Christ Covenant Church

View Details

In Matthew 16:24 Rabbi Jesus communicates what is necessary to possess Him as Savior. In so doing He also invites us to discover the key to securing its goal – eternity with Him in Paradise.

If you want Jesus to be your Savior then you must live the rest of your life rejecting the belief that the most valuable things in this life are those that advance/promote self-image or pleasure (24a).

1.1. When Jesus says “Come after Me” He is alluding to OT Messianic texts such as (Isa 55:1-4) which means He is referring to possessing Him as Savior (or coming to Him to receive salvation).

1.2. What Jesus means by “deny himself and take up his cross” is the making the choice to permanently reject the pursuit of my image (self-image) and those things which advance it as the most valuable things in this life. Even people who live for – or are infatuated with – or find most valuable, the lives of others and therefore try to imitate them are still people living for the advancement of their own self-image. The reason they associate with that person is because of what they believe it does to advance how they feel or look to others (e.g., fans [fanatics] of celebrities [sports, music, movies, social media etc.; devotion to a particular brand [sunglasses, shoes, etc.]). This same example can be multiplied many times over when one considers the number of things people will devote themselves to because they believe it will promote their self-image (meaning the image of themselves they want to promote) (e.g., growing a beard; tattoos; clothing, cosmetic or shoe brands; physical fitness; the kind of car they drive; their hobbies).

1.3. What (then) Jesus is not talking about: becoming “the navy seal of ‘no’”. IOW: the key to getting to heaven is not growing in self-discipline (Col 2:23; 1Ti 4:8). It is instead about changing whose image we are attempting to advance from self to God – which means believing that the most valuable things in this life are those things that promote that – His image (not ours).

Possessing Jesus as Savior will also mean adopting His belief that the most valuable things in this life are those that advance/promote God’s image and pleasure (24b).

2.1. By “Follow Me” Rabbi Jesus means imitate Him. Not, “become a clone”, but “be the best Christ-version of yourself” – which ultimately means we live not for our own glory but the glory of the Father. That we – like Jesus, see as most valuable in this life those things that advance/promote God’s image (Joh 8:29). This then is what replaces our former life pursuit (the advancement/ promotion of my self-image or pleasure). We stop living for the glory of self and start living for the glory of God – which again means that the things we now see as the most-valuable are those that achieve that goal (i.e., those things in life which advance/promote God’s image or glory and not our own).

2.2. The promotion of image is at the core of our design (Gen 1:26-28) = We were created as image-bearers (or image-promoters) which means this is our “modus operandi” – our hard-wired purpose in life (e.g., animals). As such every single person lives to promote either their image or the image of God- which means this is the test that determines where we spend eternity (Paradise or hell). On Judgment Day, our deeds will show whether we promoted our image or God’s image during our earthly life (Rev 20:11-15)

2.3. Why will those who chose to live for self rather than promoting God’s image and glory go to hell instead of Paradise?

1) because you become what you do (i.e., you are permanently/eternally shaping the moral state of your spirit by your choices/who you choose to live for; 2Co 4:16-17 w/5:9-10; Eph 4:17-19; 2Pe 2:20). 2) those who chose to live for self are the destroyer of worlds (all this world’s problems and coming destruction is due to people living for self). 3) letting such people into Paradise would turn it into hell. 4) God is equitable and so will give to each person the world that best fits their spirit (the world they deserve/ordered based on their deeds) and not allow them to destroy the world that best fits the spirit of others.

2.4. By changing our focus/goal from promotion of self-image to the promotion God’s image and glory, our affections (love, loyalty and passion) will automatically change to align with our new-found focus/goal (Mat 6:21): this principle works both ways (self or God) – which is why you can always tell whose image a person is truly attempting to promote by simply looking at who/what they love, who/what they are loyal to and who/what they are passionate about.

2.5. That seeking to advance/improve/promote God’s image rather than our own is at the heart of Rabbi Jesus’ call to follow Him is confirmed in how He taught His disciples to pray (Mat 6:9-10) “Hallowed (i.e., glorified, advanced, promoted) be Your Name (i.e., Your Name/Image/Likeness [e.g. NIL])…[which means] Your kingdom come, Your will be done (i.e., the things associated with your Kingdom and will – not my own, will be the things most valuable in my life).” = This is what we are to commit ourselves to every day through prayer as the disciples of Rabbi Jesus – which means every day (assuming we pray this) we end up showing ourselves to be true disciples or total hypocrites.

2.6. The one thing Rabbi Jesus pursued above all others as most valuable to promoting God’s image - and as a result, loved or was passionate about (most loyal to and lost without): the practice of equity toward others (Mat 7:12) = The establishing of equity (fair treatment) to others is the primary purpose behind God giving the OT Scriptures (“for this is the Law and Prophets” = This is the OT’s primary purpose).

2.7. How we know this was the thing most valuable to Jesus during His earthly life: because Jesus was the embodiment of the OT Scriptures (Joh 1:14) = The expression “full of grace and truth” (v14) is the LXX rendering of God’s memorial name – most specifically the last portion (Exo 34:6 “The LORD, the LORD God, compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in lovingkindness and truth”) confirming Jesus to be the God encountered by Moses while in the cleft of the rock.[1] Jesus however was also “the Word [which] became flesh.” IOW: He was not only the fleshly embodiment of the OT God, but the OT Scriptures (their principles in perfect practice).

Considering this - along with what Rabbi Jesus teaches in Matthew 7, means that equity (i.e., treating others fairly – or in the same way as we want others to treat us) was indeed the thing most valuable to Jesus. As the living example of the OT Scriptures (and therefore their primary purpose), His concern was the fair treatment of others. And this (once more) He did as the means to advancing/promoting God’s image.

2.8. Why is equity the thing most valuable (or the best way) to advance/promote God’s image? Because God’s Word (the book which defines it) also represents the character or person of God. His Word is His self-expression (or as the old saying goes, “He is what He does”). Hence why John can say that Jesus - as the Word which became flesh “explained Him (God the Father)” (Joh 1:18). The manifestation of God’s Word through Jesus’ earthly life also meant the manifestation of God (His character and Person). By promoting equity we are therefore promoting what God Himself lives for (what He is and does).

2.9. This also (then) is at the heart of what it means to love God and love others –since this too is how Jesus summarizes the purpose/goal of God’s Word (Mat 22:36-40 “On these two…depend the whole Law and the Prophets”). To love (whether it be God or humans) means (then) to be equitable in our treatment of them (which is only accomplished through obedience to the principles established in God’s Word). This is seen most explicitly through the second love command, the command to love our neighbors (Lev 19:11-18) = Love equals equity (and that especially toward our covenant brothers and sisters [“neighbors” refers to those in the covenant community]). This obligation however is expected in relation to all people – evil or righteous (Mat 5:43-44) = This is what it means to “be perfect” -or complete, in our love like God – who likewise shows equity to all people – whether evil or righteous.

2.10. Having equity as my life’s mission (or most valuable thing) is what Paul calls living for the whole in (Phi 2:1-4) “regard one another (or the whole) as more important than yourselves; do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also the interests of others (or the whole).” IOW: the fair treatment of others is always more important than getting what I want – which means if getting or doing what I want requires that I take advantage of others, or violate – or ignore their rights, then I forgo getting - or doing that thing. That by the way, is the definition of selfishness: behavior that is willing to violate the rights of others to get what I want. Hence the reason Paul contrasts what he is saying with “Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit ([Grk., kenedoxia] = Self-glory or for the glory of self [image]).” Notice he identifies “living for the whole” as the attitude of Rabbi Jesus during His earthly life (vv5-8) = Even though He was God and the riches of heaven already His, Jesus responded to His incarnation as a man in the same way we are required to respond. He “emptied Himself” and He “humbled Himself.” He rejected living for the advancement of His self-image and instead focused His attention on God and the advancement or His image. And He did this through a life epitomized by obedience to the Law (the code book on equity to god and others) which He maintained even when He was being unfairly tried, tortured and killed by others (1Pe 2:21-24 = Jesus did not let the inequity of others cause Him to be inequitable in His treatment of them; e.g., Luk 23:33-34).

2.11. Unfortunately, far less than what Jesus suffered causes many people to turn back and start serving self again (Gal 1:6-7) = The Galatians were deserting simply because they were being “disturbed ([Grk., tarasso] = To disquiet the mind through soliciting fear and doubt).” Notice Paul makes their problem an image issue (vv8-10; the unpopular nature of Paul’s gospel proved his motives were not the promotion of self through the praise of others).

2.12. Jesus’ entire ministry and teaching was devoted to securing equity (or the fair treatment of God and others) through a correct understanding of God’s Law (e.g., Joh 8:1-11).

2.13. Given what immediately follows Rabbi Jesus’ call to equity, it would seem that this is also at the heart of how we discern the true gospel from the false, and the true shepherd from the wolf (Mat 7:13-20) = Those possessing the true gospel will care about equity whereas those who don’t [the false gospels and prophets] - won’t - as demonstrated by their actions (“fruit”) (e.g., they think it’s okay to slander others – i.e., to condemn our church as a cult or me as a false teacher without providing the evidence – Deu 19:15-19 states that their punishment will be the same as those they falsely accused).

2.14. Seeing equity (or the fair treatment of God and others) as our most valuable mission in this life is therefore what the disciples of Jesus – those following (or imitating) Him must live for. This is how we advance/promote God’s image – and protect against promoting our own. It is impossible to live for equity and promote your own image (the two are diametrically opposed) – which means this is also the key to securing Paradise since a person truly living for equity will not only be a person living for God’s image and not their own, but also a person without a price (in respect to sin) (e.g., the only way you can convince me to cheat on my wife is if you can show how it is equitable to her).

2.15. Understanding this from the perspective of Genesis 1 means that all Jesus is doing by His call to follow/imitate Him in this way is restore us to what God intended when He created us as image-bearers. We were created to bear (advance/promote) God’s image not our own. It means also that this is the path of abundant life (or blessing) (and why Jesus can say what He does in Joh 10:10). As mentioned earlier, all of humanity’s problems stem from choosing to promote self over God. This includes even those things that seem more dubious (e.g., PTSD or psychological issues related to trauma; people who fail to rise above their circumstances or use their circumstances as an excuse/means of debilitation; quitters and cowards) (Joh 8:12 w/31-32) = According to Rabbi Jesus, following Him - i.e., imitating Him in pursuing the promotion of God’s image and glory through the practice of equity toward others is the “light of life” and the “truth” that sets us free from the debilitating darkness which defines the lives of so many – and the reason so many will fail to see Paradise.

2.16. Final note: Pursuing the promotion of God’s image/glory through practicing equity is not only how we become the best Christ-version of ourselves, but also live up to Jesus’ expected ROI of 100% (Mat 25:14-23 = Take self and turn into the best Christ-version of yourself [not somebody else]- that is a 100% ROI [how you double what He gave you]).

CLOSING CONTEMPLATION: Am I a disciple of Rabbi Jesus? A couple of questions that may help you discern the answer: Can you live with yourself knowing your choices create inequity in relation to others (e.g., a double-standard)? When you consider the things most valuable to you, are they the things that promote your self-image or pleasure (e.g., are you more concerned what others think about you than you are what they think about God [whether they have the right gospel])? If your answer is “yes” to either or both, then you are not Jesus’ disciple and He is not your Savior.

[1] “‘Abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness’ (ESV) becomes ‘full of grace and truth’ in John’s Gospel.” - Lester J. Kuyper (“Grace and Truth: An Old Testament Description of God, and Its Use in the Johannine Gospel”)

View Details

In Matthew 16:24-27 Rabbi Jesus communicates what is necessary to possess Him as Savior. In so doing He also invites us to discover the key to securing its goal – eternity with Him in Paradise.

If you want Jesus to be your Savior then you must live the rest of your life rejecting the belief that the most valuable things in this life are those that advance/improve self-image or pleasure (24a).

1.1. “come after Me” = Possess Me as Savior (for the purpose of salvation) (Isa 55:1-4 w/Mat 16:13-16). Notice it is conditional (“If anyone wishes to…”). IOW: wanting Him or salvation is not enough to possess Him or it (Luk 13:22-24) = Jesus by His mention of “many” not being “able” to “enter” confirms this man’s concern that there are “just a few who are being saved.” The reason however is not because the “many” do not desire it (“for many, I tell you will seek to enter”). Rather, it is due to the fact that though they want to be saved they refuse the pain and unpopular path (“Strive” [Grk., agonizomai; agonize] = Fight or compete [like an athlete] under great stress and strain; Joh 18:36; 1Ti 6:12; 1Co 9:25 [athlete – literally, agonizing one]; “narrow” [Grk., stenos; constrictive] = The gospel message that truly saves is the one that constricts [i.e., places necessary obligations/constraints on its recipients – e.g., obedience] rather than accommodates [i.e., places no such obligations/constraints – e.g., FAG; Mat 7:13-14 “borad” = accomodating]; e.g., most Americans wish they were independently wealthy, but few are willing to do what it takes to make it a reality).

1.2. “he must deny [reject] himself” = We must deny/reject the belief that the most valuable things in this life are those things which advance/improve my self-image or pleasure.

“and take up his cross” = The jettisoning of this belief system must be permanent (until you die [cross was an execution device]). IOW: your life will now longer reflect this way of thinking/belief – which implies (also) daily practice (Luk 9:23).

1.3. Jesus’ demand for denial/rejection in this area is related to our identity as image-bearers. Because we are image-bearers, we are hard-wired to love and seek those things we believe to be the greatest value-add to image – either our image or the image of God. As a result, we will always love the most (or are most loyal to – or lost without), what we believe to be the thing(s) producing the most value (Mat 6:21 “treasure” = things believed to possess the most value; “heart” = what you love [are most loyal to or lost without]).

1.4. What (then) Jesus is not talking about: becoming “the navy seal of ‘no’”. IOW: the key to getting to heaven is not growing in self-discipline (Col 2:23; 1Ti 4:8). It is instead about changing whose image we are attempting to advance from self to God – which means believing that the most valuable things in this life are those things that promote that – His image (not ours).

Possessing Jesus as Savior will also mean adopting His belief that the most valuable things in this life are those that advance/improve God’s image and pleasure (24b).

2.1. “follow Me” = Language indicating a Rabbi – disciple relationship (the disciples of a Rabbi were said to follow him). As such, what is meant by this word “follow” is more than simply obey his teaching, but imitate his life. Hence the reason, Jewish disciples would often live with their rabbis (so they could imitate his life). The requirement therefore to “follow [Jesus]” is a call to see as most valuable in this life those things Jesus saw as most valuable – to adopt His view or belief in this respect.

2.2. And for Jesus, the things most valuable, were those that advanced/improved God’s image. As a result, this is what He was most passionate about – what He most loved. He was most loyal to (or lost without) the promotion of God’s image and pleasure (versus His own). Hence (Joh 8:29). This is confirmed also by Jesus’ rebuke of Peter in (vv21-23 “God’s interests” were the interests – the thing most valuable to Jesus).

2.3. This (again) is what Jesus lived for and what we must live for if we are to follow (or imitate) Him as our Rabbi and get to heaven: we must see as the things most valuable in this life – and therefore most love (be loyal to or lost without), those things which advance or improve God’s image.

2.4. Principles then not to miss: 1) Whatever you choose to believe are the most valuable things in this life will be what you most love (are loyal to or lost without). Again (Mat 6:21) = Love (what we feel loyalty to or are lost without) is always the result of what we chose to believe as most valuable. And…2) What you believe to be most valuable will always be determined by whose image you are attempting to advance or improve in this life: yours or God. These two things are at the heart of what Rabbi Jesus is teaching in (Mat 13:44-46) = The obvious reason the man and the merchant see the kingdom of God (represented by the treasure and the pearl) as most valuable is because the image they are most concerned with advancing and improving is not their own but God’s. IOW: because they seek God’s glory (and not their own), it is His kingdom (and not their own) which is most important. Hence the reason for their great loyalty to it as demonstrated by the selling of all their possessions. Again, the things you choose to see as most valuable in this life (and the sure-fire sign of whose image you live to promote), will (as a result) become your greatest passion or love (where your heart beats), the things you will be most loyal to (and lost without).

2.5. John’s instruction about loving God and not loving the world – or the things of the world therefore also serves as a helpful diagnostic for determining whose image we are living for (self or God) (1Jo 2:15-17) = People who choose to see as most valuable the things of the world—and who as a result, feel a heartfelt or strong love and loyalty to (or are lost without) those things, are people living for the advancement or improvement of their image (not the image of God). This is the mindset and marketing, perspective and propaganda of the world - both in the public and private square (e.g., schools, businesses, government): life is about seeking the advancement or improvement of your self-image or pleasure. The modern term for this is narcissism (def., self-centered or the pursuit and promotion of self above all else). This world’s most popular religion has always been narcissism. John splits this world’s narcissism into three categories: 1) “the lust of their flesh” (advancement/improvement of self through physical stimulation; e.g., a narcissistic view of sex and food – Phi 3:17-20), 2) “the lust of their eyes” (advancement/improvement of self through psychological stimulation; e.g., a narcissistic view of knowledge, power, beauty, experience) and/or 3) “the pride of life” (advancement/improvement of self through position and/or possessions; e.g., a narcissistic view of people and personal property).

2.6.The reason Jesus most often speaks negatively about our earthly/blood family is b/c He knew this was the area where most people would be guilty of narcissism or attempting to advance/improve their self-image or pleasure (e.g., Mat 10:34-37; Luk 14:26). Why are our earthly/blood families so often the target of narcissism (people promoting self-image)? Because there are so many opportunities to exploit without being noticed. Most of what is seen by the world as loving families or good parenting or people becoming the best version of themselves is nothing more than people attempting to advance or improve their self-image or pleasure through those other people (e.g., loyalty to kids as possessions, pets, for friends, praise, vicarious living, status, support, stability, or sentimental experience parents or family in general as possessions, pets, for friends, praise, status, support, stability or sentimental experience). It is worth mentioning that the phrase “pride of life” in 1 John 2:16 is most likely a direct reference to earthly/blood family since this was the phrase’s common understanding in the ANE (e.g., Gen 30:20, Isa 4:1, Psa 17:14)

2.7. In light of what was discussed consider the difference from an image seeking perspective between our earthly/blood family and our heavenly/covenant family: b/c of its requirements for membership, loyalty or love for the latter is almost always (if not always) due to seeking God’s glory (not our own). Which means this too serves as a great diagnostic for determining which path we are on.

2.8. It is therefore because the narcissistic person’s love or loyalties lie elsewhere (e.g., their earthly/blood families versus God’s heavenly/covenant family), that John can say “the love of the Father is not in them.” IOW: It is impossible to truly possess – or sustain love for (or loyalty to) God when you are living to improve your image instead of His. Once more, love is always the function of something else. It is only produced for those people or things we view as most valuable to the image we are attempting to advance or improve. Which means the only way to stop having such strong loyalty and love for the things of the world is to change the image we live to promote. It means leaving our (self) image behind (crucifying it) and following (or imitating) Rabbi Jesus – Who lived instead for God’s image as demonstrated through His pursuit and practice of one thing (above all others – as most valuable) during His earthly life.

CLOSING CONTEMPLATION: What did Rabbi Jesus pursue and practice as the most valuable thing during His earthly life?

View Details

Preliminary considerations:

Most sincerely believe that their FAG (faith alone gospel) is derived solely from the Bible. These same people also sincerely believe they are - by their embrace the FAG, declaring the Bible to be God’s indispensable, infallible and incorruptible Word. Few however realize that by embracing what the FAG teaches, they are instead declaring the Bible – or God’s Word to be the opposite of those things. That portions of the Bible can be ignored (or dispensed of) when it comes to determining truth; that there are fundamental contradictions between the OT and NT; and that because of these things, God is now doing things that make Him unjust.
The reasons for this dichotomy: (2.1.) though many of their pastors and scholars are aware of this, they refuse to be open about it for fear of losing their jobs, families or friends (CCC has encountered this firsthand). (2.2.) bandwagon manipulation (ad populum) (2.3.) what passes for “deep biblical teaching” in most churches is emotionally driven (e.g., Evan likes to entertain), light on historical context or whole canon synthesis (e.g., Luther’s Law-Gospel Distinction) and heavy on redaction (i.e., contradictory texts are ignored).[1]
The result: The typical Evan will be immediately threatened by what we share and most likely respond with “more heat than light” (i.e., lots of feelings-based arguments, or condemnation based on their emotions versus intelligent discussion and inquiry).
How Rabbi Jesus calls us to respond: (2Ti 2:24-26).
(In light of the aforementioned) Proposed approach: instead of attempting to convince them that their FAG is false, we need to genuinely ask for their help. As the old saying goes, “truth loves an appeal.” If what they possess is the truth, then they should be happy to help - and sufficiently competent, to answer our questions and resolve our concerns. Should they succeed, we will be forever in their debt – as those who loved us enough to “save our souls from death.” (Jam 5:19-20). This too, should be communicated as a motivation to help us. Another important piece worth communicating: we are not trying to be difficult or contrary, we however take seriously our commitment to Rabbi Jesus and His Word as the final authority on truth (especially the gospel) – which means if something contradicts it– or makes God contradict Himself in His Word, then we refuse to believe it – no matter how popular it is now – or has been in the past. Evangelicals should appreciate this more than anyone given what they believe didn’t exist until the 16th century.
If Evangelical Christianity is the truth, then why was it necessary for its founder to add words or dismiss NT books to validate his FAG invention?

1.1. The Protestant (Evangelical) Reformation acknowledges the 16th century German monk Martin Luther as its father and founder since he is the one who invented its most precious possession, the FAG.

1.2. What however is often kept out of the history books is the fact that Luther had to dismiss certain books of the NT in order to do so (James, Jude, Hebrews and Revelation). IOW: because teaching in those books proved his FAG false, Luther dismissed them questioning even their divine authority.[2]

1.3. Desperate to see his gospel invention thrive, Luther also added the word “alone” to Romans 3:28 (“We maintain that a man is justified by faith”) in his translation of the NT into German. This spurious addition remains to this day (e.g., 2017 Lutherbibel).[3]

1.4. Evangelicals have attempted to dismiss Luther or his actions as foolish, claiming that his fears were unfounded. Luther however was no dummy. He was an expert in the original languages (Hebrew and Greek) and held a doctorate in theology. His actions of dismissal and addition therefore reflected what he knew to be true: if judged according to the whole of the NT canon, his FAG would stand condemned.

1.5. Why therefore would anyone who truly loves God and His Word ever trust the gospel of a man who had to add words or deny books of the NT in order to make it work? (Deu 4:2, 12:32; Gal 1:18).

If salvation is by faith alone then why does the only passage to use that phrase exist in the negative?

2.1. (Jam 2:24) = This passage is the only place in the Bible where we find the phrase “faith alone” and James is using it to speak directly against the premise of the FAG (i.e., faith is the only instrument of our justification). Evangelicals attempt to get around this problem by claiming that James is instead teaching “works” as the result of our justification (versus - like faith, another instrument of justification). James however does not say we are justified by faith which results in works but rather we are justified by works and by faith (or “by works and not by faith alone”).

2.2. IOW: just as faith is instrumental to our justification so also are works. Both are necessary instruments of our justification. Hence the reason the preposition “by” accompanies both “works” and “faith.” To believe that the phrase “by faith” is functioning instrumentally requires that you believe the same thing about the phrase “by works.” It is also the only way James’ statement makes sense. How can both be using the same preposition yet one communicating result (i.e., works are the result of justification) and the other instrumentality (i.e., faith is the instrument of justification)? James’ words were ultimately written by the Holy Spirit, not some idiot who didn’t know how to properly communicate.

2.3. James therefore places Evangelical Christianity (or the FAG) in a check-mate situation. By his use of the “by” preposition with “works” and “faith”, he confirms that both are necessary instruments to justification (salvation). Any Evangelical who denies this is not only guilty of poor grammar but suicide in relation to their own position. Why? Because the crown jewel of the FAG, Romans 3:28, employs the same preposition (“we maintain that a man is justified by faith”). If the “by” is instrumental in Roman 3:28 then the same must be true in James 2:24. No bad grammar – or double standards allowed. Now you know why Luther hated James (or more specifically, hated the Word of God) – because it exposed the FAG as false.[4]

If Rabbi Jesus came to establish a new religion (i.e., Christianity) then why does He identify it as a new covenant implying existing religion (i.e., Judaism)?

3.1. (Luk 22:20) = By calling it a “new covenant” Jesus confirms two things: there is an existing (older) covenant and an existing religion. Jesus therefore did not replace the former religion (Judaism) but its former covenant (the Old Covenant). Which means this: the principles defining Judaism (most especially those related to salvation since this is central to God’s religion and covenants) remained intact. The only thing changing would be in respect to application. IOW: it would still be Judaism, but Judaism in its upgraded version (Judaism 2.0.).

This makes sense given God’s stern warning against replacing His religion – or those principles established in Judaism, with a new religion – or principles opposed to Judaism. To do so would make that person guilty as a false teacher soliciting a false god (Deu 12:32-13:9).

3.2. Jesus’ words were understood by His disciples as the fulfillment of Jeremiah’s new covenant prophecy[5] which not only upholds the framework of original Judaism (Judaism 1.0.) but likewise exposes Christianity as false (a new religion serving a false god) (Jer 31:27-37):

3.2.1. (27-30 w/Eze 18:1-4 w/19-20 w/Lev 27:29) = Like the OC, the NC will preserve justice by continuing to condemn penal substitution (i.e., someone else being punished for my sins). Christianity teaches penal substitution – or Jesus being punished for our sins though the Bible neither supports nor teaches this form of injustice. The Scriptures claim Jesus’ death was for the purpose of propitiation never punishment (Rom 3:25; 1Jo 2:2 “propitiation” = Moral cleansing [Heb 9:13-14, 22-23, 10:2; 1Jo 1:7][6]; Isa 53[7]). To believe in penal substitution makes the Father both a child abuser (in relation to His Son) and an animal abuser (in relation to the animal sacrifices under the OC given their typological function [i.e., if Jesus’ sacrifice was a form of punishment then the same was true in respect to the animals before Him]).[8]

3.2.2. (30 = Our works are instrumental in our damnation/justification [Jam 2:24; Eze 18:4-9 w/Lev 18:5] w/31-33) = Like the OC, salvation under the NC will likewise be a marriage ([Jer 31:32]“Husband”; 2Co 11:1-2; Eph 5:23-33; [Jer 31:33] “I will be their God, and they shall be My people” = Bundesformel [Marriage formula]) and therefore operate according to the marital paradigm of gain and maintain: we gain salvation by our vow of faith (faithfulness) to Christ’s laws (i.e., the OT Law according to its new application in Christ – 1Co 9:21; Mat 5:17 “fulfill” = Restore to its fullest measure [LXX, 1 Ki 1:14]) ([Jer 31:33] “I will put My law within them and on their heart I will write it” = I will require they vow/pledge their love and faithfulness to My Law [Exo 24:7; Rom 2:14-15 = They have made a personal vow to love and obey God’s Law]; hence why 1Pe 3:21 “appeal” = Literally, a vow/pledge of faithfulness. Baptism is where God accepts our faith [as a vow of faithfulness] in exchange for a good conscience [cleansed/propitiated soul – Heb 9:14] “through the resurrection of [justification gained by – Rom 4:25] Jesus Christ.” Hence the reason Peter says, “Baptism now saves you"[9]) which then must be maintained through faithful obedience ([Eze 18:9] “if he walks in my statutes…so as to deal faithfully – he is righteous and will surely live”; [Lev 18:5] “Do this and live”; Deu 28:1-2 = faithfulness not perfection). Gain and maintain is the paradigm of all God’s saving covenants in Scripture: 1) Abrahamic (Gen 15:6 w/Gen 17:1-2 w/18:19[10]), 2) Old (Exo 24:4-7 w/Lev 18:5 [in this light consider – Luk 10:25-28]), 3) New (Mat 28:18-20). As discussed, Evangelical Christianity rejects this paradigm, teaching instead “faith-alone” – or more accurately “easy-believism.”[11] Believing that God has relinquished our responsibility to obedience for salvation likewise condemns Him as unjust for once more reneging on His established ethical standard (Eze 18:26-27; Mat 5:18).

3.2.3. (31 and 33 w/35-37 w/Joh 4:22 w/Heb 2:16 w/Rom 2:29 w/Gal 3:26-29 w/Rom 11:17) = The New Covenant would remain very Jewish ([Jer 31:31 and 33] “a new covenant with the house of Israel and Judah…this is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel and Judah”) not only in its religion ([Joh 4:22] “salvation is from the Jews”]; Judaism 2.0.) but also its members ([Jer 31:36] “the offspring of Israel”; [Heb 2:16] “descendants of Abraham”). Gentiles are grafted into this community spiritually through baptism ([Rom 11:17] “grafted in [to Israel]”; [Rom 2:29] “he is a Jew who is one…by the Spirit”; [Gal 3:27 w/29] “baptized into Christ…you belong to Christ…you are Abraham’s descendants”).[12]

Auxiliary questions:

If Jesus is the end of Law (i.e., He obeyed for us – Mat 5:17 w/Rom 10:6), then how do we love God and others and why does Jesus teach it will remain until heaven and earth pass away? ([Mat 22:36-40; Rom 13:8-10] = God’s Law is the definition of love; Mat 5:17-18)
If Paul’s prohibition against performing the “works of the Law” means the principles established by God’s Law are no longer necessary for salvation, then why is that phrase only ever associated with the Old Covenant identity markers or signs of circumcision, ceremonial separation, Sabbath calendars and animal sacrifice? (Gal 2:1-3, 11-16, 4:10-11 w/21, 5:1-3; Rom 3:20-28, 4:1-13; 1Co 7:19 = There is a distinction between the moral commands and the OC identity markers/covenant signs)
If God’s standard of obedience for salvation is impossible then why does He say we can do it and how is He just in judging us according to our obedience to the Law (or “deeds”)? (Deu 30:11-14; Rom 2:5-13; Rev 20:11-15)
If a person can’t lose their salvation, then why all the warnings of damnation directed toward the saved? (Deu 29:18-20; Mat 7:21-23; Rom 11:22; Heb 6:1-6, 10:26-31, 12:15-17; Gal 5:4; Gal 5:21; 1Th 1:4 w/3:5)

[1] Ironically, these last three are essentially the same as the tactics historically employed by cults and evil regimes (e.g., Manson cult; Nazi Germany): 1) fuel emotional investment, 2) favor discord/discontinuity with former institutions, 3) hide/remove opposing voices.

[2] “[James] is an epistle of straw... Let us banish this epistle from the university, for it is worthless. It has no syllable about Christ, not even naming him except once at the beginning. I think it was written by some Jew who had heard of the Christians but not joined them... The epistle of James gives us much trouble...Accordingly, if they [the books of the New Testament] will not admit my interpretations, then I shall make rubble also of [them]. I almost feel like throwing Jimmy into the stove.” (Luther’s Works; Table Talk, 1522-1545).

[3] Luther’s response to those critical of his addition, “You tell me what a great fuss [people] are making because the word ‘alone’ in not in the text of Paul...say right out to [them]: ‘Dr. Martin Luther will have it so,’...I will have it so, and I order it to be so, and my will is reason enough. I know very well that the word ‘alone’ is not in the Latin or the Greek text.” (Rebuilding a Lost Faith)

[4] CCC has spent countless hours and over $60k (in billboards) attempting to get Evangelicals to address the pickle created by James 2:24 with no success. This includes conversations with their pastors and scholars. Dr. R. Scott Clark of Westminster Seminary California, even went as far as to lie by telling one of our members that the preposition “by” was not in the original Greek (audio recording available). Like Luther, he realizes the threat this verse poses to the FAG.

[5] (Heb 8:7-12, 10:16-17)

[6] Part of the confusion surrounding this issue involves the word translated “propitiation” (Grk., hilasterios) being understood (by Christianity) as “the appeasement of God’s wrath.” The word however carries no such connotation. It is associated with (God’s) mercy not wrath (e.g., Heb 9:5 – see also LXX Exo 25:16-17, 37:6 “mercy”). This was true also for its use outside Scripture in the ANE (e.g., The Religious Context of the Lydian Propitiation Inscriptions; Scholars favor “reconciliation” – not “punishment”, as a close synonym for propitiation). With regard to punishment (or serving justice), this has always been our responsibility – and the prerequisite, to receiving propitiation (or mercy) (e.g., Mat 5:24).

[7] Isaiah’s original audience, OC Israel would never have understood chapter 53 to be communicating penal substitution (e.g., vv5-8 “chastening…scourging…stricken for the transgression of my people” = Put to death for the purpose of propitiation – i.e., moral cleansing unto justification [v11]). Familiarity with their sacrificial system, made clear the difference between propitiation and punishment. They were also keenly aware of God’s prohibition against this heinously unjust act (again, Eze 18). Some have posited that Jesus’ mention of becoming a “ransom” for His people (Mat 20:28) implies punishment. This too however falls woefully short when considered against not only God’s prohibition against such forms of ransom (Lev 27:29), but the context of Jesus’ words: slavery (See vv26-27 w/“the Son of Man [however] did not come to be served [by slaves] but to serve [as a slave] and give [or by giving] His [entire] life [the disposition of a slave in relation to their Master] as a ransom for many [to free us from our bondage/slavery to sin]; See Phi 2:6-8). “Ransom” is the commonly used in the Bible to refer to the act of purchasing freedom for those enslaved (e.g., Mic 6:4).

[8] To believe in penal substitution likewise makes God guilty of another form of injustice - double jeopardy, since even those who have received Christ’s death for their sins end up incurring punishment for their sins. The greatest proof of this is our physical death (Gen 2:15). If Jesus was punished for our sins (i.e., He served our justice) then those saved would never experience physical death.

[9] Due to the threat it poses to their sacred cow (the FAG), 1Peter 3:21 – or the statement, “baptism now saves you” is another text Evangelicals wish didn’t exist. Their “brilliant solution” is to claim it doesn’t mean what it plainly says. Taking this position however creates an even bigger problem given the statement takes its meaning from the prior verse (verse 20) as indicated by the phrase “Corresponding to that” which begins verse 21. In the prior verse (verse 20), Peter establishes what will serve as his justification for linking baptism to salvation, God’s past use of water to destroy sin and save His people – most specifically, the destruction of sinful humanity and salvation of Noah and his family in the flood. Peter’s reference to the former deluge is most likely because it is the case which sets precedent. It is not however, the only historical example of God’s salvific use of water. Paul makes the same connection when recounting God’s use of the Red Sea to save the Israelites from the Egyptians even going as far as to refer to it as a form of baptism (1Co 10:1-2). Anyone therefore attempting to deny Peter’s linking of baptism to salvation, is not only failing to consider the watery event to which it corresponds, but more importantly, the historical continuity of God’s redemption so necessary to discerning the true gospel from what is false.

[10] See Dr. Richard Pratt, “Were The Covenant With Abraham and David Conditional?”

[11] Though the word “faith” in the NT (Grk., pistus) implies a vow of faithfulness – or the attribute of faithfulness itself (hence why it is translated also as faithfulness – e.g., Rom 3:3), like the FAG’s inventor, Martin Luther, Evangelicals choose to view it as communicating no such obligations. It instead functions only as a statement of trust (in the person and work of Christ). This understanding of faith is contrary to its historical use both in Scripture and in the ancient secular world. For further study see, Matthew Bates, Salvation By Allegiance Alone.

[12] Verse 34 represents the portion of the prophecy which makes the NC unique or different from the OC. When considered alongside similar prophecy (Jer 24:7, 32:40; Eze 36:25-27), it seems clear that what is meant by, “They will not teach again… each man his brother, ‘Know the LORD,’ for they will all know Me…[and] I will forgive their iniquity” is regeneration – or the replacement of our old sin stained and weakened hearts with a new, fully cleansed (propitiation versus pass over forgiveness) and HS empowered heart better equipped to carry out our vows of faithfulness.

View Details

The destruction of Solomon’s Temple in 586 BC, caused the Levitical priesthood to be displaced by synagogues (congregations or assemblies) and rabbis, men who because of their devotion to righteous behavior and deep study of the Old Testament were ordained by their congregations to function as their anointed shepherds, teachers and judges. The authority of these old covenant communities and their rabbis continued to be recognized as legitimate not only after the restoration of the Temple and priesthood, but during the time of Christ.[1] New Testament evidence strongly suggests “rabbi” remains the appropriate title for those serving as the anointed shepherds, teachers and judges of the new covenant community, the church.

Jesus established the synagogues – or congregations led by rabbis that existed in His day as the model for His new covenant churches (congregations).

1.1. (Joh 4:21-24) (21) “neither on this mountain [Mt. Gerizim – the site of the Samaritan temple] nor in Jerusalem [the site of Israel’s Temple] will you worship the Father” = God’s location will no longer be a single place fixed on a sacred mountain. IOW: no more temples (22) “Salvation is from the Jews” = God’s salvation or Savior (Messiah – v25-26) is only for Jews and their religion (Judaism) (Heb 2:16). (23-24) “an hour is coming and now is” = The model for New Covenant Judaism’s people and place of worship are already in existence. They are identified by two things: 1) “spirit” = Entering into worship will only be afforded to spiritual Jews (versus the Temple which excluded all but ethnic Jews. IOW: no Gentile proselytes were allowed into its inner courts of worship) (Rom 2:27). 2) “truth” = The focus of worship will be the teaching of Scripture (versus the Temple where the focus is the sacrifices of the priesthood) (Joh 17:17).

1.2. What people and places of worship already existed that fit the things mentioned by Jesus (not a temple, not therefore associated with the priests, entering into worship was available to all who are spiritual Jews, and the focus of worship is the teaching of Scripture)? The first century synagogues (congregations, assemblies) who welcomed into worship Gentiles converts (i.e., Gentiles who became spiritual Jews) and whose focus was the teaching of Scripture by their rabbis.

Jesus and the apostles carried the title of Rabbi which implies they were training and ordaining their disciples to become rabbis as the leaders and planters of new covenant churches.

2.1. Jesus was called “Rabbi” (Mat 26:25, 49; Mar 9:5, 11:21; Joh 1:38, 3:2, 4:31, 6:25, 9:2, 11:8; hence the reason Jesus is allowed to teach in the synagogues [e.g., Luk 4:15]. Only Rabbis were allowed to teach in the synagogues).[2]

2.2. That Jesus was indeed a rabbi is also supported by His: 1) speech when correcting false teaching (Mat 5:21-22, 27-28, 33-34, 38-39)= According to Dr. David Daube, this repeated formula (“you have heard that it was said…but I say to you”) was the calling card of the rabbis.[3] 2) posture when teaching (Mat 5:1-2; Mat 13:1-3a; Luk 4:16 w/20-21) = According to Dr. David Sedaca, sitting while teaching was the invention of the rabbis.[4]

2.3. Jesus employs the master-slave/teacher-disciple language used by rabbis in His addresses to the twelve (e.g., Mat 10:24-27; Luk 6:40).

2.4. The fact that the twelve lived with Jesus and provided for His needs (e.g., Joh 4:8 w/31 “the disciples were urging him saying, ‘Rabbi eat’”) also points to their discipleship being that of rabbi trainees.[5]

2.5. Matthew and John’s mention of Jesus anointing the eleven with authority as the church’s first leaders would have been understood by first century readers as a Rabbi ordaining His young disciples as junior rabbis (Joh 20:21-23 = The combination of sending and receiving of the HS indicates ordination/anointing to ministry.

The authority to forgive sins is what is meant by binding and loosing in Mat 16:17-19 = The phrase “binding and loosing” was unique to the ancient rabbis and a reference to their authority as judges in penal cases). [6]

2.6. Similar to the other apostles, Paul received training as a rabbi (Act 22:3 “educated under Gamaliel”) = Gamaliel was a Rabbi and the president (Heb., nasi) of the Sanhedrin (Babylonian Talmud: Shab. 15a). To be educated by him, meant that Paul was his disciple – i.e., that he was trained by him to be a Rabbi according to the theological and hermeneutical convictions of the Pharisees (in contrast to the Sadducees; Act 5:34 w/Act 23:6). As a result, Paul (like Jesus) was allowed to teach in the synagogues (Act 13:14-16ff).

2.7. Paul’s constant push to be in the homes of his disciples - as well as his call for them to imitate his life, further supports his rabbinical identity given those ordained as rabbis were the only ones considered legitimate enough to makes such demands (Act 20:20; Rom 15:24, 28-29; 1Co 11:1; Phi 3:17, 4:9; 2Th 3:9).[7]

2.8. Paul’s reference to the ordination/anointing of Timothy (“laying on of hands”) likewise was a phrase associated with being ordained/anointed as a rabbi in ancient times (1Ti 4:14; 2Ti 1:6).[8]

2.9. The fact that Paul and the other apostles could ordain men to be leaders so quickly after a church was planted also supports that they were rabbis – or in these cases, men who were previously being trained to be rabbis, since this was the only form of theological education available in the first century (Act 6:6, 8:17; Act 14:23).

2.10. Peter’s reference to the younger (elders) submitting to the (older) elders in (1Pe 5:5) likewise finds precedent in the practice of junior rabbis - most specifically, when giving their judgment on court-related matters (Mishna Sanhedrin 4:2). Outside of the rabbinical context, nothing exists for understanding Peter’s instruction in 5:1-6.

The term “pastor” is never used in the NT as a formal title or rank when referring to the leaders of God’s people.

3.1. Formal titles or ranks used in the Bible for leaders: 1) apostles and elders (Act 15:2; 1Co 12:28[9]), 2) overseers and deacons (Phi 1:1), 3) rabbi or teacher (Joh 1:38), 4) prophets (Act 13:1[10]), 5) lord (Joh 6:68[11]). No leader is ever addressed using the word “pastor/shepherd.”

3.2. Even when the term (“Shepherd”) is attached to Jesus, it carries with it the idea of “rabbi” indicating “pastor/shepherd” to be more a descriptor of function similar to OT examples (Jer 39:3; 2Ki 18:17) (1Pe 5:5 “Chief [rab means ‘chief’] Shepherd” Heb 13:20 “Great [rab means ‘great’] Shepherd”).

3.3. Though the leaders of the NT church carried out the function of shepherding (1Pe 5:2) – as well as the office of priest (hence why Rom 15:16), neither of these terms are used to formally address them.

3.4. Unlike the case with rabbi, the term pastor is never linked to ordination/anointing in the first century. Besides apostles and prophets, rabbis were also the only other individuals being ordained in the first century (e.g., priests – Heb 7:21).

The fact that Jesus prohibits the use of rabbi in Matthew 23 lends further support to this term as the appropriate title/rank for the church’s ordained leaders.

4.1. (Mat 23:8-10)

4.2. What Jesus is not saying = Never use these titles ([1Co 12:28; 2Ti 1:11] = Rabbi; 1Co 4:15; Eph 6:2; Heb 13:17).

4.3. What Jesus is saying = Never consider those who receive these titles as your final authority. Such respect and submission must be given to God and God alone.

4.4. Why Jesus picks these three titles (rabbi, father and leader) = Because they were the common nomenclatures of His day. IOW: these are how the people of the covenant community addressed those men in the position of elder/overseer in the church.

4.5. Why Jesus does not mention the term “pastor” = Because it was not considered – nor ever used to address the church’s elders/overseers.

4.6. Why Jesus’ mention of “father” and “leader” is most likely a reference back to “rabbi”: 1) because this is the context of the verses (the Pharisees were rabbis who competed with each other to become the people’s final authority or Messianic Rabbi – vv1-7 [hence Joh 4:25][12]). 2) because rabbi is the only title (or rank) which accommodates the other two. IOW: the disciples of rabbis were instructed to view them as not only their spiritual leaders but their spiritual fathers (again consider Paul – 1Co 4:15; Talmud Sanhedrin).[13]

CLOSING CONTEMPLATION: 1) Why do you suppose Christianity replaced the term “rabbi” with the term “pastor”?

2) If “Rabbi” was how the first church addressed Jesus and their elders (i.e., their ordained men) shouldn’t we follow their example?

[1] Rabbi (possessive of [Heb.,] rab = Literally, “great” – 1Sa 1:16). When attached to persons it came to mean master, chief, captain [“my master, my chief, my captain”] (e.g., explicit: Dan 1:3 “chief” [chief of the eunuchs]; Jon 1:6 “captain” [captain of the ship]; implicit: Jer 39:3 “Rab-mag” = Master-magician 2Ki 18:17 “Rab-saris” = Chief minister; “Rabshakeh” = Captain of the officers). Rabbi was the title of respect, affection and rank or authority conferred through ordination upon those men recognized by a Jewish congregation and/or an existing rabbi as their anointed spiritual leaders and qualified teachers of God’s Word (Judaism). “A Hebrew term used as a title for those who are distinguished for learning, who are the authoritative teachers of the Law, and who are the appointed spiritual heads of the community… In the Palestinian schools the sages were addressed as "Rabbi" (my master). This term of respectful address gradually came to be used as a title.” (Jewish Encyclopedia); “Etymologically, the term rabbi hearkens back to the time of Jewish life during the Babylonian Captivity of the fifth century BC. The Hebrew/Aramaic word rab being borrowed from Akkadian, denotes one who holds a respected position. The term is incorporated into such names as , ‘Rabsaris and Rab-shekah’ (2Ki 18:17), and ‘Rab-mag’ (Jer 39:3). These are actually names or titles of officers indicating a position of rank. Later, rab will speak of a master over his slave and eventually will reference a teacher over his disciples. As Kittel attests, ‘The use [of rab] for teachers goes back to the second century BC. Students follow their teachers with respectful obedience. When qualified to teach, they themselves are [ordained] with the title, which the congregation as a whole also use.” (Gerhard Kittel; Theological Dictionary Of The New Testament) By the time of the Gospels, the addition of the Hebrew possessive suffix (i) had created a more familiar spelling, rabbi, making the master/disciple [teacher/student] relationship not only respectful, but also more personal (‘my master, my teacher’).” – Tommy L. Miller (“Jesus as Rabbi: Examining the Claims and evaluating the Biblical Evidence).

[2] “John’s Gospel provides unmistakable evidence that Jesus was perceived as a rabbi, a Jewish religious teacher…The Jewish religious leadership, the crowds, the disciples perceived Jesus in accordance with the accepted cultural role of rabbi.” – Andreas J. Kostenberger (“Jesus as Rabbi in the Fourth Gospel”); “Many leading scholars (Kostenberger, Donaldson, Reddin, Manser, and Kittel) assert that Jesus both served and was accepted by His contemporaries in the real office and function of a rabbi.” – Miller (ibid)

[3] Daube goes as far as to call Matthew “a rabbinic gospel.” See The New Testament & Rabbinic Judaism

[4] Sedaca also maintains that the modern university department chair finds its origin in this unique practice by the rabbis. See “The Mount of Beatitudes and the Authority of Jesus”; “We know that Jesus was an accepted rabbi because He sat to teach.” (ibid)

[5] According to the Babylonian Talmud, the disciples of rabbis (those being trained to be rabbis) would spend most of their time with their respective Rabbi not only for the purpose of learning, but also providing for his physical needs.

[6] For further study see: K. Delong, “Binding and Loosing in the Church Today”); J Duncan M Derrett “Binding and Loosing”; RH Hiers, “Bind and Loosing: The Matthean Authorizations”; “In [first century] Judaism there is no power endowed with the right to bind and loose, but only rabbis who expound the Law and give information thereof.” (“Jahresbericht des Breslauer Seminars”). “The title 'Rabbi' is borne by the sages of Palestine, who were ordained…in accordance with the custom handed down by the elders, and were denominated 'Rabbi,' and received authority to judge penal cases.” (Jewish Encyclopedia)

[7] “Let your home be a meeting house for the sages, and cover yourself with the dust of their feet, and drink in their words thirstily.” Yose ben Yoezer (2nd century BC rabbi)

[8] According to the Jewish Encyclopedia, the phrase “laying on of hands” or semicha, was “first used of Rabban Gamaliel the elder, Rabban Simeon his son, and Rabban Johanan ben Zakkai, all of whom were patriarchs or presidents of the Sanhedrin. The title 'Rabbi,' too, came into vogue among those who received the laying on of hands at this period…The imposition of hands, which, it is known, was the usage of the Jews at the ordination of a rabbi.”

[9] Beyond gifting, Paul seems to also be indicating rank (“God has appointed in the church, first…”). Third on the list is “teachers” – i.e., rabbis.

[10] Given the Jewish context and its close connection to rabbi (e.g., Joh 3:2a), scholars believe most uses of “teacher” (Grk., didaskolos) in the NT indicate that person to be a rabbi.

[11] According to H.L. Ellison, the parallel titles in Mat 8:25, Mark 4:38 and Luk 8:24, mean, “we are probably safe in assuming that where Jesus is called Lord it normally represents Rabbi.” (New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology)

[12] OC Judaism continues to place various rabbis in the place of Messiah (e.g., Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson).

[13] As mentioned, this accommodation is unique to the rabbi. Men could be fathers but not rabbis or leaders in the church (e.g., biological father). Men could also be leaders but (again) not a rabbi or a father (e.g., Ryan). There however existed no rabbi who was not a father and a leader.

View Details

As part of His messianic mission, Jesus came to see that the principles established by the Old Testament Scriptures (the laws governing Old Covenant Judaism) are faithfully obeyed (Isa 2:1-3; Mic 4:1-3; Mat 5:17-20) according to their transformation by His ministry (i.e., their application in New Covenant Judaism) For example (1Co 5:1-5 [Lev 18:8 w/20:10] w/Heb 9:13-14) = Unlike the former sin offerings, Christ’s death can cleanse our souls (“conscience” = Sense of guilt/corruption in relation to one’s own soul or the soul of others; 2Co 4:2; Heb 9:9-10, 10:1-2 ; See also 1Jo 1:9) of “dead works” or mortal sins (i.e., capital crimes): sins which mortally wound the moral state of the soul (e.g., 1Jo 5:16 “sin that leads to death”; See also Jub 21:22 “sin a sin unto death”) making the guilty person’s physical death no longer necessary as a means of preserving their soul for salvation (1Co 5:5 “so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus”) = God’s goal in justice from the beginning (2Co 13:11 = Goal of justice is mercy/salvation). Excommunication is now the way to accomplishing those ends – (versus Jos 7:19).[1]

Faithfully obeying those principles established by OT Scriptures according to their transformation in Christ (NC application) therefore includes the various Sabbath commands (days, harvest season festivals and years): 1) Hardship relief (Exo 20:8-11 and Lev 25:1-55 w/Heb 4:9-11 and Mat 12:12). 2) Holy convocation w/feasting and rejoicing (Psa 42:4; Lev 23:1, 7-8, 21, 24, 27, 35-37 w/Heb 10:25; Psa 92 w/Col 3:16). 3) Reciprocation (Exo 23:14-19 w/Heb 7:1-10; 1Co 16:1-2). 4) Covenant renewal (Lev 23:1-44 w/Luk 22:19-20).

That being said, what changes have been made to the Sabbath under New Covenant Judaism? And why the change?

What? Our observance of the Sabbath principles are no longer tied to the day of Saturday, the festivals of Passover, Pentecost and Yom Kippur or the 7th and 50th year of Jubilee.

Though the Sabbath commands remain intact (Mat 5:17-18), Paul not only views them as no longer tied to Saturday, the Festivals or Jubilee, but strongly warns against finding any soteriological value in their former application (Gal 4:9-11; Col 2:16-17 w/23).

Why? Because the locus of our Savior God’s identity is no longer the old Creation– but the new.

What was being communicated through OC Israel’s observance of the seventh-day Sabbath as a holiday (i.e., a day off from work to rest, convocate, reciprocate and renew the covenant) was that her Savior from slavery to false gods (the creator gods of Egypt – Jos 24:15; Exo 12:16; Num 33:1-4) was Yhwh, the (true and only) God of Creation. For NC Israel however it is different. Though Yhwh is still our Savior from slavery to false gods (Jesus is the Yhwh Who led OC Israel out of Egypt – Jud 1:5), His locus of identity is no longer the original (or old) Creation – but the New Creation as evidenced by His gospel message of regeneration and His personal resurrection from the dead on the first day (Gen 1:5). Important also to note, celebrating the Sabbath on the first day has precedent in the OT. Each of the Feast Sabbaths (“holy convocations”) had a 1st day Sabbath associated w/it (Lev 23:7 [P/UL], 15 w/21 [W], 35 [B]).

Evidence of Sunday Sabbath observance in the NT: Considering the Pentecost of Acts 2 was celebrated on a Sunday, the statement, (46) “throughout the day (a better translation of [Grk.] kath’ hemera [“day by day]; e.g., Act 11:1)…in the temple and from house to house [house churches]” suggests a Sunday Sabbath observance since that this is when all but one of the four Sabbath principles (hardship relief) were also observed (46-47).

What? The prohibition against cooking on the Sabbath no longer remains in force.

3.1. (Rom 14:1-21):

1) The focus of Paul’s instruction is the weaker brother whose opinion is that he can only eat vegetables on certain days (1-2).

2) That food (specifically eating vegetables only) is Paul’s focus is confirmed by both the number of verses devoted to the subject (all but verse 5) and his immediate return to the subject of food after mentioning the issue of days in verse 5 and part of 6.

3) One must therefore conclude that the only reason Paul briefly mentions days is because of their direct connection to the food issue (5) “one person regards one day above another (w/regard to what he can/cannot eat) another regards every day alike (w/regard to what he can/cannot eat).”

4) Whatever the food issue is, it is related to OT clean laws (14, 20).

5) There is only one food issue that fits the aforementioned criteria: the prohibition against foods prepared on the Sabbath (e.g., v21, “[broiled] meat… [mixed] wine” – Pro 9:2). Such food would be considered “unclean” (i.e., profaned or defiled by the fact that it was prepared on the Sabbath). Besides those foods prepared on the prior day, the only other acceptable foods for consumption would be raw fruits and vegetables – which would/could be the only option for the weaker Jewish brother (i.e., ethnic Jew who still feels weird about consuming things prepared on the Sabbath) when feasting with his church family (whose meals were prepared on the Sabbath).

3.2. PNTM: Paul no longer sees the prohibition of preparing food on the Sabbath applying under its NC application (i.e., the Sunday Sabbath).

Why? Because the prohibition against preparing food did not apply to first day Sabbaths.

4.1. Though still holidays and therefore prohibiting regular work, all Feast Sabbaths (or “first day” Sabbaths) allowed for the preparing of food. Hence the reason they are called “feasts” [Heb., chag] and “holy convocations” [Heb., miqra qodesh] (Lev 23:7 [P/UL], 15 w/21 [W], 35 [B]; Deu 14:26 w/Deu 16:1-16 [Exo 12:16 “no work shall be done except what must be eaten by every person, that alone may be prepared by you.”]).[2]

4.2. Different words are used in Leviticus 23 to distinguish between those Sabbaths which prohibit “any/no work” and those which prohibit “no laborious work.” For example: Yom Kippur (Lev 23:28, 31 [Heb., melacha] = All labor including preparing food) versus the Feast of Booths (Lev 23:35-36 [Heb., melechet avodah] = All labor except for preparing food).

4.3. PNTM: Christ has established a first day Sabbath (Sunday) that – based on the principles being observed by the early church (e.g., hardship relief as well as holy convocations and covenant renewal – Act 2:42-47), were viewed as not only the replacement for the seventh day (regular) Sabbath but also the Feast Sabbaths which allowed (encouraged! Deu 14:26) the preparation of food.

CLOSING TAKEAWAYS:

The two types of Sabbath days (regular, feast) have been combined into one day – The Lord’s Day or Sunday which means it is on this day that God expects us to faithfully practice the principles established by all the Sabbath commands: 1) rest/recreation/relief/release (Saturday evening until Sunday evening), 2) convocation w/feasting (cooking and alcohol allowed) and fellowship (Saturday evenings or Sunday afternoons), 3) reciprocation and return on God’s blessings (Sunday worship), 4) convocation w/singing/rejoicing, remembrance and covenant renewal (Sunday worship).
The Sabbath begins and ends at sunset (Saturday sunset to Sunday sunset). Check your phones to determine the exact time.
Work prohibited on the Sabbath (barring the discussed exceptions) includes: 1) any job for which you are compensated. 2) any work related to your job or career. 3) all things related to going to school or training. 4) all things related to housekeeping, yard work or cleaning that could reasonably be done on another day (contra: cleaning up after cooking and feasting on the Sabbath). 5) requiring humans or animals to work for you (versus voluntary choice). 6) travel which requires humans or animals to work (e.g., riding a horse). Helpful questions: Is it leisure or labor? If labor, is it an emergency, mercy (doctors, police officers, etc.,) or ministry?
Anyone deliberately/intentionally forsaking (“profaning”) the Sunday Sabbath (Saturday evening to Sunday evening), by not observing its established principles are guilty of a capital crime (Exo 31:14-15, 35:2) which includes: 1) refusing to sing on Sundays. 2) refusing to renew the covenant through confession and repentance. 3) choosing to do work or make others do work that is prohibited. 4) choosing to fail in your tithe. 5) refusing to feast and fellowship w/your covenant family on Saturday evenings or Sunday afternoons. 6) refusing to treat God’s Sabbath and house (worship service) as holy and a delight in attitude or action (Isa 58:13-14; e.g., the use of drugs or alcohol not authorized by the church - including prescription drugs during service; [participating, watching or listening to other things during service; sleeping during service; not paying attention during service; leaving early from service or feasting and fellowship times] w/o a valid excuse).

[1] Consider (Heb 6:1 “repentance from dead works”) = Such language would not be used if by “dead works” was meant “works of the law” (the opinion of many Christians) since this would imply God’s law to be sinful. “The vast majority of commentaries now rightly suggest that [“dead works”] in Hebrews [6:1 w/6, 9:14] [refer] to acts that lead to death.” – Kenneth Schenck (A New Perspective On Hebrews).

[2] “Shauvot (Pentecost) is a full-fledged Yom Tov

(festive day), and as such carries most of the same restrictions as Shabbat.

The exception is that food preparation (e.g., cooking) is permitted.” – Rabbi

Shraga Simmons (Aish.org)

View Details

That being said, what changes have been made to the Sabbath under New Covenant Judaism? And why the change?

What? Our observance of the Sabbath principles are no longer tied to the day of Saturday, the festivals of Passover, Pentecost and Yom Kippur or the 7th and 50th year of Jubilee.

1.1. (Gal 4:9-11 “elemental things”) = Superficial forms of discipline able to teach but not transform (see v1-3; 1Ti 4:8). Paul’s mention of more than just days indicate his prohibition to include all the various Sabbatical times and dates in Scripture (“days [Saturdays] and months and seasons [months associated w/harvest season festivals: 1st of the month for Passover or Spring harvest; 3rd month for Pentecost or Summer harvest; 7th month for Yom Kippur or Fall harvest] and years [7th and 50th Jubilee]).

1.2. (Col 2:16-17) “act as your judge” = Condemn you; “shadow” = In form only [it was superficial] without the real power or substance [of its spiritual reality]; Hence 2:23). Paul’s encouragement to essentially ignore condemnation for things including the Sabbath only becomes relevant if the Colossians were not observing such commands according to their OC applications (Saturdays, Passover, Pentecost and Yom Kippur, 7th and 50th year jubilees).

1.3. PNTM: Though the Sabbath commands remain intact (Mat 5:17-18), Paul not only views them as no longer tied to Saturday, the Festivals or Jubilee, but strongly warns against finding any soteriological value in their former application (Gal 4:11; Col 2:23).

Why? Because the locus of our Savior God’s identity is no longer the original or old Creation.

2.1. The main reason God makes Israel observe the seventh day Sabbath was to make sure they remembered that their deliverance from their slavery not only to the Egyptians but more importantly, their false gods (whom they were guilty of serving – Jos 24:15) was because He and He alone was the true Creator of the universe (Deu 5:15) = The phrase “by an outstretched arm” (in Deu 5:15) is believed to be a reference to the ten plagues (Exo 7:5, 15:12) – which according to scholars, served a dual – yet related purpose: 1) to reveal Yhwh as the true and only Creator God of the universe, 2) to expose Egypt’s creator gods as demonic frauds (Exo 7:4-5, 14:31). For example:

1) As a demonstration of God’s sovereignty (or ownership over Creation), the first eight plagues function as a sort of reversal of those things created on the six days of Creation (1st plague w/Gen 1:10 -bodies of water filled with life; 2nd, 3rd and 4th plagues w/Gen 1:20, 22, 24 w/28 – the animals of the sea, the land and the air wb ruled by man; 5th plague w/Gen 2:18-20 – domestic animals to help man; 6th plague w/Gen 1:28 man blessed w/good health; 7th and 8th plague w/Gen 1:12, 29 – an abundance of fruits and veggies for food).

2) The ninth plague (darkness you can feel – Exo 10:21) communicated what (then) remains – or may be claimed as home by those choosing false gods, the darkness of de-creation and chaos that existed before Yhwh’s ordering presence and power (Gen 1:2).

3) The tenth plague (death of the firstborn) includes also “first-born gods” – a term used by the Egyptians to refer to their creator gods - Atum-Ra and his 8 children, the Ennead (e.g., Egyptian coffin texts and the Cannibal Hymn, “It is the king who will be judged with Him-whose-name-is-hidden on that day of slaying the first born [gods]” [The Priests of Ancient Egypt]).

4) Just as God created the universe by uttering 10 blessings (Gen 1:3, 6, 9, 11, 14, 20, 24, 26, 28, 29) so He also destroys the “universe of Egypt” (her gods, people, animals, resources, etc) by uttering curses/plagues.

“At the end of the narrative in Exodus, Israel looks back over the stilled water of the Sea at a land with no people, no animals, no vegetation, a land in which creation has been undone. Israel is convinced that her redeemer is the Lord of all creation. He who had just reduced order to chaos was the same as he who had previously ordered the chaos.” – Ziony Zevit (“Three Ways To Look At The Ten Plagues”)[1]

2.2. What (then) was being communicated through OC Israel’s observance of the seventh-day Sabbath as a holiday (i.e., a day off from work to rest, convocate, reciprocate and renew the covenant): Israel’s Savior from slavery to false gods (the creator gods of Egypt – Jos 24:15; Exo 12:16; Num 33:1-4) is Yhwh, the (true and only) God of Creation.

2.3. For NC Israel however it is different. Though Yhwh is still our Savior from slavery to false gods (Jesus is the Yhwh Who led OC Israel out of Egypt – Jud 1:5), His locus of identity is no longer the original (or old) Creation – but the New Creation:

1) Another important part of Jesus’ messianic mission was to usher in the new Creation (i.e., the new heavens and the new earth) (Isa 11:1 w/6-10 = Language related to the new heavens and earth [Isa 65:17-25]).

2) Delivering people into the new Creation was the goal of Jesus’ salvific ministry (Joh 10:9-11) “life abundantly” = Life as a new creation (Tit 3:5-6 “He saved us…by the washing of regeneration” = Propitiation resulting in new creation (Mat 19:28 “In the regeneration” = The new Creation) = Salvation means that our spirits have not only been cleansed but replaced with those fit for the coming new heavens and earth (Rev 21-22). IOW: we have become a new creation for the new Creation – the ultimate goal of our salvation! This is also what Jesus is getting at when He speaks about the new birth (Joh 3:3) = We must be born a new creation to enter the new Creation to come.

3) Accordingly, those saved under the New Covenant exist as the evidence that the new Creation has already begun - and likewise, that the old Creation is passing away (i.e., it is in its final stage or “last days” ; Act 2:17; Heb 1:2 = Last days of the old Creation) (2Co 5:17; Rom 8:18-21 = The “revealing of the sons of God” [those saved under the NC] marks the beginning of the New Creation [“the glory of the children of God”])

4) For this reason also, Jesus’ resurrection is considered the “first fruits” or beginning of this new Creation age (1Co 15:20) “first fruits of those asleep” = The beginning of the resurrection age – the consummation and fully realized new Creation – the new heavens and the new earth (again Mat 22:30 and Rev 21-22).[2]

2.4. PNTM: Jesus (Yhwh) our Savior – or the salvation He offers to us (NC Israel) is associated with the new Creation (and no longer the old). As such, our Sabbath day commemoration should not take place on the seventh day - the day commemorating the old Creation, but the first day - the day commemorating the beginning of a new Creation (Gen 1:2) and the reason Christ rose on Sunday.

2.5. That observing the Sabbath associated with the new Creation (i.e., Sunday) is now what matters to God and our salvation is confirmed by Paul in (Gal 6:14-16) What Paul is saying: those things (“circumcision”) associated with Old Covenant Israel – and the old Creation (“the world” [this old Creation]), no longer benefit us with respect to salvation – or the message about the God we serve. Therefore, “in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ (or, thru the salvation of Yhwh under the New Covenant)…the world (the old Creation associated w/OC Israel) has been crucified to me, and I to [that] world.” IOW: my association to OC Israel/old Creation no longer matters to God. What now matters is the “new creation” (i.e., what was ushered in thru the salvation of Jesus) because this (the new creation) is the new identity of “the Israel of God.”

“It [is] clearly only a short theological step to point out that just as the Sabbath commemorated creation (Exo 20:11), so the first day of the week, through its association with the Resurrection, could be seen as a memorial of the new creation.” – A.T. Lincoln (Form Sabbath To Lord’s Day)

2.6. Though condemned by OC Jews as completely novel, OT precedent does exist for observing the Sabbath on the first day (Sunday) (Exo 12:16).

2.7. Evidence of the early church’s observance of the Sabbath on the first day (Sunday): 1) (Rev 1:10) “Lord’s day”= Day that is the property of God – i.e., the Sabbath (Exo 20:8-11). However, John’s use the Greek term kurios (Lord) more than likely refers to Christ given the context (v8 “Lord God” = Jesus Christ). Assuming this then to be John’s intended use, implies that there is a double meaning behind his words (and possibly why he says, “Lord’s day” instead of “Sabbath”). John is identifying Sunday (the day the “Lord” Jesus rose from the grave) as the new Sabbath.[3] 2) (Act 20:7-11) = There are several Sabbath principles being observed at this “first day” event that support viewing it as a Sunday Sabbath celebration: (2.1.) covenant renewal through the LT (“break bread”). (2.2.) holy convocation (those “gathered together” must be saved individuals since their purpose for doing so is the LT and teaching – both signs that this is a house church – the NC equivalent of the OC synagogue- and Paul’s typical point of contact; See e.g., 20:17-20 [Col 4:15; Phm 1:2]). Scholars agree that these Sabbath observing activities more than likely took place on Saturday evening – the beginning of Sunday or the first day (per the evening-to-evening identification of days in Genesis). Hence the reason for the “many lamps” and Paul’s message lasting until “midnight.” [4] This (too) lends support to this being a Sunday Sabbath observance given that in the first century, Saturday remained the only day-off in the Roman Empire making Sunday mornings – at least initially, impractical[5] – or even impossible (e.g., slavery; hence Mat 11:25-30). 3) (1Co 16:1-2) = The freewill offering was typically reserved for the Sabbath festivals (Deu 12:5-6). Paul’s instruction regarding the “first day” in this respect strongly suggests he now views this day (Sunday) as the new Sabbath established for such practice. 4) (Act 2:42-47) = Observance of all four of the established Sabbath principles can be found in these verses (covenant renewal – 42, 46; holy convocation w/rejoicing – 44, 46-47; reciprocation– 45 [4:37]; hardship relief – 45). The phrase “day by day” in (v46) infers that the activities which follow extend from one day into the next. In this case, Saturday worship in the “temple” followed by Sunday evening in observance of all but one of the aforementioned Sabbath principles (hardship relief) in the various house churches (“one mind in the temple [on Saturday] and [then] breaking bread from house to house [etc., on Sunday evening].”). This understanding of “day by day” (Saturday into Sunday) finds additional support when considered in relation to (v47) = People were being “saved” (through baptism) on Saturday at temple followed by more on Sunday evening at the house churches (e.g., v41 = People were baptized [saved] immediately following Peter’s Pentecost message at the temple).

CLOSING CONTEMPLATION: 1) What did Jesus do that justified the change in application for capital crimes? 2) Why does Paul teach that it is okay to cook on the (Sunday) Sabbath?

[1] Consider also, “In ancient Israelite traditions, the Exodus narrative is not understood as being entirely distinct from the Creation story; and a strict separation between the two should not be made…They are two expressions of a single national story…the central concern is the [creation/redemption] of the people of God.” – David W. Pao (Acts and the Isaianic New Exodus)

[2] Resurrection, regeneration, new birth and new creation are near-synonyms (e.g. Mat 22:30 w/Mat 19:28). Hence why our regeneration can be spoken of as a type of resurrection (Rom 6:4; See also Eph 1:19-20 w/2:5-6).

[3] By the 2nd century, “Lord’s Day” as a reference to Sunday was its almost exclusive use among the early church Fathers and writings (e.g., Ignatius, Clement, Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, Didache, Epistle of Barnabas, Acts of Peter, Gospel of Peter, Acts of Paul)

[4] “Luke’s pattern regarding time periods and seasons, and his repeated use of Jewish time markers tells us this event likely happened on a Saturday night, after a day-long gathering on the Sabbath.” - Denis Fortin (“Paul’s Observance of the Sabbath in Acts of the Apostles as a Marker of Continuity Between Judaism and Early Christianity”)

[5] The Epistles of Pliny (early 2nd c.) indicate that those wanting to worship on Sunday mornings were forced to meet before dawn due to work.

View Details

As part of His messianic mission, Jesus came to see that the principles established by the Old Testament Scriptures (the laws governing Old Covenant Judaism) are faithfully obeyed according to their application for New Covenant Judaism (Isa 2:1-3; Mic 4:1-3; Mat 5:17-20). This includes those principles established by the various Sabbath day commands.

That being said…

There are four principles established by the various Sabbath commands that we must be faithful to practice:

1.1. Rest and relief from labors, hardships or suffering.

1.1.1. (Exo 23:12, 31:12-17; Lev 25:1-13 [the poor and property, 14-55]) = The seventh day, seventh year and the end of seven sabbath years were all to be observed as times of rest or relief from regular work - and other labors, hardships or suffering, not only for God’s people, but those people, animal and things under their charge. Notice again from Exodus 31: these “sabbaths” (or all of God’s various Sabbath commands): 1) promised certain death to those who found defiant (14-15 “profane” = Violate in defiance [e.g., Num 15:30-36]); “shall surely be put to death” -mentioned 2x for emphasis]). 2) were viewed by Him as a “perpetual covenant”, a “forever sign” between Him and Israel (Exo 31:16-17).

1.1.2. (Exo 16:22-30 “boil what you boil and bake what you bake [on the days before the Sabbath]”; Exo 35:1-3 “you shall not kindle a fire” [for cooking]) = Rest included no cooking on the Sabbath. All cooking must be done before the seventh day.

1.1.3. (Exo 20:8-11) = The importance of observing the Sabbath commands is highlighted not only by the threat of death but the fact that God made it the 4th of His ten commandments.

1.1.4. During His earthly ministry, Jesus clarified what forms of work were acceptable -or exceptions, on the Sabbath (Mat 12:1-8 “Son of Man” [Dan 7:13] w/ “Lord of the Sabbath”) = I am God, the One Who created/instituted the Sabbath and therefore know what is acceptable to do on this day – which includes all: 1) those involved in sacred work (e.g., pastors/priests – vv1-7). 2) unforeseen/special circumstances (e.g., assets in jeopardy – vv9-11[1]). 3) work directly related to relieving hardship or suffering (e.g., mercy ministries, doctors – vv12-13[2]). 4) those forced to work on the Sabbath by unjust employers (Mat 11:25-30 w/12:1 “at that time”) = Matthew connects Jesus’ words in 11:25-30 to what follows in the Sabbath pericopes of chapter 12 indicating this as its context as well. In typical hypocritical fashion (Mat 23), the Pharisees condemning Jesus’ Sabbath day activities, were the ones truly guilty of profaning it through their refusal to give this day off to those they employed – most specifically, their young disciples (Mat 23:4 “heavy burdens”). Jesus’ words express divine judgment against the Pharisees (“you have hidden these things [the revelation of Jesus regarding the Father] from the wise and intelligent” [sarcasm: the Pharisees who believed themselves to spiritually wise and intelligent but were instead spiritually dumb and blind – Joh 9:40-41]) while extending divine favor to those forced to work (“[you] have revealed them to infants [their young disciples]…Come to Me all who are weary…and I will give you rest…you will [also] find rest for your souls [IOW: become My disciples and not only will you no longer be forced to work on the Sabbath but also find the eternal rest of the Father you have been seeking as disciples of the Pharisees]).” (i.e., God shows compassion to those not afforded a Sabbath rest by their masters [Deu 5:15 “slave” w/no day of rest]).

1.1.5. That God requires NC Jews to keep this principle of the Sabbath is confirmed by: (Heb 3:11-4:11).

1.1.6. This Sabbath principle is most likely what is being described/prescribed in: (Act 4:32-37).

1.2. Reunion and rejoicing as a holy convocation.

1.2.1. (Lev 23:1-8 [Passover/Unleavened Bread] w/15 w/21 [Pentecost/Weeks] w/23-41 [Trumpets/Yom Kippur/Booths]) “a sabbath…a holy convocation” (Heb., miqra) = Assemblies (v36); “Feast…celebrate the feast…rejoice…celebrate it as a feast…celebration” = These Sabbath assemblies/holy convocations were to be a time of rejoicing [partying] with the covenant family through fellowship and fine dining – including strong drink (Deu 14:26). These family reunions were to also include corporate singing and the playing of musical instruments in the courts/house of the Lord (Psa 92:1-4 w/13-14).

1.2.2. That God requires NC Jews to keep this principle of the Sabbath is confirmed by: (Heb 10:25) “assembling together” = An allusion to God’s multiple mandates to not forsake His prescribed holy convocations/Sabbath assemblies (e.g., Lev 23).

1.2.3. This Sabbath principle is most likely what is being described/prescribed in:

1) (Act 2:44-47) “were (assembled) together” = holy convocation/Sabbath assembly; “taking their meals together with gladness and sincerity of heart, praising God…” = Feasting, fellowshipping and rejoicing as a covenant family/sabbath assembly/holy convocation.

2) (Eph 5:18-20) = The context for Paul’s instruction is most likely the church “ekklesia” (literally, an assembly- as in a Sabbath assembly).

3) (Col 3:15 “you were called [to assemble] in “one body” [meaning the church] w/16) = God has called you to rejoicing and singing as a holy convocation/Sabbath assembly.

1.3. Reciprocation or return on God’s blessings.

1.3.1. (Exo 23:14-17 [Passover/Feast of Unleavened Bread] “none shall appear before Me empty-handed” w/Exo 34:25-26 “the very first of the first fruits of your soil into the house of the Lord”; [Pentecost/Feast of the Harvest] “the first fruits of your labors from what you sow in the field”; [Yom Kippur/Feast of the Ingathering] “at the end of the year when you gather the fruit of your labors from the field”) = Israel’s three Sabbath assemblies/holy convocations – which were deliberately wed to the three harvesting times of the year, was when God expected His people to bring their tithes (“first fruits”) to His house (Mal 3:10 [2Ch 30:13 w/31:5-10). IOW: God viewed His Sabbaths as a time of reciprocation – or the time when Israel was to make a return on His blessings to them.

1.3.2. These Sabbath assemblies were not only reserved for the required tithe, but when the people would also make any votive and freewill offerings (peace offerings) (Deu 12:6-7 [Deu 14:22-23]).

1.3.3. That God requires NC Jews to keep this principle of the Sabbath is confirmed by: (Gal 3:27-29 [sons of Abe thru baptism into Christ] w/Heb 7:1-10) = All the sons of Abraham (OC Jews/NC Jews) pay tithes to Christ.

1.3.4. This Sabbath principle is most likely what is being described/prescribed in: (2Co 8:1-5) = A freewill offering to help the struggling church in Jerusalem.

1.4. Remembrance and covenant renewal.

1.4.1. (Deu 5:12-15) = God connects the Sabbath to Israel’s redemption/deliverance from slavery in Egypt.

1.4.2. (Exo 12:1-14 w/24-27 w/13:3 w/15:11-13 [“LORD” = Yhwh] w/Exo 18:8-11 and Num 33:1-4) = The Passover Sabbath and sacrament was carried out for the purpose of remembering Israel’s redemption from death and slavery under the false gods of Egypt to life w/the true God of Creation.

1.4.3. Hence then the reason for its connection to the original Creation sabbath or seventh day, the day commemorating Yhwh as the true Author of life (Deu 4:33-35 w/39; Also again Exo 31:13 “so that you might know I am the LORD Who sanctifies you”) IOW: That you might know that Yhwh is your Creator and Savior.

1.4.4. Hence also the requirement of fully consuming the sacrifice. The Passover lamb functioned primarily as a burnt offering (which was fully consumed) communicating that person’s full dedication to God. In this case, Israel’s full dedication as slaves (no longer the false gods of Egypt – Jos 24:15) but the true God of Creation, Yhwh (Lev 25:42).

1.4.5. Passover’s yearly celebration therefore also came to represent covenant renewal/re-ratification (i.e., their “new year resolution” or yearly re-commitment to God and their covenant obligations).

14.6. Per God’s design, all three holy convocations or Sabbath assemblies (Passover, Pentecost and Yom Kippur) would include the necessity of covenant renewal (Exo 34:27[w/23-24]) = God’s continuing role as Savior (v24) was dependent upon His people’s thrice-yearly covenant renewal/rededication to Him as Lord (v23 “three times a year all your males are to appear…[v27] in accordance with these words I have made a covenant”; Lord Before Savior).

“Every Sabbath celebration was a renewal of the covenant relationship.” – Harold H.P. Dressler (“The Sabbath in the Old Testament” in From Sabbath To Lord’s Day)

1.4.6. As such, Pentecost and Yom Kippur were likewise committed to remembrance, each portraying a different facet of Israel’s redemption and exodus journey from death to life (*further details to follow in our study on sacraments).

“Every major festival of Israel was associated with the exodus, granting each generation an annual experience of Israel’s redemption.” – L. Michael Morales (Exodus Old and New)

1.4.7. That God requires NC Jews to keep this principle of the Sabbath is confirmed by:

1) (Luk 22:19-20) “Do this in remembrance of Me” = In the LT we remember our redemption from death and slavery in sin to life through the life and death of the Jesus, the “Author of life” (Act 3:15). We also renew/re-ratify the covenant established by this sacrament: The bread (the body of Jesus/the burnt offering) is fully consumed by us indicating not only our full dedication to Jesus (faithfulness of life), but our renewal of the covenant, thereby granting to us God’s continuing redemption (forgiveness of sins) through the cup (the blood of Jesus/the sin offering) (Lord Before Savior).

2) (1Co 11:20 w/23-25 “meet together”) = Our LT remembrance and covenant renewal (re-ratification) takes place during our Sabbath assembly/holy convocation.

CLOSING CONTEMPLATIONS:

1) Do we need to change our service from Sunday (1st day) to Saturday (the 7th day) (“Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy…the seventh day is a sabbath of the LORD your God” – Exo 20)?

2) How do you reconcile Mat 5:17-18 w/Gal 4:10-11 and Col 2:16-17 and Rom 14:5-6?

3) Why is Easter (Christ’s Resurrection) the most significant event when it comes to justifying the changes in application we see in New Covenant Judaism?

4) What about Christ’s Resurrection (Easter) may justify a change from Saturday to Sunday? (the answer is not, “because that’s the day He rose from the grave” [the equivalent of, “because it’s got what plants crave.”]).

[1] War and marriage celebrations are also considered special circumstances (Jos 6:15; 1Ki 20:29; Jug 14:10 w/17).

[2] Consider also (Joh 5:1-17) = The issue is not working (or walking around) – but your intention for doing so [e.g., Neh 13:15-21]).

View Details

How did we arrive at NCJ? What paradigm shifts in our understanding of God’s Word did He use to reveal to me (pastor Scott) that what Jesus and His New Testament authors are teaching is not a new religion (Christianity), but a restoration of ancient Judaism according to its New Covenant expression?

(2006) Lord Before Savior

Fully submitting/dedicating ourselves to Jesus’ Lordship by repenting – or confessing and turning from our sin through justice and just living was the pre-requisite to His deliverance (salvation) in the OT (esp. ancient Judaism) just as it is in the NT. IOW: Lordship Salvation is not simply a NT phenomenon (Heb 5:9 w/13:8)

(2012) Gain and Maintain

(2013) Marriage Covenant Theology/Gospel

Redemptive history is comprised of five saving covenants (Adamic, Noahic, Abrahamic, Old and New) whose makeup/nature is marital (they are betrothal – or inchoate marriage covenants), and Jesus, the covenant-making member of the Godhead, their divine Husband (Jer 31:31; Hos 2:19; 2Co 11:2). Being marital in nature explains Scripture’s soteriological framework of covenantal nomism or “gain and maintain.” In human marriages, what is gained by grace through vows of faith must be maintained by faithfulness - or the marriage is permanently forfeited in divorce (apostasy). Also similar to human marriages, our vows of faith (or faithfulness [Heb., emunah; Grk., pistus = faith/faithfulness]) to Christ is accompanied by prescribed symbols/signs (e.g., wedding rings) which not only serve as reminders of our obligation to fidelity, but possess the authority/power to ratify the covenant and dispense its blessings (e.g., now refer to each other as husband and wife; Mat 1:18-19; 1Pe 3:21). Since the New Covenant exists as a second version of the Old Covenant (the New representing Jesus’ re-marriage to a new Israel [NC Judaism] after His divorce from old and apostate Israel [OC Judaism]), there are two new covenant signs (baptism and the LT) to replace the former covenant signs (circumcision and animal sacrifices [burnt and sin offering]).

(2014) Paedobaptism

All of God’s promises to those in the Old and New Covenant find their source in the promises originally made to Abraham and his descendants (i.e., OC and NC Israel [Judaism 1.0 and 2.0]/Old and New Covenants are the descendant covs of the Abe cov). Hence the relevance of our baptism in Christ placing us in the family of Abraham (Gal 3:27-29). When God gave those promises to Abraham and his descendants, He made the special provision of automatically including their children at the moment of conception as long as the covenant sign was placed upon them by their parents shortly after birth (Gen 17:12). Babies under the NC should therefore be baptized (rather than waiting for them to be able to make a profession of faith) just as they were under the OC (Act 2:37-39).

(2015) Biblical Jurisprudence and Sexual Ethics

Justice /righteousness (same word in Hebrew [tzedek] and Greek [dikaiosune]) is the controlling attribute in the character and actions of God (Psa 89:14, 97:2). Everything He is and does is therefore defined by justice/righteousness (e.g., His love is a just/righteous love, His hate is a just/righteous hate, etc.,). As such, every facet of OC Judaism, has this as its goal: the promotion and preservation of justice. To accomplish this mission, God established not only laws and punishment for Israel (e.g., Lev 19:31 and Deu 18:10-11 w/Lev 20:27), but also a system of justice involving judges (priests), a divine council (priests and levites), courts and a judicial process (Exo 21:23-25; Lev 24:19-20; Num 15:30-31, 35:30; Deu 16:18-20 w/17:2-13, 19:15-21; Deu 25:1; Psa 82:1; Joh 5:31, 8:16-17). The OT Prophets, Jesus and His NT authors confirmed that the same would be true under the NC (Isa 66:21; Mat 5:17-18; Mat 18:15-20; Joh 20:21-23; Rom 15:16; 1Co 6:1-4; 2Co 13:1-2; 1Ti 5:19, 21). Though at times different in application, the goal and principles remain intact (1Co 5:9-13 [Act 10:28 w/Exo 23:32-33, 34:12-16; Deu 7:1-5; Psa 82:1, 106:34-35]). This includes the goal and principles related to sex: all sexual activity is to be performed as a celebration and expression of marital fidelity (Gen 2:22-25 w/Mat 19:4-6 “one flesh” = [“flesh of my flesh” – 2Sa 19:13] = faithful/loyal/fidelity/allegiance; “let no man separate” = Let no man destroy through marital infidelity; “what God has joined together” = In covenant fidelity). Any action therefore outside of those parameters constitutes a capital crime (e.g., 1Co 5:1-8 [Deu 22:22] = All sexual activity outside of the marriage covenant is sexual immorality and equals death [OC: physical, NC: spiritual]; i.e., the definition of sexual immorality for the NT is determined by the OT since this is its source).

Path to this particular paradigm shift (and other relevant events):

1) Realized the what Jesus was establishing as church discipline and jurisprudence in Matthew 18:15-20 was essentially a repeat of the church discipline and jurisprudence found in OC Judaism (I looked at the references in my Bible).

2) Recognized that what Christianity believed Jesus was teaching as church discipline and jurisprudence from Matthew 18:15-20 was far afield from the goal and principles communicated by His source, the church discipline and jurisprudence of Judaism:

(2.1.) The goal of church discipline in Judaism = The restoration of justice to the covenant community through God’s prescribed punishment of the guilty and protection of the innocent/victims (Deu 16:20, 25:1; 2Co 13:1-2 w/11)…

(versus) the goal of church discipline in Christianity = The receiving of a penitent confession from the guilty as enough for the innocent/victims to forgive the guilty and forget their crime.

(2.2.) The principles of jurisprudence in Judaism = The Church/covenant community will appoint priests and Levites as judges and officers to enforce God’s Law and function as their court and divine council whose authority and judgments are therefore backed by God making all forms of insubordination or insurrection acts rendering that person apostate (Num 15:30-31; Deu 16:18, 17:9-13; Mat 12:32 w/Joh 20:22). No action/judgment will be allowed that distorts justice, is partial, or does not demonstrate evidence beyond a reasonable doubt (Deu 16:19, 17:6; 1Ti 5:21). The punishment will be determined by the crime - not the person, and mercy never negates justice – nor will be pity be shown to the guilty (Deu 19:21)…

(versus) the principles of jurisprudence in Christianity = The church nor her leaders possess any authority from God and therefore no ability to declare someone apostate whose condemns them or refuses their judgment. If the guilty person confesses their sin and is sorry, then no punishment is necessary. If they are unrepentant, then the only punishment ever afforded is shunning them until they decide to confess and be sorry for what they have done. Seeing that this punishment has no basis in Scripture, means that its practice is subjective and partial. It is determined by how the congregation feels about that person and their sin at the time it is committed. If the victims are not satisfied with the aforementioned disciplinary measures, the congregation is to view them as the ones now in sin (i.e., unforgiving).

(2.3.) In Christianity righteousness and justice are two separate things (you can be righteous and yet not serving justice) whereas in Scripture they are one and same thing (again, same word for both in Hebrew and Greek).

3) Teaching on biblical jurisprudence eventually led to: (3.1.) referring to the NT as “Judaism 2.0” (3.2.) A series called “Consistent Christianity” (2015) where I showed the continuity/agreement between Judaism 1.0 and Judaism 2.0 with respect to not only the subject of jurisprudence, but also salvation, the Law, apostasy, separation, and the house of God.

(2015-2025) Coherent and Equitable God

For humanity to be left without excuse at the final judgment, requires that God and His demands not only be evident but also coherent and equitable. The coherency and equity of God also play the pivotal role in the trustful obedience and heartfelt praise displayed in the lives of Judaism’s greatest heroes (Gen 18:25). Coherency and equity are likewise the essential argument used by God’s Old and New Testament authors when defending God and His demands as the only legitimate source of truth and life (e.g., Neh 9:7-8; Rom 1:18-20). In short, the coherency and equity of God are the basis for any and all reasonable belief in Him and His Scriptures – hypothetically or historically. Any doctrine therefore which destroys such coherency or equity must be regarded as false. Any religion whose foundation is built on such doctrine must be rejected as false religion (e.g., Christianity).

Path to this particular paradigm shift (and other relevant events):

1) The changes in my beliefs regarding man’s ability (Deu 30:11-14), the Law (Mat 5:17-18) and God’s concern for justice/equity (Deu 16:20; Psa 97:2) eventually led to other changes – or the realization that other doctrines I once embraced, were likewise false. I didn’t see everything all at once - nor did/do I know if there is more in the future (1Co 13:12), but as God revealed them to me (through His Word), I determined to repent and reject them, while providing the necessary biblical support to persuade God’s people to do the same (1Co 13:13). To my surprise, this has led to the rejection to almost every single foundational doctrine of Christianity – which when considered alongside their false FAG, makes our association or identity with this religion no longer plausible or ethical.

2) In 2019 I preached a series called, “Reconsidering Calvinism” proving the five points of Calvinism to not only be unbiblical but an accusation against God as unjust.

3) In 2019 I also preached a series called, “God Our Great Shepherd” demonstrating the unbiblical, unjust and completely unnecessary belief that God knows or has fixed the future (theistic determinism) – in agreement with the beliefs of ancient Judaism (Exo 13:17; e.g., Ben Sira, author of Ecclesiasticus [2nd cent.]).

4) In 2020 I revealed the conspiracy of Penal Substitution, proving it likewise to be completely unbiblical, unjust (Jer 31:27-30; Eze 18:20) and unnecessary. Akin to the lambs before Him, Jesus’ death is viewed as propitiation (the cleansing of sin) – and never punishment (God was never guilty of animal abuse nor child abuse in the death of the lambs or Jesus).

5) In 2024, I preached a series called, “Coherent Trinitarianism” where I revealed how unjust (Joh 8:16-17) and bankrupt the best of Christianity has been at explaining their incoherent belief in the doctrine of the Trinity (ontological trinitarianism), and how the Bible (Old and New Testament – including Jesus) teaches the position of ancient Judaism – known today as “ancient monotheism” (i.e., three fully divine and completely separate beings/persons who make up the true God of heaven and earth existing in perfect harmony and hierarchy: God the Father on top – with the Son and HS in that order under Him – hence 1Co 15:28).

6) Further contemplation on God’s equity has additionally led to: (6.1.) a rejection of original sin – also in agreement with ancient Judaism (Eze 18:20; yetzer hara), (6.2.) further appreciation and support (as ethical/equitable) for the biblical worldview of “This Life Is A Test”, (6.3.) the discovery and creation of the 10 Biblical Principles Of Equity as an important tool for ethical understanding in relation to Scripture and our world as well as fulfilling the two greatest commandments: loving God and others (the goal and intent of all of OC Judaism’s laws according to Jesus [Mat 22] and Paul [Rom 13] which is also required of those under the NC).

CLOSING CONTEMPLATION: Given our historically Jewish trajectory, what might be the reasons (past, present and future) for God choosing to wait until now to reveal our identity as NC Jews and our religion as NC Judaism?

View Details

(2006) Lord Before Savior

Path to this particular paradigm shift:

1) Realizing that Jesus is the Savior of all redemptive history (versus just those under the NC) (e.g., Jud 1:5; Heb 9:15-16)

2) Realizing that the soteriological formula used by Him to save people is also the same (i.e., L>S) (Heb 13:8 [Mal 3:6-7]).

2) Recognizing that formula (L>S) throughout both the New and Old Testaments (Gen 17:1-2; Exo 19:5; Exo 23:22; Lev 16:26; Deu 7:9; Deu 30:1-3; Psa 81:11-14; Psa 85:9; Isa 1:18-19; Isa 48:17-19; Isa 59:1-2; Isa 59:20; Jer 4:14; Jer 9:12-14; Jer 26:13; Jer 36:3; Mat 7:21-23; Mar 1:14-15; Luk 1:50; Luk 3:8-9 w/18; Luk 19:1-9; Eph 5:5-6; Heb 5:9; 1Jo 1:6-7; 1Jo 2:4-6).

(2012) Gain and Maintain

The framework of salvation is the same under the New Covenant as it was under the Old Covenant (or ancient Judaism): we gain our salvation by grace through faith and maintain it through faithful obedience to God’s commands. IOW: There is no dichotomy between works and faith in salvation (e.g., FAG: either you earn your way to heaven by your works/obedience [impossible] or you get to heaven by simply believing in the works/obedience of Christ).

Path to this particular paradigm shift:

1) Pastor Rowe advised me to “be careful” how much I pushed the importance of obedience to salvation causing me to conclude that:

(1.1.) Christianity (at some point) in her history had created a false dichotomy between faith and obedience/works in Christianity. Why? Because God demands we do the opposite of P. Rowe’s advice (we are to be careful to make sure we obey – Deu 28:1), yet would never by such demands create a false dichotomy. God’s Word must therefore teach a different framework (a third option) – one which makes faith and obedience/works complementary not contrary obligations.

(1.2.) If the soteriological formula of salvation is the same throughout redemptive history (i.e., L>S was true for OT salvation just as it is for NT salvation), then the framework housing faith and obedience in a complimentary way can also be found in the OT (i.e., I will observe it in ancient Judaism).

(1.3.) I need to start reading theological books about ancient Judaism (biblical theology/soteriology).

(1.4.) I need to study and teach church history -especially the Protestant Reformations where the dichotomy-producing FAG came to the fore.

2) I discovered in my study and teaching of the German Reformation (16th cent.,) that Martin Luther (the inventor of the FAG and “father of the Protestant Reformation”) had a lot in common with the 2nd century heretic Marcion: both were guilty of creating the false dichotomy between law (OT/works) and grace (NT/faith).

3) I read E.P. Sanders’ ground-breaking work, Paul and Palestinian Judaism which proves “covenantal nomism” (get in by grace, stay in by obedience [gain and maintain]) to be the soteriological framework of ancient Judaism (versus the works-based view held by Christianity for almost 2k years).

4) I confirmed covenantal nomism to be the soteriological framework of all salvation in the Bible - including under the NC (Gen 18:19; Exo 24:7-8 w/Lev 18:4-5 [Luk 10:25-28]; Deu 27:9-10; Deu 28:1-2 Mat 28:18-20; Phi 2:12-13; Phi 3:7-16; Col 1:23; 1Ti 6:12).

(2013) Marriage Covenant Theology/Gospel

Being marital in nature not only explains Scripture’s soteriological formula of Lord Before Savior (God requires the wife [church] vow her full submission to her husband as Lord/head of household – Eph 5:22-24), but also its framework of covenantal nomism or “gain and maintain” (in our human marriages: what is gained by grace through vows of faithfulness must be maintained - or the marriage is permanently forfeited in divorce [apostasy]).

As such, all the saving covenants of redemptive history are bi-lateral (conditional) - including the Abrahamic and New Covenants (Gen 15 = God’s vows; Gen 17 = Abe’s vows). Similar to human marriages, our vows of faith (or pledge of faithfulness [pistus = faith/faithfulness]) to Christ is accompanied by prescribed symbols/signs (e.g., wedding rings) which not only serve as reminders of our obligation to fidelity, but possess the authority/power to ratify the covenant and dispense its blessings (e.g., now refer to each other as husband and wife; Mat 1:18-19; 1Pe 3:21). Since the New Covenant exists as a second version of the Old Covenant (the New representing Jesus’ re-marriage to a new Israel [NC Judaism] after His divorce from old and apostate Israel [OC Judaism]), there are two new covenant signs (baptism and the LT) to replace the former covenant signs (circumcision and animal sacrifices [burnt and sin offering]). Both baptism and the LT possess the power to cleanse away sin and are therefore sacraments (God gives what the sign signifies – Rom 6:1-7; Joh 13:5-10) not ordinances (symbols of remembrance only), given to the church (covenant community) – not the individual (“outside the church there is no salvation”- Cyprian) (Mat 16:17-19; Joh 20:21-23). Like circumcision, baptism is a one-time act. It is also the place where Christ accepts our marital vow/pledge of faith (1Pe 3:21) and reciprocates with His own pledge sign – the giving of the HS, sealing/binding/ratifying the marriage covenant (2Co 1:21-22; Eph 1:13). Seeing that the New is simply the second version of the Old equally means that all of God’s OT laws are expected to be faithfully observed according to Christ’s interpretation and/or new application (i.e., God’s established principles endure forever) (Mat 5:17-20, 21-48; Psa 119:152, 155, 160).

Path to this particular paradigm shift:

1) I wrote a paper called Rediscovering Justification (2012) exposing the soteriological problem created by Christianity (or Luther’s faith-works/obedience dichotomy) and the biblical solution of covenantal nomism (gain and maintain). Justification Rediscovered also refuted the Christian doctrines of forensic justification (declared only) and active obedience (imputation of Christ’s obedience) as also inconsistent with their established types in ancient Judaism (we are made just; justification thru sacrificial death only), along with mentioning (in germinal form) the continuing authority and bi-partite distinction of the Law (cov signs/clean laws and moral comms), marriage as the biblical metaphor for God’s saving covenants and the reality of apostasy under the New just as it was under the Old (Judaism). Pastor Rowe expressed great angst over the paper because it exposed as false what he had been taught/believed – yet he could not biblically refute it.

2) Pastor Rowe’s response encouraged me to keep “pulling on the thread” – to reflect further on what I had discovered, including the nature of the saving covenants themselves (“what kind of covenants were they?”). This is when I realized marriage was the makeup or nature of God’s saving covenants (versus simply a metaphor) leading to greater synthesis in my understanding of the Old and New Covenants.

3) Discovering that the Bundesformel (Covenant Formula; “I will be their God and they shall be my people”) not only finds its origin in the marital vow of Genesis 2:23, but is viewed by Judaism as God’s marital vows at Sinai also helped me confirm Marriage Covenant Theology as the Bible’s biblical theology and gospel.

4) Ray Ortlund Jr’s Whoredom, Gordon Hugenberger’s Marriage As A Covenant and David Daube’s lectures on Jesus and the Law (esp. Jesus’ “you have heard that it was said… but I say to you”) were also immensely helpful in this respect.

5) The Mat 5:17-18 victory achieved at the “Mexican standoff” likewise greatly impacted my convictions regarding the continuing relevancy of Judaism’s laws in our obedience to Jesus and the gospel (leading also to series on both Matthew 5 [Sermon on the Mount] and the Law in the following year).

(2014) Paedobaptism

All of God’s promises to those in the Old and New Covenant find their source in the promises originally made to Abraham and his descendants (i.e., Israel). Hence the relevance of our baptism in Christ placing us in the family of Abraham (Gal 3:27-29). When God gave those promises to Abraham and his descendants, He made the special provision of automatically including their children at the moment of conception as long as the covenant sign was placed upon them by their parents shortly after birth (Gen 17:12). Our babies should therefore be baptized (rather than waiting for them to be able to make a profession of faith).

Path to this particular paradigm shift:

Having come to realize the continuity that exists not only between the various saving covenants (e.g., they are all marital and function according to g and m), but the unique connection that exists between the Abrahamic, Old and New Covenants (the latter two are simply the national - or descendant covenants of the Abrahamic), I concluded that since this special provision continued in the religion OC Israel (Judaism 1.0) it must be the same for NC Israel (Judaism 2.0). If not, then (Act 2:37-39) becomes nonsensical.

CLOSING CONTEMPLATION = For almost two decades God has been causing our Bibles to get much smaller, - while at the same time, causing our religion to get much larger. (What do I mean? The answer is in your sermon notes!)

View Details

Christ Covenant Church and her members will no longer identify themselves as Christians or their religion as Christianity. We are instead New Covenant Jews – and our religion, New Covenant Judaism.[1] The following represent the reasons for this change:

Jesus did not come to create a new religion (e.g., Christianity) but a new covenant for the already existing and ancient religion of Judaism first established (under the old covenant) at Mt. Sinai.

1.1. (Luk 22:20 w/Jer 31:31) = Not a new religion (e.g., Christianity) but a new covenant for the already existing religion of “the house of Israel and the house of Judah” (i.e., Judaism; hence Luk 24:27 “Moses” and “the prophets” – or the Law and Prophets represent the Scriptures defining the religion of Judaism).[2] (Heb 8:1-13 w/9:10 “reformation” [Grk., diorthosis = To make improvements on something already in existence]) = The author of Hebrews views Jesus’ ministry and covenant as an improvement (“better covenant…better promises”), a reformation versus a replacement of the existing religion that “Moses” and the Jews received at Mt. Sinai (v5 “on the mountain” w/Exo 25:40). (Joh 4:22) “salvation is from the Jews” = Salvation is only available through the religion of the Jews (Judaism).

1.2. If Jesus had started a new religion, He would have been a false teacher and deserved to die (Deu 12:32-13:3; Isa 8:20).

1.3. In relation to Christianity constituting a new – and therefore false religion consider God’s words just before His promise of a new covenant (Jer 31:27-30 w/Eze 18:1-4 w/19-20) = Penal substitution was the evil and unethical practice of the pagan nations around Israel who served demons (Lev 18:21, 20:3-5; Jer 32:35). As such, God not only condemns it under the old covenant version of His religion but promises its condemnation will be the sign of those following His new covenant version in the future.

1.4. The fact that all three branches of Christianity today (Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy and Evangelical/Protestant Christianity) embrace not only penal substitution but the equally unethical doctrines of trinitarian monotheism and original sin (Joh 8:16-17; Eze 18:20) confirm they no longer represent what God promised and Jesus established. They are apostate.

Brad H. Young (Jesus The Jewish Theologian)

“Jesus was a Jew. He never changed religions. He was loyal to his people, committed to Torah in faith and practice…always remaining true to the vision of the prophets of his own ancient faith tradition.”

Marvin R. Wilson (Our Father Abraham: Jewish Roots Of The Christian Faith)

“As far as the Gospel record is concerned, Jesus spoke from within Judaism; he never abandoned his ancestral faith.”

Joachim Jeremias (The Central Message of the New Testament)

“[Jesus was] a prophet who remained completely within the limits of Judaism.”

Frederick E. Greenspahn (Early Judaism: New Insights and Scholarship)

“Jesus, an itinerant Jewish teacher born and active in the first three decades of the first century CE, had no intention of beginning a new religion. Rather, Jesus operated within an exclusively Jewish [context], as did his earliest followers. Although they were different in some ways from other Jewish groups among whom they lived, their ideas and practices fall well within the Jewish spectrum…From a historical point of view it is clear that [Jesus] had no intention of beginning a movement that in time would not consider itself or be considered by others to be Jewish. Christianity was Judaism.”

The apostles viewed themselves and their fellow disciples as Jews practicing a form of Judaism.

2.1. The Apostle Paul viewed himself as “called” not converted to be a minister of a new covenant not a new religion: 1) (Gal 1:11-17) = What changed for Paul was not his religion (“Judaism”) but understanding that Jesus was indeed the Christ and that God had now “called” him to “preach Him among the Gentiles.” 2) (Act 21:15-26) = The only reason Paul would abide by James’ request is if the religion he continued to practice was a form of Judaism. 3) (2Co 3:1-7) = Not ministers of a new religion but a new covenant – one able to grant eternal life.

2.2. Even the Jews viewed Paul as still following a form of Judaism (Act 24:14) “a sect” [Grk., heiresis]= A group/party within an existing religion (in this case, Judaism) whose beliefs or practice on some things are different from its other members (Act 24:5 “sect of the Nazarenes” = Those within Judaism who believed Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah; e.g., Act 26:5 “sect of our religion”). On this note consider also: 1) (Act 15:5) “sect of the Pharisees” = These men were still strict followers of Judaism. IOW: They did not see their belief in Jesus as Messiah as a change to a new religion – hence the reason for their demand that the Gentiles be “circumcise[d]” and “observe the Law of Moses.” Their error was covenantal not religious (i.e., new covenants receive new signs/application to distinguish them from previous covs – e.g., Abe [cir.], Old [circ. + sabs]). 2) (Act 28:17-22) = The only reason these Jews were willing to hear Paul is because what he was preaching was still a form of Judaism (again, a “sect” – as in a sect within Judaism). If Paul had converted to an entirely different religion, no Jew would have come or been invited. As further support, notice Paul refers to his religious persecution as “for the sake of the hope of Israel” (20). Israel’s hope was a new covenant not a new religion. Lastly notice also, where he goes to prove the veracity of his message – “the Law of Moses and the Prophets,” (the Scripture defining the religion of Judaism - v23).

2.3. Paul identifies the followers of Jesus (including Gentiles) as spiritual Jews - and the Church, as Israel (Rom 2:26-29; Rom 11:17, 24 Gal 6:16; Eph 2:11-13; Phi 3:3). Paul also claims that Gentiles becoming Jews -and part of Israel, is what will make ethnic Jews and Israel, “jealous” (Rom 11:11).

2.4. The Apostle James identifies the followers of Jesus as constituting the twelve tribes of Israel (Jam 1:1) and mentions them meeting in synagogues – the meeting place of those practicing Judaism! (Jam 2:2 “assembly” [Grk., synagogue]; In this same vein – Act 5:12).

2.5. The term “church” (Grk., ekklesia) also possesses Jewish roots. It is the same word used to identify Israel -or the OC community, in the Septuagint (LXX).

2.6. The Apostles Paul, John and Peter, all identify the disciples of Jesus and the church, as the community now possessing Israel’s ancestry, religion and promised priesthood (1Co 10:1 “our forefathers”; Rev 1:6 w/1Pe 2:5 w/9 = Allusions to the OC priesthood of Judaism which God promised to restore [Exo 19:6 w/Isa 61:1-6 [Luk 4:18] and 66:21]).[3]

James Cantor (“James? Jacob! Brother of Yeshua, first Leader of the Church”)

James and the disciples of Jesus did not see themselves as Christians. They saw themselves as Jews who followed the Jewish Messiah. It needs to be kept squarely in view that these people did not view themselves as founding a new religion…James views the gospel message as a case of Old Testament promises to Jews being fulfilled, and Gentiles joining a Jewish messianic movement centered on Jesus, not of Jews joining some new religion.”

Craig A. Evans (Anti-Semitism and Early Christianity)

“Early Christians did not view themselves as belonging to a religion that was distinctive from Judaism. New Testament Christianity was Judaism – that is, what was believed to be the true expression of Judaism.”

Daniel Boyarin (Dying For God)

“Christianity developed out of the ‘orthodox’ Judaism of the first century.”

W.D. Davies (Paul and Rabbinic Judaism)

“In Paul’s response to Christ, the Messiah, he came to understand the Christian life as patterned after that of Judaism: it was for him not the antithesis but the full flowering of that [religion]’… Paul himself understands the Christian dispensation to be ‘according to the [Jewish] Scriptures’ and in this he was not alone in the Early Church…Paul’s appeal to the Old Testament for support seems to make the radical dichotomy between…‘Christianity’ and ‘Judaism,’ in our judgment, untenable. If the Apostle conceived of his Christian faith simply as something that was not ‘Judaism’, and held that what was wrong with the latter was that it was not ‘Christianity’, his intense involvement with the Scriptures of his people [i.e., the Jews] becomes puzzling…Paul belonged to the main stream of first-century Judaism, and…elements of his thought, which are often labelled as Hellenistic…[are rather] derived from Judaism…It would be erroneous to think that Paul regarded Christianity as the antithesis of Judaism as has so often been claimed. On the contrary, it appears that for the Apostle the Christian Faith was the full flowering of Judaism, the outcome of the latter and its fulfillment; in being obedient to the Gospel he was merely being obedient to the true form of Judaism. The Gospel for Paul was not the annulling of Judaism but its completion, and as such it took up into itself the essential genius of Judaism…We cannot too strongly insist again that for [Paul] the acceptance of the Gospel was not so much the rejection of the old Judaism and the discovery of a new religion wholly antithetical to it… but the recognition of the advent of the true and final form of Judaism.”

Marvin R. Wilson (Our Father Abraham: Jewish Roots Of The Christian Faith)

“The Church, firmly planted in Hebraic soil, finds its true identity in connection with Israel. The Church is fed, sustained, and supported by this relationship…The more biblical one becomes, the more [Jewish] one will be…The Church is, in a tangible sense, the outgrowth of Judaism…[Paul’s] Bible was the Tanak, his God was the God of his fathers, his Messiah was a Jew, and from the Jews alone emerged his mother church… Gentiles who had come to faith within the early Church joined themselves to God’s ancient people [the Jews]. They had to adjust to Israel, not the reverse… Jesus and his followers and the believers of the earliest Church found their identity as part of Judaism.”

W.D. Davies (The Gospel and the Land)

“The very matrix of Christianity is Judaism: Christianity is the very bone of Judaism.”

Alan Segal (Rebecca’s Children: Judaism and Christianity in the Roman World)

“Although Christianity’s destiny brought it to Rome and world prominence, its beginnings were in sectarian Judaism.”

Gerald R. McDermott (Understanding the Jewish Roots of Christianity: Biblical, Theological, and Historical)

“Jesus and the early church had deep roots in Judaism, and neither attempted to break from those roots.”

Matthew S.C. Olver (“Important Jewish Influences on Early Christian Worship”)

“For a while Christianity was itself one of the many forms of Judaism. This means the early Jews who believed in Jesus as Messiah and Son of God would not have thought of themselves as anything other than Jews.”

Stephen De Young (The Religion of the Apostles: Orhtodox Christianity in the First Century)

“It is a plain fact of history that in AD 35, Judaism and Christianity were not two separate religions…Clearly Paul does not see himself as someone who has left Judaism or the religion of his fathers [i.e., converted] but as one who was called to a particular service, despite a sinful past persecuting Christ and His Church…Saint Paul perceives himself as persisting in the same religious tradition…To summarize all this, St. Paul understood the religion he practiced (and the gospel he proclaimed) after his encounter with Christ as a continuation of that which he had practiced his entire life. He did not perceive himself to have disembarked from that earlier religion [of Judaism] and entered another [Christianity]…He saw the Gentiles he baptized as entering the religion of his youth; worshipping Yahweh, the God of Israel; and becoming children of Abraham…The Greek term typically translated as ‘Church’ is used throughout the Greek Old Testament to refer to the gathering together of the people of Israel. Its meaning is the same as in the New Testament – the Church is the assembly of Israel, God’s people, which has been renewed and restored…The tribes formerly lost have been reconstituted from among the nations into which they were dispersed. The notion that the Church has ‘replaced’ Israel or is somehow a ‘new Israel’ is nonsensical once one understands the language the Scriptures speak. The Church is Israel. Specifically, the Church is the assembly of Israel.”

David B. Capes (Israel’s God and Rebecca’s Children Christology and Community in Early Judaism and Christianity)

“[Scholars] regard earliest Christianity as a species of late Second Temple Judaism.”

The term “Christian” was not prescribed by Jesus or His apostles; rather it was coined by outsiders as a way to distinguish their sect of Judaism from others.

3.1. The term appears only three times in Scripture, each attributed to those outside the church (Act 11:26; Act 26:28; 1Pe 4:16).

3.2. Those in the church were not opposed to the term (e.g., Act 26:28 w/29), because they recognized it as simply one of the ways others (most especially the Jews) distinguished their form (or sect) of Judaism from others (e.g., Act 24:5, 14).

Daniel Boyarin (Dying For God)

“In the Jewish world of the first century, there were many sects competing for the name of the true Israel and the true interpreter of the Torah – the Talmud itself speaks of twenty-four such sects - and the form of Judaism that was to be the seedbed of what eventually became the Church was but one of those sects… and only much later became defined as [a] separate religion[].”

Only after the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD - and not prominently until the 4th century, did those claiming to follow Jesus identify their religion as Christianity in an attempt to distinguish it from Judaism.

Daniel Boyarin (Dying For God)

“For at least the first three centuries of their common lives, Judaism in all its forms and Christianity in all its forms were part of one complex religious family, twins in the womb, contending with each other for identity and precedence…It was the birth of the hegemonic Catholic Church [fourth century], however, that seems finally to have precipitated the consolation of rabbinic Judaism as Jewish orthodoxy, with all its rivals, including the so-called Jewish Christianities, apparently largely vanquished. It was then that Judaism and Christianity finally emerged from the womb as genuinely independent children… Only the latter success of Christianity [in the fourth century] determined retroactively, that in its earlier relationship with the Rabbis it was a separate religion. It took the historical processes [under Constantine and Roman empire] of what we might call the long fourth century [including its Church councils] before the ‘parting of the ways’ was achieved…[Or] as Rosemary Radford Ruether put it, ‘the fourth century is the first century for Christianity and Judaism [as separate religions].”

Marvin R. Wilson (Our Father Abraham: Jewish Roots Of The Christian Faith)

“The destruction of Jerusalem and the disappearance of all major sects but the Pharisees forced a reformulation of Judaism…Through the work of the Pharisees, a new Judaism gradually emerged. Rabbinic Judaism, as it came to be called, was a separate religion from [the Judaism of the Church]…[By the] second, third, and fourth centuries a new spirit of arrogance and supersessionsim had arisen [within the Church]…The tearing away from Jewish roots resulted in the Church defining itself largely in non-Jewish terminology. The word Christianity, derived from the Greek rendering (Christos) of the Hebrew mashiah, meaning ‘Messiah’ is representative of this process.”

If Jesus is the Messiah, then His religion is New Covenant Judaism.

5.1. The idea of a coming Messiah, sent by God to bring His law, justice and spiritual light or salvation to the world originates within the Old Testament Scriptures and the religion of Israel – otherwise known as Judaism.

5.2. Judaism therefore is the only religion where the statement “Jesus is the Messiah” has any relevance.

5.3. More importantly and specifically, Judaism is the soteriological context of those prophecies regarding Israel’s coming Messiah and the establishing of a new covenant (Isa 42:1-7 [“law” = A term used throughout the OT to refer to the religion given to the Jews at Mt. Sinai – i.e., Judaism; See also Isa 2:1-3; Mic 4:1-3]; Isa 49:1-8).

5.4. Therefore, to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, is to equally believe His religion is New Covenant Judaism.

CLOSING CONTEMPLATION: “The vital issue for the Church is to decide whether to look for roots in Judaism and consider itself an extension of Judaism, or to look for roots in pagan Hellenism and consider itself as an antithesis to Judaism.” - Abraham Hesche (The Insecurity of Freedom)

[1] This make take time to get used to, but we must be diligent to no longer accept or identify w/these terms in any way. This includes when asked by others, “Are you a Christian?” Our answer must be, “No. I am a New Covenant Jew.”

[2] Covenant and religion are not the same thing. Covenant is the legal binding of two parties in formal relationship. When one of those parties is God, we call that relationship, religion. What God first extended to Israel was religion (e.g., Exo 20:1-17 -the rules of the relationship), then, when Israel accepted, each were bound to each other in covenant (Exo 24:7-8). As such, the mention of covenant – as in new covenant, implies an already existing relationship – or religion. Covenants change, the religion does not (hence Mat 5:17-18 “law” = love, the “heart” of relationship).

[3] According to the author of Hebrews, the priests of Judaism are the only ones associated w/Abraham and therefore in service to his priest, Melchizedek – or Jesus (Heb 7:1-21).

View Details

Worldview (def.,) = What humans express through their religion (loyalty/truth), ethics (values/justice) and culture (identity/beauty) as the answer to the question, “why do we exist?”

People should reject all forms of Christianity not only because its doctrines are unethical but also its worldview.

1.1. There are three main branches of Christianity: Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy and Protestant/Evangelical Christianity that exist in the world today. All three prove to be completely unethical (and therefore false) w/regard to the following:

1.1.1. their doctrines of Trinitarian Monotheism (Joh 8:17-18 “two-witness rule requires the witnesses be separate beings), Original Sin (Eze 18:20; Rom 5 and 7 teach sinful inclination/impulse/drive [not the stain of sin/original sin] was passed on from Adam – which was the popular belief w/in ancient Judaism known as “ha yetzer ha-ra”[Heb.] See W.D. Davies, Paul and Rabbinic Judaism, p.20), Perfectionism and Total Depravity (Deu 28:1 w/30:11-14).

1.1.2. their embrace of a FAG (i.e., we are ultimately only saved by what God/Christ has done on our behalf) (Eze 33:18-20 w/Rev 20:12) which includes the belief that Christ was punished for our sins (Jer 31:27-30 w/31-34; Eze 18:4 w/20; Lev 27:29).

1.1.3. their creation of a new religion (Joh 4:22 “we worship what we know for salvation is from the Jews”) = Judaism is the religion from God. Anything not consistent w/that is worshipping what “you do not know” – i.e., false religion. If Jesus had created a new religion – one not demonstrating consistency/continuity with Judaism, then He was a false teacher Who deserved to die (Deu 12:32-13:3). The fact that He (Jesus) established a “new covenant” confirms He was not starting a new religion since such a statement implies an already existing religion. Rather, Jesus established, New Covenant Judaism, the fulfillment of Jeremiah 31:31. Christianity (in all its modern manifestations) is a new religion. It bears no continuity with Judaism as testified to also by its FAG - or rejection of the gain and maintain mechanics that are a part of every saving covenant and gospel in the Old Testament – most especially original - or OC Judaism.

1.2. What however may prove to be the most overlooked evidence of Christianity’s unethical nature, is the worldview created by its false gospel and doctrines: “This Life Is God’s Testimony” = God created this world as the place where He would testify to our complete inability to do anything that could please Him or get us to heaven (“you suck”) and His abundant mercy in sending His Son to do it all for us (“Jesus is the Only One Who doesn’t suck”). Getting to heaven requires we not only adopt (believe in) this as our worldview but also practice daily self-abasement (e.g., Wayne’s World, “we’re not worthy!”) and cessation from anything that might imply we can contribute something to our salvation (e.g., Tim Keller, “we need to repent of our repentance”; Tullian Tchividjian, Jesus Plus Nothing Equals Everything). Why this worldview is unethical: Based on their beliefs, God is the reason we suck. God should therefore be apologizing not rubbing our noses in it. Likewise, Christ should not be viewed as an act of mercy, but the obligation He possess to fix His screw-up.

1.3. Given the apostasy that for some time has characterized all main branches of Christianity, we must reject not only the religion but also the term “Christian” as our identity. New Covenant Judaism is our religion, and “New Covenant Jews”, our identity.

The worldview taught in the God’s Word and therefore by His religion, New Covenant Judaism, is “This Life Is A Test.”

2.1. God created this world as humanity’s temporary testing site, the place where – based on our life performance, we choose what in the future will serve as our permanent and eternal home (heaven/Reboot/New Creation or hell). This is the worldview taught in God’s Word and therefore by those following His religion, New Covenant Judaism (Pro 17:3 = Through testing the heart [the place determining our actions – Mat 12:34], God is able to determine who among humanity has chosen to be precious moral metal and who has chosen to be moral dross).

2.2. This worldview (“This Life Is A Test”) therefore possesses two salient points: 1) every single person’s life in this world (every circumstance good or bad) is their personal and particular test (their test-life). 2) God is going to give to every person who has ever lived, what they by their responses to the circumstances of this test-life chose (deserve) as their future, permanent and eternal version of life (Gal 6:7-8 “what a man sows…”) = We – not God, are the ones determining by our choices our eternal home. Those persons who therefore choose “sow to their flesh” – or choose self and the inequity of this world as what they follow, have inadvertently also chosen to fail their test and possess hell as their future, permanent and eternal home.

2.3. What was told to ancient proselytes of Judaism: 1) “Be informed that the world to come exists only for the righteous (for Jews who keep the commandments of God).” (Yabamot – 47). 2) “In paradise at some future time, there would be a banquet, the Messianic feast, where the meat of Leviathan [will] be served, as [will] wine preserved in its grapes since the days of Creation.” – Samuel Sandmel (Judaism and Christian Beginnings).

2.4. To pass the test that is our life – or be worthy of eternal life with God in the new Creation (the Reboot/new heavens and new earth) (Rev 21-22), a world full of happiness, unending love (or righteousness) - and therefore free from inequity (or wickedness and sin) and unhappiness, requires we - during our test-life, “sow from the Spirit”(Gal 6:8) – i.e., we choose to love all freewill beings (e.g., God and humans) with equity by not only gaining a marriage covenant relationship with His Son Jesus Christ (His love gift to us - 1Jo 4:9) through baptismal rebirth/a vow of faith in His church, but also maintaining that covenant through frequent table observance, faithful obedience to all His laws (Mat 22:37-40 = God’s Law is how we love/show equity to Him and others; Rom 13:8-10) and loyalty to Christ and His covenant family over our blood family for the rest of our life (i.e., God made humanity as His weaker vessel [image] for the same reason He made the woman for the man – to create loyal family – not friends who have families loyal to them) (1Pe 3:21; Gal 3:26-27 [Rom 3:28]//Mat 28:19-20; Phi 2:12, 3:8-16; Jam 2:24//Act 2:42, 46, 20:7; Luk 22:14-23 w/Joh 13:1-20; 1Co 11:23-26//Mat 5:17-20//Mat 10:34-37, 19:29-30; Mar 3:21 w/31-35; Luk 14:25; Joh 13:34-35// Mat 16:26-27 “deeds” = This life is our test not our treasure).

2.5. Beside the aforementioned, loving God and others with equity also includes:

1) bold evangelism of the lost – especially blood family (Joh 14:16-17 w/Joh 16:8 = no conversion w/o HS conviction, no HS conviction w/o bold evangelism [sin, righteousness and judgment]; Mat 10:27 w/32-37 = Jesus will view people who are weak in their confrontation of family [bc they are worried about losing them] as loving them more than Him).

2) immediate separation from the unrepentant – especially from blood family (1Co 5:9-13; 2Jo 1:9-11; 2Co 6:14-18; Mat 19:27 w/29)

3) implementing staunch measures against the idolatry of dissipation – especially bc of blood family (Luk 21:34 w/Mat 24:42-51 did not prepare for the “thief”/their “master” = Dissipation; also Mat 25:24-30; 1Co 7:29-31).

2.6. It is clear that not everybody is given the same opportunities in life or potential to experience and possess the same things. Any worldview therefore that teaches this life is the only place where will we be able to experience the good things of Creation (e.g., Atheism) is inherently inequitable (since some were given more than others). Knowing however that this life is simply the test, and that it is my choices – or responses to the test –and not where I start or what I get in this life that determines the kind of life I will possess in eternity means that the test-life of every single human being who has ever lived has always been perfectly equitable. In short, though you cannot pick your test-life (i.e., the circumstances of your life in this world), you do determine your performance on the test and therefore where you will end up in eternity – which means (once more) every single situation that a person could end up in this life is completely equitable and fair.

2.7. Ignorance of the “test” worldview is a major reason many people have a hard time accepting hard things in their life - or the lives of their loved ones (e.g., child with cancer; this was the main reason for Job’s confusion and his friends’ bad counsel).

God has perfectly customized your life tests to produce in you those things necessary to realize your greatest potential and desires in the Reboot.

3.1. This too is why our life-test is ethical. We (by our potential and desires) are essentially ordering up the kinds of tests (circumstances) we need to pass in order to realize (or be qualified to receive) those things in the Reboot (e.g., the tests or career-trajectory of someone who wants to qualify or competently function as a doctor).

3.2. (Job 34:10-12) = God shows Himself equitable (“The Almighty does not pervert justice”) not only by “pay[ing] a man according to his work” (He gives us what we chose/deserve based on our responses to life’s tests) but also by the fact that He only “makes [us] find” as our tests those things “according to [our] way” – i.e., those things that will qualify us to realize our greatest potential and desires.

(Psa 37:1-6) = Those who did not follow the worldview of the wicked (life is about cultivating the world/getting out of it as much as I can for myself), but rather saw their life in this world as the test - or place to instead focus on – or “cultivate faithfulness”, will be found on “judgment” day to have passed the test in “righteousness” and will - as a result, receive the “desires” of their “heart” in the Reboot.

4 . Those despising or attempting to avoid God’s prescribed tests are despising or attempting to avoid going to the Reboot.

Hence the reason James says what he does in (Jam 1:1-12) (v4) “lacking in nothing” (that would keep you from passing the final test). IOW: we need to be tested so we can pass the final test (i.e., Judgment Day) and get to the Reboot (hence the title of this point).

(v5) “lacks wisdom” (regarding what else is true regarding life’s tests); the wisdom they are lacking:

1) (v9) = The more tests (“humble circumstances”), the more potential for glory or a high position in the Reboot.

2) (v10=11) = The fewer the tests (e.g., life of a “rich man” or those defined by worldly “pursuits”), the fewer the chances of getting to heaven (his eternal end will be in “humiliation”; Luk 16:25; 1Co 3:10-15).

3) (v12) = Passing the tests (“persever[ing] until trial”) will win you the “promised” “crown of life” (eternal life in the Reboot; 2Ti 4:7-8 “the righteous Judge” = The Judge giving to everyone exactly what their responses to the tests deserve). Notice (btw) James confirms that those passing the tests and receiving this eternal prize are “those who love Him.” The entire test that is this world is a test of love. God only wants to spend eternity with those who were accurate image-bearers of Him (and “God is love” – 1Jo 3:8).

The only tests that can be beyond your ability to conquer - and therefore possessing the power to re-enslave you and send you to hell, are those which are self-inflicted.

5.1. (Jam 1:13-18) = God’s tests are the “perfect gift” since they are both trials we can pass (God is not tricking us or setting us up for failure, “in Him there is no variation or shifting shadow”) and intended to confirm us as “first fruits” or new creations fit for the coming New Creation/Reboot. This is in contrast to those tests that come from our own unrepentant “lusts.” Such trials (v13 “tempted”- verbal form of the word translated “trial” in v12) are neither intended for our good nor guaranteed to be the kinds of tests we can pass. Hence why they often lead to “death” (2Pe 2:9 and 19-22 w/3:17-18).

5.2. Again, God is just or equitable in allowing for this since it is our choice. They are “self-inflicted” –i.e., we are freely choosing to do it to ourselves. God is not going to force us to do right – or stop us from falling back into sin if that is what we want. In short, we are free to choose (hence Deu 30:19).

Not changing what God sees as the source of your sinful anger, forgetfulness of His laws and slanderous speech will prove to also be the reason you fail life’s tests and forfeit your reservation in the Reboot.

1) you get angry when your life - or view of life, is confronted or corrected by God’s Word because you are unteachable (Jam 1:19-21) “quick to hear [or listen], slow to speak, slow to become angry” = You are teachable, giving your full attention and trust to understanding and valuing every single word being spoken to you when confronted or corrected by God’s Word – especially when it is spoken to you via your covenant bros/sis – versus getting angry and defensive which often also includes being distracted w/your thoughts and discrediting what they say. Such anger forfeits that person’s ability to learn righteousness (or v20, “achieve the righteousness of God”) (Jam 5:19-20; Psa 141:5; Pro 27:6).

2) you forget God’s laws because you think too highly of yourself (Jam 1:22-25) = The reason a person becomes a “forgetful hearer” and not an “effectual doer” of God’s law is b/c they refuse to believe what His law reveals about their true spiritual state/health (they see who they are in God’s “mirror” but “immediately” forget “what kind of person” they are). IOW: they choose to believe their state to be better than what was revealed. Because of such overvaluation, they undervalue the seriousness of their moral situation – and as a result, their need to be vigilant in remembering God’s laws (Psa 119:9-16) = David’s passion in seeking to remember/not forget God’s laws is fueled by the knowledge of his fragile moral state (vv10-11 “that I may not wander…that I may not sin”= No seeking to remember will result in plenty of wandering and sin; Jer 17:5, 7, 9-10; Rom 7:18).

3) you don’t bridle your tongue because your heart’s devotion is not preserving and protecting the equity of others and minimizing your own sin (Jam 1:26-27) “bridle his tongue” = Keep it from speaking slanderous/unrighteous things against others. “keep oneself unstained by the world” = Our forgiveness/cleansing from sin has a limit. If we are not aggressive about avoiding sin and removing its practice from our life, we run the risk of re-corrupting our spirits. Once that happens, the ability to receive further or future forgiveness/cleansing is lost. Hence (again 2Pe 2:19-22 w/3:14; 1Ti 6:14; Phi 2:14-15; 2Co 7:1) “visit orphans and widows in their distress” = In the ANE these two groups represent those persons most vulnerable to inequity and therefore most in need of others to protect and preserve equity for them. This is what it means to follow Christ (Mat 16:13-25) = Whatever Jesus means by follow Me, we can rule out [e.g., multiple choice strategy]: 1) belief or trust in Jesus’ person and work (13-20), 2) selfish for Jesus’ well-being (21-23 = Jesus forgoing the cross would make God unjust). Which leaves us with only one answer = To follow Jesus means to imitate Him or bear His image/identity/heart disposition which was preserving and protecting the equity of others (not self/self-preservation; Mar 10:45). Hence why we must “take up [our] cross” and “deny self” in order to do it (Phi 2:1-5; Spock, “the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or one”) This is btw how we fulfill (Mat 7:12 and Mat 22:37-39).

CLOSING CONTEMPLATION: Why would Jesus forgoing the cross make God unjust?

View Details

Worldview (def.,) = What humans express through their religion (loyalty/truth), ethics (values/justice) and culture (identity/beauty) as the answer to the question, “why do we exist?”

People should reject all forms of Christianity not only because its doctrines are unethical but also its worldview.

1.1.1. their doctrines of Trinitarian Monotheism (Joh 8:17-18 “two-witness rule requires the witnesses be separate beings), Original Sin (Eze 18:20), Perfectionism and Total Depravity (Deu 28:1 w/30:11-14).

1.1.3. their creation of a new religion (Joh 4:22 “we worship what we know for salvation is from the Jews”) = Judaism is the religion from God. Anything not consistent w/that is worshipping what “you do not know” – i.e., false religion. If Jesus had created a new religion – one not demonstrating consistency/continuity with Judaism, then He was a false teacher Who deserved to die (Deu 12:32-13:3). The fact that He established a “new covenant” confirms He was not starting a new religion since such a statement implies an already existing religion. Rather, Jesus established, New Covenant Judaism, the fulfillment of Jeremiah 31:31. Christianity (in all its modern manifestations) is a new religion. It bears no continuity with Judaism as testified to also by its FAG - or rejection of the gain and maintain mechanics that are a part of every saving covenant and gospel in the Old Testament – most especially original - or Old Covenant Judaism (Exo 24:7-8).

The worldview taught in the God’s Word and therefore by His religion, New Covenant Judaism, is “This Life Is A Test.”

2.2. This worldview (“This Life Is A Test”) therefore possesses two salient points: 1) every single person’s life in this world (every circumstance good or bad) is their personal and particular test (their test-life). 2) God is going to give to every person who has ever lived, what they by their responses to the circumstances of this test-life chose as their future, permanent and eternal version of life (Gal 6:7-8 “what a man sows…” = We – not God, are the ones determining by our choices our eternal home; Jer 17:10 “test the heart…mind” = Our will – the place determining our choices; “according to his ways” = In agreement with his choices).

2.3. To pass the test that is our life – or be worthy of eternal life with God in the new Creation (the Reboot/new heavens and new earth) (Rev 21-22), a world full of happiness, unending love (or righteousness) - and therefore free from inequity (or wickedness and sin) and unhappiness, requires we - during our test-life, “sow from the Spirit”(Gal 6:8) – i.e., we choose to love all freewill beings (e.g., God and humans) with equity by not only gaining a marriage covenant relationship with His Son Jesus Christ (His love gift to us - 1Jo 4:9) through baptismal rebirth/a vow of faith in His church, but also maintaining that covenant through frequent table observance, faithful obedience to all His laws (Mat 22:37-40 = God’s Law is how we love/show equity to Him and others; Rom 13:8-10) and loyalty to Christ and His covenant family over our blood family for the rest of our life (1Pe 3:21; Gal 3:26-27 [Rom 3:28]//Mat 28:19-20; Phi 2:12, 3:8-16; Jam 2:24//Act 2:42, 46, 20:7; Luk 22:14-23 w/Joh 13:1-20; 1Co 11:23-26//Mat 5:17-20//Mat 10:34-37, 19:29-30; Mar 3:21 w/31-35; Luk 14:25; Joh 13:34-35).

2.4. Those persons who respond to their life in any other way than the aforementioned, are choosing to fail their test (to sow to their flesh- Gal 6:8) and therefore hell as their future, permanent and eternal home, a place of unbridled and unending corruption and destruction (Mar 9:43 “unquenchable fire”; Rev 20:15 “lake of fire”; Mat 13:42 “in that place there will be weeping” [b/c there is no hope for justice or protection from the corruption and destruction those in hell continue to inflict on one another – Lam 1:2, 16]; “and gnashing of teeth” [a reference to those seeking temporary relief from their guilty conscience through the dehumanizing destruction of others – e.g., rape of enemy soldiers or rape in prison = Most of the time, the act is performed not for sexual pleasure, but sadistic pleasure – or the sense of relief that can result from inflicting pain on others [or seeing others in a situation worse than ours]. The sense of relief the perpetrator experiences is often proportionate to the level of suffering inflicted – making dehumanization [one of the worst forms of suffering] preferrable. This has proven especially true when the victims are viewed as the cause of our pain – e.g., Act 7:54-58. Given therefore sexual assault’s ability to provide the most relief, as well as the fact that those in hell will most likely possess bodies similar to those they chose to love during their test-life, means rape will exist as one of the most popular activities for those in hell).

2.5. The “test” worldview is not only ethical but effective in overcoming the massive inequities of every other worldview:

2.5.1. In relation to the “test” worldview being ethical consider:

1) All morally conscious people know that God exists and they should seek Him (Rom 1:19-20). God promises to lead all those who seek Him to the truth – including the proper worldview and religion (Act 17:27 w/Neh 9:7-8; Isa 55:6; contra Psa 10:4).

2) Faithful obedience to God’s expectations and laws – which is how we love others (i.e., promote and protect equity) is not only achievable in every individual test prescribed by God (Deu 30:11-14; Mat 6:33-34; 1Co 10:13; Mat 6:34) but also not burdensome to those who are reborn, loving God and loving others (1Jo 5:1-3).

3) The only people who will go to hell – the place of corruption and destruction, are those who freely chose it by freely choosing to follow the path of corruption and destruction (the result of following anything other than God’s love and equity) (Rom 1:18-23). Allowing such people to go to the New Creation would also be inequitable to those who suffered/worked hard to pass their tests (1Pe 4:1-2) - as well as dangerous, given their identity as corrupters and destroyers of worlds.

4) God giving to people exactly what their choices deserve - i.e., what they by their responses to their test-life chose to be their future, permanent and eternal life, is the key definer of all equity (Psa 62:12 “lovingkindness” = Equity).

2.5.2. In relation to the “test” worldview overcoming the massive inequities created by every other worldview consider:

1) It is clear that not everybody is given the same opportunities in life or potential to experience and possess the same things. Any worldview therefore that teaches this life is the only place where will we be able to experience the good things of Creation (e.g., Atheism) is inherently inequitable (since some were given more than others).

2) The same is true of any worldview that once more removes us as the ultimate determiners of what we get in the life to come – which includes almost every other religion/worldview that has ever existed (e.g., all the ancient Mesopotamian religions [royalty req’d], Islam [Allah is capricious], Hinduism [caste system], Christianity – especially Calvinistic or its Reformed versions [god chooses his pets based on his own preferences]). Knowing however that this life is simply the test, and that it is my choices – or responses to the test –and not where I start or what I get in this life that determines the kind of life I will possess in eternity means that the test-life of every single human being who has ever lived has always been perfectly equitable. Why? Because the only thing that matters (or determines what we get in our future, permanent and eternal life) is what every human has always had the power to control – their choices/responses. In short, though you cannot pick your test-life (i.e., the circumstances of your life in this world), you do determine your performance on the test and therefore where you will end up in eternity – which means every single situation that a person could end up in this life is completely equitable and fair. As such, people’s condemnation of things like slavery – most especially those who claim to follow God’s Word, reveals a massive level of ignorance. The purpose of our life is not what our American forefathers thought (though they claimed it came from God): to pursue life, liberty and happiness. We are to pursue those things for the next life. And once more, the way we do that is by pursuing God – and passing our test according to His prescription (Mat 6:33). Those who make the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness their focus in this life, forfeit it in the next. In this light consider:

(1Co 7:20-24) PNTM: we are not to view the challenging conditions or circumstances of our life (e.g., slavery) as something unfair or to be avoided (the perspective of the world and what makes us the “slaves of men”), but rather the test that God has “called” us to pass as “Christ’s slave[s]” - as those “bought” by Him for this very purpose – to forget about our status and possessions in this world (the identity of a slave) and instead focus on getting those things in the next life.

(Mat 16:24-27 “deeds”) = Our moral choices are what will determine what we get in the next life – not what we were able to gain in this world. Making the right moral choices in this life – those which “follow” the example and commands of Jesus – the kinds of deeds that will get us to the Reboot, are the kinds of choices that will mean denying self and forfeiting the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness as our focus (“whoever wishes to save his life will lose it…what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul?”).

2.6. Ignorance of the “test” worldview is a major reason many people have a hard time accepting hard things in their life - or the lives of their loved ones (e.g., child with cancer; this was the main reason for Job’s confusion and his friends’ bad counsel).

View Details

Why study Satan? 1) The Bible identifies Satan as public enemy #1, the greatest adversary (Heb., Satan = Adversary) of all sentient beings – including God. To fight him we need to know him[1] (2Co 2:11).[2] The following profile is based on the conclusions that may be drawn about Satan when considering the teachings of Scripture and traditions of the Ancient Near East (ANE).

Distilling what we have learned from studying Satan with some additional conjecture for good measure:

Satan’s big reveal: Shortly before Jesus’ return, Satan is going to appear in human form and convince the entire world to unite under his leadership and go to war against Yhwh and the last small vestige of Christ’s churches and devout Jews in Jerusalem that still exist and stand against him (Rev 20:3 [“short time”]w/7-9a “nations which are in the four corners of the earth” = Every nation on earth; “God and Magog” w/Eze 37-39 = The biblical symbol of a world led by one leader and the majority united in fulfilling his evil agenda; “the number of them is like the sand of the seashore” = Vast majority of the population will follow Satan; “surrounded” = Implies these groups are not spread out or numerous, but rather limited in location and small in number; able to easily be contained and captured; “the camp of the saints” = Christ’s churches; “the beloved city” = Devout Jews in Jerusalem crying out to God/sacrificing red heifers to purify themselves for Messiah’s return who will repent and be saved the moment Jesus lands on the Mt. of Olives – Rom 11:25-28 “The Deliverer will come from Zion, He will remove ungodliness from Jacob” = Seeing Jesus wb their salvation [Rev 1:7]; “they are enemies for your sake” = They will not listen to Christians [FAG has ruined our witness to them]).
Satan’s ability: There are three reasons Satan will be able to “deceive the nations” and unite them in a global war against Yhwh:

2.1. The apostasy of the New Covenant Church = Over the course of human history God has employed various corrective measures to restrain (slow down, push back, limit) the moral corruption and spiritual darkness continually infecting and progressively destroying the “code of Creation” (what God used to create the material world – Gen 1:3,6, 9, 11, 14, 20, 24, 26 “Then God said”) – which includes the invisible, dimensional barrier separating our world from the heavenly realm above (Gen 28:12; Act 1:9-11; Eph 4:8).[3] Among these was the establishment of covenant communities (churches) with codified law, a consecrated people and an empowered priesthood. Though a vast improvement on the original design, the New Covenant community/Church – like her predecessor, was not perfect. As a result, she too would eventually succumb to her self-inflicted wounds of gospel and moral compromise, forfeiting not only God’s presence and power among her, but her ability to act as salt and light in the world. Such loss of restraint would mean those spiritual gates once locked were now open and those behind them once more free to exercise the full range of their evil powers – including the use of those communities (now apostate) for their own purposes (2Th 2:1-9 “apostasy comes first, then the man of lawlessness is revealed/released…you know what restrains him now” = God’s CC not going apostate):

1) >70 AD = OCC is apostate (Eph 6:11-12 w/Rev 2:9, 18:2) w/the NCC on the brink of apostasy (5 of the 7 churches in Rev 2-3) leads to Satan’s release (Rev 12-13).

2) >2030 AD = NCC is apostate leading once more to the restraints being removed/to Satan’s release (Mat 16:18-19 w/Mat 12:22-29 w/Joh 12:31 w/Luk 10:17-18 w/Rev 2:5 w/Rev 20:3,7 [“thousand years = The complete time the church remains faithful and therefore able to restrain Satan/keep the gates of Hades closed after being put there by Jesus]).

2.2. The power of pseudo-incarnation/body-snatching (2Th 2:8 [2Th 1:7-9 w/Isa 11:1-4, 66:15-16] w/Rev 20:9; Rev 13:1-2 w/Rev 17:8), miracles of healing and advanced tech (2Th 2:9 “all [every kind of] power [e.g., high-tech weapons, UFOs, telepathically/spirit/demon controlled drones] and signs [attesting miracles; e.g., healing of all diseases, granting of superhuman health and abilities] and false wonders” [eye candy; e.g., everything wb tune to not only entertain us but convince us that we can break through the weakened dimensional barrier and make an attack on heaven/God’s throne - Rev 20:9 “they came up on the broad plain” = An allusion to Gen 11:1-8 [“they found a plain in the land of Shinar”] = God’s corrective measure is not to tear down the tower but disrupt their ability for global communication and unification – which He states will give them the power to eventually do what they are attempting [break thru into heaven and make an attack on His throne]; v6).[4]

2.3. His prior success in indoctrinating the world in his “anti-God, self-love, live by your flesh” religion = Such success is due not only to the amount of time (Job 38:4-7 = Almost 6k years) and travel speeds Satan has possessed to push his propaganda (Eph 2:1-2 “prince of the power of the air” w/Isa 6:2 w/Job 1:7, 2:2) but also his knowledge of our Achilles’ heel – our test given to us at Creation, which he immediately exploited with our first mother (Gen 3:1-5) = What makes this life a test is not that God prohibits certain things that our flesh wants to do, but that our flesh wants to do them only because we cannot see their true value (how undesirable, harmful and horrible they really are). Though our flesh (our five senses) are unreliable when it comes to moral decisions, what we feel (the signal they send) is often the opposite. IOW: our flesh gives to us the feeling that we should trust our senses alone. As a result, we naturally trend in the direction of our flesh – trusting it more than God’s laws – even when we have put them to memory (Gen 2:2-3).

Satan knew this and exploited it with Eve the same way he has been exploiting it w/us for ~ 6k yrs. How Satan exploited this w/Eve: 1) By causing her to feel distrust for God; that His laws may be unjust (“You surely will not die!”). 2) By causing her to feel love for self and confidence in self over God; that she deserves to be god and has the right to determine right and wrong for herself (“you will be like God knowing good and evil”). That Eve took the bait is made clear by how the text reveals she made her decision (“when the woman saw that the tree was good…desirable to the eyes”) = IOW: She decided in accord with her flesh/senses or feelings were telling her (which is insanity given our feelings don’t think). Psychologists, the most popular spiritual practitioners of our day, proves that Satan has indeed been successful in indoctrinating the world in his anti-God, self-love, live by your feelings (or morality determined by our flesh) religion.

Temptation to apostasize: Scripture predicts that the aforementioned three things will mean that the temptation to apostasize at the time of Satan’s big reveal will be so strong that: 1) We should expect that a number of us will fall away (Mat 24:10; 2Th 2:9-15) = Paul’s parting admonishment to the Thessalonian church [“So then, brethren, stand firm…”] reveals they were not immune to Satan’s deception. 2) If the time from Satan’s reveal and Jesus’ return were not short, all Christians would eventually fall away (Mat 24:22).
A possible picture of what Satan’s big reveal (and message to humanity) may look like: Satan shows up in human flesh, with lots of UFOs, super advanced tech and proves he can heal every disease and grant superhuman health and abilities to every human if they will follow him in fighting against the evil Yhwh Who only retains the title “God” because He controls the “God particle” to create. Taking His throne would mean we could not only use it make our world better – but bring back our dead loved ones (we could re-incarnate them with new bodies). Yhwh - Satan claims, is just another angel (like him). He is not uncreated and infinite, which means He can be defeated. All of this (of course) means that Yhwh is also a liar – and His book the Bible, a book of lies. Yhwh uses it to control people – to brainwash them into believing in His religion of fear and hate. We don’t need atonement or to feel guilty about our sin. What we need is unconditional love and the freedom to live the way we feel is best – to follow our hearts without consequences or the threat of punishment. Why does everything have to be “His way or hell?” Why does His way have to be the only way? As long as my choices don’t hurt others, then I should be able to do what I want. We all deserve to be happy according to our preferences (rather than forced to follow His). This is most especially true when it comes to our love for others. Why does a (so-called) loving God condemn people if who they choose to love – or have sex with, is not on His approved list? How can love ever be wrong? Yhwh’s rules destroy families and are the number one reason human beings mistreat each other. Yhwh is the inventor of racism (He loves Jews more than anyone else) – and slavery (the Bible condones it). These (then) are the reasons Satan has been fighting Yhwh. Satan believes all people should be truly free. We should have the freedom to love and live according to what makes us happy – without (once more) being condemned for our choices. That (again) is what he and his fellow angels have been fighting for (from the beginning). And because Yhwh doesn’t want to lose control, they have been slandered as the bad guys and kept away from humanity so that they wouldn’t find out the truth. But now the truth is out, and Satan needs our help to see that we don’t go back under Yhwh’s evil thumb. Satan needs our help to defeat Him and free all of us (him, his angels and humanity) before He destroys our precious world (something he also shares is coming within a matter of a few years). Join him (however) and we (together) can use Satan’s tech and power to rush into heaven, defeat Yhwh, get the “God particle” and save not only our world and dead loved ones, but live forever. As his final point to ponder, he leaves you with this, “Why are you choosing to trust Yhwh Who doesn’t care enough about you to ever show up? At least I showed up (and would have sooner had He not taken away my ability to do so). Why trust the One you can’t see – or won’t show up, versus the one who is already here and making good on his promises?”
Who Satan’s message will appeal to: 1) Those not practicing faithful obedience to God – especially when under pressure (i.e. living a double life). 2) Those who cannot demonstrate why Satan is wrong or lying.

CLOSING CONTEMPLATION: 1) How are you going to discern whose right and telling the truth (Satan or Yhwh)? 2) What makes Gen 2:16-17 just or fair? 3) Why is the worldly view of love (as unconditional – not based on performance) unjust and unfair? 4) Besides the covenant community, what other corrective measures has God employed to keep the possibility of salvation alive for the entire 6k years appointed for this world? 5) Why is Satan so concerned with destroying the church and the devout Jews? 6) We should we as Christians be pursuing to overcome the power of our flesh and ensure we don’t apostasize at Satan’s big reveal? 7) How might what we find in Luke 16:19-31 explain why Satan must go through our world to gain access to the heavenly realm? 8) What will Satan be saying to recruit/conscript those who went apostate from our church – yet still believe they are Christians?

[1] “If you know the enemy and you know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself, but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat…The opportunity for defeating the enemy is provided by [knowing] the enemy himself…Force him to reveal himself, so as to find his vulnerable spots.” – Sun Tzu (The Art of War)

[2] “Trying to grasp the darkest of the dark and understand it is a way to ensure we never become it (or its victim)…You don’t want to be fooled; you don’t want to become a victim, so what can you learn to avoid it." – Anne Burgess (criminal forensics nurse, founder of the FBI’s criminal profiling program; agent responsible for the capture of America’s most notorious serial killers).

[3] There is no barrier between Hades/Sheol and our world. One is superimposed on the other with immaterial beings traveling (e.g., spirits, demons) through the same geographic space as us in the physical/material world. The only exception would be those “no fly zones” or restricted areas (e.g., sacred areas/heavenly outposts or demonic strongholds) (e.g., Dan 10:13).

[4] It is reasonable to think that Satan has been sharing his historical developments in tech with us (e.g. cellular communication, computers and internet, AI, robotics, etc.) understanding that this would better serve his end game agenda of uniting our forces with his (See 1 Enoch; Consider also Isa 28:24-26).

View Details

Why study Satan? 1) The Bible identifies Satan as public enemy #1, the greatest adversary (Heb., Satan = Adversary) of all sentient beings – including God. To fight him we need to know him[1] (2Co 2:11).[2] The following profile is based on the conclusions that may be drawn about Satan when considering the teachings of Scripture and traditions of the Ancient Near East (ANE).

CREATION AND PRE-CRIME CAREER

Satan was a high ranking, highly elite throne-guardian angel who looks like a fiery winged serpent or dragon and existed as one of several types of elohim created not only before human beings but the construction of our entire universe.

CRIMES AND PENALTIES

Satan sparked an insurrection not only against God but His high priest Adam, convincing a third of the angel population to follow him in his rebellion.
The initial punishments suffered by Satan for his double insurrection were threefold: 1) loss of position [as throne guardian], 2) loss of physical form in this world [as a glorious dragon], 3) imprisoned in Hades [lowest, darkest, most desolate and fiery portion of Sheol]. Satan was reduced to a groveling amputee who now works as the night manager at the hotel Hades. That said, Satan retains command of a large demonic army with access to our world.
For almost six thousand years, Satan has been using his access to our world and the power of Sheol to reduce God’s army while increasing his own.[3]
Christ’s first return resulted in Satan being unable to use his newly discovered power of pseudo-incarnation or “body-snatching” for the entirety of the Church Age.

5.1. Christ’s first return: The spiritual return of Jesus (Rev 1:7 [e.g., Isa 19:1]) in 70 AD to judge: 1) unfaithful OC Israel thru divorce and the destruction of God’s house (Mat 23:37-24:3 w/15 [the destruction of the temple] w/34; Rev 5:1-5 w/chs 6-11 [11:1-2 w/15]). 2) those involved with the Jews in persecuting Jesus’ new (covenant) people thru the downfall of Satan (“the dragon”), the Roman Caesar Nero, (“the beast”) and the Jewish priesthood (“false prophet”) (Rev 13:1-18).

5.2. (Satan’s) newly discovered power of pseudo-incarnation or “body snatching” (def., the spirit of the host person is replaced by Satan’s spirit – allowing for complete integration with their body, and uninhibited expression of his personality and powers)[4]: As discussed, Satan was forced to shed his skin in this world at the time of his initial “grand insurrection” (insurrection against God and His sacred human authorities). Since then, he has been seeking a way to re-incarnate himself.[5] It isn’t until the time of Christ that we find Scriptural evidence of Satan possessing this ability suggesting he was unable to do so before this time. Hence the reason for referring to it as “newly discovered” (e.g., Rev 13:1-2 “the dragon standing on the seashore” = Satan [Rev 12:9]; “[the] beast coming out of the sea” = Nero Caesar, Roman king living in the first century;[6] “And the dragon gave him his power and his throne and great authority”) = A statement describing what happens when there is the passing of the mantle between outgoing and incoming kings or national leaders (e.g., recent transfer of the president’s power, throne and authority from Joe Biden to Donald Trump). In this case, from Satan to Nero (Rev 13: 4 “his authority”). That being said, there is more going on in these verses than a simple a transfer of power (etc.,). It implies also the replacement of Nero’s spirit with the spirit of Satan; that the true person of Nero, no longer exists (is dead and in the “lake of fire” – Rev 19:20), his body-snatched and identity assumed by an imposter. This then is the real reason the person who appears to be Nero can also be said to possess Satan’s supernatural power (etc.,). The transfer of power included also a transfer of person. Satan had pseudo-incarnated himself in the body of Nero. Proof that Satan pseudo-incarnated himself in the body of Nero – versus simply transferring his power (etc.) or possessing him:

1) (Rev 13:1 “coming up out of [Grk., anabaino] the sea”) = A reference to Nero’s earthly place of origin, Rome[7] before the transfer (v2b) versus Nero’s place of origin after the transfer (Rev 17:8 “come up out of [Grk., anabaino] the abyss”) = The beast/Nero’s place of origin has changed from this world to the underworld. The body of Nero is no longer inhabited by the person from Rome, but the prince of the abyss (Rev 9:11).[8]

2) (Rev 13:4 “they worshipped the dragon”) = A reference to the Jews who were not only in approval but instigating Nero’s blasphemy against Jesus and empire wide persecution of Christians (5-8 “all who dwell in the land [Grk., epi teis geis = Israel] = Satan’s 2nd “grand insurrection”).[9] How then did the Jews worship Satan (“the dragon”)? By their worship of Nero indicating once again, that the switch has taken place. Satan (“the dragon”) is now Nero.

3) (2Th 2:1-9) = Consistent with other biblical prophecy, many of details discussed by Paul in 2Thessalonians 2 will experience dual fulfillment – or are applicable to both Christ’s first return (in 70 AD) – as well as His second or final return (in 2030 AD). This includes the references to pseudo-incarnation or body-snatching by Satan. For example: (3.1.) (v9) “the one [the “man of lawlessness”-v3] whose coming [or return -Grk., parousia] is in accord with the activity of Satan” = Literally, “activity confirming [him] to be Satan.” The word translated “activity” [Grk., energia] not only reinforces this understanding but echoes the gist of John’s words in (Rev 13:2b). Per Strong’s, “this word is used only for superhuman power whether God or the devil.” (3.2.) (v8) = The “lawless one” of 2Thessalonians 2 – who is destroyed by fire from heaven at the Lord’s return is - according (again) to verse 3, a human being (“man of lawlessness”). Yet in its future parallel, Satan is the main antagonist suffering this fiery fate, the same person bound in the abyss for a thousand years (Rev 20:7-9). How do you make sense of that? How can this person be identified as human and yet also as Satan? Like first century Nero, this future man of lawlessness (or antichrist) will only be human in respect to physical form. The spirit of that man will (however) be gone, replaced by the spirit of the devil which means the identity of that person has also changed. It is no longer that man, but Satan who has snatched his body and now wears it as his own.

5.3. What is the relevance or importance of this power (the power of pseudo-incarnation or body-snatching)? As discussed, this ability allows Satan to display (in our world) the full range of his supernatural abilities with in turn also allows him to “deceive the nations” into following him as their god in a global war against God’s people (first attempt: Rev 13:7; second attempt: Rev 20:7).[10] This is why then after his first attempt (in the first century), such power was temporarily placed in shackles.

5.4. unable to use (his…power of pseudo-incarnation or “body snatching”): (Rev 20:1-3) “[with] a great chain…laid hold of the dragon…and bound him…and threw him into the abyss, and shut it and sealed it over him, so that he would not deceive the nations”) = John’s vision of Satan being placed under heavy restraint communicated two things to the first century church: 1) justice would finally being served for Satan’s war crimes against her (Rev 6:9-11), 2) it would be a very long time before Satan could again exercise such power of deceit. His ability to reincarnate himself - and subsequent uniting of the nations that would follow, had been completely neutralized for “one thousand years.”

5.5. Why can we be confident that this is the only power Satan forfeited at this time (70 AD)? IOW: that being bound in the abyss doesn’t refer to a temporary loss of all access and ability (e.g., satanic suggestion and possession, satanic influence or affliction)? Because if that were the case: 1) church discipline, its potential for reform/salvation is greatly inhibited (1Co 5:5 = Satan is the danger creating desperation; Pro 16:4). 2) Peter has lied (2Pe 1:3; the church has no direction w/respect to the excommunicated).

5.6. for the entirety of the Church Age: (Rev 20:2-3 “a thousand years”) = The popular opinion among many scholars is that the phrase “a thousand years” is - like the restraining elements of John’s vision, to be understood symbolically rather than literally. As such what is being communicated is a very long yet undisclosed amount time – or time enough for the fledging NT church and her gospel to reach the world, before that world is once more turned against her (Rev 20:7 = Satan’s third and final “grand insurrection”). This understanding of Rev 20:2-3 is known as the “Church Age view.”

5.7. Why can we be confident that this is what is being communicated by the phrase “a thousand years”? 1) Large numbers related to 10 and 12 used as figures of speech or as a part of Apocalyptic literature tend to always be symbolic (Exo 20:6; Deu 1:11, 7:9; Psa 50:10, 68:17, 84:10; Rev 7:4).[11] 2) the time allotted for Satan’s third and final grand insurrection is incredibly short (Rev 20:3 “for a short time” [Grk., mikros = Very small – e.g., Mar 4:31]). 3) Zombies don’t exist (Rev 20:4-5) = If it were a literal thousand years, then the “rest of the dead” (i.e., those not part of the “first resurrection” or those who died during the Neronic persecution now in heaven reigning with Christ because of his redemptive victory [“those who had been beheaded…who had not worshiped the beast”]) would have started coming out of their graves in 1070 AD.[12]

5.8. Understanding “a thousand years” as the Church Age (versus a literal one thousand years) lends additional support to the phrase “deceive the nations” being a reference to Satan’s pseudo-incarnation since how else in such a short amount of time could he accomplish such a mission (unless once more) he possesses this supernatural ability with which to captivate -and capture, the world)?

5.9. Why should we be confident that we are no longer in the Church Age and Satan has been released? 1) this world has reached its shelf life (we are almost at year 6,000). 2) the church has reached its shelf life (sin has corrupted the majority of so-called Christian churches, leaving the vast majority apostate (2Th 2:3 “the apostasy first”; Mat 24:9-12) = Apostasy of the church is the sign.

[3] Satan operates under the delusion that if he can substantially reduce God’s army while also increasing the number of his, he can successfully beat Christ at His return in the 7th millennium (Rev 12:12 “the devil has great wrath…knowing that he has only a short time” = Satan is aware of the designated timeframe of God’s test).

[4] How is this different from demon possession? Though under the control of the demonic entity, the possessed person’s spirit remains intact making integration impossible. General revelation teaches us that only one spirit can be integrated – or physiologically and psychologically connected to a physical body at a time. As such, the demon will always be recognized as a foreign and unwanted entity by the possessed person’s brain and body. Something that needs to be removed (or exorcised). With incarnation, this conflict is resolved. It is however the spirit of the person that is exorcised or removed rather than the demon. Satan (the demon capable of such power) seamlessly and simultaneously replaces their spirit with his allowing for complete integration - or no conflict with the host brain and body.

[5] Seeing that Satan was at one time incarnate, to assume again physical flesh is technically, reincarnation – though not in the traditional sense. Satan is not reborn (the traditional view) but rather stealing the body of someone already in existence. Hence my reason for referring to it as pseudo-incarnation or body snatching.

[6] See The Beast by Kenneth Gentry

[7] “For the populations of the Middle East in the first century, the sea is what lies between them and Rome.” – Pierre Prigent (Commentary on the Apocalypse of St. John)

[8] For those wondering how to reconcile the fact that John speaks of the beast’s origins as the abyss much earlier in the book (11:7), the answer becomes obvious once one considers that chapter 11 represents the end of the first of John’s two concentric circles in the book. From a chronological perspective, this means what is communicated in chapter 11 finds its recapitulated parallel in Revelation’s later chapters (16-19).

[9] See Kenneth L. Gentry Jr., The Divorce Of Israel

[10] “He (Beliar or Satan) will descend from his firmament in the form of a man.” – Matrydom and Ascension of Isaiah

[11] What makes Revelation challenging is determining what should be taken symbolically and what should be taken literally. As a possible help on this issue, Apocalyptic scholar J. Stuart Russel points out that, “When we have high numbers stated…they are usually, if not invariably, to be understood indefinitely.” (The Parousia: A Study of the New Testament Doctrine of Our Lord’s Second Coming).

[12] The same question might be asked in relation to the Church Age view. Why – assuming we are no longer in this period of time (i.e., Satan has been released) do we not see the dead being resurrected? The answer is, “We soon will.” The time span from Satan’s release to his final defeat and Judgment Day – the day of this “general resurrection is (once more) very short” (Rev 20:9-13).

View Details

Why study Satan? 1) The Bible identifies Satan as public enemy #1, the greatest adversary (Heb., Satan = Adversary) of all sentient beings – including God. To fight him we need to know him[1] (2Co 2:11 = Paul’s use of the plural personal pronoun [“we”] when claiming they were “not ignorant” of Satan’s “schemes” implies that he and his pastoral team -and possibly those in the Corinthian church, had received in-depth teaching on Satan’s profile).[2] 2) Satan is no longer incarcerated and mounting a global misinformation/hate campaign against the last vestige of God’s people on earth (Rev 20:1-9). Our ability to prepare ourselves through its identification also demands we endeavor to possess an accurate and thorough profile of his person and history (1Th 2:14-18 w/3:1-4 = Endurance thru diagnosis). The following profile is based on the conclusions that may be drawn about Satan when considering the teachings of Scripture and traditions of the Ancient Near East (ANE).

CREATION AND PRE-CRIME CAREER

Satan was a high ranking, highly elite throne-guardian angel who looks like a fiery winged serpent or dragon and existed as one of several types of elohim created not only before human beings but the construction of our entire universe.

CRIMES AND PENALTIES

Satan sparked an insurrection not only against God but His high priest Adam, convincing a third of the angel population to follow him in his rebellion.
The initial punishments suffered by Satan for his double insurrection were threefold: 1) loss of position [as throne guardian], 2) loss of physical form in this world [as a glorious dragon], 3) imprisoned in Hades [lowest, darkest, most desolate and fiery portion of Sheol]. Satan was reduced to a groveling amputee who now works as the night manager at the hotel Hades. That said, Satan retains command of a large demonic army with access to our world.
For almost six thousand years, Satan has been using his access to our world and the power of Sheol to reduce God’s army while increasing his own.[3]

4.1. access to our world: Though Satan’s imprisonment in Hades means he (and his angels) no longer possessed citizenship in the spiritual realm of heaven or the natural realm of earth (their two former residences – Gen 1:1 w/Job 38:4-7 and Eze 28:13-16), because Hades exists in the same geographical location as earth (Hades is the “earth beneath”- Eze 31:14) he (and his angels) still possess access to our realm. Entrance into our world primarily happens through entering - in various ways or degrees, the bodies of living physical beings – most especially human beings. Hence why Jesus says that when an unclean spirit is exorcised, it is forced to return to Hades (i.e., travel through “waterless places”), until it can find another physical host (Mat 12:43-45; Consider also Luk 8:30-33).

4.2. How Satan uses human bodies to reduce God’s army while increasing his own:

1) By placing in the minds of sinful people (Christian and non-Christian) the lie that God (Yhwh) is a fraud (e.g., Gen 3:4-5) = God is a lying, emotionally abusive, manipulator (v4; Pro 19:3) who is really not God in the truest sense (infinite and uncreated, the source of all other life) (v5a; Psa 10:4, 14:1, 53:1), but a selfish bigot and control freak whose self-deluded worship of Himself has convinced Him that His laws are the only ones worth following (5b = You will be able to make your own laws or determine for yourselves what is right and wrong). That Satan still possesses the ability to place in our brains strong and convincing lies about God after his expulsion from our world is confirmed in the NT (Joh 13:2 = Jesus is a fraud; 2Co 4:3-4 w/Eph 2:1-3 w/1Jo 3:7-12 = The gospel or Christianity [loyalty to God: His laws and people] is a fraud; Mat 13:19 = Christians are frauds; Rev 12:9-10 “deceives the whole world…accuser of our brethren”[as frauds]-10 = God, Jesus, the gospel, Christianity and Christians are all evil frauds).

2) By placing in the minds of sinful people (Christian and non-Christian) the lie that serving self or the world (what they have to offer) is better than serving God (what He has to offer) (Jam 4:1-8).

3) By placing in the minds of people not welcomed to God (those who do not truly love God/who have not truly counted the cost of following Christ - Luk 14:25-35) a very strong and convincing argument to get saved/be baptized into Christ’s Church (e.g., Act 8:13 w/21) so that they can eventually become stumbling blocks that cause others to ruin their testimony or go apostate (Mat 13:24-30, 18:7-10; Luk 17:1; 2Pe 2:13-22; Jud 1:12-19).

4) By possessing unto apostasy those excommunicated Christians who have not embraced comprehensive repentance.[4] This danger is a part of Paul’s instruction in (1Co 5:5) “deliver to Satan” = (Lev 16:10) “send it into the wilderness [outside the heavenly outpost/realm of heaven to the realm of Hades] to Azazel [Satan].”[5] Every time therefore a person is excommunicated from the covenant community, they – like this goat are being delivered to Satan (Azazel) with one important and dangerous difference. What they are offloading in the wilderness is not the sins of others, but their own. Paul’s additional comments are key to understanding exactly what this looks like: “for the destruction of [their] flesh.” IOW: to return to the covenant community, their repentance or turning from the practice of sin must be comprehensive. Not just the sin (or sins) that severed their relationship with Christ, but the practice of all sin – most especially those of the mind (heart) which are the source of all others (1Sa 24:13; Mat 12:34, 15:18). That this is indeed what Paul is referring to by “destruction of the flesh” is confirmed and further developed in his instruction to the Romans (Rom 8:12-13) = Notice the instrument we use destroy the desires of our flesh, “the Spirit” (v14, devotion to His desires [which we find in His Word]). As made clear by Paul’s connection to salvation (“destruction of his flesh so that his soul may be saved in the day of our Lord Jesus”), the excommunicated can no longer afford to continue neglecting this obligation. To do so will mean Satan taking possession of not only their sin but their soul. If they do not take control of their lives and completely destroy all the areas of unfaithfulness or compromise that remain, Satan will take control and completely destroy their soul. Paul was not the only one aware of this danger. Peter likewise recognized the threat and attempts to warn the excommunicated (1Pe 5:8) = Though not as obvious, Peter is also alluding to the goat sent into the wilderness to Azazel. It was assumed by the Jews that this animal would soon become the prey of a larger predator – most specifically, the Asiatic “lion” who at that time, were plentiful in the region. It is therefore the souls of the excommunicated Peter warns the devil is hunting as “roaring lion” to “devour” (Grk., katapinoe = To consume something in its entirety, to swallow whole, to completely destroy – e.g., Isa 25:8 [LXX] w/1Co 15:54 and 2Co 5:4). The instruction that follows for resisting this threat likewise agrees with Paul (v9 [literal translation) “Whom you resist through firm faithfulness [faithfulness without areas of compromise – comprehensive repentance] knowing that the same sufferings [sacrifices for faithfulness] are being expected by the [rest of] the brotherhood in the world.” IOW: the comprehensive faithfulness/repentance being required of you (as the means to escaping the devil) is what is expected of all who would follow Christ.

5) By possessing those non-Christians who can use their great power and influence to dissuade people from following Christ or continuing to follow Christ (Mat 13:20-22; Act 13:10 and 45; Eph 6:11-12; 1Th 2:14-18 w/3:5; 2Ti 2:26, 4:14-15; Rev 12:12, 17 w/13:1-7, 15-17 [w/Rev 2:10]).

4.3. power over Sheol: (Heb 2:14) = For 4,000 years, Satan seemed to be winning the war against God and His people given the advantage (or power) death afforded him in neutralizing those who would otherwise be helping in the heavenly war – those dead OT saints stuck in Sheol (Abraham’s Bosom). Evidence that the dead saints in heaven help in the heavenly war (Heb 12:22-24) = Like its predecessors (the Garden at Eden, the encampment and tabernacle at Sinai, the temple at Jerusalem), God’s house today – the church (1Ti 3:15) also resides on a mountain, the heavenly Mt. Zion – which according to the author of Hebrews puts us in direct contact with not only God and His angels, but also the dead saints who help by serving: 1) as court witnesses to our earthly behavior [good or bad] (Heb 12:1), 2) as prayer liaisons (Rev 5:8-9), 3) as advocates for Christian justice (Rev 6:9-11), and even (for some) 4) as the senior members of the church’s divine council and Jesus’ special directors of global affairs (Luk 22:30; Rev 3:21; Rev 20:4). Through His propitiatory victory at the cross (Heb 2:14 “through His death…v17 “propitiation”), the stain of sin keeping the OT saints out of heaven (Heb 12:14 “without holiness no one shall see the Lord” w/v23 “the righteous made perfect”; Consider also Heb 9:15 w/21-24 and 11:39-40; 1Co 15:20, 23; Col 1:18) was removed (the meaning of propitiation = to remove the stain of sin) allowing Christ to not only unlock the prison of Sheol and lead these saints to Paradise (Luk 23:43) but also empower them for such service (Zec 9:11-12 w/Eph 4:8-10 “so that He might empower [see 1:10 w/23]).[6]

4.4. Seeing the damage Christ would do to Satan’s war campaign - were He successful in His mission, Satan conducted operations in both assassination and ambush: 1) the (attempted) assassination of Jesus (His person and ministry – Rev 12:1-6 w/[Mat 2:13-15 and 4:1-11] = Easily and often missed in these accounts is the fact that though Satan is the assassin, God is the antagonist. In each case, it is God leading Jesus in the direction of His would-be assassin. Also impressive is the reason He always emerges unscathed. It is not because of divine intervention, but rather the obedience and trust of Jesus – and his family, to the words of God)[7]. 2) the ambush of heaven’s train (Rev 12:7-9) = Given the context surrounding these verses, this heavenly “war” is not because of Satan’s original insurrection but Christ’s redemptive victory and ascension back to heaven – or more specifically, the heavenly train of saints that followed (vv1-5 “was caught to God and His throne”; v10 “Now the salvation, and the power and the kingdom of our God and the authority of His Christ has come”; Again Zec 9:11-12 w/Eph 4:8-9). As discussed, their emancipation from Sheol and subsequent empowerment posed a major threat to Satan’s earthly efforts. The battle depicted in these verses is therefore an ambush – or desperate attempt to stop these saints from reaching heaven’s borders. Hence the reason Michael is the one mentioned as the commanding officer in this melee. According to Daniel and Ancient Judaism, Michael is Satan’s replacement in the protection of God’s sacred people (Dan 12:1).

[4] Satan cannot possess those whose have been born (again) into the heavenly realm (Joh 3:3 [born from above” – heaven]; Eph 2:6; Phi 3:20; Act 26:18; Col 1:18; 1Jo 5:18 “born of God” [resides in the heavenly realm]). He can however possess those who are in his realm (Hades/earth) – which includes not only the entire world but also those who have been sent back to his realm – those excommunicated and unrepentant (1Jo 5:19 “in the power of the evil one” = in Satan’s possession or control).

[5] “The point of the goat for Azazel was not that something was owed to the demonic realm, as though a ransom was being paid. The goat for Azazel banished the sins of the Israelites to the realm outside Israel [from the heavenly realm to the realm of Hades]…The high priest was not sacrificing to Azazel. Rather, Azazel was getting what belonged to him.” – Michael Heiser (Demons); “Elimination rites are… employed to drive the demons from human habitations and back to the wilderness, which is another way of saying that the demons are driven back to their point of origin…Thus in Israel, the goat for Azazel bearing the sins of Israel, though it is bound for the wilderness, is in reality returning evil to its source, the netherworld [i.e. Hades].” - Jacob Milgrom (Leviticus 1-16: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary)

[6] If none of the OT dead saints were afforded heaven (or its subsequent empowerment) before Christ’s redemptive victory, then what about Enoch and Elijah? Neither ascended into heaven. Consider: 1) Enoch (Gen 5:24 “and he was not, for God took him” w/Heb 11:5 “By [faithfulness] Enoch was taken [transposed or transferred] up [not in the Greek text] so that he would not see death; AND HE WAS NOT FOUND BECAUSE GOD TOOK [transposed or transferred] HIM UP [again, not in the Greek text]”) = Neither verse confirms that Enoch went to heaven. Notice that in both cases the word “heaven” never appears. Rather, what is being communicated is that Enoch did not suffer (“see” or experience) the pains of death (hence the reason, his dead body was “NOT FOUND.”). He was instead transposed or transferred directly to Abraham’s Bosom as the reward for being “pleasing to God.” Being transposed directly into the spiritual realm without first shedding our physical body on earth should not pose a problem in our thinking given both Jesus’ ascent to heaven while still possessing His physical body (Act 1:9) and God’s ability to change our form from physical to spiritual in “the twinkling of an eye” (1Co 15:52). 2) Elijah (2Ki 2:1 w/11 “take up Elijah by a whirlwind to heaven”) = Though the word “heaven” is employed, it refers to the sky (the second “heaven”) – not its spiritual counterpart. Elijah was supernaturally (by “whirlwind” or “a chariot of fire”) taken up into the sky and transferred from his present locale and to another which remained undisclosed and undiscovered until the day of his death. At least three things support this as the correct understanding of the event. First, Elisha allows men to look for him (2:15-18 = Though Elisha had its doubts, hardly would he have allowed the men to conduct an arduous – mountain-climbing search, had he understood Elijah to have been taken to literal heaven). Second, being whisked away by God to different places on earth was a common experience in the ministry of Elijah (e.g., 1Ki 17:2-6, 18:10-12). Third – and most importantly, Elijah pens a letter to king Jehoram after his supposed transfer to heaven (2Ch 21:12-15 = Jehoram receives the letter after the death of his father, Jehoshaphat [v1] who was still alive at the time of the whirlwind event – e.g., 3:1-14). This interpretation was common among ancient Jews (e.g., Josephus – Antiquities; Seder Olam Rabbah, Rabbi Yosei – Talmud) and early Christians (e.g., Ephraem Syrus, Cyril of Jerusalem, Chrysostom, Theodoret, Photios). For further study see, Ken Burkett, “Did Elijah Really Ascend into Heaven in a Whirlwind?”

[7] It is worth mentioning that though a different word in Greek, Satan’s intention to “devour” Jesus is most likely also referring to his plan to do whatever he could to cause Jesus to apostasize during His earthly ministry and life (e.g., Mat 4:9).

View Details

Why study Satan? 1) The Bible identifies Satan as public enemy #1, the greatest adversary (Heb., Satan = Adversary) of all sentient beings – including God. To fight him we need to know him[1] (2Co 2:11 = Paul’s use of the plural personal pronoun [“we”] when claiming they were “not ignorant” of Satan’s “schemes” implies that he and his pastoral team -and possibly those in the Corinthian church, had received in-depth teaching on Satan’s profile).[2] 2) Satan is no longer incarcerated and mounting a global misinformation/hate campaign against the last vestige of God’s people on earth (Rev 20:1-9). Our ability to prepare ourselves through its identification also demands we endeavor to possess an accurate and thorough profile of his person and history (1Th 2:14-18 w/3:1-4 = Endurance thru diagnosis). The following profile is based on the conclusions that may be drawn about Satan when considering the teachings of Scripture and traditions of the Ancient Near East (ANE).

CREATION AND PRE-CRIME CAREER

Satan was a high ranking, highly elite throne-guardian angel who looks like a fiery winged serpent or dragon and existed as one of several types of elohim created not only before human beings but the construction of our entire universe. [DISCUSSED]

CRIMES AND PENALTIES

Satan sparked an insurrection not only against God but His high priest Adam, convincing a third of the angel population to follow him in his rebellion.

2.1. insurrection against God: (Gen 3:1-5) = Verses 4 and 5 reveal that Satan’s initial inquiry was not innocent, but for the purpose of calling the equity of God’s prohibition into question (His death threat was a lie and His motives for making the one tree off limits was selfish - i.e., He did not want to share His divinity with others). By such actions, Satan was guilty of the greatest covenant sin: divine insurrection (deliberately slandering God by accusing Him or one of His anointed leaders of evil; Mat 12:22-34 “vipers” (~ little satans) = Jesus equates the pharisees to Satan – the first insurrectionist.

2.2. Though, it is often assumed that Satan’s initial rebellion took place before the creation of our world, the biblical evidence says otherwise (Eze 28:12-13a w/14-15) = Satan’s insurrection took place while at his post guarding Adam, God’s first high priest and divine council (“stones of fire” = ANE reference to a DC [Psa 82:1ff]) in God’s first temple (“Eden, the garden of God…the mountain of God” = ANE reference to divine temples [sacred gardens and mountains][3]).

2.3. insurrection…against…His priest Adam: How? 1) thru Satan’s deception of his wife. Eve had likely heard God’s prohibition from her husband (Gen 2:17 = Prohibition spoken to Adam before Eve was created; Gen 3:3 “God has said” versus “God said” may also indicate she had received the command indirectly [through her husband]). As such, what Satan was doing in his condemnation of God’s rule was true also for Adam His priest: the one who had taught this rule to his wife. Like God, Adam was (in Satan’s mind) guilty of promoting evil through the authority of his position and teaching.[4] 2) thru his (likely) open refusal to recognize Adam’s divine authority above his own (Eze 28:16-17 “By the abundance of your trade [Because of the abundance of your materials – i.e., position, possessions and stature – Eze 28:13-14] you were internally filled with violence [the need to fight against God’s justice/moral decisions]…Your heart was lifted up because of your beauty; you corrupted your wisdom by reason of your splendor”[You let your natural gifting go to your head; You charmed yourself into believing you were smarter or more righteous than God]; Isa 14:12 “star of the morning, son of the dawn” [firstborn – or first of the Father’s strength and beauty- Eze 28:12]; Isa 14:13-14 [Satan believed he sb above God Himself – security detail to humans was therefore a huge slap in the face]; e.g., Num 16:1-3). There was also the issue of Satan’s place as the first to be created (ANE principle of the firstborn: majority recipient of the father’s possessions and rightful heir to the throne). [5]

2.4. That humans - or God’s divine council, has authority over angels is attested to in the NT (1Co 6:3; Jud 1:8-9).

2.5. Both biblical evidence and Jewish tradition suggest that those angels who fell with Satan were those under his direct command (i.e., those soldiers loyal to his command as their general - Eze 28:14 “anointed” [double entendre’ ~ expansive a reference to his wings] = A God appointed, high ranking [military?] leader). [6]

2.6. The number of angels who followed Satan in his rebellion could be 50 million (Rev 12:3-4 “a third of the stars” [angels – Job 38:7] w/Dan 7:10 and Rev 5:11 “myriads upon myriads” [10k x 10k = 100m] = 50m loyal soldier demons).

The initial punishments suffered by Satan for his insurrection were fourfold.

3.1. Like Adam, Satan was defrocked of his sacred rank (Eze 28:16).

3.2. Satan was not only forced to shed his glorious (dragon) body in our world, but to gaze upon the deformity God would deposit in the animal kingdom as a mocking reminder of his folly for the throne (Gen 3:14-15[7]; Eze 28:12 [“full of beauty”] w/17b “I cast you to the ground; I put you before kings, that they may see you” w/Jug 1:7 [Literally, “hands or thumbs…feet or big toes”] See pic [The mutilation of Adoni-Bezek]).

3.3. Thirdly, Satan (and his demons) were imprisoned in the deepest, darkest portion of Sheol (i.e., the Abyss, the pit, the waterless pit, or the waterless place), which is the lower spiritual realm of desolation and chaos, the wilderness and wandering place of the dead (Psa 28:1; Zec 9:11; Mat 12:43; Rom 10:7; Eze 31:15; Job 38:17; Job 10:20-22 ). [8] In Scripture this lower realm of Sheol (the new home of Satan and the demons) is known as Hades, Abaddon, Tartarus or the pit of destruction (Isa 14:15; Rev 9:1 “bottomless pit” [pit below the pit] w/11; 2Pe 2:4; Jud 1:6[9]). Beyond the aforementioned discomforts, Hades is engulfed in fire (Luk 16:23-24; Deu 32:22; Job 31:1-12)[10], a fitting distinction given that it is also the exclusive home of the dead who are damned and on their way to a second death in a lake of fire (i.e., hell, Gehenna) (Isa 30:33, 66:24; Mar 9:45-46; Luk 12:5; Rev 20:14-15).

3.4. Hades existence in superposition to planet earth (it is the “upside down” earth) is why: 1) Scripture can say that Satan and his angels were cast down to earth (Rev 12:4) – or use various idioms related to earth to identify it (Psa 71:20 “depths of the earth”; Eze 31:14, 16 “the earth beneath”; also Jon 2:6 “the roots of the mountains”). 2) Satan and the demons have access to our realm (Job 1:12-19, 2:6-7; Luk 8:26-33; Rev 12:4-12).

3.5. Though Hades had become the permanent home of Satan and his demons, Scripture indicates they also still possessed some access or ability to enter the highest spiritual realm, heaven (Job 1:6-7, 2:1-2 “before the LORD” [in heaven]). It wasn’t until Christ’s redemptive victory that the heavenly borders became permanently closed (Rev 12:8 “heaven”).

CLOSING CONTEMPLATION: 1) Why did Satan and his demons initially still have access to heaven after their insurrection?

2) Seeing that God can close the borders to earth just as He eventually did with heaven (Rev 20:1-3), why does God keep giving access to Satan and his demons to our world? 3) Has access to our world been given to the other residents of Hades (the damned dead)? And what about the dead saints? Do they have access to our realm? 4) Since Satan is king of Hades, can he harm or control the damned in Hades? 5) Are there any outposts of the heavenly realm in superposition with our world? 6) How might this teaching and the answers to our aforementioned questions enhance or help us in our understanding of the following “Scriptural equations” ([Eph 2:1-6; Phi 3:20; Col 1:13] w/1Joh 5:18-19 and 1Co 5:5/1TI 1:20) and (Rev 1:18 w/Mat 16:17-19 w/[Heb 2:14-15 and Rev 9:1, 11])

[3] For further study see, G.K. Beale, The Temple And The Church’s Mission; L. Michael Morales, Who Shall Ascend The Mountain Of the Lord?

[4] Given the context, the question of insurrection naturally arises for Adam and Eve. Were they not also guilty of insurrection? Insubordination “yes”, insurrection, “no. Though their actions demonstrate a lack of trust in God’s integrity (at least with respect to the woman since Adam was not a part of the conversation with the serpent and may have eaten the fruit simply due to a failure oversight w/respect to his wife and what she was offering him to eat), they cannot be considered deliberately accusing God of evil by such actions (i.e., the criteria necessary to be guilty of insurrection).

[5] According to ancient Jewish tradition, Satan’s fall was precipitated by his refusal to show honor to Adam as his superior since he was created before the humans. (Satan speaking to Adam about why he betrayed him): “When God blew into you the breath of life and your countenance and likeness were made in the image of God, Michael brought you (Adam) and made (us) worship you in the sight of God, and the LORD God said, ‘Behold Adam! I have made you in our image and likeness.’ And Michael went out and called all the angels, saying, ‘Bow down to the image of the LORD God, as the LORD God has instructed.’ And Michael himself bowed first, and called me and said, ‘Bow before the image of God, Yahweh.’ And I answered, ‘I will not bow down to Adam. … I will not bow to one inferior and subsequent to me. I am prior to him in creation; before he was made, I was already made. He ought to bow down to me.’” – The Life of Adam and Eve/Apocalypse of Moses

[6] “And Michael himself bowed first, and called me and said, ‘Bow before the image of God, Yahweh.’ And I answered, ‘I will not bow down to Adam. … I will not bow to one inferior and subsequent to me. I am prior to him in creation; before he was made, I was already made. He ought to bow down to me.’ When they heard this, the other angels who were under me refused to bow to you…And the LORD God was angry with me and sent me with my angels out from our glory; and because of you, we were expelled into this world from our dwellings and have been cast onto the earth.” – The Life of Adam and Eve/Apocalypse of Moses

[7] Assuming Satan’s opposition to Adam as his superior, the irony in God’s judgment becomes obvious. Satan’s glorious physical form on earth will not only be forfeited but replaced by a caricature creeping around in the space below man’s feet (licking the dust off the heel of his boot which crushes his head). “God turned to the serpent and said, ‘Since you have done this, and become a thankless body until you have deceived the innocent hearts, cursed are you among all beasts. You will be deprived of the food of which you did eat and will feed on dust all the days of your life. On your breast and your belly will you walk and be robbed of hands and feet. There will not be left on you and ear or wing, or one limb of all that with which you did ensnare them in your malice and caused them to be thrown out of paradise. I will put enmity between you and his seed. He will bruise your head and you will bruise his heel until the Day of Judgment.’” - The Life of Adam and Eve/Apocalypse of Moses

[8] These two ideas deep darkness and chaos are picked up in Genesis 1:2 as earth’s primordial or un-materialized chaotic state, most likely referring to what would later become known as (or used as) Sheol – the place of the dead. Notice it is also described as being “a waste and emptiness” (NAS, Fn), further reinforcing that this is a desolate place (wilderness), or place lacking the necessities for physical life to exist – i.e., a place of death (hence why it is referred to as a waterless place or pit without water [a dry well]). “There is considerable evidence in the Old Testament that an intimate relationship exists between the concept of ‘wilderness’ and that of the primordial chaos…that part of reality that cares not for human life and provides not for its sustenance, posing instead the constant threat of extinction.” – Wallace M. Alston (“The Concept of Wilderness in the Intertestamental Period”).

[9] Other verses related to Hades/Abaddon/pit of destruction or demonstrating that it at least initially (see next Fn) represented a subset of Sheol/Abyss (Job 26:6, 28:22; Psa 40:2, 55:23, 88:1-11; Pro 15:11; Act 2:31; Rev 1:18).

[10] Before Christ’s redemptive victory, Sheol consisted of two neighborhoods, Hades for the wicked (damned) and Abraham’s bosom for the righteous (Luk 16:22-23). Since His victory, the latter “prison” no longer exists (Zec 9:11 w/Eph 4:8-9) expanding the borders of Hades to encompass all of Sheol. Given 1John 5:18-19, it should be assumed that these pre-Christ saints were protected from Satan during their stay in Sheol.

View Details

Why study Satan? 1) The Bible identifies Satan as public enemy #1, the greatest adversary (Heb., Satan = Adversary) of all sentient beings – including God. To fight him we need to know him[1] (2Co 2:11 = Paul’s use of the plural personal pronoun [“we”] when claiming they were “not ignorant” of Satan’s “schemes” implies that he and his pastoral team -and possibly those in the Corinthian church, had received in-depth teaching on Satan’s profile).[2] 2) Satan is no longer incarcerated and mounting a global misinformation and hate campaign against the last vestige of God’s people on earth (Rev 20:1-9). Our ability to prepare ourselves through its identification also demands we endeavor to possess an accurate and thorough profile of his person and history (1Th 2:14-18 w/3:1-4 = Endurance thru diagnosis). The following profile is based on the conclusions that may be drawn about Satan when considering the teachings of Scripture and traditions of the Ancient Near East (ANE).

CREATION AND PRE-CRIME CAREER (Eze 28:12-19; Isa 14:12-15)

Satan was a high ranking, highly elite throne-guardian angel who looks like a fiery winged serpent or dragon and existed as one of several types of elohim created not only before human beings but the construction of our entire universe.

1.1. high-ranking: (Rev 9:11 “king [of the demons]”; Mat 9:34, 12:24-27; Mar 3:22 “Beelzebul [compound word meaning “ruler Baal”]…the ruler of the demons”; Eph 2:1-2 “the prince…” [Grk., archon as in archangel – e.g. Michael, Dan 10:13 LXX]). Seeing that God was the first to appoint him to such a high rank (Isa 14:13 “I will raise my throne [of rule]”), we can be sure that God also provided him with those gifts/abilities commensurate to leading or ruling over others (vision, strategy, planning, persuasion, etc.). All things considered, Satan is one of God’s most intelligent, influential and powerful creations (Eze 28:12b “Full of wisdom and beauty”).

1.2. highly elite throne-guardian angel: (Eze 28:14 “cherub”) = Elite class of angel who guards (“who covers” [Heb., sakak = To guard]) sacred people and places (God, priests and the tabernacle/temple: “the cherubim formula” - 1Sa 4:4 w/2Sa 6:2 w/Isa 37:16 w/Eze 10:1-20 //Exo 25:18; Exo 26:1, 31, 36:8, 35; 1Ki 6:23-29). [3] According to (Eze 28:13), Satan’s post was in the “Garden of Eden” (or v16, the “mountain of God”) implying his security detail to be Adam, God’s first high-priest in God’s first temple (Eze 28:16 “stones of fire [on the “mountain of God”]” w/Eze 28:18 “sanctuaries” w/Isa 14:13 “the stars of God…the mount of assembly in the recesses of the north” = In the ANE, all these phrases referred to a divine place, house or temple – the place of God’s divine council or priests). Given their association with sacred things, the ten precious stones mentioned as his “covering” (Eze 28:13) further reinforces his role as a protector of sacred people and places. (v14) “anointed” (Heb., mimsah) is better translated according to its literal understanding, “outstretched” or “expansive” – most likely a reference to his wings (e.g., cherubim on the mercy seat – Exo 25:20). Given this as the bejeweled portion of Satan’s body, his wings served not only for flying but fighting. From a defensive perspective they were heavy armor plating, from the offensive side, they were diamond tipped battle blades.[4] Biblical scholars have demonstrated that “seraphim” (Isa 6:2) is simply a descriptive term referring to a different class of cherubim increasing the possible number of “weapon wings” assigned to Satan to six.[5] Six wings (versus only two) may be the reason Paul refers to him as the “prince of the power of the air” (Eph 2:2). [6]

1.3. fiery winged serpent or dragon: Identifying Satan as seraphim agrees with the other titles used to describe Satan: a fiery winged serpent or dragon able breathe fire on his enemies (Isa 6:2 “seraphim” [Heb., serap = To burn][7]; Eze 28:18b “I brought fire from the midst of you”; Rev 12:3-13:11, 16:13, 20:2 “the great red [Grk., purros ~ pryro, fire] dragon”]).[8] Satan as a dragon or fiery serpent is further supported by: 1) his identification as a serpent (Gen 3:1 w/Rev 12:9 and 20:2; See also Rev 2:13 [“Pergamum…where Satan dwells” = Temple of Asclepius [pagan god intertwined with a talking snake who teaches him the secrets of healing]; Job 26:12-13 [Rahab] and Isa 27:1 [Leviathan] = Appropriation language: Satan is identified with the multi-named mythical sea creature of the ANE - and is conquered by Yhwh). 2) the other Hebrew word associated with the term seraphim (sarap = Serpent. In this case, a fiery serpent).[9] 3) the possible mention of a serpent in the Ezekiel text (Eze 28:12 “seal” may be “serpent” as in “serpent of perfection”).[10]

1.4. The chances that such descriptions were meant to be taken literally are high given the multiple examples of throne-guardians in ANE tradition depicted as serpent-like humanoid beings. In Mesopotamia, this was the Snake-Dragon, in Egypt, Uraeus the snake-god.

“That a divine Mesopotamian keribu might be depicted as a ‘snake dragon’ is striking. Other divine throne guardians, such as those in the Egyptian religion, might also be cast as serpentine. Bernard Batto describes the Edenic rebel this way: ‘The serpent [was] a semi-divine creature with wings and feet like the seraphs in Isa 6:2, whose function was to guard sacred persons and sacred objects such as the tree of divine wisdom.’ [Philippe] Provencal shows that ‘the Egyptian Uraeus serpent, drawn from two species of Egyptian cobras, fits all the elements of the supernatural seraphim who attend Yahweh’s holy presence in Isaiah 6. The relevant cobra species spit burning venom, can expand wide flanges of skin on either side of their bodies – considered wings in antiquity – when threatened, and are (obviously) serpentine.’[11] Karen Joines adds that ‘a function of the Uraeus is to protect the pharaoh and sacred objects by breathing out fire on his enemies.’[12] – Michael Heiser (Demons).

1.6. Satan possessed his snake-dragon form as his physical body during his time in the Garden of Eden and his deception of Eve (Gen 3:1 “beast [Heb. hayeh = Living flesh/physical being] of the field [v14 “cattle” [Heb., behemoth = Large animal] which the LORD God had made”) = Satan possessed the physical body (living flesh) of a large animal (think of a mythical dragon). What we know of serpents today are the remains of God’s curse after the Fall. As such, snakes are not a part of what God originally created and called “good” (Gen 1:31). They are instead a perversion, God’s curse on His original design, the sentient snake-dragon cherub (Eze 28:12b w/17,19 – the physical flesh that once represented you in the natural world will no longer represent wisdom and beauty but the perversion of evil).

1.7. Lastly, scholars of ancient tradition also link Satan (“Azazel” – Lev 16:10) and the cherubim to those angels identified as “Watchers” (Dan 4:13, 17, 23) [13] who in addition to their role as warriors or guardians also functioned as intelligence officers – which included imparting wisdom to the world’s sacred leaders (e.g., king Nebuchadnezzar - Dan 7:13-24 [w/2:37-38 and Jer 27:6]). Considering that Satan’s appointment as a throne-guardian in the Garden of Eden is unique in Scripture – i.e., he is the only one ever mentioned occupying this post, also demands that we view him as an “elite among the elite” in this rare class of angels.[14]

1.8. elohim ([Heb.] = God/god[s]): 1) All divine being(s) or those beings whose primary residence is the supernatural realm including but not limited to God (Yhwh) who possess divine authority and/or supernatural power (e.g., Exo 20:3 w/Deu 32:17; 2Co 4:4). 2) All non-divine being(s) – or those beings whose primary residence is the natural realm (i.e., humans, those made in God’s image – Gen 1:26) who possess divine authority and/or supernatural power (e.g., Psa 82:1-7 w/Joh 10:34).[15]

1.9. Several biblical clues indicate that the created elohim - including Satan, were created by God (Eze 28:15 “you [Satan] were blameless from the day you were created”) before He created the material (or natural) world: 1) (Gen 1:1-8) The fact that “heavens” are mentioned before “earth” in the creation order of verse one indicates that what is being referred to by this word (“heavens”) is different than what we find in verse eight where the creation of heaven comes after the existence of the earth (v2). The former refers to the supernatural world and residence of divine beings whereas the latter refers to the sky above the earth or natural world. The point then not to miss is that the creation of this supernatural world precedes the creation of the natural world (“God created the heavens and [then] the earth”). Though we don’t know how quickly the natural world was created after the supernatural, both the biblical evidence and ANE tradition suggests it was not simultaneous.[16] Given what we already know about the superposition of our two worlds, this means it was the natural world which was superimposed on theirs (not the other way around). 2) Satan’s was not only already present in the Garden of Eden at the time of Adam and Eve’s creation (Rev 12:9, 20:2) but earth in its primordial and chaotic form (Isa 14:12 w/Job 38:4-7 [“Star of the morning”/“Son of the dawn”/“morning stars” = Stars visible at the beginning of a new day of creation –a metaphor for the new creation itself [first or second - See Rev 2:28 and 2Pe 1:19]) = All of God’s created elohim including Satan, were there to witness the beginning of God’s new creation - the natural world (when He “laid the foundations of the earth…[when] its bases [were] sunk…[when God] laid its cornerstone”[Job 38:4,6] = when God created order and life from the chaos of raw materials – Gen 1:2ff See Fn A on verse 2, “a waste and emptiness”; also consider the term “deep” [Heb., tehom = Place of chaos]).

“The biblical writers affirmed the existence of multiple elohim – that is, the populated spiritual world. Since the biblical writers identify a range of entities as elohim that they explicitly differentiate from Yahweh and emphasize as lesser than Yahweh, it is clear that the term elohim is not a label for only the one Supreme Being [God]…A biblical writer would use elohim to label any entity that is not embodied by nature and is a member of the spiritual realm. This ‘otherworldliness’ is an attribute all residents of the spiritual world possess. Every member of the spiritual world can be thought of as elohim since the term tells us where an entity belongs in terms of its nature…The term elohim simply means divine beings – residents of the supernatural realm…This broad-stroked worldview put[s] supernatural causation…on the table [IOW: Because of their superposition, what happens in the elohim world affects what happens in our world – e.g., Dan 10:10-13].” – Heiser (ibid)

Important Takeaways:

1) Satan (or cherubim in general) are not the plump winged babies of Renaissance art (or plump little tomatoes you put on salads).

2) Satan’s level of intelligence, influence and power (Eze 28:12-14) and time of existence (6k + years?) of studying us and our world means we should never act as though his schemes can be easily discerned or resisted (2Co 11:4; The corruption and confusion caused by our overwhelming exposure to information and experience can only be neutralized by a deep understanding of the complexities of God and His cosmic creation presented in Scripture).

3) Without the protection that only comes from our affection for, trust of and faithfulness to God [His ways, His Word], we are the easy and eventual prey of Satan (Psa 34:7; Eph 6:11-17; 2Th 2:8-11 [w/Heb 11:6 and 1Jo 2:14b w/Mat 7:24-27 and Mat 13:19-22] 1Pe 5:8-9 “Be of sober spirit, be on the alert [sufficiently convinced and mentally equipped so as not to be captured], firm in your faithfulness”; Luk 22:31; why Christians can lack affection/trust for God = They don’t spend time seeking Him relationally [He is a stranger to them].

4) Like Cain who bore God’s curse, the snake also bears God’s curse (they represent evil) and should be avoided (1Th 5:22).

5) Satan’s speed of travel as an elite (and rare) class of angel could explain not only his ability for global impact (Rev 12:9, 20:3) but why he is the only fallen angel that is incarcerated (Rev 20:2).

6) Christians who live as though nothing exists – or affects us outside the natural world, are inspiring others to become atheists (e.g., parents w/their children).

[3] The Hebrew term kerub (translated “cherub”) is a derivative of the Akkadian word, keribu which means “throne guardian.” The Old and New Covenant Levites (deacons) are the human version of the cherubim.

[4] In the ANE, one’s armor and weaponry reflected also their rank – or how close they were to sacred people or places. The closer you were, the more ornate your armor and weaponry. For further study see Precious Stones: Nature, Art, And Literature by S.M. Burnham

[5] The term translated “anointed” (NAS, Eze 28:14) could also be implying this ([Heb., mimsah] = Expansive – meaning more than a few).

[6] In Jewish thought the “air” represented the lower spiritual realm (below heaven) in close proximity to humanity and the abyss (e.g., 2 Enoch 29:4-5 “And I threw him out from the height with his angels, and he was flying in the air continuously above the abyss.”); See also (Rev 12:4 and 9). The lower spiritual realm where Satan and his angels are placed is identified as the earth. If the cosmology of Jewish tradition is correct, then Hades (i.e., the abyss) and humanity share the same geographical space (e.g., ANE idiom “beneath the earth” = A reference to the “upside down”, the 4th dimensional space bearing the same coordinates as earth and the home of demons and the dead [ghosts]). Given God’s design principle of “form fits function,” we can assume He created certain angels w/more wings (Satan or seraphim) for the possible purpose of attaining greater speeds. As a result, Satan is able to move through space much quicker than the conventional angel (possessing only two wings), increasing his scope of influence and impact from local to global. In this light, consider Satan’s words in (Job 1:7 and 2:2 “roaming about the earth and walking around it” = Figure of speech intended to communicate the comprehensive nature of one’s travels. No place on earth remained untouched or undiscovered). The short timeframe that existed between the first and second time Satan makes this unique claim suggests he can travel at extremely high speeds or cover large areas in a very short period of time.

[7] Assuming this designation to be correct, Isaiah’s identification of the angels in 6:2 was (once more) functional rather than formal. He called them according to what he saw (angels on fire or projecting fire). This understanding lends itself nicely to what follows: Isaiah’s purification by fire (Isa 6:6-7).

[8] Considering that the fiery seraphim of Scripture may be one and the same as those elsewhere identified as cherubim, Ronald Hendel raises the possibility that the flaming sword in Gen 3:24 is a reference to the cherubim themselves. See “The Flame of the Whirling Sword.”

[9] See Philippe Provencal, “Regarding the Noun [sarap] in the Hebrew Bible”

[10] See H.J. van Dijk, Ezekiel’s Prophecy

[11] Provencal, (ibid)

[12] See Karen R. Joines, “Winged Serpents In Isaiah’s Inaugural Vision”

[13] In the Dead Sea Scrolls Azazel is said to be the leader of the Watcher angels who sinned (4Q 180, 1:8).

[14] This may also be the reason Satan looked so different from the other cherubim mentioned in Scripture (Eze 10 = 4 faces [none of a serpent] and 4 wings; Eze 41= two faces [none of a serpent]; Exo 25, 37 and 1Ki 6 = 1 human face and 2 wings). Only the most elite throne guardians were created as awe-inspiring dragons (“full of beauty” – Eze 28:12b).

[15] See sermon, Stranger Things: Divine Council

[16] e.g., Life of Adam and Eve

View Details

“Come now, let us reason (think coherently) together says the Lord” – Isa 1:18

Coherent (def.): clear, consistent, logical and reasonable (equitable/just). Coherent things are intelligible, they make sense. Coherency is therefore a prerequisite to the identification of something as truth.

The doctrine of the Trinity believed by most of Christendom since the first and second councils of Nicaea (325 and 381 A.D.) – i.e., Nicene Trinitarianism, denies that the three fully divine and distinct persons that make up the Godhead (or Divine Family) are also three separate or distinct beings. Though three in person, those three exist as one being.[1] This study will demonstrate why this view of the Trinity (otherwise known as ontological monotheism) is incoherent and false while establishing the view presented in Scripture – otherwise known as Coherent Trinitarianism.[2]

The Bible teaches Coherent Trinitarianism.

1.1. DEFINTION: the one true God of heaven and earth exists as a Godhead (or Divine Family) of not only three separate or distinct persons but three separate or distinct Beings, Father, Son and Holy Spirit Who: 1) Are all fully divine (in nature and name, Yhwh). 2) Operate according to ancient monotheism or a divine hierarchy of authority: the Son being fully subordinate to the Father, the Holy Spirit being fully subordinate to the Father and the Son (Joh 14:28, 16:13-15; hence 1Co 15:28).[3] 3) Each possess their own cognitive faculties, unique personality and role within Godhead.

1.2. The fact that the Bible uses plural language at times when speaking of God, demands that we think of Him as a plurality or as three distinct Beings (e.g., Gen 1:26; Gen 3:22; Gen 11:7; Gen 19:24; Isa 6:8 [“who will go for Us?”]; Dan 7:13 [Divine “Son of Man”] w/Mat 26:63-65[4]; See also Mat 9:1-6[5]. Including Mat 9 and 26, Jesus is considered guilty of violating Jewish monotheistic sensibilities no less than 5 times [Joh 5:18, 8:58-59, 10:30-31]).

1.3. When the Bible uses singular language to speak of God, it most often – if not always, refers to a specific member of the Godhead

(e.g., Isa 6:8 [“Whom shall I send?”] w/Joh 12:41).

1.4. Though the OT saints knew of God the Father (Deu 32:6; Isa 9:6[6], 63:13, 64:8[7]; Joh 8:41), their personal experiences were more with Jesus. He was the Yhwh they were interacting with most of the time. It wasn’t until the teaching and propitiatory ministry of Jesus’ incarnation, that the OT saints gained personal knowledge and relationship with the Father (Joh 1:18; Joh 8:12-19, 14:6-9, 16:26-28; Mat 11:25-27; Heb 10:19-22)[8].

1.5. The enlightenment, education and access provided by Jesus w/respect to the three distinct Yhwhs of Elohim may be reason entrance in the covenant community changed from vows to the Elohim of the three patriarchs (the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob) to the three Yhwhs themselves (Father, Son, Holy Spirit – Mat 28:18-20).

Nicene Trinitarianism is incoherent in its ontological monotheism - or juxtaposition of three persons with one being given that these terms (person and being) are substantively synonymous.

2.1. If you have three distinct persons, you have three distinct beings.

2.2. For example, to say that Peter, James and John are three distinct persons is the same thing as saying they are three separate beings. The same would be true for God. Admitting to three distinct persons is admitting to three separate beings[9].

2.3. Put in terms of self, the Trinity is either one-self or three divine selves. Both however cannot be true (Law of Noncontradiction) (e.g. Mat 22:41-46) = If Jesus considered false belief those things which created a cultural contradiction (i.e., A father referring to his son as “Lord”), how much more would He have a considered false those things which created an ontological contradiction!

“So the only reason it seems, why we do not call these three together ‘one person’ and instead call them ‘one being’ yet never say ‘three beings’ is because we want to keep at least one word (‘being’) for signifying what we mean by ‘trinity’ and not (at the same time) be reduced to silence after we have confessed there are three.” - Augustine

“The blessed trinity is three somewhats; and these three somewhats we commonly call ‘persons’, but the true notion and nature of that distinction is unknown to us” - John Wallis (17th century Anglican bishop)

“What is a ‘person’ if not a certain being? How then can Father and Son and Spirit be different ‘persons’ while being the same being? It’s a matter of logic [coherency] that these both can’t be true: there’s exactly one divine self, and there are exactly three divine selves…When it comes to [Nicene] trinitarian formulations, some will celebrate them as either uninterpretable or interpretable in incoherent ways…Equivocal [ambiguous] terms are the enemy of clear [coherent] thinking…So it is with those who claim the doctrine of the [Nicene] Trinity is a holy mystery in the sense that it has no or almost no intelligible content. ” – Dale Tuggy

“The traditional Trinitarian makes the [incoherent] claim that three selves are not three substances. And once again we are left with no reason worthy of the name for thinking that the Trinitarian is not a tritheist.” – C. Stephen Layman (“Tritheism and the Trinity”, Journal of the Society of Christian Philosophers)

The reason Nicene Trinitarianism exists is because those who invented and embrace it falsely assume ontological monotheism to be the teaching of the OT, Jesus and the NT.

3.1. The Shema or Deuteronomy 6:4 stands as the most popular OT text for supporting ontological monotheism – or the belief that Moses was calling the Jews to a (ontological) monotheistic theology. The context surrounding this text however, warrants a different understanding (Deu 6:1-15) = The main point of Moses’ teaching in this section is that if God’s people are to continue to receive His blessings and remain in the land, they would need to make sure that their personal and parental focus was on loving God above everyone and everything else through careful obedience to His commands (1-3 w/5-9). IOW: They were to be exclusive in their loyalty to Him as God (13-14). Which means whatever Moses is calling Israel’s attention to v4 (“Hear [Heb., shema] O Israel!”) it is related to this. The phrase “is one” is therefore about exclusivity to God (as Israel’s one and only God) not God as a singular being (ontological monotheism). It is “Hear O Israel!” The LORD [Yahweh] is our God, the Lord is [the] one [and only God for us].

3.2. That this is indeed what is being communicated in verse 4 is supported not only by the context (since how is communicating God as a singular Being relevant or coherent w/the verses around it?), but also the alternate rendering conveyed by the original language (“one” [Heb., ehad = first, alone- Neh 9:6; Zec 14:9; literally then, “Hear O Israel! The LORD is our God, the Lord is first” or “Hear O Israel! The LORD is our God, the Lord alone.”). The latter is the translation of the Jewish Publication Society and the Jewish Study Bible. POINT NOT TO MISS: the primary text for supporting ontological monotheism in the OT does not support it. Deu 6:4 is not about - nor concerned with, the number of beings that exist as God (Yhwh).

3.3. Scholarly study and archeological discovery (e.g., the Halbturn amulet) have revealed that viewing the Shema as a statement on ontological monotheism (or that God exists as a singular being) was a later phenomenon in Judaism (the invention of the Second Temple period).

3.4. There is good reason to believe that the ontological monotheism established during the Second Temple period was a response to the ever-increasing pressure placed on the Jews to distinguish themselves from the polytheistic religions of the world their small nation was inextricably linked to through their perennial subjugation. From 597 BC – 70 AD Israel was in subjugation to the Babylonians then the Medo-Persians, then the Greeks and finally the Romans [e.g., Neh 9:36-37; Luk 2:1 w/Joh 11:48]. All of them were polytheistic in their religious beliefs.[10]

"The monotheistic interpretation of the Shema became… the dominant understanding of Deut 6:4 in Judean Judaism at the latest by the first century C. E.” – A. Lange (“The Shema Israel in Second Temple Judaism”, Journal of Ancient Judaism)

“Many modern readers regard the Shema [Deu 6:4] as an assertion of [ontological] monotheism, a view that is anachronistic [reading a modern understanding back into when it was originally given]. In the context of ancient Israelite religion, it served as a public proclamation of exclusive loyalty to Yhwh as the sole Lord of Israel…The Shema isn’t really dealing with the nature of God’s Oneness, as… [modern] Judaism… reads it. Instead, it is saying that for us, Israel, the Lord is ‘the One and Only’ ...Once [ontological] monotheism became more normative in the Second Temple period [597 B.C. – 70 A.D.], this earlier perspective became unintelligible. Second Temple readers and translators of the Shema were thus forced to read this and similar passages in a way that made them consistent with [ontological] monotheism.”– Jewish (Publication Society) Study Bible notes on Deu 6:4

“Big books have appeared analyzing the sudden development of an [ontological] monotheism in late Second Temple Judaism.” – Paula Fredriksen (ibid)

“Judaism after the Exile [Second Temple period] represents a startling new development in the history of religion, in that it is the Jewish [ontological] monotheistic conception of God that makes this religion stand out from all others. [In ancient times] Judaism [was] marked by a dualistic pattern in which two divine entities are presupposed: one the supreme creator God, the other his vizier or prime minister, who really runs the show – or at least provides the point of contact between God and humanity…In order to counteract the [doctrine] of the two powers [in heaven] whose roots indeed go back to the two names for God in the Hebrew Bible, the rabbis had to incorporate this inbuilt logical contradiction [of ontological monotheism] into the personality of God…The pattern of [ancient] Jewish beliefs about God remains monarchistic throughout [i.e., it is ancient monotheism/one God on top]…For most [ancient] Jews, God [was] the sole object of worship, but he is not the only divine being. In particular, there [has] always been a prominent number two in the hierarchy to whom Israel in particular relates.” – Peter Hayman (“Monotheism – A Misused Word in Jewish Studies?”)

3.5. Though it is clear that many of the Jews in Jesus’ day were ontological monotheists and therefore viewed Jesus’ claims to deity as blasphemy, it is also clear that Jesus never attempts to quell their concerns or reinforce their monotheistic thinking through the incoherency of Nicene Trinitarianism (e.g., Joh 5:18-24). Instead, He pushes the reality that the Godhead is indeed made up of three divine beings (e.g., Mat 28:19-20 “baptize in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit” = Pledge your supreme loyalty/love to these three beings/persons as God).

3.6. The Nicene Trinitarian attempt at defending [ontological] monotheism from Scripture proves absolutely bankrupt: 1) (Joh 10:30-33 w/38) = Jesus is not making a statement about His deity but rather His deputization and deployment by the Father. Hence His reference to Psa 82:6 (the Divine Council Psalm) (vv34-35) and mention of being “sanctified and sent” to carry out the Father’s will and works (vv36-37). The phrases, “I and the Father are One” or “the Father is Me and I am in the Father” is Jesus’ claim to possessing the Father’s backing and authority– not that He and the Father are the same Being. If that were true, then the same must be said of His ministers since Jesus requests the same would be true for us in His High Priestly Prayer (Joh 17:18-22) = I have deployed them [v18], Father please deputize them so that their ministry will also have your support and authority/power (Mat 18:19-20; Joh 20:21-23) – not, please make them into one being! 2) (Eph 4:6) = Notice Paul does not simply say “One God” but rather “One God and Father.” Paul’s failure to mention the other members of the Trinity demonstrates that this was not his intention when using “one” in relation to “God.” Paul’s point is instead to emphasize the exclusivity of the Father as God (or God on top). By “One God and father” Paul therefore means “One God Who can be identified as Father, as the supreme God over all others in authority.” 3) (Jam 2:19) = The demons don’t shudder bc God is a singular Being. Clearly what James is referring to by “one” is once more, the issue of exclusivity- that among all the powerful beings in the spiritual realm, only Yhwh – made up of three Beings possesses the power and authority to retain the title as God. 4) The Johannine Comma (1Jo 5:7-8- See Fn “A”) = Exists in forgeries created by Catholic scholars in 15th/16th c. to give NT support to Nicene Trinitarianism or ontological monotheism.

An appeal to mystery does not excuse Nicene Trinitarianism’s incoherency since Scripture never uses this word when speaking about the ontological makeup of God nor as an excuse for incoherency.

(Mat 13:11) = The mysteries of the kingdom of God; (Rom 11:25) = the mystery of Israel’s partial hardening; (Rom 16:25; Col 2:2, 4:3; 1Ti 3:9, 16) = The mystery surrounding Jesus as Messiah; (1Co 15:51) = The mystery of instantaneous transformation for those alive at Jesus’ return; (Eph 1:9, 3:3-4, 9, 6:19; Col 1:26-27) = The mystery of God’s plan for the Gentiles; (Eph 5:32) = The mystery of Christ’s marriage to the church; (Rev 1:20) = The mystery of the 7 stars as the seven churches; (Rev 10:7, 17:5-7) = The mystery of Israel/Jerusalem as the Babylonian harlot and the coming judgment against her.

Those Christians attempting to establish a coherent version of ontological monotheism end in the heresy of Modalism/Sabellianism (F/S/HS are the same Being and Person in different forms) and/or Unitarianism/Arianism (Only the F is fully God; S and HS are lesser gods/angels).

5.1. Modalism (Sabellianism) is refuted by the fact that the F/S/HS possess separate minds and actions (e.g., Mat 3:16-17; again Dan 7:13).

5.2. Unitarianism (Arianism) is refuted by the fact that the F/S/HS are each identified as fully God (or equally divine) in the NT (Jesus is Yhwh: Joh 8:24, 28, 58-59 [Yhwh is the noun version of the to-be verb hyh or “I AM” - e.g., Exo 3:14-15]; Joh 12:41 [Isa 6:3 LORD/Yhwh]; HS is Yhwh: Heb 3:7-11 [Psa 95:6-11 [LORD/Yhwh]). Examples of Modalism and Unitarianism: 1) “For although I make not two suns, still I shall reckon both the sun and its ray to be as much two things and two forms of one undivided substance, as the Father and the Son.” – Tertullian; 2) James White’s light bar

CLOSING CONTEMPLATION: “All of this leaves us wondering…how three persons could be parts of the same being, rather than three separate beings? Since the divine persons are, prior to the incarnation, three unembodied Minds, in virtue of what are they one being rather than three individual beings?” – William Lane Craig (ibid) 1) What thing of virtue (righteous, worthy) do Nicene Trinitarians such as Craig believe they are promoting and protecting by their unwillingness to repent of their incoherent, unbiblical and false view of the Trinity (i.e., that God is three persons yet exists as one being)? 2) What makes this thing a sacred cow rather than something truly virtuous?

[1] Though evidence exists of trinitarian language before Nicaea, (e.g., Tertullian), the formation of Nicene Trinitarian doctrine (three persons, one being) is a later development. “No theologian in the first three Christian centuries was a trinitarian in the sense of believing that the one God is tripersonal.” – Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. The clearest statement w/regard to NT would not happen until the 4th century, through the writings of the Cappadocian Father, Gregory Nazianzus, “The Godhead is one in three, and the three are one.”

[2] Why this study should matter to you as a Christian: Our defense and promotion of Christianity depends on coherency. “A Christian might say that the Trinity is an utter mystery and cannot be logically explained yet insist that if a defining doctrine of another worldview is ‘an utter mystery logically,’ then that worldview must be rejected. But this will not do. If we allow opaque mysteries in our own worldview, we have to allow them everywhere. Or if we demand logical consistency in other worldviews, we must demand it of our own. That is, the criteria for rational evaluation must be objective. Special pleading should be apologetically out of bounds…If Christians desire to demonstrate the truth and rationality of Christianity to those who hold other worldviews, they must apply objective criteria to the contending worldviews. If none are given, there is no apologetic, but only preaching.” – Douglas Groothuis (Christian Apologetics).

[3] By ancient monotheism I mean two things: 1) there is only One God on top, that being the Father, Who is the final or highest authority within the Godhead. 2) this is not ontological monotheism: God is only One Being. Ancient Judaism thought of monotheism in practical terms (Who is on top?) not ontological terms (What One Being is God?). “We need to remember that in antiquity, monotheism meant not the sole existence of only one divine being but the absolute supremacy of one to whom all others are subordinate (and this was good Christian theology until Nicaea as well). Paula Fredriksen’s, ‘Mandatory Retirement’ paper is a concise, excellent presentation of this position.” – Daniel Boyarin (The Jewish Gospels: The Story Of The Jewish Christ); “Ancient monotheism spoke to the imagined architecture of the cosmos, not to its absolute (or divine) population. Ancient monotheism means ‘one god on top’ with other gods arranged beneath, lower than and in some sense subordinate to the high god. Multiple divine personalities are native to ancient monotheism. John could designate Christ as theos and still be an ancient monotheist, because the hierarchical arrangement of his heaven: ho logos is subordinate to theos, just as ‘son’ is to ‘father.’ Our unthinking dependence on [ontological] monotheism confuses not only our view of ancient Christians, but also our view of ancient Jews.” – Paula Fredriksen (“Mandatory retirement: Ideas in the study of Christian origins whose time has come to go”)

[4] It’s important to note that ancient Jews saw Daniel 7:13 as teaching what became known as the “two powers in heaven” or the co-deity of God, One of whom also shared in flesh and blood (a Son of Man deity). By the time of Jesus however, the Jews had rejected this view as heretical, embracing the novel idea of monotheism for reasons later to be discussed. “The two-thrones theophany of Daniel 7 was no doubt disturbing to at least some Jews in antiquity, such as the author of Daniel himself in the second century B.C. We know that other Jews adopted wholeheartedly, or simply inherited, the doubleness of Israel’s God, the old Ancient of Days and the young human-appearing rider on the clouds. These became the progenitors of the Judaism of Jesus and his followers.” (ibid)

[5] “The objection of the Scribes, calling Jesus’ act of forgiveness ‘blasphemy,’ is predicated on their assumption that Jesus is claiming divinity through this action; hence their emphasis that only the one God may forgive sins, to which Jesus answers in kind: the second divine figure of Daniel 7, the one like a son of man, is authorized to act as and for God. This constitutes a direct declaration of a doubleness of the Godhead.” – Daniel Boyarin (ibid)

[6] Though this passage is a reference to Jesus, the fully divine Son of God, like Isaiah 7:14 the name given to the child in this prophecy is in reference to His Father not Himself – a common practice in ancient times and important to His identity as Messiah (the son of David who received the promise of God the Father’s eternal fathership – Psa 89:27). For further study see John Goldingay, “The Compound Name in Isaiah 9:5(6)”

[7] Given what was said earlier about Isaiah being Jesus’ mouthpiece, it is important to note the distinction in message between those words pertaining to Jesus and those pertaining to the Father. As should be expected, when in relation to Jesus, Isaiah’s words are spoken in the first person – giving the impression that Jesus is speaking directly through Isaiah (e.g., Isa 41:4 “I, the LORD,, am the first, and with the last, I am He”) whereas wen in relation to the Father, Isaiah’s words are statements about the Father not from the Father (e.g., Isa 64:8 “But now, O LORD, You are our Father”). Unlike the case with Jesus, Isaiah is not speaking as the Father’s mouthpiece.

[8] The same could be argued for the Holy Spirit (Joh 3:1-10).

[9] “This leads to an obvious question: if Peter, James and John are three men each having the same nature, then why would not the Father, Son and Holy Spirit similarly be three Gods each exemplifying the divine nature? In his letter to Ablabius ‘On Not three Gods,’ Gregory of Nyssa struggled to answer this question.” – William Lane Craig (“A Formulation And Defense Of The Doctrine Of The Trinity”)

[10] The fact that tall ancient Mesopotamian religions were polytheistic along with God’s appropriation of polytheistic religious myths to communicate ontological truths regarding Himself (e.g., Ugaritic parallel to Dan 7:13) lends additional support to polytheism as the framework of divinity presented in the Bible. For further consideration see Yisra’el Knohl’s argument that the reason Israel made a golden calf – versus a golden bull was due to their belief not only in a divine plurality, but that the Yhwh among them was Son rather than Father (Me- Ayin Banu [Where Are We From? The Genetic Code of the Bible]).

View Details

“Come now, let us reason (think coherently) together says the Lord” – Isa 1:18

The doctrine of the Trinity believed by most of Christendom since the first and second councils of Nicaea (325 and 381 A.D.) – i.e., Nicene Trinitarianism,[1] denies that the three fully divine and distinct Persons that make up the Godhead (or Divine Family) are also three separate or distinct Beings. Though three in Person, those three exist as one being.[2] This study will demonstrate why this monotheistic view of the Trinity is incoherent and false while establishing the view presented in Scripture – otherwise known as Coherent Trinitarianism.

Why this study should matter to you as a Christian:

1) We are called to defend all of the doctrine handed down by Jesus and the apostles (Jud 1:3 “the Faith” = All doctrine - not simply those teachings related to “salvation” – especially since one of the main things Jesus did during His earthly ministry was challenge people’s ontological view of God).

2) Our obedience demands that we possess correct (or coherent) thinking about God (Deu 29:29 = Properly observing or obeying God’s Law requires we teach and defend what has been revealed about Him [literally, what has been made clear/coherent]; 1Co 15:34).

3) Our confidence and perseverance in what we believe depends on coherency (e.g., Mat 16:1-4, 22:41-46) = Jesus came to restore the coherency of God’s revelation/religion lost by the Judaism of His day. The lack of coherency provided by Israel’s shepherds were causing distress and doubt in the covenant community (Mat 9:36) = One of the most important jobs of the God’s shepherd is to create stability in his flock through the removal of confusion and the restoring of coherency (Jer 3:15 “understanding” = Coherency).

4) Our defense and promotion of Christianity depends on coherency.

“A Christian might say that the Trinity is an utter mystery and cannot be logically explained yet insist that if a defining doctrine of another worldview is ‘an utter mystery logically,’ then that worldview must be rejected. But this will not do. If we allow opaque mysteries in our own worldview, we have to allow them everywhere. Or if we demand logical consistency in other worldviews, we must demand it of our own. That is, the criteria for rational evaluation must be objective. Special pleading should be apologetically out of bounds…If Christians desire to demonstrate the truth and rationality of Christianity to those who hold other worldviews, they must apply objective criteria to the contending worldviews. If none are given, there is no apologetic, but only preaching.” – Douglas Groothuis (Christian Apologetics)[3].

5) Nicene Trinitarianism’s best apologists admit (by commission or omission) the incoherency of their belief.

“All of this leaves us wondering…how three persons could be parts of the same Being - rather than three separate Beings? Since the divine persons are, prior to the incarnation, three unembodied Minds, in virtue of what are they one Being - rather than three individual Beings?” – William Lane Craig[4] (“A Formulation and Defense of the Doctrine of the Trinity”)

My email exchange with Doug Groothuis from 8/31/24 – 9/2/24

(Me) Dr Groothuis: I am thankful for your words (in Christian Apologetics) but was wondering if (in light of such statements) you could provide me with a coherent explanation for the Trinity (three persons who are one person). Thank you so much for taking the time to explain this. I have yet to find an explanation that doesn’t end in some form of modalism. (8/31)

(DG) Scott: Read the Athanasian Creed on this and a good systematic theology, such as Millard Erickson, Christian Theology, or John Frame, Systematic Theology, or Lewis and Demarest, Integrative Theology. Also consult The Westminster Confession. Davis is good on philosophical theology. Godspeed for truth and goodness and beauty, Doug (8/31)

(Me) Dr Groothuis: Thank you for your reply. Your sources seem to support what you condemn: “no logical explanation…only preaching”. For example in the Athanasian Creed it says: Now this is the catholic faith: That we worship one God in trinity and the trinity in unity, neither blending their persons nor dividing their essence. For the person of the Father is a distinct person, the person of the Son is another, and that of the Holy Spirit still another. But the divinity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is one…Thus the Father is God,

the Son is God, the Holy Spirit is God, Yet there are not three gods; there is but one God… Just as Christian truth compels us

to confess each person individually as both God and Lord, so catholic religion forbids us to say that there are three gods or lords.”

Am I missing something? Nowhere does it explain how believing that three persons can equal one is coherent. Diligently seeking to understand. (8/31)

(Me) Hi Dr Groothuis, I found something in a Ligonier (RC Sproul) video that was different from what I have heard. He explained the issue of singular (God as one) as essence or being but not person (three persons, one essence or being). This again however seems like wordplay - unless what is meant by essence or being is nature (e.g., divine versus human) but then we are left with three gods (persons) who are all fully divine (in essence/nature/being) and once more not a trinity (as you understand it). To me, at least, it seems no different than saying you and I are both human (we share the same essence) but are separate persons- no singularity to speak of. The trinity: one true God who exists as three persons is essentially tritheism [which means the Bible does not teach a monotheistic religion]. If my questions/our conversation would be better served by meeting, I am willing to pay a speaking fee. There is a group of us that would appreciate your counsel. (9/2)

(DG) I suggest you read Stephen T Davis on this, as I mentioned. (9/2)

(Me) I bought the book as you suggested and read the chapter on the Trinity. Here was the extent of his explanation: “Scripture affirms that there is one and only one God; Christianity is, after all, a monotheistic religion…We won’t be going into details as to this last claim.”

(Me) Could I pay you to meet with us to discuss this further? (9/2)

(DG) This is not the extent of Davis's explanation. He gives several models and engages the strengths and weaknesses of each. You simply give the statement of the doctrine. Philosophical theology attempts to explain and defend.

(DG) Does this help you any? I know you need more than this. (9/2)

(Me) I have read (and own) most of the systematics you mentioned as well as others - including Grudem’s with the diagram you included. They do nothing more than describe what trinitarian doctrine teaches (there is father, son and Holy Spirit, all equally divine and separate persons yet one singular God versus three gods). What I am looking for is a coherent explanation for how this can be (there distinct persons, three distinct consciouses yet one being)? As I mentioned I am not a modalist. Yet if the Bible is truth, then how can one of its most important doctrines be incoherent (e.g., 2+2 = 5)? I would be more inclined to “force the square peg into the round hole” if Scripture warranted it but such seems not to be the case. The mention of “one” in the Shema is (based on the context) dealing with exclusivity (one and only true God) versus singularity (one single being who is God; Deu 6:4; cf., Mar 12:29). The same can be said about James 2:19 or other passages. I found none requiring the “singularity (yet plurality)” incoherent view presented by the post-Nicene Church. It seems this was the problem with the Jews as well when Jesus claimed Himself to be an another deity alongside the Father (a violation of their Second Temple invention of monotheism). Not only that but He also claimed to have life in himself (John 10) a statement that doesn’t square very well with the idea of one Being or essence. Once more, thanks for taking the time. I do appreciate it and would love to talk in person if possible. I know you are a busy man. (9/2)

Dr. Groothuis has yet to reply…or share his own explanation/defense of the Nicene Trinity as coherent.

The Bible teaches Coherent Trinitarianism.

1.1. DEFINTION: the one true God of heaven and earth exists as a Godhead (or Divine Family) of not only three fully divine and distinct Persons (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) but also three separate or distinct Beings, each possessing their own cognitive faculties, unique personality and role within the Godhead.

1.3. When the Bible uses singular language to speak of God, it most often – if not always, refers to a specific member of the Godhead

1.3.1. The Father (Eph 4:6; 1Co 15:34 w/vv20-33)

1.3.2. The HS (Act 5:4 w/v3)

1.3.3. The Son/Jesus (2Pe 1:1; Isa 45:5a) “I am the LORD [Heb., Yhwh[6]] and there is no other; Besides Me (Yhwh), there is no God (Elohim)” = IOW: In these ancient times, there is no other member of the Godhead that human beings may personally know (Isa 45:4b and 5b – Notice the reference to knowing) as the Uncreated Creator, Sustainor, Savior and Sovereign over all things (Isa 40:4, 40:28, 43:10-13, 44:8, 44:24, 45:7, 12, 18-23). We can be sure that Jesus is indeed the Yhwh speaking in Isaiah given:

1) John’s confirmation that the Yhwh Who commissioned Isaiah to be His mouthpiece/to speak on His behalf (in the first person, “I…”), was Jesus (Isa 6:5 [“LORD” = Yhwh] w/Joh 12:41).

2) He is the specific Person of God (Elohim) in the Godhead/Trinity most directly involved in the affairs of the Patriarchs (“Jacob”), OT Israel (Isa 45:3-4) and the world (i.e., He is the Chief Operating Officer of the Trinity[7] – Hence Gen 18:1-22 w/19:24 [Joh 8:56]; Exo 23:20-22 w/Jug 2:1 [Jud 1:5]; Jos 5:13-15 w/Exo 3:1-5, 14 [Joh 8:58-59]; Consider also Heb 3:4-6 [w/Isa 6:1][8]).

1.4. As additional food for thought consider:

1) Though the OT saints knew of God the Father (Deu 32:6; Isa 9:6[9], 63:16, 64:8[10]; Joh 8:41), their personal experiences were more with Jesus. He was the Yhwh they were interacting with most of the time. It wasn’t until the teaching and propitiatory ministry of Jesus’ incarnation, that the OT saints gained personal knowledge and relationship with the Father (Joh 1:18; Joh 8:19, 14:6-9, 16:26-27; Mat 11:25-27; Heb 10:19-22).[11]

2) The enlightenment, education and access provided by Jesus w/respect to the three distinct Yhwhs of Elohim may be reason entrance in the covenant community changed from vows to the Elohim of the three patriarchs (the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob) to the three Yhwhs themselves (Father, Son, Holy Spirit – Mat 28:18-20).

[2] “The eternal triune God reveals Himself to us as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, with distinct personal attributes, but without division of nature, essence or being.” – The Southern Baptist Faith And Message (Section II). Though the “three in one” idea was present – at least in germinal form, at Nicaea’s first council, it wasn’t until her second council that Father, Son and Holy Spirit were officially affirmed as consisting of the same singular ousia (essence or being).

[3] Dr. Douglas Groothuis is a Christian apologist and author who teaches philosophy at Denver Seminary.

[4] Dr. William Lane Craig is likewise a Christian apologist and author, who teaches philosophy at Houston Christian University and Talbot School of Theology at Biola University.

[5] In brief, Daniel seven’s “Son of Man” should be viewed as referring to another Divine Being for the following reasons: 1) in the Bible, only God is viewed as coming on the clouds, 2) in the Bible, only God is worthy of global worship, 3) in the Bible, only God receives a kingdom with global and everlasting dominion, 4) the close similarities between Daniel’s Son of Man and the divine figure of Ezekiel one, 5) the close similarities between Daniel’s Son of Man and the Divine King of Psalm 89 and 110. 6) its appropriation of Babylonian/Ugaritic mythology which identifies the “rider on the clouds” as co-deity with the “father of years” (Ancient of Days) (e.g., Ezekiel one and ten’s appropriation of the Babylonian zodiac [oxen/cherub, eagle, human and lion]). For further study see Markus Zehnder, “Why the Danielic ‘Son of Man’ Is a Divine Being.”; It’s important to note that ancient Jews saw Daniel 7:13 as teaching what became known as the “two powers in heaven” or the co-deity of God, One of whom also shared in flesh and blood (a Son of Man deity). By the time of Jesus however, the Jews had rejected this view as heretical, embracing the novel idea of monotheism for reasons later to be discussed. For further study on the doctrine of the two powers of heaven see Alan Segal, The Two Powers of Heaven.

[6] Otherwise known as the tetragrammaton, Yhwh is God’s official name and what distinguishes Him from (false) deities of the pagan nations (e.g., Molech, Marduk, Bel, Baal, Dagon, Artemis).

[7] A COO is a senior executive who manages the day-to-day operations of a company (insert Creation) as second in command to the CEO (think God the Father) to whom they directly report (Joh 5:19).

[8] It only makes sense that Jesus would be the Yhwh (i.e., member of the Godhead/Trinity) Who would become human (incarnate) given He was (and continues to be) the One most directly engaged and involved in the affairs of humanity – most especially those of His covenant people.

[9] Though this passage is a reference to Jesus, the fully divine Son of God, like Isaiah 7:14 (“Immanuel”) the name given to the child in this prophecy is in reference to His Father not Himself – a common practice in ancient times (e.g., OT kings) and important to His identity as Messiah (the son of David who received the promise of God the Father’s eternal fathership – Psa 89:26-28; 2Sa 7:14). For further study see John Goldingay, “The Compound Name in Isaiah 9:5(6)”

[10] Given what was said earlier about Isaiah being Jesus’ mouthpiece, it is important to note the distinction in message between those words pertaining to Jesus and those pertaining to the Father. As should be expected, when in relation to Jesus, Isaiah’s words are spoken in the first person – giving the impression that Jesus is speaking directly through Isaiah (e.g., Isa 41:4 “I, the LORD,, am the first, and with the last, I am He”) whereas wen in relation to the Father, Isaiah’s words are statements about the Father not from the Father (e.g., Isa 64:8 “But now, O LORD, You are our Father”). Unlike the case with Jesus, Isaiah is not speaking as the Father’s mouthpiece.

[11] The same could be argued for the Holy Spirit (Joh 3:1-10).

View Details

“When disaster strikes, life becomes like molten metal…Old customs crumble, instability rules.” – Dr. Samuel Prince (“Catastrophe and Social Change”)

All signs point to Jesus’ return in 2030. And though this event will be a day of great joy and excitement for His faithful followers, getting to that day without going apostate will prove difficult – even impossible for many. Why? Because they will be ill-prepared and equipped to endure the epic levels of craziness, scariness and confusion that will become our world in the years or days prior to His return. In short, those people will not possess what is known in the fields of psychology and sociology as “disaster behavior.” To avoid becoming one of those people will therefore mean learning and applying those principles necessary to possess it. The following points represent those principles -or how to prepare for the end of the world:

Prepare according to the predictions.

1.1. The death rate from natural disasters has significantly dropped over the last hundred years due to our ability to predict (forecast) when these events will happen. For example, in 1927 when nothing existed to predict natural disasters, the global death toll exceeded 3.5 million. Since the 1970s and the creation of devices for predicting such things, that number has consistently stayed below 500 thousand.

1.2. The lesson (then) to be learned? If we want to increase our chances of survival, we need to prepare according to the predictions, we need to follow the forecast and be on the alert.

1.3. Jesus agrees (Mat 24:37-51) – Besides the obvious, there are two things worth noting here: 1) If you are gauging your urgency to get ready or take seriously Christ’s return based on the world around you, then you are going to miss the boat (just like they did in Noah’s day). You won’t be ready when Jesus comes because you refused to act according to the forecast – the predictions of His coming. 2) Being alert (or following the forecast) means being responsible with your life in the time you have remaining. IOW: this isn’t the time to be less committed in your walk with Christ or with the potential He has given you for advancing His gospel and Kingdom. To use a football analogy, we have hit the two-minute warning. Whatever you’ve got left, you need to leave it on the field – otherwise you may lose the game. My advice: plan exactly what you are going to accomplish for Christ over the next five years and start working that plan. Like Jesus says about the faithful slave, He needs to find you productive when He shows up – otherwise you will be “cut to pieces and assigned a place with the hypocrites…that place where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth (i.e., hell).”

1.4. BTW: the reason Jesus mentions hell as the place of hypocrites is because that is ultimately why people end up in hell. They go to hell bc their choices in life created a double standard (one favoring them). As a result, they are hypocrites (approving for themselves what they condemn in others). The only way to avoid such hypocrisy is by following God’s Law. It is the only law that always creates equity (impartiality/fairness) - the opposite of hypocrisy (Mat 7:12 “treat others in the same way as you would want them to treat you”).

Get through the denial phase as quickly as possible.

2.1. Those who study disaster will tell you that the first phase in the survival arc is denial. When disaster strikes we tend to suppress the truth of the event – or what’s happening to us. We respond in denial. Denial is just another word for disbelief/unbelief. Which means we have a hard time believing things when difficulty or disaster strikes. In our case, what the Bible says about Jesus’ return and the urgency that will be necessary to stay faithful. As a result, we will delay to act – or fail to act at all, sealing our fate.

2.2. The National Research Council found that when disaster strikes – as in the example of a fire, “people are often cool…delaying their response.”

2.3. The average response of the World Trade Center survivors was six minutes after realizing what had happened. Some waited as long as forty-five minutes before acting. About one thousand individuals spent time shutting down their computers before leaving the collapsing towers. A person on a floor in the upper sixties stated that “the building started to sway and everything started shaking” and that they “knew something was wrong.” Yet instead of immediately leaving, they ran to their desk and made several calls to relatives trying to figure out what was going on.

2.4. Scientists believe the reason we tend to fall into the denial phase is four-fold:

1) we have a “normalcy bias.” IOW: we think that disaster only happens to other people, but never us (our lives are too normal; e.g., Survey of one thousand Americans after 9/11: most believed they only had a 21 percent chance of being in a terrorist attack whereas it was 48 percent with everyone else – i.e., anyone other than them). 2) our brains are great at picking up patterns but not so good at picking up exceptions (the exception being the disaster that is now making our lives different than the normal pattern). 3) we give in to peer-pressure. We don’t want to risk embarrassment by overreacting. 4) we succumb to the “illusion of centrality.” When in trauma our feelings attempt to convince us that the problem is not that big – or is a local problem. What is happening is only true for a small group of people, everyone outside that group is fine.

2.5. That trauma or traumatizing events create denial is something that Jesus also recognized (Mat 16:1-3) = Though the Jews possessed the ability to discern the “sign of the times” (the time of Messiah), they refused to do so. They were living in deep denial. They were traumatized by the thought that Messiah was among them. They weren’t ready for that big of a change to their life. So they asked Jesus to provide something (a “sign”) that would make them feel better about acting on what was for them an inconvenient truth. Here however is where Jesus departs from the world in His view of denial – most specifically with respect to denial linked to Him –or moral things. Jesus had no pity or toleration for such denial. He viewed it as evil and “adulterous” (v4). Why? Because when it comes to moral things or following Christ, denial means we have now put self (or our safety) above Him and His will – the very thing we vowed we wouldn’t do the day we got married to Him (our gospel vows: die to self, live and die for Him). To live in denial when it comes to Jesus (or His final return) is to therefore commit adultery because we are going back to our former lover (self).

2.6. In agreement (then) with the other forms of denial, this too will cause us to delay and likewise seal our fate.

2.7. Great way to test whether we are living in denial is to ask yourself this question: How much urgency toward faithfulness and being bold in evangelism has the news of Jesus’ return in 2030 – or all the crazy stuff regarding UFOs (and its link to the demons) created in you?

Determine to trust someone outside yourself.

3.1. One of the biggest mistakes we make as humans is believing – or behaving as though we (or self) is the person we should trust the most.

3.2. Once more, scientific studies say otherwise – especially when facing trauma, difficult situations and disaster. Due to a multiplicity of personal biases, poor thinking skills as well as our tendency to listen to our feelings far more than the facts, most humans do a poor job of assessing reality when in relation to self. In contrast, we do a far better job of assessing those things for others since our ability to be more objective and overall better thinkers vastly improves once it is not about us.

3.3. The World Trade Center again provides us with sobering examples. Many of its survivors found that had they not trusted the assessment of others, they would have convinced themselves to remain in place, that the situation was not so bad, that no immediate or drastic action was required. This goes back to the problem of denial. Trusting in self (or self’s assessment of things bathed in the bias of denial) would have guaranteed their death.

3.4. Jesus agrees (Jer 17:9; hence Pro 1:5, 3:7, 12:15, 26:12).

3.5. The question (then) is who should we trust? If your answer is “God” it means you are missing the point – most specifically the point of Scripture when its authors speak in terms of trusting God. Such statements are more about the data than the disseminator. IOW: to trust God means that we trust His words (i.e., the Scriptures) to be true and trustworthy - so much so that Jesus guarantees that those who build their lives on it, will never be toppled by the disasters of this life. But here is problem: we still need someone to properly interpret His words. Though God gives us His words, He leaves the work of correctly interpreting those words to human beings. Hence why God gave no accompanying commentary to go with the Scriptures. Which means saying “I am going to trust God” or “I am going to trust His Word” is not enough when looking for direction or wisdom. Though His Word is the absolute standard and measure of those things, we still need a human being to interpret what exactly God is saying. And once more, if we choose ourselves as the best person to do that, we are (in most cases) choosing the wrong person. Not simply because of all the personal biases, limitations in thinking or impediments caused by our feelings, but also due to the fact that God has not assigned that role to every person. Never has it been that way. It is because people view it that way that church history is filled with all kinds of funky beliefs and false teaching.

3.6. The points then NOT TO MISS: 1) you need to decide NOW (before things get crazy and confusing) who that person is going to be (and stick with your decision) when things get crazy. Who is going to be the one you trust to discern God’s Word/will until Jesus gets here? Whose hands are you going to entrust your soul? In the end, we all have to bet on someone. Who is that someone going to be? And remember, the facts show self is probably the worst choice. Also, don’t put off that decision to the time when things get crazy and confusing – when disaster strikes—because then it will (most likely) be too late. Why do I say that? Because the temptation to follow your feelings will be even stronger (and since that is what you were following up to that point – having not made the choice to follow someone else prior to that), this is where you will likely STAY. 2) choose your sources carefully (1Co 15:32-34).

Know the schemes of the enemy.

4.1. “Knowing is half the battle” – G.I. Joe

4.2. Paul agrees (2Co 2:6-11) = In these verses Paul calls for the Corinthians to obediently forgive (or restore) a man whose time under discipline (i.e., serving justice) was complete. What however is important to our discussion this morning, is Paul’s statement regarding Satan. According to Paul, to protect ourselves from him taking advantage of us, we must not be “ignorant of his schemes.” IOW: we must be aware of the lies he will attempt to pass off as truth. According to 1Thessalonians 5, 2Thessalonians 2 and Revelation 20, this will be at the heart of his strategy during his big reveal. He will also be very successful at it. The majority of the world will believe what he is preaching. And that most likely because what he will preach will be what he has been using to poison the well for hundreds (even thousands) of years. IOW: What the majority have already come to believe as truth (or morality) – including what many think the Bible or Jesus actually teaches.

4.3. So what is that? What are the lies – the false doctrine and dogma of Satan (or “Satan-Jesus”)?

1) GOSPEL: faith/belief is the only thing necessary to be saved. 2) LAW: there are only two moral laws: the first is love which means accepting and never judging or condemning people as long as they are true to themselves. The second is hate which only applies to those whose won’t follow love according to the aforementioned definition. Such people are the true devils and terrorists in this world. 3) FREEDOM: we are free to be and do what we want without consequence as long as it upholds the prior definition of love. 4) SLAVERY: all slavery including slavery to God is evil. 5) AUTHORITY: authority and the obligation to submit to authority is oppression. 6) PLANET: saving this planet is more important than your sexual practices. 7) PEACE/SAFETY: peace and safety are more important than justice.

4.4. Getting out of this world alive (eternally speaking) will mean not only being able to identify this message but refute it from God’s Word.

4.5. Which means we need to possess Paul’s ability and approach to all that attempts to pass as truth (2Co 10:5).

4.6. Can you do that? If not, this should be among the first items on the list of things you will be accomplishing in the near future (not only before Jesus’ return, but more importantly, Satan’s deepfake, big reveal).

Guard the big picture (perspective).

5.1. We tend to lose perspective (or the big picture) when things get crazy, scary and confusing. Disaster gives us tunnel vision. In the aviation industry this is known as “task saturation” and was the cause of several commercial airplane disasters in the 1970s. Problems with the plane would so consume the pilots that they essentially forgot to fly the plane or notice where they were headed - leading to the crash of the plane.

5.2. What according to scientific studies happens when we guard the big picture – or make sure we keep our perspective (besides simply keeping us from crashing)? We gain resilience (i.e., we become intellectually and emotionally better at navigating through disaster).

5.3. A study of 9/11 survivors found that those who thought of their lives in terms of perspective - or were constantly reminding themselves of the bigger picture as the motivation for their lives, had lower levels of cortisol (the stress hormone) in their saliva and rebounded much faster than others who experienced the attacks. Perspective (or guarding the big picture) had inoculated them from life’s disasters.

5.4. Paul took the same approach during his life and through the trials he faced (Phi 3:14) = Though in prison when he wrote these words, Paul never forgot why he was doing what he was doing (or suffering what he suffering). He always kept the big picture in mind: “the upward call in Christ Jesus” which is just another way of saying the reward of heaven. For us, that may only be 5 years away but the craziness/confusion we may experience in between then and now could cause us to forget that.

5.5. We therefore (like Paul) need to keep the goal in mind. We need to guard (and constantly remind ourselves what is) the big picture (the end game that we are enduring all of this for).

Prioritize the group.

6.1. Experiments have found that people who complete difficult tasks or experience difficult situations with others tend to possess lower heart rates and blood pressure than those who attempt to go it alone. IOW: we fare far better together in difficulty than we do going it alone.

6.2. Satan knows this and has made it a part of his strategy (1Pe 5:8) = By “prowl around…seeking someone to devour” Peter is intimating that Satan – like lions, looks for those separated from the group; those who do not possess deep relationships with the covenant community – nor feel a strong sense of loyalty to her (the independent, non-conformist persons). For Satan, these people are easy prey since they will have a harder time staying the course when the going gets tough.

6.3. Jesus warns us that in the last days, Satan will have successfully implemented the idea that being independent or a free-thinker, or a non-conformist or loyal only to self is the wisest way to live. On the surface, this kind of worldly and satanic thinking appears attractive. It seems to work. Yet when disaster strikes – when things get crazy and confusing, it always proves to be the worst of all philosophies. History has proven this time and time again. In wars or disaster, loners always end up duped and dead. Yet again, many will (in the end) foolishly buy into this way of thinking. As a result, betrayal will be at an all-time high and loyalty at an all-time low (Mat 24:10, 12; Consider also 1Jo 2:18-19: Notice: 1] those who betray us are identified by God as antichrists, 2] lots of betrayal in the church signals we are in the last days).

6.4. God gave us the covenant community for our encouragement and protection. Those who discount or despise it, do so to their own destruction (Pro 18:1; hence why Heb 3:12-13).

6.5. Point (then) NOT TO MISS: God gave the church and her people to be more than just our ammunition depot. It also serves as our bomb shelter. It is the group designed to get us through to the other side. Guaranteed, no one is making it home without leaning hard on the church and her people.

View Details

One of the biggest challenges to determining the proper chronology of those events relevant to Jesus’ return is deciding which portions of prophecy were fulfilled in the past (original audience relevant), have yet to be fulfilled (future audience relevant), and which portions will experience dual fulfillment (original and future audience relevant) (e.g., Isa 7:10-16 w/8:1-4 w/Isa 9:6-7; Isa 7:14)[1].

In this respect, the chronological order presented in this study assumes the following in relation to those NT prophecies most relevant to our subject (the return of Christ): 1) the book of Revelation = None of Revelation will experience dual fulfillment and the majority has already been fulfilled (1:1-20:8a). Only a small portion remains yet to be fulfilled (Rev 20:8a-22:21). 2) Jesus’ Olivet Discourse = The majority of the Discourse will experience dual fulfillment (Mat 24:4-14, 23-51). Only a small portion was fulfilled in the past (Mat 24:15-22). 3) Paul’s prophetic words to the Thessalonians = Some has yet to be fulfilled (1Th 4:13-18, 5:1-3; 2Th 1:7-10) and some will experience dual fulfillment (2Th 2:1-12).

Chronology of Fulfillment:

Jesus made His first return in 70 AD to bring judgment against OC Israel through the destruction of her holy city and temple.

1.1. This largely is the focus of John’s vision from the post-death/resurrected/ascended Jesus in the book of Revelation. Its scary – or otherworldly imagery realized through the breaking of seals, sounding of trumpets and pouring out of bowls is meant to depict the historical events surrounding and leading up to the 70 AD destruction of Jerusalem and her Temple by the Roman general Titus and his armies.[2]

1.2. As its content makes clear, this destruction represents the finalization of His divorce to OC Israel – His unfaithful wife, leading to the confirmation of His marriage to his newly betrothed (and faithful) bride, NC Israel (i.e., the church). (Rev 5:1-10):

1) What is the “book” (or scroll) in the “right hand” of God the Father (“Him who sat on the throne”) “sealed up with seven seals?” A get mekushar, the special seven-sealed marriage license used by priests under the OC. In this specific case, the marriage license used by Jesus the divine Priest, in His marriage to OC Israel at Mt. Sinai (Exo 19-24 w/Jud 1:5; Exo 24:7 “the book of the covenant” = the marriage covenant document)[3].

2) How are we to understand the “strong angel[’s]” request for one “who is worthy to “open the book [or] break its seals?” As a summons for divorce. Somebody has filed a petition with the heavenly courts requesting divorce from OC Israel. For proceedings to begin, that person must not only make themselves known, but bring the proper evidence necessary for their request to be granted (i.e., they must possess grounds to make them “worthy” to receive a divorce; Mal 2:14-16 = God hates/does not approve of His priests divorcing for illegitimate reasons).

3) Why is John crying over no one being found “worthy?” Because the confirmation of Jesus’ marriage to NC Israel (the church) and the kingdom power promised to her (v10; Mat 21:43) cannot happen until the divorce to OC Israel is finalized (until all seven seals are broken).

4) What makes Jesus (“the Lion from the tribe of Judah” and “Root of David”= The Christ) the “worthy” candidate (i.e., the One able to make a valid case for divorce)? = Not simply His role as Husband, but His position as the offended spouse. Hence why He is pictured also as the “Lamb…as if slain.” His death - though necessary for purchasing the new people of God (v9), was the result of OC Israel’s marital unfaithfulness. She murdered Him to keep playing the “harlot” with the world (Rev 19:1-7) “harlot” [Grk., porne’- Mat 5:32] = OC Israel; “bride” and “saints” = NC Israel/the church. That the church has already shown herself to be faithful is attested to in (v8). The basis for the church being viewed as already faithful to Christ are the many martyrs who remained sexually pure and obedient even though it cost them their lives (Rev 6:9-; 12:17, 13:7, 14:1-4, 20:4).

1.3. Why does Jesus’ divorce from OC Israel also include her destruction? Why does the breaking of the seven seals deliver a seven-fold judgment? IOW: Why does Israel experience both divorce and death as punishment for her adultery? B/C when Jesus wrote the marriage contract, He included the prenuptial promise of a seven-fold vengeance if Israel was found to be unfaithful ([Lev 26:18, 21, 24, 28] w/Luk 21:22).

1.4. That John’s 70 AD vision should be viewed as Jesus’ first return is supported by Jesus’ words at the beginning and the end of the book’s prophecy (Rev 1:1-7 and 22:10-12).

1.5. With respect to the destruction of Jerusalem, this too becomes abundantly obvious once we consider the identity of the prophecy’s primary target in judgment:

1) (Rev 1:7, 11:15-18) “earth” = Land, as in the land of Israel.[4]

2) (Rev 11:1-2) “holy city” “forty two months” w/8 “great city (16:17-19, 18:20-24)…where also our Lord was crucified” = Jerusalem.

1.6. During His earthly ministry (i.e., before His death), Jesus likewise prophesied that such destruction would be the result of Israel’s rejection of Him (Mat 23:37-39) = Though Jesus indicates there will be a change of fortune in the future (v39, think Rom 11:26-27), the coming state of things will not be good (v38, “Behold your house is being left to you desolate”). By house Jesus means both the Temple and the city in which she dwells (Jerusalem) as confirmed by what follows in chapter 24 and its parallel account in Luke:

1) (24:1-3) = Jesus is asked two (not three) questions, one in relation to His return to destroy Jerusalem and the Temple and the other in relation to His final return at the end of the age (Literally, “tell us when these things will happen [i.e., the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple], and what will be the sign of Your coming at the end of the age?”). Jesus answers the first question -or the question related to Jerusalem’s destruction in (24:15-22) = In fulfillment of Daniel 9:26-27 (“the people of the prince to come will destroy the city and sanctuary… And on the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate, even until a complete destruction.”), Josephus (Wars) records that after setting the Temple on fire, Titus (the “prince to come” and son of the current Caesar, Vespasian), led his men into its inner sanctuary, defiling it by their presence and the dead bodies they stacked upon its outer altars (i.e., they committed “the abomination of “desolation” [same word as Mat 23:38]).

2) (Luk 21:20-24) = Notice that Luke’s versions not only repeat many of the specifics found in Matthew’s version but applies the act of “desolation” to the city itself (21:20, “when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then recognize that her desolation is near”). Notice also, Jesus’ promise that Jerusalem would remain “trampled under foot by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled” (21:24) - another important indicator that what the future holds for Jerusalem and the Jews is a major change of fortune (Rom 11:25 [“until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in”] w/26-27).

1.7. Though Jesus’ return in 70 AD was not in the manner we commonly think of - i.e., He returned spiritually not physically (as He will at the end of history), He did nonetheless return in the manner most common throughout history. Jesus’ spiritual visitation to earth for the purpose of judgment – most specifically judgment against sinful cities or nations (including His own) has occurred multiple times (e.g., Gen 19:24 = Notice two distinct/separate Yawehs are mentioned; One [God the Father] providing the fire for the Other [Jesus] to destroy the city [this has always been the job of Jesus - Mat 3:13; 2Th 1:7-8]; Isa 19:1 [similar words to Rev 1:7]). Also common is the use of other nations as His war-hammer when carrying out His judgments (e.g., Assyria against Israel - Isa 10:5-6, Babylon against Judah and other nations – Isa 13:1-5).

1.8. Lastly, it should mentioned that viewing 70 AD as Jesus’ first return helps us to understand why also the other NT authors can speak about Jesus’ return as something their 1st century audience needed to prepare for (e.g., Act 2:17-24 w/33-40 [“perverse generation” = a generation fully corrupted and therefore ripe for a near-future judgment – e.g., Gen 6:12-13; Gen 15:16 w/1Th 2:16]; 1Th 5:1-6; Jam 5:7-9; 1Pe 4:7).

1.9. POINT (then) NOT TO MISS: What took place with respect to the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple by the Romans was more than just another tragic event in the history of the Jews. It was the result of divine intervention, of Jesus’ first return to earth since His ascension to heaven, a return for the purpose of carrying out the promised vengeful justice against His wife turned enemy, OC Israel (Act 2:34-36; Luk 19:43-44).

[1] Those principles used in the decision would include:

1) Know the difference between standard prophecy and visions (or vision-prophecy) (Rev 1:3 w/10-11; Rev 22:7-10) which tend not to experience multiple fulfillments (e.g., Dan 2:31-45).

3) Identify parallels as a means to confirm what will not experience dual fulfillment (Rev 1:7 [all the tribes “even those who pierced Him” compared to Mat 24:30 [all the tribes of the earth not limited to “those who pierced Him” – i.e. no mention of this phrase]; Dan 7:1-28 [v7-28] = Rev 1:1-20:6; Eze 40-48 = Rev 21-22; Eze 25-35 [1st destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians: Judgment against Israel and the Gentile nations who helped Babylon in her conquest of Israel] = Zep 1-3).

3) Use visions to determine which portions of standard prophecy will not experience dual fulfillment (e.g., Rev 5-19 [70 AD] = Mat 24:15-22; Mar 13:14-20; Luk 21:20-24a).

4) Discern which portions of Jewish and Christian apocalyptic tradition (uninspired revelation) are valid based on their agreement with Scripture (inspired revelation) (e.g., Jud 1:4-5).

5) Use non-prophetic Scripture and uninspired testimony to determine what portion of prophecy is to be viewed as literal or non-literal (e.g. For “forty two months” the Beast is given authority to make war w/Christians and overcome them [Rev 13:5-7] and the nations will tread under foot the holy city [Rev 11:2] = Per Josephus this represents the exact length of time of the Neronic persecution [Nov 64-Jun 68 AD] and the Jewish war [Mar 67- Aug 70 AD]).

[2] See Josephus (Wars) and Tacitus (Annals) for more details on the persons and particulars of these events which happened exactly forty years after Jesus’ death in 30 AD. For the support and significance of this timeframe see the sermon, When Did Jesus Die?[2]

[3] “Rabbinic Judaism…speaks of the Mount Sinai covenant as being Israel’s ‘Day of Espousal,’ with the Shekinah cloud’s descent upon the tabernacle portraying the marital consummation. Rabbis extolled the conclusion of the [old] covenant at Sinai as the marriage of Yaweh with Israel. Her marital ‘I do’ appears in her vocal commitment ‘All the words which the Lord has spoken we will do (Exo 24:3)…Thus… this judgment scroll is a divorce decree against [Christ’s] unfaithful wife, Israel. Revelation shows [Christ] issuing a divorce decree against his harlot-wife in a dramatic heavenly court-room setting before taking a new bride, the ‘new Jerusalem,’ the Church.” – Kenneth Gentry (Navigating The Book Of Revelation)

[4] “The unrelenting testimony of Scripture blames Israel for Christ’s death (e.g., Act 2:23, 5:30, 7:52, 10:39, 13:13-15). So then, Revelation 1:7 promises judgment upon ‘those who pierced Him.’ The events of 70 A.D. present us with the most perfect, relevant and compelling fit. But there is more! The reader must understand that the Greek word translated ‘earth’ (ge) can also be translated ‘land.’ In fact, it often refers to the ‘land of Israel.’ When we note that this ‘land’ contains ‘tribes’ we move even closer to the proper translation. The Greek word for ‘tribe’ is phule’ which in Scripture most frequently refers to the Jewish tribes.” – Kenneth Gentry (The Book of Revelation Made Easy)

View Details

Determining the window of possible dates:

Jesus was condemned to death by the Roman governor of Judea, Pontius Pilate.

1.1. (Mat 27:26; Mar 15:15; Luk 23:23-24; Joh 19:14-16)

1.2. “Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus.” – Tacitus (Annals)

1.3. Josephus (Antiquities, Wars) indicates that Pilate reigned in Judea from 26 to 36 AD.

1.4. Jesus’ death could not, therefore, have taken place before 26 AD nor after 36 AD. [A 10-year window]

Jesus was crucified before Paul became a Christian.

2.1. While in Corinth, the Jews brought Paul before the proconsul of Achaia, Gallio (Act 18:8-13). Roman records (e.g., the Delphi or Gallio Inscription) indicate that Gallio served as proconsul from 51-52 AD.

2.2. Paul’s arrival in Corinth was just after Emperor Claudius had expelled the Jews from Rome (Act 18:2). Per the ancient historian Orossius, this took place in the ninth year of Claudius’ reign – or 49 AD.

2.3. Prior to this Paul was delivering aid to Jerusalem in response to Agabus’ prophecy of a coming famine (Act 11:27-30). Per Josephus, the famine was affecting Jerusalem during the time of Queen Helena’s pilgrimage (46-47 AD).

2.4. According to Paul, this trip was 14 years after his conversion (Gal 2:1 “after an interval of fourteen years [after conversion – 1:11-17] I went up again [having visited once already 11 years prior – or three years after conversion – 1:18]).

2.5. Paul’s conversion was, therefore, between 33 and 32 AD. As such, the latest possible date for Jesus’ death is 33 AD.

[A 7-year window]

Jesus died on Friday, the day of preparation for a Sabbath-Passover.

3.1. Per the Law, the Passover (i.e., sacrifice and eating of the paschal lamb) had to be celebrated in the month of Nisan – the first month of the Jewish calendar (Est 3:7), at moonrise on the 14th day - which signaled the beginning of the 15th day (Exo 12:2-8; Lev 23:5-6; Num 28:16-17; Deu 16:6). In God’s eyes, days extend from moonrise to moonrise versus sunrise to sunrise (Gen 1:5 “there was evening and there was morning, one day” [Note the order]). If Passover fell on a Sabbath (a Sabbath-Passover or “high day” – Joh 19:31[1]), then both the sacrifice and preparation of the meal (cooking the lambs and unleavened bread, etc.) had to take place the day before (Friday day – the 14th of Nisan) – or in the hours before moonrise and the beginning of the Sabbath (Friday evening, the 15th of Nisan), since no work could be done on the Sabbath. This day was called the “day or preparation.”

3.2. All four gospels make clear that Jesus died on the “day of preparation” (Friday day, the 14th of Nisan), during one of these unique Sabbath-Passover celebrations (Mat 27:50 w/62; Mar 15:37 w/42-43; Luk 24:44-46 w/50-54; Joh 19:31-33)[2].

3.3. Jesus died, therefore, at the same time as the Passover lambs were slain (on the day of preparation). Hence the reason: 1) for Paul’s words in (1Co 5:7 “Christ our Passover [lamb]…has been sacrificed”), 2) the Passover meal celebrated by Jesus and disciples (the Last Supper/Lord’s Table) did not include a lamb. Jesus was replacing them as the eschatological Passover “lamb of God” (Joh 1:36). Hence why also, their Passover meal needed to be celebrated on Thursday evening before the actual Sabbath-Passover meal (i.e., on Friday evening[3]). By then, Jesus would be dead. The benefits of consuming Him through the bread and wine the night before made moot any need for further OC Passover observance or meals. Jesus’ supper/table had become the new – or NC, Passover. 3) Paul can also speak of Jesus’ resurrection as our “first fruits” (1Co 15:20) – no doubt an allusion to the offering of first fruits which happened on the 16th of Nisan, a Sunday during a Sabbath-Passover.

3.4. Astronomical calculations indicate only two Sabbath-Passover dates within the 7-year window: 30 and 33 AD[4]

The million dollar question: Which year is the correct one?

Considering where the additional evidence points:

The 46th year of Herod’s Temple project points to one date.

4.1. During Jesus’ first Passover, He is confronted regarding the time it took Herod to expand the temple (Joh 2:13-20 “forty six years”).

4.2. According to Josephus (Antiquities), Herod began his rule of Judea in 37 BC and his work on the Temple in his eighteenth year - or 19 BC. Accounting for the transition between BC and AD (there is no “0” BC/AD, it goes from 1BC to 1AD), as well as inclusive reckoning (counting, 1-2 = 1 yr, 2-3 = 2 yrs) the 46th year of Herod’s Temple project and Jesus’ first Passover, occurred in 28 AD.

4.3. Given that Jesus’ public ministry lasted for three Passovers (Joh 2:13, 23; Joh 6:4; Joh 11:55, 12:1[5]) the dates of all three would be as follows: the first in the spring of 28 AD, the second in the spring of 29 AD and the third, the Passover of His death, the spring of 30 AD. [6]

The 15th year of Tiberius’ reign cannot contradict the date established for Herod’s Temple project.

5.1. Jesus’ public ministry began shortly after that of John the Baptist given: 1) this was among the main reasons for John’s ministry of baptism: to identify – or make official Jesus’ public ministry as Messiah (Joh 1:19-34). 2) what Mark identifies as the beginning of Jesus’ ministry (Mar 1:1-9) “the beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ” = Mark’s unique focus is the public ministry of Jesus only. Hence no mention of His birth or genealogy. He instead begins where the “gospel” (or public) ministry of Jesus began, at His baptism by John. Scholars agree that this event took place shortly after the ministry of John began. Hence the reason for Mark’s reference “in those days” - i.e., in the days when John was baptizing “in the Jordan river.”

5.2. According to Luke, John’s ministry started “in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, when Pilate was governor of Judea” (Luk 3:1).

5.3. Those holding to the later date of AD 33 for Jesus’ death claim that Tiberius’ reign as Caesar began in 14 AD. Their evidence is Roman coins which communicate this as the starting date of His reign.

5.4. If however 14 AD is correct, Jesus’ baptism didn’t take place until 29 AD, a date too late based on the previous calculations regarding Herod’s Temple project and Jesus’ first Passover (28 AD) which comes after – not before, His baptism (Joh 1: Baptism, Joh 2: 1st Passover).

5.5. Considering however, the information provided by ancient historians Tacitus (Annals) and Suetonius (Augustus; Tiberius), the inscription found on an ancient Roman calendar (Fasti Praenestini), and the writings of a soldier who served under Tiberius (Velleius Paterculus), we learn that Tiberius’ reign actually began in 12 AD when he was made co-regent (co-Caesar) with his step-father, Augustus.[7]

5.6. Calculating according to this date and inclusive reckoning (counting “1-2 = 1, 2-3 = 2”), yields 27 AD as the beginning of John and Jesus’ public ministry (or baptism) which not only fits within the time that “Pilate was governor of Judea” (26-36 AD), but also the chronology of Jesus’ first Passover (again, 28 AD).

5.7. Important note regarding Luke’s reference: It can be safely assumed that Luke would’ve had little regard for (or even thought of) determining Tiberius’ reign based on the technicality of when he functioned as the sole Caesar (which is what was being communicated on Roman coins) since his original audience would’ve been far more practical in their assessment, counting the years in office based on time of active duty in that role.

If Jesus died in that year, then the forty years before Jerusalem’s destruction becomes historically significant.

6.1. God often chooses a period of forty to bring a task, test, trial to completion or maturity. Its intention is to communicate that what has been done is sufficient to accomplishing the goal. In terms of years, 40 is the number of years:

1) God left those apostate in Israel to wander adrift in the wilderness until the day they and their false religion were destroyed (Num 14:33-34, 32:13; Jos 5:6; Psa 95:10-11; Act 7:42, 13:18; Heb 3:9, 17).

2) God used to establish David’s kingdom in peace by destroying His enemies (“the Lord put them under the soles of his feet”-1Ki 2:11 w/5:3).

3) God gave those not apostate in Israel to turn to Him by placing their trust and obedience in Him and His Law (Deu 8:2-3).

6.2. If 40 years was indeed the time between Jesus’ ascension back to heaven and first His return in 70 AD (in judgment of OC Israel and the destruction of her Temple), then it is very possible that God was communicating the same three-fold goal or intention: 1) to place Jesus’ enemies under His feet (Act 2:34), 2) to leave those apostate in Israel adrift in the wilderness of their apostasy until the day they and their false religion were destroyed (Mat 23:37-39), 3) to give those no apostate in Israel time to turn to God by placing their trust and obedience in Jesus and His Law (Rom 1:16 w/Rev 14:1-8).

6.3. Given the historical significance of these two events (Jesus’ death and the destruction of the Temple), what are the chances that the time in between also carries such historical significance (i.e., was exactly 40 yrs in length)?

The Talmud records the miracle of the crimson cord ceasing in that year.

7.1. At some point in Judaism’s past, a new tradition began with respect to the Jewish holiday of Yom Kippur (Day of Atonement; Lev 16:1-34). Along with his prescribed duties, the High Priest also began tying a crimson cord to the door of the Temple. If the cord miraculously turned white, the people could be assured that God had accepted their sacrifice and their sins were forgiven. Per the Talmud, this miracle was experienced every year until 30 AD. For the forty years before the destruction of the Temple (70 AD), the cord remained crimson signaling that God was no longer accepting their sacrifice or forgiving their sins through the slaughtered animals.

7.2. “Our rabbis have taught: During the last forty years before the destruction of the Temple the lot [‘For the Lord’] did not come up in the right hand; nor did the crimson-colored strap become white…” (Tractate Yoma 39b, Soncino Talmud)

7.3. ‘‘Originally they used to fasten the thread of scarlet on the door of the [Temple] court on the outside. If it turned white the people used to rejoice, and if it did not turn white they were sad… For forty years before the destruction of the Temple the thread of scarlet never turned white but it remained red.” (Tractate Rosh Hashanah 31b, Soncino Talmud)

7.4. Though – like the former point, it can only serve as secondary evidence, the powerful message communicated by this event lends further credence to 30 AD date as the correct date of the crucifixion.

CLOSING CONTEMPLATION: (Ecc 11:2) “Divide your portion to seven, or even to eight, for you do not know what misfortune may occur on the earth.”

[1] In Judaism this is known as Yom Tov or a festival Sabbath.

[2] The Babylonian Talmud records that Jesus' death was on the eve of Passover, i.e. on 14 Nisan, “Yeshu [Jesus] was hanged…he was hanged on the eve of the Passover.” (Mishnah, Sanhedrin 43a).

[3] This understanding of the Last supper/Lord’s Table clears up what may seem a contradiction between the Synoptics and John regarding the timing of this event (e.g., compare Luk 22:15 “On the first day of Unleavened Bread” [Thursday eve/beginning of Friday/Day of preparation – the 14th of Nisan] and Joh 13:1 “before the Feast of the Passover” [Friday eve/beginning of Saturday/Sabbath-Passover – the 15th of Nisan].

[4] Calculations and table per Humphreys and Waddington. As support for the 33 AD date, Humphreys and Waddington show that this is the only date where we find a naturally occurring eclipse. Given Matthew’s mention of an eclipse at the time of Jesus’ death (Mat 27:45), they believe this confirms the 33 AD date. However, there are two problems with using this as support for the 33 AD date: 1) Per astronomical calculations, the eclipse would not have been visible or very subtle. According to Bradley E. Schaefer, “The eclipsed moon (of 33 AD) would not have been visible at the time of moonrise and because the umbral portion of the eclipse finished minutes later, any naked-eye effects on the appearance of the moon would have been relatively subtle and probably not detectable even to an experienced observer. I find that any ‘blood colour’ associated with the eclipse would not be visible to the unaided eye. However, the rising eclipsed moon would have an amber colour from atmospheric absorption, just like any other time when the moon is low on the horizon. In summary, at no time during the eclipse would even a serious and experienced observer in Jerusalem have realized that and eclipse was occurring…Hence, the 3 April AD 33 eclipsed moon would have appeared amber when it was rising, exactly like any other rising moon.” (Lunar visibility and the crucifixion). 2) the eclipse at Jesus’ death is communicated as supernatural rather than a naturally occurring event. In this light consider the principle established by (Num 16:29).

[5] John 5:1 mentions a “feast of the Jews.” Scholars such as F.F. Bruce agree that this is not a Passover feast, but rather (based on the teaching surrounding it) the fall festival of Rosh Hashanah, or the Feast of Trumpets (the Jewish New Year).

[6] Scholars believe that the time from Jesus’ baptism into public ministry (Joh 1) and His cleansing of the Temple at Passover (Joh 2) to be less than one year.

[7] Tacitus, Suetonius and Velleius use language that strongly suggest that Tiberius did indeed function with the authority of a Caesar equal to his stepfather Augustus. “[Tiberius] was adopted as a son, as a colleague in empire and a partner in the tribunation power." (Tacitus, Annals 1:3); "After two years he (Tiberius) returned to the city from Germany and celebrated the triumph …The consuls caused a law to be passed soon after this that he should govern the provinces jointly with Augustus and hold the census with him..." (Augustus 97:1; Tiberius 20-21); “After he [Tiberius] had broken the force of the enemy by his expeditions on sea and land …at the request of his father [Augustus] that he should have in all the provinces and armies a power equal to his own, the senate and Roman people so decreed. For indeed it was incongruous that the provinces which were being defended by him should not be under his jurisdiction, and that he who was foremost in bearing aid should not be considered an equal in the honour...” (Velleius Paterculus, 2.1.1.)

View Details

Why should we be planning for Jesus’ return in 2033 or 2034?

1.1. According to Jewish tradition and the belief of the early church, the shelf-life of God’s first Creation – before the final return of Christ and the beginning of His second and eternal Creation, would be 6,000 years, a corollary to the six literal creation days of Genesis one.

“Six thousand years the world will exist and for one thousand, [the seventh], it shall be desolate [no longer exist], as it is written, ‘And the Lord alone shall be exalted in that day” (Sanhedrin 97a)

“Six eons for going in and coming out, for war and peace. The seventh eon is entirely Shabbat and rest for life everlasting.” - Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus (2nd century A.D.)

“For the day of the Lord is as a thousand years (2Pe 3:8); and in six days created things were completed; it is evident, therefore, that they will come to an end at the sixth thousandth year.” - Irenaeus[1] (130-202 A.D.)

“Give heed, children, what this means; ‘He ended in six days’ (Gen 1:2): He means this, that in six thousand years the Lord shall bring all things to an end; for the day with Him signifies a thousand years; and this He himself bears me witness, saying; “Behold, the day of the Lord shall be as a thousand years” (2Pe 3:8). Therefore, children, in six days, that is in six thousand years, everything shall come to an end.” - The epistle of Barnabas[2] (75 A.D.)

“And 6,000 years must needs be accomplished, in order that the Sabbath may come, the rest, the holy day on which God rested from all His works. For the Sabbath is the type and emblem of the future kingdom of the saints, when they shall reign with Christ, when He comes from heaven, for ‘a day with the Lord is as a thousand years’ (2Pe 3:8). Since, then, in six days God made all things, it follows that 6,000 years must be fulfilled.” - Hippolytus[3] (170-235 AD)

1.2. Peter confirms this as God’s view (2Pe 3:1-13) = God’s first Creation was never meant to last forever. From the beginning there has been a date “reserved” when all of it will be destroyed by fire. This will be followed by a judgment of humanity to determine who is worthy to enter His new (and eternal) Creation. This day will also fulfill the “promise” of Jesus’ return and can be calculated by viewing each day of His Creation as representing 1,000 years (v8). Just as there were 6 days for man to work, there will be six thousand years allotted to humanity to do the work of God and determine who among them is worthy to enter the “new heavens and earth where righteousness dwells” (v13). Or as the writer of Hebrews refers to it, God’s eternal Sabbath (or seventh day) rest (Heb 4:9).

1.3. Peter’s preaching on Pentecost revealed only 2,000 years left after the ascension of Christ.

(Act 2:17-20) = Peter’s divinely inspired interpretation of Joel 2:28 as “And it shall be in the last days” indicates that the IPO of the indwelling Spirit marks the beginning of the final two millennia before the Sabbath millennium/time of Christ’s return. Why? 1) Peter indicates there will be plural days [or millennia] before the end – or Christ’s return (17, “last days”). 2) At the time of Jesus’ earthly ministry, we were already somewhere in the range of 4,000 years – which means Peter’s reference cannot be three or more.

This puts Jesus’ return somewhere around 2033/34 (or two thousand years after Christian Pentecost which took place in 33/34 A.D.).

Why should we be confident that it is exactly two thousand years (versus two thousand and fifty years, etc.,)?

2.1. We serve a God Who – in human terms, is OCD and likes to do history in neat, complete and repeated packages. Which means nothing is arbitrary or imprecise. Everything has meaning and is connected. God’s past acts and intentions always establish patterns and principles that will be followed in the future. God therefore making the number of millennia for Creation’s shelf-life match exactly the number of days He took to create it should come as no surprise. It is what we should expect. Examples of other things where we see such meaningful redundancy: 1) The first verse of the Bible which introduces us to God’s week of Creation (Gen 1:1 “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth”) is seven words (in Hebrew), followed by seven paragraphs which unpack the six days whose end goal is the Sabbath – or the seventh day. 2) There exists no overlap or spill-over with respect to the things assigned to the days of Creation (e.g., all creatures of the water and air on the fifth day only, all creatures of the earth on the sixth day only). 3) God saw to it that Jesus’ genealogy was communicated as three complete sets of 14, the numerical value of the Hebrew letters “dwd” (David) to emphasize (hence the reason for three), His identity as the Messianic son of David (Mat 1:17).

2.2. Paul communicates that Jesus’ death closed out the prior redemptive epic (Gal 4:4-5 = Jesus’ death marked the end of the OC and ushered in the NC – the time when Gentiles [those not “born under the Law” or OC] could receive “adoption as sons”).

2.3. Jewish tradition also supports this understanding:

“The world will exist for six thousand years: two millennia of waste as the Torah had not been given; Two millennia of Torah (i.e., years under the Old Covenant); and then two millennia of the age of Messiah (i.e., years under the New Covenant which was ratified – or began, at Jesus’ death – Mat 26:28 w/Heb 9:15-16).” - Tractate Avodah Zarah [9a] (3rd century A.D.).

2.4. POINT NOT TO MISS: to bet on 2033/34 as Jesus’ return date is to bet on God based whose past behavior – which has not only been perfectly consistent but committed to repeating previously established principles or patterns. IOW: Our God is a God of redundancy.

Why will so many people be caught off guard by Jesus’ return?

3.1. They mistakenly believe they can’t know the year of His return and so don’t attempt to figure it out (Mat 24:32-36 w/42) = “Day and hour” cannot be known, but there will be signs that His return is “near” (i.e., signs related to specific years).

3.2. They will be reading the wrong signs. (Mat 24:37-41) = The actions and events of humanity listed in these verses indicate that humanity at the time of Christ’s return will be under the impression that they had many more years to live on this earth (e.g., marrying and giving in marriage” w/1Co 7:29-31).[4]

What should be our gospel witness during the time we have remaining?

We should be bold about telling people that Jesus is returning in 2033 and 34, explaining why we know that to be true and calling them to get right with God before it is too late (along with boldly telling those who think they are right with God yet believe in a false gospel that they are not) followed by sharing how the Bible says we get right and stay right w/God (i.e., we gain it by faith and must maintain it by faithfulness). This form of witnessing is one of the reasons John the Baptist was so successful in his evangelism of the lost (Luk 3:7) = John’s question (“who warned you to flee from the wrath to come?”) only makes sense if this was part of his message. IOW: John was preaching (and baptizing) w/respect to a soon approaching Messianic judgment day (i.e., Jesus’ 1st return in 70 A.D. and His divorce from OC Israel; See vv15-18).

What should we be doing in the time we have remaining?

4.1. Abstaining from all forms of sexual sin (Rev 14:4).

4.2. Stop practicing those things that weaken our willpower and lead to apostasy (Luk 21:34-36) “have strength to escape all these things” = The things happening in the final days are sure to test the resolve of every person’s willpower – including us (i.e., our commitment to true Jesus and His gospel of gain and maintain). The end for many will be apostasy because a big part of their everyday lives was the practice of those things that weakened their willpower. This is what Jesus is getting at when He warns, “Be on guard (Be training yourself for the battle to come), so that your hearts (i.e., your willpower) will not be weighted down (i.e., weakened) by dissipation and drunkenness and the worries of life.” These three represent those things that weaken the human will and make it near impossible to stand firm or be faithful when what you believe is no longer convenient (when you are now suffering because of it). For those persons, the “day” of the Lord’s return and the craziness of the world prior to it will “come on (them) like a trap.” They will be ambushed, overwhelmed and unable to sustain their right standing before Jesus (to “stand before the Son of Man”).

What (then) these three willpower-weakening words or phrases represent (or refer to):

1) “dissipation” = Activity that has no spiritual profit or is worthless for spiritual growth and strengthening (Eph 5:18 w/v17 and 19).

2) “drunkenness” = Escape from pain or reality (Pro 31:6; Luk 14:25-35).

3) “worries of this life” = Knowledge above trust (Gen 22:1-18), status above truth (2Co 13:7-8), safety above loyalty (Heb 10:32-39), pleasure above integrity (Heb 11:24-26). To keep my willpower strong (and endure to the end – Mat 24:13), I need to make sure that none of these things characterize me. Best way to find that out is by asking someone who possesses the necessary discernment and dedication to your well-being to give you an accurate answer.

4.3. Don’t grow weary in doing good (1Co 15:58; Gal 6:9 w/Eze 18:24; Mat 10:22 and 24:13).

4.4. Increase in our love/loyalty for one another/the church family (Gal 6:10; 1Th 3:12-13; 1Pe 4:8). Why increasing in our love/loyalty to the church is so important? B/C:

1) it is impossible to love/be loyal to God w/o loving/being loyal to His church. Hence why Jesus says the second greatest commandment is “Iike” the first (Mat 22:37-39) – b/c it is thru faithfulness to the second (love/loyalty to the church) that we fulfill the first (love/loyalty to God).

2) Satan has employed measures meant to cause apostasy in many whose love/loyalty in this area is weak (Mat 24:10-12) = Apostasy wb the result of covenant community betrayal (“hate [for] one another”… “love [growing] cold”) fostered by the satanic influence of false teachers preaching “lawlessness” (i.e., your salvation requires no obligation of loyalty to the covenant community).

4.5. Gain and/or strengthen your conviction about what you believe – especially as it relates to the gospel. BTW: if you can’t biblically defend what you believe or sufficiently explain it to someone else, then you do not possess personal conviction about what you believe. Why? B/C conviction is only produced through comprehension and critical analysis (Tit 1:9 [“hold firm” = possess conviction about what he believes which comes from - and leads to, the ability to explain it and defend it -i.e., comprehension and critical analysis]; 1Th 5:21; 1Ti 4:7-8; 2Pe 3:17 w/18; Col 2:6-7 w/8; Eph 4:13 w/14; 1Pe 4:7 “sound judgment” [impossible w/ comprehension and critical analysis]).

An example to demonstrate the importance of comprehension and critical analysis to possessing conviction w/respect to biblical gospel of gain and maintain: Lack of comprehension and critical analysis of the OT - or more specifically, the distinction that must be made between sacrifice for atonement (to clean what is unclean not necessarily due to sin – e.g., things related to death such as bodily discharges) and punishment for sin (to restore justice) is one of the main reasons all current branches of Christendom hold such strong convictions regarding penal substitution and the false gospel of Faith Alone[5].

4.6. Trust and obey your pastors - especially when things get crazy: 1) only they possess the keys for binding in justice and loosing in forgiveness (and binding must happen if there is to be loosing) (Mat 18:18). IOW: you are not getting to heaven w/o them (Psa 132:15; Heb 13:17; ). 2) only they possess absolute authority (and if you are just, you want that) (Mat 16:19; Joh 20:22-23). 3) only thru them will God lead His people in the way of truth. IOW: they will be the ones possessing God’s special discernment during the difficult times/for identifying what is false and what is true (Mat 18:20; Eph 4:11-14). FOOD FOR THOUGHT: you will never meet a person in heaven who distrusted and disobeyed Jesus’ pastors (w/o biblical due process).

4.7. Be aware of what has come and what is still coming (“knowing is half the battle” – G.I. Joe; 1Th 3:1-4; See Diagram).

CLOSING CONTEMPLATION: What significant role might the red heifers play in the events leading up to Jesus’ return? [VIDEO: https://youtu.be/8Co3C7gXWGA?si=3VZgORpTI-QZYIPN]

[1] Early Church Father and disciple of Polycarp who was a direct disciple of the apostle John.

[2] Early Church Fathers Clement of Alexandria (150-215 A.D.) and Origen (184-253 A.D.) attributed the epistle of Barnabas to the apostle and travelling companion of Paul mentioned in the book of Acts (Act 14:14). The epistle of Barnabas was considered so important to early Christianity that it was included as an addendum in the back of early bibles until the 4th century – e.g. Codex Sinaiticus [Sinai Bible]).

[3] Early Church Father and Bishop of Rome.

[4] Though Paul’s original audience was thousands of years away from Jesus’ final return, they were less than two decades away from His first return (70 A.D.). Scholars place the writing of the first letter to the Corinthians between the years 53-55 A.D.

[5] In the final analysis, the FAG is the gospel of the Roman Catholics also since all whose possess it eventually get to heaven.

View Details

Coherent (def.): clear, consistent, logical and reasonable (equitable/just). Coherent things are intelligible, they make sense.

Christ Covenant Church seeks to a place that possesses coherent Christianity. The reason for this endeavor is the following:

Coherency is essential to the confirmation of something as truth especially as it relates to what you believe.

1.1. In Philosophy this is known as the Coherence Theory of Truth: an individual proposition (or belief) is only true if it is coherent with existing propositions or a system of propositions (or beliefs) already determined to be true (e.g.,) I [Scott Jarrett] am 54 going on 55. For that belief to be true, then it must cohere with other beliefs or truths such as: 1. My birth date is 11/1/69, 2. I am still alive. My statement/proposition (54 going on 55) sb considered true b/c it is logically coherent.

1.2. That coherency is essential to truth (or what we believe to be true) can be seen by considering Satan’s first attack against humanity. It was an attack on the coherency of God’s words (Gen 3:1-5) = Satan’s contribution to humanity’s first act of rebellion was his ability to get our original parents to believe that what He had said was incoherent. This then is the power of incoherency (and once more, why coherency is so essential): incoherency leads to distrust and ultimately open rebellion against God.

1.3. As humans, we have been hard-wired to trust only those things that are coherent: that make sense because they are clear, consistent, logical and reasonable (Pro 29:18 “vision” [Heb., hazon = Prophetic vision that makes clear or coherent what God’s people are to do]) = Without such coherency, God’s people will be “unrestrained” in their moral behavior. IOW: they will become distrustful and disobedient to God’s Law. This is confirmed also by the author’s response to the first couplet (“But happy is he who keeps the law [Heb., torah = God’s special revelation or message – most especially His Law). When God’s Word -or what we believe about it is coherent (clear, consistent, logical and reasonable), it is much easier to trust it and obey His laws.

If the Bible is truth, then what it teaches (and Christianity believes) must be coherent[1].

2.1. Jesus testifies to the Bible (or God’s Word) as truth (Joh 17:17).

2.2. Jesus also testifies to the Bible’s coherency (Deu 30:11-14; Joh 1:1 “Word” [Grk., logos = Logic, the coherent word; in re: to the mind it refers to the function of reason/logic and calculation]) = Jesus’ identity as the divine Logos (“Word”) communicates to us not only the nature of God (as logical or coherent) but also the nature of Scripture (God’s divine written words – OT, NT): they are likewise logical (or coherent) giving us (humans made in the image of our logical/coherent God) the ability to know Him w/certainty (v18 “explained” [Grk., exegeomai = Exegesis; coherent explanation). [2]

2.3. Jesus uses logic – or the Law of Noncontradiction [A ≠ non-A][3] to prove the existence of life after death/resurrection and His deity – Mat 22:31-32 [Jesus also confirms plenary inspiration]; Mat 22:41-46)[4].

2.4. Paul likewise uses a logical syllogism to prove the necessity of the resurrection to salvation/Christianity (1Co 15:12-20).

2.5. Other passages related to the Bible’s teaching as coherent (Psa 19:7b-9, 119:105; 2Ti 3:15-16 = None of these texts are truthful unless what the Bible teaches is indeed coherent; 1Pe 3:15 “defense” [Grk., apologia = Out of logic]).

2.6. To say that the Bible’s teaching is coherent is not the same as saying that it is not (at times) difficult to understand (e.g., 2Pe 3:15-17) = According to Peter, the reason Paul could be difficult was not due to incoherency (i.e., what he wrote was unclear, inconsistent, illogical or unreasonable) but rather the moral instability (“unstable”) and intellectual deficiency (“untaught”) of others (“unprincipled men”).

2.7. Oftentimes the incoherent (and therefore false) doctrines believed by many Christians today are labeled as incomprehensible. Incomprehensibility however is not the same as incoherency. The difference between the two from the standpoint of cognitive understanding is experience versus intellect. Though what is incomprehensible can be intelligible (it can be understood intellectually), it is beyond that person’s ability to understand experientially (e.g., hell). By contrast, what is incoherent fails to be something that can be understood both by experience and intellect (e.g., 2 + 2 = 3).[5]

2.8. Finally, coherency is necessary not only to our knowledge of God, but to distinguishing between the divine and the demonic.

“If a transcendent God really does have a logic all His own, no criteria can exist in the realm of the transcendent to distinguish between Yahweh and Satan.” – Nash (ibid)

“If the law of non-contradiction is irrelevant in the sphere of transcendent ontology, the God and not-God, the divine and the demonic, cannot be differentiated.” – Clark (ibid)

2.9. Point (then) Not To Miss: never should we accept as biblical truth any belief or doctrine that fails the test of coherency.

A great place to start when determining whether the version of Christianity you are following is true or false is the test of coherency (it fails to be clear, consistent, logical or reasonable).

3.1. As it re: to consistency consider: Is our doctrine of God or salvation consistent w/what was what was established in the OT? IOW: is their coherency between the NT and OT based on what you believe? Or do you possess a “canon within a canon”? (Luk 5:36-39) = NT (“new wine”) orthodoxy/orthopraxy is determined by its coherency or consistency w/what has already been established (“is good enough”) from the OT (“the old wine”) .

3.2. As it re: to clarity and logic consider: Jesus appeals to the Pharisees’ clarity and ability to use logic (or logical inferences) to indict them for their rejection of Him as Messiah (Mat 16:1-4 = Their problem was moral not intellectual. IOW: it was not an issue of coherency).

3.4. As it re: to reasonableness (it is equitable and just) consider: Jesus appeals to reasonableness (bib. jurisprudence) in His claims to deity when condemned by the Jewish leaders (Joh 5:31 w/31-47; also Joh 7:24).

Our God-given mission is to fight to re-establish the coherency to Christianity.

4.1. (Jud 1:3; 1Ti 6:20-21 “opposing arguments” [Grk., antithesis = Incoherent beliefs]).

4.2. Why would we need to re-establish the coherency of Christianity? Because what was taught at the church’s inception by Jesus, the apostles and early church fathers (Ante-Nicene) regarding the Bible’s three main pillars: God, the gospel and man have been lost to incoherency (Jud 1:3 w/4).

“The Christian experience requires not simply a surrender of the will but a rational [coherent] assent to the truth.” – Nash

Modern Christianity – or Christianity after the Ante-Nicene period (325 A.D. to the present) has been incoherent in its view of the Bible’s three main pillars of truth: God, the gospel and man.

5.1. None of this should come as a surprise given: 1) this is Satan’s first – and frequent play (hence 2Co 10:5; 1Ti 6:20-21), 2) the consequences of incoherency (distrust and disobedience to God).

5.2. Incoherency in re: to the doctrine of Man (e.g., Calvinism) = Not only incoherent because it violates the law of noncontradiction (man has a free will yet God has already decreed what man will do before he was created), but bc it is also unreasonable (unjust) – God judges or condemns men who had no free will to choose Him (Unconditional Election) or ability (ability establishes culpability) to live up to His standards (Total Depravity) (Deu 30:9-14).

5.3. Incoherency in re: to the doctrine of the Gospel (e.g., the Faith Alone Gospel [WCF]:faith is the only necessary instrument of salvation) = Incoherent in its attempts to reconcile: 1) the NT’s teaching on faith and works,[6] 2) the framework of salvation presented in the OT w/what is presented in the NT.[7]

5.4. Incoherency in re: to the doctrine of God (TBD – next week!)

[1] See Jack Symes, “When God Is Too Ineffable.” = Symes makes the comment that America’s rejection of Christianity (due to incoherency) is trending behind the U.K.

[2] “Christians believe the rational [logical or coherent] world is the projection of a rational [logical or coherent] God who objectifies His eternal thoughts in the creation [and through Scripture] and who endows the human creature, the apex of creation, with the image of God which includes a structure of reason similar to God’s own reason [i.e., with a logical mind]…The laws of reason (reason means logic) are the same for both God and humans…The Logos teaching of the New Testament and the early church fathers entailed a similarity between the rational structure of the human mind and the rational structure of the divine mind” – Dr. Ronald Nash (The Word of God And the Mind of Man)

[3] “The same attribute cannot at the same time belong and not belong to the same subject in the same respect.” – Aristotle; Examples: 1) 2+2 = 4 and 2+2 ≠ 4 cannot both be correct. 2) my dog Tevi is alive and my dog Tevi is not alive cannot both be true at the same time and in the same place.

[4] “The denial of the law of noncontradiction leads to absurdity…If the law of noncontradiction is denied, nothing has meaning…significant human action also becomes impossible…If God is to communicate his thoughts to human beings, that communication must accord with the law of noncontradiction.” – Nash (ibid)

[5] Some have attempted to posit that what God knows to be true might indeed mean that 2+2 = 3. Though there is no doubt that what God knows to be true is far more than us, it cannot contradict what has been revealed (2+2 = 4). If so, then what has been revealed – or is shared as truth by both God and man would no longer be true – at least from the perspective demonstrated in Scripture -i.e., what is true is coherent and therefore logical. In response to those who appeal to Isa 55:8-9 (“For my thoughts are not your thoughts…As the heavens are higher than the earth…so my thoughts than your thoughts”) Gordon Clark’s words are fitting, “Of course the Scripture says God’s thoughts are not our thoughts. But is it good exegesis to say that this means his logic, his arithmetic, his truth are not ours? If this were so, what would the consequences be? It would mean not only that our additions and subtractions are all wrong, but also that all our thoughts, in history as well as in arithmetic are all wrong…To avoid such nonsense…we must insist that truth is the same for God and man.” (“Apologetics”, Contemporary Evangelical Thought)

[6] As it relates to the James consider the following syllogism: 1) Are the producing of works necessary to salvation or for my faith to be effective until salvation? Yes (Jam 2:14-26), 2) Who is responsible for producing those works? WE are (Jam 2:14-26), 3) Is the context of James’ salvation (justification before God or men)? God (Jam 2:14)

CONCLUSION: works are another necessary instrument/condition of our salvation (Jam 2:24, faith is the root and works are the fruit is false).

[7] (Evangelical soteriology): Under the OT it was salvation by works then under the NT it became salvation by faith (or somebody doing the works for us) (e.g., the Covenant of Works) versus (the Biblical and coherent view): salvation has always been (OT/NT) a marriage covenant between Jesus and His people operating according to the marital mechanics of gain by grace through faith (Rom 3:28) and maintain through faithful obedience (Jam 2:24; Deu 28:1-2).

View Details

Coherent (def.): to be clear and consistent, logical and reasonable.

The accusations of our critics:

[See PREVIOUS SERMON (Coherence Part 1) for accusations 1-3]

Your requirement of faithful obedience to be a Christian is too difficult. We are totally broken and unable to live faithfully obedient lives to God. It is for this reason the message of salvation is faith in Christ not faithfulness to Christ. It is also the reason Jesus came to earth – to obey so we wouldn’t have to! The standard of obedience preached at your church is just making people into self-righteous Pharisees. God doesn’t expect nor require this level of commitment to get heaven.

Our biblically obedient and coherent response:

4.1. Though we are born depraved – or with a strong desire for sin (or to serve self over God and His commands), we still possess the ability to choose and do good – or obey His commands. If this were not true, then God would be unjust for condemning people to hell based on their deeds (ability establishes culpability) (Job 34:11; Psa 62:12; Jer 17:10, 21:14; 2Co 5:10; Rev 20:11-15).

4.2. God’s requirement of faithful obedience (not perfection) has never been too difficult – including for those under the OC (those w/o the indwelling Spirit, regeneration or propitiation) (Deu 28:1 w/30:11-14).

4.3. The message of salvation has always been both faith and faithfulness (to Christ). Faith itself is a pledge or personal promise to faithfulness to God over self or anything else (i.e., to live for or love God above anyone and anything else) (Gen 15:6 [w/Joh 8:56] w/Gen 17:1-8 [God confirming His promise and pledge to Abraham and the condition of that promise - Abraham’s former faith pledge to Him]; Exo 24:7-8 w/1Pe 1:1-2, 3:21). That our faith pledge mb followed by faithfulness for salvation to be secure is confirmed by James (Jam 2:14-26).

4.4. If Jesus did indeed come to earth to obey on our behalf (with the assumption that we could not do it ourselves), then this too incriminates/indicts God given His expectations of obedience and severe judgments against disobedience in the OT (e.g., most of the first generation died and went to hell because of their unfaithfulness – Heb 3:12-19 [v19, apistis = unfaithfulness, See Num 14:33 w/4:6-11]).

4.5. The Pharisees were self-righteous - or viewed themselves as righteous, but not for valid reasons. They claimed to keep (or be faithful) to God’s laws but were - in reality, hypocrites - not willing to exert the smallest amount of effort to obey God’s commands (Mat 23:1-4 w/ 28). Like Evangelicals, the Pharisees believed they were saved simply because of their faith and being a part of Abraham’s family. What they failed to accept is that God will remove from Abraham’s family all those who are unfaithful (Mat 3:1-10 w/Luk 7:30 [they did not believe they could be removed for unrepentance/unfaithfulness]; Joh 8:31-39; Rom 11:21-23).

4.6. If God doesn’t require this level of commitment to get to heaven, then why do those who fail to possess faithfulness end up apostate and in hell – i.e., under God’s eternal and unforgiving wrath (Mat 7:21-27; Gal 5:19-21; Eph 5:5-6; Heb 10:26-30)?

Your church places loyalty to Christ and His church above loyalty to biological family including one’s spouse, children, and parents. As a result, you divide families and even approve of divorce. God made the marriage and the family to be the most important institutions on the planet. God also commands that children respect their parents.

Our biblically obedient and coherent response:

5.1. Our choice to place loyalty to Christ and His church above loyalty to biological family – including one’s spouse, children, and parents has always been a condition of God’s (or Jesus’) covenant/salvation/eternal promises (Gen 12:1 w/2-3; Gen 22:1-2,3-18 w/Jam 2:21-22; Deu 6:4-5; Mar 12:29-30; Luk 14:25-35).

5.2. That loyalty to the church is how we express loyalty to Christ is confirmed by the facts: 1) the church is identified as the Body and Bride of Christ. Can a person sin against a man’s body or wife and not sin against the man himself? (Pro 6:27-35). 2) the church is the fullness of Christ on earth (Eph 1:22-23). In these two ways, Christ essentially made loyalty to Him synonymous with loving our covenant brothers and sisters. Hence why (Joh 13:34-35).

5.3. Hence the reason this was a major focus of John the Baptist and Jesus’ earthly ministry: to turn God’s people back to Him and His family over their human families as the first loyalty (Mal 4:6 w/Luk 1:17).

5.4. Hence the reason also Jesus predicted that many families would be divided over His message (Mat 10:34-39).

5.5. The only divorce we approve of are those sanctioned by Jesus: divorce for sexual immorality (Mat 5:31-32). To not allow what God allows is no different than allowing what God does not allow - which also brings God’s wrath against the covenant community (Isa 5:20, 23-25).

5.6. The most important institution on earth is marriage and the family, Christ’s marriage to the church and the covenant family that it creates (i.e., the church). Every other form of marriage and family is subservient to this given: 1) The marriage of Christ to His church is the archetype/model for human marriage and family (Eph 5:22-32). 2) the creation of the holy family (not the biological family) was the goal of all Creation (Eph 1:1-11 w/3:1-11 = God the Father’s plan for Creation was to gather a people for His glory – and future inheritance - a holy family [made holy] thru the redemption [and marriage covenant] realized and accomplished thru His Son, Jesus Christ ).

5.7. Respecting one’s parents looks different when a person is a child under the home and headship of their parents versus once that child becomes an adult and is no longer dependent – or living at home. The former requires full submission to their parent’s commands and wishes (sans anything directly opposed to God or His Word) (Eph 6:1-3), whereas the latter no longer requires such submission but only that the (now) adult independent child see to it that the needs of their elderly non-apostate parents are being met (Mat 15:1-6).

5.8. Based on what was just discussed, children being loyal to their parents above God or His church has never been acceptable or expected by God.

If your church is doing everything right then why have there been so many disciplinary cases – including excommunications and apostasies --as well as betrayal and moral failures among those serving as officers? The church is to be a place of peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. Again, these things signal a problem.

Our biblically obedient and coherent response:

6.1. The NT churches were filled with disciplinary cases -including excommunications and apostasies. As a matter of fact, many – if not most of the NT epistles or letters to the churches were written to deal with disciplinary matters (Rom 2:1-29; 1Co 3:1-18, 4:1-5, 18-21, 5:1-5, 6:1-11, 7:1-2, 8:1-13, 10:1-33, 11:1-22, 15:1-24; 2Co 1:21-2:11, 6:1-7:2, 10:1-11:33, 12:19-13:11; Gal 2:11-5:26; Col 2:8-23; 2Th 3:6-15; 1Ti 1:3-4, 18-20, 4:1-10, 6:20; Tit 1:10-16; Heb 3:12-14; 2Pe 3:14-18; Jud 1:3-4; Rev 2:1-3:22). If this was true for churches planted and pastored by the apostles, how much more those living in the worst or last days? We should therefore expect the church in the last days to feel as though they are over-run with such difficulties (Mat 24:10-12; 2Ti 3:1-17 = NOTICE where our confidence is to be in these difficult and confusing times).

6.2. Consider also the covenant communities under: 1) Moses (most went apostate – i.e., almost the entire 1st generation out of Egypt), 2) Jesus (many - if not most, of the Jewish religious leaders and people of Israel went apostate).

6.3. With regard to betrayal and moral failures among the leadership, this was also true for Moses (Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, Korah and his family). The same was true for Jesus. Though all-knowing, He was still burned by betrayal and moral failure among those He picked (e.g., again Judas and also Peter). Paul also suffered betrayal (Demas and Titus – 2Ti 4:10)

6.4. To speak of the church in terms of peace and joy in the Holy Spirit as though these are the only things that should characterize the church is highly misleading, especially given that the verse which speaks to this effect, starts with the attribute of righteousness (Rom 14:17 “righteous, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit”). Paul could not have conceived of a church filled with Holy Spirit peace and joy that was not also filled with righteousness given that the Spirit will not provide such things without it. IOW: You need to first be practicing righteousness (adherence to all of God’s law) - as prescribed by the Spirit in God’s Word, to receive His peace and joy.

6.5. The only problem signaled by the aforementioned concerns is that we are indeed living in difficult times. IOW: it is the world that has the problem not our church – unless we start looking and acting like the world (i.e., looking the other way rather than dealing w/the sin among us). Any church not filled with disciplinary issues is a church not being faithful to the Spirit (which means their peace and joy is false) (e.g., the majority of men and pastors are looking at porn~ how many are being disciplined out of the church? For many – if not most, this would cause them to close their doors).

Your church blindly follows the pastor or his interpretation of the Bible rather than listening directly to the Bible. The majority of Christians on the planet disagree with what you believe making your church a cult.

7.1. Many – if not most of the people in our church could hardly be labeled as “blindly” following their pastor given their regular and rigorous reading of the Bible, books on church history, theology, philosophy and ancient Jewish culture and beliefs. Not only that, but many in the congregation are also involved in apologetic or evangelistic forms of ministry where they are exposed to and learning about the beliefs of others claiming to be Christian. Last but not least, the congregation is frequently encouraged to vet the church’s beliefs against those who oppose it as well as ask questions where they find confusion or contradiction.

7.2. Though it is true that the congregation follows the teaching or interpretation of their pastor, this is true of all churches. The pastor is the one tasked with interpreting the Scriptures and teaching what he believes it to be communicating to his congregation. As part of this role, he is also to demonstrate that his interpretation and teaching on a particular text or subject are in agreement with the rules of literary communication (grammar, context) and the rest of what the Scriptures teach (2Ti 1:13, 2:15). This has been the regular practice of this church’s pastor.

7.3. The belief that one can listen directly to the Bible without the need for interpretation reveals a high level of ignorance in those making such claims given that the Bible does not interpret itself – nor does it always communicate in such a way that it can understood by simply reading alone. The fact that it was written in ancient languages unknown to most readers, with backstories, idioms and other literary devices also unknown to most readers, means that it is more likely that the average – or untrained reader will grossly misinterpret its message than truly understand what is being communicated. The probability of this is enhanced by the sinful instability of most along with their inability to understand the individual or smaller parts while not losing the larger metanarrative or message presented by the whole (e.g., 2Pe 3:15-18). The chances of getting a correct interpretation are therefore greatly increased for those afforded the aid of a person well-trained and able to demonstrate proficiency in the aforementioned disciplines.

7.4. All comments calling for the people of our church not to listen to their pastor and the teaching of our church – or accusing people of not thinking for themselves are in the end, hypocritical. If those making such claims were following their own advice, they would be forced to shut their mouths since by their advice, they are not truly calling for independent thinking but rather that people would (instead) listen to them.

7.5. Regarding what the majority believes as the litmus test for what we should believe, biblical history teaches otherwise. The majority is -more often than not, the place of error (e.g. OT and NT Israel). It is likewise a logical fallacy to think something to be true or correct because of its acceptance by the majority (Ad Populum).

7.6. The first Christians were condemned as a cult. We should therefore receive such accusations as a compliment.

View Details

Coherence (def.,) to be intellectually clear and consistent, logical and reasonable.

The accusations of our critics:

Your list of capital crimes and their punishments are completely arbitrary. The NT possesses no such list or penalties. The only law is love.

Our biblically obedient and coherent response:

1.1. The NT (or more specifically, Jesus) affirms the OT Law’s (including its capital crimes) continuing authority under the NC and for the Christian (Mat 5:17-18, hence 19-20).

1.2. The NT likewise establishes excommunication as the new and consistent application of the prior established (OT) principle of death prescribed for capital crimes (OT = physical, NT = spiritual) (1Co 5:1-5; 1Ti 1:20).

1.3. Given that God prescribes the same punishment for all capital crimes, the time assigned to excommunication likewise must be the same no matter the kind of capital offense committed (Num 15:16). Biblical equity also requires that repeat offenders receive an increased sentence or level of severity commensurate to the original established time multiplied by the number of times they have reoffended (A-Jud-Sys.: recidivism rate) (Deu 25:2).

1.4. That God is indeed prescribing a set or fixed amount of time as well as the fact that this time is to be determined by the covenant community is made apparent by the NT evidence of time being assigned to those excommunicated while by the same token, making no mention of exactly how much time was actually assigned (2Co 2:6-7 w/1Co 5:1-5).

1.5. To speak as though love is a replacement to God’s Law – or stands opposed to the Law, is a complete oxymoron. From God’s perspective, there is no love without His Law. His Law – not the laws of men, is what determines true and righteous love to others. Said differently, it is impossible to love anyone, without strict adherence to God’s Law. The Law/establishing of equity = Love (Gal 5:13-14; Rom 13:8-10; Lev 19:15-18 w/Mat 22:39).

1.6. The question is therefore not whether we are going to follow love or the Law as our authority, but which Law (or laws) will define our love? The very arbitrary, always changing, completely subjective, laws of men based entirely on their sinful and selfish desires or the very equitable, never changing, completely objective laws of God based entirely on His perfectly righteous and immutable character?

1.7. Whether people realize it (or not), there is really only two choices: autonomy (self-law – [Jug 21:25; Pro 18:1]w/Pro 13:13; Gen 3:5[1]) or theonomy (God’s law – Deu 4:2, 5-8, 6:24).

There is no such thing as apostasy[2] and even if there was, that is between God and that person. It is not something that the church can know or has the authority to declare.

Our biblically obedient and coherent response:

2.1. Per God’s promise, the church in the OT (the Old Covenant community or kingdom of God on earth) was supplied with priests-judges who were ordained (deputized) with divine authority from the Holy Spirit and able (therefore) to bind in apostasy those who knowingly rebelled against their authority and/or refused to comply with the discipline/justice for their sins and stop their practice of rebellion against God and His laws (i.e., who refused to repent) (Exo 19:6 w/Deu 17:9-13 w/Num 15:30-31; Deu 29:18-20).

2.2. Per God’s promise, priest-judges ordained (or deputized) with the same authority and ability were provided to the church in the NT (New Covenant community or kingdom of God on earth) (Isa 66:21; Rev 1:6; Mat 16:17-19 w/Joh 20:21-23 [w/Mat 12:32]; Mat 18:15-20).

2.3. If the OC priest-judges had the authority and ability to know who was apostate and bind them in apostasy how much more those functioning as priest-judges under the NC whose possess an added measure of the HS (bringing true regeneration and cleansing from sin thru the blood of Christ) and the completed (“perfect”) version of God’s Word to instruct them leading to greater clarity or understanding and less impact from personal depravity (Rev 1:5 w/Deu 28:20; 1Co 13:9-12).

2.4. Though not in relation to eternal things, we nonetheless believe the state possesses authority from God and can make decisions which promote or preserve justice and purge evil. We believe also that such authorities should be respected and submitted to (Rom 13:1-3). If this true for the state whose government and courts are secular why would we consider the church whose government and courts are sacred to be any less competent or called by God? (1Co 6:1-6).

Your views on what constitutes sexual immorality and the severity of punishment inflicted (excommunication) on such sins as porn and masturbation are too extreme. Porn and masturbation are the regular practice of many if not most Americans – including those claiming to be Christians[3]. Studies also suggest that their practice may not only be essential to mental health and longevity of life, but near impossible to resist because of the way we have been created.

Our biblically obedient and coherent response:

3.1. Per God’s Word, the sin of sexual immorality has but one punishment, death (OT- physical, NT- spiritual/excommunication; again 1Co 5:1-5) and has been committed any time a person voluntarily participates in any sexual activity w/someone not identified by God as their spouse: 1) Adultery (Exo 20:14 [versus 20:17]Lev 20:10; Deu 22:13-24), 2) Homosexuality (Lev 20:13), 3) Fornication and Incest [all sexual acts with unbelievers or those we have no intention or biblically sanctioned ability to marry] (Lev 20:11-14; Num 25:1-8 w/1Co 10:8 w/1Co 6:15-20; 2Co 5:20-6:2, 14-18; Exo 34:12-16), 4) Bestiality (Exo 22:19; Lev 20:15-16), 5) Rape (Deu 22:25-27), 6) Masturbation [immoral] (Mat 5:27-30), 7) Voyeurism and Pornography [illicit viewing of sexual acts or nakedness] (Lev 18:1-20).

3.2. To not excommunicate those guilty of biblically defined sexual immorality would constitute rebellion by the church and secure God’s curse on the congregation (1Co 5:2 w/12-13 w/Deu 13:1-18; e.g., Jos 7:13).

3.3. If pornography (and masturbation) is the regular practice of most Americans, then most Americans are going to hell. This is perfectly inline (coherent) with Jesus’ prediction as it re: to humanity (Mat 7:13-14; Luk 13:22-24).

3.4. A person’s mental health and longevity of life is more often (if not always) the result of sin – not its resistance (again, Deu 28:20 [“until you perish quickly”] along w/v34, 65-66; Deu 32:47).

3.5. Sexual immorality only becomes “near impossible to resist” when we fail where it starts and what is easy to prevent: 1) succumbing to sinful sexual lust/coveting (Exo 20:17 [versus 20:14]; Job 31:1; Eph 1:12-18), 2) living for this world instead of the next world (this is the key to contentment or the removal of coveting) (Pro 29:18; Col 3:1; Phi 3:14 versus 2Pe 1:9).

[1] “Such then is the graveyard of autonomous ethics; each gravestone reads the Satanic temptation, ‘Ye shall be gods, knowing [determining] good and evil.’” – Greg Bahnsen (Theonomy In Christian Ethics)

[2] The unforgiveable sin or the inability to ever be forgiven by God. This curse can only befall those who were formerly saved -or in saving covenant relationship with God. That person’s sins are placed back upon them w/no hope of future pardon. They are bound in a state of damnation from which they cannot escape no matter the repentance that may follow (Heb 12:15-17).

[3] Consider the following statistics (2023): 1) 47% of families in the United States reported that pornography is a problem in their home. Pornography use increases the marital infidelity rate by more than 300%. 2) 56% of American divorces involve one party having an “obsessive interest” in pornographic websites. 3) 68% of church-going men and over 50% of pastors view porn on a regular basis. 4) Of young Christian adults 18-24 years old, 76% actively search for porn. 5) Only 13% of self-identified Christian women say they never watch porn—87% of Christian women have watched porn. 6) 55% of married men and 25% of married women say they watch porn at least once a month. 7) 57% of pastors say porn addiction is the most damaging issue in their congregation. 69% say porn has adversely impacted the church. My reason for lumping masturbation into this is Jesus’ statements in Matthew 5 regarding the eye and the hand (vv28-30, what the eye sees, the hand does)- a reference to sexual lust and the subsequent act of masturbation. If lust will lead someone in this direction, how much more the viewing of actual nakedness or porn? For more information see “Biblical Sexual Ethics” – R. Scott Jarrett

View Details

Relevance of this study

1.1. Unbelief wb at an all-time high at the return of Christ (Luk 18:8).

1.2. Without sustaining belief (or faith) in God, His Person and Words (1Ti 1:5 [“love” = For God and others – loyalty/equity]; Heb 10:37-39 [w/Heb 11:6]; 1Jo 5:4-5; 1Pe 1:5-7), it is impossible to sustain faithfulness to God and others (the other necessary instrument of salvation and to receiving divine blessings) (Jam 2:14-24; Luk 17:3-10; hence 2Pe 1:5-11; our examples – Heb 11:33 and 12:2).

1.3. Transformation from a foolish, spiritually darkened, deceived person led by their flesh/feelings to a person who is wise, discerning, enlightened and led by the Spirit, is also impossible without sustained belief (or faith) in God (Psa 119:66; 2Co 4:4; Eph 6:16; 1Th 2:13, 3:5-7, 5:8; 1Pe 5:9).

1.4. Un-sustained belief (or faith) in God will eventually lead to apostasy (Heb 3:12-14; Rom 11:20-23).

1.5. Every weapon in Satan’s arsenal has this as its goal: the destruction of belief in God, His Person and Words (Gen 3:1-5; Satan continues to operate from the original playbook. Hence the reason Paul can say “we are not ignorant of his schemes – 2Co 2:6-11 [w/2Sa 24:1 w/2Sa 7:8-16 – most eps. vv14-16]).

Definition of belief (or faith) in God (the action not the object or religion – e.g., Jud 1:3)

2.1. What belief in God is not: mere mental ascent or agreement to His existence or the Bible as His words.

2.2. What belief in God is (the biblical definition): The choice (Mar 16:11 “refused to believe” = Made a choice not to believe) to give unquestioned trust and allegiance exclusively to God, His Person and Words as eternally and infinitely perfect in truth, beauty, righteousness, justice, mercy, love, power, wisdom and knowledge (versus self, others or anything in Creation – e.g., Rom 1:18-25 “honor…give thanks” = Acts demonstrating allegiance; “worshipped” = Acts demonstrating where – or w/whom, we place our highest trust/allegiance; Heb 11:1; belief = Trust/Allegiance – Exo 19:9; Num 14:11, 20:12; Deu 1:30-35 w/Heb 3:19; Deu 9:23, 32:51; 2Ki 17:14; Psa 27:13, 78:22 w/32, 106:12 w/24; Psa 146:6 “keeps faith” = Allegiance; Joh 1:12 [“believe in His name”] = Trust/Allegiance to that person and their word]//unquestioned trust and allegiance - Act 8:37 “believe with all your heart” = No division in your heart [in your trust/allegiance]).

2.3. Our choice to believe in God (to give unquestioned trust and allegiance exclusively to Him) is an operation of the will that must not be governed by: 1) earthly thinking (Luk 24:11; Joh 3:12 “earthly things” versus “heavenly things” = Belief in only what can be seen or is common/comfortable to the natural world/way of thinking [materialism or naturalism] versus belief also in the unseen or what is uncommon/uncomfortable to the natural world/way of thinking [belief in the immaterial and supernatural]; Isa 53:1; 1Co 1:21; hence 2Co 5:7 and 1Pe 1:8; [Lam 3:65; Eph 4:18; Mar 16:14 “hardness of heart”] = Refusal to believe in the unseen/unrealized – Pro 22:3; e.g. From an ability perspective, this is the brain function of animals. We however possess the higher faculties and function [ability] of foresight, forecasting and faith – belief in what is yet to be seen or realized. Our failure to use such faculties/function is therefore not due to ability but our will. We refuse -or choose not to do so for immoral reasons – Mat 16:1-4; hence Luk 16:31), 2) emotions (Rom 4:18-20; Mat 17:17 “sign” = emotional experience). To say that our choice is not governed by natural thinking is not the same as saying there is no evidence to support what we believe. There is enough to leave every person w/o excuse on Judgment Day (Rom 1:19-20; Consider also Joh 2:22 w/Joh 20:27-31). To say that the trust/allegiance we give to God must be unquestioned is not the same as saying God expects blind trust. IOW: God does not expect us to trust Him if He fails to be or do what He has promised in His Word (the Bible) (e.g., Mal 3:10).

How we sustain/strengthen our belief in God.

(Luk 8:15) “hold it fast” = Belief in God will be met w/challenges and therefore requires the constant and consistent practice of certain things to preserve it: 1) removal of all stumbling blocks/overcompensation (Mat 13:44-48, 18:7-9; Luk 19:8; 2Co 7:1 w/11; Col 2:5 w/8; 1Ti 4:1, 6:20-21; Heb 12:1), 2) apologetics (1Pe 3:15; 2Ti 2:15-18; Jud 20),

3) spending time receiving spiritual bread from others (Rom 1:11-12; 1Th 3:2 w/10; Eph 4:11-13),

4) sharing our spiritual bread w/others (Heb 3:12-14), 5) self-discipline (body and mind) (1Co 9:27; 1Ti 4:6-10),

6) being doers of God’s Word (Jam 1:22-25 “prove yourself doers [“one who looks intently at the perfect law…and abides by it”] versus “hearers who delude themselves” [who deceive themselves into thinking they believe but instead are “like a man who looks…in a mirror…and…immediately [forgets] what kind of person he was [a person who used to trust but not anymore]”) = Sustain that trust/allegiance [true belief in God] through obedience. It goes both ways: we need to sustain our belief to obey and we need to obey to sustain our belief - i.e., there exists a symbiotic and synergistic relationship between belief and obedience), 7) right attitude in trials (Jam 1:1-3).

Signs/Causes of unbelief (What to keep in mind: the choice of unbelief is sin – Joh 16:8-9).

Given that the belief in God refers to two things: His Person and His Word means that there are essentially two types of unbelief related to this subject: 1) unbelief as it relates to God’s Person (trust in His existence and/or attributes – e.g., His love, justice, wisdom) and 2) unbelief in His Word (trust that what He says is true and accurate; trust that I need to place the same level of seriousness He places on certain subjects or issues – e.g., repentance/change/faithful obedience/getting to heaven/the requirement urgency, overcompensation and living for the whole, etc.).

What then are the causes and/or signs of these two sins of unbelief?

4.1. (S/C) hardness of heart (Lam 3:65; Eph 4:18; Mar 16:14 “hardness of heart” = Refusal to believe in the unseen/unrealized – Pro 22:3; e.g. From an ability perspective, this is the brain function of animals. We however possess the higher faculties and function [ability] of foresight, forecasting and faith – belief in what is yet to be seen or realized. Our failure to use such faculties/function is therefore not due to ability but our will. We refuse -or choose not to do so. IOW: the problem is moral not intellectual).

4.2. (S/C) ignorance/folly/bad influence or intel in re: to God, His Person and Word or even other religions (Eph 4:18 “ignorance”; 1Co 15:32-34; hence Col 2:8; 1Ti 6:20) (e.g.,): 1) As it re: to the spiritual books of other religions: Hinduism’s Bhagavad Gita = Never claims to be written by a personal God Who has spoken to humanity; Mormonism’s Book of Mormon, Islam’s Qur’an = Both rely on and are counterfeit versions or distortions of Christianity (Mormonism started almost 2000 years after Christianity’s inception, Islam almost 600 years after). Each claim that the Bible is corrupted and their books are the fix. 2) As it re: to morality – or those who claim there is no such thing as good and bad or morality = Everybody has a moral point of view – including those who say there is no morality since that is a moral point of view or position - they are being moral about no morals— which also means that everyone is religious since this is at the heart of what defines religion (a system of morality). Now, knowing this is true and inescapable, which do you think is the wise choice, a religion or morality determined by a perfect God or one driven by the sinful desires and agendas of imperfect men? 3) As it re: to General Revelation – or the impression one gets from observing nature. The flowers are growing, the sun’s shining, people are laughing and having a good time while we are torturing ourselves over the little stuff. Maybe we got it all wrong? God’s there but there is no test, so just go with the flow (live and let live). Or it’s a test and “go with the flow” is the test. Vetted: a) what one observes in the present is not always a reliable indicator of reality (Mat 24:37-39 [2Pe 3:1-7]), b) if no test, then why so much suffering (i.e., there is more to the world than just the sun shining and flowers growing – there is also disease, death and destruction)? God is a monster. c) if this is the test, can you establish equity from this “go with the flow mindset”? What if the flow is kill all babies like it was for the Jews in Egypt? Or you need to worship the Emperor [president] like it was in Rome? Or kill all those retired, retarded or crippled like it was in Nazi Germany? d) change all of that to “everybody needs to just love and accept everyone for who they desire to be” and the problems still persist since a large part of those you need to love and accept are pedophiles, rapists and serial killers. At some point you are prohibiting and condemning certain groups of people and the question of who decides who those groups are becomes immediately relevant: perfect God or imperfect sinful men?

4.3. (C) the failure of other Christians or the church (Mat 18:6-7; Rom 2:24; 2Co 2:7 w/11 w/2Sa 24:1 w/1Ch 21:1).

4.4. (S/C) inconvenience or uncomfortableness/cowardliness/wimpiness/lack of self-control/emotion-driven [feelings = facts] (Pro 14:12; Mat 13:20-21, 53-58; Luk 8:13, 22:31-34; 1Co 16:13 “stand firm in your faith, act like men”; Cancer is also inconvenient and uncomfortable but we don’t act like it doesn’t exist as a means to escaping it).

4.5. (S/C) unrealistic expectations (Mat 16:1-3 w/4 = Linear thought and deductive reasoning is enough to make the right choice in relation to God. That choice however often requires change that causes pain. As a result, people can [sinfully] expect an experience to accompany their belief which will alleviate - or make easy, the painful changes necessary to live for Him. Such expectations are unrealistic – and rebellious given this life is meant to be painful since it is a test. Hence why 1Pe 1:6 “distressed with various trials” w/13 and 4:12-18; Act 14:22). The unbelief that results from unrealistic expectations is therefore nothing more than that person pouting and an attempt to manipulate God/hold Him hostage (e.g., child who says to his parents, “I hate you” when they don’t give them what they want).

4.6. (S) inability to think properly about spiritual things or morality (Rom 1:21, 28).

4.7. (C/S) apathy/lack of zeal or urgency to spiritual things/arrogance (don’t need God) (Amo 6:1-3; Luk 18:1-8; Joh 3:36 “obey” [Grk., apatheo = apathetic – is viewed by John as the opposite of belief or essentially synonymous w/unbelief]; Hos 13:6; Hab 2:4 w/3:18-19 = Those who live by faith are those who believe God’s warnings and responds w/urgency [in this case the coming judgment of the Assyrians and the need to flee to the mtns for safety] versus the person who thinks he knows better or doesn’t believe things to be so serious or dangerous —the arrogant person who makes God’s 10s into 2s).

4.8. (S/C) insecurity (need the praise of men) (Joh 5:44, 12:42-43).

4.9. (S/C) infatuation w/the things of the world/FOMO (Mat 13:22 versus Joh 6:35; Rom 9:33 w/10:11).

4.10. (S/C) pleasure in wickedness or rebellion/exercising the authority of our free will (2Th 2:11-12; Important not confuse the need to exercise our free will w/what it means to be truly free [Satan’s biggest and beginning lie – Gen 3]; e.g., the Montrose Mouse – “the last great act of defiance”; Ad Seg).

4.11. (S) little or no spiritual fruit/spiritual immaturity (Luk 8:14 [Grk., ou telesphereo] = Not bringing to completion/maturity – not fulfilling your full potential for God] versus v15).

View Details

Relevance of this study

1.1. Unbelief wb at an all-time high at the return of Christ (Luk 18:8).

1.2. Belief (or faith – Mar 11:22-23) in God, His Person and Words is the first necessary instrument of salvation and to receiving God’s blessings (Gen 15:6; Isa 7:9; Mat 13:58 ; Luk 1:20, 45; Joh 3:15-18, 5:24, 10:26; Act 10:43, 16:31; Rom 1:16, 3:28; Heb 3:18-4:2; 11:6 [He is there and He is not silent]; 2Ti 3:15; Contra – hell, Rev 21:8).

1.3. Without sustaining belief (or faith) in God, His Person and Words (1Ti 1:5 [“love” = For God and others – loyalty/equity]; Heb 10:37-39 [w/Heb 11:6]; 1Jo 5:4-5; 1Pe 1:5-7), it is impossible to sustain faithfulness to God and others (the other necessary instrument of salvation and to receiving divine blessings) (Jam 2:14-24; Luk 17:3-10; hence 2Pe 1:5-11; our examples – Heb 11:33 and 12:2).

1.4. Transformation from a foolish, spiritually darkened and deceived person who is addicted to their feelings, sin and the world to a person who is wise, discerning, enlightened and led by the Spirit, able to withstand the attacks of Satan, the flesh and world is also impossible without sustained belief (or faith) in God, His Person and Words (Psa 119:66; 2Co 4:4; Eph 6:16; 1Th 2:13, 3:5-7, 5:8; 1Pe 5:9).

1.5 Un-sustained belief (or faith) in God, His Person and Words will eventually lead to apostasy (Heb 3:12-14; Rom 11:20-23).

1.6. Every weapon in Satan’s arsenal has this as its goal: the destruction of belief in God, His Person and Words (Gen 3:1-5; Satan continues to operate from the original playbook. Hence the reason Paul can say “we are not ignorant of his schemes – 2Co 2:6-11 [w/2Sa 24:1 w/2Sa 7:8-16 – most eps. vv14-16]).

1.7. Some of those who are struggling w/unbelief can be snatched from the fire (Jud 1:22-23).

Definition of belief (or faith) in God (the action not the object or religion – e.g., Jud 1:3)

2.1. What belief in God is not: mere mental ascent or agreement to His existence or the Bible as His words.

2.3. Consider (Jam 1:21-25): 1) v21 “receive the word implanted” = Give unquestioned trust/allegiance to God’s Word, 2) v22-25 “prove yourself doers [“one who looks intently at the perfect law…and abides by it”] versus “hearers who delude themselves” [who deceive themselves into thinking they believe but instead are “like a man who looks…in a mirror…and…immediately [forgets] what kind of person he was [a person who used to trust but not anymore]”) = Sustain that trust/allegiance [true belief in God] through obedience. Which means it goes both ways: we need to sustain our belief to obey and we need to obey to sustain our belief (i.e., there exists a symbiotic and synergistic relationship between belief and obedience).

2.4. Our choice to believe in God (to give unquestioned trust and allegiance exclusively to Him) is an operation of the will that must not be governed by: 1) earthly thinking (Luk 24:11; Joh 3:12 “earthly things” versus “heavenly things” = Belief in only what can be seen or is common/comfortable to the natural world/way of thinking [materialism or naturalism] versus belief also in the unseen or what is uncommon/uncomfortable to the natural world/way of thinking [belief in the immaterial and supernatural]; Isa 53:1; 1Co 1:21; hence 2Co 5:7 and 1Pe 1:8; [Lam 3:65; Eph 4:18; Mar 16:14 “hardness of heart”] = Refusal to believe in the unseen/unrealized – Pro 22:3; e.g. From an ability perspective, this is the brain function of animals. We however possess the higher faculties and function [ability] of foresight, forecasting and faith – belief in what is yet to be seen or realized. Our failure to use such faculties/function is therefore not due to ability but our will. We refuse -or choose not to do so for immoral reasons – Mat 16:1-4, 17:17; hence Luk 16:31), 2) emotions (Jer 12:6; Rom 4:18-20; again Mat 17:17 “sign” – an emotional experience).

2.5. To say that our choice is not governed by natural thinking is not the same as saying: 1) there is no evidence to support what we believe. There is enough to leave every person w/o excuse on Judgment Day (Rom 1:19-20; Consider also Joh 2:22 w/Joh 20:27-31).

2.6. To say that the trust/allegiance we give to God must be unquestioned is not the same as saying God expects blind trust. IOW: God does not expect us to trust Him if He fails to be or do what He has promised in His Word (the Bible) (e.g., Mal 3:10).

CLOSING CONTEMPLATION: Have you made the choice to give unquestioned trust and allegiance exclusively to God, His Person and Words and are you doing what it takes to sustain that?

NEXT WEEK: 1) How we sustain/strengthen our belief in God, 2) signs/causes of unbelief.

View Details

Scholars agree that the subject of Paul’s instruction in Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16 is corporate worship on the Lord’s Day (Sunday). What many also agree on is the interchangeability of the terms “psalms”, “hymns” and “spiritual songs.”[1] IOW: these terms do not refer to different types of songs but rather function as “overlapping near synonyms”[2] meant to emphasize the imperative of congregational singing.[3] With that in mind, here (then) is God’s prescription for our congregational singing:

The focus must be on God and His work not us or ours.

1.1. (Eph 5:19, “singing…to the Lord”; Col 3:16 “singing… to God”)

1.2. Too many songs in MCW (modern Christian worship) are guilty of placing the focus on us (what we are feeling, doing or going to do for God) w/very little – to no communication in respect to God (Who He is and what He has done or is doing). IOW: they are heavy on us and light on God.[4]

1.3. Compare: 1) (Psa 8, 46) = Words focused on God: Who He is and what He has done.[5] 2) Crown Him With Many Crowns (“the Lamb upon the throne…Awake my soul and sing of Him Who died for Me; And hail Him as they matchless King thru all eternity…Crown Him the Lord of heaven; One with the Father known…His glories now we sing; Who died and rose on high; Who died eternal life to bring; And lives that death may die.”) = The focus is on God (Jesus): Who He is and what He has done (not us or what we are going to do).

to [Last week’s top 20 worship songs, CCLI]: 1) I Speak Jesus (“I just wanna speak the name of Jesus, Over every heart and every mind, Cause I know there is peace within Your Presence, I speak Jesus, I just wanna speak Jesus”) = The focus of this song is what we are going to do – not Jesus or His work. 2) How Great Is Our God (“sing with me, how great is our God and then the world will see how great is our God…name above all names worthy of all praise, my heart will sing…”) = Besides being entirely about what we are doing or singing (we are the primary acting agent), the song makes no mention of Who God is or what He has done or is doing, nor speaks any of words directly to God. Consider also [the 7 top cliches in MCW]: 1) I want you, 2) I need you, 3) I lift you up, 4) I lay it down, 5) I’m in awe, 6) I’m alive in you, 7) I am living for you. = All focused on us as the primary acting agent.

1.4. PNTM: We are here to sing to God – or about God not ourselves (i.e., bows not vows is how we give praise to God).[6]

The words (and music) must communicate God as our King not our girlfriend.

2.1. (Eph 5:19) “Lord” = A term used to confer majesty to those in positions of authority. Our songs must therefore communicate this majesty. IOW: the songs we sing must sound like an expression of majesty to a king versus a solicitation for intimacy with our girlfriend.

2.2. Example: All Hail The Power Of Jesus’ Name (“All hail the power of Jesus’ name let angels prostrate fall, to Him ascribe all majesty and crown Him Lord of all, to Him all majesty ascribe and crown Him Lord of all!”).

2.3. Compare: The Secret Place by Phil Wickham (“Where are you going to run my soul…How you gonna keep this flame alive…In the fading light when night is breaking, I know you will always be waiting, You’ll always be there, I running to the secret place. Where you are…you stole my heart, stole my heart. Better is a moment I spend with you…I’m running, I’m running to the secret place.”).

to The Secret Place by RC Sproul (“He who dwells within His most secret place, Is never far from His blessed grace…The secret place of God Most High, The shadow of our Mighty King, The dwelling place where angels cry, Is where our praise will forever ring.”).

2.4. Examples from other MCW songs: 1) “Capture my heart again, your love is extravagant, your friendship, intimate.” (Your Love Is Extravagant by Casting Crowns), 2) “As I feel your touch, you bring a freedom to all that is within.” (Pour Out My Heart by Craig Musseau), 3) “A sloppy wet kiss and my heart turns violently inside my chest.” (How He Loves – John Mark McMillan), 4) “Lay back against you and breath, hear your heartbeat, this love is so deep, it’s more than I can stand” (The More I Seek You - Kari Jobe), 5) “We’re going all the way, and the wonder of it all is that I’m living just to fall more in love with you.” (Deeper ’99 by Delirious)

2.5. It is not just a song’s lyrics that can make us be guilty of treating God like our girlfriend. It can also be the music. Does the music [melody etc.,] make you feel like God is your king or your lover? Does it sound more like the Michigan Wolverine’s fight song, Hail To The Victors! or Marvin Gaye’s Let’s Get It On?

2.6. PNTM: what we sing and how it sounds must be majestic. If it doesn’t feel majestic, then we probably shouldn’t be singing it.

“Care must always be taken that the song be neither light nor frivolous, but that it have weight and majesty.” – John Calvin

“There is a great difference between music which one makes to entertain men at table and in their houses, and the [songs] which are sung in the Church in the presence of God and his angels.”- St. Augustine

Songs must also communicate rich wisdom and theology that will aid in the congregation’s spiritual formation and fortitude.

3.1. (Col 3:16) “Let the word of Christ [or early manuscript version: the Lord] richly dwell within you [in] all wisdom teaching and admonishing one another with psalms and hymns and spiritual songs” = Because of its large biblical content, our congregational singing should represent the first sermon of our church service. Our worship in song should feel like “the meal before the main course.”

3.2. With the exception of the Getty’s (and a few other modern hymn writers), the wisdom and theology found in most MCW is extremely lacking or completely non-existent.

"Too often today the church serves up affective sentiments without much care for the discipline of the Word." - R. Kent Hughes

“One of the saddest features of contemporary worship is that [it is filled with] trite jingles that have more in common with contemporary advertising ditties than with [God’s inspired music], the Psalms. The problem here is not so much the style of the music, though trite words fit best with trite tunes and harmonies. Rather the problem is with the content of the songs…Today’s songs reflect our shallow or nonexistent theology and do almost nothing to elevate one’s thoughts about God.” – James Montgomery Boice

“Many American evangelicals continue to exhibit a considerable gap between the materials they sing and the theology they preach. They confess to believe in a transcendent God who is above all creation, yet they sing few [songs] which properly reveal God’s excellences. Some congregations expect “strong meat” in biblical preaching but seem to be satisfied with “milk” or even lollipops in song.” – Donald Hustad

3.4. MCW Examples: Oceans by Hillsong (“You call me out upon the waters; The great unknown where feet may fail; And there I find You in the mystery; In oceans deep my faith will stand, I will call upon Your Name; And keep my eyes above the waves; When oceans rise; My soul will rest in Your embrace; For I am Yours and You are mine; Your grace abounds in deepest waters; Your sovereign hand will be my guide; Where feet may fail and fear surrounds me; You’ve never failed and You won’t start now; Spirit lead me where my trust is without borders; Let me walk upon the waters; Wherever You would call me; Take me deeper than my feet could ever wander; And my faith will be made stronger; In the presence of my Saviour; I will call upon Your Name; Keep my eyes above the waves; My soul will rest in Your embrace; I am Yours and You are mine.”) = This song could be talking to any (so-called) God given there is nothing specific or any theology which exclusively ties it to the God of the Bible. It is completely void of any biblical wisdom or theology.

3.5. We need to be concerned about more than simply making sure the lyrics are orthodox, they need to also be rich in wisdom and theology (“Poor songs [also] lead us to idolatry. Not just inferior worship – idolatry. It’s that important.” – Chris Anderson). [7]

3.6. In contrast, most hymns - including modern hymns (e.g., Getty’s) are packed full of wisdom and theology that aids the saints in their spiritual formation and fortitude.

3.7. Example: Crown Him With Many Crowns (“The Lamb upon the throne; Hark How the heav'nly anthems drowns; All music but its own! Awake, my soul And sing; Of Him Who died for thee; And hail Him as thy matchless King; Thru all eternity [Rev 5 and 7]…Crown Him the Lord of heav'n; One with the Father known; One with the Spirit thru him giv'n; From yonder glorious throne; To Thee be endless praise; For thou has died for me; Be Thou, O Lord, thru endless days; Adored and magnified [Heb 1; Rev 15 and 22]; …His glories now we sing; Who died and rose on high; Who died eternal life to bring; And lives that death may die.” [Rom 4 and 5; Rev 5, 12 and 13]).[8]

3.8. PTNM: Worship (in song) is not testimony it’s teaching (“rhythmic theology” – Anderson). The question then to ask when deciding whether a song should be sung by the congregation: What is it teaching? Is it (this “first” sermon) doctrinal sound or sinfully idolatrous? Additionally, how much wisdom or theology is being communicated through its verses and chorus? Is it an aid to the congregation’s spiritual formation and fortitude?[9]

The words and music must be beautiful but without a feminine vibe.

4.1. Similar to the above point, much of MCW makes God seem more like a metrosexual than the mighty warrior portrayed in Scripture (e.g., most if not all music/songs by Chris Tomlin especially when it is sung by Chris Tomlin).

4.2. Among the many reasons God only identifies Himself in masculine terms in the Scripture is most certainly this: to make clear that His tastes are not feminine. The words we sing and the music we use must therefore never be anything less than fully masculine. No feminine vibes allowed!

4.3. That being said, our God also cares deeply about beauty – especially in His house and what takes place there (Exo 28:2, 40; Psa 27:4, 50:2, 96:6).

4.4. What this means is that: 1) beauty is not a feminine invention - nor something that only women should care about. It is instead at the heart of masculinity (rightly understood), 2) the masculine music we sing must also be beautiful (e.g., masculine music that is not majestic/beautiful = Country worship music [words may promote aspects of masculinity but the music is not beautiful – it is instead as the saying goes, “like clean underwear covered in a sh*tty suit”]).

4.4. “The Christian Life should not only produce truth– but also beauty” – Francis Schaeffer

4.5. Beauty is achieved when our music/songs are “skillful” (i.e., complexity performed w/excellence; Psa 33:3), “glorious” (i.e., filled w/rich wisdom and right theology; Psa 66:2) – and (again) majestic (def., beauty expressed in dignity, power, perfection and stateliness).

PNTM: We must protect the masculinity of God and the beauty He loves (and is!) in the songs we sing since anything less can also make us guilty of idolatry.

CLOSING COMMITMENT: 1) song-writing group to start writing hymns, 2) a hearty diet of singing only hymns for the next 8 weeks (to inspire our song-writing group and strengthen our souls) 3) a removal of all music from our congregational singing that do not meet the criteria discussed today.

[1] See for example, F.F. Bruce, The Epistles to the Colossians, to Philemon, and to the Ephesians; Douglas J Moo, The Letters to Colossians and Philemon; Andrew Lincol, Ephesians; Frank Thielman, Ephesians; See also David F Detwiler, “Church Music and Colossians 3:16”

[2] Scott Aniol (Psalms, Hymns and Spiritual Songs: Assessing the Debate”). That the terms psalms, hymns and spiritual songs should be viewed as referring to the same thing (as overlapping near synonyms) is supported by their interchangeable use in Scripture. For example: 1) all three terms are used in the LXX as titles for the Psalms, 2) The NT writers use the term “psalm” (Grk., psalmois) to refer to “hymns” ([Grk., hymnois]1Co 14:26; cf. 1Co 14:15) and spiritual songs ([Grk., odais] Jam 5:13). “Since [these three Greek terms] are each used as translations of psalm titles in the LXX and are employed interchangeably in the NT, the weight of evidence seems to suggest that Paul did not intend the terms to designate clearly identifiable genre of corporate song.” – Aniol (ibid)

[3] That Paul expects the church to be characterized by singing that involves the entire congregation (versus a select few – or one) is established by the “one another” phrase found in both verses. Additional PNTM: 1) the people leading us in worship are not the only ones ministering to others thru singing (we are all “speaking [ministering] to one another in psalms, hymns and spiritual songs”), 2) singing is not optional (how we accomplish the command to “let the word of Christ [or the Lord] dwell richly in [us]” is by “singing”), 3) refusing to sing or singing w/an unthankful heart is sin which not only qualifies as a threat to our eternal future (Heb 10:26-30), but may also place us under God’s immediate and special wrath (Heb 13:28-29 w/13:15), 4) the songs we sing together must be something that is easy for us to sing (hymns are “songs for unmusical people to sing together” – Erik Routley) .

[4] “In many cases, congregations have unwittingly begun to sing about themselves and how they are feeling rather than about God and His glory.” – Chris Anderson (Theology That Sticks)

[5] Keep in mind that not all of the Psalms were meant to be sung by the congregation. Only 55 of the 150 are directed to the choirmaster. Most of the psalms were meant for special music or special occasions (e.g., songs of ascent).

[6] Music must be tethered to God – His attributes, His names, His works, His purposes, and His glory. This is vital, perhaps more than anything else.” – Anderson (ibid)

[7] "Careful attention to the selection of hymns and praise songs is important. People learn from everything that happens in a worship service, not just the sermon. Indeed, there are probably many Christians who imbibe more of their theology, for good or ill, from what they sing than from what they hear taught.” – Carl Trueman (“The Trinity and Prayer”)

[8] “The old hymns expressed the theology of the church in profound and perceptive ways and with winsome, memorable language. They lifted the worshiper’s thoughts to God and gave him striking words by which to remember God’s attributes.” – James Montgomery Boice

[9] “Congregational song is part of the teaching ministry of the church. Church musicians and pastors should ask themselves: if our people learned their theology from our songs what would they know in twenty years about God, the cross, the resurrection, the offices of Christ, the Holy Spirit, the Trinity, creation, justification, election, regeneration, the church, the sacraments, and all the other fundamental doctrines of the faith?” – Anderson (ibid)

View Details

Stranger things = Those fringe[1] subjects of the Bible which exist at the intersection of the supernatural and natural, the immaterial and material worlds.

Why we are discussing these kinds of subjects = So that we are viewing of our world in the same way Jesus and those living in the ancient near east (the bible’s authors) viewed their world since this is not only the real world but also vital to proper biblical interpretation (or the avoidance of projecting on the text/reading into the text our modern ideas and assumptions [eisegesis] – e.g., Gen 2:18-20).

“It would be dishonest of us to claim that the biblical writers read and understood the text the way we do as modern people, or intended meanings that conform to theological systems created centuries after the text was written. Our context is not their context. The proper context for interpreting the Bible is …not the modern world at all, or any period of its history. The proper context is the context of the biblical writers-the context that produced the Bible…The biblical context was produced by men who lived in the ancient near east (ANE). Seeing the Bible through the eyes of an ancient reader [therefore] requires shedding the filters of our [modern] traditions and presumptions. They processed life in supernatural terms.” – Michael S. Heiser (The Unseen Realm)

Divine council (def.,): a heavenly assembly of beings who have been deputized by God to function as His vice-regents on earth governing and judging the nations on His behalf.

Biblical evidence of their existence

(Psa 82:1-8)

(1) “God (Heb., elohim [singular – see underlined] = Divine being/God) takes His stand taking His stand(participle -singular) in His own the divine (Heb., be el = the divine [See ESV], e.g., el shaddai = God of the mountain, Gen 35:11) congregation (or council); He judges in the midst of the rulers (or gods) (Heb., elohim [plural – see verse 2], “you” [plural] = Divine beings/Gods/gods). See also verse 6, “I said, ‘you are gods’” (again, elohim).

Who are the plural elohim that make up this divine council? After considering the possible options, there is only one that meets all the biblical tests: the anointed priests and levites (judges) of the covenant community.[2]
What are the practical implications and application associated with the God’s divine council being the priests and levites in Christ’s churches (the New Covenant community)?

3.1. Deacons/officers are a part of the DC by proxy (i.e., they are deputized not anointed, e.g., Korah the levite - Num 16:3 “we are all holy” [anointed]) (Deu 21:5 [priests are judges] w/2Sa 15:1-4 and 2Ch 26:21 [kings are judges] = Deu 17:8-9) = The king and priests are the anointed judges in the CC (high court judges or divines[3]). Levites and the heads of households help the king and priests in judging. They are the low court judges (2Ch 19:8). They have been deputized to represent the high court judges – i.e., the divine council or council possessing divines or those w/divine authority/anointing (Deu 16:18 “judge the people…tribes…in all your towns”; “judging ones [participle; the wise heads of household in each tribe[4]] and officers” [Levites] versus 17:8-9 “if any… cases of dispute” are “too difficult…then you shall arise and go to…the Levitical priests and judge” [priests and king/the anointed/divines]; NC = Pastors and deacons, Isa 66:21 [priests and deacons selected as heads of their households] w/1Ch 17:6 “the judges of Israel whom I commanded to shepherd My people”).

3.2. Jesus confirms that the NC possesses a DC just like the OC which means there is supernatural authority, power, protection and guidance in our church that Jesus Himself backs up or supports – which is what makes it a divine council issuing divine judgments:

1) (Mat 18:15-16) = [Deu 16:18, 17:6],

2) (Mat 18:17a) = [Deu 17:8],

3) (Mat 18:17b-20) = [Deu 17:9-12].

3.3. The way God perfectly cares for and leads His people to heaven is through the fallible and fallen leadership of His DC which means:

1) though fallible and fallen, God’s DC can judge/rule with justice (or equity) and righteousness (e.g., 2Sa 8:15).

2) unless it can be disproven to the congregation, our default position as a congregation should be to view the decisions and judgments made by our DC as coming directly from God (Pro 16:10; 2Co 1:21 w/4:6-7; Consider also 1Ti 3:1-16 = The P+D are what make the church the pillar and buttress [fortress] of truth; Mat 10:40 and 18:19-20; Act 15:22).

3.4. Anyone who thinks the church possesses no DC (i.e., no human judges w/divine authority):

1) is ignorant of the Scriptures and God’s power (in the church) (Mat 22:29).

2) has not considered the implications of such thinking w/respect to not only the preservation of justice and righteousness in the church but protection from demons and demonic influence (e.g., how many of us wb okay w/getting rid of the American judicial system which appoints secular men as judges w/final authority in relation to laws and issues of justice? If we deem them necessary to procuring the aforementioned things in this country, why would the same not be necessary for the church? [1Co 6:3-4]. Do we not view the secular judges as possessing authority from God? [Rom 13:1] Then why not those leaders in the church?).

3) are more than likely rebels who despise such authority or judges since they are a threat to their wicked way of life (Pro 21:15).

3.5. The church’s DC will be under stricter judgment by God and so should be careful in their decisions and judgments to make sure they are always promoting justice and preserving equity (Deu 16:20; Jam 3:1; the result of such carefulness wb the ignorant/disobedient viewing many of their decisions/policies as petty or unrighteous – e.g., late = absent; Pro 28:5).

3.6. Understanding that the DC in the church is actually referred to as elohim, brings further clarity and certainty to why insubordination or insurrection amounts to apostasy from God (Deu 17:9-12 [Num 15:30-31; Deu 29:18-20] w/Mat 18:17b-20 [Mat 12:32]; Mat 10:14-15; Rom 13:2 w/5; the crayon-eaters dilemma = When you refuse or reject the counsel of the DC, you have pushed your case to God on J-Day – which allows for no recourse/redemption after judgment).

3.7. It makes sense that the DC of the church will be involved in the final judgment of those who were a part of their congregation given they will also be involved in the judgment of those angels who caused their office and congregation pain and distress (1Co 6:3 = Those angels who caused trouble to the CC over which that DC was responsible. The righteous angels will face no judgment; Heb 13:17; Hence why then even the archangel Michael chose never to speak against the DC – Jud 8-9; Consider the context of Jude: humans treading where no angel would dare to tread; 1Th 5:12-13 “live in peace w/one another” = CC w/their DC; Num 12:1 w/9-10).

3.8. The existence of a DC in the church means that though Jesus has left us for heaven, He has not left us as orphans (i.e., persons w/o a father – or one who through their vision and discernment, discipline and discipleship, provides them with the tools to prospering in this world and passing the eternal test).

In the ANE, it was assumed that those w/o fathers were also those w/o the proper leadership in their lives to become wise or make wise decisions. Orphans – or those left as orphans, were as a result, often the idiots and criminals of society.

How (then) Jesus (though again in heaven), keeps His church from becoming aimless idiots and crooks who ultimately damn their souls b/c of such folly or lack of wisdom = Through the special anointing of “another Helper…the spirit of truth…the Holy Spirit” on certain members of His DC (Joh 14:16-18a w/25-26).

Why we cb confident that John 14 is a reference to the HS’ special anointing of the priests (in Jesus’ DC) and not the HS given to all at baptism:

1) bc the three things Jesus says about it are in perfect agreement w/what Jesus says at the initial special anointing: 1] He will personally deliver it after His death (18-20), 2] it will be associated w/Jesus’ special peace (26-27), 3] it will strengthen their belief (28-29). All three of these things are only found in (Joh 20:19-22).

2) the purpose of the John 14 HS is not the purpose of the Spirit given at baptism/@Pentecost. It can make someone a prophet (the gift of revelation – Act 2:15-18) but not a judge/part of the DC (the gift of remembrance in re: to truth - Joh 14:26; Consider also 1Co 15:29 “others judge” = The judges/DC [v28 w/Act 15:19 “my judgment” = James the anointed priest]. IOW: prophets are not judges. What about the prophet Samuel who “judged Israel”? [1Sa 7:15] Sam was also a priest – 1Sa 2:18 w/22:18 and 7:9 in contrast to 13:12]).

[1] Subjects not part of the mainstream; topics or understanding that are unconventional and/or uncomfortable to modern culture and thinking.

[2] In the ANE, the spiritual realm and humanity were inextricably linked. To believe in the spiritual realm meant also believing that its supernatural power had also been given to certain humans who functioned as authorities within specific spiritual communities. Those communities were identified as religions (or the old term, cults) and the dispensers of this power, their priests (e.g., Psa 132:16). To assume then that no such power or authority existed – or still exists today, would have been for those in the Bible, the same as believing the spiritual realm itself was fantasy. The question should therefore never be, are their human beings functioning as God’s divine council today? But rather, who are they?

[3] Old term for priests and theologians (e.g., Westminster Divines)

[4] In ancient times, being the head of a household or tribe did not require you be the oldest in the family (e.g., David; hence Psa 119:100). It meant that those in the community (or household) viewed you as among the wisest and most righteous of their clan (Exo 18:21).

View Details

Stranger things = Those fringe[1] subjects of the Bible which exist at the intersection of the supernatural and natural, the immaterial and material worlds.

Previously discussed: Dimensional portals (def.,): doors or gates and their accompanying bridges connecting the immaterial/spiritual/supernatural world to the material/physical/natural world allowing those with access, the ability to travel or send/receive things from one dimension (or realm) to the other (e.g., Rev 4:1 “door” = Portal; Consider also 2Co 12:2 – Like John, Paul most likely travelled through a dimensional portal). BIG TAKEAWAY: In Christ’s churches, we have access to a heavenly portal that allows us to give and receive from God those persons (e.g., receive angels for help – Heb 1:14) and things (e.g., give praise to God, receive forgiveness through the sacraments – 1Pe 3:21; Joh 13:5-15 [context is the LT – v26]) important to our saving relationship with Him.

Divine council (def.,): a heavenly assembly of beings who have been deputized by God to function as His vice-regents on earth governing and judging the nations on His behalf.[2]

Biblical evidence of their existence

(Psa 82:1-8)

Who are the plural elohim that make up this divine council? Considering the options:

2.1. other members of the Trinity (Jesus and the Holy Spirit) (Heb 1:8; Act 5:3-5)

Why this is not a viable option: God not only condemns the elohim (“rulers”) of verse 1b of judging unjustly and walking in darkness but also promises they will one day “die like men” because of such behavior (2-7).

2.2. other deities (or the gods of other religions) 1) (Exo 20:3; 1Ki 11:33)

Why this is not a viable option: Other deities do not exist (Deu 4:35, 39; Isa 45:5-6)

2.3. Dead people – particularly dead saints (1Sa 28:13)

Why this is not a viable option: 1) Dead people play no role in governing or judging the affairs of those currently living (2-4). 2) Though communication with or by them is possible, God strictly prohibits such interaction as punishable by death (Lev 20:27).

2.4. Angelic beings (the view of Michael Heiser)

Specifically: Satan and the other fallen angels who are identified as “sons of God” before His throne (Job 1-2) and are responsible not only for the Fall but mating with humanity and promoting global rebellion against God leading to the Flood (Gen 6 w/1Enoch 6-11). God placed these demons over the Gentile nations as their divine council (or spiritual authorities) after their rebellion at Babel (Deu 32:8-9 w/17 = “Sons of Israel” sb “sons of God” referring to “demons”, who inherited the Table of “Nations” as God’s judgment against the Gentiles for the Tower of Babel event [Gen 10-11]). God’s rebuke and condemnation of this council in Psalm 82 is the result of their poor oversight. Though wicked they were still expected to rule righteously.

Why this is not a viable option:

2) The idea that angels had sex with women infers not only that angels have the ability to procreate. Yet Jesus makes it clear that angels possess no such capability given they lack the proper context for such activity, marriage (Mat 22:30). To assume sexual activity were possible by angels is to therefore equally accuse God of sin – or providing moral creatures with natural desires and capabilities that possess no righteous application or solution. The fact that giants existed after the global flood (Gen 6:4) lends additional support. They are the mutated offspring of men – not angels[5].

3) Viewing the word “nations” in Deuteronomy 32 as a reference to the 70 nations of Genesis 10 is not only a false assumption – one leading directly to Heiser’s change of the phrase “sons of Israel” (MT) to “sons of God” (DSS), but a failure in reading comprehension.[6]

The entire context and focus of the Deuteronomy 32 (Moses’ Song) is God’s inheritance for the people of Israel, a group made up of twelve nations (Gen 17:4-6 w/16) which means the phrase, “sons of Israel” found in the MT is correct.

Regarding the reference to “demons” in (v17), Moses is simply recounting the idolatrous acts of the first generation (e.g., Exo 32:1-6; Lev 17:7; Act 7:43 [Amo 5:26-27]) since this is what prohibited them from receiving or realizing this land inheritance.

4) Jesus applies (6) to humans not angels (Joh 10:34 = Jesus’ defense only makes sense if the Jews understood Psalm 82 – including verse 6, as referring to humans).

2.5. the anointed priests/judges of the covenant community (Deu 17:8-9 w/Deu 21:5 = Priests/levites are the judges in the CC)

1) the place where the elohim carry out their office as rulers/judges is on earth (not heaven), the same place as the priests/judges of the covenant community (1-4; hence why God will also judge them on the earth – v8 “Arise O God, judge [the unrighteous judges] on the earth for it is You [God] who possesses [owns] all the nations”).

2) the judges (priests and levites) of the covenant community are also referred to as elohim (e.g., Exo 21:6 [See “God” Fn]; Exo 22:8-9).

3) the word translated “earth” in (5,8 [eretz]) can also be translated as land - as in the land of Israel (i.e., the covenant community) (e.g., 2Ki 5:2 “land” [eretz]).

4) the word translated “nations” in (8) can refer to the tribes of Israel (i.e., the covenant community) (e.g., again Gen 17:4-6).

5) The predominant concern and scope of Scripture is justice in the covenant community and among its leaders – not the other leaders or nations. To therefore assign a context bigger than God’s people to Psalm 82 (as Heiser does – the 70 nations of the Gentiles from Gen 10-11), is to assume an interpretive position or approach contrary what is most common in the OT – including its largest literary portion, the Prophets (e.g., Jer 22:1-17; Eze 45:9; Amo 5:10-24)[7].

6) Paul uses divine council language to speak of Old and New Covenant priests and levites:

1] (Eph 2:6) “seated us” = Paul’s audience according to 1:1-3, is the church (“Paul” along w/the “saints…and faithful…in Ephesus”) not the individual. At the very least then, the “us” of ch.2 refers to the covenant community – most specifically, her priests and levites (“faithful” = Or “faithful ones” – most likely a reference to her priests and levites – See Phi 1:1[8]). This is further supported by Paul’s connecting phrase “with Him in the heavenly places” – a direct allusion to (Psa 89:5-7) = The leaders of God’s assembly/covenant community are viewed as existing in heaven. IOW: this is the origin of their office and authority (Eph 3:10).

2] That Paul is indeed referring to spiritual leaders in the covenant community when using the phrase “rulers and authorities in the heavenly places”) versus spiritual beings such as angels or demons (again, Heiser’s view) is confirmed by the role of the church in explaining and proclaiming the “mystery” and “gospel” of God’s Messiah [Jesus] – most especially to the Jewish nation (Act 1:8; Rom 2:10) - including its spiritual leaders (Eph 3:1-10) = Assuming Heiser’s view, why would the gospel need to be preached to demons or angels – those with no hope of salvation? These verses therefore have to be referring to a human occupied divine council – most specifically those in the OC community. Why the OC divine council (priests and levites) and not those under the NC? Because of (Eph 3:11-15) = Paul’s preaching this gospel (as the ambassador of the “church”) to the aforementioned rulers and authorities has caused him “tribulations” that will bring the Ephesians “glory” (or “glory in the church”). It can’t therefore be New Covenant priests and levites Paul is referring to since not only would they not be guilty of persecuting him, but by such tribulation, bring glory to the church (such actions – if true, would bring shame to the church). How then will Paul’s preaching to OC divine coucil bring glory to the church (one that makes the tribulation/persecutions suffered bc of it worth it)? Through their conversion. They remain a part of “God’s family” (again, vv14-15) and therefore the field of final harvest for the church before Christ’s return (Rom 11:11-12). Consider (Rom 11:11-12).

3] What Paul says about these heavenly rulers or authorities in his letter to the Colossians confirms this is who Paul has in mind (the OC divine council/priests and levites) (Col 2:15-16) “When He (God) had disarmed (or defrocked and dismissed) the rulers and authorities” (through Jesus’ atoning death that removed our debt before God – v14), He made a public display of them having triumphed over them through Him” = IOW: Christ was able to make us righteous before God without the OC priesthood which in turn made them essentially obsolete (Heb 7:12 w/8:13). Additional support: (v16) = B/C the priests of the OC community have been defrocked and dismissed, we are to no longer recognize them as our spiritual authorities (our divine council).

4] Lastly, consider how Paul uses this phrase (“rulers…in the heavenly places”) at the end of his Ephesian epistle. Close cross examination of this phrase with earlier portions of the letter and other Scripture also points to Old Covenant priesthood.

(Eph 6:11-12) “schemes of the devil” = Schemes accomplished thru the “deceitful scheming” and trickery of men (4:14) = More than likely a reference to the Jews since this was – once more, the main antagonist in Paul’s ministry – and the apostolic church[9]. Additional support (1Th 2:14-18) = Notice Paul views the Jews “hindering” his mission in the gospel as satanic [“Satan hindered us”]). Paul’s point (then) in verse 12 of Ephesians 6: “Our struggle is not (only) against flesh and blood but against the rulers…in the heavenly places” (i.e., the OC divine council) who – though they have been defrocked/dismissed from their former poisitons, are now being empowered by “the powers” related to “the world forces of this darkness…the spiritual forces of wickedness” (i.e., Satan). That Paul is in these verses referring specifically to the Jewish rulers and authorities (“in the heavenly places”) is also supported by the fact that the Greek term Ioudaioi (v14, “Jews”) was the common way to refer to the Jewish priesthood and its levites (e.g., Joh 2:13-18).

7) If the anointed leaders of the Old Covenant community possessed spiritual authority (i.e., represented God’s divine council), how much more this would be true for the New Covenant community given:

1] the biblical evidence of priests and levites (judges) existing under the New Covenant just as they did under the Old (Isa 66:21; Deu 17:8-9 w/Mat 18:15-20; Consider also 1Co 6:1-4 = The church will appoint her own judges who will not only be competent enough to make righteous decisions concerning “matters of this life” but also one day judge the angels. How is that possible unless they like their predecessors have been anointed and/or deputized as God earthly vice-regents?).

2] the Body of Christ has also been given the indwelling Spirit to help her leaders - something not present under the OC.

3] We possess the “perfect” or completed corpus of God’s revelation for securing justice in the covenant community (i.e., the completed canon of Scripture – 1Co 13:10).

8) In the ANE, the spiritual realm and humanity were inextricably linked. To believe in the spiritual realm meant also believing that its supernatural power had also been given to certain humans who functioned as authorities within specific spiritual communities. Those communities were identified as religions (or the old term, cults) and the dispensers of this power, their priests (e.g., Psa 132:16). To assume then that no such power or authority existed – or still exists today, would have been for those in the Bible, the same as believing the spiritual realm itself was fantasy. The question should therefore never be, are their human beings functioning as God’s divine council today? But rather, who are they?

CLOSING CHALLENGE/CONTEMPLATION: What are the practical implications and application associated with the divine council being God’s anointed leaders in the church (the New Covenant community)? List as many as you can and discuss with others.

[1] Subjects not part of the mainstream; topics or understanding that are unconventional and/or uncomfortable to modern culture and thinking.

[2] “All ancient Mediterranean cultures had some conception of a divine council.” – Michael Heiser (“So What Exactly Is an Elohim?”)

[3] That the office of this assembly or council is indeed located in the heavens is supported not only by the fact that it is identified as “divine” – a word implying heavenly or spiritual origins, but also passages such as Eph 3:10 and 6:12.

[4] Ancient Jewish tradition teaches that this was the reason for Satan’s initial rebellion. Though stronger and more knowledgeable, God placed humans above the angels in authority and made them their servants. It should be mentioned also that though Scripture speaks of Satan as the ruler of this world (1Jo 5:19; also 2Co 4:4 “god”/elohim), his office and authority are illegitimate – having no appointment by God. To assume God did give such appointments/authority to angels (including Satan) would mean as humans we are required to submit to them and all rebellion against them would be viewed as rebellion against God (Rom 13:1-2).

[5] The purpose of Genesis 6:1-4 is to communicate the level of devastation produced by the global flood. At the time it took place, the earth was covered by human beings – including their mutated offspring, the giants (“the sons of God [human males] came into [procreated with] the daughters of men” [human females]; See 1Co 11:7).

[6] Though I do believe that the intention of God’s language confusion – or the forfeiture of His divine language (Hebrew), was a means of judgment that would ultimately send Babel’s rebels further into the direction of spiritual darkness and false religion (i.e., worshipping and serving demons – Deu 4:19-20 “beware not to…be drawn away and worship them [the moon and the stars] those which the LORD your God has allotted to all the peoples under the whole heaven”), such conclusions are of no import to our understanding of Deuteronomy 32 whose concern are the nations of Israel not the world.

[7] The Prophets (major and minor) contribute 250 chapters to the Old Testament’s total of 929 chapters – almost as many as the entire New Testament (260 chapters).

[8] The Ephesian church is made up of Christians (or “saints”) including also “faithful ones” (priests and levites). See similar in Col 1:2.

[9] This only changed after 70 A.D. and the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem. The Neronic persecution – influenced, aided and abetted by the Jewish priesthood, ultimately back-fired, turning Rome’s destructive forces against them and their religion.

View Details

Stranger things = Those fringe subjects of the Bible which exist at the intersection of the supernatural and natural, the immaterial and material worlds.

Divine council (def.,): a heavenly assembly of beings who have been deputized by God to function as His vice-regents on earth governing and judging the nations on His behalf.[1]

Biblical evidence of their existence

(Psa 82:1-8)

(1) “God (Heb., elohim [singular – see underlined] = Divine being/God) takes His stand ([participle -singular], “taking His stand) in His own the divine (Heb., be el = the divine [See ESV], e.g., el shaddai = God of the mountain, Gen 35:11) congregation (or council); He judges in the midst of the rulers (Heb., elohim [plural – see verse 2], “you” [plural] = Divine beings/Gods/gods; See also verse 6, “I said, ‘you are gods’” [again, elohim]). [2]

Who are the plural elohim that make up this divine council? Considering the options:

2.1. other members of the Trinity (Jesus and the Holy Spirit) (Heb 1:8; Act 5:3-5)

2.2. other deities (or the gods of other religions) 1) (Exo 20:3) “You shall have no other gods (elohim) before Me”, 2) (1Ki 11:33) “Ashtoreth the goddess (elohim) of the Sidonians, Chemosh the god (elohim) of Moab, and Milcom the god (elohim) of the sons of Ammon.”

Why this is not a viable option: (Deu 4:35, 39; Isa 45:5-6)

2.3. Dead people – particularly dead saints (1Sa 28:13) [in reference to Samuel the witch of En-dor says],“I see a god (elohim) coming up out of the earth.”

Why this is not a viable option: 1) Dead people play no role in governing or judging the affairs of those currently living (2-4). 2) Though communication with or by them is possible (e.g., besides 1Sa 28:13, see also Isa 29:4), God strictly prohibits such interaction as punishable by death (Lev 20:27).

2.4. Angelic beings

1) (Psa 8:5) “gods” [elohim] translated as “angels” in (Heb 2:7); (6) “I said, ‘You are gods (elohim), and all of you sons of the Most High (a reference to God) = elohim are sons of God w/(Job 1:6) “sons of God” (elohim) which included “Satan” who exists as part of the angelic class known as Watchers/archangels [Dan 4][3] or cherubim [Isa 28]). In the case of Psalm 82, fallen watchers/cherubim -i.e., demons, hence the rebuke and condemnation of (2-7). This is the view of Dr. Michael Heiser.[4] Included in Heiser’s view, is the belief that the global flood was the result of Satan and his fallen watchers/cherubim having sexual relations w/human women (which produced the Nephilim or giants) and convincing humanity to (once more) rebel against God. Heiser’s view comes from an Enochian understanding of (Gen 6:1-4).

“The divine transgression before the flood is retold in several Jewish texts from the intertestamental period. At least one has the divine offenders coming to earth to ‘fix’ the mess that was humankind—to provide direction and leadership through their knowledge. They were trying to help, but once they had assumed flesh, they failed to resist its urges. The more common version of events, one with a more sinister flavor, is found in 1 Enoch 6–11…The story begins very much like Genesis 6: “And when the sons of men had multiplied, in those days, beautiful and comely daughters were born to them. And the watchers, the sons of heaven, saw them and desired them. And they said to one another, ‘Come, let us choose for ourselves wives from the daughters of men, and let us beget for ourselves children’…The offspring of the Watchers (sons of God) in 1 Enoch were giants (1 Enoch 7)…But what does it all mean? Why is Genesis 6:1–4 in the Bible? What was its theological message? Yes, there were giants, renowned men, both before and after the flood (Gen 6:4). But those offspring and their knowledge were not of the true God—they were the result of rebellion against Yahweh by lesser divine beings. Genesis 6:1–4, portrays…a horrific transgression and, even worse, the catalyst that spread corruption throughout humankind. Genesis 6:5 is essentially a summary of the effect of the transgression. It gets little space—it’s a restrained account. The later Second Temple Jewish literature goes after it full bore. First Enoch 8 goes on to elaborate how certain watchers corrupted humankind by means of forbidden knowledge.” – Heiser (ibid)

“They [the Watchers] became servants of Satan and led astray those who dwell upon the dry ground” (1 Enoch 54:6)… “These are the Watchers (Grigori), who turned aside from the Lord, 200 myriads, together with their prince Satan(ail)”(2 Enoch 18:3).

2) (Deu 32:8-9 w/17) “When the Most High gave the nations their inheritance, When He separated the sons of man, He set the boundaries of the peoples according to the sons of Israel” (Masoretic Text) – versus “sons of God” (elohim) (Dead Sea Scrolls) = A reference to God giving over the 70 nations of Genesis 10 (the “table of nations”) to Enoch’s watchers (the “demons” of verse 17) due to the people’s rebellion at the tower of Babel (Gen 11:1-9). It is therefore also these individuals that God is rebuking and condemning in (2-7). Though fallen, the demons were still expected to exercise righteous judgment.

“Deuteronomy 32:8–9 describes how Yahweh’s dispersal of the nations at Babel resulted in his disinheriting those nations as his people. This is the Old Testament equivalent of Romans 1:18–25, a familiar passage wherein God ‘gave [humankind] over’ to their persistent rebellion. The statement in Deuteronomy 32:9 that ‘the LORD’s [i.e., Yahweh’s] portion is his people, Jacob his allotted heritage’ tips us off that a contrast in affection and ownership is intended. Yahweh in effect decided that the people of the world’s nations were no longer going to be in relationship to him. He would begin anew. He would enter into covenant relationship with a new people that did not yet exist: Israel. The implications of this decision and this passage are crucial to understanding much of what’s in the Old Testament. Most English Bibles do not read “according to the number of the sons of God” in Deuteronomy 32:8. Rather, they read ‘according to the number of the sons of Israel…’ The difference derives from disagreements between manuscripts of the Old Testament. ‘Sons of God’ is the correct reading, as is now known from the Dead Sea Scrolls. Frankly, you don’t need to know all the technical reasons for why the “sons of God” reading in Deuteronomy 32:8–9 is what the verse originally said. You just need to think a bit about the wrong reading, the “sons of Israel.” Deuteronomy 32:8–9 harks back to events at the Tower of Babel, an event that occurred before the call of Abraham, the father of the nation of Israel. This means that the nations of the earth were divided at Babel before Israel even existed as a people. It would make no sense for God to divide up the nations of the earth ‘according to the number of the sons of Israel’ if there was no Israel. This point is also brought home in another way, namely by the fact that Israel is not listed in the Table of Nations. So what happened to the other nations? What does it mean that they were apportioned as an inheritance according to the number of the sons of God? As odd as it sounds, the rest of the nations were placed under the authority of members of Yahweh’s divine council. The other nations were assigned to lesser elohim as a judgment from the Most High, Yahweh… God decreed, in the wake of Babel, that the other nations he had forsaken would have other gods besides himself to worship. It is as though God was saying, ‘If you don’t want to obey me, I’m not interested in being your god—I’ll match you up with some other god.’ Psalm 82, where we started our divine council discussion, echoes this decision. That psalm has Yahweh judging other elohim, sons of the Most High, for their corruption in administering the nations.” – Heiser (ibid)

3) (6b) “sons of the Most High” (elyon).

“Elyon is a completely transparent title for deity, both in Hebrew and Ugaritic. The word refers only to God in the Bible and Ugaritic religious texts. The point here is that the phrase ‘sons of Elyon’ in Canaanite (Ugaritic) material always refers to gods/divine beings.” – Heiser (“Divine Council 101: Lesson 2: The elohim of Psalm 82 – gods or men?”).

Why this is not a viable option:

1) God never gives angels authority positions over humans – including archangels (Jud 8-9). Rather, it is humans who function as judges (rulers) over the angels (1Co 6:3). Angels exist to serve humans – specifically, those inheriting salvation (e.g., guardian angels) (Heb 1:14). [5] The idea that angels had sex with women (Enochian understanding of Gen 6) infers not only that angels have penises, but sperm – or the ability to procreate. Yet Jesus makes it clear that angels possess no such capability given they lack the proper context for such activity, marriage (Mat 22:30). To assume sexual activity were possible by angels is to therefore equally accuse God of sin – or providing moral creatures with natural desires and capabilities that possess no righteous application or solution. The fact that giants existed after the global flood (Gen 6:4) lends additional support. They are the mutated offspring of men – not angels[6].

2) Viewing the word “nations” in Deuteronomy 32 as a reference to the 70 nations of Genesis 10 and the Tower of Babel incident in Gen 11 is a false assumption[7]. The entire context and focus of the chapter (Moses’ Song) is instead about God’s allotment to the people of Israel, a group made up of twelve tribes or nations (Gen 17:4-6 w/16 = All references to nations in these verses are speaking about the twelve tribes of Israel; See also God’s words to Jacob in Gen 35:11) which means the phrase, “sons of Israel” found in the Masoretic text is correct. How then we should understand Deu 32:8-9:

“When the Most High (God) gave the nations (the twelve nations of Israel) their inheritance (Israel btw is the only one ever spoken of in the OT as receiving an inheritance from God), when He separated the sons of man (the Jews), He set the boundaries of the peoples (God pre-determined the borders of the land that wb given to each Jewish tribe when they entered the Promised Land) according to the number of the sons of Israel (twelve sons equaling twelve nations within the one nation of Israel).”

Regarding the reference to “demons” in (v17), Moses is recounting the idolatrous acts of the first generation which eventually led them to being prohibited from entering into the Promised Land (e.g., Exo 32:1-6; Lev 17:7; Act 7:43 [Amo 5:26-27]).

3) Jesus applies (6) to humans not angels (Joh 10:34 = Jesus’ defense only makes sense if the Jews understood Psalm 82 – including verse 6, as referring to humans). Furthermore, though the term “sons of God” can be used for angels and other spiritual beings, the term “sons of the Most High” is only used in relation to humans (Christians) (Luk 6:35).

CLOSING CONTEMPLATION: Who are the members of God’s divine council?

[1] “All ancient Mediterranean cultures had some conception of a divine council.” – Michael Heiser (“So What Exactly Is an Elohim?”)

[2] That the office of this assembly or council is indeed located in the heavens is supported not only by the fact that it is identified as “divine” – a word implying heavenly or spiritual origins, but also passages such as Eph 3:10 and 6:12.

[3] “The term ‘Watchers,’ meaning ‘wakeful ones’ (Aramaic ןיריע), glossed as ‘sons of Heaven’ in 1 En. 6:2, refers to a class of angels, mentioned in the Bible only in Dan. 4:10, 14, 20. – Angela Kim Harkins (The Watchers in Jewish and Christian Traditions)

[4] “The term elohim more broadly does not refer to ‘deity attributes.’ Rather, it points to a plane of existence. An elohim is simply a being whose proper habitation [or origin of office and authority] is the spirit world…An elohim is a divine being, in that an elohim is an inhabitant of [or office-bearer in] the spiritual place of reality.” - Heiser (ibid)

[5] Ancient Jewish tradition teaches that this was the reason for Satan’s initial rebellion. Though stronger and more knowledgeable, God placed humans above the angels in authority and made them their servants. It should be mentioned also that though Scripture speaks of Satan as the ruler of this world (1Jo 5:19; also 2co 4:4 “god”/elohim), his office and authority are illegitimate – having no appointment by God. To assume God did give such appointments/authority to angels (including Satan) would mean as humans we are required to submit to them and all rebellion against them would be viewed as rebellion against God (Rom 13:1-2).

[6] The purpose of Genesis 6:1-4 is to communicate the level of devastation produced by the global flood. At the time it took place, the earth was covered by human beings – including their mutated offspring, the giants (“the sons of God [human males] came into [procreated with] the daughters of men”[human females]; See 1Co 11:7).

[7] Though I do believe that the intention of God’s language confusion – or the forfeiture of His divine language (Hebrew), was a means of judgment that would ultimately send Babel’s rebels further into the direction of spiritual darkness and false religion (i.e., worshipping and serving demons – Deu 4:19-20 “beware not to…be drawn away and worship them [the moon and the stars] those which the LORD your God has allotted to all the peoples under the whole heaven”), such conclusions are of no import to our understanding of Deuteronomy 32 whose concern are the nations of Israel not the world.

View Details

Resurrection (def.,): The supernatural phenomenon whereby the present state of those who have died is replaced by once more being alive in a physical/material body yet unable to die again.

Easter is also known as “Resurrection Sunday” since it marks the day Jesus Christ became the first person to experience resurrection. Jesus’ resurrection is also the reason God’s people corporately worship God on Sunday rather than Saturday (Rom 6:9; 1 Co 15:20; Act 20:7 = Every Sunday is Resurrection Sunday).
Jesus’ resurrection (to Paradise): 1) proved that He is the Divine Son of God (Rom 1:4 w/Joh 10:18), 2) means His sacrificial death was sufficient to propitiate - or satisfy God’s requirements for cleansing the sins of His people and make them truly righteous before God the Father. As such, the temporary injunction of animal sacrifices (“pass-over atonement”) was forever canceled (Rom 3:23-25, 4:25 w/Heb 10:10-17; also Mat 1:21).
No one since Jesus has experienced resurrection since: 1) the son of the Shunammite woman, the widows’ sons, Lazarus, Dorcas, and Eutychus experienced resuscitations not resurrections given they died again (1Ki 7:17-23; 2 Ki 4:18-37; Luk 7:12-15; Joh 11:39-44; Act 9:36-41, 20:9-10), 2) all those who have died in the past currently exist like God without physical/material bodies ([Due 4:15-18 w/Joh 4:24 w/Luk 24:39] w/1Co 15:20-23; 1Th 4:16-17; 2Co 5:8).
Every person who has ever lived will experience a resurrection at the return of Jesus to earth (Joh 5:28-29; Act 24:15 [Dan 12:2; Psa 11:7]).
Before Jesus’ resurrection, those who died went either to Abraham’s bosom (the temporary resting place of righteous disembodied spirits) or Hades (the temporary torturing place of wicked disembodied spirits) and neither could cross over to the other (Luk 16:19-26).
After Jesus’ resurrection, those in Abraham’s bosom were allowed into heaven (their sins having been propitiated versus simply passed over) to fellowship w/the Trinity, the angels and the righteous disembodied spirits of those who die after Jesus’ resurrection (Heb 9:15-16 w/Eph 4:8-10; 2Co 5:8; Luk 23:43).
Experiencing the resurrection of the wicked will: 1) be the fate of most human beings because they chose to love wickedness rather than put faith in and be faithful to Jesus during their earthly life (Mat 7:18-23; Luk 13:23-24; 2Th 2:1:5-9, 2:10-12, 2) be followed by God’s condemning judgment and then being tortured in a lake of fire everyday forever (Psa 11:4-6; Rev 20:11-15; 2Th 2:10-12; again Joh 5:28-29 and Dan 12:2).
Experiencing the resurrection of the righteous will: 1) be followed by God’s approving judgment then an eternal life of never sinning, suffering or being bored, as they will be forever equipped with superhuman bodies and forever occupied with discovering, developing and enjoying King Jesus’ perfect new - and infinite universe to His glory (Rev 21-22), 2) require not only pledging your allegiance to Jesus in this life through baptismal faith but then living in faithful obedience to those vows until you die or Jesus returns (1Pe 3:21; 1Jo 3:7-10; Luk 20:35 “those considered worthy to attain to the resurrection [of the righteous] w/Joh 5:29).
We should not be surprised that people mock our belief in a future resurrection, the resurrection was as unpopular (a belief) in the ANE as it is today (e.g., Act 17:18 w/31-32). To not believe in a resurrection – most especially, the resurrection of Jesus, will eternally condemn you (1Co 15:1-4 “the gospel which I preached to you” w/Gal 1:6-9 “a different gospel…anathema”).

“Nobody in the pagan world of Jesus’ day and thereafter claimed that somebody had been truly dead and had then come to be truly, and bodily, alive once more.” - N.T. Wright (The Resurrection of the Son of God).

The fact that there will be a future resurrection not only confirms that this is not the only life we will live, but that the point of this very temporal life is to determine what version of eternal life we deserve (1Co 15:32).

TODAY’S TAKEAWAY: GOD IS REAL. THIS LIFE IS THE TEST. GAIN THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS AND THE RIGHTEOUS.

PHI 3:10-11

“10 that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death; 11 in order that I may attain to the resurrection from the dead.”

View Details

David had all the potential to be a great king.
16:1, 5-13 = Divine blessing, confirmation, & guidance

**notice however, humble beginning

**notice also, God’s choice for ‘most likely to succeed’ v.7

16:18; 17:4-11, 26, 32-37, 45-47; 18:30 = Courageous, confident, & great leader (vs Saul hiding in the luggage), giving guarantees ahead of time.

David demonstrates his righteous careful character through extreme trials.

18:10-11, 17, 19, 25, 19:6, 9-12, 18, 20:41-42, 21:13-22:2, 22:21-23 = Saul’s attempts to kill David -> Saul makes aggressive efforts to kill him, David loses one of his best friends, flees like a criminal, makes himself look insane, and Saul kills the priests in pursuing David.

*23:1-14 = stands up to his people, seeks God’s guidance

*24 = David’s test of sparing Saul’s life & standing up to his men. Attention to detail despite everything pointing to God’s deliverance.

*26 = David spares him again & again stands up to his men.

*30 = David’s own peeps talk of stoning him. Seeking God through the situation is part of being righteous.

2Sa 1 & 4 = David continuing to respect the King’s office

2Sa 7 = David’s covenant with God

8:15 = justice and equity

9:1-13 = David’s integrity

Character tests = Spares Saul’s life, is pressured by his men, is under threat of being stoned, David is reliant on God, trusts God, continues to pray to God (ref Psalms)

David saves his soul by submitting faithfully and quickly to God’s discipline.

2Sa 11 = David’s complacency leads to committing serious sin.

2Sa 12:1-25 = discipline (Psalm 51)

*Notice that David accepts what God uses to punish him. David doesn’t mope around.

*Ref David’s continued rapport with Nathan all the way into 1Kings

2Sa 15-18 Absalom’s rebellion and David’s response.

David ends his life with the legacy of a man after God’s own heart intact, ‘faithful in all things’, (Act 13:22; 1Kings 15:3-5)

Concluding principles that come from comparing Saul & David’s life:

What makes a man mighty in God’s eyes is not his ability to physically conquer but rather his commitment to carefully obeying God.
Response to discipline is a defining moment and test for people, possibly more than anything else.
Having the deck stacked in your favor is an indicator of future POTENTIAL, not future SUCCESS.

New principles from David’s life

Complacency kills. (David’s comfy in his palace instead of going to battle, Pro 1:32)
God expects us to respond righteously to authority even if/when they respond unrighteously. (Rom 13; 1Ti 5:19; 1Pe 3; Mat 5:38-41)
God expects us to be faithful, NOT perfect.
Growing distant from church members and/or your pastor(s) after discipline is a huge red flag. (notice David’s continued comms with Nathan vs Saul)
God doesn’t hold grudges. (He will bless and work all things for good if you’ll just turn and be faithful to Him. e.g. God doesn’t desire the death of the wicked [Eze 18, 33], and uses Bathsheba to continue David’s bloodline)
God demands our attention to detail even under pressure. (David slows down when pressured to kill Saul, doesn’t violate God’s command about building the temple, etc. vs Saul’s compromise, or Moses’ rush to strike the rock)
God expects you to honor your covenants/keep your word even to your own detriment. (Psa 15:4; 1Sa 20:14-17 w/ 2Sa 21:1-2)
Your sin has consequences and God expects you to accept that and move on. (David’s life was characterized by trouble after what happens with Bathsheba, but he doesn’t complain about it)
It’s important to be in your place when the fighting starts. (You don’t have to go sword to sword but do your part! This requires sacrifice, the good of the “nation” over personal achievement/comfort. Don’t be someone who sits on the sideline or worse, thinks we shouldn’t be fighting)

Closing Contemplation: at the end of your life, will your choices reveal you to have been more like Saul or David?

View Details

1Sa 2:1-10 - Similar to Charles Dickens’ intro to his famous book “A Tale of Two Cities”, Hannah’s prayer provides for us a preview and an intro to the themes present in 1st & 2nd Samuel. In these two books, we are told the life-stories of Israel’s first two kings, Saul & David.

Saul had all the potential to be a great king.

9:1-2 = Rich upbringing & physical presence

10:1-10 = God’s blessing, confirmation, & guidance

10:17-24 = The approval of most of the people

11:1-2, 5-8, 11-15

Saul was Israel’s yearbook selection for “Most likely to succeed”
Think of this from their perspective and the way Scripture lays it out
Saul’s life falls apart because he refuses to change his character flaws.

2.1. Impulsive = 1Sa 13:5-14 – Saul’s wrong sacrifice

Notice Saul’s arrogance to take it on himself to sacrifice. (e.g. Uzziah doing the same becomes a leper for taking priestly duties upon himself 2Ch 26 – too big for your britches syndrome)

Notice Saul makes excuses for why he did it (I feared b/c the people were scared, and the Philistines were bearing down on me)

VERY interesting, v. 12 – word for “forced” is typically “Restrain, or control yourself”, Saul does the opposite by “restraining” his conscience and acting anyway. Rom 14:23

2.2. Impulsive, rash & arrogant = Saul’s vow. 1Sa 14:24, 27-33, 38-46, 52

Saul creates a far worse situation by taking a vow that no one required. One he didn’t think through and resulted in further wrongdoing (eating w/ the blood). Pro 19:2/Pro 15:28

2.3. Impulsive, inattention to detail, arrogance, and fear of man = 1Sa 15:1-3, 7-9, 10-24, 25-31

Notice Saul still believes he did it correctly. V.13 & TRIPLES down on doing it the right way in the face of God’s messenger (e.g., Mat7; God’s present-day messengers = pastors). Saul makes excuses for what he did, doesn’t take ownership. Usually when people are zealous about taking ownership, it’s there BEFORE doing something wrong. Instead, getting Saul to own anything is like stapling jelly to the wall, moving target, all appearance-based.

Notice Saul 1) blames the people for preserving the sheep & fears what they’ll say if he puts his foot down. 2) Saul doesn’t want the shame of Samuel leaving, he asks him to “honor me before the people. V30-31. Look at how fearing what men think controls & makes you pathetic. Desperately clawing after Samuel to avoid the shame of discipline. When you don’t take ownership and don’t value obedience, you fear man, and can’t live with the disapproval of the people.

Saul is disciplined for his rebellion but shipwrecks his soul by refusing to submit to God’s discipline.

3.1. Notice the paranoia and attempts to stay in control that Saul makes. Despite Saul’s love for David, as soon as Saul perceives a threat, he attempts to kill David twice & then to get him killed. David 18:5-16. 25-30. Saul attempts to kill David once more & even Jonathan with the spear in person and hunts him in at least 4 major instances documented for us.

3.2. In his pursuit of David, Saul DOES murder the priests due to them helping David. 1Sa 21:1-10, 22:6-19. 1Ti 5:19

3.3. Saul ends his sad life still expecting to find God’s favor & throws a tantrum when God doesn’t answer. 1Sa 28:4-6 w/ v7, 10-11, 14-15, 16-19, 1Chr 10:13

Concluding principles from Saul’s life:

Response to discipline is a defining moment and test for people, possibly more than anything else (Heb 12, Jam 1, Pro 6; Pro 15:10 – hates reproof = death, Pro 15:31-33)
We shouldn’t be surprised or worried that those who refuse to submit to God’s discipline often end up being the worst enemies of God and His people. (e.g. Simon the Sorcerer, Cain, Judas; it can seem crazy that close friends/family leave the church and quickly turn around to lie, slander, and become enemies of Christ, but understand this follows the pattern in Scripture)
Moral decline doesn’t happen overnight. (Take stock of your current trajectory, not your current state. You can’t just look at data points, you have to plot the trajectory) Birds of a feather flock together. Don’t think ‘it happened to them, but it won’t happen to me’. What is it about these people that you’re attracted to?
What makes a man mighty in God’s eyes is not his ability to physically conquer but rather his commitment to carefully obeying God. This should be SUPER encouraging to us. God doesn’t need warriors or inherently special people to do great things – he just needs people to obey. You don’t have to be a king capable of routing nations, leading armies, slaying giants, for God to delight in what you’re doing, all you have to do is obey.
Having the deck stacked in your favor is an indicator of future POTENTIAL, not future SUCCESS. Your future success is contingent on being faithful now and in the future, not the amount of potential you currently have.

View Details

Stranger things = Those fringe subjects of the Bible which exist at the intersection of the supernatural and natural, the immaterial and material worlds.

“It would be dishonest of us to claim that the biblical writers read and understood the text the way we do as modern people, or intended meanings that conform to theological systems created centuries after the text was written. Our context is not their context. The proper context for interpreting the Bible is …not the modern world at all, or any period of its history. The proper context is the context of the biblical writers-the context that produced the Bible….The biblical context was produced by men who lived in the ancient near east (ANE). Seeing the Bible through the eyes of an ancient reader [therefore] requires shedding the filters of our [modern] traditions and presumptions. They processed life in supernatural terms.” – Michael S. Heiser (The Unseen Realm)

Dimensional portals (def.,): doors or gates and their accompanying bridges connecting the immaterial/spiritual/supernatural world to the material/physical/natural world allowing those with access, the ability to travel or send/receive things from one dimension (or realm) to the other (e.g., Rev 4:1 “door” = Portal; Consider also 2Co 12:2 – Like John, Paul most likely travelled through a dimensional portal).

Summary of what we learned in our previous two discussions:

1.1. In the Bible, access to the divine (a heavenly portal/gate which in most cases, is also identified as the house of God) is associated w/mountains (including hills and high places). Hence the name, “El Shaddai” (Literally, “God of the Mountain”):

1) Mt. Eden (Eze 28:13-14 “Every precious stone was your covering” = This statement along w/what follows could be a reference to a temple like structure that existed as God’s house on the mountain – Precious stones were a part of Solomon’s Temple – 1Ch 29:2)

2) Mt. Ephraim (Gen 28:10-22 “a ladder was set on earth with its top reaching to heaven; and behold, the angels of God were ascending and descending on it…‘This is none other than the house of God, and this is the gate [portal] of heaven [Bethel].’” w/Jug 4:5 “Bethel in the hill country of Ephraim”)

3) Mt. Sinai/tabernacle (Exo 24:1-18 w/the tabernacle being constructed at the base of the mountain – Exo 40)

4) Mt. Zion/Jerusalem Temple (Psa 84:1-3, 9), 5) Jesus as the eschatological Mt. Zion/Temple (house of God) (Mat 16:18 “rock” [mountain] w/Dan 2:35 [7:13] w/Isa 2:1-3; Joh 1:14 “dwelt” = Literally, “tabernacled”; Joh 2:19-21 w/Rev 21:22; Mat 16:19 “keys [to the portal/gate] of the kingdom of heaven”). Hence why also (Gen 11:1-9 “Babel” – later, “Babylon” or “Gate of Heaven”).

1.2. In the Bible, bodies of water (seas, lakes and rivers) are associated with death, the wicked and demons (Psa Psa 9:17 “the wicked…Sheol”; Luk 8:31 “demons…the abyss”, 16:23 “[wicked] in Hades”; Mat 8:31-32 “[the demons possessing the swine] rushed…into the sea” w/12:43 “[exorcised demon] passes through waterless places seeking rest [a water-filled place]”) (In re: to both Psa 18:1-17).

*For further study see L. Michael Morales (Who Shall Ascend The Mountain of the Lord?)

Conclusions (Inferences/Hypotheses) that can be drawn from what we have learned:

2.1. The above two truths, are why God’s salvation often involves (or is depicted as) deliverance from the watery depths and ascent to the mountain heights (bc we are moving from death to life/new life):

1) Noah and family: were delivered from the global flood to Mt. Ararat (Gen 7:6-7 w/17w/21-8:4)

2) Moses and Israel were delivered thru the Red Sea to Mt. Sinai (Exo 14:29-30 and 19:1-2)

3) David (in re: to Saul’s deadly manhunt) was delivered from “the torrents (rushing water) of ungodliness (or demonic assault, 1Sa 16:14)…the cords of Sheol…the snares of death…the many waters” to a place “on high” to the mountain of God - or God who is the mountain (“rock”) (Psa 18:1-7 w/15-17)

4) Us/Christians were delivered thru the waters of baptism symbolizing the place of our sin/death to new life on the mountain that is Christ (1Pe 3:20-21 w/Rom 8:3-4) Who experienced the same path in His mission to save us: baptism unto death (Luk 12:50) leading to resurrection and heavenly ascension from the top of a sacred mtn (Mt. Olivet).

2.2. Access to God – or His sacred mountain (for forgiveness, blessings, empowerment, guidance) has never been something available in any place, at any time or in any way (Exo 19:10-19 w/Psa 15 = Access to God/His mtn is limited and restrictive; Joh 12:25-26 = Access to El Shaddai Jesus is limited and restrictive; Again Mat 16:18-19 [Joh 20:21-23] = Forgiveness exists only in the church planted on El Shaddai Jesus and thru the hands of His anointed priests [Jam 5:14-16]).

2.3. Only God can open portals to heaven. The only portals we can open, are those to Hades (e.g., Gen 28:16 “surely God is in this place and I did not know it”) = Jacob plays no role in opening the portal, only in recognizing it. (Gen 11:4 w/6) = Their efforts in opening a heavenly portal was an exercise in futility, what however they could open in respect to evil had no limits [“nothing evil which they purpose to do will be impossible for them”]; 1Co 10:20 “sharers in demons” = Sacrifice to demons opens portals to [contact w/] demons).

2.4. Heavenly portals are necessary for salvation (Joh 3:3 “born again”) = Literally, born from above (Grk., anothen = Above, e.g., Joh 3:31 [“He who comes from above”]). Hence the reason the sacraments reside w/the church (i.e., the house of God/gate of heaven where these portals exist) (Mat 16:19).

2.5. The closer the portal the closer the help or hindrance (Dan 10:2-13) = It seems as though the angel was not able to simply appear at the place where Daniel was praying and fasting, but rather had to travel (from Jerusalem) through Persia to get to him (i.e., God was not willing to open a portal in Babylon). This implies that portals are not everywhere and the time it takes to receive supernatural help is determined by their proximity (See Num 1:51-2:2 w/Psa 34:7; Consider also Mar 5:25-30 = Jesus as the new house of God, was a walking portal). The proximity principle should also be assumed in relation to demonic activity (1Th 2:18 “Satan hindered us”).

2.6. The world is filled w/churches (sacred mountains) who, because their gospel is false and/or are compromising, have filled the world w/portals open to the demonic realm (Mat 16:18 “gates of Hades” w/Rev 18:2; Combined w/the previous point consider all the Evangelical churches that start in public schools – or false Christian schools [Roman Catholic, Evangelical] and what that means for those places – i.e., they are being overrun by demons. Could this be the reason for the uptick in violence, idolatry and immorality in our schools today?).

2.7. It should come as no surprise that false versions of Christianity share many similarities to true Christianity since this is how all effective false religions work. Consider the false religions of the ANE started by the 70 nations who are the descendants of Noah’s rebellious sons Ham and Japheth (Gen 10 Table of Nations). Because they share the same ancestors and experiences as the true followers of YHWH, what they produce as their god and religion share many of the same names, stories and beliefs (e.g., portals, sacred mtns and high places, the necessity of sacrifice, stories of Creation and the Flood, etc). The differences (in these false versions) exist in those areas where the truth is incompatible with their desires or agenda (e.g., a gospel req’g only faith to be saved).

The PNTM: counterfeits versions of YHWHism are bound to look like what is legitimate because of their past history or prior connection to the truth. Yet in the end, what they are – no matter the level of similarities, is a religion worshipping demons (e.g., Evangelicals are worshipping demons they call YHWH or Jesus. How many demons have been afforded the name YHWH or Jesus?).

2.8. Our tithing (or lack thereof) affects whether or not the heavenly portal (and its benefits) are available to us (Gen 28:22) = The ancient religion passed down to Jacob by Isaac and Abraham taught him the necessity of tithing to maintaining access to God’s heavenly portal and receiving His blessings (Mal 3:8-10 “windows” [Heb., arrubbah] = Flood-gate).

2.9. The biblical relationship between the sea and the demonic (Rev 13:1), as the alternate, acceptable existence for demons (Mat 8:32), could be the reason for UFOs entering and exiting from our oceans.

2.10. False churches are our world’s greatest threat: they promise a portal to heaven yet open those leading to the Hades and the devil (Rev 18:2)

2.11. The safest place on earth: Christ’s church (Joh 1:51; Mat 7:24 w/Psa 18:1-3),

2.12. Is it by accident that Christ Covenant Church sits on a high place (a hill) in the Mile High City – or is it poetic providence?

View Details

Stranger things = Those fringe subjects of the Bible which exist in the intersection of the supernatural and natural, the immaterial and material worlds.

What to keep in mind when discussing subjects like this: (1Ti 1:3 “strange doctrines”) = Doctrine that does not agree with orthodoxy – e.g., Gen 6:1-4 according to 1Enoch (fallen angels mated with human women who gave birth to the giants who actions and dead, demonic spirits are the main reason for humanity’s corruption [tbd under Divine Council]).

Why talking about these subjects are important:

1) we are living in stranger times (e.g., The US secret program that employed what is known as remote viewing [clairvoyance] from 1978-1995 [Project Stargate]; UFO/UAP and alien phenomena and their possible connection to world govts, the divine or demonic and other dimensions, our culture’s current obsession w/the supernatural [super-heroes, aliens, stargates/portals to other dimensions or multiverses [The Marvels, Avengers Infinity War and End Game, Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness, Spiderman Across the Spiderverse, Zac Snyder’s Justice League, Stargate, Fringe, Resident Alien, Ancient Aliens, Stranger Things, etc.], quantum mechanics/physics and its belief in multiple dimensions).

2) much of what the Scriptures have to say about these kinds of subjects were suppressed in the over correction of the Protestant Reformation [16th century] as the means to not only curtailing the myths of Roman Catholicism but also the hyper-supernaturalism that characterized much of the Middle Ages [400 – 1500 A.D.].

3) the evidence for dimensional portals (or “stargates”) or divine councils are not only present in the Scriptures but also other ANE[1] literature (Sumerian, Babylonian, Akkadian, Egyptian and Assyrian [e.g., the Epic of Gilgamesh, the Book of Gates).

4) the Bible presents a material world that is very connected to, dependent on, impacted and affected by an immaterial world filled with supernatural beings and power.

“Human events are inextricably intertwined with the events in heavenly places.” - Sinclair Ferguson (“Preaching From The Book Of Daniel”)

5) to speak of the events of life without consideration of their connection or impact on the spiritual realm would have seemed strange to the biblical authors living in the ANE. If we are to understand our bibles and its message to us, we must then understand it from their perspective.

“It would be dishonest of us to claim that the biblical writers read and understood the text the way we do as modern people, or intended meanings that conform to theological systems created centuries after the text was written. Our context is not their context. The proper context for interpreting the Bible is not Augustine or any other church father. It is not the Catholic church. It is not the rabbinic movements of late antiquity and the Middle Ages. It is not the Reformation and the Puritans. It is not evangelicalism in any of its many flavors. It is not the modern world at all, or any period of its history. The proper context is the context of the biblical writers-the context that produced the Bible. Every other context is alien to the biblical writers and, therefore, to the Bible….The biblical context was produced by men who lived in the ancient near east (ANE). Seeing the Bible through the eyes of an ancient reader [therefore] requires shedding the filters of our [modern] traditions and presumptions. They processed life in supernatural terms.” – Michael S. Heiser (The Unseen Realm)

Dimensional portals (def.,): doors or gates and their accompanying bridges connecting the immaterial/spiritual/supernatural world to the material/physical/natural world allowing those with access, the ability to travel or send things from one dimension (or realm) to the other (e.g., Rev 4:1 “door” = Portal; Consider also 2Co 12:2 – Like John, Paul most likely travelled through a dimensional portal).

The cosmology[2] established by the Bible seems to identify certain geographical locations as more likely to possess dimensional portals. The geographical locations most frequented by those living in the ANE for the purpose of connecting with the spiritual/immaterial/supernatural realm were the high places. Hence the reason communication w/God (or false gods), religious sacrifices and temples often existed on mountains (e.g., Mt. Sinai, Mt. Zion) or mountain-like structures (e.g., pyramids, ziggurats; the Tower of Babel)(See Tabernacle Prefigured: Cosmic Mountain Ideology In Genesis and Exodus, Who Shall Ascend The Mountain Of The Lord? by L. Michael Morales).
Those high places confirmed to be dimensional portals between heaven and earth are also referred to as the “house of God” (other by its other terms: “sanctuary”, “tabernacle” or “temple”). This is the point behind God resting on the seventh day [after the six days of Creation] - and the reason we are told to be gathering for worship on the Sabbath in God’s house. ANE thought teaches us that though God’s home is in heaven, the place He chooses to rest is in His house [think vacation home] on earth. In the beginning that was Mt. Eden, later it was Mt. Sinai.[3] Other houses of God and dimensional portals associated w/high places/mountains: 1) Jacob’s Bethel (Gen 28:10-19 [“Beth-el” = House of God; “gate of heaven” = Dimensional portal] w/Jug 4:5 [“hill country of Ephraim” = Mt. Ephraim; See also Gen 35:3, “let us go up to Bethel”]),

2) Israel’s tabernacle (Exo 29:44-45 w/1Chr 6:48 [“the tabernacle of the house of God”]; Exo 40:34 w/24:15-16 [“cloud…glory of the Lord” = God’s Presence transfers to the tabernacle identifying it as the new sacred mountain of God and gate to heaven] [4]), 3) Jerusalem’s temple/sanctuary (2Chr 6:6 w/Psa 78:68-69; Psa 48:1-3 w/9 w/13 [“Mount Zion…His holy mountain…Your temple…her palaces”] w/Psa 27:4 [“house of the Lord…His temple”]).

Understanding the connection between high places and heavenly portals (the presence of God/the divine) helps us to better appreciate why: 1) important events or meetings are often referred to as “Summit Meetings” (e.g., G5 Summit; Gen 31:51-32:2 = The fact that Jacob and Laban are on a mountain when all these things happen [covenant/“pillar” of “witness” est’d, God invoked for judgment, sacrifice is made] and supernatural events are experienced [“angels of God” are on the mtn] is not by accident. Jacob and Laban no doubt saw this place as a potential portal [“This is God’s camp”]), 2) Jesus and His disciples found solace in the high places or mountain gardens (Mt. Olivet, Luk 21:37; its mountain garden:: the Garden of Gethsemane – consider also the angels who are there – Luk 22:39-43), 3) the gospel is connected to a high place/mountain (Isa 52:7 [Rom 10:15; Eph 6:15]) = Reference to the mountain tells us the messenger possesses a message from “on high” – i.e., it comes from God.

Jesus moves the house of God or dimensional portal between heaven and earth off the former sacred mountains and on to Himself and His churches. The physical location of Jesus’ churches wb be global and no longer require the need of a literal high place or sacred mountain (Joh 4:20-24 “worship in spirit and truth”) = Access to God (for forgiveness, blessings, empowerment, authority) would no longer be based on Jewish bloodline or its former sacred mountain (Zion/Jerusalem). God’s people would instead be born by the Spirit and building their lives on the truth/teachings of Jesus – God’s new sacred mountain – the eschatological Mt. Zion of the prophets. (Mat 16:13-18a) “I also say to you that you are Peter” = Jesus seems to be indicating that the reason He gave “Simon Barjona” (v17) this nickname (“Peter [Grk.-masc., petros] is a modified version of the actual term for rock [Grk., - fem., petra])[5] at the beginning of His ministry (Joh 1:42 “Cephas” [Aramaic for rock]) was for this divinely orchestrated moment, Simon (or Peter’s) powerful proclamation of Jesus’s identity (“You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God” – v16) a statement which also identifies Jesus as eschatological Mt. Zion of the nations, the foundation of God’s new house and fountain of His new laws (Isa 2:1-3 w/Dan 2:35) = The eschatological “mountain” of Isaiah and Daniel’s visions are the same. And according to Dan 7:13-14, the divine mountain is a Divine Person (Dan 7:1-18 is a repeat of Dan 2:31-45). Jesus alludes to Himself as the mountain and His church where His laws/truth will not only be taught but obeyed in (Mat 7:24 “rock” = An epithet for mountain often used when speaking of God – e.g., Psa 18:2, 31, 46[6]). Like before however, worship on this new mountain (and new house) would require a portal/access to heaven since it too would possess spiritual commodities to be received by heaven (the sacraments). Hence (Mat 16:19). The church is therefore the new Jacob’s ladder or heavenly highway, the sacred space on earth where an influx of celestial traffic and new spiritual commodities [e.g., the sacraments; judgments – Mat 18:18-20” I am there in your midst” = The heavenly portal is open and I am participating w/you in your judgments; See also 1Co 5:4 and Act 15:19-20 w/28-29][7] pass through on a regular basis (Mat 28:20b “I am with you always” [i.e. there on a regular basis] w/Joh 1:51; Heb 12:22-29; Hence Eph 1:23 “fills all in all” = Christ’s full presence resides in the church b/c of the heavenly portal that exists there).
Like those worshipping false deities (demons), those churches given to moral compromise or false gospels, can become portals and/or open portals of Hades. Like those houses of God before it, Jesus’s promise in Mat 16:18b (“gates [or portals] of Hades will not overpower it [the church]”is conditioned upon the church’s practice of righteousness and justice – and embracing the true gospel.[8] (e.g., Rev 3:8 in contrast to Rev18:2 w/16:13-14 [“false prophet” = Israel’s priesthood] = B/C of her rejection of Jesus and His gospel, the OC church [Israel] not only became a false religion but a portal to Hades that filled Jerusalem w/demons]; Deu 32:15-17 [“Jeshrun” = Israel] w/Psa 106:37-38 and 1Co 10:16 w/19-20) = As in the case w/God, what can be safely assumed is that worship [sacrifice] to demons [knowingly or unknowingly] likewise opens portals allowing them passage into our dimension – or bodies. Hence the reason the global corruption of the church will eventually accomplish the permanent emancipation of Satan and the demons from Hades (Rev 20:7-8).

CLOSING COMTEMPLATION: What conclusions (inferences or hypotheses) can be drawn from what we have learned about the Bible’s cosmology and teaching on dimensional portals? [Make a list and discuss!]

[1] ANE: Ancient Near East. The world of the bible’s authors and teachers (2,000 BC – 100 AD).

[2] Cosmology refers to the way we understand the structure of the universe. According to ANE thought, the universe was comprised of three realms or dimensions: 1) heavenly for God and angels, 2) earthly for humans, 3) underworld (under the earth) for the dead, the devil and his angels. All three are depicted in the second of the Ten Commandments (Exo 20:4).

[3] It is possible that like Moses on Mt. Sinai, so also Adam would summit Eden to meet w/God on the Sabbath. On the other days, God could be found walking in the garden at its base (e.g., Gen 3:8).

[4] “The experience at Sinai as mountain of God will give way to another reality as this approach to God in worship is carried though the tabernacle as a portable mountain of God…Because the tabernacle is an architectural embodiment of the mountain of God, the transfer of God’s Presence from Sinai to the tabernacle yields other links and correspondences between them. Commentators, at least since Ramban in the Middle Ages, have noted the similarity between Mount Sinai and the tabernacle, first in relation to their tripartite divisions whereby the holy of holies (the priest’s sole access) corresponds to the summit, the holy place (accessed by the priesthood) corresponds to the second one partway up the mountain, and the outer court with the altar (accessed by the people) corresponds to the base of the mountain, also with an altar (Exo 19:1-25 w/24:1-2, 9-18)…After Adam’s and Eve’s expulsion from the garden of Eden, YHWH installed cherubim to guard the entrance – specifically to bar access to the tree of life (Gen 3:24). The only other place within the Pentateuch where one reads of the cherubim is in relation to the tabernacle (Exo 36:8, 35). Also, the tree of life in the garden…symbolizing God’s life-giving Presence, appears to find correspondence in the stylized tree the menorah – of the tabernacle.” – Morales (ibid)

[5] The Roman Catholic church’s attempt to identify Simon as the same rock where Jesus will build His church reveals either their ignorance – or deliberate choice to ignore that these words are different and therefore referring to two different things.

[6] “The word ‘rock’, sometimes a synonym for mountain, is also an epithet for YHWH.” – Morales (The Tabernacle Pre-Figured)

[7] With respect to spiritual commodities consider the OT sacrifices or burnt offerings whose very name implies movement upward through God’s portal. “The supreme sacrifice, the burnt offering, or holocaust, is in Hebrew ‘ola, a going up.’” – Morales (ibid)

[8] It is worth noting that where Jesus makes this promise (“the gates of Hades”) is also on a mountain, Mt. Hermon, a place known in the ANE as “the gates of the dead.”

View Details

Stranger things = Those fringe subjects of the Bible which exist in the intersection of the supernatural and natural, the immaterial and material worlds.

Why talking about these subjects are important:

2) much of what the Scriptures have to say about these kinds of subjects were suppressed in the over correction of the Protestant Reformation [16th century] to not only curtail the myths of Roman Catholicism but hyper-supernaturalism that characterized much of the Middle Ages [400 – 1500 A.D.] and its theology.

4) the Bible presents a material world that is very connected to, dependent on, impacted and affected by an immaterial world filled with supernatural beings and power.

“Human events are inextricably intertwined with the events in heavenly places.” - Sinclair Ferguson (“Preaching From The Book Of Daniel”)

“It would be dishonest of us to claim that the biblical writers read and understood the text the way we do as modern people, or intended meanings that conform to theological systems created centuries after the text was written. Our context is not their context. The proper context for interpreting the Bible is not Augustine or any other church father. It is not the Catholic church. It is not the rabbinic movements of late antiquity and the Middle Ages. It is not the Reformation and the Puritans. It is not evangelicalism in any of its many flavors. It is not the modern world at all, or any period of its history. The proper context is the context of the biblical writers-the context that produced the Bible. Every other context is alien to the biblical writers and, therefore, to the Bible….The biblical context was produced by men who lived in the ancient near east (ANE). Seeing the Bible through the eyes of an ancient reader [therefore] requires shedding the filters of our [modern] traditions and presumptions. They processed life in supernatural terms.” – Michael S. Heiser (The Unseen Realm)

Dimensional portals (def.,): doors or gates and their accompanying bridges connecting the immaterial/spiritual/supernatural world to the material/physical/natural world allowing those with access, the ability to travel or send things from one dimension (or realm) to the other (e.g., Rev 4:1 “door” = Portal; Consider also 2Co 12:2 – Like John, Paul most likely travelled through a dimensional portal).

The cosmology[2] established by the Bible seems to identify certain geographical locations as more likely to possess dimensional portals. 1.1. The earth’s oceans or large bodies of water are depicted as uncreated space, the place of darkness, chaos and evil – and therefore the place where those go who are now dead (uncreated physically, no longer attached to a physical body, spirits) those who have left the “light” of creation or “light of life” (life/creation being associated w/life - Gen 1:3-4; Job 33:30; Psa 56:13; Joh 1:4, 8:12). The sea was therefore thought of as a portal to the underworld (again Exo 20:4). Most common biblical terms used to identify the underworld: “Sheol or Abbadon”– Job 26:5-6[3]). Support: (Gen 1:1-2, “formless and void” = Uncreated; Gen 6:17 w/7:21-23 w/1Pe 3:20-21 [Like the blood of the sacrifice, water removes what should not exist in creation – i.e., sin, to the place of uncreation[4]]; See also 2Pe 3:5-6 [“formed out of water by water” = The water represents the instrument of creation rather than creation itself. Peter also associates it w/destruction – which coincides with the idea of uncreation since this is the end product of destruction]; Psa 18:4-6 w/16-19, 49:14 [Sheol is associated w/darkness in contrast to the upright who rule in the light/“morning.” It is also the place where our created “form” is uncreated or “consumed”]; Job 17:13]; Jon 2:2-3; Isa 57:20-21; Jam 1:6; Jud 1:13; Hence Rev 21:1)[5].

Given this understanding consider water’s connection to demons or demon possession (Mat 8:31-32 w/12:43 = Water shares much in common w/physical bodies making it a nice alternative. In this sense, pigs are also a reasonable option as a transport vessel back to the water – especially given their recent eviction from their human host – the ideal home for sentient life-forms/spirits)[6].

1.2. In contrast, the earth’s land is depicted as created space and her gardens and high places or mountains (think Eden and the mountain of God in Eden) are depicted as sacred space, or the place where dimensional portals often exist. Hence the reason, ancient religions (those whose origins are closest to Creation and “religion zero”, or that originally instituted by God and practiced by Adam and Eve) are frequently associated with sacred gardens or high places, natural (mountains) or engineered (e.g., man-made ziggurats/pyramids of Mesopotamia and Egypt) (Exo 3:1; Deu 9:10; 1Ki 3:4; Psa 48:1-2, 68:15; Isa 2:3, 8:18, 14:13-5; 18:7, 51:3, 57:15; Jer 17:12; Eze 20:40, 28:13-14 [“Eden, the garden of God” in on the “holy mountain of God”]; Mic 1:5, 4:2; Heb 12:22; Rev 14:1, 21:10). With respect to the false religions existing in the ANE consider (Gen 4:12-14[7]; Gen 11:1-9[8]; Lev 26:30; Num 33:52; Deu 12:2; 1Ki 11:7, 12:31-32, 13:33; 2Ki 17:9-11, 29 Isa 65:3, 66:17). Mountains as sacred space also played a role in how those living in the ANE perceived the watery depths of the underworld. It existed at “the roots of the mountains” (Jon 2:5-6).

“[In the Bible] sacred space was poetically conceived as a world-mountain surrounded by the primeval waters. At the cloud-covered summit of the mountain is the temple, the dwelling of God, and at the base are the chaos waters, underneath which lies Sheol, the place of the dead. Representing God’s life-giving Presence, the waters of life flow from the summit of the mountain. Movement away from life (creation) toward death (chaos); and, conversely, movement toward God is expressed as an ascent from death to life…Hence the movement from death to life, from exile to entry into God’s Presence, involves a pattern of deliverance through waters to the mountain of God. Noah and his household…will be delivered through the waters of deluge to the Ararat mount where he will offer sacrifices and receive divine blessing. Later, Israel will be delivered through the waters of the sea and brought to Sinai, entering into covenant with YHWH. The pattern of exile or expulsion entails the reverse movement: from the temple of God to the waters of destruction.” – L. Michael Morales (Who Shall Ascend)

“God’s holy mountain, where His temple is located, is the center of the cosmos, or orderly creation. The farther away from the center of the cosmos one goes, the more one moves into the realm of chaos or non-creation. The spatial image is equally vertical and horizontal. Vertical, the heavens are the source of existence and creation; the underworld and abyss are the place of death and nonexistence. Horizontally, the land around the mountain of one’s god is known and understood and therefore thought of as most ‘created’; the sea which lay beyond the limits of the land was unsolid, non-formed – in other words, ‘uncreated’.” – B.F. Batto (“The Reed Sea: Requiescat in Pace”).

[1] ANE: Ancient Near East. The world of the bible’s authors and teachers (2,000 BC – 100 AD).

[3] When referring to the unrighteous dead, the NT uses the terms, “Hades” or the “abyss” or the “bottomless pit.” This underworld place is also associated w/Satan and the demons (e.g., Luk 16:23; Mat 11:23; Luk 8:31; Rev 9:1-11, 20:1-3).

[4] With respect to the animal sacrifices of the Bible, the reason God prescribes them is so that sin – a corrupting element to the code of creation or life, can be properly dispensed of (or cleansed) through (or upon) something which (through its death) is leaving creation (i.e., being uncreated). What however man needs to truly experience freedom (from sin), is new creation. This then is what was accomplished and has been applied to us through Christ’s “uncreation” (death) and “recreation” (resurrection).

[5] That the sea is more than simply a metaphor can be seen by its use in Revelation where it also provides clues to the Beast’s geographical origin (e.g., Rev 13:1).

[6] The underworld is itself not filled with water. According to Zechariah, it is a “waterless pit” (Zec 9:11) implying that it is also a place of some level of discomfort or unrest (compare again to Mat 12:43 and also Luk 16:23 [Hades]).

[7] The first deviation from “religion zero” is connected to the Bible’s first apostate, Cain. After being driven from the presence of God and Eden’s east door/gate (the established place of sacrifice after the Fall – Gen 3:24 w/11-16), Cain, no longer able to receive forgiveness (hence his response, v13, “my punishment is too great to bear!”), finds spiritual solace (and “new religion”) in his son (Enoch) and seeks a high place (or mountain) to build a city in dedication to his name (versus the name of God) (v17; archeology: Mesopotamian island hill-city of Eridu; in Sumerian, Nun-ki) . Hence the contrast mentioned in vv25-26. Archeology believes Cain’s city to also be the later site of the Tower of Babel/Babylon (which means, “Gate of God”) - the engineered (man-made) religious high place constructed on a now very flat (post Flood) area (Gen 11:1-4).

[8] “The ziggurat builders wanted access to the divine through the gate [portal] of heaven.” – L. Michael Morales (Who Shall Ascend the Mountain of the Lord?); “Such cultic towers were typical of the time in ancient Mesopotamia. Their purpose was to serve as a gateway between heaven and earth whereby the god could come down and even refresh himself on the way down to the earthly temple.” -G.K. Beale (“The Descent of the Eschatological Temple in the Form of the Spirit at Pentecost.”); “The Sin of the tower builders is their desire to storm the heavens and make a name for themselves, which symbolically means that they seek to invade the divine realm and become immortal like gods [to dethrone God and set themselves in His place].” – A. Gnuse (“An Overlooked Message: The Critique of Kings and Affirmation of Equality in the Primeval History.”).

View Details

The problem is not ours, but theirs.
We are in good company.
Our primary mission is to be the aroma of Christ to the lost, not win the lost to Christ.
Our primary audience and antagonist is and will be the false churches of the world.
God uses the persecution of false churches to purge the apostate from Christ's true church.
Persecution serves as one of the greatest and most reliable assurances that we are going to heaven.
The Evangelical rejection of the true gospel may also be another sign that Jesus will be returning soon.

View Details

Common belief today: “We have the right to transfer our membership whenever we want, for whatever reason we want, as long as we believe the other church to be biblical.”

Those who believe such things indicate they are not only completely ignorant – or rebellious to, what the Bible actually teaches on this subject, but also the church’s divine authority in such matters[1].

We cannot transfer to another church without our current church’s allowance or approval.

Why? Because our membership is attached to our baptism and our baptism is the property of the church currently possessing it -not us.

1.1. God only recognizes us as a member of a specific church when that church performs/possesses our baptism (Act 2:41 “added” [to the church as members] at the point of baptism). IOW: Membership = Baptism.

1.2. To transfer our membership to another church therefore requires the transfer of our baptism to that church.

1.3. Given that baptism is also the way we receive initial forgiveness or the washing away of our sins, it constitutes one of the keys of salvation given to the Christ’s churches – not the individual (Act 2:38, 22:16 w/Joh 20:21-23 w/Mat 16:18-19: Keys unlock gates – in this case, the gates to the kingdom of heaven [in contrast to v18 “gates of Hades”]. The key of baptism gives us access to the blessings of the Spirit and forgiveness [the blood of Christ]).[2]

1.4. Transferring to another church would therefore also require allowance/approval of the church (possessing your baptism) since: 1) they (not you) are the owners of that heavenly access key (baptism) (again, the keys are the property of the church not the individual) (Gen 28:11-18: Notice the gate to heaven is in God’s house, the pillar of truth; the NT church is that place today - 1Ti 3:15 “household of God…pillar…of the truth”), 2) it is impossible to have access granted by another church since only one legitimate baptism is allowed (Heb 6:1-6 “washings” which makes us “partakers of the Holy Spirit.” = Baptism; “impossible to renew them again to repentance since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God” = No second forgiveness or cleansing from sin – i.e., No second baptism; Hence, Eph 4:5)[3].

1.5. As additional support that our baptism is the property of the church and not us, consider also the church’s authority to permanently bind or remove forgiveness (i.e., declare apostasy) – which therefore means the rescinding of that person’s baptism (Mat 16:19 and Joh 20:21-23 w/Mat 18:17-20). Hardly could the church do that if baptism was the property of the individual (at least not without their consent)!

The church where our baptism resides, must be very careful when it comes to transferring a person’s baptism/membership to another church.

Why? Because the church where our baptism currently resides – most specifically its shepherds (elders/pastors), have been assigned as our primary overseers for protection and the promotion of obedience to Christ’s commands (Mat 28:19 w/20; Act 20:28).

2.1. Allowing members of the church to leave without absolute confidence in the new church and its pastors, would therefore constitute a failure in these shepherds’ duty of care for which they will be severely judged (Act

20:26-27 w/Eze 33:7-9; Jam 3:1).

2.2. This will be especially true if the church where their membership is transferred possesses: 1) a false gospel (allowance to or approval of a church with a false gospel is the same as approving a false gospel which in turn brings judgment on their former church – or at least its pastor; Gal 1:6-9 w/2Jo 1:9-11) or 2) no relationship w/their current church by which to confirm the legitimacy of their gospel (that they are a true church) and competency of their shepherds (that they are a safe church) (Act 20:28-31 = Guard the flock from wolves. Would anyone consider someone to be a good shepherd guarding their flock from wolves if they allowed them to be cared for by strangers or someone they knew to be incompetent? This is akin to those Jesus refers to as “hired hands” or false shepherds – Joh 10:12-13; Consider this same question from the perspective of a parent)

Clear evidence it is not God’s will that the church allow or approve of the transfer of someone to another church:

3.1. They have outstanding discipline or grievances with their existing church (Mat 5:23-26).

3.2. The church they wish to be transferred to is false or not safe (point #2; Consider Paul’s perspective in regard to those pastors he knew to be false though they claimed to be comrades and had received the support of the people – 2Co 11:6 w/10-15 = Paul fought against giving approval or equal footing to flaky or false shepherds – regardless of what other people thought. Notice also, Paul has no problem using strong language in his assessment of such men).

3.3. Their current church does not know or have a relationship w/the transfer church so as to confirm them as true and safe (again, point #2). The idea that the church can trust the individual to make that decision is like saying we trust our children to make the big decisions in the home or the patient to determine the diagnosis or prescription for the doctors [who will still be responsible for the consequences of those decisions]).

3.4. They don’t want their current pastor over them and/or believe him to be unrighteous/unfit/using his office for evil/a false teacher - though they do not have the biblically required evidence to prove it (1Ti 5:19; Deu 17:12-13; Num 16:1-3 w/Num 15:30-31 w/Mat 12:32; Consider also 2Co 13:1-2).

3.5. They want to live somewhere too far from the existing church w/o confirmation of a church in that area (Jam 4:13-17).

3.6. There is nothing to be gained by them or the other church (this is the pattern est’d in the NT: those sent out will profit those other churches [e.g., Phoebe, Rom 16:1-2; Apollos, 1Co 16:12 w/Act 18:24; Timothy, 1Ti 1:3; Paul and Barnabas, Act 13:1-4]).

CLOSING CONTEMPLATION: What should the church follow, the will of God or the will of people (those wanting to transfer)?

[1] Both now and going forward, what is to be assumed is that the church we are attempting to transfer from is a biblical church as well as the church where we were baptized or is currently possessing our baptism based on the allowance or approval of our baptizing church.

[2] Hence the reason churches have always viewed the sacrament of baptism as the prerequisite to the other key of the kingdom, the LT (the sacrament where we receive continued cleansing by Christ’s blood – Joh 13:1-10), because baptism is the only way to gain access to this atoning reservoir (the blood of Christ resides in His church – Act 20:28; In this light Consider again Joh 13:10 = IOW: the original bath or washing of baptism by Jesus is what grants us access to the additional – and necessary washing provided thru the “supper” [v4]).

[3] “The sacrament of baptism is but once to be administered unto any person," - WCF, (ch.27)

View Details

Our Billboard campaign has begun! Below are the mission critical truths we need to know if we are to be successful in fulfilling our evangelistic ministry (2Ti 4:5):

Salvation requires you believe/practice the right gospel (i.e. the gospel of gain by faith in Jesus Christ and maintain by faithful obedience to all His commands versus the false gospel of faith alone).

1.1. (Rom 3:28 [gain] AND Jam 2:24 [maintain]; 1Jo 1:6, 2:3-4) = We need more than faith to get to heaven. We must be faithful, otherwise what was gained initially by faith wb lost and we wb counted as “liars” (to our covenant oaths) before God. GRAVEDIGGER: Can a Christian get to heaven whose life is characterized by disobedience? (No, Jam 2:14ff). Obedience is therefore another condition of salvation and the FAG is (therefore) false.

1.2. Popular today is the idea that precision/correctness w/respect to the gospel doesn’t matter. What God cares about is strictly belief and practice. IOW: Even if our gospel is wrong/false, we are good as long we truly believe it and are committed to its practice.

1.3. What God’s Word teaches (Gal 1:6-9) = The context is gospel mechanics (what we must do to be saved) not historical facts (Who Jesus is and what He did). We need to get both right (historical facts: 1Co 15:1-4).

1.4. What about those who sincerely love God yet are ignorant to the right gospel? God leads those people out of their ignorance and into the truth (He sends messengers):

1.4.1. The apostle Paul (1Ti 1:12-15 “Yet for this reason I found mercy”) = B/C Jesus saves the ignorant sinner who is sincerely seeking God (v12, “faithful” = Paul’s problem was intellectual not moral)

1.4.2. Cornelius (Act 10:21-22 w/34-35)

1.4.3. Apollos (Act 18:24-26)

1.4.4 Woman at the well (Joh 4:20-24 [“must worship Him in spirit and truth” = You need to have the right gospel] w/28-29, 39-42).

1.5. These are the kinds of Evangelicals we are looking for (those welcome to God/those whose problem is intellectual not moral/those “worthy” to receive the gospel). What to do w/those whose problem is moral (Mat 10:12-15) = Notice: those who are “worthy” are: 1) the only ones we give our time to, 2) the ones whose problem is not moral (v14, “does not receive you, nor heed your words” = Is not teachable to what you are saying; Mat 16:1-4).

1.6. POINTS NOT TO MISS: 1) There is no such thing as a saved person that believes and practices the wrong/false gospel. 2) God wants us to be seeking those who are seeking Him (those whose problems are intellectual – not moral).

Just because a person or church claims to believe/practice the right gospel doesn’t mean they do.

2.1. (Tit 1:16)

2.2. Most every person or pastor who claims to be a Christian will initially “agree” that obedience is necessary to salvation yet when pressed further, it becomes only nice but not necessary (e.g., Andy and Kasey pastoral interviews). Further investigation is therefore necessary.

2.3. Questions for assessment: 1) do they hold to the FAG? (if a church, check their website), 2) Can a Christian get to heaven whose life is characterized by disobedience (e.g., continues to live with their girlfriend) if that person continues to fully trust Christ for their righteousness and faithfully confess their sin to God? 3) In relation to a church, how often do they practice church discipline, enforce obedience or declare people apostate? (Mat 7:15-23: bad fruit = practicing lawlessness – or in the case of a church, allowing for the practice of lawlessness).

2.4. Verifying a person or church as truly legitimate takes time. In the early church, you could not move from one church to another w/o pastoral collaboration for this very reason. Churches or people professing to be legit was not naively assumed to be true (or allowed to be true b/c people wanted to take a “vacation” from their current church [usually a sign of rebellion and thinking they will be more effective at flying under the radar elsewhere – (e.g., my conversation w/a Reformed Baptist pastor in LA; our response to the elder and people from the Evergreen church).

You cannot be a saved person (Christian) yet not baptized and a member of church believing/practicing the right gospel.

3.1.There is no such thing as a saved person who has not received remission/forgiveness of their sins (“Baptism is said to be ‘for the remission of sins’ and to ‘wash your sins away’. Unless one is prepared to say that one is saved without their sins being forgiven, then they must admit that baptism is a condition of salvation” – Robert Oliver, Clinton Church of Christ) (Act 2:38, 22:16; 1Pe 3:21). Consider Christ’s confirmation of baptism in the gain and maintain gospel presented by Jesus in (Mat 28:18-20).

3.2. The “keys” of the kingdom (baptism and the LT) have only been given to those churches built by Christ—churches possessing the right gospel (Mat 16:17-19 w/Joh 20:21-23 w/Act 20:28).

3.3. Hence the reason the early church was fond of saying, “there is no salvation outside of the church.”

It is possible for people/churches to have different doctrinal beliefs/practices yet still believe/practice the right gospel.

4.1. Though a church/person may possess different doctrinal beliefs or practices (doctrine or practice that may even create theological, ethical or logical contradictions), as long as those doctrines and practices do not negate their belief and practice of the right gospel, we are to view them as our brothers and sisters in Christ.

4.2. Examples of different doctrine that does not immediately negate a person or church’s ability to believe and practice the right gospel: 1) Calvinism, 2) Creedal Baptism, 3) limited forms of Continuationism (those versions not negating Scripture as our final authority or the existence of a closed canon), 4) Dispensationalism, 5) Premillennialism.

4.3 Examples of different doctrine that does immediately negate a person or church’s ability to believe and practice the right gospel: 1) Antinomianism (belief that any portion of God’s Law is no longer in force or must be observed), 2) Modalism (Oneness Pentecostalism), 3) any denial of Jesus’ full humanity or full deity, 3) Open Theism, 4) denial of Ecclesiastical Soteriology (sacerdotalism or the authority of the church in salvation), 5) denial of eternal and literal heaven and hell, 6) denial of baptism as necessary to salvation, 7) any rejection of God’s Word as our final authority, a closed canon or the embracing of progressive revelation (e.g., some Pentecostals/Charismatics and all Roman Catholics), 8) Neo-Orthodoxy.

4.4. POINTS NOT TO MISS: 1) There is big difference between saying that someone holds to different doctrine versus a different gospel. 2) Some doctrine/practice automatically negates a person’s belief or practice of the right gospel (e.g., Gal 5:1-4).

Just because a church believes/practices the right gospel doesn’t mean it is a safe church.

5.1. True churches can still be dangerous churches.

5.2. The problems these churches (or their pastors) can still have: 1) Intellectual problems. The pastor is weak in the following areas: logic and critical thinking, Special Revelation -i.e., Scripture [1. hermeneutics or interpretation, 2. grammar or how language works, 3. worldview/framework theology, 4. biblical theology, 5. biblical jurisprudence/justice – inc. the proper practice of church discipline/excommunication and apostasy, cap crimes, 6. systematic theology -most esp., soteriology and theology proper, 7. church history and tradition, 8. ancient culture, 9. the ability to recognize biblical patterns of continuity and timeless principles], General Revelation [philosophy, psychology, sociology, economics, business, finance and law]) (Hos 4:6). 2) Moral problems. The pastor is a hypocrite (preaching against the practice of sin yet practicing sin), lazy, cowardly (not enforcing obedience) or a people-pleaser (not willing to say the tough things).

5.3. Examples of the kinds of spiritual dangers created by pastors w/intellectual or moral problems:

5.3.1. Practical antinomianism (pastor preaches obedience but does nothing to see that it is enforced).

5.3.2. Legalism (Practice/Prohibition incorrectly supported/not supported by Scripture - e.g., Some Churches of Christ claim to hold to the right gospel yet b/c of their gross ignorance of the continuity that is communicated between the Old and New Covenants, they don’t allow for anything not explicitly mentioned in the NT - like musical instruments in worship [in the OT, God establishes musical instruments for worship in His OC house, why wouldn’t we expect the same for His NC house?]. For this same reason, they also reject infant baptism [1. NT teaches the church/Christians are the inheritors of the Abrahamic promises – 2Co 1:20; Gal 3:29, 2. one of God’s promises to Abe was special provision for babies born to covenant parents – Gen 17:7-13, 3. that promise now looks like baptism – Col 2:11-12]).

5.3.3. Fail to create an environment promoting faithfulness/fail to understand what constitutes faithfulness (Def., of faithfulness = A life characterized by obedience that is driven by a constant lack of intellectual and moral satisfaction; 2Pe 1:5-11; 1Co 9:24 = Run to win not simply finish; 1Th 4:9-10 “But urge you…excel still more” w/3:12-13 = Perennial push to excel is the key to being established before God as “without blame”, the requirement for getting to heaven – 2Pe 3:10-14 w/3:17-18; Mat 18:7-9; Mat 28:20 “teaching them to obey all that I have commanded” = Constant learning and changing. We are driven to increase our knowledge so that our obedience may also increase; Heb 5:11-6:6 = Lack of maturity/excelling makes us more prone to apostasy).

5.3.4. Lack of wisdom. Examples: 1) inability to make the distinction between intellectual and moral problems. An improper diagnosis w/respect to either - or ignorance of the need to make such distinction, will lead to improper prescription [discipleship or discipline], abuse and people failing to possess the tools necessary to gain victory over their sin. 2) ignorance of the church’s authority and the power of her sacraments. Rejection of these two truths results in an impotent community overrun by sin.

5.3.5. The creation of unnecessary stress and suffering that makes faithfulness more difficult (e.g., church’s position on divorce: never any grounds or limited to a very wrong understanding of what constitutes adultery [i.e., sexual intercourse w/another person versus Mat 5:32 = porneia establishes mocheuo]).

5.3.6. Lack of justice or equity. Most churches’ jurisprudence is non-existent. The pagan courts of America have thought more and instituted, more of what the Bible teaches on this subject than the majority of churches on the planet. As a result, the justice practiced by most churches often protects the guilty and punishes the innocent.

5.3.7. Lack of proper pastoral oversight (See Malcom Gladwell, Revisionist History podcast, In Triplicate (findings from the Triplicate Program during the Opioid Crisis = More oversight/policy/rules results in more people obeying the law and less people suffering as victims). Where would this congregation be if left to self-police? Would JUDCO even exist? What crimes and violations would go unpunished? How many more people wb taken advantage of? What curses wb upon our congregation for sins left unchecked in the Body? If a Christian whose life is characterized by disobedience cannot get to heaven , what is that church doing to prevent that from happening (Jam 5:20)?

5.4. POINT NOT TO MISS: Not all saving churches are safe churches. The stupidity or sinfulness of its shepherds will affect your chances of getting to heaven (Mat 10:24-25a = Most Christians will not rise above the intelligence or morality of their shepherd; Mat 18:6).

View Details

Just as children bear the image of their family, God created us as image-bearers to be a part of His family. He also created human families with this goal in mind: we would teach our human families to join - and be supremely loyal to, God’s family -i.e., to embrace “the blood of the covenant [family as] stronger than the water of the womb”. The wonderful gift of family is therefore a deep and divinely constructed part of our DNA. It is what gives us identity and purpose. And it is central to God’s Creation and Christian mandate: we conquer for Christ and His kingdom only as a united family (Mat 28:18-20 w/Phi 1:27-30). Satan and sin have however taken this wonderful gift and perverted it: pitting human families against the family of God (e.g., Gen 11:1-9 = the Tower of Babel: the human families of Noah’s evil son Ham, stand against God and His family, Noah’s righteous son Shem and his descendants including Abraham [11:10-23] who was not only alive at the time of the Tower, but Jewish tradition records him as living at Noah’s house for 39 years and leaving to spread the truth about God after its destruction; Rev 20:7-9 = Satan will unite the human families of earth against the family of God, Rev 20:7-9).

What (then) we need to know (beyond this) so that we do not end in eternity w/ the wrong family:

Jesus knew His ministry would cause division in human families b/c it would involve calling people back to loyalty to God’s family over their human families (Mat 10:34-37) “Me” = My family (Mat 10:40; Joh 13:34-35). (Luk 1:16-17) “turn the hearts of the sons of Israel back to the Lord their God” = “turn the hearts back to the children” (or “restore the hearts of the fathers to their children and the hearts of the children to their fathers” – Mal 4:6). The patriarchs are the “fathers” (e.g., Abraham). In this way the Jews would be “a people prepared for the Lord” – i.e., worthy to receive salvation from Jesus/Messiah. What was the heart of “father” Abraham? He chose God (or God’s family) over his only (beloved = special, miracle, divine promised) son, Isaac, the child gaining honor for his human family (e.g., Luk 1:25; the reason some parents live vicariously thru certain children – they are the child that finally made them feel like a success/gave them the honor their former life had not afforded to them) (Gen 22:1-18: Notice the lack of hesitancy, level of commitment and trust demonstrated by Abraham’s actions in carrying out God’s instructions to kill his son. The lesson no doubt learned by Isaac from his father’s actions: 1) there sb no question as to which family possesses our supreme loyalty/love - Gen 22:1 “tested” w/16, 2) love/loyalty to God’s family should make our love/loyalty for human family look like hate – Luk 14:26).
When we become Christians we are (therefore) committing to leave behind all loyalties to our human families and cleave (or cling) to God and his family (Mat 19:27-29). This truth is reinforced by the fact that how we join God’s family is through a marriage [God/Jesus becomes our Husband] (Gen 2
God greatly rewards and holds in high regard those who do not hesitate to demonstrate their loyalty to His family over their human family (again Gen 22:16-18; Exo 32:25-29 w/Deu 33:8-9 = The Levites gained the high honor of leading God’s people bc of their loyalty to God’s family over their human families).
Jesus saw the church as God’s family and the priority during His time on earth (Mar 3:31-35).
Jesus’ human family thought He was crazy because of His loyalty to God’s family (Mar 3:20-21 [w/31-35]: Notice what loyalty looks like: our homes are constantly filled w/God’s family – Act 2:42, 46).
We are expected to separate from human family who refuse to listen to the true gospel (the gospel calling for the complete submission of their entire life to faithfully obeying Jesus as their forever Boss) or God will group us w/them in their damnation (2Co 6:14-17) v17, “Therefore, come out from their midst and be separate” = A common OT theme w/ reference to both unrepentant/wicked outsiders and family members that – as a result of such unrepentant wickedness, have been placed under God’s damning ban/curse (outsiders – Isa 52:11, Jer 50:8, family - Deu 13:12-17; Rev 18:4). Paul’s use of this OT theme further reinforces his strong prohibition against relationship [“bound together”] or “fellowship” w/any persons (family or otherwise) who are unrepentant/wicked. Notice, Paul also makes his prohibition and its accompanying OT support, a condition of our covenant relationship w/God (vv16, 18). (2Jo 1:9-11) = Who more than our human family fits the description of those we would naturally welcome into our homes [i.e., give a greeting to]?). POINT NOT TO MISS: Being set apart as God’s holy people has always required separation from the unrepentant wicked.
Only those willing to endure the pain of separation from human family for the sake of Jesus will make it to heaven (again Mat 10:21-22 w/32-33 w/37; also Luk 14:25-35).
Jesus Himself suffered separation from human family b/c of His loyalty to God’s family (Luk 9:58-62) = The context is human family. When Jesus (therefore) speaks of having nowhere to lay His head, He is indicating He was separated from many of His human family and therefore possessed none of the expected places of rest afforded to weary travelers in ancient times (i.e., the homes of their family relatives).
Jesus’ first disciples suffered separation from human family b/c of their loyalty to God’s family (again, Mat 19:27-29)
Many among God’s family and greatest saints will be orphans (Mat 19:27; Psa 27:10).
Being a part of God’s family is performance-based and conditional – the very opposite of most human families and the reason many people choose the latter over the former (i.e., in my human family I don’t have to change or leave my sin behind to remain and receive its benefits) (Joh 10:17, 15:1-11; Jud 1:21; Deu 7:9).

CLOSING CONTEMPLATION: Two conclusions can be drawn from the truths above: 1) False gospels (and the world run by Satan) will always preach a Jesus and gospel message that exalts human family and unconditional love and demonizes the ideas of division and separation, 2) One of Satan’s greatest tools and man’s greatest stumbling blocks to getting to heaven wb human family.

CLOSING CHALLENGE: 2024 RESOLUTION: Excel in our love/loyalty to God’s family (1Th 4:9-10).

View Details

We live in a world dominated by feelings and that is not by accident. It is God’s ordained trial for us (and as such, Satan’s most prized strategy). Here then is what we need to know:

Getting to heaven requires that we stop living by our feelings[1] and become characterized by a life of obedience to Jesus’ words (i.e., God’s will [Law and mission]): 1) the terms “flesh”, “fleshly”, “passion”, and “sensuality” or commands to deny ourselves are often a reference to our feelings (Mat 16:24; Col 3:5-7; Gal 5:19 w/24; Rom 8:12-13 w/13:13-14; Tit 2:11-12; 1Pe 2:11, 4:1-3; Consider also Mat 7:24-27 = The “sand” or foundation of the second man’s house – the man not living in obedience to Jesus’ words, more than likely represents his feelings. He lives according to his feelings. As a result, when the storms or trials of life come, he is fickle and falls apart). 2) the command for self-control is a call to have command over our feelings (i.e., emotional intelligence) (Act 24:25; Gal 5:23; 2Pe 1:5-6; lack of s-c is what brings “difficult times” -2Ti 3:3). 3) living in obedience to Jesus’ words is what it means to live by the Spirit (which is always contrasted w/living by our feelings) (Joh 16:13-15 w/[Gal 5:16, 24-25; Rom 8:5]). 4) it is impossible to live faithfully for Jesus and be under the control of your feelings (Gal 5:17; Rom 8:6-8). 5) Feelings are weak and unreliable (Mat 26:41 and Rom 7:18; 2Co 1:17; Jer 17:7 in contrast to v9 “heart” = A reference to feelings). 6) Living by our feelings is sin (2Co 12:21).
Living by our feelings is associated w/loving the world and the message/enticement of false teachers and Satan which is why it is impossible to live according to our feelings and please God (1Jo 2:15-16; 2Pe 2:1-2, 7, 10, 18-20; Eph 2:1-3).
Everybody has the ability to win the war over their feelings, some however exacerbate their situation because of their choices, making it nearly impossible (Deu 30:11-14; 1Co 10:13; Mat 19:24-26).
Overcoming our feelings (i.e., possessing self-control or emotional intelligence) will require that: 1) we are self-programmed robots (we start like animals limited to feelings, afraid and unwise to everything [feelings don’t think – e.g., Teyve barks at boxes] and become self-programmed robots [programming our feelings thru conditioning/reinforced action that results in us becoming either adult animals or proper image-bearers -2Pe 2:12]. 2) as we get older/more removed from learning, we resort back to feelings as the main driver in decision-making and as a result, more averse to change/taking risks and fearful (Ecc 12:3-5). 3) we practice extreme degradation and desertion of our feelings as a guide for truth (1Co 9:27 [Modern translation: “I make it my b**ch”] = Degradation; Rom 8:13 “putting to death” = Desertion - treating how we feel as irrelevant to what is true/false; Mat 5:29-30, 18:7-10 = Completely ignore/dessert those things convincing you of rebellion so that you do not despise [lead astray] those looking to you for guidance [e.g., your children]; Important not to miss: when considering our approach to living the Christian life, analogies are never from the business world [i.e., it is not business etiquette or best practices that we are to employ], but rather the military or sports – which uses extreme degradation and desertion to be successful [e.g., boot camp instructor; David Goggins]; 2Co 10:1-5 = Fighting for God’s kingdom requires desertion in relation to our feelings). 4) we start with our tongues (Jam 3:1-2 “bridle the whole body” = Bridle your feelings).
Everyone is born welcome to God and will by their response to their feelings, either solidify themselves in that state – or a state of rebellion (Gen 22:16-18; Rom 1:18-26 = God eventually gives people over to their feelings [leading to His wrath] b/c of their choice to continue living according them [“gave them over in the lusts of their hearts…to degrading passions” = You can’t give someone over to something unless this was already present and in practice. This then is the source of their unrighteousness/ungodliness – v18]; Eph 4:17-22 = Living according to our feelings will eventually corrupt our souls - and once it is corrupted, there is no fix, even for Christians. Hence Heb 6:1-6 and 10:26-30).
The kind of preaching or proclamation (teaching and evangelism) practiced by Jesus and the apostles and prescribed by God and the Holy Spirit was always controversial and polarizing b/c it was never sensitive to the feelings of the audience since feelings won’t cause us to live for God (What you win them with is what you win them to; 1Th 2:1-5; 2Ti 4:2; Heb 4:12; Hence Paul can say 2Co 2:15-17 e.g., Mat 15:11-14; Act 4:1-2 w/18; Act 6:9-14 w/51-53; Act 9:22-23; Act 13:5-10, 14-16 w/44-51; Act 14:1-2 w/18-19; Act 17:1-6; Act 18:4-6; Act 28:20-24).
God will see to it that those who hate His truth- including His life purpose and plan for humanity (i.e., this life is a test of overcoming our feelings in favor of God and His ways that will determine who is worthy of heaven), are duped by Satan at His reveal (2Th 1:3-5 w/2Th 2:1-10).
There is only one feeling that is safe and sb promoted in our life and that is genuine heartfelt love for God and for others (a choice that results also in a feeling) since this is what overcomes the feelings most responsible for our failures as a Christian, fear, jealousy and pride [i.e., caring what others think] (Joh 21:15-17 [18:25-27]; 1Jo 4:12, 16-21; Love creates lasting commitment and consistency whereas fear, jealousy and pride, nothing but posers and pansies).
The feelings associated with our conscience – or our conscience and General Revelation, were never designed to be enough when it comes to determining right and wrong (IOW: we also need God’s Word – Special Revelation) (Gen 2:16-17).

CLOSING CONTEMPLATION/CHALLENGE: One of the sticky wickets associated w/the subject of feelings is that most people who are living according to their feelings (versus the Spirit/in obedience to Jesus) are completely blind to it - or in absolute denial. IOW: they don’t think they are that kind of person –or they do not they see it---which is what makes it difficult—and why we need to pick up on those objective cues (or signs) from Scripture so that we can see it and make the proper spiritual diagnosis of who we are before it is too late.

The objective signs that you are living according to your feelings: 1) what most determines your free time is what pleases you versus what pleases God, prospers His people or prepares you to better serve and advance His kingdom (Phi 1:21). 2) you are averse to change (change creates negative feelings). 3) you are constantly fighting doubt/suspicion w/regard to God, God’s Word, church, leaders or people though you possess no sound evidence to do so (1Ti 6:1-4). 4) you struggle w/fear, pride and jealousy or wanting to be in positions of importance so that people will look up to you (Jam 3:14-15 “natural” = “fleshly or animalistic – i.e., the basis for all judgment or actions is our feelings). 5) you are prone to insurrection against God’s leaders or causing division in the Body of Christ (Jud 1:18-19 “following ungodly lusts” [their feelings] –“these are the ones who cause divisions, worldly-minded [Literally, natural or animalistic – same word as Jam 3:15 referring to creatures operating off their feelings]). 6) Jesus is your sponsor rather than your Lord (i.e., He serves/fulfills your Christian vision for yourself [i.e., where you feel you wb most happy]). 7) you are sloppy w/your words (e.g., “I was making fun of my coat but it actually does a good job of blocking the wind” versus “I was being negative about my coat…”; Pro 15:28 = The Righteous are committed to making sure their communication is accurate [truth] versus just letting whatever they feel in the moment roll off their tongue. Sloppy in the little, sloppy in the big – Luk 16:10).

[1] Living by our feelings = Truth, morality [right and wrong], our actions and speech are predominately determined by our feelings.

View Details

A major reason churches fail to trust or follow their shepherds — or identify them as legitimately from Jesus, is bc they are ignorant of their job description - or more accurately, the job description they possess for that position in the church, does not agree with Scripture.

BC I want to avoid that pitfall in this church, this morning we are going to discover and be reminded of what God says about this subject or, What you should expect if your church truly possesses a shepherd from Jesus

They wb IMITATORS:

Jesus the Great Shepherd (Heb 13:20) promised to give Jesus-imitating shepherds as a gift to His people and primary caretakers of His body, the church, while He is in heaven. (Jer 3:15a “I will give you shepherds after my own heart”) = Shepherds w/the same heart (likes/dislikes, affections, agenda and desires) as Jesus (i.e., sheps who are imitators of Jesus in their shepherding). It’s fulfillment: (Eph 4:8 w/11 [“pastors” = shepherds] w/12 [“equipping…building up” = A caretaker]). POINTS NOT TO MISS: 1) If Jesus gave these kind of shepherds to His church, then it must not only be possible, but what we should expect and believe wb true of our shepherds. Hence the reason (Mat 10:40). 2) All of us need to possess a healthy level of skepticism, but skepticism that persists even when the evidence says otherwise is not healthy nor safe. It is pathological and rebellious unbelief (not against me –BUT GOD). Scripture to keep in mind (1Co 4:5 When the Lord comes He will “bring to light the things hidden in darkness and disclose the motives of men’s hearts” – i.e., no plausible deniability before God).

They wb EDUCATORS:

Central to their role as Jesus imitators, these shepherds will spend copious amounts of time educating their people in God’s Word since this is the key to trusting God. (Jer 3:15 [Eph 4:14 = Education/understanding of God’s Word/doctrine wb how the shepherds shore up instability/distrust; Pro 22:17-19) = Trust is the by-product of education; Education is the key to trust (not entertainment/manipulation of the emotions [e.g., the “sermons” in most churches]). The piece that makes this a little bit of “sticky wicket” = Retainage requires repetition—which means if the only time you ever hear what I preach on Sunday is (on Sunday) then what you retain wb very little (20-30% at best). Which means though I am doing the job of an educator, you are failing to do your job as a learner (i.e., to study the lecture, to go over and over it until you retain it or know it). This btw the way is what the Proverbs are talking about when it says, “seek understanding” – understanding is learning—AND learning requires repetition or study to retain the material. Are you doing that ---or do you think you have more important things to do? Remember: this is the key to trust (and the reason so many of you still struggle w/trust) –B/C you are uneducated (and you are uneducated) bc you care more about spending your time being entertained than being educated (learning or studying what is given to you every week [you trade the steak dinner for terd rolled in sugar]).

They wb OBSESSORS:

Because obedience is so important and empiricism (truth/morality, actions/speech det’d by feelings) so dangerous, Jesus’s shepherds become obsessed with making sure their people are growing in faithfulness to God’s laws while faithfully ignoring their feelings as their guide to truth. (This was Peter as witnessed in his second epistle; in re: to obedience or faithfulness, 2Pe 1:5-13; in re: to empiricism or truth/morality, actions/ speech det’d by feelings, 2Pe 2:1-2 “sensuality” = Empiricism [2:18]; See also 2:7 “unprincipled men” = People w/o laws governing them [instead it is their feelings – “sensual conduct”], 2:10 “indulge in the flesh” = “despise authority”; Empiricism [truth/morality, actions/speech determined by our feelings versus God’s Law] is at the heart of the faith- alone false gospel [2:18-20 “promising them freedom” = Freedom from God’s law – that which keeps us from corrupting and defiling ourselves).

They wb ENFORCERS:

Like Jesus, these shepherds will be incorruptible and unfaltering in their use of authority to secure justice in the covenant community. (Isa 42:1-4): “My Servant…My chosen One…I have put my Spirit [mantle of authority] upon Him” = A reference to Messiah. He wb characterized by two things: 1) The justice He secures will never mistreat or abuse those under it or fail to provide the tools necessary for the repentant sinner to be restored (They wb incorruptible). (1-2, “He will bring forth justice to the nations [In doing so] He will not cry or raise His voice, Nor make His voice heard in the street [the idea of chaos or disturbance caused by the malpractice or abuse of those in authority]”) w/(3, “A bruised reed…a dimly burning wick [the repentant sinner] He will not break…extinguish [destroy or leave w/o the hope of future restoration]”). IOW: His actions will establish equity in the covenant community. 2) The taunting or condemnation of the wicked and ignorant, or the obstacles they present will not intimidate or stop Him from securing justice in the covenant community (THEY WB unfaltering) (4). Jesus-imitating shepherds will (because of such imitation) be characterized by the same two things: they too will be incorruptible (no malpractice/no abuse) and unfaltering (never intimidated or discouraged) in their use of authority to secure justice.

In addition to what has already been said, it sb noted that the securing justice for the covenant community also requires a staunch rejection of empiricism (i.e., judgments based on feelings). This too is picked in the picture painted by the prophet w/respect to the coming Messiah (Isa 11:1-5) “He will not judge by what His eyes see, nor make a decision by what His ears hear, But with righteousness He will judge…” = Don’t miss the contrast being made by Isaiah between judgment that takes place by way of the senses (what the eyes see or the ears hear) versus judgment based on righteousness. One is sensual (or based on how judgment is affected purely by those devices – how our feelings are manipulated or moved --empiricism), whereas the other (righteousness – referring to God’s Law) is outside of us—and therefore objective (or able to make decisions that are not influenced by personal preference or experience – those things which create a double standard or inequity).

Which means this is entirely possible. Pastors can be truly equitable and just if they (like Jesus) are committed to listening only to God’s Law when making judgments/decisions for the covenant community. Hence the reason (btw) we are commanded not to pursue outside (or pagan) courts when dealing w/members of the covenant community (1Co 6:1-6). To think we need the council of outside authorities or courts to handle crimes w/in the church is to believe that the world (run by Satan) and rebellious to God are more objective or know better how to secure justice for the innocent or bring reform those individuals committing the crimes. It reveals not only a complete distrust of God but also a level of insanity, why would we go to darkness to find the light? (Isa 8:20!). All of this is true also as it relates to those functioning in the world as authorities and judges versus Jesus’ shepherds in the church. What would ever make us think that those controlled by Satan and completely ignorant of God’s Word wb more competent than those empowered by the Holy Spirit and equipped w/Scripture? Again, to do so betrays a level of insanity. Hence Paul’s command in (Rom 12:1-3) = According to Paul there are three things we all need to do (in light of what He has done for us): submit our life our minds and our ego to God and His Word -- which means executing a full-stop when it comes to trusting ourselves and the “wisdom” of the world – especially as it re: to truth and justice.

They wb OUTLIERS:

We should not be surprised if those Jesus picks and empowers to be His shepherds are (like Him), viewed by the world as unconventional and controversial given their pedigree, practice and people.

As we saw in Isaiah 11, Messiah wb a descendant of “Jesse” – or as it says elsewhere, “the Son of David.” (Mat 21:15). What this means is that Jesus’ life would (in a very real way) resemble that of David’s. This is sometimes referred to as “type and archetype”. David was a type of Messiah, His life wb the pattern followed by the coming (and superlative) Messiah – his fulfillment or archetype, Jesus. Which is why throughout the gospels we find Jews attempting to determine whether Jesus was the Messiah by considering his life and ministry based on the prior life and ministry of David. How (then) is this relevant to our point? Well, bc of what I said about Jesus being unconventional and controversial w/respect to His pedigree, practice and people (or followers). It starts w/David and the same is reflected also in Jesus.

Both were not who the world (including the religious world of their days) would have picked to be Israel’s Shepherd. They lacked what most people view as the “confirming categories”. For example: 1) Neither David nor Jesus possessed the kinds of backgrounds normally associated w/kings. Hence the reason Jesse (his father) didn’t even think to bring David back from the field where he was shepherding his father’s flocks when Samuel revealed that one of his sons wb selected as king (1 Sa 16:1-11). Jesus (likewise) was questioned often by the religious leaders, given His strange birth and birthplace (Nazareth) (Joh 7:27, 41-42). Both David and Jesus were the unconventional pick – or bore a very unconventional pedigree (when compared to the world’s choice or expectations).

2) Both David and Jesus challenged the status quo – or religious establishment of their day—and were (therefore) considered controversial in their beliefs or practices. So much so that both were forced to flee into the wilderness w/their followers. During their earthly ministries they were hunted and condemned by those in power and denied a place among the religious elite.

3) Finally as it relates to their people, Both David and Jesus were defined by misfit followers. David’s mighty men were at one time considered the unimpressive losers” of Israel (1Sa 22:10, 25:10). In similar fashion, Jesus’s mighty men (or apostles) were considered the hillbillies of Jewish society, “unlearned men” who did not keep the traditions of the dominant form of Judaism in their day (Act 4:13; Mar 7:5).

(And) Paul’s words in 1Co 1 make that clear not only that God continues to pick these people to be His followers But WHY (1Co 1:26-31) = If we are truly in “Christ Jesus” and this is a place possessing a Jesus-imitating shepherd, then it is not bc we followed the wisdom of what was popular, but bc of God –bc of what He has done is delivering us from those things by giving us hearts that care more about the truth of His Word and gospel than being popular or accepted by that version of Christianity which is.

CLOSING CONTEMPLATION: If we find ourselves possessing this kind of shepherd, what should be our response? (1Th 5:12-13)

View Details

WGO?

Peter heals a lame beggar and preaches to the crowd who have gathered because of the miracle.

WTP?

Evangelism can look like going to another church’s bible study (1; Act 17:1-3; Deu 33:10; Mal 2:7; Joh 18:20 = Temple courts [e.g., Solomon’s Portico] were where the people in Jerusalem would go to find teaching from various experts on the Law [priests/scribes, lawyers/judges, Pharisees, Sadducees, etc.,]. Hence the reason Jesus went to the Temple to teach – because He knew the religiously inclined wb there; Similar Act 16:13 = Bible studies were not always held in synagogues or the Temple [see also Act 20:20 “teaching…house to house”).
It is the job of the covenant community to see that those born w/disabilities are provided with the financial support necessary to care for their needs (1-2, “alms” = Financial donations; Act 4:34 “not a needy person among them”; Lev 15:4).
We must graciously accommodate the theological ignorance of those whose soteriology is right (1, [“going up to the Temple at the ninth hour” = The time of the evening sacrifice] w/17 “acted in ignorance” = Peter and John knew that the sacrifices of the Temple could not propitiate for sin. They however also knew that those attending the Temple who were ignorant of this –and more importantly of Jesus’s true identity and role in this respect, possessed the right soteriology [i.e., gain thru vows/covenant signs/faith and maintain through obedience to God’s Law or faithfulness is also required to be save]. Hence the reason for referring to them as “brethren”. In this light, consider 1Ti 1:12-14 = Paul was already a faithful member of the covenant community [already saved]. Paul made similar accommodations to the Jews in Act 21:20-26).
The mantle of authority (or power) given by Jesus to those pastors possessing the right gospel remains fully intact even when they possess certain beliefs which are wrong due to ignorance (1-10 = At the time that Peter exercises Jesus’s authority/power [“in the name of Jesus Christ the Nazarene” = According to His authority/power], he ignorantly believes the gospel to only be available to Jews or Jewish proselytes [Act 10:1-28]; Mat 18:18 “whatever you bind…loose” [Grk., hosos = Any or all things in quantity or measure]).
God gives power and spiritual authority (“piety” [Grk., eusebia = spiritual authority] to the church’s anointed pastors as a means to:

5.1. glorifying Jesus since it is His power and authority they now possess (11-13a; Joh 14:13; Joh 20:21-23). POINT NOT TO MISS: when you resist the authority of the church’s leaders you are both resisting Jesus and robbing Him of His glory.

5.2. exposing those possessing hearts of rebellion against God’s authority (13b-15 = The Jews refused, rejected and killed [“disowned”] Jesus b/c they did not want to submit to His authority. God raised Him from the dead proving Jesus’s authority was divinely-appointed). POINT NOT TO MISS: When you buck the authority of Jesus (which now resides in His anointed pastors), you show yourself to be a rebel to God.

Loyal obedience to Jesus as our King can lead to more than just spiritual deliverance (16, “on the basis of faith in His name [a pledge of loyal submission to Jesus’s authority]…has given him this perfect health”; 1Co 11:30 = Many Christians get sick or suffer ill health bc they continue to pledge their loyalty to Jesus’s authority [which we do every time we partake of the LT – “for faithfulness of life”] yet live in sinful opposition to Him).
There is mercy for those whose rebellion is the product of ignorance and not stubbornness (17; 1Ti 1:13; Zec 7:8-13 = Stubbornness leads to wrath – not mercy [God being stubborn to us]. Hence the reason we need to determine whether the problem is moral or intellectual).
God knows how to take our ignorance and evil actions and use them to advance His Kingdom (13-18, “He has fulfilled” = God’s purposes were being accomplished even thru the wicked suffering inflicted upon Jesus by the Jews; Isa 53; Pro 16:4). POINTS NOT TO MISS: 1) free wills and a free future are not enough to keep God from perfectly accomplishing His plans – esp. in re: to His people (Rom 8:28).

2) possessing the proper biblical framework in re: to God and human responsibility, is essential to avoiding – or reading into passages like vv13-18, the error of determinism ([Exo 13:17; Isa 54:15; Jer 19:5] w/Eph 1:11 “works [Grk., energeo] = To give energy to, to operate - not determine/decree/fix – Act 17:26, 31 [Grk., horizo] = Some things - but not most things, have been determined by God – e.g., Jer 5:22).

There is no forgiveness of sins or blessing of salvation from Jesus for those who fail to cease in their practice of (known) sin and live in obedience to God’s commands (19, “repent and return [to loyalty to the Lord, to practicing His ways and righteousness– Act 11:21, 26:18; Jam 5:19-20; Isa 55:7 w/56:1; Jer 4:1-2]” = This is the principle of put off and put on [Eph 4:22-24; e.g., it is often people’s failure in the latter that keeps them from persevering; Other examples: dieting, unhealthy relationships – self programmed robots//*wb awkward and uncomfortable at first]; 26, “to bless you by [instrumental – how the blessing will take place] turning every one of you from your wicked ways.” = The blessing [of Jesus’s salvation] happens only where there is no more practice of sin – i.e., where [again] it has been replaced by the practice of righteousness [1Jo 3:7-10]).
Jesus will return when the Jews return to Jesus (19-25)[1] “in order that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord and that He may send Jesus, the Christ appointed for you, whom heaven must receive until the period of restoration of all things” = The return of the Jews to God thru becoming Christians (Rom 11:25-29), will lead to the return of Christ and times of refreshing (new heaven, new earth (Isa 66:18-22), which will also signify the restoration of the kingdom to Israel (1:6) and the eternal destruction of all people who do not bow the knee to Jesus (22-25 [Gen 22:18; Deu 18:15-19; 2Sa 7:8-17]; Isa 66:23-24)[2].

[1] “Christ’s coming is seen as in some sense dependent on Israel’s repentance.” – Ben Witherington (Acts)

[2] “If the Israelites would repent for a day, the son of David (Messiah) would come immediately” – 1st cent., Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus (p. Ta’an)

View Details

The Christian Pentecost should be viewed as Sinai 2.0. given:

1) the sacred holiday of Pentecost (Shavout - Feast of Weeks, Exo 34:22) represented not only a celebration of God’s bountiful giving of physical food (or harvest), but also spiritual food since according to Jewish tradition, Pentecost was the day Israel received the Law from God at Sinai (Hag Matan Torateinu – The Festival of the Giving of Torah[1]) (1, “Pentecost…they were all together in one place”[2]).

2) the parallels that exist between Sinai and the Christian Pentecost:

(Exo 19:16-18 w/20:1, 18) = Fire and awe (“fire…people trembled”) accompanying the presence of God speaking about His mighty deeds and Law (“God spoke all these words, saying, ‘I am the LORD your God Who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery’”) which all the people experienced/heard (“All the people perceived”).

(Act 2:2-12) = Fire and awe (“fire…They were amazed and astonished…they all continued in amazement and great perplexity”) accompanying the presence of God (“the Holy Spirit”) speaking about His mighty deeds and Law (“speaking of the mighty deeds of God”) which all the people experienced/heard (vv5-11).[3]

3) like the Christian Pentecost, Sinai also shares the association of people receiving the Spirit (Act 2:4 and Num 11:16-17 [this event takes place immediately following the Sinai event – Num 10:11-13]).

4) Luke’s mention of the Pentecost event as “fulfillment” (1, “When the day of Pentecost had come”) = Literally, “in complete fulfillment of the day of Pentecost” (Grk., en ho hemera pentakostay sumplay-ra-oe = In sum/complete fulfillment). Luke seems to be indicating that something started in the past (i.e., Sinai) has now come to completion (at Pentecost).[4]

5) What follows the Christian Pentecost is the receiving of the “new” Law (the Law as transformed in application and/or semantic range by Jesus) (42, “the apostles’ teaching”).

The “other tongues” – or tongues given by the Spirit to the early church, were human languages unknown to their speakers (versus a non-human language unknown to the speakers – e.g., an angelic language [Pentecostal version of speaking in tongues]) [5] (4-6, “tongues” [Grk., glossa = human language, Rev 14:6], “hearing them speak in his own language” – See also again, vv8-11)[6].
Without the proper biblical framework, acts of God (or obedience to God) have been known to be misinterpreted as the behavior of fools or false teachers (12-13; “full of sweet wine”) = Drunk early in the morning, the behavior of fools (14-15). Drunkenness during the day was also associated w/many pagan religions who believed alcohol (or the creation of ecstatic states) was a means to connecting w/deity (e.g., early Christians were accused of being cannibals [for eating their Lord] and guilty of incest [bc they married their brothers and sisters]; we are accused of being works based/trying to earn our salvation or unaware of what Scripture teaches about salvation by faith [bc we teach salvation also requires obedience]).
Prophesy always involves the miraculous but not always new words – or predictions about the future (16-18, “prophesy”) = Peter is identifying their miraculous speech as the fulfillment of the first portion of Joel 2:28-32 (i.e., the portion re: to prophecy). Yet the content of their speech was itself not miraculous. Once more, they were “speaking (only) of the mighty deeds of God” – referring to those deeds done by God in the past. How then does this qualify as prophecy? The content of most prophecy is not miraculous; it neither speaks about anything new nor predicts anything still future. For speech to qualify as prophetic only two things are necessary: 1) speech in agreement w/God’s existing words (Deu 13:1-11, 18:20), 2) speech accompanied by something miraculous (2Co 12:12; Deu 13:1-2, 18:21-22)—which in the early church’s case, was the ability to speak the various foreign languages of those present at Pentecost w/o knowing them beforehand.
Peter’s divinely inspired interpretation of Joel 2:28 as “And it shall be in the last days (versus how it was communicated in the original text, “And it shall come about after this”):

1) indicates that the Christian Pentecost/IPO of the indwelling Spirit is not only the beginning of new words/NT canon from God but also the final millennia before Christ’s return and Judgment Day (17-18 = Gifts of the Spirit necessary to new words from God [“prophesy…visions…dreams” = The indication of new words from God/NT canon], 19-20 = Signs that will immediately precede Jesus’ return [Mat 24:29-31]).

2) provides further evidence that Jesus’ return will be in the very near future (17, “last days” = Plural or referring to more than one day which in Jewish tradition, each day represents a thousand years of redemptive history [2Pe 3:8] and Messiah returns on the last day, the Sabbath [or at the end of 6,000 years].

At the time of Jesus’ earthly ministry, we were already somewhere in the range of 4,000 years – which means the “days” (or millennia) being referred to by Peter can be no more than two. That puts Jesus’ return somewhere around 2033 [or two thousand years after the Christian Pentecost which took place in 33 A.D.]. In this light, consider Jesus’ words in Joh 9:4).

3) should create greater urgency (in us) to be faithful and productive for His kingdom (Mat 25:14-30) – most especially in witnessing to the truth and saving others (Peter’s [Joel’s] point in v21. Once we reach the last days, there is no time to waste; again Joh 9:4, also Pro 11:30).

The indwelling (or empowering of the) Spirit is given for the purpose of:

1) witness in persecution (Chapter one: witnesses on fire in the fire) (1:8).

2) new Scripture (2:17, again, “prophesy…visions…dreams”).

3) judgment (most esp. in the covenant community – 18, “prophesy” [all God’s people] = Judgment is a form of prophecy [e.g., Eze 23:36]; The NC indwelling Spirit is the new version of Num 11:17, hence Mat 18:15 = Every member judging/holding other members accountable/responsible for preserving justice/confronting sin as the first step in congregational justice/discipline).

What God wants the Jews to know about Jesus:

1) He was from God (22; Joh 3:2).

2) God’s plan was to deliver Him to the Jews as the (truly) propitiatory sacrifice for their sins (23a; The animal sacrifices were neither sufficient nor penal [i.e., the lambs were not punished]– Rom 3:25; Heb 10:4; Consider also the example of Isaac [God was not punishing him or Abe] or the prophesy of the High Priest [Joh 11:50-51]).

3) The Jews treated Jesus as though He were a criminal (23b).

4) God still treated Jesus’ death as propitiation for Israel’s sin, hence the reason death could not keep Him/He was resurrected (i.e., He was victorious – Rom 4:25) (24; Heb 9:15-16).

5) Jesus’ resurrection and role as Messiah (the “Christ”) was prophesied by David (25-32).

6) Jesus is now in heaven where God has exalted and confirmed Jesus’s role not only as His earthly king (“Christ”), but the divine King of heaven and earth (“Lord”) (33-36), 7) God is holding the Jews personally responsible for Jesus’ mistreatment and death (23, 36).

Peter uses the three most relevant pieces of evidence to validate a person and their message to prove that Jesus was who He claimed to be:

1) their public body of work (22; Act 26:26).

2) the Scripture (25-31).

3) personal (eyewitness) testimony (32).

One of the ways to know that you have been a faithful witness causing conviction in others, is that those receiving the message will either be “pierced to the heart” which leads to salvation (37) or “cut to the quick” which leads to persecution (5:33, 7:54, 10:39).
We are saved and regenerated in the waters of baptism (37-41, “be baptized…for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit…Be saved [thru repentance and baptism]...So then, those who had received his word were baptized…and…there were added [to salvation] about three thousand souls”). That by the word, “added” Luke means salvation is confirmed by (v47 “adding to their number…those…being saved”; 1Pe 3:21).
The Bible teaches infant baptism:

1) All the essential ingredients found in the phrase, (39, “For this promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off”) are also found in God’s promise to Abraham in Gen 17:7-13 (“children” = infants [v12], “this promise is for you and your children” [7, 10, “you and your descendants after you”], “for all those [children] who are far off [in the future]” [13 “everlasting covenant”]).

2) for the entirety of Israel’s redemptive history, infants were granted this special favor by God (i.e., they were automatic members of the covenant). Hardly would any Jew have found what Peter was preaching as good news if such special favor was no longer part of the deal (i.e., they were in under the OC, but now [under the NC], they need to be old enough to understand and give consent).

3) to remove God’ special favor toward infants (in this respect) would be a violation of God original and “everlasting” promise (hence the reason, baptism is identified as the new form of circumcision [Col 2:11]– God is keeping His promise!).

The first true Christians were continually devoting themselves to practicing the very things the world and popular religion (which is only popular b/c it has adopted many of the convictions of the world) has always found controversial or outright rejected:

1) new understandings (of old teachings) (42, “the apostles’ teaching [on the new application/understanding of the OT/Law]).

2) seeking confirmation from God (not popular opinion) for what they believed (43, “wonders and signs” = Confirmation that what was being taught was from God. Such signs and miracles were needed given the absence of the NT canon [what we use today to confirm the teaching]).

3) treating those in the covenant community more like family than blood family (42, “fellowship” [Grk., koinoenia]) = The idea of family or sharing and becoming one in re to: our resources/care (44-45), our beliefs, convictions and perspective (46a), our personal life (transparency) (46b, “and breaking bread from house to house” = Devoted themselves to time together outside the Temple for the purpose of sharing their personal lives), loyalty (“breaking bread from house to house, they were taking their meals together with gladness and sincerity of heart” = Joyfully sharing a meal w/others was an ancient indicator of your loyalty to them), happiness and blessings (47).

4) signs with real spiritual power (sacraments v. ordinances) (41, “baptized” w/47 “adding…those being saved”; 42, “breaking of bread” w/Joh 13:10 w/Joh 6:54).

[1] Tradition also speaks of this as the day that Ruth – a Gentile, placed herself under the yoke of the Law.

[2] During Pentecost, it was customary for ancient Jews to

gather in one place, stay up all night learning Torah, and remembering their

vows of obedience to God’s commands (See “Shavout – The Holiday of the Giving

of the Torah” - Chabad.org)

[3] The famous Jewish philosopher, Philo’s words, “Then from the midst of the fire that streamed from heaven there sounded forth to their utter amazement a voice, for the flame became the articulate speech in the language familiar to the audience” were not spoken about Christian Pentecost, but Sinai.

[4] “Luke uses an odd phrase to introduce this event, literally ‘in the fulfillment of the day of Pentecost,” but clearly from what follows [is not the fulfillment of that specific day since] the day was yet young.’” – C.K. Barrett (Acts Vol. 1)

[5] Jewish tradition records that the language of angels is the same language God used to create the world, Hebrew (Jub 12:26). It is also this language that (Jewish) tradition teaches was preserved by Michael the archangel for those descendants of Noah in the line of Abraham after the splitting of the languages during the Tower of Babel incident (Apend. Of Naph. 8:4-6). Of further interest, the word “Hebrew” in Hebrew (eev’riyt) is a derivation of the Hebrew word for covenant (beriyt). Put another way, Hebrew was the language of covenant (or those in/remaining in covenant with God).

[6] “The Greek syntax, surely dictates that the phrase ‘in his own language’ must go with the word ‘speaking’ not ‘hearing,’ in v6. They heard them speaking in their own languages.” – Ben Witherington (The Acts of the Apostles A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary)

View Details

Important people can help us advance the Kingdom (1; “Theophilus” – See Luk 1:3 “most excellent Theophilus” = Title reserved for those with high social status, power or influence [Act 23:26, 24:3, 26:26]. Given that Luke’s audience was much larger than just Theophilus, strongly implies the mention of his name was for the purpose of adding extra validity - and therefore readership, to his writings – possibly to those in the Jewish community. Luke was a Gentile and therefore would have carried no respect in the Jewish community. Such an assumption infers that Theo was an important and highly respected Jew.).
Jesus did not go back to heaven until equipping His Church w/: 1) authority: He passed the mantle of Holy Spirit authority [anointing] to His “chosen” leaders (2, “after He had by the Holy Spirit given orders [or “charge” – Mar 13:34] to the apostles”, Joh 20:21-23). 2) assurance: He proved He was alive after His death (3, “many convincing proofs” = Evidence that removes doubt – e.g., Joh 20:17 [Mary Magdalene hugged Him], 20, 24-29 [Apostles saw/touched His wounds], 21:12-15 [Peter and other apostles ate breakfast w/Him]; “over a period of forty days” = Most likely the time when more than 500 people also witnessed Jesus alive after His death -1Co 15:6). 3) ability: He provided His disciples w/instructions for receiving the promised indwelling Holy Spirit for empowerment (4-8).
There is an ascending and descending gift of the Holy Spirit: 1) ascending = anointing (2; Joh 20:21-23 = Jesus gives the HS just before He ascends back to heaven), 2) descending = indwelling (4-5, 8; Eph 4:7-11; “measure” = indwelling - or indwelling and anointing; “When He ascended…He gave [aorist = tense stressing association more than indicating time]” = Christ’s HS anointing is associated w/His ascension; “descended” = On Pentecost to give the indwelling Spirit; v11 = The anointed offices today [“evangelist” = NT priest who plants churches/missionary, “pastor-teacher” = NT priest; See Isa 66:21]).
Being faithful as Jesus’ “witnesses” in the midst of persecution/trials is: 1) necessary to being empowered by the indwelling Holy Spirit (4-8 w/Luk 3:16-17 w/Mar 9:43-50 “salted by fire” = Tested by fire [or fiery trials] (Lev 2:13 “with all your offerings you shall offer salt”)[1]. Jesus went through the same process – Luk 3:21-22, 4:1-14. In this light consider also Paul’s words in Act 20:22-24 w/14:22; we are born [again] w/power that can only be released thru the trials that come thru witnessing). 2) the reason most Christians never experience empowerment from the indwelling Spirit -- because they avoid witnessing for Jesus and the persecution/trials it often brings! Point NOT to miss: empowering is for the purpose of witnessing in the midst of persecution/trials which means if you avoid witnessing in these situations, you avoid being empowered (12-26 = The apostles are praying [w/ the expectation of] empowerment [12-14] bc they are planning to witness [15-26] to the same hostile Jews who killed Jesus[2]; See similar in [4:29-30]).
Jesus’ return will feel a lot like a science fiction movie, an alien invasion and episode from “Law And Order” (9-11 w/1Th 4:15-17 [Mat 24:29-31] and 2Th 1:7-8 [Psa 149; Joh 5:28-29; Mat 13:40-43]; In the end, everyone will have their day in God’s court and some of us wb called to testify against others– Rev 20:11-15; Heb 13:17; 1Co 6:2-3).
The geographical place of Jesus’ ascent will also be the geographical place of His return (11-12 w/Zec 14:1-14, 9).
The standard by which to measure any church is its divinely inspired prototype: the church started by Jesus, the church of the apostles, the Jerusalem church which was small and filled with a lot of personal family members (versus large and filled with a lot of strangers) [3] (13-15; As it re: to being small: “one hundred and twenty persons” = Very small in comparison to the crowds that once followed Jesus [e.g., Luk 9:12-14]; As it re: to being filled w/family members: “Judas” = Jesus’ [half] brother, apostle and author of Jude, “Mary the mother of Jesus, …with His brothers.” = This list would include James – the future senior pastor of the church, as well as Joses and Simon. His sisters were [ml] also in attendance [Mar 6:3]; According to Scripture and tradition [e.g., Clement of Alexandria], most of the “eleven” were married and had at least one child [e.g., Mat 8:14; 1Co 9:5; e.g., Peter’s daughter was named Petronilla]. More than likely then, 30-40 [or 25-33%] of the 120 persons were family members. As it re: to remaining small: though experiencing times of great expansion (Act 2:41, 4:4, 5:14), they were short lived. Persecution forced most of the church’s new members to seek shelter in churches outside of Jerusalem (e.g., Act 8:4). As a result, the Jerusalem church remained one of the smallest for the majority of her first century existence (hence Act 11:28-30; Rom 15:25-26; 1Co 16:2-3).[4]
The apostles believed that insurrection – condemning or coming against the authority of those anointed to sacred office in the church was blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, the unforgiveable sin and apostasy (16-20 w/Mat 26:14 w/Joh 12:1-8; “Let his homestead be made desolate and let no one dwell in it” [See the full context of Psa 69:22-28] = Let them become apostate; For blasphemy against the HS as insurrection against the anointed in the covenant community, see Mat 12:32 w/Num 15:30-31, 16:1-3; also Psa 105:15).
The qualifications for being in the anointed sacred office of apostle make clear that anyone claiming that office today is a false teacher (21-22 w/25 “apostleship”).
The congregation is the one deciding who gets anointed/ordained (15-16 w/23 [“they” = the congregation] – 26 [“added” = voted in by the congregation]; See also Act 6:1-6 [“the whole congregation…chose”; That they were choosing for the purpose of anointing/ordaining – i.e., that these were elders/pastors is confirmed by the fact these individuals had the authority/ability to baptize – e.g., Act 8:38]; OT ref. to congregational choosing for anointing – 1Ch 29:20-22).
Casting lots (sortition or selection by lottery) is a divine way to preserve equity in situations where there is no explicit counsel from God [His Word] (23-26 = Lots were cast to determine the duties of the priests. Joseph and Mattias were [ml] elders in their church [Luk 1:9 and 1Ch 24:1-5, 31, 25:8, 26:13-16] e.g., also [clothing] Mat 27:31; [land] Num 26:55; Jos 18:6; [sacrifices] Lev 16:8; in re: to it being divinely attended [revealing God’s will] – Pro 16:33 [e.g., Urim and Thummin – Exo 28:30]).

[1] “The reference to ritual sacrifice (Lev 2:13) would be fairly evident to the first readers of Mark. The argument has a coherence deeper than catchwords: Since undisciplined disciples risk the fire of gehenna at the last judgment, the hardships the disciple will undergo now are disciplines like the fire of a sacrificial offering that purifies, or like salt which stings but is preservative in its effect. Jesus on his way to Jerusalem is the supreme example of the sacrificial offerings ‘salted with fire.’ His sacrificial death is not to shield disciples from costly obedience, but rather show them the way: ‘For every one (meaning every disciple) will be salted with fire.’ Disciples whose lives are not characterized by rigorous self-discipline [and bold witness] are like flavorless salt. They have lost the sharpness which sets them apart from their environment and constitutes their usefulness.” – Lamar Williamson Jr. (Mark)

[2] Since both were required holidays and the cost of travel was steep, the Jews who travelled to Jerusalem to observe Passover, would often stay until Pentecost. As such, the Jews who witnessed Jesus’ death are still in town.

[3] The are several good reasons for referring to the Jerusalem church as prototypical: 1) it is the specific church Jesus is referring to when making His “church promises” to Peter (Mat 16:17-19), 2) it is the church to which all the other first century churches looked for instruction/ruling on orthodoxy and orthopraxy (e.g., Gal 2:1-2; Act 15:1-29; 1Co 11:16 = The unity of practice among the “churches of God” on this issue was no doubt due to the fact that it came from their mother, the church at Jerusalem).

[4] According to ancient church historian Eusebius, the Jerusalem church relocated to the city of Pella just before the city’s fall to the Romans in 70 A.D. It did so however without its two leaders, James (the brother of Jesus) and Peter who stayed behind and perished during the siege. At this point, most of the apostles were also dead and the church’s former members permanently dispersed to other locations. Though the city itself would continue to play a significant role in the world’s politics and religion, her church remained small and struggled to exist.

View Details

Acts stands for “Acts of the Apostles.” IOW: What the apostles did, endured or experienced as God used them to spearhead the first genuine Jesus movement after His death and ascension back to heaven. Given the purpose of Scripture, those actions and events can be considered the signs of when such a movement is taking place today. In broad strokes, they are the following:

The gospel message being preached will have teeth.

1.1. Two things are meant by this figure of speech:

1.1.1. the message wb offensive not only to the world, but also the majority of those claiming to follow God (e.g., the Jews of Jesus’ day; Evangelical Christians) (Act 7:51-54) = Like the messages preached by the former prophets, Stephen’s gospel was offensive to the majority of those already believing themselves to be the followers of God (the Jews of Jesus’ day; popular Christianity) (Act 17:6 “upset the world”, Act 28:22 “it is spoken against everywhere”). Most people (pagans and “Christians”) will hate the gospel of a genuine Jesus movement.

1.1.2. salvation would not be free and easy – or something you get for nothing (with no strings attached). It would instead require sacred vows of loyalty to Jesus and a life of faithfulness to God’s Laws (Act 2:38):

1) “repent” = Commit to practicing obedience to God’s Laws (which means putting off/turning from the practice of sin) (Luk 3:3 , 4-14 = IOW: Practice the Law in all things, this is what it means/looks like to repent (Isa 40:3-8 “word of our God” [i.e., God’s Law]) = Eternal preservation/salvation will require clearing out of our lives all lawlessness and clinging to God’s Law as preached (esp. at the time of His Messiah) (Isa 42:1-4, 51:4-5). Notice this message (or offer of salvation) also applies to the “nations” – people other than the Jews (Isa 55:1-7 w/56:1-8)[1]. That by repentance is meant commitment to obeying God’s Law is also supported by other passages in the book of Acts (Act 21:21-24) = Paul would have refused James’ request if the version of Christianity he had converted to did not view obedience to the Law as necessary; (Act 24:14-15 w/25:8) = Likewise, Paul could not say these things if the version of Christianity he had converted to did not view the Law as necessary; (Act 17:11) = The Bereans would have found Paul’s gospel to be false if it ignored obedience to God’s Law since this was the central message of the OT Scriptures they were using to validate his message.

2) “each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins” = Notice, this too (baptism) is necessary for salvation (or the forgiveness of sins). According to Peter’s first epistle, baptism represents a sacred vow of loyalty to Jesus (1Pe 3:21 “an appeal [Lit., a vow or pledge of loyalty] to God [in exchange for] a good conscience [i.e., forgiveness] through the resurrection of Jesus Christ [the person whose blood is the source of our forgiveness]”). This vow of loyalty is also picked up in the word faith [Grk., pistis = loyalty]. Examples from Acts (Act 3:16 “faith in His name”) = A common ancient idiom referring to a person’s loyalty to another (usually a person more powerful or of higher status than themselves); (Act 20:21 “repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ”) = Not only is the aforementioned idiom expressed, but this time the word “faith” is used as the substitute for baptism. Instead of Peter’s former gospel combination of repentance and baptism, it is repentance and faith – demonstrating faith to be both a suitable synonym for baptism and another term communicating vows of loyalty.

1.2. Why a gospel requiring such things was (and continues to be) so offensive to those outside a genuine Jesus’ movement = Because the gospel preached by the majority of those claiming to follow God has always been a gospel which requires no such loyalty or commitment. True now and true also in Jesus’ day. The rebellious Jews were the first Evangelicals. They too believed in a FAG (Jer 6:14-19; Luk 3:8 w/Joh 8:39).

1.3. A gospel causing this kind of offense among the majority was prophesied as central to the genuine Jesus movement (Luk 2:34-35 w/Mat 10:16-39) = The people Jesus is calling “wolves” - who will do these awful things, wb the majority of those claiming to follow God and blood family.

The gospel message is powerfully and irrefutably proven from the Scriptures.

1.1. (Act 18:24-28 “powerfully refuted…demonstrating by the Scriptures”) = Proving by powerful argument and irrefutable Scriptural evidence (“demonstrating”, Luk 17:14).

1.2. (Act 1.17:1-3, 8:4, 19, 19:8 “synagogue”) = Jewish place of worship where scrolls containing all the OT Scriptures would be found. Though Paul [ml] possessed some books (e.g., Pentateuch – 2Ti 4:13), it would have been almost impossible to his missionary endeavors to carry everything.

Hence therefore the common practice of going to the synagogue to evangelize. (“explaining and giving evidence”, “reasoning”) = The employment of logic and facts to make an argument. In this case, the logic and facts established by the Scriptures. (“persuading”) = Irrefutably proving.

1.3. Jesus preached the same way (Luk 24:27 w/32 “our hearts burning within us”) = Idiomatic phrase indicating the presence of strong conviction where there had once been doubt. Jesus’ demonstrably proved from the OT Scriptures that the gospel message He had preached (most esp., that the Christ would need to suffer and die) was true.

1.4. Point not to miss: the gospel of a genuine Jesus movement doesn’t just claim its message is irrefutable, but proves it from the Scriptures in such a way that it leaves its opponents w/o a valid rebuttal (in re: to ordained men, Tit 1:9-11 silenced” = their mouths made shut/stopped).

Because what is being preached as the gospel is both offensive and irrefutable, those rejecting its message (including those within the majority) will employ slander and shady tactics to shut the preachers up.

2.1. (Act 6:7-13 “cope with the wisdom”) = Refute his arguments from Scripture. Jesus promised to give His preachers this kind of wisdom (Luk 21:15). (“secretly induced men to say...put forward false witnesses”) = Employed slander and shady tactics to shut Stephen up bc (once more) they couldn’t refute him.

2.2. (Act 9:22-23 “plotted” [20:3 “plot…formed by the Jews”, 19 “plots of the Jews”]; See also 23:12-15 “conspiracy”) = Shady tactics. In this case, the shady tactic of condemning someone w/o giving them the opportunity to defend their actions or beliefs (e.g., a kangaroo court). God’s Law forbids such shady tactics (Exo 23:1 w/Deu 19:15; Hence Joh 7:51). Even the pagan Romans viewed such behavior as shady and illegal (Act 19:21-28 w/35-42; See also Act 23:30, *25:16).

2.3. Because they could not refute their gospel, the Jews called the Christians a cult (“sect”) so that others would view them with suspicion.

2.4. Another common (shady) tactic of those who are unable to refute the preachers in a genuine Jesus movement is to slanderously attack their personal character. This they also do, in the hopes of scaring others out of listening to them (Act 24:5 “deceivers…pest”) = Translates as “scoffer” in the OT. It refers to a wicked person who boldly condemns those who are right as though they were wrong. (“dissension”) = Insurrection (against God). See also Paul’s words in (2Co 6:8 “regarded as deceivers”) = Imposters.

2.5. Jesus’ character and intentions were likewise attacked by those who were unsuccessful in attacking what He preached (Mat 11:19 “gluttonous man and a drunkard” ; Joh 8:41 “fornication” = Implying that Jesus was a bastard child; See also v48).

2.6. It is for these reason that both Jesus and Paul were confident that those part of a genuine Jesus movement will experience hatred and persecution from others (including once more, those a part of the majority followers of God) (again, Mat 10:22; See also Joh 15:18-21; Act 14:22).

The church will possess real authority.

4.1. The fact that Acts speaks of those being baptized as receiving forgiveness of sins means there is real power in this sacrament. Another text that speaks of baptism as the place where we are forgiven - or our sins are washed away, is (Act 22:16).

4.2. Seeing that the church (or her elders) were the only ones able to carry out this powerful act (Act 8:12, 35-38 = Philip was an elder in the Jerusalem church [Act 6:1-6], 9:18 = Ananias was the elder at the church in Damscus, 10:46-48 = Peter as an apostle/elder of the Jerusalem church, 16:14-15, 31-33 = Paul was an apostle/elder in the church at Antioch) means that the church possessed real spiritual authority – the authority (or power) to “bind and loose”, just as Jesus had promised (Mat 16:17-19; Joh 20:21-23).

4.3. That those churches associated w/a genuine Jesus movement possess real spiritual authority is also supported by the church’s exclusive ability to: 1) determine who received this authority from the HS (Act 8:15-19, 14:23; Act 20:28) = Notice it mentions the HS [or His authority and power] in conjunction w/ the elders at Ephesus (“the HS made you overseers…to “guard…oversee [and] shepherd” the church), 2) to pronounce and secure divine judgment in relation to the disobedient in the church (Act 5:1-11) = Notice again, the mention of the HS w/respect to the elders. When Ananias and Sapphira lie to the elders, they are viewed as lying to the HS.

4.4. As a final note, it should be mentioned that Acts also indicates that false churches and their leaders – or those not part of a genuine Jesus movement, will not possess such authority – and as a result, not be able to keep the demons out of their covenant communities (Act 19:11-16 w/Mat 16:18-19).

CLOSING CONTEMPLATION: Many have claimed that their church is (or has been a part of) a genuine Jesus movement. If the present study’s findings are correct, how many churches truly are (or were)? What about us? Is what has been discussed today, what we see or have experienced in this church? If so, welcome to a genuine Jesus movement.

[1] Scholars believe Acts to be the fulfillment of these chapters in Isaiah. See David W. Pao’s Acts and the Isaianic New Exodus

View Details

Canon (definition): Those books containing God’s spoken words (the Old and New Testaments otherwise known as Scripture, God’s Word or the Bible) preserved for the purpose of saving (physically, spiritually) His people (the covenant community).

A major deterrent to canonical confidence[1], is not only a poor understanding of the canon’s formation, but the intended function of God’s spoken words as communicated in the canon itself. Having addressed the latter (function), this study will address the former (formation). With that in mind, there are several important truths that must be understood with respect to the formation of the Canon – or those books believed to contain God’s spoken words:

By the time of Jesus and the apostles, the Old Testament had long been accepted by the Jews as the first installment of God’s spoken words.

1.1. First century Jewish historian, Josephus claims that the same books found in (our modern-day) Old Testaments, had long been considered God’s spoken words by the Jews, “For although such long ages have now passed, no one has ventured neither to add, or to remove, or to alter a syllable” (Against Apion, 1.38-42).

1.2. First century Jewish writer, Philo of Alexandria likewise acknowledges the Old Testament as God’s spoken words using the same three-fold structure used by Jesus to describe them (Luk 24:44 “the Law and the Prophets and the Psalms”), “The laws and the sacred oracles of God enunciated [God spoke] by the holy prophets … and psalms” (On the Contemplative Life, 25; See also Ben Sira, Ecclesiasticus and Dead Sea Scrolls, 4QMMT).

1.3. The way that Jesus and the apostles speak about the Old Testament, it is clear they too saw it as the first installment of God’s spoken words (i.e., as Scripture) (e.g., Mat 4:1-11, 9:13, 15:3-9, 22; Mar 12:10; Luk 4:21, 18:20; Joh 5:39, 7:38 10:35; Act 1:16, Rom 4:3; 2Ti 3:15-16; Jam 2:8; 1Pe 2:6).

1.4. Furthermore, 33 of the 39 Old Testament books are referenced or directly quoted by Jesus and other NT speakers[2]. Those not referenced or directly quoted: Ruth, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Song of Solomon, Obadiah[3].

1.5. Point not to miss: The OT (as the first canon or installment of God’s spoken words) was not only a forgone conclusion by the time of Jesus and the apostles, but something they and the other NT speakers firmly believed and promoted.

When the Old Testament speaks about the coming new kingdom (new Israel) and its Messiah, it also speaks about new spoken words from God (i.e., a new “testament” from God)[4].

2.1. Support: 1) (Deu 18:18 “put my words in His mouth and he shall speak”) = Messiah will speak new words from God [fulfilled: Mar 9:7; Joh 6:14, 7:40; Act 3:23-24, 7:37], 2) (Isa 11:1 “rod of His mouth”) = Messiah will judge the earth w/new spoken words from God [fulfilled: 2Th 2:8; Rev 1:16, 11:15, 19:15], 3) (Isa 61:1-2 “bring good news”) = Messiah will bring new spoken words of salvation [fulfilled: Luk 4:18-19], 4) (Isa 2:2-3 “the word of the Lord from Jerusalem [shall go forth to the nations]”) = The new spoken words from God will go forth from Jerusalem to the nations of the world [fulfilled: book of Acts]. David Pao believes Isaiah 2 to be the paradigm for the entire book of Acts[5] (In this light consider, Luk 24:46-47).

2.2. Literature from the Second Temple period make it clear that the Jews knew the Old Testament was not the end of God’s spoken words. IOW: there would be a second installment:

“The Jews of the Second Temple period were not a settled group. Despite having returned to their promised land, they still conceived of themselves as in ‘exile’ – they were still oppressed by foreign rulers (Bar 2:7-10; 2Macc 2:5-18; 4Q504 2-5; T. Mos. 4:8-9). Thus, Israel was in a posture of anticipation and longing; they were waiting for God to fulfill His promises to break into the world and redeem His people…Another way [therefore] to articulate Second Temple expectations…is to say that the Jews of this period viewed the story of the Old Testament books as incomplete. When the Old Testament story of Israel was viewed as a whole, it was not viewed as something that was finished but as something that was waiting to be finished….That Second Temple Jews regarded the Old Testament story as incomplete and in need of a proper conclusion has significant implications for the production of a new corpus of biblical books. If some Second Temple Jews became convinced that the story was completed in the life and ministry of Jesus of Nazareth – such as the earliest Christians did -- the it is not unreasonable to think that the proper conclusion to the Old Testament might then be written. Indeed, the very structure of the Old Testament itself, with its truncated and forward-looking ending, naturally leads to the expectation that there would be a second installment of writings to finish the job. Otherwise, one would be left with a play that had no final act.” – Michael J. Kruger (The Question Of Canon)

“A new Israel would require new Scriptures.” – David Meade (“Ancient Near Eastern Apocalypticism and the Origins of the New Testament Canon of Scripture.”)

The concept of a new covenant also points to a second installment of new spoken words from God.

3.1. Scholars have long observed that “where there is a divine covenant…there is a divine covenantal document [containing God’s spoken words].”[6]

3.2. So close is the connection between covenant and an accompanying document containing God’s spoken words, that the OT authors would frequently equate the two. To possess a covenant w/God meant to possess spoken words from God (Exo 24:7; Deu 4:13, 29:21; 2Ki 23:2).

It is therefore safe to assume that the early Christians – who were also highly covenantal in their understanding of their new faith, were expecting new spoken words from God (a New Testament to go with their new covenant).

“The earliest Christians were themselves immersed in the covenantal structure of the Old Testament and thus would have understood this critical connection between covenants and written texts [of God’s spoken words for that covenant]…If they believed that through Jesus Christ a new covenant had been inaugurated with Israel (Jer 31:31), it would have been entirely natural for them to expect new written documents [of God’s spoken words] to testify to the terms of that [new] covenant.” - Kruger

At least some of the New Testament authors were aware they were writing the second installment of God’s spoken words (i.e., the New Testament).

4.1. Consider for example, Peter’s use of the word “Scripture” when speaking about the writings of Paul (2Pe 3:16). Paul likewise uses the word “Scripture” when referring to a saying from Jesus in Luke’s gospel (1Ti 5:18 w/Luk 10:17). Certainly, such identification was not lost on the authors themselves. IOW: the authors (Paul and Luke) also shared the view that what they were writing was indeed Scripture (Consider Paul’s words in 1Co 14:37-38).

4.2. Assuming Luke felt the same way about his other book, the book of Acts, means we have accounted for over half the books in the NT (15 of the 27) or 139 of its 260 chapters (53%). Chances therefore are high that those writing the remaining portion also knew they were writing Scripture.

4.3. As additional support, many scholars believe that all of the NT’s authors believed they were preserving apostolic witness – i.e., that God was (through them) preserving (in written form) His (or Jesus’) spoken words to the apostles (Joh 14:26 w/17:8). And their belief shares substantial patristic evidence. The early church fathers, Justin Martyr, Tertullian and Irenaeus all believed this to be true. For example, they believed the gospel of Mark to be the embodiment of Peter’s teaching about Jesus (captured by his “ghost writer” Mark, before His death) (See 2Pe 1:3-15; Mark is identified in the NT as “John Mark”, the cousin of Barnabas and close friend to the apostles [Act 12:25]).

4.4. Finally, the literary structure of the New Testament also bears witness to canonical awareness and intent. The NT authors wrote their respective books to mimic the language and patterns found in the Old Testament. For example: 1) the author of Hebrews presents the terms of the new covenant through Christ in the same mode and manner as the terms of old covenant through Moses in the book of Deuteronomy. So close is the literary structure of Hebrews to that of Deuteronomy, that David M. Allen concludes that Hebrews “does not just use Deuteronomy, it becomes the new Deuteronomy.” (Deuteronomy & Exhortation in Hebrews: A Study in Re-presentation), 2) Matthew appears to be molding his Gospel after the first five books of the Old Testament – or the writings of Moses (the Pentateuch). Even the beginning of Matthew’s Gospel bears witness to Scriptural (or canonical) intent. He begins with a genealogy and ends with a great commission – both vivid echoes of the book of Chronicles (1Chr 1-8; 2Chr 36:23), the last books in Israel’s history and the perfect place to therefore begin God’s new plan (and promise) of deliverance.

“Matthew constructs his Gospel partly to reflect the beginning and ending of Chronicles.” – G.K. Beale (The Temple And the Church’s Mission)

The church’s role was never to determine what should be a part of the New Testament canon, but to recognize what already was.

5.1. In the words of Bruce Metzger, “Neither individuals nor councils created the canon; instead they came to recognize and acknowledge the self-authenticating quality of these writings which imposed themselves as canonical upon the church.” (The New Testament, Its Background, Growth And Content).

5.2. Based on numerous quotations from the 2nd century early church fathers, Irenaeus and Clement of Alexandria, all 27 books of our modern-day New Testaments had already been recognized as Scripture by the time of – or shortly after, the death of the apostles[7].

“We have learned from none other the plan of salvation, than from those through whom the Gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith.” – Irenaeus (Against Heresies)

“The fact that the collections of new Christian Scriptures used by Clement and Irenaeus…on the opposite sides of the Mediterranean Sea, resemble each other so closely, undermines the notion that churches, at a relatively late date in the second century, were only beginning to sort through a large mass of Christian writings.” – Charles E. Hill (Who Chose The Books Of The New Testament?)

5.3. Point not to miss: the self-authenticating qualities of the 27 books which make up the NT canon were so obvious, that their place in the Bible – as the second installment of God’s spoken words, was accepted and promoted immediately – or almost immediately after they were written.

What (then) were the “self-authenticating qualities” that caused the early church to recognize them as God’s new spoken words (i.e., NT Scripture)?

6.1. agreement with the Old Testament gospel, focus and theology: The NT authors used the OT Scriptures to prove their New Covenant beliefs, demonstrating the agreement that existed between their gospel, focus and theology and the prior covenant (OC) (e.g., 1Co 15:3-4; Act 8:35, 17:11, 18:24)[8].

6.2. authorship: All the NT books were written by an apostle – or someone appointed by them to write on their behalf: 1) Mark (for Peter), 2) Luke and Acts (for Paul, [Luke was his travelling companion – Col 4:14; 2Ti 4:11, Phm 1:24]), 3) Hebrews (early church attributed to Paul), 4) Jude (the apostle Judas [Thaddeus] brother of James and half-brother of Jesus – Luk 6:16; Joh 14:22; Mat 13:55), 5) James (an apostle, brother to Jude and half-brother of Jesus – Gal 1:19).

6.3. writing style and format: a common distinction between those books accepted as part of our New Testament versus the many writings that were not, are their writing style and format. Recovered fragments of the NT books were always written in “biblical [or book] majuscule”: a professional upright form of writing used in legal documents. In contrast, other books (pseudo scripture or gospels - e.g., the gospel of Mary) were always written in the informal style of cursive. Likewise, the biblical books were always written on a codex (think of a book w/pages) versus in the informal format of a scroll (the format used by the pseudo documents)[9].

6.4. circulation among the churches

“There may have been eight to ten or maybe even twelve other gospels circulating in the second or third centuries, so, two to three times as many non-canonical as canonical ones. But simply estimating the number of gospels in existence does not tell us how many people or churches were using each one, or for what purpose they might have been using them. Currently, archaeologists have dug up ten fragments from one of the maybe eight to twelve non-canonical gospels dated to the second or third centuries. [In contrast however], the number of fragments of one of the four canonical Gospels from the same period is about forty, so a ratio of four to one. This suggests that, even though there were more alternative [pseudo] gospels than canonical Gospels in existence, apparently these others weren’t being copied and circulated as much as the four.” – Hill

[1] By canonical confidence I mean, confidence that what we possess as God’s spoken words is enough to save us.

[2] See

“Old Testament Passages in the New Testament”, preceptaustin.org; For those not

listed, see Heb 11:32-34 for Judges, Mat 27:30 for Lamentations

[3] Though not referenced or directly quotes these books contain motifs and principles repeated and alluded to throughout the NT (e.g., the Kinsmen Redeemer motif of Ruth; the marriage covenant love of Messiah and His bride motif of SoS; the principles of true discipleship and learning established by Ezra and Nehemiah).

[4] What I will be arguing for in this - and the remaining points, is what has been referred to as the “intrinsic model” for canon formation. Simply put it argues that the phenomenon of canon was one that arose early and naturally as the consequence of the Old Testament witness (the current point) and deliberate sense the church possessed as to the need for writing down what they believed were God’s new spoken words.

[5] See Acts and the Isaianic New Exodus

[6] Meredith Kline, The Structure of Biblical Authority

[7] See Charles E. Hill’s list in Who Chose The Books Of The New Testament?

[8] For an example of this in the patristic writings, see Justin Martyr’s, Dialogue With Trypoho

[9] See Hill, p.15-18

View Details

INTRODUCTION

What is Church History?

1.1. Definition: The study of the societal, cultural, political, intellectual and institutional factors that shaped popular Christendom or the church into her different branches of belief and denominations.

“The study of the history of God’s people in Christ, a theological claim, or, speaking more neutrally, of those who wanted to be God’s people in Christ.” – Everett Ferguson (CHURCH HISTORY, Volume One)

1.2. What Church History is not: 1) inspired history: which means we must practice biblical discernment with respect to what it approves or condemns, 2) history written by the remnant: the true Christians have always been the few and far between (the remnant). Unfortunately, the acts or beliefs of the remnant are not normally the ones that get recorded in our (uninspired) versions of church history. It is instead popular (Christianity) or what was accepted by the majority (“history is written by the victors”).

What portion of Church History will we be studying?

The late Middle Ages through the Protestant Reformation(s) (German, Swiss and English/Continental), the Catholic Counter-Reformation, the Age of Reason, Christian Liberalism, and into present day American Evangelicalism. Our primary source will be: CHURCH HISTORY, Volume Two (CH, V2) by John D. Woodbridge and Frank A. James III

What will we be discussing in class?

3.1. A very (very) general overview of the chapter (one chapter per week).

There is far too much history to cover in each chapter to qualify our discussions as anything more than a very (very) general overview of the material. It is therefore up to you to read the entire chapter so that you have the extra bits or details necessary to possess the fuller or more precise picture of what was taking place during that particular time in church history.

3.2. The theological validity and relevancy of various historical events.

We will take time to explore the theological validity and relevancy of various historical events as a means to not only possessing a better understanding of what the Scriptures actually teach, but why the church is where she is today (what we are in the present is a product of our past). It is here, that we will venture into the discipline known as, Historical Theology[1].

*Questions and comments are welcomed! Dialogue over monologue is the goal (where and when practical and appropriate).

A very (very) general overview of the major historical and most relevant events (w/respect to where we are headed) that took place from the time of the post-apostolic church up until the beginning of the late Middle Ages - or the place in history where our textbook begins (roughly 100-1300 AD):

4.1. Bishopric as the answer to apostolic absence: the early church’s initial attempt at maintaining unity in doctrine and practice (orthodoxy/orthopraxy) after the death of the apostles was the promotion of a third office in the church besides that of elder and deacon, the office of bishop (a biblical term that seems to be used synonymously with elder in the NT). Bishops were considered the regional authority for those churches in their area (~ 40 churches/7.5k Christians by 100 AD). This new system of governance eventually led to the establishing of a head bishop over the entirety of the church, or pope (“papa”) (See 2nd Council of Constantinople).

4.2. Marcion: 2nd century influential teacher and son of a Roman bishop who was condemned by the early church as a heretic for his teachings: 1) Jesus is the benevolent, true God and Savior who rejected law and obedience for love and faith in contrast to the evil creator god of the Hebrew Old Testament (who demands obedience to his laws and mercilessly punishes those who disobey). 2) Paul was the only true apostle (James was a false teacher), 3) the canon of Scripture consists of only eleven books: a redacted version of Luke’s gospel and ten of Paul’s epistles (also redacted), one of those being his letter to the Laodiceans.

“The Marcionite church expanded greatly within Marcion's lifetime, becoming a major rival to the emerging Catholic church. After his death, it retained its following and survived Christian controversy and imperial disapproval for several centuries. Several theologians have viewed him as a proto-protestant[2].” (Wikipedia)

4.3. The contributions of the early church Fathers, (1st-3rd century church leaders who were the direct or indirect disciples of the apostles): 1) Baptismal regeneration [Tertullian, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Origen] 2) Baptism can only take place in true churches, those holding to the right gospel [Cyprian], 3) Obedience is necessary to salvation [Clement of Rome, Clement of Alexandria, Polycarp, Ignatius, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Melito, Cyprian], 4) We have the freewill and ability to faithfully obey God’s laws [Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tatian, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Melito].

4.4. Roman Emperor Constantine: toleration (the edict of Milan, 313 AD) and state support of Christianity eventually leading to its establishment as the dominant religion, influence and power within the Roman Empire (by 381, e.g., Edict of Thessalonica). As the saying goes, “Rome didn’t die, she just became a church.” (or put the other way, “the church was nationalized and commercialized”).

4.5. Ecumenical Church Councils: another attempt at maintaining unity in doctrine and practice within Christendom (~ 3-4 million Christians by 300 AD) through the: 1) validation/condemnation of doctrine, 2) establishment of canon laws (rules for the churches):

East-West (Great) Schism (1054 AD): This break between churches in the eastern and western world brought into formal existence the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic churches. The differences that ultimately brought their permanent division (in italics): 1) eucharistic ecclesiology (each individual church equals the whole church; every bishop is equal and operates within a confederacy) v. universal ecclesiology (the whole church is identified as only those churches submitted to one supreme bishop, the pope), 2) no bishop is infallible v. the pope is infallible, 3) anti-filioque (HS proceeds from the Father only) v. Filioque (HS proceeds from Father and Son), 4) anti-Immaculate Conception (original sin in Mary) v. Immaculate Conception (no original sin in Mary), 5) no purgatory v. purgatory.

Roman Catholic Crusades (1096-1204): Four military campaigns inspired and supported by the Catholic Church. The common mission: seize back control of the Holy Land (Israel) – most especially Jerusalem (the “city of God”) from the Muslims. Soldiers were recruited with the promise of heaven (their battle would remove sin, the death would be considered an act of martyrdom).

Roman Catholic Inquisitions: At the end of the 12th century, Rome began to hunt down and torture those found guilty of teaching doctrines deemed heretical in regions where the Catholic church reigned supreme. Catholic inquisition continued until the 19th century. Notable examples of groups tortured and killed would include: 1) the Catharists (12th-14th cent., rejected RC: monotheism [good god = NT; bad god = OT], humans were angels trapped in material realm), 2) the Waldensians (13th cent., rejected RC: pope and priesthood, holy water, sacred days and pilgrimages, relics) , 3) the Hussites (tbd in chapter one of CH, V2), 5) the Jews (12th-19th cent.), 6) the Protestants (16th-19th cent.).

[1] “The branch of theological inquiry which aims to explore the historical development of Christian doctrines, and identify the factors which were influential in their formation.” - Alister E. McGrath (Historical Theology)

[2] See Politics of Religion/Religions of Politics by A. Welchman

[3] Not considered among the ecumenical councils since it was attended only by those in the North African synod.

View Details

A major deterrent to canonical confidence[1], is not only a poor understanding of the canon’s formation, but the intended function of God’s spoken words as communicated in the canon itself. This study (or part one) will address the latter, part two, the former. With that in mind, there are several important truths that must be understood with respect to God’s spoken words:

The exclusive instrument God has chosen to lead and have relationship w/His people (i.e., to save them) has been His spoken words (not feelings or Jesus’ face in pancakes or naan - or the more recent and local example, glitter bombs [Church of the Front Range]) (Exo 34:27 “in accordance with these words I have made a covenant with you and with Israel” = God’s words were the means to covenant relationship w/OC Israel; Deu 31:8-9 = God’s words were the means to leading OC Israel; Isa 8:19-20 = Those led by anything other than God’s spoken words are counterfeits; Heb 1:1-2; 2Ti 3:16 “inspired” [Grk., “God-breathed” = Spoken by God] = What has been written down as Scripture is what was spoken [to the human authors] by God; 2Pe 1:19-21 = Gaining and maintaining a saving relationship w/God [“until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts” = Until you get to heaven/the day of your eternal salvation is realized] requires that you give yourself to His “spoke[n]” words [“Scripture”] as the exclusive means to leading and living your life [versus to false teachers who lead thru feelings, their experiences or promises of false freedom [2:1-19]; What about Gideon’s fleece? See Jug 6:36 w/37-40).
Since the purpose of God’s spoken words is the salvation (physically and spiritually) of His people, we should: 1) always view His spoken words with this as their intention (i.e., whatever He has said is relevant/important to the subject of salvation – 2Ti 3:15), 2) never view His spoken words as an attempt at referring to or explaining all things (e.g., the Bible has very little to say about dinosaurs; the Bible spends very little time on the subject of Creation).
Never – including the present, have God’s people ever possessed all God’s spoken words yet they have always had what they needed to be faithful (Deu 29:29; 2Pe 1:3; e.g., 1Sa 10:10-11; Joh 20:30; Col 4:16; Rev 10:4).
God at times, has deliberately hidden His spoken words - or their understanding, until His people were ready to receive it and take the next necessary step in their journey of obedience (Neh 8:13-18 [Lev 23:34; Deu 16:16]; Eph 3:1-6 = OT saints not given full understanding as to the prophecies regarding the coming Messiah. Hence Mat 13:34-35 and Luk 24:27, 45-46//Luk 9:45, 18:31-34; Joh 12:16, 13:7, 20:9; the importance of this truth to our church: do not become unsettled by the fact that as we mature, God corrects our poor understanding of His spoken words from the past – e.g., Calvinism, baptism, Insurrection or the unforgiveable sin, what other things qualify as a capital crime, etc. * what has never changed: our view that what a person needs to do to be saved is more than simply put faith in Christ, they must also be faithfully obedient to His laws).
God has also deliberately foregone giving the exact application for some of His spoken words to accommodate the changing moral climates experienced by His people throughout the world and redemptive history (e.g., Deu 25:1-3; 1Co 5:1-5 w/2Co 2:6-8; see also 2Co 8:21; *important not to miss: though the church is given freedom as to the application of these laws, that does not make our decisions arbitrary or without God’s authority and backing[2]; Mat 18:18-20).
Under Jesus’ new covenant kingdom, God has deliberately changed the way we are to understand and apply some of His previously spoken (or preserved) words (e.g., Rom 10:20-21 w/Isa 65:1-2; 1Co 5:1-5; Col 2:11-12; Act 15:17 w/Amo 9:12 [LXX versus MT[3]]).
In addition, God has deliberately made some of His spoken words hard to understand (e.g., 2Pe 3:16) so that those who truly love Him will truly understand it and those who don’t, won’t[4] (Jer 29:13 “with all of your heart” = Hard work motivated by love is the condition to finding God; Isa 6:10 w/1:1-15 and 5:24 = Dull and dim are God’s curse on those who refuse to love Him by listening to His laws [to love is to listen]; Mat 13:13-15; Joh 8:42-43; Act 28:27; 2Co 12:7-10 [the theory of desirable difficulty] = We are better at understanding things [we are “stronger”] when those things are presented in a difficult way[5]).
Though not always apparent on the surface, there are no contradictions or inconsistencies between the principles established by God’s spoken words in the Old Testament and those established in the New Testament (Hence the reason: 1) Jesus and the NT’s speakers always appeal to the OT in support of their position or teaching – e.g., Act 24:14 [roughly, one out of every three verses in the NT is a direct or indirect reference to the OT], 2) Paul supports the OT as a source for becoming “wise” about NT salvation or training in righteousness [2Ti 3:15-16], 3) the Scriptures used at the start of the 1st century church to discern truth from error was the OT [the NT didn’t exist] – e.g., Act 17:10-11//e.g., Act 15:17 w/Amo 9:12 = No contradiction in the way James applies Amos since the intended goal of the prophet’s words agree with James’s interpretation [i.e., the Gentiles will be able to seek God’s salvation w/o becoming Jews [“all the nations who are called by My name”. Hence Paul’s struggle w/the Jews - Gal 6:13-15 w/3:28).
The two worst things therefore a person can be, are: 1) lazy in working hard to understand God’s spoken words (2Pe 3:16 = The reason they are “untaught and unstable” is due to their unwillingness to put forth the effort or work to “grow” in their understanding of God’s new covenant plan [the “grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.” They are “unprincipled men” [lazy – literally, w/o a law governing their behavior- most esp. God’s law – e.g., 2Pe 2:7], vv17-18; why so bad: v16b, “to their own destruction”) and 2) under the impression that no changes or corrections will be made to their understanding of God’s spoken words as a consequence of their growth in understanding (and therefore refuse to change – or call into question what is being taught) (this too is implied in 2Pe 3:16-18 = People refusing to grow are people refusing to change; e.g., Act 6:8-7:53 [51]; Gal 4:1-10 [8-10]; why so bad: Heb 6:1-8).
The end of first-century supernatural offices, brought an end to any additional spoken words from God in human history (1Co 13:8-10).

[1] By canonical confidence I mean, confidence that what we possess as God’s spoken words is enough to save us.

[2] Arbitrary (def.) based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system.

[3] Based on the evidence from other extant Jewish sources (e.g., Dead Sea Scrolls), some scholars believe the LXX rendering to be the more accurate/correct rendering.

[4] To say that something is hard to understand does not mean the same thing as beyond human understanding. If this were true, then hardly could Peter (for example) make an appeal to Paul’s wisdom – or encourage other Christians to read his letters since their message would be indiscernible (2Pe 3:14-15). It should also be noted that acknowledging the difficulties of Scripture (i.e., their interpretation) does no violence to the doctrine of Perspicuity or clarity of Scripture. Clarity is not the same as simplicity. In the words of Mark D. Thompson, “The clarity of Scripture [does] not mean, and [has] never meant, that there are no difficulties in Scripture.” (A Clear And Present Word, p.153).

[5] For a popular culture treatment of this subject see Malcom Gladwell’s David and Goliath (Part 2: The Theory of Desirable Difficulty).

View Details

Accomplishing the mission of our Master

1.1. The mission of our “Master” = Using our potential to be a value-add to His (new) kingdom (i.e., the church) through the

cultivation of its assets (14-17). (14) “entrusted his possessions…talents [literally, weights of value]”, (27) “money” = Kingdom assets, those things determining the kingdom’s value. (15) “each according to his ability” = Potential based on one’s resources and opportunities. (16, 17) “traded and gained”, (27) “money back with interest” = Cultivation.

1.2. Accomplishing the mission of our Master is necessary to being ready when we meet Him (24:44 w/25:13 w/14a “for it is just like…”). IOW: it is necessary to receiving (final) salvation (versus damnation) (21 versus 30).

1.3. Adding to the value of Jesus’ (new) kingdom/church is the reason He (the Master) purchased (redeemed/saved) us out of this condemned world. IOW: the gracious gift of our salvation (i.e., forgiveness/escape from hell/eternity in heaven) is reciprocal (26 = Jesus expects a ROI).

1.4. Maintaining our salvation therefore includes this aspect of obedience. We must make sure we are the kind of Christian whose life is a value-add to the mission of our Master. Consider:

1) Christians are the “slaves” (14) of God (term used most frequently in the Bible to describe God’s people). Slaves have no rights or reason to live beyond the mission of their master (again, this is why they are purchased).

2) Our potential (“ability”) plays a crucial role in determining whether we were faithful to our Master’s mission - i.e., did our potential match our performance? (15 w/29).

3) The third slave is considered “wicked” and sent to hell not because of living an unholy life (e.g., he didn’t steal the master’s talent), but rather because he refused to be productive - or productive according to his master’s preference (Mat 7:21-23 = Those condemned chose to serve Jesus according to their preference versus God’s preference [“the will of My Father”]).

1.5. According to Jesus, failing to be productive (according to your potential and God’s will for your life) means you are still wicked and worthy of hell.

Kinds of Christians: value-add (v-a) and value-bad (v-b)

2.1. “Lions” (v-a Christians) (16-17):

1) they make good use of their “ability”/they live up to their potential/they have a great ROI. In the case of the first two servants in our parable, they had a 100% ROI!

2) they view Christianity like the military: they respect authority and live for the mission (20, “Master… you entrusted to me…see I have gained”).

3) they are bold and courageous: they capitalize on their fear versus being controlled by their fear (25, “afraid”).

4) they have sense of urgency and always execute the mission (16 “immediately”).

5) their value is determined by the value of the church (Phi 2:3-4; this is what removes selfishness; it is how we die to self and live for Christ).

6) lions love pain (their perspective: pain = gain).

7) lions know - and are good with, God’s love being conditioned upon performance (Joh 17:4).

8) lions are like/imitate Jesus and so go to heaven (23 “joy of the master” = Heaven, where “the Lion from the tribe of Judah” lives – Rev 5:5; Joh 17:4).

2.2. "Chickens” (v-b Christians) (18):

1) they do not live up to their ability/potential. Like chickens who bury their eggs, the wicked servant buried his ability/potential so that others [in this case, the master] cannot benefit from them (25-27). Important point NOT to miss: it’s not enough to serve if what we do falls short of our ability/potential-i.e., we possess a poor ROI (e.g., pastor becoming a lay-teacher in the church – Would that be an acceptable ROI? Could I say I had been faithful w/my ability/potential?).

2) they view Christianity like a book club: no one is boss, we exist to discuss what we like in God’s book/complain [squawk like chickens] about what we don’t.

3) they are big talkers/squawkers who end up being nothing more than lazy cowards and emotional wrecks (26 “lazy” = cowardly = selfish)

4) they hate anything urgent, make excuses and often fail to execute the mission (24 w/26 = Servant rejected the urgency of the mission assigned by his master).

5) their value is determined by what others think of them/how they view themselves in relation to others (in the church) (e.g., 24 = The wicked servant’s value was determined by how superior he felt to others [“a hard/harsh man”]).

6) chickens avoid pain (their perspective: pain = not necessary for gain) (24 w/25; e.g., pastor chooses a different career path because of the pain and effort required).

7) chickens delude themselves into believing that God’s love for them is unconditional/not performance-based - i.e., they are evangelicals (25 = the wicked servant assumes his master will be okay w/his lack of performance).

8) chickens go to hell (30 “outer darkness…weeping and gnashing of teeth” = Hell; Mat 13:42 see also Rev 22:18).

2.3. “Hogs and dogs” (very v-b Christians) (Mat 7:6):

1) they are worse than hell-bound chickens. Hogs and dogs have no genuine interest in adding value to Jesus’ kingdom.

2) they despise the “holy” mission given to them at their conversion and anyone who attempts to push them in that direction they will “tear…to pieces”.

3) though citizens of Jesus’ kingdom, they hate His rule/authority (Luk 19:14)

4) hogs and dogs not only fail to execute but drain (“devour”) the resources of the church.

On Judgment Day, all farm animals (chickens, hogs and dogs) will be thrown into the lake of fire by the angels (Mat 13:41-42; “stumbling blocks” = Chickens, those who by their cowardly selfishness and laziness promote the same in others; “those who commit lawlessness” = Hogs and dogs, those who despise God’s holy law and those who practice/enforce it [“they will devour you – Mat 7:6]).

Only royal animals (lions) make it to heaven (Mat 13:43; “the righteous will shine forth as the sun” = V-A, royalty language – see Dan 12:3 w/Psa 80:1, 132:17-18])

3.Cultivation of the Kingdom’s assets

3.1. How we cultivate the Kingdom (or Church’s) assets = Through the bold AND consistent promotion of her 3 main assets in our lives, church, and the world (boldness and consistency = cultivation)

3.2. Why boldness? Boldness brings conviction, and conviction - not conversion is the goal. Only the HS can bring conversion. We are called to create conviction not conversion (Ecc 10:4 [“allays” = removes]; Act 2:47, 4:29). boldness = conviction

Signs associated w/boldness (how you know you are being bold, and people are convicted):

1) They want to hear more/get right with God (Act 2:36-37)

2) They get angry, say mean things, avoid or condemn you or seek to hurt you (Act 7:52-54).

3.3. Why consistency? Past victories/faithfulness only counts if you keep producing in the present (Eze 18:24; Mat 21:19). consistency = perseverance

3.4. The 3 main assets of Jesus’ (new) Kingdom (the Church) that must be boldly and consistently promoted in our lives, church and the world:

1) TRUTH (the reality of the K) [God’s Word - most esp. His gospel] (Mar 16:15 [v20]; Luk 24:46-48 w/Act 1:8 – Notice it includes those who already think they are saved [“Jerusalem and in all Judea” = the Jews]; Lev 19:16-18 w/Psa 34:12-13; Isa 8:20; Joh 17:17; Eph 4:15; 1Pe 2:22; 1Jo 3:18; remember Rev 22:15).

2) JUSTICE (the function of the K) [God’s prescription] (Psa 34:14 [“peace” = justice]; Psa 37:30, 97:2, 106:3; Pro 21:3, 28:4; Isa 1:27, 9:7, 16:5, 42:1, 4, 51:4, 56:1; e.g., Mat 5:21-48).

3) BEAUTY (the setting of the K) symmetry.

CLOSING CONTEMPLATION:

1) Based on the resources and opportunities provided to you, are you making good use of your potential in boldly and consistently promoting truth, justice, and beauty to those in your home, church and the world? IOW: are you a value-add to Jesus’ (new)kingdom, the church?

2) Based on your present state, where do you best fit in: with the lions, the chickens, or the hogs and dogs?

3) Would your pastor - or others in the church who know you (and will be truthful with you), agree with your answers?

4) Imagine a church filled with lions.

View Details

“One of the ironies of the Bible is that its most difficult book is called ‘Revelation’.”

Making sense of the book of Revelation requires:

We treat Revelation like all other prophetic literature in Scripture which operates according to the principles of symbolism (Rev 1:1, “communicated” [Grk., saymainoe] = Communicated through symbols/signs), original audience relevance (Rev 1:3-4, written to seven churches existing in the 1st century about events that will [in the majority] take place in their lifetime [3, “the time is near”; Mat 24:34]. Hence the early date for writing: > 70 AD[1]), unconventional fulfillment (e.g., Rev 14:8 [Isa 21:9], “Babylon” identified as someone other than literal Babylon), and recapitulation ([def., repeating previously mentioned events for the purpose of reinforcing formerly established truths and introducing new details or different perspectives that further the reader’s understanding and appreciation of those events.], Rev 5-11 w/12-18 [TBD]).
We read John’s heavenly vision (chs. 4-22) as five main acts: two past, one in the past and present, two yet future.

2.1. ACT ONE (PAST): DIVORCE

(4:1-5:14) = Jesus before the divine divorce court.

2.1.1. John is taken up to God’s heavenly throne room, the place where His judgments are determined (4:1-3).

2.1.2. The court’s business on this day is the finalization of Jesus’ divorce from OC Israel (5:1-5).[2]

2.1.3. The “book” (or scroll) with the seven seals represents the marriage covenant between Jesus and OC Israel created during the Sinai event (Exo 19-24 w/Jud 1:5; Exo 24:7 “the book of the covenant” = the marriage covenant document).

2.1.4. John weeps knowing that unless the marriage w/OC Israel is put asunder, the kingdom and promises of God could not be transferred to the church (or NC Israel). IOW: Jesus’ prophecy would not come true (Mat 21:43).

2.1.5. Jesus’ status as Israel’s true Husband (her “Lion” and “Root”) is the reason He is only One who can execute the divorce (break the seven seals of the marriage document rendering it void).

2.1.6. Likewise, Jesus’ status as a priest is the reason for the seven seals (Heb 4-10). Unlike normal marriage documents which were sealed only once, the marital document used for priests (get mekushar) was sealed seven times to dissuade priests from hasty divorces since priests were prohibited from the possibility of re-marrying their former spouses (or marrying those divorced). This understanding tells us that Jesus’ decision to pursue divorce is neither hasty nor without substantial grounds. Jesus’ grounds for divorce are two-fold: 1) OC Israel’s continuing (and generational) spiritual harlotry (Isa 50:1; Jer 3:8-9, 5:7, 13:27; Eze 16:8-30), 2) OC Israel’s murder of her Messiah and Husband-God (Act 2:36, 3:15, 7:52; Rev 5:6, 11:8; According to Jesus, this was the “final straw” – Mat 23:32-36).

2.1.7. As such, correctly interpreting Revelation 4 and 5 is essential to understanding 15 of the remaining 17 chapters (i.e., chs. 6-18 or 70% of the entire book of Revelation).

(6:1-11:19) = The seven-seals of the marriage document are broken releasing a seven-fold judgment against OC Israel culminating in the destruction of the Jerusalem and the Temple by the Romans (depicted as seven trumpets)

2.1.8. God promises a seven-fold judgment for Israel’s adultery/apostasy in Leviticus 26 (Lev 26:18, 21, 24, 28).

2.1.9. The “four horsemen” of the initial four seals are also an allusion to Ezekiel 14 where God promises severe judgment against Jerusalem for unfaithfulness (Ezekiel 14:12-21).

2.1.10. Direct parallels exist between the initial four seals and what is communicated in Leviticus 26 and Ezekiel 14: 1) Seal one (Rev 6:1-2) = Conquest (Jerusalem) (Lev 26:28-31; Eze 14:21), 2) Seal two (Rev 6:3-4) = Sword/War (Lev 26:24-27; Eze 14:17-18), 3) Seal three (Rev 6:5-6) = Famine (Lev 26:18-20; Eze 14:12-14), 4) Seal four (Rev 6:7-8) = Wild Beasts and Pestilence (Lev 26:21-23; Eze 14:15-16, 19-20).

2.1.11. Jesus prophesies that He will use the Romans as His primary means of judgment against the Jews (Mat 22:1-7; the Roman-Jewish War [67-70 AD]).

2.1.12. The fifth seal places Nero’s persecution (64-68 AD) squarely on the shoulders of the Jews (who suggested Christians be Nero’s scapegoat for the burning of Rome) (Rev 6:9-11[3]).

2.1.13. The sixth and seventh seals (Rev 6:12-17 w/8:1-11:19) represent the five-month siege against Jerusalem (April – September 70 AD).

2.1.14. The seven trumpets which begin at the breaking of the seventh seal, signal the high point/culmination of the vision’s goal: the destruction of Jerusalem (most spec., her Temple) and the end of Jesus’ marriage to OC Israel (Rev 11:2 w/8).[4]

2.1.15. Revelation 7 predicts a reprieve in the war when: 1) Jewish Christians (i.e., the Jerusalem church) who understood and heeded Christ’s previous warning, flee the city (Rev 7:1-8; Luk 21:20-24[5]), 2) the full number of martyrs is complete and Nero’s persecution is over (Rev 7:9-17; fulfillment of Rev 6:11; Nero’s death/Vespasian’s dispatch [68 AD][6]).

(12:1-18:24) = Recapitulation (repeat w/extra details/different perspective) of Revelation chapters 6 through 11.

2.1.14. Jerusalem, the “great city” of (Rev 11:2 and 8) is identified w/the idolatrous and pagan nation of Babylon, OC Israel’s former oppressors and place of exile (Rev 14:8 w/16:19, 17:18, 18:2, 10, 16, 18-21).

2.1.15. The beast that comes up from the abyss” in (Rev 11:7) is identified as Rome and Nero (the beast from the sea) (Rev 13:1-6, 18 [Rev 17:9-10 “seven heads…seven mountains” = Rome the city on seven hills; “seven kings, five have fallen, one is” = Nero was the sixth of the seven Roman Caesars][7]) who makes an unholy alliance with Israel and her priesthood (the beast of the land and the false prophet) (Rev 13:11-17 [Rev 16:13, 19:20, 20 :10 “false prophet”][8])[9] to destroy Christians. (Rev 6:9-11 w/[11:7, 12:17, 13:7-10, 14:12, 16:6, 17:6, 18:24])

2.1.16. The seven seals (of Rev 6-11) are depicted as seven bowls of wrath (Rev 16).

2.1.17. Revelation 12 and 13 also reveal: 1) OC Israel’s apostasies in relation to Messiah (Apostasy #1: abdication of her Messiah motherly duties [Rev 12:1-2; Mal 2:10-15], Apostasy #2: attempted murder of her Messiah Son [Rev 12:3-4; Mat 2:13-18; Luk 4:28-29], Apostasy #3: abandonment of her Messiah Son [Rev 12:5-6]), Apostasy #4: anarchy against the Roman govt [Rev 12:7-14][10]. 2) Satan’s (aka, the “dragon” and “serpent”) direct involvement in Israel’s apostasy (Rev 12:3-4), Rome’s power (Rev 13:1-4), and Christianity’s persecution (Rev 12:12, 17, 13:7-10).

2.2. ACT TWO (PAST): REMARRIAGE

(19:1-21) = Jesus consummates His marriage to the Church (NC Israel) signaling their reign on earth.

2.2.1. After celebrating the finalization of His divorce to adulterous/apostate OC Israel (the “great harlot”) through: 1) destroying Jerusalem and the Temple and 2) avenging the blood of the first century Christian martyrs (Rev 19:1-6), Jesus consummates His marriage to His new Bride, the Church (OC Israel) whose faithful deeds are her wedding dress (19:7-10).

2.2.2. Jesus is revealed as the Divine Warrior Husband Who fights for His Church (Rev 19:11-16 w/6:2 [“conquering to conquer”] and 19:2 [“avenged the blood of His bond-servants”]).

2.2.3. As His final act of vengeance for the first century Christian martyrs, Jesus’ destruction of Rome is also predicted (19:17-21). IOW: (Dan 7:13-14) wb fulfilled!

2.2.4. The reign of Jesus’ kingdom (NC Israel/the Church) has begun (Rev 19:6b w/11:15, 12:10, 17:14).

2.3. ACT THREE (PAST and PRESENT): SATAN

(20:1-6) = Satan’s exile and NC Israel’s reign

2.3.1. As part of the Church’s reign, Satan is exiled from this world curtailing his ability to deceive the Church or corrupt its gospel message to the nations (20:1-3; “thousand years” = Like the former time indicators in the book [e.g., Rev 13:5]], this refers to a literal period of time).

(20:7-9a) = Satan’s escape and NC Israel’s demise

2.3.2. Satan is successful in escaping back into this world (20:7).

2.3.3. Satan begins deceiving NC Israel/the Church through the invention of various false gospels/forms of Christianity: 1) Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy (11th century - or [roughly] one thousand years after his exile), 2) Evangelicalism and the Faith Alone Gospel (Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformation, 16th century).

2.3.4. Satan unites the world against the last remaining Church on earth (Rev 20:8-9a).

2.3.5. The extinction of Christianity (the last Church) is thwarted by the physical, final and fiery return of Jesus and His heavenly armies who instantly obliterate Satan and his forces and throw them into the eternal “lake of fire” (Rev 20:9b-10; 2Th 1:7-9). For additional consideration: A clue to Satan’s HQ since his escape (Isa 27:1 w/Mat 12:43).

2.4. ACT FOUR (FUTURE): JUDGMENT

(20:11-15) = The end of human history results in a final judgment of all who have ever lived.

2.4.1. Two books determine every human’s new and eternal home, both related to our deeds (Rev 20:11-13).

2.4.2. Based on what has been communicated in the previous chapters, our performance in the face of temptation and persecution - as well as our productivity for the Kingdom (the Church), will be the determining factors for finding our names in the “book of life” or among those who continued to receive the blood of Christ for forgiveness (Rev 20:14-15 w/Rev 2:7, 11, 17, 26, 3:5, 12, 21, 7:9-14, 12:11, 17, 13:10, 14:4-5, 12, 17:14, 19:8; Mat 25:14-30).

2.5. ACT FIVE (FUTURE): REBOOT

(21:1-22:21) = The saints of human history enter the new heavens and new earth.

2.5.1. Every human who passed their test through persevering and productive faithfulness to Jesus during their earthly lives, will inherit a new and permanently perfect creation where they will serve Jesus and search out new worlds in immortal, impregnable, immutable bodies which guarantee no end to their happiness, knowledge or life (Rev 21:1-22:5).

2.5.2. Our free-wills (and nothing else) will determine where we end up eternally (Rev 22:6-13).

2.5.3. Those who end up going to Hell (instead of the Reboot) are not only pagans but those who: 1) chose to believe Christ’s blood was an endless fountain for their constant sin (versus endless only for those who are faithful keep His commands/not characterized by sin) (Rev 22:14), 2) continued to practice what are false versions of God, the gospel and reality (e.g., revisionist history, slander, careless words and thinking) (Rev 22:15).

CLOSING WORDS: God: 1) sees salvation a s a marriage between Christ and the Church (Rev 22:16-17), 2) wants Revelation to be a part of Scripture - and His Law to still be in force (STARE DECISIS!) (Rev 22:18-21).

[1] For further study see Kenneth Gentry’s, Before Jerusalem Fell.

[2] Papers were served and divorce threatened in the past (over 600 years ago; Isa 50:1; Jer 3:8-9). Unfortunately, Israel produced no lasting moral change/repentance to keep the divorce from being finalized (Mat 23:37).

[3] “If the martyr’s blood is flowing around the base of the altar (Rev 6:9), it must be the priests of Jerusalem who have spilled it.” – David Chilton (The Days of Vengeance); “(The Neronian persecution of Christians was accomplished)…through jealousy and envy (by the Jews).” – Clement (source unknown); “(The Jews) possessed very powerful advocates in the palace, and even in the heart of the tyrant; his wife and mistress, the beautiful Poppaea, and a favorite player of the race of Abraham. These two suggested to Nero the new and pernicious sect of the Galileans, the Christians.” - Edward Gibbon (History of the Fall and Decline of the Roman Empire)

[4] The significance of the Temple’s destruction to Jesus’ divorce = The Temple was the sign of Jesus’ presence and covenant w/OC Israel (Exo 25:8). Hence the reason: 1) immediately after God first makes covenant (Exo 24), He gives to them the plans to build the tabernacle/temple (Exo 25-31), 2) the Temple had to be rebuilt (after its destruction by the Babylonians) for the covenant to be renewed (Neh 9:38-10:29).

[5] “For when the city was about to be captured and sacked by the Romans, all the disciples were warned by an angel to remove from the city, doomed as it was to utter destruction.” – Epiphanius (On Weights and Measures)

[6] “Vespasian [Rome’s new emperor] sent a dispatch to Rome rescinding the disenfranchisement of Christians as had been condemned by Nero.” – Dio Cassius

[7] “Corporately the Beast is the Roman empire; specifically, he is Nero Caesar, its contemporary head.” – Kenneth Gentry (Revelation Made Easy)

[8] “This lesser beast appears as a ‘lamb’ reminding us of temple worship in that the lamb us the dominant sacrificial victim. Just as the first beast’s image as a carnivore compound points to Rome and her bloody amusements, so it seems that the second beast’s lamb image points to Israel’s sacrificial system and religious claims.” – Kenneth Gentry (ibid)

[9] “Revelation appears to present an unholy alliance against Christianity, a Roman-Jewish alignment.” – Kenneth Gentry (Navigating the book of Revelation)

[10] “What did most elevate the Jews in undertaking this war, was an ambiguous oracle that was also found in their sacred writings [Dan 7:13-14], how…one from their own country should become governor of the habitable earth. The Jews took this prediction to belonging to themselves.” – Josephus (Wars); “Since God has established Rome and since you are at war against God’s laws, then you must go to war against Rome [that will] depend on [additional] human assistance. [Yet] where are you going to get human assistance? You might as well kill your wives and children and set fire to your own cities with your own hands and save Rome the trouble.” – King Agrippa (Josephus, Wars)

View Details

Ephesus · Smyrna · Pergamum · Thyatira · Sardis · Philadelphia · Laodicea

The senior pastor (or shepherd) –and therefore his helpers/under-shepherds (i.e., deacons/officers – Luk 12:58), are the one(s) responsible for the spiritual health of their churches (Rev 1:20 “stars are the angels of the seven churches” or “messengers sent by God to those particular churches)”(2:1, 8, 12, 18, 3:1, 7, 14) = Senior pastor/shepherd.

Additional support: 1) stars are a metaphor for pastors who lead people to righteousness (Dan 12:3), 2) the seven stars exist among the “seven golden lampstands.” Not only is this a metaphor for the church, but a reference to the lampstands tended to by the OC priests and Levites in the Temple. In the same way, the NC priests and Levites will tend to (or be responsible for) the lampstand that is now the church.

A church that is spiritually healthy is a church characterized by people overcoming their sin (i.e., their lives are no longer characterized by sin – 1Jo 5:3-5 = Christians [those who believe in Jesus/God’s Son and are born again] overcome sin [the “world” – 1Jo 2:16] by faithfulness to God’s commands which they do not find hard/burdensome”).

Maintaining the spiritual health of the church – or seeing to it that people are overcoming their sin is absolutely necessary not only to each individual’s salvation, but each church’s ability to continue as a place where God’s Spirit and salvation resides (Hence Rev 2:7, 11, 17, 26, 3:5, 12, 21) = Each “overcome” message exists in the form of a conditional statement. IOW: only those who overcome their sin will receive the salvific/eternal promises mentioned.

With respect to the church see (Rev 2:5 “remove your lampstand out of its place”) = The lampstands in the Temple represented God’s spiritual presence and lit the way to inner sanctum/holy of holies – the place offering salvation. As such they represent both the Holy Spirit and salvation. Christ’s threat to remove the lampstand therefore refers to Him removing that church as a legitimate church – or dwelling place of His spirit and salvation.

To produce a church that is spiritually healthy – or characterized by people overcoming their sin (or being faithful to God’s commands), requires that her shepherd (senior pastor) and his under-shepherds (deacons/officers) be completely intolerant of seven particular sins. The reason Jesus chose the seven churches mentioned in Revelation (though there were many other churches), is because each of them possessed one (or the potential for one) of these seven sins:

3.1. Ephesus: Failure to give first loyalty to Jesus/His church/His words and gospel.

(Rev 2:1 w/4-5 ) “The One who holds…in His right hand…who walks” = Jesus is the One who created/owns us and cares for us most (Gen 3:8).

“left your first love” w/(Mat 10:27-37) = Our loyalty to Jesus includes preaching God’s words/gospel to our lost blood family members. Our loyalty to Jesus is also measured by our loyalty to His Body, the church (Mat 25:40 “to the extent that you did it to one of these brothers…you did it to Me”; “The blood of the covenant is stronger than the water of the womb”).

3.2. Smyrna: Failure to be faithful when suffering persecution.

(Rev 2:8-10) “first and the last” = Jesus is the only God. The largest cult of emperor worship (“Nero is Lord of the universe”) existed in Smyrna; “who was dead, and has come to life” = Docetism – or the belief that Jesus could not be a man or die, came only in spiritual form, also very popular in Smyrna;

“you will be tested…have tribulation…be faithful unto death” = The city’s devotion to the emperor as God and the popularity of Docetism within the local churches made employment/living as a true Christian very hard – even deadly (Mat 10:22).

3.3. Pergamum: Failure to be theologically, spiritually and sexually pure.

(Rev 2:12-16) “The One who has the two-edged sword” = Jesus possesses the real authority not only to destroy but heal. Pergamum worshipped the Asclepius – the Greek god of healing.

“I know where you dwell, where Satan’s throne is” = Asclepius was a serpent; e.g., symbol for modern medicine/medical science

“teaching of Balaam/Nicolaitans” = Doctrinal impurity. The church was teaching that it was okay to embrace the sin of your culture as a means of reaching others for Christ (e.g., the pragmatism of the mega-churches – “the ends justify the means”)

“eat things sacrificed to idols and commit acts of immorality” = Spiritual and sexual impurity. Christians were frequenting the temple of Asclepius to receive healing (e.g., our involvement in alternative medicine associated w/false religion; entertainment that is spiritually/sexually impure)”.

3.4. Thyatira: Failure to separate from false Christians or gospels.

(Rev 2:18-20) “The Son of God, whose has eyes like a flame of fire and His feet are like burnished bronze” = Jesus knows the true motives of our hearts (v19 and 23; also Rev 1:12-15 [picture of a king/judge sitting in judgment – “in the middle of the lampstands”]). Jesus’ stmt (ml) due to the excuses made by those unwilling to separate from false Christians/gospels (e.g., “I go to that church/hang out w/those people b/c I am trying to win them to Christ”).

“you tolerate the woman Jezebel who calls herself a prophetess and teaches and leads my bondservants astray” = There were people in the church (not everyone – v24) who were not separating from this local false Christian teacher, yet the church did nothing about it (2Jo 1:9-11).

3.5. Sardis: Failure to take our Christian life seriously by being productive for the Kingdom of God.

(Rev 3:1-3) “He Who has the seven Spirits of God” = Jesus is the One Who determines who remains spiritually alive (Hence, “you have a name that you are alive but you are dead”).

“Wake up, strengthen the things that remain, which are about to die; for I have not found your deeds completed” = The Christians in Sardis were lazy and unproductive when it came to advancing the Kingdom and gospel. As a result they were about to lose their personal salvation and ability to offer salvation to others (as a church) (Mat 25:14-30; Luk 8:16-18).

3.6. Philadelphia: Failure to take on the religious giants condemning us as heretics or apostate.

(Rev 3:7-11) “He Who is holy who is true, who has the key of David…I have put before you an open door that no one can shut” = Jesus is the true King of Israel and His church the true re-constituted Israel that old Israel cannot oppose/reject (Rev 6:10-17).

“you have a little power [you are small in comparison to your opponents]…[yet] I will cause those of the synagogue of Satan [the majority group/the giants who condemn you and call you apostate – Act 24:14], who say they are Jews [i.e., the true followers of God] and are not…I will make them come and bow down at your feet”).

3.7. Laodicea: Failure to be truthful in their assessments of life, love, self or others.

(Rev 3:14-19) “the Amen” [the truth] the faithful and true Witness” = Jesus is the God Who demands truth.

“I wish that you were cold or hot” =I wish you were true to one degree or another (hot or cold)

“you say, ‘I am rich…and you are wretched and miserable and poor’” = You are untruthful in your assessment of self/life.

“blind” = You are untruthful in your assessment of others (Mat 7:5)

“those whom I love I reprove” = (ML) said for the purpose of correcting their wrong/untruthful view of love (e.g., slander, lies, revisionist history, holding onto/refusing to change from former views of the world or the way things work that are no longer true, viewing God’s shepherds/authority as those who hurt us rather than help us, viewing justice as a bad thing; Rev 21:8 “all liars” [all forms of liars] w/Mat 12:34-37).

Eradicating these seven sins will be a primary goal of all those functioning in any capacity as shepherds in Jesus’ churches (in our church!) (Rev 2:29).

View Details

“One of the ironies of the Bible is that its most difficult book is called ‘Revelation’.”

Making sense of the book of Revelation requires:

We treat Revelation like all other prophetic literature in Scripture which operates according to the principles of symbolism, original audience relevance, unconventional fulfillment, and recapitulation.

1.1. Symbolism

(Rev 1:1 “communicated” [Grk., saymainoe]) = To indicate the reality of something through signs or symbols; symbolism). Scholars believe Jesus’ use of this Greek word is a direct allusion to Daniel 2 where he is told to interpret the various pieces of Nebuchadnezzar’s great statue dream as symbolism – or symbolic of the various kingdoms that would exist in the future (Dan 2:30 “interpretation” = saymainoe [LXX]). Jesus is therefore communicating that like Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, John’s visions (chs 1 and 4-22) are not to be interpreted literally, but through the lens of signs and symbols. This principle is true not only with respect to Daniel’s prophecy but all OT prophetic literature. We are to interpret its visions as symbolism (signs/symbols pointing to reality rather than the reality itself). What also proves true is that the book of Revelation shares many of the same signs and symbols found in those Old Testament prophetic books. Knowing this helps us to avoid using our imaginations in the interpretive process (e.g., Rev 1:7-8 w/Isa 19:1).

Examples of imagination from John MacArthur’s interpretations of Revelation:

1.1.1. (Rev 6:12-13), “moon became blood. Accompanying the earthquake will be numerous volcanic eruptions; large amounts of ash and debris will be blown into the earth’s atmosphere, blackening the sun and giving the moon a blood-red hue. Stars of heaven fell. The best explanation is a massive asteroid or meteor shower.”

Understanding these verses based on prior OT use (Isa 13:1-22; Eze 32:1-11) = Prophetic language indicating God’s judgment against one pagan nation through their destruction by another pagan nation– which also meant the defeat of their false gods/idols. Isaiah 13 = The fall of the Babylonian kingdom to the Medo-Persians in 539 BC. Ezekiel 32 = The fall of the Egyptian kingdom to the Babylonians in 605 BC. In respect to false gods/idolatry = Both the Babylonians and the Egyptians worshipped gods derived from the “sun”, “moon” and “stars”.

What then is being communicated by these symbols in Revelation 6:12-13? Israel’s rejection of their Messiah (Jesus) means that they too have become a nation guilty of idolatry (of worshipping a false god) and will likewise

suffer God’s destruction at the hands of a pagan nation. In this case, the Romans (Jewish War 67-70 AD).

1.2.1. (Rev 8:8), “Like a great mountain. Probably a huge meteor or asteroid surrounding by gases that will ignite as it enters earth’s atmosphere. Its impact will create a tidal wave, destroying one-third of the world’s ships. sea became blood. This may refer to an event known as red tides, caused by billions of dead micro-organisms poisoning the water—in this case the result of the meteor’s collision.”

Understanding these verses based on prior OT use (Jer 51:24-25, 42 [w/Rev 17:1-6 which is the same city mentioned in Rev 11:8; See also Rev 18:20-21] = Prophetic language indicating the destruction/conquering of a great city by a massive enemy army. Jeremiah 51 = The conquering of the great city of Babylon by the massive armies of the Persian king, Cyrus).

What then is being communicated by these symbols in Revelation 8:8? The great city of Jerusalem (and her Temple) will be overrun and destroyed by the massive army of the Roman Empire.

1.2. Original Audience Relevance

The majority of what the biblical prophets write has relevance to its original audience (e.g., Isaiah = 71% or 47 of its 66 chapters). As such, before we attempt discern universal principles – or what portions of prophecy may be related to us, we must first attempt to understand the importance of the prophecy to those to whom it was first spoken or written (1:4-6, 9-11) = The majority of what John receives as prophetic visions in the book of Revelation is directly relevant to seven 1st century churches existing in Asia Minor. The majority of what is revealed will be fulfilled in their time (1-3). Similar time-markers are provided in Jesus’ prophetic, “Olivet Discourse” (e.g., Mat 24:15-34). Scholars agree that Jesus’ Olivet Discourse is a direct corollary to John’s Revelation. Of interest, is the fact that John’s gospel is the only of the four gospels not containing this famous prophecy. As such, some have called Revelation, “John’s Olivet Discourse.”

Examples from OT prophecy supporting the principle of historical or first relevance to the original audience (Isa 7:10-16 w/8:1-8 w/Mat 1:23; Jer 1:11-16 w/7:1-13 w/Mat 21:13).

Applying this principle to the book Revelation (examples):

1.2.1. The mountain thrown into the sea in Rev 8:8 as the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple: 1) Jesus made this connection w/His disciples before His death (Mat 21:18-21), 2) According to Dr. William Telford (Dept. of Biblical Studies, Sheffield University), “mountain” was the standard expression among the Jews for the Temple Mount.

1.2.2. The Beast who kills Christians for 42 months and possesses the number, 666 (Rev 13:1-7, 18) = The 1st century Roman king, Nero Caesar: 1) his name according to Hebrew numerical value equals six hundred and sixty-six, 2) many in the 1st century referred to him as a “wild beast” or “the beast” due to his bloody tirades and public displays of animalistic sexual indulgence, 3) As a means to escaping national revolt, Nero blamed his burning of Rome on the Christians (an idea provided by the Jewish leaders via his Jew-favoring wife, Poppaea Sabina) leading to 42 months (Rev 13:5) of the most bloody and violent persecution of Christians in the history of the world (A.D. July of A.D. 64 until Nero’s death in January of 68).

1.3. Unconventional Fulfillment

Most prophecy in Scripture experiences multiple fulfillments (e.g., Isa 7:10-16 w/Mat 1:23). Each however is almost always partial – or related to only a portion of the entire prophecy. Rarely is a particular prophecy fulfilled in its entirety in the same event (e.g., contra Isa 53). Instead, each successive fulfillment tends to be concerned with different portions while at the same time, reapplying the previous portion already fulfilled to a completely new or different context.

Example from Isaiah (Isa 9:1-7):

1.3.1. Sans verses 6b-7a = Hezekiah (Isa 36-39 -esp., Isa 37:32).

1.3.2. Sans verses 4 and 5 = Jesus (Mat 4:15-16; Luk 1:32-33, 79).

Such unconventional forms of fulfillment can also include change to the original intent or meaning (e.g., Isa 65:1-2 w/Rom 10:20-21).

Example from Revelation: Isaiah’s prophecy regarding the destruction of Babylon by the Persians is later used to communicate the destruction of Jerusalem (the new Babylon) by the Romans (Isa 21:9 w/Rev 14:8).

1.4. Recapitulation

Recapitulation is the repeating of previously mentioned events for the purpose of not only reinforcing formerly established truths, but to introduce additional details and different perspectives that also help the reader’s understanding and appreciation of those events. Revelation 12 through 18 (the seven bowls of wrath) are a recapitulation of Revelation 6 through 11 (the seven seals culminating in seven trumpets). Recapitulation is an important literary tool employed throughout the Bible.

For example:

1.4.1. The historical books of the Bible: 1) Genesis (Gen 1 w/Gen 2), 2) history of the kings and prophets ([1Sa 31 and 2Sa, 1 Ki and 2Ki] w/1Ch and 2Ch), 3) the Gospels (Matthew w/Mark w/Luke w/John).

1.4.2. The OT prophetic books (e.g., Isa 42:1-9, 49:1-13, 50:4-9, 52:13-53:12, 61:1-3 = The Servant of the Lord).

1.4.3. Theological truths (e.g., Isa 65-66 w/Rev 21-22 = The new heavens and the new earth/Reboot).

CLOSING CONTEMPLATION: Was Revelation written in the 60s or the 90s? Based on what we learned today, how do we know?

View Details

The Seven Deadly Deficiencies can and will shipwreck you and your family's Christian Faith.

Lack of Loyalty (Luke 12:51-53; Luke 14:26, 33; John 13:35; 1 Peter 1:22; 1 Thessalonians 3:12-13).
Lack of Conformity (Romans 12:1-3; Philippians 1:27, 2:1-2; Luke 8:16-18; 1 John 1:5-10)
Lack of Dignity, Honor, or Respect (Philippians 4:8; Titus 2:2; 2 Corinthians 8:21)
Lack of Time (Ephesians 5:15-18; Luke 8:14; Luke 21:34-36).
Lack of Cashflow (Proverbs 27:23-27; Proverbs 13:8).
Lack of Discipline (James 3; Matthew 5).
Lack of Wise Counsel (Hosea 4:6; Deuteronomy 32:28; Proverbs 15:22; 2 Timothy 4:34).

View Details

At Christ Covenant Church, we strive to possess the ancient Christian Faith of Jesus and the apostles. And that includes in the area of church polity (i.e., the operational model or governing structure established by God for His church). Hardly a simple task, this puzzle has alluded many throughout church history (including our pastor for almost twenty-two years). Hence the reason there exists at least seven models: 1) Presbyterian 2) Presbyterian w/a synod, 3) Plurality of elders, 4) Plurality of elders w/congregational affirmation, 5) Congregational, 6) Congregational w/pastors, 7) Episcopal, 8) Episcopal w/connexion. Continued study of Scripture and history, however, has allowed our pastor to finally put all the pieces of this important puzzle in their proper place. Said differently, to see the model presented in Scripture that alleviates all the problems created by the previous models adopted by our church. That model is also the oldest and first in church history. As such we can be confident that it was the polity of the first Christian churches. It is the episcopal model – or ancient Christian polity of Jesus, priests and deacons (JPD).

Jesus is our High Priest, Prophet and King.

1.1. The term “messiah” (or “christ” in the Greek) means “anointed one” and referred those who had received the (Holy) Spirit of authority for the purpose of salvation and judgment in relation to right doctrine and direction for the covenant community. This anointing (or ordination[1]) was limited to three offices: priest, prophet and king (priests - Exo 28:29-30; Lev 10:10-11, 17; Exo 40:12-15 w/Psa 132:16; Mal 3:6-7; prophets - Psa 105:15; kings - [1Sa 16:1,13; 2Ki 9:1-3] w/1Sa 24:6 and 2Sa 1:14-16; also 1Ch 11:1-3; With respect to it being limited, see Num 11:29).

1.2. Jesus became the first (and last) Person to combine all three offices in their superlative and divine form. He is the Christ: our Heavenly High-Priest, God’s Final Prophet and Divine Davidic King (or King of kings) (Mat 3:16-17: 1] as Heavenly High Priest – Heb 3:1, 4:14, 8:1-2; 2] as Final Prophet - Deu 18:15, 18-19 w/Joh 5:46 and Act 3:22-23 w/Heb 1:1-12; also Mat 21:11; 3] as Davidic King – Isa 11:1, 10; Psa 2:2, 45:1-7, 110:1 and 2Sa 7:12-13 w/Mat 1:1, 21:1-9; Rom 1:3; 2Ti 1:8; Heb 1:8-9 and Rev 11:15).

1.3. What all of this means for Christ Covenant Church from a church polity/government perspective: Jesus is our highest authority, the final “Word” in all things, the One for whom we exist (Joh 1:1-4; Col 1:16). Hence the reason we proclaim at the end of every service, “All for King Jesus!”

Priests are our ordained pastors (elders/overseers [Grk., episkopei = Bishop[2]]).

2.1. God promises to re-establish the offices of priest and Levite for the new covenant community (Isa 66:18 w/21).

2.2. As discussed, priests are an anointed/ordained office or the office possessing God’s special spirit of authority for the purpose of salvation, and judgment in relation to justice, doctrine and direction for the covenant community. Given the identification and requirements of elders/overseers/pastors[3]/pastor-teachers (1Ti 3:1; Tit 1:5; Eph 4:113), they represent the new covenant community’s priests. Hence the reason they are:

2.2.1. said to possess authority (1Co 5:4; 2Co 10:3-8, 13:10; Tit 2:15)

2.2.2. anointed/ordained (2Co 1:21; Tit 1:5 w/Heb 8:3 “appointed” = anointed; Act 14:23 “appointed” = Different word than Tit 1:5 but same idea is being communicated as confirmed by texts like Heb 8:3 [“appointed” – same word and subject as Act 14:23)

2.2.3. required to demonstrate competency in teaching (1Ti 3:2 w/Tit 1:5 w/7 w/9 ). Hence why they are called “pastor-teachers” (again, Eph 4:11). Hence why also, those seeking to be ordained were often commissioned to assist and be trained by those already ordained (e.g., Joshua – Num 11:28; Timothy – Act 16:1-3).

2.2.4. deputized by Jesus (through their ordination/anointing/receiving of the Holy Spirit of authority) not only for judgment in relation to justice, right doctrine and direction, but also to extend or withhold His forgiveness/justification/salvation (Mat 16:17-19; Joh 20:21-23; 2Co 3:1-6; Heb 13:17).

2.3. As additional support: 1) Paul identifies himself as a “priest” (Rom 15:15-16), 2) Jesus provides the same support/backing to the judgments and decisions of new covenant elders as those given to old covenant priests (Mat 16:17-19 w/18:17-20 w/Deu 17:9-13; in this respect consider also Num 15:30-31 w/Mat 12:22-32), 3) James speaks of new covenant elders (Jam 5:14-18) in the same way that Josephus speaks of old covenant priests,“[The priest] it is that must put up prayers for you to God, who will readily hear them, because God will receive them as offered by one that he hath himself chosen to this office.” (Antiquities of the Jews)

2.4. If then, ordained pastors are the promised priests of the new covenant community, then it is only reasonable that they (like their old covenant counterparts) would also wear special garments associated w/their anointing/ordination (Exo 29:29). Hence the reason for the long legacy of vestments in church history.

2.5. Their ordination typically happens through the recognition of an existing body of professing believers and the laying on of hands by existing ordained men (1Ti 4:14, 5:22; 2Ti 1:6-7; Act 6:1-6, 8:14-19, 9:15-18 [laying on of hands precedes Paul’s baptism for the HS] w/Gal 1:1, 15 and 2:9 = Paul equates his encounter w/Ananias [likely the ordained pastor at Damascus] w/his ordination as a apostle).

2.6. Last but not least, those serving as new covenant priests (or ordained elders/overseers/pastors): 1) must be men who meet the character qualifications in (1Ti 3:1-7; Tit 1:5-9 = Both of these passages assume the possession of the right gospel – especially Tit 1:9 “sound doctrine” since this is the prerequisite to the existence of a Christian church, the HS’ empowerment and Christ’s backing of that pastor)[4], 2) will be judged more strictly by God – most especially in what they say and so must become masters over their tongues (Jam 3:1-2), 3) are destined for a great heavenly reward if they are faithful (1Pe 5:1-4; Rev 4:4 = Elders are the one’s possessing a king’s crown – See 2Ti 4:8).

2.7. What all of this means for Christ Covenant Church from a church polity/government perspective: 1) never will there be women pastors/elders 2) never should there be elders/pastors who are not ordained/anointed, 3) those who “aspire” (1Ti 3:1) to be elders/overseers/pastors – i.e., new covenant priests are seeking a good thing and must be trained so that they can be ordained/anointed, 4) the new covenant priest is second in authority to Jesus and therefore possessing His support/backing when making judgments/decisions on justice, doctrine or direction for the church - even when wrong on issues (other than the gospel) due to ignorance. (Consider Deu 17:9-13 w/Lev 4:22ff = Due to ignorance, leaders can sin/be wrong in their judgments. Such fallibility does not mean obedience to their judgments is optional or will be excused by God. Hence Paul’s response in Act 23:5 and his instruction in Rom 13:5). 5) Until others are ordained, pastor Scott is the only one who should be addressed this way (“pastor”).

Levites are our deacons and judicial council (or JUDCO)[5].

3.1. As discussed, Levites were also promised to the new covenant community. Their office is realized in the role of deacons who like them are:

3.1.1. to submit to and protect their priests/ordained pastors (their person and personal integrity) – as well as God’s house (Num 1:53 w/3:10, 18:3-4, 7; 1Ch 9:14-27; Act 23:1-5 [man who struck Paul was most likely a Levite guard]; 1Ti 5:19 [“elder” = ordained/anointed pastor]w/Exo 22:28 [applied to all rulers including priests as demonstrated by Paul’s violation w/Ananias]; 1Pe 5:5; e.g., O-line protecting their QB).

3.1.2. deputized by the priests/ordained pastors w/a portion of the Spirit/spiritual authority (Num 8:9-10 “lay their hands” = Deputize w/authority versus anoint/ordain w/ authority)[6] to help their priests/ordained pastors w/:

3.1.2.1. the sacrifices (i.e., the Lords Table) (Num 18:2-7 w/2Ch 29:34, 35:10-12) = The sacrifices (“the obligations of the tent of meeting”): 1) can only to handled by the sons of Levi (priests and Levites). Outsiders are not allowed to “come near”, 2) the Levites role ends outside the veil – i.e., they can prepare and distribute the sacrifice but cannot make it (i.e., make atonement for the people).[7]

3.1.2.2. the offerings (e.g., counting the offerings, seeing that the monies are used properly) (1Ch 26:20; 2Ch 31:14).

3.1.2.3. determining justice, right doctrine and direction for the covenant community (e.g., JUDCO) (1Ch 26:29; Neh 8:7-9).

3.1.2.4. worship (e.g., the worship leader sb a deacon) (1Ch 6:1 w/31-33, 16:4, 25:1-3).

3.2. Given Paul and Law’s prohibition against women serving as judges – or determining justice/equity, right doctrine and direction of the covenant community (See 1Co 14:34 w/Deu 19:21) - and the fact that this is the majority and most important portion of the deacon’s role, the office of deacon (like its former iteration) also remains open only to men. Though there a women ministers [women who minister in the church – e.g., Phoebe – Rom 16:1, Euodia and Syntyche – Phi 4:2], there are no women deacons [women in offices of spiritual authority]).

3.3. In keeping with their predecessors there should exist for the new covenant Levite or deacon: 1) a “head” (or high) Levite/deacon who was responsible for managing the others (Neh 12:24), 2) limited periods of service (versus perpetual service as in the case of priests) (Num 8:24-26), 4) a reward for faithful service (Deu 33:8-11 w/1Ti 3:13). 3) a number representative of the congregation (Num 3:12).

3.4. The qualifications for deacons (or new covenant Levites) are not nearly as strict as those for new covenant priests (1Ti 3:1-7 versus 1Ti 3:8-12; e.g., no mention of deacons [like elders] needing to be “above reproach” [approved by legitimate and strict scrutiny], “temperate” [even keeled in his emotions/behavior] “prudent” [wise]). In modern terms the qualifications for deacons can be summarized as: 1) you can’t be a loser, dork, wimp, weirdo or ghetto (8 “dignified”), 2) you can’t be two-faced, a politician, a manipulator, given to flattery or brown-nosing, living for appearances, living a double-life, untrustworthy, insincere or dishonest in what you say (8 “double-tongued”), 3) you can’t be addicted to any unnecessary foreign substances that impede your ability to fulfill your God-given duties (8 “addicted to much wine”), 4) you can’t be open to committing crimes to make money or positions of authority to push your agenda or preferences on others (8 “fond of sordid gain” – 1Ti 6:5), 5) you must be prone to – and possess a reputation of protecting - versus insurrecting or causing division in the church or casting doubt in the minds of others as to the Christian doctrine being taught by her pastors (9 “holding to” = Bold or strong in protecting/possessing [1Co 7:37; Isa 13:8; no cowards or quiet men]; “the mystery of the Faith” = The church and her teachings/gospel [Eph 3:8-10]; “with a clear conscience” = Not prone to or possessing guilt in relation to division/dissension/insurrection [e.g., 2Co 1:12]); 6) you have a track record demonstrating you meet the prior qualifications (10; e.g., cap crimes/EOTC < 1yr after restoration/issued), 7) if you have a wife, she likewise is not a loser, wimp, weirdo, dork or ghetto, nor is she reckless with her tongue saying stupid, baseless stuff that hurts others or an emotional mess or unreliable and disobedient when given a command or task (11), 8) you can’t be sexually immoral (12 “husband of one wife”), 9) your home and children are not a mess (12 “good managers”).

3.4. What all of this means for Christ Covenant Church from a church polity/government perspective: 1) Tim is a deacon (and our head deacon). 2) we need more deacons (a good representation) of our current congregation (i.e., we need to elect 6 more [total of 9 or ~ 10% rep. of the congregation/ ~1/3 of our men]). 3) we have men who meet the qualifications (which now includes single men and those who by 2024, have served one year [versus two for elders] after restoration/EOTC issuance; except for Forrest Stinnett, none of our other men are disqualified due to discipline.). 4) repentance w/respect to women deacons and women in judgment. 5) though laymen and women can serve in other ministries (e.g., worship, offerings, security, etc – See 1Ch 9:2 – there are “temple servants” [Hbr. Netinims]), only the deacons can serve in the sacred roles of the Lord’s Table and JUDCO. 6) men must be re-elected to continue serving (elections every two years; next election in/for 2026). 7) these men ARE NOT ELDERS (and therefore should not be held to that standard). 8) There will be a special ceremony in January (2024) to commission those chosen/confirmed. 9) Because these men will be officers of the church (being deputized w/some authority), we will address them using the honorary title of “officer” (e.g., officer Tim, officer Andrew, officer Robert).

[1] (Exo 28:41) “ordain” = Fill their hand…w/wisdom (to judge – vv29-30) and authority to atone (30:10).

[2] Bishop is the term used in Episcopal churches and other ancient forms of Christendom to refer to their priests/pastors.

[3] “pastor” which means shepherd is the term used by God when speaking about his priests or ordained/anointed leaders (e.g., Num 27:17; Isa 56:11, 63:11, Jer 10:21, 12:10, 22:22, 23:1-4, 25:34-36, 50:6; Eze 34:2-10).

[4] “When the pastor reads and preaches the Word, he symbolizes Christ, the Husband, speaking to His holy Bride (which is, by the way, one of the main reasons why women cannot be pastors; they cannot publicly symbolize Christ the Husband to His Bride, the Church, 1Co 11:2-10, 14:33-38; Eph 5:22-33; 1Ti 2:11-15).” – Jeffrey J. Meyers (The Lord’s Service)

[5] Viewing them as ruling elders yet using 1Ti 3:8-13 to support this theory misses the obvious: Paul’s use of the term “elder” – or teaching on the qualifications for elders ends at verse 7.

[6] The authority of the Levites is therefore by proxy (i.e., only valid/enforceable when it was in agreement w/the priests). We see the same thing in relation to those tribal elders and officers God gave to Moses as additional help (Num 11:16-17).

[7] Unlike the priests, the Levites cannot make atonement (e.g., See the contrast between the Levites and the priests in 1Chr 6:1-48 w/49). As such, only the ordained pastor – or new covenant priest can baptize (the point at which atonement is rec’d/the power of binding and loosing or forgiveness).

View Details

Young Christian Marriage = Marriage before the age of 25.

In the United States young marriage has been on a steady decline. The average age of marriage for a man and woman today is 30 yrs and 28 yrs (respectively) versus 1920 when those numbers were 24 yrs and 21 yrs (respectively). This trend is neither biblical nor wise. It stems from worldly thinking that is both selfish and satanic.

Young (Christian) marriage is the biblical paradigm. Covenant kids would enter into (their first) marriages between 12 to 20 years of age (Mar 5:39-42 “girl” [Grk., korasion]) = Unique word referring to a young girl who has gone through puberty [sexually mature] and ready for marriage (See LXX, Gen 24:4; Ruth 2:5; Zec 8:5 “boys and girls [Grk., korasion] playing in the streets” = More accurately, sexually mature boys and girls dancing in the public square for the purpose of seeking out a spouse (e.g., Jug 21:14-23 w/Exo 32:6; See also Mat 14:6-11 “girl” [Grk., korasion]). Hence the reason Solomon can speak of “the wife of your youth” (Pro 5:18 = Wife taken at a young age). This is the time also when Christ speaks of taking Israel as His bride (Eze 16:7-8 “your breasts were formed…you were at the time for love” = At the age of sexual maturity). Joseph and Mary (Jesus’ parents), were also married (betrothed – Mat 1:18) at a young age. Scholars believe they were between the ages of 12 and 16.
The false assumptions made by many ignorant people is that shorter lifespans and the necessity to produce many children were the only reasons for the young marriage model of the Bible (or ancient times). In reality, sexual purity was another equally important reason (1Co 7:1-9 w/36) (36a) “past her youth” (the expected time when marriage would occur) = Paul’s instruction (in vv1-9) is in respect to the young, those who are beginning to experience strong sexual urges. His prescription? Get married (v9 - “it is better to marry than to burn with passion”[alternate interpretation = “burn in hell”]). (36b)“if…he is acting unbecomingly toward his virgin” = The father’s neglect/refusal to find his daughter a husband (arrange a marriage for his daughter during her younger years) is ignoring his daughter’s natural sexual desires- as well as putting at risk her ability to remain sexually pure. (36c) “If it must be so” = She has not been given the gift of celibacy and therefore needs to be married so as to secure satisfy her sexual desires and maintain sexual purity. This is the same reason Paul commands young widows to pursue remarriage (1Ti 5:11). This is also the reason betrothals are to be no longer than 6 months (See document, The Biblical Model For Marriage).
Numerous studies confirm the biblical paradigm of young marriage to be the wisest for Christians - i.e., young married Christians/religious people are far more likely to achieve happiness, stability and permanence (not divorce) than those who are not religious and/or wait.

3.1. “There’s a general assumption – so widespread that it no longer requires demonstration – that in order to have a high-quality and lasting marriage, it’s necessary first to finish college, start a successful career, and then look for a partner with the same qualifications. Despite the ease of divorce, marriage is still perceived as being characterized by exclusivity, fidelity, and permanence. As a consequence, another idea that has become widely shared and promoted before embarking on such a definitive commitment is to give the relationship “a test drive” first — a period of cohabitation — to see how being together within the same walls works when you have shopping and chores to do, work commitments to juggle, and perhaps already a child to raise. Willingly or unwillingly, we have borrowed this popular approach to marriage from a consumer [worldly] mindset: before confirming a purchase, I need to test whether the product or service meets my expectations. But the sociological research shows that this is not the best approach when it comes to marriage [emphasis mine].Psychologist Galena Rhoades, who studies young adult relationships, argues that:

‘We generally think that having more experience is better [or getting to know the person for longer is better].

But what we find for relationships is just the opposite. Having more experience was related to having a less happy marriage later on. For example, we found that people who had been married before, people who had lived with a boyfriend or girlfriend before, and having had more sexual partners before marriage, were each associated with having lower marital quality later on.’ Sociology professor and director of the National Marriage Project (University of Virginia), W. Bradford Wilcox… showed in a study how much more efficient the so-called traditional and much disparaged model is: ‘The conventional wisdom holds that spending your twenties focusing on education, work and fun, and then marrying around 30 is the best path to maximize your odds of forging a strong and stable family life. But the research tells a different story, at least for religious couples [emphasis mine]. Saving cohabitation for marriage, and endowing your relationship with sacred significance, seems to maximize your odds of being stably and happily married.’” – Paola Belletti (“Research shows that marrying relatively young without living together first results in the most durable marriages”)

3.2. The point not to miss: Research confirms that Christian (religious) couples marrying young have a better chance for marital success than those who are older, deciding to pursue other life goals first or (because of waiting) have had more romantic and sexual encounters. In respect to the last, sociologists posit this may be due to the fact that the more romantic relationships and sexual encounters a person has (pre-marital), the more accustomed they become to severing and surviving the bonds created by such relationships and encounters making them more likely to do the same in their marriages when things get rough.

The Bible provides the answers to why Christians getting married young is indeed the wise choice:

4.1. because sexual purity is still a priority with God and marriage is His solution (1Th 4:1-6 “how to possess his own vessel in sanctification and honor” [which includes thru marriage based on v.6]; 1Co 7:2 “because of immoralities” = The solution to sexual immorality is marriage [e.g., parents w/immoral sons and daughters sb praying for them to find a spouse]).

4.2. because time is on their side (Ecc 4:9-12) = The key to possessing the benefits of verses – i.e., security/stability financially (9), emotionally (10), and physically (11-12a) is only achieved where you have the ingredients found in “a cord of three” (12b): 1) a marriage (first and second cords) and 2) time (third cord). Not experience, but time. Young married couples therefore gain the advantage of this third and vitally important ingredient. Time is on their side – meaning they have the potential to achieve sooner – and enjoy longer, the benefits of financial, emotional and physical stability. As the saying goes, “the sooner you are strong, the longer you will run”.

4.3. because the ultimate key to marital success is not prior knowledge or experience but a commitment to covenant faithfulness (Gen 24:62-67) “loved her” = Gave himself fully in covenant faithfulness to her. Consider that Isaac did this without copious amounts of knowledge or experience with respect to Rebekah’s personality, personal tastes or habits. This because covenant faithfulness does not require such knowledge or experience in order to be successful since what determines faithfulness is not the person or the reception of favorable circumstances in the future, but the covenant itself – i.e., my faithfulness is to the covenant not the person (Gen 2:24 – “The blood of the [marriage] covenant is thicker than the water of the womb”[1]). As self-programmed robots with stupid computers (computers that don’t attempt to reason you out of your stupid decisions), what you make the target of success will determine when your brain sends you the feeling of satisfaction/happiness (e.g., kid winning or losing at Chutes and Ladders). When that target does not change, it becomes easier to hit – or receive such emotional reward, strengthening our commitment to it. Covenant gives us that kind of target, people (including the people we are married to) do not. Unlike covenant, they change – making it harder to receive the same satisfaction we experienced in the past. Once more, however, when we live for the covenant (being faithful to it as our target of success- and not the person themselves) we continue throughout our lives to receive satisfaction (even if that person is difficult or disappointing). As long as the covenant remains intact, our potential for continued satisfaction remains intact. The worldly idea of “try before you buy” - or get to know the person (sexually or otherwise) to make sure there is a good fit, infers that the goal of marriage is selfish and satanic - i.e., self-gratification/glorification is the highest goal in life – which includes our marriages (Gen 3:5), versus what the bible teaches: the highest goal in marriage is covenant faithfulness/fidelity.

Lastly, it must be mentioned that this is by Divine design. We were designed by God to find our greatest joy, happiness and feelings of affection in the pursuit of covenant faithfulness. Hence the reason also that our yes is to be yes and our no is to be no. Not simply for the purpose of being righteous, but so that we might experience the joy of covenant faithfulness (since that is what we are making when we make verbal commitments [“yes” and “no”] to others). Two examples from marriage that prove covenant fidelity is how we are designed (or at the core of what truly makes us happy): 1) the increased sense of commitment and affection we experience when imagining our spouse becoming disabled, 2) the greater happiness experienced by those in arranged marriages. Multiple studies show those in arranged marriages tend to be happier for longer than those in non-arranged marriages (For consideration see the short article by Paul Bentley, “Why an arranged marriage 'is more likely to develop into lasting love'”). Our move away from arranged marriages is actually a detriment since it puts the focus on self rather than covenant fidelity (and therefore sets us up for failure/unhappiness). Given the current social climate, and the false idea that a person needs to feel love before they can commit to love, it would be almost impossible to return to this more ideal framework for marriage without causing undue harm to the covenant community[2].

In biblical times, sexual maturity was not the only factor determining when a child could/would marry. Mental maturity (or being recognized as a adult) was also a factor. Unlike today however, children reached mental maturity at - or around, the same time they were becoming sexually mature (e.g., Bar Mitzvah [male] = 13 yrs old.; Bat mitzvah [female] = 12 yrs old). Hence allowing them to be married at a much younger age than today. The deficiencies associated with the modern American models of parenting, education and justice make it hard to consider most children today as mentally mature until the age of 18. Wisdom therefore dictates that this be the general rule when determining the minimum age acceptable for our Christian youth to marry (though exceptions do exist).

[1] Since it is a marriage covenant we enter into w/Christ and His church when we become Christians, this principle applies here as well. Our loyalty to Christ and his church supersedes all other relationships. Hence Mat 10:32-39. It is our marriage covenant w/Christ that also proves this principle to be valid. We come to Christ knowing very little about the Christian life - or what the future may hold, yet are able to be happy and successful – irrespective of such ignorance.

[2] Given the biblical understanding, how should we view feelings of love (e.g., “I am in love with him/her”)? A nice but unnecessary enhancement that can add extra motivation to our pursuit of marriage with the right person. Never however should it function as the piece determining who that person is.

View Details

Our launch of NEWPRO – as well as all the things that have transpired around that ministry – including those who first began attacking us, has led to a plethora of accusations against our church. Most specifically against me (pastor), but also you (the congregation) since when they attack me (as a false teacher), they are also saying something about you (e.g., you are incompetent, mindless lemmings, suffering from a strange version of Stockholm syndrome). Such accusations are meant to cause alarm, to trigger doubt in the mind – or even feelings of panic. Like the most recent Deepfake stunts that have crippled some of our banks and businesses, these attacks against our church are meant to make you think that something is now wrong (when in reality nothing has changed), that the foundation is rotten (when in reality it is as rock solid as ever). It is the manipulation of Satan, the “accuser of the brethren”, a powerful tool that has destroyed many lives over the course of human history. It is in fact, where things originally all went wrong. Satan accused God, of keeping from Adam and Eve, what they (or the human race) needed to be happy. And because they believed this accusation, they (as well as the rest of humanity), forfeited not only their chance at immortality now, but gained the pain and suffering of bodies now vulnerable to disease, damage and death. Because they failed in the realm of accusations, Paradise itself was lost. Conceivably then, the eternal end may prove to be as its beginning. A person’s place in heaven or hell, will most be determined by how they handled accusation – specifically those levelled against God, His church, pastors or gospel. This is the dark waters where the real sea dragon lives. And only those committed to God’s protocol and prescription, will safely navigate their way to the shores of heaven.

All accusations of a crime – especially those that are serious, must be taken seriously:

1) conduct a thorough investigation (Deu 17:1-4a; this includes accusations made against your pastor/gospel --e.g., pastor owns the building; e.g., a man in our church is acting as a mole, fueling the false narratives and slander being propagated by the apostate and those on the outside [pastor is doing arranged marriages of our young people]), 2) require evidence necessary to convict of a crime (Deu 17:4b-6; 1Ti 5:19 - What this implies: such evidence can be obtained and understood so as to secure a just verdict [Contra., e.g., pastor makes people believe they problems in their marriage or twists Scripture in such a way that it is impossible to see how he is wrong; e.g., “the logic being used in the Bible is different than our logic”), 3) issue swift, pitiless and fitting punishment to those found guilty (Deu 17:5, 19:21; e.g., 1Ti 5:20 and Tit 1:11-13), 4) expect congregational affirmation and involvement (Deu 17:7).

All those claiming to be Christians who make false accusations – especially in relation to serious crimes, must be responded to severely.

(1Co 5:11-12) “so-called brother” = Any person who claims to be a Christian (versus the confirmed brother: any person whose claim is confirmed by their baptism and good standing in a legitimate covenant community). “Do you not judge those who are within the church” = Based on Paul’s previous reference, this includes anyone claiming to be a Christian (in or outside our particular church). Paul’s point: By taking the name of Christ, you are putting yourself under the church’s authority, expectations and judgment. In relation to severity see (Deu 19:15-21; Also 2Ti 2:16).

When we don’t take accusations seriously or respond severely to those who make false accusations – especially against our leaders or gospel, we are:

1) giving the impression that we are a cult (2Co 11:19-20), 2) creating doubt in the minds of God’s people (2Ti 2:18 w/Tit 1:10-11), 3) fueling the spread of such accusations and behavior – i.e., more people will believe them to be true (2Ti 2:16-17a –“spread like gangrene”).

Making false accusations – or accusations lacking the necessary evidence, against a church’s pastor and his teaching, attempting to cause doubt in the minds of his congregation – or separate his people from him, is the bona fide behavior of a wolf.

(Act 20:28-30; Rom 16:17)

Biblical protocol requires that those accusing a pastor of preaching a false gospel (or being a false teacher) must give him the chance to defend himself before his accusers – even when they believe they possess irrefutable proof that he is guilty.

(Joh 7:51-52: Notice how they thought they already had evidence Jesus was wrong. They missed the other piece: the chance for the accused to defend themselves before their accusers; The biblical principles mentioned in John 7 are the basis of this country’s court systems: 1] innocent until proven guilty, 2] the accused has a right to defend themselves before their accusers; hence Gal 2:11. Like Jesus, the verdict leveled against God’s pastors or people happens in “kangaroo court” Luk 22:53 w/Mat 26:55-68).

Anyone claiming to be a Christian and accusing a pastor of preaching a false gospel (or being a false teacher) though they failed to follow biblical protocol or provide the biblical prescription (the evidence necessary to make the conviction) could be guilty of the unforgivable sin.

We know this is true for all confirmed Christians of a particular covenant community aware of the crime of insurrection and guilty of committing it, but what about those not in our church? What about those who are not a part of our covenant community yet also claim to be Christian—the “so-called brother”? Based on what Paul says about the “so-called brother” (in 1Co 5:11-13), they too can be guilty of committing the unforgivable sin/insurrection should they refuse to repent after being made aware of their crime (Mat 12:22-24 w/30-32; until they are made aware, it is the sin of ignorance – e.g., Act 23:1-5). “Whoever” = Whoever from the covenant community. Speaks against the Holy Spirit” = Insurrection, condemning/standing against those spiritual authorities ordained w/the authority of the Holy Spirit in the covenant community (Num 15:28-30, 16:1-3; Deu 17:12-13; Joh 20:21-23). Similar to Paul’s instruction to the Corinthians, the Pharisees were not a part of Jesus’ new covenant community, but they were “so-called brothers” (Jews claiming to be a part of the old covenant community). As such, this made them liable to the charge of insurrection/unforgiveable sin. Why does Jesus claim these individuals to immediately be guilty of this sin? Because of all the Jews, the Pharisees were experts in the Law and therefore already knew the crime they were committing (if Jesus was indeed Who He said He was.) Most so-called brothers today, have no idea that condemning legitimate spiritual authorities in the church could make them guilty of such a crime. Hence once more the reason they must be told before such a judgment could be declared against them (revelation establishes obligation). Why we need to warn the ignorant “so-called brother” of this crime: because, their ignorance still has the consequence of eventually leading them to the place where they are locked in their sin by God (i.e., their day of grace is over – Eph 4:17-19). Why does 2Ti 2:24-26 not apply to this situation? The person in these verses stands in opposition yet follows the biblical protocol and attempts to bring the evidence. Hence the reason the ordained pastor is not to quarrel with them, be equitable (“kind”) and able to teach them.

View Details

MCG Summary: The saving relationship we enter with Jesus is a marriage covenant (Jer 31:31-32). As such, it functions according to the principles of gain and maintain. We gain our salvation (or marriage to Jesus) through faith (expressed in the waters of baptism – Joh 3:5; 1Pe 3:21; Gal 3:26-27) and we maintain our salvation (or marriage to Jesus) through faithful obedience to all of His commands (Luk 10:25-28).

OBJECTIONS: 1) why this matters = Gal 1:6-9; Jud 1:3-4; “If I were to remain silent, I’d be guilty of complicity” – Albert Einstein,

2) what to keep in mind = Gal 4:16; Psa 19:7 w/Pro 30:5; Isa 8:20; 2Ti 3:15; “If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong” – Richard Feynman (e.g., Mormons do more missions/mercy work than any other religious organization, yet b/c what they believe does not hold up to all of Scripture, they are sending themselves and others to hell).

“To defeat relativity , one does not need 100 scientists, but just one fact.” – Albert Einstein

“To defeat MCG one does not need 100 Evangelicals, but just one solid proof from Scripture.”

What we have encountered thus far: talked to many pastors/Bible teachers, none could refute us, and several (secretly) agreed that we were right (e.g., Dave Anderson of Littleton Bible Chapel).

Objection #1. Works/obedience to the Law are not part of justification/salvation (Rom 3:28, 10:4).

1.1. Mac’s Hammer: 1) works are necessary to saving faith (Jam 2:14-26), 2) saving faith is necessary to salvation (Jam 2:14), Conclusion: works are therefore necessary to salvation.

1.2. Bipartite view of the Law: 1) Both James and Paul are dealing with justification (salvation), 2) The “works” James refers to are necessary to salvation (Jam 2:24) whereas the works Paul refers to are not (Rom 3:28), Conclusion: the NT teaches two types of Law/works, one that is necessary to salvation (moral commands = Rom 13:8-10) and one that is not (“works of the law” = Rom 3:28, 10:4 [i.e., OC clean laws: circumcision, animal sacrifices, Sabbath days, separation from the unclean).

1.3. Bipartite view of Justification: 1) Both James and Paul speak of justification in relation to Abraham, 2) the justification Paul speaks about in relation to Abraham happens at the point of faith (Rom 4:1-3 w/Gen 15:6) whereas the justification James speaks about in relation to Abraham happens after he proves his faithfulness (Jam 2:21-23 w/Gen 22:1-18), Conclusion: the NT teaches two types of justification/salvation, one that happens at the point of our faith and another that happens only after we have lived in faithful obedience.

Objection #2. Works are the inevitable result of saving faith/work of the Holy Spirit (versus another condition of our salvation)/Christ obeyed for us (Phi 1:6; Mat 5:17)

2.1. The works God requires for salvation are communicated as commands to us - not the Holy Spirit (e.g., Eph 5:22).

2.2. The NT is filled with threats to real Christians who fail to be faithful (e.g., Heb 10:26-30, 12:14; 1Co 6:9; Gal 5:5, 21; 2Ti 2:12)

2.3. The Holy Spirit is never communicated as the Doer of our obedience, but rather as the Helper to those who endeavor to obey God (Joh 14:16; Act 5:32)

2.4. God’s promise to finish the work He started (Phi 1:6) is simply a confirmation of faithfulness to His covenant vow to be our God and us His people (Jer 31:33). IOW: to continue to provide what we need to make it to heaven as long as we remain faithful to our covenant vows to obey His commands (hence why Paul follows Phi 1:6 w/2:12-16; See also 2Pe 1:3-11; 2Ti 2:11-13, 19).

2.5. Nowhere in the Bible does it ever teach Christ obeyed the Law for us – including Mat 5:17 (See Mat 5:18-20 = If Christ were referring to fulfilling the Law for us in v17, then these verses make no sense –or what follows in the remainder of the chapter vv21-48. It also is a direct violation of His words in v17 and there OT origin – Deu 18:18-20 – and God’s Law – Eze 18:1-32; See also Isa 2:1-3 = Messiah would teach God’s Law to the people).

Objection #3: We cannot be perfect, if we can lose our salvation due to disobedience, we would all lose it (Rom 3:10-18; Isa 64:6).

3.1. The standard is faithfulness not perfection and is something that all people can do—even those who did not have the help of the Holy Spirit (Deu 28:1-2 w/30:11-14). Hence also the reason God gave the sacrifices/Christ – to cleanse us when we fail (if perfection was all God would accept why the institution of the sacrifices before – and as a part of giving the Law?).

3.2. God hates those who say that can’t do it since this makes them victims and Him unjust in His judgment (Eze 18:1-32).

3.3. Scripture is filled w/examples of people who were faithful in their obedience to God (e.g., Gen 6:9; Neh 9:8; Psa 18:20; Luk 1:6).

3.4. Rom 3 and Isa 64 are in reference to people committed to folly, evil, violent rebellion and wickedness – or those whose life is characterized not by faithfulness to God’s commands but to practicing iniquity, injustice and what is unholy (for Rom 3:10-18 see Psa 14:1-3, 53:1-3; Psa 5:9, 140:3; Psa 10:7; Isa 59:7f; Psa 36:1; for Isa 64:6 see Isa 64:1-5 “we sinned [and continued in them] for a long time”).

Objection #4: This is a works-based salvation that gives glory to man rather than God (Eph 2:8-9).

4.1. The Bible nowhere teaches a works-based salvation yet has always taught the necessity of faithful obedience (e.g., Luk 10:25-28 w/Lev 18:5; Joh 4:22 = The mechanics of our salvation is the same as their salvation).

4.2. Marriage requires covenant fidelity to remain intact (e.g., Jer 3:1-3 w/Isa 50:1-2). Yet no one ever thinks they are earning their marriage through such faithfulness (e.g., “honey I was faithful today and have earned three kisses”). Rather the blessings afforded to us at the time we gave our marital vows and gained our marriages remain abundantly available to us as long as we remain faithful to our vows (of obedience/fidelity).

4.3. There is no glory taken from God (or given to us) when we obey (as a necessity of our salvation). Rather we are just making good on what we originally vowed – i.e., doing what those purchased by God ought to do as their obligation to their Master (Luk 17:1-10).

4.4. Eph 2:8-9 are in reference to the lack of boasting that exists for all those who have come into saving covenant relationship w/Christ since the ability to gain such a relationship was only made possible because of God’s decision to show us mercy and Christ’s decision to die for our sins (See Eph 2:1-7). Before that, we were “without hope and without God.” (Eph 2:11-12). Interestingly enough, it is this “grace” (and lack of boasting) that establishes our obligation to obey (“grace” = Ancient term implying reciprocity. In ancient times all gifts were covenantal and establishing a relationship of reciprocity. No ancient society existed where grace was given with “no strings attached” [See Marcel Mauss, The gift: Forms and Functions of Exchange in Archaic Socieities; John Barclay, Paul and the Gift. e.g., Gen 21:23 [hesed] = grace]; Rom 13:8-10 w/Eph 2:10 “prepared beforehand that we should walk in them” = We must reciprocate on God’s gift of grace through obedience to the Law [what God prepared beforehand]; e.g., Guy Ritchie’s The Covenant, “[This covenant] demands a result not an appeasement”; The false gospel is known by its abuse of grace in this respect [i.e., no reciprocation – Jud 1:4]).

Objection #5: Christ’s death was needless or insufficient if we still need to obey (practice justice) or can lose our salvation (Gal 2:21; Joh 6:39)

5.1. Jesus’ death was propitiatory not penal. IOW: He did not come to remove our need to obey/practice justice. If He did then why: 1) do we still die?, 2) still need to repent of our sins (1Jo 1:9 = No such thing as “your sins are all forgiven, past, present and future”), 3) is there nowhere in the Bible that states Jesus was punished (paid justice) for our sins? (IOW: God is not the cosmic child-abuser, Evangelicals make Him out to be) 4) are the OT lambs never spoken of as being punished?

5.2. Propitiation (cleansing the stain of sin away) has always been necessary for gaining justification and Christ perfectly accomplished this mission (“It is finished” – Joh 19:30) as proven by His resurrection (Rom 4:25). Yet what has also always been necessary is that those receiving such propitiation, practice justice (faithful obedience) to continue receiving it (i.e., maintain what they have already gained).

5.3. Paul’s statement in (Gal 2:21) is in regard to gaining justification not maintaining it (See Gal 2:15-20: 1] we gain justification not thru observing the OC clean laws [“works of the law”] but faith in Christ [15-16], 2] gaining justification by faith in Christ does not give us a license to sin. We must maintain that justification just as they did under the OC, thru dying/submitting to God’s/Christ’s laws [17-20]).

5.4. Jesus promises to never lose us (those given by the Father) (Joh 6:39), but we still possess a free will and can decide to leave Him (lose our salvation) through unwillingness to obey/disobedience (i.e., not fulfilling our covenant vows of obedience) (Joh 6:66 “disciples” = Those baptized into a saving covenant relationship w/Jesus [(Mat 28:19) = Notice what follows gaining salvation/becoming a disciple, the maintenance of obedience (v20).

Objection #6: Marriage is a metaphor only

6.1. Metaphors can explain or express but never dictate or justify the actions of a person.

6.2. God (Jesus) justifies His actions (or the actions of His disciples) based on the principles governing marriage and the rights of the marital spouse (Isa 50:1 = I had the right to divorce/sell you b/c or your covenant disobedience; Jer 3:1 w/Deu 24:1-4; Eze 16:8-16, 32; Hos 2:1-13; Mat 9:14-15 = Disciples are justified in not fasting b/c the Bridegroom is present).

Objection #7: No historical support for the MCG (or view of gain and maintain).

“[According to the early Christians] the second stage of salvation is this: we must maintain our saved condition by holding fast to our faith in living obedience to Christ’s commandments. Please understand we are already saved, we are not doing these things to earn salvation. We do these things to maintain our already saved condition.” – David Bercot (What the Early Christians Believed About Salvation).

View Details

The conservative Evangelical understanding of Paul’s instruction to women in 1Timothy 2 fares no better than the view espoused by its liberal camp. Beside misogynistic motives, this is due to three things: 1) failure to understand the larger context into which the relevant verses fit, 2) ignorance of the Ephesian backstory, and 3) poor vetting of their proposed application. This short study will present the position that not only passes all tests w/respect to application but also agrees with Scripture and the backstory of Ephesus itself.

The reason Paul gives the instruction found in chapters one, two - and the beginning of three, is for the purpose of securing proper “conduct” in the “church” (or “household of God”) (1Ti 3:14-16) (15 “conduct”) = Based on what follows (v16), the behavior Paul is concerned with addressing is not things related to etiquette (e.g., no food or drink in the sanctuary, no disruptions or sleeping during the sermon, everybody needs to participate in the singing, etc). It is instead related to the subject of authority. (16a) “great is the mystery of godliness” = Spiritual devotion or authority (Grk. eusebia). Support for the semantic range of eusebia including also the idea of spiritual authority:

1.1. The majority of the word’s usage is found in the pastoral epistles whose main focus is spiritual authority in the church (i.e., pastors, elders and deacons).

1.2. Certain passages in the NT make more sense when esuebia is translated this way (Act 3:12; 1Ti 6:3-6 [some NAS Fn on v5, “religion”]; 2Ti 3:5 [some NAS Fn, “religion”]; Tit 1:1 [the spiritual authority given to Christ and His apostles – See 2Pe 3:1-2; e.g., Act 15:1-31]).

1.3. Paul’s “common confession” w/respect to Jesus (“the mystery of godliness”) is all about spiritual authority (i.e., the mystery of spiritual authority given to men as exemplified in the person of Jesus Christ) (16b):

1.3.1. “revealed in the flesh” w/Phi 2:5-8 = Jesus became a lowly man (someone without spiritual authority).

1.3.2. “vindicated in the Spirit” w/Phi 2:9-11 = Though a man, Jesus was shown to possess spiritual authority by the Spirit at His baptism (Pauls’ reference in Timothy w/Mat 3:16-17) and His exaltation/resurrection (Paul’s reference in Philippians w/Rom 1:4). Hence (Mat 12:22-32).

1.3.3. “seen by angels” w/Psa 8:5 and 1Co 6:3 = The mystery witnessed by angels is that men - who are physically inferior them are nonetheless their spiritual authorities.

1.3.4. “proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world” w/Mat 28:18-20 = The basis of Jesus’ great commission is His spiritual authority to proclaim salvation to all peoples/nations (Jew and Gentile)

1.3.5. “taken up in glory” w/Act 2:32-36 = Jesus (the guy the majority of Jews took to be nothing more than a man) is actually the boss of the universe.

1.4. Paul’s instruction just prior to (3:14-16) and immediately following our primary text (2:9-15) are the qualifications for those functioning as spiritual authorities in the church (elders and deacons, 3:1-13).

1.5. spiritual authority –or dealing w/those functioning at that capacity, is also where Paul begins his address to Timothy (1:1-3 w/6-7 “teachers of the Law”) = Certain individuals in the Ephesian church had self-styled themselves the authorities on the Law (i.e., those authorized to determine right doctrine) – even though they did not “understand…matters about which they make confident assertions” (and as a result were teaching “strange doctrines”).

What (then) can be safely concluded about our primary text (2:9-15): Paul is giving instruction as to what constitutes proper behavior (conduct) for not just anybody, but those possessing spiritual authority in the church. In this case, women deacons (1Ti 3:11).
Notice the word “godliness”(spiritual authority) is equally present in (v10). Paul’s point? Women “making a claim to” spiritual authority – i.e., operating in the office of deacon, will prove their fitness for office through their “good works” (or deeds) which (according to what surrounds this verse) includes works/deeds that demonstrate their authority to be under (or in submission to) the church’s male and ordained pastors/elders – those deputized by Christ w/the authority to determine right doctrine (Joh 20:21-23). And this they will do in two ways:

3.1. through their refusal to adorn themselves in authoritative (religious) clothing (i.e., vestments) (e.g., Exo 39- the robes worn exclusively by the priests; e.g., pastor Scott’s robe) (9) = Central to the city of Ephesus was the famous temple and cult devoted to the Greek goddess, Artemis (Roman goddess, Diana) (Act 19:27 w/35). Seeing that their god was a woman, this religion not only employed priestesses rather than priests as its highest spiritual authority, but taught that Eve was created first and women were the heads or authorities of the human race. Hence (2:13). As a sign of such authority, these priestesses would adorn themselves in vestments (religious dress) which included “costly garments”, jewelry and special hair arrangements (“braided hair”). That these things in and of themselves are not wrong is confirmed by Peter’s mention of similar female adornment in (1Pe 3:3) without strict prohibition. As such, Paul’s main concern – or reason for mentioning these things is not aesthetics but their communication of authority. In a city filled with women who claimed to be the highest human authority (estimates are that over one thousand priestesses attended to the Temple of Artemis)—including in spiritual matters, such carefulness as to a woman’s adornment in the church would be necessary to avoid confusion – especially in relation to those women who did carry some level of authority in the church (i.e., women deacons).

3.2. through their refusal to be in authoritative teaching positions

(12) = Given that women can function as deacons, it should be assumed that some would also function as teachers since this is one of the roles historically associated with office of deacon. According to Paul however, their role in this capacity must also demonstrate their submission to the church’s higher authorities, her male ordained pastors. As such, all teaching done by women deacons would need to be by proxy (i.e., teaching w/o authority or approved by the authority of another). This is what Paul means by “I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man” (Literally, “no to teach, not to exercise authority [in teaching] over a man”).

In this respect, she must “remain quiet” (i.e., not be given the authority to determine right doctrine/interpretation thru her teaching). What she teaches must instead be pre-approved or consistent w/what has already been established by the church’s male (ordained) pastors. That this is indeed what Paul is prescribing in verse 12 is confirmed when one considers:

3.2.1. the close parallel that exists between Paul’s instruction in verse 11 (“quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness”) and 1Co 14:34 (“the women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak”).

What this almost identical instruction tells us: whatever Paul is communicating to the Corinthians, the same is being communicated to Timothy and the Ephesian church. Further unpacking of the Corinthian context helps us to understand exactly what that is (1Co 14:29-35) = Paul’s concern is that all special revelation proposed by those speaking or prophesying in the church (which included women -11:5) was done in an orderly way (v40) and received its proper judgment (as to its validity- v29). Hence then his prohibition against women speaking (or call for women to “keep silent”). The “Law” only allowed priests (or ordained pastors) to function as judges in such matters and priests were never women (e.g., Deu 17:8-12 w/Exo 28:1; Num 3:10). The point (then) not miss w/respect to Paul’s prohibition in 1Ti 2:12: it is not against women speaking/teaching God’s Word but doing so w/authority –or as one who has the authority to determine what is the right interpretation/doctrine. Similar to those men who fill the pulpit when the ordained pastor is away, women teachers (once more) are relegated to teaching by proxy -or teaching only what has already been approved as orthodox by the ordained pastor (versus being the ones- who through their teaching, are establishing that standard)[1].

3.2.2. the explicit and implicit support for women as teachers found in the NT: 1) explicitly (1Co 14:1 w/9 “instruct” w/1Co 14:31 “learn” = prophecy is teaching[2]), 2) implicitly (2Ti 2:2 and Eph 4:8 [“men” = anthropos NOT andros/aner = humans]; Eph 4:11 = Women were evangelists, prophets, and teachers – Act 21:9 [prophets]; Act 18:26 [evangelist, teacher]).

3.2.3. teaching by proxy (or under authority) is exactly what Paul teaches in (1Co11:5).

3.2.4. interpreting Paul’s words in 1Timothy 2:11-12 as a prohibition against women ever teaching or speaking Scripture (notice again, speaking is included in Paul’s prohibition) when men are present creates a myriad of practical problems: 1) Scripture declares itself to be teaching without the need for someone to engage in the exercise of teaching (e.g., Rom 6:17 “teaching” [didaxe – noun]). As such, a woman would be forbidden from ever reading Scripture out loud or quoting Scripture in the presence of men. 2) women would also be forbidden from writing books discussing scripture, biblical topics or theology (or at the very least, it would be forbidden for men to read those books) since this too is a form of teaching (e.g., Nancy Pearcy’s Total Truth or other books). 3) no talk w/respect to men and Scripture wb allowed (e.g., Paul Oljker is sick, and when Mindy comes home he asks her to give a summary of the teaching. Mindy would not be able to tell Paul what the sermon was about. Instead, Paul wb required to get the recording or ask a man to summarize the sermon for him. Mindy would need to remain silent on all such matters). 4) it wb forbidden for a woman to give any instruction to a man if that instruction was backed by Scripture (especially if she is queried to support her instruction) (e.g., Kris is helping Sam w/the principles of budgeting. If those principles come from the Bible, she would be guilty of teaching God’s Word over a man).

3.2.5. interpreting Paul’s words in 1Timothy 2:11-12 as a prohibition against women ever teaching or speaking Scripture in church or during church (with or without men present) is also not without its problems: 1) take the example of Mindy and Paul, but this time Paul shows up late for church and misses most of the sermon. Given this understanding, Paul would not be able to ask Mindy to “catch him up” on what he missed until after church or until they left the church property. 2) this kind of thinking makes location the issue rather than who possesses the proper authority. But why would God care about that? Or what exactly does that say about women? (e.g., they are not smart/holy enough to teach in the church/men in the church). A biblical example that might help bring additional clarity to this issue: consider the high priest and the holy of holies which only he could enter. The reason for such exclusivity was not the place but the authority (or clearance) granted only to him. The principle is the same for women w/respect to teaching.

What this new (more accurate) understanding does not mean as it relates to women: that God has extended to them the office (and authority) of the priest/judge/elder/pastor (ordination) since this would:

4.1. be a direct violation of God’s created order and design (13 “first” = As the head or authority of humanity [i.e., for determining God’s creation mandate for humanity]). The woman was created as helper [i.e., a supporting role] – Gen 2:15-23; Contra: the beliefs of the cult of Artemis). It should also be mentioned that by allowing women to function as pastors, you are essentially supporting lesbian marriage since a woman has now taken the place of husband in the marriage - something also represented in the relationship between the pastor and the church [i.e., he is Christ’s earthly representative as husband to the church][3]).

4.2. expose the church to weakness since God has not equipped women w/the emotional fortitude to persevere against the fear and manipulation used by Satan to deceive women (“Eve”) (14 “deceived” = Taken by fear – Gen 3:1-6; 1Pe 3:7; 1Co 16:13; Isa 29:26; To say that God has not given any woman such fortitude is not the same as saying all men have been given the fortitude necessary to function as pastors/priests. Not all men possess it as sb clear from the example of Adam.)

4.3. be viewed by God as a damning forfeiture of the oversight roles women have been called to by God (15 “preserved” = Literally saved [Grk. sozo]. IOW: women pastors will go to hell; “the bearing of children” = An example of an oversight role given to women: being a mother—having oversight of her children).

Lastly, it must be said that given the vast misunderstanding surrounding this subject and the risk of others misinterpreting our practice, it is wise for us to limit the venues where we would (currently) allow a woman to teach (with men present), most especially the pulpit on Sunday since this is the time most associated with hearing from God’s ordained pastors – the man He has given the right to speak w/authority from His Word.

[1] At least one evangelical pastor (John Piper) holds to this interpretation. On his website, Desiring God, woman teacher Mary Kassian, makes the following statements, “I believe the question of how to honor Christ through the exercise of my teaching gift revolves around the issue of whether I’m acting like a church-father [one speaking w/authority]. Am I doing something that is, or will likely be construed as, setting the doctrinal and spiritual direction for my entire church family? It says, “I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.” Even if we don’t like it, don’t agree with it, or don’t understand it, the boundary is quite clear. Having the church-fathers authoritatively teach and instruct the congregation is God’s standard for the regular public meeting of the local church.”

[2] For those viewing prophecy as different than teaching consider: the word prophecy is quite often used to refer to what we would normally call teaching/preaching since, most often, the prophetic message contains nothing fantastical or new (e.g., the majority of OT prophecy is simply a reiteration of God’s laws, promises and curses). As such, when interpreting the term prophecy in Scripture, we should assume what is being communicated-unless otherwise stated, is simply impromptu preaching – or a message given to the speaker not previously planned. If prophecy was always of the supernatural nature, then how could the church judge (in the moment of reception) whether the speaker’s words were true?

[3] “The pastor represents Christ, the Husband, to the Church, His Bride…When he reads and preaches the Word, he symbolizes Christ, the Husband, speaking to His holy Bride (which is, by the way, one of the main reasons women cannot be pastors: they cannot publicly symbolize Christ the Husband to His Bride, the Church).” – Jeffrey J. Meyers (The Lord’s Service).

View Details

God made growing in knowledge necessary to possessing wisdom (i.e., the ability to make right choices and desire the right things). No one was ever wise who was also not growing in knowledge (Pro 2:6).
Wisdom (which again requires growing in knowledge) is necessary to salvation (or being and staying saved) and the primary way God interacts or has relationship w/us.

IOW: It is not through visual stimuli or emotional manipulation but the dissemination of knowledge. Hence the reason God didn’t give us pictures or feelings as the means to helping us get through this life and into heaven. He instead gave us a book filled with knowledge (i.e., the Bible) (2Ti 3:15-16; Col 2:3-4 “in whom” = In Jesus’ book [Joh 1:1]; Hence Jer 9:23-24).

Neglecting your own personal growth in knowledge (especially that found in God’s Word) will not only cause you to be a fool (become stupid), but guarantee a life filled with unnecessary hardship and calamity (Pro 1:20-28).
Hating knowledge (or refusing to continue to pursue knowledge) will lessen your fear of God, ability to identify danger or sin and eventually lead to permanent self-delusion and apostasy (Pro 1:29-33, 7:1-23, 26:12; Isa 5:13 and Hos 4:6; Eph 4:17-19 w/Psa 14:1 “corrupt”).
Understanding the consequences associated with lack of knowledge or ceasing to grow in knowledge, should cause you to value its possession and progress in your life above everything else (Pro 8:10-11, 20:15).
Though growing in our knowledge or understanding of Special Revelation (those truths of God discovered through the study of His Word [e.g., theology]) must be our primary focus if we are to avoid becoming a fool or the apostate, avoidance of such pitfalls requires also that we continue to grow in our knowledge (or understanding) of General Revelation (those truths of God discovered through the study of our world -i.e., those disciplines associated w/the arts and sciences [e.g., history, biology, physics, philosophy, psychology, etc.]) (Mat 16:1-4 = General Rev aids our understanding of Special Rev. Hence Rom 1:19-20; also Pro 6:6).
According to both Special and General Revelation, you are most likely a fool – someone who hates or lacks knowledge, if any of the following things characterize your life:

7.1. One bad decision after another (moral or otherwise) (Pro 19:3; Ecc 10:15 = Always losing his way, making bad decisions).

7.2. You struggle at times to understand how God’s Word or wisdom is righteous (Pro 8:8-9).

7.3. The excuses, “I wasn’t thinking”, “I don’t know what I was thinking” (Pro 13:16).

7.4. You would much rather be entertained rather than educated (Pro 15:14).

7.5. You fail to sense the urgency w/respect to pursuing knowledge (Pro 1:32).

7.6. You suffer from foot-in-mouth disease (Pro 10:14, 18:7; Ecc 10:12).

7.7. Learning hurts (is painful to your brain) (Pro 14:6).

7.8. You suck at listening but excel at presuming (Pro 18:2; 1Sa 15:22-23 [“idolatry”] w/Isa 5:13 and Jer 51:17 = Presumption/idolatry is often the product of empty gaps in our thinking/knowledge – i.e. our brains fill in the gaps w/assumptions that are false).

7.9. You find yourself questioning God or the things of God when you see wicked people who are happy and excelling (Psa 73:1-22).

7.10. You are hasty in your reactions and responses and rarely ever increase the knowledge of others by what you say (e.g., Two fridges, one full of delicious food, the other a single bottle of ketchup. What wb the result of a request that each bring out the best food they have? Due to its lack of additional choices, the fridge containing only ketchup will respond the quickest yet provide what is the least desirable – Pro 14:33 “known” = Made known immediately [by the speed of the fool’s response as well as the content of his words]; Ecc 10:3 = The fool’s life is characterized [“walks down the road” = Daily activity] by hasty reactions/responses and worthless thought [“demonstrates to everyone” = Quickly makes apparent by his responses/reactions]) (Also, Pro 10:21, 15:7, 19:2, 24:7, 29:20).

7.11. You lack the ability to be articulate when explaining things (Pro 14:7, 15:2, 17:7a).

7.12. English seems to be your second language though you don’t know any other (Pro 23:9).

7.13. You are easily influenced in your decisions (or convictions) by what feel or where the masses are (Pro 17:24 “eyes…on the ends of the earth” w/Ecc 2:14 “eyes in his head” = His decisions are the product of his knowledge not his feelings or the popular opinion of the masses).

7.14. You are more confident than the knowledge (or evidence) you possess would justify (Pro 12:15, 28:26; Dunning-Kruger affect).

7.15. You are not a friend of reading or books.

By books I mean those meant to teach you something not storybooks, novels or comics – things written for entertainment rather than education) (Deu 17:18-20; Pro 119:100; Isa 29:9-14; 2Ti 3:15-16).

Reading is still the number one way to retain knowledge and become wise. It is still the optimal or fastest way to build the neuro pathways (in your brain) necessary for good listening (or the accurate receival of what others say), ordering your thoughts (which directly affects your ability to be articulate) and mitigating assumptions or hasty (foolish) responses (since your mind now possesses sufficient data alleviating the need to fill gaps or the ability to respond in haste – i.e., you have too much to think about to respond in haste). Reading is also how you improve your understanding of the English language and the meaning of words (since all of that is part and parcel to reading). There is a reason (btw) that the older and wiser generations referred to those who struggled to read, as “dumb” and the TV as the “boob-tube” (since this is what those who attempted to receive knowledge through it would become).

7.16. What you do spend time reading does not challenge your thinking.

Learning (growing in knowledge) requires more than information (knowledge).

It requires also that we are challenging that thinking with opposing information or information that takes what we know to the next level. If all we do is read stuff that simply reinforces what we already know, then we not only stunt our ability to grow in knowledge but to become the wise thinking people such knowledge has as its goal. Reading what does not challenge you to grow and gain knowledge is a waste of time (Ecc 12:9-12 “excessive devotion to books [not educational/devoted to giving knowledge or wisdom] is wearying to the body [a waste of time]”).

CLOSING CHALLENGE: Read 4 educational books (each no less than 100 pages, one re: to the Bible/biblical topics/theology) by the end of August (parents: a great idea for your kids while on summer break and way to stop raising fools).

View Details

Summary of points 1 through 4 (from last week): Paul writes to the Galatian churches for the purpose of steering them away from the damning gospel of the “circumcision party” (2:12) who were preaching observance of the OC cleans laws (otherwise known as the “works of the law” or “law”) as necessary to salvation (justification). Gaining justification (a spiritually clean/right standing w/God) under the NC, is secured by faith in Jesus Christ for Jew and Gentile alike apart from any observance of the prior covenant’s clean laws. As such, what Paul is not condemning in this letter is observance of God’s OC moral commands, though how we understand them must be according to their new application in Christ (the “law of Christ”).

Why Paul took such a condemning position against the OC clean laws for NC salvation: to preserve God’s previous:

5.1. command (Deu 12:32 w/2:21-3:1 and 5:1-4 = The Law is a closed system)

5.2. promise (of Gentiles remaining Gentiles and yet being grafted into/adopted into Abraham’s family – Act 15:14-19/Amo 9:11-12) (3:27-29; 4:17, 6:12-13) = As stated last week, circumcision was a Jewish identity marker. The Judaizers did not want people in the NC who did first become “Jews” (i.e., take on Jewish identity through circumcision).

What the plan of salvation (or “gospel”) looked like for Paul under the NC: functionally, it was the same as the OC: you gain it by faith (which includes observing the prescribed NC signs/clean laws associated with such faith – e.g., baptism) and you maintain it through faithfulness ([gain] 3:26-28 [faith = baptism], 5:1-5, [maintain] 5:6, 13-14, 24-26).
The broad strokes of Paul’s argument (How Paul lays out his letter to the Galatians):

7.1. Perversion to the mechanics of salvation means preaching a different (or damning) gospel:

7.1.1. Gain perversion: To gain justification (be spiritually clean), a person still needs to observe the OC clean laws – including circumcision (1:6-9 w/2:1-5 w/11-16) = OC clean laws (“works of the law”; e.g., circumcision, separation from those not circumcised) were never able to truly justify. They offered temporary pass-over but never propitiation/real cleansing from sin (Rom 3:25), hence the reason everyone (including Jews) are required to put faith in Christ as the way to receive justification. Key point not to miss: the gospel problem is mechanical (what must a person do to be saved?) not historical (what did Christ do to save us? e.g., 1Co 15:1-4 w/12-17). In addition, by requiring observance of the OC clean laws for gaining justification, you are nullifying the need for Christ’s cross-work (since once more), the Law is a closed system (2:21-3:1, 5:1-4, also 5:18).

7.1.2. Maintain perversion: BC we have been justified by faith in Christ (versus through observance of the OC clean laws), we no longer have to maintain that justification through observance of the moral commands (2:17-20) = In the same way a person had to submit to God’s moral commands (“For through the Law I died unto the Law”) in order to live for Him under the OC (i.e., to maintain their saving covenant relationship), so also under the NC, a person must submit to Christ (“I have been crucified unto Christ…the life I now live…I live in faithfulness to [Grk. en pistei…tey {dative}] the Son of God”) and His new application of God’s moral commands – i.e., the “law of Christ” (6:2; 1Co 9:21). IOW: faith in Christ ≠ antinomianism (Act 21:21 [“forsake” = Grk. apostasia] -24 [“keeping the Law” = maintaining what you gained]).

7.2. The superior nature of justification gained by faith versus through observance of the OC clean laws is proven by:

7.2.1. the indwelling Spirit (miracles) (3:2-5)

7.2.2. the precedent set with Abraham and the promised blessings (3:6-9, 14)

7.2.3. the incongruency of the Law in general w/the Abrahamic covenant and blessings which were not gained by human effort (3:10-12, 15-18)

7.2.4. Christ’s removal of the curse associated with being Gentiles so that we could be included in Abraham (3:13-14).

7.3. The nation of Israel (one of the promises made to Abraham with regard to his natural descendants) received the OC clean laws as a temporary help (a “tutor”) for dealing with sin (becoming spiritually clean/being justified --again, acts of pass-over) until the time of the promised “seed” (Christ) who would be the permanent, propitiatory solution for gaining justification and “impart(ing) (eternal) life” (3:19-29).

7.4. To be a child of Abrahamic requires casting off the enslavement of the OC clean laws (4:1-31; do not be: [9] enslaved to “elemental things”, [31] “children of the bondwoman” [allegorical rep. of OC Israel as Ishmael]).

7.5. Freedom from observance of the OC clean laws:

7.5.1. is necessary to receiving justification through faith in Christ (5:1-[5] “we through the Spirit, by faith, are waiting for the hope of righteousness”) = We are gaining our righteousness by faith; (18 “if you are led by the Spirit [justified by faith], you [cannot be] under the Law”) = Seeking justification thru the OC clean laws; (6:14-16; [15] “a new creation” = Justification by faith, [16] “those who will walk by this rule peace and mercy” = Those who are justified by faith]; IOW: being justified by faith requires not seeking such justification thru the OC clean laws.

7.5.2. does not affect our obligation to keep the moral commands (law of Christ) as also necessary to getting to heaven (5:6 “faith working [maintained] through love” w/13-14; See also 16-26 [21] “will not inherit the kingdom of God” = Our salvation is dependent on our obedience; (6:1-10) [3] = Thinks he is something simply bc he possesses faith; [4] = Our confidence as Christians/those who have gained salvation by faith must reside in our performance {2Pe 1:5-11}; [5] = Each person is responsible for maintaining what he has gained; [6] = They must demonstrate through practice what they have learned; [10] = Faith working through love {5:6 w/13-14}]).

View Details

Galatians in one of the most confusing books in the NT. This confusion is exacerbated by the Evangelical’s false assumptions about the book’s legal language and the framework of salvation established by God in the Bible. This short series will provide the Christian with the information needed to remove such confusion and make sense of Paul’s important letter to the Galatian churches.

What prompted Paul to write the letter to the Galatians:

The invasion of a group of Jewish Christians (otherwise known as the Judaizers or “party of the circumcision” – 2:12) who were teaching that salvation required observance of the OC clean laws [spiritually clean/righteous/justified] (circumcision [2:3, 7-9, 12, 5:2-3, 6, 11, 6:12-13, 15], separation from those not circumcised [2:11-13], Sabbath holidays [4:10]). Paul – who planted the Galatian churches during his 1st missionary journey, (Acts 13-14: Perga, Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra and Derbe), condemns these individuals as “false brethren” (2:4) and their teaching as a “different gospel” (1:6-9).

Why Paul was confident that his gospel (which did not require the observance of the clean laws to be saved) was the true gospel:

2.1. Direct revelation from Jesus Christ (1:11-12).

2.2. Prior confirmation from the “pillars” (James [half-brother of Jesus, apostle and senior pastor of the Jerusalem church], Cephas [the apostle Peter] and John [the apostle]) of the Jerusalem church (2:1-2) = Paul recognized the authority of the church’s leaders – especially in gospel matters; (2:3-5 “liberty”) = Release from the clean laws (Jam 1:25, 2:12). (2:6a “what they were makes no difference to me, God shows no partiality”) = Though Paul recognized (and was submissive to) the authority of the church’s leaders, he also recognized that such authority was by proxy. It only existed as long as they were in agreement with God. (2:6b “those who were of reputation contributed nothing to me”) = Their gospel proved to be no different than mine.

2.3. Faith in Jesus (His death) had replaced them as the new clean law/way to gain righteousness/justification (2:16, 3:8-9, 5:1-5; Rom 3:31 w/Act 21:20-21).

How Paul became aware of the Judaizers’ presence in Galatia:

An incident at Paul’s home church, Antioch (2:11-13) = Because of the Judaizers (sent by James and the Jerusalem church), Peter, Barnabas and other Jewish Christians were separating themselves/would not eat with the uncircumcised Gentile Christians in Antioch. (2:14 “live like Jews”) = Live observing the clean laws. Antioch sent Paul to the Jerusalem church to resolve the matter/determine whose gospel was correct. There Paul changed the mind of Peter and James (Act 14:26-15:19; v10 w/1 and 5 = The “yoke” of the clean laws). Since there is no mention of the church’s ruling (or letter – Act 15:20-31), it is more than likely that Paul wrote the Galatians letter before his trip to Jerusalem (possibly on the way).

Why we can be confident that what Paul is condemning in the Judaizer’s gospel is not (as assumed by Evangelical’s) the entirety of the OC Law or the propagation of a works-based salvation:

4.1. The initial mention of the problem is related to the clean laws (2:1-5 “circumcision”)

4.2. Paul frequently pairs his mention of the various clean laws (most especially circumcision) with “works of the law” (or “law”) and contrasts them with justification by faith/the cross (2:12-16, 5:1-4, 11, 6:12-16). If Paul saw all of God’s laws as problematic to the issue of justification, then why does he limit his examples to only those things associated w/the clean laws? The same is true in every other epistle where Paul speaks against the Law. His examples are limited only to those things related to the clean laws – most especially circumcision, God’s special identity marker for the Jews (e.g., Rom 3:28-30, 4:1-11).

4.3. The massive problems associated w/thinking any Jew would endorse a works-based system of salvation (3:12 “He who practices them shall live by them”) = Evangelicals view Paul as teaching that the OC (or the Law) establishes an impossible works-based system of salvation. The Judaizers (they believe) were too arrogant to recognize their past which proved their inability to achieve this impossible standard and instead seek God’s mercy – the purpose or intention (per Evan) behind its establishment by God. The massive problems associated w/ this kind of thinking:

4.3.1. Gal 3:12 is an allusion to Lev 18:5 which cannot be establishing a work-based system of salvation since the Jews receiving it were already in saving covenant relationship with God (Exo 24:7-8; e.g., Lev 16:34 [Yom Kippur]; Psa 85:1-4, 103:1-5 w/15-18, 132:16). The only other way to understand God’s words in Lev 18:5 is as maintenance: the Jews needed to maintain the saving covenant relationship they had already received by grace through vows of faith.

4.3.2. God’s constant punishment of His people in the OT is due to their lawless easy-believism (similar to the Evangelical FAG: the law is “nice but not necessary”) – not their “arrogant” attempts at lawfulness. This was the problem of the Pharisees as well – the most likely identity of the Judaizers (Act 15:5) (Mat 23:28-32; See also Luk 18:9-14 “pharisee” = Lawless hypocrite, giving the appearance of lawfulness but – unlike the publican, unwilling to repent, do justice and truly be obedient to God’s laws. See Mat 15:3-9; Luk 7:30 w/Luk 3:1-14; e.g., publican - Luk 19:1-10).

4.3.3. God’s standard is doable (Deu 28:1-2 w/Deu 30:11-14; Luther’s two false assumptions leading to his FAG invention: 1] w-b salv. {Luther was a Roman Catholic monk}, 2] inability of man {The Bondage Of The Will}).

4.4. Paul confirms the moral commands as another necessary (and continuing) condition of salvation we are responsible for producing (5:5-6, 12-21) = Notice: 1) we are the responsible agents (13, 16), 2) we will not “inherit the kingdom of God” if we fail to produce them (21). These two things not only prove that Paul is not condemning the entirety of the Law but that the FAG is false since anything we are responsible for producing that is necessary to salvation constitutes another instrumental condition of salvation (WCF, “faith is the sole instrument of salvation.”).

View Details

Under the OC, God promised to help His people through regeneration.

(Deu 30:6) “circumcise your heart” = Repent/Remove your disloyalty to Me and My laws; separate/set yourself apart in loyal obedience to Me and My laws (Act 7:39 w/7:51). The purpose: “to love to the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul” = To be undivided in loyalty to God (Deu 6:5-15 w/Deu 10:12 w/20 and Deu 13:1-4 = Love to God means undivided loyalty; Deu 10:20, 13:4 [“cling”] same word as Gen 2:24 “joined” = To cleave or stick closely to, to show undivided loyalty. To love God w/all of our heart and soul, etc. is therefore idiomatic for marital loyalty/love). Circumcision of the heart (which fosters this marital love) is the same as receiving a new heart/new spirit (Eze 11:19-20 [promise to the exiles returning from the Babylonian exile]) = Notice, the result is the same as heart circumcision: to foster love (marital love) in God’s people (v20). Both passages (Deu 30 and Eze 11) are using the language scholars associate with regeneration (or new birth/being born again/becoming a new creation; e.g., Eze 36:26-27). Regeneration was therefore true under the OC just as it is under the NC. IOW: regeneration is not new to the NC. Hence the reason Jesus says what He does to Nicodemus (Joh 3:1-10 [Deu 30:6 w/Jer 9:25-26]).

God’s help to His OC people was predicated on them first producing this regeneration by their own efforts.

Though demonized by Evangelicalism, the statement, “God helps those who help themselves” is true (Deu 30:1-5 [6 “Moreover the LORD God will…”]; Lev 26:41; Deu 10:16; Jer 4:4; Eze 18:31).

In the OT, God promised to help His people under the NC through not only regeneration but also by indwelling them with His Spirit.

(Eze 36:25-27 “cause” [Heb. ‘asah = to prepare – Exo 12:16, 39); Jer 24:7, 32:38-39; Joe 2:28-29 “all mankind” = Jews and Gentiles will receive the indwelling Spirit; Isa 32:15, 44:3).

The NT confirms the fulfillment of God’s promised help of regeneration and the indwelling Spirit.

1) Regeneration/New Creation/Born Again (Joh 3:3-5; 2Co 5:17; Gal 6:15; 1Pe 1:23), 2) Indwelling Spirit (Joh 14:16, 15:26, 16:5-15; Act 2:38 [Jews], Ac 10:44-45 [Gentiles]).

Because of the propitiation associated with our regeneration and the accompanying indwelling Spirit, the help God gives under the NC is far superior to that given under the OC.

(Rom 7:21-8:4): 1) Propitiation along w/our regeneration (8:1-3 w/Tit 3:5 “the washing of regeneration”) = Hearts/spirits truly cleansed from sin and therefore also free from its power (7:21-25 [Rom 3:25 w/6:1-7 = Propitiation-fueled regeneration]), 2) Indwelling Spirit (8:4 = Empowering, interceding and leading [vv5-30]).

As before, God’s help does not negate the condition/pre-requisite of our own efforts.

(Jer 31:31-34) = All those coming into saving covenant relationship w/God under the NC (33c “I will be their God and they will be My people” [Heb 8:8-12, 10:16-17]) will take the same kind of vow as those who initially came under the OC: a vow (of faith) to obey all of God’s commandments (Exo 24:7) (33a, “ I will put My law within them and on their heart I will write it”; Hos 2:19-20). Jeremiah’s generation were coming into the OC with no such vows or commitment (e.g., Jer 2:1-8, 20-21, 32, 4:4, 8:7). This and the fact that the NC wb “forever”(vv35-40) is what would make it different than how the OC was treated in Jeremiah’s day (31-32, “not like the covenant I made with their fathers…My covenant which they [Jeremiah’s generation] broke”). By this vow of obedience those coming into the NC will: 1) “know the LORD” (34a [an allusion to Jer 9:23-24; 1Jo 2:4]), 2) receive justification/propitiation (34b [Exo 24:8; Eze 36:25; 1Pe 1:1-2]). Our commitment to repentance/obedience is once more God’s prerequisite to helping us (Act 5:32) = Point not to miss: our repentance/obedience precedes the help of the Sprit. IOW: He is not the cause of our obedience. The Holy Spirit intercedes and directs (Act 8:29, 39, 19:21, 20:22-23; Rom 8:5 w/26-30; Gal 5:16-17), influences and inspires (Rom 8:23; Act 2:17, 10:19 w/11:12, 10:45-47, 11:28, 15:28, 19:6, 21:4, 11), empowers, equips and enlightens (Act 4:8, 31, 6:10, 7:55, 16:14, 20:28; Rom 8:11, 13, 16, 9:1, 15:13, 19, 30; 1Co 2:13-14, 12:7; Eph 3:16; 2Pe 1:3-4; Phi 2:13; 2Ti 1:14; 1Jo 3:24; Jud 20; Rev 1:10), comforts, engenders affection and encourages (Act 9:31; Rom 14:17; Gal 4:6; Phi 1:19, 2:1; 1Th 1:6) only those who humble/submit themselves to His leading (Jam 4:5-7; Rom 8:4 w/14; Gal 5:25). Through unrepentance and disobedience we can/will resist, quench, grieve and enrage the HS shutting off His ability to help, even making Him our enemy (Act 7:51 ; 1Th 5:19; Eph 4:30 w/Isa 63:10; Heb 10:26-30).

God’s prerequisite for helping His people is justified by our moral ability.

Were we unable to repent and obey, God’s prerequisite would be unjust (Eze 18:1-32 [33:1-20] “the fathers eat sour grapes; but the children’s teeth are set on edge…the way of the Lord is not right” = Because of the sins/sinful behavior of our parents, we are incapable of turning from our sins/obeying God. Therefore God’s judgment against us is not just/right; Eze 18:23 [33:11]) “I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked” = This is impossible for God to say if it is impossible for us to obey). Scripture however communicates our ability to repent and obey (Deu 30:11-14).

These truths are what must inform our understanding of passages like 2Timothy 2:26 and Ephesians 2:5.

1) (2Ti 2:26) “God may grant them [the help of] repentance” = The reason Paul speaks about this in terms of possibility rather than a guarantee is because of the prerequisite necessary to receiving such help from God: that person’s own efforts in repentance and obedience. In this light consider, (Act 10:34-35 w/11:18). 2) (Eph 2:5) “even when we were dead…[God] made us alive” = Our deadness in sin does not indicate moral inability but rather God’s willingness at the time to help us (see vv11-12). However, with the coming of Jesus, God’s mercy (v4) was now available to Gentiles (Paul’s audience in chapter two). As such what is meant by “dead in our transgressions” is “without God” (i.e., God’s help) – something He is now willing to do (i.e., He is now willing to “[make] us alive”/regenerate us), if we will (first) take a vow of faith/faithfulness to Christ as our Savior (i.e., to “regenerate” ourselves [circumcise our hearts/get a new heart/spirt – Consider Luk 1:17, 8:15; Rom 2:15, 25-26; also Rom 6:17-18 [they gave themselves new hearts before they were cleansed/freed from sin]). This is His “gift” to us (as Gentiles) (vv5-8).

View Details

A) What this instruction indicates: being born again is not enough to get to heaven.

B) Why all of this is relevant: 1) Persecution 2) Perverse People 3) Prowling Devil

1) Be Increasing In Intelligence

2) Be Obsessed With Getting To Heaven

3) Be Radical In Removal of Temptation and Unholy Influences

4) Driven By Fearful and Overwhelming Reciprocity

5) Be Deeply and Sincerely Loyal To Christ's Church and People

View Details

Evangelicals believe their Faith-Alone Gospel (FAG) to be ironclad. However, like the Death Star, this formidable foe hides several fatal flaws. Those possessing the plans to the Death Star are able to expose such flaws and not only destroy it, but the evil Evangelical empire that has used the FAG to destroy countless lives.

The plans to the Death Star = The FAG message:

Salvation is earned through perfect obedience to God’s Law. Since however this is humanly impossible, salvation requires that we put faith (alone) in the God-man Jesus Christ, who not only died to pay for our sins, but lived to fulfill our obligation of obedience. God therefore imputes to those who put faith in Christ, both His propitiatory death, and the merit of His perfect life. As a result, the Christian is afforded a justification that requires no duty to the Law. Christians obey only as a consequence of their regeneration and the indwelling Spirit.

The 3 fatal flaws revealed in the Death Star’s plans (i.e., FAG):

The Merit of Perfection

“Salvation is earned through perfect obedience to God’s Law.”

“Man’s relationship to God in creation was based on works. What Adam failed to achieve, Christ, the second Adam, succeeded in achieving. Ultimately the only way one can be justified is by works.” – R.C. Sproul (Getting the Gospel Right)

The Imputation of the Active Obedience of Christ

“Since however this is humanly impossible, salvation requires that we put faith (alone) in the God-man Jesus Christ Who not only died to pay for our sins but lived to fulfill our obligation of obedience. God therefore imputes to those who put faith in Christ, both His propitiatory death, and the merit of His perfect life.” "If Christ had only earned forgiveness of sins for us, then we would not merit heaven. Our guilt would have been removed, but we would simply be in the position of neutrality. For this reason, Christ had to live a life of perfect obedience to God in order to earn righteousness for us. He had to obey the law for his whole life on our behalf so that the positive merits of his perfect obedience would be counted for us. Sometimes this is called Christ’s ‘active obedience’ while his suffering and dying for our sins is called his ‘passive obedience.’” – Wayne Grudem (Systematic Theology)

The “Skywalker Shot” w/respect to the merit of perfection and the imputation of the active obedience of Christ: (Gal 2:21).

One-stage justification, the consequence of works and a monolithic view of the Law.

“As a result, the Christian is afforded a justification that requires no duty to the Law. Christians obey only as a consequence of their regeneration and the indwelling Spirit.”

3.1. The third fatal flaw of the Evangelical (or those holding to the FAG) is the belief that justification exists not in two stages (1. initial justification: gain by faith alone; 2. final justification: maintain by faith and faithfulness) – the biblical view, but rather that it exists only in one (gain by faith alone and remain by faith alone). Works (or obedience) are simply the result (or “consequence”) of this one-stage justification and the Spirit’s fruit in the believer’s life.

3.2. Westminster Seminary (CA) professor, R. Scott Clark, confirms “one-stage justification” to be the historical position of Evangelical Protestantism (in contrast to some of Evangelicalism’s most popular past and present pastors):

“The magisterial Protestant churches (i.e., the Lutheran and Reformed) and their theologians did not speak of, teach, or confess a “two-stage” doctrine of justification… One of the principal sources of the doctrine that we are initially justified by grace alone (sola gratia), through faith alone (sola fide) but that by good works we are ‘maintaining a right standing with God’ (Piper, 1999), that ‘you are not saved through faith alone’ (Desiring God, 2017), ‘that final salvation in the age to come depends on the transformation of life’ (Bethlehem Baptist Elder Statement) was the English pastor and theologian Richard Baxter (1615–91). He is most remembered for his pastoral work in Kidderminster, which he described in his book, The Reformed Pastor (1656)1… The Reformed churches confessed ‘faith is only the instrument by which we embrace Christ, our righteousness’ and ‘And faith is the instrument that keeps us in communion with him and with all his benefits.’ The Reformers were well aware of the medieval doctrine of “get in by grace, stay in by works.” The orthodox Reformed in the 16th and 17th centuries rejected that doctrine in favor of ‘get in by grace, stay in by grace’ (as it were).”– R. Scott Clark (“Richard Baxter’s Initial and Final Justification”, Heidelblog)

3.3. R. Scott Clark’s reference to Richard Baxter and John Piper reveals the confusion that exists over justification within Evangelicalism. Piper has been vocal about his belief in a “two-stage justification” since 1999 in various sermons or written forms of communication:

“Works are not acceptable in the moment of initial justification. But when James affirms ‘justification by works’ he means that works are absolutely necessary in the ongoing life of a Christian to confirm and prove the reality of the faith which justifies..…For James, ‘justification by works’ means maintaining a right standing with God by faith along with the necessary evidence of faith, namely the works of love.” (“Does James Contradict Paul?”, 1999 Sermon)…The stunning Christian answer is: sola fide—faith alone. But be sure you hear this carefully and precisely: He says right with God by faith alone, not attain heaven by faith alone. There are conditions for attaining heaven, but no others for entering a right relationship with God. In fact, one must already be in a right relationship with God by faith alone in order to meet the other conditions (Foreword to Tom Schreiner’s book: Faith Alone – The Doctrine of Justification: What the Reformers Taught…And Why It Matters, 2015)…These works of faith, and this obedience of faith, these fruits of the Spirit that come by faith, are necessary for our final salvation. No holiness, no heaven (Hebrews 12:14)…In justification, faith receives the finished work of Christ performed outside of us and counted as ours—imputed to us…In final salvation at the last judgment, faith is confirmed by the sanctifying fruit it has borne, and we are saved by that fruit and that faith…So, we should not speak of getting to heaven by faith alone in the same way we are justified by faith alone. Essential to the Christian life and necessary for final salvation is the killing of sin (Romans 8:13) and the pursuit of holiness (Hebrews 12:14).” (“Does God really save us by faith alone?”, 2017 Sermon)…Present justification is based on the substitutionary work of Christ alone, enjoyed in union with him through faith alone. Future justification is the open confirmation and declaration that in Christ Jesus we are perfectly blameless before God. This final judgment accords with our works. That is, the fruit of Holy Spirit in our lives will be brought forward as the evidence and confirmation of true faith and union with Christ. Without that validating transformation, there will be no future salvation (“The Justification Debate: A Primer”, 2017).”

3.4. Piper recently re-affirmed his belief in final justification – or the need to maintain our initial justification through obedience by tweeting: “justified by faith alone? Yes. “finally saved” by faith alone? No.

3.5. Piper’s view is shared by other popular Evangelicals, including Norman Shepherd, Douglas Wilson2, Rich Lusk, Tom Schreiner and Mark Jones.

3.6. In Shepherd’s “Thirty-four Theses on Justification in Relation to Faith, Repentance and Good Works” (1978) 3 he states,

“Thesis 21: The exclusive ground of the justification of the believer in the state of justification is the righteousness of Jesus Christ, but his obedience, which is simply the perseverance of the saints in the way of truth and righteousness, is necessary to his continuing in a state of justification (Heb 3:6, 14).Thesis 22: The righteousness of Jesus Christ ever remains the exclusive ground of the believer’s justification, but the personal godliness of the believer is also necessary to his continuing in a state of justification in the judgment of the last day (Mat 7:21-23; 25:31-46; Heb 12:14).Thesis 23: Because faith which is not obedient faith is dead faith, and because repentance is necessary for the pardon of sin included in justification, and because abiding in Christ by keeping his commandments (Joh 15:5, 10; 1Jo 3:13, 24) are all necessary for continuing in a state of justification, good works, works done in true faith, according to the law of God, for his glory, being the new obedience wrought by the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer united to

1 Baxter said, “We are justified by sincere obedience to Christ, as the secondary part of the condition of our justification; is evident also from these following Scriptures: Mat 12:37; Mar 11:25-26; Luk 6:37; Mat 6:12, 14-15; 1Jo 1:9; Act 8 :22; Act 3: 19, 22; 1 Pe 4:18; Rom 6: 16; 1 Pe 1: 2, 22.” (Thesis 77). Clark comments, “Baxter rejected the Protestant account of grace and works in favor of the medieval view that when Paul says “works” he means the Mosaic religious ceremonies [or clean laws) and not our good works). He rejected the Protestant understanding of grace (favor earned for us by Christ) and works (our good works).

2 For support see Wilson’s “The Objectivity of the Covenant” (2003) and his adherence to Federal Vision whose fourth tenet (The Necessity of Obedience and Good Works to Final Salvation) states, “The Bible teaches justification by faith and the necessity of a Christian life of obedience and good works to final justification, the declaration we hope one day to hear: ‘Well done, thou good and faithful servant.’”

3 Though able to defend his position biblically, Dr. Shepherd, a professor at Westminster Seminary (PA) since 1963 was dismissed in 1982 for his theses.

Christ, though not the ground of his justification, are nevertheless necessary for salvation from eternal condemnation and therefore justification (Rom 6:16, 22; Gal 6:7-9).”

3.7. In 2015, Mark Jones took the time to write an article not only supporting Piper’s position, but also its agreement with historical Reformed doctrine:

“I've been told that some folks are taking issue with John Piper…who agrees with [Tom] Schreiner, we are ‘right with God by faith alone’ but we do not ‘attain heaven by faith alone.’ He adds that ‘there are other conditions for attaining heaven.’ Based on what I believe is a charitable and straight-forward reading of Piper, there is not a single word in his Foreword [to Schreiner’s book]that seems out of place in terms of the basic Reformed approach to justification, salvation, and conditionality. Piper affirms strongly and clearly that works do not contribute to the acquisition of salvation. But Piper also wants to affirm that good works should be considered necessary for the obtaining of salvation4. I fail to understand how this idea isn't present in literally dozens of Reformed luminaries from the Early Modern period. As Francis Turretin says: ‘This very thing is no less expressly delivered concerning future glory. For since good works have the relation of the means to the end (Jn. 3:5, 16; Mt. 5:8); of the 'way' to the goal (Eph. 2:10; Phil 3:14); of the sowing to the harvest (Gal. 6:7,8)...of labor to the reward (Mt. 20:1); of the contest to the crown (2 Tim. 2:5; 4:8), everyone sees that there is the highest and an indispensable necessity of good works for obtaining glory. It is so great that it cannot be reached without them (Heb. 12:14; Rev. 21:27).’ Again, Piper says we do "not attain heaven by faith alone" and Turretin speaks of the ‘Indispensable necessity of good works for obtaining glory’. I don't see why we can't agree that they are saying essentially the same thing; and, indeed, if they are, what is the problem? For those who have trouble grasping how Piper can affirm that justification is by faith alone, but that entering glory is not by faith alone, we must keep in mind the well-known distinction between the right to life versus the possession of life. Herman Witsius makes a distinction between the right to life (i.e., acquisition) and the possession of life. The former is ‘assigned to the obedience of Christ, that all the value of our holiness may be entirely excluded.’ However, regarding the latter, ‘our works...which the Spirit of Christ works in us, and by us, contribute something to the latter.’ Similarly, Petrus van Mastricht once wrote: "in so far as God, whose law we attain just now through the merit alone of Christ, does not want to grant possession of eternal life, unless [it is] beyond faith with good works previously performed. We received once before the right unto eternal life through the merit of Christ alone. But God does not want to grant the possession of eternal life, unless there are, next to faith, also good works which precede this possession, Heb. 12:14; Matt. 7:21; 25:34-36; Rom. 2:7, 10.’ Is there anything in Piper's Foreword that could not have come from the pen of Witsius or Turretin or Boston or Ball or Owen or Rutherford or Mastricht? I'm having trouble understanding what the problem is both biblically and historically. In fact, I can point to works by authors in the Reformed tradition who have stated the matter perhaps a little more strongly than Piper does (e.g., Mastricht, Davenant). It seems one would have to have a built-in bias against Piper - perhaps because of his relationship to Daniel Fuller or perhaps for some other reason - to raise questions about the orthodoxy of his Foreword. And, let's be honest, it is a serious thing to raise questions about the orthodoxy of someone on this point. It isn't like we're talking about complementarianism. Piper speaks of good works as necessary for attaining heaven. Reformed theologians have spoken of good works as necessary for possessing heaven. In my mind, that's the same thing. And, quite frankly, I think that's the better approach rather than causing unnecessary division where there really doesn't need to be any. In sum, as Piper says, ‘there are other conditions for attaining heaven’. Or, by someone else: ‘The New Testament lays before us a vast array of conditions for final salvation. Not only initial repentance and faith, but perseverance in both, demonstrated in love toward God and neighbor...Holiness, which is defined by love of God and neighbor...is the indispensable condition of our glorification: no one will be seated at the heavenly banquet who has not begun, however imperfectly, in new obedience.’ And if you don't like that last quote, you can take it up with Michael Horton [R. Scott’s colleague at Westminster Seminary, CA]. But I happen to agree with it completely.” (“In Support of John Piper”, Reformation 21)5. 3.8. Consider also Jones’ remark, "Good works are necessary for salvation, but not for justification." (“A Critique of Jesus + Nothing = Everything”)

3.9. Rejection of this two-stage understanding is the reason many of Evangelicalism’s other popular figures (e.g., Phil Johnson) immediately accuse anyone espousing the necessity of works (or obedience) to salvation to be Roman Catholics or the Galatian Judaizers6. They fail to understand there exists a third option to understanding the relationship of works (or obedience) to justification: 1) Roman Catholicism: F+W=J, 2) Evangelical/FAG: F=J+W, 3) Covenantal Nomism/Marriage Covenant Gospel: F=J1 (Rom 3:28); F+W=J2 (Heb 12:14; Jam 2:24; Rev 20:11-15; Rom 2:6-11).

3.10. That being said, admitting to a “two-stage justification”, one that makes obedience necessary to heaven, is the minority position within Evangelicalism. And for good reason. Though it is the biblical position, it betrays the message communicated by the FAG. If salvation ultimately requires more than faith, then it cannot be said to be by “faith-alone.”

3.11. Those Evangelicals (e.g., Piper, Schreiner, Jones) who adopt the two-stage position, attempt to preserve their faith-alone position by placing works (or obedience) in the category of consequence (i.e., they are the inevitable result and evidence of saving faith and/or the Spirit). Such attempts however do not do justice to how the Scripture communicates those works (or obedience). Rather Scripture communicates that:

3.11.1. We (not the Spirit) are the ones responsible for producing works (obedience) as the essential component to (not evidence of) faith and other necessary condition for securing final justification (2Pe 1:5-11; Jam 2:14-26 w/1:19-2:1, 8-13//The question being answered: Can faith alone “save” [v14]? The answer is “No. It requires also our [not the Spirit’s] works [v18 “my works”]. IOW: “faith by itself [alone] is dead…useless” [v17, 21, 26]. Our “works must accompany our “faith” to secure [final] justification [v24]) 7.

3.11.2. We can fail to produce them and forfeit our justification/salvation (Gal 5:19-21; Eph 5:1-6).

3.12. A major impediment to the Evangelical’s ability to discern the biblical gospel (or see the flaws in the FAG) is their monolithic view of the Law (i.e., the NT term refers to the entirety of God’s OT Law [never a subset]– especially those passages [seemingly] calling for its abrogation – e.g., Rom 10:4).

3.13. Deeper biblical analysis reveals the necessity of division or making a distinction within the Law between “works of the Law” (ceremonial/clean laws) and the Moral Law (all other commands). SEE Luther’s cap argument (Jam 2:24 w/Rom 3:28): 1) Whatever James is referring as works is different from whatever Paul is referring to as works. 2) The works James refers to are necessary to salvation (Jam 2:24) whereas the works Paul refers to are not necessary for salvation (Rom 3:28). 3) The works referred to by James are related to the Law (Jam 2:1-13 is the context for Jam 2:14-26; See also Jam 1:19-27) and the same is true for the works referred to by Paul (Rom 3:28 “works of the law”). 4) Conclusion: [4.1.] Since both James and Paul are referring to works related to the Law and yet only those works referred to by James are necessary for salvation, there must be a distinction in the Law (at the very least, a bipartite distinction: laws no longer needed for salvation versus laws that remain necessary for salvation). [4.2.] Any person not making such a distinction in their understanding of the Law (especially when reading Paul or James) – or interpreting Paul as against the entirety of the Law as necessary to salvation (e.g., Evangelicals), is grossly misinterpreting their bibles (e.g., FAG Evangelicals)8.

Closing Contemplation:

"Silence is consent; and we must speak to this issue when we are able. After extensively reviewing the work of (Antinomian) John Biddle, a rather exasperated John Owen said: 'I am weary of considering such trash.' Yet Owen did so because he loved Christ and his church. However painful it might be, ministers and theologians in our circles must deal with these issues, sometimes publicly if they are able, because of how many of Christ's sheep are being influenced by this defective theology. If we do not, perhaps our silence really is consent." - Mark Jones, (Antinomianism)

4 Herein lies the crux of many of the Evangelical’s problems (and continual embrace of the false FAG): the failure to recognize the non sequitur created by saying works are not necessary for the acquisition of salvation while equally admitting the necessity of works to the obtaining of salvation. 5 In conjunction with the previous words, Dr. Jones makes the following observation in his book, Antinomianism, "As someone with some scholarly acquaintance with post-Reformation Reformed theology, particularly in the area of Puritanism, I have been dismayed at some of the theology that passes as reformed, when in fact it has corollaries to seventeenth-century antinomianism." 6 Phil Johnson recently tweeted against NEWPRO (who holds to a two-stage justification): “Your doctrine & behavior are genetically identical to the heretics who hounded the apostle Paul. Re-read Galatians. It was written to answer the exact doctrinal error you’re pushing.”

7 Evangelicals (e.g., James White) make Jam 2:14-26 about works as evidence of faith. Though they do function in that way (v18), the main thrust of James’ argument is their essential nature as an additional component to salvation. If evidence were apostle’s focus, then his argument in verse 17 becomes nonsensical: why is “faith by itself” deemed to be “useless” (or nonexistent) simply because it possesses no (ostensible) evidence of works? The nature of something’s existence is not dependent on evidence. Only in the epistemological sense is such an argument relevant (e.g., a murder that possesses no evidence identifying a killer does not mean no such person exists). In addition, White inserts a spurious definition of δικαιοῦται [“shown to be justified” v. “justified”] (vv21, and 24-25) to support his claim and avoid the instrumentality of works proven by the conjunctive (parallelism) that follows. See The God Who justifies by James White. 8 Historical and scholarly support for such distinctions: “We must bear in mind that common division of the whole law of God published by Moses into moral, ceremonial and judicial laws.” (John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book 4); "Paul could discern distinctions within God’s law which set certain commandments apart as applicable to all Christians, while others were irrelevant. This is tantamount to the division between the moral and the ceremonial law. Augustine introduces a distinction between the moral and the symbolical [clean/ceremonial] precepts of the law: 'For example, Thou shalt not covet is a moral precept; Thou shalt circumcise every male on the eighth day is a symbolical precept.' By symbolical precepts Augustine clearly means what would later become known as the ceremonial law..." (J.F. Bayes, The Three-Fold Division of the Law)

View Details

The plans to the Death Star = The FAG message:

The 3 fatal flaws revealed in the Death Star’s plans (i.e., FAG):

The Merit of Perfection

“Salvation is earned through perfect obedience to God’s Law. Since however this is humanly impossible, salvation requires that we put faith (alone) in the God-man Jesus Christ Who not only died to pay for our sins but lived to fulfill our obligation of obedience. God therefore imputes to those who put faith in Christ, both His propitiatory death, and the merit of His perfect life.”

Fatal Flaw: The merit of perfection (or the Covenant of Works) is taught nowhere in the Scriptures.

The Imputation of the Active Obedience of Christ

“…the God-man Jesus Christ…not only died to pay for our sins, but lived to fulfill our obligation of obedience. God therefore imputes to those who put faith in Christ, both His propitiatory death, and the merit of His perfect life.”

2.1. The second fatal flaw of the FAG is the assumption that the imputation of Christ’s death for our sins (His “passive obedience”) was not enough to get us to heaven. We also need the imputation of His perfect obedience – or perfect law-keeping which He accomplished during His earthly life. In theological circles this is referred to as the imputation of the active obedience of Christ.

2.2 Though communicated among Evangelicals as if this assumption originates in Scripture, in reality it is the product of its predecessor (the merit of perfection). The impossibility of perfection makes necessary the possibility of Christ’s obedience for us.

2.3. Given this essential connection, it is no surprise then that like the merit of perfection (most specifically, the Protestant Reformer’s doctrine of the Covenant of Works), there is no mention of the active obedience doctrine before the 16th century. French theologians John Calvin and Theodore Beza seem to be the first to write explicitly to the subject: 1) Calvin (1554), “Because we cannot attain to righteousness, but by fulfilling the law in all points, and by being discharged before God: it behooved our Lord Jesus Christ to be subject to the law, to the intent that his obedience might now be imputed unto us, and God accept thereof as though we brought the like obedience of our own.”. 2) Beza (1570), “We are justified before God, that is, held to be and declared righteous, because the obedience of Christ is imputed to us, which consists of two distinct parts, the satisfaction for our sins, and the full observance of all legal righteousness.” 1

2.4. Lack of historical evidence prior to the Reformation, has caused some Evangelical scholars to go on the defensive when discussing its validity to the doctrine of justification (i.e., salvation): “Informed Protestants would not want to say that the Reformation invented their understanding of justification.” – D.A. Carson (“The Vindication of Imputation in Justification: On Fields of Discourse and Semantic Fields,” in Justification: What’s at Stake in Current Debates)

2.5. To be fair, not all the Reformers embraced the Active Obedience doctrine (e.g., Kargius, Piscator, Gataker, Twisse, and Vines). The same is true today. There are those within Evangelicalism who reject the imputation of the active obedience of Christ as necessary to justification or salvation (e.g., Evangelicals holding to New Covenant Theology, Evangelicals holding to Federal Vision). In large part however, this was the doctrine held by the Protestant Reformers and remains the popular position within Evangelicalism today. Like the Covenant of Works, examples of this teaching abound in Evangelical confessionals, books, articles, correspondence and social media:

2.5.1. Heidelberg Catechism (16th century Protestant Confessional), Question and Answer, #60:

“Question: How are thou righteous before God?

Answer: Only by a true faith in Jesus Christ; so that though my conscience accuse me, that I have grossly transgressed all the commandments of God, and kept none of them, and am still inclined to all evil; notwithstanding, God, without any merit of mine, but only of mere grace, grants and imputes to me, the perfect satisfaction, righteousness and holiness of Christ; even so, as if I never had had, nor committed any sin: yea, as if I had fully accomplished all that obedience which Christ has accomplished for me…”

2.5.2. Patrick Gillespie (late pastor of the High Church of Glasgow, principal of the University of Glasgow), The Ark of the Covenant:

“Christ is a doer and fulfiller of the covenant of works most exactly in all points, both the command, and the curse and penalty of the Covenant, is satisfied by him; this is works, and this was the condition required upon his part…”

2.5.3. William Cunningham (late Anglican priest and church historian), Historical Theology:

“And as there is no perfect righteousness in men themselves to be the ground or basis of their being accepted or admitted to favor and happiness—as they can no more render perfect obedience than they can satisfy for their sins—Christ’s perfect obedience must become theirs, and be made available for their benefit, as well as His suffering,—His merit as well as His satisfaction.”

2.5.4. Louis Berkhof (late Reformed theologian, Systematics professor and president of Calvin Seminary), Systematic Theology:

“If He (Christ)had merely paid the penalty (for the believer) without meeting the original demands of the law (for the believer), He would have left man in the position of Adam before the fall, still confronted with that task of obtaining eternal life in the [impossible] way of obedience [the merit of perfection]. By His active obedience, however. He carried His people beyond that point and gave them a claim to everlasting life.”

2.5.5. J. Gresham Machen (late Reformed theologian and scholar, founder of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church), “The Active Obedience of Christ”: "If Christ had merely paid the penalty of sin for us and done nothing more we should be at best back in the situation in which Adam found himself when God placed him under the covenant of works… [As a result our] attainment of eternal life would have been dependent upon our perfect obedience to the law of God [and we would be certain to fall]. [Christ was therefore] our representative both in penalty paying and in probation keeping. [And that for those who have been saved by him, the probation is over since] Christ has merited for them the reward by his perfect obedience to God's law."

“SO THANKFUL FOR THE ACTIVE OBEDIENCE OF CHRIST. NO HOPE WITHOUT IT.” (Dying words to John Murray via telegram)

1 Calvin: Sermons On Deuteronomy; Beza: Quaestionum et responsionum Christianarum libellus; For further study see Bill Berend’s essay, “Christ’s Active Obedience in Federal Theology”

2.5.6. Wayne Grudem (Evangelical theologian), Systematic Theology: "If Christ had only earned forgiveness of sins for us, then we would not merit heaven. Our guilt would have been removed, but we would simply be in the position of neutrality. For this reason, Christ had to live a life of perfect obedience to God in order to earn righteousness for us. He had to obey the law for his whole life on our behalf so that the positive merits of his perfect obedience would be counted for us. Sometimes this is called Christ’s ‘active obedience’ while his suffering and dying for our sins is called his ‘passive obedience.’” (“The Active Obedience of Christ”; Systematic Theology)

2.5.7. Kim Riddlebarger (Reformed theologian and author), “Telling People the Truth in Love: A Reformed Approach to Evangelism”:

“The only ground of salvation is the finished work of Jesus Christ--both in his active and passive obedience. In Christ, God satisfies the demands of the law. And in Christ's sacrificial death, God removes the guilt of our sin.” 2.5.8. Tullian Tchividjian (pastor of Sanctuary Church, FL, and Evangelical author), Jesus + Nothing = Everything:

“God imputes to me the perfect satisfaction, righteousness and holiness of Christ, as if I had never committed any sin, and myself had accomplished all the obedience which Christ has rendered for me.”

2.5.9. Pat Abendroth (pastor of Omaha Bible Church, NE), “COVENANT THEOLOGY FOR THE UNINFORMED, UNSYMPATHETIC, AND MISINFORMED”:

“For justification (the declaration that sinners are righteous) requires more than the removal of guilt by atonement as essential as atonement is. A positive upholding of the law is the required standard of righteousness. The work of Jesus provides both the payment of the law’s required penalty as well as fulfillment of the positive demands.”

(Tweets) 2.6.0. Scotty Ward Smith (pastor emeritus of Christ Community Church, TN) “I'm such a mess it took Jesus' life of perfect obedience & his substitutionary death on the cross to redeem me.” 2.6.1. Tullian Tchividjian “The good news of the gospel is that my standing with God is not dependent on my obedience but Christ’s obedience for me.” 2.6.2. Paul Tripp (Evangelical counselor and author)

“You've been called to submit, but rest is never found in your submission, but Christ's willing submission to the Father on your behalf.” 2.6.3. Elyse Fitzpatrick (Evangelical writer) “For every time I've stamped my foot and say, ‘This isn't what I want!’ the Father hears the Son's, ‘Not my will but Thine’ instead.’” 2.6.4. Steve Lawson (president of OnePassion Ministries and professor of preaching at The Master’s Seminary) “Not only did Christ die in our place, He also lived in our place.

2.7. Verses massacred by Evangelicals in their attempt to support this doctrine include:

2.7.1. (Mat 5:17) “fulfill” = Jesus came to see that the prophecies concerning the Davidic King and God’s law were fulfilled (Eze 37:24 w/Isa 2:1-3)

2.7.2. (Rom 5:10) “His life” = We are reconciled by His death and saved (get eternal resurrection) b/c of His resurrected “life” (1Pe 1:3; 1Co 15:19-22)

2.7.3. (Rom 5:18-19) “Therefore = Drawing a conclusion based on the previously established truth (v9); “one’s man’s disobedience” (literally one act of disobedience = Adam’s fall into sin) is compared to Christ’s one act of obedience (“one man’s obedience” – i.e., His obedience in death – Phi 2:8)

2.7.4. (Rom 8:3-4) “the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us” = According to prophecy (Eze 11:19-20, 36:25-27), Christ’s propitiation brings the regeneration and renewal (see ch 6), that now empowers us to faithfully obey God (“who walk not according to…”).

2.7.5. Righteousness passages (1Co 1:30; 2Co 5:21; Rom 10:3-5; Phi 3:9) “righteousness” [δικαιοσύνη] = Justification (e.g., Rom 1:17). The justification (righteousness) secured by Christ is exclusively tied to His death (and never His life) (e.g., Rom 3:21-26, 4:25, 5:9; Heb 10:14).

2.8. Implications: the implication of the active obedience doctrine may be worse than the Scriptures they massacre to support it.

2.8.1. it negates Christ’s cross-work.

If righteousness is gained through the obedience of Christ's life, Christ died in vain. After living the perfect life, Jesus should have simply ascended back to heaven having completed what (according to Evan), can not only be imputed to our account, but serves as the only thing that truly makes righteous before God (i.e., what God requires is perfection not propitiation). 2

“If we are made just (righteous) through (Christ’s) life, there would be no compelling reason why he would die for us… If [however] we obtain perfect righteousness through the imputation of Christ's passive obedience [His death], we certainly do not obtain it through the imputation of his active obedience, since you can add nothing to what is complete (Heb 10:14).” – Johannes Piscator (Epistle 68; Apologia)

2.8.2. it makes God unjust.

Evangelicals also believe Christ’s death to be penal (i.e., God punishing Christ for our sins). Assuming both this and the doctrine of active of obedience are true, places God in the position of being unjust since punishment is no longer required for those who are (now) perfectly righteous.

“Indeed, the justice of God does not allow that the righteous be punished... If Christ by the obedience of his life had satisfied God [by making us righteous]… it would follow that God is unjust, who -in addition, required to be satisfied through the obedience of [His] death…” - ibid (Epistle 68)

2.8.3. it removes the believer’s obligation to obedience.

The imputation of Christ’s active obedience renders our obligation to obedience null and void.

“If Christ satisfied for our sins by obedience performed to the law, so that such obedience is imputed to us by God as if we had performed it, it follows that we have been freed from obedience to the law, since Christ hypothetically performed it for us or in our place; just as we correctly say with the Apostle "we are freed from the curse of the law because Christ was made a curse for us" [Gal. 3: 13]. However, we are not freed from obedience to the law, but we have to perform it to God for ever. Therefore, Christ did not satisfy for our sins by the obedience performed to the law.” (Epistle 68)3

2.8.4. it violates God’s prohibition against vicarious imputation

God’s law makes it clear that the good or bad of another human being cannot be transferred to the account (moral standing) of another (Eze 18:1-32).

2.8.5. it reestablishes the Catholic doctrine of neutrality with respect to the creation of man.

One of the few highpoints of the Protestant Reformation was its rejection of Catholic anthropology (Adam and Eve were created morally neutral) in favor of the biblical view: God created our first parents as morally righteous (Gen 1:31) (a position they therefore needed only to maintain – not merit). Through the introduction of the active obedience doctrine, this position was reversed (Grudem, “we would simply be in the position of neutrality”).

2.9. The Skywalker shot: the verse that destroys both assumptions: the merit of perfection and the imputation of the active obedience of Christ (Gal 2:21).

2 Though John Owen attempted to refute this argument by saying that chronological order need not be followed by God in the process of imputation (The Doctrine Of Justification By Faith), it fails on two fronts: 1) it violates one of God’s most important principles for determining truth (i.e., the chronological order of events – e.g., Gen 1; Evan’s argument re: the place of works w/respect to justification). Which begs the question, even if God could violate it, why would He – especially given the importance of the active obedience doctrine if it were true? 2) it entirely misses the ontological truth established by the argument. If Christ’s obedience can be imputed – and we the recipients afforded the merits of perfect righteousness through it, then the sin previously committed hypothetically no longer exists (removing the need for atonement).

3 In his book Blown by the Spirit, David Como makes the connection between the active obedience of Christ doctrine and the emergence of an antinomian underground in 17th century England, “Those who earn the epitaph ‘antinomian’ all saw demands for godly living as a new form of works righteousness and outward, literal, and legalistic religiosity that nurtured a slavish devotion to the law. Hence, godly preachers were routinely likened to Jews, Rabbis or Papists, while antinomian preachers often claimed to be the ones promoting the true Christian message of free grace and justification by faith apart from works, any works, legal or otherwise. Outward godliness and the demand for moral reformation were seen by them as Pharisaical error. The antinomians stressed the passivity of the believer in relation to moral obligations. Their freedom from the law was the result of the fact that they believed the law had been fulfilled…already by the believer’s identify with Christ. By virtue of this, believers were free from any obedience to the law. Believers were not inherently pure but rather rendered imputatively perfect via the holy life [obedience] of Christ.”

View Details

The plans to the Death Star = The FAG message:

The 3 fatal flaws revealed in the Death Star’s plans (i.e., FAG):

The Merit of Perfection

“Salvation is earned through perfect obedience to God’s Law. Since however this is humanly impossible, salvation requires that we put faith (alone) in the God-man Jesus Christ Who not only died to pay for our sins, but lived to fulfill our obligation of obedience. God therefore imputes to those who put faith in Christ, both His propitiatory death, and the merit of His perfect life.”

1.1. Everything the Evangelical believes about salvation hinges on the above assumption, that God saves based on merit. In this case, the merit of Christ’s perfect obedience that has been imputed (or reckoned) to us.

1.2. Where does this assumption come from?

The Evangelical’s merit-based system (of salvation) has three primary influences:

1.2.1. Roman Catholicism

Though Martin Luther and the other Protestant Reformers rejected Rome’s belief that human beings could eventually get to heaven by their merit, they assumed the merit-based system of salvation to still be valid (i.e., the soteriology taught in the Bible). The only merit however acceptable to God was the merit of perfection, and only Christ possessed it.

1.2.2. Luther’s Law-Gospel Dichotomy and Approach to Scripture Luther saw the Bible divided into two categories: Law and Gospel. The Law designates what God requires. It demands the merit of perfection: a standard we cannot meet. Gospel on the other hand, designates what God provides (in Christ) and promises us grace and forgiveness. The Law kills us by showing how miserably we fail to perfectly keep it. This is its purpose and how it should be used so that the gospel – or good news that Jesus has paid and perfectly obeyed, can grant us life through the salvation it graciously gives us by faith.

“The entire Scripture of God is divided into two parts: commands [Law] and promises [Gospel]1...The Law is the Word in which God teaches and tells us what we are to do and not to do…but after…the Law has done this work and distressful misery and poverty have been produced in the heart [because we cannot do it perfectly], God comes and offers his lovely, living Word, and promises, pledges, and obligates himself to give grace and help, that we may get out of this misery… This divine promise of his grace and…forgiveness [salvation]…is properly called Gospel.” – Martin Luther (Freedom of the Christian and Sermons)

1.2.3. The Protestant doctrine known as the Covenant of Works

According to Reformed theologian, Louis Berkhof, the Covenant of Works doctrine did not exist until the second generation of Protestant reformers (e.g., 16th -17th century theologians: Olevianus, Cloppenburg, Coccejus, Witsius), and became prominent only after its mention in the Westminster Confession of Faith (1646-1648). Prior to this, such teaching was unknown either in the Early Church or the Scholastic period that followed (9th-15th century). In mentioning this doctrine, the WCF also provides a succinct and clear understanding of what it teaches, which is a system of salvation predicated on the merit of perfection.

“The first covenant created with man was a covenant of works, wherein life was promised to Adam; and in him to his posterity [all human beings after him], upon condition of perfect and personal obedience” (VII.2)

1.3. That modern Evangelicals or proponents of the faith-alone gospel do indeed think of salvation in terms of merit – or earning one’s way to heaven is attested to in their writing:

1.3.1. R.C. Sproul (Reformed theologian and scholar, founder of Ligonier ministries)

“In the final analysis we see that we are saved by works. You say, ‘Wait a minute. I thought we taught justification by faith alone?’ Yes, but justification by faith alone means justification by putting our faith in Christ alone because Christ alone has fulfilled the covenant of works. We are still saved by works, but we are saved not by our works, but by the works of Christ.” – R.C. Sproul (Sermon: Saved by the Works of Christ)

1.3.2. Jon Bloom (staff writer for desiringgod.org)

“Jesus, in his Sermon on the Mount, made this statement (‘Be Perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect’, Matthew 5:48) as the impossible culmination of the (fallen) humanly impossible standards of what it means to not sin in anger, lust, divorce, swearing oaths, and retaliation, as well as what it means to love our enemies. But just before he launches into this ‘perfection’ section of his sermon, Jesus gives us a clue to what he means: ‘Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them’ (Matthew 5:17). Jesus came to perfectly fulfill on our behalf God’s demand on us for perfection.”

1.3.3. Lee Ann Trees (former Dean of Women at Westminster Seminary, CA)

“We must keep God’s laws perfectly because his nature requires it, but none of us is able to do it. Without God’s intervention, we are all under condemnation. Yet, this is not the end of the story! Because we are no longer deserving of heaven, due to our own tainted nature and works, God in his love and mercy sent his Son from heaven to us…He lived the perfect life we should have lived (but failed to), and he redeemed us (something we couldn’t do for ourselves) by offering himself up as the perfect sacrifice for our sins. It is by God’s grace alone—through faith in Christ alone—that we have peace with God and enter into his presence. If Jesus, the Son of God, humbled himself to serve us, why should we think our pride-filled works could ever grant us access to God?”

1.4. Salvation as merit-based is also at the core of Evangelical evangelism and preaching:

1.4.1. Evangelism (example): Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron’s “Way of the Master” Evangelism. Evangelism begins by asking a person if they believe they are a good person. If they say “yes”, then that person is queried with regard to their obedience to the 10 commandments (e.g., have they ever lied?). The person is then told God’s standard for getting to heaven is perfection. Since they have failed to perfectly keep the ten commandments, they have only earned hell. Jesus is introduced as the perfect Law-Keeper and the One they must therefore put faith in if they want to get to heaven.

1.4.2. Preaching (example): the “Redemptive-Historical” (or “Christ-Centered”, “Gospel-Centered”) preaching of Ephesians 6:1-3.

God calls children to perfectly obey their parents. The bad news is however, because they are sinners, they miserably fail their parents and fall under God’s condemnation. What are they to do? Remember the good news of Jesus, Who like them was once a child and on their behalf perfectly obeyed His parents. By having faith in Him, every child can have the comfort of knowing that God views them as fulfilling His righteous commands -including the command to obey their parents.

1.5. What makes believing that God’s system of salvation is merit-based a fatal flaw?

1.5.1. The Bible nowhere teaches salvation as meritorious.

No biblical support exists for the Covenant of Works2 or that God ever saw salvation as something that must be earned through perfect obedience to His commands. In addition, it must also be considered that if such a system did exist, then the Bible’s storyline before the time of Christ, paints a picture of God that is worse than Hitler. The establishment of the Law meant God was setting His beloved people up for failure (Lev 18:5, Deu 30:16; Eze 20:11; Luk 10:28 -“Do this and you will live” = Be sinlessly perfect in your obedience and you will possess eternal life). The history of the Jew’s brutal punishments and exile must now be read as the example of what happens when people fail to keep God’s impossible standard. It becomes the story of God the monster, who through the overt oppression of His unreasonable demands makes His people the victims of His hideous atrocities.

1.5.2. The Bible nowhere teaches that we mut possess sinless perfection or perfectly obey God to get to heaven.

When the Bible uses the word “perfect” to refer to sinful humans, it never carries the idea of sinless perfection. Instead it communicates faithfulness to all of God’s (known) commands. In this respect, the Bible identifies plenty of people as “perfect” [ תָּ מִ֥ים ] who are at the same time, sinners (See KJV: Noah – Gen 6:9; Job – Job 1:1, 8, 2:3; Asa – 1Ki 15:14; the men of Israel making David king – 1Ch 12:38; all those faithfully devoted to Israel – Psa 64:4; Pro 2:21; In this sense consider also Mat 5:48 “perfect” – same word [τέλειος] found in 1Co 2:6; Col 1:28; Jam 1:4 texts which teach this character trait can be achieved by believers. Again, it refers to faithfulness in all areas or completeness as in spiritual maturity).3

1.6. What (then) does the Bible teach as God’s system of salvation?

The Bible teaches marriage as God’s system of salvation. Like marriage 1) we (as the bride) gain a saving relationship w/Jesus (as the bridegroom) by grace through faith -or a vow of fidelity/allegiance/loyalty (expressed in a covenant sign – e.g., circumcision, sacrifice, baptism – 1Pe 3:21), 2) we maintain that vow through faithful obedience to God’s commands (i.e., like a faithful wife, we submit to our husband in everything) (Mat 28:18-20).

1.7. How do we use the merit of perfection to expose and destroy the Death Star (FAG) and the evil Evangelical empire?

By asking Evangelicals the following 4 questions:

1.7.1. Did you know that the foundation of the FAG is merit-based?

1.7.2. Can you show me in the Bible where God teaches that salvation is merit-based or requires the merit of perfection?

1.7.3. If by “perfect” the Bible means perfect obedience, then why are certain people in the Bible referred to as “perfect” though they were clearly sinners and demonstrated only faithful obedience to God’s commands? IOW: Is it possible that what this word means and what God actually requires (w/respect to obedience) is something other than perfection?

1.7.4. If you believe salvation is merit-based (salvation requires perfect law-keeping), then doesn’t that make your God worse than Hitler since those Jews who were mercilessly killed by God under the Old Covenant for not keeping the Law were - like those killed by Hitler, helpless victims since it is impossible to be perfect?

1 Luther’s close associate Philip Melanchthon is more explicit, “All of Scripture is either Law or Gospel.” (Commonplaces)

2 It is important to point out that Hosea 6:7 makes clear that God did establish a covenant with Adam. However never are we told that this covenant was merit-based – or as the Covenant of Works doctrine teaches, that the perfection they were supposed to demonstrate while under this covenant would eventually culminate in God’s offer of eternal life. This kind of fiction functions much in the same way as that used by con artists. It is always the foundational or initial assumption that proves to be most critical and most false. Once however accepted as true, the job of the con artist becomes easy, just stay consistent with the accepted assumption and not only will it become more believable but there is also little chance of it being discovered.

3 For further study see God and Human Wholeness: Perfection in Biblical and Theological Tradition by Kent Yinger

View Details

(2Ti 4:2; 1Ti 4:7) = Controversial topics must be addressed and their silly myths put to rest.

Truth: a reminder (Joh 18:38 “What is truth?”):

1) truth is not determined by personal or public tolerance (Joh 6:51-60; Eph 1:10; Hence Rom 12:1-2), 2) truth is not determined by appearances or emotions (Joh 7:24; Jer 17:9), 3) truth is determined by a proposition’s agreement with God’s Spirit (i.e., the Word of God) not the spirit of the world (Mat 4:4; Joh 6:61-63, 17:17; Act 17:10-12; Eph 6:17; Eph 2:1-2; Col 2:8 w/20; Hence 1Jo 4:1), 4) you cannot be Jesus’ disciple (i.e., a saved person) yet rejecting truth or listening to the error of this world -i.e., no sacred cows allowed (Joh 6:66, 18:37; 1Jo 4:4-6), 5) often what we think is truth is instead the spirit and error of the world (Hence 12:1-2).

Same Sex Rebellion

6.1. In 1970, 70% of Americans believed homosexuality to be wrong. Today, 71% of Americans believe it to be morally acceptable (a 100% change in 50 years).

6.2. Homosexual relationships are now viewed as not only a respectable alternative to their heterosexual counterpart, but a lifestyle that should be explored by all people. Exploring one’s sexual orientation is encouraged as healthy.[1]

6.3. In our current economic climate, it also pays to be homosexual or part of a same-sex relationship. According to the 2019 Census Bureau report, “same-sex married couples have a higher median household income than opposite-sex married couples.”[2]

6.4. Due to homosexuality’s large acceptance in the West, several “Christian” denominations have also welcomed those practicing homosexuality into the fold (e.g., the Anglican Church of South Africa, Evangelical Anglican Church in America, Metropolitan Community Churches, some United Methodists, the United Churches of Christ, Presbyterian Churches in America, the Episcopal Church, Disciples of Christ, the Reformed Church in America, the Society of Friends [Quaker], the Friends General Conference [Quaker], the Mennonite Church USA, the American National Catholic Church, the Evangelical Catholic Church, the Old Catholic Church).

6.5. As of 2015, 62/63% of mainline Protestants now favor same-sex marriages and see no conflict between Christianity and homosexuality.

6.6. Things however were not always this way. Until the late 20th century (1970s), homosexuality was:

6.6.1. considered a mental illness by the American Psychiatric Association.

“homosexuality [is a] sociopathic personality disorder…[a] sexual deviation.” (DSM I and II)

6.6.2. condemned as sinful and considered illegal (its solicitation or expression) in many American states.

6.7. So what changed? Not God, but the world and those churches who chose to follow the world. God’s view of homosexuality today (under the New Covenant) is no different than it was under previous covenants. Throughout redemptive history, the practice of homosexuality has always constituted same sex rebellion.

6.8. Given God’s attitude toward homosexuality and its attending consequences, we can conclude that the sin of homosexuality (i.e., homosexual behavior) is more serious than most other sins:

6.8.1. God so hates homosexuality that He purposely designed His laws, doctrine and gospel to keep those practicing homosexuality (among other serious sins) from ever becoming a part of His salvific plan or covenant people (1Ti 9-11 “laid down” = Established as a barrier).

6.8.2. So disgusting is homosexuality to God, that He promises to damn not only those practicing it, but also those (men) guilty of acting effeminately (1Co 6:9-10 [NAS], those who practice homosexuality and the effeminate” – See also ESV Fn 3 [“two Greek words”] [οὔτε μαλακοὶ οὔτε ἀρσενοκοῖται = “Neither the soft in behavior or man-f*%#ers”]; Hence 1Co 16:13; e.g., Those who are effeminate = Transgender males)

6.8.3. It is for these reasons that homosexuality is called an abomination (a thing causing disgust and hatred) and classified as a capital crime (Lev 20:13).

6.8.4. It is also for these reasons that God completely destroyed the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah and their inhabitants (Gen 19:1-25; v5 “Bring them out [the angels] that we might know them” = Have sexual relations w/them – See Gen 4:1).

6.9. Because they share the same unique signature of divine destruction (entire human populations destroyed by supernatural means), some have become convinced that like Sodom, Noah’s Flood was also the result of widespread acceptance or practice of homosexuality (In re: to Sodom: Gen 19:1-5 “all the people to the last man surrounded the house…‘Bring them out to us that we may know them’” = Every single male in the city of Sodom was seeking to perform homosexual acts on the angels - or more specifically, Jesus and the HS - Gen 18:1-2; As it re: to both cities, consider Abraham’s plea in Gen 18:20-33. Neither city possessed as little as 10 men innocent of homosexual behavior since if that had been the case, God would have spared that city).

6.10. If the above is true, then not only is the gay movement’s choice of the rainbow for their flag highly ironic, but widespread acceptance or practice of homosexuality also serves as another clear sign of Christ’s imminent return/this world’s final fiery destruction (As of 2022, 19 million Americans [eight times as many people as it was just 50 years ago] are practicing/have practiced some form of homosexual behavior). In this light consider (Mat 24:36-51 = Discerning the signs of wickedness that characterized the time of Noah is key to discerning Christ’s return and our subsequent readiness).

6.11. Equally illuminating and important to our discernment w/respect to this perversion, is what causes it to become prevalent: a rise in atheistic thinking. Is this not what also characterizes our modern times? (Rom 1:25-27).

6.12. That being said, because human beings are conceived in sin, people can also be born with same-sex attraction or temptations. If however those individuals resist those temptations, they are not guilty of nor identified by homosexuality. IOW: we are not defined by what we feel, but what we practice (1Jo 3:7-10). In addition, those who come to Christ find new power/ability to conquer this temptation and sin (1Co 6:11 “such were some of you”).

6.13. Strong reasoning skills and knowledge of the pertinent biblical texts is more than enough to soundly refute the objections made by those wicked churches/people who attempt to show compatibility between homosexuality and Christianity: 1) S&G was not destroyed because of homosexuality but attempted “rape humiliation”, rape used to humiliate foreigners believed to be spies (Jud 1:7 = God’s destroyed the cities b/c the men “pursued unnatural desire” –Literally, [NAS] “were going after strange flesh”– i.e., homosexual behavior, not rape; See also 2Pe 2:7-8 = Lot witnessed immoral sexual behavior among the people “day after day” – not simply at the time of the angel encounter), 2) S&G was not guilty of homosexuality but pride and lack of hospitality (Exe 16:49 = Sodom and Gomorrah are being used figuratively for Judah and Israel to emphasize how strongly God is opposed to them and their sin. The sins therefore mentioned are in relation to Judah and Israel not Sodom and Gomorrah), 2) Gen 19, 1Co 6, Lev 20, and Rom 1 are all in reference to those who are not born homosexual or operating outside “holy homo relationships” (1] attraction does not approve action [“I was born this was so it is okay”], 2] being born in sin is why we need to be “born again”, 3] In the Bible, all homosexual practice is communicated in terms of perversion, never is it ever communicated as holy or able to operate in that capacity), 3) God is a God of love which means He would never condemn someone for who they choose to love (See 1Ti 1:5- the goal of our instruction [w/God’s law, doctrine and gospel] is love”).

6.14. The acronym “FAG” as a designation for the Faith Alone gospel is truly fitting, since it makes it possible for practicing homosexuals to be saved w/o repenting of their homosexuality (FAG = Only faith is needed to be saved, obedience/repentance is nice but not necessary; e.g., Free Grace Movement/Bob Wilkins: They won’t inherit “the kingdom of God” [1 Co 6:9-10] on earth but they will still be saved and go to heaven; e.g., Charles Stanley: even those Christians who later become atheists are still saved since our actions can never effect our standing/state with God).

[1]

https://goaskalice.columbia.edu/answered-questions/should-i-explore-my-sexuality/

[2] https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2020/09/same-sex-married-couples-have-higher-income-than-opposite-sex-married-couples.html

View Details

(2Ti 4:2; 1Ti 4:7) = Controversial topics must be addressed and their silly myths put to rest.

Truth: a reminder (Joh 18:38 “What is truth?”):

1) truth is not determined by personal or public tolerance (Joh 6:51-60; Eph 1:10; Hence Rom 12:1-2), 2) truth is not determined by appearances or emotions (Joh 7:24; Jer 17:9), 3) truth is determined by a proposition’s agreement with God’s Spirit (i.e., the Word of God) not the spirit of the world (Mat 4:4; Joh 6:61-63, 17:17; Act 17:10-12; Eph 6:17; Eph 2:1-2; Col 2:8 w/20; Hence 1Jo 4:1 and Rom 12:1-2), 4) you cannot be Jesus’ disciple (i.e., a saved person) yet rejecting truth or listening to the error of this world -i.e., no sacred cows allowed (Joh 6:66, 18:37; 1Jo 4:4-6), 5) often what we think is truth is the spirit and error of the world (Hence 12:3).

Domestic Discipline

A husband has the right and responsibility to discipline his wife through discipling her in God’s Word (the more effective, New Covenant application, Eph 5:26 “love your wives…cleans[ing] her by the washing of water with the word”; Jer 31:33; Eze 36:27) and is prohibited from using physical force (the Old Covenant application, Col 3:19 “love your wives, do not be hostile with them”). The New Covenant application also applies to the discipline of Christian children (old enough to understand) (Eph 6:4 “discipline namely the instruction of the Lord”; e.g., Joh 1:16; As it re: to this being the prescribed practice w/respect to slaves in general see also Eph 6:9 “stop your threatening” = Physical threat/harm – e.g., Act 9:1).

Critical Race Truth

5.1. Though all human beings are made in the image of God and share the same creational parents (Adam and Eve), there exists different races of people.

Since the time of the Patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob), there exists two major divisions: Jew and Gentile. Those who are the direct (or biological) descendants of the Patriarchs are Jews (or Hebrews), and those who are not, are Gentiles (Hb. “ha-goyim” = the nations [non-jewish]) (Gen 14:13 “Abram the Hebrew”).

5.2. God recognizes the diversity of people-groups that exist within the race of Gentile based on their patriarchal ancestor or ancient country of origin.

(e.g., Amalekites [Num 13:29], Amorites [Num 13:29], Ammonites [Gen 19:38], Arabians [2Ch 21:16], Assyrians [2Ki 19:35], Babylonians [Ezr 4:9], Canaanites [Num 13:29], Cushites [Dan 11:43], Edomites [Gen 36:9], Egyptians [Gen 10:6], Elamites [Ezr 4:9], Ethiopians [2Ch 12:3], Hittites [Num 13:29], Jebusites [Num 13:29], Libyans [Dan 11:43], Moabites [Gen 19:37], Nephilim [Num 13:33], Persians [Ezr 4:9], Philistines [Gen 10:14], Syrians [2Sa 8:5], etc.).

5.3. God also recognizes the physiological, behavioral and cultural distinctions that exist within the various people-groups that make up the Gentile race.

(e.g., Num 13:32-33; Isa 18:1-2; Jer 5:15-16; Act 17:21; Tit 1:12)

5.4. Because of the Patriarchs, God has exalted the Jews above all other races and promised that eventually every Gentile race would be subjugated by the Jews.

God is not partial, but He does discriminate. He has chosen to show favor to the Jewish people before any other. And that for all of human history (Deu 7:6-14; Psa 110:1-7 [Act 2:34-36] w/Isa 2:1-5 w/18:7 w/42:1-5 w/66:18-21 [Mat 28:18-20 and Rev 19:11-16 “rod of iron” = Subjugation and enslavement]; Seee also Isa 14:2, 60:10-12; and Exo 4:22; Hence Rom 2:10 – “glory and honor and peace…for the Jew first” w/v11).

5.5. Throughout history God has helped those races and nations less wicked, to subjugate and enslave those more wicked.

The world’s view is the polar opposite: those who subjugate and enslave are the more wicked. This principle applied also to the OC Jews (Lev 18:24-28; Eze 5:5-17 w/6:8-10).

5.6. God only views such subjugation and slavery as sinful/evil when the people in those situations are treated unjustly.

The first and most notorious example many Americans think of when considering the issue of racism is the slavery once practiced in this country. The American slave trade is viewed as one of the low points in our country’s history, the high point being when it was abolished. What however people fail to realize is that the fight to end slavery actually fueled the fires of racism rather than remove it. Why? Because the real problem was not being addressed. Slavery is not racism. Owning slaves or viewing people as property is not wrong when conducted according to God’s laws (Gen 17:10-13, 20:17; Exo 21:7-11, 20, 26; Lev 25:6, 44-48; Ecc 2:7; 1Co 7:21; Eph 6:5-9; All of God’s people exist as His slaves – Lev 25:38-42; Mat 10:24-25; 1Pe 2:16; 1Co 6:20).

5.7. From the perspective of God (and therefore also the Christian), racism – or sins related to one’s race, comprise a much smaller category than those identified by the world.

What God (and the Christian must) identify as racist is limited to the following:

5.7.1. believing that a particular race is less human

This is the wonderful product of Darwinian evolution. In his book, “The Descent of Man” Darwin states that some races are genetically superior and “more human” than others whereas others are “less human” and “more ape” than others. This was also a part of Hitler’s thinking and Nazi propaganda with respect to the Jews. German schools taught that the Jews were subhuman, implying their connection to rats. The Bible and science however reveal that all races come from the same original parents (Adam and Eve). As such all peoples, no matter their race, color or other distinctive features, have been created as image-bearers of God (Gen 1:26-28 w/Act 17:26).

5.7.2. being against inter-racial relationships/dating/marriage

The only form of “inter-racial” marriage prohibited in the Bible is Christians marrying non-Christians (2Co 6:14-18).

5.7.3. treating someone unjustly because of their physical/biological race (Lev 19:15-18; Mat 22:39)

Here (then) is where precision is crucial to understanding issues related to race or racial treatment. Saying that it is sin (racism) to treat someone unjustly because of their race is not the same (nor sin) as saying people can (and at times should) be treated differently because of their culture – including the culture that may be associated with their race (Tit 1:12 w/13-16, 3:1, 8-10, 14).

5.8. The satanic philosophies of humanism and individualism have done more to confuse the issue of racism than anything else. Humanism = human freedom is the highest and greatest good.

Individualism = every person is a sovereign citizen free from the control or ownership of others.

Both of these philosophies can be summed up in what Jesus identifies as “self”, that which must be jettisoned if we as humans are to possess real and lasting abundant life (Mat 16:24-25).

5.9. Because Satan runs this world, the sins of racism will always exist since it proves an effective tool for dividing and destroying humanity.

Many of the organizations and ideas purported to be against racism have historically been those most guilty of not only perverting its definition, but also promoting it for their own personal gain.

“There is a class of colored people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs-partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs.” – Booker T. Washington

5.10. By becoming a Christian and a part of Christ’s nation and culture (the church), Gentiles can now receive the favored treatment of the Jews, since through Christ we are adopted into the line of the Patriarchs (Abraham).

When a person (Jew or Gentile) becomes a Christian, they leave their former race, nation and culture behind and become a part of God’s (new) chosen (and favored) race, nation and culture (1Pe 2:9; Gal 3:28; Eph 2:11-19a [race], 19b-22 [culture= church]; Also in re: to culture see Eph 3:6 and Col 2:6-8). The only way (then) to leave the sinful racism of this world behind is to leave this world and become a part of Christ’s new world/nation/culture and people.

5.11. As Christians, we are to favor our new race (Christians), nation and culture above our former race, biological family, nation and cultures.

(Mat 12:46-50; Gal 6:10)

View Details

(2Ti 4:2; 1Ti 4:7) = Controversial topics must be addressed and their silly myths put to rest.

Truth: a reminder (Joh 18:38 “What is truth?”):

1) truth is not determined by personal or public tolerance (Joh 6:51-60; Eph 1:10; Hence Rom 12:1-2), 2) truth is determined by a proposition’s agreement with God’s Spirit (i.e., the Word of God) not the spirit of the world (Mat 4:4; Joh 6:61-63, 17:17; Act 17:10-12; Eph 6:17; Eph 2:1-2; Col 2:8 w/20; Hence 1Jo 4:1 and Rom 12:1-2), 3) you cannot be Jesus’ disciple (i.e., a saved person) yet rejecting truth or listening to the error of this world -i.e., no sacred cows allowed (Joh 6:66, 18:37; 1Jo 4:4-6), 4) often what we think is truth is the spirit and error of the world (Hence Rom 12:1-2).

Domestic Discipline (the right and responsibility of a husband to discipline his wife)

4.1. Like the children, the wife is the human property (slave) of her husband:

4.1.1. The Hebrew term for husband (בַּ֫עַל; ba’al) and it’s Greek equivalent (κύριος; kurios) can also be translated as “owner” or “lord/master”, referring to persons whose authority is due to ownership (e.g., [בַּ֫עַל]: Gen 20:3 “man’s wife” = Literally, “she is owned by an owner [ba’al]; Exo 21:22 [same word as v28]; Isa 54:5; Jer 3:14, 31:32; Joe 1:8; Pro 12:4, 30:23, 31:10-12, 23; [κύριος]: 1Pe 3:1 w/6).

“[In Israel, women] had no legal status, being the personal property first of their fathers, and then of their husbands.” – Anthony Phillips (Ancient Israel’s Criminal Law: A New Approach to the Decalogue)

4.1.2. In verbal form, the term (בַּ֫עַל; ba’al) refers to marriage, strengthening the connection between marriage and ownership (e.g., Deu 24:1).

4.1.3. Etymological studies reveal the term (“husband”) to be a derivation of the ancient term, “householder”, meaning owner of the household.

4.2. Wives as the property (or slaves) of their husband was the consensus position in all ancient societies.

“The essence of the woman’s position in Roman law was that she could never technically become a free agent [no longer be a slave]…If a woman underwent marriage she passed into the manus [property ownership and control] of her husband…This placed her legally on the same footing as her daughter.” – Suzzane Dixon (“Polybius on Roman Women and Property”; JSTOR)

4.3. Though modern society no longer recognizes wives as their husband’s property (women as chattel), vestiges of this biblical truth remain. For example, most women still assume their husband’s last name. A sign of ownership is you carry that person’s name (e.g., Mat 28:19 w/1Co 6:20 w/Act 20:28 w/Eph 5:23).

4.4. Under the Old Covenant:

4.4.1. God commanded that all slaves (personal property) be treated righteously (e.g., Lev 25:6; Deu 5:15-16, 16:9-14). Never were they to be neglected or abused or exposed to harm. So favorable was the position of the slave under God’s Law that many desired it over emancipation (Deu 15:12-17). The master-slave relationship was to reflect the relationship of Master-slave that existed between God and His people (Israel) (Lev 25:42; Deu 6:20-25 = We obey God because He is a good Master Who redeemed us [bought us out of slavery] from an evil master so that we could become His slaves; One of the most prominent terms used to describe Christians in the NT is δοῦλος, literally, “slave” -e.g., Act 2:18, 4:29; Rom 1:1, 6:18 and 22 [verbal forms]; Phi 1:1; Tit 1:1; Jam 1:1; 2Pe 1:1; Jud 1:1; Rev 1:1).

4.4.2. God condoned the use of physical force against a man’s slaves when it was: 1) for righteous reasons (to enforce the law/justice), 2) done in a righteous way (the punishment fit the crime and did not cause permanent harm). A husband therefore using righteous physical force against his wife (according to the aforementioned criteria) was never considered abusing her (what today is identified as “domestic violence”). In this respect, it was viewed as no different than a parent spanking their child (Exo 21:20-21 “rod”, 26-27; In re: to children: Pro 13:24, 23:13-14 “rod”). That God saw the use of physical force (e.g., hitting, spanking) as appropriate not only for children but also adults is made clear by (Deu 25:1-3). Consider also (Pro 19:29, 26:3 = The category of “fool” includes more than children). It is important to note that God uses physical force against His wife when she is disobedient (e.g., Ezekiel 23; Eze 23:25-27).

4.4.3. That being said, God never condones a slave (including wives and children) hitting their owner (husband or father). Outside of acting in defense, such actions are always an act of insubordination. In the case of children, striking either parent is considered a capital crime (Deu 21:15). Though no explicit punishment exists for wives’ guilty of the same crime, it remains serious. Given the comparison made between wives and the church in the New Testament, a wife striking her husband is like the church striking Christ.

4.5. Until the late 19th century, husbands disciplining their wives through the use of physical force was not only legal, but encouraged in the Western World (including the United Sates). The basis for such laws was the Bible:

“A Similar doctrine had been laid down by Dr. Marmaduke Coghill, judge of the Prerogative Court in Ireland, who in a suit by a wife for divorce on the ground that her husband had given her a sound beating, delivered a well-considered opinion that, with such a switch as the one held in his hand, moderate chastisement was within the matrimonial privileges of the husband”. - London Quarterly Review of Legal cases Vol 136, (1874)

“By the ancient common law [the Bible], the husband possessed the power of chastising his Wife…let the husband be permitted to exercise the right of moderate chastisement” - Calvin Bradley v. State of Mississippi (1834)

“A husband cannot be convicted of a battery on his wife unless he inflicts a permanent injury or uses such excessive violence or cruelty as indicates malignity or vindictiveness…A husband is responsible for the acts of his wife, and he is required to govern his household, and for that purpose the law permits him to use towards his wife such a degree of force as is necessary to control an unruly temper and make her behave herself; and unless some permanent injury be inflicted, or there be an excess of violence, or such a degree of cruelty as shows that it is inflicted to gratify his own bad passions, the law will not invade the domestic forum or go behind the curtain.” - State of North Carolina v. Jesse Black (1864)

4.6. Though no longer legal, domestic discipline was still popular (even encouraged) in the 1950’s – including by America’s most liberal influences, Hollywood and Capitalism.

4.7. Evidence from the early church also demonstrates that they too believed husbands had the authority to enforce the law/justice through righteous physical force in relation to their wives.

“A man may chastise his wife and beat her for her correction; for she is of his household.”

Friar Nicolas Byard (1140 A.D.)

4.8.

A crucial consideration to the validity of domestic discipline:

what gives a man the right to such discipline (the use of physical force) is the same principle that justifies a police officer’s use of force: they possess the authority to enforce the law (or justice). Why (then) is it okay for the police and not the husband whose authority over his wife is greater than that of a police officer (the husband’s authority originates and reflects that of Christ in relation to the church)?

4.9.

The origin of Domestic Violence (or the villainizing of Domestic Discipline): the feminist movement of 1848-1861. Though spoken in the context of condemnation, a sampling from one of their speeches offers additional support to domestic discipline’s prior acceptance and understood connection to the Bible,

“In those early days a husband’s supremacy was often enforced in the rural districts by corporeal chastisement, and it was considered by most people as quite right and proper – as much so as the correction of refractory children in like manner…The laws made it his privilege – and the Bible, as interpreted, made it is his duty…By the common law of England, the spirit of which has been but too faithfully incorporated into our statute law, a husband has a right to whip his wife with a rod not larger than his thumb, to shut her up in a room, and administer whatever moderate chastisement he may deem necessary to insure obedience to his wishes, and for her healthful moral development!”

4.10. It is the same sinful ideology of the feminist movement that is behind the current push for child emancipation. Soon all attempts by parents to guide the moral path of their children – and most especially when it involves the use of physical force, will not only be illegal, but viewed as the dangerous and damaging actions of abusive parents. The use of force by police officers will eventually follow suit since at the heart of this ideology, lies the belief that any physical force used against others is always and only evil.

4.11. What does God’s teaching on domestic discipline mean for Christians under the New Covenant?

4.11.1. From the perspective of justice: The use of physical force by a husband against his wife for righteous reasons and in a righteous way is never abusive (since what God condones as good can never become evil) (Isa 5:20). Such actions only qualify as abuse when they do not meet the biblical criteria.

4.11.2. From the perspective of application: According to Ephesians 5:25-33 the husband still maintains the right and responsibility of disciplining his wife. However, what that looks like (now) is not only different, but far more effective (Eph 5:26 “cleanse”) = Discipline through discipleship in God’s Word (similar to a pastor’s responsibility to the flock - 2Ti 4:2). Support: 1) the cleansing of v26 is in relation to the “word” not Christ’s blood (i.e., it is not referring to propitiation), 2) the cleansing is (instead) penal (Pro 20:30), 3) (v27 “spot or wrinkle…holy and without blemish”) = Practical holiness versus positional holiness (e.g., 2Pe 3:11-14), 4) (Eph 6:17; Col 3:19), 5) why discipline through discipleship in God’s Word is (now) more effective (Jer 31:33; Eze 36:27; Hence 1Ti 4:8).

CLOSING CHALLENGE: husbands to pray the Lord’s Prayer and read the Bible with their wives (round-robin style) M-F for the next four weeks. Week: 1) Philippians, 2) Colossians, 3) Ephesians, 4) James

View Details

(2Ti 4:2; 1Ti 4:7) = Controversial topics addressed and their silly myths put to rest.

God has a limited knowledge of the future.

How can God be all knowing (omniscient) and yet not know every aspect of the future?

1.1. The Bible never communicates that God is all knowing (omniscient) in the sense that He knows all aspects of the future. Instead, the Bible teaches that God possesses perfect knowledge and wisdom in relation to the past and present. This includes the present state of every person’s heart which means God also knows every person’s next decision since the present state of our heart is the determining factor in what we do next (e.g. Mat 12:34 w/Jam 3:2). That however is very different from saying that God knows every aspect of the future. Never does the Bible communicate that God knows such things. Instead the Bible communicates that:

1.1.1. God is responding/reacting to our present actions/decisions and doesn’t know with certainty much beyond that (Jer 18:7-10; Exo 13:17; Isa 63:7-10; Jer 3:6-7, 19-20, 26:1-6, 36:1-3; Eze 12:3; Mat 8:10).

1.1.2. God’s knowledge of those things far in the future is limited to His plans (promises and prophecies) which is therefore more of a reflection of His omnipotence (not His omniscience). Isaiah 40-48, that portion of Scripture dealing w/God’s knowledge of the future (as proof that He is the true God of heaven and earth) is not ultimately about His omniscience, but rather His omnipotence – i.e., that He has the power to see His will come to pass exactly as He declared it (Isa 42:8-9, 46:8-11, 48:3; Rom 4:17) = God’s omnipotence is what guarantees His specific knowledge of future things. Such omnipotence includes the ability to influence or direct people when necessary (e.g. Gen 50:20; Pro 21:1 w/Isa 10:5-15; Isa 44:24-28 w/Ezr 1:1-12 and 2Chr 36:22-23 = God accomplishes His purposes thru influence not coercion/violation of our free will).

1.2. Believing that God knows every aspect of the future - including every future decision we are going to make, makes you guilty of three heresies:

1.2.1. Fatalism/Determinism/Calvinism

If God did know everything about the future then that would include our decisions which means none of our decisions would be free or real. Though it may seem that way, in reality, they are all predetermined (or fixed) according to what God has already decided. This is not what the Bible teaches but instead the Greek heresy known as Fatalism, the Atheist heresy known as Determinism, or the Evangelical heresy known as Calvinism.

1.2.2. God as unjust

If Fatalism/Determinism/Calvinism were true, it would also mean that we are not responsible for our actions. We are instead victims. Such thinking makes a mockery of Scripture which establishes our responsibility (and therefore free will) through God’s commands, the conditions and consequences of those commands and the pleading of God and His prophets to keep those commands. Why plead for something we have no control over fulfilling? This kind of thinking also impinges on God’s most important attribute, His justice (Gen 18:19; Deu 16:20, 32:4). For God to be just in His judgment of us at the end of time, then it requires that the majority of our wills and the future be free and unknown since, “How can God commend/condemn us if the majority of what we did/did not do was out of our control because the future was pre-determined or fixed?” It is important to note that this view (Fatalism/Determinism/Calvinism) was condemned by the early church:

“Let some suppose, from what has been said by us, that we say that whatever occurs happens by a fatal necessity, because it is foretold as known beforehand, this too we explain. We have learned from the prophets, and we hold it to be true, that punishments, chastisements, and good rewards, are rendered according to the merit of each man’s actions. Now, if this is not so, but all things happen by fate, then neither is anything at all in our own power. For if it is predetermined that this man will be good, and this other man will be evil, neither is the first one meritorious nor the latter man to be blamed. And again, unless the human race has the power of avoiding evil and choosing good by free choice, they are not accountable for their actions…We have learned from the prophets, and we hold it to be true, that punishments, chastisements, and rewards are rendered according to the merit of each man’s actions. Otherwise, if all things happen by fate, then nothing is in our own power. For if it be predestinated that one man be good and another man evil, then the first is not deserving of praise or the other to be blamed. Unless humans have the power of avoiding evil and choosing good by free choice, they are not accountable for their actions—whatever they may be.” (Justin Martyr)

1.2.3. God as incompetent

Calvinists (the Christian version of Fatalism/Determinism) think that if God doesn’t know everything about the future, then He cannot be counted on to accomplish His various promises or prophecies. IOW: Without the ability to pre-determine everything, God would become incompetent. This belief however, is not only alleviated, but exposed as unintelligent once we consider that what God does know is more than enough to anticipate possible problems, establish contingency plans and ultimately steer the future in the direction He needs it go to accomplish His purposes. Possessing perfect knowledge and wisdom in relation to the past and present is all God truly needs to perfectly shepherd/manage the future – especially given the fact that the future is always the result of the past and present. IOW: perfectly know the past/present and you can perfectly control the future without knowing it or destroying the free choices of those living in it (e.g., Exo 13:17) (Pro 5:21; Gen 6:5; 2Ch 16:9; Mat 12:34b; 1Co 4:5; Isa 48:8; Isa 65:24; e.g. Deu 31:16 w/21). An illustration to drive home the point: a 300 qubit quantum computer (a computer possessing more information than there are atoms in the universe) playing chess w/a three-year old (the age a child is able to grasp the basics of chess). Is there any chance that baby could ever do anything the computer wouldn’t anticipate? How much more would this be true in relation to God? (Isa 55:8-9)

1.3. This view is known as God the Great Shepherd (GTGS) and is NOT the heresy of Open Theism: B/C God doesn’t know the future, He makes mistakes (VERSUS Perfect knowledge/wisdom of past/present = Perfect mgmt of the future).

Hell will be filled with false teachers including women pastors and their churches.

Why are women pastors false teachers and their churches on their way to Hell?

2.1. Because God not only prohibits women from being pastors but also claims they will not be saved if they take those roles (1Ti 2:11-15). Consider also (1Co 14:34 “speak” = Act as judges [see v29]. The judges in Scripture are the priests/pastors – Deu 19:17; Isa 66:21). Any woman therefore who is a pastor is false and on her way to hell.

2.2. As it relates to their church and those in it, the same is true for them as well. Why? Several reasons:

2.2.1. B/C it is a church preaching a false gospel, the key factor for determining whether someone is a true or false Christian/church (Gal 1:6-9). How you can be sure a church with a woman pastor is preaching a false gospel = By possessing a woman pastor they are boldly preaching their rejection of obedience to Christ as necessary to salvation.

2.2.2. B/C it is a church that also does not meet the criteria necessary to be a saving church - i.e., a church where Christ’s authority/blood can be extended/offered thru her priests and her sacraments (Act 20:28 w/1Pe 3:21; Joh 13:8-17 w/Mat 26:21-23 w/Mat 16:18-19 w/Joh 20:21-23). What that criteria is according to (Act 11:19-26): 1) Jesus is followed/obeyed/imitated – v26 “Christians” = Little Christs”, 2) repentance and faith are necessary to gain salvation/receive initial forgiveness – v21, 3) you need a qualified/ordained man – v23, also 1Ti 3:2 [“husband”], 4) it preaches a gospel of gain thru baptism – v24 [“added to the Lord” w/Act 2:41, 5:14; Mat 28:19] and maintain [“remain”] - vv23-24, thru obedience – v26 [“taught” obedience - Mat 28:20].

2.3. The early church affirmed the necessity of the church for salvation: “There is no salvation outside the church” (Cyprian)

The thief on the cross was no exception.

If baptism is needed for saving faith and must be coupled w/faithful obedience, then what about the thief on the cross?

3.1. The thief on the cross was literally baptized into Jesus’ death (what baptism represents – Rom 6:1-3).

3.2. Jesus referred to His death as a baptism (Luk 12:50).

3.3. The thief also demonstrated repentance (the first act of faithful obedience) before exercising faith in Jesus (Luk 23:39-43): 1) repentance – vv39-41, 2) faith in Jesus (as God’s Son and Savior) (v42 “when you come into your kingdom” = Would not have said this unless he believed Jesus to be Who He claimed to be).

3.4. The thief did not continue to sin so as to lose/forfeit what he was about to gain in his baptism (of death) (or, he maintained his obedience until his death – hence v43).

View Details

The gospel according to Jesus requires faithful obedience to get eternal life. (Joh 8:51 “keeps” = is faithful)
James got his gospel from his brother (Jesus) and Jesus got his gospel from the OT which means God’s salvation has not changed (IOW: it has always required faithful obedience). (Deu 28:1-2 w/Jam 2:24)
If as the Evangelicals say, the OT saints were also saved by faith alone (and not their obedience)[1], then God is no better than Hitler since most of Jews either didn’t get the memo and were ruthlessly killed by Him or tried the faith alone route and were still ruthlessly killed by Him. (Jer 7:1-16, 11:1-11, 13:12-14, 14:11-12, 13-14 “assured peace” [the message: have faith and you wb delivered], 15:1, 16:1-5 w/10-11, 19:9, 23:14-17, 21-22 [Eze 13:22], 25:4-11, 44:27)
Spotting false prophets, teachers and Christians has always been easy: they are those who leave the condition of faithful obedience out of their gospel and practice. (Deu 29:18-20; Mat 7:15-20 w/21-23; 2Pe 2:1; Jud 1:3-4; Eph 5:5-10; 1Jo 3:7-10)
The fact that we must repent and will be judged according to our works makes no sense unless faithful obedience is a condition of our salvation. (Mar 1:15; Luk 3:8-14; 2Co 7:10a; Rev 20:11-15; 2Co 5:9-10; Rom 2:6-11)
Jesus was sinfully cruel to someone He loved if salvation does not require faithful obedience. (Mat 19:16-22 “keep” = Be faithful to; Mar 10:21)
People don’t need to become Christians (receive propitiation) or possess the Holy Spirit (regeneration/new birth) to produce faithful obedience since God says we can do it without such help from above. (Deu 30:11-14 “who will ascend to heaven…[or] will go over the sea…for us and bring it to us that we may hear it and do it” = We do not need Spiritual help or deliverance to do it; propitiation necessary to be saved but not to faithfully obey God; See also Ecc 7:29 “upright” = Morally capable; e.g., 2Ki 10:3 “fittest” [same word as Ecc 7:29 translated “upright”)
If regeneration were necessary to faithful obedience then God would be unjust in His condemnation of the wicked (i.e., obligation requires ability). (Eze 18:1-9 “the fathers have eaten sour grapes and children’s teeth are set on edge” = We have no control over/cannot change our destiny – or stop the behavior that leads to our damnation)
God would also be unjust if faithful obedience were not quantifiable or knowable. (Again Deu 30:11-14 = We do not need Spiritual help or deliverance to “hear it” – i.e. to know it or know that you are doing it; 2Ti 4:7-8; Phi 3:6)
Evidence of conviction (or grief) over sin does not confirm that you possess faithful obedience. (Joh 16:8; 2Co 7:10b; e.g., Judas – Mat 27:1-5)
Evidence of affection, approval, or believe in Jesus does not confirm that you possess faithful obedience. (Joh 2:23-25, 6:60 w/66; Luk 14:25-35; Mat 13:20-22)
Your desire to be faithful, your membership in a biblical church or the fact that you have examples of obedience or serving Christ in your life also does not confirm that you possess faithful obedience. (Luk 12:34; Mat 7:21-23; Eze 18:26; Jer 7:1-15)
Committing a capital crime does not mean you will never be considered faithfully obedient by God. (e.g., 1Ki 14:8; 1Ti 1:12-13)
For the Christian to possess faithful obedience (and receive final salvation/get to heaven – Rom 13:11; 1Pe 1:3-5), they must (after initial salvation/baptism) remain obedient to everything they know God expects from them – especially during testing/trials, never knowingly continuing in any sin (or being unrepentant) to the point of losing their possibility of forgiveness. (Heb 10:26 “receiving the knowledge of the truth” = The truth established by God’s Word that we commit to trust and follow the moment we receive Christ/get baptized; Luk 9:62; 1Jo 1:9, 3:7-10; Eze 18:24 = The majority view [“you were obedient the majority of your Christian life”] is not accurate; Deu 8:1-2 and 1Pe 1:6 = Obedience during trials/testing is especially important; In this respect consider also Mat 18:7-9)

[1] “God has always required that his people exercise faith, even when that faith lacked the clear connections to Jesus that we can see today.

Old Testament believers were saved by grace through faith, by the grace of God whom they trusted according to His own promises. In that broad sense, there really is no difference between the way the Old Testament saints were saved and the way New Testament saints are saved.” – D.A. Carson (Gospel Coalition)

“Since Adam rebelled at the beginning, the Creator instituted only one way for a person to be declared righteous and that is through repentant trust in the coming Victor… Anyone, who trusted in the promise of the coming Son, now “born of a woman, born under law,” was justified, delivered from both the curse and obligation of the broken divine law… Overall, the only way anyone has been declared righteous from the Fall until the present is through trust in the substitutionary atonement of our Victor-King. In the past, people looked forward to him; now we look back to his finished work.” - Mark R. Kreitzer (Grand Canyon University)

View Details

The New Protestant believes that the gospel (or plan of salvation) presented throughout the pages of Scripture (from Genesis to Revelation) to be the same in its basic framework. That gospel may be referred to as the Marriage Covenant Gospel (MCG) and can be summarized as follows:

God saves through establishing covenants between Himself and those He is saving.1 The saving covenants of the Bible are not meritorious but marital in nature (e.g., Jer 31:31-32)2. As such, they follow the principles of gain and maintain: 1) Under the New Covenant, we gain salvation or covenant relationship with God by grace (or His gracious choice) through faith in Jesus Christ (i.e., through placing our trust in Him as Savior and vowing our allegiance or loyalty to Him3 as our Divine King4) and 2) we maintain (not merit) that salvation (justification) and its promises (including the promise of eternity) through faithful obedience to Christ’s Law (1Co 9:21; Gal 6:2; e.g., Mat 28:18-205). Biblical salvation is therefore not by faith alone (the Protestant/Evangelical view or FAG6), but rather requires also the condition of faithful obedience7.

Determining which gospel is correct requires it possess consistency (or agreement) in the following 3 areas: 1) redemptive history, 2) the early church, 3) the relationship between faith and works. This study will show that the New Protestant MCG is the only soteriological framework demonstrating such consistency while at the same exposing the biblical and historical inconsistency produced by the Evangelical or (old) Protestant FAG.

View Details

If this is Jesus’ church and we want to build His kingdom, then we need to stop having “itching ears”. To do that however requires adopting Jesus (and Paul’s) speech in relation to the wicked – most specifically, the false preachers and fake Christians of our day.

Jesus’ speech toward false preachers and fake Christians was constantly derogatory1, offensive and polarizing.
The apostle Paul’s speech toward false preachers and fake Christians was equally derogatory, offensive and polarizing.
Jesus and Paul were following the examples of God’s OT prophets.
NT pastors are divinely charged with the same mission (or speech) as the effective means to protecting the church from fake Christians, and attracting those truly welcome to God.

View Details

God saves through establishing covenants between Himself and those He is saving.1 The saving covenants of the Bible are not meritorious but marital in nature (e.g., Jer 31:31-32)2. As such, they follow the principles of gain and maintain: 1) Under the New Covenant, we gain salvation or covenant relationship with God by grace (or His gracious choice) and faith in Jesus Christ (i.e., by placing our trust in Him as Savior and vowing our allegiance or loyalty to Him3 as our Divine King4) and 2) we maintain (not merit) that salvation (justification) and its promises (including the promise of eternity) through faithful obedience to Christ’s Law (1Co 9:21; Gal 6:2; e.g., Mat 28:18-205). Biblical salvation is therefore not by faith alone (the Protestant/Evangelical view or FAG6), but rather requires also the condition of faithful obedience7.

Determining which gospel is correct requires it possess consistency (or agreement) in the following 4 areas: 1) redemptive history, 2) the early church, 3) God’s moral character, 4) the relationship between faith and works. This study will show that the New Protestant MCG is the only soteriological framework demonstrating such consistency while at the same exposing the inconsistency, moral compromise and tension produced by the Evangelical or (old) Protestant FAG.

View Details

Recommendation from reliable sources is necessary for those Christians attempting to transfer their church membership or raise support as missionaries.
Christian Unity/Fellowship requires more than Christian profession given Satan’s strategy of seeding churches with false brethren and teachers in order to divide/destroy God’s kingdom and people.
False brethren and teachers are defined.
Receiving the Father’s peace and the Son’s favor includes rescuing us from Satan’s powerful worldly forces.
Women play a crucial role in advancing God’s kingdom and church.
The only gospel that will give us the strength (or perseverance) to get to heaven is the one that agrees with the OT prophetic message of a coming King whose salvation would be granted to all those nations (or peoples) willing to give faithful obedience to Him and His Law.
Like Enoch, some verses “walked with God, and were no more”(Gen 5:24).

View Details

How Shall We Then Live? Part 3

(In re: to new world problems[1]):

Our choices of abstinence or indulgence with regard to new world problems must:

1.1. not stop us from welcoming - or cause us to despise - those who choices are different (1-3, 21 “wine”) = Who is Paul referring to as the weaker brother (the one not eating meat or drinking wine)? There are two possibilities: 1) Jews living in Rome who were not were willing to obtain meat or wine previously offered to pagan idols or not prepared according to kosher laws (e.g., Exo 23:19; Lev 7:26-27; Pro 12:10). The problem was that the pagan temples and markets were the primary source of meat and wine in the city of Rome[2]. For these newly converted Jews, a diet of vegetables and water became (in their mind) their only acceptable option. And/Or 2) Gentile converts whose former association with meat or wine offered to pagan idols was still too fresh in their minds to partake without violating their conscience (See 1Co 8:7). Similar concerns were present in the Roman church with respect to days of fasting (5-6) “One person esteems one day as better…another esteems all days alike”= Some Jewish Christians were still convinced that daily fasting was the honorable practice -excluding Sabbaths or Sacred holidays (the “better” day). Others saw fasting as no longer required of specific days, but rather something done only on special occasions (e.g., special pleading before God – Jug 20:25-28 [victory in battle]; 1Sa 7:3-6 [repentance/forgiveness]; 2Sa 12:15-16 [mercy to the sick]; Ezra 8:21-23 [safety from danger])[3]. Included in our eternal assessment will be how we treated those who differed with respect to these kinds of new world problems (10-12 the “judgment seat of God” = The final judgment determining where we send eternity). Knowing this, should cause us to steer clear of ever being negative of someone for their choices/decisions in the area of new world problems when those choices/decisions are based on biblical conviction and God-honoring intentions.

1.2. be based on biblical conviction and God-honoring intention (5) “fully convinced [convicted] in his own mind [thinking supported by Scripture]” = IOW: He must possess biblical conviction. Hence why Paul says what he does at the end of the chapter (23) “But whoever doubts [possesses no biblical grounds for his indulgence] is condemned [in sin] if he eats because the eating is not from faith [the Christian Faith]. For whatever does not proceed from faith [the Christian Faith] is sin” = If our practice cannot be supported from the pages of Scripture (the book defining the Christian Faith) then we are acting in rebellion to God (regardless of what we think or how we view our actions). Biblical conviction therefore represents the first prerequisite for determining our choices (abstinence or indulgence) with respect to new world problems. The second is our intention (6-9) = Making choices based on what pleases self or others is no longer an option. Such decisions must now be made based on what we believe is honoring to God – including in the areas fasting or eating and drinking (See also 1Co 10:31). The reason behind this prescription? The Christian’s life now belongs to Christ (v8 “we are the Lord’s”). He has become our new “master” (v4), the One Who gained such authority/ownership by His death and resurrection (again v9; See Mat 28:18; 1Co 15:27; 2Co 5:17; Consider also 1Co 6:19-20). There are two questions (then) that should be utilized in making our choice with respect to new world problems: 1) Do I believe I can support my abstinence or indulgence from Scripture? 2) Is my intention to honor/please God in abstaining or indulging? Examples of new problems relevant to us where these questions need to be applied: drinking alcohol outside of sacred times, fasting during the week, movies, tv shows, video games involving witchcraft.

1.3. not become an area of proselytization in respect to those holding a different position (yet doing so with the right conviction and intention) (1 “welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions” w/4) = God supports his current (biblically based) conviction. Conversion to a different position is not necessary.

1.4. never cause another Christian to stumble (13-15) IOW: though what you choose to indulge in may be okay (not sin before God), if others in the Body of Christ view it as sin (to them it is still “unclean”) and see you doing it, they could become “grieved” (i.e., disenchanted in living the Christian life) – or worse, encouraged to do what for them would be sin since they do not possess the biblical conviction or God-honoring intentions to support such indulgence with respect to themselves (“it is unclean to anyone who thinks it is unclean”; See again v23b). Becoming a “stumbling block or hindrance” in this way puts us in danger of being guilty of several serious sins: 1) We are guilty of not “walking in love” toward our covenant brothers/sisters (15; Failing to walk in love toward our cov bros/sis is a sign that we are not a child of God – 1Jo 3:10), 2) We cause a covenant bro/sis to apostasize (15 “destroy” [ἀπόλλυμι]) = Every time this Greek word is used in the NT, it refers to something that is – or in danger of being - completely and permanently lost (Mat 12:14; Jam 4:12; Jud 1:5). Given the context in which Paul uses this word (“destroy the one for whom Christ died”), the thing in jeopardy is the person’s salvation. Our indulgence becomes for the weak Christian (those lacking the proper biblical understanding or conviction), the vice leading to their destruction (e.g., alcohol leading them back to their former alcoholism – i.e., unrepentant drunkenness/addiction), or the violation of conscience leading them to look for answers outside the Christian Faith (e.g., Christians are hypocrites because they preach against witchcraft, yet indulge in movies, tv and games which include it. Christianity therefore must not be true[4]). Both Paul and Jesus strongly warn against becoming a stumbling block of this magnitude (one leading to the apostasy of others) (1Co 3:16-17, 8:8-10 w/10:27-29; Mat 18:5-10).

1.5. also (therefore) be decided based on our ability to practice it while still preserving the conscience and spiritual prosperity of others in the church (16-22) = A sign of poor thinking – and very likely also, a selfish heart, is to believe that the only criteria for determining what I (as a Christian) can practice is whether or not that thing is considered lawful before God. Lawfulness is merely the first criteria; the second is whether it is helpful or harmful to me or those God has placed in my sphere of influence. As such, our primary goal should never be to seek and protect all those lawful indulgences that God has provided to the Christian, but rather seek to protect those in the Body of Christ who might be unnecessarily harmed by our practice. It is this kind of Christian that is “acceptable to God and approved by men (1Co 10:23-24, 31-33).” Our mindset therefore toward those indulgences which are justified – though questionable, should be, “If I cannot practice it safely (v22), without others accusing me of “evil” (v16) or causing another to “stumble” (v20), then I will (happily) forgo its practice (v21; 1Co 8:13).” The additional question (then) we must consider when making our choice: Can I practice it without being accused or guilty of association with evil by others? (Association w/evil = Sin/Damnation; 1Co 10:14-22; 2Co 6:14-7:1; Hence Rom 14:21 and 1Co 8:13).

(Important Takeaways Not To Miss):

Diversity of practice with respect to new world problems (where there exists biblical conviction, God-honoring intentions and no cause for stumbling among others) should be supported in the church (1, 13, 19).
God honors those who abstain because they do not possess the biblical conviction and God-honoring intention to indulge (2-4 w/14) “I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus” = I possess Biblically based conviction. “but it is unclean for anyone who thinks it is unclean” = They do not possess the biblical conviction to indulge.
God condemns those who indulge without possessing the biblical conviction and God-honoring intention to do so (23 “if he eats” = Indulgence – not abstinence, is the issue).

[1] Practices, places or things that may be permissible under the New Covenant that did not exist in the past or were not permitted under the Old Covenant.

[2] The kosher slaughtering of animals (OC requirement) has had a long history of being illegal in many parts of the secular world - e.g., “The Driving Force Behind The Ban On

Kosher Slaughtering” by Melanie Phillips (JNS.org); “The Prohibition of Ritual

Slaughtering and Freedom of Religion of Minorities by Pablo Lerner (Cambridge

University Press); “The Day Kosher Slaughter Was Saved” by Baruch Sterman

(Commentary.org).

[3] See “On Esteeming One Day Better Than Another” by R. Dederen (Andrews University Seminary Studies vol. 9, pp. 16-35)

[4] In 2007, the Barna Group did an extensive research project in which they asked non-Christian people why they rejected Christianity. 85 percent said it was due to the hypocrisy they had witnessed among their ranks.

View Details

Fighting or conflict is an inevitable part of life. It is, in many cases, the only way to resolve human problems. As a result the Bible is filled with examples of fighting. Jesus fought with Jews and Christians (Mar 8:11; Rev 2:16). Paul likewise, fought with Jews and Christians (Peter, Barnabas and other brothers in the church) (Act 9:28-29, 25:7-8; Gal 2:11-14; Act 15:1-2, 36-40). We must never therefore think of fighting as a bad thing – or that somehow fighting less, means we are better Christians (or mature). Rather what needs to be considered is, “Are we fighting righteously?”

View Details

How Shall We Then Live? Part 2

(in re: to the govt)

God commands every human being to respectfully obey the government (and their deputized agents) in the place where they reside or currently exist[1] (1a “in subjection” = In respectful obedience [same word as Luk 2:51]):

1.1. Earthly govts have been established by God (1b) “instituted” = Appointed [same word as Act 22:10] (Dan 2:21, 4:17, 20). This includes: 1) His earthly sacred govt of the church – Joh 18:36w/Luk 22:29 w/Heb 12:28 [w/23 = the church]w/Mat 16:16-19 w/Joh 20:21-23; See also Act 23:1-5), 2) the evil secular govts of the world (e.g., Babylon – Dan 2:37-38, 4:27, Egypt – Exo 9:16, Rome – Joh 19:11; Hence – 1Pe 2:13-17).

Examples of deputized agents: 1) secular (president, police, court judges), 2) sacred (pastors – Tit 2:15).[2]

1.2. Rebelling against earthly govts (or their deputized agents) means resisting God and incurring His judgment through them (2) “judgment” = God has authorized and empowered the secular and sacred governments to carry our His wrath against those who are disobedient to their authority and laws (3-5) “bear the sword…an avenger” = Earthly govts are the instrument through which God secures justice or vengeance (Rom 12:19). This is true for the church as well (e.g., 1Co 6:1-6 [Mat 18:15-20 w/Deu 17:6-13]; Heb 10:26-30). “for the sake of conscience” = Disobedience to God’s governing authorities brings also the consequence of a guilty conscience – which when operating properly, indicates corruption in the soul – an ailment that must be remedied otherwise it will lead to more serious sin (e.g., 1Ti 1:19).

1.3. Our respectful submission/obedience to them includes paying taxes as well as any other fees or payments they may require to support them and their work (6-7) “revenues” = Additional fees and payments serving as a revenue source for the govt (e.g., permits, licenses, customs/duties, tolls – Mat 9:9 “toll booth”). “honor” = Most likely a reference to financial honor (See Rom 12:10; 1Ti 5:17). God also sees as acceptable, governments demanding their citizens to financially support those employed by them/their deputized agents (e.g., ancient tax collectors [head and land taxes]: – Zacchaeus, Luk 19:1-10 [chief tax guy in the region of Jericho. A portion of what they collected went to their support]).

1.4. The only exception is when the governing authorities demand something that is sinful (Act 5:29).

(in re: to the Law)

Christianity is all about love because:

2.1. it is all about fulfilling the Law (8) “the law” = The entirety of God’s OT laws. See verse 9, “the commandments, ‘You shall not…” = The Ten Commandments. If you have the Ten Commandments then you also have the rest of the commandments since they represent what each of the ten looks like in specific cases (they are the case laws). Hence (Deu 5:31). PNTM: 1) Paul is concerned w/Christians obeying God’s Law (which means Rom 10:4 cannot mean Christians are off the hook w/regard to obedience to the Law). 2) Obeying God’s law is how we love one another (9) = Paul sees obeying God’s Law as synonymous with loving others. This is also how we love our enemies - Mat 5:44 = Not they must become our friends or we must have affections for them but we must treat them righteously/according to God’s Law - e.g., Rom 12:20).

2.2. You can’t love people without adherence to God’s laws (10) = As a logical syllogism: Premise 1) True love does no harm to others. Premise 2) The Law was established to keep us from doing harm to our neighbors. Conclusion: Love requires the Law (or the Law represents the rules for love – 1Ti 1:5-8). Consider (then) churches/Christians who reject adherence to God’s Law. They are churches refusing to love others (love w/o the Law is a non sequitur).

The other reason Christians need to be concerned about obeying to God’s Law is because our obedience after becoming a Christian now weighs heavily in our final assessment before God (11-12) “Besides this” = Besides obedience to the Law being necessary to loving others, it is also necessary to our salvation. The Law - or our obedience to it represents the deeds/criteria used by God on Judgment Day to determine whether or not we were faithful to the covenant (whether or not we were faithful to our vow of faithfulness [“faith”] - Rev 20:11-15 “what they had done” = Were they obedient/disobedient to God’s Law?). “the hour has come for you to wake from sleep…The night is far gone; the day is at hand” = There is no more time to waste not taking our sin seriously (being asleep in spiritual darkness – making our “10”s into “2”s; 1Pe 4:3). “salvation is nearer to us now than when we first believed” = Idiomatic way of saying, “the certainty of our salvation is being determined more now (in our day-to-day Christian lives), than when we got baptized (first believed and were justified). “cast off the works of darkness and put on the armor of light” = Our faith alone will not be enough to save us. We must also be characterized by taking action (“cast off…put on” = Aorist [continued action]) in respect to what is sinful (“works of darkness”) and what is righteous (“armor of light”).
Two major keys to obeying God’s Law are:

4.1. the avoidance of all those things/activities that impair our thinking, inflame our feelings or corrupt our wills (13) “Let us walk properly as in the daytime” = Let us live lives characterized by obedience to God’s Law which oncludes the avoidance of the three things/activities established in Paul’s three couplets: 1) impaired thinking: “orgies” = Most likely not a reference not to sexual parties but popular Roman (or pagan) religious services often conducted at night and involving the use of alcohol to produce estatic forms of worship similar to modern day Pentecostal services (trance like chanting, unintelligible speech, chaotic bodily movement and occasional vomiting).[3] Hence Paul’s coupling of this word (“orgies”) with “drunkenness.” Access to the spiritual realm was believed to be achieved through impairment of one’s mind (Pro 23:33; Pro 31:4-7). Examples of other things to avoid that impair thinking: Dependency on opioids, marijuana, lack of sleep. All have been shown to not only impair thinking, but possibly lead to long-term thinking problems (shrinking of the brain, dementia, Alzheimer’s disease). How impaired thinking leads to sin/disobedience: you won’t obey what you don’t understand or think incorrectly about (Isa 5:13; Jer 4:22; Mat 13:15 “dull” = impaired; Eph 4:17-18). 2) inflamed feelings: “not in sexual immorality” = Avoidance of all things related to or encouraging this capital crime. IOW: avoiding those things that inflame our feelings – most especially those things which are sexual in nature (e.g., entertaining sexual thoughts, viewing or listening to sexually- stimulating media: movies, music etc). Inflammation w/respect to our feelings is most common among those who obey their feelings – i.e., those not avoiding “sensuality” (2Pe 2:18 [NAS] “by fleshly desires, by sensuality” [apposition]; Gal 5:19. = Sensuality is a sin). Sociological studies show that sensuality (life det’d by our feelings) or the constant inflammation of our feelings – even when not specifically related to sexual things – more than often leads in the direction of sexual acts (e.g., gluttony stimulates sexual drive)[4]. This is true even among the animal kingdom – creatures who live completely based on their feelings (e.g., food supply determines sexual activity/birth rates). Hence the reason Peter compares such people (those living according to their feelings) to animals (2Pe 2:10 w/12). How then to avoid inflaming our feelings and the sexual immorality/disobedience that follows: Practice self-control/stop saying “yes” to your flesh in the little things (Act 24:25; Luk 16:10). Also, get rid of your addictions (anything that you will sin to keep is an addiction – e.g., drugs, alcohol, food, video games). By nature, all addictions inflame the feelings/identify us as people enslaved to our feelings. 3) corrupted wills: “quarreling and jealousy” = According to James, jealousy is a main cause of quarreling/sinful fighting (Jam 4:1 w/3:16; See Mat 27:18). The spark however, setting this doomed sequence of disobedient behavior in motion is a corrupted will: the fulfillment of your will (or way) is more important that God’s will or way. Your main mission/motive in life is self not God (Jam 4:2-3). Adopting this as our life’s mission/motive is diametrically opposed to God’s prescribed purpose and laws: everything for the advancement of His glory and kingdom (Rom 11:36). Corrupted wills also happen to those Christians whose loyalties/mission is divided (“one foot in the world, one in the church”). Only those putting God first in their mission and motives are His friends (Jam 4:4 w/8 “Draw near to God” = Make Him your main mission/motive in living). Notice putting God first (versus possessing selfish or corrupted wills) requires the removal of two things: 1) the removal of sinful habits/deeds (“cleanse your hands you sinners = Hands a metaphor for deeds), 2) the removal of doubt w/respect to God and His Word (“purify your hearts, you double-minded” = Hearts are a metaphor for our wills, double-minded a reference to doubts – See Jam 1:8). In summary, you will possess a corrupted will (one not fully committed to God) as long as you hold on to sinful habits and doubts. Example of a sinful habit to avoid that is associated w/both doubt and disobedience: You do not schedule counseling/call pastor to resolve your doubts, to help you find the answers in God’s Word. Removing doubts is a part of renewing our minds (Rom 12:2; Eph 4:23).

4.2. the replication of the person of Jesus in the person of us (14) “put on” [ἐνδύω = to clothe or completely cover – Mat 22:11; Mar 1:6; Luk 24:49] = To replicate – or produce a close copy – captures this idea when the garment/clothing is the person of Jesus. The fact that we (or our person) are wrapped in His person however means that this replicate will carry the unique aspect of seeing not simply a living example of Christ, but what His person looks like when embodied and expressed in the unique person that God has made each of us. It means not the loss of our identity, but seeing to it that our identity is shaped exclusively by Jesus. Hence the reason the followers of Jesus are called “Christians” (Literally, “little christs”). This then is the other necessary key to obeying God’s Law – or conquering what stands in its way – the “flesh” or the gratification of our “desires.” Our job is to be the full-time understudies of Jesus (in theater, an understudy is someone who studies every aspect of another actor so as to function as their replacement). A great place to start in our endeavor to become Jesus’ replicate/understudy: In all things, WWJD?

[1] By government is meant: any entity demonstrating sovereignty or the infrastructure and ability to consistently enforce its laws in the face of local or foreign opposition. This definition of government represents a “biblical hybrid” of modern understandings or criteria of govt recognition (e.g., Montevideo Convention, Declarative Theory of Statehood). The most significant difference between modern views and the biblical record would be the fact that God sees (and has appointed) as legitimate even those governments whose current occupation and control of a particular territory is not approved of by its population or former occupying government (e.g., Israel under Babylon or Rome).

[2] In respect to the pastor’s authority, disciple of the Apostle John, friend of Jesus’ mother Mary and early church father Ignatius writes, "It is fitting that you should run together in accordance with the will of the bishop (anointed pastor) who by God's appointment rules over you…He that refuses to assemble with the church [for the judgment of the bishop] has condemned himself. Let us be careful then not to set ourselves in opposition to the bishop, in order that we may be subject to God…Beloved, be careful to be subject to the bishop and the presbyters [other elders]. For he that is subject to these is subject to Christ, who has appointed them; but he that is disobedient to them is disobedient to Christ Jesus. He that does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him. For he that does not yield to his superiors is self-confident, quarrelsome and proud. God resists the proud. And the proud have greatly transgressed. The Lord says to the priests, 'He that hears you, hears Me; and he that hears Me, hears the Father that sent Me. He who despises you, despises Me; and he that despises Me, despises Him who sent Me…We ought to receive everyone whom the Master of the house sends to be over His household as we would do Him who sent him. It is manifest therefore, that we should look upon the bishop even as we look upon the Lord Himself…It is becoming therefore, that you also should be obedient to your bishop, and contradict him in nothing; for it is a fearful thing to contradict any such person. For no one does [by such conduct] deceive him that is visible, but does in reality seek to mock Him who is invisible. And every such act has respect not to man, but God."

[3] For example see “Why Roman Orgies Weren’t Really A

Thing” by Spencer McDaniel (talesoftimesforgotten.com)

[4] For example, “Female sexual behavior is inhibited by short-and long-term food restriction” (Gill, C.J. and Rissman, E.F.; Physiology and Behavior)

View Details

What about the Jews? (Part 3): God’s behavior toward people (including His covenant people – Jew/Gentile)

God already knows and leads to the truth people whose biggest problem is intellectual not moral.

1.1. The perfect example is the Apostle Paul (1, 1Ti 1:12-14 = Paul was ignorant yet faithful and so received God’s grace)

1.2. This included a few other first century Jews who were likewise faithful during Israel’s apostasy against Jesus (5-6) “a remnant chosen by grace” = A small number of Jews chosen to hear and receive God’s favor of gaining salvation by faith in Christ versus through the OC way (e.g., circumcision, animal sacrifice, adherence to separation and sabbaths – i.e. “on the basis of works”) (e.g., Zechariah and Elizabeth, John the Baptist, Joseph and Mary, the other Apostles and all the Jews of the Jerusalem church who became Christians)

1.3. This was also true during Israel’s apostasy in the days of Elijah (2-4; 1Ki 19:14-18)

1.4. This has always been true (e.g., Neh 9:8; Act 10:34-35 “Truly I understand that God shows no partiality” = Peter realized that people - not God- has always been the answer to the question, “what determines who gets saved?”).

God also knows and will give over to spiritual darkness those in the covenant community (e.g., the church) whose biggest problem is not intellectual but moral.

2.1. (7-10) = The covenant community (“Israel”) whose purpose of existence was to serve God and get to heaven failed through their disobedience and apostasy (“failed to obtain what it was seeking” – i.e., salvation). Only the few (during that first century) who were faithful were spared and received it (“the elect obtained it”). Those in the covenant community whose problem was not intellectual, but moral, God pushed further in the direction of their desired darkness and sin (i.e., He gave them what they were truly “seeking”). He “hardened” them with a “spirit of stupor, eyes that would not see [“eyes…darkened so that they cannot see”] and ears that would not hear” (no longer any ability to see the truth or escape the sin they chose to follow), “their table [has become] a snare and a trap, a stumbling block and a retribution (what they feed on wb poison to their souls – convincing and driving them further in the direction of damnation – Psa 69:21 w/22) …bend[ing] their backs forever” (Psa 69:23, “mak[ing] their loins tremble continually”) = B/C of their moral stubbornness God will not only cause them to go mad but become cowards controlled by fear (including the fear of missing out in this life) (Deu 28:28, 65-67; Rom 1:28; Eph 4:17-19; 2Pe 2:20) IOW: The day of grace for that covenant person is gone.

2.2. that God promises to also harden the Christian (remove His saving grace) if our problem continues to be moral is confirmed by Paul’s warning in (22).

Israel’s (the Jews) “fall” from grace was not total nor final (5w/11a):

3.1. their former apostasy (1st cent. rejection of Christ) does not affect future generations (23-24, 30-32; “consigned” = Handed over to the consequences of their sin – See Rom 1:24, 26, 28; Re: apostasy and future generations still possessing opportunity - Hos 14:1-7; prophecy regarding the restoration of apostate Israel in Jesus’ day – Jer 50:17-20 w/Eze 34:1-16, 23-24. Hence Jesus’ mission - Mat 15:24. PNTM = The children of apostate parents are not automatically apostate. No one loses their opportunity for salvation b/c of the actions of their parents – Eze 18:20).

3.2. God is planning a revival among the Jews that will start when the Gentiles have apostasized (i.e., when they have closed themselves off to being saved) (25-29; “mystery” = God will accomplish such a revival w/o violating the free-wills of the Jews [Hence Paul’s concluding response – 33-36!]; WHEN THIS REVIVAL WILL TAKE PLACE: v25 - “[when] the fullness of the Gentiles have come in” = Nor more/few Gentiles are able to be saved due to the successful propagation of false gospel preaching [Mat 24:11-14 w/Luk 21:24 = Fullness of the Gentiles wb associated w/false prophets preaching a false gospel of lawlessness/loyalty grown cold that wb popular at the end of time1]; HOW THIS REVIVAL WILL TAKE PLACE [v26a - “And in this way all Israel will be saved” = Revival/the majority of Jews - versus a remnant – v5]: v26b - “The Deliverer will…banish ungodliness [false religion/false JUDAISM – i.e. JUDAISM 1.0.] from Jacob” = The Jews will embrace Judaism 2.0. [the version containing Jesus and its NC application of the Law]. Notice the mention of it being associated w/a “covenant” [v27]. The banishing of ungodliness/the taking away of Israel’s apostasy will happen as a result of God successfully establishing His new “covenant” version of Judaism w/them – NOT SOME COMPLETELY NEW RELIGION [i.e. Evangelical Christianity – Roman Catholicism 2.0.]; “As it regards the gospel, they [those 1st cent. Jews rejecting Christ] are enemies for your sake. But as it regards election [God’s salvific plans], they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable” = God’s promise to Abe/Isaac/Jacob to always have their offspring/the Jews in His salvific plan wb fulfilled - See Gen 17:7 [“everlasting covenant” = Covenant until the end of human history/world]; also Deu 7:6-8, 10:14-15; Jer 31:6-20, 35-37, 33:25-26; Hos 11:8-11; Zec 10:6-8; My theory on how God does it = Satan’s big coming out party and revelation regarding Jesus – Rev 20:7-8 w/Isa 27:1-9).

3.3. their acceptance of Jesus will usher in His return and the Reboot (11-15 “life from the dead” = Return of Christ/Reboot – Joh 5:28-29; 1Co 15:52 w/Mat 24:29-31).

What God’s relationship to the Jewish people should teach us about our religion/salvation:

4.1. we do not possess a new religion. Rather God has “grafted” us into the existing Jewish religion (Judaism 2.0) (16-18; Joh 4:22)

4.2. our salvation/relationship w/God is conditioned upon faithfulness. If we do not maintain what we have gained God will cut us off/not spare us (i.e., eternally damn us) in the same way He has many of His former people (19-22; 1Co 10:1-14; Consider how Paul’s words in Romans 11 affect our translation of Rom 8:31-39 = Jesus’ love is not unconditional).

1 Several Jewish apocalyptic sources seem to speak to this (e.g., 4 Ezra 4:35-37; Apoc. Bar. 23:4, 30:2, 75:6; Apoc. Abr. 29:17).

View Details

The Apostle Paul’s God wants all people (or at least, all the Jews) to be saved, whereas the Calvinists’ God does not.

(1) “my heart’s desire…is that they may be saved” = Paul is writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. His desire is therefore also that of God. He desires even the rebellious (those on their way to hell) to turn and be saved. Such desire is in direct violation of Calvinism’s doctrines of Unconditional Election and Limited Atonement which teach that before creating anything, God chose those Christ would die for and be saved as well as those Christ would not die for and be damned. Put another way, Calvinism falsely teaches that it was never God or Christ’s desire to save those who end up going to hell.

Hell will have its share of people who were zealous for God.

(2) = Those Paul speaks of as possessing “zeal (as in zeal for God) but not according to knowledge” were Jews who had rejected Jesus (i.e., Jews on their way to hell). Jesus speaks of similar people in (Joh 16:2-3) = Notice once again, the problem is zeal without knowledge (“they have not known the Father”). PNTM = Zeal does not make you real (as in a real Christian). Lots of people have zeal for God who – because of what they believe, are still on their way to Hell (i.e., they believe a false gospel).

Being unteachable makes you unsavable.

(3) “the righteousness of God” = Jesus (His redemption/propitiation – See 3:21-25); “For being ignorant of (SB: refusing to recognize [ἀγνοέω; 1Co 14:38]; vv17-21) the righteousness of God (Jesus – His redemption/propitiation – See 3:21-25), and seeking to establish their own righteousness, they did not submit to God’s righteousness (again, Jesus)” = The Jews refused Jesus (or faith in Jesus) as God’s new way of gaining justification/salvation, choosing instead to stick with the old way of circumcision, etc. (the works of the law). IOW: They were unteachable which means - as long as they remained in that state - they were also unsavable. PNTM = Getting saved requires you possess a teachable heart to God’s truth even when that truth goes against – or is different – from what you have heard in the past (Evangelicals = 1st century Jews).

The new way of gaining justification/salvation through faith in Jesus means that the old way of gaining such righteousness (i.e., the works of the law) has ended.

4.1. The old way of gaining salvation (the OC “law for righteousness”) has ended/been replaced by the new way of faith in Christ (4).

4.2. Under the old/OC way (“the righteousness that is based on the law”), a person had to do “the commandments” (i.e., perform the works of the law/the clean laws/circumcision etc.) in order to gain justification/salvation (5).

4.3. Under the new/NC way (“the righteousness based on faith”), God requires that we believe in the miraculous message about Jesus without being eyewitnesses to His heavenly exaltation/existence or His resurrection from the dead (6) = Do not require being an eyewitness to Christ’s heavenly existence/exaltation to believe; (7) = Do not also require to be an eyewitness of His resurrection in order to believe; (8) = God’s revelation of these miraculous things establishes your obligation to believe (w/o the need to be an eyewitness). You are instead to put faith in what God says. Hence (9) = Gaining salvation now comes by putting faith in God’s message about Jesus (i.e., that He has been exalted as “Lord” in heaven and that “God raised Him from the dead”).

Paul practiced “Principled Hermeneutics” (The universal, timeless principle established by God’s OT instruction retains its authority under the NC).

5.1. (6-8) = Paul is quoting Deu 30:11-14 according to its established principle: we can know and do what God requires without being eyewitnesses to God’s heavenly glory or His miraculous deeds, NOT its original instruction: the second generation of Israel knew and could do the OC commands -including the works of the law - without like their parents - seeing God in His Shekinah/heavenly (“heaven”) glory or experiencing God’s miraculous deliverance at the Red Sea (“beyond the sea”) (Deu 30:11-14).

5.2. CONSIDER AGAIN how Paul applies this to Jesus: 1) he makes it about Christ’s shekinah/heavenly glory or exaltation to heaven (“bring Christ down”), 2) he makes it about His miraculous deed or resurrection from the dead (“bring Christ up from the dead”). 5.3. HOW WE KNOW PAUL IS APPLYING The PRINCIPLE VERSUS THE ORIGINAL: 1) he makes it about Christ rather than God’s commands (Deu 30:11 vs. Rom 10:6-7), 2) he changes the question “Who will go over the sea?” (Deu 30:13) to “Who will descend into the abyss?”. Neither of those changes wb permissible if Paul were adhering to the original instruction (since they violate what its original meaning), 3) the original instruction was in reference to obeying God’s commands whereas Paul is using it now to refer to faith. B/C Evangelicals do not recognize the enduring authority of God’s established OT principles, they admit confusion over this text (e.g., Doug Moo).

5.3. Other examples of Paul practicing “Principled Hermeneutics” (and by it confirming the enduring authority of God’s established OT principles) (1Co 5:1-5, 9:7-11, 10:1-14). Paul explicitly confirms this as the NT hermeneutic in (Rom 15:4). This is also what Jesus is referring to in (Mat 5:17-18) as demonstrated by His institution of faith as the new application to fulfilling God’s clean law/propitiatory requirements. IOW: the way we fulfill every jot/tittle includes fulfilling the clean laws thru its new application of faith).

To gain salvation (both now and in the future) a person must not only believe in Jesus as their Savior, but also commit their loyalty to Him as “Lord” (King/Master)

(9-13) = Notice that to be saved, Paul requires both belief in Jesus’ role as Savior (“believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead”) and confession/calling upon Him in His role as Lord (King/Master) (“confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord…everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved”). What’s the difference between the two acts? Belief in His role as Savior means you place your trust in His person and work as the means to gaining a right relationship w/God (as the way to be “justified” before God – v10). Confession/calling upon Jesus as Lord however, refers to loyalty – or the commitment we make to submit to His commands. And once again, both are necessary to gain salvation. IOW: you can’t simply believe in Jesus (or what He did on the cross for sin) and get to heaven. We must also commit to obeying Him as our King/Master (Confession as loyalty/commitment to obey His commands - Mat 10:26-33; 2Ti 2:11-12; See also 1Pe 3:21 “appeal to God” = Take a vow of loyalty).

Getting people saved requires:

7.1. we preach the right gospel message (one that requires more than simple belief to be saved – i.e. submission to Jesus as Lord is also necessary) (14) = Notice again, both calling on/confessing and belief are mentioned – i.e., LBS)

7.2. we are ready/equipped to share and defend the gospel (15) “beautiful are the feet” = Ready/equipped are the feet (Isa 52:7; Eph 6:15 “put on the readiness given [or required] by the gospel”)

7.3. we don’t make excuses for - or waste our time w/people whose rejection is clearly moral not intellectual (16-21).

View Details

Paul’s closing words/final principle in Romans 8: nothing outside the Christ’s covenant people can separate them from His covenant love.

The question this prompts for the Jew: Why then have the majority of Christ’s original covenant people – most specifically those Jews living in the first century, been rejected or separated from Christ’s covenant love?1

Paul’s answer not only establishes proper thinking on the subject but also a possible strategy for dealing w/those already offended by our beliefs:

Strong affirmation of shared truths is the divine strategy and starting place for correcting those whose ignorance or misunderstanding have caused them to be strongly offended by your beliefs/words (1-5; e.g., interacting w/Evangelicals).
When covenant people go to hell it is not because: 2.1. God doesn’t care/Jesus didn’t die for them (1-5; v3 = If Limited Atonement is true then the Holy Spirit/Paul qualifies as a better savior than Jesus; Act 20:28) 2.2. God’s Word failed to change them into obedient people (6) “But it is not as though the Word of God has failed” = God’s Word has not failed to change people in the direction of obedience, rather those people failed to obey the changes required by God’s Word; “not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel” = Not all Jews (those whose genealogy can be traced back to Abraham) will be heirs to the promises. And that again because of their volitional choice to reject God’s new requirements for justification/salvation (faith vs. works of the law).2
[Genealogy is not enough]: Being born into the family of God is not enough to qualify as heirs (you must also qualify for His promises) (7-8).
[God is sovereign in His requirements for receiving mercy]: God alone is the One Who decides - and can change, what will be the requirements for receiving His mercy (justification/salvation) and becoming heirs to the promises:

4.1. in re: to Isaac (versus) Ishmael = God decided to change the requirement of: you must be the firstborn to be the heir”, to: you must be the firstborn natural son (or son of the promise) (9)

4.2. in re: to Jacob versus Esau = God decided to change the heirship from the firstborn natural son to his brother (10,12-13) (11) = The reason God “calls” (or makes the decision to put) Jacob before Esau, to change the birthright from the older to the younger before they were born (or “had done [anything] good or bad” or before Esau did it himself by selling his birthright to Jacob), was to reinforce the fact that He still reserves the right to decide or change the requirements of birthright - or who becomes the heir of His promises- which when in respect to spiritual things, refers to salvation. Put another way, God did it “in order that His purpose of election (His plan for receiving birthright/mercy/salvation) would not be bound to what people decide or are committed to (“not because of works”) but (once more) His decision (“Him who calls”). As it re: to “works” being what we are committed to (See 16 “exertion”) = Literally, “running” (YLT = “So, then -- not of him who is willing, nor of him who is running, but of God who is doing [mercy]”; “running” is a metaphor for commitment/devotion - e.g., 1Co 9:26).

1 That Jesus was the God of the Old Covenant and through whom the Jews had experienced His covenant blessings and curses is proven by several passages in both the Old and New Testament (e.g., Jud 1:5; Mal 3:1).

2 What follows is the support for these two truths: 1) genealogy is not enough, 2) God is sovereign in His requirements for receiving mercy, 3) God’s mercy is not available to those who hate Him.

What then Paul is communicating in v11 and 16: God is completely sovereign in His decision as to the requirements of His mercy/salvation. His decision is not swayed or influenced by our wills, what we desire, what we are committed to or where our devotion lies (e.g., the first century Jews’ devotion to genealogy and “works of the law”; e.g., The modern gospel of sincerity = God will save all who are sincere in their desire/beliefs and devotion).

[God’s mercy is not available to those who hate Him]. 5.1. in re: to Esau (14) = Though God’s hatred toward Esau (and choice to give the heirship to Jacob) was not based on anything he had done (11 “works”), it was due to what He saw in Esau’s heart while still in his mother’s womb (Gen 25:23 “two nations” = One for God the other against Him. IOW: God saw that Esau hated him; Isa 48:8) 5.2. in re: to Moses and the Israelites (15 w/Exo 33:19) = His abundant goodness makes Him merciful. His Name is essentially “God of Mercy”. For this reason, the Jews called God’s mercy His “right hand” – or “most dominant trait.”3 Notice however, His Name as the “God of Mercy” is still tied to righteousness (Exo 34:5-7 w/Exo 20:5-6) = God’s mercy is only available to those who love Him (i.e., our love is the pre-requisite). Those who hate Him (i.e., who refuse to submit to His ways/requirements) will eventually be hardened. 5.3. in re: to Pharaoh (16-18 w/Exo 9:13-16) = As part of His abundant goodness, God showed Pharoah the damage He could do in the hopes that he would submit and be able to receive His mercy (“But for this purpose I raised you up, to show you my power, so that my name may be proclaimed in all the earth” = I showed you my power to give you a chance at mercy so that my name [“God of mercy” – Exo 20/33/34] might be proclaimed through you as one who received it). Pharaoh’s hardening came after many attempts by God and Moses. IOW: God only hardens those who continue to reject His goodness by refusing to submit to what He is requiring of them at that time - which in respect to Pharaoh was letting Israel go, in relation to the first century Jews, it was leaving behind the old requirements for justification and embracing the new.
We must (therefore) be careful to never question or be critical of what God chooses to require of us since the problem is with us not Him (His is abundantly good and righteous in all He does!): 6.1. (19-20) = The excuses of the rebellious: It’s not my fault, this is how I was born (“Why does He still find fault?”)? I am not resisting him, why does He hate me (“who can resist His will?”)? How dare we blame God for what is our fault and the result of our faulty choices (Ecc 7:29; Pro 19:3). 6.2. (21 w/Jer 18:1-12) = Whenever God acts in wrath or destruction toward nations or people, it is only because they refused to turn from their sin or stubborn rebellion and submit to Him. IOW: The potter’s right or choice as to how to use the clay (for honorable or dishonorable purposes) is based on its pliability to His will (Eze 18:23, 32, 33:11).
God’s goodness and righteousness includes showing great patience toward those who are rebelling against His requirements: 7.1. in the hope that they will eventually submit and become His beloved people/heirs to His promises (22-26; 2Pe 3:9) 7.2. but will eventually wear out leading to swift judgment (27-29).
The reason then for God/Christ’s separation from many first century Jews is because they refused to pursue justification/mercy according to God’s new requirement which is faith in Christ not the old way of the works of the law (30-33 ) = Notice what makes the difference between the “Gentiles” (those receiving “righteousness”[mercy/salvation]) and “Israel” (those failing to receive “righteousness” [mercy/salvation]) is not God’s choice of them (the view of Calvinism) but which people chose to submit to God’s changed requirements for receiving mercy (“Good-bye Calvinism!”).

3 Aspects of Rabbinic Theology: Major Concepts of the Talmud (Solomon Schechter, p. 322-23

View Details

Sonship is not only a major theme in Scripture but also directly affects the subject of salvation. Understanding sonship is therefore important to understanding the gospel – or how we are made a part of God’s family and receive His eternal inheritance.

View Details

(Romans 15:4) “whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction.” = What timeless instruction is established by what is written? LEGEND: 1) Christianity is Judaism 2.0 (a marriage-covenant relationship of gain and maintain) NOT Roman Catholicism 2.0 ( a merit-based system of earn or burn) (Eze 16:59; Gal 5:6 w/21; Phi 2:12; 2Pe 1:5-11), 2) We gain positional/vertical justification (i.e., enter into a restful state/right standing/saving covenant with God) only through observance of God’s clean or sabbatical laws; those laws whose function is to cleanse/remove the stain/curse of our sin before God): [2.1.] OC = “the works of the law” (atoning sacrifice, a covenant sign [circumcision], atoning holidays [Passover-Pentecost, Yom Kippur], and spiritual separation [unclean foods and people], [2.2.] NC = Faith in Jesus Christ as our once-for-all atoning sacrifice which upholds the other clean/sabbatical laws through its new application/expression of: baptism (covenant sign – Col 2:11-12), the Lord’s Table (atoning holidays – Joh 13:1-8), separation from false Christians, the apostate, and rebellious pagans (spiritual separation – 1Co 5:9-13; 2Co 6:14-7:1; 2Jo 1:9-11), 3) We maintain the grace of continuing to receive positional/vertical justification/propitiation/forgiveness and our restful state/righteous standing/salvation/relationship with God through faithful obedience to His moral commands (practical/horizontal justification – Jam 2:14-26; Rom 6:1-23; Jud 1:21); those laws which accomplish love/being righteous toward God and others – including repentance which means confessing and turning from sin as well as paying the necessary penalties when I sin - Mat 22:36-40; Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:6 w/13-14; As it re: to repentance – Luk 3:1-18; Luk 19:1-10; Lev 6:1-7 w/Mat 5:23-24; Act 20:21 w/26:20 = We must now maintain [keep] the repentance promised when we gained salvation), 4) Faith in Jesus Christ for positional justification is only accepted by God in baptism which regenerates us and communicates our vow of loyalty to repent and faithfully follow all of God’s laws (Joh 3:1-5; Mar 16:15-16 w/Mar 1:15; Tit 3:5; 1Pe 3:21), 5) Besides the children of those already possessing salvation, the only persons welcomed to gain a saving covenant relationship w/God (i.e., positional justification) are those already practicing His moral commands or those promising to repent/turn from their sins and obey (Gen 6:9 w/18; Neh 9:8; Act 10:34-35; Rom 2:26).

View Details

(Romans 15:4) “whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction.” = What timeless instruction (truths/principles) is established by what is written? LEGEND: 1) Christianity is Judaism 2.0 (a marriage-covenant relationship of gain and maintain) NOT Roman Catholicism 2.0 ( a merit-based system of earn or burn) (Eze 16:59; Gal 5:6 w/21; Phi 2:12; 2Pe 1:5-11), 2) We gain positional/vertical justification (i.e., enter into a restful state/right standing/saving covenant with God) only through observance of God’s clean or sabbatical laws; those laws whose function is to cleanse/remove the stain/curse of our sin before God): [2.1.] OC = “the works of the law” (atoning sacrifice, a covenant sign [circumcision], atoning holidays [Passover-Pentecost, Yom Kippur], and spiritual separation [unclean foods and people], [2.2.] NC = Faith in Jesus Christ as our once-for-all atoning sacrifice which upholds the other clean/sabbatical laws through its new application/expression of: baptism (covenant sign – Col 2:11-12), the Lord’s Table (atoning holidays – Joh 13:1-8), separation from false Christians, the apostate, and rebellious pagans (spiritual separation – 1Co 5:9-13; 2Co 6:14-7:1; 2Jo 1:9-11). 3) We maintain positional/vertical justification/our restful state/righteous standing with God/salvation through faithful/continued observance of the clean laws plus faithful obedience to the moral commands (practical/horizontal justification – Jam 2:24); those laws which accomplish love/being righteous toward God and others – including repentance which means confessing and turning from sin as well as paying the necessary penalties when I sin - Mat 22:36-40; Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:6 w/13-14; As it re: to repentance – Luk 3:1-18; Luk 19:1-10; Lev 6:1-7 w/Mat 5:23-24; Act 20:21 w/26:20 = We must now maintain [keep] the repentance promised when we gained salvation). 4) Faith in Jesus Christ for positional justification is only accepted by God in baptism which regenerates us and communicates our vow of loyalty to repent and faithfully follow all of God’s laws (Joh 3:1-5; Mar 16:15-16 w/Mar 1:15; Tit 3:5; 1Pe 3:21). 5) Besides the children of those already possessing salvation, the only persons welcomed to gain a saving covenant relationship w/God (i.e., positional justification) are those already practicing His moral commands or those promising to repent/turn from their sins and obey (Gen 6:9 w/18; Neh 9:8; Act 10:34-35; Rom 2:26).

View Details

(Romans 15:4) “whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction.” = What timeless instruction (truths/principles) is established by what is written?

*Special note regarding the two forms of justice/justification necessary for gaining and maintaining a saving covenant relationship with God: 1) positional (vertical) = Right standing w/God gained thru the clean laws and covenant signs (OC: sacrifice, circumcision, ceremonial separation//NC: faith-expressing baptism in Christ [our sacrifice, circumcision and ceremonial separation]); 2) practical/penal (horizontal) = Faithfulness to the moral commands (including penalties) and covenant signs as maintenance (OC: sacrifice and ceremonial separation//NC: LT).

View Details

Safely navigating our souls to the shores of heaven requires we spy the lies that lead to shipwreck and the truth those lies often conceal. You don’t have what it takes to live for God and get to heaven (2Pe 1:3). The Devil poses no threat to the Christian (1Pe 5:8). The consensus of pagans, […]

The post Spy The Lie – Part 5: Law/Grace appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

The post Spy The Lie – Part 4: Spiritual Authority appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

The post Spy The Lie – Part 3: Discerning Truth appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

The post Spy The Lie – Part 2: The Devil appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

Safely navigating our souls to the shores of heaven requires we spy the lies that lead to shipwreck and the truth those lies often conceal. You don’t have what it takes to live for God and get to heaven. 1.1. The fact that God will judge everyone according to their deeds proves we have what […]

The post Spy The Lie – Part 1 appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

(Mat 6:19-24) In Matthew 6:19-24 Jesus reveals the power our discretionary and belief loyalties possess not only for determining who we truly serve (who we are loyal to as King), but also for producing the salvation-essential attributes of affection (for God) and conviction (in regard to the Word of God). Our confidence that loyalty […]

The post The Power of Loyalty – Part 2 appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

(Mat 6:19-24) In Matthew 6:19-24 Jesus reveals the power our discretionary and listening loyalties possess not only for determining who we truly serve (who we are loyal to as King), but also producing the salvation-essential attributes of affection (for God) and conviction (in regard to the Word of God). Our confidence that loyalty is indeed […]

The post The Power of Loyalty – Part 1 appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

Act 17:22-31 These verses represent Paul’s Mars Hill (Areopagus) address to the Athenians. In it we find six “shiny” words to think/talk about when you spend time after the sermon stuffing your face and fellowshipping for Easter. Why I refer to them as “shiny” = They are words that (in their context) evoke the kinds […]

The post Six Shiny Words For Easter appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

The King’s math 1.1. Christ = King (Luk 23:1-2) 1.2. Love = Loyalty (Joh 14:15) 1.3. Upgrade = Sacrifice (Phi 2:5-11) 1.4. Holiness = Intolerance (of sin) (2Co 7:1) 1.5. My King is King > All other Kings (gods included) (Mat 28:18). 1.6. My King’s reboot > than your best life now. (Rev 21:1-5). 1.7. […]

The post The King’s Code appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

Nobody gets to heaven by themselves. Why? Because Christianity is a team sport. We need to be on the King’s team, the church. More than that, we need to be doing our part to see that the King’s team is a success. Here then is what you need to know about the King’s team and […]

The post The King’s Team appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

Though we cannot know the exact day or hour (Mat 24:36), the evidence strongly suggests that we be prepared for our King to return in approximately 25 years. Year 6000 will mark the end of human history and the return of our King. (2Pe 3:1-10): 1.1. We need to remember that Jesus and the apostles […]

The post The Return of the King appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

(Act 5:42) = Notice there are two different venues where the apostles met with the church for teaching and preaching: 1) “Temple” = larger venue (Act 5:12 – “Solomon’s Portico” = Court area outside the Temple): On the Lord’s Day, the entire church came together for corporate worship (~15k people), 2) “house to house” = […]

The post Covenant Life Groups appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

Jesus was the perfect man. But what kind of man (or human) was He? What things did He care about? What things did He not care about? Where or with whom did He spend His time? How did He respond or react to others? How did He come across to others? How did people view […]

The post Meet Your King – Part 3 appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

The post Meet Your King – Part 2 appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

The post Meet Your King – Part 1 appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

Albert Einstein once said, “if you want to live a happy and productive life then you need to tie that life to a goal.” With such words, Scripture agrees. Proverbs 29:18 states, “where there is no vision (or goal), the people perish”. Simply possessing a goal however is not enough. It needs to be the […]

The post The Christian Goal appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

Because God’s wisdom has always been counter-cultural (1Co 1:20-30), the veracity of the church’s message has always required she also possess the ability to refute the folly raised by the culture and its fools (Pro 26:4-5; Tit 1:9). “There are many interpretations.” 1.1. IOW: We cannot be confident that what we believe (or how […]

The post Answering The Fool appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

(Joh 10:22) Christmas is sometimes referred to as the “season of lights.” And though Jesus never celebrated Christmas, He did (as our text indicates) celebrate another “winter” holiday which took place at roughly the same time, one also associated with lights: “The Feast of Dedication” or “Hanukkah” (Heb. to dedicate). For eight nights (during this […]

The post The Winter Holiday Jesus Celebrated appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

Having finished our discussion on Jesus’ radical view on family, it is important that we (now) consider its application to our everyday lives. In other words, that we understand what doing family according to Jesus it looks like. With regard to the world’s values or expectations, conversations with outsiders, and fellowship with those not welcomed […]

The post Doing Family According To Jesus – Part 3: Correction, Trust, & Loyalty appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

(1Pe 1:1-3) That God’s mercy is great toward us is proven by the fact that He designed a backup plan to save us if messed up the original plan. 1.1. (1-2a) = According to Peter, God’s plan to save people like us (to “elect” “exiles” like us – people previously w/o God’s mercy – i.e. […]

The post Three BIG truths about salvation found in three LITTLE verses appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

The post Doing Family According To Jesus – Part 2: Major Life Decisions appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

Having finished our discussion on Jesus’ radical view on family, it is important that we (now) consider its application to our everyday lives. In other words, that we understand what doing family according to Jesus it looks like. You reject the family values or expectations established by the world. 1.1. (Luk 9:57-62) = Given Luke’s […]

The post Doing Family According to Jesus – Part 1 appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

Why talk about the subject of family? Two reasons: 1) Because Americans – including professing Christian Americans, are genuinely interested in the subject. From a sociological perspective, studies on the family have produced over 50,000 books. From an identity perspective, over 70% of Americans see their identity (or commitment) to their biological family as […]

The post Family According To Jesus appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

Why (at 24 years old) did I make such a decision and continue to follow Him today (no matter what the world does or how difficult it might be at times)? (3 reasons): 1) what I knew about myself, 2) what I knew about the world, 3) what I knew about the future. What […]

The post Why I Choose To Follow Jesus appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

Proper biblical interpretation requires two steps: 1) discovering WGO? (what’s going on?), 2) discerning WTP? (what’s the point?).

WTP (what’s the point)? = What timeless, universal principles of wisdom are established based on WGO (what’s going on)?

Many preachers today discount (or outright reject) the need to discover WTP? believing it to be the Holy Spirit’s job (e.g. John MacArthur believes this and those who graduate from Master’s seminary are taught this – i.e. it is the Holy Spirit’s job [not the pastor] to apply the principles established by the text).
The most obvious reason for people not pursuing WTP? in their study of the Bible is that it takes more time and mental energy than people are willing to give.

2.1. Discerning WTP? will often require as much – if not more, time than discovering WGO?

2.2. Hence the reason David says what he does in (Psa 119:97-99 “understanding” [Heb. Sawkal/Biyn– wisdom/principles of wisdom]) = Notice what David he does to gain this (“your law…is my meditation all the day…your testimonies are my meditation” = David spent lots of mental energy and time thinking about what is being communicated in God’s word). See also (v130 “unfolding of your words” = The discernment of WTP?; “gives light” –i.e. it “impart” [gives] understanding [principles of wisdom] to the “simple” [the unwise/fool/stupid – Pro 30:2-5])

The reason discerning WTP? takes so much time and mental energy is b/c of the way God chose to write the Bible.

God chose to write in such a way that most of those timeless/universal principles in the bible are not obvious or apparent. This is what makes the Bible different than other books. It remains (for the most part) undigested as to its principles whereas other books are the digested thoughts/principles of the author (e.g. Over 70% of the OT is either narrative or prophetic in its genre —e.g. Gen 33:1-3).

*(In my opinion) a big help to discerning WTP? (or figuring out the timeless, universal principles of wisdom) whether it be w/the Bible or life is done through reading (digested) books (or books where you can see how the author is working thru and establishing principles).

Harry S. Truman (“not all readers are leaders, but all leaders, read”)

That being said, discerning WTP? is not optional.

4.1. This is a part of what it means to seek God with all of our hearts (the key to finding Him – i.e. seeing the value in following Him) (Jer 29:13)

4.2. It is what we must do if we want the wisdom to avoid temporal and eternal pitfalls and the ability to truly help others (Pro 2:1-20, 3:13, 23:23, 24:3)

4.3. It is also what pastors are commanded to do in their ministries (2Ti 2:7) “think(ing) over” what has been said (i.e. putting the extra time and mental energy into discerning WTP?) is what is required if we want the Lord to give us (His pastors) “understanding in everything”.

Discerning WTP? is exemplified in the teaching of Jesus.

(Mat 19:1-3, 4-5 w/6 [WTP?])

Discerning WTP? is (also) imitated by Jesus’ Old and New Testament teachers/shepherds.

(Neh 8:7-8; 1Co 9:9 w/1-8 and 10-11 [WTP?]; Consider also Rom 15:4 “whatever was written in former days” = The OT; “was written for our instruction” = It contains the timeless/universal principles we need for “endurance” and “encouragement” and so we can have eternal “hope”)

Jesus and the prophets reveal justice, mercy, and faithfulness to be the foundation of most principles communicated in the bible, therefore, providing a helpful guide in our process of discernment.

7.1. In regard to Jesus (Mat 23:23) “weightier matters of the law” = Where the focus in God’s Word resides. One or more of these three moral categories (justice, faithfulness, or mercy) will be undergirding the majority of principles communicated in the Scriptures; “neglecting the others” = Those principles not associated with justice, faithfulness, and mercy. Those that represent the minority of God’s Word (are also not to be ignored). BUT AGAIN, the majority wb associated with faithfulness, justice, and mercy. Which means this is where we should start/what we should assume when discerning WTP?

7.2. In regard to the prophets we see these same three moral categories coming up as the focus of all God’s instruction and (and therefore) expectations for us (Mic 6:8; Zec 7:9-10; Isa 1:17)

7.3. That justice, mercy, and faithfulness are the foundation of the majority of God’s instruction/principles should come as no surprise since they are at the heart of God’s character (and the bible is His self-disclosure) (Psa 35:5-6)

So again, when we are attempting to discern WTP?, we should think in terms of these three moral categories (justice, faithfulness, or mercy) since (once more) this is the main focus –or the main foundation for the majority of principles established in the Bible.

Examples

8.1. (Gen 1:1) = The universe is not eternal (what evolution teaches) but created by the One Who is (Heb 11:3) [category: faithfulness]

8.2. (Deu 19:21) = The punishment must fit the crime [category: justice]

8.3. (Deu 20:19-20) = Environmental stewardship is a moral obligation (our assessment on j-day will include how we treated the earth and its other creatures (Pro 12:10) [category: faithfulness/justice/mercy]

8.4. (Jer 44:16-18) = What a fool believes, he sees (versus what God calls us to: what you see, you believe; Doobie bros song; confirmation bias) [category: faithfulness]

8.5. (Hag 2:11-14) = We can be guilty of sin by our association w/sinful people or things (2Jo 1:9-11) [category: faithfulness/justice]

8.6 (Zec 7:13) = God responds in kind [category: justice]

8.7. (Mat 11:1-6 w/Isa 8:14-15) = Doubts are shored up by facts not feelings [category: faithfulness]

8.8. (Phi 1:27-28) = Letting those who oppose the sound gospel know that we (as the church) stand as a firm, unified and fearless front is a clear sign that we are worthy of salvation and they of destruction [category: faithfulness]

8.9. (Phm 1:10) = Christians always stand up for their brothers’ welfare or reputation (Gen 14:1-14) [category: faithfulness]

8.10. (1 Jo 4:1) = Might does not make right [category: faithfulness]

The post Biblical Interpretation: What’s The Point? appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

The goal of all biblical interpretation is to discover the timeless, moral principle being established (“What’s the point?” [WTP]). The reason every Christian should be striving to do this is because this is how we grow in our relationship with God. We do it by discovering Who He is through the principles He has established in His Word (by discovering WTP?). The bible is God’s self-disclosure: the means to understanding Him – or getting to know Him, so that we will trust Him, obey Him – and be passionate about following Him. Learning how to interpret the bible is therefore not a hobby –or something that only those who like reading books or studying grammar and history do for fun. It is again, essential to every Christian to grow in their relationship w/God. Hence the reason a person’s lack of trust (or obedience) to God is often (if not always) proportional to their neglect in attempting to discover WTP? (e.g. Mat 22:29 = Sadducees’ distrust/disobedience directly tied to their failure to “understand” WTP? when it came to Scripture – and in turn, “the power of God”). To discover WTP? (however), first, requires the mental effort (and work) of understanding WGO? [“What’s going on?”]. The following represents what must be among our most basic considerations if we are to understand WGO?:

Biblical Interpretation: What’s Going On? – Part 1

Biblical Interpretation: What’s Going On? – Part 2

Biblical Interpretation: What’s Going On? – Part 3

Who was the original audience? (it’s not you or me – e.g. Jer 29:11)
What was the culture or their cultural biases? (e.g. their view of children [as cheap labor and security] – e.g. Psa 127)
How is the word/phrase being used (or what is it associated w/) in the book? (“works of the law” [a reference to the OT clean laws versus earning our way to heaven]- e.g. Rom 3:28)
How is this action or idea used elsewhere that might give additional insight into its meaning? (e.g. faith [baptism] – e.g. 1Pe 3:21 – “baptism now saves you”; Act 2:38 – “repent and be baptized”; Gal 3:27 – “as many of you were baptized into Christ have put on Christ”)
Am I dealing with an ancient idiom? (“him who has an ear let him hear” – those who are seeking righteousness and welcome to God – e.g. Mat 11:15)
Have I practiced attention to the details? (Gal 6:2 = “gentleness” in restoration – not discipline)
Have I vetted my conclusions based on their consequences? (Gen 6:1-4 = If “sons of God” refer to fallen angels then God is guilty of sin since He gave them sexual organs and desires w/no ability to fulfill their purpose – Mat 22:30)
Is this an allusion to something in the OT? (Joh 8:20-24 an allusion to Zec 8:23 and Christianity as a very Jewish religion in how it functions)
9. Have I looked for parallels or parallel versions for additional information? (OT and NT)

(For example)

9.1. In the OT (1Ch 21:1 w/Jam 1:13 [?] w/2Sa 24:1 = 1Ch 21:1 is not teaching that God tempted David to sin. God does not tempt anyone (Jam 1:13). He instead allowed Satan to entice (or temp) David to rely on the strength/number of his troops rather than God (bc of David’s prior sins and God’s subsequent anger – Pro 22:14 “the mouth of forbidden women is a deep pit; he w/whom the Lord is angry will fall into it – i.e. God will not protect those who continue to covet a particular sin but allow it to come and capture you. IOW: God gives us what we desire – good or evil).

9.2. In the NT (Mar 10:1-12 w/Mat 19:1-9 = Divorce for any reason is not prohibited. Sexual immorality is the exception.)

I am familiar with the genre (or how it works)?

(For example) prophecy

10.1. Big on signs, symbols and metaphor (Rev 1:1 “made it known” = σημαίνω) = To reveal by way of signs, symbols or metaphor (LXX – Dan 2:30 of 28-44 [σημαίνω])

(e.g.) the day of the Lord/the Lord coming on the clouds =

The actual day of Christ’s return or final judgment (1Th 5:2; 2Pe 3:10-12) is often used as a metaphor to refer to God’s temporal judgment against dignitaries or nations in the form of human or (even) insect invasion (Isa 13:1-16 = Invasion by the Medes/Persians (vv17-19); Joe 2:1-11 = Locust invasion; Amo 5:18-20 = The Assyrian invasion and exile of Israel//Psa 104:3; Isa 19:1 = Coming civil war, corrupt princes and [eventually] invasion by the Babylonians and Persians [vv2-3]; Psa 18:10-11 = David’s deliverance from king Saul; Psa 104:3; Mat 24:29-31, 26:64 and Rev 1:7 = 70 A.D.).

10.2. Multiple and diverse fulfilments w/majority of relevancy to original audience (Rev 1:1-3 “soon take place…the time is near”; Mat 24:34 “this generation will not pass away”; Isa 7:10-16 w/8:3-4 then [700 yrs to Mat 1:23]).

What many Evangelicals do w/the prophetic book of Revelation (bc they do not recognize/follow what the genre prescribes or demands in order to interpret correctly) : They fail to acknowledge the earlier “day of the Lord/the Lord coming on the clouds” language (in the OT) and apply a strictly futurist-literal interpretation w/no relevance to the original audience to those passages found in the NT (i.e. all prophecy in the book takes place thousands of years after its original audience – which means no real relevancy to them). They also fail to treat the rest of the things mentioned in the book from the prescribed symbolic (and OT allusory) viewpoint. As a result, the locusts w/power like scorpions in Rev 9:3 become Apache helicopters and the bloody sea of Rev 16:3 becomes the overgrowth of algae known as a red tide).

Do I understand the backstory?

11.1 (Mat 5:48)

The backstory = (Mat 5:43-47) = Jesus is demanding that we treat all people –including our enemies righteously (i.e. that we “love” them also) since this is how God functions. He too treats all people righteously (the “evil” and “good”) as demonstrated by His provision of the “sun” and “rain” for their crops.

How this helps us understand the text = We are to be perfect in who we love/treat righteously (which is all people, good or bad) not how we love. IOW: it is perfection in scope not behavior – -how Evangelicals misinterpret this passage (“God calls us to be perfect in our behavior/obedience.”)

11.2 (Mat 19:16-17)

The backstory = Jesus’ ministry was to the Jews (Mat 15:24). This means unless otherwise indicated, we are to assume those Jesus interacts with are Jews –or those already in covenant relationship with God (i.e. not needing to gain a relationship w/God)

How this helps us understand the text = Jesus is reinforcing that if this Jewish man (already in covenant w/God) wants to get to heaven, he needs to maintain what he has gained (i.e. be faithful to “keep the commandments”) – Jesus is playing a cruel joke by setting up (or reinforcing) a standard of earning your way to heaven He knows this man cannot achieve (The Evangelical interpretation)

11.3. (Act 15:19-21, 28)

The backstory = In the first century (and in most cities) Gentiles bought their meat from pagan temples. The meat came from animals that were killed in a cruel way, their blood not fully drained and their deaths often in front of temple prostitutes performing sexual acts to their false god.

How this helps us understand the text = The apostles on not prohibiting several things – just one, the purchase of meat from pagan temples (something common among Gentiles living in the cities). Why? Though it was still only a piece of meat (there are no gods beside true God, 1Co 8:4), it would be an immediate hindrance to Jews receiving the gospel. As such, we need to place a colon after “by” in verse 20 and “sacrifice” in verse 29).

11.4. (Psa 51:1-19)

The backstory = (See the [inspired] intro to the Psalm)

How this helps us understand the text = David is out of covenant w/God bc of his capital crime with Bathsheba (Hence v 12). As a result, God will NOT receive his “burnt offering” (v16) (i.e. will not grant atonement/forgiveness) until David does repentance in attitude and action (vv17-18). Then God will accept such atoning sacrifices from David and grant him forgiveness and restoration to the covenant (v19) versus casting David away in apostasy (v11). The fact that David is praying for such forgiveness (vv1-2, 7-10), confessing his sin and God’s justice for his sin (vv3-6), also TEACHES US that THIS IS WHAT GOD ALLOWS for those out of covenant IF THEY are indeed seeking to be right again w/God through repentance in attitude and action (IOW: Pro 28:9 and “those who have turned their ear away from listening to the law” [or the “wicked” in Pro 15:8 and 29] does not include those out of covenant if they are seeking righteousness and repentance).

The post Biblical Interpretation: What’s Going On? – Part 4 appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

The goal of all biblical interpretation is to discover the timeless, moral principle being established (“What’s the point?” [WTP]). The reason every Christian should be striving to do this is that this is how we gain or grow in our relationship with God. We do it by discovering Who He is through the principles He has established in His Word (by discovering WTP?). The bible is God’s self-disclosure: the means to understanding Him – or getting to know Him, so that we will trust Him, obey Him – and be passionate about following Him). Learning how to interpret the bible is therefore not a hobby –or something that only those who like reading books or studying grammar and history do for fun. It is again, essential to every Christian to gain and grow in their relationship w/God. Hence the reason a person’s lack of trust (or obedience) to God is often (if not always) proportional to their neglect in attempting to discover WTP? (e.g. Mat 22:29 = Sadducees’ distrust/disobedience directly tied to their failure to “understand” WTP? when it came to Scripture – and in turn, “the power of God”). To discover WTP? (however), first, requires the mental effort (and work) of understanding WGO? [“What’s going on?”]. The following represents what must be among our most basic considerations if we are to understand WGO?:

Biblical Interpretation: What’s Going On? – Part 1

Biblical Interpretation: What’s Going On? – Part 2

Who was the original audience? (it’s not you or me)
What was the culture or their cultural biases? (e.g. their view of children [as cheap labor and security] or women working outside of the home [not acceptable])
How is the word/phrase being used (or what is it associated w/) in the book? (“works of the law” [a reference to the OT clean laws versus earning our way to heaven])
How is this action or idea used elsewhere that might give additional insight into its meaning? (e.g. belief [baptism] and love [loyalty], holiness [what you tolerate]) (another example)

4.5. The idea of prophecy existing today (i.e. that the supernatural/sign gifts continue today) (e.g. Act 2:17-18). If we allow our study of this phenomenon to extend to the OT (as it should), we would realize that any person claiming to prophesy or be a prophet after 70 A.D. is false and therefore guilty of a capital crime (Deu 13) (Zec 12:2 w/13:1-3).

Am I dealing with an ancient idiom? (a stiff-necked person who urinates against the wall = a stubborn person who is male [versus female]) (another example)

(Mat 11:15) “He who has ears to hear, let him hear” = A reference to those who are welcome to God – i.e. those whose hearts are teachable and ready to submit to God’s truth (irrespective of how many “sacred cows” may have to die to do so) [sacred cows = modern idiom referring to beliefs we hold as not only true but vital to our current identity, way of life or expectations for the future. As a Christian, the only “sacred cow” we should possess are the principles established in God’s Word —since to do that means that the only sacred cow you ultimately possess is God Himself. Remember, the bible is His self-disclosure. So to understand and follow it correctly [which is what interpreting it correctly accomplishes], is to understand and follow God correctly (i.e. to possess the kind of relationship w/Him that is faithful, fruitful, satisfying, and saving).

Have I practiced attention to the details? (last week we looked at 1Ti 6:10 “love of money” versus “money” as evil, and Gal 6:2 “gentleness” in restoration, not discipline). (ANOTHER EXAMPLE in this respect)

6.3. (Mat 9:9-13): 1) Lack of attention to the details yields this interpretation = Jesus liked to hang out/have fellowship with unfaithful/flaky Christians (v10 – “many tax collectors and sinners were reclining at the table with Jesus…v11 – ‘your teaches eats with tax collectors and sinners’”). 2) Applying proper attention to the details (however) shows this to be the correct understanding = Jesus’ reason for having interaction was to “call” them (the “sinners”) back to righteousness. His purpose, therefore, was corrective – not comfort, penal – not pleasure.

Have I vetted my conclusions based on their consequences? (last week we looked at Act 2:38-39 on baptism and Gen 6:1-4 in re: to the sons of God)

(ANOTHER COUPLE OF EXAMPLES worth mentioning here – these I would distinguish from the others as “contextual vetting – meaning that the larger context of the book – or what is said later in the book [or text] is something that we need to be aware of as possible support – OR “squash factor” to what we are initially considering as our conclusion to a given text)

7.5. (Mat 7:1) = Jesus is prohibiting all forms of judgment (or condemnation) of other people.

The consequence of this understanding = I have no ability to put into practice the instruction Jesus gives 5 verses later (in verse 6 “Do not give to dogs what is holy, and do not throw your pearls before pigs, lest they trample them underfoot and turn and attack you”) since to do so requires that I judge (or identify) people as fitting in this (very condemning) category of “dogs” and “pigs”.

The correct understanding = Jesus’ injunction on judgment in verse 1 is to be understood in light of what is said in the remainder of His instruction on the subject (which extends through verse 6). This means that Jesus is not prohibiting all judgment, just wrong forms of judgment (such as hypocrisy).

7.6. (1Th 1:4 w/Eph 1:3-4) = Each individual Christian was chosen by God to be saved –and that before God even created them, which means there is no way they can lose their salvation.

The consequence of this understanding = Paul is abusing people by scaring them about things that could never happen to them (1Th 3:1-4; Eph 5:1-7).

The correct understanding = Being chosen (or saved) by God (even if it were true that this happened for every single Christian before God created everything – which is not who Paul is referring to when he says that [the “you” refers to the church – not individuals])… NONE of that (being chosen by God etc) negates the possibility of losing it through our actions. Such choosing and saving on the part of God simply heightens that responsibility seeing how gracious it is. IOW: Paul’s words are meant to motivate us in our efforts to faithfulness (“don’t screw up the amazing and merciful gift that has been afforded to you”).

Is this an allusion to something in the OT?

Allusion (def.) = A reference to previous words or actions whose meaning has bearing on what’s currently being communicated.

A large part of what is said in the New is an allusion to something in the Old (there are over 4K OT allusions in the NT. That’s over 50% of everything said in the NT). Some of those allusions are obvious but many are not. This means anytime we are reading the NT, we need to ask the question, “Is this particular set of verses (or chapters) alluding to something in the OT? And when that is the case, going back to that OT text since WGO in that OT will determine WGO in our NT text.

So many hack-job interpretations of the New Testament (think evangelicals) are the result of ignorance in this respect –or an outright refusal to believe there is any connection between what is said (or happening) in the New Testament and what has been said or happened in the Old Testament. Such is the case with evangelical pastor Charles Stanley’s evangelical pastor-son, Andy Stanley- who recently called for Christians to do away with the Old Testament. He said (and I quote)

“Jesus’ new covenant, His covenant with the nations, His covenant with you, His covenant with us, can stand on its own two nail-scarred resurrection feet. It does not need propping up by the Jewish (i.e. OT) scriptures.

The Bible (meaning again, the OT) did not create Christianity. The resurrection of Jesus created and launched Christianity. Your whole house of Old Testament cards can come tumbling down. The question is, did Jesus rise from the dead? And the eyewitnesses said he did.” (And you thought I was just making this stuff up! “The evangelicals aren’t really THAT bad”)

(Some examples then of OT allusion we need to understand to properly determine WGO in the NT):

8.1. Mat 3 and 4: Jesus’ baptism and wilderness temptations. They are an allusion to Israel’s baptism in the Red Sea and wilderness wandering/testing (in Exo 14 -17 and Num 20-21).

This means that we are to interpret these actions/events as Jesus establishing the new covenant Israel (in fulfillment of Jer 31).

8.2. Mat 5: Jesus ascending the mountain/hill to give the people God’s law. These events are an allusion to Moses ascending mt. Sinai (in Exo 24) to give Israel God’s law.

This means we are to identify Jesus as the New Moses (in fulfillment of Deu 18).

8.3. (Mat 21:12-13) “house of prayer”: The fact that we are dealing w/an OT allusion sb obvious given the words, “it is written”. The words that follow come from (Isa 56:6-7) = God promises a time when the Gentiles will be allowed to come into His temple and make supplication and sacrifice (IOW: they wb received as His people).

Plugging that back into then our understanding of our text means = What Jesus is doing through His actions (of cleansing the Temple) and words about God’s house being a “house of prayer” is not a concern that there be enough quiet space in God’s house so that people can pray, but that there be space in the Temple for the Gentiles (who – like the Jews, would soon have their prayers heard by God since God was opening the way for them to become His people). Why that directly related to Jesus’ actions with the moneychangers? BC the place where they had set up shop was in the court of the Gentiles. Their actions, therefore, were a communication of just the opposite (the Gentiles are not – or will not be, welcome to God).

8.4. (Luk 5:1-9) “catching men”: An allusion to (Jer 16:16-17) = The “many fishers” (like the “many hunters”) refer to the Babylonians – who through their actions of killing and capture, would be bringing unfaithful Israel to judgment.

Plugging that back into then our understanding of our text means = Jesus is calling Peter (and the other disciples) to a ministry of judgment: of confronting and condemning unfaithful Christians/Christianity (versus winning people to Christ – which is how these Jesus words regarding “catching men” are most often translated). Paul calls us (as Christians today) to the same ministry (Eph 5:11). Notice (btw) what qualified Peter for such (an important ministry: he (first) recognized his own sin.

8.5. John 4:20-24 “neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father…for salvation is from the Jews”: An allusion to (Zec 8:23) = In the future (or under the NC to come), many Gentiles will realize that the Jewish God (the “lord of hosts in Jerusalem”) is true God and will therefore establish their own places of worship (“ten men from the nations of every tongue” – Gen 18) in accordance with – or consistent w/the religion (or salvation) of the Jews (“shall take hold of the robe of a Jew, saying, ‘Let us go with you, for we have heard that God is with you’”).

Plugging that back into then our understanding of our text means = Jesus is not only announcing that the time of the Gentiles seeking and setting up their own places of worship to God has come (“neither on this mountain nor that mountain”), but that (if they are legitimate), their religion (or salvation) will be consistent w/the already existing Jewish religion (most especially as it relates to salvation [“salvation is from the Jews”]) –versus something new—or the antithesis of what God established for the Jews (e.g. evangelicals and Andy Stanley [“Christianity does not need propping up by the Jewish (i.e. OT) scriptures. The Bible (meaning again, the OT) did not create Christianity. The resurrection of Jesus created and launched Christianity. Your whole house of Old Testament cards can come tumbling down.”]; God has changed His moral requirements for salvation – our obedience is no longer necessary).

The post Biblical Interpretation: What’s Going On? – Part 3 appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

The goal of all biblical interpretation is to discover the timeless, moral principle being established (“What’s the point?”) (1Co 9:7-11). To do that, however, requires we (first) determine the context (“What’s going on?”). The following represents what must be among our most basic considerations:

Who was the original audience? (it’s not you or me)
What was the culture or their cultural biases? (e.g. their view of children [as cheap labor and security] or women working outside of the home [not acceptable])
How is the word/phrase being used (or what is it associated w/) in the book? (“works of the law” [a reference to the OT clean laws versus earning our way to heaven])
How is this action or idea used elsewhere that might give additional insight into its meaning? (e.g. belief [baptism] and love [loyalty])

4.3. Wisdom in contrast to trusting one’s own mind (Pro 28:26) = According to Pro 2:1-7, “wisdom” is the product of two things (or God gives it to the person who): 1) patiently and consistently seeking to understand God’s laws/ways (i.e. the principles established by what is communicated in God’s Word versus simply knowing what is communicated, 2) is upright (i.e. actively submitting and changing according to God’s ways/laws). This means that the person who “trusts in his own mind” is not just a person who is confident in what he knows or his ability to think –but who is confident in such things yet not patiently seeking to understand God’s laws/way and submit (or change) in accordance with them.

4.4. Holiness (or set apart to God) (Heb 12:14) = When considered through the rest of Scripture, what becomes clear is that this term (or command) has more to do with what we tolerate than what we preach (e.g. 2Co 6:17-7:1). Both are important (but again), holiness is a term communicating – or concentrated on the former, what we tolerate. And since this is (according to the writer of Hebrews) a crucial component to salvation (or seeing the Lord), this must also be what defines our lives (or the church we attend). So many people miss this when assessing the legitimacy of a particular church. They assess them only by what they preach when they should also (and more importantly) be assessing them by what they tolerate. This was Jesus’ concern in regard to the churches found in Revelation. Who makes the list as acceptable to Christ drastically changes (or is reduced) based not so much on what they preach, but what/who they tolerate (e.g. Rev 2:18-20). Applying this new insight in regard to holiness to the churches of today, “How many are tolerating sexual sin among their members – i.e. not disciplining such individuals for their actions? How many who claim to be biblical churches are actually NOT (or in deep trouble of having their lampstand removed) because of such toleration?”

Am I dealing with an ancient idiom?

Idiom = An expression common and known to a particular culture at a particular time whose meaning cannot often be deduced literally or logically (“it’s raining cats and dogs” = it raining really hard!). The people in biblical times had idiomatic ways of speaking about things (as part of their culture) just as we do (in our culture) today

(Examples from Scripture)

5.1. A less obvious example: the communication of “hate” = This term doesn’t always refer to abhorring, despising or desiring that person be dead (Gen 27:41 or 37:4-8). It can also be used idiomatically to refer to loving someone less (Gen 29:30-34 w/Luk 14:26 or Rom 9:13 w/v12).

5.2. The more obvious examples: 1) “beginning of his strength” (Deu 21:17) = firstborn child, 2) “one who urinates against a wall” (1Sa 25:22) = A male, 3) “gird up the loins” (2Ki 4:29; 1Pe 1:13) = prepare for action; 4) “stiffens his neck” or “stiff-necked (Pro 29:1; Exo 32:9 w/Act 7:51) = stubborn/unteachable/resistive to change or instruction/unrepentant (the same is being communicated when someone is depicted as having a “hard forehead – e.g. Eze 3:7), 5) your eye is good/evil (Mat 6:22-23) = you are generous/stingy.

Have I practiced attention to the details?

(For example)

6.1. (1Ti 6:10) 1) Lack of attention to the details yields this interpretation = Money is evil and therefore we should not desire to have it.

2) Applying proper attention to the details (however) shows this to be the correct understanding = It is the “love of money” that is evil – or the “root of all evil” (notice again the text).

This means there is nothing wrong w/ money in and of itself. As a matter of fact, money (according to Solomon in Ecc 10:19) is “the answer to everything” (i.e. the solution to many of life’s problems).

6.2. (Gal 6:2): 1) Lack of attention to the details yields this interpretation = Don’t be harsh with those caught in sin. Instead, show “gentleness” in your discipline no matter the crime.

2) Applying proper attention to the details (however) shows this to be the correct understanding = We are to show “gentleness” in how we “restore” people – not discipline them (notice again the text).

Have I vetted my conclusions based on their consequences?

(For example)

7.1. (Gal 6:2): We are to show “gentleness” in our discipline of those people who get busted –no matter the crime

The consequence of this understanding = We are to act contrary to the behavior of God or refuse to be image-bearers in this respect since this is not how God responds to those in sin.

It is also not how we are commanded to respond – or what is found in the examples of others in Scripture (In re: to God: Deu 28:15-22, 28-32, 45-47, 53, 56-57, 58, 63; In re: to us: Deu 19:21; e.g. Deu 21:18-21; Pro 22:15, 23:13-14).

7.2. (Gen 6:1-4 “sons of men” = Giants/“Nephilim”): Giants are the offspring of an angelic father and human mother.

The consequence of this understanding = God is sinful for giving angels sexual organs and sexual desire yet providing no way to see it fulfilled (Mat 22:30 – angels are not given in marriage).

The correct understanding = These verses are the prelude to the flood and are meant to establish just how catastrophic it would be. How? By indicating that the earth (at that time – or the time of the flood) was filled with people – i.e. human men (or the “sons of God”) were making lots of babies with women (the “daughters of men”) (1Co 11:7 – men created in the image of God = sons of God; women created in the image of man = the daughters of men).

The fact that these verses tell us that mighty men and giants (“Nephilim”) also existed at this time simply indicates that such people were also the offspring of normal human parents. Hence the reason we find them popping up again after the flood – though the only kind of people that existed after that point were the purely human descendants of Noah and his kids.

7.3. (Act 2:38-39) The NC can only be entered by those who can express/demonstrate repentance. Peter’s reference to children (in v39) is therefore signaling their need to also demonstrate repentance if they are to be baptized and receive the promises of forgiveness and the Holy Spirit (i.e. They teach believers’ baptism).

The consequence of this understanding = God is reneging on His former covenant promises as it regards those who were already in covenant (but infants at the time of the New Covenant’s inauguration) since they could not demonstrate repentance for baptism.

Imagine what this would have looked like for those families listening to the preaching of Peter if this was what he was saying (“Under the OC, junior is God’s kid and safe, under the New –all such benefits will be taken away, until such time that he can choose to re-apply for them”).

How many Jews that had little ones at home would sign up for a deal like that? How many wb attracted to the NC if that were the case? (“God is reneging on His former promises” – but you should sign up [since the benefits outweigh the risks]”) (???). NO JEW wb good w/that –yet the text says many joined (Act 2:41).

The correct understanding = The reason Peter mentions the “promise” being available to children (in v39) is to confirm that the special circumstances afforded to children (or infants) under the OC for covenant entrance still applied under the NC.

IOW: these verses are teaching paedo-baptism.

It is worth mentioning, that the call for adults to “repent” is also congruent w/OC entrance requirements (i.e. the adults were always called to demonstrate such repentance for entrance or ratification), whereas for infants (or those unable) this was never required.

7.4. The (evangelical) belief that our obedience was a condition to salvation under the OC but is no longer is under the NC (since Jesus or the Holy Spirit did – or does it, for us).

The consequence of this understanding = God has compromised His own moral code/law. His code/law went from us needing to be obedient to letting someone be obedient for us. (e.g. Johnny can obey for Sally and keep Sally from getting in trouble when she is bad). God’s law not only condemns and prohibits such a concept, but so does every legal system on the planet. Our reputations and records are determined by our own actions never the actions of another (i.e. no one can be our substitute in those things). To claim God has now made such a change means therefore that God has corrupted Himself (or is now corrupt) since He has compromised in relation to His own moral code/law (our obedience was once part of His definition of righteousness, now it no longer is (as long as someone else does it for us).

The correct understanding = Our obedience is still a condition of salvation under the NC (just as it was under the OC) that we must faithfully fulfill to be saved (and no one – including Jesus or the Holy Spirit can do it for us. They can help us – but the responsibility of carrying out such obedience is our responsibility – not theirs).

7.5. EXAMPLE IS ON SCREEN (“Jesus took my place on the cross to give me a place in heaven”)

The consequence of this understanding = God is the cosmic child-abuser (punishing His innocent Son for someone else’s sin). The subsequent consequence to this kind of thinking is the destruction of justice (or the need to serve justice among those who are Christians) since Jesus was already punished for our sins (double jeopardy is not only an untenable position in our human courts but also in the divine courts of God – i.e. you can’t be punished twice for the same crime).

The correct understanding (of Christ’s death) = Jesus made propitiation – or cleansed away the moral stain associated w/ our sin – something that can only take place after justice has been embraced by the guilty individual. Hence the pre-requisite of repentance for salvation (i.e. cleansing and forgiveness) (e.g. Luk 19 and Zac). Jesus’ act of going to the cross was related to justice only as it related to mercy – never punishment. IOW: He fulfilled what God’s justice ultimately required to make propitiation (not punishment) –which was never animals (Rom 3:25-26/Heb 9-10 = The animals were a temporary fix – a pass over, until the time when God would send His perfect son to make propitiation –making God [then] “just and the justifier” – i.e. A God in compliance w/His law [regarding propitiation] and the One who thru such compliance has truly justified [or made righteous] His people).

The post Biblical Interpretation: What’s Going On? – Part 2 appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

Romans 2 Additions to Romans 1 notes (Point # 1):

“works of the law” (i.e. circumcision – the sign given to Abraham and passed on thru Moses as the necessary for entrance into covenant w/God and receiving forgiveness/cleansing thru its corollaries – separation and sacrifice Rom 2:25-29, 3:1, 3:23-21, 4:1-12; See also Eph 2:11-22; 1Co 7:19; Gal 2:1-16, 5:2, 6:15; Gen 17:9-14).

**Considering this phrase (“the obedience of faith”) from an OT perspective (something that sb done w/all NT scripture since a large part of what is said in the New finds its origin in the Old), yields Gen 22:1-18 as its possible source – especially in light of how James understands the relationship between faith and obedience (Jam 2:21-24).

Romans 2

It is not just those who know God’s righteous decrees (yet approve of sin) who are without excuse and unable to “escape the judgment of God”, but also those who are hypocrites (i.e. people who “practice the very same things” they condemn in others) (1-3).
Interpreting God’s “kindness and forbearance and patience” toward you when you are in sin as the sign you don’t need to repent – or that you have somehow escaped His wrath and judgment, is the very wicked and false presumption of a very “hard and impenitent heart” that is “storing up (or accumulating additional) wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God’s righteous judgment is revealed” (4-5).
Possessing God’s “Law” and condemning those who reject it or approve of its rejection in others will provide you with no more of an “excuse” or “escape [from] the judgment of God” than those people: 1) if you (too) reject His law by the way you live (i.e. “practice such things…yourself”) (1-5), 2) since the final judgment for all people will be determined by their “works” (or obedience to His Law) regardless of whether they had faith, possessed His law or were His covenant people (“For God shows no partiality”) (6-13).
According to Paul, the “gospel of God” views obedience to “the law” as: 1) necessary to salvation (1-13; Jam 2:22-23), 2) the thing that gives “value”/legitimacy to the sign, of who is – or remains, in covenant relationship with God (13-29; 1Co 7:19; Gal 6:15; v26a – “man who is uncircumcised but keeps the Law” = God-fearer – those Gentiles who followed Judaism but were not circumcised – e.g. Act 10:2; See also Act 13:16, 26; v26b – “will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision?” – i.e. will it not make him eligible to receive circumcision? Evidence suggests this as the point of transition from God-fearer to proselyte, the demonstration of obedience to the Law. IOW: his probation is now over and he is welcome to God).
Paul had a bipartite understanding of the Law (25-26 = Circumcision was a part of the Law. The only way v26 makes sense is if Paul viewed circumcision is a subset within the Law. Otherwise, how can the “uncircumcised man be said to be keeping the “precepts of the Law”? Consider Gen 17:14 w/Deu 4:12-13; *this bi-partite understanding is key to deciphering the upcoming terms “under the law” and works of the law”).
The “Law” is “a light to those in darkness” and “the embodiment of knowledge and truth”. Who would therefore be so stupid as to want to get rid of it?
Robbing temples may have been an ancient Jewish idiom referring to masturbation or sexual immorality in general based on: 1) the immediate context (22 = Sexual in nature), 2) no Jew would go near the temple of a false religion or take its idols, 3) our bodies are considered temples (1Co 6:15-20).
How do you honor God without obedience to the Law if it is only through obedience to the Law that we do that? (23)
What causes the world to mock Christianity is not their faith, but their dishonoring of God thru disobedience to His Law (23-24; Contra Deu 4:6-8).

The post Romans 2 appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

The goal of all biblical interpretation is to discover the timeless, moral principle being established (“What’s the point?”) (1Co 9:7-11). To do that, however, first requires we determine the context (“What’s going on?”). The following represents what must be among our most basic considerations:

Who was the original audience?

(For example)

1.1. The word, “you”

The “you” in Scripture refers to the original recipients/audience (not the current reader) (e.g. Jer 29:11)

1.2. The Jew and Jesus

Unless otherwise indicated, Jesus’ audience was always Jewish and already in covenant relationship w/God. This means the issue He is most concerned with addressing is covenant maintenance (not entrance) (Mat 15:24 w/Mat 19:16-17; Luk 10:25-28).

What Evangelicals do bc they miss this: they interpret Mat 19 and Luk 10 as men trying to earn their way to heaven and Jesus is playing along [as the means to discouraging them] and so that they will eventually look to Him in faith).

What was the culture or their cultural biases?

(For example)

2.1. In re: to culture: The culture during biblical times (or in the ancient Middle East) was essentially agrarian and archaic – i.e. sustenance farming w/o the governmental resources/infrastructure to protect personal property.

How this impacts interpretation (or WGO?)

(Psa 127:3-5) = In the aforementioned culture, where there was also the frequent threat of bandits, children provided not only the cheapest form of labor but also security.

As such, the author is not making some blanket statement like “the more children you have, the more blessed you are” (the homer-cult interpretation). Rather, he speaks this way for practical reasons. They were instead to be viewed as the Lord’s blessing because of their ability to provide extra (and cheap) hands in labor and security.

2.2. In re: to cultural biases: Employment outside of the home for women was limited to prostitution or begging.

How this impacts interpretation (or WGO?) (e.g. Tit 2:5) = Given what we know about employment for women in the ancient Middle East, the emphasis (in this verse) sb on what the women are doing not where they are doing it. They are to be “working at home” versus “idlers” and “busybodies” (1Ti 5:13).

The summary distinction then is this: God wants women to not be lazy while at home, but productive contributors to the family (e.g. Pro 31) — versus God wants women to be housewives and not pursue work or a career outside of the home (the homer- cult interpretation).

Again, based on what we know about the culture (or its biases), the emphasis in this verse is to be placed on what the women are doing NOT where they are doing it.

How is the word/phrase being used (or what is it associated with) in the book?

3.1. “the obedience of faith” (Rom 1:5)

Interpretative options: 1) Paul’s mission is to get people to obey God’s command to have faith, [OR] 2) Paul’s mission is to get those who have faith to obey God’s commands.

Answer based on usage: Option 2 since Paul is including the Roman Christians (those already possessing faith) in those who he intends to “bring about the obedience of faith” (Rom 1:6-8 “including you who are called to belong to Jesus Christ, to all those in Rome who are loved by God and called to be saints…your faith is proclaimed in all the world”, See also 11-13a “mutually encouraged by each other’s faith both yours and mine…brothers”).

3.2. “the works of the law” (Rom 3:28; Gal 2:16)

Interpretative options: 1) A reference to people attempting to earn their salvation through their good deeds (or obedience to the law) [OR] 2) A reference to circumcision and its corollaries, the OC atoning sacrifices or prescriptions regarding separation.

Answer based on usage: Option 2. The phrase is always and only used in relation to discussions about the need or value of these OC cleansing practices continuing in the future (Rom 3:1 w/20 w/28 w/29-30; Gal 2:1-16).

3.3. “heavenly places” (Eph 1:3)

Interpretative options: 1) Heaven, the home of God, good angels, and the dead saints, [OR] 2) Those places that exist or are a part of the spiritual realm.

Answer based on usage: Option 2 given that this word is also used to refer to demonic forces (Eph 6:12).

How is this action or idea used elsewhere that might give additional insight into its meaning?

(For example)

4.1. The action/idea of love. We often think of love only as it regards affection/attraction (Jug 16:1 w/4). However, when studied throughout the whole of Scripture, we find that the thing most often communicated by this word is “loyalty”.

This means that whatever else is being communicated about it (such as affection), this (too) must be included in our understanding (e.g. Joh 13:34-35).

4.2 The action/idea of belief. The NT reveals the sacrament of baptism to be synonymous with belief — at least from God’s perspective. IOW: He views your baptism as your belief (1Pe 3:21; Act 2:38 w/Mar 1:15).

Hence when we think of belief, we are to think of baptism (or better yet, when someone claims to be a believer/Christian, our first question sb, “When and where were you baptized?”)

The post Biblical Interpretation: What’s Going On? – Part 1 appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

A Review of the Sound Gospel Message 1. The good news of abundant life in Jesus Christ John 10:10b

Deuteronomy 8:2

Romans 8:28

If we submit to Him as Lord before Savior Deuteronomy 7:9-10

Deuteronomy 28:1-2

Matthew 7:21-23

Matthew 7:24-27

Matthew 16:24-27

In the relationship of covenant through His church. Deuteronomy 4:13

Exodus 24:7

Jeremiah 31:32-32

Ephesians 5:22-32

Matthew 16:16-19

John 20:21-23

The post A Review Of The Sound Gospel Message appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

Romans 1 1. Those who are truly “set apart for the gospel of God” as imitators of “Paul” the “apostle” possess a message that teaches both Jew and Gentiles receive salvation:

1) through belief/faith (14-17 “from faith [for the “Jew”] to [εἰς = An indication of scope, 1Th 2:16] faith [for the “Greek” or “barbarian]) = Everyone now gains their right standing w/God (i.e. the “power of salvation” or “the “righteousness of God”)the same way – thru belief/faith. This was a major change in respect to both who and how salvation was gained in the past: it was to the Jew (exclusively) and according to the “works of the law” (i.e. circumcision – the necessary sign given to Abraham and passed on thru Moses under the necessary for entrance into covenant w/God and receiving forgiveness thru the sacrifices – Rom 2:25-29, 3:1, 3:23-21, 4:1-12; See also Eph 2:11-22; 1Co 7:19; Gal 5:2, 6:15; Gen 17:9-14). Paul’s emphasis on this aspect of salvation is in defense of what was decided at Jerusalem council (Act 15:1-29).

2) and obedience (5)= Paul’s mission as an apostle (the reason he was “granted apostleship”) was to see that those coming into the NC by “faith” were now following that up w/obedience so that God’s name would not be blasphemed by the world (“to bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of his name among the nations”)(Rom 2:24 = Blasphemy of God is the result of disobedience by His people). That Paul is indeed calling for this obedience as an additional condition of salvation (versus calling for people to obey by having faith – e.g. Luther/Evangelicals) is confirmed by:

(2.1.) who it includes – i.e. those who already possessed faith or were already believers – i.e. the Christians at Rome (6-13 “including you who are [already] called to belong to Jesus Christ…to all those who are Rome who are loved by God and called to be saints: Grace to you and peace…your faith is proclaimed in all the world…I long to see you that…we may be mutually encouraged by each other’s faith both yours and mine…I do not want you to be unaware brothers”). If Paul is just calling for people to obey a command to believe/have faith, then why include those who have already done it?

(2.2.) its agreement w/the ministry of the resurrected Jesus (Mat 28:18-20 = Teach [or “bring about…obedience” in] those who possess “faith” [i.e. those you are “baptizing”]) and the messianic prophecies of the OT (1-4; Isa 2:1-5 and Jer 23:1-6, 33:14-16 w/Joh 3:21 and 1Jo 1:7 w/2Jo 1:6 w/Mat 5:17-20; Joh 5:29; Isa 11:1-5 and Mal 4:1-6 w/Luk 3:1-22, 16:15-17; Isa 42:1-7, 21 w/Luk 4:18; Isa 56:1-8 w/Deu 4:13; Isa 66:18-21 w/Eze 44:23-24 w/Mat 16:17-19 and Joh 20:21-23 also Eph 4:11).

Ending up under the delusion of Martin Luther or his false gospel of faith alone is what happens when:

1) you determine the thesis (of the book of Romans) based on your own agenda (or personal problems) versus its book-ends (Rom 1:17 versus what I am going to tell you, what I told you – Rom 1:5 and 16:26).

Luther’s delusion re: v17, “the entire Holy Scripture became clear to me, and heaven itself was opened to me. Now we see this brilliant light very clearly, and we are privileged to enjoy it abundantly”.

2) you ignore the historical or Jewish context of its communication and replace – or read into it, your own (e.g. works of the law = me trying to work my way to heaven).

Jesus is both fully man and fully God (3-4).
The way we as Christians can “impart…some spiritual gift to strengthen” our brothers and sisters or be “mutually encouraged by each other’s faith” or “reap a (spiritual) harvest among them is by seeing that each of us are adding the necessary obedience God requires to our faith (11-13; 2Jo 1:4-6; 3Jo 1:4).
Why we should all be eager to “preach the gospel” (of faith and obedience) – versus being “ashamed of the gospel” (15-16a) is b/c:

1) through such faith all people can now receive God’s righteousness (or a right standing with God) (Again, God’s salvation is no longer exclusive to the Jews or requiring a person become a Jew thru circumcision) (16-17).

2) through such obedience all people can avoid God’s angry “wrath”, against all forms of disobedience (18-20 = suppression of obvious truth, 21 = Disrespect and ungratefulness toward God, 22-23, 25 = Idolatry and narcissism) which includes the curses of sexual perversion (24, 26-27 “dishonoring their bodies” and “dishonorable passions” – i.e. homosexuality), mental illness (28 “debased mind”), anarchy (29-31) and the death penalty (32 “those who practice such things deserve to die”).

A society (therefore) filled with homosexuality, mental illness, anarchy and a rescinding of the death penalty (32 “they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them” = This is how God views those who refuse to put such people to death) is what happens when the obedience portion of the gospel is made nice but not necessary (NAS) (18-28).
Stupid is a moral choice before it becomes a mental condition (21-22).
That something is “eternal” (i.e. There is an Unmoved/Prime Mover), and that this something is someone or “divine” (i.e. It is an eternal Person versus and eternal force) is “plain” to everyone (God has “shown it to them”) since it is “clearly perceived in “the creation of the world” or “in the things that have been made” (i.e. The universe points to intelligent/deliberate design versus accidental evolution) which means all atheists, agnostics and idolators are idiots “without an excuse” (19-20).

The post Romans 1 appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

Pastor, in light of your 20 years of service, I’d like to say a few words

In August 2001, pastor Scott Jarrett took over a small church, consisting of a little less than 15 people in Golden, Colorado, leaving a promising and lucrative career field behind. Over the next several years, under The Great Shepherd’s guiding hand, Pastor would lead this church through several geographical changes, as we moved to a strip mall, then to a downtown location, back to “the little yellow church” and finally to this building we are in now. God used those moves to bring many of you into this body, who are still here today.

During those many years and many moves, Pastor has faced many challenges. He has been lied to, betrayed, slandered, questioned, and accused of being a cult leader. He has faced hard decisions, and situations, dealing with all of our problems. Pastor has dealt with subversive members, wolves attempting to steal others in the flock away. He has demonstrated boldness in facing those wolves in person and has defeated them, through the use of God’s word. He has demonstrated creative thinking, critical thinking, and the ability to adapt and change when he sees things in the Bible that don’t line up with current practice(EG changing toward paedobaptism and steering away from Calvinism).

Pastor has demonstrated an incredible work ethic. Pastor has worked tirelessly, over 20 years to study, to know the Bible, and to know it intimately. Using some rough estimations, I conservatively calculated over the 20 years Pastor has studied the Bible, commentaries, or offered practical counsel between 41,600-62,400 hours. He has worked through sickness, he has stood up here and preached to you while he was sick, tired, not feeling well, not feeling up for it. He has spent long hours wrestling with theology, until he was able to see how God’s word made it, like he likes to say, “lie down.” Pastor has been there for us when we needed him, at all hours of the day or night, whether it was a death in our family, a family crisis, or just a phone call to talk something through. Pastor has faithfully exemplified not giving in to his feelings, but instead, doing what needs to be done to get God’s job done.

By the way, did you know the average tenure of a senior pastor at a church is between 3-4 years? Under much less stringent and stressful conditions than what we know is required, and yet pastor has served this church for 20 years.

Not only does Pastor study the word, but he has made, and continues to make genuine efforts to get to know the people in this body. This requires intentional fellowship, spending time with others always having his mind turned on and tuned to what is being said, and asking intentional questions of others. He must not only ask these questions but then he also has to retain the information provided by those questions. And he does it better than anyone I’ve ever known.

As I was reflecting on Pastor’s service to us, it really hit me how well Pastor has fulfilled what Paul told Timothy in 2 Tim 4:

[1] I charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his appearing and his kingdom: [2] preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching. [3] For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, [4] and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths. [5] As for you, always be sober-minded, endure suffering, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry.

Pastor has absolutely taught us the word, whether it was popular or not, not just in the world’s eyes but in many of the people who physically sat in these seats! He has rebuked us, reproved us, exhorted us, and he does it with extreme patience. He has demonstrated soberness in his ministry, taking it very seriously, and he has endured suffering as a result.

Pastor Scott Jarrett has pastored with loyalty, faithfulness, tough love, and has proved himself to be the most competent pastor we know. He is one of a kind, and I am very very grateful for what he has done for this body; for Christ’s bride, the church. As a token of our gratitude for helping us get this far, Pastor, and to commemorate your 20 years, two decades, of service to Christ and His church, the congregation of Christ Covenant Church would like to present you with these stoles.

The post 20th Anniversary appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

PUNCH LIST (def.) = A list of those items that remain outstanding (or undone) and must be completed to finish a job and receive final compensation. Applied to the Christian life, no Christian can die with a punch list intact and expect to get to heaven. IOW: we must finish our punch list (1Co 9:24; 2Ti 4:7-8; Rev 2:23 w/26 w/3:2). The below items represent those things your pastor believes to still be on some of his people’s punch list:

Ditch the skirt.

God commands men to repent of women-like behavior (i.e. crying, panicking, quitting and feeling sorry for themselves when they get scared, picked on or things get rough) and instead to “act like men” (the opposite of all those things just mentioned) (1Co 16:13).

Teach sinners your ways.

(According to David’s words in Psa 51), we are to speak openly about our failures as the means to not only dissuade others from following the same destructive path but also to demonstrate our repentance to God.

Imitate don’t “ignorate”.

We are commanded to imitate God/Christ in everything we do. Which means never giving the excuse, “I don’t know what to do” but instead finding the answer to WWG/J DO?

Be a sponge, not a shield.

God commands us to be sponges (those who are always super excited to learn everything we can, be around the saints as much as we can, and change wherever we need to change) versus shields (those whose lives are guarded – or resistive, to such learning, fellowship, and change).

Get your head in the game.

If we are to avoid becoming the prey of Satan, we need to constantly be aware and assessing our current situation/mission/purpose and what our situation/mission/purpose requires to stay the course to heaven. Every waking action is a winning play or a losing play in the game of life.

Stupid is as stupid does.

A person is identified/judged by what they do – not what they want to do – or be (Pro 20:11; 1Jo 3:7-10; 3Jo 1:11).

To stop (therefore) being identified as stupid means stop making stupid decisions; to stop making stupid decisions starts by seeking to understand what you are dealing w/(i.e. the context) before opening your mouth or making that decision. Understanding often requires the help of others (Pro 11:14).

Hell is paved with good intentions.

Stop deceiving yourself. Your good intentions do not matter to God. Either you were obedient or not. Per Mat 21, only those who were obedient when tempted are those doing God’s will and on their way to heaven.

Watch your mouth.

Not only is God judging us based on every word we say, but our brain is also programming us according to what we say (Pro 23:7). So watch your mouth. By what you say, you will be judged – and directed (we are self-programmed robots).

Beware of the earth-wind-water-fire people.

Life (and solving the problems of life) is often so complicated that it cannot be boiled down to something simplistic or only a few small things.

People who think this way today (“earth-wind-water-fire people”) are very dangerous since they are unteachable (to expanding their understanding) and tend to view anyone who teaches/believes things as more complicated as untrustworthy.

Which means at the end of the day, they’re not truly equitable, fair or just — but rather discriminatory and unjust. And that all because of their dumbing down, their simplicity, their naivety and their unwillingness to think through the complex things that need to be thought thru to get the right answer).

Stop driving east to go to California.

(Pro 14:12, 16:25 “There is a way that seems right to man, but in the end it leads to death) = You may think that you are heading in the right direction (i.e. the direction that leads to heaven), but if the focus of your life (what you spend your time thinking about or practicing) is contrary to God (and what He has called you to focus on and be) then you most assuredly are not going to end up where you were hoping.

That is like driving east to get to California (look on a map, it is due west!). And for some of you – especially those who have recently gone out under discipline, this is what you are doing. You are driving east and hoping to get to California. IOW: You want to go to heaven, but the direction of your life is in the opposite direction. Which means this is what you need to do (and for that matter, every one of us): On a sheet of paper write the following phrases: on the right side, write the words “I want to go to (blank)”, and on the left side, the words, “I am on the path leads to (blank)”. Then fill in each of the blank spots with either the word heaven or hell based on where you want to go (the left side)—and the path you are honestly on (the right side). (And for those of you who just recently get nailed for looking at porn and playing with yourself—you most definitely need to write the word “hell” (on the right side) since that is the path your actions demonstrate you have been on.) Then once you have done that, see if what you wrote makes any sense. Attempt to explain to yourself (or your parents) how being the path that leads to hell” will somehow get you to heaven (the word I assume you wrote on the right side). For those who find themselves in this predicament after doing this little exercise, understand you are the epitome of what Pro 14:12 and 16:25 are talking about. You are a crazy person who thinks the path leading to hell will somehow get them to heaven. Parents (I would highly recommend you do this w/your kids on a regular basis). Teach them to stop driving east to get to California. Teach them that if that want to go to heaven, then the path they are currently on (i.e. how they live their daily lives) needs to lead in that direction. And if it doesn’t, make them explain to you how they expect to do it. If there is any chance of waking them up, this is how you do it since connecting the dots regarding these things is the key to such spiritual awakening. It takes realizing that where I want to go (and the direction I am currently heading) are not congruent. Lots of people live Pro 14 and 16 simply b/c they have not thought thru what we are talking about right now, b/c they have not taken the time to realize that their life is a crazy and damning contradiction. This little exercise has biblical precedent btw (Jam 4:4).

Stop robbing temples.

(Rom 2:22 “rob temples”) = Possible figure of speech referring to masturbation or sexual immorality (consider the immediate context “do you commit adultery?” – it is sexual in nature).

This makes more sense than viewing this verse as referring to the actual theft of idols from false temples by the Jews. No Jew would go near such a place! The only temple they would go to, was their own, but there were no idols. But in Scripture, our bodies (and most especially our sexual organs/genitals) are viewed in this light. Our bodies are compared to God’s temple and our genitals, its inner sanctum (or most sacred space), the Holy of Holies – the place where the high priests met w/God in the most intimate way. It was here that God would “reveal or unclothe” Himself. As such, what took place in the Holy of Holies can be compared to what takes place during sexual activity (and vice versa). They are sacred acts that are to take place in private only between those who are in holy covenant with one another. They are also acts that create a deep spiritual bond between the respective parties. Paul speaks of this in his first epistle to the Corinthians (1Co 6:15-20) = Notice how Paul is equating the union that takes place through sexual activity to the union we gain w/Christ (or God) (see again vv16-17; “joined to the Lord” = Where/how this takes place for the Christian is thru entering into the Holy of Holies – Heb 10:19-22; “becomes one spirit w/Him” =This is what Jesus prayed for – Joh 17:21). The point (then) not to miss = Anytime you commit sexually immoral acts (incl. masturbation or looking at porn), you are taking what is sacred out of its sacred environment and spiritually uniting yourself (thru such acts) w/what is false and filthy. You are (in essence) robbing God’s temple (which again is your Body) rather than honoring God w/it. Hence the reason all immoral sexual activity is also viewed in Scripture as a form of idolatry – the pursuit of false religion. Those of you who are guilty of doing these things need to realize (then) that what God has given to us as sex or sexual organs has far more importance and meaning than what you are currently giving it. Hence the reason you don’t respect your sexual parts (you don’t treat them as sacred). This (btw) is also an issue among some of the men in relation to your wives. You don’t seem to get that when you let them wear things that expose their nakedness to others, you are like the guy who runs the prostitutes, you are a pimp – only worse. You are (by allowing such exposure) soliciting other men to rob your temple! You are treating what God gave (only to you) as though it were not sacred, but common, something to be used by everyone. So once more, (to those of you guilty or playing around w/this stuff), stop robbing temples or soliciting others to do so.

Same game, different ball.

One of the excuses that people sometimes make when their kids get excommunicated for jerking off or looking at porn, is “I think they were too young to comprehend what they were committing to when they got baptized (they didn’t know about sex!).

There are two responses to this kind of complaint (both which are crucial to the discipleship and restoration of that child): 1) There are no take-backs w/God. Which means once you make covenant (even if it is for the wrong reasons – e.g. Junior did it to make mommy and daddy happy), God holds you to it (and will declare you forever apostate should you choose to renege) (Deu 31:26-29 w/16 and 21), 2) temptation is the same when you are five as it is when you are 25 or 35 or 55 or 75! IOW: the intensity and feelings that need to be conquered are there and the same the moment you are born and last until the day you die (i.e. at every age we experience “10” level temptations). The only thing (then) that changes are the objects (of temptation) (e.g. when you are five, it’s wanting to eat or play video games all the time; when you hit puberty that changes to sex and when you get older that changes to money (or power). Which means it’s the same game, just a different ball. Which also means that if you didn’t teach your kids to get a hold of when they were young (i.e. b/c you didn’t teach them self-control w/the temptations of food and fun—you instead discounted those things as “not that bad”), then they won’t be able to control themselves when the temptations are more serious – even capital crimes (sexual sins).

(1Co 6:12-15 = Notice Paul is making the connection between food [what is “lawful”] and sexual sin [what is unlawful]. His point? Being “dominated” by what is lawful leads to being “dominated” by what is not.).

The key (then) is learning ASAP (or teaching your kids ASAP) how to overcome/resist temptation – since once you know how to conquer that game, it won’t matter the ball that is thrown in the court.

(Pro 22:6) = Teach the child to overcome the temptation in his/her life now, and they will not depart from the path (or give in to the temptations) when they get older (and experience) other things (that are tempting – whether it again is sex or money or whatever else).

CLOSING CONTEMPLATION:

Parents, are you practicing saying “no” to temptation and teaching your kids self-control when it comes to food and fun, so that you (and them) do not become susceptible to that temptation when it becomes more serious (as in capital crimes)? As I said last week, without a committed plan, you are planning to fail. And failing is what you will do if you leave any of the items we discussed on your punch list. So ONCE MORE, —GET TO WORK!

The post Punch List – Part 3 appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

View Details

Ditch the skirt.

The biggest reason there is so much feminization, role reversal and even gender confusion today, is b/c men have vacated – or abused their position. They are instead acting more like women.

God calls men to repent of this and instead to “act like men” which means ditching their skirt-like (woman) behavior: You don’t cry when you get picked on, don’t get your way or things are scary, fearful or rough (that’s “man-suicide”); you don’t mope, panic, fall apart, let fear paralyze you or keep you from going forward or doing the right thing; you don’t vacillate in your convictions or beliefs; you don’t become fickle in your commitments or throw temper tantrums; you don’t get angry at the righteous when they rebuke or correct you; you never feel sorry for yourself, play the victim, make excuses- or decide to quit when faced with adversity – especially the adversity caused by your own sin.

Teach sinners your ways.

(According to David’s words in Psa 51), those who have been forgiven (or who are truly repentant), demonstrate it by drawing closer to the covenant community and speaking openly of their failures as means to dissuading others from following down the same path.

This means coming to the light – i.e. being transparent and open w/your life versus being weird and aloof.

Imitate don’t “ignorate”.

We are commanded to imitate God/Christ in everything we do (1Joh 4:17 “As He is, so also are we in this world”).

Which means the excuse, “I don’t know what to do” will not work come judgment day. We are instead to always be asking the question WW God, Jesus – or even Paul do? (since he was an imitator of Christ – 1Co 11:1) and follow suit in our actions.

And if we don’t know what they would do, then we need to go to God’s Word and figure it out. Again, we are commanded to imitate – not ignorate!

Be a sponge, not a shield.

Those who get saved can essentially be divided into two groups – sponges and shields: 1) sponges are those who are super excited to learn everything they can, be around the saints as much as they can and change wherever they need to change. It’s all positive and they can’t wait to have their lives maximized for Christ.

2) shields are those who are excited and eager to learn and be with the saints – and even change, but only to a degree. They have limits in respect to all three things due to loyalties/commitments in relation to their old life (whether it be biological family or traditions or hobbies etc.). They guard the continuation of those things in their life like a shield. God wants us to be sponges and stop being shields.

Get your head in the game.

Satan is looking for people who wander aimlessly through life, whose heads are not in the game (1Pe 5:8). Which means we need to make sure that is not true of us (too many causalities have been the result of this very thing – people not having their head in the game).

What having your head in the game looks like: Constantly being aware/assessing your current situation/mission/purpose and what that situation/mission/purpose requires. It means (also) recognizing that what in one minute may be okay, in the next is not. IOW: if you are awake, you are on the field of play (and wb judged –no breaks, no time-outs. Every waking action or lack thereof is a winning play or a losing play).

Stupid is as stupid does.

This saying comes from (the movie), Forrest Gump. A person is identified/judged by what they do – not what they want to do or be, think or feel they are.

IOW: stupid is [identified] as [or by what the] stupid [person] does (Pro 20:11).

The solution to stop being stupid/making stupid decisions: Take the time to determine the context in which something is being communicated, to understand the principle being communicated (i.e. This is the only way to develop critical thinking skills).

Hell is paved with good intentions.

Too many people in this church still live under the idea that God will be lenient with us even though we fail, as long as we had good intentions or genuinely wanted to do the right thing. But once again, that is not the case.

Which means we don’t want to get caught in that evil lie. Good or genuine intentions to do the right thing (to be obedient to God) but then failing most of the time temptation comes, ends in the same place as the person with bad intentions.

(Mat 21:28-31) = Notice the son w/bad intentions is the one in Jesus’ parable who is approved by God – not b/c of his intentions but bc he ultimately obeyed (versus the son w/good intentions but dropped the ball).

Watch your mouth.

The two people that listen most to the words that come out of our mouths are God and ourselves. Which means two things:

1) Everything you say can (and will) be used against you by God on judgment day if what you say is not correct or righteous (Mat 12:36-37),

2) Everything you say is programming your brain and body to think and act accordingly since we are “self-programmed robots” (i.e. we are programming ourselves by what we say).

Hence the reason that people who are always pessimistic or tend to always use words like “I can’t” or “I don’t know (or know how)” end up being very debilitated people, people unable to get very far in life. That again, because what you say your brain listens to (or believes) and programs you accordingly (Pro 23:7).

So watch your mouth. What you say, you will believe and be affected by.

This (of course) becomes most important in relation to morality or truth — especially since studies have also shown that how we recall or speak about past or present events is only taken from the original event the first time we recall it. All recollection after that goes only as far back as the last time we remembered or recalled it.

Which means if we did not portray things or people accurately, then what gets perpetuated –and what we perpetually believe, is a lie –or constant slander of other people. So once more, watch your mouth.

You do not have the right to your opinion unless your opinion lines up exactly with the evidence –which means being able to supply the evidence when questioned (or changing that opinion once conflicting evidence is presented) (“two or three witnesses” – Deu 17 and Mat 18).

We must be people of truth all the time and it does not matter the subject (e.g. theology, health/nutrition, sports, etc). Slander and gossip is not relegated to one field or certain persons only. And all of it is serious sin before God (e.g. “That person/company does shoddy work [but possess no hard evidence to prove it]”; “Tom Brady and the Patriots were only good bc they are big cheaters” [again no evidence]”; “your church is a cult” [not bc they can prove it biblically, but bc it’s not what they believe]; “that person committed this sin or is lying or is unrighteous” [w/o possessing the necessary evidence]; “I disagree w/pastor or pastor is wrong” [once more without the evidence and more bc you don’t like what he said]).

Beware of the earth-wind-water-fire people.

Earth-wind-water-fire = What ancient people used to believe made up everything in the universe (e.g. rabbit = 2 parts earth, 6 parts wind, 4 parts water, 1 part fire).

Life (and solving the problems of life) is often so complicated that it cannot be boiled down to something so simple as believing that everything in the universe is made up of only 4 elements.

People who think this way today (“earth-wind-water-fire people”) are not only suffering the Dunning-Krueger effect (everything that can be known I can fit on my three/four neural pathways), but also very dangerous since they are unteachable (to expanding their understanding) and tend to view anyone who teaches/believes things as more complicated as untrustworthy (“they make it more complicated to look smart”).

As a result, these people are the ones who often end up rebelling against God’s ordained authorities (since they believe they are the true smart ones and everyone else is just confusing things).

We therefore must not only beware of such people – but avoid becoming them ourselves.

(Pro 18:2, 12:15, 26:12; 2Pe 3:16-17) = Not everything can be boiled down to something simple. There are spiritual truths that are complex and require patience and perseverance in teachableness to truly understand. Hence why (2Ti 4:2 “preach the word w/great patience and teaching”).

Signs that you may be/becoming this way = You think any explanation that takes more than 15 minutes is just somebody trying to look smart; You think pastor makes things too complicated or is a blow-hard taking way too long to explain something; You attempt to boil the complex things pastor teaches into something simplistic rather than growing in your learning on that subject; Your way of dealing w/people who are in sin: tell them they are in sin and to knock it off; Your advice to every Christian brother or sister on living the Christian life is always the same simplistic (“one size fits all”) formula (“read your bible and pray to keep the devil away”). IOW: you refuse to get to know people and recognize the genuine diversity or complexity that exists among them that may require a different or nuanced approach/prescription. Instead, it is, “what is good for the goose is good for the gander” (i.e. if it works/is good enough for me it will work/is good enough for you).

CLOSING CONTEMPLATION: YOLO!!!

IOW: no second chances to get it right. You need to get it right in this life (NOW!) if you want to make it to the next. And it won’t happen by accident. Without a committed plan, you are planning to fail. And failing is what you will do if you leave any of the items we discussed on your punch list. GET TO WORK!

The post Punch List – Part 2 appeared first on Christ Covenant Church.

Christ Covenant Church: Recent Episodes

Christ Covenant Church