I don't remember if I've already posted this or not. It's an email that I sent to some pastor, at some church, somewhere, some time long ago. He challenged me to prove Biblically that blogging is an acceptable way to deal with the false teachings of the Christian Church…and this is as far as I got (I also end with a couple of quotes from commenters on this blog…one is from Anna, I don't remember who the other is from…please forgive me) ok, here we go:

For this to be worth the effort I am going to need a couple of things from you first.

1. I need you to be open to the ideas that are expressed here. If you are reading this just waiting to tell me how wrong I am there is no point. Please be open to the idea that your opinion may change once you have read my comments. Of course, in the end you may find that I am an idiot, and in that case I expect you to tell me exactly how wrong I am.
2. I need you to accept the premise that I am not writing this blog out of bitterness, hate, or revenge. This is very important. If this website is a result of bitterness then we can all stop right there…it is wrong. So, based on the idea that I am not just another bitter blogger lets continue.

The challenge I have been presented with is to prove Biblically that blogging is an acceptable way to deal with the false teachings of the Christian Church. This is no easy task seeing as how during the period in which the Bible was being written, computers did not exist. Lets also keep in mind that up until recently (the last couple of years really) blogs barely existed, so what we are dealing with is a fairly new idea. Even as I write this I am unaware if I will be able to successfully defend the Blogosphere. I'll give it a try.

Before I get to blogging, I would like to take some time discussing the proper way to confront someone…obviously we must start with Matthew 18:15-17

15"^(M)If your brother sins^[b], go and show him his fault in private; if he listens to you, you have won your brother.

16"But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that ^(N)BY THE MOUTH OF TWO OR THREE WITNESSES EVERY FACT MAY BE CONFIRMED.

17"If he refuses to listen to them, ^(O)tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, ^(P)let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.

Now this is a great scripture…one of the few that Christians typically all agree on and teach that we must follow completely. Let's break down each step (cross reference scriptures in parentheses)

Step 1: Go privately to your brother and confront him. (Luke 17:3)

Step 2: Take 2 or 3 witnesses with you and confront again (Deut 19:15)

Step 3: Tell the whole church (1 Cor 6)

Step 4: Do not associate with this brother anymore. (2 Thes. 3:6)

Should anyone fail to miss one of these steps then they have not handled the situation properly. This scripture alone however fails to address a couple of very key issues:

• 1. If you fail to follow these steps does this excuse the sin of your brother and what is the proper solution to get back on track? Can you still confront your brother and take the proper steps or have you lost your opportunity.
• 2. What if the person who has sinned is a leader or even the head (senior) pastor of the church?

Let's look at issue 1:

I do not believe that just because someone mishandles a situation and skips right to step three that this dismisses the sin; that does not make sense. Should you fail to follow this procedure I believe it is the responsibility of the person to go privately, repent for your mistake and then confront your brother properly. I find no Biblical evidence to suggest otherwise.

Issue 2:

What should be done if the person who has sinned is the head pastor of the church? Step one still fits you should go to your pastor in private to confront him (if you can't get a meeting send a letter). Step 2 still applies, although if you can't get a meeting it seems a little silly to have 3 signatures on a letter, but still it's better than nothing. Step 3 suddenly takes on a whole new perspective and Step 4 is rather difficult as well. How do you "take a matter to the church" when "the matter" is an issue that your pastor has already chosen to ignore you on?

From what I understand "Take it to the church" means to follow the 1 Cor 6 method of allowing someone with in the church to judge the matter, appointing "even men of little account in the church". For this to work your pastor would have to be willing to submit himself to that authority…if that works great, however…if he refuses what is the next step?  

Should we then really take it to the church? Should we stop each and every person as they exit after service and explain to them what your pastor has done? How about calling each and every household and telling all? Maybe sending out a mass email to the whole congregation?

At this point I suggest skipping straight to step 4 and not associating with him anymore. This of course requires you to leave the church, but so be it. He's a sinner anyway.

Now, as I look closely at this verse and begin to break it down I begin to see one other problem…it is seemingly talking about an individual sinning against another individual. It appears to be talking about how to deal with single instances of offence. I do not believe that this scripture is speaking to how to handle when an entire church leadership goes astray with false doctrine, therefore we must move our search along:

What does the Bible say in regard to the teachings of False Doctrine:

Acts 20:28 "Be on guard for yourselves and for all ^(A)the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd ^(B)the church of God which ^(C)He purchased with His own blood.

2 Timothy 4:2-4 preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction.

 3For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires,

 4and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths.

Romans 16:17-18 I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them. 18For such people are not serving our Lord Christ, but their own appetites. By smooth talk and flattery they deceive the minds of naïve people.

Clearly the Bible teaches that there will be false teachers and prophets but what do these scriptures say to do about them? Acts 20 tells us we are told to "be on guard", that the "Holy Spirit has made you overseers", and that we are "to shepherd the church of God". 2 Timothy 4 says to "be ready…reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction". And Romans 16 says to "watch out" for them.

These 3 scriptures do not tell us the proper way to deal with teachers of False Doctrine but it does give us some guidelines, If your blog is "on guard" and "shepherding the church" through "rebuking, reproving and exhorting" then I would say you are doing just fine.

I would like to end phase 1 with these quotes:

to paint everyone with the same broad brush "Oh, you just need to forgive" is incomplete at best. I can only forgive to the extent that I have been personally offended or injured. If I hold in my heart anger, revenge, a desire for judgment and sentencing - then I need to forgive. Anger, revenge and judgment are not mine to hold or to mete out. These belong to God alone, and personal forgiveness relinquishes my right to them. I am willing to do that, and with God's grace I do/will do.

 and Quote 2:

HOWEVER, if a Christian is in sin or error - and that sin or error leads to deception or destruction in the lives of others, my observation of that requires a response. If anger, revenge and judgment are my response, then I need to repent as above. But my forgiveness of the person does nothing to absolve them of their sin or error, does nothing to warn them of the response of the Lord, and does nothing to protect or warn those who are being deceived / destroyed.

That is why the prophets, John the Baptist and Jesus were perfectly correct to proclaim, "Woe to you ______________ (fill in the blank: shepherds, priests, Pharisees, etc.) This was not a matter of personal injury or broken relationship. They were warning of the response of God with the hope that repentence would stay His hand.

FURTHERMORE, if a Christian sins or is in error in a public way, ie, from the pulpit, then it removes the situation of personal injury or private correction. That is why the apostles felt free to publicly name names and warn their readers to reject those people and their doctrines.

It does not matter if the doctrinal error is wide-spread. If Pastor X is preaching Nicolaitan heresy, then it is perfectly right for Pastor X to be singled out for his error, even if half of Christendom preaches the same thing. And for you to tell an individual that they just need to forgive Pastor X is outrageously ridiculous. What good with that do? How will that help Pastor X or the people he is preaching to?

So, forgiveness is just and right and good. But it is not the complete response to the situation.

Which is to simply say "False teaching requires our intervention because the alternative is to allow sin into the church".

What say you? 

I've thought a lot about the subject of God ordaining evil over the past week…and what I decided was that I don't have the answers…it's all a little confusing for me. I would, however, still like to continue this discussion.

For starters, this whole concept of God Ordaining Evil is obviously offensive to some, but the problem is that no-one has been able to tell me where "evil" came from. Now, maybe we should just refer to it as "the mystery of iniquity" and say we don't know where evil came from…which I could accept, but that doesn't really help this discussion…so I'd still like someone to take a stab at explaining how God can be all powerful and the Creator of the world and yet take no responsibility for "evil" showing up.

One of the most interesting parts of this discussion for me is the issue of trusting a loving God. When I sit back and say "God is the author of all the good, bad, and ugly on this earth and I have no way of knowing His plan and purpose due to the fact that I am an ignorant fool in comparison to His great glory" it makes me feel comforted…comforted to know that there is a reason and a purpose that I may not understand…but by faith I can believe that God will work all this out for his own Glory.

Others seem to be saying, "How can you have peace and trust in a God who would ordain such evil".

Here's where I am at: This world is NOT about me, and it's NOT about you…or anyone else for that matter. We are simply here to bring Glory to God, and when I hear people say, "It's not in God's nature to ordain evil", I say "Who are you to say what is and what is not in God's nature?" There have been many scriptures listed that show "God's nature" being one of wrath and anger in which He clearly ORDAINS a lot of horrible sounding things (at least horrible in our human reality)…but do any of us want to stand before God and tell Him what He should and should not do?

It sounds to me like we want to apply our ideals to God when maybe, just maybe, God is bigger than we can even imagine. For instance, we define "love" as "a profoundly tender, passionate affection for another person"; we than see that the Bible claims that "God is Love" therefore God must exibit "a profoundly tender and passionate affection for mankind"…but who are we to tell God what Love is?

Should we apply our limited knowledge to a limitless God?

I'm not sure if I am being very clear at all or if I've just lost my mind…last night, Negro-D said to me "This is really a conversation that should be had over beers…it's to complex to discuss in this forum"…and I think he's right. Still, it's fun to try.

Let me leave you with a few comments from a man who amazes me every time I read his stuff:

John Piper, over at http://www.desiringgod.org/ has this to say in an article discussing "Open Theism":  

But in reality our pain and losses are always a test of how much we treasure the all-wise, all-governing God in comparison to what we have lost. We see this merciful testing of God throughout the Scriptures. For example, in Deuteronomy 8:3 Moses said, "And [God] humbled you and let you hunger and fed you with manna, which you did not know, nor did your fathers know, that he might make you know that man does not live by bread alone, but man lives by every word that comes from the mouth of the Lord." In other words, God ordains the hard times ("he . . . let you hunger") to see if good times are our god. Do we love bread, or do we love God? Do we treasure God and trust his good purposes in pain, or do we love his gifts more, and get angry when he takes them away?

We see this testing in Psalm 66:10-12, "For you, O God, have tested us; you have tried us as silver is tried. You brought us into the net; you laid a crushing burden on our backs; you let men ride over our heads; we went through fire and through water." And we see it in the life of Paul. When he prayed for his thorn in the flesh to be taken away Christ told him what the purpose of the pain was. "Three times I pleaded with the Lord about this, that it should leave me. But he said to me, 'My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness'" (2 Corinthians 12:8-9). The test for Paul was: Will you value the magnifying of Christ's power more than a pain-free life?

We see this testing in 1 Peter 1:6-7, "In this you rejoice, though now for a little while, as was necessary, you have been grieved by various trials, so that the tested genuineness of your faith - more precious than gold that perishes though it is tested by fire - may be found to result in praise and glory and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ." God ordains trials to refine our faith and prove that we really trust his wisdom and grace and power, when hard times come. Similarly in James 1:2-3, "Count it all joy, my brothers, when you meet trials of various kinds, for you know that the testing of your faith produces steadfastness. . . . Blessed is the man who remains steadfast under trial, for when he has stood the test he will receive the crown of life, which God has promised to those who love him." Do we love God? That is the point of the test. Do we cherish him and the merciful wisdom of his painful purposes, more than we cherish pain-free lives? That is the point of God's testing.

Our trials reveal the measure of our affection for this earth - both its good things and bad things. Our troubles expose our latent idolatry.

For those who believe that God rules purposefully and wisely over all things, our response to loss is a signal of how much idolatry is in our souls. Do we really treasure what we have lost more than God and his wisdom? If we find ourselves excessively angry or resentful or bitter, it may well show that we love God less that what we lost. This is a very precious discovery, because it enables us to repent and seek to cherish Christ as we ought, rather than being deceived into thinking all is well.

Oh, and David Mackin, I'm sure you've got good reasons to keep silent on this subject, but I'm just dying to know…what are your thoughts?

1:2: He was in the beginning with God. (NASB) 

The Word was already with God when the beginning began. Again, whenever that was. 

It’s somewhat interesting to see how when referring to the creation of the world, the Bible uses the terms “in the beginning” and “from the beginning.”  “In the beginning” is usually used more in association with God, while “from the beginning” is used more in association with Satan. Compare Gen. 1:1, John 1:1-2, and Heb. 1:10, with John 8:44, and 1 John 3:8 to see this. 

1:3: All things came into being by Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. (NASB) 

The KJV and NIV translate this verse using the verb “made” instead of  “came into being.”  Not wanting to become overly laborious here, but it is important to try and understand what John is wanting us to know about this Word. The Greek verb he chose for what the NASB renders “came into being” is egeneto, and has the idea of “causing to, or bringing something into, existence.”  

So, John is saying that the Word was behind creation, which is huge because creation, as we saw earlier, is one of the Works of God Himself. 

Jesus being the Agent of creation can be seen in Hebrews 1:1-3,10, and also here: 

¹⁶ For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities– all things have been created by Him and for Him. ¹⁷ And He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.  (Colossians 1:16-17, NASB)

 1:4: In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. (NASB) 

In these first four verses of his Gospel, we see four titles which John attributes to the Person of Jesus: the Word, the Creator, the Life, and the Light. 

John is here presenting further proof of Jesus’ Deity, in that He is the Source of Life (see also 1 John 5:11-13,20) and the Source of Light (see John 8:12 and Revelation 21:23). Jesus being “the Life” and “the Light” are themes which John repeats throughout this book (Life: see 3:36, 5:24, 8:51, 11:25, etc.; Light: see 1:8-9, 3:19-21, 9:5, 12:35-36, etc.) 

Similarly, the Psalmist connects the Word of God and Light: 

¹³⁰ The unfolding of Thy words gives light; It gives understanding to the simple. (Psalm 119:130, NASB)

God as Life and Light is also seen expressed together by Moses in Genesis chapter 1, as well as by David in the Psalms: 

⁹ For with Thee is the fountain of life; In Thy light we see light. (Psalm 36:9, NASB)

Man can’t know what it is to really live until He comes to Christ, and lives the life God intended for him to have. I suppose that’s the real reason why people fixate so on the shallow things of this world……booze, drugs, acquiring possessions, seeking attention/fame, building a personal empire, whatever. 

Someone once said that within every person’s heart there is a "God-shaped hole," and they will never find contentment or peace until He fills it. 

-joebib

Having pretty much irrefutably resolved, I think — to any open-minded person who accepts the authority of the Word of God — the question of Christ’s Deity in the previous post (hopefully that was helpful, in spite of the length), let us proceed. 

Anyone who has spent any time at all in reading the four Gospels will soon notice that the Gospel of John is markedly different from the other three.  

So much so that Matthew, Mark and Luke have been grouped together and referred to under the name Synoptics, which basically means “same view.” These Gospels record many of the same parables, miracles, and teachings from the Life of Jesus in a similar style, chronological order, and oftentimes, in almost identical language.  

But John’s Gospel is another story. It is quite unique in both style, wording, and content. Scholars believe that it was the last of the Gospels to be written, probably sometime around 90-100 A.D., towards the end of John’s life. It has been surmised that at that time, John was the Pastor of the church at Ephesus, and that since he was so close to their Savior — John 13:23, 20:2, and 21:7,20 all refer to John as “the disciple whom Jesus loved” — the Christians of John’s day were constantly asking him to give his account of the Good News as he remembered it: a spiritual record of the Life of Jesus. 

The Early Church Father Irenaeus (died ca. 185 A.D.) states that John wrote his Gospel to specifically refute the Gnostic heretic Cerinthus. Church history tells an interesting story of John, who upon encountering this Cerinthus in a public bath house, cried to his disciples, "Up! Let us leave, lest the building fall down upon us; for Cerinthus the enemy of the truth is among us!”

Quite a strong response to false doctrine, as well as perhaps an example for us in our day!  

John does not open his Gospel with a genealogy of the natural life of Jesus the Man, as do Matthew and Luke, nor with action as does Mark, but instead goes back to Eternity past, and describes Jesus as God Himself. 

Also, it may be noticed that the wording of the Gospel of John is different. The way he describes things, and the words he uses, are more simple and straightforward. Notice the subdued, almost understated way John begins in chapter one:  

“In the beginning” 

“was the Word” 

“the Word was with God” 

“the Word was God” 

“in Him was life” 

“the life was the light of men” 

This is especially apparent from his usage of the Greek language, which is of an extremely simple and basic construction. So much so, in fact, that all beginning students of Greek start out their study of this intricate and complex language in the writings of John, usually in this very Gospel. After that, it’s on to more intermediate Greek such as is found in James, the Gospel of Mark, and the Epistles of Peter. Finally — almost as punishment — one concludes with the baffling perplexities of Paul’s scholarly Greek, very complicated indeed. 

It should be noted that while John does use the most basic constructs of language to communicate his message, the words are nevertheless deeply profound in spite of their simplicity. Jerome (died ca. 420 A.D.), the writer of the Latin Vulgate, remarked that “John indeed excels in the depths of divine mysteries.”  

Students of the Bible have also noticed certain distinctive overall themes in the four Gospels.  

Matthew has been recognized as being directed to the Jews — it is believed to have originally been penned in Hebrew — and being replete with O.T. citations, is thought to have been written to prove the Messiah- and King-ship of Jesus. Thus, it is perhaps addressed to the religious man. 

Mark is thought to be addressed to the Roman world, to the man of action. Mark does not open his Gospel with a genealogy, but instead goes directly into the Ministry of Jesus. Inasmuch as Mark was known to be Peter’s companion (see 1 Peter 5:13 and Colossians 4:10), who also was connected to Rome — the “Babylon” reference in 1 Peter 5:13 is thought to be a reference to Rome — it is thought to have essentially been the Gospel according to Peter, and thus it truly seems to be the “Gospel of Action.” If you look up the words “straightway,” and “immediately” in a concordance, you will find that they occur in Mark more times than any other book. 

Luke is the longest of the four Gospels, and as he was probably a Gentile (compare Paul’s distinctions in Colossians 4:7-14), his Gospel has been recognized to have been addressed to the Greek world. His Gospel has more parables than the others, and is thought to have been directed to the thinking man. 

John focuses his Gospel on the Deity of Jesus Christ (see 20:31), and selects 8 major Miracles from the Life of Jesus to show this. This book has traditionally been recognized as being addressed to the believer. 

Thought: Many people say John is their favorite Gospel, the one they turn to in times of difficulty.  

Question: What is your favorite Gospel?

-joebib

Inasmuch as this post has generated open attempts at proselytization , and though I really didn’t intend for it to be a purely doctrinal/theological discussion, I think a brief detour concerning the Deity of Christ might be useful here. 

If you look at most of the world’s cults and religions, the one thing they all have in common is their view of Jesus Christ: nearly all false religions and cults deny His Deity.

I have heard people say, “the Bible does not teach that Jesus of Nazareth was God.” 

Which statement, of course, is patently false.  

These doubters would be better off saying, “I don’t believe what the Bible says about Jesus.” That, at least, is their prerogative, i.e., to disbelieve the Bible. But to assert that the Bible does not teach Christ’s Deity is intellectually dishonest. 

In fact, the NT very clearly records the Seven Characteristics of Deity as being seen in the Life of Jesus.  

At the risk of being a bit ponderous, please allow me to present the following study from my notes, culled mostly from Shedd and Thiessen, as well as Conner, for your consideration. Though I have reduced it substantially, there’s still a lot of information. I have quoted certain passages in full, and merely listed the references of others.

Perhaps this could be useful for later reference if one wished to save it to their files. 

Here are the seven areas at which we will be looking:

1. DIVINE NAMES ARE APPLIED TO JESUS.

 2. DIVINE ATTRIBUTES ARE ASCRIBED TO JESUS.

3. DIVINE WORKS ARE ATTRIBUTED TO JESUS.

4. DIVINE PRAYER IS ADDRESSED TO JESUS:

5. DIVINE WORSHIP IS ACCEPTED BY JESUS

6. DIVINE SINLESSNESS IS ASSERTED OF JESUS.

7. DIVINE PREROGATIVES ARE ASSUMED BY JESUS.

____________________________________________

1. DIVINE NAMES ARE APPLIED TO JESUS: 

A name is that by which something or someone is marked or known. In regard to the Names of God, these are descriptions of His Person, Attributes and Purposes. 

A. Jesus is called LORD, or Jehovah.   

    1) By Jeremiah: 

⁵ "Behold, the days are coming," declares the LORD, "When I shall raise up for David a righteous Branch; And He will reign as king and act wisely And do justice and righteousness in the land. ⁶ "In His days Judah will be saved, And Israel will dwell securely; And this is His name by which He will be called, 'The LORD our righteousness.’” (Jer. 23:5-6, NASB)  

    2) By Paul: 

³ concerning His Son, who was born of a descendant of David according to the flesh, ⁴ who was declared the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead, according to the Spirit of holiness, Jesus Christ our Lord. (Romans 1:3-4, NASB)  

    3) By James: 

1:1 James, a bond-servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes who are dispersed abroad, greetings. (James 1:1, NASB)  

    4) By Peter: 

³ Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His great mercy has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. (1 Pet. 1:3, NASB)  

    5) By Jesus Himself: 

²¹ "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven; but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven. ²² "Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ (Matt. 7:21-22, NASB)   

    6) Additionally, it is an interesting study to compare the many OT passages which refer to the LORD — Yahweh or Jehovah in the Hebrew — with the NT writings which interpret these passages as referring to Jesus.  

Here are a few:

  a. Compare Joel 2:32 with Romans 10:9-13, where Paul refers to the OT Jehovah, as Jesus.    

  b. Compare Isaiah 6:1-10 with John 12:34-41, where John quotes the OT Jehovah, whom Isaiah saw, as Jesus.    

  c. Compare Psalm 102:25-27 with Hebrews 1:8-12, where the writer of Hebrews refers to the OT Jehovah, as Jesus.    

  d. Compare Psalm 68:17-18 with Ephesians 4:7-10, where Paul refers to the OT Jehovah, as Jesus.  

B. Jesus is called Savior:    

  1) In the OT, Jehovah calls Himself “Savior,” and furthermore, says He is the only One who is Savior. (See Ps. 106:21, Isaiah 43:3,11, 45:15,21, 49:26, 60:16, Hos. 13:4 and Ps. 3:8)    

  2) Note how the NT calls Jesus, “Savior”: 

¹¹ for today in the city of David there has been born for you a Savior, who is Christ the Lord. (Luke 2:11, NASB) 

³¹ "He is the one whom God exalted to His right hand as a Prince and a Savior, to grant repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. (Acts 5:31, NASB) 

³ but at the proper time manifested, even His word, in the proclamation with which I was entrusted according to the commandment of God our Savior; ⁴ to Titus, my true child in a common faith: Grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior. (Tit. 1:3-4, NASB)  

C. Jesus is called the First and the Last, the Beginning and the Ending, Alpha and Omega:    

  1) This is a title/name addressed to the LORD, Jehovah, of the OT: 

⁴ "Who has performed and accomplished it, Calling forth the generations from the beginning? 'I, the LORD, am the first, and with the last. I am He.'" (Isaiah 41:4, NASB)  

Also, see Isaiah 44:6, 48:12.    

  2) In comparing these verses from the OT to the following passages in the Book of Revelation, we see this title/name as being applied to Jesus: 

⁷ Behold, He is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see Him, even those who pierced Him; and all the tribes of the earth will mourn over Him. Even so. Amen. ⁸ "I am the Alpha and the Omega," says the Lord God, "who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty”…¹² And I turned to see the voice that was speaking with me. And having turned I saw seven golden lampstands; ¹³ and in the middle of the lampstands one like a son of man…¹⁷ And when I saw Him, I fell at His feet as a dead man. And He laid His right hand upon me, saying, "Do not be afraid; I am the first and the last.” (Rev. 1:7-17, NASB) 

Also, see Rev. 21:6, 22:13.  

D. Jesus is called “God.” 

This, after all, is the ultimate proof of Deity.    

  1) By demons. Matt. 8:29.    

  2) By Isaiah. Isaiah 7:14, 9:6.    

  3) By Gabriel. Luke 1:35.    

  4) By Peter. Matt. 16:17.    

  5) By Paul. Tit. 2:13.    

  6) By Thomas. John 20:20.    

  7) By the Father. Heb. 1:8.    

  8 ) By Christ Himself: 

⁷⁰ And they all said, 'Thou, then, art the Son of God?' and he said unto them, 'Ye say it, because I am;' (Luke 22:70, Young’s Literal Translation) 

It is sometimes claimed that Jesus never referred to Himself as "God," nor wanted anyone to think He was God, which the above verse shows to be untrue. Christ’s followers knew He asserted that He was very God, as did His enemies, which is why they opposed Him: 

¹⁷ But He answered them, "My Father is working until now, and I Myself am working."  ¹⁸ For this cause therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God. (John 5:17-18, NASB) 

_________________________

2. DIVINE ATTRIBUTES ARE ASCRIBED TO JESUS: 

An attribute may be defined as the qualities of a person. There are five of these distinctly Divine qualities, called the Incommunicable Attributes, which are possessed only by God, and which are not found in His creation. All five of which are ascribed to, and manifested in the Life of Jesus. 

  A. God is ETERNAL.   

By this we mean that God has no point of beginning nor point of ending. He has always been, and will always be. He is free from all succession of time, and abides in an ever-abiding present tense. Gen. 21:33; Ex. 3:14; Deut. 33:27; Ps. 90:2; Isaiah 57:15; 1 Tim. 1:17; Rev. 1:4.

    1) Jesus is ETERNAL: 

² "But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, Too little to be among the clans of Judah, From you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel. His goings forth are from long ago, From the days of eternity." (Mic. 5:2, NASB)

The NT interprets this verse from Micah as referring to Jesus in Matthew 2:6. 

⁶ For a Child hath been born to us, A Son hath been given to us, And the princely power is on his shoulder, And He doth call his name Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Father of Eternity, Prince of Peace. (Isaiah 9:6, YLT) 

¹¹ They will perish, but Thou remainest; And they all will become old as a garment,¹² And as a mantle Thou wilt roll them up; As a garment they will also be changed. But Thou art the same, And Thy years will not come to an end." (Heb. 1:11-12, NASB) 

²⁴ but He, on the other hand, because He abides forever, holds His priesthood permanently. ²⁵ Hence, also, He is able to save forever those who draw near to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them. (Heb. 7:24-25, NASB) 

¹⁸ “…and the living One; and I was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of death and of Hades.” (Rev. 1:18, NASB)  

B. God is OMNIPRESENT.  

By this we mean that God is everywhere present at once. He transcends the limits of the universe, and is immanent in every part of it, with His whole Being. He is not bound by the constrictions of time and space. 1 Kings 8:27; Ps. 139:7-8; Jer. 23-24; Acts 17:27-28.

  1) Jesus is OMNIPRESENT: 

¹³ “and no one hath gone up to the heaven, except he who out of the heaven came down — the Son of Man who is in the heaven.” (John 3:13, YLT) 

²⁰ “for where there are two or three gathered together – to my name, there am I in the midst of them.” (Matt. 18:20, NASB)  

C. God is OMNIPOTENT.  

By this we mean that God is all-powerful, which power is underived and irresistible. Nothing is impossible for Him to accomplish if He so wills it. God can bring to pass whatever He wishes through the mere exercise of His Will. Gen. 1:1, 17:1, 18:14; Jer. 32:17; Rev. 19:5-6. 

  1) Jesus is OMNIPOTENT:    

    a. Over demons. Mark 5:1-15; Luke 4:33-41.    

    b. Over disease. Matt. 4:23-24; Mark 1:30-34.    

    c. Over nature. Matt. 8:23-27, 21:19; John 6:6-14.    

    d. Over death. Matt. 9:18-26; Luke 7:12-17; John 11:1-46.    

    e. Over angels. 1 Pet. 3:22.    

    f. Over all things. Matt. 28:18; Eph. 1:20-22; Rev. 1:8.  

D. God is OMNISCIENT. 

By this we mean that God is all-knowing, and knows all things at all times, immediately, simultaneously, exhaustively, and perfectly.  There is nothing that He does not know, and has not known, from all eternity. He knows all of what will come to pass, as well as what might have happened. He has nothing to ever learn. 2 Chron. 16:9; Ps. 139:1-6, 147:5; Isaiah 46:9-10; Dan. 2:28; Acts 15:18; 1 John 3:2.  

  1) Jesus is OMNISCIENT:   

    a. He knew how He would die.  Matt. 16:21; John 12:31-33, 13:1.    

    b. He knew all men.  John 2:23-25.    

    c. He knew the personal history of people.  John 4:16-19,29, 21:18-19.    

    d. He knew His betrayer.  John 13:21-30.     

    e. He knew the future.  Matt. 7:21-33, 23:34-39, 24:1-51.    

    f. He knew all things.  John 16:30, 21:17; Col. 2:3; Heb. 4:12-13.  

E. God is IMMUTABLE.  

By this we mean that God is constant and unchanging in His Being and in His Will. He remains forever the same, faithful to Himself and to His Word. 1 Sam. 15:29; Ps. 33:11; Mal. 3:6; Heb. 6:17-18; Jas. 1:17.  

  1) Jesus is IMMUTABLE:   

Compare Heb. 1:10-12 with Ps. 102:26-27.

⁸ Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today, yes and forever. (Heb. 13:8, NASB)  

_________________________

3. DIVINE WORKS ARE ATTRIBUTED TO JESUS: 

There are certain works that are restricted to God, and are only capable of being performed by God. We see these works performed in the Life of Jesus: 

  A. Jesus created all things. John 1:1-3; Col. 1:16-17; Heb. 1:1-3,10. 

  B. Jesus gives eternal life. John 1:4;1 John 5:11-13,20. 

  C. Jesus will raise all the dead and give them immortal bodies. Phil. 3:20-21. 

  D. Jesus will judge all things. Acts 10:42, 17:31; 2 Cor. 5:10; 2 Tim. 4:1; Rev. 19:11, 20-21. 

_________________________

4. DIVINE PRAYER IS ADDRESSED TO JESUS: 

See Matt. 8:25; Luke 5:8; Acts 1:21-26, 7:59-60; Romans 1:7-8; 1 Cor. 1:2.

_________________________

5. DIVINE WORSHIP IS ACCEPTED BY JESUS: 

Worship is only to be directed to God Himself. Ex. 20:3-5; Deut. 5:7-9.

 A. Jesus is worshiped by angels. Rev. 5:11-12; Is 6:1-5,10 with John 12:37-41; Heb. 1:6; Luke 2:9-14. 

 B. Jesus was worshiped by the Three Wise Men. Matt. 2:1-2,11. 

 C. Jesus was worshiped by men. Matt. 8:2, 14;33, 15:25, 28:9,17; John 9:38. 

  D. Jesus is worshiped by all creation. Rev. 5:13-14. 

Jesus never refused this worship, which would have amounted to deception — as well as blasphemy — if He was not God: 

¹⁴ — for you shall not worship any other god, for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God. (Exodus 34:14, NASB) 

¹⁰ Then Jesus said to him, "Begone, Satan! For it is written, 'You shall worship the Lord your God, and serve Him only.'" (Matt. 4:10, NASB) 

See also Acts 10:25-26; Rev. 19:10, 22:8-9.     

_____________________

6. DIVINE SINLESSNESS IS ASSERTED OF JESUS: 

Sinlessness is derived from the Divine Attribute of Holiness. By this we mean that God is absolutely pure in all He thinks, says, and does, and maintains His own moral excellence without effort or thought. He absolutely abhors sin. Ex. 3:5; Lev. 19:2; 1 Sam. 2:2; Is. 6:1-5, 57:15; Hab. 1:13; and compare 1 John 4:14. 

The NT asserts this Holiness/Sinlessness of Jesus: 

  A. By Gabriel. Luke 1:30-35. 

  B. By demons. Mark 1:23-24. 

  C. By men. Matt. 27:19; Luke 23:39-41; John 18:38, 19:4. 

  D. By the Apostles. Matt. 27:3-4; 2 Cor. 5:21; Heb. 4:15; 1 Pet. 1:18-19. 

  E. By Himself. John 8:46, 15:10. 

Also compare Ps. 40:6-8 and Isaiah 53:1-12.  

The sinlessness of Jesus is important for several reasons: 

  1) If Jesus was sinful, he couldn’t be the Savior of the world.  See Heb. 7:24-28.  

  2) If Jesus was sinful, He would have needed a Savior Himself. See Matt. 1:21; 1 Tim. 1:15; and compare Luke 1:47. 

  3) If Jesus was sinful, he would not have been able to be raised, nor raise Himself, from the dead. See John 10:15-18; Acts 2:24-27; Rom. 1:4 with 6:23; and compare 1 Cor. 15:12-22. 

  4) If Jesus was sinful, He would not have been God, for God is absolutely Holy.  

_________________________

7. DIVINE PREROGATIVES ARE ASSUMED BY JESUS: 

  A. Jesus claimed to be able to raise the dead. John 5:27-29, 6:39-40,54, 11:25-26. 

  B. Jesus claimed to be the Judge of all. Matt. 25:31-34,41; John 5:22,27-30. 

  C. Jesus claimed to be able to bestow eternal life. John 4:7-14, 5:24-25, 10:27-28, 11:20-26, 17:1-3. 

  D. Jesus claimed to have All-power. Matt. 28:18.  

  E. Jesus claimed to be Omnipresent. Matt. 18:20, 28:20. 

  F. Jesus claimed that prayer should be made to Him. John 14:13-14 

  G. Jesus claimed to be able to forgive sin. Mark 2:1-12; Luke 7:36-50; Acts 5:30-31. Compare Acts 8:14-22. 

  H. Jesus claimed to have the same Glory as the Father. John 17:5. 

  I. Jesus claimed to be God. Matt. 26:63-64, 27:11; Luke 22:70. 

³⁴ Jesus answered them, "Has it not been written in your Law, 'I said, you are gods'? ³⁵ "If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), ³⁶ do you say of Him, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, 'You are blaspheming,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God '? (John 10:34-36, NASB)

-joebib

Question: Do Christians need Bible scholars? Should Christians take time to read Bible dictionary articles and Bible commentaries or should they stick to the easier to read popular paperbacks?  Would it be better for believers just to spend their time in prayer getting revelation directly from the Holy Spirit rather than actually studying the Bible? Join Hungry on the Harbor and I as we discuss these important questions: 

Hungry on the Harbor asks: [When it comes to the Bible] what exactly is it that is supposed to be taught? 

Hungry: We are to teach the whole Bible to the whole Church. In my view, each section of the Bible has some beneficial knowledge for Christians to help them live for Jesus Christ. A problem with many churches is the topical sermon approach: the pastor-king can select whatever he wants to put together sometimes casting a spell of false doctrine over an entire congregation. More challenging is expository preaching/teaching through the Bible. The plus is that it is a little bit more difficult for a preacher to concoct false doctrine that way, but the challenge is not to make it too routine. 

Hungry on the Harbor asks: Has humanity changed so much that we need scholarly tools and 'Bible specialists' to tell us what the word of God says? 

Hungry: Humanity is still sinful like it has been from the beginning of time. Yes, we need scholars and scholarly tools to help us interpret the Bible. Are they equal to God? No. Can the average Christian get edified from the Bible without them? Yes. But, how else would we know many things, e.g., that the social structure of ancient Israel (high priestly families, priests, Levites, congregation) was based on its temple purity system which saw the holies of holies as the most sacred of all places and everything away from it as moving in lesser levels of holiness? Thus, there was a religious justification for social stratification and the accumulation of wealth at the top of this social pyramid. Sure, the Holy Spirit could show this social fact to a sincere Christian, but have you ever heard of him showing someone this insight by revelation rather than study? 

Hungry on the Harbor queries: Do you think God is pleased to see how complicated His word has become… 

Hungry: If God is the author of His word, then to follow your logic, are we not able to say that it is his own fault that the Bible has become so complicated? ;  )  The Bible is shown to be very complicated in some circles but does that mean that we run away and hide in our personal closets of anti-intellectualism? When I have a scholarly question, I go to a scholar for an answer. When I have a prophetic question, I go to a prophet for an answer. When I have a psychological question, I go to a psychologist for an answer. When I have a pastoral question, I go to a pastor for an answer. The trouble with the Senior Pastor cult is that too many senior pastors try to function in all of these realms themselves and they fail. We need every gift in the Body of Christ. 

Hungry on the Harbor queries: …that once again the 'scholars' believe the average readers of the scriptures can't understand them enough to really benefit? 

Hungry: Which scholar did you quote here to support your thought? Scholars are professionals just like any other profession. Just because they publish their articles using Hebrew, Greek, Latin, French and German terms in scholarly journals that most of us never read does not mean that they think that the average reader cannot benefit from reading the Bible! The challenge is that scholars should be willing to submit their ideas to the discernment of the average Christian reader just as much as the average Christian reader should be willing to allow his revelations to be critiqued by scholars. Paul did not leave anyone out when he said, “Test all things; hold fast that which is good.” 

Hungry on the Harbor asks: Aren't we perpetuating the myth of hierarchical importance of a man? 

Hungry: The undo exaltation of a human being can and does happen in all walks of life. Some people swear by their family doctor only to find out later that he received little or no training in basic nutrition while in medical school. Some Christians believe everything their pastor says over the pulpit even though too many read popular paperbacks rather than dig into deeper Bible reference works. Something is a “myth” only if it turns out not to be true. Why not read what scholars have to say and then, if you disagree with them, give your reasons? Isn’t this what good education is all about – even Christian education? 

Hungry on the Harbor says: … which too often means [that we make the Bible say] what we want it to say. 

Hungry: Everybody makes the Bible say what he or she wants it to say at times. Some do this more often than others, and we all have to guard against it. In an effort to avoid this kind of over-subjectivism is the reason why scholars submit their articles to their peers for critique both before and after publication. Unfortunately, I haven’t observed too much of this in the Senior Pastor cult. I remember once when a certain senior pastor had me read a paper he had written on Jeremiah. After I read it, I told him that, in my view, the paper left a lot of room for improvement. He never asked my opinion again. Why? It appeared to me that he didn’t really want constructive input, he just wanted a pat on the back.  

Hungry on the Harbor writes: I used to think more 'scholarly' in my views, I remember about 8-9 years ago paraphrasing the entire book of 1 John… and writing all my gleanings down…I was so proud of myself. 

Hungry: I would like to read your paraphrase of I John sometime. I’ll bet that it’s very edifying. May I ask, why do you think less “scholarly” in your views now? Maybe the Holy Spirit is emphasizing a different season in your life. I believe that he does this: at times, he calls us deeply into prayer and Bible meditation without any other books; at other times, he will call us to go to the library and read many articles or books on a certain topic. In my view, it all depends on what spiritual season we find ourselves in. I think it’s good that you wrote all or your thoughts down on paper. How do you know that the Lord will not want to use those gleanings in the future? You said you were so proud of yourself for doing so. One does not have to become proud through studying and note taking. Pride tends to come when we think that we don’t need the other gifts in the Body to balance and complement our own; also, when we think that we know all that there is to know about something. In I Cor. 8:1-3,  verse 2 corrects or balances out verse 1c, the verse commonly quoted by anti-intellectual Charismatics.  

Hungry on the Harbor says: The very best way to study the Bible is with a concordance and the Bible. 

Hungry: Studying the Bible with a concordance is a good start, but if one limits oneself to that, many pitfalls await. I mentioned this in an earlier blog: the main Bible study method that one of my favorite Bible teachers in Bible college still uses is the concordance. He goes through various books of the Bible and looks up every key word in an English concordance and categorizes them. When this teacher first showed me this method, I was indeed impressed, but as I began to expand my study skills, I began to see its clear limitations if not dangers. Briefly: 

(1) If you use an English concordance, e.g., Strong’s, you will miss many of the same Hebrew or Gk words that are simply translated differently. Using New Englishman’s Greek or Hebrew Concordance is better because they give you every place the Heb or Gk words is used in the text no matter how it has been translated. 

(2) The concordance method by itself does not provide the student with the historical, grammatical or cultural background of the text. The simple fact is that we cannot understand the Bible properly without studying it in context. 

(3) This method actually can give the student many false views of Scripture because it compresses worlds of meaning into a list of words. E.g. just recently I corresponded with one of my former teachers in Bible college about his published beliefs on tithing. In his last email to me, he said that I needed to go through my concordance on every verse in the Bible on tithing to try to get a more accurate picture of it. I have done that, and it was a start, but in my forthcoming book, I hope that I can demonstrate that just like going down one’s concordance will not get you to the truth about tithing, neither is it the complete answer for any other question a sincere believer might ask. 

(4) The student is falsely taught to read back into the text (eisegete) the symbolic or metaphorical meaning from one reference in the NT that is said to “interpret” most, if not all, of the others. E.g., just because “leaven’ has a negative meaning in I Cor 5:8, it does not necessarily have that same meaning in the OT sacrifices that contained it. This is why, in my view, Kevin Conner’s book, The Symbols and the Types, contains some good insights, but since it was built on the concordance method, is more of an exercise in plays with similar English words rather than solid biblical interpretation which is available in scholarly Bible dictionaries and commentaries. 

Continuing with our discussion of the Gospel of John. 

"and the Word was God."

John is the only NT writer who refers to Jesus as the Word. In the Book of Revelation, when John sees Jesus returning to the earth at His Second Coming, he says this:

11 “And I saw heaven opened; and behold, a white horse, and He who sat upon it is called Faithful and True; and in righteousness He judges and wages war. And His eyes are a flame of fire, and upon His head are many diadems; and He has a name written upon Him which no one knows except Himself.  And He is clothed with a robe dipped in blood; and His name is called The Word of God.” (Rev. 19:11-13, NASB) 

Though I’m not generally a big fan of the (too?) many different versions of the Bible which have flooded the market today — as I feel a lot of them play a bit too fast and loose with the words of Scripture —  I do like how a couple of them have rendered this particular verse in John 1:1. The CEV has, “The Word was with God, and was truly God,” and the REB has, “…and what God was, the Word was.”

I think these do a good job in bringing out what John was really trying to say…that this Word was equal to, or the same as, God. 

Now, the New World Translation, the official version of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, renders this verse as follows: 

1 In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. (John 1:1, NWT) 

In glossing through many of the other 400 or so English translations of the Bible that I could find, I notice that there are a few —  less than 1%, I suppose — which render this verse like the Witnesses do, and make the Word to be merely “divine” (little “d”), or “a god” (little “g”). Their rationale rests on their interpretation of a rule of Greek grammar known by the high-falutin title of “The Anarthrous/Articular Use of the Definite Article,” and also whether or not another grammatical rule — Colwell’s — applies.  

To save a lot of boring reading, the bottom line comes down to this: the overwhelming majority of Greek scholars behind these 400-some translations have rendered this verse with the word “God” — using a capital “G” — and thus understood John’s intention to present the Word as God Himself.  

And setting forth the Deity of Jesus is nothing new for John. A bit later in this same chapter, he states: 

¹⁸ No man has seen God at any time; the only begotten God, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him. (John 1:18, NASB) 

Towards the end of his Gospel, John records the confession of Thomas to Jesus: 

²⁸ "My Lord and my God!" (John 20:28, NASB) 

And three verses later, John gives the reason he wrote his Gospel in the first place: 

³¹ but these have been written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name. (John 20:31, NASB) 

Later, at the end of his life, John wrote the following about Jesus in his First Epistle: 

²⁰ And we know that the Son of God has come, and has given us understanding, in order that we might know Him who is true, and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life. (1 John 5:20, NASB) 

In case you may be interested, in all of these four passages, John uses the definite Greek article in referring to Jesus as (the) God. 

Interestingly, the New World Translation translates this last passage very similarly to the NASB: 

20 But we know that the Son of God has come, and he has given us intellectual capacity that we may gain the knowledge of the true one. And we are in union with the true one, by means of his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and life everlasting. (1 John 5:20, NWT) 

I suppose their punctuation checker overlooked the capital “G” in that verse, since it’s so close to the back of the Bible   

Question:  

Would it matter to you if the NT did not, in fact, teach the Deity of Jesus Christ? If He was merely some sort of super-angel, but not God Himself? Would it affect the way you feel about your salvation?

-joebib 

Taking inspiration from Reformed Pope's recent study on Matthew 5-7 (BTW, Pope, when are we gonna get some more of that?), I thought maybe we could do the same thing with John's Gospel, which is most people's favorite anyway.

1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (NASB)

One of the most familiar verses in the Bible, I suppose, at least to believers.

"In the beginning"

The words remind us of Genesis 1:1, "In the beginning, God…."

The beginning…a tough concept to wrap the mind around.

I mean, what "beginning" is this? The beginning of the earth? The beginning of the universe? The beginning of heaven itself, wherever that is? I suppose one could say that the beginning goes back to eternity itself. 

Um, whenever that was.

My "beginning" was at Emmanuel Hospital, in Portland, Oregon, in 1957. Which may seem long ago to someone in their 20s, but 50 years is really nothing in comparison to a couple of thousand years, and is a mere blip on the scope in comparison to a million years. Or a billion. Or a trillion. Or a "goolgolplex," which is the largest officially named number, consisting of a one followed by a thousand zeroes.

Whenever this "beginning" was, it had to be eons and eons ago.

"was the Word,"

The Greek scholars say that this verb "was" means something like, when you go back to whenever (and wherever) the beginning began, this Word was already there, and had been there. Forever.

Kind of like backtracking a trail which leads up a mountain. When you finally get to the top, you look out into the haze and see that you're not at the beginning of the trail at all, but that it extends back from where you are, way out beyond to a mountain in the distance where your eyes can barely even focus. So, you hop back into your Land Rover and drive back to that mountain. When you get there, you find the trail continues on past it to a another mountain in the blurry distance. So, off you go, again. When you finally arrive at that one, you find the same thing…the trail goes on and on, as far as the eye can see. You notice the gas gauge is perilously close to "E," as opposed to "F," and begin to suspect that you will never get to the beginning of this trail.

In other words, there really is no specific time when the Word started or began. It just always — and already — was.

"Word" is the familiar Greek term logos, which describes the communicating of the meaning of a thought. So, the Word here is revealing someone's thoughts. Whose?

"and the Word was with God,"

Okay, so we now see the Word is in connection with God. "God" is theos in the Greek, from where we get the word theology, which literally means,"words about God," or "God-words."

So, the Word is the one who communicates or reveals God's thoughts. Sounds simple enough.

"and the Word was God."

Here's something a bit perplexing…how can the Word be with God and also be God, all at the same time?

Well, if you could explain that to the satisfaction of all, I suppose you could probably unite all world religions, and get rid of those pesky Muslims. The thought in the original is that whatever God was, and is, the Word was, and is, the same thing.

And don't let those Jehovah's Witnesses tell you that the Greek should say "the Word was a god." That's not only baloney, but violates Greek grammar as well.

And, which goes to show that some people will try anything in order to stuff their pre-conceived, pet doctrines into the Bible. Even going so far as to create their own version of the "original" Greek text, called the "Emphatic Diaglott," which all Greek scholars outside of the JW movement know is a joke.

Still though, I wonder how many of our doctrines, what we believe, are contrived, and not really biblical at all? Which we hold with great fervor and pride.

I remember one occasion, long ago, when I was defending that wonderful "doctrine" (theory) of Dispensationalism, and the whole discussion almost ended up devolving to the point of fisticuffs. "If I have to, I'll beat my doctrine into you." Great witness there, Mr. Christian. Didn't even know I was wrong, until years later.

Which makes me worry…if any — and if so, how many— of my current beliefs are wrong now?

Thoughts?

-joebib

 

 James 4:2

…You do not have, because you do not ask God.

Ahhh, I love this scripture. How often have we heard this. It's good to get a reminder every now and again that we need to have faith and ask God for the things we want.

I wonder if the rest of the book of James is as interesting. I think I'll read on…

Wait a minute. What's this in verse 3? No, it can't be…

3When you ask, you do not receive, because you ask with wrong motives, that you may spend what you get on your pleasures.

Is this really saying that we can't just ask for anything we want? Our motives have to be right as well? This is ridiculous.

I'm cutting that verse out of my Bible.  

WWJD, Survivor, Chocolate Thunder, et al:
 

It seems like we go through this every few months, but since you’re all new to the blogging ways of the Morton family I’ll be happy to indulge…
 

I would rather get the families together to discuss this, it takes a lot less time that way, but regardless, here we go.
 

My first response will be to address the scriptures listed by WWJD under CBC Talking Points. I will hopefully be able to move on to a more humorous post in the near future, but for now we begin with:
 

GEN 14:18-20
18 Then Melchizedek, king of Salem, brought out bread and wine; he was a priest to God Most High. 19 He blessed him and said:
Abram is blessed by God Most High,
Creator of heaven and earth, 20 and give praise to God Most High
who has handed over your enemies to you.And Abram gave him a tenth of everything
 

Abram gave Melchizedek a tenth of everything. This was not commanded by God or anyone. If you research this scripture in any study Bible you will likely find that what Abram did was a custom not a command.

Gen 28:20-22

“If God will be with me and protect me on this journey and give me food and clothing, 21 and if he will bring me back safely to my father, then I will make the LORD my God. 22 This memorial pillar will become a place for worshiping God, and I will give God a tenth of everything he gives me.”
Again not a command from God, but a decision by Jacob… his decision is even conditional: “IF God will be with me…”
 

LEV 27:30
30 ”A tenth of the produce of the land, whether grain or fruit, belongs to the LORD and must be set apart to him as holy.
 

This is the best sounding scripture so far, unfortunately if you read the whole book of Leviticus you find that Christians ignore 90% of the laws it sets forth.
 

When was the last time CBC stoned someone for Blasphemy? Lev 24:16 “Anyone who blasphemes the LORD’s name must be stoned to death by the whole community of Israel. Any Israelite or foreigner among you who blasphemes the LORD’s name will surely die.” How many Christians agree with the death penalty? Lev 24:17 ”Anyone who takes another person’s life must be put to death.”
 

There are many examples like this throughout the book. Read it.
 

DT 12:17
17 ”But your offerings must not be eaten at home – neither the tithe of your grain and new wine and olive oil, nor the firstborn of your flocks and herds, nor an offering to fulfill a vow, nor your freewill offerings, nor your special gifts.
 

Back up 2 verses and see DT 12:15-16. 15 ”But you may butcher animals for meat in any town, wherever you want, just as you do now with gazelle and deer. You may eat as many animals as the LORD your God gives you. All of you, whether ceremonially clean or unclean, may eat that meat. 16 The only restriction is that you are not to eat the blood. You must pour it out on the ground like water.
 

I like my meat rare, am I going to hell for that?
 

DT 26:12
12 “Every third year you must offer a special tithe of your crops. You must give these tithes to the Levites, foreigners, orphans, and widows so that they will have enough to eat in your towns.
 

Should we only tithe every third year? Should we always tithe but give a special tithe every third year? Throw this scripture out of your study, it does more harm than good.
 

1 CH 6:45
54 This is a record of the towns and territory assigned by means of sacred lots to the descendants of Aaron who were from the clan of Kohath
 

?
 

2 CH 31:5
5 The people responded immediately and generously with the first of their crops and grain, new wine, olive oil, honey, and all the produce of their fields. They brought a tithe of all they owned
 

This is a great ideal. If people acted this way today, then there would be no need for this argument. I don’t, however,  think the command of that time still stands for us today. You should read further and see the strict way they divided up all the tithe’s brought forth. I know churches don’t follow that formula anymore.
 

PR 3:9-10
9 Honor the LORD with your wealth and with the best part of everything your land produces. 10 Then he will fill your barns with grain, and your vats will overflow with the finest wine.
 

“Honor the LORD with your wealth…” Is there only one way to do this? By giving 10% of everything you own to God? Is it possible that giving to the poor would also be Honoring the LORD? Would he bless you for that? Even if you weren’t a tither?

Mal 3:9-10
9 You are under a curse, for your whole nation has been cheating me. 10 Bring all the tithes into the storehouse so there will be enough food in my Temple. If you do,” says the LORD Almighty, “I will open the windows of heaven for you. I will pour out a blessing so great you won’t have enough room to take it in! Try it! Let me prove it to you!
 

 You are under a curse, for your whole nation has been cheating me.  Bring all the tithes into the storehouse so there will be enough food in my Temple. If you do,” says the LORD Almighty, “I will open the windows of heaven for you. I will pour out a blessing so great you won’t have enough room to take it in! Try it! Let me prove it to you!

This is my favorite. Why is it that I can turn on TBN at any time and here this scripture, but no one ever mentions what it says in Mal 2:2-3 “Honor my name,” says the LORD Almighty, “or I will bring a terrible curse against you… 3 I will rebuke your descendants and splatter your faces with the dung of your festival sacrifices, and I will add you to the dung heap. Why is it that preachers teach so strongly that God will curse you for not tithing, but fail to mention that he will also smear your face with Poo?

Of course outside of this verse I haven’t ever heard of God flinging POO at anyone, so maybe he hasn’t cursed anyone for failing to get their tithe in on time.

2 Cor 9:7
7 You must each make up your own mind as to how much you should give. Don’t give reluctantly or in response to pressure. For God loves the person who gives cheerfully.
 

Thank you. This is exactly right. This is what it is all about. It doesn’t help the “tither’s” case, but it is very clear. “You must each make up your own mind as to how much you should give.” It doesn’t say give 10% or I will curse you. It doesn’t say give 10% and I will bless you, it says “make up your own mind” and “give cheerfully”. It then goes on to say how he will provide for you. That’s why it works for CBC. It’s the principle of sowing and reaping. God will take care of his children, especially when they are generous. What you must remember is that Jesus died on the cross to take the Curse away. We don’t have to follow the letter of the law anymore. Through his grace we are saved.