Sticking with the Potter

I was struck by a thought this morning. I was reading from a short writing by some guy named Baro (Peter Baro’s Summary of Three Opinions Concerning Predestination), he produced some time in the late 1500’s. While explaining these views he mentioned a verse from Romans 9, commonly used in relation to this subject of predestination.

“Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?” (Romans 9:21)

This verse, at least since Augustine, has been used as a proof text for God’s sovereignty over determining from all eternity who will be saved and who will be damned. Now, in my opinion (which, I know, doesn’t hold much water), Romans 9 doesn’t teach directly about the salvation and life details of each person, but about how God had every right to use whatever means he chose to bring his plan of salvation about. I don’t have time to go into the details of why I think that. I just encourage you to read that chapter, and prayerfully meditate over it a while.

But this is what occurred to me: So many of these past divines and theologians used this potter illustration that came from Jeremiah, Paul and others, and applied it as an analogy to how God has chosen from all eternity who will be saved (honored) or who will be damned (dishonored), and yet I realized that they haven’t been true to this analogy.

Firstly, there’s this inserted phrase “from all eternity.” The only place in the New Testament that phrase is given in some fashion is in Acts 15:18, where it is applied to God’s works, not man’s. When it comes to the mention of the word usually translated predestination, Paul and the other New Testament writers only go so far as to reach back to the “foundation of the world,” which seems to mean, as far back as before the original creation, or before the Fall, perhaps. And then it may be discussed, what has God actually predestinated? But I digress some.

If we apply to God this analogy of a potter working with a lump of clay and determining what will be made out of that clay, why is this analogy abandoned in the middle of applying it to God’s activity in determining the salvation of souls? They stick to God’s sovereignty in making a determination, then leave off and send the determining to all the way from eternity (past?).

Now, if we apply that to the potter we can come up with something rather absurd. Imagine a potter comes into his studio and says, “Today, I will make such and such a piece from this one lump of clay. In fact, years ago, even before I ever thought of becoming a potter, I had determined exactly what I will do with this lump of clay.”

If you heard a potter saying such a thing, wouldn’t you think he’s a little off his rocker? “Well, yes, of course,” you say, “he’s not God!” Yes, but to stick to the potter analogy, we should apply to God what the potter naturally would do as he works with the clay; in other words, his determining process.

If we ask, when does the potter determine what he will make out of this clay, the answer would be, while he is working with it! It is a present-time activity. He has some idea and hope for it as he pulls this lump of clay from his clay reserves, and his mind rolls an idea or concept around. But then he puts it on the wheel and starts to work with it. It is then he gets more of the immediate vision as he feels how the clay responds in his hands, and how he will respond to it.

So, in the same way, as God is walking with each person, prompting and pleading in every way available to “mold” him or her to honor, this person may respond favorably or resist, and God needs to determine at that present time how to respond to each human response.

Perhaps why this analogy is abandoned in the middle by so many teachers and preachers is because they are apprehensive to embrace the implications of a present-time activity by God. But isn’t that what the Holy Spirit is constantly portrayed in the New Testament as doing with each one of us?

Jesus' Deliverance

We're looking at Matthew 8:28-34
28 And when he was come to the other side into the country of the Gergesenes, there met him two possessed with devils, coming out of the tombs, exceeding fierce, so that no man might pass by that way.
29 And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time?
30 And there was a good way off from them an herd of many swine feeding.
31 So the devils besought him, saying, If thou cast us out, suffer us to go away into the herd of swine.
32 And he said unto them, Go. And when they were come out, they went into the herd of swine: and, behold, the whole herd of swine ran violently down a steep place into the sea, and perished in the waters.
33 And they that kept them fled, and went their ways into the city, and told every thing, and what was befallen to the possessed of the devils.
34 And, behold, the whole city came out to meet Jesus: and when they saw him, they besought him that he would depart out of their coasts.

Compare with Mark 5:1-20
8 For he said unto him, Come out of the man, thou unclean spirit.
9 And he asked him, What is thy name? And he answered, saying, My name is Legion: for we are many.
10 And he besought him much that he would not send them away out of the country.

15 And they come to Jesus, and see him that was possessed with the devil, and had the legion, sitting, and clothed, and in his right mind: and they were afraid.

After pondering this over, I wonder at a few things.

First I wonder at the amazing deliverance Jesus brought these two men (one account only concentrates on one of them, who apparently was the most affected by the whole event, and perhaps the only one who ultimately was converted). The account says they were so fierce that no one could pass by the area they occupied. Think of their condition; however they came to be that way, they were totally devoid of reason and completely at the whim of the evil spirits who dominated them; completely isolated from the rest of society, no one trying to communicate with them. What chance did they have of getting out of their condition? They had no strength for it themselves. Jesus purposely took the initiative to rescue them from their condition.

Next, I am amazed at what Jesus was able to bring them to: a right mind, according to Mark's account. Jesus restored them to a condition where they could respond with their own understanding and will. I am thinking that when Jesus cast out the evil spirits, these men were not yet converted; what understanding did they have right after that? But afterward, I am sure Jesus ministered the Good News to them. One of them obviously responded in an affirmative way.

Also, I wonder at the situation into which Jesus had put the people of the town, and especially the men who took care of the swine. All these swine had rushed into the sea of Galilee to their death. Now you have a group of men who are now without jobs! Not only that, but they will have to explain to the owner(s) of the swine what happened to them, and maybe they would be liable for the loss!

So they come to the owner, perhaps, and it goes something like this: "So, where are my swine? Why did you come back from the pasture without them?" "Well, you see, uh, you know about the two demon-possessed men out in the Gergesene country?" "Don't tell me they killed them all? Or, better yet, let me guess, they ate them all!" "Well, not quite, you know that guy, Jesus of Nazareth? He cast the spirits out of them, and the evil spirits entered into all the swine and they ran into the water and drowned!" "Right. You expect me to believe all this?" "Ask the people of the town; they saw everything, they were uphill from it all!"

Perhaps you recall that when Paul cast the spirit out of that young woman who would predict the outcomes of things, that her masters were out of some good profits! And God rescued Peter from execution, at the expense of 16 Roman soldiers' lives. (Do you think they had time to come to Jesus before they were executed? I would hope some of them did!)

So when Jesus rescues and delivers people from what has enslaved them, it is quite possible that somebody in the worldly realms sustains a loss, small or great. Think of the loss a pimp gets from a prostitute who is able to escape her dire situation because somehow Jesus reaches her.

But let's bring this into today. We see a lot of people around us who are barely able to keep their minds straight with all the troubles, problems, and many times the guilt and other issues they are handling because of their sin. Sometimes they are also victims of other people's sin. Jesus warns us often in the Gospels of how tormenting the power of guilt is over people, not only in this life, but after the judgement. Quite frankly, when we see people go "over the edge" and do insane things, I wonder that it doesn't happen more. I just can't understand how people are able to hang on without knowing the rescuing power of Jesus Christ, and the freedom of forgiveness and a relieved conscience, which only He can give.

There are doubtless many who think they are on the verge of going insane, or a nervous breakdown is close. But they have no idea where to go for relief or an answer. They won't get it from their own dark situation, I think. Who has to bring them answers? We Christians need to. And the only answer is Jesus' rescuing power, all because of what He did on the cross.

I am not saying that there are tons of people who are demon possessed, though I am afraid and sure some are. But many are under the dominion of the Devil because they gave ground to him at some time in their lives. And like these men who had the Legion, they are under a multitude of sins, sprung from lust, love of money, bitterness, self-ambition, pride and more.

Perhaps that's you. You can't recover from that yourself: you are bound. But the power to restore your mind, and then the grace for you to turn away from your sin and follow Jesus is right at Jesus' beck and call. All you need do is turn to Him, and He promises to do it.

Errors in the Old Testament - Part 1

Skeptics and armchair theologians (of the liberal and cult type) will say the Bible—the Tanach, Old and New Testaments, etc.—has many different ways of being interpreted, is full of errors and contradictions, and therefore cannot be reliable. It would be nice to blast away at all the opposition to the Bible in one fell swoop, but there are so many issues and angles they bring up against the trustworthiness of God’s Word.

Ever since the 18th century, there has been the old Higher Criticism, or the JDEP theory, which the liberal scholars STILL hold on to without one shred of documentary evidence. Those who would be interested in defending the Bible against that should start with Hengstengberg, who was contemporary with many of the German scholars who brought that up. His writings are possibly hard to get a hold of, though. Anyone with an original edition of any of his stuff has a theological gold mine at hand.

All I can say about the JDEP theory is that, if it were true, and the Pentateuch had been put together after the Babylonian exile then the Jewish leaders all got together and claimed it came from Moses, they have foisted the greatest con job upon their own people and the world. Highly unlikely.

Then there’s those who, like the Mormon leadership, claim that the Bible can’t be trusted in how it has been translated, that it is doubtful whether it has been translated correctly. Anyone with a moderate amount of study into that topic would realize that holds little water. Successful translations of the Old Testament had been made since before the 2nd century B.C. (Please, I don’t regard the secular humanist BCE nomenclature.), so we have many other known languages to which to compare our translations. The New Testament is even more reliable in that regard.

But my concern as of late has been the little spots in the Old Testament, in the original Hebrew, where there are “differences” or some may be “errors.” I’ve been doing my morning devotions going through the Hebrew OT, or the Tanach, if you will. That is an acronym for Torah (the Law), Nevi’im (the Prophets) and C’tovim (the Writings); the three main divisions of the Old Testament.

We who claim and believe in the plenary inspiration of the Holy Scriptures, take that idea to mean that in the original writing of each book of the Bible, there were no errors in the message God intended to convey to His people, including historically, etc. No one can prove, of course, that every writer of an OT book was a perfect speller or had the best command of Hebrew grammar, but that is where many believers make their first assumption.

Remember this, too, that after the first edition was made, then it was copied over the centuries, usually onto sheepskin, papyrus or some similar perishable material. Through the centuries, it is expected that some problems would creep in over the course of being copied by the hands of fallible people. However, compared to all the ancient literature known and discovered, the ratio of properly copied words over mistakes, etc. throughout the Hebrew OT is very, very low, in the range of less than 1/10th of one percent. Think of that; that’s like one problem only after every 1,000 words!

If you were to look at a Hebrew Tanach as one finds in your local synagogue, you will sometimes see a few words written in the outer margin of a page. This is what is called a “Quere” (kar-ee), or reading. It is the way a certain word or phrase should be read out loud. It differs from the letters actually written in the Old Testament text.

That difference between what is actually written and what is spelled out in the margin, people are want to call a mistake or error. Now, I believe not every one of these quere citations are actual errors in the copying of the text. Some are. That does not mean that God’s Word is “full” of errors. And very few make figuring out the original of the text highly doubtful. Much of it can be understood by its immediate context, just like we understand what a typo in a newspaper story should really be, because we easily get the context of that word.

Of course, these are not the only scribal errors to be cited. There are small differences between various translations, such as the Greek Septuagint or the Syriac Old Testament. The extant Hebrew texts may have small variations between schools of scribes.

Here’s what I believe some of these quere “scribal errors" could very possibly be attributed to:

• Dialectic differences: It is evident from reading of the geographical and demographic differences in the settling of the Israelite tribes in the Promised Land, that there would also be differences in the way one tribe or group would speak and spell. The incident in Judges 12:5-6 lends evidence to this. One group could not pronounce the “sh” sound properly, and so they were shown to be of the Ephraimite ethnicity. 
• Bad grammar, bad spelling: As I mentioned above, we are not guaranteed that all of the Old Testament authors were perfect spellers or had perfect grammatical understanding. Some dialectical differences could also have lent to “improper” Hebrew grammar. Just look at what most blog comments and emails are replete of today.
• Politeness, embarrassment, etc.: There are a couple of examples where some vulgar words were given more polite, more gentle equivalents. The reason for this is because after the Jews were dispersed in exile, and the synagogues were their normal worship culture, the Tanach would be read out loud during service, just like we have in every Christian liturgical service.
  One case in point is in 2nd Kings 18:27, where I’m pretty sure the common words for “pee” and “poop” were used by the Assyrian official speaking in the hearing of the Jews during their siege of Jerusalem. Now if you were to read those words out loud in the synagogue, I’m sure a lot of pre-bar-mitzvahed boys would do a lot of giggling, and many mothers would recoil with shock. So, it made sense to the scribes to replace those words with something more suited to public expression.
• Confusion between letterforms: This is a very common one. In particular, the letters “vav” and “yod” are most common, because they only differ in how long the stroke is to make them. Any scribe who made the “vav” a little shorter than normal or the “yod” a little longer would have made it difficult for future scribes to discern, especially after a long day and their eyes would get weary. Another interesting nugget to chew on is the fact that at the rise of the Assyrian empire and some time afterward, there was a transition from the Jews using the original Hebrew letterforms and switching over to the Aramaic letterforms. Some scribal errors could have been introduced at those times as well.
• Dyslexia: That’s right, dyslexia isn’t just a common modern problem. The advantage today is that we have many methods for helping people overcome it. But I could surmise easily that a mild case of dyslexia could have been a problem for a number of scribes over the centuries. So many examples of obvious dyslexic errors are peppered throughout the Hebrew text, where a pair of letters were switched around. Like I said, though, the context usually betrays what the original word should be.
  And I can imagine some dyslexic scribal student arguing with his Jewish mother about this: “I just can’t get it, Mom. I keep screwing up the order of my letters in the trials. I don’t think I’m fit to be a scribe.” “What do mean, not fit to be a scribe?" she exclaims, “Nonsense. Your father is a scribe; your grandfather was a scribe; and your great-grandfather was a scribe. Just work harder. You’ll make a great scribe.” “Well, OK, Mom,” he says reluctantly, “If you insist!” No wonder we have these kinds of things in there!

The question still would be asked, if these kinds of errors lend great doubt to the inspiration of the Scriptures. I would answer “No.” Most of these are plainly solvable via the context of the words, with a strong understanding of the original languages. (Not that I have any kind of expert understanding; I am still a student of these things.) God’s word is still on a strong foundation, and not one of these scribal errors actually effect any moral and theological teaching we may find in it.

Joseph Awoke and Did

Matthew 1:24 (NKJV) Then Joseph, being aroused from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord commanded him...

I think this is the crux of the matter in things pertaining to God (or anything He has given into our responsibility). Many of us as Christians receive the dream, vision or direction from God, but we seem to awake out of “sleep”—perhaps our time spent with God—and then act as if that direction were a far off dream, something from our sleep.

There are four main parts to making our time with God's word profitable and effective: Absorption, interpretation, meditation and application. Many of us get lost just at the absorption part. Perhaps we just rush over our daily reading/devotions with little concentration.

Interpretation is, of course, where we discover or uncover what the scripture passage really means.

Meditation is where we make that a source for our new thoughts and motivations by ingraining it into our minds.

The final step, application, where I take it and make it my new pattern of daily living, is what makes the difference in accomplishing God's will in our lives. The good thing is that Joseph did that after he awoke from his dream of the angel, so Jesus was born and taken care of as God intended.

It is my prayer that, like Joseph, I will do what I have been commanded whence I am aroused from sleep.

[Golden] Calf Down the River!

I live by a philosophy that taking in a lot of Old Testament with the New Testament is a good thing. Years ago, at a Lamb concert, I remember one of them (Coghill or Chernoff, I can’t remember who) comparing the Bible to a cake. He said the New Testament is the icing on the cake, but you’re expected to eat the cake (i.e. the Old Testament) under the icing as well. And there’s a whole lot more cake than icing!

Anyway...

That brings me to this one passage in Deuteronomy:

And I took your sin, the calf which ye had made, and burnt it with fire, and stamped it, and ground it very small, even until it was as small as dust: and I cast the dust thereof into the brook that descended out of the mount.
Deuteronomy 9:21

After the Israelites had sinned against the Lord with the golden calf, Moses was angry and broke the original Ten Commandments tablets in their sight. He also took direct action with the object of their sin, the golden calf. In the first account, in the book of Exodus, we read, “And he took the calf which they had made, and burnt it with fire, and ground it to powder, and strewed it upon the water, and made the children of Israel drink of it.” (Ex. 32:20 ASV)

Now, this verse taken all on its own, may sound weird or even mean. I have seen old woodcut illustrations of this scene, with Moses pouring the dust of the golden calf into a pool of water and the disobedient Israelites surrounding it and being forced to drink this now gold dust-polluted water. And that would almost be a death sentence right there, because gold dust is poisonous to the human body. Or at best, these Israelites would have gotten very sick.

Well, after all, they deserved it! They had just sinned a great sin, one that virtually broke God’s heart so much, He was thinking of destroying them all and starting the redemption process for a Messianic line all over. “Leave me alone,” He said to Moses, like a wounded lover.

However, now that I read this line in Deuteronomy there is a different angle to think through, a different reason, perhaps.

First of all, there’s this water source to consider...

Where did it come from? This verse says it flowed from the mountain, Mount Horeb, or Sinai as we know it. Was it always there? Actually, in Exodus 17, there was water provided for the people from a rock at the base of Horeb early on in their desert journey, before the giving of the Ten Commandments. The elders of Israel went with Moses all the way to the base of Horeb and struck a rock there and the water flowed out from there to the camp of the people. This first camp for Israel must have been within sight of Horeb, so it wasn’t a far journey to get there.

So, anyway, the water that flowed from Sinai was from some kind of spring or stream. It was not standing water. Now what happens when something as “small as dust” lands in water running downstream—and the downstream speed needn’t even be very fast? You’re right! That stuff will flow out of sight within seconds. By the time the Israelites got down to lap up water from the stream, they would only be drinking fresh water flowing from the mouth of the rock, the source of the stream. In my mind, no dust from that Calf would have been left swirling at that spot.

An Object Lesson

So what was Moses’ reason for casting the dust of the Golden Calf into the water, and then making the Israelites drink from the stream? After all, if it was just to give them a time of refreshment, they could’ve gotten a drink at any time.

I believe Moses (or God via Moses) was trying to teach the people something very important: and that was a very big part of the whole idea of forgiveness. This event was a teaching opportunity, or object lesson, to show the Israelites that they needed to receive God’s provision for their forgiveness.

You see, their “sin,” as Moses called the Golden Calf, he ground down to powder, so that there would be no visible remembrance of that thing left for them. Are we keeping any “remnants” of our old sins around to give nostalgia or “take us back” to those events or practices? God is saying, here in His Word, to get rid of that. Another way to put this: Is our repentance complete? Have we renounced all known sin? Have we left anything around in our hearts in reserve, just in case this thing with Jesus doesn’t pan out, or just to keep a “little something” for ourselves? Is there something in our lives we know God is not happy seeing still hanging around?

Then Moses threw that dust into the stream so that it would flow away from the Israelite camp forever. You see, we need that kind of spiritual water that will wash our sins downstream, never to return! And what do you think that “water” is?

Here are a few possibilities:

But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.
John 4:14

He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.
John 7:38

That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
Ephesian 5:26

And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.
I Corinthians 10:4

Love is the Key

God, whose primary disposition is love, aims more at reconciling us to himself than to see that we suffer for our sin and rebellion. But our part is to acknowledge our sin with true repentance, and come to his source of forgiveness, which is through his Son, Jesus Christ. His invitation is true and sure:

And the Spirit and the bride say, “Come!” And let him who hears say, “Come!” And let him who thirsts come. Whoever desires, let him take the water of life freely.

Authority

And it came to pass, when Jesus had ended these sayings, the people were astonished at his doctrine:
For he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.

Matthew 7:28-29

The events on which Matthew focuses in the 8th chapter of his Gospel are many early miracles Jesus performed in his Galilean ministry. He heals a leper, a centurion’s servant, Peter’s mother-in-law (who knew?) and many other people afflicted with diseases and demons. (Notice that both sickness and demons are mentioned as being healed or cast out. I think it goes both ways in saying that they are real things that happen to people.)

So Jesus’ power for healing and miracles are the topic here. However, Matthew’s theme that under-girds these accounts is His authority to do these things.

Very many people have power. How many really have authority to exercise it? Having authority implies legitimacy and qualification fit for the position or task. There was something giving legitimacy to what Jesus did, whether teaching or miracle-working. Its true nature came from who He was and where He came from.

The centurion did indeed recognize this authority. From the account Luke gives us of this event, the centurion communicated to Jesus through servants and friends, and apparently, he had thought through everything he would say to Jesus. He understood the implications of Jesus’ authority because he himself was in the middle of an unbreakable chain of command. He knew if he told someone under him something to do, it would get done. His concern and focus was not Jesus’ power, but His authority.

We get more excitement from seeing a demonstration of power. And perhaps as Christians we may put more trust in in God for the benefits of His power, rather than in His authority to reign over our lives.

So, do I submit to Jesus’ authority? The centurion did. He only needed the word, the OK, from Him and he knew that his servant would be healed. What if Jesus says I need to relinquish some area of my life to His authority, because I now see it exposed for what it is? Will I submit? Before, I said that Jesus’ authority also implies He is worthy to exercise it. This makes submission a part of worship as well, ascribing that worthiness to Him which He deserves.

This authority also reaches to our motivation to share and spread the Gospel. “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me,” the ending of Matthew’s Gospel quotes Jesus saying. “Therefore go,” He says. The one thing this command shows us is there is no earthly authority that supersedes Jesus. If any government, PAC or non-profit celebrity-led group says the Gospel is illegal to share or promote, they are going against Christ's authority, and that kind of edict is not legitimate and is usurping God's authority.

If we seek to walk in Jesus’ authority, He will make the way we need to accomplish His call to bring the Gospel to our friends, neighbors and the world. That's at least, what our submission to Jesus should lead us to.

Favorite Preachers

Sometimes we need some help feeding ourselves with the meat of God’s Word. And how we can find some is in reading or listening to good—and hopefully great—preaching. I know we can easily fill ourselves with music (good and worshipful music is really good, too!) and other things. But there is something God can do through the anointed preaching of men, and women, who God has used and is using today to buid up the kingdom.

Who are some of your favorite preachers and teachers? I can quickly think of mine. So here are most of them, in no particular order:

Albert Barnes
Ravi Zacharias
Leonard Ravenhill
John Wesley
Charles Finney
Art Katz
Dr. Martin Lloyd-Jones
Paris Reidhead
Ireneus
Josh McDowell
Winkey Pratney