11/13/17

"THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS" The Sin Of Hindering Others (5:7-12) by Mark Copeland

                     "THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS"

                  The Sin Of Hindering Others (5:7-12)

INTRODUCTION

1. It is not unusual in foot races for runners to jostle one another...
   a. Bumping elbows, tripping over one another's feet
   b. Often resulting in breaking one's stride, hindering one's ability
      to keep up

2. Paul expressed his concern about Christians being 'hindered' in their
   spiritual race.. - Ga 5:7-12
   a. The word used here (anakopto) means properly to beat or drive back
      - Barnes
   b. Hence, it means to hinder, check, or retard. Dr. Doddridge remarks
      that this is "an Olympic expression, and properly signifies
      "coming across the course" while a person is running in it, in
      such a manner as to jostle, and throw him out of the way." - ibid.

[We are in a race in which we must all run well (cf. 1Co 9:24; He
12:1).  As we run, do we help or hinder others who run along with us?
Here are some thoughts on "The Sin Of Hindering Others"...]

I. HOW WE CAN HINDER OTHER CHRISTIANS

   A. THROUGH FALSE TEACHING...
      1. The problem in our text (those teaching the necessity of
         circumcision) - cf. Ga 5:1-6
      2. A concern later voiced by Peter - cf. 2Pe 3:17
      3. Preventing one from obeying the truth - Ga 5:7
      -- Certainly a warning to those who would teach and preach

   B. THROUGH SINFUL CONDUCT...
      1. Such as immorality, being a bad influence on others 
         - cf. 1Co 15:33
      2. Such as slothfulness, which is as detrimental as those who
         would destroy - cf. Pr 18:9
      3. The example we set can have an adverse effect on others
      -- This should be a warning to all Christians, whether teachers or
         not

[In different ways, then, we can easily become a hindrance to those who
are running.  To appreciate how serious a matter this is, consider...]

II. HOW GOD FEELS ABOUT THOSE WHO HINDER

   A. FROM THE WORDS OF PAUL...
      1. They are like leaven that leavens the whole lump 
          - Ga 5:9; cf. 1Co 5:6-8
         a. Their negative influence spreads, infecting others
         b. Similar to how one runner may jostle another, who then bumps
            into another, etc.
      2. They will bear their judgment (be held accountable) - Ga 5:10
         a. The Lord takes notice of those who are a hindrance
         b. It matters not who they are (or think they are)
      3. He could wish that they cut off themselves - Ga 5:12
         a. Some believe Paul had in mind that they may emasculate
            themselves
         b. Others believe Paul desired they cut themselves off from the
            community of the church
      -- Strong words from the inspired pen of the apostle!

   B. FROM THE WORDS OF JESUS...
      1. Woe to those who cause offenses (occasions of stumbling) 
         - Lk 17:1
      2. It is better to place a millstone around one's neck, and be
         cast into the sea - Lk 17:2
      3. Jesus takes mistreating His disciples personally - cf. Mt 25:
         41-45; Ac 9:1-5
      -- Equally strong words from the voice of the Son of God!

[In view of such strong words, we do well to be concerned about not
hindering our brethren...]

III. HOW WE CAN AVOID BECOMING A HINDRANCE

   A. GIVE CAREFUL ATTENTION TO OUR EXAMPLE...
      1. So Paul encouraged young Timothy - cf. 1Ti 4:12
      2. Give attention to our attendance
         a. The example we set influences others to be either faithful
            or slothful
         b. Is our example in attending services of the church hindering
            others in this regard?
      3. Give attention to our attitude
         a. We can inspire others by our love, spirit, speech and faith
         b. Are we a source of spiritual encouragement to those around
            us?
      -- What kind of example are we providing to our fellow
         'runners'...?

   B. GIVE CAREFUL ATTENTION TO THE WORD...
      1. So Paul admonished young Timothy - 1Ti 4:16
      2. Give attention to the study of God's Word
         a. Only through careful study can we discern between truth and
            error
         b. Is our example of attending Bible study encouraging others
            to do the same?
      3. Give attention to the proclamation of the Word
         a. To what we say or teach about God's Word, whether in private
            or in public
         b. Is what we tell others helping them to draw closer to God?

CONCLUSION

1. We either hinder or help our brethren in Christ...
   a. Who are running a great race, the race of faith
   b. Who can easily be made to stumble by the other runners around them

2. Christians should be a source of great encouragement to one
   another...
   a. If we are, how wonderful it will be when we are together in
      eternity!
   b. If we hinder others, woe to us, for we will be judged harshly!

Paul had confidence in his brethren (Ga 5:10); do we give each other
reason for similar confidence?  We will, if we run "looking unto Jesus"
and with "straight paths for your feet" (He 12:1-2,12-16)...


Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2016

eXTReMe Tracker 

David Has Been Found by Garry K. Brantley, M.A., M.Div.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=13&article=576


David Has Been Found

by Garry K. Brantley, M.A., M.Div.


Last summer, archaeologists excavating at Tel Dan (biblical Dan) found a fragment of a stela (inscribed stone) in the remains of a city wall that scholars acclaim as “one of the most important discoveries in the annals of Biblical archaeology” (Wood, 1993, 6[4]:121). The stone fragment seems to have been from a victory stela erected at Dan by a conquering Aramean (Syrian) army. When the Israelites eventually reclaimed the city, they destroyed the stela and used its fragments in various structures (Shanks, 1994, 20[2]:39). Professor Avraham Biran, the archaeologist heading the excavation, has dated the stela to the first half of the ninth century B.C. (Shanks, 1994, 20[2]:38).
Though only thirteen partial lines remain of this once-impressive monument, they contain an unparalleled literary jewel. Lines 8 and 9 explicitly mention the “king of Israel” and the “House of David,” which the conquering army defeated [The drawing on the left depicts the lower portion of the basalt stela from Tel Dan. The engraved inscription is written in paleo-Hebrew.  The two highlighted areas are translated “king of Isreal” and “House of David,” respectively.] These statements are important for several reasons. First, this is the only extant, extrabiblical document that unquestionably mentions the name David (perhaps it also appears in the Mesha stela, better known as the Moabite stone; see Lemaire, 1994). Even more remarkable is the fact that his name appears in the familiar phrase “House of David.” Given the date of the stela, this serves to confirm the biblical usage of this designation (cf. 1 Kings 12:19, 14:8, Isaiah 7:2, et al.).
Second, though critical scholars have tended to minimize the importance of Israel and Judah during this historical period, the inscription supports the significance that the Bible attaches to these two kingdoms. Third, the tentative date of this discovery corresponds historically with 1 Kings 15:9-20 in which Ben-Hadad, King of Syria (Aram), attacked several Israelite cities including Dan. Some scholars argue that the stela is an exact parallel to this sacred account.
However, there seem to be some differences between the details of 1 Kings 15:9-20 and the ancient stela fragment. Most conspicuously, the stela suggests (if accurately translated) that the Syrian army destroyed both Israel and Judah, but the biblical text indicates that Syria and Judah were allies against Israel. These discrepancies do not necessarily mean that either account is inaccurate. It may be that the stela refers to another battle not mentioned in the Bible, and it is very likely that there were several skirmishes involving Syria. But the stela does demonstrate that Syria (Aram) had military conflicts with Israel, lending corroborative testimony to the historical reliability of the biblical text.
No doubt, analysis of and debate over the stela will continue for some time. We can be certain, however, that the name “David” has been found in a ninth-century B.C. text other than the Bible. That incontrovertible fact is yet another ancient witness to biblical credibility.

REFERENCES

Lemaire, Andre (1994), “ ‘House of David’ Restored in Moabite Inscription,” Biblical Archaeology Review, 20[3]:30-37, May/June.
Shanks, Hershel (1994a), “ ‘David’ Found at Dan,” Biblical Archaeology Review, 20[2]:26-39, March/April.
Shanks, Hershel (1994b), “New Inscription May Illuminate Biblical Events,” Biblical Archaeology Review, 20[2]:38, March/April.
Wood, Bryant (1993), “New Inscription Mentions House of David,” Bible and Spade, 6[4]:119-121, Autumn.

Geography as the Most Important Predictor of Religion? by Kyle Butt, M.Div.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=2789

Geography as the Most Important Predictor of Religion?

by Kyle Butt, M.Div.


Seven and a half minutes into his 10-minute rebuttal speech during our February 12, 2009 Darwin Day debate, Dan Barker noted that “there are other reasons besides reason and truth that people come to their faith.” He continued:
The most obvious one is geography. Geography is the greatest single predictor of what religion a person will have. If you were born in Baghdad, you can pretty much predict what religion that person will have. If you were born in Tennessee, you can pretty much predict what kind of person you are going to be with your religion, generally. It’s the highest predictor (Butt and Barker, 2009).
While it may be true that geography is the highest predictor of a person’s religion, it is important to understand what Barker is trying to say and why it has no bearing on the truth of the proposition that God exists. The implication is that if most people in an area hold a certain religious belief, then the mere fact that it is the “traditional” belief of that area should cast disparaging light on the belief, or at least should call into question the honesty and intellectual rigor of those who hold the belief.
When Barker’s statement is studied critically, however, it becomes apparent that his point is moot. So what if the biggest predictor of a person’s religion is geography? Does that mean that when geography is the biggest predictor of those who will hold a certain belief, then that belief is false? If that were the case, we could simply lump atheism in with all other “religions” and say that geography is the single biggest predictor of whether a person will claim atheism. Polls indicate that those born in China or the former Soviet Union, and certain other areas of Europe, are much more likely to be atheists than other areas of the globe (“Major Religions of the World...,” 2007). So what does that mean about atheism? We are forced by rationality to agree that it means nothing, other than the fact that most people, including atheists, adopt the beliefs of the people nearest to them. It says nothing whatever about the truth of the beliefs.
Suppose we were to suggest that geography is the single biggest predictor of whether a person will know his or her multiplication tables by age 12? Would that mean that all those who learned their “times tables” hold an incorrect view of the world? Of course not. Would it mean that the local knowledge of multiplication casts suspicion on the truth of the math being done? No. It has absolutely no bearing on the accuracy of the multiplication tables. Again, suppose that we said that geography is the single most important indicator of whether a person understands how germs are passed. Does that mean that all those people who wash their hands because that is “what their mothers taught them about germs” have been taught wrong? Certainly not.
In truth, everyone knows that geography has nothing to do with truth claims. Is it the case that truth seekers often break away from their culturally held beliefs, forsake false ideas, and embrace the truth that God exists, the Bible is His Word, and Jesus is His Son? Yes. It is also true that many forsake the cultural truths that they were taught as children, reject the reality of God’s existence, and exchange that belief for false worldviews like atheism and agnosticism. Yes, that happens as well.
In logic, there is a common fallacy known as a “red herring.” The term comes from the idea of dragging a fish across an animal’s scent trail in an attempt to throw the hounds off the scent. In logic, a “red herring” is a device used to divert the attention of the audience from the real point that is being addressed. When we look at Barker’s use of the “geography” idea, something smells very fishy.

REFERENCES

Butt, Kyle and Dan Barker (2009), Butt/Barker Debate: Does the God of the Bible Exist?(Montgomery, AL: Apologetics Press).
“Major Religions of the World Ranked by Number of Adherents” (2007), [On-line]: URL:http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html#Nonreligious.

Water is Thicker than Blood by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=934

Water is Thicker than Blood

by Dave Miller, Ph.D.


The human relationships that exist between individuals who are physically kin to each other can, indeed, be precious and beautiful. In fact, God was responsible for creating the family framework (Genesis 2:24). Ideally, He intends for people to experience the warm, tender ties of blood kin and the multiple blessings associated with such ties.
Perspective is lost, however, when physical ties are permitted to interfere with obedience to God. God’s point is missed when a higher premium is placed on physical family than on spiritualfamily, when a Christian fails to relish to a greater degree association with the family of God—the church. The Bible teaches that Christians should not hesitate for a moment to relinquish fleshly relationships if it becomes necessary to do so in order to put God first (Luke 14:20,24).
Commenting on the status of His own blood relatives, Jesus declared: “Whoever does the will of My Father in heaven is My brother and sister and mother” (Matthew 12:50). He recognized that the stringency of His teaching would disrupt family relationships, and so He stated that “a man’s foes will be those of his own household” (Matthew 10:36). He even went so far as to relegate physical ties to the comparative level of hatred when contrasted to the priority of spiritual ties: “If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple” (Luke 14:26). [For a discussion of the meaning of “hate” in this verse, see Butt, 2003.]
Such explains why, during the Mosaic period of Bible history, Aaron was not permitted to mourn the deaths of his two sons (Leviticus 10:6). Such explains why the wives, and even some children, perished along with Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, as they apparently were unwilling to oppose the blood ties of kinfolk who sinned (Numbers 16:27,32-33). Such explains why the people were to show no pity for their relatives who promoted false teaching, but were to lead the way in the execution process (Deuteronomy 13:6-11).
Yes, the family ties of blood kin can be extremely wonderful, providing unending security and acceptance, and frequently fulfill an important, divinely intended function. But these same blood ties can be the very thing that diverts a Christian from the strait and narrow, discouraging one from standing strongly and firmly on the solid bedrock of truth and right. It is imperative that God’s church be put first—even above family (Matthew 6:33). First allegiance and loyalty must be given to those who have been cleansed by the blood of Christ by passing through the waters of baptism (Ephesians 5:6; Titus 3:5; Hebrews 10:22). For with God, water is thicker than blood.

REFERENCES

Butt, Kyle (2003), “Hate Your Parents—or Love Them?” [On-line], URL: http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/601.

Was Jesus Married?—Again by Kyle Butt, M.Div.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=10&article=5070


Was Jesus Married?—Again

by Kyle Butt, M.Div.


I teach senior Bible at a Christian high school in northwest Alabama. Recently while teaching, I looked down and saw that one of the students was wearing a pair of Chuck Taylor Allstar shoes made by Converse. I found this interesting, because when I was 12, those same shoes were all the rage. It just so happens, as I understand it, styles often have about a 20-year cycle, so that what was in style 20 years ago is back in. Turns out, false theories about Jesus and other Bible characters seem to have a similar cycle. Let me explain.
On November 12, 2014 the Associated Press published an article titled “Married Jesus? New Book Adds Fuel to Conspiracies” (2014). This article discussed a new book written by Simcha Jacobovici and Barrie Wilson titled The Lost Gospel. Supposedly, they have “unearthed” new evidence that would show Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married and possibly had children. The problem with this bold “new” claim is two-fold. First, it is historically wrong. Second, it is not in any way “new.”
The documents of the New Testament are the most historically accurate, most widely attested books from the first century. They give no hint that Jesus was married. In fact, even the document that was written much later than the New Testament books that Jacobovici is using to build his case, according to him, has to be “decoded” in order for a person to find the “secret” message that Jesus was married. But the text, according to Bible professor Greg Carey, contains a story that “was already well known to Bible scholars and ‘doesn’t require any decoding’” (“Married Jesus?...,” 2014). It is interesting that Dan Brown floated this “married Jesus” idea in his book The Da Vinci Code back in 2003, which contained similar fallacious allegations (Lyons, 2007).
Turns out, Jacobovici is rather well-known for his outlandish claims about Jesus. The Associated Press author noted that he has “a record of headline-grabbing but contested claims” (“Married Jesus?....,” 2014). The phrase “contested claims” is a rather subtle way of saying that his wild claims cannot stand up to any type of critical, historical analysis. One of these claims was Jacobovici’s declaration that he had found the family tomb of Jesus. Needless to say, neither the evidence, nor biblical, historical scholarship backed up this claim. [For a thorough refutation of the alleged tomb of Jesus, see Bryant, 2007.]
Two years ago, Apologetics Press’ Executive Director wrote an article answering the idea of Jesus being married (Miller, 2012). Seven years ago, Eric Lyons dealt with Jesus’ relationship with Mary Magdalene. Now, in 2014, we have seen the “cycle” of rumor come back around to surface the idea of Jesus being married. How many times must a false idea be proven to be false before it finally dies out? Who knows, but as long as it keeps popping up, like one of those crazy-eyed, plastic moles in the game of Whack-a-Mole, the mallet of truth will just have to keep beating it back down.

REFERENCES

Bryant, Dewayne, (2007), “Discovering the Truth about ‘The Lost Tomb of Jesus,’” Apologetics Presshttp://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=10&article=2130.
Lyons, Eric (2007), “The Real Mary Magdalene,” Apologetics Presshttp://apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=10&article=1803.
“Married Jesus? New Book Adds Fuel to Conspiracies” (2014), Associated Press,http://www.newspressnow.com/news/science/article_2f2b3bec-3ab5-5e80-b5cc-866d5a5c11c4.html.
Miller, Dave (2012), “Was Jesus Married?”, Apologetics Press, http://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=10&article=4519&topic=71.


Atheists Admit Things Look Designed by Kyle Butt, M.Div.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=9&article=1691


Atheists Admit Things Look Designed

by Kyle Butt, M.Div.


The concept of creation by a supernatural Creator has been a powerful and persuasive aspect of truth since the beginning of time. The idea that there is no supernatural Creator, and that everything we see in the Universe—from hummingbirds to humans—has evolved through mindless, chance processes has been advanced in an attempt to dispel the truth of creation. One reason that naturalistic evolution has not made more head-way against creation than it has is because, intuitively, humans can see the obvious fact that the world exhibits every indication of intelligent design. Even the most outspoken atheistic evolutionists tacitly admit this to be the case.
For instance, Richard Dawkins stated: “Living things are not designed, but Darwinian natural selection licenses a version of the design stance for them. We get a short cut to understanding the heart if we assume that it is designed to pump blood” (2006, p. 182, emp. added). Did you catch that? He said that things weren’t designed by any intelligence, but we can understand them more readily if we assume they were.
University of Chicago professor Jerry Coyne, in his book Why Evolution is True, wrote:  “If anything is true about nature, it is that plants and animals seem intricately and almost perfectly designed for living their lives” (2009, p. 1, emp. added).  He further stated, “Nature resembles a well-oiled machine, with every species an intricate cog or gear” (p. 1). On page three of the same book, he wrote: “The more one learns about plants and animals, the more one marvels at how well their designs fit their ways of life.” Atheist Michael Shermer, in his book Why Darwin Matters, stated: “The design inference comes naturally. The reason people think that a Designer created the world is because it looks designed” (2006, p. 65, ital. in orig.).
Consider another example. Kenneth Miller is an evolutionary biologist at Brown University and co-author of a biology textbook published by Prentice Hall that is used widely in high school classes across the country. In his book, Only a Theory: Evolution and the Battle for America’s Soul, he admits that structural and molecular biologists, as they study the natural order, routinely mention the presence of design in their explorations. He, himself, admits that the human body shows evidence of design, pointing out examples like the design of the ball and socket joints of the human hips and shoulders, as well as the “S” curve of the human spine that allows us to walk upright (2008). So powerful is the design inference, Dawkins was forced to grudgingly admit: “So compelling is that illusion [of design—KB] that it has fooled our greatest minds for centuries, until Charles Darwin burst onto the scene” (2009, p. 416).
The irony of the situation is that each of these writers contends that such design is a product of naturalistic, mindless factors. But their telling statements underscore the obvious conclusion. If an Intelligent Designer really did create the world, what would it look like? Answer: Exactly like the one we have!

REFERENCES

Brown University (2008), “There is ‘Design’ in Nature, Biologist Argues,” ScienceDailyhttp://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080217143838.htm.
Coyne, Jerry (2009), Why Evolution Is True (New York: Viking).
Dawkins, Richard (2006), The God Delusion (Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin).
Dawkins, Richard (2009), The Greatest Show on Earth (New York: Free Press).
Shermer, Michael (2006), Why Darwin Matters (New York: Henry Holt and Company).

Culture, Clogged Courts, and God by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=7&article=2412


Culture, Clogged Courts, and God

by Dave Miller, Ph.D.


Anyone old enough to remember the 1950s and 1960s cannot help but observe that the moral and spiritual condition of America has changed dramatically in the last 50 years. One stark contrast between then and now pertains to the nation’s criminal justice system—which has shifted from protecting the rights of the victim to protecting the rights of the criminal. Since the 1960s, crime rates have steadily risen to historically all-time highs. Prisons are full to overflowing. A greater percentage of the country’s citizenry is engaging in criminal behavior. The administration of law has been significantly altered. Penal institutions have moved away from the idea that lawbreakers must be punished (not merely rehabilitated), that they should be exposed to harsh prison conditions to discourage a life of crime, and that they should be made to work in order to “pay their debt to society.” It was not uncommon for the prison system to use prisoners to build roads, grow crops, etc. Now, however, generally speaking, prisoners routinely enjoy air-conditioned, comfortable sleeping quarters, nourishing meals three times per day, recreation facilities that enable inmates to increase their physical strength, and lots of leisure time. Technically, the only real consequence of their crimes is simply—confinement. The judicial system allows criminals who commit acts that are “worthy of death” (Romans 1:32) to be spared the consequences of their own actions by sitting on death row literally for years.
The propaganda that asserted itself so forcefully in the 1960s regarding proper discipline (in both home and society) arose from mere human opinion—social theories concocted by those who rejected the spiritual reality depicted in the Bible. The social chaos that has gripped American culture is the direct result of this sinister silencing of God in the public sector. But the Bible is still here. It still provides divine insight into the human condition—for those who are willing to listen.
Touted to be wise beyond all others, Solomon recorded for all time, by inspiration of God, a nugget of insight sorely needed in view of America’s present predicament: “Because the sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil” (Ecclesiastes 8:11). The Hebrew term translated “speedily” refers to the need to be “in a hurry” and to act “quickly” (Holladay, 1988, p. 185). It refers to “haste” and “speed” (Kaiser, 1980, 1:492; Brown, et al., 1901, p. 555). Moses used this term on the occasion when God threatened to wipe out the congregation of Israel by means of a fast-spreading plague. Moses urged Aaron to “hurry to the assembly to make atonement for them” (Numbers 16:46, NIV). Delay would be disastrous and result in more loss of life. On another occasion, God instructed Joshua to use his spear to signal his soldiers who lay in ambush to attack the city of Ai: “So those in ambush arose quickly out of their place; they ran as soon as he had stretched out his hand, and they entered the city and took it, and hurried to set the city on fire” (Joshua 8:19-20). In order for the army to be victorious, time was of the essence. Another example is seen in the tormented psalmist’s cry to God to save him from his enemies: “Bow down Your ear to me, deliver me speedily; be my rock of refuge, a fortress of defense to save me” (31:2). The psalmist sought immediate relief from his anguished circumstances. So it is in Ecclesiastes 8:11. When citizens flaunt the laws of the land and commit crimes against their fellowman, a corresponding righteous response is demanded. Indeed, that response is critically indispensable to society’s survival. Crime must be met with a firm response and curtailed swiftly.
But what happens when a sizable segment of a society lacks commitment to right, truth, and compliance with moral standards? What happens when a culture embraces the ludicrous notion that “tolerance” is a virtue and that challenging deviant behavior is “judgmental”? The response to criminal behavior softens and diffuses. Destructive forces are allowed to flourish—forces that will contribute to the unraveling of the fabric of civilization. Indeed, the tendency to flaunt law will spread, gradually permeating the population, and hastening its dissolution. “Because the sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil” (Ecclesiastes 8:11). The only hope of America is to return to the moral principles of the Bible.

REFERENCES

Brown, Francis, S.R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs (1901), The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2004 reprint).
Holladay, William L. (1988), A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).
Kaiser, Walter (1980), “mehera,” Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, ed. R. Laird Harris, Gleason Archer, Jr. and Bruce Waltke (Chicago, IL: Moody).

God Cannot be Tempted...But Jesus Was? by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

http://apologeticspress.org/AllegedDiscrepancies.aspx?article=3580&b=Matthew

God Cannot be Tempted...But Jesus Was?

by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

According to Scripture, Jesus was Deity in the flesh (John 1:1-5,14; 20:28). He was not sired by man; He was not conceived naturally by woman (Isaiah 7:14; Matthew 1:23). Rather, Jesus came from heaven (John 3:13; 6:38), proved His “mighty God” Messiahship (Isaiah 9:6) through a variety of verified miracles (John 20:30-31; cf. Lyons and Butt, 2006), accepted worship (Matthew 14:33; John 9:38), and claimed a unity with God the Father that even His enemies understood was a profession of Deity (John 10:30,33). Some, however, question the Bible’s consistency of Jesus being God. The argument goes something like this (cf. Wells, 2010): The Bible declares that Satan tempted Jesus (Matthew 4:1), and that Jesus was “in all points tempted as we are” (Hebrews 4:15). Yet, the Bible also declares that “God cannot be tempted by evil” (James 1:13). Therefore, the Bible (allegedly) contradicts itself regarding the nature of Jesus. How could He be God, if God cannot be tempted?

First, Christians freely admit that contemplation of the nature of God is by no means a simple mental exercise. We were created; He has always been (Psalm 90:2). We have flesh and bones; God is Spirit (John 4:24). We are limited in power; He is omnipotent (Genesis 17:1). We can become knowledgeable about some things; God’s knowledge has always been infinite—“too wonderful for me; it is high, I cannot attain it” (Psalm 139:6). The apostle Paul expressed his amazement of God to the Christians in Rome, saying, “Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and His ways past finding out!” (11:33). It is always a humbling mental struggle for mere man to contemplate the wondrous attributes of God.

Still, however, the legitimate question remains: How could Jesus be God, if He was tempted while on Earth? The answer to this question is basically the same for a variety of questions that one may ask about the nature of Jesus. How could Jesus not know something if He was God (e.g., the time of His Second Coming; Mark 13:32)? How could God the Father be greater than Jesus if Jesus was “equal with God” (John 14:28; John 5:18; Philippians 2:6)? The answer to these and similar questions must be understood in light of what the apostle Paul wrote to the church at Philippi concerning Jesus’ self-limitation during His time on Earth. According to Paul, Christ
being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation [He “emptied Himself”NASB], taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross (Philippians 2:6-8, emp. added).
While on Earth in the flesh, Jesus was voluntarily in a subordinate position to the Father. Christ “emptied Himself” (Philippians 2:7; He “made Himself nothing”—NIV). Unlike Adam and Eve, who made an attempt to seize equality with God (Genesis 3:5), Jesus, the last Adam (1 Corinthians 15:47), humbled Himself, and obediently accepted the role of a servant. But, as Wayne Jackson observed, Jesus’ earthly limitations “were not the consequence of a less-than-God nature; rather, they were the result of a self-imposed submission reflecting the exercise of His sovereign will” (1995, emp. added). In the form of man, Jesus assumed a position of complete subjection to the Father, and exercised His divine attributes only at the Father’s bidding (cf. John 8:26,28-29) [Wycliffe, 1985]. As A.H. Strong similarly commented, Jesus “resigned not the possession, nor yet entirely the use, but rather the independent exercise, of the divine attributes” (1907, p. 703).

Admittedly, as with Deity’s very nature, understanding Jesus as being fully human in addition to His divine nature is not a simple concept to grasp. When Jesus came to Earth, He added humanity to His divinity—He was made “in the likeness of men” (Philippians 2:7). He moved from the spiritual realm to put on flesh (John 1:14) and became subject to such things as hunger, thirst, weariness, and pain. Our holy God chose to come into this world as a helpless babe, Who, for the first time in His eternal existence, “increased in wisdom” as a child (Luke 2:52). In order to become the perfect sacrifice and Great High Priest, Jesus willingly submitted Himself to temptation and death. As the writer of Hebrews noted: “[I]n all things He had to be made like His brethren, that He might be a merciful and faithful High Priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. For in that He Himself has suffered, being tempted, He is able to aid those who are tempted” (2:17-18).

In short, the Bible’s depiction of Jesus as God incarnated is not contradictory. As the immortal, invisible, pre-incarnate Word (1 Timothy 1:17), He was God (John 1:1). When the Word put on flesh, He was still by nature God (John 10:30,33; 20:28), though He willingly “humbled Himself” and “made Himself of no reputation” (2:6-8) in order to become the tempted, but perfect Man. Indeed, He “who knew no sin” became “sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Corinthians 5:21).

REFERENCES

Jackson, Wayne (1995), “Did Jesus Exist in the Form of God While on Earth?” Reason & Revelation, 15[3]:21-22, March,  http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=10&article=354.

Lyons, Eric and Kyle Butt (2006), “The Very Works that I Do Bear Witness of Me,” Reason & Revelation, 26[3]:17-23, March, http://www.apolo geticspress.org/articles/2857.

Strong, A.H. (1907), Systematic Theology (Old Tappan, NJ: Fleming H. Revell).

Wells, Steve (2010), Skeptic’s Annotated Bible, http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/tempt_god.html.

Wycliffe Bible Commentary (1985), Electronic Database: Biblesoft.

“Love the LORD your God” Joshua 23:11 by Roy Davison

http://www.oldpaths.com/Archive/Davison/Roy/Allen/1940/046-LoveGod.html

 
“Love the LORD your God”
Joshua 23:11
“You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your strength” (Deuteronomy 6:5).
This is “the first and great commandment” according to Jesus (Matthew 22:38).
We are commanded to love God. Thus, love is an action of the will, something we can choose to do or not to do.
Love is a virtue, the attitude that desires and actively promotes the benefit of another at one’s own expense. Love is the willingness to work hard, deprive one’s self and suffer, for the sake of someone else. Without love, all other virtues are worthless (1 Corinthians 13:1-3).

God is worthy of our love.
“We love Him because He first loved us” (1 John 4:19).
Men and women are created in God’s image (Genesis 1:27). Although this image has been tarnished by sin, we learn something about God’s love by observing man’s noblest attributes.
Our first knowledge of love comes through human relationships. A child is loved by his mother and father, by his grandparents, by other family members and by friends. He learns to love others.
From these relationships he also learns something about the love of God. And parents learn something about the love of God by raising a child.
But substantial knowledge about God’s love is available only because of revelation. In the Scriptures God’s love is explained, and it is demonstrated in His dealings with man.
The ultimate demonstration of God’s love was the sacrifice of His Son on the cross to redeem man: “In this the love of God was manifested toward us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through Him. In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins” (1 John 4:9, 10).
When God told His people, “You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your strength” they had experienced His love many times and in many ways. He had every right to expect their love in return.
“How precious is Your lovingkindness, O God! Therefore the children of men put their trust under the shadow of Your wings” (Psalm 36:7). “Remember, O LORD, Your tender mercies and Your lovingkindnesses, for they are from of old” (Psalm 25:6).

“You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart.”
Superficial religion does not please God. Most religious practices on earth are vain formalities.
This was true of Israel when God said through Isaiah: “These people draw near with their mouths and honor Me with their lips, but have removed their hearts far from Me” (Isaiah 29:13).
Jesus applied this to His time: “Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written: ‘This people honors Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me’” (Mark 7:6).
Superficial or half-hearted worship does not please God. We must love God with our whole heart: with feeling, sincerity and dedication.

“You shall love the LORD your God ... with all your soul.”
Even our heart is not enough. We must love God with our whole being. Loving God is not something we do now and then. Love for God pervades our soul, is an essential part of our being, defines who we are, and influences all that we do.
Paul enlarges on this, “I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service. And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God” (Romans 12:1, 2).

“You shall love the LORD your God ... with all your mind” (Matthew 22:37).
True love for God is based on reason. We love God “with all the understanding” (Mark 12:33).
Paul says, “I will pray with the spirit, and I will also pray with the understanding. I will sing with the spirit, and I will also sing with the understanding” (1 Corinthians 14:15).“And this I pray, that your love may abound still more and more in knowledge and all discernment” (Philippians 1:9).
Our love for God must be knowledgeable. We love God with our mind, with our whole mind.

“You shall love the LORD your God .. with all your strength.”
We must love God full force.
Although the Christians at Ephesus had persevered and had exposed false teachers, their love had grown weak: “Nevertheless I have this against you, that you have left your first love. Remember therefore from where you have fallen; repent and do the first works, or else I will come to you quickly and remove your lampstand from its place - unless you repent” (Revelation 2:4, 5). Notice that love is indicated by works.
Lukewarm love is not sufficient. Jesus warned the church of the Laodiceans: “I know your works, that you are neither cold nor hot. I could wish you were cold or hot. So then, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will vomit you out of My mouth” (Revelation 3:15, 16).
Jesus said, “And because lawlessness will abound, the love of many will grow cold” (Matthew 24:12).
Our love for God must be full strength.
“You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength. This is the first commandment” (Mark 12:30).

God must be our first love.
Love for God supplants love for self, money, pleasure and the world: “For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, ... lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power” (2 Timothy 3:2, 4, 5). “Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him” (1 John 2:15).
Love for God must surpass love for family. Jesus said: “He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me” (Matthew 10:37).

What does it mean to love God?
Our love for God is intense adoration and affection.
We yearn for someone we love: “O God, You are my God; early will I seek You; my soul thirsts for You; my flesh longs for You in a dry and thirsty land where there is no water” (Psalm 63:1).
We want to be near someone we love. God’s people were told “to hold fast to Him” (Deuteronomy 11:22) and to “cling to Him” (Deuteronomy 30:20). They who love God are attached to Him.
Although we learn love from God, His love for us is different from our love for him. His love is sovereign and unearned. Our love is dependent and submissive. He is the Father, we are the toddlers. He is the Shepherd, we are the lambs.
“Make a joyful shout to the LORD, all you lands! Serve the LORD with gladness; Come before His presence with singing. Know that the LORD, He is God; It is He who has made us, and not we ourselves; We are His people and the sheep of His pasture. Enter into His gates with thanksgiving, And into His courts with praise. Be thankful to Him, and bless His name. For the LORD is good; His mercy is everlasting, And His truth endures to all generations” (Psalm 100:1-5).
We rejoice in someone we love. “But let all those rejoice who put their trust in You; let them ever shout for joy, because You defend them; let those also who love Your name be joyful in You” (Psalm 5:11).
When we love God, we want to praise and thank Him for His goodness. “Let all those who seek You rejoice and be glad in You; let such as love Your salvation say continually, ‘The LORD be magnified!’” (Psalm 40:16).

How do we show our love to God?
Although love cannot be seen, it affects everything we do. “Let all that you do be done in love” (1 Corinthians 16:14).
We want to serve someone we love. God promised to bless His people, “if you earnestly obey My commandments which I command you today, to love the Lord your God and serve Him with all your heart and with all your soul” (Deuteronomy 11:13). Thus, he who loves God with heart and soul, serves God with heart and soul.
Motivated by love we gladly obey God: “Therefore you shall love the LORD your God, and keep His charge, His statutes, His judgments, and His commandments always” (Deuteronomy 11:1).
When Joshua sent the Reubenites, Gadites, and half tribe of Manasseh back to their homes on the eastern side of the Jordan, he admonished them, “But take careful heed to do the commandment and the law which Moses the servant of the Lord commanded you, to love the LORD your God, to walk in all His ways, to keep His commandments, to hold fast to Him, and to serve Him with all your heart and with all your soul” (Joshua 22:5).
In his parting words when he was old, Joshua told the people, “Take careful heed to yourselves, that you love the LORD your God” (Joshua 23:11).
Jesus tells His followers: “If you love Me, keep My commandments” (John 14:15). “If anyone loves me, he will keep my word” (John 14:23).
John explains: “For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome” (1 John 5:3). When we love God with our whole heart, we gladly obey Him. “This is love, that we walk according to His commandments” (2 John 6).
We want to communicate with someone we love. We talk to God in prayer and listen to His word in the Scriptures. Jesus said, “My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me” (John 10:27).
We want to know someone we love and we want to be known by the one we love. “If anyone loves God, this one is known by Him” (1 Corinthians 8:3). “He who does not love does not know God, for God is love” (1 John 4:8).
We want to have fellowship with someone we love. Christians show their love for God by gathering around the Lord’s table “on the first day of the week” (Acts 20:7) to participate in the body and blood of Christ (1 Corinthians 10:16).

What have we learned?
“You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength. This is the first commandment” (Mark 12:30).
God is worthy of our love. We love Him because He first loved us. From human relationships we learn something about the love of God, but substantial knowledge about God’s love is gained only through the Scriptures. Superficial or half-hearted worship does not please God. We present our bodies as living sacrifices. God must be our first love. We cannot love God if we love self, pleasure, money or the world. Our love for God must exceed our love for family.
Our love for God is intense adoration and affection. We hold fast to God and cling to Him.
We show our love to God by serving and obeying Him. We talk to God in prayer and listen to His word in the Scriptures. Christians show their love for God by participating in the body and blood of Christ at the Lord’s table each first day of the week. Our soul yearns for God. We rejoice in Him and magnify His holy name. Amen.
Roy Davison
The Scripture quotations in this article are from
The New King James Version. ©1979,1980,1982, Thomas Nelson Inc., Publishers.
Permission for reference use has been granted.
Published in The Old Paths Archive
(http://www.oldpaths.com)

ME by Gary Rose


When I think of "Peanuts", I think of a generation that probably grew up in the 1950's. Yet, based on her comments, I think Lucy was born much later- you know, in the ME generation.

I wonder- when did the "ME" generation begin, anyway? And then I turned to the Bible...


Philippians, Chapter 2 (World English Bible)
 19 But I hope in the Lord Jesus to send Timothy to you soon, that I also may be cheered up when I know how you are doing.  20 For I have no one else like-minded, who will truly care about you.  21 For they all seek their own, not the things of Jesus Christ. (emphasis added vs. 20f.) 22 But you know the proof of him, that as a child serves a father, so he served with me in furtherance of the Good News.  23 Therefore I hope to send him at once, as soon as I see how it will go with me. 


Well, based on this Bible passage, it seems that the "ME" generation has been around a lot longer than I ever imagined. But, in spite of the widespread number of people concerned about themselves, there have always been some Timothy's out there.

BE ONE!!!!