is perfect wisdom. If we find a measure of that wisdom we shall find life and obtain favour of the Lord (Pro 8:35).

There are two particularly interesting statements in the Proverbs regarding God in His dealings with the children of men. One is the oft quoted passage, “It is the glory of God to conceal a thing, but the honour of kings is to search out the matter” (Pro 25:2). We should not have anticipated this thought, but all experience shows that it is fundamentally true. Men have often found that all their attempts to understand the laws of Nature have only opened up a vista of increased complexity. Last century the materialists were in the ascendant and for a time imagined that they were on the point of explaining everything. Now they are discredited and it is acknowledged that the universe is far more mysterious than our forefathers ever imagined. Last century the food experts thought that they knew all about the subject of nutrition; then, through the practical failure of their theories, vitamins were discovered, and now experts who certainly know far more than their predecessors, admit as Mr. Eustace Miles once wrote: “We really know very little about the matter.” At one time the ductless glands of the body were regarded as useless, now they are found to be so mysteriously important that some investigators have claimed that they are practically everything.

As in Nature so in the written Word, God has concealed things and has called upon His servants to exercise their minds in searching for the treasures of divine wisdom. It has always been “line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little.” Faithful men and women try to put the littles together and in the process find the mental exercise which brings their minds nearer to God.

The other remarkable passage is in Pro 21:1.

“The heart of the king is in the hand of the Lord: as the rivers of water he turneth it wheresoever he will.”

This is another way of saying that God rules in the kingdoms of men, a doctrine found in all parts of Scripture. Even the wicked are used as the divine sword for the punishing of other wicked. The proverb, however suggests more than this. It gives us a glimpse of the process by which the hearts of kings may be turned. It is not by a direct influence such as would make a man into a machine. It is rather as we turn the course of water, placing obstacles here and removing them there to guide the stream as we desire. The Scriptures furnish many illustrations of this principle. The King of Egypt was influenced by that which he saw and heard. The partial success of his magicians hardened his heart. The Syrians were driven from Samaria by the sound as of a host approaching. It was not in the heart of the king of Assyria to perform any work for God, but he was lured by the prospect of spoil and the hope of power. There have been illustrations of this truth in our days, nations deterred by obstacles or encouraged by easy success have taken their proper places in the world; for the heart of the king is still in the hand of the Lord, turned like a stream of water into the channel designed for it.

(PrPr)

Psalms, “Hallelujah”

ChristadelphianBooksOnline The Agora Bible Articles and Lessons: P-Q

THE HALLELUJAH PSALMS

Twelve “Hallelujah” psalms: ie psalms beginning and ending with “Praise Yahweh”:

  • 104: Double-“Hallelujah” psalms.

  • 105: Borrowing the second “Hallelujah” from end of Psa 104 (which leaves 104 beginning and ending with “Bless the Lord, O my soul”).

  • 106: Double “Hallelujah”.

  • 111: Has double “Hallelujah” by borrowing a “Hallelujah” from beginning of 112. (This is appropriate, since 111 is about the character of God, while 112 is about the character of a man.)

  • 116: Has double “Hallelujah” by borrowing a “Hallelujah” from end of 115. (There is no superscription to mark the proper point of division.)

  • 117: Double “Hallelujah”: The divine name appears in full: “Hallelu (eth) Y’howah”.

  • 135/146/147/148/149/150: Six more double-“Hallelujah” psalms.

Prov and money

ChristadelphianBooksOnline The Agora Bible Articles and Lessons: P-Q

The Proverbs have a great deal to say about money and related topics such as giving, poverty, righteousness and wisdom. The purpose of this study is to narrowly focus upon the issue of money and wealth in order to draw out, from the vast material in Proverbs, principles to help us in maintaining a Biblical lifestyle in relation to money.

A Representative List of Verses

Pro 3:9,10; 8:18-21; 10:4,15,16,22; 11:4, 24-26,28; 13:7,8,11,21,22; 14:20,23,24; 15:6,16,27; 16:8; 17:6; 18:11,23; 19:4,7; 21:5,17; 22:1,2,4,7,9,16; 23:4,5; 27:24; 28:6,8,11,22,25; 30:8; 31:18.

Honor God with your wealth.

  • Prioritize your giving; give to Him first (Pro 3:9).

  • God will often bless people materially who give first to him (Pro 3:10; 13:21).

Lesson 1: When it comes to money, put God first (Mat 6:24).

Remember that wisdom is more important than money.

  • Wisdom often brings enduring wealth (Pro 8:18,21).

  • Wisdom yields better fruit than money (Pro 8:20).

  • Wisdom enables one to rightly use money (Pro 17:16).

  • Wisdom gives one proper restraint in the pursuit of money (Pro 23:4).

Lesson 2: Ask God for wisdom in dealing with money (cf Jam 1:5).

Remember that righteousness is more important than money.

  • Righteous people can have great riches that involve no trouble (Pro 15:6).

  • A poor, but blameless man (ie one who is righteous) is better off (ie before God) than a rich, but perverse man (Pro 28:6).

  • God often rewards the righteous with money (Pro 13:21).

  • It is better to have a little money with righteousness than much with injustice (Pro 16:8).

Lesson 3: Seek uprightness in money matters (cf 2Co 8:21).

Remember that fearing God is more important than money.

  • Fearing God is better than a lot of money (Pro 15:16).

  • Humility and the fear of God often leads to the acquisition of money (Pro 22:4).

Lesson 4: Remember to whom we must give an account (Rom 14:10)!

People, diligent at what they do, often acquire much wealth.

  • Diligent people, in contrast to lazy people, often have more money (Pro 10:4).

  • All hard work brings a profit whereas mere talk accomplishes nothing (Pro 14:23).

  • Acquiring wealth takes diligent planning; anything less may end up in ruin (Pro 21:5).

  • People who cannot control their spending habits end up with nothing (Pro 21:17).

Lesson 5: Plan for your financial future as far as it depends upon you.

Recognize the limitations of money.

  • Money can do nothing to deliver someone from the wrath of God (Pro 11:4).

  • Money is very temporal and lasts but a short time (Pro 23:5; 27:24).

  • Money cannot be trusted in for it will lead to one’s downfall (Pro 11:28). Trust, instead, in God (Pro 28:25).

Lesson 6: Be sober about money; keep it in perspective (1Ti 6:6-10)!

Recognize the potential for good that money properly used can have.

  • Money can provide protection from certain problems and alleviate certain stresses (Pro 10: 15).

  • Money can be left as an inheritance to help one’s descendants in this life (Pro 13:22).

  • An industrious wife can make sufficient money to help he family (Pro 31:18).

Lesson 7: Be prepared to use your money to good ends (cf Phi 4:14).

Recognize and avoid the evil that money can cause in relationships.

  • Rich people tend to receive more attention from others than poor people do. There is often favoritism (Pro 14:20; cf Jam 2:9-11).

  • If you are rich, be careful of people who desire your friendship (Pro 19:4a).

  • If you are poor, do not be surprised if people abandon you for a rich friend (Pro 19:4b; cf Pro 19:7).

  • Those with money often become the target of thieves etc (Pro 13:8).

  • The poor person can often see through the facade of the rich person who thinks he knows it all (Pro 28:11).

  • A good reputation with people is better than much money (Pro 22:1).

  • Because of money people often try to pretend to be something they’re not; they live a lie (Pro 13:7).

  • Rich people often “lord it over” poor people (Pro 22:7).

Lesson 8: The rich and the poor must remember that God made them both (Pro 22:2); humility is the order of the day.

Giving generously often leads to acquiring further wealth and spiritual benefits, but poverty awaits the stingy.

  • Generosity, not stinginess often leads to having more money (Pro 11:24).

  • Generosity often leads to the giver being spiritually refreshed (Pro 11:25).

  • Those who are stingy often end up with nothing (Pro 11:24b; 11:26b; 28:22).

Lesson 9: Give generously (2Co 9:6,7).

Money gained by unjust means leads to naught, whereas the monetary blessing of God brings no trouble.

  • Money gained by dishonest means dwindles away fast (Pro 13:11).

  • People who oppress others for money can come to poverty because of it (Pro 22:16a).

Lesson 10: Earn your money honestly (cf Act 24:16; 2Th 3:7-9).

Be careful for greed.

  • Greed for money can lead to family problems (Pro 15:27).

  • Do not charge exorbitant interest; justice will prevail (Pro 28:8).

  • Ask God for the proper amount of money (Pro 30:8).

Lesson 11: Search your heart before God so that you might be aware of any greed (cf Eph 5:3).

Summary

Remember that a Biblical view of money begins by a commitment to honoring God first with our money (Lesson 1). Then we must keep in mind that wisdom, righteousness and the fear of God are more important than money (Lessons 2-4). This will enable us to serve God more effectively (Lessons 5-11).

Psalms, “Maschil”

ChristadelphianBooksOnline The Agora Bible Articles and Lessons: P-Q

There are 13 “Maschil” psalms: 32, 42, 44, 45, 52-55, 74, 78, 88, 89, and 142. “Maschil” means ‘causing to understand’. Practically equivalent to ‘explanation’. Three times the Passover law laid it upon the head of each household to explain what the purpose of the feast was and is (Exo 12:26,27; 13:8,9,14-16). The purpose behind this commemoration must be kept fresh and clear in the minds of succeeding generations. A similar practice was followed regarding other feasts of the Lord. The same word is used about the reading of the Law at the Feast of Trumpets (Neh 8:1,7). Essentially the same word describes how Hezekiah “prospered” (2Ki 18:7). Also, “Hezekiah spoke to the minds of all the Levites that taught (“ha-maskilim”) the good knowledge of the LORD” at this great Passover (2Ch 30:22).

Prov and speech

ChristadelphianBooksOnline The Agora Bible Articles and Lessons: P-Q

Words can wound like the piercing of a sword, a tale-bearer is often a messenger of destruction, and by “harping on a matter” the best of friends can be separated. Whispered scandals are dainty morsels that go down sweetly to the appetite, but in such words there is often sin. Life and death are in the power of the tongue, therefore we must put away from us perverse lips and make our words as a well of life. A soft answer turns away wrath and overcomes that which seems as hard and unyielding as bone. The man who guards the door of his lips and often remains silent when the impulse is strong to speak, saves himself from many troubles.

We must debate our cause with the one concerned and not disclose it to another, for such indirect speech is shameful and infamous. Words can wound and words can pierce and words can be sinful, but words can be as a tree of life. How good is a word fitly spoken!

In the above passage we have simply presented some of the wisdom of Solomon in modern language. It makes a brief but extraordinarily full exhortation. If we pay heed to the instruction it may save us from many mistakes. Sometimes men become so disgusted with futile talking that they fall into the error of despising words. “What is the use of mere words?” they say. “We want action, not speech.”

Truly there is a time to act rather than to speak, but of what value will action be unless it has first been instructed by words? Human thought cannot proceed far without speech. Beyond the very limited animal plane of feeling and observation, we need words not only to express our thoughts to others but to make them definite and coherent even to ourselves. We may not put our inmost thoughts into finished language as in giving an address to others, but words play an enormous part in shaping the most private of thoughts even when we make no attempt to form orderly sentences.

Words are needed to tell us of the will and purpose of God, and words are equally necessary to inform us of the discoveries and the opinions of men.

The mind of man consists of will, thought, and feeling, and these three things are expressed by words. An honest man always states that which is in his mind, but he is under no obligation to state it all. “A fool speaketh all his mind”, heedless of what the effect may be. A knave sometimes uses words that do not express himself; he is only intent on impressing the minds of others. A just and wise man speaks as he thinks and feels, but guards the door of his mouth so as not to express too much. He may think that one to whom he speaks is foolish, but it is not wise to say so. He may know that some of his hearers are knaves, but it is perfectly honest to treat them as honest men. He can only have two motives in speaking, to express himself and to influence other people. Usually the second object is much the more important, so self-expression must be controlled lest it should interfere with the real object of speech.

In thus “guarding the door”, the control of feeling is quite as important as the control of thought. Feelings are often strong and they reveal themselves in the tone of voice as well as in the form of words. Anger, indignation, scorn, fear, hatred, amusement, contempt, all are expressed so readily both in tone and word that many people reveal such feelings instantly even if they are unable to express any coherent ideas. The kindlier feelings of love, admiration, gratitude and appreciation are not quite so obtrusive, and if it is desired they can be concealed more readily.

In this matter of guarding the door of the mouth feeling causes the greatest difficulty. A man may discipline himself so as to be circumspect in the use of words. He may go further and avoid any ebullition of impotent rage. Anger unrestrained so often makes itself ridiculous that a capable man determines to keep cool. Yet feeling may clearly reveal itself even then. It is possible to maintain an icy coldness with far more bitterness than ever lived in the warm expressions of wrath. Indeed, when we read the passage, “There is that speaketh like the piercing of a sword”, we do not think of an obviously angry man expressing his indignation with a warm energy that will soon exhaust itself. We think rather of an icy bitterness, hard and cruel as steel, a concentrated and frozen anger expressed in speech which has not the excuse of being hasty but which wounds like the piercing of a sword. Such speech is the expression of an evil feeling which has been polished instead of being suppressed. There are people who in this matter of words repeat the vulgar error often revealed in human relationships. Anything may pass as long as it is well dressed.

A Christian should not allow evil feelings to prevail for a moment. Bitterness ought not to be in the mind, and if through faulty thinking it is there, it certainly should not be expressed. Bitterness expressed engenders the same evil in others. Like all vile things it is far easier to cause than to cure. It does not exhaust itself as does the burst of honest anger. It may even thrive on its own activity and become worse as it expresses itself and provokes ill feeling in others. Moreover, the soft answer is not quite so effective against this cold poison as it is against open anger. A Christian has a hard task when in addition to the suppression of his own natural resentment he has to win the sympathy of one who is coldly and cruelly antagonistic, all the while trying to wound and provoke by the use of polished words.

We can bring ourselves into line if we frequently raise the question what is our aim in speaking? Speech may be with the object of giving instruction, or putting questions to receive instruction, or it may be in the ordinary amenities of social life. We can think of nothing else unless it is mere self-expression, a talk for the love of talking. Where is there room for any ill-feeling to be expressed in any of these opportunities for speech? In the ordinary amenities of life there is surely every reason for good feelings which may be revealed freely with only good effects. If anyone is so unfortunate as to find ill-feeling at home, then a desperate effort should be made to avoid any aggravation of it. Words provocative of anger are always out of place in the home, but they are especially to be deprecated when such provocation has already begun. If a little fire started in a dry corner of the house, no man would be fool enough to throw petrol on it. It is strange that men should often be so ready to feed that more terrible flame, which, as the apostle James says, is set on fire of hell. Homes have been wrecked and lives made sad by the folly of hasty and ill-tempered speech. It is perfectly true, as the wise man says, that there is more hope for a fool than for a man who is hasty in his words (Pro 29:20).

Where then would words expressive of bitter feeling be appropriate? Certainly not in asking questions to receive instruction and equally certainly not when trying to instruct. There is need for a word of warning here. It is when we are trying to impress our opinions on others that controversy is engendered and controversy often provokes bitter speech. Opponents are so foolish and unreasonable! Opposition is trying to the temper, especially if we do not quite see how to answer an opponent’s argument while still, of course, being quite convinced that he is in the wrong. It is a great mistake, however, to reveal any trace of bitterness in either word or tone. If there is any cogency in the criticism to which we are subjected, it is good for us to be instructed by it, and we ought to be grateful for the help. There may be a measure of truth in an opponent’s contention even though his general conclusions are wrong. We must recognize that measure of truth, and then our position will be strengthened and polished as the result of hostile criticism. If our opponent’s argument is mere sophistry, there is great need for us to keep calm in order that we may think clearly. There is need for gentle and circumspect speech in order that those in error may be rightly influenced.

It is strange that so few learn the lesson of moderation and sweet reasonableness in speech, for all know that they themselves are not influenced by truculent declamation. Over-emphasis defeats its object. We laugh at the letter in which nearly every sentence is underlined or at the speaker who thumps the desk and by exaggerated rhetoric seeks to give weight to his argument. At the best he only excites a good-humoured contempt. The man who is coldly and cleverly sarcastic arouses a very different feeling, but while he may seem to triumph in the hour of discussion, no good result comes from his cleverness.

The fact is that most men judge the value of an argument from the wrong side. They appraise the efforts of their spokesman by their own reactions instead of trying to determine what the effect will be in the opposite camp. It may be pleasant to hear vigorous and emphatic declamation in the presentation of ideas that we hold. It may be even pleasanter to hear biting sarcasm at the expense of those who hold doctrines that we repudiate. On the other hand, it may seem disappointing to hear our cherished beliefs presented in mild and temperate language, or to hear a perfectly fair and sympathetic review of that which we detest. If, however, we desire to persuade men and to turn them from darkness to light, the exercise of a little imagination ought to teach us that the declamation and the sarcasm are worse than useless, while the sympathetic understanding will pave the way for conversion and the mildly stated argument will linger in the memory and be a moving force long after the dust of controversy has cleared away. It is the soft answer that breaketh the bone.

There is much need for the words of wisdom regarding slander and tale bearing. A personal tit-bit of private information goes down so “sweetly” that one may become a party to slanderous conversation before there is a proper realization of its trend. It is to be feared that there are moralists who while studiously refraining from slanderous talk themselves, think it quite legitimate to draw out the resources of one less scrupulous. This can be done quite skillfully even under the guise of a gentle reproof. A mild defence of an absentee may be presented in such a manner as to bring out all that can be said against him. The suggestion of possible defence for his conduct may call forth further information as to his perfidy and proof that he really had no defence.

Such talk is evil even if the allegations are true, but it is far worse when they are untrue. And it is possible for a statement to be true in point of fact but completely false in its implications. There may be an undisclosed fact behind that which is observed, changing the entire meaning of the matter. Charles Lamb tells of a boy at the Blue Coat School who by his strange aloofness and furtive movements aroused the suspicions of his comrades. When they found that he was in the habit of collecting scraps of discarded food and taking them somewhere away from the school, they concluded that he engaged in weird rites and that there was something wrong with his mentality. Finally they tracked him and discovered that the boy’s parents were starving in a garret near to the school and he was keeping them alive with the despised crusts of bread.

Coming nearer home we can remember a sister who excited criticism because of her extravagant clothing. In slanderous conversation her husband was pitied for having such an extravagant wife. It was perfectly true that she wore dresses of far more expensive quality than she could properly afford to buy. It was also true that the dresses came from a wealthy relation who cared nothing for the Truth but was pleased to pass on her dresses to a poorer sister long before they showed signs of wear. The hard working husband was not conscious of needing any pity in the matter!

It is possible even for an outstanding act of Christian charity to be so disguised by the suppression of facts that it is presented as an act of cruelty and criticised accordingly. A man who at the risk of his life jumps into a river to save another from drowning may have to use some force and even apparent violence to save the struggling man. We can hardly imagine that even a prince of slanderers would describe the violence and suppress everything else, but that is just what many self-righteous critics would do in the more complex matters of human life. Save a man from drowning in the commercial river and if you have to use any force to stop his dangerous struggling, that use of force is apt to be the one matter observed and reported.

Oh, the tongue, that little member so potent for good or evil! Words of life are expressed by it, yet death is equally within its power. The “word fitly spoken” is compared to the most beautiful sight in Nature, while the ill word of bitterness can only be likened to the hell-born spark which starts a raging fire. Let us “guard the door of our lips” lest a hasty and unwise expression should pass or even the tone of voice should be provocative of ill. “If any man speak, let him speak as the Oracles of God.”

(PrPr)

Psalms, “Messianic” sin?

ChristadelphianBooksOnline The Agora Bible Articles and Lessons: P-Q

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).

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

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

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 Psa 6, 32, 38, 102, 130, and 143, it is a psalm of profound penitence.

Is David making an excuse in v 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’ ” (Zec 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 Psalm 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 Joh 1:29; 2Co 5:21; 1Pe 2:22,24; Rom 8:3; Heb 2:14,15). From this point of view, all the vv 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:

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

  • Psa 41:9 is applied to Christ in Mar 14:18 and Joh 13:18. But Psa 41:4 reads: “I have sinned against thee.”

  • Psa 69:4,8,9,21,22,25 all have NT Messianic citations. Yet Psa 69:5 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’ (Joh 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” (Elp 127,128).

Such passages refer to Messiah’s inheritance of cursed human nature (cp 2Co 5:21; Rom 8:3; Heb 2:14; etc.). The mere presence in Jesus of propensities to sin was surely an enormous trial. An impulse to sin which is repeatedly resisted may teach us more about the power of “sin” (or sinful tendencies) than does an impulse quickly yielded to. So, in that sense, Jesus would know more about the “power” of “sin” than any other man.

Many students of the Psalms, who are willing enough to believe that Messiah’s experiences are foretold in some or even in many psalms, hesitate when they come to Psa 32. The confession of sin is so explicit that it seems impossible to believe that divine inspiration intended this psalm to be not only about David but also about His Son.

Yet, viewed from another angle, such a reading has a certain seemliness. Consider these details, which all belong to a context of much miraculous healing:

  1. “Jesus knowing in himself that virtue had gone out of him….” (Mar 5:30).

  2. “That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Isaiah the prophet, ‘Himself took our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses’ ” (Mat 8:16).

  3. “The Son of man hath not where to lay his head” (Mat 8:20) — the words of a weary man.

  4. A storm-tossed ship, yet Jesus is asleep (Mar 4:38).

If this side of Christ’s activities proved such a drain of his physical powers, is it not reasonable to presume that he experienced also a drain of his spiritual powers in his conflict against sin without and the propensities to sin within? Jesus, “tempted in all points like as we are” (Heb 4:15), must have found the very existence within himself of impulses belonging to the fallen side of human nature. Before ever he died on the cross as a sacrifice, in this sense “the Lord laid on him the iniquity of us all” (Isa 53:6; 2Co 5:21).

Prov and strife

ChristadelphianBooksOnline The Agora Bible Articles and Lessons: P-Q

We may well seek the instruction of the wise man regarding strife, for it is an ever present evil in human life. Nations have warred with each other all through history, using all their power to wound and destroy. In times of temporary international peace there has always been the strife of rivals seeking wealth and power in the markets and in the seats of the mighty. Even in the Christian Church there has been bitter strife among men claiming to be the servants of the Lord, willingly forgetful of the fact that the servant of the Lord must not strive but be gentle and patient and apt to teach. [2Ti 2:24,25]

We do not need the apostle’s words to convince us that such strife is an evil in human life. Not only does it prevent constructive work by its greedy absorption of human energy, but it has a definite and obvious influence for ill on the minds of those who engage in it. Men who aim to be fit for the Kingdom of God only need to have a little experience of such strife and sometimes they become hardly fit to live even in the kingdoms of men.

In the book of Proverbs we have the following statements regarding strife:

  •         “Hatred stirreth up strife: but love covereth all transgression” (Pro 13:10).

  •         “A wrathful man stirreth up strife.”

  •         “By pride cometh only contention.” Or more definitely in the AV: “Only by pride cometh contention” (Pro 13:10).

  •         “The beginning of strife is as when one letteth off water: therefore leave off contention, before there be quarrelling” (Pro 17:14, RV).

  •         “He loveth transgression that loveth strife” (Pro 17:19).

  •         “It is an honour for a man to keep aloof from strife; but every fool will be quarrelling” (Pro 20:3).

  •         “For lack of wood the fire goeth out: and when there is no tale bearer, contention ceaseth” (Pro 26:20).

  •         “He that passeth by and vexes himself with strife belonging not to him is as when one taketh a dog by the ears” (Pro 26:17).

From these we may gather that to be fond of strife is a sin; that the main causes of harmful strife are pride, hatred and wrath; that the course of strife is like the breaking forth of water, very difficult to stop when once it starts; and finally that the right way is to stop the argument before it reaches the quarrelling stage.

There is a fund of wisdom in these simple thoughts, and they would make a great difference to human life if men could always remember and apply them.

There is no need to raise difficulties over the use of the words. We have to contend earnestly for the Faith once for all delivered to the saints. It is only honest in fact for us to uphold that which we think is right and true in all matters whether we are dealing with the world or the brotherhood, but surely we appreciate the difference between the earnest contention which can yield good results and the strife which is definitely evil. We can remember meetings in which there was much argument, different points of view being presented and the discussion waxing quite lively, yet the results of the meetings were excellent, all members gaining something with no element of bitterness to mar the effect. We can remember other meetings in which discussion became contention and contention degenerated into quarrelling which might continue without cessation as long as disputants had sufficient breath to be uncharitable. Such strife could not be of the slightest good, for no one was willing to be influenced by it. Pride, hatred and wrath have all been in evidence at such a time. These and other evils fostered by strife are able to drag men and women down to eternal death.

Often it is possible to see the warning signs long before the water breaks forth. Then, even if we have to let an opponent have the last word or the last hundred words, it is wise to leave off contention before it degenerates into quarrelling. If the opponent is a reasonable man, he will think of the ideas we have presented, and if there is any cogency in our arguments, they will have much more effect on him in this quiet meditation than in the heat of battle. When the subject is raised again we may find that he states his position rather differently in an effort to meet our arguments. It is conceivably possible that we may find some reason for restating our views in rather different language. As the result of quiet thinking instead of noisy strife, there may be a better understanding of matters on both sides. If this clearer view does not enable us fully to agree, it may at least enable us to reach an honourable cessation from strife.

There are differences of conviction which forbid fellowship, which may even prevent association, but there is no reason for them to cause quarrelling. If men differ from us as to the God whom they worship, the hope they cherish, or the rule of faith they observe; if we are certain that they are wrong in their conception of duty or their attitude toward divine revelation, we cannot join with them or in any way sanction their error, but there is no reason for us to feel in the least degree angry with those who are so unfortunately blind. The only insistent reason for us to speak to them is that we might convince them of their error, and all experience shows that the strong argument gently presented is the one that will prevail. It is the soft answer that turneth away wrath, and it is the soft tongue that breaketh the bone (Pro 25:15). There is no incongruity in these apparently opposing thoughts. The gentle and reasonable answer to angry declamation will calm the storm. The fire of anger will die down for lack of fuel, or the irate man will make an effort to calm himself for very shame. At the same time the reasonable appeal, gently stated, will sometime prevail even against ossified determination.

We ought to be so well instructed that in large measure the reactions of opponents can be anticipated. If we present an argument which seems to deprive a man of a cherished hope, it is natural for him to be angry. If he cannot find an answering argument a personal hit may serve instead. In public debate with shallow supporters, the personal hit may be appreciated and applauded most, but whether in public or private, we ought not to retaliate, however tempting an opening may present itself. Sarcasm may destroy the individual, cursing both him that gives and him that takes, but it can very rarely assist toward a better understanding of truth or effect a change of mind in one who has been in error. Angry words only do good when they are gently answered. Then they may play a part in reproving the one who used them.

It is a strange fact that men are often more disposed to lose temper over a slight divergence than over a great one. A narrow-minded theologian may be quite affable with an atheist, but bitterly resentful toward a brother worshipper who ventures to deviate by a hair’s breadth from his conception of rectitude in faith and practice. The Jews hated the Samaritans far more than they hated barbarians. The Lord Jesus administered a stinging reproof to this uncharitableness when he chose a Samaritan as an illustration of the neighbour who was to be loved.

Sometimes men who would deny that they have any feeling of bitterness, and who perhaps in truth are actuated by good motives, nevertheless do harm by contending too much. They are so imbued with the conviction that their exact way of looking at things is the only right way, that they will go to almost any lengths in the effort to enforce it. In ecclesial life this type of brother is the author of much harm. It would be so much better if he would be content to state his opinion, trying to persuade others to the same way of thinking, arguing the matter when it is “a time to speak”. When a decision has been taken he should submit, for that is “a time to keep silent”. If he is honestly convinced that a vital principle has been breached he may be right in withdrawing altogether, thus finding peace of mind for himself and leaving peace behind him. If no such principle is involved let him remember that we all have to be subject to one another in love. It may be an evil that matters should not be conducted in the best possible way — that is, his way — but strife and discord among brethren are still worse evils.

Alas! We have known many such troubles and we have no great hope that either this or any other appeal will do much good. There are men who will agitate until they swamp the boat rather than have the sails set in any way other than their own. There are many occasions in life when “it is an honour for a man to cease from strife”, [Pro 20:3] but this is an honour to which many men do not aspire.

The wise man says that one who meddles with strife not belonging to him is like one who takes a dog by the ears. This surely would be bad for the dog and bad also for the one who interfered. The intervener can rarely do any good in such a matter and he may easily do harm. Probably the only way in which such interference can end the original dispute is by turning the wrath of both combatants upon the would-be peacemaker.

(PrPr)