Luminescence, Volume 3. C. K. Barrett

impulses, called by a holy voice, to be pilgrims in the region of faith, adventurers for the kingdom, ever seeking a fuller, finer, purer religion than that of their fathers and friends. So, too, there are those whose lives are as commonplace and uneventful as Isaac’s, people who are content to let others lead while they follow and to be just ordinary folk. Perhaps most of us see ourselves in Jacob for we are strange mixtures, sometimes roaring on wings of faith and love, but sometimes trailing our wings in the mud. We are princes with God who sometimes forget and act like children of the devil.

      Or, you may make the distinction broader and say that we differ in other ways. Some of us are mystics and some are practical men and women, some put the emphasis on prayer and worship, others are philanthropic and social services, some love to be up and doing and others love to stand and wait, some of us are of a choleric temperament, some phlegmatic, some sanguine, some of us are bright and gay and others somber and sad. And God is the God of all because He is the God of each. There is a place for each in His love and care. The love of God is broader than the measures of our mind and the heart of the Eternal large enough to take us all in. The text is reinforced by a very gracious word concerning our Master—“Jesus loved Martha and her sister Mary, and Lazarus.” The busy, bustling housewife, the contemplative listener, and the commonplace brother. Do not try to monopolize God for yourself and your own type, do not excommunicate those who differ from you. Just remember that He is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Pass on to another thought—

      GOD IS EVER THE SAME BUT MEN OF DIFFERENT TEMPERAMENT AND CHARACTER CALL HIM DIFFERENT NAMES

      They apprehend and emphasize different aspects of His character. To Abraham, amidst the perils and disappointments of his spiritual pilgrimage, God was “a shield and exceeding great reward.” Isaac’s name for God was “The fear of Isaac.” God was to Jacob the “Rock”—the rock against which he dashed himself in vain and which came ultimately to be the foundation of his life and hope.

      God never changes, but still men see Him through the eyes of their own temperament, experience, and bias. He seems to change to meet our need. He is always Love, but love coming to us according to our need. In childhood, He comes as the Good Shepherd, in youth, as the Captain of our salvation, in middle life He is the Giver of rest and strength, in old age, the One who bears and carries. Different conceptions will be stated in different terms and different needs will apprehend different aspect. Sorrow will name Him the Comforter, sin will rejoice in Him as a pardoning God, weakness will lay hold in His strength. Some will speak of His justice, some by His love, and some of His holiness. Some will think of Him as the Judge and some as the Father. So long as men are sincere, earnest, devoted in their worship let us allow them latitude and room. For the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is the God of different personalities. It follows inevitably that—

      GOD HAS DIFFERENT WAYS OF EDUCATING DIFFERENT PERSONALITIES

      You cannot read the stories of these three men without realizing that God trained them in different schools and disciplined them in different experiences. Abraham was educated and perfected through many a disappointment and the postponed fulfillment of many a hope. Isaac’s school was his family life, his quiet nature was cultured among quiet scenes. Jacob’s sins came home to roost and through them he learned life’s great lessons.

      The God of different personalities still sends different men to different schools. One bears through the failure of earthly things to seek a Heavenly City. Another sees in quiet, peaceful, homely scenes the goodness and the love of God. Another learns in the hard school of experiences the folly and futility of sin. Adversity is the university of one and success the school of another. If you ask me why, I can only answer because you are you and he is he. God does not deal with us in batches and in crowds. He knows us as individuals and sends us to the school He sees fit. Do not let us murmur and fret, covet or envy, rather let us trust and praise the heart that places, the hand that guides, and the love that has room for us all. There is another thought and I have only time to mention it, but I dare not omit it. It is this—

      GOD IS THE GOD OF SUCCEEDING GENERATIONS

      The God of Abraham, of Abraham’s son Isaac, and of Isaac’s son Jacob, and of their succeeding race. Honesty demands the admission that that is the main and first thought of the text. God was calling Moses to undertake a particularly difficult task, and telling him to undertake it in the name and strength of his fathers’ God. There is something inexpressibly beautiful in that truth. You and I have to do, not with an unknown and unrevealed God, but with the God of our fathers known of old and who revealed Himself to men and women of other days. And this God is our God and will be our guide and our educator. We can both lengthen and strengthen the list. The God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and the God of Paul, Augustine, Luther, Wesley. “We came unto our Fathers’ God, their Rock is our salvation.” And He will be the God over our children after us. We shall see Him in clearer light and see new revelations of His power, and our children may, and please God, will, advance upon our knowledge. He leads us on. But He will always be the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, our fathers’ God, and with adoring, wondering, and deepening gratitude we shall come to know Him better and love and trust Him more and as we see Him in Christ Jesus we shall each for himself or herself look up into His face and say, “My Lord, and my God.”

      “THE CRIMES OF THE CARELESS”—Exodus 22.6

      (Preached at Fentiman Road, undated, and Spring Head Mission 7/28/40)

      Exodus 22.6 “If fire break out, and catch in thorns, so that the stacks of corn, or the standing corn, or the field, be consumed therewith; he that kindled the fire shall surely make restitution.”

      This text is taken from a section of the book of Exodus which commentaries call “The Lesser Law.” That is to distinguish it from the section in “the Law” which includes the Ten Commandments. This “Lesser Law” includes a brief code of laws of deep moral interest affecting the life of the nation. The application of the penalties described here would work something little short of a revolution in the life of today. Take, for example—

      THE LAW GIVEN IN OUR TEXT

      It is simple enough but by no means unimportant. Outwardly it meant more to the people who first received it than it can mean to us. They lived in a hot, dry country where the danger of fires was ever present. The law enjoined that if a farmer wanted to burn over his stubble field, or set fire to a heap of rubbish, it was part of his responsibility to see that the wind was in the right direction and that every precaution was taken to protect his neighbor’s property. If he neglected to take precautionary measures, and his neighbor’s crop was damaged, the man who kindled the fire was held liable and had to pay for the damage done. As I say, the particular application means little to us. Though I have heard my wife say strong things when a neighbor kindled a fire in the garden just after the washing was hung out! The point is that the underlying principle is sound and of manifold application.

      The question raised concerns our liability for the consequences of our action or our neglect. Here is a pretty problem in ethics for you. Is a man morally responsible, not only for what he does, but for what results from his action? Must he be held accountable for consequences he did not intend resulting from his conduct? In my judgment, there are consequences of our actions, or of our failure to act, at a given moment which are altogether unexpected; by no knowledge accessible to us could we foresee them. For these consequences, it seems to me, we are not guilty.

      But there are cases in which we might have known that certain results would follow our action or our neglect. In such cases, we are not guiltless though there was no ill intent in our minds. We might have known that evil would follow a certain course of conduct and we ought to have found out. The text presents the case of a man who did not intend to cause damage. The law held him guilty because he was careless of consequences and did not take necessary precautions. In this sermon, we will keep to such cases because they give us our subject.

      THE CRIMES OF THE CARELESS

      That is not too strong a phrase to use. Not least among the tragedies of life are those wrought by “want of thought,” rather