Sermon Tone Analysis

“Unless the LORD builds the house,

those who build it labor in vain.

Unless the LORD watches over the city,

the watchman stays awake in vain.

It is in vain that you rise up early

and go late to rest,

eating the bread of anxious toil;

for he gives to his beloved sleep.

“Behold, children are a heritage from the LORD,

the fruit of the womb a reward.

Like arrows in the hand of a warrior

are the children of one’s youth.

Blessed is the man

who fills his quiver with them!

He shall not be put to shame

when he speaks with his enemies in the gate.”

[1]

Before engaging our minds with the text, permit me to state the genesis behind this particular message.

The third Sunday of January is the day set aside as Right to Life Sunday.

It was January 22, 1973 when seven justices of the United States Supreme Court discovered a “right to privacy” situated within penumbra and emanations of the Constitution of that great nation.

Specifically, Harry Blackman wrote of said “right to privacy” as emanations of Penumbra of the Constitution, of the Fourth Amendment, of the First Amendment and of the Ninth Amendment.

In concert with thousands of churches and with tens of thousands of worshippers of God who gives life, on the third Sunday of January each year, remembering the multiplied deaths that have occurred as result of this creation of a novel and disastrous right, I have endeavoured to bring a message addressing the biblical position of esteeming life.

Though I do not expect through preaching of God’s estimate of life, or through reminding you that God is the giver of life, that the world will come to repentance and turn from its continuing plunge into moral chaos, I do expect that I will equip you with knowledge of the will of the Holy One.

I am intent on equipping you to make wise choices to the praise and glory of the True and Living God.

The concept for a “Sanctity of Human Life Sunday” has focused in particular on the need to seek protection for the unborn.

In those nations which share in the British legal heritage, to say nothing of nations that have benefitted from the enlightenment, it was virtually unimaginable that it would ever become necessary to seek protection for the unborn prior to the advent of the feminist movement of the late twentieth century.

Before that misanthropy movement had become entrenched in the lives of bitter, self-centred members of the distaff gender, the unborn were virtually universally assured protection by force of law as well as social custom.

When the movement of misery identified as the feminist movement arose, there was the unceasing assertion that a woman had the right to do with her body what she would.

As with all lies which are ultimately incorporated into the social fabric, and the dames of desolation would employ the methods of Goebbels to insure that their lie became part of the social fabric of western culture, there is superficially an element of truth to the claim.

So that none misunderstand, I assert that a woman does have control over her own body.

She can say “No!” before consenting to intercourse.

She can say “No!” when approached by a man asking her to engage in immorality.

She can control her life, and control her body; but she has no “right” to kill her child when once life has been created in her womb.

Only if the child she carries is hers may she make such a determination.

Before assuming that the unborn belong to that woman carrying a child, we need to ask what God has to say on the subject.

Life, whether in the earliest stages of development, as in the womb, or whether nearing the final days of this present state, is to be valued and honoured.

No Christian, knowledgeable of the Word and the will of God, can ever approve of devaluing life.

Life in the womb is to be protected; yet, we have killed millions of unborn people under the guise of personal freedom.

Life in the closing days of our being is to be honoured and protected; yet, we debate whether to encourage and advance the concept of euthanasia.

Life, though held tenuously by those who are ill and debilitated, is to be preserved; though an increasing number of advocates argue for the right to take life when they decide to do so.

Nevertheless, life is precious.

Thus it is that on this day we turn our thoughts to children—God’s gift to those in whom He delights.

Children are a heritage from the LORD; the fruit of the womb a divine reward.

Such sentiments seem strange in this present day.

The idea that a family should include many children seems, not merely quaint, but positively reactionary.

Many progressive thinkers applaud Chinese planners that penalise couples that have more than one child.

Yet, the world is increasingly impoverished because there are no new families to provide governments with the moneys required to continue providing the benefits expected in this brave new world.

INITIAL THOUGHTS — It is immediately apparent that this Psalm is in two parts.

The first part is composed of the initial two verses.

They speak of the futility of a family’s labours and planning, of the efforts of a community or of the efforts of an individual when the will of God is not consulted.

The second part of the Psalm seems almost to be a separate Psalm, focusing as it does on God’s richest blessings to those whom He loves.

They are not separate poems; they have one theme—that only under God’s reign can any endeavour be fruitful and any community be strong.

Note that this Psalm is one of only two Psalms attributed to Solomon.

[2] Though some modern scholars are uncomfortable in this ancient attribution, it is likely correct that Solomon did write this particular Psalm.

The style is reminiscent of the manner in which the book of Ecclesiastes begins.

“Vanity of vanities… vanity of vanities!

All is vanity” [ECCLESIASTES 1:2].

Perhaps it is more meaningful to modern minds to update the translation to read, “Meaningless!

Meaningless!

Utterly meaningless!

Everything is meaningless.”

As the 127th Psalm opens, three times we read that labours from which God is excluded are “in vain.”

Moreover, the second verse would appear to include a cryptic reference to Solomon.

Speaking of Solomon’s birth, the Word of God pointedly informs us that “the LORD loved him”; and this knowledge was conveyed to David by Nathan the prophet.

Therefore, David called the child’s name Jedidiah, which means “Beloved of the LORD” [2 SAMUEL 12:25].

Take note of the final word of the second verse of our text:

“It is in vain that you rise up early

and go late to rest,

eating the bread of anxious toil;

for he gives to his beloved sleep.”

Focus on the final strophe of the verse: “He gives to His beloved sleep.”

The word translated “beloved” is a construct of the name by which Solomon was called.

Meaningless!

Useless!

In vain!

When God is neglected in any endeavour, the results will prove ultimately to be useless.

Is that true of all activities?

Yes—if God is excluded, our efforts will be worthless.

Our efforts to raise a family are useless, if God is treated as a junior partner.

Worse still are the people who fail to consider the will of God when they plan their lives.

Whether advancement in one’s chosen profession or in performing the work of the hands, or when considering training for our children, or directing the education of our children, all is futile when we pursue a course of action without considering the will of the Lord.

If one is to assign a theme to this Psalm, it would have to be the futility of any endeavour that fails to consider the will of God.

Solomon gives four examples, each of which must be considered.

First, he speaks of building a house.

It seems to be a given that he is likely not speaking of a physical house, but rather he speaks of building the family—the house that memorialises your name.

Then, expanding the horizon of those reading the Psalm, he writes of watching over a city.

Again, he writes of the toil of the individual endeavouring to be productive for whatever reason.

Toil, long hours of labour, anxiety—all alike lead only to exhaustion when God is forgotten.

Finally, Solomon writes of the children which God gives.

Before I consider the details of the verses, let me make some broad general observations.

These observations must be stated in part because they are almost universally ignored in this day.

[3] The first truth to note is that God works.

Jesus said, “My Father is working until now, and I am working” [JOHN 5:17].

God worked on each of the six days of creation.

He brought light out of darkness, separated dry land from water, caused the land to produce an unimaginable array of trees, shrubs and plants, created animals, birds and fish, and eventually created man, giving him responsibility to perform meaningful work.

Adam was charged to tend the Garden of Eden, name the animals, and together with Eve he was responsible to “have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth” [GENESIS 1:28].

In the opening verses of this Psalm we are reminded that if we are willing, “the LORD builds the house” and “the LORD watches over the city.”

Therefore, it should be apparent that God’s work did not cease with the seventh day when He rested “from all the work that He had done” [GENESIS 2:2].

Let me say for the benefit of each Christian: we read the Word of God in order to discover how He works in us and in the world, so that we will be equipped to work in the Name of Jesus the Son of God.

A second truth of note is that God makes our work meaningful.

The story is told of men working on a great cathedral in England.