Category Archives: Sound Doctrine

Spiritual Death Analogous to Physical Death?

30 Tuesday Jul 2019

Posted by in Exegesis, Sound Doctrine

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

It is my purpose in this study to set forth an exegetically sound interpretation of Paul’s words to the church in Ephesus on Ephesians 2:1. In addition to this, I will also set forth common interpretations that are contrary to my own. I will give attention in this presentation to the theology of those who are of a Calvinistic persuasion.

NKJV: And you he made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins.

ASV: And you did he make alive, when ye were dead through your trespasses and sins

NASV: And you were dead in your trespasses and sins.

KJV: And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins

Williams: You too were dead because of the shortcomings and sins

A brief setting of Paul in Ephesians 1 and 2. CHAPTER 1. Spiritual blessings are in Christ; none outside (1:3). Before the foundation of the world, those chosen to be in Him are to be blameless and holy (1:4). Those chosen in Christ have been predestined to adoption (1:5-6). In Him is redemption, that is, the forgiveness of sins (1:7-8). In the wisdom of God this is made known to us in the life and message of Jesus (1:8-10). It is in Him that one inherits from God (1:11-12). One is in Christ after having heard and believed the message preached, sealed by the Holy Spirit (1:13-14). Paul’s prays for the saints in Ephesus, for their enlightenment in wisdom, knowledge and the power of God, which is Christ seated at the right hand of the Father (1:15-21). Seated at the right hand of the Father, He is over all things to the church, which is His body (1:22-23). CHAPTER 2. The saints in Ephesus were once dead in sin because of the life they chose to walk (2:1-3). Paul identified himself with those of Ephesus who once walked the same path (2:3). Even when dead in sin, it was because of God’s mercy the saints in Ephesus were made alive in Christ (2:4-7). It was by God’s mercy each one is saved by grace; saved by grace (i.e., taught; 1:13-14; cf. Titus 2:11-12) means each one is God’s workmanship (2:8-10).

An interpretation frequently presented to me. The saints in Ephesus were once dead in trespasses and sins because they walked in accordance with what they wanted to do, having no regard for what God wanted. They willfully chose to indulge their desires in the flesh (2:3). They were dead in sin without regard to their own will, but because of Adam; they are only able to make things worse (volitionally) in their state of “dead in sins and trespasses.” QUESTION: If they could willfully choose to do this (make things worse), on what basis could they not also willfully choose to turn away from doing this? There is none – except that of a theological persuasion.

Connecting this with Paul’s words in Romans 5:12 and 6:3, one enters the realm of death by birth, the one born does not inherent Adam’s sin, that is, one is not judged by God as sinful based on what Adam did! One enters the physical realm of death by birth, one enters the spiritual realm of death by choice.

Interpretations from varied expositors[1]

“Physical death is a condition in which the functions of physical life have ceased; spiritual death is that where the functions of spiritual life are no longer active, and indeed, apart from the intervention of divine grace are no longer possible…” Again, a few lines later we read, “The incapacity of the unregenerated mind for the exercise of spiritual affections, is what is meant by spiritual death.”[2]

Spiritual death is nothing but alienation from God, and this is because “we are all born dead and live that way until we become partakers of the life of Christ.”[3] Chrysostom (who predates Calvin) does not concur with this sentiment. Speaking of spiritual death, he says, “But the death of the soul is the result of a free choice.”[4]

Barnes seems to take a moderate view. He states there is an affirmation of depravity, affirming the fact of it, but “…it does not settle any question as to their ability or power while in that state” to exercise their mental powers of their intellect toward the direction of God. Even though he attempted to exegete, he later writes contrary to this attempt: in regard to religion, the sinner sees no beauty in it “and no human power can rouse the sleeping dead, or open the sightless eyeballs on the light of day. The same power is needed in the conversion of a sinner which is needed in raising the dead” which means God.[5] I interpret this as a contrary remark to his exegetical attempt.

William Hendriksen recognizes that a person dead in trespasses and sins can do good in a natural world. This good, however, is not done with the attempt to please God and/or obey His law. It is “[o]nly when God turns him is he able to turn from his wicked ways” because he is depraved from the time Adam brought sin into the world; man today is guilty of original sin and he merely adds to it his own.[6]

John Stott said of those who are spiritually dead: they are as “unresponsive to him as a corpse.”[7] He does not speak in an explicit Calvinistic way, but with his words he might as well have.

Man has no ability within himself to change. “Men left in their dead state are unable of themselves to repent, to believe the gospel, or come to Christ. They have no power within themselves to change their nature or to prepare themselves for salvation.”[8] Passage used (abused) to support the declaration: Job 14:4; Jeremiah 13:23; John 6:44; 1 Corinthians 2:14; 2 Corinthians 3:5.

Analysis of the Issue:

In physical death there are no life functions, including the will (that is, the emotional and mental will). Physical life and everything associated with it is completely over – Hebrews 9:27.

In spiritual death, in contrast to physical death, extant are all the capabilities associated with physical life. That means one can live and go to this place or that; one can think and analyze this issue or that. One can willfully choose what he or she wants to do. Calvinism accepts this, but with limitations. They assert there is no ability within the spiritually dead to willfully move in God’s direction. They grant willfulness in life, but not willfulness toward God. Jesus makes clear with His words in John 5, Calvinism is a lie.[9]

Spiritual death is the result of trespasses and sin, in effect, the sin of disobedience (1 John 3:4). Calvinism maintains one is spiritually depraved from the time of birth, going back to the time of Adam and his transgression. The sinful corruption within man extends to every part of man; thus, the natural man is totally unable to do anything spiritually good, he does not have the ability to choose spiritual good over evil.[10] Passages used to justify this declaration: Genesis 2:16-17; Romans 5:12; Ephesians 2:1-3 (among others).

The only way for one to be saved, according to Calvinist theology, is for God to take the initiative. By itself, this remark is not troublesome; it’s what is meant that is false. Calvinism says God’s initiative activity is more than just preaching the Gospel to ears that want to hear; without God’s initiative to the elect only, that is, in addition to Gospel preaching,[11] salvation does not result. Consider the following points.

  • If one has free will while spiritually dead (to make things worse for themselves), but one can’t choose spiritual life on his own volition, then free-will is not total, instead free-will is limited.
  • If free-will is limited (i.e., spiritual life cannot be secured by one’s choice), then if one is prevented from securing salvation because of that limitation imposed from an outside source; thus, the one who prevents salvation is culpable.
  • This is inescapable![12]

Those who are spiritually dead have free-will to do what is desired; a spiritually dead person perpetuates their spiritual death (i.e., they choose to continue in their disobedience). While in this spiritual realm of death, a person can’t be pleasing to God because his spiritual darkness is a matter of choice (Romans 8:3-7). This means no man can determine his own path to God (Proverbs 14:12; Jeremiah 17:9; 10:23).

The realm of spiritual death is presents a gap, a separation between the created and the Creator (Isa. 59:1-2). This gap can’t be bridged by the created because he does not have the wisdom to know how to do it; neither does he have the capability to accomplish it even if he had to wisdom to do it (which he does not). In fact, that which originates within man is only corruption (Jeremiah 17:9) and can never be anything else. Anything he does that does not have its origin in God’s will falls short (Romans 3:23). Sin and sinful thinking/ways prevents man’s arrival on “God’s landing pad” (so to speak). This gap that exists between the Creator and the created does not prevent the created from choosing to hear and obey.

God, therefore, initiates a bridge (John 3:16), and based on the person’s response to God’s bridge or invitation (Matt. 11:28-30), salvation or damnation is the result. According to Acts 2:21, all who call on the Lord can be saved. Couple this with Hebrews 4:2, we learn the reason salvation did not result with some because the Word preached and heard was not “united by faith” (NASV).

Syllogistic Arguments:

If the Gospel is God’s power to save everyone who believes, it is possible for everyone to believe (Rom. 1:16; 2 Pet. 3:9). The Gospel is God’s power to save everyone who believes. Therefore, it is possible for everyone to believe.

If the spiritual realm is associated with the will/volition of man, and if man is still alive to exercise the will/volition that is required in physical life’s use, then the spiritual functions of life are still active (Johnny Polk).

If God’s message is to be preached to the whole world (creation) which is dead in sin, then the whole world (creation) which is dead in sin can hear and obey (Mark 16:15). God’s message is to be preached to the whole world (creation) dead in sin. Therefore, the whole world (creation) dead in sin can hear and obey.

To show partiality in rendering judgment[13] is sin (Gal. 2:11-14). Calvinism teaches God shows partiality in rendering judgment.[14] Therefore, Calvinism teaches God sins when He shows partiality in judgment (I think this fails meeting categorical syllogistic argument standard; use Venn. Needs work).

[1]  Without the resurrection there are none who are dead in sin because Jesus brought life and immortality to light through His message and His resurrection, having overcome the fear of man, which is death (2 Timothy 1:10). Lazarus was dead (physically), yet when the Lord called out, Lazarus heard. Those spiritually dead, when the Lord calls out through the Gospel, the spiritually dead hear.

[2] Justin A. Smith. Commentary on the Epistle to the Ephesians, An American Commentary (vol. 5: Corinthians to Thessalonians), The American Baptist Publication Society, 1890; p. 33.

[3] John Calvin. Reformation Commentary on Scripture: Galatians, Ephesians (New Testament: Vol. X). IVP Academic; 2011; p. 276.

[4] Chrysostom. Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture: Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians (New Testament: Vol. VIII). IVP; 1999; p. 120.

[5] Albert Barnes. Ephesians. Notes on the New Testament: Explanatory and Practical: Ephesians – Colossians. Baker Book House; 1974; pp. 36-37.

[6] William Hendriksen. New Testament Commentary: Ephesians (Galatians-Ephesians). Baker Book House; 1979; pp. 110-112.

[7] John Stott. The Message of Ephesians. IVP. 1979; p. 72.

[8] Five Points of Calvinism: Defined, Defended, and Documented. P & R Publishing. 2004; p. 25

[9] “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth him that sent me, hath eternal life, and cometh not into judgment, but hath passed out of death into life. Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour cometh, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God; and they that hear shall live” (John 5:24-25, ASV).

[10] Five Points of Calvinism. p. 19.

[11] “The gospel invitation extends a general outward call to salvation to all who hear the message. In addition to this external call, the Holy Spirit extends a special inward call to the elect only. The general call of the gospel can be, and often is, rejected, but the special call of the Spirit cannot be rejected; it always results in the conversion of those to whom it is made” (Five Points, p. 61). RT – if the elect can’t reject, can the non-elect accept? According to Calvinism, to ask is to answer!  

[12] Some are easily able to see this but due to a perceived understanding of (or lack of properly understanding) God’s sovereignty, Calvinism theology is accepted with “I just don’t understand, I only accept it.”

[13] Judgment in this context is not exclusively God’s eternal wrath, but includes both wrath and reward.

[14] “Before the foundation of the world, God chose particular individuals for salvation. His selection was not based upon any foreseen response or act performed by those chosen. Faith and good works are the result, not the cause of God’s choice” (Five Points of Calvinism, p. 31; italics in quote-RT).

MY LIFE

15 Wednesday May 2019

Posted by in Bulletin Article, Sound Doctrine

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

“Lord, depart from me because I am a sinful man!” What is a sinful man? A sinful man is a person who lives life in the way he or she wants to without regard to anything the Lord wants. In other words, that “want to” is contrary to the Lord’s way. In my view, it’s not any more complicated than that. A sinful person is not one who necessarily lives life in an overly vile way, but one who lives life in a different way than the Lord’s. For the Christian, presumably the life one has chosen to live is expressed  by Paul himself: “I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I that live, but Christ liveth in me: and that life which I now live in the flesh I live in faith, the faith which is in the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself up for me (Gal. 2:20, ASV).

Think about what Paul is saying. First, his life without Christ is now dead; second, the life he has chosen to live is the life of Christ; third, he understands what it is Jesus did for him and for all those who love Him, therefore he chose to serve the Almighty. If we do not embrace the life of Jesus as Paul expressed it here, we are only kidding (or deceiving) ourselves that all is well. Paul wrote to the Corinthians in his second letter, “Try your own selves, whether ye are in the faith; prove your own selves. Or know ye not as to your own selves, that Jesus Christ is in you? unless indeed ye be reprobate” (2 Cor. 13:5). How are you living your life? RT

 

BAPTISM AND FORGIVENESS OF SINS

10 Friday May 2019

Posted by in Sound Doctrine

≈ 6 Comments

Tags

, ,

In the context of our congregation, the biblical teaching of baptism for the remission of sins is not a teaching that troubles any of us (at least, with regard to what I am aware). The other day I was talking to a Baptist preacher, a man with whom I am very impressed; he was saying to me that he has trouble over the idea of someone making a decision for the Lord, then instantly dying without being baptized, how that person would not be pleasing to the Lord. I understand the nature of the problem as he posed it and I understand how some will use a similar scenario to speak against the Lord command of baptism in water as essential. Though I understand, those who think along this line are mistaken. How do I know? The scriptures teach that baptism is directly connected to the forgiveness of sins (Acts 22:16). Since this is so, consider: any command of God directly connected to the forgiveness of sins is a command essential for a person to obey in order to be saved; baptism is a command of God connected to the forgiveness of sins; therefore, baptism is a command of God for a person to obey in order to be saved (1 Peter 3:21). RT

 

Modus Ponens (Calvinism and Free Will)

30 Tuesday Apr 2019

Posted by in Salvation, Sound Doctrine

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

A recent discussion I had with a brother in the Lord who accepts the false teaching of limited atonement, a portion of Calvinism. In our discussion (last week of Mark) he gave not a single bit of attention to either one of these arguments. Instead, he dismissed them with a wave of the hand by saying “you need to use things like syllogisms to try and make your point but in the end you have zero scriptural support for your point.”

Anyone who turns against formal logic does so because formal logic turns against him.

He said I didn’t use Scripture. You have to be the judge of that.

1) If Scripture teaches God desires all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth, then any teaching which teaches God chooses only some to be saved (those He desires; limited atonement) is a false teaching.

2) The Scripture teaches that God desires all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth (1 Tim. 2:4; 4:10).

3) Thus, any teaching which teaches God chooses only some to be saved (those he desires, to whom He limits His atonement) is a false teaching.

Or another argument from our discussion:

1) Since it is the case God wants none to perish (1 Ti,. 2:4), and

2) Since it is the case that whoever calls on the name of God shall be saved (Acts 2:21),

3) Then it is the case anyone (or whosoever) calls on the Lord’s name can be and will be saved (Rom. 10:12-13)

The Sixth Command – Murder

15 Monday Apr 2019

Posted by in Sound Doctrine

≈ 11 Comments

Tags

, , , ,

     You shall not kill. The Hebrew word for “kill” is a word modern translations render “murder.” The Hebrew word can be used in contexts where one is killed intentionally or unintentionally. In Matthew 5:21-26, Jesus develops what we are to understand. The command “thou shalt not kill” is a moral failing that begins in the heart before it shows itself in criminal activity.

Consider some numbing information: some in Western society are supportive of the moral failing associated with euthanasia, otherwise known “mercy” killings. If the outcry surrounding abortion is any indication, the current outcry surrounding “mercy” killings will soon die down (pun intended). It’s a shame that so many people now recognize such killings as part of our lives. In Holland, euthanasia has been in practice for decades. In December 1998 the British Medical Journal reported that in 1995 there were 900 cases of non-voluntary euthanasia victims.

The Dred Scott case of the Supreme Court in 1857 said slaves were not legal persons. The Supreme Court, in 1973, said in effect that children in the womb are not either. It was two lawyers who defended Norma McCorvey’s right to kill her child. These lawyers, it is said, had no interest in Norma as a person (surely, they did not have any interest in any child that would be in the womb either!).  They just wanted to challenge the law prohibiting killing of the innocent in all 50 states. They got their wish when in 1973 the Supreme Court ruled 7-2 in favor of Satan’s work.

Some argue, in their lack of moral wisdom, the child in the womb is not viable; it may be life, but not viable life. This is man’s attempt to justify an action the Lord will never accept. “Thus saith Jehovah: For three transgressions of the children of Ammon, yea, for four, I will not turn away the punishment thereof; because they have ripped up the women with child of Gilead, that they may enlarge their border” (Amos 1:13, ASV, emphasis added, RT).

The shame of it all is associated with people who have become hardened to the moral failings of society. We all have our own political interests. They are varied. We ought not to think, however, our varied political interests are an acceptable approach to the Lord as we vote one political philosophy, relegating the Lord’s holiness and virtue out of our public sector under the banner of “separation of church and state.” When a person votes into office a man or woman who compromises the Lord’s way, this is a contribution to the slaughter of the innocent. The attorneys who defended the killing of the innocent to the Supreme Court will give an account to the Lord, as those who ruled against moral virtue back in 1857. Why do we think it will be any different with our individual votes?

Capital punishment does not fall under the Lord’s prohibition, as can be seen throughout the Scriptures. Capital cases are not related to the innocent, but to the guilty. Capital cases are seen for the following crimes/sins: striking or cursing a parent; blasphemy; sabbath breaking; witchcraft and false pretensions to prophecy; adultery; unchastity (of various sorts); rape; incest; abducting people for slavery; idolatry; false witnessing; murder (N-ISBE, volume 3, pp.1052-1053).

APPLICATION. The principle of this command, in a New Testament context, is our obligation to the Lord as far greater than any obligation given to man, including the political arena as well. It is a moral outrage that any Christian would support what is inherently evil! We will answer for it. One violates the Scripture because of where the heart is. RT

 

WHAT KIND OF MAN?

10 Wednesday Apr 2019

Posted by in Sound Doctrine

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

What kind of man is Jesus? He was no ordinary man, that is for sure. Yet, He came to this earth to endure the life ordinary men must live. Ordinary men are both those who are dressed in rags and those dressed in the finest of clothing, to say nothing of those in between. Jesus was no ordinary man, but He became ordinary for you and me.

Isn’t it good that He did? For certain! When there is one of us that struggles with sin, never thinking we are going to be able to overcome, is it not good that to Him each can turn? When there is one of us that struggles with the weight of the world against us (as we view the world), is it not good that to Him one can turn and see that He, too, struggled? When there is one of us that is lonely beyond measure, is it not good that to Him one can turn and find comfort and companion as each reflect on His time in the Garden of Gethsemane?

Jesus was able to sleep in a boat when the Sea around Him was tumultuous; the disciples were greatly afraid, even awakening Jesus to ask Him if He cared. Jesus cared, and in His answer to those who awoke Him He asked, “Where is your faith?” Seems a strange question, I suppose, but in fact it’s not strange at all. Perhaps in this question, the answers to man’s greatest struggles are found.

Where is your faith? My faith is in my inability to do as I know I should and to do as I know I want to. Is that not the problem? My faith is in me, or not in me (if you will). Because one’s faith is in self, the eyes of focus have been taken off Jesus. Yet the Holy Spirit exhorts that we are keep our eyes tuned straight ahead. The writer of Hebrews wrote, “Therefore let us also, seeing we are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us, looking unto Jesus the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising shame, and hath sat down at the right hand of the throne of God” (12:1-2, ASV).

Reflecting on the examples in Hebrews 11, the Holy Spirit said we should also reflect on them. One reflects best, in this circumstance, when one’s eyes are taken off oneself and places it on something else, namely, those who have walked ahead of us. We should also make a conscience decision to lay aside the weight that easily sets us back. How does one do that? To begin, get on your knees, then (second) remove your eyes off the object that tempts you; thirdly, most importantly, let each of us look unto Jesus. Not only because He is there to help us, but also because He is the author of salvation. This means we have come to understand that there is nothing in me that can make things right, but I can turn to Him who is the essence of right and know that He already made things right. What He requires of me is trust and obedience (cf. Luke 6:46).

Jesus is sitting at the right hand of God’s throne. What kind of man is Jesus? He is no ordinary man; He can tame the Sea, He can heal a demon-possessed person, He can overcome the academics of His day, He is the one who values one human soul over a heard of life-stock, He can tell a lonely and sinful woman to “sin no more.” He is the Lord!

While people fear the unknown and the world of demons, the demons fear the Author of Life.

Jesus is the man!

 

The Fifth Commandment – Honor Your Father and Mother

05 Friday Apr 2019

Posted by in Sound Doctrine

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , ,

“Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long upon the land which the Lord your God is giving you” (Exodus 20:12).

It has been said many times that when one considers the Ten Commandments, it is not long before one notices the “geometric” approach taken by the Lord. In other words, the first four commands have a vertical approach to life, that is, in relationship to God, and the last 6 commands are focused on a horizontal approach, that is in relationship to one’s neighbor. Take note how this compares with the words of Jesus in Matthew 22:34-40, when Jesus said the two great commands are to love God with all of one’s being and to love one’s neighbor as one loves (takes care of) self.

The family is the basic community-unit of society. To break it down further, the basic unit of society is the individual, but the single person connects with one of the opposite sex in marriage (not otherwise) and forms the family. The dictionary defines a family as a “group of individuals living under one roof and usually under one head” (dictionary, p. 660). Though not a narrowly defined matter, it is a starting point for a conversation to begin. There are two perspectives to consider when seeking how one should understand the word “family.” First, the perspective of God; second, the perspective of the community as set forth by man. From God’s perspective, the family is established in matrimony. From this family comes children. The following words teaches us where it all begins:

And Jehovah God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof: and the rib, which Jehovah God had taken from the man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. And the man said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed (Gen. 2:21-25, ASV).  

With children coming forth from the mother and father, the parents are to instruct their children in God’s way. From the Lord’s perspective, if the children refused to submit the authority of the parents, there was severe punishment forthcoming. From parents comes wisdom that helps the youth to get along in life much better than if they did not have instructions in wisdom. If children are thieves, the Holy Spirit speaks of them as worthless (Proverbs 28:24). The negative qualities that are in children currently (perhaps) and in those who have grown up exist because, in part, parents have failed the children in upbringing. The children will learn if the parents compel it; the children will adjust to the correction if the punishment has meat to it, so to speak. As a parent, you are not your child’s best friend, you’re are a parent, a role of authority and responsibility. Whatever may be said about a “best friend” application in the rearing years of the child, the primary role of a parent is to nurture, teach, and correct so the child will be productive in his/her adult years, but more importantly, so the child will walk in the Lord’s ways. Parents are to be understanding of the children and they are to discipline as required (Proverbs 13:24; 23:13). As much as possible parents should stay away from, “Do as I say, not as I do.”

There is no way a child can honor parents when the chosen life to live is contrary to the guidance of their parents, just like there is no way to honor God when people choose to live life contrary to His holy way.

What it means to honor your parents then? The English word “honor” conveys the idea of respect, deference, esteem and give precedence to them over others. This is best understood by asking the question, “Do we honor the Lord?” We do this not only because of who He is but also on account of His love. To honor one’s parent/parents is to respect, defer, esteem and give precedence to them over others as one would do so to the Lord. Some parent/child relationships are scarred from earlier years, thus there may not be a direct emotional connection between the two. As much as is in you (those struggling with this), honor your parents because you want to please the Lord.

How do you honor someone who d/n deserve it? An admitted difficulty. Perhaps along this line we can make an application. It’s not the particular people and their behavior (past or current), but the fact you have life. To the degree that you can honor parenting, even when your parents failed you, to that degree you might be able to make sense of what should have been done even though it was not. It’s hard to respect and honor people who live in rebellion to God; nevertheless, because of your love and devotion to the Almighty, honor Him and what He says.

How does a person show any love or honor to parents who abandoned him? How does God show love toward one who not only spit on Jesus, but nailed the pegs into His flesh and watched as He writhed in agony?

The Fourth Commandment – Sabbath

01 Monday Apr 2019

Posted by in Sound Doctrine

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it (Exodus 20:8-11).

The Gospels are filled with the tension between Jesus and the Pharisees over the observance of the Sabbath (cf. John 5). Biblical history has shown the observance of the Sabbath day has been very important to the Israelite community; if one deliberately violated the Sabbath, judicial execution was the penalty (Exodus 31:14). To stay painfully close to the “letter of the law,” the Pharisees “strove to complete a formal code for Sabbath observance.” During one part of their history, Jewish armies refused to take up arms on the Sabbath. According to the Mishna (the Mishna is a collection of Jewish writings, compiled around A.D. 200), there were 39 forms of labor prohibited on the Sabbath. (McClintock-Strong, pp. 190 ff).

Are Christians obligated to observe the Sabbath? No, for two reasons: first, the Sabbath was given to the Israelite nation and no other (Exodus 31:15-17). Notice, it was exclusively to the Israelite nation. Secondly, under the New Covenant, the Old Law (Old Covenant) was nailed to the cross and this includes the specific command of Sabbath observance given to Israel (Colossians 2:14-15; cf. Jeremiah 31:31-34; Hebrews 8:7-12). Thus, when the Lord came, He took with Him to the cross the exclusivity of the entirety of the old Law with Him. The commands, all the commands and ordinances given to Moses to teach the community of Israel were put to death.

And you, being dead through your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, you, I say, did he make alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses; having blotted out the bond written in ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us: and he hath taken it out of the way, nailing it to the cross; having despoiled the principalities and the powers, he made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in it (Col. 2:13-15, ASV).

Some of those commands given by God to Moses transcends covenants; that simply means the positive application, or the negative prohibition always apply to any people regardless of which covenant is in force. In the case of Israel, most of those commands given by God to Moses were narrowly focused for an Israelite application, such as Leviticus 23. Under the New Covenant, there is no exclusivity to an ethnic people like there was under the Old Covenant.

Sometimes there is an objection offered such as the following: “Are you telling me God nailed only the fourth command of the Decalogue to the cross, but left the other nine for a New Testament implementation? Where is that in the New Testament [NT]?”

What this objection entails is this: there is a disconnect in understanding why the Lord would take all but one command from the Ten Words (commandments) and bring them into a NT application, leaving out only the fourth command out. One may understand the significance of “nailing to the cross” the commands/ordinances of Moses, such as in Exodus 22-24 or Leviticus 23, but how can that which is interpreted as God’s moral Law be nailed to the cross?

This is a failure to understand the role of the Law of Moses to an exclusive people. The Sabbath Day was a day to keep holy, to set apart as a day of rest. It is important to notice the sabbath command is not given to any people as the command to be observed previous to what one reads in Exodus 16. Many “Sabbatarians” (people who insist on observing the sabbath day command in a New Testament context) would have you understand the sabbath command goes back to the time of Genesis 1 and 2, but this is false. When the Lord made the seventh day of the week holy, He made it holy but obligated no people, as far as the biblical Record is concerned, to observe a seventh-day rest from work, or anything else. It’s not until one reads Exodus 16, thousands of years after creation, that the Lord enjoined the Israelites to this command. It is not unreasonable for one to interpret the words of Holy Scripture in Genesis 2:1-3 and conclude the seventh day of the work week is holy and set aside for the Lord. It’s not unreasonable to conclude this, but to obligate a person, when the Lord has not done so, is putting more into the biblical text than can be sustained in discussion.

If you look at the reference to Jeremiah 31 from above, you will notice the Lord’s words to Jeremiah are prophetic in nature, saying the New Covenant is not like the Old Covenant, thus the complete putting away of the Old for the New (31:31-32). The value of what we call the Old Covenant is as Paul said in Romans 15:4, “For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that through patience and through comfort of the scriptures we might have hope” (ASV).

There is a principle for us in “the day of rest” command given to Israel. Many people have negatively influenced themselves and family members with continued secular working on the first day of the week, failing to put any degree of priority on one’s spiritual health or on God’s desire and demand to meet with the saints. It will catch up with those so guilty. RT

The Third Commandment – Profane the Lord’s Name 

30 Saturday Mar 2019

Posted by in Sound Doctrine

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

“You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, for the Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes His name in vain” (Exodus 20:7). What is in view? It is a prohibition against false swearing and includes the idea of profane or vain swearing. Dennis Prager gives a perspective that slightly varies from this. “Do not carry God’s name in vain” (Exodus, p. 245). Since God’s name is holy, one who carries God’s name, like Islamist terrorists or religious leaders who prey on people (woman, children, same-sex, greed), these are people who say one thing (in God’s name) but do the opposite of that which the Lord would Himself do, thus, it is not simply a matter of using words.

More than the use of the words is in mind, but an actual way of thinking and living is in view. Do not be misled, however. Before the way of thinking and living can begin to exist, it must first start with outside influences, outside influences as seen in lives lived and words spoken. There are many who use words with no intent to speak profanely but be guilty just the same. It may be that a person is uninformed (ignorant) of wrong doing, but still be guilty of doing wrong.

The New Bible Dictionary says, “[s]trictly speaking, Yahweh [Jehovah] is the only ‘name’ of God.” Further, “The name is no mere label, but is significant of the real personality of him to whom it belongs” (pp. 429-431). The importance of this is in relation to how you would think of it if one were to misuse your name. For instance, your name is “Tom.” A slight acquaintance of yours comes up to you and calls you “Tim.” It is likely you will gently correct that person. If the same person, knowing your name then comes up and purposely calls you by another name, mocks your name or misuses or abuses your name – how would you feel about that?

The Scriptures attests great significance to the qualities/character of God. In the model prayer (Matthew 6:9-14), the Lord taught His disciples to “hallow” the Lord’s name, keep His name holy in one’s thinking, speaking and living. “The big man upstairs” (or some similar expression) is not a reflection of reverence.

Some try to avoid misusing the Lord’s name, instead a substitute is used with little to no thought about its association. This is known as a euphemism (a substitute). Rather than saying “oh my god!”, some say, “oh my gosh!” Look in any dictionary and you’ll see the word “gosh” is used as a substitute for “God.” Perhaps the intent of the person using the word is because it’s less offensive and there is no desire to use “God” in cavalier way. Commendable, I grant you.

The point in these words is not to prohibit expressions as much as it is to educate about the significance of the Lord’s name, how we need to respect and honor Him who has that name or mark of identification. To misuse the Lord’s name is to express disrespect and to violate the spirit of the command given to the nation of Israel.

“He sent redemption unto his people: he hath commanded his covenant for ever: holy and reverend is his name” (Psalm 111:9; KJV). The Lord God redeemed (saved) a people from bondage, He gave the same people a covenant to live by in order to bring them to His desired spot, a resting place with Him in Glory. His name, then, to those who love the Lord, is holy (set apart and sanctified) and it is to be revered, that is, to be feared. The Holy Spirit said, “It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Heb. 10:31). RT

 

The Second Commandment – Religious Relics

25 Monday Mar 2019

Posted by in Sound Doctrine

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , ,

“You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me, but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments” (Exodus 20:4-6).

No Carved Images. The previous command gave attention to the object of worship, now this one with how one is to not approach the Lord. Those who worship the Lord do not need a visual reminder, an aid to facilitate worship in the proper way. It was Jesus who said that each person who comes to come must come to Him in spirit and truth. “God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship in spirit and truth” (John 4:24, ASV).

To create an object for the sake of visual appearance is to limit the Almighty to that created object. In other words, the object becomes holy and more than just a representation. The condemnation of the Lord is not against art or sculpture, per se, but against that which would be used in worship (cf. Deut. 4:15-19). One of the reasons for the popularity of religious relics, purchased nearly anywhere, is that an image helps one reflect and think on that which is divine. The Lord said this is not necessary, in fact, He forbids it.

No created object is to represent the Lord or that which is of and by Him. Since this is so, it is even more the case no one is to bow down before a created object used in worship. Genuinely motivated as they are, the Catholic Church clearly understands what is being said, so they seek for an explicitly forbidden command from the Lord, but those faithful to the Lord understand the spirit of the prohibition.

In churches of Christ, we are not immune to a similar Catholic approach. For instance, in a practical application, the forbiddance of religious relics/objects is in relation to worship, not in how a building is used. Some brethren consider the building sacred, their denials not notwithstanding. Is it proper to eat inside a church building? There is nothing inherently wrong with doing so, so it matters not whether one does or does not. However, some brethren will divide (and have divided) the church strongly resisting any eating inside of the church building. In their assertion of saying there is no authority for it, it has become a religious relic. Interestingly enough, if the state demands something before a building can be used by the general public, such as a building permit, a restroom or bathroom facilities much be built. Thus, it’s alright to defecate in the building, but not eat. Go figure that one!

The basis of idolatry is self-will. To have an idol of any sort is to rebel against God in that which He commands. The Scripture speaks of God as a jealous God. He goes to great lengths to redeem – and this is the thanks He gets! This self-will approach is also known as spiritual adultery. Spiritual adultery has long tentacles, limbs the reach out and sink roots of destruction in following generations. People who do not obey, whether out of ignorance or rebellion, are people who hate the Lord; there is no interest in obeying His commands. It does not matter that a person rejects the use of the word hate in this context, for there are really only two options from which to choose. First, if one loves the Lord obedience follows; if one does not obey the Lord then it is necessarily the case one hates the Lord’s way. Jesus said, “No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon” (Matthew 6:24).

APPLICATION. Those who love the Lord will worship Him in spirit and truth. Worship is a matter of genuine interest in pleasing the Lord (not one’s self) and in accordance with His revealed word. Those who love the Lord are not ignorant of His word, they choose to obey Him who is the giver of life. RT

January 2019 bulletin article (enhanced)

CATEGORY: Sound Doctrine; TAGS: