John Walvoord writes: “Augustine is, then, the first theologian of solid influence who adopted amillennialism.”[1] Walvoord also acknowledges the negative influence of Augustine, when he notes that Augustine “in fact, occasioned the shelving of premillennialism by most of the organized church.”[2]
Read moreThe Crucifixion of Christ, Part One
The Gospels give us the historical fact of Christ’s crucifixion. The Epistles explain the theological signification of His death. Wiersbe succinctly put it this way: “History states that ‘Christ died,’ but theology explains, ‘Christ died for our sins’ (1 Cor. 15:3).”
For example, in Philippians 2:8, Paul referred to the shame, the reproach of crucifixion when he said that Christ “humbled himself and became obedient unto death even the death of the cross.”
Crucifixion was the torturous execution of a person by fixation to a cross. Alexander the Great introduced Crucifixion to the Mediterranean world. Although first practiced by the Persians, crucifixion was perfected by the Romans as the most degrading form of execution. No Roman citizen could be crucified, only murderers, thieves, rapists and the scum of the earth.
Read moreThe Crucifixion of Christ, Part Two
Previously, we traced the preliminaries that happened to Jesus on Good Friday before 9 a.m. First, Jesus was scourged (Matthew 27:26). Next, he was mocked (Matthew 27:27-30). Lastly came the six hours of crucifixion from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m.
Read moreOur God is Sovereign Humbles the Proud (Daniel Five) Part 2
Walvoord writes that “the controversy over Belshazzar....has become one of the most complicated problems in the entire book.” Walvoord quotes Bible critics James A. Montgomery as saying the story of Belshazzar is “unhistorical” and also H. H. Rowley arguing that calling Belshazzar a king “must still be pronounced a grave historical error.”[1]
The problem with the critics is that Belshazzar is not mentioned by the ancient writers such as Herodotus (484 – 425 BC). Herodotus was an ancient Greek historian who became known as “The Father of History.” When the “Father of History” does not mention Belshazzar, the critics as usual jump to the conclusion that Daniel has historical errors. Daniel five fits the theme of Daniel.
Read moreOur Sovereign God Humbles The Proud (Daniel 4) (Part One)
Nebuchadnezzar learned the hard way Proverbs 16:18: “Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.” But he also learned the hard way that “whoever humbles himself will be exalted” spoken by Jesus in Matt. 23:12.
Nebuchadnezzar was born into royalty. His father was king. He was the heir apparent. He was like the 5 or 6 year boy who arrived with his mother at the dentist’s office. This little 5 or 6 year old didn’t want to be there. He kind a strutted in, though, like he owned the place. The dentist introduced himself and could immediately tell this kid was used to calling the shots and he wasn’t very happy.
Read moreOur Sovereign God Tests Our Faith (Daniel 3)
The apostle Peter writes to suffering Jewish believers who had been driven from their homes in 1 Peter. To them he compares their suffering to being tried by fire in 1:7: “the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that perishes, though it be tried or tested with fire, might be found unto praise and honor and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ.” Again, in 4:12 Peter uses the illustration of believers being tested as by fire: “Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try or test you, as though some strange thing happened unto you.”
It is very possible that Peter had Daniel 3 in mind when he wrote to the persecuted and scattered Jewish believers. In Daniel 3, is the story of the persecuted and scattered Jewish believers named Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego whose faith was literally tested by fire when they were thrown into the fiery furnace.
Read moreIntroduction and Outline for Mark
The Gospel of the Suffering Servant
(Mark 10:45)
INTRODUCTION TO MARK
“The Gospel of Mark is just the book for busy people who want to use every opportunity to serve God. It presents our Lord ‘on the move,’ meeting the physical and spiritual needs of all kinds of people (Warren Wiersbe).
Matthew who wrote to Jews and presented Christ as King.
Luke who wrote to Gentiles and presented Christ as the Son on Man.
John who wrote to the whole world and presented Christ as the Son of God.
Mark who wrote to the Romans and presented Christ as the Servant (10:45)
Read moreThe Belshazzar Problems
Walvoord writes that “the controversy over Belshazzar....has become one of the most complicated problems in the entire book. Walvoord quotes Bible critics James A. Montgomery as saying the story of Belshazzar is “unhistorical” and also H. H. Rowley arguing that calling Belshazzar a king “must still be pronounced a grave historical error.”[1]
The problem with the critics is that Belshazzar is not mentioned by the ancient writers such as Herodotus ( 484 – c. 425 BC). Herodotus was an ancient Greek historian who became known as “The Father of History.” When the “Father of History” does not mention Belshazzar, the critics as usual jump to the conclusion that Daniel has historical errors.
Read moreIndividual Soul Liberty
Thomas Helwys and John Smyth fled England and travelled to Amsterdam in 1609 for religious freedom from the oppression of the Church of England and King James I. They started the first Baptist church that year. In 1610, the two separated when Smyth join the Mennonites. In 1612, Helwys wrote the first declaration of religious freedom in English called the A Short Declaration of the Mystery of Iniquity. In 1613, Helwys moved back to London and started the first Baptist church on English soil. Helwys was arrested for his beliefs of individual soul liberty and died in prison in 1616 at the age of 40.
Read moreOur Sovereign God is also Our God of Wisdom (Daniel Two)
God is not only Sovereign but He is Wise. Many human dictators have been sovereign and powerful but not wise. Adolf Hitler, Osama Bin Laden, and present day president of China, Xi Jinping.
The Guardian in London reports, "China has released new morality guidelines for its citizens on everything from how parents should teach their children, to sorting their garbage, and the appropriate etiquette for raising the national flag." This is called a totalitarian regime, where the government or in this case Xi Jinping totally controls your life, even how you raise a flag in your front yard, and even more importantly what you believe.
The Chinese governments uses modern, hyper-modern surveillance, including facial recognition technologies, to enforce these rules and crush churches and underground believers. Citizens of China are now told that it is morally right to honor Xi Jinping, to believe in him, and to have faith in him, and it is morally wrong not to. These citizens are not allowed to believe in God.
Sovereignty and Godly Wisdom do not always go together in humans but they do perfectly come together in our great God. Here is how Daniel developed the theme of the sovereignty of God:
Read moreThe Aramaic of Daniel
Both the critical scholars and the conservative scholars have the same evidence on the authorship of Daniel, yet come to opposite conclusion. The obvious difference is their attitude toward Scripture. One has a high view of inspiration and inerrancy and the other has a low view. It is like the difference between Lee Strobel and Bart Ehrman. Lee Strobel began as an atheists who examined Scripture and became a Christian. Bart Ehrman began as a professing Christian who examined Scripture and became an atheist. They both had the same evidence but it was their attitude that was the determining factor. God’s Word is trustworthy and supernatural which the book of Daniel proves.
Read moreTwo Kinds of Narrative Preaching
1. Biblical narrative preaching that is based on the narratives of Scripture (See Factual Data Sheet for Narratives)
2. Non-biblical narrative preaching that is based on stories or narratives told by the preacher
Ralph L. Lewis and Gregg Lewis, in their book Inductive Preaching: Helping People Listen give two examples of inductive or what I am calling non-biblical narrative preaching. We will examine only the first example based on the petition in what the preacher identified as the Lord’s Prayer “Deliver us?” (page 168-182). This prayer is better described as the Model Prayer. The Lord’s Prayer in is John 17.
The sermon has roughly 30 stories from contemporary experiences, history, and nature. There are twelve passing references to Biblical examples. At one point, the preacher asked 19 questions back to back and in another section, 22 questions were asked back to back. What is glaringly absent from the sermon is any interpretation. No context is provided for the Model Prayer and no explanation of the Model Prayer nor of the petition “Deliver us.”
The main divisions of the inductive sermon are questions:
I. Anybody need deliverance?
II. Anybody being delivered in our day?
III. Anybody been delivered in the past?
IV. Anybody want to be delivered now?
The last main division is supposed to be the main point to which the sermon has inductively led. The last main division is supposed to be the solution. In the last main division, no solution is offered. Two passages are referred to and read (Psalm 34:4-19 and Romans 7:34) but no explanation is given.
The Biblical Narrative sermon is based on the story or narrative told by God in His Word. The Factual Data Sheet for Narratives emphasizes the context of the narrative and also shows how to interpret the content of the Biblical narrative. Biblical narratives are inductive in nature. At the beginning of the plot there is a crisis and at the end there is a Biblical solution. Biblical narrative are thoroughly biblical in content and in solutions.
An excellent resource for how to interpret and preach Biblical narratives is Steven D. Mathewson’s The Art of Preaching Old Testament Narrative. Mathewson provides five Biblical narrative sermons at the end of his book. One of the five is by Donald Sunukjian, the author of one of our textbooks.
Important Dates in reference to Daniel
God promised to bless obedience and judges disobedience in Dt. 28:1-24; 63-67; 30:1-5 (1450 B.C.).
The rest of the OT shows that God kept His promise
931 B.C. Division of the Kingdom because of Solomon’s disobedience
722 B.C. Assyrian defeat of the Northern Kingdom because of disobedience
605 B.C. First deportation. Babylonian defeat of the Southern Kingdom because of disobedience (Daniel taken captive). Jehoiakim “did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord” ( 2 Chron. 36:5). Nebuchadnezzar’s foreign policy was deportation. This demonstrates the sovereignty of God which is the theme of Daniel as noted in 2 Chronciles 36:21.
597 B. C. Second deportation. (Ezekiel taken captive). Jehoiachin (Jehoiakim’s son) “did that which was evil” (2 Chron. 36:9)
586 B. C. Third deportation. Zedekiah (Jehoiakim’s brother) “did that which was evil” (2 Chron. 36:12)
562 B. C. Death of Nebuchadnezzar
539 B. C. Death of Belshazzar
538 B.C. Zerubbabel returns and rebuilds the temple (Ezra 1-6). Under Cyrus king of Persia whose foreign policy was repatriation. This also demonstrates the sovereignty of God as noted in 2 Chronciles 36:22-23.
535-520 B.C. Worked ceased on the temple (Ezra 4:24) as a result of the preaching of Haggai and Zechariah (Ezra 5:1 and Haggai 1:1-4)
515 B.C. Temple finished (Ezra 6:15)
458 B.C. Ezra returns and reforms the people (Ezra 7-10)
445 B.C. Nehemiah comes and leads the people rebuilds the walls around God’s city (Nehemiah 1-6)
Daniel and the Sovereignty of God (Daniel 1:3-21)
Review:
1. Our God is Sovereign over the universe (Daniel 4:34-35, 37)
2. Our God is Sovereign over the rulers (Daniel 1:1-2)
3. Our God is Sovereign over our lives (Daniel 1)
Preview:
1. Our Sovereign God Blesses Godly Character (chapter 1)
2. Our Sovereign God Controls the Nations (chapters 2-7).
3. Our Sovereign God Reveals the Future (chapters 8-12)
1. Our Sovereign God Blesses Godly Character (Daniel 1)
A. Godly Character Has A Biblical World View (1:1-2)
B. Godly Character Is Dedicated to God (1:3-4)
1) Daniel was dedicated physically (he had no “blemish” and “good ones in appearance”)
2) Daniel was dedicated mentally (“skillful in all wisdom....”)
3) Daniel was dedicated personally (“had ability in them to stand in the king’s palace”)
4) Daniel was dedicated spiritually (sufficiently to overcome the brain washing attempts: “whom they might teach the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans” or of the religious) in 2:2. The magicians ((Heb. hartummim) were evidently scholars who could divine the future by using various means, Leupold, p. 75). The astrologers (The conjurers or enchanters (assapim) could evidently communicate with the dead, Leupold, p. 76). The sorcerers (The sorcerers (mekassepim) practiced sorcery and cast spells according to Thomas Constable). The Chaldeans (The astrologers (kasdim) here refer to the priestly caste that studied the heavens to determine the future in 2:2 according to Thomas Constable).
C. Godly Character Determines NOT to Yield to Sin (1:5-21)
1) Pressure to sin was subtle (1:5-7). In changing their names from God honoring names to names that honor the Babylonian gods. The reason only these four are mentioned is because most likely the rest caved into temptation and were no longer useful to God. Their godly parents gave them godly names and a godly upbringing which helped these young believers to stay true to God.
2) Pressure to sin was strong (1:8-10). The pressure was to eat food not kosher and food that had been offered to idols (1:8; Exodus 34:15). Daniel’s work ethic put him in good stead with his superiors (1:8-10) like Joseph in Gen 39:1-4 and Nehemiah in 2:1-8.
3) Pressure to sin was avoided with an alternative plan (1:11-14). Daniel did not rebel but offered an alternative plan. Nehemiah also provided an alternative plan. Again, this alternative plan is accepted because these young men were exemplary workers.
4) Pressure to sin was avoided by the blessings of God (1:15-21). God sovereignly blessed their desire and diet (1:15-16). God sovereignly blessed their work hard (1:17-21). Daniel and his three friends stayed true to God through their secular training as Moses in Acts 6:22. Daniel and three Hebrew children complete their training at the top of the class (1:17-20) and stand before Nebuchadnezzar for their final exams. God’s sovereignty is displayed in blessing Daniel and his friends to far surpass the unsaved Babylonian students who were in the same classes. God sovereignly blessed Daniel for 70 years (1:21). Daniel was loyal to his leaders. He never left them. They left him.
Daniel and the Sovereignty of God (Daniel 1:1-2)
Josh McDowell wrote Daniel in the Critics' Den to answer the attacks on the book of Daniel. Critics attack the book of Daniel because it supernaturally predicts the future. These critics deny that God is sovereign and supernatural. Their world-view is secular or unbiblical.
Every person has a world-view or a philosophy of life or how one interprets the events of his/her life. World-view is the glasses through which you view your world. Your world-view is either Biblical or secular. Supernatural or natural.
Daniel and the three Hebrew children are going to be introduced to the world-view of Babylon to transform these Jews into Babylonians. They would have been introduced into the Babylonians mythologies of creation, the flood, the origin of mankind and plurality of gods.
Read moreDaniel and The Soverenity of God (Introduction)
The movie “God’s Not Dead” is a realistic portrayal of college students who are not permitted to voice their belief in God on secular campuses. In the movie the atheistic philosophy teacher demanded on the first day of class that each of the 80 student write three words on a sheet of paper: God is Dead. One student, Josh Wheaton, who was a Christian refused and was ridiculed by his teacher for the rest of the semester.
The persecution on university campus is so widespread, that The Alliance Defending Freedom ministry actually comes to the legal defense of Christian students. The Alliance Defending Freedom has won nine Supreme Court cases in the seven years.
The theme of Daniel is God’s sovereignty even in the worst of times of persecution and even in times of chastening which was the case of Israel. God’s sovereignty encouraged the returning captives to Israel, later Jews in the Maccabean persecutions, and finally, all future suffering believers (Hebrews 11:33).
Read moreOld Testament Lexical Study of The Old Testament Word for Atonement kipper
C. H. Dodd contended that kipper or kopher in the OT and hilaskesthai in the LXX and in the NT meant expiation and the forgiveness of sins. Leon Morris argued that these words meant propitiation or an appeasing of God’s wrath. The overwhelming evidence is the meaning of propitiation of God’s wrath.
N. T. Wright has taken up the mantle of C. H. Dodd in his 2016 The Day The Revolution Began: Reconsidering the Meaning of Jesus Crucifixion. Throughout his book, Wright disparages the penal subsitutionary death of Christ and the doctrine of propitiation. For example, referring to kapporeth, Wright argues that “older interpretation suggested ‘covering.’ But recent research has challenged this, connecting the Hebrew word with the root kipper, meaning ‘cleanse’ or ‘purge.’…..”there is less, because this context, in and of itself, says nothing about punishment” (p. 328-329). Wright is correct when he writes that “the Hebrew word kapporeth was rendered in the Greek translations of Scripture as hilsasterion.” But then again following the argument of C. H. Dodd, Wright writes “So when Paul writes in Romans 3:25 God put Jesus forth as a hilasterion, he does not mean that God was punishing Jesus for the sins of Israel or the world” (pps. 328 and 330). Just a few other comments from Wright about Romans 3:21-26: “the ‘propitiation’ readings of 3:24-26 are straining” (p. 330). “Paul is not here saying, then, that God has punished former sins, whether of Israel or the Gentiles, certainly not that he has punished them in Jesus. There is no mention here of such a punishment then exhausting the divine wrath” (p. 331).
New Testament Lexical Study of the New Testament Word for Atonement
In our OT lexical study we examined kipper and kopher and demonstrated that the meaning of these words is the propitiation of God’s wrath. The Greek word group of hilaskomai, which is the most used Greek word in the LXX and the NT for the kipper word group, also contains the meaning of appeasing God’s wrath rather than expiating of sin.
Four primary sources were consulted: Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, BDAG (Third Edition), New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (Abridged Edition), and Leon Morris’ The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross.
Biblical Weddings and Marriages
The Times (London) has reported that many American couples are adjusting wedding vows to new concepts of marriage. "Til death do us part" is giving way to "for as long as our marriage shall serve the common good."
Hollywood has played its part as well. Actress Julia Roberts' wedding to Daniel Moder featured the vow to "love, support, but not obey." And consider this: Others merely promise good manners: Will Smith, the actor, recently revealed that when he married Jada Pinkett in 1997 "our vows did not promise to forsake all others. The vow that we made was that 'you will never hear that I did something after the fact'. One spouse will ask the other, 'Look I need to have sex with somebody -- please approve it'." From The Briefing on August 5, 2005.
Liam Stack at the New York Times published on Nov. 7 the results of a Pew Research study.
The Pew Research Center, published online Wednesday, show high public support for unmarried couples who live together, with majorities of every age group saying they find it acceptable to live with an unmarried partner. At the same time, the share of American adults who live with an unmarried partner has more than doubled since 1993, to 7 percent from 3 percent. The share of American adults who are married was 53 percent.
According to the survey, unmarried couples report significantly less satisfaction in their relationships than do married couples, who report higher levels of trust in their partners’ honesty, fidelity and spending habits. It said that 58 percent of married adults said their relationship was “going very well,” compared with 41 percent of unmarried people who live with a partner.
Read moreBaptism of the Holy Spirit
When you hear the words, "Baptism of the Holy Spirit" what comes to your mind? For some there are scenes of highly emotional church services accompanied with tongues. For others, a confusing mix of ideas from different studies and sermons muddies the thinking. That is understandable because there are many conflicting views. In part one, I am going to review eight views of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. I am taking some of my information from Dr. Windsor's notes on Pneumatology at Central Baptist Theological Seminary. In part two, I will discuss the Traditional view of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit.
Read more