McCheyne Reading Plan: Catching Up

Mike Leake

Disclaimer: In posting these thoughts, questions, and ramblings I feel it wise to give a disclaimer. There are many people that are far more knowledgeable and gifted in expositing the Word of God than I. These thoughts are not intended to be in-depth analysis of the text. They are thoughts. They are questions. They are ramblings. It will be a display of what God is teaching me through His Word. In depth study will be done at a different time. It is also good to know the author’s goal. 1) To be accountable in reading through Scripture. 2) To share these thoughts with others. Possibly for someone else’s edification; possibly for my own. 3) To glorify God through His Word. 4) To spur one another on in taking up Scripture and reading! So without further ado, here are today’s readings:

Matthew 15:

Apparently the disciples were not very hygienic. Maybe Jesus never taught them proper hygiene, since they do not wash their hands before they eat.

I love this dialogue between Jesus. “Why do you not obey tradition?” Jesus, “Why do you not obey God?” Ouch.

I wonder how often because of our tradition we “make void” the Word of God.

verse 12. It is easy to sympathize with the disciples here. It would have been difficult to go against the established authorities and leaders. “Hey, Jesus you are offending the Pharisees, shouldn’t you be careful?” We must be careful not to give undue offense but when the truth of God is being dishonored we must not care about offending those who hold to tradition over the Word of God. Even if it means church conflict because we change an unbiblical tradition to the disapproval of a “Pharisee”.

Apparently there are “plants” that are planted but not so by the Father. Is this similar to the parable of the wheat and tares?

It’s quite obvious to us today what Jesus is saying. But I wonder how often we do not understand truly what Jesus is saying. I think of the big “NO’s” of Christianity today and few are on this list. We are very harsh on some things (and some which perhaps do not even defile) and others on this list we ignore. How often have people been censured for false witness and slander?
I have never really understood the story of the Canaanite woman. It seems so uncharacteristic of Jesus. It sounds as if Jesus does not have a concept of Gentile inclusion. Is this tongue in cheek? He saying it almost sarcastically to the disciples to teach him that he was not sent only to the lost sheep of Israel? Nonetheless, her persistence “wins Jesus over”. What are your thoughts on this passage?

True biblical healing will result in glorifying the God of Israel.

Imagine being so dedicated and passionate about hearing what Jesus has to say that you do not eat for three days.

Acts 15:

Do stories of conversion strike joy in my heart as it did these brothers?

There are Pharisees still in the mix. It seems as if the Jewishness of Christianity in his seminal stages was quite prominent. Acts 15 will prove to be a major turning point. I imagine it must have been a very big debate. You can certainly sympathize with the thought that they must be circumcised and keep the Law of Moses. This had been their entire life. It is not as if they are meaning to denounce Christ. They are wanting to be faithful to their heritage and all that they have been taught. Christ and His gospel was so revolutionary that it had to come with such difficult questions as these.

verse 7, (If I am reading it correctly) certainly seems that God made a choice to save certain Gentiles. This certainly sounds like the type of election described by Calvinists, but perhaps because I am one I am reading this into the text. Lord, help me to read your word for what it says and not put doctrine into it. Rather I pray that my doctrine find its source in the Holy Scriptures and the glorious God of which they reveal.

“cleansed their hearts by faith”. This is very significant. The Jews are wanting a cleansing of the Gentiles. Peter is saying the Spirit of God has already done this.

I wonder why James gives these four instructions. Did Gentiles have a huge problem with these things? In reading some of the ancient literature it appears so. Are we still today to follow this?

Why is James concerned with men “proclaiming Moses”? There is a sense in which we must proclaim the Law, but certainly not at the expense of proclaiming Christ. May we never proclaim only the Law!

“gone out from us”…does this mean that they are heretics and it is synonymous to saying “gone away from us”? Or is this saying they are brothers (albeit confused) that are fruits from us as if he is saying “came from us”?

May it be said of us, “Men who have risked their lives for the sake of the Lord Jesus Christ”.

I pray that I might write, teach, and preach with such grace that those that hear the Word might, “rejoice because of its encouragement”.

Even sharp disagreement can be used by the Lord. I have, however, always been saddened by this disagreement between Paul and Barnabas.

Nehemiah 8:

“And the ears of all the people were attentive…” Dear Lord bring that to our church. Bring that to my heart, that I might ever be attentive to your Holy Word and the preaching and proclaiming of it.

I would like to begin having the people in the congregation stand at the reading of the Word. I would love to see congregational reading of the Word instilled again into our church. I would like to begin this at youth group next time we meet. Not for the sake of the practice itself but to revere our hearts to God’s precious Word.

I am told that verse 8 is pointing to expository preaching and I believe it so. The Word must be read “clearly”, and we as expositors must “give the sense”, and our goal must be that “the people understood the reading”.

I asked an earlier question about the authority of Nehemiah. Here it says he was a governor. How he got this title I am not certain. But this is why he is able to speak with such authority.

Verse 9-12 Something about this section of Scripture is still floating around in my head. The Word is read the people are weeping. Weeping for sorrow it appears. Why are they sad? Is this sadness not mourning and good? Why are they commanded to celebrate? So, then should we not celebrate instead of mourn when we understand the Word? Are there times when a clear understanding should cause weeping? Are these general principles or specific to the story?

Isn’t it ironic that we have to be commanded to celebrate and party? It seems like lost people get celebration a little better than we…and it is we that have the most to celebrate. Yet, perhaps this is our time of mourning and fasting because our bridegroom has not yet came back. Oh, but one day we will out celebrate any drunkard in Times Square on New Years Eve!

Day by day he read from the book of the Law. I wish we still had such assemblies daily. It seems to me that in times of the Great Awakening and in the ministry of many dear saints that they meetings about every day. We struggle now to have an evening service or a few days in a row. Lord, cause us to hunger and pant after You and Your Word.

Genesis 17:

Is this a separate covenant? I think it is. This time Abe has conditions. Walk before God and be blameless. (What exactly does it mean to walk before the Lord)? It does sound very similar to the prior covenant. Is this one different?

It is neat that many times when men have an encounter with God he changes their names. We are indeed a new creations-this is a cool reflection of this glorious truth. It seems as if this covenant is conditional whereas the prior one is less so. I should study these more.

Again as we read such things in verse 14, I see why the early Christians had a problem with doing away with circumcision.

Circumcision would have to take a lot of faith.

Even after Abraham messed up with Hagar, God’s grace and promise are still going to come to fruition. This is very comforting for those of us that mess up in many diverse ways. There are certain things in God’s plan that cannot and never will be jacked up! That’s wonderfully freeing.

It must have been a huge gut-buster to fall on his face laughing. And to think that he is doing this with the Almighty. What a relationship they must have had. But we see that part of this is unbelief, and God certainly is not pleased with this laughter. Abraham is begging for God’s blessing to be given to Ishmael. But God’s plan is through Isaac. The Child of Promise not the Child of the Flesh.

You get the idea that God is not surprised by the spreading of Ishmael’s descendants. Yet, he cannot be pleased with their damnable doctrines. But as a fulfillment of this look at the world’s supply of oil….much of the riches come from descendants of Ishmael.

I will probably have our son circumcised (for medical not religious purposes) before the age of 13. Is there significance in the fact that Ishmael is circumcised? Do Muslims get circumcised? Even Abraham’s servants are circumcised. Does this mean that the promises and blessings are extended to even them? If so, then we can see God’s inclusive nature even here.

McCheyne Reading Plan: Catching up on Genesis

Mike Leake

Disclaimer: In posting these thoughts, questions, and ramblings I feel it wise to give a disclaimer. There are many people that are far more knowledgeable and gifted in expositing the Word of God than I. These thoughts are not intended to be in-depth analysis of the text. They are thoughts. They are questions. They are ramblings. It will be a display of what God is teaching me through His Word. In depth study will be done at a different time. It is also good to know the author’s goal. 1) To be accountable in reading through Scripture. 2) To share these thoughts with others. Possibly for someone else’s edification; possibly for my own. 3) To glorify God through His Word. 4) To spur one another on in taking up Scripture and reading! So without further ado, here are today’s readings:

Genesis 12:

“Go to a land I will show you”. How often is it that God calls us to do things with only a few details. Truly, the only detail that we should need is this: “Follow me”.

Is this the first time that Abram has “called upon the name of the Lord”?

What would Abram’s calling Sarai his sister entail? Would they take her captive? Would they seduce her? Is her being “taken into Pharaoh’s house” a not so subtle way of saying that he “made her his”? It seems that since he “took her for [his] wife” that this is exactly what happened. This is horrible that Abram out of fear would let his own wife be given to Pharaoh. Meanwhile he gets all of these gifts. Horrible. I am sure that the culture was much different then, but still. So, this makes me wonder…have I ever dealt in such a horrible way to my wife? Have I ever been so selfish or afraid of man that I honored them or my own security over her? Never to this extent, but I am sure I have. Lord, forgive me of this and make my heart more faithful to my wife.

Genesis 13:

Now that we are told of Abram’s great wealth it helps us to see even more the depth of his “sacrifice” in leaving his country.

This “town isn’t big enough for both of us”…literally in the case of Abram and Lot.

I am sure there is some significance (dare I say allegorical) in the separation of Lot and Abram.

Verse 14-15. I’m really glad that God doesn’t give such a promise to me when I have my contacts out or glasses off; I would be trapped in a small space. I know it is only metaphor but it is amazing how many people in Abram’s offspring are being promised. Certainly this is not only the Jewish people. Certainly this is speaking of those who will be in Jesus Christ. Certainly, I am one of those specks of dust that cannot be counted.

Genesis 14:

I wonder if there are any extra-biblical sources that speak of these battles.

I think this is the first time Abram is called a Hebrew.

Had Abram already built up an army? Is that what the “trained men” is a reference to?

I never think of Abram as a military guy, but it sounds like he was a pretty good war strategist. Certainly he was outnumbered.

Melchizedek is familiar from Hebrews. He’s a priest, and here even before the Levites. I wish I knew more about ancient cultures and their history.

Abram would take nothing so that the King of Sodom could not take glory. Either Abram was prideful and wanted the glory for himself or he wanted it all to be given to God.

Genesis 15:

I cannot help but sympathize with Abram in his “doubting”. By the looks of things everything that he had been blessed with would certainly go to a member of his household. How could an old man have an heir?

Verse 6 is extremely important in NT theology. Was Abram considered righteous up until this point? Was this the moment of his salvation? Is this when God imputed to his account righteousness?

Even after Abram “believed the Lord” we still see doubts and questions. He is still looking for a sign to show him that this will be so.

Why did God have Abram bring this sacrifice? What is the significance of Abram driving away the birds of prey?

Is the darkness here spoken of the “depression” of knowing what his offspring will have to face? Or is this something else?

“The iniquity of the Amorites is not yet complete”. What a mighty God that we serve that even restrains and knows the amount of evil that a nation will accomplish. Lord, speed your coming in justice and doing away with all evil…even mine.

What is the smoking fire pot and flaming torch?

Genesis 16:

I can’t believe that Sarai suggested this. Even more I can not believe Abram took her up on the offer.

This is such a confusing exchange. Why is Sarai mad at Abram? Is not this what she was wanting to happen? Why is she mad at Abram now? Certainly this is what a mess we make when we try to come through on God’s promises by our own defiled means. Sin on top of sin.

I have always felt bad for Hagar in this story. It is nice seeing the angel of the Lord comforting her. (Is this a reference to Jesus?)

There is a lesson to be learned here about staying with those even when they are harsh with you. Submission to authority (this would include presidents and other leaders) is even to take place when they “deal harshly” with us. This principle must be used with much wisdom and discernment though. I am sure it is not a cookie-cutter doctrine.

verse 12 certainly does sound like the Islamic peoples. They seem to have their hand against everyone and everyone’s hand against them.

How comforting it must have been to know that the Lord looked after them. He looks after the mother of the peoples that have massacred countless Christians. What a gracious God that we have.

The Bruised Reed Chapter 4

Mike Leake

There is one big difference I have found between Jeremiah Burroughs and Richard Sibbes. Burroughs makes a weighty statement then expounds upon it in a neat, concise, outlined form. Sibbes just says it, and seems to let the reader do the organizing. This is great for quotes and daggers that strike the heart; but difficult if you are trying to outline and summarize.

Quick Outline:

  • The Least Spark of Grace is Precious
  • Support the Weak

Summary:

Sibbes begins by giving us two reasons that Christ does not quench the smoking flax. 1) It is his own. 2) it tends to the glory of his powerful grace. After this Sibbes expounds upon the truth that the least spark of gracious. He again gives numerous evidences from Scripture that this is so. From Emmaus to Peter to the bleeding woman, Sibbes gives numerous examples of Christ taking the least spark of grace and treating it as precious.

We are then entreated to do the same. Christ, who will not quench the smoking flax, is compared with man that will. Yet, Christ “cherishes even the least beginnings”. We are urged then by Sibbes to do the like. He encourages us to deal tenderly with new believers and to sometimes overlook their defects. As we are helping these new believers, or even sometimes weak believers, to grow up in the Lord we must be careful with our liberties. We must labor to not cause an offense nor to take offense. Along the same lines we must be careful not to despise the gifts and grace of God in others. We see in this the great work of Christ that he uses men in their weakness and refuses to lift up those in their strengths.

We are then encouraged to deal with secure sinners sometimes with a rod. Yet, in Sibbes mind, this seems to be the exception. Mostly, our weaker brothers should be dealt with gently. Always we must remember that the refining of Christ is not complete this side of glory.

Discussion:

Of all the chapters thus far this is probably my least favorite, though it is probably the most pastoral. Perhaps none of this struck me as deeply because this is something that the life of John Newton has been teaching me for a few months now. This chapter simply confirmed that which I had already been learning. It does have a few sections that carry significant weight and adds arsenal in my fight with being ill-tempered with doctrine. What I mean by that is that this chapter will help us to deal graciously with “weaker” believers.

My favorite statement from this chapter is this one: “When blindness and boldness, ignorance and arrogance, weakness and wilfulness, meet together in men, it renders them odious to God, burdensome in society, dangerous in their counsels, disturbers of better purposes, intractable and incapable of better direction, misreable in the issue“. I fear that I have often been the fool described here. I am thankful for the Lord’s grace in tempering my arrogance and wilfulness, while at the same time rescuing me from blindness, ignorance, and weakness.

This chapter also encourages us to sometimes bear the rod. It is sound advice that Sibbes gives in this chapter. It seems that our default with sinners should be gentleness. But at times Scripture encourages us to pull men out of the fire. As Sibbes says, “A sharp reproof sometimes is a precious pearl and a sweet balm”. It has been my experience that Christian’s are either truthful jerks or candy-coated pansies. I’ve been both in varying extremes. Sibbes is encouraging us here to sometimes speak the truth in love without sparing the rod, and to sometimes speak the truth in love with much gentleness. We need counsel like this in our day.

Pearls and Diamonds:

“It would be a good contest amongst Christians, one to labour to give no offence, and the other to labour to take none.” (p.23)

“When blindness and boldness, ignorance and arrogance, weakness and wilfulness, meet together in men, it renders them odious to God, burdensome in society, dangerous in their counsels, disturbers of better purposes, intractable and incapable of better direction, misreable in the issue” (p. 23)

“The scope of true love is to make the party better, which concealment oftentimes hinders.” (p. 24)

“The wounds of secure sinners will not be healed with sweet words.” (p. 24)

Review of John Newton: From Disgrace to Amazing Grace

Mike Leake 1 Comment


Author: Jonathan Aitken

Publisher: Crossway

Pages: 400 pages

Price: 21.99 USD

Genre: Biography

Quick Summary:

It is somewhat difficult to write a review on a biography when it is the first one on the subject that you have read. My exposure to Newton has been somewhat limited. I know him as the man that wrote Amazing Grace. I have heard of his conversion. Recently I have been exposed to some of his letters and a brief biography by John Piper. All of this created a stirring in me to know more about this man that said, “I am a great sinner, and Christ is a great Savior”. Would Aitken’s biography serve to fittingly tell the life of John Newton?

Aitken does a marvelous job of outlining the life of John Newton. He begins his biography not on the open sea but at Newton’s mother’s side. Sadly, Newton’s time at his mother’s side was cut short; as she was taken by tuberculosis at a young age. This left young John solely in his father’s care, and by the age of 10 Newton was off to sea. It seems that seafaring began Newton’s downward spiral into debauchery. Aitken follows the life of Newton for some 8 chapters into debauchery. The only bright spot in Newton’s story was his unrelenting love for his later-to- become wife Polly. Even after his conversion Newton continued the deplorable practice of slave trading. It is here that we are exposed to some of Newton’s most vile sinning, for now it appears he is doing so in light of the gospel. At this point in the book I remember commenting to my wife that I was growing to greatly dislike John Newton.

But my dislike for Newton would soon change. It seems as soon as Newton’s seafaring career ended his spiritual journey became stronger. At this point in the biography the life of Newton shifts gears. For the rest of the biography we follow Newton in his pursuit of ordination, his ministry at Olney, his creativity, his contribution to the corpus of Christian literature and hymns, his involvement in the abolition movement, and his ministry at London. These Aitken follows quite well until Newton’s demise and death.

Also, weaved throughout this story is Newton’s love for his wife Polly. Thus this biography becomes an exciting sea tale, a spiritual journey, a pastoral guide, and a romance all in one.

What I Enjoyed:

Aitken does a wonderful job of putting together the life of Newton into a beautifully weaved story. One of the literary features that makes this work shine is the inclusion of Newton’s letters. Sometimes it feels as if Newton is writing his own biography. One of the temptations in writing a biography is to portray the subject without many flaws and often times almost above human status. Part of the beauty of Newton’s story is that he was such a great sinner. The more that we can see Newton as a great sinner the more it points to Christ as a great Savior. Aitken keeps Newton human.

What I Disliked:

In as much as Aitken shines on displaying Newton as a great sinner, I felt that in expressing latter half of Newton’s statement (“…Christ is a great Savior”) Aitken dropped the ball. Newton would be disappointed to find that a biography on himself did not have at its center the magnificent work of Jesus Christ. One standard I apply in reading biographies is this: after reading the biography, do I want to learn more about the man or am I driven to know Christ more. After reading this, I want to know more about John Newton. That is not altogether bad but a very important part of the story played a flat role. Newton was the main character when it should have been Jesus. Because of this we miss discovering what it was that made Newton tick.

Should You But It:

Nonetheless, it is a great work on John Newton and will serve the reader well. My hope is that it only introduces the reader to Newton and inspires you to pursue more of his work, because therein one might see and savor Jesus Christ. Should you buy it? Yes. Should it be the only Newton book in your collection? No.

Rating: 4 out of 5 stars.