This was written by Wayne Jackson and appeared in the May 1982 edition of the Christian Courier. It was published by the East Main Street Church of Christ in Stockton, California and was edited by Jackson. I have broken this down into two installments for the sake of convenience.
"The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and sowed in his field, which indeed is the least of all the seeds; but when it is grown it is greater than the herbs and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and nest in its branches." (Matthew 13:31-32)
In the foregoing parable, the Lord Jesus Christ spoke of the commencement and growth of that kingdom He was planning to establish. The master Teacher, employing the tiny mustard seed as an object lesson, suggested that His kingdom would start in a small, relatively obscure fashion. This little prophetic parable implied however, that from that seemingly insignificant beginning a great movement would develop and such would be a source of blessing to many. History has wonderfully demonstrated the fulfillment of the Savior's words.
The Kingdom's Founder - From the very beginning, as the natural eye would evaluate things, it must have appeared that the Christian movement was destined for failure. For the fact of the matter is, Jesus Christ, its founder had none of those qualities that are normally associated with the establishment of great empires. But this of course, was by divine design. The prophet Isaiah had foretold that Christ would grow up, "as a root out of dry ground" (Isaiah 53:2). How unlikely it is that a "tender plant" could even survive in "dry ground" yet, the Lord not only survived, He shook this planet to its very core. Let us observe how the odds so to speak, were stacked against Christ.
First, contrary to the usual Jewish expectation, Jesus came to the earth as a baby. Many Jews expected the Messiah to be a valient conqueror on a prancing charger, violently overthrowing the pagan Romans (and that sect known as the Zealots sought to implement that concept) but contrary to such crude expectations, God sent forth His Son, "born of a woman" (Galatians 4:4). The poet George MacDonald captures this truth beautifully.
"They all were looking for a king
To slay their foes and lift them high;
Thou cam'st, a little baby thing
That made a woman cry."
Secondly, from the very beginning evil men attempted to kill the Lord. Matthew dramatically reveals how Herod the Great "inquired" (the imperfect tense stresses his repeated investigation) where the Christ should be born (Matthew 2:3). He ultimately murdered all the male babes of Bethlehem in hopes of eliminating the Savior (Matthew 2:16). Thirdly, Jesus was reared in the despised Nazareth; not exactly an enhancement to his reputation (cf. Matthew 2:23; John 1:46; 7:52).
Fourthly, the Lord had no formal rabbinical training. The Jews once said, "How does this Man know letters, having never studied?" (John 7:15) They were amazed at His knowledge in view of the fact that He had not been trained at the feet of some prominent rabbi. Fifthly, he had no vast financial resources with which to found His kingdom. The Scripture plainly affirms that He was "poor" (II Corinthians 8:9) and the Greek term means, "to be poor as a beggar" (W. E. Vine, Expository Dictionary, III, p. 192). Christ acknowleged that He had no place to lay His head (Luke 9:57). Finally, Jesus certainly had no political machine nor even any worldly fame (secular history virtually ignored Him) by which to launch a world wide movement. In fact, initially even His own kinsmen were unimpressed with His exalted claims (cf. John 7:5).
In short, it would appear that Christ possessed all of those elements which from the human point of view, would absolutely spell disaster! How could He possibly succeed? Add to this the fact that He was killed in the prime of His life and one wonders how could His movement survive, let alone accomplish anything significant? Yet here it is, Christianity, the most dominant force in civilization!
The Kingdom's Ambassadors - The apostles of the Lord's certainly were not endowed with any natural qualities which would on that basis alone, explain the phenomenal expansion of the church of Christ. They were, as a matter of fact, very ordinary men. Several of them were mere humble fishermen who would have been forever lost in the obscurity of anitquity had it not been for their involvement with Jesus. By their contemporaries, the apostles were assessed as "unlearned and ignorant men" (Acts 4:13) and this expression really denotes those who lack rabbinic training; those who are not expert or skilled.
There were also within the apostolic band, those potentially explosive components which had it not been for the guiding hand of the divine Master, could easily have destroyed the infant movement. For example, there was Matthew, a tax collector who had been in the employ of the Roman government (cf. Matthew 9:9). As a publican, Matthew was from a hated class of men. But the Lord called him to, "Follow me." Yet along with him came Simon who is called "Zelotes" (Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13) and that means he had been a member of the Zealot sect. Now Zealots were haters. They hated Romans and they especially hated Jews who "sold out" to the Romans by cooperating with them. Under any other circumstances, Simon would have killed Matthew in a moment! But Christ brought them together! How did this group, so different in many ways, launch the mightly kingdom of Christ into the ancient world?
Further, it should be noted that the apostles were not men of great wealth for they forsook their businesses to follow Jesus (cf. Mark 1:18; Luke 5:28). On their preaching tours, the apostles' provisions were quite meager (Matthew 10:9-10) so that Peter could honestly say when solicited by a beggar, "Silver and gold have I none" (Acts 3:6).
And so, the establishment and expansion of the kingdom of Christ cannot be explained on any natural basis and yet grow it did. The word "grow" is almost too mild. Really, it exploded!
The unprecedented growth of God's divine kingdom was clearly foretold by the prophets of the Old Testament era. For example, Isaiah declared that when Jehovah's house was established, "all nations shall flow into it" (2:2). Again, of the glorious gospel age the prophet announced, "for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of Jehovah, as the waters cover the sea" (Isaiah 11:9). This is not a prophecy of some future millennial reign of Christ on earth, for Isaiah 11:10 to quoted by Paul in Romans 15:12 of the Gentile influx into the church (cf. Ezekiel 47:1ff). The rapid growth of the early church therefore, was to be expected.
Wednesday, May 29, 2013
Tuesday, May 28, 2013
Is It a Sin to Miss Just One Service of the Church?
This is copied from the November 11, 1973 edition of Reminders, a weekly publication of the Moundsville Church of Christ in Moundsville, West Virginia. A. D. Kimble was the editor. They credit this to The Visitor from Haynesville, Louisiana.
The above question is often asked by church members. It is one which deserves some very careful consideration by all of us but especially by those who occasionally absent themselves from the assemblies. The question emanates from a false attitude; the attitude that one is going to try to get by with a minimum of service rather than the maximum. Certainly, we would not say it is a sin to miss one or more services due to unavoidable hinderances but we are not talking about such absences in this article. We have in mind the fellow who misses JUST ONE service because he doesn't care to go. He had rather do something else.
To get to the heart of the question, consider the following. If one doesn't sin when he INDIFFERENTLY misses JUST ONE service, how many does he have to miss before he sins? Two, four, six or a hundred? At which absence does he become a sinner in need of repentance and by what authority do you answer? The truth of the matter is that if it is a sin to miss a hundred assemblies, it is a sin to miss JUST ONE service. If not, why not?
Take this imaginary situation for example. Brother John Doe misses 8 or 10 and the church begins to wonder. Finally, he is absent a whole year and the elders go out to talk to him about his condition. When he asked for the nature of the offense, the reply was that he had forsaken the assembling with the saints. What if he should ask for the specific time at which he became a sinner? What could they say? Could they rebuke him for missing the first, third or one hundredth service? And if they should rebuke him for forsaking the assembling for one year, why shouldn't they rebuke him for foresaking the assembling for one week? Why should it be wrong to miss a year but alright to miss one week?
The only conclusion that one can come to is that missing JUST ONE service is sin. Many have never really seriously considered their duty to attend the assemblies and hence feel no guilt, regardless of how often they are absent.
We should all compare what we do for the Lord with what He has done for us, and hang our heads in shame for our lack of sacrifice for Him. We need to repent while we still have time. One day we shall stand before the Great Judge of all with unbearable disappointment for our lukewarm and half-hearted service. When that time comes, we will wish we had given heed to such admonitions as those uttered by Paul in the following words. "Not forsaking the assembling of our selves together." (Hebrews 10:25)
The above question is often asked by church members. It is one which deserves some very careful consideration by all of us but especially by those who occasionally absent themselves from the assemblies. The question emanates from a false attitude; the attitude that one is going to try to get by with a minimum of service rather than the maximum. Certainly, we would not say it is a sin to miss one or more services due to unavoidable hinderances but we are not talking about such absences in this article. We have in mind the fellow who misses JUST ONE service because he doesn't care to go. He had rather do something else.
To get to the heart of the question, consider the following. If one doesn't sin when he INDIFFERENTLY misses JUST ONE service, how many does he have to miss before he sins? Two, four, six or a hundred? At which absence does he become a sinner in need of repentance and by what authority do you answer? The truth of the matter is that if it is a sin to miss a hundred assemblies, it is a sin to miss JUST ONE service. If not, why not?
Take this imaginary situation for example. Brother John Doe misses 8 or 10 and the church begins to wonder. Finally, he is absent a whole year and the elders go out to talk to him about his condition. When he asked for the nature of the offense, the reply was that he had forsaken the assembling with the saints. What if he should ask for the specific time at which he became a sinner? What could they say? Could they rebuke him for missing the first, third or one hundredth service? And if they should rebuke him for forsaking the assembling for one year, why shouldn't they rebuke him for foresaking the assembling for one week? Why should it be wrong to miss a year but alright to miss one week?
The only conclusion that one can come to is that missing JUST ONE service is sin. Many have never really seriously considered their duty to attend the assemblies and hence feel no guilt, regardless of how often they are absent.
We should all compare what we do for the Lord with what He has done for us, and hang our heads in shame for our lack of sacrifice for Him. We need to repent while we still have time. One day we shall stand before the Great Judge of all with unbearable disappointment for our lukewarm and half-hearted service. When that time comes, we will wish we had given heed to such admonitions as those uttered by Paul in the following words. "Not forsaking the assembling of our selves together." (Hebrews 10:25)
Coins of the New Testament
This is another great article written by Wayne Jackson. It's copied here from the Christian Courier of May, 1982. The paper was published by the East Main Street Church of Christ in Stockton, California and was edited by Jackson.
The writers of the Greek New Testament employed some seven different terms for various denominations of coinage used in the ancient Biblical world. An understanding of these terms greatly enhances our appreciation for numerous New Testament passages.
Drachme - A drachme was a Greek silver coin worth approximately 18 or 19 cents. The term is used in only one New Testament context. The Lord told a parable of a woman who had ten drachmas; she lost one of them but searched diligently until she found it (Luke 15:8-9). The drachme was not an insignificant amount. According to one ancient Greek writer (300 B.C.), it was the equivalent to the price of one sheep or one fifth of an ox. It was thus a great loss to this woman and aptly depicts the value of even one soul (cf. Matthew 16:26).
Didrachmon - The didrachman was two drachmas, thus worth about 36 cents. It was the coin generally used by the Jews for payment of the yearly temple tax. This regulation was derived from the atonement money prescribed in Exodus 30:11-16, which according to Jewish tradition, later developed into an annual poll tax which every male Jew above the age of twenty was required to pay each March. When Christ and the disciples came to Capernaum, those responsible for the collection of that tax asked Peter, "Does not your teacher (Jesus) pay the didrachma?" Peter replied that the Lord did pay that tax.
Stater - Subsequently in the context just cited, Christ instructed Peter to go to the sea (of Galilee), cast a hook and in the mouth of the first fish caught, he would find a stater and with that the apostle was to pay the temple tax for himself and for the Lord (Matthew 17:27). The stater is mentioned by name only here in the New Testament. It was a silver coin equal to two didrachmas and therefore worth approximately 72 to 80 cents.
It is believed by most scholars that the stater was used in paying Judas for his betrayal of Christ, thirty pieces of silver (Matthew 26:15; 27:3-5) and if that is correct then the Lord was sold for about $22 to $24. One wonders why such a paltry sum (cf. the price of a slave in Exodus 21:32). Surely Judas could have gotten more as badly as the Jewish leaders wanted Christ. And why did he return those coins? In his interesting book The Training of the Twelve, Professor A. B. Bruce makes a strong case that other motives besides coventousness had also invaded the heart of Judas Iscariot (Chapter xxiii).
Denarion - The denarius was a silver Roman coin about the size of a dime. It was worth about 18 cents and is mentioned in the New Testament 15 times. It contained an inscription of the Roman emperor; in the case of the tribute money which the Pharisees showed to Jesus in an attempt to trap Him, Augustus Caesar. Note: Archaeologists have found originals with inscriptions representing all twelve of the Roman emperors, Augustus to Nerva. This coin represented the average daily wages for the Palestinean working man (cf. Matthew 20:2, 9-10, 13).
Shortly before He performed the miracle of feeding the five thousand, the Lord, testing Philip asked, "Where are we to find bread that these may eat?" Philip replied that not even two hundred denarii ($36) would be sufficient for such a crowd (John 6:7; cf. Mark 6:37). Was Philip suggesting the amount that was in the disciples' treasury box (cf. John 12:5-6)? If so, such may indicate that the disciples' work in helping the poor was much larger than many have suspected.
About a week before His death, Jesus came to Bethany, to the home of Lazarus, Marth and Mary. While He was there, Mary took a pound of precious ointment and with it annointed her Master's head and feet (Matthew 26:7; Mark 14:3). Judas complained about such "waste" suggesting that it could have been sold for more than three hundred denarii with the proceeds going to the poor. Judas, the thief, considered himself to be one of the chief among the poor (John 12:5-6)! By the way, his influence affected the other disciples (cf. Matthew 26:8; Mark 14:4). But Mary's gift was lavishly bestowed in love, perhaps in thanksgiving for Lazarus' restoration (note the "therefore" in John 12:3). Her gift of devotion represented a year's wages for the Jewish laborer! This may be an indication that the Lord's friends of Bethany were fairly prosperous. Wealth does not necessarily exclude piety (cf. Genesis 13:2; Job 1).
When the good Samaritan left the wounded stranger at the inn for further care, he gave the inn keeper two denarii (two days' wages) and instructed the host to care for him and when he returned, if need be, the extra cost would be supplied. Theh cost of a day's board in that day was about one twelth of a denarius (cf. J. Jeremias, Jerusalem in the Time of Christ, 1969, p. 122). Accordingly, the benevolent Samaritan provided more than three weeks lodging for that injured stranger. That is love in action! (Cf. Luke 10:35).
Assarion - The assarion was a Roman copper coin that was worth 1/16 of a denarius. Hence, a shade over 1 cent. It is mentioned twice in the New Testament. In a marvelous passage that underscores God's providential interest in His people, Christ asked, "Are not two sparrows sold for an assarion? and not one of them shall fall on the ground without your Father..." (Matthew 10:29). Sparrows were common items of food in the first century and they were inexpensive; two for a penny or five for two cents (Luke 12:6). If therefore, God is not unmindful of a creature so commerically cheap, how much more is He concerned for His people! What a thrilling concept. How great is our God!
Kodrantes - The kondrantes is the smallest of the Roman coins. It was worth about 1/4 cent. Jesus refers to this coin in a figurative sense in Matthew 5:26 where He instructs His disciples to reconcile with their adversaries while there is yet time. For if they neglect to do so, they may through proper legal channels, be cast into prison (cf. Matthew 18:30, 34) there to remain until the last kodranten is paid. The Savior stresses the urgency of making things right while opportunity prevails.
Roman Catholic theology argues that the "prison" (5:25) is purgatory. Hence, those expiating their sins may leave as soon as the lastd fractional amount of their punishment is paid. But the doctrine simply doesn't fit the Scripture. Romanism contends that people living on earth may work for the deliverance of those in purgatory, while Christ says will not leave their place of punishment, "until thou has paid..." And anyone familiar with the penal systems of antiquity knows that that means never!
Lepton - The lepton was the smallest of coins; a tiny copper worth about 1/2 of a kondrantes (Mark 12:42) or by our standards, 1/8 of a cent. The term is mentioned three times in the New Testament (Mark 12:42; Luke 12:59; 21:2). The lepton was a Jewish coin, generally engraved with religious or agricultural scenes, unlike the Roman coins which were designed with Caesar's inscription (Matthew 22:20) or with pagan symbols. The lepton could therefore, be deposited directly into the temple treasury (Mark 12:41), whereas the Roman coins could not be. Hence, money changers made a handsome profit, some 12%, converting Roman coinage into silver (cf. John 2:14; Matthew 21:12).
In Mark 12:41ff, Christ was in the temple's court of the women, wherein thirteen treasury boxes were located. He was watching (the imperfect tense verb stresses a sustained observation) the multitude as they cast money into the coffers. Presently, there came a poor widow who cast in two lepta. The Lord calaled His disciples to Him and commented upon the dear lady's generosity. Whereas others had given out of their abundance, she contributed out of her want. Indeed, she had given her entire living. And her entire substance was approximately 1/72 of a daily wage. She could only afford one half of one sparrow at the market had she been disposed to feast that day! But she was consumed with devotion to God and so gave all she had. Her copper coins were gold that day! God does not of course, require that we give everything we have into His treasury but He surely accepted her gift. That generous gift has been blessing countless thousands by her example, across twenty centuries of time.
One needs to be familiar with the social, cultural, economic conditions if the full richness of the New Testament record is to bless his life. Many great lessons can be learned from the Bible, even from something as seemingly insignificant as a coin.
The writers of the Greek New Testament employed some seven different terms for various denominations of coinage used in the ancient Biblical world. An understanding of these terms greatly enhances our appreciation for numerous New Testament passages.
Drachme - A drachme was a Greek silver coin worth approximately 18 or 19 cents. The term is used in only one New Testament context. The Lord told a parable of a woman who had ten drachmas; she lost one of them but searched diligently until she found it (Luke 15:8-9). The drachme was not an insignificant amount. According to one ancient Greek writer (300 B.C.), it was the equivalent to the price of one sheep or one fifth of an ox. It was thus a great loss to this woman and aptly depicts the value of even one soul (cf. Matthew 16:26).
Didrachmon - The didrachman was two drachmas, thus worth about 36 cents. It was the coin generally used by the Jews for payment of the yearly temple tax. This regulation was derived from the atonement money prescribed in Exodus 30:11-16, which according to Jewish tradition, later developed into an annual poll tax which every male Jew above the age of twenty was required to pay each March. When Christ and the disciples came to Capernaum, those responsible for the collection of that tax asked Peter, "Does not your teacher (Jesus) pay the didrachma?" Peter replied that the Lord did pay that tax.
Stater - Subsequently in the context just cited, Christ instructed Peter to go to the sea (of Galilee), cast a hook and in the mouth of the first fish caught, he would find a stater and with that the apostle was to pay the temple tax for himself and for the Lord (Matthew 17:27). The stater is mentioned by name only here in the New Testament. It was a silver coin equal to two didrachmas and therefore worth approximately 72 to 80 cents.
It is believed by most scholars that the stater was used in paying Judas for his betrayal of Christ, thirty pieces of silver (Matthew 26:15; 27:3-5) and if that is correct then the Lord was sold for about $22 to $24. One wonders why such a paltry sum (cf. the price of a slave in Exodus 21:32). Surely Judas could have gotten more as badly as the Jewish leaders wanted Christ. And why did he return those coins? In his interesting book The Training of the Twelve, Professor A. B. Bruce makes a strong case that other motives besides coventousness had also invaded the heart of Judas Iscariot (Chapter xxiii).
Denarion - The denarius was a silver Roman coin about the size of a dime. It was worth about 18 cents and is mentioned in the New Testament 15 times. It contained an inscription of the Roman emperor; in the case of the tribute money which the Pharisees showed to Jesus in an attempt to trap Him, Augustus Caesar. Note: Archaeologists have found originals with inscriptions representing all twelve of the Roman emperors, Augustus to Nerva. This coin represented the average daily wages for the Palestinean working man (cf. Matthew 20:2, 9-10, 13).
Shortly before He performed the miracle of feeding the five thousand, the Lord, testing Philip asked, "Where are we to find bread that these may eat?" Philip replied that not even two hundred denarii ($36) would be sufficient for such a crowd (John 6:7; cf. Mark 6:37). Was Philip suggesting the amount that was in the disciples' treasury box (cf. John 12:5-6)? If so, such may indicate that the disciples' work in helping the poor was much larger than many have suspected.
About a week before His death, Jesus came to Bethany, to the home of Lazarus, Marth and Mary. While He was there, Mary took a pound of precious ointment and with it annointed her Master's head and feet (Matthew 26:7; Mark 14:3). Judas complained about such "waste" suggesting that it could have been sold for more than three hundred denarii with the proceeds going to the poor. Judas, the thief, considered himself to be one of the chief among the poor (John 12:5-6)! By the way, his influence affected the other disciples (cf. Matthew 26:8; Mark 14:4). But Mary's gift was lavishly bestowed in love, perhaps in thanksgiving for Lazarus' restoration (note the "therefore" in John 12:3). Her gift of devotion represented a year's wages for the Jewish laborer! This may be an indication that the Lord's friends of Bethany were fairly prosperous. Wealth does not necessarily exclude piety (cf. Genesis 13:2; Job 1).
When the good Samaritan left the wounded stranger at the inn for further care, he gave the inn keeper two denarii (two days' wages) and instructed the host to care for him and when he returned, if need be, the extra cost would be supplied. Theh cost of a day's board in that day was about one twelth of a denarius (cf. J. Jeremias, Jerusalem in the Time of Christ, 1969, p. 122). Accordingly, the benevolent Samaritan provided more than three weeks lodging for that injured stranger. That is love in action! (Cf. Luke 10:35).
Assarion - The assarion was a Roman copper coin that was worth 1/16 of a denarius. Hence, a shade over 1 cent. It is mentioned twice in the New Testament. In a marvelous passage that underscores God's providential interest in His people, Christ asked, "Are not two sparrows sold for an assarion? and not one of them shall fall on the ground without your Father..." (Matthew 10:29). Sparrows were common items of food in the first century and they were inexpensive; two for a penny or five for two cents (Luke 12:6). If therefore, God is not unmindful of a creature so commerically cheap, how much more is He concerned for His people! What a thrilling concept. How great is our God!
Kodrantes - The kondrantes is the smallest of the Roman coins. It was worth about 1/4 cent. Jesus refers to this coin in a figurative sense in Matthew 5:26 where He instructs His disciples to reconcile with their adversaries while there is yet time. For if they neglect to do so, they may through proper legal channels, be cast into prison (cf. Matthew 18:30, 34) there to remain until the last kodranten is paid. The Savior stresses the urgency of making things right while opportunity prevails.
Roman Catholic theology argues that the "prison" (5:25) is purgatory. Hence, those expiating their sins may leave as soon as the lastd fractional amount of their punishment is paid. But the doctrine simply doesn't fit the Scripture. Romanism contends that people living on earth may work for the deliverance of those in purgatory, while Christ says will not leave their place of punishment, "until thou has paid..." And anyone familiar with the penal systems of antiquity knows that that means never!
Lepton - The lepton was the smallest of coins; a tiny copper worth about 1/2 of a kondrantes (Mark 12:42) or by our standards, 1/8 of a cent. The term is mentioned three times in the New Testament (Mark 12:42; Luke 12:59; 21:2). The lepton was a Jewish coin, generally engraved with religious or agricultural scenes, unlike the Roman coins which were designed with Caesar's inscription (Matthew 22:20) or with pagan symbols. The lepton could therefore, be deposited directly into the temple treasury (Mark 12:41), whereas the Roman coins could not be. Hence, money changers made a handsome profit, some 12%, converting Roman coinage into silver (cf. John 2:14; Matthew 21:12).
In Mark 12:41ff, Christ was in the temple's court of the women, wherein thirteen treasury boxes were located. He was watching (the imperfect tense verb stresses a sustained observation) the multitude as they cast money into the coffers. Presently, there came a poor widow who cast in two lepta. The Lord calaled His disciples to Him and commented upon the dear lady's generosity. Whereas others had given out of their abundance, she contributed out of her want. Indeed, she had given her entire living. And her entire substance was approximately 1/72 of a daily wage. She could only afford one half of one sparrow at the market had she been disposed to feast that day! But she was consumed with devotion to God and so gave all she had. Her copper coins were gold that day! God does not of course, require that we give everything we have into His treasury but He surely accepted her gift. That generous gift has been blessing countless thousands by her example, across twenty centuries of time.
One needs to be familiar with the social, cultural, economic conditions if the full richness of the New Testament record is to bless his life. Many great lessons can be learned from the Bible, even from something as seemingly insignificant as a coin.
Friday, May 24, 2013
Revelation Twenty
This is a great article concerning one of the most abused and misused portions of Scripture. Wayne Jackson wrote it. It appeared in the March, 1982 Christian Courier. That paper was published by the East Main Street Church of Christ in Stockton, California and was edited by Jackson.
The 20th chapter of the book of Revelation is one of the most thrilling sections of the Bible. A casual analysis of the chapter reveals that it naturally falls into four parts:
1. The Binding of Satan (1-3).
2. The Victorious Reign of the Faithful (4-6).
3. The Final Struggle and Defeat of Satan (7-10).
4. The Judgment (11-15).
A brief summation of this chapter may be presented as follows. John saw an angel descending from Heaven with a great chain. Satan was bound and cast into a pit where he was consigned to remain for 1,000 years. As a consequence of this, judgment was granted to those faithful martyrs who had neither worshipped the beast nor his image. They were said to partake of a resurrection and they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. Satan is then loosed to make a last ditch attempt to war against the saints but he and his unholy allies are banished to torment. All of the dead are then ushered before the great throne for final judgment.
The first six verses of Revelation 20 are a real source of controversy among Biblical students. They have become the heart and soul of that theological scheme known as "dispensational pre-millennialism." In brief, this is the notion that Christ came to earth for the purpose of establishing the kingdom of God but because He was surprisingly rejected by the Jews, He postponed the establishment of the kingdom (setting up the church as a sort of after-thought in its place). It is alleged however, that He will return (and many argue that His coming is very near) to the earth, set up His kingdom in Jerusalem and reign for 1,000 years on David's throne from the holy city.
The pre-millennial view of Revelation 20 is quite erroneous. Though we do not intend to discuss that entire doctrinal system at this point, we would like to make the following observations.
Since the first six verses of this narrative are relied upon so heavily for the dispensational view, special attention will be given to them. It should be immediately apparent that this section, as with the whole of the book, is highly charged with figures of speech. One notes for example, a key, a chain, a dragon or serpent, an abyss, a thousand years, thrones, a beast, marks on foreheads and hands and a resurrection. It is certainly a novel position to say the least, which contends that a figurative serpent was figuratively bound with a figurative chain and figuratively thrown into a figurative pit which was figuratively sealed and locked with a figurative key, to be confined for a literal 1,000 years! Even if one does not understand the specific design of the imagery employed, surely he can see the symbolic thrust of the subject matter. It is an absurd error to literalize a solitary feature of this obviously symbolic narrative.
A well recognized principle of Biblical interpretation is that difficult or obscure passages of Scripture are to be interpreted in light of clearer ones. One does not force literal language into harmony with the symbolic. Rather, the interpretation of figurative contexts must give way to the plain sense of literal, historical prose. The fact of the matter is, the pre-millennial scenario is so fraught with manifold errors, there is no way that Revelation 20 can even remotely be harmonized with that system! If Revelation 20 represented the pre-millennial scheme of things, is it not remarkably strange that absolutely no mention is made of Christ's second coming, the setting up of the kingdom, an earthly reign, Jerusalem, David's throne, etc.?! All of these elements (and much more) are vital to the dispensational view yet they are conspicuously absent from this narrative! It may be unhesitatingly declared that the pre-millennial view of Revelation 20 is wrong.
The 20th chapter of the book of Revelation is one of the most thrilling sections of the Bible. A casual analysis of the chapter reveals that it naturally falls into four parts:
1. The Binding of Satan (1-3).
2. The Victorious Reign of the Faithful (4-6).
3. The Final Struggle and Defeat of Satan (7-10).
4. The Judgment (11-15).
A brief summation of this chapter may be presented as follows. John saw an angel descending from Heaven with a great chain. Satan was bound and cast into a pit where he was consigned to remain for 1,000 years. As a consequence of this, judgment was granted to those faithful martyrs who had neither worshipped the beast nor his image. They were said to partake of a resurrection and they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. Satan is then loosed to make a last ditch attempt to war against the saints but he and his unholy allies are banished to torment. All of the dead are then ushered before the great throne for final judgment.
The first six verses of Revelation 20 are a real source of controversy among Biblical students. They have become the heart and soul of that theological scheme known as "dispensational pre-millennialism." In brief, this is the notion that Christ came to earth for the purpose of establishing the kingdom of God but because He was surprisingly rejected by the Jews, He postponed the establishment of the kingdom (setting up the church as a sort of after-thought in its place). It is alleged however, that He will return (and many argue that His coming is very near) to the earth, set up His kingdom in Jerusalem and reign for 1,000 years on David's throne from the holy city.
The pre-millennial view of Revelation 20 is quite erroneous. Though we do not intend to discuss that entire doctrinal system at this point, we would like to make the following observations.
Since the first six verses of this narrative are relied upon so heavily for the dispensational view, special attention will be given to them. It should be immediately apparent that this section, as with the whole of the book, is highly charged with figures of speech. One notes for example, a key, a chain, a dragon or serpent, an abyss, a thousand years, thrones, a beast, marks on foreheads and hands and a resurrection. It is certainly a novel position to say the least, which contends that a figurative serpent was figuratively bound with a figurative chain and figuratively thrown into a figurative pit which was figuratively sealed and locked with a figurative key, to be confined for a literal 1,000 years! Even if one does not understand the specific design of the imagery employed, surely he can see the symbolic thrust of the subject matter. It is an absurd error to literalize a solitary feature of this obviously symbolic narrative.
A well recognized principle of Biblical interpretation is that difficult or obscure passages of Scripture are to be interpreted in light of clearer ones. One does not force literal language into harmony with the symbolic. Rather, the interpretation of figurative contexts must give way to the plain sense of literal, historical prose. The fact of the matter is, the pre-millennial scenario is so fraught with manifold errors, there is no way that Revelation 20 can even remotely be harmonized with that system! If Revelation 20 represented the pre-millennial scheme of things, is it not remarkably strange that absolutely no mention is made of Christ's second coming, the setting up of the kingdom, an earthly reign, Jerusalem, David's throne, etc.?! All of these elements (and much more) are vital to the dispensational view yet they are conspicuously absent from this narrative! It may be unhesitatingly declared that the pre-millennial view of Revelation 20 is wrong.
The Millennium
Exactly what is the "millennium"? The term derives from two Latin roots; mille, thousand and annus, year. The Greek term in Revelation is chilia ete, and it simply means a thousand years. As we have indicated already, this thousand years is part of a cluster of symbols. It thus is not a reference to a literal span of one thousand years. In fact, the word "thousand" is used approximately thirty times in the book of Revelation and not one time does it appear to be used in a literal sense. The manner in which one interprests the "thousand years" will therefore, be determined by the view that he entertains of this context as a whole.
There are several viewpoints of Revelation 20:1ff (and variations of each) which do not clash with the Bible elsewhere (as does the pre-millennial theory) which are possible explanations of this difficult text. Two of these will be discussed here.
1. Many believe that the millennium is "co-extensive with the Gospel Age." William Cox argues that, "The kingdom, in its present phase and the millennium are practically if not altogether, synonymous terms" (Biblical Studies in Final Things, 1977, p. 180). Brother Roy Lanier, Sr. wrote that the thousand years, "is that period of duration, however short or long it may be, from the binding of Satan and the coronation of Jesus on David's throne on Pentecostd after His resurrection to the destruction of Satan and his followers on the day of judgment" (Premillennialism - True or False, Wendell Winkler, Ed., p 232). According to this view, the one thousand years might represent completeness, since 1,000 is the cube of 10 and a number of completeness (cf. Leon Morris, The Revelation of John, 1973, p. 235). Or it could denote simply an indefinite period of time. Also, this position contends that the "first resurrection" would refer either to the new birth or the translation of souls to be with Christ. This certainly is possibly the meaning of the text.
2. Another view, and one with which I feel more comfortable, is that the millennium is a symbolic description of the revival of Christianity from a period of bloody persecution. For example, earlier in Revelation John had observed the "souls" of the martyrs, "underneath the alter" crying, "How long, O Lord, holy and true, until You judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell on the earth?" (6:9-11). In chapter 20 however, the apostle sees these "souls" on "thrones" reigning with Christ. For a while, Christianity appeared to have been buried in tribulation but ultimately, it emerged. It was, figuratively speaking, resurrected. The Scriptures speak of figurative resurrections as well as literal ones (cf. Isaiah 26:18; Ezekiel 37:12; Romans 11:15). That the "first resurrection" represents the overcoming triumphs of the persecuted saints seems to be borne out further by the fact that over these reigning ones, "the second death has no power" (20:6), which is the very blessing promised to those who overcome (2:11)! Thus, "resurrection" merely becomes a figure for "overcome." And again, the 1,000 years may symbolize the completeness of their victory or it may represent a relatively long period of prosperity compared with a brieder time of persecution.
If one interprets the "millennium" as a symbol of Christianity's victory over her enemies, the specific application of this concept will depend upon the general view one takes of Revelation as a whole. For example:
a. The Early Preterist position argues that Revelation was written prior to 70 A.D. and thus would stress the church's victory over the Jewish and Neronian persecution. Foy E. Wallace, Jr. advanced this idea in his writings.
b. The Late Preterist view emphasizes Christianity's triumph over the Roman empire in the early 4th century. The thrust of J. W. Roberts' commentary is in this vein.
c. The Historical school of thought, represented among the churches of Christ by John T. Hinds in the Gospel Advocate series, would see the millennium in terms of the church's conquest over both pagan and papal Rome. This was the common view of the reformers and of our own restoration movement for many years. Within the past couple of decades though, many of our brethren have abandoned this view (perhaps too hastily) and have inclined to the Late Preterist interpretation.
d. The Idealist theory divorces the thrust of the book from specific historical applications, contending that the message of the narrative is simply that the cause of Christ will overcome all foes, whenever and wherever they arise.
Each of these views has strong and weak points. They all stress the basic message of victory characteristic of the book as a whole. And significantly, none of them attempts to erect a theological scheme which, as with the dispensational heresy, reflects upon the foreknowledge and wisdom of God and contradicts numerous Bible truths.
Pracical Lessons
Regardless of whether one feels absolutely certain that he has ascertained the exact historical application of Revelation 20, there are many tremendous lessons, very meaningful and practical which can be gleaned from this powerful chapter. Some of these truths are as follows:
1. Satan's influence is not unrestrained in this evil world. With the coming of Christ, the inauguration of His law and the unimpeded dispersal of the Holy Scriptures around the world, the devil's activities have been bound considerably. The leavening influence of Christianity has been phenomenal (cf. Matthew 13:33).
2. Suffering is not purposeless. It affords man the opportunity of exhibiting the noblest qualities of which he is capable. In suffering as Christians, we glorify God (I Peter 4:16).
3. The name of Christ is worth dying for, for "judgment" was given to those beheaded for the testimony of Jesus (20:4).
4. Faithfulness pays. Those who worshipped neither the beast nor his image, nor received his mark, reigned with Jesus (20:4, 6).
5. Satan, man's arch enemy, will be ultimately banished to eternal Hell (20:10).
6. Hell will be a place of conscious suffering, for as the devil will be tormented there (20:10), so will the wicked who are consigned to the same fate (Matthew 25:41, 46; II Thessalonians 1:9; Mark 9:48).
7. There will be a great judgment day upon which all, both great and small, will appear before the Ruler of the universe to give account for their works according to divine law (20:11-13). There are those who think that "judgment" is a joke but Jehovah will have the last laugh (cf. Psalm 2:4)!
8. On that great day "death and Hades" will give up the dead. The body will be raised from the grave and spirits will leave the Hadean realm. The two, immortal body (I Corinthians 15:52) and incorruptible spirit (I Peter 3:4) will then ben assigned their eternal relationships (cf. Matthew 10:28).
Revelation 20 is a magnificent chapter to be profitably used, not abused, as has so frequently been the case!
2. Suffering is not purposeless. It affords man the opportunity of exhibiting the noblest qualities of which he is capable. In suffering as Christians, we glorify God (I Peter 4:16).
3. The name of Christ is worth dying for, for "judgment" was given to those beheaded for the testimony of Jesus (20:4).
4. Faithfulness pays. Those who worshipped neither the beast nor his image, nor received his mark, reigned with Jesus (20:4, 6).
5. Satan, man's arch enemy, will be ultimately banished to eternal Hell (20:10).
6. Hell will be a place of conscious suffering, for as the devil will be tormented there (20:10), so will the wicked who are consigned to the same fate (Matthew 25:41, 46; II Thessalonians 1:9; Mark 9:48).
7. There will be a great judgment day upon which all, both great and small, will appear before the Ruler of the universe to give account for their works according to divine law (20:11-13). There are those who think that "judgment" is a joke but Jehovah will have the last laugh (cf. Psalm 2:4)!
8. On that great day "death and Hades" will give up the dead. The body will be raised from the grave and spirits will leave the Hadean realm. The two, immortal body (I Corinthians 15:52) and incorruptible spirit (I Peter 3:4) will then ben assigned their eternal relationships (cf. Matthew 10:28).
Revelation 20 is a magnificent chapter to be profitably used, not abused, as has so frequently been the case!
Thursday, May 23, 2013
Spiritual Gifts (Part 2)
This was written by Wayne Jackson and appeared in the February, 1982 edition of the Christian Courier. The paper was published by the East Main Street Church of Christ in Stockton, California and was edited by Jackson.
In the initial article of this two part series, we demonstrated the following relative to the subject of spiritual gifts. Nothing comparable to the signs such as were performed by the apostles of Christ and others of the first century is being accomplished in today's world. Secondly, the purpose of miracles, as explicitly revealed in the Biblical record does not obtain in this age. Finally, the method by which signs were received in the primitive church is not available today. Quite obviously therefore, no genuine miracles are being performed in our time. In this article, we propose to show that the New Testament plainly teaches that supernatural gifts were not to be perpetual.
In the initial article of this two part series, we demonstrated the following relative to the subject of spiritual gifts. Nothing comparable to the signs such as were performed by the apostles of Christ and others of the first century is being accomplished in today's world. Secondly, the purpose of miracles, as explicitly revealed in the Biblical record does not obtain in this age. Finally, the method by which signs were received in the primitive church is not available today. Quite obviously therefore, no genuine miracles are being performed in our time. In this article, we propose to show that the New Testament plainly teaches that supernatural gifts were not to be perpetual.
Miracles to Pass Away
In I Corinthians 13, the inspired apostle discusses the duration of spiritual gifts in the Lord's church. He commences by showing that the gifts must be excercised in love, for miraculous powers without love were worthless. This theme was quite appropriate in view of the spirit of rivalry that threatened the Corinthian church (some exalting certain gifts above others). From this initial instruction, there is a very natural transition into the character and permanency of love in contrast to the transitory function of spiritual gifts.
Of the nine gifts mentioned in chapter 12:8-10, Paul selects three to illustrate his argument and significantly, all three were directly related to the revealing of God's will to man. The apostle says that prophecies shall be done away with, tongues shall cease and knowledge (supernatural knowledge) shall be done away. It is wonderfully clear therefore, that these three gifts and by implication all miraculous gifts, were not designed to be a permanent possession of the church. In I Corinthians 13:9, Paul argues that God's will by means of these spiritual gifts was made known gradually; "in part." the expression "in part" translates the Greek to ek merous, literally "the things in part" and it denotes a part as opposed to the whole. And so, we may make the following argument. First, the "in part" things shall be done away. Secondly, the "in part" things are the supernatural gifts by which the will of God was revealed. Thus, the supernatural gifts by which the will of God was revealed were to be terminated.
But the question is, when were these spiritual gifts to cease? The answer is, "when that which is perfect is come." In the Greek New Testament, the expression literally reads, to teleion, "the complete thing." The term perfect here, when used of quantity, is better rendered "complete" or "whole." A noted scholar observes, "In the Pauline corpus the meaning 'whole' is suggested at I Corinthians 13:10 by the antithesis to ek merous." In his Letters to Young Churches, J. B. Phillips renders it, "...when the complete comes, that is the end of the incomplete." So we may reason as follows: (1) Whatever the "in part things" are partially, the "whole" is in completed form. (2) But, the "in part things" were the spiritual gifts employed in the revealing of God's will (Word). (3) Therefore, the "whole" was God's will (Word) as conveyed through the gifts, completely revealed.
Within this context therefore, the apostle is actually saying this: God's revelation is being made known part by part through the use of spiritual gifts and when that revelation is complted, all of these spiritual gifts will no longer be needed and hence, will pass from the church's possession. As W. E. vine noted, "With the completion of Apostolic testimony and the completion of the Scriptures of truth ('the faith once for all delivered to the saints'), 'that which is perfect' had come and the temporary gifts were done away with." Remember this vital point: spiritual gifts and the revelatory process were to be co-extensive. If men are performing miracles today, their messages are as binding as the New Testament record! But who can believe that?!
This theme is similarly dealt with in Ephesians 4 where it is affirmed that when Christ "ascended on high" he "gave gifts unto men" (vs. 8ff). The gifts were miraculously endowed functions in the church. The original word denotes, "complete qualification for a specific purpose" or, as Arndt & Gingrich render it, "to equip the saints for service." Moreover, the duration of these supernatural governments was specified. They were to continue, "till we all attain unto the unity of the faith" (4:13). "Till" is from mechri and it suggest a specification of the time up to which this spiritual constitution was designed to last." The word unity (henotes) basically means "oneness." It derives from the term hen and it emphasized one, "in contrast to the parts of which a whole is made up." The expression "the faith" refers to the revealed gospel system. For instance, "the faith" which Paul once persecuted, he later preached (Galatians 1:23). But that which he preached was the revealed gospel of Christ (I Corinthians 15:1). Thus, "the faith" was the gospel system (cf. I Timothy 5:8).
And so, to sum it up, the apostle contends that spiritual gifts would continue until the gospel system, in its individual parts as in I Corinthians 13:9, came together in oneness. Ephesians 4 and I Corinthians 13 are therefore, wonderfully complimentary.
Objections Considered
Some contend that Paul clearly taught the Corinthians that those confirming gifts would continue to the end; that is, to the coming of Christ (I Corinthians 1:6-8). That is a woefully unfounded conclusion from these verses. We offer the following comments:
1. It is not absolutely certain that spiritual gifts (miraculous) are under consideration here. Professor H. A. W. Meyer argues that "gift" (v. 7) is used, "in the wider sense of spiritual blessings of Christianity generally..." and not, "in the narrower sense of the extraordinary gifts" (Meyer's Commentaries on the New Testament, p. 19).
2. Even if it does include miraculous gifts, the passage no more asserts that miracles will continue to the coming of Christ than it does that the Corinthians would live until the coming of Christ!
3. The word "end" (telos) can mean "to the uttermost" (cf. John 13:1) and thus may not be a reference to the end of time.
4. One may be confirmed (sustained) through the message of the confirmed and inspired Word of God (II Timothy 3:116-17) and hence, be unreprovable in the day of Christ without having to possess supernatural gifts. The fact that those first century miracles were "written" (perfect tense stressing the abiding impact they were to have - John 20:31) clearly shows that their duplication is not needed to produce successive generations of believers!
It is argued that the Lord is as powerful today as He was in the first century and so, He can perform signs today. But it is not a question of His power. It is a matter of His will. Does He will to perform miracles today? He does not will to create men directly from the dust of the earth. He does not will to feed us with manna from Heaven. He is not feeding thousands with a few loaves and fish. He has the power to. Why doesn't He? Simply because He does not choose to operate in that fashion today.
The renowned scholar T. H. Horne has an excellent discussion of this matter and with it we conclude this article: "Why are not miracles now wrought? We remark that, the design of miracles being ot confirm and authorize the Christian religion, there is no longer any occasion for them, now that it is established in the world and is daily extending its triumphs in the heathen lands by the divine blessing of the preached gospel. Besides, if they were continued, they would be of no use because their force and influence would be lost by the frequency of them. For, miracles being a sensible suspension or controlment of or deviation from the established course of laws of nature, if they were repeated on every occasion, all distinctions of natural and supernatural would vanish and we should be at a loss to say which were the ordinary and which the extraordinary works of Providence. Moreover, it is probable that if they were continued, they would be of no use because those persons who refuse to be convinced by the miracles recorded in the New Testament would not be convinced by any new ones; for it is not from want of evidence but from want of sincerity and out of passion and prejudice that any man rejects the miracles related in the Scriptures. The same want of sincerity, the same passions and prejudices would make him resist any proof, any miracle whatever. Lastly, a perpetual power of working of miracles would in all ages give occasion to continual impostures, while it would rescind and reverse all the settled laws and constitutions of Providence. Frequent miracles would be thought to proceed more from some defect in nature than from the particular interposition of the Deity; and men would become atheists by means of them rather than Christians."
Wednesday, May 22, 2013
Spiritual Gifts (Part 1)
This was written by Wayne Jackson. It's reprinted from the January, 1982 Christian Courier which was published by the East Main Street Church of Christ in Stockton, California. Jackson was also the editor of the paper.
The Greek word charisma, rendered "gift" in the New Testamnet, is used in several different ways in the Scriptures. The plural form (charismata) however, is employed only in a technical sense. it denotes extraordinary gifts of the Holy Spirit, divinely imparted to the apostles and also to others upon whom the apostles conferred the gifts. In I Corinthians 12:4-11, Paul lists nine spiritual gifts. These may be catalogued and defined as follows:
(a) "The word of wisdom" was perhaps employed in explaining the deeper concepts of Christian doctrine (cf. Romans 11:33), or in the application of revealed truth to the practical aspects of righteous living.
(b) "The word of knowledge" would involve the supernatural impartation of the mind of God (I Corinthians 2:11-13).
(c) The gift of "faith" could suggest an extraordinary capacity for trusting God, perhaps under dire circumstances (cf. I Corinthians 13:2-3).
(d) "Gifts of healing" were demonstrated by the apostles and others (Acts 3:1-10).
(e) "The working of miracles" possibly referred to such spectacular powers as the explusion of demons (cf. Acts 19:11ff) or raising people from the dead (Acts 9:36ff; 20:9ff).
(f) "Prophecy" was a miraculous gift whereby certain select individuals could "speak forth" for God (Acts 13:1; 11:27ff).
(g) "Discernings of spirits" enabled the possessor to discriminate between true and false prophets (I John 4:1ff; I Thessalonians 5:20f).
(h) "Kinds of tongues" were different human languages, spoken without the benefit of having been learned through the normal educatory process (Acts 2:4ff).
(i) "Interpretation of tongues" was the miraculous ability to translate a "tongue" into a language that would accommodate a foreign hearer.
Along with these gifts, one reads of such functions as "helps" and "governments" (I Corinthians 12:28). The former term may have been a gift employed in the realm of benevolence (cf. Acts 20:35 where a verbal form of the same term is used) and the latter word may denote miraculously endowed church leaders (in the context of gifts in Ephesians 4:8ff; James 5:14).
In this study we intend to establish that spiritual gifts, such as were possessed by some in the first century church, are simply not available today. This will be demonstrated as follows: (1) Nothing even remotely resembling the "signs" of the apostolic age is being observed today. (2) The purpose of miracles, as explicitly revealed in the Biblical record, does not obtain in this age. (3) The method of receiving spiritual gifts, as they were bestowed in the primitive church, is not available today. (4) The New Testament plainly teaches that supernatural gifts were not to be perpetual. Each of these vital points needs to be studied.
The Greek word charisma, rendered "gift" in the New Testamnet, is used in several different ways in the Scriptures. The plural form (charismata) however, is employed only in a technical sense. it denotes extraordinary gifts of the Holy Spirit, divinely imparted to the apostles and also to others upon whom the apostles conferred the gifts. In I Corinthians 12:4-11, Paul lists nine spiritual gifts. These may be catalogued and defined as follows:
(a) "The word of wisdom" was perhaps employed in explaining the deeper concepts of Christian doctrine (cf. Romans 11:33), or in the application of revealed truth to the practical aspects of righteous living.
(b) "The word of knowledge" would involve the supernatural impartation of the mind of God (I Corinthians 2:11-13).
(c) The gift of "faith" could suggest an extraordinary capacity for trusting God, perhaps under dire circumstances (cf. I Corinthians 13:2-3).
(d) "Gifts of healing" were demonstrated by the apostles and others (Acts 3:1-10).
(e) "The working of miracles" possibly referred to such spectacular powers as the explusion of demons (cf. Acts 19:11ff) or raising people from the dead (Acts 9:36ff; 20:9ff).
(f) "Prophecy" was a miraculous gift whereby certain select individuals could "speak forth" for God (Acts 13:1; 11:27ff).
(g) "Discernings of spirits" enabled the possessor to discriminate between true and false prophets (I John 4:1ff; I Thessalonians 5:20f).
(h) "Kinds of tongues" were different human languages, spoken without the benefit of having been learned through the normal educatory process (Acts 2:4ff).
(i) "Interpretation of tongues" was the miraculous ability to translate a "tongue" into a language that would accommodate a foreign hearer.
Along with these gifts, one reads of such functions as "helps" and "governments" (I Corinthians 12:28). The former term may have been a gift employed in the realm of benevolence (cf. Acts 20:35 where a verbal form of the same term is used) and the latter word may denote miraculously endowed church leaders (in the context of gifts in Ephesians 4:8ff; James 5:14).
In this study we intend to establish that spiritual gifts, such as were possessed by some in the first century church, are simply not available today. This will be demonstrated as follows: (1) Nothing even remotely resembling the "signs" of the apostolic age is being observed today. (2) The purpose of miracles, as explicitly revealed in the Biblical record, does not obtain in this age. (3) The method of receiving spiritual gifts, as they were bestowed in the primitive church, is not available today. (4) The New Testament plainly teaches that supernatural gifts were not to be perpetual. Each of these vital points needs to be studied.
The Uniqueness of Spiritual Gifts
What is a real miracle? What characteristics did supernatural gifts from God possess? If Biblical students would take the time to really study the New Testament cases involving miracles, they would surely realize that nothing in today's world duplicates the supernatural phenomena of the first century. A miracle was an operation by God (through His chosen instruments) above or beyond the natural laws commonly recognized in the world. A miracle was a self-authenticating, demonstrative phenomenon. When Christ performed miracles, not even His fiercest foes could deny what had been done. They could but rationalize and attribute such to the power of the devil (cf. Matthew 12:22ff). And of the apostle's signs, the Jewish authorities were forced to concede, "...that indeed a notable miracle hath been wrought (gegonen - perfect tense, stressing the abiding effect of the sign) through them, is manifest to all that dwell in Jerusalem; and we cannot deny it" (Acts 4:16). Where are the "signs" today that are so awesome, so gripping that they absolutely demand the attention of multitudes? Whereas the miracles of the ancient church excited wonder and amazement on the part of those who witnessed them (cf. Acts 2:7, 12; 5:12ff), the so-called "signs" being staged by religious charlatans today generate nothing but contempt on the part of thinking people.
The Purpose of Spiritual Gifts
Of those early disciples who were endowed with spiritual gifts, Mark declares, "And they went forth, and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word by the signs that followed" (Mark 16:20). The function of signs therefore, was to confirm the revelatory process, the word of truth being communicated from God to man (cf. Hebrews 2:3-4). The word "confirm" (Greek, bebaioo) denotes evidence that establishes the validity of the divinely given word. The supernatural gifts of the primitive age therefore, had as their design the establishment of the credibility of Christ and His spokesmen and thus ultimately, the documentation of their message; namely that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, the Savior of the world! Now, observe this very important point please. If it can be established that those early miracles do validate the testimony of Christ and those commissioned by Him and further, that the recording of them in the New Testament was designed to perpetually accomplish that function, then it stands as demonstrated that the repetition of such signs is not needed today! Well, this is exactly what is affirmed by the apostle John. He declares that the "signs" of Christ, which he records in his gospel account, "are written (gegraptai, perfect tense, abiding effect) that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God..." (20:31). A. T. Robertson noted that this book, "has had precisely this effect of continuous and successive confirmation of faith in Jesus Christ through the ages." Even those who claim that God, "is working miracles today" when asked if they believe that the recorded miracles of Christ in the New Testament are sufficient to establish faith in Him, will answer affirmatively. It ought to be abundantly clear therefore, that since the miracles of the Bible continue to accomplish their original purpose, there is no need for a repetition of them today and they are not being duplicated in this age!
The Method of Gift Reception
So far as New Testament information goes, there were only two ways by which spiritual gifts were received in the apostolic era. The first was by means of Holy Spirit baptism (i.e., an "overwhelming" endowment of the Spirit's power). Holy Spirit baptism however, was only received by the apostles (Acts 2) and then later, as a very special case, by the household of Cornelius (Acts 10). Secondly, miraculous gifts were bestowed by the laying on of the apostles' hands. Let us observe the following Biblical facts regarding these two matters.
1. There is but one baptism today (Ephesians 4:5) and that is the baptism that is a part of the process called the new birth. And it is a baptism in water (John 3:5; I Corinthians 12:13; Ephesians 5:26; Titus 3:5; Hebrews 10:22; I Peter 3:20-21) that continues to be operative until the end of the world (Matthew 28:19). Since therefore, there is no Holy Spirit baptism today, it is obvious that supernatural gifts cannot be received through that medium.
2. Other than by Holy Spirit baptism, miraculous gifts could only be bestowed by one of the apostles of Christ. Note the evidence: (a) Though Philip the evangelist (not an apostle) could perform miracles, he could not pass the gift along to others. Accordingly, the apostles Peter and John were sent to Samaria where Philip had been preaching, so that the church there might be furnished with certain divine gifts (cf. Acts 8:5-6, 14-17).
(b) In connection with the foregoing circumstances, Simon the sorcerer, "saw that through the laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Spirit was given" (Acts 8:18). He wanted to purchase that privilege for himself but he was informed that he had neither part nor lot in the matter.
(c) In Ephesus, Paul laid hands on twelve converts and, "they spake with tongues and prophesied" (Acts 19:6).
(d) There was an unruly element within the churhc of God at Corinth that denied Paul's apostleship. Such however was a very illogical position, for that church possessed spiritual gifts (I Corinthians 12-14) and they had received them from none other than Paul. Thus, the "signs of an apostle" had been wrought among them (II Corinthians 12:12). Paul could forcefully say, "If to others I am not an apostle, yet at least I am to you; for the seal of mine apostleship are you in the Lord" (I Corinthians 9:2). The Corinthian church (with its spiritual gifts) was therefore, a "seal" (divine documentation) of Paul's apostleship and accordingly, indirect evidence that such gifts were received only from an apostle!
(e) Paul urged Timothy to, "stir up the gift of God" which was in him, which says he, "is in you through the laying on of my hands" (II Timothy 1:6). When the apostle speaks of Timothy's gift being given by the laying on of hands, it is not being asserted that Timothy received spiritual gifts from non-apostles. Rather, it is simply stated that the gift was received at a time when elders also laid hands upon the young evangelist, doubtless to appoint him to some special mission.
Since therefore, there is no "Holy Spirit baptism" available today, and further since there are no apostles (nor successors to them) today, it is quite clear that men are not in possession of supernatural gifts of the Spirit in this age. (To be continued)
1. There is but one baptism today (Ephesians 4:5) and that is the baptism that is a part of the process called the new birth. And it is a baptism in water (John 3:5; I Corinthians 12:13; Ephesians 5:26; Titus 3:5; Hebrews 10:22; I Peter 3:20-21) that continues to be operative until the end of the world (Matthew 28:19). Since therefore, there is no Holy Spirit baptism today, it is obvious that supernatural gifts cannot be received through that medium.
2. Other than by Holy Spirit baptism, miraculous gifts could only be bestowed by one of the apostles of Christ. Note the evidence: (a) Though Philip the evangelist (not an apostle) could perform miracles, he could not pass the gift along to others. Accordingly, the apostles Peter and John were sent to Samaria where Philip had been preaching, so that the church there might be furnished with certain divine gifts (cf. Acts 8:5-6, 14-17).
(b) In connection with the foregoing circumstances, Simon the sorcerer, "saw that through the laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Spirit was given" (Acts 8:18). He wanted to purchase that privilege for himself but he was informed that he had neither part nor lot in the matter.
(c) In Ephesus, Paul laid hands on twelve converts and, "they spake with tongues and prophesied" (Acts 19:6).
(d) There was an unruly element within the churhc of God at Corinth that denied Paul's apostleship. Such however was a very illogical position, for that church possessed spiritual gifts (I Corinthians 12-14) and they had received them from none other than Paul. Thus, the "signs of an apostle" had been wrought among them (II Corinthians 12:12). Paul could forcefully say, "If to others I am not an apostle, yet at least I am to you; for the seal of mine apostleship are you in the Lord" (I Corinthians 9:2). The Corinthian church (with its spiritual gifts) was therefore, a "seal" (divine documentation) of Paul's apostleship and accordingly, indirect evidence that such gifts were received only from an apostle!
(e) Paul urged Timothy to, "stir up the gift of God" which was in him, which says he, "is in you through the laying on of my hands" (II Timothy 1:6). When the apostle speaks of Timothy's gift being given by the laying on of hands, it is not being asserted that Timothy received spiritual gifts from non-apostles. Rather, it is simply stated that the gift was received at a time when elders also laid hands upon the young evangelist, doubtless to appoint him to some special mission.
Since therefore, there is no "Holy Spirit baptism" available today, and further since there are no apostles (nor successors to them) today, it is quite clear that men are not in possession of supernatural gifts of the Spirit in this age. (To be continued)
Monday, May 20, 2013
Praising the Ceiling
This is reprinted from the September, 1972 edition of Plain Talk, a publication of the Oaks West Church of Christ in Burnet, Texas. Robert F. Turner was the editor.
I wouldn't trade, "Grampa, I love you!" for an hour of oratory. A warm look of trust or a child's touch is praise far exceeding mere words. And I am persuaded that the heavenly Father would have us talk to Him and with Him, rather than about Him. Perhaps that is why I am intrigued by a shift of pronouns in the beloved 23rd Psalm.
David begins, "The Lord is my shepherd...He maketh me to lie down...", speaking of the Lord in the third person. The psalmist is talking about the Lord. "He leadeth me...He restoreth my soul..." This continues through verse three.
Then in verse four, there is a change to the second person. David begins to talk to or with the Lord. Now it is, "Thou art with me, Thy rod and Thy staff, they comfort me." The first portion is a tender testimonial of David's love for the Lord and declares the personal relationship of the Shepherd and sheep but it is a declaration. It tells others something about the Lord. The second portion loses sight of all others and speaks directly to the Shepherd.
I am reminded of a story heard long ago, about a social gathering where guests were asked to contribute something to the occasion. Many recited poetry and one eloquent speaker made a theatrical production of the 23rd Psalm. The next in line was an unlettered man, now greatly embarrassed because the 23rd Psalm was the only "poetry" he knew. He was forced to repeate what had just been recited by the talented gentleman.
There was a stir among the guests as he began his halting, unpolished presentation. But "my" Shepherd was more than words to this man. As he followed David into his close, personal relationship with the Lord, he forgot about the audience. He ceased to talk about the Shepherd and began to speak to Him. The room grew quiet.
And when he had finished, the eloquent man arose to apologize for his "production." "I know the 23rd Psalm well," he said. "But this man knows the Shepherd."
Of what value is a well worded prayer that stops at the ceiling?
I wouldn't trade, "Grampa, I love you!" for an hour of oratory. A warm look of trust or a child's touch is praise far exceeding mere words. And I am persuaded that the heavenly Father would have us talk to Him and with Him, rather than about Him. Perhaps that is why I am intrigued by a shift of pronouns in the beloved 23rd Psalm.
David begins, "The Lord is my shepherd...He maketh me to lie down...", speaking of the Lord in the third person. The psalmist is talking about the Lord. "He leadeth me...He restoreth my soul..." This continues through verse three.
Then in verse four, there is a change to the second person. David begins to talk to or with the Lord. Now it is, "Thou art with me, Thy rod and Thy staff, they comfort me." The first portion is a tender testimonial of David's love for the Lord and declares the personal relationship of the Shepherd and sheep but it is a declaration. It tells others something about the Lord. The second portion loses sight of all others and speaks directly to the Shepherd.
I am reminded of a story heard long ago, about a social gathering where guests were asked to contribute something to the occasion. Many recited poetry and one eloquent speaker made a theatrical production of the 23rd Psalm. The next in line was an unlettered man, now greatly embarrassed because the 23rd Psalm was the only "poetry" he knew. He was forced to repeate what had just been recited by the talented gentleman.
There was a stir among the guests as he began his halting, unpolished presentation. But "my" Shepherd was more than words to this man. As he followed David into his close, personal relationship with the Lord, he forgot about the audience. He ceased to talk about the Shepherd and began to speak to Him. The room grew quiet.
And when he had finished, the eloquent man arose to apologize for his "production." "I know the 23rd Psalm well," he said. "But this man knows the Shepherd."
Of what value is a well worded prayer that stops at the ceiling?
Thursday, May 16, 2013
Faith Made Perfect
Dan S. Shipley wrote this article. It appeared in the September, 1972 edition of Plain Talk, published by the Oaks West Church of Christ in Burnet, Texas. Robert F. Turner was the editor.
Not all faith is saving faith, as the Bible clearly illustrates. John writes of certain Pharisees who believed on Jesus but would not confess it, "lest they should be put out of the synagogue" (John 12:42). Through James, God informs us of a faith that is without works (James 2:14-26) and calls it a, "dead faith." Dead, not in the sense of being non-existent but in the sense of being non-productive. In verse 19 this kind of faith is likened to the faith of demons. "You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe and tremble!" The demons do believe, even to the point of trembling but not to the point of obedience. So, no matter who owns it or why, God teaches that this faith without works is a demon like faith.
In addition to being dead, this demon faith is without profit because it is nothing more than words without deeds. Its worthlessness is illustrated in verses 15 and 16 where it offers mere words to those who desperately need food and clothing. Words of comfort and encouragement are appropriate at times but not when offered as a substitute for deeds. Like, for instance, when the ladies visitation committee came calling on a sick sister. Marching right through her unkempt house, past the dirty dishes and unmade beds, past the piles of dirty clothes they came to her bedside where all chatted for a few minutes (mostly with each other), then excused themselves with these comforting words: "We do hope you get better. Be sure and call if there's anything we can do for you!" With that they marched out to "minister" elsewhere. What does it profit?
What is the profit in a faith that is not functional and that cannot be demonstrated? "...show my thy faith apart from works, and I by my works will show thee faith." (v. 18) Works show faith. What one does (or fails to do) is a reflection on what he believes. This is clearly demonstrated in the case of the Thessalonians who became examples to all believers in sounding forth the word of the Lord. Of them Paul says, "in every place your faith to God is gone forth..." (I Thessalonians 1:8) They showed their faith! So did Abraham. "Thou seest that faith wrought with is works, and by works was faith made perfect" (James 2:22). The faith that was reckoned for righteousness in Abraham (Romans 4) was made perfect (complete) by works. If Abraham's faith was incomplete without works, how much more the faith of others? No, Paul and James do not contradict. When James teaches justification by works, he speaks of works that proceed from faith. When Paul teaches justification by faith he speaks of faith that is accompanied by good works. This is the faith that works by love (Galatians 5:6).
In view of this, it should be remembered that the demon like faith of James 2 can never be saving faith. The faith that blesses, saves and justifies is always Abrahamic faith; the kind that is made complete by works. Such is the faith to be rewarded with eternal life in John 3:16 and through which salvation comes by the grace of God in Ephesians 2:8. Saving faith and good works are interdependent and inseparably bound by divine truth. God bids, "show me thy faith."
Not all faith is saving faith, as the Bible clearly illustrates. John writes of certain Pharisees who believed on Jesus but would not confess it, "lest they should be put out of the synagogue" (John 12:42). Through James, God informs us of a faith that is without works (James 2:14-26) and calls it a, "dead faith." Dead, not in the sense of being non-existent but in the sense of being non-productive. In verse 19 this kind of faith is likened to the faith of demons. "You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe and tremble!" The demons do believe, even to the point of trembling but not to the point of obedience. So, no matter who owns it or why, God teaches that this faith without works is a demon like faith.
In addition to being dead, this demon faith is without profit because it is nothing more than words without deeds. Its worthlessness is illustrated in verses 15 and 16 where it offers mere words to those who desperately need food and clothing. Words of comfort and encouragement are appropriate at times but not when offered as a substitute for deeds. Like, for instance, when the ladies visitation committee came calling on a sick sister. Marching right through her unkempt house, past the dirty dishes and unmade beds, past the piles of dirty clothes they came to her bedside where all chatted for a few minutes (mostly with each other), then excused themselves with these comforting words: "We do hope you get better. Be sure and call if there's anything we can do for you!" With that they marched out to "minister" elsewhere. What does it profit?
What is the profit in a faith that is not functional and that cannot be demonstrated? "...show my thy faith apart from works, and I by my works will show thee faith." (v. 18) Works show faith. What one does (or fails to do) is a reflection on what he believes. This is clearly demonstrated in the case of the Thessalonians who became examples to all believers in sounding forth the word of the Lord. Of them Paul says, "in every place your faith to God is gone forth..." (I Thessalonians 1:8) They showed their faith! So did Abraham. "Thou seest that faith wrought with is works, and by works was faith made perfect" (James 2:22). The faith that was reckoned for righteousness in Abraham (Romans 4) was made perfect (complete) by works. If Abraham's faith was incomplete without works, how much more the faith of others? No, Paul and James do not contradict. When James teaches justification by works, he speaks of works that proceed from faith. When Paul teaches justification by faith he speaks of faith that is accompanied by good works. This is the faith that works by love (Galatians 5:6).
In view of this, it should be remembered that the demon like faith of James 2 can never be saving faith. The faith that blesses, saves and justifies is always Abrahamic faith; the kind that is made complete by works. Such is the faith to be rewarded with eternal life in John 3:16 and through which salvation comes by the grace of God in Ephesians 2:8. Saving faith and good works are interdependent and inseparably bound by divine truth. God bids, "show me thy faith."
Wednesday, May 15, 2013
A Revealing Question From the Young Jesus
Wayne Jackson wrote this article which appeared in the Christian Courier of October, 1981. The paper was published by the East Main Street Church of Christ in Stockton, California and was edited by Jackson.
Three times each year all Hebrew males were required to appear before the Lord in the great festivals of the Jewish religion (Exodus 23:14-17; 34:23; Deuteronomy 16:16). These festivals were: Passover (Leviticus 23:5), Pentecost (Leviticus 23:15-22) and Tabernacles (Leviticus 23:34-43). The Old Testament law anticipated the celebration of these feasts at Jerusalem (cf. Exodus 34:23-24) and so Luke the historian informs us that Joseph and Mary, "went every year to Jerusalem at the feast of the passover" (Luke 2:41). As a side note here, it is significant that Mary accompanied her husband on these trips from Nazareth to Jerusalem, though she was not required to do so; a token of the spirituality characteristic of the godly mother of our Lord. At any rate, Joseph and Mary attended the feast, accompanied by the boy Jesus, who was twelve years of age. Let us look briefly at this account.
When the days of festivity were fulfilled, the Lord's parents (Joseph of course, by adoption only) began their homeward trip. After traveling about a day's journey, it was discovered that the boy Jesus was not in the traveling group (it was probably quite large) and so, with urgent dispatch, Joseph and Mary returned to Jerusalem to search for the lost son. It was three days before they finally found Jesus, but eventually they discovered Him, "in the temple, sitting in the midst of the teachers, both hearing them, and asking them questions" (Luke 2:46). Not only was Jesus respectful of those teachers, listening to them and asking them questions, but He also stunned them. The text says, "all that heard Him were amazed (the imperfect tense stressed their repeated astonishment) at His understanding and His answers." When Joseph and Mary came upon Jesus among the scholars, Luke says, "they were astonished" (literally, struck with amazement, not even they had fully realized the depth of His divine brilliance), and Mary asked, "Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? Behold, thy father and I sought thee sorrowing."
In response to that anguished question, we have the first recorded words of the Lord Jesus and they are in the form of a query (the questioning method was to become one of the Savior's powerful teaching tools). "How is it that you sought me? Wist ye not that I must be about My Father's business?" (KJV) or as the ASV has it, "...knew ye not that I must be in My Father's house?" The Greek text literally expresses it: "...I must be in the things of My Father." Plummer notes that, "Engaged in My Father's business" is a possible translation but "in My Father's house" is more probably the meaning in this context ("Luke," International Critical Commentary; cf. Arndt & Gingrich, Greek Lexicon, p. 554). There is, perhaps, not a whole lot of difference ultimately except for the fact that the concept of where-ness best fits the immediate situation. Be that as it may, there are three points of interest upon which we will no focus.
My Father - Did you notice that Jesus did not say "our" Father, thus identifying Himself with Joseph and Mary as in some sense being children of God? No, it is "My Father" in a unique sense. As one further studies the New Testament record, he is impressed with the fact that Jesus never puts Himself in the same class with others with respect to their relationship to the heavenly Father. For instance, there is the case of John 5. A certain man who had been afflicted with an incapacitating infirmity for 38 years was instructed by Christ to, "Arise, take up thy bed and walk." Immediately the man was restored to health and he took up his bed and walked (vs. 8-9). Since this incident occurred on the Sabbath day, the gnat straining Jews attempted to charge the Lord with violating the Sabbath. It has always amazed me that these Jews could be wholly unimpressed with the miracle and thus focus upon Christ's alleged violation of the Sabbath. In answer to their charge however, the Lord said, "My Father worketh even until now, and I work" (vs. 17). There is that "My Father" phraseology again. He was suggesting that He shared a nature with the Father that was unlike anyone else. And the Jews understood perfectly well what He was saying. John, the author of this narrative, nails it down for us. "For this cause therefore the Jews sought the more to kill Him, because He not only brake the Sabbath, but also called God His own Father, making Himself equal with God" (v. 18). Modern scholars who attempt to water down the force of the Lord's claim are perverters of the word of God!
There is another dramatic usage of this type of language that we need to mention. On the day of His resurrection from the dead, the Lord Jesus confronted the weeping Mary Magdalene near the empty tomb. After a brief conversation during which she ultimately recognized the Savior, (though she had not at first) Mary caught hold of the Lord, necessitating this response from Him: "Touch me not..." (John 20:17), literally, "stop clinging to Me" as expressed in the Greek Testament. Though He has not yet ascended unto the Father, He instructs Mary, "...go unto My brethren, and say unto them, 'I ascend unto My Father and your Father, and My God and your God." There is an obvious contrast between the My and your in both instances. Now this brings us back to Luke 2:49 again. By the use of that "My Father" in that situation, we must conclude that even at the tender age of twelve, Jesus already had a consciousness of His unique relationship to the Father. But exactly when did this awareness come upon Him? We cannot of course answer that. Later, Christ reflects a knowledge of having shared the glory of God before the world even existed (John 17:5) and yet, the Bible indicates that Jesus developed mentally even as other children do (Luke 1:40, 52). Be that as it may, at least by the age of twelve the boy Jesus knew of His special relationship to God.
The Temple, "My Father's House" - The great truth that we have just emphasized is further borne out by the fact that Jesus, in the temple (Luke 2:46) was "about the things" or "in the house" of His Father. God's house was His house too and this could only be true because He was the Son of God. There is an interesting account near the close of Jesus' ministry that highlights this narrative in a wonderful way.
When the Lord and His disciples came to Capernaum on the northern coast of the Sea of Galilee, some Jewish officials approached Peter and asked (with obviously designing motives), "Does your Teacher not pay the half shekel?" (Matthew 17:24). Now this half shekel (two days wages for a working man) was the tax that every Israelite twenty years of age and older was required to pay for the maintenance of the temple (Exodus 30:12-14; 38:26; II Chronicles 24:6, 9). The apostle replied that the Lord did pay such tax and he thus proceeded to go into the house where the Master was. Undoubtedly Jesus surprised Peter when He revealed by subsequent discourse, that He knew the nature of the conversation that had been conducted outside. Christ asked, "What thinkest thou, Simon? the kings of the earth, from whom do they receive toll or tribute, from their sons or from strangers?" The apostle correctly responded that toll is received from foreigners, not sons. The Lord then replied, "Therefore, the sons are free. But lest we cause them to stumble, go thou to the sea and cast a hook and take up the fist that first comes up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thous shalt find a shekel; take that and give unto them for Me and thee" (17:25ff).
Do you see the Lord's argument? A son is not required to pay tax to his father. The temple is God's house. Thus, His Son would not be obligated to pay the tax to maintain it. But Jesus was that Son! Hence, He was free (from the payment obligation); nevertheless, to prevent their stumbling, He paid anyhow! Yes, when Christ was in the temple, He was in His Father's house. And that is why he could, with perfect justification, cleanse the temple of those unscrupulous money changers declaring, "Take these things hence; make not My Father's house a house of merchandise" (John 2:16). The Lord's connection with the temple is a demonstration of His deity. In this connection we feel compelled to make one further observation. A few days before His crucifixion, in a blistering sermon of rebuke, Christ said to the Jews, "Behold, your house is left to you desolate" (Matthew 23:38). Though the term "house" in this passage likely encompasses the whole of Jerusalem, it certainly includes the temple. But notice how now it is "your house;" that has a very ominous ring to it and it previews the wrath of God that is to be visited upon these rebellious Jews who are rejecting Heaven's Gift, namely the Son Himself (cf. Matthew 24:1-2). Those dispensational pre-millennialists, who allege that God will rebuild that temple during the so-called "tribulation period" ought to learn something from this verse!
That Compelling "Must" - Finally, we cannot ignore the sense of urgent destiny that Jesus had in His youth and which remained with Him all His earthly ministry. To His parents the remarkable boy said, "I must be..." The word "must" translates the Greek term dei, which frequently denotes, "that constraint which arises from divine appointment" (J. H. Thayer, Greek Lexicon, p. 126). In his gospel account, Luke especially employs this word again and again to suggest that the events and activities in the life of Christ were not those of mere accident or fate. He was carrying out a divine program (cf. Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Ed., Colin Brown, Vol. 2, p. 665). Observe the following:
1. In Luke 4:31ff, there is the record of Jesus performing many astonishing miracles in the city of Capernaum. The fame of such rapidly spread throughout the area so that the multitudes sought after the Lord and attempted to detain Him but He declared, "I must preach good tidings of the kingdom of God to the other cities also for therefore I was I sent" (43). Compelled by the sad plight of lost men, the Lord thus proclaimed the good news of the coming reign of God. Can we not catch the spirit of that urgency? Like the prophet Jeremiah, we ought to have burning hearts that cannot contain the word of God (Jeremiah 20:9).
2. As Jesus passed through Jericho in route to Jerusalem and His appointment with Calvary, He encountered a rich chief publican who, being small of stature, had climbed a tree to catch a better glimpse of the passing Christ. When the Lord came to the place where he was, He looked up and said, "Zacchaeus, make haste and come down; for today I must abide at thy house." But why "must" He? Surely there was no physical necessity for it; no, but there was a spiritual urgency involved. As the chief publican (tax collector employed by the Romans), Zacchaeus was a social outcast as viewed by the Jews and the Lord must emphasize as He had so often done, that God's love and grace must be extended to all segments of mankind. This is stressed repeatedly in Luke's gospel (cf. Luke 5:29-32; 15:1ff; and here at the conclusion of this context, Luke 19:10). In this connection one is reminded of an important circumstance in John 4. You will remember that this chapter largely deals with a great evangelistic effort which the Savior wrought among the Samaritans (with whom the Jews had no dealings). Well, the apostle commences this chapter by observing that the Lord departed from Judea toward Galilee and, "He must needs pass through Samaria" (4:3-4). But there was no geographical necessity to go through Samaria. In fact, Jews normally detoured around Samaria by way of the Jordan Valley to avoid the dreaded Samaritans. One is inclined to believe therefore, that his is another of those divine compulsions to reveal the universal love of God!
3. As His ministry matured, the Son of God progressively employed those urgent "musts" with reference to His impending suffering and death. "The Son of man must suffer many things and be rejected of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed and the third day be raised up" (Luke 9:22; cf. 22:37; 24:7; 24:26; John 3:14).
What we are saying by all of this of course, is simply this: from at least the time that He was twelve years of age until He left the earth, the Lord Jesus Christ was conscious that He was operating according to a heavenly program. He was implementing a divine plan. His role in all of this was most assuredly a matter of His own voluntary will. He emptied Himself in becoming man (Philippians 2:7). No one took His life from Him as though He had no power to resist. He laid it down willingly (John 10:17-18; Galatians 1:4), yet according to the plan that had been determined before the foundation of the world (cf. Acts 2:23; I Peter 1:20).
Perhaps we may raise this thought in conclusion. Would it not be possible for us to believe that god has a special role for us in His divine scheme? Does He not providentially work to enhance the service of His people today? Can we not catch the spirit of history and so be impelled by a "must" attitude of accomplishing His will? May it be so!
Three times each year all Hebrew males were required to appear before the Lord in the great festivals of the Jewish religion (Exodus 23:14-17; 34:23; Deuteronomy 16:16). These festivals were: Passover (Leviticus 23:5), Pentecost (Leviticus 23:15-22) and Tabernacles (Leviticus 23:34-43). The Old Testament law anticipated the celebration of these feasts at Jerusalem (cf. Exodus 34:23-24) and so Luke the historian informs us that Joseph and Mary, "went every year to Jerusalem at the feast of the passover" (Luke 2:41). As a side note here, it is significant that Mary accompanied her husband on these trips from Nazareth to Jerusalem, though she was not required to do so; a token of the spirituality characteristic of the godly mother of our Lord. At any rate, Joseph and Mary attended the feast, accompanied by the boy Jesus, who was twelve years of age. Let us look briefly at this account.
When the days of festivity were fulfilled, the Lord's parents (Joseph of course, by adoption only) began their homeward trip. After traveling about a day's journey, it was discovered that the boy Jesus was not in the traveling group (it was probably quite large) and so, with urgent dispatch, Joseph and Mary returned to Jerusalem to search for the lost son. It was three days before they finally found Jesus, but eventually they discovered Him, "in the temple, sitting in the midst of the teachers, both hearing them, and asking them questions" (Luke 2:46). Not only was Jesus respectful of those teachers, listening to them and asking them questions, but He also stunned them. The text says, "all that heard Him were amazed (the imperfect tense stressed their repeated astonishment) at His understanding and His answers." When Joseph and Mary came upon Jesus among the scholars, Luke says, "they were astonished" (literally, struck with amazement, not even they had fully realized the depth of His divine brilliance), and Mary asked, "Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? Behold, thy father and I sought thee sorrowing."
In response to that anguished question, we have the first recorded words of the Lord Jesus and they are in the form of a query (the questioning method was to become one of the Savior's powerful teaching tools). "How is it that you sought me? Wist ye not that I must be about My Father's business?" (KJV) or as the ASV has it, "...knew ye not that I must be in My Father's house?" The Greek text literally expresses it: "...I must be in the things of My Father." Plummer notes that, "Engaged in My Father's business" is a possible translation but "in My Father's house" is more probably the meaning in this context ("Luke," International Critical Commentary; cf. Arndt & Gingrich, Greek Lexicon, p. 554). There is, perhaps, not a whole lot of difference ultimately except for the fact that the concept of where-ness best fits the immediate situation. Be that as it may, there are three points of interest upon which we will no focus.
My Father - Did you notice that Jesus did not say "our" Father, thus identifying Himself with Joseph and Mary as in some sense being children of God? No, it is "My Father" in a unique sense. As one further studies the New Testament record, he is impressed with the fact that Jesus never puts Himself in the same class with others with respect to their relationship to the heavenly Father. For instance, there is the case of John 5. A certain man who had been afflicted with an incapacitating infirmity for 38 years was instructed by Christ to, "Arise, take up thy bed and walk." Immediately the man was restored to health and he took up his bed and walked (vs. 8-9). Since this incident occurred on the Sabbath day, the gnat straining Jews attempted to charge the Lord with violating the Sabbath. It has always amazed me that these Jews could be wholly unimpressed with the miracle and thus focus upon Christ's alleged violation of the Sabbath. In answer to their charge however, the Lord said, "My Father worketh even until now, and I work" (vs. 17). There is that "My Father" phraseology again. He was suggesting that He shared a nature with the Father that was unlike anyone else. And the Jews understood perfectly well what He was saying. John, the author of this narrative, nails it down for us. "For this cause therefore the Jews sought the more to kill Him, because He not only brake the Sabbath, but also called God His own Father, making Himself equal with God" (v. 18). Modern scholars who attempt to water down the force of the Lord's claim are perverters of the word of God!
There is another dramatic usage of this type of language that we need to mention. On the day of His resurrection from the dead, the Lord Jesus confronted the weeping Mary Magdalene near the empty tomb. After a brief conversation during which she ultimately recognized the Savior, (though she had not at first) Mary caught hold of the Lord, necessitating this response from Him: "Touch me not..." (John 20:17), literally, "stop clinging to Me" as expressed in the Greek Testament. Though He has not yet ascended unto the Father, He instructs Mary, "...go unto My brethren, and say unto them, 'I ascend unto My Father and your Father, and My God and your God." There is an obvious contrast between the My and your in both instances. Now this brings us back to Luke 2:49 again. By the use of that "My Father" in that situation, we must conclude that even at the tender age of twelve, Jesus already had a consciousness of His unique relationship to the Father. But exactly when did this awareness come upon Him? We cannot of course answer that. Later, Christ reflects a knowledge of having shared the glory of God before the world even existed (John 17:5) and yet, the Bible indicates that Jesus developed mentally even as other children do (Luke 1:40, 52). Be that as it may, at least by the age of twelve the boy Jesus knew of His special relationship to God.
The Temple, "My Father's House" - The great truth that we have just emphasized is further borne out by the fact that Jesus, in the temple (Luke 2:46) was "about the things" or "in the house" of His Father. God's house was His house too and this could only be true because He was the Son of God. There is an interesting account near the close of Jesus' ministry that highlights this narrative in a wonderful way.
When the Lord and His disciples came to Capernaum on the northern coast of the Sea of Galilee, some Jewish officials approached Peter and asked (with obviously designing motives), "Does your Teacher not pay the half shekel?" (Matthew 17:24). Now this half shekel (two days wages for a working man) was the tax that every Israelite twenty years of age and older was required to pay for the maintenance of the temple (Exodus 30:12-14; 38:26; II Chronicles 24:6, 9). The apostle replied that the Lord did pay such tax and he thus proceeded to go into the house where the Master was. Undoubtedly Jesus surprised Peter when He revealed by subsequent discourse, that He knew the nature of the conversation that had been conducted outside. Christ asked, "What thinkest thou, Simon? the kings of the earth, from whom do they receive toll or tribute, from their sons or from strangers?" The apostle correctly responded that toll is received from foreigners, not sons. The Lord then replied, "Therefore, the sons are free. But lest we cause them to stumble, go thou to the sea and cast a hook and take up the fist that first comes up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thous shalt find a shekel; take that and give unto them for Me and thee" (17:25ff).
Do you see the Lord's argument? A son is not required to pay tax to his father. The temple is God's house. Thus, His Son would not be obligated to pay the tax to maintain it. But Jesus was that Son! Hence, He was free (from the payment obligation); nevertheless, to prevent their stumbling, He paid anyhow! Yes, when Christ was in the temple, He was in His Father's house. And that is why he could, with perfect justification, cleanse the temple of those unscrupulous money changers declaring, "Take these things hence; make not My Father's house a house of merchandise" (John 2:16). The Lord's connection with the temple is a demonstration of His deity. In this connection we feel compelled to make one further observation. A few days before His crucifixion, in a blistering sermon of rebuke, Christ said to the Jews, "Behold, your house is left to you desolate" (Matthew 23:38). Though the term "house" in this passage likely encompasses the whole of Jerusalem, it certainly includes the temple. But notice how now it is "your house;" that has a very ominous ring to it and it previews the wrath of God that is to be visited upon these rebellious Jews who are rejecting Heaven's Gift, namely the Son Himself (cf. Matthew 24:1-2). Those dispensational pre-millennialists, who allege that God will rebuild that temple during the so-called "tribulation period" ought to learn something from this verse!
That Compelling "Must" - Finally, we cannot ignore the sense of urgent destiny that Jesus had in His youth and which remained with Him all His earthly ministry. To His parents the remarkable boy said, "I must be..." The word "must" translates the Greek term dei, which frequently denotes, "that constraint which arises from divine appointment" (J. H. Thayer, Greek Lexicon, p. 126). In his gospel account, Luke especially employs this word again and again to suggest that the events and activities in the life of Christ were not those of mere accident or fate. He was carrying out a divine program (cf. Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Ed., Colin Brown, Vol. 2, p. 665). Observe the following:
1. In Luke 4:31ff, there is the record of Jesus performing many astonishing miracles in the city of Capernaum. The fame of such rapidly spread throughout the area so that the multitudes sought after the Lord and attempted to detain Him but He declared, "I must preach good tidings of the kingdom of God to the other cities also for therefore I was I sent" (43). Compelled by the sad plight of lost men, the Lord thus proclaimed the good news of the coming reign of God. Can we not catch the spirit of that urgency? Like the prophet Jeremiah, we ought to have burning hearts that cannot contain the word of God (Jeremiah 20:9).
2. As Jesus passed through Jericho in route to Jerusalem and His appointment with Calvary, He encountered a rich chief publican who, being small of stature, had climbed a tree to catch a better glimpse of the passing Christ. When the Lord came to the place where he was, He looked up and said, "Zacchaeus, make haste and come down; for today I must abide at thy house." But why "must" He? Surely there was no physical necessity for it; no, but there was a spiritual urgency involved. As the chief publican (tax collector employed by the Romans), Zacchaeus was a social outcast as viewed by the Jews and the Lord must emphasize as He had so often done, that God's love and grace must be extended to all segments of mankind. This is stressed repeatedly in Luke's gospel (cf. Luke 5:29-32; 15:1ff; and here at the conclusion of this context, Luke 19:10). In this connection one is reminded of an important circumstance in John 4. You will remember that this chapter largely deals with a great evangelistic effort which the Savior wrought among the Samaritans (with whom the Jews had no dealings). Well, the apostle commences this chapter by observing that the Lord departed from Judea toward Galilee and, "He must needs pass through Samaria" (4:3-4). But there was no geographical necessity to go through Samaria. In fact, Jews normally detoured around Samaria by way of the Jordan Valley to avoid the dreaded Samaritans. One is inclined to believe therefore, that his is another of those divine compulsions to reveal the universal love of God!
3. As His ministry matured, the Son of God progressively employed those urgent "musts" with reference to His impending suffering and death. "The Son of man must suffer many things and be rejected of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed and the third day be raised up" (Luke 9:22; cf. 22:37; 24:7; 24:26; John 3:14).
What we are saying by all of this of course, is simply this: from at least the time that He was twelve years of age until He left the earth, the Lord Jesus Christ was conscious that He was operating according to a heavenly program. He was implementing a divine plan. His role in all of this was most assuredly a matter of His own voluntary will. He emptied Himself in becoming man (Philippians 2:7). No one took His life from Him as though He had no power to resist. He laid it down willingly (John 10:17-18; Galatians 1:4), yet according to the plan that had been determined before the foundation of the world (cf. Acts 2:23; I Peter 1:20).
Perhaps we may raise this thought in conclusion. Would it not be possible for us to believe that god has a special role for us in His divine scheme? Does He not providentially work to enhance the service of His people today? Can we not catch the spirit of history and so be impelled by a "must" attitude of accomplishing His will? May it be so!
Monday, May 13, 2013
Reaction
This is reprinted from the November, 1971 edition of Plain Talk, a publication of the Oaks West Church of Christ in Burnet, Texas. Robert F. Turner was the editor.
The papers discuss "reaction" politics and brethren talk about "reaction" sermons, usually when thy do not like direct application of principles to current problems and "reaction to reaction" has become a popular pastime these days. There is validity in warnings about over-reacting and capitalizing on "reaction" to further personal ends.
A philosophy or pattern of conduct that is wholly "reaction" has certain weaknesses. It is completely negative, having no positive goals for sustained motivation. It is unstable, rushing here and there to meet various foes; and if things get dull, it has a tendency to imagine foes. And, "reaction" framed in the heat of battle sometimes offers a frying pan to the fire solution.
Much of our preaching on fundamentals of the gospel has been in reaction to error and has deprived us of the rich, positive understanding of truth sorely needed in our lives. the denominations abuse the subject of grace so we react by gloriously exposing their error and never get around to savoring the depth and sweetness of God's grace positively. Reaction to "faith only" has been so strong that many can scarcely read a passage on salvation by faith and enjoy and appreciate what it DOES say. We are too busy telling what it does NOT mean. We know "conscience" is not the standard of truth but how many appreciate this moral governor for its legitimate role in our lives or realize the necessity of heeding it?
When our study and thinking is done chiefly in "reaction" to a specific practice or statement we may pick at words or formulate arguments to meed immediate needs and be drawn off-side of the basic principle. A steady diet of such "reaction" preaching may saddle a church with a long list of scattered arguments that grow stale as issues change and their relevance fades and no universally sound principles by which to meet the issues of the coming generation.
But we must not discredit all reaction. Response to stimuli is a sign of life. We have no praise for the saint or body of saints so devoid of spirit that they can not be moved to action. As each new day has its own evils, we must shift our weight here and there, keeping balance and striking Satan at every opportunity. Perhaps keeping balance is the real key to a successful fight in the long run. The "reaction" fighter throws himself off balance with his "hay maker" and lacks the stability to endure blows from another direction.
Sometimes over-reaction is proof of weakness, a blind striking out under the influence of fear. But men who love the truth will fight for it and strength of conviction may have a lot to do with the nature of the action. There are young men today who are hypercritical of the "reaction" preachers of yesterday; who feast on advantages of truth they would never have had except for the labor of the men they criticize. Much truth is found and proven in the trials of fire.
And pity those who lack courage and faint for fear of "reaction."
The papers discuss "reaction" politics and brethren talk about "reaction" sermons, usually when thy do not like direct application of principles to current problems and "reaction to reaction" has become a popular pastime these days. There is validity in warnings about over-reacting and capitalizing on "reaction" to further personal ends.
A philosophy or pattern of conduct that is wholly "reaction" has certain weaknesses. It is completely negative, having no positive goals for sustained motivation. It is unstable, rushing here and there to meet various foes; and if things get dull, it has a tendency to imagine foes. And, "reaction" framed in the heat of battle sometimes offers a frying pan to the fire solution.
Much of our preaching on fundamentals of the gospel has been in reaction to error and has deprived us of the rich, positive understanding of truth sorely needed in our lives. the denominations abuse the subject of grace so we react by gloriously exposing their error and never get around to savoring the depth and sweetness of God's grace positively. Reaction to "faith only" has been so strong that many can scarcely read a passage on salvation by faith and enjoy and appreciate what it DOES say. We are too busy telling what it does NOT mean. We know "conscience" is not the standard of truth but how many appreciate this moral governor for its legitimate role in our lives or realize the necessity of heeding it?
When our study and thinking is done chiefly in "reaction" to a specific practice or statement we may pick at words or formulate arguments to meed immediate needs and be drawn off-side of the basic principle. A steady diet of such "reaction" preaching may saddle a church with a long list of scattered arguments that grow stale as issues change and their relevance fades and no universally sound principles by which to meet the issues of the coming generation.
But we must not discredit all reaction. Response to stimuli is a sign of life. We have no praise for the saint or body of saints so devoid of spirit that they can not be moved to action. As each new day has its own evils, we must shift our weight here and there, keeping balance and striking Satan at every opportunity. Perhaps keeping balance is the real key to a successful fight in the long run. The "reaction" fighter throws himself off balance with his "hay maker" and lacks the stability to endure blows from another direction.
Sometimes over-reaction is proof of weakness, a blind striking out under the influence of fear. But men who love the truth will fight for it and strength of conviction may have a lot to do with the nature of the action. There are young men today who are hypercritical of the "reaction" preachers of yesterday; who feast on advantages of truth they would never have had except for the labor of the men they criticize. Much truth is found and proven in the trials of fire.
And pity those who lack courage and faint for fear of "reaction."
The Art of Writing
This Wayne Jackson article is reprinted from the September, 1981 edition of the Christian Courier. The paper was published by the East Main Street Church of Christ in Stockton, California and was edited by Jackson.
Writing is perhaps the most important achievement that mankind has ever accomplished. Writing is first mentioned in the Bible in Exodus 17:14 when, after the Israelites had defeated the pagan king Amalek, God instructed Moses, "Write this for a memorial in a book..." Numerous other references to writing follow. Moses wrote, "the words of the covenant, the ten commandments" (Exodus 35:27-28; cf. 24:4; Deuteronomy 31:19, 22; Numbers 33:2; Joshua 8:31).
For many years however, the hostile critics of the Bible claimed that the Scriptures contained an error regarding this matter. It was forcefully argued that no alphabetic script existed in the days of Moses. This was one of the arguments employed by modernists to supposedly "prove" that the composition of the Pentateuch was of a later time than Moses. T. K. Cheyne, writing in the Encyclopedia Biblica contended that the Torah (law) was not written until almost a thousand years after the time of Moses (Vol. II, 1901, p. 2055). In fact, the modernists said that the art of writing was virtually unknown in Israel prior to the establishment of David's kingdom! Within the last half century however, these infidelic charges have been thoroughly demolished. Note the following:
1. In 1933, J. L. Starkey, a pupil of the famed archaeologist W. M. F. Petire began excavations at Lachish, a city of Judah which was prominetn in Joshua's conquest of Canaan (cf. Joshua 10). Among the amazing discoveries was a pottery ewer (water pitcher), "inscribed with a dedication in eleven archaic letters, the earliest Hebrew inscription known" (D. J. Wiseman, The New Bible Dictionary, 1974, p. 705). This artifact pre-dated Moses!
2. "The Old, or Palaeo-Hebrew script is the form of writing which is similar to that used by the Phoenicians. A royal inscription of King Shaphatball of Gebal (Byblos) in this alphabet dates from about 1600 B.C." (Charles Pfeiffer, The Biblical World, 1966, p. 33).
3. In 1904-05 Sir Flinders Petrie uncovered samples of the Proto-Semitic alphabet at Serabit el Khadem in the Sinai Peninsula. These inscriptions were found in turquoise mines in which Semitic laborers were being employed. W. F. Albright has dated these in the early 15th century B.C., though Jack Finegan dated them around 1989-1776 B.C. (Light From the Ancient Past, 1946, p. 126). The important fact about these particular inscriptions is that they are from the very area where God commanded Moses to write (Exodus 17:14).
4. In 1949, C. F. A. Schaeffer found a tablet at Ras Shamra containing the thirty letters of the Ugaritic alphabet in their proper order. It was discovered that the sequence of the Ugaritic alphabet was the same as modern Hebrew, revealing that the Hebrew alphabet goes back at least 3,500 years (S. H. Horn, Records of the Past Illuminate the Bible, 1963, p. 19).
5. In 1908, R. A. S. Macalister discovered a small limeston plaque at Gezer. It is dated in the 10th century B.C. Apparently it is a schoolboy's slate. On it is a list of farming operations for the twelve months. It is in the Palaeo-Hebrew script. Professor Gleason Archer observes that, "since it is obviously a mere schoolboy's exercise, it demonstrates that the art of writing was so well known and widely practiced in Israel during the tenth century that even children were being taught this skill in the provinces" (A Survey of Old Testament Introduction, 1964, p. 157).
As so, infidelity was wrong! Wrong again! Repeatedly wrong! And the Bible was right! Dr. W. F. Albright, who is certainly not to be considered a conservative scholar, wrote, "Only a very ignorant person can now suggest that writing (in many forms) was not known in Palestine and the immediately surrounding regions during the entire second millennium B.C." (Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, 60, 1935).
Writing is perhaps the most important achievement that mankind has ever accomplished. Writing is first mentioned in the Bible in Exodus 17:14 when, after the Israelites had defeated the pagan king Amalek, God instructed Moses, "Write this for a memorial in a book..." Numerous other references to writing follow. Moses wrote, "the words of the covenant, the ten commandments" (Exodus 35:27-28; cf. 24:4; Deuteronomy 31:19, 22; Numbers 33:2; Joshua 8:31).
For many years however, the hostile critics of the Bible claimed that the Scriptures contained an error regarding this matter. It was forcefully argued that no alphabetic script existed in the days of Moses. This was one of the arguments employed by modernists to supposedly "prove" that the composition of the Pentateuch was of a later time than Moses. T. K. Cheyne, writing in the Encyclopedia Biblica contended that the Torah (law) was not written until almost a thousand years after the time of Moses (Vol. II, 1901, p. 2055). In fact, the modernists said that the art of writing was virtually unknown in Israel prior to the establishment of David's kingdom! Within the last half century however, these infidelic charges have been thoroughly demolished. Note the following:
1. In 1933, J. L. Starkey, a pupil of the famed archaeologist W. M. F. Petire began excavations at Lachish, a city of Judah which was prominetn in Joshua's conquest of Canaan (cf. Joshua 10). Among the amazing discoveries was a pottery ewer (water pitcher), "inscribed with a dedication in eleven archaic letters, the earliest Hebrew inscription known" (D. J. Wiseman, The New Bible Dictionary, 1974, p. 705). This artifact pre-dated Moses!
2. "The Old, or Palaeo-Hebrew script is the form of writing which is similar to that used by the Phoenicians. A royal inscription of King Shaphatball of Gebal (Byblos) in this alphabet dates from about 1600 B.C." (Charles Pfeiffer, The Biblical World, 1966, p. 33).
3. In 1904-05 Sir Flinders Petrie uncovered samples of the Proto-Semitic alphabet at Serabit el Khadem in the Sinai Peninsula. These inscriptions were found in turquoise mines in which Semitic laborers were being employed. W. F. Albright has dated these in the early 15th century B.C., though Jack Finegan dated them around 1989-1776 B.C. (Light From the Ancient Past, 1946, p. 126). The important fact about these particular inscriptions is that they are from the very area where God commanded Moses to write (Exodus 17:14).
4. In 1949, C. F. A. Schaeffer found a tablet at Ras Shamra containing the thirty letters of the Ugaritic alphabet in their proper order. It was discovered that the sequence of the Ugaritic alphabet was the same as modern Hebrew, revealing that the Hebrew alphabet goes back at least 3,500 years (S. H. Horn, Records of the Past Illuminate the Bible, 1963, p. 19).
5. In 1908, R. A. S. Macalister discovered a small limeston plaque at Gezer. It is dated in the 10th century B.C. Apparently it is a schoolboy's slate. On it is a list of farming operations for the twelve months. It is in the Palaeo-Hebrew script. Professor Gleason Archer observes that, "since it is obviously a mere schoolboy's exercise, it demonstrates that the art of writing was so well known and widely practiced in Israel during the tenth century that even children were being taught this skill in the provinces" (A Survey of Old Testament Introduction, 1964, p. 157).
As so, infidelity was wrong! Wrong again! Repeatedly wrong! And the Bible was right! Dr. W. F. Albright, who is certainly not to be considered a conservative scholar, wrote, "Only a very ignorant person can now suggest that writing (in many forms) was not known in Palestine and the immediately surrounding regions during the entire second millennium B.C." (Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, 60, 1935).
Sunday, May 12, 2013
The Blood of Christ Across the Centuries
This is yet another of Wayne Jackson's fine articles. This appeared in the July, 1981 edition of the Christian Courier. It was published by the East Main Street Church of Christ in Stockton, California and was also edited by Jackson.
John the baptizer introduced Jesus Christ as, "the Lamb of God, that takes away the sin of the world" (John 1:29). In the concluding book of the New Testament, the apostle John depicts the Lord as, "the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world" (Revelation 13:8). He means that the death of Christ was an atoning sacrifice decreed from the very foundation of the world. The truth of the matter is, the Lamb's blood flows from the book of Genesis all the way through the book of Revelation and there are valuable lessons all along the way.
The Blood of Christ in Type - A type is a shadow cast upon the pages of the Old Testament which finds its fulfillment in a New Testament reality. It suggests in symbolic, picture form a glorious reality in the future. The blood of Jesus is first typically portrayed in the offering of Abel's sacrifice. Abel, who walked by faith hence, according to Jehovah's instruction (Hebrews 11:4; Romans 10:17), brought an offering before the Lord, "of the firstlings of his flock" (Genesis 4:4) but his brother Cain brought the, "fruit of the ground." One was offered in obedience, the other in disobedience. One had blood, the other did not.
As Jehovah prepared to send the tenth plague upon the wicked Pharaoh and his people, He instructed the Israelites to select a male lamb or goad one year of age and without blemish. It was to be confined for four days and then, on the 14th day of the first month, the whole congregation was to kill it in the evening or literally, "between the two evenings"; i.e., between the 9th and 11th hours (Josephus, Wars, vi, ix, 3). The Hebrews were to apply the animal's blood to the side posts and lintel of their houses and the Lord promised, "And the blood shall be to you for a token upon the houses where you are; and when I see the blood I will pass over you and there shall no plague be upon you to destroy you" (Exodus 12:13). Now the blood of that blemishless lamb was a type of Christ's. Paul, by inspiration declares, "For indeed Christ, our Passover was sacrificed for us" (First Corinthians 5:7); yes the perfect Lamb without spot or blemish (First Peter 1:19).
The Blood of Christ in Prophecy - In First Corinthians 15:3, Paul affirms that, "Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures." Not only did the Old Testament narratives foretell the death of the Son of God, they prophesied that He would die in a violent manner which would involve the shedding of His blood. Isaiah spoke of the Lamb that was to be, led to the slaughter (53:7) and Zechariah wrote of Him who would be "pierce" (12:10; cf. Psalm 22:16) and announced that in that day, "there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, for sin and for uncleanness" (13:1).
There are many ways of dying that do not involve the shedding of blood, yet for some reason it was determined within the divine wisdom that Jesus must die in a manner which entailed the pouring forth of His blood. Why was this do you suppose? The answer is supplied in Leviticus 17:11: "For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the alter to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul." Man, by virtue of sin has forfeited his life (cf. Genesis 3:4; Romans 5:12; Ephesians 2:1) and so, consistent with both the mercy and justice of God (Ephesians 2:4; Psalm 89:14) it was necessary that an innocent life (symbolized by the blood) be provided as an exchange for the guilty. Paul discusses this matter somewhat in Romans 3. Of Jesus he says, "...whom God set forth to be a propitiation, through faith, in His blood, to show His righteousness because of the passing over of the sins done aforetime, in the forbearance of God; for the showing I say, of His righteousness at this present season; that He might Himself be just, and the justifier of him that hath faith in Jesus" (25, 26). The writer of Hebrews states that, "apart from the shedding of blood there is no remission" (9:22) yet, "it is impossible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sins" (10:4) so, if man is to have the opportunity for salvation, the Son of man must be lifted up, i.e., crucified (cf. John 3:14; 12:32).
There is another interesting passage in Isaiah 53 that deserves consideration here. In verse 12, the prophet says of Christ, "...He poured out His soul unto death..." The word "soul" translates the Hebrew nephesh literally meaning "life." Note Genesis 1:30 where the beasts, birds and creeping things are said to have "life." According to Leviticus quoted earlier, "the life (nephesh) of the flesh is in the blood." So actually, Isaiah foretells that Jehovah's suffering servant (Christ - Acts 8:35) would pour out His life (His blood) as a sin offering (cf. 53:10). When the Lord was instituting the communion supper, of the fruit of the vine, a symbol of His blood, He said, "...this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many unto remission of sins" (Matthew 26:28). Perhaps Isaiah's very words were in the Savior's mind at this point.
The Blood of Christ in History - Pilate knew what was coming when he hypocritically washed his hands and said, "I am innocent of the blood of this righteous man; see ye to it" (Matthew 27:24). But the people answered, "His blood be on us, and on our children" (25). Accordingly, Jesus was delivered for crucifixion. His hands and feet were pierced (Psalm 22:16; Zechariah 12:10; Luke 24:39; John 20:27). And after He was already dead, one of the soldiers attending His execution, "with a spear pierced His side, and straightway there came out blood and water" (John 19:24). Christ paid the price for peace by means of the blood of His cross (Colossians 1:20).
The Blood of Christ and Conversion - The New Testament affirms that the sinner is, "justified by His (Christ's) blood" (Romans 5:9). A point of controversy among the religionists however, is exactly when this occurs. It is not at the point of "faith alone" as alleged by many. Rather, it is when obedient faith (Romans 1:5; 16:26) consummates itself in submitting to the command to be baptized for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38). This may be demonstrated in a variety of ways. For instance, Hebrews 9:14 asserts that the human conscience is "cleansed" by means of the blood of Christ. However, elsewhere Paul observes that the cleansing is accomplished, "by the washing of water (admittedly baptism) with the word" (Ephesians 5:26). Moreover, Peter says that baptism in water, "does now save you" and that by it one appeals to God for that, "good conscience" referred to in Hebrews 9:14 (cf. First Peter 3:21). Too, it is said that the saints "washed (nipto - used of things) their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb" (Revelation 7:14) which agrees wonderfully with Acts 22:16 where Saul was commanded to, "arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins..."
The Blood of Christ in Christian Worship - Shortly before His death, Jesus instituted the Lord's supper (Matthew 26:26-29; Mark 14:22-25; Luke 22:17-20). He intended that it be observed by Christians (in His kingdom - Luke 22:29-30) upon each first day of the week. Note the disciples met upon the first day of the week, "to break bread" (an infinitive of purpose, Acts 20:7) but they were meeting, "every first day of the week" (First Corinthians 16:2) hence, the communion was observed each week. The supper was to consist of bread which symbolized His body and fruit of the vice which represented His blood. Neither the Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation, which says that the bread and the juice turn into the body and blood of the Lord, nor the Lutheran idea of consubstantiation (the flesh and blood of Jesus are mingled with the communion elements) is true. The Lord's supper is simply a memorial service (First Corinthians 11:25) which looks back toward the cross and reminds us of the deed accomplished there. Further, it proclaims His death in view of His second coming (11:26). It is to be observed in a solemn manner, worthy of the great event it portrays (11:27).
The Blood of Christ and Apostasy - The book of Hebrews was written to inoculate Hebrew Christians against an impending apostasy from Christianity back to Judaism. False teachers were working among the brethren suggesting that Jesus of Nazareth was not the Messiah. Hence, the Christian system should be abandoned. In addressing this matter the inspired writer stresses the consequences of accepting such a doctrine; it was in effect to tread, "under foot the Son of God," to count, "the blood of the covenant wherewith He was sanctified an unholy thing," and to, "insult the Spirit of grace" (Hebrews 10:29). In practical terms, the apostle treats the Lord's blood as an "unholy thing." "Unholy" translates the Greek koinon, literally, common, yet it may possibly also suggest the notion of uncleanness (cf. Acts 10:14). This context speaks of course, of those who high-handedly repudiate the Savior and renounce His deity but could it not in a practical way also describe those who by the style of their lives, tell the world that they really are no longer interested in living the Christian life? Such people, though once loyal to Christ have long since ceased to treat His word with any respect and their conduct testifies to the world of their disregard for Jesus' blood.
John the baptizer introduced Jesus Christ as, "the Lamb of God, that takes away the sin of the world" (John 1:29). In the concluding book of the New Testament, the apostle John depicts the Lord as, "the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world" (Revelation 13:8). He means that the death of Christ was an atoning sacrifice decreed from the very foundation of the world. The truth of the matter is, the Lamb's blood flows from the book of Genesis all the way through the book of Revelation and there are valuable lessons all along the way.
The Blood of Christ in Type - A type is a shadow cast upon the pages of the Old Testament which finds its fulfillment in a New Testament reality. It suggests in symbolic, picture form a glorious reality in the future. The blood of Jesus is first typically portrayed in the offering of Abel's sacrifice. Abel, who walked by faith hence, according to Jehovah's instruction (Hebrews 11:4; Romans 10:17), brought an offering before the Lord, "of the firstlings of his flock" (Genesis 4:4) but his brother Cain brought the, "fruit of the ground." One was offered in obedience, the other in disobedience. One had blood, the other did not.
As Jehovah prepared to send the tenth plague upon the wicked Pharaoh and his people, He instructed the Israelites to select a male lamb or goad one year of age and without blemish. It was to be confined for four days and then, on the 14th day of the first month, the whole congregation was to kill it in the evening or literally, "between the two evenings"; i.e., between the 9th and 11th hours (Josephus, Wars, vi, ix, 3). The Hebrews were to apply the animal's blood to the side posts and lintel of their houses and the Lord promised, "And the blood shall be to you for a token upon the houses where you are; and when I see the blood I will pass over you and there shall no plague be upon you to destroy you" (Exodus 12:13). Now the blood of that blemishless lamb was a type of Christ's. Paul, by inspiration declares, "For indeed Christ, our Passover was sacrificed for us" (First Corinthians 5:7); yes the perfect Lamb without spot or blemish (First Peter 1:19).
The Blood of Christ in Prophecy - In First Corinthians 15:3, Paul affirms that, "Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures." Not only did the Old Testament narratives foretell the death of the Son of God, they prophesied that He would die in a violent manner which would involve the shedding of His blood. Isaiah spoke of the Lamb that was to be, led to the slaughter (53:7) and Zechariah wrote of Him who would be "pierce" (12:10; cf. Psalm 22:16) and announced that in that day, "there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, for sin and for uncleanness" (13:1).
There are many ways of dying that do not involve the shedding of blood, yet for some reason it was determined within the divine wisdom that Jesus must die in a manner which entailed the pouring forth of His blood. Why was this do you suppose? The answer is supplied in Leviticus 17:11: "For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the alter to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul." Man, by virtue of sin has forfeited his life (cf. Genesis 3:4; Romans 5:12; Ephesians 2:1) and so, consistent with both the mercy and justice of God (Ephesians 2:4; Psalm 89:14) it was necessary that an innocent life (symbolized by the blood) be provided as an exchange for the guilty. Paul discusses this matter somewhat in Romans 3. Of Jesus he says, "...whom God set forth to be a propitiation, through faith, in His blood, to show His righteousness because of the passing over of the sins done aforetime, in the forbearance of God; for the showing I say, of His righteousness at this present season; that He might Himself be just, and the justifier of him that hath faith in Jesus" (25, 26). The writer of Hebrews states that, "apart from the shedding of blood there is no remission" (9:22) yet, "it is impossible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sins" (10:4) so, if man is to have the opportunity for salvation, the Son of man must be lifted up, i.e., crucified (cf. John 3:14; 12:32).
There is another interesting passage in Isaiah 53 that deserves consideration here. In verse 12, the prophet says of Christ, "...He poured out His soul unto death..." The word "soul" translates the Hebrew nephesh literally meaning "life." Note Genesis 1:30 where the beasts, birds and creeping things are said to have "life." According to Leviticus quoted earlier, "the life (nephesh) of the flesh is in the blood." So actually, Isaiah foretells that Jehovah's suffering servant (Christ - Acts 8:35) would pour out His life (His blood) as a sin offering (cf. 53:10). When the Lord was instituting the communion supper, of the fruit of the vine, a symbol of His blood, He said, "...this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many unto remission of sins" (Matthew 26:28). Perhaps Isaiah's very words were in the Savior's mind at this point.
The Blood of Christ in History - Pilate knew what was coming when he hypocritically washed his hands and said, "I am innocent of the blood of this righteous man; see ye to it" (Matthew 27:24). But the people answered, "His blood be on us, and on our children" (25). Accordingly, Jesus was delivered for crucifixion. His hands and feet were pierced (Psalm 22:16; Zechariah 12:10; Luke 24:39; John 20:27). And after He was already dead, one of the soldiers attending His execution, "with a spear pierced His side, and straightway there came out blood and water" (John 19:24). Christ paid the price for peace by means of the blood of His cross (Colossians 1:20).
The Blood of Christ and Conversion - The New Testament affirms that the sinner is, "justified by His (Christ's) blood" (Romans 5:9). A point of controversy among the religionists however, is exactly when this occurs. It is not at the point of "faith alone" as alleged by many. Rather, it is when obedient faith (Romans 1:5; 16:26) consummates itself in submitting to the command to be baptized for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38). This may be demonstrated in a variety of ways. For instance, Hebrews 9:14 asserts that the human conscience is "cleansed" by means of the blood of Christ. However, elsewhere Paul observes that the cleansing is accomplished, "by the washing of water (admittedly baptism) with the word" (Ephesians 5:26). Moreover, Peter says that baptism in water, "does now save you" and that by it one appeals to God for that, "good conscience" referred to in Hebrews 9:14 (cf. First Peter 3:21). Too, it is said that the saints "washed (nipto - used of things) their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb" (Revelation 7:14) which agrees wonderfully with Acts 22:16 where Saul was commanded to, "arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins..."
The Blood of Christ in Christian Worship - Shortly before His death, Jesus instituted the Lord's supper (Matthew 26:26-29; Mark 14:22-25; Luke 22:17-20). He intended that it be observed by Christians (in His kingdom - Luke 22:29-30) upon each first day of the week. Note the disciples met upon the first day of the week, "to break bread" (an infinitive of purpose, Acts 20:7) but they were meeting, "every first day of the week" (First Corinthians 16:2) hence, the communion was observed each week. The supper was to consist of bread which symbolized His body and fruit of the vice which represented His blood. Neither the Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation, which says that the bread and the juice turn into the body and blood of the Lord, nor the Lutheran idea of consubstantiation (the flesh and blood of Jesus are mingled with the communion elements) is true. The Lord's supper is simply a memorial service (First Corinthians 11:25) which looks back toward the cross and reminds us of the deed accomplished there. Further, it proclaims His death in view of His second coming (11:26). It is to be observed in a solemn manner, worthy of the great event it portrays (11:27).
The Blood of Christ and Apostasy - The book of Hebrews was written to inoculate Hebrew Christians against an impending apostasy from Christianity back to Judaism. False teachers were working among the brethren suggesting that Jesus of Nazareth was not the Messiah. Hence, the Christian system should be abandoned. In addressing this matter the inspired writer stresses the consequences of accepting such a doctrine; it was in effect to tread, "under foot the Son of God," to count, "the blood of the covenant wherewith He was sanctified an unholy thing," and to, "insult the Spirit of grace" (Hebrews 10:29). In practical terms, the apostle treats the Lord's blood as an "unholy thing." "Unholy" translates the Greek koinon, literally, common, yet it may possibly also suggest the notion of uncleanness (cf. Acts 10:14). This context speaks of course, of those who high-handedly repudiate the Savior and renounce His deity but could it not in a practical way also describe those who by the style of their lives, tell the world that they really are no longer interested in living the Christian life? Such people, though once loyal to Christ have long since ceased to treat His word with any respect and their conduct testifies to the world of their disregard for Jesus' blood.
Wednesday, May 8, 2013
The Truth About John 3:16
This is a lengthy but important piece written by Wayne Jackson. It is copied below from the June, 1981 edition of the Christian Courier. The paper was published by the East Main Street Church of Christ in Stockton, California and was edited by Jackson.
The gospel of John, chapter 3, verse 16 is one of the all-time beloved and well known verses in the entire Bible. It is frequently called the "golden text" of Scripture. One might be shocked to learn therefore, that this great passage is one of the most misunderstood and abused texts of the Word of God. Many sincere people who dearly cherish John 3:16 have little idea what this marvelous verse is actually teaching. In a brief study, let us carefully look at it.
For - In the Greek New Testament, John 3:16 begins with the conjunction gar which is used to explain a foregoing statement. In this case the writer has just alluded to an historical situation that occurred in the days of Moses. After the Israelites were led from Egyptian bondage into the wilderness of Sinai, many of them discouragingly commenced to murmur against Jehovah. Accordingly, the Lord sent fiery serpents among them as a mode of punishment. When the people acknowledged their sin and sought deliverance, God instructed Moses to fashion a serpent out of brass and set it upon a standard, and any man who "looked" upon the serpent would live (cf. Numbers 21:4-9). (Note: It must be observed that the desired cure was not to be realized in simply "believing" that such could occur; rather, in addition to having faith in the Lord, the Israelite who sought healing was required to obediently look upon the image.)
The incident of the serpent was of course, typical (i.e., a symbol, picture) of the death of Christ as indicated by the "even so" terminology of verse 14 (cf. Luke 11:30). Jesus, consistent with the divine plan, must die and in a manner whereby he would be "lifted up" (cf. John 12:32). This was accomplished by His death on the cross (cf. John 8:28). The object of all of this was that, whosoever believes in Him (en auto, dative case of location) have eternal life" (verse 15). Eternal life is thus located "in Christ" (Second Timothy 2:10) and that realm is entered by baptism, the culminating act of the conversion process (Romans 6:4; Galatians 3:27). This background therefore, leads up to the introduction of John 3:16.
God so loved - It is here affirmed that God so loved the world. The term "God" is the designation of the divine nature and so can be employed of either the Father (Ephesians 1:3), Jesus the Son (John 1:1b) or the Holy Spirit (Acts 5:3-4). In this verse it is obviously used of the Father, who gave the Son.
How wonderfully is the love of God here portrayed. Unlike the gods of paganism, who were vicious and cruel and the cold and indifferent god of modern philosophy, the God of the Bible is loving (Second Corinthians 13:11; First John 4:8, 16). The term "loved" translates the Greek verb agapao. The noun form agape is not a love which is merely emotional. It is the love of genuine interest, determined dedication. It is a love which acts out of concern for others. W. E. Vine says that agapao, as used of God, "expresses the deep and constant love and interest of a perfect Being towards entirely unworthy objects, producing and fostering a reverential love in them towards the Giver, and a practical love towards those who are partakers of the same, and a desire to help others to seek the Giver" (Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, III, p. 21). It is the magnanimous love of God that motivates man to seek His grace. "We love, because He first loved us" (First John 4:19). The extent of divine love is underscored by the use of the adverb "so" (houtos), a term marking the degree of intensity. God thus loved; not passively but actively, to the extent of giving His precious Son, he "fellow" (Zechariah 13:7) for human redemption.
The World - The Greek word for "world" is cosmos. Literally it denotes the orderly universe created by the intelligent God (Acts 17:24) or in a more limited sense, the earth (Mark 16:15). Frequently though, "world" stands for all the people of the earth. The passage emphasizes the universal love of God.
The doctrine of predestination, as expressed in the old Westminster Confession of Faith (1643) and still believed by many today, taught that: "...By the decree of God, for the manifestation of His glory, some men and angels are predestined unto everlasting life and others fordained to everlasting death" (Art. III). The doctrine suggested that God, consistent with His own sovereignty, had arbitrarily determined to save some and damn others and hence, actually a man was utterly helpless as to his eternal fate. The notion is patently false and a reflection upon the character of Jehovah. Christ affirmed that He came, "to give His life a ransom for many" (Matthew 20:28) but "many" is an expression meaning "all" (First Timothy 2:6; cf. Romans 5:12, 15). Yes, God's grace appeared, "bringing salvation to all men" (Titus 2:11). Jesus was the Lamb of God, "that taketh away the sin of the world" (John 1:29; First John 2:2). Truly, God is not willing that any should perish (Second Peter 3:9). It is important to point out of course, that only the elect will be saved but the elect are those who of their own free will determine to accept the Lord's offer of salvation. And so, certain passages dealing with the death of Christ are especially focused upon them; "...Christ so loved the church, and gave Himself for it" (Ephesians 5:25). God loves the whole world and wants all to be saved but he will force no one!
That He gave - Giving is characteristic of God. He has given us life (Acts 17:25) and His gifts of providence are daily evident (Acts 14:17). He is the source of all good gifts (James 1:17) and the greatest was the gift of His Son. Seven centuries before the birth of Jesus, Isaiah foretold: "...a Child is born...a Son is given..." (9:6). Surely we must say with Paul, "Thanks be to God for His unspeakable gift" (Second Corinthians 9:15). It is quite apparent however, that even when a gift is made available, for it to be effective someone must be willing to receive it. There must be a concurrence between the will of the giver and will of the benefactor. Now the tragic fact of the matter is, though God willingly gave His Son, not all have been disposed to receive Him. Of some it was said, "...they that were His own received Him not..." (John 1:11). Men do have the power to reject gifts! Further, it is certainly true that an object may be freely given (not deserved) and yet be conditional. In the days of ancient Israel, Jehovah informed Joshua, "See, I have given into thine hand Jericho..." (Joshua 6:2). In spite of the fact that Jericho was a gift, the Lord subsequently gave specific instructions for the taking of the city. "By faith the walls of Jericho fell down after they were compassed about seven days" (Hebrews 11:30). Similarly, those who would receive Christ as God's gracious gift must submit to the conditions required by the Lord and His apostles (cf. Acts 2:41).
His only begotton Son - "Only begotten" renders the Greek monogenes, found nine times in the New Testament (five of these of Christ: John 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; First John 4:9). The term derives from two roots, monos (only, alone) and genos (race, stock). In the contexts in which it applies to Jesus, it undoubtedly denotes that He is "unique in kind." It is used, "to mark out Jesus uniquely above all earthly and heavenly beings" (Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Zondervan, II, p. 725). "In its significance monogenes relates to the several areas: (1) being or nature (uniquely God's Son), (2) the revelation of God to man (John 1:18), (3) salvation through the Son (John 3:16; First John 4:9)" (Everett F. Harrison, Baker's Dictionary of Theology, p. 386). The Lord Jesus was declared to be the Son of God by the prophets (Isaiah 9:6), angels (Luke 1:32), the Father (Matthew 3:17), Himself (Mark 14:62), His disciples (Matthew 16:16), His enemies (Matthew 27:54) and by the power of His resurrection from the dead (Romans 1:4).
That whosoever believeth on Him - Again the term "whosoever" (literally, "everyone") reveals the universality of God's saving plan. The gospel is addressed to, "the whole creation" (Mark 16:15) and as the final great invitation of the Bible has it, "...let him who thirsts come. Whosoever desires, let him take the water of life freely" (Revelation 22:17).
The word "believeth" is a present tense participle, literally, "the keeping on believing ones." But exactly what is the Biblical "belief" of which God approves? Some have defined the term as simply an acception of the historical facts regarding Christ, along with a willingness to trust Him as Savior. This is the view of those who advocate the doctrine of salvation by "faith alone." But the truth is, there is more to faith than a mental disposition!
The verb "believe" in the Greek New Testament is pisteuo. In addition to believing, trusting, the word can also include the meaning, "to comply" as Lidell & Scott observe in their Greek Lexicon (p. 1273) and as they further point out, it is the opposite of apisteo, meaning, "to disobey...refuse to comply" (p. 175). W. E. Vine declares that faith involves, "a personal surrender" to Christ (Expository Dictionary, II, p. 71). Lexicographer J. H. Thayer says that belief is, "used especially of the faith by which a man embraces Jesus, a conviction, full of joyful trust, that Jesus is the Messiah - the divinely appointed author of eternal salvation in the kingdom of God, conjoined with obedience to Christ" (Greek Lexicon, p. 511).
Saving faith cannot be divorced from obedience as the following evidence clearly reveals. (a) Belief and disobedience are set in vivid contrast in the Bible. Note this verse: "He that believeth on the Son hath eternal life; but he that obeyeth not the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on him" (John 3:36 ASV). Similarly, those Israelites that were "disobedient" were condemned "because of unbelief" (Hebrews 3:18-19; 4:3, 6). (b) While John 3:16 promises eternal life to him who believes, Hebrews 5:9 attributes eternal salvation to such as obey, thus demonstrating that the two are not mutually exclusive. Rather, saving faith includes obedience! (c) The New Testament often uses "faith" as a synecdoche (a figure of speech whereby the part is made oto stand for the whole) to denote the sum total of gospel obedience. For instance, Paul wrote, "Being therefore justified by faith, we have peace with God..." (Romans 5:1). That this means more than mere mental faith is proved by Paul's own conversion. He believed in Jesus' Lordship while yet on the road to Damascus (Acts 22:10) but he enjoyed no peace for three days subsequent thereto; until he was baptized (Acts 22:16; 9:18-19). Other components in the plan of salvation sometimes figuratively represent the entire process. Repentance is said to result in life (Acts 11:18) but certainly not repentance alone. And baptism saves (First Peter 3:21) but not baptism alone. Biblical faith therefore, is the faith that lovingly works (Galatians 5:6) in obeying the Lord's requirements for the new birth (John 3:3-5) and the maintenance of the Christian life. The notion that salvation is effected by "faith alone" is a strictly human doctrine.
Should not perish - Contrary to the assertions of some religious materialists, the Scriptures do not teach that the wicked will ultimately cease to exist. The Greek word, here rendered "perish" is apollumi, a very strong term meaning, "to destroy utterly." That apollumi does not suggest annihilation is clear in that this word is employed to describe the miserable condition of the prodigal son when separated from his loving father; in that state the son was "lost" (Luke 15:24). As Vine pointed out, "The idea is not extinction but ruin, loss, not of being but of well-being" (Expository Dictionary, I. p. 302). In this connection one should carefully study Matthew 25:46 and Second Thessalonians 1:7-9. The abiding separation of the wicked from god will entail an eternal suffering! This passage is an eloquent refutation of both the materialistic theory of the annihilation of the wicked and the modernistic assertion of universal salvation!
But have eternal life - Eternal life is here promised to those who pursue the life of obedient trust. But exactly what is eternal life? It most assuredly is not just external existence, for the wicked will exist eternally. Eternal life is the exact opposite of everlasting death. The final abode of evil persons is called, "the second death" (Revelation 2:11; 20:6, 14) and since "death" always connotes the idea of separation in some form or another, the final death is obviously eternal separation from God (cf. Matthew 7:23; 25:41; Second Thessalonians 1:9). Conversely, eternal life is everlasting communion with God along with all that that involves. It is a state of glory (Romans 2:10; Second Corinthians 4:17), rest (Hebrews 4:11) and happiness (Matthew 25:21).
John 3:16 is truly a marvelous text. But it is deeper and much richer than many have supposed. May we be wise enough to study its truths in the light of the Bible as a whole. It contains history, responsibility, warning and promise.
The gospel of John, chapter 3, verse 16 is one of the all-time beloved and well known verses in the entire Bible. It is frequently called the "golden text" of Scripture. One might be shocked to learn therefore, that this great passage is one of the most misunderstood and abused texts of the Word of God. Many sincere people who dearly cherish John 3:16 have little idea what this marvelous verse is actually teaching. In a brief study, let us carefully look at it.
For - In the Greek New Testament, John 3:16 begins with the conjunction gar which is used to explain a foregoing statement. In this case the writer has just alluded to an historical situation that occurred in the days of Moses. After the Israelites were led from Egyptian bondage into the wilderness of Sinai, many of them discouragingly commenced to murmur against Jehovah. Accordingly, the Lord sent fiery serpents among them as a mode of punishment. When the people acknowledged their sin and sought deliverance, God instructed Moses to fashion a serpent out of brass and set it upon a standard, and any man who "looked" upon the serpent would live (cf. Numbers 21:4-9). (Note: It must be observed that the desired cure was not to be realized in simply "believing" that such could occur; rather, in addition to having faith in the Lord, the Israelite who sought healing was required to obediently look upon the image.)
The incident of the serpent was of course, typical (i.e., a symbol, picture) of the death of Christ as indicated by the "even so" terminology of verse 14 (cf. Luke 11:30). Jesus, consistent with the divine plan, must die and in a manner whereby he would be "lifted up" (cf. John 12:32). This was accomplished by His death on the cross (cf. John 8:28). The object of all of this was that, whosoever believes in Him (en auto, dative case of location) have eternal life" (verse 15). Eternal life is thus located "in Christ" (Second Timothy 2:10) and that realm is entered by baptism, the culminating act of the conversion process (Romans 6:4; Galatians 3:27). This background therefore, leads up to the introduction of John 3:16.
God so loved - It is here affirmed that God so loved the world. The term "God" is the designation of the divine nature and so can be employed of either the Father (Ephesians 1:3), Jesus the Son (John 1:1b) or the Holy Spirit (Acts 5:3-4). In this verse it is obviously used of the Father, who gave the Son.
How wonderfully is the love of God here portrayed. Unlike the gods of paganism, who were vicious and cruel and the cold and indifferent god of modern philosophy, the God of the Bible is loving (Second Corinthians 13:11; First John 4:8, 16). The term "loved" translates the Greek verb agapao. The noun form agape is not a love which is merely emotional. It is the love of genuine interest, determined dedication. It is a love which acts out of concern for others. W. E. Vine says that agapao, as used of God, "expresses the deep and constant love and interest of a perfect Being towards entirely unworthy objects, producing and fostering a reverential love in them towards the Giver, and a practical love towards those who are partakers of the same, and a desire to help others to seek the Giver" (Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, III, p. 21). It is the magnanimous love of God that motivates man to seek His grace. "We love, because He first loved us" (First John 4:19). The extent of divine love is underscored by the use of the adverb "so" (houtos), a term marking the degree of intensity. God thus loved; not passively but actively, to the extent of giving His precious Son, he "fellow" (Zechariah 13:7) for human redemption.
The World - The Greek word for "world" is cosmos. Literally it denotes the orderly universe created by the intelligent God (Acts 17:24) or in a more limited sense, the earth (Mark 16:15). Frequently though, "world" stands for all the people of the earth. The passage emphasizes the universal love of God.
The doctrine of predestination, as expressed in the old Westminster Confession of Faith (1643) and still believed by many today, taught that: "...By the decree of God, for the manifestation of His glory, some men and angels are predestined unto everlasting life and others fordained to everlasting death" (Art. III). The doctrine suggested that God, consistent with His own sovereignty, had arbitrarily determined to save some and damn others and hence, actually a man was utterly helpless as to his eternal fate. The notion is patently false and a reflection upon the character of Jehovah. Christ affirmed that He came, "to give His life a ransom for many" (Matthew 20:28) but "many" is an expression meaning "all" (First Timothy 2:6; cf. Romans 5:12, 15). Yes, God's grace appeared, "bringing salvation to all men" (Titus 2:11). Jesus was the Lamb of God, "that taketh away the sin of the world" (John 1:29; First John 2:2). Truly, God is not willing that any should perish (Second Peter 3:9). It is important to point out of course, that only the elect will be saved but the elect are those who of their own free will determine to accept the Lord's offer of salvation. And so, certain passages dealing with the death of Christ are especially focused upon them; "...Christ so loved the church, and gave Himself for it" (Ephesians 5:25). God loves the whole world and wants all to be saved but he will force no one!
That He gave - Giving is characteristic of God. He has given us life (Acts 17:25) and His gifts of providence are daily evident (Acts 14:17). He is the source of all good gifts (James 1:17) and the greatest was the gift of His Son. Seven centuries before the birth of Jesus, Isaiah foretold: "...a Child is born...a Son is given..." (9:6). Surely we must say with Paul, "Thanks be to God for His unspeakable gift" (Second Corinthians 9:15). It is quite apparent however, that even when a gift is made available, for it to be effective someone must be willing to receive it. There must be a concurrence between the will of the giver and will of the benefactor. Now the tragic fact of the matter is, though God willingly gave His Son, not all have been disposed to receive Him. Of some it was said, "...they that were His own received Him not..." (John 1:11). Men do have the power to reject gifts! Further, it is certainly true that an object may be freely given (not deserved) and yet be conditional. In the days of ancient Israel, Jehovah informed Joshua, "See, I have given into thine hand Jericho..." (Joshua 6:2). In spite of the fact that Jericho was a gift, the Lord subsequently gave specific instructions for the taking of the city. "By faith the walls of Jericho fell down after they were compassed about seven days" (Hebrews 11:30). Similarly, those who would receive Christ as God's gracious gift must submit to the conditions required by the Lord and His apostles (cf. Acts 2:41).
His only begotton Son - "Only begotten" renders the Greek monogenes, found nine times in the New Testament (five of these of Christ: John 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; First John 4:9). The term derives from two roots, monos (only, alone) and genos (race, stock). In the contexts in which it applies to Jesus, it undoubtedly denotes that He is "unique in kind." It is used, "to mark out Jesus uniquely above all earthly and heavenly beings" (Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Zondervan, II, p. 725). "In its significance monogenes relates to the several areas: (1) being or nature (uniquely God's Son), (2) the revelation of God to man (John 1:18), (3) salvation through the Son (John 3:16; First John 4:9)" (Everett F. Harrison, Baker's Dictionary of Theology, p. 386). The Lord Jesus was declared to be the Son of God by the prophets (Isaiah 9:6), angels (Luke 1:32), the Father (Matthew 3:17), Himself (Mark 14:62), His disciples (Matthew 16:16), His enemies (Matthew 27:54) and by the power of His resurrection from the dead (Romans 1:4).
That whosoever believeth on Him - Again the term "whosoever" (literally, "everyone") reveals the universality of God's saving plan. The gospel is addressed to, "the whole creation" (Mark 16:15) and as the final great invitation of the Bible has it, "...let him who thirsts come. Whosoever desires, let him take the water of life freely" (Revelation 22:17).
The word "believeth" is a present tense participle, literally, "the keeping on believing ones." But exactly what is the Biblical "belief" of which God approves? Some have defined the term as simply an acception of the historical facts regarding Christ, along with a willingness to trust Him as Savior. This is the view of those who advocate the doctrine of salvation by "faith alone." But the truth is, there is more to faith than a mental disposition!
The verb "believe" in the Greek New Testament is pisteuo. In addition to believing, trusting, the word can also include the meaning, "to comply" as Lidell & Scott observe in their Greek Lexicon (p. 1273) and as they further point out, it is the opposite of apisteo, meaning, "to disobey...refuse to comply" (p. 175). W. E. Vine declares that faith involves, "a personal surrender" to Christ (Expository Dictionary, II, p. 71). Lexicographer J. H. Thayer says that belief is, "used especially of the faith by which a man embraces Jesus, a conviction, full of joyful trust, that Jesus is the Messiah - the divinely appointed author of eternal salvation in the kingdom of God, conjoined with obedience to Christ" (Greek Lexicon, p. 511).
Saving faith cannot be divorced from obedience as the following evidence clearly reveals. (a) Belief and disobedience are set in vivid contrast in the Bible. Note this verse: "He that believeth on the Son hath eternal life; but he that obeyeth not the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on him" (John 3:36 ASV). Similarly, those Israelites that were "disobedient" were condemned "because of unbelief" (Hebrews 3:18-19; 4:3, 6). (b) While John 3:16 promises eternal life to him who believes, Hebrews 5:9 attributes eternal salvation to such as obey, thus demonstrating that the two are not mutually exclusive. Rather, saving faith includes obedience! (c) The New Testament often uses "faith" as a synecdoche (a figure of speech whereby the part is made oto stand for the whole) to denote the sum total of gospel obedience. For instance, Paul wrote, "Being therefore justified by faith, we have peace with God..." (Romans 5:1). That this means more than mere mental faith is proved by Paul's own conversion. He believed in Jesus' Lordship while yet on the road to Damascus (Acts 22:10) but he enjoyed no peace for three days subsequent thereto; until he was baptized (Acts 22:16; 9:18-19). Other components in the plan of salvation sometimes figuratively represent the entire process. Repentance is said to result in life (Acts 11:18) but certainly not repentance alone. And baptism saves (First Peter 3:21) but not baptism alone. Biblical faith therefore, is the faith that lovingly works (Galatians 5:6) in obeying the Lord's requirements for the new birth (John 3:3-5) and the maintenance of the Christian life. The notion that salvation is effected by "faith alone" is a strictly human doctrine.
Should not perish - Contrary to the assertions of some religious materialists, the Scriptures do not teach that the wicked will ultimately cease to exist. The Greek word, here rendered "perish" is apollumi, a very strong term meaning, "to destroy utterly." That apollumi does not suggest annihilation is clear in that this word is employed to describe the miserable condition of the prodigal son when separated from his loving father; in that state the son was "lost" (Luke 15:24). As Vine pointed out, "The idea is not extinction but ruin, loss, not of being but of well-being" (Expository Dictionary, I. p. 302). In this connection one should carefully study Matthew 25:46 and Second Thessalonians 1:7-9. The abiding separation of the wicked from god will entail an eternal suffering! This passage is an eloquent refutation of both the materialistic theory of the annihilation of the wicked and the modernistic assertion of universal salvation!
But have eternal life - Eternal life is here promised to those who pursue the life of obedient trust. But exactly what is eternal life? It most assuredly is not just external existence, for the wicked will exist eternally. Eternal life is the exact opposite of everlasting death. The final abode of evil persons is called, "the second death" (Revelation 2:11; 20:6, 14) and since "death" always connotes the idea of separation in some form or another, the final death is obviously eternal separation from God (cf. Matthew 7:23; 25:41; Second Thessalonians 1:9). Conversely, eternal life is everlasting communion with God along with all that that involves. It is a state of glory (Romans 2:10; Second Corinthians 4:17), rest (Hebrews 4:11) and happiness (Matthew 25:21).
John 3:16 is truly a marvelous text. But it is deeper and much richer than many have supposed. May we be wise enough to study its truths in the light of the Bible as a whole. It contains history, responsibility, warning and promise.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)