Lessons

The discipline of the Lord as training (Heb. 12:5-11)

POST OVERVIEW. Thoughts about “the discipline of the Lord” in Hebrews 12:5-11 as mostly being about the Lord calling His servants to difficult assignments for the purpose of training those servants for their future good works.

In my experience, the most common teaching about Hebrews 12:5-11 and “the discipline of the Lord” is that this discipline concerns the Lord’s taking the believer “out to the woodshed” to “discipline” him so that he won’t make the same mistakes again. This teaching also usually includes the reminder that the Lord cannot “punish” those who are in Christ Jesus because all the believer’s sins have been punished in the death of Christ. But while the Lord cannot punish the believer’s sins, He can “discipline” them. So, the teaching goes, this is what the author of Hebrews is talking about here in Heb. 12:5-11. The purpose is punishment, but we call it “discipline.”

Let me briefly critique this teaching. While I appreciate that this teaching stands firm on the doctrine that the Lord cannot punish the sins of believers because their sins have all been punished in the death of Christ, I do not believe that the author is here simply using “discipline” as an acceptable synonym for the word “punishment.”

In fact, I do not believe punishment is in view at all as the author talks about “discipline.” The context of Heb. 12:1-11 is about faithfully persevering in your faith and being steadfast in the midst of testing. In 12:1, the author refers back to our great cloud of faithful witnesses (Hebrews 11), who persevered in faith despite anguish and testing and ill treatment and he exhorts us also to run with endurance the race set before us, no matter the difficulties encountered in our race. We are to imitate the example of our Lord Jesus (12:2) who victoriously endured the shame of the cross because of the joy set before Him. When we are tempted to grow weary and lose heart (12:3), we consider how Jesus endured the hostility of sinners. The repeated theme is endurance and perseverance. In spite of opposition, the disciple of Jesus continues to press forward (Phil. 3:13-14).

Therefore, when we read that we are “not to regard lightly the discipline of the Lord” (12:5), we must interpret this through the truth that, “those whom the Lord loves He disciplines” (12:6) and “God deals with you as with sons” (12:7). Those who have believed on Jesus Christ as Lord are now those whom the Lord loves. So the Lord relates to us primarily as those whom He loves. Our faith has given us the right to become children of God (John 1:12). And we are not prodigal children who are seeking our own will nor are we rebellious children needing constant correction (“discipline”), but we have become obedient children who hunger and thirst for righteousness (Matt. 5:6). My point is that the child of God desires to please the Father. Our deepest longing is to be useful to the Master so that we will hear, both now in our soul and ultimately when we see Him face to face, “Well done, good and faithful servant” (Matt. 25:21). We can live with freedom and relate to God with joy because, “There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus” (Rom. 8:1). In Christ, we are free and there is no fear of punishment (1 John 4:18).

So, if “the discipline of the Lord” is not about the believer’s correction or punishment, what is it about? The answer appears in the last verse in the passage, in 12:11. There we read that discipline is for training. “All discipline for the moment seems not to be joyful, but sorrowful; yet to those who have been trained by it, afterwards it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness.”

THE PURPOSE OF DISCIPLINE IS TRAINING

The discipline of the Lord is intended to train us so that we bear “the peaceful fruit of righteousness.” Thus we see that the purpose of discipline is training the disciple. In this sense, then, when He disciplines us, the Lord is acting more as a loving coach than as a correcting father. As the coach’s goal is to bring out the best in the athlete through rigorous training activity, so the Lord intends to help us bear more peaceful fruit of righteousness by bringing spiritual training activities into our lives. We are to be trained by the discipline of the Lord.

We know that our earthly fathers disciplined us “as seemed best to them” (12:10). Because they were mere flesh and blood, their efforts at training us and raising us were flawed and limited. By contrast, the Father of spirits is the sovereign Lord of heaven and earth and is, therefore, perfect in His discipline. Not only that, but He “disciplines us for our good” (12:10). The Lord’s training is perfectly designed and perfectly carried out to discipline us for our good. The primary motive of the Lord’s discipline is our good.

If correction and punishment are not the intentions of the Lord’s discipline, then what exactly is this “discipline” that the Lord brings into our lives to train us? What are some examples? My definition of the discipline of the Lord is: “Those trials and difficulties that the Lord brings or allows into our lives to train us to become more useful to Him for His purposes.” Paul’s “thorn in the flesh” in 2 Cor. 12:7-9 is an example of this discipline. The Lord sovereignly ordained that Satan would torment Paul to keep him from exalting himself.

A COUPLE OF PERSON INSTANCES OF THE LORD’S DISCIPLINE

In my own life, I would identify two instances of the Lord’s discipline. The first instance was when the Lord called me in my mid-forties to leave my quiet life of a bachelor and to marry a widow with three kids. This season in my life stretched me in so many ways and much of that stretching was painful and difficult, but the Lord used His discipline through the means of my marriage to make seismic changes in me and to sanctify me by decreasing so many of the sinful patterns and behaviors in my life.

The second instance was the job that He gave me when we moved to Charlotte. The job was definitely the Lord’s provision, but it was also a trial in many ways. I needed to learn how to submit to a boss that I did not respect and to work in a company that was very poorly run and to accept this relatively humble employment at the end of my career when my peers were reaching the peak of their careers. The Lord left me in that job for eleven years before releasing me. I now look back at that position and see that the Lord was using that to prepare me for other good works that He had planned for me in the future.

SUMMARY. The Lord’s purpose in bringing this discipline into our lives is to train us for the work that He has planned for us up ahead. He loves us and disciplines us for our good so that we can be useful to Him and so yield the peaceful fruit of righteousness. So we accept His discipline, and we endure and we persevere and we continue to glorify Him.

Soli Deo gloria rmb 1/20/2024 #689

Who is “most excellent Theophilus?” (Luke 1:3)

POST OVERVIEW. An investigation into how to correctly understand the identity of this person Luke calls “most excellent Theophilus” (Luke 1:3; also Acts 1:1).

AN OFFICIAL OF PROMINENCE?

Luke, the beloved physician and the author of both the gospel of Luke and the book of Acts, dedicates both of his divinely inspired books to “most excellent Theophilus” (Luke 1:3). This prompts the question that I want to address, namely, “Who is this person Theophilus?” The common teaching that I have heard most often is that Theophilus was an official of some prominence and, from the context of Luke’s dedications, a personal acquaintance of the beloved physician. But before we agree with this idea that this description applies to an individual named Theophilus, we must first resolve a number of problems that are raised by this idea.

PURPOSE. The purpose of this article is to present the difficulties with the common teaching that Theophilus was “an individual official of some prominence” so that it becomes apparent that Luke is addressing his two great works to anyone and everyone who is a “lover of God” through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. In other words, Theophilus, the person addressed in Luke and Acts, is any and every believer.

THE DIFFICULTIES PRESENTED

Before stating the difficulties, let me make a few comments. First, the correct identity of Theophilus is not a major issue. I am writing this article more as an exercise in thinking biblically than as a matter of great importance. Second, these difficulties are not presented in any particular order. Some points may be “thornier” than others, but the fact that there are many difficulties with “Theophilus as a specific official” gives evidence that there is a genuine weakness with this interpretation. Third, there is some overlap between these points that I am making and this overlap may lead to a feeling of redundancy. I apologize in advance if it seems that I am making the same point multiple times. So, on to the difficulties.

THEOPHILUS IS UNKNOWN IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. Other than Luke 1:3 and Acts 1:1, there is no mention of this person in the New Testament. There is no record of him and no reference to him. Also, Luke gives no information about him to suggest he is a specific individual. Luke is an historian of the first rank and, when he is relating the events of his gospel or the events of Acts, he usually provides detailed descriptions of virtually every character in these stories. For example, note the descriptions of Barnabas (Acts 4:36), of Lydia (16:14), or of Apollos (18:24). Yet with Theophilus, Luke provides no information at all except to indicate that Theophilus “has been taught” (Luke 1:4) and is, therefore, a believer. Even the assumption that Theophilus is some sort of official is based solely on Luke’s appellation of “most excellent Theophilus.” The only thing we know about him for sure is that he is a believer in Jesus.

THE AUDACITY OF THE PARENTS. Theophilus is a Greek word that means “lover of God.” We can deduce that his parents were certainly Gentiles and not Jews since they gave their son a Greek name. Imagine the audacity of naming your son “lover of God.” If they were pagans, then you would need to wonder, “Lover of which god?” On the other hand, if they were God-fearing Greeks, they would never have had the nerve to name their son, “lover of Elohim.” What would their Jewish friends at the synagogue think of that? All this means that it is very unlikely that there was an official of some prominence who had the actual name Theophilus.

THE PROBLEM OF DATES. There is the problem of the timing of these events. Let’s assume that “most excellent Theophilus” was thirty-five years old when Luke began writing the gospel of Luke to him. Scholars believe Luke’s gospel was written around AD 60. That means that his parents named this “official of some prominence” “lover of God” around AD 25 (AD 60 minus 35 years old), which was two or three years before Jesus began His earthly ministry. Thus Theophilus’ parents could not have been believers in Jesus Christ when they named their son. We thus need to ask why a Greek couple living in AD 25 would name their son “lover of God?”

This “date problem” is related to the next problem.

THE ASSOCIATION/RELATIONSHIP PROBLEM. Luke was a physician (“the beloved physician” Col. 4:14), which I assume means he was a doctor of some sort. Based on what we read in Acts, he probably was from the city of Troas. Luke’s main “claim to fame” was his close friendship with the apostle Paul. He traveled with Paul on the apostle’s second and third missionary journeys. As far as we can tell, there was nothing else special about Luke as a person. This, however, raises some questions when we consider the personal relationship that needs to have existed between Luke and “most excellent Theophilus.”

Why would “an official of some prominence” befriend a random physician from the town of Troas?
For that matter, why would Luke, a simple physician from Troas, befriend some random “official of some prominence?” It just seems hard to imagine the circumstances of their meeting. Doctors and prominent officials rarely travel in the same circles today, and I suspect it was the same in the mid-first century.
When would Luke have had time to make the acquaintance with this Theophilus and then have had more time to establish a fairly close relationship with him? We have no reason to believe that Luke met Theophilus before he met and joined Paul as the apostle took the gospel to Europe (Acts 16). We can be confident that Luke did not meet Theophilus during his missionary journeys with Paul, for Luke would certainly have mentioned such a meeting in the book of Acts to give a connection to Theophilus. Therefore, Luke and Theophilus must have met and become close acquaintances AFTER the events of Acts 28. But this, too, seems difficult to imagine. How would their meeting come about and why would Luke feel he wanted to dedicate his books to him?
In the first century, people did not travel much and distances were much greater than they are today. Practically speaking, this means that Theophilus would have needed to be geographically near Luke. Daniel developed a relationship with Nebuchadnezzar because he was his advisor for fifty years or so and lived in the king’s court (Daniel 1-4). Paul was acquainted with Felix because Paul was his prisoner and they chatted from time to time (Acts 24). If it had not been for these God-ordained circumstances, Daniel would never have known Nebuchadnezzar and Paul and Felix would never have known one another. In the same way, Luke and Theophilus must have been located near one another. Was there a prominent official named Theophilus near Troas in AD 60-65 who wanted to get to know a believing physician? Seems unlikely.

ANOTHER POSSIBILITY TO CONSIDER

Perhaps no single one of these difficulties is enough to discredit the notion that Theophilus was a flesh-and-blood acquaintance of Luke, but the cumulative effect of all these questions suggests that, if there were another possible understanding of Luke’s intended audience for his gospel and for Acts, we should explore that possibility.

And there is another possibility that is so apparent that it might be overlooked. What if Theophilus was not the proper name of a little-known official in mid-first century Asia Minor who was acquainted with Luke the physician, but instead “theophilus” was the word that Luke chose to describe every one of his intended readers? In other words, what if Luke carefully researched all the details of his gospel and organized all the events of Acts so that every “lover of God,” every believer in the Lord Jesus Christ, “may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught” (Acts 1:4)? What if Luke’s intended audience was not one specific believer named Theophilus but was instead any and every believer who identifies himself as a “lover of God” through Jesus Christ? I believe this is the correct way to understand Luke’s dedications.

As we consider this second possibility, we notice that all the difficulties and problems associated with the first view disappear. If Luke is writing to all lovers of God everywhere, then we no longer need to search for an individual with a highly unusual name. The fact that Luke gives no personal information about “Theophilus” now makes perfect sense, because “theophilus” now includes the three thousand people on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2) and includes Samaritans (Acts 8), an Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8), Cornelius and his family (Acts 10), Lydia and the jailer (Acts 16), barbarians, Scythians, slaves and freemen (Col. 3:11), Paul and Peter and the rest of the apostles, and the hundreds of millions of lovers of God who have been taught (Luke 1:4) about Jesus and who have believed since Christ rose from the dead in AD 30. We now understand that theophilus is not a proper name but is rather a description of every disciple of Jesus whom the Lord will raise up on the last day (John 6:39, 40, 44, 54; 11:24).

CONCLUSION

After considering the difficulties presented by the view that “Theophilus” (Luke 1:3; Acts 1:1) was the name of a specific individual who lived in the mid-first century, and after investigating the other possibility that “theophilus” (translated “lover of God”) was the way Luke described any and every believer who would read his gospel or the book of Acts, we have concluded that Luke addressed his great works to all believers in the Lord Jesus. If you are a lover of God through faith in the Lord Jesus, Luke wrote his gospel and Acts for you “so that you may know the exact truth about the things you have been taught” (Luke 1:4).

Soli Deo gloria rmb 12/22/2023 #685

Debating the contents of the Bible with an atheist

POST OVERVIEW. A tactic for the follower of Jesus to use when debating with an atheist the alleged inconsistencies or contradictions in the Bible.

Ben Shapiro, a committed Jewish person, was debating the issue of biblical slavery with a committed atheist. The atheist seemed to be getting the best of Mr. Shapiro, as he was quoting passages from the Old Testament that suggested either that the God of the Bible condoned slavery or that God contradicted Himself by saying one thing in one passage that seemed to be at odds with something else, which He had said in a different passage. Shapiro argued that God would occasionally accommodate a practice that existed at the time by giving instructions and guidelines about that practice to mitigate the damage (which is close to what a believer would argue about some of these thorny passages in the Old Testament).

It was obvious that both men were brilliant and were extremely skilled in this sort of debate, but perhaps because his opponent had a British accent and Shapiro was American, it seemed that the Brit’s arguments were superior.

But how should a disciple of Jesus address these kind of questions from an atheist? What do we do when an atheist brings up these difficult passages from the Bible?

PRINCIPLE: If the Bible is the subject of debate, the atheist’s denial of the existence of God spells doom to their every argument.

Let me explain.

In this debate with Ben Shapiro, the atheist cited the example of Deut. 21 where women of conquered nations could be taken as wives after they had been cleansed of all their uncleanness and had mourned their family for a month. But in Numbers 31, it was only the virgins of Midian who were allowed to live. (The text implies that these virgins could become wives of the Israelite men.) The atheist argued that it seemed arbitrary and contradictory that, in one situation, any woman, virgin or nonvirgin, could be spared if she were attractive, but in another situation, it was only the virgins that could be spared.

THE TACTIC PRESENTED

Whether these were the exact passages that the atheist chose and whether or not his argument was a strong one is irrelevant to the tactic I am proposing. It is the fact that the atheist is arguing from the Bible that gives the believer all the ammunition that he needs to end the debate.

Here is the dialog I would use.

BELIEVER: “So, you are saying that what the Bible says here in these passages seems to be arbitrary and/or contradictory, is that right?” (NOTE: Try to use your opponent’s own words here when you are introducing your point.)

ATHEIST: “Yes, that’s right.”

BELIEVER: “And, at least as far as we can understand it, this presents at least a logical problem and may constitute a moral problem. Would you agree with that?”

ATHEIST: “I would agree with that.”

BELIEVER: “I think I see your point. (PAUSE) I notice that you have been quoting from the Bible. In your opinion, who wrote the Bible?”

Now the atheist is in an impossible position. At this point, he has one of two choices. He either must acknowledge that the Bible was written entirely by men independent of any help or inspiration from God, which would be an answer consistent with his atheistic worldview, or he must concede that God inspired the Bible and is therefore responsible for its contents, an answer that would deny and demolish his atheism.

Without the time to think about the implications of this answer, the atheist will almost certainly opt for a reply like,

ATHEIST: “Well, the Bible was written by ordinary Jewish men a long time ago.” Something like that.

BELIEVER: “So, if I understand you correctly, your opinion is that God did not inspire the writing of the Bible. In fact, you would say that the Bible came into being independent of God. Is that correct?”

ATHEIST: “Yes, of course.”

CHECKMATE.

BELIEVER: “Well, if God was not the author of the Bible, then He also did not write the passages that confuse you. God cannot be held responsible for something He did not write. In fact, if God did not write the Bible, then He really should not be a part of any conversation about the Bible. If God did not inspire the Bible, then any difficulties you have with what the Bible says do not involve God at all but involve whoever it was that wrote the passages that confuse you. Bringing up these passages from the Bible, which, according to you, were written by some unknown Jewish men a long time ago, is really a futile exercise. Because what point could we possibly be making – if, in fact, God did not write the Bible.” (PAUSE)

BELIEVER: “I, on the other hand, am of the opinion that the Bible is breathed out by the God of our Lord Jesus Christ and that every word of this book is true BECAUSE it is God-breathed. My inability to understand every detail of this book from the mind of God does not mean that the book is somehow flawed. It simply means that God’s thoughts are higher than my thoughts.

“So, you have no point in debating the contents of the Bible, because any perceived difficulties are simply the flawed writings of ordinary men, and I believe that all the contents of the Bible are true and without error. It seems to me that our debate is over.”

Soli Deo gloria rmb 12/14/2023 #683

Isaiah Series 01: Understanding Isaiah’s role as prophet

POST OVERVIEW. The first post in “The Isaiah Series,” a series of devotional studies based on selected passages from Isaiah 41-66. Each devotional study will seek to reveal the beauty and the power of Isaiah’s prophecy and will interpret the meaning of the passage so that the disciple of Jesus is encouraged.

This study will serve both as a preamble for the series and as a description the role of the prophet in biblical prophecy.

This post inaugurates what I hope to be a series of devotional studies covering the writings of Isaiah from chapter 41 through the end of the book in chapter 66.

THE ROLE OF THE PROPHET IN BIBLICAL PROPHECY

The prophecy of Isaiah is some of the finest prose ever penned in terms of its rhetorical quality. The imagery Isaiah evokes and the mystery and power of the LORD that he conveys are breathtaking. But Isaiah is not the focus of his book. In fact, for all the accolades that could be heaped on this man, Isaiah’s personal characteristics and his own thoughts and opinions disappear and are rendered inoperative as the LORD’s voice thunders forth His divine truth. For all his literary talent, Isaiah the prophet was merely the human conduit through whom the LORD spoke His message. The son of Amoz became a chosen instrument, an amanuensis appointed to precisely record the words dictated to him by the Spirit of the living God. For we know that “all Scripture is God-breathed” (2 Tim. 3:16), and if God breathes out the Word, then His scribe must merely record what he hears. We also know that the Old Testament prophets often did not understand what they themselves wrote but obediently wrote God’s Word as they received it, knowing that God would use His Word for His glory (1 Peter 1:10-12). Finally we know that God’s Word is sure because it is not made up by an act of human will but was written by “men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God” (2 Peter 1:19-21).

And so it is that when we read the powerful words of Isaiah’s prophecy, we read not the mere musings of a Hebrew man who lived in the 8^th century before Christ, but we read the words of the eternal God. Through His chosen instrument the infinite God infinitely condescends to communicate His truth to His people. The goal of these studies is to understand the message of the LORD in these passages so that we may be edified and we may glorify the LORD with our lives.

Soli Deo gloria rmb 12/4/2023 #680

A soldier in active service (2 Timothy 2:4)

POST OVERVIEW. A devotional study of 2 Timothy 4:2.

No soldier in active service entangles himself in the affairs of everyday life, so that he may please the one who enlisted him as a soldier. – 2 Timothy 2:4 (NASB)

SOLDIER. Paul’s instructions in this verse are directed very narrowly to a specific kind of person. The exhortation that follows is first of all exclusively for soldiers. Only soldiers are being addressed. If you are not a soldier, this verse does not concern you. In Paul’s mind, the world is made up of soldiers and not-soldiers. Here he is writing to soldiers.

What is a soldier? What does Paul have in mind? The definition of soldier here would need to connect with the preceding verse where Paul tells Timothy to “suffer hardship with me as a good soldier of Christ Jesus” (2:3). A good soldier, then, is a disciple of Jesus who willingly suffers hardship for Jesus’ sake. “Suffering hardship” means consistently making choices according to the instructions and the intentions of the soldier’s commanding officer in disregard of any consequent personal pain , loss, dishonor, or sacrifice. The good soldier of Christ Jesus does not seek hardship, but neither does the good soldier avoid it. Rather, the presence or absence of hardship has been removed from the good soldier’s consideration.

So in this verse Paul is addressing those who are soldiers according to these terms. Are you a good soldier of Christ Jesus? What is your attitude toward voluntary hardship? Is your obedience to the Lord conditioned by what it will cost you? Only good soldiers need to read on.

But actually there does exist another group of disciples whom we could call “the not-yet soldiers.” These are those disciples who long to be “good soldiers,” who long to shed the rags of timidity and to discard the false safety of compromises and small disobediences and instead to put on the mantle of a soldier and charge out into the mission where your only concern is obedience to the King. If you have a burning desire to become a good soldier, then let Paul’s words fan your desire into a flame (Psalm 37:4; 2 Tim. 1:6).

We have spent some time defining a (good) soldier of Christ Jesus (2:3) because we need to determine if 2 Tim. 2:4 is written for us. Paul is not writing to all believers here, because not all believers are “good soldiers” according to this definition. Paul would desire that all disciples were soldiers, but the reality is that all are not, so Paul makes his first “cut.”

A SOLDIER IN ACTIVE SERVICE. But now Paul introduces another qualification to further narrow the funnel. As Paul knows that, among disciples, there are soldiers and there are not-soldiers, so also there are soldiers in active service and there are soldiers not in active service. So all “not-soldiers” have been excluded and now all soldiers not in active service are cut from the team.

What does it mean “to be in active service?” In a military sense, a soldier in active service is one who has been trained and equipped to be useful as a soldier and who has subsequently been deployed by his commanding office to accomplish a specific mission. His identity as a soldier compels him to be in active service and impels him toward the front lines. He lives for a mission. This is a military soldier in active service.

What, then, is Paul’s message or instruction when he speaks to Timothy as a soldier of Christ Jesus? What is the image that comes to mind for the disciple of Jesus who longs to be a soldier “in active service?” It turns out that the analogy between soldier and disciple works very well. Like the soldier, the disciple is aware that he has been deployed by his commanding officer, the Lord Jesus Christ, to accomplish the specific mission of the Great Commission (Matt. 28:19-20). His identity as a disciple of Jesus compels him to be conscious of his Commander’s mission and impels him to proclaim Jesus to the world as His witness (Acts 1:8). The disciple lives for the gospel. For the disciple in active service, Christ is his life (Phil. 1:21; Col. 3:4). He longs to be useful to the Master, prepared for any good work (2 Tim. 2:21).

DOES NOT ENTANGLE HIMSELF IN THE AFFAIRS OF EVERYDAY LIFE. Now we come to the heart of the verse and to the vital instruction that Paul is going to give to Timothy and to all disciple-soldiers in active service. Paul’s words are at once an exhortation and a warning. “Soldier, never entangle yourself in civilian affairs.”

IDENTITY. You are not a civilian, you are a soldier. Therefore, you are to live the life of a soldier, which is a life of discipline, self-control, rigor, and training.

The affairs of civilian life will dull your preparedness and distract you from your mission. Once you have tasted the ease, comfort, luxury, and safety that are part of the everyday life of a civilian, your zeal for pleasing the Master as a soldier who is dangerous to the enemy will begin to erode. The danger of everyday life is that you begin to resent the hardship of the soldier’s life. When the Commander calls you to a new mission, He finds that you are no longer eager to follow orders that involve hardship or risk. Ease and luxury and, most dangerous of all, safety begin to be values, and duty and suffering for our King gradually lose their appeal.

The life of a soldier is a life stripped down to the bare essentials. “But godliness is actually a means of great gain. If we have food and covering, with these we will be content” (1 Tim. 6:6, 8). The life of a disciple is a simple life. “Make it your ambition is to lead a quiet life and attend to your own business and work with your hands” (1 Thess. 4:11). As disciples of Jesus, we do not want to be “led astray from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ” (2 Cor. 11:3). As the disciple grows better equipped and more useful to the Master, the complications of his life are willingly sloughed off and discarded as unnecessary weight.

PLEASE THE ONE WHO ENLISTED HIM AS A SOLDIER. The soldier’s purpose is to “please the one who enlisted him as a soldier” (2:4). Getting involved in the entanglements of everyday life will cause you to lose sight of your purpose, to question your purpose, and to compromise your purpose. The sweetness of pleasing the Master by being dangerous to the domain of darkness gradually loses its satisfaction.

The soldier needs to remember the words of Hebrews 12:1: “Therefore, since we have so great a cloud of witnesses surrounding us, let us also lay aside every weight and the sin which so easily entangles us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, fixing our eyes on Jesus.”

CONCLUSION

The disciple of Jesus is a soldier in active service, joyfully enduring hardship as he battles the domain of darkness, proclaims the glories of Christ, and avoids the entanglements of the world.

Soli Deo gloria rmb 11/1/2023 #677

Matthew 24:34 – An exegetical study

POST OVERVIEW. In Matthew 24-25, we find the so-called Olivet Discourse, where our Lord tells His disciples of the things that are to come in the future.

This is a long and technical article that does a detailed exegesis of Matthew 24:34 in order to discover the correct understanding of this difficult verse.

Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. – Matthew 24:34 (NASB)

AN INTERPRETIVE CHALLENGE

The reason I want to study this verse is because it presents us with an interpretive challenge. Jesus, the Son of God, is the Person speaking in this verse. Because Jesus is the Son of God, we know that He is always correct when He speaks. Yet, as we read this verse, we encounter a situation in which it seems that Jesus may not be correct. What do I mean?

THREE SIGNIFICANT FUTURE EVENTS

In response to questions from His disciples (Matthew 24:3), Jesus has just spoken to them about three significant future events, namely, about the destruction of the temple and of Jerusalem, which occurred in AD 70, and about the events of the end of the age and the sign of His coming (παρουσία), both of which have not occurred to this day. Since we are in the 21^st century almost two thousand years after Jesus spoke these words, it is obvious that “this generation” (24:34) has long since passed away, yet it seems that “all these things” have not taken place. So, this is the interpretive challenge: “How do we reconcile Jesus’ words with our historical reality?”

TWO POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS

As we consider this quandary, it becomes apparent that there are only two possible solutions to this dilemma. Either the correct understanding of “this generation” in Matthew 24:34 reveals that Jesus spoke truth in this verse, or the correct understanding of “all these things” reveals the truth of Jesus’ words. In our study, we will examine each of these possible solutions to determine which one is the most reasonable.

AN OVERVIEW OF MATTHEW 24:2-35

Before we begin to dig deep into Matthew 24:34, however, it would be helpful to get an overview of Matthew 24:2-35 so that we can see the context of these verses and better understand our Lord’s teaching about the end of the age.

Jesus begins the dialog (Matt. 24:2) by making a prophecy about the destruction of the temple buildings. We know that the temple was destroyed by the Romans in AD 70, approximately forty years after Jesus spoke these words. The Greek and the English (NASB) of Matt. 24:2 follow.

Matthew 24:2

ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, Οὐ βλέπετε ταῦτα πάντα; ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, οὐ μὴ ἀφεθῇ ὧδε λίθος ἐπὶ λίθον ὃς οὐ καταλυθήσεται.

And He said to them, “Do you not see all these things? Truly I say to you, not one stone here will be left upon another, which will not be torn down.”

Matthew 24:3

This is a key verse in the discourse, because here the disciples ask the questions that will form the basis for Jesus’ prophecies about the future. The disciples ask three questions in Matt. 24:3 – “When . . . what . . . what?”

Just as an aside, it is likely that the disciples thought they were asking about one event with three different features. That is, they probably assumed that the destruction of the temple (“these things”), Jesus’ coming, and the end of the age would happen simultaneously in one cataclysmic event. In fact, however, they were asking questions about three distinct events.

Prompted by Jesus’ words about the destruction of the temple and “all these things” in 24:2, the disciples ask, “When will (all) these things happen?” Here the disciples were asking the question, “When will the temple be destroyed?”
Next, they ask, “What will be the sign of your coming?” Here the disciples were asking for the signs that will occur just before or during Jesus’ coming (παρουσία).
Then they ask, “(What will be the sign) of the end of the age?” In other words, “What extraordinary events will occur in the last days of the last days that tell us that the end is near?”

These are the three questions the disciples asked Jesus, and these are the three questions that Jesus answers in Matthew 24:5-35. The disciples asked, “When . . . what . . . what?” and Jesus will answer their questions with “When . . . what . . . what.”

The verses that address each of the three questions are as follows:

Matt. 24:15-20 and 24:34 address the destruction of the temple (and of Jerusalem) (“all these things” in 24:2 and “these things” in 24:3). In 24:15-20, Jesus tells what will occur in AD 70 so that “not one stone will be left upon another” (24:2). Then in 24:34 Jesus tells when “all these things” will occur.
Matt. 24:5-14 and 24:21-28 tells what the signs of the end of the age will be. These are the extraordinary events that will occur which indicate the end is near. Within these verses there seems to be an intensification of evil as the end approaches. For example, 24:5-8 twice hints that things will get worse (24:6, 8), and then in 24:9-14 things do get worse until “then the end will come” (24:14). In 24:21-22, the “great tribulation” occurs and those days must be cut short to allow some of the elect to be saved. Finally, in 24:27-28, Jesus makes clear that His coming (“the coming of the Son of Man”) will mark the end of the age.
Matt. 24:29-31 explicitly tells what the signs of the coming (παρουσία) of the Son of Man will be.

Now we will examine the two possible solutions.

FIRST POSSIBLE SOLUTION: CHANGE THE MEANING OF “THIS GENERATION”

In the first possible solution, the assumption is made that “all these things” includes all the events Jesus has mentioned in the discourse so far in 24:2-31. So, according to this view, “all these things” is interpreted to include the destruction of the temple in AD 70 (24:15-20) plus the events of the end of the age (24:5-14 and 24:21-28) plus the sign of the coming (παρουσία) of the Son of Man (24:29-31). We also know that, according to the Lord Jesus (24:34), “all these things” will take place before “this generation” passes away. Thus, the interpretive task for this possible solution is to find a meaning for “this generation” that allows “all these things” to take place before “this generation” passes away.

How would we go about completing this “interpretive task?” In considering the phrase “this generation,” one well-known Bible teacher, who holds to the view that “all these things” includes all the events Jesus has mentioned in the discourse so far in 24:2-31, explained his position this way: “ ‘This generation’ in 24:34 cannot refer to the generation living at that (sic) time of Christ, for ‘all these things’ (vv. 15-31) did not ‘take place’ in their lifetimes; rather (it is) a reference to the generation alive at the time when those final hard labor pains (v. 8) begin.” To state this position in other words, we might say that, when referring to “this generation” in Matt. 24:34, Jesus was not speaking about “this generation” at all but was speaking about “that generation” who would be living many years in the future.

A SOLUTION THAT IS NOT A SOLUTION

In the attempt to maintain the necessary condition that Jesus is always true in His prophecies, this proposed solution has ignored the plain meaning of the inspired text of Matt. 24:34 and has imposed another meaning instead. In the inspired text, our Lord said, “This generation (Greek ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη) will not pass away until . . .” The only proper meaning of “this generation” in this verse is as a reference to the people who were living at the time Jesus spoke these words. The following observations support this statement.

When speaking in terms of time, the word “this” (οὗτος in the Greek) refers to now or the current time. For example, Joshua 24:15 says, “Choose you this day whom you will serve,” meaning “Choose now.” By contrast, in temporal terms the word “that” (ἐκεῖνος in the Greek) refers to not-now. For example, in eschatology, the end of the age will occur on that day, which is not-now. Therefore, when Jesus speaks of “this generation,” He is referring to the generation living while He was speaking, that is, the generation living “now.”
In Matthew 24:2-35, in every instance when our Lord speaks about the future, He uses the word “that” (plural of “that” is “those”). We read in 24:19 about “those days” in the future when Jerusalem is being destroyed. Again in 24:22 we twice encounter “those days” talking about the future days of the great tribulation. In 24:29, “those days” also refers to the future. Thus, if in 24:34 Jesus had intended to refer to a future generation, He would have spoken of “that generation.” Since Jesus speaks instead of “this generation,” we conclude that He is referring to the generation living while He was on earth.
Aside from 24:34, the phrase “this generation” appears five other times in the gospel of Matthew, in 11:16; 12:41, 42, 45; and 23:36. The context of the first four appearances requires that Jesus is referring to the generation to whom He was speaking. In the fifth appearance (23:36), while it is not required that Jesus is speaking just to His own contemporaries, it is certain that He is not speaking to an unspecified group of people living thousands of years in the future. This evidence indicates that, in 24:34, Jesus is referring to the generation living when He made this prophecy.

This cumulative evidence leads to the conclusion that, when our Lord said, “This generation (Greek ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη) will not pass away,” He was certainly referring to the people who were living at the time He spoke these words. Since that is the case, we are forced to reject the first proposed solution and turn our attention to the second alternative.

“UNTIL ALL THESE THINGS TAKE PLACE”

In our study so far, we have reached an exegetical dead-end in trying to interpret “this generation” in any sense other than the normal, natural meaning. We have concluded that “this generation” is “the generation living at the time Jesus spoke these words.” Therefore we will now consider the other possible solution, namely, a correct understanding of the phrase “all these things.”

Admittedly, at first reading of Matt. 24:34, it seems that, when Jesus says “all these things” in this verse, He is referring to all the events that He has mentioned since the start of the discourse. But we will discover that, although this might be our first assumption, this is not the required interpretation.

WHAT WE KNOW SO FAR. We know, from our previous work, that “this generation” refers to the generation living when Jesus spoke these words. We also know, from 24:34, that “all these things” will take place before “this generation” passes away. So, to put this into concrete terms, we know that “all these things” will take place within the time span of a normal generation, say, the next thirty to fifty years. We therefore conclude that “all these things,” whatever that includes, will take place between AD 60 and AD 80.

This deduction is especially helpful because, in Matt. 24:3, the disciples had asked Jesus a “when” question regarding the destruction of the temple. The disciples’ question, “When will these things happen?” in 24:3 was prompted by Jesus’ statements in 24:2 about the destruction of “all these things” in the temple. We had mentioned earlier that, when the disciples asked, “When . . . what . . . what?” in 24:3, Jesus had answered “When . . . what . . . what” in 24:5-35 but, until 24:34, Jesus has not given the disciples a “when” answer. But now we observe that the only place in the discourse where Jesus offers a “when” answer is here in 24:34. That is, Jesus’ only guidance on when the temple will be destroyed is here in 24:34 where He says, “Before this generation passes away.” Of course, we also know something the disciples did not know. We know that the temple was, in fact, destroyed in AD 70, about forty years after Jesus spoke these words and therefore also before “this generation” passed away.

THE INTERPRETIVE TASK. All of this leads us to a “crisis of interpretation.” From what we know and what we have just deduced, we are persuaded that, in Matthew 24:34, Jesus is only prophesying the destruction of the temple in AD 70. Thus, the interpretive task becomes justifying our claim that “all these things” in Matthew 24:34 applies only to the destruction of the temple and does not include Jesus’ coming or the end of the age. We will offer three pieces of evidence which justify the claim.

EVIDENCE / THE CASE

Our first piece of evidence involves Matt. 24:33 and this verse’s role in the discourse.

³³so, you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door. – Matthew 24:33 (NASB)

EVIDENCE OF MATTHEW 24:33. In Matthew 24:33, it is apparent that Jesus is answering the disciples’ question (24:3) about His return and, by association, about the end of the age, but there is nothing in this verse to suggest that He is saying anything about the destruction of the temple. This is especially informative for us since we now know that the destruction of the temple and the return of Jesus are separated by at least two millennia. This means that when Jesus refers to “all these things” in 24:33, He is only referring to “the sign of Your coming and of the end of the age” (24:3).

We can also see in 24:33 that Jesus is answering a “what” question, not a “when” question. The phrase, “When you see all these things,” refers to “what will be the signs” in 24:3, but it supplies no information about when. That means that from Matthew 24:5-33, Jesus has not answered the disciples’ question about “when” the temple will be destroyed. We suggest that the missing answer is supplied in Matthew 24:34.

TEXTUAL COMPARISON OF MATTHEW 24:2 AND 24:34. To review, in Matt. 24:2 Jesus predicts the destruction of the temple when “all these things” will be torn down. Then in 24:3, the disciples ask Jesus, “When will these things happen?” certainly in reference to the destruction of the temple. In 24:15-20, Jesus details what the destruction of the temple and Jerusalem will be like and finally, in 24:34, He tells the disciples when this event will happen. The verses are below. (NASB – any emphasis is mine)

And He said to them, “Do you not see all these things? Truly I say to you, not one stone here will be left upon another, which will not be torn down.” – Matthew 24:2

As He was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things happen, and what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?” – Matthew 24:3

“Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.” – Matthew 24:34

COMMENTS / OBSERVATIONS ABOUT THE TEXT. Notice that the identical phrase, “all these things,” appears in both 24:2 and in 24:34. This could be interpreted as a rhetorical device to connect the two verses and to show that “all these things,” refers to the same things in both verses; namely, the destruction of the temple.

Also observe that in both 24:2 and in 24:34 Jesus uses the phrase, “Truly I say to you.” This is significant for two reasons. First, this phrase causes 24:2 and 24:34-35 to stand out and to show that they serve as bookends to this section (Matt. 24:2-35) of the Olivet Discourse about the events of the end times. The purpose of these “bookend” verses is to open the section and then to conclude the section. Here, Jesus opens the section predicting the destruction of the temple and concludes the section by telling when that destruction will take place.

But second, in this section of the Olivet Discourse (24:2-35), “Truly I say to you” appears only twice, only in 24:2 and in 24:34. As above with the phrase “all these things,” so also here this could be interpreted as a rhetorical device to connect the two verses and to show that they refer to the same things; namely, to the destruction of the temple.

These observations suggest that there are textual reasons to think that 24:34 is referring only to the destruction of the temple.

JESUS’ LIMITED KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE TIMING OF HIS COMING. The third piece of evidence in favor of understanding “all these things” in 24:34 as referring only to the destruction of the temple has to do with what Jesus says about His own knowledge about the timing of His coming (παρουσία). Note that in Matt. 24:36, Jesus says that “Of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone.” Jesus is clearly speaking about His coming (παρουσία) and He admits that even He, the Son of God, does not know the timing of His coming or the timing of the end of the age. He therefore cannot make predictions about when all these things (including His coming) will take place. We conclude that, in Matthew 24:34, Jesus cannot be declaring that His coming will occur before this generation passes away, because He has admitted (24:36) that He does not know when His coming will occur. Because Jesus cannot tell the “when” of His coming or the “when” of the end of the age, the only “when” He can be giving in Matthew 24:34 is the timing of the destruction of the temple. So we conclude that all these things in 24:34 refers to all the events around the destruction of the temple.

SUMMARY

Based on the work presented in this article, we conclude that all these things in Matthew 24:34 refers only to the events surrounding the destruction of the temple and does not refer to either the coming of Jesus or to the events of the end of the age.

Soli Deo gloria rmb 10/31/2023 #676

Justified by faith or by works? (James 2:14-26) – Part 6

POST OVERVIEW. The sixth in a series of articles on James 2:14-26. The purpose of these articles is to give the believer a correct understanding of this passage by providing a number of different approaches to this text. The goal is that, through these studies, the believer will see that James’ teaching here does not conflict with the New Testament’s doctrine of justification by faith. (See also Post #652, 5/24,2023; Post #653, 5/25/2023; Post #654, 5/30/2023; Post #655, 6/5/2023; Post #658, 6/9/2023.) This article will compare the teaching about Abraham and Rahab in Hebrews 11 with parallel teaching in James 2:21-25.

We are in the midst of a deep dive into James 2:14-26. The reason we are going into considerable detail in studying this passage is that James 2 contains teaching about being “justified by works” that appears to be in direct conflict with the teaching of Paul on justification by faith alone. False teachers and the Catholic church have capitalized on this apparent conflict and have insisted that our human “works” merit for us our salvation. Our goal in this series is to demonstrate from a variety of different angles that there is nothing in this passage in James 2 to suggest that our “works” contribute anything to our salvation. In other words, James is in complete agreement with the rest of the New Testament in declaring that justification (being declared righteous) is by faith alone, apart from works (of the Law).

REFERRING TO THE HALL OF FAME OF FAITH IN HEBREWS 11

This next study will refer to Hebrews 11, the “hall of fame of faith,” and compare what is said there about Abraham and Rahab with what James also says about Abraham and Rahab in James 2:21-25. From this investigation, we will discover, once again, that James is not teaching a new doctrine of salvation by works that conflicts with Paul’s gospel. But before we begin our investigation of these texts, we need to make some comments about Hebrews 11.

COMMENTS ON HEBREWS 11. Hebrews 11 is a chapter devoted to the “works” that selected Old Testament believers did which manifested their genuine faith. “By faith” is the English phrase that is repeated eighteen (18) times in the chapter. This phrase indicates that these Old Testament characters already possessed saving faith, because you cannot act “by faith” if you do not already possess faith. This means that all the characters in this chapter had already been “justified” (i.e., declared righteous) by faith before they performed their works of faith. Then, already possessing saving faith, these men and women took dramatic action (“works”) that both required saving faith and manifested saving faith. Thus we see that each one of the characters in Hebrews 11 was “justified by works” in the same sense that Abraham and Rahab were “justified by works” in James 2. Their radical obedience to the Lord provided visible evidence that they were already believers.

ABRAHAM. Now we will look specifically at Hebrews 11:17 about Abraham.

By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was offering up his only begotten son. – Hebrews 11:17

First, it is apparent that this verse is about Abraham’s sacrifice of Isaac on Mount Moriah from Genesis 22. Next, we observe that Abraham acted “by faith,” indicating that his sacrifice of Isaac was not done to merit his own salvation or to obtain righteousness from God, because he already possessed saving faith. Third, the Scripture says that Abraham was “tested.” God tested Abraham’s faith to determine its genuineness and its strength. And, because Abraham already had faith, he responded to the test with extreme obedience.

Having examined Hebrews 11:17 about Abraham, we now turn to the identical event described in James 2:21.

Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar? – James 2:21

First, this is obviously about Abraham’s sacrifice of Isaac from Genesis 22. Second, we read that Abraham was “justified by works.” From our study of Hebrews 11:17, we know that, at the time of this sacrifice of Isaac, Abraham already possessed saving faith and had already been declared righteous by faith (confirm James 2:23 quoting Genesis 15:6). The obedient offering of Isaac (a “work”) “justified” Abraham in that it gave an astonishing display of the strong faith he possessed. So, in the case of Abraham, we see once again that “justified by works” has nothing to do with meriting salvation by human effort.

RAHAB. Our procedure for studying Rahab the harlot will be the same as for Abraham.

By faith Rahab the harlot did not perish along with those who were disobedient, after she had welcomed the spies in peace. – Hebrews 11:31

First, Rahab obviously acted “by faith,” indicating that she already possessed saving faith before the spies arrived. When we investigate the background of this verse from the book of Joshua, we see that, by the time “she had welcomed the spies in peace,” Rahab had already declared her allegiance to the LORD (Joshua 2:9-11) and she had identified with the people of God (Joshua 2:21). Clearly, she was a woman of faith before the spies arrived in Jericho. Finally, we note that Rahab “did not perish with those who were disobedient.” Significant here is that she was obedient and she lived.

Now we turn to James 2:25 and his verse about Rahab.

In the same way, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way? – James 2:25

“Rahab the harlot was also justified by works.” James is saying that, just as Abraham was justified by works, so also Rahab was justified by works. And how was Abraham justified by his “works?” His radical obedience (offering Isaac at the LORD’s command) “gave an astonishing display of his strong faith.” In the same way, Rahab’s courageous obedience in the face of dangerous consequences “gave an astonishing display of the strong faith that she possessed.” So, in this way, Rahab was “justified by works.”

CONCLUSION. A comparison of James 2:21 and 2:25 with parallel verses in Hebrews 11 has revealed, once again, that James is not teaching an errant doctrine of imputed righteousness by human works but is stating the biblical truth that genuine faith is “justified” by actions which display that faith.

Soli Deo gloria rmb 6/13/2023 #659

Justified by faith or by works? (James 2:14-26) – Part 5

POST OVERVIEW. The fifth in a series of articles on James 2:14-26. The purpose of these articles is to give the believer a correct understanding of this passage by providing a number of different approaches to this text. The goal is that, through these studies, the believer will see that James’ teaching here does not conflict with the New Testament’s doctrine of justification by faith. (See also Post #652, 5/24,2023; Post #653, 5/25/2023; Post #654, 5/30/2023; Post #655, 6/5/2023.) This article will focus on the abundant New Testament teaching declaring that justification (“being declared righteous”) is by faith completely apart from “works.”

We are in the midst of a series of studies of James 2:14-26. These studies are going into considerable detail because this Scripture has unsettled many genuine believers (including the noble Martin Luther) and has been misused by false teachers and by the Catholic church to insist that our human “works” merit for us our salvation. Our goal in this series is to demonstrate from a variety of different angles that there is nothing in this passage to suggest that our “works” contribute anything to our salvation. In other words, James is in complete agreement with the rest of the New Testament in declaring that justification (being declared righteous) is by faith alone, apart from works (of the Law).

So far, our case has included a careful study of the word “justify” determining how James uses that word. We have also studied the concept of “works,” especially regarding the timing of “works” relative to a person’s conversion. Our most recent post looked at the personal relationship that James had with Paul. This post will examine the weight of biblical evidence.

A MISTAKEN IMPRESSION ABOUT EVIDENCE

One of the reasons this passage disturbs genuine believers has to do with a mistaken impression about the biblical evidence for the doctrine of justification by faith. This “mistaken impression” goes something like this. Perhaps in a Bible study or perhaps in a discussion about religious beliefs or doctrines, someone may comment about the teaching in James 2:21-25, in which James explicitly says that Abraham was justified by works (2:21). You open your Bible and read James 2:21 and, by golly, that is what it says. Then the person will point out that 2:22 says that faith and works go together to perfect faith and 2:24 explicitly says, “a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.” Finally, 2:25 says, “Rahab the harlot was justified by works.” Not only has James said “justified by works” multiple times, but that seems to be his whole point. By this teaching procedure, you have gotten the “mistaken impression” that there is a contradiction in the Bible because there seems to be a good amount of evidence for justification by works. What do we do now?

MIGHTY IN THE SCRIPTURES

For now we are setting aside the other studies we have done and are just wrestling with the evidence question. Does the Bible contradict itself? Is there clear and equal evidence for a man being justified by faith and for a man being justified by works? The surest way to address these types of challenges and to answer questions about what the Scripture does and does not say is to be familiar with the Bible. There is simply no substitute for knowing the content and the meaning of the Scriptures in vivid detail. What does the Bible say about “that?” Can you give me chapter and verse or can you at least find it quickly? If not, why should I believe what you say? It was said of Apollos that “he was an eloquent man, mighty in the Scriptures” (Acts 18:24). God will use a person who is mighty in the Scriptures, and He used Apollos in Achaia, where “he powerfully refuted the Jews in public, demonstrating by the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ” (18:28). We would do well to follow Apollos’ example.

So we need to know our Bibles well so that we are not easily unsettled or knocked off our doctrinal foundation. Paul exhorted Titus to find Cretan elders, men who “will be able to exhort in sound doctrine and refute those who contradict” (Titus 1:9). In other words, find men who know their Bibles well. Paul instructed Timothy to be “a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth” (2 Tim. 2:15). A person who can accurately handle their Bible is one who will not be ashamed when the false teachers speak up.

PRESENTING THE EVIDENCE

In light of this principle of knowing our Bibles well, we are going to present three classes of evidence to correct our “mistaken impression” above. First, we will present verses which demonstrate that “works” do not justify. Second, we will cite Scriptures which teach that, after conversion (i.e., salvation), “good works” or “good deeds” are mandatory. Third, we will give New Testament evidence that justification is by faith.

WE ARE NOT JUSTIFIED (DECLARED RIGHTEOUS) BY WORKS.

Romans 3:20. “By the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight.”

Romans 3:28. “A man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law.”

Romans 4:6. “God credits righteousness apart from works.”

Galatians 2:16. (3X) “knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law, since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified.

Galatians 3:10. “For as many as are of the works of the Law are under a curse.”

Ephesians 2:8-9. “For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; ⁹not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.

AFTER CONVERSION, GOOD WORKS ARE EXPECTED. (JAMES’ POSITION)

Matthew 5:16. “Let your light shine before men that they may see your good works and glorify your Father who is in heaven.”

Ephesians 2:10. “For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.

1 Timothy 2:10. “women to adorn themselves by means of good works, as is proper for women making a claim to godliness.”

Titus 2:7. “In all things show yourself to be an example of good deeds.”

Titus 2:14. “(Christ Jesus,) who gave Himself for us to purify for Himself a people for His own possession, zealous for good deeds.”

Titus 3:8. “those who have believed God will be careful to engage in good deeds.

Hebrews 10:24. “Let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds.”

1 Peter 1:7. “so that the proof of your faith, even though tested by fire, may be found to result in praise and glory and honor (“works”) at the revelation of Jesus Christ.”

JUSTIFICATION (IMPUTED RIGHTEOUSNESS) IS THROUGH/BY FAITH

Romans 3:22. “righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe.”

Romans 3:28. “A man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law.”

Romans 4:3. “Abraham believed God (faith) and it was credited as righteousness.”

Romans 4:5. “To the one who believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness.”

Romans 5:1. “Having been justified by faith . . .”

Galatians 2:16. (2X) “knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law, since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified.

Galatians 3:8. “God justifies the Gentiles by faith.”

Ephesians 2:8. “For by grace you have been saved (justified) through faith.”

WEIGHING THE EVIDENCE

Remember the reason that we went through this exercise. We are weighing the New Testament evidence supporting, on the one hand, justification (i.e., being declared righteous) by faith alone apart from “works” against the evidence supporting, on the other hand, justification (i.e., being declared righteous) by a person’s “works” plus faith. The results of our investigation overwhelmingly favor the positions that:

We are not justified (i.e., declared righteous) by our “works.”
After conversion, the believer is expected to produce “good works” as evidence of his faith. (This is the main point that James is making in 2:14-26.)
A sinner is justified (i.e., declared righteous) by/through faith in Jesus Christ.

In fact, from our investigation we have discovered that the only place where we can find any possible biblical support for the Catholic doctrine of justification by works is by a misunderstanding of James 2:21-25.

CONCLUSION. An evaluation of what the New Testament teaches regarding justification, faith, and “works” reveals that the sinner is justified by faith alone without “works.”

Soli Deo gloria rmb 6/9/2023 #658

Being a neighbor, according to Jesus – Part 1 (Luke 10:25-37)

POST OVERVIEW. Taking a break from our study of James 2:14-26, we will be looking at one of the most famous of Jesus’ parables, the story of “The Good Samaritan” in Luke 10:25-37. This first article focuses on the key question the lawyer asks Jesus and how we are to understand Jesus’ answer.

The gospel of Luke is filled with parables spoken by the Lord Jesus Himself to tell us about mysteries of the kingdom of God. One of the most famous of Jesus’ parables is the story of “The Good Samaritan.” A lawyer (an expert in the Mosaic Law) asks Jesus how a person can “inherit eternal life,” and thus ensues a fascinating dialog. This short series will drill deep into the conversation between the lawyer and Jesus and will explore the meaning and the application of the parable about the traveler from Samaria who helps a fellow traveler. My text will be from the NAS translation of the Bible. I will only quote selected portions of the passage but will assume that the reader is following along in their Bible.

Since Luke writes the scenes of his gospel account “in consecutive order” (Luke 1:3), then we can assume that this encounter between Jesus and the lawyer occurs somewhere in the middle of His earthly ministry. As the scene opens, Jesus has been teaching a group that includes this expert in the Mosaic Law. We do not know exactly what prompts his question, but the lawyer stood up and “put Him to the test” with the question, “Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” (The “rich young ruler” of Luke 18:18ff asks the identical question, so it would be an interesting exercise to study these two dialogs together. See Post #612 on 1/18/2023 for an article on the RYR.) In simple terms, the dialog then goes like this:

First, the lawyer tests Jesus by asking how a person can “inherit eternal life.”
Second, Jesus tests the lawyer by asking him about the Law.
Third, the lawyer answers his own question from what is written in the Law.
Fourth, Jesus confirms that the lawyer’s answer is correct.

Let’s pause here for a second. At this point, Jesus has confirmed the answer to the lawyer’s question. “If you do what the Law demands, then you will inherit eternal life.” (NOTE: It is very interesting that Jesus has indirectly affirmed the theoretical possibility for man to inherit eternal life through the Law.) Therefore, the dialog should end here. But obviously the dialog does not end here. Instead, the lawyer asks Jesus another question. Why? What is going on here?

JESUS’ MEANING

When Jesus confirms the lawyer’s answer (10:27) by saying, “Do this and live,” Jesus means, “Perfectly love the Lord you God and perfectly love your neighbor as yourself, at all times and in all circumstances, from birth till death, and you will live.” Jesus speaks about obeying the Law in absolute terms, in terms of absolute performance without grace. Thus, there are two possible performances – perfect obedience or abject failure. If a person would inherit eternal life through the Law, then that person must themselves fulfill all the Law’s demands. This is what God the Son means when He says, “Do this and you will live.”

THE LAWYER’S UNDERSTANDING

The lawyer’s understanding of “love the Lord your God” and “love your neighbor as yourself” is dramatically different than Jesus’. The lawyer sees obeying the demands of the Law through a relative lens. According to him (or the Pharisee or the scribe), “Do this and live,” means “make sure your performance is relatively good and better than most, and you will achieve eternal life.”

We need to spend a moment here to grasp the chasm that exists between these two ways of thinking. Even though the lawyer and Jesus have agreed on the answer to the lawyer’s question, they are oceans apart in their interpretation of what the answer means. The lawyer is probably a little surprised by how easy it is to inherit eternal life and, at the same time, Jesus knows that He is the only one who will ever fulfill the Law’s demands (Matt. 5:17). The lawyer is fully confident that his performance of the Law is good enough, while Jesus is implicitly teaching the lawyer that his performance will never merit eternal life. Ironically, Jesus’ words that should have served as a severe warning to the lawyer have probably increased the lawyer’s confidence in his self-righteousness.

THE LAWYER’S SECOND QUESTION

At this point, then, the lawyer has received from the Teacher his answer to his first question, the question about eternal life. Love God and love your neighbor and you’re good. So now, if the lawyer can just get a little clarification about loving his neighbor, he should be able to move on. It is curious that the lawyer asks, “Who is my neighbor?” and not, “How do I love my neighbor?” The Law demands that you “love your neighbor as yourself” (Lev. 19:18), but it gives no guidance on how to do that. It is this question, “According to Jesus, how do I love my neighbor as myself?” that prompts Jesus’ parable, and it is to that parable that we turn in our next article.

Soli Deo gloria rmb 6/5/2023 #656

Justified by faith or by works? (James 2:14-26) – Part 3

POST OVERVIEW. The third in a series of articles on James 2:14-26. The purpose of these articles is to give the believer a correct understanding of this passage by providing a number of different approaches to this text. The goal is that, through these studies, the believer will see that James’ teaching here does not conflict with the New Testament’s doctrine of justification by faith. (See also Post #652, 5/24,2023 and Post #653, 5/25/2023.) This fairly long article focuses on the concept of “works.”

This is the third article in a series of studies of James 2:14-26. Let’s take a moment to review where we have been so far, where we are going in this article, and where we hope to go with the rest of the series.

BRIEF REVIEW

In my first post (#652), I had explained the main interpretive difficulty in the passage; namely, that it can seem that, in James 2:14-26, and particularly in 2:21-15, James is contradicting the core teaching of the New Testament about justification by faith. The apostle Paul teaches throughout his epistles that a sinner is “justified” (meaning “declared righteous”) solely on the basis of faith in Jesus Christ. In fact, in Galatians, Paul states that a variation in the gospel on this point is anathema (Gal. 1:8, 9) and that those who preach this “other” gospel are cursed. Because of the New Testament’s teaching on “justified” and on “justification,” “justification by faith alone” became one of the five “Solas” of the Reformation. So, this is not a minor point. In my first post, I had proposed a plan of study that would allow us to examine James 2:14-26 using several different approaches to demonstrate that James is not contradicting any of the Bible’s teaching on what it means to be “justified.”

The second post of the series (#653) had begun to work through the points of the plan of study. Our first piece of information was that the verb “justify” has at least two meanings. Understanding how James uses this verb (and its related terms) in James 2:21-25 helps immensely in defusing the difficulties of the passage.

In this third article, we will focus most of our efforts on understanding the word and the concept of “works.”

THE CONCEPT OF “WORKS”

Broadly speaking, the concept of “works” relates to human effort or accomplishment. “Works” are things which the human does that affect the human’s relationship with the living God, either positively or negatively. The primary factor that determines whether “works” are pleasing to God or are perceived as “filthy rags” (Isaiah 64:6) is whether or not the one doing the “works” has believed in God and has been reconciled with God. In our day, the question would be, “Are you a follower of the Lord Jesus?” If the answer is yes, then your works are generally pleasing to God and, if not, then your works are an offense to Him and a stench in His nostrils.

Let me explain this a bit further and then clarify “works” by giving some examples. I said that the primary factor for evaluating “works” is whether or not the person working is a follower of Jesus. Why is that? It is because, when a person comes to faith in Jesus, their motivation for the “works” dramatically changes.

“WORKS” OF THE UNBELIEVER

When a person is not a believer in Jesus, he may still desire to benefit from religious activity or religious works. (In fact, a good working definition of a religion is a system of man-made human efforts intended to achieve some spiritual benefit.) Thus the unbeliever will do things prescribed by their particular religion to try to relieve themselves of guilt or to impress others or to make themselves good enough to be acceptable to their god(s) or to God. The point is that the one who “works” in this way is using their human effort to earn favor with the gods or with God.

The problem with these “works” is that they are as offensive to the living God as perhaps anything can be. These “works” offer man’s sinful efforts and his religious rituals as the means of making him acceptable to God, when God has sent His only Son Jesus into the world to be crucified on Calvary’s cross as the only acceptable sacrifice for sin and as the only means of reconciling God and man. In Acts 4:12, Peter declares,

“And there is salvation in no one else. For there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved.”

The only way to be justified before our holy God is to bow the knee to Jesus and confess Him as Lord and Savior. But, instead of repenting of sin and submitting to Jesus, man wants to continue in his wicked ways and to continue in his sin, so he offers to God a token performance of “works.” Jesus has willingly come from heaven to earth to die on the cross as the only means of rescue from the wrath of God, but by means of his “works,” man rejects the Son of God and offers instead his sin-stained man-made efforts. This is why Paul and the other New Testament writers and solid Christian churches today vigorously oppose any teaching that claims that we can be declared righteous by our “works.” Justification is by faith alone in Christ alone.

Consider these biblical examples. Cain offered to God his “works” of the fruit of the ground (Genesis 4) and he was rejected by God and perished. It was his religious “works” that Saul of Tarsus offered to God (Phil. 3:5-6), but for the apostle Paul those works were all “rubbish” (3:8). Nadab and Abihu offered religious “works” of strange fire before the LORD and were consumed in the flame (Leviticus 10). In the gospels, the Pharisees had all their religious rules, but Jesus repeatedly called them hypocrites. “Works” can never bring an unbeliever closer to God or forgive the unbeliever of one single sin. Any “work” that is using human effort or human performance to achieve favor with God is cursed.

“WORKS” OF THE BELIEVER

We have just described the “works” of the unbeliever and have seen that they are offensive to God, since they offer human effort as a replacement for the death of Christ. So, if this is the only kind of “works” known in the New Testament and if James is suggesting that the unbeliever is justified (“declared righteous”) by his own “works,” we have a major contradiction and a major problem.

But what we find as we examine Scripture is, first, that there are “works” which are entirely appropriate to the believer and which are, indeed, expected for every believer, and second, that James is certainly not suggesting that an unbeliever is justified (“declared righteous”) by his own “works.” Let’s take these two points one at a time.

In our previous post (#653), we have already demonstrated that, in James 2:21-25, “justified” is used in the sense of the believer giving outward, visible evidence of their inward, invisible faith. Their claim of faith is “justified” when they give sufficient evidence of their faith. But not only does James use “justified” in a non-salvific way in our study passage, but we also see that his examples, Abraham and Rahab, are people who are already believers and who already possess saving faith. (We will address this further when we look at Hebrews 11 in parallel with this passage in James in a later post.) Abraham and Rahab are presented not as examples of those who earned saving faith by their works, but rather as examples of those who demonstrated their saving faith by radical acts of faithfulness.

Finally, then, this passage cannot be about how the unbeliever achieves his own salvation by his “works,” because there is not even an unbeliever anywhere in the passage.

What we see instead is that it is incumbent upon the genuine believer to live a life marked by “good works” which give evidence to his claim of salvation. Calls for “good works” or “good deeds” which attest to an already-possessed salvation are common in the New Testament, and this is certainly the type of “works” that James has in mind here.

The following are places where this type of “works” appears in the New Testament:

Matthew 5:16 “Let men see your good works.”

Ephesians 2:10. It is instructive to read Ephesians 2:9 and 2:10 together. “For by grace you have been saved through faith, not as a result of works. For we are created in Christ Jesus for good works.” “Works” do not save, but “good works” should follow salvation.

Philippians 2:12. “Work out your salvation with fear and trembling.”

Colossians 1:10. Paul prays they would “bear fruit in every good work.”

2 Thessalonians 2:17. “Strengthen your hearts in every good work.”

1 Timothy 2:10; 5:10; 6:18. Good works are a mark of a faithful believer.

2 Timothy 2:21; 3:17. “prepared/equipped for every good work.”

Titus 2:7, 14; 3:8, 14. Believers are to be “zealous for good deeds.”

Hebrews 10:24. “Stimulate one another to love and good deeds.”

1 Peter 2:12. The Gentiles glorify God because of your good deeds.

SUMMARY

We have seen that “works,” which are presented by the unbeliever as an attempt to merit or earn from God a declaration of righteousness (to be “justified”), are offensive to God and are condemned because these “works” are offered instead of faith in the crucified Christ.

We have also seen that “good works,” which are produced in and by the believer as a visible manifestation (a “justification”) of their invisible faith in Jesus, are expected and are approved by God because these “good works” are wrought through the power of the Holy Spirit.

It is this latter category of “works” that James has in view in James 2:14-26.

Soli Deo gloria rmb 5/30/2023 #654

Roy's Reflections

Musings and thoughts on biblical themes