Abiding in Christ produces change. And change happens particularly one thought and one attitude adjustment at a time as we are exposed to God’s Word and God’s grace. Putting off the old man and putting on the new (Eph. 4:22–24) is a simple decision as well as a process of attitude changes. At home your attitude may be, “What about me?” One simple flip of the mind to “What about my spouse?” is possible and life changing. At work your attitude may be fretting over money. One simple attitude adjustment of remembering and believing what Jesus said about God taking care of the birds is possible and freeing (Matt. 6:25–34).

I experienced this around a family Christmas celebration. Instead of sitting there feeling sorry that no one was talking to me and complaining internally about it, I decided to engage another. These small attitude adjustments go a long way for me and my internal state.

We all desire to live life in Christ even better and more liberated. This change is possible as the sovereign Lord works in you to change one thought, attitude, and action at a time. Believe in change this year for you and for others. And when your attitude is blowing hot air, make the simple flip and stick to it. You will be glad you did.

“²²to put off your old self, which belongs to your former manner of life and is corrupt through deceitful desires, ²³and to be renewed in the spirit of your minds, ²⁴and to put on the new self, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness.”
Ephesians 4:22–24

Confusion happens to us as humans. But it doesn’t happen to God. There is not a situation that launches God into confusion. Wayne Grudem states, “In God’s being and in His actions He is separate from all confusion and disorder.”¹ He fully understands in perfect clarity everything. He understands warring between individuals, countries, and even within ourselves. He knows what happened, why it happened, and what will happen.

God is separate from all confusion because He exists wholly complete and content within Himself.² There is no confusion about who He is, what He ought to do, or why He is doing it. Satan, evil, and sin do not confuse God or throw Him into disorder. God cannot be shaken or divided; He is the God of peace!

God’s peace is extremely practical for humans. It removes the problem of sin between God and humanity (Luke 1:79). We are no longer estranged but reconciled. His salvation peace guards our hearts and minds in Christ Jesus (Phil. 4:7). We can withstand outward and inward anxious shakings. His peace is with us in obedience to His will (Phil. 4:9). And God’s peace will bring order to the evil of this world (Rom. 16:20). Ultimately, God’s peace drives us to trust Him in our confusion and disorder. You can trust the Lord our God; He is our peace in Christ Jesus!

Romans 16:20 – The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet.
The grace of our Lord Jesus be with you.

¹Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1995), 203.

²“The Hebrew translation of shalom is “completeness,” “wholeness,” “well-being,” or “welfare and peace.” It is derived from a root that means “to be complete” or “to be sound.” See Carpenter, E. E., & Comfort, P. W., Holman Treasury of Key Bible Words: 200 Greek and 200 Hebrew Words Defined and Explained (Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2000), 135.

“In all things I have shown you that by working hard in this way we must help the weak and remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he himself said, ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’”
Acts 20:35

It is a proud moment for a parent when their child is faced with two choices and they choose the better one. How happy we are to see them choose a carrot over junk food or getting up earlier instead of sleeping in all day. These choices are signs of maturity. They realize one is more blessed than the other and have chosen accordingly.

Our Lord has lifted up giving and receiving and told us which one is more blessed—giving. How are we to understand these two options? I. Howard Marshall states it well when he says, “it is better for a person who can do so to give to help others rather than to amass further wealth for himself.”¹ Gathering wealth and things for yourself is not necessarily a bad thing, but better than merely collecting for yourself is giving for the sake of others.

As we approach Christmas this truth is a great reminder for us to be conscious givers. Surely our heavenly Father is pleased when giving is the attitude of our heart. And surely our Father is pleased when we instill this truth within our children at home. Let’s be givers. Let’s train our kids to be givers. Instead of what do you want for Christmas, let’s first ask them what they want to give to someone else for Christmas. Let’s reflect the generous nature of our Savior this Christmas and beyond.

As I process the darkness all around I am reminded and directed by the following realities.

1. The world has always been dark. Since Adam and Eve chose to sin, the world has always been dark. One family on the planet and already a murder takes place. A few chapters and generations later, the world is so bad that every inclination of human hearts is evil. Even after a great worldwide judgment, one family grows and together bands against the Lord (at the Tower of Babel) only to have the Lord confuse their language and spread them throughout the earth. Moving forward, Egypt enslaves Israel. Israel is freed by God’s great and merciful power only to create their own false idols and gods. In the Promised Land, Israel does some of the most disgusting sins in killing their own children and seeking same sex rape.

The picture is clear—this world has always been dark. Darkness today shouldn’t surprise us. This is what happens when creation rejects its Creator and Savior.

2. The world has always had a light. Since Adam and Eve’s sin, the Lord has been the light that overcomes and still works His sovereign plans over and through a dark world. He mercifully gave Adam and Eve a covering after they sinned and promised them hope in their lineage. He was merciful to Cain after he murdered his brother. He provided Noah a saving ark for him and his family. He made a unilateral covenant with Abraham for the benefit of the nations even after the Tower of Babel. He gave Israel sacrifices to cover their sins. He judged His people in the land. He sent His one and only Son to reveal Himself and His plan of salvation. He worked through the hard hearts of the Jews and the Romans to provide us an atoning sacrifice. He sent His Spirit to change the hearts of man. And the list goes on and still continues even today.

Darkness is everywhere, but so is the light of our Lord overcoming and saving.

3. The Lord has designated us to be lights. What am I supposed to do now? It is overwhelming trying to solve the world’s problems, let alone even process them all. The Lord directs us to be a light right where we are at. Shine the grace and truth of the light of the world (Jesus) in word and deed right where you live and in the relationships you have. The dark world needs to see your light, the light of Jesus Christ within you.

Darkness is everywhere. Instead of letting it get you down, shine within and make a difference where the Lord has you.

¹⁴“You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden. ¹⁵Nor do people light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on a stand, and it gives light to all in the house. ¹⁶In the same way, let your light shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven.”
Matthew 5:14–16

“Come now, therefore, and I will send you to Pharaoh that you may bring My people, the children of Israel out of Egypt” (Exodus 3:10).

My November morning devotional reading has taken me to Exodus - in this verse, we see God’s plan to deliver the Israelites from the mighty hand of Egypt. Moses, having grown up in Egypt, most certainly knew that not only was this a formidable, almost impossible task, but that God’s choice of leader—Moses—must have felt completely overwhelming to him. This is echoed in Moses’ immediate response to God, where he asks, “Who am I?” (verse 10); “Who are you?” (3:13); and “What if no one believes me?” (4:1). As the story unfolds, we see God patiently using circumstances to teach Moses to trust more in God’s promises than in his own logic and reason.

God does this with all His children, doesn’t he? We must learn to “trust in the Lord with all our heart and lean not on our own understanding” (Proverbs 3:5). I’m currently in a season where a step of faith is being asked of me by God, and it’s quite like a situation which occurred ten years ago. In 2013, I remember my emotions and reason hungered to take control of both my mind and my spirit, and thus I spent far too much time absent from God’s peace. Like Moses, I could see no further than my feelings. Yet ten years later I’m grateful that while reason and emotion still want control, the peace of the Lord, and my trust in Him has been so much more prevalent.

This week Carey Nieuwhof, who is a Christian leader I follow on Twitter, posted this: “You run all of these scenarios: what if this? What if that? And you have to come back, in the end, to who do I really trust? Do I trust in horses or chariots, or in the Lord?”

Today, may we walk with God in such a way that we trust in His promises above all else and walk accordingly. May we listen to God so that we may be trusting and obedient to Him.

Pastor Chuck

Simplicity is life changing. To grasp a concept in its simplest form empowers understanding and application. It forms deep within the heart and may be recalled and applied in a moment’s notice.

A few times I have found myself struggling to communicate ideas. In witnessing to unbelievers I struggled to find the right words for sin. In an attempt to correct one of my children I stumbled over trying to explain a character attribute. How can I do better next time? I think by grasping the core of these ideas through simplicity. Below is an attempt to simplify the fruit of the Spirit that we may recall it when needed.

Galatians 5:22–23 - ²²But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, ²³gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law.

Read through the fruit of the Spirit a few times this week and try to grasp each fruit in its simplicity. May the Lord enable a simplistic grasp followed by a dynamic outpouring.

Heartfelt

To begin, Knost genuinely cares about her kids and helping other people love their kids. Each chapter is filled with heartfelt thoughts from the depth of a mom’s heart. No one can deny she speaks out of personal love and compassion. This love and concern for her children and others is inspiring.

False Dichotomy

Knost sets up a false dichotomy of parenting that runs through the whole book. Parents are confronted with two options by which to analyze their parenting. Either they are doing Gentle Parenting like her (also called connection-based parenting, trust-based parenting, and positive parenting) or they are doing punishment-based (authoritarian) parenting. She chooses two extreme ends of a spectrum and draws a line between the two. If you spank (or physically discipline), no matter how you do it, why you do it, or how much love is into it, you are not a gentle parent but now a punishing parent.

Examples within this false dichotomy are not always an accurate representation of parenting that is different than the authors. Allowing moments of crying while sleep training does not mean a parent is ignoring their cries or seeing them as manipulators. Disciplining our children doesn’t mean “we believe our children need to be punished, to make them obedient and acceptable.”³ The author would do well to reconsider views that land in-between her dichotomy.

Exegetical Fallacies

At least two exegetical (or word) study fallacies are committed by Knost. The first is “Selective and prejudiced use of evidence.”⁴ This fallacy “appeal[s] to selective evidence that enables the interpreter to say what he or she wants to say, without really listening to what the Word of God says.”⁵ The second fallacy ties in with the first when she “[A]ppeal[s] to unknown or unlikely meanings.”⁶

Example 1 - The Rod of Discipline

Proverbs 13:24 “Whoever spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him is diligent to discipline him.⁷

Knost claims that verses in Proverbs containing the word “rod” are more literally and therefore better translated as “wisdom, leadership, protection.”⁸ And that discipline is literally “‘verbal instruction and teaching’.”⁹ Therefore, Proverbs 13:24 above would read, “He who spares his…wisdom, leadership, protection…does not love… his son, but he who loves him…offers verbal instruction and teaching to him promptly.”¹⁰ Is this a good exegetical interpretation of Proverbs 13:24 and the words rod and discipline?

Hebrew dictionaries reveal that rod (Hebrew שֵׁבֶט shêbeṭ, shay´-bet) may be understood as having a literal definition and a figurative definition which arises out of the literal. Literally, shêbeṭ refers to “a stick (for punishing, writing, fighting, ruling, walking, etc.) or (fig.) a clan:—× correction, dart, rod, sceptre, staff, tribe.”¹¹ shêbeṭ consistently shows up as rod, staff, club in its first definition with a figurative picture of what it could be in its second.

Hebrew dictionaries reveal that Discipline ( מוּסָר (mû·sār)) can mean discipline, chastening, chastisement, punishment, warning, instruction, correction, and reproof. mû·sār as used in Proverbs 13:24 is consistently given under the definition of discipline, chastening, chastisement, and correction.

So how are we to understand “rod” and “discipline” in Proverbs 13:24? It is wise to understand a word in its basic or primary lexical definition unless it is clearly given a metaphorical reference or understanding that forces us to understand it differently. In this case, rod is best understood as a literal stick that is used to physically instruct. In the immediate context, rod is pictured as discipline. As a stick used for a physical task, it makes the most immediate sense to see rod here in its literal understanding. To say, “Whoever spares the “tribe,” “symbol of kingship,” or “leadership” is a far stretch that plays too far with words. Knost therefore is appealing to unlikely meanings.

When we look at the use of rod in Proverbs, this understanding of “rod” as physical discipline is corroborated.

Proverbs 10:13 - On the lips of him who has understanding, wisdom is found, but a rod is for the back of him who lacks sense.

• Bruce Waltke states, “Corrective caning [flogging, whipping] was applied to the back…of the one who lacks sense…”¹² To say the rod is wisdom or leadership for the back would makes no sense.

Proverbs 14:3 - By the mouth of a fool comes a rod for his back, but the lips of the wise will preserve them.

Proverbs 22:15 - Folly is bound up in the heart of a child, but the rod of discipline drives it far from him.

• Waltke states, “Since folly incurs the LORD’s curse… this proverb seeks to protect the youth from eternal death through the father’s relatively light sting. Prov. 20:30 called for bruising wounds to scour defiled humanity generally; 22:15 applies that truth to depraved youth particularly. Bodily harm without heals the moral rot within. Whereas most proverbs call for the youth to give an attentive ear, moral education calls for physical punishment along with sharp reproof for wrongdoing (29:15). The father must not underestimate the difficulty of his task, for he does battle with an innate recalcitrance and perversity. He must tear down and build up; eradicate and implant.”¹³

Proverbs 23:13 - Do not withhold discipline from a child; if you strike him with a rod, he will not die.

• The verb “strike” (nākâ) clearly denotes physical discipline.¹⁴

Proverbs 23:14 nmdash; If you strike him with the rod, you will save his soul from Sheol.

Proverbs 26:3 - A whip for the horse, a bridle for the donkey, and a rod for the back of fools.

Proverbs 29:15 - The rod and reproof give wisdom, but a child left to himself brings shame to his mother.

The same sense of “rod” in Proverbs can be seen in 2 Samuel 7:14 which states, “I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son. When he commits iniquity, I will discipline him with the rod of men, with the stripes of the sons of men.” The stripes of men make clear that the rod of men is a physical instrument of discipline.

Example 1 Conclusion - The Rod of Discipline

Understanding rod as “wisdom,” or “leadership” in Proverbs 23:14 is not a good interpretation. Rod is clearly a stick used to enact physical discipline for the benefit of the child. Physical discipline, done in love and control for the benefit of the child, is biblical and should not be softened to verbal instruction only.

As for how to apply this instructive and disciplinary tool along with the other tools God gives us for the benefit of our children, that is another discussion. One that should be approached with the upmost thought, love, and care. Knost does cite some unfortunate examples of extreme physical discipline (spanking) from Christian authors that this author would too disagree with. But those examples, even though taken too far, do not warrant excommunicating physical discipline altogether.

Knost’s dialogue around the rod ends with a mixture of strong and confusing statements. She strongly says that to bind ourselves to the “rod” verses in Proverbs means that we are binding ourselves to the entire Old Testament law. This is her way of saying we don’t even need to obey these after all is said and done. So does that mean we can spare her definition of Proverbs 13:24? Should we forget about discipline or verbal instruction as she translates it to our children?

She argues additionally that the words for child and children in the rod verses are literally young man and do not refer to children. This is another instance of prejudiced use of words. The Hebrew word here for child can refer to someone just born (1 Sam. 4:21), an infant (Exodus 2:6), or a child before speech (Isaiah 8:4).¹⁵ Now, it is true that we are not under the old covenant, but there is still authoritative teaching, instruction, correction, and admonition throughout as Paul states in 2 Tim. 3:16–17.¹⁶

Confusion happens as Knost ends her rod chapter (11) saying these rod verses have questionable interpretations. The reader does not get this impression as she strongly argues her translations throughout.

Example 2 - Obey/Disobey

Knost claims “that the word obey [and disobey] doesn’t even appear in the original texts of the Bible[.]”¹⁷ Is this an accurate statement? Let’s take a deeper exegetical look.

John 3:36 states, “Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.”

The following Greek lexicons give the following definitions for the Greek word used here ἀπειθέω (apeitheō).

• apeitheō: “disobey, be disobedient”¹⁸
• “ἀπειθέω, Att. form of ἀπῐθέω (though even Trag. preferred ἀπιστέω, q.v. ii), to be disobedient, refuse compliance.”¹⁹
• “ἀπειθέω (apeitheō): vb….1. LN 36.23 disobey, be disobedient (Ro 10:21; 11:30, 31; Heb 3:18; 11:31; 1Pe 2:8; 3:20; 4:17+); 2. LN 31.107 reject belief, refuse to believe (Jn 3:36; Ac 14:2; 19:9; Ro 2:8; 15:31; 1Pe 3:1+), note: there may be overlap of verses and entries.”²⁰
• “ἀπειθέω apeitheō disobey, be disobedient.”²¹
• “disobey; be an unbeliever [UBS 4^th ed., 18]

Multiple dictionaries are uniform in translating the Greek word apeitheō as disobey/disobedience.

Acts 5:29 states, “But Peter and the apostles answered, “We must obey God rather than men.”

The following Greek lexicons give the following definitions for the Greek word used here πειθαρχέω (peitharcheō).

• “πειθαρχέω…obey θεῷ Ac 5:29.”²²
• “πειθαρχέω, obey one in authority,”²³
• “πείθομαιa; πειθαρχέω: to submit to authority or reason by obeying—‘to obey.’ πείθομαιa: πείθεσθε τοῖς ἡγουμένοις ὑμῶν καὶ ὑπείκετε ‘obey your leaders and submit to them’ He 13:17.”²⁴
• “πειθαρχέω (peitharcheō). vb. to obey one in authority. This verb emphasizes the authority of the one to be obeyed. This is a rare word for obeying in the nt. It is formed from πείθω (peithō, “to persuade”)—some grammatical forms of which can mean “to obey”—and ἄρχων (archōn, “authority”). Since God is the ultimate authority, he must be obeyed (peitharcheō) above all others (Acts 5:29), and he gives the Holy Spirit to those who obey (peitharcheō) him (Acts 5:32). Christians are also to obey (peitharcheō) and submit to (ὑποτάσσω, hypotassō) political rulers. In Acts 27:21, Paul tells his shipmates that they should have obeyed (peitharcheō) him; either Paul the prisoner is claiming authority over them, or the word in this case has a more general sense of “to obey,” without indicating authority.”²⁵

Three different dictionaries are uniform in translating the Greek word πειθαρχέω (peitharcheō) as obey.

Luke 11:28 reads, “But he said, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and keep [obey] it!”

Knost removes “obey” and replaces it with “listen to, thoughtfully consider, and respond to it.”²⁶ The following Greek lexicons give the following definitions for the Greek word used here φυλάσσω.

• “φυλάσσω….to continue to keep a law or commandment from being broken….act. observe, follow (νόμον…”²⁷
• “φυλάσσωb; τηρέωc; τήρησιςc, εως f: to continue to obey orders or commandments—‘to obey, to keep commandments, obedience.’ φυλάσσωb: πάντα ταῦτα ἐφύλαξα ‘I have continued to obey all these commandments’ Mt 19:20. τηρέωc: ἐὰν ἀγαπᾶτέ με, τὰς ἐντολὰς τὰς ἐμὰς τηρήσετε ‘if you love me, you will keep my commandments’ Jn 14:15. τήρησιςc: ἀλλὰ τήρησις ἐντολῶν θεοῦ ‘but obedience to God’s commandments’ 1 Cor 7:19.”²⁸
• UBS 4th ed. (195) “guard, keep under guard; keep, obey, follow; keep safe, protect, defend…”

Three different dictionaries are uniform in translating the Greek word φυλάσσω as to continue to keep/to continue to obey.

John 14:23 states, “Jesus answered him, “If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him.”

Knost removes “obey” [here “keep” in ESV] and replaces it with “listen to, thoughtfully consider, and respond to it.”²⁹ The following standard and trusted Greek lexicon gives the following definitions for the Greek word used here τηρέω.

• τηρέω: “to persist in obedience, keep, observe, fulfill, pay attention to, esp. of law and teaching.”³⁰
• The basic meaning of τηρέω is to keep, guard, observe.

Ephesians 6:1 - “Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right.”

Knost removes “obey” and replaces it with “listen to, thoughtfully consider, and respond to it.”³¹ The following Greek lexicons give the following definitions for the Greek word used here ὑπακούω.

• “ὑπακούω…to follow instructions, obey, follow, be subject to w. gen. of pers.”³²
• “ὑπακούωa; ὑπακοή, ῆς f; εἰσακούωb: to obey on the basis of having paid attention to—‘to obey, obedience.’”³³
• “I. hearken, give ear….answer…. listen to, heed, regard”.³⁴
• “ὑπακούω (hypakouō): vb.; ≡ DBLHebr 6700, 9048; Str 5219; TDNT 1.223–1. LN 36.15 obey, be obedient (Mt 8:27; Mk 1:27; Ac 6:7; Ro 6:12, 16, 17; Eph 6:1, 5; 2Th 1:8; 1Pe 3:6); 2. LN 46.11 answer the door (Ac 12:13+).”³⁵
• “ὑπακούω (hypakouō). vb. to obey. This verb means “to obey,” with nuances of hearing and then doing. This word is formed from the verb ἀκούω (akouō, “to hear”) with the prefix ὑπό- (hypo-, “under”). In the nt, it almost always means “to obey.” (Acts 12:13, where hypakouō means “answer [the door],” is an exception, but still fits into the larger pattern of hearing and then doing.) Sometimes nature and spirits are made to obey: demons (Mark 1:27), as well as the wind and sea, obey (hypakouō; Matt 8:27) Jesus, and with faith like a mustard seed the disciples could order a mulberry tree to plant itself in the sea, and it would obey (hypakouō; Luke 17:6).”³⁶

Obey is consistently used in most Greek dictionaries concerning ὑπακούω. It has nuances of hearing and then doing that together render obey an appropriate translation. Particularly insightful is Timothy A. Gabrielson’s entry above.

Example 2 Conclusion - Obey/Disobey

Again and again Greek lexicons cite obedience and disobedience in their defining of these Greek words. So why does Knost go against the strong scholarly support here? It is not hard to see that she has a framework—a gentle framework—for parenting that she is trying to soften Scripture into.

The context in which she speaks of obey/disobey in her book is “instant obedience.” She is concerned with demanding obedience, control of children, and fear of punishment. This author would commend her for being concerned with child abuse in these areas, but she need not soften Scripture to fit her gentle parenting agenda. Obedience is a biblical concept that parents can issue to their children in love and respect and even with a gentle tongue and hand. Obedience doesn’t mean we are making mindless followers instead of leaders. No, rather we are training them to mindfully follow God’s ways instantly. Surely God is pleased in that.

Selective Scripture References

From the opening pages Jesus is laid out as the model parent and described as gentle, tender, responsive, available, listening, encouraging, teaching, guiding, God himself, intimately and emphatically connecting with his children.³⁷ No Christian will argue with this. Yes, Jesus is wonderfully all these things. But Knost also claims that Jesus did not “make demands, insist on instant obedience, and toss around kingly commands[.]”³⁸ She continues, “Jesus treated his disciples gently, tenderly. He listened. He responded to their needs, answered their questions, spoke their language. Jesus encouraged and guided and taught his disciples.”³⁹

What about when Jesus rebuked Peter and said get behind me Satan? Matthew 16:23 says, “But he turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are a hindrance to me. For you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of man.” That doesn’t sound like the Jesus Knost painted for her audience. Or what about when Jesus said (Matt. 8:26) to the disciples, “Why are you afraid, O you of little faith?” No doubt Jesus said it in love, but “little faith” carries a tone of rebuke as well. Or what about when Jesus commanded them to go and make disciples (Matt. 28:18–20)? That sounds like a king telling His children/servants exactly what to do.

Knost is very selective in representing Jesus with the disciples. Yes, He was amazingly merciful, patient, kind, and loving, but He also rebuked, commanded, and said it like it was to His disciples. Knost’s picture of Jesus and God are incomplete as represented in her book. To follow her teaching is to follow a selective and therefore incomplete teaching about God. We need God represented in all His glory, even if it makes us feel uncomfortable.

Heretical Theology

Sin Nature

Knost declares that children “are born perfect.”⁴⁰ She reasons, “Believing that babies are formed by God in the womb with a fatal flaw and are therefore born as sinners, liars, and manipulators simply doesn’t make sense. It doesn’t add up in light of God’s perfection, his love, his wisdom.”⁴¹ Paul the apostle would disagree with Knost. He says in Romans 5:12, “Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned.” When Adam fell into sin so did the rest of humanity. We all fell, because of Adam’s representative headship, into the category of sin and received sin natures. Here Knost argues that having a sin nature simply means we have the tendency to sin. That is partly true. It also means we are by nature sinners and in a sinful state before God. Ephesians 2:3 speaks of humans being by nature children of wrath, or children destined for wrath because of the sin that they are in.⁴²

Furthermore, Systematic Theologian Wayne Grudem defines sin the following way. He states, “Sin is any failure to conform to the moral laws (perfect moral nature) of God in act, attitude, or nature.”⁴³ Knost has heretically stepped out of the teaching of Scripture to declare how she feels about the nature of children instead of how Scripture reveals their true state. This reality doesn’t mean God loves children any less; rather, it highlights how much He does love them considering their hopeless and warped condition. Also, this reality doesn’t mean children have no value or worth. Not at all! Children are made in the image of God and possess life protecting value. Nonetheless they are descendants of Adam and his fallen nature until faith in Christ Jesus.

The Fruit of the Spirit

Knost teaches that “obedience is not included as a fruit of the Spirit. It is not mentioned as a measure of love for God or evidence of a relationship with God.”⁴⁴ This reasoning is flawed and misleading. The fruit of the Spirit is a representative list of the works the Holy Spirit produces in the children of God.⁴⁵ Compassion wasn’t cited as a fruit of the Spirit; shall we conclude then that the Spirit doesn’t produce this? Of course not. Prayer is also not cited as a fruit of the Spirit, and neither is worship. That’s because this is a representative list.

There are more fruitful works the Spirit produces in us just like there are more works the flesh can engage in but are not mentioned in Paul’s list in Galatians 5:19–21. See Example #2 under Exegetical Fallacies for a further treatment of Knost’s take on “obedience.”

Jesus Throws a Tantrum

Knost labels Jesus’ overturing of the tables of the money changers as a temper tantrum. Her dictionary definition gives the following: “Temper tantrum: (n) a loss of mental imbalance or composure, esp. an outburst of anger or irritation.”⁴⁶ Knost then reasons that Jesus’ actions in the temple courtyard “would be an accurate designation.”⁴⁷ Did Jesus lose his mental balance and composure through anger as Knost suggests?

Merriam-Webster states that a tantrum is “a fit of bad temper.”⁴⁸ Dictionary.com says, “a violent demonstration of rage or frustration; a sudden burst of ill temper.”⁴⁹ These dictionary definitions paint a stronger picture of a tantrum.⁵⁰ Did Jesus have a bad temper? Did Jesus have violent rage/frustration and a sudden burst of ill temper? The answer is absolutely not!

Jesus has not lost His mind, His composure, nor is He having a bad temper or burst of sudden ill. Jesus is acting out of a deeply controlled passion. John 2:17 tells us it was zeal for God’s house that drove Jesus. Jesus is not emotionally overwhelmed like a toddler; He is protecting God’s house and zealously disciplines those there for their unrighteous actions in the temple, and with a whip!

Knost uses this to argue that temper tantrums are okay with children because Jesus had one. This is another example of forcing Scripture to say and support a preconceived notion of hers. Jesus’ actions in the temple cannot be used to justify child temper tantrums.

Questionable Philosophy

Gentle Parenting is based on the core values of connection, communication, and cooperation. Connection and communication are great values for parents to have. However, Knost’s views on cooperation are highly questionable. For example she states, “Instead of ‘If you don’t put your dishes in the sink, you won’t get ice cream for dessert’ try ‘Let me know when your dishes are in the sink so I can get your ice cream for you.’”⁵¹ In trying to move from demanding obedience to gentle parenting Knost gives the child too much authority. Kids get to decide when they want to put their dishes in the sink and receive their reward. Translate this into real life and the result is not good. Imagine a teacher telling a student to let him know when they turn an assignment in, so he can grade it. They finally turn it in only to hear “Sorry, papers were due last week; grades are now closed, and you failed to meet the deadline.” Imagine an employer informing an employee to let them know when they feel like getting their work done. Not going to fly! Businesses have deadlines and if you don’t meet them, you may be out of a job.

It is okay and good to give children orders in love and set time limits on them, including this needs to be done now. If this author parented with Knost’s idea of cooperation, bath time with my three kids under the age of five would not go well.

Conclusion

More could be said of L. R. Knost’s Book Jesus, the Gentle Parent, but this review is sufficient to conclude the following.

Gentle Christian Parenting as taught by L. R. Knost has serious biblical flaws and concerns. Although she has a big heart, she has demonstrated herself a misleading theologian and not a biblically reliable source. I do not recommend her as a source for biblically based parenting. Perhaps this is why no Christian publication carries her book.

There are some nice things and even some true things, but since the book is biblically inaccurate and exegetically misguiding, I do not recommend it to parents. You can find nice and true things like this from other biblically accurate and exegetically sound sources.

As Paul is being challenged in his ministry from the Corinthian church, he explains to them what compels him—Jesus’ love. Paul says (2 Cor. 5:14–15 (ESV)), “For the love of Christ controls us, because we have concluded this: that one has died for all, therefore all have died; and he died for all, that those who live might no longer live for themselves but for him who for their sake died and was raised.” Jesus’ love in death compelled Paul to live for Him.

When people love you it is touching and even motivating to want to reciprocate. But when Jesus loved you on the cross, it was more than touching and motivating; it was compelling and controlling of our entire lives. He took responsibility for your sins on the cross. He took the blame, the punishment, the pain, and died in your place. How could we not be controlled by such love!

After coming to know and believe in Jesus’ love we are never the same. Jesus’ love doesn’t just warm our hearts, it changes them. And it changes them into His servants. This is not a burden, but our joy and delight. Jesus’ love in death changes everything. It changes our guilt. It changes what controls us. It changes our lives as we live now to serve Him and not ourselves. It is natural for the Christian to join Lumiere and say, “we only to live to serve,” yet direct that saying to Jesus, to the glory of God the Father.

Think about Jesus’ love for you in His death this week. Let that be what compels and controls you to serve Him and others. Let us not live for ourselves, but for Jesus who died and rose again.

Author Mike Walters¹ thinks different as he states that “some claims and stories found in the Bible’s text have been undoubtedly disproven.” He offers six examples concerning how science has debunked the bible. Below are his claims followed by a corrected understanding.

1. Creationism vs. Evolution

Claim: Walters says, “Fossil records and genetic studies have both provided undeniable proof of common ancestry among different species - in other words, proof of evolution. While some religious people incorporate this into their beliefs, taking on a new view of “creationism,” the idea of a literal six-day creation has been thoroughly debunked.”

Response: The fossil record² does not support the theory of biological (or macro) evolution. The fossil record demonstrates two main things that actually capsize evolution—stasis and sudden appearance. Fossils do not show macro evolutionary stages of one animal forming into another. Rather, they appear suddenly and fully formed. “Darwin recognized this as a problem as well and wrote in On the Origin of Species, ‘Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain, and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be argued against my theory (Darwin, 280).’”³

On the other hand, the fossil record accords beautifully with Genesis 1. The Scripture states multiple times that God made everything according to its own kind (Gen. 1:11–12, 1:21, 1:25). Birds make birds. Fish make fish. People make people. Now, there is room for micro development (or micro evolution) within a species (for example dogs producing different breeds of dogs), but nowhere do we see reptiles turning into birds or monkeys turning into people (macro evolution).

Science and Scripture are not at odds but complement one another and join hands in giving glory to God as Creator.

2. The Great Flood vs. The Fossil Record

Claim: “Geology and paleontology - studies of the Earth and ancient life - have found absolutely no evidence to support the idea of a flood so large. Scientific studies of sedimentary layers and the fossil record suggest that numerous localized floods have occurred throughout history - but no floods big enough to wipe out the world’s entire population, contradicting the Bible’s claim of an immense flood encompassing the whole planet.”

Response: The sedimentary layers and the fossils found in them are not consistent around the globe as evolutionary models would have one believe. All over the globe discoveries show fossils that should be found in only one layer strangely found in another. How is that? The great flood explains that clearly. As the waters covered the earth and then settled, the fossils were dispersed and settled, and not always in an orderly manner. Sea Creatures have been found in rock layers on all the continents far above sea level; even “[f]ossilized shellfish are...found in the Himalayas.”⁴ Rather than denying the great flood of the Bible, evidence like this demonstrates the worldwide rising of the sea levels in accordance with the great flood.

Check out this informative video for more evidence and specific examples of a great flood (How Rock Layers & Fossils DISPROVE Evolution - YouTube).

3. Earth as the Center of the Universe vs. The Sun as the Center

Claim: “Once upon a time, the belief that the Earth is the center of the universe was very mainstream. It’s known as the “geocentric model” and was championed by religious people and scientists alike for many, many years.”

Response: There is not much to discuss here as the Bible doesn’t even make the claim that the earth is the center of the universe. There is no biblical truth here to defend.

4. Age of the Earth

Claim: “In the Bible, the so-called age of the Earth can be tracked by looking at its genealogical accounts. These accounts imply the planet is between 6,000 and 10,000 years old - another notion that’s been entirely debunked by modern science. Radiometric dating and ice core data - both modern scientific dating methods - profoundly contradict the Bible’s claim.”

Response: Radiometric dating methods are relied on today in order to support the notion that the earth is millions or even billions of years old. But are these methods reliable? When investigating the earth scientists can measure isotope concentrations—the elements within—very accurately, “but isotope concentrations are not dates.”⁵ In order to obtain dates from isotope measurements, scientists rely on assumptions “such as a) The starting conditions are known, b) decay rates have always been constant, and c) Systems were closed or isolated so that no parent daughter isotopes were lost or added.”⁶

Further, radiometric dating has produced bad dates on things of known age. “One example is K-Ar ‘dating’ of five historical andesite lava flows from Mt Ngauruhoe in New Zealand. *Although one lava flow occurred in 1949, three in 1954, and one in 1975, the ‘dates’ ranged from less than 0.27 to 3.5 Ma [Mega annum, million years].”⁷ “The scientific literature lists many examples of excess argon causing dates of millions of years in rocks of known historical age. This excess appears to have come from the upper mantle, below the Earth’s crust. This is consistent with a young world - the argon has had too little time to escape. If excess argon can cause exaggerated dates for rocks of known age, then why should we trust the method for rocks of unknown age?”⁸

Moreover, there ought to be consistency when comparing different dating methods, such as radiometric with carbon-dating. However, there can be discrepancies. “In Australia, some wood found in Tertiary basalt was clearly buried in the lava flow that formed the basalt, as can be seen from the charring. The wood was ‘dated’ by radiocarbon (14C) analysis at about 45,000 years old, but the basalt was ‘dated’ by the potassium-argon method at 45 million years old.”⁹

Radiometric dating is full of assumptions and inconsistencies. It does not debunk the genealogical accounts of Scripture nor the interpretation of a young earth.

5. Global Language Divergence

Claim: “On the other hand, linguistic research has proven that languages evolve over time through things like cultural interactions, isolation, and linguistic drift. There is absolutely no evidence to support the Bible’s claim of a sudden introduction of multiple languages.”

Response: If language evolves according to the evolutionary model, then we would expect language to evolve from simple to complex expressions, or from lower to higher level intelligence expressions.

Allan Steel states, “[N]atural processes have only caused languages to become more analytic over time and caused inflexional morphology to be simplified. English grammar is the greatest example of the effects of these processes. All evidence strongly suggests that there was a complex beginning for the language families of the world (not just for the IE [Indo-European] family, in fact). Thus the evolutionary model has an enormous problem in that it postulates a gradual transition from simple to complex, yet the observed processes are always going the wrong way.”¹⁰

Steel continues, “We have seen that in languages there has been a great ‘downhill’ simplification in inflexions, etc. by natural processes, while the huge ‘uphill’ growth of languages in their vocabulary and expressiveness has only come about through intelligent human input. These kinds of change are quite different to the processes proposed by biological evolution, so any analogy is completely unfounded.”

The greatest evidence for the introduction of multiple languages is the Bible itself, specifically Genesis 11. God detailed for us the confusion of language and why, as His creation failed to obey His mandates.

6. The Nature of the Cosmos

Claim: “In the Bible, there are passages that describe the heavens as a solid dome with stars affixed to it. It’s an idea that influenced the beliefs of many biblical writers - but it contrasts with our modern understanding of the universe as an expansive, three-dimensional space filled with galaxies, stars, and planets.”

Response: The Biblical writers wrote from their perspective. It is the same as if someone today says the sun went down at 7:00pm. We know the sun doesn’t literally go down, but that the earth rotates around it. We simply speak from our perspective. The biblical writers did the same.

In the Christian life, the flesh can often feel like lord. It feels so strong and overpowering that we cannot help but obey it. But then there’s Galatians 5:24 which reframes how we look at the flesh. Paul says, “And those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.” Hence, when you believed upon Jesus Christ, the flesh and its desires were crucified (Thomas Schreiner). The lordship of the flesh was rendered powerless.

Therefore, Christians must reframe the flesh. It is not lord; rather, it is an animal that has been rendered powerless. It is a bee whose stinger fell off. It is a skunk whose smell was plugged up. It is a tiger that has been stripped of its claws and teeth. The flesh has been rendered powerless to rule the Christian. It has been dethroned as lord.

So when you hear the bee flaps its wings, the skunk rustle, or the tiger meow, reframe it. This is the flesh—a powerless, defeated, and crucified enemy that does not rule my life anymore. I do not have to do what it says. I do not have to live under its barking passions. For I belong to Jesus and have true power to live this life for Him by the Holy Spirit (Gal. 5:16).

Commit Galatians 5:24 to memory this week. And commit its application to your heart for life.

Galatians 5:24 - “And those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.” (ESV)

First Claim

First, it is claimed that “No first century secular evidence whatsoever exists to support the actuality of Yeshua ben Yosef [Jesus son of Joseph].” This claim limits the type of evidence it is willing to receive in order to verify Jesus actually existed. The four gospels, the letters of Paul, Peter, Jude, and John are all dismissed, and why, because they were not secular. However, there is much non-Christian evidence for Jesus’s existence. “Dr. G.R. Habermus points out approximately 18 non-Christian sources that within 110 years of Jesus’ crucifixion mention more than 100 facts, beliefs, and teachings from the life of Jesus and early Christianity. These items include almost every major detail of Jesus’ life, including His miracles, resurrection, and claims to deity.”²

For example, Josephus, a Jewish historian offers us two important references to Jesus dating back to the A.D. 90’s. In His Antiquities, Josephus writes about “‘the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ’ (20:9). This confirms the New Testament facts that there was a man named Jesus, who was known as ‘Christ’ and had a brother named Jesus.”³ Furthermore, in Antiquities 18:3, Josephus speaks about Jesus, referencing Him as a wise man, the Christ, and speaks of His resurrected appearance.⁴

Moreover, the Roman historian Tacitus recorded many facts. Concerning the great fire of A.D. 64, the Roman historian Tacitus stated that “Nero fastened the guilt…on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of…Pontius Pilatus…[Annals 15.44]”⁵

All of this evidence may not fit the precise time of this claim above, but nonetheless it is strong evidence for Jesus’ existence and must be taken into consideration. Moreover, how much should we expect first century secularists to be interested in writing about Jesus, who was considered a religious figure and crucified criminal? Was anyone truly secular back then in terms of its modern use? Didn’t everyone have a god or a religious interest? And what if there was no secular source about a particular event, does that mean it never happened?

Can you imagine a lawyer today saying there is no evidence in the second bedroom that my client was ever in the house to commit this crime. Only to hear the opposing lawyer say maybe so, but there is evidence in every other room in the house, the backyard, the front yard, the sides of the house, the roof, the driveway, and in the street.

In the book Reinventing Jesus, the authors offer valuable insight when they state,

“It is a remarkable thing that we have any statements about Jesus by non-Christian writers. After all, he was a Jewish carpenter who spent most of his time on the shores of the Sea of Galilee, occasionally journeying to Jerusalem with his disciples. What’s more, writers in the Roman Empire were typically upper-class men who looked down on Eastern religions and gazed back on Rome’s celebrated past. So why would they ever pay attention to a Nazarene who founded a religion embraced by the lowest rungs of society? Simply put, he couldn’t be ignored. The rise of the religion bearing Christ’s name was rapid, widespread, and revolutionary. And it turned the Roman Empire upside down.”⁶

Let us not fall into the trap of selective evidence and debating only on the opponent’s particular and limited terms. In reality, the New Testament is God’s Word and it is the greatest evidence we have.

Second Claim

The second claim purports that “The earliest New Testament writers seem ignorant of the details of Jesus' life, which become more crystalized in later texts.” Specifically, Paul is cited as being ignorant of the basic facts of Jesus’ life, such as His virgin birth, and never mentions Jesus’ disciples, ministry, or miracles. Paul is said to dismiss Peter and James “as nobodies and repeatedly opposes them for not being true Christians!”

These claims are misguided. Paul was called to be an apostle of Jesus after meeting Him on the Damascus road and was sent out to preach the Gospel of Jesus and serve the churches. His letters are concerned with calling people to walk with the risen Savior, not necessary to teach a biographical lesson about His earlier days. Paul has a specific focus of building up the church and that focus adjusts to each of the different churches depending on their present needs. But he is always Christ-centered and gospel-centered in his letters and claims to be sent by the Lord.

Paul does not consider James and Peter nobodies! Paul recognized Peter was entrusted with the Gospel (Gal. 2:7), spoke of Peter and James as seemingly pillars in the faith (Gal. 2:9), respected James’ decision at the Jerusalem council (not to mention James’ eyewitness account of Jesus (1 Cor. 15:7), and was a part of delivering his letter (Acts 15:13-30). Paul did rebuke Peter later for not acting in line with the Gospel (Gal. 2:14–16). But that does not mean Paul considered him a nobody or not a Christian. In love, he rebuked him to keep the Gospel in focus in his actions.

Third Claim

The third claim states, “Even the New Testament stories don't claim to be first-hand accounts.” However, upon examination, we see that the New Testament is a mixture of eyewitnesses and companions of eyewitnesses. Hear the New Testament itself.

2 Peter 1:16 - “For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty.”

1 John 1:1–3 - ¹That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we looked upon and have touched with our hands, concerning the word of life—²the life was made manifest, and we have seen it, and testify to it and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was made manifest to us—³that which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ.”

Acts 2:32 - “This Jesus God raised up, and of that we all are witnesses.”

Over 500 eyewitnesses are cited alone in 1 Corinthians 15:6.

The New Testament claims to tell the truth.

Galatians 1:20 - “(In what I am writing to you, before God, I do not lie!)”

The New Testament claims the eyewitness testimony was passed on and is true history.

Luke 1:1–4 - ¹Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, ²just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, ³it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4 that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught.

Luke, a doctor, compiled the historical testimonies of eyewitnesses and at times was himself a witness to the work of Jesus in the book of Acts.

Fourth Claim

The fourth claim states, “The gospels, our only accounts of a historical Jesus, contradict each other.” To begin, the gospels are not our only accounts of the historic Jesus. Before the gospels—Matthew, Mark, Luke and John—were written, we had apostolic letters circulating; James, Galatians, and Romans to name a few. And these are rich both historically and theologically concerning the truth of Jesus.

Furthermore, this article cites EXChristian.net and gives a twenty-question quiz designed to show the contradictions of the Gospels themselves. Let’s look at one together. Question number two has Matthew and John saying that she came while it was still dark (Matt. 28:1; John 20:1) and Mark (16:2) has they come after the sun had risen.

Mark 16:2 - “And very early on the first day of the week, when the sun had risen, they went to the tomb.”

John 20:1 - “Now on the first day of the week Mary Magdalene came to the tomb early, while it was still dark, and saw that the stone had been taken away from the tomb.”

There is a principle that will be helpful as we look at these verses, and that is helpful in interpreting all of Scripture. The principle is this: what the author wrote for the purpose in which the author wrote it and meant it is true. Simply, what the author meant to say with his words is true. One author may emphasize one part of the story while another author gives a bigger picture. They are both inspired and correct.

As for these verses the solution is simple. John emphasized that is was still dark at Jesus’ tomb while focusing on Mary Magdalene. In John 20:1–18, Mary is a special focus of John and part of a bigger point he is making in regard to seeing and believing. Mark on the other hand emphasizes that it is very early on the Sabbath and tells us that the sun had arisen, that is enough for them to see where they are going.⁷ The sun can both be up enough to give light, yet not all the way so as to leave some measure of darkness. It was neither completely dark nor completely light. It was early and both John and Mark communicated that truly to us with their particular emphasis.

Let’s look at one more. Question seven has the woman/women running to tell the disciples (Matt. 28:7–8; Mark 16:10; Luke 24:9; John 20:2) but Mark (16:8) has them running away and telling no one. The solution is not complicated. Mark’s Gospel stops at them running away in failure to tell. But Matthew, Luke, and John eventually show them sharing (Mark 16:10 is not a part of the original manuscripts). Mark does not make an absolute end-of-all type statement here. He merely stops at and emphasizes their failure, which seems to be a part of Mark’s bigger aim to show everyone but Jesus as a failure in his gospel. Matthew, Luke, and John show what eventually happened.

Fifth Claim

The fifth claim states, “Modern scholars who claim to have uncovered the real historical Jesus depict wildly different persons.” It is argued here that modern scholars have concluded various understandings of Jesus including: “a cynic philosopher, charismatic Hasid, liberal Pharisee, conservative rabbi, Zealot revolutionary, and nonviolent pacifist.” Valerie Tarico cites Robert M. Price in his Deconstructing Jesus saying, “The historical Jesus (if there was one) might well have been a messianic king, or a progressive Pharisee, or a Galilean shaman, or a magus, or a Hellenistic sage. But he cannot very well have been all of them at the same time.”⁸

Any claim to understanding the real historical Jesus must begin and ultimately end with the Word of God itself. A simple reading of the Gospels, the earliest, best, and most reliable accounts we have, give striking clarity to who Jesus is, and in His own words. And the Gospels do not depict Jesus as a liberal Pharisee, which is laughable when reading the Gospels, or a cynic philosopher. Rather, Jesus claimed to be the Son of God revealing the Father, fulfilling Scripture, and the object of saving faith. He prepped His disciples for His death, promised the Holy Spirit, and promises to return again as saving Messiah. Jesus is unique in His claims, unique in His miracles, and is the key to understanding the entire historical redemption of the entire Bible.

Various modern scholar understandings of Jesus do not take seriously the Word of God as handed down to us, or they pick and choose Scriptures they think sound more like Jesus. The church has had the Word of God for centuries and the historic faith faithfully passed from one generation to the next.

This article ends by saying, “We may never know for certain what put Christian history in motion. Only time (or perhaps time travel) will tell.” Wrong! We know exactly what put Christianity into motion and that is the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. His disciples abandoned Him only to resurface days after His death proclaiming He is alive. Where did these little Jewish fishermen get such boldness to publicly lay down their lives in preaching the victorious resurrection of Jesus over death and sin? Is it because they wanted to be famous? This kind of message may bring you public attention, but it leads to the kind that results in death. No, they didn’t want to be famous, they saw the resurrected Jesus, just as He said they would.

Jesus’ identity is not in question biblically. It is modern scholars’ faith who is in question in regard to Him.

While teaching at a synagogue in Capernaum, Jesus tells the crowd (John 6:54), “Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him upon the last day.” What did Jesus mean when He said this? Are we to literally eat His flesh and drink His blood? And if so, how do we do that considering He is at the right hand of the Father? Does this happen in the Eucharist as the Catholic faith would teach when the priest turns the elements into Jesus’ body and blood through a process called transubstantiation (see online version of Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1375, p.347)?

An interpretive key is in order. The words of Scripture ought to be taken literally, or at face value, unless context and/or theology demands otherwise. For example, the Psalms speak multiple times of hiding in the shadow of God’s wings (Ps. 17:8; 36:7; 57:1; 63:7). Does God literally have wings? Of course not; theology demands a metaphorical understanding. Wings are a metaphor that illustrate the protection of God’s care.

As for eating Jesus’ flesh and drinking His blood, the immediate context and entire book context of John demands that we read eating and drinking as a metaphor rather than literally.

Immediate Context

Fourteen verses earlier, in the same conversation, Jesus said (John 6:40), “For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” Here Jesus declared that belief in Him equals eternal life; no other qualifiers are given. Now when Jesus speaks of eating and drinking fourteen verses later, this must be understood in light of what Jesus has already said. Bible scholar D.A. Carson says, “The only reasonable alternative is to understand these verses as a repetition of the earlier truth, but now in metaphorical form.”

Book Context

Eating and drinking is reinforced as a metaphor for belief when we look at the rest of the Gospel of John. John opens his Gospel in 1:12 and states, “But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God…” And the Gospel of John ends the same. John 20:31 states, “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.” From beginning to end, John highlights faith in Jesus as the way to receiving eternal life.

Conclusion

To eat Jesus’ flesh and to drink His blood is a striking metaphor for belief in Jesus. The immediate context (John 6:40), the entire book context (John 1:12; 6:29; 20:31), and the rest of the Bible affirms this (see Acts 16:30–31; Romans 3:28; Ephesians 2:8–9; Titus 3:5–6).

God calls His children to:

• humility (Phil. 2:3; 1 Peter 5:5),
• thankfulness (1 Thess 5:18)
• trust (Prov. 3:5–6)
• joy (1 Thess. 5:16)
• hospitality (Rom. 12:13)
• mercy (Col. 3:12)
• love (Luke 6:35)
• confession (Rom. 10:9; Matt. 6:12)
• patience (Col. 3:12)
• meekness (Col. 3:12)

Do we overlook these biblical disciplines? Let us not. God has called His holy and beloved kids to exercise themselves toward godliness (1 Tim. 4:7). We are to take up and put on the attributes that God has given us to wear. And oh what a blessing to live out the attributes of God!

Pick one action from the list above this week and do it. Think about it daily. Purposefully extend it to God and others. And watch your sanctification take on beautiful new horizons.

There is a section entitled “Biblical Disciplines” on the Branch Church App. For more detailed understanding and specific application, check them out there.

What does it mean to say that Jesus is the Son of God? This is one of those terms where we kind of know, sort of get it, but are not precisely or fully sure. Ask five different Christians what “Son of God” means and you are likely to receive six different answers. Ask five different religions and you will receive even more. Jesus as Son of God is central to our understanding of His nature and work, and even our confession of Him. This reality, although not completely graspable, is biblically understandable and significant for our faith, lives, and preaching of the Gospel.

Biblical Usage of Son

To begin, it must be noted that “son” can be used in various ways. Son can be used biologically (Numb. 1:5–15), nationally to speak of Israel (Exod. 4:22–23) and metaphorically. Scripture speaks of “sons of light” (John 12:36) and “sons of the devil” (Acts 13:10). This is a picture of those who walk in the light (metaphor for good) and those who walk after the behavior of the devil. Son can be used in a discipleship sense, as when Peter refers to Mark as his son (1 Peter 5:13). Jesus speaks to His mother and John from the cross and says in an adoptive sense, “Behold your son (John 19:26).”

Therefore, when we speak of Jesus as the Son of God, we must be careful not to confine ourselves to biological thinking only, as if the term only refers to being created. Scripture is clear that Jesus is God (John 1:1), and there are no other gods (Isaiah 44:6).

Son of God as Applied to Jesus

When we speak of Jesus as the Son of God we are referring to two things: His identity and His functions.

In regard to His identity, we are to think of (a) His divinity and (b) His unique relationship with the Father. As Son, He is fully divine (John 1:1), distinctly the Son in His divinity (John 1:18), and yet not a separate God (John 5:19–30.). He is the exact imprint of God’s nature (Heb. 1:3) and even called God by the Father (Heb. 1:8). Ontologically Jesus is God, yet more precisely the Son of God.

Furthermore, His relationship with the Father is one of a kind. The Son and the Father have exclusive mutual knowledge of one another that no other created being has. Jesus said (Matt. 11:27), “All things have been delivered to Me by My Father, and no one knows the Son except the Father. Nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and the one to whom the Son wills to reveal Him.” Moreover, the Son and the Father have a unique mutual love (John 3:35; 14:31).

In regard to the Son’s functions, He is the full and final revelation of the Father. Since He is the Son—divine and in unique relationship with the Father—He narrates God the Father perfectly to this world. The world has never seen God, but God the one and only (the Son) who is with the Father has made Him known (John 1:18). The Son tells Philip that on seeing Him, he sees the Father (John 14:9). And God the Father says in these last days He has spoken to us by His Son (Heb. 1:1–2).

Additionally, Son refers to His Messianic Kingship. The angel said that Jesus will be called the Son of the Most High and God will give Him the throne of his father David (Luke 1:32). Son here is a picture of the Son ruling in the place of the Father and being His approved representative to do so. The Old Testament uses this same language in regard to Solomon (2 Samuel 7:12–15) and the king in Psalm 2:7. Jesus will be called the Son throughout His life; at His birth (Luke 1:32), His baptism (Mark 1:11), His transfiguration (Mark 9:7), and His death (Mark 15:39).

In summary, when we call Jesus the Son of God, we are referring to either one aspect of or all of the following:

Life Under the Son of God

Jesus as the Son of God gives us confidence that we have true knowledge of God, that we are saved and ruled by God, and that we have fellowship with God. Our response includes: faith (John 30:31), worship (Matt. 14:32–33), honor (John 5:23), fellowship (1 John 1:3–4), obedience (Matt. 28:19–20), and proclamation (Acts 9:20) of Jesus the Son of God. Paul sums up life under the Son of God well when he says…

“I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.”
Galatians 2:20 (ESV)

God is worthy to trust…

for SALVATION
Behold, God is my salvation;
I will trust, and will not be afraid;
for the LORD GOD is my strength and my song,
and he has become my salvation.
Isaiah 12:2

for HELP
You who fear the LORD, trust in the LORD!
He is their help and their shield.
Psalm 115:11

for FAITHFUL LOVE
But I am like a green olive tree
in the house of God.
I trust in the steadfast love of God
forever and ever.
Psalm 52:8

for DIRECTION
Trust in the LORD with all your heart,
and do not lean on your own understanding.
In all your ways acknowledge him,
and he will make straight your paths.
Proverbs 3:5–6

when AFRAID
When I am afraid,
I put my trust in you.
Psalm 56:3

for ETERNAL LIFE
Those who trust in the LORD are like Mount Zion,
which cannot be moved, but abides forever.
Psalm 125:1

for FAVOR
Blessed is the man who trusts in the LORD,
whose trust is the LORD.
Jeremiah 17:7

ALWAYS
Trust in him at all times, O people;
pour out your heart before him;
God is a refuge for us.
Psalm 62:8

Trust in the LORD forever,
for the LORD GOD is an everlasting rock.
Isaiah 26:4

What is getting you worried today? Begin with trusting it to God Almighty. He is a good Father who cares, who has provided salvation, who has given us His Spirit, who has secured a future for us, who has adopted us, who hears our prayers, and who extends mercy and grace every day.

Let us worship God by trusting Him for all things.

Every Spiritual Blessing

Every spiritual blessing most likely asserts that we, as God’s people, have been endowed with every blessing in conjunction with the Holy Spirit. “Spiritual” thus refers to the stream of blessings that flow out of the reality of being gifted with life in God’s own Spirit. That’s amazing! God’s Spirit in my life means all His desired blessings (including favor and benefits) belong to me. This includes gifts detailed further in Ephesians 1:4–14. Therefore, the spiritual blessings, in conjunction with the life of the Holy Spirit, involves election (1:4), predestination (1:5), adoption (1:5), redemption (1:7), forgiveness of sins (1:7), the mystery of His will (1:9), and a guaranteed inheritance (1:14).

God’s blessings have been completely given to His people in His Spirit. Not one blessing that could be or should be mine in the Spirit is withheld. God truly is gracious as His Spirit enables a new life whereby we receive all we need. Let all God’s people say, “The Lord is my shepherd; I lack nothing.”

In the Heavenlies

These spiritual blessings in conjunction with the Holy Spirit are granted to us in the heavenlies. The heavenlies are the unseen realm of spiritual existence. Paul speaks of the heavenlies five times in the book of Ephesians and nowhere else. Surveying the other four verses we see that the heavenlies are where Christ reigns (1:20), where God’s people have been raised up and seated with Jesus Christ (2:6), where rulers and authorities have seen the manifold wisdom of God (3:10), and where spiritual forces of evil are still operating (6:12).

Thus, in the unseen but real spiritual realm that exists alongside the material creation, we have been given every spiritual blessing in God’s Spirit. We do not see this realm currently, but Jesus’ death, resurrection, and exaltation to the right hand of the Father gives us confidence it is there. And as Jesus truly reigns, so do the Spirit’s blessings for us. These blessings will become even more apparent when Jesus returns to the earth to once and for all set up His kingdom.

Now we may better understand what we are blessing God for as we begin Ephesians 1:3. Blessed be You God and Father who has benefited us with every desired blessing in conjunction with life in your Spirit in the unseen spiritual realm where Jesus reigns.

In Christ you are fully blessed! And that full blessing will be yours forever and ever because that is how long Jesus will reign. No one will be able to change that. You are fully blessed in God’s Spirit today. Live from this reality rather than trying to reach it.

Michael Horton offers a radical mind shift for the church in his book Ordinary.¹ Writing as an accomplished theologian (PhD), seminary professor (Westminster Escondido), and longtime Christian, he challenges these ideas of being extraordinary. He discusses how it is through the ordinary acts of ordinary Christians that God accomplishes His work and may even do extraordinary things. The preacher doesn’t need an extraordinary message. He needs to preach the ordinary Gospel and administer the ordinary sacraments. Please don’t get Dr. Horton wrong. He is not saying the Gospel is ordinary in its message, but that we do not need something extraordinary on top of it to do even greater ministry. He states, “Where the biblical message calls us to the cross, to die to self and to be raised in Christ, the new message calls the old Adam to an improved self, empowered to fulfill more easily his own life project.” And herein lies a danger in trying to be extraordinary—creating a new message that isn’t really biblical.

Jesus had a similar conversation with His disciples in Mark 10:35–45. James and John wanted to sit at Jesus’ side when He comes into His glory. Jesus pulled all the disciples in and taught them about greatness or being extraordinary. He tells them (vv.43–44), “whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be slave of all. For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” Greatness, being extraordinary, or whatever else one might want to call it is really being an ordinary servant of the Gospel who is faithful to serve others. Dr. Horton explains, “Once we recover a greater sense of God’s ordinary vocation as the site of his faithfulness, we will begin to appreciate our own calling to love and serve others in his name in everyday ways that make a real difference in people’s lives.”

Such a mind shift from seeking to be extraordinary in man’s eyes to being ordinary in God’s eyes is practical. It frees us from seeking the next big thing to do the thing right in front of us. It helps us to see how God normally works through His ordinary means within and outside of the church walls. Lastly, it takes the pressure off ourselves to be the next Christian innovator. After all, God is the innovator; we are merely His servants who serve Him in ordinary ways that He blesses extraordinarily.

As you go about the week, serve and love those right in front of you. Our families, friends, neighbors, coworkers, and fellow saints need ordinary servants who notice them and love them right where they are. Don’t worry about changing the world; focus on raising your children. Don’t worry about changing the world; do your job well. Pray. Read the Bible. Mature into the image of Jesus. God will do miracles as He sees fit. Let Him do miracles, and let us do the everyday things He has called us to.

In reading through parts of a book called The Juvenilization of American Christianity, it was sad to read about the immaturity that has developed in American churches over the last one hundred years. Thomas Bergler writes, “As they listen to years of simplified messages that emphasize an emotional relationship with Jesus over intellectual content, teenagers learn that a well-articulated belief system is unimportant and might even become an obstacle to authentic faith.”¹ Statements like this are heartbreaking as the head is cast aside for the heart; knowledge cast aside for emotion. And in the process maturity is cast aside for immaturity. Progress in the Christian faith requires both the heart and the mind (Rom. 12:2; Matt. 22:37).

Maturity means moving forward

In writing the letter of Hebrews, the pastor, who is dealing with people leaning back into Judaism, exhorts his readers to move on to maturity (Heb. 6:1). That is to say here, build on the foundational truths you have been given (William Lane). Foundational truths are essential, but they are the beginning of something more. Believing in Jesus as Lord and Savior is essential; nonetheless, there is more to understand about His ministry and person; past, present, and future.

God does not desire that you learn the basics of the faith and then plop down on a spiritual couch for the rest of your days. In the same that we do not desire our children to learn the ABC’s and never revisit the English language again. God desires further sanctification with His truth. And the reality is we need this. Let us not be content to swim in the shallow end when we have a God who makes us to swim in the biggest oceans imaginable.

Maturity means discernment

Maturing is not just about knowledge though, but discernment with that knowledge. God desires our maturity that we may know right from wrong (Heb. 5:14) and walk in His righteousness. Progressing in the depth of our faith enables us to handle the complex situations we are confronted with for God’s glory.

As I progress in my life as a husband, a father, and a pastor, I am continually met with my need for God’s grace to mature me so that I can handle the complex situations that come my way. I’m thankful for His maturation process in my life. It is uncomfortable at times, but the fruit He bears is always worth it.

Maturity means unity

Maturing is not just about us, but about the body of Christ. God desires the whole body to mature in the knowledge of the faith and so come together in unity in their understanding of Jesus (Eph. 4:13). Growing in the knowledge of Jesus matures us not just to grow and discern, but to live together, love one another, and grow into “the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ” (Eph. 4:14).

Maturity recognizes itself as one part of a much bigger body, where everyone together best reflects Jesus Christ. Let us therefore desire not simply our maturity, but the maturity of those around us. We will all be better off for it, and our Lord will be better represented.

Questions to Consider:

1. Am I growing beyond the foundational truths of the faith? If not, why is that?
2. Do I exemplify maturity in my faith towards others? Or would others characterize me as immature? What is one step you can take today to better exemplify maturity in your faith?

Actions:

Read a pastorally recommended book (or chapters within) that will grow your understanding of the faith.

Examples:

• Knowing God by J.I. Packer
• Knowledge of the Holy by A.W. Tozer
• Systematic Theology by Wayne Grudem
• Biblical Doctrine by John MacArthur and Richard Mayhue

George Alan Rekers, in his chapter entitled, “Psychological Foundations for Rearing Masculine Boys and Feminine Girls,” teaches that true masculinity demonstrates responsibility in the interconnecting spheres of God’s biological, psychological, social, and spiritual design. Rekers framework is helpful for thinking through masculinity and fostering it in our boys.

Biological Masculinity

Males undoubtedly have been given a unique biology. This is clearly discernable in their cells (chromosomes), hormones (testosterone), and anatomy (reproductive capabilities).

Concerning male reproductive anatomy, God designed it to be expressed in the confines of marriage with one female. Overstepping reproductive design is not true masculinity. To engage in premarital promiscuity is counterfeit masculinity and to engage in homosexuality is perverted masculinity (Lev. 18:22; 1 Cor. 6:9). Rekers states, “Premarital and extramarital sexual intimacies are decidedly unmasculine and undermine the development of a confident and secure male identity. Similarly, boys should be taught that sexual relations with other males are not only wrong but also a symptom as well as a cause of a confused sexual identity.”

Males have also been given the unique biological trait of strength (1 Peter 3:7). Using their strength to protect, serve, and provide is truly masculine. Conversely, macho demonstrations of strength or cowardly reservations are not worthy of the biological masculinity gifted to males.

Let us teach our boys as well as model to them that true masculinity expresses its anatomy faithfully in covenant marriage and its physical strength for the good of others.

Psychological Masculinity

From the very beginning God has made humans either male or female (Gen. 1:27). Males ought to mentally realize they are different from females. They possess a different reproductive anatomy as well as different chromosomes. Females possess XX chromosomes and males XY. Psychologically they can rest assured that God has made them male and that is not a mistake nor something they can change. It is a good gift to be received and found at the deepest cellular level.

Let us affirm the unique gift of masculinity by using proper male pronouns when referring to boys and men. These help solidify the psychological male identity.

Social Masculinity

Males have been given a unique social responsibility. They are to appear distinct from females in their dress. Deuteronomy 22:5 says, “A woman shall not wear anything that pertains to a man, nor shall a man put on a woman’s garment, for all who do so are an abomination to the LORD your God.” God commands that men and women in Israel do not cross dress so as to be like the opposite sex. The sexes were to remain distinct within Israel. To blur the sexes was considered an abomination by the Lord.

Furthermore, males are to be active fathers to their offspring. Ephesians 6:4 says, “Fathers, do not exasperate your children; instead, bring them up in the training and instruction of the Lord.” True masculinity takes care of its own and seeks to train them up in the Lord rather than be too hard or even absent. Moreover, true masculinity is faithful to one’s wife. He loves her sacrificially, provides for her, cares for her, and builds her up (Eph. 5:25–28).

Whatever culture males find themselves in, their dress ought never to confuse them as a female. And their role within the family must be active love and care for their wife and children.

Biblical Masculinity

As David faced death, he charged his son Solomon to “be strong, [and] act like a man…” (1 Kings 2:1–2). What does it look like to act like a man? David continues by telling him to observe Yahweh’s requirements, to walk in obedience to Him and to what He has spoken (1 Kings 2:3). True masculinity walks with the Lord and obeys Him first and foremost.

Biblical masculinity has a moral compass designed by God and that begins with the fear of Him (Prov. 1:7). Additionally, it does not use crass language, lewd jokes (Eph. 5:4), or harass women.

Let us teach our boys to worship and serve God alone through Jesus Christ our Lord. The manliest thing a male will ever do is walk with Jesus Christ and serve Him.

True Masculinity

True masculinity is a gift from God that encompasses all spheres of life. It begins with the worship of the true God through Jesus Christ and further expresses itself in biological obedience, psychological reality, and social responsibilities to one’s family and community.

It’s 2023 and things feel crazier than ever in the United States. People are claiming to be transgender in record numbers. Medical surgeries for minors are intensely advocated for. And even the White House is displaying the transgender flag at equal height between two American flags. What’s going on! The answer is multifaceted. But a big piece of this comes from humanity’s understanding of itself—the doctrine of man.

God has given us a clear picture in the Bible of what we are (immaterial soul and physical body), why we are valuable (divine image bearers), why we are broken (sin), and how that brokenness is remedied (faith in the redeeming work of Jesus). As humans we are a wonderful male or female creation of God, bearing incredible value, who find themselves separated from God, enslaved by their sin, broken, and in need of salvation and peace with God.

But this is not the modern perspective. Instead of biblical man, the world has embraced what may be termed “psychological man.” In his book, The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self, Carl Trueman gives a historical scheme presented by Philip Rieff, where he details the historical development of psychological man, who finds identity in psychological happiness. Trueman states, “psychological categories and an inward focus are the hallmarks of being a modern person. This is what Taylor refers to as expressive individualism, that each of us finds our meaning by giving expression to our own feelings and desires.”¹ Thus, modern psychological man is committed to and governed by personal desires and anything that would disagree is a threat that must be overthrown or brought into submission.²

When compared to biblical man, psychological man is vastly different. (This difference may be understood following Carl Trueman’s historical development of the psychological man.) Biblical man is sinful by nature. However, that reality was forsaken and changed into a good nature in the 18^th century under the teaching of Jean-Jacques Rousseau. He believed we are born pure and then corrupted by society. Furthermore, Biblical man has a divine purpose and mandate to rule the earth as God’s image bearers and to multiply. Nevertheless, that truth was rejected into believing that the good life is determined by you and you alone. In the 19^th century, Friedrich Nietzsche, led people to believe that life had no purpose, and so you now determine what is a good and satisfying life.

Additionally, Biblical man is created by God. But that was discarded upon the 19^th century work of Charles Darwin, who advocated that man was evolved by natural processes. Moreover, Biblical man was to engage in God’s sexual design of the body. However, Sigmund Freud combined the life goal of happiness idea with sex. Thus, sex became central to human happiness and identity. Trueman states, “And the result is that, before Freud, sex was an activity, for procreation or for recreation; after Freud, sex is definitive of who we are, as individuals, as societies, and as a species.”³ Lastly, biblical man was to live within God’s designed family. Nevertheless, Wilhelm Reich, taught that the family and its moral codes are the primary unit of oppression against women and sexual expression, and the state must intervene for liberation.

Consequently, psychological man has stripped biblical man of his broken sinful nature, his purpose, his divine origin, his proper sexual expression, and his family unit. It is no wonder people today have no idea who they are, what their ultimate purpose is, where they came from, and how to use their bodies. It is no wonder why transgenderism is exploding on social media, receiving display tables in major department stores, demanding childhood surgeries, puberty blockers, and more. It is because they have believed in a psychological picture of mankind that has stripped itself of its true identity.

So what do we do? Proclaim the truth of the doctrine of man. Psychological man needs a picture of biblical man, for in that is the beginnings of true identity and stability. May God&rsqup;s truth of the doctrine of man be a cause for worship and evangelism in our lives.

This Sunday we are beginning the book of John and will encounter a variant in John 1:18 that deserves more attention than the setting may permit. Thus, we will tackle it here and be ready for it in the sermon together.

John 1:18 reads (NASB), “No one has seen God at any time; God the only Son, who is in the arms of the Father, He has explained Him.” The variant occurs in the words “God the only Son.” We can find manuscripts with five different readings:

1. one and only God;
2. the one and only God;
3. the one and only Son;
4. one and only Son; and
5. one and only.

How shall we go about deciphering God’s original intended meaning?

There are two basic things to know when engaging in this kind of textual criticism. First, how many manuscripts and quality of manuscripts support each reading, and second, what is the harder, or more difficult reading. The reason we ask the second question is that a scribe, when copying a biblical manuscript, is more likely to clarify a harder reading, rather than make a clear reading more difficult to read.

When we examine these two basic questions, we can see that first there is a good amount of manuscript evidence for the first three readings: (1) one and only God; (2) the one and only God; (3) the one and only Son. Second, the readings “one and only God” and “the one and only God” are a harder reading. A scribe is more likely to clarify “one and only God” into “one and only Son” rather than the other way around. Therefore, when we read John 1:18, there is a high chance that the reading should speak of Jesus as the one and only God, rather than Son.

Whatever reading one may adopt does not change our doctrinal belief about Jesus. He is proclaimed both as the Son of God and divine in the New Testament. The question becomes what is John emphasizing here?

God’s vision of Jesus in Revelation 1:12–18, empowers us to never repeat the cycle of kids with God. John says,

¹²I turned around to see the voice that was speaking to me. And when I turned I saw seven golden lampstands, ¹³and among the lampstands was someone like a son of man, dressed in a robe reaching down to his feet and with a golden sash around his chest. ¹⁴The hair on his head was white like wool, as white as snow, and his eyes were like blazing fire. ¹⁵His feet were like bronze glowing in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of rushing waters. 16 In his right hand he held seven stars, and coming out of his mouth was a sharp, double-edged sword. His face was like the sun shining in all its brilliance. ¹⁷When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. Then he placed his right hand on me and said: “Do not be afraid. I am the First and the Last. ¹⁸I am the Living One; I was dead, and now look, I am alive for ever and ever! And I hold the keys of death and Hades.

We can’t see Jesus with us; He is not visible to us. We cannot visibly see Him in our worship services. We cannot see Him in our homes. We cannot see Him at our jobs. But this vision declares to us that He is actively present among His churches. Jesus walks with us! And He does so in important “high priestly clothing” (v. 13; garment and golden band), with “years of wisdom” (v. 14; white hair), “divine insight and fierce judgment” (v. 14; eyes like fire), stable strength (v. 15; brass feet), powerful strength (v. 15; voice like many waters), controlling the angels (v. 16; seven stars in His righthand; likely interpretation), speaking final judgement (v. 16; two-edged sword out of His mouth), and a glorious appearance (v. 16; face shining like the sun) (Grant Osbourne).

All these images together declare the exalted Jesus Christ in ruling glory! He is the wise, stable (in His feet), powerful (in His voice), glorious (in His appearance) judge! And He is not far from His churches. He sits in heaven at the right hand of God, but His presence is still with His people on earth. This vision therefore brings us comfort that our Lord and Savior is near and actively in control.

With Jesus among us and ruling over us, we are comforted, and we are hopeful! He is near; He is in control. Therefore, we remain faithful to Jesus until He comes again with the clouds of heaven. We walk by faith when challenged by sight. We trust in His presence when we feel lonely. We persevere when tempted by sin and lies.

Jesus is among us and He lives, ruling all things in complete authority! My God is so big, so strong, and so mighty, there’s nothing my God cannot do—FOR YOU! Don’t lose sight of this vision. Keep it and it will keep you moving forward in God’s strength.

Without the gracious work of God in prayer, we are merely infants wobbling up to a frozen standing position. But because of the gracious work of God, our prayers make haste effectively to the throne room of God. There are two sides when it comes to prayer—ours and God’s. We offer up prayers, but what is God doing? He is doing more than we know. Here is a quick snapshot of God’s gracious work in prayer.

The Father graciously receives our prayers. As we pray “Our Father in heaven” (Matt. 6:9) and give thanks to Him for everything (Eph. 5:20), He graciously extends His mighty ear to hear us. How busy God must be to rule a world full of billions of people! Not to mention a universe that takes light years just to move a small distance. Yet, He takes the time to listen and welcome what we have to say to Him. My life is very full currently, but it is my joy as a dad, to bend down and receive my sons request to walk. Let us not take for granted that the Father hears little ol’ me when I talk to Him.

The Son graciously gives us His name. Jesus taught the disciples to pray in His name, promising both His and the Father’s response (John 14:13–14; 15:16; 16:23–24). Jesus’ name is not a magical formula, but the authority by whom we come to access the Father’s grace. Prayers in Jesus’ name rest upon His salvation work and access the Father’s ear because of His authority. How gracious is Jesus is grant us His authority to come and speak to God the Father! The Father does not listen to us because of our merits, but because of Jesus’ merits. Let us remember whose authority we stand on as we approach the Father.

The Spirit graciously helps us in the activity of praying. We don’t always know what to say, but the Spirit does; He intercedes for us through wordless groans (Rom. 8:26–27). Moreover, the Spirit is the conscious arena in which we offer the Father our heartfelt prayers and requests (Eph. 6:18). How gracious is the Spirit to speak on our behalf and help us in our weakness! Even when we cannot muster words in prayer, the Spirit can and does. Let us be assured that the Spirit speaks to the Father on our behalf in prayer.

Prayer is an essential part of the Christian life where we not only get to talk to God, but we get to see His gracious work. Next time you pray, remember God’s grace in prayer as expressed in His trinity. The Father hears us through the authoritative merits of the Son, empowered by the intercession of the Holy Spirit. How gracious is God to give us prayer and to empower the whole process for our benefit! How gracious is God to bend down and enable the whole process of walking with Him.

The vision, extensive and detailed with ancient imagery, broadcasts that Yahweh reigns from His throne. The throne pops amidst the whole vision, shining out as a precious and beautiful blue stone (lapis lazuli). Under the throne is a platform like ice pictured as the floor of heaven. Holding up the platform are the living creatures with four faces (lion, eagle, ox, and man) indicating that Yahweh rules over all creation in every direction. He is over the ferocious lion, the swift eagle, the domestic ox and the most dignified and noble of all God’s creatures—man. Pictured as carrying Yahweh’s throne, these living creatures (which are revealed as cherubim in Ezek. 10) declare the transcendent attribute of omnipotence.

The Jewish exiles would be able to, once again, answer questions they already knew the answer to. Did the god of Babylon beat Yahweh? The vision shouts no. Are we destined to be here forever? The vision proclaims no. Yahweh rules over all things, even other lands and supposed gods. Not all questions are answered, but they are framed to be answered through where all power truly resides.

Questions about your situation must be framed through Yahweh’s omnipotence. He is not being arm wrestled by someone else. He is not being pushed around by someone else. All situations and things are underneath His power; not next to it and not above it. Let us place nothing as equal to or above Yahweh’s power. There is no such thing.

Yahweh communicates one last important reality in this vision—wheels. The wheels went where the living creatures went, and they went wherever the Spirit went. The Spirit was in the living creatures and in the wheels. The wheels, powered by Yahweh’s Spirit, visualize His ability to be everywhere at once. Even though the exiles are away from the temple, Yahweh is still with them in Babylon. There is no physical place where we can be away from Yahweh. He meets us in all locations.

A good picture of God is one where He is reigning, everywhere in all power, both transcendent and immanent—this is the picture in Ezekiel 1. His throne is the framework by which our lives must live and our questions must be asked. His throne is the framework by which we find comfort, hope, and faith. We live and continue to live because He reigns! Let us not lose sight of this picture—Yahweh reigning on His throne—and all that it does for us.

While not perfect, HERE is an artist’s redarning of this vision.

God has graciously created both men and women in His image (Gen. 1:27). Therefore, by nature, men and women share equal worth and dignity in God’s eyes. When Adam and Eve disobeyed God and ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, they both fell into God’s eternal judgment having become sinners separated from God. When Jesus came to redeem lost sinners, he redeemed both men and women having provided equal salvation in Himself (Gal. 3:28). And with the coming of the Holy Spirit, both men and women, in Christ, have been given spiritual gifts to manifest God’s Holy Spirit for the common good (1 Cor. 12:7).

Different yet Complementary Functions

Without denying the equal worth, eternal judgment, salvation, and filling of the Spirit concerning men and women, God has given them different yet complementary ways of flourishing together for His glory and Gospel. This is displayed in creation, the home, and the church.

Creation

Adam was created first and given God’s command not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Gen. 2:16–17). Eve was then created to be a suitable helper for Adam (Gen. 2:18). This is the first sign of different yet complementary functions. Adam bears a leadership role in being created first and receiving God’s command, while Eve comes alongside to help Adam in filling the earth and subduing it (Gen. 1:28). Adam’s leadership is further displayed when Yahweh calls for him, not the woman, after they sin in the garden (Gen. 3:9). Paul affirms this leadership role of Adam when he says that sin entered the world through him instead of Eve (Rom. 5:12). The creation accounts give us the first glimpse of different yet complementary functions for men and women.

Home

Moreover, different yet complementary functions of men and women are taught in the home. Men are designated as the head of their wives (Eph. 5:23). And as the head of the wife, men are to love, provide, and protect their wives reflecting the love and care of Jesus Himself for the church (Eph. 5:33). Women, rather, are called to submit to their husbands as to the Lord (Eph. 5:22)¹. They are to help (Gen. 2:18), respect (Eph. 5:33), and submit to their husband’s leadership (Eph. 5:22).

Church

In the church, men and women are also given different yet complementary functions. Men are called to occupy the office of elder (synonymous with pastor and overseer) according to the qualifications given in 1 Tim. 3:1–7. The office of elder/pastor must be occupied by men with good character, the ability to teach, who manage their family well, and who are not recent converts. Just prior to giving the qualifications of an elder/pastor, Paul forbids women from teaching or exercising authority over a man (1 Tim. 2:12)². Therefore, authoritative doctrinal teaching and governing authority in the church are the responsibility of elder/pastor men. Men are to stand up and occupy these roles and serve the whole church for Jesus’ sake. Women, although not permitted to teach or exercise authority over a man in the church setting, may still teach women (Titus 2:3–4) and children (Eph. 6:1) in the church.

Arguments Against

What about other Scriptures that seem to contradict this? When Paul says that there is neither male nor female (Galatians 3:28), he is not obliterating male and female distinctions, but rather emphasizing there are no distinctions when it comes to receiving salvation in Christ. Both male and female are equal in terms of receiving salvation and being in Christ. To remove gender distinctions would contradict Paul’s later teaching on roles within the home (Eph. 5).

What about other interpretations of 1 Timothy 2:11–15? The amount of material written on these five verses is substantial. Every verse in this passage has various arguments and is too much to cover in this short article. Suffice it to say, the crux of differing arguments may be centered in 1 Timothy 2:12 which forbids women from teaching or exercising authority over men. This verse has been argued as a negative use of teaching and exercising of authority over men. Therefore, it is reasoned that if a woman engages in these two activities in a domineering way, then she is forbidden from doing them. However, if she does them in a positive non-domineering way, then she is permitted to carry them out. Nevertheless, the natural reading and conjunctional use between these two Greek infinitives (“to teach” and “to exercise authority”) suggests they should be read in a positive rather than a negative manner³. Paul is not forbidding a domineering use of teaching and exercising of authority over a man, but an absolute use in the gathered church setting. Others have argued that these commands were meant for uneducated women. If the women were trained then the prohibition wouldn’t stand anymore. However, Paul doesn’t prescribe such limitations here. And if he meant that, then why not prohibit uneducated men as well?

What about other women who have done significant things in the Bible?⁴ Didn’t Deborah judge Israel for a time? Weren’t there prophetesses like Miriam, Huldah, Anna, and Philip’s daughters? What about Priscilla helping her husband Aquilla to teach Apollos the truth more accurately (Acts 18:26)? Yes, these women and others did great things for the Lord during their time on earth and should be celebrated. Nevertheless, there is a difference between description and prescription in Scripture. The first describes things that happened but don’t necessarily mean they are always a prescribed practice for all places. The latter prescribes practices for all people, at all places, always. These instances, particularly the ruling and teaching, are descriptions. Deborah did judge, although Barak was supposed to lead and failed. Priscilla did participate in instructing Aquilla, “[b]ut again, this teaching was done in private (Acts 18:26). Priscilla may have been learned, wise, and influential, but there is no indication that she exercised teaching authority over men.”⁵

A Flourishing Partnership

What does it look like for men and women to have a flourishing partnership in the Gospel? First, men and women must see one another as equal in nature, eternal judgement, salvation, and the filling of the Spirit.

Second, men and women must realize their distinct roles as commanded by God. Men are to rise up and lead at home and in the church. They are responsible to lead, love, and protect their wives and families. Moreover, men as elders are responsible to authoritatively instruct the church and govern her for the sake of the people and the glory of God in Jesus Christ. Women are to help, respect, and submit to their husbands and jointly take care of the children at home. Also, women are to pour into other women in the church, teaching them, and may teach the children of the church as well.

Third, men and women must serve and encourage one another in these God designed roles. Each role is a necessary part of worshiping God and serving His purposes (1 Cor. 12:12–27). God has placed the parts of the body, each one of them just as He desired them to be. Men ought to inspire women to make full use of their gifts and abilities to the glory of God. Likewise, women ought to support the men to be what God has intended them to be.

Men and women will flourish together best when they realize their God given equality, their God given roles at home and in the church, and encourage one another to fulfill them.

A Principled Approach

What does a flourishing partnership in the Gospel look like particularly for women? Rather than attempt to answer many questions about specific positions and duties women may or may not hold in the church, we offer a principle based on 1 Timothy 2:12. Does the position or duty take on the teaching or exercise of authority reserved for elder/pastor men? If it does, then the women ought to focus their giftings and energies in a different capacity. This is in no way demeaning to women. Rather, it is God’s design for a flourishing partnership in the Gospel of Jesus.

David discovered this to be true of Yahweh and declared it ever so sweetly in Psalm 23. This Psalm teaches that Yahweh actively shepherds His people with complete care. All needs are known by Him and accounted for, even needs the sheep doesn’t know they had.

With Yahweh as shepherd there is complete provision (23:1). Every single need finds satisfaction; we lack nothing. There is guidance into rest (23:2). Yahweh actively provides a nourishing rest for His people when they need it (Leupold). He actively and personally guides us to places and times where we can be nurtured; because let’s face it, we need this! There is inward renewal (23:3a). Yahweh cares for our inner spiritual life, actively walking with us to renew and revive us from and out of our spiritual struggles. And the result is a renewed and reinvigorated enjoyment of life (Expositors). There is guidance (23:3b). Like train tracks that are laid down upon the earth for a train to go forth, so Yahweh as shepherd has laid down tracks of righteousness in His Word for us to travel on. And He guides us to walk in His Word for that is His will and His best for us. Moreover, there is His protective presence (23:4). Yahweh as shepherd walks with His sheep not only in good times but also in trouble. He can easily be seen in the green pastures, the still waters, and the paths of righteousness. But He can also be seen in the darkest places, where evil lurks and death is waiting. In darkness God is able to protect you from evil, as pictured in His rod and His staff.

Psalm 23 is invigorating! Our confidence soars in the Lord as we know for sure that He will shepherd us with complete care. He shepherds marriages. He shepherds families. He shepherds moms, dads, widows, orphans, singles, youth, children, and all who trust in Him. And He does it with complete care. Don’t worry (Matthew 6:25-34), trust fully now.

Before the transfiguration, Jesus predicts His suffering, death, and resurrection (Mark 8:31). Peter pulls Jesus aside to rebuke such “nonsense,” but Jesus counter rebukes Peter and tells him to get his satanic ways behind Him. Then Jesus calls the crowd along with the disciples to teach them a vital lesson in following Him. Jesus declares His disciples must deny themselves, take up their cross, and follow Him. His disciples must be ready to follow Him even unto death.

The transfiguration is understood by reading it with its previous narrative, which speaks of suffering, death and resurrection. Interpreted together, these two narratives affirm Jesus’ future glory will follow His predicted suffering. Therefore, disciples are assured to follow Jesus through suffering because of His transfiguration glory to come.

Narratives can be more challenging to interpret than New Testament letters. Letters are often direct telling the recipients what to think and do. While narratives are indirect showing actions that require additional concrete processing. What the transfiguration can teach us is to look at the narrative just before and after the one you are studying. Narratives are like movies, they are made up of many scenes cut and placed together to tell a bigger story.

When reading the Gospel, or OT narratives, look at how the narratives connect, support, and interpret one another. This skill will take time to develop. But it will help us to connect dots we haven’t yet seen on our own. Here are a few examples.

Babel, Judges, and Goliath

The tower of Babel shows Yahweh scattering people all over the earth in judgment (Genesis 11). However, in Genesis 12 Yahweh calls Abram and promises all peoples on earth will be blessed through Him. Yahweh scattered the world, nevertheless He still had a plan to rescue it.

The book of Judges illustrates the stories of twelve judges God used to save His people Israel. As you progress through the book, each judge is pictured as a little different than the previous one. Yahweh begins with honorable Othniel, follows with lame armed Ehud, then farmer Shamgar, female Deborah and foreign Jael, weak and timid Gideon, a few minor judges, daughter sacrificing Jephthah, a few more minor judges, and finally lustful Samson. From Othniel to Samson, Yahweh demonstrates His incredible ability to save through increasingly broken vessels. What does this demonstrate? Salvation is of the Lord and Him alone.

In 1 Samuel 17 young David rises up to slay the mighty Goliath. The previous chapter tells us something highly important. Before slaying Goliath, the Spirit of Yahweh came powerfully upon David. As we watch David fight larger than life Goliath, chapter 16 ensures we see this with proper eyes. David’s victory is a demonstration of the work of God’s Spirit.

Narratives are a delight to read together. Take time to see how the different scenes are placed together to tell a bigger story—the story of God’s grace through Jesus Christ.

Try It Yourself

Read Mark 4:35–5:43. What do these multiple narratives do together that they do not do alone? Why do you think Mark placed these miracles side by side in his gospel? And how do these narratives further support Mark’s portrait of Jesus from 1:1–4:34? God’s Word is so much fun!

The New Testament captures many discipleship metaphors for us to ponder and embrace. Not one metaphor captures all that may be said about a disciple of Jesus. Each metaphor delivers a particular strength, and only together do they express a fuller picture. Here are a few.

Fishers of Men

As John the Baptist is forced into prison, Jesus launches His ministry onto the public scene (Mark 1:14ff.). He calls publicly for repentance and faith in the gospel and then proceeds to call four fishermen to follow Him—Simon, Andrew, James, and John. Jesus does something unusual and amazing in this passage (among other things of course). First, He sought out His disciples. Rabbis usually waited for disciples to approach them in this time. But Jesus goes to them, calls them to follow Him, and then promises to make them into fishers of men (Mark 1:17).

What does this metaphor—fishers of men—teach us regarding discipleship? Fishers of men pictures active participation in the ministry of the kingdom of God. It speaks of disciples equipped to call other people into the kingdom of God like Jesus did.

Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime. Likewise, give a disciple personal attention and you bless him for a day. Give a disciple a net and you bless others for a lifetime. Let us not leave the fishing of people to leadership. Let’s all grab our nets and cast them for the Kingdom of God and lost souls.

Mark 1:17 - Jesus said to them, “Follow Me, and I will make you become fishers of men.”

Branches

In His last days, Jesus engrains an important metaphor into the minds of His disciples. He is the vine and they are the branches. What does this metaphor teach us about discipleship? Branches on a vine visualize that Jesus is the source of a disciple’s continued transformation. Only by remaining (or abiding) in Jesus can a disciple produce actions or results that God desires. For those who do remain in Jesus, they can expect their entire life and witness to be transformed. For those who do not remain and reject Jesus, they will be cast out and destroyed. Being a true follower of Jesus is not a one-time event; it is an ongoing process of being faithful in fellowship to Him.

This metaphor of branches is given concrete understanding as Jesus progresses in this teaching. Branches are called to remain in Jesus (15:4–5), which is further described as remaining in His words (15:7), His love (15:9–10), and His commands (15:10, 17). Each of these helps us understand what it means to remain faithful in fellowship with Jesus. Remaining is indeed a mysterious experience, but one that is nonetheless practical.

John 15:5 - “I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing.”

Salt

Jesus declares His disciples are the salt of the earth. What does this metaphor illustrate about discipleship? Before we answer this, let us begin with the substance of salt itself. Salt had multiple functions in the ancient world. It preserved food as well as added flavor. Accordingly, salt seems to depict a Christian’s righteous impact and preservation upon this world. Disciples are influential representatives of Jesus in this world. They are to live their faith in Christ and influence the world for Him.

As salt brings distinct flavor to any food it touches, so disciples of Jesus bring distinct characteristics and blessings upon society; ones given by the grace of God. May God bless us to be the gospel flavoring influencers He saved us to be. Stay salty my friends!

Matthew 5:13 - “You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt loses its flavor, how shall it be seasoned? It is then good for nothing but to be thrown out and trampled underfoot by men.”

Light

Disciples of Jesus are asserted as light of the world. What are we to make of this metaphor? Simply, light provides visibility. In this case, disciples live the knowledge and truth of the Gospel for the world to see. Not so they can be patted on the back, but so that the world may glorify our Father in heaven. Disciples do not hide their transformed lives, but live them publicly for the glory of God.

Jesus intends the world to see His disciples in action—loving and serving. We notice people who act differently than mainstream culture. We notice people who speak differently too. The world ought to notice Jesus disciples. For they act and speak out of the grace of God given to them in Jesus Christ.

Matthew 5:14–16 - “You are the light of the world. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hidden. Nor do they light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on a lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house. Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father in heaven.”

Conclusion

Keep these metaphors at the front of your minds as you walk with Jesus and serve Him. Their beautiful illustrations will shape your mind for the discipleship process and for the glory of God. Correspondingly, these metaphors are easy to remember and offer rich teaching.

Love has been defined differently to me in my eighteen years as a Christian. Initially, a teacher taught that love is giving so others can gain, and I believe this is true. Love gives for the other person with no strings attached; there is no expectation for the receiver to reciprocate. Years later, another teacher instructed that love is loyalty. This definition brought hesitancy on my part, but when applied to God it made much sense. God is loved through our loyalty to Him.

In preparing to teach a passage from Galatians 5 a few years ago, my understanding of love was instructed yet again. By looking up the word “love” (agape) in two dictionary entries¹, love was expressed as interest, high regard, and deep appreciation for another. While my definitions of love were not incorrect, I think they were missing an important element. Love does not just give; it is not just loyal, but it has a high regard and interest for the other person. Love is not just an action, but an attitude that genuinely regards the value and highest good of another person. This attitude felt like the missing ingredient in my love.

God has graciously given us freedom in Christ. The apostle Paul is clear on this and what we are to do with that freedom. Stand fast in Christ alone (Gal. 5:1) and serve one another through love (Gal. 5:13). As you go about your life, begin to see others with high value. Your spouse has high value. Your children have high value. Likewise, your boss, your neighbor, your extended family, your friends, even your enemies all possess high value because God has given it to them (Gen. 1:27). Although people may not always be so pleasant or act so lovely, they still possess high value and are to be objects of our love as Christians. What a shift of mindset! As you pass people today, begin to see and treat them with high value. That’s how Jesus treats you. Praise God for His example to us in salvation and daily life.

Galatians 5:13 — “For you, brethren, have been called to liberty; only do not use liberty as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another.”

Although Jackson was the first president to allow himself such a wide latitude in interpreting the Constitution, he would not be the last. Since the time of Jackson’s presidency, the question has been asked repeatedly throughout the history of American governance, who holds the authority of the Constitution, those who wrote it or those who interpret it?

Interpreting the U.S. Constitution is one thing but how about interpreting the Bible? Who holds the authority when it comes to the meaning of the Bible, the One who wrote it or those who are interpreting it? Seems like an obvious answer, we should say God holds the authority, it is His word after all. However, you may have noticed that it does not always work that way in practice.

Intentions and Interpretations

We have all been there, meeting with others in a Bible study and everything is going along great until we hit one of those tough passages and as it is discussed around the room, someone utters the phrase, “but that’s my interpretation.” Depending on the group or the environment, someone else will typically respond, “well, this is my interpretation” and before you know it, there are 20 different interpretations from only 10 people in the room! How did that happen? Is the Bible open for interpretation or is there an essential meaning to any given passage?

To be fair, there are plenty of places in Scripture where Bible believing, Jesus-loving people can have different interpretations and still maintain Biblical orthodoxy and fellowship in the same churches and small groups. But there are also times when Biblical interpretation means everything for how we understand Christian doctrine and what it means to follow Jesus.

In other words, what happens when my interpretation doesn’t match your interpretation on matters which cause a distinct theological fork in the road?

How do we know what is true? How do we know what God really wants us to know from his Word?

Is it really enough to say, “let’s just agree to disagree” or “that’s just my interpretation.” When do we need to challenge interpretations? When do we need to have our own interpretations challenged?

As Christians, we believe that the Bible is truth, it contains God’s very words to us and it is inspired by God. This what the Bible says about itself, “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness.”
2 Timothy 3:16

This means that there is one author, God himself, who inspired all of His word so there is one essential meaning to these words. All of this also implies that the authority for God’s word rests with the author, not the interpreter, “And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God.”
1 Thessalonians 2:13

Notice here that the apostle Paul makes a point to distinguish between the Bible as God’s word versus being “the word of men.” We can take this as an affirmation that not only is God the author of Scripture but that He owns it and He has a designed meaning and purpose for it.

In light of that, Gordon Fee and Douglas Stuart’s book, How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth, they explain the main goal of biblical interpretation, “the goal of interpretation is to get at the “plain meaning of the text,” the author’s (God’s) intended meaning.”

For anyone who has tried to understand and interpret the Bible, many times the meaning of the biblical text can be anything but “plain.” After all, the Bible is a library of 66 books written by at least 40 different human writers in three different languages over more than 1000 years of history. In addition, the settings of the Biblical story are largely foreign to modern western readers like us, both in terms of geography and culture. On top of all of that, this is a divinely inspired book that human beings are trying to understand. Given what the Bible communicates (“the very words of life”), the stakes for getting our interpretations right are well worth the investment that it takes to get there.

Hermeneutics: Funny Word, Necessary Skills

You might have never heard the word before but every time you open the Bible and try to interpret it, you are doing hermeneutics and when you do, you are drawing from whatever hermeneutical skills you have. The question then is not whether we have hermeneutical skills but how good (or bad) those skills are. Those skills, for good and bad, have a huge impact on our understanding of the Bible.

The good news is that our Biblical hermeneutical skills can constantly grow and get better, often yielding a more faithful understanding of the Bible. If you are interested in improving your interpretation skills, there also plenty of ways you can get started immediately. Some of the best ways include studying the Bible itself with a commentary or study Bible notes, reading books on Biblical theology and hermeneutics, and listening to certain podcasts and sermons.

If you really want to get a jump start on developing your Biblical interpretive skills, you can join us for our new Branch U class, Understanding the Bible, which starts this Sunday, February 19, 2023 at 11am and will continue for four weeks.

Hermeneutics is more than just a funny word. It describes an essential set of interpretive skills necessary to engage the most important words that you and I will ever read.

Since worldviews are the framework propelling everyday beliefs, values, and actions, it will be helpful to dialogue with people at their worldview level. Dialoging at the worldview level opens a new kind of conversation where at least three important realities may be illuminated. First, it reveals the source of their beliefs, values, and actions. Most people probably do not realize that their deepest beliefs are standing upon a deeper foundational set of beliefs. Worldview conversations are eye opening. People might think, “Wow, I never thought about what foundational beliefs uphold the rest of my beliefs.” Second, it tests the source of their beliefs, values, and actions. Now that a worldview has been recognized, does it hold up to scrutiny? Does it make sense of all the available evidence humanity has discovered? And if it doesn’t, then the beliefs it upholds have nothing solid to stand on. How terrible it would be to build a high building (your life) upon a faulty foundation (incorrect beliefs)! Third, it fosters opportunity to share the Christian worldview and the Gospel of Jesus. Having one’s eyes opened to their worldview and its major faults, allows opportunity to hear the true worldview and its author—our Lord Jesus Christ.

Consider the trans community. Transgenderism is gaining momentum in American culture pushing beliefs such as: (1) gender is an individual choice completely distinct from biological sex; and (2) whatever gender you choose gives you the rights and privileges of that gender. The transgender community now advocates for their choice of bathrooms, gender conforming surgeries, sports competitions, federal laws, and national acceptance of their beliefs and lifestyle. These beliefs, however, are the product of a worldview. The more important questions concerning transgenderism begin at their worldview level. Let’s dialogue.

First, what worldview(s) does transgenderism stand upon? The answers will likely vary, but the worldviews that makes the most sense are the atheistic/evolutionary or agnostic worldviews. Some may claim a theistic worldview (such as theism, deism, or polytheism), but transgender beliefs are hard pressed to find support in these, especially Christianity. Second, does this atheistic or agnostic worldview which produces transgender beliefs hold up to scrutiny? This worldview lacks moral authority and the right to bind my conscience. This worldview allows people to believe what they want and advocate for it, but it has no authoritative right to compel me or anyone else to follow it, let alone accept it. Furthermore, an atheistic or agnostic worldview most likely rests upon a cosmic, chemical, and evolutionary understanding of the world. These theories contain major holes, great leaps of faith, and struggle to make sense of the finer realities of life, such as morality. Thus, transgenderism stands upon a worldview which lacks moral authority and scientific authority. Third, what now? Demonstrate the worldview that one can know, be assured of, and give one’s life to. The Christian worldview reveals where we came from, why we have value, what our biggest problem is, how God has fixed it, what God requires, our purpose for living, and where we go upon death. Whew! So much good knowledge to share! Simply, the Christian worldview offers a trusted revelation which gives us the true moral authority, scientific support, the love of a Father, and a future hope.

As you venture into the broken world, remember the goal of worldview conversations: to help people take a step back and see the faulty foundation upon which they are standing, and encourage them to stand upon Jesus Christ (Matthew 7:24–27). Take a moment and read Matthew 7:24–27.

“And from his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace.”
John 1:16

It was too early in the morning and we were way too close to each other for her to be screaming that way. As she yelled at players and referees and coaches, it made me wonder what her 10 year old child was thinking as he played basketball in that little gym. Unfortunately, she didn’t seem to care as she continued to hurl insults and unsolicited commentary about the youth basketball game that was being played in front of us. As the parents and grandparents of the kids on the court crowded together on those tiny bleacher seats, it was all but impossible to ignore her and just focus on watching our kids have fun playing a game.

It wasn’t even halftime before my resentment started to grow, thinking to myself, “she is ruining everyone’s experience”. Resentment inevitably grew into bitterness, “I just wanted to watch my son play basketball without having to deal with this kind of thing”. Finally, bitterness grew into anger, “the nerve of this lady, thinking it’s all about her without a care for the rest of us!” It was all I could do to hold back from turning around and giving her a piece of my mind.

It was about at that point that I started to catch myself or maybe that God’s Spirit quickened my conscience, I don’t know. But thankfully, I resisted that temptation.

Continuing to resist wouldn’t be easy though. By the second half of the game, I had cooled my anger and was working through the bitterness and resentment that was churning in my spirit as she continued with even more fervor. At one point, she even physically got out of the stands to go yell at the scores table about 2 points that they had misallocated. I mean, are you kidding me?!

By the time the final buzzer sounded to end the game, I sprung off of those bleachers, grateful to be free of the tyranny of “that lady” and her behavior. As I did, I thought to myself, “man, I am glad I am not like her” as I basked in the pride of taming my own tongue.

Pesky Hidden Sin

Later that same day, I was at home watching another basketball game, this time on the TV in my living room, featuring college basketball players representing my alma mater against a rival school. As I became more and more emotionally invested in the game, it wasn’t long before—you guessed it—I was yelling at the little digital referees and players and coaches displayed on that screen.

It wasn’t until after the game was over that I settled down enough to realize how similar my behavior was to the behavior that had so angered me earlier in the day. Of course, my first reaction was to rationalize it though, “My behavior wasn’t public, it was in the privacy of my own home…I was yelling at a TV screen, not actual people…At least I didn’t use profanity, my yelling was ‘clean’…”

Once I was quiet enough to listen to God, I was reminded again of a perpetual lesson that I am continuing to learn. Sin hides itself deep in our hearts and just when we think we’ve found it and dealt with it, it comes out of hiding. It might not seem like my behavior during a basketball game on TV was all that sinful. After all, who hasn’t gotten a little too excited watching their favorite sports team? However, this isn’t about rating our sin and one thing I can say with confidence is that my behavior wasn’t Christlike and it wasn’t pleasing to God, so my behavior needed correction.

Another word for this kind of correction in Scripture is repentance. Repentance itself refers to a change based upon recognizing and agreeing with God about a sinful or wrong behavior and then turning away from that sin and turning towards God to walk in a different kind of nature that is pleasing to God.

Repentance is a Gift

Repentance is an intimidating word for most people. It often conjures up in our minds images of God’s anger towards us as we melt away under the weight of our shame and contrition. In this view, it is little more than a form of spiritual punishment that we have to endure so that God will be happy with us again.

At the same time, it seems that the biblical view of repentance is very different from a mere form of spiritual punishment. Here is where the gospel of Jesus makes all the difference. When Jesus paid the penalty for our sin on the cross many things changed for us spiritually. One of those things is that true repentance for a Christian is a gift and treasure. For those of us who are in Christ, we have experienced grace that has saved us from the penalty of our sin and we also experience ongoing grace that saves us from the power of sin in our lives. Repentance is the gateway to that kind of grace worked out in our lives and just like our salvation, repentance is a gift of God’s grace through Jesus. This is grace upon grace.

Here’s a simple example of how this works in our everyday lives,

When we sin in word, in deed, in heart attitude, conviction often comes from the work of the Holy Spirit in our hearts to help us recognize that sin for what it is, that it is something that is not Christlike, not pleasing to God, something that has caused pain or brokenness around us. We then have a choice once conviction comes. We can agree with God’s Spirit that what we have done is sin and we can confess it as sin. Or, we can chose to ignore the conviction and rationalize our sin, justify our sin, minimize our sin, etc.

If we chose to ignore the sin, it will typically get worse and like a cancerous tumor, it will likely grow until it becomes a habit and then from a habit it can become a full-blown character issue. However, if we confess our sin, which in effect, means to agree with God about it, then we are on our way to finding repentance as a gift of God’s grace. If confession is the beginning of the change, it is repentance that ushers in transformation to our lives, since repentance is the act putting off sin and putting on the righteousness of Jesus.

The Privilege of Repentance

The Apostle Paul writes this to the Ephesians, which I think is an apt description of the act of repentance on our part,

“Put off your old self, which belongs to your former manner of life and is corrupt through deceitful desires, and to be renewed in the spirit of your minds, and to put on the new self, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness.”
Ephesians 4:22–24

Seen in its proper light, repentance is a gracious privilege of God, won for us by Jesus which allows us take off the old self and to put on the new self, characterized by the righteousness of Christ. In Christ, we have the life-giving and freedom-producing privilege of repentance. So that as I repent,

I *get to* take off my resentment and put on Christ’s compassion.

I *get to* take off my bitterness and put on Christ’s joy.

I *get to* take off my anger and put on Christ’s peace.

I *get to* take off my pride and put on Christ’s humility.

I *get to* take off my hatred and put on Christ’s love.

I *get to* take off my sin and put on Christ’s righteousness.

One of the major characteristics of sin is its ability to be deceptive and to hide itself. To hide itself in our pride, in our justifications, in our vanity, in our self-deception. I am thankful for God’s grace in revealing my sin to me on a daily basis and giving me the privilege of exchanging the bondage of my sinful behavior for the freedom of Christ’s righteousness.

We should always remember that as God’s children, our Father doesn’t show us our sin so that he can beat us down in guilt and shame. He shows us our sin out of his kindness (Romans 2:4) so that we can receive repentance as a gift and privilege of Christ’s saving work. So, confess and repent with every chance you get and by God’s gracious work, you’ll experience deeper fellowship with the triune God and see the fruit of an eternally transformed life.

All of which begs the questions for us as Christians,

What has Jesus saved you from?

What has Jesus saved you to?

In my experience I have found that most Christians find it a lot easier to answer the first question than they do the second question. Of course, we should be careful not to create a false dichotomy here since the answers to these two questions really work together. However, the answers to the first question usually come to mind a lot faster than the answers to the second question, as we often know a lot more about what we have been saved from, things like sin, guilt, shame, condemnation, wrath, hell, than what we have been saved to.

Now, why does it matter whether or not we can answer the second question well?

If New Testament usage is any indication, it matters a lot! In fact, you could say that the most prevalent theme in the New Testament is actually about what Jesus has saved us to.

Perhaps there is no better example of this than the one found in the opening verses of Ephesians,

“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places” (Eph 1:3) (emphasis mine)¹

Think about that for a minute. What exactly does that mean, “every spiritual blessing”? How would you put that into words? If this hits us the way it should, it makes our heads spin just thinking about it.

Certainly there are blessings under this heading that would be classified as “things which eye has not seen…that God has prepared for those who love him” (1 Cor 2:9), but what about those things—those blessings—that we can see and hear and understand now? What are those and why do they matter?

In reality, that’s a question that we’ll spend a lifetime and an eternity trying to understand which might be why biblical scholars have observed that much of the New Testament is about telling followers of Jesus how to become who we already are in Jesus.

Listen to 2 Cor 5:17, which seems to communicate this very idea, “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come.”

You may know that there is a lot contained in the idea of a new creation in Christ. What is key to notice here is that the Greek word for new is the word “kainos”, which means a new kind of thing, something unprecedented². So for anyone who is in Christ, that person has been made into a new kind of creation which is different than anything that has come before it, certainly different in kind than what that person was before being in Christ.

So what kinds of things have we been saved to as new creations? Here’s a sampling, according the New Testament,

A New Righteousness. “But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it—the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe.”
Romans 3:21–22

A New Relationship. “All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself.” 2 Cor 5:18

A New Identity. “But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light. Once you were not a people, but now you are God's people; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.”
1 Peter 2:9–10

A New Mind. “For who has understood the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.”
1 Cor 2:16

A New Life. “I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.”
Galatians 2:20

A New Destiny. “And he who was seated on the throne said, Behold, I am making all things new.”
Revelation 21:5

Even in the Old Testament, as God’s foreshadows the saving work of Jesus in both Ezekiel and Jeremiah,

A New Heart and Spirit. “And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh.”
Ezekiel 36:26

Again, why is it so important that we know not only what we have been saved from but what we have been saved to? Because for the Christian, becoming who we already are in Jesus is the core of discipleship, that we learn and grow into a calling to live as new creations in Christ. This is what the apostle Paul calls the “upward call of God in Christ”

“Not that I have already obtained this or am already perfect, but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own. Brothers, I do not consider that I have made it my own. But one thing I do: forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what lies ahead, I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus. Let those of us who are mature think this way”
Philippians 3:12–15

If you want to mature and grow as a disciple of Jesus, you need to know what Jesus has saved you to as well as what he has saved you from. It is the calling of Christian discipleship to pursue what is kainos in Christ so that we can see God’s Spirit bring real transformation. That is how we become who we already are in Christ Jesus.

In Mark 9:14–29 Jesus returns from an incredible moment of transfiguring before select disciples only to find the rest of his disciples in dispute with the scribes. A boy was brought to the disciples who had a mute spirit. The spirit would throw him down and cause him to foam at the mouth, gnash his teeth, and become paralyzed; poor boy! The disciples could not cast this demon out. You can imagine their confusion as they had done this before with the authority Jesus gave them (Mark 6:13). Nevertheless, Jesus casts this demon out and commands him to never enter the boy again thus demonstrating once again His incredible power.

Later the disciples ask Jesus privately why they were not able to cast out the demon. Jesus responded, “This kind can come out by nothing but prayer.”¹ The disciples seem to have run into an issue of self-reliance. Why could “we” not cast it out they asked? Could it be that they became so used to success that they forgot who really was the one doing the casting out? Did they forget whose power was doing the work? Mark Strauss says, “Their problem was that their past successes had given them confidence in their own abilities. Jesus calls them to more prayer, that is, greater dependence on God, who alone has authority over the forces of evil. The disciples’ authority to cast out demons was always mediated authority; they are Jesus’ representatives acting in his power.”²

As we walk with God and serve Him, let us grow in greater dependence upon Him, especially through prayer. Prayer is a grace given to us whereby we may rely on God and trust in His power for ministry and life. We may plant and water seeds, but God is the one who makes things grow (1 Cor. 3:6–7).

Genesis 1:27

In order to assess Allison’s “spiritual experience” of Genesis 1:27, we turn to the Hebrew. First, do the words male and female indicate something different than man and woman? The simple answer is no. “Zākār [Hebrew male] is a gender-specific designation; it always specifies the male individual or a group of males.³ The Abridged BDB affirms this in saying that zākār refers to “men, male persons (of all ages)…”⁴ These dictionaries affirm the same reality in the Hebrew word for female.⁵

Second, are we suppose to understand the word “and” as “to”? Again, the simple answer is no. The Hebrew gives us a conjunction here, not a preposition. A conjunction expresses male and female as two distinct categories that are related in one system. Genesis 1:27 teaches that God made human kind either male or female. If the author of Genesis wanted to express the word “to” instead of “and,” he would have used a preposition instead of a conjunction, which he clearly did not.

This interpretation is further affirmed when we examine the usage of Genesis 1:27 in the New Testament. Jesus cites Genesis 1:27 in Mark 10:6 and also uses a conjunction rather than a preposition.

The Scriptures are clear that God has made humans male and female. Allison is mistaken in his interpretation and is dangerously leading many astray, especially children. One would be hard pressed to find a true biblical scholar that would agree with his spiritual experience and assessment of Genesis 1:27.

Lesson Learned

Allison’s “spiritual experience” instructs us. Let us be careful not to read our situations or desires into a text of Scripture; we must seek the author’s meaning. The Scriptures are not a fortune cookie that we turn to and make it immediately apply to our lives. There is an original context and audience to whom it was first written. In order to interpret it into our context, we must first begin with understanding it in theirs. This takes work, but it is important into understanding God’s Word and interpreting it faithfully.

A Savior Born of Woman¹

After Adam and Eve ate from the tree, Yahweh pronounced judgment on the man, the woman, and the serpent. In Genesis 3:15, He declares judgment upon the serpent saying, “And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her Seed; He shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise His heel.” The judgment spoken upon the serpent is the first sign of the Gospel (known as the protoevangelium or first-gospel). Yahweh has drawn a line between the woman and her children (seed) and the serpent and his children (seed). The children here are not necessarily physical descendants, but those who would follow in the ways of the serpent and rebel against God (his seed), and those who would embrace God by faith (her seed).

Although sin has entered the world and humanity will now taste death, there is hope. God declares victory of the woman’s seed over the serpents with a superior strike to his head. Seed refers to a group here, but it can additionally refer to an individual. Bruce Waltke points out that seed “can refer to an immediate descendent (Gen. 4:25; 15:3), a distant offspring, or a large group of descendants. Here and throughout the Scripture, all three senses are developed and merged.”² Unpacking the use of “seed” in Genesis 3:15, Waltke concludes, “we can infer both the singular and collective sense. But since only the head of the serpent is represented as crushed, we can expect an individual to deliver the fatal blow and to be struck uniquely on his heel.”³

Therefore, “seed” pictures those who will embrace Yahweh by faith in a collective sense, but it also incorporates Christ in a singular sense. And Christ will come and give a fatal blow to the serpent through His work. Though seed is too vague at this point to specify the Savior Jesus Christ; it is too clear to deny that He is its fulfillment. Although seed refers to many, it will eventually be represented by Christ for the whole world (see Paul’s discussion of “Seed” in Galatians 3, specifically 3:16).

What remains significant is that this victory for humanity over the serpent and his followers will come through the woman’s seed. Therefore, there will be a human individual who will bruise the serpent’s head as a descendent of woman. One of the first things the Old Testament promises and foreshadows about the Gospel is that its Savior will be human, born of a woman, and represent humanity.⁴ This is in accord with the New Testament’s genealogies (Matthew 1:1–17 and Luke 3:23–38) and its teaching about the birth of Jesus Christ.

A Dying Savior

As the Old Testament Scriptures now wait for a human Savior to come and strike the serpent, remember it also predicts He will be struck on the heel. Yes, victory is certain in Yahweh’s plan, but it will come at a great cost. That cost will be typified in Exodus (the Passover) and Leviticus (the sacrificial system), and explicit in the prophet Isaiah.

Isaiah states (53:12), “Therefore I will divide Him a portion with the great, and He shall divide the spoil with the strong, because He poured out His soul unto death, and He was numbered with the transgressors, and He bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.” This Servant spoken of by Isaiah was given a portion and spoil by Yahweh, because He gave up His own life to bear the sins of others and to make intercession for them. We do not know who this Servant is at this point, and neither does Isaiah. He and the people of his time are left trusting that God will make known who this person is.

The New Testament illuminates Isaiah 53:12 remarkably. Isaiah’s “He poured out His soul unto death” is fulfilled in Jesus yielding up His Spirit (Matthew 27:50; Luke 23:46). Isaiah’s “He was numbered with the transgressors” is fulfilled in Jesus being numbered with the transgressors on the cross (Luke 22:37, 23:32–33). And Isaiah’s he “made intercession for the transgressors” is fulfilled in the veil being torn and the people resurrecting from the dead after His death (Matt. 27:51–53). Jesus is assuredly the Servant in Isaiah 53:12.

Jesus will victoriously strike the serpent, and the cost of death is not the result of His fight but the means to bring about victory. A dying Savior was always the plan, for that is where the victorious strike happens; that is where the serpent will be rendered powerless and where humans will find justification from their sin. Victory through death, although a hard concept to grasp (see the disciples in Mark 9:31–32), is a Gospel concept, one prophesied in the Old Testament and fulfilled in the New. We should not be surprised of a dying Savior (Isaiah 53:12; Genesis 3:15), who forgives the sins of His people (like the Passover and the sacrificial system).

A Resurrected Savior

To bring victory over sin for humanity, the dying human Savior must also rise from the dead and conquer death. Does the Old Testament teach a resurrected Savior/Messiah? It does!

When the Holy Spirit descended in Acts 2, He caused many to speak in different languages. Some onlookers were amazed and perplexed while others mocked the speakers as having had too much wine. Peter—the same Peter who denied Jesus publicly three times—stood up and addressed the crowd. He explained this phenomenon as the pouring out of God’s Spirit prophesied about in Joel 2:28–32. Then Peter spoke about the reality of Jesus’ resurrection. He did not quote what Jesus said about His resurrection, even though he had many instances in which he could pull from. Rather, Peter went further back in time and quoted David from Psalm 16.

Psalm 16:8–11 says, “8I have set the Lord always before me; Because He is at my right hand I shall not be moved. 9 Therefore my heart is glad, and my glory rejoices; My flesh also will rest in hope.10 For You will not leave my soul in Sheol, nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption. 11 You will show me the path of life; In Your presence is fullness of joy; at Your right hand are pleasures forevermore.”

Verse 10 explains why David is glad, rejoicing, and resting in hope secure. The reason is because the Lord will not leave his soul in Sheol, “the place where the dead are gathered for judgment.”⁵ And then he says, “Nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption [or more literally the “pit”].” “Both ‘my soul’ and ‘Holy One’” seem, at first glance, to be talking about David. “My soul” is clearly David, and “Holy One” seems to be a poetic parallelism describing himself in synonymous terms.

Yet Peter sees the Messiah in the phrase “Holy One;” an instance of David speaking about the Messiah’s resurrection. According to David, the Holy One will not see corruption, or “the pit,” which may be defined as “the state or action of decomposition.”⁶ Thus, we understand David to be saying in the second line of v. 10 that the Lord will not allow His Holy One to decay in his body and rot in the ground. However, David did die as Peter says in Acts 2:28. And his body has remained in the ground and has in fact rotted. Since David’s body did rot, his words in v. 10 did not come true—at least for him they did not. Peter reasons in Acts 2:30 that David was a prophet and knew that in his line of descendants Yahweh had promised one of his descendants would sit on his throne.

Therefore, David was speaking concerning someone else who would not see the corruption in the grave. Who was David speaking about? It was the Messiah, his future son. Thus, David was ultimately prophesying the resurrection of the Messiah from the dead and freed from decay. Paul reasons the same thing in Acts 13:36. He says David died, was buried, and saw corruption (bodily decay in the ground). But the one whom God raised the from the dead—the Messiah—saw no corruption.

Glancing back at Isaiah 53:12 (under a “Dying Savior”), we see that Yahweh exalted His Servant for His sacrificial death. Yahweh says, “Therefore I will divide Him a portion with the great, And He shall divide the spoil with the strong.” If the Servant dies a sacrificial death and then is given a portion with the great and divides the spoil with the strong, He must be raised back to life in order to do that. Therefore, resurrection is implied in the exaltation of God’s Servant in Isaiah 53:12, which we clearly saw is Jesus. Thus, the Gospel truth of a resurrected Savior is prophesied in Psalm 16 and is implicitly taught in Isaiah 52.

A Reigning Savior

In 2 Samuel 7:1–17 Yahweh graciously promises to establish His rule forever through the house and kingdom of David. We have the blessing of getting to look back and see how Yahweh’s promise played out to David and his house. After David comes Solomon; he is wise, builds up the kingdom of Israel like never before and then falls into idolatry with the result that the kingdom is divided. Many kings follow Solomon: Rehoboam, Abijah, Asa, Jehoshaphat, Jehoram, Ahaziah, Joash, Amaziah, Azariah, Jothem, Ahaz, Hezekiah, Manasseh, Amon, Josiah, Johoiakim, Jehoiachin, Zedekiah, and then exile under the Babylonians (1 Chronicles 3:10–16).

Where is the Davidic king now? Israel is in exile, kingless under the slavery of another nation. Has Yahweh’s promise to David failed? Has Yahweh’s hesed (covenant love) proved unfaithful? Not a chance! Yahweh confirmed His promise to Israel of a Davidic root to arise (Isaiah 11:1–5), a prince of peace to come on whose shoulders the government will be (Isaiah 9:6–7)—even before the exile happened. And during the exile Yahweh gives Daniel a vision of one like a son of man who was given an everlasting rule (Daniel 7:13–14). The promise of a Davidic ruler continues to be confirmed despite exile and judgment.

Centuries later, Yahweh declares who the eternal Davidic King is. He sends His angel to a young Israelite woman named Mary and reveals that she will give birth to a son. His name will be Jesus; He will have the throne of his father David, and He will rule forever over Jacob’s descendants (Luke 1:31–33). What good news! And after so many years! The King is finally here!

But 33 years later this same Jesus died. What happened? The eternal King is supposed to reign, not die. Remember Isaiah 53:12. A sacrificial death was necessary in order to make intercession Yahweh’s people. Nevertheless, Yahweh raised Jesus—the son of David—from the dead, crowned Him with glory and honor (Hebrews 2:9), and exalted Him to His right hand (Hebrews 1:3; 8:1; 10:12; 12:2). Therefore, God has indeed kept His promise and established His rule forever through the son of David—Jesus Christ.

The Gospel of Jesus Christ—His birth, death, resurrection, and exalted reign—permeate the entire Bible. This is the central message, theme, and goal of the Scriptures. As such, we may be and ought to be confident of the unity of Scripture and its message. Yahweh has promised the Gospel, fulfilled the Gospel, and gives salvation and rest to those who repent and believe the Gospel.

Paul begins the character of love in 1 Corinthians 13:4 with its response to a problem—the problem of challenging and frustrating people. And what does love do when it is challenged, when its buttons are pushed? Love suffers a long time. Love puts up with people’s challenges and difficulties (Gordon Fee). Love bears up under the difficulty and continues in spite of the difficulty.

I think the best example of love suffering is parents. When I was asked what it was like to be a parent, I tried to find the best words and here is what I came up with. Having kids is wonderfully hard; emphasis on wonderful. But let’s face it, kids can also be extremely difficult. For example, your kid asks for a yogurt. Great, I will get you a yogurt. You open it up, put the spoon in, give it a stir, and then happily hand it to your child only for them to cry uncontrollably. What happened, you thought? You wanted this; I got this. What went wrong? Only to find out later they didn’t want you to stir it and because you did they do not want it anymore.

How much more does God the Father suffer through us, our will and our sins? It’s incredible to think that God actually introduced suffering into His existence by creating us. He must really desire to love us! And oh how He has shown it since the beginning of time!

The first thing we learn about the character of love here is that it doesn’t give up when frustrated. Love does not quit when challenged. I think this is a love we all desire for our relationships, especially for our marriages. Thank God it is the love He gives to us.

Positional Sanctification

For those who have placed their faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord, Yahweh has already sanctified them. This means that He has removed them from one position and placed them in another. As unbelievers, we were in a position of guilt and uncleanness before God, but through Christ we have been moved into a position of holiness. We no longer stand in a position of servitude to Satan having been taken captive to do his will, but now we have been moved into a position of service to God, being set apart to Him alone. Positional sanctification is summed up well in Hebrews 10:10 which says, “we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all time.”

Positional sanctification is a work of God in Christ and through His Spirit that declares your holy position before Him. This is a cause for celebration and worship! You may confidently believe and affirm that in Christ Yahweh looks upon you as cleansed, purified, and set apart to Him.

Progressive Sanctification

Although we are seen as pure before Yahweh, we don’t always act like it. Struggles and sin still impact our lives. However, Yahweh continues the sanctification process where He now transforms us to be holy, in order to further reflect the position of holiness we already have been given. Think of a child who has been adopted into a new family. The adoption is legal and final, but now there is the work of learning to live in that household according to the parents’ desires. Progressive sanctification is the continual work of Yahweh setting us apart from evil thoughts and behavior to good thoughts and behavior according to His will.

Progressive sanctification is a cause for celebration and worship! You may be confident that Yahweh is graciously transforming you more and more that you may share in His holiness and enjoy Him.

Trust

When you encounter difficult situations, trust Yahweh for His sanctifying purposes. Trust, even though it hurts and you cannot see what He is doing. The house may be full of dust from construction and thus hard to see, but the Builder is doing a good work, and the dust will clear up.

Jesus’ experience in Capernaum is instructive for us. There He amazes people by casting out an unclean spirit and healing all who were sick and demon-possessed. The next morning, He is praying in solitude and His disciples cannot find Him. They searched eagerly for Him and when they found Him, they exclaimed, “Everyone is looking for You.” Jesus’ response is key. He says, “Let us go into the next towns, that I may preach there also, because for this purpose I have come forth.” The people wanted more of Jesus there—whether His teachings and/or miracles—but He was not going to be driven by what they wanted.

Jesus was not going to be sidetracked by people or their values, no matter how noble they might be. Rather, He was driven by the kingdom of God. And as such He prays early even after a long day, staying focused and empowered by God the Father. He preaches even though people likely want to see more miracles, for that is why He was sent. Jesus shows us a life driven by God’s Kingdom that still inspires our daily lives.

As Americans, it is far too easy to be influenced by the American ideal of the daily life. Things within the American ideal may not necessarily be bad, but they are not what ultimately drive us as Christians. No, we are driven by God’s kingdom; its proclamation, its reality in our lives, and giving our time, talent, and resources to its continued coming.

My heart is that we don’t become complacent as Christians in America. But that our eyes are open to the awesome reality of God’s Kingdom through Jesus Christ in our daily lives. As citizens of heaven (Philippians 3:20), let us be driven by the kingdom of God. Let us live in it, grow in it, share it, and worship God for it.

They might reason with you that this is true because there is no definite article (or “the”) in the Greek language of John 1:1c. So then, it must be translated as “a.” What shall we say? We must admit they are technically correct that there is no definite article (or “the”) in the original Greek language of John 1:1c. But we must point out that they are incorrect in their understanding and translation of the definite article’s absence. When a definite article (or “the”) is absent before a noun (a person, place, or thing), the noun does not automatically warrant an “a” before it. Rather, the noun may be one of three things: indefinite, qualitative, or definite. Indefinite refers to one of many in a class (such as a horse from the herd). Qualitative describes a noun’s “quality, nature, or essence” (such as having a horse’s nature). And definite marks out something or someone specific (such as the big horse).

With the absence of the definite article in John 1:1c, the question now is, which is the best understanding and translation? Is it indefinite, definite, or qualitative?

Indefinite - “a god"

Should the noun “God” be understood indefinitely and rendered “a god”? At least two reasons teach that we should not (Wallace). First, the grammatical construction of this verse does not support such a translation. The Greek of John 1:1c reads literally like this, “and God was the Word.” In order for us to know how to translate this into English we have to know which word is the subject, verb, object, direct object, etc. The case endings in Greek teach us that “the Word” is the subject (or nominative) and that “God” has a close association with the subject (called the predicate nominative). Thus, when we translate John 1:1c into English, “the Word” is placed before “God” in the sentence since it is the main subject, even though the Greek has a different word order.

Why all the grammar Sean? The grammar is put forth because knowing the original Greek here is most helpful. The way the Greek construction is written puts “God” before the verb (“was”) and leaves it indefinite (without the definite article). This construction fits into what is known as Colwell’s Construction, which says in essence that a predicate nominative (in this case “God”) that appears before the verb in Greek “is normally qualitative, sometimes definite, and only rarely indefinite (Wallace).” Thus, the word “God” in John 1:1c follows a construction that is normally used to express a word as qualitative or definite.

Daniel B. Wallace (262n19) cites a study by Paul Steven Dixon and says, “Of the 53 Cowell’s constructions Dixon found in John, not one was considered indefinite.” Therefore, the indefinite translation lacks support in John 1:1c. Second, a theological study of John does not warrant an indefinite translation. After reading of Jesus’ deity expressed in John 1:18, 5:17–18, 8:58, 14:9, and 20:28, an indefinite translation is confusing.

Definite - “the God”

Should the noun “God” be understood definitely and be rendered “the God”? Is this what John is trying to say, that the Word is the God? If this translation is adopted, then we would end up with the heretical teaching of Modalism, which fails to distinguish between the three persons of the Trinity. Modalism holds that God sometimes manifests as the Father, sometimes as the Son, and sometimes as the Spirit. Simply, the one God appears in different modes. Scripture rejects this teaching. We see clearly in Scripture that the Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Spirit, and the Spirit is not the Father (Matthew 28:19–20). This distinction must be kept intact, and a definite translation would lose this as it would in essence say that the Son is the Father.

Qualitative - “was God”

Should the noun “God” be understood qualitatively and be rendered “was God”? The answer is yes. First, this fits Cowell’s Construction where the predicate nominatives that are before the verb and lack the definite article are normally qualitative. And second, this understanding is in line theologically with the rest of John.

Thus, John is not saying that the Word was a god (one of many), or the God (modalism), but rather that the Word was in essence and nature God. John 1:1 teaches us in compact language that the Word was distinct from God (the Father) in eternity, with God (the Father) in eternity, and also possessing the nature and essence of God (the Father) from eternity. Jesus is not the Father then, but He is fully divine like Him and shares fully in His essence and nature.

John 1:1 is a powerful statement of the personhood and deity of our Lord and Savior. He is not “a god” or a lesser god than the Father. Rather, Jesus is God, the Divine Word, who shares the same essence of the Father and is a part of the one true Godhead. Let us be confident in the divine nature of Jesus!

The same is true with trials; they will find you. There is no safe place on this earth where you can escape the struggle and pain of this world.

However, the Lord offers an incredibly helpful way to deal with the trials that come our way (James 1:2–8).

To begin, trials are to be judged as opportunities for joy. When a trial finds you, your first thoughts will likely be heavy. “Why is this happening to me?” “I hate this!” But what if instead your first thoughts were joyful. I don’t mean rejoicing in the fact that you feel pain, but rather delighting in the hand of God through the trial. We are not celebrating the pain, but thanking God for what He is doing in us.

The reason why we can find delight is because these trials are perfecting agents. They are producing qualities and character that God desires which are of ultimate good for us. We can count trials as occasions of joy because we know trials also contain God’s grace. Ultimately, they are giving us steadfast endurance or what Chris Vlachos calls “staying power.” Think of trials as dumbbell weights. Although heavy, they can be used to develop strength (Douglas Moo).

When we see trials correctly, they become weights we lift that produce inward strength.

However, trials may still leave you struggling to delight in God and see things from His perspective. All you may see is the pain in what seems to be a meaningless trial. In such moments the Lord teaches and commands us to ask Him for wisdom. Wisdom is defined here as seeing trials from God’s perspective. As such, wisdom considers trials from their end result as well as the current joy of their perfecting work. When we ask, God promises to give us wisdom (or joyful perspective) generously and without making fun of us.

God does command though that we set aside doubt and ask in faith. May the Lord bless you to consider trials as occasions of joy, knowing they are perfecting agents for your good, and to ask for wisdom when you find it hard to see.

By grace God has given us an eternally greater gift than a bat or a scholarship; He has given us freedom from sin’s penalty and power. Unfortunately, God’s grace can be misunderstood and even misused. The thought in Paul’s day was something like, “so then, the more I sin, the more God’s grace increases and covers that!” “Well according to that logic, I will just keep on sinning so the gift of grace is actualized even more.” Paul writes in Romans 6 that receiving grace is not a license to sin, but rather a union with Jesus that frees us from sin in order to serve God. Therefore, we learn the power that sin had over us is completely broken. Sin cannot force us to do anything it says or wants. And this is true because of our union with Jesus! For being united into Christ is being united into His reality of overcoming sin and living for God (6:3–10). Being united to Jesus by faith gives us not only a new position before God, but a new quality of life with God. We are not just forgiven of sin’s penalty, but we are free from sin’s power.

Our union with Jesus now calls us to be certain of our freed state from sin’s power and our new life towards God (6:11). And in this freed state we no longer allow sin to be the boss.

We go so far as to not even position our bodies to be weapons (or tools) of unrighteousness to sin. How could we possibly live such a life aiming ourselves at the target of sin when Jesus has made us new creatures by His sacrifice? Do we really want to turn our bodies into weapons to hurt other people? Absolutely not! Instead we present ourselves to God as a weapon (or tool) for His righteous purposes. I think this is key to overcoming the temptation to sin and to honor God; by focusing our energies and bodies in this direction. As such we will steer away from sin and live under grace.

Here are two ways to apply Romans 6 this week. First, be certain of your freed state from sin’s power. Your life doesn’t have to be dominated and pulled around by sin. You are a new creation in Christ. Second, aim your thoughts, body, and heart at serving God's purposes. It may be helpful to think of one sinful desire that comes up on a continual basis for you, and then ask, “How can I present myself to God and serve Him instead of giving into that desire?”

Before we begin, it must be pointed out that our frameworks for understanding God in all His glory are not perfect. There are at least four classification frameworks used to understand God’s attributes. These four may be reduced to two simplified groups: (1) who God is and has been forever and as distinct from everything else and (2) who God is as manifested in relationship to objects.

Generally stated, God is usually classified in His nature and the expression of it to objects. But even that is far too simple and imprecise to say. Nonetheless, it is helpful to have some kind of human-dimensional framework to think of the infinite and invisible God (similar to the Bible’s use of anthropomorphisms). Therefore, I propose a foundational and imperfect framework which begins to think of God in terms of His nature, characteristics of His nature, and actions that reveal His nature.

God’s Nature

When asked who is God, I propose we start with the truth that God is spirit (John 4:24). As spirit, we rightly think of God as having a non-corporeal existence, which is to say that He does not have a physical body or parts or dimensions like we do. Rather, God is invisible and not confined by space nor existing of matter. This is why Jesus talks of not worshiping in one location, for God is not confined to one location. From this let us begin to build (or better yet grow).

God is spirit who has revealed Himself as the Father (Rom. 1:7), the Son (John 1:1), and the Holy Spirit (Heb. 9:14). He is one God (Isaiah 45:5) expressed in three persons (Matthew 28:19–20). Each person is fully God, but distinguishable within the one God. You might visualize the framework so far like this:

Characteristics of God’s Nature

Along with the truth that God is spirit revealed as triune, are further essential characteristics to His nature. While all of God’s characteristics are essential to His nature—such as being spirit—I have chosen to imprecisely describe it this way for the sake of finding a simple place to begin. From the truth that God is spirit and triune, we note that He is self-existent. God depends on no one else for His existence (Acts 17:24– 25). Furthermore, He is eternal. There was never a point in time in which God did not exist (Psalm 90:2). He always was, is, and will be. Additionally, God doesn’t change.

Creation will wear out like a garment and be changed, but God will never change (Psalm 102:25–27). As a self-existing, unchanging, and eternal spirit existing in a Trinity, God is also omniscient (Psalm 139:1–6), omnipresent (Psalm 139:7–12), and omnipotent (Genesis 18:14). He knows all things, is fully everywhere, and can do anything that is an object of His power.

Moreover, He is morally perfect (Psalm 118:29). Our updated framework now looks like this:

Actions that Reveal God’s Being

Our framework ends with actions that reveal the nature of God. Among these are the truth that God is creator, sustainer, judge, and redeemer of all things. All creation comes from God, is sustained by Him, and is answerable to Him as judge. But the news is good! For our creator and judge has also become our redeemer and savior through the blood of His Son Jesus Christ. Our foundational framework is now complete and even contains the gospel!

So who is God? Great question! He is a noncorporeal spirit existing as three distinct yet co-equal persons—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit—who is self-existing, unchanging, eternal, and morally perfect, who created all things, will judge all things, and seeks covenant relationship with mankind through Jesus Christ.

This framework may feel overwhelming at first glance. But so was our first language when we were young. Nevertheless, through practice we learned, memorized, and now speak well. Let that be the case with learning the beautiful and foundational truths of God.

Ephesians 6:10–17 introduces us to the armor of God and commands us to put on the full armor of God so that we can stand against the devil’s schemes. But what is it? A reflection upon the Old Testament is insightful. In Isaiah 59:17, God Himself took on armor when He put on the breastplate of righteousness and the helmet of salvation.

In Isaiah 11:5, God’s Messiah will come and wear righteousness as a belt and faithfulness around His waist. Thus, before we are commanded to put on the full armor of God, we see God and His Messiah put on armor. What then is the armor? The answer seems to be attributes. God is shown as wearing attributes—His attributes—like armor. The imagery from Isaiah informs us that God is acting as divine warrior in His divine attribues!

Now when we read Ephesians 6:10–17, we are lead to understand this armor of God as taking on His attributes and living out His character. Paul is going to now “urge his readers to take up the armor that, in Isaiah, Yahweh and his Davidic king use to fight for and establish truth and righteousness in the era prior to Israel’s restoration…” (Carson and Beale, Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, 832)

So what is the armor of God? It is God’s attributes given to His church, likened to real historical Roman armor which visually demonstrates the power and protection of these attributes. And these are the means by which we are strengthened in the Lord for the day of evil and stand firm against the schemes of the demonic realm.

The enemy would lie, we stand in truth. The enemy would tempt to wicked behavior, we stand in righteousness. The enemy would tempt to disunity, we stand in peace reconciled to God and each other. The enemy would tempt to doubt, we stand in faith. The enemy would tempt to selfdeliverance or self-righteousness or someone else’s righteousness, but we stand in God’s salvation.

We must realize that God has already defeated the devil and his followers and that God’s armor is stronger than all the schemes of the devil (Hoehner, Ephesians, 836). How great is our God that He has saved us from sin and evil and now gives us everything we need to stand in His victory until He comes to take us home. Let the Church find the incredible ability to stand and live, living out God’s attributes in this cosmic battle.

What ensued from Chalcedon was a biblical understanding of the natures of Jesus commonly known as the hypostatic union, which the church still holds to today. So what does Scripture teach us about Jesus’ natures? Scripture teaches us that Jesus has two natures—one divine and one human— and that they exist in the one person of Christ. His divine nature is the same as God (John 1:1) and is human nature is the same as ours (Hebrews 2:14, 17). And He is always referred to as one person. We never see split personalities or Jesus referred to as multiple people.

But how are we to understand the joining of these two natures in the one person of Jesus Christ? By seeing them joined together—not mixed—and retaining their distinct qualities.

This truly is a profound mystery but one that makes theological sense. Jesus was not just human on the outside with divine insides. In this case He could not have fully represented us on the cross. Jesus was not a new hybrid mixture, for again He would not have been able to represent us as our atoning sacrifice. Rather Christ is “acknowledged in two natures, inconfusedly…the distinction of natures being by no means taken away by the union, but rather the property of each nature being preserved, and concurring in one Person and one Subsistence, not parted or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only begotten, God the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ…”

The hypostatic union helps us to understand how Jesus can be worshipped even though He was fully human and how He could be tired even though He was fully God. Moreover, we discover that both of His natures were necessary to be our Savior. As man Jesus was able to taste death for sin. And as God His sacrifice was eternal.

Jesus is the complete Savior—our complete Savior. He is everything we need to be rescued from sin, to have peace with God, and to know God while we wait for His return.

Council of Chalcedon Definition

“We, then, following the holy Fathers, all with one consent, teach men to confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the same perfect in Godhead and also perfect in manhood; truly God and truly man, of a reasonable [rational] soul and body; consubstantial [coessential] with the Father according to the Godhead, and consubstantial with us according to the Manhood; in all things like unto us, without sin; begotten before all ages of the Father according to the Godhead, and in these latter days, for us and for our salvation, born of the Virgin Mary, the *Mother of God, according to the Manhood; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, only begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures, inconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably; the distinction of natures being by no means taken away by the union, but rather the property of each nature being preserved, and concurring in one Person and one Subsistence, not parted or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only begotten, God the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ; as the prophets from the beginning [have declared] concerning Him, and the Lord Jesus Christ Himself has taught us, and the Creed of the holy Fathers has handed down to us.”

Jesus gave a reality check to His disciples one day. They had a grand view of following Him as conquering Messiah until he informed them that He will suffer and die. And that following Him as suffering Messiah looks different than they might think. From Mark 8:34–38 we learn at least three things about following Jesus as God’s saving and ruling Messiah.

First, there must be selfrenunciation (“deny yourself”). In humility, we must deny ourselves as Lord. My life is no longer my own. My desires are not king. My life belongs to Jesus. Second, there must be commitment (“take up your cross and follow Me”). Jesus must be followed even unto death. If we are ever faced with deny Jesus or die; we choose death. Third, there must be confidence (“whoever is ashamed for Me”). We are not ashamed of Jesus, but proud. We are not sorry, but bold. It is our confident pleasure to follow and serve Him.

Let us be clear about following the Messiah who suffered on our behalf. It will cost us and suffering may be inevitable, but it is eternally worth it to follow the saving King of kings and Lord of lords.

This is where Jesus comes in. He claimed to be the long-awaited remedy to the human condition—God’s rescue plan revealed. But how can we know if he was right? After Jesus’ death, his tomb was mysteriously found empty, and hundreds of people began reporting witnessing him alive.

Lest you think that this is mere Christian fiction, the empty tomb and resurrection appearances are so well attested that even the vast majority of non-Christian scholars (atheists even!) accept these events as historical fact.

The problem is that there is no naturalistic way to account for these things. Was it all a big conspiracy? Was everyone going to the wrong tomb? Were people hallucinating having seen Jesus? All these ideas have fatal flaws. The best explanation of the facts is the one that the eyewitnesses themselves came to: Jesus rose bodily from the dead. We can know from the historical evidence alone that Jesus is alive! What does this mean? Christianity is in fact true!

Apostolic Authority

God spoke through certain people designating them prophets and apostles. Therefore if a document was alleged to be written directly or indirectly by a prophet or an apostle it was under consideration to see if it was true. The document was not automatically recognized just for claiming apostolic authority but was also considered along with the following factors below. The recognition of a document containing such authority happened sometimes with haste and sometimes with patience. Some books were recognized immediately (Deut. 31:26; Joshua 24:26; Colossians 4:16) and some took time to recognize (2nd, 3rd John, and Revelation). And some even recognized others (Joshua 1:7; 1 Kings 2:3; Jer. 26:18; Ezek. 14:14; Mic. 4:1–3; 2 Peter 3:15–16).

Orthodoxy

In addition to apostolic authority documents had to tell the truth about God.

Anyone can write a document and place another’s name on it—see for example the Gospel of Peter and Barnabas—but in order for it to be discovered as being from God it had to accurately reveal God and His commands.

Catholicity

Further, the Church discovered God through documents addressing His people as a whole. Some letters were, however, written to single individuals, but their apostolic authority demonstrated inspired value for the Church as a whole.

Traditional Use

Moreover, the Church discovered God through the widespread use of these inspired documents. The widespread use demonstrated the people of God recognized God’s Word in different places and were using it for faith and practice. Some documents were used widely but eventually discarded for failing to meet other criteria.

These realities (T.A.C.O.) helped the Church to discover which writings were in the canon of Scripture and which were not. Furthermore, these realities teach us that the Church as a whole, in its many locations in the first few centuries, was in the discovery process of God’s Word. This process was not in the hands of a few people or even one person.

And even though the final canon was not officially discovered until the fourth century, these divinely inspired books had been in Church operation for centuries. Also, it was not one criteria but several that helped lead the Church to discover God’s Word. And even more important surely was and is the guidance of God’s Spirit in the process.

Therefore, the Church discovered God through general and special revelation as guided by the discovery of the canon of Scripture. Thus, the biblical canon is of upmost importance to the world and especially the Church. And it may be summarized in the following acronym.

The…
Commands of God (through)
Apostles and Prophets
Narrating
Ordained Salvation
Necessary in Christ Alone

But no matter the noise, the accusations, the fear tactics, or even Scripture passages employed, I want you to remember…

this is a human life—be confident! Here are three ways to be confident.

1. Be confident biblically.

What is that in the womb of the mother? Scripture is clear. This is a creation of God. David, inspired by the Holy Spirit, says, “You created my inmost being; You knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise You because I am fearfully and wonderfully made… (Psalm 139:13–14a)” Clearly, God forms the child in the womb.

Furthermore, God knows the child in the womb. Yahweh speaks to Jeremiah and tells him, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations (Jeremiah 1:4–5).”

Moreover, God calls the baby by the same terms both in and outside the womb. Luke (1:41) tells us, “When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.” The Greek word for baby here—brephos—is used for an unborn child in the womb. This same word is used to describe an infant (Acts 7:19) and a small child (Luke 18:15). The Old Testament reflects this understanding of babies in and outside the womb. In Genesis 25:22–23, Yahweh responds to Rebekah revealing to her the future of her two children within her. In v. 22, God calls her children—the ones still within her womb—by the plural Hebrew word for son. That Hebrew word—ben—is used over 4,000 times in the Old Testament to refer to men and groups of men outside the womb.

God creates the child in the womb. God knows the child in the womb. And God calls the unborn babies and the already born babies by the same term. Clearly, this is human life!

2. Be confident scientifically.

The process of gametogenesis and fertilization reveal the baby to be a unique human being.

Gametogenesis refers to the process of producing sperm and eggs from primitive germ cells. These germ cells have 46 chromosomes each (which carry genetic information), but through the process of myosis are cut in half and end up with 23 chromosomes. After the sperm and eggs mature through gametogenesis, they are then fertilized into a unique one–of–a–kind human being with their own 46 chromosomes. Dr. Diane Irving (PhD) describe this as a radical process from possessing human life (in gametogenesis) to being a “whole living being” (through fertilization/conception).¹ Wayne Grudem comments on Dr. Irving’s article saying that, “the distinct genetic identity of the unborn child shows that he or she is far different (in every single cell of the child’s body!) from any part of the mother’s own body (for every cell of the mother’s body contains the mother’s DNA, not the child’s).”²

3. Be confident Apologetically.

As you encounter arguments for abortion, both new and old, there is good reason, sound logic, and biblical evidence to defend your position. Here are two arguments to be aware of.

First, some may argue that the Bible supports abortion in light of Exodus 21:22–25. In sum, these verses describe what is to happen if two men are fighting and one of them accidently strikes a woman with child. If the woman is hit causing a premature birth and there is no harm, then the culprit is to pay a fine. If however, there is injury, then it is life for life, eye for eye, etc. The confusion happens with the phrase “gives birth prematurely.” Some have argued that the idea is a miscarriage. So the argument goes like this: if the woman is hit and miscarries causing the baby to die, then only a fine is paid. Thus, the baby does not have the full human or legal status as the living. There is good reason to reject this as a miscarriage. A literal translation renders the Hebrew phrase as “gives birth,” not miscarriage. There is another word for miscarriage (shakal),which is not used here, and the Hebrew word for “gives birth” (yasa) is connected to live birth.³

It seems that requiring a fine for a baby born prematurely is to render monetary help. Gleason Archer says, “Monetary damages usually are required when a baby is born prematurely, for there are apt to be extra expenses both for medical attention and for extra care.”⁴ But if there is injury, it is a tit for tat response. So, whether the mother and/or presumably the baby is injured, there is an accounting. This passage does not affirm abortion or the inequality of the baby in the womb. It rather protects the woman and her pregnancy in the case of accidental harm as well as limits the judicial response.

Second, some may argue that the baby is in fact a human, but one that does not possess personhood. As such, the baby does not have equal rights as other human beings. To remove personhood from humanity is a clever argument, but nevertheless a false one. Biblically, there is no differentiation between personhood and being human. David understood God as making “me” and that me includes personhood. Scientifically, it makes the most and clearest sense to see personhood attached to being human. For there are no indicators after fertilization or conception in which personhood distinctly happens. Attempts to do so find great difficulty. To claim personhood at the baby’s sense of pain, brain activity, or viability do not provide solutions, as these run into issues with people alive today.

The abortion conversation and its supporting advocates will likely be around until the return of Christ. As we wait for His return remember…

this is a human life—be confident!

Tactic #1: Empty Slogans

Language games can be dangerous. It’s easy to replace arguments with mantras and believe that you’re saying something meaningful when you’re actually saying nothing at all. We pretend like we know what someone means when they say they “support women’s choice” or that they are for “reproductive freedom,” but we really don’t—these are meaningless catchphrases. How can you support a “women’s right to choose” when there’s no content to that choice? Choose what? Surely no one supports choice unrestricted. What are “reproductive rights”? Are these really under attack? It would seem that people are displaying their reproductive freedom in their ability to get pregnant in the first place. In fact, what does “abortion” even mean? How does one terminate a pregnancy? Why is there such little information out there as to what goes on during these procedures and what results? There is a massive veil of mystery when it comes to abortion and the abortion industry. Why? There is a real (and possibly intentional) lack of clarity surrounding this debate. Often vagueness of language is a sign of a weak position.

Tactic #2: Extreme Exceptions

It’s rare to hear a discussion of abortion that doesn’t include the topics of rape, incest, or ectopic pregnancies. My question is what do these things have to do with the morality of abortion? Not much! That’s not to say that they aren’t important discussions in themselves; it’s just to say that they are secondary discussions. If abortion is good and moral, then of course it’s justified in the rare circumstances of rape and incest (ectopic pregnancies have nothing to do with abortion and is a complete red herring). If abortion is inherently immoral, how one became pregnant may at most provide moral or legal exceptions in those particular circumstances.* In other words, rape and incest have nothing to do with the morality of abortion broadly. Imagine arguing that we should get rid of all traffic laws just because at times it may be justified to disregard them (e.g., when rushing someone to the hospital). When you must rely on rare exceptions to rhetorically boost your case, it may be because your general position is indefensible.

* Whether rape or incest actually justify abortion in those cases is another discussion.

Tactic #3: Ascribing Motives

Maligning those who hold opposing views doesn’t replace the need to defend your own views. In place of arguments for abortion, the pro–life movement is smeared as just wanting to control women’s bodies. It is merely asserted that any restriction on abortion is an attack on women’s freedom and autonomy. But what evidence is there of that? Are there other examples of widespread efforts to control women’s bodies? Any other medical procedures or surgeries that this movement is trying to ban? If there is in fact a broad attack on female autonomy, you’d expect more than a single charge. If you can’t think of anything, it’s because there just isn’t a broader conspiracy at play. Abortion is being targeted because there is something unique and relevant about this procedure in particular—namely that there is a separate, innocent life involved. One could argue against this point, but it’s far easier to conjecture about the motivations of others and try instead to “win” the argument by character attacks.

My point here is not to make a pro–life case. It’s instead to point out that the general conversation surrounding abortion and the tactics involved should cause anyone in the pro–choice camp serious pause. If pro–choice is the superior position—if abortion is truly a good thing (or at least a morally neutral and necessary thing)—then why is there such a concerted effort to talk about any and everything except abortion? Why is there such little effort to understand or address the pro–life position? Usually when you’re dependent on vague slogans, trying to latch on to any scenario that makes your position seem justifiable, and turning your opponent’s position into a broad conspiracy, it’s not because you are on the rational side of the debate.