Isaiah 39
OGCEXAMINATION Chapter S THIRTY-EIGHT AND THIRTY-NINE
IDENTIFICATION AND LOCATION
(Identify and locate the following by telling all you know about them.)
Hezekiah
the wall
dial of Ahaz
Sheol
the loom
the pit
the house of Jehovah
cake of figs
Merodachbaladan
the house of his armor
Babylon
thy sons that shall issue from thee
MEMORIZATION
In those days was Hezekiah sick unto ____, And Isaiah the prophet the son of _____ came to him, and said unto him, Thus saith Jehovah _______ _______ ,; for thou shalt ______, and not live. Then Hezekiah turned his _____ to the ______, and prayed unto Jehovah, and said, Remember now, O Jehovah, I beseech thee, how I have walked before thee in ______ and with a ______ heart, and have done that which is ______ in thy sight. And Hezekiah ______ sore. (Isaiah 38:1-3)
Then said Hezekiah unto Isaiah, ______ is the word of Jehovah which thou has spoken. He said moreover, For there shall be ______ and ______ in my ______ (Isaiah 39:8)
EXPLANATIONS
Explain why Hezekiah was so distraught when he learned he would die (Isaiah 38:1-22).
Explain why it was proper for Hezekiah to ask for a sign of his healing, when the N.T. denounces the Pharisees for continually seeking a sign from Jesus (Isaiah 38:7-8).
Explain why Hezekiah could say the prediction of the Lord of the Babylonian captivity for Judah was good (Isaiah 39:5-8).
APPLICATION
(In its context every scripture has one meaningthe author’s intended meaning. How may the following be applied in the believer’s life?)
What is the difference between the Old Testament concept of life after death and that of the New Testament and what difference should this make in our relationship to God?
What did Hezekiah do wrong in showing the Babylonians his treasury and what application could be made in the church’s (the New Kingdom of God) relationship to the world?
What overall application could be made for the Church and the World in this whole section, Chapter s 24-39?
SPECIAL STUDY
THE THREE DIMENSIONS OF DISCIPLINE Hebrews 12:1-11
by Paul T. Butler INTRODUCTION I. WHAT HAS GIVEN BIRTH TO THIS MESSAGE? A. The general tenor of thought and action today
Freedom means license.
Lawlessness is sin.
Note: Billy Graham, Eternity, November, 1965, says, What we need in the Church today is a new holy disciplineand a disciplined life.
II.
DISCIPLINE DEFINED (Baker’s Dictionary of Theology) Discipline implies instruction and correction, the training which improves, molds, strengthens, and perfects character. It is the moral education obtained by the enforcement of obedience through supervision and control.
The concept of discipline is usually, in Scriptural terms, called chastening, chastisement, instruction.
The concept is usually illustrated in the Scriptures by the correction of human fathers toward their sons.
III.
THE THREE DIMENSIONS OF DISCIPLINE (may be taken from this text)
A.
Demands (There are some who think man must be free of any authority or discipline to attain his greatest good.)
B.
Designs (Discipline is not an end in itself, but the means to an end. the means must be endured to reach the purposed end.)
C.
Derivatives (If we are to endure it and it is to reach the right end, discipline must have the right motivation or derivative.)
I.
DISCIPLINE DEMANDED
A.
The nature of our being demands it.
Man is an organismwithout discipline he loses balance; without authority he disintegrates; an organism is an integrated structure and it must have discipline and authority to remain integrated.
Without discipline man’s life is chaoticinsecurepurposelessPsychologically we must have discipline to feel needed and cared forlook at Hebrews 12:8, If you are left without discipline, in which all have participated, then you are illegitimate children and not sons. Illustration: A preacher took a 17 year old deliquent boy into his home. When the boy broke the rules that had been laid down, the preacher punished him bodily. Sobbing, the boy exclaimed that it was the first time anyone had shown true concern for him!
This is the heart rending cry of many despairing souls today. We live in an indifferent universe.
Reader’s Digest, November, 1965: There seems to be no doubt whatsoever that parents who have the least trouble with their children take the task of discipline seriously. Psychologists, once so permissive, now point out that the worst thing we can do for our children is to be too kind, for children whose parents love them too much to punish them are like pedestrians wandering in traffic where there are no stop signs. Frightened, children may provoke their parents with worse and worse behavior. It is as though they were saying, If we get snarled up enough, somebody will have to take over.
It’s sobering to find that children themselves frequently testify they-’d like their parents to be stricter. In a survey taken a few years ago, one high-school child in five thought the discipline in his life inadequate; 13% even felt that a good whack was a fine idea! Maybe I-’m old-fashioned, a young mother told me after she, had dispatched a whining, showing-off five year old to her room, but I can-’t believe that being allowed to make everybody else miserable now is going to make her more lovable twenty years from now. Perhaps parents would not be so afraid of discipline if they could think of it as something more than punishment and reward. In fact, it is a question of putting our children so in control of themselves that they can use their best qualities. It is a question of giving them the ability to make decisions and to accept the consequences of their choice.
A libertine existence, a life without the restraints of Godly discipline, leads inevitably to pessimism, cynicism and despair. sometimes to suicide. I could tell you of people I have known who, suddenly made bereft of the security of authority and discipline they had rested in, took their own lives.
a.
Nietzsche went insane when he cast off all discipline of the mind and will.
b.
Comte suffered a mental breakdown and attempted suicide as a result of his undisciplined philosophic ramblings.
c.
King Saul, Herod the Greatboth suffered similarly.
Yes, even man’s thinking and learning processes are dependent upon discipline; authority; order. Without discipline, there is no learning. Illustration: Gary Boyd tells of the little boy attending a school of progressive education where the student was told that 2 + 2 equals whatever he discovered he wants it to equal. His father showed him an old fashioned school book where students were taught the discipline of the multiplication tables on authority. HE WAS ALMOST OVERCOME WITH JOY.
Man’s moral balance is dependent upon discipline. Man must obey and submit to what is right and orderly or else he comes to guilt, anarchy, disorientation.
B.
The nature of our association demands it:
Illustration: Chas. E. Whittaker, former Supreme Court Justice, in December Reader’s Digest, says, Can a disorderly society survive? In all recorded history none ever has.
Every society must have order, and discipline is necessary to order.
The church is a kingdom; a kingdom without authority and discipline results in anarchy.
The church is a family; a home without discipline results in misery and heartache.
The church is a body; an organism without discipline results in frustration.
The church is a flock; a flock without discipline and submission to the leadership of its shepherds is destined for disaster through the straying of its lambs.
The church is an army; an army without discipline, order and submission to its commanders is headed for certain defeat!
The Christian life is like an athletic contest; an athlete without discipline will lose!
C.
The word of God and God’s very nature demands it.
God ordered the church into existence.
By His Word He has given her a constitution; there is a sense of being under law to Christ, 1 Corinthians 9:21.
By His Word He has appointed shepherds for His flock. When the church of the Lord, following the guidance of the word of the Lord, appoints elders and leadersthey have been appointed by the Lord.
Hebrews 13:17 - Obey your leaders and submit to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as men who will have to give account. Let them do this joyfully, and not sadly, for that would be of no advantage to you.
Paul wrote to the young preacher, Timothy, listing certain disciplines for him to follow and said, I hope to come to you soon, but I am writing these instructions to you so that, if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth. 1 Timothy 3:14-15
There are many references to the Divine wisdom in God’s demands for discipline.
The rod of reproof gives wisdom, but a child left to himself brings shame to his mother. Proverbs 29:15
Discipline your son, and he will give you rest; he will give delight to your heart. Proverbs 29:17
One very pertinent example: The chosen people of the O.T. intended to be a disciplined people. God said through Jeremiah, Thus saith the Lord, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk there in, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein. Also I set watchmen over you, saying, Hearken to the sound of the trumpet. But they said, We will not hearken. Jeremiah 6:16-17
So they were disciplined by judgment and captivity.
The Word of God demands that Christians live in harmony with the discipline of their employers, their homes, their governments. THE WORD OF GOD DECLARES BOTH BY PRECEPT AND EXAMPLE THAT THE BODILY LIFE IS A CONTINUAL LIFE OF DISCIPLINE.
THE VERY CALL OF CHRIST IS THE CALL TO BECOME A DISCIPLE. SO, EACH ONE OF US IS OBLIGATED TO CONFORM TO DISCIPLINE; OUR NATURE DEMANDS IT, OUR ASSOCIATION DEMANDS IT, OUR LORD DEMANDS IT! One never outgrows in this life the obligation to follow disciplinethe child must follow it; the teenager must follow it; the college student must follow it; the college teacher must follow it, THE PREACHER, THE PREACHER’S WIFE MUST FOLLOW IT!
II.
THE DESIGN OF DISCIPLINE (Its Purpose)
A.
To build character - the purpose of discipline is the correction, the improvement, the obedience, the faith, and the faithfulness of God’s child. The outcome is a happiness (Job 5:17) a blessedness; and assurance (Revelation 3:15).
Moses learned discipline and grew in character from his 40 years of schooling in the deserts of Midian.
David learned discipline and grew in character from his schooling in the caves and wilderness of Judea fleeing from Saul.
Even the Lord Jesus Christ, accepting the limitations of flesh, returned to Nazareth as a boy and was obedient to Mary and Joseph and increased in wisdom and in stature, and in favor with God and man. Luke 2:51-52 Yes, even Jesus experienced obedience through the things He suffered and has become the author of eternal salvation to all them who obey Him. Hebrews 5:9
YOU ARE BUILDING YOUR CHARACTER EACH MOMENT OF EACH DAY ACCORDING TO YOUR RESPONSE TO THE DEMANDS FOR DISCIPLINE.. EVEN IN SMALL MATTERS.
a.
When committing yourself to serve in a certain capacity. SEE IT THROUGH EVEN THOUGH IT INTERFERES WITH YOUR SOCIAL LIFE!
B.
To fit one as a vessel for use by Christ
In a great house there are not only vessels of gold and silver but also of wood and earthenware, and some for noble use, some for ignoble. If any one purifies himself from what is ignoble then he will be a vessel for noble use, consecrated and useful to the master of the house, ready for any good work. 2 Timothy 2:20-21 So SHUN YOUTHFUL PASSIONS.
The discipline of the Lord is to make us more Christlike; self-surrendering; self-giving.
When He had washed their feet, and taken his garments, and resumed his place, he said to them, Do you know what I have done to you? You call me Teacher and Lord; and you are right, for so I am. If I then, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another’s feet. For I have given you an example that you also should do as I have done to you. Truly, truly, I say to you, a servant is not greater than his master.. If you know these things, blessed are you if you do them. John 13:12-17
YES, THERE ARE CERTAIN DISCIPLINES NECESSARY TO HUMBLE US THAT WE MAY BECOME PROPER VESSELS.
I REFER YOU TO John 13. the servant is not greater than his Master!
Have this mind in you, which you have in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men, and being found in human form He humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross. Philippians 2:5-8
Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, which you have from God? You are not your own; you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body. 1 Corinthians 6:19
Even our text says we are disciplined to share His holiness, Hebrews 12:10.
C.
The discipline of the Lord is to cause you to bear fruit. I am the true vine, and my Father is the vinedresser. Every branch of mine that bears no fruit, he takes away, and every branch that does bear fruit he prunes (disciplines) that it may bear more fruit. John 15:1-2
One of the clearest statements as to the purpose of discipline and chastening is found in 2 Corinthians 1:3-11. Paul says there he was afflicted in order that he might learn to strengthen others who were afflicted. to bear fruit.
OUR TEXT IN Hebrews 12 says For the moment all discipline seems painful rather than pleasant; later it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it. Hebrews 12:11
Another important discussion of the discipline of the Holy Spirit within a man which bears fruit is Paul’s discussion of Christian liberty and expediency in 1Corinthians 8, 9. All things are lawful but all things are not expedient.
If eating meat causes my brother to stumble, I will never again eat meat, lest I cause my brother to fall. … we endure anything rather than put an obstacle in the way of the gospel of Christ. THIS IS THE DISCIPLINE WE ALL SHOULD SEEK.
III.
THE DERIVATIVES OF DISCIPLINE
C. S. Lewis, in his book, The Problem of Pain, outlines the reasons for chastening of God as God’s Omnipotence, God’s Goodness.
A.
The Fear of God should motivate us to lead lives of holy discipline.
As Mr. Lewis says, It is hardly complimentary to God that we should choose Him as an alternative to Hell; yet even this He accepts. The creature’s illusion of self sufficiency must, for the creature’s sake, be shattered; and by trouble or fear of trouble on earth, by fear of the eternal flames, God shatters it.
Paul wrote, Knowing the terror of the Lord, we persuade men. He wrote, It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God. He wrote, For if we sin wilfully after we receive the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful prospect of judgment, and fury of fire which will consume the adversaries. REBELLION WAS NOT TREATED LIGHTLY IN THE OLD TESTAMENT; NEITHER WILL IT BE FOR THOSE UNDER THE NEW. IF YOU-‘RE IN REBELLION AGAINST DISCIPLINE, YOU HAD BETTER STUDY AGAIN WHAT THE N.T. HAS TO SAY ABOUT OBEDIENCE TO APPOINTED LEADERS! YOU HAD BETTER CULTIVATE AGAIN AN AWESOME RESPECT AND HEALTHY FEAR OF GOD.. THE FEAR OF THE LORD IS THE BEGINNING OF WISDOM.
B.
Another derivative is the power of the Holy Spirit.
By His leading we may put to death the deeds of the body.
By the weapons He affords us we may bring every thought into captivity to Christ.
By His supernatural word is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction for training in righteousness that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.
Being born again by the word of the Spirit planted in our hearts, having been raised with Christ we may set our minds on things that are above, where Christ is seated..
We may purify our souls by obeying the truth.
By the exceeding precious promises we become partakers of the divine nature and escape the corruption in the world.
C.
The ultimate derivative is the love of Christ.
Paul wrote, The love of Christ constrains us. 2 Corinthians 5:14 NOTHING WILL BRING US TO FOLLOW THE LEADING OF DISCIPLINE LIKE LOVE..
Illustration: Time, Birds, Beetles and Butterflies. Timbertop, patterned largely after Gordonstoun, is a branch of Australia’s Geelong Grammar School, an exclusive institution operated by the Church of England. It is designed to toughen up 130 young aristocrats every year. The boys do all their own housekeeping except cook. They make overnight hikes across 1,300 acres of rugged Crown land, watch birds, hunt beetles, collect butterflies.
Young Charles will live in a rustic wooden dormitory, get up at 7 a.m., dress in jeans, an open shirt, sweater and desert boots. He will take his turn at serving a breakfast of cooked meal, tea, toast and milk from a nearby dairy barn, attend compulsory chapel, then turn to rigorous academic work until 3 p.m. After that come the chores, which range from polishing the chapel’s huge picture window to varnishing floors, feeding the pigs, washing the dishes, cutting and carting a portion of the 500 tons of wood that the school consumes each year. In the evening he will study under a master’s eye. Lights go out at Isaiah 9:15.
Spurgeon, that great preacher, once said, Christ is our great example in discipline, cross-bearing. He had not where to lay his head in life, nor a rag to cover him in death, nor anything but a borrowed grave in burial. What manner of persons ought we to be in all unselfishness when we have such a Lord! He has not said to us in matters of self-denial, Take up thy cross and go! but Come, take up thy cross and follow me. Well may the soldiers endure hardness when the King himself roughs it among us; and suffers more than the lowest private in our ranks. My soul, I charge thee, bear thy cross, and look not for ease where Jesus found his death.
For even hereunto were ye called; because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow in His steps; 1 Peter 2:21.
**SPECIAL STUDY
THE FUTURE LIFE**
A Study of the Teaching of the Bible concerning the Future Life, with special attention given to the Revelation in the Old Testament.
by R. C. Foster
We are living in an age in which the belief in the life after death is being widely doubted and denied. This is to be expected in an atheistic age, for the belief in the future life is the necessary corollary of a belief in God. Atheistic groups have seized the government of nations, as in Russia and Germany, and seek to destroy the very remnants of those who still cling to the Bible. Investigations reveal that in our own country at least 40 percent of the young people in our colleges are turning to atheism under the strong pressure of atheistic professors. Preachers, supposed to be Christian, disavow belief in the future life, although questionnaires show that the percentage of preachers who deny the existence of hell is larger than those who deny entirely the life after death! What more timely topic than to consider The Teaching of the Bible Concerning the Future Life? The Christian is the salt that is to save a dissolute world from utter corruption; he is the light set on the hill to shine out and save the world from despair. Now is the time for Christians everywhere to obey the command of their divine Lord and preach the gospel. The belief in the future life is the very crown of glory which adorns this gospel. To preach the gospel in an age like this requires not merely an intimate mastery of the teaching of the Bible, but a thorough knowledge of the criticisms of the opponents of Christianity, and of the grounds on which they rest. The universality of the belief in the life after death has always been a convincing argument. Even the most degraded savages have had their conception of the future life. It seems rather strange to hear so many voices of doubt raised in an age so boastful of its intellectualism, its culture and its own infallibility. But reflection upon this leads one to doubt the wisdom and worth of this generation rather than the truth and value of belief in eternal life. The more one studies this present generation and perceives its vaunting egotism, its shallow reasoning, its stupid prejudice and its polluted morals, the more one is inclined to cling to the anchor of hope which has sustained the Christian through the centuries.
VIEW OF THE ATHEIST
Those who question the teaching of the Bible in regard to the future life are divided into various groups. First, there is the outright atheist. Many sermons have been preached on The Search for an Atheist. The thought of the sermons has been-’ that such a person does not exist. It is said that deep down in the heart of the so-called atheist there is still the latent faith in God, smothered, but sure to break into a flame when misfortune or death comes. The speech of Robert Ingersol at the grave of his brother, when he could almost hear the rustle of angels-’ wings, was often cited. Likewise the dying statement of Voltaire that if the devil had ever had a hand in anything, it had been in his attacks on the Bible. But it is perhaps more than any one can affirm with assurance that every one who has denied the existence of God and the future life has sooner or later recanted. It is better to rest on the declaration of the Bible without qualifications: The fool has said in his heart there is no God. H. J. Allen, of Kansas, tells of a young Russian guide, a college graduate, who ridiculed him, as he was touring Moscow, because he frankly admitted that he still read and believed the Bible. He finally asked her where she expected to go when she died. She replied, Into fertilizer.
THE HUMANISTS-’ AND MODERNISTS-’ POSITION
The humanists who reduce God to a mere idea seem to be in utter confusion concerning the future life, and the impression most of them make is that they believe in annihilation, although they use a variety of phrases and illustrations and still talk about eternity as they do about God. Modernists who are not so extreme center their attacks on the Old Testament to prove that the future life is not taught there, or at least only in a very vague way, until later books were written. This theory has been so widely disseminated that quite frequently preachers who think that they believe the Bible proclaim that the future life is not taught in the O.T., but only in the N.T. They think they are exalting Christ and the N.T. by so affirming, but the truth is they have merely consciously or unconsciously adopted a modernistic theory without examining its basis or implications. It is the purpose of this essay to examine both the O.T. and the N.T. to determine the general outline of teaching concerning the life after death, with special emphasis upon the question as to whether the O.T. actually teaches the future life.
THE MODERNISTS-’ PRESUPPOSITION
The presupposition which underlies the modernists-’ denial that the Old Testament teaches the future life is their theory as to the development of the O.T. They deny that it is revealed of God, and affirm it is merely man’s gradual discovery of what is therein affirmed. In support of this they dissect various O.T. books, such as the Pentateuch and Isaiah, and whenever they find a statement or teaching which their theory of evolutionary development of the O.T. supposes could not have prevailed until a late period in the thinking of the Jews, they immediately declare this passage is by some later writer, J, E, D, P, or a second Isaiah. A free use of the evolutionary shears enables them to cut up the O.T. and rearrange its contents so as to make a gradual development throughout of the idea of a life after death. Thus they slyly attempt to prove one presupposition by another presupposition, and depend upon their solemn use of big words and scientific terms to prevent the reader from discovering the hoax. Prof. Kyrsopp Lake, the famous humanist of Harvard, was pressing in his class one day this theory that the O.T. does not teach the future life. A student spoke up and said: But, Professor Lake, what about the time when the spirit of Samuel returned and talked to Saul before the battle where the latter was slain? After a moment’s hesitation, Prof. Lake responded: Well, IF that is in the O.T., I will have to admit that it teaches the future life, but have not the critics been able to cut that passage out?
A MORE MODERATE VIEW
Prof. A. C. Knudson, of Boston University, who is not so extreme in his modernism, has recently published a book entitled, The Religious Teaching of the Old Testament. He has a chapter on The Teaching of the Old Testament Concerning the Future Life. He does not attempt to cut out the passages that affirm such a belief; he just tries to rub them out, to insist that these passages do not really represent the belief of the Jews of the time. At times he resorts to the dissection of books to relegate certain statements to a late period.
The Christian believes the Bible to be inspired of God. The miraculous proof it offers sustains its claim. That the teaching concerning the future should be more clearly and emphatically presented in the New Testament than the O.T. is to be expected, for the new and final revelation is superior to the old, and it was Christ who brought life and immortality to light. But that the O.T. does not teach the future life is the theory of unbelievers like the Sadducees in the time of Jesus and the modernists of today. Anyone who has become confused upon this topic should read repeatedly the discussion of Jesus as to whether the O.T. teaches the future life in Matthew 22:23-33, and the great review of this problem in the 11th chapter of Hebrews.
HEATHENISM AND THE OLD TESTAMENT
Prof. Knudson quotes several authors on the question as to why the O.T. has so much less to say on the future life than the religions of Egypt, Greece and other nations. Prof. Salmond declares the O.T. to be below the standard of other religions of ancient times, less tolerable than the Greek, less ethical than the Egyptian, less adequate and certain than the Persian. These had a more special mission than can be claimed for the Hebrew faith, in the preservation and transmission of the truth of a future life. Kant, the German philosopher, held that, because of this lack of emphasis on the future life, the O.T. lacks a genuinely religious character. While his compatriot, Schopenhauer, calls the O.T. on this basis, The rudest of all religions.
REPLY TO THE ACCUSATION
A sufficient answer to all this unfavorable comparison of the O.T. to the heathen religions of the times is the reminder that it is not how much, but what is said on a subject that counts. Read the endless silly ideas advanced by these pagan religions. Visit the tomb of Tut-ankh-amen, filled with the rations and decorations prepared for the dead king. Is the religion of Israel inferior to Egypt because the O.T. is not filled with instructions about burying food and gold chariots, etc., with the dead, for them to use hereafter? Prof. Knudson claims that ancient Hebrew graves have been unearthed in Palestine that contain such primitive preparations for the future life. But if this be so, it only proves again what the O.T. continually relates that the Jewish people at times deserted the true faith and became contaminated by the false religions about them. Prof. Knudson cannot find any passage in the O.T. which instructs that such physical equipment be provided for the dead. He argues at great length that the Jews generally accepted the crude practices of their pagan neighbors concerning the future life, such as ancestor worship, citing Deuteronomy 26:14; Jeremiah 16:7; Psalms 106:28; Hosea 9:4; Ezekiel 24:17; Leviticus 19:28; Leviticus 21:5; 2 Samuel 15:30; Ezekiel 24:17. A reading of these passages will show the absolute absence of proof; they warn against excess or mourning. Psalms 106:28 condemns Israel for having joined the heathen in the wilderness in sacrifices of the dead, but such a reference, together with those that warn Israel against the practice of witchcraft in regard to the dead, shows that the teaching of the O.T. plainly recognizes the life after death, and warns the Jews against the false heathen practices concerning it.
The critics who argue that the O.T. does not teach the future life until a very late period, when they had borrowed the idea from their heathen neighbors, are in desperate straits trying to explain the amazing difference between the teaching of the O.T. and that of the surrounding pagan nations. Some suggest that the reason the future life is not emphasized more is the strong sense of solidarity which held the nation immortal. They, say, The Messianic hope rendered unnecessary the belief in personal immortality. But this falsifies the facts as to the O.T. teaching and as to the natural and inevitable longings of the human heart. The Messianic hope was one that the individual was to share. Prof. Toy holds that the lack of teaching on the life after death is due to the lack of constructive imagination on the part of the Semites; the Jews knew nothing of drama or metaphysics. In other words, if the Jews could have just seen one or two Greek plays, it might have occurred to them that life after death would be desirable! Another explanation of this difficulty seems to have been overlooked: that it may be caused by a lack of eye-sight on the part of the critics.
EVIDENCE FROM THE OLD TESTAMENT
What evidence does the Old Testament bear that the writers who led and molded the faith of the nation believed in the future life? What evidence that God was revealing to His chosen people in His own way and time the glories of the beyond, drawing them away from the foolish and degrading teaching of the heathen, and leading up to the natural climax of the revelation in Christ?
(1)
Actual cases of resurrection of the dead (1 Kings 17:22; 2 Kings 4:35; 2 Kings 13:21)
(2)
Actual cases of translation where the individual did not die, but was translated by God. (Genesis 5:22-24; 2 Kings 2:11)
The modernists argue that these cases do not mean that the people would be led by such to believe in a future life. How so, unless we presume the Jews were a nation of imbeciles?
(3)
Actual case of reappearance of Samuel, after his death, to talk with Saul. (1 Samuel 28:12-19)
(4)
Definite declarations of belief in future life.
After David’s extravagant mourning on the ash heap during the illness of his child, as he prayed for forgiveness and for the child’s life, his servants feared to report to him the death of his child, and were astounded at the calmness with which he heard the news and ceased his mourning. His statement is a classic for all time: But now that he is dead, wherefore should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he will not return to me. (2 Samuel 12:15-23). David’s statement does not mean annihilation, for his whole conduct was that of hope instead of despair. And his repeated declarations voice his faith in the future life.
OVERLOOKING THAT EVIDENCE
Prof. Knudson overlooks the above incident. He quotes four Psalms (16, 17, 49, 73) as teaching vaguely (16, 17) or definitely (49, 73) the future life, but claims they are all of late origin. His theory compels him to hold that no clear statements of the future life were made until about the Maccabean period, when the Jews could have had time to learn this from the Persians. The apostle Peter did not feel compelled to trim the O.T. to fit the theory of evolution, for on the day of Pentecost he made the teaching of the O.T. on the future life one of the central points of argument in his sermon as he quoted David as saying in Psalms 16:8 ff.: Thou wilt not leave my soul unto Hades, Neither shalt thou give thy holy one to see corruption. He declared that David was predicting the resurrection of Jesus.
Just to show that the belief in the future life underlies the whole O.T., and to take a Psalm which nobody denies is written by David, read the famous 23rd Psalm: Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil.. He does not say into the valley, but through the valley. Death was not a destination to him, but a thoroughfare. He had the mountain-top vision. He was traveling through the valley and on to the heights of glory beyond. Hear him as he closes: And I shall dwell in the house of the Lord for ever.
THE RESURRECTION AND JUDGMENT
Many other passages might be quoted, such as Ezekiel 37:1-14; Isaiah 14:9; Isaiah 25:8; Isaiah 26:19; Isaiah 53:10-12; Isaiah 66:24; Daniel 12:2. The last passage is particularly interesting: And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. Critics hold that this teaches man is immortal; i.e., some will be raised and some annihilated (not raised). But this would mean that man may achieve the resurrection by either pre-eminent righteousness or pre-eminent wickedness! Ewald holds the many means all Israelites as contrasted with the heathen; Charles and Knudson hold it means The pre-eminently good and bad in Israel. But the next verse makes quite clear that all the wise and noble are to be raised to a blessed existence, and it immediately follows that all the wicked shall also be raised, but to everlasting punishment.
THE OLD TESTAMENT ANSWERS DOUBTERS
The fact that a number of O.T. writers argue the question of the future life, and state both the position of doubt and of faith, does not alter the fact of what the O.T. teaches. For the point is not that some verse may be quoted from Job or Ecclesiastes or Psalms which expresses doubt as to the life after death, but the question is: To what conclusion did the author come in the end? It is futile to quote the earlier expressions of doubt in Ecclesiastes. What does he say is his conclusion after he has considered the whole range of human pleasures, doubt and despair? Man goeth to his everlasting home, and the mourners go about the streets: before the silver cord is loosed, or the golden bowl is broken, or the pitcher is broken at the fountain, or the wheel broken at the cistern, and the dust returneth to the earth as it was, and the spirit returneth unto God who gave it. This is the end of the matter; all hath been heard: Fear God, and keep his commandments; for this is the whole duty of man. For God will bring every work into judgment, with every hidden thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil (Ecclesiastes 12:5-14). It is true that Job ponders the side of doubt as he asks, If a man die, shall he live again? (Job 14:14). But hear his conclusion: But as for me, I know that my Redeemer liveth, and at last he shall stand up upon the earth: And after my skin, even this body, is destroyed, then without my flesh shall I see God (Job 19:25-26). The same is true of the Psalmist.
WHAT DID JESUS TEACH?
A question of supreme interest is: What did Jesus have to say on the teaching of the Old Testament as to the future life? The skeptics of His day rendered a negative verdict as today. But hear the Son of God as He tore apart the flimsy argument of the Sadducees Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God (Matthew 22:29). No better comment could be written across the face of many books on this subject, written by men who claim to be scholars. After answering the puzzle about the seven husbands and one wife, and pausing to press it home that there are angels in heaven even as there is a resurrection, even though the Sadducees denied both, Jesus offered just one passage from the Old Testament to prove that it teaches the future life. And what an extraordinary passage it is! Ye blind leaders of the blind, hear His words! But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living. Not invented by man; not learned in Egypt, Greece or Persia, but spoken unto you by God. And as if to meet the critics of the 20th century, He does not quote Daniel, Isaiah or the Psalms; He quotes from the words of God to Moses, recorded in Exodus 3:6. No room for late development of ideas! His argument is this: Abraham had been dead many years, also Isaac and Jacob; but God does not say to Moses, I was the God of Abraham (while he was living, but not now), but, I am the God of Abraham; he is alive now, for a dead person who is no longer in existence can have had a creator, but he cannot have a God. It is as if Jesus said: Approach the Old Testament where you will, and scratch the surface; you will find the life after death implied, if not stated.
TESTIMONY IN THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS
Like most problems which concern the Old Testament, the question as to its attitude toward the life after death finds a sublime discussion in the Epistle to the Hebrews. One might well write across the magnificent 11th chapter, the title, The Teaching of the Old Testament Concerning the Future Life. It reviews the first glimmer of hope in Abel’s obedient sacrifice; the translation of Enoch; the faith and hope of Abraham. These all died in faith, not having confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth (Isaiah 11:13). By its emphatic study of the word pilgrim which Abraham used, Hebrews analyzes his faith. It pictures Abraham standing by the grave of Sarah and solemnly affirming that he was a pilgrim (Genesis 23:4). A pilgrim is a traveler with a destination. So with Abraham in his sojourn in Palestine: he dwelt in tents and kept looking for a permanent city. It was not Ur of the Chaldees, for the way was open to return there. But now they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed of them to be called their God; for he hath prepared for them a city (Isaiah 11:16). Hebrews pictures Abraham with uplifted knife, about to kill Isaac, in obedience to God’s command. How was this possible? Because Abraham believed that death did not end all, but that God would be able to raise Isaac from the dead. What strong faith was this in the future life! The faith of Isaac and Jacob as they died, and the specific command of Joseph concerning his bones, all are cited. The critics who cite this longing of Joseph to be buried with his fathers as proof that the O.T. leaders counted the geographical location of burial more important than righteous living, ought to be given the first prize for intellectual confusion. It proves this much, however, that Joseph was looking forward to a blessed life hereafter, or why bother about any command concerning his bones, that his body should be taken with the Israelites to Palestine? Moses-’ hope in the recompense of reward, which was to offset all his sacrifice and suffering for the Lord here on earth, receives great emphasis. Special mention is made of the fact that women received their dead by a resurrection; others were tortured not accepting their deliverance; that they might obtain a better resurrection (Hebrews 11:35).
The Old Testament thus was God’s message to Israel to clear their minds of the confused and false teaching of pagan nations about the after life, and to prepare the way for His final and complete revelation in the New Testament. The second coming of Jesus, the end of the world, the judgment of men according to the deeds done in the body, the separation of the righteous from the wicked, the blessed life of the redeemed with God forever, the eternal punishment of the wickedall this has tremendous emphasis in the teaching of Jesus and the whole New Testament. The resurrection of Jesus is the keystone on which all this is builded. It is the very type of our resurrection. It contains a double miracle: not merely the rejoining of the soul and body of Jesus, but the final translation of this earthly body into the heavenly at the time of the ascension.
PAUL’S TEACHING CONCERNING THE RESURRECTION
Of this mystery Paul speaks in I Corinthians, when he seeks to explain the fact that, although the Christian is to expect a resurrection, he is not expected to have in heaven exactly the same body as on earth. People were disturbed at Corinth with the question as to how are the dead raised?.. and with what manner of body do they come? Paul illustrates by the grain of wheat planted in the ground. It is the same grain of wheat and it is not the same grain of wheat which comes forth. We see different kinds of flesh here: beasts, birds, fish. This should illustrate God’s power to give us a heavenly body according to His own will. This corruptible shall put on incorruption. We shall preserve our identity. We shall be like Him when we see Him as He is. These that are arrayed in the white robes, who are they and whence came they?. These are they that come of the great tribulation, and they washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb (Revelation 7:13-14). In this blessed hope let us live and die, for death is but the beginning of life, unending and blessed, for those who follow the Son of God.
Addendum: For an excellent expose-’ of Modern Higher Criticism dealing at length with the Pentateuch, see Dr. John L. Campbell’s book, The Bible Under Fire. Read especially the first chapter which deals with the Polychrome (Rainbow) Bible where the critics literally took shears and cut and pasted until they made a Bible which would prove their theories of gradual development.
Isaiah 39:1-4
D. PRESUMPTION, CHAPTER 39
- PRIDE
TEXT: Isaiah 39:1-4
1
At that time Merodachbaladan the son of Baladan, king of Babylon, sent letters and a present to Hezekiah; for he heard that he had been sick, and was recovered.
2
And Hezekiah was glad of them, and showed them the house of his precious things, the silver, and the gold, and the spices, and the precious oil, and all the house of his armor, and all that was found in his treasures: there was nothing in his house, nor in all his dominion, that Hezekiah showed them not.
3
Then came Isaiah the prophet unto king Hezekiah, and said unto him, What said these men? and from whence came they unto thee? And Hezekiah said, They are come from a far country unto me, even from Babylon.
4
Then said he, What have they seen in thy house? And Hezekiah answered, All that is in my house have they seen: there is nothing among my treasures that I have not showed them.
QUERIES
a.
Why was the king of Babylon so interested in Hezekiah?
b.
Why did the prophet Isaiah question Hezekiah?
PARAPHRASE
About nine years before Hezekiah’s confrontation with the Assyrian Rabshakeh, soon after his recovery from his illness, the king of Babylon, Merodachbaladan, son of Baladan, sent his envoys with a letter and a gift to Hezekiah. The King of Babylon was interested in the reports of Hezekiah’s phenomenal recovery from terminal illness. Hezekiah was proud of the fact that the king of Babylon had sent envoys to inquire of his recovery so he took them on a tour of his palace, showing them the wealth of his treasury and the armaments in his armory. Hezekiah was so taken with the overtures of the Babylonians, he showed them everything in his city they wanted to see. Immediately, Isaiah the prophet confronted King Hezekiah and said to him, What did these men say to youwhere are they from? Hezekiah did not tell Isaiah what the men said but did reply, They are from far away in Babylon. Then Isaiah asked the king, what have you shown them of your kingdom? Hezekiah replied, I have shown them everything about my kingdomeverything in my treasury and in my armory.
COMMENTS
Isaiah 39:1-2 VANITY OF THE KING: 2 Chronicles 32:31 relates that the envoys from Babylon were sent to inquire about the sign that had been done in the land. Evidently word had filtered into the courts of foreign potentates of the phenomenal, miraculous recovery of King Hezekiah from a terminal illness. Some commentators are inclined to think the inquiry of the envoys about Hezekiah’s recovery was simply a ploy, a ruse, to approach Judah for a military alliance against Assyria. Whatever the case, the text in II Chronicles indicates Hezekiah did not seek the Lord’s guidance in dealing with the Babylonians so, God left him to himself, in order to try him and to know all that was in his heart.
If our chronology is correct (see comments on Isaiah 38:1-3) the Babylonian envoys came to Hezekiah before the invasion of Sennacherib (Isaiah 36-37). They came soon after Hezekiah’s recovery. This would place their visit sometime in 710 B.C. Merodachbaladan (which means, Marduk has given a son) was probably named for the pagan god Marduk. He was the valiant leader of a people known as Chaldeans who gained power and rule over the southern territory of Mesopotamia. In 722 B.C. he rebelled against the Assyrian rule of that territory and formed his own kingdom. Sargon, king of Assyria (Isaiah 20), recognized his domain in 721 B.C. so he reigned over that small southern territory for 11 years. About 710 B.C. he sent envoys to Jerusalem, supposedly to give his best wishes to Hezekiah at his recovery from illness. What the envoys really came for was to invite Hezekiah to join in an alliance against Assyria. Merodachbaladan had already persuaded Susa, Phoenicia, Moab, Edom, Philistia and Egypt to join him in a military attack upon Assyria. Sargon learned of the planned attack and set about to defeat these nations, one by one. He took Babylon and Bit-Yakin (Merodachbaladan’s home in the swamps of southern Mesopotamia) and Merodachbaladan himself was captured. He managed to be reinstated as ruler of a small princedom at Bit-Yakin. Around 702 or 701 he occupied Babylon and ruled there again but only briefly. Sennacherib, Sargon’s son and successor drove him back to the swamps and Bit-Yakin. Later he was forced to flee to Elam (Persia) and Chaldean influence was silenced in Mesopotamia. Although Merodachbaladan was unsuccessful in his attempt to overthrow Assyria and revive the power of ancient Babylon, the Chaldeans rose after his death to the dominant power in Mesopotamia.
Merodachbaladan’s escapades and seditions are documented in the Assyrian inscriptions of Sennacherib found by archaeologists (See Archaeology and Bible History, by Joseph P. Free, pg. 210-211).
The Hebrew word samahk expresses more than gladness. It often means to shine cheerfully. Hezekiah was evidently very impressed with his visitors. He was flattered that the king of Babylon would send him a present. He was also momentarily charmed by their invitation to join in the efforts to break the Assyrian yoke. With such charming visitors Hezekiah felt it would be an opportune time to show off the grandeur of his country’s wealth and armament. He probably wanted to prove to them he was no second-rate king. Hezekiah committed a two-fold faux pas; a political blunder and a personal transgression. For the king of God’s covenant people to display all his treasures and weapons to pagan envoys who represented inevitable enemies was political stupidity. The envoys undoubtedly made mental note of fortifications, weapons and financial resources for future use. The personal blunder was in succumbing to vanity, pride, egotism and self-sufficiency. This detracted from his faith and trust in Jehovah. And this almost immediately after his great psalm of praise and trust in Jehovah! How like us mortal men he was!
Isaiah 39:3-4 VOICE OF THE PROPHET: It appears Isaiah came almost immediately after the tour of the envoys and confronted Hezekiah with his blunder. Isaiah was sent by Jehovah as Isaiah 39:5 confirms. His approach reminds one of the confrontation between the prophet Nathan and King David. Hezekiah is so charmed by the prestige apparently accorded him by this visit he misses the ominous inferences of the prophet. Isaiah asks, what have these men said? and where are they from? Hezekiah places first importance on where they were fromBabylon. Never mind what they sayeven though they may be talking about a Babylonian-Judean alliance. The important thing to notice is how important I am that they would come all the way from the great city of Babylon to see me.
Isaiah’s next question is one of foreboding also, What have they seen in your house? In other words, How much have you shown them of your armament and treasures? Have you been discreet or indiscreet? Still elated over being flattered by such auspicious visitors, the King blurts out that he has shown them everything! Nothing has been kept secret. Isaiah’s questions were intended to reveal to the king his blunder. They were specifically to remind him he had not kept his promise to trust in Jehovah but he had been seduced through his egotism to trust in men.
QUIZ
What does 2Chronicles 32 tell us about this incident?
When did the envoys from Babylon come to Hezekiah?
What was Hezekiah’s reaction to their visit?
Isaiah 39:5-8
- PUNISHMENT
TEXT: Isaiah 39:5-8
5
Then said Isaiah to Hezekiah, Hear the word of Jehovah of hosts.
6
Behold, the days are coming, when all that is in thy house, and that which thy fathers have laid up in store until this day, shall be carried to Babylon: nothing shall be left, saith Jehovah.
7
And of thy sons that shall issue from thee, whom thou shalt beget, shall they take away; and they shall be eunuchs in the palace of the King of Babylon.
8
Then said Hezekiah unto Isaiah, Good is the word of Jehovah which thou hast spoken. He said moreover, For there shall be peace and truth in my days.
QUERIES
a.
Why carried away to Babylon instead of Assyria?
b.
Why did Hezekiah say the prediction was good?
PARAPHRASE
Then Isaiah said to Hezekiah, Hear the word of Jehovah of hosts. Behold, the time is coming when all of the armament and treasures which you have so boastfully shown your Babylonian visitorseverything your ancestors have worked so hard to accumulate and store upwill be carried off by the Babylonians as the booty of war. None of your wealth or weapons will be left, says the Lord. Your own sons and grandsons will be taken away by these same Babylonians and made slaves in the palace of their king. Hezekiah was humbled by the prophet’s words and said, Yes, the word of the Lord is good and just. Furthermore, the word of the Lord is merciful. The Lord will make peace and truth to prevail for us at least for the rest of my days.
COMMENTS
Isaiah 39:5-7 CARRYING AWAY: Isaiah came, not in a human advisory capacity, but as a prophet of God. His prediction carried all the authority of Almighty God. It was, in fact, the word of Jehovah.
It is ironic that all the treasures Hezekiah had shown to the Babylonian envoys will someday, Isaiah predicts, be carried off by the Babylonians as the booty of conquest. Isaiah’s prediction is enigmatic and problematical, to say the least. Here are the Babylonian envoys bringing gifts, expressing concern about Hezekiah’s health, making friendly and charming inquiries about the grandeur of Judah’s beautiful Temple vessels, diplomatically inviting Hezekiah to join forces with a great crusade against the common enemy, Assyria, and Isaiah is predicting they will be Judah’s real conquerors. What appears to be the real threat, which has terrified the people, Assyria, Isaiah has predicted will disappear and pose no threat at all to Judah. What it really amounts to is a confrontation between the finite knowledge (limited only to the past and present) and the infinite knowledge of God (unlimited). Hezekiah’s part in the drama is to decide which he will trust.
A prediction even more piercing to the heart of Hezekiah was the one concerning his sons. He does not even have a son yet! Now the dark news comes that when he shall have a son, his destiny is that of conquest and slavery in a pagan palace. The fulfillment of this prediction may be seen in Daniel 1:3-6; 2 Chronicles 33:11; 2 Kings 24:12-16. Manasseh, Hezekiah’s immediate son, was taken to Babylon by the Assyrians; Jehoiachin, a great-great-great-great grandson of Hezekiah was taken captive by the Babylonians. The throne of Judah, the house of David, so precious to Hezekiah, will not only cease to exist, but the sovereign crowned heads which sit upon it will be forced into shameful servitude in an unclean, idolatrous, pagan court.
Isaiah 39:8 CALM ACOUIESCENCE: Hezekiah reacts to the rebuke of Isaiah and the word of the Lord as one would expect a man of his calibre to react. He is a man of great faith, but not a perfect man. He has weaknesses. But he is a man of a good and malleable heart. He is capable of acknowledging his sin and repenting when confronted with the will of God. In this respect, he is like his progenitor, David. It is not only the sin of Hezekiah that brings on the Babylonian captivity (cf. Deuteronomy 28:32), but the whole nation has defaulted on their covenant with God. Already other prophets have arraigned Judah before the judgment bar of God (Amos 2:4-5; Hosea 6:11, etc.).
Hezekiah should not be accused of a selfish attitude when he says, For there shall be peace and truth in my days. He has resigned his will to that of the Lord and pronounced the will of the Lord good! What all does he mean? We cannot be certain. Perhaps he is acknowledging the justness of God’s chastisement. Perhaps he is acknowledging the good that will result from the chastening of a rebellious and unfaithful people through the coming captivity. He himself has just endured a chastening in his illness, and it has made him a man more responsive to the revealed will of God. Now he thanks the Lord, not only for himself but for his nation, that there will be a time of peace and truth for Judah before the darkness of the Babylonian captivity falls. E. J. Young paraphrases Hezekiah, There will be peace and truth at least in my days, but I am not spared the misfortune of the knowledge that my descendants will go into captivity. The great forces of evil that oppose the redemptive work of God through His covenant loom on the horizon in Babylon. The mercy of God is extended to the covenant people for a short time. But soon they must be cast into the crucible and purified. Soon they must suffer the discipline of God that produces the fruit of righteousness. Soon the remnant must be refined that through it may come the Messiah and redemption to all peoples. It is no comfort to know that peace and truth will last only for Hezekiah’s day. What about the future fortunes of the people of God? What ultimate and everlasting comfort can be given to God’s people? What about peace and truth forever? The answers to these questions are reserved for the second great section of the book of Isaiah, Chapter s 40-66.
QUIZ
What is so enigmatic about predicting captivity by Babylon?
Which sons of Hezekiah were taken captive?
Was Hezekiah selfish in being glad of peace and truth in his own days?
Where is the answer to the enigma of the captivities?