God Makes a Wish: That Each and Every Sinner Might Be Saved!

Posted by deangonzales on May 30, 2009
55 Comments

When you and I make a wish, we can’t be certain it will come true. But when God makes a wish, he has both the power and prerogative to effect its fulfillment. “Our God is in the heavens,” declares the psalmist, “he does all that he pleases” (Ps. 115:3). Nevertheless, the Sovereign God of all creation has not chosen to fulfill every one of his wishes he has disclosed to us. The Lord expressly desired that Adam and Eve refrain from eating the forbidden fruit (Gen. 2:16-17), yet he ordained their Fall (Gen. 3:1-6). He plainly wants all moral creatures on earth to conform to his revealed moral standard, as do the moral creatures in heaven (Matt. 6:10), yet he not only allows men to break his law but also uses their evil deeds to accomplish his plan (Gen. 50:20; Acts 4:27-28). And God sincerely yearns that each and every sinner might turn from his sinful autonomy, embrace his Creator as Lord and Savior, and enjoy God’s saving blessing, even though God has not in fact chosen to bring to fruition the salvation of each and every sinner. In other words, while God fulfills all his decreed wishes, he has chosen not to fulfil every one of his prescriptive or revealed wishes.¹

This mysterious and paradoxical reality²  is underscored in a text like Deuteronomy 5:29. As the Israelites prepare to enter the Promised Land, Moses recounts for them the Ten Commandments (Deut. 5:6-21), which God had given to their fathers and reminds them how their parents had responded when they heard the Yahweh’s thundering voice from Mount Sinai. They were frightened and awestruck (5:22-26). They pleaded with Moses to mediate between them and God. “Go near and hear all that the LORD our God will say,” they entreat Moses, “and speak to us all that the LORD our God will speak to you, and we will hear and do it” (5:27). And God approved of their response according to Moses. “The LORD heard your words when you spoke to me,” Moses told them. “And the LORD said to me, ‘I have heard the words of this people, which they have spoken to you. They are right in all that they have spoken.’” Literally, “they have done well in all that they have said.”

God’s generous assessment of their response is amazing given the fact that this is the same bunch of Israelites who would make the golden calf. This is the same bunch of Israelites who would grumble against the Lord in the wilderness. This is the same bunch of Israelites who would never enter Canaan because of unbelief. “With most of them,” the apostle Paul remarks, “God was not pleased for they were overthrown in the wilderness” (1 Cor. 10:5). So most of these people were reprobates and are probably now suffering in hell. Whatever devotion and commitment they expressed at the foot of Mount Sinai was superficial and short-lived.

Of course, their shallow response didn’t pull the wool over God’s eyes. God knew their professed devotion was only skin-deep. Accordingly, God immediately qualifies his commendation of their initial response with a striking expression that highlights both the spurious quality of their devotion and also God’s wish that it were otherwise:

Oh that they had such a mind as this always, to fear me and to keep all my commandments, that it might go well with them and with their descendants forever!

This passage teaches us that God passionately wishes³ the good of those who never experience that good.  And I don’t believe Matthew Henry is wrong to take the meaning of this text a step further. Commenting on this verse, he writes,

The God of heaven is truly and earnestly desirous of the welfare and salvation of poor sinners. He has given abundant proof that he is so: he gives us time and space to repent, by his mercies invites us to repentance, and waits to be gracious; he has sent his Son to redeem us, published a general offer of pardon and life, promised his Spirit to those that pray for him, and has said and sworn that he has no pleasure in the ruin of sinners.⁴

So it is that God genuinely and earnestly desires the salvation of all men (cf. John 3:16)⁵ though he only decrees the salvation of some.⁶ This is what Jesus taught when he declared, “Many are called, but few are chosen” (Matt. 22:14). These two truths may at first glance seem inconsistent to us. But there they are, side-by-side. Mystery indeed! But sacred mystery with which we must not tamper! What practical lessons can we draw from this biblical paradox?

Let us beware that we don’t deny one biblical truth in order to accommodate another.

Heterodoxy often results when men overemphasize one truth to the neglect or denial of another. We fear that some of our Calvinist friends suppress the clear teachings of certain texts that don’t seem to fit with their understanding of biblical doctrines like God’s sovereignty, transcendence, and immutability. In defense of rejecting the clear meaning of a text in favor of an implausible reading, they will appeal to “the analogy of Scripture.” But as Sam Waldron aptly cautions,

There is but one step between the responsible interpretation of the Bible which believing in its theological unity, refuses to so interpret any text as to transgress that unity; and on the other hand, the dogmatic interpretation of the Bible which assuming its system to be biblical, refuses to allow the Bible to speak. This latter method gags the Bible under the pretense of the analogy of faith (emphasis his).⁷

Our duty is to believe and preach whatever God reveals in His inspired Word whether or not our puny mind can trace out all the connections. Hence, a Calvinist may ex animo adhere to and teach both God’s absolute sovereignty in salvation and also God’s free and well-meant offer of the gospel to all men indiscriminately because both doctrines are taught in Scripture.⁸

(2) Let us desire the salvation of all men in imitation of our heavenly Father and our precious Savior.

It’s a wonderful thing to be convinced of the truth of God’s sovereignty in salvation. The doctrine of election is a glorious truth, and we all ought to be zealous for it! But brothers, should we not be equally zealous for this other truth? Should we not sincerely desire to see every sinner we meet come to Christ? Shouldn’t the very thought of them rejecting the gospel and incurring God’s judgment break our heart? Should we not hunger and thirst to see sinners turn from their sin and live? It was said of the Scottish pastor Robert Murray M’Cheyne that he was dying to have his parishioners converted.⁹ Are you dying to have your wife saved? Your husband? Your children? Your friend? Your parents? Your workmates? May God help us all to earnestly desire the salvation of all men!

(3) Let’s take comfort that a Sovereign God sincerely and earnestly wants all of us to come to Christ by faith and to enjoy eternal life.

“All have sinned and come short of the glory of God” (Rom. 3:23) and “the wages of sin is death” (Rom. 6:23). And if you do not repent of your sins and believe the gospel, then you will perish and go to hell. God is a holy God, and He cannot turn a blind eye to sin. He is a just God, and He will not be mocked. Those who reject God’s Son God himself will reject (John 3:36).

But know that God earnestly and sincerely wants you to be saved. The Bible doesn’t present God as some narrow-hearted scrooge who’s trying to keep everyone out of heaven. Instead, the Bible pictures God as pleading with sinners to be saved. Listen to this description of God in Isaiah 65:2: God says, “All day long I have stretched out my hands to a rebellious people.” I fear there are some who interpret this passage as if God were a cosmic fullback stiff-arming the sinner or a cosmic boxer keeping sinners at length with a left jab. But that’s not the imagery at all. God is standing with His arms wide open. He’s ready to receive! He’s like the Father of the Prodigal Son–He’s ready and willing to fall on your neck and heap upon you kisses of mercy. His heart is overflowing with compassion. Yes, God must be just. But He may also be the justifier of him who believes in Jesus. And that’s what God prefers to do. That’s his wish!

Bob Gonzales, Dean
Reformed Baptist Seminary

1. For the common distinction between God’s decretive will and his perceptive will, see John Frame, The Doctrine of God (P&R, 2002), 531-33; or John Piper’s “Are There Two Wills in God: Divine Election and God’s Desire for All to be Saved” [↩]
2. I’m using the adjective “mysterious” in the sense of “that which is not easily comprehended or explained” and “paradoxical” in the sense of “that which seems self-contradictory or absurd but in reality expresses a truth.” Lest anyone should misunderstand my position, I do not affirm that every dimension of truth transcends full comprehension on the part of humans. Nor do I believe that every true proposition or set of propositions is paradoxical. There are, however, dimensions or facets of biblical revelation that transcend the human mind’s ability to fully comprehend. And there are, I believe, certain biblical propositions that, when viewed side-by-side, seem contradictory but are not truly contradictory. For more on the nature of mystery and paradox in relation to biblical revelation, see Cornelius Van Til, The Defense of the Faith, 3rd edition (P&R, 1967), 41-46; John Frame, “The Problem of Theological Paradox,” Foundations of Christian Scholarship: Essays in the Van Til Perspective, ed. Gary North (Ross House Books, 1979), 295-330; James Anderson, Paradox in Christian Theology: An Analysis of Its Presence, Character, and Epistemic Status (Paternoster, 2007). For a helpful Internet resource, see Derek Ashton’s “THEOparadox.” [↩]
3. The opening Hebrew phrase mi-yitten (literally, “who will give?” but idiomatically, “Oh, that it were given!”) signals the optative mood, which is defined as follows: “designating a statement using a verb in the subjunctive mood to indicate a wish or desire.” See Ronald Williams, Hebrew Syntax: An Outline, 2nd ed. (Toronto University Press, 1976), sec. 547; Paul Joüon, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew (Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 2000), sec. 163d; Bruce Waltke and M. O’Connor, An Introduction of Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Eisenbrauns, 1990), sec. 40.2.2d. For other examples of this desiderative construction, see Exod. 16:3; Deut. 28:67; 2 Sam. 19:1; 2 Sam. 23:15; Job 6:8; 14:13; 23:3; Ps. 55:7; Jer. 9:1. The ESV, like nearly all other English versions, appropriately renders the expression with the words “Oh that …” (KJV, ASV, NASB, NKJV, NIV, NLT). A few translations employ the conditional “if only” (NRSV, NET, CSB). But even the “conditional” expression, in this case, carries optative force. [↩]
4. Commentary on the Whole Bible (reprint, Fleming H. Revell Co., n.d.), 749. Expositors like John Gill seem to reject Henry’s application of this text to salvation of sinners. Writes Gill, “These words do not express God’s desire of [the Israelites'] eternal salvation, but only of their temporal good and welfare, and that of their posterity; for their eternal salvation was not to be obtained by works of righteousness done by them, but their fear or worship of God, or by their constant universal obedience to his commands. They were saved by the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, even as we. Their fear of God, and obedience to his will issued indeed in their temporal prosperity …” (For the Cause of God and Truth (reprint, Sovereign Grace Book Club, n.d.), sec. III, 4 [p. 5]. I agree with Gill that all men are saved by grace apart from works, I also agree that the blessing in view in the text had more immediate reference to their temporal prosperity in the Land of Canaan. Nevertheless, I also hold that God intended the people of the Old Covenant to look beyond its types and shadows of the Old Covenant to the eternal realities represented by such. Hence, their was both a temporal rest and an eternal rest (Heb. 4:1-10) envisioned in the blessing. In this way, the Mosaic covenant was not merely an administration of law but a “covenant of the promise” (Eph. 2:12). Moreover, “the fear” God desired from the Israelites in the text is nothing less than a “circumcised heart,” that is, regeneration and conversion. This God commanded of them (Deut. 10:16). But ultimately, it was an inward work only God’s grace could produce (Deut. 30:6; Jer. 32:39-40; Ezek. 36:26). Accordingly, since what God desires from the Israelites is ultimately regeneration and conversion and since such a heart-change is both the evidence of justifying faith and also a condition for eternal life (John 3:3, 5, 7; Heb. 12:14), I see no reason to confine the purview of this text to mere outward obedience and temporal prosperity. Strangely, in another place where Gill comments on this text, he seems to acknowledge that the “fear of God” in view is regeneration and conversion, and he locates the scope of the text within the scope of the covenant of grace: “that they would fear me; which is not naturally in the heart of man, is a gift of God, a part of the covenant of grace, is implanted in regeneration, and is no inconsiderable branch of it” (emphasis added).An Exposition of the Old Testament (William Hill Collingridge, 1852), 718. And though John Calvin, like Gill, interprets God’s wish anthropopathically (see below), he, nevertheless, did not limit the purview of the passage to the Israelites’ temporal blessing but applies the passage to his congregants as follows: “And so it is a very profitable warning for us when we see in this text how God wills that we should do the things that he commands us to the intent it might go well with us. Whereby we see that if we receive the doctrine with humility and desire to obey it, the end thereof cannot bee but happy so as we shall be sure of our salvation…. On the other side, let us rejoice inasmuch as we see how he procures our salvation and intends the furtherance thereof, as oft as his word is preached unto us” (emphasis added). Sermons on Deuteronomy (facsimile edition), trans. Arthur Golding (reprint, Banner of Truth, 1987), 261. [Note: Since I'm citing from a facsimile edition translated in 1583, I took liberty to update the spelling and punctuation for the modern reader.] [↩]
5. I agree with those Calvinist interpreters who see John 3:16 as indicative of God’s salvific stance towards the entire fallen race of humanity. See John Calvin, The Gospel According to John 1-10, trans. T. H. L. Parker, vol. 4 of Calvin’s NT Commentaries (Eerdmans, 1993), 73-76; D. A. Carson, The Difficult Doctrine of the Love of God (Crossway, 2000), 17, 79-80; idem, The Gospel According ot John (Eerdmans, 1991), 203-07; John Piper, God So Loved the World, Part 2 [↩]
6. Some Calvinists resist this conclusion and suggest that the reader interpret the optative predicated of God figuratively, as an anthropopathic expression. At best, the text identifies the kind of heart disposition of which God approves and in consequence of which he rewards, and it indicts the Israelites for failing to manifest such a disposition. The text cannot, according to these interpreters, denote a fervent longing for the salvation of the non-elect since (1) genuine emotions cannot be predicated of God, and (2) unfulfilled desires are logically inconsistent with God’s sovereignty and perfect blessedness. See Wilhelmus à Brakel, The Christian’s Reasonable Service, trans. Bartel Elshout (Soli Deo Gloria, 1992), 1:117; John Gill, An Exposition of the Old Testament, 717-18; Matthew Poole, A Commentary on the Holy Bible (reprint, Banner of Truth, 1962), 1:349; Robert Reymond, A New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith (Thomas Nelson, 1998), 692, n. 25; Matthew Winzer, “Murray on the Free Offer of the Gospel: A Review”; accessed May 30, 2009 on the Internet: http://www.fpcr.org/blue_banner_articles/murray-free-offer-review.htm. It must be admitted that Calvin himself avoided the force of such passages and suggested a figurative reading though he affirmed, “[God] invites all promiscuously to (eternal) life.” Commentaries on the Last Four Books of Moses, trans. Charles W. Bingham (reprint, Baker Book House, 2003), 1:337; idem, Sermons on Deuteronomy , 259-61. Such an interpretation, however, is exegetically implausible and unwarranted by the analogy of Scripture. First, according to the plain meaning of the text (which the detractors above concede), God is not said merely to approve of human devotion and consequent felicity in the abstract. Rather, he is said to desire a concrete objective ardently, and that concrete objective is nothing less than that those identified in the text, i.e., the Exodus generation and their descendants, should both fear him truly and enjoy his blessings eternally. Second, a proper understanding of God’s transcendence, sovereignty, and immutability does not preclude the attribution of genuine emotions to God (see my “There Is No Pain, You Are Misreading”: Is God “Comfortably Numb”?). Third, the analogy of Scripture does not require the reader to relate every divine desire to God’s decretive will. Those who attempt to do so often point to texts like Psalm 115:3, which reads, “Our God is in the heavens; he does all that he pleases” (cf. Ps. 135:6). The syntax of this passage does not demand that every desire experienced by the subject must of necessity be realized. It only demands that every desire that the subject chooses to bring to fruition be realized (compare 1 Kings 9:1). Accordingly, I agree with those commentators and theologians whose interpretation does justice to the exegetical data of the text without violating the Scripture’s clear testimony of God’s absolute sovereignty and transcendent felicity. See Thomas J. Crawford, The Mysteries of Christianity (William Blackward & Sons, 1874), 351-352; Frame, 534; Arthur W. Kuschke, Jr., John Murray, and Ned B. Stonehouse, “The Free Offer of the Gospel”; the majority report submitted to the Fifteenth General Assembly of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (1948) taken from the Minutes, Appendix, pp. 51-72; K. W. Stebbins, Christ Freely Offered (Covenanter Press, 1978), 43-47; Samuel E. Waldron, Modern Exposition of the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith (Evangelical Press, 1989), 122. [↩]
7. From Waldron’s unpublished lecture notes on “Hermeneutics.” C. H. Spurgeon also warns against this danger when he writes, “My love of consistency with my own doctrinal views is not great enough to allow me knowingly to alter a single text of Scripture.  I have great respect for orthodoxy, but my reverence for inspiration is far greater.  I would sooner a hundred times be inconsistent with myself than be inconsistent with the word of God…. God forbid that I should cut or shape, even in the least degree, any divine expression. So runs the text, and so we must read it.” [↩]
8. Most Calvinists who affirm the “free” and “well-meant” offer of the gospel do so because of their allegiance to Scripture and not from a cowardly desire to please men. For this reason, I was disappointed to read James White’s caricature of such Calvinists like myself (and those referenced above) in a post entitled “Of Squeamish Calvinists and Hyper-Arminians” (March 18, 2009); accessed May 30, 2009 at http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?itemid=3197; Internet. Ironically, White is reacting to Calvinists who view his rejection of God’s well-meant offer of the gospel as “hyper-Calvinist,” which he views as a kind of ad hominen argument. But exchanging ad hominen for ad hominen is not normally Dr. White’s debate methodology. For another specimen of ad hominem argumentation, see Sean Gerety’s “The Sincere Insanity of the Well-Meant Offer.” For a defense of the free and well-meant offer of the gospel, I would direct the reader to the following resources: R. Scott Clark, “Janus: the Well-Meant Offer of the Gospel and Westminster Theology,” in The Pattern of Sound Doctrine: Essays in Honor of Robert B. Strimple, ed. David VanDrunen (P&R, 2004), 149-79; Robert Lewis Dabney, “God’s Indiscriminate Proposals of Mercy,” in Discussions: Evangelical and Theological (reprint, Banner of Truth, 1967), 1:307f; idem, Systematic Theology (reprint, Banner of Truth, 1985), 555-59; Frame, 534-37; John Murray, The Free Offer of the Gospel (Banner of Truth, 2002); Iain H. Murray, Spurgeon v. Hyper-Calvinism: The Battle for Gospel Preaching (Banner of Truth, 1995); Stebbins, Christ Freely Offered; Waldron, Modern Exposition, 121-122. For helpful Internet resources, see Robert Lewis Dabney’s “God’s Indiscriminate Proposals of Mercy”: Phil Johnson’s A Primer on Hyper-Calvinism; John Piper’s “Are There Two Wills in God: Divine Election and God’s Desire for All to be Saved”; the historical resources on David Ponter’s Calvin and Calvinism and Theology Online, as well as and Tony Byrne’s “Theological Meditations.” [↩]
9. This is taken from Andrew Bonar, Diary and Life (reprint, Banner of Truth, 1984). Bonar recounts, concerning M’Cheyne, “A servant-girl, in a house where he stayed, described him as “‘deein’ to hae folk converted” (397). [↩]

Like a Weaned Child: Trusting God When We Don’t Understand

Posted by deangonzales on November 5, 2008
2 Comments

What do we say when a Christian mother backs the car over the top of her little toddler and crushes him to death?  When a young Christian man discovers he has brain cancer and must soon leave his three young children without a father?  When a hurricane destroys the homes and disrupts the lives not only of unbelievers but also of believers? Perhaps you’ve asked that question in light of personal trial or tragedy. You’ve lost a loved one or gone through a heart-rending divorce or contracted a chronic illness or been betrayed by a Christian friend. The Lord has dealt bitterly with you, as He did with Naomi, and you want to know “Why?”

A Jewish Rabbi tried to answer this question in a book entitled, When Bad Things Happen to Good People. In this book, Rabbi Kushner argued that there’s evil in this world that God cannot prevent. God would like to help people if He could, but His power is limited. There are two problems with Kusher’s answer: first, he assumes that men are basically good and don’t deserve to suffer. But the Bible teaches that all men have sinned and are under the wrath of God (John 3:36; Rom. 1:18; Eph. 2:1-3). So the real question is Why Do Good Things Happen to Bad People? Second, Rabbi Kushner denies God’s absolute sovereignty. According to Scripture, God not only controls the good things that happen; He also controls the bad things that happen (Job 1: Isa. 45:7; Jer. 44:2; Acts 2:23; 4:28). The writer of Lamentations declares, “Who can speak and have it happen if the Lord has not decreed it? Is it not from the mouth of the Most High that both calamities and good things come?” (3:37-38).

Rabbi Kushner does not have the answer. But that drives us back to the question: why do bad things happen to God’s people? We are still sinners, but we are God’s people. Accordingly, when a godly Christian suffers some tragedy, we’re inclined to ask, “Why, Lord, are You allowing this to happen?” And it’s not always wrong to ask that question. When we read through the Psalms, we find the psalmist often raising this question when a difficult trial came into his life. For example,

Why do You stand afar off, O LORD? Why do You hide in times of trouble? (Ps. 10:1)

My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me? Why are You so far from helping Me, And from the words of My groaning? (Ps. 22:1)

Awake! Why do You sleep, O Lord? … 24 Why do You hide Your face, And forget our affliction and our oppression? (Ps. 44:23-24)

The Bible does give us some answers. It tells us that God causes all things to work together for the ultimate good of His people (Rom. 8:28). It tells us that suffering can make us more like Christ (Phil. 3:10; 1 Pet. 2:21). It tells us that Christians will ultimately go to heaven where there is no suffering (Isa. 25:8; 1 Cor. 15:54-58; Rev. 21:4). But the Bible does not give us all the answers! As the hymnwriter reminds us, “God moves in a mysterious way, His wonders to perform.” And sometimes God’s mysterious providence can be very unpleasant. When we encounter these dark providences, it’s not always wrong to ask “Why?”

But there is a danger! The danger comes when we expect that God must give us an answer to all our questions. The danger comes when we demand that God remove the mystery and give an account for all of his ways. In light of this ever present danger, I would like to highlight the importance of trusting God even when we don’t understand. As I hope to demonstrate, we should be willing to trust God even when He does not answer our question. The text upon which I would base this proposition is Psalm 131. The author is identified as David, and it’s inclusion among the Songs of Ascent indicates its popularity and frequent usage in the worship community.

I.    A recognition of inexplicable mystery

David recognizes that there are lofty realities beyond our comprehension.

LORD, my heart is not haughty, nor my eyes lofty.
Neither do I concern myself with great matters,
Nor with things too profound for me (Ps. 131:1).

These “great” and “profound” realities would include mysteries about the world and about God who created the world. More specifically, the terminology David uses is used elsewhere of God’s mysterious providences—those aspects of God’s activity in the world that are difficult for the human mind to comprehend (cf. Job 5:8, 9; 9:10; 37:5, 14; 42:1-4). This would not only include the good things God did for David but also the unpleasant things: the trials, suffering, and tragedy that God brought into David’s life. I believe those commentators are correct who see verse one as an allusion to some difficult and painful trial David was experiencing. And part of what made this trial particularly challenging for David was its mysterious nature. Some of us can identify with David. We’ve experienced some dark providences. They are dark not only because of the pain but also because of the mystery. We don’t understand why God has brought these trials into our life.

Imagine that you’re about to run a race. Your coach comes up to you at the starting line, and he gives you a pep talk. He urges you to run well and to finish the course. Then, after he exhorts you to do your best, he hurries down the course and begins to set up obstacles in your way. He builds a wall for you to climb over. He digs a pit for you to cross. He breaks up the ground and makes it rough. You also notice that He’s not putting the same obstacles in front of the other runners. Their way seems smoother and easier. And immediately, you begin to wonder, “Why is he doing this?” I thought he wanted me to run well—why is he making it so difficult?

Sometimes, God appears to be dealing with us in this way. He tells us to “lay aside every weight and to run the race with endurance.” But then He seems to place obstacles in our way—trials, hardship, suffering. We immediately begin to wonder, “Lord, why are you doing this?” “What is Your purpose?” “What are You trying to teach me?”

II.    An affirmation of trustful humility

David not only acknowledges the reality of mystery, but he lets us know how he has responded to such mystery as it has directly impacted his life. According to his own testimony, David had come to accept such inexplicable mysteries with trustful humility.

A.    David’s humility described (1-2a)

To begin with, David refuses to demand God give him an account for all His providences. To insist God answer all his questions would be the height of pride. David will not allow such pride to poison his heart or influence his behavior.

LORD, my heart is not haughty, nor my eyes lofty.
Neither do I concern myself with great matters,
Nor with things too profound for me.

If we’re not careful, asking the question “why?” can promote agitation and anxiety. These in turn can make us impatient and demanding of God. David knew this. Therefore, he purposely assumes a calm and quiet disposition. Verse 2: “Surely, I have calmed and quieted my soul ….” David is not pouting.  He’s not walking around with a long face. The expression David uses describes a humble, trustful disposition. This is confirmed in the last half of verse 2, which brings us to

B.    David’s humility illustrated (2b)

David compares himself to a “weaned child.”

Like a weaned child with his mother;
Like a weaned child is my soul within me.

The picture is that of a weaned child who is no longer fussy and agitated though his mother has removed something very satisfying. The child is not able to understand why. He does not realize that weaning is necessary for his growth and maturation. Nevertheless, he has become quiet and calm. Those of us who are parents know from experience that this is not the first response of a child being weaned. Initially, the child objects with loud complaints. But eventually with a little love and discipline, there is quietness. The child is not at rest because he has learned the mystery! His mother has not given him a lecture on the importance and necessity of weaning. She has not explained to the child that he is entering in upon a new stage of physical development and that he must now learn to eat solid food. It’s all still a mystery and an unpleasant mystery at that! But now, the child is no longer objecting and complaining about the mystery. Now he’s willing to trust his mother’s wisdom and love and to live with the mystery.

David, like the weaned child, eventually responded to God’s dark providence with composure and quietness. Perhaps David, like the child, had initially complained about the unpleasant and uncomfortable providences in his life. But now he had come to realize all such complaining was futile because God was not going to give in. He had also come to believe that such complaining was unnecessary because God would take care of him.

III.    An exhortation to the covenant community

Like the Apostle Paul, David knew that all God’s children “must through much tribulation enter the kingdom of God” (Acts 14:22). They will not all suffer the same trials. They will not all suffer to the same degree. But like David, all God’s covenant people will be faced with mysterious providences. Turning from his own experience, David faces the covenant community and exhorts them to respond in like fashion to dark providences that come into their life:

Let Israel hope [‘wait for,’ ‘place her trust’] in the LORD from henceforth and for ever.

What lessons can we draw from David’s experience and exhortation?

Lesson #1: The trials envisioned and trust enjoined by this text are not extraordinary but normative for the covenant community.

The command to “hope” in verse three is very common throughout the Bible, especially in contexts of hardship, suffering, and persecution (e.g., Lam 3:24, 26). Thus, the Psalmist is not calling God’s people to do something extra-ordinary. He’s calling them to live a life of faith in a sin-cursed world. And that’s the kind of world we live in. As a result, trials and tragedies are not rare, but rather they are part of life (Job 5:7; 1 Peter 4:12). We may not all suffer the same trials. We may not all face the same mysteries. But sooner or later, God will bring difficulty into our life that we may not understand. Trusting God in such circumstances is what the Christian life is all about!

Lesson #2: God often intends the afflictions of one member for the good of the whole community

In Psalm 119:71, David says, “It is good for me that I have been afflicted, that I might learn [God’s] statutes.” But it was not only good for David’s soul. It was also good for the entire community of Israel. God afflicted David, so that David might encourage God’s people to trust in the Lord. Such was also Paul’s experience—2 Corinthians 1:4: “[God] comforts us in all our tribulation that we may be able to comfort those who are in any trouble.”

Who are the great teachers in the church today? Not merely those with great intellect, rhetorical ability, and eloquent voice. No, the great teachers in the church are often those who like David have gone through deep waters and who have responded with humble trust. In light of this principle, those afflicted by God should feel a degree of honor and stewardship.You may say, “But I don’t know much theology. I haven’t learned the difference between supralapsarianism and infralapsarianism.” That may be true. But if you have learned to trust God even when life hurts, then you have something very valuable to teach the rest of us.

And the rest of us in Israel should be ready to listen to those among us who have endured great trial. We might be tempted to think of our afflicted brethren as those God has “set-on-the-shelf.” Or worse yet, we may think of them as those God is judging for their sin” (e.g., Job’s “friends”). As a result, we might think they need to hear from us, not we from them. In some respects it may be the opposite. As we see in our Psalm, God had a message to convey to Israel, and He chose to convey that message through one of his afflicted children.

Do you know anyone who has continued to trust in the Lord through the midst of great trial? Look at their lives, listen to their words, and be motivated to trust and follow the Lord. And they don’t have be living saints. You can benefit from the books and biographies of tried saints, such as David Brainard, Henry Martin, Robert Murray McCheyne, Charles Spurgeon, Amy Carmichel, and others!

Lesson #3: According to this psalm, it is truly possible for every believer to trust God through the difficult trials of life even when he doesn’t completely understand.

David was not an angel or a glorified saint. To be sure, he had a regenerated heart; but he was still a sinner—a man who may have struggled with doubts—a man who may have sometimes complained—a man who was tempted in all points as we are—yet a man who did not merely talk of the hypothetical possibility of trusting God when life hurts, but he actually calmed and quieted his soul. He came to trust in God’s wisdom and love. If David could trust God and if he exhorted all Israel to do the same, then such trust is within our reach as well. By God’s grace we can do it!  With this in mind, below is some practical counsel for cultivating this kind of disposition.

First, if there is any pride in your heart, repent and seek God’s forgiveness. Perhaps you’ve been entertaining negative thoughts about God. You’ve become bitterly angry at God and demanded that He give you an answer. You’ve said things to God you’d be ashamed for others to hear. Dear friend, if you think God owes you an explanation for everything He does, you are greatly mistaken. You have the opposite spirit of David. Indeed, your disposition is contrary to the proper attitude of a Christian disciple. Jesus said in Matthew 18:3, “Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.” Becoming a Christian is like assuming the disposition of a little child—even the disposition of a weaned child! Therefore, I exhort you, stop demanding that God give you account for all of His dealings in your life. Repent of your pride, and ask His forgiveness. Make Job’s confession your confession: “I have uttered what I did not understand, things too wonderful for me, which I did not know….  Therefore I abhor myself, and repent in dust and ashes” (42:3, 6).

Second, learn to be content with mystery. Learning from trial and tragedy does not mean that God must tell you all His secret plans and purposes for your life. Instead, learning from our trials and tragedies often means learning that God is God, that we are His creatures, and that we need to trust Him. Period!  “The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but those things which are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law” (Deut. 29:29). We must not merely affirm this truth intellectually. We must submit to it practically and experientially. Until then, we are not ready to graduate from “the School of Dark Providence.”

Third, determine, by God’s grace, to view God’s providence and your own feelings about God’s providence in the light of Scripture. When God brings trial or tragedy into your life, don’t make your own immediate feelings the judge over God’s providence. Rather, let all your thoughts and feelings about God’s dealings with you be governed by the teaching and promises of Scripture. As William Cowper artfully reminds us:

Blind unbelief is sure to err, and scan God’s works in vain;
God is His own interpreter, and He will make it plain.

Only when we view God’s providence through the lens of Scripture will you and I be able to properly cope with tragedy when it strikes. Only then will we be able to trust God even when we do not understand. Only then will we experience the truth of Psalm 119:165:

Great peace have those who love Your law,
And nothing causes them to stumble.