8/8/2019 All Class Notes Without Index http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/all-class-notes-without-index 1/105 Class Notes Page #1 Apostles¶ Creed I believe in God, the Father Almighty, the Maker of heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord: Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried; He descended into hell. The third day He arose again from the dead; He ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty; from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. I believe in the Holy Ghost; the holy catholic church; the communion of saints; the forgiveness of sins; the resurrection of the body; and the life everlasting.
ii. Etymology (where the word came from) ± from two Greek words ³theos´ (God) and ³logos´(word) - ³word about God´
iii. Greeks - referred to the sayings of the philosophers and poets about divine matters,especially when viewed within the framework of knowledge of humankind and nature.4
iv. Christian adoption of the term
2) Historical development of the word
i. Church fathers ± teaching of the church
i) Tertullian5
ii) Augustine6
ii. Middle ages ± systematic arranged teaching
iii. German theologian - Friedrich Schleiermacher 7- concept of unified practical science replacedby 3 fold division
i) Biblical theology
ii) Historical and systematic theology
iii) Practical theology
3) Contemporary use
i. A broad sense of the account of God in the various religions8
ii. A narrower sense ± used as a synonym for
i) Dogmatics (systematic theology) ± intellectual reflection on faith
ii) Doctrine ± articulation of a specific belief system
iii) Systematic theology
iv) Coherent presentation of the themes of the Christian faith
4) Contemporary theologians¶ definition
i. Thomas Oden
The discipline of systematic theology (or basic theology or Christian doctrine) seeks toformulate Christian teaching in an orderly, sequential, plausible way that is accountable toScripture and tradition and meaningful to contemporary experience.´9
ii. Stanley Grenz
4 For this latter point, see Frank Whaling, "The Development of theWord 'Theology,'" Scottish Journal of Theology
34 (1981): 292-93.5 Tertullian, Ad Nationes, Book 2, ch.1.6 City of God Book VIII. i. 1"de divinitate rationem sive sermonem7See Schleiermacher, A Brief Outline of the Study of Theology,8 Whaling, "The Development of theWord 'Theology,'" 305-6.9 Thomas Oden, Systematic Theology I: The Living God. Peabody: Hendrickson, 2006. pg. 5
³Theology is primarily the articulation of a specific religious belief system itself (doctrine). Butit also includes reflection on the nature of believing, as well as declarations concerning theintegration of commitment with personal and community life.10
iii. Wayne Grudem
Systematic theology is any study that answers the question µWhat does the Bible teach ustoday?¶ about any given topic.?11´
5) Use in this class.
i. Simple definition ± ³study of God´
ii. Systematic theology provides the answers to current issues based on scripture within aChristian worldview. (Professor Brown)
2. Divisions of ³systematic theology´
1) Angelology and demonology: the study of angels and demons
2) Anthropology: the study of the doctrine of man
3) Apologetics: the study of reasons to believe
4) Christology: the study of the doctrine of Jesus Christ
5) Ecclesiology: the study of the doctrine of the church
6) Eschatology: the study of the doctrine of last things
7) Hamartiology: the study of the doctrine of sin
8) Pneumatology: the study of the doctrine of the spirit
9) Soteriology: the study of the doctrine of salvation
10) Theology proper: the study of the doctrine of God
3. Distinctions between theology and other concepts
1) Theology and faith
i. Faith requires action involving every area of our lives
ii. Theology studies faith but can be only an intellectual exercise
2) Theology and religious studies
i. Religious studies may not involve faith at all.
ii. True theology requires the practice of faith
3) Theology and the sciences
i. Like science, theology seeks to understand reality
ii. While science can be simply theoretical, theology involves a practical application
4) Theology and truth
i. Humble approach
ii. No one is able to understand fully God
iii. Use of ³analogies´ essential ± both in concept and language
10 Stanley Grenz, Theology for the Community of God. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,2000. pg. 311Wayne Grudem, Bible Doctrine, Essential Teachings of the Christian Faith, Grand Rapids, Zondervan, 1999, pg.17.
QUESTION 4: WHY SHOULD I STUDY ³SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY?´
"What comes into our minds when we think about God is the most important thing about us.12
"It is impossible to keep our moral practices sound and our inward attitudes right while our ideaof God is erroneous or inadequate. If we would bring back spiritual power to our lives, we mustbegin to think of God more nearly as He is.´13
1. Biblical reasons
1) Direct commands
Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. Love the LORD your God with all your
heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. These commandments that I give youtoday are to be upon your hearts. Impress them on your children. Talk about them when you sitat home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up. Tie them
as symbols on your hands and bind them on your foreheads. Write them on the doorframes of
your houses and on your gates.Deut. 6:4-9 NIV
2) History of Israel
Be strong and very courageous. Be careful to obey all the law my servant Moses gave you; do not
turn from it to the right or to the left, that you may be successful wherever you go. Do not let thisBook of the Law depart from your mouth; meditate on it day and night, so that you may becareful to do everything written in it. Then you will be prosperous and successful.
Joshua 1:7-8 NIV
Be very strong; be careful to obey all that is written in the Book of the Law of Moses, without
turning aside to the right or to the left.
Joshua 23:6 NIV
Also see 1 Samuel 12, Prophets
3) Jesus
Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.
Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them inthe name of the Father and of the
Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. Andsurely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."
Matthew 28:18-20 NIV
4) Paul on Mars hill
When they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, wherethere was a Jewish synagogue. As his custom was, Paul went into the synagogue, and on three
Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and proving that the
Christhad to suffer and rise from the dead. "This Jesus I am proclaiming to you is the Christ,
]
" hesaid. Some of the Jews were persuaded and joined Paul and Silas, as did a large number of God-fearing Greeks and not a few prominent women.
Acts 17:1-4 NIV
5) Peter
12 A.W. Tozer, The Knowledge of the Holy (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1961), 1. 13 Ibid., viii
But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone
who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness andrespect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good
behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander..´
1 Peter 3:15-16 NIV
2. Historical reasons - Christians have thought it was important to study theology because1) Polemics ± explaining why other explanations/religions are incorrect.
i. Answering questions of seekers
ii. Explaining why you believe what you believe
2) Apologetics ± defending the faith ³why I believe Jesus is the Son of God´
i) Present our faith to the world in a logical cohesive manner
ii) David Calhoun ± historically four reasons Christians became an insignificant minority in aculture they formerly dominated
a. Becoming dependant on government (financial support, education, etc.)
b. Syncretism
c. Loss of passion for evangelism
d. Failure to engage culture in marketplace of ideas
3) Catechetics
i. Offer instruction to converts
ii. Training to young christians
4) Biblical summarization ± concise statements of what we believe about:
Trinity, abortion, truth, salvation, etc.
3. Practical reasons
1) Systematic theologians are at the forefront of cultural battles
2) Everyone is a ³theologian´ - some belief about God
i. Beliefs determine action
ii. One cannot profess to love God and not want to know more about him.
3) Impacts our faith
i. Defines the character of the God we believe in
ii. Theology affects the content of what we trust
4) Systematic theology impacts every area of our lives.
i. Ethics are a result of theology
ii. View of ourselves product of theology
iii. Every sermon preached, lesson taught, issued addressed that references the scriptures is anexercise in systematic theology.
5) Systematic theology attempts to answer real life questions
Is the devil an actual being? Is evil just an impersonal force?
Was Jesus a real human being?Was Jesus really God?
What¶s the difference between the spirit of God and the Holy Spirit?
What is sin?
Is it wrong for engaged couples to sleep together?
Is God personal?Is God compassionate?
Does Jesus reveal God?
Why are we born? Why do we die?
What happens when we die?
Why should I go to church?
Is Scripture the Word of God?
Does revelation need reason?
Why is abortion wrong?
What about homosexual activity? Is it wrong?
6) God¶s truth does not change, but language, culture and thinking is constantly changing4. Systematic theology answers questions asked by the contemporary culture
1) Biblical message
2) Interpreted in the historical-cultural context14
3) Placed within the boundaries of the historic Christian faith.15
5. Objections to systematic theology
1) God¶s Word is to be enjoyed, not studied
i. Systematic theology has become ³speculative theology´
ii. Influence of ³what does this passage mean to me?´
iii. False dichotomy between study and enjoyment.
iv. You cannot love someone without knowing them
2) Jesus unites but doctrine divides
i. Biblical prophets clearly divided people. Reason some were tortured or killed.
ii. Paul 1 Corn. 5
iii. Christians are called to judge what is true. Council of Nicea (325 A.D.) ³ Jesus truly God?
iv. The primary purpose of truth, of theology is not to divide, nor to unite, but to discover andprotect the truth." Martin Luther
3) It leads to endless speculation
i. At times, that has been true (how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?)
ii. Does not need to be the case
4) It¶s all just your interpretation
i. Everything is interpretation at some level
14 For a similar delineation, see Gabriel Fackre, The Christian Story (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984), 40.15 See Scot McKnight, The Blue Parakeet, also Thomas Oden, Systematic Theology
Answering the questions contemporary culture and society ask is the responsibility of all Christians.
1. Roman Catholicism
1) Bible ± canonized by church and interpreted by the magisterium 16
2) Apostolic tradition as determined by the church3) Evaluation
i. Complete authority invested in church
ii. Absolute power absolutely corrupts
2. Luther and the reformers
1) Sola scriptura ± authority rests completely in the scriptures
2) Westminster Confession "the Holy Spirit speaking in the scriptures. ± John Calvin´17
3) Evaluation
i. Potential for ³concordant´ theology (using a concordance to look up scriptures that relate to
the subject, thus make the mistake of taking scripture out of context)
ii. Opt for theoretical over practical
3. ³Real theology´ ± context of community (language, and thought forms)
1) Paul Tillich ± method of correlation.18
i. Existential questions of philosophers (meaning of life, why are we here?)
16 The Magisterium or Teaching Authority of the Church by Fr. William G. Most
By the Magisterium we mean the teaching office of the Church. It consists of the Pope and Bishops. Christ
promised to protect the teaching of the Church : "He who hears you, hears me; he who rejects your rejects me, he
who rejects me, rejects Him who sent me" (Luke 10. 16). Now of course the promise of Christ cannot fail: hence
when the Church presents some doctrine as definitive or final, it comes under this protection, it cannot be in error;
in other words, it is infallible. This is true even if the Church does not use the solemn ceremony of definition. The
day to day teaching of the Church throughout the world, when the Bishops are in union with each other and withthe Pope, and present something as definitive, this is infallible. (Vatican II, Lumen gentium # 25). It was precisely
by the use of that authority that Vatican I was able to define that the Pope alone, when speaking as such and
making things definitive, is also infallible. Of course this infallibility covers also teaching on what morality
requires, for that is needed for salvation.
A "theologian" who would claim he needs to be able to ignore the Magisterium in order to find the truth is
strangely perverse: the teaching of the Magisterium is the prime, God-given means of finding the truth. Nor could
he claim academic freedom lets him contradict the Church. In any field of knowledge, academic freedom belongs
only to a properly qualified professor teaching in his own field. But one is not properly qualified if he does not
use the correct method of working in his field, e.g., a science professor who would want to go back to medieval
methods would be laughed off campus, not protected. Now in Catholic theology , the correct method is to studythe sources of revelation, but then give the final word to the Church. He who does not follow that method is not a
qualified Catholic theologian. Vatican II taught (Dei Verbum # 10): "The task of authoritatively interpreting the
word of God, whether written or handed on [Scripture or Tradition], has been entrusted exclusively to the living
Magisterium of the Church, whose authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ."
The Basic Catholic Catechism PART FIVE: The Apostles' Creed IX ± XII Ninth Article: "The Holy Catholic
Church; the Communion of Saints"17 "The Westminster Confession of Faith," 1.10, in The Creeds of the Churches, ed. John H. Leith, third edition
(Atlanta: John Knox, 1982), 196.18 Paul Tillich, Systematic Theology, three volumes (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1953), 1:22-28,59-66.
iv. God does reveal Himself in propositional form as well as existential
v. Possibility of inverted authority
4. Wesleyan quadrilateral - appeals to four sources:20
1) Scripture (the Bible as properly exegeted)
2) Reason (the findings of science and human reasoning)
3) Experience (individual and corporate encounters with life)
4) Tradition (the teachings of the church throughout its history).
5) Evaluating Wesleyan quadrilateral
i. Term coined by Albert Outler ii. Overused and abused21
iii. All traditions use a variety of the quadrilateral
iv. Question of the "norming norm´22
v. Is experience a source of theological criteria?23 (my experience may be different from yours´
vi. More correctly the focus of theological task24
vii. Subjective aspect ± by nature not verifiable (do not seek an experience, seek God)
viii. Must not confuse our experience with our relationship
ix. View as hierarchical rather than equal.
5. A proposed solution
1) Scripture
2) Telescope of church history
3) Address contemporary issues
19Paul Tillich, Systematic Theology, three volumes (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1953), 1:22-28,59-66.
20 Clark Pinnock, Tracking the Maze (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1990), 170-81.21
Albert Outler, the definitive authority on Wesley later stated Later stated he wished he never used it22 DonaldW. Dayton, "The Use of Scripture in theWesleyan Tradition," in The Use of the Bible in Theology:
Evangelical Options, ed. Robert K. Johnston (Atlanta: John Knox, 1973), 135.23 Tillich, Systematic Theology, 1:42.24
For a lengthy discussion of theology as the giving of an account of Christian faith, see Gerhard Ebeling, Dogmatik des christlichen Glaubens, three volumes (Tubingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1982).
God is constantly looking for an opportunity to ³punish´ me
ii. God is a giant Santa Claus
Prayer becomes a ³Christmas wish list´
2) Theoretical discussions at times may have very little application
i. Trinity
Endless debates ± some was necessary,
Theories of the atonement
ii. Relationship of God with His creation
Not deism ± God is transcendent
Not pantheism ± God is in nature
2. Right beliefs lead to right practice
1) Man will never fully understand God and His workings
Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God!
How unsearchable his judgments,
and his paths beyond tracing out!³Who has known the mind of the Lord?Or who has been his counselor?´
³Who has ever given to God,
that God should repay him?´
For from him and through him and to him are all things.
To him be the glory forever! Amen.Romans 11:33-36 NIV
2) We must avoid bizarre speculation
He is not far from each one of us. 'For in him we live and move and have our being.' As some of
your own poets have said, 'We are his offspring'"
Acts 17:27b-28 NIV
25 The history of mankind will probably show that no people has ever risen above its religion, and man's spiritual
history will positively demonstrate that no religion has ever been greater than its idea of God. Worship is pure or
base as the worshiper entertains high or low thoughts of God. Were we able to extract from any man a complete
answer to the question, "What comes into your mind when you think about God?" we might predict with certaintythe spiritual future of that man. Were we able to know exactly what our most influential\ precision to foretell
where the Church will stand tomorrow. A.W. Tozer, The Knowledge of the Holy New York, HarperOne, 1978 pg. 1
Whom are we to worship - Father only, Son, Holy Spirit, or the Triune God? To whom are we to pray?
Is the work of each to be considered in isolation from the work of the others, or may we think of theatoning death of Jesus as somehow the work of the Father as well?
Should the Son be thought of as the Father's equal in essence, or should he be relegated to a somewhatlesser status?
1. The Biblical teaching
1) The oneness of God
Evidence for the unity of God²that God is one; evidence that there are three persons who areGod; and finally, indications or at least intimations of the three-in-oneness.
i. Revealed to the Hebrews
Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one . Deut. 6:4 NIV
ii. Affirmed in the N.T.
We know that an idol is nothing at all in the world, and that there is ... but one God, theFather, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus
Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live"
1 Cor. 8:4, 6 NIV
2) The deity of three
Additional biblical witness to the three persons are God.
i. Deity of the Father
For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who
gave himself as a ransom for all men - the testimony given in its proper time.
1 Timothy 2:5-6 NIV
ii. Deity of the Soni) John
John 1:1
, , .
In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God
Last phrase ± does it mean ³a god´ or God? Without any question ³God´
ii) Paul¶s description
Who, being in very nature God,did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,
but made himself nothing,
taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.
Phil. 2:6-7 NIV
morphe
³the nature or character of something, with emphasis upon both the internal and externalform´Louw & Nida
The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being,
sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, hesat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.
Hebrews 2:3 NIV
iii) Jesus¶ self-consciousness
W
hen Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, "Son, your sins are forgiven." Nowsome teachers of the law were sitting there, thinking to themselves, "Why does thisfellow talk like that? He's blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?"
Mark 2:5-7 NIV
iii. Deity of the Holy Spirit
i) Attributes belonging only to God are ascribed to the Holy Spirit
ii) The resurrection of Jesus attributed to the Holy Spirit
But if Christ is in you, your body is dead because of sin, yet your spirit is alive because of
righteousness. And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he
who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his
Spirit, who lives in you.
Rom. 8:10-11 NIV
3) Three-in-oneness
i. Is it found explicitly in the Bible?
1 John 5:7?
ii. The plural form of the noun for the God of Israel
In the beginning God (Ehohim) created the heavens and the earth
Elohim is plural form
Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness« Genesis 1:26 NIV
Let us« our image« our likeness - all three use the common plural form
iii. The baptism of Jesus
As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was
opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and lighting on him. And avoice from heaven said, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased."
Matthew 3:16-17 NIV
iv. Great commissionTherefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and
of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded
you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."
Matthew 28:19-20 NIV
v. Promise of Jesus to his disciples
And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever
He who does not love me will not obey my teaching. These words you hear are not my own;
they belong to the Father who sent me.But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you allthings and will remind you of everything I have said to you.
John 14:16, 24, 26 NIV
4) Historical constructionsDuring the first two centuries a.d. there was little conscious attempt to wrestle with the theologicaland philosophical issues of what we now term the doctrine of the Trinity.
i. The economic view of the Trinity (vs. ontological)
Way the Trinity was manifested in creation and redemption
Too vague, did not define well the relationship
ii. Monarchianism
In the late second and third centuries, two attempts were made to come up with a precisedefinition of the relationship between Christ and God.
i) Dynamic monarchianism.
Dynamic ± also called ³adoptionism´ ± Jesus was ³adopted´ to become God
ii) Modalistic monarchianism.
One God ± different modes. Also called ³patripassianism´ the Father came to earth asthe Son, lived and died.,
Problem with H2O ± Ice, water, steam
All are not present at the same time
iii. The orthodox formulation
Filioque 26conflict ± does the Holy Spirit proceed from the Father ³and from the Son?´
i) Council of Constantinople (381)
ii) The formula which expresses the position of Constantinople is "one ousia [substance] inthree hypostases [persons]."
iii) Homoiousios - like the substance of the Father
26 Advanced Information: The term means "and from the Son" and refers to the phrase in the Western version of the
Nicene Creed which says that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. Originally this was not in the
confessions agreed to at Nicaea (325) and Constantinople (381). It seems to have been first inserted at the local
Council of Toledo (589) and in spite of opposition gradually established itself in theWest, being officially
endorsed in 1017. Photius of Constantinople denounced it in the ninth century, and it formed the main doctrinal
issue in the rupture between East andWest in 1054. An attempted compromise at Florence in 1439 came to
nothing. Among the fathers Hilary, Jerome, Ambrose, Augustine, Epiphanius, and Cyril of Alexandria may be
cited in its favor; Theodore of Mopsuestia and Theodoret against it; with the Cappadocians occupying the middleground of "from the Father through the Son."
On the Eastern side two points may be made. First, the relevant verse in John (15:26) speaks only of a proceeding
from the Father. Second, the addition never had ecumenical approval.
Two points may also be made for the filioque. First, it safeguards the vital Nicene truth that the Son is
consubstantial with the Father. Second, the Son as well as the Father sends the Spirit in John 15:26, and by
analogy with this relationship to us we are justified in inferring that the Spirit proceeds from both Father and Sonin the intratrinitarian relationship. Not to say this is to divorce the Spirit from the Son in contradiction of the
passages that speak of him as the Spirit of Christ (cf. Rom. 8:9; Gal. 4:6).
5) Essential elements of a doctrine of the Trinity
It is important to pause here to note the salient elements which must be included in anydoctrine of the Trinity.
i. Unity of God
God is one, not several.
ii. Deity of three persons
The deity of each of the three persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Each is qualitatively thesame.
iii. Threeness and oneness of God
God is three persons at every moment of time. Maintaining his unity as well as distinction.
iv. Trinity is eternal
The Trinity is eternal. There have always been three, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and all of them have always been divine.
v. Function of TrinityThe function of one member of the Trinity may for a time be subordinate to one or both of theother members, but that does not mean he is in any way inferior in essence. Each of thethree persons of the Trinity has had, for a period of time, a particular function unique tohimself.
vi. Trinity is incomprehensible
The Trinity is incomprehensible. We cannot fully understand the mystery of the Trinity.
6) The search for analogies
i. The egg: it consists of yolk, white, and shell, all of which together form one whole egg.
The egg analogy is drawn from the realm of individual human psychology. As a self-conscious person, I may engage in internal dialogue with myself.
ii. Water: it can be found in solid, liquid, and vaporous forms.
The other analogy is from the sphere of interpersonal human relations. Take the case of identical twins. In one sense, they are of the same essence, for their genetic makeup isidentical.
³Try to explain it, and you'll lose your mind; Try to deny it, and you'll lose your soul.´ 27
2. Summary statements.
1) Whom are we to worship - Father only, Son, Holy Spirit, or the Triune God?
The bible commands worship to all three.
2) To whom are we to pray?
While prayer is addressed to the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, a customary way of praying hasbeen to
Theology proper ± the study of the acts and attributes of GodWhat we think about God is the mostimportant question we can ask.
1. God cannot be known by man¶s searching
2. God must be known through revelation
1) Man is finite, God is infinite
2) God must reveal Himself
3) Description of revelation
i. An unveiling (disclosure) of God
ii. A making known (manifestation) of the divine previously unknown
4) Two kinds of revelation
i. General revelation to all people at all times in all places
ii. Special revelation± to particular people at particular times in particular places
3. Nature of special revelation
i. Analogical nature (analogies we can understand)
i) Divine speech
"The word of the Lord came to me, saying, . . ." (e.g., Jer. 18:1; Ezek. 12:1, 8, 17, 21, 26;Hos. 1:1; Joel 1:1; Amos 3:1).
ii) It may be an audible speaking.
iii) It may be a silent, inward hearing of God's message.
iv) "Concursive" inspiration - revelation and inspiration have merged into one.
ii. Anthropic nature of revelationi) Human languages
ii) Common in a particular time
iii) Forms which are part of everyday human experience
4. The modes of ³general revelation´
1) Universe
The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork.
Day to day pours out speech, and night to night reveals knowledge.There is no speech, nor are there words, whose voice is not heard.
Their voice goes out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world.
In them he has set a tent for the sun, which comes out like a bridegroom leaving his chamber,
and, like a strong man, runs its course with joy.
Its rising is from the end of the heavens, and its circuit to the end of them,and there is nothing hidden from its heat. Psalm 19:1-6 ESV
2) History of mankind
But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah,out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel,whose origins are from of old, from ancient times. Micah 5:2 NIV
In approximately 700 B.C. the prophet Micah named the tiny village of Bethlehem as thebirthplace of Israel's Messiah. The fulfillment of this prophecy in the birth of Christ is one of themost widely known and widely celebrated facts in history.
(Probability of chance fulfillment = 1 in 100000.)
3) Nature of man
The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to
them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisiblequalities - his eternal power and divine nature - have been clearly seen, being understood from
what has been made, so that men are without excuse.Romans 1:18-20 NIV
5. The result of general revelation
1) Knowledge of God28
i. Providence (Noah, Gen. 9)
ii. Eternal power (Romans 1)
iii. Divine nature (Romans 1)2) The residual effect of the fall has not substantially distorted this revelation
3) Effect of general revelation29
i. Calvin ± just enough to condemn30
ii. Wesley ± accountability based on ³knowledge´31
iii. Analysis32
28 It is argued that God's existence, transcendence, immanence, self-sufficiency, eternality, power, goodness, and
hate for evil can be comprehended and seen through his creation (Elwell, Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, p.
1,019; cf. Romans 1).29 There is some debate among theologians as to the effect of general revelation. Many Arminians contend that
general revelation provides enough information for salvation, many Calvinists (not all eg.30 But though we are deficient in natural powers which might enable us to rise to a pure and clear knowledge of God,
still, as the dullness which prevents us is within, there is no room for excuse. We cannot plead ignorance, without
being at the same time convicted by our own consciences both of sloth and ingratitude. It were, indeed, a strangedefence for man to pretend that he has no ears to hear the truth, while dumb creatures have voices loud enough to
declare it; to allege that he is unable to see that which creatures without eyes demonstrate, to excuse himself onthe ground of weakness of mind, while all creatures without reason are able to teach. Wherefore, when we wander
and go astray, we are justly shut out from every species of excuse, because all things point to the right path. But
while man must bear the guilt of corrupting the seed of divine knowledge so wondrously deposited in his mind,
and preventing it from bearing good and genuine fruit, it is still most true that we are not sufficiently instructed by
that bare and simple, but magnificent testimony which the creatures bear to the glory of their Creator. Calvin,
John. Institutes of the Christian Religion. Book First, Chapter 5, section 15, pg. 6231 Presumptions as to the manner in which such a revelation would be made most effectually to accomplish its ends,
are indeed to be guarded, lest we should set up ourselves as adequate judges in a case which involves large views
and extensive bearings of the Divine government. But without violating this rule, it may, from the obviousness of
the case, be presumed, that such a supernatural manifestation of truth should, 1, contain explicit information on
those important subjects on which mankind had most greatly and most fatally erred. 2. That it should accord with
the principles of former revelations, given to men in the same state of guilt and moral incapacity as we find themin the present lay. 3. That it should have a satisfactory external authentication. 4. That it should contain provisions
for its effectual promulgation among all classes of men. Watson, Richard. Institutes, Vol. 1, pp. 62,6332 See accompanying handout ³General Revelation and Salvation
Theology proper ± the study of the attributes and character of God
1. Aseity of God
God is self-existent. His existence is not conditioned on anything outside himself; he is totally
independent. His existence is grounded totally on himself Moses said to God, "Suppose I go to the Israelites and say to them, 'The God of your fathers has sentme to you,' and they ask me, 'What is his name?' Then what shall I tell them?"
God said to Moses, "I am who I am . This is what you are to say to the Israelites: 'I AM has sent me toyou.¶´
Exod 3:13-4 NIV
For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son to have life in himself.John 5:26 NIV
2. Simplicity of God
God is not the sum total of His attributes, but He exists as an indivisible being
I am the LORD, and there is no other;
apart from me there is no God. I will strengthen you,
though you have not acknowledged me,so that from the rising of the sun
to the place of its setting men may know there is none besides me.
I am the LORD, and there is no other.Isaiah 45:5-6 NIV
3. The immanence and transcendence of God
1) Immanence - God is present and active within his creationImplications of Immanence
i. God uses indirect as well as direct methods.
ii. God uses ungodly people to accomplish godly goals.
iii. All of God¶s creation should be appreciated.
iv. God is reflected in His creation.
v. Points at which the gospel can make contact with the unbeliever
2) Transcendence ± beyond our ability to understand him
Implications of transcendence
i. There is something higher than human beings.ii. God can never be completely captured in human concepts.
iii. Our salvation is not our achievement.
iv. There will always be a difference between God and human beings.
v. Reverence is appropriate in our relationship with God.
vi. God will be working in natural and supernatural ways.
i) The attributes that describe the greatness of Godii) The attributes which describe the goodness of God
5. The greatness of God
1) Spirituality
He is not composed of matter and does not possess a physical nature.
God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth. John 4:24 NIV
Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory for ever and ever.Amen.
1 Tim. 1:17 NIV
«which God will bring about in his own time - God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no
one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen.1 Timothy 6:16-17 NIV
i. Consequence
i) He is not limited by space - location
The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does
not live in shrines made by man.Acts 17:24 NIV
ii) He is not destructible, as is material nature.
ii. Objectionsi) Statements about God¶s hand, feet, ect.
and saw the God of Israel. Under his feet was something like a pavement made of
sapphire, clear as the sky itself.Exodus 24:10 NIV
Have pity on me, my friends, have pity, for the hand of God has struck me.
ii) The anthropic necessity of God explaining who he is - from ³anthropos´ manlanguage of man. He speaks and reveals Himself in a way we understand. These ³anthromorphic´expressions communicate to us essential truths of who God is. He will cover you withhis feathers,
He will cover you with his feathers,and under his wings you will find refuge;
his faithfulness will be your shield and rampart.Psalm 91:4 NIV
iii) The analogical nature of special revelation ± used analogies we could understand
iii. Personal appearances of God to people
The LORD appeared to Abram and said, "To your offspring I will give this land." So he built
an altar there to the LORD, who had appeared to him.Genesis 12:7 NIV
When Abram was ninety-nine years old, the LORD appeared to him and said, "I am God
Almighty ; walk before me and be blameless.Genesis 17:1 NIV
The LORD appeared to Isaac and said, "Do not go down to Egypt; live in the land where I tellyou to live.
Genesis 26:2 NIV
i) Theophanies
ii) Temporary manifestations of God.
2) Life
God is alive.
i. He is characterized by life.
But the LORD is the true God;
he is the living God, the eternal King.When he is angry, the earth trembles;the nations cannot endure his wrath.
Jeremiah 10:10 NIV
ii. Contrast between Himself and gods of metal and stone
iii. Has life in Himself
For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son to have life in himself.John 5:26 NIV
iv. He needs nothing else
v. Always existed
3) Personality
Individual being, with self-consciousness and will, capable of feeling, choosing, and having areciprocal relationship with other personal and social beings.
4) Infinity - God is unlimited, but that he is unlimitable.
i. Space
ii) Immensity - He has no location ± He brought space into existence
The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth anddoes not live in temples built by hands. And he is not served by human hands, as if heneeded anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else.
Acts 17:24-25 NIV
ii) Omnipresence - No place He cannot be found
Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence?If I go up to the heavens, you are there; if I make my bed in the depths, you are
there.
If I rise on the wings of the dawn, if I settle on the far side of the sea,even there your hand will guide me, your right hand will hold me fast.If I say, "Surely the darkness will hide me and the light become night around me,"
even the darkness will not be dark to you; the night will shine like the day,for darkness is as light to you.
Psalm 119:7-12 NIV
ii. Time does not apply to God
The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does notlive in shrines made by man.
Acts 17:24 NIV
i) God is the one who always is. He was, he is, he will be.
Lord, you have been our dwelling placethroughout all generations.
Before the mountains were born
or you brought forth the earth and the world,from everlasting to everlasting you are God.
Ps. 90:1-2 NIV
ii) God is not bound by time does not mean that he is not conscious of the succession of points of time. He is aware that events occur in a particular order.
5) Knowledge
i. His understanding is immeasurable
Great is our Lord and mighty in power;his understanding has no limit.
Psalm 147:5 NIV
Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart fromthe will of your Father. And even the very hairs of your head are all numbered.
Matthew 10:29-30 NIV
ii. We are all completely transparent before God
Nothing in all creation is hidden from God's sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare
before the eyes of him to whom we must give account.Hebrew 4:13 NIV
i) When God acts, he takes all of the facts and correct values into consideration.
Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God!
How unsearchable his judgments,Romans 11:33 NIV
ii) His judgments are made wisely.How many are your works, O LORD!
In wisdom you made them all;the earth is full of your creatures.
Psalm 104:24 NIV
6) Power - omnipotence of God. By this we mean that
i. God is able to do all things which are proper objects of his power.
'el Shaddai., "I am God Almighty" (Gen. 17:1).
ii. God's omnipotence in his overcoming apparently insurmountable problems.Ah, Sovereign LORD, you have made the heavens and the earth by your great power and
outstretched arm. Nothing is too hard for you.
Jeremiah 32:17 NIV
7) Constancy
i. God does not change
"I the lord do not change³ Mal. 3:6 NIV
³with whom there is no variation or shifting shadow.´ James 1:17 NASB
i) no quantitative change.
God cannot increase in anything, nor can he decrease,ii) no qualitative change.
God¶s nature does not undergo modification.
ii. Response to objections of those passages where God seems to change his mind
i) Anthropomorphisms and anthropopathisms. ± descriptions of God¶s actions and feelingsin human terms
ii) May actually be new stages in the working out of God's plan
iii) Changes of orientation when humans move into a different relationship with God.
6. The Goodness of God or moral qualities
Difference between greatness and goodness ± great and cruel, great and capricious
1) Moral Purity
God's absolute freedom from anything wicked or evil.
every excellence in God is without blemish or limit
b. Implications of holiness
Holiness is at the center of God¶s being ± it harmonizes all other divine attributes
God is undivided
Fullness of moral excellence
Freedom from sin
Points to humanity¶s moral inadequacy
Everything God does is holy
Criterion for moral activity
"I am the Lord your God; you shall make yourselves holy and keep yourselves holybecause I am holy" (Lev. 11:44).
c. Refracting the Divine holiness
Made in God¶s image requires a true reflection of His essential nature
God does not coerce creatures into doing good.
God opposes idolatry and sin ± they infest human life
Sin impedes moral goodness
Holiness includes the idea of set apartness
God is free from evil ± we are called to separation
ii) R.C. Sproul34
a. To be holy is to be distinct, separate, in a class by oneself.
The primary meaning of holy is µseparate.¶ It comes from an ancient word that meant,µto cut,¶ or µto separate.¶ Perhaps even more accurate would be the phrase µa cutabove something.¶ When we find a garment or another piece of merchandise that isoutstanding, that has a superior excellence, we use the expression that it is µa cutabove the rest.
³When the Bible calls God holy it means primarily that God is transcendentallyseparate. He is so far above and beyond us that He seems almost totally foreign tous. To be holy is to be µother,¶ to be different in a special way. The same basicmeaning is used when the word holy is applied to earthly things.´
b. To be holy is to be morally pure.
When things are made holy, when they are consecrated, they are set apart untopurity. They are to be used in a pure way. They are to reflect purity as well as simple
apartness. Purity is not excluded from the idea of the holy; it is contained within it. Butthe point we must remember is that the idea of the holy is never exhausted by theidea of purity. It includes purity but is much more than that. It is purity andtranscendence. It is a transcendent purity.
33 This list is taken from Thomas Oden, Systematic Theology34
The following is a summarization of R. C. Sproul, The Holiness of God (Wheaton, Illinois: Tyndale HousePublishers, Inc., 1985), p. 40 - 57.
c. For God to be holy is for Him to be holy in relation to every aspect of His nature andcharacter.
When we use the word holy to describe God, we face another problem. We oftendescribe God by compiling a list of qualities or characteristics that we call attributes.We say that God is a spirit, that He knows everything, that He is loving, just, merciful,gracious, and so on. The tendency is to add the idea of the holy to this long list of
attributes as one attribute among many. But when the word holy is applied to God, itdoes not signify one single attribute. On the contrary, God is called holy in a generalsense. The word is used as a synonym for his deity. That is, the word holy callsattention to all that God is. It reminds us that His love is holy love, his justice is holy
justice, his mercy is holy mercy, his knowledge is holy knowledge, his spirit is holyspirit.
iii) Uniqueness. He is totally separate from all of creation.
Who among the gods is like you, O LORD ?
Who is like you² majestic in holiness,
awesome in glory,
working wonders?
Exodus 15:11 NIViv) Unable to tolerate the presence of sin
The foundations of the thresholds shook, and the house was filled with smoke. Theseraphs cried out, "Holy, holy, holy is the lord of hosts" (Isa. 6:1-4). The Hebrew word for
"holy´ vwødq means "marked off " or "withdrawn from common, ordinary use." Theverb from which it is derived suggests "to cut off or "to separate."
ii. Righteousness
i) Holiness of God applied to his relationships to other beings.
The law of the LORD is perfect, reviving the soul.
The statutes of the LORD are trustworthy, making wise the simple.
The precepts of the LORD are right, giving joy to the heart.The commands of the LORD are radiant, giving light to the eyes.
Psalm 19:7-8 NIV
ii) Standard to which God adheres is not external to God - it is his own nature.
iii. Justice
i) His official righteousness, other moral agents adhere to the standards as well.
but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of
it you will surely die.Genesis 2:17 NIV
ii) He is fair in the administration of his law.
For I know how many are your offenses and how great your sins.You oppress the righteous and take bribes and you deprive the poor of justice in thecourts.
Amos 5:12 NIV
2) Integrity
i. Veracity - God is true, tells the truth, and becomes revealed as truth through history.
i) congruence between who God is and what God does.
ii) God not only makes known the truth but is the truth,
iii) faithfulness of God means that God proves true to his promises by keeping them.
iv) God does not cease being truthful while sharing in human estrangement.
ii. Benevolence ± goodness of God - God wills the happiness of creatures and desires toimpart to creatures all the goodness they are capable of receiving
i) God allows life to be sustained and perpetuated giving value to life.ii) God is not only good in himself, but wills to communicate this goodness to creatures.
iii) Divine goodness affects all attributes. No justice, holiness or truth apart from goodness.
iv) The goodness of God is demonstrated by but is far above our conceptions of moral good.
v) God¶s patience illustrates His goodness
iii. Love -benevolent affection, good will, and empathic understanding
i) Demonstrated in redemption by God¶s desire and energy toward mankind.
a. A focus on God's holiness which ignores God's love might imply God cares onlyabout His own life.
b. God's holiness does not remain trapped within itself, but reaches out for others.c. God's love reveals the divine determination to hold in personal communion all
creatures capable of enjoying this communion
d. God¶s love is not weak or distorted.
e. Love is necessary for us to exist as human beings
f. Agape and Eros
a) False dichotomy
b) Place a high value upon the object of its expression
c) Both involve a yearning: love as eras yearns for the self's fulfillment throughanother; love as agape yearns for the other's fulfillment even at a cost to oneself
g. One who loves may love wrongly or unworthily.
h. Love may be unrequited
ii) God¶s love¶s is not completely at disjunction with our way of loving.
iii) God loves all humanity and every person
iv) The love of God has two aspects
a. Enjoyment of them for their own sake
b. Self-giving for the one loved
v) God¶s love is sacrificial
a. Cost was His only beloved Sonb. Directed toward godly and ungodly
a) Godly refract God¶s holy love
b) Ungodly ± God sees potentiality, possibility of restoration
For at the very time when we were still powerless, then Christ died for thewicked. Even for a just man one of us would hardly die, though perhaps for agood man one might actually brave death; but Christ died for us while we were
yet sinners, and that is God's own proof of his love towards us.
He who dwells in love is dwelling in God, and God in him. This is for us the perfectionof love, to have confidence on the day of judgment; and this we can have, because even
in this world we are as he is. There is no room for fear in love; perfect love banishes fear.1 John 4:16, 18 NIV
iv. Holiness and love come together in the atonement
i) Holiness and love epitomized in Jesus Christ
ii) Holy love demonstrated in the cross
iii) Wherever holiness is spoken of in Scripture, love is nearby; wherever God's love ismanifested, it does not cease to be holy.
v. Grace and mercy: the forbearance and kindness of God
i) Grace means unmerited favor.
ii) Divine mercy is the disposition of God to relieve the miserable, salve the wounds of thehurt, and receive sinners, quite apart from any works or merit
iii) God is "compassionate and gracious, long-suffering, ever constant and true, maintainingconstancy to thousands, forgiving iniquity, rebellion, and sin, and not sweeping the guiltyclean away" (Exod. 34:6, 7).
Summary statement: God is the source and end of all things, that than which nothing greater can beconceived; uncreated, sufficient, necessary being; infinite, unmeasurable, eternal One, father, Son, and Spirit; all-present, all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-empowering creator, redeemer, and consummator of all things; immanent without ceasing to be transcendent, Holy One present in our midst; whose way of
personal being is incomparably free, self-determining, spiritual, responsive, and self-congruent; whoseactivity is incomparably good, holy, righteous, just, benevolent, loving, gracious, merciful, forbearing, kind;hence eternally blessed, eternally rejoicing, whose holiness is incomparable in beauty
The person and work of Christ are at the heart of Christian theology.Deity of Christ is one of the mostcrucial issues. Our faith rests on Jesus' actually being God in human flesh,
1) The biblical teachingi. Jesus' self-consciousness
i) He made claims inappropriate for someone less than God
I tell you, whoever acknowledges me before men, the Son of Man will also acknowledge
him before the angels of God. But he who disowns me before men will be disowned before the angels of God.
Luke 12:8-9 NIV
ii) He claimed divine prerogatives
When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, "Son, your sins are forgiven."
Now some teachers of the law were sitting there, thinking to themselves, "Why does this
fellow talk like that? He's blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?"Immediately Jesus knew in his spirit that this was what they were thinking in their hearts,
and he said to them, "Why are you thinking these things? Which is easier: to say to the paralytic, 'Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, 'Get up, take your mat and walk'? But thatyou may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins . . . ." He said to
the paralytic, "I tell you, get up, take your mat and go home." He got up, took his mat andwalked out in full view of them all. This amazed everyone and they praised God, saying,
"We have never seen anything like this!"
Mark 2:5-12 NIV
iii) He claimed authority over the sabbath.
One Sabbath Jesus was going through the grainfields, and as his disciples walked along,
they began to pick some heads of grain. The Pharisees said to him, "Look, why are theydoing what is unlawful on the Sabbath?"
He answered, "Have you never read what David did when he and his companions were
hungry and in need? In the days of Abiathar the high priest, he entered the house of God
and ate the consecrated bread, which is lawful only for priests to eat. And he also gavesome to his companions."
Then he said to them, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. So theSon of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath."
Mark 2:23-27 NIV
iv) He claimed an unusual relationship with the Father
I and the Father are one.John 10:30 NIV
If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well. From now on, you do know
him and have seen him."
Philip said, "Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us."
Jesus answered: "Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a
long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us theFather'?
v) At His trial, he did not dispute the charge He claimed to be God
The Jews insisted, "We have a law, and according to that law he must die, because heclaimed to be the Son of God."
John 19:7 NIV
Then the high priest stood up and said to Jesus, "Are you not going to answer?What isthis testimony that these men are bringing against you?" But Jesus remained silent.The high priest said to him, "I charge you under oath by the living God: Tell us if you are
the Christ, the Son of God."
"Yes, it is as you say," Jesus replied. "But I say to all of you: In the future you will see
the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of
heaven."
Then the high priest tore his clothes and said, "He has spoken blasphemy!Why do we
need any more witnesses? Look, now you have heard the blasphemy.What do youthink?"
He is worthy of death," they answered.
Matt. 26:62-66 NIV
vi) He accepted the ascription of deity by his disciples
A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though
the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you!"Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and
put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe."
Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"
Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are thosewho have not seen and yet have believed."
John 20:26-29 NIV
vii) He equates his own words with the words of the Old Testament
21"You have heard that it was said vs 22But I tell you that anyone
27"You have heard that it was said vs. 28But I tell you that anyone
31"It has been said, vs. 32 But I tell you that anyone
33Again, you have heard vs. 34But I tell you,
38"You have heard that it was said, vs. 39But I tell you,
43"You have heard that it was said vs. 44But I tell you:
Matthew 5 NIV.
viii) He implies by direct statement that He has power over life and death
Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live,even though he dies; and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe
this?"John 11:25-6 NIV
ix) He specifically applied expressions to himself which conveyed His self understanding.
For this reason the Jews tried all the harder to kill him; not only was he breaking theSabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.
In the beginning was theWord, and theWord was with God, and theWord was God. He was
with God in the beginning.
Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. Inhim was life, and that life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, but thedarkness has not understood it.
John 1:1-5 NIV
iii. Paul
For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible,whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him.
He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the
church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything hemight have the supremacy. For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, andthrough him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by
making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.
Col. 1:16-20 NIV
Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing,
taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.
And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself and became obedient to death² even death on a cross!
Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
Phil. 1:5-11 NIV
iv. Hebrews
In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various
ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of allthings, and through whom he made the universe. The Son is the radiance of God's glory and
the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven. So he
became as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs.
Heb. 1:1-4 NIV
v. The term "Lord"
Can be used without christological connotations, other things to consider
i) LXX ± ususal translation of YHWH is ³kurios´ kuriovV Lord)
ii) NT uses ³kurios´ kuriovV Lord) for OT quotes of Elohim MyIhølTa(God)
The sun will be turned to darknessand the moon to blood
before the coming of the great and glorious day of the Lord.
iii) ³kurios´ kuriovVLord) is used in NT to designate both God the Father and Jesus
For the Jews particularly, the term kyrios suggested that Christ was equal with the Father.
vi. The evidence of the resurrection
i) Wolfhart Pannenberg ± history can only be seen by looking back
We can look back to the cross and resurrection
ii) Early Christian proclamation is significant
For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our
sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third
day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve.Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are stillalive, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the
apostles. Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me. For I am the least of the apostles, unworthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God..
1 Co. 15:3-11 NIV
2) Implications of the deity of Christ
i. We can have real knowledge of God.
Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. John 14:9
ii. Redemption is available to us.
iii. God and humankind have been reunited.
iv. Worship of Christ is appropriate.
2. The humanity of Christ.
1) The importance of the humanity of Christcannot be overestimated, for our salvation is at stake.
i) Gap between ourselves and God
ii) God cannot be known by unaided human wisdom
iii) Spiritual and moral gap
iv) Jesus¶ intercessory ministry dependent upon his humanity
2) Physical human nature.
i. He was born, He had a human nature.
iii. He suffered and died
iv. His use of the word ³man´ in reference to himself.
v. He ³took on flesh´
vi. His contemporaries had a genuine physical perception of him.
i) Next to resurrection, the most debated and controversial event of Jesus¶ life
Central to the fundamentalist/modernists controversyii) Actually more correctly ³virgin conception´
Jesus¶ conception was not a result of a sexual relationship
i. Biblical evidence
Based on two explicit biblical references
Matthew 1:18-25; Luke 1:26-38
ii. The theological significance - scripture teaches it
i) Reminds us that our salvation is supernatural.
ii) Demonstrates that God's salvation is fully a gift of grace.
iii) Evidence of the uniqueness of Jesus the Savior.iv) Confirmation of the power and sovereignty of God over nature.
3. The sinlessness of Jesus
1) He was tempted just as every human is tempted
For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we haveone who has been tempted in every way, just as we are²yet was without sin. Let us thenapproach the throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to
help us in our time of need.Heb. 4:15-16 NIV
Now there have been many of those priests, since death prevented them from continuing in office; but because Jesus lives forever, he has a permanent priesthood. Therefore he is able to save
completely those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them.
Such a high priest meets our need - one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners,
exalted above the heavens.Heb. 7:23-26 NIV
How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself
unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may servethe living God!
Heb. 9:14 NIV
2) He explicitly and implicitly claimed to be righteous.
Can any of you prove me guilty of sin? If I am telling the truth, why don't you believe me?John 8:46 NIV
While Pilate was sitting on the judge's seat, his wife sent him this message: "Don't have anything
to do with that innocent man, for I have suffered a great deal today in a dream because of him."Matt. 27:19 NIV
For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one
who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.Hebrews 4:15 NIV
i) He was DeityWhen tempted, no one should say, "God is tempting me." For God cannot be tempted by evil,
nor does he tempt anyone;James 1:13 NIV
4) Implications of the humanity of Jesus
i. The atoning death of Jesus can truly avail for us.
ii. Jesus can truly sympathize with and intercede for us.
iii. Jesus manifests the true nature of humanity.
iv. Jesus can be our example.
v. Human nature is good.vi. God is not totally transcendent.
4. The Unity of the person of Christ
1) The importance and difficulty of the issue
2) The biblical material
3) Early misunderstandings
i. Nestorianism
ii. Eutychianism4) Other attempts to solve the problem
i. Adoptionism
ii. Kenoticism
iii. The doctrine of dynamic incarnation
5) Basic tenets of the doctrine of two natures in one person
The standard for all of Christendom, was formulated at the Council of Chalcedon in 451. Thisstatement speaks of one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, to be acknowledged intwo natures, inconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably; the distinction of natures beingby no means taken away by the union, but rather the property of each nature being preserved,and concurring in one Person (prosopon) and one Subsistence (hypostasis), not parted or dividedinto two persons, but one and the same Son, and only begotten, God the Word, the Lord JesusChrist, as the prophets from the beginning [have declared] concerning him, and the Lord JesusChrist himself has taught us, and the Creed of the holy Fathers has handed down to us36.
i. Incarnation was more a gaining of human attributes than a giving up of divine attributes.
ii. The union of the two natures meant that they did not function independently.
36 Philip Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1919), vol. 2, p. 62.
QUESTION #10: WHAT DO WE BELIEVE ABOUT THE HOLY SPIRIT?
Pneumatology
1. The importance of the doctrine of the Holy Spirit
1) The Holy Spirit is the point at which the Trinity becomes personal to the believer
2) This is the time period (epoch) when the Holy Spirit¶s work is prominent.
3) The current culture emphasizes experience; it is by the Holy Spirit we experience God.
2. Difficulties in understanding the Holy Spirit
1) We have less explicit revelation in the Bible than the Father and Son
2) Lack of concrete imagery
3) Not a prominent - the ministry of the Holy Spirit ± carrying out the will of the Father and Son
4) Must not lead us to conclude that the Spirit is inferior to the Father and Son
5) Last half of 20th century ± increase in interest ± rightly so.
Last half of the 20th In the last half of the twentieth century, there had been considerablecontroversy
3. The nature of the Holy Spirit
1) The Deity of the Holy Spirit
i. Various references to the Holy Spirit are references to God
Don't you know that you yourselves are God's temple and that God's Spirit lives in you?
1 Cor. 3:16 NIV ii. The Holy Spirit possesses the attributes of God the Father.
a. Omniscience
Who has measuredthe Spirit of the LORD,or what man shows him his counsel?Isaiah 40:13 ESV
b. Omnipresence
Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence?
If I go up to the heavens, you are there; if I make my bed in the depths,you are there.If I rise on the wings of the dawn, if I settle on the far side of the sea,
even there your hand will guide me, your right hand will hold me fast.
Ps. 139:7-10 NIV
c. Omnipotence
When you send your Spirit, they are created, and you renew the face of the earth.
Ps. 104:30 NIV
d. Equating the Holy Spirit with God
Then Peter said, "Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have liedto the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the
land? Didn't it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn't the money
at your disposal?What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied to men but to God."
Acts. 5:3-4 NIV
Don't you know that you yourselves are God's temple and that God's Spirit lives in you?
If anyone destroys God's temple, God will destroy him; for God's temple is sacred, and
you are that temple.1 Corinthians 3:16 ± 17 NIV
iii. Power of the Holy Spirit is synonymous with the power of God
The angel answered, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most Highwill overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God.
Luke 1:35 NIV
iv. Eternality is attributed to the Holy Spirit
How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offeredhimself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that wemay serve the living God!
Hebrews 9:14 NIVv. The Holy Spirit performs certain works commonly ascribed to God.
When you send your Spirit,
they are created,
and you renew the face of the earth. Psalm 104:30 NIV
iii) One issue which must be faced is whether the symbolism is consistent.
a. Issue of ³dust´ in 2:7 and 3:19 ± same word in same context
b. If 2:7 means previously existing life form, 3:14 must also.
c. Left with absurdity
then the LORD God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into hisnostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature.
Genesis 2:7 ESV
By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread,till you return to the ground,
for out of it you were taken; for you are dust,
and to dust you shall return."Genesis 3:19 ESV
3. The image of God in the human
i. What it is that God brought into being when he created humankind
ii. What is ³image´ and ³likeness´
1) The relevant scripture passages
i. Genesis 1:26 ± 27
Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them havedominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock andover all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth."
So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.ii. 1 Corinthians 11:7
For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God, but woman isthe glory of man.
iii. James 3:9
With it we bless our Lord and Father, and with it we curse people who are made in thelikeness of God.
iv. Romans 8:29
For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, inorder that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.
v. In 2 Corinthians 3:18 And we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into thesame image from one degree of glory to another.
2) Views of the image
i. The relational View
i) Contemporary ± image of God not something resident within human nature
2) Soul ± psychological element ± basis of reason, emotion,
3) Spirit - religious element ± receive and respond to spiritual stimuli
4) Indebted to ancient Greek metaphysics
5) Basis in scripture
May God himself, the God of peace, sanctify you through and through. May your whole spirit,
soul and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.1 Thessalonians 5:23 NIV
For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to thedivision of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions
of the heart.Hebrews 4:12 NIV
1 Corinthians 2:14-3:4
Paul classifies people ³of the flesh´ (sarkikos -sarkivnoV), ³of the spirit´ (pneumatikos -
pneumatiko;V) and ³of the soul´ (psychikos yuciko;V)
6) Found in the writings of Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and Gregory of Nyssa
2. Dichotomism
1) Most prominent view throughout history of Christian thought
2) More recent views ± OT presents a unitary, NT dualism
3) Arguments are more anti-trichotomy than pro-dichatomy
4) If 1 Thessalonians 5:23 represents trichotomy other passages seem to conflict
He answered: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all
your strength and with all your mind'; and, 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'"Luke 10:27 NIV
v. John A.T. Robinson ± Hebrew thought does not distinguish between body and soul
2) Biblical considerations
i. Indication of an intermediate state between death and resurrection
Jesus answered him, "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise."Luke 23:43 NIV
3) Parable of rich man and Lazarus ± Luke 16:19-31
i. Name of character mentioned
ii. Describes a ³certain´ rich man
iii. Paul¶s reference to being away from the body is to be present with the Lord
We are confident, I say, and would prefer to be away from the body and at home with the
Lord.2 Cor. 5:8 NIV
iv. Distinction between body and soul necessary for certain passages to make sense.Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the
One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.Matthew 10:28 NIV
4. An alternative model: conditional unity
1) OT ± humanity viewed as a unity
2) NT ± body ± soul terminology used
3) Intermediate state clearly described
4) Normal state is a unitary being
5) Death ± immaterial lives on
6) Physical returns to dust
7) Resurrection ± reuniting of soul and body
5. Implications of a conditional unity
i. Each person is uniquely connected to creation
ii. Humans are complex beings.
iii. The different aspects of human nature are all to be attended to and respected.
iv. Religious development or maturity does not consist in subjugating one part of human natureto another.
v. Human nature is not inconsistent with the scriptural teaching of a personal consciousexistence between death and resurrection.
1) Emphasis in Old and New Testament ± sin is a serious matter
2) The impact of sin has several dimensions.
i. The consequencesaffect our relationship with God
ii. Brings Divine disfavor
iii. Results in Guilt
iv. Requires punishment
5. Sin brings death
1) Physical Death
i. The mortality of all humans is both an obvious fact and a truth taught by Scripture.
³Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, Hebrews 9:27 NIV says, "It
is appointed for men to die once, and after that comes judgment." Paul in Romans 5:12 attributesdeath to the original sin of Adam. Yet while death entered the world through Adam's sin, it spreadto all humans because all sinned.
ii. Were humans created mortal or immortal?
iii. The problem is not as simple as it might at first appear.
12Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way deathcame to all men, because all sinned² 13for before the law was given, sin was in the world. But sin is nottaken into account when there is no law. 14Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the timeof Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of
the one to come.15But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how muchmore did God's grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to themany! 16Again, the gift of God is not like the result of the one man's sin: The judgment followed one sinand brought condemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification. 17For if, bythe trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receiveGod's abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man,Jesus Christ.
18Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men. 19For just as through thedisobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the oneman the many will be made righteous.
2) Last clause of verse 12, Paul is speaking of personal sin(s)?
i. Problem ± word ³sin´ not ³sinned´
ii. ³sin´ referred to in ³all men sin´ would be different from that referred to in ³sin came into the world byone man.´
3) Federal aspect ± Adam¶s sin affected us
4) Participation in part ± we cooperate in our guiltiness
1. The Church as an organization comprised of local believers, communities of faith and denominations
1) Definition of the universal church
While it might appear that agreement on a definition would be an easy matter, such is not thecase. There are at least two competing views:
i. Covenant theology
The universal church consists of all believers from at least the time of Abraham, and morelikely from the time of Adam, through the last person who is saved. For many the unifyingstructure is a theological covenant called the covenant of grace.
ii. Dispensational theology
The universal church is made up of all believers from the day of Pentecost until the rapture.The church is formed through the baptism of the Holy Spirit, and this began on the day of Pentecost.
iii. Hermeneutical issues
Whatever one may think about the correctness of these or other similar views, thesepositions are attempts to deal with some serious hermeneutical/theological issues.
i) To what degree is there continuity and discontinuity between Israel and the church?
ii) How are the testaments related hermeneutically?
iii) Since no one holds to either absolute continuity or discontinuity, I think that it is best tothink of the relationship between the two as a continuum. The one emphasizes continuity,the more s/he falls within the covenant camp; the more one emphasizes discontinuity. themore s/he falls within the dispensational camp.
iv. What factors determine where one falls on this continuum?´
i) Pentecost
How new one thinks the work is that God began on the day of Pentecost? Not a verynew makes a covenant theologian. Quite new makes one a dispensationalist.
Is there a future for national, ethnic Israel as Israel? If one thinks that the church hasreplaced Israel, that there is no future for national, ethnic Israel apart for the church, thenone is a covenant theologian. If, on the other hand, one thinks that there is a future for national, ethnic Israel distinct, though it may be related, from the church, then one is adispensationalist.
2. The relationship between the NT church and Israel
1) Arguments for Covenant Theology
i. Theological arguments
i) Dispensationalism compartmentalizes Scripture and divides the people of God,threatening the unity of God's work in history. On the other hand, covenant theologyprovides unity for God's work through a series of theological covenants (it is thisfeature that gives this theology its name).
2:. The Covenant of Works: Though there is some disagreement on this covenant, theprevailing view is that God made a covenant or agreement with Adam whereby manwas offered eternal life for obedience and death for disobedience to his command.
Adam sinned, and the race fell under condemnation.
b. The Covenant of Grace: Because man disobeyed, another covenant was needed.Thus, this covenant was made between God and the elect sinner whereby Godelects some to salvation, and provides for their blessedness through the death of hisson.
c. The Covenant of Redemption: Some theologians, although not all, posit a thirdcovenant made between the members of the Godhead establishing the part thateach would play in the securing of salvation
ii) Dispensationalism teaches two ways of salvation, and is therefore false.Dispensationalism teaches that salvation came by keeping the law in the OT and bygrace in the NT. This is at odds with the teaching of Scripture that salvation is always bygrace. and thus dispensational ism cannot be true, some even calling it a heresy.
iii) Dispensationalism teaches that the church is a parenthesis in the plan of God. Such a
view is out of keeping with the biblical teaching concerning the church as the bride of Christ for whom he gave his life. In dispensational ism the church is an afterthought,depreciating its centrality in the plan of God in history. This disparity betweendispensational teaching and the Bible is again a sign of its falsity.
ii. Evaluation of these arguments
i) The criticism concerning the unity in God's program has some validity. In emphasizingeither discontinuity or continuity, there is the danger of stressing your side while notadequately stating the other side. In dispensational ism some have certainly emphasizedthe discontinuity to extent that one might think that there was no continuity between theIsrael and the church. For instance, it has been argued that the sharp distinct willcontinue into eternity where the church will be God's heavenly people and Israel hisearthly people. However, such a radical distinction is not common today, a number of
dispensationalist speaking of a single plan of God with a variety of purposes and a singlepeople of God with distinguishable groups. There can be a number of subsidiarypurposes under an overarching purpose. On the matter of theological covenants, even aclassical dispensationalist like Lewis Sperry Chafer held that, though he did not see muchdirect biblical evidence for them, he did not think that they were inherently hostile to theteaching of Scripture.
ii) On the matter of two ways of salvation, it is unfortunate that some, even major figures,have either said or written things when taken in isolation from all that they have said,would lead one to think that they were teaching two ways of salvation. However, as Ryrie
shows in Dispensationalism Today the same kinds of unfortunate statements can befound in covenant theology. When the writings of an individual are taken in their entirety,it is unlikely that anyone on either side of the issue really held to two ways of salvation.But what is more to the point, such a view is not a necessary part of either dispensationalism or covenant theology in my opinion.
What is raised by this whole discussion is the important issue of progress in salvation
history. Let me give my understanding of this matter as it relates to the question of salvation. First, it is important to see that there are some things that are constant, they donot change. The basis of salvation has always been and will be the death of Christ. Themeans of salvation has always been by grace through faith. The object of faith has beenGod or God's promises. Second, it is equally important to see that some things change.The content of faith grew constantly with the further revelation of God about himself andhis activity in history. We know more in these areas than did the Israelite in David's or Isaiah's day. This is simply to say that there is progress in revelation. Furthermore, theexpression of faith or human responsibility in the light of said revelation has changed.The OT believer expressed faith by the bringing of an animal sacrifice. We do not! TheNT believer expresses his or her faith by doing good works (James 2:17). It is this pointthat leads the dispensationalist to speak of dispensations.
It is helpful to see that in the progress of salvation history some things are concluded
(animal sacrifices), some are continued (obedience to God's moral law) and some arecommenced (Christian baptism).
iii. Dispensationalism does not teach that the church is an afterthought in God's program.The idea of the church being a parenthesis in God's program comes from a way aexpressing the belief that there is an interval between week 69 and week 70 in thefulfillment of the prophecy of Daniel's seventy weeks (9:24-27). Using the word"parenthesis" to express the idea may give the wrong impression, but again I think thosethat reject dispensational ism on this ground do so without really understanding theposition and on entirely superficial ground.
2) Arguments for covenant theology
i. There are a number of cases in the NT where OT passages clearly given to the nation of
Israel are said under inspired exegesis to have been fulfilled in the church. Three suchexamples are Joel 2:28-32 and its fulfillment in Acts 2:16f; Amos 9:11, 12 and its fulfillment in Acts 15:16; and Jer 31:31f and its fulfillment in Heb 8, 10. In Joel the outpouring of the Spiritis fulfilled in the' coming of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost, in Amos the building of David's fallen tent is fulfilled in the ingathering of Gentiles into the people of God, and finally,the new covenant of Jeremiah has fulfillment in the church. This inspired exegesis shows thatthe church has replaced the Israel and is fulfilling her promises in some spiritual sense.
ii. The national promises that were given to Israel in the OT were given on the condition of obedience, and because of her disobedience they are no longer valid. Because of theconditionality of these promises and Israel's disobedience there is no distinct future for her.The church has replaced her in God's program, and any future for Israel is as a part of thechurch.
How to define the curisoh
1) A definition of the local church
i. Our English word "church" is derived from the late Gk. word (kuriakon) which is aneuter adjective formed from the Gk. (kurios), and which means "belonging to theLord." This word is used two times in the NT without reference to the church (the NT word for church is (ekklesia). It came to refer to the church as a place that belonged to God.
ii. Saucy40 suggests that in contemporary usage it has five meanings:
i) The place of meeting--the building
ii) A local organization of believers
iii) The universal body of Christ
iv) A particular denomination
v) Groups of believers in a particular area or nation
iii. Feinberg's definition of the local church41: The local church is primarily or fundamentally agroup of believers (not a building) who meet at specified times and places, and haveorganized themselves for the purposes of worship, edification (teaching), exhortation,encouragement, fellowship and evangelism.
2) Four ways the term ³church´ is used
i. The people who constitute the church or the local assembly.
ii. A church is an organized or structured group.
iii. The purposes of a church are varied.
iv. The local church is a manifestation of the universal or invisible church.2. THE FUNCTIONS OR MISSION OF THE LOCAL CHURCH
1) Toward God.
The church's mission toward God is to bring him glory
2) Toward the nation of Israel.
The Jews should see God's blessing upon us, and be moved to ask. Were these not promised tous? Why are we not experiencing them?
3) Toward unbelievers or the world.
i. Evangelism, Mt 28:19-20.ii. Salt and Light, Mt 5:13-16
4) To its Own Members.
The church is pictured as a body. This body has individual members to whom the whole has amission.
i. Edification. This comes from a word that means "to build up." We have this responsibility andit is to be met in two ways: positively by instruction and negatively by refraining from suchthings as gossip and backbiting, 1 Cor 14:26, Eph 4:16; Jude 20.
ii. Purification. We are to exhort one another to holiness, Eph 4:20-24.
iii. Consolation.
3. The government of the church
1) The fact of organization
i. The NT church had officers, Acts 14:23; Phil 1:1; 1 Tim 3 and Titus 1: 5-9.
40 Robert Saucy, The Church in God¶s Program, Chicago, Moody Press, 1972, pg. 1141 Paul Feinberg, class notes, ³Ecclesiology and Eschatology
ii. The NT church had a specific time of meeting, Acts 20:7; Heb 10:25.
iii. The NT church functioned in an orderly way and exercised discipline, 1 Cor 14:40; Col 2:5; 1Thess 5:14; 2 Thess 3:6, 7,
iv. The NT church had certain practices that presupposed organization:
v. Letters of commendation--Acts 18:24-28; 2 Cor 3:1. Contributions (they took and distributed
them) - Rom 15:26 Cor 1-2; 2 Cor 8:6-9:5.vi. Registered widows--1 Tim 5:9
2) The purposes of organization42
i. To permit the Holy Spirit to raise up and approve workers (Acts 13:1-4; 1 Tim 3:1-13; Titus1:5-9).
ii. To enforce apostolic discipline--includes any challenge to apostolic doctrine (Mt 18:15-20; 1Cor 5:1-5; Tim 5: 19-22) 2 Cor 2: 6-11;
iii. To encourage the development and use of the gifts in all members of the body for ministry;this includes evangelism (Ro 12:3-8; 1 Cor 12:1-30; 1 Thess 5:11-14; 1 Pet 4:10-11).
iv. To preserve the unity of the body (1 Cor 1:10-13; 12:24, 25; Eph 4:1-6; 2 Thess 3:6, 14, 15).
v. To equip the saints and permit them- to mature into Christlikeness (Eph 4:11-16).
vi. To maintain orderly worship (Acts 6:2, 4: 1 Cor 11:13-16; 14:18-40; 1 Tim 2:11, 12).
vii. To protect the purity of the Lord's table (1 Cor 5:7, 8; 10:14-22; 11:20-34; 2 Cor 6:14-18).
viii. To support the full-time ministry financially (1 Cor 9:1-4; Gal 6:6; Phil 4:10-19; 2 Thess 3:8, 9;1 Tim 5:17, 18).
ix. To care for the widows and the poor (Acts 6:1-6: 1 Cor 16:1-3: 1 Tim 5:9-16).
3) The forms of organization
i. Episcopal, hierarchical or monarchical church government
i) Definition: Ultimate authority in this form of church government rests with the bishop(s).Government is by bishops, priests and deacons. The authority of the bishop(s) in partrests in the ability to ordain other bishops, priests and deacons. There are various waysin which the authority of the bishop is justified:
a. By apostolic succession as in the Roman Catholic Church. The authority of thebishop of Rome is the result of the fact that he is the successor to Peter who isunderstood as having been given his power by our Lord Jesus Christ.
b. By historical succession as in the Church of England. Historically, authority hasrested with the archbishop of Cantebury. There is no claim to apostolic succession: itis just that the holder of this office has had supreme authority in the Church of England and will continue to have such.
c. No succession as in the Methodist Church. Authority for the bishop does not rest on
any idea of succession. Government is simply by bishops.ii) Arguments for Episcopal, Hierarchical or Monarchical Church Government
a. By the middle of the second century (ca 150 A. D.) the church very clearly had athreefold system of church government: bishops, priests and deacons. This systemcan be seen in the writings of Ignatius whose lifetime overlapped that of the ApostleJohn. Sometimes the fact that he had contact with the apostle is taken to be a kind of apostolic endorsement.
42 From The Beacon, Apr. 27, 1976, by Victor Walter
b. It is claimed that there are NT precedents, although such a threefold form of ministryis not discernible. It is argued that there is at least NT precedent for investing power in a single bishop. The precursors are James and Timothy and Titus.
a) The position of James in the Jerusalem Church is said to be the primaryantecedent to the power that became invested in the bishop of Rome. He iscalled an apostle (Gal 2:9), a pillar of the church (Gal 2:9), a leader in the church
at Jerusalem (Acts 12:17; 21:18), and has a prominent place at the Jerusalemcouncil where he presided, summing up the debate and giving his opinion onmatters (Acts 15:13 ff.).
b) A second antecedent is seen in the positions of Timothy and Titus. They hadauthority over several churches covering a considerable area. Moreover, theyappointed bishops in the cities they served.
iii) Evaluation of these arguments
a. There is no question that there is evidence for a threefold ministry in the secondcentury, but even those who advocate this form of church government admit that itwas not present in the NT.
b. Serious questions can be raised as to whether James, Timothy and Titus are genuineantecedents to a mono episcopacy. Is James not a prominent individual amongequals? His influence might be compared to the influence that a pastor of aprominent church might have today. He is more the presiding officer of a group thanone who has authority over them. Paul and Barnabas are mentioned as coming tothe Jerusalem council as representatives of their church (Acts 15:4). His opinion issaid to be the decision of "the apostles and elders with the whole church" (Acts15:22). Moreover, is it not equally as possible that James' reputation rested on thefact that he was the nearest male relative to Christ and on his reputation for unusualpersonal piety, earning him the surname "the Just" and the tradition that his "kneeshad become callous like a camel's" from praying?
Similar questions may be raised about Timothy and Titus. While they did serve anumber of churches, this covered considerable area. In the early church bishopsserved a locality. No titles are given to them, and no provision is made for
succession. Though it is said that they appointed bishops, it is likely that that is areference to elders and not their own successors (cf. Titus 1:5, 7). They are better understood as temporary representatives of Paul, helping him in the establishment of new churches (1 Cor 4:17; 2 Cor 8:23; Phil 2:19-23; 1 Thess 3:2). Once they hadaccomplished their task, they returned to Paul (cf. 2 Tim 4:9, 21; Titus 3:12).
ii. Apostolic succession
The most important passage on this issue is Mt 16:18, 19. The interpretation of these textsrests on the identification of the rock in v. 18 and the keys in v. 19.
i) The identity of the rock in 16:18
a. Peter
Roman Catholics have usually held to Peter, and concluded that this is justification
for the authority of the bishop of Rome as his successor.b. The confession of the deity of Christ
Protestants have generally resisted identifying the rock as Peter, arguing for one of the other two. The arguments against Peter and for the confession or Christ are asfollows: the contrast in the text between Peter () [petros] and the rock ()[petra]. Peter is the little stone, while the church is built on sheet rock; Peter himself in 1 Pet 2:5-8 calls Christ the rock on which the church is built. If he (Peter) were therock, he would not have called Christ the rock; if one accepts Peter as the rock; you
end up with the Roman system of an infallible pope who is the successor of Peter and the head of the church.
c. Christ himself
ii) The identity is of the keys, 16:19. The keys are involved in loosing and binding, The verbsfor loosing and binding are Gk future perfect passive periphrastic, having not only theverb but also an auxiliary. There are two ways to translate them into English. One is to
translate them as future perfect passives, the other as simple future passives. The former would be "whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven," and the latter "whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven," The former simply confirms whathas already occurred in heaven, while the latter causes something to happen in heaven.
Don Carson suggests the keys relate to the bringing of knowledge in light of what Jesushas to say to the teachers of the law in Lk 11:52. The keys of the kingdom refer to theapostolic teaching which, given the response of an individual, will either allow them toenter heaven or bind them from entrance (p. 373).
iii) There is an absence of any instructions for succession. In Mk 3:14, Mt 10:1-4 and Lk6:12-16 the disciples are chosen and commissioned, but nowhere are there anyinstructions for succession. This omission is important as such instructions are to befound where succession is important, e. g., the OT monarchy, priesthood, etc. Therefore,
such an oversight here would be surprising indeed.iv) There are no examples of succession in the NT. A good counter example is found in Acts
20:17-28. Paul says goodbye to the Ephesian elders, but there is no hint that he ispassing his authority on to them.
v) The Didache, a summary of apostolic doctrine at the end of the first century says thatcongregations appointed deacons and bishops, nothing more.
vi) If to be an apostle one had to receive instruction from and see the incarnate Christ, thenit would be impossible to pass on the apostolic office.
2) Representational church government
There seems to be two forms of representational church government: presbyterian and non-
presbyteriani. Presbyterian church government
i) Definition: The church is ruled by elders. Elders are divided into teaching and rulingelders. The teaching elder (the minister or pastor) has special responsibility for the wordand sacrament, as well as governing the church, making him a ruling elder too. Teachingand ruling elders have equal authority; they only differ in ministry. However, the teachingelder is the principal order. Teaching elders are ordained by other ministers, while rulingelders are ordained by local congregations.
The governing body of the local assembly is called the session or consistory. It consistsof all the ruling elders with the teaching elder as the presiding officer. This form of churchgovernment is also characterized by ecclesiastical bodies above the local church level.Immediately above the session is the presbytery, which includes all the ordained
ministers or teaching elders and one ruling elder from each local church in a givenvicinity. Beyond the presbytery is the synod, and the highest body is the generalassembly. Both of these last two bodies are made up of equal numbers of ruling elders or laymen and teaching elders or ministers.
ii) Evidence for this form of government:
a. The NT clearly teaches that the care of the church is placed in the hands of theelders (Acts 15:4, 22-23; 1 Thess 5:12 f.; 1 Tim 3:4, 5; Heb 13:7). It is not clear however the extent of the authority vested in them.
b. The distinction in ministries is based on the fact those who labor in teaching aresingled out from those who rule, teaching that they are worthy of double honor or pay(1 Tim 5:17).
c. There is scriptural justification for authoritative representative bodies above the localchurch in the Jerusalem council (Acts 15:1-16:4).
iii) Evaluation of these arguments:
a. The distinction between teaching and ruling elders, establishing two orders, rests onslim evidence. All elders or bishops are to be apt to teach (1 Tim 3:2: Titus 1:9).
b. While the Jerusalem council is an example of interchurch discussion and agreement,it is questionable whether it justifies an authoritative body above the local church. Thedecision of the Antioch church to go to Jerusalem was voluntary. Paul and Barnabasdid not come as inferiors to receive correct doctrine. Rather, they came to Jerusalembecause their disagreement was with that church (Acts 15:1). The decision of thecouncil was not imposed on the participants.
ii. Nonpresbyterian
This form of church government has arisen recently, primarily in a number of super churches.
i) Definition: Again. the rule of the church is in the hands of the elders. There is nodistinction in ministries (teaching vs. ruling). The pastor is considered as one amongequals. There is wide diversity, though, on the office of elder. Some churches have aspecified number of elders, while others allow anyone who meets the qualifications for that office to hold it. In some instances the elders are chosen by the congregation for aperiod of time after which they must again be chosen to hold that position, while in other churches the elder's board is self-perpetuating, never stands for congregational reviewand one can only be removed from that board if he or the board feels that he no longer meets the qualifications for an elder. In this latter case the appointment is for life unless itis determined that one no longer qualifies. Thus, in this form of church government thereare varying degrees of congregational supervision or control.
ii) Arguments for this form of church government: Many of the arguments would be similar to those for the presbyterian form. There is a strong emphasis on
a. the NT teaches that the oversight of the church has been placed in the hands of elders
b. the representational principle is found widely in Scripture. To these arguments areadded the following:
c. This form of church government best allows the development and use of spiritualgifts. as it removes significant responsibility from pastor to elders.
d. Super churches cannot possibly be governed congregationally as they are too large
e. The pastor as one among equals prevents strong individuals from becomingdictators. This understanding of the role of the pastor keeps him from accumulatingtoo much power.
f. It places the actual decision-making power in the hands of spiritually matureindividuals. Congregationalism gives every member of the assembly equal authorityregardless of whether they are spiritually mature or carnal Christians.
iii) Evaluation of these arguments:
a. Those churches whose elders are chosen by the congregation and periodically standfor congregational review are far less objectionable.
b. While the NT does place the oversight of the church in the hands of the elders, eldersmay function in a variety of forms of church government.
c. Where everyone who qualifies for the office of elder assumes that office for life, thereis the real possibility of pride and hypocrisy.
d. While the equality of ministry may be a stated goal in this form of church government,in fact the pastors of these super churches are such strong personalities andpowerful individuals that it is unlikely that the elders would dissent if a matter is reallydesired by the pastor. Moreover, if that desire is not good for the church, since the
number of individuals needed to make this policy is reduced, the pastor has reducedthe number of possible objecting voices.
3) Congregational form of government
i. Definition: Ultimate authority in the church rests with the the local congregation. Thatlocal assembly is autonomous with no ecclesiastical bodies or person above it exceptChrist as its head. Christ alone has authority over any local church.
The local congregation has the authority to call a minister, discipline its members andmaintain sound doctrine.
ii. Arguments for this form of church government
i) The NT teaches that Christ is the head of the church, and this form of churchgovernment best exemplifies that teaching (Eph 5:23; Col 1:18). There are nointermediaries between the body and its head.
ii) The local church is given authority in matters of church discipline. There is no appealbeyond the local body (Mt 18:15-17). Even the apostle Paul does not have theauthority to discipline, but asks the local church to discipline its immoral and lazymembers (1 Cor 5:5; 2 Thess 3:6, 14, 15).
iii) The local congregation has the responsibility for maintaining sound or apostolicdoctrine and practice (1 Cor 14:40; 1 Thess 5:21; 1 Jn 4:1).
iv) In the NT the election of officers and the sending of delegates to the Jerusalemcouncil is the prerogative of the local assembly (Acts 14:23 and Titus 1:5 for theelection of elders; Acts 6:3-5 for the institution and election of deacons; Acts 11:22.14:27. 15:3. 4. 1 Cor 16:3 and 2 Cor 8:19 for the sending of messenger between
churches; Acts 15:6, 12,22,23,25 for the Jerusalem council).v) This form of church government best exemplifies the NT teaching on the priesthood
of all believers (1 Pet 2:5-9; Heb 10:19-23). Equality before God demands ademocratic form of church government. Moreover. such a governmental structuregives greatest opportunity for the development and exercise of spiritual gifts.
iii. Evaluation of these arguments
i) Pure congregationalism is not possible or practical. Some decisions must beentrusted to individuals or committees as representatives of the congregation.
ii) When every member has authority. the vote of those who are spiritual and seek theadvancement of God's kingdom can be offset by those who are either unsaved or carnal.
iii) While it may be true that certain teachings of the NT are best exemplified incongregationalism, it does not follow that they cannot be exemplified in other governmental forms. Moreover, if congregationalism is not prescribed in the NT asthe sole governmental form, then no church is obligated scripturally to follow thatstructure.
4) Concluding remarks
i. No one form of church government prescribed in the NT
ii. There are certain things that the church congregation should retain in its authority regardlessof what form of church government is practiced: the right to discipline its members withoutappeal to a higher authority; the right to maintain sound doctrine.
4. The officers of the local church
1) The number of officers
The NT teaches that there are two officers prescribed for the local church elders and deacons.Elder, bishop and pastor are different names for the same office.
i. Passages that show that elder, bishop and pastor are the same office.
i) Acts 20:17, 28--Paul calls for the elders at Ephesus to meet him at Miletus (v. 17), andrefers to these same men as overseers or bishops in his remarks to them (v. 28).
ii) Acts 20:28--The elders are admonished to shepherd or feed the flock.
iii) 1 Tim 3, Titus I--The qualifications for a bishop (1 Tim) are identical with the qualificationsfor an elder (Titus).
iv) Titus 1:5-7--Paul says that he appointed elders in every town (v. 5), but says that theseoverseers should be blameless (v.7).
v) 1 Pet 2:25--0ur Lord Jesus Christ is called the shepherd and bishop of our souls.
vi) 1 Pet 5:1, 2--The passage is addressed to elders who are to feed the flock and to serveas overseers.
ii. Evidence showing that there are only two offices in the local church.
i) Phil 1:1 - Paul sends greetings to the bishops and deacons.
ii) 1 Tim 3, Titus l -Qualifications are given for only two officers, elders and deacons.
iii) Didache, a summary of apostolic teaching, says that the church's ministry wasrepresented by bishops and deacons.
iv) Jerome, Hilary and Chrysostom held that bishops and elders were the same office, andthat there were two officers in the local assembly.
iii. Explanation as to why three words are used to identify one office or officer.
i) Elder () is probably the best term to describe the office. The person who holds thisoffice should be a spiritual, mature individual, not a novice (1 Tim 3:6, 5:1-3). This wordoccurs 66 times in the NT, making it the most common term for this office.
ii) Bishop () is the word that denotes an important function of an elder. The termcomes from two Gk words: , (epi), ³over´ and (skopeo), ³to see or watch.´Thus, the bishop oversees or watches after the church. Jesus Christ is the chief Bishop,1 Pet 2:25, and the local leader serves in his stead.
iii) Pastor () also refers to an important function of the elder. He is to shepherd thechurch, to feed the flock (Eph 4:11, Acts 20:28, 1 Pet 5:1, J. 21:15). Jesus Christ is thechief Shepherd, the good Shepherd who is the prime example of what this person ought
to be (In 10, 1 Pet 2:25).
2) The origin of the offices.
i. Elder, 1 Tim 3:1-7, Titus 1:5-9.
i) Qualities of personal character
a. not self-willed, self-assertive, arrogant, Titus 1:7. -not quick tempered, Titus 1:7.
i. self-controlled (word applies to the body, not the mind), Titus 1:8.
j. not a new convert, 1 Tim 3:6.
k. not puffed up or conceited, 1 Tim 3:6.
ii) Qualities of the intellectual life
a. disciplined, Titus 1:8.
b. holds firmly to sound doctrine so that he can teach others and refute those in error,Titus 1:9-11.
c. able to teach, 1 Tim 3:2. He should have the teaching gift, and be able to use it in
accord with the requirements of sound doctrine.iii) Qualities that relate to conduct (relationships and reputation)
a. above reproach or blameless (this is the most qualification in this group). It means anaccusation that could not be justly made against him, Titus 1:6, 7
b. Husband of one wife*, 1 Tim 3:2: Titus 1:6.
c. a good manager of his home, 1 Tim 3:4, 5: Titus 1:6. This includes children who obeyhim and believe the gospel.
ii. Deacons, 1 Tim 3:8-12. Note that the qualifications for this office are equally as high as for elder.
i) Qualities of personal character
a. sincere, 3:8.
b. not a drunkard, 3:8.
c. not a money grabber (this is particularly important since the deacon serves in thisarea), 3:8.
d. tested, 3:10.
e. not malicious talkers, 3:11.
f. temperate, 3:11.
g. trustworthy in everything, 3:11.
ii) Qualities of one's intellectual life
a. holds to the deep truths of the faith with a clear conscience, 3:9.
1) The difference between an ordinance and a sacrament
i. The term sacrament comes from the Latin sacramentum, meaning sacred or consecrated. Itis the Latin term for the oath a soldier takes to obedience. The Vulgate translated the Gkmusth vrion(mustrion) by this word, and applied it to the Lord's supper and baptism. A
sacrament, therefore, was anything that had a secret or mysterious significance. Whenapplied to the Christian rites, it described them as means of grace, that is, grace was infusedto the recipient through participation. Augustine called a sacrament "the visible form of aninvisible grace."
ii. Because the idea of mystery developed to the point where it bordered on magic, many,primarily Protestants, prefer to call these rites, ordinances, Ordinance comes from the Latinordo, meaning an order. These rites are merely symbols; they do not convey grace. SomeProtestants like to retain the term sacrament, but use it in the limited sense that we haveassigned to ordinance.
2) The number of ordinances
i. Some Christian denominations hold that there are no ordinances that are obligatory on thechurch today. Two such groups are the Friends or Quakers and the Salvation Army.
ii. Other groups, like the Grace Brethren and many Mennonites, observe three ordinances. Onthe basis of their understanding of - Jn 13:14, 15, they add footwashing as an ordinance.
iii. The Roman Catholic Church has seven, teaching that they are outward forms of inwardmeans of grace. The sacraments are: baptism, Lord's supper, confirmation, penance,marriage, ordination and extreme unction.
iv. In contradistinction to the views mentioned above the majority of Protestant bodies hold thatthe Scriptures teach that there are two ordinances: baptism and the Lord's supper.
3) Baptism
i. The meaning of Christian baptism
i) It identifies one with Christ. The baptismal formula includes"in the name of the Son or Christ" (Matt 28:19: Acts 2:8; 8:16). At the time of the writing of the NT "in the name of "
was a technical commercial term. It meant "to the account" of someone, signifyingownership. In Jewish thought the phrase had the idea of being made over. Thus, the firstcentral idea in baptism is the recognition of Christ's lordship and power over the believer.This is not all. The one baptized also calls upon the name of the Lord (Acts 22:16). Thisis a confession of penitence and submission. It is his/her final surrender. It is also anidentification with the great saving act of God in Christ. There is a relationship to thewashing and cleansing from the defilement of sin (Acts 2:38; 22:16; 1 Cor 6:11; Heb10:22). We die with Christ, are buried with him and rise to new life. This marks the end of our old way of life (Ro 6:4; Col 2:12 cf. 1 Pet 3:20 ff.).
ii) It identifies one with the Church. In being united with Christ the believer is identified withhis body, the church, The believer becomes a part of a new community composed
through the death, burial and resurrection of our Lord, He is the risen head (Ro 12:4, 5; 1Cor 12:12; Eph 2:15). I personally do not see water baptism as the initiatory rite into thelocal church as most Baptists do. However, I do not want to take away from theimportance of this ordinance. The NT knows nothing of an unbaptized believer. Everybeliever should be obedient to our Lord's command and be baptized.
ii. The subjects of baptism
i) There is general agreement that if one is baptized as an adult that one should be abeliever: baptism should be preceded by a profession of faith (Mk 16:16; Acts 2:41;8:37; 16:31-33). Unbelievers should not be knowingly baptized.
ii) Infant baptism (pedobaptism) is the focus of debate between baptistic and those whoare not. Are babies to those who are be baptized?
a. Arguments for the baptism of infants
a) The covenant of grace whereby God offers his grace to those who are electsinners is still in effect. Under the old dispensation of this covenant, a childwas placed under the benefits and blessings of this covenant through the rite
of circumcision. Under the new dispensation of this covenant, circumcisionhas been replaced by water baptism. Thus, presently to place a child under the benefits and blessing of the new covenant, that child should be baptized,This is confirmed by the NT teaching concerning children (Matt 19:14; Acts2:38, 39; 1 Cor 7:14) and the replacement of circumcision by baptism (Col2:11-12).
b) NT describes household baptisms. While it is true that it is possible that therewere no children in these households, it is extremely unlikely. Householdbaptisms are as follows: Cornelius (Acts 11:14); Lydia (Acts 16:14, 15); thePhillipian jailer (Acts 16:31-33) and Stephanas (1 Cor 1:16). The claim is thatdecisions made by the head of the house directly affect the rest of themembers (cf. Acts 18:8; Crispus; Onesiphorus, 2 Tim 1:16).
c) Since infants are born into the world as sinners by nature (Ro 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21-22), they are in danger of dying without hope of salvation unless theyreceive baptism for the removal of original sin.
d) Origen, Commentary to the Romans, V. ix. 3, says: "The Church hasreceived a tradition from the Apostles (emphasis mine) to give baptism evento little children." By the end of the second century pedobaptism was widelypracticed.
b. Arguments against infant baptism and for believer's baptism
a) Col 2:11, 12 does not teach that baptism has replaced circumcision. LesslieNewbigin, The Household of God (NY: Friendship Press, 1954), pp. 31-34,offers a twofold argument against the replacement of circumcision bybaptism. First, since water baptism is "made with hands" as is circumcision,
Paul cannot mean the ordinance of baptism. The point is not the substitutionof one external rite for another but the circumcision of the heart for thecircumcision of the flesh. The work of man is replaced by the work of theHoly Spirit. Second, if the circumcision of the old covenant is replaced bybaptism under the new covenant, why did not someone at the JerusalemCouncil make this point when some were demanding that Gentiles becircumcised? Note that Acts, Galatians and Romans never hint at thisidentification. To this a third argument from Saucy may be added. Thebaptism of John was a baptism of repentance for the remission of sins for those who had already been circumcised. His baptism provides a transitionto the new significance of baptism.
b) The argument from household baptisms is not nearly as convincing as itmight at first seem. There is at least as good evidence that those baptizedhad all believed. Look at the cases of Cornelius, Lydia and the Philippian
jailer. Cornelius: The angel tells Cornelius that Peter will come and tell himand his house how to be saved (Acts 11:14). That this only included thoseold enough to understand and believe is evident from the report of whathappened. As Peter spoke, the Holy Spirit fell on those who heard the word(10:44). They began to speak in tongues and to magnify the Lord. This wouldseem to exclude infants. Lydia: While nothing explicitly is said about themembers of Lydia's household, the details that we do have seem to indicatethat she was either a widow or unmarried. Nothing is said of her husband.She has a vocation, a seller of purple. She invites Paul and his party over to
her house, an action very unlikely without consultation with her husband inthat culture. Who constituted her household? Probably, relatives andservants. Philippian jailer: Verse 31 must be understood in conjunction withverse 32 and 34. The word was spoken to the jailer and all who were in hishouse, and the jailer rejoiced, believing in God with his entire house.
c) The symbolism of baptism, discussed above, could only have meaning for
one who has believed.iii. The mode of baptism
Three different modes of baptism have been used in the church: sprinkling, pouring or effusion and immersion. Some, especially those that practice sprinkling or pouring, holdthat the mode of baptism is not specified in the NT, and thus any mode is acceptable aslong as the fundamental idea, namely, that of purification, finds expression in the rite.
i) Arguments against immersion
a. Jesus and the NT do not prescribe a mode of baptism. In fact there is not asingle passage in the NT where we are told how baptism was administered. Allthat is required is that the idea of purification is present.
b. It is not definite that (baptizo) always signifies immersion. It indicates
that something is under water, but does not specify how it got that way(immersion, sprinkling, etc.). Thus, the word does not have to signify immersion.See Berkhof, pp. 629-30.
c. bapto) and (baptizo) came to mean "to wash" and "to purify bywashing." There are a number of passages where purification was done bysprinkling: Num 8:7; 19:13, 18, 19, 20; Ps 51:7; Ezek 36:25; Heb 9:10. Moreover, (baptizo) cannot possibly mean immersion in these passages: Matt3:11; Lk 11:37, 38; 12:50; Ro 6:3; 1 Cor 10:1, 2; 12:13; Heb 9:10 (cf. vv. 13, 14,19,21).
d. Some passages which Baptists typically appeal to are inconclusive: Acts 9:18: Itdoes not say that Paul left the place where Ananias found him and went to apool. Acts 10:47, 48: The impression is that water was brought into Cornelius'
house and he was baptized. Acts 16:32, 33: It is unlikely that the Philippian jailer took his prisoners to a river so that he could immerse them. It is far more likelythat they were baptized near the prison. Acts 8:36-38. This is supposed to be animportant immersionist passage, but it too is inconclusive. (eis) can mean"into" or "to," so that the text might read "and they both went down to the water "
ii) Arguments for immersion
a. The arguments just cited against immersion are either unconvincing or irrelevant.For instance, if (baptizo) means to dip, then the first two argumentsabove lose their force. You may not have explicit statements of the mode, but theclearest inference is that immersion is correct. A non-immersionist interpretationof the passages in the fourth argument above rests on speculation about whatcould have taken place or from silence in the passage. A number of passagesare cited in the third argument above, but some have nothing to do with baptismat all, others are from the OT and have nothing to do with Christian baptism andyet still others like 1 Cor 12:13 mark a metaphorical use of the word--why is itwrong to think that Spirit baptism is immersion in the Spirit?
b. Lexical authorities agree that (baptizo) means "to dip" or "immerse." It isthe intensive of (bapto). While cases where it does not mean to immersecan be found (Lk 11:37, 38), these matters should be kept in mind. First, theseexceptions are few in number and are dictated by the context. Second, hadimmersion not been meant, there are a number of NT words to better express
non-immersionist ideas: (nipto), to wash; (rantizo), to sprinkle; andeither (epicheo) or (proschusis), to pour.
c. The symbolism of baptism is not simply purification from sin, but in light of Ro 6:4and Col 2:12 identification with Christ in his death, burial and resurrection. Suchsymbolism can only be expressed in immersion.
d. Biblical examples of baptism either imply or allow immersion. These passages do
not prescribe a mode, but they are instructive in understanding how the NTchurch understood the rite. Good examples are: Christ's baptism (Mk 1:9, 10);John's baptism was done near Salim because there was much water (In 3:23);Phillip and the Ethiopian eunuch went into ( , eis) the water and then came out(, ek). While such examples do not prove that immersion was practiced, theydo seem to fit best with an immersionist view of baptism.
e. The witness of history is in favor of immersion. Saucy states that the unanimoustestimony of ancient history is to immersion. It was the common practice of thechurch until as late as the 13th century, although sprinkling and pouring hadbegun to be practiced well before that time. The pouring had begun to bepracticed well before that time. The earliest mention of baptism outside of the NTis to be found in the Didache (c. 100 A. D.) where triune immersion is implied.
4) The Lord's supper
i. Biblical names for the Lord¶s supper
i) The Lord's supper (, deipnon kuriakon), 1 Cor 11:20. This a supper belonging to the Lord in the sense that he invites us to it and provides for all.
ii) The table of the Lord (, trapeza kuriou), 1 Cor 10:21.
iii) The breaking of bread (, klasis tou artou), Acts 2:42; 20:7. The meal thatwas eaten is included in this expression.
iv) Eucharist (, eucharisteo), Matt 26:27; 1 Cor 10:16; 11:24. The root meaning isthanksgiving, and most likely refers to the practice of giving thanks before eating of theelements.
ii. Symbolism and meaning of the Lord¶s supper
i) Symbolizes the death of Christ for our sins, 1 Cor 11:26; Mk 14:24.
ii) Symbolizes our personal appropriation of the benefits of Christ's death, 1 Cor 11:24 cf. 2Cor 5:7,
iii) Symbolizes the method of this appropriation, through union with Christ, 1 Cor 10:16.
iv) Symbolizes the continued dependence of believers for all spiritual life on Christ, Jn 6:53.
v) The meaning or significance of the ordinance is:
a. A memorial rite of Christ and his redemptive death, Lkv22:19; 1 Cor 11:24-25.
a) A remembrance of Christ's past death. The bread and wine speak of his past
sacrifice, cf. Heb 13:11; Mark 14:24.b) A remembrance of his presence and fellowship with his Church now. In
communion the believers share intimate fellowship with Christ, 1 Cor 10:16-17.
c) An anticipation of Christ's return, Mt 14:25, cf. Mt 26:29; Lk 22:16, 18; 1 Cor 11:26.
b. A fellowship among believers. As we commune with Christ, so also we communewith other believers. In fact, much of Paul's criticism of the Corinthian observance of the Lord's supper had to do with the fact that their observance had become a time of gluttony and drunkenness rather than a time for real Christian fellowship.
i) Jesus said, "This is my body" and "This is the cup of the new covenant in my blood." However, the Church has asked throughout its history in what sense the bread is Christ'sbody and the cup is his blood, i.e., in what sense he is present. Four basic positions havedeveloped in the Church's understanding.
ii) Views on Christ's presence
a. Transubstantiation (Roman Catholic position)
a) This is the view that the bread and the wine after the blessing of the priestbecome the actual body and blood of Christ. When the priest pronounces theformula of consecration, though the accidents remain the same, the essence of the elements is changed into Christ's body and blood.
b) Support for this position is found in the literal reading of the «is" in «This is mybody" and "This is my blood."
c) Objections
1. When Christ spoke the words, he was personally present, so the discipleshardly could have thought they were eating his literal body and blood.
2. The view seems to require the re-sacrifice of Christ at each celebration of theLord's supper. This quite clearly is at odds with passages that teach thefinality of Christ's sacrifice, Heb 9:28.
3. It is incredible to think that the disciples and Jews, who would not eat theblood of animals, would drink human blood.
4. The word "is" is used metaphorically. Jesus often spoke of himself inmetaphorical terms calling himself a door." a vine," and a light" without ever intending to imply that these were to be taken literally. Why then should "thisis my body" be taken literally rather than metaphorically?
b. Consubstantiation (the Lutheran view)
a) This view advocates the real presence of Christ too. While the bread and wine do
not change when the blessing is pronounced over the element, the body andblood of Jesus are mingled in, around and under the elements.
b) This is an improvement over the Catholic view in that it does not require us tobelieve that the elements change though their appearance remains the same. Inthe end, however, most of the objections to the Catholic view apply with equalforce here.
c. Spiritual presence (the Reformed or Calvinistic view)
a) The body and blood of Christ are not present in any real or physical sense. Christis spiritually present so that his entire person is enjoyed in the meal. By partakingin the symbols of his death, the believer by faith is partaking in his redemptivepresence. It is a ³means of grace´
b) Some questions about this position. The phrase is µthis do ³in remembrance´ of me¶. There is a difference between saying that Christ's spiritual presence is inthe elements as we eat them, and saying that the celebrant receives a spiritualbenefit from participation in the supper. The latter seems to be taught inScripture, I doubt that the former is.
d. The memorial view (the Zwinglian or Symbolic view)
a) The supper is a memorial of Christ's death. It is a witness to what he did. Theelements are purely symbolic, and the representation is symbolic of what Christ did.Christ is not physically present (some might say that he is spiritually present but not
in the same way the reformed view does). Most, however, think that there is aspiritual benefit that comes to the participant.
b) The words of institution are not to be taken literally as in the real presence views,then it would seem to favor the memorial view. The fact that spiritual truth is spokenof, does not necessitate spiritual presence. The memorial view does not preclude thatsome spiritual benefit comes from taking the Lord's supper. It is uplifting and edifying.
Finally, Christ says that these things are to be done in remembrance of him and Paulsays that in doing so we show forth (we witness to) his death until he returns.
iv. Some concluding observations on the Lord's supper
i) Frequency of observation: " As often as you eat this bread and drink this cup" (1 Cor 11:26) is the biblical admonition. Therefore, it may be observed once every day in homes(Acts 2:46), once each Lord's day (Acts 20:7: cf. 1 Cor 16:2), once each month or onceeach quarter. But, it should be observed!
ii) The bread: Should the bread be unleavened as that was the type of bread used in thePassover and since Christ is sinless (leaven is a symbol of sin)? Where unleavenedbread is available, I think that it is nice to use it. However, the disregard or use of thissymbol is most likely a matter of local choice.
iii) Closed or open communion: It is the Lord's table, so it does. not belong to any localcongregation or denomination. Open communion best accords with this fact.
iv) Participants: It should be limited to believers, but not any believer. It should be celebratedonly by believers who have examined themselves and have confessed all known sin.
Introduction to Eschatology
1. Introduction to eschatology
1) Eschatology has traditionally meant the study of the last things.
2) Rise of technology
1. Definition of the universal church
While it might appear that agreement on a definition would be an easy matter, such is not the case.There are at least two competing views:
1) Covenant theology
The universal church consists of all believers from at least the time of Abraham, and more likelyfrom the time of Adam, through the last person who is saved. For many the unifying structure is atheological covenant called the covenant of grace.
2) Dispensational theology
The universal church is made up of all believers from the day of Pentecost until the rapture. Thechurch is formed through the baptism of the Holy Spirit, and this began on the day of Pentecost.
3) Hermeneutical issues
Whatever one may think about the correctness of these or other similar views, these positions areattempts to deal with some serious hermeneutical/theological issues.
i. To what degree is there continuity and discontinuity between Israel and the church?
ii. How are the testaments related hermeneutically?
iii. Since no one holds to either absolute continuity or discontinuity, I think that it is best to thinkof the relationship between the two as a continuum. The one emphasizes continuity, the mores/he falls within the covenant camp; the more one emphasizes discontinuity. the more s/hefalls within the dispensational camp.
iv. What factors determine where one falls on this continuum?´
i) Pentecost
How new one thinks the work is that God began on the day of Pentecost? Not a verynew makes a covenant theologian. Quite new makes one a dispensationalist.
ii) Israel
Is there a future for national, ethnic Israel as Israel? If one thinks that the church hasreplaced Israel, that there is no future for national, ethnic Israel apart for the church, thenone is a covenant theologian. If, on the other hand, one thinks that there is a future for national, ethnic Israel distinct, though it may be related, from the church, then one is adispensationalist.
2. The relationship between the NT church and Israel
1) Arguments for Covenant Theology
i. Theological arguments
i) Dispensationalism compartmentalizes Scripture and divides the people of God,threatening the unity of God's work in history. On the other hand, covenant theologyprovides unity for God's work through a series of theological covenants (it is this featurethat gives this theology its name).
a. The Covenant of Works: Though there is some disagreement on this covenant, theprevailing view is that God made a covenant or agreement with Adam whereby manwas offered eternal life for obedience and death for disobedience to his command.
Adam sinned, and the race fell under condemnation.
b. The Covenant of Grace: Because man disobeyed, another covenant was needed.Thus, this covenant was made between God and the elect sinner whereby Godelects some to salvation, and provides for their blessedness through the death of hisson.
c. The Covenant of Redemption: Some theologians, although not all, posit a thirdcovenant made between the members of the Godhead establishing the part thateach would play in the securing of salvation
ii) Dispensationalism teaches two ways of salvation, and is therefore false.Dispensationalism teaches that salvation came by keeping the law in the OT and bygrace in the NT. This is at odds with the teaching of Scripture that salvation is always bygrace. and thus dispensational ism cannot be true, some even calling it a heresy.
iii) Dispensationalism teaches that the church is a parenthesis in the plan of God. Such aview is out of keeping with the biblical teaching concerning the church as the bride of Christ for whom he gave his life. In dispensational ism the church is an afterthought,depreciating its centrality in the plan of God in history. This disparity betweendispensational teaching and the Bible is again a sign of its falsity.
ii. Evaluation of these arguments
i) The criticism concerning the unity in God's program has some validity. In emphasizingeither discontinuity or continuity, there is the danger of stressing your side while notadequately stating the other side. In dispensational ism some have certainly emphasizedthe discontinuity to extent that one might think that there was no continuity between theIsrael and the church. For instance, it has been argued that the sharp distinct willcontinue into eternity where the church will be God's heavenly people and Israel hisearthly people. However, such a radical distinction is not common today, a number of dispensationalist speaking of a single plan of God with a variety of purposes and a singlepeople of God with distinguishable groups. There can be a number of subsidiarypurposes under an overarching purpose. On the matter of theological covenants, even aclassical dispensationalist like Lewis Sperry Chafer held that, though he did not see muchdirect biblical evidence for them, he did not think that they were inherently hostile to theteaching of Scripture.
ii) On the matter of two ways of salvation, it is unfortunate that some, even major figures,have either said or written things when taken in isolation from all that they have said,would lead one to think that they were teaching two ways of salvation. However, as Ryrieshows in Dispensationalism Today the same kinds of unfortunate statements can befound in covenant theology. When the writings of an individual are taken in their entirety,it is unlikely that anyone on either side of the issue really held to two ways of salvation.But what is more to the point, such a view is not a necessary part of either dispensationalism or covenant theology in my opinion.
What is raised by this whole discussion is the important issue of progress in salvationhistory. Let me give my understanding of this matter as it relates to the question of salvation. First, it is important to see that there are some things that are constant, they donot change. The basis of salvation has always been and will be the death of Christ. The
means of salvation has always been by grace through faith. The object of faith has beenGod or God's promises. Second, it is equally important to see that some things change.The content of faith grew constantly with the further revelation of God about himself andhis activity in history. We know more in these areas than did the Israelite in David's or Isaiah's day. This is simply to say that there is progress in revelation. Furthermore, theexpression of faith or human responsibility in the light of said revelation has changed.The OT believer expressed faith by the bringing of an animal sacrifice. We do not! TheNT believer expresses his or her faith by doing good works (James 2:17). It is this pointthat leads the dispensationalist to speak of dispensations.
It is helpful to see that in the progress of salvation history some things are concluded(animal sacrifices), some are continued (obedience to God's moral law) and some arecommenced (Christian baptism).
iii. Dispensationalism does not teach that the church is an afterthought in God's program.The idea of the church being a parenthesis in God's program comes from a way aexpressing the belief that there is an interval between week 69 and week 70 in thefulfillment of the prophecy of Daniel's seventy weeks (9:24-27). Using the word"parenthesis" to express the idea may give the wrong impression, but again I think thosethat reject dispensational ism on this ground do so without really understanding theposition and on entirely superficial ground.
i. There are a number of cases in the NT where OT passages clearly given to the nation of Israel are said under inspired exegesis to have been fulfilled in the church. Three suchexamples are Joel 2:28-32 and its fulfillment in Acts 2:16f; Amos 9:11, 12 and its fulfillment in
Acts 15:16; and Jer 31:31f and its fulfillment in Heb 8, 10. In Joel the outpouring of the Spiritis fulfilled in the' coming of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost, in Amos the building of
David's fallen tent is fulfilled in the ingathering of Gentiles into the people of God, and finally,the new covenant of Jeremiah has fulfillment in the church. This inspired exegesis shows thatthe church has replaced the Israel and is fulfilling her promises in some spiritual sense.
ii. The national promises that were given to Israel in the OT were given on the condition of obedience, and because of her disobedience they are no longer valid. Because of theconditionality of these promises and Israel's disobedience there is no distinct future for her.The church has replaced her in God's program, and any future for Israel is as a part of thechurch.
3) Rise of the Third World
4) Threat of nuclear holocost
5) Eschatomania ± preoccupation with eschatology
6) Eschatophobia ± complete aversion to eschatology
7) Eschatology ± last things in it¶s proper place
2) Place of eschatology
1) Eschatology is a major topic in systematic theology.
2) Eschatology deserves attention and study
3) Eschatology does not pertain exclusively to the future.
4) There are elements of predictive prophecy
5) Biblical eschatological events are far more than existential descriptions of life
6) We have a play a part in bringing about those eschatological events
7) Eschatology should arouse in us alertness in expectation of the future
8) Eschatological matters vary in significance.
9) Our eschatology should stress their spiritual significance and practical application.
1) History - late 19th, 20th and 21st centuries eschatology received more focus
i. Rapid development ± rise of futurism ± ex. Alvin Toffler ³Future Shock´
ii. Dialectical materialism ± sees history marching toward an ultimate goal - Belief in the ascendency of man
iii. Contrasting point ± lack of hope in mankind ± Wars and the threat of a nuclear holocaust
iv. Interest in ³Late Great Planet Earth´ and ³Left Behind´
2) How to approach this discipline
i. Avoid ³eschatomania´ (all of theology revolves around eschatology)
ii. Escape the trap of "eschatophobia"²a fear of or aversion to eschatology
1. Personal eschatology vs cosmic eschatology
i. Personal - what happens when I die? etc.
ii. Cosmic ± how is this present age going to end
1) Personal
i. Death
i) Is inevitable
ii) Unpleasant to face
a. People do not die, they ³expire´
b. We don¶t have graveyards, but ³memorial parks´
ii. Nature of death
i) Physical death ± death is not extinction but another state of existence
ii) Spiritual death ± separation from God
iii) Eternal death ± (second death) eternal separation from God
iii. Effects of death
i) Unbeliever
a. A curse - cuts one of from any opportunity of eternal life
c. Nothing positive in it.
ii) Believer
a. Brings a person into the presence of the Lord.Now we know that if the earthly tent we live in is destroyed, we have a building from God, an eternalhouse in heaven, not built by human hands. Meanwhile we groan, longing to be clothed with our heavenlydwelling, because when we are clothed, we will not be found naked. For while we are in this tent, wegroan and are burdened, because we do not wish to be unclothed but to be clothed with our heavenlydwelling, so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life. Now it is God who has made us for this verypurpose and has given us the Spirit as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come.
Therefore we are always confident and know that as long as we are at home in the body we are awayfrom the Lord.We live by faith, not by sight. We are confident, I say, and would prefer to be away from the
d. Individuals who are in a state of grace but not spiritually perfect go to purgatory
e. A state of temporary punishment for purging of sins
ii) Problems
a. Basis is in Apocrapha
b. For humans to ³atone´ for their sins implies salvation by works
c. Contradicts certain passages
Galatians 3:1-14 and Ephesians 2:8-9.
iii. Instantaneous Resurrection
i) Paul and Rabbinic Judaism by W.D. Davies
a. Paul had two views of the resurrection
b. 1 Corn. 15 ± future resurrection
c. 2 Corn 5- more advanced ± instant resurrection
ii) Problems
a. Paul talks of a future transformation (Phil. 3:20-21)b. He speaks of the 2nd coming as a deliverance
c. Jesus emphasized a future time when dead are raised
iv. Better suggestion
i) Joachim Jeremias - the New Testament distinguishes between Gehenna and Hades.
ii) Hades receives the unrighteous for the period between death and resurrection, whereas Gehenna isthe place of punishment assigned permanently at the last judgment.
iii) Indications the the righteous dead do not descend to Hades (Matt. 16:18-19; Acts 2:31).
iv) The righteous, or at least their souls, are received into paradise (Luke 16:19-31; 23:43).
v) Paul - absent from the body = present with the Lord (2 Cor. 5:1-10; Phil. 1:19-26).
vi) Believers go immediately to a place and condition of blessedness
vii) Unbelievers go immediately to misery, torment and punishment
4) Implications of the Doctrines of Death and the Intermediate State
i. Death is to be expected by all, believer and unbeliever.
ii. Although death is an enemy it has now been conquered
iii. There is an intermediate state in which believers and unbelievers experience,
iv. Our hope in this life and the next is in the grace of God, not our works.
Hebrews 9:28; James 5:7-8; 1 Peter 1:7, 13; 2 Peter 1:16; 3:4, 12; 1 John 2:28.
ii. The indefiniteness of the time
i) Jesus did not know
Mark 13:32-33, 35; see also Matt. 24:36-44
ii) The angels and His disciples did not know
iii) Jesus urged watchfulness
Matt. 24:44, 50; 25:13; Mark 13:35)
iii. The Character of the Coming Personal
i) Physical
ii) Visible
iii) Unexpected
iv) Triumphant and Glorious
iv. The Imminence of the Second Coming
i) Jesus urged his disciples to be ready for his coming,ii) There is a repeated emphasis that we are to wait eagerly, for the Lord's coming is at hand.
iii) Paul's statement that we await our blessed hope
Is. 26:19: "Thy dead shall live, their bodies shall rise. O dwellers in the dust, awake and sing for joy! For thy dew is a dew of light, and on the land of the shades thou wilt let it fall.
Daniel 12:2 " And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life,and some to shame and everlasting contempt
ii) NT affirmations
John 6:39-40, 44, 54; 1 Corinthians 15,1 Thessalonians 4:13-16
ii. A Work of the Triune God
i) By the Father through the Holy Spirit
Rom. 8:11
ii) Special connection between Christ and resurrection 1 Corinthians 15:12-14:
iii. Bodily in Nature
Romans 8:11: "If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised ChristJesus from the dead will give life to your mortal bodies also through his Spirit which dwells in you "
1 Corinthians 15, Paul says, "It is sown a physical body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a physicalbody, there is also a spiritual body"
Job 19: 25-7
I know that my Redeemer lives,and that in the end he will stand upon the earth.
And after my skin has been destroyed,yet in my flesh I will see God;
I myself will see himwith my own eyes²I, and not another.How my heart yearns within me!
iv. Of Both the Righteous and the Unrighteous
Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame andeverlasting contempt.
Daniel 12:2 NIV
However, I admit that I worship the God of our fathers as a follower of the Way, which they call a sect. Ibelieve everything that agrees with the Law and that is written in the Prophets, and I have the same hopein God as these men, that there will be a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked.
"But I tell you that it shall be more tolerable on the day of judgment for the land of Sodom than for you."
Matthew 11:24
"It is appointed for men to die once, and after that comes judgment
Heb. 9:27
For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive what is due him for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad.
2 Corn. 5:10 NIV
ii. Jesus Christ the Judge
Jesus pictured himself as sitting on a glorious throne and judging all nations (Matt. 25:31-33).
"The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son . . . and has given him authority toexecute judgment, because he is the Son of man" (John 5:22, 27;
iii. The subjects of the judgment
i) All humans will be judged (Matt. 25:32; 2 Cor. 5:10; Heb. 9:27).ii) Evil angels
In
iv. The basis of the Judgment
i) Earthly lives
2 Cor. 5:10
ii) Jesus Christ
He who rejects me and does not receive my sayings has a judge; the word that I have spoken will be his judge on the last day John 12:48
v. The Finality of the JudgmentOnce passed, the judgment will be permanent and irrevocable.
Eternal life
4) Consequences of the 2nd coming of Christ
i. History has a goal
ii. We should watch and anticipate Christ¶s return
iii. Our bodies will be transformed
iv. A time is coming when evil will be done away with
v. We must act according to the finality of the judgment
There are three major views on the millennium: Postmillennialism; Amillennialism and Premillennialism.
i. Postmillennialism
i) Basic tenets of Postmillennialism
a. In the death, resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ the administration of the covenant of grace in
terms of the old covenant came to an end, and he established the kingdom of God in a new and powerfulway. He began to defeat opposition to God's rule. With his ascension he has given this task to the church.While there may be ;setbacks, the church will be triumphant so that society will be Christianized andmoral righteousness established before Jesus returns to this earth.
b. The millennial era will dawn gradually. Revealed truth will be diffused throughout the world and mostwill accept the rule of God. It will be a time of peace, material prosperity and spiritual glory. Themillennium will be an extended period of human history, but not necessarily exactly 1,000 years.(Actually, all positions have some people who do not see the millennium as exactly 1,000 years.) Since itis the result of processes presently at work, for most postmillennialists it beginning is almostimperceptible. Some emphasize the material aspects of the kingdom, while others see it in more spiritualterms.
c. At the end of the millennial era most, thought not all, hold that there will be a brief period of apostasy
and resurgence of evil. There will be the revelation of the anti-Christ who will stir up the nations inpreparation for the judgment.
d. Jesus will return at the end of the millennium. There will be a single resurrection (of both the wickedand righteous) and a single judgment.
Postmillennialism
Millennium: Return of Reign of Christ Christthrough the spread
i. The sine qua non of premillennialism is a belief in two resurrections, the first of the righteous and thesecond of the wicked, separated by an earthly reign of Christ.
ii. While Christ is building his church during the present age, the general course of this age is one of
increasing wickedness.iii. Prior to the second coming of Christ there will be a period of trial or tribulation. For some premils thatwill be an undetermined period of time, while for others it will be seven years in length asper Daniel 9:37.Some hold that we are in the tribulation period at the present
iv. The return of Christ precedes the millennium. It is the second coming of Christ that establishes theearthly kingdom, not concludes. This is exactly opposite of the postmillennial position which says thatChrist comes back at the end of the millennium.
v. During the millennium, Satan and the demonic hosts will be bound, only being released for a littlewhile at the end of that age. There is some disagreement, as to the relationship of the millennium to thenation of Israel. For some like Ladd, it has no special relationship, so that there is an egalitarianrelationship among the nations during the earthly reign of Christ. For others, the millennium has a specialsignificance for the i, nation of Israel in that national promises of seed and land will be realized, so that
Israel has an hierarchial relationship to the gentile nations. Moreover, some premils take the 1,000 yearsas literal, while others take the number symbolically.
vi. The first resurrection is of the righteous and precedes the-millennium ; the second resurrection is of the wicked and follows the millennium. Just prior to the end of the millennium and before the secondresurrection, Satan is loosed and organizes a rebellion which God puts down with fire from heaven. Thesecond resurrection is followed by the judgment of the wicked or a general judgment. Judgment isfollowed by the new heavens and earth for the blessed and eternal damnation for the unbeliever.
Premillennialism
Millennium:Return Rule of Christof Christ with the saints
1. The Church as an Organization: The Local or Visible Church
1) A definition of the local churchi. Our English word "church" is derived from the late Gk. word (kuriakon) which is a
neuter adjective formed from the Gk. (kurios), and which means "belonging to theLord." This word is used two times in the NT without reference to the church (the NT word for church is (ekklesia). It came to refer to the church as a place that belonged to God.
ii. Saucy43 suggests that in contemporary usage it has five meanings:
i) The place of meeting--the building
ii) A local organization of believers
iii) The universal body of Christ
iv) A particular denomination
v) Groups of believers in a particular area or nation
iii. Feinberg's definition of the local church44: The local church is primarily or fundamentally agroup of believers (not a building) who meet at specified times and places, and haveorganized themselves for the purposes of worship, edification (teaching), exhortation,encouragement, fellowship and evangelism.
2) Four ways the term ³church´ is used
i. The people who constitute the church or the local assembly.
ii. A church is an organized or structured group.
iii. The purposes of a church are varied.
iv. The local church is a manifestation of the universal or invisible church.
2. The functions or mission of the local church
1) Toward God.
The church's mission toward God is to bring him glory
2) Toward the nation of Israel.
The Jews should see God's blessing upon us, and be moved to ask. Were these not promised tous? Why are we not experiencing them?
3) Toward unbelievers or the world.
i. Evangelism, Mt 28:19-20.
ii. Salt and Light, Mt 5:13-16
43 Robert Saucy, The Church in God¶s Program, Chicago, Moody Press, 1972, pg. 1144 Paul Feinberg, class notes, ³Ecclesiology and Eschatology
The church is pictured as a body. This body has individual members to whom the whole has amission.
i. Edification. This comes from a word that means "to build up." We have this responsibility andit is to be met in two ways: positively by instruction and negatively by refraining from suchthings as gossip and backbiting, 1 Cor 14:26, Eph 4:16; Jude 20.
ii. Purification. We are to exhort one another to holiness, Eph 4:20-24.
iii. Consolation.
3. The government of the church
1) The fact of organization
i. The NT church had officers, Acts 14:23; Phil 1:1; 1 Tim 3 and Titus 1: 5-9.
ii. The NT church had a specific time of meeting, Acts 20:7; Heb 10:25.
iii. The NT church functioned in an orderly way and exercised discipline, 1 Cor 14:40; Col 2:5; 1Thess 5:14; 2 Thess 3:6, 7,
iv. The NT church had certain practices that presupposed organization:v. Letters of commendation--Acts 18:24-28; 2 Cor 3:1. Contributions (they took and distributed
them) - Rom 15:26 Cor 1-2; 2 Cor 8:6-9:5.
vi. Registered widows--1 Tim 5:9
2) The purposes of organization45
i. To permit the Holy Spirit to raise up and approve workers (Acts 13:1-4; 1 Tim 3:1-13;Titus 1:5-9).
ii. To enforce apostolic discipline--includes any challenge to apostolic doctrine (Mt 18:15-20;1 Cor 5:1-5; Tim 5: 19-22) 2 Cor 2: 6-11;
iii. To encourage the development and use of the gifts in all members of the body for ministry; this includes evangelism (Ro 12:3-8; 1 Cor 12:1-30; 1 Thess 5:11-14; 1 Pet4:10-11).
iv. To preserve the unity of the body (1 Cor 1:10-13; 12:24, 25; Eph 4:1-6; 2 Thess 3:6, 14,15).
v. To equip the saints and permit them- to mature into Christlikeness (Eph 4:11-16).
vi. To maintain orderly worship (Acts 6:2, 4: 1 Cor 11:13-16; 14:18-40; 1 Tim 2:11, 12).
vii. To protect the purity of the Lord's table (1 Cor 5:7, 8; 10:14-22; 11:20-34; 2 Cor 6:14-18).
viii. To support the full-time ministry financially (1 Cor 9:1-4; Gal 6:6; Phil 4:10-19; 2 Thess3:8, 9; 1 Tim 5:17, 18).
ix. To care for the widows and the poor (Acts 6:1-6: 1 Cor 16:1-3: 1 Tim 5:9-16).
3) The forms of organization
i. Episcopal, Hierarchical or Monarchical Church Government
i) Definition: Ultimate authority in this form of church government rests with the bishop(s).Government is by bishops, priests and deacons. The authority of the bishop(s) in part
45 From The Beacon, Apr. 27, 1976, by Victor Walter
rests in the ability to ordain other bishops, priests and deacons. There are various waysin which the authority of the bishop is justified:
a. By apostolic succession as in the Roman Catholic Church. The authority of thebishop of Rome is the result of the fact that he is the successor to Peter who isunderstood as having been given his power by our Lord Jesus Christ.
b. By historical succession as in the Church of England. Historically, authority has
rested with the archbishop of Cantebury. There is no claim to apostolic succession: itis just that the holder of this office has had supreme authority in the Church of England and will continue to have such.
c. No succession as in the Methodist Church. Authority for the bishop does not rest onany idea of succession. Government is simply by bishops.
ii) Arguments for Episcopal, Hierarchical or Monarchical Church Government
a. By the middle of the second century (ca 150 A. D.) the church very clearly had athreefold system of church government: bishops, priests and deacons. This systemcan be seen in the writings of Ignatius whose lifetime overlapped that of the ApostleJohn. Sometimes the fact that he had contact with the apostle is taken to be a kind of apostolic endorsement.
b. It is claimed that there are NT precedents, although such a threefold form of ministryis not discernible. It is argued that there is at least NT precedent for investing power in a single bishop. The precursors are James and Timothy and Titus.
a) The position of James in the Jerusalem Church is said to be the primaryantecedent to the power that became invested in the bishop of Rome. He iscalled an apostle (Gal 2:9), a pillar of the church (Gal 2:9), a leader in the churchat Jerusalem (Acts 12:17; 21:18), and has a prominent place at the Jerusalemcouncil where he presided, summing up the debate and giving his opinion onmatters (Acts 15:13 ff.).
b) A second antecedent is seen in the positions of Timothy and Titus. They hadauthority over several churches covering a considerable area. Moreover, theyappointed bishops in the cities they served.
iii) Evaluation of These Argumentsa. There is no question that there is evidence for a threefold ministry in the second
century, but even those who advocate this form of church government admit that itwas not present in the NT.
b. Serious questions can be raised as to whether James, Timothy and Titus are genuineantecedents to a mono episcopacy. Is James not a prominent individual amongequals? His influence might be compared to the influence that a pastor of aprominent church might have today. He is more the presiding officer of a group thanone who has authority over them. Paul and Barnabas are mentioned as coming tothe Jerusalem council as representatives of their church (Acts 15:4). His opinion issaid to be the decision of "the apostles and elders with the whole church" (Acts15:22). Moreover, is it not equally as possible that James' reputation rested on the
fact that he was the nearest male relative to Christ and on his reputation for unusualpersonal piety, earning him the surname "the Just" and the tradition that his "kneeshad become callous like a camel's" from praying?
Similar questions may be raised about Timothy and Titus. While they did serve anumber of churches, this covered considerable area. In the early church bishopsserved a locality. No titles are given to them, and no provision is made for succession. Though it is said that they appointed bishops, it is likely that that is areference to elders and not their own successors (cf. Titus 1:5, 7). They are better understood as temporary representatives of Paul, helping him in the establishment of
new churches (1 Cor 4:17; 2 Cor 8:23; Phil 2:19-23; 1 Thess 3:2). Once they hadaccomplished their task, they returned to Paul (cf. 2 Tim 4:9, 21; Titus 3:12).
i. Apostolic succession
The most important passage on this issue is Mt 16:18, 19. The interpretation of thesetexts rests on the identification of the rock in v. 18 and the keys in v. 19.
i) The identity of the rock in 16:18a. Peter
Roman Catholics have usually held to Peter, and concluded that this is justification for the authority of the bishop of Rome as his successor.
b. The confession of the deity of Christ
Protestants have generally resisted identifying the rock as Peter, arguing for one of the other two. The arguments against Peter and for the confession or Christ are as follows: the contrast in the text between Peter () [petros]and the rock () [petra]. Peter is the little stone, while the church is builton sheet rock; Peter himself in 1 Pet 2:5-8 calls Christ the rock on which thechurch is built. If he (Peter) were the rock, he would not have called Christthe rock; if one accepts Peter as the rock; you end up with the Romansystem of an infallible pope who is the successor of Peter and the head of the church.
c. Christ himself
ii) The identity is of the keys, 16:19. The keys are involved in loosing and binding,The verbs for loosing and binding are Gk future perfect passive periphrastic,having not only the verb but also an auxiliary. There are two ways to translatethem into English. One is to translate them as future perfect passives, the other as simple future passives. The former would be "whatever you bind on earth shallhave been bound in heaven," and the latter "whatever you bind on earth will bebound in heaven," The former simply confirms what has already occurred inheaven, while the latter causes something to happen in heaven.
Don Carson suggests the keys relate to the bringing of knowledge in light of whatJesus has to say to the teachers of the law in Lk 11:52. The keys of the kingdomrefer to the apostolic teaching which, given the response of an individual, willeither allow them to enter heaven or bind them from entrance (p. 373).
iii) There is an absence of any instructions for succession. In Mk 3:14, Mt 10:1-4and Lk 6:12-16 the disciples are chosen and commissioned, but nowhere arethere any instructions for succession. This omission is important as suchinstructions are to be found where succession is important, e. g., the OTmonarchy, priesthood, etc. Therefore, such an oversight here would be surprisingindeed.
iv) There are no examples of succession in the NT. A good counter example isfound in Acts 20:17-28. Paul says goodbye to the Ephesian elders, but there isno hint that he is passing his authority on to them.
v) The Didache, a summary of apostolic doctrine at the end of the first century saysthat congregations appointed deacons and bishops, nothing more.
vi) If to be an apostle one had to receive instruction from and see the incarnateChrist, then it would be impossible to pass on the apostolic office.
2) Representational Church Government
There seems to be two forms of representational church government: presbyterian and non-presbyterian
i) Definition: The church is ruled by elders. Elders are divided into teaching and rulingelders. The teaching elder (the minister or pastor) has special responsibility for the wordand sacrament, as well as governing the church, making him a ruling elder too. Teachingand ruling elders have equal authority; they only differ in ministry. However, the teachingelder is the principal order. Teaching elders are ordained by other ministers, while ruling
elders are ordained by local congregations.The governing body of the local assembly is called the session or consistory. It consistsof all the ruling elders with the teaching elder as the presiding officer. This form of churchgovernment is also characterized by ecclesiastical bodies above the local church level.Immediately above the session is the presbytery, which includes all the ordainedministers or teaching elders and one ruling elder from each local church in a givenvicinity. Beyond the presbytery is the synod, and the highest body is the generalassembly. Both of these last two bodies are made up of equal numbers of ruling elders or laymen and teaching elders or ministers.
ii) Evidence for this form of government:
a. The NT clearly teaches that the care of the church is placed in the hands of theelders (Acts 15:4, 22-23; 1 Thess 5:12 f.; 1 Tim 3:4, 5; Heb 13:7). It is not clear
however the extent of the authority vested in them.b. The distinction in ministries is based on the fact those who labor in teaching are
singled out from those who rule, teaching that they are worthy of double honor or pay(1 Tim 5:17).
c. There is scriptural justification for authoritative representative bodies above the localchurch in the Jerusalem council (Acts 15:1-16:4).
iii) Evaluation of these arguments:
a. The distinction between teaching and ruling elders, establishing two orders, rests onslim evidence. All elders or bishops are to be apt to teach (1 Tim 3:2: Titus 1:9).
b. While the Jerusalem council is an example of interchurch discussion and agreement,it is questionable whether it justifies an authoritative body above the local church. The
decision of the Antioch church to go to Jerusalem was voluntary. Paul and Barnabasdid not come as inferiors to receive correct doctrine. Rather, they came to Jerusalembecause their disagreement was with that church (Acts 15:1). The decision of thecouncil was not imposed on the participants.
ii. Nonpresbyterian
This form of church government has arisen recently, primarily in a number of super churches.
i) Definition: Again. the rule of the church is in the hands of the elders. There is nodistinction in ministries (teaching vs. ruling). The pastor is considered as one amongequals. There is wide diversity, though, on the office of elder. Some churches have aspecified number of elders, while others allow anyone who meets the qualifications for that office to hold it. In some instances the elders are chosen by the congregation for aperiod of time after which they must again be chosen to hold that position, while in other churches the elder's board is self-perpetuating, never stands for congregational reviewand one can only be removed from that board if he or the board feels that he no longer meets the qualifications for an elder. In this latter case the appointment is for life unless itis determined that one no longer qualifies. Thus, in this form of church government thereare varying degrees of congregational supervision or control.
ii) Arguments for this form of church government: Many of the arguments would be similar to those for the presbyterian form. There is a strong emphasis on
a. the NT teaches that the oversight of the church has been placed in the hands of elders
b. the representational principle is found widely in Scripture. To these arguments areadded the following:
c. This form of church government best allows the development and use of spiritualgifts. as it removes significant responsibility from pastor to elders.
d. Super churches cannot possibly be governed congregationally as they are too large
e. The pastor as one among equals prevents strong individuals from becomingdictators. This understanding of the role of the pastor keeps him from accumulatingtoo much power.
f. It places the actual decision-making power in the hands of spiritually matureindividuals. Congregationalism gives every member of the assembly equal authorityregardless of whether they are spiritually mature or carnal Christians.
iii) Evaluation of these arguments:
a. Those churches whose elders are chosen by the congregation and periodically standfor congregational review are far less objectionable.
b. While the NT does place the oversight of the church in the hands of the elders, eldersmay function in a variety of forms of church government.
c. Where everyone who qualifies for the office of elder assumes that office for life, thereis the real possibility of pride and hypocrisy.
d. While the equality of ministry may be a stated goal in this form of church government,in fact the pastors of these super churches are such strong personalities andpowerful individuals that it is unlikely that the elders would dissent if a matter is reallydesired by the pastor. Moreover, if that desire is not good for the church, since thenumber of individuals needed to make this policy is reduced, the pastor has reducedthe number of possible objecting voices.
3) Congregational form of government
i. Definition: Ultimate authority in the church rests with the the local congregation. That localassembly is autonomous with no ecclesiastical bodies or person above it except Christ as itshead. Christ alone has authority over any local church.
The local congregation has the authority to call a minister, discipline its members andmaintain sound doctrine.
ii. Arguments for This Form of Church Government
i) The NT teaches that Christ is the head of the church, and this form of church governmentbest exemplifies that teaching (Eph 5:23; Col 1:18). There are no intermediaries betweenthe body and its head.
ii) The local church is given authority in matters of church discipline. There is no appealbeyond the local body (Mt 18:15-17). Even the apostle Paul does not have the authority
to discipline, but asks the local church to discipline its immoral and lazy members (1 Cor 5:5; 2 Thess 3:6, 14, 15).
iii) The local congregation has the responsibility for maintaining sound or apostolic doctrineand practice (1 Cor 14:40; 1 Thess 5:21; 1 Jn 4:1).
iv) In the NT the election of officers and the sending of delegates to the Jerusalem council isthe prerogative of the local assembly (Acts 14:23 and Titus 1:5 for the election of elders;
Acts 6:3-5 for the institution and election of deacons; Acts 11:22. 14:27. 15:3. 4. 1 Cor 16:3 and 2 Cor 8:19 for the sending of messenger between churches; Acts 15:6,12,22,23,25 for the Jerusalem council).
i) Elder () is probably the best term to describe the office. The person who holds thisoffice should be a spiritual, mature individual, not a novice (1 Tim 3:6, 5:1-3). This wordoccurs 66 times in the NT, making it the most common term for this office.
ii) Bishop () is the word that denotes an important function of an elder. The termcomes from two Gk words: , (epi), ³over´ and (skopeo), ³to see or watch.´Thus, the bishop oversees or watches after the church. Jesus Christ is the chief Bishop,
1 Pet 2:25, and the local leader serves in his stead.iii) Pastor () also refers to an important function of the elder. He is to shepherd the
church, to feed the flock (Eph 4:11, Acts 20:28, 1 Pet 5:1, J. 21:15). Jesus Christ is thechief Shepherd, the good Shepherd who is the prime example of what this person oughtto be (In 10, 1 Pet 2:25).
2) The origin of the offices.
i. Elder, 1 Tim 3:1-7, Titus 1:5-9.
i) Qualities of personal character
a. not self-willed, self-assertive, arrogant, Titus 1:7. -not quick tempered, Titus 1:7.
b. not addicted to wine, a drunkard, Titus 1:7.
c. not a brawler or quarrelsome, Titus 1:7.
d. not money hungry, Titus 1:7.
e. hospitable, Titus 1:8.
f. lover of the good, Titus 1:8.
g. upright, Titus 1:8.
h. holy, Titus 1:8.
i. self-controlled (word applies to the body, not the mind), Titus 1:8.
j. not a new convert, 1 Tim 3:6.
k. not puffed up or conceited, 1 Tim 3:6.
ii) Qualities of the intellectual life
a. disciplined, Titus 1:8.
b. holds firmly to sound doctrine so that he can teach others and refute those in error,Titus 1:9-11.
c. able to teach, 1 Tim 3:2. He should have the teaching gift, and be able to use it inaccord with the requirements of sound doctrine.
iii) Qualities that relate to conduct (relationships and reputation)
a. above reproach or blameless (this is the most qualification in this group). It means anaccusation that could not be justly made against him, Titus 1:6, 7
b. Husband of one wife*, 1 Tim 3:2: Titus 1:6.c. a good manager of his home, 1 Tim 3:4, 5: Titus 1:6. This includes children who obey
him and believe the gospel.
ii. Deacons, 1 Tim 3:8-12. Note that the qualifications for this office are equally as high as for elder.
c. not a money grabber (this is particularly important since the deacon serves in thisarea), 3:8.
d. tested, 3:10.
e. not malicious talkers, 3:11.
f. temperate, 3:11.
g. trustworthy in everything, 3:11.ii) Qualities of one's intellectual life
a. holds to the deep truths of the faith with a clear conscience, 3:9.
b. note that an ability to teach is not required.
iii) Qualities of conduct
a. husband of one wife, 3:12.
b. a well managed home, 3:12.
5. The ordinances of the church
1) The difference between an ordinance and a sacramenti. The term sacrament comes from the Latin sacramentum, meaning sacred or consecrated. It
is the Latin term for the oath a soldier takes to obedience. The Vulgate translated the Gkmusth vrion(mustrion) by this word, and applied it to the Lord's supper and baptism. Asacrament, therefore, was anything that had a secret or mysterious significance. Whenapplied to the Christian rites, it described them as means of grace, that is, grace was infusedto the recipient through participation. Augustine called a sacrament "the visible form of aninvisible grace."
ii. Because the idea of mystery developed to the point where it bordered on magic, many,primarily Protestants, prefer to call these rites, ordinances, Ordinance comes from the Latinordo, meaning an order. These rites are merely symbols; they do not convey grace. SomeProtestants like to retain the term sacrament, but use it in the limited sense that we have
assigned to ordinance.
2) The Number of Ordinances
i. Some Christian denominations hold that there are no ordinances that are obligatory on thechurch today. Two such groups are the Friends or Quakers and the Salvation Army.
ii. Other groups, like the Grace Brethren and many Mennonites, observe three ordinances. Onthe basis of their understanding of - Jn 13:14, 15, they add footwashing as an ordinance.
iii. The Roman Catholic Church has seven, teaching that they are outward forms of inwardmeans of grace. The sacraments are: baptism, Lord's supper, confirmation, penance,marriage, ordination and extreme unction.
iv. In contradistinction to the views mentioned above the majority of Protestant bodies hold that
the Scriptures teach that there are two ordinances: baptism and the Lord's supper.
3) Baptism
i. The Meaning of Christian Baptism
i) It identifies one with Christ. The baptismal formula includes "in the name of the Son or Christ" (Matt 28:19: Acts 2:8; 8:16). At the time of the writing of the NT "in the name of " was a technical commercial term. It meant "to the account" of someone, signifyingownership. In Jewish thought the phrase had the idea of being made over. Thus, the firstcentral idea in baptism is the recognition of Christ's lordship and power over the believer.
This is not all. The one baptized also calls upon the name of the Lord (Acts 22:16). Thisis a confession of penitence and submission. It is his/her final surrender. It is also anidentification with the great saving act of God in Christ. There is a relationship to thewashing and cleansing from the defilement of sin (Acts 2:38; 22:16; 1 Cor 6:11; Heb10:22). We die with Christ, are buried with him and rise to new life. This marks the end of our old way of life (Ro 6:4; Col 2:12 cf. 1 Pet 3:20 ff.).
ii) It identifies one with the Church. In being united with Christ the believer is identified withhis body, the church, The believer becomes a part of a new community composedthrough the death, burial and resurrection of our Lord, He is the risen head (Ro 12:4, 5; 1Cor 12:12; Eph 2:15). I personally do not see water baptism as the initiatory rite into thelocal church as most Baptists do. However, I do not want to take away from theimportance of this ordinance. The NT knows nothing of an unbaptized believer. Everybeliever should be obedient to our Lord's command and be baptized.
ii. The subjects of baptism
i) There is general agreement that if one is baptized as an adult that one should be abeliever: baptism should be preceded by a profession of faith (Mk 16:16; Acts 2:41;8:37; 16:31-33). Unbelievers should not be knowingly baptized.
ii) Infant baptism (pedobaptism) is the focus of debate between baptistic and those who
are not. Are babies to those who are be baptized?a. Arguments for the baptism of infants
a) The covenant of grace whereby God offers his grace to those who are electsinners is still in effect. Under the old dispensation of this covenant, a childwas placed under the benefits and blessings of this covenant through the riteof circumcision. Under the new dispensation of this covenant, circumcisionhas been replaced by water baptism. Thus, presently to place a child under the benefits and blessing of the new covenant, that child should be baptized,This is confirmed by the NT teaching concerning children (Matt 19:14; Acts2:38, 39; 1 Cor 7:14) and the replacement of circumcision by baptism (Col2:11-12).
b) NT describes household baptisms. While it is true that it is possible that there
were no children in these households, it is extremely unlikely. Householdbaptisms are as follows: Cornelius (Acts 11:14); Lydia (Acts 16:14, 15); thePhillipian jailer (Acts 16:31-33) and Stephanas (1 Cor 1:16). The claim is thatdecisions made by the head of the house directly affect the rest of themembers (cf. Acts 18:8; Crispus; Onesiphorus, 2 Tim 1:16).
c) Since infants are born into the world as sinners by nature (Ro 5:12-21; 1 Cor 15:21-22), they are in danger of dying without hope of salvation unless theyreceive baptism for the removal of original sin.
d) Origen, Commentary to the Romans, V. ix. 3, says: "The Church hasreceived a tradition from the Apostles (emphasis mine) to give baptism evento little children." By the end of the second century pedobaptism was widelypracticed.
b. Arguments against Infant Baptism and for Believer's Baptism
a) Col 2:11, 12 does not teach that baptism has replaced circumcision. LesslieNewbigin, The Household of God (NY: Friendship Press, 1954), pp. 31-34,offers a twofold argument against the replacement of circumcision bybaptism. First, since water baptism is "made with hands" as is circumcision,Paul cannot mean the ordinance of baptism. The point is not the substitutionof one external rite for another but the circumcision of the heart for thecircumcision of the flesh. The work of man is replaced by the work of theHoly Spirit. Second, if the circumcision of the old covenant is replaced by
baptism under the new covenant, why did not someone at the JerusalemCouncil make this point when some were demanding that Gentiles becircumcised? Note that Acts, Galatians and Romans never hint at thisidentification. To this a third argument from Saucy may be added. Thebaptism of John was a baptism of repentance for the remission of sins for those who had already been circumcised. His baptism provides a transitionto the new significance of baptism.
b) The argument from household baptisms is not nearly as convincing as itmight at first seem. There is at least as good evidence that those baptizedhad all believed. Look at the cases of Cornelius, Lydia and the Philippian
jailer. Cornelius: The angel tells Cornelius that Peter will come and tell himand his house how to be saved (Acts 11:14). That this only included thoseold enough to understand and believe is evident from the report of whathappened. As Peter spoke, the Holy Spirit fell on those who heard the word(10:44). They began to speak in tongues and to magnify the Lord. This wouldseem to exclude infants. Lydia: While nothing explicitly is said about themembers of Lydia's household, the details that we do have seem to indicatethat she was either a widow or unmarried. Nothing is said of her husband.She has a vocation, a seller of purple. She invites Paul and his party over toher house, an action very unlikely without consultation with her husband inthat culture. Who constituted her household? Probably, relatives andservants. Philippian jailer: Verse 31 must be understood in conjunction withverse 32 and 34. The word was spoken to the jailer and all who were in hishouse, and the jailer rejoiced, believing in God with his entire house.
c) The symbolism of baptism, discussed above, could only have meaning for one who has believed.
iii. The Mode of Baptism
Three different modes of baptism have been used in the church: sprinkling, pouring or
effusion and immersion. Some, especially those that practice sprinkling or pouring, holdthat the mode of baptism is not specified in the NT, and thus any mode is acceptable aslong as the fundamental idea, namely, that of purification, finds expression in the rite.
i) Arguments against immersion
a. Jesus and the NT do not prescribe a mode of baptism. In fact there is not a singlepassage in the NT where we are told how baptism was administered. All that isrequired is that the idea of purification is present.
b. It is not definite that (baptizo) always signifies immersion. It indicates thatsomething is under water, but does not specify how it got that way (immersion,sprinkling, etc.). Thus, the word does not have to signify immersion. See Berkhof, pp.629-30.
c. bapto) and (baptizo) came to mean "to wash" and "to purify bywashing." There are a number of passages where purification was done bysprinkling: Num 8:7; 19:13, 18, 19, 20; Ps 51:7; Ezek 36:25; Heb 9:10. Moreover, (baptizo) cannot possibly mean immersion in these passages: Matt 3:11; Lk11:37, 38; 12:50; Ro 6:3; 1 Cor 10:1, 2; 12:13; Heb 9:10 (cf. vv. 13, 14, 19,21).
d. Some passages which Baptists typically appeal to are inconclusive: Acts 9:18: It doesnot say that Paul left the place where Ananias found him and went to a pool. Acts10:47, 48: The impression is that water was brought into Cornelius' house and hewas baptized. Acts 16:32, 33: It is unlikely that the Philippian jailer took his prisonersto a river so that he could immerse them. It is far more likely that they were baptized
near the prison. Acts 8:36-38. This is supposed to be an important immersionistpassage, but it too is inconclusive. (eis) can mean "into" or "to," so that the textmight read "and they both went down to the water "
ii) Arguments for immersion
a. The arguments just cited against immersion are either unconvincing or irrelevant.For instance, if (baptizo) means to dip, then the first two arguments
above lose their force. You may not have explicit statements of the mode, but theclearest inference is that immersion is correct. A non-immersionist interpretationof the passages in the fourth argument above rests on speculation about whatcould have taken place or from silence in the passage. A number of passagesare cited in the third argument above, but some have nothing to do with baptismat all, others are from the OT and have nothing to do with Christian baptism andyet still others like 1 Cor 12:13 mark a metaphorical use of the word--why is itwrong to think that Spirit baptism is immersion in the Spirit?
b. Lexical authorities agree that (baptizo) means "to dip" or "immerse." It isthe intensive of (bapto). While cases where it does not mean to immersecan be found (Lk 11:37, 38), these matters should be kept in mind. First, theseexceptions are few in number and are dictated by the context. Second, hadimmersion not been meant, there are a number of NT words to better expressnon-immersionist ideas: (nipto), to wash; (rantizo), to sprinkle; andeither (epicheo) or (proschusis), to pour.
c. The symbolism of baptism is not simply purification from sin, but in light of Ro 6:4and Col 2:12 identification with Christ in his death, burial and resurrection. Suchsymbolism can only be expressed in immersion.
d. Biblical examples of baptism either imply or allow immersion. These passages donot prescribe a mode, but they are instructive in understanding how the NTchurch understood the rite. Good examples are: Christ's baptism (Mk 1:9, 10);John's baptism was done near Salim because there was much water (In 3:23);Phillip and the Ethiopian eunuch went into ( , eis) the water and then came out(, ek). While such examples do not prove that immersion was practiced, theydo seem to fit best with an immersionist view of baptism.
e. The witness of history is in favor of immersion. Saucy states that the unanimoustestimony of ancient history is to immersion. It was the common practice of thechurch until as late as the 13th century, although sprinkling and pouring hadbegun to be practiced well before that time. The pouring had begun to bepracticed well before that time. The earliest mention of baptism outside of the NTis to be found in the Didache (c. 100 A. D.) where triune immersion is implied.
4) The Lord's Supper
i. Biblical names for the Lord¶s supper
i) The Lord's supper (, deipnon kuriakon), 1 Cor 11:20. This a supper belonging to the Lord in the sense that he invites us to it and provides for all.
ii) The table of the Lord (, trapeza kuriou), 1 Cor 10:21.iii) The breaking of bread (, klasis tou artou), Acts 2:42; 20:7. The meal that
was eaten is included in this expression.
iv) Eucharist (, eucharisteo), Matt 26:27; 1 Cor 10:16; 11:24. The root meaning isthanksgiving, and most likely refers to the practice of giving thanks before eating of theelements.
ii. Symbolism and meaning of the Lord¶s supper
i) Symbolizes the death of Christ for our sins, 1 Cor 11:26; Mk 14:24.
ii) Symbolizes our personal appropriation of the benefits of Christ's death, 1 Cor 11:24 cf. 2Cor 5:7,
iii) Symbolizes the method of this appropriation, through union with Christ, 1 Cor 10:16.
iv) Symbolizes the continued dependence of believers for all spiritual life on Christ, Jn 6:53.
v) The meaning or significance of the ordinance is:
a. A memorial rite of Christ and his redemptive death, Lkv22:19; 1 Cor 11:24-25.a) A remembrance of Christ's past death. The bread and wine speak of his past
sacrifice, cf. Heb 13:11; Mark 14:24.
b) A remembrance of his presence and fellowship with his Church now. Incommunion the believers share intimate fellowship with Christ, 1 Cor 10:16-17.
c) An anticipation of Christ's return, Mt 14:25, cf. Mt 26:29; Lk 22:16, 18; 1 Cor 11:26.
b. A fellowship among believers. As we commune with Christ, so also we communewith other believers. In fact, much of Paul's criticism of the Corinthian observance of the Lord's supper had to do with the fact that their observance had become a time of gluttony and drunkenness rather than a time for real Christian fellowship.
iii. Christ's presence in the Lord's supper
i) Jesus said, "This is my body" and "This is the cup of the new covenant in my blood." However, the Church has asked throughout its history in what sense the bread is Christ'sbody and the cup is his blood, i.e., in what sense he is present. Four basic positions havedeveloped in the Church's understanding.
ii) Views on Christ's Presence
a. Transubstantiation (Roman Catholic position)
a) This is the view that the bread and the wine after the blessing of the priestbecome the actual body and blood of Christ. When the priest pronounces theformula of consecration, though the accidents remain the same, the essence of the elements is changed into Christ's body and blood.
b) Support for this position is found in the literal reading of the «is" in «This is mybody" and "This is my blood."
c) Objections
1. When Christ spoke the words, he was personally present, so the discipleshardly could have thought they were eating his literal body and blood.
2. The view seems to require the re-sacrifice of Christ at each celebration of theLord's supper. This quite clearly is at odds with passages that teach thefinality of Christ's sacrifice, Heb 9:28.
3. It is incredible to think that the disciples and Jews, who would not eat theblood of animals, would drink human blood.
4. The word "is" is used metaphorically. Jesus often spoke of himself inmetaphorical terms calling himself a door." a vine," and a light" without ever intending to imply that these were to be taken literally. Why then should "thisis my body" be taken literally rather than metaphorically?
b. Consubstantiation (the Lutheran view)
a) This view advocates the real presence of Christ too. While the bread and wine donot change when the blessing is pronounced over the element, the body andblood of Jesus are mingled in, around and under the elements.
b) This is an improvement over the Catholic view in that it does not require us tobelieve that the elements change though their appearance remains the same. Inthe end, however, most of the objections to the Catholic view apply with equalforce here.
c. Spiritual presence (the Reformed or Calvinistic view)
a) The body and blood of Christ are not present in any real or physical sense. Christ
is spiritually present so that his entire person is enjoyed in the meal. By partakingin the symbols of his death, the believer by faith is partaking in his redemptivepresence. It is a ³means of grace´
b) Some questions about this position. The phrase is µthis do ³in remembrance´ of me¶. There is a difference between saying that Christ's spiritual presence is inthe elements as we eat them, and saying that the celebrant receives a spiritualbenefit from participation in the supper. The latter seems to be taught inScripture, I doubt that the former is.
d. The Memorial View (the Zwinglian or Symbolic view)
a) The supper is a memorial of Christ's death. It is a witness to what he did. Theelements are purely symbolic, and the representation is symbolic of what Christ did.Christ is not physically present (some might say that he is spiritually present but notin the same way the reformed view does). Most, however, think that there is aspiritual benefit that comes to the participant.
b) The words of institution are not to be taken literally as in the real presence views,then it would seem to favor the memorial view. The fact that spiritual truth is spokenof, does not necessitate spiritual presence. The memorial view does not preclude thatsome spiritual benefit comes from taking the Lord's supper. It is uplifting and edifying.Finally, Christ says that these things are to be done in remembrance of him and Paulsays that in doing so we show forth (we witness to) his death until he returns.
iv. Some Concluding Observations on the Lord's Supper
i) Frequency of observation: " As often as you eat this bread and drink this cup" (1 Cor 11:26) is the biblical admonition. Therefore, it may be observed once every day in homes
(Acts 2:46), once each Lord's day (Acts 20:7: cf. 1 Cor 16:2), once each month or onceeach quarter. But, it should be observed!
ii) The bread: Should the bread be unleavened as that was the type of bread used in thePassover and since Christ is sinless (leaven is a symbol of sin)? Where unleavenedbread is available, I think that it is nice to use it. However, the disregard or use of thissymbol is most likely a matter of local choice.
iii) Closed or open communion: It is the Lord's table, so it does. not belong to any localcongregation or denomination. Open communion best accords with this fact.
iv) Participants: It should be limited to believers, but not any believer. It should be celebratedonly by believers who have examined themselves and have confessed all known sin.
Eschatology
1. Definition of the universal church
While it might appear that agreement on a definition would be an easy matter, such is not the case.There are at least two competing views:
The universal church consists of all believers from at least the time of Abraham, and more likelyfrom the time of Adam, through the last person who is saved. For many the unifying structure is atheological covenant called the covenant of grace.
2) Dispensational theology
The universal church is made up of all believers from the day of Pentecost until the rapture. Thechurch is formed through the baptism of the Holy Spirit, and this began on the day of Pentecost.
3) Hermeneutical issues
Whatever one may think about the correctness of these or other similar views, these positions areattempts to deal with some serious hermeneutical/theological issues.
i. To what degree is there continuity and discontinuity between Israel and the church?
ii. How are the testaments related hermeneutically?
iii. Since no one holds to either absolute continuity or discontinuity, I think that it is best to thinkof the relationship between the two as a continuum. The one emphasizes continuity, the mores/he falls within the covenant camp; the more one emphasizes discontinuity. the more s/he
falls within the dispensational camp.
iv. What factors determine where one falls on this continuum?´
i) Pentecost
How new one thinks the work is that God began on the day of Pentecost? Not a verynew makes a covenant theologian. Quite new makes one a dispensationalist.
ii) Israel
Is there a future for national, ethnic Israel as Israel? If one thinks that the church hasreplaced Israel, that there is no future for national, ethnic Israel apart for the church, thenone is a covenant theologian. If, on the other hand, one thinks that there is a future for national, ethnic Israel distinct, though it may be related, from the church, then one is adispensationalist.
2. The relationship between the NT church and Israel
1) Arguments for Covenant Theology
i. Theological arguments
i) Dispensationalism compartmentalizes Scripture and divides the people of God,threatening the unity of God's work in history. On the other hand, covenant theologyprovides unity for God's work through a series of theological covenants (it is this featurethat gives this theology its name).
a. The Covenant of Works: Though there is some disagreement on this covenant, theprevailing view is that God made a covenant or agreement with Adam whereby manwas offered eternal life for obedience and death for disobedience to his command.
Adam sinned, and the race fell under condemnation.
b. The Covenant of Grace: Because man disobeyed, another covenant was needed.Thus, this covenant was made between God and the elect sinner whereby God
elects some to salvation, and provides for their blessedness through the death of hisson.
c. The Covenant of Redemption: Some theologians, although not all, posit a thirdcovenant made between the members of the Godhead establishing the part thateach would play in the securing of salvation
ii) Dispensationalism teaches two ways of salvation, and is therefore false.Dispensationalism teaches that salvation came by keeping the law in the OT and bygrace in the NT. This is at odds with the teaching of Scripture that salvation is always bygrace. and thus dispensational ism cannot be true, some even calling it a heresy.
iii) Dispensationalism teaches that the church is a parenthesis in the plan of God. Such aview is out of keeping with the biblical teaching concerning the church as the bride of Christ for whom he gave his life. In dispensational ism the church is an afterthought,
depreciating its centrality in the plan of God in history. This disparity betweendispensational teaching and the Bible is again a sign of its falsity.
ii. Evaluation of these arguments
i) The criticism concerning the unity in God's program has some validity. In emphasizingeither discontinuity or continuity, there is the danger of stressing your side while notadequately stating the other side. In dispensational ism some have certainly emphasizedthe discontinuity to extent that one might think that there was no continuity between theIsrael and the church. For instance, it has been argued that the sharp distinct willcontinue into eternity where the church will be God's heavenly people and Israel hisearthly people. However, such a radical distinction is not common today, a number of dispensationalist speaking of a single plan of God with a variety of purposes and a singlepeople of God with distinguishable groups. There can be a number of subsidiary
purposes under an overarching purpose. On the matter of theological covenants, even aclassical dispensationalist like Lewis Sperry Chafer held that, though he did not see muchdirect biblical evidence for them, he did not think that they were inherently hostile to theteaching of Scripture.
ii) On the matter of two ways of salvation, it is unfortunate that some, even major figures,have either said or written things when taken in isolation from all that they have said,would lead one to think that they were teaching two ways of salvation. However, as Ryrieshows in Dispensationalism Today the same kinds of unfortunate statements can befound in covenant theology. When the writings of an individual are taken in their entirety,it is unlikely that anyone on either side of the issue really held to two ways of salvation.But what is more to the point, such a view is not a necessary part of either dispensationalism or covenant theology in my opinion.
What is raised by this whole discussion is the important issue of progress in salvationhistory. Let me give my understanding of this matter as it relates to the question of salvation. First, it is important to see that there are some things that are constant, they donot change. The basis of salvation has always been and will be the death of Christ. Themeans of salvation has always been by grace through faith. The object of faith has beenGod or God's promises. Second, it is equally important to see that some things change.The content of faith grew constantly with the further revelation of God about himself andhis activity in history. We know more in these areas than did the Israelite in David's or Isaiah's day. This is simply to say that there is progress in revelation. Furthermore, theexpression of faith or human responsibility in the light of said revelation has changed.The OT believer expressed faith by the bringing of an animal sacrifice. We do not! The
NT believer expresses his or her faith by doing good works (James 2:17). It is this pointthat leads the dispensationalist to speak of dispensations.
It is helpful to see that in the progress of salvation history some things are concluded(animal sacrifices), some are continued (obedience to God's moral law) and some arecommenced (Christian baptism).
iii. Dispensationalism does not teach that the church is an afterthought in God's program.
The idea of the church being a parenthesis in God's program comes from a way aexpressing the belief that there is an interval between week 69 and week 70 in thefulfillment of the prophecy of Daniel's seventy weeks (9:24-27). Using the word"parenthesis" to express the idea may give the wrong impression, but again I think thosethat reject dispensational ism on this ground do so without really understanding theposition and on entirely superficial ground.
2) Arguments for covenant theology
i. There are a number of cases in the NT where OT passages clearly given to the nation of Israel are said under inspired exegesis to have been fulfilled in the church. Three suchexamples are Joel 2:28-32 and its fulfillment in Acts 2:16f; Amos 9:11, 12 and its fulfillment in
Acts 15:16; and Jer 31:31f and its fulfillment in Heb 8, 10. In Joel the outpouring of the Spiritis fulfilled in the' coming of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost, in Amos the building of David's fallen tent is fulfilled in the ingathering of Gentiles into the people of God, and finally,the new covenant of Jeremiah has fulfillment in the church. This inspired exegesis shows thatthe church has replaced the Israel and is fulfilling her promises in some spiritual sense.
ii. The national promises that were given to Israel in the OT were given on the condition of obedience, and because of her disobedience they are no longer valid. Because of theconditionality of these promises and Israel's disobedience there is no distinct future for her.The church has replaced her in God's program, and any future for Israel is as a part of thechurch.
Eschatology
1. Introduction to eschatology
1) Eschatology has traditionally meant the study of the last things.
2) Rise of technology
3) Rise of the Third World
4) Threat of nuclear holocost
5) Eschatomania ± preoccupation with eschatology
6) Eschatophobia ± complete aversion to eschatology
7) Eschatology ± last things in it¶s proper place
2) Place of eschatology1) Eschatology is a major topic in systematic theology.
2) Eschatology deserves attention and study
3) Eschatology does not pertain exclusively to the future.
4) There are elements of predictive prophecy
5) Biblical eschatological events are far more than existential descriptions of life
6) We have a play a part in bringing about those eschatological events
Class Notes3) Rather, the righteous, or at least their souls, are received into paradise (Luke 16:19-31; 23:43).
4) Paul equates being absent from the body with being present with the Lord (2 Cor. 5:1-10; Phil.1:19-26).
5) Upon death believers go immediately to a place and condition of blessedness, and unbelievers toan experience of misery, torment, and punishment.
Terms
Eschatology - the study of "last thing". Built from two Greek words "eschatos" (last) and "word". It is nota word found in the English Bible but has been useful for definition.
Millennium - is a word taken from the Latin "mille" and "annum". These words mean "thousand" and"year ". They are not words found in our English Bibles, but is very helpful for discussion.
Rapture - taken from Latin "raptus", meaning "carry away". Another word not found in our English Bibles,but is helpful for discussion.
Postmillennialism - the view of the last things which holds that the Kingdom of God is now being extendedin the world through the preaching of the Gospel and the saving work of the Holy Spirit, that the worldeventually will be Christianized, and that the return of Christ will occur at the close of a long period of righteousness and peace commonly called the "Millennium1.
Amillennialism - the view of the last things which holds that the Bible does not predict a "Millennium1 or period of worldwide peace and righteousness for the end of the world. It does teach that there will be aparallel and contemporaneous development of good and evil - God's kingdom and Satan's kingdom - inthis world, which will continue until the second coming of Christ. At the second coming of Christ theresurrection and judgment will take place, followed by the eternal order of things - the absolute perfectKingdom of God in which there will be no sin, suffering nor death.
Historic Premillennialism - the view of last things which holds the second coming of Christ will be followedby a period of world-wide peace and righteousness, before the end of the world, called "the Millennium1or "the Kingdom of God1, during which Christ will reign as King in person on this earth. Premillennialistsare divided into various groups by their different views of the order of events associated with the second
coming of Christ, but they all agree in holding that there will be a millennium on earth after the secondcoming of Christ but before the end of the world.
Dispensational Premillennialism - the view of last things which holds the second coming of Christ will befollowed by a period of world-wide peace and righteousness, before the end of the world, called "theMillennium' or "the Kingdom of God', during which Christ will reign as King in person on this earth.Dispensational premillennialism is distinguished from historic premillennialism by their view of Israel.Dispensational premillennialism is best represented by the statement "the basic premise of
