GCLI and Eschatology

To prepare for the GCLI study this week, I'm reading a book by Jonathan Menn called Biblical Eschatology. He takes the amillennialism position, but he does a good job of defining the terminology in the subject. Here are a few quotes.

The Key Issues

“The major positions regarding eschatology differ over two main issues: (1) The nature of the “thousand years” (Rev 20:2–7): Is the “thousand years” a discrete period of time distinct from the rest of history, or not? and What does it look like? (i.e., Is it a “golden age” on earth that can be experienced in the flesh, or can it be apprehended only by faith?); and (2) The timing of the “thousand years”: Is the “thousand years” a past, present, or future period of time? and Does it occur before or after Christ comes again?”

Hermeneutical Issues

“The different answers to the main eschatological issues tend to be based on different answers to three hermeneutical issues: (1) The role of the NT in interpreting the OT; (2) How to interpret the Bible’s symbolic language; and (3) The relationship between Israel and the church.”

“Ladd observes that dispensationalism’s fundamentally different hermeneutical presuppositions distinguish it from all other forms of Christianity: “Here is a basic watershed between a dispensational and a nondispensational theology. Dispensationalism forms its eschatology by a literal interpretation of the Old Testament and then fits the New Testament into it. A nondispensational eschatology forms its theology from the explicit teaching of the New Testament.”

Definition of the different Positions

Premillennialism
Premillennialism is any belief that Christ will come before the “thousand years.” Premillennialists believe that at his coming Christ will institute a thousand-year reign (“golden age”) on the earth, after which he will institute the eternal state. In older writings, “premillennialism” is often called “chiliasm” from the Greek “chilioi” which means “thousand.” Premillennialists are divided into two main camps: historic premillennialists and dispensational premillennialists.”

Historic Premillennialism
Historic premillennialists believe that any doctrine of the millennium must be based on the NT and be consistent with Christ’s present reign. They believe that there will be two bodily resurrections separated by the “thousand years”: the resurrection of the righteous when Christ comes again and then the resurrection of the unrighteous after the thousand years. After that, the eternal state will be instituted.

Dispensational Premillennialism
Dispensational premillennialists hold that there is a radical distinction between Israel and the church and that all prophecies must be interpreted “literally”: prophetic promises to OT Israel must literally be fulfilled in the physical nation of Israel, not in the church. They view the millennium as the climax of God’s dealings with Israel. They hold that Christ will actually have two “second comings”: the first one, which they call the “pretribulational rapture,” is only “for” his church (i.e., the church will leave the earth and meet Christ in the air and then go back with him to heaven). Later, after the “great tribulation,” Christ will physically come with his church to the earth and set up a thousand-year kingdom in which Israel is dominant.11 They also believe that there will be three resurrections: the first for the righteous dead at the rapture; the second at the end of the tribulation for those saints who have died during the tribulation; and the third at the end of the millennium for the unbelievers.12 After that there will be a great rebellion which Christ will overcome. He will then institute the eternal state.

Postmillennialism
Technically, any belief that Christ will come after the “thousand years” is postmillennial. As popularly used, however, postmillennialism is the belief that the “millennium” is a future, discrete period of unprecedented Christian influence in the world (a “golden age”), based on the work of the church and the Holy Spirit in the world, that gradually emerges before Christ’s return. Christ will then come again, receive the kingdom, and initiate the eternal state.”

Pretribulationism, Midtribulationism, and Posttribulationism
“Pretribulationism” is a distinctively dispensationalist idea. Pretribulationists believe that before the “tribulation” Christ will come part-way from heaven to earth to “rapture” (“take away” to heaven) the church. A variant of this is “midtribulationism” which believes that Christ will rapture the church in the middle of a seven-year tribulation (i.e., just before the “great tribulation”). Both pre- and mid-tribulationists believe that after the tribulation Christ will come again, this time all the way to earth, to set up a thousand-year kingdom. After that he will establish the eternal state. On the other hand, “posttribulationism” holds that Christ will return only once, after the church goes through tribulation. Posttribulationists believe that the rapture of living believers will take place along with the resurrection of the dead when Christ returns.”

Preterism
The term comes from the Latin “praeter” which means “past” or “beyond.” Preterism is divided into two main camps: “full preterism” and “partial preterism.” Full preterism holds that all significant events of prophecy, including the “millennium” and Christ’s second coming (which preterists see as a spiritual coming), took place in AD 70 when the Jewish temple was destroyed by the Romans. Partial preterism holds that most of the major eschatological events were fulfilled by AD 70, but that Christ will physically come again in the future and set up the eternal state.”

Full Preterists
Full preterists are a relatively small minority. “The true preterist view is that the second coming of Christ was to finally judge and remove the last vestiges of the Old Covenant system and fully establish the kingdom and the New Covenant system by 70 A.D.” They also view the resurrection as spiritual not bodily, and that the resurrection, the day of the Lord, and the judgment all occurred in AD 70. Most Christians hold that full preterism is heretical because it denies the bodily resurrection of believers and the future second coming of Christ.

Partial Preterism
Partial preterism, particularly in its mild variety, has a well-established history. Mild partial preterism “holds that the Tribulation was fulfilled within the first three hundred years of Christianity as God judged two enemies: the Jews in A.D. 70 and Rome by A.D. 313.”

Moderate Partial Preterism
such as that advanced by R. C. Sproul, “sees the Tribulation and the bulk of Bible prophecy as fulfilled in the events surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in A.D. 70; but they still hold to a future second coming, a physical resurrection of the dead, an end to temporal history, and the establishment of the consummate new heaven and new earth.” Moderate partial preterists believe that “in the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 there was a parousia or coming of Christ [but] it was not the parousia.

Amillennialists
Amillennialists thus hold that the “thousand years” is a symbolic reference to the entire period (which we are now in) between Christ’s resurrection until shortly before his return. This age will be characterized by the spread of the gospel but also by the spread of sin, i.e., there will be no “golden age” before Christ returns. Satan is now bound in the sense that he can no longer absolutely prevent the spread of the gospel to the nations or unite the world to destroy the church. Shortly before the second coming, he will be loosed and persecution will increase. That will be ended by Christ’s return in victory. The biblical millennium, therefore, is not the glorious age to come, but this present era for giving the message of salvation to the nations.

Updated Haiti Information

I last updated my information page for the Fall 2014 Haiti Trip on July 4th, 2014. Here's the link:
Haiti 2014 Fall Trip Information and Prayer Requests

C. S. Lewis -- Jesus is Lord God, Bad Man, or Mad Man Argument

C. S. Lewis used the classic "Good Man/Bad Man" Argument in several essays. He "borrowed" from the Church Fathers and updated the argument. Here's his version in Mere Christianity:

“I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God. That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.”

The classic argument can be diagramed as I have laid out here in this PDF.

Good Man / Bad Man Argument

Church Discipline

The "Fellowship of the Bean" is studying First Corinthians. I am preparing to lead the discussion on 1st Corinthians 5. Here's the first few verses of the chapter:

It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that is not tolerated even among pagans, for a man has his father's wife. And you are arrogant! Ought you not rather to mourn? Let him who has done this be removed from among you.(1 Corinthians 5:1-2 ESV)

The situation involves a man who is blatantly sleeping with his stepmother. This sin is prohibited explicitly in Leviticus. Both the Greek and Roman cultures abhor this relationship. The Corinthians are so prideful that they are challenging Paul's authority and apostleship instead of taking care of business. The congregation should not have been arrogant against Paul, they should have been in mourning as a congregation for the grievous sin among them.

Charles Hodge, the astute president of Princeton Theological Seminary between 1851 and 1878, makes the following observations in his commentary.

Chrysostom says the idea is, that they should have acted as they would have done had a pestilence appeared among them which called for mourning and supplication in order that it might be removed. It is a right inherent in every society, and necessary for its existence, to judge of the qualification of its own members; to receive those whom it judges worthy, and to exclude the unworthy. The right is here clearly recognized as belonging to the church. It is also clear from this passage that this right belongs to each particular church congregation. The power was vested in the church of Corinth and not is some officer presiding over that church. The bishop or pastor was not reproved for neglect of discipline; but the church itself, in its organized capacity. (Hodge, p. 82-83)

First Corinthians is a letter written to the entire congregation at Corinth. Paul is exhorting the whole congregation, not the elders alone, but the entire membership of the Corinthian church is to be held accountable for the sin among them.

Holiness is a corporate responsibility. I'm not sure what this looks like. It is easier to see love as a corporate responsibility: carrying one another's burdens, showing hospitality, and doing all the one anothers. But how do we stand up for God's holiness as a congregation? How do we show love to one another and yet encourage each other to purity? I'm not sure, but Paul is chiding everyone in the congregation for not taking action. We are together to grieve for the sin among us and hold each other accountable.

I'm reminded of the incident in Numbers 25. A man was blatantly sinning against God in front of the whole nation of Israel and the nation did nothing. How do we take action like Phinehas did in Leviticus 25? Phinehas alone took action to uphold God's holiness in the congregation and was rewarded with a covenant of peace.

God's Immutability and the Church

One of my favorite C. S. Lewis quotes is from the end of his most famous sermon, The Weight of Glory

There are no ordinary people. You have never talked to a mere mortal. Nations, cultures, arts, civilization—these are mortal, and their life is to ours as the life of a gnat. But it is immortals whom we joke with, work with, marry, snub, and exploit—immortal horrors or everlasting splendours. This does not mean that we are to be perpetually solemn. We must play. But our merriment must be of that kind (and it is, in fact, the merriest kind) which exists between people who have, from the outset, taken each other seriously—no flippancy, no superiority, no presumption. And our charity must be a real and costly love, with deep feeling for the sins in spite of which we love the sinner—no mere tolerance or indulgence which parodies love as flippancy parodies merriment. Next to the Blessed Sacrament itself, your neighbour is the holiest object presented to your senses. If he is your Christian neighbour he is holy in almost the same way, for in him also Christ vere latitat—the glorifier and the glorified, Glory Himself, is truly hidden. (The Weight of Glory)

Lewis points out correctly that we need to see people as God sees them: He sees them as eternal beings. The obnoxious people you fellowship with at church are the most holy beings except for God that you will ever encounter. I agree with Lewis, but I think we need to go one step further. I am reading Stephen Charnock on the immutability of God. His premise is since scripture teaches that God does not change, then His promises never fail. God is eternal, omnipotent, and He does not change; therefore, He keeps His promises and does not change them. Charnock proves his point through scripture by exegeting the following strophe from Psalm 102:

Of old you laid the foundation of the earth,
and the heavens are the work of your hands.
They will perish, but you will remain;
they will all wear out like a garment.
You will change them like a robe, and they will pass away,
but you are the same, and your years have no end.
The children of your servants shall dwell secure;
their offspring shall be established before you.
(Psalm 102:25-28 ESV)

Charnock makes the following conclusion from God's immutability as taught in this passage.

“The design of the penman is to confirm the church in the truth of the divine promises; that though the foundations of the world should be ripped up, and the heavens clatter together, and the whole fabric of them be unpinned and fall to pieces, the firmest parts of it dissolved; yet the church should continue in its stability, because it stands not upon the changeableness of creatures, but is built upon the immutable rock of the truth of God, which is as little subject to change, as his essence.” ("The Existence and Attributes of God

God effects His promises to believing individuals through the Church. Scripture repeatedly uses the illustrations of a building or a body to explain the function of the Church. Using the illustration of a building, God is using the building blocks--the members of the church--to knock the rough edges off the other blocks (Proverbs 27:17) so we can fit together snugly. In other words, God is using the Church as a whole to prepare us for heaven. God does not only want personal holiness, but corporate holiness as well. Look at the following promises about the church.

• And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” (Matthew 16:18-19 ESV)
• For I feel a divine jealousy for you, since I betrothed you to one husband, to present you as a pure virgin to Christ. (2 Corinthians 11:2 ESV)
• So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord. In him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit. (Ephesians 2:19-22 ESV)
• Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body. “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church. However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.(Ephesians 5:25-33 ESV)
• As you come to him, a living stone rejected by men but in the sight of God chosen and precious, you yourselves like living stones are being built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. For it stands in Scripture:
  
  “Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone,
  a cornerstone chosen and precious,
  and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.”
  (1 Peter 2:4-6 ESV)

God saves us both individually and corporately. God wants to unite us with Himself both individually and corporately. God is making us into one holy people to love Him and enjoy Him forever.

For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit. (1 Corinthians 12:12-13 ESV)

God promises that the Church will be Christ's Bride in heaven for ever. Let us praise our immutable, faithful, and holy God.

Therefore let us be grateful for receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, and thus let us offer to God acceptable worship, with reverence and awe, for our God is a consuming fire. (Hebrews 12:28-29 ESV)

Sloth and the Sluggard in Scripture

Jason Blackley asked me a week ago what I knew about Sloth. He stumped me. I posted some quotes from Dorothy L. Sayers and C. S. Lewis earlier in the year, but I didn't really know what the Bible had to say.   Since I couldn't sleep, I threw a bunch of verses together. Jason probably has modern resources, I decided to go old school with my Vine's and my concordance. I did use Google. Vine gave the definition of Slothful in his Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words.

SLOTHFUL
1. NOTHROS, indolent, sluggish, is rendered "slothful" in Heb. 6:12 A. V. See DULL and synonymous words there and SLUGGISH.
2. OKNEROS, shrinking, irksome, is translated "slothful" in Matt. 25:26. and Romans 12:11, where "in diligence not slothful," R. V., might be rendered 'not flagging in zeal.' (Vines Expository Dictionary)

Under DULL in my Vines Expository Dictionary, he stated

There is a deeper more inborn sluggishness implied in northros, and this bound up as it were in the very life, more than in either of the other words of this group. (p. 343) 

Here are some verses.

• Go to the ant, O sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise. Without having any chief, officer, or ruler, she prepares her bread in summer and gathers her food in harvest. How long will you lie there, O sluggard? When will you arise from your sleep? A little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to rest, and poverty will come upon you like a robber, and want like an armed man. (Proverbs 6:6-11 ESV)
• A slack hand causes poverty, but the hand of the diligent makes rich.(Proverbs 10:4)
• Like vinegar to the teeth and smoke to the eyes, so is the sluggard to those who send him. (Proverbs 10:26 ESV)
• The hand of the diligent will rule, while the slothful will be put to forced labor. (Proverbs 12:24 ESV)
• The soul of the sluggard craves and gets nothing, while the soul of the diligent is richly supplied. (Proverbs 13:4 ESV)
• Slothfulness casts into a deep sleep, and an idle person will suffer hunger. (Proverbs 19:15 ESV)
• The sluggard does not plow in the autumn; he will seek at harvest and have nothing. (Proverbs 20:4 ESV)
• The desire of the sluggard kills him, for his hands refuse to labor. All day long he craves and craves, but the righteous gives and does not hold back. (Proverbs 21:25-26 ESV)
• I passed by the field of a sluggard, by the vineyard of a man lacking sense, and behold, it was all overgrown with thorns; the ground was covered with nettles, and its stone wall was broken down. Then I saw and considered it; I looked and received instruction. A little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to rest, and poverty will come upon you like a robber, and want like an armed man. (Proverbs 24:30-34 ESV)
• The sluggard says, “There is a lion in the road! There is a lion in the streets!” As a door turns on its hinges, so does a sluggard on his bed. The sluggard buries his hand in the dish; it wears him out to bring it back to his mouth. The sluggard is wiser in his own eyes than seven men who can answer sensibly. (Proverbs 26:13-16 ESV)
• The sluggard does not plow in the autumn; he will seek at harvest and have nothing. (Proverbs 20:4 ESV)
• Do not be slothful in zeal, be fervent in spirit, serve the Lord. (Romans 12:11 ESV)
• And we desire each one of you to show the same earnestness to have the full assurance of hope until the end, so that you may not be sluggish, but imitators of those who through faith and patience inherit the promises. (Hebrews 6:11-12 ESV)

I noticed in these verses that slothfulness is tied to pride, poverty, hunger, envy, selfishness, and stinginess.

In Matthew 25, Jesus is preaching about the kingdom of God in the "Parable of the Talents." I have heard two similar interpretations of this parable. One is that God gave us skills, resources, and talents and we should use them diligently for the Kingdom of God and not be slothful. The second interpretation is that Jesus is teaching about the Kingdom of God and is giving the Gospel to us. He wants us to use this information--this good news--to enter the Kingdom of God. We should not be slothful with our talents or the Gospel in either case.

“For it will be like a man going on a journey, who called his servants and entrusted to them his property. To one he gave five talents, to another two, to another one, to each according to his ability. Then he went away. He who had received the five talents went at once and traded with them, and he made five talents more. So also he who had the two talents made two talents more. But he who had received the one talent went and dug in the ground and hid his master's money. Now after a long time the master of those servants came and settled accounts with them. And he who had received the five talents came forward, bringing five talents more, saying, ‘Master, you delivered to me five talents; here I have made five talents more.’ His master said to him, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant. You have been faithful over a little; I will set you over much. Enter into the joy of your master.’ And he also who had the two talents came forward, saying, ‘Master, you delivered to me two talents; here I have made two talents more.’ His master said to him, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant. You have been faithful over a little; I will set you over much. Enter into the joy of your master.’ He also who had received the one talent came forward, saying, ‘Master, I knew you to be a hard man, reaping where you did not sow, and gathering where you scattered no seed, so I was afraid, and I went and hid your talent in the ground. Here you have what is yours.’ But his master answered him, ‘You wicked and slothful servant! You knew that I reap where I have not sown and gather where I scattered no seed? Then you ought to have invested my money with the bankers, and at my coming I should have received what was my own with interest. So take the talent from him and give it to him who has the ten talents. For to everyone who has will more be given, and he will have an abundance. But from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. And cast the worthless servant into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’ (Matthew 25:14-30 ESV)

My favorite verses on Diligence:

• And let us not grow weary of doing good, for in due season we will reap, if we do not give up. (Galatians 6:9)
• "Let us therefore strive to enter that rest, so that no one may fall by the same sort of disobedience." (Hebrews 4:11 ESV)
• Therefore, brothers, be all the more diligent to make your calling and election sure, for if you practice these qualities you will never fall. (2 Peter 1:10 ESV)
• Therefore, beloved, since you are waiting for these, be diligent to be found by him without spot or blemish, and at peace. (2 Peter 3:14 ESV)

Coalbiter's Book Recommendations

This is an online bookstore that I created in association with Amazon.com. It is a good way to keep track of the books and commentaries I've read and recommended. Please keep coming back to this page as I plan to add more categories and more books to each category. I doubt the bookstore will make any money, but I will direct any funds earned from the bookstore to help finance my mission trips.

Here are the links: 

Coalbiter's C. S. Lewis Books and Resources
Coalbiter's Recommended Commentaries
Coalbiter's Puritan Theology Recommendation
Coalbiter's Recommendations on Jonathan Edwards
Coalbiter's Recommended Books on Theology
Coalbiter's Recommended Eschatological Resources

In His Name,

Jeff

GCLI, Chesterton and God's Mirth

This blog post is not really about the GCLI materials, but it is a meditation on how Jesus is displayed in the Old Testament. There is an article in Book II of the GCLI materials called, Defending the Deity of Christ from the Teachings of Contemporary Cults by Pastor Kurt Jurgensmeier. On page 282, Point 5.2 raises the question, Does Proverbs 8:22-31 teach that Jesus was created by God? The author asserts that Jehovah Witnesses claim that Proverbs 8 proves that Jesus is a created being. Jurgensmeir argues the following:

Correcting the misinterpretation: The phrase, "The Lord brought me forth as the first of his works" (Proverbs 8:22, NIV) cannot be referring to the creation of Christ. Such a notion, again, contradicts all the other Scriptural truth regarding the deity of Christ. Solomon is simply personifying wisdom, just as he does in the first chapter of Proverbs, referring to wisdom as a woman who cries out in the streets.

However, in his Systematic Theology, Grudem argues convincingly that Proverbs 8:22-31 is talking about Christ and argues against the Jehovah Witness position in a different way. Grudem shows that the Hebrew word for "create" in verse 22 does not always mean create.

One of the most disputed Old Testament texts that could show distinct personality for more than one person is Proverbs 8:22–31. Although the earlier part of the chapter could be understood as merely a personification of “wisdom” for literary effect, showing wisdom calling to the simple and inviting them to learn, vv. 22–31, one could argue, say things about “wisdom” that seem to go far beyond mere personification. Speaking of the time when God created the earth, “wisdom” says, “Then I was the craftsman at his side. I was filled with delight day after day, rejoicing always in his presence, rejoicing in his whole world and delighting in mankind” (Prov. 8:30–31 NIV). To work as a “craftsman” at God’s side in the creation suggests in itself the idea of distinct personhood, and the following phrases might seem even more convincing, for only real persons can be “filled with delight day after day” and can rejoice in the world and delight in mankind.

But if we decide that “wisdom” here really refers to the Son of God before he became man, there is a difficulty. Verses 22–25 (RSV) seem to speak of the creation of this person who is called “wisdom”:

The LORD created me at the beginning of his work,
the first of his acts of old.
Ages ago I was set up, at the first, before the beginning of the earth.
When there were no depths I was brought forth,
when there were no springs abounding with water.
Before the mountains had been shaped,
before the hills, I was brought forth.

Does this not indicate that this “wisdom” was created?

In fact, it does not. The Hebrew word that commonly means “create” (bārā’) is not used in verse 22; rather the word is qānāh, which occurs eighty-four times in the Old Testament and almost always means “to get, acquire.” The NASB is most clear here: “The Lord possessed me at the beginning of his way” (similarly KJV). (Note this sense of the word in Gen. 39:1; Ex. 21:2; Prov. 4:5, 7; 23:23; Eccl. 2:7; Isa. 1:3 [”owner”].) This is a legitimate sense and, if wisdom is understood as a real person, would mean only that God the Father began to direct and make use of the powerful creative work of God the Son at the time creation began: the Father summoned the Son to work with him in the activity of creation. The expression “brought forth” in verses 24 and 25 is a different term but could carry a similar meaning: the Father began to direct and make use of the powerful creative work of the Son in the creation of the universe.(Grudem, p. 228-229)

If Wisdom in Proverbs 8 is referring to Jesus Christ, it fits in well with Christ being the "Logos" in John 1. Furthermore, it makes the rest of the paragraph in Proverbs 8 even more poignant.

then I was beside him, like a master workman,
and I was daily his delight,
rejoicing before him always,
rejoicing in his inhabited world
and delighting in the children of man.
(Proverbs 8:30-31 ESV)

The idea that God enjoys His creation and people meshes with the rest of scripture. There is a beautiful cross-reference about God rejoicing in the sons of man in Zephaniah 3:17 (KJV):

The Lord thy God in the midst of thee is mighty; he will save, he will rejoice over thee with joy; he will rest in his love, he will joy over thee with singing.

In the gospels, we really do not see Jesus's mirth and joy. Isaiah's prophecy about Jesus in the Old Testament describes well Jesus who is reflected in the Gospels as a "man of sorrows, acquainted by grief" (Isaiah 53:3). G. K. Chesterton has a famous quote about Jesus's lack of joy in the Gospels:

G. K. Chesterton
"JOY, which was the small publicity of the pagan, is the gigantic secret of the Christian. And as I close this chaotic volume I open again the strange small book from which all Christianity came; and I am again haunted by a kind of confirmation. The tremendous figure which fills the Gospels towers in this respect, as in every other, above all the thinkers who ever thought themselves tall. His pathos was natural, almost casual. The Stoics, ancient and modern, were proud of concealing their tears. He never concealed His tears; He showed them plainly on His open face at any daily sight, such as the far sight of His native city. Yet He concealed something. Solemn supermen and imperial diplomatists are proud of restraining their anger. He never restrained His anger. He flung furniture down the front steps of the Temple, and asked men how they expected to escape the damnation of Hell. Yet He restrained something. I say it with reverence; there was in that shattering personality a thread that must be called shyness. There was something that He hid from all men when He went up a mountain to pray. There was something that He covered constantly by abrupt silence or impetuous isolation. There was some one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth; and I have sometimes fancied that it was His mirth." (Orthodoxy)

An elder at Grace has been encouraging people to read the Gospels to get to know the man Jesus, especially in light of going to Haiti to share the Gospel. I agree that reading the Gospels is a good way to prepare for Haiti and evangelism. However, the whole Bible speaks out about Jesus Christ. The Old Testament reveals Christ in ways we don't see in the Gospels. In the Old Testament we see Christ's mirth and joy in His creation and His people.

Eternality and Heaven

I was reading Stephen Charnock about God's eternality and he gave the following illustration.

If an estate of a thousand pound per annum render a man’s life comfortable for a short term, how much more may the soul be swallowed up with joy in the enjoyment of the Creator, whose years never fail, who lives forever to be enjoyed, and can keep us in life forever to enjoy him! (The Existence and Attributes of God)

I just read online that Michael Jordan is auctioning his house in Chicago. The house has 56,000 square feet and the property is 7.39 acres. The home has its own regulation size indoor basketball court, several bathrooms, an attached guest house, and an infinity pool. One could probably spend months exploring the house and the grounds. One could enjoy it for decades; however, eventually, no matter how spectacular the house, one would stop enjoying it. Jordan's needs are changing. His kids are grown and he has no reason to live in Chicago. Charnock points out our joy in God will be forever. Our need for God will never change. We will never tire of knowing him better and better. We will enjoy him forever in heaven. Charnock elaborates on this joy a little later on in the chapter.

The enjoyment of God will be as fresh and glorious after many ages, as it was at first. God is eternal, and eternity knows no change; there will then be the fullest possession without any decay in the object enjoyed. There can be nothing past, nothing future; time neither adds to it, nor detracts from it; that infinite fulness of perfection which flourisheth in him now, will flourish eternally, without any discoloring of it in the least, by those innumerable ages that shall run to eternity, much less any despoiling him of them: “He is the same in his endless duration” (Ps. ch. 27). As God is, so will the eternity of him be, without succession, without division; the fulness of joy will be always present; without past to be thought of with regret for being gone; without future to be expected with tormenting desires. When we enjoy God, we enjoy him in his eternity without any flux; an entire possession of all together, without the passing away of pleasures that m ay be wished to return, or expectation of future joys which might be desired to hasten. Time is fluid, but eternity is stable; and after many ages, the joys will be as savory and satisfying as if they had been but that moment first tasted by our hungry appetites. When the glory of the Lord shall rise upon you, it shall be so far from ever setting, that after millions of years are expired, as numerous as the sands on the sea-shore, the sun, in the light of whose countenance you shall live, shall be as bright as at the first appearance; he will be so far from ceasing to flow, that he will flow as strong, as full, as at the first communication of himself in glory to the creature. God, therefore, as sitting upon his throne of grace, and acting according to his covenant, is like a jasper-stone, which is of a green color, a color always delightful (Rev. iv. 3); because God is always vigorous and flourishing; a pure act of life, sparkling new and fresh rays of life and light to the creature, flourishing with a perpetual spring, and contenting the most capacious desire; forming your interest, pleasure, and satisfaction; with an infinite variety, without any change or succession; he will have variety to increase delights, and eternity to perpetuate them; this will be the fruit of the enjoyment of an infinite and eternal God: he is not a cistern, but a fountain, wherein water is always living, and never putrefies. (ibid)

Now you know why I love reading the Puritans. They are a lot of work, but then you get paragraphs like the one above.

The Eternality and Wisdom of God

I have been reading Stephen Charnock's book, The Existence and Attributes of God. He has a chapter on The Eternality of God. In the following quote he ruminates on how God's eternality applies to God's knowledge.

“God be eternal, he knows all things as present. All things are present to him in his eternity; for this is the notion of eternity, to be without succession, If eternity be one indivisible point, and is not diffused into preceding and succeeding parts, then that which is known in it or by it is perceived without any succession, for knowledge is as the substance of the person knowing; if that hath various actions and distinct from itself, then it understands things in differences of time as time presents them to view. But, since God’s being depends not upon the revolutions of time, so neither does his knowledge; it exceeds all motions of years and days, comprehends infinite spaces of past and future. God considers all things in his eternity in one simple knowledge, as if they were now acted before him: “Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world;” “from eternity” (Acts xv. 18). God’s knowledge is co-eternal with him; if he knows that in time which he did not not know from eternity, he would not be eternally perfect, since knowledge is the perfection of an intelligent nature.”

Think about this. God knows everything. God knows eternity past and eternity future. He knows all the possible futures of every sub-atomic particle in the entire universe. He knows everyone's innermost thoughts (Psalm 139). By everyone, I mean everyone who has existed and will exist. All this knowledge is "simple knowledge" meaning he just knows everything as if it were happening that instant. He is outside time so he doesn't experience our reality (except during the incarnation) in successive moments. He doesn't think in successive thoughts.

For example, when I play chess, I have successive thoughts. If I am in the middle of a game and I would consider my next move in the following manner. If I move my king to e5, I then would have to consider my opponent's best possible move; for example, if my opponent moves his queen to d5 or moves his rook to e1. My next thought would be if my opponent did move his queen to d5, I would have to move my rook to e8. I would then start to consider what if my opponent moved his rook instead of his queen. All these thoughts take place successively and they are in time. The point is that I do not multitask my thoughts. If I use a chess clock during the game, I could time my thoughts. God does not think like us: He doesn't experience a succession of moments, his thoughts are not successive, and his thoughts do not take place in time. He just "is" and he just "knows." Theologians like Grudem would say "eternality" is a incommunicable attribute. It is an attribute we do not share with God. We as Christians will live with Him everlastingly, but we have a beginning and our existence will depend on God's good pleasure. God is the only one who has eternality: existence dependent on nothing else.

What's the application for this esoteric knowledge? First, we can't second guess God. Our limited minds and limited experience cannot compete with God. God's wisdom and intelligence are on a different level than our intelligence. As Isaiah wrote,

For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.(Isaiah 55:8-9 ESV)

We can not plan our lives better than God can plan our lives. Be grateful for what He has given you and seek His guidance continually.

Second, this infinite and and eternal God has our best interests at heart and those interests are eternal and not temporal. Sin, disease, death, and injustice have no purpose and have no meaning in this world, unless God is sovereign and eternal. God plans for his adopted children to be with Him in Christ for all eternity. His Son died so that may happen and His Holy Spirit is preparing us for that existence.

And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose. For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified. (Romans 8:28-30 ESV)

Third, God knows everything about us in detail: everything we have done, everything we have thought, and everything we will do. As David writes in the Psalms

O LORD, you have searched me and known me!
You know when I sit down and when I rise up;
you discern my thoughts from afar.
You search out my path and my lying down
and are acquainted with all my ways.
Even before a word is on my tongue,
behold, O LORD, you know it altogether.
You hem me in, behind and before,
and lay your hand upon me.
Such knowledge is too wonderful for me;
it is high; I cannot attain it.
(Psalm 139:1-6 ESV)

God knows we are sinners and we will sin again, but he saved us anyway. We can't surprise God. Confess your sins and stay close to God.

but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.(Romans 5:8 ESV)

If we have believed in Christ, we can have great confidence that Christ will take us home in Him.

Our Worship and Christ's Intercessory Work

I came across Psalm 5:7 in my reading.

But as for me, I will come into thy house in the multitude of thy mercy: and in thy fear will I worship toward thy holy temple." (Psalm 5:7 KJV).

Only by the multiple mercies given to us by God can we come into the presence of God even to offer praise. This is echoed in the New Testament. According to the writer of Hebrews, Christ is continually making intercession for us, which allows us access to the throne.

Consequently, he is able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them. (Hebrews 7:25 ESV)

Toward the end of Hebrews, the writer continued to talk about the current ministry of Christ. Our praises and prayers of thankfulness, cannot even reach God unless it is through Christ's intercessory work.

Through him then let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that acknowledge his name. (Hebrews 13:15 ESV)

The following is from Calvin's commentary about Hebrews 13:5.

But as it was the Apostle's design to teach us what is the legitimate way of worshipping God under the New Testament, so by the way he reminds us that God cannot be really invoked by us and his name glorified, except through Christ the mediator; for it is he alone who sanctifies our lips, which otherwise are unclean, to sing the praises of God; and it is he who opens a way for our prayers, who in short performs the office of a priest, presenting himself before God in our name.

The only way to approach God is humbly through the Cross. Don't get me wrong. God loves us and He is so humble that He works to makes the gifts of our lips and sacrifice of our bodies (Romans 12:1) holy and acceptable. Christ intercedes for on the basis of His sacrifice. Christ's blood makes our gifts clean. If you are humble and sincerely seeking to praise and thank God, don't rely on feelings too much to evaluate the success of your prayers. Your prayers and your feelings are not worthy. Christ is the one who makes our prayers efficacious.

GCLI -- Meditations on Eldership (1st Peter 5:1-4)

GCLI had a section on elders. The course work quoted 1st Peter 5. I haven't really studied 1st Peter for a long time, so I decided to dig a little bit into the passage. It struck me that Peter called himself an "Apostle" and an "Elder." When I read these terms in Acts and the epistles, I understood that the Apostles had unique gifts and ministries, but I tended to group the functions of elders and apostles within the church as very similar. An apostle would be a super elder so to speak. However, Peter saw them as separate roles, ministries, and functions. Here is the passage:

So I exhort the elders among you, as a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, as well as a partaker in the glory that is going to be revealed: shepherd the flock of God that is among you, exercising oversight, not under compulsion, but willingly, as God would have you; not for shameful gain, but eagerly; not domineering over those in your charge, but being examples to the flock. And when the chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the unfading crown of glory. (1 Peter 5:1-4 ESV)

The ESV starts the chapter with "So" and the NASB starts chapter 5 with a "Therefore." The conjunction is pointing the reader to what Peter wrote before. We need to go back to 1 Peter 4 to find out the context.

For it is time for judgment to begin at the household of God; and if it begins with us, what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God? And “If the righteous is scarcely saved, what will become of the ungodly and the sinner?” Therefore let those who suffer according to God's will entrust their souls to a faithful Creator while doing good. (1 Peter 4:17-19 ESV)

Peter is stating that judgment is beginning with the household of God. He is giving his fellow elders his advice about to handle suffering. Peter can do this because he is a fellow elder and therefore he will be a fellow partaker of oncoming suffering. Furthermore, Peter is a witness of the suffering of Christ. No one is more qualified than Peter in how to endure suffering. Notice that very next topic Peter writes about is "glory going to be revealed." Peter is going to participate in the suffering of the elders because he is a fellow elder. He is going to partake in the glory with the elders because of the suffering he will experience with them.

Peter is being a shepherd to the elders. This shepherding reminds us of the exhortation Paul gave the elders in Acts,

Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God, which he obtained with his own blood. (Acts 20:28 ESV)

Peter was paying careful attention to the elders of these churches, so that they may watch over themselves and their flocks to stay firm during the time of suffering. Elders not only need to watch over their flock; they need to watch over each other.

Let us look at some of the terms that Peter is using in 1 Peter 5. The word shepherd means of course means keeper of sheep. Jesus speaks of himself as a shepherd in Matthew 9:37.

When he saw the crowds, he had compassion for them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd. (Matthew 9:36 ESV)

Therefore, a shepherd guides, feeds, and protects his sheep.

The next word I want to look at is "oversight." It means to look over. It is also found in Hebrews 12:15.

Looking diligently lest any man fail of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you, and thereby many be defiled; (KJV)

This command in Hebrews to "exercise oversight" or "look diligently" is for all Christians, but especially for elders. As it is indicated in the parable of the lost sheep (Matthew 18), the shepherd looks out for stragglers and runaways. I have been trained as a lifeguard. It has the same idea. A lifeguard cannot afford to be distracted. He is to continually look over the swimming pool for swimmers in danger. When an elder exercises oversight he is studying his flock and trying to identify the weak and misguided so he can protect them. However, as the verse in Hebrews indicates, we all are supposed to be watching out for each other.

A leader should exercise oversight, not under compulsion, but willingly. A man should not be coerced into being an elder. Being an elder is a heavy responsibility especially during times of suffering. Therefore, elders need to have a deep desire to serve God in this calling. If an elder loses desire for the ministry, he should be allowed to resign.

An elder should shepherd not for shameful gain, but willingly. We all can think of preachers who profited from the poor of his flock to line his pockets. Ezekiel prophesied against the shepherds of Israel for feeding themselves at expense of their flocks.

"Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel; prophesy, and say to them, even to the shepherds, Thus says the Lord GOD: Ah, shepherds of Israel who have been feeding yourselves! Should not shepherds feed the sheep? You eat the fat, you clothe yourselves with the wool, you slaughter the fat ones, but you do not feed the sheep. (Ezekiel 34:2-3 ESV)

If an elder burns out and is shepherding only to keep his paycheck, he needs to stop and reconsider his options. He needs to lean on the other elders to either recapture his desire to elder or step down as elder. An elder should serve because he wants to and not just to earn a paycheck.

Elders should not be domineering over those in their charge. The word translated as "domineering" "includes the idea of domineering as in the rule of a strong person over one who is weak. (TBKC, p. 856)." This is a tough one. An elder should be checking himself to see if he is domineering. Even if his intentions are good, he needs to step back and evaluate how he is acting. He needs to get feedback to see how others see him. Peter provides an encouragement on how others ought to lead: elders should lead by example. They should get their hands dirty in good deeds and evangelism. They should excel in loving their wives, their fellow elders, and their flock.

Although the ministry of an elder is difficult one, it has great reward. James warns the people who are considering elders or teachers:

Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness. (James 3:1 ESV)

However, with must risk there is much reward. Elders will receive an unfading crown of glory.

I haven't really figured out why Peter saw the role of elder so important that he differentiated it from apostleship at the start of the passage . Perhaps it was just so he could identify with his readers. However, Peter did see the role of elder as key to the church especially in time of suffering. So submit to our elders and let serve them with rejoicing.

Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with groaning, for that would be of no advantage to you. (Hebrews 13:17 ESV)

The Clarity of Scripture and Illumination of Scripture

The second half of 1st Corinthians 2 is one of the main teaching passages on two doctrines: Perspicuity or Clarity of Scripture and Illumination of Scripture. Here is 1 Corinthians 2:10-16

these things God has revealed to us through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God. For who knows a person's thoughts except the spirit of that person, which is in him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might understand the things freely given us by God. And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual.

The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. The spiritual person judges all things, but is himself to be judged by no one. “For who has understood the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?” But we have the mind of Christ. (1 Corinthians 2:10-16 ESV)

Piper gives an interesting illustration of the differences between the two doctrines. Before reading the illustration, the following definitions of the two doctrines provide a context to understand the illustration better.

Wayne Grudem defined the clarity of scripture as:

The appropriate conclusion from these passages is that Scripture repeatedly affirms that it is able to be understood—not only certain verses or statements, but the meaning of the whole of Scripture on many topics is able to be understood by God’s people. These affirmations are not limited to understanding the basic way of salvation, or understanding only major themes, or understanding certain topics or certain parts. These are affirmations about the nature of Scripture in any part, apparently grounded in a deep assumption that the Scriptures are communication from a God who is able to communicate clearly to his people.(http://thegospelcoalition.org/themelios/article/the_perspicuity_of_scripture)

John MacArthur makes the following points about illumination from this passage.

Unlike God’s revelation and inspiration, which were given to the biblical writers, His illumination is for all Christians. We all can rightly appraise the Word when rely on the Giver of the Word.

The doctrine of illumination does not mean we can know and understand everything (Deut. 29:29), that we do not need human teachers (Eph. 4:11-12), or that study is not hard work (2 Tim. 2:15). It does mean that Scripture can be understood by every Christian who is diligent and obedient.

John Piper in a sermon on 1 Corinthians 2:14-16 on May 20th, 1984 provided a good illustration on how the two doctrines work together.

The manual of operation for the Christian wartime mentality is the Bible. It contains the truth needed to win us over from the enemy to Christ, to deprogram our old thought patterns, to train us in strategies of righteousness, and to equip us with armor and weapons to defeat Satan and liberate his captives. But we have a natural aversion to this truth. Therefore, the work of the Holy Spirit is utterly indispensable as we make use of this manual. But now we can see more clearly what this work of the Spirit is and what it isn't. The work of the Spirit is not to tell us what the manual of operation means. That we must determine by a disciplined study of the text. The Spirit inspired these writings and he does not short-circuit them by whispering in our ear what they mean. When we pray for his help, we do not pray that he will spare us the hard work of rigorous reading and reflection. What we pray is that he would make us humble enough to welcome the truth. The work of the Spirit in helping us grasp the meaning of Christ's manual of operation is not to make study unnecessary but to make us radically open to receive what our study turns up, instead of twisting the text to justify our unwillingness to accept it.

The lessons are plain for those who long to fight the fight of faith and be an integral part of the war effort. We must be diligent students of the Commander's manual. And we must soak all of our study in prayer that his Spirit would humble us to submit to every truth and commandment in it. The work of the Holy Spirit is to make us say from the heart as we take up the manual, "Far be it from me that I should glory except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world was crucified to me, and I to the world." If our pride has not been crucified by the Holy Spirit, the Bible will be a wax nose and we will call it foolish or mold it to fit our own natural desires. In either case, the word of the Commander will not be obeyed and the war effort will languish and the cause of the enemy will go unchecked. (Piper, sermon notes).

Some people interpret the 1st Corinthians 2 passage and the doctrine of illumination as a way to skip diligent study of the bible. However, according to other passages of scripture, diligent study, meditation, prayer and memorization of scripture is important in growing in our relationship to God. According to Piper who is explaining the 1 Corinthians 2 passage above, Illumination is one of the Holy Spirit's ministries. He clarifies to the Spirit-led believer what the Bible says and helps the believer to discern what the Bible says is true and valuable. The Holy Spirit reveals Jesus Christ through the scriptures and these truths are the most precious truths in the universe.

Some verses to reflect upon:
Paul is exhorting Timothy to do his best to understand and to clearly explain the word of truth.

Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth. (2 Timothy 2:15 ESV)

The psalmist is exhorting young men to memorize scripture to help fight the battle for purity in their lives.

How can a young man keep his way pure? By guarding it according to your word. With my whole heart I seek you; let me not wander from your commandments! I have stored up your word in my heart, that I might not sin against you. (Psalm 119:9-11 ESV)

Peter points out that Paul is hard to understand, which we can infer that diligent, prayerful, careful study will allow us to understand the Pauline epistles.

as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.(2 Peter 3:16 ESV)

Notice here is Paul is exhorting Timothy to "think" and the Lord will give understanding.

Think over what I say, for the Lord will give you understanding in everything. (2 Timothy 2:7 ESV)

The psalmist delights in the scriptures and encourages the reader to meditate on them:

I will also speak of your testimonies before kings and shall not be put to shame, for I find my delight in your commandments, which I love. I will lift up my hands toward your commandments, which I love, and I will meditate on your statutes. (Psalm 119:46-48 ESV)

GCLI Correction 2: Servant/Leadership

This is another note to myself about GCLI materials. It is a minor mistake and one that leads me to meditate on servant/leadership. On page 205 of Book II of the GCLI materials, the author claims that the word "Servant" in 1st Corinthians 3:5 is doulos; however, the word is actually diakonos. This is the same word group that we get the English word for deacon. The article does point out correctly that the word for servants in 1st Corinthians 4:1 is huperetes, which is taken from a word meaning "under-rower". However, the author fails to account for how the word had evolved from its original meeting. Here are the passages in question.

What then is Apollos? What is Paul? Servants through whom you believed, as the Lord assigned to each. I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the growth. So neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God who gives the growth. He who plants and he who waters are one, and each will receive his wages according to his labor. For we are God's fellow workers. You are God's field, God's building. (1 Corinthians 3:5-9 ESV)

This is how one should regard us, as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God. Moreover, it is required of stewards that they be found faithful.(1 Corinthians 4:1-2 ESV)

In my Vine's An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, under the definitions for the word "Minister", the expository dictionary describes the following schema for the Greek synonyms that mean servant:

• diakonos views a servant in relation to his work;
• doulos in relation to his master;
• huperetes, in relation to his superior; 
• leitourgos, in relation to public service

This leads us back to the passages and how to interpret the two different Greek synonyms that mean "servant: "diakonos" and "huperetes." Fee explains the correct use of the words for "servant" in the 1st Corinthians passages on p. 159 in his commentary:

What is significant for this paragraph is the change of metaphors. In 3:5-9 the word diakoni is used, emphasizing the servant nature of their task under God, with secondary emphasis on the division of labor. Now the metaphor changes to that of a household. The first word, hyperetas("servants [of Christ]"), is a more general term, but often refers to one who has the duties of administering the affairs of another. That this was Paul's intent is verified by the second word, oikonomos, which denotes a "steward" (often a slave) who has been "entrusted with" managing a household. This is a happy change of metaphors for Paul (cf. 9:17); not only is it pregnant with the notion of accountability that is in the forefront of this paragraph, but it inherently conveys the motif of delegated authority as well, the other concern of this chapter. Thus apostles are to be regarded as "servants of Christ," reemphasizing their humble position and their belonging to Christ alone; at the same time they are "stewards of the mysteries of God" (RSV), emphasizing both their truest position and their accountability to God.

There are a couple points I want to make. First, notice in the chapter 3 passage that Apollos and Paul are not the ones causing the growth in the church. They are servants simply performing their Master's will. It is the Holy Spirit who causes the growth in individuals and the Church. I often hear people say or even I speculate that a church would disappear if a teaching pastor would leave the church and go on to greener pastures. When we think that, we demonstrate a misunderstanding of the interplay between the role of the teachers and the role of the Holy Spirit in church growth. A church may or may not disappear if a popular preacher leaves it, but the preacher does not cause the abundance of growth or the lack of growth. The Holy Spirit causes the growth. If a church fails because its popular pastor leaves, we must ask ourselves whether the Holy Spirit is building that church?

The second point is that the leaders of a church may just be servants, but they are also trusted stewards of a very valuable commodity. They are responsible to teach the flock, to equip the body so "we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ." (Ephesians 4). The elders are some of the instruments the Holy Spirit uses to build us up as a church to help mature us. Therefore, the leaders as a whole deserve are respect and obedience as they carry out this ministry. (Hebrews 13:17).

The Distinguishing Mark of Christian Living (Ephesians 5:1-2)

We are studying Ephesians 5 in our faith family. I am reading Peter O'Brien's commentary on the passage in preparation. The first two verses of Ephesian 5 are as follows.

Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children. And walk in love, as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God (Ephesians 5:1-2 ESV)

O'Brien does some word studies and cultural analysis. He summarizes the verses as follows.

... 'for a fragrant aroma', which was used in the Old Testament of all the main types of sacrifice in the levitical ritual, indicates what is well pleasing to God. Paul is here capturing this Old Testament sense of a sacrifice that is truly acceptable to God. Christ willingly offered himself as a sacrifice to the Father, and this was fully pleasing to him.

The apostle's point is plain. Christ's handing himself over to death for his people was the supreme demonstration of his love for them. Because he is both the ground and model of their love, costly, sacrificial love is to be the distinguishing mark of their lives. To serve others in this way is not only to please God; it is also to imitate both God and Christ.(p. 355, The Letter to the Ephesians)

O'Brien then summarizes the section of this section of the epistle (4:25-5:2) with the following observations.

Paul has depicted in the strongest possible terms the contrast between the readers' previous way of life in the society of his day and their present existence in Christ. The standards presented in this passage are very different from the lifestyle of the surrounding world. This is not to say that some moralists would have disagreed with the apostle's assessment and given contrary advice. Some would have concurred with him at a number of points. Virtue and vice lists, and negative and positive injunctions of a kind similar to Paul's can be found in the Graeco-Roman and Hellenistic-Jewish literature of the day. But it is 'the framework of motivations supplied by his gospel' that makes his 'ethical teaching coherent and distinctly Christian'. Particularly significant is the motivation not to grieve the Holy Spirit of God by whom they were sealed until the day of redemption (v. 30). God has stamped the readers with his own character and guaranteed to protect them until the final day. How ungrateful they would be if they now behaved in a manner which grieved the very Spirit by whom God had marked them as his own. Further, they are to forgive others just God in Christ forgave them (v. 32), and they are to be imitators of God by walking in love. The model and ground for such a life of love is Christ's love so signally demonstrated in the cross. Ultimately, then, to imitate God is to imitate Christ, and costly, sacrificial love is to characterize believers in their relationships with one another. (pp. 355-356, ibid)

At the end of Ephesians 4, Paul describes how Christians should live together in community. Some moralists in the secular world would recognize that moral behavior is the only way a society can thrive. However, without Christ's sacrificial death for us, it would be impossible to live in such a manner. Without the Holy Spirit living within us and enabling obedience, we cannot live as a loving, holy community together. We need to remember who we are in Christ and what Christ sacrificed for us in love. Furthermore, we need to rely on the Holy Spirit's sanctifying work in our lives. This living in Christ-like love with one another will distinguish the Church supernaturally from the rest of the world (John 13:35).

Grudem on Prayer (Romans 8:26)

There is a group of us at Pearson going through Grudem's Systematic Theology. It has been great so far. Wayne Grudem makes observations about different doctrines all the time that encourages us. He makes the following observation about Romans 8:26:

In Romans 8:26–27 Paul says: Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with sighs too deep for words. And he who searches the hearts of men knows what is the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints according to the will of God. Interpreters differ on whether the “sighs too deep for words” are the sighs the Holy Spirit himself makes or our own sighs and groans in prayer, which the Holy Spirit makes into effective prayer before God. It seems more likely that the “sighs” or “groans” here are our groans. When Paul says, “The Spirit helps us in our weakness” (v. 26), the word translated “helps” (Gk. sunantilambanomai) is the same word used in Luke 10:40, where Martha wants Mary to come and help her. The word does not indicate that the Holy Spirit prays instead of us, but that the Holy Spirit takes part with us and makes our weak prayers effective. Thus, such sighing or groaning in prayer is best understood to be sighs or groans which we utter, expressing the desires of our heart and spirit, which the Holy Spirit makes into effective prayer.”(p. 381)

When we are too distressed or emotionally wrought to pray verbally for ourselves and all we can do is like Job, groan and sigh: the Holy Spirit helps us to make our prayers effective to God. He is indeed our Comforter and our Friend. The point is that we need to pray no matter how distraught we are. We have the Holy Spirit to comfort us and to help us articulate our prayers. We have the Son of God to intercede for us (Hebrews 7:25). Finally, we have God the Father who loves us so much that He sent His only Son to die for us (John 3:16). God, the Three-In-One Godhead, is fully involved in our prayer life.

Charles Hodge on the Centrality of the Cross

Charles Hodge made a good point in his commentary on 1 Corinthians 2:2. Hodge pointed out that Paul preached Christ as crucified.

Jesus Christ, and him crucified. Paul’s only design in going to Corinth was to preach Christ; and Christ not as a teacher, or as an example, or as a perfect man, or as a new starting point in the development of the race--all this would be mere philosophy; but Christ as crucified, i.e. as dying for our sins. Christ as a propitiation was the burden of Paul’s preaching. It has been well remarked that Jesus Christ refers to the person of Christ, and him crucified, to his work; which constitute the sum of the gospel. (Charles Hodge).

C. S. Lewis on "Are Miracles Possible?"

Here are some more snippets from my "Bible and C. S. Lewis" study guide. The guide addresses the nature of miracles and whether they are possible or not. As a side note, Tim Keller's book, Walking with God through Pain and Suffering has some great arguments about this topic.

Hume's Argument against the "Probability of Miracles" Summarized.

David Hume was a Scottish philosopher in the eighteenth century. His works profoundly influenced two schools of philosophy: skepticism and empiricism. His arguments against the probability of miracles still hold sway today. C. S. Lewis addressed Hume’s arguments in his book, Miracles. Norman Geisler is a respected, Christian apologist.

Hume's real argument is much more difficult to answer. It is not an argument for the impossibility of miracles but for the incredibility of miracles. It can be stated this way

1. A miracle is by definition a rare occurrence.
2. Natural law is by definition a description of a regular occurrence.
3. The evidence for the regular is always greater than that for the rare.
4. A wise man always bases his belief on the greater evidence.
5. Therefore, a wise man should never believe in miracles.

Notice that on this "soft" form of the argument miracles are not rule out entirely; they are simply held to be always incredible by the very nature of the evidence. The wise man does not claim that miracles cannot occur; he simply never believes they happen, because he never has enough evidence for that belief. However, even in this "soft" interpretation of the argument, miracles are still eliminated, since by the very nature of the case no thoughtful person should ever hold that a miracle has indeed occurred. If this is so, Hume has seemingly avoided begging the question and yet has successfully eliminated the possibility of reasonable belief in miracles. Variations of these arguments are still held to be valid by some widely respected contemporary philosophers. (Norm Geisler)

C. S. Lewis on Miracles

But if we admit God, must we admit Miracle? Indeed, indeed, you have no security against it. That is the bargain. Theology says to you in effect, “Admit God and with Him the risk of a few miracles, and I in return will ratify your faith in uniformity as regards the overwhelming majority of events.” The philosophy which forbids you to make uniformity absolute is also the philosophy which offers you solid ground for believing it to be general, to be almost absolute. The Being who threatens Nature’s claim to omnipotence confirms her in her lawful occasions. Give us this hap’orth of tar and we will save the ship. The alternative is really much worse. Try to make Nature absolute and you find that her uniformity is not even probable. By claiming too much, you get nothing. You get the deadlock, as in Hume. Theology offers you a working arrangement, which leaves the scientist free to continue his experiments and the Christian to continue his prayers. We have also, I suggest, found what we were looking for--a criterion whereby to judge the intrinsic probability of an alleged miracle. We must judge it by our “innate sense of the fitness of things,” that same sense of fitness which led us to anticipate that the universe would be orderly. I do not mean, of course, that we are to use this sense in deciding whether miracles in general are possible: we know that they are on philosophical grounds. Nor do I mean that a sense of fitness will do instead of close inquiry into the historical evidence. As I have repeatedly pointed out, the historical evidence cannot be estimated until we have first estimated the intrinsic probability of the recorded event. It is in making that estimate as regards each story of the miraculous that our sense of fitness comes into play. (Miracles)

C. S. Lewis on the "The Grand Miracle"

One is very often asked at present whether we could not have a Christianity stripped, or, as people who asked it say, 'freed' from its miraculous elements, a Christianity with the miraculous elements suppressed. Now, it seems to me that precisely the one religion in the world, or, at least the only one I know, with which you could not do that is Christianity. In a religion like Buddhism, if you took away the miracles attributed to Gautama Buddha in some very late sources, there would be no loss; in fact, the religion would get on very much better without them because in that case the miracles largely contradict the teaching. Or even in the case of a religion like Mohammedanism, nothing essential would be altered if you took away the miracles. You could have a great prophet preaching his dogmas without bringing in any miracles; they are only in the nature of a digression, or illuminated capitals. But you cannot possibly do that with Christianity, because the Christian story is precisely the story of one grand miracle, the Christian assertion being that what is beyond all space and time, what is uncreated, eternal, came into nature, into human nature, descended into His own universe, and rose again, bringing nature up with Him. It is precisely one great miracle. If you take that away there nothing specifically Christian left. There may be many admirable human things which Christianity shares with all other systems in the world, but there would be nothing specifically Christian. Conversely, once you have accepted that, then you will see that all other well-established Christian miracles--because, of course, there are ill-established Christian miracles; there are Christian legends just as much as there are heathen legends, or modern journalistic legends--you will see that all the well-established Christian miracles are part of it, that they all either prepare for, or exhibit, or result from the Incarnation. Just as every natural event exhibits the total character of the natural universe at a particular point and space of time; so every miracle exhibits the character of the Incarnation. Now, if one asks whether that central grand miracle in Christianity is itself probable or improbable, of course, quite clearly you cannot be applying Hume's kind of probability. You cannot mean a probability based on statistics according to which the more often a thing has happened, the more likely it is to happen again (the more often you get indigestion from eating a certain food, the more probable it is, if you eat it again, that you again have indigestion). Certainly the Incarnation cannot be probable in that sense. It is of its very nature to have happened only once. But then it is of the very nature of the history of this world to have happened only once; and if the Incarnation happened at all, it is the central chapter of that history. It is improbable in the same way in which the whole of nature is improbable, because it is only there once, and will happen only once. (God in the Dock)

C. S. Lewis: The Centrality of the Resurrection

Quote from C. S. Lewis on the centrality of the resurrection to Christianity. I included some verses to back him up.

Miracles: A Preliminary Study.

As this qualification suggests, to preach Christianity meant primarily to preach the Resurrection. Thus people who had heard only fragments of St. Paul's teaching at Athens got the impression that he was talking about two new gods, Jesus and Anastasis (i.e. Resurrection) (Acts xvii. 18). The Resurrection is the central theme in every Christian sermon reported in the Acts. The Resurrection, and its consequences, were the "gospel" or good news which the Christians brought: what we call the "gospels," the narratives of Our Lord's life and death, were composed later for the benefit of those who already accepted the gospel. They were in no sense the basis of Christianity: they were written for those already converted. The miracle of the Resurrection, and the theology of that miracle, comes first: the biography comes later as comment on it. Nothing could be more unhistorical than to pick out selected saying of Christ from the gospels and to regard those as the datum and the rest of the New Testament as a construction upon it. The first fact in the history of Christendom is a number of people who say they have seen the Resurrection. If they had died without making anyone else believe this "gospel" no gospels would ever have been written.

The Bible on the "Centrality of the Resurrection."

Now if Christ is preached, that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there is no resurrection of the dead, not even Christ has been raised; and if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain, your faith also is vain. Moreover we are even found to be false witnesses of God, because we witnessed against God that He raised Christ, whom He did not raise, if in fact the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised; and if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If we have hoped in Christ in this life only, we are of all men most to be pitied. (I Corinthians 15:12-19)

But whatever things were gained to me, those things I have counted as loss for the sake of Christ. More than that, I count all things to be loss in view of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them but rubbish in order that I may gain Christ, and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith, that I may know Him, and the power of His resurrection and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death; in order that I may attain to the resurrection from the dead. (Phillipians 3:7-11)

C. S. Lewis on Suffering

I wrote an evangelical discussion guide years ago on the works of C. S. Lewis. Here are a few C. S. Lewis quotes from my chapter on the problem of pain. I'll list some resource books at the end. Some I did not have when I wrote the study guide.

Quotes From The Problem of Pain

• The Christian doctrine of suffering explains, I believe, a very curious fact about the world we live in. The settled happiness and security which we all desire, God withholds from us by the very nature of the world: but joy, pleasure, and merriment He has scattered broadcast. We are never safe, but we have plenty of fun, and some ecstasy. It is not hard to see why. The security we crave would teach us to rest our hearts in this world and pose an obstacle to our return to God: a few moments of happy love, a landscape, a symphony, a merry meeting with our friends, a bathe or a football match, have no such tendency. Our Father refreshes us on the journey with some pleasant inns, but will not encourage us to mistake them for home.
• But pain insists upon being attended to, God whispers to us in our pleasures, speaks in our conscience, but shouts in our pains: it is His megaphone to rouse a deaf world.
• No doubt Pain as God's megaphone is a terrible instrument; it may lead to final and unrepented rebellion. But it gives the only opportunity the bad man can have for amendment. It removes the veil; it plants the flag of truth within the fortress of a rebel soul.
• If the first and lowest operation of pain shatters the illusion that all is well, the second shatters the illusion that what we have, whether good or bad in itself, is our own and enough for us. Everyone has noticed how hard it is to turn our thoughts to God when everything is going well with us. We "have all we want" is a terrible saying when “all" does not include God. We find God an interruption. As St. Augustine says somewhere, "God wants to give us something, but cannot, because our hands are full--there's nowhere for Him to put it." Or as a friend of mine said, "We regard God as an airman regards his parachute; it's there for emergencies but he hopes he'll never have to use it. Now God who has made us, knows what we are and that our happiness lies in Him. Yet we will not seek it in Him as long as He leaves us any other resort where it can even plausibly be looked for. While what we call "our own life" remains agreeable we will not surrender it to Him. What then can God do in our interests but make "our own life" less agreeable to us, and take away the plausible sources of false happiness? It is just here, where God's providence seems at first to be most cruel, that the Divine humility, the stooping down of the highest , most deserves praise. We are perplexed to see misfortune falling upon decent, inoffensive, worthy people--on capable, hard-working mothers of families or diligent, thrifty little trades-people on those who have worked so hard, and so honestly, for their modest stock of happiness and now seem to be entering on the enjoyment of it with the fullest right.... Let me implore the reader to try to believe, if only for the moment, that God, who made these deserving people, may really be right when He thinks that their modest prosperity and the happiness of their children are not enough to make them blessed: that all this must fall from them in the end, and that if they have not learned to know Him they will be wretched. And therefore He troubles them, warning them in advance of an insufficiency that one day they will have to discover. The life to themselves and their families stands between them and the recognition of their need; He makes that life less sweet to them.

A Quote from A Grief Observed.

The terrible thing is that a perfectly good God is in this matter hardly less formidable than a Cosmic Sadist. The more we believe that God hurts only to heal, the less we can believe that there is any use in begging for tenderness. A cruel man might be bribed--might grow tired of his vile sport--might have a temporary fit of mercy, as alcoholics have fits of sobriety. But suppose that what you are up against is a surgeon whose intentions are wholly good. The kinder and more conscientious he is, the more inexorably he will go on cutting. If he yielded to your entreaties, if he stopped before the operation was complete, all the pain up to that point would have been useless. But is it credible that such extremities of torture should be necessary for us? Well, take your choice. The tortures occur. If they are unnecessary then there is no God or a bad one. If there is a good God, then these tortures are necessary. For not even a moderately good Being could possibly inflict or permit them if they weren't. Either way, we're in for it.

Books on Suffering

• The Problem of Pain by C. S. Lewis 
• A Grief Observed by C. S. Lewis 
• Suffering and the Sovereignty of God -- A collection of essays edited by John Piper and Justin Taylor 
• Walking with God through Pain and Suffering by Timothy Keller

GCLI -- Kenotic Theology

This is a note to myself about the GCLI materials. In the GCLI Book 2, p. 194, the author listed "Kenosis" as a key doctrine in understanding the Incarnation. The author, Herschel Martindale, even listed the doctrine before Hypostatic Union. Kenotic Theology is a relatively new doctrine (19th and 20th centuries) and is rejected by most prominent evangelicals. I ran my objections by Brooks Simpson and Dan Bovenmeyer and they agreed. I'm outlining my objections here so if anyone asks me what I think about the GCLI materials, I can give my concerns; however, no one really cares about this stuff anymore.
Martindale listed the 5 characteristics of Kenotic Theology as follows:

"The Kenosis" (self limitation or emptying), Dr. Dennis J. Mock, (Bible Doctrine Survey): Through the incarnation, Jesus as God became real man. But how could God take on humanity and still be God? Philippians. 2:5-11 is the key text. Verse 6: "Being in very nature; God" (Deity). Verse 7: "Being made in human likeness" ;(humanity). Verse 7: "Made Himself nothing" ("emptied Himself"). Verse 8: "He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross." Christ then

1. Voluntarily gave up the right to use some divine prerogatives, and divine position for a time;
2. Condescended to add unglorified humanity to His Deity.
3. Limited the use some of His divine attributes while a man;
4. Voluntarily depended on the Holy Spirit during His early ministry;
5. Sacrificially became God's Servant.

My biggest objection is that it is just plain bad exegesis on Philippians 2:5-11. Grudem comments on the passage in his Systematic Theology:

But does Philippians 2:7 teach that Christ emptied himself of some of his divine attributes, and does the rest of the New Testament confirm this? The evidence of Scripture points to a negative answer to both questions. We must first realize that no recognized teacher in the first 1,800 years of church history, including those who were native speakers of Greek, thought that “emptied himself” in Philippians 2:7 meant that the Son of God gave up some of his divine attributes. Second, we must recognize that the text does not say that Christ “emptied himself of some powers” or “emptied himself of divine attributes” or anything like that. Third, the text does describe what Jesus did in this “emptying”: he did not do it by giving up any of his attributes but rather by “taking the form of a servant,” that is, by coming to live as a man, and “being found in human form he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross” (Phil. 2:8). Thus, the context itself interprets this “emptying” as equivalent to “humbling himself” and taking on a lowly status and position. Thus, the NIV, instead of translating the phrase, “He emptied himself,” translates it, “but made himself nothing” (Phil. 2:7 NIV). The emptying includes change of role and status, not essential attributes or nature.

A fourth reason for this interpretation is seen in Paul’s purpose in this context. His purpose has been to persuade the Philippians that they should “do nothing from selfishness or conceit, but in humility count others better than yourselves” (Phil. 2:3), and he continues by telling them, “Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others” (Phil. 2:4). To persuade them to be humble and to put the interests of others first, he then holds up the example of Christ: “Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant . . .” (Phil. 2:5–7).

Now in holding up Christ as an example, he wants the Philippians to imitate Christ. But certainly he is not asking the Philippian Christians to “give up” or “lay aside” any of their essential attributes or abilities! He is not asking them to “give up” their intelligence or strength or skill and become a diminished version of what they were. Rather, he is asking them to put the interests of others first: “Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others” (Phil. 2:4). And because that is his goal, it fits the context to understand that he is using Christ as the supreme example of one who did just that: he put the interests of others first and was willing to give up some of the privilege and status that was his as God. (pp. 550-552).

Charles Ryrie comments on Mock's use of the term, "Kenosis":

So if our understanding of kenosis comes from Philippians 2, we should get our definition of the concept there. And that passage does not discuss at all the question of how or how much Christ's glory was veiled. Nor does it say anything about the use or restriction of divine attributes. It does say that the emptying concerned becoming a man to be able to die. Thus the kenosis means leaving His preincarnate position and taking on a servant-humanity. (p. 301, Basic Theology)

F. F. Bruce has a comment on Philippians 2:7, which summarizes this blog rather nicely.

The implication is not that Christ, by becoming incarnate, exchanged the form of God for the form of a slave, but that he manifested the form of God in the form of slave ( p. 218, F.F. Bruce as quoted by Peter in O'Brien, The Epistle to Ephesians)

Jesus did have limited knowledge sometimes, but he had supernatural knowledge at other times. Jesus limited his power at times on earth, but he demonstrated his power over nature in his miracles. The point of the passage is not why Christ did not display more of his power on earth, but rather to exemplify Christ's humility. I do not understand how the two natures of Christ communicated between each other, but this doctrine of Kenosis confuses rather than clarifies the mystery.

The Foolish Things of the World...

The Fellowship of the Bean is studying 1st Corinthians. Paul in the first chapter was trying to unify the Corinthians. They were dividing themselves up according to teacher: some were for Paul, some were for Apollos, etc. Some were even claiming to be just following Christ. They claimed Paul was a poor speaker with lowly appearance. They wanted a more polish rhetorician. Paul began building up the Corinthians by tearing them down. He first pointed out that they did not choose to follow Christ. The message of the Cross was unbelievable to the world: a stumbling block to the Jews and foolishness to the Greeks. Paul stressed that God chose them and not for reasons they would like. God chose them because they were foolish and powerless. Here are the verses at the end of chapter 1.

But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, so that no human being might boast in the presence of God. (1 Corinthians 1:27-29 ESV)

Gordon Fee comments poetically on verse 29 of Chapter 1.

With this clause Paul expresses the ultimate purpose of the divine folly: "so that no one may boast before him." God, it turns out, deliberately chose the foolish things of the world, the cross and the Corinthians believers, so that he could remove forever, from every human creature, any possible grounds on their part of standing in the divine presence with something in their hands. The ground is level at the foot of the cross; not a single thing that any of us possesses will advantage him/her before the living God--not brilliance, "clout," achievement, money, or prestige. By choosing the lowly Corinthians God declared that he has forever ruled out every imaginable human system of gaining his favor. It is all--"trust him completely" (v. 31)--or nothing. (p. 84, Gordon D. Fee, The New International Commentary on the New Testament: The First Epistle to the Corinthians

Haiti, Evangecube, and Bible Verses

In Haiti we used a tool for evangelism called the "Evangecube." It is a cube that can open up in different ways to reveal different pictures that explain the Gospel in very direct terms. Some of the verses in the instructions I have already memorized, but there were some verses I do not have memorize. This post is for future reference where I can direct myself or others on how to prepare for a Haiti trip or just share the gospel.

Here's a link on how to use the Evangecube: How to use an Evangecube

I have one caution about this post. This list is more of a meditation on what would be useful in sharing the gospel. It is not necessary to memorize all these verses to use the Evangecube. These verses are definitely not necessary to share the Gospel. I am encouraging people to think about how to share the gospel and what verses they would use. In my personal experience and my personal style in sharing the gospel in Haiti, I think it would be useful for me to have these verses somewhat memorize so I can have people read a Creole bible and read the verses back to me.

Picture 1 (Man in Separated from God).

for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, (Romans 3:23 ESV)

Picture 2 (Christ on the Cross)

He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed. (1 Peter 2:24 ESV)

For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit,(1 Peter 3:18 ESV)

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.(John 3:16 ESV)

but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. (Romans 5:8 ESV)

Picture 3 (Tomb) The instructions did not have a verse for Jesus being buried in a tomb, but here's one.

When it was evening, there came a rich man from Arimathea, named Joseph, who also was a disciple of Jesus. He went to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. Then Pilate ordered it to be given to him. And Joseph took the body and wrapped it in a clean linen shroud and laid it in his own new tomb, which he had cut in the rock. And he rolled a great stone to the entrance of the tomb and went away. (Matthew 27:57-60 ESV)

Picture 4 (Risen Christ) Again no verses in the instructions, but here is the verse in the Gospel of Matthew:

But the angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here, for he has risen, as he said. Come, see the place where he lay.(Matthew 28:5-6 ESV)

Picture 5 "Cross Bridge"

Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.(John 14:6 ESV)

For good news came to us just as to them, but the message they heard did not benefit them, because they were not united by faith with those who listened. (Hebrews 4:2 ESV)

Picture 6 (Heaven and Hell)

Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. (John 3:18 ESV)

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

This verse is not in the instructions, but I think it would be useful in sharing:

Then he brought them out and said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” And they said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.” And they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all who were in his house. And he took them the same hour of the night and washed their wounds; and he was baptized at once, he and all his family. Then he brought them up into his house and set food before them. And he rejoiced along with his entire household that he had believed in God. (Acts 16:30-34 ESV)

Assurance of Salvation

But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.(John 1:12-13 ESV)

My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. (John 10:27-28 ESV)

Picture 7 (Steps for the Followers of Christ)
Love God and all people

“Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.” (Matthew 22:36-40 ESV)

Study the Bible (God's Word) Daily

Like newborn infants, long for the pure spiritual milk, that by it you may grow up into salvation— (1 Peter 2:2 ESV)

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

Pray to God constantly

do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God. And the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus. (Philippians 4:6-7 ESV)

Meet regularly with other Christians

not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near.(Hebrews 10:25 ESV)

Tell others the good news about Jesus

And he said to them, “Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation. (Mark 16:15 ESV)