Works of John Bunyan — Complete

by John Bunyan

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 plain testimony of the Scriptures are, that Solomon would not have built this beautiful house at so great a distance from the capital—that he would not have risked so much treasure nor the munitions of war in a forest—and that he would not, on the extreme border of the kingdom of Judea, have set up a throne, or seat of judgment. The answer to these objections appears to me to be conclusive. Lebanon possessed the most commanding sites for a border fortress, and therefore an admirable depot for arms, to enable the Jewish warriors to keep out their most vigilant and dangerous enemies, the Assyrians. The wealth that was deposited in this house was calculated to excite greater vigilance to protect so important a pass, while it would divert the attention of an enemy from the still more wealthy temple and fortress at Jerusalem. A throne of justice was well placed there, to save a long journey to the capital, for the trial of offenders, and the settlement of disputes on the borders of the empire. It appears to me that common sense and the soundest evidence supports the view which Bunyan took, which was far in advance of the age in which he lived.

The way in which this building, with the purposes for which it was intended, is spiritualized, is very ingenious, and admirably carried through in the following treatise. Whether it was intended by the Holy Ghost to be typical, must be left to the judgment of the impartial reader. That Lebanon is used figuratively by the inspired writers there can be no doubt. 'Lebanon is ashamed and hewn down,' must be intended as a type of the church, when under the malice of her enemies. So also when Babylon, a type of Antichrist, fell, 'the cedars of Lebanon rejoiced'; doubtless referring to the joy of God's saints when relieved from the oppressor. Whether the fine old trees, or the splendid house built as a defence to prevent the approach of enemies to the temple, is intended as a type of the Christian warfare, is left to the impartial consideration of the reader. There is very little reason to doubt but that we shall adopt Bunyan's view; if we consider the temple to be typical, we shall consider the house in the forest of Lebanon to be typical also.

It has been said, by an author of very great repute (Addison), that had Bunyan lived in the times of the Christian fathers, he would have been as great a father as the best of them. He stands unrivalled for most extraordinary mental powers for allegory and for spiritualizing, but to compare him with the best of the fathers is faint praise indeed. He was as much their superior, as the blaze of the noon-day sun excels the glimmer of a rushlight.