Ask Dr. Couch

Dr. Couch, did the early church have deaconesses?

The earliest of the churches followed the NT which does not call for deaconesses. The word diaconnas means servant. So there were women who did things for carrying out the ministry of the church but there were no deaconesses officially in the congregation. However around the third century some churches began to form deaconess boards, but in the west, in the Latin churches this ended around AD 441. In the Greek orthodox churches it ended around the 12^th century.

   The churches began to have problems with the women who wanted to lead the men. This is happening today with the liberal churches. Women are not to lead men. However in some conservative seminaries today (with some in the Dallas/Ft. Worth area) they are supposedly training women “to be leaders.”

   In the church Council of Orange around the fifth century they banned women from being officially deaconesses. It was not biblical nor was it working! Women who want to be elders/pastors are foolish and are stepping out of their key roles as wives and mothers. Yes, women can help around the church to help serve or clean up the church but this is not an official position. It is women who think they are “men.”And they are not! Can you believe what is happening in our military! Some women are taking our military to court because they won't let the women go into combat. Can you imagine the men who think it is ok to place women into harms way! It is now acceptable to allow the women to defend the men! It is ok to kill wives and mothers on the front lines. Women are 50% less physically capable of doing what men do. They have only 50% upper body strength and have only 50% stamina that men have. So it is a social agenda and a social argument that wishes to place them where only men are supposed to go!

   Some women who are very ignorant try to use Romans 16: 1-2 to argue that there were women deaconesses  in the early church are just plain wrong. The passage says that the church was to receive Phoebe “who was a servant (deaconess) of the church at Cenchrea.” But then it says she was to be received “in the Lord in a manner worthy of the saints, and that you help her in whatever matter she may have need of you; for she herself has also been a helper of many, and of myself as well.”

   She was to be accepted as an ordinary “saint” or church  member, not as one in a special role of a formal deaconess. She certainly did have a ministry, and she must have traveled about doing special spiritual work but this does not mean she was formally a deacon of an assembly.

   Think carefully when you read a passage of Scripture! Don't read into it what is not there. Some women have a hidden ambition to rule over men and to take their positions.

   Thanks for asking.

   Dr. Mal Couch(6/11)

Ask Dr. Couch

Dr. Couch, is the real tabernacle in heaven?

The most used word for tabernacle (or tent) is skeenee. It is used eleven times in the book of Hebrews. There it is called the “true,” the “first” in importance, “the holiest of all,” the “perfect.” In 8:2 we read “the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched and not man.” Verse 1 reads “the main point in what has been said is this: we have such a high priest [now], who has taken His seat at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens.” “At the right hand of the throne” is quoting Psalm 110:1-2. This is where Christ is now!

   Is this tabernacle real? When we get to heaven will we have a “real” body? Yes, but it is not of this same physical we now possess. It will be real but it will also be eternal. The heavenly tabernacle is real but it is not of the same material that the wooden tabernacle was made of. The tabernacle in the wilderness was limited. It was patterned after the heavenly. But it was a place where the offerings were made representing Christ. The tabernacle in heaven represents Christ and His offering for sin, though He will be there in glory. The heavenly tabernacle but represents that great work He performed when here on earth. It is where God meets with man that brings about a redemption for believers.

   Thanks for asking.

   Dr. Mal Couch (6/12)

Ask Dr. Couch

Dr. Couch, what does it mean “To be IN Christ?”


The Greek preposition IN (en, “to be in [en] Christ”) is used in Paul's letters 164 times. And the same expression is used by John in the Upper Room Discourse 12 times. This expression is real but it is also a mystical expression that may be difficult to fully describe. The great Greek scholar Deissmann says this of the preposition en and the expression “To be in Christ”: 

There cannot be any doubt that “Christ in me” means the exalted Christ living in Paul … and Paul in Christ. Christ, the exalted Christ is Spirit. Therefore, He can live in Paul and Paul in Him.” A. T. Robertson adds: “This mystic relation is likened to the air that is in us and yet we are in it.” -- Dr. Mal Couch (6/12)

Ask Dr. Couch (#422)

Dr. Couch, is Psalm 83 about the end times? It seems to be prophetic concerning the nations that are near her and who come against Israel in the latter days. What do you think?

ANSWER: I agree. The psalmist Asaph pleads with God not to remain silent. "For behold, Your enemies make an uproar; and those who hate You have exalted themselves. They [will] make shrewd plans against Your people, and conspire against Your treasured ones" (vv. 1-3). More, "They have said, 'Come, and let us wipe them out as a nation, that the name of Israel be remembered no more'" (v. 4).

They have conspired "together with one mind; against You do they make a covenant" (v. 5). (Does this seem like today!) What adds to this view is the fact that the nations mentioned who despise Israel are the nations surrounding her and that are the closest to the Promised Land! "Edom and the Ishmaelites," Moab, Ammon, and the Amalekites. Philistia and the inhabitants of Tyre. But more, even the Assyrians, who today would be the peoples of Iraq and Iran! The way the text puts it, is that the "Assyrians also have joined with them" (v. 7). In other words, the people of Iraq and Iran have joined in a pact to come and help the nations who are closer to Israel to come and help destroy her!

A hundred years ago or so, all the Arab peoples were called by the West, the "Ishmaelites." Today, the enemies of the Jewish people have all been mixed up together; they now are the descendants of the nations mentioned above.

As with the Arabs today, they want what the Jews have. They want to take over the Promised Land, the Holy Land, as their own. They say, "Let us possess for ourselves the pastures of God" (v. 12).

But the Lord will have the last word. He is beseeched by the psalmist to "make them like the whirling dust; like chaff before the wind. Like fire that burns the forest, and like a flame that sets the mountains on fire, so pursue them with Your tempest, and terrify them with Your storm" (vv. 13-15).

While these peoples have an opportunity to turn to God, they more than likely will not. "They will be humbled and perish" (v. 17). They will then know that God's "name is the Lord, and that He is the Most High over all the earth" (v. 18).

Unger believes also that Psalm 83 is a prophetic glimpse of Israel's future troubles and ultimate deliverance into the Messianic Kingdom, the Davidic reign of Christ. It is about the Wrath, the Tribulation, that will last seven years on earth. These nations will be chastened and finally destroyed, though some of the peoples will repent and be saved for the Kingdom.

Unger further points out that there has never been recorded a coalition in the past such as mentioned here in these verses, so the Psalm waits for a future fulfillment. But Unger goes further and says that it is not impossible that this passage could be fulfilled just before the Tribulation, that is, even in our present time! He writes:

Probably its fulfillment will come in some pan-Arabic coalition and attack
on the Israeli State before the church is taken out, or at least before Daniel's seventieth week begins. (Commentary, pp. 866-67)

Interestingly, some of the Rabbis of the past held that Edom was Rome, or the kingdom of Italy. Many have forgotten that about 150 years ago, all of Italy was the kingdom of the Pope. It was his own state, the Papal state. Then a civil war followed and the various kingdoms of the Italian peninsula broke away from the Vatican. That Edom is Rome is a minor view of some of the orthodox Rabbis. On the day of Edom's downfall, the Lord will make war against the nations. When He is victorious, there will come about the resurrection of the dead Old Testament saints in order that they may enter the Messianic Kingdom.

Below is Rabbinical fiction, but it is very interesting:

During this turmoil, the Jews will say to the Arabs, "The temple is ours. Take silver and gold and leave the temple." The Arabs will answer, "You have no right to the temple. Accept our sacrifice and we shall be one people. Accept our faith!" The Jews will answer, "We shall rather slay and be slain, but we shall not deny God!"

The Messiah in the Tribulation will end this conflict; He will say "See the salvation of the Lord!" He will blow upon the Arabs with the breath of His mouth, and all of them will fall dead before Him.

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch

Ask Dr. Couch (#421)

Dr. Couch, what is going on in Matthew 19:28 where Christ says that He would be with the believers in the "regeneration"?

ANSWER: The Lord is talking about the regeneration, the receiving of salvation, in the Kingdom, "when the Son of Man sits on His glorious throne," with "the twelve disciples sitting on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel." This word "regeneration" is palingenesia (the again birth) and it is used only one more time, in Titus 3:5.

That passage reads, God "saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of the regeneration (the again birth) and the renewing (the again newing, remaking) by the Holy Spirit."

"The again birth" or the "regeneration," by the Holy Spirit, has to do with the New Covenant. The New Covenant was ratified by the death of Christ and launched at Pentecost. Christ said in Luke 22:20 "This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood." His sacrifice on the cross, the pouring out of His blood, begins the New Covenant. The church does not fulfill this covenant but benefits by it.

The New Covenant will be fulfilled by Israel when the Kingdom begins, and that is what is said in Matthew 19:28. In Titus 3:5, it is clear that church saints are saved by the New Covenant, the regeneration work of the Holy Spirit. The church is not Israel, and Israel is not the church.

Paul makes it clear that we today represent the New Covenant. He says that God made us, the church saints, "adequate as servants of a new covenant, not of the letter (of the Law), but of the Spirit; for the letter (of the Law) kills, but the Spirit (through the New Covenant) gives life" (2 Cor. 3:6).

Matthew 19:28 is a great passage that proves the point. For Israel, the "regeneration" of the New Covenant will be fulfilled in the Kingdom.

Christ refers to the regeneration coming, in John 3:3. He told Nicodemus "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God (the millennial kingdom)." Born again here is two distinct words. Born happens to be part of the word "regeneration," or the verb gennao. It is an Aorist Passive Subjunctive. The action comes upon the subject. The word again here is mistranslated. It is the Greek word anothen which is better translated from above. However, the idea, and the relationship between the two thoughts are related. To be born again is to be born from above. This is the work of the New Covenant carried out by the Holy Spirit! In John 3, Christ is talking about the same thing as He is in Matthew 19:28. He is not speaking about being born again in the church dispensation but in the Kingdom dispensation. The Lord makes that clear. "Truly, truly, I say to you (Nicodemus) unless one is born of water and (that is, even), the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God" (v. 5).

(Christ is not referring to water baptism but to the washing of the Spirit which is the application of the New Covenant. Jesus is referring to Ezekiel 36:25-27 which promises the coming work of the New Covenant. "This I will sprinkle (slosh) clean water on you (the Jews), and you will be clean … I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes …" Christ chided Nicodemus that he should have known this Ezekiel passage. He asked him, "Are you the teacher of Israel, and do not understand (know) these things?" (John 3:10). Where could Nicodemus have known of that truth? Only from Ezekiel 36:25-27.

Ask Dr. Couch (#420)

Dr. Couch, what is the lie that people will believe in the end times?

ANSWER: The word lie comes from the word pseudos, and can be translated lie, deceive, false. Surprisingly, the NT uses the word often with many verifications and combinations. One of the key passages where the word is used in found in 2 Thessalonians 2:9-12. There, it is used in the context of the tribulation when Satan seems to have complete control of the world and its philosophies. But it must be kept in mind that, while the passage is about the seven year tribulation, what is happening in that period really began some years before the rapture of the church. In other words, the world progressively moves into that horrible period, not just suddenly!

Satan during the tribulation will be active "with all power and signs and false (lying) wonders" (v. 9). He will deceive the world "with all deception (trickery) of wickedness for those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth so as to be saved" (v. 10). Notice the open door for the satanic deception begins with the world's attitude of not loving the truth! The world does not desire the truth and has no love for it. For this reason, God will send upon them a deluding (leading astray) spirit (influence) "so that they might believe what is false (a lie), in order that they all may be judged who did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in wickedness" (vv. 11-12).

Now, what is the lie?

The lie may include many things but it begins with a denial of God. Paul writes in Romans 1:25: The lost "exchanged the truth (about) God for a lie (for that which is false), and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator …" The creature is better translated as "That which is created," the physical. To worship humanity is part of this as well. What mankind can create and do is worshipped rather than the God who made man.

Just recently many churches celebrated the birth of Charles Darwin. They consider him a great man and scientist. Darwin replaced "chance" with God, not just in his science, but in his theology. God is dead! The world today despises the truth, and rejects God. Therefore, it is becoming more and more humanistic and moving deeper into immorality. The world has said "There is no God" (Psa. 14:1). From that, men feel no compulsion to know the God of Scripture. Instead, they commit "abominable deeds; there is no one who does God." "They have turned aside; have become corrupt" (v. 3).

This is why there is on its way, the wrath of God! In the future, in the Kingdom period, "salvation will come out of Zion (Israel)" (v. 7), when the Lord restores His captive people, (then) Jacob (Israel) will rejoice, Israel will be glad" (v. 7b).

For the deceiver, the liar, "There is no fear of God before his eyes" (Psa. 36:1). TV shows us the direction the world is going. There is no turning back. We are into the apostasy. The rapture of the church is probably closer than we can imagine!

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch

Ask Dr. Couch (#419)

Dr. Couch, what is the "new" nation that Christ is speaking about in Matthew 21:43? Some say it is the church, and that the Kingdom of God has been taken away from the Jews and given to the "church," which is that new nation.

ANSWER: The passage says (Matthew 21:33-44) that the vine-growers take the owner's son (who would be Christ in the context) and kill him and seize his inheritance (v. 38). The Lord adds: The stone which the builders rejected has become the chief corner stone (v. 42). Then, "The kingdom of God will be taken away from you (the chief priests and the Pharisees), and be given to a nation producing the fruit of it" (v. 43).

Some foolishly argue that this means the Kingdom of God is taken from the Jews and given to the Gentiles, the church! How does the church "produce the fruit of the Kingdom"? There is no comparison between what happens in the dispensation of the Kingdom and what is now taking place in the dispensation of the church! The Kingdom is a theocracy, with Israel, confined in its governorship to the Promised Land, though the Messiah's rule is worldwide. There is the restoration of the priesthood (Zadokian priesthood) and the restoration of a new Kingdom temple (Ezek. 40-48).

Secondly, the church is never called "a nation." The Jewish leadership got the point; they knew He was speaking of them. "They understood that He was speaking about them" (v. 45). Christ is speaking about a future generation of Jews, a new and later Jewish nation that will embrace the Kingdom. He said, "Truly I say to you, all these things shall come upon this generation" (23:36). A future generation, a new nation, will receive and accept the Kingdom!

Some dumbly attempt to say that when Peter quotes Exodus 19:6, he is there calling the church the "holy nation" as was applied to Israel. Exodus 19:6 reads: "You shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation. These are the words that you shall speak to the sons of Israel." (Notice it has to do with Israel, not the church!) Peter quotes this in 1 Peter 2:9 and says to the Jews who are in the Diaspora (the scattered ones), "You are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation." While it is true that Peter is writing to Jews who now belong to the church, his point is that the believing Jews have this as their heritage with its national promise. He is not applying this in the broad sense to the church. He says to those Jews, the "scattered Jews," that they have such promises as a nation. In fact, he goes on and says, you are "a people for God's own possession" (v. 9). The believing Jews now have received the promised blessings of the New Covenant as prophesied in Jeremiah 31:31-on. These Jews "obeyed Jesus Christ and [were] sprinkled with His blood" (the New Covenant). They had received grace "in the fullest measure."

Thus, even believing Jews today can be proud of their historic heritage. They were God's "race," His holy race, and "a royal priesthood" that represented Him on earth, and as well, they were designated "a holy nation" which is not said of the church. The church is not a race or a nation, but this is how the Jewish people, even today, are described!

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch

Ask Dr. Couch (#418)

Dr. Couch, I have friends who foolishly say the church is in the OT. They say that the Greek Septuagint, for example, translates the Hebrew word "congregation" from the Greek word "ecclesia" which can be "church." Thus, the doctrine of the church is in the OT. How do you answer?

ANSWER: These people are just plain foolish and ignorant! I can't be anymore strong about it. The Greek word "ecclesia" can be translated "church, assembly, congregation" but that is simply a judgment call by the translators. Context determines whether we are speaking about the NT doctrine of the church or not. (Note Numbers 10:2.) This is simply a translation issue and not a doctrinal issue.

The doctrine of the church is something brand new in the NT. The Bible is not saying that the doctrine of the NT church is in the OT. And these people who so argue are really crazy and blind, and I might add, argumentative! I can't help but believe they really know better but they want the Bible to say what they want it to say, even throwing common sense to the wind!

In some ways, it is not worth our time to argue with them. Their heads are in the sand and their arguments are so nutty that it is impossible to discuss such issues with them!

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch

Ask Dr. Couch (#417)

Dr. Couch, some say that John 10:14-16 shows that the church is now part of Israel. Is this so?

ANSWER: Of course not. And, those who take such a view have not read the passage carefully. In the context, Christ is calling Himself the "good shepherd" (v. 14). He is taking on the description of God that is found in Ezekiel 34. There, the heavenly Father calls Himself the Shepherd and Israel His sheep. He reminds them that they are being scattered but that He will someday bring them back to their Promised Land (v. 13).

In the John 10 passage, the Lord takes on that same designation, the Good Shepherd. He then says "I have other sheep, which are not of this (sheep) fold; I must bring them also, and they shall (in the future) hear My voice; and they shall (in the future) become one flock with one Shepherd (which would be Christ)" (v. 16).

Christ is the Shepherd to all believers, whether to the OT Jews or for the church. But note, the "other sheep" are not of the same (sheep) fold, that is the other sheep fold which is Israel, though there is a common relationship that OT saints and/or NT saints have with Him: He is the Shepherd for both! This does not mean that the church has become part of the Jewish Kingdom or of the nation of Israel.

All people who are redeemed are redeemed by the death of Christ. His death goes back to the saving of the OT saints, and it goes forward to saving the NT saints; but there are two different sheep folds!

Study by context, context, and, keep the lines straight when interpreting the Bible!

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch

Summer Programs

This is the start of the summer Sunday school season and many Churches are transitioning to a different organization and schedule. And as usual this summer I am hearing about the nightmares at some Churches concerning their summer children’s programs. For various reasons, many Churches seek to reduce the burden of staff, resources, and etc. As a result, children, leaders, and parents all get short changed. It is almost inevitable that those Churches that reduce staff in the summer end up combining classes of vastly different age needs, producing oversized classes, stressed out leaders and the dread of summer - upset people who pick up and leave for another Church. 

Traditionally, the summer is the time when people move and/or visit other Churches seeking to find something better. If these migrants come to visit your Church, will they find unbalanced children’s classes and overcrowded classrooms with stressed out leaders? Does this sound familiar? 

I just heard of a case where the 2-3 year old class was combined with the 4-5 year old class, the result was that two leaders were teaching 20+ children aged 2-5 years old with only one helper.  What never ceases to amaze me is the lack of knowledge of the age difference problem. 

Children who are 2 years old do not interact the same as a 3 three year old. A 2 year old is learning to interact with other children and usually require a short one-on-one teaching session. Sometime between 2 and 3 years old they progress enough to interact in the class with each other. 

There is a huge maturity progresses as the 2 year old matures during the year. He or she moves from the nursery to a classroom environment, from being held and playing in the nursery to individual play and instruction to group play and instruction.  

            If you are in the position to make these kinds of decisions, I encourage you not to make this common mistake.

            If you are in this situation in your Church, it is not too late to change the organization. Make sure your classrooms are sized correctly, leaders are trained, and the littlest in your Church are taken care of. If the smallest are taken care of then people will notice and God will be glorified.     

-- Dr. John Pappas

HATING ISRAEL

Many Evangelicals despise the Jewish people, or at least, give no thoughts to them as God's earthly people. But Psalm 129:5 says: “May all who hate Zion, be put to shame and turned backward.” Though not all covenant guys hate Israel, or ignore Israel, still many turn against the Jews and believe that the Lord is finished with Israel. However, God loves them and therefore we should as well (Rom. 9:28). “They are beloved to God.”

   The Hebrew word for hate is “sa-nay” and can be translated “to be unable to put up with,” or “to slight.” Thus, “to disdain.”

   Woe to those who turn their backs on Israel.

--   Dr. Mal Couch (6/12)

James 1:12-17

Saint Augustine was one of the great fathers of the early church.  The story is told that soon after his conversion to Christ he was walking down a street in Milan, Italy, where he was at the time a student.  A prostitute saw him and called him by name.  “Augustine,” she said.  He paid no attention to her, though he heard her.  She called after him several times, but he did not respond and just kept on walking.  Finally she said, “Augustine, it is I.”  Without slowing down or even looking at her, he said, “Yes, but it is no longer I.”

 

Surely Augustine was enduring temptation at that time.  His reply to the prostitute, whom he no doubt knew, indicate his knowledge also of the true source of solicitation to evil and the way of victory as well.  Augustine’s reply, “It is no longer I,” expresses his realization that having become a believer, a Christian, he now had a new enablement to say no to sin and he availed himself of that power.  He was a changed man from the inside out. 

 

Our friend James, brother of Jesus, was used of God to give us information about how to have victory over both the trials and troubles of life and the temptations to sin.

-- Dr. Robert Lightner, pg 3, Solid Stepping Stones (used with permission) 

Ask Dr. Couch (#416)

Dr. Couch, what does the word "power" mean, and what is going on in Matthew 26:64?
 

ANSWER: The verse reads: "Hereafter you shall see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven."

Some foolish allegorists and amillennialists think this is about Christ's final coming to simply judge humanity, with eternity beginning right after that. Actually, the word here is speaking of God Himself! The passage is about the Lord's coming to reign on the Davidic throne for the 1,000 year millennial rule. The expression Son of Man is messianic and is never used in relationship to the church. The rule here is not His rule presently over the church. And the Kingdom of God is certainly not the church. It is the promised Kingdom period. Christ has two main offices: (1) to die for the sins of mankind, and (2) to be the King of Israel sitting on the literal throne in Jerusalem as promised in the OT. How dare the amillennial guys to remove His second major office from history! They say that the church has "replaced" His Kingdom reign! What audacity!

The NAS translates dunameos as Power. The word has the thought of "might, strength, ability, capability." In this Matthew 26:64 passage the word is used of God Himself. He is the POWER. He is no less! There is no other Power in the universe!

The word can also be used simply as a noun. Mark 13:25 speaks of the "stars of heaven falling and THE POWERS (pl.) of the heavens being shaken."

Ephesians 1:21 says that Christ presently is "seated at the right hand of God in the heavenly places, far above all rule and authority and powers (exousia) and DOMINION (dunameos)." Dominion implies that Christ's great power controls all aspects of the universe. He is fully in charge!

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch

Ask Dr. Couch (#415)

Dr. Couch, what do we do with Galatians 2:20? Have you noticed the similarity with Romans 6:6?
 
ANSWER: Yes, there is a similarity but too, there is a difference. Romans 6:6 reads: "Knowing that our old man was crucified with Him, that our body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin."

"Crucified (once and for all) with Him" is an Aorist Tense. It is completed and finished action. In our Position before God, we died with Christ. Our old self was crucified and judged but still active and causing us grief in the Christian walk. Paul attests to this when he writes: "I am not practicing what I would like to do, but I am doing the very thing I hate" (7:15).

Galatians 2:20 goes from this statement about Positional truth to the daily Experience of the believer as he walks about here on earth. Paul uses the Perfect Tense which reads: "I have been progressively crucified with Christ …" In other words the action started in the past and comes up to the present. The result is impacting us now.

On the Perfect Tense, the great Greek grammarians Dana and Mantey say this: It "shows the progress of an act to a point of culmination with its finished results. It implies a process that reaches its consummation, into a finished state. It can be shown this way:
Start>>>>>>>>>>>>>Culmination in the Present.

Putting it all together, Galatians 2:20 reads

I have been crucified with Christ (with the present impact being) it is no longer I who am presently living (Present Tense), but Christ is presently living (Present Tense) in me; and the [life] which I now am living (Present Tense) in the flesh (in this body), I am living (Present Tense) by the Son of God, the One who distinctly loved (Aorist Participle) me and who distinctly gave Himself over, delivered Himself up (Aorist Participle) for me.

The verse starts with Positional truth and then progresses to Experiential truth concerning daily living out the Christian life! This is about the mysterious work of Christ living through the believer. It is impossible to fully understand or explain. We are new creatures. But too, there is the struggle in the Christian walk because there is conflict going on with the flesh. He deals with that in chapter 5. Paul writes: "I say, be continually walking by means of the Spirit, and you will not carry out the lust of the flesh" (v. 16). If we walk by the Spirit then "you may not do the things that you please" (v. 17). "For the flesh sets its desire against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; for these are in opposition to one another" (v. 17a). "If we are in the new Position, living by means of the Spirit, then let us also in our Experience be walking by means of the Spirit [and not by means of the flesh]" (v. 25).

Can believers transgress in the flesh? You bet they can! Paul writes, "Brethren, even if a man is caught in any trespass …" (6:1).

I hope this helps. Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch

Ask Dr. Couch (#414)

Dr. Couch, what happened in the last election? Why did so many young people vote for the wrong party and wrong president?

    This was a shocker to all of us. But the answer comes from a survey of the younger minds in our population. Young people disregard experience. They think it is not necessary. They repudiate wisdom and experience, and particularly, biblical wisdom.

   Some believe, and I agree, that Mike Huckabee was knocked out of the race because he implied that our nation should respond to the idea that "God said so" in the Bible. But the Bible does not carry the authority that it once did. Those who want to go back to the Scriptures are "outdated," and "out of touch" with our population, the younger crowd says. I was disappointed to read in the publication of Houston Baptist University's The City, that we don't need to argue from the Bible, we can just argue from the standpoint of social conservatism's view of common sense and people should then respond to what is right. The article entitled "A Political Road Not Taken," says:

Rather than argue that abortion is contrary to God's law and that we need to bring the Constitution into conformity with God's law, social conservatives should argue that as a matter of scientific fact the child in a mother's womb is a whole, living human being, and that as a matter of moral truth the direct killing of any peaceable human being is gravely unjust. (p. 39)

   This old and tired view was popular in the past: the law of reason is sufficient; we don't need the proclamation of the Scriptures to live by in our culture. "A rational person should automatically recognize that abortion is wrong! He has a seed of what is right within his soul!" This places the Word of God outside of the workings of culture. And it denies the doctrine of Total Depravity that says good is not innate within human beings. "There is a natural truth that everyone should agree to, and everyone should see!" But this is not so. The heart of man is depraved and will find a way to reject Scripture and spurn what is logical and what is right! The article went on:

Amend the Constitution to be in accord with reason, that [sic] is what Huckabee should have said. While Huckabee mobilized many social conservatives to show up at the polls, he did not persuade anyone outside their world to join them. … To be successful, hearts and minds need to be changed. Minds are changed by rational appeals, by a winning argument, and by presenting the perspective of a faithful believer, … not just more preaching to the choir. (p. 43)

   In other words we will find moral truth outside of the Bible and people will rally to that. This is dead wrong! And it is a view of the foolish who think we can win the war on rational grounds. We don't need the Scriptures to enlighten us! By this thinking, we've already lost the war! And that's where we are today. The apostasy has begun!

   If the younger crowd rejects experience and spurns biblical truth, the nation is doomed. Dr. Bruce Waltke in his excellent commentary on Proverbs says in so many words: If biblical truth, wisdom, age, and authority are rejected, then a culture is in deep trouble. The moral fiber of a nation is rejected and the "society unravels and anarchy ensues" (I, 187).

   Thanks for asking.
   Dr. Mal Couch

Ask Dr. Couch (#413)

Dr. Couch, what is a good model for a home Bible study class?

Many today use the psychological approach where everybody sits around and shares their ignorance. The leader is but a facilitator who just helps people think through issues. This is all dead wrong, and, the implication is that there is no absolute truth. Truth is simply where you find it, or, truth is simply what is true to you!

We have moved away from the strong objective Bible teacher format. We must return to having strong, well-trained leaders who really know the Scriptures. However, it is getting very late in the evening. Darkness is rapidly closing in on the best of our churches. Good seminaries that taught the Word to dedicated teachers are disappearing. The night is soon coming!

The biblical method of study is being lost. Good Bible study has to do with (1) observation, (2) interpretation, and (3) application. And this takes work and sweat! There is no short changing preparation by a Godly teacher.

Anyone who leads a class should arm himself with outstanding spiritual tools. Good commentaries that can be trusted, etc. The way I was taught, heavy doses of Hebrew, Greek, systematic theology, church history, English Bible, is now going away. The schools I attended back in the "dark ages" of the 50s and 60s are no longer around. They have cut back on such disciplined training so that the men are unable to do solid work in the text. A good friend, who is attending one of the "big" seminaries in the Dallas/Ft. Worth area, admits he cannot do in depth exegetical work. The skills are no longer being taught at that institution. The students are getting only about half of such studies as I received.

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch

Ask Dr. Couch (#412)

Dr. Couch, what is presuppositional apologetics?

This is what most Evangelicals would hold to. It presupposes the truth about Christianity as the starting point of apologetics. In apologetics one must present the Christian view first and foremost and no other argument is sufficient. It presupposes the truth of the Bible and of the gospel.

Revelation and the revealed Word is the starting point. No other arguments will lead men to Christ. And yes, apologetics assumes the total depravity of man. So only the Word, applied to the heart and mind by the Holy Spirit will, have positive effect and conviction.
Francis Schaeffer was said to promote "practical" presuppositional apologetics. Only living in a practical way the Word of God was the responsibility of the believer. The "livability" of the Word was a test for the falsity of non-Christian systems. By this the truth of Christianity was demonstrated to the world.

While I certainly believe all that is mentioned above, I have found that good, strong doctrine and systematic theology is what is needed by students of Scripture to create solid teachers of the Scriptures. (This is why I majored in Systematic Theology in grad school.)

I find a lot of younger men today are enamored by apologetics, but the problem is that it is an interesting study in itself but it does not create a strong understanding of the Word. Apologetics can become a study in philosophy but not really create exegetes.

I have taken my share of graduate apologetic courses but when finished I said "So what?"

I hope this helps. Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch

Wisdom (James 1:5-8)

At first glance it seems a bit strange that James would call upon his readers to ask God for wisdom after he has just said they should consider themselves blessed and joyful during trials.  What does wisdom have to do with our trials?  Actually, the two have much to do with each other.  It is heavenly wisdom that we need in order to bear up under the trials and hardships of life.

 

So, does this mean that all we need to do to be victorious despite hard times is to ask God for wisdom and He will give it? No, there are some conditions attached to what might at first appear to be a blank check from God.  First, we need to ask God and He will give us assistance.

 

The word “ask” (1:6) here means to ask repeatedly. It is also used as a request coming from a subordinate and undeserving person.  Too, the one seeking wisdom from above is to ask for it “in faith,” believing that God will respond positively.  There is to be no “doubting” (1:6).  Doubters are said to be like “the surf of the sea, driven and tossed by the wind.”  In other words, God would have us have confidence in Him to do and permit what is best for us.  Without this we cannot expect to receive help from God.  There is no doubt about it, we all need wisdom from God to know how to view and endure the trials of life.  Yet, if we come to Him “double-minded” (:8), we will be like a person with two souls, like Mr. Face-It-Two-Ways.  A person who is double-minded is one with divided allegiance.

 

The believing Jews to who James wrote, and by application all Christians since then up to this very day, were called upon to always view trials and hardships God’s way.  Patience will have an opportunity to do its perfect work only when the child of God uses heavenly wisdom in the face of trials.  The tried saint who needs this wisdom is simply to “ask of God” (v.5).  James uses the present tense of the verb, which tells us to keep on asking (cf. Matthew 7:7, where the same usage occurs.).  Here, then, is an invitation to persistence in prayer.  Wisdom to face life’s problems has its source not in the “wise” of this world  -  Greeks or Jews  -  but in God.

- Dr. Robert Lightner, pg 9-10, Solid Stepping Stones (used with permission) 

DR. COUCH IS WRITING ANOTHER BOOK

And you may want it! It raises the question: “Where does the believer go following death?” The book is just $10 and it will be a classic study as a witnessing tool for those who are confused about salvation. His latest book, INERRANCY, is considered by those who have read it as an important volume about the Inspiration and Inerrancy of Scripture.

Ask Dr. Couch (#411)

Dr. Couch, I heard someone say that if believers are not faithful, they will not reign with Christ in the millennium. They use 2 Timothy 2:11-13 for their reasoning. What do you say?

Verses 11-13 stands complete like a poetic statement. Many believe this was a song or a doctrinal statement used by the early church that was sung or quoted in congregational meetings. The verse in question is 12 which says "If we endure, we shall also reign with Him." The "if" is a first class condition of the subjunctive and should better read "Since we shall endure…." It reads: "Since we are now abiding under (apomeno) (Him), we shall in the future be reigning together with (synbasileuo) Him."

Paul is not assigning a moral judgment on this "abiding under." He has created parallel thoughts. Verses 11-12 all run together. "To have died with Him equals we are now abiding under Him with the result with will be reigning together with Him."

"Abiding under" is the better way to translate "endure." As I have shown the word is actually upo=under, meno=abide.

I do not doubt that we will all have different roles in our reigning, but to say that we will or will not reign with Him is not what the passage is about. As those who are saved, we now are abiding under Him! BUT NOW THE BIG SURPRISE, THE KICKER! The first meaning of upomeno is not "abiding under" but is better translated "to be under suffering." The great Greek scholar Kenneth Wuest agrees with me on this!

This is the better thought in the passage. So the teacher you heard is all wrong in the way he is taking the passage!

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch

Ask Dr. Couch (#410)

Dr. Couch, I have been fascinated with so many verses on the sovereignty of God in the book of Acts. I didn't realize how prevalent that subject was throughout the Bible.

My favorite verse on God's sovereignty in relation to our life, and even our death, is found in Acts 13:36. In fact, this is one of my theme verses in the NT. Paul said, "For David after he had served the purpose of God in his own generation, fell asleep, and was laid among his fathers, and underwent decay." David died only after God was through with his ministry, not any sooner or later! God is in charge of our existence. Now He may give us medicine and doctors to keep us going, in this generation that we are living in, but even that is part of His plan. It is no accident that we are so blessed. We will still die when He says it is time!

Another heart-stopper on God's sovereignty is 4:27-28. God gathered together all of the actors involved in the crucifixion of Christ to cause them "to do whatever Thy hand and Thy purpose predestined to occur." The word predestined means to "before encircle." God's plans were put into place eons in the past. He is now carrying out what He designed to happen. The verb "to occur" means "to come about, to happen, to become." God makes things happen; He is in charge! Even though human beings are active, and responsible, we are not the first cause of all things—God is!

I heard recently about a pastor who was teaching the sovereignty of God from Romans 9. About four couples just "walked." They left the church! Their egos could not tolerate the doctrine of God's sovereignty! In my opinion, they left the church out of their ignorance and evil hearts. They did not want God to be God! And, they disrespected the pastor's authority and failed to try to understand what the Bible was teaching.

Another passage about God's sovereignty and His working in our lives comes from James 5:13-16. James says we should not put weight on our own plans for next year, because we are just a vapor, "that appears for a little while and then vanishes away." He then adds, "What you ought to say is, 'If the Lord wills, we shall live and also do this or that.'" If the Lord wills is the key! James implies that it is our arrogance that denies His sovereignty! He then states: "But as it is, you boast in your arrogance; all such boasting is evil" (v. 16).

I have two sayings for my students: "Who do we think we are?" And, "Who is in charge?" The answers are obvious. We are nothing, and God is in control!

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch

Ask Dr. Couch (#409)

Dr. Couch, I appreciate your observations about where our nation is going. Where are some other verses that describe the state of our country?

Try Isaiah 57:20-21 and Jeremiah 17:5-11. America is a spiritually restless and destructive nation. I am now writing a book on where this is all going entitled: Satan, the Nations, and the End Times. If it is possible, we are seeing sin becoming more sinful! Television is a good thermometer to tell us what is happening to the people, especially the younger people, of our nation. Did you know that in some state universities they now have co-ed apartments. In other words, men and women can live together in the same room.

God has said "The wicked are like the tossing sea, for it cannot be quiet" (Isa. 57:20). "Its waters toss up refuse and mud." Because of this "There is no peace, says my God, for the wicked" (v. 21). Our nation only focuses on the material and the physical. The moral and the spiritual are ignored.

But even more pointedly, Jeremiah quotes the Lord as saying, "Cursed is the man who trusts in mankind" (17:5). That is what the people of our nation are doing. America trusts in America and not in God! Jeremiah adds, cursed is the man who "makes flesh his strength" (v. 5b). And, cursed is the man "whose heart turns away from the Lord" (v. 5c). This man is like a bush in the desert who "lives in stony waste in the wilderness" (v. 6). There is nothing but dryness and deadness around!

But there is a reminder: "Blessed is the man who trusts in the Lord and whose trust IS the Lord" (v. 7). That man is like "a tree planted by the water, that extends its roots by a stream and will not fear when the heat comes; but its leaves will be green, and it will not be anxious in a year of drought nor cease to yield fruit" (v. 8).

Then the Lord warns: "The heart is more deceitful than all else and is desperately sick; who can understand it?" (v. 9). We cannot understand even our own heart. We can be self deceived and not even know who we really are. God searches our heart and tests our minds (v. 10a). And He will reward according to our works.

The hope of Israel is the Lord. If they do not trust Him, as all people, there will be judgment. Those who forsake Him are "put to shame" (v. 13a). Those who turn away from Him will be "written down, because they have forsaken the fountain of living water, who is EVEN THE LORD!" (v. 13b).

In reference to the spiritual fall of America, the old scholar Lange said "Out of the virtues and vices of the family come the virtues and vices of nations."

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch

Answers to Your Questions

I was looking up the word “saved” in a concordance and I find the word is confusing. Can you explain how they can translate the word so differently?  

I gather from your question you are not asking how one is saved or what one is saved from, but your question seems more to do with linguistics and hermeneutics. That is to say, how can they translate the common word for save or salvation to mean all those other words like deliverance, preserve, heal, & etc? We often come to the word “save” or “salvation” and immediately jump to the theological definition of the word as it applies to eternal life, but the word does have a root meaning and an extra-biblical root. The word in the Hebrew is yasha meaning to save, deliver, help, victory & etc. Sometimes the word for “life” hayah is translated saved. How do translators determine what to translate the word as? Words have a basic meaning, but it is context that determines exactly what it applies to and hence the meaning. For example, the word for salvation is the Greek soteria and can mean preservation from danger, disease, or death. Hence it is sometime used to mean physical salvation or deliverance.

Within the realm of the Bible, words are analyzed in their context to build what is known as a Biblical Theology or a Systematic Theology. Biblical Theology is restricted to what specifically comes from the Bible, while Systematic Theology is built by both the Bible and external sources and disciplines. The word for saved in the Greek New Testament is the verb sozo and can mean preserve or rescue from natural dangers and afflictions. Context determines how to translate the word and what it means in detail. There are some who say words don’t mean anything except in context, but that is not correct. The basic word is still restricted to a certain range of meanings, and it is made precise when placed in context.

Understanding this is important and in some Churches a lack of understanding has led to great error. For example, in some Churches, one cannot be saved unless they confess in front of the whole congregation, or unless one is publically baptized in water, or speak in tongues. This kind of error comes from a lack of basic hermeneutical principles, chief of which is context. It is just like your grade school teacher taught you, when reading ask the five “W’s:” who, which, what, why, and when. Answering these questions will make the writing clear and clear up some of these errors. One big mistake when reading the Bible is the called Cross-reference interpretation, where the reader searches for uses of the same word or similar passages, words, or phrases anywhere in Scripture assuming the word means the same thing everywhere without regard for the immediate context. So, for example, even though the Bible clearly states many times (over 100 times) salvation is received by belief alone, at times there are passages where salvation is used in the same sentence with baptism, but context gives us clues as to why. The historical, cultural setting cannot be thrown out when reading the Bible, and when the word saved is used throughout the Scriptures, some 1500 years of history and various cultures and authors have to be brought into consideration.     

From the basic Greek word sozo and a concordance one finds the word means to save from death (Matt. 14:30), bring out safely (John 12:27), to free from disease or demonic possession (Matt. 9:22), but the word has a special spiritual significance as it relates to rescue or preserve from eternal death, from judgment, sin, to bring salvation, or bring to salvation. Categorizing the word theologically, that is to say, organizing the teachings of the word as it specifically relates to eternal life for mankind, one finds that salvation is something that God does. Salvation is of the Lord (Jonah 2:9; Ps. 3:8), it means being saved from the guilt and penalty of sin (Rom. 6:23), and occurs when one believes the gospel of Christ (Acts 16:31). The gospel being the message that Jesus (Jesus is the Hebrew word for savor) Christ, God came in the flesh, died on the cross, was buried and resurrected (1 Cor. 15:1-5). 

Salvation has three tenses: the past – we have been saved (Eph 2:5,8), relates to the release from guilt and penalty of sin and is accomplished the moment one believes the gospel. The present – we are being saved (Phil. 1:19; 2:12-13) relates to the release from the power of sin (John 17:17; Rom. 6:14; 8:2; Gal. 5:16). The future – we will be saved (Rom. 13:11) is the completion of release from the presence of sin.

This part of the theology not only includes context, but grammar. The verb tenses speak volumes – “we have been saved” is a Greek perfect passive, meaning the action was performed by an external agent and it occurred in the past and is complete. This of course speaks of the character of our God. Our God is in active control, bringing eternal life to all who believe, and He will keep them safe, preserved forever (Rom. 8:28-29) – for they possess eternal life. May God bless you in your studies.          

Ask Dr. Couch (#408)

Dr. Couch, which denominations hold to baptism of infants? And why do they do this?

Dr. Lacy Couch goes to a nursing home each week in order to teach the Bible to some older folks. It breaks her heart to have some of them say, "My 'holy' baptism as a child is what is saving me." She has gotten many away from that false belief and helped them understand that it is only by faith in Christ that saves. Not "holy" water baptism!

   Mainly, Catholics, Episcopalians, and Lutherans believe water baptism as an infant is what saves, though each group has some difference in meaning and in interpretation. The Lutheran Augsburg Confession says: "We confess that Baptism is necessary for salvation, and that children are to be baptized, and that the baptism of children is not void, but necessary and efficacious to salvation."

   Remember, that people believe certain doctrines though they cannot prove them by Scripture, instead they hold them by tradition. In other words, they hold to a belief because that is what they were taught, and what they were taught must be true, whether they can prove it by the Bible or not. Many people do not believe in critical thinking, that is by observation, observation, observation, as to what the text says!

   "Tradition, tradition" they sang in Fiddler On The Roof!

   Those who hold to infant baptism use Luke 18:16 ("Permit the children to come unto Me"); Acts 10:23-48 (Cornelius' household); Acts 16:25-34 (The jailer's household); Gal. 3:27; Rom. 6:3-6; Acts 2:38, 22:16.

   Luke 18:16: This passage is easy! There is no way it can be talking about infants. Christ is referring to children who can walk, come up to Him, understand to a degree who He is! This in no way can support "infant baptism"! The main point has to do with their simple trusting and faith that then becomes an example to grownups. He added: "Whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like (just as, with the same simplicity) a child shall not enter it at all." "Don't complicate the gospel--the simple way of faith in coming to Christ!"

   Acts 10:23-48: The Roman officer invited Peter to come to his house "together [with] his relatives and close friends" to hear the truth. Those who hold to infant baptism imply that small little children were there who would get saved by water baptism (v. 47). But only those would be saved who "believed" in Christ and had "received forgiveness of sins," and who were "listening to the message" (vv. 43-44). You cannot apply this passage to infants and infant baptism! Those who (1) heard the gospel, (2) believed, (3) THEN received the Holy Spirit, and THEN (4) it was ordered that they be water baptized! (See vv. 47-48). IT IS IMPOSSIBLE to argue that water baptism has anything to do with getting saved from this passage. Water baptism is the sign of salvation that follows faith, and then the receiving of the Holy Spirit. They were already saved before they were dunked!

   Acts 16:25-34: Paul and Silas went to the home of the jailer and spoke "to all who were in his household" (vv. 32-33). Those who hold to infant baptism say, "See, there must have been children here who were baptized." But the apostles said to the man, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you shall be saved, you and your household" (v. 31). They "spoke these words to the jailer" and they spoke these words to all who were in the house, implying that all in the house could understand these words! Infants could not do so! Then "immediately he was baptized, he and all his household" who had believed! (v. 33).

   Galatians 3:27: This passage used by the groups mentioned above does not fit their argument either, because it has to do with spiritual baptism, "For you ARE ALL baptized INTO CHRIST [and thus] have clothed yourselves with Christ." This is referring to the baptism of the Holy Spirit whereby He unites us with the spiritual body of Christ, as explained in 1 Corinthians 12:12-on. It is interesting that these groups do not mention this passage which reads: "For by one Spirit WE WERE ALL BAPTIZED into ONE BODY, … we were all made to drink of one Spirit." This spiritual work does not take place by the water baptism administered by the pastor at the baptismal font in the church!

   Romans 6:2-6: This passage ties directly into the 1 Corinthians 12 passage. It is not about water baptism but about the Spirit's baptism that ties us to the spiritual body of Christ. Common sense makes this clear and obvious! Paul writes "we are BAPTIZED INTO CHRIST JESUS [and have] been [baptized] into His death" (Rom. 6:3). We were baptized into His death, raised from the death, united with Him in the likeness of His death, and will be resurrected in the likeness of His resurrection (vv. 4-5). And, we were "crucified" with Him in order to be release from slavery to sin. Are these spiritual works are actual works? That is, were we actually nailed to His cross, crucified, buried and resurrected in an actual sense or a spiritual sense? Are these spiritual works, done by the Holy Spirit, or actual physical happenings? If they are spiritual works then so is the baptismal event spoke of here. Water baptism does not save but the work of the Spirit, whereby He unites us to Christ, this saves us!

    Acts 2:38; 22:16. We have already explained Acts 2:38 previously. However, Acts 22:16 reads:

  "And now why are all of you (plural) delaying? With each one of you (singular) standing up, and with each one of you (singular) calling upon His name, let all of you (plural) be baptized, and let all of you yourselves (plural) wash away your sins."

  By the individual action of standing up, or coming forward to call upon the Lord, the result is that as a group they all then are baptized collectively as a group, and the overall result is that they all, by these acts, wash away their sins. There is a long list of verbs, and all the action is working together. One cannot say that the baptism is alone bringing on the salvation. The commitment to Christ is the stepping forward, the standing up, followed by the calling upon His name in order to be saved. These are the acts that saved them. They knew that the water baptism did not save! Their heart and soul commitment is what saved them! The Jews were appointed to KNOW something (His will), to SEE someone (the Righteous One), and to HEAR something (the utterance from His mouth) (v. 14). These are symbolic and spiritual things, not physical. So with the baptism. The water baptism was symbolic of the washing away sins. The water baptism in itself did not save!

   Don't cling to tradition! I think it's about forty times or more in the book of John that tells us we are saved only by faith, and not by works or by baptism.

   Thanks for asking.
   Dr. Mal Couch

Ask Dr. Couch (#407)

Dr. Couch, why did Christ heal and do miracles so often on the Sabbath?

One could argue that He was pushing the Jews to accept good works being done on the Sabbath as upon any other day. But the better answer would be that He was doing a good work on any day, even it happened to be on the Sabbath. No work was to be done on the Sabbath, and the Jews, in their distorted view of the Law, saw Him violating the Law of Moses.

A good answer may be found in John 7:21-24. Christ had done a good work on the Sabbath. He said, "I did one deed [on the Sabbath] and you all marvel" (v. 21). He added, "On this account Moses has given you circumcision (not because it is from Moses, but from the fathers), and on the Sabbath you circumcise a man. If a man receives circumcision on the Sabbath that the Law of Moses may not be broken, are you angry with Me because I made an entire man well on the Sabbath?" (vv. 22-23).

In other words, the Jews did not consider circumcising on the Sabbath was breaking the Law, but they did healing someone! Christ was showing their hypocrisy and their legalism, and too, He was showing how much they hated Him. So it may be that Christ was not trying to taunt the Jews, but He simply was not going to stop healing or doing a good work on the Sabbath. Whatever was needed to be done, He went forward and did it, and did not care what the Jews thought. This is seen also concerning the man with a withered hand (Luke 6:6-12). He said to the Jews, "I ask you, is it lawful on the Sabbath to do good, or to do harm, to save a life, or to destroy it?" (v. 9). The Jews responded and "were filled with rage, and discussed together what they might do to Jesus" (v. 11).

The Jews had forgotten that "The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath" (v. 5) and He could do as He pleased on that day. In my commentary on Luke I wrote:

The great sorrow of this story is how the leaders could ignore the great miracle that had just taken place before their very eyes. Their religiosity and animosity toward Christ was so great that they were blinded with hatred. This moral and emotional tragedy permeates the gospel stories.

The Jews were so spiritually narrow-minded that they could not see the big picture, nor could they see who He was, the promised King of Israel, and the Son of God. I believe this explains why He continued to "work" on the Sabbath no matter what they said or thought!

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch

The Message (James 1:2-4)

Conservative scholarship largely agrees with A.T. Robertson’s view of when the book of James was written:  “The Epistle of James was probably written shortly before the Jerusalem Conference, most probably just before, that is A.D. 48 or 49.”  The practical message of the book was most fitting for the times in which it was written, and it is equally so for our day.  Christians of all times need to know what God expects of them and how to walk with God in a world that is opposed to Him and His teaching.  There is always the constant need to translate heavenly truths into earthly shoe leather.  Children of God must continually be on their guard against becoming so heavenly minded that they are of little earthly good.

 

It was to “the twelve tribes who are dispersed abroad” (1:1) that James wrote.  In other words, he wrote to Jews who had been taken captive and then scattered.  They had experienced captivity and scattering from Assyria, Babylon, and Rome.  Sometimes they would also migrate on their own to seek their fortunes.  However, wherever they went, they always retained their identity and were loyal to their ancient customs.  The Jewish historian Josephus said:  “There is no city, no tribe, whether Greek or Barbarian in which Jewish law and Jewish customs have not taken root.”

 

Apparently, James used the phrase “the twelve tribes” in a nontechnical or general way.  Before James wrote , the ten northern tribes had already disappeared from history.  The content of the book reveals that James had a particular group of scattered Jews in mind: those who had come to believe in Jesus as Israel’s Messiah.  Perhaps James saw and even conversed with some of these Jews as they came to Jerusalem to worship and sensed their need for practical admonition and guidance on their Christian journey.

-- Dr. Robert Lightner, pages 2,3, Solid Stepping Stones (used with permission) 

Ask Dr. Couch (#406)

Dr. Couch, where do you start the antichrist in Daniel 11? Most seem to say that he is first mentioned in verse 36 and on.

You sent me a very complicated question about where I think we begin seeing him in prophecy, in that chapter. The best scholars I know say the reference to him does indeed begin with verse 36. It must be remembered that whether one is looking for information in chapter 11 about Antiochus Epiphanes or the antichrist, most of what is said has to do with events that we know, or will know, little about in terms of details. So it is difficult to be dogmatic as to all that is going on in this chapter. In some ways, chapter 11 is one of the toughest chapters in the OT, because it gives to us extremely detailed information and prophecies.

Christ, and then Paul, refers back to Daniel 9 and 11 when predicting the coming of the antichrist. And of course so does the apostle John in the book of Revelation.

The Lord refers to the antichrist and the Abomination of Desolation "standing in the holy place spoken of through Daniel the prophet" (Matt. 24:15). Paul also speaks of him in 2 Thessalonians 2:3-on. Scofield Ministries produced Paul Benware's excellent commentary on Daniel that is now available for a donation of $15. Those reading this really need this great volume. Dr. Benware handles with meaning detail, as much as can be known, the issues of Daniel 11.

After going through all of the twists and turns on chapter 11, Benware concludes: "It seems best, therefore, to see 11:36-45 as referring to the coming Antichrist who will appear at the end of the ages and completely fulfill these predictions of Daniel. Dr. John Walvoord observed that 'many students of Scripture have recognized from antiquity that another king must be in view' and many of these (such as Jerome and Luther) identified him with the Antichrist of the New Testament. We are, therefore, in good company when we identify this king as the 'man of sin', 'the beast', 'the Antichrist'."

The address for ordering the commentary is: 120 CR 3222, Clifton, TX 76634.

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch

Ask Dr. Couch (#405)

Dr. Couch, what is going on in Luke 16:8-9?

This is a very tough passage of Scripture. Christ speaking about a steward and his master says:

And his master praised the unrighteous steward because he had acted shrewdly; for the sons of this age are more shrewd in relation to their own kind than the sons of light. And I say to you, make friends for yourselves by means of the mammon of unrighteousness; that when it falls, they may receive you into the eternal dwellings.

What throws us is the statement "mammon of unrighteousness." It seems Jesus is talking about profane riches, or simply money of the world. Though in itself money is not sinful, it is what the world uses in its dealings. The disciples had to use money to get things done, and even to bless people from time to time. Just like us today: we give donations and charity by using the world's money. We bless people with the funds of this government system.

Our friends, those who are believers, who die and go before us to glory, will bless us when we arrive at our "eternal dwellings." They will do this because here on earth we used money to bless them. Money can be used for evil or for God's purposes. By reversing the thought in verse 11, I think the point is made clear. "If you have been faithful in the use of unrighteous mammon [worldly riches], you will be entrusted with the true riches [the spiritual riches]."

I hope this helps. Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch