9/27/19

Does It Really Matter Who Wrote the Pentateuch? by Eric Lyons, M.Min.




Does It Really Matter Who Wrote the Pentateuch?

by Eric Lyons, M.Min.
Since the “period of Enlightenment,” liberal scholars have been extremely critical of those who teach that Moses was the inspired human author of the first five books of the Bible. These critics teach that the Pentateuch was compiled from four original source documents—designated as J, E, D, and P—which supposedly were written at different times by a different author (or authors), and eventually were compiled as the Pentateuch by a redactor (editor) around 200 B.C. This theory, which wears various names (Graf-Wellhausen Theory, Documentary Hypothesis, JEDP Theory, etc.), has becoming increasingly popular through the years. Numerous commentaries, religious journals, and Web sites promote it. And many professors who teach religious courses espouse it. Undoubtedly, it is the champion among topics discussed in classes on a critical introduction to the Bible. In most “scholarly” circles, if one does not hold to the Documentary Hypothesis (or at least some form of it), he is considered fanatical and uneducated. In fact, we at Apologetics Press received an e-mail some time ago inquiring as to why we do not hold to this theory, since “it is accepted by almost all scholarly interpreters.” In his book The Darwin Wars, Andrew Brown mentioned an interview he had with the rabbi Jonathan Sacks, in which Dr. Sacks defended the proposition that Moses wrote or dictated the first five books of the Bible. Brown’s response was: “That is the most shocking thing I have ever heard an intellectual say” (1999, p. 167).
Since the theory that Moses did not write the Pentateuch has become so widely accepted by “intellectuals,” many Christians are “caving in” under pressure and declaring that “it doesn’t really matter who wrote the first five books of the Bible as long as we believe they are inspired.” This certainly is true of other books of the Bible, so why not the first five? We do not consider it a necessity to know whom God inspired to write the book of Job or the epistle of Hebrews. We do not draw lines of fellowship over who wrote 1 and 2 Kings and 1 and 2 Chronicles. Why, then, should the discussion of who penned the first five books of the Bible be any different? The difference is that the Bible is replete with references attributing these books to Moses.
Within the Pentateuch itself, one can read numerous times how Moses wrote the law of God.
“And Moses wrote all the words of the Lord” (Exodus 24:4).
“Then the Lord said to Moses, ‘Write these words…’ ” (Exodus 34:27).
“Now Moses wrote down the starting points of their journeys at the command of the Lord” (Numbers 33:2).
“So Moses wrote this law and delivered it to the priests…” (Deuteronomy 31:9).
Bible writers throughout the Old Testament credited Moses with writing the Pentateuch (also known as the Torah or “the Law”). A plain statement of this commonly held conviction is expressed in Joshua 8:32: “There in the presence of the Israelites, Joshua copied on stones the law of Moses, which he [Moses—EL] had written” (NIV, emp. added). Notice also that 2 Chronicles 34:14 states: “...Hilkiah the priest found the Book of the Law of the Lord given by Moses” (emp. added; cf. Ezra 3:2; 6:18; Nehemiah 13:1; Malachi 4:4). As Josh McDowell noted in his book, More Evidence that Demands a Verdict, these verses “refer to an actual written ‘law of Moses,’ not simply an oral tradition” (1975, pp. 93-94).
The New Testament writers also showed no hesitation in affirming that Moses wrote the Pentateuch. John wrote: “The law was given through Moses” (John 1:17). Luke recorded of the resurrected Jesus: “And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them [His disciples—EL] in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself ” (Luke 24:27). Referring to the Jewish practice of publicly reading the Law, James affirmed Mosaic authorship: “For Moses from generations of old hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath” (Acts 15:21). With this Paul concurred saying, “For Moses writes about the righteousness which is of the law, ‘The man who does those things shall live by them’ ” (Romans 10:5, emp. added; cf. Leviticus 18:5). In 2 Corinthians 3:15 Paul also wrote: “Moses is read.” The phrase “Moses is read” is a clear example of the figure of speech known as metonymy (when authors are put for the works which they have produced). Today, we may ask someone if he has read Homer, Virgil, or Shakespeare, by which we mean to ask if he has read the writings of these men. In the story of the rich man and Lazarus, one can read where Abraham spoke to the rich man concerning his five brothers saying, “They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them” (Luke 16:29). Were Moses and the Old Testament prophets still on Earth in the first century? No. The meaning is that the rich man’s brothers had the writings of Moses and the prophets.
Furthermore both Jesus’ disciples and His enemies recognized and accepted the books of Moses. After Philip was called to follow Jesus, he found his brother Nathanael and said, “We have found Him of whom Moses in the law, and also the prophets, wrote—Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph” (John 1:45, emp. added). Notice also that New Testament Sadducees considered Moses as the author, saying: “Teacher, Moses wrote to us that if a man’s brother dies, and leaves his wife behind, and leaves no children, his brother should take his wife and raise up offspring for his brother” (Mark 12:19, emp. added; cf. Deuteronomy 25:5).
A final reason that one must defend the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch, instead of idly sitting by and claiming that “it doesn’t really matter who wrote it,” is because Jesus Himself claimed “the Law” came from Moses. In Mark 7:10 Jesus quoted from both Exodus 20 and 21, attributing the words to Moses. Later in the gospel of Mark, we read where Jesus asked the Sadducees, “Have you not read in the book of Moses, in the burning bush passage, how God spoke to him, saying, ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?’ ” (12:26, emp. added). But, perhaps the most convincing passage of all is found in John 5:46-47 where Jesus said: “For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me; for he wrote about Me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?” (emp. added; cf. Deuteronomy 18:15-18). The truth is, by claiming that Moses did not write the books of the Pentateuch, one essentially is claiming that Jesus is not God. As M.R. DeHaan explained in his book, Genesis and Evolution:
Prove that Moses did not write the books of the Pentateuch and you prove that Jesus was totally mistaken and not the infallible Son of God he claimed to be. Upon your faith in Moses as the writer of the five books attributed to him rests also your faith in Jesus as the Son of God. You cannot believe in Jesus Christ without believing what Moses wrote. You see, there is much more involved in denying the books of Moses than most people suppose (1982, p. 41).
Indeed, believing that Moses wrote the Torah is very important. It is not a trivial matter that we should discuss frivolously while suggesting that “it really doesn’t matter.” It matters because the deity of Christ and the integrity of the Bible writers are at stake!

REFERENCES

Brown, Andrew (1999), The Darwin Wars (New York: Simon and Schuster).
DeHaan, M.R. (1982), Genesis and Evolution (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan).
McDowell, Josh (1975), More Evidence that Demands a Verdict (San Bernardino, CA: Campus Crusade for Christ).

Does Inspiration Imply Dictation? by Eric Lyons, M.Min.



Does Inspiration Imply Dictation?

by Eric Lyons, M.Min.


Sometimes honest and sincere people apparently believe that God dictated every jot, every tittle, and ever word in the Scriptures, thus making the Bible writers little more than mechanical robots that dutifully copied down the Scriptures—verse by verse, as it were. If God had dictated the Bible, however, the style and vocabulary of each book of the Bible would be the same throughout. Yet, a simple reading of the Scriptures proves that the mechanical dictation viewpoint is incorrect. The fact is, the personality and style of each author are evident in every book of the Bible. Paul’s writings are different from Peter’s, and John’s are different from Luke’s. At times, Bible writers even used different words to teach the same story or to give the same commands.

Take, for example, one of the differences between Mark’s gospel and Luke’s gospel. When writing about how difficult it is for a rich man to enter heaven, Mark said it is “easier for a camel to go through a needle’s eye” (Mark 10:25). Mark uses the Greek word rhaphis (needle), which means a sewing needle. On the other hand, when Luke used the same analogy (Luke 18:25), he employed the Greek word belone, which frequently was used when speaking of a surgeon’s needle. The same principle is taught in both texts, yet different words are used. Luke was a doctor (Colossians 4:14), and so he used the kind of needle with which he was most familiar. Likewise, Mark used the term for a seamstress’s needle, most likely because that was the kind of needle he was most accustomed to seeing. Is this a contradiction? No. Two different personalities are reflected in the words, but the idea is the same. Although the concept may be somewhat difficult to understand, inspiration involves the selection of the exact words, yet allows room for the personality of the individual to be reflected in the writing. And while inspiration extends to every word of Scripture, it does not rule out either human personality or human personal interest. Simply put, when the Bible writers claimed inspiration (cf. 2 Peter 1:20-21 and 2 Timothy 3:16-17), they did not have mechanical dictation in mind.

The correct view is to understand that the Bible’s inspiration is verbal and plenary. This means that the Bible writers penned exactly what God wanted them to write, without errors or mistakes, yet with their own personalities evident in their writings. By “verbal,” we mean that every word in the Bible exists because God permitted it (via the direction of the Holy Spirit). King David clearly recognized the validity of this kind of inspiration when he said: “The Spirit of the Lord spoke by me, and His word was on my tongue” (2 Samuel 23:2, emp. added). By “plenary,” we mean that each and every part of the Bible is inspired, without anything being omitted. (“Plenary” means full).

By employing the verbal and plenary view of inspiration, God ensured that the independent Bible writers penned only that which was correct and consistent with His will.

Does God Tempt People? by Eric Lyons, M.Min.



Does God Tempt People?

by Eric Lyons, M.Min.
In his February 12, 2009 debate with Kyle Butt, Dan Barker alleged that he “knows” the God of the Bible cannot exist because “there are mutually incompatible properties/characteristics of the God that’s in this book [the Bible—EL] that rule out the possibility of His existence.” Seven minutes and 54 seconds into his first speech, Barker cited James 1:13 and Genesis 22:1 as proof that the God of the Bible cannot exist. Since James 1:13 says: “Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man” (KJV), and Genesis 22:1 affirms that “God did tempt Abraham” (KJV) to sacrifice his son, Barker asserted that God is like a married bachelor or a square circle—He cannot logically exist.
If Genesis 22:1 actually taught that God really tempted Abraham to commit evil and sin, then the God of the Bible might be a “square circle,” i.e., a logical contradiction. But, the fact of the matter is, God did not tempt Abraham to commit evil. Barker formulated his argument based upon the King James Version and only one meaning of the Hebrew word (nissâ) found in Genesis 22:1. Although the word can mean “to tempt,” the first two meanings that Brown, Driver, and Briggs give for nissâ in their Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament is “to test, to try” (1993). Likewise, the Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament (1997) defines the word simply “to test” (Jenni and Westermann, 1997, 2:741-742). The Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament agrees that nissâ is best translated, whether in secular or theological contexts, as “testing” (Botterweck, et al., 1998, 9:443-455). For this reason, virtually all major translations in recent times, including the NKJV, NASB, ESV, NIV, and RSV, translate Genesis 22:1 using the term “tested,” not tempted.
When David put on the armor of King Saul prior to battling Goliath, the shepherd realized: “I cannot walk with these, for I have not tested (nissâ) them” (1 Samuel 17:39, emp. added). Obviously, this testing had nothing to do with David “tempting” his armor; he simply had not tested or tried on Saul’s armor previously. God led Israel during 40 years of desert wanderings “to humble...and test” them (Deuteronomy 8:2, emp. added), not to tempt them to sin. Notice also the contrast in Exodus 20:20 between (1) God testing man and (2) trying to cause man to sin. After giving Israel the Ten Commandments, Moses said: “Do not fear; for God has come to test (nissâ) you, and that His fear may be before you, so that you may not sin” (Exodus 20:20, emp. added). If one were to use Barker’s reasoning that nissâ must mean “to tempt,” regardless of the context, then he would have to interpret Exodus 20:20 to mean that God tempted Israel to sin, so that they will not sin.
When a person interprets the Bible, or any other book, without recognizing that words have a variety of meanings and can be used in various senses, a rational interpretation is impossible. Many alleged Bible contradictions, including several of those that Dan Barker mentioned in the Butt/Barker Debate, are easily explained simply by acknowledging that words are used in a variety of ways. Is a word to be taken literally or figuratively? Must the term in one place mean the exact same thing when in another context, or may it have different meanings? If English-speaking Americans can intelligibly converse about running to the store in the 21st century by driving a car, or if we can easily communicate about parking on driveways, and driving on parkways, why do some people have such a difficult time understanding the various ways in which words were used in Bible times? Could it be that some Bible critics like Barker are simply predisposed to interpret Scripture unfairly? The evidence reveals that is exactly what is happening.
Rather then contradicting James 1:13, Genesis 22:1 actually corresponds perfectly with what James wrote near the beginning of his epistle: “My brethren, count it all joy when you fall into various trials, knowing that the testing of your faith produces patience. But let patience have its perfect work, that you may be perfect and complete, lacking nothing” (1:2-4, emp. added). By instructing Abraham to sacrifice his promised son (cf. Hebrews 11:17), God gave Abraham another opportunity to prove his loyalty to Him, while Abraham simultaneously used this trial to continue developing a more complete, mature faith.

REFERENCES

Botterweck, G. Johannes, Helmer Ringgren, and Heinz-Josef Fabry (1998), Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).
Brown, Francis, S.R. Driver, and Charles B. Briggs (1993), A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament (Electronic Database: Biblesoft).
Butt, Kyle and Dan Barker (2009), Does the God of the Bible Exist? (Montgomery, AL: Apologetics Press).
Jenni, Ernst and Claus Westerman (1997), Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson).

Keys Promised to Peter by David Vaughn Elliott



Keys Promised to Peter
by David Vaughn Elliott

He who holds keys controls entry. Is Peter standing at the gates of heaven, deciding who enters? No, that is just sacrilegious joke material. Well then, will Peter be standing at the gates of a future millennium reign of Christ, deciding who enters? I never heard of any premillennialist teaching that. 

What, then, is Jesus telling Peter in Matthew 16:18,19? "I will build My church... I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven." Notice 1) In practically the same breath, with no hint of changing subjects, Jesus speaks of the church and the kingdom, apparently equating them. 2) Peter would use the keys to bind "on earth," thus it was to be done during his lifetime. 

Since Jesus does not fail, His promises amount to prophecy.  Thus this is a prophecy about the kingdom. The prophecy says that Peter will open the way into the kingdom and that he will make binding decrees regarding the kingdom. Even futurist-premillennialists apply this prophecy to Peter's earthly ministry beginning on the day of Pentecost. Thus they inadvertently confess that the church is the kingdom and that the kingdom of God began on the day of Pentecost in the year 30 A.D. 

Since Jesus promised Peter "the keys of the kingdom," it is no coincidence that Peter was the leading spokesman on the day of Pentecost. Keys open doors. Once open, others can enter. Thus, Christ designated Peter to unlock the doors, telling people how they could enter the kingdom: "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit" (Acts 2:38). The doors of the kingdom have been open for 2000 years. Those who listen to the holder of the keys are privileged to enter. 

God speaks to man by Eugene C. Perry



God speaks to man


When God speaks we should be listening. We should by all means be tuned in, on the right wave length, to receive, assimilate and translate into obedient action whatever instruction or admonition God sends our way.
Although I do not claim to be an authority, I will make some observations on this subject. I cannot but have questions when I hear of the variety of strange messages men are claiming that they receive from God. Pilgrimages, mass suicides, polygamous marriages, “holy” wars, etc. have been proclaimed to be responses to divine messages.
We are forced to the conclusion that men often make plans, decide what they want to or think they should do, and then manage to convince themselves and announce that such was revealed to them as God’s will. The same process has, I fear, even been true regarding doctrines that relate to salvation, worship and Christian living.
There is a difference between being open and receptive to God’s communications and looking for and expecting his support for preconceived plans, ideas and concepts. Whatever the manner of communication, it is important that the message not be “wrested” to fit our agendas. When someone tells you that God spoke to them, that they heard his actual words, do you wonder why you never had such an experience?
Through the history of his dealings with humans, God has communicated in a variety of ways. Certainly, “what has been made” speaks to us of “his eternal power and divine nature” (Rom.1:20). He had a conversational relationship with Adam, Enoch and others. He spoke to and through patriarchs (fathers of families), prophets and chosen people. He communicated in visions, dreams and demonstrations. In considering this the writer of Hebrews began the letter, “In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways,” (Heb.1:1). However, these former processes are contrasted with, “but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son,” (v.2a).
Since Jesus is not physically with us today, it appears that he has made provision for us to hear his message from others whom he chose for the purpose rather than in some mystical way, perhaps “better felt than told”. The inspired writer proceeds to point to the “binding” nature of the messages received “by angels” and uses this to warn us of the grave consequences of ignoring “such a great salvation,” (Heb.2:2,3), the message by his Son.
The message of God regarding our great salvation was spoken by Jesus himself, refreshed in the memories of his apostles by the Holy Spirit (Heb.2:3,4) and confirmed for us (its source established) by means of miracles. The New Testament scriptures have long been recognized as the end result of this process, written by those that heard Jesus and saw his great works and later were enabled to do similar works to establish what they spoke and wrote. This body of teaching, “the faith”, is described as “once for all entrusted to the saints” (Jude 3). Hence, it appears that we should not expect any new or different message from modern day theologians, scholars or “prophets”.
There are those who are seriously asking whether God is speaking to churches today through “theological voices” as he did through Paul and the other New Testament writers. Today’s scholars cannot be God’s messengers in the same way that the apostles were. They have not seen or heard Jesus nor has he promised them a Comforter to put his message in their minds.
On the individual, personal level, communication from God via the scriptures may seem too general and to God by prayer, too one-way. Because of this some claim that God actually responds verbally or, perhaps, in some still small voice. Others, having no direct message, feel that they do not experience God in an intimate way. Current literature on “Experiencing God” appears to be an attempt to respond to these feelings.
Some are urging us to practise “listening prayer”. Certainly, we should, while praying, let God know that we are open to his message and really do seek his response whether it is through scripture, circumstances or our brothers and sisters. It is not uncommon to hear, in a prayer, the request that God “guard, guide and direct us”. Yes, we need protection. Yes, we fumble around and are lost without his guidance and direction. God has taken care of much of this through the scriptures and our relationship with one another in his family.
God’s message is provided to and for the seeker. (John 7:17, Matt.7:7,8). Cornelius’ prayer resulted, not in God telling him what to do to be saved, but in his coming to this knowledge through God’s chosen agent (Acts 10). God’s medium today is the New Testament scriptures and not individual direct messages and not some modern day prophet speaking differently then those scriptures, either more or less.
We must tune in, - study with open minds and receptive hearts. Let us, first of all, be willing to receive and submit to the clear and obvious rather than look for less likely messages delivered in some other way.
God speaks to us today through Jesus and those he appointed. Let us tune in, be receptive and humbly obey.

Eugene C. Perry


Published in The Old Paths Archive
(http://www.oldpaths.com)

WOW! by Gary Rose




Look at that expression! Only one word comes to mind – WOW! Since young children are amazed at a great many things, I can’t even hazard a guess as to what might be causing a reaction like this. Apart from your childhood, what could cause you to have an expression like this? Winning the publisher Clearing house sweepstakes, inheriting several million dollars, getting engaged to be married, or the birth of your firstborn child?

As I think about this, I remember The Apostle Paul, on the Damascus road and then suddenly...


Acts 9 ( World English Bible )
Act 9:1, But Saul, still breathing threats and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest,
Act 9:2, and asked for letters from him to the synagogues of Damascus, that if he found any who were of the Way, whether men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem.
Act 9:3, As he traveled, it happened that he got close to Damascus, and suddenly a light from the sky shone around him.
Act 9:4, He fell on the earth, and heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?”
Act 9:5, He said, “Who are you, Lord?” The Lord said, “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.
Act 9:6, But rise up, and enter into the city, and you will be told what you must do.”
Act 9:7, The men who traveled with him stood speechless, hearing the sound, but seeing no one.
Act 9:8, Saul arose from the ground, and when his eyes were opened, he saw no one. They led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus.
Act 9:9, He was without sight for three days, and neither ate nor drank.
Act 9:10, Now there was a certain disciple at Damascus named Ananias. The Lord said to him in a vision, “Ananias!” He said, “Behold, it’s me, Lord.”
Act 9:11, The Lord said to him, “Arise, and go to the street which is called Straight, and inquire in the house of Judah for one named Saul, a man of Tarsus. For behold, he is praying,
Act 9:12, and in a vision he has seen a man named Ananias coming in, and laying his hands on him, that he might receive his sight.”
Act 9:13, But Ananias answered, “Lord, I have heard from many about this man, how much evil he did to your saints at Jerusalem.
Act 9:14, Here he has authority from the chief priests to bind all who call on your name.”
Act 9:15, But the Lord said to him, “Go your way, for he is my chosen vessel to bear my name before the nations and kings, and the children of Israel.
Act 9:16, For I will show him how many things he must suffer for my name’s sake.”
Act 9:17, Ananias departed, and entered into the house. Laying his hands on him, he said, “Brother Saul, the Lord, who appeared to you on the road by which you came, has sent me, that you may receive your sight, and be filled with the Holy Spirit.”
Act 9:18, Immediately something like scales fell from his eyes, and he received his sight. He arose and was baptized.


I think being directly confronted by the post-resurrected Jesus would cause anyone to have an expression like the child in the picture. Paul, especially, for he had persecuted the church (the body of Jesus). This was obviously a life-changing event; and the change was total. From persecutor to chief advocate, Paul’s life was never the same.

Question: Has knowing Jesus changed your life and if you don’t know HIM, what’s preventing you from doing so? Why wait? You too, will say WOW!

9/25/19

"THE THIRD EPISTLE OF JOHN" Imitating The Good (11-12) by Mark Copeland 


"THE THIRD EPISTLE OF JOHN"

Imitating The Good (11-12)

INTRODUCTION

1. After describing "the spirit of Diotrephes" in verses 9-10, John
   encourages his beloved Gaius to be careful about what he imitates:

   "Beloved, do not imitate what is evil, but what is good. He who does
   good is of God, but he who does evil has not seen God. Demetrius has
   a good testimony from all, and from the truth itself. And we also
   bear witness, and you know that our testimony is true." - 3Jn 11-12

2. Following upon the condemnation of Diotrephes, and followed by the
   commendation of Demetrius, it is easy to infer...
   a. That John was warning Gaius not to be like Diotrephes
   b. And encouraging him instead to be like Demetrius

3. But why does John feel the need to exhort Gaius in this way?
   a. Haven't we seen that Gaius was a man whose soul was prosperous?
   b. Haven't we observed that he was walking in the truth?
   c. Haven't we noticed that he was commended for his hospitality?
   -- Wouldn't this make Gaius himself a man worthy of imitation?

4. Yes, and perhaps this should tell us something...
   a. About ourselves as imitators
   b. About the need for everyone to have good role models that we can
      imitate

[In this lesson, "Imitating The Good", I would like for us to reflect
on the idea of being imitators.

Let's begin by observing that...]

I. WE ARE NATURALLY IMITATORS

   A. CHILDREN IMITATE THEIR PARENTS...
      1. Especially in their early years, children seem to delight in
         imitating their parents
      2. They quickly pick up their parent's mannerisms:  the way they
         talk, walk, etc.
      3. It is as though there was some innate reason for them to 
         imitate mom and dad


   B. TEENAGERS IMITATE THEIR PEERS AND POPULAR IDOLS...
      1. As children get older, they may not seek to imitate their 
         parents, but they are still active imitators
      2. For better or worse (usually worse), they seek to emulate
         those in their peer group, or those whom they hold in high 
         regard (athletes, musicians, etc.)
      3. Despite frequent claims to want to "be themselves", you can
         usually tell by their behavior who they have been watching or
         listening to

   C. CHRISTIANS IMITATE THOSE THEY HOLD IN HIGH REGARD...
      1. I have observed that many brethren often reflect the 
         attitudes, dispositions, and conduct of those preachers or
         elders for whom they have much respect
      2. This can be good, but in some cases it is not...
         a. I have known some Christians (including preachers) whose
            behavior greatly disturbed me, wondering how they could 
            justify their conduct
         b. But when I saw their peers, or those brethren whom they 
            held in high regard acting in the same way, I began to 
            understand

[For whatever reasons, then, we seem to be natural born imitators. Once
we are aware of that fact, we are in a position to appreciate John's 
exhortation to Gaius in verse 11.

That leads us to our next point...]

II. WE SHOULD IMITATE ONLY THE GOOD

   A. IN OUR TEXT, JOHN EXPLAINS WHY...
      1. "He who does good is of God"
         a. The one who does good, truly and naturally, bears evidence
            that they have been born of God - cf. 1Jn 5:18
         b. Such was the case of Demetrius, whose life bore testimony
            from all who knew him - 3Jn 12
      2. "He who does evil has not seen God"
         a. The one who consistently engages in evil demonstrates that
            he or she is has not seen God, and is in fact a child of
            the devil! - cf. 1Jn 3:6b,10
         b. The implication seems to be that Diotrephes was 
            demonstrating that he had not seen God
      3. Who is a better role model for us?
         a. One whose life bears witness that they have come to know 
            God, and are led by Him?
         b. Or one whose life demonstrates that despite their claims to
            the contrary they have yet to come to know God?

   B. THERE IS ANOTHER GOOD REASON TO IMITATE ONLY THE GOOD...
      1. We become like those we imitate!
         a. Yes, I know this is redundant
         b. But it needs to be stressed, for some believe they can act 
            like others, dress like others, and yet somehow not be like
            them
      2. Children become like their parents, teenagers like their peers
         and idols, Christians like those they hold in high regard
      3. If we imitate the good, we become good; if we imitate the 
         evil, then it is evil we become!

[So if by nature we must be imitators, then let us be selective in who
we follow.  Fortunately...]

III. WE HAVE MANY GOOD EXAMPLES TO IMITATE

   A. WE CAN IMITATE DEITY...
      1. As Christ encouraged us to do, in showing kindness to our
         enemies - Mt 5:43-48
      2. As Paul instructed the Ephesians to walk in love - Ep 5:1-2
      3. What better example do we have, than that of God and Jesus Christ?
      4. Indeed, some of the very titles we wear imply such imitation:
         a. Children of God
         b. Disciples of Jesus Christ
      5. Do you seek to learn as much about God and Jesus as you do 
         other role models?

   B. WE CAN IMITATE NEW TESTAMENT EXAMPLES...
      1. To the degree they imitate Christ, as Paul wrote to the
         Corinthians - 1Co 11:1
      2. The New Testament is filled with good examples for Christians today...
         a. For married couples, there is the example of Aquila and
            Priscilla - Ro 16:3-5
         b. For those blessed with things of this life, there is the
            example of Philemon and Gaius - Phm 1-7; 3Jn 5-8
         c. For women, there is the example of Dorcas - Ac 9:36,39
         d. For young men there is the example of Timothy - Php 2:19-22
      3. This does not mean to preclude many fine Old Testament 
         examples as well:  Joseph, Daniel, Barzillai the Gileadite (an
         old man who helped David in his affliction - 2Sa 17:27-29;
         19:31-39) and many others
      4. Indeed, the Scriptures are filled with many wonderful examples
         worthy of our emulation!

   C. WE CAN IMITATE MANY OF OUR FELLOW CHRISTIANS TODAY...
      1. As Paul encouraged his fellow Christians to imitate those who
         provided a similar pattern as he - Php 3:17
      2. Yet we should be careful, for not all who profess to be 
         Christians behave as they should - cf. Php 3:18-19
      3. It is important, therefore, that we know the Scriptures well
         enough to know when someone is worthy of our emulation

CONCLUSION

1. Since it appears that we are creatures who will imitate something,
   let us make the choice to imitate the good!
   a. Only then do we have the hope of  being "of God"
   b. Only then can we have a testimony like that of Demetrius, to 
      which all bore witness
   -- The only alternative is to imitate the evil, which prevents us
      from ever "seeing God"
   
2. We close by adding these words of the writer to the Hebrews:

   "And we desire that each one of you show the same diligence to the
   full assurance of hope until the end, that you do not become
   sluggish, but imitate those who through faith and patience inherit
   the promises." - He 6:11-12

Let us therefore look to the example of Gaius and Demetrius, and beware
of the example of Diotrephes!

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2016

eXTReMe Tracker 
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)