| Dr. Couch, what do you think about the Manhattan Declaration and the statement put together by the leadership of Chuck Colson? ANSWER: A few months back I wrote online about the fact that Christians need to stand together on immoral issues being imposed upon us by the culture and by our government. Colson has put together a consortium of leaders from the Protestant churches, Catholic and Greek orthodox assemblies. The three issues focused on are: (1) homosexuality, (2) marriage is the union of one man and one woman, and (3) the issue of abortion. Some ask, "Should we join hands even with different Christian groups that are so doctrinally diverse?" Because of the urgency of the times, I'm rethinking some of the positions we all have taken in the past. For example, if I joined and came aboard with the Manhattan Declaration, would I have to compromise my doctrinal beliefs and distinctions? Would I still be free to share the gospel as I understand it from Scripture? And as far as I can tell, those coming on board do not have to compromise such distinctions and beliefs. If that is the case, maybe it is time for us to join forces in order to present a united front. Compromising doctrinal issues is not part of the requirement. I can still believe what I wish to believe and witness to the Scriptures as I see fit. One of the things that Colson is pushing for is that those who buy into the Manhattan Declaration will stand firm even if it means losing tax-exemption for ministries, and even facing arrest by being accused of promoting "hate crimes." I think many believers in Christ are reaching the point where "enough is enough"! We have taken it long enough, and, it is only getting worse! Someone has rightly said that none of us makes a firm stand on issues until our own interests are at stake; until what we believe becomes threatened, then we move! And maybe we have arrived where our own circle is threatened. I would like for those reading this to send me an email on your opinion on what I have just written, and on your opinion on the Manhattan Declaration. We will use your name, or not, whatever you desire. Please let me have your thoughts quickly! Dr. Mal Couch (Nov., 09) |
Saturday, November 28, 2009
Ask Dr. Couch
Friday, November 27, 2009
Ask Dr. Couch
| Dr. Couch, why did President Barack Hussein Obama bow to the leaders of China, Japan, and Saudi Arabia? I thought this was a "no, no" for American Presidents? ANSWER: It is. And everyone is asking the same questions. The secular media is trying to argue that he really was not bowing but by all the evidence from the photos, he was! Obama seems to continue to put down America and want to make it simply one of the many nations of the world. But most Presidents have felt that we owe no leader of another country any such honor. No one can fully figure out what the President is doing with his continual subjugating of our country. He does not look at our country as other leaders have in the past! Thanks for asking. Dr. Mal Couch (Nov., 09) |
Thursday, November 26, 2009
Ask Dr. Couch
| Dr. Couch, what is going on in Matthew 7:21-23? What does Christ mean by "I never knew you"? Does this mean He truly did not know anything about them? ANSWER: The passage has to do with hypocritical Jews who wanted to identify with the Messiah. They said "Lord, Lord," and yet they were not following the God of heaven nor doing His will (v. 21). These Jews even said they had prophesied in His name and had also cast out demons for Him (v. 22). Then Christ said, "I never knew you" (v. 23). The Greek word "knew" is "ginosko" (Aorist Tense). The word has the thought of knowing by experiencing, learning by relationship. The idea is not simply about acquiring knowledge or having a knowledge base. Christ actually knew all things. As God, nothing was kept from Him. We may say about a friend or acquaintance, "I really know him!" meaning we have a relational knowledge. This is what Christ is saying. The Lord did not know them in a close, spiritual, fellowship way! I hope this helps. Thanks for asking. Dr. Mal Couch (Nov., 09) |
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Ask Dr. Couch
| Dr. Couch, Hebrews 6:20 says that the Messiah "has become a high priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek." Melchizedek was both a priest and a king, thus, the Kingdom Now folks say He is reigning as such, as King, presently. What do you say? ANSWER: Notice in Hebrews 7 that Melchizedek was "king over Salem, which is peace" (v. 2). But it is true that Christ is both priest and king but that does not mean that He is presently reigning as King. That will happen when He arrives to "sit on His glorious throne" and when, on earth, He begins to rule and judge the nations (Matt. 25:31-34). That is His literal, earthly, historic rule that has not begun yet. You correctly pointed out Luke 1:32-33 where it states "The Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David; and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever; and His kingdom will have no end." Luke uses two future tenses in Greek, and "the house of Jacob" means "the house of Jacob" not the church. Also, "the throne of His father David" does not mean the church. The rule of interpretation: observe, observe, observe! Thanks for asking. Dr. Mal Couch (Nov., 09) |
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
REACHING MUSLIMS
| Recently, an evangelist who reaches Muslims for Christ said "Muslims are our mission field, they are not our enemy." With all due respect, I do not fully agree with him. There is a "yes" and a "no" answer that he needs to address. While we should reach them for Christ when given the opportunity, in light of that, we are commissioned to present to them the gospel. But when we are talking about the social nature and structure of America, this is another matter. With thousands pouring into America, who know nothing about our Christian foundation, we are in danger of losing the historical and social structure of the country. Every month that passes, the people in this nation know nothing about the founding fathers, the Christian roots, the European foundation of America. Thus, we will become simply another nation that has forfeited its great heritage. To be quite frank, this loss has already begun to take place. Our people some fifty years ago threw away those great facts of history. And because of the evil in the hearts of our educators, we will never recover a knowledge of those beginnings. Our children and young people in our schools and colleges are being stonewalled as to the beginnings of America. So in one sense, we cannot blame the foreigners who are pouring in (including the law breakers crossing our borders). We have forfeited and thrown to the wind our heritage, and thus, it is not the fault of the Muslims. Yet, I keep asking, if they dislike our nation so much, why don't they go back home? But be prepared for this nation to be another country in just a few years; it will never again be the same! Remember, our freedoms are based on the foundations of the Bible. They do not have the Word of God as their belief system. They will carry us back to the dark ages! This is a judgment of God. Our country is becoming more and more heathenistic and immoral. And that is our fault! – Dr. Mal Couch (Nov., 09) |
Monday, November 23, 2009
MR. PRESIDENT, PLEASE LEAVE!
| Did you read what our President, Barack Hussein Obama, said to a group of homosexuals at their supposed Human Rights Campaign on October 13? No President has ever voiced these immoral thoughts before publicly! He told the cheering crowd: "I am with you on the homosexual agenda." Further: "My expectation is that when you look back on these years, you will see a time in which we put a stop to discrimination against gays and lesbians—whether in the office or on the battlefield," he told 3000 people. "You will see a time in which we as a nation finally recognize relationships between two men or two women." He added, "There can be people who hold fast to outworn arguments and old attitudes; who fail to see your families [homosexuals] like their families; who would deny you the rights most Americans take for granted." Please, Mr. President, do not run again. Go away and retire somewhere! Leave us alone. You have uttered thoughts that no President of the past has ever uttered. Do not continue to spoil this great nation, leading us down such a blatant immoral path. One term is enough, in fact, it has been too much. Let us vote in a new man, a strong moral leader who knows right from wrong, and who believes in all that the Bible says. We have had enough! (Nov., 09) |
Sunday, November 22, 2009
GOD HAS ALREADY TOLD US, SO WHY ARE WE SURPRISED?
| There will always be evil in high places, especially when the culture collapses. We should expect it! America has departed from the Word of God, and from the Lord Himself. "When the righteous triumph, there is great glory. But when the wicked rise, men hide themselves" (Prov. 28:12). "When the wicked perish, the righteous increase" (v. 28). And, "The ruler gives stability to the land by justice, but a man who takes bribes overthrows it" (29:4). Finally, "When the wicked increase, transgression increases; but the righteous will see their fall" (v. 16). Remember, "Foresight is better than hindsight, but insight is Best!" – Dr. Mal Couch (Nov., 09) |
The Emerging Third Way of Apostate Pastors and Globalist Leaders By Brannon S. Howse
| The following is an excerpt from the just released book by Brannon Howse, Grave Influence: 21 Radicals and Their Worldviews That Rule America From The Grave (368 pages, hard-cover) The leaders in the educational establishment, the apostate Church, occultism/pagan spirituality, or the government-corporate complex want the idea of social and spiritual evolution embraced worldwide in order to bring about their desired "new order" or "new world order." Secular humanist and Fabian Socialist Julian Huxley (brother of Aldous) was the First Director General of the United Nations educational, Science, and Culture Organization (UNESCO). He explained, "The task is to help the emergence of a single world culture!" This "task" is even at work in America's political arena. Bill Clinton's mentor and former professor Carrol Quigley made this clear in his book, Tragedy and Hope: The chief problem of American political life...has been how to make the two Congressional parties more national and international. The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can "throw the rascals out" at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy. And it's working. While there are some truly conservative Republicans, most embrace the same worldview and agenda of their fellow politicians across the aisle. This is a form of Marx's dialectic process, the true intent of which is revealed by Julian Huxley: "...at the moment, two opposing philosophies of life confront each other" You may categorize the two philosophies as super nationalism, or as individualism versus collectivism or as capitalism versus communism, or as Christianity verses Marxism. Can these opposites be reconciled, this antithesis be resolved in a higher synthesis? I believe not only that this can happen, but that, through the inexorable dialectic of evolution, it must happen. Those who buy into Darwinian or neo-Darwinian evolution and apply it to society embrace this concept of social evolution. There are others who apply it not only to the social and cultural arenas but also to the spiritual world. Generally, these are New Age devotees of the New Spirituality. Generally-but not always. Emerging Trouble The pastors and authors of one of America's fastest growing spiritual movements, the Emergent Church, sing the praises of socialism. As I'll explain in more detail later, the Emergent Church champions the neo-Marxist call for a utopian society through spiritual evolution where good and evil merge to form a "better" third option. This idea derives from the belief system of philosophers such as Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel and finds its contemporary manifestation in the "Third Way" movement of Bill Clinton and Tony Blair. In the Third Way, capitalism, socialism, and communism merge to form a misanthropic combination of the three. This blending is now represented in the terms "the New World Order" and "the new enlightenment." The Third Way promotes Communitarianism, a toxic blend of communism, socialism, atheism, and Cosmic Humanism. Communitarians believe in universal health care, government-subsidized housing and education, radical environmentalism, Fabian socialism, and the like. An article on the website of the Democratic Leadership Council explains how Clinton and Blair have promoted Third Way thinking across the globe: Starting with Bill Clinton's Presidential campaign in 1992, Third Way thinking is reshaping progressive politics throughout the world. Inspired by the example of Clinton and the New Democrats, Tony Blair in Britain led a revitalized New Labour party back to power in 1997. The victory of Gerhard Shroeder and the Social Democrats in Germany the next year confirmed the revival of center-left parties which either control or are part of the governing coalition forming throughout the European Union. From Latin America to Australia and New Zealand, Third Way ideas also are taking hold. On Sunday, April 25, 1999, President Clinton and the DLC hosted a historic roundtable discussion, "The Third Way: Progressive Governance for the 21st Century, "with five world leaders including British PM Tony Blair, German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, Dutch PM Wim Kok, and Italian PM Massimo D'Alema, the First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton and DLC President Al From. Not to be hoodwinked by the window dressing of Third Way advocates, however, Vaclav Klaus, prime minister of the Czech Republic, warns against the real future it offers: "The Third Way is the fastest route to the Third World." But that seems to be where communitarians want to take us. Grave Influence: 21 Radicals and Their Worldviews that Rule America from the Grave This is it, the one book you need to read if you want to understand the big picture, connect all the dots, and understand current times, and future events and trends that will be unfolding. This ground-breaking book by best-selling author Brannon Howse is the result of thousands of hours of research over many years and is must reading for every teenager and adult. Brannon reveals how the worldviews of 21 dead people are still influencing every aspect of American life and vying for the hearts and minds of adults and students. Whether we are discussing, law, science, economics, history, family, social issues, education or religion, the people and worldviews seeking to further their agenda in these disciplines are almost always connected back to four major forces. Brannon reveals the connection between occultism/pagan spirituality, the apostate church, the educational establishment and government/corporations. Through this book you will come to understand the oppositions worldview, heroes, goals, strategies, masking terms, networks and targets. Those who share the worldviews of these 21 enemies of our constitutional republic and Biblical worldview do not want their agenda and its consequences to be revealed to the American people. Above all, they do not want us to equip and train our children and grandchildren with a Biblical worldview by which to recognize, reject, and fight against their seductive and destructive lies. This book will equip you to do just that as Brannon gives specific and pro-active responses you can take to make this the finest hour for the American church. Here is the list of twenty-one for which Brannon has dug up worldview facts you must know and prepare to oppose: Saul Alinsky, Karl Marx, John Dewey, John Maynard Keynes, Aldous Huxley, Charles Darwin, Friedrich Nietzsche, Margaret Sanger, William James, Alice Bailey, Helen Schuman, Sigmund Freud, Alfred Kinsey, Benjamin Bloom, B.F. Skinner, The Frankfurt School, Soren Kierkegaard, Julius Wellhausen, Christopher Columbus Langdell, Betty Friedan and Roger Baldwin. Topics covered include: Corporate fascism, sustainable development, the Third Way, global governance, dialectic process, the Delphi technique, the Cloward-Piven Strategy and deliberate chaos, community organizing, Fabian socialism, the federal reserve and a fiat currency, America's decline is Europe's gain, cultural Marxism, government mandated youth service, legal positivism, postmodernism, soft-despotism, higher-criticism, pagan spirituality, feminism, welfare-state capitalism, the false-dominate church, the Emergent Church, the spiritual battle for America, the United Nations and occultism, unmasking the one-world religion, the deconstructionists in the culture and in the church, psychological labeling of dissenters, behavior modification, a planned economy, the assault on parental authority, the two tracks to globalism, Keynesian economics, collectivism, similarities between America and Nazi Germany, national leaders are a reflection of the people, social justice, why the culture war is lost if the church goes weak, is God judging America?, When and why does God judge a nation?, the environmentalist/globalist connection, cultural revolution/sexual revolution, the right to die becomes the duty to die, the true purpose of the law, why the State wants the children, are we all God's children? And much, much more. |
Saturday, November 21, 2009
CHRISTIANITY IS GONE!
| "Christmas" has been deleted from Social Studies textbooks in the State of Texas. In its place for the sixth-grade reader is the honoring of books about Hinduism. The kids are told about Diwali, a Hindu festival. Jonathan Saenz, a lobbyist for the conservative Free Market Foundation calls this "outrageous." It is a conscious effort to remove Christianity from our culture, misleading students about current society. The textbooks place Christianity alongside of all religions. While that may seem commendable, it downplays the role of Christianity in the founding of this nation. More and more in our society claim to be atheists or agnostics, and not "religious" at all. We are moving into a dark world that will bring upon our children and grandchildren an unparalleled time of open sin! – Dr. Mal Couch (Nov., 10) |
Friday, November 20, 2009
New Audio Files: Mark
Join Dr. Couch and the Clifton Bible Church as they continue their way through the book of Mark.
New Audio Files: Ephesians
Please join Dr. Couch as the Clifton Bible Church continues to journey through the book of Ephesians:
TEXAS FALLING APART!
| There is a turmoil going on at the campus of The University of North Texas in Dallas. The student body is voting on whether to allow homosexuals to be both the King and Queen at the Home Coming games. This is not the Texas I was raised up in! The administration is chicken liver and has no power to say "no" to such an abominable situation. The adults are no longer in charge of the school. This reminds me of what either did happen, or would happen, during the tribulation in Israel as recorded in Isaiah 3. God said "I will make mere lads (teens) the princes of the nation, and capricious children will rule over them" (v. 4). The people will cave in to sin: "And the people will be oppressed, each one by another and each one by his neighbor; the youth will storm against the elder, and the inferior against the honorable" (v. 5). They will have a smirk on their faces: "The expression of their faces bears witness against them. And they display their sin like Sodom; they do not even conceive it [or understand what they are doing]. Woe to them!" (v. 9). And, "O My people! Their oppressors are children, and WOMEN WILL RULE OVER THEM. O My people! Those who guide you lead you astray, and confuse the direction of your paths" (v. 12). Thus, "The Lord will enter into judgment with the elders and princes (rulers) of the people" (v. 14). Unger says this is prophetic about Israel's future, and, it certainly forecasts probably what will happen too in the Gentile nations: "This shows that Israel's sins and chastisement, here outlined prophetically, prefigure her sins that will bring on her Tribulation trials and testings in 'the time of Jacob's trouble,'" the seven year period of the Wrath of God! This is "identically described (2:6-22), preceding Kingdom blessing." This reminds me of this saying: We have lost our spiritual equilibrium and inverted our values. We confess that we have ridiculed the absolute truth of your Word and called it more pluralism. We have worshipped other gods and called it multiculturalism. We have endorsed perversion and called it alternative lifestyle. We have rewarded laziness and called it welfare. We have killed our unborn and called it choice. We have neglected to discipline our children and called it building self-esteem. We have polluted the air with profanity and pornography and called it freedom of expression. We have ridiculed the time-honored values of our forefathers and called it enlightenment. – Mal Couch (Nov., 09) |
Thursday, November 19, 2009
New Audio File: Dr. Robert Lightner
Join guest teacher Dr. Robert Lightner as he teaches on two important subjects at the Clifton Bible Church:
A Testimonial Regarding Dispensationalism
| Dr. Couch, below is a testimonial of what I went through with Preterism. [Some of what this man wrote, we have condensed for shortening his message.] Thank you for your kind response to what I wrote last. I am fully convinced that Dispensationalism is the truth of Scripture, however, in the past I believed otherwise. I would attribute my acceptance of Preterism to one main factor: My ignorance of the prophetic Scriptures. I did not have a very good handle on biblical truth at the time (which was between 2005-2006), and so was easily led away by false doctrine. It all started when I began studying the books about covenant theologians who continually spiritualized the Word of God. I read several books on Preterism that greatly influenced me. In my readings I moved farther and farther into Preterism until I began accepting their views as a valid theology. At best, I became a partial Preterist. I read books by men who said Christ's second coming took place in AD 70, but that His coming was still going on today. As I understand, the Preterist field is in confusion today, with some infighting between full and partial Preterists. I seriously doubt whether many of them are sure of what they believe. That said, I appreciate the effort you have put into combating this doctrine. I remained a Preterist for about a year and a half and then saw the light! I have your book "Classical Evangelical Hermeneutics" and enjoyed it quite a bit. One of the chapters led me to acquire Dr. Paul Tan's "The Interpretation of Prophecy." This is one of the greatest books I've ever read! I also have "The Endtimes Controversy." I look forward to more resources! Blessings on your work, Brian S. |
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Ask Dr. Couch
| Dr. Couch, what is going on it Jeremiah 18:7-10? And, does this sound like what is happening to America today? ANSWER: While not applied directly to America, the principle is certainly applicable to this nation and all nations that turn from the Lord. God will speak to the evil nation and a kingdom to uproot and pull it down, to destroy it, when it defies Him (v. 7). If that country turns from its evil ways, God will relent concerning the calamity "I planned to bring on it" (v. 8). But America, and the other nations of the world, will not repent. Prophecy tells us the nations will apostatize and go deeper into their sin. If the nation goes further into its sin, God will think better "of the good with which I had promised to bless it" (v. 10). Concerning Judah and Jerusalem, God has said He will speak against its inhabitants, saying: "Behold, I am fashioning calamity against you and devising a plan against you. Oh turn back each of you from his evil way, and reform your ways and your deeds" (v. 11). But this will not happen. Israel will go through the birth pangs (Jer. 30) of the tribulation, and so will the nations of earth! Unger writes: "The Lord is sovereign in His dealing with His people (Isa. 45:9; 64:8; Matt. 20:15; Rom. 9:21). He is the Potter, they are the clay." We are drawing nearer to the end, and there is no turning back! We should not be surprised or troubled! Thanks for asking. Dr. Mal Couch (Nov., 09) |
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
New Audio Files: Romans
Join Dr. Couch and the Clifton Bible Church for the Monday Night Bible Study through the book of Romans:
WE’VE BEEN LIED TO!
| We are continually told that women are not mandated to be combat troops in the military. But the government is lying to us. Women are now put on combat ships. The problems this generates, according to sailors I talk with, is incredible! They say that there is to be no hanky panky on ships but the military then turns around and passes out birth control items. And when the little girls get pregnant on the ship they are put ashore and allowed to have abortions. Watching Veterans Day on TV, I was further shocked. They showed a parade of little girls who were part of a High School Junior ROTC unit. With about 30 kids marching, there were only about four boys in the unit—the rest were High School girls. And, they were all carrying rifles! If they are not being trained for combat, or allowed to go into combat, why would the girls in the ROTC unit be carrying rifles? The answer is clear: they are preparing them to be allowed to take frontline combat roles. The feminine Nazis in the military are now pushing for women to be allowed to be aboard submarines. There is not one man in the Navy who would be for that! Talking to men in the Army, I asked, "What do they do with the little girls being allowed to work in the motor pool with heavy trucks and trying to lift heavy truck tires?" The answer: "They put them on jobs that they can handle and let the men do the heavy lifting!" In other words, the men are discriminated against. The women receive the same pay but are not required to do the same work! The military will tell you the physical requirements for women are the same as for men. Another lie! The women run the mile as the men do, but they are allowed to run it slower than the men—this they do not tell you! Dr. Lacy Couch finally has it right! I've asked her for years why women want to be with the guys in the office and in the military. She thinks she finally has it figured out. The women want the same AUTHORITY as the men, or even over the men! It's an Adam and Eve thing. The apostle Paul addresses this in 1 Timothy 3:12. "I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet." What happened to the Home Making Courses for girls in High School? Girls were taught to be mothers and wives, and they learned what really being a woman was all about. Paul says: "Women are to adorn themselves in proper clothing, modestly and discreetly ... rather by means of good works, as being women making a claim to godliness" (1 Tim. 2:9-on). Peter says: "Observing your chaste and respected behavior ... And let not your adornment be merely external ... but let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the imperishable quality of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is precious in the sight of God" (1 Pet. 3:1-6). "Being submissive to your own husbands" (v. 5). Paul further adds, that the young woman must learn to love their own husbands ... to be sensible, ... workers at home, kind, being subject to their own husbands" (Titus 2:3-5). Women are being emotionally led astray as Paul suspected they could be because they can be fooled by the culture. It is all over in America. We are into the apostasy, and there is no way back! – Dr. Mal Couch (Nov., 09) |
Monday, November 16, 2009
Ask Dr. Couch
| Dr. Couch, thank you for your strong stance on God's sovereignty. It seems as if there are hundreds, if not thousands, of verses on the fact that He is in control. ANSWER: Yes, you are right! In Ecclesiastes 1:13-15 we find that all that is done under the heavens, is "a grievous task which God has given to the sons of men to be afflicted with." Thus, "What is crooked cannot be straightened, and what is lacking cannot be counted" (v. 15). Solomon adds: "Consider the work of God, for who is able to straighten what He has bent? In the day of prosperity be happy, but in the day of adversity consider—God has made the one as well as the other so that man may not discover anything that will be after him" (7:13-14). While God is not the author of evil, as we might conceive, He still can use evil for His divine purposes. We are not to speak of human conspiracies because it is God who turns the hearts and minds of men to do His biding. We are "not to fear what [men] fear or be in dread of it. ... [God] shall be your dread" (Isa. 8:12-13). In our present administration in Washington, men do not understand righteousness. "Evil men do not understand justice, but those who seek the Lord understand all things" (Prov. 28:8). Foolish men now lead us, and without God's direct sovereignty in America, we will not see Godly change in this country. Thanks for asking. Dr. Mal Couch |
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Ask Dr. Couch
| Dr. Couch, what is going on in Philippians 2:13? It sounds like the absolute sovereignty of God working in the believer! Is this right? ANSWER: You're right! That is what is going on! The believer is not a robot and yet, God is absolutely sovereign. Nothing happens with us without His working and causing us to be willing and then to be working in regard to His good pleasure! The Greek text reads: "Be continually working intently your salvation with fear and trembling; for God is the One continually working in you the to be willing and the to be working concerning the good pleasure [of Him]" (Phil. 2:12b-13). Notice the Present Tenses in the verse. Nicoll points out that there is no conflict with Divine sovereignty and human responsibility. But guess which one dominates? God's sovereignty. His work causes all things to be! A.T. Robertson is stronger on the passage. "God is the Energy and the Energizer of the universe. ... God is back of all activity in nature." "Both the willing and the working (the energizing). God does it all, then. The will of God is behind gravitation and all the laws of nature." As I used to ask my students: "Who is in charge?" And, "Who do we think we are?" Ellicott goes further: "The word 'works in you' is constantly applied to the divine operation in the soul, ... to do the action of men. It must necessarily extend to the will as well as the action; otherwise God would not be sovereign in the inner realm of mind. Hence, while we cannot even conceive the existence of freedom under an unbending impersonal law or force, the harmony of our will with a Supreme Personal Will (God's) is mysterious, indeed." Thanks for asking. Dr. Mal Couch |
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Ask Dr. Couch
| Dr. Couch, what causes people to worship mythological figures and idols? What about secret organizations, do they intentionally deceive the masses, and their followers, on the lower levels? ANSWER: Secret societies certainly can deceive but far more follow after idols and mythological characters because of the ongoing work of Satan in the culture. Believing in other gods, and idols, was one of the main sins and early responses of the world to the religious work of Satan. He loves to see people fooled and misled by idolatry. In the NT we find many believers being fooled by idolatry. Many struggled getting out of cultish religious worship, though they were still saved. Idolatry is a sin just like all sin! And since believers can "do" all sins, they can be idol worshippers. Paul wrote to the Corinthians: "We should not crave evil things, as they also craved (the Jews did in the wilderness). And do not be idolaters, as some of them were" (1 Cor. 10:5b-6). James said he wrote to the Gentile Christians "to abstain from things contaminated by idols ..." (Acts 15:20). John warned the Christians "Little children, guard yourselves from idols" (1 John 5:21). I am doing a Gathering Storm CD with Dr. Andy Woods on how Satan works on believers today. It will be put out June 2010. It'll be a shocker! You need to get on the subscription list ($30 per year) in order to hear what we say about demonism. Thanks for asking. Dr. Mal Couch |
Friday, November 13, 2009
Ask Dr. Couch
| Dr. Couch, what causes people to worship mythological figures and idols? What about secret organizations, do they intentionally deceive the masses, and their followers, on the lower levels? ANSWER: Secret societies certainly can deceive but far more follow after idols and mythological characters because of the ongoing work of Satan in the culture. Believing in other gods, and idols, was one of the main sins and early responses of the world to the religious work of Satan. He loves to see people fooled and misled by idolatry. In the NT we find many believers being fooled by idolatry. Many struggled getting out of cultish religious worship, though they were still saved. Idolatry is a sin just like all sin! And since believers can "do" all sins, they can be idol worshippers. Paul wrote to the Corinthians: "We should not crave evil things, as they also craved (the Jews did in the wilderness). And do not be idolaters, as some of them were" (1 Cor. 10:5b-6). James said he wrote to the Gentile Christians "to abstain from things contaminated by idols ..." (Acts 15:20). John warned the Christians "Little children, guard yourselves from idols" (1 John 5:21). I am doing a Gathering Storm CD with Dr. Andy Woods on how Satan works on believers today. It will be put out June 2010. It'll be a shocker! You need to get on the subscription list ($30 per year) in order to hear what we say about demonism. Thanks for asking. Dr. Mal Couch |
Thursday, November 12, 2009
NewsNote: Boys Wearing Skirts to School? What’s Going On? by Albert Mohler
"Clothes are never a frivolity -- they always mean something." Thus spoke James Laver, a famous costume designer and interpreter of fashion. He is right, of course. Clothes always mean something, which is why The New York Times gave major attention to an issue facing many schools: "Can a Boy Wear a Skirt to School?"
The article, right on the front of the "Sunday Styles" section of the paper, announced, "When gender bends the dress code, high schools struggle to respond." The story reveals a confusion over gender that goes far beyond the dress code.
As Jan Hoffman reports, high schools generally have very specific rules about clothing these days. Boys are forbidden to wear muscle shirts and saggy pants, and girls cannot wear midriff-exposing tops or skirts that are too short. But what happens when a boy wants to wear a skirt?
"In recent years, a growing number of teenagers have been dressing to articulate — or confound — gender identity and sexual orientation," Hoffman reports. "Certainly they have been confounding school officials, whose responses have ranged from indifference to applause to bans."
This is no longer an issue limited to isolated examples. Districts across the country have reported teens who have attempted to cross the gender line in dress. Many of these cases have captured media attention, with highly publicized controversies. In other cases, the challenges have been more quiet.
The cases are, to say the least, both interesting and troubling. Boys are making news for wearing skinny jeans, makeup, wigs, and skirts. Girls are bending gender in their own way by, for example, wearing a tuxedo for the school picture or to a school event.
Jan Hoffman does a good job of setting the issue in perspective:
Dress is always code, particularly for teenagers eager to telegraph evolving identities. Each year, schools hope to quell disruption by prohibiting the latest styles that signify a gang affiliation, a sexual act or drug use.
But when officials want to discipline a student whose wardrobe expresses sexual orientation or gender variance, they must consider antidiscrimination policies, mental health factors, community standards and classroom distractions.
Well, that certainly presents a very complicated challenge. Diane Ehrensaft, an Oakland psychologist cited in the article, states the obvious: "This generation is really challenging the gender norms we grew up with. . . . A lot of youths say they won't be bound by boys having to wear this or girls wearing that. For them, gender is a creative playing field." She added that adults then "become the gender police through dress codes."
As Hoffman makes clear, these challenges to dress codes can quickly become legal skirmishes pitting students (and often their parents) against school administrators. Kay Hymowitz of the Manhattan Institute argues that this is one reason that so many schools have shifted to students wearing uniforms.
"It's hard enough to get students to concentrate on an algorithm," she reminds, "even without Jimmy sitting there in lipstick and fake eyelashes."
That sets the issue in a very clear instructional perspective. Schools are about teaching and learning, and both teachers and administrators face daunting challenges. The last thing they need is the added distraction of gender-bending teenagers on parade.
And the issues can be far more troubling than classroom distractions. Hoffman reports that some schools have faced boys wearing "pink frilly scarves" and makeup and girls trying to dress like male gang members. In Columbus, Ohio a boy wore girl's clothing but used the boys' bathroom. Jeff Grace, faculty advisor for the school's gay-straight alliance club told Hoffman, “One day I heard a student say, ‘Man, there was a girl in the guy’s restroom, standing up using the urinal! What’s up with that?’" Another student then quipped, “That wasn’t a girl. That’s just Jack."
These adolescents represent the younger face of a society that is giving itself over to a confusion about gender and dress that reveals a much deeper confusion about gender, sexuality, and the limits of self-expression. The controversy also reveals an even deeper cultural and moral divide over the same issues.
Should a boy who shows up at school dressed as a girl be celebrated for self-expression and transgressing the boundaries of gender roles, or should he be seen as signaling a need for help and adult-imposed rules? The widely divergent answers to that question reveal the great worldview divide in postmodern America. This controversy cannot be isolated from the movement to normalize homosexuality, and that movement cannot be separated from an effort to remove all notions of fixed gender roles and sexual identity.
The controversy over boys wearing skirts to school is a symptom of our loss of sexual sanity and the will to preserve any reasonable and healthy understanding of gender. These teenagers are telling us something important -- we are losing our sexual sanity.
For Christians, the issue is a matter of biblical concern. The Bible reveals a concern for respecting and honoring gender as God's gift. In the Old Testament, the Law taught respect for these distinctions and roles. In the New Testament, we find similar expectations. As the Apostle Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 11: 7-15:
For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. That is why a wife ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man nor man of woman;for as woman was made from man, so man is now born of woman. And all things are from God.Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a wife to pray to God with her head uncovered?Does not nature itself teach you that if a man wears long hair it is a disgrace for him, but if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her for a covering.
While addressed to the specific concerns of a church setting, this text also generalizes the point by making a specific reference to what nature teaches concerning the recognition of the difference between males and females. The Creator is honored and glorified when men and boys dress and present themselves as males and when women and girls dress and present themselves as females. Culture by culture and generation by generation the specific form of this distinction may change, but the point remains.
God made human beings to show His glory, and an essential part of that glory is the visible difference between males and females that is reflected even in the public presentation of dress. We should be able to tell the difference between a boy and a girl by the way they dress and present themselves in public.
As James Laver reminded, clothes always tell us something. This article from the "Sunday Styles" section of The New York Times tells us something as well -- something we need to hear.
This article originally appeared on AlbertMohler.com
The article, right on the front of the "Sunday Styles" section of the paper, announced, "When gender bends the dress code, high schools struggle to respond." The story reveals a confusion over gender that goes far beyond the dress code.
As Jan Hoffman reports, high schools generally have very specific rules about clothing these days. Boys are forbidden to wear muscle shirts and saggy pants, and girls cannot wear midriff-exposing tops or skirts that are too short. But what happens when a boy wants to wear a skirt?
"In recent years, a growing number of teenagers have been dressing to articulate — or confound — gender identity and sexual orientation," Hoffman reports. "Certainly they have been confounding school officials, whose responses have ranged from indifference to applause to bans."
This is no longer an issue limited to isolated examples. Districts across the country have reported teens who have attempted to cross the gender line in dress. Many of these cases have captured media attention, with highly publicized controversies. In other cases, the challenges have been more quiet.
The cases are, to say the least, both interesting and troubling. Boys are making news for wearing skinny jeans, makeup, wigs, and skirts. Girls are bending gender in their own way by, for example, wearing a tuxedo for the school picture or to a school event.
Jan Hoffman does a good job of setting the issue in perspective:
Dress is always code, particularly for teenagers eager to telegraph evolving identities. Each year, schools hope to quell disruption by prohibiting the latest styles that signify a gang affiliation, a sexual act or drug use.
But when officials want to discipline a student whose wardrobe expresses sexual orientation or gender variance, they must consider antidiscrimination policies, mental health factors, community standards and classroom distractions.
Well, that certainly presents a very complicated challenge. Diane Ehrensaft, an Oakland psychologist cited in the article, states the obvious: "This generation is really challenging the gender norms we grew up with. . . . A lot of youths say they won't be bound by boys having to wear this or girls wearing that. For them, gender is a creative playing field." She added that adults then "become the gender police through dress codes."
As Hoffman makes clear, these challenges to dress codes can quickly become legal skirmishes pitting students (and often their parents) against school administrators. Kay Hymowitz of the Manhattan Institute argues that this is one reason that so many schools have shifted to students wearing uniforms.
"It's hard enough to get students to concentrate on an algorithm," she reminds, "even without Jimmy sitting there in lipstick and fake eyelashes."
That sets the issue in a very clear instructional perspective. Schools are about teaching and learning, and both teachers and administrators face daunting challenges. The last thing they need is the added distraction of gender-bending teenagers on parade.
And the issues can be far more troubling than classroom distractions. Hoffman reports that some schools have faced boys wearing "pink frilly scarves" and makeup and girls trying to dress like male gang members. In Columbus, Ohio a boy wore girl's clothing but used the boys' bathroom. Jeff Grace, faculty advisor for the school's gay-straight alliance club told Hoffman, “One day I heard a student say, ‘Man, there was a girl in the guy’s restroom, standing up using the urinal! What’s up with that?’" Another student then quipped, “That wasn’t a girl. That’s just Jack."
These adolescents represent the younger face of a society that is giving itself over to a confusion about gender and dress that reveals a much deeper confusion about gender, sexuality, and the limits of self-expression. The controversy also reveals an even deeper cultural and moral divide over the same issues.
Should a boy who shows up at school dressed as a girl be celebrated for self-expression and transgressing the boundaries of gender roles, or should he be seen as signaling a need for help and adult-imposed rules? The widely divergent answers to that question reveal the great worldview divide in postmodern America. This controversy cannot be isolated from the movement to normalize homosexuality, and that movement cannot be separated from an effort to remove all notions of fixed gender roles and sexual identity.
The controversy over boys wearing skirts to school is a symptom of our loss of sexual sanity and the will to preserve any reasonable and healthy understanding of gender. These teenagers are telling us something important -- we are losing our sexual sanity.
For Christians, the issue is a matter of biblical concern. The Bible reveals a concern for respecting and honoring gender as God's gift. In the Old Testament, the Law taught respect for these distinctions and roles. In the New Testament, we find similar expectations. As the Apostle Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 11: 7-15:
For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. That is why a wife ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man nor man of woman;for as woman was made from man, so man is now born of woman. And all things are from God.Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a wife to pray to God with her head uncovered?Does not nature itself teach you that if a man wears long hair it is a disgrace for him, but if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her for a covering.
While addressed to the specific concerns of a church setting, this text also generalizes the point by making a specific reference to what nature teaches concerning the recognition of the difference between males and females. The Creator is honored and glorified when men and boys dress and present themselves as males and when women and girls dress and present themselves as females. Culture by culture and generation by generation the specific form of this distinction may change, but the point remains.
God made human beings to show His glory, and an essential part of that glory is the visible difference between males and females that is reflected even in the public presentation of dress. We should be able to tell the difference between a boy and a girl by the way they dress and present themselves in public.
As James Laver reminded, clothes always tell us something. This article from the "Sunday Styles" section of The New York Times tells us something as well -- something we need to hear.
This article originally appeared on AlbertMohler.com
THEY’RE TEARING UP MY COUNTRY!
| I was motoring around SAM'S in that little electric buggy the other day and stopped at the DVD section on documentaries on World War II. An old guy walked up whom I knew had to be a veteran. "Did you fight in the big War?" I asked. "Yes," he answered. "I fought at Okinawa and was almost killed by the Japanese. A hand grenade exploded in front of my face and blew part of my jaw off. That was the end of the war for me." He went on: "I saw some terrible things in frontline combat." He asked, "Were you in the war?" No, I said, I am just over seventy years of age. "Oh, well I'm 82." he answered. "Fifteen thousand or more of my buddies died on that island, but we had to have it in order to fire bomb Japan in order to end the war." As we parted, tears came into his eyes. I said, "What terrible things are happening to our nation!" Looking back, he replied, "Yes, and now they're really tearing up my country!" From east coast to west coast, with those who are older and mature, so many are realizing that this is not the same nation. We are sinking into the abyss. And, we will never turn it back around. The minorities, and the criminal illegals, who have no respect for our laws, and who have sneaked across our borders, along with many in the younger generation, just don't get it! They're socialists and free loaders, and they're now really tearing up our nation! – Dr. Mal Couch (Nov., 09) |
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
WE MUST BE STUPID!
| When the Major killed so many at Ft. Hood, the press, and the military, came out and told us we should not make this a "religious" issue. But then, as they continue to check the Major out, they find that this is exactly what it was! How come we the people are so dumb, and the military is so smart, but keeps getting it wrong. I heard one person on a talk show say, "We're all getting tired of the 'politically correct' thing in America." We cannot use common sense. We're told what to think. But what if I want to be 'politically un-correct'? That's my business and no one else's. As a Christian, and an American, I should be able to think the way I please and it's the business of no one else! – Dr. Mal Couch (Nov., 09) |
WHILE YOU WERE ASLEEP ...
| The Barack Hussein Obama group joined a U.N. effort, along with many Arab nations, in putting into place a restriction against religious speech. Another freedom was just taken away from you while you slept! This resolution, pushed by the Arabs, means you have to be careful of anything you say against Islam, or you could be arrested! The resolution was passed unanimously by European countries and the so-called developing countries, which means mainly Arab nations. If you point out what Islam teaches this could be considered hate speech or blaspheming their doctrines. The good thing about this resolution is that it may be almost impossible to enforce. But Obama probably went along with it to make the Arabs think that he is on their side. This is supposed to push forward pluralism in America and around the world. But that is not how America was founded. We were meant by the founding fathers to have total freedom of speech no matter what the response from others. This "law" is being enforced in other nations around the world. In Canada, the human rights commission punished a pastor for speaking out against gays. In Italy, a comedian was under investigation for making jokes about the Pope. In Poland, a Catholic magazine was fined $11,000 for criticizing abortion as being similar to the death chambers of Auschwitz. The Obama administration is joining the world in removing free speech and in crafting a new faith-based speech standard. This is only the beginning. More than likely this law will be given more teeth in order to come against those who hold to the morals of the Bible. We are moving deeper and deeper into the prophesied time known as the apostasy. There is no turning back. – Dr. Mal Couch (Nov., 09) |
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
THE WORLDWIDE SCOPE OF THE BOOK OF REVELATION
| Only the blind would say the book was about local issues. The book was written after 70 AD and it is worldwide in its scope. Those who oppose this clear fact have not read the book. The book assumes an exploding mushrooming population, interlinking economy, jet age transportation, and satellite communication. Also, there are so many statements that are universal in nature. For example, a fourth of the world's population is destroyed (6:8), avenging those who dwell on the earth (v. 10); the asteroids [stars, asteros] falling on the earth (v. 12); a third of mankind killed (9:18); the "rest" of mankind did not repent (v. 21); many peoples, nations, tongues (10:11); those of all peoples, tribes, tongues, nations will look on the dead bodies of the two martyrs and prophets (11:9) [satellite television]; "those who dwell on the earth will rejoice ... and they will send gifts to one another, because these two [godly] prophets tormented those who dwell on the earth" (v. 10). The old great scholar Lange writes: "Revelation, in accordance with its ... world-historical character, takes in the entire breadth of the world ..." How silly to say all of this is simply local! – Dr. Mal Couch (Nov., 09) |
Monday, November 9, 2009
NOT A RELIGIOUS ISSUE?
| When asked if the shooting at Fort Hood was a "religious" issue, officials and the press all yelled, No! This was not a religious issue! But they lied loud and clear! The day of the shooting the major who did all the firing was passing out copies of the Koran, and, as he was firing his weapon, he was calling out the Muslim cry, "God is Great! God is Great!" We were lied to again in order to keep things politically correct! – Dr. Mal Couch (Nov. 09) |
Sunday, November 8, 2009
Ask Dr. Couch
| Dr. Couch, what is the vengeance in Luke 21:22? ANSWER: This is the prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple that takes place in 70 AD. It is part of the Olivet Discourse of our Lord that He gave to His disciples before His arrest and crucifixion. In that Discourse He spoke of the far off coming tribulation period but He also taught on the coming judgment of 70 AD. Christ called it "the vengeance." The Greek word is "ekdikasis" which means "a revenging, a punishment," to vindicate a wrong, "accomplished with an avenging, to inflict punishment." From the time of Christ's ascension until 70 AD the Jews went into the mode of rejecting Christ, and then of persecuting His followers. Christ spoke of those "days of vengeance [coming] in order that all things which are written may be fulfilled, the great distress upon the land, and wrath to this people" (Luke 21:22-23). Where was the vengeance predicted? In Hosea 9:7, 17. There the prophet Hosea writes about "The days of punishment [that] will come, the days of retribution will come; ... because of the grossness of your iniquity." And he added, "My God will cast them away [His people] because they have not listened to Him; and they will be wanderers among the nations." This wandering among the nations is predicting the dispersion of 70 AD by Hosea. In my Luke commentary published by AMG, I wrote: "When this vengeance came in A.D. 70, the Lord was executing judgment because of the Jewish rejection of Christ. The disciples suffered great persecution and martyrdom. A mountain of wrath had been built and had come down on the heads of the people, as brought about by the Romans. The Jewish people were not at war with Christians, but they were at war with the Lord, because this was His vengeance. Some see this Lukan passage about Jerusalem being surrounded and destroyed coming from Hosea 9." Unger as well sees some of the punishment mentioned in Hosea 9 as the 70 A.D. dispersion. He writes that "the Jews of Russia, China, India, and other countries are evidently descendants of the ten tribes. The Jews at Pentecost (Acts 2:9) and those addressed by James (1:1), doubtlessly included the ten tribes, as well as Judah and Benjamin" who were dispersed in 70 A.D. Thanks for asking. Dr. Mal Couch |
Saturday, November 7, 2009
Ask Dr. Couch
| Dr. Couch, what is driving Evangelical feminists? What are they thinking? ANSWER: I often ask Dr. Lacy Couch the same thing, and she comes up with some pretty good insights as to what is going on. (1) While they may deny it, they are influenced and driven by the culture, especially those who have attended secular universities. The lies have rubbed off on them! They think it is "smart" to be worldly and contemporary in their thinking. (2) They enjoy being in the company of men; they do not like being women. (3) They think being a woman is beneath them. They believe men have all the fun and that they are left out of what is most important. (4) They do not like motherhood. Raising children, and pouring themselves into a child is demeaning. They have not been taught properly what the Word of God teaches about the high calling of being a wife and mother. They do not think that they are appreciated. (5) They want to teach men, though they can already teach children and other women, this is not enough for them. They want to teach men. They think they are being deprived of something that they want to do. And, they think the apostle Paul, or other men, are keeping them from a higher calling. (6) They think that they are highly intellectual but the reality is that they are emotional and they are like sheep. They are really followers and don't think independently as they believe about themselves! (7) They do not believe in the inspiration and inerrancy of Scripture. They challenge Paul's opinions and think that they are simply the thoughts of man and not of the Holy Spirit. Strong men need to challenge them and speak up to them head-on. They are far more foolish than they think! Thanks for asking. Dr. Mal Couch |
Friday, November 6, 2009
Theology in John 1-3 Part 2 By John Pappas, Th.M, Th.D
| The last article examined the opening chapter of John's gospel which concentrated on the person of the One who came in the flesh – Christ, the Son of God. Though John does not move away from pounding the point of the deity of Christ throughout the book, he intertwines the major theme of the book, the fundamental concept that belief is what brings life – eternal life. This article continues the task of defining who Jesus is, by examining the method of pronouncing Him though the God's legal demand of the use of personal testimony.
Spiritual transformation that results in eternal life does not come by any means of man by himself, but rather by an external agent – God, and although all three persons of the Godhead participate in this transformation, John concentrates in the early chapters upon means - believing in His name; Jesus Christ, the Anointed Savior. The apostle John puts it this way, "But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." (John 1:12-13)
John uses the word "believe" some 98 times. He prefers the word believe over faith (this will be looked at later). As part of the doctrine of belief is the logical question, "what is believed?" It is not simply belief, for even the demons believe (cf, Matt. 8:29; James 2:19) and they are not called children of God. No, it is a positive belief, a belief that is accepted in the affirmative that Jesus is the Christ and their personal savior. There is no rejection of who Jesus is, there is no curious consideration of what does this mean, but a belief that is the result of a changed heart, a new heart, a new capability to hear and accept the things of God. Belief is seen as a gift that is received by the child of God. A belief that is a gift from God – yes, even our faith is called a gift (cf. Eph. 2:8-9). That indeed one's belief is a work of God (cf. John 6:29)!
Part of what God wants to demonstrate is that man on his own refuses to accept the things of God. Man in is fallen estate is so prideful, the heart so hardened, so callused, that he finds no need for God – he wants to be independent, so the callus thickens, growing to the point where nothing can pricks it. God provides a witness to all and that witness is provided for a reason. To demonstrate the hold sin has on mankind. That even with a true witness, man refuses to take notice, examine the facts before him or her and accept the facts as they are – that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, the Savior of the World.
Witness A witness is not usually a theological construct formulated and presented, but the doctrine of a witness provides the legal demands of God and appears early in the testimony of Moses in the Law. It also appears early in the Gospel of John and for good reason. A witness is binding and by two witnesses a death penalty can be executed (Dt. 17:6). There are observed in Scripture seven witnesses of God to the world; (1) Israel (Isa. 43:10-12; 44:8), (2) the prophets (Act 10:43; 26:22-23), (3) John the Baptist (John 1:7, 15, 32-34; 5:33-34), (4) Jesus (John 8:18; 18:37; Rev. 1:5-6), (5) the Holy Spirit (John 15:26; Act 5:30-32; Rom. 8:6), (6) signs and wonders (John 2:11; 20:30-31; Heb. 2:3-4), (7) and Jesus' followers (Luke 1:2; Act 1:8; 3:15-16; 5:30-32; 10:41-42).
Paul adds creation as a witness that clearly proclaims who God is so that no one has an excuse (Rom. 1:18-25), John restricts witnesses to a spoken word - a testimony. The word witness in the Greek is the verb martureo meaning "to be a witness," "to bear witness," and means "to affirm that one has seen or heard or experienced something, or that he knows it because it was taught by divine revelation or inspiration." However, it is in the Hebrew that an 'ed "a witness" more closely relates to the legal aspect of "evidence," "a legal testimony," and its root verb means to "repeat," "do again," "say again." That is what a witness does; he or she repeats the words, events and works.
It is no mistake that two witnesses can be found in John chapters 1-3; John the Baptist and signs and wonders. John the Baptist's witness was to prepare the way of the Lord as he implored the nation to repent, then he pointed to the Messiah as the "Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world." Signs and wonders are the validation of the person performing the act as someone from God so that those listening will pay attention to the message. But this someone was not just another prophet but God in the flesh - the promised Messiah.
John the Baptist as Witness John the Baptist was sent by God Himself as a witness, "to bear witness of the Light" (John 1:6-7). John was from a line of priests, his father was a priest and his mother was a daughter from the line of Aaron which makes his witness especially important. And the people seem to flock to his witness, first as a man separated from the traditional priesthood, a Nazarite, but also because his mission was somewhat unique, it was to prepare the way for the Lord. John became a well known person who performed baptisms for repentance. It seems that during John's baptizing, all that repentance and ritual washing caused an increase in the number of personal sacrifices in Jerusalem, the Jewish authorities wanted to know what this was all about. He says to the inquiring Jewish leadership upon their inquiry of who he was:
"He said: I [am] 'the voice of one crying in the wilderness: make straight the way of the Lord."
The expression "make straight" is used for "making a road," clearing all the debris so that people can travel without obstacles (John 1:23). In John the Baptist's case, there were a lot of obstacles to clear. He was separated from the religious crowd with their traditions that corrupted the word of God. So his teachings were not like those of the nation's established priesthood with its man-made traditions (Matt. 15:1-9; Mark 7:1-13). The gospels speak of John the Baptist's message as containing three major topics: (1) repentance for the forgiveness of sins; (2) baptism of the Holy Spirit and fire, and (3) the nearness of the kingdom of God (Matt. 3:1; Mark 1:4; 7-8; Luke 3:7-14; cf. Matt. 3:11-12).
John's gospel, however, is somewhat different from the other gospels. He tells the Baptist's message with greater detail placed upon the facts of the witness. John's gospel explains that when John the Baptist taught in the wilderness, his message was focused upon:
(1) The ever-existing one is coming (John 1:15, 30) (2) Jesus will bring blessing after blessing (John 1:16) (3) Jesus will make God the Father known because He is God (John 1:18) (4) Baptism with water whose purpose is to reveal the Savior to Israel (John 1:26, 31) (5) Jesus is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world (John 1:29) (6) The Holy Spirit's baptism of Jesus (John 1:32) (7) Jesus is the Son of God (John 1:34) (8) Who so ever believes in the Son has eternal life (John 3:36) (9) Who so ever rejects the Son will have God's wrath (John 3:36)
To see John the Baptist in his final days speaks volumes about the hatred of the righteousness of God. In his early mission he professed repentance to individual Jews and received a sizable following, but how did the message go with the Jewish leadership? At first he was accepted as Jesus says the Jewish leadership "rejoiced in his light" (John 5:35). That rejoicing did not last long as they, as a whole, rejected him and did not think much of him. In his later days he was placed in jail by Herod Antipas who was a Jew who seduced his brother's wife Herodias, divorced his own wife then married her. A violation of the law so when John the Baptist pointed this out, instead of repentance – calling it like it is, John came to his death as his head was delivered to Herodias' daughter on a platter. This speaks volumes about mankind's desire for sin and the hatred of the righteousness of God.
Signs and wonders as witness Signs and wonders are spoken of as witnesses. The question is what is their testimony? The main testimony of a sign and wonder is that it validates the messenger is from God. The next thing one is to do is listen to the one displaying the sign and wonder. In Jesus' case, in the first three chapters of the book of John anyway, signs were used by Jesus to get the people's attention so that "you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name" (John 20:31; cf. John 2:23b).
So it is that when Jesus turned water to wine in chapter two, this is said to be a sign that "manifested His glory, and His disciples believed in Him" (John 2:11).
The Lamb of God John the Baptist's testimony is that Jesus is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world (John 1:29). Sacrifice appears in scripture seemingly out of nowhere. It is first observed in Genesis 4 as Abel brings his firstling before the Lord for an acceptable sacrifice (Gen. 4:4; cf Heb. 11:4). Next, we find the promised lamb to be provided by God Himself as Abraham, by faith, offers his son Isaac (Gen. 22:8-12; cf Heb. 11:17). This lamb prefigured the Paschal Lamb offered up on the first night of Passover, which itself prefigured Jesus the Lamb of God. The third instance is when the nation Israel is in bondage in Egypt and the Lord command the nation to place lambs blood upon the two doorposts and those who do will be spared the death of the firstborn (Ex. 12:3-15). This occasion is then commemorated in the feast of Passover (Ex. 12). Then a slaughtering of a lamb is placed as an important place in the law specifically in the specified days and feasts of the nation. The fifth instance is Isaiah's prophecy concerning the suffering servant, speaking not of a real lamb, not of the nation Israel, but of a man, Jesus Himself. Next, in John 1:29, we have the Lamb that takes away the sin of the world identified. Then, in Revelation 5 we have the Lamb magnified by the hosts of heaven (Rev. 5:12). And finally, the Lamb is seen glorified as He is seated on the eternal throne of God (Rev. 22:1). Arthur Pink writes the following: "Once more; mark the orderly development in the scope of the sacrifices. In Gen. 4 sacrifice is offered for the individual – Abel. In Ex. 12 the sacrifice avails for the whole household. In Lev. 16, on the annual Day of Atonement, the sacrifice was efficacious for the entire nation. But here in John 1:29 it is "Behold the lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world" – Gentiles are embraced as well as Jew!" (Arthur Pink, Exposition of the Gospel of John, p. 59)
The typology of the slain Lamb Typology may be defined as "an Old Testament institution, event, person, object, or ceremony which has reality and purpose in Biblical history, but which also by divine design foreshadows something yet to be revealed" (Donald Campbell in Paul Tan, The Interpretation of Prophecy, p. 167).
As Dr. Couch notes, "Prophecies and types both point to things future and are predictive in their natures. Types, however, are to be distinguished from prophecies in their respective forms. That is, a type prefigures coming reality; a prophecy verbally delineates the future. A type is expressed in events, persons, and acts; a prophecy is couched in words and statements. A type is passive in form, a prophecy active….When an Old Testament element is said to be a type of an element in the New, this does not mean that one equals the other. One element may prefigure another and the resemblance between the two may be very close, but a type never equals its antitype. The Old Testament sacrificial lamb typifies – but does not equal – Christ." (Mal Couch, gen.ed., An Introduction to Evangelical Hermeneutics, p. 81).
The Old Testament typology of the slain lamb applied to Jesus as the Lamb of God has at its core the prophetic reality that Jesus is the spotless (without sin) lamb that has been offered up once for all, never to be offered up again in our place (Heb. 9:28).
It is not a small point that this typology of a slain lamb and Jesus as the Lamb of God was (a) planned before the foundation of the world (1 Pet. 1:20); (b) foretold in the Old Testament (Isa. 53); and (c) fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Acts 8:32-35).
The significance of the blood of the Lamb The significance of the shed blood can be found in the Old Testament to be applied in several ways apart from the simple killing: (1) as a sacrifice (i.e., religious significance), (2) sealing of a treaty, and (3) a payment of tribute.
Sacrifice. The sacrificial offering was both before the Law (Gen. 4) and as part of the institution of the Law (Ex. 12; Num. 28-29). This offering involved the slaughtering of the animal and the shedding of blood. Of this blood it is said "for the life of the flesh is in the blood" (Lev. 17:11), but the blood also symbolized forgiveness (Lev. 17:11; Heb. 9:22), in fact it offered a legal transaction in the Law. Jesus, when His blood was shed on the cross is said to be presented to God in heaven (Heb. 9:12, 24-28), and was used to accomplish: (1) our forgiveness (Eph. 1:7; Heb. 9:22; Rev. 1:5); (2) our redemption (Acts 20:28; Heb. 9:12; 1 Pet. 1:18-19); (3) our atonement (Rom. 3:25); (4) our justification (Rom. 5:9); (5) our reconciliation (Eph. 2:13-16); (6) our cleansing (Heb. 9:14; 1Jn. 1:7; Rev. 7:14); (7) our holiness (Heb. 10:29; 13:12); (8) the power over Satan (Rev. 12:11); and (9) established the New Covenant (Luke 22:20; 1Cor. 11:25).
Sealing of a Treaty. Another application of the blood of a slain lamb is in the sealing of treaties by God Himself in the Abrahamic Covenant (Gen. 15), and between individuals (cf. Gen. 21:27-31). This sealing of a treaty insures that the requirements of the treaty terms will be fulfilled and backed by blood. It is no small thing that the blood of Jesus establishes the New Covenant (Luke 22:20).
Payment of Tribute. As a payment of tribute the offering was to be the best of the flock. This "best of the flock" was of an acceptable age and without defects (Lev. 1:10; cf., Num. 31:37).
Propitiation. The shed blood symbolizes forgiveness as it makes atonement (Lev. 17:11) and purifies (Heb. 9:22), it is said to be a propitiation (Rom. 3:25; Heb. 9:5). A propitiation is a satisfaction, and while some theologians do not like the word satisfaction for propitiation, the fact is Jesus' death satisfied the righteous demands of God. The word, however, has an Old Testament element as the word propitiation is used of the cover of the ark of the covenant in the Holy of Holies, which was sprinkled with the blood of the expiatory victim on the annual day of atonement (this rite signifying that the life of the people, the loss of which they had merited by their sins, was offered to God in the blood as the life of the victim, and that God by this ceremony was appeased and their sins expiated); hence the lid of expiation, the propitiatory (Online Bible Greek Lexicon).
The extent of the sacrifice of the Lamb The extent of the sacrifice, as John the Baptist says, covers the "sin of the world." In fact the word atonement in the Old Testament is the word kaphar and means "to cover." John, however, says Jesus is the Lamb of God who "takes away" the sin of the world. Not only was the extent of the sacrifice to cover all sin, but Jesus' sacrifice takes away, or as the Greek word airo means "to pick up and carry off or away," as Vincent's Word Studies notes "either takes away or takes upon himself, in order to bear: either removal or expiation of sin."
The fact is, Jesus' sacrifice is unique in that unlike the sacrifices of the Old Testament that were effective for a limited group, for a limited time, Jesus' sacrifice was for the world. This is specified by the Apostle John in the following way: (1) by John the Baptist – "Behold! The Lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world!" (John 1:29); (2) by Jesus – "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life." (John 3:16).
And in case some might restrict the meaning of world to mean "both Jew and Gentile," but moreover, limited to believers; John in his First Epistle writes, "And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world" (1 John 2:2). There can be no mistaking – His death covered the whole world!
The doctrine of baptism The doctrine of baptism in the first three chapters of John is a major theme. The theme goes something like this: John the Baptist is introduced in chapter one and Jesus is baptized, and the foretelling of His special baptism which will be with the Holy Spirit (notice Jesus does not baptize with water - His disciples do the baptizing cf., 4:2; Jesus will baptize with the Holy Spirit cf., 1:33). Then, the miracle of water turned to wine, water being that basic element of the baptism. Chapter three starts with the description of the new birth. Jesus speaks in reference to the baptism of the Holy Spirit - That very thing that John the Baptist proclaimed concerning Jesus' baptism in chapter one. In other words, water baptism prefigured the baptism of the Holy Spirit (cf. Tit. 3:5; 1 Pet. 3:21) and is used to picture important theological truths (cf. Rom. 6:1-10; Gal. 3:27; 1 Pet. 3:21). Water baptism has the basic meaning of association or identification with someone, some group, some message or some event (Charles Ryrie, Basic Theology, p. 488).
The word in the Greek baptizo means "to dip, immerse, submerge, to wash." In the Old Testament baptism was a ritual for cleansing, initiation or identification; as an example, it was required for the priest upon his initiation to service. The Jewish rules of purification concerning ritual uncleanness gave the word a technical religious connotation implying purification. During the diaspora, Gentiles seeking admission to Israel required public repentance and acceptance of Mosaic Law were immersed in water, symbolizing moral and ritual cleansing from the defilements of paganism (Walter Elwell, Baker Theological Dictionary of the Bible, p. 50).
Nelson's New Illustrated Bible Commentary notes the following different types of baptisms in Scripture: Jewish baptism: a ceremonial cleansing prescribed for both people and articles (Ex. 19:10-14; Lev. 8:6; Heb. 9:10). John's baptism: a preparatory act in which Jews expressed their belief in the imminent coming of the Messiah and their desire to turn away from sin and live righteous lives (Mark 1:4-8). Jesus' baptism: an act of ceremonial righteousness. By being baptized, Christ was not admitting His sinfulness, as those who submitted to John's baptism were, nor repentance. Instead through baptism, Christ was consecrating Himself to His ministry (Mark 1:9-11). Spirit baptism: the supernatural work of the Holy Spirit by which believers are joined to the body of Christ (Rom. 6:3, 4; 1 Cor. 12:13; Gal. 3:26, 27; Eph. 4:5; Col. 2:9-12). Christian baptism: a ceremonial act instituted by Christ (Matt. 28:19) and practiced by the apostles (Acts 2:38) that depicts a believer's union and identification with Christ in His death, burial, and resurrection. Baptism by fire: a possible reference either to the judgment at the Second Coming or to the coming of the Spirit at Pentecost (Matt. 3:9-12; Luke 3:16, 17).
Baptism symbolizes the following: Forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38) Washing away of sins (Acts 22:16) Spiritual rebirth (Tit 3:5) Salvation (1 Pet. 3:21) Dying with Christ, in His death, burial and resurrection (Rom. 6:3-4; Col. 2:12) Inclusion in the body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:13) Unity in the body of Christ (Eph. 4:3-6) Being clothed with Christ (Gal. 3:27)
Christian baptism: Commanded by Jesus (Matt. 28:19-20; Mark 16:16) Done in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit (Matt. 28:19)
Dr. Waterhouse summarizes, "Baptism speaks of a sharing in Christ's death, burial, and resurrection. Sharing in Christ's life comes about through Spirit baptism into the Spirit of Christ. Thus, baptism in water also pictures baptism in the Spirit and union with the universal church. The one who undergoes baptism displays obedience to Christ's command and identifies with the visible church. It also seems reasonable to think that baptism symbolizes the cleansing (forgiveness) which comes through faith in Christ." (Steven Waterhouse, Not by Bread Alone – an Outlined guide to Bible Doctrine, Amarillo:Westclift Press, p. 349)
The doctrine of the baptizing of Jesus by the Holy Spirit From birth Jesus was filled with the Holy Spirit, so what is the significance of the baptism of Jesus as the Holy Spirit came upon Him like a dove at the age of about 30? The significance of the baptism of Jesus is the induction into His first coming ministry. Dr. Walvoord writes, "From now on, the Holy Spirit will effect the outward signs of Messiahship, the miracles and the prophetic ministry of Christ being its major evidence. As the coming of the Spirit in the form of a dove was visible and outward, so the ministry of the Spirit would be visible and outward." (John Walvoord, The Holy Spirit, p. 95)
In the Old Testament the Holy Spirit would indwell people for a temporary period in order for the person indwelt to accomplish a specific task. So the individual would be gifted in some cases with wisdom (Gen. 41:38-40; Num. 27:18; Judg. 3:10; 6:34; 11:29; 1 Sam. 10:10; 16:13), special skills (Ex. 28:30-35; 31:3; 1 Kgs. 7:14), and unusual physical strength (Judg. 13:25; 14:6, 19; 15:14).
Dr. Pentecost notes, "We must remember that John from his birth had been filled, or controlled by, the Holy Spirit (Luke 1:15). Because of the Spirit's ministry John recognized the person who was presenting Himself for baptism and knew He was not a candidate for his baptism. It had been made very clear that baptism by John was a sign of confession and repentance with a view to forgiveness of sin. Jesus Christ was sinless and therefore had no need for repentance or confession. The nature of John's baptism thus eliminated Jesus as an eligible candidate for such baptism. …The use of water was the same, but the significance was not identical. The baptism of Jesus by John was a special, unique kind of baptism. It was distinct both from John's baptism and from Christian baptism even as John's baptism was distinct from a believer's baptism today." (J. Dwight Pentecost, The Words and Works of Jesus Christ, Grand Rapids:Zondervan, 1981, p. 92-93)
Believe in His name – Becoming a Child of God To believe in Jesus' name is to possess life (John 3:15). What does it mean to believe in His name?
John chapter one says,
But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God. (John 1:12-13)
His name is Jesus Christ, Jesus is of Hebrew origin from Yehoshua' or Joshua a compound of "Jehovah is salvation," and Christ is the Greek Christos meaning "anoint." The name comes from the Old Testament – the Messiah, the Anointed One of Israel. To anoint someone in the Old Testament was to empower one to perform a task so Priests, Kings and prophets were anointed, but Jesus Christ is the special, unique Anointed One who will deliver and save Israel and bring in ultimate peace in the Messianic Kingdom. "Rabbinical writings refer to 456 separate OT passages used to refer to the Messiah and messianic times (Edershiem, 710-41)….From a theological perspective, the unique role of the Messiah is that He combines in His person and work the roles of the three different messiahs of the OT theocracy – the prophet, the priest, and the king" (Mal Couch, gen. ed., The Dictionary of Premillennial Theology, p. 251).
So to believe in His name is to believe He is the Anointed Savior. That promised Messiah of the Old Testament that would come into the world and perform the task of the suffering servant taking the sins of the world upon Himself (Isa. 7:14; 52:13-53:12), and that He will return as victorious King, reconciling all things and ultimately bring in the eternal state.
His first coming Prophecy of Isaiah 53 and NT fulfillment He will be call Immanuel – God with us Matt. 1:23; Luke 1:31-35 He will be exalted (52:13) Phil. 2:9 He will be disfigured by suffering (52:14; 53:2) Mark 15:17, 19 He will be widely rejected (53:1, 3) John 12:37, 38 He will bear our sins and sorrows (53:4) Rom. 4:25; 1 Pet. 2:24, 25 He will make a blood atonement (53:5) Rom. 3:25 He will be our substitute (53:6, 8) 2 Cor. 5:21 He will voluntarily accept our guilt and punishment John 10:11 He will be buried in a rich man's tomb (53:9) John 19:38:42 He will justify many from their sin (53:10, 11) Rom. 5:15-19 He will die with transgressors (53:12) Mark 15:27, 28; Luke 22:37
The book of John has a lot to say concerning the role of Jesus in His first coming, for example, John 12:27: "Now, My soul is troubled, and what shall I say? Father, save Me from this hour? But for this purpose I came to this hour." His name was given by the angel Gabriel as: "you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins (Mat. 1:21).
So it is that John the apostle summaries the purpose of Jesus' first coming when he writes,
He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. 11 He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him. 12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: 13 who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. (John 1:10-13)
Jesus was a Jew so He came to the Jew first, but they did not receive Him. But whosoever believes in Him name will find eternal life. This eternal life is associated with being born of God – not man. The summary statement is made clear by the three-fold literally jewel – not of blood (or as the NIV states "born not of natural decent"); not of the will of the flesh (not by any natural desire); not of the will of man (John Gill says, man's free will, which is carnal and corrupt, is enmity to God, and impotent to everything that is spiritually good.") – Salvation is of God and Him alone!
Life John speaks of life, possessing life, and eternal life more than any other gospel writer. A survey of the doctrine of life in John is rich and varied as only this Jewish writer can accomplish. The topical survey is:
Life in Jesus Himself (1:4; 5:26; 11:25; 14:6) Water of life (4:14; 7:37-38) Bread of life (6:33, 35, 48, 51, 53-54) Light of life (8:12) Eternal life through faith in Jesus (3:15-16, 36; 5:24; 6:40, 47; 17:2-3; 20:31) A full life (10:10)
In chapter one, John uses life as the previous article detailed, as physical life of everyone who comes into the world and "in Him was life" spoke of his self-existence, life apart from the created things which He created. Then, in chapter three Jesus moves to the spiritual life that one must possess and having eternal life comes from "believing in Him," a variation of believe in His name (John 3:15-16).
The consequence of not believing in Him is said to be the "wrath of God abides (continues to abide) upon him." The word for "wrath" is sometimes translated as "anger." The continuous sense has the idea that the unbeliever is now and continues in both his natural life and the wrath to come is in a state of alienation from God. Or as Vincent puts it, "He lives continually in an economy which is alienated from God, and which, in itself, must be habitually the subject of God's displeasure and indignation" (Vincent's Word Studies).
Life has to do with participating in the goodness of what God actively provides every moment. Death by contrast is the absence of any good that God provides - it is separation from God. Separation from His provision is seen as torment – eternal pain and torment.
|
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
