A Few Thoughts

Posted: May 15, 2012 in Uncategorized
0

Romans 3:21-26 ESV 

[21] But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it—[22] the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: [23] for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, [24] and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, [25] whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. [26] It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

8 OBSERVATIONS:

(1) Faith alone in Christ alone = IS the righteousness of God

(2) I am a sinner

(3) I am falling short (continually) of the glory of God

(4) Jesus purchased me from slavery (law, sin, death)

(5) God crushed his Son to absorb his justice and fury

(6) I receive the benefits by faith alone because of Jesus’ blood & death

(7) God is just in justifying a spiritually bankrupt and undeserving sinner like me

(8) God is the good news: Repent, Believe, Trust

I am extremely needy & weak: PTL!

Christ-Hymn in Philippians 2:6-11

Posted: April 24, 2012 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
0

This article will provide a short analysis of the structure of the Christ hymn in Philippians 2:6-11. First, I will briefly discuss the humiliation/exaltation motif that runs through the corpus of Scripture. Second, I will focus on the literary pattern of the Christ hymn. Verses 6-8 will describe the humiliation of Christ, his coming down to earth in humility and submission to his Father’s will, and verses 9-11 discuss the exaltation of Jesus Christ as Lord of all. Thirdly, I will provide a section describing the call to humble submission to the Lordship of Jesus Christ and servant leadership in the modern church.

Humiliation / Exaltation

This passage describes the humiliation and exaltation of Jesus Christ. The humiliation of Christ can be found in verses 6-8. Jesus Christ stepped out of his glorious position in heaven and came down to earth as the incarnate God/Man displaying the ultimate example of humility by “death on a cross” (Phil. 2:8c). The exaltation of Jesus Christ can be found in verses 9-11. His exaltation positions him seated at the right hand of the Father, far above all rule and authority with the name that is above every name (Ephesians 1:20-23). Paul encourages the Philippians in chapter 2:6-11 by reminding them of the promise of their own eschatological vindication[1] and exaltation with Jesus Christ at the consummation. The humiliation/exaltation motif is also common throughout other parts of Scripture encouraging the obedience of Jesus’ followers. For example, Luke 18:14 (ESV) states, “…For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but the one who humbles himself will be exalted.” This refers to earthly humility/exaltation with an eschatological view in the back of the reader’s mind. Lastly, Moises Silva states that “Paul is even more explicit in linking Jesus’s humiliation/exaltation with that of believers: “…If we suffer with him, so that we may be glorified with him” (Rom. 8:17; cf. 2 Tim. 2:11).”[2]

Humiliation of Christ

This section will deal with the first downward slope of the Christ-hymn. The first part will discuss the humiliation of Jesus Christ in verses 6-8b. There are two separate four line stanzas[3] within this first section. First, verses 6-7b begin and end with the word morphe (form). They deal with the pre-incarnate morphe (2:6a), pre-existent divine status (2:6b), incarnation (2:7a-b), and conclude in 2:7b with Jesus’ incarnate morphe[4] as a doulos (slave). In this first stanza the reader can also see that Jesus was in the morphe of God (2:6a) but he did not take advantage of his divine status with God (2:6b) “as grounds to avoid the incarnation.”[5] Rather, he laid aside (2:7a) his divine prerogative[6] (2:7a, kenosis) and assumed the role of a doulos (2:7b). Jesus is the eternal Son and he has never “aspired” or “been tempted” to gain equality[7] with God because he is co-equal with his Father in deity. The main point is that Jesus came down from the “highest glory to [the] lowest depths.”[8] The second stanza consists of verses 2:7c-8b and begins and ends with the participle genomenos (having become).[9] This section focuses on the incarnation of Jesus Christ, “in likeness of men genomenos.”[10] There appear to be some interesting parallels between each line of the first and second stanzas. 2:7c parallels the first line of the first stanza (2:6a) when Jesus was in the morphe of God. Also, in his incarnation represented in 2:7c, Jesus “was truly man and not only, [had] he become like a man.”[11] 2:8a-b further demonstrates Jesus’ humility in the Christ-hymn. In Ralph Martin’s commentary on Philippians he comments on Jesus’ humility stating, “only a divine being can accept death as obedience; for ordinary people it is a necessity. He alone as the obedient Son could choose death as his destiny; and he did so because of his love…”[12] This also has a parallel in 2:6a-b, “[6] who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped. [7a] but emptied himself…” Both of these stanzas make explicit reference to the humiliation of Christ as they build up to the climactic point of the passage in 2:8c, “even death on a cross.” The “clause thanatou de staurou in 2:8[c] breaks the poetic pattern of all major strophic arrangements of the passage,”[13] leading the reader to take special note of its great importance. The topic of the cross of Christ was one of the Apostle Paul’s major concerns in his writings. This “death on a cross” also serves as an appropriate center-piece in the broader context of 2:1-18 in that it displays the ultimate form of Christ’s humiliation. Ralph Martin stated that “undoubtedly the climax of his life is most prominently in view, namely, his humiliation in the passion and death at Calvary.”[14] The death of Christ further demonstrated what kind of God he was through his behavior. He not only called his followers to a deep-sense of humility, he acted it out through the gruesome death of the cross. Furthermore, the broader context of verses 2:1-18 called the Philippians to humble, joy-filled unity. His death not only secured the reconciliation of the church to God, but it was also efficacious in the reconciliation of believers one to another.

Exaltation of Christ

Verses 9-11 describe the exalted Christ as Lord of all. First, God is the subject in these verses and not Jesus.[15] Second, verse 2:9 describes the crowning moment of the humiliated Christ. Reference is made to his resurrection and ascension and he is given an onoma (name) that is above every name. Up until this point (2:6-9) the onoma of Jesus had not been mentioned because of his refusal to take advantage of his divine position. He was echarisato (granted) this onoma by God. Verses 10-11 present the onoma of Jesus for the first time as the “universally recognized Lord.”[16] He is also recognized as kyrios (Lord) in reference to the Old Testament parallel ‘YHWH.’ Silva points this out by stating, “in conclusion, we must pause to appreciate the stunning implications of applying Isa. 45:23 to Jesus. Isaiah 45:18-25 (excerpted below from the literal NASB) constitutes one of the most powerful OT affirmations of the uniqueness of the God of Israel in the context of his redeeming work: I am the Lord [Yahweh], and there is none else…. They have no knowledge, Who carry about their wooden idol, And pray to a god who cannot save…. …there is no other God besides Me, A righteous God and a Savior; There is none except Me. Turn to Me, and be saved, all the ends of the earth; For I am God, and there is no other. I have sworn by Myself,… That to Me every knee will bow, every tongue will swear allegiance.”[17]   Also, his exaltation and being given the onoma that is “above every name” (2:9) results in his title as kyrios (YHWH). Furthermore, “at the name of Jesus every knee should bow…and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord” (2:10a, 11a). Lastly, this universal Lordship points in no other direction than “the glory of God the Father” (2:11b).

Application

The exaltation of Jesus Christ also provides his followers with the only way to be made holy (sanctification). They find their eschatological vindication (glorification) through the humble life, death, resurrection, and ascension of their exalted Lord. A note on Christian leadership must be made at this time as well. 2:6-11 give one of the best examples of servant leadership in the entire corpus of Scripture. Jesus displays the behavior and mindset of a Christian leader through humility (incarnation, submission, death on a cross). The broader context of 2:1-18 also describe the mindset and behavior of those representing Jesus on earth. They are to have the “same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind. Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves. Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others” (2:2-4,ESV). Furthermore, Paul proclaims the call to “work out your own salvation with fear and trembling” (2:12d). Jesus’ “death on a cross” expressed how seriously God takes humble submission to one another and unity in the church. Leaders must realize that they are representing Jesus on earth and what they say and do in the church will affect the reputation of Jesus, either for good or bad. Lastly, Peter O’Brien comments on the humiliation/exaltation motif by stating, “a refusal to exalt oneself, humbling oneself under God’s almighty hand (as an expression of trust and confidence), and finally being exalted by God in due time”[18] displays the mindset of Jesus Christ which is to be imitated by those who have been united to him by faith.

Conclusion

The humiliation/exaltation motif plays an important role in the Christian life. The example set forth in 2:6-11 gives the greatest example of how the Christian leader should seek to live. Through the great eye-opening realization that humility should be the natural outpouring of the believer’s union with Christ, they will see that it is God who will exalt them. They will not seek selfish ambition and they will not count themselves more significant than others if they desire to live in accord with these words. Not only will God raise leaders in their positions of authority through humble submission, he will also raise them eschatologically through the death, resurrection, and ascension of their risen Lord. This great and awesome fact helps motivate Christian leaders in service to their King as they wait in the current tension of their future glorification. They know that serving in humble submission to the lordship of Jesus, along with humble servant leadership to his bride not only displays the character of their great God but it also leads to their own eschatological vindication and victory as they continue to trust in the finished work of Jesus Christ, “to the glory of God the Father” (2:11b).    


[1] Peter O’Brien, The Epistle to the Philippians: A Commentary on the Greek Text (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1991), 261.
[2] Moises Silva, Philippians (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2005), 98.
[3] Ibid. 99
[4] H. Douglas Buckwalter, Structure of Philippians, (Myerstown: Evangelical Theological Seminary Notes) 1.
[5] Silva, 99
[6] Ibid. 104
[7] Ibid.
[8] Ibid.
[9] Silva, 99 and also see Buckwalter, 2.
[10] Silva, 99.
[11] Ralph P. Martin, Philippians (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1987), 106.
[12] Ibid.
[13] Silva, 107
[14] Martin, 106.
[15] Silva, 108.
[16] Buckwalter, 2.
[17] Silva, 112.
[18] O’Brien, 261.

Galatians: A Short Study

Posted: April 19, 2012 in Galatians Study
Tags: , , , , ,
0

Introduction

            This article will attempt to provide a brief exegetical exploration into Paul’s letter to the Galatians. First, I will be discussing the probable background circumstances which gave rise to the letter. This point will cover: the author, probable dates within various theories, the location of the letter’s recipients, along with the problem and need for the letter in today’s culture. Second, I will provide a working outline of the letter accompanied with a brief explanation of its contents. Third, we will explore the letter’s major themes and probable reasons for the emphases that Paul places on these specific themes. Fourth, we will discuss how Paul credentials himself within the letter. This point takes on special significance in the book of Galatians. Lastly, we will bring the book of Galatians into a contemporary context and discuss the practical value it provides for today’s Christian. The book of Galatians is known as one of Paul’s greatest writings and it provides great freedom, power, and encouragement for followers of Jesus Christ.

Background Information

            The authorship of Galatians has not been much of a disputed topic in church history. The apostle Paul has received credit for the authorship of this work for ages. Furthermore, this work is known as one of Paul’s ‘capital’ epistles[1] (others 1 and 2 Corinthians and Romans) and is used as one of the primary examples for determining the authenticity of Paul’s other writings. Among the ‘capital’ epistles, Galatians has also been given pre-eminence with regard to Pauline authorship.[2]

When attempting to determine the date for this letter the reader has a much more difficult task. Historically, there have been two theories expounded. Both theories take on special significance for the dating of Galatians and they generally surround the geographical location of the recipients of the letter.

First, there is what has been referred to as the “North Galatian” hypothesis which places the recipients of Paul’s letter in the northern region of Asia Minor. The name “Galatia applied only to the northern region, which had been occupied by Celtic groups migrating from Gaul.”[3] J.B. Lightfoot is the greatest advocate of this theory which was held almost exclusively by scholars until the 18th century.[4]

Second, is what has been referred to as the “South Galatian” hypothesis. This view was championed by William M. Ramsay and it continues to be affirmed by many scholars today.[5] This hypothesis places the recipients of the letter near Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, and Derbe in southern Asia Minor. This view also provides better accuracy when comparing the contents of Galatians with the contents of the book of Acts.

One reason this has been a debated topic in the past is because of how the reader dates the book, as well as its relationship to the book of Acts. The “North” hypothesis has traditionally been known to carry a “late” date (53-57AD), while the “South” hypothesis has traditionally been known to carry an “early” date (48-49AD). Moises Silva shares a slightly different view when he states, “However, while it is true that the North Galatian view requires a date after the Jerusalem, the South Galatian view leaves that question open.”[6] He goes on to support the Southern hypothesis along with the late date.

The question of whether or not the recipients are from northern or southern Asia Minor is not the main point. Attempting to reconstruct the history leads to how the book of Galatians and more specifically Galatians 2:1-10 relate to the book of Acts. Silva further explains how the contents of Galatians 2:1-10 and Acts 15 have too many similarities[7] to be describing different events. Another leading scholar F.F. Bruce disagrees with this assessment. While holding to the southern hypothesis, he also holds the traditional view with the early date.[8]

Problem

            Paul describes the problem in the letter to the Galatians as a distortion of the Gospel. He states this in 1:7, “some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel.” The distortion comes from false teachers having snuck in to “spy out our freedom” (2:4). The freedom that the Galatians had in Jesus Christ through the Gospel was being added to and Paul declared this teaching to be “accursed” (1:8-9). In 3:23 these false teachers tried to convince them that they were righteous because of law keeping. This false teaching was spreading through the church and Paul was “perplexed” (4:20) because of the believers that were following this teaching and were being strayed away. They began the practice of observing days and months and seasons and years (4:10) again and going further and further away from the Cross.

Paul described the loyalty that the Galatians once had for him in 4:15 when he stated, “you would have gouged out your eyes and given them to me.” This was followed by Paul’s statement that he had become their enemy by telling them the truth (4:16) that merit based righteousness was actually contrary to the Gospel. Desiring to be under the law displayed a heart that refused the grace of God in Jesus Christ (4:21-31). This refusal had grave consequences because God meets sinners through the person and work of his Son, Jesus Christ. Refusing the Son for the law of Moses severed sinners from Jesus Christ permanently and grace was no longer an option (5:4-5). In conclusion, the problem surrounded the keeping of the law in order to gain favor with God, and Paul “did not yield in submission even for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you” (2:5).

Outline

1)      Introduction (1:1-5)

a)      Paul’s apostleship (1:1)

b)      Glory of Christ (1:3-5)

Paul began the letter to the Galatians with the affirmation of his status as a chosen apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ. The office of apostle is extremely important in the book of Galatians. Paul also praises God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ for the good news of his death and resurrection. The introduction concludes with praise directed toward the Glorious One who died for sin.

2)      The Gospel (1:6-10)

a)      False Teachers (1:7)

b)      Only One Gospel (1:8-9)

c)      Please God and Preach Christ (1:10)

Paul directed all of his attention toward the false teachers who sought to destroy the glorious Gospel of grace by presenting a false gospel. He stated, “even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed” (1:8). The message is what holds top priority, even over the one preaching.[9] It is only “Paul’s Gospel” because it was given to him by the Jesus Christ. If the message is contrary to the Word of God by stating that people must perform deeds to merit salvation, then the message must be condemned as false. He concludes this section by telling the people that God’s approval is far superior to the approval of man. This Gospel brings the dead to life and it is the power of God unto salvation and therefore must be proclaimed in a way that honors Jesus Christ.

3)      All of Christ (1:11-2:10)

  1. Not man’s Gospel (1:11-12)
  2. Paul’s Judaism (1:13-14)
  3. Paul set apart by God (1:15-16b)
  4. Paul’s training ‘in Christ’ (1:16c-18)
  5. Paul’s Gospel affirmed by apostles (2:1-2:10)
  6. Peter acts hypocritically to his calling and Paul’s rebuke (2:11-14)

 

The interpretation of this section has played several important roles in the history of the church. First, Paul presents the origin of his Gospel. He stated that he received it by direct revelation from Jesus Christ. The reason he speaks with such boldness is that his status as an apostle was being challenged by the false prophets. Second, this section plays an important role in the relationship between the books of Galatians and Acts. Furthermore, the relationship between Acts and Galatians helps determine the dating for the book. An interesting observation can be made if one takes the position that Galatians 2:1-10 and Acts 15 are speaking of the same account. The question usually arises as to why Paul did not speak about the decrees made at the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15. A legitimate answer to this question could be that Paul did not want his hearers to further accuse him of being a false apostle. If Paul were to have announced the decrees in Galatians 2:1-10 he could have been charged with having received his message from the other apostles instead of divine revelation. Paul explains with great detail in 1:11-24 that his message came from the Lord Jesus Christ and it was not the product of human agency. If one interprets this section in this manner then the dating is later (53-58AD) than many scholars place it (48-49AD).

Others take the opposite view and place the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15) after this because the decrees were not mentioned, and had they been mentioned, Paul could have ended the debate with the affirmations of the other apostles. Furthermore, the book of Acts records that the apostles had called Paul down to Jerusalem and the book of Galatians states that Paul “went up because of a revelation” (2:2).

4) Justification by Faith Alone (2:15-21)

a)      Justified by faith alone (2:15-19)

b)      United to Christ and justified apart from law (2:19-21)

Paul went into detail about how one is obtains a right standing with God. He states that individuals are not declared righteous before God by any law keeping or merit based performance. He explains that individuals are accepted by God through faith alone in Jesus Christ as the sole source of salvation. Furthermore, individuals that have received him have been united to him by grace alone through faith alone, as they stand in the life, death, and resurrection of Christ alone.

5) Abraham: father of the faithful (3:1-14)

a)      Begin and end by Spirit or you are “foolish” (3:1-5)

b)      Abraham justified by faith alone (3:6)

c)      Abraham believed the Gospel and believers are blessed with him (3:7-9)

d)     Not one justified by works (3:10-11a)

e)      The righteous shall live by faith! (3:11b-12)

f)       Redeemed in Christ and blessed with Abraham (3:13-14)

New Testament Christians are saved from the wrath of God Almighty in the same way Abraham was. That is, Abraham was saved through faith alone. The Galatians began by the Spirit but quickly reverted to merit based righteousness because of the teachings of the false prophets. Paul reminds them that God “preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham” (3:8) and “those who are of faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith” (3:9).

Paul further explains that those relying on a merit based righteousness are not blessed with Abraham but are “under a curse” (3:10). Paul proceeds to give all of the credit to Jesus Christ for providing redemption by “becoming a curse” (3:13). Lastly, this section ends by stating the blessing of receiving the “promised Spirit through faith” (3:14), just as Abraham did.

6) Law and Promise (3:15-4:7)

a)      Covenant came to Abraham as a promise (3:15-18)

b)      Law is meant to drive sinners to  Christ (3:19-24)

c)      Abraham’s offspring are co-heirs with Christ (3:25-4:7)

This section focuses on the covenant God made with Abraham in Genesis 15:9-10, 17-18. This covenant can be described as a royal grant or some scholars describe it as a last will and testament.[10]  The royal grant in 3:15-18 displays the one-sided blessing from God to Abraham and his “offspring” (3:16). The offspring in verse sixteen is in reference to Jesus Christ. The promise being referred to is none other than the believer’s inheritance as they stand in Jesus Christ by faith and not by works of the law.

The law was and is meant to drive sinners to the person and work of Jesus Christ. This occurs through the proclamation of the law and the Gospel. The law is meant to show the sinner how far short they fall from God’s requirements. Galatians 3:24 states, “so then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith.” Jesus Christ fulfilled all righteousness and believers are brought back into relationship with God by trusting in his wrath absorbing death and resurrection. Galatians 3:29 states, “And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise.” The section closes with Paul’s praise that God sent his Son to fulfill the law and bring sinners into the family of God, adopted with full rights as sons.

7) Set free by Jesus Christ (4:8-5:15)

a)      Paul is perplexed by the Galatians return to merit based righteousness (4:8-20)

b)      Promise of Abraham comes by grace (4:21-5:15)

Paul confronts the Galatians for having subjected themselves to merit based righteousness (3:9-10) and desired that “Christ is formed” (3:19) in them once again. He goes on to explain that justification is by faith alone and not based on any type of merit system. The promise of Abraham is all of grace and if the Jews refused to receive grace then they would be “severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law, you have fallen from grace” (5:4). The reason they would be severed from Christ is that they insist on earning their salvation by works and subjecting themselves once again to slavery. The letter to the Galatians is about receiving grace and living in the freedom of the Lord Jesus Christ and 5:13 displays that very thought.

8) Walking in the Spirit and its Effects (5:16-6:10)

a)      Walk in the Spirit and display Christ’s love and character (5:16-26)

b)      Bearing burdens and perseverance (6:1-10)

To be “in the Spirit” is to be “in Christ.” To be “in the flesh” is to be “outside of Christ.” This is important to note when studying this section of Galatians 5. The section describes the organic outflow of the believer’s union with Jesus Christ. The character of Jesus Christ is being developed in the lives of his followers through this union and the natural outflow is love. The love is directed toward fellow Christians and this love bears burdens and perseveres. The good of others will trump selfish desires through spontaneous acts of loving service.

9) Closing (6:11-18)

Paul’s entire boast is in the finished work of the Lord Jesus Christ on the cross. He closes the section with a blessing “for all who walk by this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God” (6:16).

 

Major Themes

1. Paul’s Gospel Defense

Paul goes into detail about how his Gospel was not given to him by man (1:1, 11-12, 16) but was delivered to him by a direct revelation from Jesus Christ. He was called by God to proclaim the mystery of Christ for the building of the church. In Galatians 2:1-10 Paul described a trip to Jerusalem that involved an extremely strong defense of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. False teachers were spreading the claim that in order to be in a right standing with God they needed to keep the law of Moses and subject themselves to law-based slavery all over again. Paul defended the Gospel of grace and freedom in Christ with great boldness, and his Gospel was also affirmed by the other apostles in Jerusalem when they were given the right hand of fellowship (2:6-9).

2. Paul’s Gospel Explanation

Paul stressed the theme of justification by faith alone. He explains that individuals are not accepted by God on the basis of personal merit. In fact, he goes on to say that those refusing to receive salvation by grace are “under a curse” (3:10). The law is meant to lead people to the knowledge of their sin, repentance and turning to the glorious Gospel of grace. In order for individuals to be received into the family of God they must cast aside any island of righteousness they cling to and throw themselves upon the person and work of Jesus Christ. This theme is explained with great care in 2:15-21, where Paul claimed “that a person is not justified [declared righteous] by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ.” He used Abraham as an example (3:6, 7-9, 14) from Genesis 15:6 and he explained that every Christian throughout all of redemptive history receives salvation in the same manner. He stated, “it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham. And the Scripture foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham…” (3:7-8). Furthermore, Abraham “believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness,” because he was not counted righteous because of any deeds he performed to reckon himself righteous. This theme explains the type of freedom that is available for anyone that turns from their legalistic practices and trusts in the finished work of Jesus Christ alone. There was nothing to add to it because Jesus Christ attained perfect salvation.

3. Paul’s Application of the Gospel

The Holy Spirit plays a key role in applying the finished work of Jesus Christ. The Spirit is responsible for uniting individuals to the person and work of Christ. Galatians 2:20 states, “I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me.” The Spirit of Christ lives within believers, empowering them for service in the kingdom of God and personal sanctification.

Galatians 5:18 speaks of being “led by the Spirit” and this signifies the believer’s life in union with Jesus Christ. Being “led by the Spirit” does not exist for those outside of Christ. The fruits of the Spirit (5:22-23) display the outworking of the redemption accomplished by Jesus. The Holy Spirit also enables believers to “love” (5:22) and “bear one another’s burdens” (6:2).

Paul uses this theme to further explain the freedom that exists for those in Christ. Again, salvation has been accomplished by Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit has sealed them until the day of redemption. Believers must not submit to false teaching that spread a false gospel message proclaiming salvation by works. This teaching was an insult to the Lord Jesus Christ because he “was publicly portrayed as crucified” (3:1) for the salvation of souls. Salvation is by grace alone, through faith alone, because of the finished work of Jesus Christ alone and believers are to cling to his work depending on the power of the Holy Spirit for full assurance.

 

Credentials

            Paul credentials himself as an apostle of Jesus Christ (1:1). One reason Paul stresses this point so much is that he was being attacked as having preached a false gospel (1:6). In Galatians 1:11-12, Paul explained that “the gospel that was preached by me is not man’s gospel. For I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.” If Galatians 2:1-10 relate to the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15, Paul may have kept out the decrees mentioned in Acts 15 because he was stressing the point of his apostleship and the divine revelation of Jesus Christ. His opponents could have challenged the divine origin of his message and credited it to the apostles from the Jerusalem Council instead of the divine origin that Paul credits it with. Moises Silva affirms this by noting, “a direct appeal to that agreement would have blunted the edge of Paul’s insistence that he had received his distinctive message directly from God, not from the other apostles.”[11] This may have been one of the reasons he stresses his apostleship with such intensity.

The divine origin (1:1) of Paul’s letter demands the attention of all people. If his message is divine then it holds authority (1:11-12) over all of humanity. Furthermore, Paul’s teaching of justification by grace alone through faith alone is the antithesis to the human nature. Mankind desires to justify themselves by their own efforts, but salvation is all of Christ and in order for individuals to receive this salvation they must trust in the Lord Jesus Christ. Paul pressed this point in his teaching when he stated, “if righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose” (2:21). Paul’s Gospel has divine origins, therefore his teaching has authority over all of humanity and demands a proper response.

 

 

Conclusion

The apostolic origin of Paul’s message coupled with his teaching on the theme of justification by faith alone provides the groundwork for relevant personal application. As mentioned above, the believer’s union with Jesus Christ provides grace and assurance to all who have come to know and trust in his finished work. The message of justification by faith alone provides great freedom for the follower of Jesus Christ. The book has even been referred to as the “Magna Cart of Christian liberty”[12] because of the radical message of freedom in Jesus Christ. This message continues to hold great relevance even in the 21st century. Human beings will always be inclined to trust in their own ability to perform and that does not stop in the market place, it continues in all spheres of life. Followers of Jesus Christ will always need to be reminded of the glorious Gospel of grace that is found in no other place than in his finished work on the cross. The substitutionary atonement will continue to provide Gospel motivation to believers throughout the world. The Gospel of grace will also continue to raise the spiritually dead to life because faith comes through hearing the good news of Jesus Christ dying on their behalf (Romans 10:17). In conclusion, Martin Luther was a strong advocate of the doctrine of justification by faith alone and found great comfort in the letter to the Galatians. It seems fitting to leave the reader with these final words, “for if the article of justification be once lost, then is all true Christian doctrine lost.”[13]

 

 

 

[1] F.F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Galatians (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982), 1.

[2] Ibid

[3] Moises Silva, Interpreting Galatians (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001), 129.

[4] Bruce, Galatians, 5.

[5] Silva, Interpreting Galatians, 132; Bruce, Galatians, 18; Philip Ryken, Galatians (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 2005), 8; John Stott, The Message of Galatians (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1986), 11; Leon Morris, Galatians: Paul’s charter of Christian freedom (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1996), 17.

[6] Silva, Interpreting Galatians, 129.

[7] Silva, Interpreting Galatians, 132.

[8] Bruce, Galatians, 18.

[9] Bruce, Galatians, 83.

[10] Bruce, Galatians, 170; Ryken, Galatians, 120-121.

[11] Silva, Galatians, 134.

[12] T. Nelson Inc. , Nelson’s Complete Book of Bible Maps and Charts (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1996), 383.

[13] Martin Luther, Commentary on Galatians (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1979), xvi.

Love of God in 1 John

Posted: April 18, 2012 in Uncategorized
0

Introduction

            In this paper I will be analyzing the concept of “love” in the letter of 1 John. The paper will be categorized into the following two sections. First, I will attempt to develop several themes that are mentioned throughout the book in reference to the concept of “love.” I will then conclude the paper with a section suggesting why John uses the concept of “love” in the midst of the heretical teachings of the secessionists. 

Love of the Father

            The first theme to be mentioned in this paper is the theme of the Father’s love. The letter of 1 John displays what kind of love the Father has for his church. The first observation that will be made is that his love initiates and gives. 1 John 4:9-10 displays the ultimate sacrificial love the Father has for his children. He gave his only Son as a wrath absorbing sacrifice to bring us back into relationship with himself. He also tells his readers that he “first loved us” (1 John 4:19) and gave the ultimate gift to the church, namely his Son Jesus Christ. John Stott states, “The sending of God’s Son was both the revelation of his love (This is how God showed his love…9) and, indeed, the very essence of love itself (this is love…10). It is not our love that is primary, but God’s (10), free, uncaused and spontaneous, and all our love is but a reflection of his and a response to it.”[1]As a result of this great love, the Father also tells us how the giving of his Son as a sacrifice in 1 John 3:1 initiated their adoption into the family of God. The text reads, “See what kind of love the Father has given to us, that we should be called children of God; and so we are.” God is the primary source of love to his church and this love is to be returned to him in obedience to his revealed will.

            God in his very nature is love (1 John 4:16) and “by this [love] we know that we abide in him and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit” (1 John 4:13). Believers abiding in God prove their genuineness by displaying his characteristic of love to one another. Believers are in fact commanded to love one another (1 John 3:23; 4:21) but the love that is displayed is a direct reflection of the nature of God. As the initiator of love, his people respond with obedience to him. 1 John 3:24 states, “whoever keeps his commandments abides in God, and God in him….”

            In conclusion, the Father’s love was displayed for the good of his people by sending his Son to die for them. This was the ultimate sacrificial love. God initiated the plan of redemption because of the great love he demonstrated toward his people. His love is also evident in the lives of his followers as they live in obedience to his commandments. The obedience that comes from his people has been given to them by the Father’s gift of the Spirit. Lastly, God is love, and John displays that with brilliance in his first letter

Love of the Son

The next section will explore the love of the Son.  1 John 3:16 states, “By this we know love, that he laid down his life for us, and we ought to lay down our lives for the brothers.” The love of the Son was displayed by giving his life as a sacrifice for sin. His life was also dedicated to absolute purity and “in him there is no sin” (1 John 3:5). His moral perfection also displayed the type of love he had for his followers because his sinless character was bringing salvation them. The same sacrificial love is shown in 1 John 4:9-10 where Jesus gave himself as an atoning sacrifice for the redemption of a spiritually bankrupt people at enmity with his Father. He was declared the “Savior of the world” in 1 John 4:14 which further display’s his love being acted out on behalf his followers. His love is an active love. His love transforms the lives of his followers by causing them to live in purity, because 1 John 3:3 states, “and everyone who thus hopes in him purifies himself as he is pure.” On that glorious day, the love of the Son will be made perfect when his followers are finally made to “be like him” (1 John 3:2) in glorification.

Love in connection to the believer

The love God has displayed toward his followers is unparalleled. His creatures have rebelled against him and out of pure love he chose to set his affections on them for their good. God gave his only Son to absorb his holy wrath in order to justly set his love on his creatures. The love that was displayed on the cross of Jesus Christ is an illustration of the type of love followers of God are commanded to display toward their fellow man (1 John 3:24). Love has been poured out in their hearts as a result of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ (1 John 4:10-11) and they have been given the greatest gift. In return they are to display the love that God has shown them to their brothers. The same love rejoices in truth because God has set his anointing on his people (1 John 2:27). Although his followers are told that the world will hate them for believing this truth, they rejoice because they know the truth, and no lie is of the truth (1 John 2:21). His followers are also called to prove their love by being obedient to his commandments. Jesus Christ gave his life out of love for his followers and those that know him “keep his commandments” (1 John 2:3). Followers of Jesus Christ receive the old commandment as if it’s new because of their new found relationship in Christ. At one point in time they were at enmity with God but now because of the great love that has been shown to them, they rest in the love of their Savior and follow his commandments (1 John 2:7-8). 1 John 3:9 further explains the result of the believer’s union with Christ when it states, “No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God’s seed abides in him, and he cannot keep on sinning because he has been born of God.” His love demands obedience from his followers and further proves the genuineness of their faith in him. Believers in the Lord Jesus Christ have been forgiven much and are called to remain in a state of unparalleled joy coupled with continual repentance (1 John 1:9).

In conclusion, Jesus set his love on his followers and the only legitimate response is to return this love by believing the Gospel, loving the brethren, loving truth, forgiving others as they have been forgiven, and obeying his commandments.

Do not love the world

            There are many examples of what to love in this letter but there are also grave warnings concerning what not to love. 1 John 2:15-17 warns his followers not to love the world. The meaning in these verses explain that followers of Jesus Christ are called not to love fleshly desire, and possessions. Followers of God are also not permitted to love lawless living. 1 John 3:4 states, “Everyone who makes a practice of sinning also practices lawlessness; sin is lawlessness.” Believers are not to embrace darkness in any way because of its contrary nature to the revealed will of God. Jealousy and murder are also mentioned as behaviors that are not to be embraced by followers of God. Believers are called to love others (1 John 3:11) because they were first loved by God (1 John 4:19). Finally, followers of Jesus Christ are not to love sin and they are to expose this type of treason against their God (1 John 5:16).

            Followers of Christ behaved in this way before coming to know the love of God in Christ. After this conversion takes place the above mentioned sinful behaviors are no longer appealing in the same way they once did and this is because of the work that God has performed in their lives. He is to be praised, worshipped, and loved and all sinful habits are to be repented of (1 John 1:9) because of the great love he has displayed toward those that believe.

False teaching

            The letter of 1 John faced two major heresies. First, in 1 John 1:8-10 he fights an ethical battle over the nature of sin. False prophets were challenging John by declaring that they had no sin. They were rejecting the provision God had made for them in the cross of Jesus Christ. F.F. Bruce comments in his commentary by stating, “To assert that one has never sinned is to contradict the consistent witness of divine revelation and human experience. God makes provision for men as sinners; the acknowledgment of honest men confronted with the holiness of God takes the form, ‘I have sinned’.”[2] These false prophets were attempting to spread this teaching among God’s people.

            Second, 1 John 2:22 and 4:2 explain the other heresy that was being spread through the church. False prophets were denying the incarnation of Jesus Christ. They attacked the humanity of Christ by denying that he came in the flesh, thus denying that he was indeed the Christ. F.F. Bruce further comments, “To John, the Father is He who has revealed Himself uniquely and fully in the incarnate Jesus, not only in the ministry of word and work for which He was anointed by the Spirit at His baptism, but equally so – indeed, supremely so – in His death on the cross.” When these false prophets attacked the incarnation they were attacking one of the pillars of Christianity without which there is no salvation.

John’s use of love

            John’s use of love in this letter unmasks the heretical nature of the secessionists teaching by explaining how the love of God that has been shed abroad in hearts of his followers necessitates an ethical failure on their part. If his followers had no sin as the heretics taught, there would be no need for the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. The love of God has displayed the utter foolishness of this teaching in 1 John 1:8 when he stated, “If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.” The love of God that pursued his followers first displayed itself in the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross. The sacrifice of atonement that was made on behalf of his followers displayed the type of love God has for his people. The love God displays toward his people empowers them to live ethical lives to the glory of God. This would have been impossible if the heretical teaching that was being propagated among these churches was able to take root. Salvation would not come to those that deny they have no sin.

            The love of God was also displayed in the sending of his only Son to be a propitiation for sin. Jesus Christ revealed the Father while serving in his earthly ministry and did this as the incarnate God Man. The love of God dashes this heretical teaching to pieces because to deny the incarnate Son is to deny any form of salvation. Bruce states, “Those who denied the incarnation of the Son of God and saw no revelatory element in His passion refused that revelation of the Father which is imparted in the gospel. In denying the Son, they denied the Father too, little as they may have intended to do so.”[3] The heretics were not denying the Father in their teaching but in their denial of the Incarnate Christ, they were in essence denying the Father. The love of God was wonderfully displayed in the Incarnation. The God Man came to earth and displayed perfect love, even dying on the cross.

            In conclusion, we have taken a look into the letter of 1 John to see what ways God has displayed his love. The conclusion is that God is the initiator and Jesus Christ gave his life to further display his love. Because of this, followers of Jesus Christ have been empowered to love because of the power and example of the great love that God displayed toward his church. This love proves itself through obedience to the revealed will of God and seeks the good of others as Jesus Christ did for his followers. The false teachings that were being propagated made no real headway because the loving God who gave, is the same loving God that defends the rights of his truth and people.

[1] John R.W. Stott, The Letters of John (Leicester: Inter-Varsity, 1988), 164.

[2] F.F. Bruce, The Epistles of John (Old Tappan: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1970), 45.

[3] Bruce, 74.

10 Ways Jesus makes the Father known

Posted: February 9, 2012 in Uncategorized
1

(1) John 10:11-14 & Ezekiel 34:10-15

Jesus made the Father known through his work as shepherd. In John 10:11-14, Jesus was depicted as the shepherd King who cared for his own people. When all of the people went astray Jesus gathered his own and gave them security in himself. Through this, he was to be known as the shepherd king with sole protection and authority over the lives of his people. The Father also behaved in the same manner in Ezekiel 34:10-15. He did not stand idly watching the oppression of his people. He also promised to gather them together as a shepherd gathers his sheep and he gave them security.

(2) Luke 7:36-50 & Deuteronomy 4:32-40

In Luke 7:36-50, Jesus made the Father known by receiving worship. This would have been an utterly blasphemous thing if Jesus were not God. Only God was and is to receive worship. The Father demonstrated this same type of behavior in Deuteronomy 4:32-40 by declaring that he alone was to receive worship. Jesus gave us an excellent picture of how God received worship and also how believers throughout all ages are to worship him.

(3) Matthew 4:23, 24 & Exodus 4: 6, 7

Jesus made the Father known in Matthew 4:23, 24 by demonstrating his supernatural healing power. He also displayed the sovereign rights of the King of the universe by furthering the kingdom of God through these healings amongst his creatures. The Father demonstrated this same behavior in Exodus 4:6, 7, when he afflicted Moses with leprosy and immediately healed him of this disease. He was not only healing Moses physically; he was furthering the kingdom of God by means of convincing his people of who he was.

(4) John 4:39 & Psalm 94:9-11

Jesus made the Father known in John 4:39 by telling the woman by the well all she had ever done. This action gave insight into the type of knowledge that God has. This knowledge is not limited like human knowledge. He knew everything the woman had ever done and he had never even met her. The Father also displayed this characteristic in Psalm 94:11. The Father made bold declaration that he “knows the thoughts of man.” This knowledge displays God’s omniscience and deity.

(5) John 3:16, 17 & Isaiah 43:10-13

Jesus made the Father known in John 3:16-17 through his role as Savior of the world. He displayed to the world what kind of God the Father was. He was in essence declaring the desire that the Father had to bring people into a saving relationship with himself. The Father also displayed this same type of behavior in Isaiah 43:10-13, by declaring that only he was capable of bringing people into this saving relationship through firm faith and trust in his saving purposes.

(6) John 19: 28-30 & Exodus 12: 5, 6

Jesus made the Father known in John 19:28-30 by displaying that he was a God of justice. He paid the ultimate price by giving his life as a payment for sin, and fully propitiating the Father’s wrath. This behavior displayed how seriously the Father judged sin. Sin was required to have been punished and the Father displayed this same type of behavior in Exodus 12:5-6. The death of the Passover lamb signified to Israel that God required the death of the lamb in order for their homes to have been passed over. If the lamb were not slain, the justice of the Father would have fallen on their homes.

(7) John 1:3 & Genesis 1:1

Jesus made the Father known in John 1:3, having been attributed with creative power. “All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made” (John 1:3). This gave the picture of deity. Jesus and God both displayed creative power in the beginning. The Father displayed this same power in Genesis 1:1 when he “created the heavens and the earth.”

(8) Luke 21:1-4 & Exodus 22:25-27

Jesus made known the Father in Luke 21:1-4 by demonstrating his compassion for the poor. He gave another great description as to what the Father is like. He is a God that loves, cares, and shows compassion for his people. The Father demonstrated this same type of behavior in Exodus 22:25-27 when he told the poor man’s neighbor to “return it (cloak) to him before the sun goes down, for that is his only covering, and it is his cloak for his body; in what else shall he sleep? And if he cries to me, I will hear, for I am compassionate.” The Father is a compassionate God and Jesus makes this known very clearly in the passage in Luke.

(9) Matthew 21:12, 13 & Judges 2:11-15

Jesus made the Father known in Matthew 21:12-13 by displaying jealous anger for the house of God. The anger Jesus displayed can be described as his having been righteously angry for the glory of his Father. Jesus caused great distress to fall on all who were in the temple that day by reacting in such a confrontational manner. He was serious about his Father’s honor and glory. The Father displayed the same type of behavior in Judges 2:11-15. The people of Israel were constantly whoring after idols and bowing down to them. The Father’s jealous anger went out against the people of Israel. He gave them into the hands of their enemies in order to teach them what it meant to be jealous for his glory, and bring them to repentance and faith.

(10) Matthew 5:17 & Habakkuk 1:13

Jesus made the Father known in Matthew 5:17 by declaring that he came to fulfill all righteousness. His behavior demonstrated the purity of God. God is holy and completely set apart from sin and Jesus demonstrated this behavior throughout his entire life. The Father also displayed the same characteristic in Habakkuk 1:13. He declared that he was “of purer eyes than to see evil and cannot look at wrong.” God is without sin and Jesus made the purpose of his Father known by behaving in accordance with the fulfillment of all righteousnes

Between the Animal Parts

Posted: December 28, 2011 in Uncategorized
1

Introduction

                        The topic of the ancient near eastern treaty and its relationship to the Old Testament has created a tremendous stir within the last fifty to sixty years. There has been a lot of focused attention given to the subject. This paper will attempt to look at and analyze the relationship between Genesis 15:10, 17, Exodus 24:3-8, and Jeremiah 34:18, and the ancient near eastern treaty. Attention will be focused on the formation of the ancient near eastern suzerain / vassal treaty along with the biblical parallels as listed above. Lastly, I will be drawing attention to the meaning of the animal rite as mentioned in all three passages.

Treaty Formation

                        There has been a general acceptance of parallels within the ancient near eastern treaty and the Old Testament within the past couple of decades. Thousands of hours of study have gone into this fascinating topic and there has been an enormous amount of energy dedicated to the ancient near eastern treaty as never before. In these studies there has been more attention given to parallels in the Old Testament and the Hittite form of ancient near eastern treaty than any of the other treaty forms. The following section will focus on the formation of the ancient near eastern treaty.

There are six elements to the formation of the ancient near eastern treaty although not all of these treaties include all six sections or follow this strict order in there formation. Kenneth Kitchen comments on this by stating, “external evidence on treaties and covenants shows that the order of enactment does not always correspond to the final order of items in formal written copies of such a document.”[1]

The first section of the treaty began with a preamble. This section would be the suzerain’s introduction to the vassal king. The preamble would display the great suzerain king’s high and exalted status. There are also parallels to the ancient near eastern treaty preamble in the Old Testament. Yahweh is mentioned as the great suzerain king in Exodus 20:1; Deuteronomy 1:1-5 and Joshua 24:1-2[2]. Yahweh’s treaty preamble would be different than ordinary ancient near eastern treaty preambles in that Yahweh as presented in the Old Testament is not pridefully boasting of his status as the ancient kings were prone to. Yahweh presents himself as a merciful King that cares for his people. Second, there would be a historical prologue. In this section of the treaty the suzerain king would remind the vassal king of his past acts of protection and faithfulness. The suzerain would remind his vassal of the privileges of protection and power he has from his great overlord. This section would also include past relationships between the suzerain and the vassal’s familial history of kingship. The historical prologue is another category that can be found in the Old Testament. Exodus 20:2, Deuteronomy 1:6-8, and Joshua 24:2-13 are prime examples of the historical prologue in the Old Testament.[3] The third section of the treaty would include treaty stipulations. The section concerning stipulations would be either one section of general stipulations or some were broken into two separate sections including general stipulations and a section dedicated to more specific stipulations. The stipulation section includes obligations that the suzerain king would impose on his vassal king. The stipulation section would also include the obligation of absolute vassal allegiance to the suzerain. Along with this, the vassal must be made ready for war when called upon by his overlord. The stipulations section of the ancient near eastern treaty is the core of the treaty and as John H. Walton states,

“if the biblical examples did not have stipulations, there would be very little basis for comparing them to the ancient treaties. In Exodus-Leviticus, stipulations comprise the Decalogue, the covenant code, and the ritual instructions in Leviticus 1-25. In Deuteronomy, certainly chapters 12-26 are stipulations, and many find reason to include 4-11 also. In Joshua 24, verses 14-15 are the core of the stipulations, with 16-25 also containing the repetition of some of them.[4]

 

The fourth section focuses on the documentary clause. This section of treaty formation would focus on the public deposit and regular reading of the treaty document. This was to remind the suzerain and vassal of their binding treaty obligations. There are also Old Testament parallels to this verse and we may include Exodus 24:7 which states, “Then he took the Book of the Covenant and read it in the hearing of the people. And they said, “All that the LORD has spoken we will do, and we will be obedient.” Further attention will be given to this verse and concept of treaty ratification in later sections. The fifth section of the ancient near eastern treaty would call the ancient pagan gods to witness the document. In the declaration of treaty witness the pagan gods are made to be protectors and enforcers of the treaty document. The major difference between the ancient near eastern treaty and the Old Testament is that Yahweh’s treaty with Israelwould not call other gods to witness the document because Yahweh declares himself to be the only God. In fact, he would even call “heaven and earth” (Deuteronomy 30:19a) as witness to the treaty document. Also, in Deuteronomy 31:19 Yahweh “instructs Moses to comprise a song and teach it to the Israelites so that it may function as a witness”[5] to his treaty document. Lastly, the most important thing to notice again is that Yahweh does not need to call pagan gods as witnesses to his treaty, and because he is the Sovereign of the universe he has nothing else to call as witness than himself displayed through his created order. Hence, the calling of heaven and earth as witness serves his purpose. The sixth and final section of treaty formation is the curses and blessings of the treaty. This section speaks of the ramifications of failing to fulfill treaty stipulations. The gods would watch over the suzerain or vassal depending on which king was obligated to keep treaty stipulations (usually the vassal was responsible for maintaining fidelity to the suzerain). The gods would also be responsible for ensuring blessing and curse.[6]

History

            This section will attempt to set forth a historical perspective surrounding the ancient near eastern treaty along with its biblical parallel. Debate surrounds the dating of the ancient near eastern treaty and that of the Pentateuch. Genesis 15:17 and Jeremiah 34:18 represent two separate animal rites in history. This has been the subject of great concern amongst scholars seeking to find the meaning of the animal rites[7] as well as whether or not there is a similarity in dating the biblical covenants alongside the ancient near eastern treaty.  The passage in Genesis 15:17 states, “When the sun had gone down and it was dark, behold, a smoking fire pot and a flaming torch passed between these pieces” (Genesis 15:17 ESV). This represents a form of a treaty that was almost completely foreign to early second millennium treaties accept for two known examples in the Alalakh and Mari Letters[8]. In both of these documents there are examples of animal rites[9]. The significance of these findings confirm that there indeed were examples of the animal rite in the time of Abraham in the early second millennium B.C. Also, later Jeremiah 34:18 states, “And the men who transgressed my covenant and did not keep the terms of  the covenant that they made before me, I will make them like the calf that they cut in two and passed between its parts” (Jeremiah 34:18, ESV). This passage also provides further affirmation of the animal rite in the Old Testament. The purpose of the animal rite in the ancient near eastern treaty served to do one of two things that are also contested. Scholars debate over whether or not the animal rite is a royal grant.  In this, the suzerain has promised to fulfill his own terms by means of gracious promise with no stipulations being placed on his vassal. Second, the animal rite in ancient near eastern treaty language would signify what would happen to the vassal king if he did not fulfill the terms of the treaty. Namely, he would be slaughtered like the animal he is walking between. Further historical evidence points to the fact that the suzerain would almost never participate in walking between the animal parts alone as suggested in Genesis 15:17. But again, it has happened in rare cases in ancient near eastern treaties.[10] Lastly, I would suggest through historical evidence that the second millennium B.C. Hittite treaty form provides, “the best backdrop for comparisons with the Mosaic covenant and support the credibility of a mid-second millennium date for the composition of the Pentateuch.”[11]

Commentary

            This next section will attempt to answer the question of whether or not there is a connection between the three passages. From the gathering of this data there are scholars on both ends of the spectrum agreeing and disagreeing on the meaning of the animal rite. Genesis 15:10, and 17 state, “And he brought him all these, cut them in half, and laid each half over against the other. But he did not cut the birds in half” (Genesis 15:10 ESV) and “When the sun had gone down and it was dark, behold, a smoking fire pot and a flaming torch passed between these pieces” (Genesis 15:17 ESV). Although this ratification ceremony seems strange because of the suzerain king walking between the animal parts, this type of royal grant has occurred in both biblical and extra-biblical examples throughout history[12]. Because of this scholars have a hard time accepting the idea that Yahweh would be calling down a curse on his own head if he did not perform the stipulations of his own treaty[13]. On the other hand, there are scholars that support this type of treaty of which some refer to as a royal grant; affirming the idea that Yahweh was in fact displaying his sovereign power by stating that he would definitely fulfill this treaty in terms that would be understood in the ancient near east.[14] This seems to be the best interpretation given the data available for study. Yahweh promises to fulfill this royal grant to Abraham and his spiritual descendants throughout all of history (Romans 4:16). The passage in Genesis 15:10, 17 also seems to have a direct relationship with the ratification ceremony mentioned in Jeremiah 34:18 which states, “and the men who transgressed my covenant and did not keep the terms of the covenant that they made before me, I will make them like the calf that they cut in two and passed between its parts” (Jeremiah 34:18 ESV). There is definitely mention of the animal rite in this passage which seems to bring further affirmation that people in the ancient near east would understand the significance and meaning of this animal rite due to the examples in extra-biblical history. However, there is a sharp distinction in the roles of the suzerain and vassal between this passage (Jeremiah 34:18) and the passage in Genesis 15:10, 17. Yahweh is not the One walking between the animal parts in Jeremiah 34:18. The people as Yahweh’s vassal walked between the animal parts. This distinction can also be mentioned and possibly related to the ratification ceremony in Exodus 24:8 which states, “And Moses took the blood and threw it on the people and said, “Behold the blood of the covenant that the LORD has made with you in accordance with all these words” (Exodus 24:8 ESV).[15]

The relationship between the Jeremiah 34:18 and Exodus 24:8 passages exist in that the people are acting as Yahweh’s vassal obligating themselves to keep the stipulations of his covenant. I would suggest that these passages have in essence the same meaning. As Dilbert R. Hillers notes, “the idea is similar to that involved in passing between the parts of an animal; the sprinkling with blood in a similar way establishes contact and identification with the victim. The thought is “May the Lord do so to me, and more also, if I go back on my word…”[16] The passage in Jeremiah 34:18 makes definite mention of the curse sanction and I would suggest that Yahweh’s vassals in Exodus 24:8 do the same exact thing. Exodus, chapters 19-24 contain the entire Sinai treaty and at the conclusion Moses declares, “Here is the blood of the covenant which God has made [literally, “cut”’] with you, on these terms”[17] The implications of the “cutting” of the covenant in both passages again imply that this type of ratification ceremony was something that was understood to be a curse-sanction for not maintaining fidelity to the treaty. This is very similar in its formation to the passage in Genesis 15:17.

Genesis 15:17 also displays a form of curse-sanction but in this passage the people as Yahweh’s vassal did not walk between the animal parts. Yahweh walks between the animal parts by himself. His vassal servant Abram is asleep when Yahweh literally walks out and performs his treaty. This curse-sanction is declared to be fulfilled by Yahweh.

The reason that Yahweh can declare fulfillment of the curse-sanction in Genesis 15:17 is not because he is an unjust God but in fact the exact opposite is true. The curse-sanction of the treaty must be dealt with but since Yahweh is God Almighty he has no other god to call on in order to witness the treaty’s formation, and also watching over it in order to ensure its sanctions are kept. The question is just how will Yahweh ensure justice when dealing with people that break the sanction section of the treaty?

This question will begin to give clarity as to the differences between the three passages. First, in Exodus 24:8 and Jeremiah 34:18 Yahweh has the people declaring, “all that the Lord has said we will do.” The passages also deal with an animal being sacrificed in order to ratify the treaty. In Jeremiah 34:18 Yahweh tells the people that he is going to make them like the animal that they passed between; likewise in Exodus 24:8, after declaring the entire Sinai treaty the people declare that they will keep the terms of the treaty. At the conclusion of the Sinai treaty Moses takes half of the blood from the animal sacrifice and sprinkles it on the people. When the blood was sprinkled on the people it was a symbol that the entire Sinai treaty had been ratified in a way very similar to the ratification ceremony that occurred in Jeremiah 34:18. The people did not pass between the animal parts but the same essential message was conveyed and might have even been understood by the people when Moses threw the blood of the animal sacrifice on them; due to the type of ratification and it’s occurrence in their culture.

Likewise, Genesis 15:17 also spoke of an animal rite. But again, in this case Yahweh walks between the animal parts. If compared to what has occurred above we may conclude that Yahweh in essence is saying, “all that I say I will do.” Also, if following the pattern above, he is also saying that if he does not perform the obligations of the treaty he will make himself like the animal that he walked through. This portion of the treaty is where scholars in the past have run into major problems because like mentioned above they cannot come to grips with Yahweh declaring that he will call curse-sanctions down on himself. But he does this very thing! The treaty stipulations along with the blessings and curses must be dealt with in order for Yahweh to be a just King that keeps his stipulations. This should not point people away from dealing with the animal rites as presented in these passages in the Old Testament. It should cause scholars to figure out how Yahweh does it.

Conclusion

            The Genesis 15:17 passage follows the same order as the Exodus 24:8 and Jeremiah 34:18 passages in that Yahweh sent his only Son to fulfill the curse-sanction. Jesus Christ is the One who absorbed the full wrath of Yahweh for the people that were counted in the treaty of the Great King. Jesus Christ has enabled Yahweh to be “just and the justifier” (Romans 3:26) because he did not overlook broken treaty stipulations or deal with them the same way he did in Exodus 24:8 or Jeremiah 34:18, by enforcing them on the people. Instead the merciful King satisfied the demands of the treaty in Himself. This is the good news of Genesis 15:17. All who “believe God and are counted righteous” (Genesis 15:6) are justified because of the merits of another, namely the great King who walked between the animal parts on their behalf. In biblical terms one may conclude that salvation is by grace alone because Yahweh has secured salvation for all that he has given to his Son (John 6:37). He would pay the ultimate price by laying down his life for a people that should have had to walk between the animal parts and suffer the consequence of breaking Yahweh’s stipulations, suffering the curse-sanctions as recorded in the treaty of the Great King.

[1] Kenneth A. Kitchen, On the Reliability of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2003), 283.

 

[2] John H. Walton, Ancient Israelite Literature in its Cultural Context (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1989), 102.

 

[3] Ibid

[4] Ibid. 103

[5] Ibid. 104

[6] Also see Charles F. Fensham, “Clauses of protection in Hittite vassal-treaties and the Old Testament,” Vetus Testamentum 13 (1963): 133-143 and Meredith Kline, “Dynastic Covenant,” Westminster Theological Journal 23 (1960): 1-15 and J.A. Thompson, “The significance of the ancient near eastern treaty pattern.” Tyndale House Bulletin 13 (1963): 1-6 for further data concerning treaty formation.

[7] John H. Walton, Ancient Israelite Literature in its Cultural Context (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1989), 106.

 

[8] James B. Pritchard, Ancient Near Eastern Texts (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969), 482.

[9] John H. Walton and Victor H. Matthews, The IVP Bible background commentary: Genesis-Deuteronomy (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1997), 42.

[10] Dennis J. McCarthy, Treaty and Covenant (Rome: 1963, 51-53.

[11] Michael A. Grisanti, The World and the Word (Nashville: B&H Publishing Group, 2011), 62.

[12] James B. Pritchard, Ancient Near Eastern Texts (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969), 482.

[13] See Gerhard F. Hasel, “The meaning of the animal rite in Genesis 15,” Journal For the Study of The Old Testament (1981): 64 and Dennis J. McCarthy, Treaty and Covenant (Rome: 1978), 63.

[14] See Gordon D. Fee, How to Read the Bible for all its worth (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003), 165-166; Dan McCartney, Let the reader understand (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 2002), 201, 207; Michael S. Horton, God of Promise (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2006), 40-41; Arvid S. Kapelrud, “The interpretation of Jeremiah 34:18,” Journal For the Study of the Old Testament no. 22 (1982): 140.

[15] Michael S. Horton, God of Promise (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2006), 31, 40.

[16] Dilbert R. Hillers, Covenant: The History of a Biblical Idea (Baltimore: John Hopkins Press, 1969), 57.

[17] Ibid. 56

Inerrancy – A Starting Point

Posted: October 27, 2011 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , ,
0

Introduction

Much debate exists today when discussing the topic of ‘truth’. This essay will defend the position of ‘biblical inerrancy.’ In 1978, a document was compiled on the topic of biblical inerrancy that caused an enormous stirring within evangelical and academic circles. This document was affirmed and signed by nearly 300 evangelical scholars. The title of the document is The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy[1] and the reader is advised to read this document as supplementary material to the current discussion. As ‘truth’ invites great controversy it will also be my position that ‘truth’ brings great freedom to the soul. Furthermore, attention will be given to ideas one must contend with when dealing with the truthfulness of the written Word. A.W. Pink, a 20th century theologian makes a valuable statement in his commentary on the Gospel of John, “If then the Word is truth what a high value we should put upon it. If it is by the truth we are sanctified, how dearly we should prize it. How solemn too is the converse: if truth separates from  evil, error conducts into evil. It was so at the beginning: it was believing the Devil’s lie which plunged our race into sin and death! Then beware of error: as poison is to the body, so is error to the soul. Shun those who deny any part of God’s truth as you would a deadly plague: “Take heed what ye hear’ (Mark 4:24).”[2] And lastly, I will present a case for maintaining orthodoxy within the context of affirming current culture without compromising the truth claims of Christianity and biblical inerrancy.

 

Thy Word is Truth

Today’s Christian should make a defense for the doctrine of biblical inerrancy. “Thy word is truth” (John 17:17) represents an absolute claim that favors the affirmation of this controversial doctrine. The claim is also an intellectual assault on the teaching surrounding todays widely accepted understanding of knowledge as relative versus believing in absolutes. The first way biblical inerrancy must be understood is that the Bible is ‘true’. The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy presents the reader with definitions of both infallibility and inerrancy as thus: “’Infallible’ signifies the quality of neither misleading nor being misled and so safeguards in categorical terms the truth that Holy Scripture is a sure, safe and reliable rule and guide in all matters. Similarly, ‘inerrant’ signifies the quality of being free from all falsehood or mistake and so safeguards the truth that Holy Scripture is entirely true and trustworthy in all its assertions.”[3]This stance is very counter-cultural and great gain is made when one proclaims it with boldness. D.A. Carson presents the reader with a postmodern view and notes that, “religions that speak of being right or wrong on certain matters or that support any form of exclusive claim or that uphold rigorous standards of personal and public morality will be dismissed as “intolerant,” even if they vigorously support the right of all religions to defend their own patch and seek new converts.”[4] There is a great chasm that needs to be bridged by today’s evangelical community and the question that arises is how one might find victory in this great battle for truth? God in His most wise and divine providence has not only protected His word from extinction but He has also protected it from error throughout many generations. The Bible also declares in various passages[5] that God is the divine author of Scripture. The Scripture is also referred to as ‘theopneustos’ or ‘breathed out by God’ displaying God given inspiration even through the means of fallen men. This battle must be fought by proclaiming the God-breathed word as inerrant. In conclusion to this section I will leave the reader with an affirming quote from James Montgomery Boice, “When the church takes its proper stand and teaches that the Bible is truthful, something else happens. Not only is sin disclosed, but individuals are also brought face to face with the God of Scripture. Despite the disturbing nature of that confrontation, it is what we need if we are to grow strong as God’s children.”[6]

What is the word and how is it true?

The ‘Word’ is the written Word of God as presented in the writings of Holy Scripture. This ‘Word’ and the sense in which it can be understood as ‘true’ has been the topic of much dispute in recent decades. I will affirm this doctrine as presented in The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy. The overarching theme presented in the statement can be summed up as “what Scripture says, God says.”[7] This is a truth claim and biblical inerrancy can and must be seen as vital for the continued growth of today’s evangelical church. Holy Scripture declares itself as authoritative in all that it teaches. This ‘Word’ through the operation of the Holy Spirit binds the conscience of human beings and makes them willing to receive the divine Word as authoritative in their lives. An excellent example of this can be found in the second letter to the church in Corinth with these words, “For even if I made you grieve with my letter, I do not regret it–though I did regret it, for I see that that letter grieved you, though only for a while. As it is, I rejoice, not because you were grieved, but because you were grieved into repenting. For you felt a godly grief, so that you suffered no loss through us” (2 Cor. 7:8-9, ESV). This valuable statement in Scripture also affirms the written Word as revelation from God through the use of human language. One might ask how God can maintain inerrancy through the use of imperfect human beings or why has God not seen fit to ensure perfection through all of the copied texts that have been written throughout history? Roger Nicole understands this concern when discussing such a vital topic and gives the church a valuable answer when he states, “In fact, however, we do find that manuscripts differ. We find that those ancients who quoted or copied the Bible were subject to the same frailties which are found among those who copied other works. Probably no manuscript is entirely like any other manuscript, for even those who did their labors with painstaking care still introduced some slight deviations into their product. We need to take account of this in our understanding of inspiration. It was recognition of this fact which led evangelical theologians to emphasize the inspiration of the original manuscripts.”[8] This affirmation was also presented by the authors of the Chicago Statement. Precision was achieved through the biblical authors in the original autographs and inerrancy is accepted through proper interpretation using the grammatico-historical exegetical method of interpretation[9]. The main point of this is that of the biblical authors ‘original manuscript’ as said to be inerrant, not copies or translations but as the ‘original manuscripts’ were recorded. There is also an amazing internal cohesiveness within the Scriptures that further points to the divine inspiration within. Also, when points of dispute or apparent contradiction are encountered one finds this internal cohesion further expressed within the analogy of faith. Scripture interprets Scripture! Lastly, biblical inerrancy is only understood by those who have been regenerated. Jesus states in John 3:3, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.”

Contend & Believe

James Montgomery Boice makes note of his encounter with relativism when he notes, “I remember the first time I came across the idea that there is no firm view of truth today. It was in college when I first read C.S. Lewis’ The Screwtape Letters. Wormwood, the junior devil, had written to Screwtape, his superior, to get advice on how he should handle his “patient,” a man who was about to become a Christian. Wormwood had introduced him to a materialist who had been giving him reasons why he should not believe in Christianity. This plan had not worked very well. By presenting his arguments the materialist had caused the patient to think, and as he thought, some of the evidences for Christianity had begun to get through to him. Wormwood wanted to know what he should do. In the first letter Screwtape replied that a rationalistic approach to the patient was wrong, because today people do not operate on the basis of arguments. He said that the way to deal with the patient was not to convince him that Christianity was wrong, but that it was outworn, academic, or irrelevant.”[10] This is a good example for the church to learn from when considering why Wormwood was at fault. He was at fault because he made the man ‘think’. This is a powerful thought in the midst of a post-modern world. Christianity is “outworn, academic, or irrelevant.” Also, Christians that claim the Bible to be inerrant and true have even been charged with “willful ignorance or intellectual dishonesty”[11] and even “idolatry.”[12] Another idea that evangelicals must contend with is the idea that ‘what’s true for you isn’t true for me’. This position may abound because human beings in their fallen nature do not want to be held accountable to a holy, just God. Lastly, evangelical believers must contend with the unbelieving world accusing them of intolerance because “absolutism…manipulates people and controls them”[13] which leads to problems with evangelistic efforts. D.A. Carson notes, “evangelism, understood to be proselytization, is often viewed in the broad culture as intrinsically obnoxious, because no matter how gently it is done, it cannot avoid giving the impression that Christians think they have something superior.”[14] This presents further ramifications for Christians because some will become passive in their witness for the supremacy of Jesus Christ in all things. These are some big problems but the Sovereign God of the universe has great things in store for the evangelical church. Through an understanding of the times that Christians are currently living in, one can find great hope by affirming biblical inerrancy and making a defense to “contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3, ESV). The next section will focus on bridging the gap between a firm grasp and affirmation of the doctrine of biblical inerrancy while at the same time confronting the world with the truth claims of Jesus Christ in a slightly different way.

Conclusion

In conclusion, affirmation of the doctrine of biblical inerrancy along with affirming culturally relevancy within a biblical guideline will be taken. Acts 17:26 states, “…having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place.” This affirms the providential hand of God in determining when and where Christians fit into today’s world. A firm grasp and belief in biblical inerrancy will naturally lead to debate in the postmodern world that evangelicals have been called to live in at this very point in time. D.A. Carson notes, “In a culture where many people read and substantially know the Bible, the Bible’s absolute claims regarding God, salvation, many forms of right and wrong, and the like will discourage the rapid spread of postmodern relativism.”[15] Biblical literacy that affirms the Bible’s truthfulness along with an understanding of current culture gives the church an excellent opportunity to practice and experience the Great Commission in a new and invigorating way. Mark Driscoll, in his book Confessions of a Reformission Rev., presents the church with a way to bridge the gap between the two camps as displayed above. He states, “Gospel+Culture+Church=Reformission” he further defines this term, “Reformission combines the best aspects of each of these types of Christianity: living in the tension of being culturally liberal yet theologically conservative Christains and churches who are absolutely driven by the gospel of grace to love their Lord, their neighbors, and their fellow Christians.”[16] Reformission affirms the doctrine of biblical inerrancy in its fullest while also affirming the ever changing culture. When one of these falls, one vital aspect of the church goes with it. Matthew 28:18-20 affirms the supremacy of Jesus Christ in all things and Christians are given the task of proclaiming the absolute truth claims of Christianity, “And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age” (Matt. 28:18-20, ESV).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bibliography

Beale, G.K. The Erosion of Inerrancy in Evangelicalism: Responding to New Challenges to Biblical Authority. Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2008.

Boice, James Montgomery. Standing on the Rock: Upholding Biblical Authority in a Secular Age. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1994.

—. The Foundation of Biblical Authority. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1978.

Carson, D.A. Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005.

Driscoll, Mark. Confessions of a Reformission Rev. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2006.

Nicole, Roger R., Michaels, J. Ramsey. Inerrancy and Common Sense. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1980.

Pink, A.W. Exposition of the Gospel of John. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1975.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[1] The Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals, “Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy,” The International Counsel on Biblical Inerrancy, http://www.alliancenet.org/CC_Content_Page/0,,PTID307086_CHID750054_CIID,00.html (accessed October 24, 2010).

[2] A.W. Pink, Exposition of the Gospel of John (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1945), 949.

[3] The Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals, “Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy,” The International Counsel on Biblical Inerrancy, http://www.alliancenet.org/CC_Content_Page/0,,PTID307086_CHID750054_CIID,00.html (accessed October 24, 2010).

[4] D.A. Carson, Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005), 100.

[5] See: 2 Peter 1:19-21; 2 Timothy 3:16; Luke 1:3

[6] James Montgomery Boice. Standing on the Rock: Upholding Biblical Authority in a Secular Age (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1994), 25.

[7] The Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals, “Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy,” The International Counsel on Biblical Inerrancy, http://www.alliancenet.org/CC_Content_Page/0,,PTID307086_CHID750054_CIID,00.html (accessed October 24, 2010).

[8] Roger R. Nicole, The Nature of Inerrancy from Inerrancy and Common Sense (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1980), 73-74.

[9] Article 23:  The Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals, “Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy,” The International Counsel on Biblical Inerrancy, http://www.alliancenet.org/CC_Content_Page/0,,PTID307086_CHID750054_CIID,00.html (accessed October 24, 2010).

[10] James Montgomery Boice, Standing on the Rock: Upholding Biblical Authority in a Secular Age (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1994), 15, 16

[11] James Montgomery Boice, Standing on the Rock: Upholding Biblical Authority in a Secular Age (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1994), 15, 16 Quotes: “Dr. Robert G. Bratcher in the News report by Dan Martin of the Baptist Press, Nashville, Tennessee. Bratcher states “Only willful ignorance or intellectual dishonesty can account for the claim that the Bible is inerrant and infallible… No truth-loving, God-respecting, Christ-honoring believer should be guilty of such heresy. To invest the Bible with the qualities of inerrancy and infallibility is to idolatrize it, to transform it into a false God…”

[12] Ibid. 15, 16.

[13] D.A. Carson, Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005), 97

[14]Ibid. 101.

[15] D.A. Carson, Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005), 99.

[16] Mark Driscoll, Confessions of a Reformission Rev. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2006), 15.

You MUST be being Transformed!

Posted: October 5, 2011 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
0

Introduction

             In this essay I will be discussing the phrase “transformed by the renewing of the mind” that is found in Romans 12:2.  First, I will be the meaning of the word ‘transformed’. Second, I will be discussing the Creator-creature distinction with an emphasis on the preeminence of the ontological Trinity. This will be placed in the context of western culture in the 21st century. Furthermore I will describe some of the current problems preventing this transformation from happening. Lastly, I will present how we might prevent this problem from reoccurring.

Meaning

The word ‘μεταμορφουσθε’ or ‘transformed’ has a unique meaning. We can break the word down in two parts. First, the word ‘μετά’ is a preposition meaning ‘with’. Second, the word ‘μορφόω’ can be translated as a ‘shaping’ or ‘forming’.[1] Next, I will parse the verb: present, passive, imperative, second person, plural.[2] The point that needs highlighting is that this word is an imperative. The word can be literally translated as ‘you must be being transformed by…’. The significance is obvious. Since the word is a passive imperative it means that you ‘must’ be being transformed by something. Let’s use the illustration of a child playing baseball. You can say ‘the child hit the ball’ which displays the child as having the active role or you can say ‘the child was hit by the ball’ which displays the child as the one on the receiving end or in the passive sense which is our meaning in this word.  In Romans 12:2 something goes on the offense while the recipient is being ‘μεταμορφουσθε’ (transformed) by something. That something is the ‘renewal’ of the mind. Since the renewing of the mind is how a Christian again ‘must’ be transformed the approach taken will describe the problem in the 21st century as a severe lacking of a biblical renewal of the mind intellectually.

Man with the Iron Mask

            For this study the man with the iron mask the one who suppresses his knowledge of himself as he truly is.[3] What might this mean? Michael Horton states, “from the abandonment of the self-revealing God came the enthronement of the autonomous (divine) self.”[4] Many churches have adopted this mindset and have been negligent in two ways. First churches are allowing this type of teaching to exist in the local body but even teaching this both directly and indirectly. Second, this faulty perception is also in agreement with Immanuel Kant in saying “the right way to advance is not from grace to virtue but rather from virtue to grace.”[5] When starting with virtue and leading to grace an enormous problem seeps in and corrodes the church. J. Gresham Machen states, “The chief modern rival of Christianity is “liberalism.” An examination of the teachings of liberalism in comparison with those of Christianity will show that at every point the two movements are in direct opposition.”[6] The biblical description of the nature of man has been suppressed and almost altogether dismissed in today’s culture along with the replacement of self on equal terms with the God of the Bible.

Creator-Creature Distinction

            Next the distinction between the Creator and the creature will be presented Again, a proper understanding of this concept will help immensely when seeking to find an answer to how Christianity can be restored in America. Vern Poythress presents a picture through the lens of Westminster theologian Cornelius Van Til, “According to the Bible, the Creator-creature distinction is fundamental (Gen 1; Isaiah 40: 1 Cor 8:6; Col 1:15-17). There are two levels of being, two levels of existence: the self-sufficient, original existence of God the Creator, and the dependent, derivative existence of creatures.”[7] He further states, “God’s knowledge must be differentiated from the knowledge that creatures have (Isa 40:28). God’s knowledge is original and self-sufficient (Isa 40:13-14). Our knowledge is derivative and dependent (Ps 94:10).[8] This point gives great insight into the Creator-creature distinction. In light of the statement from Kant above a head on collision has just occurred. Modern man has the tendency by nature to place himself in the position of God. Van Til describes man’s place as a creature under the sovereign rule of God Almighty while Kant places man at the center. The statements from Van Til also describe the ‘ontological Trinity’. The ontological Trinity is “God as he is in his own existence before creation and independent of creation.”[9] God is the One who is (ontology) according to this method of thought before creatures attain knowledge (epistemology). In fact without the ontological Trinity the entire idea of knowledge, thought, or any other concept surrounding intellect is non-existent. The definition of the Creator-creature distinction draws a sharp line between the two. This has direct implications when considering the state of the church because the natural man wants to climb the heights to attain equality with God. Martin Luther would refer to this as being a theologian of glory. This theologian of glory can be described as one who “involves us in the task of ascending to heaven when we should be seeking like our Lord to come down to earth, to learn what it means to be a Christian here on this earth.”[10] The problem stated describes man as having elevated himself to a position of equality with God. This is the prevailing though of the 21st century church.

 

Human Nature

            Along with the brief description of the Creator-creature distinction let’s turn our eyes and look at the implications of the fallen nature of humanity. Humans are sinners by nature (Gen. 3; Rom. 5:12-21, ESV). Louis Berkhof describes the effects of the fall in garden thus, “This sin is called “original sin,” (1) because it is derived from the original root of the human race; (2) because it is present in the life of every individual from the time of his birth, and therefore cannot be regarded as the result of imitation; and (3) because it is the inward root of all the actual sins that defile the life of man.”[11] This is definitely not the definition received in much of modern Christendom. A majority of 21st century Christianity has removed the idea of humanity in its fallen state. This concept has been replaced with the idea of being wounded or hurt and how one might pick themselves up and like the theologian of glory, climb the ladder of self-righteous Phariseeism. Original sin also gives great insight into an understanding of the place of man in the context of the Creator-creature distinction. Humans are sinners by nature. Next we will discuss the idea of how to bring about change in the church.

The Cure: Theologian of the Cross

            Thus far the term for transformed has been defined in the original language along with describing the Creator-creature distinction and the nature of man. We have also built a case against those that place themselves in the position of God Almighty by faulty epistemological foundations. The Christian must cast aside the Kantian idea of virtue leading to grace and trust in the One who came down to earth. Again Michael Horton states that, “instead of striving as masters of reality to behold God in his archetypal majesty, we must take our place as unfaithful servants and be addressed by him on his own terms, in judgment and grace.”[12] And “While a theology of glory presumes to scale the walls of God’s heavenly chamber, a theology of the cross will always recognize that although we cannot reach God, he can reach us and has done so in his preached and written Word…”[13] Thus we are beginning to see a cure to this deadly disease. With this knowledge what can we do to affect change in the lives of those in the church? Christians need to take serious the imperative to be transformed by the renewing of the mind. Jesus Christ needs to be seen as the One who condescends to earth to meet humanity in desperate need. We must also see Jesus Christ as the most glorious One to ever live. He must not even be mentioned with mere mortals. He far transcends anyone or thing in the history of the universe. J.P. Moreland states, “Jesus was not merely a Savior from sin: He was the wisest, most intelligent, most attractive person they had ever seen. Interestingly, in the early centuries of Christianity, the church presented Jesus to unbelievers precisely because He was wiser, more virtuous, more intelligent, and more attractive in His character than Aristotle, Plato, Moses, or anyone else.”[14] The Gospel of God’s saving work in Christ is the ultimate way the mind is transformed and renewed. Also, Christians must see scripture alone as the inerrant and infallible rule of life. So how can Christians stand in the midst of a relativistic culture that does not believe in absolute truth and exalts itself to the position of God? Again, the Gospel is the only hope for change. The Christian must not accept the post-modern notion of relativism. If the Christian is to stand in the midst of confusion and unbelief he or she will believe the scriptures when they proclaim that all of humankind has a knowledge of God but suppresses it. (Rom. 1:18-23, ESV). The Gospel that God came to earth to die for sinners and not that man has climbed into heaven to find God brings life!

Conclusion

What if every person rejected the Gospel from now until the end of time, should the message change? Should the basis of knowledge go back into the corner of the creature? Should pragmatism overtake the authority of the Bible? Again Cornelius Van Til gives insight, “As for the question of whether the natural man will accept the truth of such an argument, we answer that he will if God pleases by his Spirit  to take the scales from his eyes and the mask from his face. It is upon the power of the Holy Spirit that the Reformed preacher relies when he tells men that they are lost in sin and in need of a Savior. The Reformed preacher does not tone down his message in order that it may find acceptance with the natural man. The natural man is, by virtue of his creation in the image of God, always accessible to the truth, accessible to the penetration of the truth by the Spirit of God…The natural man must be blasted out of his hideouts, his caves, his last lurking places.”[15]  The answer is an emphatic ‘NO’. The Christian must recognize that God not only ordains the beginning and the end but he is also providentially governing the means to his intended end. The answer to what prevents post-modern relativism from taking over the church is found in no other place than the Gospel of Jesus Christ as found in Word of God. The creature is subject to their Creator and will one day give an account. But the Creator has done the most merciful thing by coming down to meet mankind here on earth bringing reconciliation between God and the church in order to enjoy sweet fellowship with God. Great encouragement is brought to the Christian in the imperative in Romans 12:2 that states that transformation must come by the renewal of the mind. The Christian has the super-natural grace of God found in the Gospel to bring the dead to life. The intellect must be exercised in order for the Christian worldview to again take command in the 21st century. I will leave you with these words from Cornelius Van Til, “The Reformed apologist must also seek a point of contact with the systems constructed by the natural man. But this point of contact must be in the nature of a head-on collision. If there is no head-on collision with the systems of the natural man, there will be no point of contact with the sense of deity in the natural man.”[16]

 

 

 

 

 

Works Cited

Berkhof, Louis. Systematic Theology. Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1958.

Copen, Paul and Craig, William Lane. Passionate Conviction: Contemporary Discourses on Christian Apologetics. Nashville: B&H Publishing Group, 2007.

Forde, Gerhard O. Where God Meets Man: Luther’s Down-to-Earth Approacah to the Gospel. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1972.

Horton, Michael. The Christian Faith: a Systematic Theology for Pilgrms on the way. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2011.

Machen, J Gresham. Christianity and Liberalism. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans , 2009.

Poythress, Vern S. “Reforming Ontology and Logic in the Light of the Trinity.” Westminster Theological Journal 57, no.1, 1995: 187-219.

Van Til, Cornelius. Christian Apologetics.  Edited by William Edgar. Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 1976, 2003.

Wigram, George V. Analytical Greek Lexicon of the New Testament. Wilmington: Associated Publishers and Authors Inc., n.d.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[1] George V. Wigram, Analytical Greek Lexicon of the New Testament. (Wilmington: Associated Publishers and Authors Inc., n.d.), 273.

[2] Ibid., 266.

[3] Cornelius Van Til, Christian Apologetics (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 1976, 2003),131.

[4] Michael S. Horton, The Christian Faith: a Systematic Theology for Pilgrims on the Way (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2011), 63.

[5]    Immanuael Kant, “Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason.” Gesammelte Schriften, 6:202. Quoted in Michael Horton, The Christian Faith: a Systematic Theology for Pilgrims on the Way (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2011), 63.

[6] J. Gresham Machen, Christianity & Liberalism (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1923), 45.

[7]      Cornelius Van Til, “An Introduction to Systematic Theology” (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1974) 12; “Christians believe in two levels of existence, the level of God’s existence as self-contained and the level of man’s existence as derived from the level of God’s existence”; cf. Cornelius Van Til, “The Defense of the Faith” (2d ed.; Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Refomred, 1963) 29. quoted in Vern Poythress, “Reforming Ontology and Logic in the Light of the Trinity: An Application of Van Til’s Idea of Analogy.” Westminster Theological Journal 57, no. 1: 187.

[8] Ibid.., 14-20; Van Til, Defense, 39-41. Quoted in Vern Poythress, “Reforming Ontology and Logic in the Light of the Tinity: An Application of Van Til’s Idea of Analology.” Westminster Theological Journal 57, no. 1:187.

[9] Vern Poythress, “Reforming Ontology and Logic in the Light of the Tinity: An Application of Van Til’s Idea of Analology.” Westminster Theological Journal 57, no. 1:196.

[10] Gerhard O. Forde, Where God Meets Man (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1972) 8.

[11] Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology (Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1958), 244.

[12] Michael S. Horton, The Christian Faith: a Systematic Theology for Pilgrims on the Way (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2011), 50.

[13] Ibid., 51.

[14]     Paul Copan and William Lane Craig, Passionate Conviction: Contemporary Discourses on Christian Apologetics (Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing Group, 2007), 19.

[15] Cornelius Van Til, Christian Apologetics (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 1976, 2003),135.

[16]   Cornelius Van Til, Christian Apologetics (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 1976, 2003),127.

Short study on the Beatitudes

Posted: September 22, 2011 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , ,
0

The subject of studying Matthew’s beatitudes has been a subject of extreme interest in the history of the church.  In this short theme paper I will be discussing the over-arching theme of the word ‘blessing’ or ‘beatitude’ as used in the Gospel of Matthew. I will be defining what each beatitude means along with demonstrating how Matthew’s Gospel exhibits it in the life of Jesus.

            To begin with, the Greek word μακάριοι or blessing is used to begin every sentence in this section. Kittel describes the word as “The special feature in the NT is use of the term for the distinctive joy which comes through participation in the divine kingdom.”[1] This joy has been implanted in the hearts of those that have been united to the person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ.  One final introductory observation by Leon Morris, “it is significant that this sermon begins with beatitudes rather than imperatives. Jesus will go on to make great demands on his followers, but these demands are to be understood in a context of grace.”[2] This is extremely important to note that while Jesus pronounces blessings on his people he does so in the context of those that have been redeemed by grace, not in the context of ‘what one must do to be saved’.

(Matthew 5:3-10 ESV)

1.  “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.”

In this context we see the poor in spirit as those who are blessed.  The word πτωχοὶ as an adjective means “destitute,” “mendicant.”[3] How true this is! We live in total reliance on the gracious provision of God Almighty. We have nothing to bring him but bankruptcy and despair. But our Father in heaven gives us his best, his only Son! We also see our Lord as poor in spirit in his humiliation. The incarnate God-man came to earth to die a sinner’s death and satisfy the wrath of God Almighty. In doing so he laid aside his divine prerogative and “made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant” (Phil. 2:7, ESV) proving that he was willing to ‘bankrupt’ himself for those he would die for.  Matthew’s Gospel demonstrates this in Jesus’ temptation in the wilderness.[4]

            2.  “Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted.”

            Psalm 119:136 speaks of the mourning referenced here.  “My eyes shed streams of tears, because people do not keep your law.” This again is a solemn recognition of the redeemed heart before God. The world does not recognize sin and their eyes are blind to spiritual things (1 Cor 2:14, ESV). Carson notes, “The Messiah comes to bestow “the oil of gladness instead of mourning, and a garment of praise instead of a spirit of despair” (Isa 61.3, ESV). But these blessings, already realized partially but fully only at the consummation (Rev. 7:17, ESV), depend on a Messiah who comes to save his people from their sins.[5] Matthew’s gospel demonstrates this in the life of Jesus as he had compassion for the helpless people and was affected by the fact that they walked like “sheep without a shepherd.”[6]Also, those who have been brought to life have the perfect righteousness of Jesus Christ credited to their account which brings much comfort to the soul that mourns over sin. Lastly, God in the Old Testament gives the most comforting words in the world, “I will be their God, and they shall be my people” (Jer. 31:33, ESV). 

3.  “Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.”

The word πραεῖς or meek has different definitions among commentators but generally refers to gentleness.  Leon Morris has some valuable insights regarding this term.  He says “Meekness is quite compatible with great strength and ability as humans measure strength, but whatever strength or weakness the meek person has is accompanied by humility and a genuine dependence on God.”[7] Philippians 2:8 gives us a picture of how our Lord Jesus Christ was a man of meekness. Again, in the humiliation of the incarnate God-man he comes to a sin cursed world to die for sinners. Matthew also displays this in the life of Jesus in Matthew 11:29, “I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.”[8]

            4.  “Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied.”

            In Matthew 5:6 we see that those who shall be satisfied ‘hunger and thirst’ for righteousness. The hunger and thirsting being referred to has direct connection to the believer’s inner union with Jesus Christ as we are being transformed into his image. The desires we have are being changed to the desires of our Savior.  Matthew also displays this in the life of Jesus (Matt. 12:50, ESV). Morris again notes, “We need not doubt that the term here includes the doing of right an indication that we are expected to live in full accordance with the will of God. How could anyone have a strong desire for a right standing before God without at the same time strongly wanting to do the right?”[9] Lastly, it is about the deep longing the believer enjoys knowing he is justified and desiring the things of the Lord Jesus Christ.

            5.  “Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy.”

            The word ελεημονες or mercy can be described as kindness owed in mutual relationships as well as God’s gracious faithfulness.[10] Morris defines the adjective for merciful as “those whose bent is to show mercy, not those who engage in an occasional merciful impulse.”[11] Also, Carson notes that “mercy embraces both forgiveness for the guilty and compassion for the suffering and needy.”[12] One of the over-arching themes of the believer’s life should be mercy.  The Lord has shown believers mercy as well as imparting this virtue in the life of the believer through their union with Jesus Christ. Matthew’s gospel gives an excellent description of the Lord Jesus Christ being merciful to sinners.  We see this excellent example of our Lord in Matthew’s Gospel (Matt. 9:10-38, ESV). Jesus was the prime example of mercy to a fallen humanity.  Again, he came to earth showing mercy to the multitudes while maintaining the perfect standard of God.  The Old Testament also displays this same mercy. An excellent example can be found in the book of Isaiah (Isa. 30:18, ESV).

            6.  “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.”

            Καθαροι or pure is also used in John’s Gospel referring to our having been cleansed through the work of Christ.[13] An interesting note is that neither Morris or Carson reference the cleansing work that happens when we are made alive with Christ and united to him by faith as a ground for purity in the Christian’s character. Morris mentions “the pure in heart see God in a way that the impure never know”[14] giving us a glimpse into the believer’s position as declared righteous before God. No doubt the meaning has much more to offer than a picture of the justified sinner. Carson notes, “The one who is single-minded in commitment to the kingdom and its righteousness (6:33) will also be inwardly pure.”[15] Matthew’s gospel displays Jesus as inwardly pure in his temptation (Matt. 4:1-10, ESV) as well as the writer of the books of Hebrews (Heb. 1:8-9, ESV). Jesus displayed perfection in extreme conditions while continually declaring the Word of God as his standard. The Old Testament also presents God as inwardly pure in Habbakkuk 1:13.[16] God is displayed in the same way of perfection.

            7.  “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.”

            This beatitude is speaking of those who bring good tidings to a lost and dying people.  The ultimate picture of a peacemaker is found in no other than the Lord Jesus Christ.  He is referred to as the “Prince of Peace” (Isa. 9:6-7, ESV). He is the One who has satisfied divine justice and redeemed a people for himself. Carson notes “In the light of the gospel, Jesus himself is the supreme peacemaker, making peace between God and man, and man and man. Our peacemaking will include the promulgation of that gospel.  It must also extend to seeking all kinds of reconciliation. Instead of delighting in division, bitterness, strife, or some petty “divide-and-conquer” mentality, disciples of Jesus delight to make peace wherever possible.”[17] Once adopted into the family of God we become agents of peace as we proclaim the good news of the gospel and the reconciling grace that is found in Jesus Christ. Matthew’s Gospel presents Jesus as the One instituting the great commission. In this He is the One who gives the message to his own to bring about peace between God and man through his own finished work.      

            8.  “Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the         kingdom of heaven.”

            D.A. Carson notes “The reward of these persecuted people is the same as the reward of the poor in spirit”[18] and I think there is great value in understanding persecution. In Matthew 10:14-20 Jesus explains to the twelve that they will be sent out as sheep among wolves. They will be delivered over and persecuted with extreme violence. As previously noted, the poor in spirit are those who recognize their utter dependence on the grace and good providence of God Almighty. They are to remain steadfast in the midst of persecution trusting in their covenant God. He is the One who has given their bankrupt status much worth through his life, death, and resurrection. Jesus is also described as the shepherd of the sheep who takes care of his own and through great persecution he “cried out again with a loud voice and yielded up his spirit” (Matt. 27:50, ESV) finishing the work he came to accomplish.

            In conclusion, the beatitudes give a beautiful picture of the suffering Savior. In his humiliation Jesus came down to serve. Note as you think of Jesus as the One who fulfills all righteousness in the place of sinners. Also, continue to recognize the beatitudes were directed toward believers. The significance is that only for those who have been united to the Son by faith now share in his benefits. It’s all about the believer’s union with Christ for kingdom enabling work. The ethical teachings of Jesus are not a way to obtain righteousness before God but the signs of one who has been brought to life. There is great value to understanding with your mind and embracing in your heart the teachings therein. Finally, I leave you with words from the great theologian J. Gresham Machen. “Hear the Sermon on the Mount, and do as well as hear, and your life will be founded on the rock. But hear it, not from a mere teacher, but from the Savior who died; not from a dead prophet, but ever anew from the living Lord.”[19]

           Works Cited:

[1] Gerhard Kittle, Abridged from Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1985), 548-549.

[2] Leon Morris, The Gospel according to Matthew (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1992), 95.

[3] Kittel, Theological Dictionary of New Testament, 969.

[4] (Matt. 4:1-11, ESV).

[5] Don A. Carson, Matthew 1-12 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995), 133.

[6] (Matt. 9:33-38, ESV.)

[7] Leon Morris, The Gospel according to Matthew (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1992), 99.

[8] Don A. Carson, Matthew 1-12 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995), 133.

[9] Morris, The Gospel according to Matthew, 99.

[10] Gerhard Kittle, Abridged from Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1985), 223.

[11] Morris, The Gospel according to Matthew, 100.

[12] Don A. Carson, Matthew 1-12 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995, 134.

[13] See, (John 13:10,11; 15:3, ESV).                        

[14] Leon Morris, The Gospel according to Matthew (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1992), 100

[15] Carson, Matthew 1-12, 134.

[16] “You who are of purer eyes than to see evil and cannot look at wrong…” (Hab. 1:13, ESV).

[17] Don A. Carson, Matthew 1-12 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995), 135.

[18] Ibid. 136.

[19] J. Gresham Machen, The New Testament (Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1976, 197.

Psalms 96:7

Posted: August 20, 2011 in Uncategorized
0

Ascribe to the LORD, O families of the peoples, ascribe to the LORD glory and strength!

Older Entries