The Bible is Beyond Human Production - by Jovan Payes

Introduction
It has been a few years since Mel Gibson’s movie, "The Passion of the Christ," was all that the world could talk about. It was a situation bound to receive controversial media coverage – it just comes with the territory of religion in the media. A case in point was the February 16 issue of Newsweek published in anticipation of Gibson’s film. About a week or so before this publication hit the stands, Jon Meacham’s cover story entitled, "Who Killed Jesus?," was published online on MSNBC.com in four internet pages.

Meacham’s article feigned an attempt to evaluate Gibson’s new movie, and instead, assaulted the biblical text. He openly affirms, "the Bible is the product of human authors." He further argues that these authors were producing religious propaganda for Christianity, and like any other literary work the Bible is plagued with historical inaccuracies. Concerning the Bible Meacham writes:

The Bible can be a problematic source. Though countless believers take it as the immutable word of God, Scripture is not always a faithful record of historical events; the Bible is the product of human authors who were writing in particular times and places with particular points to makeand visions to advance.[1]

This is just one quote from a number of similar statements found throughout the article. The editor of Newsweek couches his statement with liberal theological overtones. In other words, Scripture is regarded as human produced literature designed only to give morals, void of any direct involvement of God.

Media's Treatment of the Bible
Meacham’s view of the Bible articulates three ways the Bible is often misrepresented in mainstream American media: (1) the Bible is of sole human origin, (2) the Scriptures are unreliable historical records, and (3) the biblical sources are legendary that need specious sources to embellish the narrative to provide the "true story." With a national circulation over 3 million, there is no doubt that the church, our neighbors (religious or otherwise) and our youth our influenced by this.

How shall we respond? Bible believers need to be able to affirm the following response. Although these erroneous views of the Bible are widespread, the Bible (i.e. Scripture) is beyond that of human production and consequently trustworthy, because the internal evidence of predictive prophecy, the uncanny historical accuracy, and the marvelous unity of the 66 books is of supernatural origin and guidance.

Predictive Prophecy
Predictive prophecy is one of the most powerful lines of evidence that the Bible is beyond that of human production. The specific foretelling of future events serves as an accurate brief definition. Moreover, there are at least three criteria: (1) it must be given separated by a significant amount of time, (2) there are specific details (not generalities) and, (3) 100% fulfillment must follow (not 95% etc.). As an example, observe the prophecy of the rise and fall of four world powers of antiquity given in Daniel 2 and its relationship to the establishment of the church in the first century.

The image of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream (Dan. 2:1-24) was a picture of 4 sequential kingdoms: Babylonia (605-539 B.C), Persia (539-331 B.C.), Hellenistic (331-63 B.C.), and Roman (63 B.C-A.D. 476).[2] Daniel living in the 6th century B.C. predicted the fall of Babylon and the rise of these world empires. Furthermore, in Daniel 2:44-45 the prophecy was declared that during the reign of Imperial Rome, the God of heaven would establish His kingdom for all time.

While Rome was in power Jesus was born, lived, ministered, died, and resurrected. He declared that he was going to establish His church (Matt. 16:18), which in this context means His kingdom (Matt. 16:19-20; Mark 9:1). This kingdom-church would come after the Holy Spirit had come upon the 12 Apostles (Acts 1:4-8), which arrived on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2). The prophecy was fulfilled as precisely as it was given centuries in advance.[3]

Precise Historical Accuracy
Historical accuracy is another line of reasoning which demonstrates that the Bible is beyond that of human production. The book of Acts is a powerful example. Luke wrote the book of Acts, which is a chronicle of the labors of the apostles Peter and Paul as the gospel goes from Jerusalem to the entire world. The accuracy of Acts is such that no human could have been so accurate, except for the guidance of the Holy Spirit; observe:

This companion of Paul was a careful and meticulous historian. For instance, in Acts he mentions thirty-two countries, fifty-four cities, and nine Mediterranean islands. He also mentions ninety-five persons in Acts, sixty-two of which are not named elsewhere in the New Testament. He is thoroughly familiar with the geographical and political conditions of his day. And this is really amazing since the political/territorial situation was in a constant state of flux and flow in Luke’s time.[4]

Accessibility to libraries was minimal due to how few or exclusive they were, and even if they had reference works, "the events Luke was trying to chronicle had taken place – at least at the beginning – in what the people of that day would have said were remote areas of the world."[5]

There has yet to be historical accuracy of the magnitude of Acts and the Bible recovered from antiquity to the present.

Unity of the Scriptures
A third line of argumentation is the unparalleled unity of the Scriptures. For instance, Jeremiah 25:1 and Daniel 1:1 are among a variety of passage appealed to substantiate the claim that the Bible is not a harmonious work. Here is the argument. Jeremiah 25:1 and Daniel 1:1 refer to the same event in antiquity, the invasion of Judah by Nebuchadnezzar. However, the date of the event mentioned appears upon face value discrepant for Jeremiah says the event happened in the 4th year of Jehoiakim’s reign while Daniel says the timeframe was during the 3rd year of Jehoiakim’s rule.

If the two accounts cannot be harmonized then this is a historical mistake, underscoring a purely human enterprise. The answer to this riddle, however, lies in the distinct systems of dating reignal years used by Daniel and Jeremiah. Bruce K. Waltke writes:

In Babylonia the year in which the king ascended the throne was designated specifically as "the year of accession to the kingdom," and this was followed by the first, second, and subsequent years of rule. In Palestine, on the other hand, there was no accession year as such, so that the length of rule was computed differently, with the year of accession being regarded as the first year of the king's reign.[5]

Therefore, Daniel living in Babylonia used that system, while Jeremiah employed the Palestinian method. The unity spans cross-cultural methods of communication, how wonderful! The remarkable unity is so strong that even difficult passages backfire on the critic.

As so often happens, the supposed discrepancies become evidence against the critics of the Bible.

Conclusion
The Bible is not a problematic source; however, that does not mean that it has no range of complexity. The Bible is "a faithful record of historical events," and its principles are grounded upon historical reality (e.g. creation, the Exodus, the resurrection of Jesus, etc.). The Bible comes together like pieces of a jig-saw puzzle. It is due to overwhelming evidence like this that we affirm that the Bible is beyond human production.

Sources

1. Meacham, Jon. "Who Killed Jesus?" MSNBC.com. 16 Feb. 2004. Accessed: 12 Aug. 2007; p.1 par.5.
2. Boyd, Robert T. World's Bible Handbook. Nashville: Nelson, 1996; p. 309.
3. Jackson, Jason. "How Can the Church be the Fulfillment of Daniel 2.44?" Christian Courier Online. 28 Sept. 2005. Accessed: 16 Aug. 2007.
4. Jackson, Wayne. Biblical Studies in the Light of Archaeology. Montgomery, AL: Apologetics Press, 1982; p. 46.
5. Boice, James M. Acts: An Expositional Commentary. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1997; p. 14.
6. Waltke, Bruce K. "The Date of the Book of Daniel." Bibliotheca Sacra 133 (1976); p. 326.

Comments on 2 Peter 1.1-11 - by Jovan Payes

Greeting (2 Peter 1:1-2)
Unlike modern letter writing standards, ancient letter writers put the author’s name first, followed by some reference that connects the author and the readers. Peter calls himself a servant and apostle, two terms that are quite descriptive. As a servant (the word usually means slave), Peter stresses his submission to God and his disposition regarding his ministry to others. The word apostle stresses his spiritual commission to represent God and his message.

The readers are those who share the same faith as he does, they are on "the same level as the author."[1] This faith is personal, as developed with their relationship with God and Jesus. Then consistent with ancient letter writing, Peter sends them a greeting. Grace is usually seen as the Greek salutation, while peace is typically considered to be the Hebrew way of saying hello. It is probably because of what Peter will address later, that he sends this greeting in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord.

In fact, 2 Peter places a high premium on knowledge, especially as it pertains to knowledge and morality, and knowledge and truth. True knowledge appropriately originates from God and of Jesus our Lord.

3-4: The Basis for Godly Living
Peter continues the theme of knowledge and says that it is through Christ’s divine power (God-based ability), that Christians have been given access to all things that pertain to life and godliness. Christians must learn here that "the ultimate condition, prerequisite, or essential foundation for holiness in the believer’s life is God’s divine power."[2]

The Christian has this access through knowledge, but this is not simple knowledge, it is the knowledge of him who called us to his own glory and excellence. The reference to his glory and excellence is a pointer to which our calling finds completion -to abide with God. Yet this final reality can only be obtained through knowledge of him.

Knowledge has given us his precious and very great promises, which are the means by which God allows us to become partakers of the divine nature (i.e. to share the nature of God). Modern man -even the modern Christian- may feel skeptical about this promise,[3] but it is what we have to look forward to (1 John 3.2). This nature is obtained as one learns how to escape from the corruption that is in the world because of sinful desire. Christians are expected to employ God’s knowledge to do this, it will not happen by accident.

5: Faith, Virtue, and knowledge
Naturally, since the Christian aim is to escape the corruption of this world and partake of the divine nature through knowledge, Peter provides a list of virtues that must be added to one’s lifestyle in order reach these goals.

The virtues described in the chain in 1.5-7 not only are holy actions, but the very chain indicates the fullness of holiness that they must strive for. Thus those who seek them will be completely holy.[4]

In fact, the word supplement suggests "the believer contributes lavishly to the work of his salvation."[5] Christians must contribute faith with virtue; moreover, this faith is probably the same referred to earlier -a personally developed reliance upon God- that must be contributed to with virtue (moral excellence).[6]

Furthermore, Christians are to supplement their moral excellence with knowledge, meaning that in a fully functional godly behavioral system they are to have knowledge. Contextually, this knowledge is what allows Christians to become partakers of the divine nature, after escaping the corruption that is in the world because of sinful desire.

6: Self-Control, Steadfastness, and Godliness
In addition to moral excellence and knowledge, to become completely holy and capable to partake of the divine nature, the Christian is to assume the development of self-control, steadfastness, and godliness. Some translations have the word temperance (KJV), but this is inaccurate since now the word "temperance" is limited to self-control against alcohol. The English word used here comes from a Greek word meaning, "to exercise complete control over one’s desires and actions - ‘to control oneself, to exercise self control.’"[7]

Next, is the idea of bearing up courageously under suffering, here translated steadfastness.[8] And then, disciples of Jesus are to supplement their behavior with godliness. One would think that this exhortation is unnecessary since the whole list of virtues revolves around the idea of devotion towards God in such a way where one "does that which is well-pleasing to Him."[9]

7: Brotherly Affection and Love
The last two virtues of Christian godliness are brotherly affection and love, elements which are of special consideration because there is a distinction being made here between the two. Brotherly affection is mutual love, while love is all the more encompassing.

Fred Craddock discusses these words in the following way:

Mutual affection is literally ‘love of one’s brothers and sisters’ (philadelphia) and is an essential component of church life. But that is just the point: mutual affection, reciprocal love, pertains to life in the church, to the fellowship. Beyond that, however is love, agape. Love does not require reciprocity; it includes the stranger, and even the enemy. It behaves favorably and helpfully toward the other regardless of who the other is or what the other had done.[10]

8-9: The Importance of these Characteristics
Peter does not hold back here, where people are prone to; instead, he affirms clearly that these things -qualities- must be in the Christians possessions and in the process of development. In so doing, he affirms, they will keep you from being ineffective or unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. Peter does not let loose of two concepts -godly living and knowledge- for the two are joined at the proverbial "hip."

This will stand more clearly in stark contrast to the false teachers in chapter 2. Rigorous training and development in godly behaviors assures one that they will not become "useless and unproductive" in the joys that exist in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. A strong warning is made against those who would lack these qualities, stressing that to lack these qualities is the result of forgetting that a person’s sinfulness was forgiven, and that these sins represent one’s imperfection and need to develop morally. Failure to do this will be detrimental to one’s calling and election.

10-11: Making Your Calling and Election Sure
Because of the dangers that inhere should a Christian not develop these qualities of godly living, Peter warns with a logical conclusion, be all the more diligent to make your calling and election sure. The answer to the question "why?" is provided, for if you practice these qualities you will never fall. It is crystal clear that Peter is demonstrating that one’s salvation can be a fragile thing, should one neglect personal development.

Neglect will give way to falling, and contextually, this fall refers to one’s failure to enter into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Peter even affirms, by supplementing one’s life with godly characteristics, one will be richly provided an entrance into this kingdom; however, failure to do this makes this entrance void - it is not just the richness of the heavenly entrance being considered, it’s the entrance into heaven itself.[11]

Sources

1. Perkins, Pheme. First and Second Peter, James, and Jude. Interpretation. Ed. James L. Mays. Louisville, KY: Knox, 1995; p. 167.
2. Howe, Frederic R. "The Christian's Life in Peter's Theology." Bibliotheca Sacra 157 (2000): 303-14; p. 307.
3. Perkins, p. 169.
4. Neyrey, Jerome H. 2 Peter, Jude: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. Anchor Bible. Vol. 37C. Gen. ed. William F. Albright and David N. Freedman. New York: Doubleday, 1993; p. 154.
5. Kistemaker, Simon J. Exposition of the Epistles of Peter and the Epistle of Jude. New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1987; p. 251.
6. Newman, Jr., Barclay M. A Concise Greek-English Dictionary of the New Testament. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1993; p. 24.
7. (L-N) Louw, Johannes P., and Eugene A. Nida. Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains. 2nd ed. Eds. Rondal B. Smith and Karen A. Munson. New York: United Bible Societies, 1989. 2 vols; 1.751.
8. Vine, W.E., Merrill F. Unger, and William White, Jr. Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words. Nashville: Nelson, 1984. 2 vols; 2.200.
9. Vine, Unger, and White, 2.273.
10. Craddock, Fred B. 1 and 2 Peter and Jude. Westminster Bible Companion. Louisville: WJK, 1995; p. 101.
11. Kistemaker, pp. 257-58.

Purge the Evil Person: A Brief Analysis of 1 Corinthians 5.1-13 - by Jovan Payes

Introduction
One of the most difficult public displays of Christian obedience to God is the withdrawal of fellowship from a recalcitrant Christian. It is perhaps one of the most dynamic of commands to follow in the New Testament. Before reaching such a public excision, the Lord Jesus addressed the problem of confronting a wayward brother with the view to "gain" him (Matt. 18.15-17).

Preliminary Thoughts
The Lord sets forth a four-pronged redemptive procedure that begins under the most private of circumstances – "you and him alone" (18.15); in this setting, then, a private appeal to repent is offered. If the rebellious child of God maintains their posture, then the circle of brotherly concern widens to "one or two others" that come to witness the call to repentance (18.16).

Unfortunately, even at this point some are so entrenched in sin, that they will not hear the admonitions; consequently, the Lord says, "if he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church" (18.17). The publication of the situation allows the church as a whole to make an appeal to their fellow saint. All the "ties that bind" are summoned to invite this wayward soul to repent.

The Lord acknowledges that some will not be gained back to the fold by these loving and redemptive attempts, and sets forth the final process – consider the rebellious Christian as both an outsider of the blessings of the Christian covenant and a traitor who has chosen to serve Satan instead of Christ. In other words, the congregation must "disassociate the offender from the church fellowship."[1] The saved has now become the lost – how ironically tragic.

A Flagrant Issue
The New Testament has several examples of discipline; most usually they are of a very flagrant issue. For example, in 3 John 9-10 the apostle of love forewarns his audience that he will bring discipline upon Diotrephes the "missions" killer. Or, when Paul abbreviates his role in the discipline of Hymenaeus and Alexander ("delivered them to Satan"), who made shipwreck of their faith (1 Tim. 1.19-20).

However, in 1 Corinthians 5.1-13, Paul deals with an outlandish mode of porneia that is not even "tolerated" among the pagans (5.1 ESV). Porneia is the Greek word that is commonly translated "fornication" in older translations, and in newer translations as "sexual immorality."

The truth of the matter is that porneia is a generic term for "illicit sexual intercourse."[2] Porneia is an umbrella term and context must determine the type that is under consideration. The flagrant form of porneia Paul addresses in 1 Corinthians 5.1 is this, "a [Christian] man has his father’s wife" (i.e. his stepmother). The severity of this behavior is evident by the fact that Paul appeals to the fact that Gentiles – or pagans – do not even permit such behavior.

This context provides the most insightful New Testament example of withdrawing Christian fellowship from recalcitrant saints. And as careful Bible students, we must definitely rehearse the valuable instruction of these verses.

The Duel Rebuke
Paul moves from the case of the man with his stepmother, and draws attention to the congregation’s part in this flagrant relationship. The church had been "arrogant" and not "mournful" about the sinful relationship (5.2), and argues immediately that removal of the Christian was the appropriate reaction. The church at Corinth was laden with arrogance (4.6, 18-19), and here Paul rebukes them for this dispositional flaw that was affecting their decision making process on this matter.

Paul demonstrates that not only is the rebellious person accountable to God, but that the church too cannot subscribe to a lax posture about known – public – sin in the church. The church is responsible and accountable to respond to a situation where a saint’s sin has become public knowledge. The apostle’s prescribes that a period of "mourning" along with "disciplinarian action" is the appropriate reaction to sins of a public nature.

The Judgment
With the next flip of his pen, Paul moves into position to make the judgment Corinth should have – he places judgment upon the Christian and the sexually immoral relationship with his un-Christian stepmother (5.3-5). There is no clear statement regarding the woman in view, aside from the fact that she is the wife of his father.[3]

However, since the judgment is upon the Christian man, "it seems safe to assume that she is not a Christian."[4] Paul writes:

When you are assembled in the name of the Lord Jesus and my spirit is present, with the power of our Lord Jesus, you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord. (1 Cor. 5.4-5 ESV)

The context for such a procedure is the public assembly of the church. This recalls the instruction of Jesus regarding the procedures to discipline another for sin (Matt. 18.15-17), the last two of which are set in a public context. Paul assesses that this situation is a public matter; and consequently, the licentious Christian must be disciplined immediately by the church in the public eye. The goal of this withdrawal is redemptive – "that his spirit may be saved."[5]

The judgment is upon his sin and behavior, but the goal of the discipline is to restore him back – i.e. to gain him (Matt. 18.15). In Hebrews 12.12-13, the author demonstrates that discipline is a privilege of sonship (12.5-8), and that the purpose is so "that the lame may not be put out of joint but rather be healed" (12.13).

Discipline is not designed to "disable permanently those who have experienced the crippling effects of sin. Rather, His purpose is to heal and restore the repentant to spiritual usefulness"[6]; in other words, "that we may share his holiness" (Heb. 12.10).

The Imagery of Influence and Purity
Corinth was crippling the unfaithful man’s ability to be restored by failing to address his immoral relationship. Paul makes very clear that both the church and the man were in a spiritually precarious position. Paul appeals to the imagery of the Passover, where preparing unleavened bread demanded the need to remove the leaven (yeast) from the lump of dough (5.6-7).

The bread is the congregation, and the leaven (yeast) is the culprit sinner in the church, and Paul speaks very clearly that the bread must be prepared for the Passover feast which is the Christian faith. From this, the apostle suggests that the Christian who is in a sexually immoral relationship with his stepmother must be removed from the congregation. Otherwise, the church would be affected by the "leaven" (influence) of this spiritually rebellious relationship.

But the truth is, they were already being afflicted by his influence, making it necessary for a public withdrawal to maintain the purity of the loaf (i.e. the church). David Williams, in his profitable work, Paul’s Metaphors: Their Context and Character, writes:

Paul had been speaking of the leaven (yeast), every trace of which had to be cleaned out of the house before the Passover was celebrated. On this analogy, he demanded that the Corinthians put their "house" in order by removing from among themselves what he called the "old leaven," a particularly appalling instance of sexual immorality that the church had condoned (vv. 1-5).[7]

The apostle, then, was addressing what should have been quite obvious; but, because of the Corinthian’s arrogance the real issue (i.e. the issue of purity) was not seen as relevant – how shameful. May we strive to then the lesson of Corinth.

The Place of Christian Judgment
Paul later recalls a previous letter, where he instructed them "not to associate with sexually immoral people" (5.9 ESV). But it does not seem that they were even practicing such instruction, evident by the fact that they had allowed this immoral situation a harbor of protection in the bay of misguided church fellowship. Yet, Paul did not even suggest mere sexually immoral people in general. He meant, defiant immoral Christians are not to be associated with (5.9-11).

It is very interesting to observe that Paul moves from a specific case of porneia, and ends with formulating a generic principle against Christians practicing immorality in general – poneroi (i.e. evil doers).[8] Verse 11 is very clear that purity focused Christians are not to be involved with Christians who practice evil, and it is transparent where Paul stands on the matter by saying that eating a meal with them is forbidden. Such a withdrawal of Christian fellowship reflects the disfellowshipped Christian’s heavenly reality – estrangement from God (Matt. 18.18-20).

Christians have a responsibility to each other before the Lord (Matt. 18.15-17). This responsibility is to "judge" each other regarding sin when necessary (1 Cor. 5.12). To support his case, Paul appeals back to a formula common in Deuteronomy that highlights the need to judge insiders rather than outsiders of the covenant (17.7, 19.19, 21.21, 22.21, 24, 24.7),[9] and affirms : "God judges those outside. ‘Purge the evil person from among you’" (5.13).

The Aftermath: Mission Accomplished
What ever became of this gentleman and his situation after being withdrawn from? The answer depends upon the view taken as to how many letters Paul wrote to the Corinthians. It is true that Paul mentions a previous letter written to them prior to 1 Corinthians (1 Cor. 5.9), but did he write a third letter that would chronologically fit between 1 and 2 Corinthians (2 Cor 2:3-4; 7:8)?[10]

Without delving into this academic discussion, we set forth our assessment of the discussion. Essentially, we assume for the time being that Paul wrote three letters: (1) A lost letter prior to 1 Corinthians (5.9); (2) 1 Corinthians known as the "sorrowful letter" or "severe letter" (2 Cor 2:3-4; 7:8); and (3) 2 Corinthians.

Chronologically placing 1 and 2 Corinthians together contributes greatly in answering our question. In 2 Corinthians 2.6-11, Paul speaks of the reward of making the Corinthians sorrowful, and a certain punishment rendered by the majority of the congregation upon a certain individual. The connection is drawn that the man in 1 Corinthians 5 is the same as the gentleman made sorrowful in 2 Corinthians 2.

This man was sufficiently disciplined (2.6), and now the congregation's responsibility was three-fold (2.7-8): (1) "forgive him"; (2) "comfort him"; and (3) "reaffirm brotherly love." There will a great deal of Divine judgment upon those that do not respond in this fashion to a penitent brother or sister, for this is a great test of Christian obedience (2 Cor. 2.9-10; Matt. 6.14-16).

To the apostle, it appears that the matter of restoration of fellowship is just as important as the withdrawal of fellowship; the reason being, Satan is prepared to take advantage of our short comings at these pivitol moments (2.11). Would it not be appropriate to make the restoration announcement just as public as the withdrawal process was? It would definitely seem so.[11]

Conclusion
It seems therefore important to stress that the same amount of effort it took in the discipline process, should follow in the restoration process. There is to be no more invisible line of fellowship between the restored and the brethren, for that is over and the saint has returned. Neither should a "we'll see" attitude embody the brotherhood, but a loving reception - a mirror of heaven - is expected by Paul.

This is the victory of faith, the power of the blood of Christ, and the faithfulness of God. This is a great test of Christian faithfulness. May we be ever minded to discipline when needed and repair the splintered connections of fellowship after restoration. May we likewise be faithful to receive those who have been restored.

Sources

1. Laney, J. Carl. "The Biblical Practice of Church Discipline." Bibliotheca Sacra 143 (1986): 353-64; p. 361.
2. Vine, W.E., Merrill F. Unger, and William White, Jr. Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words. Nashville: Nelson, 1984. 2 vols.; p. 2.252; Thayer, Joseph H. Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament.1896. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1999; p. 532.
3. The phrase reads: ὥστε γυναῖκά τινα τοῦ πατρὸς ἔχειν. Simon J. Kistemaker observes that "in Jewish circles, the wording wife of his father meant 'stepmother,'" and observes that God repeatedly told the Israelites to refrain from sexual relationships with their father's wife (cf. Lev. 18.8, 20.11; Deut. 22.30, 27.20). Kistemaker, S.J. "'Deliver This Man to Satan' (1 Cor. 5.5): A Case Study in Church Discipline." Master's Seminary Journal 3.1 (1992): 33-46; p. 35.
4. South, Tommy. That We May Share His Holiness: A Fresh Approach to Church Discipline. Abilene: Bible Guides, 1997; p. 87.
5. Some view the expulsion here as permanent, and redemption only to be found at the end of time (Harris 146-48); however, such a conclusion runs counter to the instruction of Jesus on discipline (Matt. 18.15-17), to Paul's use of similar language in disciplining and restoring false teachers (1 Tim. 1.20), and the general tenor of the New Testament regarding cleansing of sin in the Christian's life (1 John 1.6-2.3). Harris, Gerald. "The Beginnings of Church Discipline: 1 Corinthians 5." Understanding Paul's Ethics: Twentieth-Century Approaches. Ed. Brian S. Rosner.Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995. 129-51. Cf. Wayne Jackson's article on the forgiveness available to Christians in sinful lifestyles: Jackson, Wayne. "God's Plan of Salvation for His Lost Children." Christian Courier Online. 7 July 2004. Accessed: 30 Aug. 2007.
6. Laney, pp. 355-56.
7. Williams, David J. Paul’s Metaphors: Their Context and Character. 1999. Peabody: Hendrickson, 2004; p. 248.
8. Zaas, Peter S. "‘Cast out the Evil Man from You Midst" (1 Cor. 5.13b)." Journal of Biblical Literature 103.2 (1984): 259-61; p. 259.
9. Zaas points out that aside from a minor adjustment by Paul, the Greek phrase is parallel with the LXX (i.e. Septuagint) formulations in Deuteronomy, p. 259.
10. Wallace, Daniel B. "2 Corinthians: Introduction, Argument, and Outline." Bible.org. 2007. Accessed: 26 July 2007. For those interested in this issue, Wallace's discussion will be of help on some of the complexities of this issue.
11. Pilgrim, James. Withdrawing from the Disorderly. West Monroe, LA: Central Printers, n.d. I agree with Pilgrim's observation that, "To fail to forgive and receive the returning brother is as wicked as not marking him in the beginning (2 Cor. 2.11)" (p.17).

Thoughts on the Attributes of God - by Jovan Payes

There are few biblical subjects that demand as must attention as does the attributes of God. Unfortunately, it seems sometimes insufficient attention to this topic is given.

We are not overstating the case when it is suggested that as a consequence of neglecting a specific study of the attributes of God, unbiblical concepts are formulated on the part of many Bible students regarding God and his attributes; not to mention, the demonstration of one's obedience to his Creator (Eccl. 12.13).

The scope of this subject is so vast; however, that obviously it cannot be addressed completely in such a minute space as this. However, there are numerous items that we can address. The particular lines of thought considered below are crucial to the formulation of a balanced and biblical understanding of God and his attributes.

The Goal to Understand God and His Attributes is a Paradox
A paradox is basically two statements that sound contradictory, but actually are not. When we say that understanding God and his attributes is paradoxal, we are referring the two pictures that the Bible presents. On the one hand, God can be known by humanity. On the other hand, Scripture presents God as beyond total human comprehension.[1] Look at an example of this contrast:

And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments. (1 John 2.3)

And the peace of God, which surpasses all under-standing, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus. (Phil. 4.7)[2]

When Scripture makes reference to the fact that we can know God, we must not conclude that we know God exhaustively. We know God to the limit that He has revealed himself to humanity – through Scripture and Nature (Eph. 4.6; Rom. 1.19-20). Beyond His revelation, we cannot search (Isa. 40.28; 1 Cor. 2.10-16).

Despite the fact that we cannot understand God beyond what is revealed, we must constantly remember that his revelation can be adequately understood (John 6.44-45). Furthermore, his written revelation will be the measure by which man will be ultimately judged (2 Thess. 1.8; Jude 3).

Philosophies such as subjectivity or postmodernity will not be the standard of judgment; instead, it will be righteousness (Acts 17.31; John 12.48ff).

Synthesizing the Biblical Teaching on God
Understanding God and his attributes must be based upon a synthetic process of reasoning. In other words, we must not focus upon one attribute to the exclusion of all the rest.

To focus upon one attribute to the exclusion of another is to be unduly analytical. Analysis literally means to break apart to the most basic components for the purpose of individual study. This can be done to great profit; however, we must remember that God is every attribute at the same time (cf. Matt. 5.48).

God’s attributes exist in harmony in such an infathomable fashion, that we agree with the inspired Paul who observed that God is beyond total human comprehension (Rom. 11.33).

It is truly ironic when Atheist who are woefully ignorant of the Bible, or even when supposed Bible scholars presumptuously act as if they know God better than God (Isa. 55.6-11). No finite being has the intrinsic ability to prescribe what an infinite God can or should not do.

The Attributes of God are Cooperative
We must understand that the attributes of God are cooperative, not divisive. Where humans are prone to sacrificing one or more of their characteristics for another, God alone exists with all of his attributes intact. God’s goodness is not diminished by his mercy; neither is his justice altered by his love and good will, nor is his holiness infringed upon when God enacts his wrath.

As we underscored above, we must understand God and his attributes synthetically. The attributes of God never cancel each other out; otherwise, God would not be God and infinite. Furthermore, he will never do anything that would diminish or contradict any of his attributes. If he did, it would mean that he is not infinite in all of his attributes; hence, not the God of the Bible – the only true God (1 Thess. 1.9).

Contemplating the Attributes of God
We will briefly introduce a number of attributes of God and observe that there is no way to accept one attribute to the exclusion of another. These observations are made in light of the fact that so many sincere people extract one attribute that is most appealing to them, and divorce it from the totality of the nature of God.

Virtually everything we believe and practice religiously goes back to our perception of God; consequently, if our perception of God is skewed our beliefs will be too.

1. The attribute of love. Among many of the more popular attributes of God which religionists cleave to is his love. The Bible says that “God is love” (1 John 4.16). The term here used is agape, and expresses behavior that has another’s best interest in mind.[3] Furthermore, action is taken to obtain the best possible state of being for another. This is expressed clearly in the sacrifice of Jesus, where God agape-loved the whole world, that he demonstrated the measure of his concern for our best spiritual interests by sending his son to give us spiritual life (John 3.16). But, we live under false assumptions if we exclude that God is equally demonstrative in his other attributes, like his just wrath (John 3.33-36).
2. The attribute of justice. Justice includes God’s ability to evaluate humanity’s moral and immoral actions, and as its judge respond apprpriately (Gen. 18.25). Sometimes in God’s infinite justice certain actions, or punishments, are taken that do not make sense to finite humanity. For example, since God is holy, and will not allow sin to be in his presence (Lev. 16.13-15), sinners deserve estrangement from his presence (Isa. 59.1-2ff). That is the magnitude of sin (Rom. 3.23, 5.12). The ultimate estrangement is an eternal punishment in hell (Rev. 20.14). While some have over stressed the wrath aspect of the justice of God (cf. Jonathon Edwards[4]), it must be constantly reminded that God is also infinite in the mercy aspect of his justice.
3. The attribute of mercy. The attribute of mercy is profoundly important to consider here. It seems that despite the just punishment of estrangement from God due to our sins, redemptive mercy had to be made and offered to humanity for God to be God. Observe this quote:
   

   [23] [F]or all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, [24] and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus [25] whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. [26] It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. (Rom. 3.23-26)

   His mercy and justice did not clash, but work harmoniously. Humans probably do not like the idea that punishment is still there looming in the possible future should they reject God’s mercy (Matt. 23.33; Mark 16.16). This disposition says more about the limitation or incompletion of our finite concept of justice and mercy, than it does about the alleged incompatibility of eternal punishment for unforgiven sin.
4. The attribute of omnipotence. Defining omnipotence is extremely important. Thomas B. Warren presents a helpful description of the omnipotence of God:
   

   God can do whatever is possible to be done (that is, he can accomplish whatever is subject to power), and that (in harmony with his perfection in goodness and in justice) he will only do what is in harmony with the absolute perfection of his own nature.[5]

   The omnipotence of God is a two-sided concept. God has infinite power, but God only uses that power in harmony with his other attributes (mercy, holiness, etc.). Power cannot violate any of God’s other infinite attributes, even if he is employing infinite power. Note these examples: God cannot lie (Titus 1.2), God cannot be tempted with evil (Jas. 1.13), and God cannot be illogical since he is the foundation of logic. These are things that no amount of power can accomplish.

In conclusion, studying the attributes of God is of supreme importance, since much of what we practice and believe, stems from our conception of God. Let us develop a biblical picture of God, so we will not create a god in the image of our ignorance.

As we study this subject, let us remember that:

(1) Understanding God and his attributes is paradoxal.

(2) Understanding God and his attributes must be synthetic.

(3) We must understand that the attributes of God are cooperative, not divisive.

Finally, let us reflect upon what Moses has written:

The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but the things that are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law. (Deut. 29.29)

Sources

1. Gilmore, Ralph. "Four Paradoxes of Our Sovereign God." Unpublished essay, 2004. Freed-Hardeman University. Henderson, TN; pp. 3-4.
2. All Scriptural quotations are taken from the English Standard Version of the Holy Bible (Wheaton: Crossway, 2001).
3. Newman, Jr., Barclay M. A Concise Greek-English Dictionary of the New Testament. Stuttgart: Deutsche Biblegesellschaft, 1993; p. 2.
4. Edwards, Jonathon. "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God." 8 July 1741. Leadership U Online. 6 March 1997. Accessed: 24 July 2007.
5. Warren, Thomas B. Have Atheists Proved there is no God? Moore, OK: National Christian, 1972; p. 27.

Of Sheep and Shepherds – by Jovan Payes

Introduction
Background Bible study is fascinating and is perhaps one of the most important parts of biblical research. Obtaining a “behind-the-scenes” look into the biblical documents will “contribute to a more precise comprehension of the Word of God."[1] This observation can be said about the shepherd motif found in Scripture. Since it is dangerous to paint half a picture of anyone or anything – especially biblical topics. We stress, then, that this is but an introductory survey to the beautiful motif made by biblical writers of the pastoral profession (i.e. the shepherd).

Shepherds in Israel
Shepherding was a great profession in the culture of the Ancient Near East, and so far as it relates to Israel’s history, pastoral work was a constant aspect of nomadic life (cf. Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, etc.). Even when they conquered and settled into Palestine, the end of the nomadic life did not stop pastoral work[2] (e.g. David 1 Sam. 16.19; Amos 1.1, 7.14). The widespread awareness of this profession “made motifs of sheep and shepherding apt descriptions of human and divine roles and relationships."[3]

Notice one Old Testament example. God through Jeremiah pronounces a “woe” upon the leadership of Judah using the pastoral motif:

[1]"Woe to the shepherds who destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture!" declares the LORD. [2] Therefore thus says the LORD, the God of Israel, concerning the shepherds who care for my people: ‘You have scattered my flock and have driven them away, and you have not attended to them. Behold, I will attend to you for your evil deeds, declares the LORD.’” (Jer. 23.1-2 ESV)

The “shepherds” failed to maintain the pastoral relationship with God’s flock; consequently, the sheep were scattered. Jeremiah, looking to post-exilic times, promises that God will restore the proper care to his flock with faithful shepherds (Jer. 23.3-4).

Shepherds in the New Testament
There are several related New Testament words used to the work of shepherding. The noun form is poimein, and refers to a shepherd, herdsmen, or pastor,[4] and hence it is a metaphor describing a guardian-leader. The third translation option probably receives the most attention from among the three, and this is due to its connection with the eldership of the New Testament (Eph. 4.11, here teaching-pastors), and its erroneous but popular usage in denominational circles.

However, the New Testament uses the term significantly in its normal sense. Jesus refers to himself as “the good shepherd” in John 10.1-18 to distinguish himself from the leaders who had oppressed or neglected the house of Israel. Luke narrates the story of the shepherds, in the field with their flock, who were told of the arrival of the Messiah (2.1-20). Jesus warned his disciples that when he is handed over to the Jews, that they would be scattered like sheep when their shepherd is harmed (Matt. 9.36 = Mark 6.34).

But perhaps the most vivid pastoral scenes are those that relate to our relationship with Jesus. The Lord is described as “the Shepherd and Overseer” of our souls (1 Pet. 2.25 cf. Heb. 13.20), who receives straying sheep as any good shepherd does. Another vivid scene using the shepherd motif is the Day of Judgment, when Jesus “will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats” (Matt. 25.32). This is taken from a understanding that sheep and goats were “pastured together” in Palestine, but at certain appropriate times they “require separation.”[5] The figure is given Christian meaning as a metaphor of the judgment upon faithful and non-faithful Christians.

Learning from the Sheep and the Shepherds
There are so many relationship lessons that God has taken from pastoral care, we would do well to reflect upon it more. For example: at the birthing of a new lamb, the shepherd “guards the mother during her helpless moments and picks up the lamb and carries it to the field. For the few days, until it is able to walk, he may carry it in his arms or in the loose folds of his coat.”[6] Could we not make an application from this? The shepherd and the lamb have a wonderfully tender relationship, and we would strengthen our fellowship in taking a lesson from this behavioral motif.

Truly, we can see that a pastoral care for Christians will encourage us to help in the development and care of new converts. It will stimulate us to help heal wounded sheep, and protect them as they are nourished to good health. And more personally, perhaps we would be more receptive to the prodding and care by our shepherds in the church. The “pastoral” mentality is not only for the elders, we would all do well to lead on, or be led, ever so gently (Gen. 33.14).

Sources

1. Jackson, Wayne. Background Bible Study. rev. ed. (Stockton, CA: Courier, 1999); p. 1.
2. Miller, Madeleine S., J. Lane Miller, Boyce M. Bennett, and David H. Scott. Harper’s Encyclopedia of Bible Life. 3rd ed. (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1978); p. 142.
3. Johnson, D. in Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels. Eds. Joel B. Green, Scot McKnight, and I. Howard Marshall (Downer's Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1992); p. 751.
4. Vine, W.E., Merrill F. Unger, and William White. Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words (Nashville: Nelson, 1986); 2:462, 2:569.
5. Lewis, Jack P. Matthew (Abilene, TX: Abilene Christian UP, 1984); 2:137.
6. Patch, J. in International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. Gen. ed. James Orr. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1943); 4:2764.

An Introduction to the Concepts of Revelation and Inspiration by Jovan Payes

A common misconception regarding the Bible has to do with its origin and production. There are many who allege that the Bible originated through the sole ingenuity of humanity. The statement, “the Bible was written by men,” is a common affirmation by those who often wish to reject its message. With this belief, many limit the Bible’s message to the cultural mores of its authors, and affirm it to be out-dated because modern humanity continues to progress in wisdom and knowledge. So the Bible is, to many, an antiquated anthology of religious instruction.

If the Bible speaks of itself as a religious resource, collected over time to give practical religious instruction with no Divine contribution, then the Bible student has no reason to be antagonistic towards this view of the Bible. However, this is not what the biblical evidence demonstrates. In fact, the testimony of the biblical evidence compels us to affirm that the Bible is beyond human production. Consequently, although many today believe –-even some of our religious neighbors-– that the Bible is the sole production of human intellect, the Bible is the product of Divine revelation and Divinely inspired human beings. But what are these concepts? Do they mean the same thing? How should they impact our perception of the Bible? These are the questions that will be explored here.

The Nature of Revelation
To the average church attendee, the word revelation is not foreign. Quite typically, the word revelation is employed in Bible class and in sermons; however, what does this word mean? Paul speaks of revelation:

[11] For I would have you know, brothers, that the gospel that was preached by me is not man’s gospel. [12] For I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ. (Gal. 1:11-12 ESV)

In this context, Paul is demonstrating the independent and authentic nature of his preaching, in contrast to those that were troubling the Galatian Christians (1:6-9). In fact, he mentions his encounter with the Apostles in Jerusalem, noting that they “added nothing” to his preaching or Gospel education (2:1-10).

There are several points of interest in this passage contributing to an appropriate understanding of revelation. The word revelation comes from apocalupsis, an “uncovering”; but more particular, when applied to the gospel message suggests “an expression of the mind of God for the instruction of the church.”[1] Again, revelation “has to do with that which could not be known except by direct communication from Jehovah.”[2] Consequently, revelation is God unveiling his mind to his people.

Furthermore, Galatians 1:11-12 gives us three points regarding the nature of revelation. (1) Revelation is not derived from the logistical faculties of mankind; (2) revelation is received – it is not a religious epiphany; but (3) it is received from a Divine Source – here Jesus Christ.[3]

The Nature of Inspiration
Revelation is God’s action of expressing his message to his prophets (1 Cor. 2:11-16); inspiration is a related but somewhat distinct term. The apostle Paul’s second letter to Timothy provides the clearest case of what inspiration is. Paul writes to Timothy the following words:

[14] But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it [15] and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. [16] All Scripture is breathed by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, [17] that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work. (2 Tim. 3:14-17 ESV)

As Paul encourages his young friend to have confidence in his ministry and his training, placing all confidence in the “sacred writings” (here the OT), Paul uses one of the most unique words in the entire New Testament –-used only once, theoneustos (“God breathed”).[4]

The word has often been translated as inspired, an English word that needs some clarification as to its origin. Jack P. Lewis discusses this point in Questions You’ve Asked about Bible Translations. Latin translators of the New Testament used the phrase divinitus inspirata, meaning “Divinely breathed in,” not “God breathed,” and this rendition has affected English translations for subsequent generations.[5] The difference between the two is this: (a) “Divinely breathed in” refers to a characteristic of Scripture, while (b) “God breathed” is a statement of how Scripture came to be. To capture the meaning of “God breathed” Scripture, E. Nida and J. Louw suggest that the phrase “all Scripture God breathed” be understood as: “Scripture, the writer of which was influenced by God.”[6] Ultimately, inspiration is a characteristic of every ounce of Scripture, but this is not Paul’s point here (a distinction that should be appreciated).[7]

The Relationship between Revelation and Inspiration
Although revelation and inspiration overlap in some aspects in their meaning, it is important to keep them distinct. It has been correctly noted, “all revelatory material contained in the Bible is inspired of God, but not all inspired material was revelatory in nature."[8] Meaning, there are parts of Scripture that did not need God to reveal them, as in the case of eyewitness testimony. For example, the apostle Matthew would not have needed revelation per se to produce his Gospel account; however, he would need God’s guidance to select the appropriate narratives and emphases.

Furthermore, there are examples where Paul quotes poets (Aratus in Acts 17:28), playrights (Menander in 1 Cor. 15:33), and philosophers (Epimenides in Titus 1:12). Likewise, Jude refers to non-inspired Jewish literature in verses 9 (Book of Enoch) and 14 (Assumption of Moses). C.A. Wilson explains: “Jude was probably using a current idea to teach a spiritual lesson, and the Holy Spirit has seen fit to include this particular statement in Holy Writ."[9] Wilson’s comment on Jude is equally applicable to Paul and any other inspired writer. Inspiration secures that prophetic writers used non-biblical literature –-as noted above-– correctly.

The Impact of Revelation and Inspiration
Turning attention to the question regarding how revelation and inspiration should impact one’s perception of the Bible, it is important to recognize that God revealed and secured the accuracy of the message penned. It is vital to reflect upon the fact that what God had his prophets preach, became the substance of what God had his prophets pen (Isa. 30:8-17).

When we read the Bible we are reading the product of revelation (a God given message) and inspiration (God’s message accurately reproduced), observe:

[19] And we have something more sure, the prophetic word, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, [20] knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. [21] For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. (2 Pet. 1:19-21 ESV)

The Scriptures are God given, produced through the guiding hand of God into an unchangeable and enduring format –-the written. And “although God’s Word is thus not limited to books or scrolls, the prophetic words are known only because they were committed to writing."[10] The written word is as authentic and authoritative as the spoken word.

Conclusion
Contrary to the notions of some of our religious friends, all that exists in modern times is the written word and its exposition (1 Cor. 13:8-13). As disciples of Christ, we must be impressed with the importance of biblical exposition, because it the not the word of men. Instead, it is the word of God, shining afresh in our modern era to guide us through life’s tempestuous struggles.

When we hear the statement, “the Bible was written by men,” we must not be afraid. Instead, we must understand that God revealed his message to men, guided men to speak this message, and then to ultimately commit God’s message into a written format. Yes, men wrote the Bible, but these were Holy-Spirit-lead men. The Bible is truly the Word of God, no matter if there was human participation (1 Thess. 2:13).

Sources

1. Vine, W.E., Merrill F. Unger, and William White. Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words (Nashville: Nelson, 1986); 2:532.
2. Jackson, Wayne. in Essays in Apologetics. Eds. Bert Thompson and Wayne Jackson (Montgomery, AL: Apologetics Press, 1984); 2:236.
3. Spicq, Ceslas. Theological Lexicon of the New Testament. Trans. James D. Ernest. (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1996); 2:250.
4. House, H. Wayne. "Inspiration of the Bible in 2 Tim. 3.16." Bibliotheca Sacra 137 (1980): 54-61. This is an engaging article on the nature, conception, and meaning of a keystone passage on the inspiration of the Bible. Cf. Bennetch, John H. “2 Timothy 3:16a – A Greek Study.” Bibliotheca Sacra 106 (1949): 187-95.
5. Lewis, Jack P. Questions You’ve Asked about Bible Translations (Searcy, AR: Resource, 1991); pp. 74-76.
6. Louw, Johannes P., and Eugene A. Nida. Eds. Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains. 2 ed. (New York: UBS, 1989); 1:418.
7. Wallace, Daniel B. The Basics of New Testament Syntax: An Intermediate Greek Grammar (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000); p. 139.
8. Jackson, 2:236 emphasis added.
9. Wilson, Clifford A. New Light on New Testament Letters (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1975); p. 103.
10. Cukrowski, Ken, Mark Hamilton, and James Thompson. God’s Holy Fire: The Nature and Function of Scripture (Abiliene, TX: Abilene Christian UP, 2002); p. 28.
    

1 Peter 3:15: Do You have an Answer? by Jovan Payes

Introduction
It has long been observed that Christians must always be “prepared to make a defense” as to why we have “a reason for the hope” of Christ (1 Pet. 3.15 ESV). The high calling of God is a unique phenomenon (Eph. 4.1; 1 Pet. 4.4), so much so that those who are both antagonistic and genuinely curious of the Lord’s way will ask us questions. We must give them, in return, rational answers.

Before focusing attention to the Christian’s responsibility of knowing why there is hope, we must not overlooked an implicit truth of this passage: confidence in the Lord and commitment to his doctrine are never to be divorced (Luke 6.46).

Christian Apologetics
Peter instructs Christians to give a “reason” for their faith and hope. What does this mean however? The corresponding word for “reason” is apologia and it has a legal background, meaning the argumentation employed as a “verbal defense” in a court hearing.[1]From time to time it will be demanded of Christians to defend their faith and explain why they live “differently” in contrast to the world. The apostles and early-inspired men of the first century likewise defended the Christian faith in two ways: (1) verbally (Acts 22.1, Phil. 1.7, 16, 2 Tim. 4.16) and (2) by means of literature (1 Cor. 9.3).

The New Testament documents themselves often have a defensive purpose. One of the aspects of Luke’s two-volume work (Luke-Acts) is its defensive nature. By taking into account Paul’s judicial context in Rome, scholars have observed that Luke-Acts – as Paul's defense brief – provides excellent testimony to the Greco-Roman world that the Lord’s way is a benefit to society, and not an usurping religious system as many claimed Christianity to be.[2]

The apostle John’s Gospel and his first epistle are both defensive documents, responding to different challenges that the early church faced. The Gospel establishes the rationale for our hope on the Christ as Deity (John 20.30-31); meanwhile, 1 John refutes misconceptions of how to live godly in the face of the docetic-gnostic teachers infiltrating the church (1 John 2.1)

The apostle’s use of apologia demonstrates that the field of Christian Apologetics is centuries old. This word is in fact the basis for our modern word apologetics. Its incorporation by Christians from the legal setting, where it was a “legal speech for the defense” to be delivered before the judicial authorities and subsequently published ,[3] was therefore not a large leap (Acts 22.1; Phil. 1.17). In fact, it partially explains the publishing of Luke-Acts, and fits well with trumped-up political hearings where Christians had to defend themselves verbally (cf. 6.10-15, 18.12-17, 22.1, etc.; Matt. 10.19).

Besides biblical examples, from about 185-250 A.D. there was a series of apologies designed to “explain the origin, doctrine, and worship” (i.e. the historical basis) of the church to their contemporaries –antagonistic or supportive.[4] The works of Justin (his Apologies, Dialogue with Trypho), Athenagoras (Apology, On the Resurreciton), and Tertullian (Against Marcion, Prescription of Heretics) are usually thought of in this light.

Christian Apologetics was not, however, limited to the study of science, philosophy, and evolution and creationism. These are topics that consume Christian Apologetics today; however, in the early church apologetics was more a defense of why Christians live they way they live. This is not a criticism of contemporary apologetics, but a call to providing a rational defense of Christian ethics – religious and moral. Before moving on, observe that historically emotions have never been the basis for a proper defense for one’s beliefs.

As the need arose in the first century, so our responsibility to give reasons for our hope to our modern neighbors has not diminished. Antagonists and genuine inquisitors are constant factors in the Christian’s life; consequently, Christians must be capable to provide solid, well-studied responses. Likewise, every generation carries the responsibility of preaching the gospel to a dying world (Matt. 28.18-20).

To fulfill this work Christians must study the Bible, believe and follow through with its instruction, and teach it rigorously so that the next generation can continue in this Divinely given cycle (2 Tim. 2.1-2).

The Need for Personal Bible Study
To be sure, there are many Christians who are diligent and capable Bible students; some however, engage in superficial study and have rendered themselves incapable of giving a defense of their faith – or even passing it on. For this reason, it is important to recognize the value of congregational Bible study; but we must understand that congregational Bible study is only a foundation to be built upon. It should not be the only time Christians are exposed to God or His instruction.

Again, congregational Bible study is not a substitute for personal spiritual maturing (2 Tim. 2.15, 3.16-17); neither does it replace the daily light needed for living before God (Psa. 119.11, 105). To be truly blessed, Bible study must be a part of one’s meditation and life – “both day and night” (Psa. 1.1-2). God’s guidance must come from personal contact with His revelation.

Principles for Proficient Bible Study
It is sufficient to say, then, that in order to be proficient in one’s faith true Bible study cannot be superficial. Spiritually nurturing Bible study includes, at the very least: ample time for study, rigorous mental industry, a respect for the text, and a patient and prayerful consideration of all the facts. We will introduce and briefly consider these points below.

Our consideration here is limited of course; however, the points below are so vital to effective study that books are devoted to the pursuit of implementing each of them.

1. There must be ample time for study. Time is a valuable commodity. In the business world the phrase “time is money” illustrates how valuable time is. With regards to Bible study we might coin the phrase “time is life.” There is no substitute for having plenty of valuable time with the word of God.

Renewing one’s mind requires proper time with the word (Col. 3.9-10). However, the media-based culture we find ourselves in makes it difficult for some to spend time with the pages of inspiration. Nevertheless, we must make the time available (Rom. 13.14).

We must remember that it takes time to read the biblical passage, it takes time to understand how a specific passage fits into the rest of Scripture, and it takes time to examine both the context and words employed. Just as it takes time to mature through life, it takes time to mature spiritually (Psa. 1.1-3).

2. There must be mental industry. This is not a matter of intellectual genius. This is a matter of determination, exposure, and focus. Here is an example: in 1 Corinthians 15.1-11 Paul reminds the church of the Gospel that they received and believed. Now notice verses 3 and 4:

[3] For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, [4] that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures […].

This brief section of scripture yields an enormous amount of information. In fact, it is a “busy” section of Scripture, one scholar observes as he initiates his own study of this fundamental passage.[5]

As one determines to study the Scriptures, the level of exposure to biblical concepts increase. We must remain focused on the task of understanding the passage, noting unique phrases and points. For example, the phrase “in accordance with the Scriptures” above refers to a precise instance where Scripture has fulfilled prophetic passages regarding the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus (Acts 2.24-36).

The next step, then, is to find what scriptures predicted these events (cf. Isa. 53.5-12 and Psa. 16.8-11). When these passages are found and studied in collaboration with the Gospel message, untold spiritual fortification will occur. But remember, this is a matter of mental industry, not of mental genius.

3. There must be respect for the nature of the text. In other words, we must recognize numerous aspects of a passage. There are, of course, numerous facets or angles that a passage may be studied, but some of the most significant ones are: the context of the passage, the original purpose of the passage, the method used to prove the author’s point, and the covenantal context of the passage (e.g. Patriarchal, Mosaic, or Christian).

For example, animal sacrifice was offered both during the Patriarchal and Mosaic systems; however, the ramifications of the New Testament covenant demonstrates that this method of atonement is no longer a viable way for the forgiving of man’s sins (Heb. 9.1-10.18). One cannot overestimate solid principles of interpretations.[6]

One more issue that must be considered separately is acknowledgement that the Bible was not written in English. One must also respect the fact that the Bible English readers have is a translation of the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek language. This fact must never be ignored, ridiculed, nor underestimated in the study of God’s word.

Jack P. Lewis expresses this caution in the following way:

In the ultimate analysis every significant Biblical question is to be solved on the basis of what a writer meant by a Hebrew, Greek, or Aramaic expression.[7]

Observing this one principle can sometimes help distinguish biblical truth from both liberal and legalistic conclusions.

4. There must be patience and a prayerful consideration of all the facts. There is no value in jumping to conclusions. This is a fundamental principle to rational thinking. To understand the Bible’s teaching on a subject, we must take a slow and prayerful approach in coming to a conclusion. This way, one is as thorough as humanly possible.

J.D. Thomas reminds us of the importance of thorough Bible study:

All facts must be considered. One white horse can ruin an hypothesis that all horses are brown, and one contrary fact can ruin any inductive-reasoning hypothesis, meaning that research must start again. This means that for perfect, absolute exegesis, every stone must be turned - every fact possible must be determined and taken into account, in order to complete scholarly research.[8]

No one of genuine concern wants to be wrong on what the Bible teaches. Therefore we must be cautious and ready to see all the biblical evidence as slowly or quickly as it is analyzed.

In principle, it is what we find in Paul’s instruction to the Thessalonians:

[19] Do not quench the Spirit. [20] Do not despise prophecies, [21] but test everything; hold fast what is good. [22] Abstain from every form of evil” (1 Thess. 5.19-22 ESV).

We must be patient and let the scriptural facts reveal themselves on their own terms.

Conclusion
The Christian will always be called upon to share their hope with the world; no matter what generation it is. Providing answers so that people may understand the nature of the Christian faith is the true purpose of Christian Apologetics. In order to comply with the apostle Peter’s instruction, Christians must be diligent Bible students; however this is not always the case.

While congregations are to be supporters of the truth (1 Tim. 3.15), individual members must abide in the words of the Gospel (John 8.31-32). By engaging in proficient Bible study, Christians will have knowledge of their faith and hope, and therefore be able to share their faith.

Sources

1. Newman, Jr., Barclay M. A Concise Greek-English Dictionary of the New Testament (Stuttgart: Deutsche Biblegesellschaft, 1993); p. 22.
2. Carson, D.A., James Moo, and Leon Morris. An Introduction to the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992); pp. 196-97.
3. Carey, G.L. “Apologists.” New International Dictionary of the Christian Church. Gen. ed. J.D. Douglas. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1974; p. 57.
4. Mattox, F.W. The Eternal Kingdom. Rev. ed. (Delight, AR: Gospel Light, 1961); pp. 67-87; cf. Wallace, Ronald S. “Apologetics.” New International Dictionary of the Christian Church. Gen. ed. J.D. Douglas. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1974. 56-57.
5. Jackson, “Gospel” 3
6. To that effect, consider Wayne Jackson’s profitable material on this subject in A Study Guide to Greater Bible Knowledge (Stockton, CA: Courier, 1986); pp. 20-29.
7. Lewis, Jack P. "Inspiration and Authority of the Bible." Alternative 5.2 (1979): 3-8; p. 6 emphasis added.
8. Thomas, J.D. Harmonizing Hermeneutics (Nashville: Gospel Advocate, 1991); p. 87 emphasis added.