Living by Faith - Romans

The Promise and the Power

Professor: Dr. R.J. Rushdoony

Subject: Living by Faith

Lesson: 59-64

Genre: Talk

Track: 059

Dictation Name: RR311ZE59

Location/Venue:

Year: ?

Let us worship God. Our help is in the name of the Lord who made heaven and earth. Thus saith the high and lofty one who inhabiteth eternity, whose name is holy: I dwell in the high and holy place, and with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite. If Thou shalt seek the Lord Thy God Thou shalt find Him; if thou seek Him with all thy heart, and with all thy soul. Let us pray.

Oh Lord our God, unto whom all glory and honor belongeth, we rejoice in Thy government, and the certainty that Thy word and Thy will and Thy purpose shall prevail. In our hearts, in the world at large, in the counsels of state, and in every atom of all creation. Make us ever joyful in Thee, that we may work in the confidence of Thy victory, and of our triumph in Thee. We give thanks unto Thee that Jesus Christ is our Lord, our King, the king who overthrows the powers of sin and death, and makes us more than conquerors by His grace. And so we gather together again to rejoice in Thy word and in Thee, and by Thy Spirit, to be instructed in the things of Thy kingdom. In His name we pray, amen.

Our scripture is Romans 15:8-13, our subject: The Promise and the Power. The Promise and the Power, Romans 15:8-13.

“8 Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers:

9 And that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy; as it is written, For this cause I will confess to thee among the Gentiles, and sing unto thy name.

10 And again he saith, Rejoice, ye Gentiles, with his people.

11 And again, Praise the Lord, all ye Gentiles; and laud him, all ye people.

12 And again, Esaias saith, There shall be a root of Jesse, and he that shall rise to reign over the Gentiles; in him shall the Gentiles trust.

13 Now the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing, that ye may abound in hope, through the power of the Holy Ghost.”

Paul returns once again to the subject of circumcision; but in a very, very remarkable context. He declares Jesus Christ to be a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers. He then declares this promise is the ingathering of the Gentiles; where Israel saw circumcision as a mark of privilege before God, Paul says that from the beginning according to the Old Testament it marked salvation for the gentiles, the world wide mission entrusted to the covenant people.

Geerhardus Vos some years ago said on circumcision that it had always meant ethical living from the beginning of circumcision as a covenant act. It meant the covenanted life, it was a sign of the covenant, that man was in covenant with God and therefore bound by the covenant law, by moral living. He declared that the ethical character of Old Testament religion is symbolized by circumcision, and of course Moses set this forth clearly as did Jeremiah and Ezekiel, they declared it is man’s heart that needs to be circumcised, that human nature is unclean and disqualified in its very source, and that sin is a matter of the race, and not of the individual only.

Thus, according to Vos and I quote: “The danger was created that natural descent might be understood as entitling to the grace of God. Circumcision teaches that physical descent from Abraham is not sufficient to make true Israelites. The uncleanness and disqualification of nature must betaken away. Dogmatically speaking, therefore, circumcision stands for justification and regeneration, plus sanctification.”

Because circumcision stands for regeneration and justification, it points clearly to the ingathering of the gentiles. It says that God is trying to create through Israel a new humanity. Israel, by making the covenant a racial fact, was giving way to the gentiles as a new Israel, and the gentiles will be supplanted if they do the same, as many are. They act as though all that they are is not by the grace of God, but by the fact that they are of a particular inheritance.

How do people define their religion? Recently, one writer, describing a trip to Israel, Donahue, said that in Israel and I quote: “’Anyone who isn’t a Jew or a Muslim is a Christian.’ In other words, Hitler was a Christian.” Hitler planned the destruction of Christianity, as well as of Judaism, and yet by this kind of definition, Hitler and Stalin, everyone who is not a Jew or a Muslim is a Christian.

One of our staff asked a friend recently: “Why are you a Jew?” “Well, my parents kept the festivals.” Well, in other words, his grandparents may have been believers, his parents maintained some tie, but he still regarded himself as religiously a Jew; he had converted it into a nationalistic fact.

But the Jews are not alone in this, I recall vividly some years ago a well-to-do conservative who was very generous in his day, who gave $25,000 to this cause or to that, and couldn’t do enough for the Conservative movement, and was always talking about God and country, and Christianity, to support his position although he was obviously a humanist, and he had borrowed the term ‘God and country’ without any appreciation of its meaning. I tried to tell him once that what he was talking about was humanism, that he wasn’t a Christian; and he turned on me and said: “What do you think I am, a Jew?”

Now to such people like these people in Israel whom Donahue talked with, religion is a matter of cultural background. This is why circumcision is so important to Paul. He has made it clear that man requires conversion, and circumcision is a symbolic act wherein the hope of regeneration is cut off, to show confidence in God alone, in His regenerating power. And Paul turns to circumcision to show that what it is talking about is the ingathering of the gentiles, and that the law and the prophets speak about this specifically. Jesus Christ, therefore, is a minister Paul says, sent first to the Jews to recall them to this task.

Then in verses 9-12 Paul gives several verses from the Old Testament to emphasize this covenantal duty, this calling, as God’s purpose. Israel called to be a missionary people to the world.

Psalm 18:49 “Therefore will I give thanks unto Thee oh Lord, among the heathen, and sing praises unto Thy name.”

Deuteronomy 32:43 “Rejoice, O ye nations, with his people: for he will avenge the blood of his servants, and will render vengeance to his adversaries, and will be merciful unto his land, and to his people.” We will return to that verse in a moment.

Psalm 117:1 “O praise the LORD, all ye nations: praise him, all ye people.” A summons to the whole world to join Israel in the praise of God.

And 11:1 of Isaiah, and 11:10 “And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots:”… “And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: and his rest shall be glorious.”

Now to understand what Paul is saying, we have to know what the Old Testament is saying. I cited Deuteronomy 32:43. It is part of a passage, Deuteronomy 32:39-43, in which God sets forth His vengeance on all His adversaries all over the world. Now most modern translators render the beginning of Deuteronomy 32:43, which is in the King James, and in the Septuagint as well as the Hebrew is: “Rejoice oh ye nations with His people.” But modern translators render it: “Rejoice in His people oh ye nations.” Not to rejoice in the Lord, but to rejoice in Israel.

Well, we could understand it if these people were Scofieldian, Premill, Dispensationalist, who see all prophecy in terms of Israel; but the modernists do this to, which is in effect making primitive what Paul is saying, making it ethnocentric, as though all the Old Testament is talking about is not God and God’s purpose, but Israel. It is a terrible perversion, a nationalistic reading.

In Psalm 18:49, which I also read, David rejoices that God has delivered him, and calls on the Gentile nations to rejoice with him. An absurd statement in David’s day, but David knew that God is the God of all peoples, and he expected the ingathering of all nations, and that in time to come people unknown to him would joyfully echo his words, like us.

Psalm 117 which he quotes, is the shortest psalm in the entire Bible; it is only two verses long, and Paul quotes the first verse: “Oh Praise the Lord all ye nations, praise Him all ye people.” What was this psalm about? It was declaring that the whole world, all nations, were to praise God and worship Him, and obey Him and His law. It was only two verses because it was apparently repeated after other psalm, or in the liturgy of the temple, and then of the Synagogue; as a reminder of the fact that all nations would believe in time to come.

Isaiah 11:1,10 speak of the world restoration, and dominion through the messiah, the descendant of David. Paul reminds us of the Old Testament fact; his interpretation is that of the Rabbis of his day, and in fact you can find it in the Rabbis of today. For example, Rabbi Avrohom Chaim Feuer, regarding Psalm 117 says, and I quote: “its brevity symbolizes the simplicity of the world order which will prevail after the advent of the Messiah.” And so on.

The difference between the Orthodox Rabbis and Paul, then and now, was this: Paul said Jesus is the Messiah. The Rabbis said, and say, He is yet to come. But both look for the same world order.

Verse 13 is a benediction: “Now the God of hope, fill you with all joy and peace in believing, that you may abound in hope through the power of the Holy Ghost.” The God of hope.

Now hope as it is used in scripture does not mean a wish, but it means a present certainty in God’s grace, and an assured, guaranteed expectancy, a future glory. Hope in the scripture means in effect that you have in your hand a guarantee, a title, to a future glory.

Then he speaks of joy and peace in believing, so that we may abound in hope. And the way to this is through the power of the Holy Ghost. This is a very interesting statement, because we often forget that the association with power is basic in the New Testament to the doctrine of the Holy Spirit. Now, the doctrine of the Holy Spirit has been over the centuries a neglected area of doctrine. A key reason has been the abuse of this doctrine. In analyzing this we need to see two things; first, the Holy Ghost is said to be the source of God’s power. In Acts 1:18 “Ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you.”

The problem throughout church history has been that men have sought power without grace, and this has been a major problem in church history. Far more than general surveys will tell you. As a result, a great many great theologians of the church have been wary of a great stress on the Holy Spirit, because disorders have been so readily justified in the name of the Spirit. The quest by people for power without grace is dangerous, and it is destructive of the life of faith.

But second, we have to say that the power of the Spirit in us does not negate the necessity for patient growth. We are saved sinners, not perfect in this lifetime, and the power of the Spirit leads in some to false or an evil pride, with sorry results. In the great awakening, many who ceased upon the doctrine of the Spirit, set themselves up against their pastors, had all kinds of revelations that told them they didn’t have to meet their responsibilities, and so on; and the great awakening did as much harm as it did good. Many lost a great deal as a result of the Great Awakening, and the evil consequences thereof, the destruction to homes, to communities, to marriages.

But we do require God’s power to do God’s work in this world, and so we cannot neglect the doctrine of the Spirit. We cannot limit the Spirit’s work to inspiring us, or merely to filling us with zeal and with love.

Aaron Williams in 1770 began his hymn with the right emphasis when he wrote: “Lord God, the Holy Ghost! In this accepted hour, As on the day of Pentecost, O come in all Thy power.” And then he went on to make it clear it was to do the work of the Lord, not power for us.

Paul tells us to begin with that the just man, the man justified by Christ’s atonement to live in terms of God’s justice shall live by faith. He reminds us now that the just man is not helpless as he faces an unjust world; he is able to stand, he is able to endure, and is able to conquer through the power of the Holy Ghost.

God’s promise is that the world shall be Christ’s realm, and we shall gain all through the power of the Holy Ghost. Let us pray.

Oh Lord our God, Thy word is truth, and Thy Spirit is power; and we pray that we may go forth to serve Thee according to Thy word and by Thy Spirit, to the end that the kingdoms of this world might become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of His Christ. Great and marvelous are Thy ways oh Lord, Thy grace and mercy to us, and Thy blessing hand upon us; and we praise Thee. In Jesus name amen.

Are there any questions now, first of all on our lesson? Yes?

[Otto Scott] If the Great Awakening created so much trouble, as much trouble as it did good, and we think of Cromwell’s army falling apart for (Centurion?) reasons; and the Reformation itself divided by all sorts of issues; what can we expect about the awakening that is under way today?

[Rushdoony] Yes, first of all, the Great Awakening had in it some very serious problems. It associated regeneration with a dramatic experience. On the plane coming back I was reading an account of this young man, who didn’t doubt a word of scripture, who believed it, but he couldn’t say that he’d had an experience; and until he did he could not qualify in the church. Now this was at the time of the Great Awakening, his father was a pastor, and he himself was a very distinguished person in his own right, very prominent. Now this was the kind of problem it created, it put the emphasis on a dramatic experience, rather than a redirection of man’s life.

So people were having dramatic experiences, and were telling the pastor: “You aren’t converted, you didn’t collapse and have a dramatic experience as the Spirit hit you and you fell to the ground, you are unregenerate and you have no right preaching to us.” And because some of them saw themselves now as in effect a walking Holy Spirit, they were ready to say that anything they didn’t like the Spirit didn’t like; and so they their wife: “Get lost, the Spirit tells me that I cannot live in communion with you.”

Now that was the evil that the Great Awakening brought about. One of the things that it did, and there was a great deal of good that happened, and this country was born out of the good men that were a product of the Great Awakening, there never would have been a resistance to Britain without these people. But on the other hand, if you didn’t have this dramatic experience, you were an outsider and you were secular. So it created the rift between Puritan and Yankee; so you were not one of the saints if you didn’t have this dramatic experience, even though you might know you Bible better, and believe it, and apply it much more systematically. It was this experientialism, and this was born out of the scientific movement, so that reality was becoming what could be experimentally seen, physically seen; and what we now call experientialism, they called experimentalism, experimental religion. And it was under the influence of the scientific temper of the times, that they came to this absurd identification, whereby it was not the heart of man, nor the mind of man, but ‘was your body converted’ in effect, to put it crudely.

Now that was the great weakness, that although the Great Awakening had marvelous results in some areas, this had devastating results. Does that help make it understandable?

[Otto Scott] …I’ve noticed myself that people with strong beliefs are apt to become intolerant.

[Rushdoony] Also, a great many people are in Bible believing churches, who have had an experience and have gone forward, and have never bothered to grow in the faith. They think that was all that was necessary to make them Christian, the experience. But those who grow, week in and week out, I think are stronger Christians by far. Yes?

[Audience Member] Isn’t the same applied in the speaking in tongues, in other words if you are not speaking in tongues you are not saved; …?...

[Rushdoony] Yes, some of the old fashioned pentecostal churches have been at times very rigid on that; in fact I grew up in a community where a deep rift was created in a church that in the twenties became Pentecostal, a foursquare church, and those that could not speak in tongues were for some time driven out, before they came to their senses and realized they were losing many of their best people.

Last time there was a question raised, and I would like to deal with it, because it was with regard to exorcism; and this is from a book which is by a very brilliant historian, but I don’t think it is particularly good, Lucifer, the Devil in the Middle Ages by Jeffrey Burton Russell, and I quote:

“From the third century onward, an order of ordained exorcists existed, but their functions were soon absorbed by the priests. In 1972 Pope Paul the sixth decreed the abolition of the former order of exorcist. He provided that national episcopal councils could establish ministries with such a title, but without function. The meaning of the term exorcist has never been closely defined, its origins are in Greek paganism. The word derives from the Greek ‘Exorciso’ to secure by oath, or to ask or pray deeply from (orkos?) oath. In its root meaning, it is a solemn, intense address to someone or something, and it is by no means necessarily connected with demons. Among the pagan Greeks and even the early Christians, exorcism could be addressed to good as well as to evil powers. In the New Testament Jesus was Himself exorcised twice, once by the High Priest, and once by the (Garoseen?) demoniac. By the third century, the meaning of exorcism has become more precise; it was the ritual expulsion of harmful spirits from affected persons or objects, with the help of superior spiritual powers. Three kinds of exorcisms were common in early and medieval liturgies; exorcism of objects, exorcism of catechumens during the scrutiny’s of baptism, and exorcism of demoniacs. Originally it was assumed that the devil or demons were not themselves exorcised, although the exorcism was indirectly addressed to them, and in the last analysis, the exorcism always is an indirect prayer to Christ.”

Does that help clarify what Exorcism has been? Yes?

[Audience Member] One of the things, one of the points that Otto raised about …?... the Reformation and the Great Awakening in the present day, I think the Biblical parallel for each of those events, the historical sequence of events, is that whenever the nation of Israel is in decline, there was always a remnant that was called out or kept by God, we see significant examples of that; and that, the work of reformation or reconstruction, or restoration, etc, was largely done in terms of its intellectual presentation, and the core of it was usually done by that small remnant, although… and the farther you got away from that core remnant, why the more polluted became… although the whole nation may have appeared to have repented and turned, it was actually motivated and sustained by a very small remnant, and I think that was what happened to the Reformation, we saw a very small handful of people, you could probably name the really great thinkers whose work continues to last on the fingers of one hand, there wasn’t thousands of them. And the same thing happened during the Great Awakening, we had two or three people during the Great Awakening whose though was important, and had a lasting effect, and I think in this generation during the Christian Reconstruction we have the work of maybe three or four individuals whose work is key; and beyond that everyone else is either feeding off of that core, or is redefining that core for a wider mass audience.

[Rushdoony] One of the things, you see, that we have got to remember too about the Great Awakening is this: the greatest minds at the time were leaders of the Great Awakening. Jonathan Edwards, Bellamy, Hopkins, and others. And these were the men that some of the contemporary scholars say were responsible for the war of Independence, they created the sense of freedom.

On the other hand, at the second echelon, and third and fourth echelon, you didn’t have minds like that, men who were thinkers; you had men who simply stressed experientialism or experimentalism. So they in effect contrasted reason and faith, and created a division there, and faith was associated with emotionalism. Well, it meant that a great man second and third rate people pulled away from the Reformation, and Harvard which was not beyond reclamation, looked down its nose and moved further into rationalism. So reason went off this way, and then the emotional religion culminated in the Arminian Revivalism of about fifty years later. So the two pulled apart, and that has had continuing impact in the history of the church, both here and in Europe, but especially in this country. The separation of reason and faith, as though if you believed you couldn’t be a man of reason. So at that point they did a great deal of harm. On the top level, the good that was accomplished was dramatic, but this other aspect undercut that good very rapidly.

Well, if there are no further comments, let us bow our heads in prayer.

Our Lord and our God, we give thanks unto Thee that we are Thy people, and Thou hast called us to serve Thee. Make us joyful in Thee and in Thy service, and more than conquerors through Christ. And now go in peace, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost, bless you and keep you, guide and protect you, this day and always, amen.