1/8/18

"THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS" Salvation By Grace Through Faith (2:4-10) by Mark Copeland

                     "THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS"

                Salvation By Grace Through Faith (2:4-10)

INTRODUCTION

1. In the previous lesson we saw our true condition outside of Christ:
   a. Dead in trespasses and sins - Ep 2:1
   b. Walking with world and the devil - Ep 2:2
   c. Fulfilling the desires of the flesh and mind - Ep 2:3
   -- Truly we were "sons of disobedience" and "children of wrath"!

2. At the close of the previous lesson, I asked, "How can such 'sons of 
   disobedience' and 'children of wrath' ever become..."
   a. "Holy and without blame"?
   b. "Receive the adoption as sons"?
   c. "Accepted" by God?

3. In the text for this study (Ep 2:4-10) we find our answer, where we
   learn that "salvation by grace through faith" involves many elements 
   besides just grace and faith

[To begin with, "Salvation By Grace Through Faith"...]

I. INVOLVES THE "GREAT LOVE" OF GOD (4)

   A. THIS IS THE BEGINNING POINT OF SALVATION...
      1. From this, all else flows
      2. What mercy, grace, etc., that God shows mankind is founded upon
         the fact that God has a great love for us - cf. Jn 3:16

   B. THIS LOVE IS NOT BECAUSE OF WHO WE ARE, BUT WHO GOD IS...
      1. God did not love us because we were lovable, but because God is
         loving!
      2. As John wrote in an effort to inspire his brethren to love one 
         another, God is love, and that moved Him to offer His Son  - 
         cf. 1Jn 4:7-10

[Starting then with the love of God, "Salvation By Grace Through Faith"
also...]

II. INVOLVES THE "RICH MERCY" OF GOD (4)

   A. DEFINING MERCY...
      1. The word "eleos" is defined by Vine's Expository Dictionary as 
         "the outward manifestation of pity"
      2. Mercy, then, is compassion that one has for those in trouble

   B. GOD'S "GREAT LOVE" MAKES HIM "RICH IN MERCY"...
      1. His great love for sinners enables God to be filled with 
         compassion toward them
      2. The riches of His mercy seek to reach out to all who will 
         accept it - cf. 1Ti 2:3-4; 2Pe 3:9

[Unfortunately, not all receive His great mercy.  But for those who do, 
they soon learn that "Salvation By Grace Through Faith" also...]

III. INVOLVES BEING "MADE ALIVE TOGETHER" WITH CHRIST (5)

   A. HERE IS WHERE "GRACE" REALLY ENTERS IN...
      1. For notice that Paul says "WHEN we were dead...(God) made us 
         alive"
      2. While STILL "dead in trespasses" God has somehow made us alive 
         together with Christ!
      3. Though not fully explained in this passage how (and when) this 
         happened, it occurred because of God's "unmerited favor" (the 
         definition of "grace")

   B. HOW (AND WHEN) WE WERE "MADE ALIVE TOGETHER WITH CHRIST" IS 
      EXPLAINED ELSEWHERE...
      1. Especially in Col 2:11-13
      2. Where we learn that it is in baptism...
         a. We are buried with Christ and then raised with Him - Col 2:
            12; cf. Ro 6:3-6
         b. We, who were "dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision
            of your flesh", were thus "made alive together with Him 
            (Christ)" - Col 2:13
         c. Our trespasses were all forgiven - Col 2:13; cf. Ac 2:38;
            22:16

[So while our text in Ephesians doesn't actually refer to baptism 
itself, it describes that which occurs when one is baptized into Christ:
by the grace of God we are being "made alive together with Christ"!

But there is more, for as we continue to read our text we learn that 
"Salvation By Grace Through Faith"...]

IV. INVOLVES BEING "RAISED UP TOGETHER" WITH CHRIST (6-7)

   A. WE SAW IN EP 1:20...
      1. Where Christ was raised from the dead
      2. And then was seated at the right hand of God in the heavenly 
         places

   B. NOW WE LEARN FROM EP 2:6-7...
      1. That we too are raised up and made to sit together with Christ
         in the heavenly places!
         a. This speaks of our present condition in the "spiritual 
            realm" (heavenly places)
         b. Because of our union with Christ, we enjoy an exalted 
            position together with Him
         c. Which union serves as the basis for our wonderful spiritual 
            blessings - cf. Ep 1:3
      2. But our present condition, and the blessings it entails, are 
         only the beginning!
         a. There is more "in the ages to come"
         b. There are "exceeding riches of His grace in kindness" yet to 
            be shown in Christ Jesus!

[How wonderful, then, is this salvation by grace!  Not only does it 
pertain to "this age", but looks forward to the "ages to come"!

As we continue, we find Paul making sure we understand the basis of this
wonderful salvation, and that it...]

V. INVOLVES "FAITH", AND NOT MERITORIOUS WORKS (8-9)

   A. SALVATION IS FIRST AND FOREMOST, BY "GRACE"...
      1. Up to this point, Paul has said nothing about man's part in the
         process of salvation
         a. It was GOD'S mercy, love, and grace which made salvation 
            possible
         b. It was GOD's working that "made us alive...raised us up...
            made us sit together with Christ"
      2. Truly, salvation is...
         a. "not of yourselves; it is the gift of God"
            1) Some understand this phrase to refer to "faith"
            2) But I understand Paul to be referring to salvation   
         b. "not of works, lest anyone should boast"
            1) We are not saved by works of merit, whereby we earn 
               salvation
            2) But as Paul told Titus "according to His mercy He saved 
               us..." - Tit 3:5

   B. NEVERTHELESS, SALVATION IS BY GRACE "THROUGH FAITH"...
      1. "Faith", together with the "working of God", is how we were 
         "raised with Christ" in baptism - cf. Col 2:12
      2. In other words, it is an obedient faith that receives the 
         salvation in Christ - cf. He 5:9
      3. So when a person in faith is being baptized...
         a. They are not "earning" their salvation
         b. Rather, they are "receiving" their salvation which is by 
            God's grace and God's working, for in baptism they are 
            receiving Jesus Christ and all He accomplished by His death
            and resurrection! - cf. Ga 3:27

[Finally, we note that while "Salvation By Grace Through Faith" does 
not include meritorious works whereby we try to earn our salvation, 
it...]

VI. INVOLVES BEING "CREATED...FOR GOOD WORKS" (10)

   A. IN CHRIST, WE ARE "HIS WORKMANSHIP"...
      1. As Paul intimated in his discussion of baptism in Col 2:12 ("the
         working of God")
      2. Through God's "working" in which He...
         a. "made us alive"
         b. "raised us up"
         c. "made us sit together in the heavenly places"
         ...we have truly become "a new creation"! - cf. 2Co 5:17

   B. THE GOAL OF THIS "WORKMANSHIP":  CREATED FOR GOOD WORKS...
      1. Though not saved by good works, we are to do good works!
      2. God "prepared beforehand that we should walk in them"
         a. It is part of His predetermined plan
         b. Not just to save, but to create a people diligent in good 
            works! - cf. Tit 2:11-14
      3. Therefore, the people of God should...
         a. "be ready for every good work" - Tit 3:1
         b. "be careful to maintain good works" - Tit 3:8
         c. "learn to maintain good works" - Tit 3:14

CONCLUSION

1. So it is "by grace through faith" that...
   a. "Children of wrath" can become "children of God"!
   b. "Sons of disobedience" can "receive the adoption as sons" of God!
   c. We can be "accepted" by God!

2. Because "Salvation By Grace Through Faith" involves:
   a. God's great love
   b. God's rich mercy
   c. God making us alive together with Christ     
   d. God raising us up together with Christ to sit with Him in the 
      heavenly places
   e. An obedient faith that trusts in God's workmanship, not one's own 
      works
   f. A new creature that is diligent in doing good works to the glory 
      of God

How can one receive this wonderful salvation?  Let Jesus and His 
apostles show you the way, for it is when we in faith submit to the 
Lord's command to be baptized that we enjoy the blessings of God's love,
mercy, and workmanship... - Mk 16:16; Ac 2:38; Col 2:12-13

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2016

eXTReMe Tracker 

Which Spirits are from God? (1 John 4:1-3)? by Kyle Butt, M.Div.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=1203


Which Spirits are from God? (1 John 4:1-3)?

by Kyle Butt, M.Div.


The first three verses of 1 John 4 contain certain elements that, at first glance, can be somewhat confusing. Yet, when taken in their proper context and compared with the rest of the letter, their meaning becomes much clearer. The verses state:
Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God; for many false prophets have gone out into the world. By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. And this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming; and now it is already in the world (NRSV).
As a brief background to these verses, it should be noted that the book of 1 John deals in an in-depth fashion with the Gnostic apostasy that divided the Lord’s Church during the later part of the first century and on into the second century. One of the main tenets of the Gnostic heresy was the idea that anything physical was, by its very nature, evil. Therefore, according to the Gnostics, if Jesus Christ actually came in the flesh, then He must have been tainted by sinful, evil flesh. This group suggested, then, that Jesus Christ never literally came “in the flesh,” but only seemed to come in the flesh.
John’s argument at the beginning of 1 John 4 is an encouragement to Christians to test the teachings and beliefs of everyone who would pretend to be speaking on behalf of God. [John used the word “spirit” to refer to the teachings, beliefs, and actions of people (in this case, true and false teachers). Lenski stated: “ ‘Spirit’ is the person as such with his inner, spiritual character. There is no need to put more into this word” (1966, p. 485).] John then suggested the criterion whereby his readers could know if the teacher was speaking from God or not. John wrote: “Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God.” This particular phrase has caused some confusion in the religious world. Looking at the phrase by itself, it seems that every person who claims that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is “from God,” regardless of any other beliefs or teachings that may conflict with the Bible. Using this verse, it has been argued that God accepts any religious group that acknowledges that Jesus has come in the flesh.
Upon further investigation, however, it can be shown that this phrase was not intended to offer blanket acceptance of all religious people or groups who simply state a belief that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh. In fact, to state that one believes that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is to do no more than the demons did during the earthly ministry of Christ. In Mark 1:21-28, the gospel writer related a story about Jesus casting an unclean spirit out of a man who lived in Capernaum. Upon meeting Jesus, the unclean spirit cried out, “Let us alone! What have we to do with You, Jesus of Nazareth? Did You come to destroy us? I know who You are—the Holy One of God!” (1:24). Obviously, the unclean spirit recognized Jesus as coming in the flesh; yet few, if any, would argue that the unclean spirit’s verbal confession would classify this demon as being pleasing or acceptable to God. Therefore, it is clear that John’s statement does not mean that every person who merely says that Jesus came in the flesh is pleasing to God.
What does John’s statement about confessing Christ mean? When looking at other parts of 1 John, several criteria for a faithful follower of God are enumerated. James Burton Coffman offered a list of at least seven things that John used in the epistle to gauge whether or not a person was faithful and acceptable to God (1979, p. 415). Among other things, John wrote that a person must: (1) confess his or her sins (1:8-10); (2) keep God’s commandments (2:3-4; 5:2); (3) practice righteousness (2:29); (4) love others (3:10); (5) provide for the physical needs of others (4:17); and (6) believe and confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh (4:1-3). As Coffman noted of these criteria:
They are not separate tests, actually, but a composite, each of the above scriptures being, in a sense, commentary on each one of the others…. [T]he unity of the tests is seen in the fact that “keeping his commandments,” “loving one another,” “doing righteousness,” “possessing the Holy Spirit,” etc., all amount to one and the same thing” (1979, pp. 415-416).
It is evident, therefore, that John’s statement about confessing Christ was not meant to be a single test of authenticity, but rather a summary statement that entailed all of the other necessary conditions found throughout the book. Charles Ryrie wrote in regard to 1 John 4:2: “From this verse, we are not to suppose that this was the only test of orthodoxy; but it is a major one, and it was the most necessary one for the errors of John’s day” (1971, p. 1022). R.C.H. Lenski likewise stated: “It would be a serious mistake to think that John speaks of confessing only the one fact or doctrine of the Incarnation…” (1966, p. 488). Thus, mental acceptance and verbal acknowledgment of the fact that Jesus Christ came in flesh will never put a person in a right relationship with God without the proper actions and obedience to God’s commands.
Additional comments are in order concerning John’s reference to the “spirit of the antichrist.” Countless people and groups have attempted to identify the antichrist. Simply type in the word “antichrist” on the Internet, and you will be inundated with suggested personalities such as the Roman Emperor Nero, Adolf Hitler, Saddam Hussein, and the Pope—which are but a few of the candidates put forth. In most cases, “the antichrist” is supposed to be connected with the end of the world, the number 666, and various other “signs of the times.” However, John is the only biblical writer to use the word antichrist(s). He uses it five times in the following verses: 1 John 2:18, 22; 4:3; 2 John 7. In these five brief references, John made several things clear concerning the antichrist. He wrote in 1 John 2:18,22: “Children, it is the last hour! As you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. From this we know that it is the last hour…. Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son.”
First, let it be noted that John specifically mentioned that many antichrists had already come into the world. If his readers were looking for a single, solitary figure distinguished as the sole antichrist, John disabused them of this notion by mentioning that many antichrists had come. Any attempt to identify the antichrist as a solitary political or religious personality misses the pointed statement by John that many antichrists had already come into the world. No doubt, John was specifically referring to those of the Gnostic persuasion.
Second, John unambiguously informed his readers that during their own lifetime (i.e., the first century), these antichrists had already come into the world. All efforts to connect the antichrist with some future, end-time predictions fail to account for the fact that John specifically stated that the many antichrists were already in the world at the time of his writing.
If, according to John, there were many antichrists in the first century, what was John’s definition of an antichrist? John defined an antichrist as any person (or group) who denies the Father and the Son. In 1 John 4:3, he explained, “every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. And this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming; and now it is already in the world.” When analyzed critically, one can see that anyperson or group, which does not recognize that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, has come in the flesh, is a person or group that has been seized by the spirit of antichrist. As abrasive as it may seem, groups such as Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, and even orthodox Jews would all fall under John’s condemnation of denying the Son and the Father.
As John urged his readers almost two thousand years ago, so we must today: “Test the spirits to see whether they are from God; for many false prophets have gone out into the world” (1 John 4:1).

REFERENCES

Coffman, Burton (1979), Commentary on James, 1&2 Peter, 1,2&3 John, and Jude (Abilene, TX: ACU Press).
Lenski, R.C.H. (1966), The Interpretation of the Epistles of St. Peter, St. John, and St. Jude(Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg).
Ryrie, Charles C. (1971), Wycliffe Bible Commentary (Chicago, IL: Moody Press).

1/5/18

"THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS" Our Condition Outside Of Christ (2:1-3) by Mark Copeland

                     "THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS"

                 Our Condition Outside Of Christ (2:1-3)

INTRODUCTION

1. In the last half of chapter one, we saw where Paul mentioned several 
   things for which he had been praying in behalf of the Ephesians:
   a. That they might know God - Ep 1:17
   b. That they might know the hope of His calling - Ep 1:18a
   c. That they might know the glorious riches of His inheritance in the
      saints - Ep 1:18b
   d. That they might know the exceeding greatness of God's power toward
      believers - Ep 1:19

2. In a previous lesson we briefly noted that Paul equated this great 
   power with the working of God that was exercised...
   a. In raising Jesus from the dead and exalting Him to be the head of 
      all things - Ep 1:20-23
   b. In our own conversion, when God took us who were "dead in sin" and
       made us "alive together with Christ" - Ep 2:1-7

3. In order that we might appreciate more fully the grace and power that
   was at work in our conversion, this lesson will focus on the 
   description of our condition BEFORE our conversion
   a. For we will not likely appreciate our PRESENT wealth, unless we 
      fully appreciate our FORMER poverty!
   b. Without a proper appreciation of our PRESENT wealth, we will not 
      likely heed the exhortations found later in this epistle (e.g., 
      Ep 4:1,17; 5:1-2)

[As we consider, then, "Our Condition Outside of Christ", we learn that 
prior to our conversion we were truly "the walking dead"!  For as Paul 
states at first, we were...]

I. DEAD IN TRESPASSES AND SINS (1)

   A. "DEAD" IN WHAT WAY?
      1. Not in the sense of being devoid of ANY good or godly desires
         a. As some who believe in "Total Hereditary Depravity" would 
            teach
         b. For consider that most of those people whose conversions are
            described in Acts were "God-fearing, Bible-believing" people
            BEFORE their conversion!
            1) The thousands of "devout men" in Jerusalem for Pentecost 
               - Ac 2:5
            2) The Ethiopian Eunuch, who had traveled great distances to
               worship God and was reading Isaiah when Philip found him 
               - Ac 8:27-28
            3) Cornelius, a devout God-fearing Gentile who "prayed to 
               God always" - Ac 10:2
            4) Lydia, a prayerful woman "who worshipped God" - Ac 16:
               13-14
            5) The "fair-minded" Bereans - Ac 17:11
            6) Saul of Tarsus (i.e., the apostle Paul) - Ac 22:3; Php 3:
               4-6
      2. Rather, "dead" in the sense of being "separated" from God
         a. Just as "physical death" is a separation of body and spirit 
            - cf. Jm 2:26
         b. So "spiritual death" exists when we are separated from God 
            - cf. Ro 6:23; Is 59:1-2
   
   B. THE CAUSE OF THIS "DEATH"...
      1. Our separation from God has been brought about by "trespasses 
         and sins" - cf. Ro 6:23
         a. "trespasses" (deviations from the straight and narrow path, 
            Hendriksen) - what we might call "sins of COMMISSION"
         b. "sins" (inclinations, thoughts, words, and deeds which "miss
            the mark" of glorifying God, Hendriksen) - including what we
            might call "sins of OMISSION"
      2. "trespasses and sins" that WE committed...
         a. As made clear in verse two of this chapter ("in which you 
            once walked...")
         b. Not those of our forefathers - cf. Ezek 18:20

[Before our conversion to Christ, then, we were "dead" because of our 
OWN sins, and as such, spiritually separated from God, even if we were 
as religiously devout as those described in the book of Acts.  That 
should tell us something about the terribleness of sin!

But the terribleness of sin becomes clearer as we learn what sort of 
"company" we kept before our conversion.  For though "dead", we were...]

II. WALKING WITH THE WORLD AND THE DEVIL (2)

   A. WALKING "ACCORDING TO THE COURSE OF THIS WORLD"...
      1. Before conversion, one walks "in conformity with the customs 
         and manners of the world at large" (Barnes)
      2. The moral condition of those still "in the world" is described 
         more fully in Ep 4:17-19
         a. Alienated from the life of God because of ignorance and 
            hardened hearts, those "in the world"...
            1) Walk in the futility of their mind
            2) Have their understanding darkened
         b. Being past feeling, those "in the world"...
            1) Give themselves over to licentiousness
            2) Work all uncleanness with greediness
         -- Sounds pretty much like our own present generation, doesn't 
            it?
      3. With keeping such "company" before one's conversion, you can 
         understand why they are spiritually "dead" (separated from God) 
         - cf. 1Jn 2:15-17

   B. WALKING "ACCORDING TO THE PRINCE OF THE POWER OF THE AIR"...
      1. Before our conversion, it is not just the "world" we walk 
         according to, but "him" who Paul describes as:
         a. "the prince of the power of the air"
         b. "the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience"
      2. This can be none other than Satan himself!
         a. The great "Adversary" (the word "satan" literally means 
            "adversary") who seeks to "devour" all he can 
             - cf. 1Pe 5:8
         b. Those "in the world" are under his influence, captives to do
            his will - cf. 2Ti 2:26
      3. Those still under his influence are called the "sons of 
         disobedience", because they serve him rather than obey God!

[Influenced by Satan, walking "according to the course of this world", 
we can see why a person before their conversion is truly "dead in 
trespasses and sins"!

But is this also true of those devout, religious souls who are not yet 
"in Christ"?  Like those devout Jews at Pentecost, the Ethiopian Eunuch, 
Lydia, the Bereans, Saul of Tarsus, and God-fearing Gentiles like 
Cornelius?

Yes!  For as Paul says in verse 3, "among whom ALSO WE ALL once
conducted ourselves...".  Yes, even the religiously devout before 
conversion to Christ were...]

III. FULFILLING THE DESIRES OF THE FLESH AND MIND (3)

   A. BEFORE HIS CONVERSION, EVEN A RELIGIOUSLY DEVOUT PERSON LIKE 
      PAUL...
      1. Conducted himself "in the lusts of our flesh"
         a. "Living to gratify the flesh" (Barnes)
         b. As described in Ro 7:14-24, even one who desires to do 
            good, outside of Christ finds himself "enslaved" to the "law
            of sin" in the members of his flesh
      2. Fulfilled "the  desires of the flesh and of the mind"
         a. The "desires of the flesh" are those "unrighteous cravings, 
            such as belong to and are spawned by the flesh" (Hendriksen)
         b. The "desires...of the mind" would include "all kinds of 
            hostile, self-righteous, and/or immoral plans and 
            cogitations, which finally result in wicked deeds"
            (Hendriksen)

   B. THUS, EVEN RELIGIOUSLY DEVOUT PEOPLE BEFORE CONVERSION ARE
      "CHILDREN OF WRATH"...
      1. "just as the others", Paul says, placing himself before 
         conversion on the same level as the "sons of disobedience" 
         described in verse two
      2. All are "children of wrath" (or "sons of disobedience") "by 
         nature"...
         a. Some understand this "nature" to be something one is born 
            with
            1) This passage (Ep 2:1-3) does not actually say "when" we
               began to be "children of wrath"
            2) Only that before we became "children of God" (at our 
               conversion), we were "children of wrath"
         b. The term "nature" can be understood as "a mode of feeling 
            and acting which by long habit has become nature" (Thayer)
            1) In the context of Ep 2:1-3, Paul is not talking about 
               sinful conduct committed by ancestors, the consequence of
               which is felt by their descendants
            2) But sins in which "YOU once walked", "WE all once 
               conducted ourselves", i.e., sins PERSONALLY committed
         c. Therefore, because of our "conduct" before our conversion, 
            we developed a "nature" that resulted in our being:
            1) "sons of disobedience" - 2:2
            2) "children of wrath" - 2:3

CONCLUSION

1. We have seen that "Our Condition Outside Of Christ" is one in which 
   we are...
   a. Dead in trespasses and sins - Ep 2:1
   b. Walking with the world and the devil - Ep 2:2
   c. Fulfilling the desires of the flesh and mind - Ep 2:3
   -- And thus "sons of disobedience", and "children of wrath"!

2. How can such "sons of disobedience" and "children of wrath" ever 
   become...
   a. "holy and without blame"? - Ep 1:4
   b. Receive the "adoption as sons"? - Ep 1:5
   c. And be "accepted" by God? - Ep 1:6

3. The answer will be explained more fully in Ep 2:4-10, where we 
   learn of "Salvation By Grace Through Faith"
   a. We will examine that answer in detail in our next lesson
   b. But for now, compare carefully Ep 2:5 with Col 2:11-13

Have you experienced the working of God's grace in your life, by being 
buried with Christ in baptism where your sins are "cut away" and then 
raised with Christ, thereby "made alive together with Him"...?

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2016

eXTReMe Tracker 

Does Matthew 18:11 Belong in the New Testament? by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=13&article=5404


Does Matthew 18:11 Belong in the New Testament?

by Dave Miller, Ph.D.


Q:

My resources are limited to find a decent enough answer for the passage at Mt. 18:11. I would like to know why or why not it should be in our Bibles.

A:

During the early centuries of Christianity, copies of New Testament books were made by Christians as those books came from the hands of the apostles. Then copies were made of copies, and then copies of copies of copies, and so on. It was inevitable that slight/minor changes would occur in some copies. In later years, New Testament books were copied by monks and even by professional copyists who did so for their living. Those who became very familiar with the synoptic Gospel accounts sometimes unnecessarily attempted to harmonize them with each other in those passages that are parallel, even though the Holy Spirit used different wording in, say Matthew, than He did in Luke, where the same incident is reported. Hence, copyists sometimes introduced words from one Gospel account into another to force them to be uniform in wording. That is clearly what happened with Matthew 18:11. Somewhere along the line, a copyist who was very familiar with Luke introduced the words of Luke 19:10 into the copy of Matthew 18 that he was making. The words are authentic from Luke’s pen, but were not written by Matthew. Many manuscript copies do not contain the verse, but the copies that ultimately influenced the KJV were copies that had the interpolation introduced. Observe that no doctrine of Scripture is placed in jeopardy and no new information is added to the text by such variants in certain copies, and the original text is still preserved in the aggregate of manuscripts. See our article at: http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=13&article=5196&topic=103.

God's Electrical Heavens by Branyon May, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=1269

God's Electrical Heavens

by Branyon May, Ph.D.


According to atmospheric scientists, the Earth has a functioning dynamic global electric circuit. “In the conventional picture, the main components of Earth’s global electric circuit include thunderstorms, the conducting ionosphere, the downward fair-weather currents and the conducting Earth” (Su, et al., p. 974). [The ionosphere is a portion of the upper atmosphere composed of ionized particles formed by the x-ray and ultraviolet irradiative effects of the Sun.] In a greatly simplified picture, the global electric circuit can be viewed as a large spherical capacitor (i.e., a device for the storage of electrical charge). In this model, the ionosphere serves as the upper boundary, and the ground serves as the lower boundary. Between these two boundaries, scientists have measured an existing potential difference of 300,000 volts (Pasko, 2003, 423:927). The electric potential that exists due to this natural capacitor is vital to the global electric circuit. The balance of this potential is vital to the proper functioning of the atmospheric system. Victor Pasko, professor of electrical engineering at Penn State University, commented: “There are many components contributing to the balance of potential between the plates, but two are critical: thunderstorms, of which there are about 2,000 globally at any given time and which act as batteries charging the capacitor; and fair-weather regions, in which the capacitor can discharge continuously through the weakly conducting atmosphere” (p. 927). During fair weather, there is a continual discharge occurring in the global electric circuit. This discharge has been estimated to account for a leakage of approximately one kiloampere, on the global scale.
The traditional view held that the role of thunderstorms was to counteract the continual fair-weather discharge, by acting as a generator driving current into the Earth’s capacitor, both recharging and maintaining the potential difference found between the ionosphere and ground. However, the discovery by Su and his colleagues has introduced another aspect to thunderstorm activity. As Pasko remarked, there is “a new factor in the model of the Earth’s electrical and chemical environment” (p. 927). These “gigantic optical jets” have acted against the commonly held view of thunderstorms as recharging mechanisms; rather, the measurements support the view that they serve to discharge the global capacitor, removing approximately 30 Coulombs each, from the ionosphere. The researchers stated that this would account for only a fraction of one percent of the total charge in the atmosphere, but does “account for a substantial fraction of charges residing in the lower ionosphere” (Su, et al., p. 976). With the new data, Su and his colleagues concluded: “[T]he conventional picture of the global electric circuit needs to be modified to include the contributions of gigantic jets and possibly sprites” (p. 974).
In addition to the electrical environment, Pasko also mentioned that these jets present a new factor in the chemical environment. Oxygen is one of the primary constituents of Earth’s atmosphere, accounting for approximately 21%. Oxygen is considered a diatomic element, meaning that it has an affinity for being paired with itself, as in atmospheric oxygen (O2 ). The explosion of thunder that can be heard is the result of a rapid expansion of air. The expansion of air is caused by the intense heating of atmospheric molecules by the electrical discharge. As it extends, lightning scorches the air, reaching temperatures more than four times hotter than the surface of the Sun—nearly 50,000 degrees Fahrenheit. According to John Roach, writer for National Geographic, lightning produces “enough energy to keep a 100-watt light bulb lit for three months” (2003). Through its electrical nature, lightning also has the capacity to ionize particles. It has been documented that lightning has the capacity of initiating chain reactions, whereby atmospheric oxygen molecules are dissociated, leading to the formation of ozone. This process has been duplicated in the production of industrial ozone for the past century (see van Veldhuizen, 2000). Concerning their chemical effects, Pasko commented: “The ionization created by a gigantic jet is likely to have a significant chemical effect on that volume of atmosphere” (p. 928). He went on to correlate the known surface effects with the high-altitude conditions that would be present in TLEs. He commented that in high altitude situations, streamers would “have the ability to produce highly active chemical species and can effectively ‘treat’ thousands of cubic kilometers of atmosphere” (p. 928). Finally, Pasko concluded: “So the known chemical impact of streamers may be a good indication that TLEs noticeably affect the chemistry of the atmosphere” (p. 929).

EVOLUTION VS. DESIGN

The atmosphere is of vital importance to all life on Earth. It contributes to more aspects of life than we are able to quantify, or that could be qualified. For the evolutionist, the changing, early atmosphere of the Earth accounts for the chance emergence of life and the subsequent organic evolutionary process. However, scientists constantly are being confounded by their observations. Although men have been viewing the natural world since the dawn of time, there continues to be an unending stream of intricacies to discover.
Concerning the atmospheric discoveries mentioned, scientists have declared: “It has not been clear, however, whether all the important components of the global circuit have even been identified” (Su, et al., p. 974). They also have commented: “This field is in its infancy, and it remains to be seen how important the electrical and chemical effects of the gigantic jets and other TLEs are for our planet” (Pasko, p. 929). The design of the Earth’s atmosphere continues to impress humanity’s combined intellectual prowess. When discussing the driving forces behind the formation of lightning, Roach described the particle collisions that are needed to produce a separation of electrical charge, which results in the imbalance between cloud and ground. Senior meteorologist Stephen Hodanish of the National Weather Service concluded that a correction (i.e., lightning) for this imbalance results because, “Mother Nature doesn’t like to see that” (as quoted in Raoch, 2003). By ascribing the ultimate cause to an ethereal Mother Nature, Hodanish unknowingly proved the presence of design. Whether it was his intention or not, Hodanish’s comments illustrate the extent of naturalism that now pervades science, and the extent to which that naturalism has reached even into the common aspects of everyday life. Yet, by the scientists’ own admission, it is known that with the brilliantly obvious effect of lightning, there also is a brilliantly obvious Cause.
In the book of Job, the inspired writer penned the words of Elihu, as he declared God’s majesty: “He spreadeth abroad the cloud of his lightning: and it is turned round about by his guidance” (Job 37:11). And to Job, the questions were asked: “O Job: stand still, and consider the wondrous works of God. Dost thou know how God layeth his charge upon them, and causeth the lightning of his cloud to shine? Dost thou know the balancings of the clouds, the wondrous works of him who is perfect in knowledge?” (Job 37:14-16). Job was chastened for placing honor upon himself, neglecting to acknowledge The Most Honorable. For that, Job was reproved—by God Himself.
“Suffer me a little, and I will show thee; for I have yet somewhat to say on God's behalf ” (Job 36:2). In discussing such wonderful design, we also must pay tribute to the Designer; in standing in awe of such an incredible effect, we also must stand in awe of the far greater Cause. As Elihu boldly proclaimed in the verse above as he rebuked Job for self-righteously questioning God’s majesty, we, too, ask, “on God’s behalf,” that time be taken to behold the extraordinary design that is present in the world around us. We must not ascribe it to some mystic, ethereal force; rather, we must acknowledge the ever-so-loving and familiar Father Who can be clearly seen and perceived (Romans 1:20), and Who is “upholding all things by the word of his power” (Hebrews 1:3).

REFERENCES

Pasko, Victor P. (2003), “Atmospheric Physics: Electric Jets,” Nature, 423:927-929. June 26.
Pickrell, John (2003), “Huge Mystery Flashes Seen In Outer Atmosphere,” National Geographic News, [On-line], URL: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/06/0625_030625_atmospherethunder.html, June 25.
Roach, John (2003), “Key to Lightning Deaths: Location, Location, Location,” National Geographic News, [On-line], URL: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/05/0522_030522_lightning.html, May 22.
Su, Han-Tzong, Rue-Ron Hsu, A.B. Chen, Y.C. Wang, W.S. Hsiao, W.C. Lai, L.C. Lee, M. Sato, and H. Fukunishi (2003), “Gigantic Jets Between a Thundercloud and the Ionosphere,” Nature, 423:974-976. June 26.
Van Veldhuizen, E.M. ed. (2000), Electrical Discharges for Environment Purposes: Fundamentals and Applications (Nova Science: New York).

Which Law Was Abolished? by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=531


Which Law Was Abolished?
by Eric Lyons, M.Min.


A great deal of confusion exists in the religious world concerning what spiritual law man is under today. Some say the old law still is binding—all of it. Others say that most of it has been abolished, but that some of it still is in effect. Many simply pick and choose laws out of both testaments and abide only by those that are appealing to them. Much of the confusion today about the old law and the new law is a result of the false teachings of the Seventh-Day Adventist Church. This intensely evangelistic group teaches that the Ten Commandments still are binding in the present age. Although most Christians readily agree that nine of the Ten Commandments either are stated explicitly or are implied in the New Testament (and thus binding today because they are part of the new law), Seventh-Day Adventists actively teach that the Ten Commandments (including and especially the command to observe the Sabbath day—Exodus 20:8) are part of “God’s unchangeable law” (from the Seventh-Day Adventist’s official Web site—www.adventist.org/beliefs). Whereas certain parts of the Old Testament have been abolished, they insist that God intended for the Ten Commandments to be an eternal covenant that all of His children must follow.
In response to such teachings, some Christians (like myself) quickly cite passages of Scripture that indicate the old law has been taken away. For example, the writer of Hebrews plainly stated that “if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second” (8:7). Then, quoting the prophet Jeremiah, he wrote: “Because finding fault with them, He says: ‘Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah— not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt’ ” (8:8-9; cf. Jeremiah 31:31-34). Elsewhere, the apostle Paul stated that Christ has “wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross” (Colossians 2:14, emp. added). The old law has become “obsolete” (Hebrews 8:13; cf. 7:12; Ephesians 2:14-16). Although we still can learn numerous valuable lessons and principles about how to live godly lives from the old law (cf. Romans 15:4), we are bound by it no longer.
What some like the Seventh-Day Adventists teach, however, is that that God gave two laws on Mt. Sinai. They differentiate between the Ten Commandments and the ceremonial laws, saying that one (the Ten Commandments) is the Law of God and the other (the ceremonial laws) is the Law of Moses. Moreover, they assert that all of the passages in the Bible that refer to the old law being abolished are speaking of the ceremonial laws and not the Ten Commandments, which (they stress) were written with the very finger of God (Exodus 31:18).
Those who separate the “the Law of God” and “the Law of Moses” (in an attempt to find approval for continuing to follow portions of the old law) fail to realize that the Bible does not make such distinctions. Ezra read from “the Book of the Law of Moses,” which also was called “the Book of the Law of God” (Nehemiah 8:1,18). Luke recorded that after Mary gave birth to Jesus “when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were completed, they brought Him to Jerusalem to present Him to the Lord (as it is written in the law of the Lord, ‘Every male who opens the womb shall be called holy to the Lord’), and to offer a sacrifice according to what is said in the law of the Lord, ‘A pair of turtledoves or two young pigeons’ ” (Luke 2:22-24, emp. added). The Law of Moses and the Law of the Lord were the same thing and still are. When writing to the brethren in Rome, the apostle Paul quoted from the Ten Commandments and taught that it was part of the old law to which they had “become dead…through the body of Christ” (Romans 7:4,7). In his second epistle to the Corinthians, Paul wrote:
[C]learly you are an epistle of Christ, ministered by us, written not with ink but by the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of flesh, that is, of the heart…. But if the ministry of death, written and engraved on stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of the glory of his countenance, which glory was passing away, how will the ministry of the Spirit not be more glorious…. For even what was made glorious had no glory in this respect, because of the glory that excels. For if what is passing away was glorious, what remains is much more glorious (3:3-11, emp. added).
What was “passing away”? The law written on the “tablets of stone.” What was the law “engraved on stones” that was given to Moses on Mt. Sinai? The Ten Commandments (Exodus 20). In this passage, Paul teaches the very opposite of what Seventh-Day Adventists teach—the Ten Commandments are not an eternal covenant.
The New Testament explicitly teaches that the old law has been abolished. Whether one is talking about the Ten Commandments or the ceremonial laws, the Law of Moses or the Law of God, all are considered the old law that no longer is in effect. Jesus Christ fulfilled that law and nailed it to the cross forever (Matthew 5:17-18; Colossians 2:13-17).

Did Jesus Condone Law-breaking? by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=10&article=1276

Did Jesus Condone Law-breaking?
by Eric Lyons, M.Min.


The Pharisees certainly did not think that the Son of God was beyond reproach. Following Jesus’ feeding of the four thousand, they came “testing” Him, asking Him to show them a sign from heaven (Matthew 16:1). Later in the gospel of Matthew (19:3ff.), the writer recorded how “the Pharisees also came to Him, testing Him, and saying to Him, ‘Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for just any reason?’ ” It was their aim on this occasion, as on numerous other occasions, to entangle Jesus in His teachings by asking Him a potentially entrapping question—one that, if answered in a way that the Pharisees had anticipated, might bring upon Jesus the wrath of Herod Antipas (cf. Matthew 14:1-12; Mark 6:14-29) and/or some of His fellow Jews (e.g., the school of Hillel, or the school of Shammai). A third time the Pharisees sought to “entangle Him in His talk” (Matthew 22:15) as they asked, “Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?” (22:17). The jealous and hypocritical Pharisees were so relentless in their efforts to destroy the Lord’s influence that on one occasion they even accused Jesus’ disciples of breaking the law as they “went through the grainfields on the Sabbath…were hungry, and began to pluck heads of grain and to eat” (Matthew 12:1ff.). [NOTE: “Their knowledge of so trifling an incident shows how minutely they observed all his deeds” (Coffman, 1984, p. 165). The microscopic scrutiny under which Jesus lived, likely was even more relentless than what some “stars” experience today. In one sense, the Pharisees could be considered the “paparazzi” of Jesus’ day.] Allegedly, what the disciples were doing on this particular Sabbath was considered “work,” which the Law of Moses forbade (Matthew 12:2; cf. Exodus 20:9-10; 34:21).
Jesus responded to the criticism of the Pharisees by giving the truth of the matter, and at the same time revealing the Pharisees’ hypocrisy. As was somewhat customary for Jesus when being tested by His enemies (cf. Matthew 12:11-12; 15:3; 21:24-25; etc.), He responded to the Pharisees’ accusation with two questions. First, He asked: “Have you not read what David did when he was hungry, he and those who were with him: how he entered the house of God and ate the showbread which was not lawful for him to eat, nor for those who were with him, but only for the priests?” (12:3-4). Jesus reminded the Pharisees of an event in the life of David (recorded in 1 Samuel 21:1ff.), where he and others, while fleeing from king Saul, ate of the showbread, which divine law restricted to the priests (Leviticus 24:5-9). Some commentators have unjustifiably concluded that Jesus was implying innocence on the part of David (and that God’s laws are subservient to human needs—cf. Zerr, 1952, 5:41; Dummelow, 1937, p. 666), and thus He was defending His disciples “lawless” actions with the same reasoning. Actually, however, just the opposite is true. Jesus explicitly stated that what David did was wrong (“not lawful”—12:4), and that what His disciples did was right—they were “guiltless” (12:7). Furthermore, as J.W. McGarvey observed: “If Christians may violate law when its observance would involve hardship or suffering, then there is an end to suffering for the name of Christ, and an end even of self-denial” (1875, p. 104). The disciples were not permitted by Jesus to break the law on this occasion (or any other) just because it was convenient (cf. Matthew 5:17-19). The Pharisees simply were wrong in their accusations. The only “law” Jesus’ disciples broke was the Pharisaical interpretation of the law (which seems to have been more sacred to the Pharisees than the law itself). In response to such hyper-legalism, Burton Coffman forcefully stated:
In the Pharisees’ view, the disciples were guilty of threshing wheat! Such pedantry, nit-picking, and magnification of trifles would also have made them guilty of irrigating land, if they had chanced to knock off a few drops of dew while passing through the fields! The Pharisees were out to “get” Jesus; and any charge was better than none (1984, p. 165, emp. added).
Jesus used the instruction of 1 Samuel 21 to get the Pharisees to recognize their insincerity, and to justify His disciples. David, a man about whom the Jews ever boasted, blatantly violated God’s law by eating the showbread, and yet the Pharisees justified him. On the other hand, Jesus’ disciples merely plucked some grain on the Sabbath while walking through a field, an act that the law did not forbid, and yet the Pharisees condemned them. Had the Pharisees not approved of David’s conduct, they could have responded by saying, “You judge yourself. You’re all sinners.” Their reaction to Jesus’ question, however, was that of hypocrites who had been exposed—silence.
Jesus then asked a second question, saying, “Have you not read in the law that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath, and are blameless?” (Matthew 12:5). Here, Jesus wanted the Pharisees to acknowledge that even the law itself condoned some work on the Sabbath day. Although the Pharisees acted as if all work was banned on this day, it was actually the busiest day of the week for priests.
They baked and changed the showbread; they performed sabbatical sacrifices (Num. xxviii. 9), and two lambs were killed on the sabbath in addition to the daily sacrifice. This involved the killing, skinning, and cleaning of the animals, and the building of the fire to consume the sacrifice. They also trimmed the gold lamps, burned incense, and performed various other duties (McGarvey, n.d., pp. 211-212).
One of those “other duties” would have been to circumcise young baby boys when the child’s eighth day fell on a Sabbath. The purpose of Jesus citing these “profane” priestly works was to prove that the Sabbath prohibition was not unconditional. [NOTE: Jesus used the term “profane,” not because there was a real desecration of the temple by the priests as they worked, but “to express what was true according to the mistaken notions of the Pharisees as to manual works performed on the Sabbath” (Bullinger, 1898, p. 676).] The truth is, the Sabbath law “did not forbid work absolutely, but labor for worldly gain. Activity in the work of God was both allowed and commanded” (McGarvey, n.d., p. 212). Coffman thus concluded: “Just as the priests served the temple on the Sabbath day and were guiltless, his [Jesus’—EL] disciples might also serve Christ, the Greater Temple, without incurring guilt” (p. 167). Just as the priests who served God in the temple on the Sabbath were totally within the law, so likewise were Jesus’ disciples as they served the “Lord of the Sabbath” (Matthew 12:8), Whose holiness was greater than that of the temple (12:6).

REFERENCES

Bullinger, E.W. (1898), Figures of Speech Used in the Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1968 reprint).
Coffman, Burton (1984), Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Abilene, TX: ACU Press).
Dummelow, J.R. (1937), One Volume Commentary (New York: MacMillan).
McGarvey, J.W. (n.d.), The Fourfold Gospel (Cincinnati, OH: Standard).
McGarvey, J.W. (1875), Commentary on Matthew and Mark (Delight AR: Gospel Light).
Zerr, E.M. (1952), Bible Commentary (Raytown, MO: Reprint Publications).