2/12/20

"STUDIES IN THE MINOR PROPHETS" Joel - The Day Of The Lord (2:28-3:21) by Mark Copeland




                    "STUDIES IN THE MINOR PROPHETS"

                 Joel - The Day Of The Lord (2:28-3:21)

INTRODUCTION

1. In our previous lesson on Joel, we saw that...
   a. Joel's prophecy was occasioned by a plague of locusts - 1:2-4
   b. He proclaimed the plague as a warning from God - 1:15-16
      1) If the people would not repent, "the day of the Lord" would
         come and bring greater destruction - 2:1-5
      2) If they did repent, then material blessings would  follow - 2:12-14
   c. Joel therefore called for a national repentance - 2:15-17a
   d. Evidently his work was effective, for he describes the blessings
      that had come - 2:21-27

2. We also noticed some lessons to be learned from the book...
   a. The value of natural calamities (can serve to turn men to God)
   b. The nature of true repentance - 2:12-13
   c. The character of the Lord - 2:13b
   d. "The day of the Lord", when referring to God's judgment on a city
      or nation, can be averted - cf. also Jer 18:7-8; Jonah 3:1-10

3. In this lesson, we shall complete our survey of Joel by reading 
   2:28-3:21...
   a. With attention to the prophetic element of this passage
   b. Offering comments concerning its interpretation

[Let's begin with a careful reading of this passage...]

I. JOEL'S PROPHECY OF THE FUTURE

   A. WHAT SHALL COME TO PASS "AFTERWARD" (2:26-32)
      1. God's Spirit will be poured out on all flesh - 2:28-29
      2. Wonders in heaven and earth to appear before the coming of 
         "the day of the Lord" - 2:30-31
      3. There shall be deliverance in Mount Zion and Jerusalem - 2:32

   B. WHAT SHALL OCCUR "IN THOSE DAYS" (3:1-17)
      1. God will judge all nations on account of His people - 3:1-3
      2. Specifically mentioned are Tyre, Sidon and Philistia - 3:4-8
         a. Who had mistreated God's people
         b. Who shall be treated as they treated others
      3. The nations are called to do battle - 3:9-12
         a. "Prepare for war!"
         b. Come to the "Valley of  Jehoshaphat", where the Lord will
            judge the nations
            1) Jehoshaphat means "God shall judge"
            2) The valley referred to may be the Kidron near Jerusalem
      4. The outcome - 3:13-17
         a. There will be a great harvest
         b. "The day of the Lord" is described...
            1) As near in this "valley of decision"
            2) In which the heavenly bodies are diminished and shaken
         c. While God's people find shelter and strength in Him
         d. The Lord will be known and dwell in Zion, Jerusalem forever
            remaining holy

   C. WHAT SHALL COME TO PASS "IN THAT DAY" (3:18-21)
      1. Judah shall be blessed by a "fountain...from the house of the
         Lord" - 3:18
      2. Egypt and Edom will be desolate because of their violence- 3:19
      3. Judah and Jerusalem shall abide forever, acquitted of their 
         guilt - 3:20-21

[Such is the prophetic message of Joel.  What he SAYS is clear enough.
What he MEANS is something else!  Here are a few thoughts on...]

II. INTERPRETING JOEL'S PROPHECY

   A. THERE ARE THREE KEY PHRASES...
      1. "it shall come to pass afterward" - 2:28
         a. This period of time is clearly defined by Peter in Ac 2:14-21
         b. In which he applies it to the events on the Day of 
            Pentecost
      2. "in those days and at that time" - 3:1
         a. The same period of time as described in 2:28-32
         b. I.e., at some point during the Messianic age
      3. "in that day" - 3:18
         a. The context places this AFTER "the day of the Lord"
         b. I.e., at some point during the Messianic age, but not until
            AFTER the judgment of the nations in the "Valley of Jehoshaphat"

   B. DETERMINING THE TIME AND EVENTS...
      1. Certainly 2:28-29 refers to a period beginning with the 
         events described in Acts 2
         a. Peter said "this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel" 
            - Ac 2:16
         b. An inspired statement pinpointing when this prophecy began
            to be fulfilled
      2. However, there are different opinions regarding Joel 2:30-3:21
         a. "The day of the Lord" in 2:30-31 is variously interpreted as:
            1) The destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD
            2) The final coming of the Lord
         b. The judgment  in the "valley of Jehoshaphat" in 3:1-17 is
            variously interpreted as:
            1) Figurative, by some; literal, by others
            2) Referring to no specific judgment, by some
            3) Referring to a specific judgment at some time, by others...
               1) E.g., after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD
               2) E.g., The "Battle of Armageddon" prior to the 
                  "millennium" - Re 16:14-16
               3) E.g., the battle after the "millennium" described in Re 20:7-10
         c. Various views are also offered for the blessing of Judah 
            and Jerusalem in 3:18-21
      -- With such differences in interpretation, one should not be dogmatic

   C. HERE IS MY OWN UNDERSTANDING OF 2:30-3:21...
      1. The passage is not to be taken literally
         a. It would be physically impossible for ALL the nations to 
            gather in the "Valley of Jehoshaphat" - 3:2,12
         b. The "Valley of  Acacias" is located on the other side of 
            the Jordan River, making it geographically impossible to be
            watered by a stream from Jerusalem - 3:18
      2. This passage speaks in terms meaningful and comforting to 
         Israelites in Joel's day
         a. The prophecy was initially given to comfort them, give them
            hope for the future
         b. Therefore prophetic elements are described in terms to 
            which they could relate
            1) E.g., deliverance in their capital, Jerusalem - 2:32
            2) E.g., judgment upon those enemies who oppressed them- 3:1-8
            3) E.g., desolation of such enemies as Edom and Egypt- 3:19
            4) E.g., blessings to befall the nation and the land- 3:18,20-21
      3. But it refers to spiritual realities fulfilled with the coming
         of the Messiah!
         a. Salvation and deliverance will indeed come out of Zion and
            Jerusalem - cf. 2:32 with Lk 24:44-47; He 12:22-24
         b. God will judge the enemies of His people - cf. 3:1-17 with
            Re 4-20 (esp. Re 20:7-10)
         c. In the end, God's people will prosper and the wicked will 
            be desolate - cf. 3:18-21 with Re 21-22 (esp. Re 22:1-2)
      4. This is true whether or not any particular event is referred 
         to in this passage
         a. I lean toward the view that "the day of the  Lord" in this
            passage is the FINAL JUDGMENT when the Lord comes again
         b. Others think that it refers to the DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM
            in 70 A.D
         c. Whatever one's interpretation, the application is the same...
            1) The means and source of salvation:  The Lord Himself - 2:32
            2) The day of the Lord is coming!
               a) A terrible day for the wicked - cf. 3:14-16a
               b) But for God's people there is shelter and strength- cf. 3:16b
               c) And in the end, blessings for the people of God, 
                  while their enemies lie desolate - cf. 3:18-21

CONCLUSION

1. In studying "The Minor Prophets"...
   a. Determining the proper INTERPRETATION is certainly a worthy goal
   b. But determining the proper APPLICATION is our essential task!

2. If this be true, then the crucial question is this:  Have we found
   that salvation, deliverance, shelter and strength which only the Lord
   can provide when the final "day of the Lord" comes?

To know where to look, one should carefully read Peter's sermon on the
Day of Pentecost, after he had quoted Joel - cf. Ac 2:22-39

Afterlife and the Bible by Dave Miller, Ph.D.


http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=1478


Afterlife and the Bible

by  Dave Miller, Ph.D.

We human beings find it very easy to live life as if we will be here forever. On occasion, we come face to face with death when a loved one or friend passes away. But the essence of daily living is such that it is easy to ignore the reality of death and the certainty of existence beyond the grave. Numerous ideas exist in the world regarding life after death—from annihilation to reincarnation. Islam speaks of “paradise” while Catholicism speaks of “purgatory.” While it does not answer all of our questions, the Bible nevertheless speaks definitively and decisively regarding afterlife.
The Bible teaches that human beings are composite creatures. Humans possess a fleshly body that is composed of physical elements made from “the dust of the ground” (Genesis 2:7). Unlike animals, humans also possess a spiritual dimension—made in God’s own image—that transcends the body and physical life on Earth (Genesis 1:26-27). God places within each prenatal person at conception a spirit that makes each individual a unique personality that will survive physical death, living on immortally throughout eternity (Zechariah 12:1). At death, the spirit separates from the body and exists in a conscious condition in the spirit realm (Genesis 35:18; 1 Kings 17:21-22). Thus the Bible defines “death” as “separation”—not “extinction” or “annihilation” (Thayer, 1901, p. 282; Vine, 1940, p. 276). Since “the body without the spirit is dead” (James 2:26), the separation of one’s spirit from one’s body results in the physical death of the body. But what about the spirit?
The clearest depiction of existence beyond physical death is seen in Luke 16:19-31. In this account, both men are said to have died. Wherever Lazarus went, angels transported him there. The rich man’s body was buried—but his person was in Hades where he was tormented in flames. The rich man could see and recognize Lazarus and Abraham. Abraham referred to the rich man’s former existence as “your lifetime.” Abraham made clear that their respective locations were irreversible. The rich man’s brothers still occupied their father’s house on Earth. The rich man’s plea to send Lazarus to his living relatives would require Lazarus to “rise from the dead” (vs. 31).
The term translated “hell” in verse 23 (KJV) is the Greek word hades, and is not to be confused with the term gehenna. “Gehenna” (found twelve times in the New Testament) refers to the place of eternal, everlasting punishment—the “lake of fire” where Satan, his angels, and all wicked people will be consigned after the Second Coming of Jesus and the Judgment. Gehenna is hell. On the other hand, “hades” (occurring ten times in the New Testament and paralleling the Hebrew Old Testament term sheol) always refers to the unseen realm of the dead—the receptacle of disembodied spirits where dead people await the return of the Lord (Revelation 1:18). Hades is not hell.
Observe further that Luke 16 depicts Hades as including two regions: one for the deceased righteous, and a second for the deceased wicked. The former is referred to as the “bosom of Abraham” (meaning “near” or “in the presence of ” Abraham—cf. John 1:18). Jesus referred to this location as “paradise” (Luke 23:43; cf. Acts 2:25-34). The term “paradise” is of Persian derivation, and referred to “a grand enclosure or preserve, hunting-ground, park, shady and well-watered” (Thayer, 1901, p. 480). The Jews used the term as “a garden, pleasure-ground, grove, park,” and came to apply it to that portion of Hades that was thought “to be the abode of the souls of the pious until the resurrection” (p. 480). The word is used in three senses in the Bible: (1) In the Septuagint (Genesis 2:8,9,10,15,16; 3:2,3,4,9,11,24,25), the Greek translation of the Old Testament, it refers to the literal Garden of Eden on Earth where Adam and Eve lived (Septuagint, 1970, pp. 3-5). It normally is translated “garden” in English versions; (2) It is used one time, in a highly figurative New Testament book, to refer to the final abode of the saved, i.e., heaven (Revelation 2:7); and (3) It is used in connection with the Hadean realm.
While Jesus, the thief, and Lazarus went to the paradise portion of Hades, the rich man went to the unpleasant area that entailed torment and flame—tartarosas, or Tartarus (2 Peter 2:4; Jude 6). The occupants there await “the judgment of the great day.” Thus, Hades is a temporary realm that will be terminated at the Judgment (Revelation 20:13-14).
God gives people only their earthly life to prepare their spirits for their eternal abode (Hebrews 9:27). When a person dies, his or her body goes into the grave, while the spirit enters the Hadean realm to await the final Judgment. At the Second Coming of Christ, all spirits will come forth from Hades and be resurrected in immortal bodies (John 5:28-29; 1 Corinthians 15:35-54). All will then face God in judgment, receive the pronouncement of eternal sentence, and be consigned to heaven or hell for eternity.
[NOTE: For an audio sermon on this topic, click here.]

REFERENCES

Septuagint Version of the Old Testament (1970 reprint), (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan).
Thayer, J.H. (1901), A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1977 reprint).
Vine, W.E. (1966 reprint), An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words (Old Tappan, NJ: Revell).

Adam and Eve, Good and Evil by Eric Lyons, M.Min.


http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=2728

Adam and Eve, Good and Evil

by  Eric Lyons, M.Min.

Q.

Did Adam and Eve know of good and evil prior to sinning? It was only after Adam and Eve ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil that the Bible says they came “to know good and evil” (Genesis 3:5,22). How could God punish them for an evil action if they did not know what evil was?

A.

Consider a hypothetical situation: What if two godly parents living in the most wicked city in the world chose never to let their children out of their house. They gave them everything they needed for survival inside the house. They filled their home with only good things. Their children never saw evil on television, heard of it on the radio, nor read of it in books. The children could play in any room in the house and open any door, except they had been forbidden to open the front door that leads to “Sodom and Gomorrah.” Do these children know what they can do and cannot do? Yes. Have they seen, witnessed, or experienced the evil outside their house (and compared that evil to the good within their own house)? No. Everything in their house was good. They had the freedom to do any number of things within their own house. They were forbidden to do one thing: open the front door. Did they know they were not supposed to open the front door? Yes. But did they know of the evil on the other side? No. They had never seen it, heard it, thought it, or experienced it.
The term “know” (Hebrew yada, Greek ginosko) or one of its derivatives (i.e., knew, known, etc.) is used in Scripture in a variety of ways. Several times it refers to a man and woman having sexual intercourse (Genesis 4:1,17,25; Judges 11:39; 19:25). Jesus used the term to refer to His regard for His sheep (i.e., people—John 10:27). In contrast to the way of the wicked that will perish, the psalmist wrote that God “knows” (i.e., approves, takes delight in, etc.) the way of the righteous (Psalm 1:6). Paul used the term “know” in Ephesians 3:19 in the sense of knowing “experimentally what intellectually is beyond our powers of knowing”—the love of Christ (Jamieson, 1997). The fact is, like so many other words in Scripture (and in modern times) the word “know” has a variety of meanings.
When Adam and Eve were in the Garden of Eden everything was “very good” (Genesis 1:31). They had the freedom to eat of “of every tree of the garden” (2:16), but were forbidden to eat of the fruit of one of them (2:17). They knew of God’s good creation and they knew that if they ate of “the tree of the knowledge of good and evil” (the one forbidden tree), God said they would die (3:2-3). However, it was not until after they ate of the forbidden tree that they actually “knew” (experienced) evil. Thus, in one sense Adam and Eve did know the difference between right and wrong, good and evil (they knew what they should and should not do; they understood moral distinctions), but they did not know of good and evil experientially until after their disobedience.

REFERENCE

Jamieson, Robert, et al. (1997), Jamieson, Fausset, & Brown Bible Commentary (Electronic Database: Biblesoft).

A Look at 1 Corinthians 7:15 by Dave Miller, Ph.D.


http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=4183

A Look at 1 Corinthians 7:15

by  Dave Miller, Ph.D.

A current misconception with regard to divorce and remarriage is the notion that 1 Corinthians 7:15 is “later revelation” which “modifies” or “clarifies” Matthew 19:9. It is argued that 1 Corinthians 7:15 permits the Christian, who is deserted by a non-Christian mate, to remarry on the sole ground of that desertion. On the other hand, Matthew 19:9, which permits remarriage only on the ground of fornication, applies strictly to a Christian married to a Christian and therefore is not to be considered applicable to the Christian who is married to a non-Christian. Several factors make such a viewpoint untenable:
First, the context of Matthew 19 is divorce (Matthew 19:3), while the context of 1 Corinthians 7 is not divorce, but the propriety of marriage (1 Corinthians 7:1ff.). Jesus applied God’s original marriage law (paraphrased from Genesis 1:27 and 2:24 in Matthew 19:4-6) to the question of divorce and remarriage in Matthew 19:9. But Paul applied God’s general marriage law (paraphrased in 1 Corinthians 7:10-11) to several different questions which relate to celibacy and the legitimacy of marriage for widows/widowers, Christian/non-­Christians, and singles.
Second, it is fallacious to hold that if 1 Corinthians 7:15 relates to a Christian married to a non-Christian, Matthew 19:9 must refer exclusively to a Christian married to a Christian. Matthew 19:9 was uttered in context to a group of Jews who were seeking an answer to their question concerning Jewish divorce (Matthew 19:3). Jesus gave them an answer that was intended for them—as well as for all those who would live during the Christian age. He appealed to Genesis 2 which resides in a pre-Jewish context and clearly applies to all men—the totality of humanity. Genesis 2 is a human race context. It reveals God’s ideal will for human marriage for all of human history—pre-Mosaic, Mosaic, and Christian. Though divorce and remarriage for reasons other than fornication was “allowed” (though not endorsed—Matthew 19:8) during the Mosaic period, Jesus made clear that the Jews had strayed from the original ideal because of their hard hearts. He further emphasized (notice the use of δε [“but”] in Matthew 19:8-9) that the original marriage law, which permitted divorce and remarriage for fornication alone, would be reaffirmed as applicable to all persons during the Christian age. Prior to the cross, ignorance may have been “unattended to” (Acts 17:30), that is, God did not have a universal law, as is the Gospel (Mark 16:15-16), but with the ratification of the New Testament, all men everywhere are responsible and liable for conforming themselves to God’s universal laws of marriage, divorce, and remarriage. God’s original marriage law was and is addressed to all people (Genesis 2:24; Matthew 19:4-6). Christ’s application to the question of divorce was implied in the original law and is addressed to all people (Matthew 19:9). Paul’s application to questions of sex, celibacy, and non-Christian mates is addressed to all people (1 Corinthians 7). Scripture harmonizes beautifully and God treats all impartially. Thus “to the rest” (1 Corinthians 7:12) cannot be applying to other marriage relationships since Jesus had already referred to all marriages (whether Jew or non-Jew, Christian or non-Christian).
Third, 1 Corinthians 7 does not address different “classes” of marriages. The Corinthian letter was written in response to correspondence previously sent to Paul by the Corinthian (cf. 1:11; 5:1; 7:1; 8:1; 12:1; 16:1). Thus, 1 Corinthians amounts to a point-by-point response to matters previously raised by the Corinthians themselves. When Paul refers to the general question of sexual activity/celibacy (7:1), he is alluding to the method by which he is organizing his remarks in direct response to questions asked by the Corinthians. Thus, “to the rest” (7:12) refers to the rest of the matters or questions about which the Corinthians specifically inquired (and to which Jesus did not make specific application while on Earth). These matters (not marriages) are easily discernible from what follows. The “rest” of the questions would have included the following:
  1. Should a Christian husband who has a non-Christian wife sever the relationship (vs. 12)?
  2. Should a Christian wife who has a non-Christian husband sever the relationship (vs. 13)?
  3. Are Christians somehow ceremon­ially defiled or rendered unclean by such a relationship (vs. 14)?
  4. Are children born to such relation­ships ceremonially unclean (vs. 14)?
  5. Is a Christian guilty of sin if his or her non-Christian mate severs the relationship (vss. 15-16)?
  6. Does becoming a Christian mean that one should dissolve all conditions and relationships which were entered into before becoming a Christian (vss. 17-24)?
  7. What should be the sexual and/or marital status of virgins and widows in light of the current period of distress (vss. 25-40)?
All of these questions may be answered in light of and in harmony with Jesus’ own remarks in Matthew 19. Jesus did not specifically make application to these unique instances. He did not address Himself to the application of God’s general marriage law to every possible scenario (specifically, to the spiritual status of a Christian married to a non-Christian). Yet, His teaching applies to every case of marriage on the question of divorce.
Fourth, the specific context of 1 Corinthians 7:15 relates to the person who becomes a Christian, but whose mate does not. The unbeliever now finds himself married to a different person (in the sense that his mate underwent a total change in thinking and morals, and began to live a completely different lifestyle). The unbeliever consequently issues an ultimatum, demanding that his mate make a choice: “either give up Christ, or I’m leaving!” Yet, to live in marriage with an unbeliever who makes continuance of the marriage dependent upon the believer’s capitulation (i.e., compromise of Christian responsibility or neglect of divinely-ordained duty) would amount to slavery (i.e., “bondage”—being forced to forego the Christian life). But neither at the time the marriage was contracted, nor at the present time, has the Christian been under that kind of bondage (such is the force of the perfect indicative passive in Greek). God never intended or approved the notion that marriage is slavery. Christians are slaves only to God—never to men or mates (Matthew 23:10; Romans 6:22; Ephesians 6:6; Colossians 3:24; Philemon 16; 1 Corinthians 7:15). So, Paul is saying that, though a believer is married to an unbeliever (and continues to be so), the believer is not to compromise his or her discipleship. To do so, to back away from faithful loyalty to Christ, at the insistence of the unbelieving mate, would constitute a form of slavery which was never God’s intention for marriage. To suggest that δεδουλωται (“bondage, enslaved, reduced to servitude”) refers to the marriage bond is to maintain that in some sense and in some cases the marriage bond is to be viewed as a state of slavery. But God does not want us to view our marital unions as slave relationships in which we are “under bondage.” Yes, if our marriage is scriptural, we are “bound” (δεο—1 Corinth­ians 7:27,39; cf. Romans 7:2), but we’re not “enslaved” (1 Corinthians 7:15). So Paul was not commenting on the status of a believer’s marital status (i.e., whether bound or loosed). Rather, he was commenting on the status of a believer’s spiritual responsibilities as a Christian in the context of marital turmoil generated by the non-Christian mate and calculated to derail the Christian’s faithfulness to Christ. Paul was answering the question: “How does being married to a non-Christian affect my status as a Christian if he/she threatens to leave?” He was not answering the question: “How does being married to a non-Christian affect my status as a husband/wife (with the potential for remarriage) when the non-Christian departs?” Jesus already answered that question in Matthew 19:9—divorce and remarriage is permitted only upon the basis of your mate’s sexual unfaithfulness. Paul, too, spoke more directly to this question back in verses 10-11 when he ruled out remarriage.
Summarizing, though God’s marriage law is stringent (for everybody), and though God hates divorce (Malachi 2:16), neverthe­less, there are times when an unbelieving mate will actually force the believer to make a choice between Christ and the unbelieving mate. To choose the mate over Christ—to acquiesce to the non-Christian mate’s demand to compromise one’s faithfulness in any area of obligation to God—would be to subject oneself to, and to transform the marriage into, a state of slavery (i.e., “bondage”). Yet, the believer is not now and never has been in such enslavement. Thus, the believer must let the unbeliever exit the relationship in peace. The believer must “let him depart”—in the sense that the believer must not seek to prevent his departure by compromising his loyalty to Christ. Of course, the Christian would continue to hold out hope that the marriage could be saved. If, however, the non-Christian forms a sexual union with another, the Christian is permitted the right to exercise the injunction of Matthew 19:9 by putting away the non-Christian solely on the grounds of fornication, freeing the innocent Christian to marry an eligible person.
Fifth, one final factor to consider. Verses 17-24 cannot be requiring an individual to remain in whatever marital state he or she is in at the time of conversion. Paul uses the examples of slavery and circumcision to show that, merely because a person becomes a Christian, he is not absolved of his pre-Christian circumstances. If he is a slave prior to baptism, he will continue to be a slave after baptism, and should not think that becoming a Christian gives him the right to shirk his legal status as a slave. Such is why Paul instructed Onesimus to return to his position of servitude (Philemon 12). So, Paul was encouraging the person who becomes a Christian, but whose mate does not become a Christian, to remain in that marriage rather than think that becoming a Christian somehow gives him or her the right to sever the relationship with the non-Christian mate. Being married to a non-Christian mate is not sinful in and of itself (see Miller, 2002). But Paul was not placing his stamp of approval upon relationships, practices, and conditions that were sinful prior to baptism and encouraging Christians to remain in those relationships. Such would contradict what he later tells the Corinthians concerning unequal yokes (2 Corinthians 6:17) and repentance (2 Corinthians 7:8-10). He was referring to relationships and conditions that were not sinful prior to baptism. Christians still have the same obligations to conduct themselves appropriately (i.e., according to God’s laws) within those pre-conversion situations, though they have now become Christians. Such instructions apply to any relationship, practice, or condition that was not sinful (i.e., in violation of Christ’s laws) prior to baptism. But this directive does not apply to any practice or relationship that was sinful prior to baptism (i.e., adultery, homo­sexuality, evil business practices, etc. cf. 1 Corinthians 6:9-11).
May God grant us the humility and determination to conform our lives to His will concerning marriage—no matter how “narrow” it may seem (Matthew 7:14). May the church of our day be spared any further harm that comes from the promotion of false theories and doctrines which are calculated to re-define God’s will as “wide” and “broad” (Matthew 7:13). May we truly seek to please, not men, but God (Galatians 1:10).

REFERENCES

Miller, Dave (2002), “Be Not Unequally Yoked,” Apologetics Press, http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=431&topic=37.


HUMAN TRADITION? by steve finnell


http://steve-finnell.blogspot.com/2017/04/human-tradition-by-steve-finnell-is-man.html

HUMAN TRADITION? by steve finnell


Is man-made tradition equal to Scripture? Can following human tradition save anyone? Does God approve of human tradition that is contrary to the Bible?

Believers in God have always struggled with human traditions.

Isaiah 29:13 The Lord says: "These people come near to me with their mouth and honor with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. Their worship of me is made up only of rules taught by men. (NIV)

Human tradition does not please God

Mark 7:1-9.......7 They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules made by men.' 8 You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men." 9 And he said to them : "You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God  in order to observe your own traditions! (NIV)

God did not inspire man-made creed books, denominational doctrines that are contrary to Scripture, nor any other books that have been inspired by men's opinions.

Matthew 16:5-12.......12 Then they understood that he was not telling them to guard against  the yeast used in bread, but against the teaching of the Pharisees and the Sadducees. (NIV)

The Pharisees and Sadducees had a problem. They loved their human traditions more than God's commandments.

2 Timothy 4:3-4 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine . Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what they want to hear. 4 They will turn away from the truth and turn aside to myths. (NIV)

Myth Defined: Any invented story, idea, or concept.

All doctrine that is contrary to the Bible is a myth. 

Human traditions that men have accepted as truth, but are contrary to the Bible:
1. That mankind living under the new covenant can be saved like the thief on the cross. No water baptism required. The thief did not believe that God raised Jesus from the dead, so no belief in the resurrection of Jesus required.

NOT TRUE

2. God selected a few men to be saved by grace alone and selected all others to burn in hell for all eternity.

NOT TRUE

3. That praying to the Virgin Mary and other dead saints has been approved of by God.

NOT TRUE

4. That water baptism is for a testimony of faith, but not essential for forgiveness of sins.

NOT TRUE

5. That God created theistic evolution.

NOT TRUE

6. That God established different denominations so men could choose the plan of salvation that agrees their own desires. That faith and practice could be written according to the tradition of men.

NOT TRUE

7. That pastors and priests have been given the authority to forgive men of their sins against God.

NOT TRUE

8. That studying Bible commentaries, church creed books, catechisms, denominational statements of faith is the way to find God's absolute truth.

NOT TRUE

9. That all men are guilty of Adam's sin at birth and need to be forgiven of Adam's sin. That the doctrine of original sin is confirmed by Scripture. [Note: Infants are not guilty of sin. Period. They do not break God's commandments.]

NOT TRUE 

-------------------------------------

The Bible and the Bible alone is the antidote for the myths of human traditions. The Bible is the inoculation against false doctrine.

It Shall Accomplish What I Please by B. Johnson


http://www.oldpaths.com/Archive/Johnson/Edna/Elizabeth/1939/accomplish.html


It Shall Accomplish What I Please
 
“For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater: So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it” (Isa 55:10-11).
Our Heavenly Father says that His word is like the snow and rain from heaven which make the earth bud and give seed to the sower and bread to the eater. Like the moisture from the sky, His word will not return to him void, but it will accomplish the purpose for which it has been sent.
The comparison here is between the earth receiving the snow and rain and being nourished, or watered, by it and His word (both Old Testament and New) being sent into the hearts of the people. Sometimes the earth is rocky and hard; likewise the hearts of the people may not be receptive, yet the gospel has a way of softening or watering those stony hearts to make them grow into what God wants them to be.
When we have studied and worked with an individual or a group of people who seem not to understand or respond, we need to remember this passage and know that God’s word will not return to him empty. It will accomplish His will even if it only serves to put Jesus’ enemies under his feet (1 Cor 15:24-26). Our Father is fair and will give these people every possible chance to repent (2 Pe 3:9).
God has ordained that He will accomplish His will through His word. Man’s ways and thoughts are not the same as God’s ways and thoughts (Isa 55:8-9). The only way we can know God’s thoughts is for Him to reveal them to us, for only the Holy Spirit knows the thoughts of God (1 Cor 2:11). God’s prophets and apostles were inspired to write the word of God in the scriptures (2 Tim 3:16-17). They were guided into all truth (Jn 16:13).
We can build with wood, hay and stubble, but the only thing that will endure the test of the fire is gold (1 Cor 2:12-13). God’s word is pure gold, and we must use it to build in the hearts of the people. The Lord commanded Timothy to preach what he heard from the inspired apostle (2 Tim 2:2), and was told to preach God’s word (2 Tim 4:4). He commands us to preach the oracles of God (1 Pe 4:11). If we trust Him, and preach His word, it will not return to Him void.
Beth Johnson
The Scripture quotations in this article are from
The King James Version.
Published in The Old Paths Archive
(http://www.oldpaths.com)

Those last words by Gary Rose



Last night we watched “New Amsterdam”, which is a hospital drama. What struck me about this particular show was its emphasis on a hospital’s care for the terminally ill in their last days. There was one patient in particular, a Chinese math professor, who was looking for the meaning of life. His search ended in seeing the grandness of a snowstorm in counting the snowflakes, which seemed meaningless to me. But, it does raise the question about our last moments on Earth, as does the picture above. The Bible also raises the question but in a different way….


2 Kings 20 ( World English Bible )
[1] In those days was Hezekiah sick to death. Isaiah the prophet the son of Amoz came to him, and said to him, “Thus says Yahweh, ‘Set your house in order; for you shall die, and not live.’” 

  [2]  Then he turned his face to the wall, and prayed to Yahweh, saying,  [3] “Remember now, Yahweh, I beg you, how I have walked before you in truth and with a perfect heart, and have done that which is good in your sight.” Hezekiah wept bitterly.

  [4]  Before Isaiah had gone out into the middle part of the city, Yahweh’s word came to him, saying,  [5] “Turn back, and tell Hezekiah the prince of my people, ‘Thus says Yahweh, the God of David your father, “I have heard your prayer. I have seen your tears. Behold, I will heal you. On the third day, you shall go up to Yahweh’s house. [6] I will add to your days fifteen years. (see also, Isaiah, chapters 38 and 39)


Now, it was a little depressing to see those people who were about to die, but reading Hezekiah’s plea and God’s response made up for it, because the Bible gives us hope. In his “last words” Hezekiah turned to God. Ever wonder what your last words will be? For Christians, they will most likely involve the appreciation of what God has done for them in this life and the certain hope of the blessings in the next!