11.09.07
Posted in Bible Study, Bryan Dunn at 10:21 am by Bryan Dunn
Through His Temptation (Matt 4:1-11; Mark 1:12-13; Luke 4:1-13)
At His baptism, Christ was anointed with the Spirit for His messianic ministry. Now the synoptics describe Jesus being led by the Spirit into the desert to demonstrate His moral right to the Kingdom.
• Mark (describing a servant) says the Spirit sent him out into the desert
• Matthew (describing a King) says Jesus was led by the Spirit into the desert
• Luke notes Jesus was full of the Holy Spirit
This was different than the temptation of the first Adam, who met his temptation in the garden of beauty and plenty. Jesus went into the wilderness, a place that was barren, flowerless waste pocketed with wild beasts, poverty and hunger.
We see Jesus was in the desert for 40 days. This is a number that we see quite a bit in scripture.
Farrar says – the number occurs again and again in Scripture, and always in connection with the facts of temptation or retribution. It is clearly a sacred and representative number, and independently of other associations, it was 40 days that Moses had stayed on Sinai, and Elijah in the wilderness.
Mark notes He was with the wild animals, and angels attended him . All of this was in keeping with God’s promise found in Psalms 91:11 For he will command his angels concerning you, to guard you in all your ways. The best I can see in the Word of God is that while Jesus fasted these 40 days, He didn’t experience the sensation of hunger until this time was over (see Matt. 4:2 – where He then says He was hungry). It reminds me of getting lost in a project on the computer, or reading a good book, a playing a great video game. This is a reflection of the intensity of the conflict that Christ was engaged in.
Since Christ was under the control of Holy Spirit, and since the purpose of the temptation was to demonstrate His sinlessness and prove His moral right to be Savior-Sovereign, we need to be aware that the aggressor (the one picking the fight) was Jesus in this battle. Jesus forced Satan to put Him to the test so that His true character may be revealed. I know, we usually hear that Satan waited until Jesus was weak and ‘vulnerable’ to attack…well…that kinda tarnishes the image of the God I know…Jesus wasn’t weak, He was not ill-prepared or caught off guard in this skirmish. I would hazard a guess that Satan sought to escape the confrontation. Had there been a longer delay, that would have meant that Satan conceded that Jesus was exactly who He clamed to be – the sinless One.
The question that begs here is this – was the attack by Satan a ‘genuine’ temptation?
(reference pages 97-103)
Keeping in mind that God was fully Divine and fully human, I would agree with Walvoord. The answer is YES. The question is simply ‘is it possible to attempt the impossible.’ It is indeed possible for a rowboat to attack a battleship. While the temptation was real, there may be infinite power to resist the temptation, and if this power is infinite – the person is impeccable.
A person who cannot sin, it is said, cannot be tempted to sin. This is not correct; any more than it would be correct to say that because an army cannot be conquered, it cannot be attacked. In fact, Jesus did face the temptations from Satan, the god of this world, the son of the morning, the prince of the power of the air, the pinnacle of power on the earth.
Satan approached Christ with the statement If you are the Son of God . In this concession Satan acknowledged the FACT of the deity of Christ. In doing so, Satan asks for proof to back up the claim of this identity. In this proof, Satan gives a suggestion of a sign - tell these stones to become bread . The implication here is that the Father had acknowledged the sonship of Christ at His baptism. That carried with it certain rights over all creation, so Satan reckoned that there was no reason why He could not exercise those rights and satisfy Himself and His hunger. The suggestion is that man’s highest good comes from gratifying his desires and happiness comes from satisfying his fleshly appetites.
Yes, He was hungry. But no, He wasn’t there to fulfill the needs of His flesh. The temptation was an attempt to thwart His perfect obedience to the will of God. He was in the desert in the will of God, and because of that all that He endured while in the desert was part of God’s will for Him. To gratify His own desires would have been to abandon the will of God and substitute His own will.
Christ responded by quoting from Deuteronomy 8:3 He humbled you, causing you to hunger and then feeding you with manna, which neither you nor your fathers had known, to teach you that man does not live on bread alone but on every word that comes from the mouth of the LORD.
So, in the first temptation Christ had shown faith in God and dependence on Him. He had shown submission to the Word of God. Now in that freedom of submission, Christ would be tested to show His utter dependence on God.
Matt 3:5 says then (at that very instant) Christ was taken to the pinnacle of the temple. Satan used the scripture back at Christ (since Christ started it by quoting Deut. – often times we think Satan is a big dummy…he’s not!) to put his faith and trust into action. Take a bold leap, give a divine show of who you are as the heavenly host come in to ensure not a bone will be broken or a scratch received.
Satan here is saying that Jesus, as a Son, has a right to put His Father to a test. Keep in mind, the one that puts another to a test is putting themselves in a superior position. If Jesus tested God, that would mean Jesus had abandoned His dependence on God. You test another because you DO NOT have confidence in them. If you have full confidence, then no test is needed.
Christ responded by quoting from Deuteronomy 6:16 Do not test the LORD your God as you did at Massah. Jesus again accepted His place in the will of God and submitted to the Word of God. He wasn’t afraid that God the Father wouldn’t pull through in a rescue attempt, He took God at His Word, He needed no further evidence that God would be faithful.
Now we go to the next temptation, on a very high mountain where showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor . Then Satan give Christ the opportunity to possess all these things that He had been shown…if Jesus would bow down and worship him.
This was an interesting set up. Satan made this claim in the presence of Jesus. He claimed some right to the kingdoms of the world. Here Satan seems to lay clam to the title ‘prince of this world’ even before Jesus gives this to him. The implication here is that Jesus could lay claim to His throne in a way that was separate from the path that God chose for Him through His sacrifice on the Cross. The only thing conditional with this plan was the small detail of the bow down and worship part.
Receiving worship was Satan’s chief ambition, since, being motivated by pride, he attempted to dethrone God, usurp God’s authority, and receive the worship, honor and glory that belong to
God Himself (ref. Isa. 14:14; 2 Thes. 2:4).
In the first 2 temptations, Jesus recognized God’s absolute authority and had submitted to Him. Here Satan shows a desire to receive the worship of Christ, this desire was so great that he was willing to surrender the entire realm over which he ruled in order to gain that end.
Christ responded by quoting Deuteronomy 6:13 Fear the LORD your God, serve him only and take your oaths in his name. Worship and service to God were demanded by the law, and in perfect obedience Jesus only offered these to His Father.
Now that the 3 temptations of Christ had been recorded, Matthew notes in verse 11 Then the devil left him.
John noted that there are 3 avenues through which Satan can assault and individual: through the lust of the eyes, through the lust of the eyes, and through the pride of life (1 John 2:15). Satan tried each of these on Christ. Christ showed perfect obedience to the will of God. Perhaps this is why the writer to the Hebrews said in Hebrews 4:15 For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are — yet was without sin.
In conclusion – Morgan summarizes:
The significance of the temptation may be seen by placing the whole of the facts in contrast with the account of the temptation of Adam. The devil challenged the first man. The second Man challenged the devil. The devil ruined the first Adam. The last Adam spoiled the devil. The first Adam involved the race in his defeat. The last Adam included the race in His victory. The first Adam stood as the head of the race and falling, dragged the race down with him. The last Adam stood as the Head of the new race, and being victorious, lifted that race with Him.
This is not a picture of the last Adam doing merely what the first Adam did, going into the place of passive life, and then when temptation came, resisting it. The second Man had not only to resist temptation when it assailed Him for His own sake, but He had to lay hold of the tempter, and defeat him and punish him for the wrong he did in the ruin of the first man.
3 temptations. 3 victories over temptation. Batting 1000. I don’t know if I have ever done that! What about you? If tempted, would you be obedient? Or cave in? Would you know enough of the Word of God to respond in obedience? What about knowing enough just from Deuteronomy?
Permalink
Posted in Bible Study, Bryan Dunn at 10:18 am by Bryan Dunn
The Approval of the King
At His Baptism (Matthew 3:13-17; Mark 1:9-11; Luke 3:21-23)
The last time we have a record of the visit of Jesus to the Temple in Jerusalem was to observe the Passover at age 12. Now, some eighteen years later, He made a similar journey in order to be baptized by John. Matthew gives us the specific purpose as such in Matthew 3:13. In Luke 3:23 we see that Jesus was about 30 years old.
Once John sees his cousin in front of him to be baptized, John immediately tries to dissuade Him. John recognizes His sinlessness. Keep in mind, John had been filled with the Spirit from birth (Luke 1:15). So John wasn’t just putting on a show, he knew good and full well that Jesus was the only candidate that should not receive baptism. Baptism was a sign of confession and repentance. Jesus was sinless and had no need for either.
What a catch 22. John knew Jesus didn’t need to be baptized. He also knew that he (John) was unworthy to do the baptizing. And John knew he needed the baptism that the prophets had promised the Messiah would give when He came.
Jesus didn’t deny any of John’s statements. He didn’t need to be baptized. He didn’t need to repent or confess. He (Jesus) was sinless. He was God in the flesh.
So…why was Jesus baptized by John? You see, if Jesus needed John’s baptism, then He would be acknowledging that He was also awaiting the coming of the Messiah who would forgive sins.
Some think Jesus was baptized by John to be inducted into His priestly office. These folks have pointed out that Jesus was about 30 years old, the age when Old Testament priests were inducted into office in a ritual that included a ceremonial washing with water. It’s true that Jesus was set apart by His Father to be a Priest. But…He was not a priest in the order of Aaron, instead he was a priest after the order of Melchizedek (Psalms 110:4 The LORD has sworn and will not change his mind: “You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek.” NIV
The logic goes like this. From the time of the institution of the Levitical law, God ruled that there was a limitation of who could be a priest, and that limit was extended to the tribe of Levi and the family of Aaron. Now, let’s think back to an earlier lesson. In the lineage of Jesus, was he from that family? No, He was of the Davidic lineage (the kingly line). He was not of the right tribe nor was He from the right family. Jesus Christ was ineligible to serve as a Levitical priest.
So…there was no point in attempting to induct Him into an office for which He was not eligible. Jesus Christ’s appointment to be a priest after the order of Melchizedek awaited His resurrection. Only then could He be inducted into the priestly office by His Father. So, the baptism here was not so He could be inducted into the priesthood.
But there were several reasons for the baptism of Christ.
1. To fulfill all righteousness (Matt 3:15 Jesus replied, “Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness.” Then John consented).
2. To fulfill the law Galatians 4:4-5 But when the time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law, 5 to redeem those under law, that we might receive the full rights of sons.). The law said a priest was consecrated to office with the washing of water (Leviticus 16:4 He is to put on the sacred linen tunic, with linen undergarments next to his body; he is to tie the linen sash around him and put on the linen turban. These are sacred garments; so he must bathe himself with water before he puts them on.). But keep in mind Jesus was inducted into the office of Messiah, not that of a priest. Bin in order to fulfill the demands of the law, Christ was baptized, signifying that He was consecrated to God and acceptable to Him for service.
3. To release John to make a public announcement concerning the coming of Christ (John 1:33-34 I would not have known him, except that the one who sent me to baptize with water told me, ‘The man on whom you see the Spirit come down and remain is he who will baptize with the Holy Spirit.’ 34 I have seen and I testify that this is the Son of God.”) John publicly recognized His coming after the Spirit descended on Jesus that the promised Messiah had arrived.
4. So Jesus could identify Himself with the believing remnant in Israel. John’s ministry had brought men to faith and anticipation of the Messiah. When Jesus came, He didn’t identify Himself with the religious folks (Pharisees, Sadducees, Herodians, Zealots), but instead identified Himself with the believing remnant who were expecting the fulfillment of the promises of God.
5. So Jesus could identify Himself with sinners. It was sinners that were coming to John to confess and repent. They embraced this outward sign of their faith in a Savior who would come and redeem them from Sin. He wanted to identify with sinners so that they would know He would be their substitute (2 Corinthians 5:21 God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.) This follows the Old Testament ‘shadow’ of the scapegoat. What an interesting picture that is in Leviticus 16! Look there for the identification of Israel with the scapegoat, and the scapegoat being identified with Israel (through laying on of hands). Same picture of Christ identifying Himself with sinners so they could be identified with Him when He gave Himself as a substitute for their sins.
Jesus was praying at the time of His baptism (Luke 3:21). We don’t know what that prayer was, but you could bet He was separating Himself to the Father’s will and work which only He could accomplish as Messiah. Then God confirmed to John (and the others present) that He was who John introduced Him to be. This was done by a visible sign (dove) and audible sign (voice from heaven). John had prepared the people for this monumental event. The Father confirmed the appointment of the Son to the messianic work. Now the Son was officially presented by His forerunner.
What about us? When presented with something that is a sign, how do we respond? Are we ever prepared ahead of time for what God is going to do? If so, what do we do when He does it?
Perhaps this week we can look at how God has worked to prepare us for what He will be doing. And we can look at how we may respond when He does what He has promised He will do!
Permalink
Posted in Bible Study, Bryan Dunn at 10:17 am by Bryan Dunn
The Promise by John (Matt. 3:11-12; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:15-18)
John was a preacher who didn’t mind telling it like it was. Fire…brimstone…hell…damnation. All of those things, but he also gave a message of hope and promise. Notice in Luke 3:15 The people were waiting expectantly. They knew something was ‘heavenly’ about John. But the question they wanted answered was this – was John the Messiah?
From what is recorded, we know that Join pointed men to Jesus, not to himself. He said he was a servant of the Lord, and even in saying that John would likely be the first to say he wasn’t even worthy to be called a servant. Look at what he said in Mark 1:7 After me will come one more powerful than I, the thongs of whose sandals I am not worthy to stoop down and untie.
One of the hallmarks of John’s ministry was baptism. It is tied to him in name (John the Baptist), but we need to keep in mind this sign of Baptist was external. And it wasn’t the first external sign. Circumcision was a sign of the Abrahamic covenant. Sabbath observance was a sign of the Mosaic covenant. Now, we have John and the external sign of baptism.
The catch was – once the Messiah arrived, He would give a new sign to identify God’s people. What was that sign?
Joel 2:28 And afterward, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your old men will dream dreams, your young men will see visions. NIV
Ezekiel 36:25-27 I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you will be clean; I will cleanse you from all your impurities and from all your idols. 26 I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. 27 And I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws. NIV
We also see it in one of today’s verses, Luke 3:16 I baptize you with water. But one more powerful than I will come, the thongs of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire. Let’s break this down. First, we’ll discuss this baptism of the Holy Spirit, and while we’re at it, perhaps asking if there are any questions on water baptism (the external sign given by believers).
About baptism, here’s what the Baptist Faith & Message say:
VII. Baptism and the Lord’s Supper
Christian baptism is the immersion of a believer in water in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. It is an act of obedience symbolizing the believer’s faith in a crucified, buried, and risen Saviour, the believer’s death to sin, the burial of the old life, and the resurrection to walk in newness of life in Christ Jesus. It is a testimony to his faith in the final resurrection of the dead. Being a church ordinance, it is prerequisite to the privileges of church membership and to the Lord’s Supper.
The Lord’s Supper is a symbolic act of obedience whereby members of the church, through partaking of the bread and the fruit of the vine, memorialize the death of the Redeemer and anticipate His second coming.
Matthew 3:13-17; 26:26-30; 28:19-20; Mark 1:9-11; 14:22-26; Luke 3:21-22; 22:19-20; John 3:23; Acts 2:41-42; 8:35-39; 16:30-33; 20:7; Romans 6:3-5; 1 Corinthians 10:16,21; 11:23-29; Colossians 2:12.
Simply put, baptism is an outward sign of an inward work. We follow in obedience to the command of Christ in getting baptized, and there really is no excuse for not doing this publicly as a sign of our identifying with Christ.
Now, on to this baptism with the Holy Spirit. While water baptism (the outward sign) is still something done, this baptism by Messiah would be different, it would somehow be an internal sign. Any external sign could be duplicated by man, the work that Messiah would do in giving the Holy Spirit to believers could not be duplicated by men.
Moving on from that, the last part is very interesting. This mention of fire. What is that all about? Fire was associated with judgment just as the winnowing fork is in Matthew 3:12 (His winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor, gathering his wheat into the barn and burning up the chaff with unquenchable fire). When Messiah comes to set up shop, He will remove all that is worthless, useless, lifeless. He will accept into His kingdom only what has life, and that life would be the life that men had received from Him ALONE. And that John denied that he was the Messiah in his ministry to introduce the Messiah – note he appeals to the Old Testament scriptures. The concept of the Messiah was well established in the Judaism of the day, so John had no need to describe the Messiah.
Now I will say this – be careful in what you ask for. You’ve heard that! But Jews longed for a Messiah, a Savior! But their understanding of what they were going to get was a bit misshapen from years of errant insight.
What about us? Have we gone through baptism? What about the Holy Spirit? Looking forward to the baptism with / by fire?
Permalink
Posted in Bible Study, Bryan Dunn at 10:10 am by Bryan Dunn
The Explanation by John (Matt. 3:7-10; Luke 3:7-14)
John was a ‘hit’ if you will. Luke records that crowds came out to be baptized by him (vs. 7).
[John] did not prophesy in vain. He moved Israel as Israel had not been moved for centuries. New hopes, new fears, awoke in Judea. The people became conscious of sin, conscious of their failure to be the people of God. The voice from the banks of the Jordan awed the heart of Jerusalem, and stilled the conflicts of priests and scribes. For one splendid moment the nation awoke to the meaning of its singular and sublime faith, forgot its struggles against the eagles and images of Caesar in its consciousness of the reign and righteousness of God.
There seemed to be a divide in the crowd. One side was the religious leaders of the day – the Pharisees and Sadducees (Matt. 3:7). These leaders were self-righteous and considered themselves acceptable to God (indeed, I would argue many of them felt that they were made Jews by God and had no need to do much more than follow what had been left by their forefathers – they were in no position to need anything or anyone else).
John knew of their rejection of his message and didn’t hold back – ‘You brood of vipers!’ According to the law, a viper was unclean and unacceptable to God and would defile anything it touched. In calling them snakes, John said they were unclean and spread defilement to everyone they touched. He repudiated the teaching that one’s relationship to Abraham was a basis for entrance into the kingdom. He reminded them that God was able to give life to stones to make them the children of Abraham.
Imagine the crowds listening. John, demanding repentance from the religious leaders! He said it honestly and had a sense of urgency in his request, ‘Produce fruit in keeping with repentance … The ax is already at the root of the trees, and every tree that does not produce good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire’. John had a concern for coming judgment and asked that the religious leaders escape it by showing through their lives their true repentance.
In his audience there were many publicans and sinners, with Gentiles, Samaritans, soldier-police, and people of all classes…as the crowds pressed forward for confession and baptism, John put his finger on the sin of each in turn, besides laying down certain broad principles of reformed conduct. Those who were able, must be charitable in a definite way, sharing the necessary clothing and food with those who had need. John had pointed out the sin of the Pharisaic class to be that of a self-righteous dependences on their hereditary and class privilege. The Pharisees had not even inquired what they must do.
To John (and to Christ), the ‘outcasts’ were as acceptable as those who deemed themselves already to be sons of the kingdom. And the ‘outcasts’ adopted the message…the same can’t be said for the religious leaders.
Note that in Luke (verses 10-14) the others in the crowd inquired as to what they needed to do. And John told them what to do. In each case repentance was required, a turning from what they were doing (sin) and a turning towards what they should do. It mattered not if you were a religious leader, a tax collector, a soldier, or an ‘outcast’ – repent!
So…what about us? The message has not changed much. Sometimes we need to hear it, and we need to hear the ‘real deal’, not a smoothed over and sweet “I’m OK and you’re OK too” message. Today, you need to repent. Repent from…? That’s between you and God. But you know what it is. When will you repent so you can restore the relationship with God through His Son Jesus Christ? It is not beyond His blood to repair…why not give it up and turn from the sin and run towards God…He waits for you with open arms!
Permalink
Posted in Bible Study, Bryan Dunn at 10:08 am by Bryan Dunn
The Message from John (Matt. 3:1-6; Mark 1:2-6; Luke 3:3-6)
Before we get to the ministry of Christ, we are introduced to the ministry of the forerunner, John the Baptist. He didn’t follow in his father’s footsteps and serve in the temple…God called him instead to a unique ministry outside of the established religious system – both geographically and from the standpoint of what he preached.
The three synoptic writers relate John to the prophetic programs that Jews were familiar with in the Old Testament. All quote Isaiah 40:3-5 in their explanation. If we look there, you will see this is a message of comfort to a group of oppressed and distressed people. The northern kingdom was in captivity, and the southern kingdom threatened with a similar fate. The prophecy was for the coming Messiah, to give the nations hope in a better future. They continued in their sin and, under the hand of Nebuchadnezzar’s invasion, destruction of Jerusalem, and deportation of their nation suffered the consequences of their sins.
So, when God returned, He would speak to them outside the boundaries of the temple and Jerusalem. This came to pass with John. No priestly garb, no service in a temple, he wore the clothes of a prophet and served in the desert. Of interest, John appeared in the role of a prophet, but was not introduced as such. To this day we refer to him as they did thousands of years ago – John the Baptist. The nation to which John came with his message was very familiar with the ritualistic use of water in baptism. So maybe we should discuss that…
BAPTISM - The word baptism is the English form of the Grk. baptismos. The verb from which this noun is derived-baptizo-is held by some scholars to mean “to dip, immerse.” But this meaning is held by others to be not the most exact or common but rather a meaning that is secondary or derived. By the latter it is claimed that all the term necessarily implies is that the element employed in baptism is in close contact with the person or object baptized. The Gk. prepositions en and eis have played a prominent part in discussions respecting the mode of baptism.
Jewish Baptism. Baptisms, or ceremonial purifications, were common among the Jews. Not only priests and other persons but also clothing, utensils, and articles of furniture were thus ceremonially cleansed (Lev 8:6; Ex 19:10-14; Mark 7:3-4; Heb 9:10).
John’s Baptism. The baptism of John was not Christian, but Jewish. It was, however, especially a baptism “for repentance.” The only faith that it expressed concerning Christ was that His coming was close at hand. Those who confessed and repented of their sins and were baptized by John were thus obedient to his call to “make ready the way of the Lord” (Matt 3:3).
Because the disciples Paul met at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-7) were “acquainted only with the baptism of John” (18:25), i.e., were ignorant of the Christian message and the baptism of the Holy Spirit, save as a prophesied event (19:4), they did not “receive the Holy Spirit, when [they] believed” (19:2). They had heard only John’s message and received only John’s baptism, which were introductory and merely preparatory. Faith in them could not bring the free gift of the Holy Spirit. The moment they heard and believed the new message of a crucified, risen, and ascended Savior, they received the blessing of that message-the gift of the Holy Spirit, which included His baptizing ministry.
(from The New Unger’s Bible Dictionary. Originally published by Moody Press of Chicago, Illinois. Copyright © 1988.)
John’s preaching begins with the word ‘repent’ (Matt. 3:1). This brings to mind an important Old Testament truth. In Deut. 28 we can start to read and learn it. Obedience = Blessing; Disobedience = Discipline. In Deut. 30 God revealed that the discipline could not and would not be lifted from the nation until they turned back to God from their sin and obeyed His commands. Repentance was just such a return to God.
Mark was preaching a ‘baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins’ (vs. 4). So discussions usually crop up around this asking the question of if this means that the act of faith accompanied with the act of baptism effected the forgiveness of sins. Basically it was a public act of confession of sin, humiliating to the Jews, that signified their decision of faith to turn from sin and towards God who could forgive. The next verse in Mark The whole Judean countryside and all the people of Jerusalem went out to him. Confessing their sins, they were baptized by him in the Jordan River (vs. 6) tells me that John announced Jesus as coming to a literal kingdom on planet earth with a literal promised Messiah. So this generated widespread interest. And those interested submitted in large numbers to John’s baptism as a symbol of the people’s expectations and hope of this Messiah.
So, John was brining together those who believe in and anticipated the coming Messiah. Messiah would provide them with the forgiveness of sin and institute a kingdom of peace and righteousness in which they would enjoy the benefits of His reign.
If we had the benefit of someone, a bit unorthodox perhaps, that came to let us in on an impending ushering in of God’s return, what would we do? Listen? Ignore them? Ask them to move on to another church or city?
Permalink
Posted in Bible Study, Bryan Dunn at 10:07 am by Bryan Dunn
The Ambassador of the King: The Message to John
It had been 400 years. No prophet to Israel had delivered a message from God. The time had come for God to break the silence. Luke, ever the historian, was careful to describe the time that this prophet arrived.
Sheperd writes – The times were ripe. The crisis had been reached in this history of the Roman Empire, which held absolute sway over the whole known world. Rome had reached her highest pinnacle of development under Augustus and was now on the downward road of decline. … All religions of all the subject peoples were tolerated in Rome, but not satisfied the deeply felt needs of the times. Slavery abounded, and indescribable cruelty everywhere marked the treatment accorded to the slave. The sacredness of marriage had disappeared and nameless abominations remained instead. Oriental religions with the vilest of rites were substituted in the place of the ancient religion of Rome. Worship of the Emperors led to promiscuous deification accompanied with the vilest lusts. Might was substituted in the place of right and justice fled from the land.
It wasn’t just Rome. Israel also needed God’s revelation in a mighty way.
Sheperd writes – Harshness characterized the administration of Palestine in the reign of Tiberius. In Rome the Jews suffered severe persecution. The procurators in Judea had changed the High Priest four times, although it was supposed to be an office of life tenure; until they found and appointed Caiaphas, who was willing to be a puppet of the Roman Tyranny. Violence, robbery, insults, venality, murders without trial, and cruelty, were charged against the administration of Pontius Pilate. Annas was deposed from the office of High Priest after nine years, and various successors were tried out, until Caiaphas, his son-in-law, succeeded to the office. Annas through his astuteness and political influence, remained the power behind the throne still, and continued to preside of the Sanhedrin (Acts 4:6).
The religious conditions in Palestine were low. There was much religiosity but little sincere relition. The externals had been multiplied and the spirit had been quenched. The Pharisees emphasized separateness but not true holiness. They filled themselves with self-satisfaction, depending on their hereditary relationships with Abraham and losing sight of the necessity of personal character. The Scribes professed great devotion to the Scriptures, but emphasized traditionalism and sought selfish aggrandizement. The multiplied regulations for every detail of life, until these became a burden too heavy to be borne. The ceremonial was elevated to the same rank with the moral law, with the result that the latter was soon lost to view.
As to the date or time that John began his prophetic ministry, Hoehner writes extensively on the chronological problems related to the ministry. These revolve around the date of Tiberius, which is crucial to a determination of the dating of all events in Christ’s life. See the bottom of page 79 through page 80 for a thorough treatment of the issue.
So in verses 1 and 2 of Luke 3, we see that Luke identifies the Roman authorities who were in power, and also the high priests who ruled supreme in the religious realm (Annas and Caiaphas). The Romans recognized Caiaphas as the high priest, the Jewish people continued to recognized Annas (the ruling power behind the office).
Also in verse 2 we read the word of God came to John son of Zechariah in the desert. You can find similar statements at the introduction to Haggai’s prophecy
Haggai 1:1 In the second year of King Darius, on the first day of the sixth month, the word of the LORD came through the prophet Haggai to Zerubbabel son of Shealtiel, governor of Judah, and to Joshua son of Jehozadak, the high priest: NIV
Zechariah’s prophecy
Zechariah 1:1 In the eighth month of the second year of Darius, the word of the LORD came to the prophet Zechariah son of Berekiah, the son of Iddo: NIV
Malachi’s prophecy
Malachi 1:1 An oracle: The word of the LORD to Israel through Malachi. NIV
God is consistent – this is the ‘formula’ for a prophetic message from God to be delivered to the nation Israel. So John stood in the same relationship to Israel that the three great postexilic prophets occupied. He was God’s messenger with God’s message that was to be delivered to God’s people.
But…God chose to send John to the desert. Not to the king’s court. Not to the temple. His lifestyle didn’t sit well either. He seemed to be ‘outside’ the established religious ‘norm’ for that day. In fact, John did not come to transform the religious order of his day, he came to separate people from it and beckon them to the Lord.
Fairbairn writes - … a New Prophet had appeared, ancient in manners and spirit, modern in speech and purpose. No sleek scribe, no pompous priest, or courtier clad in soft raiment was he; but a son of the desert, clad in garments of coarse camel’ hair, bound round him by a leathern girdle, seeking his food from the rock where the wild bee left its hone, and the locust came – a man full of the stern spirit of solitude and the thoughts God speaks to the soul that can dare to be alone. He called himself a Voice, but his was not like the still, small voice the Prophet had heard in his mountain cave; he was rather like the wind and the fire that broke in pieces the rocks, heralds as they were of the low sweet voice that was to come out of the silence they left.
What would we do if a ‘new kid on the block’ started to proclaim a message from God? Would we heed it? Scorn it? Mock it?
Permalink
Posted in Bible Study, Bryan Dunn at 10:05 am by Bryan Dunn
His Boyhood – His Development (Luke 2:51-52)
The key thing to note in these couple of verses is found in a short phrase in verse 51 – [he] was obedient to them. Obedience characterized the life of Jesus from His earliest infancy. He obeyed the law. He obeyed his parents. He obeyed the government. He obeyed His Father even to His death. This was one of those characteristics of Christ we see over and over again.
There were 18 years of silence at this point, from Christ at 12 until He reached 30. The synopsis we get from Luke include Jesus developing intellectually (in wisdom), physically (in stature), spiritually (in favor with God), and socially (in favor with men).
Note that this is spoken of favorably. How so? In a flattering fashion? Like one of admiration?
Or perhaps other took the not so flattering approach, kinda like the teacher’s pet.
The bottom line, those that came into contact with him spoke favorably. His Father was pleased with Him, and men on earth did not withhold their admiration / approval of His conduct.
Pentecost adds ‘His humanity was as perfect as His deity was complete’. Let’s ponder that and ask ourselves a few questions.
How do others view us (and I ask that without hesitating to let you and others know that I don’t really CARE what you think of me personally)? We can get a clue from this insight…however, I don’t subscribe to us attempting to ‘live up’ to the expectations of others.
Permalink
Posted in Bible Study, Bryan Dunn at 10:03 am by Bryan Dunn
His Boyhood – His visit to Jerusalem (Luke 2:41-50)
It was the custom of Jesus’ parents to travel to Jerusalem each year to observe the Feast of the Passover. This is one of the three feasts which the Israelites were to observe at the central sanctuary. Mary and Joseph made the journey annually to observe these festivals; however, this particular Passover had a greater significance to this household, as Arndt notes:
When a Jewish boy was twelve years old (the Talmud says, ‘at the age of puberty’), he – through a special ceremony…was acknowledged a ‘son of the Law.’ At that age he was supposed to have learned enough to be sufficiently mature for following the mandates of the Law of God. From now on he would be expected to attend the festivals in Jerusalem whose attendance the Law prescribed.
This was the occasion that He would become a ‘son of the law’ and was responsible before the law for Himself, because prior to this the provision was made for Him through His father. It is not known how long the family stayed in Jerusalem, but Luke notes that after the feast was over, while his parents were returning home, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem, but they were unaware of it. The requirement of the Jews was that they observe the Passover in Jerusalem. Also, it was expected that they would observe the Feast of Unleavened Bread there for the succeeding seven days. This was customary, but not required.
Travel to and from the festivals would be done in groups, families with other families so there was strength and protection in numbers (in case of illness or thievery by highway robbers). Some in the group may walk more leisurely than others. It’s not hard to imagine some of Mary and Joseph’s traveling with some special friends, knowing the agreed upon destination for their nightly rest, would not be with every member of the family. Notice the narrative in verse 44 shows that they were aware of the absence of Jesus and they were probably looking forward to catching up with His young legs upon their arrival that evening.
Add to this that the Jewish men usually traveled in one group and the women in another. It’s not hard to see how each parent could have assumed that Jesus was with the other. Joseph may have seen Jesus still has a child traveling with the mother; Mary may have seen that Jesus, as a ‘son of the law’ had left traveling with the women and was with the men.
When they arrived, Jesus was nowhere to be found. It was dark, they probably spent the night at the agreed upon destination. The next day was spent traveling back to Jerusalem. And the day after that they spent searching for Jesus but did not find Him. Then we read in verse 46 After three days they found him in the temple courts, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions. Jesus was an active participant in the discussions being held in the temple court. He was not there just as a listener, because He was also asking questions.
We learn more in verse 47 Everyone who heard him was amazed at his understanding and his answers. It shouldn’t surprise anyone with a 12 year old that questions are being asked. What was extraordinary was that His questions would show keen insight that attracted the attention of the learned teachers. Zeal for knowledge was strong with Jesus, He had made good use of the years of His childhood and stored up much knowledge of the Old Testament in His memory. Looking at this verse, you could say that the teachers may have had problems answering Jesus’ questions, yet when He was questioned He was able to answer them and ‘amaze’ them with the answer that was given.
Now Jesus’ parents discover Him. In verse 48 Mary rebukes Him When his parents saw him, they were astonished. His mother said to him, “Son, why have you treated us like this? Your father and I have been anxiously searching for you”. It’s natural for this unexplained absence to have shaken up His parents – so I would surmise that they took their parenting duties seriously and were concerned about this lapse in responsibility.
In verse 49 we see Jesus’ response - 49 “Why were you searching for me?” he asked. “Didn’t you know I had to be in my Father’s house?”.
Theologians have speculated as to when Jesus first became conscious of the fact that He was God’s son in a peculiar sense and of this Messianic mission. We turn to these words as the sould clear self-revelation of Jesus in His boyhood years. In them we find His feeling of a distinct disappointment, that His parents did not understand Him better. He reveals in them the consciousness of a unique relationship to His Father. He expressed in them a clear sense of His primary obligations to God, which for the time had so engrossed His attention that He almost lost sight of time and His human filial relationships.
Jesus gives a response that, at 12, He was fully aware of His person, His relationship to His Father, and His mission.
Item of thought – was there ever a time that Jesus did not know who He was? Who His Father was? Why He had come into the world?
What about us – do you know who you are, or more specifically, who you are in Christ? Who your Father is? Why are you in the world (what is your mission)?
Permalink
Posted in Bible Study, Bryan Dunn at 10:02 am by Bryan Dunn
His Boyhood – His Growth (Luke 2:40)
The only facts we know about Jesus’ boyhood are found in Luke. In the many years spent in Nazareth, during the time that Jesus grew from infancy to childhood, from childhood to youth, from youth to manhood, the narrative gives us but a brief glimpse. See verse 40. Then, of his youth, except for the account of His questioning the Rabbis in the Temple, the year before He attained Jewish majority – that “He was subject to His parents” and that “He increased in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man”.
Now don’t misunderstand. There are writings that are filled with supposed stories about Jesus (noncanonical ‘gospels’). Luke only notes about his growth physically, and His growth intellectually. Once those were commented on, Luke records Jesus’ spiritual development in the last part of the verse.
Jesus had godly parents who cared for Him, raised Him in a godly household, and taught Him the scriptures and brought Him to the synagogue from the earliest years. Our natural curiosity would like to know more of His development. Scripture is silent. It simply tells us that He went through the normal stages of growth and development.
Permalink
Posted in Bible Study, Bryan Dunn at 10:01 am by Bryan Dunn
His Infancy - In Nazareth (Matthew 2:19-23; Luke 2:39)
We now get to read the record of the third visit by an angel to Joseph. Now, he is instructed to leave Egypt and to return with his family to the land of Israel.
Joseph obeyed at once, but on the way back he heard who the new ruler was. Verse 22 But when he heard that Archelaus was reigning in Judea in place of his father Herod, he was afraid to go there. Having been warned in a dream, he withdrew to the district of Galilee, 23 and he went and lived in a town called Nazareth. In his last hours, Herod changed his will and appointed Archelaus instead of Antipas the oldest son over Judea, Idumea, and Samaria, with the title of King…Archelaus possessed all of the vices and weaknesses of his father and none of his redeeming characteristics. Augustus did not permit him to bear the title of king but that of ethnarch (The ruler of a province (as in the Roman Empire and Byzantine Empire) or certain religious rulers with secular authority). He was not liked by the Jews, and immediately on his accession slew 3000 Jews in the Temple at the Passover.
So, it appears that Joseph at first intended to move back to Bethlehem. That would be a natural choice since he lived there previously and his trade would have easily supplied his modest wants in the town. But once he learned of this new ruler, common prudence dictated that he not return there. So we now get the record of a fourth angelic visit or some other form of warning Joseph received. He needed to go into Galilee.
Joseph chose Nazareth as the place to dwell. Matthew relates that this had some significance. See verse 23 So was fulfilled what was said through the prophets: “He will be called a Nazarene.” Since there is no specific Old Testament prophecy we can turn to that predicts Jesus’ settling in Nazareth, the question should be raised – how was Matthew using Scripture? See the book, page 73 for 3 alternatives. Pentecost relates that Matthew evidently saw a connection between Galileans, who were despised and rejected by the Jews, and the One spoken of in Isaiah 53:3 He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering. Like one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not. Note that in verse 23 the use of the term prophets is plural, not singular. Because of that Matthew seems to have been summarizing the Old Testament teaching concerning the despised and rejected One. It was significant that He dwelt in a despised and rejected place.
The attitude of Jews in Judea toward the Galileans was observed by Smith:
…the Galileans were despised by the proud Judeans. Judaea was the home of orthodoxy, the shrine of Israel’s sacred institutions. Hers were Jerusalem, the Temple, the Sanhedrin, the great Teachers; and she boasted of these distinctions and disdained the boorish folk of Galilee. The ignorance of the latter was a byword, and, when they visited Jerusalem at the festal seasons, their manners, dress, and accent were the jest of the citizens. Since they spoke with a strong burr, the instant they opened their mouths their nationality was discovered, and their confusion of the gutturals sometimes occasioned ludicrous blunders. A Galilean woman once said to her neighbor: ‘Come, and I will give you butter to eat,’ and it seemed as thought she said: ‘May a lion devour you!’ The Judeans derided the Galileans, but their contempt was probably not unmingled with jealousy. The contrast between their own barren land and fair and fruitful Galilee awoke their envy…the contempt of the Judeans was certainly unjust. They had a saying: ‘out of Galilee a prophet ariseth not,’ regardless that several of Israel’s greatest prophets had been Galileans…Galilee gave the Messiah a home. Judea gave Him a cross.
Geikie adds: The Jew of the south, wrapped in self-importance, as living in or near the holy city, amidst the schools of the Rabbis, and under the shadow of the Temple, and full of religious pride in his assumed superior knowledge of the Law, and greater purity as a member of a community nearly wholly Jewish, looked down on his Galilean brethren. The very ground he trod was more holy that the soil of Galilee, and the repugnance of the North to adopt the prescriptions of the Rabbis was, itself, a ground of estrangement and self-exaltation. He could not believe that the Messiah could come from a part so inferior, for ‘the Law was to go forth from Zion, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.’ Jesus found willing hearers and many disciples in the cities and towns of Galilee, but He made little impression on Judea.
Ah yes…can’t you feel the love! Kinda like Virginia/West ‘by god’ Virginia.
A friend from West Virginia was shopping at the Wal-Mart in Blacksburg, VA. At the cash register, my friend wrote a check. The clerk asked for her driver’s license. She presented her West Virginia driver’s license and the clerk grabbed it away from her and scoffed at her, “If you’re going to use a fake ID, you could at least use a real state!” A manager was required to verify West Virginia’s statehood.
Did you hear about the New 3 Million Dollar West Virginia State Lottery? You gets 3 dollars a year for a million years.
Why do folks from West Virginia go to the movie theater in groups of 18 or more? 17 and under not admitted.
Why did OJ Simpson want to move to West Virginia? Everyone has the same DNA.
Did you hear that the governor’s mansion in West Virginia burned down? Almost took out the whole trailer park.
A West Virginian came home and found his house on fire, rushed next door, telephoned the fire department and shouted, “Hurry over here. My house is on fire!”
“OK,” replied the fireman, “how do we get there?”
“Say, don’t you still have those big red trucks?”
The West Virginian and his gal were embracing passionately in the front seat of the car.
“Want to go in the back seat?” she asked.
“No,” he replied.
A few minutes later she asked, “Now do you want to get in the back seat?”
“No,” he said again, “I wanna stay here in the front seat with you.”
Lord – help us to keep our petty preconceived notions and prejudices out of the way of what you would have us do.
Permalink
« Previous entries · Next entries »
