Tag Archives: Jesus

Articles, Books

[Life of Christ] Jesus is Coming…Soon (Part 2)

Leave a comment

(Matthew 1:18-25; Luke 2:1-20)

Mary spent the first three months of her supernatural pregnancy in Judea with her cousin Elizabeth. Meanwhile, Joseph was back in Nazareth, oblivious that a miracle had occurred. But he was soon to find out.

Mary Discovered to be Pregnant (Matthew 1:18)

Now the birth of Jesus Christ happened this way: While his mother Mary was betrothed to Joseph, before they came together, she was discovered to be with child by the Holy Spirit.

In essence, Matthew summarizes the same information Luke gave—but with one big difference. It was discovered (“found,” KJV) that she was pregnant before she and Joseph came together in marriage. The use of the word discovered means it wasn’t something Mary revealed to him. We aren’t told how Joseph discovered it. But by the time Mary got back from Judea, and as the pregnancy continued, it would have become obvious to those who saw her. And it isn’t difficult to surmise that someone went and told Joseph about it.

Though Matthew says, “she was discovered to be with child by the Holy Spirit,” it is clear the miraculous aspect of the birth wasn’t discovered by Joseph when he first heard about it.

Joseph’s Righteous Response (Matthew 1:19-20a)

Then Joseph her [betrothed] husband, being righteous, and not wanting to make a public spectacle of her, determined to put her away secretly. But while he thought on these things


How Would You Respond?

Joseph receives word that his fiancĂ©, the one he contracted to marry, has turned up pregnant—and there is only one thing he knows for sure: It isn’t his. The immediate, human reaction would be shock, sadness, hurt, and anger. After all, to Joseph this is a betrayal of a covenant, a disruption/shattering of his plans and hopes of the future.

Many people would react by immediately ending the engagement, and spreading to the world that they were cheated on by their fiancĂ©. In other words, many people seek revenge when they are wronged (or think they are wronged), and want to cause as much damage to the other person’s reputation as possible. Others might be willing to forgive, but only after verbally and emotionally beating down the “offender,” making them grovel and beg for forgiveness, and making sure they know they are scum. In other words, they will only consider forgiveness (if you can even call it that) when they think they’ve made the “offender” hurt enough—but they make sure to have it ready to bring back up at a moment’s notice if necessary.

But Joseph? He didn’t respond that way at all.

The Righteous Response

Matthew tells us Joseph was “righteous” (“a just man,” KJV). And then he shows us what a righteous response is when we are hurt.

He did not want to make a public spectacle of her. In other words, he acted out of what was best for her. Certainly other people knew she was with child, and that it wasn’t Joseph’s (and you can imagine the whispering, What exactly was she doing when she was gone for three months?). This was embarrassing enough, and (in Joseph’s mind) Mary would have felt ashamed—Joseph wasn’t about to add to that pain and shame by making a public spectacle of her.

He decided to put her away (end the betrothal) quietly (NIV) or secretly (NASB). The Law of Moses had rules for these types of situations—and in all cases, at least one person (always the man, and in some cases the woman too) was to be killed by stoning. That would be a very public thing, which would draw more attention to Mary’s (supposed) actions. And Joseph wasn’t going to shame her more.

When you are hurt, do you try to get revenge on the one who hurt you? A righteous person won’t. Let that sink in.

Then Joseph contemplated the whole matter. He had made up his mind to put her away, but was still thinking about the whole situation. The point is, he didn’t act immediately. He took the time to make sure he thought it through. In other words, he did not let his emotions dictate his response. And why? Because righteous people don’t act on emotions, they act on thoughtfulness.

So he thinks about her instead of himself. He has compassion. He knows something must be done, but wants to make it as quiet as possible so as not to bring her more shame. And even after making that determination, he takes more time to contemplate it.

Then he sleeps on it (see verse 24) before carrying out anything.

All I Have to Do is Dream (Matthew 1:20b-21)


behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, don’t be afraid to take Mary to you to be your wife; because that which is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. And she will bring forth a son, and you shall call his name “Jesus,” because He will save His people from their sins.”

A Messenger Appears

While Luke gives us the name of the angel who appeared to Zacharias and Mary, we aren’t told who appeared to Joseph in this dream. Ultimately, it doesn’t matter which angel it was. All that matters is this messenger1 was from God.

He addresses him as “Joseph, son of David.” This is a subtle reminder about just who is in line for the throne of David. At this point, it is Joseph. In order for Jesus to be the King, the true heir of David’s throne, Joseph had to marry Mary.

The Messenger’s Message

Joseph made up his mind, but hadn’t carried through with it yet, when he has a dream. And in the dream, an angel tells him to go ahead and marry Mary. Why? Because even though it appeared like she had done something wrong, sinned against Joseph, she actually hadn’t. Instead, according to the angel, her pregnancy was as a result of the Holy Spirit.

I have had some crazy dreams before, but once I woke up, I didn’t think they were real. Of course, I don’t recall seeing any angels in my dreams either. But Joseph knows this messenger of God is not just a dream, but is telling him the truth. And that takes a lot of faith, because he is being asked to believe something that has never happened before in the history of mankind! He is being asked to believe something that goes against his emotions, something that goes against his understanding of how the world works. And outside of words (from the dream-angel, and potentially from Mary), he has no evidence that it is true.

Joseph chose to believe.

Generally speaking, we don’t like being wrong—and frequently people (even Christians) will reject, ignore, or minimize evidence that might prove them wrong. We would rather dig in our heels and defend our first impression, our emotional response, because there’s no way we could be wrong


But a righteous person is willing to (1) listen to the evidence, (2) do it with a truly open mind, and then (3) act on the evidence, not on emotion.

The Meaning of the Message

The angel reveals to Joseph that Mary is pregnant with a son—and not just any son, but a Son who is a Savior. And in addition to marrying Mary, Joseph had another role to play—he was to call the Son Jesus. It is interesting that Gabriel tells Mary she was going to name Him Jesus.2 Here, and angel tells Matthew he will name the child Jesus. And when Matthew gives the prophecy fulfilled explanation,3 he quotes Isaiah 7:14 as “they shall call His name
” It all works together.

As we saw last time, the name Jesus means Jehovah is Salvation or Jehovah Saves. Joseph probably knew this, but the angel explains anyway, “You will call his name Jesus, because He will save
” But what Joseph probably didn’t know (if he was like the majority of Jews) is that this salvation wasn’t from human oppression (like Rome), but from sin.

Ultimately, it is sin that we need salvation from. It is sin that separates us from God. And if we die separated from God, we will stay separated from Him forever. Heaven is not great because it is a place. Heaven is great because God and Jesus are there. And the only way we can have the joy of eternally being in God’s presence is by being saved from our sins.

Matthew, I am sure, drops that little nugget in the angel’s message to give his Jewish readers a heads-up that God’s Messiah isn’t what they were expecting.

Prophecy Fulfilled! (Matthew 1:22-23)

Now all this was done, so that what the Lord said by the prophet might be fulfilled, specifically, “Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel,” which being interpreted is “God with us.”

Matthew’s First Explanation of Events

Matthew, repeatedly in his gospel account, wants to make sure his readers don’t miss the importance of certain events. So he will stop the narrative to say (in essence), This happened to fulfill prophecy. Which one? Here, let me quote it for you. Several of these Old Testament quotations had meanings when they were first given, but those meanings and applications were just shadows—they were ultimately pointing forward to Jesus.

Matthew’s first prophecy fulfilled moment deals with the virgin birth of Jesus. Lest his Jewish readers doubt the story, Matthew pulls up a quote from Isaiah 7:14 which foretold this. While it seems to initially have been foretelling the birth of Isaiah’s own son, Mahershalalhashbaz, it was ultimately pointing to Jesus.4 Some people call this “dual-fulfillment” prophecy.

The prophecy spoke of a virgin who would become pregnant and have a son.5 And not just that, but this Son would be called Immanuel, which means God with us. In other words, when Jesus is born, God is now literally with His people.

Joseph Obeys (Matthew 1:24-25)

Then Joseph, being raised from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord instructed him, and took his wife to himself, and did not know her [sexually] until she had brought forth her firstborn son. And he called His name Jesus.

Matthew greatly condenses the story at this point, which we will see as we skip back over to Luke’s narrative.

Joseph was awakened from his sleep (by God?), and did what he was instructed to do: take Mary as his wife. But the timeline of when he did this isn’t as clear. Was it that day? Quite possibly. But Mary was still called Joseph’s “betrothed wife” after their journey from Nazareth to Bethlehem, close to the birth of Jesus. What we can say for certain is that any thought of ending the betrothal disappeared.

Joseph, probably out of honor to God, did not consummate his marriage to Mary until after Jesus was born. Had they done so, it could not be said that “a virgin
shall bring forth a son
” But after Jesus’ birth, that was no longer an issue. Joseph did not “know” his wife until after Jesus was born—which means he did afterwards. Mary was not a perpetual virgin.6

But we’re getting ahead of ourselves. Because in order to find out about the birth of Jesus, we need to go to Luke chapter 2.

The Taxing Trip to Bethlehem (Luke 2:1-5)

And it happened in those days, that a decree went out from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed [or counted]. (This taxing [census] was first made when Quirinius was governor of Syria). And all went to be taxed [registered], every one into his own city.

And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judea, into the City of David, which is called Bethlehem, (because he was of the house and lineage of David) in order to be taxed [counted] with Mary, his betrothed wife, who was great with child.

Rome says, “Time to Count You so We Can Tax You”

Caesar Augustus (also known as Octavian) was the second Caesar of Rome, the first being his uncle Julius. He ordered that a census be taken of “all the world.” This phrase, or “the whole world” frequently refers to the Roman Empire in both biblical and non-biblical writings of that era. The purpose of the census was to levy a tax on the inhabitants. A Jewish writer of that era said Rome was exacting “tribute” from Jerusalem.

Luke makes it clear this was the first census/taxing done when Quirinius was governor of Syria. This probably means nothing to you, but this has caused no end of criticizing of Luke’s account, because secular historians haven’t found evidence of a census done during the time Jesus was about to be born. But given that Justin Martyr (a Jewish Christian from the second century), when writing to a non-Christian, told him he could find the evidence in the Roman archives, it seems pretty clear there was documented proof this really happened just when Luke said it did.7

In order for this census to take place, everyone was to go to “his own city.” Apparently, they were supposed to go to their ancestral land. Being a direct descendant of David, Joseph’s inheritance would have been in Bethlehem, though it seems as though the land was no longer in his family’s possession.8

Because of this census/taxation, Joseph left Nazareth (where he was living) and took Mary with him up to Bethlehem, the city of David. This wasn’t exactly the easiest journey on a good day. It would have taken multiple days, and probably longer than normal, since Mary was getting close to giving birth.

Betrothed
still?

In verse 5, Luke, the detailed historian, drops an interesting fact in our laps—Mary was still betrothed to Joseph at this time. They weren’t officially or completely married yet. What exactly all that entails is a matter of speculation and debate. It seems clear Joseph had taken her as his wife (taken her into his house?) based on Matthew 1:24. She traveled to Bethlehem with him, which was not permitted in ancient Jewish culture unless they were married. Yet Luke still calls them “betrothed.” Some possibilities have been suggested:

  • They were married, but hadn’t consummated the union. This seems to be the majority viewpoint in commentaries, but it seems odd for the detail-oriented Luke to use the word “betrothed” when other, more specific words could have been used which wouldn’t lead to ambiguity or confusion.
  • Joseph and Mary remained betrothed until after the birth of Jesus, both bearing some level of social shame from the pregnancy, so that when Jesus was born, He would only be the Son of God, and not son of Joseph.9 While interesting, and it could be right, this is ultimately conjecture.
  • Joseph and Mary were officially married sometime before the birth of Jesus, because Joseph appears to have the right to “know” Mary, but did not take advantage of that right until after Jesus’ birth. This right wouldn’t have been available to him during a betrothal.10 But this could be reading too much into Matthew 1:25.
  • If the conception of Jesus was near the beginning of their betrothal, and betrothals lasted a year (as some claim), their betrothal period wouldn’t be over for another couple months.11 But it would certainly make things awkward to have a wedding ceremony with a new baby present (maybe that’s why they stayed in Bethlehem instead of going back to Nazareth right away?).

I wish I had a good answer to explain when they became officially married (before or after the birth of Jesus), and what it was that changed it from betrothed to official. If it is the consummation of the marriage, then that alone proves the Catholic doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary to be false—unless they want to say Mary and Joseph were never officially married (which they would reject).

(We will continue this study next week)

1 The Greek word angellos has been Anglicized, or transliterated, instead of being translated in almost every Bible. The Greek word means “messenger,” and the context must determine whether a human or heavenly messenger is under consideration. This is dealt with more extensively in my book War in Heaven War on Earth: What Revelation Meant to the Original Readers and What It Means for Us Today.

2 Luke 1:31.

3 Matthew 1:22-23.

4 Though some are very adamant that Isaiah 7:14 can only be speaking of Jesus, the context of Isaiah 7 and 8 (the only two times in the Old Testament the word “Immanuel” is used) requires an initial application to the time soon after the prophecy was given. The things said of “Immanuel” in Isaiah 7 match the things said of Mahershalalhashbaz in Isaiah 8—these being signs of the overthrow of the kings of Syria and Israel, who were both tormenting the kingdom of Judah.

5 Isaiah 7:14 literally says The virgin  or This virgin (scholars say it could be either), and appears to be speaking to or about a virgin in the king’s palace (tradition says Isaiah married a daughter of the king of Judah). So when he says, “This virgin shall conceive and bear a son,” it wouldn’t mean she would be a virgin after conceiving, but that she was a virgin when Isaiah said it. But when Matthew uses it and applies it to Jesus, he says it had a larger meaning and greater fulfillment by a virgin being pregnant and having a child—while still a virgin.

6 We will deal with this issue more in detail when Jesus’ brothers and sisters show up in the narrative.

7 This is a very shortened response to what is an interesting historical topic. For more details on it, see the commentaries on this passage by Adam Clarke, Matthew Henry, Henry Alford, and others.

8 The Old Testament required that all family land was kept in the family, unless it had to be sold to pay for debts—and then it was to be returned to the family in the 49th year—the year of Jubilee. That Joseph didn’t have anywhere to stay indicates the land had been sold, and possibly that the year of Jubilee had been (again) ignored by the Jews.

9 This was suggested to me via text message from a friend who hadn’t previously considered the issue.

10 This was suggested to me via text message from a friend and long-time evangelist for the Lord.

11 I have not found anyone arguing this, but I present it as another possibility.

Books, Commentary, Sermons

[Life of Christ] Jesus is Coming… Soon (Part 1)

Leave a comment

Before we get into this one, another apology for all those who signed up to receive the new posts via email. I just today discovered the emails weren’t including anything in square brackets–which means none of the footnote numbers showed up, and the link to download the worksheet for each issue didn’t show up in the emails either. I hopefully will remember to fix that for future emails.

To download the worksheet for this lesson, click here.

Luke spends nearly half of his first chapter detailing the lead-up, birth, and naming of John the Immerser.1 The rest presents the lead-up to the birth of Jesus (which continues into chapter 2). The similarities between the two parts are interesting, so keep an eye out for them:

  • Gabriel announces the miraculous conception of both John and Jesus.2
  • Both children were prophesied about by the power of the Holy Spirit.3
  • Both mothers stayed out of the public eye of their hometown for a while.4

Gabriel’s Second Revelation (Luke 1:26-33)

And in the sixth month [of Elizabeth’s pregnancy] the angel Gabriel was sent from God to Nazareth, a city of Galilee, to a virgin betrothed to a man named Joseph, of the house of David. The virgin’s name was Mary.

The angel came to her, and said, “Rejoice, honored one, the Lord is with you—You are blessed among women.”

When she saw him, she was troubled by this saying, and pondered what this kind of greeting meant.

And the angel said to her, “Don’t fear, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you shall conceive in your womb, and give birth to a son, and you shall call His name Jesus. He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest. And the Lord God will give to Him the throne of His father David, and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever—there shall be no end of His kingdom.”

One Month Later


Elizabeth, after becoming pregnant, “hid herself” for five months.5 Apparently after that, she was willing to go back in public again and let others see how God was blessing her. It was a month afterwards that Gabriel is sent on another mission, this time to the other end of the Promised Land—to a little, insignificant town in Galilee, called Nazareth. He had to find a specific girl and give her a great message.

The girl’s name: Mary.

Mary

Assuming our assessment of the genealogies is correct,6 Mary is of the tribe of Judah, descended from David through his son Nathan. And she is betrothed to another descendant of David, a man named Joseph.

Betrothals in that time were legally-binding agreements between the husband-to-be and the parents of the bride-to-be. In the eyes of the law and culture, they were legally married (to break it off required a divorce), but until the marriage ceremony, they did not live together nor did they engage in any “marital activities” that might result in children. In other words, since Joseph entered into an agreement to marry Mary—a virgin—Joseph rightly expected to marry a virgin.7

The Strange Greeting

Gabriel says, “Rejoice, honored one!” I know your translation doesn’t read this way. The word translated “Hail” (KJV, ASV) or “Greetings” (NIV, ESV) is translated “rejoice,” “rejoiced,” or “rejoicing” (or “joy,” “joyfully,” or “glad”) 49 of the 60 times it appears in the New Testament. The NKJV gets it right by showing Gabriel start by telling Mary to “Rejoice,” because he has great news to share.

The phrase “honored one” (or “highly favored,” or “favored one”) only shows up one other place—Ephesians 1:6, where it is translated “accepted” (KJV), “freely bestowed” (NASB), and “freely given” (NIV). It is a modified form of the word for “grace.” Gabriel calls her “honored one” because of the great news he has to share.

Gabriel says, “the Lord is with you.” This is the first part of why she is supposed to rejoice. People who are truly trying to follow God almost always have nagging doubts about whether they are right in God’s sight. To hear a heavenly messenger say, “the Lord is with you” would be a great comfort. But it wasn’t just her righteous status under consideration.

Gabriel then says, “You are blessed among women.” He will explain it momentarily, but Mary is blessed, because—of all the women in the world—God chose her to be the mother of the Messiah.

So why did God choose Mary?

  1. She was of the right lineage (so the Messiah would physically be a descendant of David).
  2. She was engaged to the right person (so the Messiah would legally be heir to the throne).
  3. She was faithful—she “found favor with God” (verse 30).

We aren’t told how old Mary was when this happened. Some have suggested she was potentially as young as 13, though I have serious doubts about that for the following reasons:

  • However old she was, she had to have shown an independent faithfulness to God (not just following orders from her parents), because she “found favor with God.” This phrase refers to how God views a person’s actions, and is never used of a child elsewhere in the Bible. The first time this idea is found is with Noah, who was around 500 years old.8
  • Mary traveled (apparently alone?) from Galilee to Judah, a trip that was often taken by caravanning together with many others for safety. It would either require going through the land of the Samaritans, or crossing the Jordan River twice to avoid Samaria. Mary made this journey in a hurry, which eliminates the idea of a large caravan. A 13-year old girl, traveling alone (she did not come from a wealthy family, so there would have been no servants) on this journey would have been a prime target for thieves and predators (both human and animal).

I don’t doubt that she was young (obviously younger than Elizabeth), but I can’t picture a 13-year old fitting these circumstances. If I were forced to make a guess, I would say Mary was between 16 and 18 when this event took place.

Mary’s Confusion

When Zacharias saw Gabriel, he was afraid and troubled because the angel was standing there in the temple. When Mary saw Gabriel, she was troubled (and apparently had some fear) because of the message. She wasn’t expecting this, and honestly didn’t know what this greeting even meant—she “pondered” on it.

The Good News

Gabriel tells Mary not to be afraid (implying she was at least somewhat afraid), because she had “found favor with God.” As we said earlier, this means her faithful living was seen by God—so much so that God chose her to be the mother of the Messiah.

Then he gets to meat of the message: “You’re going to conceive and give birth to a son, and you’re going to name Him Jesus.” Other than Gabriel using the name Jesus, this can easily be seen as a reference to Isaiah 7:14—which Mary certainly didn’t understand completely. The name Jesus means “Jehovah Saves” or “Jehovah is Salvation,” and is the same name as Joshua in the Old Testament.

“He shall be great.” Chalk it up to Gabriel to give a massive understatement. This is the same thing he said to Zacharias about John, “He shall be great”—except John would be great “in the sight of the Lord.” Jesus is the Lord, so Gabriel simply states, “He shall be great.”

He will be called the Son of the Highest, or the Son of God. Jesus later taught, “Love your enemies
and your reward shall be great, and you shall be called sons of the Highest, because He is kind to the ungrateful and the evil” (Luke 6:35). Whereas we gain the name “son [or daughter] of the Highest” in a spiritual sense, Jesus was literally Son of the Highest. God is His only Father, and Jesus also lived up to all the spiritual ideals of the Father. In other words, Jesus is “Son of the Highest” at birth, and earned that title throughout His life (and beyond).

  • Jesus is declared God’s Son prior to His conception (Luke 1:32).
  • Jesus is declared God’s Son at His baptism (Luke 3:22).
  • Jesus is declared God’s Son in the midst of His ministry (Luke 9:35).
  • Jesus is declared God’s Son at His resurrection (Acts 13:33)

Jesus will have the throne of his father David. This was prophesied back in Isaiah 9:6-7.

Unto us a son is born. Unto us a child is given. The government will be on his shoulder. And his name will be called Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, on the throne of David, and on his kingdom, to order it and to establish it with judgment and justice from now even forever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.

This means clearly that Mary’s Son must be of the royal lineage of David. She would have understood that much at least. It is not a coincidence that Luke mentioned her husband-to-be was “of the house of David.”

One thing we should address now (and probably more in-depth much later in this study) is the term “throne of David.” Some well-meaning but completely off-base folks teach this is speaking of Jesus ruling in literal Jerusalem on David’s literal throne. The prophecy isn’t about a literal chair (which, at 3,000 years old, is either destroyed, disintegrated, or so fragile no one could sit on it). It refers to Jesus ruling as the legitimate heir to David. Jesus is sitting on His throne, reigning from heaven (Acts 2:30; Hebrews 12:2).

This rule will be “forever,” and this kingdom will have no end. This is the same thing said in Daniel 2:44; Isaiah 9:7; and others.

His reign over the “house of Jacob” means, first off, that He was born King of the Jews—He is the Jewish Messiah. Secondly, it means they will have to answer to Him as their King and Judge. Thirdly, it also expands to His kingdom—the church—which is spiritual Israel (Romans 9:6).

Mary Accepts the Mission (Luke 1:34-38)

Then Mary said to the angel, “How is this going to happen, seeing I don’t [sexually] know a man?”

And the angel answered her, saying, “the Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Highest will overshadow you. Because of this, that holy thing which will be born from you will be called the Son of God. And look, your cousin Elizabeth, she in her old age has also conceived a son. And this is now the sixth month with her, who had been called barren. For with God, nothing shall be impossible.”

According to some sources, the Jews had a year-long betrothal period before the marriage. Mary and Joseph may well have been at the beginning of their betrothal period when this message was given by Gabriel. The marriage was at least 3 and a half months away (see verses 39-40 and 56), and probably longer. But Gabriel is apparently hinting this pregnancy is going to happen pretty quickly. That explains Mary’s response.

Mary’s Question

She asks him, in essence, “How is this going to happen, since I’m a virgin?” First, notice the difference between her response and Zacharias’ response. Zacharias asks, “How shall I know this?” In other words, he asked for proof, for a sign. Mary asks, “How is this going to happen?” It is a question of curiosity, not a question of doubt.

Second, note that she assumes there is going to be something miraculous about it, because her question is, How am I going to be pregnant when I’m a virgin? And she knows her wedding is not imminent yet, but seems to believe this pregnancy is going to happen before that time.

Gabriel’s Explanation

It isn’t often we are given the explanation for how God performs something supernatural, but Mary gets just such an explanation. He said the Holy Spirit would come upon her. When miracles happened in the Bible, the Holy Spirit was always involved. Thus, if a child was born via miraculous means, the Holy Spirit was involved. When Joseph was troubled about Mary’s pregnancy, an angel told him, “that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 1:20).

He also said “the power of the Highest [that is, God] will overshadow you.” In other words, God will make it happen by His power. If God can create man from dust (after creating the dust in the first place), then there is no reason to assume He can’t make Mary pregnant without the aid of a man.

As a result of this supernatural involvement, Mary’s Son would be called “the Son of God.” As we saw earlier, Jesus is Son of God literally, and He also earned the title through His obedience.

To make sure he eliminates any doubt Mary might have, he shares some news with her that she may have not yet heard—your old cousin Elizabeth is pregnant, and has been for six months—and people called her barren!” Then he prompts her to respond in faith: “Because with God, nothing is impossible.”

Some have questioned how Mary and Elizabeth could be cousins (literally the Greek word means “same family”) when Mary is clearly from Judah and Elizabeth is clearly from Levi. The answer is a simple one. All it would take for Mary and Elizabeth to be first cousins (hypothetically) is for Mary’s mother to be from the tribe of Levi (tribal descent was from the father’s line) or Elizabeth’s mother to be from the tribe of Judah. And the text doesn’t say what exact relation they were—they could have been second cousins or third (and don’t get me started on the “once removed” parts), which would just mean a grandma or great-grandma married into a different tribe—which was common. Whatever the relationship, when Gabriel mentions Elizabeth, Mary knows exactly who he is talking about, because they are family.

Mary’s Acceptance

Mary responds with humility, and acceptance. She just says, “Behold, [I am] the handmaid of the Lord. Let it happen to me according to your declaration.” No arguing, no trying to explain why God should choose someone else (like Moses did). She accepts the mission God has given her.

Then the angel departs from her. I have to wonder how he did the departing. Did he just *pop* disappear? Did he quickly ascend to heaven? Was there some smoke to travel upward (see Judges 13)? We aren’t told, but I’m still curious.

The Three-Month Visit with Elizabeth (Luke 1:39-56)

And in those days, Mary arose and went to the hill country, into of Judah, hurriedly. And she went in the house of Zacharias and greeted Elizabeth.

And it happened that, when Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit, and she spoke out loudly, saying, “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb. And how is it that the mother of my Lord should come to me? For behold, as soon as the sound of your greeting came to my ears, the baby leaped in my womb for joy. And blessed is she who believed, because those things which were told to her by the Lord will take place.”

And Mary said, “My soul praises the Lord, and my spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior, because he has regarded the low estate of His handmaiden. For behold, from now onward, all generations shall call me blessed. Because He is mighty who has done great things to me, and His name is holy. His mercy is on those who fear Him from generation to generation. He has shown strength with His arm; He has scattered the proud in the imaginings of their hearts. He has put down the mighty from their thrones, and exalted those of low estate. He has filled the hungry with good things. And he has sent the rich away empty. He has helped His servant Israel in remembering His mercy, as He spoke to our fathers, to Abraham and to his seed forever.”

And Mary stayed with her about three months, then returned to her own house.

Rushing to Judah

Why Mary rushed so quickly to Judah is a subject of speculation, but rush she did. Some suggest she wanted to see if the angel had told her the truth.9 Others suggest it was to build up her faith by seeing pregnant Elizabeth in person and to celebrate with her.10 Others think she quickly traveled down to Judah to congratulate11 and assist her aged cousin in her final months of pregnancy. Others think she went to quickly get the highly-respected Zacharias and Elizabeth on her side to vouch for her story of a male-less pregnancy.12 And still others suggest she was so bursting at the seams to tell someone about it, but couldn’t tell anyone around Nazareth for fear of shame, that she went as quick as she could to tell Elizabeth.13

Several suggestions exist for when she left to go there. And this wouldn’t be an issue, except we are trying in this study to keep things in chronological order as much as possible. The Ethiopic translation says “in that day,” meaning she left the very day Gabriel spoke with her. Most English translations say “in those days,” which leaves a bit of ambiguity to how long she waited. I have read guesses of a few hours to two days to three or four weeks. The ones who argue for it being over a week say betrothed virgins were not permitted to travel alone, and that there had to be time for Joseph to find out she was pregnant, have his dream, and decide to go ahead and quickly marry her, then allow her to travel. While I guess that could be true, the idea of Mary hurrying to get there shows she was in a massive rush to get there—something that seems incongruous with a weeks-long or month-long delay.

It seems most likely to me that Mary, discovering the news about Elizabeth, packed as quick as she could and left at the earliest point possible (perhaps the same day, probably a day or so later) to be with Elizabeth. And then, after returning home three months later, she is obviously pregnant, and word gets around (through the grapevine, so to speak) to Joseph, and then the events recorded in Matthew 1 take place (and we will cover those in the next lesson).

Elizabeth’s Praise

Mary comes in and greets Elizabeth. King James says “saluted,” but the word means a loving greeting (and “saluted” doesn’t scream loving nowadays). When Elizabeth heard it (so apparently she wasn’t right there when Mary said it), the baby John leaped in her womb. Before our son was born, he liked to kick, and my wife could feel it very clearly. So what does it feel like for a baby to leap inside the womb?

After John leaped, Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit (meaning she was being given inspired words) and began to speak. But she spoke “with a loud voice” (Greek mega phone), perhaps because she wasn’t in the same room as Mary—at least not at first.

We know she was inspired to speak these words, because she spoke things she would not have previously known. She repeats Gabriel’s blessing: Blessed are you among women. Then she adds, “Blessed is the fruit of your womb,” that is, the as-yet-unborn baby Jesus. But Mary hadn’t told her she was pregnant.

Elizabeth then asks, “How is it that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” This is proof as well that her proclamation was inspired—it is one thing to guess someone is pregnant, but to know Mary was pregnant with the Lord—the Messiah? There’s no way that could have been guessed. And knowing what we know about Elizabeth—that she kept all the laws of the Lord blamelessly—she would not have spoken a blessing on Mary if there was even a small doubt about her being pregnant by divine means.

The Catholic Church calls Mary “the mother of God.” This is blasphemous. They reason this way: Mary is the mother of Jesus (correct). Jesus is God (correct). Therefore Mary is the mother of God. No! God has no mother or father. God is eternal. “In the beginning, God
” Mary is the mother of Jesus. She is the mother of the human Jesus. His nature as God existed thousands of years before Mary was born, so in no way can Mary be said to be the mother of God.

Then I can only imagine Elizabeth was smiling, perhaps even chuckling a bit, when she says, “And look, as soon as I heard the sound of your greeting, the baby in my womb leaped for joy.” It sounds like she is sharing the joy the baby is expressing.

As a side note, the Bible attributes emotion to the baby inside the womb, and calls him a “baby.” The biblical writers use the same word for a baby inside the womb and a baby outside the womb. It is a baby. Not a fetus. Not a clump of cells. It is a baby.

It is also interesting to note that Luke, being a physician, would have been the perfect person to disprove the virgin pregnancy and virgin birth of Mary. He could have easily said, “This is clearly impossible.” Instead, he does the research, probably even interviews Mary,14 and concludes that it actually happened just as he describes it.

The final line of Elizabeth’s praise shows us Mary didn’t come there to check if the angel was telling the truth. Elizabeth (by inspiration) says “Blessed is she who believed” (speaking of Mary). Mary believed the angel, and God was going to bring about the things He told her through Gabriel.

Mary’s Magnificent Magnificat

Verses 46-55 are often called the Magnificat (especially by Catholics) and it is claimed to be one of the eight earliest Christian hymns, and the first hymn in praise to Mary—yet no documented proof for this claim is offered. These verses may have been done in poetic form (I doubt anyone reading this is an expert on first century poetic structure of Hebrew-speakers whose words were recorded in Greek), but it would be sacrilegious to say Luke wrote down a song designed to be sung in praise to Mary—when all praise is to go to Deity.

The first line of Mary’s praise is “My soul magnifies the Lord.” That means she praises Him, she makes a big deal out of Him. She makes Him bigger and herself smaller. It is a fancy way of saying the Lord is important to her. And we all ought to be able to say the same thing.

In the same vein, she says her spirit rejoices in God her Savior. How often do we rejoice in knowing God saves us? Mary here speaks of God as already being her Savior. Her ultimate salvation is through her not-yet-born Son, Jesus. But the salvation she is referencing is God raising her up from a lowly place (a poor girl in a nowhere town in the lower-class part of the country) to a position where everyone who knows about her will say she was blessed by God. Everyone who cares about God and His plan will know who she is.

She knows this elevation in status isn’t an accident—it took a mighty one to do this great thing. And even His name is holy. And the reason God, the Mighty, did this was because He has mercy to those who fear Him.

Mary then appears to reference (in general) God’s actions in the past, though it ultimately points forward to the spiritual reality in Christ.

  • He showed strength with His arm.
  • He dispersed the proud in their imaginations.
  • He ripped the mighty from their thrones.[15]
  • He exalted those of low estate.
  • He filled the hungry with good things, but sent away the rich empty-handed.
  • He helped His servant Israel (that is, when they acted as His servant, He helped them) by remembering His mercy.

The idea of God humbling the proud and exalting the humble appears several times in the New Testament, and each of these examples fits the same paradigm.

These things were done to fulfill the promise God made to Abraham way back in Genesis 12.

Mary Goes Back Home

After this memorable exchange, Mary stayed with Elizabeth for three months—just about the time baby John was to be born. She went back to her own house (that is, back to her parents), and awaited her marriage (though as we will see next time, there were some issues leading up to it).

What This Means for Us Today

Trust God, even when it seems impossible. Many promises to us in the Bible seem difficult, if not downright impossible, to grab hold of and trust. Can I really cast my cares and anxieties on Him and let Him take care of them? Can I really trust God to make sure I have what I need? Mary was told she would have a child without the involvement of a man. Yet her stance was that since God promised it, it was going to happen.

Family is important—especially if they follow God too. Whatever the reason may be, Mary spent three months with Elizabeth, and they were both overjoyed at what God had done for them. Far too often Christians (especially if they are related) spend their time complaining about things: the economy, the government, the church, etc. Instead, we ought to be seeking to build each other up.

Jesus is Lord, the Savior. Several times in this passage, Jesus is called “Lord.” It is here Mary is told His name will be Jesus—Jehovah saves. Jesus is the one who saves us from our sins through His death on the cross. Let us not ever forget this amazing gift God offers to us.

1 Luke 1:5-25, 57-80—All of which was covered in the last lesson. And while verses 39-56 include Elizabeth (John’s mother), and most of that section are Elizabeth’s words, the focus is not on John, but on Jesus, whom Mary was then carrying in her womb.

2 1:18-20, 26-31.

3 Elizabeth prophesied about Jesus (1:41-45, specifically verses 42-43); Zacharias prophesied about John (1:67-79).

4 1:24, 39-40, 56.

5 1:24.

6 Lessons 3 and 4.

7 The Law of Moses describes a potential situation where a husband claims his wife wasn’t a virgin on the day of the marriage. The parents of the wife were to bring out the bloody sheet that was on the bed during the wedding night, proving she had lost her virginity after the marriage (Deuteronomy 22:13-19).

8 Genesis 6:9.

9 Benson, Joseph, Joseph Benson’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1857), e-sword edition.

10 Calvin, John, Calvin’s Complete Commentaries, e-sword edition.

11 Alford, Ibid.

12 Coke, Thomas, A Commentary on the Holy Bible (1803) e-Sword edition.

13 Butler, Paul T. The Gospel of Luke (Joplin, MO: College Press, 1986) (College Press Commentary set) e-Sword edition.

14 This would be the most likely way he would know what she had been thinking and pondering, as is said multiple times in chapters 1 and 2. See John Krivak’s article, “The Voice of Mary” in The Quarterly (Volume 5, Number 1), January, 2021.

15 Some translations say, “seats,” but the Greek word is the same.

Articles

From Murderer to Missionary – The Life of the Apostle Paul (Part Two)

Leave a comment

ApostlesLogo

To those who have asked or wondered, yes, I realize that there was still more of the life of Peter to cover.  I ended up teaching those sections without notes, and so I’m behind on that.  It will get done at some point.  🙂

Saul the Persecutor

Saul first appears on the biblical stage, by name, as an enemy of the cross.  It is possible that, living in Jerusalem, Saul was among the groups of Pharisees who saw, questioned, and aggravated Jesus during His earthly ministry.1  But the first time we see his name is in connection with the death of Stephen.  It is possible that, being from Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, that Saul is one of the men who was arguing with Stephen in Acts 6.

Then there arose certain of the synagogue, which is called the synagogue of the Libertines, and Cyrenians, and Alexandrians, and them of Cilicia, and of Asia, disputing with Stephen.  And they were not able to resist the wisdom and the spirit by which he spoke.  Then they suborned men, who said, “We have heard him speak blasphemous words against this holy place and the Law.  Because we have heard him say that this Jesus of Nazareth shall destroy this place, and shall change the customs which Moses delivered to us.2

After Stephen’s sermon before the Sanhedrin in Acts 7, the Jews were outraged.

When they heard these things, they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed on him with their teeth.  But [Stephen], being full of the Holy Spirit, looked up steadfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God, and said, “Behold!  I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God!”  Then they cried out with a loud voice, and stopped their ears, and ran upon him together, and cast him out of the city, and stoned him.  And the witnesses laid down their clothes at a young man’s feet, whose name was Saul. 
 And Saul was pleased with his death.3

After hearing the sermon, Saul accompanied the mob (and was perhaps involved in it) that threw Stephen out of the city.  According to Deuteronomy 17:7, the witnesses against someone had to be the first ones to stone him.  So it was these witnesses who removed their outer garments and left them in the care and supervision of Saul.  This event seemed to awaken a bloodlust in Saul, an indignation against anyone who would dare promote the name of Jesus, for we see soon afterwards:

As for Saul, he was devastating the church, entering into every house, and dragging men and women away, and committed them to prison.4

Years later, Saul spoke about his actions against the church:

I truly thought within myself that I ought to do many things antagonistic to the name of Jesus of Nazareth.  I did these things in Jerusalem, and I shut up many of the saints in prison, having received authority from the chief priests.  And when they were murdered, I voted against them.  And I punished them often in every synagogue, and compelled them to blaspheme.  And being exceedingly enraged against them, I persecuted them even into foreign cities, in which I also went to Damascus with authority and commission from the chief priests.5

He also said that, “beyond measure, I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it.”6

-Bradley S. Cobb

1 Since Saul was a “young man” when Stephen was killed, he would have been even younger (and thus not in any sense a leader) when Jesus was on the earth, some 3-7 years earlier.  Therefore, if Saul was among the groups of Pharisees, it would be no surprise that he isn’t mentioned at all.  Additionally, only two Pharisees are mentioned by name in the gospel accounts: Simon (Luke 7) and Nicodemus (John 3); and both of them are mentioned because they were involved in a one-on-one discussion with Jesus.  All that to say, the fact that Saul is not named in the gospel accounts does not prove he wasn’t there.

2 Acts 6:9-14.

3 Acts 7:54-58; 8:1.  The word “consenting” (KJV) literally means “was pleased with.”  It gave Saul pleasure to see Stephen get stoned.

4 Acts 8:3.  See Modern Literal Version.

5 Acts 26:9-12.

6 Galatians 1:13, KJV.

Articles

The Disciple Whom Jesus Loved–The Life of the Apostle John (Part 2)

Leave a comment

John as an Apostle

One morning, John and the rest of the disciples of Jesus were called to go up a mountain where Jesus had been praying all night.  John must have been excited by being selected as one of just twelve men that would be representatives for the miracle-working man that he believed to be the Messiah.  John then followed his cousin down the mountain, where he saw a crowd of people waiting—and Jesus healed the sick and diseased among them.1

After preaching in Decapolis, on the other side of the Sea of Galilee, Jesus returned to Capernaum2 and was approached by the ruler of the synagogue, Jairus,3 concerning his daughter who was near to death.  John was one of just three disciples of Jesus who was selected to accompany the Lord inside the house to see this little girl raised from the dead.4

Later on, John was taken by Jesus, along with Peter and James, to a mountain where Jesus prayed.  John fell asleep, but when he awoke, the sight before him was quite a shock: Jesus was positively shining, and standing with Him were Moses and Elijah.  Then a cloud overshadowed them, and they heard God Himself speak, “This is my beloved Son: hear Him.”  And then John looked, and the two Old Testament figures had disappeared, leaving only Jesus.  A mixture of fear and excitement was boiling inside John, but Jesus told them not to say anything about what they had seen until after He was risen from the dead.5

Upon returning to Capernaum, John and the other disciples argued about who was the greatest among them.  Jesus criticized them all, and said, “If any man desires to be first, he shall be last of all and servant of all.”6  This is a lesson that John apparently didn’t learn the first time, because not too long afterwards, he and his brother James had their mother ask Jesus for the two greatest seats in the kingdom, causing Jesus to say almost the exact same words: “Whoever shall be great among you shall be your servant; and whoever of you desires to be the first shall be servant of all.”7

In between these two events, John tells Jesus a story about how, when the apostles were out and about, they saw someone who wasn’t part of their group casting out demons in Jesus’ name.  John and some others went to the man and told him to cease, because he wasn’t following them.  To this, Jesus replied, “Don’t forbid him, for there is no man who shall do a miracle in my name that can speak evil lightly of me.  For he that is not against us is on our side.”8  John learned an important lesson there—don’t forbid people from doing good.

But what happens when people are staunchly rejecting Jesus?  John didn’t just want to forbid them, he wanted to kill them!

It came to pass, when the time was come that [Jesus] should be received up, He steadfastly set His face to go to Jerusalem.  And He sent messengers before His face: and they went and entered into a village of the Samaritans, to make [things] ready for Him.  And they didn’t receive Him because His face was as though He desired to go to Jerusalem.  And when His disciples, James and John, saw, they said, “Lord, do you desire that we command fire to come down from heaven and consume them, even as Elijah did?”  But He turned and rebuked them, and said, “You do not know what manner of spirit you are of.  For the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them.”  And they went to another village.9

Jesus and His disciples came to the Jerusalem area, and stayed at the house of Lazarus on the Sabbath.10 On the next day, John witnessed the “triumphal entry,”11 where Jesus entered the city riding the colt of an ass, and heard the people crying out, “Hosanna! Blessed is He that comes in the name of the Lord!”12  Then John followed Jesus to the temple, where the Lord taught the people, after which they returned to Bethany (probably to the house of Lazarus, Mary, and Martha).13  On Monday, John followed Jesus back into Jerusalem.  Along the way, they saw a fig tree, and Jesus desired to eat some of the fruits from it.  However, there was nothing but leaves on the tree, and John heard Jesus utter the words “Let no fruit grow on you, henceforward forever!”14  After they came into Jerusalem, and into the temple, John watched:

Jesus went into the temple, and began to cast out those who sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves; and He would not allow that any man should carry any vessel through the temple.  And He taught, saying to them, “Is it not written, ‘My house shall be called by all nations The House of Prayer’?  But you have made it a den of thieves!”15

That evening, John accompanied Jesus out of Jerusalem for the night.16

On Tuesday, John again accompanied Jesus into Jerusalem, and they passed the same tree they had the day before.  Except this time, the tree was dried up from the roots—completely withered—after which Jesus spoke about the power of faith.  They then entered the city and went into the temple, where a group of scribes, elders, and chief priests confronted Jesus and demanded to know where He got His authority to do these things.  John must have smiled to himself when he heard Jesus reply by asking them where John’s authority to baptize came from—and saw the Jewish leaders feign ignorance.17

Then, John heard Jesus give a parable, condemning the Jewish leaders—and they knew it was directed at them—for rejecting Him.18  Then he saw Pharisees, Herodians, and Sadducees all working together, taking turns trying to trap Jesus.19  As they were leaving the temple, one of the disciples (we’re not told which one) said to Jesus, “Master, see what manner of stones and what buildings!”  To this, Jesus replied, “You see these great buildings?  There shall not be left one stone on another, that shall not be thrown down.”20

It was because of this statement of Jesus that John approached Jesus with Peter, Andrew, and James, and asked Jesus to “Tell us when shall these things be?  And what shall be the sign when all these things shall be fulfilled?”21  In answer to those questions, Jesus told these four men about the signs to look for, including “when you shall see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near.”22 This he did, foretelling the destruction of Jerusalem—which took place 40 years later in AD 70.23

Thursday evening,24 Jesus came with John and the rest of the apostles to a large upper room that was prepared for them to eat the Passover.25  Earlier, Jesus had specifically selected Peter and John, sent them from Bethany into Jerusalem so that this room could be made ready.

Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the Passover must be killed.  And He [Jesus] sent Peter and John, saying “Go and prepare us the Passover, so that we may eat.”  And they said to Him, “Where do you wish that we prepare it?”

And He said to them, “Behold, when you have entered into the city, a man will meet you there, carrying a pitcher of water; follow him into the house that he enters.  And you shall say to the goodman of the house, ‘The Master says to you, “Where is the guest-chamber where I shall eat the Passover with my disciples?”’ And he will show you a large upper room furnished: there make ready.”

And they went, and found [everything] as He had said to them: and they made ready the Passover.26

Based on the command of Jesus and John and Peter’s obedience, it appears that these two disciples actually did the killing and cooking of the lamb in preparation for what is usually called “The Last Supper.”

When they were all gathered together in the upper room, Jesus said, “With desire I have desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer.”27 It was during this occasion that Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper, followed by announcing that one of the twelve was going to betray Him.28  The apostles all began to ask, “is it I?”29

Now there was, leaning on Jesus’ bosom, one of His disciples [John], whom Jesus loved.  Therefore, Simon Peter motioned to him, so that he should ask who it would be about whom He spoke.  He, then, lying on Jesus’ chest, says to Him, “Lord, who is it?”  Jesus answered, “He it is, to whom I shall give a sop, when I have dipped it.”  And when He had dipped the sop, He gave it to Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon.30

Then, the same old argument came up again about which one would be greatest among them.  It is possible that James and John had learned their lesson by this point and kept their mouth shut, but it’s also possible that their ego took over again.31  And like before, Jesus had to teach them the lesson about being a servant.32  Yet just hours after they were arguing about who would be the greatest, they all (even John) ran away and forsook Jesus.33

Before abandoning Jesus, however, John was taken by Jesus with Peter and James in order to “watch” while He prayed.34  But John, like the other two, fell asleep.  After being awakened by the Lord, John again went to sleep shortly after the Lord left to go pray a second time.  The next time John woke up, Judas was arriving with a band of soldiers.35

After abandoning Jesus, John regained some of his composure, and began to follow the crowd to the high priest, Annas.  The high priest knew John, which many have taken as evidence that John’s family was wealthy, and so this disciple was permitted to enter into the court to view the proceedings.  He watched as Jesus was interrogated and brutalized during this mock trial.36

Whether John followed Jesus to his other trials that morning isn’t stated, but he stood at the cross, looking up at His Master who was hanging, bleeding, and beaten.  He heard the Lord say to His mother Mary, “Woman, behold your son!”  Then John heard Jesus speak directly to him, “Behold, your mother!”  And from that moment, John took care of her.37

-Bradley S. Cobb

1 Luke 6:12-19.

2 Matthew places this incident with others which took place in Capernaum.  See Matthew 9:1 (“His own city”), 9:9-17 (the call of Matthew, followed by the feast at Matthew’s house), after which Matthew says “While He spoke these things to them, behold, a certain ruler [Jairus] came to Him
”  Mark places these events in Capernaum (Mark 2:1-22).

3 This Jairus, being the ruler of the synagogue in Capernaum, would have been on hand to see Jesus casting out the demon, as recorded in Luke 4:31-37.

4 Luke 8:51-55.

5 Luke 9:28-36, Mark 9:8-9.

6 Mark 9:33-35.

7 Matthew 20:20-24; Mark 10:35-44, especially verses 43-44.  The KJV says “chiefest,” but the Greek is the same as in 9:35 and 10:44.

8 Mark 9:38-40.  Neither Mark nor Luke (the only other gospel writer who mentions this event) tell us who this man casting out demons in Jesus’ name was.  Some (Lange, Lightfoot, and others) have suggested that this man was a disciple of John the Immerser who cast out demons by the name of the “Messiah” which he expected to come, not necessarily doing it in the name of “Jesus”—but there is no evidence that any of John’s disciples were able to perform miracles.  Others (Calvin, most notably) take the ridiculous stance that this man “proceeded inconsiderately to work miracles.”   Clarke suggests that this man might have been one of the seventy who had been given miraculous abilities, yet who decided to not be part of the mass of disciples after returning from his mission—except that this event took place before Christ chose the seventy (see Luke 9:49-10:1).

What is important to note is that John doesn’t say the man was trying to cast out demons (like the sons of Sceva in Acts 19), but that he was actually doing it.  Jesus even acknowledges that this man was actually working miracles by saying “Don’t forbid him [from casting out demons].”  Thus this man had been given miraculous power by God (probably via Christ), because he was a true disciple of the Lord, even though for whatever reason, he was unable to devote all of his time to following Jesus on His preaching tours.

9 Luke 9:51-56.  The first-rate chronological historian gives no record of events between John’s misplaced zeal for forbidding those who believed in Jesus and his desire to destroy the ones who rejected Him.  It’s as though John was saying, “Jesus, I get that we aren’t supposed to forbid those who are doing good, but surely you can’t have a problem with us wiping out those who are refusing to help you at all!”  What John didn’t understand at that point was the patience of the Lord, and that the Lord Himself will take care of punishing the wicked at judgment.

10 John 12:1-13, with special emphasis on the first and last verse of that section.

11 It is never called that in Scriptures, but it is the commonly accepted name for what took place on the Sunday prior to Jesus’ crucifixion.

12 Mark 11:9; Luke 19:38 (Luke says “Blessed is the King
”).  This is a quotation of Psalm 118:26.  Most likely, the Jews who were saying this would have quoted the verse as it is written, which is “Blessed is he that comes in the name of Jehovah!”

13 Mark 11:11, Luke 19:47.  Mark provides some specifics on the passage of days during this week (see Mark 11:12).

14 Mark 11:12-14; Matthew 21:19.  Mark adds the detail that it wasn’t time for figs yet (verse 13).

15 Mark 11:15-17.  This was a significant event which emboldened the scribes and chief priests to even more want Jesus dead (Mark 11:18).

16 Mark 11:19.

17 Mark 11:20-33; Luke 20:1-8.

18 The fullest account of this exchange between Jesus and the Jewish leadership is found in Matthew 21:33-46.

19 Mark 12:13-27. This is astounding, because these are (for lack of a better term) different political parties within Judaism.  They were violently opposed to each other (see Acts 23, for example), but they all recognized that Jesus was a danger to their positions of power.

20 Mark 13:1-2, Matthew 24:1-2, Luke 21:5-6.

21 Mark 12:3-4 is the only place that tells us that this question was asked by just these four men.

22 Luke 21:20.  Matthew calls it “the abomination of desolation” which Daniel foretold, meaning that Jesus described something that had been prophesied hundreds of years earlier.

23 There are disagreements about the exact year of Jesus’ death, but biblically and historically speaking, it is most likely AD 30, which makes Jerusalem’s destruction in AD 70 forty years away.

24 For the Jews, the new day of the week began at 6pm, because of Genesis 1, which says “the evening and the morning were the first day.”  So Thursday evening to them, because it began a new day, is what we would refer to as Wednesday evening.

25 Mark 14:12-17.

26 Luke 22:7-13.

27 Luke 22:15.  This is another way of saying, “I have desired very much
”

28 Some have argued, based on Matthew and Mark’s accounts (juxtaposed with John’s) that Judas left prior to the institution of the Lord’s Supper.  However, Luke (who claimed to write chronologically) places the announcement of betrayal (“the hand of him that betrays me is with me on the table”) after the institution of the Lord’s Supper (Luke 22:14-22).

29 Mark 14:18.

30 John 13:23-26.  It seems strange that though Jesus positively identified Judas as the betrayer, none of the other apostles seemed to catch what He was saying.  Judas had them all fooled.

31 Luke 22:24.  It’s interesting that this should come right on the heels of Jesus announcing that one of them would betray Him.  It may be that they went from saying, “Is it I?” to “It couldn’t be me,” to “I know it couldn’t be me, because I’m the most devoted follower Jesus has.”

32 Luke 22:25-30.

33 Matthew 26:56.

34 Mark 14:32-34.

35 Matthew 26:36-47.

36 John 18:15-22.

37 John 19:26-27.  Some have questioned why it is that Jesus would ask John to take care of his mother instead of asking His own brothers.  First, it is most likely that Joseph was no longer alive at this point (otherwise Jesus would be asking His mother to leave her husband, which is ridiculous).  Second, John wasn’t a stranger—he was Mary’s nephew, so John is still family.  Third, at this point, the brothers of Jesus were not believers, and perhaps Jesus didn’t want to subject His mother to staying with non-believers.  Fourth, John was apparently wealthy—the family fishing business was large enough to employ servants, and John was on friendly terms with the high priest (which couldn’t be said of many—if any—poor people).  We don’t know that the Jesus’ brothers were financially able to care for their mother.

Articles, Books

A Disciple with “Horse” in His Name (part 1)

Leave a comment

We hope you have been enjoying reading these sections of our upcoming book, “Who Were The Apostles?”  Today, we begin talking about a man named “Philip,” whose name in Greek literally means “Lover of Horses.”

Philip the Disciple

Like Andrew, Philip is known by a Greek name, which means “Lover of Horses.”1  Philip was a Jew,2 a native of the fishing village of Bethsaida like Andrew and Peter,3 which possibly means that these men were already acquainted with each other before they were called.  He was one of the earliest disciples of Jesus, joining the band of followers just one day after Andrew and Peter.4

That day, Jesus planned to go to Galilee, and He searched for Philip.  The Greek word used by John (from which we get our word eureka!) indicates that Jesus found him after searching for him.5  When He found Philip, He said, “follow me.”6  What kind of a man must Philip have been that Jesus would actively search him out to be one of His disciples! Since Philip was from the same city as Andrew and Peter, it’s quite possible that they were the ones who suggested that Jesus find him. 7  Given the quickness with which Philip followed Jesus, and the fact that he knew where He was from and who His earthly father was, it is possible that Philip already knew Jesus, or at least knew of Him.8

Philip’s immediate response was two-fold.  First, he accepted the call to be one of Jesus’ disciples.  Second, he searched out his friend Nathanael9 and told Him they had found “Him, of whom Moses in the Law and the Prophets did write.”10  This shows that Philip had a very high regard for the inspired word of God, and that he was awaiting the advent of the Prophet like Moses.11  After Nathanael expressed doubt because of Jesus’ hometown (“can anything good come out of Nazareth?”), Philip encouraged him to “come and see” for himself, showing that Philip had confidence in who Jesus was.12  Philip then led Nathanael to Jesus, where the Lord convinced the doubter with His greeting.13

The day after he was called by Jesus, Philip accompanied Him to the wedding feast in Cana where Jesus turned water into wine, increasing his faith in Jesus as the Messiah.14  Afterwards, Philip accompanied Jesus into Jerusalem, where the Lord overturned the tables in the temple, sending animals and greedy money-exchangers running.15  Philip watched in awe as Jesus performed miracles on the Passover in Jerusalem.16  Some time afterwards, they went out of Jerusalem, and Philip began to baptize many people.17

After returning with Jesus to Galilee, Philip apparently resumed his regular occupation while the Lord traveled around the area, preaching.18  But after Jesus returned to Capernaum, calling Andrew, Peter, James, and John, Philip must have re-joined Him, for it is thereafter that Jesus and “His disciples” ate with a tax collector named Levi, causing consternation among the Pharisees and scribes.19  Some time later, Philip and the other disciples walked with Jesus through some fields, picked some wheat, and ate some of it—all on the Sabbath—again causing the Pharisees to be very upset.20

-Bradley S. Cobb

1 Philip was a common name both then and now.  The popularity of the name likely originated with Philip of Macedon, the father of Alexander the Great.  As Alexander conquered cities and areas, new names were occasionally given, which led to the city called “Philippi” (in Macedonia), the city of Caesarea Philippi, etc.  There were three men mentioned in the Bible who had this name: (1) Herod’s brother, whose wife had been stolen from him by Herod (Matthew 14:3-4); (2) Philip the evangelist, “one of the seven” who was chosen to assist the widows in Jerusalem (Acts 6:1-6; 8:5-40; 21:8), and (3) Philip the apostle, one of “the twelve” chosen by Jesus (Luke 6:13-16).  As such, it is unlikely that we can gain any insight into the character of Philip or his family through the name he was given.

2 James Hastings, in his Dictionary of Christ in the Gospels, states that Bethsaida had a mixed Greek population, and suggests that this is possibly Andrew’s background.  While possible, such a background would almost certainly have been used as a reason by the Jews to reject the apostles, having a “half-breed” in their midst.  Since there is no hint of such an objection, this theory is highly unlikely.

3 John 1:44.  As seen in our chapter on Andrew, this verse does not necessarily mean that he still lived in Bethsaida, but that it is where he originally came from.  Andrew, according to Mark, lived in Capernaum with Peter, though John said they were from Bethsaida.

4 John 1:40-43, especially verse 43.  It seems probable that John, the son of Zebedee, was also called to follow Jesus the day before the Lord called Philip.  See John 1:35-40, and remember that John never mentions himself by name in his gospel account; the other unnamed disciple may well be the author himself.

5 ΕυρÎčσÎșΔÎč.  See Thayer’s definition.

6 John 1:43.  Vincent’s Word Studies points out that this word is often used when Jesus was calling disciples after Him.

7 A.T. Robertson, in his Word Pictures, makes this suggestion.  Herbert Lockyer, in his All the Apostles of the Bible, boldly jumps from suggestion to an all-out declaration, embellishing the gospel narrative by saying that Philip “owed his soul to Andrew
his father in the faith” (page 155).

8 It is not outside of the realm of possibility that these two religiously-minded men (Jesus and Philip), both growing up in Galilee, would have met each other.  If this is the case, then Philip would have known the impeccable character that Jesus had.  It is also possible that Philip’s quick acceptance of Jesus as the promised Messiah had to do with Jesus’ choice of words (saying “follow me” as a disciple) and the presence of Peter and Andrew, whom he apparently already knew well, saying they had already become His disciples.  If Philip was at all aware of the teachings of John the Baptizer, he would have been looking for the “greater” One that would come; and when Jesus called him to follow, he knew he’d found the One.

9 Lockyer, in All the Apostles of the Bible, states that “There are those expositors who suggest that Philip and Nathanael, or Bartholomew, were brothers” (page 156), though he does not state who.

10 John 1:45.  John uses the same word for Philip’s “finding” of Nathanael as he does for Jesus’ “finding” of Philip.

11 Deuteronomy 18:18.

12 John 1:45-46.

13 We will delve into this in more detail in the chapter on Nathanael/Bartholomew.

14 John 2:11.

15 John 2:13-17

16 John 2:23

17 John 3:22; 4:1-2.  There is no telling how many people were baptized at this point, and no names are given.  It has been suggested in the chapter on Andrew that it is perhaps at this time that Mary, Martha, Lazarus, and even Judas Iscariot were baptized and made disciples of Jesus.

18 There is no mention of the disciples in the travels of Jesus from John 4:43 through the end of chapter five.  It is after this preaching mission that He returned to Capernaum and called Peter, Andrew, James, and John—all of whom had resumed their fishing trade.  It is, therefore, logical to conclude that Philip would have resumed his trade as well during this time.

19 Luke 5:27-33.

20 Luke 6:1 (KJV) says that these events took place on the “second Sabbath after the first.”  The meaning of this phrase, and even its validity, is in question.  Some have suggested that it is a reference to the Sabbath after that which is described in Luke 4:31-41.  However, that ignores verse 44, which entails weeks, if not months of preaching after that event.  Others have suggested that this took place on the Sabbath of Pentecost, which was the second most important day on the Jewish calendar, thus literally in Greek, Luke would be calling it the “second-first” Sabbath.  Others relieve themselves of the difficulty by pointing to some of the ancient manuscripts which don’t contain the word at all, and simply record Luke saying “on a Sabbath.”  In short, there’s nothing from this passage which will give us a more exact idea of when Philip rejoined Jesus.

 

Articles, Bible Questions

Did Paul Receive the Holy Spirit by the Laying on of Hands?

7 Comments

Question: The book of Acts says that Ananias came and laid hands on Paul so that he would “receive the Holy Spirit.”  Does that mean that he had the Holy Spirit before he was baptized? –F.B.U.

To answer this question, we need to look at the text that it comes from:

Acts 9:17-18

And Ananias went his way and entered into the house. And putting his hands on him, he said, “Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus that appeared to you in the way as you came has sent me so that you might receive your sight, and be filled with the Holy Spirit.” And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales, and he received sight immediately, and arose, and was baptized.

Putting his hands on him
”Brother Saul
receive your sight
”

Here we see the miracle of Saul’s sight being restored. Verse 18 makes it clear that was the result of Ananias’ laying hands on him. That much is clear and undisputed by anyone who believes the Bible.

The question now, though, is what do we make of the phrase “be filled with the Holy Spirit”?

Jesus
has sent me so that you might
be filled with the Holy Spirit.

There are several opinions from scholars as to what this means. Some insist that it is the literal indwelling of the Holy Spirit being given to Saul of Tarsus—prior to baptism—by Ananias laying hands on him. Others say basically the same thing, except they say it was the gift of miracles being given to Saul prior to his baptism by Ananias laying hands on him.

When Luke uses the phrase “filled with the Holy Spirit” or “full of the Holy Spirit,” miracles (usually inspiration) are always under consideration. Examine them for yourself: John the Immerser (Luke 1:15), John’s mother, Elisabeth (Luke 1:41-45), John’s father, Zacharias (Luke 1:67-79), the apostles (Acts 2:4), the apostles again (Acts 4:31), Stephen (Acts 6:5, 7:55-56), Barnabas (Acts 11:22-24), Paul (Acts 13:9-11), and the disciples of Antioch in Pisidia (Acts 13:14, 51-52).

Understanding this, let’s now look at the evidence to come to a rational, biblical conclusion to this potential conundrum.

First, Jesus said that the purpose of Ananias’ laying hands on Saul was so he would receive his sight. That was seen in verse 12 of this same chapter. There was no indication in Jesus’ words that Ananias was going to give Saul the Holy Spirit.

Second, the only result of this event shown in the Bible is that Saul received his sight. After he put his hands on Saul, the Bible only records that Saul received his sight. It says nothing about him receiving the Holy Spirit. If we look at Acts 22, where Saul (who is also called Paul) is telling about this very event, we see that he doesn’t even mention the Holy Spirit at all—but he does mention receiving his sight again.[1]

Third, the ability to pass on the Holy Spirit was only available to the apostles. This is shown in chapter 8, verses 14-18. Ananias was not an apostle, and so—unless someone wishes to argue that Ananias should be classed as an apostle—the evidence is against his being able to pass on this gift.

Fourth, Saul was lost in his sins when Ananias laid his hands on him, and was not a candidate to receive the Holy Spirit, for he had not been baptized. This principle is seen in Acts 8:15-16. Acts 22:12-16 shows that he was still lost in sins after Ananias laid his hands on him. The Holy Spirit was promised only to those who were the obedient servants of God.[2]

Fifth, Paul makes it very clear throughout his life that he did not receive his apostleship from any man. Miracles (the gift of the Holy Spirit) and the ability to pass them on were “the signs of an apostle.”[3] Paul states that he was “an apostle—not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ and God the Father who raised Him from the dead.”[4] All of the apostles received their miraculous ability direct from heaven.[5] Paul would be no different.

Sixth, we see no record of Saul performing miracles until years later. The first time we read of Saul (now called Paul) doing any miracle is in Acts 13:9-11. This is the first time where Paul is said to be “filled with the Holy Spirit.” Now, this does not mean that Paul was unable to perform miracles prior to Acts 13, but it is supportive evidence that he didn’t receive the Holy Spirit when Ananias laid hands on him. There is no evidence that Saul was able to work miracles before that event.

Seventh, it took the testimony of Barnabas to convince the apostles that Saul was really a disciple of Jesus Christ. You might ask, What does that have to do with anything? If Saul of Tarsus had the miraculous abilities given by the Holy Spirit at this point, it would have been very simple for him to prove to the apostles and other disciples that he was a Christian. But instead, it took Barnabas speaking on his behalf. Though not conclusive, this evidence seems to indicate that at this point Saul did not have the miraculous gift of the Holy Spirit.

Since the evidence implies that Saul did not receive the Holy Spirit when Ananias laid hands on him, what exactly did he mean when he told Saul “Jesus
has sent me so that you might
be filled with the Holy Spirit”?

Ananias’ mission was to heal and baptize Saul; to bring him into the family of God and Christ. As you can see from other passages in Acts,[6] the Holy Spirit was only given to those who were servants of God, and who obey Him. Ananias came to help Saul become spiritually acceptable before God, and thus also help him become a candidate for the reception of the Holy Spirit. It was preparatory work.

-Bradley S. Cobb

[1] Acts 22:12-13

[2] Acts 2:17-18, 5:32

[3] II Corinthians 12:12

[4] Galatians 1:1

[5] Acts 2:1-4, 4:29-31

[6] Acts 2:17-18, 5:32

Articles

“I think the sheriff has very little ability and no guts.”

Leave a comment

These words were spoken by Major General Milton Foreman about Sheriff Melvin Thaxton of Williamson County, Illinois, back in 1922.

You see, for days, everyone knew tensions were rising in Herrin, IL, then the biggest city in the county.  One of the mines had brought in non-union men (“strikebreakers”) to work during the UMWA strike.  The mine had brought in hired guns as “guards” who terrorized people who drove down the roads that crossed over mine property.  The union miners had robbed stores of guns and ammunition, saying “charge it to the union” as they left.

The governor was receiving telegrams from concerned citizens about the events, but when the Major General of the Illinois National Guard contacted Sheriff Thaxton, the sheriff said, “I have everything well in hand.”  And he added that there was no need for troops to be sent.

Even as June 22, 1922 came, and literally thousands of union miners and sympathizers attacked the mine, took the miners and guards prisoner, dynamited the mine equipment, and led the men at gunpoint to the city, the Sheriff did nothing.  In fact, he was nowhere to be found, having gone to a neighboring county to investigate a shooting (which wasn’t even in his jurisdiction).

Even after reports surfaced of prisoners being dragged from behind cars, shot, stabbed, beaten, and hanged, the Sheriff told the national guard “I have everything under control.”

When Major General Foreman was asked what he thought of the Sheriff’s response, he replied “I think the sheriff has very little ability and no guts.”

See, the Sheriff knew what was going on and did nothing to stop it.  He either supported the actions (my personal guess) or he was to big of a wimp to stop it.

You might wonder at this point why I’m even mentioning all of this.  I’ve noticed (and I’m sure you have too) that there are many Christians who fit this same description.  They have very little ability to fulfill their role as Christ’s messengers and they have no guts.

I don’t say this to sound demeaning towards these people.  I really don’t.  I’m talking about people who have been Christians for years, but who couldn’t tell someone the plan of salvation and prove it from the Bible if their life depended on it.  I’ve heard of preachers who passed out a worksheet to the congregation asking for this exact information.  The overwhelming majority of the congregation couldn’t tell you where the Bible says to hear, or to believe, or repent, or confess, or be baptized.

These Christians have very little ability–because of their own choice.  The writer of Hebrews chastised people like this because they should have been able to teach others–instead, they needed someone to teach them again!

We’d think there was something wrong if a baby was born and 15 years later, he was still a baby, unable to walk, to talk, or to chew food.  But for some reason, we give people a pass when they remain spiritual babies for 5, 10, 15, or more years!  This ought not be!

Another great fault of many Christians is that they have no guts.  Obviously, the ones who don’t know how to even show something as basic as the plan of salvation have good reason to be afraid to engage in spiritual discussions with others.  But what about those who do know the Scriptures?

Have you noticed that in this modern age, many Christians are more concerned about how others will react than they are about their eternal judgment?  We see lost and dying souls everywhere we go, but we don’t want them to think that we’re “religious nuts” or “Jesus freaks.”  We don’t want to potentially hurt their feelings by pointing out that they’re going to hell because they’ve not obeyed the gospel of Jesus Christ.  We’ve got the greatest news in the history of mankind, yet we’re more willing to tell someone about low gas prices than we are to tell them about that which can save their soul!

In short, several Christians have no guts when it comes to spreading the gospel.

My friends, we’ve got a job to do.  Whether we feel prepared for it or not, we still have a job to do.  We can either go into the job completely unprepared and fail miserably, or we can prepare ourselves.  If we are unprepared; if we do not cultivate the ability to carry out the work of the Lord, it is our own fault.

It takes guts–it takes courage to show others that they are living in sin and what the consequences of their continued sin will be.  It takes guts to be active in the Lord’s work.  It may not be easy, but it still must be done.

When you stand before the Lord on Judgment Day, will He say “well done, good and faithful servant”?  Or will His words be more like “I think you have very little ability and no guts”?

-Bradley Cobb

Note: The above story is true, and the quotations come from an Associated Press story printed on June 24, 1922 in newspapers across the country.

Articles

An Introduction to Apologetics

Leave a comment

Life has been extremely busy the past few weeks, leading to our less-than-stellar frequency of posts here at TheCobbSix.  Thanks for sticking with us.  🙂

Beginning this week, we are studying Apologetics in our Wednesday night Bible class.  We hope you will find these lessons as useful as we do!

What Is Apologetics?

Now, seemingly more than in any other time, apologetics is needed. “Apologetics” comes from “apologia,” which means “a formal, usually written, defense or justification of a belief, theory, or policy”[1]

God is being attacked on many different fronts by different people. There are some that completely deny His existence. Some will acknowledge His existence, but deny the Scriptures are really His  Word and are inspired by Him. And there are literally billions of people in the world today who do not believe that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, and is indeed deity.[2]

Because of this, and the constant onslaught of teachings that come along with these  three topics, we are devoting some time for the next several weeks to study apologetics — the defense of the truth of these things.

 Why should anyone study apologetics?

Everyone should study apologetics to establish or solidify their own faith in God, His  Word, and His Son Jesus. Perhaps you are sitting, thinking, “I already believe in God and those other things.” But why do you believe? Is it just because that is what you’ve been taught?[3] Or have you weighed the evidence?

God never expected people to operate on “blind faith.”  God sent the ten plagues on Egypt so that They would know that He was the Lord (Exodus 14:4). God sent the quail and the manna to the children of Israel in the wilderness so that they would know that He was the Lord (Exodus 16:12). Jesus performed miracles so that people would see that He was from God (John 3:2). God has always, since the beginning of time, shown His existence. Our faith must be built on the evidence, not on what someone else has told us.

You should study apologetics so that you can teach others.  There are many in the world who call themselves “agnostics” who say that there is not enough evidence to prove God exists or to prove that He doesn’t exist.[4]  Simply put, these people just don’t know what to think.  Most want to know one way or the other, and the only way to prove it to them is to show them all of the evidence. You would not want a judge deciding a case against you without presenting him with all of the evidence, so why would you not want to teach a lost soul and show them all the evidence for the existence of God?

When you have that faith that is rock-solid because it is based on all of the evidence,  you are much more likely to convince someone else to become a Christian.

You need to study apologetics so that you can combat false teachings. In the schools (and everywhere else for that matter), evolution is being paraded as the truth about the origin of man and everything else.[5]  This denies the existence of God.  This denies that the Bible is inspired from God.  This denies that Jesus exists.  We must be able to combat these falsehoods that are being taught to everyone, especially our children.

There are false teachings even within the church that need to be combated with apologetics.  There are those who say they believe in God, but also claim to believe in evolution.[6]  This contradicts Genesis 1, Exodus 20:11, 31:17, and others which clearly state that creation began and ended in a total of six 24-hour days.

This would make Moses a liar or uninspired. If Moses was uninspired, so was Jesus who quoted him and who was called the      prophet like Moses (Acts 3:22). To say evolution is true is to, ultimately, deny the inspiration of the Bible and the deity of Jesus Christ!

 Can these things really be proven?

Yes! They can be proven!  God gave us everything that pertains to “life and godliness” (II Peter 1:3).  This would include proof that He indeed exists.  If there was no proof God’s existence, there would be nothing on which to base faith.

The heavens declare that God exists (Psalm 19:1).  The fact that there is design in the universe shows that someone had to design it.  The fact that nothing comes from nothing shows that someone had to create the universe.[7]

The complete accuracy of the Bible (even though it had many writers over a period of 1500 years) historically, doctrinally, and scientifically screams out that it is inspired of God. Skeptics have tried over and over to show the Bible as being historically wrong on something, yet it always turns out that they were wrong and the Bible was right.[8]

The Bible has stated scientific facts that were not discovered until thousands of years later.[9] The Bible predicted specific world events, sometimes tens and sometimes hundreds of years before they happened.[10]

The Bible records all the things we need to believe in Jesus as the Son of God (John 20:30-31).  Once we establish the inspiration of the Bible, we can see that Jesus Christ is indeed the Son of God.  The Jews heard Him say this, and they called it blasphemy because they knew it meant that He was claiming to be deity (John 10:24-33).  Jesus truly was God (John 1:1).

 What to Expect

We will see in the rest of this study various things that prove the existence of God, the inspiration of the Scriptures, and the deity (God-ness) of Jesus Christ. We will also look at arguments used against these things and show why they are wrong and should not be accepted. Ultimately, the goal of this study is to make your faith strong and to help bring others to Christ.

[1] Encarta World English Dictionary: “Apologia.”

[2] The “Jehovah’s Witnesses” claim that Jesus was the first being created by God, and is not deity (see their translation of John 1:1 as “the word was a god”). Other religious groups, such as the Muslims, claim Jesus was a good man and perhaps even a prophet, but deny that He is deity. Others, such as Buddhists, believe that if Jesus ever did exist, He was just a man. Still many others claim that Jesus never existed in the first place. As strange as it might seem to some of us, this denial of Jesus’ deity is held by the majority of people living today.

[3] Remember that Aquila and Priscilla had to teach Apollos more perfectly the way of the Lord. He did not have all the evidence, and thus was teaching an inadequate gospel (Acts 18:24-26). We must be ready to search the evidence to find out if these things are true (see Acts 17:11).

[4] The word “agnostic” means “no knowledge.” (Encarta) They believe it is impossible to know if God exists.

[5] Nearly every science textbook in public schools teaches the theory of evolution as a fact, and offers no alternative to it.

[6] There are examples that could be given, but this is not the place to list names of brethren who hold this belief. Suffice it to say, if one does much investigating into the topic, they will find numerous brethren of both today and times past that hold this stance.

[7] The Law of Biogenesis states that living things can only come from other living things, and not from non-living material. Basically stated, spontaneous generation is impossible.

[8] See later lessons on the inspiration of the Scriptures for specific examples.

[9] Again, see later lessons on the inspiration of the Scriptures for specifics.

[10] Specifically, the destruction of Jerusalem was predicted by Jesus approximately 40 years before it happened (Matthew 24:2-3); Daniel prophesied the Babylonian Empire would fall to the Persian Empire, which would fall to the Greek Empire of Alexander the Great, and that there would be a fourth kingdom, that being Rome. It was during the days of the Roman Empire that the church would be established. Daniel wrote this hundreds of years before the fact (Daniel 2, especially verse 44).

Articles, Bible Questions

Bible Q&A – Prayer to Jesus?

1 Comment

Question: I’ve heard a lot of people recently addressing their prayers to Jesus. When I asked them about it, they said that we’re supposed to pray to God, and Jesus is God, therefore we can pray to Jesus. On the surface, that sounds good, but I’m still bothered by it. Can you help me understand this?—“Confused,” in Oklahoma.

Thanks for writing. I understand your concern, and I think it’s great that you want to know for sure what the right thing to do is. Before we answer this question, I want you to realize that there’s no way to deal with this completely in one article. Entire books have been written on this topic (from both sides of the debate).

To get the answer to this question, we have to turn to the Bible. One thing that bothers me is that the specific people you mentioned did not show you from the Bible where they get their doctrine, but they tried to prove it by human reasoning. Even if they are correct in their belief, the argument they gave you is not proof. After all, here is the exact same argument, applied to something else.

Jesus died on the cross. Jesus is God. Therefore God died on the cross. And since the Holy Spirit and the Father are both God, that means that the Father died on the cross, as did the Holy Spirit.

What is true of one person of the Godhead is not always true for the rest of them. Regardless of whether prayer can be offered to Jesus, the “Jesus is God, therefore we can pray to Him” argument isn’t proof at all.

Let’s look at the evidence:

What did Jesus Say?

Therefore, pray after this manner [or, in this way]: “Our Father who is in heaven
” (Matthew 6:9).

Jesus is the Son of God, and is deity in His very nature. However, when He was giving instructions about the one people were to pray to, he specifically stated prayer is to be directed to “the Father.”


That whatever you ask the Father in my name, He may give it to you (John 15:16).

Jesus, speaking to His apostles, is preparing them for His departure. And He tells them that whatever they ask of the Father, He would give to them.

In that day, you will ask me nothing. But whatever you shall ask the Father in my name, He will give it to you (John 16:23).

Jesus has just finished telling His apostles that He will be leaving them. He will die and later ascend to heaven. And after He left, He would send the Comforter, that is the Holy Spirit, to guide them into all truth (16:12-15). That’s important to keep in mind, because here Jesus says, “in that day, you will ask me nothing.” When is Jesus speaking about? He’s talking about the time after His ascension. From that point on, Jesus says, they won’t ask Him anything. Instead, they will be asking the Father.

To Whom did Jesus Pray?

This may seem like an ignorant question, but it’s worth answering. Nowhere did Jesus pray to Himself. But just as important, there is no record of Jesus praying to the Holy Spirit either. And if praying to Jesus is permissible based on the fact that He is God, then why didn’t Jesus ever pray to the Holy Spirit—who is also called “God” (Acts 5:3-4)?

“Father, the hour is come. Glorify your Son, that your Son may also glorify you” (John 17:1).

We could put the entire prayer of John 17 here, and it would be abundantly clear who Jesus addressed His prayers to. Look at verses 1, 5, 21, 24, and 25 of that chapter and you’ll see that Jesus continually addresses His prayer to the Father.

“Father, into your hands I commend my spirit” (Luke 23:46)

At His death, His prayer was to the Father—and to no one else.

To Whom did the Apostles Pray?

They lifted up their voice to God with one accord, and said, “Lord, you are God who has made heaven and earth and the seas and all that is in them
.For of a truth, against your holy child Jesus, whom you have anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel were gathered together
” (Acts 4:24, 28).

It should be obvious from this passage that the apostles were praying to the Father, since they were speaking to the one who had a child named Jesus. Thus, this passage shows them praying to the Father.

What were the Apostles’ Commands?

We give thanks to God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, praying always for you (Colossians 1:3).

The one they give thanks to and pray to, is identified as the Father.

Giving thanks to the Father
 (Colossians 1:12).

Paul repeats his previous statement about the one to whom prayers of thanks are offered.

Whatever you do, in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through Him (Colossians 3:17).

To whom did the inspired apostle Paul direct Christians to pray and give thanks? The Father.

Giving thanks always for all things unto God the Father, in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ (Ephesians 5:20).

We are to always and in all things give thanks to the Father. That covers every prayer of thankfulness. There are no prayers of thankfulness, then, that are to be directed anywhere else. They belong only to the Father.

Be anxious for nothing; but in everything, by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known unto God. And the peace of God which surpasses all understanding shall keep your hearts and minds through Jesus Christ (Philippians 4:6-7).

Paul says that in everything—nothing is left out—requests are to be made known unto God. And lest anyone argue that this could mean Christ, Paul continues and shows that he is speaking of the Father, and not Jesus Christ as “God” in this passage.

In everything, prayers and supplications and thanksgiving are to be directed to the Father.

Objections?

In the light of this clear, direct, and blunt evidence, there are still those who object and argue that prayer can be directed towards Jesus. We will, Lord willing, consider their arguments in a later article.

 -Bradley S. Cobb

Articles, Bible Questions

Bible Q&A – Jesus the Only Speaking God?

2 Comments

Question: I read an article recently in a brotherhood paper which said that it was Jesus, not the Father, who was “walking and talking” with Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. His reasoning was that “A Spirit does not have feet and a voice …” And since Jesus is the only one from the Godhead who was said to become “flesh,” it must have been Him in the garden, and not the Father. This is confusing to me. Can you shed some light on the matter?—G.J.R., Oklahoma.

I have read the article that you refer to, and while I don’t necessarily have an issue with his conclusion, the arguments that he uses to get there are not valid.

The article is on the question “Where art thou?” from Genesis 3:9. This question was spoken by “The LORD God,” but as the person who wrote the article showed, the Godhead is comprised of more than one entity. And to quote the article, “therefore the phrase ‘Lord God’ does not ‘definitively’ answer the question!” To this, we fully agree. Just because something is said to be done by God doesn’t show us exactly which member(s) of the Godhead were the doers. For example, Genesis 1:1 says God created the heavens and the earth, but John 1:1-3 shows us that it was “the Word” [Jesus] who did the actual work of creating.

The article makes the statement that “the Father is the planner,” and gives some passages which show the Father is the one who planned and purposed the life, death, and resurrection of Christ (Acts 2:23, Ephesians 3:11). The article then states that Jesus is the “Executor,” that is, the one who actually does the doing of things. There is nothing in the article to pinpoint the Holy Spirit’s role is in the Godhead.

While we gladly admit that these statements are often the case, they are not always the case. They are not absolutes. We will show this to be the case momentarily.

The article, however, assumes that these distinctions are true 100% of the time, with no variation, and that therefore the Father is only ever the planner, and never the “executor” or doer of His will. Therefore, Jesus [the Word] is the only “Executor” or doer, and that everything that is actively done by God can only be done by Jesus.

Using these two descriptions as absolutes, the article proceeds to reason from them and apply them to Genesis 3:9. The exact quotation is:

[W]hen it is observed that “The Word/Logos” is the “Executor” and He created all things, it is correctly deduced that it was “The Word”, who became “flesh” (John 1:14) “walking and talking” in the Garden.

The problem with this reasoning is that the roles of the Godhead in regards to “planner” and “Executor” are not absolutes. For example, Jesus Christ was raised from the dead by the Father (Acts 13:30, 37, Galatians 1:1). The Father planned it, and the Father executed His plan Himself.

The quotation continues (immediately following the above quote):

A Spirit does not have feet and voice that spake the world into existence, which asked the question, “Where art thou?”

It is this argument that I have the biggest problem with. While it might sound good on the surface, the necessary conclusions from this statement violate Scripture. And if the necessary conclusions violate Scripture, then the statement itself must be wrong. The article argues that only one who “became flesh” can be “walking and talking” because “A Spirit does not have feet and voice that spake the world into existence.”

Here, we offer our objections:

(1) If it requires flesh to do “walking and talking,” then that demands that before the world could be spoken into existence, one of the Godhead had to become flesh. The writer states that a Spirit does not have a voice; therefore the necessary conclusion is that one of the Godhead had to be flesh before creation.

(2) Jesus is the only one of the Godhead who is said to have been “made flesh.” If it requires flesh for God to speak, the necessary conclusion is that every time we see God talking in the Bible, it’s actually Jesus speaking. This makes for a very interesting conundrum, because when Jesus was raised up out of the water after being baptized, a voice [God] spoke from heaven, saying “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased” (Matthew 3:17). Are we really to believe that Jesus (the only member of the Godhead who was ever in the flesh) was speaking to Himself from heaven, calling Himself His own Son?

(3) The Holy Spirit—one of the Godhead that did not become flesh—can speak (Acts 10:19-20).

There are other instances that could be used, but we believe these are sufficient to show that these arguments used in this article are not valid.

Please note: the article was written by a good, faithful gospel preacher. This response was written merely to bring to light some issues that the brother probably did not consider in his arguments. His conclusion, that it was Jesus who asked the question to Adam and Eve, is his opinion, and could possibly be the correct one. My problem was not with the conclusion, but with the reasoning used to get there.

———-

Because this question is now before us, I will present the evidence that I believe might point to a different conclusion.

When people read Genesis 3:8, they make an assumption that God Himself is “walking” in the Garden when this event took place. As in, this is God in human form, literally walking with human feet through the foliage. If that’s what Genesis 3:8 said, I’d stop right there and say, “that might be a pre-incarnate appearance of Jesus.” But that’s not what the text actually says.

Genesis 3:8 says “They heard the voice of God walking in the Garden.” It’s not God walking through the Garden; it’s God’s voice “walking” through the Garden. You might ask, “How does a voice walk?” The word which is translated “walking” is usually translated as went or go (or a variation of these two words). Thus, they heard the voice of God going through the Garden. They didn’t hear God Himself in human flesh walking through the Garden of Eden; they heard His voice as it went through the Garden.

Luke 3, in giving the complete genealogy of Jesus, states that Adam is the son of God (Luke 3:38). The member of the Godhead that Adam would have interacted with, it seems, would have been his “Father.”

We’ve already shown from the incident at Jesus’ baptism (and to that, we could add the Transfiguration) that the Father is fully capable of speaking to humans in a voice they can understand.

These arguments are not definitive in answering the question, but they absolutely show that the Father could easily have been the one whose voice went through the Garden of Eden, asking Adam and Eve “Where art thou?”

-Bradley Cobb