Scott Duvall and Daniel Hays On The Work Of The Holy Spirit

In my studies this morning I came across something that I found to be very helpful in regards to the work of the Holy Spirit. I believe that in our current day, there is much confusion surrounding the person of the Holy Spirit and His ministry. It is my hope and prayer this morning that what I'm sharing may be of help to others in this regard.

"The Spirit's works of inspiration is finished, but his work of bringing believers to understand and receive the truth of Scripture continues. Theologians use the term illumination to refer to this ongoing work of the Spirit.

On the night before he was crucified, Jesus promised his followers that the Holy Spirit would guide them into all truth: "I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear. But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come. He will glorify me because it is from me that he will receive what he will make known to you. (John 16:12-14)

Notice how Jesus stresses that the work of the Spirit is directly related to Jesus' teachings (i.e., the Word of God). Because of the Spirit's work of inspiration and illumination, we know that the Spirit and the Word work together and must never be set against one another. Since the Spirit inspired Scripture in the first place, we should not expect him to contradict himself when he illuminates it. This means, for example, that we should not allow personal experience, religious tradition, or community consensus to stand above the Spirit-inspired Word of God. The Spirit does not add new meaning to the biblical text; instead, he helps believers understand and apply the meaning that is already there.

In this regard, Kevin Vanhoozer writes that the "Spirit may blow where, but not what, he wills." Vanhoozer goes on to describe the Spirit as the "Word's empowering presence." This description is helpful because it reminds us that the Spirit's role is not to author a new Bible (i.e., revealing new meaning through personal experience or community tradition), but to bring home to us the meaning of the Scripture he has already authored."

Bibliography:

(1) Grasping God's Word by J. Scott Duvall & J. Daniel Hays

Did Jesus Claim Deity?

Did Jesus claim to be God? Some liberal scholars argue that Jesus never claimed divinity. Bart Ehrman, in his latest book, How Jesus Became God – The Exaltation of a Jewish Preacher from Galilee, argues that Jesus never claimed to be God. According to Dr. Michael J. Kruger, to prove this point, Ehrman summarizes his arguments by dismissing the validity of John's Gospel, and by claiming the Christ was only an end times prophet and never claimed divinity [1]. 

Ehrman dismisses the Gospel of John because it appears that John's theology is more developed, giving suspicion for a later date. However, this is not a valid reason to dismiss John as a late manuscript. For example, Paul's Epistle to the Romans is highly developed theologically, but nevertheless it is dated around A.D. 57 [2]. Hebrews is another strong example. It too is highly developed theologically and is also dated in the first century. Both of these examples show that it was by no means impossible for the early church to be very developed theologically early on. If Paul was teaching justification by faith alone (Rom. 5), and the propitiatory death of Christ by A.D. 57 (Rom. 3:35), why is it difficult to believe that John had a highly developed theology by A.D. 95-100, nearly 38 years later at the least?

There is even more evidence suggesting the Gospel of John was written at the end of the first century as conservative scholars have suggested. This is suggested in the fact that it is quoted very early on in the second century. It was quoted twice by Ignatius (c. 107); once by Polycarp (c. 107);  Papias' elders (c. 110-120); and Hierapolis' Exegesis of the Lord's Oracles (c. 120-132). 

Answering Ehrman's objections to Christ's divinity, Kruger points out the inconsistency of Ehrman's claims. Kruger points out that "numerous places in the Synoptic Gospels, Christ's divinity is affirmed. For example, in Matthew 26:63-65 (cf. Mark 14:62/Luke 22:67-71) Jesus not only identifies himself as the Son of God, but then also identifies himself as the Son of Man coming to judge the world on the clouds of heaven—an identity that the chief priests regard as worthy of the charge of blasphemy. So, even if one were to discount the Gospel of John, there is sufficient evidence elsewhere for Jesus’ divine self-understanding" [3]. 

These aren't the only places where Jesus' divinity is affirmed. It is undoubtedly affirmed in Matthew 22:42-45, where He claimed to be the Old Testament Adonai. It is clearly affirmed when Jesus identifies Himself with God in the baptismal formula (Matt. 28:29). It is affirmed when Jesus claimed to forgive sins (Mark 2:5-7). It is affirmed when he allowed people to worship Him (Matt. 14:33; 28:9). It is affirmed when He claimed omnipotence (Matt. 28:18), that the dead would respond to His authority (Luke 7:14), and that nature would obey his words (Mark 4:39). 

In conclusion, with one last point aimed at proving Christ's divinity; the Jews recognized that He claimed deity for Himself, and they responded accordingly, "Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him [Jesus], because he not only had broken the Sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God" (John 5:18). The Jews understood that He was saying, "I am the Son of God". Why would they seek to kill him and crucify Him for any other reason? They accused Him of blasphemy [4]. Jesus clearly claimed divinity in His actions. He claimed to be Adonai. He claimed to forgive sins, which is something only God can do. He allowed his followers to worship Him, and He clearly identified Himself in the baptismal formula. Though some may claim that He never claimed to be God, the biblical account of Christ in the Synoptic Gospels and the Gospel of John records ample evidence that Jesus did make this claim. 

Bibliography

[1] http://michaeljkruger.com/did-jesus-claim-to-be-god-a-response-to-bart-ehrman-part-3/

[2] http://www.theopedia.com/Gospel_of_John

[3] Ibid. 

[4] Theology for Today, by Elmer L. Towns 

Pastor Michael Dent On Tips For Young Men Called To Be Pastors

Earlier this morning I had the opportunity to pick the brain of Pastor Michael Dent. Michael Dent is Pastor of Campus Church of God in Cyclone, West Virginia. While we sat down and talked, I asked him what advice would he as a pastor that has been in ministry for several decades, give to a young person feeling called to one day become a pastor. After conversing and taking notes for around an hour, all of Pastor Dent's advice could be condensed into four tips. Here they are: 

1. Manage Your Time Wisely: Time is fleeting. As the Lord's half-brother James said, your life is "just a vapor that appears for a little while and then vanishes away." (James 4:14). How you use your time matters. Plan ahead. Don't just wake up in the morning with out a plan of how your day is going to go. If you allow yourself to go throughout your day in a reactive posture, you're more likely to feel overwhelmed which will lead to stress, aggravation, and can allow you to drift aimlessly throughout the day. Resolve early in your ministry to set aside time each day to plan your days accordingly. Whether your write it out on paper, your iPhone, iPad, in your mind, whatever, make sure your days are planned in advance!
2. Get To Know The Back-End Of Things: As a pastor, you're going to be in charge of more than just crafting and preparing messages week in and week out, and visiting people that are are no longer capable to make it out to church. Get acquainted with the nuts and bolts of what it takes for a church to operate. Pastor Dent recounted to me some accounting classes that he had taken in college that helped him tremendously here and advised me to finding some resources that dealt with this area.
3. Take Time For Yourself:  When talking to Pastor Dent about rest and scheduling time for Sabbath, he said to me, "If you don't do this, you will not make it". Sabbath is essential. Now, I'm not saying "you must take observe the Sabbath!". Not at all. What I am saying is that ministry is a grueling job. According to Forbes, being a pastor is one of the most difficult leadership roles that one could take on. It may not be as taxing physically as a manual labor job, but spiritually and mentally, it is taxing. Pastor Dent recounted a recent Sabbath he took after preaching an exhausting revival. When you empty your bucket, make time for yourself to rest, reset, and meet with God and allow Him to fill your bucket back up. Operating on empty isn't good for you, your health, or the people around you. Sabbath is essential. 
4. Be Led By The Spirit: Most important of all, be led by the Holy Spirit. You cannot make it in ministry acting in your own strength; it must be in Christ's strength. Ministry is time consuming, and tiring. The battle isn't against flesh and blood, but against spiritual forces of evil in heavenly places (Eph.6:12). Though you are a preacher of the Gospel, it is the Spirit that regenerates and saves a sinner, not you. You must rely on Him for this. You are a vessel in which God uses to proclaim the Good News about His Son Jesus. The message that Jesus lived, died, was buried, and was resurrected to take away the sins of His people! 

I thank and appreciate Pastor Dent for his time this morning! I look forward to speaking with him again, and I look forward to hopefully discussing these types of things with others across the state of West Virginia in the future as well. 

Defending Mosaic Authorship of the Pentateuch and Responding To The Documentary Hypothesis

Proponents of the Documentary Hypothesis rely on various pieces of internal factors such as differing literary styles, differing names of God (Elohim; Yahweh), couplets (repeated stories), and editorial insertions. They ofter argue that writing and monotheism were unknown during the time of Moses. The Documentary Hypothesis was given its classical articulation by Julius Wellhausen (1876-83), who argued that anonymous editors compiled the Pentateuch long after Moses from the four documents: J Documents (Yahwist, 850 BC), E Documents (Elohist, 750 BC), D Documents (Deuteronomist, 621 BC), and P Documents (Priestly Code, 525 BC).

Despite the widespread acceptance of the Documentary Hypothesis, and even though this is regarded as a virtual fact by critical scholars, there are several major problems  which causes it to be suspect and therefore rejected.

First, it is contradicted by the traditional view of the Jews and the early church.

Second, the Pentateuch itself declares Mosaic authorship (Exodus 17:14, 24:4-7, 34:27; Numbers 33:1-2, 31:9).

Third, the rest of the Old Testament presupposes Mosaic authorship (Joshua 1:7-8, 8:32-34, 22:5; 1 Kings 2:3; 2 Kings 13:23, 14:6, 21:8; 1 Chronicles 1:1; Ezra 6:18; Daniel 9:11-13; Malachi 4:4).

Fourth, the New Testament designates Moses as the author of the Pentateuch (Matthew 19:4-8; Mark 7:10, 12:26; Luke 16:29-31, 20:37, 24:27; John 5:46-47, 7:19-23; Acts 15:1; Romans 10:5-19).

Fifth, the Pentateuch reflects a thematic literary unity that implies a single author.

Sixth, the author writes as an eye witness to much of the Pentateuch’s content, which would be impossible for a writer long after the events (Exodus 15:27; Numbers 2:1-31, 11:7-8).

Seventh, the writer demonstrates familiarity with Egyptian culture and geography, which would be unlikely for a later Judean writer (Genesis 13:10, 16:1-3, 33:18, 39:4, 40:9-11, 41:40-43). Clearly Moses’ Egyptian education would have certainly qualified him to write the Torah. In addition, archaeologists have discovered multiple written languages existed longer for the time of Moses.

The Documentary Hypothesis is built upon unfounded assumptions and evidence. The documents that the theory relies upon have never been discovered. There is no archaeological evidence nor extrabiblical historical proof that such documents (J, E, D, P) ever existed. To the contrary, archaeological discoveries in nearby ancient Near Eastern countries that date to the period of Abraham and Moses contain similar laws and customs. These finds rebut the documentary presuppositions that some material in the Pentateuch is historically impossible or represents life at a much later period. After careful analysis of the theory, Moses Segal of Hebrew University rejected it because of “the absurd lengths the which it carries the analysis of the text, breaking up homogenous passages, and even single verses into smaller fragments.”

Conservative evangelical scholars recognize that certain small elements of the Pentateuch were probably added later, such as the account of Moses’ death and burial (Deut. 34), but they believe Moses was the substantial author of the Pentateuch. He probably used ancient patriarchal records (toledoth) to compile the early chapters of Genesis so he should be considered the primary editor, arranger, and author of this material as is affirmed by the biblical account.

Bibliography:

Hindson Ed, Essence of the Old Testament (Nashville, Tennessee; B&H Publishing, 2012), 48-49.

A Critical Review of The Gospel of Jesus Wife

The Gospel of Jesus Wife is a fragment of ancient papyrus written in the Egyptian Coptic language. Like something straight out of Dan Brown’s The Davinci Code, this so-called “gospel” makes the claim that Jesus had a wife. The Harvard News Office reported that the papyrus shows close connections to other newly discovered gospels written at that time, especially the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Mary, and the Gospel of Philip (1).

Today news outlets online rushed to confirm that The Gospel of Jesus’ Wife has now been confirmed as “authentic”.

For Christians that are familiar with textual criticism, and Apocryphal literature, this should immediately raise suspicion. The Gospels of Thomas, Mary, and Philip are all writings that were produced by the 2nd-century heretical Gnostic movement, which were never accepted by orthodox Christianity. Gnosticism was a philosophical worldview that stressed special knowledge. The word comes from the Greek gnosismeaning knowledge. Gnosticism was prevalent in the first century during and after the time of Christ.  It maintained that matter is evil and spirit is good.  Because matter is bad human souls, in a sense, are trapped in a material world (2).

After reading more about The Gospel of Jesus Wife this evening, red flags began going off everywhere. This papyrus clearly does not meet the criteria to be confirmed as “authentic”.  Authentic in my mind and the minds of others would be to say that it is Theópneustos (which means God-breathed). However, when this document is met with scrutiny it becomes clear that it is of course not authentic in anyway shape or form. The claims made today is nothing more than a tactic that has been launched to strike fear in the hearts of Christians everywhere and to cast doubt on the reliability and authenticity of the Bible. If Christians can be made to believe that there are lost books out there that didn’t make into the canon of Scripture for whatever reason, then their job is complete! However, there is a specific reason why this book, and these other Gnostic writings never made it into the canon of Scripture, not counting that they came from a non-Christian, heretical movement.

There are three tests that a book must pass to be considered part of the canon of Scripture:

1. Apostolicity
2. Rule of Faith
3. Consensus

The test of Apostlicity means that a book must be written by an Apostle or one connected to an apostle. When applied to the New Testament, most of its books automatically meet this requirement (those written by Matthew, John, Paul, and Peter). Mark and Luke were both associates of Paul. James was half brother of Jesus, and Jude is either an apostle or the half brother of Jesus. The only book that has much difficulty with this criterion is Hebrews. Many in the early church believed that Paul wrote Hebrews, but many NT scholars today suggest that it was written by Luke. However, we can be certain that this book meets the criterion of Apostlicity. Hebrews 13:23 says, “Be aware that our brother Timothy has been released.” Whoever the author was, this reference places him within the Pauline circle.

The Gospel of Jesus’ Wife does not meet this criterion. According to articles, it has been dated to the 8th or 9th century AD, and may be as early as the 4th century. This puts this document way out of the range to meet the criteria of Apostlicity. John was the last Apostle to die, and according to church history, this occurred around 100 AD. This document was written at the most 800-900 years after the death of the last Apostle (8th-9th century date). At the very least, it was written 400 years after the last Apostle (4th-century date).

The rule of faith refers to the conformity between the book and orthodoxy. “Orthodoxy” means “right doctrine”. Therefore, the document had to be consistent with Christian truth as the standard that was recognized throughout Christian churches (e.g., in Corinth, Ephesus, Philippi, etc.). If a document supported heretical teachings, it was rejected.

The Gospel of Jesus’ Wife does not meet this criterion. According to its internal testimony, the document states, “Jesus said to them, my wife” (3). When the rule of faith is applied to this document, it becomes obvious that this is an aberrant teaching that was not accepted within the early Christian church. It is not consistent with the doctrines found within the testimonies of eye-witnesses to the life, death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. If Jesus had a wife, his own brothers (James and Jude) would have surely mentioned it. If Jesus had a wife, surely his apostles would have mentioned it in their writings.

Finally, consensus refers to the widespread and continuous use of a document by the churches. Widespread acceptance could sum up this point. For a document to be “authentic” as claimed by secular scholars, this document would have to meet this criteria, and it simply does not. Whatever this document is, it was not widespread in orthodox Christian churches or it would have been included into the canon. We also have to keep in mind that 1st, 2nd, and 3rd century Christians wouldn’t have ever even seen this document since the earliest possible date for it is around the 4th century. It simply doesn’t date back far enough to have been widely circulated, and even if it did it still didn’t reflect orthodox Christian teaching, which would have caused it to be rejected immediately.

Applying these criteria to the books contained within the New Testament, and to those that were left out shows the consistency of the canon as it was handed down. The Gospel of Jesus Wife fails these criteria. It cannot be definitively linked to Apostles, or those associated with them. On this basis, it fails the test of Apostlicity. The Gospel of Jesus Wife teaches that Jesus had a wife, which contradicts the teachings found in the eye-witness testimonies which makes up part of the canon of Scripture. On this basis, it fails the rule of faith test. The Gospel of Jesus Wife was not used universally or continuously by the early church, nor is it quoted by any early church father, etc. On this basis, it fails the consensus test. Since this document fails all three tests, it must therefore be rejected and regarded as a counterfeit.

Bibliography:

1. HDS scholar announces existence of new early Christian gospel from Egypt (Harvard Divinity School, 18 September 2012)
2. http://carm.org/questions/about-philosophy/what-gnosticism
3. http://gospelofjesusswife.hds.harvard.edu/testing-indicates-gospel-jesuss-wife-papyrus-fragment-be-ancient
4. Essence of the New Testament, Towns & Gutierrez, 2012, pg. 4

Why Should Christians Evangelize If God Is Sovereign?

Why should we as Christians spend our time and energy evangelizing if God has already predetermined before the foundations of the world who will be saved and who will not be? If God has an elect group of people, will they not just come to faith no matter what happens? Why do we need to preach the Gospel? These were all questions that I had prior to becoming a Calvinist. I’m sure there are many people out there today that are asking similar questions (I know, because I see them in anti-Calvinist threads on an almost daily basis!).

As a young Christian, I had vehemently opposed the idea that God had predetermined the fate of humanity before the foundation of the world. It just did not sit right with me (partly because of my pride, and partly because I didn’t understand my own sinfulness at the time). I could not for the life of me understand why we were commanded to evangelize if it was all a “done deal”, so to say.

To make a long story short, God in His grace began to peel back the layers of my own pride and ego, and began to show me my own sinfulness before Him. Over time, I came to understand that the sovereignty of God and evangelism actually are not enemies at all, but rather they are the very best of friends. It is my intention to help others that may be struggling as I was to understand how God’s sovereignty and evangelism are actually friends, rather than enemies.

Why Evangelize If God Is Sovereign? 

God ordains not only the end, but He also ordains the means to that end. The Apostle Paul in Romans 1:16 tells us that the Gospel is “God’s power for salvation to everyone who believes”. In Romans 10:13, he tells us that “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved”. So we see that the Gospel is the power of God for salvation for everyone who believes, and that everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved. From there, the apostle begins to delve deeper. He asks “but how will they call on Him they have not believed in and how can they believe without hearing about Him? And how can they hear without a preacher? And how can they preach unless they are sent?” (Romans 10:14-15 HCSB).

To lay out Paul’s thinking, it would look similar to this:

1. The Gospel is the power of God for salvation,
2. and all that call on the name of the Lord will be saved.
3. But, how can they call on the name of the Lord if they haven’t heard about him to begin with?
4. How can they hear about Him and this power without a preacher?
5. How can they preach about Him and this power for salvation if they are not sent out?

Paul knew that God is sovereign, and had already ordained the end. But, he knew that the means was essential to get to that end.  He talks about God’s glorious and mighty sovereignty so strongly in chapters 8, 9, and 11 of Romans. But here in chapter 10, smashed right in between those chapters, he addresses the importance of sending out preachers of the Gospel to evangelize; “how will they call on Him they have no believed in, and how can they believe without hearing about Him? How can they even hear about Him and what He did for sinners without a preacher?” [1]

The Gospel – The Ordained Means For Salvation

This is why we evangelize. God is sovereign. He has ordained the end (salvation) and the means to that end (the preaching of the Gospel). God's elect cannot come to God without believing in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and they cannot respond to this Gospel message without hearing it being preached. We do not know who the elect are. They are scattered all throughout the world. They are a part of every tongue, tribe, and nation. So, we preach indiscriminately to all and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, just as Jesus commanded.

Bibliography

(1) http://www.opc.org/new_horizons/NH01/07b.html

The Importance of Communion

This evening while reading through a very short book  titled, The Heart of Love: Obeying God's Two Great Commandments which was written by my theology professor, Ted Rivera, I was reminded of the importance of communion.

As I was reading through this and being reminded of the importance of communion, two things struck me: 1) I haven't partaken in communion a great deal as a Christian, and 2) It's mostly because I, and most of the churches that I have attended has unfortunately had a bad theology of communion.

My bad theology of communion was perpetuated mostly by my own selfishness. Often I felt that communion was about my own holiness. But, Rivera rightly points out communion isn't about me, or you, or even us as a whole. Ultimately, communion begins with our love of Christ and His holiness, and a remembrance of His broken body, and His blood that was poured out for our sins.

Rivera rightly states, "communion provides us with a regular opportunity to evaluate our relationship with God: 'Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink of the cup' (1 Cor 11:28). All of us sin. The purpose behind this self-examination is not intended to help us determine whether we have earned the right to participate in communion because we have been particularly obedient of late. Instead as we examine ourselves -- and see our sins, our failings, and our short comings all to easily -- we are compelled to remember our great, cavernous need for Jesus. So also we are compelled to remember the Bible's call to holiness and obedience, the fruit of a life of love. . . It's important for us to recognize every time we take communion together that we are declaring to our Lord and to one another that, indeed, we are sinners saved by grace. Even the apostle John, known throughout history as the beloved disciple, wrote, 'If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us' (1 John 1:8). Whenever we remember Jesus and his titanic sacrifice on our behalf, we cannot help but examine ourselves and be reminded of how great our need was for that saving work. This surely brings forth love toward God in the believers heart!" [1].

Communion is very important in the life of a believer. It's main purpose is to see in the bread the broken body of our Lord, and in the wine, the blood that was poured out to satisfy the wrath of God against our sins. Jesus said, "whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him" (John 6:56). If we long for intimacy with Christ, we should anticipate and prepare for the Lord's Table.

Bibliography: 

[1] The Heart of Love: Obeying God's Two Great Commandments by Ted Rivera