|
So close, His shadow falls, His shade to cast On Me to hide from every threat without; Within? This peace e’er unsurpassed will last Within the fortress of My God; no doubt Of my deliverance divides My thought; For God, My Help in ages past, on Whom I set My heart, salvation He has wrought Against the arrowed enemy at noon And of the terror of the night that stalks – Persistent pestilence in shadowy coil That strikes against the light of day; He walks With Me, and I – by Him – inspirited to toil Against this tempter and his crafty past, Now seeking thrice to trap Me in his snare; But God will rescue Me, My life will last, Forever guarded by His loving care. But God delivers Me, My life will last Forever, guarded by His loving care.
0 Comments
Two years ago today in the early morning, Dad entered the presence of the Lord. In memory of him, today I am posting a poem that he wrote and would recite to my sister and me, mostly when asked. It is called “The Sea.”
Each stanza begins with the same two words, yet there is no set meter or rhyme scheme. Therefore to me, the poem captures both the repetitious, patterned movement of the waves and the unpredictability of the sea. The poem feels like the ocean moving up and down, side to side, over and over again, yet with unexpected metaphor and imagery in each stanza. Best of all, the poem ends with peace and expectation with a word on how the sea is a "sanctuary" for those whom God made to dwell there. The Sea The sea comes rolling in at dawn. It is like a great army Trying to take possession of what it owns By flooding a vast area of sand and sea creatures to get it. The sea is cold to the touch With its blue mountains Rising into the morning mist Then reaching up and pulling down the sky. The sea is an angry giant. It can wreck a ship Or flood a small town in an instant Destroying life and property. The sea is a playground for some And a way of life for the ones who know it well. But when the day is done, And there are no more people or ships on its waters, It becomes a sanctuary for all the creatures in it, until tomorrow. Here is another gem of an excerpt from Douglas F. Kelly’s commentary on Revelation. In this passage, he speaks of the assurance the Christian can have that Christ will successfully subdue all his enemies as his Kingdom expands throughout the earth. Every false political system or religious system that does submit to the authority of Christ will eventually fail. Kelly writes, In Revelation 11, the seventh and the last trump of the angel celebrates the victorious, never-ending reign of the enthroned Lord Jesus Christ. It is a celebration of the new creation which starts with the expansion of the Spirit-baptized church. This is good news, for once the seventh trumpet, the last trump, is sounded it means that no power, Satanic or otherwise, can stop the expansion of the glorious reign of the Lord Jesus Christ on earth. That is why we can be certain the year will come that Communism will fall in China, just as the Berlin wall came down and the USSR came apart – the trump has sounded and evil systems that seek to stop the expansion of the gospel will eventually fall. That will be the case with Islam, which seems so powerful with all its oil money and wishes to use it to stop the gospel. Down it must go, because the seventh trump, the last trump, has sounded at the glorious reign of Christ: he will be victorious over all his enemies. Kelly writes with a postmillennial hope that Christ will be victorious in subduing all that the Father has given him as his inheritance. He writes with the postmillennial hope that Christ will actually save the world that he came to save. He writes with the postmillennial hope that the Great Commission will be fulfilled – all the nations will be discipled and know the Lord. Praise God for the victory we have in Christ!
Kelly, Douglas. Revelation: A Mentor Expository Commentary. Ross-shire, Scotland: Mentor, 2012. p. 208-9. The best book I read in 2025 was Michael Morales’s Who Shall Ascend the Mountain of the Lord?: A Biblical Theology of the Book of Leviticus. Morales has taken a book of the Bible that many slog through in their Bible-reading plan and has turned it into really enchanting reading. Reading Morales’s book was pure delight and I’m looking forward to reading it again. It is a well-written, thoughtful work of biblical theology that helps the reader to savor the Word of God more. That, to me, is the best kind of book. Here is a sample from the “Prologue” which gives an idea of how illuminating this book is. Reflecting on the structure of the tabernacle and the Aaronic blessing in Numbers 6:23-27, Morales writes, In summary, the light of the lampstand represents the life-giving Presence of God, his blessed glory, while the twelve loaves represent the twelve tribes of Israel. Aaron’s role of regularly arranging the lamps so that they shone upon the loaves summarizes the role and function of the priesthood to mediate God’s blessings to his people. One might say, in short, that these references to Numbers summarize the role of the cultus for Israel’s relationship with God, as it relates to the goal of the covenant. Numbers 6:23-27 and 8:1-4 present the blessing of God upon the people of God, mediated by the priesthood of God. Morales, L. Michael. Who Shall Ascend the Mountain of the Lord? A Biblical Theology of the Book of Leviticus. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2015, p. 17.
Psalm 110:1 is arguably the most quoted and alluded to verse in the New Testament. Many of those quotations are found in the book of Hebrews (1:3, 1:13, 8:1, 10:12, 12:2). Psalm 110:4 is also quoted in Hebrews (5:6, 5:10, 6:20, 7:17, 7:21), indicating that Jesus is the fulfillment of the Melchizedekian priest-king who has inaugurated a new and better covenant. As Melchizedek was both a priest and king, so is Jesus. In the following paragraph, Beale reminds us that Jesus, by his resurrection from the dead, becomes the fulfillment of the Melchizedekian priest-king, while also reminding us that Jesus is the “last Adam.” He writes, The resurrection demonstrates not only Jesus’s kingship but also his priesthood: “We have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God.” (Heb. 4:14). Psalm 2:7, in addition to supporting Jesus’s kingly inheritance in Heb. 1:2-4, is adduced to support Jesus becoming “high priest” at the time of his resurrection. Conceptually, this also has an analogue with Gen. 1-2, where we saw that Adam, being a king in God’s image, was also a priest. And it is not likely coincidental that the first mention of priesthood in Hebrews is at 2:17, right on the heels of Jesus’s portrayal as the “last Adam” figure (cf. 2:6-9). That it was the resurrection that also clearly indicated Christ’s eternal priesthood is clear from 7:16-17: Christ “has become [a Melchizedekian priest] not on the basis of a law of physical requirement, but according to the power of an indestructible life. For it is attested of Him, ‘You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek.’” Consequently, Jesus “abides forever” and “holds his priesthood permanently,” so that “he always lives to make intercession” for his people (7:24-25). Here we see at least two ways that Jesus fulfills the Old Testament expectation. He is the new and better Adam, the Man who achieved what the first Adam failed to achieve. Jesus is also the new and better Melchizedek, the priest-king who reigns from heaven where he is seated at the right hand of the Father (Ps 110:1). From there, he intercedes for his people. Beale continues with the significance of Jesus’ ascension: Now, in Heb. 8, the author puts together formally what has been implied in the preceding chapters: Christ’s kingship and priesthood are of a piece and are a result of his ascension: “Now the main point in what has been said is this: we have such a high priest, who has taken His seat at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens” (v. 1). That Christ’s ascension propelled him as a priest into a new creation is apparent from 9:11: “But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation.” He became a priest in a temple of the new creation (cf. similarly 9:24). Again, 10:12-13 underscores the combination of priesthood and kingship in the one person of Jesus: “He, having offered [as a priest] one sacrifice for sins for all time, sat down at the right hand of God, waiting from that time onward until His enemies be made a footstool for His feet.” The old creation was corrupted by sin, but in the ascended Christ, the new creation has come. Finally, a man–the Man Jesus Christ–has fulfilled the mission that Adam failed to achieve. Christ, by his redemptive work and through gospel proclamation, is filling the earth and subduing it. He is bringing all things into submission under his feet, and he will reign until all his enemies are made his footstool. May his Kingdom come on earth as it is in heaven!
Beale, G. K. A New Testament Biblical Theology: The Unfolding of the Old Testament in the New. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2011, p. 318-19. The sixth and final of Douglas Kelly’s “indicators” for Revelation’s early date deals with the military imagery used in the book. Kelly claims that the weapons of warfare fit with the Jewish War against Rome in the first century, not with current or futuristic weapons of wars. Kelly writes, Sixth, the military imagery used in Revelation fits with the Jewish War of 70 AD. Horses and swords are used, not tanks, airplanes, and missiles. It takes a violence of interpretation to get the military equipment spoken of to mean anything but typical first century hardware. There is no compelling reason to resort to such interpretation when the events of 70 AD literally fulfill the kinds of battles spoken of in Revelation (and Matt. 24). Dispensational pundits on the radio and internet are frequently heard analogizing the weapons mentioned in Revelation and using those analogies to predict future events like the appearance of the Antichrist or the final coming of Christ. At best, this hermeneutic does violence to the text and fails to interpret Revelation within the first century time indicators it gives (i.e. “soon,” “quickly,” “about to,” etc.). At worst, this type of “prophecy” manipulates the listener into living within a worldview that is not consistent with that of the Bible. Kelly’s commentary is worth reading because he consistently seeks to situate Revelation in its first century context. Far from making the book of Revelation irrelevant to us, Kelly's preterist reading allows us modern readers to apply the text properly to our own lives without over-analogizing the text out of its first-century context. Let horses and swords be horses and swords.
Kelly, Douglas. Revelation: A Mentor Expository Commentary. Ross-shire, Scotland: Mentor, 2012. p. 20-1. In his commentary on Revelation, Douglas F. Kelly gives six “indicators” that support Revelation’s early date of composition (before 70 AD). His fifth indicator is that the sixth king in Revelation 17 is still alive at the time that John received the revelation, and that sixth king is Nero. Kelly writes, Fifth, Revelation appears to have been written during the life of the sixth king (or Roman Emperor). Revelation 17:9-10 states: ‘And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sitteth. And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.’ If one counts from Julius Caesar (as the first emperor), then the sixth would be Nero, who started the first official Roman persecution against the Church in 64 AD. Nero died in 68 AD, so it appears that Revelation was written before his death. [1] In his book The Last Days According to Jesus, R. C. Sproul argues that though some scholars prefer to start counting the kings (emperors) with Augustus Caesar (who was emperor after Julius), it is more natural to begin with Julius. He writes, A more natural approach, however, is to begin the list of kings with Julius Caesar, as was the custom of ancient historians such as Josephus and Suetonius, as well as Dio Cassius. In this series, the sixth king is Nero. If he is the king referred to in Revelation in the present tense, then this adds considerable weight to the argument for dating the book in the mid- to late-sixties. [2] [1]Kelly, Douglas. Revelation: A Mentor Expository Commentary. Ross-shire, Scotland: Mentor, 2012. p. 20.
[2] Sproul, R. C. The Last Days According to Jesus: When Did Jesus Say He Would Return? Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1998, p. 159-160. The book of Revelation contains many strong bits of internal evidence in favor of an early date of composition (before 70 AD). One piece of internal evidence that Douglas F. Kelly, along with many others, finds convincing is that the Temple in Jerusalem seems to have been still standing when John receives instructions to measure it. Kelly writes, Fourth, Revelation 11:1-2 seems to consider the Jerusalem Temple as still standing when Revelation was written (as we find in Matthew 24, Luke 21, and Mark 13). The Christ whom so much of Judaism officially rejected will judge them and their now apostate temple worship as his judgment descends by means of the Roman army in 70 AD. There is no scriptural reason to postpone this historic judgment to some future rebuilt temple. If John wrote Revelation after 70 AD, it must be asked what temple John was told to measure. In Dispensationalism, a future, third temple is supposed, yet nowhere does the Bible say anything about a third, future, rebuilt temple. Another common interpretation, especially among amillennials, is that the temple John is told to measure is the church, which in Ephesians 2:21-22 is referred to as a growing temple. Given the context of Revelation 11, however, and the prophecy in verse 2 that the city would be trampled underfoot for 42 months (i.e. 67 AD to late 70 AD when the Temple was destroyed), the most likely answer is that John was told to measure the Temple in Jerusalem and that he received these instructions prior to 70 AD.
Kelly, Douglas. Revelation: A Mentor Expository Commentary. Ross-shire, Scotland: Mentor, 2012. p. 20. Jesus said to them, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” And they marveled at him. -- Mark 12:17, ESV You must not forget that Caesar is dead
In humble submission to life’s final law And proof that Rutherford’s dictum remains The truest submission, the truest of all. In his new booklet entitled Your Sons and Daughters: Paedocommunion, the Gospel, and the Church, Peter Leithart argues that our understanding of the church should shape our understanding of who can and should receive the sacraments. As one who grew up in a Christian tradition where baptized children were welcomed to the table, I appreciate Leithart's defense of paedobaptism and paedocommunion. It gives words to what I experienced as a child. I wanted to share a couple of quotes. Paul's sacramental reasoning can be extended in many directions. We know, for instance, that the church is a body in which divisions of Jew and Gentile, slave and free, male and female have been dissolved (Galatians 3:28), and Paul severely rebuked Peter when his table fellowship failed to line up with this ecclesial reality (Galatians 2:11-21). A church that refuses bread and wine to blacks, or to whites, or to Asians, is lying about both the church and the Supper. More pointedly: Paul says that the church is a community where the weakest and most unseemly are welcomed (1 Corinthians 12:22-26). Does the Baptist refusal to baptize infants give ritual expression to that kind of church, or does it instead imply that the church welcomes only the smart and the strong? (p. 11-12) He adds in a footnote: I am not suggesting that Baptists are unmerciful toward the weak. Many Baptist churches put paedobaptists to shame in this regard. I am asking whether Baptist baptism tells us the truth about the church. My experience is the same as what Leithart articulates. I am a member of a predominately credo-baptist church with lots of mature believers who are engaged in all sorts of mercy ministries. I am honored to be a part of my church and am thankful that I am accepted even as a "sacramental outlier." However, I also wonder with Leithart if "Baptist baptism tells us the truth" or if it best gets to the heart of who the church is supposed to be as God's people in the world. I do not see anywhere in the New Testament where covenant (church) membership is redefined to be more exclusive--even less, more exclusive of children--than in the Old Testament. Here's the second quote I wanted to share. [W]e might note that the same Paul who warned against unworthy participation in the Supper said in the same letter that the children of believers are "saints" (1 Corinthians 7:14). Dare we call unclean what God has cleaned?...What are we saying about the church when we exclude children from the table? (p. 24-5) We must consider how our sacramental practices serve to receive (or reject!) those whom God has welcomed. What if in our desire to "fence the table," we fence out a major group that Jesus explicitly wants in? Didn't He say the Kingdom of God was "of such as these"? Surely God's promises of covenant faithfulness still extend to our children today as they did in the Old Testament, even to the thousandth generation (Deut. 7:9). May they taste and see that He is their God.
Leithart, Peter. Your Sons and Daughters: Paedocommunion, the Gospel, and the Church. West Monroe, LA: Athanasius Press, 2025. |
writer
Michael Price - I am a husband, father of three, poet, and science teacher at a classical Christian school in Memphis, TN. I have four volumes of poetry. My latest volume The Shadowed Night can be purchased by clicking on the button below. 
Archives
December 2025
Categories |
RSS Feed