Much has been said recently about Andy Stanley's sermon series "Who Needs God?", particularly his comments about the Bible in the third installment; "The Bible Tells Me So". His statements about the foundation of faith in Jesus Christ are very confused and take a classical apologetic approach much to far. Classical apologetics will take a presupposition like the inspiration, inerrancy, and infallibility of the Bible and, for the sake of argument, lay that aside. But, Andy Stanley seems to be encouraging the jettisoning of that view in everything but name only. There has been some very good analysis of the problems with his position already. I won't comment on them anymore. See the links below, including one that supports Pastor Stanley.
http://michaeljkruger.com/is-the-bible-foundational-to-christianity-engaging-with-andy-stanley/
http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2016/09/is-christianity-bookish-faith.html
http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2016/09/the-big-bad-wolf.html
http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2016/09/inerrancy-and-general-historical.html
http://crossexamined.org/andy-stanley-right-foundation-christianity-defend/ (defends Andy Stanley)
What I would like to address are his comments in the second part; "Gods of the No Testament". The part I will discuss below starts at about 25 minutes in on the message only version.
http://northpointonline.tv/messages/who-needs-god/gods-of-the-no-testament
In the sermon, Andy rightly attacks people's misconceived notions about who God is. The aptly named "somebody-told-me-so god". In other words, someone along the line told a Christian this is who God is, but in reality that's not correct, such as; "bodyguard god". This god stops at nothing to protect you and supply all your needs according to your whim at the moment. Andy gives other examples of gods that are not real and does a fair job of deconstructing them. Where he falls apart, however, is in "anti-science god". His overarching message is that the details of creation do not constitute the foundation of our faith and we shouldn't abandon God over them. For instance, and this is my example, not his; a hyper-literal reading of the Bible would suggest that the Earth is flat. When someone finds out, after being told that the Earth is flat, that we have scientific and photographic evidence that the Earth is round, they shouldn't abandon God. They should rethink their interpretation of scripture by paying attention to poetic or metaphoric language based on the literary genre of the passage they are reading. So, here, I think Pastor Stanley is correct. However, he quickly ventures into dangerous territory.
His opening remarks about "anti-science god" pit "undeniable science vs. unreliable religion". He also says: "When religion and science conflict, at the end of the day, if you are an honest person, science must win. But the message that we get sometimes, the message you grew up with, and perhaps the reason you just walked away from God, is you grew up with a message that said; "Quit thinking and start believing!". This is very confused. Of course, if you were told to quit thinking, then that is wrong. But, does that mean that you just believe science in every instance where it supposedly conflicts with the Bible? Hardly. I'm not suggesting we ignore the advances of science, but Andy is talking about science as if it is an authoritative and infallible body of knowledge that should never be challenged. Really!? If scientific knowledge is monolithic and infallible, why are there so many competing theories on various topics? Let's take cosmology for instance. Which theory of the universes' origin is undeniable? The standard model, oscillating model, chaotic inflationary model, vacuum fluctuation model, quantum gravity model, or the cyclic ekpyrotic model? The standard model is the generally accepted model of universe origins due to its broad defensibility based on observable evidence, although opinion is somewhat splintered. Guess what? This model fits with a plain reading of Genesis 1 on either a young earth or an old earth view.
Andy continues by saying that "God or science is a false alternative". Three cheers for him! I totally agree. But then he puts his foot in his mouth with a terrible example. Christians are hypocrites for using medicinal science to heal our kids and ignoring science in other areas. We take them to the doctor while we pray in the background. This is some major equivocation concerning "science". Medicinal science is not the same as say, theoretical astrophysics. First of all, the use of antibiotics for instance, does not conflict with anything in the Bible. Praying and taking your kid to the doctor is perfectly OK. There is no command in scripture that says we should only pray to God when someone gets sick. This also ignores the fact that ultimately, God's sovereignty and providence rule that situation anyway, no matter what the doctors do. Secondly, as I said before, Andy is equivocating on the term science. He is putting all things considered science into one big lump and clearly they are not the same. He is using an obviously wrongheaded example, the use of doctors and medicine for sick kids, to say that we, as Christians, should accept all science, even when it conflicts with the Bible. That is a false transference that doesn't logically follow.
Just to make sure we're not confused, Andy says: "The moment your theology conflicts with the discoveries of science, you have a theological problem, not a science problem." And a little later: "We're hypocrites. If we lean into science for our health, why would we reject science in any other capacity?" It is no wonder why Andy views the Bible the way he does. He has an "undeniable" body of science that informs his worldview, including how he reads and interprets the Bible. In my understanding of what his sermon means: he isn't suggesting that we see where our reading of scripture might be wrong in light of science (or vice versa) and then see how we can attempt to make them compatible, like the flat Earth example above (if compatibility, broadly speaking, is possible and I'm not saying that it is in all cases); he is suggesting that we always believe in the science and simply abandon scripture that doesn't fit or reinterpret it to make it fit. This is a very misinformed and confused view of the interplay of science and religion. Look here for a short, but informative article about this topic. As believers in Jesus, I think we are called to read two books. The Bible and the book of nature or what theologians have traditionally called natural revelation. We should always be asking the question: are we, as fallen humanity, reading both correctly?
Andy also seems to be missing the fact that the preaching of the Gospel, combined with the drawing of the Father to Christ and the conviction of the Holy Spirit on an unbeliever, are how God has ordained salvation to be effected. As I have taught in my classes at church, apologetic methods are a secondary tool to the Gospel. In the end, I think Andy Stanley wants to knock down as many barriers as possible to faith in Jesus Christ. I think he is muddying the waters by taking his apologetic method too far. These are noble intentions, but noble intentions don't always produce noble results.
Showing posts with label scripture. Show all posts
Showing posts with label scripture. Show all posts
Monday, September 26, 2016
Monday, August 22, 2016
Shepherds Feeding Themselves
There is an interesting connection between two passages in two very different books of the Bible. Jude 12 and Ezekiel 34:1-10 being those texts. Part of Jude 12 says: "These are...shepherds feeding themselves". This is said by way of analogy concerning the false teachers Jude is writing about. It is in the midst of a string of six analogies Jude uses to discuss what these false teachers are like. Likewise, Ezekiel 34:1-10 speaks of shepherds feeding themselves:
"The word of the Lord came to me: “Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel; prophesy, and say to them, even to the shepherds, Thus says the Lord God: Ah, shepherds of Israel who have been feeding yourselves! Should not shepherds feed the sheep? You eat the fat, you clothe yourselves with the wool, you slaughter the fat ones, but you do not feed the sheep. The weak you have not strengthened, the sick you have not healed, the injured you have not bound up, the strayed you have not brought back, the lost you have not sought, and with force and harshness you have ruled them. So they were scattered, because there was no shepherd, and they became food for all the wild beasts. My sheep were scattered; they wandered over all the mountains and on every high hill. My sheep were scattered over all the face of the earth, with none to search or seek for them.
"Therefore, you shepherds, hear the word of the Lord: As I live, declares the Lord God, surely because my sheep have become a prey, and my sheep have become food for all the wild beasts, since there was no shepherd, and because my shepherds have not searched for my sheep, but the shepherds have fed themselves, and have not fed my sheep, therefore, you shepherds, hear the word of the Lord: Thus says the Lord God, Behold, I am against the shepherds, and I will require my sheep at their hand and put a stop to their feeding the sheep. No longer shall the shepherds feed themselves. I will rescue my sheep from their mouths, that they may not be food for them."
The passages are related in wording and subject matter, but have a different audience. Jude is addressing Christians with a warning of these false teachers who will do nothing but feed themselves. Ezekiel is prophesying a word from God directed at the shepherds of Israel as a warning of their evil behavior. While these passages are separated by a considerable amount of time from each other and from our time, they carry the same lesson that can help us right now. Ezekiel was written from approximately 595-575 BC. Most of the book is about the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in 586 BC as well as the promises God makes to restore Israel. Jerusalem was destroyed because God had become fed up with the idolatry taking place in Israel. The "shepherds of Israel" were not merely participating in the idolatrous practices of the people, they were leading them (Ezekiel chapters 5-16). Jude most likely wrote late in the apostolic era, sometime around 65-80 AD. False teachers had slithered in to a congregation that Jude had apparently taught (Jude 5) and encouraged the disciples to use the grace of God to practice sexual immorality (Jude 4).
What can be said concerning how this relates to our time is this: there were shepherds feeding themselves in Ezekiel's time; 600 years later there were shepherds feeding themselves in Jude's time; chances are there are shepherds feeding themselves in our time (Jesus said there would be tares; Matt. 13:24-30) and these passages give us a clue as to what they act like and how we should deal with them.
1. Feeding the sheep is the shepherd's job. If a leader is feeding himself first, he isn't doing his job. If he isn't caring for the weak, the sick, the injured, or the strayed and lost, he isn't doing his job. If he is leading people astray with false teachings and encouraging sinful lifestyles, he isn't doing his job.
2. Ruling with force and harshness is not the way to lead. The fruit of the Holy Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control (Gal. 5:22-23). If a leader doesn't reflect these there is something wrong.
3. In the Ezekiel passage, verse 10, the Lord says: "I will require my sheep at their hand". Shepherds will be held accountable for the guidance they give their flock. This goes both ways: bad shepherds will face a fearful judgment and should be warned when they are not fulfilling their duties, and possibly even shunned and ignored while a body of believers builds themselves up (Jude 19-20), while good shepherds should be honored and given the benefit of the doubt considering the huge responsibility they have in being entrusted with a flock from God.
There are a lot of people putting themselves out there as "shepherds" of God's people in various ways. As an example, go to Lifeway or Family Christian bookstores and check out the enormous number of books being written about just about any topic you can think of concerning the Christian life. They are all trying to be shepherds in some way to the body of Christ. The message of this post is that not all of the people who put themselves forward as leaders should be trusted as sent from God. 1 John 4:1 says: "Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world." It is our duty as Christians to test every spirit and see if they are acting in accordance with the guidelines God has shown us in his word.
"The word of the Lord came to me: “Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel; prophesy, and say to them, even to the shepherds, Thus says the Lord God: Ah, shepherds of Israel who have been feeding yourselves! Should not shepherds feed the sheep? You eat the fat, you clothe yourselves with the wool, you slaughter the fat ones, but you do not feed the sheep. The weak you have not strengthened, the sick you have not healed, the injured you have not bound up, the strayed you have not brought back, the lost you have not sought, and with force and harshness you have ruled them. So they were scattered, because there was no shepherd, and they became food for all the wild beasts. My sheep were scattered; they wandered over all the mountains and on every high hill. My sheep were scattered over all the face of the earth, with none to search or seek for them.
"Therefore, you shepherds, hear the word of the Lord: As I live, declares the Lord God, surely because my sheep have become a prey, and my sheep have become food for all the wild beasts, since there was no shepherd, and because my shepherds have not searched for my sheep, but the shepherds have fed themselves, and have not fed my sheep, therefore, you shepherds, hear the word of the Lord: Thus says the Lord God, Behold, I am against the shepherds, and I will require my sheep at their hand and put a stop to their feeding the sheep. No longer shall the shepherds feed themselves. I will rescue my sheep from their mouths, that they may not be food for them."
The passages are related in wording and subject matter, but have a different audience. Jude is addressing Christians with a warning of these false teachers who will do nothing but feed themselves. Ezekiel is prophesying a word from God directed at the shepherds of Israel as a warning of their evil behavior. While these passages are separated by a considerable amount of time from each other and from our time, they carry the same lesson that can help us right now. Ezekiel was written from approximately 595-575 BC. Most of the book is about the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in 586 BC as well as the promises God makes to restore Israel. Jerusalem was destroyed because God had become fed up with the idolatry taking place in Israel. The "shepherds of Israel" were not merely participating in the idolatrous practices of the people, they were leading them (Ezekiel chapters 5-16). Jude most likely wrote late in the apostolic era, sometime around 65-80 AD. False teachers had slithered in to a congregation that Jude had apparently taught (Jude 5) and encouraged the disciples to use the grace of God to practice sexual immorality (Jude 4).
What can be said concerning how this relates to our time is this: there were shepherds feeding themselves in Ezekiel's time; 600 years later there were shepherds feeding themselves in Jude's time; chances are there are shepherds feeding themselves in our time (Jesus said there would be tares; Matt. 13:24-30) and these passages give us a clue as to what they act like and how we should deal with them.
1. Feeding the sheep is the shepherd's job. If a leader is feeding himself first, he isn't doing his job. If he isn't caring for the weak, the sick, the injured, or the strayed and lost, he isn't doing his job. If he is leading people astray with false teachings and encouraging sinful lifestyles, he isn't doing his job.
2. Ruling with force and harshness is not the way to lead. The fruit of the Holy Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control (Gal. 5:22-23). If a leader doesn't reflect these there is something wrong.
3. In the Ezekiel passage, verse 10, the Lord says: "I will require my sheep at their hand". Shepherds will be held accountable for the guidance they give their flock. This goes both ways: bad shepherds will face a fearful judgment and should be warned when they are not fulfilling their duties, and possibly even shunned and ignored while a body of believers builds themselves up (Jude 19-20), while good shepherds should be honored and given the benefit of the doubt considering the huge responsibility they have in being entrusted with a flock from God.
There are a lot of people putting themselves out there as "shepherds" of God's people in various ways. As an example, go to Lifeway or Family Christian bookstores and check out the enormous number of books being written about just about any topic you can think of concerning the Christian life. They are all trying to be shepherds in some way to the body of Christ. The message of this post is that not all of the people who put themselves forward as leaders should be trusted as sent from God. 1 John 4:1 says: "Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world." It is our duty as Christians to test every spirit and see if they are acting in accordance with the guidelines God has shown us in his word.
Monday, July 25, 2016
The Holy Spirit in the New Testament: Paul's Letters
In part one we looked at the Gospel's information about the Holy Spirit. In part two we looked at Acts. Now we are going to take a look at Paul's letters. These are the letters written to particular churches/regions and the Pastoral epistles with specific admonitions and corrections for them. These letters are Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, and Titus. Philemon says nothing about the HS.
Romans
1:4
Jesus is declared to be the Son of God by the proof of his resurrection which was through the working of the HS. This is a proof that Jesus is divine.
2:29
It is the HS that circumcises our hearts. I think this means that we are cleansed by the HS, given a new heart by the HS, and as we will see later on in Galatians, makes us partakers of God's covenant with Abraham and thus "a Jew" inwardly.
5:5
This could be a follow-up to 2:29. The HS is the deliverer of God's love that has transformed our hearts. This allows us grace to suffer, endure, gain character, and hope (v. 3-4) as we await his return.
7:6
Paul is here juxtaposing the law and the Spirit. The Spirit is the new way, the way of freedom. The law is what held us captive and that we are no longer a slave thanks to the HS's work in our lives.
8:2-17
Paul expounds the point he started on in 7:6. The HS has set us free from the law (v. 2) and when we walk in step with the HS the law is fulfilled (v. 4). This means our mind is set on the things of the Spirit (v.5) which gives us life and peace (v. 6). If you do not have the HS, you are not of God and do not have life (v. 9-10). The HS will give us life just as he did Jesus Christ (v. 11). Finally, the HS bears witness that we are God's (v. 15-16) and this means we are adopted Sons of God.
8:23
As Paul continues, he says that the Romans have the firstfruits of the Spirit which testifies about our adoption that will be complete when Christ returns. Like the rest of creation, we groan for it to be remade.
8:26-27
The HS helps us pray by interceding according to the will of God. This is not a proof of praying in heavenly language tongues. The text clearly says that the "groanings [are] too deep for words."
9:1
Paul says that his conscience bears him witness in the HS. In other words the HS is reassuring Paul he actually is telling the truth.
14:17
A blunt statement from Paul about the uselessness of the law for the Kingdom of God. The kingdom is about the righteousness, peace, and joy in the HS. I presume that Paul is talking about the earthly evidence of the kingdom that will come in full when Christ returns.
15:13
Only through the HS can we have hope.
15:16
The HS sanctifies believers. This context is the Gentiles.
15:18-19
Paul evangelized Gentiles by word and deed, power of signs and wonders, and power of the HS. I think all of these things were empowered by the HS.
15:30
Paul appeals to the Romans by the love of the HS.
1 Corinthians
2:4
Paul tells the Corinthians that his message was by the power of the HS, not just his own worldly wisdom.
2:9-16
This is an important passage. Paul says that God reveals the hope of glory by the HS (v. 9-10). He then says that only the spirit of a person knows that person's thoughts (v. 11a), so only the HS knows the thoughts of God (v. 11b). We have received this HS (v. 12a) so we can understand godly things (v. 12b) and impart them to others (v. 13). The natural person doesn't understand these godly things because he doesn't have the HS (v. 14). We can judge all things by the HS (v. 15) because the HS knows the "mind of the Lord" (v. 16a) which is the very same "mind of Christ" that we have (v. 16b). This is what gives us the ability to read and ponder the Bible with clarity and understanding and why the Bible seems so ridiculous and foolish to those not being led by the HS.
3:16
We are the temple of God because the HS dwells in us. This correlates to the presence of God dwelling in the tabernacle/temple in the OT. We don't have to go to a certain place to worship and serve God (John 4:21-24).
6:11
When a believer is save they are washed, sanctified, and justified in Jesus Christ. Because of the finished work of the cross, it does not require any work on our part. This all happens by the power of the HS.
6:19
We are the temple of the HS. This tells us once again that the HS is God when we compare this with 3:16.
7:40
Paul comments that he too has the Spirit of God. I think he is saying that he is writing under inspiration from God on the matter of unmarried and widows (v. 25-39).
12:3
No one can say "Jesus is Lord" without the HS. Does this mean that everyone who says this combination of words is a faithful servant of Jesus Christ teaching everything correctly? No, I don't think Paul has that kind of mechanical view here. I think he is saying that those who actually profess Jesus as Lord and mean it can only do so by the HS. The mere annunciation of the words "Jesus is Lord" don't serve to prove anything about a person.
12:4
The HS gives out a variety of gifts.
12:7
The gifts or manifestations as Paul now calls them, are for the common good of the body of Christ.
12:8-11
The gifts of the HS are listed. Paul continues his line of thought that these gifts are all from the same Spirit. They are for individuals and the HS gives as he wills. While we might have one of these gifts (there are other gifts listed elsewhere in Paul's writings: Romans 12:6-8; 1 Cor. 7:7; 1 Cor. 12:28; Ephesians 4:11; 1 Peter 4:11 also), it is the HS who has the charge of operating through us with the gifts. A person is not empowered with healing for instance, and can go around healing people at will. It is very clearly up to the HS's will (i.e. God's will), not ours. This also doesn't mean that a believer only has one gift. They may have multiple. Finally, as we will see shortly, this list is not comprehensive by any means and some of these gifts are mingled with others which leads me to the conclusion that Paul was listing gifts off the top of his head as examples of spiritual gifts, not as an exhaustive list. I will talk about his more at 1 Cor. 12:14-30 (v. 28 in particular).
12:13
This verse is interpreted differently in various translations, but sometimes (NIV) it is translated as "For we were all baptized in one Spirit into one body-whether Jews or Greeks, slave or free-and we were all given the one Spirit to drink." This is a similar phrase to the baptism in the HS from the Gospels and Acts that we have already discussed. Is this another example of the Pentecostal baptism in the HS? Pentecostals would say no, because the context is clearly talking about when the Corinthians were saved, not a subsequent experience of empowerment by the HS. I don't think this interpretation holds up however. The prima facie reading of this statement seems the same to me as John the Baptists' "baptism with the HS." Wayne Grudem, in his Systematic Theology (pg. 766-773), makes a compelling case from the Greek text that it is essentially the same phrase. This makes baptism in the HS a salvation experience. But, as I said when writing about Acts, I think that there are several things that happen as a person is converted and walks with Christ that could happen in any order God chooses. Figuring out exactly what order isn't important, it is being aware of all that God has to offer when he decides to give it to us.
12:14-30
Paul finishes this section (12:1-30) by explaining that there are different gifts so the whole Church can be built up and operate as God intended. He compares this to a body and its parts, which must work together or they will fail. No one has all the gifts and all the answers for guiding the Church, except God, who is giving out all these gifts to be used in harmony. In verse 28 we find another list of gifts, the second of this chapter. What is interesting is that miracles, healing, and tongues are mixed in with other gifts that were not mentioned in v. 8-11. This makes me think that none of Paul's lists are exhaustive as I said above. We will look at another list in Eph. 4.
13
This whole chapter says that without love, these gifts mean nothing. What does this have to do with the HS? The first fruit listed in Gal. 5:22 is love, which is manifested in us when we walk by the Spirit. Of note here as well is verse 10: "...when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away." Cessationists will say that the gifts were for the apostles (or the apostolic age) only. They then died away after the church was built up and off the ground so to speak. The "perfect" is the canon of scripture that is our guide. We don't need the gifts anymore. Paul goes on to say that "For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known" (v. 12). What is the now and then? It seems to me that Paul is talking about when Christ comes. Mirrors don't show images perfectly, just like the gifts don't show God perfectly. Earthly knowledge, even if led by the HS in discovery, isn't perfect, but when Christ comes we will see him perfectly and know him perfectly just as he knows us now.
14:2
Speaking in tongues is to God because no one understands the "mysteries in the Spirit." Paul is saying that there should be an interpretation if a tongue is given or else it is not useful to the body.
14:12
The Corinthians, who were eager for the HS to operate openly, need to operate in the gifts that build up the church. That means interpreted tongues and singing in the Spirit per verse13. This whole chapter is concerned with the appropriate use of the gifts which Paul says should be in order (v. 26-33).
2 Corinthians
1:22
The HS is a believers' guarantee or down payment of salvation that will be paid in full when we are glorified with Christ at his second coming.
3:3
Here Paul is using a metaphor. The Corinthians are a letter written with the HS on tablets of human hearts. This relates directly to the previous verse about the HS living with us. Paul also says "Spirit of the living God" indicating for us, once again, that the HS is God.
3:6
Paul says he is a minister of the new covenant that is of the Spirit, not the letter. The HS gives life while the letter kills. This hearkens back to Jesus saying that one must be born again to enter the kingdom (John 3:3-8) and to creation when the HS was instrumental in the universe's "birth" (Gen. 1:2) and mankind's "birth" (Gen. 2:7).
3:8
Paul again constrats the ministry of the Spirit and the letter. If the law (letters) had glory, how much more does the Spirit have?
3:17-18
Here we have an explicit statement of the HS being God. Paul uses the word Lord (kyrios) and says that "the Lord who is the Spirit." This Spirit, who is God, gives freedom. Freedom to behold God in his glory which then transforms us into his image.
6:6
Paul says that his ministry is marked by the HS in commendation.
Galatians
3:2-6
Paul asks a series of rhetorical questions of the Galatians as they struggle with a false gospel from the Judaizers who want to add works of the law to the finished work of Christ. In order, the answers are:
1. We received the HS by hearing with faith
2. Yes, we can all be that foolish.
3. We are not ever perfected by the flesh.
4. We don't have to suffer in vain.
5. By hearing with faith, just like Abraham.
This passage makes it very clear that we are saved by the work of Christ through the HS and not by works of any law (Paul just happens to be dealing with Mosaic law, but all laws are useless to earn eternal life).
4:6
This is an interesting verse. Note the order. We are sons, therefore the HS is in our hearts. This could go two ways (at least). This could be seen as adoption first, then the HS. Or it could be that adoption follows conversion as two separate events in which the HS is performing different actions at different times. It seems more natural to me to read this passage and related ones (Gal. 3:26; Rom. 8:15-16) as a single event that encompass several things at once: justification, conversion, adoption, regeneration. All of this is accompanied by the HS doing all sorts of things.
4:29
During Paul's analogy concerning Ishmael (the flesh) and Isaac (the Spirit) he says that the former's persecution of the latter is happening now. The flesh torments the Spirit.
5:5-23
We wait in hope only by the HS, through faith. Paul then continues contrasting the flesh and the Spirit urging the Galatians to forsake the false gospel hindering them and live according to the Spirit. He tells them that the Spirit is against the flesh and vice-versa. In verse 22 he recounts the fruit of the HS: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. Unlike the various HS gift lists, there is only one fruit list. Since Paul says that all the gifts are worthless without love and love is one of the fruits of the HS; it follows that the fruit is more important than the gifts. Something that many in the Christian world seem to get backwards.
6:8
As Paul concludes the flesh/Spirit comparison he says that the flesh reaps corruption and the Spirit reaps eternal life.
Ephesians
1:17
Paul is praying that the Ephesians receive the HS, which he describes as being of wisdom and revelation. This wisdom and revelation is related to Christ's finished work and the hope of glory that awaits us (v. 18-21).
2:18
In the HS we have access to the Father through Jesus.
2:22
Paul again says that we are a dwelling place for God like 1 Cor. 3:16 does (as individuals). The HS is building us. This is in the context of the whole Church this time.
3:5
The mystery of the Gospel is revealed to apostles and prophets of this age by the HS. If you know anything about Mormon doctrine, you know that they believe that the "fullness of the Gospel" was preached in every generation and lost. That includes Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, etc. But, Paul nixes that idea in this verse. The Gospel, he says "was not made known to the sons of men in other generations as it has now been revealed."
3:16-17
The power of the HS gives us faith so that Christ can dwell in us.
4:3-4
Paul urges the Ephesians to be unified which can only take place by the one HS.
4:30
The HS should not be grieved. The HS seals us for the day of redemption. This again shows that it is God's work to save and persevere us, not ours.
5:18
An oft-quoted verse. We should always be filled with the HS. The verb tense makes this something like "be being filled with the HS". It is a continuing action that we should always be doing. The HS will fill us if we don't grieve him (4:30).
6:17-18
The sword of the HS is the word of God. It is our offensive weapon against the enemy. We should also pray in the HS. This could mean tongues, like a heavenly prayer language (1 Cor. 14), or with the HS intercessing (Rom 8:26-27).
Philippians
1:19
The HS helps Paul's ministry. The HS is called the "Spirit of Jesus Christ" in this passage. This rounds out the names for the HS in the NT. He has been called the HS, comforter, teacher, Spirit of the Father, Spirit of God, and now Spirit of Christ. It should be clear now that there is some realtionship between the Father, Son, and HS that goes beyond master and servant. They are being equated by the use of these names.
2:1
Paul encourages the Philippians to have unity. If they have any participation in the HS, they will be unified.
3:3
Worship is by the HS. This hearkens back to John 4:24. It is only through the HS (and truth!) that we can properly worship God.
Colossians
1:8
Love is in the HS, per 1 Cor. 13.
1 Thessalonians
1:5-6
The Gospel came to the Thessalonians in the HS (Rom 15:18-19; 1 Cor 2:4) and they received it in the joy of the HS (Gal 5:22).
4:8
God gives the HS to you. The physics of this means that the Father, the Son, and the HS give the HS to you. This makes the HS a person because he is willingly giving himself to you. He can't have a will without being a person.
5:19
"Do not quench the Spirit." Enough said
2 Thessalonians
2:13
The HS sanctifies believers, which means he cleanses us in preparation for our final redemption.
1 Timothy
3:16
Speaking of Christ, Paul says that he was "vindicated [or justified] by the Spirit." I think this is talking about his resurrection which happened through the HS. The order would make sense as well with that interpretation.
4:1
The HS prophesied about the end times.
2 Timothy
1:14
Paul tells Timothy to guard the deposit (the Gosepl v. 8-13) by the HS. Presumably, he is telling him not to wander from the actual Gospel as that is the thrust of this whole section.
Titus
3:5
Another instance of the sanctifying work of the HS.
Paul's letters carry a few themes that recur.
1. We are both individually and collectively a temple(s) of the HS. This is God's presence inside of us just like he descended on the tabernacle and the temple in the OT.
2. The Gospel message is delivered in the power of the HS, not in fancy arguments.
3. The HS is God. We can deduce this from the various names the HS is called throughout Paul's letters as well as the Gospels and Acts.
4. The HS is preparing us for the 2nd coming of Christ. He circumcises our hearts, seals us, sanctifies us, washes us, and testifies to us that we are sons of God.
5. The HS's work is ongoing in both the gifts (less important) and the fruit (more important). Remember, without love nothing is worthwhile including the HS's gifts.
Next time we will finish this series by covering the general epistles including Revelation.
Romans
1:4
Jesus is declared to be the Son of God by the proof of his resurrection which was through the working of the HS. This is a proof that Jesus is divine.
2:29
It is the HS that circumcises our hearts. I think this means that we are cleansed by the HS, given a new heart by the HS, and as we will see later on in Galatians, makes us partakers of God's covenant with Abraham and thus "a Jew" inwardly.
5:5
This could be a follow-up to 2:29. The HS is the deliverer of God's love that has transformed our hearts. This allows us grace to suffer, endure, gain character, and hope (v. 3-4) as we await his return.
7:6
Paul is here juxtaposing the law and the Spirit. The Spirit is the new way, the way of freedom. The law is what held us captive and that we are no longer a slave thanks to the HS's work in our lives.
8:2-17
Paul expounds the point he started on in 7:6. The HS has set us free from the law (v. 2) and when we walk in step with the HS the law is fulfilled (v. 4). This means our mind is set on the things of the Spirit (v.5) which gives us life and peace (v. 6). If you do not have the HS, you are not of God and do not have life (v. 9-10). The HS will give us life just as he did Jesus Christ (v. 11). Finally, the HS bears witness that we are God's (v. 15-16) and this means we are adopted Sons of God.
8:23
As Paul continues, he says that the Romans have the firstfruits of the Spirit which testifies about our adoption that will be complete when Christ returns. Like the rest of creation, we groan for it to be remade.
8:26-27
The HS helps us pray by interceding according to the will of God. This is not a proof of praying in heavenly language tongues. The text clearly says that the "groanings [are] too deep for words."
9:1
Paul says that his conscience bears him witness in the HS. In other words the HS is reassuring Paul he actually is telling the truth.
14:17
A blunt statement from Paul about the uselessness of the law for the Kingdom of God. The kingdom is about the righteousness, peace, and joy in the HS. I presume that Paul is talking about the earthly evidence of the kingdom that will come in full when Christ returns.
15:13
Only through the HS can we have hope.
15:16
The HS sanctifies believers. This context is the Gentiles.
15:18-19
Paul evangelized Gentiles by word and deed, power of signs and wonders, and power of the HS. I think all of these things were empowered by the HS.
15:30
Paul appeals to the Romans by the love of the HS.
1 Corinthians
2:4
Paul tells the Corinthians that his message was by the power of the HS, not just his own worldly wisdom.
2:9-16
This is an important passage. Paul says that God reveals the hope of glory by the HS (v. 9-10). He then says that only the spirit of a person knows that person's thoughts (v. 11a), so only the HS knows the thoughts of God (v. 11b). We have received this HS (v. 12a) so we can understand godly things (v. 12b) and impart them to others (v. 13). The natural person doesn't understand these godly things because he doesn't have the HS (v. 14). We can judge all things by the HS (v. 15) because the HS knows the "mind of the Lord" (v. 16a) which is the very same "mind of Christ" that we have (v. 16b). This is what gives us the ability to read and ponder the Bible with clarity and understanding and why the Bible seems so ridiculous and foolish to those not being led by the HS.
3:16
We are the temple of God because the HS dwells in us. This correlates to the presence of God dwelling in the tabernacle/temple in the OT. We don't have to go to a certain place to worship and serve God (John 4:21-24).
6:11
When a believer is save they are washed, sanctified, and justified in Jesus Christ. Because of the finished work of the cross, it does not require any work on our part. This all happens by the power of the HS.
6:19
We are the temple of the HS. This tells us once again that the HS is God when we compare this with 3:16.
7:40
Paul comments that he too has the Spirit of God. I think he is saying that he is writing under inspiration from God on the matter of unmarried and widows (v. 25-39).
12:3
No one can say "Jesus is Lord" without the HS. Does this mean that everyone who says this combination of words is a faithful servant of Jesus Christ teaching everything correctly? No, I don't think Paul has that kind of mechanical view here. I think he is saying that those who actually profess Jesus as Lord and mean it can only do so by the HS. The mere annunciation of the words "Jesus is Lord" don't serve to prove anything about a person.
12:4
The HS gives out a variety of gifts.
12:7
The gifts or manifestations as Paul now calls them, are for the common good of the body of Christ.
12:8-11
The gifts of the HS are listed. Paul continues his line of thought that these gifts are all from the same Spirit. They are for individuals and the HS gives as he wills. While we might have one of these gifts (there are other gifts listed elsewhere in Paul's writings: Romans 12:6-8; 1 Cor. 7:7; 1 Cor. 12:28; Ephesians 4:11; 1 Peter 4:11 also), it is the HS who has the charge of operating through us with the gifts. A person is not empowered with healing for instance, and can go around healing people at will. It is very clearly up to the HS's will (i.e. God's will), not ours. This also doesn't mean that a believer only has one gift. They may have multiple. Finally, as we will see shortly, this list is not comprehensive by any means and some of these gifts are mingled with others which leads me to the conclusion that Paul was listing gifts off the top of his head as examples of spiritual gifts, not as an exhaustive list. I will talk about his more at 1 Cor. 12:14-30 (v. 28 in particular).
12:13
This verse is interpreted differently in various translations, but sometimes (NIV) it is translated as "For we were all baptized in one Spirit into one body-whether Jews or Greeks, slave or free-and we were all given the one Spirit to drink." This is a similar phrase to the baptism in the HS from the Gospels and Acts that we have already discussed. Is this another example of the Pentecostal baptism in the HS? Pentecostals would say no, because the context is clearly talking about when the Corinthians were saved, not a subsequent experience of empowerment by the HS. I don't think this interpretation holds up however. The prima facie reading of this statement seems the same to me as John the Baptists' "baptism with the HS." Wayne Grudem, in his Systematic Theology (pg. 766-773), makes a compelling case from the Greek text that it is essentially the same phrase. This makes baptism in the HS a salvation experience. But, as I said when writing about Acts, I think that there are several things that happen as a person is converted and walks with Christ that could happen in any order God chooses. Figuring out exactly what order isn't important, it is being aware of all that God has to offer when he decides to give it to us.
12:14-30
Paul finishes this section (12:1-30) by explaining that there are different gifts so the whole Church can be built up and operate as God intended. He compares this to a body and its parts, which must work together or they will fail. No one has all the gifts and all the answers for guiding the Church, except God, who is giving out all these gifts to be used in harmony. In verse 28 we find another list of gifts, the second of this chapter. What is interesting is that miracles, healing, and tongues are mixed in with other gifts that were not mentioned in v. 8-11. This makes me think that none of Paul's lists are exhaustive as I said above. We will look at another list in Eph. 4.
13
This whole chapter says that without love, these gifts mean nothing. What does this have to do with the HS? The first fruit listed in Gal. 5:22 is love, which is manifested in us when we walk by the Spirit. Of note here as well is verse 10: "...when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away." Cessationists will say that the gifts were for the apostles (or the apostolic age) only. They then died away after the church was built up and off the ground so to speak. The "perfect" is the canon of scripture that is our guide. We don't need the gifts anymore. Paul goes on to say that "For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known" (v. 12). What is the now and then? It seems to me that Paul is talking about when Christ comes. Mirrors don't show images perfectly, just like the gifts don't show God perfectly. Earthly knowledge, even if led by the HS in discovery, isn't perfect, but when Christ comes we will see him perfectly and know him perfectly just as he knows us now.
14:2
Speaking in tongues is to God because no one understands the "mysteries in the Spirit." Paul is saying that there should be an interpretation if a tongue is given or else it is not useful to the body.
14:12
The Corinthians, who were eager for the HS to operate openly, need to operate in the gifts that build up the church. That means interpreted tongues and singing in the Spirit per verse13. This whole chapter is concerned with the appropriate use of the gifts which Paul says should be in order (v. 26-33).
2 Corinthians
1:22
The HS is a believers' guarantee or down payment of salvation that will be paid in full when we are glorified with Christ at his second coming.
3:3
Here Paul is using a metaphor. The Corinthians are a letter written with the HS on tablets of human hearts. This relates directly to the previous verse about the HS living with us. Paul also says "Spirit of the living God" indicating for us, once again, that the HS is God.
3:6
Paul says he is a minister of the new covenant that is of the Spirit, not the letter. The HS gives life while the letter kills. This hearkens back to Jesus saying that one must be born again to enter the kingdom (John 3:3-8) and to creation when the HS was instrumental in the universe's "birth" (Gen. 1:2) and mankind's "birth" (Gen. 2:7).
3:8
Paul again constrats the ministry of the Spirit and the letter. If the law (letters) had glory, how much more does the Spirit have?
3:17-18
Here we have an explicit statement of the HS being God. Paul uses the word Lord (kyrios) and says that "the Lord who is the Spirit." This Spirit, who is God, gives freedom. Freedom to behold God in his glory which then transforms us into his image.
6:6
Paul says that his ministry is marked by the HS in commendation.
Galatians
3:2-6
Paul asks a series of rhetorical questions of the Galatians as they struggle with a false gospel from the Judaizers who want to add works of the law to the finished work of Christ. In order, the answers are:
1. We received the HS by hearing with faith
2. Yes, we can all be that foolish.
3. We are not ever perfected by the flesh.
4. We don't have to suffer in vain.
5. By hearing with faith, just like Abraham.
This passage makes it very clear that we are saved by the work of Christ through the HS and not by works of any law (Paul just happens to be dealing with Mosaic law, but all laws are useless to earn eternal life).
4:6
This is an interesting verse. Note the order. We are sons, therefore the HS is in our hearts. This could go two ways (at least). This could be seen as adoption first, then the HS. Or it could be that adoption follows conversion as two separate events in which the HS is performing different actions at different times. It seems more natural to me to read this passage and related ones (Gal. 3:26; Rom. 8:15-16) as a single event that encompass several things at once: justification, conversion, adoption, regeneration. All of this is accompanied by the HS doing all sorts of things.
4:29
During Paul's analogy concerning Ishmael (the flesh) and Isaac (the Spirit) he says that the former's persecution of the latter is happening now. The flesh torments the Spirit.
5:5-23
We wait in hope only by the HS, through faith. Paul then continues contrasting the flesh and the Spirit urging the Galatians to forsake the false gospel hindering them and live according to the Spirit. He tells them that the Spirit is against the flesh and vice-versa. In verse 22 he recounts the fruit of the HS: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. Unlike the various HS gift lists, there is only one fruit list. Since Paul says that all the gifts are worthless without love and love is one of the fruits of the HS; it follows that the fruit is more important than the gifts. Something that many in the Christian world seem to get backwards.
6:8
As Paul concludes the flesh/Spirit comparison he says that the flesh reaps corruption and the Spirit reaps eternal life.
Ephesians
1:17
Paul is praying that the Ephesians receive the HS, which he describes as being of wisdom and revelation. This wisdom and revelation is related to Christ's finished work and the hope of glory that awaits us (v. 18-21).
2:18
In the HS we have access to the Father through Jesus.
2:22
Paul again says that we are a dwelling place for God like 1 Cor. 3:16 does (as individuals). The HS is building us. This is in the context of the whole Church this time.
3:5
The mystery of the Gospel is revealed to apostles and prophets of this age by the HS. If you know anything about Mormon doctrine, you know that they believe that the "fullness of the Gospel" was preached in every generation and lost. That includes Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, etc. But, Paul nixes that idea in this verse. The Gospel, he says "was not made known to the sons of men in other generations as it has now been revealed."
3:16-17
The power of the HS gives us faith so that Christ can dwell in us.
4:3-4
Paul urges the Ephesians to be unified which can only take place by the one HS.
4:30
The HS should not be grieved. The HS seals us for the day of redemption. This again shows that it is God's work to save and persevere us, not ours.
5:18
An oft-quoted verse. We should always be filled with the HS. The verb tense makes this something like "be being filled with the HS". It is a continuing action that we should always be doing. The HS will fill us if we don't grieve him (4:30).
6:17-18
The sword of the HS is the word of God. It is our offensive weapon against the enemy. We should also pray in the HS. This could mean tongues, like a heavenly prayer language (1 Cor. 14), or with the HS intercessing (Rom 8:26-27).
Philippians
1:19
The HS helps Paul's ministry. The HS is called the "Spirit of Jesus Christ" in this passage. This rounds out the names for the HS in the NT. He has been called the HS, comforter, teacher, Spirit of the Father, Spirit of God, and now Spirit of Christ. It should be clear now that there is some realtionship between the Father, Son, and HS that goes beyond master and servant. They are being equated by the use of these names.
2:1
Paul encourages the Philippians to have unity. If they have any participation in the HS, they will be unified.
3:3
Worship is by the HS. This hearkens back to John 4:24. It is only through the HS (and truth!) that we can properly worship God.
Colossians
1:8
Love is in the HS, per 1 Cor. 13.
1 Thessalonians
1:5-6
The Gospel came to the Thessalonians in the HS (Rom 15:18-19; 1 Cor 2:4) and they received it in the joy of the HS (Gal 5:22).
4:8
God gives the HS to you. The physics of this means that the Father, the Son, and the HS give the HS to you. This makes the HS a person because he is willingly giving himself to you. He can't have a will without being a person.
5:19
"Do not quench the Spirit." Enough said
2 Thessalonians
2:13
The HS sanctifies believers, which means he cleanses us in preparation for our final redemption.
1 Timothy
3:16
Speaking of Christ, Paul says that he was "vindicated [or justified] by the Spirit." I think this is talking about his resurrection which happened through the HS. The order would make sense as well with that interpretation.
4:1
The HS prophesied about the end times.
2 Timothy
1:14
Paul tells Timothy to guard the deposit (the Gosepl v. 8-13) by the HS. Presumably, he is telling him not to wander from the actual Gospel as that is the thrust of this whole section.
Titus
3:5
Another instance of the sanctifying work of the HS.
Paul's letters carry a few themes that recur.
1. We are both individually and collectively a temple(s) of the HS. This is God's presence inside of us just like he descended on the tabernacle and the temple in the OT.
2. The Gospel message is delivered in the power of the HS, not in fancy arguments.
3. The HS is God. We can deduce this from the various names the HS is called throughout Paul's letters as well as the Gospels and Acts.
4. The HS is preparing us for the 2nd coming of Christ. He circumcises our hearts, seals us, sanctifies us, washes us, and testifies to us that we are sons of God.
5. The HS's work is ongoing in both the gifts (less important) and the fruit (more important). Remember, without love nothing is worthwhile including the HS's gifts.
Next time we will finish this series by covering the general epistles including Revelation.
Monday, June 13, 2016
Book Review: When Heaven Invades Earth by Bill Johnson
Bill Johnson is the lead pastor at Bethel Church in Redding, California. I first heard of him in the documentary Finger of God. The movie is about the everyday occurrence of miracles. I imagine many people are familiar with Johnson through the worship music produced by Jesus Culture and Bethel Music; both of which come out of Bethel Church Redding. Bill Johnson is also known for his association with the New Apostolic Reformation movement and for endorsing the Lakeland Revival in 2008. In particular, he endorsed Todd Bentley, who was seen as the leader of the revival. As with any prominent pastor or church leader who puts sermons and teaching "out there" for everyone to peruse, Johnson has his detractors. I have read many things about Bill Johnson's teaching, both good and bad, but I have never, until now, actually engaged with his material first hand. That is why I set out to read one of his books. I wanted the source for much of the material I had been reading about secondhand. When Heaven Invades Earth is the book I saw quoted from most often and so, that is the one I purchased and read.
I will be completely upfront. I don't have many positive things to say about this book. I think the only real solidly positive item is that Johnson thinks Christians do not rely on the power of the Holy Spirit in their daily lives nearly enough. I agree with him in principle, but how he comes to that conclusion I cannot agree with at all. Stylistically, this book is short (189 pages), written in a staccato style with short, choppy sentences, and is sometimes very difficult to read and understand what exactly Johnson is trying to convey. There are two overarching themes in the book. The first is, as I mentioned above, that believers should be walking in the power of the Holy Spirit every day of their lives. This means not only sanctification, but the fruit and gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as signs and wonders, miracles, and healings as we ask in faith and the Holy Spirit performs. The second major theme of the book is that man has lost dominion of the Earth to Satan in the fall. Jesus has reclaimed that dominion through the cross and now, we, as adopted Sons of God, can walk in that victory and renewed dominion of the Earth with the power of the Holy Spirit. In filling out the details of these teachings Johnson steps in every obstacle and error in his path. I am going to focus on three main issues I see with his teaching. They are: a pseudo-Gnostic doctrine that pits the "invisible" realm against the "visible" realm wherein the former is superior to the latter, an utter disdain for any of the conventions of Biblical interpretation that leads to absurd uses of scripture, and worst of all, a faulty kenoticism concerning the emptying that occurred at the incarnation of Jesus Christ.
Johnson begins his discussion of the invisible realm by telling us that in order to see it, we must repent and have faith. He says: "Faith is the key to discovering the superior nature of the invisible realm" (pg. 42). This sentence comes at the end of chapter three as a set-up for chapter 4, which is titled "Faith-Anchored in the Unseen." I am going to quote a large portion of the beginning of that chapter for two reasons. The first is that I don't want anyone thinking I took him out of context and the second is that we can better analyze the entirety of this particular teaching, including his scripture references, to see what's wrong with it. The following is the first three paragraphs unedited from page 43.
"Faith has its anchor in the unseen realm. It lives from the invisible toward the visible. Faith actualizes what it realizes. The Scriptures contrast the life of faith with the limitations of natural sight. (2) Faith provides eyes for the heart."
"Jesus expects people to see from the heart. He once called a group of religious leaders hypocrites because they could discern the weather but couldn't discern the times. It's obvious why Jesus would prefer people to recognize the times (spiritual climate and seasons) over natural weather conditions, but it's not quite so apparent why He would consider them hypocrites if they didn't."
"Many of us have thought that the ability to see into the spiritual realm is more the result of a special gift than an unused potential of everyone. I remind you that Jesus addresses this charge to the Pharisees and Sadducees. The very fact that they, of all people, were required to see is evidence that everyone has been given this ability. They became blind to His dominion because of their own corrupted hearts and were judged for their unfulfilled potential."
There is a lot to dissect here. For starters, in general terms, there are no scripture references given to back any of this teaching up. I left in the only reference, the parenthetical 2, which I will discuss shortly. The first two sentences say faith is anchored in the unseen realm and lives from there toward here (the visible realm). Without scripture references I am unsure what he means. In the context of the rest of the book, which never specifies what the unseen realm consists of, I can only infer that the invisible realm is some kind of esoteric universe full of different spirit substances that can benefit us. The reason I think this is because Johnson calls many things substances, such as: faith and fear (pg. 50), peace (pg. 66), and anointing (pg. 75). So our faith should be anchored in this unseen realm that is full of substances. There is never any mention of Christ our cornerstone, the true object of our faith (Acts 4:11) or of the invisible God (1 Timothy 1:17). As for the second sentence, how can the invisible live toward the visible if we are supposed to have the "eyes for the heart" fixed toward the invisible realm? I don't know and Johnson never explains. The third sentence is flat out false and comes from a mixture of mind science teachings and Christianity as popularized by Kenneth Hagin. He taught that faith is a substance and our words can be containers of this faith-substance. By speaking these faith-filled words aloud we create our own reality and can have anything we want through faith. This is where the prosperity gospel comes from and is the root teaching of Hagin and his disciples. In Johnson's defense, he never discusses prosperity, but nonetheless, this idea that "faith actualizes what it realizes" is the very same teaching. By believing in faith for anything we desire (realizing it), we can make it happen (actualize it). There is never any mention of God's purposes or will in this discussion of actualizing things. Ultimately, God's purposes will be done no matter how we think, say words, or believe in faith (Isaiah 46:8-11). This doesn't mean God won't do things we ask for, but it is not a simple matter of speaking words in faith for them to happen. Faith-filled words don't create or do anything, God does.
Johnson's next sentence is correct if we stick to the context of the Biblical citation he provides; 2 Corinthians 5:7, which says "For we walk by faith, not by sight." In the context of 2 Corinthians 5:1-10, Paul is talking about the heavens (v. 1) and our wanting to be there (v. 2-3). Our being in heaven means our mortality has been "swallowed up by life" (v. 4). God has prepared us for this and sealed us with His Holy Spirit (v. 5) so we can walk in courage looking towards our redemption by walking in faith, not by sight (v. 6-7). This "good courage" (v. 8) drives us to please Him (v. 9) in anticipation of the final judgment (v. 10). This passage never says anything about seeing with the eyes of the heart through faith. Some may object that what Johnson means by invisible is the heavens, and this might be the case, but, again, as I stated above, he doesn't ever say that is what the invisible realm is. The context of the entire book leads me away from thinking that is what he intends.
I want to mention that there is a verse that says "eyes of the heart" in Ephesians, but this is not what Johnson references, so it's impossible to say if he has that in mind here. It is found in Ephesians 1:18-21 which says: "having the eyes of your hearts enlightened, that you may know what is the hope to which he has called you, what are the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints, and what is the immeasurable greatness of his power toward us who believe, according to the working of his great might that he worked in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places, far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come." Even if Johnson is thinking about this verse concerning his sentence above, it is clear that "eyes of your hearts" has nothing to do with seeing into an invisible realm. It is about fixing our hearts on the hope of Jesus Christs' return.
The second paragraph opens with an assertion that we are expected by Jesus to see with our heart. I have already established that faith does not provide eyes for the heart to see into the invisible realm. Since that is the case, Jesus couldn't have expected us to see that way. It is an unbiblical concept. The passage in question, which Johnson does not cite, is Luke 12:54-57 (with a similar, but not the same, narrative in Matthew 16:1-4). Jesus does call people hypocrites for being able to discern the weather but not the "present time" (v. 56). The Matthew passage has the Pharisees and Sadducees, not Luke. Johnson is apparently conflating two different passages with a similar rebuke from Jesus. Luke says in 12:1 that "so many thousands of the people had gathered together" and in 12:54 "He [Jesus] also said to the crowds." This is the kind of careless Bible handling that I will discuss later on. Craig Keener, in his background commentary on the New Testament says that the signs for the weather (v. 54-55) were obvious and so was the truth of Jesus' message. They should be able to judge rightly about him (v. 56-57) (Keener, pg. 215). The Bible Exposition Commentary on these verses makes it more clear why they were called hypocrites:
"If people were as discerning about spiritual things as they are about the weather, they would be better off! The crowd could predict a storm, but it could not foresee the coming judgment. It knew that the temperature was about to change, but it could not interpret the “signs of the times.” The Jewish nation had the prophetic Scriptures for centuries and should have known what God was doing, but their religious leaders led them astray." (Wiersbe, pg. 223)
The issue was not some misinterpreted eyes for the heart that should be used. It was the fact that the Jewish religious leaders didn't recognize or refused to recognize Jesus as the Messiah and as a result, led the Israelites away from their and the world's Savior.
The last paragraph in this section has more of the same stuff about seeing with the eyes of the heart. I am not going to comment on that anymore. What I will comment on is, in my view, the pseudo-Gnostic language Johnson uses in the paragraph. Just to make sure we are all on the same page; Gnosticism taught that flesh is evil and spirit is good, and through secret and/or special knowledge (Gnosis) the elite (those who show interest) have access to it and are superior to "regular" believers (Harold O. J. Brown, Heresies, pg. 44). While Johnson doesn't quite say the same thing as the original Gnostics, hence my use of the term pseudo, he is saying that there is knowledge he has that gives us access to a superior realm, the invisible one, that can make us better Christians. He says that we have "unused potential" to do this. How do we have the "unused potential" to do this? Because we can all become divine, just like Jesus according to Johnson. On page 79 he says: "The anointing [Holy Spirit] is what linked Jesus, the man, to the divine, enabling Him to destroy the works of the devil. These miraculous ways helped to set something in motion that mankind could inherit once we were redeemed." The implication is that we all have the potential to become divine. This sounds like New Age divine potential teaching which you can read about here. This is clearly wrong. Many biblical passages discuss God's uniqueness (Deut 4:35,39; 2 Sam 7:22; 1 Kings 8:60; Isa 46:9; Psalm 18:31). Also, Jesus, being fully God (Col 1:19) and fully man (Heb 2:14-18), is utterly unique among humanity. We can be conformed or transformed into the image of Christ as Paul says and partake of the divine nature as Peter says, (Romans 8:29; 1 Cor 15:49; Phil 3:21; Col 3:10; 2 Peter 1:4) but does this mean we can be just like Jesus and somehow a part of God? Hardly. This means we have God living inside of us and by His power we can live holy lives. The Bible Knowledge Commentary comments on 2 Peter 1:4: "These promises enable Christians to participate in the divine nature. “Participate” is literally “become partners” (genēsthe … koinōnoi). Because they are “partakers” (KJV) of God’s nature, Christians can share in His moral victory over sin in this life and share in His glorious victory over death in eternal life" (Walvoord and Zuck, pg. 865, Vol. 2).
This discussion of the partaking of the divine nature leads us right into the next main idea in Johnson's book that I want to address. It is his view of the incarnation of Jesus Christ wherein he professes kenoticism, that being an emptying of the divine nature while on Earth. It is this error that leads Johnson to conclude that we can be exactly like Jesus Christ.
Concerning Christs' incarnation, Johnson presents three conflicting statements. The first is as follows:
"Jesus lived His earthly life with human limitations. He laid his divinity aside (3) as He sought to fulfill the assignment given to Him by the Father: to live life as a man without sin, and then die in the place of mankind for sin." (pg. 79)
The reference he gives is Philippians 2:5-7, where indeed, it does say that Christ "emptied himself". Jesus did live His life with all of our limitations except sin. The problem is when he says that Jesus laid His divinity aside. What exactly does he mean by this? On the same page, we find the second statement:
"The anointing Jesus received was the equipment necessary, given by the Father to make it possible for Him to live beyond human limitations...That would include doing supernatural things...The anointing is what linked Jesus, the man, to the divine, enabling Him to destroy the works of the devil. These miraculous ways helped to set something in motion that mankind could inherit once we were redeemed." (pg. 79)
First of all, the anointing, which Johnson explains is the Holy Spirit as he opens the chapter being quoted from, is not a substance as he says on page 75. God is spirit; the Holy Spirit is God; so the Holy Spirit is an immaterial spirit, not something physical. He says that this is what linked Jesus to the divine. In other words, Jesus while on earth was not divine until the Holy Spirit rested on Him. Jesus could not perform supernatural acts before His baptism and the dove's (Holy Spirit) coming down. By implication given the next sentence, we also can be divine once we are saved and filled with the Holy Spirit. Is this a correct understanding of Jesus' emptying during the incarnation? I don't think so. While the original kenotic theologians said that Christ gave up some of His divine attributes (omnipresence, for instance) in order to be human, Johnson is teaching something very similar, perhaps even taking a further step, by saying Jesus laid His divinity aside and thus, all of His divine attributes rather than just some. Theologian Wayne Grudem addresses kenosis:
"But does Philippians 2:7 teach that Christ emptied himself of some of his divine attributes, and does the rest of the New Testament confirm this? The evidence of Scripture points to a negative answer to both questions. We must first realize that no recognized teacher in the first 1,800 years of church history, including those who were native speakers of Greek, thought that "emptied himself" in Philippians 2:7 meant that the Son of God gave up some of his divine attributes. Second, we must recognize that the text does not say that Christ "emptied himself of some powers" or "emptied himself of divine attributes" or anything like that. Third, the text does describe what Jesus did in this "emptying": he did not do it by giving up any of his attributes but rather by "taking the form of a servant," that is, by coming to live as a man, and "being found in human form he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross" (Phil. 2:8). Thus, the context itself interprets this "emptying" as equivalent to "humbling himself" and taking on a lowly status and position. Thus, the NIV, instead of translating the phrase, "He emptied himself," translates it, "but made himself nothing" (Phil 2:7 NIV). The emptying includes change of role and status, not essential attributes or nature. A fourth reason for this interpretation is seen in Paul's purpose in this context. His purpose has been to persuade the Philippians that they should "do nothing from selfishness or conceit, but in humility count others better than yourselves" (Phil 2:3), and he continues by telling them, "Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others" (Phil 2:4). To persuade them to be humble and to put the interests of others first, he then holds up the example of Christ: "Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant..." (Phil 2:5-7). Now in holding up Christ as an example, he wants the Philippians to imitate Christ. But certainly he is not asking the Philippian Christians to "give up" or "lay aside" any of their essential attributes or abilities! He is not asking them to "give up" their intelligence or strength or skill and become a diminished version of what they were. Rather, he is asking them to put the interests of others first: "Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others" (Phil. 2:4). And because that is his goal, it fits the context to understand that he is using Christ as the supreme example of one who did just that: he put the interests of others first and was willing to give up some of the privilege and status that was his as God. Therefore, the best understanding of this passage is that it talks about Jesus giving up the status and privilege that was his in heaven: he "did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped" (or "clung to for his own advantage"), but "emptied himself" or "humbled himself" for our sake, and came to live as a man. Jesus speaks elsewhere of the "glory" he had with the Father "before the world was made" (John 17:5), a glory that he had given up and was going to receive again when he returned to heaven. And Paul could speak of Christ who, "though he was rich, yet for your sake he became poor" (2 Cor. 8:9), once again speaking of the privilege and honor that he deserved but temporarily gave up for us. The fifth and final reason why the "kenosis" view of Philippians 2:7 must be rejected is the larger context of the teaching of the New Testament and the doctrinal teaching of the entire Bible. If it were true that such a momentous event as this happened, that the eternal Son of God ceased for a time to have all the attributes of God-ceased, for a time, to be omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent, for example-then we would expect that such an incredible event would be taught clearly and repeatedly in the New Testament, not found in the very doubtful interpretation of one word in one epistle. But we find the opposite of that: we do not find it stated anywhere else that the Son of God ceased to have some of the attributes of God that he had possessed from eternity. In fact, if the kenosis theory were true (and this is a foundational objection against it), then we could no longer affirm Jesus was fully God while he was here on earth. The kenosis theory ultimately denies the full deity of Jesus Christ and makes him something less than fully God. S. M. Smith admits, "All forms of classical orthodoxy either explicitly reject or reject in principle kenotic theology."
(Grudem, Systematic Theology, pg. 550-551)
The "emptying" of Jesus at the incarnation is a very difficult topic, hence the long quote from Grudem, and I do not pretend to know everything about it or even propose a model for how he was truly man and truly God at the same time. What I hope is evident at this point however, is that Johnson teaches a faulty and dangerous version of kenosis that strips the uniqueness of Jesus and ultimately takes away his ability to be a truly redeeming sacrifice for all mankind because he is not God while on earth. He is only some sort of semi-divine human possessed with the power of God. In the third conflicting passage to be highlighted concerning Jesus' emptying, Johnson says: "Jesus Christ said of Himself, "The Son can do nothing."...He had NO supernatural capabilities whatsoever! While He is 100 percent God, He chose to live with the same limitations that man would face once He was redeemed." (pg. 29)
This doesn't agree with what Johnson says later in the book (pg. 79) that I covered above. If Jesus laid aside His divinity He isn't God. If He is 100 percent God, He can't have laid aside His divinity while on earth. It has to be one or the other. Jesus' supernatural abilities (or the lack of them) is also a difficult issue. Based on many passages from both the Old and New Testament (Isa. 11:2-3, 42:1, 61:1 cf. Luke 4:18-19; Matt. 3:16; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22; John 1:32; Luke 4:1, 14, 36, 40-41; Acts 10:38) it appears that Jesus operated by the power of the Holy Spirit during His ministry. According to Johnson, without the Holy Spirit, Jesus "had NO supernatural capabilities whatsoever!" Is this the case? I don't think so. Luke 2:41-52 relates a story about the 12 year old Jesus giving and asking amazing answers and questions in the temple. Jesus was also sinless for 30 years (or so) before being empowered by the Holy Spirit. How did He do that if He had no supernatural capabilities? There is yet another problem with this line of thinking as well. If Jesus is truly God while on earth (as well as truly man), how did He not have supernatural abilities? If He didn't have those powers, then He isn't God.
The final point of contention I have with Johnson's book is that of his use of the Bible. Based on the scripture citations and my analysis of them, Johnson uses the Bible in a very helter-skelter and slipshod manner. He reads into the Bible what he wants to get out of it and he doesn't hesitate to partial quote verses out of context. Since I have already dealt with his use of scripture somewhat, I will just give one big, clear example of his poor usage.
The example concerns the typology of the Israelites crossing the Jordan river into the Promised Land. After relating the exodus from Egypt story Johnson says:
"When the Jews finally entered the Promised Land, they entered through a river-another baptism. This baptism was not a departure from sin. Such was illustrated when they left Egypt. This new baptism would take them into a different way of life. For example: they fought wars on the wilderness side of the river and won. But once they crossed the Jordan River, wars would be fought differently. Now they would march around a city in silence for days, finally raising up a shout and watching the walls fall (6). Later they would experience the challenge of sending a choir into battle first (7). And then there was the time God intentionally sent over 30,000 soldiers back home so He could fight a war with 300 torch wielding trumpet blowers. He makes the Promised Land possible, and we pay the price to live there. He'll give us His baptism of fire if we'll give Him something worth burning. This baptism in the Holy Spirit is the fulfillment of the Old Testament picture of entering the Promised Land." (pg. 71-72)
Again, I quoted a full passage in context with no omissions or chopped sentences including the parenthetical references, 6 and 7, which are the scriptures Joshua 6 and 2 Chronicles 20:21 respectively. His last sentence where he declares that the Israelites entrance into the Promised Land is the picture of the baptism in the Holy Spirit is what I want to address here. The reason I want to consider this interpretation is, 1) maybe you don't agree with my corrections of Johnson's interpretations up to this point and 2) it is the Biblical text itself that will correct him all on its own. The passage that will make this evident is found in Hebrews 3:7-4:13 and deals with both the Israelites who, by unbelief, were allowed to perish in the desert, and the obedient Israelites who entered the Promised Land. What did the author of Hebrews say the entry into the Promised Land could be compared to?
"Therefore, as the Holy Spirit says, "Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion, on the day of testing in the wilderness, where your fathers put me to the test and saw my works for forty years. Therefore I was provoked with that generation, and said, ‘They always go astray in their heart; they have not known my ways.' As I swore in my wrath, 'They shall not enter my rest.'" Take care, brothers, lest there be in any of you an evil, unbelieving heart, leading you to fall away from the living God. But exhort one another every day, as long as it is called "today," that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin. For we have come to share in Christ, if indeed we hold our original confidence firm to the end. As it is said, "Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion." For who were those who heard and yet rebelled? Was it not all those who left Egypt led by Moses? And with whom was he provoked for forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose bodies fell in the wilderness? And to whom did he swear that they would not enter his rest, but to those who were disobedient? So we see that they were unable to enter because of unbelief. Therefore, while the promise of entering his rest still stands, let us fear lest any of you should seem to have failed to reach it. For good news came to us just as to them, but the message they heard did not benefit them, because they were not united by faith with those who listened. For we who have believed enter that rest, as he has said, "As I swore in my wrath, 'They shall not enter my rest,'" although his works were finished from the foundation of the world. For he has somewhere spoken of the seventh day in this way: "And God rested on the seventh day from all his works." And again in this passage he said, "They shall not enter my rest.” Since therefore it remains for some to enter it, and those who formerly received the good news failed to enter because of disobedience, again he appoints a certain day, "Today," saying through David so long afterward, in the words already quoted, "Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts." For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken of another day later on. So then, there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God, for whoever has entered God's rest has also rested from his works as God did from his. Let us therefore strive to enter that rest, so that no one may fall by the same sort of disobedience. For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart. And no creature is hidden from his sight, but all are naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must give account." (Hebrews 3:7-4:13)
There isn't anything in there that discusses the baptism of the Holy Spirit. The answer to my lead-in question is that entering the Promised Land was a picture of entering God's rest. No commentary from me or commentaries from professionals needed. The Bible refutes Johnson's interpretation all by itself. If he is willing to interpret the Bible in this way, with careless disregard for what the text itself says, then I think that any other interpretation he gives of any section of scripture should be closely scrutinized before being internalized as proper teaching.
In conclusion, Bill Johnson of Bethel Church-Redding has written a book that teaches: a pseudo-Gnosticism wherein the "invisible" realm of esoteric substances is what our focus should be on, an error-filled kenosis that makes Jesus out to be just a man with some divine power during ministry, not actually God, and that you can interpret the Bible any way you like as long as it fits your own personal theology and doctrine, notwithstanding what the Bible really says. Without exaggeration, this is only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the poor interpretations and arguments made in this book. I would not recommend this book to anyone because I would be inviting them to read incorrect theology. I also am going to be very wary of anything that comes out of Bethel Church-Redding, including their music, because I don't know exactly what the sermons, conference talks, and lyrics of songs mean and I will not pollute my mind with a blatantly mistaken view of both the focus of the Christian life and God, specifically in the person of Jesus Christ.
References
Scripture quotations taken from the ESV unless otherwise noted. Crossway. 2008.
When Heaven Invades Earth: A Practical Guide to a Life of Miracles by Bill Johnson. Destiny Image Publishers, Inc. 2003.
The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament by Craig S. Keener. InterVarsity Press. 2014.
The Bible Exposition Commentary by Warren W. Wiersbe. Victor Books. 1996.
The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Victor Books. 1985.
Heresies: The Image of Christ in the Mirror of Heresy and Orthodoxy from the Apostles to the Present by Harold O. J. Brown. Doubleday & Company, Inc. 1984.
Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine by Wayne Grudem. Zondervan. 1994.
I will be completely upfront. I don't have many positive things to say about this book. I think the only real solidly positive item is that Johnson thinks Christians do not rely on the power of the Holy Spirit in their daily lives nearly enough. I agree with him in principle, but how he comes to that conclusion I cannot agree with at all. Stylistically, this book is short (189 pages), written in a staccato style with short, choppy sentences, and is sometimes very difficult to read and understand what exactly Johnson is trying to convey. There are two overarching themes in the book. The first is, as I mentioned above, that believers should be walking in the power of the Holy Spirit every day of their lives. This means not only sanctification, but the fruit and gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as signs and wonders, miracles, and healings as we ask in faith and the Holy Spirit performs. The second major theme of the book is that man has lost dominion of the Earth to Satan in the fall. Jesus has reclaimed that dominion through the cross and now, we, as adopted Sons of God, can walk in that victory and renewed dominion of the Earth with the power of the Holy Spirit. In filling out the details of these teachings Johnson steps in every obstacle and error in his path. I am going to focus on three main issues I see with his teaching. They are: a pseudo-Gnostic doctrine that pits the "invisible" realm against the "visible" realm wherein the former is superior to the latter, an utter disdain for any of the conventions of Biblical interpretation that leads to absurd uses of scripture, and worst of all, a faulty kenoticism concerning the emptying that occurred at the incarnation of Jesus Christ.
Johnson begins his discussion of the invisible realm by telling us that in order to see it, we must repent and have faith. He says: "Faith is the key to discovering the superior nature of the invisible realm" (pg. 42). This sentence comes at the end of chapter three as a set-up for chapter 4, which is titled "Faith-Anchored in the Unseen." I am going to quote a large portion of the beginning of that chapter for two reasons. The first is that I don't want anyone thinking I took him out of context and the second is that we can better analyze the entirety of this particular teaching, including his scripture references, to see what's wrong with it. The following is the first three paragraphs unedited from page 43.
"Faith has its anchor in the unseen realm. It lives from the invisible toward the visible. Faith actualizes what it realizes. The Scriptures contrast the life of faith with the limitations of natural sight. (2) Faith provides eyes for the heart."
"Jesus expects people to see from the heart. He once called a group of religious leaders hypocrites because they could discern the weather but couldn't discern the times. It's obvious why Jesus would prefer people to recognize the times (spiritual climate and seasons) over natural weather conditions, but it's not quite so apparent why He would consider them hypocrites if they didn't."
"Many of us have thought that the ability to see into the spiritual realm is more the result of a special gift than an unused potential of everyone. I remind you that Jesus addresses this charge to the Pharisees and Sadducees. The very fact that they, of all people, were required to see is evidence that everyone has been given this ability. They became blind to His dominion because of their own corrupted hearts and were judged for their unfulfilled potential."
There is a lot to dissect here. For starters, in general terms, there are no scripture references given to back any of this teaching up. I left in the only reference, the parenthetical 2, which I will discuss shortly. The first two sentences say faith is anchored in the unseen realm and lives from there toward here (the visible realm). Without scripture references I am unsure what he means. In the context of the rest of the book, which never specifies what the unseen realm consists of, I can only infer that the invisible realm is some kind of esoteric universe full of different spirit substances that can benefit us. The reason I think this is because Johnson calls many things substances, such as: faith and fear (pg. 50), peace (pg. 66), and anointing (pg. 75). So our faith should be anchored in this unseen realm that is full of substances. There is never any mention of Christ our cornerstone, the true object of our faith (Acts 4:11) or of the invisible God (1 Timothy 1:17). As for the second sentence, how can the invisible live toward the visible if we are supposed to have the "eyes for the heart" fixed toward the invisible realm? I don't know and Johnson never explains. The third sentence is flat out false and comes from a mixture of mind science teachings and Christianity as popularized by Kenneth Hagin. He taught that faith is a substance and our words can be containers of this faith-substance. By speaking these faith-filled words aloud we create our own reality and can have anything we want through faith. This is where the prosperity gospel comes from and is the root teaching of Hagin and his disciples. In Johnson's defense, he never discusses prosperity, but nonetheless, this idea that "faith actualizes what it realizes" is the very same teaching. By believing in faith for anything we desire (realizing it), we can make it happen (actualize it). There is never any mention of God's purposes or will in this discussion of actualizing things. Ultimately, God's purposes will be done no matter how we think, say words, or believe in faith (Isaiah 46:8-11). This doesn't mean God won't do things we ask for, but it is not a simple matter of speaking words in faith for them to happen. Faith-filled words don't create or do anything, God does.
Johnson's next sentence is correct if we stick to the context of the Biblical citation he provides; 2 Corinthians 5:7, which says "For we walk by faith, not by sight." In the context of 2 Corinthians 5:1-10, Paul is talking about the heavens (v. 1) and our wanting to be there (v. 2-3). Our being in heaven means our mortality has been "swallowed up by life" (v. 4). God has prepared us for this and sealed us with His Holy Spirit (v. 5) so we can walk in courage looking towards our redemption by walking in faith, not by sight (v. 6-7). This "good courage" (v. 8) drives us to please Him (v. 9) in anticipation of the final judgment (v. 10). This passage never says anything about seeing with the eyes of the heart through faith. Some may object that what Johnson means by invisible is the heavens, and this might be the case, but, again, as I stated above, he doesn't ever say that is what the invisible realm is. The context of the entire book leads me away from thinking that is what he intends.
I want to mention that there is a verse that says "eyes of the heart" in Ephesians, but this is not what Johnson references, so it's impossible to say if he has that in mind here. It is found in Ephesians 1:18-21 which says: "having the eyes of your hearts enlightened, that you may know what is the hope to which he has called you, what are the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints, and what is the immeasurable greatness of his power toward us who believe, according to the working of his great might that he worked in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places, far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come." Even if Johnson is thinking about this verse concerning his sentence above, it is clear that "eyes of your hearts" has nothing to do with seeing into an invisible realm. It is about fixing our hearts on the hope of Jesus Christs' return.
The second paragraph opens with an assertion that we are expected by Jesus to see with our heart. I have already established that faith does not provide eyes for the heart to see into the invisible realm. Since that is the case, Jesus couldn't have expected us to see that way. It is an unbiblical concept. The passage in question, which Johnson does not cite, is Luke 12:54-57 (with a similar, but not the same, narrative in Matthew 16:1-4). Jesus does call people hypocrites for being able to discern the weather but not the "present time" (v. 56). The Matthew passage has the Pharisees and Sadducees, not Luke. Johnson is apparently conflating two different passages with a similar rebuke from Jesus. Luke says in 12:1 that "so many thousands of the people had gathered together" and in 12:54 "He [Jesus] also said to the crowds." This is the kind of careless Bible handling that I will discuss later on. Craig Keener, in his background commentary on the New Testament says that the signs for the weather (v. 54-55) were obvious and so was the truth of Jesus' message. They should be able to judge rightly about him (v. 56-57) (Keener, pg. 215). The Bible Exposition Commentary on these verses makes it more clear why they were called hypocrites:
"If people were as discerning about spiritual things as they are about the weather, they would be better off! The crowd could predict a storm, but it could not foresee the coming judgment. It knew that the temperature was about to change, but it could not interpret the “signs of the times.” The Jewish nation had the prophetic Scriptures for centuries and should have known what God was doing, but their religious leaders led them astray." (Wiersbe, pg. 223)
The issue was not some misinterpreted eyes for the heart that should be used. It was the fact that the Jewish religious leaders didn't recognize or refused to recognize Jesus as the Messiah and as a result, led the Israelites away from their and the world's Savior.
The last paragraph in this section has more of the same stuff about seeing with the eyes of the heart. I am not going to comment on that anymore. What I will comment on is, in my view, the pseudo-Gnostic language Johnson uses in the paragraph. Just to make sure we are all on the same page; Gnosticism taught that flesh is evil and spirit is good, and through secret and/or special knowledge (Gnosis) the elite (those who show interest) have access to it and are superior to "regular" believers (Harold O. J. Brown, Heresies, pg. 44). While Johnson doesn't quite say the same thing as the original Gnostics, hence my use of the term pseudo, he is saying that there is knowledge he has that gives us access to a superior realm, the invisible one, that can make us better Christians. He says that we have "unused potential" to do this. How do we have the "unused potential" to do this? Because we can all become divine, just like Jesus according to Johnson. On page 79 he says: "The anointing [Holy Spirit] is what linked Jesus, the man, to the divine, enabling Him to destroy the works of the devil. These miraculous ways helped to set something in motion that mankind could inherit once we were redeemed." The implication is that we all have the potential to become divine. This sounds like New Age divine potential teaching which you can read about here. This is clearly wrong. Many biblical passages discuss God's uniqueness (Deut 4:35,39; 2 Sam 7:22; 1 Kings 8:60; Isa 46:9; Psalm 18:31). Also, Jesus, being fully God (Col 1:19) and fully man (Heb 2:14-18), is utterly unique among humanity. We can be conformed or transformed into the image of Christ as Paul says and partake of the divine nature as Peter says, (Romans 8:29; 1 Cor 15:49; Phil 3:21; Col 3:10; 2 Peter 1:4) but does this mean we can be just like Jesus and somehow a part of God? Hardly. This means we have God living inside of us and by His power we can live holy lives. The Bible Knowledge Commentary comments on 2 Peter 1:4: "These promises enable Christians to participate in the divine nature. “Participate” is literally “become partners” (genēsthe … koinōnoi). Because they are “partakers” (KJV) of God’s nature, Christians can share in His moral victory over sin in this life and share in His glorious victory over death in eternal life" (Walvoord and Zuck, pg. 865, Vol. 2).
This discussion of the partaking of the divine nature leads us right into the next main idea in Johnson's book that I want to address. It is his view of the incarnation of Jesus Christ wherein he professes kenoticism, that being an emptying of the divine nature while on Earth. It is this error that leads Johnson to conclude that we can be exactly like Jesus Christ.
Concerning Christs' incarnation, Johnson presents three conflicting statements. The first is as follows:
"Jesus lived His earthly life with human limitations. He laid his divinity aside (3) as He sought to fulfill the assignment given to Him by the Father: to live life as a man without sin, and then die in the place of mankind for sin." (pg. 79)
The reference he gives is Philippians 2:5-7, where indeed, it does say that Christ "emptied himself". Jesus did live His life with all of our limitations except sin. The problem is when he says that Jesus laid His divinity aside. What exactly does he mean by this? On the same page, we find the second statement:
"The anointing Jesus received was the equipment necessary, given by the Father to make it possible for Him to live beyond human limitations...That would include doing supernatural things...The anointing is what linked Jesus, the man, to the divine, enabling Him to destroy the works of the devil. These miraculous ways helped to set something in motion that mankind could inherit once we were redeemed." (pg. 79)
First of all, the anointing, which Johnson explains is the Holy Spirit as he opens the chapter being quoted from, is not a substance as he says on page 75. God is spirit; the Holy Spirit is God; so the Holy Spirit is an immaterial spirit, not something physical. He says that this is what linked Jesus to the divine. In other words, Jesus while on earth was not divine until the Holy Spirit rested on Him. Jesus could not perform supernatural acts before His baptism and the dove's (Holy Spirit) coming down. By implication given the next sentence, we also can be divine once we are saved and filled with the Holy Spirit. Is this a correct understanding of Jesus' emptying during the incarnation? I don't think so. While the original kenotic theologians said that Christ gave up some of His divine attributes (omnipresence, for instance) in order to be human, Johnson is teaching something very similar, perhaps even taking a further step, by saying Jesus laid His divinity aside and thus, all of His divine attributes rather than just some. Theologian Wayne Grudem addresses kenosis:
"But does Philippians 2:7 teach that Christ emptied himself of some of his divine attributes, and does the rest of the New Testament confirm this? The evidence of Scripture points to a negative answer to both questions. We must first realize that no recognized teacher in the first 1,800 years of church history, including those who were native speakers of Greek, thought that "emptied himself" in Philippians 2:7 meant that the Son of God gave up some of his divine attributes. Second, we must recognize that the text does not say that Christ "emptied himself of some powers" or "emptied himself of divine attributes" or anything like that. Third, the text does describe what Jesus did in this "emptying": he did not do it by giving up any of his attributes but rather by "taking the form of a servant," that is, by coming to live as a man, and "being found in human form he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross" (Phil. 2:8). Thus, the context itself interprets this "emptying" as equivalent to "humbling himself" and taking on a lowly status and position. Thus, the NIV, instead of translating the phrase, "He emptied himself," translates it, "but made himself nothing" (Phil 2:7 NIV). The emptying includes change of role and status, not essential attributes or nature. A fourth reason for this interpretation is seen in Paul's purpose in this context. His purpose has been to persuade the Philippians that they should "do nothing from selfishness or conceit, but in humility count others better than yourselves" (Phil 2:3), and he continues by telling them, "Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others" (Phil 2:4). To persuade them to be humble and to put the interests of others first, he then holds up the example of Christ: "Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant..." (Phil 2:5-7). Now in holding up Christ as an example, he wants the Philippians to imitate Christ. But certainly he is not asking the Philippian Christians to "give up" or "lay aside" any of their essential attributes or abilities! He is not asking them to "give up" their intelligence or strength or skill and become a diminished version of what they were. Rather, he is asking them to put the interests of others first: "Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others" (Phil. 2:4). And because that is his goal, it fits the context to understand that he is using Christ as the supreme example of one who did just that: he put the interests of others first and was willing to give up some of the privilege and status that was his as God. Therefore, the best understanding of this passage is that it talks about Jesus giving up the status and privilege that was his in heaven: he "did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped" (or "clung to for his own advantage"), but "emptied himself" or "humbled himself" for our sake, and came to live as a man. Jesus speaks elsewhere of the "glory" he had with the Father "before the world was made" (John 17:5), a glory that he had given up and was going to receive again when he returned to heaven. And Paul could speak of Christ who, "though he was rich, yet for your sake he became poor" (2 Cor. 8:9), once again speaking of the privilege and honor that he deserved but temporarily gave up for us. The fifth and final reason why the "kenosis" view of Philippians 2:7 must be rejected is the larger context of the teaching of the New Testament and the doctrinal teaching of the entire Bible. If it were true that such a momentous event as this happened, that the eternal Son of God ceased for a time to have all the attributes of God-ceased, for a time, to be omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent, for example-then we would expect that such an incredible event would be taught clearly and repeatedly in the New Testament, not found in the very doubtful interpretation of one word in one epistle. But we find the opposite of that: we do not find it stated anywhere else that the Son of God ceased to have some of the attributes of God that he had possessed from eternity. In fact, if the kenosis theory were true (and this is a foundational objection against it), then we could no longer affirm Jesus was fully God while he was here on earth. The kenosis theory ultimately denies the full deity of Jesus Christ and makes him something less than fully God. S. M. Smith admits, "All forms of classical orthodoxy either explicitly reject or reject in principle kenotic theology."
(Grudem, Systematic Theology, pg. 550-551)
The "emptying" of Jesus at the incarnation is a very difficult topic, hence the long quote from Grudem, and I do not pretend to know everything about it or even propose a model for how he was truly man and truly God at the same time. What I hope is evident at this point however, is that Johnson teaches a faulty and dangerous version of kenosis that strips the uniqueness of Jesus and ultimately takes away his ability to be a truly redeeming sacrifice for all mankind because he is not God while on earth. He is only some sort of semi-divine human possessed with the power of God. In the third conflicting passage to be highlighted concerning Jesus' emptying, Johnson says: "Jesus Christ said of Himself, "The Son can do nothing."...He had NO supernatural capabilities whatsoever! While He is 100 percent God, He chose to live with the same limitations that man would face once He was redeemed." (pg. 29)
This doesn't agree with what Johnson says later in the book (pg. 79) that I covered above. If Jesus laid aside His divinity He isn't God. If He is 100 percent God, He can't have laid aside His divinity while on earth. It has to be one or the other. Jesus' supernatural abilities (or the lack of them) is also a difficult issue. Based on many passages from both the Old and New Testament (Isa. 11:2-3, 42:1, 61:1 cf. Luke 4:18-19; Matt. 3:16; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22; John 1:32; Luke 4:1, 14, 36, 40-41; Acts 10:38) it appears that Jesus operated by the power of the Holy Spirit during His ministry. According to Johnson, without the Holy Spirit, Jesus "had NO supernatural capabilities whatsoever!" Is this the case? I don't think so. Luke 2:41-52 relates a story about the 12 year old Jesus giving and asking amazing answers and questions in the temple. Jesus was also sinless for 30 years (or so) before being empowered by the Holy Spirit. How did He do that if He had no supernatural capabilities? There is yet another problem with this line of thinking as well. If Jesus is truly God while on earth (as well as truly man), how did He not have supernatural abilities? If He didn't have those powers, then He isn't God.
The final point of contention I have with Johnson's book is that of his use of the Bible. Based on the scripture citations and my analysis of them, Johnson uses the Bible in a very helter-skelter and slipshod manner. He reads into the Bible what he wants to get out of it and he doesn't hesitate to partial quote verses out of context. Since I have already dealt with his use of scripture somewhat, I will just give one big, clear example of his poor usage.
The example concerns the typology of the Israelites crossing the Jordan river into the Promised Land. After relating the exodus from Egypt story Johnson says:
"When the Jews finally entered the Promised Land, they entered through a river-another baptism. This baptism was not a departure from sin. Such was illustrated when they left Egypt. This new baptism would take them into a different way of life. For example: they fought wars on the wilderness side of the river and won. But once they crossed the Jordan River, wars would be fought differently. Now they would march around a city in silence for days, finally raising up a shout and watching the walls fall (6). Later they would experience the challenge of sending a choir into battle first (7). And then there was the time God intentionally sent over 30,000 soldiers back home so He could fight a war with 300 torch wielding trumpet blowers. He makes the Promised Land possible, and we pay the price to live there. He'll give us His baptism of fire if we'll give Him something worth burning. This baptism in the Holy Spirit is the fulfillment of the Old Testament picture of entering the Promised Land." (pg. 71-72)
Again, I quoted a full passage in context with no omissions or chopped sentences including the parenthetical references, 6 and 7, which are the scriptures Joshua 6 and 2 Chronicles 20:21 respectively. His last sentence where he declares that the Israelites entrance into the Promised Land is the picture of the baptism in the Holy Spirit is what I want to address here. The reason I want to consider this interpretation is, 1) maybe you don't agree with my corrections of Johnson's interpretations up to this point and 2) it is the Biblical text itself that will correct him all on its own. The passage that will make this evident is found in Hebrews 3:7-4:13 and deals with both the Israelites who, by unbelief, were allowed to perish in the desert, and the obedient Israelites who entered the Promised Land. What did the author of Hebrews say the entry into the Promised Land could be compared to?
"Therefore, as the Holy Spirit says, "Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion, on the day of testing in the wilderness, where your fathers put me to the test and saw my works for forty years. Therefore I was provoked with that generation, and said, ‘They always go astray in their heart; they have not known my ways.' As I swore in my wrath, 'They shall not enter my rest.'" Take care, brothers, lest there be in any of you an evil, unbelieving heart, leading you to fall away from the living God. But exhort one another every day, as long as it is called "today," that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin. For we have come to share in Christ, if indeed we hold our original confidence firm to the end. As it is said, "Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion." For who were those who heard and yet rebelled? Was it not all those who left Egypt led by Moses? And with whom was he provoked for forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose bodies fell in the wilderness? And to whom did he swear that they would not enter his rest, but to those who were disobedient? So we see that they were unable to enter because of unbelief. Therefore, while the promise of entering his rest still stands, let us fear lest any of you should seem to have failed to reach it. For good news came to us just as to them, but the message they heard did not benefit them, because they were not united by faith with those who listened. For we who have believed enter that rest, as he has said, "As I swore in my wrath, 'They shall not enter my rest,'" although his works were finished from the foundation of the world. For he has somewhere spoken of the seventh day in this way: "And God rested on the seventh day from all his works." And again in this passage he said, "They shall not enter my rest.” Since therefore it remains for some to enter it, and those who formerly received the good news failed to enter because of disobedience, again he appoints a certain day, "Today," saying through David so long afterward, in the words already quoted, "Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts." For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken of another day later on. So then, there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God, for whoever has entered God's rest has also rested from his works as God did from his. Let us therefore strive to enter that rest, so that no one may fall by the same sort of disobedience. For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart. And no creature is hidden from his sight, but all are naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must give account." (Hebrews 3:7-4:13)
There isn't anything in there that discusses the baptism of the Holy Spirit. The answer to my lead-in question is that entering the Promised Land was a picture of entering God's rest. No commentary from me or commentaries from professionals needed. The Bible refutes Johnson's interpretation all by itself. If he is willing to interpret the Bible in this way, with careless disregard for what the text itself says, then I think that any other interpretation he gives of any section of scripture should be closely scrutinized before being internalized as proper teaching.
In conclusion, Bill Johnson of Bethel Church-Redding has written a book that teaches: a pseudo-Gnosticism wherein the "invisible" realm of esoteric substances is what our focus should be on, an error-filled kenosis that makes Jesus out to be just a man with some divine power during ministry, not actually God, and that you can interpret the Bible any way you like as long as it fits your own personal theology and doctrine, notwithstanding what the Bible really says. Without exaggeration, this is only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the poor interpretations and arguments made in this book. I would not recommend this book to anyone because I would be inviting them to read incorrect theology. I also am going to be very wary of anything that comes out of Bethel Church-Redding, including their music, because I don't know exactly what the sermons, conference talks, and lyrics of songs mean and I will not pollute my mind with a blatantly mistaken view of both the focus of the Christian life and God, specifically in the person of Jesus Christ.
References
Scripture quotations taken from the ESV unless otherwise noted. Crossway. 2008.
When Heaven Invades Earth: A Practical Guide to a Life of Miracles by Bill Johnson. Destiny Image Publishers, Inc. 2003.
The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament by Craig S. Keener. InterVarsity Press. 2014.
The Bible Exposition Commentary by Warren W. Wiersbe. Victor Books. 1996.
The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Victor Books. 1985.
Heresies: The Image of Christ in the Mirror of Heresy and Orthodoxy from the Apostles to the Present by Harold O. J. Brown. Doubleday & Company, Inc. 1984.
Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine by Wayne Grudem. Zondervan. 1994.
Saturday, June 11, 2016
Wednesday Night Apologetics: Lesson 8
This is the conclusion to our argument for Christian theism. In it, steps 9-12 are discussed. They are: Therefore, Jesus is God. Whatever Jesus, who is God, says is true. Jesus claimed that the Bible is the Word of God. Therefore, the Bible is the Word of God and anything oppossed to it is false.
Wednesday, February 24, 2016
Victory in the Risen Christ
One of my favorite movies of all time is The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King. I recently watched all three movies in the series again and I was struck by one scene in particular. It is the scene where Denethor is about to burn himself alive. As Gandalf enters the chamber to stop him, Denethor says:
"You may triumph on the field of battle for a day; but against the power that has risen in the East, there is no victory."
Denethor's mind had been poisoned into believing there was no way to win. The irony of this scene is that the Rohirrim had just shown up and were slaughtering the orc armies. If Denethor had just looked at the battlefield at that moment he may have been persuaded that victory, not just on that day, but total victory was possible.
As I watched this I was struck by the thought that we already have total victory in Christ. Not only in one battle but for eternity. From the moment God pronounced the curse on the serpent in Genesis 3:14-15, the war was virtually over. Jesus completed the victory in His death and resurrection and He will consummate it at His second coming. Sometimes it can be difficult to keep that in mind as we walk with the Lord day to day. A lot of the time we are like Denethor when we consider this earthly life; believing that there is no victory against Satan or against the power of our flesh. The Lord reminded Israel of His power in Isaiah 60:1-3:
"Arise, shine, for your light has come, and the glory of the Lord has risen upon you. For behold, darkness shall cover the earth, and thick darkness the peoples; but the Lord will arise upon you, and his glory will be seen upon you. And nations shall come to your light, and kings to the brightness of your rising."
Though things look bleak and dark for the Israelites, God will win through. The victory will be so complete and evident that nations and kings will be drawn to Israel. God has promised those who are faithful in Christ a victory even more complete in the conquering of death:
"I tell you this, brothers: flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. Behold! I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall all be changed. For this perishable body must put on the imperishable, and this mortal body must put on immortality. When the perishable puts on the imperishable, and the mortal puts on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written:
"Death is swallowed up in victory. O death, where is your victory? O death, where is your sting?" 1 Cor 15:50-55
Victory is already ours! Death has already lost! The message of the cross is victory in God's love and not just at the end of the age, but right now. The inauguration of that victory occurred on a Sunday morning when Christ rose from the grave. That is why Paul taunts death at the end of that passage. Jesus has won and given us the victory. No fighting on our part, no conditions attached.
So my message to you is this: don't be like Denethor when your life looks bad, when you struggle with sin, when you contemplate suffering and evil in the world, or when the day to day grind of this fallen world tries to drag you down. Look out at the battlefield and see that the Lord has won. If you are in Christ, you've already won through Him and you can change Denethor's words to read:
"Satan may triumph on the field of battle for a day; but against the power that has risen from the grave, there is no victory."
"You may triumph on the field of battle for a day; but against the power that has risen in the East, there is no victory."
Denethor's mind had been poisoned into believing there was no way to win. The irony of this scene is that the Rohirrim had just shown up and were slaughtering the orc armies. If Denethor had just looked at the battlefield at that moment he may have been persuaded that victory, not just on that day, but total victory was possible.
As I watched this I was struck by the thought that we already have total victory in Christ. Not only in one battle but for eternity. From the moment God pronounced the curse on the serpent in Genesis 3:14-15, the war was virtually over. Jesus completed the victory in His death and resurrection and He will consummate it at His second coming. Sometimes it can be difficult to keep that in mind as we walk with the Lord day to day. A lot of the time we are like Denethor when we consider this earthly life; believing that there is no victory against Satan or against the power of our flesh. The Lord reminded Israel of His power in Isaiah 60:1-3:
"Arise, shine, for your light has come, and the glory of the Lord has risen upon you. For behold, darkness shall cover the earth, and thick darkness the peoples; but the Lord will arise upon you, and his glory will be seen upon you. And nations shall come to your light, and kings to the brightness of your rising."
Though things look bleak and dark for the Israelites, God will win through. The victory will be so complete and evident that nations and kings will be drawn to Israel. God has promised those who are faithful in Christ a victory even more complete in the conquering of death:
"I tell you this, brothers: flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. Behold! I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall all be changed. For this perishable body must put on the imperishable, and this mortal body must put on immortality. When the perishable puts on the imperishable, and the mortal puts on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written:
"Death is swallowed up in victory. O death, where is your victory? O death, where is your sting?" 1 Cor 15:50-55
Victory is already ours! Death has already lost! The message of the cross is victory in God's love and not just at the end of the age, but right now. The inauguration of that victory occurred on a Sunday morning when Christ rose from the grave. That is why Paul taunts death at the end of that passage. Jesus has won and given us the victory. No fighting on our part, no conditions attached.
So my message to you is this: don't be like Denethor when your life looks bad, when you struggle with sin, when you contemplate suffering and evil in the world, or when the day to day grind of this fallen world tries to drag you down. Look out at the battlefield and see that the Lord has won. If you are in Christ, you've already won through Him and you can change Denethor's words to read:
"Satan may triumph on the field of battle for a day; but against the power that has risen from the grave, there is no victory."
Friday, December 11, 2015
Literary Genres in the Bible, Part 2
Video length: 30:41
A.
Prophets
1. Paragraph: God tells Habakkuk
that He is about to do a wondrous work
2. Oracle: Habakkuk complains about
Israel’s treatment, God answers
3. Book: Israel rejects God, He
punishes them but promises them hope in the end
4. Sinaitic covenant (the Law): God’s
chastisement of Israel through the prophets is all related to the Law and
Israel’s inability/unwillingness to obey God’s commands
5. Bible: God must constantly call
Israel to repentance for their disobedience which He does through His prophets.
This sets up the significance of Jesus’ sacrifice by showing that nothing we
could ever do would merit God’s forgiveness. Even the people with the Law from
Heaven could not do it!!! How can we ever expect to?
6. Near and distant future mixed in
a confusing manner (telescoping)
7. Reference helps: use outside help
abundantly, biblehub.com
B.
Psalms
1. What kind of Psalm is it?
a. Laments
i.
individual: 3, 22, 31, 39, 42, 57, 71, 88, 120, 139, 142
ii. Corporate:
12, 44, 80, 94, 137
b. Thanksgiving
i.
individual: 18, 30, 32, 34, 40, 66, 92, 116, 118, 138
ii. Corporate:
65, 67, 75, 107, 124, 136
c. Hymns of Praise: 8,
19, 33, 66, 100, 103, 111, 113, 114, 117, 145-149
d. Salvation-History:
78, 105, 106, 135, 136
e. Celebration and
Affirmation: 2, 18, 20, 21, 24, 29, 45-48, 50, 72, 76, 81, 84, 87, 89, 93, 95-99, 101, 110, 122, 132, 144
f. Wisdom: 36, 37, 49,
73, 112, 127, 128, 133
g. Songs of Trust: 11,
16, 23, 27, 62, 63, 91, 121, 125, 131
2. Reference helps: Out of the Depths:
The Psalms Speak for Us Today, Steven Bishop; How to Read the Psalms, Tremper
Longman III; biblehub.com commentary section
C.
Wisdom
1. Proverbs: practical attitudes and
behaviors in everyday life
2. Job: speculative wisdom about
suffering and evil in the world; points to Christ's destruction of evil in the
end
3. Ecclesiastes: speculative wisdom
about the nature of earthly pleasure; points to
Christ's crucifixion that gives us eternal life
4. Song of Solomon (Song of Songs):
marital romance and appropriate sexual desire, not sexual lust and pleasure
5. Reference helps: biblehub.com
commentary section
D.
Law (12 rules from Fee and Stuart, pg. 186)
1. Do see the OT law as God's fully
inspired word for you.
2. Don't see the OT law as God's
direct command to you.
3. Do see the OT law as the basis
for the old covenant, and therefore for Israel's history.
4. Don't see the OT law as binding
on Christians in the new covenant except where specifically renewed.
5. Do see God's justice, love, and
high standards revealed in the OT law.
6. Don't forget to see that God's
mercy is made equal to the severity of the standards.
7. Do see the OT law as a
paradigm-providing examples for the full range of expected
behavior.
8. Don't see the OT law as complete.
It is not technically comprehensive.
9. Do remember that the essence of
the law (the Ten Commandments and the two
chief laws) is repeated in the Prophets and renewed in the NT.
10. Don't expect the OT law to be
cited frequently by the Prophets or the NT. Legal
citation was first introduced only in the Roman era, long after the OT was complete.
11. Do see the OT law as a generous
gift to Israel, bringing much blessing when obeyed.
12.
Don't see the OT law as a grouping of arbitrary, annoying regulations limiting people's freedom.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)