His Word Today

“Again, men tell us that our preaching should be positive and not negative, that we can preach the truth without attacking error. But if we follow that advice we shall have to close our Bible and desert its teachings. The New Testament is a polemic book almost from beginning to end … It is when men have felt compelled to take a stand against error that they have risen to the really great heights in the celebration of the truth.” – J. Gresham Machen

J. Gresham Machen may not have been looking for a theological fight with the religious progressives in the 1920’s. However, a fight came and Machen was ready to lead in the battle. 

 “The promise of a new century fostered a progressive spirit and an unfettered belief in the goodness and potential accomplishment of man. World War I offered a massive setback, especially in Europe. America, however, being an ocean away and untouched by war directly, ran headlong into the 1920s. “The Roaring Twenties,” they would call it. The description for this greater period is modernism. The rejection of God and the dismissal of religion sit atop the list of modernism’s endeavors. This cultural bomb landed hard on the American church,” explains Dr. Stephen J. Nichols.

The scientific progress of the Twentieth Century resulted in many individuals leaving the church and leaving God behind. Church leaders began to rethink and attack biblical doctrine and theological convictions. They wanted to be in sync with the culture. Many church leaders today are committing the same error in judgment. They seek to be cool or “rock star” pastors. What a tragedy.

In spite of the publication of The Fundamentals (1910-1915), religious modernism began to take hold of Protestant churches, seminaries, and entire denominations. Religious progressives subtly attacked biblical doctrines. They denied the inerrancy of Scripture, the sovereignty of God, the sinfulness of man, the virgin birth of Christ, the substitutionary atonement of Christ, and the bodily resurrection of Christ.

During this time, Machen and his mentor and colleague B.B. Warfield remained close comrades in holding fast to biblical truth. The aging Warfield exhorted his younger colleague to continue the work that he was doing at Princeton. He encouraged him to hold firmly to your biblical course and convictions.

When Warfield died in 1921, Machen deeply mourned his passing. In writing to his mother, Machen wrote, “Princeton will seem an insipid place without him. There is no one living in the church capable of occupying one quarter of his place. To me, he was an incalculable help and supporter ion a hundred different ways.”

When Machen recalled the removal of Warfield’s casket following his memorial service, he wrote, “It seems to me that the Old Princeton – a great institution it was – died when Dr. Warfield was carried out.”

The leadership mantle of preaching truth and attacking error fell upon Machen. He began publishing scholarly works, such as The Origin of Paul’s Religion.

“Robust, rigorous and responsible scholarship would mark all of his efforts in defending the faith. A better successor to Warfield could not be found,” states Dr. Nichols.

The church needed the right man for this moment in its history. The Lord raised up the right man for the appropriate moment.

Soli deo Gloria!

“In the sphere of religions, in particular, the present time is a time of conflict; the great redemptive religion which has always been known as Christianity is battling against a totally diverse type of religious belief, which is only the more destructive of the Christian faith because it makes use of traditional Christian terminology.” – J. Gresham Machen.

What Machen wrote in 1923 remains true today. We often hear, “Deeds not creeds.” Yet that statement is a creed or doctrine. Machen understood, as should all believers in Christ, that the Scriptures teach both (Eph. 2:8-10; James 2:14-26). An understanding of biblical doctrine impacts biblical behavior. Biblical behavior displays an understanding of biblical doctrine.

“The head or the heart? The mind or the emotions? The will or the affections? Often, we’re tempted to think of them as opposite ends of the spectrum. We can either be filled with information or be ‘filled with the Spirit’ (understood here in the emotional sense),” explains biblical apologist Gregory Koukl. “Both head and heart are important.”

As a young Princeton professor, Machen struggled in understanding this necessary biblical balance. Machen did not desire a biblical intellectualism without faith. Neither did he desire a faith devoid of intellect. He pursued a rigorous scholarship and a vital piety.

 “He (Machen) longed for piety and intellect fused into one, an intellectually informed and compelling faith,” writes Dr. Stephen J. Nichols. “He had forgotten the vital piety he had seen in his home, and for that matter, at Princeton. But he also needed to hear that the vital piety was founded on intellectual merit. The faith that Machen would be defending in the years to come would be no blind faith.”

Machen proved to be a popular professor with the students at Princeton. He interacted with students within, and outside of, the classroom. In spite of other teaching offers, he chose to remain at Princeton.

However, the threats of theological liberalism appeared on the horizon. This looming danger was met with the publication of The Fundamentals (1910-1915). It was a series of combined articles defending biblical Christianity. Contributing authors included C. I. Scofield and Princeton’s B.B. Warfield. 

With the outbreak of World War I, Machen applied his biblical intellectualism and vital piety into practice by serving overseas in the humanitarian efforts of the YMCA. He often led Bible studies among the soldiers, Machen served on the front lines often in the midst of gunfire, bombs, and the noise of airplanes. He encountered destroyed villages and the remains of countless dead. He served among both French and American soldiers.

Following the end of the war in 1918, Machen returned to Princeton. He returned, as did others, a changed man. He was no longer the same quiet professor enjoying the hallowed halls of academia. He would soon face another battlefront, just as important and devastating as the one he encountered in Europe.

“With World War I over, the battle for the faith was only beginning. Through the first two decades of the twentieth century, Machen had been engaged only in the periphery, and most of the time he was not sure that he wanted to be engaged even at that level. In the next decade, all of that would change. As the “Roaring Twenties” came in full force, Machen emerged as the premier defender of the faith,” explains Dr. Nichols.  

Soli deo Gloria!

“I charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his appearing and his kingdom: ² preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching. ³ For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, ⁴ and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths.” (2 Timothy 4:1–4 ESV)

“I am so thankful for the active obedience of Christ. No hope without it.” – J. Gresham Machen, January 1, 1937.

2023 marks the 100^th anniversary of the publication of the book Christianity and Liberalism by J. Gresham Machen. It will be advantageous to examine the content and the enduring legacy of Machen’s life and classic work. Let’s begin by identifying the individual and ministry of J. Gresham Machen. Who was this man and why are his writings significant today?

John Gresham Machen (1881-1937) was an American Presbyterian New Testament scholar and educator in the early 20th century. He was the Professor of New Testament at Princeton Seminary between 1906 and 1929.

Machen eventually led a movement against the Modernist Theology at Princeton and formed Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia (1929). As the Northern Presbyterian Church continued to embrace modern theological liberalism, Machen also led a small group of conservative pastors and leaders out of the denomination to form the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (1936). 

John Gresham Machen was born in Baltimore, Maryland, on July 28, 1881, to Arthur Webster Machen and Mary Jones Gresham. Arthur was a successful Baltimore attorney. While Arthur was an Episcopalian, Mary was a Presbyterian. She taught her three sons, Arthur Jr., Thomas and middle son John Gresham the Westminster Shorter Catechism from an early age. The family attended Franklin Street Presbyterian Church.

Even as a child, evidenced by his report cards that his mother kept, Machen was an intelligent young man and destined to be a scholar. He excelled in geometry, algebra, Latin, Greek, French, natural science and English by age fourteen. The question was not if he would attend college, but where?  

Following graduation from high school, Machen attended John Hopkins University where he also excelled. Following graduation, Machen took an extended trip to Europe. He visited many cities and museums. However, what captivated him most were the mountains. Mountain climbing became his favorite recreational activity.

Upon returning from Europe, Machen remained uncertain as to his career. He began graduate studies at John Hopkins, and also spent a summer studying international law and banking at the University of Chicago. Machen eventually decided to enroll at Princeton Theological Seminary. He did not consider a call to the pastorate. However, he became a professor and Princeton would remain his home from 1902 -1929.

Machen loved Princeton. Although he was an avid scholar, his activities were not solely academic. He enjoyed Princeton football. “The football at Princeton is a continual delight to me,” he wrote. He also enjoyed Philadelphia baseball.

Machen would serve alongside fellow professor Benjamin Breckenridge Warfield, known as the “Lion of Old Princeton.” However, it would be William Park Armstrong who taught Machen the New Testament. Armstrong recognized Machen’s potential and following Machen’s professorship, he would become the young scholar’s beloved mentor.

However, theological storms were on the horizon; not only at Princeton but also in Machen’s personal life. He entered into a dark night of the soul. It was this personal and professional period of crisis that we will examine when next we meet.

Soli deo Gloria!  

⁵⁷ “And they took offense at him. But Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor except in his hometown and in his own household.” ⁵⁸ And he did not do many mighty works there, because of their unbelief.” (Matthew 13:57–58 ESV)

“You can’t go back home to your family, back home to your childhood, back home to romantic love, back home to a young man’s dreams of glory and of fame, back home to exile, to escape to Europe and some foreign land, back home to lyricism, to singing just for singing’s sake, back home to aestheticism, to one’s youthful idea of ‘the artist’ and the all-sufficiency of ‘art’ and ‘beauty’ and ‘love,’ back home to the ivory tower, back home to places in the country, to the cottage in Bermuda, away from all the strife and conflict of the world, back home to the father you have lost and have been looking for, back home to someone who can help you, save you, ease the burden for you, back home to the old forms and systems of things which once seemed everlasting but which are changing all the time–back home to the escapes of Time and Memory.” ― Thomas Wolfe

The people of Jesus’ childhood home took offense at Him. To take offense (σκανδαλίζω; skandalizo) means to cause one to experience anger or shock. Jesus’ striking instruction resulted in the people becoming angry at Him. This was the second time such a reaction occurred towards Jesus when He taught in the Nazareth synagogue. In Luke’s account (Luke 4:16-30), the people sought to kill Jesus (Luke 4:29). Matthew and Mark (Mark 6:1-6) recorded no such intention by the people at this second incident.

Why were the people so incensed at Jesus? Why were they angry at Him? Jesus provided in the answer which Matthew records.

First, the Nazarenes’ response to Jesus fulfilled Scripture. Jesus quoted from the Prophet Jeremiah (Jer. 11:1-2). Sinful people do not respond well to biblical truth. However, the prophets, and in this case Jesus, were not audience driven but rather obedience driven. Their obedience was to the Word of God and the God of the Word. The same remains true today for pastor/teachers (2 Tim. 4:1`-5).

Second, the people of Nazareth were unbelievers. They did not understand the Word of God neither did they desire it. This evidenced their fallen, spiritual condition (I Cor. 2:14). Matthew wrote that this is why Jesus ceased to do many works in the area. The people wanted miracles but they did not want biblical truth. This was the case with members of Jesus’ own family.

“Like the Pharisees before them (12:22–32), the citizens of Nazareth acknowledge the good work that Jesus is doing and yet fail to discern the source of His authority. For them, familiarity has bred contempt, and they will do whatever they can to deny the obvious,” explains Dr. R. C. Sproul.

“It is not mere ignorance that hinders men, but that, of their own accord, they search after grounds of offense, to prevent them from following the path to which God invites,” states John Calvin.

Whatever people thought they knew about Jesus when He was growing up in Nazareth needed to change because of who He truly was; God in the flesh. They were unwilling and unable to do this because of their unbelief. What about you?

“Western society is blessed to be steeped in the teaching of Scripture and the person and work of Christ. However, we must take care that this blessing of familiarity does not motivate contempt in us for the things of God. Even if we do not consciously disregard the Lord, failing to marvel at the Father’s grace — because we hear of it every week — is a subtle and powerful form of contempt. Take time to meditate on the greatness of our God and His love for us,” concludes Dr. Sproul.

Soli deo Gloria!

⁵³ “And when Jesus had finished these parables, he went away from there, ⁵⁴ and coming to his hometown he taught them in their synagogue, so that they were astonished, and said, “Where did this man get this wisdom and these mighty works? ⁵⁵ Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not his mother called Mary? And are not his brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? ⁵⁶ And are not all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all these things?” (Matt. 13:53-56 ESV).

Today’s passage parallels Mark 6:1-6. Jesus left Capernaum and travelled to His hometown, Nazareth (Matt. 2:19-23; Luke 2:39-40; John 1:43-46). It was while He was there that He taught in their synagogue. Neither Matthew nor Mark reveal from what biblical text Jesus taught. However, both disclose the peoples’ response to Jesus’ teaching.

The attendees in the synagogue were astonished. To be astonished (ἐκπλήσσω; ekplesso) is a present, passive infinitive verb. It literally means to strike. Jesus, and His teaching, struck the people with great amazement. They were filled with wonder.

The congregation’s seven recorded, rhetorical questions evidence their astonishment. “Where did this man get this wisdom and these mighty works? Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not his mother called Mary? And are not his brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? ⁵⁶ And are not all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all these things?”

“The one place we might expect Jesus to receive a warm welcome is in Nazareth, the town in which He was raised (Matt. 2:19–23). The people of Nazareth (Jesus’ “hometown,” 13:54) are amazed at the wisdom and power of the carpenter’s son. This is due to their familiarity with Jesus and His upbringing. They know His family well, and apparently no one in His clan is all that remarkable,” explains Dr. R. C. Sproul.

“Lacking a formal education, Jesus should not be able to teach with the authority that He conveys. Yet Mary’s son is unafraid to instruct with boldness (vv. 55–56). We would therefore expect the people in Nazareth to experience awe when in the presence of Jesus, whose teaching demonstrates that He is the Holy One of God.”

Another observation from today’s text is that Mary had other children besides Jesus. These sons and daughters were Mary and Joseph’s naturally born children. Jesus had four brothers and at least two sisters since the noun is in the plural form. The Bible clearly rejects the perpetual virginity of Mary.

The people’s initial astonishment will become offense. Why? The answer will be forthcoming when next we meet.

Are you continually astonished by the Lord’s salvation of your soul by grace alone, through faith alone in the person and work of Jesus Christ alone? May who Jesus is and what Jesus did continue to astonish each of us. Have a blessed day in the Lord.

Soli deo Gloria!

⁵¹ “Have you understood all these things?” They said to him, “Yes.” ⁵² And he said to them, “Therefore every scribe who has been trained for the kingdom of heaven is like a master of a house, who brings out of his treasure what is new and what is old.” (Matthew 13:51–52 ESV)

When Jesus concluded His parabolic teaching, He asked the disciples if they understood all the things that He had said. To understand (συνίημι; syniemi) means to intelligently comprehend. It is to realize to the point of insight. They responded that they did understand and comprehend. One wonders if this was true.

“Before His final kingdom parable, Jesus asks His disciples if they have understood all that He has said (v. 51). They answer yes, which is an overestimation of their insight since the disciples later have no clue about the nature of the kingdom and the suffering it entails. For example, Peter will object to the Lord’s crucifixion (Matt.16:21–23) and all the disciples flee upon Christ’s arrest in Gethsemane (26:47–56). Still, the Twelve are not wholly wrong to say that they have understood our Savior’s teaching, for He has explained His parables to them (13:18–23, 36–43, 47–50). Their comprehension is not mature, but it is not absent altogether,” states R. C. Sproul.

“Their yes did not actually mean that they understood all that Jesus was teaching, only that they believed all that they did understand and were prepared to act on it,” explains Dr. James M. Boice.

Jesus then said, ““Therefore every scribe who has been trained for the kingdom of heaven is like a master of a house, who brings out of his treasure what is new and what is old.” What did Jesus mean by this cryptic statement?

Discipleship precedes understanding. God converts and then consecrates sinners. By the act of conversion, followed by the process of consecration or sanctification, the believer progresses from a rudimentary understanding of theology to an increasing knowledge of God; His person and His work. This involves an understanding of the Old Testament revelation and how it applies to the New Testament.

“The special revelation of Jesus allows His people to see in the Old Testament kingdom truths that have been there since the foundation of the world, but which have largely gone unnoticed (vv. 34–35). These new truths are the key to the right appropriation of Scripture, but they are not in opposition to the old truths evident apart from the parables of Jesus,” continues Dr. Sproul.

“The disciples are not to spurn the old for the sake of the new. Rather, they are to understand the new insights gleaned from Jesus’ parables in light of the old truths, and vice versa,” concludes Dr. John MacArthur.

Recently, well-known pastors have suggested that the Old Testament is no longer necessary for the church. A study of the New Testament is all that matters. Jesus’ words from today’s text belies that postmodern perspective.

Soli deo Gloria!

⁴⁷ “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a net that was thrown into the sea and gathered fish of every kind. ⁴⁸ When it was full, men drew it ashore and sat down and sorted the good into containers but threw away the bad. ⁴⁹ So it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come out and separate the evil from the righteous ⁵⁰ and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” (Matthew 13:47–50 ESV)

“The parable of the wheat and the tares (Matt. 13:24–30, 36–43) is probably not first and foremost about the presence of people who profess the Christian faith falsely in the institutional church. However, this does not mean that Jesus has nothing to say on the subject. The parable of the net apparently deals with the fact that those who do not really know Christ will “worship” beside true believers in the visible covenant community,” explains Dr. R. C. Sproul.

Jesus compared the kingdom of heaven to a fishing net. This net was thrown into the sea. This resulted in a gathering of various fish. As with the previous parables, Jesus used the object lesson of fishing to explain a spiritual truth. Fishing, along with farming and shepherding, was a familiar way of life for the Jew. They could relate to the plot, setting and characters of the story. The question would be if they would understand the biblical truth.

Jesus continued by saying that when the net was full, the fisherman drew it ashore, sat down and sorted the fish. They placed the good fish into containers and threw away the bad. How many fishermen in Jesus’ audience that day had not done the same thing (Matt. 13:1-2)? It was a common practice.

Jesus then explained the point of his parable. The gathering of fish illustrated the gathering of humanity at the end of the age and before the judgment seat of God. Jesus said that, “The angels will come out and separate the evil from the righteous ⁵⁰ and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”

“Our Lord’s contemporaries are again familiar with the imagery in this parable. Those who had worked on the seas knew well the task of sorting out the edible fish from those not fit for consumption (13:48), which is likened to the angelic separation of the righteous from the unrighteous when the kingdom is consummated (vv. 49–50),” continues Dr. Sproul.

“Like a net catching fish, the church will bring in many kinds of people. Yet just as not all fish are fit for eating, so too are not all members of the visible church fit for heaven. The church we can see is a mixed body until the Savior returns. All those whom we see professing Christ (the visible church) do not necessarily have faith; some join the church for motives other than serving Jesus. These false professors are mixed with true believers in the visible church, but not forever. For on Judgment Day those who never possessed saving trust in Christ will find eternal punishment (vv. 49–50).”

What kind of fish are you? He who has ears to hear, let them hear.

Soli deo Gloria!  

⁴⁵ “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant in search of fine pearls, ⁴⁶ who, on finding one pearl of great value, went and sold all that he had and bought it.” (Matthew 13:45–46 ESV)

Matthew 13:1-50 contains seven parables concerning the Kingdom of Heaven. These include the Parable of the Sower (Matt. 13:3-23), the Parable of the Weeds (13:24-30), the Parable of the Mustard Seed (13:31-32), the Parable of the Leaven (13:33), the Parable of the Hidden Treasure (13:44), the Parable of the Pearl of Great Value (13:13:45-46), and the Parable of the Net (13:47-50). Today’s study concerns the Parable of the Pearl of Great Value.

Jesus indirectly compared the kingdom of heaven to a treasure (Matt. 13:44). He also compared the kingdom to a pearl of great worth.

Jesus tells a tale of a merchant. Merchant (ἔμπορος; emporos) means an individual involved in commerce and trade. In other words, this individual was a businessman perhaps involved in the shipping trade. This would be reasonable since he was searching for fine pearls.

“Pearl hunting, also known as pearling, is the activity of recovering pearls from wild mollusks, usually oysters or mussels, in the sea or freshwater. Pearl hunting was prevalent in the Persian Gulf region and Japan for thousands of years,” explains one scholar. “Historically the mollusks were retrieved by freediving, a technique where the diver descends to the bottom, collects what they can, and surfaces on a single breath.”  

“Divers sought pearls in the Red Sea, Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean, and some pearls could be worth the equivalent of millions of dollars. Jesus’ hearers were probably familiar with the basic story line; there seems to have been a folktale that ran similarly, although it did not make the same point about the kingdom,” explains commentator Craig Keener.

The merchant in Jesus’ parable was not just attempting to find any kind of pearls. Rather, he was actively searching for fine pearls. Fine (καλός; kalos) means beautiful and valuable.

“Before the beginning of the 20th century, the only means of obtaining pearls was by manually gathering very large numbers of pearl oysters or mussels from the ocean floor or lake or river bottom. The bivalves were then brought to the surface, opened, and the tissues searched. More than a ton were searched in order to find at least 3-4 quality beads,” states a scholar.  

“In order to find enough pearl oysters, free-divers were often forced to descend to depths of over 100 feet on a single breath, exposing them to the dangers of hostile creatures, waves, eye damage, and drowning, often as a result of shallow water blackout on resurfacing. Because of the difficulty of diving and the unpredictable nature of natural pearl growth in pearl oysters, pearls of the time were extremely rare and of varying quality.”

In his search, the merchant discovered one pearl of great value. One can imagine that after his extensive searching, the man’s efforts were finally rewarded. However, Jesus gives no reason why the man would need to sell all he had to buy the pearl he found. It is sufficient to understand that the pearl was of greater value than all he previously possessed.

“Jesus uses illustrations to which His contemporaries can easily relate. Given the potential for political instability and invasions, as well as the non-existence of safety deposit boxes, ancient Jews often buried their valuables. Sometimes these treasures were abandoned, and finding one that had been left behind was a once-in-a-lifetime event. That such a treasure is found indicates the kingdom’s rarity and therefore, its preciousness. Pearls were more highly valued in first-century Palestine than diamonds are in our culture. Other biblical passages use pearls to illustrate all-surpassing worth (Rev. 21:21), and so Jesus likens the kingdom to a precious pearl,” explains Dr. R. C. Sproul.

“These parables teach us primarily how we must value Jesus’ kingdom. Yet they also tell us about the people our Redeemer saves. As with the man in the field, some “stumble upon” Christ when they are not looking for Him. Others travel various spiritual paths for years before “finding Jesus,” just as the merchant searches tirelessly for the costliest pearl. God’s grace calls the spiritually apathetic as well as those who believe themselves to be seeking Him.”

Do you personally possess the treasure of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the pearl of great value? It is only available by grace alone, through faith alone, in the person and work of Jesus Christ alone.

Soli deo Gloria!