Some older sermon notes from Pastor Paul from last year, from his teaching on Genesis 22, on the sacrifice of Isaac:
The test put before Abraham is to sacrifice his only son, the ultimate test. God never had a plan to have Isaac sacrificed: rather, this was a testing of faith. In this situation there is no mention of Sarah being told - likely she was not. What happens here is that Abraham sets out resolutely to obey.
In Hebrews, the writer states that Abraham didn't have it all figured out, but he know God could raise Isaac from the dead. The father is resolute to obey, and the son is submissive to the father. The sacrifice took place on Mt. Moriah, the same place where David sacrificed for his people. Moriah is later the site of Israel's temple in Jerusalem.
God's test here is about substitution. "the angel of the Lord" (v. 15) is considered by some to be the pre-incarnate Christ. In John 8:56, "Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day", a reference here to Genesis 22. This chapter paints a picture of the sacrifice that God makes for use. Christ's death is the pinnacle of our faith. Trials in life are reminders of what Christ endured. Abraham understood this, and we all deserve to be Isaacs on the altar because of our sin.
After the sacrifice is stopped, God reaffirms the covenant (v. 17). The provisions are for blessing, increased descendants, and to possess the land of his enemies. Abraham was willing to give up family for his walk with God. Sometimes our relationships are separated by God's will, and obedience to Christ may lead us and our family ultimately to persecution and death. Abraham knew of this, and his example is one of faithfulness to God in the most extreme situation of testing.
Showing posts with label Isaac. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Isaac. Show all posts
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Thursday, September 2, 2010
Gen. 25:19-26
Some notes that I found recently on a Voddie sermon about Genesis 25:19-26. Voddie presenting a doctrinal overview of predestination in terms of the lives of Isaac, Esau and Jacob. The overview included a detailed look at Romans 9, as well a look at the London Baptist Confession.
Voddie mentioned how Genesis so far spoke tremendously about Abraham and his life, but we don't see much about Isaac. V. 20 gives a sneak peek of Laban, who will resurface later in the life of Jacob.
In terms of Isaac and Abraham, there are a number of parallels: Both dealt with issues of barrenness, in light of God's promise that they will be fathers of a prosperous nation. The distinction, however, is that Abraham, when told he would have a child at his old age, laughed at the promise. Abraham also turned to the sinful human option and had a child with Hagar, which was not God's plan. Isaac, on the other hand, when presented with a situation of a barren wife, fell on his face and prayed. Voddie specualted that, in light of his father's sin with Hagar, he directly witnessed the friction between his mother and Hagar and did not want to repeat this. Sounds completely logical to me.
Rebecca had two children, Jacob and Esau. Jacob was described in Hebrew as "akave" (going with the phonetic here) that means "heel-grabber", a reference to his character. The contention between the brothers is also reflective of contention between mother and father: Isaac was fond of Esau, particularly of the wild game that he caught, while Rebecca was fond of Jacob. Favoritism is never a good thing.
Romans 9 presents a doctrinal exposition of the life of Jacob and Esau. The issue of predestination can be a tricky, and difficult, one for me, but it is one that I find to be consistent with scripture. Voddie shared a series of passages from the London Baptist convention on the topic: those saved are chosen out of the good please of the will of God, while others are "left to act in their sin" and get what their sins deserve. It's not God's injustice that sends men to Hell, but man's want/bent to sin.
One of many challenges that arise is the question of, "If God has already predestined certain individuals, why share the gospel then?" The answer is because God told us to in His word, and because this is the means and process that God uses to call the elect. Voddie pointed out that an "arrogant Calvinist" should be a contradiction: "I'm saved and there's nothing in me God would have wanted to save." It's humbling.
Another question is, is this just? The answer is that it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God who has mercy. Can what is made question the maker? God predestined us to adoption according to the council of His will:
John 5:21 - "The Son gives life to whom He will"
John 6:65 - "No one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father."
Otherwise, the alternative is that there are people who are smart enough, or holy enough, to "figure it out" moreso than other people. This emphasises human effort and initiative, moreso than the grace of God, and it's God's grace alone that makes us alive in Christ.
Romans 8 - "those whom he foreknew he also predestined" - you can't separate predestination from salvation. According to Lorraine Boetner, foreordination is the work of a wise and merciful heavenful father, as opposed to the working of blind, physicial fate.
Voddie also spoke about the "prescient" view and the fallacy of this viewpoint, that God's predestination of individuals is based on seeing into the future, and knowing from future actions that someone will be good or bad. The fallacy here is that God is basically little more than a time-traveler, and this takes away from His sovereignty. The prescient view can't explain Roman's 9 and how God could love one and hate another.
As far as applications presented, we as believers should adore God for His grace and NOT for our own ability. The wrong view is one of, "God saw that I would someday choose him", and commend me for being "smarter" than others to find the path to salvation.
Another point is that success in sharing the gospel does not depend on us. God has guaranteed the salvation of His elect. We should avoid over-introspection of whether or not we are of the elect, but rather our focus should be on repentance and believing the gospel. The same situation with our children: we should not fuss over worrying if our children are "elect" or not, but rather focus on sharing the gospel with them.
Voddie mentioned how Genesis so far spoke tremendously about Abraham and his life, but we don't see much about Isaac. V. 20 gives a sneak peek of Laban, who will resurface later in the life of Jacob.
In terms of Isaac and Abraham, there are a number of parallels: Both dealt with issues of barrenness, in light of God's promise that they will be fathers of a prosperous nation. The distinction, however, is that Abraham, when told he would have a child at his old age, laughed at the promise. Abraham also turned to the sinful human option and had a child with Hagar, which was not God's plan. Isaac, on the other hand, when presented with a situation of a barren wife, fell on his face and prayed. Voddie specualted that, in light of his father's sin with Hagar, he directly witnessed the friction between his mother and Hagar and did not want to repeat this. Sounds completely logical to me.
Rebecca had two children, Jacob and Esau. Jacob was described in Hebrew as "akave" (going with the phonetic here) that means "heel-grabber", a reference to his character. The contention between the brothers is also reflective of contention between mother and father: Isaac was fond of Esau, particularly of the wild game that he caught, while Rebecca was fond of Jacob. Favoritism is never a good thing.
Romans 9 presents a doctrinal exposition of the life of Jacob and Esau. The issue of predestination can be a tricky, and difficult, one for me, but it is one that I find to be consistent with scripture. Voddie shared a series of passages from the London Baptist convention on the topic: those saved are chosen out of the good please of the will of God, while others are "left to act in their sin" and get what their sins deserve. It's not God's injustice that sends men to Hell, but man's want/bent to sin.
One of many challenges that arise is the question of, "If God has already predestined certain individuals, why share the gospel then?" The answer is because God told us to in His word, and because this is the means and process that God uses to call the elect. Voddie pointed out that an "arrogant Calvinist" should be a contradiction: "I'm saved and there's nothing in me God would have wanted to save." It's humbling.
Another question is, is this just? The answer is that it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God who has mercy. Can what is made question the maker? God predestined us to adoption according to the council of His will:
John 5:21 - "The Son gives life to whom He will"
John 6:65 - "No one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father."
Otherwise, the alternative is that there are people who are smart enough, or holy enough, to "figure it out" moreso than other people. This emphasises human effort and initiative, moreso than the grace of God, and it's God's grace alone that makes us alive in Christ.
Romans 8 - "those whom he foreknew he also predestined" - you can't separate predestination from salvation. According to Lorraine Boetner, foreordination is the work of a wise and merciful heavenful father, as opposed to the working of blind, physicial fate.
Voddie also spoke about the "prescient" view and the fallacy of this viewpoint, that God's predestination of individuals is based on seeing into the future, and knowing from future actions that someone will be good or bad. The fallacy here is that God is basically little more than a time-traveler, and this takes away from His sovereignty. The prescient view can't explain Roman's 9 and how God could love one and hate another.
As far as applications presented, we as believers should adore God for His grace and NOT for our own ability. The wrong view is one of, "God saw that I would someday choose him", and commend me for being "smarter" than others to find the path to salvation.
Another point is that success in sharing the gospel does not depend on us. God has guaranteed the salvation of His elect. We should avoid over-introspection of whether or not we are of the elect, but rather our focus should be on repentance and believing the gospel. The same situation with our children: we should not fuss over worrying if our children are "elect" or not, but rather focus on sharing the gospel with them.
Monday, October 19, 2009
Genesis 26: 34 - 27: 45
Missed worship last week, so there's a gap in the Genesis notes, but here's where it picks up again. Pastor Paul spoke more on the unraveling narrative of Issac, Jacob and Esau. He spent a lot of time more so on the topical side of things, addressing themes of God's election and various viewpoints of God's interaction with the world, then touched on the passages more specifically.
Genesis 26: 34 - 27: 45 talks about the stolen blessing. Isaac had planned to bypass God's will and just give Esau the blessing, but Rebbecca schemed to have Jacob get it instead. It's all a big mess, but as pastor said, God's will is accomplished in spite of us. God's election is at work here, and in Gen. 25 we God's election at work in the two nations in the womb, Jacob and Esau.
Pastor Paul went on to elaborate some of the misconceptions of God's role in the universe. Some of the worldviews that he pointed out and spoke about were:
Another question addressed was that, if God in in control, then why is there evil? Pastor Paul pointed out that often bad things, or things that seem bad to us at the time, are there as part of God's direction leading to good. He pointed out the example of Joseph, who was taken from his family and brought into slavery. From this "bad" situation, Joseph, given the ability from God to interpret dreams, was able to rise in prominence to being second in command of Egypt, second only to the Pharaoh, and from this position, he was able to not only save his family but also ultimately the people of Israel.
Genesis 26: 34 - 27: 45 talks about the stolen blessing. Isaac had planned to bypass God's will and just give Esau the blessing, but Rebbecca schemed to have Jacob get it instead. It's all a big mess, but as pastor said, God's will is accomplished in spite of us. God's election is at work here, and in Gen. 25 we God's election at work in the two nations in the womb, Jacob and Esau.
Pastor Paul went on to elaborate some of the misconceptions of God's role in the universe. Some of the worldviews that he pointed out and spoke about were:
- Deism - God created everything and left it all alone.
- Pantheism - God is in everything and not distinct from the creation.
- Everything just by chance (as opposed to providence)
- Impersonal faith - "Things just happen. That's just how the world is", etc.
Another question addressed was that, if God in in control, then why is there evil? Pastor Paul pointed out that often bad things, or things that seem bad to us at the time, are there as part of God's direction leading to good. He pointed out the example of Joseph, who was taken from his family and brought into slavery. From this "bad" situation, Joseph, given the ability from God to interpret dreams, was able to rise in prominence to being second in command of Egypt, second only to the Pharaoh, and from this position, he was able to not only save his family but also ultimately the people of Israel.
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Genesis 26: 6-11
Greg Parker spoke on Genesis 26: 6-11, and continued the theme of God's multi-generational faithfulness narrative through the life of Isaac. Again the theme apparent here is God's faithfulness in working through sinful individuals as we see here Isaac repeating the sin of his father Abraham - namely that of lying about his wife Rebecca (as Abraham did in Gen. 12:10). The text tells us that Abimelech, believing Rebecca to be Isaac's sister was both of them laughing (and in some translations, in "intimate dialog") with one another and knew he had been told a lie.
It's easy to perceive Isaac as a bridge between Abraham and Jacob, as we don't know much about his life. We know of the miraculous situation of his birth, the sacrifice, and his marriage, but otherwise not much else. From the previous week, we also know that he had a fondness for wild game, and exercised a favoritism towards Esau.
Looking ahead to the book of Hebrews, we read about how Isaac was identified as one of the "by faith" individuals and how Isaac invoked the future blessings of Jacob and Esau. His sin of lying is not mentioned by the writer of Hebrews. In spite of his shortcomings, God forgave them and Isaac was remembered as an inportant member of the Messianic line.
I missed some details of the message as I needed to care for a crabby baby during the service (it's integrated worship, so no nurseries here) but I thought that Greg did a good job with the message. As I understand it, he's done speaking before but this was his first sermon at Gfbc, and he's clearly been blessed by God with the ability to teach from the Word.
It's easy to perceive Isaac as a bridge between Abraham and Jacob, as we don't know much about his life. We know of the miraculous situation of his birth, the sacrifice, and his marriage, but otherwise not much else. From the previous week, we also know that he had a fondness for wild game, and exercised a favoritism towards Esau.
Looking ahead to the book of Hebrews, we read about how Isaac was identified as one of the "by faith" individuals and how Isaac invoked the future blessings of Jacob and Esau. His sin of lying is not mentioned by the writer of Hebrews. In spite of his shortcomings, God forgave them and Isaac was remembered as an inportant member of the Messianic line.
I missed some details of the message as I needed to care for a crabby baby during the service (it's integrated worship, so no nurseries here) but I thought that Greg did a good job with the message. As I understand it, he's done speaking before but this was his first sermon at Gfbc, and he's clearly been blessed by God with the ability to teach from the Word.
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Gen. 25:1-18
For the beginning verses of Genesis 25, Pastor Voddie spoke about the life of Isaac and his somewhat minimal narrative in the Bible. With Isaac, his importance is defined in terms of who he's connected to in terms of God's covenantal promise.
(Voddie touched on the "controversy" around Gen. 25:1 and his other offspring, and what was the situation that empowered him to have more children. Was it his "rejuvenation", that allowed him to have Isaac, also something that allowed him to have other children as well? The issue with Keturah and whether she was a wife or concubine is interesting but ultimately not important. One interesting note is that Keturah bore Midian, and later on with will be the Midianites who took Joseph out of the well to sell to the Ishmaelites.)
The various promises that shape the life of Isaac include God's promise to provide offspring for barren Abraham, as well as the land of Caanan. We also see through God's promise that Ishmael would be a great nation an example of Abraham's unfaithfulness, and presents the account of another son who does not get to be the promised one. Abraham did not have to sin to fulfil the promise. Ishmael was set against Isaac, and this is still manifest to this day.
In terms of the messianic linage, through Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, etc, we see that it wasn't from the goodness and sinlessness of these individuals that God called them to be of the chosen line. Rather, God used this lineage of sinful men to lead up to Christ, the one through whom forgiveness of sins would be offered.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
