# Luke 13, use in sermon and question on meaning



## NaphtaliPress (Feb 24, 2009)

I’m editing a sermon by James Durham (one of many for a projected collected sermons), and this puzzles me on the meaning. Any good surmises what the meaning of “boast” is in this context? Since it is used of the Lord I think we can rule out the predominant negative use. Is there anything in the verse in question in the Greek that indicates any sharpness to the words? I notice some versions put the words in all caps. Boast can me cry or loud words in general though the predominant use is negatively.

We condemn not duties, God forbid; but it is a sad and hazardous case, when they are mainly laid weight on, and stuck to at death. Such self-justifiers are brought in by the Lord (Luke 13), saying, Lord, we have eaten and drunken in thy presence, etc. Whom yet he boasts away from him.


----------



## LawrenceU (Feb 24, 2009)

Could he be referring to the stone mason's boasting? Boasting is the roughing off of stone: knocking it away in preparation for final shaping.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Feb 24, 2009)

Can't this just be the normal use of the term boasting?

The sentence is:

Whom yet he boasts away from him.

It is in reference to this from Luke 13:


> 26Then shall ye begin to say, We have eaten and drunk in thy presence, and thou hast taught in our streets.
> 
> 27But he shall say, I tell you, I know you not whence ye are; depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity.



I believe the subject of the sentence is the worker of iniquity and the object is Christ. The worker of iniquity _boasts away_ from Christ.

Is he not saying, in essence, that the worker of iniquity does not boast in Christ but, instead, appeals to the fact that he ate and drank with Him?


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Feb 24, 2009)

Rich, I think in context the "whom" doing the boasting away from, is Christ. Got to run but I appreciate all and any input.


----------



## VictorBravo (Feb 24, 2009)

I tend to think opposite of Rich, that the one boasting is master of the house in Luke 13. 

It seems that Durham is using the word boast in the sense of being high and arrogant, not bragging. That is the tone of the master when he tells these hypocrits to go away: "I know you not whence ye are; depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity."

But I like Lawrence's idea a lot. I just think it is a bit of a stretch, given the context.


----------



## LawrenceU (Feb 24, 2009)

Yep, it's a stretch, but I like to think that sometimes those archaic uses of words were more common in the older use of our language. Often they are.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Feb 24, 2009)

victorbravo said:


> I tend to think opposite of Rich, that the one boasting is master of the house in Luke 13.
> 
> It seems that Durham is using the word boast in the sense of being high and arrogant, not bragging. That is the tone of the master when he tells these hypocrits to go away: "I know you not whence ye are; depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity."
> 
> But I like Lawrence's idea a lot. I just think it is a bit of a stretch, given the context.



Well, I keep looking at the sentence and Durham says:



> We condemn not duties, God forbid; but it is a sad and hazardous case, when they are mainly laid weight on, and stuck to at death. *Such self-justifiers* are brought in by the Lord (Luke 13), saying, Lord, we have eaten and drunken in thy presence, etc. Whom yet he boasts away from him.



It talks about what the self-justifier says to Christ. In the following sentence, Whom is associated with the "him" at the end of the sentence and not the "he" who boasts. It's an awkward sentence structure and I kept looking at it thinking it's the Lord who boasts away but the more I look at it the more I think it's the self-justifier.

I considered the opposite - namely that Christ is the subject who "boasts away" and the term might be a way of saying "condemn" or "reprove".


----------



## py3ak (Feb 24, 2009)

But whom is not associated with either "he" or "him". And the "yet" introduces a contrast between the self-justifiers professed intimacy with Christ, as over against Christ's authoritative rejection of them.

Is there any possibility that "boasts" is a typo for "beats"? Otherwise I would just take "boast" as being a perhaps idiosyncratic term for vigorous language.


----------



## VictorBravo (Feb 24, 2009)

Semper Fidelis said:


> victorbravo said:
> 
> 
> > I tend to think opposite of Rich, that the one boasting is master of the house in Luke 13.
> ...



  

I want to see it your way, but I'm having trouble. I agree that "him" probably refers to "whom" and is reflexive. But the "he" is singular, unlike the self-justifiers. That's why I tilt toward thinking "he boasts" refers to none other than the singular Lord of the house.

So I take it to read: "Self justifiers, whom he boasts away from him(self).

Or, paraphrased in modern language, "Self justifiers, whom he harshly (even arrogantly) sends off from himself."


----------



## LawrenceU (Feb 24, 2009)

I, too, can't get around the verb agreement being singular. I think that Vic might just have it.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Feb 24, 2009)

Either way, if "him" refers to the self-justifier*s* then we have the same problem with a singular pronoun.


----------



## Prufrock (Feb 24, 2009)

I think we might be reading too much of a connection between "self-justifying" and "boasting." I think the two words in this case have absolutely nothing to do with each other, though in most other circumstances the related nature of the words should signal connection.

I read "Boast" here not in a negative way at all: boasting is negative on our part because we have no rightful cause to do so; God, however, can freely boast. There may indeed be a play on words happening with the word "boast", but I think that's as far as you can take the connection. Thus, paraphrased, I would read the passage as follows:

"It's not all duties we forbid; rather, it's boasting in the performance of our duties before God, or justifying ourselves. Thus, to those who come before God, boasting, saying 'Look, haven't we done all this before you?", to them, Christ boasts back, 'So, What of it? I am the Lord, and I perform redemption, and I have never known you. Your works are nothing compared to me!"

That is how I would read the slightly confusing sentence, anyway. Then again, I could be way off.

*Edit* 
Basically, then, I guess I would agree with Vic's last reading. No matter what, it's an awkward sentence.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Feb 24, 2009)

Thanks all. Vic and Paul may be close. Here is the full context if it helps.
(4) There is a fourth sort, of self-righteous persons that please themselves with the hope of heaven, because they have been good neighbors and lived harmlessly, they were not gross*ly profane, they were not drunkards, swearers, sabbath break*ers nor extortioners, etc, but civil and honest, faithful and just, in their dealings and their callings, they had prayer in their fam*ilies and in secret, they waited on ordinances, etc. And at death they confirm themselves from these grounds, that all shall be well. We condemn not duties, God forbid; but it is a sad and hazardous case, when they are mainly laid weight on, and stuck to at death. Such self-justifiers are brought in by the Lord (Luke 13), saying, *Lord, we have eaten and drunken in thy presence, *etc. Whom yet he boasts away from him. See how the proud and self-justifying Pharisee on such grounds as these is sent away unjustified (Luke 18). Folks’ habituating themselves to these grounds of confidence in their lifetime, makes them stick stiffly to them at their death, and keeps them from seeing the absolute necessity of Christ’s imputed righteousness, and from flying to it for their justification.​


----------



## Prufrock (Feb 24, 2009)

Chris,

What "work" is this from? I realize it's probably an isolated sermon, but I'm assuming it's found in a larger collection, too?


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Feb 24, 2009)

Prufrock said:


> I think we might be reading too much of a connection between "self-justifying" and "boasting." I think the two words in this case have absolutely nothing to do with each other, though in most other circumstances the related nature of the words should signal connection.
> 
> I read "Boast" here not in a negative way at all: boasting is negative on our part because we have no rightful cause to do so; God, however, can freely boast. There may indeed be a play on words happening with the word "boast", but I think that's as far as you can take the connection. Thus, paraphrased, I would read the passage as follows:
> 
> ...



I agree with this and note that this is how I would interpret _boast away_ if Christ is the subject who boasts away. I'm thinking that boasting away communicates the opposite idea of _boasting toward_. I didn't mean to intimate that I thought the boasting was bad as even Paul boasts in the Lord.

I think we're in agreeement that the person is taking confidence in the wrong thing - that he sort of hung with Christ at some point. If the subject "boasting away" is the sinner then he's boasting in the wrong thing (boasting away from Christ). If Christ is the subject of "boasting away" then I agree with you guys.

I think the sentence construction is really rough and can go either way and still make sense to me.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Feb 24, 2009)

Thanks Rich; yes it is pretty rough I agree. Paul, this is from the second of seven sermons on Rev. 14:13, published as a very small volume entitled _The Blessedness of the Dead that Die in the Lord._ These were republished by Naphtali Press in the old Anthology series in volume 1 in 1988, and I followed what has proved to be a poor text (missing texts etc). Soli Deo Gloria republished these in 2003 from the first edition (though the 3rd may be the definitive text; still studying that), but less the substantial Dedication by John Carstares. I'm going back to the early editions to get the text right and follow my druthers as to editing. I'm putting a collection together of all Durham's sermons that were published (except for the Isaiah 53) which would include these, another volume by SDG (Unsearchable Riches of Christ), and the rest heretofore unpublished for several centuries. These would be uniformly edited and include all the original prefacing material. We are probably talking 1000 to 1200 pages in a generous format.



Prufrock said:


> Chris,
> 
> What "work" is this from? I realize it's probably an isolated sermon, but I'm assuming it's found in a larger collection, too?





Semper Fidelis said:


> Prufrock said:
> 
> 
> > I think we might be reading too much of a connection between "self-justifying" and "boasting." I think the two words in this case have absolutely nothing to do with each other, though in most other circumstances the related nature of the words should signal connection.
> ...


----------



## Prufrock (Feb 24, 2009)

Chris, I just read the sermon on EEBO -- edifying little work. When are you shooting to have this volume published?

Rich, I was quite tempted to jump over to the alternative reading you provided: but I think there is too much of an intentional contrast set up between the words "...are _brought in_ by the Lord," and "whom he _boasts away_ from him." Also, I don't think "whom" would make sense that way: if it were parallel to those who "are brought in," and thus a subject, I think it would say "who." Thus, the fact that it is a "whom" suggests it is the object (not the subject) of the "boasting." Either way -- both are true. So if the Naphtali press edition says it differently than Durham did, at least Durham would still be giving a hearty "Amen!" from heaven.

-----Added 2/24/2009 at 07:09:12 EST-----

Chris,

I don't see some of the titles on your website which I have heard you mention that you have published, such as Durham's work on Scandal. Are these works no longer available?


----------



## MW (Feb 24, 2009)

In the Scots language of the period "boast" can be used as a synonym for "threaten" or "scare."


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Feb 24, 2009)

Thanks very much Matthew; I think I saw that in Jamieson or OED but still find the construction difficult to caste as far as explaining the meaning as used. Would it be akin to saying the Lord says strongly, sternly, or some such, "away from me" etc? 



armourbearer said:


> In the Scots language of the period "boast" can be used as a synonym for "threaten" or "scare."


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Feb 24, 2009)

"Boost" as a kind of synonym came to my mind first off, with a similar meaning to VB's proposal.

From *A Dictionary of Archaic and Provincial Words,* by John Orchard Halliwell, Kessinger Publishing, 2006 (this is a reprint from 1860)

p.196 BOOST. Boast; noise. _Weber_.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Feb 24, 2009)

2010 probably. It is quite complicated to put such a work together, and 2009 looks like a bad year to plan much of anything any way; and I'll be doing good getting the fifth issue of the Confessional Presbyterian out.

Durham on Scandal is available still in the 1990 edition if you know where to look. I have none; but it is in stock at James Dickson books in Scotland, and supposedly Gospel Mission books is getting some copies from there to stock for the US. You might check with both. Not all the old Anthology of Presbyterian & Reformed Literature is in print; but Ebay has them on occasion. Vols. 1, 2 & 4 are out of print. It is hardest to complete the set by getting volume 1. Vols 1-3 were made up of 4 quarterly issues; vols 4 and 5 were annuals, hardbound with dust jackets. Large format (8.5 by 11).



Prufrock said:


> Chris, I just read the sermon on EEBO -- edifying little work. When are you shooting to have this volume published?
> 
> -----Added 2/24/2009 at 07:09:12 EST-----
> 
> ...


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Feb 24, 2009)

Bruce, that was toward my initial thought, some sort of cry "away from me" etc? That sound right to you? All?


----------



## MW (Feb 24, 2009)

NaphtaliPress said:


> Thanks very much Matthew; I think I saw that in Jamieson or OED but still find the construction difficult to caste as far as explaining the meaning as used. Would it be akin to saying the Lord says strongly, sternly, or some such, "away from me" etc?



Chris, My knowledge of Scots as a distinct language really only comes through secondary references where I've been clarifying Rollock or some other author, so I'm really only providing a practical guess. The syntax seems to require reading it as a verb rather than an adverb. Other possibilities are "scold" and "reprove," as provided by the Dictionary of the Scots Language. Perhaps "scold them away" might be the best fit in the context.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Feb 26, 2009)

Thanks once again all. Below is the note I came up with. Thoughts?
"Such self-justifiers are brought in by the Lord (Luke 13), saying, *Lord, we have eaten and drunken in thy presence, *etc. Whom yet he boasts away from him"†​*†*_Boast; boist._ “Threaten; to endeavor to terrify” (Jamieson); here perhaps with a sense of reproof. The meaning seems to be, the Lord is scolding and upbraiding these self justifiers, sending them away with a sharp terrifying rebuke.​


----------



## LawrenceU (Feb 26, 2009)

Good work.


----------



## MW (Feb 26, 2009)

Chris, that leaves the meaning of the phrase in no doubt whatever.


----------



## VictorBravo (Feb 26, 2009)

I like it too. Well done. Now for the next page. . . .


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Feb 27, 2009)

victorbravo said:


> I like it too. Well done.


Thanks Vic.


victorbravo said:


> Now for the next page. . . .


Soooooo true.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Feb 27, 2009)

Good job Chris. I'm glad my input helped steer you away from the incorrect definition. 

This thread ought to be saved to demonstrate how important understanding words is to the meaning of something. It is interesting that none of us doubted that Christ was rebuking and threatening in Durham's exposition but that single word was hard to account for.


----------



## LawrenceU (Feb 27, 2009)

Good point, Rich. It also demonstrates the value of having a variety of input.


----------

