Podcasts about Bibliotheca Sacra

     The Bible recognizes Satan's world-system and warns us not to love it. John writes and tells the Christian, “Do not love the world nor the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life, is not from the Father, but is from the world” (1 John 2:15-16). We live in a fallen world, and John's command is intended to warn us of real danger. First, John opens with the negative particle Μὴ Me, which is followed by the Geek verb ἀγαπάω agapao, which is in the imperative mood—the mood of command. The word ἀγαπάω agapao denotes desire or commitment to something or someone. Allen comments on love: "In its essence love is two things: a desire for something and a commitment to something … Whatever it is you desire and whatever you're committed to, that's where your time and resources will go. If you love football, that's where your time and resources will go. If you love hunting or fishing, that's where your time and resources will go. If you love your spouse, you desire to spend time with her and you are committed to her. Love is more than an emotional feeling. Love requires a commitment of time and resources."[1]      John then gives the object we are not to desire or be committed to, namely, the world (τὸν κόσμον). The Greek word κόσμος kosmos is used in Scripture to refer to: 1) the physical planet (Matt 13:35; Acts 17:24), 2) people who live in the world (John 3:16), and 3) the hostile system created and controlled by Satan that he uses to lure people away from God (1 John 2:15-16). It is this third meaning that John has in mind. Hence, the word κόσμος kosmos refers to “that which is hostile to God…lost in sin, wholly at odds with anything divine, ruined and depraved.”[2] Concerning, the word κόσμος kosmos, Allen writes: "Sometimes the word “world” is used to refer to the organized evil system with its principles and its practices, all under the authority of Satan, which includes all teachings, ideas, culture, attitudes, activities, etc., that are opposed to God. A fixation on the material over the spiritual, promotion of self over others, pleasure over principle—these are just a few descriptors of the world system John is talking about. The word “world” here means everything that opposes Christ and his work on earth. Jesus called Satan “the ruler of this world” (John 14:30; 16:11), and Paul called him “the god of this world” (2 Corinthians 4:4). In Luke 16:8 Jesus referred to all unsaved people as “the sons of this world.”[3]      Satan's world-system consists of those philosophies and values that perpetually influence humanity to think and behave contrary to God and His Word. This operating apart from God is first and foremost a way of thinking that is antithetical to God, a way of thinking motivated by a desire to be free from God and the authority of Scripture, a freedom most will accept, even though it is accompanied by all sorts of inconsistencies and absurdities. Chafer writes: "The kosmos is a vast order or system that Satan has promoted which conforms to his ideals, aims, and methods. It is civilization now functioning apart from God-a civilization in which none of its promoters really expect God to share; who assign to God no consideration in respect to their projects, nor do they ascribe any causality to Him. This system embraces its godless governments, conflicts, armaments, jealousies; its education, culture, religions of morality, and pride. It is that sphere in which man lives. It is what he sees, what he employs. To the uncounted multitude it is all they ever know so long as they live on this earth. It is properly styled “The Satanic System” which phrase is in many instances a justified interpretation of the so-meaningful word, kosmos."[4] Lightner adds: "The world is the Christian's enemy because it represents an anti-God system, a philosophy that is diametrically opposed to the will and plan of God. It is a system headed by the devil and therefore at odds with God (2 Cor 4:4). Likewise, the world hates the believer who lives for Christ (John 17:14). The Lord never kept this a secret from his own. He told them often of the coming conflict with the world (e.g., John 15:18-20; 16:1-3; 32-33; cf. 2 Tim 3:1-12). It is in this wicked world we must rear our families and earn our livelihoods. We are in it, yet are not to be a part of it."[5]      Many people who live in Satan's world-system exclude God and Scripture from their daily conversations. Some actively exclude God from their daily lives because they feel He offers nothing of value to them, or they are afraid to mention Him for fear of persecution. Most exclude God passively, in that they just don't think about Him or His Word. This exclusion is true in news, politics, academic communities, work and home life. God is nowhere in their thoughts, and therefore, nowhere in their discussions (Psa 10:4; 14:1). These are the agnostics and atheists. But there are others in Satan's world-system who are very religious, and these are the worst kind of people, because they claim to represent God, when in fact they don't. In the Bible, there were many religious people who spoke in the name of the Lord (Jer 14:14; 23:16-32; Matt 7:15; Acts 13:6; Rev 2:20), claiming to represent Him, even performing miracles (Deut 13:1-4; Matt 24:24; 2 Th 2:8-9; Rev 13:13). The Pharisees, Sadducees and Scribes where this way, and they said of themselves, “we have one Father: God” (John 8:41b). But Jesus saw them for what they really were and said, “You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father” (John 8:44a). The religious—like Satan—are blinded by their pride. Humility must come before they will accept God's gospel of grace, and it does no good to argue with them (2 Tim 2:24-26). These false representatives loved to talk about God, read their Bibles, pray, fast, give of their resources, and spent much of their time in fellowship with other religious persons. Theirs is a works-system of salvation, which feeds their pride; giving them a sense of control over their circumstances and others.[6] These false organizations and their teachers appear as godly and righteous, but Paul described them as “false apostles, deceitful workers, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ” (2 Cor 11:13). Though very religious, these are in line with Satan, who operates on corrupt reasoning and is a deceiver. Paul goes on to say, “No wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. Therefore, it is not surprising if his servants also disguise themselves as servants of righteousness, whose end will be according to their deeds” (2 Cor 11:14-15).      The contrast between the growing Christian and the worldly person is stark, as their thoughts and words take them in completely different directions. The growing believer thinks about God and His Word all the time, as “his delight is in the law of the LORD, and in His law he meditates day and night” (Psa 1:2). The word law translates the Hebrew word תּוֹרָה torah, which means law, direction, or instruction. Navigating the highways of this world can be tricky, and the believer needs the direction or instruction God's Word provides. It is our divine roadmap for staying on God's path and getting to the destination He intends.      At the core of Satan's world-system is a directive for mankind to function apart from God, and when obeyed, people produce all forms of evil, both moral and immoral. We should understand that Satan's system is a buffet that offers something for everyone who rejects God, whether that person is moral or immoral, religious or irreligious, educated or simple, rich or poor. Satan is careful to make sure there's even something for the Christian in his world-system, which is why the Bible repeatedly warns the believer not to love the world or the things in the world. We are to be set apart (Col 2:8; Jam 1:27; 4:4; 1 John 2:15-16). Lightner notes, “The world is the Christian's enemy because it represents an anti-God system, a philosophy that is diametrically opposed to the will and plan of God. It is a system headed by the devil and therefore at odds with God (2 Cor 4:4).…It is in this wicked world we must rear our families and earn our livelihoods. We are in it, yet are not to be a part of it.”[7] It is important to understand that we cannot change Satan or his evil program; however, we must be on guard, for it can and will change us if we're not careful to learn and live God's Word.      At the moment of salvation, God the Father “rescued us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son” (Col 1:13), and now “our citizenship is in heaven” (Phil 3:20). This transference is permanent and cannot be undone. Once this happens, we are hated by those who remain in Satan's kingdom of darkness. For this reason, Jesus said to His disciples, “If the world hates you, you know that it has hated Me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, because of this the world hates you” (John 15:18-19; cf. John 16:33; 1 John 3:13). Love and hate in this context should be understood as accept or reject, which can be mild or severe in expression. When praying to the Father, Jesus said, “they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world” (John 17:14b), and went on to say, “I do not ask You to take them out of the world, but to keep them from the evil one” (John 17:15). It is not God's will that we be immediately removed from this world at the moment of salvation, but left here to serve as His representatives to the lost, that we “may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light” (1 Pet 2:9). We are not to participate in worldly affairs that exclude God, but are to “walk as children of Light” (Eph 5:8), manifesting the fruit of the Light “in all goodness and righteousness and truth, trying to learn what is pleasing to the Lord” (Eph 5:9-10), and we are told, “do not participate in the unfruitful deeds of darkness, but instead even expose them” (Eph 5:11).      The growing Christian faces real struggles as Satan's world system seeks to press him into its mold, demanding conformity, and persecuting him when he does not bend to its values. The world-system not only has human support, but is backed by demonic forces that operate in collaboration with Satan. Scripture tells us “our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places” (Eph 6:12). The battlefront is more than what is seen with the human eye and is driven by unseen spiritual forces. As Christians living in the world, we are to be careful not to be taken “captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ” (Col 2:8). Realizing the battleground is the mind, we are to think biblically in everything, which is our only safeguard against the enemy (2 Cor 10:3-5).      As Christians we face situations every day in which we are pressured to compromise God's Word. We face difficulties at work, school, home, or other places, in which we are confronted by worldly-minded persons, both saved and unsaved, who demand and pressure us to abandon our biblical values. There is room for personal compromise where Scripture is silent on a matter; however, where Scripture speaks with absolute authority, there we must never compromise! Wiersbe correctly states, “The world, or world-system, puts pressure on each person to try to get him to conform (Rom 12:2). Jesus Christ was not ‘of this world' and neither are His people (John 8:23; 17:14). But the unsaved person, either consciously or unconsciously, is controlled by the values and attitudes of this world.”[8]      By promoting the gospel and biblical teaching, the church disrupts Satan's domain of darkness by calling out of it a people for God. By learning God's Word, Christians can identify worldly conversations and activities and either avoid them or seek to redirect them by interjecting biblical truth, which should never be done in hostility. When sharing God's Word with others it's proper to know that not everyone wants to hear God's truth, and even though we may not agree with them, their personal choices should be respected (Matt 10:14; Acts 13:50-51). We should never try to force the gospel or Bible teaching on anyone, but be willing to share when opportunity presents itself. At times this will bring peace, and other times cause disruption and may even offend. In this interaction, the growing Christian must be careful not to fall into the exclusion trap, in which the worldly person (whether saved or lost) controls the content of every conversation, demanding the Christian only talk about worldly issues, as Scripture threatens his pagan presuppositions. Having the biblical worldview, the Christian should insert himself into daily conversations with others, and in so doing, be a light in a dark place. He should always be respectful, conversational, and never have a fist-in-your-face attitude, as arrogance never helps advance biblical truth (2 Tim 2:24-26). The worldly-minded person may not want to hear what the Christian has to say, but he should never be under the false impression that he has the right to quiet the Christian and thereby exclude him from the conversation. Dr. Steven R. Cook   [1] David L. Allen, 1–3 John: Fellowship in God's Family, ed. R. Kent Hughes, Preaching the Word (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2013), 96–97. [2] Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, p. 562. [3] David L. Allen, 1–3 John: Fellowship in God's Family, 96. [4] Lewis S. Chafer, “Angelology Part 4” Bibliotheca Sacra 99 (1942): 282-283. [5] Robert P. Lightner, Handbook of Evangelical Theology: A Historical, Biblical, and Contemporary Survey and Review (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1995), 206. [6] There are many church denominations today that call themselves “Christian”, but who come with a false gospel in which human works are added as a requirement for salvation (i.e., Catholics, Methodists, Church of Christ, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, etc.). [7] Robert P. Lightner, Handbook of Evangelical Theology, p. 206. [8] Warren Wiersbe, The Bible Exposition Commentary, New Testament, Vol. 2, p. 18.

The Terms of Salvation      God requires that certain information be received and believed before He saves someone. This means saving faith requires content. From the divine side, God has done several things to bring about our salvation. From eternity past it was planned by God the Father (Eph 1:4; 2 Tim 1:9; 1 John 4:9-10, 14), executed in time by God the Son (John 3:16; Mark 10:45; Luke 19:10), and applied to those who believe by God the Holy Spirit (John 3:6; 1 Cor 12:13; Gal 3:27; Tit 3:5; 1 Pet 1:3). It was necessary that God the Son come into the world in hypostatic union, as undiminished deity and perfect humanity (John 1:1, 14; Col 2:9; Heb 1:8; 10:5; 1 Pet 2:24), be born of a virgin (Isa 7:14; Luke 1:30-35), live a sinless life (2 Cor 5:21; Heb 4:15; 1 Pet 2:22; 1 John 3:5), willingly go to the cross (Isa 53:10; John 10:11, 17-18), die a penal substitutionary atoning death on behalf of all humanity (Rom 5:8; 1 Cor 15:3-4; Heb 2:9; 10:10-14; 1 John 2:2), and be buried and resurrected on the third day (Matt 16:21; Rom 6:9; 1 Cor 15:3-4; 12-20). This was done to satisfy God's righteousness and justice regarding our sin (Rom 3:25; 1 John 2:2), and to display His love for us as lost sinners for whom Christ died (John 3:16; Rom 5:8). This was necessary because we are totally corrupted by sin and helpless to save ourselves (1 Ki 8:46; Eccl 7:20; Isa 59:2; 64:6; Rom 3:10, 23; 5:12; Eph 2:1-2; Jam 1:14-15), and if God had not acted in love (John 3:16; 1 John 4:9-10), we would all be damned forever to the lake of fire (Rev 20:15).      God, who is infinitely loving, good, and gracious, offers us salvation freely, as a gift (Rom 3:24; 6:23), by grace (Eph 2:8-9), and conditions it on faith alone in Christ alone (John 14:6; Acts 4:12), and “not as a result of works, so that no one may boast” (Eph 2:9; cf., Rom 11:6). According to Lewis Chafer, “salvation in all its limitless magnitude is secured, so far as human responsibility is concerned, by believing on Christ as Savior. To this one requirement no other obligation may be added without violence to the Scriptures and total disruption of the essential doctrine of salvation by grace alone.”[1] Charles Ryrie adds: "More than 200 times in the New Testament, salvation is said to be conditioned solely on the basis of faith—faith that has as its object the Lord Jesus who died as our substitute for sin (John 3:16; Acts 16:31). Salvation is a free gift; therefore, any statement of the terms must carefully avoid implying that we give God something. He gives it all; we receive that gift through faith (John 1:12)."[2] John Walvoord states: "The terms of salvation are limited to faith in Christ because of the inadequacy and insufficiency of any other approach. Salvation is pictured therefore as a gift (Rom 6:23), as obtained by those “dead through … trespasses and sins” (Eph 2:1). Salvation is therefore not a work of man for God or a work of God assisted by man, but rather a work of divine salvation effective on those who are willing to receive Jesus Christ as Savior."[3] J. Dwight Pentecost states: "The gospel is characterized by its simplicity. When the Apostle Paul declared the terms of salvation to the Philippian jailer, he said “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved …” (Acts 16:31). The Apostle Peter, speaking concerning salvation, declared, “… there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved” (Acts 4:12)—none other but the name of Jesus. Sinners, confronted with their need of salvation, frequently stumble over the very simplicity of the salvation which God offers. Since Satan cannot take away anything from the conditions of salvation or the plan of salvation—for God has already reduced it to an irreducible minimum—if Satan is to confound the minds of the sinners he must do so by addition, not subtraction. If conditions were placed by God to salvation, Satan might take away those conditions so that men would not be saved. But since there are no conditions, and salvation is a simple fact to be believed, Satan's method of deceiving men has been to add to the simplicity of the gospel. That is why some will teach that salvation is by faith and good works; or, salvation is by faith and baptism; or, salvation is by faith plus church membership; or, salvation is by faith plus repentance. These are all attempts to darken the mind of the man who needs to be saved concerning the central issue and the basic plan of redemption."[4]      Though faith alone is the only requirement by God, the content of faith has changed throughout the ages, depending on what God revealed at a particular time. What God revealed to Adam and Eve was different than what He revealed to Abraham, and what He revealed to Abraham was different than what He reveals to us. Before addressing the content of saving faith, let's look at what it means to believe. What it Means to Believe      The word believe, in the OT, derives from the Hebrew verb aman (אָמַן) which means “to regard something as trustworthy, to believe in.”[5] And in the NT, the Greek verb pisteuō (πιστεύω) means “to consider something to be true and therefore worthy of one's trust.”[6] In Genesis we see where Abraham “believed [aman] in the LORD; and He reckoned it to him as righteousness” (Gen 15:6). When citing this passage in the NT  (Rom 4:3; Gal 3:6; Jam 2:23), the writers used the Greek verb pisteuō (πιστεύω) in place of the Hebrew verb aman (אָמַן), which shows the words are synonymous. Faith, as a verb, is used of trust in God (Gen 15:6; Heb 11:6; cf. Rom 4:3), trust in Jesus (Acts 16:31; 1 Pet 1:8), and trust in Scripture (John 2:22).[7]Biblically, faith means having an attitude of confidence in God, being certain that He will keep His Word and do as He promised, for He cannot lie (Num 23:19; Heb 6:18; Tit 1:2). When faith is exercised, it trusts solely in the object and no one else. Abraham is an example of a believer who trusted God at His Word, for “with respect to the promise of God, he did not waver in unbelief but grew strong in faith, giving glory to God, and being fully assured that what God had promised, He was able also to perform” (Rom 4:20-21).      To believe is to have a mental conviction that a testimony is true or that someone or something is reliable and worthy of confidence. Faith starts with mental assent and results in placing one's faith in the object itself. For example, one can assent that a chair is structurally sound and able to support a person, and then, by faith, sit in the chair and relax. Or one can assent that an automobile is safe to drive, and then, trusting the car, get behind the wheel and drive it to a desired destination. Faith always demands an object, is exercised with a view to receiving a benefit, and the object gets the credit for doing what it was supposed to do. For Christians, Jesus is the object of our faith, eternal life is the benefit we receive, and Christ gets all the glory as the One who saves. When we believe in Jesus, we acknowledge that He is the incarnate Son of God (John 1:1, 14), that our salvation was accomplished by means of His death, burial, and resurrection (1 Cor 15:3-4), and we trust in Him alone to save us eternally (Acts 4:12; 16:31). Christ alone saves. Nothing more. The following illustration is helpful: "Many people misunderstand what the Bible means by “believe.” Belief basically means trust. As an example, imagine you are stranded on one side of a river. The only way across is via a tightrope suspended overhead. A man on the other side has a wheelbarrow and says he can rescue you. Being a skilled acrobat, he crosses the tightrope with the wheelbarrow successfully. Now, you believe that the man himself can cross the tightrope, but in order to be saved, you have to trust him to get you over the tightrope in the wheelbarrow! Will you believe in him or not? Similarly, trusting Jesus for salvation means trusting him to do for you what you cannot do for yourself. There's no way we can earn heaven; we must trust Jesus to carry us there."[8]  Dr. Steven R. Cook     [1] Lewis Sperry Chafer, Systematic Theology, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1993), 371. [2] Charles Caldwell Ryrie, A Survey of Bible Doctrine (Chicago: Moody Press, 1972). [3] John F. Walvoord, “The Doctrine of Assurance in Contemporary Theology,” Bibliotheca Sacra 116 (1959): 200–201. [4] J. Dwight Pentecost, Things Which Become Sound Doctrine (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1996), 61. [5] Ludwig Koehler et al., The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1994–2000), 64. [6] William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 816. [7] The NT also presents faith as a noun (πίστις pistis), which often refers to “that which evokes trust and faith…the state of being someone in whom confidence can be placed, faithfulness, reliability, fidelity” (BDAG 818). The word is used with reference to God who is trustworthy (Rom 3:3; 4:19-21), and of people who possess faith (Matt 9:2, 22; 21:21), which can be great (Matt 15:28; cf. Acts 6:5; 11:23-24), small (Matt 17:19-20), or absent (Mark 4:39-40; cf. Luke 8:25). It is also used of Scripture itself as a body of reliable teaching (i.e. Acts 14:22; 16:5; Rom 14:22; Gal 1:23; 2 Tim 4:7). And we see faith as an adjective (πιστός pistos), which describes someone “being worthy of belief or trust, trustworthy, faithful, dependable, inspiring trust/faith” (BDAG 820). The word is used God (1 Cor 1:9; 10:13; 2 Tim 2:13; Heb 10:23; Rev 1:5), and of people (Matt 25:23; 1 Cor 4:17; Col 1:7; 1 Tim 1:12; 2 Tim 2:2; Heb 3:5). [8] Michael Klassen and William W. Klein, “Romans,” in The Apologetics Study Bible for Students, ed. Sean McDowell (Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers, 2017), 1410.

     Biblically speaking, guilt implies one has acted contrary to God's moral character and laws. Divine laws are a reflection of the righteousness of God. The righteousness of God may be defined as the intrinsic, immutable, moral perfection of God, from which He commands all things, in heaven and earth, and declares as good that which conforms to His righteousness and as evil that which deviates. God's character is the basis upon which all just laws derive; either divine laws from God Himself or human laws which conform to His righteousness.[1] The Bible reveals “the LORD is righteous and He loves righteousness” (Psa 11:7). We're informed that at a future time, “He is coming to judge the earth. He will judge the world in righteousness and the peoples in His faithfulness” (Psa 96:13), and He will “judge the living and the dead” (2 Tim 4:1). The problem is that all humanity is corrupt, for “are all under sin” (Rom 3:9), and “there is none righteous, not even one” (Rom 3:10), for “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Rom 3:23). Sin may be defined as the breaking of God's moral laws. John wrote, “Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness” (1 John 3:4). Sin is when we transgress God's law and depart from His intended path. According to J. I. Packer, “Sin may be comprehensively defined as lack of conformity to the law of God in act, habit, attitude, outlook, disposition, motivation, and mode of existence.”[2]The motivation behind sin is self-interest. It means we set our wills against the will of God; that we desire our interests above His interests and are willing to act contrary to His directives. According to Augustus Strong, “the sinner makes self the center of his life, sets himself directly against God and constitutes his own interest the supreme motive and his own will the supreme rule.”[3] Samuel Harris notes four characteristics of sin, namely, “It is self-sufficiency, the opposite of Christian faith…It is self-will, the opposite of Christian submission…It is self-seeking, the opposite of Christian benevolence…It is self-righteousness, the opposite of Christian humility and reverence.”[4] Merrill F. Unger states: "The underlying idea of sin is that of law and of a lawgiver. The lawgiver is God. Hence sin is everything in the disposition and purpose and conduct of God's moral creatures that is contrary to the expressed will of God (Rom 3:20; 4:15; 7:7; Jam 4:12, 17). The sinfulness of sin lies in the fact that it is against God, even when the wrong we do is to others or ourselves (Gen 39:9; Psa 51:4)."[5]      As sinners before a holy and righteous God, we bear an objective guilt because we have violated His holy character and righteous demands. We are responsible to God for what we have, what we are, and what we do. We have Adam's original sin, which has been imputed to our account (Rom 5:12-13; cf. 1 Cor 15:21-22), we are sinners by nature (Psa 51:5; Jer 17:9; Rom 7:14-25; 13:12-14), and we do sin personally (Prov 20:9; Eccl 7:20; Isa 59:2; 64:6; Jam 1:14-15). God holds us accountable for our sinfulness. Our guilt is based on what God says about us and not our subjective impressions of ourselves. J. C. Moyer states, “Guilt is both the legal and moral condition that results from breaking God's law.”[6]Louis Berkhof adds, “Guilt is the state of deserving condemnation or of being liable to punishment for the violation of a law or a moral requirement. It expresses the relation which sin bears to justice or to the penalty of the law.”[7] C.W. Stenschke states: "In biblical language and thought guilt and sin are closely related. While sin usually denotes an action of personal failure (in deed, word or thought), guilt is a legal term that denotes the state resulting from this action. Guilt is an objective fact and arises when God's standards have not been met, when the creator's claim on his creation is neglected or refused whether willfully or unintentionally."[8]      Being guilty before God is a fact and not a feeling. It is based on the objective truth of God's Word and not our subjective impressions or fluctuating emotions. Our emotions are a blessing from the Lord, but only when properly calibrated to the truth of His revelation, otherwise they can be an impediment to our relationship with Him.      Humanism rejects God and His revelation and places mankind at the center of morality and meaning. Francis Schaeffer explains humanism as “Man beginning from himself, with no knowledge except what he himself can discover and no standards outside of himself. In this view Man is the measure of all things, as the Enlightenment expressed it.”[9] But atheism creates a problem concerning moral absolutes, for if there is no God, then there is no moral absolute Law-giver; and if there is no moral absolute Law-giver, then there are no moral absolutes, and we are left to conclude that what is, is right, and any further discussion about right and wrong becomes nothing more than opinion.[10] Francis Schaeffer is correct when he states: "If there is no absolute moral standard, then one cannot say in a final sense that anything is right or wrong. By absolute we mean that which always applies, that which provides a final or ultimate standard. There must be an absolute if there are to be morals, and there must be an absolute if there are to be real values. If there is no absolute beyond man's ideas, then there is no final appeal to judge between individuals and groups whose moral judgments conflict. We are merely left with conflicting opinions."[11]      Those who reject God are left to create and impose arbitrary values on others, and the tyrants of the world are glad to bully and control others by means of strong arm tactics, whether social intimidation, economic coercion, or brute physical force. The only objective standard for measuring righteousness or guilt is set forth in God's Word which defines reality. The Bible reveals God is “the Judge of all the earth” (Gen 18:25), and He “is a righteous judge” (Psa 7:11), and He “judges righteously” (Jer 11:20), and “will by no means leave the guilty unpunished” (Ex 34:7). Yet, the Bible also reveals God is “merciful and gracious, slow to anger and abundant in lovingkindness and truth” (Psa 86:15), and One “Who pardons all your iniquities” (Psa 103:3), when we come to Him in honesty and humility. And for those who come to Him in humility, who are like the tax collector, who “was even unwilling to lift up his eyes to heaven, but was beating his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, the sinner!'” (Luke 18:13), will find Him to be merciful. For those of us who trust in Christ as Savior, we are blessed with “forgiveness of sins” (Eph 1:7; cf., Acts 10:43), the “gift of righteousness” (Rom 5:17; cf., 2 Cor 5:21; Phil 3:9), “eternal life” (John 10:28), and become “children of God” (John 1:12), with a promise that we will spend eternity in heaven with Him (John 14:1-3). J. Dwight Pentecost notes, “If you should be without Jesus Christ as your personal Savior, you stand guilty before God because you are still in Adam's race. Even though Christ bore that sin, it means nothing to you until you are related to Him by faith. The righteousness of Christ cannot be imputed to you unless you personally receive Jesus Christ as your Savior.”[12] If you have not yet trusted in Christ as your Savior, then I “beg you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God” (2 Cor 5:20). Dr. Steven R. Cook     [1] If there is no God, then there is no absolute standard for right and wrong and we are left with arbitrary laws based on manufactured values. [2] J. I. Packer, Concise Theology: A Guide to Historic Christian Beliefs, 82. [3] Augustus Hopkins Strong, Systematic Theology (Philadelphia: American Baptist Publication Society, 1907), 572. [4] Samuel Harris, “The Christian Law of Self-Sacrifice,” Bibliotheca Sacra 18, no. 69 (1861): 149. [5] Merrill F. Unger, et al, “Sin,” The New Unger's Bible Dictionary, 1198. [6] J. C. Moyer, “Guilt; Guilty,” ed. Geoffrey W Bromiley, The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Revised, 580. [7] Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans publishing co., 1938), 232. [8] C. W. Stenschke, “Guilt,” in New Dictionary of Biblical Theology, ed. T. Desmond Alexander and Brian S. Rosner, electronic ed. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000), 529. [9] Francis A. Schaeffer, A Christian Manifesto (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2005), 24. [10] God does exist, as “The heavens are telling of the glory of God; and their expanse is declaring the work of His hands” (Psa 19:1). And though people may “suppress the truth in unrighteousness” (Rom 1:18), the reality is, “that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse” (Rom 1:19-20). [11] Francis A. Schaeffer, How Should We Then Live?: The Rise and Decline of Western Thought and Culture, 50th L'Abri Anniversary Edition. (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2005), 145. [12] J. Dwight Pentecost, Things Which Become Sound Doctrine (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1996), 48.

ORIGINAL AIR DATE: NOV 29, 2017Back in mid-nineties a peer-reviewed article was published that sought to legitimize the idea that the Hebrew text of Genesis encrypted meaningful information about modern persons and events. Their method for detecting the presumed encrypted knowledge was known as equidistant letter sequencing (ELS).This article (Witztum, Rips, and Rosenberg) became a reference point for journalist Michael Drosnin, who wrote the bestselling book, The Bible Code, shortly thereafter. Subsequent to the success of Drosnin's book, Bible-code research expanded to the full Torah and beyond, to the rest of the Hebrew Bible. In this episode we ask whether there is such a thing as ELS Bible codes. Have other statisticians and biblical scholars agreed with Witztum, Rips, and Rosenberg, or are there serious problems with the method and its assumptions?Articles:Witztum, Doron, Eliyahu Rips, and Yoav Rosenberg, “Equidistant letter sequences in the Book of Genesis,” Statistical Science 9.3 (1994): 429-438McKay, Brendan, Dror Bar-Natan, Maya Bar-Hillel, and Gil Kalai, “Solving the Bible Code puzzle,” Statistical Science (1999): 150-173Richard A. Taylor, “The Bible Code: ‘Teaching them [wrong] things',” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 43, no. 4 (2000): 619-636Paul J. Tanner. “Decoding the Bible Code,” Bibliotheca Sacra 157 (2000): 141-159

     At the moment of faith in Christ, we have eternal life. This is a fact, even if we don't fully understand it. In truth, most people will not understand what they have from God or find assurance of their salvation until they've studied God's Word and learned to live by faith. Doctrinal ignorance and/or false teaching will lead to fear and doubt. For those who have trusted Christ as their Savior, subsequent knowledge of God's Word and trust in it will yield assurance of their salvation. And, as one advances spiritually, there will also be a noticeable change within, and this too may provide a subjective assurance of salvation. Objective Assurance of Salvation      The Bible reveals God is absolutely righteous and set apart from all that is sinful (Psa 11:7; 99:9; Hab 1:13; 1 John 1:5) and He hates and condemns sin (Deut 25:16; Psa 5:5; 45:7; Prov 8:13; 15:9, 26; 20:9; Zech 8:17; Rom 1:18; Col 3:6; Heb 1:9). The problem for us is that all mankind is sinful (Gen 6:5; 8:21; 1 Ki 8:46; Psa 143:2; Eccl 7:20; Isa 59:2; 64:6; Jer 17:9; Rom 3:10; 3:23; Eph 2:1-2; 1 John 1:8, 10). Not only are we sinful, but our good works have no saving merit (Rom 4:4-5; Gal 2:16; Eph 2:8-9; Tit 3:5). Our salvation was accomplished 100% by Jesus who died on the cross for our sins. Salvation is never what we do for God, but what He's done for us at the cross (Rom 5:8; 6:10; 1 Cor 15:3-4; 1 Pet 3:18). God offers to justify and save us freely as a gift, totally apart from any good works we may perform (Rom 3:24, 28, 4:5; Gal 2:16; Eph 2:8-9; Tit 3:5; 1 Pet 3:18). God's salvation comes to us who have trusted in Christ as our Savior (John 3:15-18; 6:40; 10:28; 11:25; 14:6; Acts 4:12; 16:31; 1 John 5:12). Salvation means we have forgiveness of sins (Eph 1:7), the gift of righteousness (Rom 5:17; 2 Cor 5:21; Phil 3:9), eternal life (John 10:28), are part of the family of God (Gal 3:26; 1 John 3:1), are blessed with many spiritual blessings (Eph 1:3), and will never face condemnation (Rom 8:1, 33).      When we understand these truths by studying Scripture and accept them by faith, we have assurance of our salvation because we trust in God and His Word (Psa 119:160; John 17:17). The apostle Paul wrote, “I know whom I have believed and I am convinced that He is able to guard what I have entrusted to Him until that day” (2 Tim 1:12). The apostle John wrote, “God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life” (1 John 5:11-12). The assurance of salvation does not come by looking to ourselves, but to the One who saved us. John also wrote, “These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life” (1 John 5:13). Assurance of salvation is not a guessing game for those who have trusted in Jesus as their Savior, but is a confidence that is rooted in the revelation of God's Word. For those of us who have trusted in Jesus as our Savior—believing He died for our sins, was buried, and raised again on the third day—we have eternal life. According to Zane Hodges, “It should be said here that all true assurance of salvation and eternal life must rest on the ‘testimony of God,' for only that testimony has full reliability and solidity.”[1] What Calvinists and Arminians Generally Believe      Arminians are those who believe they are eternally secure in Christ, as long as they remain faithful in their walk with God. Like Catholics, they believe faith + works = salvation. They believe their salvation can be lost due to intentional, egregious, ongoing sin; therefore, they cannot have assurance of salvation because there's always the chance they may turn away from God and forfeit their salvation. This stands in contrast to the Calvinistic doctrine of perseverance of the saints, which teaches that those whom God has chosen will persevere in faith until the end.      Calvinists believe God gives His elect a special kind of faith that guarantees they will persevere to the end of their lives and be saved eternally; however, knowing they are among the elect is always a question in their minds that cannot be finally answered until they die. If they have persevered until the end, not having denied the Lord, and continued in good works, then they can know they were among the elect. If they fall into serious and prolonged sin, especially to the end of their lives, it strongly argues they were not among the elect who are said to persevere to the end. Kenneth D. Keathley notes, “Arminians know they are saved but are afraid they cannot keep it, while Calvinists know they cannot lose their salvation but are afraid they do not have it.”[2] Norman Geisler correctly notes: "Arminians and strong Calvinists have much in common on this issue. Both assert that professing believers living in gross, unrepentant sin are not truly saved. Both insist that a person cannot be living in serious sin at the end of his life if he is truly saved. And both maintain that no one living in grave sin can be sure of his salvation."[3]      Though Christians may, to some degree, advance spiritually by learning and living God's Word, and bear the fruit of the Spirit in their lives, this will never be consistent, because the taint of sin is also present in the life of every Christian, and this to varying degrees. Christians are never free from sin (1 John 1:8, 10), and God never promises to make us completely sinless during our time on earth, so consistency of performance is lacking. Because of our imperfect knowledge and imperfect life, our ability to analyze ourselves accurately will not always be consistent. John Walvoord notes: "The difficulty is that human experience may be far from a norm, may be inaccurately analyzed, and may be made the basis of an induction which in the last analysis is based only on fragmentary evidence…The only sure basis for salvation is the promise of God in the inspired Word of God which properly accepted by faith gives validity to assurance. One clear promise sustained by “Thus saith the Lord” is better than a thousand testimonies of human conviction without a specific ground. A proper doctrine of assurance of salvation is therefore inseparable from a belief in the inspired Word of God."[4]      The Word of God is the objective basis for what we believe, and our focus should always be on learning and living His Word so that we can expunge any false ideas and properly calibrate our thinking to align with His divine revelation. Jesus said we have “eternal life…and will never perish” (John 10:28); therefore, there is no danger of us losing our salvation, for there is “no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus” (Rom 8:1), and “Who will bring a charge against God's elect? God is the one who justifies” (Rom 8:33). The matter of our eternal destiny was settled at the cross when Jesus paid the penalty for all our sins. And Jesus' work on the cross was perfectly applied to us at the moment we trusted in Him as our Savior.[5] Subjective Assurance of Salvation      Christians who are advancing spiritually may enjoy a subjective assurance of their salvation. Paul wrote, “The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God” (Rom 8:16). According to William MacDonald, “The Spirit Himself bears witness with the believer's spirit that he is a member of God's family. He does it primarily through the Word of God. As a Christian reads the Bible, the Spirit confirms the truth that, because he has trusted the Savior, he is now a child of God.”[6] This experience is valid only for believers who are in submission to God (Rom 12:1-2), learning and living Scripture (2 Tim 3:16-17; 1 Pet 2:2), walking by faith (2 Cor 5:7; Heb 10:38; 11:6), and advancing to spiritual maturity (Heb 6:1).      As believers, we have been “born again” (1 Pet 1:23), “made alive” spiritually (1 Cor 15:22), and are a “new creature” in Christ Jesus (2 Cor 5:17). At the moment of salvation, God the Holy Spirit indwells us and gives us a new nature that, for the first time in our lives, has the capacity and desire to obey God. Paul wrote of his new nature in Christ when he said, “I joyfully concur with the law of God in the inner man” (Rom 7:22). Since we have the Spirit within us, as well as new spiritual life, it is natural to expect there will be some change in attitude and behavior. The degree to which this change occurs, in part, depends on our staying positive to the Lord. According to John Walvoord adds: "The ground of assurance as stated in Scripture is something more than an intellectual comprehension of the theology of salvation and more than a conviction that the terms of salvation have been met. Scriptures make plain that there is a corresponding experience of transformation which attends the work of salvation in a believer. Some aspects of this are nonexperimental, but the new life in Christ is manifested in many ways. The believer in Christ possesses eternal life and a new divine nature which tends to change his whole viewpoint. He is indeed “a new creature: the old things are passed away; behold, they are become new” (2 Cor 5:17). The believer in Christ is indwelt by the Spirit of God, which opens a whole new field of spiritual experience. He now knows what it is to have fellowship with his heavenly Father and with His Savior the Lord Jesus Christ. His eyes are opened to spiritual truth, and the Scriptures take on a true living character as the Spirit of God illuminates the written Word. He experiences a new relationship to other believers as he is bound to them by ties of love and common faith and life. The believer is relieved from the load of condemnation for sin and experiences hope and peace such as is impossible for the unbeliever. His experiences include deliverance from the power of sin and from opposition of Satan. He enters into the joy of intercessory prayer and experiences answers to prayer. The new life in Christ, therefore, provides a satisfying and Biblical new experience which is a confirming evidence of the fact of his salvation and a vital and true basis for assurance."[7]      As Christians, our assurance of eternal life is, first and foremost, based on the salvific work of Jesus on the cross (Acts 4:12; Rom 5:8; 1 Cor 15:3-4), and the revelation of Scripture that we, who have trusted in Christ as our Savior (Acts 4:12, 16:31), “may know that [we] have eternal life” (1 John 5:13). This assurance is objective and constant, because God's Word is sure and does not change. Dr. Steven R. Cook     [1] Zane Clark Hodges, The Epistle of John: Walking in the Light of God's Love (Irving, TX: Grace Evangelical Society, 1999), 228. [2] Kenneth D. Keathley, “Perseverance and Assurance of the Saints,” in Whosoever Will, ed. David L. Allen and Steve W Lemke (Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing Group, 2010). [3] Norman L. Geisler, Systematic Theology, Volume Three: Sin, Salvation (Minneapolis, MN: Bethany House Publishers, 2004), 302. [4] John F. Walvoord, “The Doctrine of Assurance in Contemporary Theology,” Bibliotheca Sacra 116 (1959): 198. [5] The Bible reveals that when we sin, we are walking in darkness and have broken fellowship with God (1 John 1:5-6), and stifled the work of the Holy Spirit who dwells within us (Eph 4:30; 1 Th 5:19). If we continue in sin, or leave our sin unconfessed, we are in real danger of divine discipline from God (Psa 32:3-4; Heb 12:5-11; 1 John 5:16-17; cf. Dan 4:37), which can eventuate in physical death (1 John 5:16; cf., Lev 10:1-2; Acts 5:3-5; 1 Cor 11:30), and the loss of eternal rewards (1 Cor 3:10-15; 2 John 1:8). If we confess our sin directly to God, He will immediately forgive it and restore us to fellowship (1 John 1:9; cf. Psa 32:5). Being in fellowship with God means learning and living His Word (2 Tim 2:15; 3:16-17; 1 Pet 2:2), walking by faith (2 Cor 5:7; Heb 10:38; 11:6), being honest with Him about our sin (1 John 1:8, 10), and coming before His “throne of grace” (Heb 4:16) in transparent humility and confessing it in order to be forgiven (1 John 1:9; cf. Heb. 4:16). God is faithful and just to forgive us our sins every time we confess them because of the atoning work of Christ who shed His blood on the cross for us (1 John 1:9; 2:1-2). [6] William MacDonald, Believer's Bible Commentary: Old and New Testaments, ed. Arthur Farstad (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1995), 1711. [7] John F. Walvoord, “The Doctrine of Assurance in Contemporary Theology,” Bibliotheca Sacra 116 (1959): 201–202.

In this week's episode of Carseat Questions, we're joined by Dr. Mikel Del Rosario, a leading authority in Christian apologetics, to tackle a question that many Christian parents grapple with: How can we help our children understand that the Bible is true and reliable? Young minds are naturally curious, and nurturing their faith with a solid foundation is paramount. Dr. Del Rosario offers a treasure trove of insights, strategies, and engaging ways to guide your children in developing an unshakable belief in the truth of the Bible. Join us for a thought-provoking discussion that equips parents with the tools to navigate these crucial conversations. Whether your child is asking questions about the Bible's authenticity or you want to proactively instill a deep and unwavering faith, this episode is a must-listen. Dr. Del Rosario's wisdom will help you foster an environment where your children can embrace the Bible as a source of truth, wisdom, and spiritual guidance in their lives. Dr. Mikel Del Rosario is a Professor of Bible and Theology at Moody Bible Institute. Previously, he taught Christian Apologetics and World Religion at William Jessup University and Digital Media for Ministry at Dallas Theological Seminary. He has published over 30 journal articles on apologetics and cultural engagement in Bibliotheca Sacra with his mentor, Dr. Darrell Bock. He holds an M.A. in Christian Apologetics with highest honors from Biola University, along with a Master of Theology (Th.M) and a Ph.D in Biblical Studies (Emphasis in New Testament Studies) from Dallas Theological Seminary where he served as Project Manager for Cultural Engagement at the Hendricks Center, producing and hosting The Table podcast. He has also served in the Philippines as a missionary professor with Converge Worldwide and a youth pastor to refugees and multicultural students in California. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

     In addition to the blinding effects of sin resident in every human heart is the veiling work of Satan. Paul wrote, “And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, in whose case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God” (2 Cor 4:3-4). The blinding work of Satan in the minds of the lost, coupled with negative volition (i.e., the unbelieving heart), creates a double wall of resistance that cannot be penetrated by human effort. Attempts to breach these walls, or to break them down by human effort alone, has resulted in great frustration. The lost can only be saved when the Spirit performs His work in their hearts and they respond positively and freely to the gospel of grace. Lewis Chafer states, “It is as definitely contended that, apart from this divine influence, no unregenerate person will ever turn to God. From this it will be seen that, next to the accurate and faithful presentation of the gospel of saving grace, no truth is more determining respecting all forms of evangelism than this.”[1]The Spirit must do His work in the hearts of the unsaved, and the lost must respond to His work before salvation can occur. Then, and only then, will the evangelist be effective in winning souls, and this when he presents the gospel of grace clearly to the willing heart.      Prior to the present work of the Spirit in the world today, He was working in the life of Jesus to sustain His humanity until He completed the Father's mission (Matt 3:16; 4:1; 12:28; Luke 4:14, 18). Naturally, His work with God the Son to complete our salvation preceded His work of applying that salvation to all who turn to Christ in simple faith, believing the gospel, and trusting in Christ to save. The Spirit's Sustaining Ministry      The coming of God the Son into the world marked a shift in human history (John 1:1, 14, 18), and God the Holy Spirit was involved in His human conception (Luke 1:26-35), sustained Him during His time of ministry (Luke 4:14; cf. Matt 12:28; Mark 1:10-12), and upheld Him during His time of death on the cross (Heb 9:14). John Walvoord notes: "There is implication that the whole process of the incarnation leading to the cross was related to the work of the Holy Spirit. As Christ was sustained in life, so also in death the Holy Spirit sustained Christ. In the difficult hours of Gethsemane and all the decisive moments leading to the cross, the Holy Spirit faithfully ministered to Christ."[2]      God the Holy Spirit was helping Christ fulfill the Father's mission of going to the cross and dying in the place of sinners. Of Jesus' time on the cross, the writer of Hebrews states, “how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?” (Heb 9:14).[3] William Lane notes, “The fact that his offering was made ‘through the eternal Spirit,' implies that he had been divinely empowered and sustained in his office.”[4] God the Holy Spirit helped to sustain the humanity of Jesus in hypostatic union, which enabled Him to complete the Father's mission of going to the cross and dying as a substitute for lost humanity. According to Walvoord: "The work of the Holy Spirit in relation to the sufferings of Christ on the cross consisted, then, in sustaining the human nature in its love of God, in submission to the will of God and obedience to His commands, and in encouraging and strengthening Christ in the path of duty which led to the cross. In it all the ministry was to the human nature, and through it to the person of Christ. The inquiring mind must ever confess that this truth is infinite and beyond our complete comprehension."[5] Dr. Steven R. Cook   [1] Lewis Sperry Chafer, Systematic Theology, vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1993), 210. [2] John F. Walvoord, “The Holy Spirit in Relation to the Person and Work of Christ,” Bibliotheca Sacra 98 (1941): 52. [3] There is some debate about whether the “the eternal Spirit” refers to Jesus' Spirit (Fruchtenbaum) or the Holy Spirit (Radmacher). [4] William L. Lane, Hebrews 9–13, vol. 47B, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1991), 240. [5] John F. Walvoord, The Holy Spirit (Galaxie Software, 2008), 101.

Jesus' Sinless Life      The record of Scripture is that Jesus “knew no sin” (2 Cor 5:21), was “without sin” (Heb 4:15), “committed no sin” (1 Pet 2:22), and in whom “there is no sin” (1 John 3:5). But why was the sinless humanity of Jesus necessary? The biblical teaching is that all mankind is sinful and separated from God (Rom 3:10-23). We are sinners in Adam (Rom 5:12; 1 Cor 15:21-22), sinners by nature (Rom 7:14-25; 13:12-14), and sinners by choice (Isa 59:2; Jam 1:14-15). Because of our fallen sinful state, we are completely helpless to solve the sin problem and save ourselves (Rom 5:6-10; Eph 2:1-3), and good works have no saving merit before God (Isa 64:6; Rom 4:4-5; Eph 2:8-9; Tit 3:5). Being completely sinless, Jesus was qualified to go the cross as “a lamb unblemished and spotless” (1 Pet 1:19) and die a substitutionary death in our place, “the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God” (1 Pet 3:18). Charles Lee Feinberg states, “Though tempted in all points as we are, He was nevertheless without sin (Heb 4:15); indeed, we are told, He was holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinners (Heb 7:26). In short, the combined testimony of Scripture reveals that in Him is no sin (1 John 3:5).”[1] According to R. B. Thieme Jr.: "As true humanity living on earth, Christ was free from all three categories of human sinfulness: the sin nature, Adam's original sin, and personal sins. The first two categories were eliminated from our Lord's life through the virgin birth, but personal sin remained an issue throughout the Incarnation. Scripture confirms that our Lord can “sympathize with our weaknesses,” because He “has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin” (Heb. 4:15). The temptation to personal sin did not come from within, because the humanity of Christ had no inherent sin nature. He did, however, receive temptation from outside His person—even being tempted by Satan himself…By constantly relying on the provisions of the spiritual life (the same provisions available to us), Jesus Christ was able to resist every temptation and remain perfect (1 John 3:3, 5)."[2]      Sinners need salvation, but cannot save themselves, nor can they save another. All are trapped in sin and utterly helpless to change their condition. But God the Son did what we cannot do for ourselves. He obeyed the Father and stepped into time and space, taking true and sinless humanity to Himself, and living a perfect life before the Father. Then, at a point in time, He surrendered Himself to the cross and died a penal substitutionary death on behalf of all humanity, bearing the wrath of God in their place. Then He was placed in a grave and rose again to life on the third day, never to die again. The benefits of the cross are applied to those who come to Jesus with the empty hands of faith, believing He died for them, was buried, and raised again on the third day. When they place their faith in Him as Savior, they have forgiveness of sins and eternal life. This is given freely by grace. R. B. Thieme Jr. states: "Every human being needs to be saved, because everyone enters this world in a state of spiritual death, total depravity, and total separation from God. Because man is born hopelessly lost from God and helpless to do anything about it, God, in His grace, designed a perfect plan to reconcile man to Himself. God the Son took the burden of responsibility: He became true humanity and remained sinless so that He could be judged for the sins of the world (1 Pet 3:18). While Jesus Christ hung on the cross, God the Father poured the full wrath of His justice upon the Son He loved so perfectly (Matt 27:46; Rom 5:8–10; 2 Cor 5:21). Christ “bore our sins in His body” (1 Pet 2:24) and took the punishment in our place. God's righteous standard approved of Jesus' sacrifice as payment for all human sins."[3] Jesus' Willingness to Die      Jesus was not forced to go to the cross, but willingly went and bore our sin (Isa 53:4-11; John 10:17-18; 1 Pet 2:24). Jesus said, “I am the good shepherd; the good shepherd lays down His life for the sheep” (John 10:11), and “No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative” (John 10:18a). It was the will of the Father for Jesus to die a penal substitutionary death, and Jesus willingly accomplished it. Jesus said, “Sacrifices and offerings you have not desired, but a body have you prepared for me” (Heb 10:5). And once in hypostatic union, Jesus said, “Behold, I have come to do your will” (Heb 10:9). It was necessary for Jesus to be fully human and free from sin to be the atoning sacrifice. Thomas Constable states, “Jesus willingly offered Himself; no human took His life from Him. However, He offered Himself in obedience to the Father's will.”[4] According to Leon Morris, “The Lord's death does not take place as the result of misadventure or the might of his foes or the like. No one takes his life from him. Far from this being the case, he himself lays it down, and does so completely of his own volition.”[5] William MacDonald adds: "No one could take the Lord's life from Him. He is God, and is thus greater than all the murderous plots of His creatures. He had power in Himself to lay down His life, and He also had power to take it again. But did not men kill the Lord Jesus? They did. This is clearly stated in Acts 2:23 and in 1 Thessalonians 2:15. The Lord Jesus allowed them to do it, and this was an exhibition of His power to lay down His life. Furthermore, He “gave up His Spirit” (John 19:30) as an act of His own strength and will."[6] Jesus' Substitutionary Atonement      Atonement is a very important concept in the Bible. In the OT, the word atonement translates the Hebrew verb kaphar (כָּפַר) which means to “cover over, pacify, propitiate, [or] atone for sin.”[7] Theologically, it means “to bring together in mutual agreement, with the added idea, in theology, of reconciliation through the vicarious suffering of one on behalf of another.”[8] The animal sacrificial system—which was part of the Mosaic Law—taught that sin must be atoned for. The idea of substitution was clearly taught as the sinner laid his hands on the animal that died in his place (Lev 4:15, 24; 16:21). The innocent animal paid the price of death on behalf of the guilty sinner.      The animal sacrificial system under the Mosaic Law taught that God is holy, man is sinful, and that God was willing to judge an innocent creature as a substitute in place of the sinner. The animal that shed its blood gave up its life in place of the one who had offended God, and it was only through the shed blood that atonement was made. A life for a life. The animal sacrificial system under the Mosaic Law was highly symbolic, temporary, and pointed forward to the work of Jesus Christ on the cross. The Levitical priests would regularly perform their temple sacrifices on behalf of the people to God, but being a symbolic system, the animal sacrifices could never “make perfect those who draw near” to Him, for the simple reason that “it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins” (Heb 10:1, 4). For nearly fourteen centuries the temple priests kept “offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins” (Heb 10:11), until finally Christ “offered one sacrifice for sins for all time” (Heb 10:12), and through that one offering “perfected for all time those who are sanctified” by it (Heb 10:14). What the Mosaic Law could never accomplish through the sacrifice of symbols, Christ did once and for all time through His substitutionary death on the cross when he died in the place of sinners.      Jesus' death on the cross was a satisfactory sacrifice to God which completely paid the price for our sin. We owed a debt to God that we could never pay, and Jesus paid that debt in full when He died on the cross and bore the punishment that rightfully belonged to us. In Romans 3:25 Paul used the Greek word hilasterion (ἱλαστήριον)—translated propitiation—to show that Jesus' shed blood completely satisfied God's righteous demands toward our sin, with the result that there is nothing more for the sinner to pay to God. Jesus paid our sin-debt in full. The Apostle John tells us “He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world” (1 John 2:2; cf., 1 John 4:10). Jesus' death on the cross forever satisfied God's righteous demands toward the sins of everyone for all time! God has “canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross” (Col 2:14). Regarding Christ's death, J. Dwight Pentecost states: "You can be adjusted to God's standard, because God made Christ to become sin for us. The One who knew no sin, the One in whose lips had never been found guile, took upon Himself our sin in order that He might bear our sins to the cross and offer Himself as an acceptable substitute to God for us—on our behalf, in our place. And when Jesus Christ identified Himself with sinners and went to the cross on their behalf and in their place, He was making possible the doctrine of reconciliation. He was making it possible for God to conform the world to Himself, to adjust the world to His standard so that sinners in the world might find salvation because “Jesus paid it all.” You can be adjusted to God, to God's standard, through Christ, by His death, by His cross, by His blood, and by His identification with sinners."[9]      In the NT, the idea of substitution is observed in the use of two Greek prepositions. The first is the preposition huper (ὑπὲρ), translated “for,” which means “in behalf of, for the sake of someone.”[10] The idea of Jesus dying as a substitute in the place of sinners is seen in Romans 5:8 where Paul wrote, “God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.” The second preposition that denotes substitution is anti (ἀντὶ), also translated “for,” which expresses the idea “that one person or thing is, or is to be, replaced by another, instead of, in place of.”[11] The preposition anti (ἀντὶ) is seen in Jesus' statement, “the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many” (Matt 20:28). According to Robert Lightner: "The biblical view of the Savior's death is that he died to satisfy the demands of the offended righteousness of God. The Savior died in the sinner's place. This is an essential, indispensable truth in evangelicalism. It is true that Christ died for the sinner's benefit, but that does not fully describe the nature and purpose of his finished work. He gave his life in the sinner's place. He died as the sinner's substitute. The strongest expression of Christ's substitutionary death is given with the Greek preposition anti, translated “for.” Christ himself used this word when he said, “even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many” (Matt 20:28; cf. Matt 26:28; 1 Tim 2:6). Christ died in the sinner's place. He died instead of the condemned."[12]      Jesus' atonement for sins is the basis for reconciliation, because God has judged our sins in the Person of Christ who died on the cross in our place. The death of Christ has forever satisfied God's righteous demands for our sin and it is on this basis that He can accept sinners into heaven. The blood of Christ is the only coin in the heavenly realm that God accepts as payment for our sin-debt, and Christ paid our sin debt in full. That's good news!      Because Jesus' death satisfied God's righteousness demands for sin, the sinner can approach God who welcomes him without reservation. God has cleared the way for sinners to come to Him for a new relationship, and this is based completely on the substitutionary work of Christ. God has done everything to reconcile humanity to Himself. The debt that was owed to God was paid in full by the blood of Christ.  Dr. Steven R. Cook   [1] Charles Lee Feinberg, “The Hypostatic Union,” Bibliotheca Sacra 92 (1935): 423. [2] Robert B. Thieme, Jr. “Impeccability of Christ”,  Thieme's Bible Doctrine Dictionary, (Houston, TX., R. B. Thieme, Jr., Bible Ministries, 2022), 135. [3] Robert B. Thieme, Jr. “Salvation”,  Thieme's Bible Doctrine Dictionary, (Houston, TX., R. B. Thieme, Jr., Bible Ministries, 2022), 232. [4] Tom Constable, Tom Constable's Expository Notes on the Bible (Galaxie Software, 2003), Jn 10:18. [5] Leon Morris, The Gospel according to John, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1995), 456. [6] William MacDonald, Believer's Bible Commentary: Old and New Testaments, ed. Arthur Farstad (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1995), 1526. [7] Francis Brown, S.R. Driver and Charles A. Briggs, The New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew-English Lexicon (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers 1979), 497. [8] G. W. Bromiley, “Atone; Atonement,” ed. Geoffrey W. Bromiley, The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Revised (Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1979–1988), 352. [9] J. Dwight Pentecost, Things Which Become Sound Doctrine (Grand Rapids, Mi., Kregel Publications, 1965), 89. [10] William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 1030. [11] Ibid., 87. [12] Robert P. Lightner, Handbook of Evangelical Theology: A Historical, Biblical, and Contemporary Survey and Review (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1995), 194.

Jesus' Humility      It is only natural that the subject of Jesus' humility be discussed after examining His position as the Suffering Servant. W. H. Griffith Thomas notes: "In the Old Testament our Lord is called “the Servant of Jehovah,” and in the New Testament He is described as having taken “the form of a servant.” In order to do the will of God and redeem mankind, it was necessary for Him to humble Himself and become a “Servant,” so that along the pathway of service He might come to that Cross which was at once the exemplification of devoted duty, redeeming grace, and Divine love."[1]      Matthew records Jesus' mental attitude of humility when He said, “Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart” (Matt 11:29). The word humble translates the Greek adjective tapeinos (ταπεινός), which denotes being “lowly, undistinguished, of no account.”[2] Jesus' mental attitude of humility was in contrast with that of the world which regards the virtue of humility in a negative way. Moisés Silva notes, “In the Greek world, with its anthropocentric approach, lowliness is looked on as shameful, to be avoided and overcome by act and thought. In the NT, with its theocentric perspective, the words are used to describe our relationship with God and its effect on how we treat fellow human beings.”[3] For Jesus, being humble meant He was more concerned with doing the Father's will than that of the world around Him, or even His own will (Luke 22:42). And there was no greater act of humility than Jesus being obedient to the point of death on the cross. Paul wrote that Jesus “humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross” (Phil 2:8). Wiersbe states, “His was not the death of a martyr but the death of a Savior. He willingly laid down His life for the sins of the world.”[4] Homer Kent notes, “He was so committed to the Father's plan that he obeyed it even as far as death (Heb 5:8). Nor was this all, for it was no ordinary death, but the disgraceful death by crucifixion, a death not allowed for Roman citizens, and to Jews indicative of the curse of God (Deut 21:23; Gal 3:13).”[5] And Earl Radmacher comments: "Jesus came to the earth with the identity of a man. Here the word appearance points to the external characteristics of Jesus: He had the bearing, actions, and manners of a man. He humbled Himself: Jesus willingly took the role of a servant; no one forced Him to do it. Obedient: Although He never sinned and did not deserve to die, He chose to die so that the sins of the world could be charged to His account. Subsequently He could credit His righteousness to the account of all who believe in Him (2 Cor 5:21; Gal 1:4)."[6]      As stated before, Jesus was not forced to go to the cross, but willingly went to the cross and bore our sin (Isa 53:4-11; John 10:17-18; 1 Pet 2:24). As God, He could have avoided the cross altogether, or even stepped down from the cross if He'd wanted. Jesus died on a cross to accomplish the Father's will. To be an atoning sacrifice for our sins, so that we could receive forgiveness and eternal life and enjoy heaven forever with Him. His being humble to the point of death was for our wellbeing. He died for us, “the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God” (1 Pet 3:18). Walvoord notes: "No one else has ever come from infinite heights of glory to such a shameful death. If there had been a better way or another way by which the sin of the whole world could have been taken away, surely God would not have required His beloved Son to submit to such a death. This was the only way. There had to be a perfect sacrifice, an atonement of infinite value. This could be accomplished only by a person who was both God and man, who was without sin and yet was truly a man representing the human race. No other could take the place of Christ, no act of devotion, however unselfish, no act of ordinary man, however courageous, for  sin. As we contemplate the mind of Christ which made Him willing to die on the cross, we must realize that if Christ had not died men would still be in their sins with a hopeless eternity and facing just as certain a judgment as that which is the lot of the lost angels who know nothing of salvation."[7] Jesus' Sinless Life      The record of Scripture is that Jesus “knew no sin” (2 Cor 5:21), was “without sin” (Heb 4:15), “committed no sin” (1 Pet 2:22), and in whom “there is no sin” (1 John 3:5). But why was the sinless humanity of Jesus necessary? The biblical teaching is that all mankind is sinful and separated from God (Rom 3:10-23). We are sinners in Adam (Rom 5:12; 1 Cor 15:21-22), sinners by nature (Rom 7:14-25; 13:12-14), and sinners by choice (Isa 59:2; Jam 1:14-15). Because of our fallen sinful state, we are completely helpless to solve the sin problem and save ourselves (Rom 5:6-10; Eph 2:1-3), and good works have no saving merit before God (Isa 64:6; Rom 4:4-5; Eph 2:8-9; Tit 3:5). Being completely sinless, Jesus was qualified to go the cross as “a lamb unblemished and spotless” (1 Pet 1:19) and die a substitutionary death in our place, “the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God” (1 Pet 3:18). Charles Lee Feinberg states, “Though tempted in all points as we are, He was nevertheless without sin (Heb 4:15); indeed, we are told, He was holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinners (Heb 7:26). In short, the combined testimony of Scripture reveals that in Him is no sin (1 John 3:5).”[8] According to R. B. Thieme Jr.: "As true humanity living on earth, Christ was free from all three categories of human sinfulness: the sin nature, Adam's original sin, and personal sins. The first two categories were eliminated from our Lord's life through the virgin birth, but personal sin remained an issue throughout the Incarnation. Scripture confirms that our Lord can “sympathize with our weaknesses,” because He “has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin” (Heb 4:15). The temptation to personal sin did not come from within, because the humanity of Christ had no inherent sin nature. He did, however, receive temptation from outside His person—even being tempted by Satan himself…By constantly relying on the provisions of the spiritual life (the same provisions available to us), Jesus Christ was able to resist every temptation and remain perfect (1 John 3:3, 5)."[9]      Sinners need salvation, but cannot save themselves, nor can they save another. All are trapped in sin and utterly helpless to change their condition. But God the Son did what we cannot do for ourselves. He obeyed the Father and stepped into time and space, taking true and sinless humanity to Himself, and living a perfect life before the Father. Then, at a point in time, He surrendered Himself to the cross and died a penal substitutionary death on behalf of all humanity, bearing the wrath of God in their place. Then He was placed in a grave and rose again to life on the third day, never to die again. The benefits of the cross are applied to those who come to Jesus with the empty hands of faith, believing He died for them, was buried, and raised again on the third day. When they place their faith in Him as Savior, they have forgiveness of sins and eternal life. This is given freely by grace. R. B. Thieme Jr. states: Every human being needs to be saved, because everyone enters this world in a state of spiritual death, total depravity, and total separation from God. Because man is born hopelessly lost from God and helpless to do anything about it, God, in His grace, designed a perfect plan to reconcile man to Himself. God the Son took the burden of responsibility: He became true humanity and remained sinless so that He could be judged for the sins of the world (1 Pet 3:18). While Jesus Christ hung on the cross, God the Father poured the full wrath of His justice upon the Son He loved so perfectly (Matt 27:46; Rom 5:8–10; 2 Cor 5:21). Christ “bore our sins in His body” (1 Pet 2:24) and took the punishment in our place. God's righteous standard approved of Jesus' sacrifice as payment for all human sins.[10] Dr. Steven R. Cook   [1] W. H. Griffith Thomas, The Christian Life and How to Live It (Chicago: The Bible Institute Colportage Association, 1919), 59–60. [2] William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 989. [3] Moisés Silva, ed., New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology and Exegesis (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2014), 452. [4] Warren W. Wiersbe, The Bible Exposition Commentary, vol. 2 (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1996), 75. [5] Homer A. Kent Jr., “Philippians,” in The Expositor's Bible Commentary: Ephesians through Philemon, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 11 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981), 124. [6] Earl D. Radmacher, Ronald Barclay Allen, and H. Wayne House, Nelson's New Illustrated Bible Commentary (Nashville: T. Nelson Publishers, 1999), 1550–1551. [7] John F. Walvoord, To Live Is Christ (Galaxie Software, 2007), 45. [8] Charles Lee Feinberg, “The Hypostatic Union,” Bibliotheca Sacra 92 (1935): 423. [9] Robert B. Thieme, Jr. “Impeccability of Christ”,  Thieme's Bible Doctrine Dictionary, (Houston, TX., R. B. Thieme, Jr., Bible Ministries, 2022), 135. [10] Robert B. Thieme, Jr. “Salvation”,  Thieme's Bible Doctrine Dictionary, (Houston, TX., R. B. Thieme, Jr., Bible Ministries, 2022), 232.

For Christians, what is the proper way to think about bioethics and bioengineering? What moral limits should be placed upon bioengineering research and development? Will science give us the ability to live forever, apart from God Himself? On part two of our conversation with philosopher, apologist and author, Dr. Douglas Groothius (GROW-tice), we unpack some ways through these questions and help equip you to give a defense in such important discussions. Douglas Groothuis earned his PhD from the University of Oregon and has been a faculty member at Denver Seminary since 1993. He has also taught at The University of Oregon and Metro State University, in Denver. He has authored thirty academic articles in journals such as Philosophia Christi, Religious Studies, Sophia, Bibliotheca Sacra, and Academic Questions. He has also written for Christianity Today, The Christian Research Journal, The Journal for Christian Legal Thought, The Chronicle of Higher Education, and many other publications. He has authored thirteen books, including Unmasking the New Age, The Soul in Cyberspace, Truth Decay, On Jesus, Christian Apologetics, Philosophy in Seven Sentences, Walking through Twilight: A Wife's Illness—A Philosopher's Lament, I Love You to the Stars (a children's book written with Crystal Bowman), Christian Apologetics, Fire in the Streets: How You Can Confidently Respond to Incendiary Cultural Topics. and The Knowledge of God in the World and in the Word an Introduction to Classical Apologetics (2022) with Andrew I. Shepardson. He has contributed numerous entries to reference volumes such as The Dictionary of Christianity and Science, The Apologetics Study Bible, The Evangelical Dictionary of World Religions, and the textbook, Problems in Value Theory.Related Links: Free access to some related Watchman Profiles: Watchman Fellowship 4-page Profile on Transhumanism by Dr. Douglas Groothuis: watchman.org/TranshumanismProfile.pdf Watchman Fellowship 4-page Profile on Atheism by Dr. Robert M. Bowman: watchman.org/Atheism Watchman Fellowship 4-page Profile on Scientism by Dr. Luke Barnes and Daniel Ray: watchman.org/Scientism Additional ResourcesFREE: We are also offering a subscription to our 4-page bimonthly Profiles here: www.watchman.org/Free.PROFILE NOTEBOOK: Order the complete collection of Watchman Fellowship Profiles (over 600 pages -- from Astrology to Zen Buddhism) in either printed or PDF formats here: watchman.org/notebook. SUPPORT: Help us create more content like this. Make a tax-deductible donation here: www.watchman.org/give.Apologetics Profile is a ministry of Watchman Fellowship For more information, visit www.watchman.org © Watchman Fellowship, Inc.

Episode 64: Acts 27-28 - Survivor - MaltaJan 7, 2022 - Host: Dr. Gregory HallThe last two chapters in Acts contain the details of an amazing shipwreck where all the crew and passengers are brought safely to the island of Malta. The story is better than a similar reality tv program you may have watched… and for several reasons it's also a fitting end to Luke's account of the Acts of the Apostles.Resources Referenced and/or Read:Yates, K. W. (2016). Military Leaders and Jonah in the Writings of Luke, Part 2. Bibliotheca Sacra, 173(692), 457–458.Gage, W. A. (2011). Return from Emmaus: The Resurrection Theme in Scripture (p. 41). Warren A. Gage.Gage, W. A., & Carpenter, S. P. (2014). A Literary Guide to the Life of Christ in Matthew, Mark, and Luke-Acts: How the Synoptic Evangelists Tell the Story of Jesus (p. 153). St. Andrews House.WatermarkGospel.com Video - Paul on Malta - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMcS-8rMRtcKeener, C. S. (1993). The IVP Bible background commentary: New Testament (Ac 28:18–31). InterVarsity Press.Beale, G. (2018). We Become What We Worship: A Biblical Theology of Idolatry (pp. 244–245). InterVarsity Press Academic.Show Music:Intro/Outro - "Growth" by Armani Delos SantosTransition Music - produced by Jacob A. HallPodcast Website:The All-America Listener Challenge Updates: https://rethinkingscripture.comMy New Podcast Studio... The Upper Room: https://rethinkingscripture.com/podcast-episodes/More information about The Homes and Help Initiative: https://rethinkingscripture.com/homes-help-initiative/Sister site: RethinkingRest.comRethinking Rest... the Book: Available January 19, 2023!More information: https://rethinkingrest.com/the-book/Social Media:Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/RethinkingScripture Twitter: @RethinkingStuffInstagram: Rethinking_ScriptureYouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC6YCLg2UldJiA0dsg0KkvLAPowered and distributed by Simplecast.

     Restore Broken Fellowship with God Through Confession of Personal Sin. All believers sin, and there are none who attain perfection in this life (Pro 20:9; Eccl 7:20; 1 John 1:8-10). For this reason, familial forgiveness is necessary for a healthy relationship with God. David understood the folly of trying to conceal his sins, which resulted in psychological disequilibrium and pain; however, when he confessed his sin, God forgave him (Psa 32:2-5). John wrote, “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (1 John 1:9). God forgives because it is His nature to do so, for He “merciful and gracious, slow to anger and abundant in lovingkindness and truth” (Psa 86:15; cf. Psa 103:8-14). And He is able to forgive because Christ has atoned for our sins at the cross, satisfying the Father's righteous demands regarding our offenses. The apostle John wrote, “My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; 2 and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world” (1 John 2:1-2). The challenge for many believers is to trust God at His word and accept His forgiveness and not operate on guilty feelings. William MacDonald states: "The forgiveness John speaks about here [i.e., 1 John 1:9] is parental, not judicial. Judicial forgiveness means forgiveness from the penalty of sins, which the sinner receives when he believes on the Lord Jesus Christ. It is called judicial because it is granted by God acting as Judge. But what about sins which a person commits after conversion? As far as the penalty is concerned, the price has already been paid by the Lord Jesus on the cross of Calvary. But as far as fellowship in the family of God is concerned, the sinning saint needs parental forgiveness, that is, the forgiveness of His Father. He obtains it by confessing his sin. We need judicial forgiveness only once; that takes care of the penalty of all our sins—past, present, and future. But we need parental forgiveness throughout our Christian life."[1]      Be Filled with the Spirit. Paul wrote to Christians, “don't get drunk with wine, which leads to reckless actions, but be filled by the Spirit” (Eph 5:18 CSB). If a believer consumes too much alcohol, it can lead to cognitive impairment and harmful behavior. But the believer who is filled with the Spirit will possess divine viewpoint and manifest the fruit of godliness, worship, and thankfulness to the Lord (Eph 5:19-20). Being filled with the Spirit means being guided by Him rather than our own desires or the desires of others. The Spirit's guidance is always according to Scripture. Being filled with the Spirit does not mean we have more of Him, but that He has more of us, as we submit to His leading. Warren Wiersbe comments: “Be filled with the Spirit” is God's command, and He expects us to obey. The command is plural, so it applies to all Christians and not just to a select few. The verb is in the present tense, “keep on being filled”, so it is an experience we should enjoy constantly and not just on special occasions. And the verb is passive. We do not fill ourselves but permit the Spirit to fill us. The verb “fill” has nothing to do with contents or quantity, as though we are empty vessels that need a required amount of spiritual fuel to keep going. In the Bible, filled means “controlled by.” “They... were filled with wrath” (Luke 4:28) means “they were controlled by wrath” and for that reason tried to kill Jesus. “The Jews were filled with envy” (Acts 13:45) means that the Jews were controlled by envy and opposed the ministry of Paul and Barnabas. To be “filled with the Spirit” means to be constantly controlled by the Spirit in our mind, emotions, and will…But how can a person tell whether or not he is filled with the Spirit? Paul stated that there are three evidences of the fullness of the Spirit in the life of the believer: he is joyful (Eph. 5:19), thankful (Eph. 5:20), and submissive (Eph. 5:21–33). Paul said nothing about miracles or tongues, or other special manifestations.[2] Lewis S. Chafer wrote: "To be filled with the Spirit is to have the Spirit fulfilling in us all that God intended Him to do when he placed Him there. To be filled is not the problem of getting more of the Spirit: it is rather the problem of the Spirit getting more of us. We shall never have more of the Spirit than the anointing which every true Christian has received. On the other hand, the Spirit may have all of the believer and thus be able to manifest in him the life and character of Christ. A spiritual person, then, is one who experiences the divine purpose and plan in his daily life through the power of the indwelling Spirit. The character of that life will be the out-lived Christ. The cause of that life will be the unhindered indwelling Spirit (Eph 3:16-21; 2 Cor 3:18)."[3] Charles Ryrie states: "To be filled with the Spirit means to be controlled by the Spirit. The clue to this definition is found in Ephesians 5:18 where there is contrast and comparison between drunkenness and Spirit-filling. It is the comparison which gives the clue, for just as a drunken person is controlled by the liquor which he consumes, so a Spirit-filled Christian is controlled by the Spirit. This will cause him to act in ways which are unnatural to him, not implying that such ways will be erratic or abnormal, but asserting that they will not be the ways of the old life. Control by the Spirit is a necessary part of spirituality."[4]      Walk in the Spirit. Paul wrote, “walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh” (Gal 5:16). In this passage walking is a metaphor for daily living, which can be influenced by God (Deut 5:33; 10:12), other righteous persons (Prov 13:20), sinners (Psa 1:1; Pro 1:10-16; 1 Cor 15:33), or one's own sin nature (Gal 5:17-21). To walk in the Spirit means we depend on His counsel to guide and power to sustain as we seek to do His will. The Spirit most often guides us directly by Scripture. Jesus, speaking of the ministry of the Holy Spirit, said, “the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you” (John 14:26). The Holy Spirit helps the Christian know the Word of God, and to recall Scripture when needed for guidance. The Holy Spirit also works through mature believers—whose thinking is saturated with God's Word—to help provide sound biblical advice for others. Warren Wiersbe states: "The New Testament calls the Christian life a “walk.” This walk begins with a step of faith when we trust Christ as our Savior. But salvation is not the end—it's only the beginning—of spiritual life. “Walking” involves progress, and Christians are supposed to advance in the spiritual life. Just as a child must learn to walk and must overcome many difficulties in doing so, a Christian must learn to “walk in the light.”[5] Charles Ryrie adds: "Constant dependence on the power of the indwelling Spirit of God is essential to spiritual growth and victory. By its very nature, walking is a succession of dependent acts. When one foot is lifted in order to place it front of the other one, it is done in faith—faith that the foot that remains on the ground will support the full weight of the body. You can only walk by the exercise of faith. You can live the Christian life only by dependence on the Holy Spirit. Such dependence will result in the Spirit's control over the deeds of the flesh (Gal 5:17-21) and the Spirit's production of the fruit of the Spirit (vv. 22-23). Dependence on the power of God and effort on the part of the believer are not mutually exclusive. Self-discipline and Spirit-dependence can and must be practiced at the same time in a balanced spiritual life. Dependence itself is an attitude, but that attitude does not come automatically; it usually requires cultivation. How many genuine Christians there are who live day after day without even sensing their need of dependence on Him. Experience, routine, pride, self-confidence all tend to drag all of us away from that conscious dependence on God which we must have in order to live and act righteously."[6]   [1] William MacDonald, Believer's Bible Commentary: Old and New Testaments, ed. Arthur Farstad (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1995), 2310-11. [2] Warren Wiersbe, The Bible Exposition Commentary: New Testament, Vol. 2 (Colorado Springs, Col., Victor Publishing, 2001), 48. [3] Lewis S. Chafer, He that is Spiritual (Grand Rapids, Mich. Zondervan Publishing, 1967), 43-44. [4] Charles C. Ryrie, “What is Spirituality?” Bibliotheca Sacra 126 (1969): 206. [5] Wiersbe, The Bible Exposition Commentary: New Testament, Vol. 2, 479. [6] Charles Ryrie, Balancing the Christian Life (Chicago. Ill., Moody Press, 1994), 198.

Our guest this week and next, philosopher Dr. Douglas Groothuis (pronounced GROW-tice), unpacks and helps us better understand the foundation behind these ideas and shows us that we as Christians have no reason to fear contributing sound biblical and theological answers to these important topics.Douglas Groothuis earned his PhD from the University of Oregon and has been a faculty member at Denver Seminary since 1993. He has also taught at The University of Oregon and Metro State University, in Denver. He has authored thirty academic articles in journals such as Philosophia Christi, Religious Studies, Sophia, Bibliotheca Sacra, and Academic Questions. He has also written for Christianity Today, The Christian Research Journal, The Journal for Christian Legal Thought, The Chronicle of Higher Education, and many other publications. He has authored thirteen books, including Unmasking the New Age, The Soul in Cyberspace, Truth Decay, On Jesus, Christian Apologetics, Philosophy in Seven Sentences, Walking through Twilight: A Wife's Illness—A Philosopher's Lament, I Love You to the Stars (a children's book written with Crystal Bowman), Christian Apologetics, Fire in the Streets: How You Can Confidently Respond to Incendiary Cultural Topics. and The Knowledge of God in the World and in the Word an Introduction to Classical Apologetics (2022) with Andrew I. Shepardson. He has contributed numerous entries to reference volumes such as The Dictionary of Christianity and Science, The Apologetics Study Bible, The Evangelical Dictionary of World Religions, and the textbook, Problems in Value Theory.Related Links: Free access to some related Watchman Profiles: Watchman Fellowship 4-page Profile on Transhumanism by Dr. Douglas Groothuis: watchman.org/TranshumanismProfile.pdf Watchman Fellowship 4-page Profile on Atheism by Dr. Robert M. Bowman: watchman.org/Atheism Watchman Fellowship 4-page Profile on Scientism by Dr. Luke Barnes and Daniel Ray: watchman.org/Scientism Additional ResourcesFREE: We are also offering a subscription to our 4-page bimonthly Profiles here: www.watchman.org/Free.PROFILE NOTEBOOK: Order the complete collection of Watchman Fellowship Profiles (over 600 pages -- from Astrology to Zen Buddhism) in either printed or PDF formats here: watchman.org/notebook. SUPPORT: Help us create more content like this. Make a tax-deductible donation here: www.watchman.org/give.Apologetics Profile is a ministry of Watchman Fellowship For more information, visit www.watchman.org © Watchman Fellowship, Inc.

     Do not Love the World. The apostle John warns Christians, saying, “Do not love the world nor the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life, is not from the Father, but is from the world” (1 John 2:15-16). When John writes and tells the Christian “Do not love the world”, he's not talking about the physical planet. The Greek word κόσμος kosmos as it is used by the apostle John and others most often refers to “that which is hostile to God…lost in sin, wholly at odds with anything divine, ruined and depraved.”[1] The world, or world-system, originated with Satan and consists of those philosophies and values that perpetually influence humanity to think and behave contrary to God and His Word. The world-system is mankind and society functioning without God, and is first and foremost a mindset that is antithetical to divine viewpoint. Lewis S. Chafer explains: "The kosmos is a vast order or system that Satan has promoted which conforms to his ideals, aims, and methods. It is civilization now functioning apart from God-a civilization in which none of its promoters really expect God to share; who assign to God no consideration in respect to their projects, nor do they ascribe any causality to Him. This system embraces its godless governments, conflicts, armaments, jealousies; its education, culture, religions of morality, and pride. It is that sphere in which man lives. It is what he sees, what he employs. To the uncounted multitude it is all they ever know so long as they live on this earth. It is properly styled “The Satanic System” which phrase is in many instances a justified interpretation of the so-meaningful word, kosmos."[2]      Satan's world system is a spiritual darkness that envelopes and permeates the human race, influencing every aspect of thought and behavior in such a way that the depraved nature of man is magnified while God is excluded. We should be careful to understand that Satan's system is a buffet that offers something for everyone who rejects God, whether he is moral or immoral, religious or irreligious, educated or simple, rich or poor. Satan is careful to make sure there's even something for the Christian in his world-system, which is why the Bible repeatedly warns the believer not to love the world or the things in the world. We are to be set apart (Col 2:8; Jam 1:27; 4:4; 1 John 2:15-16). Robert Lightner states: "The world is the Christian's enemy because it represents an anti-God system, a philosophy that is diametrically opposed to the will and plan of God. It is a system headed by the devil and therefore at odds with God (2 Cor 4:4). Likewise, the world hates the believer who lives for Christ (John 17:14). The Lord never kept this a secret from his own. He told them often of the coming conflict with the world (e.g., John 15:18-20; 16:1-3; 32-33; cf. 2 Tim 3:1-12). It is in this wicked world we must rear our families and earn our livelihoods. We are in it, yet are not to be a part of it."[3]      Do not Quench the Spirit. Paul wrote to the church at Thessalonica and said, “Do not quench the Spirit” (1 Th 5:19). The word “quench” translates the Greek word σβέννυμι sbennumi which means to “stifle or suppress.”[4] The word carries the idea of dowsing water on a fire so as to extinguish it. To “quench the Spirit” is to resist His revealed will and not follow as He leads. The Holy Spirit wants to work in our lives, but we must let Him have His way, and this means yielding, or submitting to Him on a regular basis, as opportunity permits; however, the Spirit does not force us to be spiritual, therefore He can be resisted. John Walvoord states, “Quenching the Spirit may simply be defined as being unyielded to Him, or saying, ‘No.' The issue is, therefore, the question of willingness to do His will.”[5]      Do not Grieve the Spirit. To the church at Ephesus, Paul wrote, “Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption” (Eph 4:30). The Spirit is a Person, and He is grieved with us as Christians when we sin and act contrary to His holy character. Our sin hurts our relationship with Him and hinders His work in our lives. Grieving the Spirit is a willful act on our part when we think and behave sinfully. John Walvoord writes: "The Scriptures often testify to the fact that the Spirit of God is holy and that He is a person. The indwelling presence of this holy person constitutes the body of a believer a temple of God. In the nature of the case, the presence of sin in any form grieves the Holy Spirit. Accordingly, when the Christian is exhorted to “grieve not the Holy Spirit of God, in whom ye were sealed unto the day of redemption” (Eph 4:30), it is an appeal to allow nothing in his life contrary to the holiness of the Spirit. It is clear that the one cause of grieving the Holy Spirit is sin."[6]      When the Christian is walking as he should, according to Scripture, then the Holy Spirit can work through him to touch the lives of others. When the Christian commits sin, then the Spirit is grieved and His ministry to others is diminished, and the Spirit must then begin to work on the heart of the Christian to bring him back into fellowship. Lewis S. Chafer states, “Sin destroys spirituality. It is necessarily so; for where sin is tolerated in the believer's daily life, the Spirit, who indwells him, must then turn from His blessed ministry through him, to a pleading ministry to him.”[7]      Restore Broken Fellowship with God Through Confession of Personal Sin. All believers sin, and there are none who attain perfection in this life (Pro 20:9; Eccl 7:20; 1 John 1:8-10). For this reason, familial forgiveness is necessary for a healthy relationship with God. David understood the folly of trying to conceal his sins, which resulted in psychological disequilibrium and pain; however, when he confessed his sin, God forgave him (Psa 32:2-5). John wrote, “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (1 John 1:9). God forgives because it is His nature to do so, for He “merciful and gracious, slow to anger and abundant in lovingkindness and truth” (Psa 86:15; cf. Psa 103:8-14). And He is able to forgive because Christ has atoned for our sins at the cross, satisfying the Father's righteous demands regarding our offenses. The apostle John wrote, “My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; 2 and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world” (1 John 2:1-2). The challenge for many believers is to trust God at His word and accept His forgiveness and not operate on guilty feelings. William MacDonald states: "The forgiveness John speaks about here [i.e., 1 John 1:9] is parental, not judicial. Judicial forgiveness means forgiveness from the penalty of sins, which the sinner receives when he believes on the Lord Jesus Christ. It is called judicial because it is granted by God acting as Judge. But what about sins which a person commits after conversion? As far as the penalty is concerned, the price has already been paid by the Lord Jesus on the cross of Calvary. But as far as fellowship in the family of God is concerned, the sinning saint needs parental forgiveness, that is, the forgiveness of His Father. He obtains it by confessing his sin. We need judicial forgiveness only once; that takes care of the penalty of all our sins—past, present, and future. But we need parental forgiveness throughout our Christian life."[8]   [1] Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed., rev. and ed. Fredrick William Danker (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 562. [2] Lewis S. Chafer, “Angelology Part 4” Bibliotheca Sacra 99 (1942): 282-283. [3] Robert P. Lightner, Handbook of Evangelical Theology: A Historical, Biblical, and Contemporary Survey and Review (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1995), 206. [4] Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 917. [5] John F. Walvoord, The Holy Spirit (Grand Rapids, MI., Zondervan Publishing, 1977), 197. [6] Ibid., 200. [7] Lewis S. Chafer, He that is Spiritual (Grand Rapids, Mich. Zondervan Publishing, 1967), 70. [8] William MacDonald, Believer's Bible Commentary: Old and New Testaments, ed. Arthur Farstad (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1995), 2310-11.

In this episode, Dr. Mikel Del Rosario and Vocab Malone discuss 7 key lessons and strategies for effective evangelism and apologetics in urban settings, focusing on his ministry to people in the city, including those involved in new religious movements like the Black Hebrew Israelites.

Rethinking Scripture PodcastEpisode 57: Acts 15 - Who Were Those "Appointed to Eternal Life?"October 19, 2022 - Host: Dr. Gregory HallIn Acts 15, a decision is made. The question on the table was how to keep peace between the different cultural expectations of those who had come to faith in Jesus.  The list of action items they came up with might be a little surprising to our modern ears. But what's really interesting… is something that didn't make the list at all.Resources Referenced and/or Read:Witherington, B., III. (1998). The Acts of the Apostles: a socio-rhetorical commentary (pp. 440–441). Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.Savelle, C. H. (2004). A Reexamination of the Prohibitions in Acts 15. Bibliotheca Sacra, 161, 464–465.Show Music:Intro/Outro - "Growth" by Armani Delos SantosTransition Music - produced by Jacob A. HallPodcast Website:The All-America Listener Challenge Updates: https://rethinkingscripture.comMy New Podcast Studio... The Upper Room: https://rethinkingscripture.com/podcast-episodes/More information about The Homes and Help Initiative: https://rethinkingscripture.com/homes-help-initiative/Sister site: RethinkingRest.comRethinking Rest... the Book: Coming January 19, 2023!More information about the book: https://rethinkingrest.com/the-book/Social Media:Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/RethinkingScripture Twitter: @RethinkingStuffInstagram: Rethinking_ScriptureYouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC6YCLg2UldJiA0dsg0KkvLAPowered and distributed by Simplecast.

In this episode, Drs. Mikel Del Rosario and Frank Turek discuss how how comic book movies can reveal truths about God and point to Christ, focusing on Marvel characters like Captain America and Iron Man as well as DC characters like Batman and Wonder Woman. Plus, a bonus case study based on the tragic hero of the Star Wars franchise, Dark Vader. Discover the spiritual "easter eggs" that no one noticed in popular superhero movies!

In this episode of the Apologetics Guy Show, Dr. Mikel Del Rosario and Sarah Enterline discuss philosophical arguments for God's existence, focusing on the work of 18th century philosopher Susanna Newcome, the first woman to publish an apologetics book.

Satan's World System      As we discussed previously, Satan is permitted, for a time, to rule over the majority in this world. Three times Jesus referred to Satan as “the ruler of this world” (John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11). Other passages of Scripture call Satan “the god of this world” (2 Cor 4:4), and “the prince of the power of the air” (Eph 2:2), informing us “that the whole world lies in the power of the evil one” (1 John 5:19). Satan rules as a tyrant who has “weakened the nations” (Isa 14:12), and currently “deceives the whole world” (Rev 12:9). He personally attacked Adam and Eve (Gen 3:1-7), Job (Job 1:6-12; 2:1-13), David, (1 Chr 21:1), Joshua the high priest (Zec 3:1-2), Jesus (Matt 4:1-11), Judas (John 13:27), and Peter (Luke 22:31-32). He continues to attack God's people today (1 Pet 5:8), practices deception (2 Cor 11:13-15), and has well developed strategies of warfare (Eph 6:10-12). Furthermore, humanity is living in an “evil age” (Gal 1:4), under “the dominion of Satan” (Acts 26:18), whose sphere of influence is called “the domain of darkness” (Col 1:13). Though Satan has attacked some people directly, he mainly operates as commander of an unseen realm of demons, through a worldwide system of philosophies and values he's created, through unbelievers whom he energizes to do his will, and through the sinful inclinations of our fallen nature. These all help advance his agenda in which he attacks God and His people. Paul, when writing to Christians in Ephesus, discusses the reality of these things. Paul said: "And you [Gentile Christians, before salvation; see Eph 2:4-9] were dead [νεκρός nekros – dead, corpse; i.e., separated from God] in your trespasses and sins [i.e., acts of disobedience against God], 2 in which you formerly walked [περιπατέω peripateo – to walk, conduct oneself, behave] according to the course of this world [κόσμος kosmos - world, system], according to the prince of the power of the air [Satan – the commander of an unseen realm], of the spirit that is now working [ἐνεργέω energeo – to work, energize, empower] in the sons of disobedience [i.e., sons characterized by their disobedience to God]. 3 Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh [σάρξ sarx – flesh, body, i.e., sin nature], indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind [even their reasoning processes were corrupt], and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest." (Eph 2:1-3)      The Bible recognizes Satan's world-system and warns us not to love it. John writes and tells the Christian, “Do not love the world nor the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life, is not from the Father, but is from the world” (1 John 2:15-16). We live in a fallen world, and John's command is intended to warn us of real danger. First, John opens with the negative particle Μὴ Me, which is followed by the Geek verb ἀγαπάω agapao, which is in the imperative mood—the mood of command. The word ἀγαπάω agapao denotes desire or commitment to something or someone. David L. Allen comments on love: "In its essence love is two things: a desire for something and a commitment to something … Whatever it is you desire and whatever you're committed to, that's where your time and resources will go. If you love football, that's where your time and resources will go. If you love hunting or fishing, that's where your time and resources will go. If you love your spouse, you desire to spend time with her and you are committed to her. Love is more than an emotional feeling. Love requires a commitment of time and resources."[1]      John then gives the object we are not to desire or be committed to, namely, the world (τὸν κόσμον). The Greek word κόσμος kosmos is used in Scripture to refer to: 1) the physical planet (Matt 13:35; Acts 17:24), 2) people who live in the world (John 3:16), and 3) the hostile system created and controlled by Satan that he uses to lure people away from God (1 John 2:15-16). It is this third meaning that John has in mind. Hence, the word κόσμος kosmos refers to “that which is hostile to God…lost in sin, wholly at odds with anything divine, ruined and depraved.”[2] Concerning, the word κόσμος kosmos, David L. Allen writes: "Sometimes the word “world” is used to refer to the organized evil system with its principles and its practices, all under the authority of Satan, which includes all teachings, ideas, culture, attitudes, activities, etc., that are opposed to God. A fixation on the material over the spiritual, promotion of self over others, pleasure over principle—these are just a few descriptors of the world system John is talking about. The word “world” here means everything that opposes Christ and his work on earth. Jesus called Satan “the ruler of this world” (John 14:30; 16:11), and Paul called him “the god of this world” (2 Corinthians 4:4). In Luke 16:8 Jesus referred to all unsaved people as “the sons of this world.”[3]      Satan's world-system consists of those philosophies and values that perpetually influence humanity to think and behave contrary to God and His Word. This operating apart from God is first and foremost a way of thinking that is antithetical to God, a way of thinking motivated by a desire to be free from God and the authority of Scripture, a freedom most will accept, even though it is accompanied by all sorts of inconsistencies and absurdities. Lewis Chafer writes: "The kosmos is a vast order or system that Satan has promoted which conforms to his ideals, aims, and methods. It is civilization now functioning apart from God-a civilization in which none of its promoters really expect God to share; who assign to God no consideration in respect to their projects, nor do they ascribe any causality to Him. This system embraces its godless governments, conflicts, armaments, jealousies; its education, culture, religions of morality, and pride. It is that sphere in which man lives. It is what he sees, what he employs. To the uncounted multitude it is all they ever know so long as they live on this earth. It is properly styled “The Satanic System” which phrase is in many instances a justified interpretation of the so-meaningful word, kosmos."[4]      Many people who live in Satan's world-system exclude God and Scripture from their daily conversations. This is true in news, politics, academic communities, work and home life. God is nowhere in their thoughts, and therefore, nowhere in their discussions (Psa 10:4; 14:1). These are the agnostics and atheists. But there are others in Satan's world-system who are very religious, and these are the worst kind of people, because they claim to represent God, when in fact they don't. In the Bible, there were many religious people who spoke in the name of the Lord (Jer 14:14; 23:16-32; Matt 7:15; Acts 13:6; Rev 2:20), claiming to represent Him, even performing miracles (Deut 13:1-4; Matt 24:24; 2 Th 2:8-9; Rev 13:13). The Pharisees, Sadducees and Scribes where this way, and they said of themselves, “we have one Father: God” (John 8:41b). But Jesus saw them for what they really were and said, “You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father” (John 8:44a). The religious—like Satan—are blinded by their pride. Humility must come before they will accept God's gospel of grace, and it does no good to argue with them (2 Tim 2:24-26). These false representatives loved to talk about God, read their Bibles, pray, fast, give of their resources, and spent much of their time in fellowship with other religious persons. Theirs is a works-system of salvation, which feeds their pride; giving them a sense of control over their circumstances and others.[5] These false organizations and their teachers appear as godly and righteous, but Paul described them as “false apostles, deceitful workers, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ” (2 Cor 11:13). Though very religious, these are in line with Satan, who operates on corrupt reasoning and is a deceiver. Paul goes on to say, “No wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. Therefore, it is not surprising if his servants also disguise themselves as servants of righteousness, whose end will be according to their deeds” (2 Cor 11:14-15).      The contrast between the growing Christian and the worldly person is stark, as their thoughts and words take them in completely different directions. The growing believer thinks about God and His Word all the time, as “his delight is in the law of the LORD, and in His law he meditates day and night” (Psa 1:2). The word law translates the Hebrew word תּוֹרָה torah, which means law, direction, or instruction. Navigating the highways of this world can be tricky, and the believer needs the direction or instruction God's Word provides. It is our divine roadmap for staying on God's path and getting to the destination He intends.      At the core of Satan's world-system is a directive for mankind to function apart from God, and when obeyed, people produce all forms of evil, both moral and immoral. We should understand that Satan's system is a buffet that offers something for everyone who rejects God, whether that person is moral or immoral, religious or irreligious, educated or simple, rich or poor. Satan is careful to make sure there's even something for the Christian in his world-system, which is why the Bible repeatedly warns the believer not to love the world or the things in the world. We are to be set apart (Col 2:8; Jam 1:27; 4:4; 1 John 2:15-16). Lightner states, “The world is the Christian's enemy because it represents an anti-God system, a philosophy that is diametrically opposed to the will and plan of God. It is a system headed by the devil and therefore at odds with God (2 Cor 4:4).…It is in this wicked world we must rear our families and earn our livelihoods. We are in it, yet are not to be a part of it.”[6] It is important to understand that we cannot change Satan or his evil program; however, we must be on guard, for it can and will change us if we're not careful to learn and live God's Word.      At the moment of salvation, God the Father “rescued us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son” (Col 1:13), and “our citizenship is in heaven” (Phil 3:20). This transference is permanent and cannot be undone. Once this happens, we are hated by those who remain in Satan's kingdom of darkness. For this reason, Jesus said to His disciples, “If the world hates you, you know that it has hated Me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, because of this the world hates you” (John 15:18-19; cf. John 16:33; 1 John 3:13). Love and hate in this context should be understood as accept or reject, which can be mild or severe in expression. When praying to the Father, Jesus said, “they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world” (John 17:14b), and went on to say, “I do not ask You to take them out of the world, but to keep them from the evil one” (John 17:15). It is not God's will that we be immediately removed from this world at the moment of salvation, but left here to serve as His representatives to the lost, that we “may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light” (1 Pet 2:9). We are not to participate in worldly affairs that exclude God, but are to “walk as children of Light” (Eph 5:8), manifesting the fruit of the Light “in all goodness and righteousness and truth, trying to learn what is pleasing to the Lord” (Eph 5:9-10), and we are told, “do not participate in the unfruitful deeds of darkness, but instead even expose them” (Eph 5:11).      The growing Christian faces real struggles as Satan's world system seeks to press him into its mold, demanding conformity, and persecuting him when he does not bend to its values. The world-system not only has human support, but is backed by demonic forces that operate in collaboration with Satan. Scripture tells us “our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places” (Eph 6:12). The battlefront is more than what is seen with the human eye and is driven by unseen spiritual forces. As Christians living in the world, we are to be careful not to be taken “captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ” (Col 2:8). Realizing the battleground is the mind, we are to think biblically in everything, which is our only safeguard against the enemy (2 Cor 10:3-5).      As Christians we face situations every day in which we are pressured to compromise God's Word. We face difficulties at work, school, home, or other places, in which we are confronted by worldly-minded persons, both saved and unsaved, who demand and pressure us to abandon our biblical values. There is room for personal compromise where Scripture is silent on a matter; however, where Scripture speaks with absolute authority, there we must never compromise! Wiersbe states, “The world, or world-system, puts pressure on each person to try to get him to conform (Rom 12:2). Jesus Christ was not ‘of this world' and neither are His people (John 8:23; 17:14). But the unsaved person, either consciously or unconsciously, is controlled by the values and attitudes of this world.”[7]      By promoting the gospel and biblical teaching, the church disrupts Satan's domain of darkness by calling out of it a people for God. By learning God's Word, Christians can identify worldly conversations and activities and either avoid them or seek to redirect them by interjecting biblical truth, which should never be done in hostility. When sharing God's Word with others it's proper to know that not everyone wants to hear God's truth, and even though we may not agree with them, their personal choices should be respected (Matt 10:14; Acts 13:50-51). We should never try to force the gospel or Bible teaching on anyone, but be willing to share when opportunity presents itself. At times this will bring peace, and other times cause disruption and may even offend. In this interaction, the growing Christian must be careful not to fall into the exclusion trap, in which the worldly person (whether saved or lost) controls the content of every conversation, demanding the Christian only talk about worldly issues, as Scripture threatens his pagan presuppositions. Having the biblical worldview, the Christian should insert himself into daily conversations with others, and in so doing, be a light in a dark place. He should always be respectful, conversational, and never have a fist-in-your-face attitude, as arrogance never helps advance biblical truth (2 Tim 2:24-26). The worldly-minded person may not want to hear what the Christian has to say, but he should never be under the false impression that he has the right to quiet the Christian and thereby exclude him from the conversation.      As we grow spiritually and walk with God, learning and living His Word (2 Tim 2:15; 3:16-17), we stand in opposition to Satan's world-system and sow the seeds of spiritual insurrection in the lives of those who live and walk in his kingdom of darkness. We disrupt Satan's kingdom when we share the gospel, “that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor 15:3-4). When anyone places their faith in Christ, trusting solely in Him as Savior, they are forgiven all their sins (Eph 1:7), gifted with eternal life (John 3:16; 10:28), and the righteousness of God (Rom 4:1-5; 5:17; 2 Cor 5:21; Phil 3:9). They are rescued from Satan's enslaving power, as God rescues them from the “domain of darkness” and transfers them into “the kingdom of His beloved Son” (Col 1:13). The gospel is the only way a person can be delivered from spiritual slavery; “for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes” (Rom 1:16). Once saved, we seek to influence the thoughts and lives of other Christians through fellowship (Heb 10:23-25), prayer (Jam 5:16), edification (Eph 4:29), encouragement (1 Th 5:11), love (1 Th 4:9; cf. Eph 4:14-15), and words of grace (Col 4:6).   [1] David L. Allen, 1–3 John: Fellowship in God's Family, ed. R. Kent Hughes, Preaching the Word (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2013), 96–97. [2] Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, p. 562. [3] David L. Allen, 1–3 John: Fellowship in God's Family, 96. [4] Lewis S. Chafer, “Angelology Part 4” Bibliotheca Sacra 99 (1942): 282-283. [5] There are many church denominations today that call themselves “Christian”, but who come with a false gospel in which human works are added as a requirement for salvation (i.e., Catholics, Methodists, Church of Christ, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, etc.). [6] Robert P. Lightner, Handbook of Evangelical Theology, p. 206. [7] Warren Wiersbe, The Bible Exposition Commentary, New Testament, Vol. 2, p. 18.

Atheism's BIGGEST lie is that Christianity is anti-science. In this episode, Drs. Mikel Del Rosario and Melissa Cain Travis discuss what the conversation between faith and science ACTUALLY reveals, focusing on an accessible approach to explaining scientific data that points to the mind of the Maker. Don't miss Travis' best apologetics illustration—inspired by the world of luxury sports cars!

In this interview with Dr. Doug Groothuis, we discuss his new book, “Fire in the Streets.” The book covers a variety of topics related to Critical Race Theory in America. We dive into reparations, evangelical sympathizers to CRT, and socialism. How should Christians respond to CRT? How did CRT and neo-Marxism take over the academy? Is CRT a conservative bogeyman? Bio from Denver Seminary:“Dr. Douglas Groothuis earned his PhD from the University of Oregon and has been a full-time faculty member at Denver Seminary since 1993.He has also taught at The University of Oregon and Metro State University, in Denver. He has authored thirty academic articles in journals such as Philosophia Christi, Religious Studies, Sophia, Bibliotheca Sacra, and Academic Questions. He has also written for Christianity Today, The Christian Research Journal, The Journal for Christian Legal Thought, The Chronicle of Higher Education, and many other publications. He has authored thirteen books, including Unmasking the New Age, The Soul in Cyberspace, Truth Decay, On Jesus, Christian Apologetics, Philosophy in Seven Sentences, Walking through Twilight: A Wife's Illness—A Philosopher's Lament, and I Love You to the Stars (a children's book written with Crystal Bowman). He has contributed numerous entries to reference volumes such as The Dictionary of Christianity and Science, The Apologetics Study Bible, The Evangelical Dictionary of World Religions, and the textbook, Problems in Value Theory.”Patreon - https://www.patreon.com/chasedavisEpisode 7 - Blaise Pascal, Metallica, Donald Trump, and Critical Race Theory with Dr. Douglas Groothuis - https://fullprooftheology.buzzsprout.com/1249781/5944654Fire in the Streets - https://amzn.to/3RWZ6mXSocial Justice and the Christian Church - https://amzn.to/3PUAJ7XTwitter - https://twitter.com/DougGroothuis

Dr Don Sunukjian's lifelong love has been preaching, both as a pastor and a teacher. His passion is to see God's Word presented with accuracy, clarity, interest and relevance. With doctorates in theology and communication and 21 years as a senior pastor, he brings both scholarship and experience to his classroom at Biola University where he serves as Professor Emeritus of Christian Ministry and Leadership.In this conversation he speaks with Mike Neglia about oral clarity and the importance of establishing relevance through vivid, real life examples. Dr Sunikjian has contributed to The Bible Knowledge Commentary, Biblical Preaching, Bibliotheca Sacra, Walvoord: A Tribute and The Big Idea of Biblical Preaching. He has has conducted pastors' conferences in most metropolitan centers of the United States and maintains a regular preaching schedule.Recommended Resources: An Invitation To Biblical Preaching: https://www.kregel.com/preaching/invitation-to-biblical-preaching/ How Don Sunukjian Preaches: https://homiletix.com/don-sunukjian-how-i-preach/ Biblical Sermons: https://bakerbookhouse.com/products/41270 Dr Uche Anizor - Overcoming Congregational Apathy : https://www.expositorscollective.com/podcast/2022/6/7/overcoming-congregational-apathy-uche-anizor Dr Jeffrey Arthurs: https://www.expositorscollective.com/podcast/2022/5/3/fearing-god-more-than-fearing-people-jeffrey-arthursDr Gerald Bray: https://www.expositorscollective.com/podcast/2021/11/30/pastoral-preaching-brevity-and-john-chrysostom-gerald-brayJoin our private Facebook group to continue the conversation: https://www.facebook.com/groups/ExpositorsCollectiveThe Expositors Collective podcast is part of the GoodLion podcast network, for more thought provoking Christian podcasts visit https://goodlion.io

How can you talk about Jesus with someone who isn't comfortable starting with the Bible? In this episode of The #Apologetics Guy Show, Dr. Mikel Del Rosario and J. Warner Wallace discuss one strategy: Explaining the undeniable impact Jesus of Nazareth has had on key areas of culture and showing why Jesus STILL matters—even in a world that rejects the Bible. See why you can't erase Jesus and don't miss the part where Wallace and Del Rosario explain how Jesus and his followers have impacted the history of music and 1 out of every 3 guitars sold in the USA!

If you previously enjoyed hearing Dr. Mikel Del Rosario host Dallas Theological Seminary's podcast, "The Table," you'll love his brand-new #apologetics podcast on the Christianity Today Network: The Apologetics Guy Show! In this prelaunch episode, you'll discover the heart and vision of Mikel's new podcast, along with what you can expect to learn from his accessible apologetics conversations on the first Friday of each month. Plus, get a sneak peek at future episodes featuring insights from Dr. Melissa Cain Travis and J. Warner Wallace.

     In our current section on case laws (Deut 19:1—26:19), we are considering how the nation of ancient Israel was to practice righteous living after they entered the land of Canaan (Deut 16:20), how righteousness was measured by conformity to God's laws (Deut 6:24-25), and obedience would result in the Lord's blessings (Deut 11:26-28). In this section, Moses addresses maintaining purity in military camps (Deut 23:9-14), providing refuge for runaway foreign slaves (Deut 23:15-16), and a prohibition against men and women serving as pagan cult prostitutes (Deut 23:17-18).    Purity in Military Camps      Moses opens this section, saying, “When you go out as an army against your enemies, you shall keep yourself from every evil thing” (Deut 23:9). Here, the military represented a specific group within the nation of Israel, and they were called to maintain purity in their military camp. The word evil translates the Hebrew adjective רָע ra, which commonly denotes “bad, evil, wicked, [or] no good.”[1] The word often refers to what is morally reprehensible to God; however, in the following verses (Deut 23:10-14), it refers to what is physically impure among God's people. Being the source of absolute holiness, God determines and declares what is good or evil.      Moses continued, saying, “If there is among you any man who is unclean because of a nocturnal emission, then he must go outside the camp; he may not reenter the camp. But it shall be when evening approaches, he shall bathe himself with water, and at sundown he may reenter the camp” (Deut 23:10-11). The nocturnal emission is not identified. It could refer to an accidental nighttime seminal discharge, which a man might experience when away from his wife for a period of time. Moses had previously mentioned such a discharge (cf., Lev 15:16-17), which rendered a man ceremonially unclean, not morally unclean. However, the context implies that the nighttime emission more likely refers to one who urinated in his bed. Peter Craigie states: "The first example relates to a man who is unclean because of what happens at night. On the analogy of Leviticus 15:16, these words are often interpreted as signifying the nocturnal, involuntary emission of semen; the Hebrew in this passage, however, is different and less specific than that of Leviticus 15:16, and it is possible that something else is intended. The references may simply be to urinating in the camp at night, either involuntarily or else because a man was too lazy (or tired) to get up and go outside his camp. This interpretation seems to provide a more natural parallel to the legislation contained in Deuteronomy 23:13-15, and it would thus refer to a more typical and common occurrence in any military camp. A man who had behaved in this manner was to remain outside the camp the following day; toward evening he would wash himself, again for hygienic and ritual reasons, and he would be permitted to reenter the camp after sunset."[2]      This law was to go into effect after Israel had entered the land of Canaan; at which time, they would find themselves facing an enemy. Moses continued his instruction, saying, “You shall also have a place outside the camp and go out there, 13 and you shall have a spade among your tools, and it shall be when you sit down outside, you shall dig with it and shall turn to cover up your excrement” (Deut 23:12-13). Some pagan cultures, such as the Egyptians, used animal feces as part of their medical practices. Fawver and Overstreet write: "Much of the information found in the Egyptian medical texts was medically hazardous. For example, donkey feces were used for the treatment of splinters, which probably increased the incidence of tetanus because of tetanus spores present in feces. Crocodile feces were used for birth control. In contrast Moses wrote that God instructed the Israelites to cover their excrement because it was “unclean” (Deut 23:12–13). At no time did Moses resort to adding the popular medical techniques of his day, though he was “educated in all the wisdom of the Egyptians” (Acts 7:22), which certainly included their medical wisdom."[3]      Moses concludes, saying, “Since the LORD your God walks in the midst of your camp to deliver you and to defeat your enemies before you, therefore your camp must be holy; and He must not see anything indecent among you or He will turn away from you” (Deut 23:14). Here is the primary rationale for maintaining purity in the camp. When going out to battle, the Israelites must constantly be aware that God is among them, walking in their midst, inspecting the camp for cleanliness. God is holy and He expects His people to be holy (c.f., Lev 19:1-2). In these verses, cleanliness was an act of holiness in God's sight. Warren Wiersbe states: "This section applied to Israel's soldiers when they were encamped away from home. The basic principle was that they treat the camp as they would their land at home, for the Lord was with them even on the battlefield, walking in their midst. The idol-worshiping nations believed that they left their gods behind when they went to another country, but Israel's God was always with them, for He is the God of all the earth. If a soldier had become unclean at home, he would have to leave the community, wash, and return the next day; and that same rule applied in the camp. The men were also to have a place outside the camp for disposing of their excrement. This would not only keep them from being defiled, but it would also promote hygiene."[4] Protecting Runaway Slaves      Concerning runaway slaves from a foreign country, Moses wrote, “You shall not hand over to his master a slave who has escaped from his master to you. 16 He shall live with you in your midst, in the place which he shall choose in one of your towns where it pleases him; you shall not mistreat him” (Deut 23:15-16). The passage considers slaves who ran away from their foreign master to seek refuge in Israel. Such a scenario might be tied to the previous section pertaining to going out to war. It's possible a foreign slave might be near Israel because he/she was brought there by a commander or soldier. Being in proximity might have afforded the slave the opportunity to run away and seek refuge within the Israelite community. If this happened, God's people were to allow such a one to live in their midst for protection and freedom, to reside in whatever town they wanted, and not to take advantage of them or mistreat them. A modified form of slavery was permitted in ancient Israel, in which a person who owed a debt could obligate himself to his debtor to pay off a debt. This contract arrangement was voluntary for both parties and had a divinely set term limit of six years, after which, the slave must be set free (Deut 15:12). Furthermore, the slave was to be set free with a liberal severance package adequate to jumpstart his own economic wellbeing (Deut 15:13-15). Such actions were predicated on the fact that Israel, as a nation, had been enslaved in Egypt, and they were to regard willful Israelite slaves with compassion and fairness. However, if an Israelite served his six-year contract and came to love his master because he was treated very well, he could voluntarily enter into a lifetime agreement of service (Deut 15:16-18). Prohibition Against Cultic Prostitution      Moses continued, saying, “None of the daughters of Israel shall be a cult prostitute, nor shall any of the sons of Israel be a cult prostitute” (Deut 23:17). Here was a prohibition against young Israelite women or men from being a cult prostitute in a pagan temple. Canaanite parents were known to give their sons and daughters to serve as prostitutes in their worship of pagan idols. In such situations, the children were exploited by the parents for sinful purposes.[5] Israel was not to be like the pagan cultures around them. They were to be holy. For a young woman or man to engage in such activity would imply some residual Canaanite influence in the land. Jack Deere writes, “The prohibition here was probably intended to prevent a foreign religion being practiced by Israelites, and to keep the worship of the Lord from being contaminated by temple prostitution.”[6] Unfortunately, this command to prohibit Israelites from serving as temple prostitutes was not followed by later generations (see 1 Ki 14:24; 15:12; 22:46; 2 Ki 23:7). Eugene Merrill writes: "So-called cultic prostitution was widespread among the fertility cults of the ancient Near Eastern world that saw in its employment a means of achieving productivity of plant, animal, and even human life. Whole guilds of male and female temple personnel participated in grossly sexual rituals designed to induce the various gods and goddesses to release their procreative powers on the earth. Nowhere was this more commonly practiced than among the peoples of Syria and Canaan, hence the special need to warn Israel against it."[7]      Moses further states, “You shall not bring the hire of a harlot or the wages of a dog into the house of the LORD your God for any votive offering, for both of these are an abomination to the LORD your God” (Deut 23:18). The male prostitute is called a dog because his brutish behavior is like that of a dog, which indiscriminately mounts another canine for sexual gratification. Whether a female or male prostitute, their wages were regarded as dirty money that was not acceptable to the Lord. Giving to the Lord' work is a valid act, but what is given must be derived from honest work done in an honest way. Present Application      Through our study of Deuteronomy, we learn that God is concerned about just laws and moral behavior among His people. God's laws through Moses were just laws, because they derived from a righteous God. As a theocracy, God was their Judge, Lawgiver, and King (Isa 33:22). Though the church is not under the Mosaic Law as the rule for life, we still have directives to follow, and these are always for our good and the good of others. As Christians, we are not called to form a nation like Israel, but are to go out to many nations (Matt 28:19-20), and this to preach the gospel and God's Word to all who will listen. As Christians living in a fallen world, we realize that a just and moral nation is the product of a just and moral people. As Christians, we desire morality and justice in our society. However, such morality never occurs through social or political force. We have failed as Christians as soon as we seek to politicize our message and control others through legislative means. We realize true and lasting transformation must occur from the inside out, as people are regenerated through faith in Christ and advance to spiritual maturity through learning and living God's Word, not by a forced morality imposed through the halls of congress. Where Christianity prevails in a society, social evils will decline, and freedom will be maintained by a moral and just people. John Adams knew this very well and said, “Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”      As Christians, we are called to share the gospel that people might receive new life and be liberated from Satan's slave-market. If a person rejects Jesus as Savior, then that person chooses to continue as a slave to Satan and his world-system. It's unfortunate, but it's their choice, and it must be respected. God is a perfect Gentleman and He does not bully anyone to accept His offer of salvation, nor to live according to His directives. If people turn away from Him and suppress His truth in unrighteousness, then He will let them go their own way. Concerning those who “suppress God's truth in unrighteousness” (Rom 1:18), three times it is written that He “gave them over” to “the lusts of their hearts” (Rom 1:24), and “to degrading passions” (Rom 1:26), and “to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper” (Rom 1:28). Once God permits a person to operate by his/her sinful passions, they are given a measure of freedom to live as they want. These are described as “being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, and unmerciful” (Rom 1:29-31).        Such people live according to laws of their own making, with no greater source of morality than that which can be derived from their own fallen hearts. However, because they have rejected God, they have no basis for moral absolutes by which to declare anything ethically right or wrong. There is only subjective opinion, which fluctuates from person to person and group to group. If God and His Word are rejected, we're left with no moral absolutes, and then what is, is right, and the conversation is over. Morality then becomes a matter of what the majority wants, or what an elite, or tyrant, can impose on others. Francis Schaeffer wrote:  "If there is no absolute moral standard, then one cannot say in a final sense that anything is right or wrong. By absolute we mean that which always applies, that which provides a final or ultimate standard. There must be an absolute if there are to be morals, and there must be an absolute if there are to be real values. If there is no absolute beyond man's ideas, then there is no final appeal to judge between individuals and groups whose moral judgments conflict. We are merely left with conflicting opinions."[8]      As biblically minded Christians, we realize that without God, there is no final basis for ethics or laws other than finite and flawed people. If there is no God, then right and wrong are reduced to opinion, and cries for justice become nothing more than psychology reports from dissatisfied people. It's interesting that people cry out for personal and social justice because they're naturally wired that way. But for the atheist, such inclinations are either a learned behavior based on arbitrary social norms, or a biological quirk that developed from accidental evolutionary processes.      As believers, we know God exists, that He is there, and He is not silent. God reveals Himself in the human heart (Rom 1:19), through nature (Psa 19:1-2; Rom 1:20), through His Son (Heb 1:1-2), and through His written Word (Psa 119:160; John 17:17; 2 Tim 3:16-17; 2 Pet 1:20-21). Furthermore, God has placed within each person a conscience, and this operates according to a morality God has infused within each person. Paul wrote, “For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them” (Rom 2:14-15). Human conscience, when operating properly, serves as God's moral compass placed within each person. People intuitively know that God exists (Rom 1:18-20), and that certain laws are right (Rom 2:14-15). We don't have to persuade anyone. People intuitively know God exists, that He is just, and that actions such as murder, abortion, lying, stealing, and adultery are wrong.      For those who have positive volition, they will hear the Christian message and turn to Christ as Savior, believing Jesus “died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor 15:3-4). Once saved, they can then begin the process of renewing their minds according to God's Word (Rom 12:1-2), advance to spiritual maturity (Eph 4:11-13; 1 Pet 2:2; 2 Pet 3:18), live by faith (Heb 10:38; 11:6), operate in the power of the Holy Spirit (Eph 5:18; Gal 5:16), walk in a manner consistent with their new identity in Christ (Eph 4:1), and manifest the fruit of the Holy Spirit in their daily lives (Gal 5:22-23). Such Christians will become the moral backbone of any society, which will be richer because of their walk with the Lord.   [1] James Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains : Hebrew (Old Testament) (Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997). [2] Peter C. Craigie, The Book of Deuteronomy, The New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1976), 299. [3] Jay D. Fawver and R. Larry Overstreet, “Moses and Preventive Medicine,” Bibliotheca Sacra 147 (1990): 275. [4] Warren W. Wiersbe, Be Equipped, “Be” Commentary Series (Colorado Springs, CO: Chariot Victor Pub., 1999), 158–159. [5] The sinful exploitation of children continues today. I knew a girl in Las Vegas who, when she was 11, her mother used to prostitute her out to men in order to maintain the mother's cocaine habit. This went on for several years. That a parent would do such a thing to a young child reveals the depravity of the human heart. The past few decades have seen a global rise in kidnapping and child exploitation as part of the sex-trade. Sin and evil still exist. [6] Jack S. Deere, “Deuteronomy,” in The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures, ed. J. F. Walvoord and R. B. Zuck, vol. 1 (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1985), 304. [7] Eugene H. Merrill, Deuteronomy, vol. 4, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994), 313. [8] Francis A. Schaeffer, How Should We Then Live?: The Rise and Decline of Western Thought and Culture, 50th L'Abri Anniversary Edition. (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2005), 145.

Bible used for reading:Christian Standard Bible (Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers, 2020).Other sources consulted for and/or quoted today:D. A. Carson, ed., NIV Biblical Theology Study Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2018), 1256.Louise A. Ferrebee, The Healthy Marriage Handbook (Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2001), 168.John C. Hutchison, “Servanthood: Jesus' Countercultural Call to Christian Leaders,” Bibliotheca Sacra, 166 (January-March 2009): 53-69Douglas Mangum, ed., Lexham Context Commentary: Old Testament, Lexham Context Commentary (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2020), Is 49:1–55:13.

Rethinking Scripture Podcast - Episode 23: God in a Garden (John 18)November 19, 2021 - Host: Dr. Gregory Hall In John 18, we get to see God in a garden. It's the night of Jesus' betrayal and arrest. During all the commotion Jesus makes a request of those arresting him that you may not have noticed. He asks the Roman cohort to let his disciples go their way. Surprisingly, this request gives us a unique insight into the nature and development of faith.Referenced Resources:Thatcher, Tom. (1994). A New Look at Asides in the Fourth Gospel. Bibliotheca Sacra, 151, 430.Thatcher, Tom - Linkedin Profile - https://www.linkedin.com/in/tom-thatcher-4b97363b/ Show Music:Intro/Outro - "Growth" by Armani Delos SantosTransition Music - produced by Jacob A. HallPodcast Website:RethinkingScripture.comThe John Study Resources: https://rethinkingscripture.com/john-study-resources/ John 18 Teaching Video - https://rethinkingscripture.com/the-john-study-videos/Sister site: RethinkingRest.comSocial Media:Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/RethinkingScripture Twitter: @RethinkingStuffInstagram: Rethinking_ScriptureYouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC6YCLg2UldJiA0dsg0KkvLAPowered and distributed by Simplecast.

This volume showcases the diversity of Warfield's interests: as a systematic theologian, New Testament scholar, historian and churchman. Included are all the articles Warfield wrote for the journal Bibliotheca Sacra in the year of his death on John Humphrey Noyes and the Oneida Community. --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/3daudiobooks0/support

Rethinking Scripture Podcast - Episode 14: A... Problem, of Punctuation? (John 9)September 13, 2021 - Host: Dr. Gregory Hall Before Jesus heals a blind man, in John 9, the disciples ask Him a very strange question. “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he would be born blind?” Unfortunately, our English translations may be misguiding us in regards to Jesus' response. So let's move some punctuation around and rethink what Jesus might have been saying about sin, work… and the sabbath.Referenced Resources:Merrill C. Tenney, “John,” in The Expositor's Bible Commentary: John and Acts, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 9 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981), 101.MacDonald, W. (1995). Believer's Bible Commentary: Old and New Testaments. (A. Farstad, Ed.) (p. 1521). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.Metzger, B. M. (1993). Persistent Problems Confronting Bible Translators. Bibliotheca Sacra, 150, 273.John C. Poirier. (1996). “Day and Night” and the Punctuation of John 9, 3. New Testament Studies, 42, 288–294.Poirier, J. C. (2006). “Day and Night” and the Sabbath Controversy of John 9. Filología Neotestamentaria (Mayo–Noviembre 2006), XIX(37–38), 113.Show Music:Intro/Outro - "Growth" by Armani Delos SantosTransition Music - produced by Jacob A. HallPodcast Website:RethinkingScripture.comThe John Study Resources: https://rethinkingscripture.com/john-study-resources/ Sister site: RethinkingRest.comSocial Media:Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/RethinkingScripture Twitter: @RethinkingStuffInstagram: rethinking_scriptureYouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC6YCLg2UldJiA0dsg0KkvLAPowered and distributed by Simplecast.

Rethinking Scripture Podcast - Episode 5: The Curious Case of Nick at Night - Part 1July 5, 2021 - Host: Dr. Gregory HallNicodemus is a well known character in John's gospel. He comes to Jesus at night. He has lots of questions… and he often doesn't seem to follow the conversation very well. But I think Nicodemus has been completely misunderstood. Who exactly is this mysterious man? There's a lot to rethink in this week's episode and I invite you to join me outside the box?Referenced Resources:Hodges, Z. C. (1978). Grace after Grace—John 1:16: Part 1 of Problem Passages in the Gospel of John. Bibliotheca Sacra, 135, 34.Hodges, Z. C. (1978). Untrustworthy Believers—John 2:23–25: Part 2: Problem Passages in the Gospel of John. Bibliotheca Sacra, 135, 139-152.Carson, D. A. (1991). The Gospel according to John (pp. 193–194). Leicester, England; Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity Press; W.B. Eerdmans.Show Music:Intro/Outro - "Growth" by Armani Delos SantosTransition Music - produced by Jacob A. HallPodcast Website:RethinkingScripture.comThe John Study Resources: https://rethinkingscripture.com/john-study-resources/ Sister site: RethinkingRest.comSocial Media:Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/RethinkingScripture Twitter: @RethinkingStuffInstagram: rethinking_scriptureYouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC6YCLg2UldJiA0dsg0KkvLAPowered and distributed by Simplecast.

Are you stuck in the present? Our culture is quick to dismiss anything perceived as old, even last year's cell phone model, much less the wisdom learned from history. And those of us raising the next generation with Classical Christian education are more often looking to the past for wisdom in a world that insists the present is all that matters. David Moore will inspire you to gain a new appreciation of history and learn practical ways to better navigate the daily bombardment of information from modern-day, forward-only thinkers.BIOGRAPHYDavid Moore graduated from both Dallas Theological Seminary and Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. He has written three other books, including one of Preaching Magazine's best books of the year, and has interviewed 200 authors in both print and on the radio. A regular contributor to Christianity Today/Jesus Creed, Moore has also written for the Gospel Coalition, Huffington Post, Bibliotheca Sacra, Austin American-Statesman, Touchstone, Mere Orthodoxy, C. S. Lewis Institute's Heart & Mind, and Front Porch Republic. He lives in Austin with his wife, Doreen. Purchase: Stuck in the Present by David Moore

For this month’s classic lecture we go way back to 1973 and Dallas Theological Seminary. Jay was the first non-premillennialist invited to present the annual Griffith Thomas Lecture Series. Competent to Counsel was turning the academic world upside down and the folk at Dallas wanted to hear what he had to say. The lecture hall where they met was too small and many had to stand in the back and aisles, and the room quickly became quite warm. Even though he had to read from a prepared manuscript, as he explains as he begins, you will hear the passion in his voice for the cause of Biblical counseling. Still, there is a hilarious moment when he is forced to veer off-script. The lectures were later published in Bibliotheca Sacra, Dallas’ theological journal, as well as in book form. O that the powers that be at Dallas Seminary today would listen to this lecture and change course!

     The purpose of this lesson is to reveal what the Bible says about Satan’s world-system, by which he influences those who reside in, or participate in his kingdom of darkness.      The Bible recognizes Satan’s world-system and warns us not to love it (1 John 2:15-16). When John writes and tells the Christian “do not love the world”, he’s not talking about the physical planet. The Greek word κόσμος kosmos as it is used by the apostle John and others most often refers to “that which is hostile to God…lost in sin, wholly at odds with anything divine, ruined and depraved.”[1] Satan’s world-system consists of those philosophies and values that perpetually influence humanity to think and behave contrary to God and His Word. This operating apart from God is first and foremost a way of thinking that is antithetical to God and His Word, a way of thinking motivated by a desire to be free from God and the authority of Scripture, a freedom most will accept, even though it is accompanied by all sorts of inconsistencies and absurdities. "The kosmos is a vast order or system that Satan has promoted which conforms to his ideals, aims, and methods. It is civilization now functioning apart from God-a civilization in which none of its promoters really expect God to share; who assign to God no consideration in respect to their projects, nor do they ascribe any causality to Him. This system embraces its godless governments, conflicts, armaments, jealousies; its education, culture, religions of morality, and pride. It is that sphere in which man lives. It is what he sees, what he employs. To the uncounted multitude it is all they ever know so long as they live on this earth. It is properly styled “The Satanic System” which phrase is in many instances a justified interpretation of the so-meaningful word, kosmos."[2]      People who live in Satan’s world-system exclude God and Scripture from their daily conversations. This is true in news, politics, academic communities, work and home life. God is nowhere in their thoughts, and therefore, nowhere in their discussions (Psa 10:4; 14:1). The growing Christian thinks about God and His Word all the time, as “his delight is in the law of the LORD, and in His law he meditates day and night” (Psa 1:2). The contrast between the growing Christian and the worldly person is stark, as their thoughts and words take them in completely different directions.      At the core of Satan’s world-system is a directive for mankind to function apart from God, and when obeyed, people produce all forms of evil, both moral and immoral. We should understand that Satan’s system is a buffet that offers something for everyone who rejects God, whether that person is moral or immoral, religious or irreligious, educated or simple, rich or poor. Satan is careful to make sure there’s even something for the Christian in his world-system, which is why the Bible repeatedly warns the believer not to love the world or the things in the world. We are to be set apart (Col 2:8; Jam 1:27; 4:4; 1 John 2:15-16). “The world is the Christian’s enemy because it represents an anti-God system, a philosophy that is diametrically opposed to the will and plan of God. It is a system headed by the devil and therefore at odds with God (2 Cor 4:4).…It is in this wicked world we must rear our families and earn our livelihoods. We are in it, yet are not to be a part of it.”[3] It is important to understand that we cannot change Satan or his evil program; however, we must be on guard, for it can and will change us if we’re not careful to learn and live God’s Word.      At the moment of salvation, God the Father “rescued us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son” (Col 1:13), and “our citizenship is in heaven” (Phil 3:20). This transference is permanent and cannot be undone. Once this happens, we are hated by those who remain in Satan’s kingdom of darkness. For this reason, Jesus said to His disciples, “If the world hates you, you know that it has hated Me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, because of this the world hates you” (John 15:18-19; cf. John 16:33; 1 John 3:13). Love and hate in this context should be understood as accept or reject, which can be mild or severe in expression. When praying to the Father, Jesus said, “they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world” (John 17:14b), and went on to say, “I do not ask You to take them out of the world, but to keep them from the evil one” (John 17:15). It is not God’s will that we be immediately removed from this world at the moment of salvation, but left here to serve as His representatives to the lost, that we “may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light” (1 Pet 2:9). We are not to participate in worldly affairs that exclude God, but are to “walk as children of Light” (Eph 5:8), manifesting the fruit of the Light “in all goodness and righteousness and truth, trying to learn what is pleasing to the Lord” (Eph 5:9-10), and we are told, “do not participate in the unfruitful deeds of darkness, but instead even expose them” (Eph 5:11).      The growing Christian faces real struggles as Satan’s world system seeks to press him into its mold, demanding conformity, and persecuting him when he does not bend to its values. The world-system not only has human support, but is backed by demonic forces that operate in collaboration with Satan. Scripture tells us “our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places” (Eph 6:12). The battlefront is more than what is seen with the human eye and is driven by unseen spiritual forces. As Christians living in the world we are to be careful not to be taken “captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ” (Col 2:8). Realizing the battleground is the mind, we are to think biblically in everything, which is our only safeguard against the enemy (2 Cor 10:3-5).      Christians face situations every day in which they are pressured to compromise God’s Word. They face difficulties at work, school, home, or other places, in which they are confronted by worldly-minded persons, both saved and unsaved, who demand and pressure them to abandon their biblical values. There is room for personal compromise where Scripture is silent on a matter; however, where Scripture speaks with absolute authority, there the believer must never compromise! “The world, or world-system, puts pressure on each person to try to get him to conform (Rom 12:2). Jesus Christ was not “of this world” and neither are His people (John 8:23; 17:14). But the unsaved person, either consciously or unconsciously, is controlled by the values and attitudes of this world.”[4]      By promoting the gospel and biblical teaching, the church disrupts Satan’s domain of darkness by calling out of it a people for God. By learning God’s Word, Christians can identify worldly conversations and activities and either avoid them or seek to redirect them by interjecting biblical truth, which should never be done in hostility. When sharing God’s Word with others it’s proper to know that not everyone wants to hear God’s truth, and even though we may not agree with them, their personal choices should be respected (Matt 11:14; Acts 13:50-51). We should never try to force the gospel or Bible teaching on anyone, but be willing to share when opportunity presents itself. At times this will bring peace, and other times cause disruption and may even offend. In this interaction, the growing Christian must be careful not to fall into the exclusion trap, in which the worldly person (whether saved or lost) controls the content of every conversation, demanding the Christian only talk about worldly issues, as Scripture threatens his pagan presuppositions. Having the biblical worldview, the Christian should insert himself into daily conversations with others, and in so doing, be a light in a dark place. He should always be respectful, conversational, and never have a fist-in-your-face attitude, as arrogance never helps advance biblical truth (2 Tim 2:24-26). The worldly-minded person may not want to hear what the Christian has to say, but he should never be under the false impression that he has the right to quiet the Christian and thereby exclude him from the conversation.      As we grow spiritually and walk with God, learning and living His Word (2 Tim 2:15; 3:16-17), we stand in opposition to Satan’s world-system and sow the seeds of spiritual insurrection in the lives of those who live and walk in his kingdom of darkness. We disrupt Satan’s kingdom when we share the gospel, “that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor 15:3-4). When anyone places their faith in Christ, trusting solely in Him as Savior, they are forgiven all their sins (Eph 1:7), and gifted with eternal life (John 3:16; 10:28), and the righteousness of God (Rom 4:1-5; 5:17; 2 Cor 5:21; Phil 3:9). They are rescued from Satan’s enslaving power, as God rescues them from the “domain of darkness” and transfers them into “the kingdom of His beloved Son” (Col 1:13). The gospel is the only thing that will deliver a person from spiritual slavery; “for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes” (Rom 1:16). Once saved, we seek to influence the thoughts and lives of other Christians through fellowship (Heb 10:23-25), prayer (Jam 5:16), edification (Eph 4:29), encouragement (1 Thess 5:11), love (1 Thess 4:9; cf. Eph 4:14-15), and words of grace (Col 4:6).   [1] Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, p. 562. [2] Lewis S. Chafer, “Angelology Part 4” Bibliotheca Sacra 99 (1942): 282-283. [3] Robert P. Lightner, Handbook of Evangelical Theology, p. 206. [4] Warren Wiersbe, The Bible Exposition Commentary, New Testament, Vol. 2, p. 18.

Happy Shelter in Place Day, Friends! I find myself living in the part of Central California right now that has been essentially shut down for the next 22 days, and our Shelter in Place order just went into effect about an hour ago. These are strange, strange times! So – sometimes people ask me how it’s going doing a daily podcast. I can tell you that each episode takes just a little under 3 hours from start to finish, which includes writing the episode, recording it, editing it in Audacity, and entering all of the pertinent information into a WordPress and Libsyn post. Longer episodes take longer, shorter episodes can be around 2 hours of time. Last night was one of the later nights for the show. One of my daughters wanted to watch a show with me, and I’ll take just about any excuse I can to spend time with them, so we watched a show together, which began after midnight. Then I wrote a fairly long pastoral email to the congregation of the church I pastor about the coronavirus pandemic. When I say fairly long, I mean over 1800 words, so about 6 pages worth. We’re in California, and on a virtual lock-down, so hopefully they had a little extra time to read. One of the problems being in a church that is pastored by somebody who fancies himself as a writer is that you can get very long emails from time to time. If you are a leader at the church I pastor, you got a 2100 word email from me AND an 1800 word email from me within the space of 4 days. I should repent in sackcloth and ashes for that, I suppose, but these are trying times we live in right now, filled with dangers like novel viruses, lack of toilet paper, and novel-length emails from pastors. ANYWAY, the point of what I was trying to say earlier before I rambled was that I didn’t start WRITING the podcast until around 3AM. Fortunately, I had some great material from pastor David Platt to use, so I didn’t have to write a ton of original material myself. It was, however, one of the few times since I began this daily podcast in January that I kind of just wanted to go to bed, and not spend 2 hours or so on a podcast. HOWEVER – when I got to the point of recording it, and I got to the part where I was just reading the Scriptures into the microphone, that’s when I noticed something that happens practically every time I do the podcast: THE WORD OF GOD ENCOURAGED ME. It gave me HOPE. It built me up. It elevated my mood. Almost every time I record this show, I come away encouraged. Not because I like recording and editing a podcast – that can get a little tedious…but because the WORD of God is powerful, and supernatural, and it just builds me up in faith, because faith comes by HEARING THE WORD OF GOD. I just wanted to share that with you as a benefit. You can get that same benefit – without the 2-3 hours of writing, recording and editing by simply READING (or listening!) to the WORD OF GOD! If you haven’t done so yet, allow me to encourage you to listen to the other half of today’s episode – episode #78 – I split today’s show into two parts so it wouldn’t be too long. In today’s reading, we encounter the story of the woman caught in adultery, known to scholars as the Pericope Adulterae. Many scholars, including many evangelical ones, consider this passage to be a later edition to the New Testament, and in most modern Bibles, this part of John is set apart to show doubt about the passage. So – what’s going on here, and was this story original to John’s Gospel, or was it a later edition?             The Pericope Adulterae, found in John 7:53-8:11, is surrounded by more controversy and conjecture than any other New Testament Passage with the possible exception of the ending of Mark. The authorship and placement of this pericope has been hotly debated at least since the fifth century, and there are still scholars lined up on opposite sides of the issues surrounding this passage.             Attempting to extract meaning and application from this passage is almost meaningless without first wrestling with the genuineness of the text and the mass of evidence for and against it. The issue is simple to grasp – if this pericope is a genuine and accurate happening in the life of Jesus, then it carries just as much weight as the rest of the New Testament. Conversely, if the passage is a later edition with no basis in fact (i.e. it never happened) then the passage is notable only for its historical value and the question of how it became inserted into many manuscripts of the New Testament.        Though it will be argued that there is no way to be certain of the historicity of this passage, the preponderance of the evidence points to it being a genuine happening in the life of Jesus, and as such it does have application in the modern church and it can inform how we live and interact with each other. Summary of the Passage             7:53-8:2 The Pericope Adulterae begins with a somewhat awkward[1] transition from the previous narrative. The stage is set here; Jesus has spent the night at the Mount of Olives and dawn finds Him mingling with the crowd near the temple courts. His very presence attracts a crowd and notably (for the fourth Gospel)[2] Jesus sits down to teach them.             8:3-8:6a As Jesus is teaching the people, The scribes and Pharisees bring in a woman and stand her in front of the crowd. They explain to Jesus that the woman was caught in the act of committing adultery, and (on the surface) they present her to Jesus for judgment. The question is, should the woman be stoned in accordance with the law of Moses? The text informs us that this question is a trap for Jesus, a classic catch 22, there is no clear way that Jesus can give a verdict here without opening Himself up to some basis for accusation, either in the eyes of the Roman authorities, or the people.             8:6b-8:9 Perplexingly, Jesus doesn’t answer their questions immediately, indeed, He never gives them the verdict. Instead, He leans over and writes on the ground. The accusers persist in their questioning, and Jesus finally responds with His classic retort, challenging any one of the accusers without sin to be the one that casts the first stone. Though we don’t know how much time passed after Jesus’ challenge, one can almost be assured of an awkward silence, punctuated by occasional stones hitting the soft earth as they fall from the hands of the accusers. Beginning with the eldest among them, the scribes and Pharisees melt away into the crowd.             8:10-8:11 Jesus and the accused woman are left as the center of attention. He initiates dialogue her, asking the obvious questions – where is everybody? Is no one left to condemn? Upon her acknowledgment that they have all left, Jesus also refuses to condemn the woman, but warns her to leave behind her life of sin. Controversy and Canonicity: Contra Johannine             This Pericope is a wonderful piece of literature; very moving and dramatic. Jesus cleverly meets the challenge of the scribes and Pharisees without compromising and without falling into a trap, and the woman caught in sin is given a second chance to repent. It’s a powerful story, but is it genuine? Did it really happen? If it did really happen, why is there so much evidence against it being an original part of the gospel of John? A survey of the evidence for and against genuineness is presented below.             The majority of New Testament scholars are fairly adamant that the Pericope Adulterae is non-Johannine in origin. The ancient manuscript evidence is indeed stacked against this Pericope. Bruce Metzger  points out that all major early Greek manuscripts omit the Pericope, including our oldest and most respected early manuscripts, Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Vaticanus,        p66 and p75.[3] Though some Old Latin manuscripts include the Pericope, many omit it as well, and the early Syriac, and Coptic manuscripts do not contain the passage[4]. Codex Bezae is the only major Greek manuscript prior to the 8th century that this pericope appears in, and Bezae is known for its many interpolations. In fact, Metzger states,                         “No other manuscript has so many and such remarkable variations from     what is usually taken to be the New Testament Text. Codex Bezae’s special            characteristic is the free addition (and occasional omission) of words, sentences      and even incidences.”[5]                         Further manuscript evidence against the Johannine nature of the Pericope is the variety of places it is attached in some of the manuscripts that do contain it. In some manuscripts, it appears after John 7:36, in some after John 7:44, some as an addition at the end of John’s gospel, some after Luke 21:28, and some even after Luke 24:53.[6] Though the number of manuscripts that displace this pericope is not overwhelming, the mere fact of its varied appearance in even a few manuscripts tends to cast doubt on the concreteness of its location after John 7:52.             The final bit of manuscript evidence is the unusually high number of textual variants found in the manuscripts that do contain the pericope. Gary Burge points out that line per line, these twelve verses contain more textual variants across the manuscript tradition than almost any other passage of scripture. [7]             There is also much patristic evidence, especially in the east, stacked against the passage. This pericope is not mentioned by any Greek Father until Euthymius Zigabenus in the 12th century and isn’t found in the writings of the early Fathers in the west either. Thus, it is omitted by Origen, Clement, Cyprian, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Cyril and Chrysostom,[8] even in writings where it would seem to be an appropriate resource for them to use. While Zane Hodges tries to make the case that the absence of the Pericope in these church fathers constitutes an argument from silence, and thus proves nothing[9], the fact of the matter is that this is more empirical evidence stacked against the pericope, and it adds weight to the non-Johannine argument.             While the manuscript evidence would seem to be the greatest evidence against the Pericope, there are also suspicious grammatical and contextual features of the text. Statistical analysis of the text has claimed to show several features which “prove” its non Johannine nature. Vern Poythress has examined the grammatical use of the conjunctions “de”, “oun”, “kai”, and “asyndeton” in the Gospel of John, and developed some general rules that John appears to follow. Upon examination of the adulteress pericope, it would appear that there are enough variations in its use of conjunctions (compared with the rest of John) to allow Poythress to conclude that this Pericope is not written by John.[10]             Further grammatical evidence focuses on the words that are used in the passage. Bryant and Krause point out that approximately nine percent, or 15 of the words used in this pericope do not occur elsewhere in the gospel, the highest percentage for a passage of this size in John[11]. The Mount of Olives, The scribes, and the phrase “early morning” are not found anywhere else in the gospel of John, but all are somewhat common in the synoptic gospels. In addition, only here in John is Jesus addressed as teacher.             While some of these unique words can be explained by the nature of the story, as well as the semi-technical judicial language employed, there are still a high frequency of unique words and constructs here compared with the rest of John.             Finally, there is contextual evidence that seems to indicate this pericope is out of place. Borchert[12] and many others believe that the text disrupts the flow of the Feast of Tabernacles narrative. Many point out its similarity in time and setting to Luke 21:37-38, and (as mentioned above) some manuscripts place the passage right after verse 38 because it seems to be a better fit. It is also true that the flow of the text from 7:52 to 8:12 is smooth and uninterrupted when this passage is removed, but of course, that could be said of many passages! Controversy and Canonicity: Pro Johannine             Most scholars believe the evidence against the Pericope Adulterae is overwhelming, but there is much positive evidence for the ancientness of this event, and even some evidence that would seem to indicate the text is Johannine and not at all out of place.             The strongest evidence for the veracity and Johannine nature of the Pericope comes from the manuscripts and church fathers of the west. Several Old Latin manuscripts do in fact contain the Pericope. Hodges argues valiantly that the absence of the passage in our earliest and most reliable manuscripts (Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, p66 and p75) is due to those manuscripts being of a proto-Alexandrian origin, and thus likely coming from the same (ancient) exemplar, one which had the passage intentionally excised.[13] He posits that the Pericope was removed from some texts very early (before 200), but that the passage was quite possibly in the original autograph.             The Patristic evidence for the Pericope is surprisingly strong in the west. Several church fathers in the fourth and fifth century mention the text, beginning with Pacian of Barcelona, and including Ambrose, Ambrosiaster, Jerome and Augustine. Jerome and Augustine in particular add much to the pro Johannine side of the argument, providing significant ancient evidence and speculation on the passage.             Jerome includes the Pericope Adulterae in his Latin Vulgate translation of the scriptures, thus cementing its future acceptance among the Catholic church. In his Dialogue against the Pelagians, Jerome makes a very intriguing reference to this passage,                         “In the Gospel according to John in many manuscripts, both Greek and Latin, is found the story of the adulterous woman who was accused before the Lord.”[14]             This comment is very significant in considering the Pericope Adulterae, and would seem to stand as the strongest pro-Johannine evidence available. As Hodges points out[15], Jerome was well traveled, and would have had a wide exposure to both Greek and Latin texts, many of which were older than any that has survived to this day. Jerome’s statement should carry much more weight with modern New Testament textual scholars than it appears it does.             Augustine goes even further than Jerome does in his commentary on the passage, acknowledging the already existing controversy over the passage and offering a reason for it’s removal from some manuscripts,                         “Certain persons of little faith, or rather enemies of true faith, fearing, I suppose, lest their wives should be given impunity  in sinning, removed from their manuscripts the Lord’s act of forgiveness toward the adulteress, as if He who said  ‘sin no more’ had granted permission to sin.” [16]             While Augustine’s hermeneutical approach to the passage contains a common mistake (Jesus did not specifically forgive the adulterous woman), his observation is very relevant and offers an intriguing possible explanation for the manuscript problems (and textual variances) associated with this passage. Hodges further quotes Ambrose who makes a similar suggestion to Augustine’s – that the passage is a stumbling block.             The contextual argument against this pericope is perhaps the easiest to answer. While many commentators have pointed out the “disruption” of the Feast of Tabernacles narrative that this pericope seems to effect, Allison Trites convincingly argues the opposite; the entire passage fits into the overall theme of controversy in John 1-12.[17] Other contextual clues could be seen to indicate the proper placement of this passage. For one, it would seem that the story is a great illustration of John 3:17, “For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.” (John 3:17, NIV)             The Pericope can also be seen in a literary sense as a response to the question posed in John 7:26, “Here he is, speaking publicly, and they are not saying a word to him. Have the authorities really concluded that he is the Christ?” (John 7:26, NIV)             While much has been made of the grammatical analysis of this pericope, specifically focusing on what is considered non Johannine grammar, there has been some grammatical work on the passage that offers different conclusions. Alan Johnson has used some of the existent grammatical statistical methods on other, non disputed passages of John, and concluded that some of those would be considered non Johannine based on the very same methodology used on the Pericope Adulterae. In addition, he also points out several grammatical features in this passage that are consistent with the rest of John, including the use of “de”, “touto” and “legein” [18]             My own grammatical analysis of the passage has produced some interesting results, further casting doubt on the ability of statistical grammatical analysis to effectively determine canonicity and authorship questions. The phrase “meketi amartane” (no longer sin, or stop sinning) only occurs here in the pericope and in John 5:14, where Jesus likewise instructs the paralytic to stop sinning. “ina ecosin” (that they might) is a phrase found only in verse six, and John 17:13. “Kai palin” (and again) in verse 8 is found six other times in John but only once in Luke. Finally, the phrase “eis ten gen” (in the earth) from verse 6 is found 23 times in the New Testament, 5 are in John, and 12 are in Revelation – so of the 23 times that phrase is used, 17 times it is Johannine. That analysis might be used to impress upon some a level of certainty that John did write this passage, but in fact, in the final analysis it doesn’t add much to the argument one way or the other – except to possibly refute those who use statistical grammatical analysis to “prove” that this Pericope is non-Johannine.             A thorough survey of the evidence reveals one thing quite clearly: the authorship and position of the Pericope Adulterae is not an easy issue to decide. It is perplexing and frustrating to see the certainty that is exhibited by many scholars on both sides of this issue. Bruce Metzger, Phillip Comfort, Kurt Aland, Raymond Brown, George Beasley-Murray, Leon Morris and many others all make absolute statements on the Pericope and point to overwhelming evidence that it is either non-canonical or non Johannine. Beasley-Murray goes so far as to write, “It is universally agreed by textual critics of the Greek NT that this passage was not part of the Fourth Gospel in its original form.”[19] What an outrageous and misleading statement! On the other hand, there are a few scholars (Elmer Towns, some scholars in the King James only camp, and several Dallas Theological Seminary professors) who are equally adamant that this passage is certainly genuine, and right where it belongs in the New Testament. The fact is that the best and most irrefutable evidence against the Johannine nature of the Pericope Adulterae is its lack of attestation in many of our earliest and best surviving manuscripts. When this manuscript evidence is considered in light of Jerome’s quote above on all of the Greek and Old Latin manuscripts he saw that contained the Pericope (and likely were older than most that we have now) we have a clear conundrum, one that cannot be fairly answered without new evidence coming to light.             Thankfully, one thing is agreed upon by most N.T. scholars – this pericope is very old[20] and very likely to be an accurate event in the life of Jesus. Thus Metzger writes that John 7:53-8:11, “has all the earmarks of historical veracity”[21], and Raymond Brown writes, “There is nothing in the story itself, or its language that would forbid us to think of it as an early story concerning Jesus.”[22]             If this Pericope is in fact a genuine event in the ministry of Jesus – how is it that it is absent in so many early Biblical texts? To put the issue another way, Phillip W. Comfort offers a list of suspect passages in the Textus Receptus, including the Pericope Adulterae. He challenges those who would argue for the inclusion of these questionable passages to, “come up with good arguments as to why scribes (in the early centuries) would have purposely excised these passages.”[23] Gary Burge proposes an interesting, though improvable suggestion that answers both questions: the Pericope Adulterae text was excised from some early manuscripts for theological reasons. Burge points to the unbiblical Doctrine of Penance, as articulated by early church fathers like Tertullian, Clement and Cyprian. Sexual sins in the eyes of many of the early church fathers were very grave, and in some cases unforgivable.[24]  In light of that, it is conceivable that this passage was removed, under the impression that it was or too light on a sin, or in fear (As Augustine suggests above) that it would give others license to sin without fear of reprisal. It is also a possibility that the text is a real happening in the life of Jesus that never was put into the gospels because of the fear listed above (or for another reason – as John says, if everything Jesus did was written down, the world couldn’t contain the books!) A Deeper Look at the Text We now turn our attention back to the text itself, and from the perspective that it is a genuine happening, and is placed in the appropriate place in the text. Examining this passage in its literary context, we see that Jesus’ ministry, previously marked by amazing miracles and healings at the time of the adulterous pericope had become quite controversial. Jesus’ teachings were very challenging, and He even lost some disciples because of them.             In the events leading up to the encounter, Jesus brothers urge Him to go the Feast of Tabernacles, and he temporarily declined, only to come later and begin to interact with the people. As He teaches, many people believe in Him, and many don’t – causing arguments and strife. The temple guards are sent to arrest Jesus, but they themselves become arrested by His words and fail to complete their job. The Pharisees and other religious leaders meet in anger, considering what to do and finding no solution. It is directly after this that the incident with the adulterous woman happens.             The Old Testament, in Deuteronomy 22 states, “If a man is found sleeping with another man’s wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die.” (Deuteronomy 22:24, NIV) Leviticus 20 states similarly, “If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death.” (Leviticus 20:10, NIV) These were the laws of Moses referred to in vs. 5 of this passage. Curiously, there is no mention of the man that was with the woman – this has led many to conclude that the situation was a set up from the beginning, (i.e. the woman was also “trapped”) The scribes and Pharisees, therefore, were wanting Jesus to rule on a case that was flawed from the beginning – they were asking Him to incompletely apply the law of Moses to this situation.             This was merely another attempt by the religious leaders to put Jesus in a position where there is no good way out. A similar incident occurs in Matthew 22 (and the other Synoptics): Jesus is asked whether it is right to pay taxes to Caesar, if He answers yes, then the crowds would get angry with Him, if He answers no, then He risks making enemies of the Roman leaders. Also, Jesus uses the same technique against the religious leaders in Matthew 21 when asked who gave Him his authority, His return question, was John’s Baptism from heaven or not, could not be answered in such a way as to not cause the leaders problems.  In this particular instance, if Jesus were to “rule” that the woman should be stoned, He would run afoul of Roman laws against mob violence[25] and if He let the woman off the hook, then He would be countermanding the Law of Moses.             The response of Jesus to this dilemma, certainly knowing the religious leader’s hearts and motives, is very interesting: He merely stoops down and writes on the ground. Much ink has been wasted trying to determine what exactly it was that Jesus wrote in the ground. Beasley-Murray offers a good list of past suggestions: Was He writing out His decision in the case before verbally announcing it? Was he writing out a passage from Exodus that warns against supporting a wicked man as a malicious witness? Was He writing in the dust to remind the scribes of Jeremiah’s words, “Those who turn away from you will be written in the dust, because they have forsaken the Lord, the spring of living water.” (Jeremiah 17:13, NIV).[26] I prefer Raymond Brown’s proposal; that Jesus was merely doodling[27], possibly to consider how to handle the situation wisely, possibly in prayer. The fact is that what Jesus wrote has not been recorded, so it clearly was only an important issue for the exact time the incident took place, if even then.             By suggesting that the one who is without sin cast the first stone, Jesus brilliantly defuses the situation. It’s very possible He could be referring to Deuteronomy 17, which prescribes that nobody should be put to death on the testimony of just one witness, and that the witnesses should be the first one to cast the stone. Is Jesus pointing to the possibility of the corruption of the witnesses here – understanding that the woman, though guilty, was caught in an elaborate set up, and thus invalidating the “prosecution’s” case against her, or is He articulating a more basic principle – if you are sinless you can participate in her stoning? This is a difficult question to answer; Stephen James argues somewhat convincingly that what Jesus means by “without sin” in this context is that their case must be presented without evil motives, and in accordance with the law of Moses (how many witnesses to the act were there, more than one? What of the man?) The religious leaders knew their motives weren’t correct, and therefore left the scene.[28]             It is also important to point out here that in defusing the scene the way He did, Jesus did not abrogate the Law of Moses, nor did He completely uphold it – He chose a third, an option that leaves open the question of whether those laws were still applicable in His mind.             The incident ends with Jesus challenging the woman to go and leave her life of sin. Modern and ancient preachers and commentators alike have written or preached that Jesus actually forgave the woman – this is not the case – Jesus did not explicitly forgive her as recorded in the text, He simply chose not to condemn her, and exhorted her to also stop sinning. Application             If we accept the hypothesis that this Pericope is an accurate and genuine happening, then how does it apply today? Did it abolish the death penalty, as many have argued? Did it usher in an age of more leniency on sin? What sort of standard is Jesus setting for those who would be in a position to judge or pronounce punishment over another? While it is very important to not draw doctrine out of a narrative that doesn’t explicitly indicate doctrinal things, this text can still go beyond being a beautiful story of the mercy and wisdom of Jesus and find application in our modern setting.             The first application to consider is what this story says about the death penalty, if anything. As Stephen James points out, many (including John Howard Yoder, Dwight Erricson, Lewis Smedes, G.H. Clark, Charles H. Milligan etc) have used this passage to argue for the abolishment of the death penalty.[29] A careful reading of the text will clearly show that Jesus does not abolish the death penalty, indeed, He doesn’t even address the issue. Thus, both opponents and proponents of capital punishment will need to look in other places to justify their beliefs.             I believe the real modern application of this passage is found in Jesus’ challenge to the religious leaders, “If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.” (John 8:7 NIV) There seems to be a profound connection to this principle and the plank-eye principle that Jesus articulates in Luke 6 – in order to help remove the speck from your brother’s eye, you must first remove the plank from your own. The principle is this, that we should judge and purify ourselves, worrying less about the bad things we see in other people – until our own issues are dealt with – then we will see clearly to help others out. The principle is not advocating merely minding your own business – it is advocating personal holiness that can lead to corporate holiness when we help and challenge each other in right heart and attitude. The Pharisees and scribes were not at all interested in the principle behind the Mosaic laws they were urging Jesus to rule on (i.e. purge the evil from among you), they were just interested in accomplishing their own agendas. The church today cries out for those who would walk in holiness and near the heart of God to the point where we can see clearly enough to help our brothers out with the specks in their eyes, and we can pass judgments rightly. Conclusion                         An objective look at the Pericope Adulterae, its context, its grammar and its manuscript history leads one to the conclusion that this passage has been rightly seen as controversial through the ages. There is not the kind of overwhelming evidence that is needed for dogmatic statements regarding the authorship and canonicity of John 7:53-8:11 either for or against. There is substantial evidence, however, to demonstrate that this text represents a genuine and accurate event in the life of Jesus, and as such it can inform the modern believer about the nature of Jesus and the importance of holiness in the realm of judgment.                 [1] Somewhat awkward, but not completely out of place – see below.             [2] Some scholars point out that Jesus sitting and teaching is a common feature of the Synoptic Gospels, and cite it as further proof of the Non-Johannine authorship of the Pericope – see John 6:3, however for another instance of Jesus sitting down among the people. Borchert, Gerald The New American Commentary Volume 25A: John 1-11. (electronic edition) Logos LibrarySystem (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1996)                 [3] For a full list of the major Greek manuscripts that omit this pericope, see: Metzger, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, Second Ed. (New York: Oxford, 1992.), 219-220                 [4] Brown, Raymond E.  John 1-11. Anchor Bible 29.  Garden City:   Doubleday, 1982, 335                 [5] Metzger, Bruce M. The Text of the New Testament – Its Transmission, Corruption           and Restoration, Third Ed. (New York: Oxford, 1992.), 50                 [6] The Text of the New Testament – Its Transmission, Corruption and Restoration p. xxix                 [7] Burge, Gary M. “A Specific Problem In The New Testament Text And Canon: The Woman Caught In Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” (Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 27 no.2), 144                 [8] “A Specific Problem In The New Testament Text And Canon: The Woman Caught In Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” 142             [9] Hodges, Zane C. “Problem Passages in the Gospel of John Part 8: The Woman Taken in Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” (Bibliotheca Sacra 136 no. 544 (October, 1979), 329                 [10] Poythress, Vern S. “Testing for Johannine Authorship by Examining the Use of Conjunctions” (Westminster Theological Journal 46, no. 2 Fall 1984), 362             [11] Bryant, Beauford H. and Krause, Mark S. John. The College Press NIV Commentary. (Joplin: College Press, 1998)             [12] Borchert, Gerald – John 1-11 The New American Commentary. (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1996)                 [13] “Problem Passages in the Gospel of John Part 8: The Woman Taken in Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” 323                 [14] As quoted in “Problem Passages in the Gospel of John Part 8: The Woman Taken in Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” 330                 [15] “Problem Passages in the Gospel of John Part 8: The Woman Taken in Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” 330                 [16] As quoted in  “Problem Passages in the Gospel of John Part 8: The Woman Taken in Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” 331                 [17] Trites, Allison A. “The Woman Taken in Adultery” (Bibliotheca Sacra 131 no. 522 April, 1974) 138-144             [18] Johnson, Alan F. “A Stylistic Trait of the Fourth Gospel in the Pericope Adulterae” Bulletin of the Evangelical Theological Society (IX Spring, 1966) 91-96                 [19] Beasley-Murray, George R. The Gospel according to John The Word Biblical                 Commentary.  (Dallas: Word Incorporated, 1999.)                 [20] Raymond Brown quotes Eusebius, who in turn quotes Papias writing near the time of the Apostles about a woman who was brought before Jesus accused of many sins. Brown also mentions the 3rd century Syrian Didascalia Apostolorum, which gives clear reference to the events of the Pericope Adulterae which indicates that 2nd century Syria knew of the narrative. John 1-11, p. 335                 [21] Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, p. 220                 [22] John 1-11, p. 335                 [23] Comfort, Phillip W. Encountering the Manuscripts  (Nashville: Broadman and Holman, 2005) p.99                 [24] “A Specific Problem In The New Testament Text And Canon: The Woman Caught In Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” pages 146-148                 [25] John 1-11 The New American Commentary                 [26] The Gospel according to John The Word Biblical Commentary                  [27] John 1-11. Anchor Bible 29 p. 334             [28] James, Stephen A. “The Adulteress And The Death Penalty.” (Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 22 no. 1 March, 1979) pages 49-50. [29] “The Adulteress And The Death Penalty.” Pages 45-46

Happy Shelter in Place Day, Friends! I find myself living in the part of Central California right now that has been essentially shut down for the next 22 days, and our Shelter in Place order just went into effect about an hour ago. These are strange, strange times! So – sometimes people ask me how it’s going doing a daily podcast. I can tell you that each episode takes just a little under 3 hours from start to finish, which includes writing the episode, recording it, editing it in Audacity, and entering all of the pertinent information into a WordPress and Libsyn post. Longer episodes take longer, shorter episodes can be around 2 hours of time. Last night was one of the later nights for the show. One of my daughters wanted to watch a show with me, and I’ll take just about any excuse I can to spend time with them, so we watched a show together, which began after midnight. Then I wrote a fairly long pastoral email to the congregation of the church I pastor about the coronavirus pandemic. When I say fairly long, I mean over 1800 words, so about 6 pages worth. We’re in California, and on a virtual lock-down, so hopefully they had a little extra time to read. One of the problems being in a church that is pastored by somebody who fancies himself as a writer is that you can get very long emails from time to time. If you are a leader at the church I pastor, you got a 2100 word email from me AND an 1800 word email from me within the space of 4 days. I should repent in sackcloth and ashes for that, I suppose, but these are trying times we live in right now, filled with dangers like novel viruses, lack of toilet paper, and novel-length emails from pastors. ANYWAY, the point of what I was trying to say earlier before I rambled was that I didn’t start WRITING the podcast until around 3AM. Fortunately, I had some great material from pastor David Platt to use, so I didn’t have to write a ton of original material myself. It was, however, one of the few times since I began this daily podcast in January that I kind of just wanted to go to bed, and not spend 2 hours or so on a podcast. HOWEVER – when I got to the point of recording it, and I got to the part where I was just reading the Scriptures into the microphone, that’s when I noticed something that happens practically every time I do the podcast: THE WORD OF GOD ENCOURAGED ME. It gave me HOPE. It built me up. It elevated my mood. Almost every time I record this show, I come away encouraged. Not because I like recording and editing a podcast – that can get a little tedious…but because the WORD of God is powerful, and supernatural, and it just builds me up in faith, because faith comes by HEARING THE WORD OF GOD. I just wanted to share that with you as a benefit. You can get that same benefit – without the 2-3 hours of writing, recording and editing by simply READING (or listening!) to the WORD OF GOD! If you haven’t done so yet, allow me to encourage you to listen to the other half of today’s episode – episode #78 – I split today’s show into two parts so it wouldn’t be too long. In today’s reading, we encounter the story of the woman caught in adultery, known to scholars as the Pericope Adulterae. Many scholars, including many evangelical ones, consider this passage to be a later edition to the New Testament, and in most modern Bibles, this part of John is set apart to show doubt about the passage. So – what’s going on here, and was this story original to John’s Gospel, or was it a later edition?             The Pericope Adulterae, found in John 7:53-8:11, is surrounded by more controversy and conjecture than any other New Testament Passage with the possible exception of the ending of Mark. The authorship and placement of this pericope has been hotly debated at least since the fifth century, and there are still scholars lined up on opposite sides of the issues surrounding this passage.             Attempting to extract meaning and application from this passage is almost meaningless without first wrestling with the genuineness of the text and the mass of evidence for and against it. The issue is simple to grasp – if this pericope is a genuine and accurate happening in the life of Jesus, then it carries just as much weight as the rest of the New Testament. Conversely, if the passage is a later edition with no basis in fact (i.e. it never happened) then the passage is notable only for its historical value and the question of how it became inserted into many manuscripts of the New Testament.        Though it will be argued that there is no way to be certain of the historicity of this passage, the preponderance of the evidence points to it being a genuine happening in the life of Jesus, and as such it does have application in the modern church and it can inform how we live and interact with each other. Summary of the Passage             7:53-8:2 The Pericope Adulterae begins with a somewhat awkward[1] transition from the previous narrative. The stage is set here; Jesus has spent the night at the Mount of Olives and dawn finds Him mingling with the crowd near the temple courts. His very presence attracts a crowd and notably (for the fourth Gospel)[2] Jesus sits down to teach them.             8:3-8:6a As Jesus is teaching the people, The scribes and Pharisees bring in a woman and stand her in front of the crowd. They explain to Jesus that the woman was caught in the act of committing adultery, and (on the surface) they present her to Jesus for judgment. The question is, should the woman be stoned in accordance with the law of Moses? The text informs us that this question is a trap for Jesus, a classic catch 22, there is no clear way that Jesus can give a verdict here without opening Himself up to some basis for accusation, either in the eyes of the Roman authorities, or the people.             8:6b-8:9 Perplexingly, Jesus doesn’t answer their questions immediately, indeed, He never gives them the verdict. Instead, He leans over and writes on the ground. The accusers persist in their questioning, and Jesus finally responds with His classic retort, challenging any one of the accusers without sin to be the one that casts the first stone. Though we don’t know how much time passed after Jesus’ challenge, one can almost be assured of an awkward silence, punctuated by occasional stones hitting the soft earth as they fall from the hands of the accusers. Beginning with the eldest among them, the scribes and Pharisees melt away into the crowd.             8:10-8:11 Jesus and the accused woman are left as the center of attention. He initiates dialogue her, asking the obvious questions – where is everybody? Is no one left to condemn? Upon her acknowledgment that they have all left, Jesus also refuses to condemn the woman, but warns her to leave behind her life of sin. Controversy and Canonicity: Contra Johannine             This Pericope is a wonderful piece of literature; very moving and dramatic. Jesus cleverly meets the challenge of the scribes and Pharisees without compromising and without falling into a trap, and the woman caught in sin is given a second chance to repent. It’s a powerful story, but is it genuine? Did it really happen? If it did really happen, why is there so much evidence against it being an original part of the gospel of John? A survey of the evidence for and against genuineness is presented below.             The majority of New Testament scholars are fairly adamant that the Pericope Adulterae is non-Johannine in origin. The ancient manuscript evidence is indeed stacked against this Pericope. Bruce Metzger  points out that all major early Greek manuscripts omit the Pericope, including our oldest and most respected early manuscripts, Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Vaticanus,        p66 and p75.[3] Though some Old Latin manuscripts include the Pericope, many omit it as well, and the early Syriac, and Coptic manuscripts do not contain the passage[4]. Codex Bezae is the only major Greek manuscript prior to the 8th century that this pericope appears in, and Bezae is known for its many interpolations. In fact, Metzger states,                         “No other manuscript has so many and such remarkable variations from     what is usually taken to be the New Testament Text. Codex Bezae’s special            characteristic is the free addition (and occasional omission) of words, sentences      and even incidences.”[5]                         Further manuscript evidence against the Johannine nature of the Pericope is the variety of places it is attached in some of the manuscripts that do contain it. In some manuscripts, it appears after John 7:36, in some after John 7:44, some as an addition at the end of John’s gospel, some after Luke 21:28, and some even after Luke 24:53.[6] Though the number of manuscripts that displace this pericope is not overwhelming, the mere fact of its varied appearance in even a few manuscripts tends to cast doubt on the concreteness of its location after John 7:52.             The final bit of manuscript evidence is the unusually high number of textual variants found in the manuscripts that do contain the pericope. Gary Burge points out that line per line, these twelve verses contain more textual variants across the manuscript tradition than almost any other passage of scripture. [7]             There is also much patristic evidence, especially in the east, stacked against the passage. This pericope is not mentioned by any Greek Father until Euthymius Zigabenus in the 12th century and isn’t found in the writings of the early Fathers in the west either. Thus, it is omitted by Origen, Clement, Cyprian, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Cyril and Chrysostom,[8] even in writings where it would seem to be an appropriate resource for them to use. While Zane Hodges tries to make the case that the absence of the Pericope in these church fathers constitutes an argument from silence, and thus proves nothing[9], the fact of the matter is that this is more empirical evidence stacked against the pericope, and it adds weight to the non-Johannine argument.             While the manuscript evidence would seem to be the greatest evidence against the Pericope, there are also suspicious grammatical and contextual features of the text. Statistical analysis of the text has claimed to show several features which “prove” its non Johannine nature. Vern Poythress has examined the grammatical use of the conjunctions “de”, “oun”, “kai”, and “asyndeton” in the Gospel of John, and developed some general rules that John appears to follow. Upon examination of the adulteress pericope, it would appear that there are enough variations in its use of conjunctions (compared with the rest of John) to allow Poythress to conclude that this Pericope is not written by John.[10]             Further grammatical evidence focuses on the words that are used in the passage. Bryant and Krause point out that approximately nine percent, or 15 of the words used in this pericope do not occur elsewhere in the gospel, the highest percentage for a passage of this size in John[11]. The Mount of Olives, The scribes, and the phrase “early morning” are not found anywhere else in the gospel of John, but all are somewhat common in the synoptic gospels. In addition, only here in John is Jesus addressed as teacher.             While some of these unique words can be explained by the nature of the story, as well as the semi-technical judicial language employed, there are still a high frequency of unique words and constructs here compared with the rest of John.             Finally, there is contextual evidence that seems to indicate this pericope is out of place. Borchert[12] and many others believe that the text disrupts the flow of the Feast of Tabernacles narrative. Many point out its similarity in time and setting to Luke 21:37-38, and (as mentioned above) some manuscripts place the passage right after verse 38 because it seems to be a better fit. It is also true that the flow of the text from 7:52 to 8:12 is smooth and uninterrupted when this passage is removed, but of course, that could be said of many passages! Controversy and Canonicity: Pro Johannine             Most scholars believe the evidence against the Pericope Adulterae is overwhelming, but there is much positive evidence for the ancientness of this event, and even some evidence that would seem to indicate the text is Johannine and not at all out of place.             The strongest evidence for the veracity and Johannine nature of the Pericope comes from the manuscripts and church fathers of the west. Several Old Latin manuscripts do in fact contain the Pericope. Hodges argues valiantly that the absence of the passage in our earliest and most reliable manuscripts (Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, p66 and p75) is due to those manuscripts being of a proto-Alexandrian origin, and thus likely coming from the same (ancient) exemplar, one which had the passage intentionally excised.[13] He posits that the Pericope was removed from some texts very early (before 200), but that the passage was quite possibly in the original autograph.             The Patristic evidence for the Pericope is surprisingly strong in the west. Several church fathers in the fourth and fifth century mention the text, beginning with Pacian of Barcelona, and including Ambrose, Ambrosiaster, Jerome and Augustine. Jerome and Augustine in particular add much to the pro Johannine side of the argument, providing significant ancient evidence and speculation on the passage.             Jerome includes the Pericope Adulterae in his Latin Vulgate translation of the scriptures, thus cementing its future acceptance among the Catholic church. In his Dialogue against the Pelagians, Jerome makes a very intriguing reference to this passage,                         “In the Gospel according to John in many manuscripts, both Greek and Latin, is found the story of the adulterous woman who was accused before the Lord.”[14]             This comment is very significant in considering the Pericope Adulterae, and would seem to stand as the strongest pro-Johannine evidence available. As Hodges points out[15], Jerome was well traveled, and would have had a wide exposure to both Greek and Latin texts, many of which were older than any that has survived to this day. Jerome’s statement should carry much more weight with modern New Testament textual scholars than it appears it does.             Augustine goes even further than Jerome does in his commentary on the passage, acknowledging the already existing controversy over the passage and offering a reason for it’s removal from some manuscripts,                         “Certain persons of little faith, or rather enemies of true faith, fearing, I suppose, lest their wives should be given impunity  in sinning, removed from their manuscripts the Lord’s act of forgiveness toward the adulteress, as if He who said  ‘sin no more’ had granted permission to sin.” [16]             While Augustine’s hermeneutical approach to the passage contains a common mistake (Jesus did not specifically forgive the adulterous woman), his observation is very relevant and offers an intriguing possible explanation for the manuscript problems (and textual variances) associated with this passage. Hodges further quotes Ambrose who makes a similar suggestion to Augustine’s – that the passage is a stumbling block.             The contextual argument against this pericope is perhaps the easiest to answer. While many commentators have pointed out the “disruption” of the Feast of Tabernacles narrative that this pericope seems to effect, Allison Trites convincingly argues the opposite; the entire passage fits into the overall theme of controversy in John 1-12.[17] Other contextual clues could be seen to indicate the proper placement of this passage. For one, it would seem that the story is a great illustration of John 3:17, “For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.” (John 3:17, NIV)             The Pericope can also be seen in a literary sense as a response to the question posed in John 7:26, “Here he is, speaking publicly, and they are not saying a word to him. Have the authorities really concluded that he is the Christ?” (John 7:26, NIV)             While much has been made of the grammatical analysis of this pericope, specifically focusing on what is considered non Johannine grammar, there has been some grammatical work on the passage that offers different conclusions. Alan Johnson has used some of the existent grammatical statistical methods on other, non disputed passages of John, and concluded that some of those would be considered non Johannine based on the very same methodology used on the Pericope Adulterae. In addition, he also points out several grammatical features in this passage that are consistent with the rest of John, including the use of “de”, “touto” and “legein” [18]             My own grammatical analysis of the passage has produced some interesting results, further casting doubt on the ability of statistical grammatical analysis to effectively determine canonicity and authorship questions. The phrase “meketi amartane” (no longer sin, or stop sinning) only occurs here in the pericope and in John 5:14, where Jesus likewise instructs the paralytic to stop sinning. “ina ecosin” (that they might) is a phrase found only in verse six, and John 17:13. “Kai palin” (and again) in verse 8 is found six other times in John but only once in Luke. Finally, the phrase “eis ten gen” (in the earth) from verse 6 is found 23 times in the New Testament, 5 are in John, and 12 are in Revelation – so of the 23 times that phrase is used, 17 times it is Johannine. That analysis might be used to impress upon some a level of certainty that John did write this passage, but in fact, in the final analysis it doesn’t add much to the argument one way or the other – except to possibly refute those who use statistical grammatical analysis to “prove” that this Pericope is non-Johannine.             A thorough survey of the evidence reveals one thing quite clearly: the authorship and position of the Pericope Adulterae is not an easy issue to decide. It is perplexing and frustrating to see the certainty that is exhibited by many scholars on both sides of this issue. Bruce Metzger, Phillip Comfort, Kurt Aland, Raymond Brown, George Beasley-Murray, Leon Morris and many others all make absolute statements on the Pericope and point to overwhelming evidence that it is either non-canonical or non Johannine. Beasley-Murray goes so far as to write, “It is universally agreed by textual critics of the Greek NT that this passage was not part of the Fourth Gospel in its original form.”[19] What an outrageous and misleading statement! On the other hand, there are a few scholars (Elmer Towns, some scholars in the King James only camp, and several Dallas Theological Seminary professors) who are equally adamant that this passage is certainly genuine, and right where it belongs in the New Testament. The fact is that the best and most irrefutable evidence against the Johannine nature of the Pericope Adulterae is its lack of attestation in many of our earliest and best surviving manuscripts. When this manuscript evidence is considered in light of Jerome’s quote above on all of the Greek and Old Latin manuscripts he saw that contained the Pericope (and likely were older than most that we have now) we have a clear conundrum, one that cannot be fairly answered without new evidence coming to light.             Thankfully, one thing is agreed upon by most N.T. scholars – this pericope is very old[20] and very likely to be an accurate event in the life of Jesus. Thus Metzger writes that John 7:53-8:11, “has all the earmarks of historical veracity”[21], and Raymond Brown writes, “There is nothing in the story itself, or its language that would forbid us to think of it as an early story concerning Jesus.”[22]             If this Pericope is in fact a genuine event in the ministry of Jesus – how is it that it is absent in so many early Biblical texts? To put the issue another way, Phillip W. Comfort offers a list of suspect passages in the Textus Receptus, including the Pericope Adulterae. He challenges those who would argue for the inclusion of these questionable passages to, “come up with good arguments as to why scribes (in the early centuries) would have purposely excised these passages.”[23] Gary Burge proposes an interesting, though improvable suggestion that answers both questions: the Pericope Adulterae text was excised from some early manuscripts for theological reasons. Burge points to the unbiblical Doctrine of Penance, as articulated by early church fathers like Tertullian, Clement and Cyprian. Sexual sins in the eyes of many of the early church fathers were very grave, and in some cases unforgivable.[24]  In light of that, it is conceivable that this passage was removed, under the impression that it was or too light on a sin, or in fear (As Augustine suggests above) that it would give others license to sin without fear of reprisal. It is also a possibility that the text is a real happening in the life of Jesus that never was put into the gospels because of the fear listed above (or for another reason – as John says, if everything Jesus did was written down, the world couldn’t contain the books!) A Deeper Look at the Text We now turn our attention back to the text itself, and from the perspective that it is a genuine happening, and is placed in the appropriate place in the text. Examining this passage in its literary context, we see that Jesus’ ministry, previously marked by amazing miracles and healings at the time of the adulterous pericope had become quite controversial. Jesus’ teachings were very challenging, and He even lost some disciples because of them.             In the events leading up to the encounter, Jesus brothers urge Him to go the Feast of Tabernacles, and he temporarily declined, only to come later and begin to interact with the people. As He teaches, many people believe in Him, and many don’t – causing arguments and strife. The temple guards are sent to arrest Jesus, but they themselves become arrested by His words and fail to complete their job. The Pharisees and other religious leaders meet in anger, considering what to do and finding no solution. It is directly after this that the incident with the adulterous woman happens.             The Old Testament, in Deuteronomy 22 states, “If a man is found sleeping with another man’s wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die.” (Deuteronomy 22:24, NIV) Leviticus 20 states similarly, “If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death.” (Leviticus 20:10, NIV) These were the laws of Moses referred to in vs. 5 of this passage. Curiously, there is no mention of the man that was with the woman – this has led many to conclude that the situation was a set up from the beginning, (i.e. the woman was also “trapped”) The scribes and Pharisees, therefore, were wanting Jesus to rule on a case that was flawed from the beginning – they were asking Him to incompletely apply the law of Moses to this situation.             This was merely another attempt by the religious leaders to put Jesus in a position where there is no good way out. A similar incident occurs in Matthew 22 (and the other Synoptics): Jesus is asked whether it is right to pay taxes to Caesar, if He answers yes, then the crowds would get angry with Him, if He answers no, then He risks making enemies of the Roman leaders. Also, Jesus uses the same technique against the religious leaders in Matthew 21 when asked who gave Him his authority, His return question, was John’s Baptism from heaven or not, could not be answered in such a way as to not cause the leaders problems.  In this particular instance, if Jesus were to “rule” that the woman should be stoned, He would run afoul of Roman laws against mob violence[25] and if He let the woman off the hook, then He would be countermanding the Law of Moses.             The response of Jesus to this dilemma, certainly knowing the religious leader’s hearts and motives, is very interesting: He merely stoops down and writes on the ground. Much ink has been wasted trying to determine what exactly it was that Jesus wrote in the ground. Beasley-Murray offers a good list of past suggestions: Was He writing out His decision in the case before verbally announcing it? Was he writing out a passage from Exodus that warns against supporting a wicked man as a malicious witness? Was He writing in the dust to remind the scribes of Jeremiah’s words, “Those who turn away from you will be written in the dust, because they have forsaken the Lord, the spring of living water.” (Jeremiah 17:13, NIV).[26] I prefer Raymond Brown’s proposal; that Jesus was merely doodling[27], possibly to consider how to handle the situation wisely, possibly in prayer. The fact is that what Jesus wrote has not been recorded, so it clearly was only an important issue for the exact time the incident took place, if even then.             By suggesting that the one who is without sin cast the first stone, Jesus brilliantly defuses the situation. It’s very possible He could be referring to Deuteronomy 17, which prescribes that nobody should be put to death on the testimony of just one witness, and that the witnesses should be the first one to cast the stone. Is Jesus pointing to the possibility of the corruption of the witnesses here – understanding that the woman, though guilty, was caught in an elaborate set up, and thus invalidating the “prosecution’s” case against her, or is He articulating a more basic principle – if you are sinless you can participate in her stoning? This is a difficult question to answer; Stephen James argues somewhat convincingly that what Jesus means by “without sin” in this context is that their case must be presented without evil motives, and in accordance with the law of Moses (how many witnesses to the act were there, more than one? What of the man?) The religious leaders knew their motives weren’t correct, and therefore left the scene.[28]             It is also important to point out here that in defusing the scene the way He did, Jesus did not abrogate the Law of Moses, nor did He completely uphold it – He chose a third, an option that leaves open the question of whether those laws were still applicable in His mind.             The incident ends with Jesus challenging the woman to go and leave her life of sin. Modern and ancient preachers and commentators alike have written or preached that Jesus actually forgave the woman – this is not the case – Jesus did not explicitly forgive her as recorded in the text, He simply chose not to condemn her, and exhorted her to also stop sinning. Application             If we accept the hypothesis that this Pericope is an accurate and genuine happening, then how does it apply today? Did it abolish the death penalty, as many have argued? Did it usher in an age of more leniency on sin? What sort of standard is Jesus setting for those who would be in a position to judge or pronounce punishment over another? While it is very important to not draw doctrine out of a narrative that doesn’t explicitly indicate doctrinal things, this text can still go beyond being a beautiful story of the mercy and wisdom of Jesus and find application in our modern setting.             The first application to consider is what this story says about the death penalty, if anything. As Stephen James points out, many (including John Howard Yoder, Dwight Erricson, Lewis Smedes, G.H. Clark, Charles H. Milligan etc) have used this passage to argue for the abolishment of the death penalty.[29] A careful reading of the text will clearly show that Jesus does not abolish the death penalty, indeed, He doesn’t even address the issue. Thus, both opponents and proponents of capital punishment will need to look in other places to justify their beliefs.             I believe the real modern application of this passage is found in Jesus’ challenge to the religious leaders, “If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.” (John 8:7 NIV) There seems to be a profound connection to this principle and the plank-eye principle that Jesus articulates in Luke 6 – in order to help remove the speck from your brother’s eye, you must first remove the plank from your own. The principle is this, that we should judge and purify ourselves, worrying less about the bad things we see in other people – until our own issues are dealt with – then we will see clearly to help others out. The principle is not advocating merely minding your own business – it is advocating personal holiness that can lead to corporate holiness when we help and challenge each other in right heart and attitude. The Pharisees and scribes were not at all interested in the principle behind the Mosaic laws they were urging Jesus to rule on (i.e. purge the evil from among you), they were just interested in accomplishing their own agendas. The church today cries out for those who would walk in holiness and near the heart of God to the point where we can see clearly enough to help our brothers out with the specks in their eyes, and we can pass judgments rightly. Conclusion                         An objective look at the Pericope Adulterae, its context, its grammar and its manuscript history leads one to the conclusion that this passage has been rightly seen as controversial through the ages. There is not the kind of overwhelming evidence that is needed for dogmatic statements regarding the authorship and canonicity of John 7:53-8:11 either for or against. There is substantial evidence, however, to demonstrate that this text represents a genuine and accurate event in the life of Jesus, and as such it can inform the modern believer about the nature of Jesus and the importance of holiness in the realm of judgment.                 [1] Somewhat awkward, but not completely out of place – see below.             [2] Some scholars point out that Jesus sitting and teaching is a common feature of the Synoptic Gospels, and cite it as further proof of the Non-Johannine authorship of the Pericope – see John 6:3, however for another instance of Jesus sitting down among the people. Borchert, Gerald The New American Commentary Volume 25A: John 1-11. (electronic edition) Logos LibrarySystem (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1996)                 [3] For a full list of the major Greek manuscripts that omit this pericope, see: Metzger, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, Second Ed. (New York: Oxford, 1992.), 219-220                 [4] Brown, Raymond E.  John 1-11. Anchor Bible 29.  Garden City:   Doubleday, 1982, 335                 [5] Metzger, Bruce M. The Text of the New Testament – Its Transmission, Corruption           and Restoration, Third Ed. (New York: Oxford, 1992.), 50                 [6] The Text of the New Testament – Its Transmission, Corruption and Restoration p. xxix                 [7] Burge, Gary M. “A Specific Problem In The New Testament Text And Canon: The Woman Caught In Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” (Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 27 no.2), 144                 [8] “A Specific Problem In The New Testament Text And Canon: The Woman Caught In Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” 142             [9] Hodges, Zane C. “Problem Passages in the Gospel of John Part 8: The Woman Taken in Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” (Bibliotheca Sacra 136 no. 544 (October, 1979), 329                 [10] Poythress, Vern S. “Testing for Johannine Authorship by Examining the Use of Conjunctions” (Westminster Theological Journal 46, no. 2 Fall 1984), 362             [11] Bryant, Beauford H. and Krause, Mark S. John. The College Press NIV Commentary. (Joplin: College Press, 1998)             [12] Borchert, Gerald – John 1-11 The New American Commentary. (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1996)                 [13] “Problem Passages in the Gospel of John Part 8: The Woman Taken in Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” 323                 [14] As quoted in “Problem Passages in the Gospel of John Part 8: The Woman Taken in Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” 330                 [15] “Problem Passages in the Gospel of John Part 8: The Woman Taken in Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” 330                 [16] As quoted in  “Problem Passages in the Gospel of John Part 8: The Woman Taken in Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” 331                 [17] Trites, Allison A. “The Woman Taken in Adultery” (Bibliotheca Sacra 131 no. 522 April, 1974) 138-144             [18] Johnson, Alan F. “A Stylistic Trait of the Fourth Gospel in the Pericope Adulterae” Bulletin of the Evangelical Theological Society (IX Spring, 1966) 91-96                 [19] Beasley-Murray, George R. The Gospel according to John The Word Biblical                 Commentary.  (Dallas: Word Incorporated, 1999.)                 [20] Raymond Brown quotes Eusebius, who in turn quotes Papias writing near the time of the Apostles about a woman who was brought before Jesus accused of many sins. Brown also mentions the 3rd century Syrian Didascalia Apostolorum, which gives clear reference to the events of the Pericope Adulterae which indicates that 2nd century Syria knew of the narrative. John 1-11, p. 335                 [21] Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, p. 220                 [22] John 1-11, p. 335                 [23] Comfort, Phillip W. Encountering the Manuscripts  (Nashville: Broadman and Holman, 2005) p.99                 [24] “A Specific Problem In The New Testament Text And Canon: The Woman Caught In Adultery (John 7:53-8:11)” pages 146-148                 [25] John 1-11 The New American Commentary                 [26] The Gospel according to John The Word Biblical Commentary                  [27] John 1-11. Anchor Bible 29 p. 334             [28] James, Stephen A. “The Adulteress And The Death Penalty.” (Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 22 no. 1 March, 1979) pages 49-50. [29] “The Adulteress And The Death Penalty.” Pages 45-46

Study Notes Ed Underwood Worship: The Exclusive Responsibility of God’s People!   “For the eyes of the Lord run to and fro throughout the whole earth, to show Himself strong on behalf of those whose heart is loyal to Him” (2 Chronicles 16:9). The fourth major unit within the seventeen Historical Books is referred to as the Divided Kingdom Period. The Books of Kings record the reigns of kings of Israel and Judah following David. The United Kingdom of Israel reached the zenith of its power and influence early in Solomon’s 40-year reign (1 Kings 1-11). It began to decline because of Solomon’s divided heart for God. The books of Kings cover the 431 years of Israel’s history from Solomon’s coronation (973 B.C.) to Jehoiachin’s release from Babylonian exile (561 B.C.). The focus is on the 387 years from Solomon’s coronation to the destruction of the temple in 586 B.C. It begins with the Temple being built and ends with the Temple burnt. I believe it was written primarily by the prophet Jeremiah and finished by Ezra or Ezekiel with some final editing by unknown editors. It was written to the remaining kingdom of Judah before and after its Babylonian exile. It is at once an explanation for the Babylonian captivity and a warning to learn the lessons of history. “...1, 2 Kings present Israel’s history as a series of events that describe how and why the nation fell from the heights of national prosperity to the depths of conquest and exile. More specifically, [these books] explain how and why Israel lost the land it fought so hard to win in Joshua and worked so hard to organize in Judges, and 1, 2 Samuel.” (Paul R. House, 1, 2 Kings, pp 15, 28) 2 Chronicles provides the divine commentary on the Divided Kingdom era. Written to the remnant returning to the Promise Land from Babylonia under Ezra and Nehemiah before 500 B.C., the Chronicler (Ezra, Nehemiah or a contemporary) focuses on God’s faithfulness to His promises to Israel in electing and preserving His people (Judah) and His kingly line (David’s descendants). This selective and theological history is designed “to rally the returned remnant to hopeful temple worship...by demonstrating their link with the enduring Davidic promise.” (Jeffrey Townsend, “The Purpose of 1 and 2 Chronicles,” Bibliotheca Sacra 145:575 (July-September 1987): 99-126. Though the Second Temple would never measure up to Solomon’s, they were still God’s people. The Davidic line, Temple worship, and the priesthood were still theirs. The Chronicler reminds the returning remnant of their place in God’s plan to redeem Creation and begins to thrust their thoughts toward a coming King: 1 and 2 Chronicles cover a broader period of history than any other Old Testament book. 2 Chronicles gives a priestly perspective on the history of God’s people from Solomon’s reign through Cyrus’s edict to rebuild the Temple more than 400 years later. The emphasis on the Temple exhorts them to reestablish worship as guided by the Mosaic Law. I. SOLOMON’S GLORY: Israel’s golden age of peace, prosperity and Temple worship. David’s dream to build a majestic Temple for Israel’s worship becomes Solomon’s reality. However, in the midst of rejoicing there is a stern warning—this type of worship flows from hearts loyal to God. If the nation fails to remain true to God, He will uproot them from their homeland and destroy this magnificent place of worship. Six of these first nine chapters center on the construction and dedication of the Temple. (1-9) Messiah: The Temple was designed to point God’s people to Christ, but most missed the point! Jesus tried to tell them that He was greater than the Temple (Matthew 12:6). He claimed to be the One who replaces the Temple. The glory of God that used to reside in the Temple now resides in the person of Jesus Christ, God’s only Son (John 1:14). 2 Chronicles: Worship is a lifestyle, not an event!   II. JUDAH’S DECLINE: Israel’s glory declines as true worship of her God declines. Solomon’s death quickly divides the nation and both kingdoms eventually choose to worship other gods. Sinful lifestyles in the palaces and neighborhoods of Israel and Judah cause the nation to forsake pure Temple worship. A few of Judah’s kings bring revival, but it never lasts more than one generation. (10-36) 30% DEDICATION TO TWELVE EVIL KINGS: Chronicles virtually ignores the northern twelve tribes and barely mentions the evil kings of Judah. The emphasis is on Judah as God’s sovereign choice to glorify Him through Temple worship. This never happens in the northern kingdom and ceases during the reign of the idolatrous kings of the south. 70% DEDICATED TO EIGHT RIGHTEOUS KINGS: The Chronicler offers a detailed account of the deep spiritual commitment, courage and integrity of the rulers who walked in the ways of David. Five of these kings—Jehosaphat, Joash, Hezekiah, and Josiah bring revival and restore Temple worship. THE HOPE OF WORSHIP: 2 Chronicles concludes with hope. The Persian King Cyrus decrees that the Jerusalem Temple will be rebuilt. III. 2 Chronicles and You: 2 Chronicles is a fascinating study of God’s perspective on history. The events of the Divided Kingdom era seem secondary to God’s primary concern—authentic worship of Him in this world. In the key New Testament passage on worship Paul teaches us that true worshipers of Christ give their lives to God in response to His mercies (Romans 12:1-2). PauldevoteselevenchapterstocarefullydetailinghowtherighteousnessofGodisdemonstrated in His mercies to believers. Worshipers should never be ashamed of the delivering power of the Gospel that reveals the righteousness of God in everyone who believes (1:16-17). The Gospel delivers believers from the penalty of sin. Justification by faith—every believer is declared righteous the moment they believe (Chapters 1-4). The Gospel delivers believers from the power of sin. Sanctified by faith—every believer who relies on God’s Spirit will live righteously (Chapters 5-8). The Gospel’s promises are the promises of a covenant-keeping God (God’s faithfulness to Israel, Chapters 9-11). Paul devotes four chapters to carefully detailing how believers should respond to His mercies. Worshipers should give their lives to God as a sacrifice of worship (12:1-2). In a decisive act of the will we present our lives to God to transform to do His will (12:1-2). This decision counts the cost of living selflessly in the church and the world (12:3-21). God is looking for authentic worshipers who gather together in authentic worshiping communities to glorify Him in this fallen world. An authentic worshiper is a Christian who has given his or her life to God in response to the mercies of God. Worship is a lifestyle, not an event! An authentic worshiping community that “has good worship” according to God’s definition is a gathering of believers who are serving Christ together in response to His mercies. The event of good worship is the expression of the collective worshipful lifestyles of the community. "It is in the process of being worshipped that God communicates His presence to men." C.S. Lewis

Study Notes Ed Underwood God’s Special People; God’s Special King! “O Lord, you are great, mighty, majestic, magnificent, glorious, and sovereign over all sky and earth! You have dominion and exalt yourself as the ruler of all.” (King David before the assembly, 1 Chronicles 29:11) The third major unit within the seventeen Historical Books is referred to as the United Kingdom Period. These four books—1 Samuel, 2 Samuel, 1 Kings 1-11, and 1 Chronicles—record the United Kingdom under three rulers, Saul, David, and Solomon. The events reported during this era cover a period of 170 years, from the birth of Samuel (1 Samuel 1:20) to the death of Solomon (1 Kings 11:43). By the end of the chaotic period of the judges, God’s people are crying for a king. Samuel, the last judge and first great prophet in Israel, anoints the people’s choice for their first king—Saul. Though Saul’s political credentials are impressive, his indifferent heart attitude toward God causes him to lose his kingdom to the young king-elect—David. But David, whose heart is dedicated to God, must wait for his kingdom. Saul rebels against God’s will, becoming insanely jealous of the young king to be. David flees for his life and learns many lessons of faith. Finally, Saul and his sons meet death on Mount Gilboa, setting the stage for 2 Samuel and the prosperity of Israel under righteous King David. The first half of 1 Kings (1-11) reports the life of Solomon, the last king of the United Kingdom era. Solomon reigned 40 years during the Golden Era of Israel’s history. During his monarchy Israel rose to the peak of her wealth and influence in the world. His greatest accomplishment was building the Temple in Jerusalem, and his wisdom and wealth brought him worldwide fame. But his heart for God waned when he disobeyed God’s warning and married pagan wives. God’s wisdom proved greater than Solomon’s. God knew these pagan wives would turn his heart toward their idols. Sure enough, the king’s divided heart left behind a divided kingdom 1 Chronicles provides the divine commentary on the United Kingdom era. Written to the remnant returning to the Promise Land from Babylonia under Ezra and Nehemiah before 500 B.C., the Chronicler (Ezra, Nehemiah or a contemporary) focuses on God’s faithfulness to His promises to Israel in electing and preserving His people (Judah) and His king (David). This selective and theological history is designed “to rally the returned remnant to hopeful temple worship...by demonstrating their link with the enduring Davidic promise.” (Jeffrey Townsend, “The Purpose of 1 and 2 Chronicles,” Bibliotheca Sacra 145:575 (July-September 1987): 99-126. 1 and 2 Chronicles cover a broader period of history than any other Old Testament book. 1 Chronicles gives a priestly perspective on the genealogy and reign of David. The emphasis on the Temple exhorts them to reestablish worship as guided by the Mosaic Law. And the record of King David’s prosperity and righteousness remind them of their special status as God’s chosen people through whom He would establish His kingdom forever. I. ISRAEL’S HISTORICAL LINEAGE: These nine chapters are the most comprehensive genealogical tables in the Bible. They are highly selective. The family tree of Judah and Benjamin dominate because the Chronicles are not concerned with the northern kingdom but with the southern kingdom and the Davidic dynasty. (1-9) Messiah: The tribe of Judah is placed first in the national genealogy because the monarchy, temple, and Messiah (Genesis 49:10) will come from this tribe. Since Chronicles are the last books of the Hebrew Bible, the genealogies in chapters 1-9 are a preamble to the genealogy of Christ in the first book of the New Testament, Matthew. 1 Chronicles: The best way to celebrate the past is by trusting God for the future! II. REIGN OF DAVID: Compared with Second Samuel, David’s life is seen in an entirely different light. There are both omissions and additions. (10-29) A. Don’t live in the past but do learn from the past. B. Don’t judge significance by human standards but by the promises of God. C. Remember what God remembers about your sin and failures! (2 Samuel-Psalm 51-1 Chronicles) D. Get on with your life by trusting God for what He’s asking you to do right now! “Has this world been so kind to you that you should leave with regret? There are better things ahead than any we leave behind.” –CS Lewis DAVID BECOMES KING: Chronicles completely omits David’s struggles with Saul. In fact Saul is only given one chapter. The emphasis is on David as God’s sovereign choice as king. (10-12) DAVID BRINGS THE ARK TO JERUSALEM: David’s deep spiritual commitment, courage and integrity stand out. His concern for the things of the Lord and heart for God are evident as the ark returns to its people. (13-17) DAVID’S VICTORIES: The kingdom is strengthened and expanded during his reign. His sin with Bathsheba—the event that hurt the rest of his life—is omitted. His passion for the temple shines. (18-27) DAVID’S LAST DAYS: David is not allowed to build the temple, but he designs the plans, gathers the materials, prepares the site, and recruits the workers. The book closes with his beautiful public prayer of praise and the accession of Solomon. (27-29) Chronicles and You: 1 Chronicles is a fascinating study of God’s perspective on history. The returning remnant bemoaned the meager dimensions of the Temple God was asking them to build in comparison to the grand Temple Solomon built (Ezra 3:11-13). I believe 1 Chronicles was God’s response to their fears, doubts, and regrets.

No particular text in today's topical (doctrinal) teaching.  Building on text from "Easter" Sunday, John 20:1-18, we are doing our best to grasp what the Bible teaches concerning Christ's Ascension -- and why it's so important.  So important that Saint Augustine said: "The Ascension festival 'is that festival which confirms the grace of all the festivals together, without which the profitableness of every festival would have perished. For unless the Saviour had ascended into heaven, His Nativity would have come to nothing… and His Passion would have borne no fruit for us, and His most holy Resurrection would have been useless.'"(quoted by Peter Toon, Bibliotheca Sacra, July 1983)

The concept of rewards in the coming kingdom of heaven can be found on almost every other page in the New Testament. However, there are many who do not value this doctrine as an essential segment of their theological understanding. That is to say, this doctrine is considered insignificant in the grand scheme of God’s plan for the ages. But a careful reading of the New Testament will prove this notion to be false, and almost embarrassing that it would be discarded or discredited as nominal in any way. The doctrine of rewards finds great significance in one’s theological understanding because it allows for grace to remain grace without any inclusion of works. One of the greatest arguments against those who promote a “grace gospel” is that this “grace” is too free because it requires nothing of the individual needing salvation except that they believe the Gospel. These opponents would state that unless an expected result is required, such as a submission of one’s life, the repentance of all of their sins, or the desire to give up all that they have is present, they are not truly saved. The tension that is created between grace and works often manifests itself in contradictions. For example, A.W. Pink writes, “If it be true that no attempt to imitate Christ can obtain a sinner’s acceptance with God, it is equally true that the emulating of Him is imperatively necessary and absolutely essential in order to the saints’ preservation and final salvation.”[1] This could be understood as saying “you can’t do anything to be saved, but in order to be truly saved you must do something.” The Gospel is not about what the sinner does, but what the sinner needs.A sinner is saved by the grace of God alone, who was not obligated to supply a solution to our sin problem. From out of His profound love, the Creator God sent His only Son to die as a substitute for our sin, which paid the enormous penalty that we had incurred as sinners and made the perfect righteousness of God available to all who believe (have faith) in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ alone. It is by faith alone in Jesus Christ alone that one is saved, receiving all that he or she was lacking. This includes the complete forgiveness of all sin, a wholly new Life, relief of all guilt and shame, reconciliation and full acceptance with his or her Creator, the perfect righteousness of God credited to them, and eternal life that is guaranteed beyond this present existence which can never be lost.The doctrine of rewards extinguishes the tension between faith and works. While one is saved by faith alone, there are consequences for how the believer lives in light of what he or she understands from the Scriptures. Every child of God is responsible for conducting their lives according to the truth of God’s Word. When they are faithful in what the Lord has asked of them, they receive a reward (1 Cor 3:14). But if they are unfaithful, whatever “good works” that they may have thought that they had will be burned up and the believer will suffer loss (1 Cor 3:15). Thus, there is a very real and serious consequence for believers who live unfaithfully to the Lord, but it does not infringe upon or impugn His unconditional acceptance of them in Christ Jesus.The opportunity to earn rewards is something that is wholeheartedly condoned by the Lord Jesus Christ (Matt 6:1, 17-18, 20; Mark 9:41; Luke 6:35). But the doctrine of rewards is not a personal “padding of the wallet” in the kingdom, for self-servitude will not be rewarded (Matt 6:2, 5). Rewards are to be done in service to the Lord Jesus Christ with “His name’s sake” as the heart’s motivator. The Christian Life is a responsibility to be stewarded, not a stage to be applauded. Many have believed that receiving a reward is only possible by an extreme act of obedience, but Jesus tells us that “whoever gives you a cup of water to drink because of your name as followers of Christ, truly I say to you, he will not lose his reward” (Mark 9:41). Simply caring for those who are serving Christ earns one a reward.We can clearly see that the Christian Life is one of faithful stewardship in light of the teachings of Scripture. Thankfully, Jesus taught on this subject in order to reorient much of the wrong thinking that may have been present among the Jewish people, and even His disciples, in the first century. While Luke 19:11-27 is similar to the parable taught in Matthew 25:14-30, the surrounding context of Luke 19 calls for this teaching to stand on its own merit. Luke 19:11-27. The parable that Jesus taught in Luke 19:11-27 follows His interactions with Zaccheus in 19:1-10. However, this parable may be slightly connected with Zaccheus’ situation in that he may have been present when this parable was taught, and Jesus’ use of the “mina” would have been something that he could have directly related to considering his background as a tax collector. Whether these connections are legitimate or not, Luke supplies us with a two-fold reasoning for why Jesus was teaching this parable. First, Jesus was “near Jerusalem” (19:11b) which is a detail that finds its significance later in the chapter when His “triumphal entry” takes place (19:28-40). This first point must be pondered because of the events that surround it. Jesus’ entry into the city was anything but “triumphal.” For Jesus, this was a time of great grief and sorrow. While His disciples were rejoicing and shouting as the Son of Man passed by the Mount of Olives just outside of the city (19:37-38), Jesus began weeping at the sight of Jerusalem (19:41). The message of the disciples was “Blessed is the King who comes in the name of the Lord; Peace in heaven and glory in the highest” (19:38), Jesus’ words capture the rejection of the Jewish people, the postponement of the kingdom of heaven on Earth, and the judgment that awaited the Jews because of their rebellion (19:42-44). Jesus knew what could have been had Israel accepted her Promised Messiah, but the leaders had spoken for the people (Matt 12:24), and though His miracles testified that the kingdom of God had come upon them (Matt 12:28), they rejected their Christ, which plunged the Jewish people into a “partial hardening” (Rom 11:25b), having the truth hidden from their eyes because of their unbelief (Luke 19:42b; Matt 13:10-17).The second reason given for Jesus teaching this parable was that “they supposed that the kingdom of God was going to appear immediately” (19:11c). This would explain the joyful celebration of the disciples in 19:37-38. As one reads through this parable, it becomes very clear that the kingdom will come at a later time, and that the “nobleman” must go away to receive this kingdom and then come again, now having possession of it, in order to establish it in the country from which he left. This justifies Jesus’ sorrow in Luke 19:41b-44, seeing that the Jews did not “recognize the time of your visitation” by the Messiah (19:44). Unbelief has postponed the kingdom. Instead, the Jewish people will be disciplined for their unbelief (19:44b). Thus, Jesus’ parable will serve to dispel the notion that the kingdom was to appear at His entry into the city of Jerusalem.Starting in 19:12, Jesus speaks of a nobleman who travels to a “distant country” for the purpose of receiving a kingdom “for himself.” After receiving this kingdom, the nobleman would then return. The details here must be carefully noted, especially in light of the current-day belief that the kingdom of heaven is “already” here in a spiritual form, but “not yet” here in a physical form. Theissen notes, “Consistency of interpretation demands that we hold, not only that the nobleman must return in person, but also that he will set up his kingdom in the country from which he departed. In other words, we must insist that Christ is not now sitting on the throne of David in heaven and ruling over his people on earth from that sphere, but that He receives the kingdom in heaven, returns to earth, and then sets up the kingdom on the earth.”[2] Having a general understanding of what Scripture tells us about the Messiah and the promise of His future return to establish His Kingdom, it is not hard to connect the dots and see that Jesus is this nobleman, the “distant country” would be during the interadvent age between His ascension and return when Christ is seated at the right hand of the Father (Acts 2:33; 5:31; 7:55-56), preparing a place for all believers (John 14:2-3) while making intercession for the saints (Rom 8:34; Heb 7:25). Before Jesus Christ returns to the Earth, He will have received the kingdom of heaven and His return will mark the establishment of that kingdom on Earth. What is interesting about this parable is that its contents were not hard to relate to by those in the audience, considering that the successor to Herod had done the same thing. Robertson explains, “Apparently this parable has the historical basis of Archelaus who actually went from Jerusalem to Rome on this very errand to get a kingdom in Palestine and to come back to it. This happened while Jesus was a boy in Nazareth and it was a matter of common knowledge.”[3] As we will see in 19:14, the “citizens” did not want the nobleman to rule over them, just as it was with the Jews and their response to Archelaus assuming command. While Jesus is not speaking of Archelaus, the concept would be familiar to those living in the first century.Luke 19:13 shows the nobleman calling ten of his slaves (“servants”) together before he leaves with each one being entrusted with a must “mina.” A mina is “a Greek monetary unit worth one hundred denarii.”[4] A “denarii” (also known in some cases as a “drachma”) is the equivalent of 100 days wages. With this, he gives them specific instructions: “Do business with this until I come back” (19:13b). Hodges explains, “Here lay the central point of the parable. The interadvent period which the parable proclaimed could be used to advantage. It was a time for investment. More than that, it was a time for investment directly related to the coming kingdom of God. Therefore, Zacchaeus needed to hear the parable at this crucial moment in his life. But so did everyone else in the audience as well.”[5] This speaks to the stewardship of the nobleman’s resources, which he entrusted to his slaves with the expectation that they would be faithful with what was entrusted to them.This “principled story-telling” has a vital application for us today. While our Master is away receiving the kingdom, we His servants are to be engaged in His business with His resources while He is away. We are to be faithful and wise with what He has entrusted to us, keeping in mind that it is ultimately His and that there will be a day in which He will return and settle accounts with His servants, receiving unto Himself the return that was earned while He was away.In Luke 19:14 we have the introduction of a group of people whom Jesus has not mentioned yet, the “citizens.” This group is said to have hated the nobleman, raising a protest against His rulership over them through a “delegation.” No doubt the citizens are the Jewish people and the “delegation” would be the Pharisees who were leading the charge against their Messiah in verbalizing the nation’s anti-belief (Matt 12:24). For the time being, the citizens are placed in the background of the parable while Jesus explains the events surrounding the nobleman’s return (Luke 19:15). The timing of this event is precise, with Jesus noting that the man had received the kingdom. This comment places this moment after Jesus has assumed the right to reign, but before He has brought His servants to account at the Judgment Seat of Christ (1 Cor 3:11-15; 2 Cor 5:10; Rev 19:6-10). The nobleman is ready to inquire of his servants regarding the business that they conducted while he was away and the return that they had received with the money that he had entrusted to them. While there are ten slaves that were given one mina each (19:13), we have only three that are brought to account, with each demonstrating a different level of return with what they were entrusted. With the first slave, we find that he was able to make an investment that gave a 1,000% return! The nobleman commends this servant, saying “Well done, good slave” (19:17a). This slave’s faithfulness over the small amount that he had been given was then greatly rewarded by the nobleman who set the slave over ten cities in his kingdom (19:17b).The second slave comes before the nobleman and presents a 500% return (19:18) to which the master replies by granting this servant rulership over five cities (19:19). One cannot help but to notice that the public commendation of “Well done, good slave” is absent from this scenario. This slave, who earned half the return that the first slave earned, does not get the privilege of hearing these words from the nobleman’s mouth.At this point, it should be clear that those who are faithful in this life, being about his Master’s business until He comes to bring us all to Himself (John 14:2-3) will receive rewards and reigning responsibilities that are much greater in magnitude than what we were entrusted with while on Earth. Thiessen cites Godet in explaining this: “In Luke the one point in question is to settle the position of the servants in the economy of glory which is opening, and consequently to determine the proportion of faithfulness displayed during the time of labor and probation which has just closed.”[6] Christ desires to share the regal responsibilities of His kingdom with His companions, but they must be faithful stewards who have proven themselves. One would not in clear conscience entrust their estate to a slothful and wayward child, for the outcome of such unbridled wealth in the hands of an irresponsible soul would be guaranteed devastation. Though related by blood, and though greatly loved, they would not be worthy of possessing such an opportunity. Their life’s record has shown them to be unworthy. What is the “mina” in the life of the one who is a disciple of Christ? There are many who have considered the “sharing of the Gospel” as the focus of what has been entrusted to the slave and that “doing business” (19:13b) would be evangelism, but we must conclude that this is not the only way that one can be faithful to that which God has entrusted to us. Believers have a responsibility to love one another (John 13:34-35), forgive one another (Eph 4:32), build up one another in love (Eph 4:15-16) and encourage one another daily (Heb 3:13). While there is so much more that would be considered in the realm of Christian faithfulness, the point is clear that the believer in Christ is not just a missionary to the world, but is also a minister to the Body of Christ. The first two accounts show that diligence and faithfulness should be the attitudes of all who would hope to reign alongside Jesus Christ in His coming kingdom. In Luke 19:20, a third servant approaches the nobleman but his response is entirely different than that of the first two slaves. Coming before the master, the third slave returns the exact same mina that was entrusted to him before the nobleman left to receive his kingdom. The slave reveals that he had hid it away in a handkerchief. The third slave then divulges the reason for his negligence in not “doing business” with the nobleman’s mina, citing “fear” of the nobleman “because you are an exacting man; you take up what you did not lay down and reap what you did not sow” (Luke 19:21b). The word “exacting” is the Greek word austēros meaning “harsh, rough, rigid,”[7] which has led to the transliteration of “austere” in the KJV. The charge is that the third slave did not want to risk losing what he had been given because he understood the nobleman to be harsh and rigid, taking those things which are not his and plundering the goods of others others for personal gain. Having returned the same mina that he had been given, the thought may have been “Well, at least I didn’t lose it!”At this point, a few questions need to be answered. First, has there been anything in the telling of this parable that would lead one to believe that the nobleman was a short-tempered tyrant who plundered the goods of others? No.Second, throughout this parable have we not seen that the nobleman’s actions are in direct relation to that which the Lord Jesus will do in leaving to receive a kingdom for Himself and then returning again to establish it at the place from whence He left? Yes.Would we conclude that the Lord Jesus Christ is a short-tempered tyrant who plundered the goods of others? I don’t think so either.In fact, what we see is that the third slave’s description of the nobleman is completely off base from who he really was. What we find out when listening to the third slave’s explanation is that he did not know his master very well at all and proceeded to live his life on a false presumption of his master that kept him from experiencing great things when his master returned. This is a tragic result! Being ignorant of his master’s character, the slave lived in fear, complacency, and slothfulness. Had he known his master more intimately, he would have served him with joy knowing that “He who promised is faithful” (Heb 10:23). Again, Godet (as quoted by Thiessen) has captured the third slave’s situation with clarity noting that he is a “believer who has not found the state of grace offered by Jesus so brilliant as he hoped,—a legal Christian, who has not tasted grace, and knows nothing of the Gospel but its severe morality.”[8]The nobleman responds to this excuse by calling the man a “worthless slave” (19:22a), which is probably better translated as a “wicked” or “evil slave.” While one may be quick to conclude that the declaration that this slave is “worthless/evil/wicked” would communicate that he was obviously “unsaved,” our attention must be drawn to the fact that this slave was as much a part of the nobleman’s house as the other two who were brought to account for the business that they had done. Not only that, but this third slave was also entrusted with the same amount as the other two. This remark against the slave is the conclusion that the nobleman makes due to his inactivity and unfounded excuses for slothfulness. Simply put, he did not know his master intimately, and because of this his assumed misrepresentation of his master’ character caused him to do nothing with what he was given.That the third slave’s description is a solid misrepresentation of the nobleman’s character can be seen in the master’s response in Luke 19:22b, which is posed in the form of a question: “Did you know that I am an exacting man, taking up what I did not lay down and reaping what I did not sow?” It is as if the nobleman is responding by saying, “is this who you really think that I am?” He then reasons with the third slave that if this was the presumption by which he was operating, “why did you not put my money in the bank, and having come, I would have collected it with interest” (Luke 19:23)? The least that this man could have done was invest it at the lowest level possible so that even the smallest amount of interest would have been gained. However, he did not. This tells us that either the man was lying in his reasonings with the nobleman and was actually lethargic and slothful, not caring about the responsibility entrusted to him, nor in serving his master, or that his unfounded mischaracterization of his master had paralyzed him from making the least of wise decisions that would secure gain for the nobleman.Regardless of the reason, his mina was confiscated and given to the most profitable slave (19:24). The “bystanders” (19:24a) are astonished at this act, seeing that the first slave already has ten minas. The nobleman explains that those who “have” will be given more, and those that have not will lose even those things that they have (19:26). The failure of the third slave to be diligent in his responsibilities has led him to a moment of shame before his master. One cannot help but to reflect on Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 3:15 which state, “If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire.” Finishing this parable, the nobleman speaks of his “enemies” (Luke 19:27) and clarifies their identity as those “who did not want me to reign over them,” speaking of the “citizens” in Luke 19:14. As identified earlier, this is (by and large) the nation of Israel who had rejected their Messiah, leading to a postponement of the kingdom of heaven. These enemies are brought before the nobleman and slaughtered for their rejection of him. This should not be surprising, considering that much is said in the Old Testament regarding the judgment that will befall the Jews because of their rejection of God and which occurs right before the establishment of the kingdom on Earth (Jer 30:4-9; Ezek 20:33-38). On a broader scale, Jesus’ return will bring about the slaughter of all who have rejected Him as can be clearly seen in Revelation 19:15-21. We are told that Jesus will “strike down the nations” (Rev 19:15), that the birds will gorge themselves on the flesh of kings and mighty men who had rebelled against Messiah (Rev 19:17-19), and that the rest “were killed with the sword which came from the mouth of Him” (Rev 19:21). All who reject Christ and are rebellious of His reign over them will be put to death. These are unbelievers who will be judged at the Great White Throne judgment (Rev 20:11-15). However, the servants/slaves are wholly different than the “citizens/enemies” in this parable, with Jesus drawing the necessary distinctions. This is most notable in that the servants are judged first (representative of the Judgment Seat of Christ) and the “citizens/enemies” are judged later (representative of the Great White Throne judgment). To sum up the eternal destinies of the parties involved in this parable, Wilkin writes, “Good servants will rule with Christ fully. Half-hearted servants will rule with Him in a more limited way. Wicked servants won’t rule with Christ at all, though they will be with Him forever. Unbelievers will experience the second death and will spend eternity in the lake of fire.”[9] With the third slave’s misunderstanding of his master, we could conclude that the more that you are intimately acquainted with Jesus, the more that you will faithfully serve Him with joy, knowing that He desires to reward you richly for the service that you have rendered (Rev 22:12). This third servant, having full rights and equal responsibility within the house of the master, was declared “wicked” because of his sloth and negligence. Therefore, he suffered loss, for even what he thought he had was taken away.The application is clear.The Lord Jesus Christ has entrusted His work to His people. While He is away receiving the kingdom for Himself, we are to be doing business: loving one another, praying, studying His holy Word, living His holy Word, forgiving one another, encouraging one another, structuring our lives to be led in holiness and faithfulness to wherever He may lead us, and making disciples of all nations. Thiessen commissions us writing, “Let us also ‘carry on business’ till He come, in order that we may hear His ‘well done,’ and receive a reward when He comes!”[10] How will your conversation with the Master go when He returns and settles accounts? [1] Arthur Walkington Pink, Eternal Security (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2005), p. 75.[2] Henry Clarence Thiessen, “The Parable of the Nobleman and the Earthly Kingdom (Luke 19:11-27),” Bibliotheca Sacra, vol 91 (1934): 184.[3] A.T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament (Nashville, TN: Broadman Press, 1933), Lk 19:12.[4] Louw and Nida, p. 62.[5] Zane C. Hodges, A Free Grace Primer: The Hungry Inherit, The Gospel Under Siege, Grace in Eclipse, ed. Robert N. Wilkin (Denton, TX: Grace Evangelical Society, 2011), p. 335.[6] Thiessen, “The Parable of the Nobleman”: 188.[7] Thayer, Greek-English Lexicon, p. 84.[8] Thiessen, “The Parable of the Nobleman”: 190.[9] Robert N. Wilkin, “Two Judgments and Four Types of People (Luke 19:11–27),” Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society 25, no. 48 (2012): 20.[10] Ibid.

Gary Habermas is Professor of Philosophy and Apologetics at Liberty University. Michael Ruse is Professor of Philosophy of Science at Florida State University. They debate whether Michael's belief in naturalism (all that exists is the material world) is a coherent worldview given the challenges posed by personhood, morality, free will and subjective states. They also discuss whether progress in science has eliminated the need for God. For Gary Habermas on naturalism http://www.garyhabermas.com/articles/Bibliotheca-Sacra/habermas_BtS_paradigm-shift.htm For Michael Ruse http://philosophy.fsu.edu/content/view/full/871784 For Unbelievable? Live in the USA on Sat 27 Aug http://www.truthmattersministries.com/events/unbelievable-live/ Order Unbelievable? The Conference 2016 DVD/MP3CD http://www.premier.org.uk/Shop For more faith debates visit http://www.premierchristianradio.com/Shows/Saturday/Unbelievable Join the conversation: Facebook and Twitter Get the MP3 Podcast of Unbelievable? Via RSS or Via Itunes