Tag Archives: Matthew 26:72

Christianity, Part 4

Posted on by

There are 13 occurrences of πάντας in Luke’s Gospel [see Table below], the Greek word translated all people in And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people (πάντας, a form of πᾶς) to myself.1 Two occurrences found in narrative passages were limited by words immediately following πάντας, and three others were limited by the time and place mentioned in context. There is one more occurrence in a narrative phrase introducing Jesus’ teaching, one in a question Peter asked Jesus about his teaching and six occurrences spoken by Jesus as He taught. I’ll consider these in detail.

And [Jesus] said to all (πάντας, a form of πᾶς), “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will save it.2

In a narrative passage I would assume that πάντας was limited to all who heard Jesus at a particular time and place: Now it happened that as he was praying alone, the disciples were with him.3 But the nature of his message here causes me to question that assumption. It seems to apply beyond the immediate time and place to τις θέλει ὀπίσω μου ἔρχεσθαι, anyone [who] would come after [Jesus].

Given my predisposition it was natural, perhaps inevitable, for me to consider that this desire (θέλει, a form of θέλω) to follow Jesus originated with, or was conjured by, the human individual. It rendered that individual worthy of Jesus’ salvation. The lack of this desire, or one’s inability to conjure it, made one worthy of damnation. Then lightning struck, metaphorically speaking, in the form of Jesus’ saying: No one (οὐδεὶς) can (δύναται, a form of δύναμαι) come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him.4

The desire to follow Jesus on these terms, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily, does not originate with any human individual. It is evidence that one is being drawn by God. And this truth, If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me; For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will save it, is not limited to those who would follow but applies to all. So, πάντας here stands without any limitation of time or place: And he said to all.5

I’d like to consider the fuller version of D. A. Carson’s argument quoted in “What Did Jesus Mean When He Said That he will ‘Draw All Men [and Women] to Myself’?” on the Christian Publishing House Blog:

“On the verb ‘to draw’, cf. notes on 6:44. There, the one who draws is the Father; here [John 12:32], it is the Son, but nothing much should be made of this (5:19)…

John 6:44 quotes Jesus saying: No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.6 John 5:19 reads: So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever the Father does, that the Son does likewise.7

Mr. Carson’s quote continued:

“But the scope and efficacy of the drawing in the two places are quite different. There, the focus is on those individuals whom the Father gives to the Son, whom the Son infallibly preserves and raises up at the last day. Here, ‘all men’ reminds the reader of what triggered these statements, viz. the arrival of the Greeks…

The “arrival of the Greeks” is a reference to the following (John 12:20-23 ESV):

Now among those who went up to worship at the feast were some Greeks. So these came to Philip, who was from Bethsaida in Galilee, and asked him, “Sir, we wish to see Jesus.” Philip8 went and told Andrew; Andrew and Philip went9 and10 told Jesus. And Jesus answered11 them, “The hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified.

I agree that “the scope…of the drawing [is] quite different” in John 6:44 and 12:32. The Father draws a select few relative to all who have lived, or will ever live, on earth prior to Jesus’ crucifixion. Jesus promises to draw all afterward. But I fail to see how the “arrival of the Greeks” as described above alters the “efficacy of the drawing.”

In the KJV πάντας was translated all men (ESV: all people), but the Greek is not πάντας ἄνθρωπον or πάντας ἀνθρώπους as if Jesus intended to limit πάντας in some way. It is simply πάντας. Yet in Mr. Carson’s argument the “arrival of the Greeks” so alters the efficacy of Jesus’ drawing that πάντας ἑλκύσω (literally: “all I will draw”)…

…means ‘all people without distinction, Jews and Gentiles alike’, not all individuals without exception, since the surrounding context has just established judgment as a major theme (v. 31), a time for distinguishing between those who love their lives (and therefore lose them) and those who hate their lives (and therefore keep them for eternal life, v. 25).”

John 12:31 reads: Now is the judgment of this world; now will the ruler of this world be cast out.12 This indicates to me that Mr. Carson thought the judgment of this world and the casting out of the ruler of this world were opposed somehow to Jesus drawing all to Himself. John 12:25 reads: Whoever loves his life loses13 it, and whoever hates his life in this world will keep it for eternal life.14

I want to consider this in context (John 12:23-26 ESV):

And Jesus answered them, “The hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified. Truly, truly, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit. Whoever loves his life loses it, and whoever hates his life in this world will keep it for eternal life. If anyone serves me, he must follow me; and where I am, there will my servant be also. If15 anyone serves me, the Father will honor him.

All that follows falls under the heading: The hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified.16 Jesus referred to Himself here as the Son of Man but whenever I hear this phrase I think also of those who follow Him. Truly, truly, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit.17 He spoke of his own death but also the death of those who would follow Him. Whoever loves his life loses it, and whoever hates his life in this world will keep it for eternal life.18 This is true of the Son of Man as it is true of all born of Him. And if I seek more clarification, what it means to hate my life in this world, Jesus spoke directly to us: If anyone serves me, he must follow me.19

This brings me back to the beginning of this essay:

If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me.20

To hate my life in this world is to deny myself (I do not know the man21) in this world, to take up [my] cross daily in this world and to follow Jesus. Here it becomes clear that our old self born of the flesh loves its life in this world, does not deny itself, take up its cross daily or follow Jesus: We know that our old self (ὁ παλαιὸς ἡμῶν ἄνθρωπος) was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin.22 It is the new self (τὸν νέον), which is being renewed in knowledge after the image of its creator23 who comprehends that, I have been crucified with Christ, and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; So the life I now live in the body, I live because of the faithfulness of the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me,24 is not a hyperbolic expression of Paul’s personal devotion, but normative for all who believe.

Considered as a whole I can’t fit Mr. Carson’s argument into my understanding of a rational argument against And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people (πάντας, a form of πᾶς) to myself.25 It doesn’t line up in any way that persuades me that Jesus intended to limit πάντας here, nor cause me to doubt the efficacy of Jesus’ drawing relative to that of his Father. In fact, this argument resolves for me as: “Jesus didn’t say I…will draw all…to myself because that conflicts with the thoughts of my religious mind regarding the judgment of this world.” I prefer now to let my thoughts be shaped by the mind of Christ where, Now is the judgment of this world; now will the ruler of this world be cast out; And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself,26 is one continuous thought rather than a contradiction.

The next occurrence of πάντας in Luke’s Gospel follows (Luke 12:41 ESV):

Peter said,27 “Lord, are you telling this parable for us or for all (πάντας, a form of πᾶς)?”

The parable to which Peter referred follows (Luke 12:35-40 ESV):

“Stay dressed for action and keep your lamps burning, and be like men who are waiting for their master to come home28 from the wedding feast, so that they may open the door to him at once when he comes and knocks. Blessed are those servants whom the master finds awake when he comes. Truly, I say to you, he will dress himself for service and have them recline at table, and he will come and serve them. If29 he comes in the second watch,30 or in the third, and finds them awake, blessed are those servants!31 But know this, that if the master of the house had known at what hour the thief was coming,32 he would not have left his house to be broken into.33 You34 also must be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect.”

Jesus’ answer to Peter’s question is interesting (Luke 12:42-48 ESV):

And35 the Lord said, “Who then is the faithful and wise manager, whom his master will set over his household, to give them their portion of food at the proper time? Blessed is that servant whom his master will find so doing when he comes. Truly, I say to you, he will set him over all his possessions. But if that servant says to himself, ‘My master is delayed in coming,’ and begins to beat the male and female servants, and to eat and drink and get drunk, the master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he does not know, and will cut him in pieces and put him with the unfaithful. And that servant who knew his master’s will but did not get ready or act according to his will, will receive a severe beating [Table]. But the one who did not know, and did what deserved a beating, will receive a light beating. Everyone to whom much was given, of him much will be required, and from him to whom they entrusted much, they will demand the more.

I suppose my first thought would be that this parable is a warning to the ambitious: Who then is the faithful and wise manager, whom his master will set over his household, to give them their portion of food at the proper time? Blessed is that servant whom his master will find so doing when he comes. Truly, I say to you, he will set him over all his possessions.36 But since the ambitious are always with us, I want to stay alert, too, just for self-preservation. Even if they don’t succumb to alcohol the ambitious are very prone to error and desire to take others along with them. They’re ambitious.

Though the parable speaks of a master who is away, Jesus did not leave us orphaned (John 14:18-26). This is not about following a vague memory of a predetermined plan but being led by the Holy Spirit rather than someone else (including oneself). A light beating is insufficient cause to be ignorant of my master’s will. So, first and foremost I follow the Holy Spirit through the Bible and then in daily life.

So, how did Jesus answer Peter’s question: Lord, are you telling this parable for us or for all (πάντας, a form of πᾶς)?37 He answered it at a specific time when God drew a select few to Jesus. But if I believe his promise, And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people (πάντας, a form of πᾶς) to myself,38 I can hear his answer as yes and yes. Yes, it is for you, and, yes, it is for all.

The translators of the NET rendered Peter’s question: Lord, are you telling this parable for us or for everyone (πάντας, a form of πᾶς)?39 The blog post I’ve been quoting reads: “Here we must go a bit further in our understanding of verse 32: But I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men [πάντας, a form of πᾶς] to myself. Certainly, the Lord had no intention that we should read into this text the idea that everyone would be saved because we know only believers find eternal life.”40

Does faith arise spontaneously in the hearts of the unrighteous who do not seek for God? I don’t think so. I’m also having difficulty understanding how Jesus by drawing all to Himself might impact faith adversely. The question I remember most from my unbelief is: If you’re such a big deal, where are you? How does the answer, I’m drawing you to Myself, impede faith?

I do recall the Scripture on which this argument, “we know only believers find eternal life,” is based (John 3:16 ESV [Table]):

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.”

The Greek word πᾶς, translated whoever here, is limited by the words immediately following it: ὁ πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν (believes in him). This was translated everyone who believes in him in the NET. The phrase should not perish was μὴ ἀπόληται in Greek. The translation should…perish was intended to signal a verb in the subjunctive mood to those who already know Greek. It was translated will not perish in the NET despite the fact that the verb was ἀπόληται rather than ἀπολεῖται, because this is a result clause.

The subjunctive mood indicates probability or objective possibility. The action of the verb will possibly happen, depending on certain objective factors or circumstances. It is oftentimes used in conditional statements (i.e. ‘If…then…’ clauses) or in purpose clauses. However if the subjunctive mood is used in a purpose or result clause, then the action should not be thought of as a possible result, but should be viewed as a definite outcome that will happen as a result of another stated action.41

The author of this blog post was correct, writing, “we know only believers find eternal life.” But does it then follow that “the Lord had no intention that we should read into this text the idea that everyone would be saved”? Can we take this knowledge and use it as a rule to judge what Jesus can and cannot say? Consider the next verse (John 3:17 ESV [Table]):

For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.

The Greek word translated might be saved was σωθῇ (a form of σώζω), another verb in the subjunctive mood. It was translated should be saved in the NET. Again, this is a result clause. The meaning in Greek is: God sent his Son into the world…in order that the world [will] be saved through him. The inference here is not: Jesus cannot draw all to Himself because “we know only believers find eternal life.” The inference of this knowledge is that all whom Jesus draws to Himself will believe.

I’ll continue with the occurrences of πάντας in Luke’s Gospel in another essay. The table mentioned above follows.

Occurrences of πάντας in Luke
Reference NET Parallel Greek ESV
Luke 1:65 ἐγένετο ἐπὶ πάντας φόβος τοὺς περιοικοῦντας αὐτούς fear came on all their neighbors
Luke 4:36 ἐγένετο θάμβος ἐπὶ πάντας they were all amazed
Luke 5:9 πάντας τοὺς σὺν αὐτῷ all who were with him
Luke 6:10 περιβλεψάμενος πάντας αὐτοὺς looking around at them all
Luke 6:19 ἰᾶτο πάντας healed them all
Luke 9:23 Ἔλεγεν δὲ πρὸς πάντας And he said to all
Luke 12:41 πρὸς ἡμᾶς τὴν παραβολὴν ταύτην λέγεις ἢ καὶ πρὸς πάντας are you telling this parable for us or for all?
Luke 13:2 δοκεῖτε ὅτι οἱ Γαλιλαῖοι οὗτοι ἁμαρτωλοὶ παρὰ πάντας τοὺς Γαλιλαίους ἐγένοντο do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans
Luke 13:4 δοκεῖτε ὅτι αὐτοὶ ὀφειλέται ἐγένοντο παρὰ πάντας τοὺς ἀνθρώπους τοὺς κατοικοῦντας Ἰερουσαλήμ do you think that they were worse offenders than all the others who lived in Jerusalem
Luke 13:28 πάντας τοὺς προφήτας all the prophets
Luke 17:27 ἦλθεν ὁ κατακλυσμὸς καὶ ἀπώλεσεν πάντας the flood came and destroyed them all
Luke 17:29 ἔβρεξεν πῦρ καὶ θεῖον ἀπ᾿ οὐρανοῦ καὶ ἀπώλεσεν πάντας fire and sulfur rained from heaven and destroyed them all
Luke 21:35 πάντας τοὺς καθημένους ἐπὶ πρόσωπον πάσης τῆς γῆς all who dwell on the face of the whole earth

Tables comparing the Greek of John 12:22, 23; 12:25; 12:26; Luke 12:41; 12:36; 12:38-40 and 12:42 in the NET and KJV follow.

John 12:22, 23 (NET)

John 12:22, 23 (KJV)
Philip went and told Andrew, and they both went and told Jesus. Philip cometh and telleth Andrew: and again Andrew and Philip tell Jesus.

John 12:22 (NET Parallel Greek)

John 12:22 (Stephanus Textus Receptus)

John 12:22 (Byzantine Majority Text)
ἔρχεται ὁ Φίλιππος καὶ λέγει τῷ Ἀνδρέᾳ, ἔρχεται Ἀνδρέας καὶ Φίλιππος καὶ λέγουσιν τῷ Ἰησοῦ ερχεται φιλιππος και λεγει τω ανδρεα και παλιν ανδρεας και φιλιππος λεγουσιν τω ιησου ερχεται φιλιππος και λεγει τω ανδρεα και παλιν ανδρεας και φιλιππος λεγουσιν τω ιησου
Jesus replied, “The time has come for the Son of Man to be glorified. And Jesus answered them, saying, The hour is come, that the Son of man should be glorified.

John 12:23 (NET Parallel Greek)

John 12:23 (Stepanus Textus Receptus)

John 12:23 (Byzantine Majority Text)
ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς ἀποκρίνεται αὐτοῖς λέγων· ἐλήλυθεν ἡ ὥρα ἵνα δοξασθῇ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ο δε ιησους απεκρινατο αυτοις λεγων εληλυθεν η ωρα ινα δοξασθη ο υιος του ανθρωπου ο δε ιησους απεκρινατο αυτοις λεγων εληλυθεν η ωρα ινα δοξασθη ο υιος του ανθρωπου

John 12:25 (NET)

John 12:25 (KJV)
The one who loves his life destroys it, and the one who hates his life in this world guards it for eternal life. He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal.

John 12:25 (NET Parallel Greek)

John 12:25 (Stepanus Textus Receptus)

John 12:25 (Byzantine Majority Text)
ὁ φιλῶν τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ ἀπολλύει αὐτήν, καὶ ὁ μισῶν τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ τούτῳ εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον φυλάξει αὐτήν ο φιλων την ψυχην αυτου απολεσει αυτην και ο μισων την ψυχην αυτου εν τω κοσμω τουτω εις ζωην αιωνιον φυλαξει αυτην ο φιλων την ψυχην αυτου απολεσει αυτην και ο μισων την ψυχην αυτου εν τω κοσμω τουτω εις ζωην αιωνιον φυλαξει αυτην

John 12:26 (NET)

John 12:26 (KJV)
If anyone wants to serve me, he must follow me, and where I am, my servant will be too. If anyone serves me, the Father will honor him. If any man serve me, let him follow me; and where I am, there shall also my servant be: if any man serve me, him will my Father honour.

John 12:26 (NET Parallel Greek)

John 12:26 (Stepanus Textus Receptus)

John 12:26 (Byzantine Majority Text)
ἐὰν ἐμοί τις διακονῇ, ἐμοὶ ἀκολουθείτω, καὶ ὅπου εἰμὶ ἐγὼ ἐκεῖ καὶ ὁ διάκονος ὁ ἐμὸς ἔσται· ἐάν τις ἐμοὶ διακονῇ τιμήσει αὐτὸν ὁ πατήρ εαν εμοι διακονη τις εμοι ακολουθειτω και οπου ειμι εγω εκει και ο διακονος ο εμος εσται και εαν τις εμοι διακονη τιμησει αυτον ο πατηρ εαν εμοι διακονη τις εμοι ακολουθειτω και οπου ειμι εγω εκει και ο διακονος ο εμος εσται και εαν τις εμοι διακονη τιμησει αυτον ο πατηρ

Luke 12:41 (NET)

Luke 12:41 (KJV)
Then Peter said, “Lord, are you telling this parable for us or for everyone?” Then Peter said unto him, Lord, speakest thou this parable unto us, or even to all?

Luke 12:41 (NET Parallel Greek)

Luke 12:41 (Stephanus Textus Receptus)

Luke 12:41 (Byzantine Majority Text)
Εἶπεν δὲ ὁ Πέτρος· κύριε, πρὸς ἡμᾶς τὴν παραβολὴν ταύτην λέγεις ἢ καὶ πρὸς πάντας ειπεν δε αυτω ο πετρος κυριε προς ημας την παραβολην ταυτην λεγεις η και προς παντας ειπεν δε αυτω ο πετρος κυριε προς ημας την παραβολην ταυτην λεγεις η και προς παντας

Luke 12:36 (NET)

Luke 12:36 (KJV)
be like people waiting for their master to come back from the wedding celebration, so that when he comes and knocks, they can immediately open the door for him. And ye yourselves like unto men that wait for their lord, when he will return from the wedding; that when he cometh and knocketh, they may open unto him immediately.

Luke 12:36 (NET Parallel Greek)

Luke 12:36 (Stephanus Textus Receptus)

Luke 12:36 (Byzantine Majority Text)
καὶ ὑμεῖς ὅμοιοι ἀνθρώποις προσδεχομένοις τὸν κύριον ἑαυτῶν πότε ἀναλύσῃ ἐκ τῶν γάμων, ἵνα ἐλθόντος καὶ κρούσαντος εὐθέως ἀνοίξωσιν αὐτῷ και υμεις ομοιοι ανθρωποις προσδεχομενοις τον κυριον εαυτων ποτε αναλυσει εκ των γαμων ινα ελθοντος και κρουσαντος ευθεως ανοιξωσιν αυτω και υμεις ομοιοι ανθρωποις προσδεχομενοις τον κυριον εαυτων ποτε αναλυση εκ των γαμων ινα ελθοντος και κρουσαντος ευθεως ανοιξωσιν αυτω

Luke 12:38-40 (NET)

Luke 12:38-40 (KJV)
Even if he comes in the second or third watch of the night and finds them alert, blessed are those slaves! And if he shall come in the second watch, or come in the third watch, and find them so, blessed are those servants.

Luke 12:38 (NET Parallel Greek)

Luke 12:38 (Stephanus Textus Receptus)

Luke 12:38 (Byzantine Majority Text)
κὰν ἐν τῇ δευτέρᾳ κὰν ἐν τῇ τρίτῃ φυλακῇ ἔλθῃ καὶ εὕρῃ οὕτως, μακάριοι εἰσιν ἐκεῖνοι και εαν ελθη εν τη δευτερα φυλακη και εν τη τριτη φυλακη ελθη και ευρη ουτως μακαριοι εισιν οι δουλοι εκεινοι και εαν ελθη εν τη δευτερα φυλακη και εν τη τριτη φυλακη ελθη και ευρη ουτως μακαριοι εισιν οι δουλοι εκεινοι
But understand this: If the owner of the house had known at what hour the thief was coming, he would not have let his house be broken into. And this know, that if the goodman of the house had known what hour the thief would come, he would have watched, and not have suffered his house to be broken through.

Luke 12:39 (NET Parallel Greek)

Luke 12:39 (Stephanus Textus Receptus)

Luke 12:39 (Byzantine Majority Text)
τοῦτο δὲ γινώσκετε ὅτι εἰ ᾔδει ὁ οἰκοδεσπότης ποίᾳ ὥρᾳ ὁ κλέπτης ἔρχεται, οὐκ |ἂν| ἀφῆκεν διορυχθῆναι τὸν οἶκον αὐτοῦ τουτο δε γινωσκετε οτι ει ηδει ο οικοδεσποτης ποια ωρα ο κλεπτης ερχεται εγρηγορησεν αν και ουκ αν αφηκεν διορυγηναι τον οικον αυτου τουτο δε γινωσκετε οτι ει ηδει ο οικοδεσποτης ποια ωρα ο κλεπτης ερχεται εγρηγορησεν αν και ουκ αν αφηκεν διορυγηναι τον οικον αυτου
You also must be ready because the Son of Man will come at an hour when you do not expect him.” Be ye therefore ready also: for the Son of man cometh at an hour when ye think not.

Luke 12:40 (NET Parallel Greek)

Luke 12:40 (Stephanus Textus Receptus)

Luke 12:40 (Byzantine Majority Text)
καὶ ὑμεῖς γίνεσθε ἕτοιμοι, ὅτι ᾗ ὥρᾳ οὐ δοκεῖτε ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἔρχεται και υμεις ουν γινεσθε ετοιμοι οτι η ωρα ου δοκειτε ο υιος του ανθρωπου ερχεται και υμεις ουν γινεσθε ετοιμοι οτι η ωρα ου δοκειτε ο υιος του ανθρωπου ερχεται

Luke 12:42 (NET)

Luke 12:42 (KJV)
The Lord replied, “Who then is the faithful and wise manager, whom the master puts in charge of his household servants, to give them their allowance of food at the proper time? And the Lord said, Who then is that faithful and wise steward, whom his lord shall make ruler over his household, to give them their portion of meat in due season?

Luke 12:42 (NET Parallel Greek)

Luke 12:42 (Stephanus Textus Receptus)

Luke 12:42 (Byzantine Majority Text)
καὶ εἶπεν ὁ κύριος· τίς ἄρα ἐστὶν ὁ πιστὸς οἰκονόμος ὁ φρόνιμος, ὃν καταστήσει ὁ κύριος ἐπὶ τῆς θεραπείας αὐτοῦ τοῦ διδόναι ἐν καιρῷ |τὸ| σιτομέτριον ειπεν δε ο κυριος τις αρα εστιν ο πιστος οικονομος και φρονιμος ον καταστησει ο κυριος επι της θεραπειας αυτου του διδοναι εν καιρω το σιτομετριον ειπεν δε ο κυριος τις αρα εστιν ο πιστος οικονομος και φρονιμος ον καταστησει ο κυριος επι της θεραπειας αυτου του διδοναι εν καιρω το σιτομετριον

1 John 12:32 (ESV)

2 Luke 9:23, 24 (ESV) Table

3 Luke 9:18a (ESV)

4 John 6:44a (ESV) Table

5 Luke 9:23a (ESV)

6 John 6:44 (ESV) Table

7 John 5:19 (ESV) Table

8 The NET parallel Greek text and NA28 had the article ὁ preceding Philip. The Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text did not.

9 The NET parallel Greek text and NA28 had ἔρχεται here, where the Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had και παλιν (KJV: and again).

12 John 12:31 (ESV)

13 The NET parallel Greek text and NA28 had ἀπολλύει (NET: destroys) here in the present tense, where the Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had απολεσει (KJV: shall lose) in the future tense.

14 John 12:25 (ESV)

15 The Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had the conjunction και preceding If. The NET parallel Greek text and NA28 did not.

16 John 12:23 (ESV)

17 John 12:24 (ESV)

18 John 12:25 (ESV)

19 John 12:26a (ESV)

20 Luke 9:23 (ESV) Table

21 Matthew 26:72b (ESV) Table

22 Romans 6:6 (ESV)

23 Colossians 3:10b (ESV)

24 Galatians 2:20 (NET)

25 John 12:32 (ESV)

26 John 12:31, 32 (ESV)

27 The Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had αυτω (KJV: unto him) here. The NET parallel Greek text and NA28 did not.

29 The NET parallel Greek text and NA28 had κὰν here and preceding third watch (NET: or), where the Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had και εαν ελθη (KJV: And if he shall come) and και (KJV: or) preceding in the third watch. The NET parallel Greek text and NA28 had the verb ἔλθῃ only after third watch rather than both locations as the Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had.

30 The Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had φυλακη here and again after third. The NET parallel Greek text and NA28 had φυλακῇ only after third.

32 The Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had εγρηγορησεν αν και (KJV: he would have watched, and) here. The NET parallel Greek text and NA28 did not.

33 The NET parallel Greek text and NA28 had διορυχθῆναι here, where the Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had διορυγηναι (KJV: to be broken through).

34 The Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had ουν (KJV: therefore) here. The NET parallel Greek text and NA28 did not.

36 Luke 12:42-44 (ESV)

37 Luke 12:41 (ESV)

38 John 12:32 (ESV)

39 Luke 12:41 (NET)

Sowing to the Flesh, Part 2

Posted on by

We religious folk of a Christian persuasion are fixated on life and death, heaven and hell.  Jesus was fixated on fulfilling the Scriptures.  How then would the scriptures that say it must happen this way be fulfilled?[1] (πληρωθῶσιν, a form of πληρόω) He asked rhetorically when Peter took up arms to defend Him.  Up to that moment Jesus’ disciples were willing to follow Him, even to death.  But upon his insistence to submit quietly to death to fulfill the Scriptures they fled.

I do not know the man![2] Peter declared.

Jesus was not the Messiah his religion taught him to expect.  Even after his resurrection Jesus’ disciples wanted Him to conform to their religious image: Lord, is this the time when you are restoring the kingdom to Israel?[3] they asked.  Tracey R. Rich expressed both a modern and an ancient understanding of this in two very succinct paragraphs.[4]

Jews do not believe that Jesus was the mashiach. Assuming that he existed, and assuming that the Christian scriptures are accurate in describing him (both matters that are debatable), he simply did not fulfill the mission of the mashiach as it is described in the biblical passages cited above [Isaiah 2:2-4; 11:2-5, 10, 11-12; 42:1; Jeremiah 23:5, 8; 30:3; 33:15, 18; Hosea 3:4-5; Micah 4:2-3; Zephaniah 3:13; Zechariah 14:9]. Jesus did not do any of the things that the scriptures said the messiah would do.

On the contrary, another Jew born about a century later came far closer to fulfilling the messianic ideal than Jesus did. His name was Shimeon ben Kosiba, known as Bar Kokhba (son of a star), and he was a charismatic, brilliant, but brutal warlord. Rabbi Akiba, one of the greatest scholars in Jewish history, believed that Bar Kokhba was the mashiach. Bar Kokhba fought a war against the Roman Empire, catching the Tenth Legion by surprise and retaking Jerusalem. He resumed sacrifices at the site of the Temple and made plans to rebuild the Temple. He established a provisional government and began to issue coins in its name. This is what the Jewish people were looking for in a mashiach; Jesus clearly does not fit into this mold. Ultimately, however, the Roman Empire crushed his revolt and killed Bar Kokhba. After his death, all acknowledged that he was not the mashiach.

Rather than frustration with his disciples’ failure to know Him Jesus exhibited supreme confidence in his own Holy Spirit (John 16:12-14): You are not permitted to know the times or periods that the Father has set by his own authority, He said.  But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the farthest parts of the earth.[5]

Enter through the narrow gate, Jesus said, because the gate is wide and the way is spacious that leads to destruction (ἀπώλειαν, a form of ἀπώλεια), and there are many who enter through it.  But the gate is narrow and the way is difficult that leads to life, and there are few who find it.[6]  What happens if I approach this with Jesus’ fixation rather than my own?  Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets, He said.  I have not come to abolish these things but to fulfill (πληρῶσαι, another form of πληρόω) them.[7]  What if ἀπώλειαν meant a destruction of corruption—being completely severed from the righteousness Jesus has provided us here and now through his death and resurrection and the power of his Holy Spirit—rather than an eternal sojourn in a lake of fire?

Instead of an immutable prophecy of his relative failure to accomplish his Father’s mission—For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world should be saved through him[8]—we have Jesus’ warning that the church will do a less than stellar job of imparting the Gospel of his grace.  But this understanding is only evident back in context (Matthew 7:11-16a NET):

If you then, although you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him!  [Luke was explicit that these good gifts are the Holy Spirit.]  In everything, treat others as you would want them to treat you, for this fulfills (ἐστιν, a form of ἐστί; literally, is) the law and the prophets.  Enter through the narrow gate, because the gate is wide and the way is spacious that leads to [corruption] (ἀπώλειαν, a form of ἀπώλεια), and there are many who enter through it.  But the gate is narrow and the way is difficult that leads to life, and there are few who find it.  Watch out for false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are voracious wolves.  You will recognize them by their fruit.

None of this is to wag my finger at pastors, priests and Bible teachers, but to appreciate Jesus’ saying: Children, how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God![9]  I feel terribly inept at explaining what it’s like to live by the Spirit.  I stumbled over progressive sanctification.  The knowledge enshrined in churches as doctrine, however, was not the issue.  A table of quotes from Presbyterian, Baptist and Christian & Missionary Alliance perspectives on progressive sanctification follows.

Progressive Sanctification
Presbyterian Baptist

C&MA
“Sanctification is the work of God’s free grace, whereby we are renewed in the whole man after the image of God, and are enabled more and more to die unto sin, and live unto righteousness.” What God has begun in regeneration He will work to continue without interruption throughout the believer’s life. All Christians understand first the first reality: that Christ’s blood has atoned for their sins and they no longer need to fear eternal separation from God. But most Christians do not understand or experience the second reality—the fullness of the Holy Spirit in their lives.
“The Lord Jesus has undertaken everything that His people’s souls require; not only to deliver them from the guilt of their sins by His atoning death, but from the dominion of their sins by placing in their hearts the Holy Spirit; not only to justify them, but to sanctify them.” It involves our availability to the Holy Spirit, our separation from sin, and our growth in the likeness of Christ. Every Christian is a sanctified person, belonging to Christ, and therefore should keep from immorality (1 Cor. 6:13-14; 2 Cor. 7:1). We are involved in a lifetime struggle against sin and a moment-by-moment submission to the Holy Spirit for victory. The New Testament clearly teaches that there are two kinds of Christians. In 1 Corinthians 3:1-4, Paul talks about Christians who are “spiritual” and contrasts them with those who are “worldly,” or “carnal.” In Romans 7 and 8, the comparison is between those believers who are self-propelled and those who are Spirit driven. In Ephesians 5:18, he implies that some are “filled” and some are “not filled.”
The Lord has given to us His Spirit, and by Him communicates His own life to the justified believer. Holiness is divinely wrought within Christians. Christ enables us to walk in holiness. It [to “present your bodies a living sacrifice”] is a choice we make as believers. No one else can make that choice for us. It is self-determined and is repeated often. The opportunity to experience the two realities of sanctification is available to every believer. The path to the Spirit-filled life requires taking faith-filled risks, which always involves change.
As we look at Christ we are changed into the image of Christ, by the work of the Spirit of God. The Holy Spirit indwells the believer for the purpose of enabling us to overcome sin and conform us to the likeness of Christ. When we “walk by the Spirit” we do not carry out the deeds of the flesh, but produce “the fruit of the Spirit” (Gal. 5:16, 22). Surrender We can’t make ourselves holy any more than we can make ourselves saved—we become holy only by realizing that we haven’t got what it takes to be holy (Romans 6:11; Romans 12:1-2).

Accept Christ is our Sanctifier in the same way that He is our Savior (Colossians 2:6; Galatians 2:20).

Abide We maintain a continuous relationship with Jesus through obedience to His Word (John 15:1-11).
Our dependence upon the Holy Spirit is not something that is attained once for all, but is the result of a daily struggle and a constantly renewed commitment.

God will not give up on His goal of making you become like Christ. He will not give up on you until the day He presents you complete, perfect, and mature to the Father in heaven.

These were my religious influences growing up.  I have nothing but minor quibbles over words (obedience, for instance) with any of these statements individually and appreciate all of them together.  I even checked the Catholic catechism.  Sanctification was a subcategory of justification there rather than a separate topic but still I have no serious objection to anything in it.  Oddly enough, I found words closer to my own misunderstanding in the Catholic catechism under the heading III. MERIT, line 2010:

Since the initiative belongs to God in the order of grace, no one can merit the initial grace of forgiveness and justification, at the beginning of conversion. Moved by the Holy Spirit and by charity, we can then merit for ourselves and for others the graces needed for our sanctification, for the increase of grace and charity, and for the attainment of eternal life. Even temporal goods like health and friendship can be merited in accordance with God’s wisdom. These graces and goods are the object of Christian prayer. Prayer attends to the grace we need for meritorious actions.

In my misunderstanding I thought positional sanctification was God’s work in Christ and progressive sanctification[10] was up to me to accomplish.  I grew up in a Catholic neighborhood but I never read the catechism.  Besides, line 2011 is fairly clear on this:

The charity of Christ is the source in us of all our merits before God. Grace, by uniting us to Christ in active love, ensures the supernatural quality of our acts and consequently their merit before God and before men. The saints have always had a lively awareness that their merits were pure grace.

The charity of Christ is ἀγάπη in the New Testament, the love that is an aspect of the fruit of the Spirit, the love that is the fulfillment of the law.  The relative failure of the church to impart the Gospel of grace was not a lack of knowledge.  So is it in the execution, the way that knowledge is imparted?  Here I’m reminded of an observation that made little sense to me until this very moment: Churchmen liked me better when I was striving on my own to keep rules than when I began to try to live by the Spirit.

My use of churchmen requires some explanation.  I don’t necessarily mean clergy.  And I don’t mean men exclusively.  The best explanation I can imagine is a profile.  Churchmen aren’t believers in the sense that they have any awareness of a crisis moment that marks a difference in their lives between unbelief and belief.  They are probably the children or grandchildren of believers.  Christianity seems natural to them and they have never strayed far from it.  But fitting a profile doesn’t necessarily mean that one did the “crime.”  The “crime” in this case is too facile an identification with the local church in which one takes a leading role: “My church is the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through my church.”  But the real crime was that I idolized churchmen and coveted their status.

Churches as institutions have their own agendas.  I fit into those agendas better when I obey their rules.  In other words, churchmen are institutionally biased to favor compliant hypocrites, actors.  This is not to say that they are necessarily hypocrites themselves.  It is to say that they have little experience with any struggle to live by the Spirit.  Their instruction to those of us who do have trouble takes the form of platitudes—”sin is just bad habits which can be overcome by good habits“—techniques for inculcating said good habits and rules to prohibit bad ones, as opposed to faith in Jesus by his Holy Spirit.

Rules are neat and orderly.  Living by the Spirit is messy: When you come together, each one has a song, has a lesson, has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation.[11]  Churchmen (I will say for the sake of argument) decided long ago that we should sit silently in neat rows, stand when we were told to stand, sing what we were told to sing and listen to the lesson the church wanted us to hear.  My church allowed revelations, I suppose, during testimony time.  (I thought testimonies were about all the good things God did for people who were good and “obedient,” you know, churchmen.)  Tongues and interpretations?  Forget about it!

And, frankly, I intend all of this more as a metaphor for imparting the Gospel of grace.  I don’t really care how a church service is organized as much as I care whether someone who doesn’t know how to be led by the Spirit of God can learn that there.  And here I return to Martin Luther.

He lived in a created cosmos where it is hard… to enter the kingdom of God.  He grew up in a religious system partially corrupted by false teachers and false prophets.  (The alternative—Jesus killed all the false teachers and false prophets and sent them to hell before they had any influence on anyone else—is untenable to me.)  Martin Luther, by the Holy Spirit, recognized some of the corrupting influences that plagued him and wrote to correct them.  But was Martin Luther perfect and totally free of error himself?

The Luther/Graebner commentary on the fruit of the Spirit[12] follows:

The Apostle does not speak of the works of the Spirit as he spoke of the works of the flesh, but he attaches to these Christian virtues a better name. He calls them the fruits of the Spirit.

LOVE

It would have been enough to mention only the single fruit of love, for love embraces all the fruits of the Spirit. In I Corinthians 13, Paul attributes to love all the fruits of the Spirit: “Charity suffereth long, and is kind,” etc. Here he lets love stand by itself among other fruits of the Spirit to remind the Christians to love one another, “in honor preferring one another,” to esteem others more than themselves because they have Christ and the Holy Ghost within them.

JOY

Joy means sweet thoughts of Christ, melodious hymns and psalms, praises and thanksgiving, with which Christians instruct, inspire, and refresh themselves. God does not like doubt and dejection. He hates dreary doctrine, gloomy and melancholy thought. God likes cheerful hearts. He did not send His Son to fill us with sadness, but to gladden our hearts. For this reason the prophets, apostles, and Christ Himself urge, yes, command us to rejoice and be glad. “Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem; behold, thy king cometh unto thee.” (Zech. 9:9.) In the Psalms we are repeatedly told to be “joyful in the Lord.” Paul says: “Rejoice in the Lord always.” Christ says: “Rejoice, for your names are written in heaven.”

PEACE

Peace towards God and men. Christians are to be peaceful and quiet. Not argumentative, not hateful, but thoughtful and patient. There can be no peace without longsuffering, and therefore Paul lists this virtue next.

LONGSUFFERING

Longsuffering is that quality which enables a person to bear adversity, injury, reproach, and makes them patient to wait for the improvement of those who have done him wrong. When the devil finds that he cannot overcome certain persons by force he tries to overcome them in the long run. He knows that we are weak and cannot stand anything long. Therefore he repeats his temptation time and again until he succeeds. To withstand his continued assaults we must be longsuffering and patiently wait for the devil to get tired of his game.

GENTLENESS

Gentleness in conduct and life. True followers of the Gospel must not be sharp and bitter, but gentle, mild, courteous, and soft-spoken, which should encourage others to seek their company. Gentleness can overlook other people’s faults and cover them up. Gentleness is always glad to give in to others. Gentleness can get along with forward and difficult persons, according to the old pagan saying: “You must know the manners of your friends, but you must not hate them.” Such a gentle person was our Savior Jesus Christ, as the Gospel portrays Him. Of Peter it is recorded that he wept whenever he remembered the sweet gentleness of Christ in His daily contact with people. Gentleness is an excellent virtue and very useful in every walk of life.

GOODNESS

A person is good when he is willing to help others in their need.

FAITH

In listing faith among the fruits of the Spirit, Paul obviously does not mean faith in Christ, but faith in men. Such faith is not suspicious of people but believes the best. Naturally the possessor of such faith will be deceived, but he lets it pass. He is ready to believe all men, but he will not trust all men. Where this virtue is lacking men are suspicious, forward, and wayward and will believe nothing nor yield to anybody. No matter how well a person says or does anything, they will find fault with it, and if you do not humor them you can never please them. It is quite impossible to get along with them. Such faith in people therefore, is quite necessary. What kind of life would this be if one person could not believe another person?

MEEKNESS

A person is meek when he is not quick to get angry. Many things occur in daily life to provoke a person’s anger, but the Christian gets over his anger by meekness.

TEMPERANCE

Christians are to lead sober and chaste lives. They should not be adulterers, fornicators, or sensualists. They should not be quarrelers or drunkards. In the first and second chapters of the Epistle to Titus, the Apostle admonishes bishops, young women, and married folks to be chaste and pure.

Is there anything here that indicated that the Holy Spirit produces this fruit in us, or does it read like a list of ideals to pursue or rules to obey?  I see two things that may hint at the Holy Spirit’s involvement: 1) “There can be no peace without longsuffering” and, 2) “the Christian gets over his anger by meekness.”  While I appreciate the connection of the fruit of the Spirit and the definition of love in 1 Corinthians 13, nothing here would have turned me from viewing that definition as a list of rules to obey to prove I was a Christian.  In fact, the explanation given for “a walk in the Spirit”[13] seems both mystical and works oriented to me:

They crucify the flesh with its evil desires and lusts by fasting and exercise and, above all, by a walk in the Spirit. To resist the flesh in this manner is to nail it to the Cross. Although the flesh is still alive it cannot very well act upon its desires because it is bound and nailed to the Cross.

Granted, failing at the effort to love like Jesus by turning Paul’s definition of love into rules, prompted me to look for something else—something like the fruit of the Spirit.  But I wonder about Martin Luther.

If Theodore Graebner’s translation carries anything of Luther’s own thinking on the fruit of the Spirit, this alone could account for the pridefulness on which Joe Heschmeyer commented.  If Luther let go of the rule-based righteousness of the monastery yet didn’t fully embrace the righteousness of God in the fruit of the Spirit as he fought for his life to believe in justification by “faith alone” against a stronger adversary than any of us know as the Roman Catholic Church—both pridefulness and a general lack of love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control make sense to me.

Every boy growing up in my church knew that “sowing to the flesh” meant viewing pornography.  While that may well be an example of “sowing to the flesh” in one area of human life, rejecting the righteousness of God (Romans 3:21, 22) that is given new every morning—the love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control that flows from his Holy Spirit—to do it somehow on one’s own is sowing to the flesh in every area of human life (Galatians 6:7-8 NET).

Do not be deceived.  God will not be made a fool.  For a person will reap what he sows, because the person who sows to his own flesh will reap corruption (φθοράν, a form of φθορά) from the flesh, but the one who sows to the Spirit will reap eternal life from the Spirit.

Luther/Graebner commented[14] literally if superficially[15] on this:

This simile of sowing and reaping also refers to the proper support of ministers. “He that soweth to the Spirit,” i.e., he that honors the ministers of God is doing a spiritual thing and will reap everlasting life. “He that soweth to the flesh,” i.e., he that has nothing left for the ministers of God, but only thinks of himself, that person will reap of the flesh corruption, not only in this life but also in the life to come. The Apostle wants to stir up his readers to be generous to their pastors.

While sharing all good things with the one who teaches[16] the word is a good thing (Galatins 6:9, 10) that flows from the goodness (ἀγαθωσύνη) of the fruit of the Holy Spirit, bribing one’s teacher will not help anyone live righteously here and now—unless one is also led by the Spirit of God.  Here I’ll turn to Peter to explain Paul (Acts 8:17-20 NET):

Then Peter and John placed their hands on the Samaritans, and they received the Holy Spirit.

Now Simon, when he saw that the Spirit was given through the laying on of the apostles’ hands, offered them money, saying, “Give me this power too, so that everyone I place my hands on may receive the Holy Spirit.”  But Peter said to him, “May your silver perish (ἀπώλειαν, a form of ἀπώλεια) with you, because you thought you could acquire God’s gift with money!”

If your teacher is not even trying to teach you how to be led by the Spirit of God, find another to share all good things with the one who teaches.  Better yet, cry out to Jesus and study the Scriptures with Him.  He loves the Scriptures.  He died, rose from the dead, ascended into heaven and will return again to make them so.

[1] Matthew 26:54 (NET)

[2] Matthew 26:72b (NET) Table

[3] Acts 1:6b (NET) Table

[4] Tracey R. Rich, Mashiach: The Messiah, Judaism 101

[5] Acts 1:7, 8 (NET) Table

[6] Matthew 7:13, 14 (NET)

[7] Matthew 5:17 (NET)

[8] John 3:17 (NET)

[9] Mark 10:24b (NET)

[10] Some think that progressive sanctification is so tainted with self-righteousness that it is heresy. I’m sensitive to this criticism, having lived and breathed that heresy, but will wait to consider it in another essay.

[11] 1 Corinthians 14:26b (NET)

[12] Commentary on Galatians 5:22, 23

[13] Commentary on Galatians 5:24

[14] Commentary on Galatians 6:8

[15] Therefore they will eat from the fruit of their way, and they will be stuffed full of their own counsel (Proverbs 1:31 NET).  The one who sows iniquity will reap trouble (Proverbs 22:8a NET)…  But you have plowed wickedness; you have reaped injustice; you have eaten the fruit of deception.  Because you have depended on your chariots; you have relied on your many warriors (Hosea 10:13 NET).  See: Is “you reap what you sow” biblical?

[16] Galatians 6:6 (NET)

Fear – Deuteronomy, Part 4

Posted on by

I’m considering the third occurrence of yirʼâh (ויראתך) in the Bible, the word I’d hoped would distinguish the fear of the Lord from ordinary fear: This very day, yehôvâh (יהוה) said to Moses, I will begin to fill all the people of the earth with dread and to terrify them when they hear about you.  They will shiver and shake in anticipation of your approach.[1]  I want to consider it in context, not only for Moses and Israel but for us as well (Deuteronomy 2:16-19 NET).

So it was that after all the military men had been eliminated from the community, the Lord (yehôvâh, יהוה) said to me, “Today you are going to cross the border of Moab, that is, of Ar.  But when you come close to the Ammonites, do not harass or provoke them because I am not giving you any of the Ammonites’ land as your possession; I have already given it to Lot’s descendants as their possession.”

I am not giving you any of the Ammonites’ land as your possession, yehôvâh said to Moses.  As a lapsed atheist who has read Nietzsche I assume that isn’t true.  What probably happened was that Israel attempted to take the Ammonites’ land but failed.  So leaders like Moses made up this conversation with God after the fact to keep the peoples’ spirits (and taste for battle) up.  The word for this assumption is unbelief.

If anyone wants to become my follower, Jesus said, he must deny (ἀπαρνησάσθω, a form of ἀπαρνέομαι) himself…[2]  I tell you the truth, Jesus said to Peter, on this night, before the rooster crows, you will deny (ἀπαρνήσῃ, another form of ἀπαρνέομαι) me three times.[3]  I do not know the man![4] Peter said.  I do not know the lapsed atheist who has read Nietzsche and assumes that the Bible is false.

The first thing that happens is I hear yehôvâh’s next statement differently than I might have heard it before: I have already given it to Lot’s descendants as their possession.  It prompts a question.  If yehôvâh gave land to the Ammonites’ and yehôvâh is giving land to Israel, does yehôvâh give land to all people?  Frankly, I don’t plan to pursue that question at the moment.  My point is that even an imitation of faith as simple as denying my native unbelief changes my approach to Scripture.  Moses continued with what seems at first like a nonessential aside[5] (Deuteronomy 2:20-23 NET):

(That also is considered to be a land of the Rephaites.  The Rephaites lived there originally; the Ammonites call them Zamzummites.  They are a people as powerful, numerous, and tall as the Anakites.  But the Lord (yehôvâh, יהוה) destroyed the Rephaites in advance of the Ammonites, so they dispossessed them and settled down in their place.  This is exactly what he did for the descendants of Esau who lived in Seir when he destroyed the Horites before them so that they could dispossess them and settle in their area to this very day.  As for the Avvites who lived in settlements as far west as Gaza, Caphtorites who came from Crete destroyed them and settled down in their place.)

This becomes a bit clearer if I skip ahead to another “nonessential aside” (Deuteronomy 3:11 NET):

Only King Og of Bashan was left of the remaining Rephaites.  (It is noteworthy that his sarcophagus was made of iron.  Does it not, indeed, still remain in Rabbath of the Ammonites?  It is thirteen and a half feet long and six feet wide according to standard measure.)

All the people we saw there are of great stature, those who spied out the promised land had said to discourage Israel.  We even saw the Nephilim there (the descendants of Anak came from the Nephilim), and we seemed liked grasshoppers both to ourselves and to them.[6]  So the knowledge—that yehôvâh destroyed the Rephaites in advance, a people as tall as the Anakites, so the Ammonites (a people presumably more Israel’s stature) could displace them—was presented to encourage Israel and give them confidence in yehôvâh.  Here, I think, Moses may have spoken more than the Lord (yehôvâh, יהוה) had instructed him to do,[7] but I can hear the man’s heart for his people.

Moses would not be among them when they entered the promised land.  Why?  Because you did not trust me enough to show me as holy before the Israelites, yehôvâh had said to Moses and Aaron.[8]  The Hebrew word translated you did…trust me enough was ʼâman.[9]  Moses had already diagnosed Israel’s problem: However, through all this you did not have confidence (ʼâman, מאמינם) in the Lord your God, the one who was constantly going before you to find places for you to set up camp.  He appeared by fire at night and cloud by day, to show you the way you ought to go.[10]

Moses didn’t originate this diagnosis, he had heard it from yehôvâh (Numbers 14:11 NET Table):

The Lord (yehôvâh, יהוה) said to Moses, “How long will this people despise me, and how long will they not believe (ʼâman, יאמינו) in me, in spite of the signs that I have done among them?”

In this, yehôvâh spoke in a way that was very near to Moses’ own heart, for Moses himself had asked (Exodus 4:1-9 NET):

“And if they do not believe (ʼâman, יאמינו) me or pay attention to me, but say, ‘The Lord has not appeared to you’?”  The Lord said to him, “What is that in your hand?”  He said, “A staff.”  The Lord said, “Throw it to the ground.”  So he threw it to the ground, and it became a snake, and Moses ran from it.  But the Lord said to Moses, “Put out your hand and grab it by the tail” – so he put out his hand and caught it, and it became a staff in his hand – “that they may believe (ʼâman, יאמינו) that the Lord, the God of their fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has appeared to you.”

The Lord also said to him, “Put your hand into your robe.”  So he put his hand into his robe, and when he brought it out – there was his hand, leprous like snow!  He said, “Put your hand back into your robe.”  So he put his hand back into his robe, and when he brought it out from his robe – there it was, restored like the rest of his skin!  “If they do not believe (ʼâman, יאמינו) you or pay attention to the former sign, then they may believe (ʼâman, והאמינו) the latter sign.  And if they do not believe (ʼâman, יאמינו) even these two signs or listen to you, then take some water from the Nile and pour it out on the dry ground.  The water you take out of the Nile will become blood on the dry ground.”

Aaron[11] spoke all the words that the Lord had spoken to Moses and did the signs in the sight of the people, and the people believed (ʼâman, ויאמן).  When they heard that the Lord had attended to the Israelites and that he had seen their affliction, they bowed down close to the ground.[12]  Moses wrote about the impact crossing the Red Sea (Exodus 14) had upon Israel: So the Lord saved Israel on that day from the power of the Egyptians, and Israel saw the Egyptians dead on the shore of the sea.  When Israel saw the great power that the Lord had exercised over the Egyptians, they feared (yârêʼ, וייראו) the Lord, and they believed (ʼâman, ויאמינו) in the Lord and in his servant Moses.[13]  I have a hunch that combination of yârêʼ and ʼâman may prove to be important.

Finally, The Lord said to Moses, “I am going to come to you in a dense cloud, so that the people may hear when I speak with you and so that they will always believe (ʼâman, יאמינו) in you.”[14]  And so I think what I’m seeing in these “nonessential asides” was Moses’ attempt to return the favor, to transfer the faith in Moses yehôvâh had given Israel back to yehôvâh Himself.  Moses couldn’t do this with signs he was incapable of performing apart from yehôvâh’s spirit.  He did it with recent history and an artifact with which the people were already familiar.

I, of course, am not familiar with giants, though I’ve heard it’s a bit intimidating to get on an elevator with a pro basketball team. The NET was unique in translating ʽereś (repeated twice, ערשׁ וערשׁ) sarcophagus.  Their reason, offered in a footnote (19), has nothing to do with Hebrew grammar or syntax but an article from the Biblical Archaeology Society (which is not available for free online).  I’ve included a few free articles from different perspectives, followed by a table of the translation of ʽereś in the NET at the end of this essay.

Herodotus recorded the following story of a smith who set out to dig a well: “I came upon a coffin seven cubits long.  I had never believed that men were taller in the olden times than they are now, so I opened the coffin.  The body inside was of the same length: I measured it, and filled up the hole again.”[15]   I’m not going to solve the issue of giants here.  I do think it’s important to keep an open mind on the subject.  But what I will pursue a bit is The Book of King Og recently partially published online.

First, The Book of King Og online is fiction: “I let them know that when King Og of Bashan is being quoted, that those are my words,” Peter Demmon wrote on his blog.  Though I haven’t found confirmation I assume Father Martin, the Vatican translator of The Book of King Og, is also a literary creation of Mr. Demmon’s, a talented writer.  But I didn’t know any of this when I stumbled across it.  The introduction read:

THE BOOK OF KING OG is referenced by association throughout (relatively) recent history, perhaps most notably in the NEW HISTORY OF ECCLESIASTICAL WRITERS published in 1693. In this reference book, the BOOK OF KING OG is described as, “Forged by Jews and Hereticks both Fabulous and Erroneous.” What I have come to conclude is that this has been a mistaken suppression of key Biblical knowledge by the Catholic Church.

With an introduction like that I read it as apocryphal—looking for the reasons it wasn’t included in the Bible—rather than as Scripture—looking for the reasons it was included in the Bible.  The most obvious reasons for rejecting its authenticity are the many twisted quotes from Scriptures that were written after King Og’s death.  An example from the prophecy of King Og follows:

THE PROPHECY OF KING OG: BAAL OF THE EARTH

NET
Do not be afraid, for I am Baal of the earth.  The first and the last.   I am the living one.  I am alive forever and ever.

2B:9

 Do not be afraid!  I am the first and the last, and the one who lives!  I was dead, but look, now I am alive – forever and ever…

Revelation 1:17b, 18a
I, Baal of the earth know your works, your toils and your patient endurance with the abomination.  I know that you cannot tolerate the circumcision. I know that you have tested the Rephaim that claim to be whole-membered and found some to be false.

2B:10, 11

 I know your works as well as your labor and steadfast endurance, and that you cannot tolerate evil.  You have even put to the test those who refer to themselves as apostles (but are not), and have discovered that they are false.

Revelation 2:2
It is to your credit that you hate Nimrod, who I also hate.

2B:12

 But you do have this going for you: You hate what the Nicolaitans practice – practices I also hate.

Revelation 2:6
I, Baal of the earth, know of your affliction and of the [Moonchild].  I know that the slander of the circumcised is spoken against you.

2B:13

 I know the distress you are suffering and your poverty (but you are rich).  I also know the slander against you by those who call themselves Jews and really are not, but are a synagogue of Satan.

Revelation 2:9
Do not fear for the war that you are about to suffer.  Be faithful to Baal of the earth and abhor circumcision until your death and I will give you rewards.

2B:14

 Do not be afraid of the things you are about to suffer.  The devil is about to have some of you thrown into prison so you may be tested, and you will experience suffering for ten days. Remain faithful even to the point of death, and I will give you the crown that is life itself.

Revelation 2:10
Let he who has ears listen to what Baal of the earth has to say through his servant Og.

2B:15

 The one who has an ear had better hear what the Spirit says to the churches.

Revelation 2:11a

My conclusion that the writing of Revelation preceded the writing of The Book of Og took little more than a childlike faith that the resurrected Jesus didn’t twist the prophecy of King Og of Bashan.  Since I’ve been looking at texts translated from Hebrew and Greek it also seemed that King Og’s quotes had been lifted directly from contemporary English rather than translated from an ancient language.  That prompted me to search out more about Peter Demmon and Father Martin.

The website timetobelieve.com posted a portion of The Book of King Og last year, realized “it may indeed be a hoax” and added the following disclaimer: “We strongly suggest you study the actual biblical writings…”  I agree wholeheartedly.  Ultimately, faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.[16]  Still, Moses attempted to encourage Israel’s faith recalling how yehôvâh destroyed the Rephaites in advance for the Ammonites and the Horites for the descendants of Esau.  Perhaps he even appealed to Israel’s vanity that Avvites who lived in settlements as far west as Gaza were destroyed by Caphtorites[17] without any mention of yehôvâh.

I confess that I’ve needed to look outside of the Bible to overcome my objections to the Bible at times, too.  I am sending you out like sheep surrounded by wolves, so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves,[18] Jesus told his disciples.  I think we can heed this when studying outside of the Bible as well.  Too often we critique the Bible endlessly and then turn around and accept the oracular pronouncements of historians or scientists completely uncritically.

An argument from “The Bed of Og” why the “iron bed” could not have been made of iron (barzel, ברזל) is a case in point: “Because of the very high melting point of iron, the casting of molten iron was impossible using the technology of the ancient world.”  This logic is fatally flawed and must be restated: Because of the very high melting point of iron, the casting of molten iron was impossible using [any known] technology of the ancient world.  This gives one a much better grasp of the actual situation.  It is tentative, provisional knowledge practically begging to be overturned by a future discovery.  Stating it as positivist dogma doesn’t alter that fact.  It’s a kind of faith—faith that all that can be known about ancient technology is already known—that runs counter to researchers’ experience in any field.

If one accepts the oracle that “the casting of molten iron was impossible using the technology of the ancient world” then one must also consider that the comparison of Egypt to an iron-smelting furnace was added much later than the time of Moses.  At the same time it’s important to remember that the word written in the Bible is barzel not iron.  Whether what we know as iron is a legitimate translation of barzel may be arguable.  (A table of the NET translations of barzel to this point in Deuteronomy follows at the end of this essay.)  I’ll consider a recent example from an article in New Scientist for comparison.

“Long-lost continent found submerged deep under Indian Ocean,” the headline reads.  I might suppose that geologists in a submarine found a long lost continent, swam out in scuba gear and planted their flag.  There are two actual discoveries listed in the article: 1) “some parts of the Indian Ocean were found to have stronger gravitational fields than others” and 2) “Although Mauritius is only 8 million years old, some zircon crystals on the island’s beaches are almost 2 billion years old…Ashwal and his team have found zircon crystals in Mauritius that are up to 3 billion years old.”

One way to view these discoveries is as evidence that contradicts current knowledge.  Continental crust tends to be thicker and denser than oceanic crust, hence “stronger gravitational fields.”  If radiometric dating is an accurate measure of time, then the discovery of 3 billion-year-old crystals on an 8 million-year-old island requires some explanation.  And the rest of the article is composed of stories to explain these discoveries in the light of current knowledge, created largely out of a faith in current knowledge.

I suggested earlier my own practice—denying myself—when I have objections to the content of Scripture.  But this self-denial is not faith as Paul described it (perhaps it qualifies as my faith).  It is a stopgap that keeps me immersed in God’s word (sometimes I go to bed with a headache), where I have an opportunity to hear, until the faith that is an aspect of the fruit of his Spirit fills me.  And so often that faith comes when I’m digging into the details (or sleeping off a headache from digging into the details).

This may be entirely personal, but I’ll share it anyway: I find that when I’m relying on my faith I react to objections angrily or defensively.  When I’m relying on the faith that is an aspect of the fruit of the Spirit I react to objections with a smile or a chuckle.  I’ll  continue with the context of this third occurrence of yirʼâh in another essay.

Free Online Articles About Og’s Iron Bed
The Bed of Og http://jbqnew.jewishbible.org/assets/Uploads/401/jbq_401_og.pdf
Og’s Bed http://www.esra-magazine.com/blog/post/ogs-bed
Colavito, Hanks, and Giants: Some Interaction by Heiser http://drmsh.com/colavito-hanks-and-giants-some-interaction-by-heiser/
Giants in the Old Testament https://answersingenesis.org/bible-characters/giants-in-the-old-testament/

 

Reference

 Form of ʽereś

Translation in NET
Deuteronomy 3:11 ערשׁ וערשׁ It is noteworthy that his sarcophagus was made of iron.
Job 7:13 ערשׁי If I say, “My bed will comfort me, my couch will ease my complaint”…
Psalm 6:6 ערשׁי …my tears saturate the cushion beneath me.
Psalm 41:3 ערשׁ The Lord supports him on his sickbed…
Psalm132:3 ערשׁ יצועי He said, “I will not enter my own home, or get into my bed.”
Proverbs 7:16 ערשׁי I have spread my bed with elegant coverings…
Song of Songs 1:16 ערשׁנו The lush foliage is our canopied bed…
Amos 3:12 ערשׁ They will be left with just a corner of a bed, and a part of a couch.
Amos 6:4 ערשׁותם …lie around on beds decorated with ivory, and sprawl out on their couches.

 

Reference

 Form of barzel

Translation in NET
Genesis 4:22 וברזל …heated metal and shaped all kinds of tools made of bronze and iron.
Leviticus 26:19 כברזל I will break your strong pride and make your sky like iron…
Numbers 31:22 הברזל Only the gold, the silver, the bronze, the iron, the tin, and the lead…
Numbers 35:16 ברזל But if he hits someone with an iron tool so that he dies…
Deuteronomy 3:11 ברזל It is noteworthy that his sarcophagus was made of iron.
Deuteronomy 4:20 הברזל …Lord has selected and brought from Egypt, that iron-smelting furnace…

[1] Deuteronomy 2:25 (NET)

[2] Mark 8:34 (NET)

[3] Matthew 26:34 (NET)

[4] Matthew 26:72 (NET) Table

[5] I had intended to skip this but was overruled.

[6] Numbers 13:32b, 33 (NET) Table1 Table2

[7] Deuteronomy 1:3b (NET)  See: Deuteronomy, Part 1

[8] Numbers 20:12a (NET)

[9] It was translated ἐπιστεύσατε (a form of πιστεύω) in Greek in the Septuagint.

[10] Deuteronomy 1:32, 33 (NET)

[11] For an explanation why Aaron spoke and performed the signs rather than Moses see Exodus 4:10-17 (NET).

[12] Exodus 4:30, 31 (NET)

[13] Exodus 14:30, 31 (NET)

[14] Exodus 19:9 (NET)

[15] Herodotus/history.1.i.html

[16] Romans 10:17 (NKJV) I’ve written about my understanding of this in Romans, Part 39 and Romans, Part 13.

[17] Stephen Caesar wrote an article in Jewish Bible Quarterly linking Caphtorites with Philistines, some of whom were rather large as well.

[18] Matthew 10:16 (NET)

The Will of God – Jesus, Part 3

Posted on by

Jesus trusted his Father so completely that the flesh of Adam was much more subjugated in Him than in me.  Still, I can think of two incidents where the flesh made an appearance and was recorded by the Gospel writers.  Matthew and Mark had different opinions as to whether the first incident happened before or after Jesus cleansed the temple, but both associated it with that event.

Now early in the morning, Matthew recorded, as [Jesus] returned to the city, he was hungry.  After noticing a fig tree by the road he went to it, but found nothing on it except leaves.  He said to it, “Never again will there be fruit from you!”  And the fig tree withered at once.[1]  The tree appeared as if it should have fruit on it but did not have any.  Mark wrote: Now the next day, as they went out from Bethany, [Jesus] was hungry.  After noticing in the distance a fig tree with leaves, he went to see if he could find any fruit on it.  When he came to it he found nothing but leaves, for it was not the season for figs.  He said to it, “May no one ever eat fruit from you again.”  And his disciples heard it.[2]

Mark added the following details: 1) The fig tree that withered at once was overnight, 2) Jesus saw and approached the tree from a distance; and 3) it was not the season for figs.  This is what persuades me that I am witnessing the flesh of Adam in Jesus, a frustration that overcame his reason.

It’s not too hard to see that the actual frustration Jesus vented on the fig tree was the hypocrisy of his own people.  He might have cursed those who were selling and buying in the temple courts[3] with chilling effect.  Instead, as a man like Adam He began to drive out those who were selling and buying in the temple courts.  He turned over the tables of the money changers and the chairs of those selling doves, and he would not permit anyone to carry merchandise through the temple courts.  Then he began to teach them…[4]

The second incident occurred in the garden of Gethsemane the night he was betrayed.  Jesus, born of the Spirit of God, knew that the death of the flesh of Adam was part of his Father’s purpose for his life and ministry.  Now my soul is greatly distressed, He said.  And what should I say?  ‘Father, deliver me from this hour’?  No, but for this very reason I have come to this hour.[5]  But Jesus, also born of the flesh of Adam, prayed, My Father, if possible, let this cup pass from me![6]

It is important to me to believe that Jesus’ willingness to suffer was of utmost concern to his Father.  I believe Jesus could have said, Father, deliver me from this hour, with complete impunity.  He still would have sat at his Father’s right hand, and his Father would have said something equivalent to, “Don’t worry about it.  We’ll get’em next time, Tiger.”  But Jesus did not pray Father, deliver me from this hour.  He never put his Father in that position.

Jesus prayed, Father, if possible, let this cup pass from me!  Yet not what I will (θέλω),[7] but what you will.[8]  He was strengthened by the Holy Spirit, then prayed a second time, My Father, if this cup cannot be taken away unless I drink it, your will (θέλημα)[9] must be done.”[10]  Luke wrote, Father, if you are willing (βούλει, a form of βούλομαι),[11] take this cup away from me.  Yet not my will (θέλημα) but yours be done.[12]  As subjugated as the flesh was in Jesus He did not rely on his desires (θέλω or θέλημα) to direct his path, but relied on the will of God.

While I am completely convinced by my own experience (for the Scripture doesn’t say it) that the living Holy Spirit of God interceded with Jesus in real time and space, and strengthened Him at that precise moment, I can’t escape how the same Holy Spirit interceded for Jesus in other ways as well.  The flesh of Adam transmitted to Jesus came through his mother.  When I see Jesus praying My Father, if this cup cannot be taken away unless I drink it, your will must be done, I can’t help but see Mary answering Gabriel, Yes, I am a servant of the Lord; let this happen to me according to your word.[13]  This is the spirit of the woman who raised Jesus as a boy.

I am becoming more and more convinced that the idea of human sacrifice (including the death of the Lord Jesus) did not originate in the mind of God.  They have also built places of worship in a place called Topheth in the Valley of Ben Hinnom so that they can sacrifice their sons and daughters by fire. That is something I never commanded them to do!  Indeed, it never even entered my mind to command such a thing![14]  They have built places here for worship of the god Baal so that they could sacrifice their children as burnt offerings to him in the fire.  Such sacrifices are something I never commanded them to make!  They are something I never told them to do!  Indeed, such a thing never even entered my mind![15]  They built places of worship for the god Baal in the Valley of Ben Hinnom [that is, Gehenna] so that they could sacrifice their sons and daughters to the god Molech.  Such a disgusting practice was not something I commanded them to do!  It never even entered my mind to command them to do such a thing![16]

Though I don’t believe that Jesus’ sacrifice originated in the mind of God, I do believe it is evidence of how far God—Father, Son and Holy Spirit—will go to communicate to the religious minds of those born of the flesh of Adam, who thought that such sacrifice should have some merit.  So as I see Jesus praying, your will must be done, accepting the death that will put an end to sacrifice—I want (θέλω) mercy and not sacrifice[17]—and an end to oaths of righteousness—I say to you, do not take oaths at all[18]—and I see his mother praying, let this happen to me according to your word, I also see an unnamed girl who was commemorated for her words, My father, since you made an oath to the Lord, do to me as you promised,[19] after she returned from mourning her virginity and was sacrificed to God to fulfill Jephthah’s reckless oath.  Here I find my understanding of one of Jesus’ more enigmatic sayings, enigmatic to those of us who must follow Him by faith rather than by sight.

If anyone wants to become my follower, Jesus said, he must deny himself, take up his cross, and follow me.[20]  Peter and Paul helped me see what it meant to deny myself, to believe that I have died to sin,[21] to say, I do not know the man[22] to the old man that was crucified with [Christ] so that the body of sin would no longer dominate[23] me.  To take up [my] cross is to join Jesus distrusting my own desires and saying to God, not my will but yours be done.[24]  And finally, to follow Jesus is to love and forgive others as He did, which is the fulfillment of the law.[25]  Freely you received, Jesus told his disciples, freely give.[26]

[1] Matthew 21:18, 19 (NET)

[2] Mark 11:12-14 (NET)

[4] Mark 11:15b-17a (NET)

[5] John 12:27 (NET)

[6] Matthew 26:39 (NET)

[8] Matthew 26:39 (NET)

[10] Matthew 26:42 (NET)

[12] Luke 22:42 (NET)

[13] Luke 1:38 (NET)

[14] Jeremiah 7:31 (NET)

[15] Jeremiah 19:5 (NET) Table

[16] Jeremiah 32:35 (NET)

[17] Matthew 9:13 and 12:7 (NET) ἔλεος θέλω καὶ οὐ θυσίαν a quotation of Hosea 6:6 from the Septuagint, ἔλεος θέλω καὶ οὐ θυσίαν.  Hosea 6:6 translated from contemporary Hebrew reads, For I delight in faithfulness, not simply in sacrifice (NET).  See also Hebrews 10:5-9 (NET).

[18] Matthew 5:34 (NET)

[19] Judges 11:36 (NET) Table

[20] Matthew 16:24 (NET)

[23] Romans 6:6 (NET)

[24] Luke 22:42 (NET)

[26] Matthew 10:8 (NET)