A People for His Name

Approaching Evangelism Properly in Light of Supernatural Opposition

March 7, 2011

In the Parable of the Sower, Jesus teaches that those who do not believingly receive the Word of God experience a fearful reality: “Those by the way side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved” (Luke 8:12). The other Gospels add that Satan does so “immediately” (Mark 5:15) in the heart of a person when he hears” the word of the kingdom” and does not understand it (Matt. 13:19). Through these statements, Jesus teaches us that the devil is always actively at work in removing the Word of God in some unexplained manner out of the hearts of people who do not understand what they hear about the kingdom of God.

How should this sobering truth affect our evangelistic practice? It seems that we should conclude from this teaching by Jesus that we should treat a lost person who has received even much previous testimony but has not understood what he has been given as if he has never heard those truths at all. If this understanding is correct, we should be all the more diligent to testify central truths as clearly as possible to lost people each time we witness to them and not take for granted that they understand any of them in the manner that they should to be saved.

Our focus, therefore, in evangelism must be on bringing lost people to understand and accept what they hear and not just on a quick witness followed by an immediate decision. We should take pains to do what we can to be reasonably certain that they understand central truths properly.

As a specific application of this line of reasoning, we should not assume that unsaved people who have grown up in Christian homes or attended church even for many years have a proper understanding of any key truth. Even if they protest that they already know something or have heard it many times before, we should not allow their protesting to deter us from thoroughly explaining key truths to them prior to leading them to make a decision.

For example, multitudes of unsaved people have some familiarity with the Resurrection of Jesus. Their simply knowing and even assenting to the bare fact that Jesus rose does not constitute a biblical understanding of its full evangelistic significance. God has revealed to us that He has proven a specific truth to all men by raising Jesus from the dead (Acts 17:31) and that He mandates a specific response to that truth from all men everywhere (17:30). We, therefore, would do well to probe all people to whom we witness about their understanding and acceptance of that truth and their willingness to act properly on it before leading any of them into a profession of faith.

Although there will be situations in which we encounter people who already have the necessary understanding of key truths and willingness to act upon them, we will not know that such is the case apart from carefully trying to discern that readiness properly. Taking steps to ensure proper understanding in the people that we evangelize should help us at least to some degree to overcome the supernatural opposition that we face and to reduce the number of false professions that we see.

In Evangelism Evangelism

The Salvation of a "Good" Man

March 6, 2011

The Gentecost accounts (Acts 10, 11) present how a “good” man named Cornelius and others who were with him were saved. From these accounts, we should note many key truths about how a person, even a good man, is to be saved.

Cornelius was a high-level military official in the Roman army. He was a “devout man, and one that feared God with all his house, which gave much alms to the people and prayed to God always” (10:2). His servants said that he was “a just man, and one that feareth God, and of good report among all the nation of the Jews” (10:22). These statements reveal that Cornelius was truly an exemplary man.

One day, he saw an angel of God in a vision (10:3). The angel came to him and informed him that his prayers and alms were “come up for a memorial before God” (10:4). The angel then instructed Cornelius about what he was to do. Because we are given four separate records of this angelic encounter (10:3-7; 22; 30-32; 11:13-14), we know that God has greatly stressed to us this event in Cornelius’ life. Interestingly, we are given key information in the last record that is not provided in any of the others: the angel told Cornelius to send for Peter, who would tell him words, whereby he and his entire house would be saved (11:13-14).

Based on the information provided, we learn many important truths about how this good man was not saved. First, he was not saved by being a good man. Though he was an exemplary man in many ways, he still needed to be saved. His good deeds of giving alms to people did not save him. His being religious did not save him. His fear of God did not save him. Though he prayed to God continually, his doing so did not save him. His being just in his dealings with others did not save him. Though he was a model citizen who had a good reputation among all the Jews, he was not saved.

Furthermore, though he had an authentic encounter with a true angel of God, that supernatural experience did not save him. What’s more, though God had heard his prayers and remembered his alms, he still was not saved!

After the angelic encounter, Cornelius immediately sent for Peter (10:7-8; 33). Peter came to him. Upon seeing Peter coming in, “Cornelius met him, and fell down at his feet, and worshipped him. But Peter took him up, saying, ‘Stand up; I myself also am a man'” (10:25-26). Peter was the Christ-chosen leader of the apostolic company. He thus was the top religious leader among the disciples of Jesus. Cornelius met this supreme religious figure and did homage to him, but his doing so did not save him. We thus learn that meeting and doing homage to any mere man, even the supreme religious leader of one’s time, will not save a person.

After Cornelius explained to Peter why he had sent for him (10:30-33), we read how Cornelius was finally saved. As the angel had told him, to be saved, Cornelius had to hear words from Peter whereby he would be saved. . . .

(Read the full article)

In Evangelism, Interpretation Evangelism

Interpreting the Word "Lord" in the NT

March 5, 2011

In the Greek version of the 39 books of the OT, 37* of them use the Greek word for Lord (kurios) to express the judicial actions or authority of God:

Gen. 6:5ff.; Exod. 9:3; Lev. 10:2; Num. 33:4; Deut. 32:36
Jos. 24:20; Judg. 11:27; Ruth 1:17
1 Sam. 2:10; 2 Sam. 3:39; 1 Ki. 2:32; 2 Ki. 15:5; 1 Chr. 2:3; 2 Chr. 7:21
Ezr. 9:15; Neh. 1:8; Est. 4:17* [the Hebrew does not have a word for Lord here or anywhere else in Esther]
Ps. 7:7; Prov. 3:32-33; Job 42:7
Isa. 1:24; Jer. 1:14; Lam. 1:5; Ezek. 5:8; Dan. 1:2
Hos. 1:4; Joel 1:15; Amos 1:2; Obad. 1:1-2; Jon. 1:14
Mic. 1:3; Nah. 1:2-3; Hab. 1:12; Zeph. 1:2-3; Hag. 1:9; Zech. 1:12; Mal. 1:4

Only Ecclesiastes and Song of Solomon do not have the word in them.

This Greek word for Lord is used profusely in the Greek Old Testament to communicate truth about God as the Judge. For example, the word is used more than 40 times just in Genesis alone in that way. Genesis also explicitly identifies the Lord (18:22-33) as the Judge of all the earth (18:25). Although I have not yet compiled the exact number of times kurios is used concerning the Lord in this sense, it is very likely well over 2500 times in the OT (In my dissertation research, I compiled more than 3700 verses in the OT concerning God as the Judge, and a high percentage of them use the word Lord for God.)

Based on this data, we should understand that any one who was familiar with the Old Testament in Greek would have had the profound sense that this word with great frequency communicates truth about God as the Judge. Almost every book they would read in their Bibles would testify to them about the Lord as the Judge. When such a person would hear apostolic evangelistic proclamation about Jesus that declared Him to be the One that God has made both Lord and Christ (Acts 2:36), what truth about Jesus would he very likely have understood the term to communicate (cf. the subsequent flow of thought in Acts 2:37ff.)?

Along that line, of the 27 books in the Greek NT, 21 of them use the word to express the judicial actions or authority of God or Jesus in some manner:

Matt. 7:22-23; Mk. 12:9 (human master; clear implicit significance for Christ); Lk. 13:25-28; John 8:11
Acts 2:20; Rom. 9:28; 1 Co. 4:4-5; 2 Co. 5:10-11
Eph. 6:9; Phil. 2:11 (those under the earth will not bow to Him willingly, but they will be forced to do so; cf. Rom 14:11); Col. 3:24
1 Thess. 4:6; 2 Thess. 2:8; 1 Tim. 6:13-14; 2 Tim. 1:16
Heb. 10:30; Jas. 5:7-8; 1 Pet. 3:12; 2 Pet. 2:9; Jude 1:5; Rev. 15:4

Galatians and Philemon do have the word, but they do not have any clear uses of it to convey someone who renders judgment. Four books (Titus and the Johannine Epistles) do not have any occurrences of the word.

The Greek word for Lord communicates truth about God as the Judge in 58 of the 66 books of the Bible in Greek. When key statements in the New Testament speak of Jesus as Lord, we must interpret them in light of this data.

In Biblical Greek, Interpretation Interpretation

Repaving the Romans Road – Romans 6:23

March 4, 2011

In using the Romans Road approach to evangelism, after 3:23, many share Romans 6:23 next: “For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” In explaining the first part of the verse, they often use the concept of earning a wage after having worked at a job. Explaining how it would be unjust for an employer not to pay an employee who has worked all week, they testify to the similar necessity of receiving a penalty for one’s sin.

In explaining the second half of the verse, they stress the contrast between a gift and wages. Often, the illustration of holding out a Bible to a person is used accompanied by a question of how a person would get the Bible as a gift. Many times, an explanation of eternal life as both a new quality of life and life that lasts forever is included at this point.

Next, they explain that God gives the gift of eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. Various scenarios are often used to illustrate this truth (for example, discussing a person’s necessity of going to the only welfare office in a town if they are to receive their welfare check). They then draw the parallel to receiving salvation only through Jesus.

A closer look at the preceding revelation in Romans supports repaving the Romans Road at this point by tying the presentation of the verse more directly to what Paul says earlier in the book. Prior to 6:23, Paul speaks about eternal life for the first time in the middle of a lengthy section that focuses heavily on God’s actions as Judge (2:1-16). In this section, Paul indicts the person whom he addresses (“O man”; 2:1, 3) for judging others while committing the same misdeeds himself. After explaining to him God’s benevolent intent for His not judging him for his hypocritical judging (2:4), Paul informs him of the solemn future that awaits him:

But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God; WHO WILL RENDER TO EVERY MAN ACCORDING TO HIS DEEDS: To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life; But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile; but glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile: For there is no respect of persons with God (2:5-11).

In these verses, explicit statements (“the day of wrath . . . and of the righteous judgment of God”; “who will render . . . according to his deeds”; “no respect of persons with God”) show that the entire section emphasizes what God as the Judge will do with respect to every man. Paul, therefore, communicates in this section the truth that God, as the impartial Judge, will righteously render eternal life to certain people according to their deeds.

Paul’s concluding this section by speaking of “the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to [his] gospel” (2:16) strongly confirms this analysis of the preceding verses that immediately surround his reference to eternal life. This concluding statement about “the day when God shall judge” does so by forming an inclusio with the earlier reference to the day of His judgment (2:5).

Based on this analysis, Paul’s first reference to eternal life is in a context that highlights God as the Judge who gives eternal life. Furthermore, in the flow of thought, his concluding statement of God’s judging through Jesus Christ signifies that God is going to render eternal life to people through the judgment that He will carry out through Jesus Christ. The flow of thought from 2:5-16 thus sets forth Jesus Christ as God’s judicial agent who will render eternal life to those people who by patient endurance in well doing seek for it. (See both John 5:22-24 and 5:25-30 for essentially the same teaching from Jesus Himself about both His judicial agency and His giving eternal life by virtue of that authority; cf. 5:34, which makes explicit that He gave this teaching because He wanted the people to whom He gave it to be saved).

Because Paul has already taught us as the readers of Romans this glorious truth before we get to 6:23, our understanding of the subsequent reference to God’s gift of eternal life through Jesus Christ should account for this earlier teaching. Based on this aspect of the flow of thought in Romans, we should use this truth from Romans 2:5-16 as at least a part of our explanation of how we get eternal life from Jesus. By presenting to sinners Jesus Christ as the Lord, God’s judicial agent (cf. 14:9-12), who gives eternal life, we will provide to them biblical truth that God intends for them to receive through our witness.

In my preceding article, “Extending and Repaving the Romans Road,” I argued for adding Romans 2:16 and using it in explaining 3:23. This article further supports adding Romans 2:16 to the Romans Road. We thus would do well to extend and repave the Romans Road by adding this key statement and using the vital truth that it teaches to explain both 3:23 and 6:23.

In Evangelism, Interpretation Evangelism

Extending and Repaving the Romans Road

March 3, 2011

Millions of believers have been taught “the Romans Road” as an approach to evangelism. Often, those who present this approach teach the use of five verses: Romans 3:23; 6:23; 10:9-10; and 10:13. Undoubtedly, God has used this approach to save many people. Nonetheless, key considerations call for extending and repaving the Romans Road.

First, the “success” of this approach has resulted from realities that need careful scrutiny . . .

Read the full article.

In Evangelism, Interpretation Evangelism

Obedience to His Heavenly Vision

March 2, 2011

When he stood trial before King Agrippa, the apostle Paul declared, “I was not disobedient unto the heavenly vision” (Acts 26:19). What Paul said next is striking because it reveals that his own thinking about what was central for him to do in obedience to his heavenly vision was more than what many believers today might initially think that it was. His first statement about his obedience was not a statement explicitly about his proclaiming Christ. In fact, Paul’s first words in explaining his obedience do not say anything at all explicitly about his ministering to people content about Jesus. (Of course, proclaiming Christ was a key aspect of Paul’s obedience, as his later statements make clear [26:22-23]). Instead, Paul said that he . . . (read the full article)

In Evangelism, Interpretation Evangelism, Interpretation

Why Did Jesus Repeatedly Say, "My God"?

March 1, 2011

Before Jesus died on the Cross, He said, “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, MY GOD, MY GOD, WHY HAST THOU FORSAKEN ME?” (Matt. 27:46; caps in original). Although He Himself was fully God, Jesus addressed the Father as His God twice in this statement. Anyone who reads this statement and understands what He said has to reckon with the fact that the One dying on the Cross made an incredible statement that was not focused on His own deity. Rather, the reader is to accept the truth of the profound reality communicated by Jesus’ words concerning Him and His Father.

In one of His resurrection appearances, Jesus said to Mary, “Touch Me not; for I am not yet ascended to My Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto My Father, and your Father; and to My God, and your God” (John 20:17). Although He had risen from the dead, He had not yet been glorified at the Father’s right hand when He made this statement that speaks of the Father as His God. Again, the reader is confronted with a statement that directs his attention away from Jesus’ own deity and to that same profound truth seen earlier. Apparently, Jesus intended His saying to communicate to His original audience and to all who have encountered it thereafter that the Crucifixion and the Resurrection did not change this profound reality concerning Him and His Father.

About six decades after Jesus had made these statements, Jesus appeared to the apostle John. At that time, He had already been glorified at the Father’s right hand for more than half a century. In one of His statements to John, the glorified Jesus again spoke of the Father as His God. This time, however, He strikingly emphasized that truth by repeating the words, “My God,” four times:

“Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name” (Rev. 3:12).

Why did Jesus repeatedly say these words to John? Apparently, Jesus intended to communicate unmistakably to John that His ascension and glorification did not change the profound reality concerning Him and His Father that He had spoken of decades earlier. The Father was still His God, and Jesus wanted to be sure that John understood that fact and was mindful of it.

Moreover, by His including these words in one of the letters to the seven churches, we understand that Jesus wanted to confront all the churches of that time with the same striking emphasis. Jesus thus desired that all believers of that time would be mindful of the profound reality of the Father as His God.

Because the Holy Spirit has recorded these statements in Scripture, it is clear that there is a divine intent for all believers in all subsequent ages to be mindful of the fact that the Father is still Jesus’ God. The last statement by Jesus about that truth emphasized that truth far beyond the other two. Revelation was written several decades after Jesus’ glorification, and the greater emphasis on this truth in Revelation 3:12 suggests that believers at that time needed an even stronger presentation of that truth than those who lived during the days that Jesus was on the earth.

If this understanding is correct, why was it so? Perhaps part of the explanation for what Jesus did is found in considering our human desire ever increasingly to resolve paradoxical truths and explain everything as fully as possible. How the Father can be the God of Jesus—who Himself is God—is a very difficult truth for us as humans to handle. Jesus’ final statement served not to lessen the difficulty but to intensify it greatly. We thus must conclude that God views it as very important that we maintain, regardless of the difficulties that doing so presents to our minds, full belief in and mindfulness of both Jesus’ own deity and the truth of the Father’s continuing even today to be the God of Jesus.

Jesus repeatedly spoke of the Father as His God so that we would not become overly focused on Jesus’ own deity and lose sight of the profound nature of His relationship to the Father. Revelation 3:13 shows that we must continue to make known that emphasis in our churches today.

In Interpretation Interpretation

Is It Essential to Use the Word "Savior" in Gentile Evangelism?

February 28, 2011

An examination of the occurrences of the word Savior in Scripture reveals some striking facts. The following study seeks ultimately to allow Scripture to direct us concerning the question, “Is it essential to use the word Savior in Gentile evangelism?”

The word Savior does not occur in the OT until Second Samuel 22:3. This means that the first nine books of the OT do not have the word even once. It occurs twelve times in five books among the remaining 29 books. Of the 39 books of the OT, the word thus does not occur in 33 of them. (The word does occur in two other books as a plural in references to people [Neh. 9:27; Oba. 21]).

Four books have one occurrence each (2 Kings 13:5; Psalm 106:21; Jer. 14:8; Hos. 13:4). Isaiah has 8 occurrences (19:20; 43:3, 11; 45:15, 21; 49:26; 60:16; 63:8). Of these references, the first one refers ultimately to the Messiah’s future work in the end times, but the rest do not (at least directly and unambiguously) seem to set forth the Messiah as the Savior. The OT, therefore, uses the word Savior only once to emphasize who the Messiah would be.

In the NT, the word does not occur in Matthew or Mark. God thus inspired two Gospels that present the life of Christ without using the word at all. The word Savior occurs twice in Luke (God [Luke 1:47] and Jesus [2:11]) and once in John (Jesus, 4:42). In Luke, it occurs in the angelic announcement at the birth of Christ, which certainly was an announcement of good news for all people. In John, the word occurs in a statement by some Samaritans who heard Christ and believed in Him. The Gospels, therefore, lack any explicit record of its use in evangelism by any human. They also do not record a single instance of Jesus’ referring to Himself as the Savior.

The word Savior occurs twice in Acts (5:31; 13:23), but not in either of the two epochal accounts of apostolic evangelism, Pentecost and Gentecost. Instead, in two lesser accounts, the word occurs in explicit statements concerning what God has done for Israel. Acts 5 records the testimony of Peter and the apostles to the Jewish Council, and thus appears not to have much direct bearing on our understanding of Gentile evangelism. Though there were Gentiles present when Paul preached his message in Antioch (13:42), his subsequent statement (13:46) shows that he did not regard this occasion at least in some sense as Gentile evangelism. Acts, therefore, does not record a single instance of the use of the word Savior in a context of exclusively Gentile evangelism.

The word Savior also does not occur in the four major theological epistles concerning salvation (Romans; 1 Corinthians; Galatians; Hebrews; this identification of these books as the four major theological epistles concerning salvation is from a recent statement in a sermon by Dr. Mark Minnick). Its absence in the greatest theological treatise in the world about salvation, the book of Romans, is incredible. Furthermore, Paul’s statements in 1 Corinthians 15:3-5 declare central truths about the gospel, but they do not use the word Savior to do so. (If use of the word were truly central to apostolic evangelism, 1 Corinthians 15:3 would seemingly have been a prime place for Paul to do so.)

In the other Epistles, it occurs 19 times. The word refers to the Father 7 times (three times each in First Timothy [1:1; 2:3; 4:10] and Titus [1:3; 2:10; 3:4] and once in Jude 25).

The word Savior refers to Jesus 12 times in these Epistles (once each in four books [Eph. 5:23; Phil. 3:20; 2 Tim. 1:10; 1 John 4:14]; three times in Titus [1:4; 2:13; 3:6]; and five times in Second Peter [1:1, 11; 2:20; 3:2, 18]). Two of the twelve references to Jesus in the Epistles have significant relevance concerning apostolic evangelism (2 Tim. 1:10; 1 John 4:14), but lack of further information leaves unclear their exact relevance for evangelism today.

The word Savior does not occur in Revelation. The inspired capstone of divine revelation thus does not use the word at all to refer to Jesus.

Based on this analysis of the divinely inspired content of Scripture, how much emphasis and what kind of emphasis should we give to this word in our doctrine and practice? In particular, is it essential to use the word Savior in Gentile evangelism?

In Evangelism, Interpretation Evangelism, Interpretation

Christian Faith: Learning to Please God from the Example of Enoch

February 27, 2011

Hebrews 11 highlights many great heroes of the Christian faith, especially Abraham and Moses. Much preaching and teaching focuses on these great men and others like David, who is only mentioned in passing in 11:32. Though he is spoken of in two full verses (Heb. 11:5-6), Enoch, however, seems to have received far less attention. Closely examining the scriptural revelation about him shows some important truths from his life. Most of all, we can and should learn to please God from his example.

Overall, Scripture does not provide much revelation about Enoch. Four passages tell us about him (Genesis 5; 1 Chronicles 1:3; Hebrews 11; and Jude). From these passages, we learn two major truths about Enoch that teach us how to please God.

Please God by walking with Him

As a married man with sons and daughters, Enoch walked with God for three hundred years (Gen. 5:21-24)! He pleased God and did not see death because God translated him (Heb. 11:5). People searched for him but did not find him because God was so pleased with him that He translated him. The next verse declares that pleasing God is only possible by those who come to Him as believers in His existence and His being a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him (Heb. 11:6).

Together, Hebrews 11:5-6, therefore, teach us that Enoch pleased God by walking with Him by coming to Him with faith in His existence and in His being the God who rewards people who seek Him earnestly. Moreover, like Enoch, we too must in our Christian faith learn to please God. To do so, we must walk with Him with confidence in Him and in His intent to reward us for pursuing Him wholeheartedly.

Please God by speaking for Him

Although many have given attention to what Genesis 5 and Hebrews 11 together teach us about Enoch, fewer people seem to have considered how Jude 14-15 compared with these passages also teaches us important truths about how Enoch walked with God in a pleasing way. Jude 14 tells us that Enoch was the seventh from Adam. It adds that he prophesied of the Lord’s coming.

What is not often brought out is what the content of Enoch’s prophesying about the Lord’s coming teaches us about how he pleased God by walking by faith in Him. Enoch prophesied that the Lord would come with multitudes of His saints to render judgment on all ungodly people (Jude 15). Yet, we are not given any information that the Lord ever returned to do so in Enoch’s lifetime.

By comparing Genesis 5, Hebrews 11, and Jude, we thus learn that Enoch believed and proclaimed to others the revelation that he received from some undisclosed source about the future coming of the Lord to judge. These passages considered together suggest that Enoch’s faith in future judgment by God was a key element of his walk that pleased God. We thereby should learn the great importance of that doctrine in our Christian faith.

From all that we know about Enoch, we learn that we are to stress that God desires to reward those who diligently seek Him, having heeded His revelation that warns of His future judgment of the ungodly that refuse to please Him by faith. Although speaking of future judgment by God is an unpopular teaching with many people, Enoch’s example shows us that communication of that truth is a vital aspect of a walk that pleases God.

Scripture teaches us that there are many important doctrines in the Christian faith, and the example of Enoch teaches us that the doctrine of judgment is one of those doctrines. From other Scripture, we learn that we are to preach the judgment of God compassionately and lovingly whenever possible. Let us please God in our Christian faith by walking with Him and speaking for Him.

In Interpretation Interpretation

Learning Parenting from Job

February 26, 2011

Scripture speaks highly of Job in several passages (1:1, 8; 2:3; Ezek. 14:14, 20; cf. James 5:11). In fact, God Himself commends Job twice to Satan by declaring, “There is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that fears God, and eschews evil” (1:8; 2:3). Job thus was the godliest man of his day.

Because God attested to his excelling character and life, it seems reasonable to conclude that Job was a model father. Along that line, the initial account of the book reveals an aspect of Job’s parenting that is worth considering carefully.

After describing the habitual practice of his children, the writer of Job tells what Job did out of concern for his children:

And it was so, when the days of their feasting were gone about, that Job sent and sanctified them, and rose up early in the morning, and offered burnt offerings according to the number of them all: for Job said, It may be that my sons have sinned, and cursed God in their hearts. Thus did Job continually (1:5).

In some unspecified manner, Job regularly met with his children and sanctified them. Their having their own houses and feasting in them shows that at least his sons were adults (1:4). Job thus ministered to his adult children on a regular basis regarding their spiritual state. As circumstances allow, many parents today also actively interact regularly with their adult children with the intent of ministering to them directly concerning their spiritual condition.

Job’s great concern for his children’s spiritual state also led him to offer burnt sacrifices to God continually in view of what his children may have done against God in their hearts. Job, therefore, understood that the wrong thoughts of his children were also sinful and required the offering of burnt sacrifices.

Job was an exemplary father in his day. How many fathers today routinely minister to their adult children out of concern for their sinning against God in their hearts? How many fathers regularly consider the possible sinfulness of the thought life of their adult children and bring that concern to God in their prayers for them? Job’s practice seems to inform us that parents, especially fathers, should continually parent even their adult children in at least these ways.

In Interpretation Christian Living, Interpretation, Parenting

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: