The Pleroma (11) - Charles H. Welch

No.11. Two attitudes to the curse -

Civilization or Redemption. 

While it is the responsibility of the teacher to deal with positive truth rather than pursue all the possible and impossible side lines of controversy, we must not forget that occasionally the purpose of grace is served by pausing in the pursuit of truth, in order that a necessary warning may be given. So the Apostle, in Col. i. 28, combines ‘warning with ‘teaching’ and in II Tim. iii. 16 ‘instruction’ is associated with ‘correction’. It is sometimes as important, when giving directions, to warn not to turn to the left, as it is to instruct to turn to the right. 

If the pleroma is God’s consequent reaction to the failure brought about by the enemy, and if the attack of the enemy is characterized by deceit and counterfeit more than by open warfare, it should not surprise us to discover early in the record of truth, that an attempt was made to substitute a false pleroma for the true. 

When Jude wrote in his epistle of the prophecy uttered by Enoch, he is careful to designate him as ‘the seventh from Adam’, the reason being that there was another of the same name in the line of Cain. This was a part of the deceiver’s attempt to foist a substitute for truth upon the earth. 

The A.V. margin of Gen. iv. 17 draws the reader’s attention to the fact that the Hebrew is chanock and as there is no such note at Gen. v. 18 he may suspect that the names are not identical. The same spelling is employed in Gen. iv. 17 as in Gen. v. 18, and when the genealogy is repeated in I Chron. i. 3, it is spelt henoch. 

To Enoch in the line of Cain was born Irad which is similar, though not identical with Jared, the son of Mahalaleel (Gen. v. 15). The difference between these two names is that of one letter, Irad employing one letter more than Jared in the original. Another pair of names that suggest substitution is Methusael (Gen. iv. 18) & Methuselah (Gen. v. 21), which differs only in the conclusion of the word. At the close of Cain’s line is Lamech, whose boast introduces the words ‘sevenfold’ and ‘seventy and seven fold’ (Gen. iv. 24), while Lamech the father of Noah, lived “seven hundred, seventy and seven years”. There is sufficient superficial likeness in these names to suggest intention, and that intention coming through the line of Cain would be evil. 

The record of Cain’s descendants opens with a reference to the curse that had fallen upon the earth (Gen. iv. 11) and Cain’s attempt to palliate the effects of the curse is CIVILIZATION, “He builded a city” (Gen. iv. 17). Lamech, the descendant of Seth also speaks of the curse which rested upon the ground, but instead of attempting to minimize the curse by human expedients, he looked for ‘rest’ through the ministry of his son Noah, whom he so named, because the word means ‘comfort’ or ‘rest’. Lamech looked to REDEMPTION where Cain looked to civilization. 

The first cities of the Bible are associated with evil and rebellion. 

(1) Enoch, the city built by Cain after the curse (Gen. iv. 17). 

(2) Nineveh, the city built by Nimrod, the mighty Rebel (Gen. x. 11). 

(3) Babel, the city and tower built in rebellion (Gen. xi. 4). 

(4) Sodom, the city which was destroyed by fire (Gen. xix. 24). 

Meanwhile Abraham had left Ur of the Chaldees, and had become a pilgrim and a stranger, dwelling in tents, having here ‘no continuing city’ but seeking ‘one to come’ (Heb. xi. 10, 16; xiii. 14). 

Let us ponder the record of Lamech, his reference to Noah and his typical work of deliverance. The primary significance of the Hebrew preposition min, translated 

‘because’ in Gen. v. 29, is that of ‘a part or portion’, hence something arising out of, or caused by, anything, as for example Israel who sighed ‘by reason of’ the bondage they endured (Exod. ii. 23). Lamech had no doubt but that the ‘work and toil’ which life imposed, was ‘because’ of the curse that had fallen upon the ground. 

The story of Gen. i.-ix., from Adam to Noah, is bounded by references to the “ground”, Hebrew adamah. 

A | i. 26. “Every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth (ground).” 

   B | ii. 5. “There was not a man to till the ground.” 

* * * * * * * 

A | ix. 2. “All that moveth (creepeth) upon the earth (ground).” 

   B | ix. 20. “Noah began to be an husbandman (lit. a man of the ground).”

In between these two sets of references is the curse, the flood, and the new start under Noah. The impression which this survey leaves in the mind is that Lamech was right. Not the building of a city, but the building of an Ark was God’s pleroma to fill the gap or rent occasioned by the curse. The way of Cain is still markedly different from the way of Abel. 

The parallels between Adam and Noah are so many and so clear, that the reader who once perceives them cannot avoid the conclusion that with Noah, God was making a new start. 

Before setting out the parallel passages, we note one or two more features of interest concerning Lamech. 

“In naming his son Noah, Lamech emphasized his felt need of rest. Noah is derived from nuach which means ‘to be at rest’, and occurs in Gen. viii. 4, ‘and the ark rested in the seventh month’. Again in Exod. xx. 11, ‘for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day’. When we read in Gen. viii. 9, ‘the dove found no rest’, the word is manoach, or in viii. 21, ‘the Lord smelled a sweet savour’, the word ‘sweet’ is nichoach, and literally the passage reads, ‘a savour of rest’. 

Thus it will be seen that for God as well as man there is a place of rest, and that rest is Christ, of whom Noah and the ark are prophetic. 

Lamech in naming his son said, ‘this same shall comfort us (nacham, or give us rest) concerning our work and toil of our hands, because of the ground which the Lord hath cursed’. The word rendered ‘toil’ is twice rendered ‘sorrow’ in Gen. iii. where the curse is first pronounced, ‘I will greatly multiply thy sorrow’, and ‘in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life’ (verses 16, 17). The words ‘work and toil’ may be a figure, meaning very grievous work; the work and the toil are clearly specified as being the work and toil of the hands, and in connection with the ground, that under the curse yielded but thorns and thistles of itself, and bread only by ‘sweat of face’. 

Lamech, ‘the seventh from Adam’, in the line of Cain, has three sons, one (Jabal) kept cattle, and so continued in the work of the ground, but Jubal was the father of all such as handle the harp and organ, and Tubal-cain an instructor of every artificer in brass and iron. It would appear that the veneer which has spread over the curse, and which is variously named culture, civilization, etc., to-day, was originated by the sons of Lamech in Cain’s line; the Lamech who begat Noah, however, is in direct contrast, he does not appear to have attempted to evade the weary toil that must be experienced by those who, by sweat of face, eat the bread that is produced by the ground that is cursed. Lamech longed for rest, but he did not accept the vain travesties of Cain’s descendants. There are many to-day who, surrounded by the comforts and inventions of man could scarcely believe that there is truth in the record of the curse on the ground. The products of the earth and sea are brought to their door; no thought passes through their mind as to the sorrow and the toil that someone, somewhere, must endure to provide them with the necessities of life. Lamech knew no such deadening influence; the toil of his hands was hard and wearying because of the ground that the Lord had cursed. A friend writing recently gave an unconscious echo of Lamech’s words, saying, "When one, from the back of the land, sees the toil of man and beast, there come to the lips no more fitting words than, ‘Even so, Come, Lord Jesus’. " 

Harps and organs, however, melodious and charming, brass and iron, modeled and designed into the most wonderful of machines and inventions, though they may ‘prove’ to the natural man the upward development of man’s attainments, afford no rest for those in whose hearts the truth of God abides.Rest for them is found in the true Noah, whose witness and whose experiences testify of the resurrection, and a new heavens and a new earth,wherein dwelleth righteousness.” (From Volume VIII of The Berean Expositor, pages 101-103). 

Let us now set out the evident parallelism that the record of Genesis provides between the lift story of Adam and that of Noah. 

---------------------

(From The Berean Expositor vol. 42, page 232).
http://charleswelch.net/BE%20Vol%2042%20Final.pdf

------------------

Greater Riches than the Treasures in Egypt (3)

by Charles H. Welch

No.3. The only ground of boasting 

(I Cor. i. 31; iii. 21 - 23). 

In the preceding article we were concerned largely with the faction and division that raised the party cries ‘I am of Paul, I am of Apollos’ etc., and realized that this party spirit is in mind right through the section, Paul, Apollos and Cephas being mentioned by name in the closing verses of chapter iii. 

‘Glorying’ or ‘boasting’ falls into two main groups, namely, those things in which the believer can boast, and those things in which he cannot or must not boast. Those references which do not fall under one or other of these categories will need to be considered separately. 

(1) Legitimate grounds of boasting for the believer. 

This list can be headed with the words of I Cor. i. 31:

“He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.” 

The only true ground of boasting or glorying for a sinner saved by grace is expressed in the words of Gal. vi. 14: 

“But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ.” 

It is the characteristic of the true believer that he is one that: 

“Worships God in spirit, boasts or glories in Christ Jesus, and has no confidence in the flesh” (Phil. iii. 13). 

This boasting, while it may be expressed in faltering tones here and now, will be fully expressed in the day of redemption, 

“that I may rejoice, boast or glory, in the day of Christ, that I have not run in vain, neither laboured in vain” (Phil. ii. 16). 

This relation of the apostle’s “boasting” in that day, with the faithfulness of those believers who came under his care, is more fully announced when he said:

“For what is our hope, or joy, or crown or rejoicing (or glorying)? Are not ever ye in the presence of our Lord Jesus Christ at His coming?” (I Thess. ii. 19). 

When the Apostle would bring the first great section of Romans to a conclusion, which he does in Rom. v. 1-11, he writes his exultant praise around three occurrences of kauchaomai thus: 

A1 | 1, 2. BOASTING in hope. 

     B | 3-. Not only so. 

A2 | -3-10. BOASTING in tribulation also. 

     B | 11-. Not only so. 

A3 | -11. BOASTING in God. 

The interposition of the ‘glorying in tribulations also’ brings us to another aspect of truth. It must not be assumed from the rigorous denial of all grounds of boasting in self and the flesh, that Paul was austere or unsympathetic in his dealings with fellow believers—the opposite is the truth. He finds some grounds for thanksgiving in the opening salutation of the epistle to the Corinthians, even though the bulk of the epistle exposes such aberration and folly as to cause the Apostle to weep. After all that he has said to the contrary he said he would ‘boast’ in himself, but not in his prowess his wisdom, his success, but in his infirmities! 

“He said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee; for My strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me . . . . . for when I am weak, then I am strong” (II Cor. xii. 9, 10). 

He who could glory in tribulations and infirmities as did the Apostle, was no defeatist or cynic; he was an exultant believer delivered once and for ever from the vanity of self-justification, and could, from that standpoint, see that even his own acknowledged frailty but emphasized the power of Christ upon him. In much the same way, the same Apostle who resolutely set aside all boasting in self and in men, could punctuate II Cor. vii.-ix. with this boasting in the generosity of the Corinthian church.

“Great is my boldness of speech toward you, great is my glorying of you: I am filled with comfort, I am exceeding joyful in all our tribulation” (II Cor. vii. 4). 

Other references to the same theme are II Cor. vii. 14; viii. 24 and ix. 3, 4. But in all this the discerning reader will see that there is no boasting in the flesh. To this end, the concluding verse of II Cor. ix. should be pondered. When he had said all that could be said about the liberality of the Corinthians and their magnificent response, he gives the whole passage a significant turn at the end by saying: 

“Thanks be unto God for His unspeakable Gift” (II Cor. ix. 15). 

Similarly when Paul said that he had whereof he could boast through Jesus Christ, it was ‘in those things which pertain to God’, which the context reveals to be the grace given to him as the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles (Rom. xv. 15-20). In like manner, in the self-same chapter of Galatians where he writes ‘God forbid that I should boast’ he says “But let every man prove his own work and then shall he have rejoicing (or a ground of boasting) in himself alone, and not in another. For every man shall bear his own burden (or allotted task, pack or load)” (Gal. vi. 4, 5). 

(2) The Apostle has brought together a series of reasons to show that boasting in human merit, when the subject is related to sin and salvation, is entirely excluded. 

Again we can head this list with quotations from the passages in Corinthians that are before us: 

“That no flesh should glory in His presence” (I Cor. i. 29). 

“Therefore let no man glory in men” (I Cor. iii. 21). 

In his two fundamental epistles, namely Romans and Ephesians, while the dispensations differ and the sphere of blessing differs, they are in accord regarding the question of boasting in self. Having brought the great question of justification by faith without the deeds of the law to its triumphant conclusion in Rom. iii. 19-26, he puts the question and supplies the answer. 

“Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith” (Rom. iii. 27). 

In like manner, in Ephesians, he speaks of salvation and boasting: 

“By grace are ye saved through faith: and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God. Not of works, lest any man should boast” (Eph. ii. 8, 9). 

The classic example of Abraham occupies a large portion of the opening section of Rom. i. 1 - v.11, and there we read:

“What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found?” (Rom. iv. 1). 

All that Paul has said is summed up in the words of I Cor. i. 29 “That no flesh should glory in His presence”. 

It might be well if we remember that enopion “In His Presence” is translated “in His sight” in Rom. iii. 20: 

“There shall be no flesh justified in His sight” (Rom. iii. 20). 

The intensive form katenopion and its usage makes any boasting in the presence of God, excepting boasting in the Lord, impossible. The word occurs but five times. Two references deal with witness (II Cor. ii. 17; xii. 19), the remaining three with complete and unconditional acceptance. 

“According as He hath chosen us in Him, before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame BEFORE Him” (Eph. i. 4). 

“In the body of His flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in His SIGHT” (Col. i. 22). 

What more fitting conclusion to an article like this can there be than the doxology of the epistle of Jude: 

“Now unto Him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless BEFORE THE PRESENCE of His glory, with exceeding joy, TO the only wise God our Saviour, be glory, and majesty, dominion and power both now and ever. Amen.” (Jude 24, 25). 

---------------

(From The Berean Expositor vol. 41, page 115).

http://charleswelch.net/BE%20Vol%2041%20Final.pdf

---------------