Why did you write this commentary (Numbers)?

Iain M. Duguid, pastor of Christ Presbyterian Church in Grove City PA, writes the following in his preface to Numbers: God's Presence in the Wilderness (Crossway, 2006):

"Before I began work on this volume, I had little exposure to the book of Numbers. I had never preached on a text from Numbers, nor, as far as I know, had I ever even heard a sermon on the book of Numbers. According to my anecdotal surveys of other pastors, I am far from being alone in that regard. When I told another Old Testament professor that I was currently preaching through the book, he expressed the opinion that it was scarcely meant to be preached. I'm sure he was simply saying out loud what many pastors have thought, and at times during the past eighteen months I have been tempted to sympathize with that opinion.

However, I hold firmly to another conviction that trumps any practical difficulties, the conviction that 'All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work' (2 Timothy 3:16, 17). In addition, I understand the central message of the Scriptures from beginning to end to be the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow (1 Peter 1:10, 11; see Luke 24:44-47). I believe that a Christ-centered approach to preaching, which seeks to explore the way in which Old Testament passages prepare for and foreshadow the gospel, makes its truths accessible again to God's people. This approach feeds the hearts and souls of believers, as well as challenging unbelievers, with the result that even less familiar passages can speak powerfully to our congregations.

What I found as I proceeded was that the book of Numbers confronted us week by week with the challenge to live faithfully as pilgrims and aliens in a wilderness world and the encouragement to look to the One who has gone through this wilderness world ahead of us.

I would like to thank the people of Grace Presbyterian Church, Fallbrook for being such eager hearers of God's Word. Every Preacher needs people who have the gift of listening, and it has been a delight to preach the unsearchable riches of God's Word to you and to see your evident love for Christ and his gospel week after week."

Why did you write this commentary (Leviticus)?

From the preface to Mark Rooker's Leviticus commentary (2000, B&H):

"At the end of the process of writing a commentary I am indebted to numerous individuals who have been of tremendous personal encouragement and assistance. I wish to express my appreciation first of all to Dr. George B. Davis, Sr., Associate Pastor of First Baptist Church of Dallas, Texas, who both encouraged me to work on Leviticus and was instrumental in recommending me to the New American Commentary series."

"I would like to offer a special thanks to my wife Carole for supporting me throughout the entire project. I would like to thank her for her consistent and patient encouragement to complete the commentary and the extra "sacrifices" she made for the undertaking to be completed. I gladly and appreciatively dedicate this work to her."

"As we begin the twenty-first century, it is apparent that the greatest fear our culture now faces may not be that of a nuclear catastrophe but rather corruption from within. We have witnessed a moral decay in all echelons of our society, even in high places. The religion of the Canaanites is making a decisive comeback! The Book of Leviticus calls us to a holy living under prescribed and unalterable ethical norms but also speaks of a way of atonement. In one sense no book of the Bible could be more relevant. My prayer is that this volume will be of assistance in the exposition and understanding of Leviticus for the church and that the Lamb of God who was sacrificed for our transgressions will be exalted. Thanks be to God for the time and strength He has given me to undertake this concentrated study on this precious but often neglected portion of Holy Scripture. Thanks be to the Lord Jesus Christ whom I have come to know in a more intimate way through the study of Leviticus (Luke 24:27)."

Why did you write this commentary (Exodus)?

Alec Motyer writes the following about his excellent (and worth purchasing) commentary on Exodus (2005, IVP):

"This book began its life in 1974 when the Keswick Convention invited me to prepare the morning Bible expositions – with an additional request for something from the Old Testament – and I elected to undertake Exodus. The work alerted me all over again to the richness and importance of the book, and the attempt to compress forty chapters into four hours got me interested in its structure.

My first request is that this book be read with an open Bible alongside, for the best benefits will be reaped by patient reading which takes time to look up cross-references. Where the structure of a section or passage is given in diagram form, please work through it, point by point, before going on to read what is written about it. Reference must be made here to the number of footnotes attached to this study of Exodus. Not everything important to the understanding of Exodus can be accommodated in an expository treatment, where the emphasis is on the emerging message, and so the footnotes are offered in the hope that they will give students and preachers access to this additional material. From time to time the footnotes threatened to ‘swamp’ the page! In these cases they have been moved to become additional notes attached to the chapter in question.

Cassuto says about his extensive commentary that, ‘we shall not cite the various interpretations (but) content ourselves with expounding the simple meaning of the text in the manner we deem correct’. This is the case here too, indeed it has to be so, for neither ability nor space would permit a comprehensive review and critique of what all the commentaries say. I have chosen, for example, not to give any sort of extensive introduction to the documentary analysis of the Pentateuch and Exodus into the famous J, E, D and P strands. It would, however, be an absurd ‘head-in-the-sand’ attitude to ignore totally an understanding of Exodus that has been so hugely influential. For myself, I have to confess that the documentary theory has never commanded my adherence or seemed to me the most helpful or natural way of approach. I plead for the tolerance of those who think otherwise. I have occasionally offered extra comments in the notes where it seems that this method particularly lacks coherence, evidence or persuasiveness.

Now that this particular bout of study on Exodus is finished, I shall miss it greatly: the sheer joy of engaging with its message; its frequently stately, sometimes earthy and businesslike, and always beautiful Hebrew; and its uplifting revelation of the Lord God in his power and patience, tenderness and redemption, and in his inflexible insistence on honouring his word and keeping his promises. In their history as recorded here, our early brothers, sisters and parents in the Israel of God found him in turn to be their covenant-keeping Redeemer in slavery, the Angel of the Lord, their divine companion in pilgrimage, and the Holy One indwelling their camp and sharing their lot. He is still unchangeably the same."

Why did you write this commentary (Genesis)?

I now start a series of short posts focusing on the author's preface from commentaries I have found useful. Often, commentaries reveal very little about the author (as it should be) and the only place you get much of an insight in to their joys/pains in writing is in the preface. So without further ado ...

Kenneth A. Mathews writes the following about his commentary on Genesis 1–11:26 (published in 1996 by Broadman & Holman):

My generation has witnessed both the quintessential achievement of human knowledge and the collapse of the tyrannical Soviet empire which had subjugated millions in Western Asia and Eastern Europe for seventy years. My goal has been to present a commentary on Moses' First Book which offers insights but also incites the church to proclaim the Bible's first words to such a world ... In the study of Genesis I have learned anew both how inconsequential humanity is in God's expansive universe and yet the immense value that he has placed on each individual human life ... In a world increasingly made up of affluent technocrats and desperate autocrats, Genesis is God's first word concerning his gracious and faithful purpose to bless all men and women ... Genesis also has a first word that tells us we are sinners and have spoiled the good world, pointing us toward another Word, the full and last Word, who alone achieves for those who trust him the blessing that humanity was created to enjoy. May the words of this volume honor the first words and be acceptable to the last Word.

Kenneth A. Mathews also has written Genesis 11:27-50:26 which was published in 2005.

New Atheism - A Passing Fad?

Mark Baddeley has written a great little article on New Atheism (think Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens et al.). Here are a few quotes to whet your appetite:

A few years ago at an event hosted by Oxford University’s resident atheist, secularist, and humanist societies, one speaker lectured on the question “Can the natural sciences answer all questions?” To my surprise, it turns out his answer was “Yes, the natural sciences can answer all real questions”. He apparently argued strongly that questions like “What is the meaning of life?” or “What is good and evil?” or even “What does it mean to be a human?” are not real questions. Real questions involve the chemical composition and molecular make-up of bits of the human body, questions about the rate of fusion in stars, and the like. Only questions that can be answered by scientifically analysing nature are real. All other questions are merely errors in thinking.

There’s three problems here, and it seems to me that they are endemic whenever New Atheism raises its head.

First, this isn’t primarily an assault upon God. It’s primarily an assault on everything other than the natural sciences. Yes, obviously the speaker above was attacking the validity of theology as a discipline and whether there is a God to be known. But he’s also throwing philosophy under the bus, along with history, literature, psychology, education, sociology, and anthropology. It is a rejection of the validity of any discipline other than natural science, because apparently only natural scientists ask real questions. Everyone else is wasting their time.

This kind of radical empiricism is only ever going to appeal to a very small group of people—natural scientists, and people who wish they were natural scientists. The vast majority of the human race have to deal with questions that cannot be answered by the natural sciences, and value those disciplines that help them to come to grips with them. This extraordinary shrinking of what human beings are allowed to ask questions about just doesn’t ring true for most people. Life is more than the lab.

[T]he kind of people who are attracted to the arguments of New Atheism will invariably be people who have an aptitude for science and some kind of respect for scientists and the capacities of the scientific method. People who don’t care, or who are orientated to other aspects of life, like art, are rarely going to be swayed much by New Atheism (although they may be attracted to forms of atheism grounded in other approaches). Thinking highly about science is hardly a bad thing—science is a good gift from God—but it is something to keep in mind. One of the things that might be useful to check and address when you think someone might be susceptible to New Atheist arguments is the level of the person’s respect for science and scientists. Do they think science can answer almost any question, for example? Do they see it as having any limits, and if so, what?

I can also recommend my friend David Glass's book Atheism's New Clothes.

Book Review - God in Our Midst by Daniel Hyde

God in Our Midst: The Tabernacle and Our Relationship with God

I admit to being a sceptic when it comes to books and sermon series about the tabernacle, priests garments, and so forth. It seems to me that some writers and preachers see too much in the tabernacle. Surely one or two sermons, or a dozen or so pages, ought to cover it? Surely the Gospels and Hebrews give all the inspired and authoritative explanation of the tabernacle that Christians need? In fact, in Hebrews when speaking of the tabernacle, the unnamed author says 'Of these things we cannot now speak in detail' (Hebrews 9:5).

This book by Pastor Daniel Hyde is 220 pages of text and I was thinking, before reading it, that he probably sees too much. I really liked Alec Motyer's 15 pages in The Message of Exodus. However, the tabernacle instructions form a large part of Exodus and are therefore important to understand. In reading a larger book about the tabernacle I would expect the following:

• Why is the tabernacle needed at this point?
• What has God been doing in history up until this point?
• What was the purpose of the tabernacle?
• What did it mean to the people at the time?
• What does it mean to Christians today?

Thankfully, the author also thinks some of these questions are important (p. 2) and seeks to answer them in the Introduction.

Daniel Hyde says 'The common purpose of Eden, the tabernacle, and the temple was that the creature could have fellowship with the Creator' (p. 25). He goes on to say:

They had experienced the reality that they were the "treasured possession" of the Lord (Ex. 19:5), but they had no Bibles. They had become a "kingdom of priests" (Ex. 19:6), but they had no catechisms. They had become a "holy nation" (ex. 19:6), but they had no Sunday school. How would the Lord teach a congregation that no doubt numbered two to three million souls (cf. Num. 1:45, 47) to leave behind the idolatry they had seen and experienced in Egypt, and to cling in faith to Him alone, having no other gods before Him (Ex. 20:3)? How would He instruct them to leave the false worship they had seen in Egypt and participate in the pure worship of God alone, having no carved images (Ex. 20:4)? The answer to these questions was the tabernacle. (pp. 45-46)

The author then makes his way through the Exodus narrative. The contents of 'God in Our Midst' were originally sermons and therefore the book reads very well. One stand-out feature is the amount of scripture Hyde quotes, particularly scripture that links OT with NT. Another stand-out feature is the very searching application (e.g. see pp. 54-55 and pp. 69-70). A final stand-out feature are the quotes from Church Fathers, creeds, and confessions. These writings and documents, although not perfect, were often forged in defence against heresy and are often profound.

There are only a few places when I thought the explanation of some feature of the tabernacle furniture was overwrought. For example. in chapter 4 - The Table With Bread - Hyde explains the crown molding around the table was to keep the bread and all holy utensils from falling off the table. He then goes on to say that '[t]his is a wonderful picture of the care of God for His people' (p. 76). Maybe, maybe not. I wonder if this is a case of 'the right doctrine from the wrong text'? Also, in chapter 6 - The Construction of the Tabernacle - Hyde makes the link from detailed instructions given to Moses to instructions for the for the worship of the Church (i.e. the regulative principle of worship - we only do what God has positively commanded). But why is Jesus not the point of this? We only come to worship Jesus in the way he has described - through Jesus. I will need to mull these points over but on first read they seemed a little off when compared to the rest of Hyde's applications.

This is a good devotional book on a large part of scripture that could be a little remote to most Christians today. Daniel Hyde has done a good job in showing the relevance of the tabernacle. There was at least one line of thought that was hinted at in the book, particularly in the conclusion (pp. 209 - 211), which is rattling around in my head - the tabernacle was a picture of Heaven. I would love to read more about this.

So has Daniel Hyde cured my scepticism? A little, but I still like Alec Motyer's 15 pages.

* To comply with Federal Trade Commission guidelines, I will receive a free copy of the book as compensation for this review. It was supplied by Reformation Trust.