Podcasts about Leon Morris

Grief is universal. But not all grief is the same.In this message from 1 Thessalonians 4:13–14, guest speaker Cornel Rasor opens with a pastoral truth that Paul made plain to the Thessalonians: Christians do not grieve as those who have no hope. The distinction isn't about grieving less—it's about grieving differently. The sorrow is real. The tears are real. But the hopelessness isn't.Rasor walks through what the Thessalonians were actually worried about: would their believing loved ones who had already died miss the glory of Christ's return? Paul's answer, grounded in the resurrection of Jesus, is a resounding no. Because Christ died and rose again, God will bring with Him those who have fallen asleep in Jesus. The dead in Christ are not behind—they will be coming with Him.Drawing on ancient pagan epitaphs, Ecclesiastes, commentary from Leon Morris, and John 14, Rasor paints a vivid contrast between the despair of a world without resurrection hope and the settled confidence of those who know where their beloved ones are right now—and where they are going.This episode also addresses the harder question: what about loved ones whose salvation is uncertain? Rasor speaks to that grief with care and points believers back to the sovereignty, mercy, and goodness of God.For anyone carrying the weight of loss, this is a message built to hold that weight. ★ Support this podcast ★

Grief is universal. But not all grief is the same.In this message from 1 Thessalonians 4:13–14, guest speaker Cornel Rasor opens with a pastoral truth that Paul made plain to the Thessalonians: Christians do not grieve as those who have no hope. The distinction isn't about grieving less—it's about grieving differently. The sorrow is real. The tears are real. But the hopelessness isn't.Rasor walks through what the Thessalonians were actually worried about: would their believing loved ones who had already died miss the glory of Christ's return? Paul's answer, grounded in the resurrection of Jesus, is a resounding no. Because Christ died and rose again, God will bring with Him those who have fallen asleep in Jesus. The dead in Christ are not behind—they will be coming with Him.Drawing on ancient pagan epitaphs, Ecclesiastes, commentary from Leon Morris, and John 14, Rasor paints a vivid contrast between the despair of a world without resurrection hope and the settled confidence of those who know where their beloved ones are right now—and where they are going.This episode also addresses the harder question: what about loved ones whose salvation is uncertain? Rasor speaks to that grief with care and points believers back to the sovereignty, mercy, and goodness of God.For anyone carrying the weight of loss, this is a message built to hold that weight. ★ Support this podcast ★

We come this week to what has been described as "the most obscure and difficult in the whole of the Pauline writings" (Leon Morris 1984). However, despite the many gaps and guesses in the thinking around this passage in 2 Thessalonians 2, it is in fact meant to be a word of great encouragement and hope to the church in Thessalonica, and therefore, to us. As daunting as the prospect of the revealing of 'the man of lawlessness' may be, he is brought to nothing by the appearing of Christ. Paul writes this passage, not to shake the church up but to settle it down; not to spook them into a panic but to comfort and stir their hearts in patient faith, steadfast hope and enduring love.

Leon Morris once said that Romans 3:21-27 is the most important paragraph ever written. The reason that he said this is captured well by what Charles Spurgeon said of this passage. He said "I do not know any passage in Scripture in which the way of salvation is more clearly and fully set forth than this one." John Piper said about this passage that, "if you understand this passage, you understand Christianity." Martin Luther said that this passage is "the central place of the book of Romans, and of the entire Bible." Nowhere is the gospel so clear. Nowhere is the logic of salvation so powerfully set forth as it is in this passage. In this passage we see that salvation is by Grace alone, through Faith alone, in Christ alone, and to the glory of God alone. This episode is a sermon that was originally preached by Jackson Hankey at a Christian Retreat for College Athletes.

According to many Christians today, faith isn't based on external facts or evidence, but is considered an internal, subjective feeling, intuition, or experience. But is this taught anywhere in the Bible? What about other religious texts and traditions? Shane Rosenthal explores these questions and more and talks with Craig Parton, author of Religion on Trial. Note: This is Humble Skeptic episode #4, which was originally released on Dec. 6, 2022.SPECIAL OFFER: What is Faith?This 20-page PDF resource by Shane Rosenthal walks through many of the issues covered on this episode, and includes all the supporting documentation in case you'd like to research things further yourself. We'll send you a link to download this PDF when you upgrade to a paid subscription or make a gift of any size. Click here for more info.SHOW NOTESArticlesIs Faith a Feeling? Shane RosenthalThe Mormonization of American Christianity, Shane RosenthalWhy Should We Believe the Bible?, Shane RosenthalDoes Hebrews 11:1 Teach Blind Faith?, Shane RosenthalIs My Dad Mentioned in Billy Joel's “Piano Man”?, Shane RosenthalBe a Berean!, Shane RosenthalOn Faith & Doubt, Shane RosenthalHow to Detect Deception, Shane RosenthalThe Story of Us, Shane RosenthalEpisodesReligion on Trial, Humble Skeptic #5 with Craig PartonThe Pilot Episode, Humble Skeptic #1 — The Billy Joel episodeNew Evidence for The Executive Room, HS #55 with John GibsonEvidential Reasoning, Humble Skeptic #56 with Craig PartonFaith & Experience, Humble Skeptic #28Is Faith Blind? Humble Skeptic#3Is Faith Irrational? Humble Skeptic #2Faith Founded on Facts, Humble Skeptic #15Are The Gospels History or Fiction? Humble Skeptic #52Dealing with Doubt, Humble Skeptic #19BooksReligion on Trial, Craig Parton,Habits of the Heart, Robert Bellah et al1984, George OrwellGod in the Whirlwind, David WellsFaith is Not Wishing, Greg KouklTestimonies to the Truth, Lydia McGrewCan We Trust The Gospels? Peter J. WilliamsIs Jesus History? John DicksonWe Need Your Help!Consider supporting The Humble Skeptic podcast by making a one-time gift or by upgrading to a paid subscription via Substack ($5.95 per month, $59 per year). Use the button below for more information about giving options.Books Currently For Sale in Our New & Used Bookstore (US Only)Every purchase helps to support this podcast. We'll even throw in a Humble Skeptic coaster with every purchase!Redating the New Testament, John A.T. Robinson • $45The Letters to the Seven Churches of Asia in their Local Setting, Colin J. Hemer • $40The Deconstruction of Christianity, Alisa Childers & Tim Barnett • $24The Great De-Churching, Jim Davis & Michael Graham • $20Click one of the links above to get more info about a book or to purchase via Ebay. Click here for additional books, including a complete set of the New International Commentary on the New Testament (NICNT) by Eerdmans, featuring respected scholars such as F.F. Bruce, Leon Morris, Philip Hughes, Herman Ridderbos, and others.LIMITED TIME OFFER — U.S. Residents Only!The Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture (30 Vol. Softcover Set)We'll send you a brand new boxed set for a donation of $675 to support the work of The Humble Skeptic. This commentary series retails for over $1,500, and is currently listed on Amazon for over $1,400. This donation is not tax-deductible. Get full access to The Humble Skeptic at www.humbleskeptic.com/subscribe

When asked to define the word “faith,” the majority of Christians polled at a variety of Christian events and gatherings described it a “blind leap.” But is this idea taught anywhere in the Bible? On this episode of The Humble Skeptic, Shane examines the arguments and passages that some Christians use in support of blind faith. This is Humble Skeptic episode #3 which was originally released on Nov. 22, 2022.SPECIAL OFFER: What is Faith?This 20-page PDF resource by Shane Rosenthal walks through many of the issues covered on this episode, and includes all the supporting documentation in case you'd like to research things further yourself. We'll send you a link to download this PDF when you upgrade to a paid subscription or make a gift of any size. Click here for more info.SHOW NOTESRecommended ArticlesDoes Hebrews 11:1 Teach Blind Faith?, Shane RosenthalWhy Should We Believe the Bible?, Shane RosenthalBe a Berean!, Shane RosenthalOn Faith & Doubt, Shane RosenthalHow to Detect Deception, Shane RosenthalIs My Dad Mentioned in Billy Joel's “Piano Man”?, Shane RosenthalRecommended EpisodesIs Faith Irrational? Humble Skeptic #2Faith & Proof, Humble Skeptic #7Proof of the Gospel, Humble Skeptic #8Greg Koukl on Blind Faith, Humble Skeptic #18Faith Founded on Facts, Humble Skeptic #15Are The Gospels History or Fiction? Humble Skeptic #52Dealing with Doubt, Humble Skeptic #19The Pilot Episode, Humble Skeptic #1 (The Billy Joel episode)Recommended BooksFaith is Not Wishing, Greg KouklReligion on Trial, Craig PartonTestimonies to the Truth, Lydia McGrewCan We Trust The Gospels? Peter J. WilliamsIs Jesus History? John DicksonA Doubter's Guide to Jesus, John DicksonProof of The Gospel, Eusebius of CaesareaLuke's Key Witness, Shane RosenthalWe Need Your Help!Consider supporting The Humble Skeptic podcast by making a one-time gift or by upgrading to a paid subscription via Substack ($5.95 per month, $59 per year). Use the button below for more information about giving options.Books Currently For Sale in Our New & Used Bookstore Every purchase helps to support this podcast. We'll even throw in a Humble Skeptic coaster with every purchase!Redating the New Testament, John A.T. Robinson • $45From Joshua To Caiaphas: High Priests After the Exile, James C. VanderKam • $50The Letters to the Seven Churches of Asia in their Local Setting, Colin J. Hemer • $40The Deconstruction of Christianity, Alisa Childers & Tim Barnett • $24The Great De-Churching, Jim Davis & Michael Graham • $20Click one of the links above to get more info about a book or to purchase via Ebay. Click here for additional books, including a complete set of the New International Commentary on the New Testament (NICNT) by Eerdmans, featuring respected scholars such as F.F. Bruce, Leon Morris, Philip Hughes, Herman Ridderbos, and others.LIMITED TIME OFFER — U.S. Residents Only!$675 • The Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture (30 Vol. Set)This softcover set retails for over $1,500, but for a limited time we'll send you a brand new boxed set for a gift of $675 or more to help support the work of The Humble Skeptic (this donation is not tax-deductible). I frequently use this set for my own research and study. The Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture published by IVP promotes a vital link between the varied Christian traditions of today and our common ancient ancestors in the faith. "The initial cry of the Reformation was ad fontes--back to the sources! The Ancient Christian Commentary Series is a marvelous tool for the recovery of biblical wisdom in today's church. Not just another scholarly project, the ACCS is a major source for the renewal of preaching, theology and Christian devotion." — Timothy George"Contemporary pastors do not stand alone. We are not the first generation of preachers to wrestle with the challenges of communicating the gospel. The Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture puts us in conversation with our colleagues from the past, that great cloud of witnesses who preceded us in this vocation. This commentary enables us to receive their deep spiritual insights, their encouragement, and guidance for present-day interpretation and preaching of the Word." — William Willimon Get full access to The Humble Skeptic at www.humbleskeptic.com/subscribe

This week we feature mandolin player Dick Staber.  Dick has recently written a very interesting memoir about his life in bluegrass music and after reading it, we got in touch with Dick and asked about conducting a podcast interview.  Dick notably play with Del McCoury from 1968 to 1975 and also performed with Don Stover, Bob Paisley, Leon Morris, Bill Clifton and many others.

Are you asking God for a sign?Jesus' words in Luke 11:32 may help you recognize the answer right before you. Luke 11:32b (CEV)“They turned to God when Jonah preached and yet here is something far greater than Jonah.”  https://livesteadyon.com/ To connect with Susie:https://susiecrosby.com/Facebook: @‌susiecrosbyauthorInstagram: @‌susiecrosby Susie's devotionals, “Lighthearted” and “Just One Word: 90 Devotions to Invite Jesus In” are available on Amazon. https://www.logos.com/https://enduringword.com/https://www.wordhippo.com/https://www.biblegateway.com/https://www.blueletterbible.org/ Johannes Behm and Ernst Würthwein, Gerhard Kittel, Geoffrey W. Bromiley, and Gerhard Friedrich, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1964–), 976.Leon Morris, Luke: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 3, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1988), 220. Douglas Mangum, ed., Lexham Context Commentary: New Testament, Lexham Context Commentary (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2020), Lk 11:29–32. John A. Martin, “Luke,” in The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures, ed. J. F. Walvoord and R. B. Zuck, vol. 2 (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1985), 236. The New International Version (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2011), Lk 11:16. I. Howard Marshall, “Luke,” in New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition, ed. D. A. Carson et al., 4th ed. (Leicester, England; Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity Press, 1994), 999.Vine, W. "Repent, Repentance - Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words." Blue Letter Bible. 24 Jun, 1996. Web. 27 Sep, 2024.  Theme music:Glimmer by Andy Ellison

Does Jesus affirm women as leaders?Luke 8:1b-2a shows us how Jesus welcomes leadership from those who may not be affirmed to serve in many situations and organizations.Luke 8:1b-2:a (NIV)The Twelve were with him, and also some women who had been cured of evil spirits and diseases: LiveSteadyOn.comTo connect with Susie:https://susiecrosby.com/Facebook: @‌susiecrosbyauthorInstagram: @‌susiecrosbySusie's devotionals, “Lighthearted” and “Just One Word: 90 Devotions to Invite Jesus In” are available on Amazon. https://www.logos.com/https://enduringword.com/https://www.wordhippo.com/https://www.biblegateway.com/https://www.blueletterbible.org/Walter Grundmann, “Σύν - Μετά with the Genitive, Συναποθνῄσκω, Συσταυρόω, Συνθάπτω, Σύμφυτος, Συνεγείρω, Συζάω, Συζωοποιέω, Συμπάσχω, Συνδοξάζω,” ed. Gerhard Kittel, Geoffrey W. Bromiley, and Gerhard Friedrich, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1964–), 770.Vine, W. "Set - Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words." Blue Letter Bible. 24 Jun, 1996. Web. 9 Sep, 2024.Leon Morris, Luke: An Introduction and Commentary.+~On+this+occasion+he+ "‌"), vol. 3, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1988), 169.Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset, and David Brown, Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible, vol. 2 (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997), 105–106.Douglas Mangum, ed., Lexham Context Commentary: New Testament%2c+~Luke+provides+report "‌"), Lexham Context Commentary (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2020), Lk 8:1–21.John A. Martin, “Luke,” in The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures, ed. J. F. Walvoord and R. B. Zuck, vol. 2 (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1985), 224–225.Catherine Kroeger, Mary Evans, and Elizabeth Elliot, The IVP Women's Bible Commentary: An Indispensable Resource for All Who Want to View Scripture through Different Eyes (InterVarsity Press, 2002), 571.Theme music:Glimmer by Andy Ellison

Does something in your life feel lifeless?Luke 7:14 reminds us that God has the power to breathe life into what we consider to be without hope. Luke 7:14b (ESV)And he said, “Young man, I say to you, arise.” LiveSteadyOn.comhttps://livesteadyon.com/ To connect with Susie:https://susiecrosby.com/Facebook: @‌susiecrosbyauthorInstagram: @‌susiecrosby Susie's devotionals, “Lighthearted” and “Just One Word: 90 Devotions to Invite Jesus In” are available on Amazon. https://www.logos.com/https://enduringword.com/https://www.wordhippo.com/https://www.biblegateway.com/https://www.blueletterbible.org/ Leon Morris, Luke: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 3, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1988), 159–160.John A. Martin, “Luke,” in The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures, ed. J. F. Walvoord and R. B. Zuck, vol. 2 (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1985), 222.Vine, W. "Arise, Arose, Arouse, Raise, Rise, Rouse - Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words." Blue Letter Bible. 24 Jun, 1996. Web. 2 Sep, 2024.  Theme music:Glimmer by Andy Ellison

The letter of Romans strengthened the ancient church, brought reformation to the dark ages, has brought hope for 2000 years, and can change your life!This week Pastor Joel continues his message series, Romans Bold Faith That Saves. We look at why is Jesus such a big deal, and why is the cross and Jesus' resurrection the only way? Absolutely nothing about your relationship with God is earned, none is credited to your effort. Absolutely everything about your relationship with God is because of Jesus own righteous perfection in your place and through your life!This is a special four part series that will span the year of 2025. LINKS + RESOURCES FROM THIS EPISODE:• Recommended reading for this series• Leon Morris, RC Sproul, Martin Luther, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Doxology song by Thomas Ken• Download the free study guide by visiting and clicking on the button "Download Study Guide"⁠• Find a complete transcript here• Scripture References: Romans ch. 3, verse 21 - ch. 4, verse 25; Genesis 17; Psalm 51; Galatians 2, verse 20• Find out more about Covenant Church at ⁠covenantexperience.com

"God is love. This means more than ‘God is loving' or that God sometimes loves. It means that he loves, not because he finds objects worthy of his love, but because it is his nature to love. His love for us depends not on what we are, but on what he is. He loves us because he is that kind of God, because he is love.” – Leon Morris, “1 John”, in New Bible Commentary, 1406.

The Leon Morris Lecture in New Testament Studies 2024Ambassadors of Hope: A New Testament ThemeEpisode DescriptionThis lecture will explore one of the key themes of the New Testament – that of reconciliation. Reconciliation shows the heart of God, and the church is called to reflect that heart. This echoes something Leon Morris himself emphasized decades ago (although in a broader sense). The Bible calls it demonstrating an unconventional wisdom and it is our overall mission. It leads to hope and enablement, impacting how we present and reflect the gospel in a needy world. It calls us to word and deed convergence and the importance of practice and tone in engaging culture alongside what we believe.SpeakerDarrell L. Bock is Senior Research Professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary in Dallas, Texas and serves as Executive Director of Cultural Engagement at the Hendricks Center for Christian Leadership. He has served on the board of Chosen People Ministries for over two decades. In addition, he serves on the board at Wheaton College, as well as on the boards of the Institute for Global Engagement, the Hope Center in Dallas, and Christians in Public Service. He is a fellow at the Kirby Laing Institute in Cambridge, England and a graduate of the University of Texas (B.A.), Dallas Theological Seminary (Th.M.), and the University of Aberdeen (Ph.D.). He has authored or edited over forty-five books, including a New York Times Best Seller in non-fiction, numerous works on Jesus and the gospels, and the recently released Cultural Intelligence: Living for God in a Diverse, Pluralistic World.  Study With RidleyIf you are interested in finding out more about studying at Ridley College or have any questions regarding any courses or units, we invite you to contact us via this link: https://www.ridley.edu.au/study/Ridley Chapel PodcastBe sure to check out our Ridley Chapel Sermons Podcast through this link: https://ridleychapel.transistor.fm/DonateThis podcast is made possible through the generous donations of our alumni and supporters. We welcome your partnership with us in our mission of equipping men and women for God's mission in our rapidly changing and increasingly complex world. If you'd like to contribute to our work, you can donate by clicking this link if you wish to donate: https://www.ridley.edu.au/donate/

Pastor Ty Neal Romans 13:1a Christians, respectfully submit to the governing authorities. Romans 13:1Judges 21:25Romans 13:2-5 “Conscience is a powerful reinforcement of the outward directions to submit to the state. But once conscience is brought in, there is a limit: what is against conscience cannot be done … Conscience at one and the same time obliges us to be obedient and sets a limit to that obedience.” Leon Morris 1 Peter 2:13-15Romans 12:1-21 Peter 2:16 “The Lord gives democracies the

Dear friendsMartin Luther described it as “the chief point, and the very central place of the Epistle, and of the whole Bible”. Australian biblical scholar Leon Morris went even further and called it “possibly the most important single paragraph ever written”.It's the paragraph we locate in our Bibles as Romans 3:21-26, and it's where we're up to in our podcast series walking through the opening chapters of this extraordinary book.In Romans so far, Paul has been slowly building up to this point. He started by saying that his gospel is the ‘power of God for salvation', and that it reveals the righteousness of God. But the only righteousness of God we have seen so far is his completely righteous and justified judgement against the universal rottenness of humanity. So if all of us—Jew, Greek, everybody—is under the power of sin, how can God be a righteous God and yet bring salvation to people like us?It's the age-old and very pressing question of how perfect justice can co-exist with grace and free forgiveness. And this world-changing paragraph has the answer.I hope you find our discussion of these momentous ideas as encouraging as we did in the conversation that follows.Your brotherTony This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.twoways.news/subscribe

We have been "living in Babylon" since we got kicked out of the Garden of Eden. It is a symbolic place where there is active resistance to God and His ways.  It is a picture of "civilized man apart from God; man in organized but godless community."  Leon Morris.The antidote to this is to MAKE ROOM FOR GOD.  You know the space: perhaps your greed,  your lust, your anger, or your pride.   Subscribe to listen tomorrow to find out what happens to those who don't make room.Apple Podcasts, Google podcasts, Spotify, CastBox, Podcast Addict.  We're on them all. Please share, like and subscribe.

Join the American Baptist Churches of Nebraska on the 2024 Lenten reflections, "Facing Jerusalem"   2024 Lent Readings February 18: Luke 9:51-62 February 25: Luke 13:22-30 March 3: Luke 17:11-19 March 10: Luke 18:31-34 March 17: Luke 19:11-27 March 24: Palm Sunday Luke 19:28-44 March 31: Easter Luke 24:1-12 April 7: Luke 24:13-34   Churches and Pastors First Baptist Church, Lincoln, Nebraska--Rev. Joy Martinez-Marshall United Faith Community Church, Valley, Nebraska--Rev. Scott Jones Gibbon Baptist Church, Gibbon, Nebraska--Pastor Taylor Shippy Benson Baptist Church, Omaha, Nebraska--Rev. TN Praveen Kumar American Baptist Churches of Nebraska, Omaha, Nebraska--Rev. Dr. Greg Mamula   Resources New International Commentary: Luke by Joel B. Green Bible Project: Luke Lent for Everyone by NT Wright Tyndale NT Commentary by Leon Morris

Join the American Baptist Churches of Nebraska on the 2024 Lenten reflections, "Facing Jerusalem"   2024 Lent Readings February 18: Luke 9:51-62 February 25: Luke 13:22-30 March 3: Luke 17:11-19 March 10: Luke 18:31-34 March 17: Luke 19:11-27 March 24: Palm Sunday Luke 19:28-44 March 31: Easter Luke 24:1-12 April 7: Luke 24:13-34   Churches and Pastors First Baptist Church, Lincoln, Nebraska--Rev. Joy Martinez-Marshall Arthur Baptist Church, Arthur, Nebraska--Rev. Blake Wilkes United Faith Community Church, Valley, Nebraska--Rev. Scott Jones American Baptist Churches of Nebraska, Omaha, Nebraska--Rev. Dr. Greg Mamula   Resources New International Commentary: Luke by Joel B. Green Bible Project: Luke Lent for Everyone by NT Wright Tyndale NT Commentary by Leon Morris  

John 13:36 Simon Peter said to Him, "Lord, where are You going?" Jesus answered him, "Where I am going you cannot follow Me now, but you shall follow Me afterward." 37 Peter said to Him, "Lord, why can I not follow You now? I will lay down my life for Your sake." 38 Jesus answered him, "Will you lay down your life for My sake? Most assuredly, I say to you, the rooster shall not crow till you have denied Me three times. 14:1"Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me. 2 "In My Father's house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.  Today's Scripture deals with the time in the upper room where Jesus and the disciples are having the last supper. Jesus is giving final instructions to them before He leaves earth so they can deal with all that life will throw at them.  Peter does not understand why he cannot go with Jesus; he has gone with Him everywhere for 3 years and does not want Jesus to leave him and the disciples. Peter goes so far as to say he will die for Jesus.  Jesus then tells Peter that he will deny Him three times before the rooster crows.  He then begins to tell them it is going to be alright and they need not be troubled.  He tells them to trust in Him and believe in Him as they already do in God the Father, because He is God and is equal with the Father. Jesus knows they are in a really bad place and He wants to assure them that it will be okay and that He is going to prepare a place for them so they can be with Him forever.  36 Simon Peter said to Him, "Lord, where are You going?" Jesus answered him, "Where I am going you cannot follow Me now, but you shall follow Me afterward." I think Peter was so shocked by our Lord's words in verse 33 that he just couldn't get past them. Peter “locked in” on what Jesus had said about going away. He wanted to know where Jesus was going and why he could not go with Him. He had followed Him all this way, all the way to Jerusalem. There was no turning back for him. He was committed to follow Jesus. And now Jesus is talking about going somewhere where he cannot follow? No way! Not for Peter. Jesus answers Peter's question indirectly, but even this oblique reply should have given Peter some comfort. Jesus was going somewhere where Peter could not follow Him now, but he will, Jesus said, “follow later.” That is not good enough for Peter. The word “now” is foremost in Peter's mind. He does not want to wait. He wants to follow Jesus now, wherever that might be. Peter does not seem to have a clue that Jesus is talking about going to the Father in heaven. He seems fixed on the idea that Jesus is going to change His place of residence on earth. Peter seems to be reasoning something like this: “Jesus says He's going somewhere, and I can't follow. He won't say where, and He won't say why. It must be the danger. He doesn't want me coming along because it's too dangerous. He doesn't think I can take it. Well, I'll let Him know that I can handle anything anyone dishes out …”  37 Peter said to Him, "Lord, why can I not follow You now? I will lay down my life for Your sake."  38 Jesus answered him, "Will you lay down your life for My sake? Most assuredly, I say to you, the rooster shall not crow till you have denied Me three times. (NKJV) In his excellent commentary on the Gospel of John, William Hendriksen points out some very informative facts about Peter's words here and in the Synoptic Gospels. Let me cite them: In connection with this boast a few additional facts must be noted: Peter spoke these words both before and after Christ's prediction which is recorded in 13:38, as is clear from Matt. 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31. Evidently, at the time, the words of Jesus, telling Peter that in spite of his boasting he would do the very thing which he promised so emphatically not to do, failed to register. Peter was too sure of himself. He used very emphatic language. Note the double negative in Matt. 26:35, so that the boast may be rendered: ‘I will certainly not deny thee.' And compare: ‘I will never be ensnared.' He spoke with great vehemence (Mark 14:31), evidently not at all pleased with the fact that Jesus had a different opinion. The passage here in John indicates that Peter's boast was not only negative ‘I will not be ensnared,' ‘I will not deny') but also positive: ‘My life for thee I will lay down.' Luke 22:33 supplies the commentary. His self-reliant exclamation was copied by the others: ‘Likewise also said all the disciples.' Not a single one among these disciples knew his own heart. Notice the three ‘all's': ‘You will all be ensnared (Mark 14:27), said Jesus. They all said, ‘Impossible' (for exact words see Matt. 26:35). ‘Then all the disciples left him and fled' (Matt. 26:56). Though not one of the disciples knew his own heart, yet while all were ensnared, Peter went much farther: he denied that he even knew the Master at all; see on 18:15-17; 18:25-27; cf. Matt. 26:69-75.[1] Here, then, is our first lesson, is it not? The one who is most confident that he will not fall is the most likely to fall. The second thing that I find emphasized in this text is that Jesus is in complete control. I believe the most important lesson in our text is about true love. This chapter virtually oozes with the love of our Lord for His disciples (e.g. 13:1). Placed neatly between our Lord's words on His imminent glorification and departure and His prophecy of Peter's denial are verses 34 and 35, which contain our Lord's instruction to His disciples to “love one another.” Was Peter's problem not a lack of love? I would simply remind you that after Peter's denial, our Lord's death, and His resurrection, Jesus addressed Peter directly about his love and his service (John 21). Love seems to be a major issue for Peter. The thing he passed over so abruptly in our text, he must deal with much more seriously at the end of this Gospel. As I close, let me do so with the words of the late Dr. John G. Mitchell: There are three measurements of a disciple. We had the first in chapter 8: ‘If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free' (8:31-32). The second measurement is here. ‘By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.' Remember, ‘love suffers long, and is kind' (1 Corinthians 13:4). The third measurement of discipleship is in chapter 15. ‘Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit; so shall ye be my disciples' (15:8). God grant that we Christians, we who love Him, we who have been redeemed by His precious blood, may wear the badge of discipleship. It is genuine love one for another and especially with frail, stumbling believers. My friend, this rules out all divisions. It rules out all bitterness and jealousy and envy among God's people. It rules out all pettiness and smallness and shallowness. How much are we to love each other? As Christ loves us. This is the measure of it.[2] So what are the implications of this scene for us today, do you think?  I think there are two big lessons.  Number one, we have to look beyond suffering in this world to the face of the Father. "This physical infirmity is nothing compared to what Christ endured not only physically but spiritually, in a way we can't comprehend."  And so, for me it's a very powerful reminder. You have got to look beyond the life now and the suffering you endure and try to look in the face of the Father that somehow He's going to use this. I don't know how. I don't like it, but that's faith and it's a requirement.  And secondly, I think when, not if, when we deny Christ, He extends mercy. He extends forgiveness. He gives many opportunities again and again and again for us to repent, but the issue becomes, will we, like Peter, go on record saying you know, "I love You. I love You. I love You. I'll do whatever You ask me to do. Forgive me for my sins."  And what a great way Christ restored Peter after his denial. And in some cases our denial is not the kind of active denial that Peter displayed where we say, "I don't know you."  It's a more passive kind of denial where we simply failed to respond in obedience. Where we don't do what we know we ought to do. That's denying Christ as well. Peter's question was only the first of several that the disciples proceeded to ask Jesus. This shows their bewilderment and discouragement. They should have been comforting Him in view of what lay ahead of Him (12:27; 13:21), but instead Jesus graciously proceeded to comfort them by clarifying what lay ahead of them. Jesus was troubled because of what lay before Him, and the Eleven were troubled (Gr. tarassestho) because they did not understand what lay before them. Jesus had just told them that He was going to leave them (13:33), but they had forsaken all to follow Him. Jesus had said that Peter would deny Him implying that some great trial was imminent (13:38 Trust my Presence 1 "Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me. Joh 14:27; 16:22-23 1Pe 1:8 whom having not seen you love. Though now you do not see Him, yet believing, you rejoice with joy inexpressible and full of glory, Probably in both clauses Jesus meant to give an imperative command: "Believe in God; believe also in me." This makes the most sense in the context, as most of the modern English translations have concluded. He meant, "Stop being troubled." Jesus was telling the disciples (plural "your") to trust in God and to trust in Him just as they trusted in God. This was a strong claim to deity and a great comfort. They could rely on what He was about to tell them as coming from God. The NASB translates the singular "heart" (Gr. kardia) that Jesus used collectively. The heart is metaphorically the center of personality. “Don't be distressed that I am going away, and that you cannot come with me right now. You believe in God, don't you? Can you see Him? Does He have a physical body that you can see and touch? No. I am going away, and you will not be able to see Me as you have for these past three years. I challenge you, therefore, to believe in Me in the same way that you believe in God the Father, as your unseen Lord. I will be just as real in My absence as I have ever been while dwelling among you.” The disciples don't want this to change. They want a God who is not only near them, but one who can be seen and touched.[i] It is better that Jesus returns to the Father, and that they begin to worship Him just as they do the Father. Strangely enough, while He will no longer be with them as He once was, they will come to know Him more intimately than they ever did while He was with them. What we read in verse 1 is not really that difficult for us, as Gentiles, but let us remember that our Lord's words would have stuck in the throat of a Jew. As early as John chapter 5, the Jews are violently reacting to our Lord's claim to be equal with God. The Jews did not (and do not) believe in the Trinity, and thus our Lord's exhortation to His disciples to believe in Him as they did the Father would sound blasphemous. Our Lord's claims and teaching are revolutionary to the Jews living in those times, including our Lord's disciples Let me sum up a very important principle which Jesus is teaching His disciples in the first verses of chapter 14: The relationship which Jesus sustained for a few years with His disciples was temporary and exceptional. In the light of His imminent death, burial, resurrection, and return to the Father in heaven, they must now relate to Him in a very different manner—the same manner in which they relate to God the Father. Carson writes, “Despite the clarity of Jesus' claim, the apostles cannot accept it at face value. Steeped in Jewish heritage in which monotheism played so strong a part, they could scarcely conceive of a Trinitarian monotheism like that which Christians came in time to confess. They were still maintaining a fundamental chasm between Jesus and the Father. Sad to tell, some of Jesus' most bitter opponents discerned what Jesus was claiming more swiftly than did his apostles. We seek to stone you, they said, ‘for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God' (10:33). But at this late date, Philip can still ask, ‘Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us' 14:8 The “Jesus” that Peter rebuked and resisted (Matthew 16:21-23; John 13:6-8) came as one whose deity and glory was “veiled” (not set aside), and who was not recognized for who He really was: Isaiah 53:1-4, NKJV 1 Who has believed our report? And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed? 2 For He shall grow up before Him as a tender plant, And as a root out of dry ground. He has no form or comeliness; And when we see Him, There is no beauty that we should desire Him. 3 He is despised and rejected by men, A Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief. And we hid, as it were, our faces from Him; He was despised, and we did not esteem Him. 4 Surely He has borne our griefs And carried our sorrows; Yet we esteemed Him stricken, Smitten by God, and afflicted. The glory which the disciples beheld was not evident by His physical appearance or earthly form. When Jesus was transfigured, His glory was seen by the inner three, but there His appearance changed or was transformed, so that they saw Him differently than they usually did. Jesus, as He appeared at His transfiguration, was like the One who appeared to John in Revelation. Those who desire to “turn back the clock” to the “good old days” when we would have been able to walk and talk with Jesus wish for something that never was, and can never be. When we see our Lord at His second coming, He will not look like the Jesus we read about in the Gospels. Let us therefore be careful not to wish for a return to the “good old days” of our Lord's presence as the disciples experienced it when they followed Him on this earth. Times have never been better for true believers than since our Lord's departure, and they will be even better yet when He returns! Trust my Promises  2 "In My Father's house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. Joh 13:33, 36 To be in the Father's house is to be in Christ The emphasis is not on the luxuriousness of the facility as much as its adequacy to accommodate all believers. Other revelation about heaven stresses its magnificence (e.g., Rev. 21:1—22:5). Another son would be married and he would attach another wing to the same house. Pretty soon they would marry and they would close it in almost so that the patio was in the middle and everyone lived around the patio...the father, the sons all the way around and the relatives. Now that's what it's talking about and it's not talking about tenement rooms, it's the idea of total dwelling, like a very full and complete apartment but all surrounding the same patio. Verse 16 of Revelation 21, "And the city lies foursquare and the length is as large as the breadth and he measured the city with the reed, twelve thousand furlongs. The length and the breadth and the height of it are equal." Now that's 1500 miles approximately, 1500 miles in every direction of a cube. An Australian engineer named Thomas calculated that would be two million, two hundred and fifty thousand square miles. To give you a reference point, London is 140 square miles. That city is two million, two hundred and fifty-thousand square miles. And at the ratio of population in London, it could hold a hundred thousand million people unglorified. Glorified, who knows? It could hold thirty times the population of our world right now and still have plenty of room to spare. Now that's many dwelling places. The bad news for the disciples (so far as they perceived it) was that Jesus was going away without them. The good news puts all this into perspective. He is going to His Father's house; He is going back to heaven. He is going there to prepare a place for His disciples, so that they can be with Him for all eternity. His Father's house has plenty of “dwelling places.” The word “mansions” is not really accurate, as both Leon Morris and D. A. Carson point out to us: The Greek word translated in the King James Version as ‘mansions' is found only here and in verse 23 in the New Testament. It is connected with the verb that means ‘to abide, dwell,' which is used quite often in chapter 15. It points to places to stay. The translation ‘mansions' is due to the fact that when Jerome translated the New Testament into Latin he used the word mansiones at this point, and the King James translators used the English word that came closest to that. But the Latin word means ‘lodging-places'; it refers to places to stay and not to elaborate houses.  The King James Version promises ‘many mansions' rather than ‘many rooms'; and no doubt the prospect of an eternal mansion is more appealing to many than the prospect of an eternal room. The word mansion has called forth quite a number of songs which picture eternal bliss in largely materialistic categories: ‘I've got a mansion just over the hilltop,' we sing, scarcely able to restrain our imaginations from counting the valets at our beck and call. ‘A tent or a cottage, why should I care? They're building a palace for me over there.' Here we even manage to upgrade ‘mansion' to ‘palace.'  Jesus had previously spoken of His departure as including His death, His resurrection, and His ascension (13:31-32, 36). Consequently He probably had all of that in view when He spoke about going to prepare a place for believers. His death and resurrection, as well as His ascension and return to heaven, would prepare a place for them. The place, the Father's house or heaven, already existed when Jesus spoke these words. He would not go to heaven to create a place for believers there. Rather all that He would do from His death to His return to heaven would constitute preparation for believers to join Him there ultimately. The idea that Jesus is presently constructing dwelling places for believers in heaven and has been doing so for 2,000 years is not what Jesus meant here. Jesus' going itself prepared the place.  3 "And if I go (When I go- 3rd class condition) and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also. Joh 12:26; 14:18, 28; 17:24; Ac 1:11; 1Th 4:17 Our knowledge of Heaven is limited as was Thomas' knowledge, John 14:5. Jesus told him that we don't need to know because He will personally come to get us. The question must occur to the reader, “But why is it taking Him so long to prepare this place for us? After all, doesn't the Father's house already have many dwelling places? Is Jesus taking up carpentry again, in heaven, and busily building rooms for His followers?” I think we know better than that. It only took seven days to create the heavens and the earth, so why is it taking Him so long to make a place ready for us? While on this earth, Jesus referred to the temple as His Father's house (John 2:16; 14:2). Now, it is apparent that He is speaking of His heavenly “home” and not the temple in Jerusalem. In heaven, there will be no temple, for God's place of dwelling will be with His saints: Revelation 21:1-4, 22-27 1 Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and earth had ceased to exist, and the sea existed no more. 2 And I saw the holy city—the new Jerusalem—descending out of heaven from God, made ready like a bride adorned for her husband. 3 And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying: “Look! The residence of God is among men and women. He will live among them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God. 4 He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death will not exist anymore—or mourning, or crying, or pain; the former things have ceased to exist.” … 22 Now I saw no temple in the city, because the Lord God All-Powerful is its temple, and the Lamb. 23 The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it, because the glory of God lights it up, and its lamp is the Lamb. 24 The nations will walk by its light and the kings of the earth will bring their grandeur into it. 25 Its gates will never be closed during the day (for there will be no night there). 26 They will bring the grandeur and the wealth of the nations into it, 27 but nothing ritually unclean will ever enter into it, nor anyone who does what is detestable or practices falsehood, but only those whose names are written in the Lamb's book of life. Compare this passage in Revelation with these texts from Ephesians and 1 Peter: Ephesians 2:19-22 19 So then you are no longer foreigners and non-citizens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of God's household, 20 because you have been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the cornerstone. 21 In him the whole building, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord, 22 in whom you also are being built together into a dwelling place of God in the Spirit. 1 Peter 2:4-10 4 So as you come to him, a living stone rejected by men but chosen and priceless in God's sight, 5 you yourselves as living stones are built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood and to offer spiritual sacrifices that are acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. 6 For it says in Scripture, “See, I lay in Zion a stone, a chosen and priceless cornerstone, and whoever believes in him will never be put to shame.” 7 So you who believe see his value, but for those who do not believe, the stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone, 8 and a stumbling-stone and a rock to trip over. They stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do. 9 But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people of his own, so that you may proclaim the virtues of the one who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light. 10 You once were not a people, but now you are God's people. You were shown no mercy but now you have received mercy. If the “place” our Lord is preparing is this heavenly temple, a house made up of living stones (saints), then this “house” will not be completed until the last of His saints are brought to faith. God is delaying the outpouring of His wrath on guilty sinners, destined to condemnation, so that He might manifest His grace by saving those who are His “objects of mercy.” The punishment of guilty sinners is delayed until the full measure of those prepared for glory are saved. This, in my opinion, is what our Lord is presently preparing—a holy temple, a congregation of believers in whom, and among whom, He will dwell for all eternity. When the disciples comprehend what Jesus is saying here, they will look on His “absence” in an entirely different light. It is better for them that He leave them, for a time, so that they may dwell with Him for all eternity. Since Jesus spoke of returning from heaven to take believers there, the simplest   explanation   seems   to   be   that   He   was   referring   to   an eschatological bodily return (cf. Acts 1:11). Though these disciples undoubtedly did not realize it at the time, Jesus was evidently speaking of His return for them at the Rapture rather than His return at the Second Coming. Other Scripture clarifies that when Jesus returns at the Rapture it will be to call His own to heaven immediately (1 Thess. 4:13-18).479  In contrast, when He returns at the Second Coming it will be to remain on the earth and reign for 1,000 years (Rev. 19:11—20:15). It is important to note that Jesus did not say that the purpose of this future coming to receive believers is so that He can be where they are—on the earth. Instead, He said that the purpose is so that they can be where He is—in heaven." This the purpose of the departure and the return of Christ. And this is heaven for the believer to be where Jesus is and with him forever.[ii] Here in John 14 the Lord gives a new and unique revelation; He speaks of something which no prophet had promised, or even could promise. Where is it written that this Messiah would come and instead of gathering His saints into an earthly Jerusalem, would take them to the Father's house, to the very place where He is? It is something new. . . . He speaks then of a coming which is not for the deliverance of the Jewish remnant, not of a coming to establish His kingdom over the earth, not of a coming to judge the nations, but a coming which concerns only His own."  The emphasis in this prediction is on the comfort that reunion with the departed Savior guarantees (cf. 1 Thess. 4:18). Jesus will personally come for His own, and He will receive them to Himself. They will also be with Him where He has been (cf. 17:24). Jesus was stressing His personal concern for His disciples' welfare. His return would be as certain as His departure. The greatest blessing of heaven will be our ceaseless personal fellowship with the Lord Jesus there, not the splendor of the place. Trust My person  4 "And where I go you know, and the way you know." Jesus could say that the Eleven knew the way to the place where He was going because He had revealed that faith in Him led to eternal life (3:14-15). This had been a major theme of His teaching throughout His ministry. However, they did not understand Him as they should have (v. 5). These four verses answered Peter's initial question about where Jesus was going (13:36).  5 Thomas said to Him, "Lord, we do not know where You are going, and how can we know the way?" 14:5     Thomas   voiced   the   disciples'   continuing   confusion   about   Jesus' destination.  Apparently the “Father's house” did not clearly identify heaven to them. Without a clear understanding of the final destination they could not be sure of the route there. Thomas' question was a request for an unambiguous explanation of Jesus' and their destination and how He and they would get there. Jesus has just told His disciples that He is going to “His Father's house” so that they can be with Him there. He then tells them that “they know the way where He is going” (verse 4). Thomas chooses to differ with His Master. He says, in effect, “Master, we don't know your destination, so how can we possibly know the way to get there?” But Thomas was wrong. They did know where Jesus was going. They had simply forgotten it, or at least put it out of their minds. Over and over again Jesus had told them that He had come from the Father in heaven, and that He was going to return there: “For I have come down from heaven not to do my own will but the will of the one who sent me” (6:38).  John 14:6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me. Have you trusted Him as your Savior? He can Save you if You ask Him based on His death, burial, and resurrection for your sins. Believe in Him for forgiveness of your sins today.  hisloveministries.podbean.com #HLMSocial hisloveministries.net https://www.instagram.com/hisloveministries1/?hl=en https://www.facebook.com/His-Love-Ministries-246606668725869/?tn-str=k*F https://www.paypal.com/fundraiser/110230052184687338/charity/145555   “And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”  -John 8:32    The world is trying to solve earthly problems that can only be solved with heavenly solutions. [1] William Hendriksen, Exposition of the Gospel According to John, 2 vols. (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1953-1954), vol. 2, pp. 255-256. [2] John G. Mitchell, with Dick Bohrer, An Everlasting Love: A Devotional Study of the Gospel of John (Portland: Multnomah Press, 1982), pp. 261-262. [i] This seems to be the case with Mary Magdalene as well, as can be seen in John 20:11-18, especially verse 17. [ii] Robertson, A. (1997). Word Pictures in the New Testament (Jn 14:3). Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems.

In episode 2 Chapter 5 "Inspiring Stories", host of The Heart Matters podcast Louis (Ibn Leon) Morris, shares his story of how Allah (God) guided him to the way of life Islam while in prison. He shares how he had reverence for the Qur'an due to a childhood experience, and then how the Qur'an inspired him to become Muslim in young adulthood. Also, Louis is looking for Muslims who want to come on the podcast and share their inspiring Islamic story. If any Muslims are interested, please email Louis at: spiritualcoaching.150@gmail.com Get bonus content on Patreon Become a member so we can continue to bring you content and interviews that nourish the mind and heart. It is our mission to bring good to the world by educating ourselves and others from the inside out. Truly, the heart matters. https://plus.acast.com/s/the-heart-matters-with-life-coach-louis-morris. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In episode 2 Chapter 5 "Inspiring Stories", host of The Heart Matters podcast Louis (Ibn Leon) Morris, shares his story of how Allah (God) guided him to the way of life Islam while in prison. He shares how he had reverence for the Qur'an due to a childhood experience, and then how the Qur'an inspired him to become Muslim in young adulthood. Also, Louis is looking for Muslims who want to come on the podcast and share their inspiring Islamic story. If any Muslims are interested, please email Louis at: spiritualcoaching.150@gmail.com Get bonus content on Patreon Become a member so we can continue to bring you content and interviews that nourish the mind and heart. It is our mission to bring good to the world by educating ourselves and others from the inside out. Truly, the heart matters. https://plus.acast.com/s/the-heart-matters-with-life-coach-louis-morris. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

We're on the rundown to Christmas, so we've got Caroline Jones & the Trenwiths doing a Christmas song, bluegrass style (of course!) as well as some classic bluegrass from the Bluegrass Album Band, the Stanley Brothers and the Spinney Brothers. Jeanette Williams, Mike Compton, the Bluegrass Expedition, Leon Morris and High Fidelity also get chance to present some music. Definitely worth tuning in!

Ted asks about how my struggles in my Christian faith and walk reflects on my eternal salvation. Rod talks about the story in Scripture about the Pharisee and the Publican, and which man went home justified, and studying words connected to the cross during the church year season of Lent. Produced by: Rick Ritchie SHOW NOTES: “The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross”, by Leon Morris - https://www.amazon.com/Apostolic-Preaching-Cross-Leon-Morris/dp/080281512X “The Gospel for Those Broken by the Church”, (original recording) by Rod Rosenbladt - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jj2bm5-PMAI “The Gospel for Those Broken by the Church”, PDF TEXT https://1517-dadrods-assets.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/Rosenbladt-The+Gospel+For+Those+Broken+By+The+Church.pdf “The Gospel for Those Broken by the Church”, PDF TEXT - Booklet form https://1517-dadrods-assets.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/Rosenbladt-The+Gospel+For+Those+Broken+By+The+Church-BOOKLET.pdf ** WHAT'S NEW FROM 1517 ** HWSS Hosted Livestream: Tune in Oct 26 to Oct 28th Though 1517's 2023 annual national conference, themed “C.S. Lewis & the Untamed God”, is sold out, you can join the livestream online and enjoy the content wherever you are! Don't miss it! https://www.1517.org/livestream FREE 2023 Advent Resources This Advent season, 1517 presents “The Clothing of the King”—a new free resource for churches that walks your congregation through the divine wardrobe God provides for his people. This all-in-one package includes a midweek Advent and Christmas Sermon Series for pastors to use in their congregations as well as music helps, original and suggested hymns, presenter slides, and more. https://www.1517.org/advent Tickets are now on sale for the 2024 Here We Still Stand Regional Conference in Northwest Arkansas! Join us May 3rd and 4th as we gather again at the iconic Meteor Theater in Bentonville, Arkansas, and celebrate the boundless grace of God in the gospel of Jesus. The 2024 theme will be “Grace and Peace in Christ”—GET YOUR TICKETS while they're still available! http://www.1517.org/hwssnwa “All Charges Dropped, Vol. 2”, by Haroldo Camacho, available from 1517 Publishing Dive into the pages of the second volume of “All Charges Dropped”, where the author Haroldo Camacho, a Certified Court Interpreter, invites you into the gripping world of courtrooms. But these stories also lead you to something deeper—the ultimate courtroom of God's judgment seat. Through each tale, you'll find a common thread: "Your sins are forgiven." As you journey through these stories, you'll witness a shift from human justice to divine grace, where guilt is replaced by freedom and forgiveness reigns supreme. https://shop.1517.org/products/all-charges-dropped-devotional-narratives-from-earthly-courtrooms-to-the-throne-of-grace-volume-2 === Support 1517 - https://www.1517.org/donate https://www.1517.org/videos-playlist/talks-with-dad-rod Explore more 1517 podcasts - https://www.1517.org/podcasts/ === https://gab.com/talkswithdadrod https://www.facebook.com/talkswithdadrod/ https://twitter.com/TalkswithDadRod https://www.instagram.com/talkswithdadrod/ Talks with Dad Rod playlist on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLJDWGbhcNf-kTljFKeMHg3j1qqDsV3LGR Watch this episode on YouTube: https://youtu.be/Y1XbM7qIsmo

John 10:29 "My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father's hand. 30 "I and My Father are one." 31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him. 32 Jesus answered them, "Many good works I have shown you from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?" 33 The Jews answered Him, saying, "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God." 34 Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your law, 'I said, "You are gods"'? 35 "If He called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), 36 "do you say of Him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, 'You are blaspheming,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God'? 37 "If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me; 38 "but if I do, though you do not believe Me, believe the works, that you may know and believe that the Father is in Me, and I in Him." 39 Therefore they sought again to seize Him, but He escaped out of their hand. 40 And He went away again beyond the Jordan to the place where John was baptizing at first, and there He stayed. 41 Then many came to Him and said, "John performed no sign, but all the things that John spoke about this Man were true." 42 And many believed in Him there.      In this great section of Scripture we see the eternal security of the believer expressed again as Jesus says, No one is greater than God, so they cannot take anything away from God that belongs to Him.  Then Jesus tells them again that He is one with the Father.  In every way possible Jesus is like God the Father because He is God in human flesh. Col 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. 17 And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. These verses tell us that Jesus is God, He created everything, He holds it all together, and He is the preeminent one (the one who has first place in everything).  Then the Pharisees want to stone Jesus and He asks them why, for what good work do you stone Me.  They understood He was saying He was God, so they say it is not for a good work, but because you claim to be God.  Jesus tries to tell them again He is God and came from the Father, but they still won't believe and so they try to seize Him and He escapes from them because it is not time for Him to die yet.  He then goes to where John had baptized and many believe He is the Christ and are saved at that location. “Snatch” (“ravenous wolves, robbers”). This is a fitting word here for the same verb is used in 10:12, “the wolf attacks” (lit., “snatches away”). The sheep feel secure (3:16; 6:39; 17:12; 18:9). 29 "My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father's hand. The greatness of the Father, not of the flock, is the ground of the safety of the flock. He makes it very clear that the salvation and (eternal) security of the sheep are not the result of our sheepish efforts, but rather the sovereign will and working of God.[1] The Father chose us for salvation and gave us to the Son. It is the No one overrules His will. No one overpowers Him. No one nullifies what He has achieved. No one takes away those He has purchased. Jesus had promised this security in Galilee (6:37, 39). No wolf, no thief, no bandit, no hireling, no demon, not even the devil can pluck the sheep out of my hand. Colossians 3:3–4 (ESV) 3 For you have died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God. 4 When Christ who is your life appears, then you also will appear with him in glory. It is obvious that the only one who can separate us from God's love is ourselves (cf. Rom. 8:38–39; Gal. 5:2–4).  30 "I and My Father are one." Not one person but one essence or nature. Colossians 2:9 (ESV) 9 For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, They have the closest possible unity of purpose. Jesus' will is identical to the Father's regarding the salvation of His sheep. And yet absolute identity of wills involves identity of nature. Jesus and the Father are One in will (and also in nature for both are God; John 1:1, John 5:18, John 8:58, 10:18 He meant that He and the Father were one in their action. This explanation also harmonized with the context since Jesus had said that He would keep His sheep safe (v. 28) and His Father would keep them safe (v. 29). The Jews had asked Jesus for a plain statement about His Messiah ship. Jesus gave them far more, a claim that He fully and completely carried out the Father's will that strongly hinted at Jesus' deity This statement is the climax of Christ's claims concerning the relation between the Father and himself (the Son). They stir the Pharisees to uncontrollable anger. 31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him. It is not the word that is used before (ch.8:59), but great stones, stones that were a load, such as they used in stoning malefactors. They brought them from some place at a distance, as it were preparing things for his execution without any judicial process; as if he were convicted of blasphemy upon the notorious evidence of the fact, which needed no further trial.  32 Jesus answered them, "Many good works I have shown you from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?" it was not for His works but for His words that they were going to kill Him. The reader should realize by now that Jesus was exactly who He claimed to be, one with the Father and more than a mere mortal. A man was not making Himself out to be God, but God had made Himself a man (1:1, 14, 18).  33 The Jews answered Him, saying, "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God." The response of the Jews to our Lord's challenge is amazing. In effect, they are saying, “Oh, we don't look at your words in relation to your works; we view them separately.” Only those who are great hypocrites find this feat easy to accomplish. Their words and their works are not related (Matthew 23:1-3), and so they do not care that Jesus' words and works are completely consistent. They are not about to be confused with the facts when their minds are already made up. They conclude (wrongly, of course) that Jesus is merely a man, and thus His claim to be God must be blasphemy. In their minds, He deserves to die. If Jesus did not really claim to be God, He could easily have corrected the Jews' misunderstanding here. The fact that He did not is further proof that the Jews correctly understood that He was claiming to be God.  34 Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your law, 'I said, "You are gods"'?  35 "If He called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), The psalm ends: “Arise, O God, judge the earth; For You shall inherit all nations.” Can they not see what both our Lord and this psalm are saying? This psalm is not just a text Jesus has chosen to stump His adversaries. It is not a cute trick, which shames those who would pose trick questions to Messiah. He is the fulfillment of this psalm, as they are. They are the “gods” whom God is coming to judge. They are the “gods” who will die like men; He is the God who will die to save His sheep, only to rise again from the dead. This text says it all, but they cannot see it, for they are blind, while He is the light of the world. They cannot hear, for He is not their shepherd. His critics. He wanted them to see that the divine terms that He was using to describe Himself were terms that the Old Testament itself also used of human beings. They could not logically accuse Him of blasphemy because the Father had set Him aside and sent Him into the world with a special mission. He was a legitimate Son of God for this reason. If your judges could be called gods, are you going to call Me a blasphemer because I say I'm the Son of God when your judges were here on earth and the word came to them, and I came from there with the Word?  Don't I deserve even a greater title?"  As the Jews had sanctified their temple after its desecration by Antiochus Epiphanies, so God had sanctified His Son. The Jews celebrated the sanctification of their physical temple with the Feast of Dedication, but they were unwilling to accept the spiritual temple that replaced it, namely, Jesus.  36 "do you say of Him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, 'You are blaspheming,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God'?  37 "If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me;  38 "but if I do, though you do not believe Me, believe the works, that you may know and believe that the Father is in Me, and I in Him."  39 Therefore they sought again to seize Him, but He escaped out of their hand. The response of the Jews to our Lord's challenge is amazing. In effect, they are saying, “Oh, we don't look at your words in relation to your works; we view them separately.” Only those who are great hypocrites find this feat easy to accomplish. Their words and their works are not related (Matthew 23:1-3), and so they do not care that Jesus' words and works are completely consistent. They are not about to be confused with the facts when their minds are already made up. They conclude (wrongly, of course) that Jesus is merely a man, and thus His claim to be God must be blasphemy. In their minds, He deserves to die.  40 And He went away again beyond the Jordan to the place where John was baptizing at first, and there He stayed. John presented Jesus' departure from Jerusalem as the result of official rejection of Him. The event had symbolic significance that the evangelist probably intended. Jesus withdrew the opportunity for salvation from the people there because they refused to accept His gracious offer of salvation.  Evidently, Jesus went from Jerusalem back to Bethany in Perea on the east side of the Jordan River where the Jewish rulers had no authority to pursue Him (cf. 1:28).  41 Then many came to Him and said, "John performed no sign, but all the things that John spoke about this Man were true."  42 And many believed in Him there. It is not yet His appointed time to die for His sheep, and so Jesus retreats to the more desolate and distant places along the Jordan river, which John the Baptist used to frequent in his ministry. We do not know exactly where this was, and likely, our Lord's enemies do not know either. That is the point of His retreat. While our Lord's enemies do not come to Him there, many others find Him in this place. It would seem that Jesus performed a number of miracles there from the words of those who compare His ministry with that of John: “John performed no miraculous sign, but everything John said about this man was true!” These words are recorded by John here for a reason that is very much related to the point of this passage. I have suggested that while the theme of shepherding is prominent, so is the relationship between our Lord's words and His works. My point is this: Many of the Jews believed that John the Baptist was a true prophet (see Matthew 21:26). They believed his words, even though he did not perform any miraculous works. And yet the Jews in Jerusalem (especially the religious leaders) will not believe Jesus' words, even though He does many miraculous works. What a contrast John draws between these “Jordan River” Jews and the sophisticated Jews of Jerusalem. In contrast to our Lord's rejection in Jerusalem, many are believing in Him who come to Him at the Jordan River. And so we see that those who are His sheep have more than enough reason to believe, and that those who are not will never have enough evidence to believe. First, this text strongly teaches the sovereignty of God, especially as it relates to the salvation and the security of His sheep. Those who resist such teaching should consider the fact that the doctrine of God's sovereignty is not a flattering one. Is this not the principle reason we are inclined to reject it? The doctrine of God's sovereignty glorifies God, and not men. It stresses His work, and not our works. It is this very teaching that the Jewish opponents of our Lord react to so strongly. Does this not serve to warn those who would seek to reject this teaching today, here in our text? This does not mean that the Bible ignores human responsibility, but it does mean that our salvation and our security are in His hands, and not ours. For that we should rejoice, not resist. Second, this text reminds us of the necessary link between what we say and what we do, between our profession and our practice. Jesus constantly challenges His adversaries to consider the relationship between His words and His works. He also rebukes the Pharisees for their lack of consistency in these matters. Let us take heed. Let us be sure that what we say we believe is also what we behave. Third, this text says much about leaders and leadership. It reminds us that leaders have been given their place of authority to carry out their roles as God's agents. It certainly indicates to us that those of us under such divinely ordained authority should submit to it, as to the Lord. But in addition, the message is loud and clear that those leaders who fail to fulfill their mission as “good” shepherds will someday stand before the Great Shepherd and give account for their deeds. In this day when leaders seem to be getting away with murder, let us never forget this truth.      Mark 8:36 "For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?  John 14:6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me. Have you trusted Him as your Savior? He can Save you if You ask Him based on His death, burial, and resurrection for your sins. Believe in Him for forgiveness of your sins today.  hisloveministries.podbean.com #HLMSocial hisloveministries.net https://www.instagram.com/hisloveministries1/?hl=en https://www.facebook.com/His-Love-Ministries-246606668725869/?tn-str=k*F https://www.paypal.com/fundraiser/110230052184687338/charity/145555  The world is trying to solve earthly problems that can only be solved with heavenly solutions. [1] Morris puts it this way: “It is one of the precious things about the Christian faith that our continuance in eternal life depends not on our feeble hold on Christ, but on His firm grip on us.” Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1971) p. 521.

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.

"A church can continue only for so long on a loveless course. Continuing on that course means ceasing to be a church. Its lampstand is removed." —Leon Morris

Judges 6:14a (NIRV)“The Lord turned to Gideon. He said to him, “You are strong.”Angie teaches on the Lord's call on Gideon's life and how God can turn our weakness into strength.https://livesteadyon.com/Email Angie at: steadyonpodcast@gmail.comFacebook @livesteadyonInstagram @angiebaughman421Grab freebies and subscribe to the weekly Steady On newsletter at: https://livesteadyon.com/live-steady-on-newsletter/You can download a blank study sheet here:https://livesteadyon.com/sbs-blank-study-sheet/Interested in the Step By Step Bible study method? Download the FREE masterclass here: https://livesteadyon.com/live-steady-on-stepbystepmasterclass/Logos Software https://www.logos.com/Enduring Word Commentary https://enduringword.com/WordHippo https://www.wordhippo.com/BibleGateway https://www.biblegateway.com/Blue Letter Bible https://www.blueletterbible.org/Daniel Isaac Block, Judges, Ruth, vol. 6, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 261.Arthur E. Cundall and Leon Morris, Judges and Ruth: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 7, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1968), 104Angie mentionedSong, “Another in the Fire” by Hillsong UNITEDSong, “Nobody” by Casting CrownsTheme musicHeartwarming by Kevin MacLeodLink: https://incompetech.filmmusic.io/song/3864-heartwarmingLicense: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ The details for the Steady On University beta team can be found here: https://livesteadyon.com/sou-beta/Preroll music: Tomorrow Comes Soon by Dreamlamp

Welcome aboard a transformative journey as we venture into the profound concept of joining Jesus in the harvest. We're inviting you to envision our very own Bay Area, Tri-Cities of Fremont, Union City, Newark, and San Jose as a plentiful harvest. This is a call to arms, a call to gather people from all walks of life, to guide them away from sin and towards placing their faith in Jesus. As we walk together, we'll delve deep into the compassionate view of Jesus, a view that sees beyond mere spiritual needs. He sees us as complex beings tangled in a web of physical, spiritual, emotional, psychological, and social needs. What does it mean to care for someone holistically, the way Jesus does? We'll explore this together and reflect on how we, as followers of Jesus, can emulate this profound empathy. Finally, we'll reflect on the powerful words of Leon Morris as we grapple with the role and importance of the church's mission. Jesus's words echo in our hearts - the harvest is plentiful but laborers are few. The question we ask ourselves is, will we be those laborers? Will we take up the call to teach, proclaim, heal, and ultimately be shaped by Jesus's mission? So let's roll up our sleeves, let's get our hands dirty and let's join Jesus in the harvest, working tirelessly until Christ makes all things new.

Episode 43 of What Gives? the Jewish philanthropy podcast from Jewish Funders Network. Rabbi Leon Morris, President of the Pardes Institute of Jewish Studies, talks to JFN President and CEO Andres Spokoiny about his essay in Sources, "In Defense of Surrender in Liberal Jewish Life." Morris argues that a Jewish response to individual agency having eclipsed every other important value is necessary, and can be done through a sense of surrender (of our defenses, our time, and our notion of isolated individualism) to community, rather than submission to authority. Leon talks about what he finds exciting about pluralistic spaces, how thoroughly modern Jews are having trouble finding places for Jewishness in their lives, the enormous relevance that traditional texts still have for our modern time, and what gives him hope for the Jewish future. Works referenced in this episode: In Defense of Surrender in a Liberal Jewish Life Kaddish, Leon Wieseltier (1998) Judaism in a Digital Age, Danny Schiff (2023)

The Leon Morris Lecture in NT Studies 2022The Problem Of Evil And Jesus: An Answer I Can Live WithGuest Speaker: The Rev'd Graham ColeDescriptionThe existence of evil in the world is undeniable. The media gives us access to local and global news of violence, suffering, and death 24/7. People suffer and die, friends suffer and die, loved ones suffer and die. For some, their knowledge and experience of evil is enough to justify unbelief in the existence and/or goodness of God. In this lecture, the problem of evil is faced in the light of the coming of Jesus Christ into the world. He is the God who became human and wept with individuals and even over a whole city. Whether God can suffer per se is a much-debated question, but that Jesus in his humanity knew suffering from the inside and experienced evil perpetrated against him is undeniable. If there is a believable Christian answer to the problem of evil, Jesus will be at the centre to it.Thank you for listening to the Ridley College Podcast, brought to you by Ridley College. If you enjoyed this episode, please consider subscribing and liking our podcast.Ridley Chapel Podcast Be sure to check out our Ridley Chapel Sermons Podcast through this link: https://ridleychapel.transistor.fm/  Donate This podcast is made possible through the generous donations of our alumni and supporters. We welcome your partnership with us in our mission of equipping men and women for God's mission in our rapidly changing and increasingly complex world. If you'd like to contribute to our work, you can donate by clicking this link if you wish to donate: https://www.ridley.edu.au/donate/ 

The Leon Morris Lecture 2021Pray without CeasingGuest Speaker: Dr Andrew MaloneDescriptionAndrew explored the role of prayer in the two letters written to the Thessalonians by Paul and his missionary team. Arguably more than in any other Pauline correspondence, prayer dictates the shape of these writings. Many of the prayers are offered as models for next-generation believers to emulate, especially the prayers of thankfulness. They provide us with clear evidence of how the earliest Christians readily addressed their prayers to Jesus as well as to God.Thank you for listening to the Ridley College Podcast, brought to you by Ridley College. If you enjoyed this episode, please consider subscribing and liking our podcast. Ridley Chapel PodcastBe sure to check out our Ridley Chapel Sermons Podcast through this link: https://ridleychapel.transistor.fm/DonateThis podcast is made possible through the generous donations of our alumni and supporters. We welcome your partnership with us in our mission of equipping men and women for God's mission in our rapidly changing and increasingly complex world. If you'd like to contribute to our work, you can donate by clicking this link if you wish to donate: https://www.ridley.edu.au/donate/

The Leon Morris Lecture 2020Jesus Among the Gods: Early Christology and the Ancient Theologies of DivinityGuest Speaker: The Rev'd Dr Mike BirdDescriptionThis year's Leon Morris Lecture will feature our very own the Rev'd Dr Mike Bird on the topic of Jesus among the gods: Early Christology and the Ancient Theologies of Divinity.Thank you for listening to the Ridley College Podcast, brought to you by Ridley College. If you enjoyed this episode, please consider subscribing and liking our podcast. Ridley Chapel Podcast Be sure to check out our Ridley Chapel Sermons Podcast through this link: https://ridleychapel.transistor.fm/  Donate This podcast is made possible through the generous donations of our alumni and supporters. We welcome your partnership with us in our mission of equipping men and women for God's mission in our rapidly changing and increasingly complex world. If you'd like to contribute to our work, you can donate by clicking this link if you wish to donate: https://www.ridley.edu.au/donate/

Join me for a weekly run down of the top ten Gospel songs according to The Radio Music News Top Ten Southern Gospel Songs from weekly charts with your host - Danny Hensley. This week features mid-program songs from Billy Swinson, A.J.Lee and Leon Morris. Join us at 91.7 FM Community Radio and streaming around the world at www.sbbradio.org or www.sbbradio.net and our station quick link at station.voscast.com/5c2bf0e47fbe8/ We're also on live365 under Southern Branch Bluegrass

This week we feature guitar player and singer Leon Morris.  Leon has been well-known in the Washington, DC area bluegrass scene for decades and Putuxent Music recently released an album titled The Best of Leon Morris.  We talk with Leon about his long career in bluegrass music and the new album.

"There is but one door to a fold, and sheep and shepherds alike must enter by this door. There is no other way for them. But Jesus does provide the way." —Leon Morris

Extra Notes Some final instructions and encouragements All are an expression of grace, or the results of receiving the grace of God. 'admonish' - '‘It denotes the word of admonition which is designed to correct while not provoking or embittering' (J. Behm, TDNT, iv, p. 1021). It seems to carry a suggestion of blame for wrongdoing (cf. ‘warn those who are idle', v. 14) and is aimed at correcting the wrong. Best sees it as addressed to the will rather than the mind.' Tyndale "while its tone is brotherly, it is big-brotherly." 166. Leon Morris NITCOTNT See 1 Cor. 4:14.         * 'highest'             * 'hyperekperissou is a very forceful word (see on 3:10), called by Findlay a ‘triple Pauline intensive' meaning ‘beyond-exceeding-abundantly'' Tyndale         * 'love'             * agape - not affection, but much more. Not only respect your leaders, but love them. They are primarily there not to perform a function for your benefit, but to share in Christian love with you.        * help the weak             * spiritually weak, Rom 14; 1 Cor 8. "The thought is that it is good for weak souls to know that there are others who are with them, who will cleave to them in the difficult moment, who are not forsake them." 169 Leon Morris             * help - 'The verb antechesthe (help) is used of holding on to something, cleaving to a person (cf. Luke 16:13). The weak need to feel that they are not alone and strong Christians should ‘hold on to them' and give them the support they require.' Tyndale         * Patient - 1 Cor 13:4. "It is more important for him that he be able to render them some service than that his ego should be satisfied." 169 Leon Morris         * 'pays back'             * Rom. 12:17; 1 Pet. 3:9             * No retaliation whether to external threats (causing suffering) or internal injustice (harshness of leaders). Jesus is our inspiration in this - 1 Pet. 2:23.     * v16         * Rejoicing is needed especially when there is conflict in church relationships. Indeed, strange, though it may seem, it is possible to rejoice matter what is going on. Additionally, if we work through these issues of relationship disharmony, we will find the effort and repentance rewarded with great joy. This joy is so important because it is so different to that of the world. That in the world is dependent on circumstances, that in the kingdom is dependent on our Lord. "They thought more of their Lord than of their difficulties; more of their spiritual riches in Christ than of their poverty on Earth; more of their glorious future when the Lord should come again than of their unhappy past."         * See Phil 4.4.  Source of joy is God, not circumstances, Matt 5:12. Lk 10.20.         * Strange as it may seem, affliction and deep joy go together ([[2 Cor. 6:10]]; [[2 Cor. 12:10]]). Paul rejoiced in tribulations ([[Rom. 5:3]]; [[Col. 1:24]]; cf. [[Acts 5:41]]; [[Acts 16:25]]).         * A mark of the early church. A joy that cannot be stolen, [[John 16:22]]. Supernaturally provided, [[Galatians 5:22-23]], [[Romans 14:17]].     * v17         * See [[Luke 18:1]]; [[Romans 12:12]]; [[Ephesians 6:18]]. A spirit of prayer more than a perpetual speaking. At times words will break out - as they do in Paul's epistles.         * It is our habit to look away from our circumstances, difficult as they are, to deliberately contemplate the presence of God.         * "Though it is quite impossible for us always to be uttering the words of prayer it is possible and necessary that we should always be living in the spirit of prayer." Leon Morris NICOTNT 173             * We cannot control our circumstances, but we do not have to be controlled by them.         * ‘this is God's will' - rejoice, pray, give thanks. A mantra for the Christian life?         * Do not grieve the Spirit, Ephesians 4:30. Live in the way I have taught you, as pleases God, and you will not be quenching the Spirit.         * 'contempt' - strong word         * ‘reject' - see Romans 12:9. Strong word. Same as 1 Thess. 4:3         * 'of peace':             * cf. Rom. 15:33; Romans 16:20; 2 Cor. 13:11; Phil. 4:9; 2 Thess. 3:16.         * ‘sanctify'             * God sanctifies us - the power; Ephesians 5:26 - Spirit; Romans 15:16 - Son (and Word, John 17:17). Conclusion - Which leader can you express love to ? - What will help you to “ Rejoice always, pray continually, give thanks in all circumstances”? Pick one a week? - Will you use one of Paul's prayers as a template? - What has stood out to you most from the book of Thessalonians?  Please add your comments on this week's topic. We learn best when we learn in community.  Do you have a question about teaching the Bible? Is it theological, technical, practical? Send me your questions or suggestions. Here's the email: [malcolm@malcolmcox.org](mailto:malcolm@malcolmcox.org).  If you'd like a copy of my free eBook on spiritual disciplines, “How God grows His people”, sign up at my website: http://[www.malcolmcox.org](http://www.malcolmcox.org/).  Please pass the link on, subscribe, leave a review.  “Worship the LORD with gladness; come before him with joyful songs.” (Psalms 100:2 NIV11)  God bless, Malcolm

No complacency, room for growth Focus on purity and love 1. Purity     - Immorality was as part of the culture then as now. Expected, allowed. “Continence was regarded as an unreasonable demand on a man. Leon Morris, NICOTNT     - "Pagan temples regularly doubled as brothels, and sexual practices of all sorts were at least tolerated if not actively encouraged within the society as a whole." Wright, Everyone     - “Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a person commits are outside the body, but whoever sins sexually, sins against their own body. Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honour God with your bodies.” (1 Corinthians 6:18–20 NIV11)     - Self-control - about habits, not instances     - ‘a holy life' - it is possible. Reassuring! We breath ‘holy air'. 2. Love     - God-taught: ““This is the covenant I will make with the people of Israel after that time,” declares the LORD. “I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people.” Jer 31.33-34      - Beyond local church     - urge - more and more - increase and overflow (3:12)     - work - expecting second coming? Evangelism is more important?! Conclusion - Purity and love marked Christians out i those times. Same today? - Question: What makes it clear we are Christians to other people even if we do not tell them? - Question: What helps your purity? Do your friends know? - Question: What inspires you to love others such that you are a blessing to them, not a burden? Please add your comments on this week's topic. We learn best when we learn in community.  Do you have a question about teaching the Bible? Is it theological, technical, practical? Send me your questions or suggestions. Here's the email: [malcolm@malcolmcox.org](mailto:malcolm@malcolmcox.org).  If you'd like a copy of my free eBook on spiritual disciplines, “How God grows His people”, sign up at my website: http://[www.malcolmcox.org](http://www.malcolmcox.org/).  Please pass the link on, subscribe, leave a review.  “Worship the LORD with gladness; come before him with joyful songs.” (Psalms 100:2 NIV11)  God bless, Malcolm

One of my favorite classes that I ever took as a student was a 16th century Reformation class at Milligan College my sophomore year (30 years ago this fall). We met once a week for three hours, I think it was on Thursday evenings. I started that semester in a 1/4" thick plastic brace that went from my neck to my pelvis due to a fractured vertebrae that the brace was intended to stabilize. The injury is significant to the story because I broke my back near the end of my freshman year while playing baseball for the Buffaloes, and when I went home for the summer, I couldn't work or do much of anything due to the pain and numbness. I got a ridiculous brace, and all my friends got jobs. I was at home, and got so bored of watching VHS tapes of “Home Improvement” that in desperation I decided to...*read a book*. Tucked into some bookshelves full of English literature, my mom had a couple books that caught my eye: _The Sovereignty of God_ by A. W. Pink, and _The Five Points of Calvinisms: Defined, Defended, and Documented_. I was in trouble the rest of the summer. By the time I got back to Milligan I had learned about God's sovereignty in salvation. The doctrines of grace answered questions I'd had and it reinvigorated my biblical studies. I started talking to fellow students at Milligan, I soon after started a small Bible study of about six, and we went through verse after verse about man's sinfulness and God's election and Christ's atonement and the Spirit's regeneration and the hope of perseverance unto eternal life. Around campus I started getting labeled as a false teacher, a false prophet, David Koresh, and one girl called me the antichrist. Another acquaintance pleaded with me to stop this Bible study and, when I said I didn't think I would, he said a group of students were going to gather outside my room the following Friday night and pray that God would cast the devil out of my soul. I said, "Thanks! Because if the devil is in there, I don't want him to be!”It was that same fall semester when I was taking the Reformation class. Dr. Craig Farmer was a graduate of the Duke Divinity school, and had I stayed at Milligan I'm sure I would have encountered difficulties with some of his beliefs. But he was a Calvinist on the down low. And after some weeks of reading Erasmus complaining about the Pope, we got to reading Erasmus complaining about predestination. We read _On the Freedom of the Will_ (*De Libero Arbitrio*). But we read it in a copy that was followed by Martin Luther's _On the Bondage of the Will_ (*De Servo Arbitrio*).Erasmus presents a sympathetic position to how a lot of Christians feel today. Erasmus was especially concerned that some of these things shouldn't be put as a burden upon "lay" Christians, the regular, non-academic theologians. In the preface he writes:> For there are some secret places in the Holy Scriptures into which God has not wished us to penetrate more deeply…. (38). Moreover, some things there are of such a kind that, even if they were true, and might be known, it would not be proper to prostitute them before common ears. (40) Some things for this reason are harmful because they are not expedient, as wine for a fevered patient. Similarly, such matters might allowably have been treated in discussion in the learned world, or even in the theological schools, although I should not think even this to be expedient save with restraint. (41-42)Erasmus was sure that it would lead to misunderstandings and misrepresentations of God, even to an increase of impiety among weak men as well as to division among believers. You could come in the house (of Scripture), but there were a lot of rooms that would be off limits unless you had special training, and even then, best to stay out. Luther gave no quarter to Erasmus, and all the Reformers were driven to attack any who would keep God's Word from the people. Among many choice responses about why God's Word is so good for us, Luther wrote:> For if I am ignorant of what, how far, and how much I can and may do in relation to God, it will be equally uncertain and unknown to me, what, how far, and how much God can and may do in me, although it is God who works everything in everyone (1 Corinthians 12:6). But when the works and power of God are unknown, I do not know God Himself, and God is unknown, I cannot worship, praise, thank, and serve God, since I do not know how much I ought to attribute to myself and how much to God. (117)This makes Erasmus' plea, as virtuous and humble as he presents it, full of pride. Does God know what He revealed? Does God need us to edit what He's said, to protect His people from certain parts of His Word? By no means! Should we do our best to rightly handle the word of truth (2 Timothy 2:15)? Of course. Should teachers be careful because they are going to be judged with greater strictness (James 3:1)? Absolutely. Is refusing to read, teach, and exhort from, any part of inspired Scripture more honoring to God who spoke it (2 Timothy 3:16, 2 Peter 1:21)? By no means!> "What remedy then is there for the godly? Must they avoid every thought of predestination? By no means: for as the Holy Spirit has taught us nothing but what it behoves us to know, the knowledge of this would no doubt be useful, provided it be confined to the word of God." (—John Calvin, _Commentary on Romans_)_ We want to read the Word, preach the Word, receive and believe the whole counsel of God (Acts 20:27). I'm fine with nicknames that attempt to summarize what we find. I've often thought that it's a mercy that whoever acronym-ized the doctrines of grace gave us TULIP, a beautiful flower, rather than something such as BRICK or BLADE or BLUDGEON. Because we are talking about God's emphasis on *mercy*. He is sovereign over all, and all His attributes are infinitely excellent. But He reveals that some make others stand out more. His righteousness is His commitment to the glory of His name, and while we learn to fear Him for His forgiveness (Psalm 130:4), His forgiveness is that much more significant because of His omniscience (Psalm 130:3) and because He is holy, holy, holy (Isaiah 6:3). So even in Romans 9, and especially in Romans 9:19-23, His righteous wrath makes His righteous mercy even more outstanding, and it is His mercy that we ought to marvel at most. I've spent a long time getting back to the paragraph because it's fine to take a couple weeks to look at these truths. If you love them already, lingering probably doesn't frustrate. If you don't love them already, there are any number of reasons, including maybe having heard distorted accounts or not attending to the passage itself. We want to see what's here before we complain about all the other things. # Question: How is God fair? (verse 19)Among those who've been around (and around and around) in these conversations about God's sovereignty, there is a common, and commendable push back about how the greater scandal is not that God judges anyone but that God forgives anyone. And from one angle, that is true. None of us have ever not sinned. We all sinned in Adam, we all sin—as in we want, intend, and commit to disobey. We *mean it* when we do evil. We all deserve death. The rotten tree produces rotten fruit and is rightly identified by the fruit. If we got what we "deserved" there could be no justification. “Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous” (1 Peter 3:18), but that isn't *fair*. We tend to minimize how much mercy was required in the blood of Christ so that God "might be just and justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus" (Romans 3:26).In Romans 9 we certainly ought to be fired up about Isaac and Jacob and the elect-elect in Israel that got mercy. They weren't entitled their election, the did not deserve God's compassion or love. *But* that is *not* the complaint Paul raises and responds to starting in verse 19.> You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” (Romans 9:19 ESV)The problem is **fault**, the problem is "blame." The problem isn't undeserved mercy, the problem here is (what looks like) undeserved judgment. Okay, fault *for what*? The most recent character in context is Pharaoh, providing an example of those who God chose not to show mercy, after Ishmael and Esau. The final inference in verse 18 says that God "has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills." Is mercy unconditional and hardening conditional? Many commentators think so. > “His hardening always presupposes sin and is always part of the punishment of sin.” (Leon Morris)> “It must be borne in mind that Paul is not now dealing with God's sovereign rights over men as men but over men as sinners. …[Sovereign hardenings] presupposes sin and ill-desert. It would be exegetically indefensible to abstract verse 21 and its teaching from these presupposed conditions.” (John Murray)So this is a question of whether God is righteous to let sinners have more of the sin that they already have shown that they want? But if we're dealing with God's response to unrighteousness than why would we ask how He finds fault? He found unrighteousness, that's how He found fault. If He finds fault first, then He finds a condition for hardening. When the motive condition is met in a man, God's motive is off the hook. Isn't this partly why Paul didn't leave the Isaac over Ishmael example by itself? There was something obviously lesser about Ishmael. There was no difference between Jacob and Esau that we could see *or that God was looking for* according to human standards. > “If the difference had been based on works, Paul would have to no purpose mentioned this question respecting the unrighteousness of God, no suspicion could have been entertained concerning it if God dealt with every one according to his merit.” (John Calvin)Of course we should be careful on this ground because God “neither is nor can be the author or approver of sin.” (Westminster Confession of Faith, 5:4) And James 1:13-14 make clear that God is not tempted with evil and tempts no one. But is He sovereign over sin and evil in any way? And if judgment/wrath is *only* based on man's fault, what is the purpose of this paragraph? # ConclusionPaul's answers, or at least his responses, come in the next verses. We are pots, and the Potter has all the power to make pots into what He wants (20-21). We are pots, and the Potter has ultimate purpose (22-23), which ultimately is to make known the riches of His glory for vessels of mercy. God did not spare His own Son but gave Him up for us that He could also graciously make us conquering sheep (Romans 8:32, 36-37).----------## ChargeBecause God has a great purpose, He sent His Son to suffer and die for us. Because God has a great purpose, He calls you who have been given eternal life in Christ to come alongside one another and be a blessing to each other. The Potter has made you a vessel for honorable use, so live as a pot for His great purpose. ## Benediction:> For God has not destined us for wrath, but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ, who died for us so that whether we are awake or asleep we might live with him. Therefore encourage one another and build one another up, just as you are doing. (1 Thessalonians 5:9–11, ESV)

Selections from my vinyl LP collection, as well as from my shelves of CD's. Jim & Jesse, Leon Morris, Jerusalem Ridge, early Mike Auldridge, the great band Country Gazette from the early 1970's, as well as some more recently recorded Grasstowne and Mickey Galyean.

Ecclesiastes, along with Job, Psalms, Proverbs, and the Song of Solomon, is in the Wisdom Literature section of the Old Testament. These books deal with the way the world works. They mix direct statements with analogies and word pictures. Sometimes it addresses big problems—like why is there evil in the world—and other times it deals with smaller issues that can be addressed with common sense—reckless words are harmful so watch your mouth. Wisdom Literature is like philosophical writings of today with one BIG difference. Philosophy (love of wisdom) seeks to understand ourselves and the world around us in a humanistic way. Wisdom Literature seeks to understand ourselves and the world around us in a theological way. And, of course, Wisdom Literature is inspired by God. Ecclesiastes 12:13-14 Life “under the sun” doesn't make sense unless you have an “over the sun” perspective. Fear God: Ecclesiastes 12:13 Martin Luther explained fearing God using “servile fear” and “filial fear.” Servile fear: The emotion of a tortured prisoner. Filial fear (“filial” means “family” in Latin): The healthy love and respect children have for parents. Fear of God: Love, honor, and respect for my Heavenly Father. Prepare for Judgment: Ecclesiastes 12:14 God as Judge (Genesis 18:25; Judges 11:27) Jesus as Judge (John 5:22-29) Characteristics of a Judge (from J. I. Packer, Knowing God) • The judge is a person with authority. • The judge is a person identified with what is good and right. • The judge is a person of wisdom, to discern truth. • The judge has the power to execute sentence. The doctrine of the final judgment . . . stresses man's accountability and the certainty that justice will finally triumph over all the wrongs . . . This doctrine gives meaning to life . . . [it] means that history moves to a goal. Judgment means that evil will be disposed of authoritatively, decisively, finally. Judgment means that in the end God's will will be perfectly done. -Leon Morris, The Biblical Doctrine of Judgment, 72. Quoted in Knowing God, 144. The Coming Judgment Matthew 25:31-41 When the Son of Man comes in his glory . . . he will sit on his glorious throne. Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate people one from another . . . Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world . . . Then he will say to those on his left, Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 2 Corinthians 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil. Romans 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. Call on the coming Judge to be your Savior, today! DAILY DEVOTIONAL WITH RON MOORE Get Ron's Daily Devotional to your inbox each morning; visit biblechapel.org/devo. LIVING GROUNDED Learn more about how you can grow deeper and embrace the foundational truths of the Christian faith with Living Grounded. Whether you're just starting out in faith or you've been a Christian for years, Living Grounded offers truth, wisdom, and encouragement for every stage. Contact gdevore@biblechapel.org to get connected. CAREGIVING Do you have a need we can pray for? Do you need someone to walk alongside you? Do you know of another person who needs care? Let us know at caregiving@biblechapel.org. CAMPUS FACEBOOK GROUPS You're invited to connect with The Bible Chapel family in your campus Facebook Group. Look for Facebook Groups at facebook.com/biblechapel and click on Groups on the left side. FIND AN ENCOURAGER TODAY! JOIN A SMALL GROUP Community Groups are our easiest on-ramp to community at The Bible Chapel; these groups use sermon-based questions to dive deeper into weekly messages. Visit biblechapel.org/smallgroups to learn more and sign up!

Martin Luther called Romans 3:21-26 ‘the chief point, the very central place of the epistle of Romans, and of the whole bible.' Australia theologian Leon Morris said ‘‘it may possibly be the single most important paragraph ever written.' After the negativity and heaviness of the opening two and a half chapters of Romans, these verses introduce us to a 'new righteousness that comes through the grace of God, through faith in Christ Jesus'. It's a remarkable part of the bible.Join us as magnification pastor Liam Denny (Village Evenings) unpacks these words.It is some seriously good news.

Each of the Gospels gives a unique perspective on the historical fact of Jesus' physical resurrection. A carefully crafted story manufactured by the Apostles would have never looked like this. Leon Morris, “The differences in the Gospels amount to no more than a demonstration that here we have the spontaneous evidence of witnesses, not the stereotyped repetition of an official story.” The entire superstructure of Christianity either stands or falls upon this historical fact. The resurrection of Jesus Christ is mentioned at least 104 times in the New Testament. It was the central theme of the preaching of the Apostles. It is no surprise then that Satan has continuously attacked the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Jesus said of Himself, “The Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost” (Luke 19:10). The Parable of the Lost Sheep, better than any place else in the Gospels, reveals Christ's heart to seek and to save the lost. https://youtu.be/5SmTMgu3OE0 Luke 19:10 says, “The Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost.” The Parable of the Lost Sheep reveals His heart to save the lost. Table of ContentsFamily Worship GuideSermon NotesLesson One: Jesus seeks and saves the lost, because they're valuable to Him.Lesson Two: Jesus seeks and finds the lost, versus the lost seeking and finding Him.Lesson Three: Finding and saving the lost causes Jesus to rejoice. Family Worship Guide Directions: Read the verses and then answer the questions: Day 1: Luke 15:3-4, 19:10—Why did the religious leaders in Jesus's day avoid tax collectors and sinners? Why was Jesus willing to leave the 99 to seek and save the one? Considering how valuable the lost are to Christ, what application does this have for us?Day 2: Luke 15:5, 1 Timothy 1:15, Romans 3:11, 1 John 4:19, John 6:39, 44, 65—What was the prevailing view of how people were forgiven in Jesus's day? Why do sheep make such good pictures of the lost? What does it mean that we build our theology with indicatives supported by narratives? Can you think of any other indicatives teaching that Jesus seeks us?Day 3: Luke 15:6, Matthew 13:44-46, Hebrews 12:2—In the parables, what do the treasure and pearl of great price represent? Who is the man and the merchant? In what ways did Jesus sell all that he has for the treasure and pearl? In what ways did Jesus buy the field? What Old Testament account prefigures this parable? Sermon Notes The title of this morning's sermon is, “To Seek and to Save the Lost.” On Sunday mornings we're working our way through Luke's gospel verse by verse and we find ourselves at Luke 15:3. Please stand with me for the reading of God's Word. We will back up to verse 1 for context. Luke 15:1 Now the tax collectors and sinners were all drawing near to hear him. 2 And the Pharisees and the scribes grumbled, saying, “This man receives sinners and eats with them.” 3 So he told them this parable: 4 “What man of you, having a hundred sheep, if he has lost one of them, does not leave the ninety-nine in the open country, and go after the one that is lost, until he finds it? 5 And when he has found it, he lays it on his shoulders, rejoicing. 6 And when he comes home, he calls together his friends and his neighbors, saying to them, ‘Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep that was lost.' 7 Just so, I tell you, there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance. You may be seated. Let's pray. The religious leaders in Jesus' day divided people into two groups: the clean and the uncleanthe righteous and the unrighteous They wanted to be clean and righteous so they tried to live, as much as possible, separate from people they thought were unclean and unrighteous. Leon Morris wrote, “Some rabbis in Jesus' day took this idea so seriously that they refused to even teach people they thought were unclean and unrighteous.” Paul Billerbeck wrote, “Let not a man associate with the wicked, not even to bring him the law.” This led to their criticism in verse 2 that “[Jesus] receives sinners and eats with them.” Jesus responded by preaching these three parables that are all found only in Luke's Gospel. Jesus said of himself… Luke 19:10 For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost. These parables, better than any place else in the Gospels, reveal Christ's heart to seek and to save the lost. They will help us prepare for The Exchange. Look with me at verse 3… Luke 15:3 So he told them this parable: 4 “What man of you, having a hundred sheep, if he has lost one of them, does not leave the ninety-nine in the open country, and go after the one that is lost,

A Hospitable Bed Interview on Spiritual Formation with Jim Houston “I came here to die.” Speaking from Hospice that is what Christian pillar James Houston, who is 99 years old, told me on our chat today – yet he is still writing and still offering wisdom to weary souls (read his "Letters From A Hospital Bed: Reflections From a 99 Year Old" here) and offers a lifetime of insight in these 45 minutes. In this interview with Dr. Houston, I had the great honor to glean wisdom on everything from spiritual health and cultivation (“We need to ask God to allow us to dream about Him each night.” “We need to remove obstacles that keep us from a love-affair with God… Let God be the last thing you think about each night, not the news or a book or a movie…”) to Trinitarian theology of participation, and to the Evangelical over-emphasis on “Systematic Theology” (As opposed to, what he suggests, a healthy “Child Theology”). His book, “Memoirs of a Joyous Exile and a Worldly Christian” is a short chronicle of his life that reads like a constellation of relationships and formation (Jim was family friends with James Torrance and the Torrance family, Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones was a conversation partner, he was colleagues with J.I. Packer, he was in a small group with C.S Lewis, a co-author with Bruce Waltke, neighbors with JRR Tolkien, had his orthodoxy checked by Francis Schaeffer and his friend John Stott, is related, by marriage, to Jim and Elizabeth Elliot, and then the list goes on and on with other paths crossing of Carl F.H. Henry, F.F. Bruce, Malcom Muggeridge, Charles Colson, Os Guinness, Leon Morris, etc.). I'm grateful to Dr. Houston and his daughter Claire who helped this interview.

QUOTES FOR REFLECTION “He [Jesus] must increase but I must decrease.” ~John 3:30 (ESV) “A great man is always willing to be little.” ~Ralph Waldo Emerson 19th Century American Author “It was pride that changed angels into devils.” ~St. Augustine 5th Century Bishop of Hippo “It is not particularly easy in this world to gather followers about one for a serious purpose. But when they are gathered it is infinitely harder to detach them and firmly insist that they go to another. It is the measure of John the Baptist's greatness that he did just that.” ~Leon Morris 20th Century Australian New Testament Scholar “And being found in human form, he [Jesus] humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.” ~Philippians 2:8 (ESV) “If you think you are not conceited, it means you are very conceited indeed.” ~from Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis 20th Century British Author “Christ is the humility of God, embodied in human nature. The eternal love humbling itself, clothing itself in the garb of meekness to win, and serve, and save us.” ~Andrew Murray South African Pastor and Writer SERMON PASSAGE John 3:22-36 (ESV) 22 After this Jesus and his disciples went into the Judean countryside, and he remained there with them and was baptizing. 23 John also was baptizing at Aenon near Salim, because water was plentiful there, and people were coming and being baptized 24 (for John had not yet been put in prison). 25 Now a discussion arose between some of John's disciples and a Jew over purification. 26 And they came to John and said to him, “Rabbi, he who was with you across the Jordan, to whom you bore witness—look, he is baptizing, and all are going to him.” 27 John answered, “A person cannot receive even one thing unless it is given him from heaven. 28 You yourselves bear me witness, that I said, ‘I am not the Christ, but I have been sent before him.' 29 The one who has the bride is the bridegroom. The friend of the bridegroom, who stands and hears him, rejoices greatly at the bridegroom's voice. Therefore this joy of mine is now complete. 30 He must increase, but I must decrease.” 31 He who comes from above is above all. He who is of the earth belongs to the earth and speaks in an earthly way. He who comes from heaven is above all. 32 He bears witness to what he has seen and heard, yet no one receives his testimony. 33 Whoever receives his testimony sets his seal to this, that God is true. 34 For he whom God has sent utters the words of God, for he gives the Spirit without measure. 35 The Father loves the Son and has given all things into his hand. 36 Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.

QUOTES FOR REFLECTION “I used to not take chances with God's name But it's been so long since I last prayed And now I'm all [messed] up and my heart's changed ‘Cause I care more about what other people say.” ~Sam Fischer and Demi Lovato in their song “What Other People Say” “Discipleship is the process of becoming who Jesus would be if he were you.” ~Dallas Willard (1935-2013), philosophy professor and popular author “Discipleship isn't a program or an event; it's a way of life. It's not for a limited time, but for our whole life.” ~Bill Hull, author, pastor and professor “Most people in America, when they are exposed to the Christian faith, are not being transformed. They take one step into the door, and the journey ends.” ~David Kinnaman, author and social researcher “Discipling our children is not about teaching them to behave in a way that won't embarrass us. We're working toward something much more important than that. We're actually raising our children with a view toward leading them to trust and to follow Christ.” ~Voddie Baucham, dean at African Christian University (Zambia) “Christianity without discipleship is always Christianity without Christ.” ~Dietrich Bonhoeffer (1906-1945), pastor-theologian executed by the Nazis “Faith…is an activity which takes people right out of themselves and into Christ.” ~Leon Morris (1914-2006), Australian scholar “…the Church could best…speak to the heart of modern humanity, not by shrinking her message, but by displaying the beauty of her central Fact in all of its fullness.” ~David L. Schindler on Henri de Lubac's The Mystery of the Supernatural “…it is nothing less than God's glory that John and his friends witnessed in the word-made-flesh.” ~D.A. Carson, biblical scholar, on the Gospel of John (1:14) “I don't know exactly what covetous is, but in my experience it is not so much desiring someone else's virtue or happiness as rejecting it, taking offense at the beauty of it.” ~Marilynne Robinson, Pulitzer Prize winning author SERMON PASSAGE John 1:35-51 (ESV) 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God…14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth… 35 The next day again John was standing with two of his disciples, 36 and he looked at Jesus as he walked by and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God!” 37 The two disciples heard him say this, and they followed Jesus. 38 Jesus turned and saw them following and said to them, “What are you seeking?” And they said to him, “Rabbi” (which means Teacher), “where are you staying?” 39 He said to them, “Come and you will see.” So they came and saw where he was staying, and they stayed with him that day, for it was about the tenth hour. 40 One of the two who heard John speak and followed Jesus was Andrew, Simon Peter's brother. 41 He first found his own brother Simon and said to him, “We have found the Messiah” (which means Christ). 42 He brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said, “You are Simon the son of John. You shall be called Cephas” (which means Peter). 43 The next day Jesus decided to go to Galilee. He found Philip and said to him, “Follow me.” 44 Now Philip was from Bethsaida, the city of Andrew and Peter. 45 Philip found Nathanael and said to him, “We have found him of whom Moses in the Law and also the prophets wrote, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.” 46 Nathanael said to him, “Can anything good come out of Nazareth?” Philip said to him, “Come and see.” 47 Jesus saw Nathanael coming toward him and said of him, “Behold, an Israelite indeed, in whom there is no deceit!” 48 Nathanael said to him, “How do you know me?” Jesus answered him, “Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you.” 49 Nathanael answered him, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!” 50 Jesus answered him, “Because I said to you, ‘I saw you under the fig tree,' do you believe? You will see greater things than these.” 51 And he said to him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, you will see heaven opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man.”

QUOTES FOR REFLECTION “...the mystery...that Almighty God would come down...in the person of Jesus Christ and became one of us.... There is really nothing like that incredible social inversion of Almighty God coming here and living with us and dying with us.” ~Anne Rice, author of The Vampire Chronicles “. . . John in his use of Logos [i.e. Word] is cutting clean across one of the fundamental Greek ideas. The Greeks thought of the gods as detached from the world, as regarding its struggles and heartaches and joys and fears with serene divine lack of feeling. John's idea of the Logos conveys exactly the opposite idea. John's Logos does not show us a God who is serenely detached, but a God who is passionately involved.” ~Leon Morris (1914-2006), Australian New Testament scholar “The Son is the Father's All.” ~Athanasius (c. 196-373 AD), North African theologian and church leader “The heart of Christianity is a myth which is also a fact…. By becoming fact it does not cease to be myth: that is the miracle…. Those who do not know that this great myth became Fact…are, indeed, to be pitied. But Christians also need to be…reminded that…[Christianity] carries with it into the world of Fact all the properties of a myth. God is more than a god, not less…. We must not be ashamed of the mythical radiance resting in our theology.” ~C.S. Lewis (1898-1963), writer and academic at both Oxford and Cambridge “God had one son on earth without sin, but never one without suffering.” ~St. Augustine (354-430), bishop in North Africa “… if we would see the glory of God, it appears most in grace, and mercy, and lovingkindness, and such sweet attributes…. We must take God, not as considered [abstractly]…, but God in Christ; for other notions of god are terrible.” ~Richard Sibbes (1577-1635), English theologian “The Gospel of John opens with Jesus Christ in the bosom of God, and closes with the sinner in the bosom of Jesus Christ.” ~D. L. Moody (1837-1899), founder of Northfield Mount Hermon Schools (MA) “Because Jesus Christ is a man, He feels what we feel. Because He is God, He can do something about it.” ~Tony Evans, pastor and author SERMON PASSAGE selected passages John 1 (NIV) 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it…. 14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth. 15 (John testified concerning him. He cried out, saying, “This is the one I spoke about when I said, ‘He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.'”) 16 Out of his fullness we have all received grace in place of grace already given. 17 For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known. Exodus 33 (ESV) 18 Moses said, “Please show me your glory.” 19 And he said, “I will make all my goodness pass before you and will proclaim before you my name ‘The Lord.' And I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy. 20 But,” he said, “you cannot see my face, for man shall not see me and live.” 21 And the Lord said, “Behold, there is a place by me where you shall stand on the rock, 22 and while my glory passes by I will put you in a cleft of the rock, and I will cover you with my hand until I have passed by. 23 Then I will take away my hand, and you shall see my back, but my face shall not be seen.” Exodus 34 (ESV) 4 So Moses cut two tablets of stone like the first. And he rose early in the morning and went up on Mount Sinai, as the Lord had commanded him, and took in his hand two tablets of stone. 5 The Lord descended in the cloud and stood with him there, and proclaimed the name of the Lord. 6 The Lord passed before him and proclaimed, “The Lord, the Lord, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, 7 keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty… Psalm 85 (ESV) 7 Show us your steadfast love, O Lord, and grant us your salvation. 8 Let me hear what God the Lord will speak, for he will speak peace to his people, to his saints; but let them not turn back to folly. 9 Surely his salvation is near to those who fear him, that glory may dwell in our land. 10 Steadfast love and faithfulness meet; righteousness and peace kiss each other.

We are thankful to many scholars and pastors for their insights on this passage.Douglas MooJohn Stott Thomas Schriner John MacArthur John PiperMartin LutherJohn MurrayLeon MorrisC.F.B. Cranfield

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