Filal obedience.
The filial obedience of the Rechabites is here adduced as a rebuke to the people of Israel for their disobedience to their Father in heaven.
I. WE OWE A DUTY OF FILIAL OBEDIENCE TO GOD. Obligation corresponds to privilege; peculiar relationship involves peculiar duties. If God is our Father, we owe special obedience to God on account of our relationship with him. The doctrine of the fatherhood of God is no excuse for the relaxation of the fidelity which we felt to be obligatory so long as he was regarded only as our supreme Ruler. Instead of making us more careless, this doctrine should increase the assiduity of our devotion. Strict religionists who dread the moral effects of the modern broad enunciation of this great truth, and lax self-indulgent people who fancy it will allow them to defy the Law of God at pleasure, both fall into a grievous mistake. The father has rights over his children possessed by no one else, and they owe obedience to him as to no other person. This was recognized and carried out much further in the ancient world than it is among us.
1. It is based on nature; the child naturally belongs to the parent.
2. It is increased by experience. For years the child is wholly dependent on his parents. Helpless, and needing constant attention, he finds in them sustenance, protection, and happiness. Parental anxiety, labour, and sacrifice should bind the children by ties of deepest gratitude. Repayment is impossible, nor is it expected; but the least that can be done is to offer, obedience.
3. It is recognized by law. The old Roman law gave the father absolute power over the life of his child. Modem law, though it interferes more with the relations of the family, sanctions wide parental fights. Now, if God is our Father, similar obligations bind us to filial obedience to him over and above the obligation we may feel to his Law, his holiness, and his supremacy (Malachi 1:6).
II. THE NEGLECT OF FILIAL OBEDIENCE TO GOD IS REBUKED BY THE NEGLECT OF FILIAL OBEDIENCE TO MEN. The Rechabites were a rebuke to the Israelites. Yet the Israelites had less excuse for disobeying their heavenly Father than the Rechabites would have had for neglecting the ordinances of their ancestor. Matthew Henry clearly indicates the points of contrast somewhat as follows. I give his thoughts with abridgment:—
1. The Rechabites were obedient to one who was but a man; but the Jews were disobedient to an infinite and eternal God.
2. Jonadab was long since dead, and could neither take cognizance of their disobedience nor give correction for it; but God lives forever to see how his laws are observed, and to punish disobedience.
3. The Rechabites were never put in mind of their obligations to their father; but God often sent his prophets to his people, "rising early and speaking," etc.
4. Jonadab never did that for his seed which God had done for his people; he left them a charge, out left them no estate to bear the charge; but God had given his people a good land, etc.
5. God did not tie up his people to so much hardship as Jonadab required of his descendants; and yet Jonadab's orders were obeyed, and God's were not.