Foreknowledge, Predestination, and Election

Posted on June 28, 2013 by Bryan Hodge

In earlier lessons, we defined these words, and individually considered these words from New Testament passages that use these words.  However, for simplicity sake, we did not consider those passages in which more than one of these words appear.

In this lesson, we will consider those passages in which more than one of these words appear.  Since we will not restate all that has been previously said, reviewing the previous three lessons may be helpful.

Romans 8:29-30

“For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to conform to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren” (v. 29).

The word “for” takes one back to the previous verse.  Those “who He foreknew” are “those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose” (v. 28).  God’s purpose is to call man to salvation by the Gospel (2 Thessalonians 2:14).  Those who love God obey Him (John 14:15, 21, 23-24; 1 John 5:2-3).

The word “foreknew” simply means “before knew”.  The term “know” frequently means “to approve of” or “fellowship” (1 John 1:6 cf. 2:4; 1 John 1:7 cf. 2:3; Matthew 7:21-23; 1 Corinthians 8:3).  Roy Deaver commented, “‘Foreknow’ signifies that in His purpose (in His mind) God looked down through the ages and considered those characters (the kind of persons) He would approve” (Deaver, Romans, God’s Plan For Man’s Righteousness, p. 297).

Moreover, whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified (v. 30).

Roy Deaver commented, “God planned to extend the invitation (Matthew 28:19; Mark 16:15)… To those who would accept the invitation, God purposed to grant justification – complete forgiveness of sins… to those… God purposed (in His mind, in Eternity) to grant ultimately the glorification – the glory that shall be revealed” (ibid, p. 299).

He predestined such to conform to the image of His Son.  “The image of His Son” is a reference to the Son’s glorified existence (cf. Romans 8:17:30; 1 John 3:2; Philippians 3:20-21).  Roy Deaver commented, “God foreordained (appointed) that certain ones would ultimately share the glory of His Son.  Which ones?  Those whom He would approve.  All this took place in the mind of God – in His purpose (ibid, p. 299).

Note: J.W. McGarvey understood the word “foreknew” differently, commenting – “Before man was created God foresaw his fall, and designed the gospel for his redemption; this fact is well attested by scripture (Romans 16:25-26; 1 Corinthians 2:7; Ephesians 1:8; 3:9; Colossians 1:25-26).  In those times eternal, man, the gospel, justification, etc., existed only in the purpose of God; and it is of these times and conditions that the apostle speaks, showing how God foreknew that a certain class yet to be born would accept of a salvation yet to be provided through the terms of the gospel yet to be made actual.  As to this class he foreordained, or foredecreed that they should after the resurrection bear the image or likeness of his Son” (Thessalonians, Corinthians, Galatians, Romans, pp. 366-367).

Ephesians 1:4-5, 11

“He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love” (v. 4).

God’s selection is “in Him”.  Such is where He has chosen to locate “every spiritual blessing” (Ephesians 1:3), “redemption” (Ephesians 1:7), “an inheritance” (Ephesians 1:11), “grace” (2 Timothy 2:1), “salvation” (2 Timothy 2:10), and “eternal life” (1 John 5:11).  Man gets into Christ by baptism (Galatians 3:26-29).

This plan is no afterthought.  It is no late coming plan.  It goes back before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:4 cf. Luke 11:50-51; John 17:5, 24).  It is according to His “eternal purpose” (Ephesians 3:11).

The aim is that we should be holy and without blame before Him (Ephesians 1:4 cf. 5:25-27).  Moreover, He wants us to conduct ourselves in love (Ephesians 1:4; 1:15; 3:17; 4:1-2; 4:15-16; 5:2; 5:25; 5:28; 6:23-24).  Note: Remember, it is up to us to make our call and election sure (2 Peter 1:5-7, 10-11).

“having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ, according to the good pleasure of His will” (v. 5).

Even though, man through sin had become “children of wrath” (Ephesians 2:3), God preplanned a way for us to be His sons, through Jesus Christ.  Note: The term translated “adoption” (huiothesia) literally refers to “a standing as son”.  Vine’s commented, “God does not ‘adopt’ believers as children; they are begotten…”  It refers to sonship with all of its privileges (cf. Ephesians 1:11).  T. Pierce Brown has written, “The point I am making is that huiothesia NEVER refers, as far as we can tell, to COMING INTO THE FAMILY… IT ALWAYS refers to the standing or position of a son who has the rights and privileges (of such B.H.)” – (Brown, article Born or Adopted?”).  John exclaimed, “Behold what manner of love the Father has bestowed on us, that we should be called children of God!” (1 John 3:1).

“In He also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of Him, who works all things according to the counsel of His will that we who first trusted in Christ should be to the praise of His glory” (v. 11-12). 

God marked out before that the inheritance  would be in Christ.  In truth, that is where “ever spiritual blessing” is located (Ephesians 1:3).  This is where sonship, and its benefits are (Galatians 3:26-29).

1 Peter 1:2

“Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience and the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ” (v. 2).

God chose them.  Keep in mind that man, according to Peter, has much to do with his election (2 Peter 1:5-7, 10-11).  Marshall Keeble used to say: (1) God voted for you.  He wants to save you.  (2) Satan voted against you.  (3) It is up to you to cast the deciding vote in your election.   While this isn’t exactly how the term is used, it does express a Biblical truth.  Note: They had purified their souls by obeying the truth (1 Peter 1:22).

It seems to me there is a reason that the term “elect” was used in this verse.  They were being called the Israel of God (1 Peter 2:9 cf. Deuteronomy 14:2).  There was a promised land awaiting (2 Peter 1:10-11).

This election was according to the foreknowledge of God.  A form of the same word is translated “foreordained” by many translations in 1 Peter 1:20.  Connect these two passages.  The point is God’s selection was according to His preplanning (1 Peter 1:10-11; 1:18-20).  (1) The Father planned it (1 Peter 1:2 cf. 1:3-5).  (2) The Spirit revealed the plan for our sanctification (1 Peter 1:2 cf. 1:10-12).  (3) Jesus gave His blood for our salvation (1 Peter 1:2 cf. 1:6-9; 1:18-21).

We close with these words – “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His abundant mercy has begotten us again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus from the dead, to an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled and that does not fade away, reserved in heaven for you” (1 Peter 1:3-4).

Posted in calvinism, Textual study, Word Study | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Election

Posted on June 25, 2013 by Bryan Hodge

The word “elect” (chosen) is used, in some form, nearly thirty times, to refer to the saved or God’s saving man (Matthew 20:16; 22:14; 24:22; 24:24; 24:31; Mark 13:20; 13:20; 13:22; 13:27; Luke 18:7; Romans 8:33; 11:5; 11:7; 11:28; Ephesians 1:4; Colossians 3:12; 1 Thessalonians 1:4; 2 Thessalonians 2:13; 2 Timothy 2:10; Titus 1:1; James 2:5; 1 Peter 1:2; 2:9; 5:11; 2 Peter 1:10; 2 John 1:1; 1:13; Revelation 17:14).  At times,  the word is connected with other words addressed in this series: “predestined” (Ephesians 1:4-5, 11); “foreknowledge” (1 Peter 1:2).  However, for simplicity sake, at this time we will consider some of the passages where the word is not joined with the other words (we will look at the passages where they appear together at a later time).

Definition

The most common word is eklego “to pick out” or eklektos “picked out”.

Another word is haireo “to take”.  Only one passage that we will consider is of this original word, and that passage is 2 Thessalonians 2:13.

2 Timothy 2:10

“Therefore I endure all things for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.”

The Calvinist assumes that election was entirely of God, arbitrary and without standards.  However, if this is so, why did Paul endure the things he did “that they also may obtain salvation”?

This passage is saying that Paul endure the things he did, so that man may be saved and receive eternal glory.  The term elect is either being used of: (1) Those who had been forgiven, but had not entered into heaven at this point, and thus needed to remain faithful, or (2) it is being used of those who will ultimately make it to heaven in the end.  Either way, Paul did what he did “that they…  may obtain salvation.”

A choice may be based on standards.  F. Furman Kearley illustrates: “Prospective parents who are in negotiation with an adoption agency for adopting a child often predetermine the characteristics that the child should meet.  Likewise, the adoption agency predetermines the characteristics the parents should meet.  Prospective parents can discuss these matters with the adoption agency and learn what their criteria are, and even work to develop their situation so as to meet those criteria.  Similarly, especially for older children, since good behavior is usually a desirable characteristic the adoption agency attempts to teach the children how to behave in a becoming manner” (Kearley, The Biblical Doctrine of Predestination, Foreordination, and Election, p. 9).  Another illustration: “A young Christian man or woman who is seeking a mate will likely predetermine that their mate should have certain characteristics and meet certain qualifications, especially in the spiritual realm” (ibid, p. 8).  One more illustration: The church at Jerusalem chose seven men to care for the daily distribution to the widows (Acts 6:5).  Yet, this choice was standard based (Acts 6:3).

2 Peter 1:10-11

“Therefore, brethren, be even more diligent to make your call and election sure, for if you do these things you will never stumble; for so an entrance will be supplied to you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.”

This is a key verse in understanding election.  This was written to brethren (v. 10).  They had been cleansed from their old or former sins (v. 9).  Yet, they were instructed to “be diligent” (to exert one’s self, endeavor – Thayer) “to make your call and election sure” (v. 10 cf. v. 5).  They were told “if” (a conditional conjunction) “you do these things,” then you will make it into the everlasting kingdom (v. 10-11).  What things?  Watch the context, “add to your faith virtue, to virtue knowledge, to knowledge self-control, to self-control perseverance, to perseverance godliness, to godliness brotherly kindness, and to brotherly kindness love” (v. 5-7).  God’s election is standard based.  We have something to do with whether we are elected or not.  It is not entirely, and arbitrarily of God.

2 Thessalonians 2:13

“We are bound to give thanks to God always for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God from the beginning chose you for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth.”

Lynn Blair commented, “Paul was thankful for these brethren because they had been chosen to salvation.  How did God choose them?  Through two parts: God’s part (sanctification on the Spirit) and man’s part, or reaction (belief of the truth).  God chose them through their belief of the truth” (Houston College of Bible Lectureship, Calvinism, p. 447).  Remember that sanctification comes through the truth of God`s word(John 17:17).  The Holy Spirit reveals this truth.  it is up to man to receive it (cf. 2 Thessalonians 2:11-12).  Paul rejoiced that God chose to save these Gentiles.  His decision to do so was “from the beginning” (cf. 1 Corinthians 2:7; Ephesians 1:4; 3:5-6, 11).

There is another possibility.  Some manuscripts read “firstfruits” instead of “from the beginning.”  The English Standard Version reads, “God chose you as the firstfruits to be saved…” If this be allowed, Kearley says, “The passage simply means that God chose, in His providence,  that the Thessalonians should be (among) the first to have opportunity to hear the Gospel in that area” (The Biblical Doctrine of Predestination, Foreordination, and Election, p. 11).

Posted in calvinism, Textual study, Word Study | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Predestination

Posted on June 23, 2013 by Bryan Hodge

The word “predestination” (foreordination ASV) appears in some form eight times, in reference to God’s dealings with man (Acts 4:27-28; Romans 8: 29; 8:30-9:23; 1 Corinthians 2:7; Ephesians 1:5; 1:11; 2:10).  At times, the word is connected with other words, which we will also define at some point in this series: “foreknow” (Romans 8:29-30); “chosen” (Ephesians 1:4-5, 11).  However, for simplicity sake, now we will only consider those passages where the word is not joined with these other words.

Definition

The most common wording is proorizo, which literally means “to mark out beforehand.”  Thus, “to predetermine, or decide beforehand.”

The word in Romans 9:23 and Ephesians 2:10 is proetoimazo, which literally means “to prepare beforehand.”

Let us add the word tasso, which  refers to being “decided”, “appointed”, or “ordained”.  This word appears in Acts 13:48.  I did not include it in the list of words associated with God’s dealings with man.  However, we will consider it.

Acts 4:27-28

“Both Herod and Pontius Pilate,  with the Gentiles and the people of Israel, were gathered together to do whatever Your hand and Your purpose determined before to be done.”

Prophecy (Acts 4:25-26 cf. Psalms 2:1-2), marked out before what the people would do with the Christ.  These things were according to God’s determined purpose to save man (Acts 2:23; 4:27-28; 1 Peter 1:18-20; Revelation 13:8).  Wayne Jackson commented, “one must remember this: Jehovah respects human free will.  He never forces men to do wicked things.  When they are so inclined, however, God can manipulate the circumstances and bring about His ultimate will” (Acts, p. 50).

Illustration: Joseph’s brethren sold him into slavery (Genesis 37).  God used this to put Joseph in place to accomplish good (Genesis 50:19-20).  Even so, it is in the case of Christ – God used man’s evil to accomplish salvation.

Illustration: God used Nebuchadnezzar and Babylon to punish Judah (Jeremiah 25:9).  Yet, His use of them did not mean that their conduct was approved(Jeremiah 25:12).  Even so, it is the case with Jesus’ death – God did not approve of the behavior of the people (Acts 2:36-38; 3:14-15, 19), but He did use such for salvation.

Acts 13:48

“Now when the gentiles heard this, they were glad and glorified the word of the Lord.  And as many as had been appointed (NKJV/ordained KJV) to eternal life believed.”

The wording “had been appointed” is not the usual word rendered “predestined.”  The original word can carry the idea of “to dispose… to settle, decide” (The New Analytical Greek Lexicon, p. 402), or “to make disposition, to fix, to turn one’s gaze, to set one’s heart” (The Theological Dictionary of The New Testament, p. 1157).  The same original word appears in Acts 15:2 (determined) and 1 Corinthians 16:15 (devoted).

The context is essential to understanding this passage compare Acts 13:45 with 13:48

     Jews                                                                                                     Gentiles

Filled with envy                                                                                          Glad

Contradicting and  Blaspheming                                                               Glorified God

Judged themselves unworthy                                                                Appointed to  eternal life

Adam Clark commented, “(The world) carries no idea of pre-ordination or pre-destination of any kind.  What does the word mean?  The disposition of readiness of mind of several persons in the congregation, who possessed the reverse of the disposition of those Jews who spoke against those things” (p. 790).

Wayne Jackson commented, “The term ‘ordained’ means to arrange or, to set in order, to determine.  Here the word may be either passive form ‘were ordained,’ or middle form ‘determined themselves’ (Lenski, p. 552).  The context indicates that the latter is the case, because the Gentiles are set in contrast to the Jews who trust from themselves the message of salvation.  Knowling says, ‘there is no countenance here for the absolutum decretum of the Calvinist, since verse 46 had already shown that the Jews had acted through their own choice’ (p. 300)” (Jackson, The Acts of the Apostles, Wayne Jackson, pp. 161-162).

Note: We did not include this passage in our list in paragraph one, because this does not refer to God’s preordaining, but to man’s ordaining himself.

1 Corinthians 2 :7 

“We speak the wisdom of God… which God ordained before the ages for our glory.”

God, long ago, before time itself (Ephesians 3:11; 1 Peter 1:20; Revelation 13:8), marked out a plan for our glory.  Glory refers to that blessed state to come (Phil. 3:20-21 cf. 1 John 3:1-2; Colossians 3:4; 2 Thessalonians 2:14).

This plan of God had been hidden.  It was in time past a mystery (1 Corinthians 2:7; Romans 16:25-26; Ephesians 3:3-6; Colossians 1:24-27).  The term “mystery” refers to God’s plan which could not be understood without revelation, and which in times past was not clearly revealed, but now has been revealed by the apostles and prophets (Romans 16:25-26; Ephesians 3:3-6; Colossians 1:24-27).  The mystery of the ages is no longer a mystery.

Ephesians 2:10

“We are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared before that we should walk in them.”

The words “prepared before” refer to the standard.  Foy Wallace Jr. commented, “prepared for Jews and Gentiles… one course of conduct” (Romans, Galatians, and Ephesians, p. 152).  David Lipscomb commented, “God prepared works in which his children should walk before he created them in Christ Jesus.  He who fails to live that life fails to fulfill the ends for which he was created in Christ Jesus” (Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians, p. 44).

Romans 9:23

“That He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory.”

There are two ways to understand predestination.  F. Furman Kearley explains – “One model for understanding the concept of foreordination, predestination, and election may be called the ‘particularistic’ or ‘individual’ model.  In this model one predetermines… that he will bestow certain blessings upon some and certain curses upon others, regardless of what they do, determined solely upon arbitrary… factors (of which the individual knows nothing).  For example, a teacher might predetermine that all the students who enroll in a class will receive grades on a random basis having nothing to do with their performance in the class.  The teacher designates in his own mind that all who sit in the front row will receive A’s, all who sit in the second row will receive B’s, all who sit in the third and fourth rows C’s, all who sit in the fifth row will receive D’s, and all who sit in the sixth row will receive F’s.  The students, they know nothing of the teacher’s plan… anyone with a sense of fairness would immediately conclude the teacher’s system of grading was unfair.  This model would be still more limited if one envisions the teacher as having a list of students beforehand and simply, on the basis of going down the list, decided in advance what grade he would give each student.

“A second model… would be the ‘general’ model or ‘criteria’ model.  Under this model, which is basically the model all teachers use, one would determine what knowledge and what skills should be expected on the part of students.  It would be predetermined those who achieved this knowledge or these skills to better than 90% would receive an A, while those who develop them to better than 80% would receive a B, etc…  Then, when the students come to class, this teacher would attempt to communicate what the students were expected to know and the skills they were expected to develop, and would assist in growing and developing.  This latter model we recognize as a fair and just one” (Kearley, The Biblical Doctrine of Predestination, Foreordination and Election, pp. 7-9).

Certainly, this last model is the way God deals with man’s salvation.  He is “not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9).  He “desires all to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth” (1 Timothy 2:4).

Note: The destiny of the vessel is determined by the quality of the clay.  Moreover, we have control over the quality (Romans 9 cf. Jeremiah 18:1-11, especially vv 8, 10, 11).  There is no implication of Calvinistic predestination found in this passage.

Posted in calvinism, Textual study, Word Study | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Foreknowledge

Posted on June 19, 2013 by Bryan Hodge

The word “foreknowledge” appears, in some form, in reference to God, four times in the King James Version (Acts 2:23; Romans 8:29; Romans 11:2; 1 Peter 1:2).  At times, this word is joined with other words, which also, we will define in this series “predestined” or “foreordained” (Romans 8:29-30); “elect” or “chosen” (1 Peter 1:2).  However,  for simplicity sake, now we will consider only those passages where the word is not joined with these other words.

DEFINITION

The verbal form, proginosko, literally means “before to know.”

ACTS 2:23

“Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death.”

God knew what man would do.  God foretold these things “by the mouth of all His prophets” (Acts 3:17-18; cf. Isaiah 53).  Jesus foreknew (Matthew 16:21; 20:17-19).  It was not a surprise.

He used this foreknowledge to accomplish His purpose, “It pleased the LORD to bruise Him” (Isaiah 53:10).  It should be understood, that to say God knew man would do this is not to say that God made man to do this; now is it to say that He approved of the personal behavior of the wicked in this.

Illustration:  Joseph’s brethren sold him into slavery (Genesis 37).  God used their evil to accomplish good.  Joseph said, “Do not be afraid, for am I in the place of God?  But as far as you, you meant evil against me; but God meant it for good, in order to bring it about as it is today, to save many people alive” (Genesis 50:19-20).

Illustration: God used Nebuchadnezzar and Babylon to punish Judah (Jeremiah 25:9).  Yet, He did not approve of their behavior (Jeremiah 25:12). His use of them did not mean approval of their actions, or conduct.

Romans 11:1-2

“I say then has God cast away His people?  Certainly not!  For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.  God has not cast away His people whom He foreknew.”

The word “know,” frequently, in scripture, carries the idea “to approve of,” or “fellowship” (1 John 1:6 cf. 2:4; 1 John 1:7 cf. 2:3; Matthew 7:21-23; 1 Corinthians 8:3).  Thus, Roy Deaver commented on this verse saying, “Reference here is to those Jews whom God formerly regarded with favor, those He accepted… those to whom He had a very special relationship” (Deaver, Romans: God’s Plan For Man’s Righteousness, p. 393).  Robert Taylor Jr. commented, “The people He foreknew (recognized or approved) were obedient Israelites” (Taylor, Studies in Romans, p. 192).  Again, he writes, “God had rejected them as a nation for a surety and for good reason (see Matthew 23:34-36 cf. Genesis 15:16; 1 Thessalonians 2:14-16 cf. Genesis 15:16 – B.H.), but national rejections had not as much as a particle to do with whether they, as individual could be saved” (Romans, p. 191).  Paul, himself, was proof that God had not rejected the people of Israel as a whole (Romans 11:1).

1 Peter 1:18-20

“…You were not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or gold, from your aimless conduct received by tradition from your fathers, but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot.  He indeed was foreordained (foreknown ASV) before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you.”

Notice – Though, I did not list this as one of the four passages in the King James version ( see paragraph one) due to the fact that it uses the word “foreordained,” this is the same word, and is so rendered by the American Standard Version.

This verse is much like Acts 2:23.  Christ’s coming was planned before “the foundation of the world.”  His death was no accident.  It was according to the planning of God.

BAD SOLUTIONS

The Calvinist has difficulty understanding that God can foreknow something, without man being preprogrammed and without choice.  Therefore, they deny fee-will to man. However, God is not bound by time as man is (Isaiah 46:10).  Here is an illustration: Think of man standing on a building rooftop in a city.  He is standing at a corner of the building so that he can see two perpendicular streets intersect.  This man sees two cars accelerating to go through the intersection.  he might conclude that there would be an accident.  However, such does not mean that he caused the accident.

Certain non-calvinist have also had a difficulty with God’s foreknowledge and man’s free-will.  T.W. Brents taught that God limited His knowledge in order to not violate man’s free will (Brents, The Gospel Plan of Salvation, chapter 4).  Guy Woods likewise had difficulty with this same point saying, “To project a plan of redemption into a period prior to the fall of man raises immediately and inevitably the question of the free agency of Adam and Eve.  If God had already devised a plan for the redemption of man from a sin which was certain to be committed, how could Adam and Eve have avoided its commission?”  (Woods, Peter, John and Jude p. 47).  Thus, he suggested that the foundation of  the world in 1 Peter 1:20 refers to the Jewish system (p. 48).  However, consider: (1) The terminology seems to refer to creation (cf. Luke 11:50-51; John 17:5 cf. 17:24).  (2) This simply moves the issue to a later time.  Did God’s foreknowledge of what Judas and the Jewish nation would do with Jesus (cf. Revelation 13:8; John 6:71; 13:18-ff; Matthew 26:24 take away their freewill?  Did it take away their responsibility?

Remember: We should not think that God`s foreknowledge removes man’s ability to choose, or man`s ressponsiblity.

Posted in calvinism, God, Textual study, Word Study | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Think on These Things!

Posted on June 12, 2013 by Bryan Hodge

It is so easy to allow one’s mind to dwell upon the wrong things. Someone has offended you, and you meditate on such day and night until you allow a root of bitterness (cf. Hebrews 12:15) to grow within your heart. Such can be spiritually destructive and even spiritually deadly. You watch or listen to the latest news on TV, radio, paper, or internet. You become frustrated, angry, or feel hopeless. The world seems to be “going to hell in a hand basket”. Now, I am not suggesting that one should go through life uninformed of world events, shielding one’s self from the news of the day. However, should the evil of the day consume every thought? Is it worthy of being the central thing upon which our minds dwell?

The Bible says, “Finally, brethren, whatever things are true, whatever things are noble, whatever things are just, whatever things are pure, whatever things are lovely, whatever things are of good report, if there is any virtue and if there is anything praiseworthy—meditate on these things” (Philippians 4:8). Let’s notice …

1. Whatever things are true.

I should be interested in truth. Ultimate truth is found in God’s word. Jesus said to the Father, “You word is truth” (John 17:17). Jesus affirmed, “I am the way, the truth, and the life” (John 14:6). The Psalmist wrote, “The judgments of the LORD are true and righteous together” (Psalm 19:9). I should spend time in meditation, each day, thinking upon the truth of God’s word. Such will give me a bigger picture. Such will allow me to maintain a more optimistic outlook.

I also should spend time thinking about positive things. I should think about people and things which support God’s truth.

Moreover, I should not believe every evil report that I hear. I should test things (1 Thessalonians 5:21). I should not “lay hands on anyone hastily” (1 Timothy 5:22).

2. Whatever things are noble (NKJV).

Other translations read: honest (KJV); honorable (ASV, NASB, ESV). This word is defined: “august, venerable” (Vine’s); “august, venerable, reverend” (Thayer); “honorable, worthy, venerable, holy, above reproach” (B-A-G).

I should fill my mind with what is honorable in the sight of God and in the sight of men. What if all could know what I was thinking? God certainly knows! The Psalmist wrote, “O Lord, You have searched me and known me … You understand my thoughts afar off” (Psalm 139:1-2). It is healthy for me to remind myself that God knows my thoughts. I should say, “Let the words of my mouth and the meditations of my heart be acceptable in Your sight, O LORD, my strength and my redeemer” (Psalm 19:14).

3. Whatever things are just (KJV, ASV, NKJV, ESV).

Other translations: “right” (NASB). This word is defined: “righteous, observing divine and human laws; one who is such as he ought to be” (Thayer); “used of things just, equitable, fair” (Perschbacher).

I should think about what is the just and the right thing to do, not simply what is convenient or momentarily advantageous. I am only going to be able to discern such by spending a great deal of time in the study of God’s word. The Psalmist wrote of God, “All your commandments are righteous” (Psalm 119:172). In fact, “Righteousness and justice is the foundation of (God’s) throne” (Psalm 89:14).

4. Whatever things are pure.

The word is defined: “pure from defilement, not contaminated (from the same root as hagios, ‘holy’) … see chaste” (Vine’s); “pure from carnality, chaste, modest … pure from every fault, immaculate” (Thayer).

The word is sometimes used of sexual purity (e.g., 2 Corinthians 11:2). I should be careful with my thoughts. “Whoever looks at a woman to lust after her (the intention of the look B. H.) has already committed adultery with her in his heart” (Matthew 5:28). Thomas Jefferson commented, “[Jesus] pushed his scrutinies into the heart of man, erected his tribunal in the region of his thoughts, and purified the waters at the fountain head” (David Barton, Original Intent, p. 327). John Quincy Adams declared, “Human legislators can undertake only to prescribe the actions of man. They acknowledge their inability to govern and direct the sentiments of the heart; the very law styles it a rule of civil conduct, not internal principles … It is one of the greatest marks of divine favor … The Legislator gave them rules not only of action but for the government of the heart” (ibid). “Keep your heart with all diligence, for out of it springs the issues of life (Prov. 4:23).

5. Whatever things are lovely.

The word can be literally rendered pros = toward and philes = brotherly love.

I should dwell upon things that lead me toward brotherly love. Harboring ill feelings will not lead me toward loving behavior. “When my love to Christ grows weak, when for deeper faith I seek, Then in thought I go to thee, Garden of Gethsemane… When my love for man grows weak, when for stronger faith I seek, Hill of Calvary I go to thy scenes of fear and woe” (song: When My Love to Christ Grows Weak by J.R. Wrenford).

6. Whatever things are of good report (KJV, ASV, NASB, NKJV).

Other translations: “commendable” (ESV). The literal wording is eu = good and phema = sounding.

I should fill my mind with good thoughts of good people, good things, good ideas and ideals. I should not be the type who loves to hear the bad. I should get excited over good news. John wrote to the elect lady, “I rejoice greatly that I have found some of your children walking in truth” (2 John 4). He wrote to Gaius, “I have no greater joy than to hear that my children walk in the truth” (3 John 4). Some reported to Paul of the good things happening at Thessalonica (1 Thessalonians 1:8-10). I should be more like this.

I should fill my thoughts with things which sound good if repeated. I should dwell upon such things.

7. Whatever is of virtue (KJV, ASV, NKJV),

Other translations: “excellence” (NASB, ESV). The word defined: “whatever procures preeminent estimation of a person or thing, hence, ‘intrinsic eminence, moral goodness, virtue” (Vine’s); “any excellence of a person (in body or mind)’” (Thayer); “manliness (valor)” (Strong’s). Our English word, “virtue”, has to do with strength or power morally or physically.

I should appreciate moral goodness and excellent behavior. I should appreciate and commend moral strength.

8. Whatever is praiseworthy.

I should think upon things which are worthy of praise in God’s sight. Good does exist. I should look for it and meditate upon it. Life could be so much better if I would look for such things.

Posted in christian growth, Dedication, Mental Health, Priorities, stewardship, Temptation, Textual study, Word Study | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Man: Soul and Spirit

Posted on June 10, 2013 by Bryan Hodge

What, if anything, is the difference in these two terms?  Is man composed of two parts (the outward man, i.e., the human body; The inward man, i.e. spirit or soul – these words being used interchangeably)?  Or, is man composed of three parts (the outward man, i.e. the human body; the inward man composed of two distinct parts – the soul and spirit)?

Soul

The Old Testament term is ‘nephesh.’  This is the Hebrew word translated ‘soul’ (one of 28 English words by which the KJV translated this word).  The word has a variety of usages depending upon the context.  It is used of: (1) animal or physical life – see Genesis 1:20 (life); Genesis 1:21, 24 (living creature); Genesis 1:30 (life); Genesis 2:7 (soul); (2) It is sometimes used of persons (Genesis 36:6) even if dead (Leviticus 21:1, 11).  (3) God is said to have a ‘nephesh’ Jeremiah 51:14 (Himself); Amos 6:8 (Himself); Psalm 11:5 (soul); Job 23:13 (soul).  Robert Morey has well observed, “In no way can God’s nephesh be reduced to the principle of physical life, because God does not have a physical body (Death and Afterlife, p. 46).  (4) There are places in scripture where the nephesh is distinguished from the physical life – 2 Samuel 11:11; Isaiah 1:14.  (5) The soul is said to worship God, Deuteronomy 10:12; sorrow, Leviticus 26:16; feel bitterness, 1 Samuel 1:10; experience misery, Judges 10:16.  Also grief, 1 Samuel 2:23; The soul can pant and thirst after God, Psalm 42:1-2).

The New Testament term is ‘psuche.’  (The Septuagint Greek translation also used this word as the equivalent of the Hebrew ‘nephesh’).  This word occurs more than 100 times in the New Testament.  It is rendered by the KJV into six English words.  Most frequently it is translated ‘soul’.  The word ‘psuche,’ like ‘nephesh’, is used in several different ways.  It is used of: (1) physical life (Matthew 2:20; Matthew 6:25; Mark 3:4; Mark 10:45; John 10:11, 15 – all rendered ‘life.’  (2) It is used for people in general (Acts 2:41).  (3) It is used of God (Matthew 12:18; Hebrews 10:38).  Robert Morey has written, “That ‘psuche’ cannot mean physical life when used of God is obvious.  It is used to refer to the seat of emotion, intellect, and will in God” (ibid, p. 55).  (4) It is used of disincarnate souls that worship at God’s throne (Revelation 6:9).  (5)  It is used of the part of man that goes to hades (Acts 2:26-27).  (6) It, at times, is viewed as distinct from the body or physical life (Matthew 10:28; 3 John 2).  (7) It refers to man’s will (Ephesians 6:6 – heart); man’s emotions (Matthew 26:38); and man’s intellect (Acts 14:2 – ‘minds’).  It is closely connected with the heart (Acts 4:32).  (8) It also at times refers to animal life (Revelation 8:9; Revelation 16:3 – rendered ‘life’ and ‘soul’).

Spirit

The Old Testament Hebrew for spirit is ‘rauch.’  Morey writes, “The word ‘ruach’, like ‘nephesh’ has a wide range of meanings.  First, it seems originally to have referred to the wind which was viewed as being invisible and immaterial (Genesis 8:1).  Second, since God is invisible and immaterial, like the wind, He is described as ‘spirit’ (Isaiah 63:16).  Third,  since angels of God are invisible and immaterial, the are called ‘spirits’ (Psalm 104:4, KJV; cf. Hebrews 1:14).  Fourth, since the life principle which animates man and animal is invisible and immaterial, it is also called ‘spirit’ (Genesis 7:22).  In this sense it was viewed as the ‘breath’ of life which departs at death.  Fifth, since man has an invisible and immaterial self or soul which transcends the life principle by its self-consciousness, man’s ‘mind’ or ‘heart’ is called his ‘spirit’ (Psalm 77:6; Proverbs 29:11, KJV).  The invisible side of man which is called ‘spirit’ cannot be reduced to the mere principle of physical life or of the breath of the body because man’s transcendant self is contrasted to those things in such places as Isaiah 42:5.  Also, man’s self-awareness as a cognitive ego obviously transcends the life principle which operates in animals.   At death this transcendent ego or disincarnate mind is called a ‘spirit’ or a ‘ghost’ (Job 4:15).  Sixth, since attitudes and dispositions such as pride, humility, joy, or sorrow are invisible and immaterial, they are described as being someone’s spirit – Proverbs 11:13; 16:18 (ibid, p. 51-53).

The New Testament greek term for ‘spirit’ is ‘pneuma’.  (The Septuagint Greek translation used this work as an equivalent to the Hebrew ‘ruach’).  Morey indicates that this word refers to “First… wind…”  John 3:8.  Second, ‘pneuma’ refers to the life principle which animates the body (Revelation 13:15).  Third, ‘pneuma’ is used to describe the immaterial nature of God and angels (John 4:24; Hebrews 1:14).  Christ defined a ‘spirit’ or ‘ghost’ as an immaterial being (Luke 24:39).  Fourth, ‘pneuma’ refers to the disposition which characterizes a person, such as pride, humility, fear, etc. (1 Peter 3:4).  Fifth, ‘pneuma’ is used to describe the disincarnate spirit or soul of man after death (Matthew 27:50; Luke 24:37, 39; John 19:30; Acts 7:59; Hebrews 12:23; 1 Peter 3:19).  Sixth, man’s transcendent self, or ego, is also called ‘pneuma’ because of its immaterial and invisible nature (1 Corinthians 2:11).  It is described as the center of man’s emotions, intellect and will (Mark 8:12; Mark 2:8; Matthew 26:41).  Since man’s ‘pneuma’ transcends his mere physical life, it is frequently contrasted to his body (Matthew 26:41; Mark 14:38; Luke 24:39; John 3:6; 6:63; 1 Corinthians 5:5; 7:34; 2 Corinthians 7:1; Galatians 5:17; 6:8, 9; James 2:26).  It is man’s ‘pneuma’ which ascends to God at death – Acts 7:59 (ibid, p. 61-62).

Synonymous?

At times the Bible uses the term ‘spirit’ and ‘soul’ interchangeably, (see Isaiah 26:9; Luke 1:46-47) though the terms are not synonymous.  The term ‘spirit’ as to do with the invisible or immaterial.  The term ‘soul’ has to do with life or being.

At times the words are used with distinction one from another (e.g. Hebrews 4:12; 1 Thessalonians 5:23).  Bert Thompson has written, “The word ‘spirit’ sometimes refers to wind or air (Genesis 3:8; John 3:8), the word ‘soul’ does not.  The word ‘spirit’ refers to demons (Mark 5:2; Luke 9:39); the word ‘soul’ does not.  The word ‘soul’ sometimes refers to both the inner and outer man (i.e. the whole person, Exodus 1:5; Ezekiel 18:20; Acts 2:41; Romans 13:1).  The word ‘spirit’  does not.  The word ‘soul’ sometimes refers to a corpse (Numbers 5:2; 6:6; Psalm 16:10; Acts 2:27).  The word ‘spirit’ does not” (Rock Solid Faith: How to Sustain It, p. 187-188).

The context must determine the meaning of the usage of the words.  Bert Thompson illustrates, “…were I to ask you to define the term ‘foil’ without seeing the word in context you could not possibly know what I meant.  I might be referring to: (1) a noun used to define a fencing sword; (2) a noun that indicates a thin, shiny metal used by cooks in kitchens all over the world; or (3) a verb used as a synonym for defeat (ibid, p. 174-175).  Even so, the terms ‘spirit’ and ‘soul’ must be understood from context.

In Hebrews 4:12, the terms are used with distinction one from another.  Just a marrow is within joints or bony matter; Even so, the term ‘spirit’ seems to refer here to the inner man and the term ‘soul’ to the outer man.

In 1 Thessalonians 5:23, again the terms are used with distinction, in some way.  Some think that this teaches that man is a three-fold being – body, spirit and soul.  Others such as Adam Clark have another explanation.  He understood the term ‘body’ to refer to our material bodies; The term ‘soul’, he understood to refer to man’s affections, passions, and emotions; And, the term ‘spirit’ to refer to ‘the immortal spirit’ (vol. 6, p. 555).

Some Things Certain

The Bible clearly indicates that there is an outward man, and there is an inward man (2 Corinthians 4:16-5:1; Romans 7:22; Ephesians 3:16; 1 Peter 3:1-6).  There is an existence ‘in the flesh’ as well as without (Philippians 1:21-24).  One can be conscious outside the body (2 Corinthians 12:2-4).  There is a part of man that survives the body (Matthew 10:28).  The physical body is viewed by Peter as a tent.  Listen to Peter, “Yea, I think it meet, as long as I am in this tabernacle (tent – B.H.) to stir you up by putting you in remembrance (2 Peter 1:13).  Think through this: If Peter was in a tabernacle (tent – ref. to physical body), then the tent must not be Peter.  Something dwells in a tent.  In this context Peter refers to the real substantive self.  There is a conscious existence on the other side (Luke 16:19-31).  Read John 16:17-18.  Even on the other side Christ had the power to take His life again.  Yet, He was in hades.  Thus, hades will be a place of consciousness.  Is it well with your soul?  Where will your spirit go after death?  All of us will be somewhere forever!

Posted in Jehovah Witnesses, Man, Word Study | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Letter vs. Spirit

Posted on June 6, 2013 by Bryan Hodge

In 2 Corinthians 3:6 we read, “Who also hath made us able ministers of the New Testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.” What do these words mean?

The reference in a context concerns a comparison between the Old and New Testaments. The “letter” has nothing to do with the New Testament. The reference is to what Moses set before the people “written and engraven in stones” (2 Corinthians 3:7). The Old Testament had its beginning upon tablets of stone (Exodus 31:18; 32:19; 34:1, 4). The New Testament had its start from the Spirit (Acts 2). The word “letter” is a reference to the coming of the New Testament.

“The letter killeth, but the Spirit giveth life.” Three thousand were killed when the Old Testament came forth (Exodus 32:26-28). Three thousand were saved on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:38-41). The Old Testament is said to kill because it provided condemnation without a means of true justification (Galatians 3:10-ff; Acts 13:39; Hebrews 10:4). Through the New Testament life is again possible (John 3:16; 6:63, 68; 10:10; Hebrews 10:4, 10). Only through the blood shed for the New Testament (Matthew 26:28) may those of Old have a chance of salvation (Hebrews 9:15-16; 11:16; 11:39-40; Romans 3:25; Galatians 4:4).

This chapter is set forth to show how much better the New Testament is. Note this chart:

OLD TESTAMENT

  1. Ministration of death (v. 7), And condemnation (v. 9)
  2. Had glory (v. 9)
  3. Done away (v. 11)
  4. Old (v. 14) cf. Hebrews 8:13

NEW TESTAMENT

  1. Ministration of the Spirit (v. 8), And righteousness (v. 9)
  2. More glorious (v. 9-11)
  3. Remained (v. 11)
  4. New (v. 6) cf. Hebrews 8:13

Similar word occur in Romans 7:6. The passage reads, “But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.” To what does this passage refer?

It seems to me that the reference is the same. The teaching is that we are under a New Testament which was initially received by the Spirit. We are not under the previous Testament which initially came forth to the people by letter upon tablets of stone.

Some believe that a little more is being taught herein. Clearly, the term “letter” refers to the Old Testament. But, some think that the term “spirit” refers to the human spirit (John 4:24; Romans 1:9) revitalized under the New Testament. God always expected more than external obedience (Deuteronomy 6:5; Isaiah 29:13). But, it is the teachings of the New Testament that especially stirs us inwardly (John 13:34; 1 John 3:16; 4:10, 11, 19; 2 Corinthians 5:14a, etc.).

The last passage we’ll mention is also found in the book of Romans. It also uses similar wording. Romans 2:28-29 reads: “For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.”

It seems to me that again the reference is the same. The Jews were to be externally circumcised. Many Jews (though they shouldn’t have) put all their trust in externals. But Paul is saying that it is not that type of circumcision that God demands today. What God demands is an internal circumcision of the heart – a pure heart [God circumcises our hearts from sin at the point of baptism (Colossians 2:11-13)]. Again, the contrast is between the Old Testament and the New Testament.

These passages do not teach: (1) that we should follow our feelings and not the “letter” of the New Testament (John 12:48). The term “letter” refers to the Old Testament. (2) Nor do they teach that we should follow some original intent not written in the scriptures. If the original intent is not written in scriptures how could we possibly know what the original intent was? (3) Listen to Bob Berard’s comments: “’Spirit’ is put in contrast with ‘letter’ only so far as ‘letter’ stands for the Old Testament in part or in whole. Patently false is the notion that ‘spirit’ describes God’s instructions communicated by some means other than the words of the Holy Spirit, the words now completely and finally recorded in God’s book (2 Timothy 3:16-17; 1 Corinthians 13:8-10; 2 Peter 1:3; Jude 3). God’s intentions, the thoughts He has seen fit to reveal to direct men in the current age, are now conveyed by and only by, the words written in the New Testament (1 Corinthians 2:7-13; John 12:48; 2 Timothy 3:16-17; 1 Corinthians 4:6). To conclude otherwise is to deny the all sufficiency of the scriptures and to open the flood gates of subjectivism… that which is called ’spirit’ is put in contrast with the Mosaical law or ’letter’ and is equated with the words of the New Testament” (Editor Dub Mcclish, Studies in 2 Corinthians, p. 97, Denton Lectureship)

Posted in Holy Spirit, Old Testament/New Testament, Phrase Study, Textual study | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Man: Sinful Nature

Posted on June 4, 2013 by Bryan Hodge

 Do we have a sinful inborn nature? The NIV evidently thinks so for it “translates” the term sarx 25 times into English “sinful nature.” The KJV, 148 out of 151 occurrences renders the term “flesh.” The remaining 3 times it is translated “carnal” or “carnally.” The KJV never renders the word “sinful nature;” nor do the ASV, NASB, or the NKJV. The question remains – Do we have a sinful nature? Is there anything within the word sarx which suggests such?

 It is worth pointing out, the NIV does not translate this same word “sinful nature” when it is used in connection with Jesus (John 1:14; 1 Timothy 3:16; Hebrews 5:7; 1 John 4:2; 2 John 7). Why the inconsistency? If the word inherently means “sinful nature” why not so translate it in reference to Jesus?

 Some Key Passages

 Someone says, “What about Romans 8:3? (KJV). The word ‘flesh’ (sarx) is herein preceded by the word ‘sinful’ (hamartias). This is not suggesting that the flesh in and of itself is sinful. It is the equivalent of Philippians 2:7. Goebel Music has written, “It distinctly, intelligibly, and unmistakably is saying that He came as a man. Human flesh is not inherently sinful; if so, Jesus was sinful.” (ADL, Studies in Romans, p. 143). All that is being said is that Jesus took upon Him – the same flesh, that the rest of sinful humanity wore (Heb. 2:17; Heb. 4:15).

 Another might wonder about Matthew 26:40-41? Please note that it does not say that the flesh is sinful by nature. It simply says that the flesh is weak. What is the meaning? The context is that they were having difficulty staying awake due to absolute exhaustion (Luke 22:45). They were weak. It seems to me that Jesus is saying, “I know you men would have stayed awake, if it weren’t for the fact that you are exhausted physically” (cf. 1 Cor. 15:42-44; 2 Cor. 13:4). Others have thought that the reference is to the fact that despite their loyalty and willingness to serve Him, still it is so easy to give in to the fleshly desire of preservation (Matt. 26:33, 56b-57; 27:69-74). Whatever the case, this does not teach that man is sinful by nature. It simply teaches that man is weak.

 Next passage: 1 John 2:16. This passage is not teaching that the flesh is sinful by nature. Rather, it teaches that when Satan tempts us, it is through the lust of the flesh, lust of the eyes, and the pride of life. Roy Deaver writes, “The natural desires of the human body are not inherently sinful. They are God-given. God has provided for their satisfaction. Those desires can be satisfied in a right way, or they can be satisfied in a wrong way (Romans, God’s Plan for Man’s Righteousness, p. 201). Robert Taylor Jr. adds, “Bodily appetites are not wrong per se. But they are to be fulfilled legitimately. We hunger for food, water, air, sexual release, security, etc. There are wrong ways to obtain such; There are right ways to obtain such” (Studies in Romans, p. 114). Desiring food is not wrong, but Satan can use such to tempt us to steal, or violate God’s law in some other way (e.g. Adam and Eve). Sexual desire can be fulfilled properly in marriage or illegitimately in fornication. Man must regulate his appetites by the word of God.

 Next passage: Romans 7:25. Kenneth Jones well wrote, “The last sentence of the verse does not describe a warfare within the Christian between the spirit and the flesh but rather a contrast between two kinds of service. He had been a slave to sin but now has been redeemed to the service of God. In the Christian, the mind dominates the flesh, but in the sinner, the flesh dominates the mind” (Spiritual Sword Lectureship, The book of Romans, page 117-118, quoted in Studies in Romans by Robert Taylor Jr, page 132). Read Galatians 2:20; Colossians 3:1-2; Romans 7:14-15; 8:4-6. We must control our bodies with our minds, by allowing our minds to be changed through the word of God (Rom. 12:2; cf. 1 Thes. 2:13).

 What about Galatians 5:19-ff? This is simply describing what man in the flesh commonly does, when he’s led simply by fleshly desires without consideration for God and His instructions (cf. Gen. 6:5, 12). This is simply telling us how man sometimes behaves and the fact that God is not at all well pleased with such behavior.

 What about Galatians 5:17? This here is simply speaking of one who hasn’t yet mentally, and spiritually gotten control over the flesh (cf. Gal. 5:18, 23; v. 18 is elliptical i.e. “not under the condemnation of the law” – see Romans 8:1). It seems that Galatians 5:17 is much like James 4:4, 8 and is speaking of a double minded person. Galatians 5:16 is a command. We can choose which we follow: after the flesh or the spirit.

 Concluding Remarks

 There are other passages that certainly could be considered. But, I know the following things: (1) There is nothing about the term sarx (flesh) which suggests a sinful nature. Understand that the same term is often used in connection with Jesus (see Rom. 8:3 cf. Heb. 4:15). If sarx means ‘sinful nature,’ then Jesus too had sinful nature, and you know this is not true. (2) Man has a choice upon this earth (Joshua 24:15). Man can respond to God (Acts 2:37-38, 40). If not, again we ask what about Jesus? (3) Man can rise above his environment (Gen. 6:5, 9; 2 Kings 16:1-3, 19-20; 18:1-f). (4) One does not need a direct operation of the Holy Spirit to do what is right (Acts 2:36-38; Acts 8:12-17; Acts 19:1-6). (5) In the end , if I’m lost, it’s nobody’s fault but mine (Isa. 59:1-2; Ezek. 18:20; Col. 1:21). (6) Satan does use the weaknesses and desires, and natural appetites of the flesh to tempt (1 John 2:15-17).

Posted in calvinism, Man, Sin, Word Study | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

The New Covenant

Posted on May 31, 2013 by Bryan Hodge

Let’s define “covenant.”  The Hebrew word has its origin in a verb meaning “‘to cut or divide’ in allusion to a sacrificial custom in connection with covenant making” (Vine’s).  The word is used of (1) Covenants between men – (a) a treaty, alliance, league; (b) constitution, ordinance between monarch and subjects; (c) agreement, pledge; (d) alliance of friendship; (e) alliance of marriage.  (2) Covenants between God  and man – (a) alliance or friendship; (b) divine constitution or ordinance (B-D-B-G).

The Greek word means literally “through a receptacle, repository, chest, box.”  It is used of “a disposition of property  by will or otherwise” (Vine’s).  It is also used of: (1) a disposition, arrangement; (2) a compact, covenant (Thayer).  The word is used by the Septuagint for the Hebrew word.  Another point to understand is that this word frequently refers to unilateral agreements or declarations.  “It is the declaration of one person’s will, not the result of an agreement between two parties” (B-A-G).

Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah” (Jeremiah 31:31).

The writer of Hebrews quoted Jeremiah 31:31-34 (see Hebrews 8:7-13; 10:15-18).  He even said, “In that He says, ‘A new covenant,’ He has made the first obsolete” (Hebrews 8:13).

When did this covenant come?  Jesus connected this covenant with his blood (Matthew 26:28; Luke 22:20).  The Hebrews writer said, “where there is a testament, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.  For a testament is in force after men are dead, since it has no power at all while the testator lives” (Hebrews 9:16-17).  The writer then connected these words with the sacrifice of Jesus (Hebrews 9:23-28).

Some have seen an allusion to a “last will and testament” in Hebrews 9:16-17; However, such is really not in view.  Consider these things: (1) the New Covenant is being compared to Moses’ giving of the Old Covenant.  There was no death of the testator in the covenant, if we mean by this the death of one who made out a “last will and testament.”  However, there was blood shed (cf. Exodus 24:1-8).  (2) The words “men” and “testator” do not appear in the Greek reading of Hebrews 9:16-17.  The word are supplied.  Adam Clark commented, “Where there is a covenant, it is necessary that the death of the appointed (victim) should be exhibited, because covenant is confirmed over dead (victims), since it is not valid while the appointed (victim) is alive” (Vol. 6, pg. 747-748).  The Zondervan Parallel New Testament in Greek and English reads, “For where a covenant death necessity to be offered of the making covenant, for a covenant over dead [is] firm, since never has it strength when lives the making covenant.”  (3) The comparison is this: Moses declared the covenant and then ratified, or instituted it, with blood.  This is exactly what Jesus did.

“… not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt” (Jeremiah 31:32).

The words “the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt” includes that which was engraved upon stones (see 1 Kings 8:9 cf. 8:21).  This covenant would be in some way(s) differ from that covenant.

“But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the LORD: I will put my law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.  No more shall every man teach his neighbor and every man his brother saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ for they all shall know me, from the least of them to the greatest of them says the LORD… I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more” (Jeremiah 31:33-34).

Here are the differences in the covenants…

1)  The Israelites of old became Israelites (G0d’s chosen people) by birth.  One became such without any knowledge of the LORD, or His law.  He had to be taught such things later by others.  Some Israelites did have God’s word in their hearts [(Psalm 37:41; 40:8; 119:11; cf. Deuteronomy 4:9-10; 6:6-7; 11:18-19; 30:14) and even some Gentiles (Romans 2:15)].  However, under this new covenant one must first know (cf. John 6:45).  Today, man is required to be “born again” (John 3:3-5).

2) Sin under the previous covenant was remembered each year on the Day of Atonement (Hebrews 10:1-3 cf. Leviticus 16:11-15).  The sacrifice of Jesus is once and for all (Hebrews 9:25-26).  He remembers our sin no more (Hebrews 10:17-18).

Posted in God`s word, Old Testament/New Testament, Textual study, Word Study | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Jesus: Worthy of Worship?

Posted on May 26, 2013 by Bryan Hodge

Is He worthy of worship?  This is a very important question.  Our decision in this should come from the Biblical evidence.  Let us examine the evidence and draw the conclusion warranted.

First, the Bible teaches that mere men are not worthy of worship.  Good men refuse such.  Peter did.  Acts 10:25-26 reads, “And as Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him, and fell down at his feet,  and worshipped him.  But Peter took him up saying, Stand up, I myself also am a man.”  Barnabas and Paul rejected such.  Acts 14:11-15, reads, “And when the people saw what Paul had done, they lifted up their voices, saying in the speech of Lycaonia, the gods are come down to us in the likeness of men.  And they called Barnabas, Jupiter; and Paul, Mercurius, because he was the chief speaker.  Then the priest of Jupiter… brought oxen and garlands up to the gates, and would have done sacrifice with the people.  Which when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of, they rent their clothes, and ran in among the people crying out, and saying, sirs, why do ye these things?  We also are men of like passion with you, and preach unto you that ye should turn from these vanities unto the living God, which made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are therein.”

Second, the Bible teaches that mere angels should not be worshipped.  Like good men, good angels should refuse such.  John says of his encounter with an angel, “And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, see thou do it not: I am thy fellow servant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy” (Revelation 19:10); and again he said, “And I John saw these things, and heard them.  And when I had heard and seen, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel which shewed me these things.  Then saith he unto me, see thou do it not: for I am thy fellow servant, and of thy brethren the prophets and of them which keep the saying of this book: worship God” (Revelation 22:8-9).

Third, Jesus never refused worship.  Read Matthew 2:2, 11; 8:2; 15:25; 28:16-17; John 9:38).  Other passages could be supplied.  Jesus unlike mere men and angels, never refused worship.  This is significant.  The “Jehovah’s Witnesses” sometimes argue that this word should be rendered “obeisance” and not “worship.”  They use this on people who don’t know any better.  They try to make a distinction between the words “obeisance” and “worship”.  They prey on ignorance.  The fact is this is the usual word for worship.  It is the word used of what only belongs to the Divine (Matthew 4:10).

Fourth, consider the testimony of the scriptures.  Hebrews 1:6b, “let all the angels of God worship him.”  Even the angels are to do this.  John 5:23a, “That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father (emp. mine).  Philippians 2:10, “That at the name of Jesus every knew should bow, of the things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under earth” (cf. Romans 14:11).  This is language of what is due God (Isaiah 45:23).  The act of bowing the knee is an act of worship.  Remember 1 Kings 19:18, where God said, “Yet, I have left me seven thousand in Israel, all the knees which have not bowed unto Baal…” (Emp. mine).

Yes, Jesus is worthy of worship.  Revelation 5:13 reads, “Blessing, and honour, and glory and power, be unto Him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb forever and ever.”  We are to sing unto the “Lord” (Ephesians 5:19), and in context the “Lord” is Jesus (Ephesians 5:20).

The Jehovah Witnesses have been far from consistent on this subject.  In the November 1, 1964 Watchtower (page 671) these words appear, “It is unscriptural for worshippers of the living and true God to render worship to the Son of God, Jesus Christ.”  But years before, in the October 15, 1945 Watchtower (page 313) these words appear, “You must worship and bow down to Jehovah’s chief one – namely Jesus.”

Some have reasoned that since God was not pleased with their worship of the brazen serpent (2 Kings 18:4), and since Jesus is compared to that brazen serpent (John 3:14), we should not worship Jesus.  But, just because two things are compared does not mean that they are alike in every aspect.  Moreover, one needs to re-examine our third and fourth points mentioned earlier in this writing.

Posted in Jehovah Witnesses, Jesus, worship | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment