Last week, I started my Fall 2009 courses at the Southern Seminary Extension Center. I am in the process of getting acclimated to the new semester as well as preparing for the Greek Test at the first of October. Therefore, my plate is overflowing and I am going to hold off on posts for a couple of weeks.
Thanks!
Josh
Monday, August 24, 2009
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Dealing with the Guilt of Sin
I wanted to write a quick Biblical encouragement to those who are dealing with the guilt of past sin or habitual sin. Are you a Christian who feels that you cannot be used of God because of some past sin that Satan keeps throwing in your face? Do you allow the Accuser to keep you enslaved to a habitual sin? I want to share this verse with you that should encourage you!
Micah 7:7-9 ESV - this passage in context is talking about the City of Jerusalem, but it has a New Covenant meaning for the Christian that is evident. Here is the text:
But as for me, I will look to the Lord;
I will wait for the God of my salvation;
my God will hear me.
Rejoice not over me, O my enemy;
when I fall, I shall rise;
when I sit in darkness,
the Lord will be a light to me.
I will bear the indignation of the LORD
because I have sinned against him,
until he pleads my cause
and executes judgment for me.
He will bring me out to the light;
I shall look upon his vindication.
This is a powerful verse. Whatever hold Satan has on you, it does not have to be this way! Yes, you have sinned, and yes, you will bear the indignation of God and the consequences of that sin. But you will not experience condemnation! There is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus (Romans 8:1). What an amazing promise!!! It is God who will bring you out of the darkness of sin and into the light. Do not trust your own strength, nail your sin to the cross and put it to death at Christ's finished work!
Rest in God's amazing grace! Look upon the vindication of God's almighty name in your life! He will have vindication, he will have his victory in your life!
Micah 7:7-9 ESV - this passage in context is talking about the City of Jerusalem, but it has a New Covenant meaning for the Christian that is evident. Here is the text:
But as for me, I will look to the Lord;
I will wait for the God of my salvation;
my God will hear me.
Rejoice not over me, O my enemy;
when I fall, I shall rise;
when I sit in darkness,
the Lord will be a light to me.
I will bear the indignation of the LORD
because I have sinned against him,
until he pleads my cause
and executes judgment for me.
He will bring me out to the light;
I shall look upon his vindication.
This is a powerful verse. Whatever hold Satan has on you, it does not have to be this way! Yes, you have sinned, and yes, you will bear the indignation of God and the consequences of that sin. But you will not experience condemnation! There is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus (Romans 8:1). What an amazing promise!!! It is God who will bring you out of the darkness of sin and into the light. Do not trust your own strength, nail your sin to the cross and put it to death at Christ's finished work!
Rest in God's amazing grace! Look upon the vindication of God's almighty name in your life! He will have vindication, he will have his victory in your life!
Monday, August 10, 2009
Jerome Quote
I got this off the wikipedia article for Jerome. I think this is a really great quote - similar to the "lazy hands are the devils workshop" proverb.
"Be ever engaged, so that whenever the devil calls he may find you occupied."
Jerome was a Christian in the 4th Century and was responsible for translating the Original Languages (Hebrew and Greek) into Latin, called the Vulgate. This translation of the Bible was the only authorized translation of the church (Roman Catholicism) until the Protestant Reformation.
Sunday, August 2, 2009
No Other Name - Acts 4:12
A couple of weeks ago, we at Dresden First Baptist Church had a scripture memory verse, Acts 4:12. Here is the verse with verse 11 to provide a small amount of context:
"This Jesus is the stone that was rejected by you, the builders, which has become the cornerstone. And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved." ESV.
This is another scripture on conversion that highlights the exclusivity of Christ. Evangelical Christians do not make up the belief that Jesus is the only way to salvation. There are ample passages of scripture that point to this doctrine, this being one (John 14:6 being another). There is no other way under the sun to receive salvation except through the blood of Christ Jesus. This has massive implications - with one I would like to highlight today:
Major Implication: If Christ is the only way, and he is, then Christians must evangelize the world for Christ and be not ashamed of the gospel! There are over 5 Billion lost people in the world today, and this statistic simply blows me away. We must work in our local churches to get connected and mobilized for Great Commission tasks. In other words, our main goal is to be about making disciples.
There is no other name, but the name of Jesus that brings peace and salvation. Let's bring that name to the nations.
Amen, let it be so.
"This Jesus is the stone that was rejected by you, the builders, which has become the cornerstone. And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved." ESV.
This is another scripture on conversion that highlights the exclusivity of Christ. Evangelical Christians do not make up the belief that Jesus is the only way to salvation. There are ample passages of scripture that point to this doctrine, this being one (John 14:6 being another). There is no other way under the sun to receive salvation except through the blood of Christ Jesus. This has massive implications - with one I would like to highlight today:
Major Implication: If Christ is the only way, and he is, then Christians must evangelize the world for Christ and be not ashamed of the gospel! There are over 5 Billion lost people in the world today, and this statistic simply blows me away. We must work in our local churches to get connected and mobilized for Great Commission tasks. In other words, our main goal is to be about making disciples.
There is no other name, but the name of Jesus that brings peace and salvation. Let's bring that name to the nations.
Amen, let it be so.
In Nashville for Family Visit
This weekend, Bonnie, Marianne, and I have traveled to Franklin, TN to visit Bonnie's parents. Bonnie's parents have recently moved to Franklin, TN (last week) and we are visiting them for the first time here. Johnny and Julia Brundige live in a great area now and we know that we have a great "get away" spot in Franklin, TN!
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
New Covenant
The following is another posting from the past (moore4christ blog) that I am transferring over to this blog. If you have not read this before, I hope this is edifying. If you have already read this, I will be writing new posts in the coming days. This blog post was another response to a collaboration question in Old Testament II. Thank you! jtm
Perhaps the finest expression of Jeremiah’s prophetic preaching is found in 31:31-40. Jeremiah describes the new covenant as “permanent” (see especially 31:35-40). If this new covenant is “permanent,” what is its relationship to the covenant made at Sinai? Does the new covenant supplant the covenant at Sinai? Can this new covenant be broken as was the one at Sinai? Can Jeremiah’s new covenant be equated with the covenant established by Christ’s blood? Why, or why not?
Clearly, the context of Jeremiah 31:31-40 illustrates and describes a permanent, new covenant between God and His people.First I want to quickly answer these questions and then make some observational points in more detail.
What is the relationship to the covenant here described and the covenant made at Mount Sinai? I would say that new covenant does not SUPPLANT the Mosaic Covenant, but it fulfills the covenant. In other words, the covenant made at Sinai is fulfilled ultimately in this new covenant.
Can this new covenant be broken as was the one at Sinai? No, not in an ultimate sense.
Can Jeremiah’s new covenant be equated with the covenant established by Christ’s blood? Yes, I have always equated the two in my interpretation of Jeremiah 31:31-40. I see the covenant provided by the atonement of Christ for our sins and the justification that is found in grace and through faith and repentance to be equal with the new covenant described in Jeremiah 31.
With these brief responses, I would like to make the following points of observation:
Jesus definitely represents and enacts a new covenant, one that is synonymous with the covenant described in our focal discussion. The writer of the book of Hebrews makes this plain in Hebrews Chapter 8. Starting in verse 6, “But as it is, Christ has obtained a ministry that is as much more excellent than the old as the covenant he mediates is better, since it is enacted on better promises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion to look for a second.” (Hebrews 8:6-7). The writer then quotes verbatim Jeremiah 31:31-34 in Hebrews 8:8-12. Thus, it is obvious that the writer of Hebrews through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit equates the Then the writer wraps up the discussion of the covenant by saying in verse 13 of Chapter 8, ‘In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.” This verse raises the earlier questions in the issue – is the Sinai Covenant now abolished or overthrown and to be forgotten?Since Jesus inaugurates this new covenant in his life and ministry, which is fulfilled ultimately in his death, burial, and resurrection, we need to see what Jesus said about the old covenant. Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount said in Matthew 5:17-20: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heave and earth pass away, not an iota, or a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Therefore, whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.” Jesus in this passage clearly is connecting his ministry with the old covenant in that he will be the fulfillment of that covenant. Reading the old covenant (the Law and the Prophets) is not abolished, it is fulfilled in Jesus Christ.But what about Hebrews 8:13? The ESV translation says that the old covenant is obsolete. This at first glance seems to be synonymous with “abolished”. But I believe that this is not what the writer of Hebrews is saying. The writer is not saying that the old covenant is abolished, but that many aspects of the old covenant, heavily dependent on the sacrificial system, is now obsolete given the complete and victorious work of Christ on the cross.Can this new covenant be broken like the old one could? The language of the new covenant in Jeremiah is totally opposite the language of the Sinaitic covenant. This new covenant illustrates a loving God actually doing the action of creating the new covenant “within” the believer. No longer is the covenant externally focused on the obedience of a nation or chosen race. This covenant is forged within the individual believer. We must be careful however to make the distinction that the Old Testament believers were not saved because of their works or in obeying the Law to the letter. Legalism has never saved. Paul in Romans 4 makes clear that even before the Law was instituted on Mt. Sinai, the righteous were saved through faith. Justification has always been through faith alone by grace alone. The difference in the Sinaitic Covenant (the best I can see it right now), is that it encompassed both the remnant of Israel (those who truly believed) and also “nation” of Israel, even including those who were unregenerate. In the new covenant, there is no distinction. In the universal church, there is no such thing as a visible church and invisible church. Yes, there are some denominations that want to place this moniker on the church, but the new covenant will NOT be broken. Once you are regenerate, once you are justified, and as you are sanctified, you will persevere to the end. Yes we are subject to sin, but we will not break the covenant.
Perhaps the finest expression of Jeremiah’s prophetic preaching is found in 31:31-40. Jeremiah describes the new covenant as “permanent” (see especially 31:35-40). If this new covenant is “permanent,” what is its relationship to the covenant made at Sinai? Does the new covenant supplant the covenant at Sinai? Can this new covenant be broken as was the one at Sinai? Can Jeremiah’s new covenant be equated with the covenant established by Christ’s blood? Why, or why not?
Clearly, the context of Jeremiah 31:31-40 illustrates and describes a permanent, new covenant between God and His people.First I want to quickly answer these questions and then make some observational points in more detail.
What is the relationship to the covenant here described and the covenant made at Mount Sinai? I would say that new covenant does not SUPPLANT the Mosaic Covenant, but it fulfills the covenant. In other words, the covenant made at Sinai is fulfilled ultimately in this new covenant.
Can this new covenant be broken as was the one at Sinai? No, not in an ultimate sense.
Can Jeremiah’s new covenant be equated with the covenant established by Christ’s blood? Yes, I have always equated the two in my interpretation of Jeremiah 31:31-40. I see the covenant provided by the atonement of Christ for our sins and the justification that is found in grace and through faith and repentance to be equal with the new covenant described in Jeremiah 31.
With these brief responses, I would like to make the following points of observation:
Jesus definitely represents and enacts a new covenant, one that is synonymous with the covenant described in our focal discussion. The writer of the book of Hebrews makes this plain in Hebrews Chapter 8. Starting in verse 6, “But as it is, Christ has obtained a ministry that is as much more excellent than the old as the covenant he mediates is better, since it is enacted on better promises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion to look for a second.” (Hebrews 8:6-7). The writer then quotes verbatim Jeremiah 31:31-34 in Hebrews 8:8-12. Thus, it is obvious that the writer of Hebrews through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit equates the Then the writer wraps up the discussion of the covenant by saying in verse 13 of Chapter 8, ‘In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.” This verse raises the earlier questions in the issue – is the Sinai Covenant now abolished or overthrown and to be forgotten?Since Jesus inaugurates this new covenant in his life and ministry, which is fulfilled ultimately in his death, burial, and resurrection, we need to see what Jesus said about the old covenant. Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount said in Matthew 5:17-20: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heave and earth pass away, not an iota, or a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Therefore, whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.” Jesus in this passage clearly is connecting his ministry with the old covenant in that he will be the fulfillment of that covenant. Reading the old covenant (the Law and the Prophets) is not abolished, it is fulfilled in Jesus Christ.But what about Hebrews 8:13? The ESV translation says that the old covenant is obsolete. This at first glance seems to be synonymous with “abolished”. But I believe that this is not what the writer of Hebrews is saying. The writer is not saying that the old covenant is abolished, but that many aspects of the old covenant, heavily dependent on the sacrificial system, is now obsolete given the complete and victorious work of Christ on the cross.Can this new covenant be broken like the old one could? The language of the new covenant in Jeremiah is totally opposite the language of the Sinaitic covenant. This new covenant illustrates a loving God actually doing the action of creating the new covenant “within” the believer. No longer is the covenant externally focused on the obedience of a nation or chosen race. This covenant is forged within the individual believer. We must be careful however to make the distinction that the Old Testament believers were not saved because of their works or in obeying the Law to the letter. Legalism has never saved. Paul in Romans 4 makes clear that even before the Law was instituted on Mt. Sinai, the righteous were saved through faith. Justification has always been through faith alone by grace alone. The difference in the Sinaitic Covenant (the best I can see it right now), is that it encompassed both the remnant of Israel (those who truly believed) and also “nation” of Israel, even including those who were unregenerate. In the new covenant, there is no distinction. In the universal church, there is no such thing as a visible church and invisible church. Yes, there are some denominations that want to place this moniker on the church, but the new covenant will NOT be broken. Once you are regenerate, once you are justified, and as you are sanctified, you will persevere to the end. Yes we are subject to sin, but we will not break the covenant.
Monday, July 20, 2009
God Hates the Sin, but Loves the Sinner?
In the continued effort to bring the posts from my old blog (moore4christ) over to this blog, below is a post I published in April of this year and was a submission that I made in a collaboration for Old Testament II. The question as posed by the professor is in red and then my response is in black:
The obvious theme of Psalm 2 is Yahweh’s use of “his anointed” (v. 2) to control rebellious nations. However, not all mentioned in this Psalm are pictured as rebellious and thus as objects of divine wrath. The Psalm closes on a positive note: “How blessed are all who take refuge in Him!” Clearly, the Psalmist believes that the wicked will experience God’s wrath, not his grace. On the other hand, those who bow before him will experience blessing. In light of the Psalmist’s presentation, evaluate the statement: “God hates the sin, but loves the sinner.”
I believe that we talked about this somewhat in an earlier collaboration for Old Testament II, but I am glad to see singular treatment using the 2nd Psalm as the context. I think the previous collaboration discussion was on the equality of God's love - the thought that God loves the entirety of humanity in the same way, equally. There is a sense that in an individualistic and largely democratic society that we live in today, that the thought of equality is certainly a major factor in our idea of freedom. The Declaration of Independence declares that all men are created equal. This has been the clarion call for all disenfranchised persons in the American tradition and it has also had somewhat of an impact on our view of God's approach to the sinner and sin. We run to John 3:16 and read, "For God so loved the world..." or I John 2:2, "He is the propitiation of our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world", and then say that God LOVES the world and LOVES the sinner. God LOVES you and me. When HE was on the cross YOU were on his mind (and in our minds, there is no qualification to that thought - no limitation). Therefore, God even LOVES the unregenerate sinner. But I cannot go that far. Ephesians 2:3 states that we are by nature children of wrath - all humanity. By nature, all humanity is subject to the wrath of God. This is a holy stance against the sinner! Yes, there is an effacacious condescendence by God through Christ to the world because of God's love for the world so that he might save the elect, but God still must stand in holiness against sin and thus the sinner. God hates sin - with wrath and judgment - and the nature of the sinner is SIN. Therefore, God hates the very nature of the sinner. But this is not an EMOTIONAL hatred that we usually attach to the word in human terms. WRATH is not an emotional response from God - it is a response of holiness and according to the sake and glory of HIS NAME. This HATRED is wrought out of the perfection of God's holiness. The only people that the phrase, "God hates the sin, but loves the sinner" would apply to is the regenerate believer - not the unbeliever.
The obvious theme of Psalm 2 is Yahweh’s use of “his anointed” (v. 2) to control rebellious nations. However, not all mentioned in this Psalm are pictured as rebellious and thus as objects of divine wrath. The Psalm closes on a positive note: “How blessed are all who take refuge in Him!” Clearly, the Psalmist believes that the wicked will experience God’s wrath, not his grace. On the other hand, those who bow before him will experience blessing. In light of the Psalmist’s presentation, evaluate the statement: “God hates the sin, but loves the sinner.”
I believe that we talked about this somewhat in an earlier collaboration for Old Testament II, but I am glad to see singular treatment using the 2nd Psalm as the context. I think the previous collaboration discussion was on the equality of God's love - the thought that God loves the entirety of humanity in the same way, equally. There is a sense that in an individualistic and largely democratic society that we live in today, that the thought of equality is certainly a major factor in our idea of freedom. The Declaration of Independence declares that all men are created equal. This has been the clarion call for all disenfranchised persons in the American tradition and it has also had somewhat of an impact on our view of God's approach to the sinner and sin. We run to John 3:16 and read, "For God so loved the world..." or I John 2:2, "He is the propitiation of our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world", and then say that God LOVES the world and LOVES the sinner. God LOVES you and me. When HE was on the cross YOU were on his mind (and in our minds, there is no qualification to that thought - no limitation). Therefore, God even LOVES the unregenerate sinner. But I cannot go that far. Ephesians 2:3 states that we are by nature children of wrath - all humanity. By nature, all humanity is subject to the wrath of God. This is a holy stance against the sinner! Yes, there is an effacacious condescendence by God through Christ to the world because of God's love for the world so that he might save the elect, but God still must stand in holiness against sin and thus the sinner. God hates sin - with wrath and judgment - and the nature of the sinner is SIN. Therefore, God hates the very nature of the sinner. But this is not an EMOTIONAL hatred that we usually attach to the word in human terms. WRATH is not an emotional response from God - it is a response of holiness and according to the sake and glory of HIS NAME. This HATRED is wrought out of the perfection of God's holiness. The only people that the phrase, "God hates the sin, but loves the sinner" would apply to is the regenerate believer - not the unbeliever.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)