Promises | Knowable Word

Easy Money Can’t Deliver on its Promises

January 31, 2025 By Peter Krol

Last week, we saw that easy money promises community and security. Don’t fall for it.

My son, do not walk in the way with them;
Hold back your foot from their paths,
For their feet run to evil,
And they make haste to shed blood.
For in vain is a net spread
In the sight of any bird,
But these men lie in wait for their own blood;
They set an ambush for their own lives. (Prov 1:15-18)

abandoned pink piano in a derelict building — Photo by Mike Norris on Pexels.com

Security

Where is the promised security? “But these men lie in wait for their own blood; they set an ambush for their own lives.” All the promises of an easier life with fewer worries are simply lies. If we murder an old lady for her credit cards, we’re likely to be imprisoned or executed. The authorities are not very forgiving with tax evaders. Buying more stuff puts us in more debt, which costs us more in the long run.

Even winning the lottery can be more trouble than it’s worth. For example, consider Canadian Gerald Muswagon who won $10 million in the lottery, spent it all in seven years, and then hanged himself in 2005. Or William “Bud” Post, who in 1988 pawned a ring to buy some lottery tickets, won $16.2 million, racked up $500,000 in debt within three months, and had to declare bankruptcy. He ended up with numerous homes full of unused junk and declared, “I was much happier when I was broke” (Source: Maclean’s Magazine).

Please note that Proverbs is not condemning all wealth. The warning is against the unjust acquisition of wealth (what I’m calling “easy money”), which happens whenever we trample on others to gain it. Proverbs expects that wise people will gain wealth: “Honor the Lord…[and] your barns will be filled with plenty” (Pro 3:9-10). However, the methods for acquiring wealth make all the difference:

Diligence in gainful employment: “Whoever works his land will have plenty of bread, but he who follows worthless pursuits will have plenty of poverty” (Prov 28:19).
Inheritance from wise forebears: “A good man leaves an inheritance to his children’s children, but the sinner’s wealth is laid up for the righteous” (Prov 13:22).
Patient endurance over time: “Wealth gained hastily will dwindle, but whoever gathers little by little will increase it” (Prov 13:11).

In addition, the motivation for gaining wealth ought to be to serve others and not ourselves. God provides money and possessions to those who will share it with others: “Whoever multiplies his wealth by interest and profit gathers it for him who is generous to the poor” (Prov 28:8).

From Prov 13:22 and Prov 28:8, quoted above, we see that you can’t keep your wealth; either you plan to give it away, or you have it taken from you. Is that your perspective on money? The critical point is that the wise person never finds his security in his wealth, but rather in the Lord. “The name of the LORD is a strong tower; the righteous man runs into it and is safe. A rich man’s wealth is his strong city, and like a high wall in his imagination” (18:10-11).

Community

Not only does easy money fail to keep its promise of security; it also can’t deliver on community.

One hint of this failure to provide community comes in Prov 1:15: “My son, do not walk in the way with them.” When I trample on others to gain wealth, they’ll eventually withdraw to avoid my folly.

People will catch on to my selfishness and run away: “for in vain is a net spread in the sight of any bird” (Prov 1:17). If I come to you with a proposition for easy money, and you have the wisdom to see through the empty promises, you will fly like a sparrow. I can lay the net out to catch you, but—unless you are blind to reality—I’ll never gain your confidence.

That last fact gets at the heart of the matter. How often am I willfully blind to reality? I hear the promises of easy money, and I want to believe them! Gaining wealth, by hard work over a long time, in order to serve others, doesn’t sound like much fun. It sure doesn’t give me much hope that my stress will go away. So I spend more money, get nicer things, go further into debt, and leave it to my next of kin to pick up the pieces. This plan of action does not build community with those I love the most!

Now, not only does easy money fail to deliver on its promises; it also is highly self-destructive (Prov 1:19). More on that next week.

This post was first published in 2012.

Easy Money Makes Promises

January 24, 2025 By Peter Krol

Why is it the case that pursuing a quick buck, as the cost of serving others, will always keep us from being wise and ought to be rejected?

If they say, ‘Come with us, let us lie in wait for blood;
Let us ambush the innocent without reason;
Like Sheol let us swallow them alive,
And whole, like those who go down to the pit;
We shall find all precious goods,
We shall fill our houses with plunder;
Throw in your lot among us;
We will all have one purse’ (Prov 1:11-14).

These verses are morbidly comical. When was the last time you ever had a total stranger approach you on the street and ask, “Hey, whadd’ya say we go find a defenseless old lady, beat her to death, and take her credit cards? We can share them; I promise.” It just doesn’t happen like that, and Solomon knows it. It’s not like the ancients were so much dumber than we are that they’d fall for such a thing.

man wearing sunglasses and leather jacket at the party — Photo by Wolrider YURTSEVEN on Pexels.com

Rather, Solomon is taking what is usually implicit, and he’s making it explicit by telling a story. He’s bringing to light what is really going on every time we give in to our desire for more stuff. We’re not innocent victims (Prov 1:10 implies that we consent to it), and we’re not making life any easier for ourselves. Instead, we love ourselves and ignore reality. We believe the world’s promises.

The first promise is that easy money will give me community. “Come with us… Throw in your lot among us; we will all have one purse.” Easy money promises me that I can be just like everyone else. I won’t be left behind, and I can’t be the butt of people’s jokes. I won’t be one of those weirdoes who is out of touch with his own generation. I will be normal, acceptable, informed, and relevant. I might even be envied and pursued by others who are normal, acceptable, informed, and relevant. I will have the community I’ve always longed for.

The second promise is that easy money will give me security. “We shall find all precious goods; we shall fill our houses with plunder.” Once I get all the precious stuff that normal people are supposed to have, my life will be easier. Communication will be easier. Managing my life will be easier. I’ll finally be able to relax on that ideal vacation. My clothes will be more comfortable, my work will be more productive, and my stress level will drop drastically. I can pay for the car, the house, college tuition, and weddings. I’ll be set up for retirement. Problems will disappear, and nothing will shake me. I will have security.

In the poem’s next stanza, we’ll see that easy money can’t keep such promises.

This post was first published in 2012.

Why ‘Proverbs Aren’t Promises’ is Still Misleading

September 6, 2024 By Peter Krol

A few weeks ago, I republished, with some editing, a 2016 post about why the conventional Bible study advice that “proverbs aren’t promises” is misleading. Then Pastor Paul Carter interacted with my piece on The Gospel Coalition Canada site, concluding that “proverbs aren’t promises” is true after all.

I would encourage you to check out Carter’s article, as he defends the conventional wisdom and illuminates a few places where my argument is not as clear as it ought to be. Below, I will seek to rectify that. But first let me point out what I appreciate about Carter’s piece, along with how important our definitions are.

Substantial Agreement

First, while Carter makes use of scholarship to assist his arguments, he primarily looks to the Scripture itself for guidance. For this I am grateful. He takes pains to highlight the wisdom literature’s own view of the world, especially life in a fallen world.

Second, while holding to the maxim that proverbs aren’t promises, Carter makes sure to also state that “Proverbs are true and can be trusted entirely.” And that “They are truths you can build your life upon.” I affirm these conclusions wholeheartedly. I believe that these truths are in tension with the claim that “proverbs aren’t promises” on account of definitions, but more on that below. I’m just grateful up front that Carter recognizes the need to be explicit about the trustworthiness of the Proverbs.

Third, Carter’s argument is almost entirely based on the nature of life in a fallen world. And I would agree with him on his analysis of the wisdom literature’s description of our fallen existence: “Sometimes the righteous get what the wicked deserve and the wicked get what the righteous deserve. I’m not sure how anyone living on planet earth could deny that.” Agreed. In no way am I denying that reality.

Finally, Carter affirms the long-term view taken by the Proverbs: “Proverbs are true and can be trusted, but because the world is fallen, a person may have to wait until the Final Judgment and the resurrection for the full enjoyment of that truth and the full possession of the rewards associated therewith.” I fully agree with the fact that the truth of proverbs is often not fulfilled in the present age. Now strikingly, Carter believes that “promise” is the wrong label for this “full enjoyment of that truth and the full possession of the rewards associated therewith” that comes in the Final Judgment.

It is on that point of labels and definitions that my disagreement chiefly lies. So let me turn to that.

What is a Bible Promise, Really?

If by “promise,” we mean a deistic, impersonal mechanism, by which certain inputs infallibly result in guaranteed outputs, then I would agree that proverbs aren’t promises. And all over Carter’s article, it is clear that this is what he means by “promise.”

“Is the Bible promising that all who work hard will be rich? Is the Bible promising that all who are wise will receive honour? Or is it stating general principles?”
“Sometimes things happen that our view of the world would not lead us to expect, which is why, many would argue, it is best not to refer to proverbs as promises.”
“it is best not to think of Proverbs as ‘promises’ lest that phraseology lead one to expect immediate and inevitable fulfillment in this life.”

So for Carter, a “promise” is:

A universal and perhaps impersonal mechanism for rewarding certain inputs (such that, for example, all who work hard will get rich and all who are wise will receive honor).
Something that always delivers the very thing our view of the world would lead us to expect.
Something that creates an expectation of immediate and inevitable fulfillment in this life.

It’s as though God embedded into the source code of the universe a touch screen kiosk for ordering fast food. Just input your diligent labor, and pre-programmed robotic servers will bring riches and wealth right to your table.

Again, if that is what is meant by “promise,” then I agree that proverbs aren’t promises.

man in black long sleeved shirt and woman in black dress — Photo by Jasmine Carter on Pexels.com

However, the biggest problem here is that this is not what a promise is in the Bible. And that is the basis for my entire argument that “proverbs aren’t promises” is misleading.

In the Bible, a promise is:

Contextual: Promises are made to particular people at particular times and for particular reasons, and will therefore have differing (or no) application to people other than the intended recipient(s). It takes a lot of work for us to establish whether, how much, and how a Bible promise applies to us today. For example, “When your feet enter the city, the child shall die” (1 Kings 14:12) is a clear promise from God, but not for anyone reading this post.
Covenantal: Promises are made within the context of a person’s or group’s contractual relationship with God and cannot be treated as impersonal deistic mechanisms for securing a desired reward. For example, Deuteronomy 28 promises to Israel, in extravagant detail, many blessings for obeying the law and many curses for disobeying the law. These promises are alluded to frequently in the rest of the OT history as reasons why Israel stands or falls before God in her covenantal relationship with him.
Conditional: Not all, but many of the Bible’s promises are contingent on belief, obedience, or both, and therefore cannot be treated as universal guarantees. For example, “If you will walk before me, as David your father walked … then I will establish your royal throne over Israel forever, as I promised…” (1 Kings 9:4-5).

The promises of the book of Proverbs fit squarely within these characteristics. The assurances and predicted rewards or curses (I’m not sure what else to call them besides “promises”) are offered to the young nobility of Israel in the kingdom period [contextual], on the basis of their fear of the Lord (Prov 1:7, 9:10) and their standing in his steadfast love and faithfulness (Prov 3:3) [covenantal], and on condition of walking faithfully on a straight path away from self-reliance and toward Yahweh their God (see Proverbs 1-9, which is the foundation for the practicals in the rest of the book, and especially Prov 3:5-6) [conditional].

No, the assurances of Proverbs are not mathematical functions within a universal, deistic machine. Yes, the assurances of Proverbs function just like the rest of the Bible’s promises. We can come up with exceptions to the assurances of Deuteronomy 28 on account of the world’s fallenness. But nobody thereby concludes that “covenant blessings and curses aren’t promises.” So why do we make that claim about the Proverbs? Yes, they are promises. We just need to define “promise” the way the Bible does.

I’m grateful to Carter for his article, which illuminated the need for me to clarify this presupposition of my argument. My concern with the maxim “proverbs aren’t promises” lies not with what it says about proverbs but with what it says about promises.

Solving One Pastoral Problem Only to Create More Worse Ones

The conventional wisdom that “proverbs aren’t promises” always appears to arise from one of two observations:

People use Prov 22:6 to guilt-trip hurting parents with wayward children.
People are confused by how Prov 26:4-5 appear to provide contradictory guidance.

Both of those concerns are real pastoral problems. Yet when we address them with a sweeping hermeneutical solution (that proverbs aren’t promises), the collateral damage is even greater than the presenting problem.

First, if it is true that proverbs aren’t promises, then it must follow that none of the following particular proverbs are promises:

“The name of the LORD is a strong tower; the righteous runs into it and is safe” (Prov 18:10).
“Every word of God proves true; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him” (Prov 30:5).
“Better is a little with righteousness than great revenues with injustice” (Prov 16:8).

Many more examples could be given. And if none of those are promises (the way the Bible defines “promise”), where does that leave us? Under the guidance offered by the conventional principle, as Bruce Waltke recognized decades ago, a psychologically well person could scarcely trust God.

Second, if it is true that proverbs aren’t promises, how can we even say we expect their fulfillment in the Final Judgment or the new heavens and new earth? Isn’t it the case that many of the Bible’s promises are not fully true—i.e. we will experience apparent exceptions to them—until the age to come? “The wolf shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the young goat … They shall not hurt or destroy in all my holy mountain” (Isaiah 11:6-9). Carter claims that “promise” is the wrong label for truths that “will be resisted and delayed until the Final Judgment.” So what, then, should we call those assurances in other parts of the Bible that will be resisted and delayed until That Day?

Third, if the assurances of Proverbs can be refuted by appealing to self-evident exceptions to them in a fallen world, what is to prevent us from approaching any of the Bible’s promises the same way? For example, God promised to David that his son would sit on his throne forever (2 Sam 7:13). It is self-evident that Solomon did not reign forever, providing an exception to the larger promise of David’s dynasty. Does that mean that 2 Sam 7:13 is not a promise, just like “proverbs aren’t promises”? (Psalm 89 wrestles with a very similar question.) Of course not; we now know God was talking most fully about the Messiah. But this takes us back to the previous point: If the fulfillment of the promise delays until a future age, does that make it no longer a promise?

Fourth, if the assurances of Proverbs can be refuted by appealing to exceptions that violate our expectations of how the world ought to work (something to which Carter appeals numerous times in his article), what is to prevent us from approaching any of the Bible’s promises the same way? For example, “If you ask me anything in my name, I will do it” (John 14:14). But my experience has shown numerous times when Jesus did not do what I asked in his name; this violates my expectation about how Jesus said the world ought to work. Does that mean this can’t be a promise, just like “proverbs aren’t promises”? Of course not; there must something contextual, covenantal, and/or conditional that I must grasp from John’s gospel to help me overcome the pastoral problem of this verse. After all, promises are not universal, deistic mechanisms for attaining what I want.

Fifth, when the guidance that “proverbs aren’t promises” sinks in, people lose interest in the book of Proverbs. If all I find here are “general principles” and “probabilities” which may or may not be true in my life — and there’s no way of predicting whether they will be true in my life or not — then why would I pay any attention to this book at all? The book of Proverbs used to be core to Christian discipleship, as evidenced in part by its inclusion with the Psalms in the Gideons’ “New Testaments.” These days, I find it rare to come across Christians who have any real familiarity with the book of Proverbs at all. There’s just not much motivation to soak in this book when you’ve been told you can’t bank on what you find there. And in our generation, we sure would benefit from soaking in this book to guide us through the mess we’re facing.

To be fair, Carter explicitly denies the idea that the truths of Proverbs can’t be trusted. But he is not clear about how “proverbs aren’t promises” and “they are truths you can build your life upon” can both be true, when denying the latter conclusion follows directly downstream from affirming the former.

My point is simply that we create far more serious pastoral problems when we apply a sweeping hermeneutical solution to the presenting set of pastoral problems. This, I believe, is the very concern of which Dr. Waltke tries to warn us in his commentary.

A Word About Dr. Waltke

Carter is not the first critic to claim that I have misread Bruce Waltke’s commentary, which I quoted in my original article. But the criticism goes like this:

You invoke Waltke in support of your claim that ‘proverbs aren’t promises’ is misleading.
But look at all these other places where Waltke clearly denies that proverbs are universal, deistic mechanisms for attaining reward.
Therefore, you have misread him (or not allowed for his nuance).

This is to miss the point of my citation of Dr. Waltke. I do not claim that Dr. Waltke supports a deistic, mechanistic view of the promises of Proverbs. Nor do I argue myself in favor of a deistic, mechanistic view of the promises of Proverbs.

All that Dr. Waltke is saying, to which I am appealing, is that to solve the pastoral problems of Proverbs with a sweeping hermeneutical maxim that “proverbs aren’t promises but probabilities” is “stating the matter badly.” By the way we have chosen to frame the hermeneutical principle, we have created a host of “theological, practical, and psychological problems” that are even worse than the original matter we set out to address.

So again, I deny that proverbs are universal, deistic, mechanisms for attaining reward in this present life. But I strenuously urge us all not to frame our correction with the language of “proverbs aren’t promises.” By doing that, we create even worse problems for the people we’re trying to help.

What’s at Stake

I am not arguing, as Pastor Carter claims at the start of his article, against the overstatement of a valid hermeneutical principle. I am arguing against even the bare statement of such a faulty principle, even though the principle is well-intended to address a real problem.

To continue repeating the oft-repeated maxim that “proverbs aren’t promises” is to throw into question all of the Bible’s promises, because the same arguments against proverbs being promises can be directly applied to promises from other genres of the Bible. That is why the statement “proverbs aren’t promises” is misleading.

But that which truly concerns Pastor Carter, along with the myriad other proponents of the conventional guidance, is something with which I fully agree. Proverbs are not mechanistic guarantees for life in this fallen world. Can we not simply frame the matter that way, and do away with the label of “not promises”?

Why “Proverbs Aren’t Promises” is Misleading

August 2, 2024 By Peter Krol

Pick up a book with Bible-reading advice, and you’ll barely get your nose in before it gets mashed with the ubiquitous yet astonishingly forceful declaration: Proverbs aren’t promises! This piece of conventional wisdom is everywhere. Though it has roots in careful thinking about the genre of wisdom literature, this advice often goes too far and misses the point of the proverbs.

In almost every case, the counsel comes with strong emotion and a reference to Proverbs 22:6. Too many people have seen too many people bludgeon the hurting parents of wayward children through immature and thoughtless reference to this crucial verse about parenting. (“If you had trained your child right, he would not have walked away from the Lord.”) And the pastoral reflex is just right. This is not how to use Scripture.

Train me up. I promise I'll be good. — Train me up. I promise I’ll be good.

But the conclusion—that proverbs are not promises—is not right. In this case, the cure is worse than the disease.

Deep Roots

Consider first, the many respectable authors and pastors who promote the conventional wisdom. They often offer sound counsel, and their sensitivity to abuse is spot on. But when discussing how to read wisdom literature, they move in synchrony:

“A common mistake in biblical interpretation and application is to give a proverbial saying the weight or force of a moral absolute.” (R.C. Sproul)

“The proverbs commend certain paths to family members because they reflect the ways God ordinarily distributes His blessings. But ordinarily does not mean necessarily…Proverbs are not promises.” (Richard Pratt)

“The particular blessings, rewards, and opportunities mentioned in Proverbs are likely to follow if one will choose the wise courses of action outlined in the poetic, figurative language of the book. But nowhere does Proverbs teach automatic success.” (Gordon Fee & Douglas Stuart)

“The proverbs are meant to be general principles.” (John Piper)

“The proverbs appear to represent likelihoods rather than absolutes with God’s personal guarantee attached.” (James Dobson)

In other words, all agree: Proverbs are general, but not universal, statements. Proverbs are usually, or ordinarily, true. They speak about what is likely, not about what is guaranteed. But proverbs certainly are not promises. They are not absolutes. We cannot bank on them completely.

Where the Roots Run Aground

But consider some amazing statements from the proverbs. And consider where we end up if we read them as probabilities instead of promises. The conventional wisdom feels right with a verse like Proverbs 22:6, but it doesn’t hold up with much of the rest of the book.

According to Lady Wisdom: “If you turn at my reproof, behold, I will pour out my spirit to you; I will make my words known to you” (Prov 1:23). According to the conventional approach, this means that only most people who turn at wisdom’s reproof will know her words. It cannot be absolutely certain that wisdom is available to those who turn to her. Some who turn will be disappointed when she rejects them anyway.

Or consider chapter 2: “My son, if you receive my words and treasure up my commandments with you, making your ear attentive to wisdom and inclining your heart to understanding…if you seek it like silver and search for it as for hidden treasures, then you will understand the fear of the Lord and find the knowledge of God” (Prov 2:1-5). This can’t really mean what it says. What Solomon wants to communicate is that those who receive and treasure, pay attention and incline their hearts, seek wisdom like silver and search for it as for hidden treasure—such people might understand the fear of the Lord. Some—but not all—who seek the wisdom of God, and who seek it in the way God requires, will know God in the end. Hopefully you can be one of the lucky ones.

But it gets better. “For the Lord gives wisdom; from his mouth come knowledge and understanding; he stores up sound wisdom for the upright; he is a shield to those who walk in integrity (Prov 2:6-7). Today, of course, we know that only sometimes does the Lord give wisdom. This isn’t absolute, because of course you can find wisdom in other places besides him. He’s usually the source of wisdom, but if you try other places, other deities, other schools of thought, you might also get the life you need.

Or let’s hear personified Wisdom once more: “For whoever finds me finds life and obtains favor from the Lord,but he who fails to find me injures himself; all who hate me love death” (Prov 8:35-36). Because this can’t be a promise, it must be only a likelihood. So those who find the fear of the Lord and walk in his wisdom might get his favor. Or they might end up still injuring themselves and dying the eternal death. Ya never know. In this broken world of ours, it’s a crap shoot. So go with the better odds; but don’t bank on any certainties.

Proverbs are Promises…With a Context

There has to be a better way to read this genre. And I contend that, when a proverb sounds like a promise, it is making a promise! And you can always trust God’s promises. When a proverb issues a command, it is making a moral absolute!

However, these promises and commands all have a context. Just as Jeremiah 29:11 was a promise with a context (not modern-day graduates, but ancient Israelites in exile), so also proverbs have a context, a specific situation at which they are aimed. And instead of seeing proverbs as “general” or “broad” statements, we need to see them for what they truly are: very specific and particular statements. They speak to the minute details of life, which is why they can even sound contradictory at times. For example, see Prov 26:4-5. One saying is always true in a certain context (where answering a fool will make you as foolish as he is), and the next statement is always true in a different context (where not answering a fool will leave him wise in his own eyes). Wise people will discern which context they find themselves in. But both statements are always true within their contexts, and absolutely so. Neither statement is a mere likelihood.

And to get more specific, the context of the Proverbs is God’s covenant with Israel. The promises of Proverbs typically involve blessings or curses for those who keep or reject the covenant stipulations to know the Lord and walk in his wisdom. Just read Proverbs 3:1-12 immediately after Deuteronomy 28, and you can’t help but observe the contextual connection. However, nobody argues that Deuteronomy 28 contains only “probabilities,” or that these covenant blessings and curses are “not promises.” No, these promises of blessing and cursing exist within the context of God’s covenant with Israel and simply require care to apply them properly to our new covenant context.

Objection #1: Why are You the Only One Saying This?

I’m not. Everyone agrees that Bruce Waltke has written “the standard commentary” on Proverbs. Yet few listen to him on this point:

“The popular evangelical solution that these are not promises but probabilities, though containing an element of truth, raises theological, practical, and psychological problems by stating the matter badly…A psychologically well person could scarcely trust God with all his heart (Prov 3:5) knowing that he usually, but not always, keeps his obligations.” (The Book of Proverbs, Chapters 1-15 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2004), pp. 107-8)

Brothers and sisters, let us no longer state this matter badly.

Objection #2: What About Proverbs 22:6?

So we must return to that which set us down the false trail. What will we do with those who mistakenly read Prov 22:6 as a promise, and thus trample on faithful, wounded people who cannot control the hearts of their children?

We must understand the context to which this proverb speaks. In his book, God’s Wisdom in Proverbs (pp.353-379), Dan Phillips argues convincingly that Prov 22:6 means almost the opposite of what we tend to think. The verse doesn’t promise superhero children to those who follow the correct parenting techniques. Instead, it threatens selfish, miscreant children to those who refuse to use God’s means (the rod and the word of patient, faithful exhortation) to drive the folly from their children’s hearts.

In other words, the verse does not promise good kids to all good parents. But it does threaten bad kids to all bad parents. Train up your child according to his way. Teach him to continue loving himself and putting himself at the center of the universe. Show him over time that there are no consequences to his foolish choices. And even when he is old, he will not depart from his natural inclinations toward himself and himself alone. This is a promise.

But even this covenant curse has a context within the covenant of grace. There is always hope. The grace of our Lord overflows with the faith and love which are in Christ Jesus. “And the saying is trustworthy and deserving of full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners.”

Photo Credit: Clark Maxwell (2010), Creative Commons

This post was first published in 2016.

Disclaimer: Above, Amazon links to great books are affiliate links. If you click those links, I promise you I will usually receive a small commission, ordinarily at no extra cost to yourself. But you never know when Amazon may change the terms of their agreement with me. Don’t read such probabilities as absolute promises. Click only if you dare to dig into this topic further.

Does New Testament Grace Eliminate our Obligation to Obey God’s Commands?

June 26, 2024 By Peter Krol

A listener to John Piper’s podcast recently asked him a question about the roller coaster of Bible reading. A steady diet of Scripture can take a person consistently through cycles of promise, warning, assurance, and threat. What are we to make of that?

In the process of answering the question, Piper offers a keen answer to an important question: Does the grace of God in the New Testament eliminate our obligation to obey God’s commands?

Piper says:

And here’s what our friend, who sent this question, is drawing our attention to: God uses both promises and threats to motivate that obedience to his commandments. Lest anybody say, “Whoa, whoa, whoa. I don’t even need the word commandments. We shouldn’t even use the word commandments in the New Testament. That’s an Old Testament idea. We don’t live by commandments in the New Testament. That’s law. We live under grace.” To that I respond…

I won’t paste his excellent response. You’ll have to go check it out for yourselves.

God’s Big Promises Bible Storybook: One Big Story

September 29, 2023 By Peter Krol

Among the wide variety of children’s storybook Bibles available to us today, I’m thrilled to tell you about Carl Laferton’s God’s Big Promises Bible Storybook. This is a resource that knows what it’s trying to do and accomplishes its mission with great success.

When I requested a review copy from the publisher, I saw that it weighs in at just over 400 pages. I was curious to see how overwhelming that might appear to a very young audience. What I didn’t realize until the book arrived is that the book’s actual dimensions put it closer to a pocket handbook than a typical (oversized) storybook Bible. The effect of the small size makes the hundreds of pages fly past in a very satisfying way.

The book’s general premise is that the Bible tells one big story from beginning to end. That wonderful truth has — wonderfully — become conventional wisdom these days, and it’s delightful to see the trend continue in children’s resources. Yet the unique strength of Laferton’s work is the mechanism by which he ties the entire Bible together into a single story: God’s big promises.

Laferton grabs five major promises that summarize the work of God for his people: the promises to rescue, to raise a people, to provide a good land, to bring joy and happiness, and to install a king. For each of the five promises, he marks places where the promise is made, and places where the promise is kept.

The Bible stories that contain one or more of the promises (either made or kept) are then tagged with stand-out icons in order to remind the reader of that story’s connection to the overarching story. In addition, the table of contents provides charts for the “Promise Paths,” listing which stories should be read if you want to follow a single one of the promises from beginning to end.

While I’m no art critic, I find the illustrations by Jennifer Davison to be drawn from typical perspectives, though the colors are more vibrant and appealing than I’m used to. Some terrific choices are made, such as giving the serpent legs and feet like a dragon (p.31), chain links exploding off a distant Gerasene demoniac (p.273), and a strong yet reasonable diversity of complexion and skin tone all throughout.

Regarding the text: Each of the 92 chapters is unceremoniously brief and can be read out loud in less than two minutes. Despite their brevity, the stories cover quite a bit of ground, and Laferton responsibly avoids the temptation to elaborate on the Bible’s stories for the sake of color. To give one example: You won’t find any speculation here about Moses’ childhood relationship with the Pharaoh he would later oppose. Here is a sample of the first 30 pages.

When Laferton editorializes or interprets a story, he is careful to do so the same way the Scriptures themselves do. For example, with the Good Samaritan, Laferton doesn’t get too specific or use guilt to motivate. He concludes with a simple: “The Jesus asked, ‘Which of those men was truly loving others? You go and be kind like him. People who truly love God will show it by truly loving others.'” If a parent were to doubt whether that is the proper way to conclude the story, they need only look to Luke 10:36-37 to see how closely Laferton sticks to Luke’s narrative.

As a resource that claims to present the Bible’s full storyline through the framework of God’s five big promises, God’s Big Promises Bible Storybook is a smashing success. I am happy to commend it to you. It’s best use is to read aloud to preschoolers, or to give to young elementary students to read themselves.

You can find it at Amazon, Westminster, or directly from the Good Book Company.

Disclaimers: The Good Book Company sent me a free review copy in exchange for an honest review. Amazon and Westminster links are affiliate links. Clicking them will likely provide a small commission to this blog at no extra cost to yourself. We promise, even though our promises aren’t as good as God’s.

Context Matters: God Will Give You the Desires of Your Heart

January 21, 2019 By Ryan Higginbottom

W A T A R I (2018), public domain

If you’re a Christian, you may have heard that God has promised to give you the desires of your heart. That sounds amazing, doesn’t it?! Indeed, this quip has been used to justify both questionable actions and bad theology.

In this article, we will look at this phrase in its context, because context matters. When we learn to read the Bible properly—and not merely as a collection of one-liners and sound bites—we’ll find that some of the most famous passages take on different and deeper meanings than we’ve thought.

A Conditional Promise

We should begin with the most obvious fact. The phrase “he will give you the desires of your heart” is only half of a verse. Plucked clean and held up in the wind, this seems like an unconditional promise. But we must consider the entire verse!

Delight yourself in the Lord, and he will give you the desires of your heart. (Psalm 37:4)

That’s a harder pill to swallow. It’s a conditional promise—if you delight yourself in the Lord, then he will give you the desires of your heart. In the immediate context, this is powerful. If we desire God, he will give us our desires, which must include him!

But there’s more here. The first two verses of the psalm are an exhortation not to be envious of the wicked, “for they will soon fade like the grass.” Then verses 2–6 exhibit a pattern, as the reader is urged to love the Lord in various ways and he promises to respond and act. The parallel structure of these verses helps us understand what it means to “delight yourself in the Lord” and what it means that God “will give you the desires of your heart.”

Followers of God should “trust in the Lord and do good” (verse 3), “commit [their] way to the Lord” (5), and “trust in him” (5). Then God will grant them to “dwell in the land and befriend faithfulness” (3), “he will act” (5), and “he will bring forth [their] righteousness as the light, and [their] justice as the noonday” (6). Notice the circular pattern here—the more we commit our ways to God and trust in him, the more he will give us growth in righteousness, which leads to more trust in God.

The Larger Picture

The entire psalm is repetitive but instructive. The wicked will fade away and perish, but the righteous will inherit the land. David’s reference to “the land” throughout this psalm picks up on God’s covenant promise, dating back to the days of Abraham, to dwell with his people in their own land.

David goes on to describe the ways people pledge themselves to the Lord and the ways he cares for them.

How do the righteous act? They do not envy the wicked (verse 1); they are still before the Lord and wait for him (7); they do not worry about the ways the wicked prosper (7); they cease from anger and wrath (8); they wait for the Lord (9); they are meek (11); they are generous and giving (21); they delight in God’s way (23); they lend generously (26); they turn away from evil and do good (27); they speak wisdom and justice (30); they keep the law of God in their hearts (31); they wait for the Lord and keep his way (34); they are people of peace (37); and they take refuge in the Lord (40). These actions go along with delighting oneself in the Lord.

Now, how does God care for those that honor him? He will give them the land (9); he will give them land and abundant peace (11); he will turn back the plots of the wicked (15); he upholds them (17); he knows their days and their heritage will remain forever (18); he does not put them to shame in evil times (19); they have abundance in the days of famine (19); he will give them the land (22); he upholds their hand (24); he will not forsake them (28); they will dwell in the land forever (29); he will not allow them to be condemned when brought to trial (33); he will exalt them to inherit the land (34); he gives them salvation (39); he is their stronghold in troubled times (39); and he helps them, delivers them, and saves them (40). These blessings go along with receiving the desires of our hearts.

Conclusion

We cannot say that God will give us the desires of our hearts. If we delight in him, he will change our desires so that they glorify him, and he will satisfy those desires. He will even give us himself.

Psalm 37 is not the only place in the Bible that we see this glorious truth, but we can see it here if we read carefully. A sugary half-truth is no match for the deep, brilliant promises of God.

Context matters.

For more examples of why context matters, click here.

More on How to Apply Old Testament Promises Today

December 7, 2016 By Peter Krol

As a follow-up to my “check it out” post a few weeks ago, here’s a brief interview with John Piper addressing how to apply Old Testament promises today. Piper starts with 2 Cor 1:20 to show that all the promises belong to us through Christ. Then he explains how the meaning of some promises changes in light of Christ’s work on the cross.

You can listen to the 9-minute recording or read the transcript. Check it out!

How to Apply the Bible’s Promises

November 23, 2016 By Peter Krol

Context matters! Many Bible readers read promises such as Jeremiah 29:11 or Exodus 14:14 and memorize them as personal promises to us today. But this is not a helpful way to read the Bible.

Stand to Reason recently published a great post about how to know whether a certain Bible promise applies to us. In this post, Amy Hall explains how to consider the context of the original text and audience, and she suggests we figure out what that promise in that context revealed about God’s character. Then we can consider how we can rest in that aspect of God’s character today. This doesn’t mean the exact promise still applies, but that God’s character is the same yesterday, today, and forever.

The post demonstrates how to consider the context to discover the main point so we may apply the main point and not all the details. Here is a taste:

Always look for what you can learn about God through His dealings with human beings throughout the Bible. When God makes promises about who He is, that always applies. When God promises to give something specific, look more closely at the context to see if He’s promising it in a unique situation (or under the terms of the Mosaic Covenant).

Here’s how I would apply that approach in the case of Jeremiah 29:11. In Jeremiah 29:11, we learn that God cares for His people and doesn’t abandon them, and that He hasn’t abandoned them even if it seems everything has gone wrong in their lives. We see that His good purposes are still moving forward, even when everything looks grim. This, we can cling to, because it’s an understanding of God’s character, which doesn’t change. What we can’t cling to is the specific outworking of God’s character in that unique biblical situation. That is, in that particular situation, God’s goodness and wisdom decreed that He would bring back those who were exiled to Babylon, saying, “I will restore your fortunes and gather you from all the nations.” But in a different situation, God’s goodness and wisdom may decree something different. John the Baptist was beheaded, not released from jail (Matthew 14:1–12). Stephen was stoned, not saved (Acts 7:54–60).

For the rest of the article, check it out!

Exodus 2: Do You Want Deliverance Or Not?

September 23, 2016 By Peter Krol

Exodus 1 showed us a new devil attempting to take God’s place in the life of God’s people, and the chapter left us wondering what would come of his decree to drown the sons. The Lord will reveal something about himself in this chapter that none of us would ever have expected.

Observation of Exodus 2

As usual, though my list must be highly selective, I hope it still proves representative of the narrator’s intentions.

Most repeated words in ESV: Moses, said (each 10 times), child, daughter, when (each 8x), Pharaoh (7x), God, water (each 6x).

Because “said” repeats so many times, dialogue will become much more important in this chapter.
Pharaoh sought to stamp out the sons, but God will respond through the “child” of the “daughter.” Very sneaky.
At first, I’m inclined to overlook “when” as being significant. But upon further investigation, the repetition clues me in on an important motif: When x, then y. In other words, the event sequence matters. There is an order to things here, and God is facilitating events to happen just so.

Names/Titles:

It’s noteworthy that the narrator will later tell us the names of Moses’ parents (Ex 6:20) and sister (Ex 15:20). But for now, we’re meant to think of them only in terms of their literary roles: man, woman, mother, sister, and daughter.

Grammar/structure:

Paragraph 1 (Ex 2:1-10): A Hebrew woman delivers a fine child through the river and into the hands of Pharaoh’s daughter.
Paragraph 2 (Ex 2:11-15): A Hebrew man rejects the deliverance Moses attempts, and Pharaoh’s vengeance squeezes Moses out of Egypt and into Midian.
Paragraph 3 (Ex 2:16-22): Moses (thought to be “an Egyptian” – Ex 2:19) delivers seven Midianite daughters through well water. they cheerfully receive his deliverance by extending hospitality, a family, and a new identity as sojourner.
Paragraph 4 (Ex 2:23-25): The king of Egypt dies, and the God of the living knows his people and remembers his duty to them.

Steve Perin (2007), Creative Commons

Interpretation of Exodus 2

A few possible questions:

What does it mean for baby Moses to be “fine”, and why does this fact motivate his mother to hide him and save his life?
Why are we given no names except Moses, Reuel (priest of Midian), Zipporah (Moses’ Midianite wife), and Gershom (Moses’ son)?
Why is deliverance such a repeated theme?
Why is water such a repeated theme?
So what must we conclude about Moses’ behavior in murdering the Egyptian?

Answers (numbers correspond to the preceding questions):

A short jaunt into a Hebrew tool reveals that the word for “fine” is the same word in Genesis 1 translated “good.” The phrase is very similar to “And God saw that it was good”—”She saw that he was good.” So, as with Exodus 1, we see more connections back to Genesis. In addition, the word used for baby Moses’ “basket” is the same word used for Noah’s “ark,” and this word occurs nowhere else in the Old Testament. With the birth of Moses, God is making a new creation, a new beginning for his people, and Moses is the firstborn of this new creation. This new beginning includes a new deliverance from water through water, just like Noah. This causes us to expect something earth-shattering will soon take place.
The point is not so much who these people are, but what role they play. Pharaoh targeted the sons, so the daughters (including his own) work to undermine him. And with a “man” and a “woman” conceiving and bearing a son, we can’t help but think of the first man and woman at the first creation. This leads us to see the “new creation” idea even more clearly in Moses. And interestingly, Reuel may mean “friend of God”—the priest of Midian, who invites Moses into his home and family, stands in stark contrast to both the Egyptian and Hebrew people.
God foreshadows his intentions. He will, no he must, deliver his people—because of his promises to their ancestors. Moses’ role in the story of Israel will be to deliver in God’s name. He experiences deliverance himself and takes a first stab at it.
Water contributes to the “new creation” theme (see answer to question #1).
Many (most?) modern readers and commentators are quick to condemn Moses’ actions here as being rash and sinful. That might be true, but the text never draws attention to the rashness or sinfulness of these actions. In fact, the chief point of tension occurs not when Moses kills the Egyptian, but when the Hebrew rejects Moses as a prince or judge over him. It is that rejection, and not the murder itself, which causes Moses to flee from Egypt to Midian. What might have happened if Israel had trusted that “God was giving them salvation by his hand”? We should note that the first martyr Stephen interprets this episode in just this way (Acts 7:23-29). We would do well to follow Stephen’s lead on how to read this story.

Train of thought:

Pharaoh’s decree to drown the sons has an unintended effect: the creation of a deliverer (aided and abetted by his own household!).
But the people who need deliverance reject the potential deliverer.
The deliverer must flee and take his deliverance to a different people-group, who, while outside the covenants of promise, are yet eager to receive God’s deliverance.
But God is not yet done with his covenant people. The people who reject and thus don’t deserve deliverance will find that their God is a God who ever hears their groaning, remembers his covenant, and knows what to do.

Main Point: God will deliver his people through the hand of his appointed deliverer…just not yet.

Connection to Christ: He came to his own, and even his own did not receive him (John 1:11). And even those who have received him, who have become children of God (John 1:12), still must wait eagerly for him to appear a second time to truly, finally save them (Hebrews 9:28).

Application of Exodus 2

Application should be as varied as the people who put it into practice. Here is mine for today.

Inward:

Head: Do I believe that I am delivered from sin’s penalty, but must wait eagerly to be delivered from sin’s presence once and for all?
Heart: Do I trust God’s appointed deliverer to be a prince and judge over me?
Hands: Choose eagerness instead of disillusionment when I bump into rejection and the pain of life.

Outward:

Head: Teach my children to trust in Jesus through the pain they face today.
Heart: Inspire my children to long to become agents of deliverance to the world around them, in the image of the firstborn Son of God.
Hands: Talk with my children about how they can present Christ to some of their friends.

Click here to see what I’m doing with this sample Bible study and why I’m doing it.