New Warhorn Media post by Tim Bayly:
3 Likes
Thank you for sharing this. I especially liked this paragraph:
We answer the first simply by saying this is the Word of God. If the Word of God commends a particular woman for her proper submission toward her husband in act and speech, and puts her forward as an example to all women of God, that’s final. Of course, you already know this, but it must be said.
Hebrews 11:11 comes to mind as well. Here’s some of what Robert Bruce (d. 1631) preached on that verse:
Someone may ask how it could be that this woman is praised by the apostle so highly for her faith. When we read the account of the promise in Genesis 15, there is no mention at all of Sarah’s faith, not so much as a single footprint within the story. Indeed, moving on to chapter 16, we see clearly definite marks of doubting, infidelity and weakness in this woman;’ it is manifestly extremely difficult to argue that she was a woman of faith when she acted as she did. Coming to chapter 18, I find that when the promise was renewed to Abraham, the text tells us, as she listened hidden in her tent, that sche laith within hirself and that this laughter flowed not from faith, but from doubt, mistrust and unbelief. The Lord himself testified this in righteous discernment, while her own behaviour also had born witness of her failure to believe. …
Yes, here so far we find only the marks of her unbelief, but as yet no hint of any faith. Yet, when we read this chapter with its account of all this, there may be perceived a single footprint of Sarah’s faith, and I want now to consider this faint footprint with you. In spite of the fact that she made that denial and lied to God, in his dealings with her, the Lord did not let her off with her denial, but insisted that she had laughed: It is not so: for thou laughedst. By his repeated affirmation a fear was wrought within her (it says, she was afraid); this fear I take to be a footprint and evidence of her nascent faith. It was as if God said to her something like this, ‘I know what you are thinking: because your laugh was hidden in your stomach you assumed I didn’t know you that had laughed, but I assure you I was aware of that silent laughter as plainly as if it had burst out volubly, and everyone had heard and witnessed it.’
Because of God’s insistent assertion, Sarah was afraid. But why? Because she realised that it was not a mere man who was dealing with her, even though the Lord appeared to her in human form; neither was it an angel, for angels cannot see into our innermost thoughts. Therefore, at once it dawned upon her that this ‘man’ speaking to her was the living God; it was at that point she knew that nothing was impossible to such a God.
He started this part of the sermon with this (I never heard of Sarah as the princess of God, till I read your post, and now Bruce):
The apostle now goes from the husband to the wife as he proceeds to the example of Sarah’s faith, this godly and honest mother. Even though there are many godly and faithful women well-reported of in Scripture, none of them have a place in the apostles list as being a princess of God. Sarah is the only woman he specifically mentions. Her example is fitting for all godly and honest women, who have not besmirched their womanhood. Even though they may be the weaker vessels, yet the Lord has made them capable of faith, and he has a special mercy and regard for them.
Further on in the chapter the apostle quotes the example of Rahab the harlot who had faith, no doubt to bring comfort and consolation to all penitent harlots, and to other lost, debauched women, whereas Sarah’s example is cited for the comfort and encouragement of faithful and chaste women. As God gives me grace, I want to consider now the aspects of Sarah’s example that moved the apostle to bring her to our attention. I think there are several points to notice.
First, as well as the great faith of both wife and husband, it was the singular work of God wrought upon the wife that is one reason why the writer wants it to be seen by us more clearly. That God’s dealings with her and the pair’s combined faith may be more manifest, he must include her in his account. It is not unusual for an old man to father a child, but it is very unusual for an old woman to give birth to a son. Second, I have no doubt that he cites Sarah because the child was begotten within the lawful relationship of marriage.
Third, he makes mention of her faith in order to strengthen and console all women, because the merciful Lord, notwithstanding the sin of Eve, has made them just as capable as men of exercising faith. It is true that when women think of Eve they have every reason to regret and grieve over her defection, but that should be no cause for despair, since the Lord gave Eve the promise of mercy and everlasting life before he gave it to Adam.
Finally, he includes Sarah in his list to instruct husbands, by the example of Abraham, to share their faith and spiritual gifts with their wives. As they have become one flesh in body, and share together their temporal gifts and graces, so should they share together their spiritual and heavenly graces. Where there is such harmony in body and soul between a man and his wife, there can be no question but that such harmony in their relationship will be blessed. Therefore, the apostle’s purpose in bringing before us the example of Sarah whose husband was her teacher, is to instruct all husbands concerning their duty towards their wives, as well as towards the rest of their households over which they are the head.
He also makes the point that Sarah would have had to have faith that the child be conceived, preserved in the womb, and born safely:
First, I set before you the person of the woman upon whom we will reflect. Consider according to the Scriptural account both the frailty of her nature and her advanced years. We are told that she had been barren all her days; further, at this time she was four score years and ten, therefore her natural female routine had ceased. Clearly she was by now considered to be of barren stock. Yet notwithstanding, she is promised that she will be enabled to retain her husband’s seed and conceive. As to her husband, he too was by now also far beyond the age when he would be able to beget children as he had done earlier in life. Being about a hundred years old and on account of his infirmity, he was also reckoned to be as good as dead.
These considerations of this woman let you see the problem with God’s promise, if it was evaluated in terms of mortal flesh and blood. For Sarah had to begin by believing that the Lord’s power and ability reached far above her human nature, and was able to give her the strength to conceive a child.
She must also believe that the same God by whose power she would be able to conceive, would then preserve the child in her womb, and enable the foetus to grow until the right time for him to be born a perfectly formed baby. Otherwise, she might have suspected that she would be able to conceive, but that then she would miscarry and the child be lost.
Further, she must believe that when the full term was ‘completed’, the baby would be safely delivered and both she and her son would be safe and well. Otherwise, she might have kept the baby in her womb for the full nine months, but then at her delivery the baby be lost. Again, the same God must be trusted-right from her conception, throughout the pregnancy and up to the safe delivery of her son—so that his mighty power would bring her and the child safely through it all. Reflect, then, upon her womanly nature, her age and her husband’s age, for humanly speaking the prospect of a child was out of the question, a series of impossibilities according to the expectations of flesh and blood; yet, notwithstanding, she believed in spite of all this. It was through the power and virtue of her faith, all came to pass.
As you taught in our hermeneutics class, this is the type of hermeneutic pastors need to recover. These old dead reformed pastors are so much better to read than most modern commentaries.
I do find it odd that Bruce uses both “foetus” and “baby.” The translator is not the most trustworthy; he may intentionally have done this to hint that the personhood of the child really begins at birth. Then again, Bruce was not fighting the same battles we are today. He could have just made the distinction to emphasize his point: Sarah’s need of faith from conception of the child to his birth.
1 Like
Yes, Hebrews 11 has a great list of the OT heroes of the faith, although when you look back at their individual stories, it often comes across as another matter! Perhaps the writer is saying that in the end, it is faith, and our faith in action, that will ultimately last the distance.
3 Likes