Interpretation | A People for His Name

Archives For Interpretation

Christian Blogging Principles from Psalm 45:1

May 24, 2013

Obviously, blogging did not exist when Psalm 45 was written. Nevertheless, the Psalm opens with a statement that suggests some key blogging principles for Christians:

^KJVPsa 45:1 <To the chief Musician upon Shoshannim, for the sons of Korah, Maschil, A Song of loves.> My heart is inditing a good matter: I speak of the things which I have made touching the king: my tongue is the pen of a ready writer.

^NKJPsa 45:1 To the Chief Musician. Set to “The Lillies.” A Contemplation of the sons of Korah. A Song of Love. My heart is overflowing with a good theme; I recite my composition concerning the King; My tongue is the pen of a ready writer.

^NAUPsa 45:1 For the choir director; according to the Shoshannim. A Maskil of the sons of Korah. A Song of Love. My heart overflows with a good theme; I address my verses to the King; My tongue is the pen of a ready writer.

1. A Heart Overflowing with a Good Matter – “My heart is inditing a good matter:” (Ps. 45:1a)

A Christian blogger, like all Christians, must serve God with all his might (Eccl. 9:10). With his heart filled and overflowing by the work of God’s Spirit (Eph. 5:18), he writes about whatever good subject God burdens his heart.

2. A Message about the King – “I speak of the things which I have made touching the king:” (Ps. 45:1b)

A Spirit-filled blogger writes everything with his King in view and when his subject legitimately permits, he writes about his King. Such blogging, however, does not artificially insert content about the King where it is not fitting. Just as not all Scripture is explicitly about the King, neither does the Spirit-filled blogger write every blog explicitly about the King. In fact, he need not even mention the King directly, but whatever he writes will seek to make his readers disciples of the King (Matt. 28:19).

3. A Message Skillfully Written by a Prepared Writer – “my tongue is the pen of a ready writer” (Ps. 45:1c)

A Spirit-filled blogger writes with whatever skill God has given him and does so with the eagerness and willingness of one who has been called and discipled by God to write for the sake of the kingdom. Having acquired skill through diligence and experience, he diligently researches his subject and ponders carefully what he says (Eccl. 12:9).

He sets in order his blog post so that it skillfully communicates words of truth and uses words that communicate his delight in his subject (Eccl. 12:9-10). Through such writing, he teaches God’s people knowledge (Eccl. 12:9) and goads them to serve their King (Eccl. 12:11).

Christian Blogging to the Glory of God

Through posts written by Spirit-filled bloggers who manifest these principles in their writing, God desires to advance His kingdom and righteousness (cf. Matt. 6:33). May God grace all of us who blog to honor and glorify Him in these ways with what we write (1 Cor. 10:31).

In Discipleship, Exposition, Theology

What the Sufficiency of Scripture Does Not Mean Concerning the CCM Debate

May 20, 2013

Second Timothy 3:15-17 definitively asserts the sufficiency of Scripture. Applying that teaching to the CCM debate, some argue that there must be a direct reference to things such as specific music styles in order for us to speak definitively about the propriety of their use in Christian worship.

Several passages show us that this is a mistaken approach to the CCM debate:

1. Psalm 19 teaches us that God is continuously infallibly communicating moral truth to all people without the use of any words and regardless of whether they ever hear any Scripture or not. Especially in connection with other teaching in the Psalms, God’s doing this has important implications for the CCM debate (see Natural Revelation, Music Related to God’s Providence, . . .).

2. Titus 1 unequivocally supports believers’ using statements by expert secular authorities to confirm their own biblically based assessments of moral issues in the lives of people (see Titus 1 and the CCM Debate). On the authority of Titus 1 (and other Scripture), believers are justified in arguing against the use of CCM by citing secular authorities who confirm their own negative assessments of it.

3. Mark 6 and Matthew 14 show us that Scripture can communicate authoritatively that an activity can be sensual by only mentioning the activity itself in a given context and without having to give any details about the activity. This observation validates the understanding that certain Scriptural statements about music need not be explicit or detailed in order to teach us that music can be sensual (see Will the Sensuality of CCM in Your Church . . .).

4. First Corinthians 11 is another passage that helps us to know what the sufficiency of Scripture does not mean for the CCM debate. Although its teaching and relevance are related to those of Psalm 19, this passage has unique aspects that warrant treating it separately.

Even “Nature” Taught the Corinthians That Something Was Shameful

Paul wrote to believers in Corinth to instruct them concerning the use of head coverings while they were praying or prophesying (1 Cor. 11:1-16). To support his argumentation for his teaching about that practice, he cited the teaching that even “nature” provided them:

1Co 11:13 Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?

¹⁴ Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?

¹⁵ But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.

Although there are many debates about various aspects of this passage, it is indisputable that Paul held that a source other than Scripture was teaching the Corinthians infallibly that something was shameful. Paul thus believed and taught that Scripture was not the only source of authoritative information that informed believers about the moral nature of certain things.

The Specificity of Nature’s Moral Teaching to the Corinthians is Noteworthy

Paul declared that “nature” was teaching the Corinthians that if a man was having long hair, it was a shame to him (1 Cor. 11:14). A non-biblical source of information, therefore, was teaching them authoritatively about the moral character of a specific aspect of the hair of a man.

Moreover, we must note that because God made humans to have hair on their heads, hair itself is not amoral—it is morally good. Yet, a non-biblical authority was instructing the Corinthians that long hair was a shame to a man.

Does “Nature” Teach Us about the Moral Value of Music?

Before we can answer the question of whether “nature” teaches us anything about the moral value of music, we should consider at least briefly what “nature” means in this passage. Some hold that it means what is observable in the natural world that God created. Some believe that it refers to intrinsic moral perspectives that God has put within humans. Some seem to equate “nature” in this passage with culture.

Views that combine these ideas in various ways probably also exist. Regardless of what the word “nature” means here, it is clear that Paul was teaching that something other than Scripture was teaching the Corinthians that something would be shameful concerning something that in and of itself was actually moral.

For an example of how “nature” teaches us about the moral value of music, listen to the following audio with your eyes closed and try to detect impartially whether what is sung is sensual music or not: Nature’s Teaching About Music. Were you not able to know that this music was sensual in spite of there not being any sensual words sung by the singer?

As this example plainly shows, a believer does not need to have Scriptural teaching about what makes music sensual in order to know that this song was sensual. The sufficiency of Scripture does not mean that Scripture must provide an explanation of what comprises music that is sensual.

In CCM, Interpretation, Music, Theology

Beware of Calling Other Believers “Pharisees”!

May 18, 2013

Calling other believers “Pharisees” is a very serious matter. An examination of Jesus’ dealings with the Pharisees shows why you should beware of doing so.

Jesus’ Rebuke of the Pharisees

Mark 7:1-13 records an incident when Jesus sternly rebuked the Pharisees. The incident began with the Pharisees asking Jesus why His disciples did not follow certain traditions:

Mar 7:1 Then came together unto him the Pharisees, and certain of the scribes, which came from Jerusalem.

² And when they saw some of his disciples eat bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen, hands, they found fault.

³ For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders.

⁴ And when they come from the market, except they wash, they eat not. And many other things there be, which they have received to hold, as the washing of cups, and pots, brasen vessels, and of tables.

⁵ Then the Pharisees and scribes asked him, Why walk not thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashen hands?

Jesus responded initially by using Isaiah 29:13 to rebuke them for their hypocrisy:

Mar 7:6 He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.

⁷ Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

He continued His stern dealings with them by charging them with neglecting God’s commandments in order to follow human tradition (Mark 7:8). He then rebuked them further for their invalidating God’s Word through their tradition (Mark 7:9-13).

A Closer Look at Jesus’ Response

Jesus did rebuke the Pharisees for following certain human traditions instead of keeping the word of God (Mark 7:7), but He did so based on His knowing that their hearts were far from God (Mark 7:6b). He had the supernatural ability to know their hearts, and thereby exposed them as hypocritical and vain worshipers of God.

He thus made known that they were not holding to these human traditions because they thought that they would help them honor God; they knew in their hearts that they were dishonoring God with what they were doing. Moreover, Jesus later explained to His disciples the solemn truth about the true condition of these Pharisees:

Mat 15:12 Then came his disciples, and said unto him, Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying?

¹³ But he answered and said, Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up.

¹⁴ Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.

Jesus revealed that these Pharisees were not planted by His Father—despite their religiosity, they were unbelievers.

Only Someone Who Can Know the Heart Can Legitimately Call Another Believer a “Pharisee”

When Jesus rebuked the Pharisees for their following human traditions instead of God’s Word, He did so knowing that their hearts were far from God. He had the supernatural ability to know the true condition of their hearts and thereby excoriated them for being hypocritical unbelievers.

Because no believer has the ability to know the heart of another believer the way Jesus did, it is unrighteous for him to call another believer “Pharisee.” Before you call another believer a “Pharisee,” you should think carefully about your inability to know the heart of that person.

Beware of calling other believers “Pharisees”!

In Discipleship, Exposition, Theology

Are Churches Supposed to Be Judgment-Free Zones?

May 4, 2013

In the American political scene today, many believe in the merits of various places being gun-free zones. Many others, however, hold opposing views.

Although sorting out the truth about that disputed topic is important, of far greater importance is the belief by many in the American religious scene today that churches should be virtually judgment-free zones. Is this view valid?

Key passages help us to answer this question definitively:

1. Believers in Churches Must Judge Themselves When Taking the Lord’s Supper

1Co 11:27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.

²⁸ But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.

²⁹ For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.

³⁰ For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.

³¹ For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.

³² But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world.

Every believer must partake regularly of the Lord’s Supper. When doing so, he must judge himself thoroughly by repenting of, confessing, and forsaking his sins. If he fails to do so and yet takes the Lord’s Supper, God will judge him to chasten him until he repents.

2. Believers Are to Judge Themselves So That They Do Not Cause Others to Stumble

Rom 14:12 So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.

¹³ Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother’s way.

Every believer is going to answer to Jesus Christ one day (Rom. 14:20). Because that will be the case, Paul commands us all to judge ourselves to be certain that we not cause others to stumble. This teaching must guide everything that we do in our churches.

Furthermore, Paul teaches that believers must not give offence either to believers or to unbelievers:

1Co 10:31 Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.

³² Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God:

³³ Even as I please all men in all things, not seeking mine own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved.

1Co 11:1 Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.

For an example that points to a serious way in which many believers in local churches may be failing in this aspect of judging themselves, see my previous post about the testimony of Meghan O’Gieblyn, Romans 14, and the CCM Debate.

3. Unbelievers or Unlearned People Who Enter Churches Are to Be Judged Through the Prophesying of the Entire Congregation

1Co 14:23 If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?

²⁴ But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or one unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all:

²⁵ And thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest; and so falling down on his face he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth.

Through the corporate prophesying of the entire congregation, God intends that unbelievers and unlearned people who enter a church come under conviction for their sins and become convinced that they will be judged for their sins unless they repent. Being judged by the ministry of the entire congregation, they are to repent and worship God.

A proper church service thus is not supposed to make such people feel good about themselves—God wants them to be convicted of their sins. They are supposed to become burdened about the judgment that they are under for not repenting of their sins.

4. Believers Are to Judge Unrepentant People in the Church

1Co 5:9 I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators:

¹⁰ Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world.

¹¹ But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.

¹² For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within?

¹³ But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.

Paul wrote a letter to the Corinthians to instruct them not to associate with evil people in the church (1 Cor. 5:10). He reiterated that command to them (1 Cor. 5:11) and made clear that they were not even to eat with those who call themselves brothers but are unrepentant of serious sins in their lives.

In explaining his teaching, Paul used a rhetorical question that demands an affirmative answer (1 Cor. 5:12) to make clear that believers in churches must judge unrepentant people who are among them. Such people must be expelled from the church (1 Cor. 5:13) until they are genuinely repentant.

A Local Church Is Not to Be a Judgment-Free Zone

These passages show that we must allow Scripture to renew our minds about this vital aspect of life in our local churches. Contrary to the seemingly widespread perspective of many believers today, Scripture shows that God does not want churches to be judgment-free zones.

Rather, God intends that our churches be places where we judge ourselves, where unbelievers repent because they become burdened about the judgment they are under for their sins, and where unrepentant professing believers are judged and, if necessary, expelled from the church until they repent. A local church must not be a judgment-free zone.

In Discipleship, Exposition, Theology

Is Jesus As the Judge "The Bad News" about Jesus Christ?

April 12, 2013

The world detests the message that Jesus is the Judge. Sadly, many believers also may often have a mindset that views the truth of Jesus as the Judge as “the bad news.” Is the truth of Jesus as the Judge “the bad news”? If so, how is it bad news and for whom?

John 5 is a key passage in the Gospels that emphasizes the truth of Jesus as the Judge. A close examination of this passage provides a clear answer to our question.

The Primary Truth about Jesus in John 5

John 5 records at length Jesus’ interaction with an impotent man and certain Jews in Jerusalem. Jesus healed the man on the Sabbath. He did so as the Son of Man with the authority to forgive sins on the earth.

Observing the man who was healed carrying his bed on the Sabbath, the Jews confronted him about his actions, which they regarded as unlawful (5:9-10). The man defended himself by saying that the One who had healed him also ordered him to take up his bed and walk (5:11). The Jews inquired who it was that directed him to do so (5:12).

The man did not know who it was because Jesus had left the location (5:13). Later, Jesus found him in the temple and sternly charged him, “Behold, you are made whole: sin no more, lest a worse thing come to you” (5:14). The man left and informed the Jews that Jesus had made him whole (5:15). The Jews, therefore, persecuted Jesus and sought to kill him (5:16, 18) because He healed the man on the Sabbath and because they rejected His saying that God was His own Father (5:17-18).

The entire conflict between these Jews and Jesus concerned what was and was not lawful to do on the Sabbath. The Jews judged Jesus as a lawbreaker and wanted to kill Him for what they regarded as His unlawful actions and for His stupendous assertion that they regarded as His making Himself equal with God (5:18).

Jesus’ response to them comprises one of the lengthiest records of His words (5:17; 19-47; 30 verses). The great length of direct discourse by Jesus that John records here stresses this passage greatly.

In effect, Jesus defended Himself before these Jews by making known that His actions were not unlawful because He is the One to whom the Father has given all judgment (5:22, 27). As the God-appointed Judge, He is thus the Lawgiver who decides what is and is not lawful.

Seen in this light, the entire passage (5:1-47) is primarily about Jesus as the God-appointed Judge. His explicit statement that what He said to these Jews was so that they might be saved (5:34) shows that this passage is an evangelistic account. Jesus’ profound emphasis on His judicial agency (explicit statements in 5:22, 27, 30; contextually throughout the passage) in His evangelizing these hostile Jews shows that Jesus held that His judicial agency was the central truth that He wanted them to receive in order that they might be saved (5:24).

John 5 Illumines What the Good News Is in Act 10

This analysis of John 5 provides help for us to rightly interpret Peter’s climactic statement at Gentecost that stated that Jesus is the One appointed by God as the Judge of the living and the dead (Acts 10:42). Far from being the bad news to the Jews (John 5) and to the people at Gentecost (Acts 10), the truth of Jesus as God’s judicial agent was the central truth that sinners had to hear and receive at these occasions to be saved.

How can this possibly be? A closer look at Jesus’ words to the Jews reveals just how this was the case.

The God-Appointed Judge Who Raises People to Eternal Life!

In brief, Jesus emphatically and repeatedly asserted His judicial agency with great solemnity (“Verily, verily”; three times, John 5:19, 24, 25). As part of His explanation of His judicial agency, He taught that an hour is coming when all who are in the graves would hear His voice as the Son of Man to whom the Father has given authority to execute judgment (5:27-28). Those who would hear His voice would come forth to one of two fates: a resurrection of life or a resurrection of damnation (5:29).

Jesus thus taught that He as the God-appointed Judge is the One who would raise all dead people and that they would thereafter enter into their eternal destiny (5:25-29). The ones that had done good would enter into the resurrection of life; the ones who had done evil would enter into damnation (5:29). He closed this section of His witness to them by yet another explicit statement of His judicial agency by saying that He could not do anything of His own self; as He had heard of the Father, He did (5:30a). He added that His judgment was just because He did not seek His own will, but the will of the Father who had sent Him (5:30b).

With this teaching, Jesus made known that He as the God-appointed Judge would decide the fates of all dead people. Some He would raise to eternal life and the others He would raise to eternal damnation. His judicial agency, therefore, is only “bad news” to those who have done evil and die refusing to repent of their sins and believe in Him.

For those who have done evil and then repent of their rejection of Jesus’ equality with God by believing in Jesus as the One whom the Father sent with all authority to execute judgment, His judicial agency is the greatest good news that they could possibly hear. He is the Judge who will raise everyone one day and give eternal life to those who do good by hearing His word and believing on Him who sent Him to be that Judge (5:24)! To do so is to do good because they thereby honor the Son even as the Father, which is the purpose of the Father’s giving all judgment to the Son (5:22-23).

They will not enter into condemnation because He as the Judge will not condemn them (5:24). They have passed from death to life (5:24) because He as the Judge has already quickened them (cf. 5:21) and will one day assuredly raise all of them who die to the resurrection of life (5:29).

The Good News of the God-Appointed Judge Who Saves Those Who Repent and Believe in Him!

Based on this analysis, we understand that Jesus as God’s judicial agent is not “the bad news of Jesus Christ” to sinners who repent and believe the good news that He is the One to whom the Father has given all judgment. His judicial agency is the central truth that both Jesus and Peter gave to sinners that they might be saved in the two accounts treated above.

The Jews rejected His judicial agency and were not saved. The lost people at Gentecost believed in Him as that God-appointed Judge (Acts 10:42) and were therefore forgiven their sins by Him (Acts 10:43). They were saved by believing in the name of the One whom the Father sent as the Son of God (John 5:25), the Son (5:26), and the Son of Man (5:27), His judicial agent (5:22, 27, 30)!

By virtue of the judicial authority that the Father has given Him (5:22, 27, 30), Jesus gives eternal life to as many as the Father has given Him (17:2). He does so for those who believe that He died for their sins and that God raised Him from the dead (1 Cor. 15:3-5; Rom. 10:9-10). Hear His own words about His judicial agency, acknowledge that you have done evil and are repenting, believe on the Father who sent Him with all judicial authority, and you will have everlasting life! You will never come into condemnation; you will have passed from death to life!

As the Son of Man, He has the judicial authority to forgive your sins (Luke 5:24; cf. Acts 7:56-60; 10:42-43) and to give you eternal life (John 5:24-29). He will save you by doing these things and much more (Heb. 7:25; 1 John 2:1). Believe the good news of Jesus Christ that includes the glorious truth that He is the God-appointed Judge and you will be saved!

In Evangelism, Exposition, Theology

Beware This Widely Overlooked, Deadly Type of Hypocrisy

April 8, 2013

In the thinking of most people, being a hypocrite probably means something along the lines of saying one thing but doing another. In Luke 12, we learn that Jesus challenged people about a much more deadly type of hypocrisy that is widely overlooked.

Jesus Instructs His Disciples and the People about Hypocrisy

Speaking to a vast multitude of people (Luke 12:1), Jesus warned His disciples about the hypocrisy of the Pharisees (12:1-13). On that same occasion, he challenged the people about hypocrisy by pointing out a glaring discrepancy in their lives:

Luk 12:54 And he said also to the people, When ye see a cloud rise out of the west, straightway ye say, There cometh a shower; and so it is.

⁵⁵ And when ye see the south wind blow, ye say, There will be heat; and it cometh to pass.

⁵⁶ Ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky and of the earth; but how is it that ye do not discern this time?

⁵⁷Yea, and why even of yourselves judge ye not what is right?

Jesus sternly chided these people because they capably assessed some indicators of their time but did not do so with others that were equally obvious. John A. Martin explains their hypocritical failure:

Jesus taught the crowds that they needed to be sensitive to interpret the things they were seeing. Though they had been observing His ministry they were not able to ascertain that He was truly the Messiah. He made the point that they, with no trouble, could interpret natural signs (western clouds and south winds—the appearance of the earth and the sky). But they could not discern spiritual signs. They should discern what was going on right in their midst—He was offering the kingdom and they were not responding properly to His offer.—BKC: NT, 239; emphasis in original

Jesus thus reproached people for being hypocrites by their rightly discerning specific weather indicators but not doing so with spiritual ones.

Darrell L. Bock summarizes Jesus’ forceful challenge:

Jesus then turns to the crowd. He rebukes them for not spotting the obvious. They can read the weather, but they are blind to what God is doing. Jesus clearly reveals the nature of the time; yet they do not respond. —Luke 9:51-24:53, 1200

Based on Jesus teaching here, Norval Geldenhuys gives this sobering warning:

To-day also there are for us all many signs pointing to the seriousness of life and to the necessity of right living. Especially those who have the opportunity of reading the Bible and listening to the preaching of the Gospel have the fullest opportunities of discerning the signs of the times and of knowing that Jesus is the Redeemer. He who is blind to this and who does not take heed, while the period of grace continues, to have peace with God through the Saviour, must await a dark future.—Luke, NICOT, 369.

These commentators reveal that Jesus challenges us all to be sensitive to judge rightly the valid spiritual information that we have been exposed to in our lives. Failing to do so, we will be guilty of a deadly hypocrisy that is much more serious than what people often complain about concerning the so-called hypocrisy of religious people.

Please take a few moments and read the good news that God has for all people and believe: The Good News for All

In Exhortation, Exposition, Quotes

Additional, Unique Evidence for the Bodily Resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth

March 30, 2013

Human denial of the bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead has plagued the Church from its beginning (Matt. 28:11-15; cf. 1 Cor. 15:12). In addition to its clear direct testimony to the bodily resurrection of Jesus, the Gospel of Matthew provides additional, unique evidence that implies that truth (Matt. 27:52-53).

To better assess this unique evidence for the bodily resurrection of Jesus, we will consider it in relation to some of the other evidence in Matthew for bodily resurrection of the dead.

Evidence for Bodily Resurrection of the Dead before the Death of Jesus

1. Jesus Raised a Ruler’s Daughter (Matt. 9:18-26)

2. Jesus Authorized and Commissioned His Twelve Disciples to Raise the Dead (Matt. 10:1, 8)

3. Jesus Warned of the One Who is Able to Destroy Both Soul and Body in Hell after Death (Matt. 10:28)

4. Jesus Testified of the Dead Who Had Already Been Raised Up as Proof That He Was the Christ (Matt. 11:5)

5. Jesus Repeatedly Predicted That He Would Be Raised from the Dead (Matt. 16:21; 20:19; etc)

6. Jesus Taught That God Spoke about the Resurrection of the Dead Long Ago (Matt. 22:31-32)

7. Jesus Promised That He Would Drink Again with His Disciples of the Fruit of the Vine in His Father’s Kingdom (Matt. 26:29)

Each of these seven points shows that Jesus affirmed the reality of bodily resurrection of the dead. Several of them also point, either directly or implicitly, to Jesus Himself bringing about such a resurrection of people.

Evidence for Bodily Resurrection of the Dead after the Death of Jesus

Matthew relates several remarkable events that took place when Jesus died and afterwards:

Mat 27:50 Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.

⁵¹ ¶ And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;

⁵² And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,

⁵³ And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

He is the only one to record the opening of the graves of many saints (Matt. 27:52a). He specifies that the bodies of those who slept arose (Matt. 27:52b).

He asserts that they came out of their graves after the resurrection of Jesus (Matt. 27:53a). Moreover, they went into Jerusalem (the holy city) and appeared unto many people (Matt. 27:53b).

Given the preceding context of the book and Matthew’s explicit statement that their bodies arose, the reader of Matthew has every reason to believe that these saints experienced bodily resurrection from the dead. In fact, there is no legitimate basis for believing otherwise.

Importantly, Matthew testifies that they did not come out of their graves until after Jesus rose, which means that His resurrection preceded theirs. Their exiting the grave and appearing after Jesus arose implies that His resurrection was the basis for theirs, which is in keeping with His plain assertions elsewhere (John 5, 11).

To hold then that Jesus experienced only some kind of spiritual resurrection but these saints experienced a bodily resurrection would make no sense at all. In order to assert validly that there was such a radical difference between His resurrection and theirs, a person would have to provide extremely compelling evidence that would overrule both the entire preceding context of bodily resurrection in Matthew and the close relationship between Jesus’ resurrection and theirs.

Because there is no such compelling evidence, the bodily resurrection of these saints implicitly testifies to the bodily resurrection of Jesus. This interpretation of the significance of Matthew’s mentioning their resurrection is strengthened by Matthew’s direct testimony to Jesus’ rising bodily, which he provides in Matthew 28.

Evidence for the Bodily Resurrection of Jesus after His Resurrection

Matthew provides much evidence about the bodily resurrection of Jesus in his last chapter.

1. The women came to the tomb, saw where He was laid, and did not find the body (Matt. 28:1-7). In fact, an angel affirmed to them that He had risen just as He said that He would and directed them to verify that fact by looking at the place where He had been laid (Matt. 28:5-6).

2. Jesus then appeared to the women (Matt. 28:9a). They grabbed His feet and worshiped (Matt. 28:9b), clearly proving that He had risen bodily.

3. His enemies were unable to produce the body and had to concoct a ridiculous story to explain that inability (Matt. 28:11-13). Their inability powerfully testifies to the bodily resurrection of Jesus.

4. Jesus appeared to the eleven who had proceeded to Galilee and commissioned them (Matt. 28:16-20). This appearance confirmed the truth of what the angel had directed the women to testify to them (Matt. 28:7), which further verifies that He rose bodily.

Jesus Arose Bodily!

The unique Matthean information about the resurrection and appearances of many saints implicitly corroborates both the implicit and the explicit evidence in Matthew for the bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead. Truly, Jesus arose bodily!

In Exposition, Theology

Does Matthew 21:13 Record That Jesus Was Claiming to Be Deity?

March 25, 2013

After His triumphal entry into Jerusalem (Matt. 21:1-11), Jesus went into the temple and proceeded to cleanse it (21:12-13). A closer look at what took place on this occasion calls into question a common understanding of this account.

What Did Jesus Claim by What He Said When He Cleansed the Temple?

Entering the temple, Jesus discovered people there who were selling and buying there. He violently acted to disrupt their activities, overturning the chairs and tables of those who were defiling the temple by their corrupt mercenary practices (21:12).

As He did so, He pronounced judgment on them by declaring that these people were thieves: “It is written, ‘My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves” (21:13). In saying the words, “My house,” was Jesus claiming to be Deity Himself by asserting that the temple was His house?

Whose House Was Jesus Claiming the Temple to Be?

At least two aspects of this account call into serious question the interpretation that Matthew 21:13 records that Jesus was claiming to be Deity. First, Jesus did not just say, “My house . . .” He said, “It is written . . .” In other words, Jesus was quoting Scripture when He said the words, “My house.”

“My house . . .” therefore, was a declaration that the house that belonged to God was being corrupted by these people. Through His actions and His words, Jesus was asserting God’s authority over the house that belonged to God.

Second, the remainder of the account shows a conspicuous absence of a response from His enemies that would be fitting with their having perceived that He had made the stupendous claim of being God Himself:

Mat 21:14 And the blind and the lame came to him in the temple; and he healed them.

¹⁵ And when the chief priests and scribes saw the wonderful things that he did, and the children crying in the temple, and saying, Hosanna to the Son of David; they were sore displeased,

¹⁶ And said unto him, Hearest thou what these say? And Jesus saith unto them, Yea; have ye never read, Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise?

¹⁷ And he left them, and went out of the city into Bethany; and he lodged there.

Had Jesus citation of the words, “My house,” been a claim to His being Deity Himself, we would expect that His enemies would have immediately exploded with charges against Him that He had blasphemed. Matthew, however, does not say anything about a hostile response from them.

The parallel account in Mark does inform us that there was a hostile response from the Jewish religious leadership on this occasion; however, it explains that their response was for a different reason: “And the scribes and chief priests heard it, and sought how they might destroy him: for they feared him, because all the people was astonished at his doctrine” (11:18). The religious leaders thus feared Jesus’ influence with the people.

Had Jesus plainly claimed on this occasion that He was God, the leaders would not have had to sway the people into opposing Him because they themselves would have turned against Him for making such a claim. Neither Matthew’s account nor the parallel passages in Mark and Luke, however, seem to provide any clear indication that what Jesus said on this occasion provided the Jewish leadership or the people with an occasion to charge Him specifically with blasphemy.

In light of these considerations, I conclude that Matthew 21:13 is not a record of Jesus’ claiming directly to be God. Although His words and actions on this occasion do imply that truth, the passage is not handled properly when people speak of its pointing to His Deity as the main point of the passage.

What Jesus’ Words and Actions Actually Stressed on This Occasion

What then did Jesus’ words and actions on this occasion stress? Clearly, Jesus was claiming that He was the Messiah whom God had chosen and authorized to judge all those among His people who were sinfully perverting the righteous ways of God. Jesus claim to have such God-given judicial authority over the established Jewish leadership is thus the actual main point of Jesus’ words and actions at this time.

This interpretation does not deny that the passage has implications for Jesus’ own deity, which is clearly taught in many other passages as well as plainly implied in many other passages. Rather, it stresses that the main point of the passage is about Jesus being the Christ who rendered judgment for God.

Jesus’ own words on the earlier occasion of His cleansing the temple provide strong support for this interpretation because John writes that on that occasion “His disciples remembered that it was written, ‘The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up’ (John 2:17). John thus made known that His disciples viewed Jesus’ cleansing of the temple as His acting in zeal for the glory of His Father’s house, which shows that He did what He did on that occasion as God’s agent of judgment.

As Jesus did in His first cleansing of the temple (John 2:13-22), so He rendered similar judgment on those who were perverting His Father’s house later (Matt. 21:12-17). Both accounts of Jesus’ cleansing the temple stress Jesus’ judicial authority as God’s Christ.

In Exposition, Theology

How to Be Immovable, As God Commands Us to Be

March 22, 2013

Paul concludes his great chapter on the resurrection of the dead by commanding believers to be “steadfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord” (1 Cor. 15:58). Psalm 15 concludes with a conceptually parallel statement: “He that doeth these things shall never be moved” (15:5b).

The parallel idea in both of these passages suggests that Psalm 15 provides us with inspired instruction about how we can be immovable, as God commands:

15:1 <A Psalm of David.> LORD, who shall abide in thy tabernacle? who shall dwell in thy holy hill?

² He that walketh uprightly, and worketh righteousness, and speaketh the truth in his heart.

³ He that backbiteth not with his tongue, nor doeth evil to his neighbour, nor taketh up a reproach against his neighbour.

⁴ In whose eyes a vile person is contemned; but he honoureth them that fear the LORD. He that sweareth to his own hurt, and changeth not.

⁵ He that putteth not out his money to usury, nor taketh reward against the innocent. He that doeth these things shall never be moved.

The teaching of Psalm 15 can be helpfully organized in the following way.

In general, to be immovable, we must walk uprightly and work righteousness. These general statements pertain to the entirety of our lives, teaching us that we should be blameless people who live righteously and fulfill our obligations to God and man.

Positively, we must speak the truth in our hearts. The truthfulness of whatever we say either to ourselves or to others is crucial to our being upright, as God commands.

We must also “treat or think of [vile people] with contempt” (Webster’s definition of contemn), but honor those who fear God. An upright person thus must not honor evil people, and he must not fail to honor godly people.

In addition, we must keep the promises that we make, even if hurts us to do so. Any oaths that we make must be fulfilled.

Negatively, we must not backbite with our tongues. As upright people, we thus must not slander anyone.

We also must not do evil to our neighbors or take up a reproach against them. Our dealings with everyone we encounter, therefore, must be upright, not harming anyone in action or speech.

Furthermore, we must not go back on our promises. Our “yes” should mean that we do what we have said we would, and our “no” should mean that we do not do what we say we will not do.

We also must not lend our money with usury. If we choose to lend money to people, we should not “take advantage of those who must borrow” (BKC: OT, 803).

Moreover, we must not accept a bribe against an innocent person. We must steadfastly refuse the efforts of any person who would bribe us so that we would pervert the justice that innocent people are due.

God commands us to be upright people who are immovable in our living for Him all our days. He will grace us to do so as we strive in the power of the Spirit to follow the teaching of 1 Corinthians 15 and Psalm 15.

In Discipleship, Exposition

Amazing Grace Teaches Wretches to Deny Ungodliness and Worldly Lusts

February 27, 2013

John Newton’s song Amazing Grace highlights how God saves wretches who once were lost in their sins. Stanza 3 testifies of the ongoing work of grace in the life of saved wretches like us: “Thru many dangers, toils and snares I have already come; ‘Tis grace hath brought me safe thus far, And grace will lead me home.”

In our day, much Christian teaching and preaching focuses on the saving work of God’s grace in the sense of its delivering sinners from the penalty of their sins. Although that is certainly a vital dimension of the work of God’s grace for sinners, the apostle Paul emphasizes a key facet of its work that needs much more emphasis than it is currently receiving—God’s grace that saves sinners has a vital sanctifying teaching ministry in the life of every true believer:

Titus 2:11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,

¹² Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;

¹³ Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;

¹⁴ Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.

In this passage, Paul stresses that God’s grace teaches believers to be denying ungodliness and worldly lusts as they live soberly, righteously and godly in this present world. An examination of this truth brings out vital understanding for how we should live in our day.

GRACE TEACHES BELIEVERS ABOUT THE UNGODLINESS AND WORLDLY LUSTS OF OUR PRESENT WORLD

The teaching of Paul about grace in this passage implies that grace teaches us about the ungodliness and worldly lusts that characterize the present world. We understand then that our age in which we live has evil aspects that are ungodly (not like God) and worldly (opposed to Him, His interests, and the best interests of His people and focused rather on human desires that are either intrinsically evil or are perversions of God-given legitimate desires).

An emphasis that downplays the reality of the ungodly and worldly aspects of the present world thus misleads believers into thinking contrary to what the Scripture teaches about God’s grace. Such teaching comes far short of rightly instructing believers to live the grace-filled lives that God desires for them.

GRACES TEACHES BELIEVERS TO IDENTIFY THE UNGODLINESS AND WORLDLY LUSTS OF OUR AGE

Also implicit in this Pauline teaching about grace is the reality that God’s grace enables believers to identify what is ungodly and worldly in the present world. Apart from that grace, they would be like all the lost people of the world who lack the ability and desire to identify accurately what aspects of our age are ungodly and worldly versus what aspects are not so.

Moreover, because of God’s grace working in their lives, Christians who are right with God desire to discern accurately what comprises the ungodliness and worldly lusts of our contemporary world. Based on these truths, an emphasis on living a grace-filled life that minimizes a believer’s need to discern what comprises the ungodliness and worldly lusts of our world is in direct opposition to explicit Scriptural teaching about what God’s grace effects in a believer’s life.

GRACE TEACHES BELIEVERS TO DENY THE UNGODLINESS AND WORLDLY LUSTS OF OUR WORLD

Beyond enabling believers to identify the ungodliness and worldly lusts of our day and teaching them to do so, God’s grace teaches believers to deny these aspects of our world! We thus do not live the grace-filled lives that God intends if we are not actively denying these things in our lives.

An emphasis on grace-filled living that does not stress a believer’s denying ungodliness and worldly lusts in his living is highly detrimental to the cause of Christ because it misleads believers about an essential facet of how they must live in this world. We must reject such teaching as unscriptural because it is not in accord with biblical teaching about what God’s grace effects in a believer’s life.

Is amazing grace teaching wretches like you and me both to identify the ungodliness and worldly lusts of our present age and to deny them? Or, has deficient teaching about living a grace-filled life misled us so that we are not actively doing so?

In Discipleship, Exposition

Archives For Interpretation

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: