Lester.wcbc.edu



Bible Doctrines 3Introductory Lecture – An OverviewThe importance of sound biblical understanding of the doctrines covered in this course cannot be underestimated. Most Christians in the 21st century could not defend their beliefs using the Bible. As Christians, we may read the Bible, but many are still biblically illiterate when it comes to doctrinal understanding.Christians who read their Bibles today generally read for devotional material or read it based on its famous stories. This was not always the case. One hundred years ago, one could find a woman writing devotional material that was very doctrinal in its nature. During the days of the Reformation, Protestant English Queens, at the age of 16, were baffling all Catholic inquisitors with Scriptural answers for every question they gave her. While Baptists are not “Creedal People” per se, there was a time when Christians would walk through 129 questions (Heidelberg Catechism) and give a biblical answer. It would appear that too many Christians answer with the phrase, “I think…” or “I believe…” or “The way I see it / In my opinion…” etc. What we need a scripturally accurate answers today.Paul, in writing to a young preacher, could state with confidence: “Thou hast fully known my doctrine…”The need for this hour is for Christians to be able to earnestly contend for the faith that has been entrusted to us. Yet, one cannot give an answer to those with questions unless he has learned what the Scriptures teach.In this third semester of Bible doctrines, we emphasize the following doctrines:Pneumatology – the doctrine of the ________________________________His NatureHis Personality His DeityHis WorkRegarding RevelationRegarding the Old TestamentRegarding ChristRegarding the ChurchRegarding the ChristianAnthropology – the doctrine of ____________________CreationSix literal daysThe Image of GodDichotomous or Trichotomous beingLiving SoulEffects of FallHamartiology – the doctrine of ____________________DefinedDiscussedDisplayedSoteriology – the doctrine of ________________________AtonementElectionRegenerationRepentance and FaithReconciliationJustification and Sanctification“Sinner’s Prayer”SecurityIn effect, we cover the Spirit, Sinners, Sin, Salvation, and Security – and the interrelationships between each doctrine. Each doctrine is misrepresented by liberal Christianity today. Many Bible-believing Christians have subconsciously come under this false teaching’s influence. For example, the modern-day Charismatic movement has caused many Baptists to not even mention the Holy Spirit. Our society is claiming that man is becoming better all the time – we are basically good people. When this idea is carried to its full fruition, good people do not need a Saviour! Understand that you are called to minister in a day that has exchanged doctrine for emotion, separation for inclusiveness, and holy living for antinomianism. You should also note that “antinomianism” is being preached as “grace.” Grace is not only the instrument that saves us, but also it is the instrument that separates us (Titus 2:11-14). If that is the cultural mentality, then we must have God’s mindset to combat it – hence, Bible doctrine is essential to your ministry.Bible Doctrines 3Lecture 1 – Understanding the Holy Spirit as a PersonThe importance of the ministry of God’s Spirit in our lives cannot be understated. Cult teachings have tried to relegate the Spirit into an inanimate force or influence coming from God. Is the Holy Spirit a real person, or is He simply an energized force emanating from God? Consider these quotes from the official Watchtower website: What is God’s holy spirit? In its opening words, the Bible speaks of the holy spirit—also rendered God’s active force—as ‘moving to and fro over the surface of the waters’…These and other Bible passages have led some to conclude that the holy spirit is a person, just as God, Jesus, and the angels are individual spirit persons. In fact, for centuries some of the most influential religions of Christendom have attributed personality to the holy spirit. Despite this long-standing doctrine, many church members remain confused, and some even disagree with their religious leaders. For instance, according to a recent survey, 61?percent of those interviewed believe that God’s spirit is “a symbol of God’s presence or power but is not a living entity.” What, though, does the Bible say?...An honest Bible reader cannot help but conclude that the holy spirit differs from official church descriptions of it as a person.The Bible, our final authority for all matters of faith and practice, declares unequivocally that He is a real person with the qualities and attributes of personality. It must be understood that personality and visibility are not synonymous. Just because the Spirit cannot be seen does not make Him less of a person. People who struggle with the personality of the Spirit generally start by using human personality as a standard. This is imperfect! We must begin our definition of personality as it relates to God. It is a false assumption to say that true personality exists only when there is true corporeality. Jesus, in speaking to the religious crowd of His day, once made an interesting observation about the phrase: God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob…Jesus stated that God was not the “God of the dead,” but of the living. Consider this: Paul is alive right now, without a body. To say it another way, Paul, as a personality, is existing without visibility. Any definition of personality that makes visibility or bodily presence a vital element is a skewed definition. Therefore, we will define personality as that characteristic which contains these three important elements:Intelligence / Intellect (also called a mind…)Emotion (can He feel…)Volition (does He have a will…)If we can scripturally prove that these three characteristics are to be found in the Holy Spirit, then we can conclusively prove that He is a person, a member of the Godhead. What saith the Scriptures?The Holy Spirit has the attributes of ______________________________________________He is said to possess a “mind” Romans 8:27He knows and searches the things of God1 Cor 2:10-11; Isa 11:2He bestows spiritual gifts1 Cor 12:4-11EmotionHe can be grievedEph 4:30He can loveRom 15:30___________________He distributes gifts accordingly1 Cor 12:11He exercises His will toward othersActs 16:6-7STATEMENT: The Holy Spirit passes the tests of personality. He has the three major components of personality clearly demonstrated from Scripture: 1) Intellect, 2) Emotion, and 3) Volition.The Holy Spirit _____________________ the actions of personalityHe teachesJohn 14:26He testifiesJohn 15:26He guidesJohn 16:13; Rom 8:14; Gal 5:18He reprovesJohn 16:7-11He restrainsGen 6:3; 2 Thess 2:6-7He commands / directsActs 8:29He performs miraclesActs 8:39He calls men to serviceActs 13:2He sends men to serviceActs 13:4He intercedes for usRom 8:26STATEMENT: The Holy Spirit not only has the marks of personality, He also does what only a Person can do. Based on Scripture, He is a Person.The Holy Spirit ________________________ actions as a personalityHe can be obeyedActs 10:19-21He can be lied toActs 5:3He can be resistedActs 7:51He can be grievedActs 4:30He can be reverencedPs 51:11He can be blasphemedMatt 12:31He can be outragedHeb 10:29STATEMENT: The Spirit has the marks of personality and performs the actions that are only accomplished by a Person. Additionally, Scripture demonstrates that He can also be affected as only a Person can.The Holy Spirit defies the accidence of ___________________ as a personalityDefinition: Accidence ~ that part of grammar that relates to gender, tense, number of persons, etcBy now, it should be apparent that the word translated “spirit” is the neuter noun, Pneuma. This word is also translated wind and breath. It is the word from which pneumonia and pneumatics is derived. Since it is a “neuter” noun, basic rules of grammar demand that a neuter pronoun be used. Yet, there are instances, when under divine inspiration, when biblical writers deliberately ignored this basic rule, choosing instead to substitute the neuter pneuma with a masculine pronoun. In the case studies below, we see that three different kinds of masculine pronouns were used, thus showing that these writers considered the Spirit to be a person, not just a thing.Case Example #1John 16:13-14In this passage, there is a masculine demonstrative pronoun that is used twice. John 16:13-14 οταν δε ελθη εκεινο? το πνευμα τη? αληθεια? οδηγησει υμα? ει? πασαν την αληθειαν ου γαρ λαλησει αφ εαυτου αλλ οσα αν ακουση λαλησει και τα ερχομενα αναγγελει υμιν | εκεινο? εμε δοξασει οτι εκ του εμου ληψεται και αναγγελει υμιν In bold above is the demonstrative masculine pronoun. In our English translation, it is given as Howbeit, when he… and in verse 14, he shall glorify me… To a Greek-speaking person, this word would be understood as “that (masculine) one.” Our translators, in bringing the Greek nuance and thought into our language used the masculine pronoun he to communicate this truth.Case Example #2John 15:26 / Ephesians 1:14In these passages, we find a masculine relative pronoun standing in for the neuter, Pneuma. John 15:26 οταν δε ελθη ο παρακλητο? ον εγω πεμψω υμιν παρα του πατρο? το πνευμα τη? αληθεια? ο παρα του πατρο? εκπορευεται εκεινο? μαρτυρησει περι εμου Eph 1:14 ο? εστιν αρραβων τη? κληρονομια? ημων ει? απολυτρωσιν τη? περιποιησεω? ει? επαινον τη? δοξη? αυτου The bolded words above show the relative pronoun. From Strong’s Concordance: ??, ?σγε [hos, he, ho /hos/] pron. Probably a primary word (or perhaps a form of the article 3588); GK 4005 and together with Strong’s 1065 as GK 4007; 1393 occurrences; AV translates as “which” 395 times, “whom” 262 times, “that” 129 times, “who” 84 times, “whose” 53 times, “what” 42 times, “that which” 20 times, “whereof” 13 times, and translated miscellaneously 430 times. In John 15:26, the translation of this pronoun is found in the phrase, “whom I will send unto you from the Father…” In Ephesians 1:14, the masculine pronoun is the first word of the sentence, translated as “which is the earnest of our inheritance…”Don’t let the word which cause you alarm. Again, we find our translators using terminology with which we are familiar. For example, someone might say, “Mike is the boy that Jenni loves…” This sentence is not denying masculinity to “Mike.” Furthermore, it should be remembered that the KJV was a “British English” translation. The rules of British English does not necessarily equate with the rules of American English (or Southern English!) To be accurate, we should note that British English, the words “that” or “which” can be used for human antecedents.Case Example #3John 16:7-8In this passage, we find the masculine personal pronoun in use. Additionally, we note that the word for Comforter is masculine as well.John 16:7-8 αλλ εγω την αληθειαν λεγω υμιν συμφερει υμιν ινα εγω απελθω εαν γαρ μη απελθω ο παρακλητο? ουκ ελευσεται προ? υμα? εαν δε πορευθω πεμψω αυτον προ? υμα? | 8 και ελθων εκεινο? ελεγξει τον κοσμον περι αμαρτια? και περι δικαιοσυνη? και περι κρισεω? In the verses above, we point out the under-scored words: o parakletos - masculine word meaning, “the Comforter.” In the preceding chapter, John (15:26) has identified this “Comforter” as the “Spirit of truth” (also mentioned in 16:13). This Comforter / Spirit is identified with the masculine demonstrative pronoun from the first case example, translated as “And when he is come…”The relative pronoun, in bold above, is translated as, “I will send him unto you…” “The word for spirit is pneuma and is a neuter gender word. According to every normal rule of grammar, any pronoun that would be substituted for this neuter noun would itself have to be neuter. However, in several places the biblical writers did not follow this normal rule of grammar, and instead of using a neuter pronoun when referring to the neuter noun pneuma, they deliberately contradicted the grammatical rule and used masculine pronouns. Indeed, they used two different kinds of pronouns, all in the masculine gender. This shows that they considered the Spirit to be a person and not merely a thing.”The Holy Spirit has the _________________________ of personalityHis associations with other peopleThe ______________________Consider Acts 15:28, “For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things.”Here, the Spirit is distinguished from the apostles as a separate person.It would not seem natural to associate Him with the apostles if He were only an influence or force.____________________________In looking at the language of scripture, we are compelled to state that if the Lord Jesus Christ has personality, then also personality belongs to the Spirit.The greatest teaching on the Spirit comes from 3 chapters in John (14-16). The Upper Room Discourse is the Lord’s testimony concerning the person of the Spirit.____________________________It would be unthinkable to read Matt 28:19-20 and state 2 are persons and 1 is notIn Matt 3, at Baptism of Christ, we find distinctions in Godhead – 1 God, 3 Persons.In Matt 4, we find the Spirit leading the Son and the Son referencing the Father.In 1 Peter 1:2, we find each member of the Godhead involved in our salvation. If we are saved by a “person,” then the Holy Spirit is co-equal to the Father and Son.His own ____________________Substituting “power” for Spirit shows absurdity of denying personality to the Spirit.Consider Luke 4:14: “And Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit into Galilee.”Consider Acts 10:38: “How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power…”His association with ___________________Baptismal formulaIn Matthew 28, we are commanded to baptize in the name (SINGULAR)…For the authority of baptism, only one name given: Father, Son, and Holy GhostApostolic BenedictionIn 2 Cor 13:14, we read, “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen.”Can we have communion [fellowship] with a force?CONCLUSION:Some reasons could be given why some want to view the Holy Spirit as a force or power. The word itself is impersonal. Sometimes He is left out of a verse that deals with the Father and the Son. There’s not as much information given about Him as the Father and Son in Scripture.At the very least, here is what you should remember from this lecture:The Holy Spirit has all the elements of ___________________________The Holy Spirit can be responded to as a ________________________The Holy Spirit does what only a __________________________ can doThe Holy Spirit was looked upon by the early church as an equal member of the GodheadThe Holy Spirit was heavily emphasized in the book of __________________ (see chart on next page)Nicene Creed as used by Reformed BaptistsWe believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible.And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of his Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; by whom all things were made; who for us and for our salvation came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the Virgin Mary, and was made man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; he suffered and was buried, and the third day he rose again according to the Scriptures, and ascended into heaven, and is seated at the right hand of the Father; and he shall come again, with glory, to judge both the living and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end.And we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and giver of Life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son; who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; who spoke by the prophets; and we believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church; we acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; and we look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.Graph Bible Search ResultsNumber of Hits for “Pneuma” in BookVersions:?Stephens 1550 Textus ReceptusIn the transitional book of Acts, we find the most “hits” for pneuma in the NT. What does this observation teach us? Bible Doctrines 3Lecture 2 – Understanding the Holy Spirit as GodSimply proving that the Spirit has all the necessary elements of personality only proves that He is a Person – it does not prove that He is God. There is still something missing from the argument. (In like manner, someone may use the laws of thermodynamics to prove that Evolution is not possible – but that does not necessarily prove that the God of the Bible created…)There is much confusion about the Spirit’s role in the Godhead. Mormonism makes a distinction between the Holy Ghost and the Holy Spirit. The Spirit is an impersonal presence via God’s essence. The Holy Ghost is the third member of the trinity (as Mormonism defines Trinity!). One of their early leaders, James Talmadge states, “He [the Holy Ghost] is a being endowed with the attributes and powers of deity, and not a mere force, or essence.In the early proto-Catholic emerging church, here is how the Godhead was explained in creedal form (Nicene Creed, post-filioque controversy):I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds; God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made.Who, for us men and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary, and was made man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sits on the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again, with glory, to judge the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end.And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of Life; who proceeds from the Father and the Son; who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; who spoke by the prophets.And I believe one holy catholic and apostolic Church. I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; and I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.Another attempt by the early proto-Catholic church to prove the Spirit’s Deity was the Athanasius Creed. This creed was probably not written by Athanasius personally as it is never referred to during his time. However, it is classified with the Three Ecumenical Creeds (The Apostles, The Nicene, and Athanasius). Known more for its position on Christology, it nevertheless has some bearing on how the early church understood Pneumatology.The Athanasius CreedWhosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith. Which Faith except everyone do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the Catholic Faith is this, that we worship one God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity. Neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Substance. For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son and of the Holy Ghost is all One, the Glory Equal, the Majesty Co-Eternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father Uncreate, the Son Uncreate, and the Holy Ghost Uncreate. The Father Incomprehensible, the Son Incomprehensible, and the Holy Ghost Incomprehensible. The Father Eternal, the Son Eternal, and the Holy Ghost Etneral and yet they are not Three Eternals but One Eternal. As also there are not Three Uncreated, nor Three Incomprehensibles, but One Uncreated, and One Uncomprehensible. So likewise the Father is Almighty, the Son Almighty, and the Holy Ghost Almighty. And yet they are not Three Almighties but One Almighty. So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not Three Gods, but One God. So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not Three Lords but One Lord. For, like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by Himself to be God and Lord, so are we forbidden by the Catholic Religion to say, there be Three Gods or Three Lords. The Father is made of none, neither created, nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone; not made, nor created, but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father, and of the Son neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding. So there is One Father, not Three Fathers; one Son, not Three Sons; One Holy Ghost, not Three Holy Ghosts. And in this Trinity none is afore or after Other, None is greater or less than Another, but the whole Three Persons are Co-eternal together, and Co-equal. So that in all things, as is aforesaid, the Unity is Trinity, and the Trinity is Unity is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be saved, must thus think of the Trinity. Furthermore, it is necessary to everlasting Salvation, that he also believe rightly the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. For the right Faith is, that we believe and confess, that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man. God, of the substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and Man, of the substance of His mother, born into the world. Perfect God and Perfect Man, of a reasonable Soul and human Flesh subsisting. Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead, and inferior to the Father as touching His Manhood. Who, although He be God and Man, yet He is not two, but One Christ. One, not by conversion of the Godhead into Flesh, but by taking of the Manhood into God. One altogether, not by confusion of substance, but by Unity of Person. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one Man, so God and Man is one Christ. Who suffered for our salvation, descended into Hell, rose again the third day from the dead. He ascended into Heaven, He sitteth on the right hand of the Father, God Almighty, from whence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies, and shall give account for their own works. And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting, and they that have done evil into everlasting fire. This is the Catholic Faith, which except a man believe faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved.How do we prove that this Personal Being is co-equal, co-eternal, and co-existent with God the Father and God the Son? Do we memorize the Apostles’ Creed? Do we use the Nicene Creed in our soulwinning? How many people today have even heard of Athanasius? I contend that we stick to the Scriptures! From the Scriptures, we can develop the following lines of evidence for the deity of the Spirit:We look at His ________________________He is called ________________________Acts 5:4In this passage, Peter is confronting Ananias and Sapphira. At first, he states that they have not lied to men, but unto the Holy Ghost. Then, for emphasis, he accuses them of lying to the Holy Ghost. This use of interchangeable words demonstrates that Peter believed the Spirit to be more than an impersonal force – He was God.He is called the __________________________ God1 Cor 3:16, 6:11; Isa 61:1He is called the Spirit of Jehovah as wellIsaiah 11:21 Corinthians 3:16Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? In this verse, we find an interchangeable truth – we are the temple of God in which the Holy Spirit dwells. Remember, a “temple” was something built/made for a deity. It is not made as a habitation for an impersonal force or power. Therefore, if our bodies are temples in which the Spirit of God indwells, then this “Spirit” is God.For a cross-reference, consider Haggai 1:14, where God stirred up the “spirit of Zerubbabel…” In this usage, the “spirit of Zerubbabel” is identical to “Zerubbabel.”He is called the _______________________ SpiritHebrews 9:14If the Spirit possesses the attribute of eternality, then He is God. No created being could ever be called “eternal.”He is called “another” ___________________John 14:16Greek, the language through which God gave the ultimate revelation of Himself, His Son, and His Spirit, is a very precise language. This minute preciseness is highlighted in this verse. Our English word another translates two Greek words. These two words, while similar, have a distinct nuance that is important here. The two words, allos and heteros, can each mean “another.” However, Jesus deliberately chose the word allos to use here. Why? Allos carries the connotation of “another person of the same kind…” Practically speaking, Jesus is stating: “I am your Helper, your Paraclete, your Comforter. But, I am going to go back to my Father. Don’t worry, I’ll send you another Comforter just like me.” So, if Jesus is a Person, the Holy Spirit is a Person. If Jesus is God, then the Holy Spirit is God.We look at His ____________________He is described as _________________________Hebrews 9:14As already stated, eternality is an attribute that only belongs to a Creator, Someone who is “before time began…”Genesis 1:2 states that the Holy Spirit was there at creation, bringing life to all that is by His brooding over the earth. The Holy Spirit was not created by Jesus Christ and then sent into the world after the Ascension. He was here before the beginning.In this context, the eternal Spirit is viewed in light of the eternal redemption that is purchased for us. This eternal redemption, obtained by Christ through the eternal Spirit, makes available to us the promise of eternal inheritance (Heb 9:12-15).He is described as ___________________________Psalm 139:7-10Again, the attribute of being everywhere at one time can only be given to God. No created being, which is bound by time and space, can ever be described as omnipresent.He is described as ___________________________Luke 1:35He is the “power of the Highest.” There is no higher designation of power than this.He is described as ___________________________1 Corinthians 2:10-11To have all knowledge that is both unlearned and immediate can only be attributed to God.He is described as ______________________Isa 63:10-11In 96 different verses, this Person of the Godhead is called either “Holy Ghost” or “Holy Spirit.” Holy is not a name. It is a descriptive term. One writer stated it this way, “Holiness is a basic characteristic of the Spirit. The Spirit is so holy that blasphemy against the Spirit cannot be forgiven, although blasphemy against Jesus could be (Matt. 12:32). Insulting the Spirit is just as sinful as trampling the Son of God under foot (Heb. 10:29). This indicates that the Spirit is inherently holy, holy in essence, rather than having an assigned or secondary holiness such as the temple had.”We are called to be holy. In other words, we are called to become what we are not already. The Spirit did not “become” holy. He is intrinsically holy. It is His nature. This is consistent with the nature of God.We look at His _____________________He ______________________Gen 1:2; Job 33:4; Psalm 104:30No created being has the power to create. To say that the Spirit creates is to say that the Spirit is the Creator. This action is one that belongs to God.He imparts ___________________Gen 1:2; Rom 8:11The life that He imparts is resurrection life…This attribute is also descriptive of the Lord Jesus: “In him was life, and the life was the light of men…”He ________________________________ lost menJohn 3:3-5; Tit 3:5-6Re-gening a man, also called “quickening,” is an operation that can only be performed by Deity. If the Spirit of God can bring us from death to life, He is God. Definition of Regeneration:The word regeneration (Gk. paliggenesia) appears only twice in the New Testament. Once is used eschatologically, “of the renewing of the world in the time of the Messiah” (Matt. 19:28),36 the second usage is “of the rebirth of a redeemed person” (Titus 3:5).37 Regeneration should be distinguished from conversion.Conversion refers to the response of the human being to God’s offer of salvation and approach to man. Regeneration is the other side of conversion. It is God’s doing. In regeneration the soul is passive; in conversion, it is active. Regeneration may be defined as the communication of divine life to the soul … as the impartation of a new nature … or heart … and the production of a new creation.38 Succinctly stated, to regenerate means “to impart life.” Regeneration is the act whereby God imparts life to the one who believes.SCRIPTURES CONCERNING REGENERATIONTwo basic passages of Scripture discuss regeneration as it pertains to the impartation of new life to a believer. John 3:3 (although not using the word regeneration) refers to regeneration as a “new birth.” The Greek word translated “new” is anothen and may be translated “from above.” In other words, the second birth is a birth from above, from God. The new birth is a spiritual birth in contrast to the first birth which is a physical birth. In the spiritual birth the Holy Spirit regenerates the person; He is the means of regeneration. In John 3:5 the phrase “is born” is passive,39 indicating it is a work done upon man, not by man. Man does not bring about regeneration; the Holy Spirit produces it. Titus 3:5 is the other passage where regeneration is explained. In this passage regeneration is linked to two things: washing and renewing by the Holy Spirit. It is noteworthy that in both John 3:5 and Titus 3:5 two elements are mentioned: water and the Holy Spirit. It is possible to understand water as symbolic of God’s Word (cf. Eph. 5:26).40 Others link water and the Holy Spirit to cleansing as in Ezekiel 36:25–27. In this case the water would refer to the cleansing that comes through repentance.41He inspires _________________________________2 Peter 1:21Think for a moment on how we describe the Bible. We call it “the Word of God.” (1Thes 2:13) Yet, we know from Scripture that it was the Spirit of God who put “the words of God” in their mouths. For example, David stated in 2 Samuel 23:2-3, “The Spirit of the LORD spake by me, and his word was in my tongue. The God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spoke to me, He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God.” Who spoke to David? Was it the Spirit? The God of Israel? The Rock of Israel? Yes!He begets ___________________________________Luke 1:35In this verse, the power of the Spirit is equated with the power of the Highest (God). This shows the equality within the Godhead.He indwells __________________________________Eph 2:22; Rom 8:11; 1 Cor 3:16To indwell every believer shows His deity as He inhabits a temple. It shows His deity as well in that He must be omnipresent to indwell each believer at the same time! NOTE: The permanent indwelling of each believer is a distinction between the New Testament and Old Testament saint. In the Old Testament, He is said to dwell in men (Genesis 41:38, Numbers 27:18, and Daniel 4:8, 5:11-14), but David prayed that the holy Spirit would not be taken from him in Psalm 51. He sanctifies ____________________________Rom 15:16; 1 Pet 1:2; 2 Thess 2:13The idea of sanctification is to make us holy. He, the holy Spirit is at work in our lives making us “conformed to the image of Christ.” We are saved through the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit. A created being could never conform us to the image of uncreated God!VIII.He ______________________ for believersRomans 8:26The Holy Spirit, who indwells us, is also in the presence of the Father. He takes our requests which cannot even be put into words and intercedes on our behalf.We look at His ______________________________He is equated to____________________ of the Old TestamentIsa 6:8-10 w/ Acts 28:25-27Another example in this same genre would be to compare Exodus 16:7 with Hebrews 3:7-10. When this exercise is performed, one finds that the biblical writers used as interchangeable the terms God, Jehovah and Holy Spirit. Summary statement: The Holy Spirit is associated in Scripture with Jehovah that He must be regarded as co-equal and co-existent with the Father.He is an equal member of the __________________________Matt 28:18-20; 2 Cor 13:14; 1 Pet 1:2In these three passages, we find each member equally involved in salvation (1 Pet 1:2), growth (Matt 28:18-20), and Christian grace (2 Corinthians 13:14). We look at His _______________________He is likened to a ___________________Matt 3:16This represents:Chaste PurityCant 6:9InoffensivenessMatt 10:16PeaceGen 8:11BeautyPsalm 68:13DeliveranceGen 8:8He is likened to an ___________________Eph 1:13-14An earnest is a pledge, security or guarantee. The Holy Spirit, given to us, is God’s pledge that He who has begun a good work in us will complete it…This earnest, closely associated with the Seal of the Spirit, is the foundational element for our eternal security.He is likened to ______________________Acts 2:3It was cloven tongues that lighted on the believers in the Upper Room, but they appeared as tongues of fire as they were descending. For these Jews who were assembled at Pentecost, the imagery of fire would remind them of:God’s presenceExo 3:2God’s protectionExo 13:21God’s approvalLev 9:24God’s cleansingLev 10:2; Isa 6:1-8Additionally, John stated that Jesus would baptize with the Holy Ghost and with fire. See Matthew 3:11,11?I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire: What did He mean? Several different interpretations are offered to explain John’s words:This was completely fulfilled at PentecostBaptism of the Spirit was fulfilled at Pentecost but the fire is a general reference to the entire work of sanctification throughout the ageJohn, the last OT prophet, was speaking of Pentecost with reference to the baptism of the Spirit and of the judgment at the Second Coming in reference to the fire.Good men differ. My take: The fire that purifies the saint purges the dross from the earth. It is a mixture of options 2 and 3.He is likened to _______________________Luke 4:18Consider what Jehovah said of Christ in Isaiah 61:1, “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because the Lord hath anointed me…”Spurgeon preached an entire sermon entitled “The Oil of Gladness” that demonstrated the analogies between the work of the Holy Spirit and anointing oil. This sermon can be read online at many sites, including . Oil, in relationship to the work of the Spirit, pre-figures at least three elements:When an Old Testament priest began his ministry, he was inducted with anointing oil (see Exo 40:9-16). Thus, for our Great High Priest beginning His public ministry, it was imperative that He be anointed with the Holy Spirit (at His baptism). Finally, we (as New Testament priests) need the work of the Spirit in our lives if we are to be prepared (and recognized) for ministry. In the epistle of 1 John, we have an anointing, an unction…In the Old Testament tabernacle, the only light that was provided was through the holy oil in the lampstand. This light, non-existent without the oil, lit the place where God was to be worshipped – the place where every piece of furniture foreshadowed the work of Christ. In like manner, today the Holy Spirit throws the spotlight upon Christ so He can be glorified in the eyes of believers.Finally, in the Old Testament oil was known to be used as a medicine, a healing ointment. The same oil would be used to cleanse lepers and to sanctify priests. In like manner, the heavenly Oil of Gladness cleanses and sanctifies us to be meet for the Master’s use.He is likened to a ________________________2 Cor 1:22; Eph 1:13; 4:30A seal is a mark of ownership or identity. In a technical sense, the Holy Spirit is not the One sealing us – He is the seal. Implied in this seal are the following elements:We belong to God as a purchased possessionWe are permanently secured for God is the only One who can break the seal (and He has promised that we are sealed until the day of redemption).The picture this paints was readily understood by the Ephesians who had multitude of barges of timber, sealed by their owners, awaiting the date of the purchased possession.He is likened to a ________________________Genesis 24In this story, the unnamed Servant has been sent by the Father into a foreign land in order to secure a Bride for his Son. The parallels are strikingly similar to that which is found within the Godhead. Additionally, in this story we find the Servant giving gifts to the Bride just as spiritual gifts are given to us today through the Spirit.He is likened to _________________________John 4:14; 7:38-39In John 7, Jesus compares the future ministry of the Spirit to water springing up and flowing out of our lives. From this analogy, we observe:Eternal life springing up from that which was entirely barren beforeThe abundance of the “life more abundant” which Christ givesService, for out of the believer shall flow rivers of living water to others.He is likened to ________________________ (Breath)John 3:8; Job 33:4The wind bloweth where it listeth… What do we learn from this analogy?The Spirit’s work cannot be seen (but we know when He is working)The Spirit’s work is sovereign – wherever it listeth…The Spirit’s work is supernatural – the new birth is “from above…”The Spirit’s work is strong – not to destruction (as in powerful wind tornadoes), but to construction (as in a new life!)Conclusion:At the very least, you should remember the following truths:The Holy Spirit is ____________________The sealing of the Spirit is related to our _________________________The ________________________ of our heavenly inheritance is the Holy SpiritBible Doctrines 3Lecture 3 – Understanding the Holy Spirit’s MinistryIn the current study of the Holy Spirit, we have established two basic facts:He has all the characteristics of personalityHe has all the attributes of deityWith these two basic truths providing a framework, we can now see what He has been doing | what He does. Did His ministry simply begin at Pentecost? What was He doing for 4,000 years of biblical history? If we find Him involved in our salvation as a New Testament saint, was He involved in any one’s salvation before Pentecost? What is His role in relationship to Creation? What is His role in relationship to Christ? What is His role in relationship to the Church? What is His role in relationship to the Canon of Scriptures? What is His role in relationship to the individual Christians?His ministry in __________________________________He is described as the Author of ____________________________This can be seen by the word theopneustos2 Timothy 3:16This is illustrated by a wind filling the sails of a ship2 Peter 1:21He speaks to _______________________________He spoke to and through EzekielEzekiel 2:2He spoke to and through BalaamNumbers 24:2He spoke to and through David2 Sam 23:2; Matt 22:43His work is not __________________________ DictationPeter’s use of the word pheroThe analogy is that of a wind filling the sails of a shipThe inference is that the Spirit takes the initiative with ScriptureWe may say that He superintended the process of “inspiration”He did not suppress personalities , experiences, emotional or intellectual abilitiesWhat we have is an intimate involvement with the Spirit and each writer.This is a divine-human concurrence – not conceptual inspiration or dictationHis ministry in the _______________________________________________________________He createsGenesis 1:2; Job 26:13He sustains creationPsalm 104:29-30He renews creationIsa 32:15; Rom 8:18-27______________________________Imparts wisdom, skill, strength, and abilityNoticeable during construction of :TabernacleExo 31:1-11Ark of the covenantExo 31:1-11The TempleZech 4:6 We could call this selective indwelling. He was in certain onesJosephGen 41:38JoshuaNum 27:18DanielDan 4:8; 5:11-14He came upon certain onesOthnielJudges 3:10GideonJudges 6:34Saul1 Samuel 10:10He filled certain onesBezaleelExo 31:3Understand the ________________________ between the Old and New Testament saint:The indwelling Spirit of the Old Testament saint was not permanent. Hence, David prays, “Take not thy holy Spirit from me…” (Ps 51:11)Jesus gives insight from His words in John 14:17, Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. The Old Testament work of the Spirit was not erratic, indicated by the use of the word “dwell” or “abide.”His ministry at Pentecost was different for now He would not just be “with” us, He would be “in” us. Nation of _________________________Raising gifted peopleGen 41:38Raising national leadersJudges (entire book)Raising prophets1 Sam 10:10He restrained _____________________Evidenced in the days before the floodGen 6:3Evidenced by His namesNeh 9:20; Ps 51:11____________________________________Involved in the Jews’ salvationEzekiel 36:26-28Involved in the Jew’s sanctificationNeh 9:20Involved in bringing future righteousnessIsa 11:2-5His ministry in ____________________________ to ChristHe is involved with the miraculous ____________________ of ChristHe places Christ within MaryMatt 1:18; Luke 1:35The Virgin Birth insures Jesus is fully man while never ceasing to be fully GodHe anointed Jesus for _________________________Evidenced at His baptismLuke 3:21-22Evidenced in the WildernessLuke 4:1Evidenced by the miraclesLuke 4:14-18He was involved with His ________________ and __________________________His deathHeb 9:14His resurrectionRom 1:4; 8:11He ___________________ men to ChristJohn 15:26NOTE: The Holy Spirit is mentioned 88 times in the Old Testament and over 250 times in the New Testament…The emphasis speaks for itself.NOTE: Consider Creation: the Father is the AUTHOR, the Son is the EXECUTOR, and the Spirit is the ENERGIZER of that act. We could say it this way: “The Holy Spirit energizes and brings to completion each divine action.”His ministry in __________________________ to the ChurchHe is involved with the ____________________________________ of the ChurchWhile Christ is the “Head,” the Spirit is the AdministratorAs Administrator, He gives gifts1 Cor 12As Administrator, He gives instructionActs 8:29; 10:19; 13:2-4; 16:6-7Administrator: One who administers affairs; one who directs, manages, executes, or dispenses, whether in civil, judicial, political, or ecclesiastical affairsHe is involved with the ____________________________ of the ChurchPreaching1 Pet 1:12; 1 Thes 1:5PrayerEph 6:18; Jude 20SingingEph 5:18-19His ministry in relationship to the ___________________________He ____________________________A delineationConviction can be caused by the Subconscious Conscience Conviction can be caused by the Scriptural CanonConviction can be caused by the Seeking ChristConviction can be caused by the Spirit’s CharacterAn illustrationOur conscience convicts us of what not to doOur bibles convict us of what to doJesus gives us an example of bothThe Spirit gives specific instructionsA parable:A man is traveling down a highway. His speedometer is broke and he doesn’t know the speed limit, but inside something tells him that he is speeding (his conscience). Soon, he passes a posted speed limit sign and simultaneously, his speedometer begins to work (the objective standard of Scripture). He then notices another car on the road that is traveling within the boundaries of the speed limit, setting an example for him to follow (Jesus Christ). He then pulls out a map to know exactly where to drive, and how fast to drive in order to reach his destination (the Holy Spirit).Observe:If one only trusts his conscience, he may leave the wrong place, but not know where to go.If one trusts the Bible without the Spirit, he may drive properly, but not arrive in the exact spotThe Holy Spirit has a “perfect place” for us to serve Him. By following His convicting prods, we will find that place.It is by the exceeding greatness of His power that the Holy Spirit fixes the mind of a quickened and enlightened soul upon the due consideration of sin. Then it is that the subject of this experience cries, “my sin is ever before me” (Ps. 51:3), for God now reproves him and “sets his sins in order” before his eyes (Ps. 50:21). Now he is forced to behold them, no matter which way he turns himself. Feign would he cast them out of his thoughts, but he cannot: “the arrows” of God stick in his heart (Job 6:4), and he cannot get rid of them. He now realizes that his sins are more in number than the hairs of his head (Ps. 40:12). Now it is that “the grass withereth, the flower fadeth; because the Spirit of the Lord bloweth upon it” (Isa. 40:7).The Spirit occupies the quickened and enlightened soul with the exceeding sinfulness of sin. He unmasks its evil character, and shows that all our self-pleasing and self-gratification are but a species of sinfulness—of enmity against Him—against His Person, His attributes, His government. The Spirit makes the convicted soul feel how grievously he has turned his back upon God (Jer. 32:33), lifted up his heel against Him and trampled His laws underfoot. The Spirit causes him to see and feel that he has forsaken the pure Fountain for the foul stream, preferred the filthy creature above the ineffable Creator, a base lust to the Lord of glory.The Spirit convicts the quickened soul of the multitude of his sins. He realizes now that all his thoughts, desires and imaginations, are corrupt and perverse; conscience now accuses him of a thousand things which hitherto never occasioned him a pang. Under the Spirit’s illumination the soul discovers that his very righteousnesses are as “filthy rags,” for the motive which prompted even his best performances were unacceptable to Him who “weigheth the spirits.” He now sees that his very prayers are polluted, through lack of pure affections prompting them. In short, he sees that “from the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness in him; but wounds, and bruises, and putrefying sores” (Isa. 1:6).The Spirit brings before the heart of the convicted one the character and claims of God Sin is now viewed in the light of the Divine countenance, and he is made to feel what an evil and bitter thing it is to sin against God. The pure light of God, shining in the conscience over against vile darkness, horrifies the soul. The convicted one both sees and feels that God is holy and that he is completely unholy; that God is good and he is vile; that there is a most awful disparity between Him and us. He is made to feelingly cry, “How can such a corrupt wretch like I ever stand before such a holy God, whose majesty I have so often slighted?” Now it is that the soul is made to realize how it has treated God with the basest ingratitude, abusing His goodness, perverting His mercies, scorning his best Friend. He _____________________________Titus 3:5It is the Spirit that regeneratesJohn 3:3-6It is the Word that regeneratesEph 5:26; 1 Pet 1:23; John 17:17This regeneration is the imparting of the divine nature (2 Peter 1:4) so that we are now “in Christ” and hence a new creature.2Corinthians 5:17He places us into the ______________________ of ChristSIDEBAR: There are some pastors who take the position that 1 Cor 12:13 (along with Ephesians 4:4-5) as dealing with water baptism.I take 1 Cor 12:13 as teaching that Christ is the Baptizer, the Spirit is the means, the Agent by whom we are baptized/ placed into the body of Christ. I cross reference this with Matthew 3:11 and Acts 1:5 I view body as both institutional and local. The reasons I do not see this as water baptism are as follows:1) It is the Lord who adds to the church personally2) He adds us to His body by conversion, not baptism3) Misunderstanding this passage leads to baptismal regeneration4) If this is water, there are believers who are not part of the body (interpreted as “local”)5) At the rapture, when Christ comes for His bride, His Church, then unbaptized believers (by water) would have to be left behind as they would not be part of that Bride, Body, or Church6) Jesus Himself stated that the believers would be baptized with the Holy Ghost – Acts 1:5If your church has taught this passage differently than how I am presenting it, go with what your church teaches.What is “____________________ __________________” 1 Cor 12:13The word baptizo can mean to immerse, to submerge, to sink, or to place under (into).With this understanding, 1 Cor 12:13 would teach that the Holy Spirit places us into the body of Christ.Primarily, this gives the Christian a position (we are in Christ); secondarily, it gives us power. Baptism by the Spirit is not to be confused with _____________________ of the SpiritBaptism is for all believers without exception.In this context, the most carnal Christians at Corinth are declared to be baptized and in the one bodyBaptism (by the Spirit) is never commandedThis takes place only once.Indicated by the verb used – Aorist tenseCompared with Ephesians 4:4-5 – One Baptism…This joins us to the body of Christ which gives us a relationship from which spiritual power and blessings flow (Rom 6:1-10)The absence of unusual experiences does not indicate an “unbaptized” position.If that were true, one could be a believer and not in the bodyCarnal Corinthians were baptized by the Spirit Baptized Galatians were turning from the true gospelMany were baptized who did not speak in tongues It is possibly because the label “means” or “instrument” sounds so impersonal that people hesitate to label the actions of a very personal Holy Spirit as such, but ejn can also designate a personal agent.14 Thus persons can be used as an instrument, and the person of the Holy Spirit is in fact the instrument used by Christ to baptize the believer, just as water was the instrument used by John to baptize believers (cf. Acts 1:5).This concept is also consistent with John the Baptist’s prophesy that Christ would baptize them with the Holy Spirit. In Mark 1:8 John says, “I baptized you with water; but He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit.” And Luke also records his words. “John answered and said to them all, ‘As for me, I baptize you with water; but One is coming who is mightier than I, and I am not fit to untie the thong of His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire’” (Luke 3:16). Concerning this Tom Woodward writes:Six of seven passages on Spirit-baptism are a quotation of John’s prophecy or Jesus’ restatement of it. … Since the literal baptism of John involved an immersion in…water, it follows that Christ’s baptism in the Holy Spirit is a vivid metaphor picturing immersion in an outpoured river of the Holy Spirit.15 He goes on to say,Unfortunately, Paul does not carry on the parallel with water baptism when writing the Corinthian church about Spirit-baptism. For this reason, translators and expositors have felt a freedom to cast the Spirit in the role of the Baptizer—something they cannot do in the other six passages because of his clearly fixed role as the metaphorical element of baptism.16Thus when we read statements like that of one author who says, “Note, the Spirit is the baptizer and the Body of Christ is that into which the person was injected”17 or when Barth writes, “After the ‘Spirit’ has been mentioned in vs. 4,… there is no need for the author to insist again, in vs. 5, that the gift of the Spirit makes the Christians one body,”18 they have missed the point. The Spirit is not the Baptizer and does not give the gift. Christ is the Baptizer, and Christ gives the gift. The Spirit is the gift.After all that has been said, though, it is essential that this concept not be misconstrued so as to degrade the person and work of the Holy Spirit because it is certainly not the intent of this author. The Holy Spirit is certainly not an inanimate object like the water of John’s baptism. The Holy Spirit is Christ’s personal agent and obviously takes an active role in the baptism of the believer.ConclusionIf the Spirit is understood as being the instrument and Christ is actually the one who baptizes, then Spirit baptism is actually Christ’s baptism,19 and consequently, there is no conflict with the trinitarian grouping of verses 4-6 and with the contents of verse 5 (particularly a reference to Spirit-baptism) being associated with the second person of the Trinity. Perhaps alleviation of this conflict will open the door for consideration of the other reasons that this might indeed be a reference to Spirit baptism.He indwells _________________________________Key passages: 1 Cor 6:15-19; 1 Cor 3:16; Rom 8:9; John 14:17Recognition of His permanent presence is part of the secret to the realization of His power.If the Holy Spirit dwells in us forever, then eternal security must be related to this doctrine.This permanent indwelling is the marked difference between OT and NT believers.This permanent indwelling causes our bodies to now become living, moving temples of God – a truth that has ramifications on holy living.He __________________________Key passage: Eph 1:12-14; Eph 4:30A seal is a mark of ownership or identificationHistorical Insight:The Ephesian believers well understood the picture that Paul was creating when he used the seal. Ephesus was a seaport city which carried on extensive lumber business. The lumber merchant would come to Ephesus, select and purchase his timber. He would then stamp that timber with the acknowledged sign of ownership, the signet. Often he would leave the purchased possession in the harbor with other floats. Sometime later, he would send a trusted agent who would compare the impress of the signet with that of the lumber, taking those that belonged to his master back with him.The analogy of this insight gives us a mental picture of Christians, as purchased possessions, floating with possessions that belong to another merchant. One day, a Representative will come, check the impress, and take all the possessions that belong to His Master back with Him.Connected with this entire passage, we find that God has chosen those who are saved will be holy and blameless. There is also a mentioning of the Holy Spirit as the earnest of God’s purpose. In other words, this chapter, which includes the sealing work of the Holy Spirit is directly tied to our security as believers.He _________________________In contrast with “baptism,” filling is commandedEph 5:17-18There is only “one baptism” (Eph 4:4-5) but many fillings.In fact, the force of the Ephesians text is that we are to be continually filled…If the idea of filling is control, then the secret to being filled is yieldedness.Yieldedness fits in with the thought of Romans 6 as well.He __________________________Rom 8:2He directsRom 8:14He directs in the who of serviceActs 13:2-4He directs in the where of serviceActs 8:27-29He ___________________________He illumines1 Cor 2:12-14Man is in darknessHe loves darkness rather than lightScriptures can bring lightOur mind needs illumined to understand itHe instructsJohn 16:13-14He instructs us in the principles of ChristHe instructs us in the signs of the futureHe empowersActs 1:8He _________________________ fruitDifferent types of fruit in the Christian lifeFruit of soulwinningJohn 15Fruit of sanctified livingRom 6Fruit of the SpiritGal 5When we deal with the fruit of the Spirit, we are not dealing with service. We are not dealing with soulwinning. We are dealing with CHARACTER.“Fruit does not consist of some strenuous exercise. It is not a laborious performance to bring forth some excellence. It is a natural normal result of a healthy condition. If the soul is in health, and the Spirit fills it, there will be fruit.” – O’RearPerhaps the best way to state a definition of the “fruit of the Spirit” would be: A Portrayal of the Character of Jesus Christ in me. This is evidenced by Paul’s statement in Gal 2:20: Christ liveth in me…He makes _________________________ with God possibleJude 20Prayer“The Holy Spirit is the great Director of prayer, and only prayer in the Spirit is accepted and answered. He examines and tests the motives for our asking. He suggests the subjects for our petitions. He undertakes all the wonderful mystery of prayer from within expressed in words, or in groaning that are unutterable. He understands the will of God for us, the plans designed for us by God; the service we can acceptably render to God. To us the next day or hour is veiled but not to Him, therefore, He loves and longs to have such control of our thoughts and desires, as to be able, unhindered, to indite prayer, and such prayer as He knows is according to the will of God, and so must be answered.” – SoltauWorship and PraisePhil 3:3; Acts 2:11Anonymous Quote:In our prayers we are taken up with our needs, in our thanksgiving we are taken up with our blessings, but in our worship we are taken up with Himself.ThanksgivingEph 5:18-20He will ________________________ usRom 8:11-23Just as “resurrection power” is attributed to God the Father and to God the Son, it is also attributed to God the Holy Spirit.He gives Spiritual __________________________Rom 12; 1 Cor 12These two lists are differentOne focuses on ministries of the written word (Rom 12)The other focuses on revelatory gifts (1 Cor 12)The difference between these lists form the basis for the debate between cessationists (those who believe the revelatory gifts have ceased) and Charismatics (those who still see these gifts as relevant).The gifts that are mentioned in Romans, which would be later in the development of the canon are as follows:___________________________________Could be referred to as inspired teaching (as in Ac 15:32). Anyone speaking with divine authority—whether with reference to the past, the present, or the future—was termed a prophet (Ex 7:1). ___________________________________This is the word from which we get deacon. It deals with being a “servant at large.” It describes a person who “sees the need and takes the lead.” To have the heart of a servant is to have a heart that is produced by the Holy Spirit. ___________________________________Inherent in the word is the intent to influence the understanding of the person who is taught. Application of the taught knowledge is the goal.___________________________________From this word comes the idea of Paraclete, a name translated as Comforter for the Holy Spirit. Exhortation carries the nuance of comfort, exhort, encourage, cheer, urge, motivate….___________________________________This is one who gives financially to meet needs. It is done with “simplicity” – the idea is one of sincerity, generosity. Everyone gives a tenth; there are some who have a special enablement from the Spirit to go beyond that in a very tangible way._______________________________ | _________________________________When this word is used in the context of “to be the head of” in the Pastoral epistles, as well as the rest of the New Testament, the shaded nuance care for is always included. So, to manage one’s household is the same as to take good care of a household.___________________________________This is one who shows compassion on the lost, on the sick, on the elderly, on the poor, on the down-and-out, etc. He is to do it with cheerfulness because these people already have enough burdens on their own!Observed in this list of gifts is the absence of any miraculous, sign, or revelatory gifts. These gifts are centered upon the spreading of the Gospel message that has already been delivered. The final lecture for Pneumatology deals with the revelatory gifts as mentioned in 1 Corinthians 12.Bible Doctrines 3Lecture 4 – Understanding Spiritual Gifts in relationship to TonguesIntroduction:If you have not dealt with this issue yet, you will. The question is phrased different ways: “Why do you limit the Holy Ghost? Why do you not believe in the Holy Ghost? Why do you not practice all the gifts in the Bible?” The end result is always the same. What they want to know at a fundamental level is simply, “Why do you not speak in tongues?”Background of Modern Charismatic movementWhat is today known as the “Charismatic” movement embraces all denominations. It was originally known as Neo-Pentecostalism. This movement began in 1960, in Van Nuys, CA. Dennis Bennett, Rector at St. Mark’s Episcopal Church, announced to the congregation that he had received the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. This brought about a renewed interest in the supernatural gifts of the Spirit that infiltrated Methodism, Anglicanism (both US and UK), Lutheranism, and even Catholicism.When we use the word “Charismatic,” we tend to think of the phenomenon of glossolalia, or speaking in tongues. In a technical sense, this is related to Pentecostalism. The history of this movement does not trace itself back to Acts 2. Instead, it is traced to a prayer meeting in Topeka, Kansas. On January 1, 1901, students from the Bethel Bible School had been praying for God’s Spirit to manifest Himself. One student, Agnes Ozman, reportedly spoke in tongues. From here, the seeds were planted for what many would call the “official” renewal of the supernatural gifts. In 1906, on Azusa Street in Los Angeles, a launching pad was given for the Pentecostal movement. Charles Parham (the president of the school in Topeka), along with William Seymour (a zealous black preacher who brought the Topeka experience to California) begin to preach what they saw as a revival of a lost apostolic doctrine. This doctrine was called the “baptism of the Spirit.” (This is why it is important that you understand what the biblical doctrine of the baptism of the Spirit is.)By way of background info as well, it should be stated that the Azusa Street Revival which sprang from the Apostolic Faith Mission began with 12 elders praying for Los Angeles. Six of these elders were women. There is no doubt that they were sincere and loved the Lord. However, it should be noted that “elders” – whether we deal with Israel or the church – was a position held by men. In the only chapter in the Bible that gives policies and principles for conducting a “tongues service,” we read that women are to keep silence in the church.This is not to say that women are not needed or cannot serve God. What is it underscoring is that God has a biblical order that He has laid down in Scriptures. If the neo-Pentecostal movement is from God, then He has violated His own Word (which He has exalted above His name).Biographical Sketch: Agnes OzmanAgnes Ozman (1870-1937) was a female student at Charles Parham's Bible School in Topeka Kansas. In 1901 she made Pentecostal history by being the first member of this Bible school to speak with other tongues. When she got the "gift" it is recounted that she could not speak a word of English for three days! [She spoke and wrote only in Chinese for 3 days…]Many credit her experience with the initial flood of spiritual gifts being released into the Church, yet a careful reading of Church history proves that people had already been speaking in other tongues via Sister Etter's meetings some eleven years prior to Agnes Ozman's experience. However, it was a black man and woman named William Seymour and Lucy Farrow who were students at Parham's school who took this new experience with them to Los Angeles and from Azusa Street the neo-Pentecostal movement was birthed.The _______________________ of Spiritual GiftsThe Spirit gives gifts according to His _____________________________1 Corinthians 12:11He divides these gifts to every manHe gives them severally as he willsThe Spirit gives gifts so that the body can be _______________________Every Christian has at least one giftNo Christian has all the giftsThe Christian who uses this gift in a local church setting is performing a vital taskThe gifts are intended to be used in the local church rather than independentlyWhen used in such a way, Christians are edified 1 Cor 14:4When used in such a way, God is glorified1 Cor 14:2_______________________ Christians can abuse spiritual giftsAbused by one’s actionRefusing to use itUsing it in a wrong mannerAbused by one’s attitudeEnvyPrideThe __________________________ of Speaking in TonguesWhat is “tongues” in the Bible?Law of First MentionActs 2At Pentecost, there are at least two miracles:Every one heard [no interpreter needed]in their own languageThree thousand were saved They were saved because the Gospel was proclaimedIt is very likely that Peter preached in Greek once the crowd was assembledThose who want to attempt to “recreate the miracle of Pentecost” mostly look at that visible manifestation of tongues – the harvest of souls is minimized in favor of the experience.It is this desire to elevate experience over scriptures [or at least to an equal authority] that still plagues the modern Pentecostal / Charismatic movement.In 1 Corinthians, the tongues experience is different. In Acts, no interpreter is needed. In 1 Corinthians, the church is told to not exercise the gift unless an interpreter is present.In Romans, the gift is not even mentionedLaw of Primary MeaningGlossa:(I) An organ of the body (Rev. 16:10); as of taste (Luke 16:24); of speech (Mark 7:33, 35; Luke 1:64; 1?Cor. 14:9; James 3:5, 6); personified (Rom. 14:11; Phil. 2:11, “every tongue” means every person [cf. Acts 2:26; Sept.: Is. 45:23 {see also Ps. 16:9}). To bridle the tongue (James 1:26; 3:8; 1?Pet. 3:10; Sept.: Judg. 7:5; Job 29:10; 33:2).(II) Metaphorically, speech or language.(A) Generally (1?John 3:18, “Let us not love in word nor speech only” [a.t.]; Sept.: Prov. 25:15; 31:26).(B) Of a particular language or dialect as spoken by a particular people (Acts 2:11; 1?Cor. 13:1; Sept.: Gen. 10:5, 20; Dan. 1:4). Used for the people who speak a particular language, e.g., tribes, people, and tongues (Rev. 5:9; 7:9; 10:11; 11:9; 13:7; 14:6; 17:15; Sept.: Is. 66:18; Dan. 3:4, 7, 30, 32).(C) In the phrases gló?ssais hetérais (2083), tongues others or different, meaning different than their own native tongues. Also gló?ssais kainaís (2537), qualitatively new, to speak languages not known to them before, means to speak in or with tongues other than their own native tongue (Mark 16:17; Acts 2:4; 10:46; 19:6; 1?Cor. 12:30; 14:2, 4–6, 13, 18, 23, 27, 39). Will tongues _______________ __________________?The biblical answer is “NO.”When Paul discusses speaking in tongues in 1 Cor 13, he specifically states that they will cease.Every Christian, of every stripe and persuasion, has to understand that tongues are not meant to last forever.Was Paul teaching us that one day all of our tongues will quit working? No. In context, he is stating that these revelatory gifts will one day come to a close.If the question is changed to, “Has tongues already ceased?” – the answer will vary based upon your final authority.ExperienceEmotionScripturesWhen will tongues _____________________-?When “that which is perfect” is come…(technically, it will have already ceased when the “perfect thing” comes)What does this mean?The answer to the whole misunderstanding rests on this question._____________________: the Greek word here is pauo. It is in the middle voice. Take a look at 1Corinthians 13:8 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall failc; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.____________________/ Vanish away: Comes from the word katargeo. It means to “render inoperative.” These verbs are in the passive voice.That which is ____________________: Here we are dealing with a neuter phrase, to teleion.Points of observation:The verbs associated with prophesy and knowledge are passive voice, meaning that they are acted upon. In other words, when “that which is perfect” comes, the action that this will have upon the gifts of prophecy and knowledge is that it will be rendered inoperative.The verb associated with tongues is middle voice. The idea here is that it will stop by itself, it will run out.Example: 3 students are taking a timed final exam. A teacher who knows the patterns of his students may say something like this: “Mike and Rick will be stopped but Tim will stop.”What are the implications of the analogy? Mike and Rick will run out of time. As a result of time running out, they will be stopped (The time will act upon them: passive voice). Tim, on the other hand, will finish before time runs out and will stop himself (when he has accomplished his purpose – i.e., the middle voice).How does this relate to 1 Cor 13:8?Regardless of how one interprets “to teleion,” tongues will have stopped on its own prior to the arrival of the complete “thing.” While the completed “thing” will cause prophecies and knowledge to be rendered inoperative, it will not have any effect upon tongues because it would have already ceased on its own accord after accomplishing its purpose.Perhaps this is why in 1 Cor 13:9 the writer only deals with prophecy and knowledge…He does not say:We prophesy in partWe know in partWe speak in tongues in partThe partial revelatory gifts of prophecy and knowledge are brought to an end by the complete revelation (Scripture). Tongues will have already ceased even before the complete revelation is revealed.To what does to teleios refer?What are the options?The Second Coming of ChristThe Rapture of the ChurchThe Maturity of the 1st Century ChurchThe Completion of the CanonWhat is the context of 1 Cor 13?The over-arching theme deals with love’s superiorityJuxtaposed against love are some of the miraculous sign giftsPropheciesKnowledgeTonguesIn comparing love to these sign gifts, the gifts are shown to be inferior to love because they are only temporary in natureThese temporary, partial gifts would be stopped when something complete came.The parallelism | analogy that is used is that of comparing partial revelation (1 Cor 13:9) to complete revelation (that which is perfect).Since partial revelatory gifts are contrasted against that which is complete, the analogy is a comparison of partial vs. complete revelation.From this, we state that the complete revelation (which is a “thing” not a “person”) is the completed Scriptures.This same word is used to describe Scripture by James (in an adverbial form) in James 1:25. (…perfect law of liberty…)Do the 1 Corinthian examples of tongues mean an ecstatic language?Charismatics often emphasize the unknown tongues at the Corinth church.The implication is that these were not known to mankind, but were heavenly languages.When the word glossa is used in Mark, Acts, and Revelation – it always refers to a language associated with a nationality or race. There is no translational/textual license that can now change the meaning of a Greek word that is based upon an italicized English word.Unknown – it is italicized in 1 Cor 14 as a supplied word to emphasize that this language was not known to the speaker and was miraculous.Contextually (and Biblically), we must conclude that glossa refers to a known language. At times, God has empowered others to speak in one of these known languages – even though it has been unknown to them.The ___________________________ of Speaking in Tongues_________________ did God use this gift at all?To communicate the Gospel messageTongues are a sign…to them that believe not (1 Cor 14:22)Signs = Seimon (Greek)The reference in the text is back to Isaiah 28:11-12. Here, God had sent warnings through the prophets in Israel’s own language. She had ignored those warnings. Now, the message of judgment was coming through an unknown tongue – that of the Assyrians. When they heard the language, it was a sign of God’s judgment. That is the context of 1 Corinthians 14.This word “sign” is often used in the New Testament to convey divinely-given messages to unbelievers. Consider John 20:30-31. The misuse of the Corinthian church in the area of tongues caused Paul to challenge them to maturity. (See 1 Corinthians 14:20, “Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men.”) Here, the word men refers to mature.The abuse of tongues in Corinth did not arise from the belief in speaking in tongues, but rather in the neglect of the Scriptures which taught its proper use.The purpose of tongues was to communicate God’s message, which can be verified with the three passages in Acts which deal with tongues.Acts 2: Speaking in tongues here was used as a missionary / evangelistic tool in fulfillment of Isaiah 28:11. There was no need for the disciples to learn a new language to first spread the gospel – God supernaturally overcame that barrier. At Pentecost, there were Jews from every nation, but each heard the gospel in his own language.Acts 10:46, Again, we are communicating the gospel in this context. Here, we are dealing with the conversion of Cornelius. At this house, the speaking in tongues were a sign for the Jews that the gospel was being communicated.Acts 19:6, Here, Paul deals with “disciples of John.” He begins to question their salvation by asking about their relationship to the Holy Spirit. These people had a head knowledge of everything Paul preached but they were missing the Holy Spirit. With the confusion that could have taken place, an evidential sign was needed to “prove” that the Gospel had been communicated adequately to them. These three passages plus 1 Corinthians are the only passages in the New Testament that demonstrate tongues-speaking. None of the later epistles mention this gift. This gift was transitional in nature.To confirm the __________________________ messageWhen an Apostle spoke in tongues, it was a confirming sign. An apostle’s authority came from the Lord, but was validated by the sign. An apostle could not always turn to a verse and claim its authority – the Scriptures were still being written.When portions of the Bible were being written, God confirmed the messengers with signs and wonders:Moses LawElijahProphetsApostlesNew TestamentThe Jews require a sign (1 Cor 1:22). Consider these verses:Matthew 12:38 Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from thee. Matthew 16:1 The Pharisees also with the Sadducees came, and tempting desired him that he would shew them a sign from heaven. John 2:18 Then answered the Jews and said unto him, What sign shewest thou unto us, seeing that thou doest these things? John 6:30 They said therefore unto him, What sign shewest thou then, that we may see, and believe thee? what dost thou work?During the Tribulation period, the Jews will be deceived by someone who is able to work “signs and lying wonders…” (2 Thess 2:9)“Let us who are Christ’s not be seeking signs as did the unbelieving Jews. We who are the Lord’s have the Holy Scriptures, so let us “walk by faith, not by sight” (2 Corinthians 5:7). Whenever the gift of tongues was exercised Jews were present, tongues-speaking being used either to communicate the Gospel or else to confirm to the Jews that the Gentiles were worthy of salvation and should therefore have the Gospel also. Such confirmations are seen in Acts 10:45 and 19:6. “And they went forth, and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen” (Mark 16:20).“If anyone denies the message of God’s written Word today, there is no other court of appeal. In the days of the Apostles, the New Testament being yet unwritten, the Holy Spirit supported their message by accompanying it with signs. But after those holy and inspired men completed writing the New Testament, such confirmations were no longer necessary. The rich man in Hell asked Abraham to send Lazarus from the dead that he might witness to his five unsaved brothers, hoping that such a sign (or miracle) would lead them to repent. But Abraham replied, “If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead” (Luke 16:27-31). The Pentecostal sign ushered in a new age before the New Testament was written. But if men reject God’s inspired Word now, they need not look for any supernatural signs.“A significant New Testament passage which adds to the fact that the sign gifts were given to confirm the Gospel message is Hebrews 2:3,4:“How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard Him; God also bearing them witness, both with signs, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost according to His own will?” If the Epistle to the Hebrews was written between 65 and 70 A.D. it would be obvious that the people to whom the message was “confirmed” with signs and gifts were that generation immediately following our Lord’s death.”The ______________________________ of Speaking in Tongues“I want you to see Paul’s introduction to the subject of spiritual gifts. And incidentally, this is the only place in the entire Bible where spiritual gifts are discussed. The Apostle writes, “Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant” (1 Corinthians 12:1). In the Authorized Version the word “gifts” is in italicized letters, telling us that it did not appear in any of the Greek manuscripts but was inserted by translators. Paul actually said to the Corinthians, “I don’t want you to be ignorant about pneumatica” (the spirituals), meaning of course the spiritual gifts.“Now the Corinthians were not ignorant of the fact of the spiritual gifts, for the Apostle had already said to them, “Ye come behind in no gift” (1:7). When he said, “I would not have you ignorant”, he was not speaking about their ignorance of the existence of the gifts, but rather about their ignorance of the right exercise of the gifts. They were well informed as to what the spiritual gifts were, but they were ignorant about the proper use of the gifts, as is evidenced by the mistakes they made in their exercise of them. “Before Paul launches into a discussion of the spiritual gifts, he reminds them of how easily they were led astray. He says, “ye know that ye were gentiles, carried away unto these dumb idols, even as ye were led” (12:2). In substance he is saying, “Before you tell me about your experience let me remind you of your lack of spirituality (3:1), and therefore your inability to discern between the Holy Spirit and false spirits” (2:15). Because they were carnal, “babes in Christ” (3:1), their exercise of the gifts were self-induced by fleshly energy, not by the Holy Spirit. All Christians do not use their gifts properly, so that a Christian’s use of a gift might not be in accord with the Word of God. Mistakes can be made by any of us in the exercise of a gift.”It is a mistake to state that speaking in tongues is _________________________ with the baptism of the Spirit.All the believers in Corinth had been baptized by the Spirit (1 Cor 12:13)Not all believers in Corinth spoke in tongues (1 Cor 12:30)The baptism of the Spirit deals with our position in Christ. It happens at salvation for “all believers” are baptized [placed into] the body of Christ.It is a mistake to state that speaking in tongues is _____________________ of being filled with the Spirit.Again, all believers are commanded to be filled with [controlled by] the Spirit.Yet, nowhere in Scripture are we commanded to speak in tongues.There are examples where people were filled with the Spirit and did not speak in tongues:Acts 4:31Acts 13:9-11How is one to know if he is filled with the Spirit?Ephesians 5:18-21 mentions three characteristics:Joyful heartThankful heartSubmissive heartNothing is said about speaking in tonguesActs 1:8One “fruit” is mentioned - soulwinningIt is a mistake to state that speaking in tongues is the _________________ of the Spirit. The fruit of the Spirit results from being filled with the Spirit. The fruit of the Spirit is mentioned in Galatians 5:22, 23 and includes nine characteristics. “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance.” None of the sign-gifts are included in this nine-fold cluster of fruit. The Christian who is filled with the Spirit will manifest the fruit of the Spirit apart from ever having spoken in tongues. As a matter of fact, in Ephesians and Galatians, where the fullness and fruit of the Spirit are discussed tongues-speaking is not mentioned once. Moreover, in the list of gifts mentioned by Paul, gifts that the ascended Lord bestowed upon His Church, the sign gifts are omitted. “And He gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers” (Ephesians 4:11). All Christians should be filled with the Spirit and all are to exhibit the fruit of the Spirit, but not every Christian has all the gifts. Spirituality does not depend on speaking in tongues. God’s goal for every child of His is to be Spirit-controlled, but that goal does not include speaking in tongues. No Christian need ever feel that he is lacking in spirituality because he has not spoken in tongues. Quality of life is the best evidence of the fullness and fruit of the Holy Spirit. John the Baptizer was filled with the Spirit from his mother’s womb (Luke 1:15), yet this Spirit-filled man did no miracles and never spoke in tongues (John 10:41). But he was so Christ-like that people who were looking for the Messiah were led to ask of him, “Art thou the Christ?”It is a mistake to state that speaking in tongues is an evidence of one’s ______________________.To the contrary, the persons who seek signs and sign-gifts show their lack of faith. It is a sin for any Christian to seek for signs before he will believe God’s Word. As was pointed out earlier in this study, “tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not” (1 Corinthians 14:22). So you see, the Christians at Corinth were showing that they were weak in faith, and possibly some who identified themselves with the believer had never been saved. The person who seeks any sign, whether it be speaking in tongues or any other sign-gift, is either a babe in Christ or an unbeliever.Thomas is an illustration of a disciple weak in faith who would not believe without seeing. After our Lord arose from death, He appeared to the disciples. “But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in His hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into His side, I will not believe” (John 20:24, 25). Thomas was like the Corinthians, weak in faith, demanding to see the sign (miracle) before he would believe.Eight days later the Lord appeared again. “Then saith He to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side:and be not faithless but believing.” (John 20:27). The doubting Thomas needed a sign, so the Lord appeared to him so that he would not continue without faith. And then He said to Thomas, “Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed; blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed” (John 20:29). The Christian who will study the Bible and believe what it says will walk by faith, not by sight or sound.It is a mistake to ________________ the ability/gift to speak in tongues.It is clear that not all in the church at Corinth spoke in tongues. Why didn’t they? The Apostle says, “Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit . . . for to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit; To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit; To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy, to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues: But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as He will” (1 Corinthians 12:4-11). Please note that the gifts were given “as He (the Holy Spirit) will,” not as we will, “as it hath pleased Him” (vs. 18), not us. The reason why all the Christians did not have the gift of tongues is because all of the gifts are divinely bestowed. The Spirit divides and distributes to each believer his own gift. Not one of us is capable of choosing his own gift. The Spirit will not give a gift according to our desire and the way we pray. Don’t try to tell God which gift He should give to you. We are but members of the Body, and no one member has any right to tell the Head what to do.It would have been a mistake for the Corinthians to seek the gift of tongues because it is the least of all the gifts. Where the gifts are listed twice in 1 Corinthians 12, in each instance tongues and their interpretation are placed last (verses 8-11 and 28-30). Note the careful wording in the latter passage: “First . . . secondarily . . . thirdly . . . after that . . . ” The least to be desired comes at the bottom of the list, the scale being according to importance and usefulness. The minor place of tongues is further stressed in 1 Corinthians 14:1, 5, 6, 19. The modern cult of tongues would have you believe that this gift is the only one that really counts and that every Christian ought to have it. The Corinthians erred in overemphasizing the gift of tongues as the most coveted gift of all. To them tongues was the prestige gift, hence its misuse and abuse at Corinth.Paul charges them with such misuse of the gifts in 12:31. When he writes, “But covet earnestly the best gifts . . .” he is not exhorting or commanding them, as the imperative mood might indicate. Rather he is issuing a statement of fact, as is suggested in the indicative. In substance he is saying, “You are selfishly desiring the more spectacular or demonstrative gifts.” The word “covet” is not used in a good sense, but in a bad sense, that of self-seeking. “You are not satisfied to be a foot, concealed in a stocking and shoe; you want to be an eye. You want to be seen and heard.” And then the Apostle adds, “Yet shew I unto you a more excellent way. Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity (love), I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal “ (HYPERLINK ""1 Corinthians 12:31,13:1).A young man who claimed to have the gift of speaking in tongues told me that the biblical basis for his doing so was 1 Corinthians 14:4, namely, self-edification. But this is both selfish and wrong. Paul did say, “He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself” (14:4), but then he added, “Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the Church” (14:12). The gifts were given for the edification and profit of the entire Body of Christ, not merely one member. “The members should have the same care one for another” (12:25). Self-edification is contrary to the principle of love as taught in Chapter 13, for “love seeketh not her own” (13:5). The gifts were given for the common good of all (12:7).It is a __________________________ for women to speak in tongues.“Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak . . .” (14:34). The prohibition here has a direct relation to the problem with which the Apostle is dealing, namely, speaking in tongues. Earlier in the same Epistle he told the women how to dress when they prayed or prophesied in the church (11 :3-10), therefore he would not forbid them here in Chapter 14 that privilege which is countenanced in Chapter 11. The setting of 1 Corinthians 14:34 has reference primarily to women speaking in tongues. It is clear and unmistakable that speaking in tongues was a gift limited to men and is never to be exercised by women. Now he is not saying that women may not teach or testify or pray, but that they may not speak in tongues. Elsewhere Paul writes, “But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence” (I Timothy 2:12). The point of this passage is that a woman’s ministry must not usurp authority over the man. She may teach women or children, but not men.If this admonition were heeded today much of the present tongues movement would be eliminated. Women are the worst offenders in the modern confusion of tongues. The word “speak” in 14:34 is the same word used in verse 28, therefore it cannot mean mere “chatter” that would disturb a service in the church. The purpose of this entire section on speaking in tongues is to curb the wrong use of the gift. Verses 27-33 give instruction for men in the matter of speaking in tongues. “If any man speak in an unknown tongue . . .” (14:27); verses 34-36 are directed to “women” exercising the gift of tongues. And if any women wanted to take issue with Paul, he would ask them one question, “Which book in all the inspired Scriptures was written as the result of the Holy Spirit revealing the woman?” (Verse 36). It is a mistake for a woman to speak in tongues.It is a mistake to assume that sign-gifts are given to believers ______________________.Now I am not arbitrarily closing the door on miracles. God does intervene in supernatural ways performing miracles when and wherever He pleases to do so. The matter before us now is whether or not the Bible teaches that certain gifts were temporarily given. The evidence of God’s Word must be the final source of authority. I am stressing this because there are many persons who are not students of the Bible, therefore their only source of knowledge and understanding is subjective, namely, reason or experience. Whatever appeals to their reason, or whatever experiences they have had, settle a matter for them once and for all time.It is not uncommon to hear someone say something like this: “I cannot believe in Hell because I cannot conceive a loving God sending anyone to such a place of torment.” Such persons might listen to clear and sound expositions on the biblical doctrine of Hell, and yet they will reject what the Bible teaches because of their inner feelings and rationale. And so their rationalization becomes their final authority.Now I am not suggesting that there is no validity in experience or reason. I am quite sure that there are times when one’s reason and experience are correct and therefore reliable. But neither reason nor experience can be accepted as final authority. Someone will argue: “I have had the experience of speaking in tongues; I find this experience in the New Testament; therefore my experience is true.” Any trained Christian philosopher will tell you that such an argument is not valid because it makes experience the basis of truth, so if one does not experience all of the experiences he does not have all of the truth. True Christian philosophy moves from truth to experience, therefore any valid Christian experience must be determined by the right interpretation of Holy Scripture. Experience, which is related to our emotions, can be deceptive, but a correct interpretation of God’s Word can never deceive.We come now to the question, Is the gift of tongues a part of God’s program for the Church today? If it is, then we would be wrong if we closed our minds to it. If it is not, then we are wrong if we insist upon the exercise of tongues-speaking. Let us turn to 1 Corinthians 13. Now keep in mind the fact that the subject in Chapters 12-14 is spiritual gifts with the main emphasis on tongues, because tongues was the one gift that the Corinthians were abusing. Chapter 12 concludes with “tongues” (12:30) and Chapter 13 begins with “tongues” (13:1). Obviously from the behavior of the Corinthians they were lacking in the fruit of the Spirit, namely, love. And so in Chapter 13 the Apostle dwells upon the essential ingredient of love which supersedes the gifts, and without which the Christian is nothing at all.Among the Corinthians there were quarreling and division, but the needed fruit of the Spirit, love, was missing, so Paul writes, “Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity (or love), I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal” (13 :1). In Corinth the tongues-speaking amounted to so much noise because carnality had invaded their exercise of the gift. Even today there is a kind of spiritual prestige associated with tongues-speaking. For a Christian to show off any gift that God has given manifests pride that is lacking in love. Where love is lacking, the exercise of any gift is worthless.If Christians would take seriously, within context, all of the teaching about tongues in 1 Corinthians, they could not fail to see that tongues-speaking would cease. Paul writes, “Charity (love) never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away” (13:8). There will always be the need for love, therefore love will never drop off. But when the canon of Scripture is made “perfect” (or complete), there will be no further revelation from God, neither in predictive prophecy nor in divinely revealed knowledge other than prophecy. The gifts of “prophecy” and “knowledge” will be entirely unnecessary with the completion of the Scriptures. And “if any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book” (Revelation 22:18).Paul acknowledged the incomplete nature of the Scriptures in his day when he said, “For we know in part, and we prophecy in part” (13:9), or more literally from the Greek, “For in part we are knowing, and in part we are prophesying.” Then he adds, “But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away” (13:10). The word perfect is in the neuter gender, and therefore refers to the perfect (finished or completed) Word of God. If the word perfect referred to Christ it would be in the masculine gender. The sign gifts were “done away” (rendered inoperative) with the completion of the New Testament.Now what about tongues? “Whether there be tongues, they shall cease” (13:8). Tongues shall cease (Gr. pauo), that is, they shall come to a complete halt. Who needs tongues? Only the untaught, carnal babes in Christ, for Paul added, “When I was a child, I spake as a child . . . but when I became a man, I put away childish things” (13:11). The word “spake” in context can only refer to speaking in tongues. So that Paul himself came to the place of Christian maturity, through God’s revelation to him, where tongues were no longer necessary. And so in the same tongues context he admonishes the Corinthians, “Brethren, be not children in understanding . . . but in understanding be men” (14:20). Experientially, tongues cease when the Christian matures on a diet of the meat of God’s Word. Actually tongues is baby talk.For the past two years I have made it my practice to ask many of the leading Bible teachers and scholars, some of whom having a rich working knowledge of Hebrew and Greek, if they have ever spoken in tongues. Among them are college and seminary presidents and professors. To date I have not had one of about sixty men tell me that he ever spoke in tongues! I have been asked if I ever spoke in tongues. No, I have not. God and I have gotten along nicely for the past forty-five years in English. I speak to Him in English and He hears and understands me. He speaks to me in English through His Word, and I understand Him.How then can we account for the wide-spread practice of speaking in tongues? I do not have all of the answers to this question, but I will make three suggestions for your prayer consideration. First, speaking in tongues can be self-induced. Second, speaking in tongues can be group-induced. Third, speaking in tongues can be satanically-induced.Since the creation of man Satan’s insidious master-plan has been to put a veil between God’s children and God’s inerrant Word. It began in the Garden of Eden when the Devil asked Mother Eve, “Yea, hath God said . . . ?” (Genesis 3:1), thereby raising doubt as to the authority and authenticity of what God has said. We know that this enemy has stepped up the pace of his strategy.Our present generation is witnessing the growing menace of satanic activity in the realm of the miraculous. Where the Devil does not succeed in taking the Bible from us, he works hard at taking us from the Bible. And he succeeds in getting Christians to focus their attention on the claims of men and women to some supernatural experience, and in so doing those seekers after the experiences of others have neither time nor interest in searching the Scriptures for God’s truth.God does have a plan in His dealings with the human race, and that plan does not necessarily include the continuing repetition of the same miracles in every succeeding century. The miracles of God are rare occurrences in history. Enoch’s bodily translation from earth to heaven was the only recorded miracle performed by God in over 1700 years between Adam and the flood.The Church of Christ does not need a new Bible, nor new apostles, nor new faith-healers, nor new charismatic movements, nor self-styled miracle workers. What the Church needs is to return to the Word of God and proclaim the whole counsel of God in the power and love of the Holy Spirit.It is a mistake to talk about ________________________ in an unknown tongue…There is no biblical example of believers praying privately in an unknown tongue Some would try to use 1 Cor 14:27-28 as justification for this.Yet, Paul is not commanding a person to pray in an unknown tongue – rather, he is commanding him to not use the gift and instead pray!If praying in a tongue were beneficial to a stronger walk, why is it never dealt with in passages dealing with sanctification and Christian living?All of the commandments about prayer in the New Testament assume a conscious, intelligible act on our part.The Model Prayer of Matthew 6 is an understandable prayer.Paul’s commandments given in Rom 15:30-32, Eph 6:18-20, Col 4:2-3, all require a conscious effort on our behalf.There is not one recorded instance of prayer in Scripture that was unintelligible.If a “prayer language” were possible within the context, we are dealing with divinely bestowed gifts – it could not be learned or imitated.A “private prayer language” destroys one of the chief purposes of tongues – a sign to unbelieving Israel. Former Pentecostal Fernand Legrand wisely observes: “By using this sign in private, some think they can profit from ONE of its aspects, while ignoring the others, but you cannot dismantle a gift and retain only one of its components. A car is a complex mechanical object that is driven as an entity or is not driven at all. You cannot take the wheels for a run and leave the body and the engine in the garage. When a car is running it is the whole car that moves. In the same way, TONGUES WERE NOT TO BE SLICED UP LIKE A SAUSAGE. They were to edify the speaker AND the others AND be a sign for the Jewish unbelievers AND be understandable or be so rendered by interpretation. They had to be all that at the same time. The gift was inseparable from its one and only unchanging purpose: to be a sign for non-believing Jews of the universal offer of salvation (Acts 2:17; 1 Cor. 14:20-22)” (All about Speaking in Tongues, p. 67).If we were to agree that there is such a thing as a “private prayer language” and that it would help us live a better Christian life and if we were to accept the Charismatic’s challenge to “try it and see,” the next question is, “How do I begin to speak in this ‘prayer language’?” A chapter in the book These Wonderful Gifts (by Michael Harper) is entitled “Letting Go and Letting God,” in which the believer is instructed to stop analyzing experiences so carefully and strictly, to stop “setting up alarm systems” and “squatting nervously behind protective walls.” He says the believer should step out from behind his “walls and infallible systems” and just open up to God. That is a necessary but unscriptural and exceedingly dangerous step toward receiving the Charismatic experiences. Having stopped analyzing everything with Scripture, the standard method of experiencing the “gift of tongues” or a “private prayer language” is to open one’s mouth and to start speaking words but not words that one understands and allegedly “God will take control.” Dennis Bennett says: “Open your mouth and show that you believe the Lord has baptized you in the Spirit by beginning to speak. Don’t speak English, or any other language you know, for God can’t guide you to speak in tongues if you are speaking in a language known to you. ... Just like a child learning to talk for the first time, open your mouth and speak out the first syllables and expressions that come to your lips. ... You may begin to speak, but only get out a few halting sounds. That’s wonderful! You’ve broken the ‘sound barrier’! Keep in with those sounds. Offer them to God. Tell Jesus you love Him in those ‘joyful noises’! In a very real sense, any sound you make, offering your tongue to God in simple faith, may be the beginning of speaking in tongues” (The Holy Spirit and You, pp. 76, 77, 79).Question: Doesn’t Paul state, “For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful…”[1 Cor 14:14]? If so, how can I argue that tongues were always intelligible earthly languages?Paul’s understanding is in contrast with those around him.In 1 Cor. 14:13-17 Paul is saying that the tongues-speaker should give an interpretation of his tongue so that he is not the only one that understands what is being said, because if he prays in a tongue that is not interpreted those who are listening cannot understand and cannot therefore be edified.In other words, what Paul is understanding is not of benefit to anyone around because there is no interpreter. In this context, we are still dealing with “public prayer” rather than “private prayer” in that an interpreter is needed.Quotes regarding speaking in tongues:John Chrysostom (c 347-407) Concerning the spiritual gifts of 1 Corinthians: “This whole place is very obscure: but the obscurity is produced by our ignorance of the facts referred to, and by their cessation, being such as then used to occur but now no longer take place” (“Homilies on 1 Corinthians,” Vol. XII, The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Hom 29:2).John Calvin (1509-1564) “...the gift of healing, like the rest of the miracles, which the Lord willed to be brought forth for a time, has vanished away in order to make the preaching of the Gospel marvellous for ever” (Institutes of the Christian Religion, Bk IV:19, 18).John Owen (1616-1683) “Gifts which in their own nature exceed the whole power of all our faculties, that dispensation of the Spirit is long since ceased and where it is now pretended unto by any, it may justly be suspected as an enthusiastic delusion” (Works IV, 518). Thomas Watson (c 1620-1686) “Sure, there is as much need of ordination now as in Christ's time and in the time of the apostles, there being then extraordinary gifts in the church which are now ceased” (The Beatitudes, 140). Matthew Henry (1662-1714) Speaking of the ‘gift of tongues,’ he said, “These and other gifts of prophecy, being a sign, have long since ceased and been laid aside, and we have no encouragement to expect the revival of them; but, on the contrary, are directed to call the Scriptures the more sure word of prophecy, more sure than voices from Heaven; and to them we are directed to take heed, to search them, and to hold them fast ...” (Preface to Vol IV of his Exposition of the OT & NT, vii). Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758) “Of the extraordinary gifts, they were given 'in order to the founding and establishing of the church in the world. But since the canon of Scriptures has been completed, and the Christian church fully founded and established, these extraordinary gifts have ceased” (Charity and its Fruits, 29). George Whitefield (1714-1770) “... the karismata, the miraculous gifts conferred on the primitive church ... have long ceased ...” (Second Letter to the Bishop of London, Works, Vol. IV, 167). James Buchanan (1804-1870) “The miraculous gifts of the Spirit have long since been withdrawn. They were used for a temporary purpose” (The Office and Work of the Holy Spirit, 34)Robert L. Dabney (1820-1898) “After the early church had been established, the same necessity for supernatural signs now no longer existed, and God, Who is never wasteful in His expedients, withdrew them ... miracles, if they became ordinary, would cease to be miracles, and would be referred by men to customary law” (‘Prelacy a Blunder,’ Discussions: Evangelical and Theological, Vol. 2, 236-237).Charles Haddon Spurgeon (1834-1892) Speaking of the office of the apostles, “an office which necessarily dies out, and properly so, because the miraculous power also is withdrawn” (Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit 1871, Vol. 17, 178).Benjamin B. Warfield (1851-1921) “These gifts were ... distinctively the authentication of the apostles. They were part of the credentials of the apostles as the authoritative agents of God in founding the church. Their function thus confirmed them to distinctively the apostolic church and they necessarily passed away with it” (Counterfeit Miracles, 6).Quotes from leading __________________________________:Jack Hayford: “Some tongues may be satanic, some may be Psychological, but there is a need for tongues today.”Oral Roberts: “Tongues is God’s way of speaking today.”Kenneth Copeland: “If your pastor doesn’t encourage you to speak in tongues, leave the church.”Jimmy Swaggart: “Beg for the miraculous gift of the Holy Spirit.” Again, “Speaking in tongues is the initial sign of the Holy Spirit baptism…”Rev. Christenson: “Yes, we must seek tongues. In order to speak in tongues, you must quit praying in English. You lapse into silence and resolve not to speak in a syllable you ever heard. The 1st sounds will be strange, unnatural, and inarticulate.”George Gardines, former Pentecostal: “So the seeker for experience goes back through the ritual again and again, but begins to discover something; ecstatic experience, like drug-addiction, requires larger and larger doses to satisfy. Sometimes the bizarre is introduced. I have seen people run around a room until they were exhausted, climb tent poles, laugh hysterically, go into trances for days and do other weird things as the “high” sought became more elusive. Eventually, there is a crisis and a decision is made; he will sit in the back seats and be a spectator, “fake it” or go on in the hope that everything will eventually be as it was. The most tragic decision is to quit and in the quitting abandon all things spiritual as fraudulent. The spectators are frustrated, the fakers suffer guilt, the hoping are pitiable, and the quitters are a tragedy. No, such movements are not harmless!”BONUS QUOTE: William Samarin – Professor of Linguistics, Toronto University: Over a period of five years I have taken part in meetings in Italy, Holland, Jamaica, Canada, and the United States. I have observed Old fashioned Pentecostals and neo-Pentecostals. I have been in small meetings in private homes as well as in mammoth public meetings. I have seen such different cultural settings as are found among Puerto Ricans of the Bronx, the snake handlers of the Appalachians, and the Russian Molakans of Los Angeles. I have interviewed tongues speakers, and tape-recorded and analyzed countless samples of Tongues. In every case, glossolalia turns out to be linguistic nonsense. In spite of superficial similarities, glossolalia is fundamentally not language.Conclusion:At the very least, you should remember the following truths:The ___________________________________ to the modern Charismatic / Pentecostal phenomenon was not borne out of Scriptural principles.The motives behind Spiritual gifts should be understoodThe meaning of “speaking in tongues” should have a biblical frame of referenceThe ministry of “speaking in tongues” should have _____________________ answers and insightThe common misconceptions about tongues should be understoodBible Doctrines 3Lecture 5 – Understanding the Doctrine of Sin in relation to ManIntroduction:What is one thing we have in common with every one we meet? We are all sinners! If we are all sinners, the question must be asked: Then why did God create us? If we are all sinners, how are we created in His image? If I am a sinner, how can I seek to please Him in my everyday life?____________________ did God make me?Some people paint the picture that God was lonely and longed to have fellowship with other persons. This is biblically inaccurate. If this were true, it would pre-suppose that God needed us. God is independent from His creation – He is self-existent. He does not need His creation; yet we need Him. We read in Jesus’ prayer in John 17 that there was fellowship, love, and communication with the Father and Son before the world began. We were not created so God could fellowship with us. We were created for His glory.Isaiah 43:7Even every one that is called by my name: for I have created him for my glory, I have formed him; yea, I have made him.Ephesians 1:11-12In whom also we have obtained an inheritance being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will: That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.Revelation 4:11Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.1Chronicles 16:24, 27-29Declare his glory among the heathen; his marvellous works among all nations…Glory and honour are in his presence; strength and gladness are in his place. Give unto the LORD, ye kindreds of the people, give unto the LORD glory and strength. Give unto the LORD the glory due unto his name: bring an offering, and come before him: worship the LORD in the beauty of holiness.Habakkuk 2:14For the earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the LORD, as the waters cover the sea.1Corinthians 10:31Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.Romans 3:23For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.We have been made for the glory of God. We have all missed that mark and are considered sinners or transgressors. God’s intent for our lives is that we would bring glory, joy, and pleasure to Him. “This fact guarantees that our lives are significant. When we first realize that God did not need to create us and does not need us for anything, we could conclude that our lives have no importance at all. But Scripture tells us that we were created to glorify God, indicating that we are important to God himself. This is the final definition of genuine importance or significance to our lives: If we are truly important to God for all eternity, then what greater measure of importance or significance could we want?”What is our _____________________________ in life?The simple answer to this question, based on why we have been created, is to glorify God. The Westminster Shorter Catechism has as its first question: “What is the chief end of man?” The answer given by the children is: “The chief end of man is to glorify God and to enjoy Him forever.”Our purpose must be to fulfill the reason that God created us: to glorify him. When we are speaking with respect to God himself, that is a good summary of our purpose. But when we think of our own interests, we make the happy discovery that we are to enjoy God and take delight in him and in our relationship to him. Jesus says, “I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly” (John 10:10). David tells God, “In your presence there is fulness of joy in your right hand are pleasures for evermore” (Ps. 16:11). He longs to dwell in the house of the Lord forever, “to behold the beauty of the Lord” (Ps. 27:4).Consider the thought that when we glorify God, He rejoices in us. Isaiah 62:5For as a young man marrieth a virgin, so shall thy sons marry thee: and as the bridegroom rejoiceth over the bride, so shall thy God rejoice over thee.In Zephaniah 3:17, the same thought is reiterated. God will rejoice over us as we seek to do His will, to delight ourselves in His law. As we begin to understand this aspect of creation, it has very practical results for us. When we realize God created us for His glory, and when we live our lives in accordance to that plan, we begin to experience joy unspeakable and full of glory. Some would object to God creating us for His glory. To them, this seems egotistical or arrogant. Obviously it is wrong for man to receive glory because he is robbing that which belongs to God (Isaiah 42:8; 48:11 – God does not share His glory). This attitude of man seeking glory is demonstrated for us vividly in the case of Herod Agrippa 1 (Acts 12:22-23). However, in the case of God – the question would simply be, “From whom is He robbing glory?” 1 Chronicles 16:29 says we are to give Him the glory due to His name. He deserves glory as the Creator of all that is. God’s_________________________?Too much speculation has gone into trying to determine what exactly is meant by the phrase, “God’s image and likeness.” Some have attempted to prove this refers to man as a trichotomous being. Some refer to the fact that man is creative, that he can make moral decisions, or that he will live forever as being the answer to what this phrase means. Some see the fact that man was given a dominion, or that he has intellectual abilities all point to the fact that he was created in the image of God.Perhaps a better way at defining this phrase would be to ask how the original readers of Moses’ book understand the two terms found in Genesis 1:26. We will use a definition given by Grudem in his Systematic Theology book: The fact that man is in the image of God means that man is like God and represents God. Wayne Grudem’s comments on the “Image and Likeness of God”Theologians have spent much time attempting to specify one characteristic of man, or a very few, in which the image of God is primarily seen.8 Some have thought that the image of God consists in man’s intellectual ability, others in his power to make moral decisions and willing choices. Others have thought that the image of God referred to man’s original moral purity, or his creation as male and female (see Gen. 1:27), or his dominion over the earth.In this discussion it would be best to focus attention primarily on the meanings of the words “image” and “likeness.” As we have seen, these terms had quite clear meanings to the original readers. When we realize that the Hebrew words for “image” and “likeness” simply informed the original readers that man was like God, and would in many ways represent God, much of the controversy over the meaning of “image of God” is seen to be a search for too narrow and too specific a meaning. When Scripture reports that God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness” (Gen. 1:26), it simply would have meant to the original readers, “Let us make man to be like us and to represent us.”Because “image” and “likeness” had these meanings, Scripture does not need to say something like,The fact that man is in the image of God means that man is like God in the following ways: intellectual ability, moral purity, spiritual nature, dominion over the earth, creativity, ability to make ethical choices, and immortality [or some similar statement].Such an explanation is unnecessary, not only because the terms had clear meanings, but also because no such list could do justice to the subject: the text only needs to affirm that man is like God and the rest of Scripture fills in more details to explain this. In fact, as we read the rest of Scripture, we realize that a full understanding of man’s likeness to God would require a full understanding of who God is in his being and in his actions and a full understanding of who man is and what he does. The more we know about God and man the more similarities we will recognize, and the more fully we will understand what Scripture means when it says that man is in the image of God. The expression refers to every way in which man is like God.This understanding of what it means that man is created in the image of God is reinforced by the similarity between Genesis 1:26, where God declares his intention to create man in his image and likeness, and Genesis 5:3: “When Adam had lived a hundred and thirty years, he became the father of a son in his own likeness [???????, H1952], after his image [?????, H7512], and named him Seth.” Seth was not identical to Adam, but he was like him in many ways, as a son is like his father. The text simply means that Seth was like Adam. It does not specify any specific number of ways that Seth was like Adam, and it would be overly restrictive for us to assert that one or another characteristic determined the way in which Seth was in Adam’s image and likeness. Was it his brown eyes? Or his curly hair? Perhaps it was his athletic prowess, or his serious disposition or even his quick temper? Of course, such speculation would be useless. It is evident that every way in which Seth was like Adam would be a part of his likeness to Adam and thus part of his being “in the image” of Adam. Similarly, every way in which man is like God is part of his being in the image and likeness of God.Does man still _______________________ this image? Yes, but it is distorted. In Genesis 9, when God institutes capital punishment for murder with Noah, His reasoning is that man is created in the image of God. Therefore, to attack man is to (if it were possible) attack God. We see this thought further developed in the New Testament in James 3:9. Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God. From God’s perspective, and from the perspective of those who wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, we are still in possession of the image of God.However, we must point out that this image is not perfect. Our lack of moral purity and integrity of character definitely betray the holiness of God. Our intellect has been darkened by sin and our relationships are sometimes governed from motives less than selfless love. This is where the doctrine of sanctification enters into the Christian journey. This life-long process, in effect, is making more of the image of God visible in us. To phrase it in the language of Scripture: We are being conformed into the image of his dear Son. According to Hebrews 1, Jesus Christ is the “express image” of the Person of God. Therefore, as we become more like Him (as we develop the mind of Christ), we will be more in tune with the image of God personally. For when Christ appears, “we shall be like Him; for we shall see him as he is.” – 1John 3:2Final Thoughts on Man as God’s Image-_______________________“It would be good for us to reflect on our likeness to God more often. It will probably amaze us to realize that when the Creator of the universe wanted to create something “in his image,” something more like himself than all the rest of creation, he made us. This realization will give us a profound sense of dignity and significance as we reflect on the excellence of all the rest of God’s creation: the starry universe, the abundant earth, the world of plants and animals, and the angelic kingdoms are remarkable, even magnificent. But we are more like our Creator than any of these things. We are the culmination of God’s infinitely wise and skillful work of creation. Even though sin has greatly marred that likeness, we nonetheless now reflect much of it and shall even more as we grow in likeness to Christ.“Yet we must remember that even fallen, sinful man has the status of being in God’s image (see discussion of Gen. 9:6, above). Every single human being, no matter how much the image of God is marred by sin, or illness, or weakness, or age, or any other disability, still has the status of being in God’s image and therefore must be treated with the dignity and respect that is due to God’s image-bearer. This has profound implications for our conduct toward others. It means that people of every race deserve equal dignity and rights. It means that elderly people, those seriously ill, the mentally retarded, and children yet unborn, deserve full protection and honor as human beings. If we ever deny our unique status in creation as God’s only image-bearers, we will soon begin to depreciate the value of human life, will tend to see humans as merely a higher form of animal, and will begin to treat others as such. We will also lose much of our sense of meaning in life.”Bible Doctrines 3Lecture 6 – The Origin of the Sinful Soul Introduction:A running debate in Christendom relates to from where the soul of man comes. How can material beings pass on something immaterial? Yet, if the soul is not generated by the parents, but by God, how does He create something sinful? There is a tension within both of these positions.There are basically two positions in Christianity today: Creationism and Traducianism. Creationism teaches that every human soul is a direct creation of God and is implanted within the child either at conception or before birth. This view is held to by most of the Reformed Theologians. Traducianism holds that the entire entity of man (body and soul) is propagated or generated by the parents. This view is held by Lutherans (W.G.T. Shedd) and some Baptists (A.H. Strong).Roughly a year ago, Jay Adams (a Reformed Presbyterian) wrote a short blog on why he held to a Traducianist position (which was against the normative Reformed position). TraducianismJanuary 6, 2009 by Jay Adams This doctrine, which by many is derided as esoteric, is anything but. It has very important moral and social implications. But before turning to that, let’s set forth what is meant by the term and why it must be accepted as biblical.Traducianism is the teaching that not only the body but also the soul is passed down by natural generation. That is to say, in contrast to the rival doctrine called Creationism there is no time from conception on when there was not a soul present in the child. Creationists believe that a new soul is created for every child but differ as to whether it is placed within him at conception or possibly at some other time preceding birth.Now, the proofs for traducianism are many, among which I shall mention these:When God finish creating there was nothing more left to create. According to Genesis 2:3, after creating man He ceased creating. His Creative work was complete. The Scriptures never indicate that God created anything else. In His providence He now orders all that occurs in that creation, but does not create anything more de novo.Sin (both corruption and guilt) is passed down from one generation to the next. Though the body suffers from the effects of sin (clubfeet, retardation, and so on), it is not the conveyer of the sinful nature itself. The sinful nature is a matter of the heart (or soul). Unless sinful corruption is passed down through the generations by means of the soul, it could not happen. Such continuity would be broken if the Creationist’s suppositions were true.If God created souls (after Adam and Eve’s) then He would be creating something sinful rather than “good.” That, of course, is unthinkable. He Himself declared His creation “good.”The fact that children die before birth indicates that they are considered “sinners.” That is true because the “wages of sin is death.” In Adam all die. Since children in the womb die at every stage, their standing as human beings, held guilty of Adam’s sin, is assured from conception.From this discussion there is but one conclusion to reach – Traducianism is true. There is also one implication that I wish to draw: If Creationism were true, Creationists could not be called upon to refute the idea that the fetus at some stage or other might be less than a human being. Creationists might be forced to admit that until the new soul was created and placed into the body (whenever that might be), the living substance within the womb could be considered non-human. Clearly, Creationism leaves this option open, though (without any evidence) many Creationists refuse to posit such a period of time. While it is unknown how the soul is passed down in conjunction with the body, that is no objection to Traducionist teaching. There are aspects of many things that are assuredly true for which we await answers.Some thoughts to consider:We do not inherit simply “punishment” from sin, but actual __________________.David states, “In sin did my mother conceive me…”The wages of sin is death – infants die in the wombGod does not create anything “not good” in its original _______________________.If a soul is directly given by God, it is pure – thus, man is not born with a sin nature.If man is not born with a sin nature, it would be possible to live a sinless life.If man could live a sinless life, he would _______________ need a Saviour.The sin nature is passed down because we sinned in Adam (Rom 5:12)This principle is illustrated with Levi paying tithes to Melchizedek (Hebrews 7:9)Bible Doctrines 3Lecture 7 – What is Sin? Introduction:Today we understand that sin is “bad.” When we are witnessing to people, they seem to intuitively think that murder is a major sin that disqualifies them from Heaven. Sometimes we lessen the definition and illustration of sin by describing it in terms of wronging another person. What is missing is the grievous sin against God. Sin is “out and out” rebellion against a holy God. It is the soul, longing for autonomy, that says, “My way or the highway…”The _______________________ of Sin“Theologians have long argued over the concept of imputed sin. Many understand it to mean that Adam’s first sin was charged to the account of every man that has been born into the world. Others feel that Adam acted as the representative of mankind but without any guilt actually being transferred to others. The debate centers around the meaning of Romans 5:12 and especially the last words in that verse—“all sinned.” Do they mean that all are sinners (which is essentially saying that all have a sin nature) or do they mean that in some way all mankind sinned when Adam sinned? If the latter, then this is imputed sin.“Many charge that such a concept of sin could not be correct because it seems not to be fair to be charged with something when you were not even born. Whether this be a logical conclusion or not, it is true that imputation is a recognized idea both in and outside the Scriptures. For an example of imputation in the Bible, read Hebrews 7:9–10. Notice also 1 Samuel 22:15 and 2 Corinthians 5:21 (an undeserved imputation no Christian objects to!). Procedures in courts of law often involve the principle of imputation in this modern day, so the concept is not exceptional at all. “If the concept of imputed sin is a biblical one (and it appears to be), then this along with man’s personal sinning and his depraved nature are three reasons why God must condemn all men for their sin.”“To impute means to reckon, to lay to one’s account. As such, it can equally describe the reckoning of sin or of righteousness to an individual’s account. As Charles Hodge says, In the imputation of Adam’s sin to us, of our sins to Christ, and of Christ’s righteousness to believers, the nature of imputation is the same, so that the one case illustrates the others.[Systematic Theology, 2:194] What is more, imputation is a constituting act, as Paul says, ‘For as through the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous.’ [Rom 5:19] Made in each case translates kathistemi, a verb which denotes to place, set, appoint, or constitute. This means, in essence, that others, not personally or voluntarily engaged, come to have property, indeed propriety, in the personal, voluntary performance of another. [Murray, The Imputation of Adam’s Sin, p.88] Someone’s actions become reckoned as another’s.”An _______________________________ of SinSin is more than just simply missing the right mark – it is hitting the wrong mark! Another word that is used for sin is anomia, translated in the Authorized Version “iniquity” and in the Revised Version “lawlessness.” Peter used the adjective anomos (lawless) when referring to the men of Sodom and Gomorrha and Lot’s association with them, when he wrote, “For that righteous man (Lot) dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing, vexed his righteous soul from day to day with their unlawful deeds” (II Peter 2:8). The thought here is not merely that of doing what is unlawful according to the standard of men, but of a flagrant defiance of the known law of God.This explanation of sin is given clearly by John in the words, “sin is the transgression of the law” (1Jn 3:4). The Greek NT has the word anomia, and simply reads, “sin is lawlessness.” It is a condition of being without law, contrary to law, the violation of law, the rejection of law, the refusal to submit to law. Ryrie says in his Biblical Theology of the New Testament, “It is the negation of that which is inherent in the very character of God Himself. Sin, then, is that which is contrary to God Himself.” Any attitude or action that holds the law of God in contempt is sin. Jesus said that the approaching end of the age will be marked by the increase of lawlessness--“iniquity shall abound” (Mt 24:12).This doctrinal word hamartia means to “miss the mark.” In Scripture, there are two diametrically opposed themes – 1) the Holiness of God, and 2) the Sinfulness of Man. Sin, like a cancer, has slowly permeated every aspect of society today. It brings a “deadening” to the conscience. It brings a “relativism” to the thinking. It is so deceitful that we fail to notice its workings until we have already been conquered. If you are going to preach against sin or win sinners to Christ, you must have a biblical definition of what sin is. Notice what God has said about sin:Anything which is not of faith is SIN Rom 14:23Transgression of the law is SINI John 3:4All unrighteousness is SINI John 5:17Omission of known duty is SINJames 4:17The thought of foolishness is SINProverbs 24:9Sin can be studied from two different perspectives. It has the EXEGETICAL dimension by which we study the Scriptures and come to a biblical conclusion. It also has the SPECULATIVE dimension. This is the approach in which we study man, philosophy and society and form our beliefs based on those observations Some of the systems of thought that have been “invented” from this perspective include:___________________________This would mean that sin is that which is wrong for you.Society labels this as “if it feels good, do it…”____________________________Anything that you enjoy is sin.The key to living a sinless life is to deprive yourself of anything that brings pleasure.This lead to the thinking of cloistered lives in convents and monasteries, etc.Man is basically ____________________This led some to believe in a belief that the flesh could be eradicated in this life.In other words, we could be perfect and sinless now…any wrong we would commit would not be “sin” – instead, it would be an “error.”If man is basically good, he does not need a Saviour.The Sinfulness of man is always seen as a contrast to the Holiness of God. Our world wants to elevate man and minimize God’s word. As a result, the standard for right and wrong has become relative rather than absolute. Here are some of the thought patterns that people posit in dealing with sin:The Custom of Culture: If a native kills and eats human flesh or has human wives, then it is fine.What you can get away with is fine: “If it were really wrong, God would stop me…”What the judicial system allows…: “If it were really wrong, the penalty would have been tougher…”Society calls sin an “_______________________” – God calls it an abomination.Society calls it a “blunder” – God calls it blindness.Society calls it a “chance” – God calls it a _____________________.Society calls it a “defect” – God calls it a disease.Society calls it an “______________________” – God calls it enmity.Society calls it a “fascination” – God calls it fatality.Society looks at it as “luxury” – God sees it as leprosy.Society cries “liberty” – God says “_________________________.”Society sees a “mistake” – God says “madness.”Society labels it a “trifle” – God sees it as a tragedy.Society screams “______________________” – God says wickedness.How does all of this __________________ to Mankind?Introduction:Man – for some, he is a god among gods. In speaking with some, you would think that they actually hung the stars and that the world revolves around them! Yet, the Bible is clear: We are made in HIS image. Hence, a very important implication becomes clear. No Creator = no man. Furthermore, if our existence is owed strictly to Him, our allegiance should be as well.Throughout society, there are always those who would say that God does not exist. The Bible calls these people fools. Yet, we must ask the question, “What drove them to that point?” “What caused them to deny conscience, creation, and the Canon of Scriptures?” Could it not be that age-old desire to be autonomous? Mankind, since the Garden, has wanted to make his own decisions, irrespective of the consequences. Different religions teach conflicting ideas about mankind. Some say that man is a sinner because of his environment. Others deny that man is a sinner altogether. Still others, admitting the inherent “weaknesses” of mankind will instruct others to “tip the balance” by performing good works. One of our great founding fathers, a deist, lived by this motto: I will please God by doing good to man (Benjamin Franklin). Unfortunately, God has stated that our righteousness is as filthy rags (Isaiah 64:6). Mormonism will teach you that man can become his own exalted god. Others teach that there is a little of the Divine in all of us. With so many different opinions, we must seek the truth in the Word of God.Just as David asks, “What is man…” in the Scriptures, those same Scriptures will answer the question for us. Before beginning a full-blown discussion of anthropology, it would be prudent to define some basic terms:Anthropology: The study of manCreation: Ex Nihilo (Latin: out of nothing…)Man’s Nature:Sinful and fallen because of AdamEvolution:The concept that man is progressing from an “amoeba” into a “god.” Bara:Hebrew verb used in Genesis meaning to “produce out of nothing.”Asah:Hebrew verb used in Genesis meaning to “cause to exist in an appointed form.”Yatzar:Verb used in Genesis meaning to “cause man’s disposition to be in a certain form.Imputation:To put something on the account of another, a reckoning term.The ________________________ of ManMan as a created beingThe creation of man was decreed. (Gen 1:26)The creation of man was declared. (Gen 1:27)The creation of man will be delivered. (Jn 3:16; Rom 8:21,22)The _______________________________ of a created beingMan is created for God’s glory. (Isaiah 43:7; Revelation 4:11)Man is made in the image of God. (Gen 1:26,27; Gen 9:6)Man is formed from the dust of the ground. (Gen 2:7)Man is made upright. (Ecclesiastes 7:29)Man is endowed with intelligence. (Gen 2:19-20; Col 3:10)Man is wonderfully made. (Psalm 139:14-16)Man was given wide dominion (abrogated that role with the fall) Gen 1:28God created them MALE and FEMALE. (Gen 1:27)Man is superior to the animals. (Matt 10:31)Man was given a living soul. (Gen 2:7)God breathes into man, he becomes a living soul. God breathes out His words; these become a living book. Wherever the Breath of God is, there is life.The conditions _______________________ on the created beingMan was given a free will. (This is demonstrated in Genesis 3)Man was given only one probation. (Gen 2:15-17)Probation refers to a time during which man was subjected to a particular test, consisting of a positive command concerning the tree of knowledge. The result would either be continued favor with God or the death penalty, depending on their actions.The _____________________________ of ManThe ________________________Man was not created as an automaton (robot).Sin enters our world due to man’s volitional acts.This Fall is not isolated to Christian literature.The state of innocence ends with this Fall.This one sin affects the whole human race. (We sinned in Adam…Romans 5:12)Just as sure as it was possible for Adam to sin, it was possible for him not to sin. NOTE: It was not the “perfect will of God” for Adam to sin.The ________________________Satan was the TempterHe comes through the form of a serpent.The enticement for man’s sin comes from without, not from within. (The fall of Lucifer came from within, leaving him unredeemable.)Though man is fallen, he is redeemable. (Yet, he is unable to redeem himself – he cannot pay the price.)Though Adam sinned willfully, there was still some deception involved as he was speaking to a serpent (he thought) as opposed to a fallen angel.The _________________________________Step one: The Woman is listening alone (without the protection of the husband) in a forbidden place.Step two: Upon entering into conversation, the deceiver plants doubt.Step three: The woman does not know she is being deceived. Flattered, she continues the conversation.Step four: By continuing to dialogue, the woman then tampers with God’s word, leaving room for the enemy to pry open the door.Step five: The devil moves from doubt to denial.Step six: The woman fixes her eyes. “She saw that it was pleasant…”Step seven: Where the eyes are fixed, the heart soon follows – she takes and eats.Step eight: The tempted then becomes the tempter, giving the fruit to Adam.The _________________________________The Effects to the First CoupleThere is a loss of a suitable personal appearance accompanied by shame.There is now a craven fear of God, causing man to hide.Man is expelled from the Garden.Immortality in a fallen, depraved, sin-cursed human body was a greater penalty than even God wanted for man. Hence, He expelled them from the Garden before they each ate from the Tree of Life. Understood in this light, their expulsion was just as much an act of mercy as it was judgment.The Effects to _____________________________The ground has been cursed ever since. (Gen 3:17-19)The woman now has pain in childbearing. (Gen 3:16)Adam’s sin has been imputed to our account. (Rom 5:12; Isa 53:6; John 3:36; Gal 3:10; Rom 3:9-23; Eph 2:3)We now experience physical, spiritual and possible eternal death.Unredeemed man is viewed as the child of the devil. (John 8:33-34)Every one born in this world is called a sinner. (Rom 3:10, 23)Mankind and the earth is under bondage (Rom 3:19, 8:21)The nature of man has been changed.His understanding is now darkened. (Eph 4:18; 1 Cor 2:14)His heart is deceitful. (Jer 17:9)His mind and conscience are defiled. (Gen 6:5; Tit 1:15)His spirit is dead. (Eph. 2:1; 2 Cor 7:5)His will, though “free,” is feeble. (Rom 7:18)We are found destitute of any qualities that would merit redemption.The ___________________________________ of ManThe ReasonsThe Imputed Sin of AdamRomans 5:12 does not teach that we all have sinned at least once in our life-time. This is the teaching of Romans 3:23.This is evidenced by the fact that Paul uses the word ημαρτονThis is AORIST INDICATIVEaorist — The aorist verb tense is used by the writer to present the action of a verb as a “snapshot” event. The verb’s action is portrayed simply and in summary fashion without respect to any process. In the indicative mood, the aorist usually denotes past time, while an aorist participle usually refers to antecedent time with respect to the main verb. Outside the indicative and the participle, the aorist does not indicate time. “First Aorist” refers to the inflected form. First Aorist verbs are marked by an augment (usually a prefixed ε, η or ω) and either -σα, -ξα, or -ψα as part of the suffix endings.In chapter 5, we see that we all sinned in ADAM. This is the contrast of the believers’ position: IN CHRISTThe only way to overcome “imputed sins” is to be found in union with Christ.Our sins are imputed to us from Adam.Our sins are imputed to Christ at Calvary.When we are in Christ, His righteousness is imputed to us at justification.This is why the word justification deals with a “being declared righteous.”Adam’s sin is seen in contrast with the justifying work of ______________________.Through Adam, not Eve, sin enters our world.As sin is personified, we notice that if it is entering into the world, then it is already in existence.This functions as an indirect proof that angels fell before mankind.Even though Eve sinned first, it was Adam who had been given the direct command by God. It was Adam who was the Federal Head. It was Adam from which Eve had been made.Death is then passed upon all of Adam’s descendants, who are made after his image and who also sinned in the Garden as well.By that one trespass, many have died. This one event being enough to judge humanity before the law was given.One man – Adam; one sin – a bite; one effect – death passed upon the whole human race.One man – Christ; one act – crucifixion; one effect – eternal life to whomsoever believesThrough his disobedience, we are all sinners. The only way to avert the condemnation is to be removed “from out of Adam” and to be placed “in Christ.” This is the ONLY place of refuge.The Individual Sins of ______________________While many would like to complain that the imputed sins are not fair, it is a worthless argument because our own sins condemn us.The doctrine of imputation is not just a negative doctrine. Consider the following:Adam’s sin is imputed to our account.Our sins have been imputed to the account of Christ (and paid in full).His righteousness has been imputed to our account, thus making possible the reality of justification.The _____________________________The result of standing condemned is eternity in Hell. (Yet, there is therefore now no condemnation…)Again, the condemnation that came “by one” must be exchanged for the “free gift” that came by Christ.Finally, the result of a justified man is seen throughout chapter 5, not the least of which would be eternal security. When God closes the reckoning book on our sins, it is closed forever, never to be remembered against us again.Conclusion:Wherever you study the doctrine of man, you will always study sin. These two doctrines are inseparable. The study of anthropology always leads to Soteriology for man needs a Saviour. Hence, the Son of Man came to seek and to save that which was lost. Salvation then is the “Cleansing of Man.”Bible Doctrines 3Lecture 8 – What about Salvation? Introduction:The story of sin and Adam’s fall is a tragic one in human history. Six thousand years later, we still feel the effects of that one decision by Adam. Yet, we would do well to remember that long before God created, even before the foundation of the world itself, Jesus Christ was the Lamb of God already slain. In essence, before God ever created, He had already outlined a plan of redemption for all of Adam’s descendants.What is _________________________?Salvation DefinedWebster’s DefinitionWebster gave six definitions for salvation in his 1828 dictionary1. The act of saving; preservation from destruction, danger or great calamity. 2. Appropriately in theology, the redemption of man from the bondage of sin and liability to eternal death, and the conferring on him everlasting happiness. This is the great salvation. Godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation. 2 Cor 7. 3. Deliverance from enemies; victory. Exo 14. 4. Remission of sins, or saving graces. Luke 19. 5. The author of man's salvation. Psa 27. 6. A term of praise or benediction. Rev 19.____________________________ DefinitionIts major use is to denote a work of God on behalf of men, and as such it is a major doctrine of the Bible which includes redemption, reconciliation, propitiation, conviction, repentance, faith, regeneration, forgiveness, justification, sanctification, preservation, and glorification. On the one hand, salvation is described as the work of God rescuing man from his lost estate. On the other hand salvation describes the estate of a man who has been saved and who is vitally renewed and made a partaker of the inheritance of the saints. The salvation of man, therefore, is first of all his deliverance from the total burden of this actually experienced curse. And as this curse is the root of all human woe, to rescue from this and from the return of this is to make a complete rescue, to effect a salvation which as remedy shall be complete. To each man of the race does the gospel, in terms the most clear, full, solemn and impressive, reveal the provision and make the promise of exactly this total complete remedy“Salvation,” cried C. H. Spurgeon in the great congregation, “is everything for nothing!—Christ free!— Pardon free!—Heaven free!”______________________________ DescribedPertinent ScripturesEphesians 2:8-10For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.Titus 3:5Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;Acts 16:30-31…Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.Romans 10:13For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.John 3:3, 5, 7Jesus answered and said unto him, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God…Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God…Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.John 3:16For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.OBSERVATION:We are not saved by works – we are saved by grace. According to Romans 11:6, these two principles do not mix. According to Romans 4, salvation is for the man who works not, but believes.What about the “washing of regeneration” and being “born of water…” – Does this constitute Baptismal Regeneration?Grammatically, in Titus 3:5, the “washing of regeneration” and the “renewing of the Holy Ghost” are both objects of one preposition – DIA (Gr. ???, through or by means of). According to the rules of Greek grammar, the two objects are synonymous and not two distinct means of salvation. In mathematical equations, we could look at it this way:If (washing of regeneration) = (baptism)Then Titus 3:5 is paraphrased as such:Not by works of righteousness which we have done [except for baptism], but according to his mercy [and our good work of baptism] he saved us…If (washing of regeneration) + (renewing of the Holy Ghost) = SalvationThen we are still left with the conclusion that salvation is merited by our work.If (washing of regeneration) = (renewing of the Holy Ghost) = SalvationThen, Titus 3:5 now fits within the scope of the rest of the salvation verses.This is to be expected since Titus 3:5 does not mention faith. In other words, Paul is NOT emphasizing man’s part (which would include water baptism); rather, it is the work of the Spirit that is being stressed.What about Acts 2:38? Repent and be baptized for the remission of sins…Thoughts for consideration:It would appear from the order of this verse that this is what happens:Peter preachesRepentBe baptizedReceive remission for sinsReceive the gift of the Holy GhostLet’s compare that with Acts 10 – those in Cornelius’ homePeter preachesHoly Ghost is receivedTongues are usedPeople are baptizedOBSERVATION:How do these unregenerate people receive the Holy Ghost? If baptism is what saves us, and the Holy Ghost is given before they are baptized, and if those who have the Spirit belong to God…the doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration has a flaw…ALTERNATIVE:The Greek word eis (translated: for) does not always mean “for the purpose of.” It can carry the idea of “as a result of.”John was sent to prison for murder.Was John sent to prison in order to murder or because he had already murdered?Be baptized for the remission of sins…Are we baptized in order for our sins to be remitted or because they are already?Attention should be given to the change in person and number. In verse 38, the word “repent” is 2nd person plural. The term “be baptized” is 3rd person singular. “Every one of you for the remission of sins” switches back to second person plural again. Grammatically, the imperative “repent” is connected to “for the remission of sins” whereas “be baptized” is disconnected and separated from the main idea in the sentence.Finally, though definitely not to exhaust the subject, it would do well to simply compare Peter’s message in Acts 2:38 with his message in Acts 3:19: “Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out…”___________________________________________SalvationWeren’t Old Testament saints saved differently?Didn’t they have to keep the law to be saved?No one has ever been able to keep the law in order to merit salvation!Salvation has always been “by grace through faith…” Consider:Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord (Gen 6:8)Abram believed in the LORD and it was counted to him for righteousness (Gen 15:6)Abel offered his sacrifice by faithThe Just lived by faith (Hab 2:4)Salvation was always in a PERSON:Exodus 15:2f. Psalm 118:142 Samuel 22:3g. Isaiah 12:21 Chronicles 16:35h. Isaiah 45:22Psalm 3:8i. Jeremiah 3:23Psalm 27:1j. Zechariah 9:9God’s plan of salvation does not change. From the days of creation until our present time – it is by grace and through faith…New Testament SalvationThief on the cross – believe…Ethiopian Eunuch – believe…Philippian jailor – believe…Observation:It is to “as many as received Him…”It is to “whosoever wills”It is to “him that worketh not, but believeth…”It is for “whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord…”What does Salvation _________________________?When you set out to divide and define the “miracle of a moment,” you do not have an easy task!______________________________________ of the SpiritJesus Himself promised in John 16 that when He would send the Spirit, He would “reprove”John 16:8-11And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: of sin, because they believe not on me; of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more; of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.______________________________________Justification is not necessarily, “just as if I’d never sinned.” Consider the following:One sometimes hears the popular explanation that justified means “just-as-if-I’d-never-sinned.” The definition is a clever play on words and contains an element of truth (for the justified person, like the person who has never sinned, has no penalty to pay for sin). But the definition is misleading in two other ways because (1) it mentions nothing about the fact that Christ’s righteousness is reckoned to my account when I am justified; to do this it would have to say also “just-as-if-I’d-lived-a-life-of-perfect-righteousness.” (2) But more significantly, it cannot adequately represent the fact that I will never be in a state that is “just-as-if-I’d-never-sinned,” because I will always be conscious of the fact that I have sinned and that I am not an innocent person but a guilty person who has been forgiven. This is very different from “just as if I had never sinned”! Moreover, it is different from “just as if I had lived a life of perfect righteousness,” because I will forever know that I have not lived a life of perfect righteousness, but that Christ’s righteousness is given to me by God’s grace.Therefore both in the forgiveness of sins and in the imputation of Christ’s righteousness, my situation is far different from what it would be if I had never sinned and had lived a perfectly righteous life. For all eternity I will remember that I am a forgiven sinner and that my righteousness is not based on my own merit, but on the grace of God in the saving work of Jesus Christ. None of that rich teaching at the heart of the gospel will be understood by those who are encouraged to go through their lives thinking “justified” means “just-as-if-I’d-never-sinned.”Theologically, justification is a legal term. It is God declaring me righteous based upon the imputed righteousness of Jesus Christ. This is demonstrated for us in 2 Corinthians 5:21. Now, the just(ified ones) are to live by faith. _____________________________________This word means “a satisfactory payment.” The theological definition would be a payment that satisfies the just demands of a holy God. Expiation and propitiation are correlative terms. The sinner, or his guilt is expiated; God, or justice, is propitiated. Guilt must, from the nature of God, be visited with punishment, which is the expression of God’s disapprobation of sin. Guilt is expiated, in the Scriptural representation, covered, by satisfaction, i.e., by vicarious punishment. God is thereby rendered propitious, i.e., it is now consistent with his nature to pardon and bless the sinner. Propitious and loving are not convertible terms. God is love. He loved us while sinners, and before satisfaction was rendered. Satisfaction or expiation does not awaken love in the divine mind. It only renders it consistent with his justice that God should exercise his love towards transgressors of his law. This is expressed by the Greek verb ?λ?σκομαι, propitium facio. “To reconcile oneself to any one by expiation.”6 That by which this reconciliation is effected is called ?λασμ?? or ?λαστ?ριον. The effect produced is that God is ιλαο?. God is good to all, full of pity and compassion to all, even to the chief of sinners. But he is ?λαο? only to those for whose sins an expiation has been made. That is, according to the Old Testament usage, “whose sins are covered.” “To cover sin,” ???????, is never used to express the idea of moral purification, or sanctification, but always that of expiation. The means by which sin is said to be covered, is not reformation, or good works, but blood, vicarious satisfaction. This in Hebrew is ?????, that which covers. The combination of these two ideas led the LXX. to call the cover of the ark ?λαστ?ριον, that which covered or shut out the testimony of the law against the sins of the people, and thus rendered God propitious. It was an ?λαστ?ριον, however, only because sprinkled with blood. Men may philosophize about the nature of God, his relation to his creatures, and the terms on which He will forgive sin, and they may never arrive at a satisfactory conclusion; but when the question is simply, What do the Scriptures teach on this subject? the matter is comparatively easy. In the Old Testament and in the New, God is declared to be just, in the sense that his nature demand the punishment of sin; that therefore there can be no remission without such punishment, vicarious or personal; that the plan of salvation symbolically and typically exhibited in the Mosaic institution, expounded in the prophets, and clearly and variously taught in the New Testament, involves the substitution of the incarnate Son of God in the place of sinners, who assumed their obligation to satisfy divine justice, and that He did in fact make a full and perfect satisfaction for sin, bearing the penalty of the law in their stead; all this is so plain and undeniable that it has always been the faith of the Church and is admitted to be the doctrine of the Scriptures by the leading Rationalists of our day. It has been denied only by those who are outside of the Church, and therefore not Christians, or by those who, instead of submitting to the simple word of God, feel constrained to explain its teachings in accordance with their own subjective convictions.Propitiation is defined in Baker’s Encyclopedia as: Turning away of anger by the offering of a gift. The word was often used by the pagans in antiquity, for they thought of their gods as unpredictable beings, liable to become angry with their worshipers for any trifle. When disaster struck it was often thought that a god was angry and was therefore punishing his worshipers. The remedy was to offer a sacrifice without delay. A well-chosen offering would appease the god and put him in a good mood again. There is also the context of the word propitiation that directs us back to the Mercy Seat and the Day of Atonement. Word Study: Hilasmos and HilasterionThe word hilasmos is found in only two places in the NT, both in 1 John: in 2:2 and again in 4:10. There has been extended debate among scholars concerning the meaning of hilasmos. Does it denote the removal of guilt and the purifying of the sinner (expiation),37 or the appeasing of God’s anger towards sinners (propitiation),38 or God’s action in offering propitiation to humanity.39 Most important in deciding the matter are the contexts in which the word is used in 1 John. Before examining these it is worth noting the use of the hilasmos in the LXX.Hilasmos is found six times in the LXX, indicated by the italicised words in the descriptions of its use in the relevant texts which follow: Lev 25:9, referring to the Day of Atonement; Num 5:8, used in connection with the ram with which people make atonement for their sins; Ps 129:4 (ET 130:4), where the psalmist rejoices that God does not keep a record of sins and that there is forgiveness with him; Amos 8:14, a strange use of the word referring to those who swear by the shame of Samaria; Ezek 44:27, referring to the sin offering a priest must make for his own sins; 2 Macc 3:33, referring to the high priest presenting the offering of atonement. In addition to these six occurrences of hilasmos there is one more in a variant reading in Dan 9:9, which speaks of the mercies and forgivenesses of the Lord. These usages do not decide the issue. Even though most of them relate to atonement and forgiveness, it is not clear in these texts whether atonement relates to the removal of sin or to appeasing God. Because the use of the word hilasmos itself in the LXX does not decide the matter, it is worthwhile checking the way cognate words are used.The cognate noun hilastērion is found 28 times in the LXX, all of which refer to the mercy seat in the tabernacle except for one in Amos (9:1), which the NIV translates as ‘the capitals’, and three in Ezekiel (43:14, 17, 20), which the NIV translates as ‘ledge’. Hilastērion occurs twice in the NT: once in Rom 3:25 to denote Christ as the atoning sacrifice set forth by God, and the other in Heb 9:5 to denote the mercy seat in the tabernacle.The cognate verb hilaskomai is found 12 times in the LXX, where it nearly always means to forgive (people their sins). It is found twice in the NT, once in Luke 18:13, where it means to forgive, and once in Heb 2:17, where it means to make atonement for sins.The cognate verb exilaskesthai is not found at all in the NT, but is found 105 times in the LXX in 97 verses. These include several texts in which exilaskesthai denotes atonement that involves cleansing the sinner (e.g., Lev 12:7, 8; 14:18, 20, 29, 31, 53; 15:30; Num 8:21); many others where atonement effects forgiveness (e.g., Lev 4:20, 26, 31, 35; 5:10, 13, 16, 18; 6:7; 19:22; Num 15:28; Ps 65:3; 78:38; 79:9; Isa 22:14; Jer 18:23; Ezek 16:23); and several more where atonement means removal of wrath (Gen 32:20; Exod 30:12; 32:30; Num 8:19; 17:11 [ET 16:46]; 35:31; Prov 16:4; Isa 47:11). What this suggests is that the notion of atonement in the OT is best understood comprehensively to include both the cleansing and forgiveness of the sinner, and the turning away of God’s anger. This in turn suggests that neither the idea of expiation nor that of propitiation can be ruled out as possible meanings for hilasmos in 1 John 2:2 and 4:10. It is therefore the context of hilasmos in these texts that provides the best guide. As we argued in the commentary on 2:2 above, the context of that verse does support the idea of propitiation, though the notion of propitiation must not be thought of in pagan terms as the overcoming of the wrath of a hostile god, because, as 4:10 makes clear, it was God himself who provided his Son as the atoning sacrifice for our sins.__________________________________Lutroo / apolutroo - He ransomed4 them from slavery to sin (1 Pet. 1:18).Again, in the same book, Enns states: The word redemption comes from the Greek word agorazo and means “to purchase in the marketplace.” Frequently it had to do with the sale of slaves in the marketplace. The word is used to describe the believer being purchased out of the slave market of sin and set free from sin’s bondage. The purchase price for the believer’s freedom and release from sin was the death of Jesus Christ (1 Cor. 6:20; 7:23; Rev. 5:9; 14:3, 4).Because the believer has been bought by Christ, he belongs to Christ and is Christ’s slave. “The redeemed are paradoxically slaves, the slaves of God, for they were bought with a price…Believers are not brought by Christ into a liberty of selfish ease. Rather, since they have been bought by God at terrible cost, they have become God’s slaves, to do His will.”3A second word related to the believer’s redemption is exagorazo, which teaches that Christ redeemed believers from the curse and bondage of the law that only condemned and could not save. Believers have been purchased in the slave market (-agorazo) and removed from (ex-) the slave market altogether. Christ set believers free from bondage to the law and from its condemnation (Gal. 3:13; 4:5). “A curse rests on everyone who does not fulfill the law; Christ died in such a way as to bear or be a curse; we who should have been accursed now go free … (moreover, this is) a legally based freedom.”4A third term that is used to explain redemption is lutroo which means “to obtain release by the payment of a price.”5 The idea of being set free by payment of a ransom is prevalent in this word (Luke 24:21). Believers have been redeemed by the precious blood of Christ (1 Pet. 1:18) to be a special possession for God (Titus 2:14).Agorazo / exagorazo- Again, the concept of being purchased from out of the slave market of sin is the overriding picture of these words.___________________________________God is propitiated; man is reconciled.God is never reconciled to man because God is not the One who moved away.Restoration of friendly relationships and of peace where before there had been hostility and alienation. Ordinarily it also includes the removal of the offense which caused the disruption of peace and harmony. This was especially so in the relation of God with humanity, when Christ removed the enmity existing between God and mankind by his vicarious sacrifice. The Scripture speaks first of Christ’s meritorious, substitutionary death in effecting reconciliation of God with sinners; of sinners appropriating this free gift by faith; the promised forgiveness and salvation that become the sinners’ possession by grace; and, finally, reconciliation to God (Rom 5:10; 2 Cor 5:19; Eph 2:16).Self-evidently, then, the vicarious atonement or redemption of Christ underlies God’s reconciling activity. Reconciliation took place not by God’s exercise of divine fiat or decree of power, but through Christ interposing himself as the people’s surrogate or substitute before the Law’s condemnation. Thus the vicarious atonement is the key to understanding reconciliation as scripturally conceived and taught. Christ “became sin for us”; he clothed himself, not with holiness (which was his proper attribute), but with the garments of unrighteousness, and assumed the full obligations of the Law, perfectly fulfilling it, and fully bearing the guilt and punishment. Sins and guilt were laid on him; his righteousness attained under the Law was imputed to mankind. Martin Luther underscores the significance of the words “for us” as used in Galatians 3:13 (cf. Is 53:4–7; Mt 20:28; 2 Cor 5:21; Gal 4:4, 5; 1 Pt 3:18) and presses home the point that Christ has for the sake of all people “become the greatest transgressor, murderer, adulterer, thief, rebel, blasphemer, etc., that ever was or could be in all the world.” And were this not the wonderful truth and were people in their misguided pride to try “to turn away this reproach from Christ, that he should be called a curse or execration,” then they would have to “bear them, and in them die and be damned” (Luther’s Works, vol 26, 277ff.).From the 1828 Webster’s Dictionary definition for reconciliation:1. The act of reconciling parties at variance; renewal of friendship after disagreement or enmity.Reconciliation and friendship with God, really form the basis of all rational and true enjoyment.2. In Scripture, the means by which sinners are reconciled and brought into a state of favor with God, after natural estrangement or enmity; the atonement; expiation.Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression and to make an end of sin, and to make reconciliation for iniquity. Dan. 9. Heb. 2.3. Agreement of things seemingly opposite, different or inconsistent.In his book, "Reaching Generation Next", Lewis A Drummond writes, "It may well be that the most relevant aspect of salvation to our post-modern day centers in the truths implied by the word reconciliation. It has already been pointed out in some detail that we all live in a three-fold relationship—to God, our fellows and ourselves. The rupturing of these vital relationships constitutes the tragedy of sin. Reconciliation means the restoring of these essential and vital relationships, and post-moderns zealously seek out relationships."In Paul Tan’s book, Encyclopedia of 7700 illustrations, a picture is formed about reconciliation:A poor criminal stood before an Eastern monarch, trembling for his life. In just a moment his head was to be severed from his body. He asked for a drink of water. They brought it, but his hand trembled so that he could not drink. The king cried to him, “Do not be so alarmed; your life is safe till you drink that water.”? In an instant the glass fell to the pavement and the water untasted, and looking boldly up to the king, the condemned man claimed the royal word. The monarch smiled bitterly, and said, “You have fairly won your life: I cannot break my word even to you. You are saved.”From that moment, the pardoned convict went from being the king’s adversary to the king’s ambassador. Another story that illustrates the ministry of reconciliation: “Late one night a salesman drove into a strange city and tried to get a room in a hotel. The clerk informed him that there was no vacancy. Disappointed, he started to leave the lobby when a dignified gentleman offered to share his room with him. Gratefully the traveler accepted his kindness. Just before retiring, the man who had shown such hospitality, knelt and prayed aloud. In his petition he referred to the stranger by name and asked the Lord to bless him. Upon awakening the next morning, he told his guest it was his habit to read the Bible and commune with God at the beginning of each day, and he asked if he would like to join him. The Holy Spirit had been speaking to the heart of this salesman, and when his host tactfully confronted him with the claims of Christ, he gladly received the Savior. As the two were ready to part, they exchanged business cards. The new believer was amazed to read, “William Jennings Bryan, Secretary of State.”You see William Jennings Bryan was not only the Secretary of State under Woodrow Wilson, but more importantly he was an ambassador for Christ. Once you are saved you are transformed into a “new creature” and are given a new mission.? You become Christ’s “ambassador.” As an ambassador, we have been given the ministry of reconciliation.__________________________________This theological word covers the ideas of reconciliation, propitiation, and expiation.All NT references to expiation have to do with the sacrifice of Christ for human sin. In the Bible both expiation and propitiation are part of God’s atoning work. Christ’s sacrifice both propitiates (turns away) the wrath of God and expiates (covers) human sin. God’s redemptive work is both personal, or relational, and objective. When a biblical context concentrates on God’s wrath, propitiation is involved; when human sin is the focus, then redemption provides expiation.Expiation: This term does not occur in av, but it is found in some modern translations in place of ‘propitiation’, e.g. 1 Jn. 4:10, rsv. Objection is made to ‘propitiation’ on the ground that it means the appeasement of an angry God, an idea not found in Scripture. Therefore expiation is substituted for it. But the matter is not so simple. Expiation properly has a thing as its object. We may expiate a crime, or a sin. Propitiation is a personal word. We propitiate a person rather than a sin (though we should not overlook the fact that in the Bible ‘propitiate’ is occasionally found with sin as the object, the meaning being ‘to make propitiation with respect to sin’). If we are to think of our relationship to God as basically personal we cannot afford to dispense with the concept of propitiation. Those who advocate the use of expiation must face questions like: Why should sin be expiated? What are the consequences if no expiation takes place? Is the hand of God in those consequences? Expiation is a valuable word only if we can confidently answer ‘No’ to the last question. If sin is a thing, and can be dealt with as a thing, blotted out, cast from us, and the like, then we may properly talk of expiation. But if sin affects man’s relationship with God, if the relationship with God is the primary thing, then it is difficult to see how expiation is adequate. Once we bring in the category of the personal we need some such term as propitiation. It seems, then, that, despite the confident claims of some, expiation is not the solution to our difficulties. The ideas expressed in the words usually translated *‘propitiation’ are not adequately safeguarded by the use of the term ‘expiation’.The AtonementThe heart of the gospel is redemption, and the essence of redemption is the substitutionary sacrifice of Christ. They who preach this truth preach the gospel in whatever else they may be mistaken; but they who preach not the atonement, whatever else they declare, have missed the soul and substance of the divine message.In Christian thought, the act by which God and man are brought together in personal relationship. The term is derived from Anglo-Saxon words meaning “making at one,” hence “at-one-ment.” It presupposes a separation or alienation that needs to be overcome if human beings are to know God and have fellowship with him. As a term expressing relationship, atonement is tied closely to such terms as reconciliation and forgiveness.The doctrine of the atonement relies heavily upon the perspective of several background doctrines. The doctrines of the nature of God, the status of the law, the human condition, Christ, and the Old Testament sacrificial system have great influence on a view of the atonement. In the New Testament Gospels, Jesus Christ refers to himself as a ransom, a substitute, and the giver of life to humanity. Paul described Christ’s work of the atonement as propitiation or the appeasement of God’s wrath for the sins of humanity. Therefore, we may understand the atonement to involve sacrifice, propitiation, substitution, and reconciliation in the relationship of God to humanity. It is the penal substitution theory that best describes this relationship for the atonement.The Vicarious Atonement is one of the fundamentals of the faith.Who _______________ it? (How does it ___________________?)It is clear from Scripture that salvation involves each member of the Godhead. For example, consider what Peter says, “Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.” (1 Peter 1:2)In Titus, throughout the book an interchangeable expression is used, “God our Saviour, Christ our Saviour.” In the book of Isaiah, Jehovah states that He is the only Saviour. Yet, in the New Testament, Jesus is the Saviour of the world.In simple terms, we may say it this way:The Father ___________________ the plan for usThe Son _____________________the plan for usThe Spirit __________________________the plan to usFor _____________________ is it?Bible terms investigated________________________Listen to men of the past define it:“Grace is love which passes beyond all claims to love. It is love which after fulfilling the obligations imposed by law, has an unexhausted wealth of kindness.” – Dr. Dale“Grace—what is that? The word means, first, love in exercise to those who are below the lover, or who deserve something else; stooping love that condescends, and patient love that forgives. Then it means the gifts which such love bestows; and then it means the effect of these gifts in the beauties of character and conduct developed in the receivers.” – Dr. McClaren“Grace is energy. Grace is love-energy. Grace is a redeeming love-energy ministering to the unlovely, and endowing the unlovely with its own loveliness.” – Dr. Jowett “Grace means favor, mercy, pardon. Grace and love are essentially the same, only Grace is love manifesting itself and operating under certain conditions, and adapting itself to certain circumstances. As, for instance, love has no limit or law such as Grace has. Love may exist between equals, or it may rise to those above us, or flow down to those in any way beneath us. But Grace, from its nature, has only one direction it can take. GRACE ALWAYS FLOWS DOWN. Grace is love indeed, but it is love to creatures humbling itself. A king’s love to his equals, or to his own royal house, is love; but his love to his subjects is called grace. And thus it is that God’s love to sinners is always called GRACE in the Scriptures. It is love indeed, but it is love to creatures, and to creatures who do not deserve His love. And therefore all He does for us in Christ, and all that is disclosed to us of His goodwill in the Gospel, is called Grace.” – Dr. Alexander WhyteGrace is almost indefinable. Yet an illustration can shed light:I read this sentence in a riveter’s shop-window the other day: “No article can be broken beyond repair—the more it is smashed the better we like it,” and I said within myself: “Thus it is with the Grace of God, and long as I live I will tell poor sinners so.”_________________________Does the Bible teach Election? The obvious answer is an emphatic, “Yes.” If, however, the question is phrased, “Does the Bible teach that some are elected for salvation and others elected for reprobation?” – then the answer would have to be given in the negative. The Bible does teach election, but it does not teach it as it is promoted by Calvinists of today.Pertinent Verses:The word “elect” is found in 20 different verses, both in the Old Testament and the New Testament. Isa 42:1 ? Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles. Isa 45:4 For Jacob my servant's sake, and Israel mine elect, I have even called thee by thy name: I have surnamed thee, though thou hast not known me. Isa 65:9 And I will bring forth a seed out of Jacob, and out of Judah an inheritor of my mountains: and mine elect shall inherit it, and my servants shall dwell there. Isa 65:22 They shall not build, and another inhabit; they shall not plant, and another eat: for as the days of a tree are the days of my people, and mine elect shall long enjoy the work of their hands. Mt 24:22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened. Mt 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. Mt 24:31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. Mr 13:20 And except that the Lord had shortened those days, no flesh should be saved: but for the elect's sake, whom he hath chosen, he hath shortened the days. Mr 13:22 For false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the elect. Mr 13:27 And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven. Lu 18:7 And shall not God avenge his own elect, which cry day and night unto him, though he bear long with them? Ro 8:33 Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth. Col 3:12 ? Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering; 1Ti 5:21 I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels, that thou observe these things without preferring one before another, doing nothing by partiality. 2Ti 2:10 Therefore I endure all things for the elect's sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory. Tit 1:1 ? Paul, a servant of God, and an apostle of Jesus Christ, according to the faith of God's elect, and the acknowledging of the truth which is after godliness; 1Pe 1:2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied. 1Pe 2:6 Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded. 2Jo 1:1 ? The elder unto the elect lady and her children, whom I love in the truth; and not I only, but also all they that have known the truth; 2Jo 1:13 The children of thy elect sister greet thee. Amen.Initial Observations:The six uses in Matthew and Mark are duplicates. This fact means there are 17 (not 20) unique verses with the word elect.1 Timothy 5:21teaches about elect angels – not relevant to our discussion.At times elect refers to the Messiah, to Israel, or to the Church/Saints.QUESTION FOR DISCUSSION: Is the word elect / election used to describe an individual?QUESTION: Does election refer to salvation in any of these verses?NOTE: Read through the Appendix on Election. Disclaimer: He corrects the Textus Receptus, which is unfortunate in my opinion.Excursus – Tulip TheologyMost Reformed theologians can express their beliefs with the acrostic, TULIP. T – Total DepravityThis is sometimes better understood as Total Inability.U – Unconditional ElectionIn this context, election refers to “soteric election”L – Limited AtonementThe blood of Christ was not shed for every man. Rather, it was shed only for the elect.I – Irresistible GraceThose who have been chosen to be saved cannot fight God’s choice. They will be saved, no matter what their thoughts or choices about the matter are.P – Perseverance of the SaintsThe way to know that you are truly elect is demonstrated by your consistent perseverance to the end. If at any time you fall away, you are not backslid or carnal – you have proven you were never elect in the first place.Can this theological system give 100% assurance that a person is going to Heaven at death? Why or why not?_________________________________The Greek word used here is a combination of the prefix pro and the word horizo, from which our word horizon comes. The word means beforehand, to determine before, to mark out beforehand. Again, the question must be asked: Does predestination deal with salvation? What verses deal with the concept of predestination?Romans 8:29-30For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.Ephesians 1:5, 11Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will…in whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his will:The word destine is related to the word destiny. A destiny is a place, a final destination, the end of the journey. In the verses listed above, here is what we observe:One pre-determined goal is that we will be conformed to the image of His Son.Another way to state the same goal is a pre-determined goal of adoption.Adoption should be understood in the context of the culture of that day as opposed to what we mean by adoption today.Question: In both passages, who have been predestined and to what have they been predestined?Answer: In both passages, those who are saints (collectively, not individually) have been predestined to be conformed to the image of Christ, to be mature – in short, to be glorified.________________________________ASSIGNMENT: Contextualize the use of the word chosen in the 119 verses it is found.Observations from the New Testament: Matthew 12:18 and Luke 23:35 refer to Jesus as God’s chosen…John 15:16 – we have been chosen to bear fruit…Acts 1:2 – Apostles were chosen…not to be saved for they were chosen out of a group of disciples already…Ephesians 1:4 – we have been chosen to be blameless and holy2 Thessalonians 2:13 – He has chosen how we are to be savedThere is no conclusive verse in the New Testament that would teach that a person is chosen for salvation. Rather, it will teach that saved people are chosen for service. 2Thessalonians 2:13 would be the closest we could find.What do we do with 2 Thessalonians 2:13?But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth.ημει? δε οφειλομεν ευχαριστειν τω θεω παντοτε περι υμων αδελφοι ηγαπημενοι υπο κυριου οτι ειλετο υμα? ο θεο? απ αρχη? ει? σωτηριαν εν αγιασμω πνευματο? και πιστει αληθεια? ?με?? δ? ?φε?λομεν ε?χαριστε?ν τ? Θε? π?ντοτε περ? ?μ?ν, ?δελφο? ?γαπημ?νοι ?π? Κυρ?ου, ?τι ε?λετο ?μ?? ? Θε?? ?π? αρχ??11 ε?? σωτηρ?αν ?ν ?γιασμ? Πνε?ματο?, κα? π?στει ?ληθε?α?·Textual Variant Note: ?παρχ?, ??, ? (1) in Mosaic ceremonial law, a technical term for the first portion of grain and fruit harvests and flocks offered to God firstfruits, first offering (Ro 11.16); (2) figuratively, of persons as the first of a set or category first: as the first converts in an area (Ro 16.5), as the first to be resurrected (1Co 15.20), as the first of their category to be dedicated to God (Rev 14.4); (3) of the Holy Spirit, given to believers as the first portion and pledge of all that God will give to redeemed people foretaste (Ro 8.23)See Appendix on 2 Thessalonians 2:13 – VERY IMPORTANT READ.____________________________ and Fore-knowAre these two words synonymous? To many Calvinists, they are. In that particular school of thought, the reason God can know beforehand what will happen is because He himself has so decreed it. When this school of thought is pressed, we come to some disturbing conclusions. For example, a simple question would be: Did God know ahead of time that Satan would fall? The answer is obvious – of course He did! Now for a follow-up question: why did He know? Is it because He lives in the eternal now and sees the beginning from the ending, or is it because He so decreed that Lucifer would fall? In other words, was it God’s design, His desire, for Lucifer to sin? Carry that same thought down to man. Was it God’s will for Adam to sin? Was Adam fore-ordained by the eternal decrees of God to sin? Did Adam really not enjoy the privilege of free will? Is God the author of sin?It is true, then, that whatever happens is God's will. Everything that transpires falls within the sovereign will of God in one sense or another. However, it is absolutely crucial to understand that there are three different senses in which this may be true: (1) Sometimes a thing occurs because God decides it will happen, and then He makes it happen. This we have called God's decretive will and it seems to be limited mostly to His working out the "scheme of redemption." (2) Sometimes a thing occurs because God desires it and man decides, of his own free will, to do what God desires. This we have identified as God's preceptive will and has to do with God's commandments or precepts. (3) Sometimes a thing occurs because of the agency of an individual or group of individuals, and God permits it to happen. We have called this God's permissive will. Included in this category are sinful or careless acts like murder, or the death of one caused by the actions of a drunken driver. Even tragedies that occur through the natural processes would fit in this category. All three of these categories can be classified as "God's will," but only the first category is God's will in any causative sense. And even though God is Sovereign Ruler of the universe, categories two and three remind us that we must allow the Sovereign Ruler to respect the integrity of the freedom He has so graciously accorded His creation. As His creatures, we must learn to trust God's wisdom in knowing what good can be drawn from the tragic episodes He permits to take place in category three.We should note from the above paragraph that we are now leaving the Biblical moorings and heading into philosophical reasoning. There are three different positions regarding the order of decrees:a*) Infralapsarian ViewGod decrees in the following order:God decreed the creation of mankindGod decreed mankind would be allowed to fall into sin through choiceGod decreed to save some of the fallenGod decreed to provide Jesus Christ as the RedeemerNOTE: This view focuses on God allowing the Fall and providing salvation.b*) Sublapsarian ViewGod decreed to create humanityGod decreed to permit the FallGod decreed to provide salvation sufficient for allGod decreed to choose some to receive this salvationNOTE: The only difference between these first two views is which event was decreed first: salvation through Jesus Christ or the election of who would be saved? Some would even see these two views as synonymous.c*)Supralapsarian ViewGod decreed the election of some to salvation and the rest to reprobationGod decreed to create those who were elected to salvation and reprobationGod decreed to permit the FallGod decreed to provide salvation for the elect through Jesus ChristNOTE: This view focuses on God ordaining the fall, creating certain people for the sole purpose of being condemned, and then providing salvation for only those whom He had elected.Reference to TULIP Theology 1 Supralapsarianism generally leads to 5-point Calvinism. 2 Sub- and infralapsarianism generally hold to 4-point Calvinism. 3 The point of distinction between 4 and 5-point Calvinists centers on the issue of the Atonement.Fore-ordain – What does the Bible say?Foreknowledge – How is it used in the Bible?Is God’s foreknowledge just another way to say He is omniscient?An Illustration:On Superbowl Sunday, consider a few assumptions:First, let’s assume that I have the ability to record the entire game while at church. Secondly, let’s assume that you have no idea when the game starts.Thirdly, let’s assume no one tells you any details about the game.Finally, let’s assume that I have convinced you that for this year only, they have moved the Superbowl to Monday night because of the protests of all the Christians in America…With these assumptions, I now have the ability to invite you over on Monday to watch the Superbowl. I have already previewed the game on Sunday night after church. I know how the game will end, I know what commercials will be shown during halftime. I know how the big plays will turn out.During the opening commercials, just for “fun” we each lay out our prognostication of how the game will go. After each friend gives his best guess, I then proceed to tell you who will win the coin toss, what the score will be in five minute increments, and what the final score will be.I encourage you to write down my predictions and compare them as the game unfolds. To your amazement, I am 100% accurate in everything I have stated. You wonder how I can be so accurate? I have fore-knowledge! However, I did not “cause” any of these events – I simply saw the outcome before you experienced it.In the NT the Greek equivalent of “foreknowledge” appears only seven times. It refers to the Christian’s advance warning about false teachers (2 Pt 3:17); the Jews’ previous knowledge of Paul’s early life (Acts 26:4, 5); God’s previous knowledge of the death of Christ (Acts 2:23; 1 Pt 1:18–20); and knowledge of his people (Rom 11:2) and of the church (8:28–30; 1 Pt 1:1, 2).The concept of foreknowledge does, however, appear throughout the Bible in other ways. First, the all-inclusiveness of the knowledge of God is clearly taught. God’s understanding is unlimited (Ps 147:5). He knows every heart and thought (1 Chr 28:9). Psalm 139 provides an extended poetic description of God’s knowledge of all human thoughts, words, and actions. This knowledge extends to the flight of a sparrow and the number of hairs on the head (Mt 10:29, 30). From such limitless knowledge, it may be inferred that God also knows the future events of human history.In addition, Scripture directly teaches that God is aware of events before they happen. This sets him apart from heathen idols who lack the ability to foresee the future (Is 44:6–8; 45:21; 48:14). It is God’s foreknowledge that provides the basis for the predictions of the prophets. God announced to Adam and Eve that the seed of the woman would certainly defeat the serpent and his seed (Gn 3:15). Promises of future blessing were given to Abraham (12:3). God said to Moses, “I know that the king of Egypt will not let you go” (Ex 3:19). The coming glory of the Messiah was declared by the OT prophets. (See, e.g., Is 9:1–7; Jer 23:5, 6; Ez 34:20–31; Hos 3:4, 5.) In Daniel 7 (see Dn 2:31–45) God reveals the rise and fall of future world empires and the establishment of the kingdom of God. In many places the NT sees Christ’s ministry and the establishment of the Christian church as fulfillment of predictions made beforehand by the OT prophets (Mt 1:22; 4:14; 8:17; Jn 12:38–41; Acts 2:17–21; 3:22–25; Gal 3:8; Heb 5:6; 1 Pt 1:10–12; etc.).For many of the early Greek philosophers, fate rigidly controlled all future events, including not only the events of human history but the fortunes of the gods as well. Occasionally a future event might be known by the gods and revealed to men, and such foreseen events could in no way be altered. This view is, of course, far different from the biblical view of the personal Creator who knows the future and guides history according to his own purpose.Nevertheless the question of the relationship between God’s foreknowledge and human responsibility and freedom has occupied the attention of theologians and philosophers over the centuries. It is sometimes argued that if God knows infallibly what will happen in the future then it must happen. Therefore it makes no difference at all what choice a person makes since it could not have been otherwise.The theologians of the early church emphatically denied that foreknowledge implies any predetermination of events. Justin Martyr, for example, said, “What we say about future events being foretold, we do not say it as though they come about by fatal necessity.”Other theologians, fearing that foreknowledge destroys human freedom and responsibility, insist that God does not know future events either certainly or completely. Modern process theology, for example, conceives of God as growing and developing along with nature and man. This God, it is argued, can at most know only those events which have already taken place. Hence the future remains open and uncertain for God as well as for man. An older theologian, Adam Clarke, suggested that although God can know all future events, he chooses not to know some events beforehand.Augustine denied foreknowledge for a different reason. He argued that God lives in eternity where all things are present. For God, then, there is no past or future. Hence he would not know things before they happened, since he would see all events from the vantage point of an eternal “now.” Augustine, of course, did not deny God’s knowledge of all things, even of things which are still in the future as far as we are concerned.Because of the clear biblical teaching regarding God’s foreknowledge, evangelical theologians have generally held that God has complete knowledge of all future events. There is a further distinction, however. The followers of Augustine and Calvin insist that God knows all events precisely because he sovereignly determines what is to happen in human history right down to the tiniest detail. Here foreknowledge is closely tied to, if not identified with, foreordination. At the same time, most Calvinistic theologians assert that human beings are nonetheless responsible for their choices—not victims of a blind fate. It is also generally held that God is not the author of sin. Rather, sin is result of the rebellion of angels and men against a holy and righteous God.Evangelicals in the Arminian tradition, on the other hand, distinguish foreknowledge from foreordination of events. While the plan of salvation of the world and human history in broad outline are predetermined by God, it is argued that individual response to God is not so predetermined. Hence God can foreknow an event without directly decreeing that event to take place.While evangelical Christians differ in their descriptions of the relationship between the eternal all-knowing God and the events of human history, it should be kept in mind that Scripture teaches both God’s foreknowledge of all things and the responsibility of humans for their choices.__________________________________The key to understanding God’s sovereignty is to see it as an issue of CONTROL rather than one of CAUSATION.It is possible for someone who is non-Calvinist to believe that God is sovereign. I believe in the Sovereign God of the Universe. I believe He is in control of all things, that He knows all things, and that not even one sparrow can fall to the ground without Him taking notice of it. I believe that this sovereign God can take even the bad things of life and allow them to work out for my good and His glory.In short, I believe God is in control! Who would want to serve a God that did not have control? However, my definition of sovereignty is not that God directly causes all things. I cannot say, “God caused that man to murder that single mom, leaving behind a three year old orphan with no one to take care of him…”Did this event catch God off-guard? Absolutely not! In fact, it is even possible that God sent messengers to the mom along the way to spare her, but she did not heed the warning. Regardless of all the details and nuances of this situation, I cannot say that a loving God caused this incident. I cannot say a holy God violated His own law and caused murder.General ____________________________ – salvation is for all!TIME MAGAZINE, Saturday, May 12, 1923In " the good old days" of the Bible Baptists, members of this denomination held that only persons baptized by immersion were Christians, because immersion was the New Testament mode of baptism. The Southern Baptists still hold to this belief, and refuse to cooperate with any other Protestant denominations in the Federal Council of Churches. The Northern Baptists cooperate, but have a communion service which is closed to all Christians except those who have been immersed. Dr. Cornelius Woelfkin, of the Park Avenue Baptist Church, New York, has declared for the " open church "—i. e., receiving members from other communions without immersion. Along with this " heresy," Dr. Woelfkin declares that he believes in evolution, and thinks that the church should try to elevate the theatre, not obliterate it. He is assailed by conservatives like Drs. John Roach Stratton and J. Frank Norris, as subverting Baptist faith and morals. The controversy assumes importance because the annual Northern Baptist Convention will be held at Atlantic City on May 22, and this " open church " question disturbed last year's convention at Indianapolis. Dr. Woelfkin is in no danger of a heresy trial, because each Baptist church governs itself, and Dr. Woelfkin's church is largely in his favor.Verses to know!1 John 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.1Timothy 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.1 Timothy 2:5–6 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.1Timothy 4:10 For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.John 3:16For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.Hebrews 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.2 Corinthians 5:14–15 For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead: And that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again.Revelation 22:17And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download