Covenant Protestant Reformed Church
83 Clarence Street, Ballymena BT43 5DR
Rev. Angus Stewart
Lord’s Day, 3 May, 2020
“Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies,
kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering …” (Col. 3:12)
Morning Service – 11:00 AM
Knowing Our Corruption [youtube]
Scripture Reading: Psalm 51
Text: Heidelberg Catechism, Lord’s Day 3
I. Its Extent
II. Its Origin
III. Its Usefulness
Evening Service – 6:00 PM
The Kingdom of God Versus the Kingdoms of Man (15)
Nebuchadnezzar’s Confession That the Most High Rules [youtube]
Scripture Reading: Daniel 4:1-3, 23-37
Text: Daniel 4:1-3, 34-37
I. A Rich Confession
II. A Public Confession
III. A Saving Confession?
For CDs of the sermons and DVDs of the worship services, contact Stephen Murray
If you desire a pastoral visit, please contact Rev. Stewart or the elders
CPRC Website: www.cprc.co.uk • Live Webcast: www.cprc.co.uk/live-streaming
CPRC YouTube: www.youtube.com/cprcni
CPRC Facebook: www.facebook.com/CovenantPRC
Quote to Consider
Homer C. Hoeksema’s arguments that Nebuchadnezzar was not regenerate and saved in Daniel 4:
- Nebuchadnezzar personally was “the head of gold” in the dream-image of Daniel 2 which represents the antichristian world-power, which shall be broken in pieces by “the stone cut out of the mountain without hands.” To me it is unthinkable that this antichristian “head of gold” was nevertheless a regenerated child of God.
- Nebuchadnezzar made similar admissions on other occasions, after which it became plain that he was not a child of God. Cf. Daniel 2:47 and especially Daniel 3:28.
- Such language comes from the mouth of wicked kings more frequently. Think of Pharaoh’s admissions in Exodus 9:27 and Exodus 10:16-17. Think, too, of the language of Cyrus’s decree in Ezra 1. All such language does not imply faith and regeneration, but simply means that the wicked, to their own condemnation, must acknowledge that God is GOD.
- Not only is there no personal confession of sin and of trust in the Lord in the king’s acknowledgement, but one can still detect a good deal of “I” in the king’s account. Moreover, there is absolutely no evidence that this ‘confession’ was followed by a life of conversion. For example, would not a converted king have ended the captivity of God’s people? And would he not have instituted radical reform in his own kingdom?
- What took place in Nebuchadnezzar is quite consistent with the purpose twice stated by Daniel: “till thou know that the most high ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will.” In undeniable fashion the Lord had caused Nebuchadnezzar to know this; and in unmistakable language Nebuchadnezzar, though he hates God and opposes God’s everlasting kingdom, must acknowledge this. Only then is his kingdom restored.
Announcements (subject to God’s will)
Both the Standard Bearer and the Beacon Lights are available on-line: www.rfpa.org/pages/the-standard-bearer and www.beaconlights.org.
The Reformed Witness Hour broadcast next Lord’s day (Gospel 846 MW at 8:30 AM) by Rev. R. Kleyn is entitled, “Considering and Provoking One Another” (Heb. 10:24).
Rev. Stewart (via phone link) will discuss regeneration on Iron Sharpens Iron Radio on Thursday, 14 May, from 4-6 PM (Eastern Time in the US) or 9-11 PM (GMT) (www.ironsharpensironradio.com).
Offerings: General Fund: £920. Donation: £500.
Translation Additions: 8 Indonesian, 7 Japanese, 7 Khmer, 7 Vietnamese, 6 Spanish, 2 Burmese, 1 Afrikaans and 1 German.
PRC News: Rev. Jon Mahtani accepted the call to Hope PRC (MI).
David Is King in Hebron
Brian D. Dykstra
II Samuel 2
Saul and all but one of his sons had died in battle. The surviving son, Ishbosheth, does not possess the materials of which kings are made. He lacks leadership and initiative. While those around him take action, Ishbosheth fades in the background, void of decisiveness. How seriously would Israel take his claim to the throne?
We would think David’s way to Israel’s throne would be free of obstruction. God, in His wisdom, would place further obstacles in David’s path. Though Saul was dead, David’s ascendancy to rule all of Israel would not be quick and easy. Were some people of Israel suspicious of David because he had recently joined himself to Achish, a leader of the Philistines?
Let’s first notice, though, how David serves as a good example for us in the beginning of II Samuel 2. He enquires of the Lord about moving to any of the cities of Judah in order to reside there. He does not think to himself, “I’m king so I can do whatever I please!” No, he humbly goes to God recognizing His authority over him, and that David must act according to God’s will to know His blessing. God responds to David’s enquiry and directs him to go to Hebron. Judah recognizes David as king. However, no other tribes follow suit. The other tribes claim Ishbosheth to be their king, inept though he may be.
The real power behind Ishbosheth is Abner, Saul’s cousin and leader of Saul’s army. Abner leads Saul’s host to Gibeon, a mere five miles northwest of Jerusalem. It is there that Joab, captain of David’s host, meets Saul’s army. The hosts meet by the pool of Gibeon, which measured 72 feet by 42 feet. Despite its size, children should not think of this pool as a place for swimming and recreation. It was the local water supply. Would the local citizens be happy to find children frolicking in their drinking and cooking water? One can also imagine how challenging it would be to keep the children out of the pool.
Neither Joab nor Abner desires a large battle between the two hosts. They realize this would lead to death, bitterness and difficulty uniting Israel. They decide to have twelve men from each army fight. Whoever wins this small-scale struggle would be recognized as gaining victory for their entire side. It strikes one as strange that the word “play” is used in verse fourteen. There is nothing playful about what will happen here. One almost has the impression that those not involved in the twelve-on-twelve skirmish viewed this as entertainment.
The “play” does not end as Joab and Abner desired. All twenty-four of the participants die. As there was no clear winner, a “very sore battle” follows. We read, “Abner was beaten, and the men of Israel, before the servants of David.” With this victory, David is a bit closer to ruling all of Israel.
The Bible then draws our attention to a detail of the large battle.
“And there were three sons of Zeruiah there, Joab, and Abishai, and Asahel: and Asahel was as light of foot as a wild roe.” Although the details concerning Zeruiah are cloudy, we may consider Zeruiah to be David’s sister. Her three sons, then, are David’s nephews.
Asahel has ambition. He desires to be the hero of the day, so killing Abner would shine the spotlight of attention on him. If Asahel could bring Abner’s armour back to camp as proof of his great deed, people would celebrate his brave action in joyful song. We see his single-minded determination when we read, “and in going he turned not to the right hand nor to the left from following Abner.”
Abner sees Asahel. Abner tries to convince Asahel not to fight him, but to fight one of the young men with him and to take his armour. Abner knows he will lose a footrace to Asahel. However, Abner is certain that when the race is finished and hand-to-hand combat ensues, he will kill Asahel. Abner knows killing Asahel with affect his future dealings with Joab. He does not want to be the man who killed Joab’s brother. Abner seems to know something about Joab’s character. Asahel does not heed Abner’s repeated warnings.
The Bible has some details for us about Asahel. He is listed among David’s of heroes, one of David’s thirty mighty men. Asahel, then, must have been able to handle himself very well on a battlefield. Yet, he proves no match for Abner. Asahel was a great runner which might provide a clue as to his physical characteristics. There are different types of runners. Olympic sprinters are often powerfully built and physically imposing. Olympic long-distance runners are different. They are lean and thin. Asahel might have been the latter type of runner.
The two men join in conflict. Abner’s spear had two points. The front had the metal point, sharpened for battle. The end of the shaft also had a sharpened wooden point. This allowed a soldier to thrust his spear in the ground, keeping it upright, without damaging the metal point. Abner used the back of his spear against Asahel. Abner must have been quite powerful, for we read, “Abner with the hinder end of the spear smote him under the fifth rib, that the spear came out behind him; and he fell down there, and died in the same place.” No wonder Abner was confident of victory. He’s strong enough to drive the back of his spear all the way through a man’s body.
Because of subsequent events, it is important for us to notice that Abner is not a murderer. This was a time of war. When soldiers kill the enemy in battle, God does not regard them as murderers. Also Abner is defending himself. Keeping the commandment, “Thou shalt not kill,” means that we must not harm ourselves nor allow others to harm us. We do not have to allow an enemy to kill us for fear of our killing them in the mistaken notion that God would then view us as murderers.
Abner then gathers his men on the top of a hill. Joab is ready to strike a decisive blow. Abner knows the bitterness which would follow the slaughter of his men, so he requests that Joab tell his forces to break off the battle. Joab, surprisingly, does so, buries Asahel in Bethlehem and returns to Hebron. Abner’s defeated men cross the Jordan River and go to Mahanaim, a city of the Levites in the territory of Gad.
