The Works of John Bunyan, vol 3, John Bunyan [ebook reader color screen TXT] 📗

fall upon him who attempts to enter heaven with temporal or ecclesiastical pomps vain-gloriously carried upon his shoulders.—Ed.

[12] Every Christian pilgrim, if he journeys aright, must be entirely guided by prayerful personal inquiries at the holy oracles as to his way to heaven. How do sin and Satan strive to mislead him in this essential duty.—Ed.

[13] The simple-minded nature of Bunyan here appears conspicuously.

He measures others by his own bushel, as if every pastor had as single an eye to the welfare of their flocks as he had over the Church at Bedford. How tenderly ought the churches of Christ to cherish such pastors as Bunyan, while they prayerfully watch over their ministrations.—Ed.

[14] This is one of those beautiful gems which sparkle all through Bunyan’s works, ‘As the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God!’—Ed.

[15] Ceiled is now only used with reference to the top of a room—the ceiling. It is an old English word, and means overlaid or lined with wood, wainscot, or plank, either roof, sides, or floor.—Ed.

[16] The line means the text. The marginal reading agrees with the puritan version ‘overlayed.’ Tyndale renders it, ‘And he paved the house with precious stones goodly.’ Coverdale, ‘And overlayed the house with precious stones to beautify it.’—Ed.

[17] A bath was a Hebrew measure containing about seven gallons and a half.—Ed.

[18] The moral law of ten commandments.—Ed.

[19] This is from the Genevan or puritan versions. Our translation has ‘on the right side.’—Ed.

[20] The candlesticks mentioned in 2 Chronicles 4:7, Zechariah 4, and Revelation 1, appear to have been of one pattern. A stem, with a bowl bearing a centre and six branches—three on each side.

Of these there were ten in the temple. The prophets Zechariah and John, in their holy visions, saw but one, with its seven lamps secretly supplied by living olive trees. These lights ‘are the eyes of the Lord, which run to and fro through the whole earth’; the seven lamps ‘are the seven churches.’ What a source for reflection is here opened.—Ed.

[21] Oil called golden, from its representing that which is better than thousands of gold and silver. So pure that, in the golden bowl, it would look like liquid gold.—Ed.

[22] A malignant was a term of reproach given to those who, in the civil wars, opposed Divine truth, and promoted popery and arbitrary domination. Clarendon calls it ‘a term imposed upon those that the puritans wished to render odious to the people.’—Ed.

[23] A tenth deal is the tenth part of a Hebrew measure, called the ephah, containing about a bushel.—Ed.

[24] Daniel Burgess published a curious sermon, in 1697, on the golden snuffers, showing that they are a type or emblem of spiritual snuffing or reproving; and of pure gold, to show that reprovers should be holy and unblameable. His directions and cautions are valuable, but Bunyan says much more in his few lines than Burgess does in his eighty pages.—Ed.

[25] Great was the fatherly care felt by Bunyan for his own children, especially for his blind Mary; and judging by the lessons he draws from the temple spoons, those feelings extended to his church. It must be a severe trial to a minister’s temper, when teased with babes in religion at three score and ten years of age, especially if they are old professors. Thus Bunyan, in addressing the readers of his emblems, says—

‘We now have boys with beards, and girls that be ‘Huge as old women wanting gravity.’—Ed.

[26] The degraded state of the poor, when the religious houses (so called) distributed food to all comers, was long felt after the suppression of those hot-beds of vice, from the encouragement they gave to idleness, pauperism, and the most vicious habits. Even in Bunyan’s days the beggar, carrying a bowl to receive the fruit of their industrious neighbours’ toil, was still remembered. At intervals, plague and famine swept away the helpless wretches, to the terror of all classes. How severely is this curse still felt in Ireland.—Ed.

[27] How careful ought churches to be in casting out an offending member, seeing that their sentence should be as ‘the judicial judgment of God.’ It is not revenge, hatred, malice, or the mere exercise of power, that is to lead to it; it is the good of the individual that is to be pursued and sought. While the church endeavours to remain pure, its aim and object should be mainly to correct and reform the offender, that his spirit may be saved. When discipline is undertaken from any other motive than this; and when it is pursued from private pique, or rivalship, or ambition, or the love of power, it is wrong. The salvation of the offender, and the glory of God, should prompt to all the measures which should be taken in the case. ‘Restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted’ (Gal 6:1).—Ed.

[28] In Bunyan’s ‘now-a-days,’ it was much debated whether singing ought to be introduced in a mixed assembly. It was contended that a voice and talent for singing does not accompany the new birth; that it might tend to hypocrisy and vanity; and that it was not expressly commanded. The Quakers rejected it, but all other sects adopted that delightful part of public worship. See Keach’s Breach Repaired.—Ed.

[29] The olive wood is used, with ivory and mother of pearl, in ornamenting the most sumptuous apartments in oriental palaces. It is exceedingly durable and elegant. ‘The choosing olive out of every other kind of wood, for the adorning these sumptuous apartments, shows the elegance and grandeur of the taste in which Solomon’s temple was built, where the doors of the oracle, and some other parts, were of olive wood.’—Harmer, Scheuzer, Lady M. W. Montague.—Ed.

[30] As the mercy-seat covered the law deposited in the ark, so Christ covers the transgressions of his people; while Christ sits upon the mercy-seat, the law cannot rise up in judgment against them.—Jennings.

[31] In Bunyan’s edition this is called the ‘new tabernacle,’

a typographical error which is corrected by restoring the true reading.—Ed

A DISCOURSE

OF

THE HOUSE OF THE FOREST OF LEBANON.

ADVERTISEMENT BY THE EDITOR.

That part of Palestine in which the celebrated mountains of Lebanon are situated, is the border country adjoining Syria, having Sidon for its seaport, and Land, nearly adjoining the city of Damascus, on the north. This metropolitan city of Syria, and capital of the kingdom of Damascus, was strongly fortified; and during the border conflicts it served as a cover to the Assyrian army. Bunyan, with great reason, supposes that, to keep them in check, Solomon built a tower house and palace, well furnished with munitions of war, called the house in the forest of Lebanon.

As the magnificent temple at Jerusalem was the seat of public worship appointed by God, it was considered typical of the gospel dispensation, which was intended to supersede it. All its parts and utensils, sacrifices and services, have been described, in their typical meaning, in Solomon’s Temple Spiritualized; but as the lovely system of the gospel had, with slow and irresistible steps, to conquer the prejudices, passions, and wickedness of mankind, those who bore the brunt of this battle were considered as the church militant in the wilderness: and Bunyan has, in this treatise, endeavoured to show that this palace and fortress was typical of the churches of Christ while in a state of holy warfare, defending their Divine dispensation, and extending the line of defence by progressive spiritual conquests. While the churches are surrounded by enemies, they have inexhaustible internal comfort, strength, and consolation. Like the house in the forest of Lebanon, they are also pleasantly, nay, beautifully situated. If Mount Zion was the joy of the whole earth, the mountains of Damascus were a picture of the earthly paradise. So beautiful is the scenery, and balmy the air, that one part is called Eden, or the garden of the Lord. It is described by Arabian poets as always bearing winter far above upon his head, spring on its shoulders, and autumn in his bosom, while perpetual summer lies sleeping at his feet. It was upon this beautiful spot, called by Isaiah ‘the glory of Lebanon,’

that Solomon built his house in the forest.

This is the plain matter of fact which Bunyan establishes from the sacred Scriptures, but he was, as to lettered lore, an unlearned man; at all events, no man could say of him that ‘much learning has made thee mad.’ Bunyan’s is the plain common-sense scriptural account of this building; but he differs greatly from almost all our learned commentators—they imagining that this house was near the temple of Jerusalem. The Assembly of Divines, in their valuable annotations, suggest that it was so called ‘because great store of trees, as in Lebanon, were planted about it; and gardens, orchards, and all manner of delightful things were added thereto’: to aid this conjecture, they quote Ecclesiastes 2:4, 6. Poole says that it was ‘a house so called, either, first, because it was built in the mountain and forest of Lebanon, for recreation in summer time; but generally held to have been near Jerusalem; or rather, secondly, from some resemblance it had with Lebanon for its pleasant shades and groves.’ Diodati considers it the same with Solomon’s palace, but called the house of Lebanon by reason of the groves planted about it; or of the great number of cedar columns brought from Lebanon, and used in its construction. Even Bunyan’s favourite translation, made at Geneva by the Puritans, while it gives two wood-cuts of ‘The King’s house IN the wood of Lebanon,’ a marginal note is added—‘For the beauty of the place, and great abundance of cedar trees that went to the building thereof, it was compared to Mount Lebanon.’ Calmet, in his very valuable translation, accompanied by the Vulgate Latin, gives the same idea: ‘Il batit encore le palais appelle la maison du Leban, a cause de la quantite prodigeuse de cedres qui entraient dans la structure de cet edifice.’ [Translation: ‘Another thing he did was build the palace which was called the house of Lebanon because of the prodigious quantity of cedars used in its construction.’]

Bishop Patrick places this house in or near to Jerusalem, ‘In a cool, shady mountain, which made it resemble Mount Lebanon.’ Dr.

Gill was of opinion that this house was near Jerusalem; because it was a magazine of arms, and a court of judicature, and had its name from being built of the cedars of Lebanon, and among groves of trees. Josephus, in his Antiquities of the Jews, book 8, chapter 6, section 5, states that when the Queen of Sheba came to Judea, she was amazed at the wisdom of Solomon, and surprised at the fineness and largeness of his royal palace; ‘but she was beyond measure astonished at the house which was called the forest of Lebanon.’ Matthew Henry follows the opinion of Bunyan; ‘I rather incline to think it was a house built in the forest of Lebanon itself, whither, though far distant from Jerusalem, Solomon having so many chariots and horses, and those dispersed into chariot cities, which probably were his stages, he might frequently retire with ease.’ Express notice is taken of Lebanon, as the place of a warlike building, in 2 Kings 19, and in Canticles 7:4.

The tower of Lebanon is described as looking towards Damascus.

The ruins of this house and tower, in the forest of Lebanon, are probably those seen by Benjamin of Tudela, who describes the stones of which it was built as twenty palms long, and twelve wide. Gabriel Sionits describes the tower as an hundred cubits high, and fifty broad. Maundrel saw the ruins in the mountains of Lebanon at a distance. The objections made by our commentators to the