Episode 245

Welcome to Halting Toward Zion, the podcast where we limp like Jacob to the Promised Land and talk about life, the universe, and everything along the way. I’m Emily Maxson here with Greg Uttinger and Rachel Voytek, and we are in Acts 10.

We’ve been talking about Peter’s vision of all manner of four-footed beasts of the earth, wild beasts, creeping things, and fowls of the air being lowered down on a sheet and offered to him three times – in fact, not even offered, there was a command and he was like, “No, Lord.” We talked about that last time, so going on we’re going to start in verse 17 of Acts 10.

Now while Peter doubted in himself what this vision which he had seen should mean, behold, the men which were sent from Cornelius had made enquiry for Simon's house, and stood before the gate [that is they were outside] and called…

They were apparently yelling, “Anyone there? Is there a Peter here?”

…and asked whether Simon, which was surnamed Peter, were lodged there. While Peter thought on the vision, the Spirit said unto him, Behold, three men seek thee.

A little Holy Spirit amplifying the doorbell there.

Yeah.

Arise therefore, and get thee down and go with them, doubting nothing, for I have sent them.

So there’s this marvelous vision of the sheet being lowered with all kinds of animals in it. Three times Peter’s told, “Arise, kill or slaughter and eat,” and each time, “Not so, Lord, for I’ve never eaten anything common or unclean.” Unclean would mean according to the dietary laws of the Old Testament. Common would mean “hangs out with such” and therefore very questionable. Having told God no three times – uh-oh, three times, hmm, have we been here before? – he’s wondering what it all means, doubting in himself.

Emily, have you had time to look up the word?

Yes. It’s more “thinking through things” as in he’s wondering or he’s confused. It’s not the opposite of faith. That’s not the way we would use that word. Similarly, later when it says “doubting nothing” it could mean doubt, it could mean hesitate, but it plays against itself in English but not in the original. It’s not the same word.

Good, so Peter has had a 3-fold vision. He hears voices, which he may or may not be able to understand, calling his name. He has the Holy Spirit telling him in plain koine Greek or Aramaic, whatever he was speaking at the time, “There are three men there. I sent them. Go with them. Do it,” and so he does.

Then Peter went down to the men which were sent unto him from Cornelius and said, Behold, I am he whom ye seek. What is the cause wherefore ye are come?

Now, we’re going to get Cornelius’ story a number of times – four I think all together – and it would be easy as a student of literature or as a writer to say, “You know, we could just sum up here and move along. People are going to fall asleep hearing the same…” but this is speaking again of history.

This is a key moment in history. If the ball gets fumbled here, all of history gets changed. This is the moment where the church realizes not simply that the gospel can go to the Gentiles – they kind of actually understood that – but they had the Old Testament perspective. “Of course, they’re God-fearers. We keep them at a safe distance, but occasionally they do nice things for us and we appreciate that. But go hang out with them?”

Or they become Jews and they come in via that method.

Yes, by circumcision, which was not terribly popular for obvious reasons. So it’s very important that the church (we) really, really get this, so more of that as we go along.

And they said, Cornelius the centurion [Roman name, Roman title], a just man, and one that feareth God, and of good report among all the nation of the Jews…

Ok, checking all the boxes there, he’s a righteous man, sensitive to the laws of God and tries to keep them. He fears God, takes God seriously. If you fear God you only fear the one God, so he’s not a polytheist or idolator. He’s of good report and all your Jewish relatives who know him really like him. In fact, the whole nation of the Jews. He’s known throughout Israel.

…was warned from God by a holy angel…

We’re stacking up things here. “They’re having to sell this to me.” They’ve no doubt had dealings with Jews before, and this would be difficult in the best of circumstances. Can you imagine a friend of yours coming and saying, “Well, let’s not cast it like this, let’s cast it like ‘There was this UFO that just landed in my backyard, and it brought me news of impending doom for our planet.’

“What have you been drinking? Where’s the camera? Where’s the joke?”

This is on a different level, but it’s that same kind of, “He’s not going to believe us, is he?” “Probably not.” “Okay, make sure you say that.” “Yeah.” “And this.” “Yeah.” “And that. It’s an angel, make sure it’s a holy angel.” “Okay.” “And it’s sent from God.” “Yes, of course he is.”

… to send for thee into his house…

It’s not to come out into a marketplace or a neutral area or hilltop and talk to him. Come into his house. You just didn’t do that, as Peter is going to tell us.

… and to hear words of thee.

Interestingly enough, that doesn’t quite register with Peter because when he gets there he’s going to say, “So what did you want to know?”

“What’s your job, Peter?”

Then called he them in and lodged them.

That’s significant because they’re almost certainly Roman soldiers or at least Gentiles of some sort working for Rome. Of course, Simon the tanner is already kind of questionable anyway since he’s a tanner and the Jews barely consider him a Jew at all. Still, Peter is there so they bring these guys in and lodge them.

And on the morrow Peter went away with them, and certain brethren from Joppa accompanied him.

So word gets around that something interesting is going on, something unusual, something outside our social normals. “Hey, we want to see, too! You might need an observer. You might need a witness. I think it’s going to be weird,” so they’re all going for whatever personal reasons.

And the morrow after they entered into Caesarea.

We were talking last time about how far the trip was. It’s two days. He just said so. You could push it into one, I imagine, but not easily.

And Cornelius waited for them, and he had called together his kinsmen and near friends.

He has had a wide impact in his ministry to people.

And as Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him and fell down at his feet and worshipped him.

Possibly not in the idolatrous sense of, “Oh no, this is God,” but showing him way more respect. He’s a Roman. He’s used to falling down before nobles and people like that.

But Peter’s about to stop him.

Yes, Peter stops him real fast.

But Peter took him up, saying Stand up. I myself also am a man.

For Peter it’s not all about him. There are some famous preachers today who might do well to learn that lesson.

Those who consider themselves the heirs of Peter.

And as he talked with him, he went in and found many that were come together.

So he’s gone into the house and this is crossing social boundaries and Jewish taboos.

And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company or come unto one of another nation…

The word ‘unlawful’ doesn’t mean contrary to God’s law. It means disorderly or not the way things are done around here, not the way good people act, that kind of thing. We’re breaking some major taboos here.

…but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.

He’s beginning to put the pieces together. That’s the line from the vision. “Oh, he wasn’t talking primarily or ultimately at least about animals. He’s talking about people and I should not call any man either unclean, so that’s new, or common. The fact that people go and hang out with Gentiles doesn’t contaminate them, so God is telling me to change my mindset.” Peter is getting it, little by little.

Therefore came I unto you without gainsaying, as soon as I was sent for. I ask therefore for what intent ye have sent for me?

I think that’s my opening to tell the story again.

And Cornelius said, Four days ago I was fasting until this hour, and at the ninth hour…

Again, this was the time of the offering of the evening sacrifice and the offering of the incense in the holy place, so it’s an appropriate time.

…I prayed in my house, and behold, a man stood before me in bright clothing.

He doesn’t call him an angel. He softens it to “a man in bright clothing,” but notice where – in his house. “The angel came into my house.” Okay, the angel’s in the house.

He said, Cornelius, thy prayer is heard, and thine alms are had in remembrance in the sight of God.

It’s not as something earning merit but as something reflecting this man’s zeal for the Lord and his desire to be useful, so God’s going to use him.

Send therefore to Joppa, and call hither Simon, whose surname is Peter. He is lodged in the house of one Simon a tanner by the sea side, who, when he cometh, shall speak unto thee. Immediately therefore I sent to thee, and thou hast well done that thou art come. Now therefore are we all here present before God, to hear all things that are commanded thee of God.

“I don’t know what words you’re supposed to speak, but I thought God told you. So whatever he told you, you probably should tell us, and we’re all here to hear them.”

Rachel, is there anything that you would add to this from your church history lessons?

I think you covered most of it, other than that Peter does get more information in the second retelling because the men give a summary the first time. But Cornelius as the eyewitness has a very good memory for exactly what happened in the vision and surrounding it, and also he again confirms that it’s been four days – two days to go get Peter, two days to come back. He shows very much the immediacy with which he acts. He’s a man of action, we might say, and again layering in that he is not being presumptuous to ask for these things, but rather he doesn’t really know what he’s going to get.

Again, the historical note of four days. We’re tying passing time to geographical location. They’re not writing myths and fables. They’ve set this in the real world because it happened in the real world.

Then Peter opened his mouth and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons.

That’s not because all people are good and nice and sweet and basically divine.

It also doesn’t mean that God ain’t got no respect. That’s not what that means.

No. It means that before Him all humans are creatures and sinners and in need of salvation, and at that level at least outward circumstances, conditions of birth, social standing, color of skin – all of that is irrelevant to God because those things in and of themselves don’t make you more sinful, and they certainly don’t make you more holy or acceptable to God.

God does show respect in that he elects some to eternal life and he ensures that some hear the gospel, but it’s not based on anything in them. He doesn’t go around looking for the good people, the right people, his favorite kind of people. He picks a lot of really weird people to be his children.

But in every nation he that feareth him and worketh righteousness is accepted with him.

Fearing God is the attitude of the heart. It’s a synonym more or less for faith. Again it’s a word that Revelation uses to sum up the everlasting gospel – fear God and worship him – and then works that out in terms of a lifestyle that conforms to God’s love.

If you’ve got that, again it doesn’t matter what your skin color is, what nation you were born in or what continent or what language you speak. All of that is irrelevant to God. He looks at the heart and then he looks at ethical conduct that flows from it.

The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ (he is Lord of all) that word, I say ye know, which was published throughout all Judaea…

So he gets a lot in. Again in the early sermons in Acts it’s interesting how much they leave for the very end or sometimes just leave implied. It doesn’t start with, “The second person of the Trinity took on flesh in this thing we call the hypostatic union so he could do substitutionary atone for sin, and those who trust in him are justified, having his righteousness…” He doesn’t do that. There’s nothing wrong with that, assuming the person understands what you’re talking about, but they approached it differently.

Sometimes we need to stop and realize that it’s one thing when you’re drilling or grilling somebody on their theological orthodoxy. It’s something else when you’re talking to this person you just met.

I love how he begins with asking what Cornelius wants. He’s trying to listen first. Then from Cornelius’s answer you get that Cornelius wants to hear the word of God, which is more information than we had before. That’s what he’s after, and I think Peter wanted to know that that’s what he was after.

Also he presumes that Cornelius knows things. He doesn’t assume he’s an ignorant pagan. He has listened and said, “Oh, you do know some of the word of God. You know what’s been going on in this area about Jesus. You know the history of Jesus.”

And so the word which God sent preaching peace, shalom, peace for body and soul, for now and forever, by Jesus the Messiah. He is Lord of all, which is to say he’s God, but he doesn’t flesh that out. He just drops it there as really important. It shows up as a parenthesis in the King James, but this is a central message here. How are you going to find peace? The implication is you need him as your Lord.

That word, I say ye know, which was published throughout all Judaea, and began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached.

“You know.” Later on when Paul is standing before one of the kings, I think it’s Agrippa, he says, “I am convinced that the king knows these things because this was not done in a corner.” These were not things that happened in some obscure corner of the empire. Well, Palestine is pretty obscure, I guess, but at least for anyone living in the area Jesus’ name was well-known. John the Baptist in some respects had been apparently even more well-known, possibly because he broke the 400 years of silence, at least for most Israelites.

Jesus had done some pretty spectacular things. He was popular and unpopular, loved and hated, he’s been crucified, and there were rumors that he didn’t stay dead. So there was a lot of stuff going on, probably some conflicting accounts as there are today.

Again I’m reminded of a hotel room in Rome where a couple of my students were sharing a room and came to me. “This girl who’s sharing our room wants to know about Judas because she’s been watching…” it was either Jesus Christ Superstar or Godspell, I forget which. “She’s confused because…”

“Alright, you could probably do this fine by yourselves but okay, I’ll get up,” so I got out of bed and went out in the hallway. It was a large well-lit hallway with couches, so we sat down. She was saying, “It’s almost like Jesus knew that Judas was going to betray him!”

“I’m going to answer your questions, but I want you to tell me something. Who was Jesus?”

“Oh, he was this great kind and loving man who did great things, but people hated him. He was so great, it was almost like he was like God or something. But they hated him and they killed him!”

“Is Jesus alive today?”

“Oh, no.”

“Okay, I’m going to tell you a story,” and I started at the last supper, and when I was done she said, “That’s the greatest story ever!”

This young lady attended what she thought was an evangelical church. She did not know Jesus was God. She did not know he was alive. To her he was this great kind good man who made enemies and was martyred.

When you talk to people about Jesus, they’ve heard lots of things, good and bad. Finding out where people are and what they may know or what they don’t know is sometimes useful. Sometimes you can just tell them the truth and let them ask the questions. “Wait a minute, do you mean…?”

“Yes, I do actually, or more to the point God does.”

How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good…

So, a tangent of major proportions. I just came across something a couple days ago in my own Bible reading. There’s a passage in James that you know where James says, “Don’t say today or tomorrow we’ll go here and do this. You have to say ‘If the Lord wills we’ll do this or that,’ for what is your life? It is a vapor that appeareth for a short time and passeth away,’” and suddenly it struck me. He’s quoting Ecclesiastes. That changes the nature of what comes after that because he sums it up by saying, “Therefore, to him that knoweth to do good and doeth it not, to him it’s sin.”

The commentaries I’ve read over the years – and I haven’t been exhaustive with my reading by any means, but the ones I’ve seen have looked at the ‘therefore’ and said, “It doesn’t really go back to anything. It’s just kind of a “by the way, here’s a thought for you.”

I didn’t think that was it, but I couldn’t find anybody who could supply an answer. How does “if you know to do good and you don’t do it, you’re sinning” – how does that follow from what he’s just said? In other words, how does it follow from Ecclesiastes? Once you realize it’s Ecclesiastes, what is the summary of Ecclesiastes? Fear God and keep his commandments.

What does it mean to do good? In the context of Ecclesiastes, especially the last chapter or so, the wise man is talking about investing. “Cast your bread upon the waters. Sow in the morning and the evening, for you do not know which will prosper, this or that, or whether…” In other words, take chances with opportunities. Do good where you can because then God can bless. And if you know you should do this and you don’t do it, that’s sin.

He’s not talking about, “I should have put $5 more in the offering plate if I really was tithing.” You should, but that’s not what it’s saying. He’s not saying that anytime we know that we should keep God’s commandments and we fail we sin. Duh. That’s not the point. The point is that when you have an opportunity to do something of significance that can bring an impact to someone else’s life, and you chicken out for one reason or another, or you can’t be motivated to cross the room and talk to that person about Jesus, or whatever – then that good thing is sin.

What does it have to do with this? Jesus went about doing good. That doesn’t mean he went around handing people bottles of water or giving them directions to tourist attractions.

Yeah, he talked to that lady at the well who asked him for water and he said something quite spectacular at that time.

I think you could connect it very much to the parable of the talents, where it’s about using what the Lord has given you and not burying it. Jesus, to the utmost, used all the good that the Lord gave him. All the anointing of the Spirit he used perfectly to speak the truth to others from God, to do all manner of good.

And that’s what it’s getting at is not that he was a nice guy. In fact, the next line gives us a little peak into at least part of what he has in mind.

…who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil…

Not just healing people, which of course he did, but oppressed of the devil. He takes it down to the level of spiritual warfare. There’s spiritual warfare going on in Judea and around the world, and Jesus entered into it with all that God gave him.

Part of that was visible to us in terms of the healing miracles that he did, because many of these people were in that condition because of Satanic influence of one sort or another. So that’s the Jesus – not the nice guy who helps grannies across the street, but the divine warrior full of the Spirit who, as you said, takes all that God has given him and lays it out in an assault on Satan’s kingdom, and there are visible things that are unusual – we call them miracles – that testify that that’s what was going on here.

…for God was with him.

There’s a nice understatement for you. He doesn’t say, “Because he was God.” But again, as Messiah, as God in man, he’s emphasizing our Lord’s humanity. Yes, the Father was with him and around him and about him and in him.

And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem, whom they slew and hanged on a tree.

Anybody familiar with the Old Testament would pick up on that. “Wait, anyone hung on a tree is accursed of God.” He doesn’t say cross. In fact, the apostles in Acts generally don’t. They generally say tree, probably because it was a tree, but it also drives home the Old Testament passages in Deuteronomy where the sign that God has wholly rejected you and that all of his wrath has come upon you is if your carcass is thrown on a tree until sundown, so that would stand out. It’s not the kind of thing you usually brag about for your religious leader or your God, the most despicable thing that ever happened to him. No, no, that was a good thing.

Him God raised up the third day and shewed him openly, not to all the people, but unto witnesses chosen before God, even to us who did eat and drink with him after he rose from the dead.

In passing, drinking almost certainly means drinking wine, because that’s what the phrase means every other time that it’s used of Jesus, so his temporary Nazirite vow was over. The kingdom of God had come. He would drink wine with them again after he rose from the dead.

And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead.

That’s a line that finds its way into the Apostles’ Creed. Paul will also kind of climax his sermon on Mars Hill with that same thing. He’s the judge of the world. He’s the Lord of all. He’s got the fullness of the Holy Spirit, and he’s the judge of the living and the dead. Read between the lines here.

You can almost see this as an echo of John 1:1 in that we’re starting with Jesus being Lord of all. He was the Word. He’s pre-existent. That does mean that he’s God, but that’s not what John says yet.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

That’s a more blatant statement. Saying that Jesus is going to be the judge of the world is another way of saying that he’s God.

Yes, it’s God who judges the world.

It’s also a very significant statement for us thinking of history, because as we move forward Peter is telling us, “This is one of the most important things we need to keep track of and tell people about for the rest of history.” That’s what Jesus has told us to do, because knowing that Jesus is the judge, and what the standard is that he’s judging by, is the most important thing in history for anyone to know.

And that’s why that phrase finds its way into the Apostles’ Creed. If the Apostles’ Creed were being invented today we probably would say something about “And Jesus is coming back real soon,” but that’s not what he says. He talks about judging the living and the dead, which by the way is what the word ‘quick’ means.

It’s not something that Christians talk about very much, and when we do we generally talk about the judgement seat of Christ, and rewards and crowns, and what do all the crowns mean, and all that kind of stuff. There’s a place for that, but far more significant is that your eternal destiny will be announced to the universe on that day, and the one who announces it will be Jesus the Messiah, who is God, and how you have related to him.

When you stand before a judge who holds your life in his hands, the fact that you, I don’t know, shot his dog and raped his daughter yesterday probably is going to be something you’re going to regret at that point, so you need to know who this is you’re dealing with and that there are consequences for how you deal with him. He’s not going to say, “Oh, but I’m so loving and kind, come on in anyway. It’s one big party.” That’s not what’s going to happen.

Speaking again of history, there is an end to redemptive history, when the last of God’s elect is saved and God blows the whistle and calls time and Jesus comes back with the trumpet blast and the dead are raised and the whole world stands before him for judgement.

How far off that is, or how soon, is not our business but it is a certainty, and history is moving toward that. There are things that need to happen along the way because that’s the climax, it’s not the quick way out, and meanwhile there’s a battle that Jesus initiated. He fought against the devil. Well, there’s more fighting to do.

There’s one more thing that’s crucially important.

To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.

That’s justification by faith, so it is here. “I’ve told you all these things.” He doesn’t wait for Cornelius to say, “Well, men and brothers, what shall we do?” Peter knows he’s going to want to know what to do. “You need to trust in this one I’ve described to you – the judge of the world, the Lord of all, the one who fought the devil on his own turf, the one who died and rose again – died, cursed of God, and yet raised by God to be the judge. You have to believe on him, and if you do then you will be forgiven of all your sins.”

Again, there’s not a theological and legal explanation. The words ‘substitutionary atonement’ don’t show up. The words ‘justification by faith’ don’t show up. It’s not explained explicitly that he died accursed for your sins because he was carrying them. It’s not said ‘and his righteousness will be imputed to you.”

Again, there are a lot of ways you can explain the gospel. It doesn’t mean that you have to use all of the technical language or even some of the things that are dearest and most important to us as we talk about the gospel. That can come later.

In some ways, in spelling it out they’ve broken it into small words for us at that point, if you will. The language of the Old Testament and the images – people were not strangers to these doctrines because they hadn’t been put into succinct and theologically precise language at that time, these concepts.

We have the benefit of having it broken down very clearly for us by the work of the church over the past several centuries, but these doctrines were not foreign simply because they hadn’t been spelled out at that time.

Or just because they’re foreign to us in the 21st century.

They’ve been steeped in the language of these images.

Yes, they knew the language. They knew what it all meant.

He very much brings the continuity also of the witness of scripture through history. He identifies himself and the other apostles with the prophets of the Old Testament saying, “Cornelius, you know the Old Testament. You know the word of God spoken there. We are witnesses just like they are witnesses, that single testimony.”

So Cornelius, if he believes the word of the Old Testament, he needs to believe what Peter is saying in the same way, and therefore that all points to the name of Jesus to explain it all.

I think we can finish the chapter.

While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. For they heard them speak with tongues [different languages] and magnify God.

So God interrupts the sermon. Peter apparently wasn’t done yet. He’s going to make that clearer when he recounts all this, and God just interrupts with, “Okay, enough of that. Time to get these people into the new covenant,” so he pours of the Spirit with the sign of speaking in tongues.

This kind of thing happened with Israel at the Day of Pentecost. It happened among the Samaritans and it happens now, probably so that each group can say, “Yeah, well, that happened to us too,” and no group could say, “We had something you didn’t have.”

The whole point here is that God is no respecter of persons, so they get it too. It doesn’t happen every time the Holy Spirit comes on somebody, but it happens now. There’s no obvious reason for it because there’s nobody here as far as we know from any other country or who can’t speak whatever language Peter is using, probably either koine Greek or Aramaic. But God does it to punctuate, “Yes, they’re on your level,” which is kind of the lesson here.

“On the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.” These circumcised believers again were not surprised that Gentiles could come to God, that they could be somewhere in God’s kingdom and ultimately see heaven in eternity and all that. That they could handle, but to come in on the same level with the same gifts and the same experiences and the same spiritual power and closeness to God? Having the Holy Spirit in you – it doesn’t get any closer to that – so they are shocked and don’t quite know what to make of it.

This is the one true place of, you might say, equality, which is coming equally before God in the exact same manner. He’s making it clear that there is truly no difference between them. The people themselves are different. It doesn’t undo that, but there is a unity and uniformity in God’s work of his Spirit.

That confuses us, even though we spend all our time trying to make people the same or something, but this is the sameness the Lord gives, which is the indwelling Holy Spirit.

There’s an old evangelical saying – “The ground is level at the foot of the cross.”

Peter sees this and says –

Then answered Peter, Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

Peter will explain his thought a little bit later when he retells the story, but it’s not that hard to figure out. John said, “I baptize with water. The one who comes after me baptizes with the Holy Spirit.” Baptism with water is a picture of baptism with the Holy Spirit, so if they’ve got the reality, why would anyone want to deny the symbol that points to the reality?

And please note that the sign is still necessary.

Yeah. “I’m already a Christian. I don’t need to be baptized.”

“Um, actually – let’s talk about that word ‘need,’ shall we? What do you mean by that? Do you need to obey God? Do you need to be welcomed among the covenant people?” And there’s more to it than that.

And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord.

It’s a small point but he doesn’t say, “Can anybody forbid us from going to water?” Apparently the water was being brought to them, and they’re baptized in the name of the Lord.

Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.

And he does because that’s the next chapter.

So Peter has grown up a lot. Cornelius has undergone a conversion of sorts, going from being an Old Testament God-fearer to being a New Testament Christian. Peter has had a lengthy journey of his own and it’s not completely over yet. He will take a stand at the Council of Jerusalem on the side of God and the gospel, but then there will be that little relapse in Antioch when Paul has to get in his face over it.

It was a hard, hard lesson that these people who talk funny and live on the other side of the railroad tracks – “Yeah, we’re glad they came to Christ, and we’re glad they have their own churches over there, but what’s one of them doing in our church?”

That kind of thing is still with us. It hasn’t gone away yet, but God has begun his work to show the church that it’s got to go away. Those externals do not matter. Those who trust in Jesus Christ are our brothers and sisters, like, you know, brothers and sisters, not like long-lost cousins whose identity we actually doubt and look up on the internet.

With that I think we’re near the end.

Yes. We’ll pick it up from chapter 11 next time. Until then, shall we wrap up with some recommendations? I think I went first the last couple times, so I don’t want to go first this time, although I have one.

I do have a recommendation. I’ll actually volunteer to go first for once.

Last time I mentioned a commentary I had read on Song of Solomon, and as commentaries go I think it’s still my favorite. It’s not perfect but it’s pretty solid. I got another one from Amazon and it looked promising, and the promise was fulfilled but in a different way than I expected.

The author starts out by saying, “Here are the options as to who the characters are in this book,” and I understood him to be saying that it can’t be Solomon because Solomon, given his lascivious lifestyle and multiple marriages that began even before he assumed the throne, he doesn’t fit unless you want to think of him as late-in-life repenting.

Then I got into it and suddenly he’s talking about it being Solomon, so I’m not quite sure what happened there. I don’t know if I just didn’t read carefully or what’s going on. But despite that, he does understand that the book is primarily, first of all, about marital love.

These two people, a bride and groom, really really love each other on all levels, and we, kind in a polite way, are being peeping Toms, watching through the lens of pastoral imagery some very private things. This is God celebrating beauty and holiness in marriage. It’s basically an anti-gnostic book. It never says that, but that’s kind of what it’s getting at, so that was all great.

And then he starts asking the reader questions about our own marriages and our roles as spouses. “Husbands, answer these 10 questions. Wives, answer these 12 questions. Now, sit down and talk to each other about your answers. Take your time with it. Then here are some more questions now that you can talk about. Rate these things in terms of your commitment to them. Then ask your spouse whether or not you’re right. And then here are some thought questions for you both to…”

This is getting really convicting at this point because he doesn’t present them as moralistic absolutes. It’s more, “How much time do you spend together? Is it a priority? Don’t talk to me, talk to your spouse.”

It sounds like just shining the light of scripture on your life.

That’s exactly what it is, and as I say it’s convicting and at a few points reassuring, but more convicting than not because one little bit of conviction goes a long way. As opposed to, “Yeah, I do that. Yeah, I do that. Oh, that? I know I should work on that one. That? Oh, I didn’t even see that one coming. Hmm.”

So having told you about it, I don’t believe the author is Reformed but I may be wrong. It doesn’t come out clearly, but he doesn’t come across so much as a commentator, although he is, he comes across as a marriage counselor, and I think this book was originally part of some kind of counseling series or something.

Anyway, in its current form as a commentary it’s called Exalting Jesus in Song of Songs. It’s part of the Christ-Centered Exposition and Commentary series, and the author is Dr. Daniel Akin. He runs a Christian college someplace. I don’t know the man otherwise.

Whereas the first commentary I recommended is very scholarly, this is just really laid back in your face, and I think something that newlyweds or even people getting near to marriage could profit from. Hey, people married for 30 years could profit from this. That’s Exalting Jesus in the Song of Songs by Dr. Daniel Akin.

I recommended a book on marriage a couple years ago, and since then the author has come out with some unorthodox views, I believe. Whenever that happens it’s like, “Oh, do I still recommend this book?” I think in that case I still do because the value of it was never in the author’s opinions. The value was in the conversations that you have with your husband or wife that the book starts. It sounds like a similar kind of thing.

I have a recommendation. I told you it would be a long string of poetry things. With your permission I will read a poem. This was published in the spring issue of Ad Fontes Journal, which is published by the Davenant Institute, and I just loved this poem. It struck me as a very “Kate” sort of poem.

Smooth and white and hard,
the countertops are cleared and washed with water
where tender flesh was sliced and pared, to hide
the necessary fact that something died—
a grain, a grape, a lamb.

The harvest and the slaughter
happened some other place, with other hands—
here, hands can sort and sear in stainless steel
then gently rinse, without having to feel
the strain of sacrifice.

To mute the grim demands
of sustenance, the blades that cleave and trim
are cleaned and sheathed meticulously. Still,
the solemn law remains—that life must spill
from life to nourish life.

“Kitchen Abstraction” by Steven Searcy.

Very nice. And yes, that is a very Kate-like poem.

I enjoy that it’s about a kitchen and needing to clean the kitchen. I’m an obsessive cleaner about raw meat. I hate raw meat so much, so I appreciate that.

But even grapes die.

And grain – grapes and grain. Rachel, do you have a recommendation for us?

Yes. This is kind of a funny recommendation because I got the recommendation from our friend Talitha, who got the recommendation from you, Emily, so it’s possible that you’ve made the recommendation and I don’t remember.

It’s possible I don’t remember either, so go right ahead.

The recommendation is for an album by Sarah Sparks called Into the Lantern Waste. They’re songs about the Chronicles of Narnia, and she’s done her own take on the various characters. Talitha introduced me first to the Blood For Blood song, which is about Edmund, and it’s beautiful. Then there’s a Eustace song that’s wonderful.

There are so many that I love, but the one I wanted to specifically share is called Shasta’s Complaint. I love it because it’s a conversation between Aslan and Shasta, and it very much reminds you of Job where the character is complaining, but God’s response is, “What do you know?”

My favorite part is near the end where Aslan is speaking in the song and says,

A man may find his eye deceiving, a fool holds on to trust his sight
A wise man knows that his own feeling may not with the truth align.
"And you think that you have never seen my face?
But every moment you’re alive, you know my grace
For only death in this whole world is justly deserved.

And you say that I never answer, just because you have not heard
But you don’t know yet how to listen or to understand my words.”

Her crafting of the poetry of her songs is beautiful. I’ve listened to some of her other pieces since then and I really enjoy her sound, but also her writing is wonderful. If you love the Chronicles of Narnia you should listen to this album because it’s lovely. So thank you, Emily, by indirect reference for that.

Great recommendation, and thank you both for this conversation. It’s been a delight, as always. I look forward to next time.

Thank you also to David, our producer and my lawfully-wedded husband, and a big thank you to our financial supporters over at Patreon for keeping the show rolling. If you’d like to join their number, dear listener, you can visit patreon.com/haltingtowardzion.

If you’d like to get in touch with us with any questions or comments, send us an email at [email protected]. We would love to hear from you.

In the meantime, tell a friend about us. Give us a 5-star rating wherever you’re listening to us. Like, share, and subscribe, and God bless. We’ll see you next time.