Home » Theological Doctrine » NT Theology » New Testament Theology
| New Testament Theology [message #13198] |
Sun, 15 March 2020 18:01  |
 Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
New Testament Theology
These are all my notes from the charismatic school taught by Bro. Freeman. EDIT I just noticed that Gillian had posted an outline several years ago.
Outline
New Testament Theology
I. Introduction
II. Revelation and Inspiration in the New Testament
A. New Testament Viewpoint
B. Mode of Revelation and Inspiration in the N.T.
C. Scope of N.T. Revelation
III. The New Testament Conception of God
A. God as Love
B. God as Father
C. God as Moral Ruler and Judge
D. God as Jesus Christ
E. God as Spirit
IV. The Kingdom of God in the New Testament
A. Its Central Significance in Scripture
B. Old Testament Background
C. The Kingdom of God and Christ's Mission
D. The Nature of the Kingdom
E. Conditions for Entrance into the Kingdom
F. Relation between the Kingdom and the Church
G. The "Keys" to the Kingdom
H. Possessing the Kingdom
V. Jesus Christ in the New Testament
A. The N.T. Doctrine of the Messiah
B. Jesus Christ as the Son of Man
C. Jesus Christ as the Son of God
D. The Logos
E. Jesus Christ as Mediator
VI. The New Testament Conception of Man
A. The N.T. View of Man is Simplistic
B. What it means to be "In Christ" or "In Adam"
C. The Nature of Man in the N.T.
VII. Redemption in the New Testament
A. Redemption and the Kosmos
B. Redemption and the Nature of the Atonement
C. Redemption and the N.T. View of Law and Grace
D. The Divine and Human Aspects in Redemption
E. Benefits of Redemption in the New Testament
VIII. The Consummation of All Things
A. The Second Advent
B. The Millennium
C. The Eternal State
1. Preliminary Events
2. New Heavens, New Earth, and New Jerusalem
3. Life in the Eternal State
[Updated on: Sat, 28 March 2020 19:35]
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| Re: Revelation and Inspiration [message #13199 is a reply to message #13198] |
Sun, 15 March 2020 18:04  |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
It is based on 3 assumptions:
1. NT Chrisianity is not merely a 1st century product but is conditional on the religious history of Israel. It is not merely a continuation of OT thought and concept but is the fulfillment of Gods revelation to Israel. (Matt 5-7) Its not old but older Its not new but newer. Jesus fulfilled what was implicit in the OT law.
2. Christianity is understood in light of the intertestement period. 400 yrs of history influencing the NT scene. No literary prophets but much history. The Maccabees sects temple to synagogue. Much theology was developed.
3.This study will not duplicate the biblical theology studies. It is not as comprehensive as much was covered there. Biblical theology is a general theological survey of the whole bible from a systematic viewpoint. NT theology is only NT.
Revelation and Inspiration in the NT
Definitions:
1. Revelation: God through the scriptures, his ministers, his providence and the created order has unveiled all man needs to know about him his will and his purposes.
2. Inspiration: The divine influence of the HS upon the writers of scripture whereby their writings were made verbally infallible.
All the orally inspired prophecies of the apostles and prophets was anointed but only a part of this was set down and recorded. Revelation is when God unveils himself through visions dreams miracles the scriptures audible voice. Revelation concerns the giving of truth to man. Inspiration involves mans accurate reception of that truth. Anyone can record what they see but inspiration records the accurate reception of the revelation.
The scriptures are the inspired record of the revelation. 1 Cor. 14/29 is said of prophecy but never of scripture. Prophecy is in the bible but can't be compared with scripture.
Inspiration is an English word that doesn't occur in the bible. Job 32/8 The Heb. Word is breath Meshamah
11 Tim. 3/16 The Greek word is God breathed. Theo pnustos
Paul didn't say the writers were inspired but that God breathed out his word through them 11 Peter 1/20-21
What did the NT writers think about what they spoke? Did they of the NT era consider themselves inspired like the prophets of old? Without question the apostles considered themselves inspired and spokesmen for God.
1. Paul claimed direct revelation for his message. Gal. 1/6f
2. 1 cor. 14/37-38 In teaching on the gifts and order in the church services he said anyone who is spiritual will recognize the truth of what I say.
3. He commands the Thessalonians to exclude anyone who doesn't obey his word.
1 Thess. 3/14
4. Eph. 3/1-5 Paul claims revelation as an equal with that of the OT prophets.
5. He claimed to speak for Christ and had authority to discipline those who did not obey him as an apostle.
11 Cor. 13/2-3 with 1 Thess2/13 1 Cor. 7/10f
Other apostles claimed inspiration and authority
1 John 4/6 Those in the truth hear us those not don't hear us.
11 Peter 1/16-21, Acts 2//33, 12 Acts 4/8
The apostles claimed their writings were on a level with the OT scriptures
11 Peter 3/15-16, 1Thess 5/27, Rev. 1/1, Rev.2/7, 1 Tim. 5/18 with Deut.
The apostles could claim inspiration for their message because Jesus said they could
John 14/26, 15/26-27, 16/12-14
Their divine inspiration and revelation is confirmed by God himself.
Mark 16/20, Heb. 2/3-4, Rom. 15/ 18-19, 1Thess. 1/5
The Mode of Revelation.
1. Unlike the OT revelation comes by the BHS to all in the church. This was predicted by Joel.
Acts 2/1-4 14-18 quotes Joel
Acts 10, Acts 19 the gentiles received the BHS
Eph. 6 we are to pray in the spirit Jude 20,Rom. 8, 1Cor 12,14
Dreams visions, prophecy Jesus appears or speaks audibly
2. Revelation in the Spirit.
caught up in the spirit or in a trance state (not self imposed) sometimes in and out of the body. 11/cor. 12 Rev.1/9f This is not the same as a vision
3. Through a prophet in the church
1 Cor.14/29-32, Acts 2
4. Through the gifts of the Spirit set in the church 1Cor. 12,14
The Scope of NT Inspiration and Revelation
The OT scope is generally limited to the law the prophets and the writings. The OT revelation is type and shadows the book of Heb.
The NT has 4 parts
1. The message of the gospels. - redemption through faith in Christ
2. The message of the book of Acts - the releasing of the redemptive power of Christ through the HS.
3. The message of the epistles the interpretation of the meaning of redemption by instruction
4. The message of the book of Revelation
which is a picture of the future triumph of Christs redemption . . .
- over his enemies
- the establishment of his kingdom
- the eternal state
Two extremes about the scope of Revelation
1. Those who add to the canon of scripture
- The RC church ie: apocrypha,church tradition, decisions of church councils, excathedra pronouncements. Errors: Maryology, purgatory, mass, transubstantiation, prayers for the dead, prayers to Mary and the saints
- Various cults - they believe in the bible but add their revelations ; Mormonism,
Christian science Seventh day Adventist Swedenborgianism
- Rev. 22/18 is addressed to the book of Revelation but the principle applies to all the church.
2. Those who subtract from the bible
Liberals and modernists. The followers of expediency follow the bible except where it contradicts what they want to believe.
Conclusion: 11 Tim. 3/16-17
1. The nature of scripture: its God breathed. People weren't always inspired. Their writings set in scripture always are.
2. Its benefit: profitable for doctrine for reproof for correction for instruction
3. Its purpose: to equip us to be perfect complete thoroughly furnished to do all good works
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| The NT Conception of God [message #13200 is a reply to message #13198] |
Sun, 15 March 2020 18:15 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
The NT Conception of God
Jesus never gave us a systematic explanation of God. He shows us how God acts and feels about his creation and his purposes for man. For eg. Jesus describes God as someone who loves his creation so much he gave his most precious possession to redeem it. Jesus describes God the father as a righteous judge and as Spirit.
God as Love
1 John 4/8,16 God is self giving love. The greatest expression of love is based on what God does because of what he is. Ie: Love
He gave himself as love John 3/16 but it was self giving love. John 10/18 Matt 20/28 Col.2/9 11Cor.5/19 The highest expression of love is self giving love 1 John 3/16 Acts 20/28 Matt. 5/43-48
1. to be children of God we have to love our enemies. 1 John3/10,14 Love is proof we have received the new birth 1 John4/7 We are to imitate his perfection which is self giving love
2. another reason we like God should love and pray for sinners and enemies because of gods providential care for them as his creation 1 John 3/17, James 2/14-17, Matt. 20/28
3. Jesus giving himself as God unto persecution for righteousness sake w/o retaliation is 1 Peter 2/19. An expression of self giving love which we are to imitate. Love without retaliation is self giving. As Gods love was given unto us 1 John 4/9-10 so we are to show our love to others 1 John 4/11
What is meant by the statement God is love
He is telling us what God is by nature. We have an emotion called love but with God is his nature and more than just an attribute. There are no degrees of love with god. Unlike man god doesn't have to taught to love because it is an expression of his nature. We don't have to learn how to be human as it is our nature. God is eternal. His live is eternal;
How is his Love expressed?
1. By his act of creation (pre-fall). Because it shows his desire to share himself in fellowship
2. Love after the fall is expressed in redemption and in providing a way that he could be shared. John 3/16
3. Gods providence is an expression of his love. Without rain and sun we would have no food.
Also in his preservation of his creation Ps. 104
How are we to view the wrath of God when we know he is love?
Gods love is not to be set against his wrath like it is some imperfection of his character. God holiness will aid us understanding how if God is live how he can express wrath. Holiness is the greatest perfection of God. Gods love for holiness is expressed as wrath. If he didn't deal with sin he wouldn't be true to his holiness. His holiness is expressed as wrath against unholiness. Wrath is the divine expression of Gods holiness. He takes his holiness seriously and any violation of it must be punished or his holiness would not be perfect. Any violation of it must be purged or punished
For God to love he must love perfectly and absolutely. That is why he cannot allow even the smallest sin in his universe. Holiness is so connected to God that even the word is used as a synonym for his name. eg: the Holy one of Israel Heb 12/14 Gods concern for holiness is seen throughout the NT. Rev. 15/1,4 He is pouring them out because he is holy.
So many who apologize by their teaching for God wrath and who teach sentimentality and emotion are really afraid of his wrath. If they admit to it then they might fall under it they feel.
Some invent theories to excuse Gods wrath
eg:
Punishment in hell is remedial
The wicked will be annihilated (Is. 66 Seventh day Adventist)
Eternal separation is not eternal punishment
Why does Bro. Freeman believe in Gods wrath as much as Gods love.
1. Because the Bible teaches it. The NT (mat. 3/7) opens with a warning to flee from his wrath. John 3/36 Rev. 4-19 is the future for the sinner and only the sheep are saved out of it. Rom. 1/18. His wrath was revealed in judging Adam and eve. Also in the flood. Sodom and Gomorrah. The giving of the law to Moses was a system of sacrifice killing innocent victims as a substitute. Something had to die. His wrath was revealed in destroying Israel. It is still being revealed ie. Wars, 6 million Jews, great disasters earthquakes. The bible witness is from the beginning God has revealed his wrath against sin
2. God is not ashamed to openly proclaim that hes is a God of wrath and judgment. Just open a concordance. There are many more references to his wrath anger vengeance than to his love.
3. He himself confirms it by an oath. Ps. 89/30-35 He swears by his holiness because he is the greatest thing he can swear by. Heb. 6/13, 3/11-12, Ps. 95/10-11
4. Because there's no contradiction between his love and his wrath Rom.11/7-22 In his wrath for them he expressed his love toward me.
5. He records his wrath in the bible to motivate me to Godly fear and faithful service. Children for eg fear discipline.
Heb 12/28-29 10/30-31, 1 Thess. 1/9-10
6. There would be a defect in his character if like the sentimentalists he excused sin. His wrath isn't a defect. Indifference to sin is a moral blemish and what is wrong with teachers leaders parents courts who excuse it.
The Divine initiative
God doesn't deal with us as a holy judge but as a loving father. As holiness he demands punishment but as love he bears the punishment on himself. He is a divine creator who loves his creation. In the OT God is not depicted as taking the initiative in seeking sinners. Is. 19/25, 65/1 do say he will seek a people but in the OT salvation was found only in Israel. One had to join Israel to be saved.
Why didn't God seek sinners to save them in the OT?
Right up to Pentecost (Matt.10/5-6) salvation was only for the Jews. In the NT you see God as love coming into focus. That is John 3/16 not the OT Luke 15/1-10 God is seeking sinners. We see in the NT God taking the initiative and seeking sinners
Gods love is sovereign
This means that God sovereignly chooses who he will love Rom. 9/10 God can bestow it on who he wants because no one deserves it. It pleased him to give it to Jacob and not Esau. Duet. 7/7-8
God love is Eternal
If God is love (and his nature is love) and God is eternal than his love is eternal. There was never a time God didn't love me. Everything he does is in love. Even punishing sinners because he loves holiness. Eph. 1/4-5 11 Tim 1/9 Jer. 3/3. The point here is you don't just get up and decide to accept Gods love. It is a sovereign bestowal of Gods love.
Gods live in infinite
Eph. 2/4,3/19 Rom. 8/28-39
He loves us with an everlasting love
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| God as Father [message #13201 is a reply to message #13198] |
Sun, 15 March 2020 18:18 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
God as Father (not a father)
Jesus referred to him as his father and encouraged us to believe he was our father.
The stress in the NT in on he fatherhood of God. The term father in the OT is used incidentally. In the OT it describes Israels special relationship to God. Israel was Gods first born son. In the NT the stress is individual. The OT stress was on the nation. Is. 64/8, Is. 1/2-4 Generally in the OT father is fatherhood and refers to his creation of them as a nation sustained by covenant and speaks of his special providential care . The stress is he is their ruler and king. In the NT Jesus personalizes God as father and relates it to every one in the kingdom.
God is their Father. Matt. 5/16,48 Luke 12/32, Mark 11/25
Application of God as Father in the NT
1. Perhaps the most unique teaching of Jesus was that God as father was not a general designation anymore but personal and to be taken literally. He is literally and personally my father.1 John 3/1,9 John 1/11-12, 11 Peter 1/4
2. When you are born of God you partake of the divine nature. Matt. 6/9 We are to call him our father and not just as a theological concept.
3. God has a parental concern for his children. He acts like a father. He id concerned about every area of our life just a father would. Matt. 10/29-30 James 5/13-16 He is concerned about our health and all the little things.
4. We should call him father because we see in his many promises that he is not indifferent to our needs and desires and invites us to come boldly and ask Matt. 21/22, Mark 11/24, john 5/14-15 The very fact that he ordained prayer indicates his willingness to answer. The fatherhood of God is expressed as parental concern in that he does hear and answer the prayers of his children.
What is the Significance of God ordaining Prayer
1. It implies his parental concern that he will answer our prayers. It means his providential concern is not to be taken for granted. The fact he ordained prayer as a means of obtaining our needs but you have to ask (in faith) God as a real parent will provide for his children if they will ask and meet the conditions. With Gods providential concern and the promises he makes there is a 3 fold responsibility You must determine 1 John 5/14-15 his will and how to receive it.
We must meet the conditions for the answer Matt 21/22 (believing) Mark11/25 (forgiveness)
We must act in accordance with his will James 2.
We have to ask in faith or we won't get an answer.
2. To give a witness to the world for his fatherly concern Matt. 5/44-45 He provides for all men. He ordained prayer to have a means of communication with him and through it he shows his special providence for us to the world.
What the Fatherhood of God does not mean in the NT
The fatherhood of God and the related concept of the brotherhood of men is not taught in the NT. In the biblical context it would alright but the liberals teach that this means he is the father of all men. John 8/38-44 1 John 3/10
John 1/11-12 Faith in Jesus is always the basis for membership in Gods kingdom.
Acts 17/28-29 Liberals appeal to this. The problem is he is quoting the poets and saying God is creator and then goes on to make his point about Jesus Rom. 8/14, Ps. 66/18, Prov,. 20/9
The refutation of the error of the universal fatherhood of God is refuted by Jesus in Matt.11/27, John 14/6
God as Moral Ruler and Judge
The NT depicts God as love but he is also wrath to those who reject his love and fatherhood. As love his concern is to find the lost and save them. Eg parables lost coin, lost sheep, prodigal son. But as a holy god he must remain true to his holiness and punish sin and disobedience eg parables talents,wheat and tares, fish net
Mark 3/1-12 john the Baptist. You see both love and wrath
Mark 8/34-38,Matt 10/32-39,25/34,41 Matt 13/37f, 11/20-24, Luke 10/13-15,
The two aspects offering pardon and punishing those who reject it. The apostles it. Rom 1, Rev. 4-1911 Peter 3/9f
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| God as Jesus Christ [message #13202 is a reply to message #13198] |
Sun, 15 March 2020 18:22 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
God as Jesus Christ
We study Jesus as God if for now other reason he is the revealer of God. We can't see God but we can see Jesus. John 1/18 Jesus came revealing the father. The HS came revealing Jesus.
God reveals himself in many ways
Ps. 19/1 Rom. 1 through creation
1 Tim. 4/13-16 through his word
Rom. 12 by the gifts
Heb. 1 through his son directly
Why is it necessary for God to reveal himself? The answer is that he didn't deliberately hide himself Ps. 19, Rom 1. but because of mans sin obscured his vision. He now needs special revelation to understand and see. Natural revelation only confirms Gods existence. It can't save him. Natural revelation declares his glory and power. It also makes him without excuse.
The Deity of Christ as God
John 1, Phil.2 John 10/30, Heb. 1/3
Jesus is so uniquely God that no one can come to the Father except through him. John 14/6. Jesus is the only way
What is Truth
Truth is that which corresponds to the actual facts. The true xian will add " as God interprets those facts" Because facts are not always as they seem Thus for the xian its not merely what we see but what God has to say about it was well.
How can we know if our judgment lines up to the actual facts as God sees them? The answer is he has given us the revelation (the word) inspired by the HS and then given us the HS to interpret it to us.
Religious man is a genius at supplying substitutes for truth:
1. Feelings, emotions, mental reasoning's and desires, traditions The RC church substitutes their tradition for the word. Traditions are OK if they are based on the word 11 Thess. 2/15, 3/6
2. Sense evidence The sun appears to rise in the a.m. Sense perception can be a source of truth but is very subjective.
3. Intuition can be a source of truth but can't be a test for truth. There is wrong intuition.
4. Customs. Can be good or bad ie: pagan holidays
Jesus said the way to life is through the truth.
Truth is that which lines up to the world of God. But words taken from the bible are not truth unless the intent to use them the way God intended is there. IE: many denominational creeds quote words from the bible yet mean mean something entirely different .
Truth is not truth just because it is quoted from the bible. But it is truth when we mean what God meant when he inspired the words. Truth is corresponding with the words of the bible as well as the mind and intent of God,
Jesus could say John 14/6 because his life and teachings were in exact harmony with the mind and intent of God when he gave him the words to speak.
John 8/31-32 John 16/13 We can know all we need to know for doctrine and how to live. 11 Tim. 3/16 The bible when it address itself to psychology or science it is always 100% correct. To Jesus faith and truth were inseparable. Rom. 10/17 The bible doesn't separate them. Faith has to be related to knowledge. Not sense knowledge but spiritual knowledge. Knowledge that isn't related to Gods word isn't acceptable.
How do we know the bible is truth and all we need to know.
1. By the nature of faith itself. Not the ability to reason and deduce something as true but the very faith we use to believe the bible is the truth is the evidence its true. The very fact we can have faith in it. Faith that the word is truth comes from the word of truth.
2. The inner witness of the spirit of truth to the truth of Gods word. John 7/16-17
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| God as Spirit [message #13203 is a reply to message #13198] |
Sun, 15 March 2020 18:51 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
God as Spirit
Introduction:
John 4/24 God is Spirit. This is speaking of his nature.
1. Man has a spirit but he is flesh. Man is the adjective (spiritual) God is the noun (spirit)
2. As spirit God is presented as having two aspects:
- As to his nature or being he is spirit
- One manifestation of that nature is the HS. His nature is spirit but when he manifests that nature its the HS.
What did Jesus mean in John 4/24 by "God is Spirit"?
1. We know he is spirit by logical implications. Spirit is not created or finite matter. Spirit is the highest form of existence possible. Rom. 1/20 Looking at creation we can see there must be an invisible God. All man sees is decay and change and death in the material world so that which is greater than this must be changeless or spirit (immortal) Since man knows intuitively that our mind is of a higher order than the brain and body then God must be of the highest order or existence possible. The brain will decay but the mind will be eternal
2. We know God is Spirit because the scriptures say so.
John 4/24, Phil. 2/5-6 before Jesus was flesh he was spirit. Isaiah 31/3
3. We know God is spirit from doctrine
4. We know God is spirit by his Eternalness. Only spirit is eternal. Anything created is finite because it as created. Our spirit is finite because it was created. Our spirit is from God. He did not create it he imparts it to what he creates so it will have life. Eternity is not endless time. Spirit and eternalness are synonymous.
5. By his omnipresence
Ps. 139/7-10 Only spirit can do this
Jer. 23/23-24 Acts 17/27-28
6. By his invisibility
Col. 1/15, 1 Tim.1/17, Heb. 11/27 Only spirit can be invisible without hiding
Luke 4/28-30, John 8/56-59
What is Spirit
One professor said Spirit has no shape size colour weight and it does not occupy space. Spirit is as real as matter but his is an attempt to define another kind of reality that we have never experienced. Spirit is invisible immaterial spaceless and immortal
Spirit is invisible. If you can see it it isn't spirit. If you do see it and you're conscious (not a vision) it doesn't mean your eyes see it but the invisible makes itself visible. If you can see it its because you are in a trance or seeing a vision
1. Spirit is immaterial A material body has parts (eyes ears) but a spirit can't be divided into parts. There is no element of spirit which is not the whole element or spirit. You can't divide up something immaterial. This is why you can't divide up God into 3 parts
2. Spirit is Spaceless Something immaterial doesn't occupy space and doesn't need space. Even molecules and atoms need space. Before God made mater he made space because he needed a place to put it. Matter occupies space. Spirit doesn't need space. The only time it needs space is when it makes itself visible to us. Space is emptiness. Spirit doesn't need emptiness to exist in. Beams of light converging on one another and crossing each other. Each beam wouldn't affect the other because light is immaterial. It wouldn't matter how many beams of light were that space it would never be filled up. Demons are spirits and immaterial and they don't occupy space. Thats why one person can have many.
3. Spirit is immortal
Material objects can be changed in form. Water/ice/vapour Spirit cannot be changed to something else or reduced to something else because Spirit is the basic essence.
The Relation of immortality to time
Spirit is immortal. Immortality of spirit unlike created matter is not affected by time. Spirit is not affected by time because time measurements change. Everything created is in the process of change. God created time because when he created an object to put in space it began to change otherwise it would be eternal and immortal. Time was created to record and measure the change.
Eternity is not endless time.
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| NT Terms for Spirit [message #13205 is a reply to message #13198] |
Sun, 15 March 2020 18:56 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
NT Terms for Spirit
1.Spirit in the OT is used in a figurative way. It is used to describe character disposition attitude (spirit of anger)
Prov. 16/18-19
2. Spirit can be a personality Ps. 104/4 angels Evil spirits 1Sam.16/14-16 1 Kings 22/19-23
3. spirit is used in relation to body and soul. Here spirit in contrast to body and soul is the principle of conscious life. Gen. 2/7 Sometimes equated with breath. Spirit in the OT is the vital principle that animates the body. Which then becomes soul.
OT Terms
Heb. Ruach
spirit Gen. 1/8
wind Gen. 8/1
breath Gen. 6/17
Heb. Nephesh soul
In the OT Nephesh generally demotes the person as a person. Ruarch usually refers to the animating fore within the individual. Nephesh and spirit are not interchangeable.
Gen. 2/7 Nephesh Gen. 46/26-27
Gen. 32/8 He is person and he has spirit
The bible shows that the relation between soul and spirit is that the soul is the person and the spirit is what makes him a person when joined with his body.
Job 32/18 Ps. 133/4
Nephesh in the OT can also signify the seat of the appetites and desires. Duet.12/20
Jer. 13/17 the seat of the emotions
Lev. 17/11 sometimes it signifies the life itself
Gen. 35/18 soul should be life in a general sense
NT Terms
Pneuma Gr. spirit it is translated as spirit Heb. 12/23 wind John 3/8 breath 11 Tim. 2/8
1 Peter 3/4 spirit can be used figuratively
Heb. 1/4,14 used of angels as personalities
Luke 8/2 used of demons
It is used in relation to body and soul. Spirit in the NT is the vital life principle. The conscious life
Luke 8/55 1 Thess.5/23 Heb. 4/12
Psyche Gr. Soul In the NT like in the OT soul is used of the person himself Acts 27/37 Matt.10/28 1 Peter 2/11
Rev. 6/9 It is the immaterial incorporeal aspect of the personality w/o the body shown here
Spirit or pneuma demotes the immaterial part of mans personality.
11 Cor. 7/1 the point is to cleanse ourselves inside and out.
1 Cor. 16/18 spirit could just as easily have been said "me" He is saying my innermost being.
In both OT and NT in referring to the deceased the terms are used interchangeable
Heb. 12/23, Rev. 6/9
When John saw the souls under the alter he didn't see souls or spirits he saw people. Men are not spirits. God gives of his spirit and it is then spoken of as the mans spirit
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| The Implication of John 4/24 [message #13209 is a reply to message #13198] |
Wed, 18 March 2020 17:40 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
The Implication of John 4/24
You're not worshiping God if you're not doing it in the spirit like Jesus said. Jesus was clearly showing in this passage that there is a link between Gods nature as spirit and our worship of him. Our conception of the nature of God will affect the nature of our worship of him. Man in every way he can has attempted to make finite the infinite God. eg. Paintings films carvings or ritual worship
The point here is that the Jewish temple or the Samaritan temple on the mountain (vs 20) were built on rituals and Jesus said something else was coming. Jesus was reminding the women that God is spirit. Something the Jews, the Samaritans and even the gentiles (Rom. -2) knew. Jesus was saying God was to be worshiped in a manner befitting his nature. Anything less than that is degrading.
He is not to b e worshiped in a finite manner like statutes, pictures, crosses, Neither in a ritualistic way like Jews, Samaritans,Catholics, Protestants. Therefore it is a sin to attempt to worship or depict the infinite invisible God by pictures statutes or by a created thing like a dove. Deut. 4/10-18,Ex. 20
The manifestation of the HS as a dove was temporary to show John who the messiah was. Jesus was saying we are to worship according to the reality of him as spirit and not as liturgy or picture. Man will always transfer his allegiance and affection to man made objects or created things.
We are not worship God through ritual as it is degrading. Acts 17/28, John 4/24
Most protestants get emotional about the picture of Jesus or Di Vinci's last super etc anything less than he demands is unacceptable. We are to worship from our invisible heart and spirit to the invisible God who fills heaven and earth. It is significant to note that there is not one clue in the NT as to Jesus appearance. If we needed an aid to worship then surely he would have given us one. Its interesting to note on Di Vinci's last supper that the same model was used to portray both Jesus and Judas
Why did God use a Dove to represent the HS when he appeared to John the Baptist.
1. Song of Solomon 1/15,2/14 It is depicted there as a symbol of love endearment and tenderness
2. The dove was one of the clean birds allowed for food in the OT.
3. The dove was the only bird that could be used as a sacrifice.
4. God had to give John a sign and that was the one he chose.
The dove represented the HS to Jesus. He is represented to us as tongues of fire.
Another implication of God being worshiped in spirit is Jesus is showing us why God had to assume a human nature. That being to redeem us as spirit cannot die.
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| God as Holy Spirit [message #13210 is a reply to message #13198] |
Thu, 19 March 2020 15:34 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
God as Holy Spirit
1. He is set forth as personality not just a force or power. John 15/7-15 personal pronouns are used of him.
2. John 14/16 The HS is called the Paraclete. The same word is used of Jesus in
1 John 2/1.
3. John 14/26 He has the attributes of personality, Wisdom, knowledge 1 Cor. 12,
He reproves John 16/8, Grieves Eph. 4/30, Appoints Eph. 4/11, Acts 13/2
He speaks Acts 13/2, John 16/13
4. He is called God Acts 5/3-4, 1 Cor. 3/16, 6/19, Eph. 2/22,
5. He is equated with God in the triune passages. Matt 28/19, 11 Cor.13/14, 1 Peter 1/2,
6. He can be blasphemed so he must be personal. Matt 12/31-32
The Ministry of the HS
1. He is the one who inspired the scriptures
2. He brought the church into existence
3. He is the agent of regeneration 1 Cor. 12/13 John 3
4. He is the agent in all evangelism teaching & ministry because he directs it.
Acts 13/2, 20/28, 16/1-7, John 16/8f
5. Without the HS you can't even make a saving confession of faith 1 Cor. 12/3
6. He sanctifies and consecrates 11 Thess 2/13, 1 Peter 1/2, Gal. 5, 1 Cor. 6/19-20
7. He educates us about the word John 14/26, 16/14, 1 Cor. 2/10,13
8. Effective intercession can only be made by the HS. Rom. 8
9. The ministry of the gifts with the HS baptism Acts 1-2, 1 Cor. 12,14, Acts 10/38
10. He is the agent of our resurrection from the dead. Rom. 8/11
11. He was the agent in Christs conception. Luke 1/35 No human seed involved.
12. In regard to his temptation to sin.
He received the HS at his baptism who then led him into the wilderness.
Luke 4/1, Mark 1/12 He was both led and driven.
the temptation to sin
- to misuse his messianic power to turn stones into bread
- to misuse faith by casting himself down from the temple
- to misuse his worship of God and his allegiance to him
Luke 4/13, 22/28, Heb. 5/8, Heb. 4/15,
13. It was the HS who empowered him in his public ministry Luke 4/18-19, Acts 10/38
14. It was the HS that raised Jesus from the dead.
15. After his resurrection he sent the HS to empower us. Acts 2
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| The Kingdom of God and its Nature [message #13211 is a reply to message #13198] |
Thu, 19 March 2020 18:14 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
The Kingdom of God and its Nature
The Central Significance of the Kingdom
1. the kingdom of God is the central message of the NT. It was central to the message of John baptist Jesus and the apostles. Jesus came to establish his kingdom and are citizens of it and are called his church.
- John the Baptist Matt. 3/1-2,
- Jesus Mark 1/14-15
- Apostles Luke 9/1-2
2. The theme of most of Jesus parables were about the kingdom of God
Matt. 13/19,24,33
3. Christs instructions after his resurrection were to preach the kingdom
Acts 1/3
4.The message of the early church was the kingdom of God
Acts 8/12, 14/22, 19/8, 20/25, 28/31
5. Gods purpose in sending the messiah was to sit on the throne of the kingdom
Luke 1/30-33
6. We are to pray his kingdom will come. Matt. 6/10
7. We are to seek his kingdom first Matt. 6/33
The OT background about the Kingdom
The gospel of the kingdom is both OT & NT. It has new aspects in the NT but it is in the OT as well. The NT message has its roots in the OT and is viewed there from 2 aspects
1. The kingdom of God is the kingdom of Israel. It was a theocracy where God ruled as king. Deut 33/1-5, Is. 43/15
2. Gods kingdom was future, earthly and millennial.
Acts 1 the disciples looked for the restoration of the kingdom. Those who studied the word in the OT knew that the coming kingdom (post exilic) would be a world wide kingdom. Zech. 14/9.
They saw Israel as having a central place in the new kingdom Is. 2/1-4 Dan. 7/13-14
Acts 1 The apostles thought this was the time. They saw the kingdom in its two aspects. The literal visible theocracy and the future worldwide kingdom.
The OT sees a king and his kingdom. Gen. 4910,11 Sam.7, Is. 9/6-7, 11/1-5, 32/1,
Dan. 2,7, Jer. 23/5-6, Micah 5/2
The NT writers as well as Jesus himself took these promises literally and applied them to Jesus. Matt. 2/1-6, Luke 1/30-33
The millennial kingdom will be literal and physical Is. 12/1-4, 11/1-9, Jer. 3/17, 23/5-6, Ezek. 40-48, Zech. 2,8,14, Rev. 5/10, Rev. 20 There is a detailed study on the millennium in the deeper life book.
The Kingdom of God and Christs Mission
For a detailed study see the tape Christs Mission Our Commission
John 20/21 He commissioned us to continue his work. The central purpose of God in sending Christ into the world is Luke 16/16. To establish the kingdom of God on the earth. This is the only concept big enough to cover everything Jesus said and did.
The Kingdom of God in the NT
1. The kingdom of God and the kingdom of Heaven are interchangeable terms
Matt. 11/11 with Luke 7/28
2. We need to recognize the present universal kingship of God is not the millennium. The bible teaches the millennium but he already king over everything. He will be king on the earth ruling. His kingship is present and universal. Ps. 47 He is king over all as well asking over Israel. Ps. 103/19, Acts 2/29-36, not just messiah but also Lord.
3. The kingdom of God is not entirely new but has its foundation in the OT.
4. The nature of the kingdom is a mystery and is only revealed to those whom Jesus wills to reveal it. Matt. 13/10-17
5. The church as part of the kingdom was a mystery but is now revealed. Eph. 3/1-9, col. 1/26-27, Rom. 16/25-26 the church is a mystery unveiled and the kingdom is a mystery not fully revealed.
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| The Kingdom of God as a Mystery [message #13212 is a reply to message #13198] |
Fri, 20 March 2020 03:55 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
The Kingdom of God as a Mystery
It is a mystery not fully revealed yet but God does give us some insights with much of that in the parables.
1. The kingdoms perpetuation.
Its laws of growth are mysterious. Mark 4/26-29 the parable of the seed growing by itself. The laws governing its growth are supernatural. There is no way to tell how a seed grows. It is perpetuated by the HS not mans methods and organization. God is not in the religious systems of man and its a mystery then how the kingdom is perpetuated. Jesus said it clearly in vs 27 "he knows not how"
2. The kingdoms universal expansion
Matt. 13/31-32 This is not the same as # 1. One says its a mystery how it happens and the other says it will cover the world someday. The true church (John 4/24) is still relatively small and is compared to a mustard seed. Many believe that to expand the church (by any means) is to expand the kingdom. Not everyone in the church is in the kingdom. The basic meaning of this parable is the contrast between its insignificant beginning and its eventual worldwide expansion. Its deeper application is a mystery even to the apostles. Rev. 12/10 is when the kingdom comes.
3. The parable of the leaven.
Matt. 13/33 It is a mystery how yeast makes bread rise..Jesus incorporated both 1 & 2 into this parable
Rev. 12/10 When Satan is cast out then the kingdom comes. Dan. 2/31-35, 44-45
The mystery is not the kingdom as that is revealed. The mystery is in its nature.
There are three aspects to the kingdom
1. It is a present possession Luke 17/20 Col. 1/13 in our hearts
2.It is a future realization. Future millennial earthly. Rev. 5/10,Luke 22/29-30
Luke 19/11 he said this to correct their idea that the kingdom was only present.
When will the saints will inherit the kingdom? Matt. 25/31-34
3. There is a eternal aspect to the kingdom Rev. 21,22
This is a mystery except to those to whom it is revealed. It is a present possession but the world only sees another person standing there. It is also future but the denominational church doesn't believe in a millennium.
The Kingdoms mystery concerning its citizens.
The mystery is that its citizens consist of good and bad. Parable of the net Matt. 1347-50 Parable of the wheat and tares
Matt. 13/24-30, 37-43
Both true and false disciples are at present in his kingdom. Jesus said let grow together. In Gods wisdom there is a parallel development of both. Evil like good must come to maturity before it is reaped Gen. 15/13-16. Why does God allow good and evil to grow together? Because 11 Peter 3/9 God is long suffering. God does not remove evil from his kingdom and the world so the true disciple can have their faith tested. Judges 2/20-23 Acts 20/28, 11 Cor. 11/13-15
The mystery of the kingdom does not mean its existence is a mystery . Its not hidden from men but the mystery is in its nature.
[Updated on: Sun, 22 March 2020 02:35]
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| The Kingdom of God as a Mystery # 2 [message #13213 is a reply to message #13198] |
Fri, 20 March 2020 19:10 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
The Conditions for Entrance into the Kingdom.
You must receive the message of the kingdom in the right manner.
Matt. 13/10-23 sets forth Gods side of salvation with respect to the message of the kingdom
Matt. 13/1-9 set forth human responsibility
1. Because the parable is a mystery there is a group of people who because of the hardness of their heart will not show enough interest in the message of the kingdom to seek to have its mystery revealed.
2. The second group receives the message of the kingdom but receives it in a shallow way
3. A third group responds to the message but don't treasure it enough to fully enter into its mysteries
4. The 4th group has their hearts prepared to respond in such a way that they can produce fruit. They give themselves fully to it and the message (the mysteries) are worked through them and then in them.
The stress here in Matt. 13 is fruit bearing. The key to discerning who is a true citizen is the bearing of fruit. The mysterious growth of the kingdom is worked out by the true citizens who bear fruit 30-60-100 fold. We must first learn all that the mystery of the kingdom includes before one can discern how much has been unveiled to you. Most are content to allow the mystery of the kingdom to remain a mystery so they can continue to live as citizens of this world.
The main thrust of the parable is how people respond to the message. Not the initial response but the endurance the fruit bearing & pruning. Do you continue to hear and bear fruit? Healing, sermon on the mount or whatever is taught in the word is the message of the kingdom. The doctrines aren't hidden. Jesus said that these things are the message of the kingdom and that they will be progressively unfolded to those who listen.
You must be willing to pay the cost to enter the Kingdom
Matt. 13/44-46 Parables of the treasure and the pearl. The privilege of citizenship in the kingdom has to be our most precious possession.
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| The Relation of the Kingdom to the Church [message #13219 is a reply to message #13198] |
Wed, 25 March 2020 18:24 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
The Relation of the Kingdom to the Church
Are equated? Like Augustine and the RC church did?
1. The NT distinguishes between the church and the kingdom. Jesus the apostles and the early church all taught the kingdom of God and not merely the church. The kingdom is mentioned 121 times in the gospels and the church 2 times. Its not that the church is unimportant but the kingdom is what he came to preach. Those who believe the message become the church.
Acts 1/3to 28/31 Mark 1/14-15, Matt. 3
The kingdom is the reign and rule of God which is right now invisibly in mans hearts and later visibly. The church consists of the citizens of the kingdom. The teaching equating the two began with Augustine (4th. C) The RC church (6th. C) picked up Augustine's error which gave rise to the RC error. The universal visible church theory of Rome. ie: you must belong to the RC church to be saved.
After the reformers left the RC church they had a problem. They solved it by starting the theory of the universal invisible church. It was invented by Luther and up to today it is the protestant position. The reformers solved the problem by stating it is reasonable to deduce that side by side with the visible church wherever it is in the world is the invisible church and they labelled it the invisible mystical body. They said all believers living and dead belong to the mystical church. This is how they got around Romes position.
All believers are in the kingdom but not all are in a true church. Col. 1/13 there are some who belong to local churches but who are not in the kingdom
2. The kingdom of God is a more comprehensive and broad concept than the church. The kingdom is universal invisible and spiritual. The church in the NT is local tangible and visible Luke 17 20-21 col. 1/13
Rev. 2/1 the letters were written to seven churches. He wrote to each one. Why not just a general letter to the invisible church. Col.1/2
1 Cor. 12/13,27 The body of Christ is a metaphor. He is writing to a church. The local church is the "church" in its local expression.
3. The church is the agent to proclaim the kingdom Matt. 10/7, Luke 10/9
The church in the NT is seen to be the instrument of the kingdom and not the kingdom itself. The proclamation of the message of the kingdom and the signs of the kingdom (Mark 16)
4. The church in the NT is the key to the kingdom. Matt. 16/13-19
What are the keys? Various views.
a. RC view. Because of the Matt 16 passage Peter is made to be the chief apostle
(1st pope) and because he established the church at Rome (for which there is not a shred of evidence) then the popes have apostolic succession. The keys symbolize their authority. Peter and the popes have power to bind and loose sins in the confessional.
b. The non-catholic view. Which includes Protestants
All generally agree that its Peters confession of Christ which is the rock. Anyone who makes this confession becomes his church. Jesus is building that confession of him as Christ and Lord. The keys were give to all the apostles (who used them) and then the church which is built on the foundation of apostles and prophets. The keys are the gospel which opens the door to the kingdom.
Luke 11/51 seems to support this. He is saying that a correct knowledge of the scriptures is the key which unlocks the way to true salvation
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| The Keys of the Kingdom [message #13221 is a reply to message #13198] |
Thu, 26 March 2020 18:00 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
The Keys of the Kingdom are the Full Gospel
Some people include the following in the keys.
1. prophecy prophecy is a key to understanding the as yet unrevealed will of God which comes by revelation through a prophet. (Bro Freeman agrees with this)
2. The anointing or Holy Spirit Baptism & manifestation of the supernatural gifts. Which God has appointed as a means of bringing sinners into the kingdom. Mar 16. One anointed evangelist with the gifts can bring in 1000's of converts.
3. The keys speak of governmental and administrative authority.
Is 22/15-22 Here the key is administrative authority over Davids kingdom. On this analogy this view holds that the keys symbolize apostolic and ministerial authority over the church. Ie: F/F ministry.
4 The keys are extended to include the spiritual power of binding and loosing.
What is biblical view of binding and loosing?
a. The spiritual power to admit or reject a person from joining a church. 1 Cor. 5
b. It is equated with the same power given in Matt. 18/18-19 The power to bind or loose anything we speak in harmony with the will of God.
- dealing with demons
- vs 19 is built on vs 18 -again I say He was saying two can enter into a binding agreement about something they need.
c. In the RC view this power is given to give or withhold absolution from sin by the priest. The problem with this view that this power was given to all the apostles and not just Peter. Then by extension to the church Eph. 2 Because the church is built on the apostles. There is no instance in the NT where the apostles received confession and gave absolution like the RC church does.
In the larger context of the NT John 20/23 would have reference to the sinners response to the gospel or his rejection of it. This would be the non-RC view. We become ministers of life or death when we preach the word. 11Cor 15-16 John 12/48 How can a man forgive sins when he can't see the heart to know if it is genuine repentance.
Matt. 10/15,40f it is the response to our preaching the gospel
What are the keys used for? What are the keys of the kingdom for?
To lock or unlock. They are instruments to open and close. cars, doors closets
From ancient times keys have symbolized authority. They also symbolize special position like a governor or administrator. They can symbolize recognition as in the keys to the city. Opening the doors to the city.
Is. 22/22 with Rev. 3/7 a messianic prophecy
11 Sam. 7/12-13 The kingdom of David and the kingdom are equated. Jesus has authority over both. Luke 1/30-33, Dan. 7/13-14
The keys in scripture signify . . .
Jesus owns the keys to the kingdom. Luke11/52 The religious leaders obscured the way into the kingdom by their traditions and creeds. This blinded the eyes of the people to finding the true way into the kingdom. The key here is the same key Jesus possess.
Rev. 1/8 He holds the keys to hades and death. Which is the door to that. It is equated with the keys Jesus has in Matt. 16. Believing the gospel is the key into the kingdom and once in these keys in Rev. 1/18 are made available to us.
What are the Keys?
The keys are the gospel of Jesus Christ and Peters confession is its essence. The keys open the door of the kingdom and out of the realm of hades and death. Probably because of his confession he was the first to be able to use the keys Acts 3 but not the only one.
Acts 3 The key is used to allow 3000 Jews into the kingdom
Acts 5 The key was used to lock the door for Ananias and Saphira
Acts 8 Phillip used the key to open the door for him. The lawyers had the key but they locked it and Phillip opened it.
Acts 10 the gentiles were allowed in.
The keys signify authority with reference to the kingdom of God.
Acts 8/18-24 Peter had the authority to withhold
Acts 13/7-11 Paul used these keys to bind up a sorcerer
Elijah used it many times- shut up the rain called down fire.
11 Cor. 13/1-2 ,10, 1Cor. 4/18-21
Were the keys given only to Peter?
No! Matt. 18/1, 18-19 the context is vs 1 "the disciples came to him" John 20/23
Matt. 16 he is speaking to Peter. Matt. 18 he gives it to all the apostles.
1 Cor. 5/1-5 the keys are given to all the church. Paul said they should have done it.
11 Cor. 2/5-10 Then Paul says now use the keys to let him back in.
Matt. 10/13-14 Vs. 40 gives the principle
Those who do not receive the message of the church cannot get into the kingdom. Rom. 10 The only way in is by the message of church. This is the key. All men must enter this way. In this sense the church becomes the key. The key to the kingdom is by believing our message of the kingdom. ie: the full gospel. Where does it say one can believe what they want.
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| Possessing the Kingdom [message #13223 is a reply to message #13198] |
Fri, 27 March 2020 23:49 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
Possessing the Kingdom
Dan. 7/13-18 Dan. 12/8-9, Acts1/6
Eph. 3/1-10 The church was a mystery. Every other doctrine is in shadow or embryo form in the OT. In the OT the word saint referred to Israel but in the NT it refers to a xian. The kingdom of Dan. 7 is the kingdom of the NT.
There are definite conditions that have to be met to enter the kingdom.
1. You have to receive the message of the kingdom
2. You have to pay the cost to enter the kingdom.
3. You have to obey the teachings of the kingdom
We can't let familiarity with Matt. 7/21-22 obscure our obeying it. The wife makes herself ready but everyone just believes in a general rapture. Israel put aside the 1st stream of prophecy (suffering servant) to get to the second one. (king) Paul said Israels missing the kingdom was for our admonition. Those who possess the kingdom will not be those ministers who are called by the people. Those who possess the kingdom will not be those who resist ministers who are called by God. Gal 5/19-21 These things will disqualify a person from entrance into the kingdom.
We need to get delivered from everything that will hinder one from entering the kingdom . We need to pay the full cost in everything.
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| The NT Doctrine of the Messiah [message #13225 is a reply to message #13198] |
Sat, 28 March 2020 19:39 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
Jesus Christ in the NT
The NT Doctrine of the Messiah
Two terms: Mashiach & Christos both of which mean anointed. When it is applied to a person it means anointed one. In the OT there is a close relationship between anointed and consecration. They weren't just anointed but set apart to Gods service. The term anointed one came to be a tittle.
Ps. 2/2,7, Dan. 7/25-26 Messiah is just the Heb word for anointed
In the NT the term as a tittle becomes a designation or name. It became a proper name for Jesus. John 1/36-41 We see here the apostles referring to Jesus as Messiah but it is still a tittle.
1 Cor. 1/1 and all the epistles. Jesus Christ is a name. Anointed becomes his personal name. sometimes he is just Christ which is his name.
This term in the bible is used to refer to various persons. (anointed prophet or anointed servant) but as a title or name it used exclusively of Jesus Christ
Jesus Christ and His Mission
There are two streams of prophecy in the bible
1. Glorious king 11Sam. 7, Ps. 2, Zech. 2, Is.9/6-7, Is. 11
2. Suffering servant. Zech. 9/9, Is. 53, Zech. 13/7, Dan.9/25-26
These two streams of prophecy were hard to reconcile by a Jew in those days. It is like the church looking for the rapture and forgetting the persecution to precede it. Israel forgot the suffering servant and looked for the political king. This was the situation by the time Jesus arrived on the scene.
We see this political expectation all through the gospels.
- John 6 the loaves and fishes They wanted to make him king.
- Matt. 2 the wise men. Herod killed those who thought threatened his kingdom.
John 11/46f The raising of Lazarus. The religious leaders saw that as a threat to their position.
Jesus was the messiah and anointed one but he rarely called himself that. He called himself the son of man. Matt. 16/13-16,20. In Matt. 16/21-22 They still only saw the reigning king aspect.
Acts 1 after the resurrection they saw the two aspects and assumed the suffering servant aspect was over and now it was the glorious king. It was the first thought in their mind.
All the messianic teachings of Jesus were in marked contrast to the nation and his apostles popular belief. His mission at his first advent was to open a door for all the world to enter his kingdom. So that their would be citizens to populate his kingdom at his second advent. A time will come to close the door of salvation to the gentiles and turn back to the Jews Rom. 11/25
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| Jesus Christ as the Son of Man [message #13234 is a reply to message #13198] |
Thu, 02 April 2020 01:50 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
Jesus Christ as the Son of Man
Questions:
- What does the term mean?
- Why does he use it so often of himself
- Is he the only one in the bible called the son of manifestation
- What did his contemporaries think of this term
- What meaning was he trying to convey or was he deliberately trying to obscure something.
Various Views
1. He uses this term as a substitute for "I" (pronoun) Luke 6/22 - I, me, my, myself
The problem is it tells us nothing of why he uses it.
2. The church fathers understood the term to refer to his humanity
3. In the OT it simply means man and Jesus used it this way.
Num. 23/19, Ps. 8/4 this is a common phrase in the OT Why isn't it carried into the NT and used except with Jesus? In both these passages man is contrasted with God and you can't use it that way in relation to Jesus.
4. The background to Jesus usage of the phrase is the prophet. Ezek. 2/3 Jesus was referring to himself as a prophet but still doesn't explain its meaning
5.This was a common term used in Jesus day for messiah. The question though is was it understood that way by the Jewish nation. It only occurs one time in the OT as a messianic title. Would the Jews make the connection. Probably not as the only connections they made were wrong. John 12/32-34, Matt. 16/13-16 Peter mad the right connection.
6. He had reference to the OT prophecies which referred to a suffering servant. He was identifying himself Is. 53 in the first advent. In the second advent he will come as Son of God Matt. 25/31
7. By this designation Jesus refers to himself as the founder of the kingdom of God. He relates himself to the kingdom prophecies. The point is when he called himself son of man many times he was dealing with kingdom passages eg. Parable of the sower
8. The title signifies Jesus is the ideal man. The question though is that what Jesus had in mind.
The Biblical view of the term Son of Man
Dan. 7/13-14 Any Jew reading this would immediately identify the messiah. For Jesus the title son of man meant messiah
1.There is only one place in the entire OT where this term is identified with a divine personality.
2. Son of man is a unique title No one ever called himself the son of man. N one else ever used it of him. Only he used it of himself. Only Steven used it in Acts 7/55-56 Standing there anointed of the HS and he identified Jesus as standing on the right hand of God to the Jews.
3. This is an intentional enigmatic use of this term. In many parables the meaning was hidden. They could have put it together but they didn't.
Mark 2 He gave them 2 clues right in that chapter about who he was.
- the son of man had power on earth to forgive sins which refers to his heavenly preexistence vs 10
- the son of man is Lord of the sabbath vs. 23-28
When he openly identified himself as messiah they right away crucified him.
4. He repeatedly said the son of man will suffer and die. The more perceptive could have seen son of man + suffering Dan. 7- Is 53 and put it all together.
Peter by revelation realizes son of man is Dan. 7 Then Jesus talked of Is. 53 and Peter rebuked him.
5. He claimed as son of man to be the Savior of man. Luke 10/19
6. Jesus repeatedly spoke of himself as king of the future kingdom as the son of man. He rebuked them in Luke 24 because they didn't put it together
Mark 8/38, 14/62, Matt. 19/28, 24/7, 25/34
The perceptive should have been able to put it together. Is. 53 & Dan.7
In Jesus use of son of man he is laying claim to the messiahship because that is the only place where deity and son of man are connected in the OT. Jesus did not openly lay claim to his title as messiah because that was opposite to what his mission was. They looked for a king but he came as servant. He used the uncommon title which designates messiah intentionally. This way he could lay claim to the messianic title and then go and conduct his ministry the way he wanted to.
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| Jesus Christ as Son of God [message #13236 is a reply to message #13198] |
Fri, 03 April 2020 02:15 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
Jesus Christ as Son of God
For Jesus to have made constant claims to messiahship and kingship would have merely antagonized the religious leaders prematurely. When he did openly lay claim to it he was immediately crucified. He forbade his disciples to tell who he was. He commanded the demons not to speak of it. Many of his great miracles and at his transfiguration he told them not to tell.
The bible calls us all sons of God. Jesus as son of God was different not in kind but only in degree
OT usage of the the term Son of God
It is used of Angels Job.1/6. In both Heb. thought and in the Septuagint (LLX) the term is used of angels.
Gen.6 with Jude 6-7
Job 2/1 Job 38/7
What does this term mean because others than Jesus are called sons of God
the judges (magistrates) Ps. 82/1,7
the Israelites Deut.14/1-2, Hosea 1/10, Ex. 4/22, Deut. 22/6-10
Luke 3/38 the genealogy of Jesus
the messiah himself 11 Sam. 7/14, Ps. 2/7
Son of God in the NT
Matt. 5 peacemakers
Matt. 44-45 love your enemies
Gal. 4/4-7 This passage shows the difference between his sonship and ours.
1.We become sons by adoption whereas Jesus is a son by nature
2. He does not attain to sonship like us. He possesses it inherently. He is the same substance as the father Heb. 1/3. John 1 the word was God. John 10 the father and I are one.
3. Our sonship in a legal relationship but his was personal from the beginning.
John 3/16 stresses the unique relationship
Micah 5/2
Heb. 11/17 the same Gr word is used of Issac and again mistranslated. Issac was the only unique one. The only one of his kind.
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| Jesus Christ as Logos [message #13257 is a reply to message #13198] |
Wed, 08 April 2020 01:10 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
Jesus Christ as the Son of God Logos
The word in relation to Jesus is used only by John
John1/1, 1John 1/1, Rev. 19/13
The word means: a word or reason (thought or reasoned thinking) not a grammatical word. It means word in the sense of language which embodies a conception or idea.
Luke 24/17 communications = logos
Logos to us is thought expressed as speech. Jesus is the word. Meaning what God has to say to the world. Not just a word or a printed word but the revelation of God's printed word or knowledge.
We know that the HS inspired the use of the word logos but what was in John's mind when he used it.
What didn't influence John?
Greek Philosophy. The term is used as an abstract term which meant word.
Philo (20 bc to 50 ad) He was a Jew from Alexandria who combined Greek philosophy with Judaism. He believed in dualism. The idea that God and physical matter are both co-eternal. So God is totally other than physical matter or totally transcendent. In order than to deal with creation god needed an intermediary. For Philo then it was the logos meaning the one whom God deals with the world. The logos to Philo was one of the spiritual emanations of God.
John 1/1 To John the logos was God and this logos which was God became incarnate in flesh. This idea is totally foreign to Greek philosophy.
Johns logos was Hebrew
The OT usage and background. ?The OT implications which lay the basis for the appearance of the logos in flesh as Gods son out a context of monotheism.
1. The plurality of the godhead taught in the OT suggests a background for the logos concept.
Gen. 126, 11/7, Ps. 110/1, Gen. 19/24, 11Sam. 7/14 Ps. 2/7, Is. 48/16
2. The OT theophanies. The angel of the Lord who called himself God and received worship.
Gen. 16/9,13, 31/11,13, Ex. 3/1-5, Judges 13/20-22
3. The Messianic prophecies which show he is God and God's son.
Ps. 2/7 Dan. 7, Is. 9/6, Ps. 110, Ps. 45/6-7 Micah 5/2 Zech. 12/10, 13/7
4. The Word of the Lord. A very significant phrase in the OT that some (Freeman) see as a relationship between the phrase and the NT logos. The word of the Lord is the means by which God revealed himself to man; by which he created the world; and gives life to man. It is precisely this which is said of the logos in John1/1
John 1.18 Jesus revealed the mind and will of the father just like the "word of the Lord"
John 1/2-3 The logos made the world Gen. 1-3. God spoke and created the world with his word.
John 1/7-9 His word spoke life. Gen. 1/20-24
5 The personification of wisdom in Prov. 8. The Heb word means wisdom. It goes beyond mere expression and seems to embrace divine personality. Wisdom personified is described as the master worker in creation John 1/2. wisdom personified is what God delights in. Matt. 17,Mark 1/10-11
At the time of the Apocrypha the wisdom concept became highly developed and prepared the way for the NT concept. Ie; Wisdom of Solomon 7-9
1 Cor 1/23-34,Col. 2/3
In the OT wisdom is the creator. In the NT Jesus are both wisdom and the creator. The point is that wisdom is not just an attribute of God but an extension of God and personified as the logos.
The logos is preexistent as God and the creator of all things.
Logos speaks of word based on thought. Words communicate our inward self, our wills our selves. The son of God can be designated as logos because he reveals the mind and will of God. In the OT the word of the Lord came by the prophets. Int he NT it came in person Heb. 1-3. The term logos denotes Gods personality as son who was spirit.
John 1/1,14, 18. Logos speaks of his pre-existence and then they speak of him as Jesus Christ. Paul using the thought of logos speaks of it as the form of God in Phil. 2.
The logos is John 1/1 is seen as God yet as a distinct manifestation. He was God/with God. The OT background suggests that the logos is son of God, creator, and wisdom of God. Then when the NT speaks of the logos incarnate he is said to be all of those things.
The point here is that John doesn't give all the OT prologue he just points to Jesus and says logos.
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| Jesus Christ as Mediator [message #13259 is a reply to message #13198] |
Wed, 08 April 2020 17:42 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
Jesus Christ as Mediator
This is the central theme of the bible. Christ offering himself to bring reconciliation between God and man.
Definition: One who mediates between two parties to bring reconciliation.
Theologically it has reference to the method by which God and man are reconciled.
Eg: through Jesus atoning death. Rom. 4/25, 5/2, 9-11
The term mediator only occurs in the NT except for once in the Septuagint.(Job 9/33)
Gr. mesites Gal.3/19-20, Heb. 8/6, 9/15, 12/14, 1Tim. 2/5
OT Background for Mediation
1. Patriarchal mediation
This was in the time of the patriarchs before the law. Mediatory sacrifices (Job1/5) were offered by the head of the family.
Noah after the flood Gen. 8/20
Abraham Gen. 12/7-8, 15/9-11
Issac Gen. 26/24
Jacob Gen 31/54, 33/20
2. Intercessory mediation through prayer
Moses stood in the gap. Ex. 32/31 Deut. 7/9
Samuel 1 Sam. 7
The prophets Jer. 15/1, Dan. 9-10
Job 42/8-10, Gen. 18/32-33
3.Priestly mediators
The ordained priesthood made reconciliation on behalf of the people.
Especially on the day of atonement
4. Messianic mediation predicted.
Is. 53 is the connecting link between OT sacrifice & type and its fulfillment in Christ.
Rom. 5 by his death he mediates
Sin has resulted in mutual alienation
From man's side, the bible says man is in a state of enmity toward God
Rom. 5/10, 8/7, Col. 1/21
From Gods side, his attitude is righteous wrath against the sinner
Rom. 1/18, 5/9, Eph. 5/6, col. 3/6, 11Peter 3/9
It is a mutual enmity. For reconciliation to be effected God must find an acceptable mediator. He can't just base it on a whim or a divine fiat.
The Mediator Must . . .
1. Have a mutual affinity to both sides. An intimate relation to both parties. The Logos became flesh. The only personality ever that was acceptable. A concern for us and a concern for the father's righteousness.
2. He must be innocent of any guilt with no taint of sin.
Why the incarnation?
1. It was impossible to take away sin without animal sacrifice. Heb. 10/1-5, 2/14-16
No ordinary person could take on himself to be a substitute. It would have to be God himself.
2. The Son of God as eternal spirit could not be tempted. But the Logos as son of man or flesh could experience temptation and then suffer and die. The divine logos in an inseparable union with humanity could suffer and die on our behalf. Acts 20/28
Flesh was necessary to become a proper mediator. Phil. 2/8, He left the form of God (Spirit) but not his divinity. He took on flesh & soul & spirit and became a human being.
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| The NT view of Man [message #13261 is a reply to message #13198] |
Thu, 09 April 2020 15:41 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
The NT view of Man
There is much written on this subject. In the NT especially in Pauls epistles you are either in Christ or in Adam. Its very simplistic. 1 Cor. 15/22. Jesus regarded all men as in Adam and all lost and must be born again to enter his kingdom.
What does it mean to be in Christ or in Adam.
1. The common phrase "in Christ" occurs 164 times in Paul's writings. Its one of his most characteristic phrases. In the Lord, In Christ, In Christ Jesus.
11Cor. 5/17, 1 Cor.15/22, Rom. 3/24, 6/11, 8/1 Gal. 3/20, 3/27, Eph. 2/10, 3/17, col. 1/4
The term is used 3 ways in the NT.
a. The believer is in Christ. Rom. 16/7
b. Christ is in the believer Rom. 8/10, Col.1/27
c. The 2 concepts are united. John 17/20-21
11 Peter 1/4 His divine nature. By implication, we partake of it and he is in us.
The Benefits of Being in Christ.
In Adam you have the curse. - sin, sickness, suffering, ultimately death. Physical and spiritual death.
All the blessings are in Christ
Eph. 1/4 election we are chosen in him
Col. 1/14 redemption we are chosen in him
Rom. 6/33 we have eternal life
Gal. 2/24 liberty
Phil.2/1 comfort
Eph. 4/32 forgiveness
Gal. 3/14 the blessings of Abraham. They become ours in Christ. He was a rich fruitful man.
1 Cor. 15/22 Life
Rom. 12/5 fellowship with one another.
1 Cor. 5/17 new creation.
1 Cor. 1/2 we're saints consecrated and set apart to God. We are his family
1 Cor. 1/2 sanctification
Col. 2/10 we are complete in Christ
164 times the term "in Christ" enumerates a benefit to us
The Scope of Being in Christ
This is not to be limited to an individual being in Christ as the phrase can also be used corporately.
Rom. 12/5 is 1 Cor. 12 in miniature.
Gal. 1/22, 1 Thess. 1/1 2/14 He is writing to the churches in Christ Ie: the Ekklesia
It is important to grasp the significance of our corporate identity in christ and its nature so we understand what it means to be in Christ with one another. God never intended a Christian to be off by himself but a Christian as part of a local body. 1 cor. 12 when one hurts we all hurt. The corporate relationship is also expressed toward the father by our being called sons of God or children of God. We are also called bros & sis so family.
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| The NT view of Man # 2 [message #13266 is a reply to message #13198] |
Fri, 10 April 2020 20:13 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
The distinctions and differences in Christ
1. distinctions in Growth. Both mature and immature are in Christ.
Heb. 5 - babes
1 Cor. 3 carnal not in position but in growth
Rom. 16/13 not election but a faithful bro. Rom. 16/10
2. Differences in function
There are different gifts and ministries. 5/f
Eph. 4/7-16 Rom 12
There are differences between the gifts and the ministry gifts
ie: prophesying vs a prophet
Responsibilities in Christ
1. One thing not brought over from the OT was circumcision. I was a definite religious rite in the OT but also a racial characteristic. Gal.5/6
2. Being in Christ does not change the responsibilities of the household. Going from being in Adam to being in Christ doesn't change it either. Children are to obey parents Eph. 6/1 In the NT there is a stress for husbands to love their wives. Eph 5, 1Peter 3.
We are not to consider wives as an extension of our personality but as a separate creation in Christ and a joint-heir. 1 Cor. 11 both now need each other. Gender is no distinction in our approach to the Lord or our relationship with the Lord. Gal. 3/28 Being in Christ doesn't change the roles.
3. You can't just marry anyone you want. You have to marry a Christian.
4. We are to be in unity and of one mind. Phil. 2 1Cor. 1/9-10
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| The Nature of Our Union of the Being in Christ [message #13269 is a reply to message #13198] |
Sat, 11 April 2020 23:53 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
The Nature of Our Union of the Being in Christ
1. It is a vital union as life is imparted to us
1Cor. 15/22, John 15 the branch and the vine
2. It is a spiritual union. 1Cor. 5/17
1Cor. 6/15-20 It is such an inseparable union that even the body is his
3. Being in Christ is an eternal union.
1Thess. 4/14 Even those dead are with the Lord. Even though the body is dead yet it is so inseparable that they are with Christ. An eternal union closer than the soul and body because the soul remains in Christ.
4. A corporate union. We are in Christ with the rest of the church. Rom. 12/5, John 17
5. It is a perceptible union. The world will see a disciple.
Matt. 10, Luke 9, Luke 14. The union in christ is a stronger bond than marriage and family. Jesus comes first
6. They will know we are in Christ because of our life. Matt.5/ 13-16 Phil. 2/15
7. Our union with Christ is seen by our status as his representatives.
11Cor. 5/20 to reject us is to reject him
8. It is seen by our suffering with him. Phil.1/29
Rom. 8/17, 1Peter 2/19, Col. 1/24
9 The fact we are in Christ will be seen at the final judgment Matt. 25
Jesus himself will separate those in Adam from those in Christ.
Sometimes the term in Christ is synonymous with being in Christ. Basically being in Christ means having his life, spirit and nature in us and also all the benefits.
[Updated on: Sun, 12 April 2020 20:36]
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| What Does it Mean to be in Adam? [message #13274 is a reply to message #13198] |
Sun, 12 April 2020 20:35 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
What Does it Mean to be in Adam?
1 Cor. 15/45-49 Rom. 5/12-18
There are two basic views:
1. Reformed view: All men die because they are in Adam. Because of the solidarity of the human race then Adams sin and death became our sin and death. We are all one in Adam. This is called the doctrine of original sin.
2. Armenian view: all men die because they sin. This is the personal sin view. Man doesn't inherit a sinful nature but a tendency toward sin. We're told Rom.5/12 can be translated "all men die because all man have personally sinned"
The Armenian appeals to vs 19. They say men die because they sin. The reformers say they die anyway. Why do babies die? They have no conscious sin and some even die in the womb or in the process of birth.
Rom. 5/13-14 All die because death reigns. Adam let it in but all personally sin as well. Men die not just because they sin but because they inherit a sinful nature from their first parents.
Augustine and the reformers after him formulated the doctrine of Federal Theology.
Ie: Adam represents all of us. God entered into a relationship with Adam (who represented all of us) and said if you touch the tree you will die. Adam was the federal head of the race. Federal theology leads to the doctrine of original sin which is that as head of the human race when he sinned we all did.
The stress should be placed on the fact that man is a sinner by nature and that's why he chooses to sin. The race doesn't sin because Adam did but the race suffers the consequences of Adams sin. Babies are born into the world spiritually dead and alienated from God because they inherited a sinful nature from Adam.
Eph. 2/3 we are by nature the children of wrath. Adam acted as our representative because we were in his loins and the consequence of his sin passed to us. God dwelt with the human race through Adam.
The bible shows that Adam is our representative head because Genesis shows that God regarded Adam as representing our race. The command to be fruitful and multiply was given to Adam as representing our race.
Gen. 3/20 Eve was the mother of the human race with Adam as the father. Men don't die because they personally sin but because of Adam.
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| The Problem of Evil [message #13286 is a reply to message #13198] |
Tue, 14 April 2020 23:47 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
The Theological Problem of the Entrance of Sin into God's Good World
How could it? God created it good. Why would God permit sin in his good world?
Here is the nature of the problem . . .
1. Either God wanted to prevent evil from entering the world and lacked the power to prevent it or
2. He could have prevented it but for his own good reasons didn't.
The scriptures show that God is sovereign and infinite in power and goodness. It follows then that he must have had an ultimate good reason for allowing sin to enter and continue to this present hour. 11Chron.20/6, Dan. 4/35, Eph. 1/11, Rom. 9/18
The nature of evil in the universe.
1. natural evil. Economic sickness natural disasters.
2. Moral evil. Originally from the devil but now from man. Murders wars crime lying deceit fornication cultism
There are 3 basic solutions to the presence of evil
1. evil is an illusion. This is the christian science view. Evil pain sickness are only illusions of the mind. The problem with that is if its an illusion only in men's minds then they have admitted to its presence.
2. God is finite. Some theologians hold this view. They believe either the sovereignty or goodness of God must go. Called dualism. To be totally good he can't be sovereign. Good and evil are eternal realities. We will never get rid of both. Sometimes like a pendulum one triumphs over the other. A good God wouldn't let evil in his universe so he isn't totally sovereign but he is always warring against evil. The problem is if true at the end he may lack the power to deliver us from evil. Rev. 20 shows he does have the power over the origin of evil and the devil and will ultimately destroy him and evil.
3. Evil in the universe was permitted by God for his own good purposes. God was not taken by surprise at Adams or the devils sin. This does not make him the author of sin.
Why then did God permit it?
1. God will ultimately be glorifies by overcoming evil and eradicating it from his universe.
2. Evil was allowed to enter Gods good world
a. Satan and man are responsible for it
b. At the end Satan and men will eventually be held accountable and judged. He is not just overlooking it. He will purge it out eventually by judgment
3. It is only through mans deliverance from judgment that the grace of God can be fully appreciated, God's grace is magnified by the fact of our deliverance from eternal punishment. Eph. 2/1,7 1/4-6 His grace is magnified in delivering me from what I deserved.
4. The evil intentions of sinful men magnify the goodness of God by contrast.
Rom. 9/17-18
5. The temptations to evil help prove and develop our character in a manner nothing else could. Acts 14/22, James 1/13 You have to overcome the temptations to get the crown.
Within the context of our study the allurement of evil sin and temptation allow the stimulation is us to do what is right. O/C's have to have something to o/c.
6. A moral struggle unites the believe with Gods struggle against evil. We're warring with him. O/cing evil with him. God is 24 hrs a day warring against evil. Jesus o/c the devil and we o/c with him every time we yield to righteousness. God has decreed that the believer work with him in o/cing evil. This is the significance of Mark 16
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| The Nature of Man in the NT [message #13376 is a reply to message #13198] |
Sat, 25 April 2020 01:55 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
The Nature of Man in the NT
There are two main views
1. He is a dichotomy consisting of body and soul
2. He is a trichotomy consisting of body soul and spirit. 1 Thess. 5/23 is the correct view
3. there is a recent view among theologians that man is to be viewed as whole. Body soul and spirit but each is simply a different way of looking at man as a whole. You can't divide man up but this view is an oversimplification because you can't confuse them either.
Gen. 2/7 body plus spirit equals soul
Rom. 13/1 soul is the word for "you"
In both OT & NT soul is synonymous with the person
The Ethical View of Man
Flesh and spirit are used in a moral sense but also especially by Paul in an ethical sense. Paul used the term flesh as more than a collection of cells. When he used flesh in a context where he is talking about man as a sinner then we know he isn't talking about his body of flesh. The old man (flesh) vs the new man (spirit). Flesh is personified as a power warring against the spirit. The flesh depicts man as mortal creaturely and finite and not infinite like God who is spirit. 1Peter 1/24 Flesh could easily be translated as man here.
The Biblical use of the Term Flesh
Greek: Sarx - flesh
Soma body
The NT uses the word Soma as the body of flesh. Body is also used in the NT in the ethical sense equated with the person himself. The body in the NT is used of the person. That makes it an ethical use because its not talking about the physical body but the person or personality. Rom. 12/1, 1Cor. 13/3
The importance of the body in the NT cannot be overemphasized because of its somatic existence. It comes from the Gr. Soma. The stress in the NT is upon the somatic existence. Meaning existence in a body both now and future. A person who is dead and their body is in the grave is awaiting the resurrection so they can have a body. The same Paul who teaches crucifixion of the flesh teaches a bodily resurrection.
The NT also teaches that the body is important to mans existence yet it is corruptible finite mortal and therefore it can become an instrument of unrighteousness. The body is subject to those things which can ruin us so Paul also calls it a body of death. Rom. 7/24
The members of our body can be used as instruments of unrighteousness. The tongue for eg. So the body of sin is not the physical body but the use it is put to. It's a moral and ethical use when he speaks of the body of death and the body of sin.
The various uses of Sarx other than ethical
Some passages equate flesh with body 11Cor. 4/10-11, 1 Cor. 6/16, 1Cor. 15/38-39
Flesh refers to ones physical relationship with ones ancestors. Rom.9/3, 1/3, 1Cor. 10/18
Some passages use Sarx as ethical and non-ethical
It is sometimes used of ones abilities or station. Phil.3/3, Gal. 6/12-14
The Use of Sarx as an Ethical Term
OT Background: Generally the flesh means the physical body but sometimes it is used morally and ethically.
OT Heb. Flesh = Basar It becomes a synonym for man in contrast to God who is Spirit
Ps. 56/4, Jer. 17, Is. 40. 6-8, Ps. 78/38-39
Flesh describes man's inner nature as sinful, corrupt and unregenerate. Gen.6
Flesh contrasts man and beast from God who is Spirit.
[Updated on: Wed, 29 April 2020 00:19]
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| What Does It Mean to Walk in the Spirit? [message #13391 is a reply to message #13198] |
Wed, 29 April 2020 16:56 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
What Does It Mean to Walk in the Spirit?
We see this dualism Paul teaches in the NT (not two natures) but a dualism of flesh and spirit. (See deeper life book pg 88-99) Briefly summarized two natures teach that when born again you receive a new nature but retain the old sinful nature. The bible teaches that man has one nature either regenerate or unregenerate. Eph. 2/3
This erroneous doctrine does two things:
1. It gives the xian an excuse to blame his faults and sins on his own nature
2. the average xian resigns himself to a half-hearted xian life.
Our nature is us. It's not some abstract thing we can lift out of yourself. Man has one nature; human fallen sinful and corrupt which at conversion is cleansed and renewed. 11Cor. 5/17 says we have one nature cleansed and renewed at conversion.
What does Sarx mean to Paul ethically
Flesh signifies the unregenerate state of man. Rom 8/1, Gal. 5/19-21
Rom.8/8 We are obviously in the flesh so it must refer to an ethical use. How we live our life.
Flesh:
1. It stands for the unregenerate state of man 11Peter 2/9-10
2.It speaks of religious works based upon human efforts rather than the work of the HS in us Gal. 3/1-3, Gal. 6/1-13
3 It signifies the physical body with its appetites and desires which although God given can be an instrument of sin unless ruled by the spirit.
4. Flesh for Paul also speaks of religious error. Col. 2/18 Gr. Lit. "mind of the flesh"
5. It also denotes human ability intellectualism status in life and achievement which generates pride. Phil.3/3, Gal. 6/12-14, 11Cor. 10/1-3
What is the NT Meaning of Walking in the Spirit.
Gal. 5/16 Rom. 8 We are to walk in the Spirit and not the flesh. The bible speaks of a walk meaning a figure of speech. Gen 5/22-24 A persons religious life is described as a walk. Mark 7/5. To walk in the flesh is to yield ones mind and life to the control of the spirit of this world. To walk in the spirit is to yield your life to the HS and his influence and to obey the promptings and influence of your own spirit.
Paul emphasis is on the use of Sarx as the physical body with its appetites and desires which can become an instrument of sin if it isn't controlled by the Spirit. According to Paul its not an old sinful nature but it is the flesh. Something which remains with the xian after conversion. Whereas before you let your appetites and desires remain unchecked now you have a warfare to control them. You don't want to yield your members to drinking and fornication etc.
1Cor.6/19-20 You can glorify God in your body.
Eph. 5/29 We are to take care of our body
1Cor. 6/19 our body is the temple of the HS. Paul was not an ascetic and said the body was good and to be used to glorify God
1Cor. 6/15 The body is to be kept clean and pure. God thinks so highly about our body that he redeemed it along with our spirit. 1Cor. 6/20 and will give us anew resurrected one out of that body we planted. 1Cor. 15
Sin doesn't reside in the flesh or body or in the God given appetites. Sin results from the misuse of these appetites impulses and desires. Asceticism will never promote spirituality. 1Cor. 9/24-27 with Col. 2. The flesh is not inherently evil. It is the use it is put to. The flesh belongs to God. In the unregenerate man the flesh principle rules his life. This principle motivates directs and influences his every thought and action, an unregenerate man is a slave to his appetites and desires and he willingly fulfills that role as a slave.
[Updated on: Wed, 29 April 2020 20:17]
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| The doctrine of Redemption - The Kosmos [message #13394 is a reply to message #13198] |
Thu, 30 April 2020 15:46 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
The doctrine of Redemption
This is the most comprehensive doctrine in the Bible.
Redemption and the kosmos
Terms:
1. The literal visible earth. 1Tim. 6/7, Rom. 4/13, Phil.2/15, Rom. 1/20
2. the whole created universe. Eph. 1/4
3. It signifies the inhabitants of this earth. Rom. 3/6,19, 11Cor. 5/19, john 12/19, 8/23
4. It designates the sinful world order under the control of Satan. 1John 2/15-17, 5/19
John 8/23, Gal. 6/14
The Gr. Word for kosmos has its counterpart in the OT Heb.
Gen. 1 the physical world
Gen. 6/11-12 the inhabitants of the earth
Olam age eternity world Ps. 73/12
Chelem world age dispensation
The NT View of the Kosmos
Both OT and NT view the world from 3 aspects. Three different worlds
1. The world as it was. Gen. 1/1,31 John 1/13, col. 1/16
2. The world as it is. (evil) It showed its moral depth not too long after creation. Gen. 6/5-7
Is. 24-27 shows how wicked the world is and the judgment to come upon it.
Matt. 24, 11Thess.1/7-9, 11Peter 1/3, Jude, Rev.
3. A future glorious age. Both the millennium and a new earth. The new earth will be a spiritual reality. Not spirit but spiritual. Dan. 7/13-14, 2/44-45, Is. 66/22,
Rev. 20, Rev. 21/22
The biblical view of the Kosmos is not:
1. that of Gr. Dualism (spirit/world). Meaning the physical world is evil while the spiritual is good.
2. It is not the view of the early church extremists like the Gnostics. A cosmological dualism with the world and all physical things evil. An eternal evil and eternal good in a constant struggle.
3. It is not that of evolution or sciences big bang
The cosmology of the NT consists of two worlds. The world above and the world beneath. John8/23, Eph. 4/8-10
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| Redemption and the Kosmos # 2 [message #13402 is a reply to message #13198] |
Sun, 03 May 2020 19:28 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
The NT View of the Two Worlds
1. This world is corrupt and under Satan's control.
1John 5/19 in contrast to the world up there 11Cor. 4/4
2. The wisdom of this world is foolishness when compared to the divine wisdom emanating from the world up there. Rom. 1, 1Cor. 1, Col. 2/8,20,
3. Spiritual authority doesn't come from this world but from above
John 18/36 Acts 5/28, 4/17-20
4. 11Peter 3 This present world (not the one that was before the flood) will be replaced by one from above. Rev. 21, Is. 65/17
5. This world is not the place of our permanent citizenship John3/13, John6/33, 38
We are pilgrims Heb. 11 passing through.
Phil.3/20 Jesus came into this world briefly and then went out.
6. Mans highest good cannot be realized in this world.
What is to be our Attitude toward this Kosmos?
Gal. 6/14, Col. 3/1, Matt. 6/19-34 No affection
The NT view of the kosmos as an object of God's love mercy and grace
The kosmos is under God's curse and will be judged by him nevertheless the kosmos as humanity is an object of his grace love and mercy . That includes both humanity and creation
1. The kosmos as humanity. John 3/16 At Jesus first advent he came to redeem. It is at the second he comes for judgment.
2. He intends to redeem the kosmos as the created world.
Rom. 8/18-22 This is Pauls attitude
Mark 13/19, Luke 10/21 This is Jesus attitude. It belongs to God and he will one day redeem it back to himself. Satan has temporarily usurped it.
Jesus doesn't look on the world as something God discarded when Adam sinned. God created this world and is still interested in preserving it. Luke 12/6, 22f
Matt. 5/45, Acts 14/15-17 God is concerned enough about this physical world to provide for both just and unjust. To provide for all creation.
Our attitude toward the kosmos as this present age
Gal.6/14, 1John 2/15-17
Our attitude to toward the kosmos with redemption in mind
-as representing humanity our attitude is to be the same as Jesus
John20/21, 1John3/16-17, Mark 16/15, 11Cor. 5 19-20
- as representing the created order our attitude is to be a cause to praise God.
Rom. 1, Luke 10/21, Ps. 19/1, Ps. 8
Jesus Attitude Toward the Kosmos as Humanity
He viewed humanity as sinful by nature and by choice. John 3/16, 8/54, Matt. 7/16-18, John 5/40 Man chooses to sin. John 3/16-20 Sin isn't just an act but a state. It's our nature.
John 8. Sin is a state in which man finds himself when he is born into this world.
Sin is out of the heart or nature Matt. 12/34-35,7/18
The Bibles Attitude toward the Kosmos as Humanity
Rom. 3 The universality of sin and a picture of humanity as God sees it.
Evidence for the universality of sin
1. The scriptures. Gen.6/5, Ps. 14/1, Eph. 2/1
2. The history of mankind.
a. You have to come to the conclusion that something is wrong
b. Every culture and every race down through history has had some form of priesthood and sacrifice without exception.
c. The religious writings of all cultures deal with this need for violated law and unrighteousness etc. The fact that there are gods that need to be appeased.
d. The archaeological discoveries prove sin is universal in nature. The most ancient civilizations had codes of law against sin, murder, adultery, etc. As well as punishment for breaking them. 3-4000 BC. Way back at the beginning of recorded history.
3. The implication of that fact from the bible doctrine. Not certain statements from the bible but doctrines. Atonement, justification, judgment, regeneration.
4. The existence of the church (as a light on a hill) lighting up the sinfulness and darkness of the world
Christ viewed the kosmos both humanity and creation as redeemable.
John. 3/16, 11Cor. 5/19, John 12/32, Luke 5/31-32, Luke 15
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| Redemption and the Nature of the Atonement [message #13408 is a reply to message #13198] |
Wed, 06 May 2020 15:36 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
Redemption and the Nature of the Atonement
The term atonement is a KJV word. In the OT it means "a covering over" Heb. is Kippur.
In the NT the Gr. is reconciliation. To be reconciled or restored to favor with God. Gr. Katalaga Eph. 2/11-16 We are no longer alienated but reconciled to God
The Nature of the Atonement
It is redemptive propitiatory sacrificial substitutionary
1. It is Redemptive
Gr. Lutron ransom. The price of our redemption. This term was used in the Koine or everyday greek as a ransom or price paid to get a slave or prisoner. It was also used as a pledge like something in hock in a pawn shop. Jesus said the "Lutron" I pay to get humanity free is my life. Rom. 3/24, Eph. 1/7, Titus 2/14 This term is used because man is in bondage to sin and one who is outside the prison has to redeem him. We were enslaved to Satan and sin and God demands absolute payment down to the last penny for his violated holiness
2. It is Propitiatory
Redemption in the bible looks in two directions: man word and God ward. This is summed up in the gr. Term Hilasterios propitiation to appease or conciliate
The death of Christ redeems us by a "Lutron" but also appeases God's wrath
Rom. 3/24-26, 1John 2/2, 4/10, Gr. Word is Hilasmos
Most seminaries and churches (especially liberal ones) show this to mean God isn't wrathful and angry. Sinners are just misdirected. They translate this term expiation
(cleansed) with no basis for doing it.
In reply to expiation (which means to cleanse)
a. We see Gods wrath everywhere in the bible. In the garden, God said you will die. Noah's flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, The destruction of Israel in the wilderness, The wrath of God is mentioned more in the bible than his wrath. The entire book of Rev. Is Gods wrath poured out.
b. This term (with its derivatives) even in the Koine and secular usage always means to appease an offended party
c. The LLX translates Hilasterios to appease Gods anger
d. The context of Rom 3 requires the use of this term.
3. The Atonement is Sacrificial
His death is called a sacrifice. Eph. 5/2 1Cor. 5/7, Heb. 10/11-12, John 1/29
There are many references in the NT to the shedding of blood which is a direct reference to the nature of his death. Also pointing to the animal sacrifices. Eph. 1/7, Rom. 3/25, 5/9, col.1/20 The point here is the shedding of blood speaks of sacrifice. His blood gives us power over the devil. Rev. 12/11 He means the shed blood speaks of his sacrifice and the blood speaks of his life. 1Peter 1/18-19 Heb. 9-10
4. The Atonement is Substitutionary
It is vicarious which means to take the place of another. Gr. Is "huper" on behalf of.
The NT stresses over and over that Christ did not die for himself nor as a martyr for some truth but that his death was for someone else. He didn't have to die and the only way he could was to lay it down. His death was totally unnatural. It was completely on behalf of others. 1Thess.5/9-10, Rom. 5/8, 8/32, Eph. 5/2, mark 10/45, Gal. 3/13
Substitution: Is. 53, Gal. 3/13, Rom. 3/24-25, Eph.5/1-2, 1/7, 1Tim.2/15-6, Rom. 5/8-9,
Heb. 9/26-28, 10/10-14, 11Cor. 5/19,21, 1John 2/1-2, Titus 2/14, Gal. 1/4, 4/4-5, Rom. 5/19
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| Redemption in Relation to Law and Grace [message #13416 is a reply to message #13198] |
Sat, 09 May 2020 17:47 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
The NT View of Law and Grace with Respect to Redemption
Jesus did not introduce a new religion in Matt. 5/17-19. He said his teaching was to replace the old not by destruction but by fulfillment. The law had its place and the NT was built right on the OT.
Rom. 3/31 Neither Paul nor Jesus rejected the law. The law has to be fulfilled in us by faith. In Jesus fulfilling the law the whole OT system had to pass away. How? The same way a blossom has to pass away to allow the fruit to come. Col.2/14 the law went to the cross. The OT system was designed to pass away at its fulfillment in Christ.
Heb. 10/9 The law was a shadow
Some teach that the civil and ceremonial law has passed away but the moral law yet remains ie: food, tithing, sabbath. Gal. 5/3 they said faith in Christ plus circumcision and the law.
As Christians, we are to Divorce ourselves from being under the Law in any sense
1. The 10 commandments are never called the moral law in the bible. The whole OT is filled with moral and ethical teaching. Rom. 7/7 Paul called the 10 commandments the law.
2. Gal. 3/10 If you are under any part of the law in any sense you're under its curse
3. Col. 2/13-23 All the law with its penalties was abolished at the cross
4. The NT shows the OT & NT are completely different dispensations. New wine in old wineskins. Jesus didn't abolish the law he fulfilled it and brought in the new. John 1/17 Paul always contrasted the two.
The law was covenant that pertained only to Israel. They were the only nation to have it. The old covenant was never given to the church. Israel was set aside temporarily and the law with it.
To be under the law means to be under its jurisdiction commands precepts and penalties. Israel was under the law in all 4 areas.
The purpose of the law for Israel was two things:
1. to be a means of salvation for the Jew.
2. to be a guide to their moral and ethical conduct and life until the NT.
Rom. 3/19-20 is the answer.
The law was given as a teacher To give knowledge of the nature of sin and to show all men are guilty before God. Rom. 8 shows a revelation of the basic requirements of
God's righteousness and must be fulfilled in us or by faith in Christ for us.
Heb. 10/1 Greek word there for 'image" means the exact replica of the heavenly things as the shadow is the one on the ground. The contrast between law and grace is between shadow and type in the old system contrasted with the NT which is the exact image of what God intended for us all along.
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| The Divine Aspects in Redemption [message #13419 is a reply to message #13198] |
Mon, 11 May 2020 03:02 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
The Divine and Human Aspects in Redemption
The Divine: The sovereign provision instituted by God on man's behalf
Human: It requires a response from man. John 3/16
1. The divine aspect involves all 3 personalities of the Godhead.
- it is the plan of the Father
- the work of redemption is wrought by the Son. John 10/15,17-18
- the application is by the HS. John 3/3-8
2. The initiative in redemption is all Gods.
- it is seen in the institution of the OT sacrificial system. Rom. 5/8-10 Eph. 1/4-11,
- it is seen in his elective choice of those who he saved John 15, Rom. 15/16, 8/29-30
- there is an effectual call and those who receive it respond to it and receive gifts of grace and repentance
3. The divine motivation in redemption (why did God save us?)
a. Because God is love. 1John 4/8,16
His love toward all humanity Matt. 5/44-45.
His providential care Ps. 145/9.
His longsuffering and patience toward humanity Eph. 2/1,3 11Peter 3/9,
His fatherly correction of his children. Heb. 2
His many provisions and promises 11Peter 1/3
His declaration that he is love. Ie: parables of the coin, sheep,prodigal son etc
b. Because of man's lack
Mans nature is lacking in every area of his being. He is under the curse.
- Physical health. He begins dying as soon as he is born
- His life. Man lacks true life as he is spiritually dead. Eph. 2/15
- Man lacks proper understanding. Mentally the ability to understand true values
- He lacks security
- He lacks joy and peace and has anxiety and worry instead
c. The saints' response is love back to God
Eph. 1-2 We'll spend eternity thanking God for saving us. Eph. 1/4-6, 2/5-7
d. Human likeness. Gen. 1/26 We are made in the image of God
Gen. 1-2 Ps. 8 God made man his crown of creation. Adam's fall would have marred the image but not destroyed it. When he made man he made him in the image he wanted for himself as he would also have it for eternity. So one reason he wanted to redeem us is because he made us like him.
e. Gods eternal purpose. Eph. 1/1 which is not fully explained in the bible.
His motivation for redemption is because it fills God's purpose.
God's purpose?
- from his side it was sovereign election. He chose us before the foundation of the world.
11Tim. 1/9 Matt. 25/34
- from our side it is the application of redemption in believing the truth. 1Thess. 2/13
The basis of his election of us was his own purpose
No sinner ever had any merit. We had nothing but filthy rags. The basis for election is not faith and repentance as they are gifts of God. Eph. 2/2-9, Acts 5/31, 11/18, Rom. 2/4
Election is not foreknowledge of your obedience because election is unto obedience. 1Peter 1/2, Eph. 2/10 We are elected unto good works and holiness. Eph. 1/4
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| The Human Aspect in Redemption [message #13421 is a reply to message #13198] |
Tue, 12 May 2020 16:06 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
The Human Aspect in Redemption
This subject is dwelt with extensively in Biblical theology.
From God's side it is regeneration. From our side it is conversion. It means to be completely turned around. Greek is "Strepho" to turn or to turn oneself. Matt. 18/3
Acts 3/19 repentance and conversion go together. The Greek word for repentance means to change your mind.
Various Extremes
1. Liberalism They de-emphasize the need for conversion which applies to all God's children.
2. Protestant groups. Lutheran and reformed. They substitute the doctrine of justification by faith. They place this in the foreground with the need of conversion tagging along behind. Justification by faith is a doctrine while conversion is an experience. They emphasize a doctrine rather than an experience. The point here is you can believe the doctrine without having the experience.
3. Viewing regeneration as an outward act. eg. Water baptism RC church, Church of Christ. They believe baptism saves and saving grace is bestowed through baptism.
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| Benefits of Redemption [message #13422 is a reply to message #13198] |
Wed, 13 May 2020 15:34 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
Benefits of Redemption
1. Faith Eph. 8-9 it is the gift of God
2. Repentance Rom. 2/4, Acts 5/31,11/18
3. Justification from sin Rom. 5/1
4. Forgiveness from sin Eph. 1/7
5. New birth 11Cor. 5/17, Eph. 2/10
6. Union with Christ 1John 4/13 with John 17 1cor. 15/22
7. Adoption Rom. 8/15, Gal. 4/5
8. Children of God John 1/11-12, we're Gods family
9. Resurrection 1Cor. 15 This is the gospel
10. Healing Matt. 8/16-17
11. Preservation Rom. 8/28f
13. Eternal Life John 3/16
Eternal Life as a benefit of Redemption
All the other benefits center around this. This is the goal and central theme of Jesus and the apostles. There are two dimensions to this The present and the future. 1John 5/13 1Cor. 3/20-22
The Greek word life (Zoe) means life The adjective used in its place is aionios which means that which has no beginning or end.
Matt. 18/18 everlasting fire
Mark 3/29 eternal damnation
Luke 16/9 habitation for the justification
Rom. 16/9 the adjective is used of God
Heb. 9/14 eternal Spirit
Titus 1/2 eternal life
Matt. 25/46 eternal punishment eternal life
Two Aspects to Eternal Life
1. the NT teaching of eternal life referencing to the age to come
Mark 10/30 & 17
Matt. 25/ 31-33, 46 Life after the resurrection
John 5/29
2. Eternal life in the present John 5/24, 4/13-14,10,27-29, 11/25-26,
John 5/24-25 both the present and the future
John 10/10 1 Cor. 3/20-21
Some like the Liberals are not sure of what the life after life will bring.
Some are materialists and the only life is this one
Agnostics don't know but figure they will make it because they don't know. They don't believe immortality can be proven.
Eastern religions and some cults believe in the ultimate reality eg. The Christ mind soul of the universe etc.
Communist where the state not man is immortal with the goal being the welfare of the state.
Both OT and NT teach immortality. This is the central theme of the NT. The gospel is immortality. Jesus taught it John 3/16 5/24
John 11/25-26 They will be resurrected.
John 14 a mansion is being prepared
Luke 16 the rich man and Lazarus
Rev. 6/9 The souls under the altar
Rev. 20/4, Heb. 10/39 James 1/21, 1Cor. 15, Rom. 8, 1John 2/17, 24-25, Jude 20-21
The central teaching of the gospel is resurrection but implicit in it is immorality.
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| The Second Advent - The Timing [message #13424 is a reply to message #13198] |
Thu, 14 May 2020 16:05 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
The Second Advent
Jesus
Christ will put in a second appearance on the earth and every eye will see him. A literal personal visible bodily return to the earth. The first was an incarnation the second will be a manifestation.
Greek term: "parousia" advent arrival or presence
The topic of the 2nd advent is about 8 times larger than the 1st. Jesus mentioned it constantly. Matt. 24, Luke 19, John 14, The apostles as well. 1Cor. 1/7, 11Thess 2, 1Thes 4, James 5/7-8, 1Peter 1/7, Revelation.
Both the first and second advents were announced by angels Acts 1
The Time of the Second Advent
The time is unknown but many speculate with a lot of signs pointing to this generation
Matt. 24/36
Human Theories
1.Jehovah Witnesses. He came invisibly in 1874. In 1914 WW1 began the end of time. Satan was expelled from heaven and Christ enthroned.
2. Seventh-Day Adventists. He was supposed to come in 1843. He didn't they set another date and then gave up. One of his disciples went off with that. He said Miller was right as to time but wrong with the place. Jesus actually went into heaven then.
3. Pentecost. The 2nd coming is equated with the coming of the HS at Pentecost. The
Father in the OT Jesus was on the earth and now the HS since Pentecost.
4. The conversion experience. He comes and dwells in our hearts when we are saved.
5. At death. Jesus comes to the individual Christian at death to receive them.
6. It is equated with some great event in history. eg. Destruction of the temple in 70 AD
7. The second advent is equated with the spread of the gospel. When you preach the word Jesus is present.
8. Current view. Christ will appear but not literally. Only through the manifested sons
The time of the second advent is unknown but there are signs that point to this generation.
Matt. 24
vs 5 many Christs
vs 6-8 war pestilence famine
vs 9-10 persecution and lack of love
vs 11 many false prophets
vs 14 the gospel preached everywhere.
vs 15 abomination of desolation
vs 21-31 great tribulation
vs 36-39 Life as usual with not many expecting it. 1Thess. 5/1-3
vs 29 unusual signs in the heavens and earth.
Daniel, Rev. 13, Psalms 11Thes 2 The antichrist will be on the scene and there will be a temple 11Thes.2/7-12, 2/3,
Luke 21/20-24 Zech 14 the regathering of Israel
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| Views Concerning the Nature of the Second Advent [message #13428 is a reply to message #13198] |
Fri, 15 May 2020 16:17 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
Views Concerning the Nature of the Second Advent
1. Spiritualized Views
a. The spiritual presence theory. The promises of the 2nd advent are not to be taken literally but fulfilled at Pentecost by the coming of the HS. Christ has now returned to the earth in his spirit. ie: the HS
b. The manifested sons theory. There is truth to this but goes beyond Rom. 8. the theory is that Christ will not bodily return. As the sons mature Christ will manifest himself in them. There is no bodily resurrection because it is occurring now as we mature.
2. The amillennial view. This could be classified under the spiritualized view but it is widely known under this heading. 95% of denominational churches believe this. Augustine was the father of this view. Also the RC view. There is no literal earthly millennial reign of Christ with his church. They say Rev. 20 speaks of the present church age. Satan (Luke 10/18) was bound at the 1st advent. The prophecies concerning Israel and the church on the millennium are being fulfilled in the church. There is a general resurrection and a general judgment. Augustine could safely say the millennium began at Pentecost as he lived in the 4th century. The problem is 1000 AD has come and gone.
3. The post-millennial view. This view came because 1000 AD came and went. This view arose to square with the facts of history. It was adopted by the theologians of the post-reformation period. They claimed there would be a literal millennium. A golden age. The gospel preached and spread all over with the world Christianized. The church would have such an impact a golden age would result. A long period of peace and prosperity for the would lasting maybe 1000 yrs and maybe not 1000 yrs. The horrors of WW1 put a stop to this theory. As a result, the millennial theory became popular again. It also became popular because it appeals to people who like to spiritualize the bible as they then don't have to believe it.
Amil basically denies a 1000 yr reign of Christ with his saints. The present church age is the millennium. The promises made to Israel are being fulfilled in the church except the curses which still belong to the Jews.
4. Pre-millennial view. The biblical view
These events will occur prior to the 2nd advent.
- world conditions will get worse just prior to Christs return. Matt. 24
- anti-Christ will appear on the world scene. 11Thess 2
- a great falling away from the church 11 Thess 3
- overcomers will be raptured just prior to the great tribulation
- Jesus appears after the trib. Matt 24/29
- the preliminary judgment of the nations Matt. 25/31f
- The saints will be judged for their works 11 Cor. 5/10 Rom. 14/10
- Satan is bound for 1000 yrs. Rev. 20
- Israel is restored saved and the covenant promises fulfilled. Zech. 12/10f, Rom. 11
- Satan is loosed for a short time for a world rebellion after which is total physical annihilation general resurrection and judgment and punishment of the wicked dead.
The intervening kingdom (mil) ruled over by the son is then given to the father and merged with his eternal kingdom.
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| The Millennium [message #13439 is a reply to message #13198] |
Sun, 17 May 2020 19:57 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
The Millennium
The term which doesn't occur in the bible comes from the Latin
Mille 1000 and annum year
1. It will be a time for the fulfillment of all unconditional promises and covenants made by God to Israel. Gen. 13/14-16, 15/1-21, 17/1-8, It is also on pg 142 in the deeper life book
2. It will be the time for the fulfillment of the unconditional promises made to David concerning his throne and his kingdom. 11Sam. 7, Luke 1/31-33
3. The time for the restoration of salvation to Israel. Zech.12/10f,
Rom. 11/25-29 It will begin during the trib
4. Israel's worship and temple will be restored Ezek 40-48
Description of the Millennium
1. A time of ideal conditions restored and peace will prevail. Is. 2/1-4 There will not be even the rumour of war. Is. 9/6-7, Micah 4
2. The effects of the curse will be removed from the earth Is. 11/6-9 Is. 35/7-9,
3. Sickness and disease will be removed Ezek. 47/12
4. The longevity of life Is. 65/20
5. Prosperity Is 30/23 Amos 9/13-14
6. The substitution of joy for weeping Rev. 21/4, Is. 65/18-19
7. Holiness will characterize it. Zech. 14
8. The knowledge of the Lord will fill the earth. Is. 11/9
[Updated on: Mon, 18 May 2020 15:42]
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| The Consummation of all things and the Eternal State [message #13441 is a reply to message #13198] |
Mon, 18 May 2020 16:10 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
The Consummation of all things and the Eternal State
There are some intervening events between the eternal state and the Mill.
The Loosing of Satan Rev. 20/1-3 7-10 Amillinnials say the little season ( vs 3) is the present church age. But vs 7 refutes it.
Question: How could Satan deceive the nations after 1000yrs of Christ's reign? A glorious time! Isn't everyone in the mill saved?
Answer: In Matt. 25 the nations are judged with the righteous nations going into the mill. Life will go on there. Houses children harvests. Natural childbirth in the mill will produce children. Life will go on. Natural children born in Adam still have to get saved.
The mill is not the final perfect state. With Satan bound sin will be held in check in the mill.
All of this is the consensus of opinion held by conservative scholars. This is the accepted position of pre-millennial scholars.
The possibility of sin breaking out in the mill is suggested in scripture and if it does it is dwelt with immediately. Is. 65/19-20, Zech. 14/16-19
During the mill Jesus reigns and rules but with a rod of iron (which speaks of authority) and not a golden scepter. Rev. 2/26-27, Luke 19/16-19 Sin is held in check by the rule of Christ as well as the presence of the righteous saints
This is shown by the fact that tares are present in the church with all the outward marks of a Christian. Satan will obtain his army at the end of the mill from the same source he does now. The unregenerate ones and some saved may apostatize just like now.
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| Gog and Magog [message #13462 is a reply to message #13198] |
Sat, 23 May 2020 22:40 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
Gog and Magog
Who is Gog and Magog? Rev. 20/8 Ezek. 38-39
Rev. 20/8 shows that out of the unregenerate nations deceived by the devil at the end of the mill. will be a group called Gog and Magog. There are three views as to its meaning.
1. Gog and Magog of Ezek. 38-39 refer to the battle of Armageddon. Rev. 16,19 This view holds that Armageddon with Gog and Magog takes place at the close of the trib. and beginning of the Mill.
The biblical answer to this view.
a. The Ezek 38 battle has Gog as head of this army. At the battle of Armageddon the anti-christ is in charge. Rev. 19/19.
b. The Gog battle has definite allies named with them. At Armageddon it says all nations are there. Zech. 14/2, 12/3, Joel 3/2, Zeph. 3/8,
c. Gog comes from the north. Armageddon comes from all the earth.
d. Gog invades at a time when Israel is dwelling securely. Ezek. 38/11-16
e. Gog comes to despoil Israel. Ezek. 38/11-13. At Armageddon the emphasis is on destroying. Zech /141-3 Joel 2/3, Rev. 19/19
f. Anti-Christ is destroyed at the close of Armageddon. Gog is destroyed on the mountains of Israel
2. The Gog and Magog of Ezek 38 are the Gog and Magog of Rev. 20/8 and the battle takes place at the close of the Mill.
The biblical answer to this view.
a. Ezek states it is a northern confederacy while in Rev. 20 it is the whole earth.
b. there is no mention of the binding of Satan in Ezek.
c. The invasion of Ezek 38-39 takes place after the restoration of Israel (Ezek 37) and before the Mill (Ezek. 40-48)
d. Ezek 38 shows it takes 7 months to bury the dead etc. And much is made of that so we don't want to spiritualize it. In Rev. 20 the army is devoured by a fire from heaven.
e. Ezek Gog battle is followed by 7 yrs of cleaning up while the Rev. 20 Battle is followed by the new heavens and earth.
3. Some equate Gog and Magog (Ezek 38) with previous invasions in the past. Eg Babylon, Egypt Syria etc.
The biblical answer to this view.
This doesn't equate with what we know of the past. No invader in the past has ever been
destroyed on the mountains of Israel but in their own land and by others. Ezek. 38/8 states that the destruction of Gog & Magog will take place in the latter days.
4. The biblical view.
Rev. 20 and Ezek 38 Gog/Magog are not the same
Ezek 38/2 ASV has a better translation of these VS. It should be translated
"Gog of the land of Magog" meaning Gog is the prince and Magog is the land.
"chief prince" (chief Rosh) can be translated that way but HEF believes it should be translated "prince of Rosh"
Gog of the land of Magog prince of the land of Rosh
Vs 2
Rosh is Russia
Meshech is Moscow- represents European Russia
Tubal is Tobolsk- Asiatic Russia
vs 5
Persia is Iran
Cush is Ethiopia
Put Libya
Gomer Germany (east)
Togarmah Turkey
Ezek 38-39 show a northern confederacy with her allies and their invasion of Israel. It is not the battle of Armageddon.
Dan. 11/40, 9/27 At the time of this invasion Anti-Christ has a covenant of peace with Israel. Dan. 11/44 shows Gog invading Israel and anti-Christ defeats him.
This is not Armageddon it is the events leading up to Armageddon. The same terms are used (Gog / Magog) because the purpose of both armies is the same. That is to destroy the people of God. In Ezek it is to destroy Israel. In Rev. It is to destroy the church.
Ezek 38 occurs in the middle of Daniels 70th week. Its a time when Israel is dwelling securely in her land. Ezek 38 /10-11 In the middle of the trib.
Zech. 13/8-9 14/1-3 The Ezek 38 war cannot occur at the close of the trib because at Armageddon the city and land are destroyed. Ezek 38 has to occur at a time when Israel is at peace.
Dan.9/27 Because Anti-Christ makes a covenant with Israel at the beginning of the trib and then beaks it 1/2 way through then it is unlikely that Gog's invasion is at the beginning of the trib. Because Israel is at peace when he invades. Gog invades Israel anti-Christ destroys him and then destroys Israel himself.
When Gog invades Israel (Dan. 11/40) Anti-christ is still in covenant with Israel because he goes against Gog for invading the one he is in covenant with. Then he breaks the covenant himself in the middle of the week (Dan. 9/27) so the Gog war must be in the same time context as the breaking of the covenant. Dan. 11/36f.
- Gog invades
- destroyed by Anti-christ
- breaks the covenant
- destroys Israel himself
It is suggested by some . . .
He makes the point here that it is only a suggestion although obvious from his comments it is one he agrees with. He also makes the point shortly after that one can't get too dogmatic about end-time events as we aren't given enough info.
It is suggested by some that Rev. 7/9-14 the great multitude of Jews and gentiles is saved by seeing the destruction of Gog. Ezek. 38/23 39/22 39/21. All say it is a sign to gentiles and Jews Zech. 12/10f, 14/1f, Rom. 11
Rev. 13/7 Anti-Christ has absolute sovereignty over the earth. So Gog cannot occur at the close of trib because if he has total sovereignty then why is Gog attacking Israel. The close of the trib is when Anti-Christ is destroyed. There is no mention of the northern confederacy in the battle of Armageddon so we can assume he has already been dwelt with.
Also in Joel
2/20 the northern army
3/1-16 battle of Armageddon
3/17-21 the millennium
To sum up
Anti-Christ makes a covenant with Israel to allow here to dwell securely in her land. Ezek. 38/8,11 Dan. 9/27 To gain her natural resources Gog invades Palestine
Ezek. 38/10-13 Joel 2/1-21 Anti-Christ goes against Gog and they are destroyed on the mountains of Israel. Which just means inside Israel not big mountains. Ezek. 39/1-4
Anti-Christ breaks his covenant Dan. 11/44-45 with Israel and sets up his tabernacle there Rev. 13/7-8 Ps. 2/1-3. At this time its probably one world gov't etc. And the whole world gathers to destroy Israel and Jerusalem. Rev. 19 The nations are judged and the millennium begins. Zech. 14 Rev. 2/26-27, Rev. 19-20
[Updated on: Mon, 25 May 2020 18:35]
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
| The Consummation of all things and the Eternal State [message #13472 is a reply to message #13198] |
Mon, 25 May 2020 18:33 |
Mark L
Messages: 857
Registered: October 2006
Location: Canada |
Senior Member |
|
|
The Consummation of all things and the Eternal State
After Armageddon and before the mill there is a 75 day period
Dan. 12/9-13
1260 day trib
vs 11 1290 days extra 30 days
vs 12 1335 days extra 45 days
From the middle of the trib to the very end of the trib is 3 1/2 yrs 42 mon 1260 days. To the 1290 and 1335 is 75 days. The 75 day period is not explained but some suggestions are
-the judgment of the nations
- our judgment and reward
- typographical changes in the earth Rom. 8
The fact is we aren't told everything but the 75 days are necessary. These three things have to happen and it takes time to do these things. Another thing that has to happen is the great white throne judgment. Rev. 20/ 14
The Destiny of the Wicked
- a place of eternal darkness Matt. 8/12, 25/30
- eternal death Matt. 25/41
- eternal punishment and destruction 2Thess. 1/9 Matt. 25/46
- The place of unquenchable fire Gehenna Mark 9/43f
- The lake of fire Rev. 20/14, 19/20
- a place of torment Rev. 14/9-11, with fire and brimstone
- a furnace of fire Matt. 13/42
- the second death Rev. 20/6, 14, 21/8
- abiding under the wrath of God John 3/36, Rev. 14. 10, 2/5
- It is an eternal unchangeable state. Luke 16, Rv. 22/10-12, Matt. 25/41, 46,
2Thess. 1/9, Matt9/48, Rev. 14/11, 20/10
Some believe that this place is a place of remorse where they burn with lust and desire for ever and ever. Their punishment is that they thirst for their own sins and can't have them.
Both heaven and hell are literal Matt. 25/46, Luke 16
Annihilationism
Seventh Day Adventists for eg. Sinners are annihilated at death or at judgment are cast into the lake of fire and burned up. Or cast into the lake of fire and tormented until some later date and then annihilated.
Restorationism
Ultimate reconciliation. The fire of hell will correct them and they will ultimately be reconciled to God. The devil and the demons as well. Or else God's love was a failure at the cross.
You can read
"Meanderings on Scripture by Mark
https://mlederman.substack.com/
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Mon Nov 18 16:23:25 UTC 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01133 seconds
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
E-mail to friend 
