| Back to Home Page | Back to Book Index
|
Judges Chapter
Eighteen
Judges 18
Chapter Contents
The Danites seek to enlarge their inheritance, and rob
Micah.
The Danites determined to take Micah's gods with them. Oh
the folly of these Danites! How could they imagine those gods should protect
them, that could not keep themselves from being stolen! To take them for their
own use, was a double crime; it showed they neither feared God, nor regarded
man, but were lost both to godliness and honesty. What a folly was it for Micah
to call those his gods, which he had made, when He only is to be worshipped by
us as God, that made us! That is put in God's place, which we are concerned
about, as if our all were bound up in it. If people will walk in the name of
their false gods, much more should we love and serve the true God!
── Matthew Henry《Concise Commentary on Judges》
Judges 18
Verse 1
[1] In
those days there was no king in Israel: and in those days the tribe of the
Danites sought them an inheritance to dwell in; for unto that day all their
inheritance had not fallen unto them among the tribes of Israel.
Those days —
Not long after Joshua's death.
The tribe — A
part of that tribe, consisting only of six hundred men of war, with their
families, verse 16,21.
Inheritance —
The lot had fallen to them before this time, but not the actual possession,
because the Philistines and Amorites opposed them.
Verse 2
[2] And the children of Dan sent of their family five men from their coasts,
men of valour, from Zorah, and from Eshtaol, to spy out the land, and to search
it; and they said unto them, Go, search the land: who when they came to mount
Ephraim, to the house of Micah, they lodged there.
There —
Not in the same house, but near it.
Verse 3
[3] When
they were by the house of Micah, they knew the voice of the young man the
Levite: and they turned in thither, and said unto him, Who brought thee hither?
and what makest thou in this place? and what hast thou here?
Knew — By
the acquaintance which some of them formerly had with him.
Verse 5
[5] And
they said unto him, Ask counsel, we pray thee, of God, that we may know whether
our way which we go shall be prosperous.
Ask — By
thine Ephod, and Teraphim, or images, which they knew he had, verse 14.
Verse 6
[6] And the priest said unto them, Go in peace: before the LORD is your way
wherein ye go.
Before the Lord —
That is, your design is under the eye of God; that is, under his care,
protection and direction. This answer he either feigns to gratify their humour;
or, did indeed receive from the devil, who transformed himself into an angel of
light, and in God's name gave him answers, and those not sometimes very true,
which God suffered for the trial of his people. But it is observable, his
answer was, as the devil's oracles usually were, ambiguous, and such as might
have been interpreted either way.
Verse 7
[7] Then
the five men departed, and came to Laish, and saw the people that were therein,
how they dwelt careless, after the manner of the Zidonians, quiet and secure;
and there was no magistrate in the land, that might put them to shame in any
thing; and they were far from the Zidonians, and had no business with any man.
Manner of the Zidonians — Who living in a very strong place, and abounding in wealth, and
perceiving that the Israelites never attempted anything against them, were
grown secure and careless.
Put to shame —
Or, that might rebuke or punish any thing, that is, any crime. Putting to shame
seems to be used for inflicting civil punishment, because shame is generally
the effect of it.
Zidonians —
Who otherwise could have succoured them, and would have been ready to do it. No
business-No league or confederacy, nor much converse with other cities, it
being in a pleasant and plentiful soil, between the two rivulets of Jor and
Dan, not needing supplies from others, and therefore minding only their own
ease and pleasure.
Verse 10
[10] When
ye go, ye shall come unto a people secure, and to a large land: for God hath
given it into your hands; a place where there is no want of any thing that is
in the earth.
Given —
This they gather partly from God's promise which they supposed they had from
the Levite's mouth; and partly from his providence, which had so disposed them,
that they would be an easy prey.
Verse 12
[12] And
they went up, and pitched in Kirjathjearim, in Judah: wherefore they called
that place Mahanehdan unto this day: behold, it is behind Kirjathjearim.
Mahaneh-dan —
That is, the camp of Dan.
Verse 13
[13] And
they passed thence unto mount Ephraim, and came unto the house of Micah.
To the house —
That is, to the town in which his house was, for they were not yet entered into
it.
Verse 14
[14] Then
answered the five men that went to spy out the country of Laish, and said unto
their brethren, Do ye know that there is in these houses an ephod, and
teraphim, and a graven image, and a molten image? now therefore consider what
ye have to do.
Answered —
That is, spake, the word answering being often used in scripture of the first
speaker.
These houses —
That is, in one of these houses.
What to do —
Whether it be not expedient to take them for your farther use.
Verse 17
[17] And
the five men that went to spy out the land went up, and came in thither, and
took the graven image, and the ephod, and the teraphim, and the molten image:
and the priest stood in the entering of the gate with the six hundred men that
were appointed with weapons of war.
Thither —
Into the house, and that part of it, where those things were.
The gate —
Whither they had drawn him forth, that they might without noise or hindrance
take them away.
Verse 18
[18] And
these went into Micah's house, and fetched the carved image, the ephod, and the
teraphim, and the molten image. Then said the priest unto them, What do ye?
These —
The five men.
Verse 19
[19] And
they said unto him, Hold thy peace, lay thine hand upon thy mouth, and go with
us, and be to us a father and a priest: is it better for thee to be a priest
unto the house of one man, or that thou be a priest unto a tribe and a family
in Israel?
Lay thy hand —
That is, be silent.
A family —
Namely, a tribe, that is, a family.
Verse 20
[20] And
the priest's heart was glad, and he took the ephod, and the teraphim, and the
graven image, and went in the midst of the people.
Was glad —
Being wholly governed by his own interest.
The midst —
Both for the greater security of such precious things, and that Micah might not
be able to come at him, to injure or upbraid him; and, it may be, because that
was the place where the ark used to be carried.
Verse 21
[21] So
they turned and departed, and put the little ones and the cattle and the
carriage before them.
Before them —
For their greater security, if Micah should pursue them.
Verse 24
[24] And
he said, Ye have taken away my gods which I made, and the priest, and ye are
gone away: and what have I more? and what is this that ye say unto me, What
aileth thee?
I made — So
far was he besotted with superstition and idolatry, that he esteemed those gods,
which were man's work. But he could not be so stupid, as to think these were
indeed the great Jehovah that made heaven and earth; but only a lower sort of
gods, by whom, as mediators, he offered up his worship to the true God, as
divers of the Heathen did.
What have I — I
value nothing I have in comparison of what you have taken away. Which zeal for
idolatrous trash may shame multitudes that call themselves Christians, and yet
value their worldly conveniences more than all the concerns of their own salvation.
Is Micah thus fond of his false gods? And how ought we to be affected toward
the true God? Let us reckon our communion with God our greatest gain; and the
loss of God the sorest loss. Wo unto us, if He depart! For what have we more.
Verse 25
[25] And
the children of Dan said unto him, Let not thy voice be heard among us, lest
angry fellows run upon thee, and thou lose thy life, with the lives of thy
household.
Thy voice —
Thy complaints and reproaches.
Angry fellows —
The soldiers, who are in themselves sharp and fierce, and will soon be enflamed
by thy provoking words.
Thy Life —
Which, not withstanding all thy pretences, thou dost value more than thy
images.
Verse 27
[27] And
they took the things which Micah had made, and the priest which he had, and
came unto Laish, unto a people that were at quiet and secure: and they smote
them with the edge of the sword, and burnt the city with fire.
Burnt —
Not wholly, but in great measure, to make their conquest more easy.
Verse 28
[28] And
there was no deliverer, because it was far from Zidon, and they had no business
with any man; and it was in the valley that lieth by Bethrehob. And they built
a city, and dwelt therein.
And they built a city — That is, rebuilt it.
Verse 29
[29] And
they called the name of the city Dan, after the name of Dan their father, who
was born unto Israel: howbeit the name of the city was Laish at the first.
Of Dan —
That it might be manifest, that they belonged to the tribe of Dan, though they
were seated at a great distance from them, in the most northerly part of the
land; whereas the lot of their tribe was in the southern part of Canaan.
Verse 30
[30] And
the children of Dan set up the graven image: and Jonathan, the son of Gershom,
the son of Manasseh, he and his sons were priests to the tribe of Dan until the
day of the captivity of the land.
Image —
Having succeeded in their expedition according to the prediction which, as they
supposed, they had from this image, they had a great veneration for it.
The captivity —
When the whole land of the ten tribes, whereof Dan was one, was conquered, and
the people carried captive by the Assyrian, 2 Kings 17:6,23, which is called by way of
eminency, the captivity. It is not said, that the graven image was there so
long, for that is restrained to a shorter date, even to the continuance of the
ark in Shiloh, verse 31, which was removed thence, 1 Samuel 4:3-5. But only that Jonathan's
posterity, (so his name is at last mentioned) were priests to this tribe or
family of Dan, which they might be under all the changes, even 'till the Assyrian
captivity, sometimes more openly, sometimes more secretly, sometimes in one way
of idolatry, and sometimes in another.
── John Wesley《Explanatory Notes on Judges》
18 Chapter 18
Verses 1-31
The Danites sought them an inheritance . . . They
set them up Micah’s graven image.
The image-worship expanding into tribal idolatry
I. The straits to
which unbelief reduces the strong (Judges 18:1).
II. Discontent with
a divinely-marked lot leads to evil (Judges 18:2).
III. Trifling
circumstances often lead to the discovery of sinful schemes (Judges 18:3).
IV. Silent neglect
at first, leads afterwards to open rejection of God’s ordinances (Judges 18:5).
V. The most
inoffensive people are not safe from the attacks of evil men (Judges 18:7; Judges 18:9-10).
VI. Religion is
sometimes invoked to aid the plots of the ungodly (Judges 18:5).
VII. Indirectness is
a character of the world’s counsel (Judges 18:6).
VIII. False
worshippers take refuge in imitating the appearances of the true (Judges 18:14; Judges 18:17).
IX. Divine
providence often offers no interruption to the execution of the designs of the
wicked.
X. The sudden
destruction of the man-made religion (Judges 18:15-20).
XI. Prayer will not
secure the Divine blessing on a wrong action (Judges 18:5-6, also Judges 18:18-19).
XII. Worldly minds
care little for accuracy in spiritual things (Judges 18:17-19).
XIII. Neither moral
principle nor sound reason can be expected of those who deny to God His natural
rights.
XIV. Success in
evil is no proof of the Divine approval.
XV. True service
is not to be expected from a false priest (Judges 18:20).
XVI. The excessive
importance which an idolater Attaches to his gods (Judges 18:24). (J. P. Millar.)
Ask counsel, we pray thee,
of God.
Counsel of God
Seeking counsel of God is the first duty of Christian men.
I. Why we should
ask.
1. On account of our ignorance and short-sightedness. The way before
us dark, uncertain. So reason would suggest to ask, etc. it is the course God’s
people have ever adopted. See Jacob at Bethel (Genesis 27:20); Moses (Exodus 33:12); David (2 Samuel 7:29).
2. On account of God’s ability to give. He knows all the way before
us.
3. On account of the fact that our best interests are involved in the
counsel God can give. It is like the pillar and cloud, the compass of the
mariner, light of day, etc.
II. What we may
ask.
1. As to our temporal concerns. Duties in the world, engagements,
plans, and changes.
2. As to our relative concerns. Families, children, friends, etc. So
Abraham and David; so all the truly pious.
3. As to our spiritual concerns. The way of experimental piety,
usefulness, etc. Influence for good. The text speaks of the “way being
prosperous.”
III. How we must
ask.
1. With a deep conviction of our exigency. Not self-sufficient.
2. With believing confidence. The promises are abundant for every
scene. To lead, direct, keep, deliver, strengthen, protect, sanctify, save;
hence we must calmly look and plead.
3. With a resolution to follow the counsel.
4. Through the person and advocacy of Christ. (J. Burns, D. D.)
We have seen the land, and
behold, it is very good.--
Report from the promised land
This was a model report, because it urged the brethren to take
advantage of an opportunity that meant benefit to themselves. The believer in
Jesus Christ is an explorer, and he brings back a report to his brethren who
are unbelievers. Religion, like science, to be exact, must be grounded in truth
and fact. We listen to Livingstone and believe him, as we would but few who
might tell us of the wastes of Africa, for we know that he has seen. Let your
life be a life fragrant with peace, a life unselfish, devoted, Christ-like, a
life of beauty, and it will bring a winning report of the land, and your
hearers will say, “We will go with you. It will be a good land, for God is with
you.” Suppose a man from the cold and cheerless Arctic comes here. He comes
from a land of chill and blasts, where the sun’s warmth never falls, where no
birds sing, and where flowers never bloom. Suppose a man from this zone of the
Arctic were to come to our city and open an office upon Broadway. How many
would listen and go back with him to the terrors of that frozen north? But
suppose a man from the sunny south should come. He would tell of the
birds that sing the whole year round, of the flowers that bloomed season after
season, and the bubbling streams that flowed on for ever. Which of the two
would repel and which attract? God’s people are weak. Do not attribute their
failures to the land from which they come. Do not set your reproof against the
land. It is a glorious land. Go and make that land your land, your hope and
your eternity. (W. T. Sabine.)
And are ye still?--
Indifference to religion
It may be that we wonder at the slowness of the Danites--wonder
that they should hesitate to press forward and possess themselves of such an
earthly inheritance; of such an inheritance because it was a part of the land
promised by God to their fathers. May we not, however, be the more astonished
at ourselves, as we remember our own indifference towards a heavenly
inheritance? The habitation we now hold, straitened as it is, and but for time,
must be resigned at the call of death, whether we have made any advance towards
the heavenly inheritance or not. And why are we still? Is it because we are
required to withdraw our affections from the earth? If so, we are to be gainers
by it (1 Peter 1:4). And we ourselves often
profess a desire to possess such a home. And often do we picture to ourselves a
home where all that renders this life painful will be found no more. We desire
a land which is “very good.” Such a home, such a land, God’s Word speaks of to
us, and says that it is laid up for those who seek it (1 Corinthians 2:9). Yet few of us
really seek this home; and so, in the words of the spies, we are again and
again rebuked for our indifference. “Behold the land is very good: and are ye
still? be not slothful to go, and to enter to possess the land.” Now the spies
declared, concerning the people of Laish: “When ye go, ye shall come unto a
people secure, and to a large land.”
1. The security here alluded to was a false security. It was that
careless indifference to danger--that want of thought for their own
safety--which the people of Laish indulged. There was peace about them. They
did not think of the possibility of its being broken. They, in fact, prepared
the way for their own destruction. And Holy Scripture tells us who seek the
heavenly inheritance: “When ye go ye shall come unto a people secure, and to a
large land.” But this security is a true one (2 Samuel 22:2-3).
2. It is a large land. In it we shall dwell in peace with those who
now enjoy its blessedness. Our entrance there will be followed by the gift of
our God to us of fuller measures of love. Could we possibly desire a life more
blessed than this?--a life passed with angels, and archangels, and all God’s
faithful ones. “Behold,” then, “the land is very good, and the people dwell
secure: and are ye still?” In order to rouse their countrymen, and to hasten
them forward towards Laish, the spies declared, “God hath given it into your
hands.” Now these words either set forth the faith of the spies, and mean, “God
will give it into your hands,” or they refer to God’s promise of old to Abraham
(Genesis 15:18), and mean, “Know ye not
that it is yours already by promise? God hath given it into your hands, since
He sware unto Abraham that he and his seed should possess it.” And we would
borrow their words, and say of heaven, “God hath given it into your hands.” For
ever since the Saviour shed His blood for you, heaven has been purchased
thereby for your everlasting inheritance. Heirs, by promise, thereof, your
baptism made you. Citizens of heaven ye are now. Take heed that ye forfeit not,
by following the world and its lusts, your citizenship. Moreover, it was not
purchased to be bestowed arbitrarily, and after the manner of men, upon a few.
And this is evident from the whole of our blessed Lord’s teaching. “In it there
are many mansions.” “It is a large country.” And though many have passed from
the earth, and are sure to enter it, “yet there is room.” But for whom is their
room? Oh, not for the proud and the haughty. Not for those who cry “Lord,
Lord,” yet do not the things which He hath commanded. Not for those who love
this present world, yet profess to seek a better, but are still! There is room
in heaven for the poor and humble in spirit, for those who follow “temperance, soberness,
and chastity.” The spies also sought to urge their countrymen on by declaring,
concerning Laish, that it was “a place where there is no want of anything that
is in the earth.” So tempting a prize as this would, we should think, put away
all hesitation, all fear of difficulties. And we declare the same of heaven.
The blessings offered to the Danites had respect unto the present life. The
blessings offered to us are those of the eternal life with God in heaven. Do
you desire peace? It is there. Heaven is the abode of holiness; and where
holiness is, there also is peace. Do you desire joy? It is there. In heaven
sorrows and tears are not. Do you desire security? In heaven nothing shall
disturb your peace, nothing shall diminish your joy. Do you long to offer unto
God a worship holy and undefiled? In heaven you shall offer it. There you will
join the sinless angels, and “the just made perfect,” and with them worship and
adore your God. (C. P. Longland.)
Be not slothful to go, and
to enter to possess the land.--
Practical attention to religion
I. Some
considerations to induce an earnest, practical attention to religion.
1. Consider the glory and the grandeur of the inheritance to which
you aspire. You see much of the wisdom of God in furnishing figurative descriptions
of the blessedness of heaven.
2. Consider the encouraging assurances we have of success in our
pursuit.
3. Consider the danger of remissness and indifference where interests
so momentous are at stake.
II. Brief
suggestions as to the means of promoting spirituality of mind.
1. Endeavour to form a high standard of that holiness of character in
which fitness for heaven consists.
2. Serious and devout meditation upon the Word of God should form a
part of the business of every day.
3. Cultivate a devotional spirit. (Homiletic Magazine.)
Fetched the carved image,
the ephod, and the teraphim.--
The stolen gods
Micah and his household worshipping the images of silver, the
Levite officiating at the altar, seeking counsel of Jehovah by ephod and
teraphim, the Danites who steal the gods, carry off the priest, and set up a
new worship in the city they build--all these represent to us types and stages
of what is really schism, pitiful and disastrous--that is, separation from the
truth of things and from the sacred realities of Divine faith. Selfish untruth
and infidelity are schism, the wilderness and outlawry of the soul.
1. Micah and his household, with their chapel of images, their ephod
and teraphim, represent those who fall into the superstition that religion is
good as insuring temporal success and prosperity, that God will see to the
worldly comfort of those who pay respect to Him. Even among Christians this is
a very common and a very debasing superstition. The sacraments are often
observed as signs of a covenant which secures for men Divine favour through
social arrangements and human law. The spiritual nature and power of religion
are not denied, but they are uncomprehended. The national custom and the
worldly hope have to do with the observance of devout forms rather than any
movement of the soul heavenward. A Church may in this way become like Micah’s
household, and prayer may mean seeking good terms with Him who can fill the
land with plenty or send famine and cleanness of teeth.
2. The Levite represents an unworthy, worldly ministry. Very few of
those in the ranks of the Christian ministry are entirely concerned with the
respect paid to them in society and the number of shekels to be got in a year.
That he keeps pace with the crowd instead of going before it is perhaps the
hardest thing that can be said of the worldly pastor. He is humane, active,
intelligent; but it is for the Church as a great institution, or the Church as
his temporal hope and stay. So his ministry becomes at the best a matter of serving
tables and providing alms--we shall not say amusement. Here, indeed, is schism;
for what is farther from the truth of things, from Christ?
3. Once more, we have with us to-day, very much with us, certain
Danites of science, politics, and the press, who, if they could, would take
away our God and our Bible, our Eternal Father and spiritual hope, not from a
desire to possess, but because they hate to see us believing, hate to see any
weight of silver given to religious uses. Not a few of these are marching, as
they think, triumphantly to commanding and opulent positions, whence they will
rule the thought of the world. And on the way, even while they deride and
detest the supernatural, they will have the priest go with them. They care
nothing for what he says; to listen to the voice of a spiritual teacher is an
absurdity of which they would not be guilty; for to their own vague prophesying
all mankind is to give heed, and their interpretations of human life are to be
received as the Bible of the age. Of the same order is the socialist who would
make use of a faith he intends to destroy, and a priesthood whose claim is
offensive to him, on his way to what he calls the organisation of society. In
his view the uses of Christianity and the Bible are temporal and earthly. He
will not have Christ the Redeemer of the soul, yet he attempts to conjure with
Christ’s words, and appropriate the power of His name. The audacity of these
would-be robbers is matched only by their ignorance of the needs and ends of
human life. (R. A. Watson, M. A.)
Ye have taken away my
gods.--
The loss of gods
I. All men have a
God.
1. Whatever a man’s god be, he deems it the greatest good.
2. But man’s ideas of God are very deficient and conflicting. Some
make a god of the means of gratifying their passions and lusts; others make
money and riches their god; others the praise and approbation of their
fellow-creatures, and others the outward rites and ceremonies of religion.
3. It is one thing to be religious; another and a very different matter
to be godly, worshipping the Father “in spirit and in truth.”
II. False gods can
be taken from their devotees.
1. Often in life. Many, long before they die, lose the means of
gratifying sense; many, early in life, though lovers of money, become pitifully
poor; and many, by some means or other, are deprived of the means to pursue
their accustomed mode of attending to religious rites, and therefore lose their
gods.
2. In death. Sense cannot be gratified in the grave. No miser has
ever been able to take a grain of his adored money to another world. The
world’s praise and blame are equally unimportant when a man feels he is to be
ushered before the judgment-seat; and all religious rites and formularies are
left behind for ever when we enter a world of spirits.
III. The loss, even
of a false god, will be felt to be a great loss. “What have I more?” To tear
the thing we have made our god from us is the greatest bereavement. Even though
the thing is bad, it has been loved supremely, and the loss of it will create a
vacuum and an agony intolerable. But the conscious loss of the true God--this
is the climax of suffering. Then the soul is a chaos, an orphan in the
universe. (Homilist.)
Micah the Ephraimite
Consider the plan of life he made, and the reason why it turned
out so badly.
1. He was not a heathen, though he was an idolater. He thought to
serve God through the medium of idols. It was more comfortable to remain at
home, and it was more easy to worship by means of what could be seen. He was
like people who say that it is not necessary to go to church, because they can
read the Bible and say their prayers at home; as if reading the Bible and
saying prayers were the whole duty of the man! He was also like those who think
that worship must be comfortable: they are not called upon to rise early or to
adopt more than a sitting posture. You can see what the influence of idols
would become in this man’s life. Micah would gradually forget the unseen world
of which they were supposed to remind him, and his image-shop would call for
his constant care and attention. What soul he possessed would be centred there,
and the presence of the Levite would soothe him with the notion that all was
well. Nor was the life a lonely one, for others, it seems, lived near, and took
an interest in the carved image, the ephod, the teraphim, and molten image: in
fact, there was quite a comfortable little schism formed into which no one was
likely to inquire. Such was the plan of Micah’s religious life--a cheap one,
you will observe, in spite of the ten shekels of silver and apparel and
victuals, for no journeys need now be undertaken to other seats of worship, and
no money offered to them.
2. And why did such an inexpensive way of serving God fail? Some rude
travellers robbed him of his gods and his priest, and what had he more? It
might have been possible to replace them, but the cost would have been much;
besides, he had grown fond of these images, and this priest, and his heart was
with them. It was too late to begin life again, and such handsome images it
would be difficult to make. All might still have been well had he known what
worship meant, but unfortunately in his service of God he had left out God.
“God is Spirit, and they that worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in
truth,” Is there anything akin to us in the character of this poor man, who
began by cheating others and ended by being cheated himself?
1. True religion cannot be easy, at least at first. It never can be
cheap. To do God’s will entails the sacrifice of ourselves, soul and body, to
the Almighty. And so easy-going religion is popular. Men will not go far to a
service. If they have their temple at their door they can drag their wearied
limbs so far, but, unlike their forefathers, they do not care to walk a few
miles to God’s house. As for time and money, what a little suffices often to
soothe the sleepy conscience!
2. Micah’s religion was self-made. Has he not followers in those who
teach that we can please ourselves in the manner and method of worship? Is it
perfectly immaterial whether our Saviour made a Church or not, whether we
continue steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking
of bread and in prayer, or not? And if these things do matter, surely they are
worth a little hard thought. “We are all going the same way,” people tell you.
Yet it is inconceivable that all can be equally right. Are we not bound to
give, each for himself, a reason for the form of the faith we hold?
3. Micah’s religion failed him. His gods were taken away, and his
priest, and what had he more? God was left out of sight. We can take the
warning to ourselves. Our religion, it may be, has been largely outward: we
have said formal prayers morning and evening; we have come to church and gone
through services; we have read a few verses of the Bible as a disagreeable
duty; we have hoped all was well; and suddenly, a big blow falls--and where are
we? Is our religion a comfort? does it help to support us? Not a bit. Why?
Because it was only skin-deep. (W. R. Hutton, M. A.)
The stable and the unstable in religion
This story has but a faint analogy with what I wish to speak
of--but yet it illustrates a principle applicable in all ages, that essential
religion is some thing which cannot be stolen. Now there are all sorts of
Danites--real hostile Danites, and men accounted such by timid souls who are
not so at all. There are ruthless Danites, whose honest, or dishonest, aim it
is to remove what they really seem to think religion is wrapped up in. And then
there are friendly Danites, who would remove idol images out of a real love for
a more spiritual and vital faith. But whoever the Danites be, this is
true--that nobody is afraid of the Danites unless he has gotten a Micah
religion; and nobody encourages the raids and raileries of the Danites--“What
aileth thee?”--like the man who cries, “What have I more?”
I. Any religion
which centres in a form or organisation can be stolen. This is only to say that
external aids to devotion, and diverse organisation of God’s host may be
changed, and yet destroy none but a Micah faith which is wrapped up in them.
But what has seemed so permanent and vital at different times, and to different
souls, is just this very thing! The Micah faith of the Jews could be, must be,
stolen away. But what was permanent? Reverence and worship of Almighty God.
Again, take the New Testament. It was a zeal in God’s name by which Jesus
Himself cleansed the temple of His Father! And who ever stole away the Micah
elements of religion as did our Lord Himself, in mingled love and indignation
for God’s eternal law? Again, have you ever realised that the great argument all
through the Epistles of Paul is just this carrying-off process of that system,
glorious in its purity and needed for its day, but now to pass, in its
essential elements, into a different form of growth? His great contention every
where is that there were shadow and substance both in the old Mosaic economy;
that form was vanishing, its truth permanent; that Christ had fulfilled, or
filled full, those great moral and spiritual needs of men which once were best
fed by other means. Did He take away a single element that was permanent?
II. Standards of
what is right and wrong in conduct may be stolen, and yet not carry off the
eternal obligations of mortality. How often people have been trying to say that
this, that, and the other thing is eternally right or wrong for everybody and
all nations to do or not to do! It is this spirit which goes to the Bible, and
in Leviticus and Ecclesiastes, as well as in John and Romans, would find, on
one level of authority, some word to decide, as by a talisman, whether this or
that is consistent for everybody everywhere to do or not to do. How this
confuses and misrepresents the Bible! The Bible is a book of life, and so it has progressively
changed and raised its forms of moral obligation from age to age. Right in the
midst of the Old Testament, like a lighthouse in a storm, stand the ten
commandments--true, not because they are there, but there because universally
true; and yet even they are not true because that is the best or highest form
of moral obligation; for Jesus says of that law, “It says so and so, but ‘I’
say”--carrying those same principles further and higher, and adding entirely
new and deeper motives and sanctions. Negative “Thou shalt not“ accomplishes
for one man or one age what Jesus’ positive “Thou shalt love” does for
another--two forms of the same thing. See the progress in Bible standards!
1. Thou shalt not do wrong.
2. Thou shalt love God and man.
3. Love one another, “as I have loved you.” There is a vast
difference between these three ways of looking at one thing.
III. What is true of
forms of worship and standards of morals is true also of forms and proportions
of theological issues. Judged by the Micah creeds of men we might suppose the
Christian world would have nothing left of faith after the Danites of each
generation had carried away some things upon which every thing seemed to hang.
We are living in a time when hosts of Christian people think the ark of God is
in danger as it never was before. But when was there an age in which people did
not say the same thing? This is said to be an era of readjustment and
revolution. Yes; but so has nearly every age been accounted since Jesus came,
if we may judge from the fearful auguries of every century. There are always
some people perfectly sure if this or that doctrine is not held just as their
fathers, or their Church or themselves hold it, that men are cutting loose from
all sure anchorage. The reassuring thing is that that is just what men have
always been saying, and yet despite dark doubt and augury, hostile Danites, and
men so counted Danites in one age to be canonised in the next, have all stolen
only what was either false or only one-sided and temporary. There is not a
great fact or essential truth of Christian revelation which is not held as
firmly this very day as ever before. (A. R. Merriam.)
The Indian problem
Do we consider that a man situated as this man was a fit object of
pity and sympathy or not? The stern, uncompromising iconoclast would certainly
say, “No.” He would feel that it was better for such an one to find out by
bitter experience how vain and useless were the idols in which he trusted. In
and through his desolation he might be brought to seek for help where alone it
could be found. The mild, tolerant student of comparative religion would
probably say, “Yes.” He would urge on his behalf that at that particular point
in the evolution of Jewish religion from its primitive worship of invisible
forces it was inevitable that the worshipper should seek to give concrete form
and embodiment to the anthropomorphic idea of God which was then being
assimilated from the nations around. For such an one to be deprived of his
idols was to be put out of rapport and correspondence with his religious
environment, and as that meant spiritual death, he clearly deserves our pity in
his destitution. Turning, however, from the merely speculative interest which
the ancient Israelite’s case presents, I wish to transfer it, “as in a figure,”
to the very real and practical interest presented by the parallel situation of
a large section of our fellow-subjects in India, and to endeavour to answer the
question just raised by considering what our duty to them is. For in the main the
plea of the Jew of Mount Ephraim is being echoed now either in unexpressed
feeling or in outspoken utterance by thousands of religious-minded Hindus in
India. It is only with one portion of the problem that I would attempt to deal;
that, namely, which is connected with the sphere of Christian education. It
would be to repeat an oft-told tale to recount at any length what has been and
will be increasingly the necessary result of such contact of the West with the
East as our rule in India has brought about. That contact is unique and
unprecedented in some if not all of its conditions, and must be expected to
produce strange and unlooked-for, even contradictory, results. But it is of the
moral aspect of them only that I wish to speak. When the Government of India
decided that State education must be conducted on the principle of religious
neutrality and non-interference, it does not appear whether the disintegrating
effect of purely secular instruction was fully realised. What, in short, was
not foreseen, but is now being daily found to be the inevitable result of the
State system of education, is that while it tends to destroy much that was
hurtful and fatal to progress, it fails to supply the place of what it destroys
by any new and vital principle of cohesion and solidarity. The son goes back to
his home and announces to his parents that he has learnt to rise superior to
caste traditions and prejudices, and it is found that what this amounts to
practically is, that while he has a veneer of Western learning and science, he
has lost his hold of what is the very life and soul of any society, the sense
of obedience, of reverence, of duty in the family and in the State. He has
gained, indeed, ideas of freedom, of independence, of equality, of
self-assertion, but if he has lost or is in danger of losing these other ideas,
which surely it is true to say are more fundamental and indispensable for the
well-being of the family and the nation, is not the loss likely to be greater
than the gain, at any rate for the Indian? If there is any virtue which the
caste system can claim to have developed and preserved, it is the instinct of
reverence and obedience. And it is this instinct which it is the tendency of
our education to weaken if not to destroy. And further, it is precisely in
those parts of India which are most advanced in Western knowledge where this
tendency is seen in its fullest development. What wonder is it, then, that the
parent who hears of the boasted advantages of Western science and education
bewails the result of it in words which seem an echo of the cry of the Jew of
Mount Ephraim “Ye have taken away my gods which I made, and what have I more?
and how then say ye unto me, What aileth thee?” But this is not all. The
student, bereft of the moral sanctions of his religion, and supplied with no
new motives of obedience and rectitude, is exposed to yet other dangers. If the
demon of superstition has been expelled, there are the seven other spirits more
wicked than the first, ready to rush in and occupy the vacant, cheerless room.
For the mental facilities of the Indian student are far in advance of his moral
faculties. This is so naturally; and when the course of education tends almost
exclusively to develop the intellectual part of him, the disparsity becomes all
the more marked. The moral element in him, already of weakened vitality, is
gradually starved out, and the struggle for superiority is rather between the
animal and the intellectual. There are many noble exceptions, but they cannot
redeem a system which condemns the majority to moral sterility. It is to the
Christian Church, and that alone, that we must turn for the assertion and
vindication of the principles of true reform, as well as for the moral dynamic
which is to energise and embody them in and through an actual visible living
society. And it is quite wonderful to notice how India’s need of the gospel is
being recognised on all sides and in the most unexpected quarters. The
politician looks to the spread of Christianity as one great source of strength
and stability for the permanence of British Empire. The educationalist
looks to our native Christian women as at present the most hopeful means of
making female education effective among the upper classes. Sir W. W. Hunter has
lately said, “Christianity holds out advantages of social organisation not
offered by Hinduism or Islam. It provides for the education and moral
supervision of its people with a pastoral care which Islam, destitute of a
regular priesthood, does not pretend to. It receives the new members into its
body with a cordiality and a completeness to which Hinduism is a stranger. I
believe,” he says, “it is reserved for Christianity to develop the highest uses
of Indian caste, ‘as a system of conservative socialism.’ . . . But it will be
Indian caste humanised by a new spiritual life.”Or to take one or two more
specific cases. The tahsildar or head native officer of a large country town
appeals to a missionary to send a Christian teacher for a Hindu school, because
he finds the Hindu teachers have yielded to the prevailing immorality of the
town. The municipality of a large city in the Punjab appoints a native
Christian minister its chairman because they can find no other man so
high-minded and honest for the post. The only great modern religious reformer
India has produced bore witness on his death-bed to India’s need of Christ.
When the man of Macedonia stood before St. Paul that night in the vision, did
not the pathos of the cry, “Come over and help us,” arise from the very fact of
its being the unconscious appeal of the heathen world for help? And if the
response to that cry was the mission to Europe, which was the origin and cause
of all that is highest and best and noblest in our life and thought here
to-day, shall the Church’s response to India’s cry be less prompt, less
devoted, less full of faith and hope and love, when she has that greatest of
all examples to inspire and stimulate her, the experience of the power of the
message he bore to support and guide her in her task, the certainty of final
victory, not in our time, but in God’s time, to cheer and encourage her till
Christ comes to claim the kingdom for His own? (S. S Allnutt, M. A.)
And what have I more?--
The beyond in religion
It was natural that Micah should deplore the loss of his images.
We may smile at his grief, and say that he was a very ignorant and a very
superstitious man. Doubtless he might have reflected that the loss was not
irreparable; doubtless he might have consoled himself with the thought of what
remained. And yet we, with our purer faith and nobler creed, need to remind
ourselves that such superstition is not altogether unknown amongst us. There
has always been a tendency to mistake the outward and visible for the inward
and spiritual, to think or to act as if these were all, and to forget the
beyond; even to imagine that if these are withdrawn and taken from us, then all
is gone and nothing more is left. Idolatry in its grosset forms has passed
away, and it is not likely to return; but the tendency still exists to pay
undue deference to and to depend upon what is visible and material and
transitory, while we ignore those unseen and abiding elements in which alone
the true vitality of religion consists. Let us trace this tendency in three
directions.
1. Religion is enshrined in ceremonies. Forms may be not only useful
in religion, they are to certain extent necessary. In Christian worship there
has always been more or less of form, ceremonial, ritual. Men have tried at
various times to maintain a religion which should be purely spiritual, but the
effort has not in the long run been successful. In early days Christian worship
was severely simple. It was so partly by design, in contrast with the sensuous
materialism of surrounding idolatry; partly of necessity, because of the
poverty of the worshippers. In later times came the elaboration of ceremonial.
The question for us is, What have we more? Do our worship, our ceremonies lead
us to what is beyond? Are we relying on the accessories, or on the everlasting
truths they enshrine? What have we more? I may, for instance, be accustomed to
a place of worship where the services are rendered with the most exquisite
musical taste, where the art of the sculptor or the painter ministers to my
sense of culture and refinement; but what have I more? If altered circumstances
should force me to worship with none of those surroundings, could I know that
there in the meanest and poorest temple is no less the presence of God? If I
should be condemned as an invalid to pass weary months and even years within
the four walls of my sick-room, could I rest in the assurance that still Christ
is with me, and that possessing Him I possess all things? This is to penetrate
into the kernel of religion; this is to have the power as well as the form of godliness,
and it is to this that all form, all ritual, should lead up, and without this
they profit nothing.
2. But religion is not only enshrined in form; it is embodied in
phrases. Churches have their creeds and their catechisms. Religious truth must
find its expression in doctrine, in portable forms which are easily remembered,
though the doctrine probably expresses very inadequately the truth it
inculcates. A sound creed is the basis of a strong character. Words are the
necessary embodiment of truth. But there is always a danger lest the mere
framework of words be taken as a substitute for the truth it indicates. There
are those who worship, instead of a living Christ, their own wooden and stony
forms of theology, which may leave them just as hard and just as narrow and
just as loveless as any other form of superstition. The history of Christianity
is full of examples. This tendency to depend on words is especially seen in the
decadence of any religious movement. Phrases which were at one time pregnant with
meaning are repeated
with parrot-like accuracy by those who are very far from being animated by
their spirit. They think that because they have the words they must also have
the truth. “What have I more?” We have our doctrines, our creeds, our
catechisms; but do they lead us to what is beyond? Do we reach forth with the
strong grasp of a living faith to the unchanging and eternal truths which the
words embody? Do you remember that it is one thing to say, “I believe in God,”
another to believe in God with heart and soul as the great Factor in our lives?
Phrases may change; but God does not change. Truth cannot change, though it may
be conveyed through different means. Creed is important, but character is
greater than creed. Life is more than orthodoxy, and goodness than correct
opinions.
3. Once more, religion is not only enshrined in ceremonies and
creeds, but also in persons. When St. Paul says that the Church is the “body of
Christ,” he implies that our Lord works through Christian people, and that they
are His representatives on earth. As a matter of fact all our earlier
impressions, and many of our later impressions, in religion, have come to us
through persons. The mother who taught our infant lips to pray, the teacher who
first instructed us in the simple truths of the gospel, the pastor at whose
feet we sat as children, the friend so noble and so brave on whom we leaned for
counsel and guidance--these and others were those who first brought religion to
our notice as the great power in the world. And no one can overrate the power
and the value of religious training and Christian friendship. But yet even the
best and purest and holiest of earthly influences may sometimes be almost the
idol, whose removal may be the wreck of our hopes. I sometimes tremble for the
religion of the young lad who goes forth from a holy and happy village home
into the crowded thoroughfares of the great city. Will he stand fast in the
future? Will he be true to the teaching of his boyhood in the presence of
increasing temptations? Will he keep to the old faith in the land that is new?
He will not, if his faith is merely second-hand. He will not if he has never
really made his parents’ belief to be his own belief. The great question is,
“What have I more?” I have Christian influence around me, I have religious
friends; but what have I more? If God should see fit to take away these, have I
learnt to trust in the one Friend from whom neither distance nor death can
part? Can I lean on Him when every earthly prop is removed? Some years ago I
was called to visit an aged lady who was on her death-bed. She was a very
sincere Christian, who had led an exceptionally useful life of active
benevolence. But she had drunk deep of the cup of sorrow; she had been reduced
through monetary losses to comparative poverty; her husband had deserted her,
and she had few, if any, relatives who could help her. And as I sat by her
bedside, a few hours before her death, she talked of her trials, her sorrows,
her losses, when, suddenly raising herself, she pointed upward to a text above
her bed, and said, “But I have found that true all along.” I looked up and read
the text. It was the familiar promise, “I will never leave thee nor forsake
thee.” Yes, earthly friends might fail and leave her, but there was One who
would never forsake her, the unchanging Friend who had strengthened and
supported her in life as in death. Certainly the day will come to us all when
all earthly helps will leave us, and we shall have to fall back on the unseen
realities, or on--nothing. At such a time, if ever, we shall need to depend on
the reality and not the shadow. No forms, no phrases, no friends can help us
then. Nothing but the living Christ can then be our strength and stay; He and
He only can say, “When thou passest through the waters I will be with thee.”
May God keep us from trusting in the shadow rather than the substance. “Whom
have I in heaven but Thee? and there is none upon earth that I desire beside
Thee. Thou shalt guide me with Thy counsel, and afterward receive me to glory.
My flesh and my heart faileth, but God is the strength of my heart and my
portion for ever.” (Christian World Pulpit.)
──《The Biblical Illustrator》