In our last study last week, we left
Abram dwelling by the Oaks of Mamre, which
are in Hebron, by his altar, and Lot
by the city of Sodom.
And so we pick up the story now
in Genesis chapter 14 for our scripture reading.
I want to read the entire chapter.
I'm sure that you're interested again in the
official pronunciation of some of these names that
appear before us in chapter 14, and so
I'm going to go through it and pay
particular attention.
This is the official pronunciation of these words.
I was a little puzzled myself by a
few of them, and so last night I
even looked up a few of them in
the Bible dictionary, and I hope I'm able
to pronounce them as they should be pronounced.
Genesis chapter 14, verse 1 through verse 24.
And it came about in the days of
Amraphel, king of Shinar, Ariok, king of Eleazar,
Keterleoma, king of Elam, entitled king of Goyim.
Some of you in your editions may have
Goyim rather than Goyim.
The New American Standard Bible which I am
reading has Goyim.
But they made war with Bera, king of
Sodom, and with Bersha, king of Gomorrah, Shanab,
king of Atmar, and Shemeba, king of Zeboiim,
and the king of Bela, that is, Zor.
These kings in the first verse are kings
from the east.
You'll recognize Elam as Persia, for example, and
Shinar as Babylon.
The kings mentioned in the second verse are
kings from the area of Sodom and Gomorrah,
and in fact four of the kings, or
four of the localities, Sodom, Gomorrah, Atmar, Zeboiim.
These are little places that were destroyed when
God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah.
Verse 3, all these, that is the kings
of verse 1, all these came as allies
to the valley of Siddim.
Then Moses adds, which perhaps is an indication
of the antiquity of the basic account, all
these came as allies to the valley of
Siddim, that is, he adds the salt sea.
Twelve years they, that is the five kings
in the land, twelve years they had served
Ketolaoma, but the thirteenth year they rebelled.
And in the fourteenth year, Ketolaoma and the
kings that were with him came and defeated
the Rephaim in Ashtaroth, Carnaium, and the Zuzim
in Ham, and the Amim in Shaveh, Kiriathayim,
or Thayim, and the Horites in their Mount
Seir, as far as El Paran, which is
by the wilderness.
Then they turned back and came to En
Mishpat, that is Kadish, and conquered all the
country of the Amalekites, and also the Amorites,
who lived in Hazazon, Tamar.
And the king of Sodom, and the king
of Gomorrah, and the king of Admar, and
the king of Zeboiim, and the king of
Bila, that is Zoar, came out, and they
arrayed for battle against them in the valley
of Siddim, against Ketolaoma, king of Elam, entitled
king of Goyim, and Amraphel, king of Shanar,
and Ariok, king of Elazer, four kings against
five.
Now the valley of Siddim was full of
tar pits, and the kings of Sodom and
Gomorrah fled, and they fell into them, that
is, they fell into the tar pits.
But those who survived fled to the hill
country.
Then they took all the goods of Sodom
and Gomorrah, and all their food supply, and
departed, and they also took Lot.
This next phrase, Abram's nephew, is very important,
because this links the whole account to the
story of the life of Abram.
And they also took Lot, Abram's nephew, and
his possessions, and departed, for he was living
in Sodom.
Then a fugitive came and told Abram, the
Hebrew, now he was living by the Oaks
of Mamre the Amorite, brother of Eshcol, and
brother of Ena, and these were allies with
Abram.
And when Abram heard that his relative had
been taken captive, he led out his trained
men, born in his house, three hundred and
eighteen, and went in pursuit as far as
Dan.
Evidently these three hundred and eighteen men were
servants of Abram, and they must have had
some form of freedom as well.
He had trained them, in addition, for protection.
And he divided his forces against them by
night, he and his servants, and defeated them,
and pursued them as far as Hobar, which
is north of Damascus.
And he brought back all the goods, and
also brought back his relative Lot, with his
possessions, and also the women, and the people.
Then after his return from the defeat of
Ketileoma, and the kings who were with him,
the king of Sodom went out to meet
him at the valley of Sheve, that is
the king's valley.
And Melchizedek, king of Salem, brought out bread
and wine.
Now he was a priest of God Most
High.
It's, it would seem evident from the way
this account is constructed, that Melchizedek accompanied the
king of Sodom.
And as the king of Sodom went out
as the political leader to greet Abram, Melchizedek
stepped forward, and it's obvious from the account
that the king of Sodom and Mel, and
Abraham recognized that Melchizedek was a greater figure
than either of them.
And so as he stepped forward, the account
focuses attention upon him and his words.
So we read in verse 19, And he
blessed him, that is Abraham, and said, Blessed
be Abram of God Most High, possessor of
heaven and earth, and blessed be God Most
High, who has delivered your enemies into your
hand.
And he gave him, that is he, Abram,
he gave him, Melchizedek, a tenth of all.
By the way, this is not the beginning
of the tithe.
There is some evidence to indicate that the
giving of a tenth part of things was
accustomed in the recognition of the dignity and
position of a superior being.
And this reads literally, not he gave him
a tithe, but he gave him a tenth
part.
Now later on in the Mosaic law, as
we know, the tithe was introduced as a
form of income tax, in that everybody had
to pay the tithe.
The tithe was not a gift at all.
It was a kind of tax.
Everybody had to pay it.
Gifts and offerings were above the tithe.
That's why it's rather amusing for the Christian
church to speak about tithes.
Because in the New Testament, since the law
has been done away with, the tithe has
been done away with.
Gifts are made, but giving is as God
has prospered us.
It is voluntary.
And consequently the determination of giving is entirely,
well it's not different.
Because gifts and offerings were gifts and offerings
in the Old Testament.
But it does not have any relationship to
the tithe.
Now we read in verse 21, and the
king of Sodom said to Abram, give me
the, give the people to me and take
the goods for yourself.
And Abram said to the king of Sodom,
I have sworn to Yahweh, God most high.
You'll notice he identifies the Lord with the
name that Melchizedek has used for God.
Signifying that they really are speaking about the
same person.
The Lord, God most high, possessor of heaven
and earth, that I will not take a
thread or a sandal thong or anything that
is yours, lest you should say, I have
made Abram rich.
I will take nothing except what the young
men have eaten and the share of the
men who went with me.
Ener, Eshcol and Mamre.
Let them take their share.
Now this is rather interesting because of course
we read in Genesis chapter 12 that Abram
had received a great deal of benefit from
Pharaoh when he was in Egypt.
But now we read that he says that
he will not take anything, not a thread
or a sandal thong of anything that belonged
to the king of Sodom.
That suggests one or two things.
In the case of the gifts of Genesis
chapter 12 they were given as a kind
of dowry.
Because Pharaoh expected to marry Sarah, whom he
thought, who he thought was the sister of
Abram.
And so consequently Abram felt free to accept
the gifts as a dowry, for that was
a kind of secular practice.
But when it came to spiritual things that
was a different matter entirely.
Or another explanation may be appropriate.
It may be that when Abram was forced
to leave Egypt by Pharaoh, when he was
in effect forced to leave, Pharaoh ran him
out of Egypt.
He may have said to him, you should
be ashamed of yourself.
Abram was humiliated, he said nothing.
You shouldn't be ashamed of yourself, it is
I who have blessed you, I've made you
the so-called prophet of the Lord rich.
And perhaps he was so humiliated by what
had really happened, and that that man could
say what he said.
That now he says, he doesn't want anybody
saying I have made Abram rich.
It's possible he learned his lesson when he
was in Egypt.
We don't know, the Bible doesn't make either
of those explanations definite.
But at any rate he makes a definite
stand here and says he will take nothing
from the King of Sodom.
He does not expect his faith to be
the faith of Eshcol and Aner.
And so he says let them take their
share.
If they want to do that, that's their
responsibility.
I won't force them to live by my
faith.
But as for me, I don't want you
to say, you've made Abram rich.
Abram is the servant of Yahweh, possessor of
heaven and earth.
May God bless this reading of his word.
The subject for today and the continuation of
our exposition of the book of Genesis is
the faith of the father of the faithful
uncompromising.
The challenge of Abram's life, we have been
saying, is to live by the vision that
God gave to him when he called him
out of Ur of the Chaldees, to go
out to a land for an inheritance.
In a sense that is the kind of
challenge that faces each of us as believers.
For we too have a calling.
The Apostle Paul speaks about the fact that
we have been called.
And consequently our calling is to a life
with God, while somewhat different than Abram's.
It is essentially the same kind of calling.
And the challenge for us is to live
by the vision, the understanding of the divine
revelation, which has been given to us.
His life was not that of constant success.
It's already clear that Abram had his ups
and his downs.
And yet as you study the life of
Abram you discover that there is a growing
conformity to the will of God.
And even though later on he will fall
into some of the same sins that characterized
his earlier walk with God.
Nevertheless there is development and progress and growth.
That's the essence of the doctrine of progressive
sanctification, which the Bible teaches concerning the saints.
In the incident that we looked at last
week, when strife arose between the shepherds of
Lot's flocks and the shepherds of Abraham's flocks.
One saw the grasp of the invisible upon
the spirit of Abram.
And one saw also how in the test
that came to him, when he gave Lot
first choice, he showed insight, wisdom, and generosity.
The eternal in a sense triumphed over the
temporal.
And I think as far as I'm concerned,
when I thought about the decision that Abram
made, giving Lot first choice, allowing him to
take any part of the land that he
wished.
There came home to me the texts in
the epistle to the Hebrews in the eleventh
chapter that had to do with, that have
to do with Moses.
The writer of that epistle says, by faith
Moses when he had grown up refused to
be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter.
Choosing rather to suffer ill treatment with the
people of God than to enjoy the passing
pleasures of sin.
Considering the reproach of Christ greater riches than
the treasures of Egypt, for he was looking
to the reward.
Notice that, he was looking to the reward.
And then in the twenty-seventh verse, by
faith Moses left Egypt not fearing the wrath
of the king, for he endured as seeing
him who is unseen.
Now if the enduring as seeing one who
is unseen characterized Moses, it certainly also characterized
Abram.
And as a result of his decision, with
reference to the strife, the promises were renewed
to him, they were expanded.
And we found an illustration of the fact
that in the final analysis it is the
separated man who is the strong man, and
it is the worldly man who is the
weak.
We shall see the evidences of that particularly
in chapter 14.
This chapter incidentally is of great importance for
biblical Christianity.
For the first time the biblical events are
expressly coordinated with external history.
And so we read about kings from the
east, and then we read about kings from
the land, and the battle that they have.
And so we have a coordination of what
some like to call secular history, with sacred
history.
Strictly speaking all history is sacred history, for
God controls all of the affairs of men,
even those affairs that we think of as
secular.
But nevertheless you see in this, that Abram
while he is in the world is really
not of it.
And we find that illustrated here.
Incidentally in connection with this 14th chapter of
Genesis, for a long time this was thought
to be a fictitious chapter.
Because the archaeologists and other students of antiquity
had never been able to discover any definite
connection between secular history and the events that
are referred to here.
And even the names of some of the
individuals.
One of the greatest of the Semitic scholars,
Albright of Johns Hopkins, wrote a few years
back, Genesis 14 contains so many archaisms in
language, in personal and place names, that it
has been long impossible for a serious scholar
to deny that its source material must go
back to early times.
My own attitude toward the historicity of the
chapter has oscillated over the decades, but has
tended to grow more conservative as new material
turns up to elucidate this or that obscurity.
And I think that is characteristic of modern
scholarship now.
This chapter is seen to be an authentic
chapter.
And the events, while not everything is confirmed
by secular history, nevertheless the events have sufficient
confirmation for us to believe, strictly from the
standpoint of historiography, that the chapter is an
authentic chapter.
Now that is important, this integration of coordination
of external and biblical history.
But even more important is this chapter for
its key and clue to the high priestly
ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Isn't it interesting that in the New Testament
we are told that the Lord Jesus Christ
is a high priest, not after the order
of Aaron, as one might expect for Aaron
as a prominent character in the Old Testament,
but he's a high priest after the order
of Melchizedek.
And this strange, fantastic person is introduced here
in Genesis chapter 14 without any reference to
his genealogy.
So far as Genesis is concerned, he doesn't
have a father, he doesn't have a mother,
he doesn't have beginning of days, he doesn't
have end of life.
It was customary for the prominent characters of
Genesis to have their genealogies inscribed in this
book, but in the case of Melchizedek we
do not have it.
So the writer of Hebrews, inspired by the
Holy Spirit, thinks about this deeply enough to
recognize that point and sees in it that
in this way we have a beautiful illustration
of an eternal king priest.
And so this, the argument that he uses
is a kind of argument from silence, but
since of course it is the divine record,
he knows that the record is by divine
design.
And so he sees in Melchizedek a beautiful
illustration of our Lord as the eternal priest.
And consequently this becomes very important for the
understanding of Jesus Christ's ministry to us as
priest, as advocate, as intercessor, a ministry that
he's carrying on at this very time.
And so Melchizedek makes Genesis chapter 14 very
important.
The writer of the epistle of the Hebrews
incidentally says that the reason that so many
of you are lethargic and indifferent and weak
in your Christian life is that you don't
know the ministry of the Lord Jesus as
the priest after the order of Melchizedek.
And so you ought to know that ministry
and therefore the heart of that epistle is
an exposition of what it means to be
a priest after the order of Melchizedek.
I know there are people who say well
I'm interested enough in trying to apply the
few things in the Bible that I know
and I'm not interested in gaining a deeper
knowledge.
That reminds me of some words that the
old commentator Matthew Henry once said.
We shall not only be called into account
for the truth that we knew and did
not apply, but also for the truth that
we might have known and did not come
to know.
So when the time of the judgment seat
of Jesus Christ takes place and believers pass
before that judgment they shall not be judged
simply concerning the truth that they know and
did not apply, but also by that truth
that they might have known if they had
diligently studied the word of God.
Therefore the priest after the order of Melchizedek
is a rather important thing.
Finally in this 14th chapter, I know it's
dangerous to insert a finally when you're introduction,
but nevertheless this is finally, so far as
this chapter is concerned, finally the words that
Abram spoke to the king of Sodom throw
an important light on financial principles of Christian
ministry.
And I want to spend a little bit
of time on that later on and consequently
if you will allow me I will skip
rather lightly over the struggle over lot and
center a little bit of attention upon the
words that Abram spoke to the king of
Sodom.
In third John there is a very interesting
little clause.
John speaks about some individuals, recommends them, and
says that one of the things that characterizes
them is that they went out taking nothing
of the Gentiles.
In other words he approved of the fact
that they gave their ministry without appealing to
those who did not know truth.
Now that principle is very important and we
find this illustrated in the words that Abram
will give to the king of Sodom, to
which we'll give attention shortly.
We left lot at the end of chapter
13 in Sodom and Abram by the oaks
of Mamre.
Abram in a new capacity in chapter 14
is seen as a man equal to kings.
The kind of man who knows what it
is to commune with God on the mountains
by himself, by his flocks and his shepherds,
but at the same time a man who
is able to enter into all of the
affairs of the world and give a good
account of himself even in military affairs.
An unusual man.
The warring parties are described in the first
three verses.
It was I guess a small war in
which five rebel cities in the land defy
their masters from the east and suffer swift
and devastating punishment.
The campaign of Cateleoma is described in verse
four through verse seven.
Evidently Cateleoma and the five, the four, the
three other kings that were associated with him
when the news came that the kings were
rebelling in the land and not paying the
tribute as they should have paid it, decided
that since he was going to have to
make a trip he may as well do
a thorough job of it.
And so he makes this journey a punitive
raid and it becomes an orgy of annihilation.
And so he moves from the east to
the east down to the south and then
across to the west and then up to
the north again until the enemies are gathered
in that little valley which is located near
the northern end of the Dead Sea.
Where there were pits, pits of Batumen the
Hebrew says.
So evidently there were lots of pits with
pitch in them.
And as a result of this wide sweep
and finally the confrontation with the five kings
from the south in a very disgraceful defeat,
the kings crawling amid the Batumen pits, they
were overcome by Cateleoma and the kings with
him.
And in true marauder fashion Cateleoma and those
that were with him take everything that is
not nailed down back toward the east and
included in the spoils is Lot.
What a humiliation for this man who was
a true believer the New Testament tells us
but a worldly.
He had chosen as his prize that land
that was about Sodom.
It reminded him remember of the Garden of
Eden.
It reminded him of the fertile plains in
the land of Egypt.
And so looking with his eyes and judging
from the standpoint of the visible and the
material he chose that little plot of ground
near Sodom as his own possession.
But this prize that was carnally chosen is
now lost.
Someone has described this as the capture of
Lot or nemesis pursuing sin.
How true.
You see our sins do find us out
and our worldliness as Christians will ultimately find
us out too.
We shall discover that we shall suffer for
the things that are contrary to his word.
Now of course as far as Christians are
concerned we know that we shall not suffer
the loss of eternal life but we shall
suffer the loss of the enjoyment of the
communion with God that we might have known.
There is great practical importance on attached to
Lot's experience.
How frequently do we hear people defending continuance
in a position that they admit to be
wrong on the plea that they think that
thereby they may enjoy a wider sphere of
usefulness.
We often hear people saying people who are
in a very liberal bible despising fellowship.
And you will often hear them say particularly
if they are evangelical Christians who have come
to a little bit of knowledge about the
word of God.
Not enough but a little bit at least.
You will often hear them saying in a
way in which they attempt to excuse their
own position.
Well I know that it may not be
right for me to be in this fellowship
that I'm in but after all I'm expecting
to have a Christian witness there.
And so to have a Christian witness in
that place becomes the predominant motive for staying
in a fellowship that is contrary to the
express words of holy scripture.
Now to all such reasoning Samuel furnishes a
pointed and powerful reply.
He says to obey is better than sacrifice
and to hearken than the fat of rams.
Now we shall see that of the two
men Abram and Lot the one who conceivably
by human reasoning might have been thought to
withdraw himself from the world.
And therefore to have little opportunity for testimony
is the one who does have ultimately the
testimony.
And Lot has a testimony too but it's
a testimony to the failure of worldly Christianity.
So there is an important lesson in this.
You see the proper position of a Christian
is not to identify with the world in
order to testify, in order to have a
witness in a fellowship that is contrary to
the truth.
But the place of effective service and the
place of effective witness is to separate from
the world and to testify against it.
We're not talking about isolation.
That of course is not taught in the
word of God.
But we are talking about no entangling alliances.
And the effectiveness comes when a particular position
that is scriptural is the position of the
witness.
And from that effective testimony against the unbelief
of the world given.
That is effective testimony it seems to me.
Well the deliverance of Lot is described in
verse 13 through verse 16.
Someone has said faith makes us independent but
not indifferent.
I'm afraid that Abram is a much better
believer than I am.
I think I would have been inclined to
say well Lot has by his decision made
it necessary that he learn a lesson.
And so let him stew in his own
juice.
And consequently he'll learn that when you make
decisions for the Lord you should make them
by eternal principles.
By the unseen principles.
But one thing about Abram.
The Bible says incidentally faith purifies the heart.
It works by love.
It overcomes the world.
And Abram is a man of faith.
He is the king of faith.
He's overcome the test of self-interest by
allowing Lot to choose first.
Now he overcomes the test of self-complacency.
Because he recognizes that Lot is his brother.
His nephew actually.
But he also is a believer.
And they are bound together in a relationship.
And so he has a responsibility to him.
But whatever you say about Abram he failed
a great deal.
He was not a vindictive person.
I'm afraid I would have been.
I would I think have enjoyed the thing
that happened to Lot.
That'll teach him a lesson.
And all of us who do like Lot.
But Abram felt that was a call upon
him.
And so in true evangelical Christianity fashion.
Thinking over the fact that here are people
that are now oppressed by Cataleon and those
that are with him.
He sets out to remedy the situation.
There are people today who tell us that
the social effects of evangelical Christianity are not
seen.
Now that is simply a confession of the
ignorance of history.
It is in evangelicalism that we see some
of the most outstanding social effects.
And here we see it right here.
In Abram determining to rescue Lot and those
that were with him from the oppression of
Cataleon and the others.
Now the defeat of the kings is described
in verse 15 in a most interest most
interesting way.
He divided his forces against them by night.
He and his servants and defeated them and
pursued them as far as Hobar which is
north of Damascus.
You might not have expected this because in
Abram there is there there is conjoined the
graces of a saint with the talents of
a soldier.
Now that's not uncommon in the Bible.
We have it illustrated in the case of
Moses who we learn from tradition outside scripture
was a man that was mighty in his
exploits among the Egyptians before God called him
to the task to which he was to
devote the remainder of his life.
We've seen it in Gideon, we see it
in David, we see it in others of
the Old Testament saints.
They were saints but at the same time
they were also magnificent military men.
An indication of the fact that a man
may be an outstanding Christian and at the
same time very skilled in his particular task
whatever that may be.
He brilliantly displayed military tactics that from time
immemorial have characterized good generals.
Characterized men like Miltiades and Themistocles of Greece,
Julius Caesar, Oliver Cromwell, Napoleon, Stonewall Jackson of
course.
Incidentally Stonewall Jackson was both a saint and
an outstanding general whose tactics incidentally are still
studied in our military colleges of Von Moltke
and others.
Now notice the things that characterize Abrams skill
and you'll recognize immediately if you know anything
about military life.
I know not much but I know this
much.
Notice the things that characterize his work as
a leader.
Celerity of movement, suddenness of attack, surprise attack
by night, skillful division of his forces.
That characterized Jackson at places in the early
campaigns of the war for the liberation of
the south.
The outflanking and outmarching of the enemy.
All of these things characterize Abrams attack.
It's not surprising that he won.
Well the rescue is described in verse 16,
and he brought back all the goods and
also brought back his relative Lot with his
possessions and also the women and the people.
Can you not imagine what happened to the
remnants of Catalaoma's army when they reached the
east?
They straggled back amazed at the unexpected end
to this campaign which had been a campaign
of victory.
Until Abram came in touch with them.
It was easy to save Lot out of
that disorganized multitude and Abram managed to save
not only Lot but all of the material
goods as well.
But now as is characteristic of all spiritual
life, he's won a great victory.
But he faces a dilemma which he probably
has no inkling of.
When you win a great victory that's the
time to beware, because you tend to relax.
And consequently when you relax you're at your
weakest.
And so a greater conflict now faces him
in the appearance of the two kings.
The king of Sodom and the king of
Salem.
And what is represented by them.
Now remember Abram was just like any other
man.
He wanted security.
Men want security don't they?
They will sit at their desk and go
over their possessions and say, ah I now
have a portfolio that is worth seven hundred
and fifty thousand dollars.
But I would feel much better if it
were one million.
And I know enough millionaires to know that
when you sit down with your portfolio one
million two hundred and fifty thousand, you would
love to have one worth two million.
Security is something we all want.
Abram was probably a wealthy man, but security
and the test of security was a severe
test for him.
He was a homeless man.
He probably could easily see how he might
lose everything with a bad year or two.
Hudson Taylor used to say, every trial is
a vote of confidence from my heavenly Father.
So the trials come in order to test
us and to make us better men and
women.
And here comes the trial.
The king of Sodom comes.
A very handsome business-like offer.
Abram you've won the victory, take it all.
Just give us the people.
We had the roar of the serpent in
the earlier part of the chapter.
We have the roar of the lion I
should say in the earlier part of the
chapter.
Now we have the hiss of the serpent.
Satan works in various ways.
Now at this point when they meet the
king of Sodom and Abram, Melchizedek is there.
This strange mysterious figure.
He has a remarkable name incidentally.
Melchizedek comes from two Hebrew words.
One melech which means king and tzedek which
means righteousness.
So his name means king of righteousness.
Furthermore he was the king of Salem.
Now Salem was Jerusalem.
So here is a king of Jerusalem, king
of righteousness.
And incidentally David is the first Israelite to
sit on Melchizedek's throne.
Now since he's king priest, he's king and
priest of Salem and years later David will
be installed as king in Salem or Jerusalem
being the first Israelite king to sit on
the throne of Salem, Jerusalem.
And no doubt David thinking about the history
of Jerusalem in the past remembered that it
was at Jerusalem that Melchizedek had reigned as
king priest.
And so in the greatest of the Messianic
Psalms, Psalm 110 in the fourth verse David
by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit sings,
the Lord has sworn and will not repent
thou art a priest forever after the order
of Melchizedek.
As he thinks about the Messiah who is
to come.
So he himself sitting on the throne recognizing
himself as typical of the king who is
to come announces that he will be a
priest after the order of Melchizedek for he
has inherited his priesthood when he sits upon
the throne in Jerusalem.
Well this great figure appears and evidently the
king of Sodom backs off and Abram himself
recognizes his superiority and so Melchizedek speaks after
he has brought forth bread and wine.
Now I cannot help but feel that that
has some relationship to the bread and wine
of the New Testament.
Abram didn't need any refreshment he had all
the spoils.
So I rather tend to think that this
is symbolic of perhaps the memorials of sacrifice
as a basis of communion or perhaps symbolic
of the words that he will give in
the prophecy or the expression of praise that
he gives in verses 19 and 20.
At least we are to think of them
as symbolic.
Symbolic of that which represents a finished work.
Bread and wine.
He blesses Abram three times the word is
used.
He blessed him.
Blessed be Abram.
Blessed be God most high.
So he blesses Abram he blesses the Lord
and this blessing is clearly designed to provide
Abram with some strength for the test that
is going to face him now.
What are you going to do with the
spoils Abram?
And so we read that he Abram gave
him Melchizedek a tenth part of the spoils.
Recognition of the divine office of Melchizedek.
Now we hear words from the king of
faith.
The king of Sodom said to Abram give
the people to me and have the goods
for yourself and Abram said to the king
of Sodom I have sworn to the Lord
God most high possessor of heaven and earth
that I will not take a thread or
a sandal thong or anything that is yours
lest you should say I have made Abram
rich.
Put in our language he'd say I will
not take a red scent from you lest
you say I have made it possible for
Abram to be rich.
You see if a person lives by the
vision that God has given to him he
won't be disturbed by that because the possessor
of heaven and earth Yahweh possessor of heaven
and earth he's the possessor of heaven and
earth and if he fills the vision vision
then the goods of Sodom have little attraction.
What a majestic response this is on the
part of Abram the great example of faith.
Now that brings me to say just a
few words about financial practices and evangelicalism today.
The customs of today include collections, indiscriminate, appeals,
charges for the ministry of the word of
God.
We have actually seminars constantly given in which
we are told that if we will pay
anywhere from zero to sixty dollars we'll be
able to sit in on these meetings in
which the word of God is taught.
Prayer letters constantly are sent out.
Incidentally they know exactly those who send them
out exactly the kind of response that is
expected.
A Pavlovian kind of response is the thing
that is expected.
I've sat in on meetings like this and
heard men say we are in a little
bad straits and so consequently let's send out
a prayer letter we know that we will
get a certain kind of response.
And so we have that in evangelicalism.
We have appeals to foundations that are foundations
that are not built upon scriptural principles at
all generally speaking.
Generally speaking are foundations that are founded by
men who do not know our Lord Jesus
Christ.
Now there are many things that I disagree
with Bob Thieme about.
He is a very forthright Arminian and I
am a fairly forthright Calvinist as you know.
But Bob Thieme was certainly right when he
said the greatest con artists of all are
Christians.
I agree with that.
I think that is true.
And one of the reasons for this is
that they play upon the kinds of emotions
that are ordinarily very good.
It is we who are appealing for your
funds who are like Elijah.
Someone has likened it to this.
We're like Elijah standing on Mount Carmel fighting
against Baal.
And God has told us to do this.
To take on 50 more radio stations or
to build this building or establish this university.
He has given us the vision and this
is what we're going to do.
And are you not going to support us?
And we therefore feel if we say no
that we are saying no to the Lord.
It's as if we are saying that we
will support the prophets of Baal rather than
our leader who's standing on the mountain.
This past week in the Wall Street Journal
in one of the lead articles on the
front page there was a story about a
particular radio and TV ministry which was so
much in debt that the station was threatening
to cancel their program.
They hadn't paid their bills for six months.
And so the leader, Elijah standing on Mount
Carmel, the leader announced that he was going
to write a twenty thousand dollar check.
Everybody knew it was worthless.
I think he knew it was worthless too.
But nevertheless he directed his secretary to write
the twenty thousand dollar check.
And he said God told me to do
it last night.
And then on Monday according to his autobiography
and according to the story in the journal
thirty thousand dollars came in.
And so naturally he was encouraged and later
on that year he wrote two more quote
faith checks unquote.
The title of the article incidentally is faith
fails to keep money woes away from a
TV ministry.
These things are being carried on in evangelicalism
even in those most evangelical circles.
Abram gave no recital of his needs.
He sent out no prayer letters with self
-addressed envelopes hinting at his needs or anything
like that.
What should a Christian do?
Why should do the obvious thing?
Don't respond.
I think of the congregation to which a
visiting minister was preaching.
And it was said at the conclusion of
the meeting that they would take up a
love offering.
And so they didn't have any collection plates
and the preacher was there and he had
his hat.
And so they took the preacher's hat and
they passed the hat around after he had
preached.
I wonder how much I would get this
morning.
But anyway they passed the hat around and
finally they returned the hat to the minister
and it was conspicuously and embarrassingly empty.
And so slowly and deliberately the preacher took
the hat and he inverted it and turned
it upside down and shook it good like
this.
Then he raised his eyes toward heaven and
he is said to have prayed fervently.
I thank thee dear Lord that I got
my hat back from this congregation.
Well I think that would at least teach
him a lesson to not take up love
offerings.
There are sophisticated fundraising machineries by which you
can spend thousands and thousands of dollars and
whole programs are set forth by which you
can obtain money from people.
In one article that I read this week
from Eternity Magazine there is a statement that
fifty thousand dollars was spent by one organization
for one week's work in planning a year's
prayer letters, TV giveaways and appeals for funds
of this one organization.
Now what is the peril of all of
this?
As I see it, it's this.
In the first place it robs God of
his glory.
He's sovereign in the supply of our needs.
He's the living God.
That's what we say isn't it?
He's the living God and if he's the
living God and if he has called us
to ministry then we can be sure that
he will supply our needs.
And if he doesn't supply the funds there
is nothing bad about closing shop.
It may indicate a change in his purpose.
What's wrong with that?
But if he wishes us to carry on
a ministry he will supply our funds.
Now I don't like to be put in
the embarrassing position of glorying.
The Apostle Paul had to apologize for glorying
too and I guess in one sense I
can say that's scriptural.
But embarrassingly I say to you that's why
we don't take up a collection in the
morning service here at Believers Chapel.
We know there are many of you who
are not Christians.
We don't want you to feel you have
to support this ministry.
This is the responsibility of the Lord through
the saints who are moved in gratitude to
see that the word of God goes forth.
We don't appeal for funds over our radio
ministry.
That puzzles a lot of people.
I was in Nashville this past week.
I received one of the greatest compliments I've
ever received.
A young lady.
She is a multi-multi-multi-millionaire.
If I named her father many of you
would know him.
He has founded three national corporations that are
worth well some of them up in the
billions of assets.
She is approached by every appeal in that
city.
I wish I could tell you what she
did once when Vanderbilt Divinity School came to
ask for some funds from her.
She's an evangelical Christian has been converted relatively
in recent years.
Was in Dallas attended Believers Chapel for a
lengthy period of time.
She said last week, Dr. Johnson is the
only person who comes to Nashville and doesn't
beg for money.
Now I thought that was one of the
greatest compliments I've ever received.
I don't carry out the will of God
as I would like to.
I fail often.
If you knew me and knew my heart
you would know the many failures that I
have.
But that is one thing that I would
want to do.
To glorify God and not beg for money
as if God is poor.
He's not.
It robs God of his glory.
It weakens the exercise of faith in the
invisible God in prayer.
In the Presbyterian Journal of September there was
an article by a man who was formerly
a registrar vice president of Wheaton College.
He wrote an article in which he said
that he had been on an extended holiday
recently and when he came home he found
an accumulation of second and third class mail.
It included 78 appeals from 49 Christian organizations.
78 appeals from 49 organizations.
It's obvious some of them had already appealed
two or three times while he was on
his vacation.
The title of the article incidentally is, I
thought it was good, why pray when you
can solicit.
Now this is an experienced Christian man.
He's speaking truth.
That is the tendency.
Why pray when you can solicit.
And finally, I know you're happy to hear
that, this often leads to disastrous consequences because
deadly strings are often attached to the gifts
of the ungodly.
When I was in Scotland just a few
weeks ago one of the strangest things that
I ever expect to see happen, happened.
The General Assembly of the Church of Scotland
was meeting.
The professor of dogmatic theology at the university's
Divinity School is retiring this year.
They were selecting a successor.
A few years back the Divinity School, because
it's wandered from the truth and no longer
preaches with fervency the doctrine of the grace
of God, got into financial difficulties and consequently
they were unable to do with their buildings
the things that they wanted to do.
And so someone thought up the idea, why
not attach the Divinity School to the university,
so that it will become the theological faculty
of the university.
There was an association, but let's make it
part of the university.
Therefore the university will have the responsibility to
support us materially.
And so they devised a little scheme of
12 electors, or a committee of 12 to
appoint successors, thinking, well after all most of
the people in Scotland are in the Church
of Scotland, so the six men from the
university, since most of them will be Church
of Scotland men, and the six men from
the Divinity School which selects the professors, well
we'll have our way, but at the same
time we'll have our money.
Well, at the General Assembly on Thursday, I
think it was, the rumor got out that
the new successor to the professor of dogmatics,
who has had a reputation of being an
evangelical, a man under whom I've studied several
times, the rumor got out that the successor
was not going to be a Church of
Scotland man.
In fact, the rumor was out that he
was going to be a man from the
Roman Catholics.
Well, it was so disturbing to the people
of the Church of Scotland that they quickly
passed a motion, someone offered a motion, that
no one should take that position who did
not believe in the doctrines that Thomas Chalmers
believed in.
It was the chair of, the Thomas Chalmers
chair of theology, an old great evangelical man.
And then finally they became desperate and passed
a motion that he should be a man
that they approved, but it was too late,
they'd already selected him.
And so the assembly came to an end
on Friday and on Monday it was announced
that the successor to the Church of Scotland's
theological school, the chair of, the professor of
dogmatics was a Roman Catholic scholar, not only
a Roman Catholic scholar but one who had
been removed from a Roman Catholic institution for
heresy himself.
You see, the gifts of the world often
have deadly strings attached to them.
May God help us to profit from the
lesson of Abram.
If you're here this morning and you've never
believed in our Lord Jesus Christ, let me
remind you that there is no salvation except
in him who has loved us and loosed
us from our sins in his own precious
blood.
The atoning sacrifice has been offered.
If you by the grace of God the
Holy Spirit have come to a recognition of
your sin, there is salvation and forgiveness of
sin offered through Jesus Christ.
May God help you to come.
Let's stand for the benediction.
We are grateful to thee Lord for the
lessons that we learn from the word of
God.
Enable us, O God, to live in such
a way that thy name is honored and
glorified.
We know we are weak and sinful and
very inconsistent.
We do desire, Lord, however, to please thee,
to honor thee, and that others may see
thee as the sovereign of this universe, the
God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ
through whom alone there is salvation.
There are some here who have not come
to him, O God, bring them to him.
Now may grace, mercy, and peace go with
us for Jesus' sake.
Amen.