A:  It depends on what you mean by “higher standard.”

Anyone who is serious about the authority of Scripture would agree that a church elder must satisfy the requirements that Paul lists in 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:6-9.

Some churches see these requirements as unique requirements for eldership, requirements that are not necessarily expected of all Christians.  Such churches might allow that there are cases where a Christian may legitimately divorce, but they would say that a divorcee may not be an elder, because an elder must be the “husband of one wife.”  Similarly, some churches acknowledge that, while the Bible warns about the dangers of intoxicating beverages, it does not forbid their consumption.  While acknowledging that the consumption of alcohol is a matter of Christian freedom, they may still require an elder to completely abstain from alcohol, because they believe that this is part of the “higher standard” to which elders are called.

I believe that this is a faulty view of the requirements for an elder.

There are not two different standards for Christian conduct: one for elders, one for everyone else.  All Christians are held to the same standard of conduct.  All Christians are expected to be chaste, hospitable, temperate, gentle, self-controlled, etc.  The standard is perfect conformity to the image of God.

However, no Christian can live up to that perfect standard.  Since no Christian actually meets the standard, should the role of elder be open to any Christian, regardless of how fall short they fall?  No, an elder should meet a “minimum” standard of maturity.  While no Christian is perfect, there is a range of Christian maturity.  The biblical requirements for an elder are a way of saying that an elder must be “this far along” in their sanctification.

So, if by “higher standard” you mean that an elder must meet certain requirements not expected of other Christians, then I say, no, the Bible does not teach that.

But, if by “higher standard” you simply mean a greater degree of conformity to the one high standard of Christian living, then I will agree that the “entrance requirements” for eldership are higher than say, the entrance requirements for church membership.

No related posts.

Mohler:

Joel Osteen is in the news once again, this time for saying that Mormonism is just another form of Christianity.
…
The main point of concern in Joel’s latest comment is the lack of any biblical standard of judgment and the total abdication of theological responsibility.
…
He doesn’t “get hung up” on doctrinal issues, nor has he “really studied them or thought about them.”

Not to heap criticism on Osteen, but Mohler is right that all Christians need to think deeply about what constitutes Christianity, and what beliefs separate authentic Christianity from non-Christianity.  We are constantly bombarded with different ideas about what “Christianity” should look like.  Are these different ideas just different opinions from various Christians, or do some of them deviate from actually being Christianity?

No related posts.

I took Dr. Powlison’s Antipsalm 23 and put it alongside Psalm 23 for a phrase-by-phrase comparison.

The text is in a PDF so that it will display correctly.  Click here to download.

No related posts.

A comparison is drawn between salvation in the ark and baptism. In both instances, believers are saved through the waters of judgment, since baptism portrays salvation through judgment. The mere mechanical act of baptism does not save, for Peter explicitly says, “not as a removal of dirt from the body,” meaning that the passing of water over the body does not cleanse anyone. Baptism saves you because it represents inward faith, as evidenced by one’s appeal to God for the forgiveness of one’s sins (for a good conscience). Furthermore, baptism “saves” only insofar as it is grounded in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Baptism is a visual representation of the fact that Christians are clothed with Christ (cf. Gal. 3:27), and in union with Christ they share his victory over sin.

(from the ESV Study Bible notes on 1 Peter 3:21)

No related posts.

As I was pondering this topic, my thoughts turned to Paul’s statement in Philippians 3:10, where he says, “I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death.”

Fueled by that statement, I would like to explore what it means for us to share in the cross of Christ.

Sometimes I have a tendency to view Good Friday as primarily a time to look back, and remember what Christ did for me in the past, and be grateful for the forgiveness of my sins, and thankful that I can go to heaven.  And certainly, we should do that.  But, we should not fall into the trap of viewing the cross as simply the means of becoming a Christian, as though the cross is just the starting point, and then we move on from there.  Our continued affiliation and participation in the cross of Christ is also the means by which we live a Christ-centered life.  Our unity with Christ is a unity of sharing with him in the cross.

There are three ways that we share in what Christ accomplished on the cross:

1. We share in his suffering.
2. We share in his death.
3. Because we share in his death, we also share in his resurrection.

We share in Christ’s Suffering

Let’s look first, then, at what it means to share in Christ’s suffering.  I already mentioned Philippians 3:10, where Paul said he wants “to know Christ … and the fellowship of sharing in his suffering.”  Just to drive the point home, let me read a few other passages that reiterate this idea of sharing in Christ’s suffering.

Philippians 1:29 – “For it has been granted to you on behalf of Christ not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for him.”

Romans 8:17 – “Now if we are children (God’s children, that is), then we are heirs–heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ, if indeed we share in his sufferings in order that we may also share in his glory.”

1 Peter 2:21 – “To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps.”

1 Peter 4:13 – “But rejoice that you participate in the sufferings of Christ, so that you may be overjoyed when his glory is revealed.”

To me, it’s a little unsettling to look at the many verses that talk about suffering, and see that suffering isn’t just inevitable, but it’s actually necessary.  Not that we earn or merit any reward because of our suffering, and not that we in any way make up for our sin.  It is simply that experiencing suffering is part of what it means to follow Christ.

Part of being an imitator of Christ, is experiencing suffering.  Christ was a “suffering servant.”  As Isaiah 53:3 says, “He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering.”  Part of being a Christian is being like Christ.  So, if Christ was a “man of sorrows,” “familiar with suffering,” then in order for us to be like him, it is necessary that we also must be acquainted with suffering.

Since we’re going to experience suffering, we need to be prepared for it.  We need to prepare for suffering before we experience it, not wait until suffering strikes, and then attempt to handle it appropriately.  When you’re talking to someone who is going through a time of suffering, that is not the best time to tell them how they should respond.  You may have the best of intentions, and you may be speaking truth, but you may be received as someone offering spiritual platitudes, when what the person really needs at that moment is a shoulder to cry on and a helping hand.  If we haven’t learned how to respond to suffering before suffering strikes, the suffering will be that much harder to handle.

So, what are some ways that we may experience suffering?

First let me exclude some categories that are not relevant to sharing in Christ’s suffering.  For one, I’m not referring to penance or self-inflicted punishment; that is unnecessary suffering that someone might subject themselves to for improper reasons.  Another type of suffering that we’re not talking about is suffering the consequences of our own wrong doing.

I read 1 Peter 2:21 already, but let me read verses 19-20 also:

“For it is commendable if a man bears up under the pain of unjust suffering because he is conscious of God. But how is it to your credit if you receive a beating for doing wrong and endure it? But if you suffer for doing good and you endure it, this is commendable before God.

The type of suffering that we share with Christ is unjust suffering.  I have divided the unjust suffering we may experience into two categories: One is suffering as a direct result of our faith.  The other is suffering simply as a consequence of living in a fallen world.

Suffering as a result of our faith

In the first category, suffering as a result of our faith, there are two subcategories.

Persecution from those hostile to Christ

The first, is suffering persecution from those who are hostile to Christ.  Much of the suffering the apostles and early disciples experienced was this type of suffering.  This is what Jesus referred to in the Sermon on the Mount.

Matthew 5:11 – “Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me.”

Christians in countries around the world suffer persecution like this simply because they are followers of Jesus, and people who hate Jesus will also hate his followers.

Although we are relatively free from this type of persecution right now in America, there may come a day when we see more of this type of persecution.  While we don’t yet suffer the blatant persecution that Christians in some countries face, we may still experience persecution on some level from those hostile to Jesus.  Maybe it comes in the form of someone who talks down to you or says bad things about you because of your faith.  Maybe it’s a neighbor who purposely shows disregard for your property because you’re one of those “Christians.”

How should we respond when we encounter persecution like this?  Just like we are to follow Christ in our expectation of suffering, we are also to follow his example in our response to persecution.

As 1 Peter 2:23 says, “When they hurled their insults at him, he did not retaliate; when he suffered, he made no threats. Instead, he entrusted himself to him who judges justly.”

We should not demand our rights, or seek to get even.  We can accept the injustice, because it helps us identify with Christ, and we know that God will make all things right.

Consequences of taking a moral stand

The second way that we may experience suffering as a result of our faith is by doing the right thing even when that may expose us to undesirable consequences.

Some have experienced this type of suffering by being arrested for standing in the way of allowing abortions to take place.  Other examples might include telling the truth when a small lie could save your hide; or obeying the law when you could easily get away with something that would give you a huge advantage.  Instead, you tell the truth; you abide by the law; you refuse to get involved in something immoral, and it costs you.  When we sacrifice our time, energy, or money for the cause of Christ, we may experience suffering as a result, but that suffering is part of what unites us with Christ.

Random suffering

In addition to suffering because of our faith, we also experience suffering that is simply the result of living in a fallen world.  The way that we respond to this suffering can also be a means of identifying with Christ.

Examples of this type of suffering might include physical pain and sickness, accidents, natural disasters, financial hardship, the loss of a loved one, and other emotional burdens like depression or other forms of mental illness.

Excluding, again, suffering that may be the result of our own wrong choices; when we are intentional about enduring random calamity for the sake of Christ, it is a means of identifying with him.

This is how James could say, “Consider it pure joy, my brothers, whenever you face trials of many kinds, because you know that the testing of your faith develops perseverance.  Perseverance must finish its work so that you may be mature and complete, not lacking anything.” (James 1:2-4).  To be “mature and complete, not lacking anything,” is to be like Christ, and that requires suffering.  Knowing this, we can be joyful in the midst of suffering.

We share in Christ’s Death

Not only do we share in the suffering that Christ experienced, we also share in his death.

Galatians 2:20 says, “I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.”

As human beings, we are both physical and spiritual creatures.  You might say that sharing in Christ’s suffering is a means of physical connection with Christ, whereas sharing in his death is a spiritual connection.

What does it mean that we have died with Christ?  There are two different ways of looking at our spiritual death.

Paul says in Galatians 6:14, “May I never boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world.”

In one sense, the sin that used to be our master is put to death.  In another sense, our old self, who was a slave to sin, is put to death.

Using the analogy of a master and a slave, there are two ways to sever their relationship.  Either the master dies, or the slave dies.  If the master is dead, he obviously can’t boss around the slave.  If the slave is dead, he obviously can’t obey his former master.

Sin becomes dead to us; our sin nature is put to death, so it no longer controls us.

On the one hand, our previous master (the world, the flesh, or our sinful nature) has died; and a dead master is no master at all; a dead master can no longer control us.

Romans 8:9 says, “You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you.”

We used to be controlled by the sinful nature, but not anymore:

Galatians 5:24 – “Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires.”

We die to sin; a dead man cannot obey his former master.

However, in another sense, our old master still beckons to us.

1 Peter 2:11 says, “I urge you, as aliens and strangers in the world, to abstain from sinful desires, which war against your soul.”

Although our sin nature is put to death, ending its mastery of us, we are still at war.  The way that we war against these sinful desires is to count ourselves dead to their influence.

Colossians 2:20 – “Since you died with Christ to the basic principles of this world, why, as though you still belonged to it, do you submit to its rules?”

A slave who dies can’t obey his master anymore.  So why do we still obey the rules of the world, if our relationship with the world was severed through our death?

Romans 6:6 says that “our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin.”

We used to be slaves to sin. But when a slave dies the old master can no longer command obedience.  Our “old self,” the person we were prior to conversion, is dead now.  We should act in accordance to the reality that our old self is dead.  We should not drag the dead old man around with us, prop it up, or act like it is still alive.

We share in Christ’s resurrection

Finally, because we share in Christ’s suffering and death, we also share in his life.  His resurrection gives us spiritual life now and forevermore, and guarantees the resurrection and renewal of our bodies as well.

Romans 6:4-5 – “We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.  If we have been united with him like this in his death, we will certainly also be united with him in his resurrection.”

Continuing on to verse 8 – “Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him.”

We share in Christ’s victory because we share in His death.

I started out mentioning Philippians 3:10, where Paul said he wants “to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death,” (continuing in verse 11) “and so, somehow, to attain to the resurrection from the dead.”

So let us look forward to Easter and the celebration of Christ’s resurrection and the promise of our own resurrection with rejoicing that we share in his suffering, that we share in his death, and that we share in his life.

No related posts.

Now we ask you, brothers, to respect those who work hard among you, who are over you in the Lord and who admonish you. (NIV1984)

In 1998, the New International Reader’s Version was published, which simplifies things for those who read on a more basic level.

Brothers and sisters, we ask you to have respect for the godly leaders who work hard among you. They have authority over you. They correct you. (NIrV)

In 2005, after attempts to revise the NIV generated controversy, Today’s New International Version was published as a separate version alongside the NIV.

Now we ask you, brothers and sisters, to acknowledge those who work hard among you, who care for you in the Lord and who admonish you. (TNIV)

Now in 2011, the NIV has been revised, replacing both the 1984 version and the TNIV with a single version that incorporates many of the changes that were made in the TNIV.

Now we ask you, brothers and sisters, to acknowledge those who work hard among you, who care for you in the Lord and who admonish you. (NIV)

Has there been a weakening of the “authority” language?  I’m not a New Testament scholar, so I cannot attest to which translation is best.  However, compare the NIV with these other translations, which are touted as being very accurate:

But we request of you, brethren, that you appreciate those who diligently labor among you, and have charge over you in the Lord and give you instruction (NASB)

We ask you, brothers, to respect those who labor among you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you (ESV)

Now, you might argue that having “care for” someone is essentially the same as having “charge over” someone, and that the NIV still indicates spiritual authority.  But in an age of freedom and independence, are readers of the NIV going to read this verse as an indication that we have people over us, leaders whose word carries more weight than ours?

I’m a Protestant.  I believe in sola scriptura and the priesthood of all believers.  I have no desire to elevate pastors or elders to an undue level of authority.  I am still responsible before God for obeying His Word, regardless of what my pastor might say about this thing or that.  However, I’m worried that there is a high degree of individualism in the church that prevents people from recognizing spiritual authority. Most people have the idea that “we’re all equal,” and “it’s just between me and God.”  They might listen to their pastor because he studies a lot and is more knowledgeable than they, but they don’t really see him as being “over” them.  And yet, Scripture says that there are those who are “over [us] in the Lord.” (TNIV and NIV 2011 notwithstanding.)

What, then, does proper spiritual authority look like?  What are the bounds of pastoral authority?  How is it different on an interpersonal level compared to a communal (local church) level?

No related posts.

Verse 19 says, “This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil.”

The contrasting verse is verse 21, which says, “But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God.”

It seems to me that this is not a case of men seeing the light of Christ and then evaluating how they should respond.  It’s not like they were presented a choice and could go either way.  On the contrary, their response was predetermined by who they were.

Those who love the darkness do so because they are evil doers.  Those who accept Christ do not become lovers of truth as a result of coming into the light; rather, they come into the light because God has awakened them to the truth.

Going back up to verse 8 (and preceding), Jesus compares the Spirit (Gr., pneuma) with wind (also pneuma).  He says that a re-born spirit is the work of the Spirit, and the Spirit is like the wind in that it “blows wherever it pleases.“  The main point is that spiritual rebirth is a very real thing despite the mechanism being unseen.  However, the passage also implies that the Spirit is not only the “mechanism” that does the regeneration, but also the reason why regeneration takes place.

John 3:16 (and 15) is frequently read as if belief is the criteria for being born again, which is in turn the criteria for eternal life.  However, that is not what Jesus said.  He simply said that those who believe will have eternal life.  I contend that it makes more sense in the context of the chapter to think that those who have been born again are those who will believe.  In other words, spiritual rebirth is the criteria for belief, not the other way around.

No related posts.

Although I don’t really know, I’m guessing that responses to Jonathan Edwards frequently fall into one of several different categories:

1.  Jonathan Edwards is my homeboy!  He was a great thinker and theologian; there is much that can be learned from him.

2.  I’ve heard of him, but that’s about it.

3.  Yeah, I’m not a big fan of those “hellfire and damnation,” “fire and brimstone” types.  We serve a God of love!

These are exaggerated generalizations, and I’m sure there are other categories, but I suspect these three are fairly common reactions.

In my imagined scenario, the person to whom I was speaking fell into the 3rd category.

At that point, I don’t bother trying to convince them that Edwards may have something valuable to offer.  That maybe they have the wrong impression of him; that maybe they should actually read Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God, instead of just dismiss it.  Instead, I suggest that maybe they should do a study on God’s wrath.

John 3:16 is a wonderful verse.  It’s great news that God offers eternal life to those who believe in Jesus.  But it’s a mistake to focus solely on the positive.  It’s simply not true that the only barrier to eternal life is man’s unwillingness to accept it.  The real barrier, an insurmountable barrier (unless God removes it), is God’s wrath.

John 3:16 says that if we believe in Jesus we will not perish.  We had better ask the question, “why would we perish otherwise?”  We need to read the whole chapter.  John 3:36 tells us that if a person doesn’t believe (and obey) Jesus, then God’s wrath remains (or abides) on him.

I think it’s also worth noting that John isn’t just saying, “one day (in the future) you’ll face God’s wrath” if you don’t trust in Jesus.  It’s true that the day of Judgment, when God pours out His full wrath, is still coming.  But John 3:36 says that God’s wrath “remains.”  It’s already there.  John 3:18 says that the one who doesn’t believe is already under condemnation.

Another instructive passage is in Romans.  Romans 5:8 is quite popular, and rightly so.  But many seem to have lost sight of Romans 5:9.  When we are saved by Christ, what are we saved from?  From ourselves?  Are we rescued from Satan’s grip?  Certainly salvation includes release from bondage to many things, but primarily, we are saved from the wrath of God.

When Jesus died for us, he drank the cup of God’s wrath for us (Matt. 26:42; Isa. 53:4-5,10; Gal. 3:13).  Those who do not trust in Jesus will have to drink the cup of God’s wrath on their own (Rev. 14:10).

There are some within Christianity who minimize or deny the importance of Christ’s substitutionary atonement.  This is a problem, not due to differing interpretations of theological minutia, but a problem of not understanding and appreciating God’s wrath.

No related posts.

Several websites confirm an understanding of this phrase that is more-or-less the way I have normally understood it.

For example, The Phrase Finder defines the meaning as “I too, like someone seen to have suffered misfortune, might have suffered a similar fate, but for God’s mercy.”

Adrian Room, writing in Brewer’s Dictionary of Phrase & Fable, says that the phrase (normally uttered upon observing the disaster or disgrace that has befallen someone as a result of their actions or misdoings) “implies that most of us have committed the same follies, sins etc., but have been fortunate enough to escape the consequences.”

The Free Dictionary has an entry explaining the phrase to mean that, “I would likely have experienced or done the same bad thing if God had not been watching over me.”

Finally, here are the definitions provided by Wiktionary:

1. A recognition that others’ misfortune could be one’s own, if it weren’t for the blessing/kindness/luck bestowed by fate or the Divine.
2. Man’s fate is in God’s hands.
3. More generally, our fate is not entirely in our own hands.

Each of these definitions is true. It’s not my intention to dispute these definitions, but to provide an alternative mindset for thinking about this phrase. The standard thought behind this phrase is that we are passive. I am attempting to change my thinking about the grace of God to include an active element.

“There but for the grace of God, go I,” not because I passively managed to avoid (by luck or by providence) what befell someone else, but because God granted me grace to live a different life.

I still recognize that, in my own power, I could not keep myself from the same behavior and the same results, no matter how hard I try or how much I want to. However, through God’s grace, I don’t just experience different circumstances. My life is actually different. I am a different person. “Thanks be to God for his unspeakable gift,” his exceeding grace, which is in us (2 Cor. 9:14-15, ASV). Quoting Matthew Henry again, this grace “enables and inclines” our hearts to do what we could not (if we wanted) and would not (if we were able) do on our own.

No related posts.

It is only through God’s grace that we can repent. Grace isn’t the overlooking of faults. Grace isn’t expressing appreciation of someone undeserving. Grace is the power to do what we could not do in and of ourselves. (Hard times come again more and more)

The common definition of grace as “unmerited favor” is perhaps a little misleading, at least the way we tend to understand favor. My tendency, at least, is to think of “favor” as simply to “look at someone” with a “favorable attitude,” or to ultimately reward someone despite the fact that they don’t deserve it. While this definition captures the “unmerited” nature of God’s grace, I don’t think it sufficiently captures the fact that grace doesn’t just mean an “award,” but it delivers an “ability.”

Matthew Henry states this dual aspect of grace better than I could have, in his commentary on Romans 7.

“We are under grace, which promises strength to do what it commands, and pardon upon repentance when we do amiss.”

I see a lot of focus on the forgiving nature of grace, but not much mention of the fact that grace is not just a status; it is the ability to accomplish what God intends for us.

No related posts.

Steve Taylor wrote a song called “Harder To Believe Than Not To.” That song comes to my mind now and then, especially when people try to “sell” Christianity as a six-step process for life enrichment. The Apostle Paul implied that the Christian life is not one you would want to live if it weren’t for the fact that in Christ we have eternal life to look forward to (I Cor. 15:19).

So, what is it about being a Christian that is hard? Is it holding our tongue, being kind to others, helping others in need, and things like that? Sometimes those things can be hard, but I don’t think those things are what make the Christian life hard.

I want others to like me, so it’s not that hard to be kind to them. Sure, sometimes it’s hard to be kind to someone who is annoying or mean-spirited, but in general it’s not that hard to be kind.

I don’t like to see other people suffering, so it’s not that hard to offer help to people in need. Sure, sometimes I am too protective of “my time” or “my stuff,” and it can be hard to find motivation to help someone who continually makes poor choices, but for the most part, it’s not that hard to extend a hand to those in need.

High moral standards aren’t what set Christianity apart. Sometimes it’s hard to consistently maintain high moral standards, but that’s not what makes the Christian life hard. The world understands “good behavior.” The world understands the “golden rule.” What sets Christianity apart and makes the Christian life hard to live, is something that doesn’t occur to the world.

Repentance is hard

The hard thing about the Christian life is repentance. Repentance is hard. Not just confession. Confession isn’t that hard. Sure sometimes pride gets in the way of confession, but it’s not that hard to say, “sorry, I messed up.” It’s not that hard to say, “I see now that what I did was wrong.” “I knew it was wrong, and I did it anyway.” “I broke the rules.” The world understands confession. It also understands what is left unsaid after most confessions. “Now, cut me some slack.”

The hard thing is to not only confess, but then say, “I will change. I will not be like that anymore. I will live my life differently than I used to.” It’s hard for a couple of reasons. One, because often we don’t really want to change. We want to continue with what we know, avoiding the major failures, but not really changing our life. Second, because despite our best intentions we know that we’re likely to fail again. It’s hard to say, “I will stop doing that,” when we aren’t sure how long it will be before we do it again. The most challenging thing about repentance, the root beneath all areas of weakness in our lives, the thing that we are least willing to do, is relinquishing control of our lives. We want to be in control of our money, our happiness, our safety, our image, etc. The result of trying to be in control of our lives is greed, laziness, fear, pride, etc. We need to repent of living life on our own terms.

Ultimate Repentance: putting an end to the usurpation of our lives

The essence of sin and separation from God is living outside of God’s authority. When we sin, we live under our own authority (or so we think; we actually are enslaved to sin). We put ourselves on the throne of our lives. We aren’t actually ruling (we’ve actually turned ourselves into puppets), but we’ve lifted up an idol of ourselves, thinking that we know best. Repentance is acknowledging that our life belongs to God, and letting him take the reins.

The rich young ruler in Matthew 19, Mark 10, and Luke 18 kept the commandments. But he wanted to keep living life on his terms. He wanted to keep his wealth. Jesus said that if we try to hang on to control of our lives, we will lose our life (Luke 17:33). The key to life is to turn our lives over to the rightful owner.

Giving up your life is hard.

Grace: the power to repent

The truth is, we won’t repent; we won’t relinquish control of our lives. Not of ourselves anyway. Everything in our flesh clings desperately to ownership of our lives. It is only through God’s grace that we can repent. Grace isn’t the overlooking of faults. Grace isn’t expressing appreciation of someone undeserving. Grace is the power to do what we could not do in and of ourselves.

In 1 Cor. 15:10, Paul makes it clear that grace doesn’t just free us from the past, it is the enabling power behind our new creation. Grace has an effect. It makes us into something we couldn’t be without grace. In 2 Cor. 9:8, Paul reminds us that the power to do good works is a result of grace. Grace isn’t just an idea or an emotion. It has legs. It does stuff in our lives. As Hebrews 4:16 says, grace helps us. It is by grace that we saved (Eph 2:8).

Grace makes it possible for us to do the hard work of repentance.

No related posts.

Here are some resources I’m looking at to inform my view on this subject:

http://www.eng.auburn.edu/~sjreeves/personal/baptism_faq.html

http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/credobaptism

http://www.orlutheran.com/html/whoswork.html

http://www.desiringgod.org/Search/?search=baptism

You might notice that these are primarily from the credobaptist viewpoint (with the exception of the Lutheran page). That’s mainly because that’s the view I currently hold, and I want to see the arguments for this view. If I’m going to be convinced to change my mind, I’m not going to do it lightly. When I read the arguments in favor of paedobaptism, I need to be convinced that the case is stronger than the case for credobaptism if I’m going to change my view.

At this point, it appears to me that the strongest arguments for paedobaptism are historical precedent and the framework through which one understands the Old and New Covenants. I’m sure there are other reasons, but the comparison of baptism to circumcision seems to be the primary argument, backed up by historical practice.

While not pertaining to baptism, per se, this is another link I’m perusing:

http://www.samwaldron.us/Papers.html

No related posts.

-Martin Luther

(found at Douglas Wilson’s Blog and Mablog)

No related posts.

Rational thought is certainly of great value, but do we risk limiting God’s work in our life if we only engage Him with our mind, and not our spirit? How do we communicate with our spirit? Do we need to “disengage” our mind in order to not “get in the way” of spiritual communication?

These questions prompted me to look up some verses that may relate to spiritual communication.

Psalm 4:4 says, “reflect in your heart and be still” (HCSB).

Psalm 77:6 says, “I will meditate with my heart, and my spirit ponders” (NASB).

Ecclesiastes 1:16 says, “I communed with my heart” (NKJV).

Is this to say that there is a distinction between the mind and the heart?

In Ecclesiastes, I take it that he is saying that his mind is instructing his heart. He goes on to say, in the same verse, “My heart has understood great wisdom and knowledge.” We typically think of wisdom and knowledge as the realm of the mind, not the heart. Is Solomon using the mind and heart as synonyms? Some translations do not refer to the heart in this verse.

Psalm 46:10 says, “Be still, and know that I am God.” In what way are we to be still?

The context is that of fighting?; the command to be still is a command to stop worrying. See also Exodus 14:14 and Nehemiah 8:11.

Psalm 37:7 is another verse that says to “be still.” Again, the context is an instruction to not worry.

No related posts.

It has occurred to me when reading the Gospels that when Jesus told parables, He might have told some of them as a comedian might tell a joke. Just try to picture Jesus using different voices and acting out his stories. Large crowds of people followed Jesus, but few understood His parables; perhaps some just hung around because He was entertaining. I don’t know, it’s just a thought.

Noticing humor in the Bible can make reading the Bible more enjoyable, but also is an aid in getting to know the Bible better and remembering where things are. If you find anything funny in the Bible, or have some Bible jokes, I’d be interested in hearing them so I can add to my list.  Here’s a handful of corny “Bible Jokes.”

The first passage is probably what made me think of the idea of finding humor in the Bible.  I first saw this passage in a men’s dorm bathroom at Taylor University.  Someone had printed it on a piece of paper and stuck it to the door of one of the stalls.

“Jeremiah’s Linen Shorts” (Jeremiah 13:1-7, modified KJV)

Thus saith the LORD unto me, Go and get thee some linen shorts, and wear them, but do not wash them. So I got some linen shorts according to the word of the LORD, and I wore them. And the word of the LORD came unto me the second time, saying, Take the shorts that thou hast got, which thou art wearing, and arise, go to Euphrates, and hide them there in a hole of the rock. So I went, and hid them by Euphrates, as the LORD commanded me. And it came to pass after many days, that the LORD said unto me, Arise, go to Euphrates, and take the shorts from thence, which I commanded thee to hide there. Then I went to Euphrates, and digged, and took the shorts from the place where I had hid them: and, behold, the shorts were marred, they were profitable for nothing.

“Arameans Hear Things” (2 Kings 7:5-7, NIV)

At dusk they got up and went to the camp of the Arameans. When they reached the edge of the camp, not a man was there, for the Lord had caused the Arameans to hear the sound of chariots and horses and a great army, so that they said to one another, “Look, the king of Israel has hired the Hittite and Egyptian kings to attack us!” So they got up and fled in the dusk and abandoned their tents and their horses and donkeys. They left the camp as it was and ran for their lives.

“EXTRA!! EXTRA!! Hit Men Begin Prophesying! Read all about it!” (1 Sam. 19:20-23, NIV)

[Saul is trying to kill David] so he sent men to capture him. But when they saw a group of prophets prophesying, with Samuel standing there as their leader, the Spirit of God came upon Saul’s men and they also prophesied. Saul was told about it, and he sent more men, and they prophesied too. Saul sent men a third time, and they also prophesied. Finally, he himself left for Ramah and went to the great cistern at Secu. And he asked, “Where are Samuel and David?” “Over in Naioth at Ramah,” they said. So Saul went to Naioth at Ramah. But the Spirit of God came even upon him, and he walked along prophesying until he came to Naioth.

“The Israelite Bathroom” (2 Kings 10:27, NIV)

They demolished the sacred stone of Baal and tore down the temple of Baal, and people have used it for a latrine to this day.

No related posts.

Before getting into his main argument (that Christians should adhere to the Law of Moses), the author (Aaron) acknowledges to his reader(s) that…

“You have the real advantage of the entire body of orthodox Christian interpretation on your side. I acknowledge my views as being outside the pale of commonly accepted Christian belief.”

While I know that many who have come to believe that Christians should observe the Mosaic Law have struggled with the fact that so many trusted theologians and preachers teach otherwise, I think this point deserves more weight than it gets.

We are commanded to be subject to our elders (I Peter 5:5). This doesn’t mean our elders are infallible; we still have an obligation to examine Scripture for ourselves. In some cases, those whom we would consider our elders do not agree with each other. In those cases, we might follow the elders we trust the most, arrive at our own conclusion based on personal study, or leave the matter unresolved. However, when the vast majority of our elders are teaching more or less the same thing on a given subject, it strongly suggests that I should not abandon their teaching for my own ideas or the ideas of someone else whom I find more agreeable.

As I look at those whom I would consider as elders, who have committed their lives to the study and proclamation of God’s Word, I cannot believe that they are all unaware of the historical and cultural context that would supposedly reveal the true meaning of Scripture as regards the Law. These are highly educated men who have devoted their lives to this pursuit.

Being made aware of the historical and cultural context, I cannot believe that they are all unable to see it for what it is and accurately deduce the correct meaning. These are highly intelligent men who evidence giftedness in interpreting God’s Word.

Seeing the historical and cultural context for what it is, I cannot believe that they are all unwilling to accept an interpretation that is contrary to their preexisting beliefs. These are godly men who evidence the character that is fitting for an elder. I place more confidence, as a whole, in their willingness to follow the Spirit than in my own.

That being said, I must move on to the specifics of the discussion at hand.

Aaron highlights the supposed discrepancy between the way the Law was regarded by Moses and the Prophets, Jesus, the Apostles, etc and the typical interpretation of Paul’s writings. He then sets up two untenable conclusions and the conclusion that he would have us believe. The problem is, his statements are constructed in a way that I would term a “false dilemma.”

When it comes to “reinterpreting” Paul, it is necessary to “redefine” what Paul meant by “law” and “circumcision,” assigning to them the extra-biblical actions that constituted a “legal” conversion of nationality.

However, when “law” is referred to elsewhere, it is taken to explicitly mean the Mosaic Law in its entirety. This assumption of definition is what sets up the logical fallacy that insists on a reinterpretation of Paul as the only way out.

I have not done what I would consider a thorough study of the use of the word “law” or its synonyms. I do know that God commended Abraham because he “obeyed my voice and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.” This was before the Mosaic Law was given, so we have a precedent for considering God’s “law” to be broader than the list of commandments given to Israel.

As soon as the Ten Commandments were given, Moses tells the Israelites that God is using this set of laws to test them (Exodus 20:20). They fail the test miserably, making it clear that we need something more than “guidelines” for how to live.

The laws that were given to Israel were part of the “Book of the Covenant.” In comparing the covenants that God has made with mankind, I think it is significant that the Mosaic Law is linked with the covenant God made with Israel at Mount Sinai. This was a conditional covenant, summarized as “obey the commands I have given you, and things will go well; disobey, and I will send calamity.” This Old Covenant was neither capable of nor intended to justify man or produce righteousness. The New Covenant, which makes the first one obsolete (Hebrews 8:13), also puts an end to the external regulations associated with the Old Covenant (Hebrews 9:10).

I have started a beginning attempt at a unified approach to God’s various covenants with mankind here:
http://blog.sloppyedwards.com/biblical-covenants/

The broader “Law of God” is to be understood and obeyed in much the same way as in the time of Abraham. As Paul said in I Corinthians 9:20-21, he is not under the law that the Jews followed, but is subject to the rule of God in his life.

Going back to Aaron’s post, he says near the end that “by becoming Jewish, they accepted upon themselves the additional liability of the special responsibilities of the Jewish people.” What are these “special responsibilities,” if not the Mosaic Law? What was it that made the nation of Israel “Jewish?” Was it not their shared cultural heritage, as expressed in and built upon the Book of the Covenant? How is it possible for a Gentile to observe the Mosaic Law without becoming “Jewish?”

No related posts.

I think these arguments, like so many arguments, miss the point by focusing on the action (ie, the “do” or the “don’t”) instead of the purpose (ie, the “why”).

It is my intent, therefore, to take a Biblical look at the purpose of Alcohol.

In order to find passages discussing alcohol and to distinguish between different types of alcohol, let’s first review the different words used for alcohol in the Bible.

yayin (H3196) – Typically translated as “wine” in the Old Testament. Strong’s definition: “from an unused root meaning to effervesce.”

she?ka?r (H7941) – Typically translated as “strong drink” in the Old Testament. Strong’s definition: “an intoxicant, that is, intensely alcoholic liquor.”

ti?yro?sh (H8492) – Typically translated as “new wine” or “sweet wine” in the Old Testament. Wine which has been freshly pressed.

oinos (G3631) – The New Testament equivalent of “yayin.”

sikera (G4608) – The New Testament equivalent of “she?ka?r.”

gleukos (G1098) – The New Testament equivalent of “ti?yro?sh.”

There are a few other words used for various forms of alcohol, but they are used rarely or are minor variations of the words above. These word forms are sufficient to determine the usage of alcohol in the Bible and the intended purpose of alcohol. If it comes to light that a different word provides significant insight, the list will be revised.

No related posts.

Three types of baptism:

Baptism of John – water baptism of repentance; precursor to Jesus; getting the heart right through repentance.

Act 13:24 (NIV)
Before the coming of Jesus, John preached repentance and baptism to all the people of Israel.

Baptism of the Holy Spirit – indwelling of the Holy Spirit

Act 1:5 (NIV)
For John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.”

Act 1:8 (NIV)
But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.”

Baptism of Jesus – a testimony of salvation. Water baptism representing spiritual cleansing and rebirth.

There are ten passages in Scripture documenting a conversion to Christ in the early church. All passages in Acts, and in all cases immediately followed by baptism.

1. Acts 2:38-41 – Peter’s sermon; the conversion of 3,000
Act 2:41 Those who accepted his message were baptized.

2. Acts 8:9-13 – Simon the magician
Act 8:13 Simon himself believed and was baptized.

3. Acts 8:26-38 – The Ethiopian eunuch
Act 8:38 Then both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water and Philip baptized him.

4. Acts 9:15-18 – the Apostle Paul (Saul)
Act 9:18 He got up and was baptized.

5. Acts 10:47-48 – Cornelius et al
Act 10:48 So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.

6. Acts 16:13-15 – Lydia and her household
Act 16:15 She and the members of her household were baptized.

7. Acts 16:30-33 – The Philippian jailer and his family
Act 16:33 Then immediately he and all his family were baptized.

8. Acts 18:7-8 – Crispus
Act 18:8 Many of the Corinthians who heard him believed and were baptized.

9. Acts 19:1-6 – unnamed disciples
Act 19:5 On hearing this, they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus.

10. Acts 22:12-16 – the Apostle Paul (flashback)
Act 22:16 Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name.

Why don’t we baptize immediately today?

1. Inconvenience; lack of water
2. perceived as a barrier to the gospel
3. desire for the entire church to be witnesses
4. perceived as adding works to the gospel

No related posts.

What are all these covenants, and what bearing do they have on our life today?

To begin, let’s look at the definition of a covenant.

The Definition of a Covenant

The English dictionary defines a covenant as “an agreement, usually formal, between two or more persons to do or not do something specified.”

In the Bible, the word “covenant” is first encountered in Genesis 6:18, and is the Hebrew word “beri?yth” (Strong’s number H1285). The word is used 285 times in the KJV, and is translated “covenant” 265 times out of those 285. It is also translated as “league,” and “confederate” or “confederacy.”

“Beriyth” is related to the word “ba?ra?h” (H1262) meaning “to select” and “ba?ra?’” (H1254) meaning “to cut.” It is frequently used with the word “ka?rath,” which also means “to cut.” In Genesis 9:11 where the KJV reads “I will establish my covenant,” it is literally saying “I will cut my covenant.” The context of “cutting a covenant” is portrayed in Genesis 15 when God has Abraham cut a heifer, a goat, and a ram in half, then God passes between the halves.

In the New Testament, the word for “covenant” is the Greek word “diathe?ke?” (Strong’s number G1242). The same word is also translated “testament.”

Old Testament Covenants

As mentioned previously, the first use of the word “covenant” in the Bible is found in Genesis 6:18.

But I will establish my covenant with you, and you shall come into the ark, you, your sons, your wife, and your sons’ wives with you.

Here, God is speaking to Noah and giving him instructions on how to build the ark. At this point, it appears that the establishment of the covenant is future tense (“I will establish”). After the flood, we find the record of God initiating and defining His covenant with Noah.

Then God said to Noah and to his sons with him, “Behold, I establish my covenant with you and your offspring after you, and with every living creature that is with you, the birds, the livestock, and every beast of the earth with you, as many as came out of the ark; it is for every beast of the earth. I establish my covenant with you, that never again shall all flesh be cut off by the waters of the flood, and never again shall there be a flood to destroy the earth.” And God said, “This is the sign of the covenant that I make between me and you and every living creature that is with you, for all future generations: I have set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and the earth. When I bring clouds over the earth and the bow is seen in the clouds, I will remember my covenant that is between me and you and every living creature of all flesh. And the waters shall never again become a flood to destroy all flesh. When the bow is in the clouds, I will see it and remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is on the earth.” God said to Noah, “This is the sign of the covenant that I have established between me and all flesh that is on the earth.” (Genesis 9:8-17 ESV)

Things to note about this covenant:

1. Who are the parties to the covenant?

God makes the covenant with Noah, all the animals, and all future generations.

2. Is a duration given for the covenant?

The covenant is an “everlasting covenant” made with “all future generations.”

3. Is the covenant conditional?

No conditions are mentioned.

4. Is there a sign of the covenant.

The rainbow is the sign of the covenant.

From these observations, we can conclude that the covenant applies to everyone who came after Noah, including those of us alive today, believer and unbeliever alike. The sign of the covenant is still visible as proof that the covenant is still in effect.

From God’s covenant with Noah and the rest of creation, we proceed to the next use of the word “covenant” (beri?yth) in Genesis 15:18.

On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, “To your offspring I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates, the land of the Kenites, the Kenizzites, the Kadmonites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Rephaim, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Girgashites and the Jebusites.” (Genesis 15:18-21 ESV)

The description of the making of the covenant is in the preceding verses.

After these things the word of the LORD came to Abram in a vision: “Fear not, Abram, I am your shield; your reward shall be very great.” But Abram said, “O Lord GOD, what will you give me, for I continue childless, and the heir of my house is Eliezer of Damascus?” And Abram said, “Behold, you have given me no offspring, and a member of my household will be my heir.” And behold, the word of the LORD came to him: “This man shall not be your heir; your very own son shall be your heir.” And he brought him outside and said, “Look toward heaven, and number the stars, if you are able to number them.” Then he said to him, “So shall your offspring be.” And he believed the LORD, and he counted it to him as righteousness. And he said to him, “I am the LORD who brought you out from Ur of the Chaldeans to give you this land to possess.” But he said, “O Lord GOD, how am I to know that I shall possess it?” He said to him, “Bring me a heifer three years old, a female goat three years old, a ram three years old, a turtledove, and a young pigeon.” 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. And when birds of prey came down on the carcasses, Abram drove them away. As the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell on Abram. And behold, dreadful and great darkness fell upon him. Then the LORD said to Abram, “Know for certain that your offspring will be sojourners in a land that is not theirs and will be servants there, and they will be afflicted for four hundred years. But I will bring judgment on the nation that they serve, and afterward they shall come out with great possessions. As for yourself, you shall go to your fathers in peace; you shall be buried in a good old age. And they shall come back here in the fourth generation, for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet complete.” When the sun had gone down and it was dark, behold, a smoking fire pot and a flaming torch passed between these pieces. (Genesis 15:1-17 ESV)

At least in the immediate context, there are no conditions placed upon Abram. In fact, Abram was asleep when the terms of the covenant were stated and God passed between the carcasses. (Note: at the time God made this covenant with Abram, he was between 75 (Gen. 12:4) and 85 (Gen. 16:3) years old.)

15 or so years later, God revisits His covenant with Abram and expounds on it.

When Abram was ninety-nine years old the LORD appeared to Abram and said to him, “I am God Almighty; walk before me, and be blameless, that I may make my covenant between me and you, and may multiply you greatly.” Then Abram fell on his face. And God said to him, “Behold, my covenant is with you, and you shall be the father of a multitude of nations. No longer shall your name be called Abram, but your name shall be Abraham, for I have made you the father of a multitude of nations. I will make you exceedingly fruitful, and I will make you into nations, and kings shall come from you. And I will establish my covenant between me and you and your offspring after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and to your offspring after you. And I will give to you and to your offspring after you the land of your sojournings, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession, and I will be their God.” And God said to Abraham, “As for you, you shall keep my covenant, you and your offspring after you throughout their generations. This is my covenant, which you shall keep, between me and you and your offspring after you: Every male among you shall be circumcised. You shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and you. He who is eight days old among you shall be circumcised. Every male throughout your generations, whether born in your house or bought with your money from any foreigner who is not of your offspring, both he who is born in your house and he who is bought with your money, shall surely be circumcised. So shall my covenant be in your flesh an everlasting covenant. Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.” (Genesis 17:1-14 ESV)

In this passage we see some similarities to the covenant God made with Noah.

1. The covenant is not only with Abraham, but with his offspring.

2. The covenant is an everlasting covenant.

3. A sign of the covenant is given.

However, in verse 14 we see a significant difference between this covenant and the one God made with Noah. Disobedience to God’s command regarding circumcision results in the covenant being broken.

Another difference from God’s covenant with Noah is that His covenant with Abraham is not all-encompassing. Not ALL future offspring are members of the covenant. God specifies that He will establish His covenant with Isaac, not Ishmael.

There are some other covenants made in the book of Genesis, but they are between men. God reaffirms the covenant He made with Abraham to Isaac (Gen. 26:3-5,24) and Jacob (Gen. 28:13-15, 35:9-12), but we do not see any new covenants initiated by God.

Of interest is the fact that yet again, God’s covenant with Abraham is selective; he established the covenant with Jacob, but not Esau. As Paul stresses in Romans 9, this should make it clear that God is completely free to select the recipients of His grace at His own discretion. At the time God choose Isaac over Ishmael, one might have thought that His selection was based on Isaac being a “true” son as opposed to Ishmael being the son of a handmaiden. However, Jacob and Esau were twins, sons of Isaac’s favored wife Rachel. God’s choice of Jacob had nothing to do with heritage. In fact, Esau was the firstborn, so God even saw fit to reverse the natural order.

When God first made His covenant with Abraham, He told him that his offspring would be afflicted for 400 years (Gen. 15:13). So when God “remembers” His covenant in Exodus 2:24, it is after the children of Israel have lived in Egypt for about 400 years and grown into a nation.

God heard their groaning, and God remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob.

Notice that God did not make individual covenants with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He made one covenant with all three patriarchs.

The events that transpire between Exodus 2:24 and the giving of the law at Mount Sinai are the fulfillment of Genesis 15:14. Exodus chapters 3 and 4 record the call of Moses. Chapters 5 through 11 record the interaction of Moses and Aaron with Pharoah and the first 9 of the 10 plagues. Chapters 12 and 13 describe the Passover and the exodus from Egypt. The crossing of the Red Sea is in chapter 14, and chapters 15 through 18 describe the travels through the wilderness up until they reached Mount Sinai.

God mentions His covenant again in Exodus 19:3-6. He tells Moses,

“Thus you shall say to the house of Jacob, and tell the people of Israel: …if you will indeed obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my treasured possession among all peoples, for all the earth is mine; and you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.

(Sidebar: In Exodos 20:20, after delivering the Ten Commandments to the people, Moses informs them that “God has come to test you, that the fear of him may be before you, that you may not sin.” It is obvious from the rest of the Old Testament that the Israelites failed the test. Man’s fear is not sufficient to keep him from sinning. Only God Himself is able to keep us from sin. Hence our need for a saviour and the New Covenant.)

Moving ahead to the next mention of the covenant, we come to Exodus 24:7, where we find Moses reading the “Book of the Covenant” to the people. What is the content of this “Book of the Covenant,” what is it’s source, and how and when did it come into being?

Between Exodus 19 and Exodus 24 God is giving Moses a list of His commandments. According to Exodus 24:4, Moses wrote down all the words of the Lord, and it was this record of God’s commandments that comprised the Book of the Covenant. The “official” establishment of this covenant is found in Exodus 24:8. After Moses read the Book of the Covenant, and the people voiced their agreement, the blood from animal sacrifices was used to signify the sealing of the covenant. It is worth noting that the Law or Torah is part of this covenant made at Sinai.

Behold the blood of the covenant that the LORD has made with you in accordance with all these words.

(Note the similarity between the language Moses uses here, and the language Jesus uses in Matthew 26:28 and Mark 14:24…”This is my blood of the covenant.” The writer of Hebrews discusses this parallel in Hebrews 9:18-22.)

After the covenant with Israel had been established, God gave Moses more details regarding His commandments and the original two tablets with the Law insribed on them (chapters 25-31). In Exodus 31:13-17 God indicates that the Sabbath is a sign of the covenant. So we see, that like the rainbow was a sign of God’s covenant with Noah, and circumcision was a sign of His covenant with Abraham, so the Sabbath was a sign of His covenant with the nation of Israel.

In Exodus 34, after God had replaced the tablets that Moses had broken, He says, “Behold, I am making a covenant” (v.10) and “Write these words, for in accordance with these words I have made a covenant with you and with Israel” (v.27). So we have the contents of the covenant, in the Book of the Covenant, written by Moses, and the tablets of the covenent, the Ten Commandments, written by God. We also have the recipients of the covenant, Moses and the nation of Israel. And we have a sign of the covenant, the Sabbath.

The remainder of the book of Exodus records the carrying out of God’s instructions to Moses on Mount Sinai. Then, in the book of Leviticus, God conveys more commands to Israel.

Towards the end of Leviticus, in chapter 26, God says that if Israel breaks His covenant, He will bring calamity upon them (vv. 14-39). In verses 42-45, He promises to remember His covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

God also makes some separate covenants with the Levites and the descendents of Aaron. In Numbers 18:19 God makes a “covenant of salt” with Aaron and his descendents that they should receive a portion of the offerings that the Israelites would bring. He also makes a covenant with Phinehas, Aaron’s grandson, that the priesthood would not depart from his family.

In Deuteronomy, before the Israelites cross the Jordan River into Canaan, Moses reviews with them the events that have occured and the covenant that God has established with them. Deuteronomy 5:2-3 make it clear that the covenant established as Mount Sinai was a distinct covenant, separate from the covenant with their fathers (Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob). However, the proceeding text in Deuteronomy 7-8 reveal that while the covenant at Sinai was distinct from the covenant with Abraham, it was a result of God’s covenant with Abraham (cf. Dt. 7:12, 8:18).

After Moses reviews the Sinia Covenant with the Israelites, He outlines a second covenant or “sub-covenant” in Deuteronomy 29-30. As seen in Deuteronomy 30:6, this second covenant includes a promise of the New Covenant.

The LORD your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your
offspring, so that you will love the LORD your God with all your heart and with
all your soul, that you may live.

This is the New Covenant that Jeremiah (cf. Jer. 31:33) and Ezekiel speak of later, and that Jesus reveals at the Last Supper.

No related posts.

There are many ways to address this question; some answers can get quite involved.

One answer is, ignorance is no excuse. God is holy, humans are sinful (all of us, with no exceptions–Romans 3:10, 3:23), and without an acceptable sacrifice applied on our behalf, we deserve to go to hell (Romans 5:12, 6:23). There is nothing wrong with this answer, and it should motivate Christians towards global evangelism (Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, and the ends of the earth–Acts 1:8).

However, this answer is still unsatisfactory to some, who find it difficult to accept that there is no hope of salvation for those who die without ever hearing about Jesus. Perhaps this raises the question, “what does it take for an acceptable sacrifice to be applied on your behalf?”

The question with regards to the inhabitant of the remote jungle might be, “is it possible to be saved by Jesus without knowing about Jesus?”

While not attempting to provide a definitive answer to every question that might be asked, there are several concepts that I find helpful.

1. God reveals Himself to us through nature.

Romans 1:19-20 ESV
For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.

Psalms 19:1-4 ESV
The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork. Day to day pours out speech, and night to night reveals knowledge. There is no speech, nor are there words, whose voice is not heard. Their measuring line goes out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world.

2. Those who seek God will find Him.

Deuteronomy 4:29 ESV
… seek the LORD your God and you will find him, if you search after him with all your heart and with all your soul.

Jeremiah 29:13 ESV
You will seek me and find me. When you seek me with all your heart.

Luke 11:9-10 ESV
And I tell you, ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives, and the one who seeks finds, and to the one who knocks it will be opened.

Proverbs 8:17 ESV
I love those who love me, and those who seek me diligently find me.

3. To whom much is given, much is required.

Luke 12:48 ESV
…the one who did not know, and did what deserved a beating, will receive a light beating. Everyone to whom much was given, of him much will be required, and from him to whom they entrusted much, they will demand the more.

James 3:1 ESV
Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness.

These verses provide a picture of a God who does not “automatically condemn” people who are unfortunate enough to be born in a part of the world unreached by Christianity. This does not mean sin is excused when there is a lack of knowledge. No one is innocent, but God reveals Himself to everyone, no matter where they live. If someone responds to what they know about God, and earnestly seek the source of that knowledge, God promises to honor their search by revealing more of Himself. There is also an indication that the response that is required of someone who knows a little might look different than the response that is required of someone who knows a lot. This does not mean that there is more than one way of salvation–John 14:6 is clear on that. However, we should not fall into the trap of thinking that salvation is born out of a prescribed response to specific knowledge. The Bible teaches that we are counted as righteous in response to faith. Faith is a gift from God, and God bestows that gift upon whomever He wishes. This also does not excuse us of our responsibility to preach the gospel to a world in need of a Savior. Although God doesn’t “need” us to be His messengers, He glories in working through us, and it is a matter of obedience for us to be witnesses of His glory.

No related posts.