Archives For Theology

Fig Leaf Aprons and Christian Use of Rock Music

March 14, 2015

After God made Adam, He put him in the Garden of Eden “to dress and to keep it” (Gen. 2:15). Although Scripture does not provide any more information about these activities, we can be sure that Adam’s work involved the use of various tools to take care of the garden that God had planted (Gen. 2:8).1

Genesis 3 confirms this inference by informing us that Adam and Eve engaged in some skilled activity that involved their using an unspecified tool for fabricating for a specific purpose something that had never existed before:

Gen 3:7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.

A close consideration of this revelation about their first actions after they had fallen shows that it has direct applicability to some key issues pertaining to the debate about the propriety of Christian use of rock music.

Who Made These Fig Leaf Aprons?

God made the fig tree (or trees) that the leaves came from (Gen. 2:8-9), but the Spirit tells us that Adam and Eve took the fig leaves, sewed them together, and made aprons for themselves (Gen 3:7). Plainly, Scripture is saying that Adam and Eve, and not God, made these aprons.

Furthermore, the text does not say in any way that God directed them to make these aprons. In fact, we have no basis for holding that they had ever received any prior revelation concerning taking fig leaves and crafting aprons from them.

What Was Involved in Making These Aprons?

To make these aprons, Adam and Eve used their God-given creative abilities to invent an entirely new use of the leaves from the good fig tree that God made. In doing so, they in addition had either to invent or to put to a new use some kind of tool to sew them together and to do something similar about the thread or other material that they used to sew the fig leaves together.

What Was God’s Assessment of Their Making the Aprons?

After they had made the aprons (Gen. 3:7), Adam and Eve hid themselves from God (Gen. 3:8). God then dealt with them about their sinful eating of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Gen. 3:9-24).

After He had dealt with them about this sin, He made coats of skins and clothed Adam and Eve (Gen. 3:21). His doing so shows that He deemed the aprons that they had invented unfit for accomplishing the purpose for which they had made them.

Application to Issues Concerning the Propriety of Christian Use of Rock Music

The first recorded instance of human creative activity involved taking good preexisting materials that God had created and producing an entirely new entity that had never existed before. Even though everything that Adam and Eve used to make these fig leaf aprons was a good thing that God created, the resulting product was not fit for use for the purpose for which they made it.

The application of this revelation to issues concerning the propriety of Christian use of rock music becomes clear through an analysis of how many Christian proponents of the use of rock music argue for their position. As we consider their arguments, we must keep in mind vital points of correspondence between what they say and what we have discovered through our comparative examination of Genesis 3:7 and 3:21.

Some proponents of Christian use of rock music argue that instrumental rock music necessarily is inherently fit for human use because they hold that God created all music. Not only does the Bible provide no support for this view, but also it provides explicit revelation that points to fallen humans, and not God, as the originators of human musical styles (Gen. 4:21; see this post for an explanation of this key point).

In response to this biblical data, proponents of Christian use of rock music argue that all human musical styles are still good because God created as good all the elements of music that fallen humans have combined to form all the musical styles that they have originated. Because all the elements were created as good, they hold that all combinations of those elements must also necessarily be good and fit for human use.

Our analysis of Genesis 3:7 and 3:21, however, has shown that Scripture presents a key instance when human creative activity involving the combining of good things that God created did not result in a product that was suitable for the purpose for which it was made. Because Scripture provides us with this explicit evidence, we know that any argument that insists that every way of combining good musical elements that God has created necessarily must result in a musical style that is fit for human use is false.

Supporters of rock music, therefore, cannot legitimately argue that rock music necessarily is inherently fit for human use because it merely combines good musical elements that God created. No such necessity for the fitness of such a combination exists and making such an argument is refuted by the direct implications of Genesis 3:7 and 3:21.2

Conclusion

Biblical revelation about the unsuitability of the fig leaf aprons that Adam and Eve invented shows that Christians who use rock music cannot justify their doing so by arguing that rock music is necessarily a fit-for-human-use musical style because it was originated by combining good musical elements that God created. Proving that rock music is a musical style that is fit for human use requires more than asserting that it is merely a combination of good musical elements.

1 We are unable to know definitively where Adam got these tools and how he learned to use them. It is possible that he invented them.

2 This examination of Genesis 3:7 and 3:21 does not prove that rock music is unfit for human use. It only proves that an argument for the necessity of the fitness of rock music for human use based on its being a combination of good elements is invalid.

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

In CCM, Interpretation, Theology
 permalink

How Genesis 4:21 Directly Applies to the CCM Debate

March 7, 2015

Whether or not all musical styles are inherently good and inherently fit for use in divine worship is a key point of dispute among believers concerning CCM. Because Genesis 4:21 is the earliest biblical revelation about humans playing musical instruments, examining its relevance to the CCM debate is vital.

In my experience, however, Genesis 4:21 has not been considered thoroughly by most people on either side of the CCM debate. I have previously written several articles that treat various aspects of what Genesis 4:21 reveals, especially in relation to certain issues concerning CCM.1

This post brings out yet another facet of its teaching about music that applies to the CCM debate in a way that I have not previously discussed. To understand the application of this facet of Genesis 4:21 to the CCM debate, we have to examine it in relation to its surrounding context that includes many biblical references to divine creative activity and some other references to human creative activity.

References to God as the Creator of All Things in Genesis 1-11

Through at least 30 direct references to divine creative activity2 in Genesis 1-11,3 God indisputably asserts at the beginning of our canonical arrangement of Scripture that He is the Creator of all created things. It is worth noting also that all of these references speak of God’s creating things that man did not play any role in their creation (for example, light, the expanse, and the animals).

Furthermore, it is also noteworthy that only one of these 30 references speaks of God’s making something that humans could conceivably even have made or played a role in its making: “Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them” (Gen. 3:21). Based on this data, we know that the Spirit is purposely directing to our attention numerous statements about distinctively divine creative activity in these chapters.

References to Humans as the Makers of Certain Things in Genesis 1-11

Only after we have read 24 statements about what God has created do we encounter the first statement about something that man made:

Gen 3:7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.

This earliest reference to human creative activity speaks of humans taking something that they did not make (the fig leaves) and fashioning something else out of it (aprons; for a fuller explanation of the vital importance of this text for issues concerning the CCM debate, see this post).

Genesis 4 provides the next information that we have about human creative activity (Gen. 4:17, 20, 21, 22). Among those statements is the earliest statement that we have about human musical activity:

Gen 4:21 And his brother’s name was Jubal: he was the father of all such as handle the harp and organ.

We must not fail to note that the first information that the Spirit gives to us about human musical activity directly concerns not their singing but their playing musical instruments. Moreover, the Spirit does not frame His presentation of this revelation in such a way as to highlight God’s working in these people to produce and do what they did.

Instead, the Spirit says to us that Jubal was “the father” of all those who were playing these instruments. By framing this statement in that way, the Spirit is clearly emphasizing that Jubal was either the inventor of these instruments or the one who pioneered playing them in some way or both.

Regardless of which way we understand this statement, it is clearly not presenting God as the One who created the style or styles in which Jubal and the others mentioned here played these instruments. Rather, and in sharp contrast to the surrounding profound emphasis on divine creation, the Spirit is highlighting that fallen humans created these musical styles.

Application to the CCM Debate

Christian supporters of the use of rock music and CCM rely heavily on an argument based on God as the Creator of all musical styles to support their views. They argue that God is the Creator of all musical styles, and therefore they are all inherently good and inherently fit for use in divine worship.4

Scripture, however, not only does not say anything about God as the One who created all musical styles but also it directly emphasizes the opposite by saying that fallen humans originated the musical styles that are in view in the earliest biblical revelation about humans playing musical instruments. For this reason, discussions of rock music and CCM that defend Christian use of these types of music by appealing to God’s creating them as inherently good and therefore necessarily fit for divine worship are seriously flawed because they do not account properly for how the Bible in Genesis 4:21 frames its first presentation of human musical activity.

Conclusion

When believers who hold to the propriety of Christian use of rock music and CCM seek to defend their views, they must not use an illegitimate argument from the supposed divine creation of these styles to justify their views. To defend their views properly, they must show from the Bible why they believe that these styles are fit for Christian use in spite of biblical evidence that shows that not even all the animals that God originally created as good were acceptable for offering to Him in worship even by the time of the Flood.

1 See these previous posts for more information.

2 Genesis 1:1, 6, 7, 9, 11, 14, 16, 20, 21, 24, 25, 26, 27, 31; 2:2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 18, 19, 22; 3:3, 21; 5:1, 2; 6:6, 7; 7:4.

3 Genesis 1-11 is a natural place to limit our examination because these chapters naturally go together in providing us with information about early human history.

4 See my post Are All Musical Styles Inherently Moral? for a biblical treatment of evidence from Genesis that disproves the view that all musical styles are inherently moral.

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

In CCM, Exposition, Music, Theology
 permalink

How Genesis 7-8 Applies to the CCM Debate

March 2, 2015

Some supporters of CCM assert that because God made music, all instrumental musical styles, including rock music, are necessarily inherently acceptable for use in divine worship. An examination of certain statements in Genesis 7-8 points to why this argument is invalid.

Divine Instruction to Noah about Animals

In preparation for the Flood, God gave Noah specific instructions about the animals that he was to bring into the Ark:

Gen 6:19 And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female.

 20 Of fowls after their kind, and of cattle after their kind, of every creeping thing of the earth after his kind, two of every sort shall come unto thee, to keep them alive.

Among those animals, he was to bring specified numbers of clean animals and unclean animals:

Gen 7:2 Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female.

 3 Of fowls also of the air by sevens, the male and the female; to keep seed alive upon the face of all the earth.

Scripture does not give us any further information about this distinction among the animals, but we can understand the following truths based on this revelation:

  1. The Lord expected Noah to know which animals were unclean and which ones were not and to act accordingly. Scripture does not tell us how Noah would know this information; it may be that God also specified this information to him at this time but chose not to record His doing so.
  2. Scripture does not reveal how or why this distinction among all the animals that God had created originated nor does it explain what this distinction signified concerning in what sense some of the animals were clean and others were unclean; we are simply told that this distinction existed.
  3. Scripture does not tell us whether this distinction had been in place prior to this time or it was established only at this time.

Furthermore, because later revelation shows that God had not yet given animals to humans as food (Gen. 9:3-4), we have no basis for saying that the distinction among the animals at this time had anything to do with human consumption of them as food.

Divine Worship by Noah Using Animals

After the Flood, Noah built an altar to the Lord and worshiped Him by offering burnt offerings on it:

Gen 8:20 And Noah builded an altar unto the LORD; and took of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar.

Notice that Noah offered these offerings only from every clean animal and bird—he did not offer any of the unclean animals in his worship of God.

God accepted Noah’s worship that offered to Him only these clean animals and birds (Gen. 8:21) that he had taken on the Ark in obedience to divine directive (Gen. 7:2-3). God blessed Noah and his family after he had worshiped Him (Gen. 9:1ff.), including now giving all animals to them for food (Gen. 9:3).

Strikingly, God then made a covenant with Noah and his sons that Scripture explicitly specifies four times was a covenant that was also with every living creature that was with them in the Ark (Gen. 9:10, 12, 15, 16)—the covenant therefore was also with those unclean animals and birds that were not offered to God in worship to Him!

Discussion

As the Creator, God made everything (Gen. 1), including all living beings (Gen. 1:20-28). After God had made all things, He pronounced that all that He had made was good (Gen. 1:21, 25, 31).

Just prior to the Flood, however, we read that God directed Noah concerning his bringing into the Ark both animals that were clean and animals that were unclean (Gen. 7:2-3). Scripture does not explain how, when, and why some animals received this designation of being unclean and others did not.

After the Flood, we see Noah offering only the clean animals in worship to God, even though God had also made all the unclean ones as good animals when He created them. After Noah had worshiped God, we read that God gave all animals to Noah and his family for food, including those animals that were designated as unclean and not offered in worship to Him.

Based on this biblical data, we see that although every animal that God created was originally pronounced by Him as good, He declared just before the Flood that an unspecified number of them were unclean animals. These unclean animals were not acceptable for use in divine worship even though God created them and pronounced them good at the Creation.

Because, however, God entered into an everlasting covenant with these unclean animals after the Flood—just as He did with the clean ones—we know that their unacceptability for divine worship was not because these animals were of no lasting value to Him. Moreover, because God gave these animals to humans as food after the Flood, we know that their unacceptability for divine worship was not because they were somehow unfit for human consumption.

Application to the CCM Debate

Many supporters of CCM argue that instrumental rock music is both inherently moral music and acceptable for use in divine worship because God created all music. From our study above, however, we have seen that such an argument from Creation is not valid because some of the animals that God created as good at the Creation were for some unspecified reason unclean and unfit for use in divine worship just prior to the Flood.

Even if it were true, therefore, that all instrumental musical styles were inherently good at the Creation because God created all music, it would still not necessarily follow that they all are inherently acceptable today for use in divine worship. Supporters of CCM, therefore, cannot legitimately use an argument from Creation to support their view that using CCM in divine worship is necessarily legitimate because all instrumental musical styles are inherently acceptable to God.

Conclusion

In the debate about the propriety of using CCM in divine worship, many supporters of CCM argue that rock music is inherently fit for use in divine worship because God created music and therefore all musical styles are necessarily acceptable for use in worshiping Him. A close examination of biblical revelation about divine worship in Genesis 8 has shown, however, that it is not true that everything that God created as good at the Creation is necessarily therefore still acceptable for use in worshiping Him. An argument from Creation, therefore, does not prove that God accepts the rock music that those who use CCM in divine worship offer to Him.

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

In CCM, Interpretation, Music, Theology
 permalink

Ten Examples of the Value of Learning Biblical Greek!

February 21, 2015

If you have ever studied New Testament Greek, I think that these ten previous posts would help confirm to you the truth that using Biblical Greek is very valuable for understanding the Bible and the things of God better!

A Good Example of the Value of Learning NT Greek

Paul’s Commission to Proclaim the Gospel of the Kingdom of God!

The Teaching of Nature (1 Cor. 11:14-15)

Haman, Head Coverings, and First Corinthians 11:1-16

Who Did John the Baptist Identify Jesus to Be

Understanding the Biblical Use of “Dunamai” More Accurately

God Made Jesus Both Lord and Christ

The King’s Words about Everlasting Fire

Interpreting the Word “Lord” in the NT

The “Sabbath” Psalms

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

In Biblical Greek, Biblical Languages, Interpretation, Theology
 permalink

Beware This “News Report” Approach to Using John 11 in Evangelism!

February 9, 2015

This morning, I used a creative approach with some other believers to help them understand better how many believers have not rightly understood why Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead the way that He did. I believe that a vast number of believers need to understand this key point and then use that understanding to adjust in a very important way their use of John 11 in evangelizing people.

An Imaginary News Report of Jesus’ Raising Lazarus from the Dead

Imagine that a news crew from a leading TV network is able to go back in time to videotape one key Bible event, and they choose when Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead. This crew has the ability to record what takes place without any of the people even seeing that they are present.

As they watch Jesus and others coming to the tomb, they choose to begin recording only at the exact moment when He actually commands Lazarus to come forth. Getting what they want on tape, they return to the present to share their highly selective eyewitness account with the world.

On a prime time news program, they present the stunning video, which instantly creates a worldwide sensation. As teams of news reporters and analysts all around the world go back and forth discussing the remarkable footage, leading news anchors here in the US carry on a torrid debate about what the world should make of this miraculous event.

The Internet explodes with a never-before-seen deluge of discussion on social media. Many bloggers chime in with their take on what significance the world should attach to seeing Jesus do something that no one else had ever been recorded doing—raising a person back to life who had been dead for four days!

Everywhere, people fiercely dispute why Jesus did what He did the way that He did it and what His doing so reveals about who He was. An endless stream of world leaders, political and religious, gives their opinions on whether they believe that the video proves that Jesus was God.

All too often, many Christians have evangelized people by using the account of Jesus’ raising Lazarus from the dead in a very similar way to what I concocted in this hypothetical story. By focusing on a very small portion of the Bible record about this event, they have in many cases not given people a right understanding of why Jesus raised Lazarus the way that He did and what His doing so shows about who He was.

The Foreground Significance of Jesus’ Raising Lazarus the Way That He Did

An examination of the Holy Spirit’s inspired report of what happened shows clearly how this has been the case. When John relates to us what happened immediately before Jesus commanded Lazarus to come out of the grave, he says,

Joh 11:38 Jesus therefore again groaning in himself cometh to the grave. It was a cave, and a stone lay upon it.

 39 Jesus said, Take ye away the stone. Martha, the sister of him that was dead, saith unto him, Lord, by this time he stinketh: for he hath been dead four days.

 40 Jesus saith unto her, Said I not unto thee, that, if thou wouldest believe, thou shouldest see the glory of God?

 41 Then they took away the stone from the place where the dead was laid. And Jesus lifted up his eyes, and said, Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me.

 42 And I knew that thou hearest me always: but because of the people which stand by I said it, that they may believe that thou hast sent me.

Only after relating these events does John tell us the very selective part that the fictitious news story I gave above provided:

43 And when he thus had spoken, he cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, come forth.

 44 And he that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot with graveclothes: and his face was bound about with a napkin. Jesus saith unto them, Loose him, and let him go.

Had the Spirit only inspired John to write verses 43-44 after he had given enough preceding material to give the basic information about the setting of this event, the news report would have been a more valid representation of what took place on this occasion. John, however, provided vital information in the verses immediately preceding verses 43 and 44 that the news report failed to provide.

Right before Jesus commanded Lazarus to come forth, John says that Jesus lifted up His eyes and talked aloud with God the Father (John 11:41). In this conversation, Jesus thanked the Father for hearing Him and for His always hearing Him. These statements show that Jesus communicated that He had prayed to the Father just before His raising Lazarus from the dead and that the Father had heard His prayer, just as He always had done before this event!

Moreover, John then recorded that Jesus then remarked to the Father, “But because of the people which stand by I said it, that they may believe that thou hast sent me” (John 11:42). Here John reports from the mouth of Jesus Himself what is the key to understanding why Jesus raised Lazarus the way that He did—He wanted the people to believe the vital truth that the Father had sent Him!

Saying this, Jesus told all those who were present on that occasion that the foreground significance of His raising Lazarus the way that He did was that people would believe that God the Father had sent Him! What He Himself said prior to what He was about to do thus made known that His intent through this miraculous event did not have proving His own deity as its foremost significance.

Yes, what He did testified to His deity but that clearly was not the sum total of what this event testified about Him. In fact, by Jesus’ own statement that John relates, we know that His own deity was not even the foremost truth to which His raising Lazarus the way that He did gave witness to His original audience.

How We Must Use John 11 Properly in Evangelism

As we have seen, this conversation between Jesus and the Father about His hearing Jesus’ prayer was a vital facet of this miracle that the news report completely left out. What Jesus testified about His purpose for doing this miracle the way that He did it is also a vital facet of this event that many, many believers do not account for when they use this account to witness to people.

In using John 11 in evangelism, we must not use this “news report” approach to sharing this glorious event with lost people. We must rather faithfully tell them that Jesus raised Lazarus the way that He did so that they will believe that the Father sent Him!

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

In Evangelism, Exhortation, Exposition, Theology
 permalink

Thoroughly Equipped to Be Witnesses of Christ: Part I

February 7, 2015

In my first message in this series, I presented key introductory truths about how all Scripture equips us thoroughly to be witnesses of Christ. The following seventeen points summarize most of the teachings of Scripture about this vital subject that I emphasized in this message.

  1. God has given us the Bible to make us wise unto salvation (2 Tim. 3:15) and to equip us thoroughly for every good work (2 Tim. 3:16-17). We can only know with certainty what those good works are through what the Scripture says.
  2. Because we are believers in God after the coming of Christ, the NT books are of special significance for us in our knowing what good works God wants us to do (cf. Heb. 1:1-2). To understand further what these good works are that the NT books specially equip us to do, we must examine some key features of these books.
  3. Of the 27 books of the NT, we know that God explicitly directed many of them to the same original recipient or recipients. For example, First and Second Corinthians were both written to the same church (1 Cor. 1:2; 2 Cor. 1:1), First and Second Timothy were both written to the same man, Timothy (1 Tim. 1:2; 2 Tim. 1:2), and Luke and Acts were both written to the same man, Theophilus (Luke 1:3; Acts 1:1).
  4. Because of this key feature of these books, we are justified in treating them together as units of the NT. Among such units of the NT, Luke-Acts is by far the largest; in fact, Luke-Acts comprises more of the NT than the combined writings of any other author of the NT.
  5. Because God directed far more of the NT to Theophilus than He did any of the rest of the NT to any other original recipient or recipients of Scripture, we can be certain that Luke-Acts is of special importance for our understanding of the good works that Scripture equips us to do.
  6. Another indicator of the special importance of Luke-Acts relates to the special nature of the first five books of the NT in our present canonical order of Scripture. Each of the first four books ends by informing us that Jesus gave authoritative instructions to His disciples after His resurrection (Matt. 28; Mk. 16; Luke 24; John 20) and Acts, the fifth of these books, begins by doing so (Acts 1; cf. also Acts 10).
  7. From Matthew, the earliest written of these books as well as the first in the canonical order, we learn that Jesus informed His disciples that He had been given all authority in heaven and in earth (Matt. 28:18). Based on that authority, Jesus commanded them to go and make disciples of all nations (Matt. 28:19).
  8. Moreover, in making disciples of all nations, they were to baptize them and instruct them to obey everything that He had commanded them themselves as His original disciples to do (Matt. 28:19). Finally, He promised to be with them until the end of the age (Matt. 28:20), which implied that believers from then on were to continue making disciples for all time until the age would end.
  9. From Matthew, therefore, we learn that Scripture thoroughly equips us to do the good work of making disciples of all nations by teaching them to obey all that Jesus commanded. We are to do this good work because Jesus with the authority that the Father has given Him commanded us to do so  and because Jesus promised to be with us as we do so until the end of the age.
  10. The Gospel of Mark ends by specifying that Jesus commanded His disciples to go into the whole world and preach the gospel to every person (Mk. 16:15). Based on Matthew and Mark, we learn that all Scripture equips us for doing two primary good works that Jesus with the authority that the Father has given Him has commanded us to do: (1) evangelize all people in all nations; and (2) disciple all nations to obey all that Jesus commanded. Moreover, we are to do these good works until the end of the age.
  11. Although Matthew and Mark both provide us with vital information that equips us to do these good works that Jesus has commanded us to do, we should expect Luke-Acts to be even more important in doing so because it comprises by far the biggest section of the beginning books of the NT in the present canonical order of books. When we give special attention to Luke-Acts to see what it teaches us about these good works that Jesus has authoritatively directed us to do, we certainly discover that such is the case.
  12. The Gospel of Luke teaches us that God wants us to know the certainty of the things that we have been instructed (Luke 1:4). It also teaches us that God wants us to know all that He has revealed about what Jesus did and taught (cf. Acts 1:1).
  13. Luke ends with a record of explicit teaching from Jesus that He directed His followers to be witnesses of repentance and forgiveness of sins to all nations (Lk. 24:46-48). Based on what Matthew, Mark, and Luke combined teach us, we learn that Scripture equips us to do two primary good works: (1) evangelize all people in all nations by preaching the gospel to them, including especially witnessing to them about repentance and the forgiveness of sins; and (2) disciple all nations to obey all that Jesus has commanded.
  14. Acts begins with a record that amplifies our understanding of what Matthew, Mark, and Luke teach us by specifying that the disciples were to be witnesses of Christ to all places in the world in a specific geographical progression (Acts 1:7-8). Matthew, Mark, Luke, and Acts, therefore, equip believers to do two primary good works that Jesus has commanded them to do until the end of the age: (1) evangelize all people in all places in all nations, including testifying to them about repentance and remission of sins; and (2) disciple all nations to obey all that Jesus has commanded.
  15. Based on what we find in the rest of the book of Acts, we know that a major purpose of the book of Acts is to relate to us how the believers in the apostolic company were witnesses of Christ from Jerusalem to the world (Acts 1:7-8). Moreover, by applying Matthew 28:18-20 to what we find in Luke-Acts, we know that Christ wants us also to be such witnesses for Him (cf. Acts 8:1-4).
  16. Based on the discussion above, we learn that God has given us Luke-Acts especially so that we would be thoroughly equipped to be witnesses for Christ. In these four messages, we will look at many passages in Acts to learn more about how God wants us to be witnesses for Christ.
  17. The goal of this series is to present as thoroughly as possible in the time allotted many key biblical truths from Luke-Acts that we all need to give more attention to in our teaching and ministry in the area of witnessing.

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

In Preaching, Theology
 permalink

Beware “Theological Reductionism” that Overemphasizes the Deity of Jesus!

February 3, 2015

Is overemphasizing the deity of Jesus even possible? Mark 1:1-3 is a crucial passage for showing that such overemphasis is not only possible, but also is very widespread and has negatively affected the theological understanding of many believers.

The Proper Approach to Interpreting Mark 1:1

The Gospel of Mark begins with vital teaching about the gospel of Jesus Christ: “The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1). This theologically pregnant statement juxtaposes many key theological terms: “gospel,” “Jesus,” “Christ,” and “the Son of God.”

Self-evidently, a right handling of this text is of preeminent importance. How then should we approach interpreting what Mark affirms here?

The Holy Spirit answers that question by how He has inspired what immediately follows in the passage: “As it is written in the prophets …” (Mark 1:2a). To interpret Mark 1:1 properly, we must relate it properly to how the Spirit has signified that Mark 1:1 is to be understood through our attention to previous biblical teaching.

What Does Mark 1:2-3 Itself Teach Us?

Before we can understand how Mark 1:1 relates properly with Mark 1:2-3, we must examine what Mark 1:2-3 teaches us itself. Mark 1:2-3 directs our attention to teaching found elsewhere in Scripture:

Mar 1:2 As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee. 3 The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.

A careful analysis of verse 2 reveals that this biblical citation speaks of three distinct persons:

(1) the Speaker of the statement (“I,” “my”);

(2) the one who is sent by the Speaker as His messenger and who will prepare the way of another Person to whom the Speaker addresses the statement;

(3) the One Whom the Speaker addresses the statement to and Whose face the Speaker will send His messenger before and Whose way the messenger will prepare before Him (the third Person spoken of in the passage who is the referent of both occurrences of the pronoun “thy” in this verse).

The Speaker is God the Father, the one whom He sends as His messenger is John the Baptist (cf. especially 1:4-6), and the third Person in the passage is Jesus (Mark 1:7ff.).

Because Mark 1:3 informs us that the messenger would proclaim that the One whose way he would prepare (Mark 1:2) is the Lord, interpreters rightly understand that the passage is affirming the deity of Jesus. Is this affirmation of His deity, however, the only essential teaching of the passage about the gospel of Jesus Christ?

What Mark 1:1 Signifies Based on Its Relation to Mark 1:2-3

Many interpreters hold that the phrase “the Son of God” at its essence signifies Jesus’ deity in this passage and support this understanding by noting how that phrase is used elsewhere and by how 1:3 speaks of Him as the Lord whose way the messenger would prepare. Arguing in this way, they affirm that the essential truth about the gospel that Mark is stressing here is that Jesus Christ is deity Himself.

All too often, as they handle the passage in this way, however, they lose sight of another essential truth that the passage plainly affirms about Jesus before it speaks of Him as the Lord—Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is a distinct Person from the Father who sent His messenger before Him to prepare His way and His paths! Yes, this passage affirms the full deity of Jesus Christ, but what it teaches about His deity is not the only essential truth that this passage provides us about the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Discussion

When interpreters emphasize one truth that a passage teaches to such an extent that they obscure or minimize without biblical warrant other key truths that the passage also teaches, they engage in what I call “theological reductionism.” Such reductionism, when it is repeatedly done, easily leads to widespread neglect of key biblical teaching and the mishandling of key passages of Scripture.

Yes, Mark 1:1-3 affirms the deity of Jesus Christ as the Lord. No, the passage does not teach that Jesus Christ as the Son of the God means only that Jesus is God Himself.

Rather, through inspiring Mark 1:2-3 as the essential explanation of the meaning that He intends for us to understand about the gospel significance of Jesus Christ as the Son of God, the Holy Spirit teaches us to hold that “the Son of God” here denotes both His deity and His being a distinct person from God the Father. To emphasize the former at the expense of the latter is to engage in theological reductionism.

Moreover, the passage teaches us that the Father sent His messenger to prepare the way for the coming of Jesus to people as the Lord. The emphasis on the preparatory ministry of the messenger shows us that what would take place in Jesus’ life as the Lord was not a self-determined expression of and exercise of His own deity; Jesus came as the Lord whose paths His Father directed and determined.

Conclusion

Mark 1:1-3 teaches that a right understanding of the gospel significance of Jesus Christ as the Son of God includes both His deity and His distinction in person from God the Father. It also teaches us that another key truth about the gospel significance of Jesus Christ as the Son of God is that the Father prepared His way to come to people as the Lord.

We must take care not to reduce the vital theological teaching of this passage about the gospel in such a way that we communicate that the gospel at its essence is reducible to merely an affirmation of and an expression of the deity of Jesus Christ. To furnish people with a proper understanding of the gospel of Jesus Christ, we must communicate to them not only the deity of Jesus but also both His distinction in person from God the Father and the Father’s essential working in the life of Jesus.

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

In Exposition, Gospel, Theology
 permalink

Are You Rightly Receiving the Bible in Your Life?

January 29, 2015

Paul ends Second Timothy 3 with a profound statement that is rightly stressed for what it teaches about the inspiration of Scripture (2 Tim. 3:16). An examination of that statement in its surrounding context provides crucial understanding that every believer needs to have in order that he would be rightly receiving the Bible in his life.

Scripture Makes People Wise unto Salvation

Paul taught Timothy that the holy Scriptures were able to make him wise unto salvation through faith that is in Jesus Christ:

2Ti 3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

This statement shows that genuine salvation results in a person’s life from his contact with the Bible only if he allows it to impart to him the wisdom that he lacks. Specifically, he must accept God’s wisdom that Scripture reveals to him by believing what the Scripture presents to him about Jesus Christ.

People who refuse to believe in Jesus Christ through the ministry of the Bible that they receive are people who reject divine wisdom that is essential for salvation. Until a person repents of such rejection, he will never rightly receive the Bible in his life.

Scripture Profits Believers unto All Good Works

When a person repents toward God and believes in Jesus Christ through rightly receiving the Scripture in his life, he is saved. After his salvation, God intends for him to continue rightly receiving the Bible in his life:

2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

Here Paul taught Timothy that as a believer in Jesus Christ, he was to receive profit from all Scripture such that it all would perfect him as a man of God. Paul then expanded on how Scripture was to perfect Timothy as a man of God by telling him that through his rightly receiving all Scripture in his life, Timothy would be thoroughly furnished for all good works.

By concluding this teaching as he did, Paul expressed that God’s intent for providing the entirety of the Bible to every believer was so that he would be fully equipped to do all the good works that God wants him to do! Saying this, Paul taught the profound truth that a believer’s doing all the good works that God intends for him to do is the essential outcome that must result from his contact with all Scripture.

When a believer is not doing all the good works in his life that God wants him to do, he shows that he is not rightly receiving the Bible in his life. He must repent and believe what Scripture teaches him about all the good works that he is to do.

Conclusion

We must all assess ourselves with all diligence to see if we are rightly receiving the Bible in our lives. To whatever extent we are failing to do all the good works that God wants us to do, we are not rightly receiving the Bible in our lives.

Are you rightly receiving the Bible in your life?

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

In Discipleship, Exposition, Theology
 permalink

Like Jesus from Childhood to Death!

January 24, 2015

Two profound statements in Scripture about Jesus arrest my attention nearly every time I read them:

Luk 2:40 And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom: and the grace of God was upon him.

Heb 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

The first shows that as a child who was waxing strong in Spirit and filled with wisdom, Jesus had the grace of God upon Him. The second shows that Jesus tasted death for every man by the grace of God.

Comparing these two verses, we see that Jesus—both as a sinless child and as a dying Christ who died for our sins—was what He was by the grace of God! Obviously, these verses do not have as their primary focus that Jesus Himself was “very God of very God” because God does not need grace to be or do anything.

Yes, Jesus was “very God of very God,” but these verses forcefully teach us that we must not make that glorious truth the sum total of our understanding of Jesus’ life from childhood to death. A theology and practice that mostly overlooks or ignores the biblical teaching about the grace of God in Jesus’ life is a distorted and unbiblical theology and practice.

Although He was fully God Himself, Jesus yet both lived and died by the grace of God that was upon Him! Let us take great encouragement from these truths that we can be like Jesus (in the ways that we can and should be) from childhood to death by the grace of God!

Praise God for His marvelous grace that He pours out on all who repent toward Him and believe in His Son!

 

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

In Exhortation, Interpretation, Theology
 permalink

A Key Recommendation Based on the Profound Glory of Theophilus

January 17, 2015

(I took this post down temporarily to correct an unintentional but serious factual error that I made originally: Because Moses wrote the Pentateuch, he, and not Luke, wrote far more of the Bible than any other writer of Scripture did.

I apologize for the inaccuracy of this post in its original form. Here is the corrected post.)

Analyzing in various ways the 66 books that the Holy Spirit inspired holy men of God to write reveals some striking and instructive facts about Scripture. After listing several of these facts, this post presents a key recommendation that stems from the profound distinction that Theophilus has among all people that have ever lived.

Noteworthy Facts about Scripture

1. The book of Psalms has the most chapters (150), verses (2,461), and words (43,738) of any single book of the Bible.1 Psalms is the only book of Scripture that we know with certainty was written by multiple authors.

We also know that many of the individual Psalms were written especially for specific people (the choir director, etc.). Moreover, we do not have any explicit indication that all the Psalms were specifically addressed initially to any one individual.

2. Moses wrote five books of the Bible, Genesis-Deuteronomy. These books combined comprise 5,852 verses and 156,736 words.

Moses authored far more verses and words of the Scripture than did any other author.2 Although his five books were for the children of Israel and were to be read to them, the books do not explicitly say that they were written for any specific individual.

3. Paul wrote 13 books of Scripture, far more than any other author of Scripture did. The Pauline Epistles comprise 2,033 verses and 43,487 words, which are both slightly less than the corresponding numbers for Psalms.

Paul addressed some of his epistles to individuals and others to groups of people, which means no single individual (or group) was the divinely intended initial recipient of all of Paul’s writings.

4. Although Luke wrote far fewer books than Paul and Moses did, and the combined size of his two books (Luke and Acts) is far less than the totals for the works of Moses, Luke’s writings are greater in both words (50,184 versus 43,487) and verses (2,158 versus 2,033) than the Pauline Epistles are when they are treated as a unit.

Compared to Psalms, although Luke-Acts has fewer verses (2,158) than the Psalms (2,461), it has more words than Psalms does (50,184 [Lk-Acts] versus 43,738 [Psalms]).

Although Luke wrote far fewer verses and words of Scripture than Moses did, he did write more of the New Testament than any other writer did.3

Luke wrote both of his books to the same man, Theophilus.

The following table helps us see further the significance of these facts:

Books of Scripture

The Profound Glory of Theophilus

The analysis of Scripture above underscores the biblical importance of Luke-Acts in comparison with the writings of other major contributors to Scripture. When we then also take into account that Scripture informs us explicitly that both Luke and Acts were written to the same person (Theophilus), we learn that God inspired far more Scripture to be written to Theophilus than He did to any other human being that has ever lived!

Moreover, Theophilus is the only person to whom we know with certainty God directed that two genres of Scripture be written (a Gospel; Acts). These facts show that the vast numbers of believers who have never thoroughly studied Luke-Acts as a unit should do so in order that they might be blessed in the same way that God blessed Theophilus by bestowing upon him the profound glory of being the initial recipient of Luke-Acts!

1All basic statistics in this post are for the books in English in the KJV and are based on the Detailed Stats available in the Search Statistics Window of BibleWorks 7.

2Moses also wrote Psalm 90, so the totals for the numbers of the verses and words that he wrote are actually greater than this but those additional verses and words do not affect the comparisons made in this post in any significant way.

3If Paul also wrote Hebrews, his writings would total 2,336 verses and 50,392 words. Paul would then have written more words of Scripture than Luke did, but he still would have written far less of Scripture than did Moses.

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

In Bible reading, Theology
 permalink