Ask Dr. Couch #46

Dr. Couch, what do the words holocaust and pogrom mean? ANSWER: Holocaust comes from the word "holo" which means "complete, whole, entire." In the Middle English, and in Latin, the word is "holocaustrum." The Septuagint Greek uses the word "holokauston" meaning to burn up completely and wholly. This Greek word is used in Exodus 10:25; 29:25. It refers to the burnt offerings on the altar. This word comes into current usage and refers to what happened to the Jews during World War II. Many thousands, if not millions, were consumed by the fires of Nazi hatred. And by the way, we now have evidence that the main reason for World War II was to get rid of European Jewry. The Germans were paranoid about the Jews. From start to finish, in the rise of Hitler, the purpose was to rid the world of Israel. This was top priority with Hitler and many, many Germans. Pogrom is a Yiddish and a Russian word that described the persecution of the Jews in Russia around 1880-85. It speaks of the organized massacre of the Jews during that period, but also, of any other time in which there is a distinct effort to destroy and eliminate God's chosen people. The word comes from the Russian word "pogramit;" the word "gromit" means to destroy, devastate, and that comes from the idea of "thunder." These two words are applied only to what happened to the Jewish people. They are graphic and descriptive words that conjure up a terrible picture of destruction and satanic hatred. Thanks for asking. Mal Couch, Ph.D., Th.D.

Ask Dr. Couch

Dr. Couch, what is going on in our country? ANSWER:  It is the apostasy, but it's happening not only here but worldwide. Specifically, in America, one of the things taking place is the splintering or shattering of our national cohesion. We are being split racially. Our laws will now be watered down by racial segments. The laws once governing this land were Reformation, European in nature. Now they will be seen through the glasses of a Latin, or even a Muslim orientation. There will be no turning back! The direction is set.    All that is taking place has spiritual and theological overtones. Most in our Evangelical churches do not comprehend the nature of the changes we're experiencing. Our new President, Barack Hussein Obama, recently said this is not a Christian nation but a mixture of religions. In one sense, he is right, in that our country was not established as a theocracy. But in the larger picture, he is wrong, and is very ignorant of history. The founding Fathers saw the Bible as the foundation, or the base, upon which our Constitution would rest.    Many believe Benjamin Franklin was not a Christian. The jury is still out on that question. I believe that it is possible that over the years he returned to the faith of his parents, and trusted Christ as his Savior. But it is clear that during the Federal Convention of 1787 he realized that the Congress needed to call upon God daily in order to secure His blessings on the nation. He said:    "In this situation of the convention, groping, as it were, in the dark to find political truth, and scarce able to distinguish it when presented to us, how has it happened that we have not hitherto once thought of humbly applying to the Father of lights to illuminate our understanding? In the beginning of the context with Great Britain, when we were sensible of danger, we had daily prayers in this hall for divine protection. Our prayers were heard, and they were graciously answered. … Have we now forgotten that powerful Friend? Or do we imagine that we no longer need His assistance? I have lived, sir, a long time; and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth,--that God governs in the affairs of men. And, if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid? We have been assured, sir, in the sacred writings, that 'except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it.' I firmly believe this; and I also believe that, without His concurring aid, we shall succeed in this political building no better than the builders of Babel."    I am presently writing a book on the spiritual founding of America. Send me your address and we'll send you a FREE copy when the book is published.    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch

Ask Dr. Couch #41

Dr. Couch, what do you think of those who hold we should today be under the Sabbath? Also, some of the Reformed folks say Sunday is the Sabbath. This seems all very unbiblical. What do you think? ANSWER: Yes, yes, and yes! You are right on! Your question just throws more light on why the Reformed people are off in so many places, especially with their unbiblical "Covenant theology" position. Only dispensationalism makes it clear how the Bible goes forward, and shows without a doubt we are not under any part of the Law. The New Testament makes it clear that the early church met on the first day of the week (Sunday) and not on the Sabbath (Saturday). Check out Acts 20:7 and 1 Corinthians 16:2. Down through church history this became the norm for all the assemblies. Though it must be pointed out there is no "moral command" in the New Testament to meet on any particular day; this is just what the church did. Clearly, they were moving away from Sabbath meetings that were more Jewish and "synagogue" in nature. Thanks for asking, Mal Couch, Ph.D., Th.D.

A Letter of Thanks

Dear Dr. Couch,   I received the 3 books you sent me about 2 weeks ago. Just last night I finished reading through, "For the Cause of Zion". This book sums up what is going on in the Middle East and Israel in particular and you have confirmed all my observations that we are indeed coming in the last days. I had the conviction the Rapture may just be in our time because of all the events you mentioned. I am really thankful for you.  At the moment I'm reading through your book "The Biblical Theology of the Church". I knew there was something wrong with the nomination of leaders/elders in our church and my convictions all along were right when I read your book about this matter. I was recently elected as one of the elders (a week ago). As far as the biblical qualification is concerned I'm qualified. It just dawns on me that the way the church is electing elders is just really not biblical. In the first six months that I've been in this church I have had the impression actually that they are in apostasy. I only stayed in this church because they are carefully listening to my Bible studies and Sunday schools.  By the coming July of this year we will go through the book of Revelation in our Bible studies, I was the first to raised my hand for this choice, I felt it's a timely study. I saw your commentary on this book in our local Bible bookstore but it's quite a fortune compared with the price in the US. I think in Australia we don't have the comfort of buying good books like yours at an affordable price. I can see too many rubbish books in our local Bible bookstore here.  I wish to thank you very much again for the 3 books you sent me, I know it will help me a lot particularly regarding ecclesiology. Actually your website is helping me a lot especially your "Ask Dr. Couch" portion, it's short but precise and straight to the point. May our Lord continue to bless your ministry in the middle of the apostate world and churches may your light shine and be a blessing.   Yours in the Lord service, A. B. (Australia)

CHRISTIAN PROGRAMS CUT

President Barack Hussein Obama has by executive order cut Christian programs from the nationally sponsored PBS network. There was no explanation given and there were no objections from Congress or even from the public. In fact there are very few people who even know about this action! There is nothing that can be done. This is part of his plan to carry out the idea that this is no longer a Christian nation and such programming should not be aired. The apostasy is coming quickly! We are rapidly losing our freedoms and the blessings that have sustained this nation for so long!

Ask Dr. Couch #36

Dr. Couch, does God love the non-elect? I noticed that A. W. Pink argues that He does not love the elect. What do you say? ANSWER: I always say what the Bible says. Later Calvinists went to extremes and pushed some of their election thinking too far, and certainly beyond what the Bible says. 1. Total Depravity shows that no man can come to God on his own, by himself. He is dead in trespasses and sins. 2. God provides redemption for all but the "all" (or none) will by themselves come to Him. "The sacrifice of Christ is sufficient for all but applied only to the elect." Many Calvinists agree with this statement. 3. Since none will come of themselves God divinely calls only the elect. He clearly is not "wishing" that any should perish, but He has not willed that ALL come to Him—and that is obvious to anyone who thinks about it! 4. Election is specific. Only those whom God draws will come to Him! Many men like Pink went philosophical and left being biblical. You can't do that! You have to take a passage at face value. You cannot say "well, it doesn't mean that!" I'm specifically thinking of the passages that speak of God loving the world. The hard-core Calvinists have to say, "That means the world of the elect. It doesn't mean what it says!" The passages do not say what they want them to say! Here are the verses that I think destroy their view of Limited Atonement, i.e., the view that says the atonement of Christ was ONLY for the elect. Don't simply follow what the hard-core Calvinists say about Limited Atonement! Look up the passages for yourself: John 3:16 1 Tim. 2:4, 6 2 Pet. 3:9 Titus 2:11; 3:4 I Tim. 4:10 1 John 2:2 I have a theological friend everyone reading this answer would know. He began to lean toward Limited Atonement and we were arguing. I said "what do you do with 1 John 2:2?" He went brain dead and finally answered: "Well, yes, I do have a problem with that passage!" I answered back "Dick Tracy, no kidding!" He never brought up the subject again. Thanks for asking, Dr. Mal Couch

Ask Dr. Couch #31

Dr. Couch, do Romans 3:31 and Hebrews 10:16 support the Covenant theology idea that believers are under the Law as a rule of life and for sanctification? It seems to me that the NT teaches that believers are not under the Law but under grace. ANSWER: If we were under Law by works, we would fail, as the Jews failed trying to keep it. Peter reminded the Jews at the Jerusalem Council that they could not keep the Law which was like putting a test upon God "by placing a yoke (upon our necks) which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear" (Acts 15:10). The point in Romans 3:31 is that God sees my faith, in a sense, fulfilling the Law: "We establish the Law" by our faith. The Greek word "establish" means "to confirm." Thus by faith God sees me as a Law keeper, though really it was Christ who lived the perfect life and kept it! Romans 3:31 says nothing about placing the church believers back under the Mosaic Law system. In Hebrews 10:16-17, the author is establishing the fact that the New Covenant is now in operation. Jeremiah 31:31-on shows that the New Covenant replaces the Mosaic system. By this New Covenant God sees the believer as having the Law principles established inside, in the heart and in the mind. It no longer is something to keep by external standards. If you go back and look at the prophecy of the New Covenant in Jeremiah 31:31-on, you see that the Mosaic Law has been replaced. We are of course to live out in our lives the moral and spiritual principles that can be seen in the Law, but this is not saying we are now under the Mosaic Law as a way of life or as a system. We are not! The Covenant guys just put all of the Bible into one big mixing bowl and stir it all up. Dispensational guys look carefully at context and see the unfolding plan. Thanks for asking, Mal Couch, Ph.D., Th.D.

Ask Dr. Couch #32

Dr. Couch, I am considering purchasing either the Scofield Reference Bible or a Ryrie Study Bible. Which do you recommend? ANSWER: I have for years used both. You can now get the Scofield in the NAS version. I think this is excellent and use it mostly. Ryrie is good and reliable but a little thin in content in some places. The most important thing is that both are clearly premillennial and dispensational. They sell the most—in the millions of copies! A plain Covenant and Reformed Bible does not sell. This tells me that the layman wants to know the truth and always goes with dispensational writers, though not being sophisticated as to all the issues. The Bible IS premillennial and dispensational! Thanks for asking, Mal Couch, Ph.D., Th.D.

Ask Dr. Couch #30

Dr. Couch, what do you think of the book Romans Verse By Verse by William Newell? I heard it is one of the best dispensational commentaries on Romans. ANSWER: It is a great volume on Romans. Newell years ago taught at Moody Bible Institute where I worked and taught at for awhile. He was an outstanding practical dispensational scholar. I also highly recommend from my NT commentary series, of which I act as general editor, Romans by Woodrow Kroll, published by AMG Publishers. Both commentaries would be an excellent addition to your library. Thanks for asking, Mal Couch, Ph.D., Th.D.

Ask Dr. Couch #29

Why are so many saying now that "The Greats," Spurgeon and Pink (both five point Calvinists) believed in Lordship Salvation? Are they reading something into their writings? Were they into Lordship Salvation? I have a collection of the old Calvinistic writings, including the ones you mentioned in your question. And you could not come up with Lordship Salvation from their writings. The term did not come along until John MacArthur published his book The Gospel According to Jesus. MacArthur admits why he came up with the saying and this teaching. He saw so much carnality in churches that he deduced many must not have claimed Christ as Lord when they made a "profession." In fact he goes on and writes that one can not be saved unless he claims Christ as Lord! His deduction is wrong! Christians can be carnal, and as Paul says, "walk like mere men." What MacArthur did (though he would deny this) was to put an additional requirement upon simple and basic salvation faith. Over forty times "belief" is mentioned by itself for salvation in the book of John. What MacArthur was trying to do was screw the nut down tightly in order to "force" Christians to live a sanctified life! I have been accused of not reading his "Gospel According to Jesus" but this is not so. I have over fifty dog-ears on the pages where he is intellectually and biblically misleading the reader. In their doctrine of Perseverance of the Saints, the old Puritans and Calvinists wanted to add to the doctrine of Eternal Security the "near" perfect walk of the saints. For example the old giant Puritan Baptist John Gill writes in his theology volume: "By Perseverance God keeps the believer from sin, not from the indwelling of it in the hearts of believers; nor from all acts of sin in their conduct; but from the dominion, power, and tyranny of it; and from a final and total falling away through it." While there is absolute truth in this statement it could be interpreted that Christians will never sin "bad," but only slightly bad! What Gill wrote is basically true but anyone in the pastorate knows that the sheep can sin and do terrible things. Paul of course teaches the same thing: "Brothers (Christian brothers), even if a man is caught in any trespass (bad, bad sin), you who are spiritual restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness; each one looking to yourself, lest you too be tempted" (Gal. 6:1). Read what MacArthur writes: "Christ is Lord, and those who refuse him as Lord cannot use him as Savior. Everyone who receives him must surrender to his authority, for to say we receive Christ when in fact we reject his right to reign over us is utter absurdity." What MacArthur writes is absurd! I have been in the ministry almost fifty years and I have never seen a new believer in Christ "refuse, refuse to surrender to his authority, reject" Him as Lord! We all do that when we rebel and sin! That shows our carnality! I have never known anyone who consciously "refuses" Christ in the way MacArthur is claiming. In his book MacArthur also takes to task Lewis S. Chafer for pointing out from 1 Corinthians 2-3 that Paul describes two types of Christians: those who walk spiritual and those who walk carnal. This is what Paul writes. MacArthur jumps on Chafer for simply quoting Paul! MacArthur must not believe Christians can walk carnal! Lordship Salvation will fade away as all error finally does. It is an aberrant position and won't last! Thanks for asking, Mal Couch, Ph.D., Th.D.

GUESSING WORLD LEADERS

Can you guess what world leader we're talking about? He came to power during a worldwide crisis. He always made sure there were a lot of national flags in the background when he spoke. He was recognized as a gifted orator. He moved the people by emotion and not by playing on their critical thinking skills. In fact, he counted on them to stop thinking and be moved by their feelings rather than by rationality.    In the crisis he worked to take away the people's democratic decision making abilities. He took over the unions and made them think they had a place in government. He nationalized big business. He made the population think that their problems were actually started by the previous government authorities. He made most of the decisions for the people and bypassed them and their elected assembly. He turned the nation into a welfare state. He put into place a billion public works projects. He spent the nation out of the world depression. Thus, all freedoms were removed!    Your choice: (1) Adolf Hitler, or (2) Barack Hussein Obama?    History indicates both!    Know your history so you can make rational decisions.

Ask Dr. Couch #28

Dr. Couch, is Revelation 13:3 a reference to the Antichrist or to the restoration of the Roman Empire? ANSWER: The Antichrist is the "beast" in this passage, but he will be the instrument in restoring the Roman Empire. Note in verse 3 he "appears" to have been slain and to have come back from the dead. This is a counterfeit of the actual death and resurrection of Christ. We are now seeing the progressive construction of the Roman Empire taking place in Europe. There is the European parliament, common money, open borders, a common European taxation, and open trade between countries. We premillennialists and dispensationalists are continually being proven correct in our normal, literal interpretation of Scripture. I don't know what the poor allegorist/covenant/amillennial guys are going to do! They have no biblical and prophetic answers as to what we see in history that matches up with Scripture. I sometimes watch Dr. Kenney on television. He never can speak of international issues. His audience is going to sleep, and they rarely have a Bible in their laps. Covenant theology is a dead end and can not speak to the issues of the rapture, the tribulation, and the coming earthly reign of Christ in Jerusalem! Poor fellows! To show how demented the covenant guys are in reference to prophecy, we look to Ellicott's commentary on Revelation. He says, "The beast of Rev. 13 is always the figure of the kingdoms of this world today." And, "the wild beast (the Antichrist) broke forth when Christianity seemed to have put fetters on the Roman empire." What??? What sick interpretation. Thanks for asking, Mal Couch, Ph.D., Th.D.

LIBERTY UNIVERSITY SIDETRACKS THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY

Liberty University closed down the Democratic Party Club on campus saying that the party does not stand for the moral principles of the school. Thank God, and praise the Lord! But be prepared—here comes the ACLU who will make a big ruckus and try to sue the school. The liberals could get away with this but the conservatives will be jumped on.

Ask Dr. Couch #24

Dr. Couch, what do you think of Marvin Rosenthal's Pre-wrath rapture position? ANSWER: When you want Bible answers listen to those capable of truly exegeting the Scriptures. Rosenthal has virtually no biblical training. Those of us who have had years and years of strong theology, and hours and hours of the biblical languages, are far better qualified to explain the truth, and that is in this case, the fact is that the rapture of the church is clearly a PRE-TRIBULATIONAL RAPTURE! A close friend of mine and a fellow graduate school graduate, Dr. Renald Showers, has done the final word on this crazy belief in his book The Pre-Wrath Rapture View (Kregel). Get the book. It will answer the issue once and for all. However I found the Achilles Heal on the subject in Revelation 6:12-17 as clearly shown in my Greek translation. This is the sixth seal, which is way up front at the start of the tribulation and the beginning of the wrath. From the Greek verses 16b-17 we read: "Hide us from the presence of Him who is right now sitting on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb, for the great day of "their" wrath [the wrath of the Father and the Son] CAME, ARRIVED, IS HERE, and who is able to continue to right now be left standing." In other words at this point, at the beginning of the tribulation, the wrath of God and His Son had already arrived, whereas Rosenthal says the wrath comes further down in the book of Revelation. He even foolishly calls in 6:17 the CAME as a future aorist tense, which will in no way fly by the full context and the grammar of the passage. In other words, Rosenthal has an agenda. He wants desperately to put the church somewhere into the tribulation so it can get "cleaned" up from its sins. This is the nutty view of "tribulation sanctification," which means Rosenthal does not understand "Positional" sanctification of the believer, and the fact that this "Positional" truth is what gets us to heaven, not some phony cleaning up by the pain of the tribulation! Why is it that people want to always go down the bumpy back road and not stay on the main highway of clear, obvious meaning of a text? It is because they have an axe to grind, an agenda that somehow fits into their preconceived ideas. And, for some reason, they hate like crazy the obvious pre-tribulational view that is so easy to exegete and explain from the plain meaning of the Bible texts. Thanks for asking, Mal Couch, Ph.D., Th.D.

Ask Dr. Couch

Dr. Couch, you often write about the absolute sovereignty of God found in Scripture. Is John 12:39-41 also a sovereignty passage? ANSWER: Yes, indeed! John quotes Isaiah 53:1 to show that Israel was judicially blinded and would not trust in their own Messiah. For God "has blinded their eyes, and He hardened their heart; lest they see with their eyes, and perceive with their heart, and be converted, and I heal them." John then adds that Isaiah saw the glory of God, and he spoke of Him. Some say that John is saying Isaiah saw the glory of Christ, Israel's Messiah, and thus spoke of Him! Many in Israel were blinded because of wanting the approval of men. Nevertheless, the blinding is a judicial work of God. People do not come to the Lord just by accident. Their sinful depravity keeps them from accepting Him. The Holy Spirit must do His sovereign work or no one would be saved! You cannot escape the sovereignty of God in the Bible. He is in charge of His creation. And because of total depravity, no one will come to the Lord apart from His absolute sovereign work. Thanks for asking. Dr. Mal Couch

Ask Dr. Couch #27

Dr. Couch, many argue that there was not a Christian mandate in the founding of America, and this was supposed to be simply a secular society. How do we answer? ANSWER: The Bible was central to the thinking of the founding fathers even though not all of them (Jefferson) were Christians. People get confused on this issue. They rejected sectarianism, i.e. that this country was to be founded on the Church of England, on Baptist or Methodist doctrine. This they rejected but not the principles of Scripture. Here are some important quotes: "What we obtain too cheaply, we esteem too lightly; it is dearness only that gives everything its value. HEAVEN knows how to put a price upon its goods, and it would be strange indeed if so CELESTIAL an article as freedom should not be highly rated." --Thomas Payne, 1776 "For the support of this declaration with a firm reliance on the protection of the DIVINE PROVIDENCE, we mutually pledge to each other, our lives, our fortunes, and our SACRED honor." --Declaration of Independence Thanks for asking, Mal Couch, Ph.D., Th.D.

Ask Dr. Couch

Dr. Couch, the charismatics, who are generally ignorant about the Greek text, in 1 Corinthians 13:10, take the "perfect" to by the coming of Christ. Thus they say that tongues will not disappear until Christ returns. I understand that you take the perfect to be referring to the completion of the NT canon. Can you explain?

ANSWER: One of the arguments against my position is that the passage does not refer to the NT canon, thus I have to insert that idea in the text. But those who hold that it is referring to Christ's return also insert their idea into the context of the passage. They argue that I am going to my theology (that tongues are no longer with us) in my view. But they are also doing the same thing—inserting their view that it is referring to the second coming of Jesus!

I argue from two points: (1) the coming of this "perfect" is replacing the "partial" mentioned in the passage. We know that the canon of Scripture was not complete when Paul wrote 1 Corinthians. (2) I have evidence from church history that sometime after the canon was complete (circa. 90 AD, with the book of Revelation) that many of the key church fathers said that tongues had ceased.

Does it make sense to say that Christ's coming will cause the "partial" to go away, whatever the partial is? But we can say that for sure we only had part of the canon of Scripture—it was not complete when Paul wrote!

The word "partial" is a neuter word (meros). The verb says that in the future "it will be made ineffective, powerless, abolished." The word is "katargeo", and it is a Future Passive Indicative in form. "The partial will be acted upon in the future and it will be abolished."

Interestingly, in the Greek lexicon (Balz & Schneider) the word meros here has to do with "eschatology (prophecy) and [future] history."

Church history confirms what I say, and so does Balz & Schneider!

Iranaeus (120-202) in his work "Against Heresy" says: "These Corinthians who were 'mature' received the Spirit of God and spoke 'in all languages' (not jibberish). We do not hear of the brothers in the church now speak in these languages."

Chrysostom (345-407) said: "This entire passage (1 Cor. 13) is obscure; but the obscurity is by our own ignorance of the facts referred to and by their cessation, being such as then used to occur but now no longer take place."

Eusebius (126-180) Against Montanus the heretic. "He raved and babbled in a sort of frenzy and ecstasy strange things which was not the custom of the church handed down by tradition from the beginning. Some of those who heard were indignant and they rebuked him as one that was possessed. He stirred up two women and filled them with the false spirit, so that they talked wildly and unreasonably and strangely."

Augustine (354-430). "In the earliest time, the HS fell upon them that believe; and they spoke with tongues (languages) which they had not learned as the Spirit gave them utterance. These were signs adapted for the time to show the gospel of God was to run through all languages over the whole earth. That thing was done for a sign and it passed away."

In my opinion, the argument is over about tongues. This shows the value of church history in that it can explain sometimes what is happening in a biblical text.

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch

Ask Dr. Couch #23

Dr. Couch, in Psalm 74:8 there is a mention of the synagogue. I thought the synagogue did not begin until the period between the Testaments. How do we answer? ANSWER: Many Bible versions translate the word in this verse as "the meeting place." It is the Hebrew word Mo'av. The Rabbis point out in my Jewish commentaries that this psalm was probably written during the Babylonian captivity when the Temple had been destroyed. They say, "It is preferable to find the setting of the psalm in the onslaught in the sixth century which destroyed the Southern Kingdom and the Temple, and inaugurated the Babylonian captivity." Thus, more than likely, the Jews in captivity began meeting in small groups that later developed into synagogues in Babylon, and of course in the land, when they returned from the exile. The Holman Dictionary has another take on the passage and writes: "Worship centered around the Temple in Jerusalem. Psalm 74:8, written late in Old Testament times, seems to refer to local places of worship destroyed when the Temple was destroyed." Unger agrees in his OT Commentary I had re-published. He believes these were "meeting places," houses of sacred worship where the Law was read even while the Temple was standing. He prefers to call them "houses of sacred meetings." Thanks for asking, Mal Couch, Ph.D., Th.D.

A WORD OF THANKS

From an older pastor who works with young ministers: "Dr. Couch, your books have been such a blessing especially to the younger pastors. I do rejoice that they provide a real help in getting them orientated and acquainted with the Word of God." "I am finding more and more young men who appreciate us old grandpas! Second, I am finding lay people who are so sick of fluff that when I tell them of men and churches that I know are blessing others, they regularly respond with 'I didn't know that there were such who used the Bible so often in their preaching.'" "Thank you again for your help!" PS: To all young ministers of the gospel, if you will send me your address, we'll fire off a couple of my books at no charge for your library!

Ask Dr. Couch #22

Dr. Couch, what about Calvinism? We have a new pastor who says he believes what Calvinism says. We voted him in without knowing what he held on this issue. I am confused and my heart is heavy. Can you help? ANSWER: Your heart should be glad that the young pastor is teaching the great truths about the sovereignty of God. Let me tell you my story: Before I went to college I heard a seminary student teach on God's sovereignty and His divine election and predestination. I thought he was crazy, so in college, I used all my free time in the library trying to refute him. Lo and behold I ended up the strongest Calvinist you can imagine, minus their teaching on Limited Atonement, which cannot be supported by Scripture. "Basic" Calvinism is what has been taught at all our most formidable Evangelical colleges and seminaries. Many (but not all) in the Covenant and Reformed camp teach Limited Atonement, but as I say, I can debate anyone on this issue to show that it is not biblical. To me "Basic" Calvinism would be: (1) the absolute and total sovereignty of God, (2) the providence of God (He holds all things together and sustains all), (3) the Total Depravity of Man (man is dead in his sins, as a dead body!), (4) the absolute and complete election and predestination of some to salvation, but obviously not all, (5) the security of the believer (all who are saved will be kept saved!). I can prove all of these doctrines by Scripture. I taught the same at the schools founded by D. L. Moody, and by C. I. Scofield who founded Philadelphia College of Bible (now Philadelphia Christian University). As for the freewill of man, you cannot find "freewill" in Scripture, though from Geneis to Revelation, you find that mankind is "responsible." How can man be responsible for his actions and God be sovereign? Or how can God be absolutely sovereign and man be responsible for his actions? I DON'T KNOW, but that is what the Bible shows to be true. You have been taught that Calvinism is "bad" but you have been taught wrong! I suggest you purchase Pink's Sovereignty of God, and Boettner's The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination. And if you can get your hands on it, Lewis Sperry Chafer's Systematic Theology, volumes I and III. Again, I do not hold to Limited Atonement because as a Greek teacher, this view cannot be sustained grammatically and textually. It is the weakest view proposed by hard core Calvinists. Nevertheless, all the Reformers held the views I believe are biblically sustainable. America was founded basically on Calvinistic theology. We owe a great debt of gratitude to our understanding of systematic Bible study to John Calvin, yet I do not hold to a view simply because Calvin, or any Bible teacher, taught such. I must be able to explain the Bible textually and verse by verse. And that is what Scofield Ministries is all about—the propagation of biblical truth and sound biblical exegesis. Thanks for asking, Mal Couch, Ph.D., Th.D.

More of the Inconvenient Truth by Jan Markell

No matter how you cut it, I am an outcast. To the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), I am a right-wing extremist. I am suspect because I am pro-life, pro-family, anti-illegal immigration, pro-U.S. sovereignty, study the end-times and thus might be part of the militia movement, and I trust returning war vets. Thankfully, DHS head, Janet Napolitano, gave a partial ppology to the last mentioned. But now I fall into another guilty category: I am a friend of Israel, also known as a Christian Zionist. Church of England priest Stephen Sizer has written another vitriolic book, this time titled, Zion's Christian Soldiers. Suggesting we are like the Crusaders, Sizer warns that pro-Israel U.S. evangelicals have monstrously distorted the Middle East by aligning America with Israel. Sizer states, "In its worst forms, Christian Zionism uses the Bible to justify racial superiority, land expropriation, colonial settlements, the denial of international law, and the dehumanization of Arabs." Unfortunately Sizer represents a more conservative wing of the Church of England and thus has a platform in places he should not. One such platform is the radio program of the so-called "Bible Answerman" Hank Hanegraaff. Hank is adept in some areas of apologetics and has a radio audience in the millions. Christians who call his daily program remind him that he has revolutionized their spiritual life. I am not sure we want this kind of revolution as he echoes Sizer's sentiments. Additionally, Hanegraaff is a Preterist, believing all end-time prophecy happened in 70 AD and Nero was the antichrist. That theology puts my brain in a pretzel as I don't want to look at prophecy in a rear-view mirror! Sizer suggests that the reason Britain and America have become the focus of so much hatred from the Islamic world is because these two nations perpetrate "the most influential and destructive movement among Christians today: Christian Zionism." I wonder why this movement is ridiculed when there is a commandment in the Bible to "pray for the peace of Jerusalem" (Psalm 122:6)? A previous book by Sizer is titled, Christian Zionism: Road Map to Armageddon. The mantra is the same: Friends of Israel will lead the world into total doom. Who else is on this vitriolic bandwagon? None other than some Emergent Church leaders including Brian McLaren and his followers in the religious Left. In Jim Wallis' April edition of Sojourners Magazine, McLaren states that Christians like me are "terrible," "deadly," and "distorted." He likens my belief system to the racism of the 1950s and 1960s. McLaren is outraged that Israel might be a special nation to the Lord. Both McLaren and Jim Wallis are "advisors" to Barack Obama, who will likely throw Israel under the bus when he meets with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu next week. Keep this important meeting in prayer. Israeli intelligence admits, in writing, "Under Obama's policies, we are irrelevant. We have become an obstacle." How will Bibi deal with this? We can't leave out Tony Campolo who says in his book Speaking My Mind that the good people who follow a ministry like mine are "rigid" and are "the real problem for the whole world." Those who look at the last days, which include a heavy emphasis on Israel, "are to blame for wars and a host of other evils." Campolo was one of Bill Clinton's "advisors." We are dealing with high profile people here, not obscure folks who can be easily marginalized and ignored. Also among this critical legion includes a pastor in my hometown of Minneapolis. He is Pastor John Piper, lauded for his many books and mushrooming churches in this area. His sentiment is quite well known. He does not believe the Jews even deserve their land due to their unbelief. He states in a sermon from March 2004, "The promises made to Abraham, including the promise of the land, will be inherited as an everlasting gift only by true, spiritual Israel, not disobedient, unbelieving Israel. Being born Jewish does not make one an heir of the promise -- neither the promise of the land nor any other promise." Ezekiel makes this pretty clear in chapter 37: The Jews return to the land in unbelief and then God begins a spiritual work in their hearts. What is so complicated about that? I'll stand by Israel because our Messiah is Jewish, the writers of our blessed book called the Bible were Jewish, and "salvation is of the Jews" (John 4:22). The roots of Christianity are Jewish, thus the olive tree (Romans 9-10-11). Her critics are in the millions. Her friends are a tiny minority, scoffed at by the intellectuals and scolded by the religious Left and other liberals of all persuasion. I wish we did, indeed, have the power they claim we have. If you find yourself in this tiny club, welcome aboard. Our crimes are praying for Israel, attending a "Bless Israel" rally now and then, spending our tourist dollars there, and educating the church that her roots come from the Jews. For this we are vilified. Yet at least 10% of my e-mail list will unsubscribe because I have touched their anointed one. I have a reputation for telling the inconvenient truth, but it is the truth. So, I confess: I am a terrorist after all. I'm a right-wing extemist with no apologies. I'm a Christian Zionist capable of bringing on Armageddon and the end of the world. And I can't make this stuff up. This is truly what many people believe today!

Ask Dr. Couch #15

Dr. Couch, Dispensationalists seem to focus more on prophecy than on practical living. How do you answer? ANSWER: We dispensationalists focus on prophecy because the Covenant guys do not, and probably over fifty percent of Scripture is prophetic! With you question I could not help but think of a statement by John Gregory, written in 1886, from his book The Seven Laws of Teaching. He wrote: In the Bible more than in any other book are reviews needful and valuable. Not only does the Bible most require and most repay repeated study, but most of all ought Bible knowledge to be familiar to us, if it be, as is claimed, the Word of God. Its great truths ought to dwell in the heart and in the conscience as a divine presence; its very language should haunt the memory as echoes from the hills of heaven. Its words and precepts should rest clear and precise in the thoughts as the dictates of duty and the PROPHECIES OF DESTINY. Its grand and divine doctrines, its vital precepts, its BLESSED PROMISES, its sublime histories, and still SUBLIMER PROPHECIES, should inhabit continually the daily bread of our God-ward life. Thanks for asking, Mal Couch, Ph.D., Th.D.

MORE EVIL IN WASHINGTON

Mrs. Hillary Clinton told the House Foreign Affairs Committee the truth! She is pro-Margaret Sanger, the most flaming abortionist of the past century. Sanger is responsible for the abortion movement in America and many other parts of the world. She was responsible for the organization called Reproductive Health. The name was later changed to something more positive, Planned Parenthood!

Clinton told conservative Pro-Life Congressman Chris Smith "I admire Margaret Sanger enormously, her courage, her tenacity, her vision. I am really in awe of her." Clinton then admitted that the expression reproductive health is a euphemism for abortion. "Reproductive health includes access to abortion that I believe should be safe, legal, and rare." (At least she added "rare.") She added that abortion should be on demand. Under Barack Hussein Obama, abortion will now be paid for worldwide by the U.S. Clinton and Obama are at work for you! There is no stopping the flood of evil now drowning our world! By the way, in the state of Israel, more children have been murdered by abortion then those who were killed in Europe during the World War II holocaust! The Jews have taken on the sins of the Gentiles! – Dr. Mal Couch

Ask Dr. Couch

Dr. Couch, is Acts 2:38 saying that baptism produces salvation? ANSWER: Oh, heavens no! But you need some Greek to understand grammatically what's going on in the verse. Ger, in our commentary series from AMG, gets it right. He writes: "Peter is not saying that the physical act of baptism results in forgiveness of sin, but rather, that baptism is the closely related physical sign of the spiritual reality of repentance, which results in forgiveness. "Repentance is linked with the forgiveness of sin based upon grammatical agreement in both gender and number (both are second person plural). The 'eis' indicates that forgiveness of sin is the result of repentance. This makes the command to be baptized (third person singular) a parenthetical idea. The verse could then be paraphrased as follows, 'Repent for the forgiveness of your sins, and be baptized.' Peter only associates repentance or belief with the forgiveness of sin, making no mention of baptism as a condition of forgiveness (3:19; 5:31; 10:43)." Be careful of legalists and those who do by study by fear! They are usually very ignorant and try to put a legalistic spin on verses in Scripture. They always move to the extreme and have no sense of how doctrine and truth really work in the Word of God. Such folks avoid! I hope this helps. Thanks for asking. Dr. Mal Couch

Ask Dr. Couch #12

Dr. Couch, I hear some Reformed folks criticize dispensationalists and say that they are but Judaizing the prophecies by taking them literally, as the orthodox Jews did. How do we answer? ANSWER: The orthodox and pious Jews, along with Christ and the disciples, took all the words of the OT prophets in a literal manner. They looked for the Messiah to both die for the sins of the people, but also to reign and rule on the throne of David over Israel and the entire world. Christ's first coming was literal and historic, and His second coming will be literal and historic. The NT confirms this in so many places but it also "assumes" this fact from the OT, and therefore does not have to continually repeat over and over again all the details of His second coming. Take for example the following in the NT: "When the Son of Man comes in His glory, He will sit on His glorious throne" (Matt. 25:31). God will "send Jesus the Christ appointed for you (Israel), whom heaven must receive until the period of restoration of all things about which God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from ancient times" (Acts 3:20-21). "Christ also having been offered once to bear the sins of many, SHALL APPEAR A SECOND TIME for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him" (Heb. 9:28). The orthodox Jews believe everything dispensationalists believe except they do not believe that Jesus was the promised Messiah. They believe in a worldwide tribulation, an antichrist, a regathering of repenting and believing Israel, a judgment of the nations, the reign of the Messiah in restored Israel. Dispensationalists are in good "interpretative" company. It is the Reformed guys who use pagan Greek allegory to rewrite what the Bible says in the OT about the earthly reign of the Messiah! They replace the promises to Israel with the church. The church becomes the "new" Israel and God is through with the Jews! Thanks for asking, Mal Couch, Ph.D., Th.D.

Ask Dr. Couch

Dr. Couch, you speak often about deception that will come in the last days. What does the word mean? ANSWER: In Greek the word is "apatee" meaning "to cheat, mislead, entice" with the idea of seduction. In my commentary on Thessalonians I write "It stood as a sign of the end times with all its destructive consequences. When the seven year tribulation begins, with the church gone in the rapture, this seduction will grow worse as the kingdom of the Antichrist becomes darkened and then starts to disintegrate." Paul first used the word in prophecy in 2 Thessalonians 2:10 and shows that this is what the Antichrist will do ("deceive") with the generation that follows him. I believe verses 10-12 could begin even now, before the rapture of the church. In other words, the departure of the lost, moving deeper into evil, could begin even before the church is taken away. It will grow worse as the Antichrist captures the minds of the lost. Paul goes on and says men will be deceived "because they did not receive the love of the truth so as to be saved. And for this reason, God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they might believe what is false." The result: "They will be judged who did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in wickedness." There is the apostasy of the church before the rapture, and also an apostasy of the world, in that men will gallop deeper into sin and deception even just before the seven year tribulation starts. I believe both could be happening right now. Some have asked me, "But is not the rapture imminent, in that it could happen at any time, with nothing taking place before?" Dr. Couch, are you saying that the apostasy must come before the rapture?" There is a little phrase that we often miss when discussing the "difficult times that will come" (2 Tim. 3:1). In these verses (3:1-9) Paul is talking about a kind of departure that will happen with the lost, "in the last days …" (v. 1). His description is about the lost who will morally turn worse and worse in their actions. (Read the verses.) Then the apostle says, "And avoid such men as these." While on one hand, the world will fall deeper into sin and an apostasy, some men were already around in Paul's days, who were living the way he describes before the "last days." Paul did not know God's timetable. Paul was not certain—God had not given him all the information as to the "when" of these events. Then how can we know we're into the final days before the rapture? Because of the (1) universal nature of all that is now happening, that is, the explosion of evil, and because (2) the Jews are back in the land in preparation for the seven year tribulation! I believe we are now rapidly moving into the apostasy of the church, and the deepening immorality of the world! The next event will be the rapture of the church! Thanks for asking. Dr. Mal Couch

Ask Dr. Couch #11

Dr. Couch, how do you understand 1 Corinthians 13:10 which speaks of "when the perfect has come, the partial will be done away." Some Bible teachers are saying this refers to the close of the canon of the NT, not the second coming of Christ. Did Paul know when the canon was going to be closed? What do you think? ANSWER:  Of course Paul did not know when the canon of Scripture would be closed, i.e., when the final book of the NT would be written. It happened to be, of course, the book of Revelation that was written by the last apostle, John, around AD 90-95. To understand what is going on in 13:10, one must look at the context of verses 8-11. Paul is discussing the issue of communicating the truth. His point is that spiritual truth is not simply communicated by one of the "communication" gifts (prophecy, tongues [languages], or knowledge), but by love.     These three gifts were used by the early church to convey spiritual truth that had not be recorded or written down yet. That was what these three gifts were all about. Some believer had the special gift of teaching (prophecy), or the gift of sharing truth in a mixed linguistic setting, or had an additional dose of spiritual knowledge that others did not have. When the canon was completed these gifts gradually faded away.     We know this especially about the gift of "languages" (tongues). In my book The Coming of the Holy Spirit, I quote Eusebius, Irenaeus, Chrysostom, and Augustine, who tells us tongues was a language and that it was with the early church but had ceased. This would fit what Paul said.     The apostle said (in Greek), "Prophecy will in the future be made inoperative, will be set aside." "Tongues will in the future stop themselves." He says of knowledge, "It will in the future stop itself." The early church concurs this happened! These statements of Paul work perfectly with what we know in church history.     By the way, when Paul writes "when the perfect comes," the word perfect is teleion and means that which is complete or whole. In is in the neuter gender and could not refer to Christ. He is masculine! I have the greater proof that Paul is referring to the cessation of the special gifts for communicating spiritual truth than others have that it is referring to the second coming. And besides, the rapture comes before the second coming. The church will be gone in the rapture. Paul has something else in mind in this passage besides the rapture!     If you want my book on the Holy Spirit, send $10 to Scofield Ministries, 120 CR 3222, Clifton, TX 76634. Your donation includes postage and handling.    Thanks for asking,    Mal Couch, Ph.D., Th.D.

Audio Studies: Revelation

This is the seventh installment of many audio studies of the book of Revelation by Daniel Woodhead.

• Times of the Gentiles (Part 3)
• Times of the Gentiles (part 4, conclusion)
  

New Audio Files: Acts

Join Dr. Couch as he teaches the book of Acts at The Clifton Bible Church.

• Acts 12
• Acts 13

Ask Dr. Couch #6

Dr Couch, what is meant in I Corinthians 15:50, "that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable"? ANSWER:  First of all it must be understood that in every case, "the kingdom of God" is a reference to the coming millennial earthly reign of Christ as Israel's King! In my interpretation textbook "Classical Evangelical Hermeneutics" (Kregel), I show by scriptural proof this fact. Paul's context in 1 Corinthians 15 has to do with the resurrection, specifically the resurrection of church saints in which we will come back with Him from heaven for this kingdom rule on earth.     Whether by the miracle of the resurrection (vv. 42-45), or by the miracle of the rapture of the church, whereby believers now living will be changed (vv. 51-52), we end up on earth ultimately with Him in the Davidic kingdom, the kingdom of God!     To see what is going on more clearly in the verse, it is important for me to translate it from the Greek text. It reads: But now I am bringing to light (phami, pres. act. ind. ), brothers, that flesh and blood is not able to "specifically inherit" the kingdom of God; neither the perishable the imperishable is able to be inheriting" [it].    The key word here is inherit which is used twice and means: "To legally be designated, appointed, assigned." Thus: "flesh and blood cannot be assigned the kingdom of God" and "neither can that which is perishable be assigned what is imperishable." Since there will be people who are spared in the tribulation and enter the kingdom in their natural bodies, Paul must have something specific in mind here. That which is simply natural or sinful cannot "inherit" (a key word) the kingdom. One enters into the kingdom because he spiritually belongs to Christ, though that believer is existing physically in a natural body. To enter this coming future kingdom of God, one must be born again by faith; one cannot simply enter by being "naturally" born (John 3:1-5).     While Paul is addressing the issue of church believers, we know from OT passages that the OT saints will also be resurrected for this coming kingdom reign of Christ, but they are not resurrected as "the body of Christ" but as the saints of Israel who in their life trusted everything that God had said to them. By Christ's victory at the cross (v. 57) the OT saying "Death is swallowed up in victory" (v. 54; Isa. 25:8; Hosea. 13:14) is applicable to all who will someday be resurrected, both OT and NT saints. Christ's death has covered the sins of all of humanity, past, present, and future!    Thanks for asking,    Mal Couch, Ph.D., Th.D.

New Audio Files: Misc

Join Dr. Couch and the Clifton Bible Church for these two topics:

• Dealing with Worldly Issues
• Resurrection Sunday (Easter) 2009

Ask Dr. Couch #7

Dr. Couch, What is the meaning of Isaiah 24? It sounds like the terrible prophesied Tribulation, though most amillennial speakers or writers never touch the passage. ANSWER:  You are absolutely correct. This is a Tribulation passage that sounds that is a preview of the book of Revelation. I will not repeat all the verses here but simply urge all who are reading this answer to open their Bibles to Isaiah 24 and get an eye full of what is coming (I believe) soon upon the earth.    Verse 5 is virtually quoted in Revelation 11:18. Isaiah 24:5 reads: "The earth will also be polluted by its inhabitants, for they transgress laws violate statutes, and break the everlasting covenant."    Revelation 11:18 reads: "God's wrath will fall on the small and great, to destroy those who destroy the earth."    However, as bad as it is, Isaiah 24:23b ends on a positive note: "For the Lord of hosts will reign on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem, and His glory will be before His elders." Since God the Father is Spirit seen by no one, this has to be God the Incarnate Son who visibly will reign and rule in Jerusalem. The amills foolishly try to spiritualize this and call it a reference to the church! This will not fly!     Though he was a personal friend of mine before his death, Dr. Edward J. Young, the great Westminster Seminary OT professor in his Isaiah commentary used poor hermeneutics to try to explain Isaiah 24:23. He wrote: "The seat of the reign is Zion and Jerusalem. As an OT prophet Isaiah uses the figures that were known to him to depict the spiritual salvation of the NT. In this reign the Church will be glorified."     The problem with his statement is that Young eliminates all normal, literal meaning from the text. And though spiritual salvation may be part of the passage, it is about the restoration of the Jewish people back to the land, with the terrible Gentile persecution removed from them. I had a debate with Young and found him "wanting" in poorly trying to describe his amillennial views!    In some of my future tapes I will be exegeting many of the "lost and forgotten" messianic kingdom passages. The world is growing darker and I think we are closer to these terrible events than we think.    Thanks for asking,    Mal Couch, Ph.D., Th.D.

New Audio Files: 2 Corinthians

Join Dr. Couch as the book of 2 Corinthians is taught at the Clifton Bible Church:

• 2 Corinthians 12:1-10
• 2 Corinthians 12:11

GOOD QUEEN VICTORIA

No one would want to argue that the Victorian era was perfect. But from it came many wonderful qualities that lasted for decades and touched the entire civilized world. We got from those days: duty, loyalty, morality, honor, and a sense of the wonderment of God. From that same period we got Darwinian evolution. So it would be impossible to say that all was perfect.    Below is an analysis from Walter Hall in his book A History of England and the British Empire.    "During the long and wonderful reign of the good queen, a little island set the pace for all mankind in industry, in law, in elevating the character and the dignity of the poor, in the advance of true science, in spreading the gospel and Christianity and Parliamentary institutions in all parts of the earth. Distant lands were peopled with Anglo-Saxons, and the dread of war grew less. If one compares representative Victorians with famous Britons of earlier or later times, it is difficult to find in any age in English history a similar galaxy of distinguished men; and in view of their accomplishments not only in economic achievement but also in literature and science, in political and social morality, one must give highest rank to the Victorians."    From Wales, Scotland, and England, went hundreds if not thousands of medical missionaries and evangelists, especially to Africa and India. To these dark places on earth went the gospel, civilization, law, industry, medicine, railroads, and roads. Many in those countries now are unappreciative, they blast the Victorian era as oppressive; they label this period the colonial period, not counting the blessings that came forth from England to help their people. Again, the Victorian age was not perfect but it did overall spread the truth of the Word of God, and light, to those who sat in darkened paganism! It is important to know history in order to understand where we are today. – Dr. Mal Couch

Ask Dr. Couch #9

Dr. Couch, what is going on in Acts 2:38? Some say that passage teaches that baptism is necessary for salvation. Can you explain? ANSWER:  Anyone who has taken basic English grammar, and of course Greek grammar, can answer this question easily. No, the passage is not teaching baptism is essential for salvation. The Greek grammar explains it all!    First of all, remember in English grammar that you do not mix singulars and plurals in the same sentence. But to do so in Greek is okay because the grammar is more distinct in its structure and syntax. It is easy to spot when one goes from one to the other without destroying the rules of Greek grammar.    With that said, here is what we see grammatically when we bunch all the plurals together and the singular construction together:    The verse best reads        "Repent (all of you, plural) … for the forgiveness of your sins, and you (all,        plural) shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit then let each of you (singular)        be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ."    Alford writes: "Repentance, accompanied by faith in the forgiveness of sins in Christ, would be the receiving of the gift of the Holy Spirit, followed by the outward ritual of water baptism." Water baptism is not the cause of salvation, it is only the sign of salvation and the cleansing work of the Spirit symbolized by water.    The BKC says, "The verb makes a distinction between singular and plural verbs and nouns. The verb 'repent' is plural and so is the pronoun 'your' in the clause 'so that your sins may be forgiven,' literally, 'unto the remission of your sins.' The imperative 'be baptized' is singular, setting it off from the rest of the sentence." Thus personal water baptism follows after all the other issues in the verse have been accomplished by faith. The Jews never considered water as necessary for redemption. This is something that is the creation of "church theology" divorced from the background from whence it came!    It is easy when we study the Bible in the original grammar in which the Holy Spirit gave to us God's Word!    Thanks for asking,    Mal Couch, Ph.D., Th.D.

Theology in John 1-3 By John Pappas, Th.D

The book of John is unique in that it is more of a Jewish theology book than a historical narrative. His  purpose in writing the gospel is so that "you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name" (John 20:31). Dr. Morris in his excellent work "New Testament Theology" writes, "One of the intriguing things about Johannine studies is the fact that, while the scholars learnedly pursue their abstruse quests, ordinary men and women – yes, and boys and girls too – read the book without asking questions and find not only that they understand it, but that they learn to their souls health." (Leon Morris, New Testament Theology, p. 225)  God, through the apostle, provides the reader with a brilliant theology book taught through plain talk, illustration and symbols.   Dr. Barnes says of the book, " It contains more about Christ, his person, design, and work, than any of the other Gospels. The other evangelists were employed more in recording the miracles, and giving external evidence of the divine mission of Jesus. John is employed chiefly in telling us what Christ was, and what his unique doctrine was." (Albert Barns, Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible)  All told, John uses 19 different terms or names for Jesus in the first chapter alone! These terms themselves provide important information and characteristics of the person of Christ – both in His pre-incarnate and incarnate states.    In this set of articles the great theological doctrines of the faith will be examined as the author John presents them in a unique Jewish way, teaching through word pictures, illustrations and literary parallelism.    Jesus as God, Creator, Sustainer, and Author of All Life   1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2  He was in the beginning with God. 3  All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. 4  In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5  And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it. (John 1:1-5)     Starting from verse one, John provides the following theological teaching: (1) the Word (Jesus) was with God (the Father) before the creation of all things, and in fact, the Word and God are One! Teaching not only the deity of Christ but also providing important information concerning the doctrine of the Trinity (the Word was with God, and the Word was God – separate distinct persons, but One in essence). That is, the Father and the Son – the First and Second Persons of the Godhead or Trinity, are described as One.  It is not that the third Person of the Godhead - Holy Spirit is left out; it is just that John's main point in verses 1-5 concern the Word (Jesus) and teaches the following doctrine about the person of Christ:   The Word was God (1:1) Pre-existent (1:1-2) Creator of all (1:3) Sustainer of all life (1:4)  Revealer of both God and sin to mankind (1:5)        The Word was God (1:1) The fact that the author declares so plainly that Jesus was God is clearly seen in the grammar of this text. The Jehovah Witnesses boldly proclaim that the Greek teaches that Jesus was a god. How can they make such a claim? Because the founder Charles Taze Russell claimed to be educated in the Koine Greek (the language of the New Testament). When a good berean publically exposed his claims of higher educational credentials, Russell brought a libel suit against Mr. Ross the pastor of James Street Baptist Church in Hamilton, Ontario who published the pamphlet entitled "Some facts about the Self-Styled Pastor Charles T. Russell."   Dr. Walter Martin in his classic work, "The Kingdom of the Cults" provides the following court transcript snippet:   Question: (Attorney Staunton) – "Do you know the Greek alphabet? Answer: (Russell) – "Oh yes." Question: (Attorney Staunton) – "Can you tell me the correct letters if you see them?" Answer: (Russell) – "Some of them, I might make a mistake on some of them." Question: (Attorney Staunton) – "Would you tell me the names of those on top of the page, page 447 I have got there?" Answer: (Russell) – "Well, I don't know that I would be able to." Question: (Attorney Staunton) – "You can't tell what those letters are, look at them and see if you know?" Answer: (Russell) – "My way …" [he was interrupted at this point and not allowed to explain] Question: (Attorney Staunton) – "Are you familiar with the Greek language?" Answer: (Russell) – "No."  (Walter Martin, The Kingdom of the Cults, 1985, p. 44)   It is astonishing that the JWs continue today with their own Greek manuscript, their own translation and their same claim to be the only experts in translation and interpretation of the original Greek language of the New Testament.  Their conclusion is that the Word in John 1:1 was a god. The implication being, that He is one of many such gods!   The Greek is simple, clear, and the universally accepted translation of John 1:1 is, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." That this speaks of the Trinity (a least 2 persons) is plain as the Word was with God clearly points out. They are three Persons in One, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.   The reference to the Word by John in the opening verses refers to Christ as the all-powerful Creator of the universe, who spoke creation into being (cf. Heb. 1:3). This is the Jewish thought, not as the Greek philosophers (and Philo) say speaking of the "eternal wisdom," whose arguments bear witness to man's wisdom and self-existence. No, that is a counterfeit impersonal god. The Word spoken of in the Bible has to do with a personal God, whose creation of the universe includes specific laws of life, both physical and moral.   Of the physical laws is included such laws that govern the stars and planets, the relationship of the ocean and the earth, the reproductive types as only certain flesh can reproduce with like kind of flesh and etc.   Pre-existence of Christ (1:1-2) The pre-existence of Christ is foundational and of utmost importance to the incarnation, that is, Christ existed before the creation of the world. Not only did John testify to this fact, but also later in the gospel, Jesus Himself will declare this doctrine. Another important aspect of this doctrine is that there are those who say Jesus, as the Son of God, is born (or starts His existence), since He is said to be begotten of God which can mean born, but can also mean in the Greek monogenes "one who has the characteristics of" the Father, "the only one of its kind." The phrase comes from Psalm 2.  It is important to understand that Jesus declares He existed before His birth; therefore the phrase begotten does not refer to His physical birth. One cannot call Him a created being, just another good teacher or special prophet, but rather God Himself – the only unique One who has the same characteristics as the Father.     Creator of all  (1:3) It is clear that the creator of all life is the Word (the pronoun "He" points to "the Word" - Christ) who is God. John proclaims that all things were made by Him, or as the Greek more accurately reads by use of the word ginomai (to become), "All things came into existence by Him."   Vincent's Word Pictures says,  "Literally, 'came into being, or became'. Expressing the passage from nothingness into being, and the unfolding of a divine order."        As if to silence the critic for any inch of heresy, John adds, "without Him nothing was made" which also speaks of Christ's self-existence. Self-existence means Christ is eternal - the uncaused cause as some have put it. As Creator of all things, He is outside creation and Himself uncreated (cf. Col. 1:16-17). To say Christ is eternal is to say He is outside of time, since "in the beginning" means in the beginning of time as both God and man measure it. In science time is usually the forth dimension. In other words, in the physical laws which God gave to govern the physical elements, time and space are inseparable. An object moves through space with respect to time (e.g., velocity & acceleration), and with respect to human activity, man moves on the physical earth, in measurable time (i.e., history) with respect to a measurable moral law which is unchangeable and mankind is bound by that moral law.   Aside from creating inorganic material, Christ brought into existence living things - the world of the organic. "In Him was life," suggests that everything that He gives life to is made for a purpose – as living creators which interact with each other in different ways. Moreover, there is a ranking in the created world. There are angels at the top of the hierarchy, then mankind, then the animals, then the plants. There is also a spiritual aspect of knowing good and evil with man in his fallen estate, seen in John, as the one who cannot comprehend the things of God (the light shines in the darkness and the darkness did not comprehend it).   Sustainer of all life (1:4) Christ is the sustainer of all life. John defines the light/life construct in a two fold fashion in chapter one.   (1) Physical life (In Him was life and the life was the light of men); and verse 1:9, "That was the true Light which gives light to every man coming into the world." (2) Spiritual life by way of revealing, cutting to the heart of man – "This man [John the Baptist] came for a witness to bear witness of the Light, that all through him might believe" (v. 7).             A theological significance takes on a legal aspect. Since Christ brings everyone into the world, it is Him alone who is able to do with that life as He wills. So it is that He alone sustains all life, as "the light (continually) shines in the darkness" indicates (v. 5). The great grammarian A.T. Robertson says, "Usually in John zōē means spiritual life, but here the term is unlimited and includes all life." (A.T. Robertson, Robertson's Word Pictures)  The absence of this "continual light" results in the loss of both physical life and spiritual life as the author refers to total darkness. Absence of the presence of the light shining in the darkness is separation from God! Absence of the goodness of God is separation from God - eternal death (Rev. 20:11-15).   It is no small matter to understand what God's goodness toward His creation means. Dr. Ryrie defines goodness saying, "Goodness may be defined as God's benevolent concern for His creatures (Acts 14:17)." (Charles Ryrie, Basic Theology, p. 44). In other word we exist on this planet because God continues to hold up all the conditions that make the planet habitable – even holding down sin!   The Psalmists puts it this way,   The Lord is good to all and His mercies are over all His works (Psa. 145:9).      And James puts it this way,   Every good thing bestowed and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow of turning (James 1:17).     Christ as revealer of both God and sin to mankind (1:5) "The light shines in the darkness and the darkness did not comprehend it" (1:5) speaks of the lostness of fallen mankind, the total inability of man to come to the knowledge of God. Literally, "the darkness cannot lay hold of it [the light]."   It takes Christ, the True Light (v. 9), to cut through the darkness of individuals, to open the eyes of the heart of man, to make him understand and cause man to believe. This revealer of God to man can cut to the heart, causing man to see the holiness of God and the sinfulness of self. And the means by which He accomplishes this end is to send His Son into the world to die on the cross for the sins of the world (John 3:15-16). Acknowledging this truth is understood as light or truth and is the means of eternal life.    It is a fact that man is fallen and spiritually dead. He is in spiritual darkness. This is affirmed in both the Old and New Testaments. Darkness is used as a metaphor for both the ignorance concerning God (Job 37:19; Isa. 60:2; 1 John 2:8), and for sin and evil (Rom. 13:12; Eph. 5:11; John 3:19; 1 John 1:6; 2:9, 11). Notice how the psalmist's puts it,   They do not know, nor do they understand, They walk about in darkness; All the foundations of the earth are unstable. (Psa. 82:5)    What John says in Jewish illustration, Paul writes in western (or Latin) logic, "For it is God who commanded light to shine out of darkness, who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ (2 Cor. 4:6).   The revelation of who God is with His loving kindness and goodness is contrasted with lostness or darkness and this darkness is equated with wickedness,   For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places. (Eph. 6:12)      Jesus is the God-Man Another great doctrine found in chapter one of John is the doctrine of the Incarnation. "The Word became flesh and dwelt among us" (v. 14) points to the fact that God took on the flesh of man and dwelt with mankind. This is the incarnation. One of the great truths of the faith is that there is only one who is righteous and that One is God, so it is that God came in the flesh, becoming a proper representative of mankind before a holy and righteous God for the purpose of being "the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world" (1:30).   There is described in the first three chapters of John the following purposes for the incarnation:    To reveal the glory of God to man (1:14) To reveal God the Father to man (1:18) The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world (1:29) The Son must be lifted up (i.e., die on the cross 3:14) The Son sent into the world not to condemn it (3:17) The Son sent so that the world might be saved (3:17) To expose man's sinfulness to him (3:20)         Christ as the Light One title used by John is that Christ is the Light or the True Light indicating a revealing of something. To shed light upon a thing is to bring it out of the darkness into full observable sight whether it is by the sight of the eyes or the heart. Within the Jewish mind is the concept that both the heart and mind sees. While the heart and mind are often taken synonymous (cf. Ps. 26:2; 139:23; Pr. 3:5; Mt. 22:37; Rev. 2:23) it is the heart that adds emotion to the knowledge or puts motion to truth.   It is not that the mind is absent of emotion for it is described as being troubled (Gen 41:8), disturbed (Dan. 7:15), and anxious (Deut. 28:65), but the primary characteristic of the mind involves the intellect in the form of thinking (Neh 5:7), remembering (Gen. 37:11), and understanding (Dan. 5:12). Thus the mind makes decisions (1 Chr. 12:38), plans (2 Sam 7:1-3) but also changes (2 Kgs. 24:1), plots evil (Ps. 83:5) and vacillates (is double minded) (James 1:8).      The heart however is the center of the human being. It is the wellspring of all life (Pr. 4:23; Luke 6:45), moving within man through emotion to activate the will (1 Sam. 2:35; 1 Chr. 28:2), providing the mechanism of motion as man is moved in the heart (Ex. 35:21) with purpose (Jer. 23:20), desire (Ps. 21:2; Rom. 10:1) and motive (1 Cor. 4:5). The key characteristics of the heart involve adjectives like a glad heart (Ex. 4:14; Act 2:26), loving heart (Dt. 6:5), excited heart (Luke 24:32), courageous heart (1 Sam. 10:26; Ps. 27:14), thankful heart (Col. 3:16), repentant heart (Mt. 11:29), a compassionate heart (Luke 7:13), but then there  are described a heart of pride (Pr. 18:12), deceit (Jer. 17:9), rebellion (Jer. 5:23), evil (Gen. 6:5), deluded (Isa. 44:20), unrepentant (Rom. 2:5), unbelieving (Heb. 3:12), far from God (Isa. 29:13; Mark 7:6) and darkened (Rom. 1:21).     It is God however that searches and knows the heart (Ps. 7:9; Jer. 17:10; 1 Sam. 16:7). In John 1:43-50, Jesus encounters Philip and tells him to follow Him. Philip found Nathanael and told him about Jesus and the two head to find Jesus. Upon their approach Jesus says, "Here is a true Israelite, in whom there is nothing false." Nathanael asks, "How do you know me?" And Jesus answered, "I saw you while you were still under the fig tree before Philip called you."  This encounter is an example of God's omnipresence, but also His omniscience His all knowing ability. He knows the heart. Again after Jesus clears the Temple some began to believe, but Jesus would not entrust Himself to them because He knew what was in a man (John 2:23-25). What does this mean except that Jesus knows the heart of man.       In chapter 12 John describes the state of the heart of the Jews in general: "He has blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts, Lest they should see with their eyes, Lest they should understand with their hearts and turn, So that I should heal them." (John 12:40)   But many did believe (12:42) and were as Jesus said "become sons of light."   Then Jesus said to them, "A little while longer the light is with you. Walk while you have the light, lest darkness overtake you; he who walks in darkness does not know where he is going. While you have the light, believe in the light, that you may become sons of light." These things Jesus spoke, and departed, and was hidden from them. (John 12:35-36)   It is a fact that knowledge is essential for eternal life (John 17:3) but it is also true that this knowledge is a gift, an illumination of both the darkened heart and mind. Notice Jesus prayer in chapter 17:   Jesus spoke these words, lifted up His eyes to heaven, and said: "Father, the hour has come. Glorify Your Son, that Your Son also may glorify You, 2  as You have given Him authority over all flesh, that He should give eternal life to as many as You have given Him. 3  And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. 4 I have glorified You on the earth. I have finished the work which You have given Me to do. 5 And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was. 6 I have manifested Your name to the men whom You have given Me out of the world. They were Yours, You gave them to Me, and they have kept Your word.(John 17:1-6)   One final note concerning illumination, John uses the Greek word eido "to see," "to know," "understand," a lot and has the idea "to understand because one has seen with the eyes (or seen with the mind)." (cf. John 1:26).      Light related to truth While the concept of light in chapter one has to do with both physical life and spiritual illumination of the heart, light used in chapter three has to do exclusively with revealing spiritual truth that moves to the physical as one's deeds are seen in their true light. Notice Jesus' explanation of this truth:   He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19  And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20  For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. 21  But he who does the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be clearly seen, that they have been done in God.(John 3:18-21)   One's good deeds must be pronounced to the glory and in the name of God so that truth may be revealed. It is true that as believers we are children of the light (1 Thes. 5:5; Matt. 5:14) and are called into God's light (1 Peter 2:9). Where light is seen as truth and not just truth but described as pure truth, as light is seen as a purifier, so, as we confess that the Lord is our light (Ps. 27:1; Mic. 7:8-9) and by that we mean that we walk in the light (Isa. 2:5; 1 John 1:5, 7), our walk in truth guides us (Ps. 43:3), protects us (Ps. 40:11), and sets us free (John 8:31-32).        Light related to revealing God to man That Jesus is the revealer of God to man is seen in His testimony or witness, in His deeds, and in His truth. Jesus is the light of the world (1:9) but also He is said to reflect the light of the Father (Heb. 1:3). The word of God is called light (Ps. 119:105; Prov. 6:23, 2 Peter 1:19) and both Jesus revealed and the word of God gives light (Ps. 119:130) so that in God's light we see light (Ps. 19:8; Ps. 36:9) which reveals the person of God to us.   This walking in the light (Isa. 2:5; 1 John 1:5; 7) means that we not only believe God's word but that we live and testify to that truth - to that light, confessing that the Lord is our light (Ps. 27:1; Mic. 7:8-9) and we reflect that light to the world (Matt. 5:14-16; Phil. 2:15).      John has a lot to say about the concept of light in chapters 8 and 9 so we will return to this topic later and tie in what he says in his letter 1 John.   In the next article the concept of a witness (both John the Baptist and signs and wonders) along with the highly disputed doctrine of chapter three - how one is born again will be examined.