Leviticus 1:1

Introduction

Just recently, I was having lunch with another pastor. As we were discussing different elements of ministry I told him that I was planning to preach through Leviticus. As soon as the words came out of my mouth, the pastor simply looked up from his meal and only had one question...Why? This seems to be the biggest question attached to Leviticus. Why would a believer study this book? Is there actual benefit to reading Moses' third book?

Hopefully, the average believer would find it wrong to rip the pages of Leviticus from their Bible. But in a practicality, the believer may neglect it. We may know that it is part of the Word of God, but we certainly don't treat it that way. However, the book should not be read out of simple guilt or a feeling of obligation. It should be read with anticipation. It is the Word of God. In fact, it even tells us so.

Commentary

v 1

Then the LORD called to Moses...

Context
Though Leviticus is a separate book, it should be understood in the immediate context of Exodus 40. Consider:

Now in the first month of the second year, on the first {day} of the month, the tabernacle was erected. Moses erected the tabernacle and laid its sockets, and set up its boards, and inserted its bars and erected its pillars. He spread the tent over the tabernacle and put the covering of the tent on top of it, just as the LORD had commanded Moses. Then he took the testimony and put {it} into the ark, and attached the poles to the ark, and put the mercy seat on top of the ark. He brought the ark into the tabernacle, and set up a veil for the screen, and screened off the ark of the testimony, just as the LORD had commanded Moses. Then he put the table in the tent of meeting on the north side of the tabernacle, outside the veil. He set the arrangement of bread in order on it before the LORD, just as the LORD had commanded Moses. Then he placed the lampstand in the tent of meeting, opposite the table, on the south side of the tabernacle. He lighted the lamps before the LORD, just as the LORD had commanded Moses. Then he placed the gold altar in the tent of meeting in front of the veil; and he burned fragrant incense on it, just as the LORD had commanded Moses. Then he set up the veil for the doorway of the tabernacle. He set the altar of burnt offering {before} the doorway of the tabernacle of the tent of meeting, and offered on it the burnt offering and the meal offering, just as the LORD had commanded Moses. He placed the laver between the tent of meeting and the altar and put water in it for washing. From it Moses and Aaron and his sons washed their hands and their feet. When they entered the tent of meeting, and when they approached the altar, they washed, just as the LORD had commanded Moses. He erected the court all around the tabernacle and the altar, and hung up the veil for the gateway of the court. Thus Moses finished the work.

Then the cloud covered the tent of meeting, and the glory of the LORD filled the tabernacle. Moses was not able to enter the tent of meeting because the cloud had settled on it, and the glory of the LORD filled the tabernacle. Throughout all their journeys whenever the cloud was taken up from over the tabernacle, the sons of Israel would set out; but if the cloud was not taken up, then they did not set out until the day when it was taken up. For throughout all their journeys, the cloud of the LORD was on the tabernacle by day, and there was fire in it by night, in the sight of all the house of Israel.--Exodus 40:17-38 (emphasis added)

After meticulously following all the Lord had commanded, the tabernacle is ready for worship. The cloud descends upon the tabernacle and fills the tabernacle. Verses 36-38 are really summary verses about the function of the cloud. Really the narrative of this account could transition straight from verse 35 to Leviticus 1. Historically, it could almost be read as: Moses was not able to enter the tent of meeting because the cloud had settled on it, and the glory of the LORD filled the tabernacle...Then the LORD called to Moses.

While all Scripture is breathed out from God (2 Timothy 3:16-17), this does not mean the text is dictated. However, much of Leviticus is filled with quotations from God to Moses. In fact, the Hebrew name for the book of Leviticus is the word that conveys "the Lord called."

We should read Leviticus for it is like the rest of Scripture: God-breathed and usual for equipping the believer.

We know the book by the name Leviticus, a name derived from the tribe of Levi. Many read the book of Leviticus as a manual or guide for the priesthood. The book is considered relevant only to the priests and those serving in the tabernacle. However, as believers, the function of priests should interest us:

This precious value, then, is for you who believe; but for those who disbelieve, "THE STONE WHICH THE BUILDERS REJECTED, THIS BECAME THE VERY CORNER {stone,}" and, "A STONE OF STUMBLING AND A ROCK OF OFFENSE"; for they stumble because they are disobedient to the word, and to this {doom} they were also appointed. But you are A CHOSEN RACE, A royal PRIESTHOOD, A HOLY NATION, A PEOPLE FOR {God's} OWN POSSESSION, so that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; for you once were NOT A PEOPLE, but now you are THE PEOPLE OF GOD; you had NOT RECEIVED MERCY, but now you have RECEIVED MERCY.--1 Peter 2:7-10

Peter reminds us that God has transfered us from an unidentifiable collection of nothing particular into a people chosen by God. We've become a nation unto God and each believer is a priest within that nation. This was done with the purpose of proclaiming the excellencies of Him who called us out of darkness into His marvelous light. Understanding the priesthood should help the believer understand the work of our High Priest, Jesus Christ.

It's also critical to remember that the work of a Christian is to offer sacrifice to the Lord:

Therefore I urge you, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God, {which is} your spiritual service of worship. And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect.--Romans 12:1-2

It is critical to note the particular order in which Paul places things. First, we are to be aware of the gospel message. Paul begins his letter of Romans discussing the gospel and then unpacks details (depravity, justification by faith, imputation of righteousness, believers battle against indwelling sin, eternal security in Christ, power to save both Jew and Gentile, etc.). As he approaches chapter twelve, he states we are to offer our bodies as a sacrifice. This language would not be lost on the reader of that day. Paul is providing the visual of climbing up on the altar ourselves, not to offer a sacrifice, but to be the sacrifice. This cannot be done, however, preceding the gospel.

First, a person must understand Christ's payment on his/her behalf. We must understand that no sacrifice on our part will clean us up enough to be approved by God. We can give up things we love. We can spend more time in a church. We can donate money to other causes. We can make sacrifices and adaptation to our life, but apart from trusting only in the work of Christ on our behalf, we still stand guilty of our sins. The order is clear in Romans...in view of God's mercy. Once the person has trusted the perfect work of Christ, then he offers his life back to Christ in gratitude.

This is not a change in process. The Old Testament saints were not saved by their sacrifices, but instead, their sacrifices were a response to the salvation God had offered them. We can learn a lot by studying the sacrifices offered by the people in accordance to the writings of Leviticus. Likewise, the believer today can offer themselves back to God as a response to His ultimate sacrifice for us.

The Main Character

However, Leviticus should not be read simple as a culture or history lesson.

Now the main point in what has been said {is this:} we have such a high priest, who has taken His seat at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, a minister in the sanctuary and in the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, not man. For every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices; so it is necessary that this {high priest} also have something to offer. Now if He were on earth, He would not be a priest at all, since there are those who offer the gifts according to the Law; who serve a copy and shadow of the heavenly things, just as Moses was warned {by God} when he was about to erect the tabernacle; for, "SEE," He says, "THAT YOU MAKE all things ACCORDING TO THE PATTERN WHICH WAS SHOWN YOU ON THE MOUNTAIN." But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, by as much as He is also the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted on better promises.--Hebrews 8:1-6

We study Leviticus to better understand Christ. The office of the priesthood points to Christ. Utensils used in the tabernacle point to Christ. The sacrifices themselves point to Christ. Even the very tabernacle points to Jesus Christ! It was important that Moses obey all that the Lord commanded him and to the detail, for it was important that the Levitical system would all point to the Messiah.

Conclusion

While many may doubt the relevancy of Leviticus, both inside and outside of the church, we must remember it does not cease to be relevant. In fact, in December of 2008, Leviticus was mentioned in Newsweek Magazine. From the article "Our Mutual Joy", Lisa Miller (religion editor for Newsweek) states:

Twice Leviticus refers to sex between men as "an abomination" (King James version), but these are throwaway lines in a peculiar text given over to codes for living in the ancient Jewish world, a text that devotes verse after verse to treatments for leprosy, cleanliness rituals for menstruating women and the correct way to sacrifice a goat—or a lamb or a turtle dove. Most of us no longer heed Leviticus on haircuts or blood sacrifices; our modern understanding of the world has surpassed its prescriptions. Why would we regard its condemnation of homosexuality with more seriousness than we regard its advice, which is far lengthier, on the best price to pay for a slave?

While Ms. Miller's results are certainly unbiblical, it is understandable how she came to this conclusion. She describes the book as a peculiar text filled with advise on archaic issues. Certainly no text that speaks of treating leprosy, sacrificing animals or selling a slave could have any value for us today. Perhaps Leviticus was valuable in their day, but most of us no longer heed Leviticus on haircuts or blood sacrifices; our modern understanding of the world has surpassed its prescriptions.

While many of us may not trumpet the virtues of homosexual marriage, we may sometimes handle the text in a similar way. Are you able to explain why we eat cheese on burgers today, or trim our beards, or wear multiple fabrics in our clothing? Many would simply answer that those rules are old and to a different society and they don't apply to us. But this is not a Biblically reasoned answer. And if one were to read the article from Lisa Miller, we would understand that this sort of approach to Scripture has a giant ripple effect. Suddenly, other passages and parts of Scripture become irrelevant and obscure too. It no longer matters if the Lord is calling, for we will simply redefine His words.

How does one keep from making the same critical mistakes with the text? A person must be mindful that they come to the text, not to study history and not to learn some simple rules or techniques. They come to text to see Jesus.

We must study Leviticus because God called to Moses and through this book, God also calls to us.

Will we listen?

Exodus 32:1-6

Introduction

It can be hard for us to imagine idolatry. Why in the world would people ever be tempted to worship an object they created? While the average evangelical will acknowledge that we can be tempted to worship something/someone before God, the idea of "crafting an image" is much harder to imagine. Why in the world would an object of gold, metal or wood compete with worshipping God? Sadly, most scoff this temptation, considering they are much to sophisticated to be tempted, thus ignoring John's exhortation, Little children, guard yourselves from idols.

But perhaps a look at one of the most famous "idol exchanges" can show us the tendency of the human heart to craft an image.

Commentary

v1
Moses delayed. Since the Lord answered Moses with thunder (19:19) it is possible that the mountain thundered the entire time the Lord spoke to Moses. Perhaps, when the Lord was finished speaking (31:18) it quit thundering? Perhaps the thunder quit, or perhaps they were simply in awe of the whole encounter, but when Moses did not at first reappear, the people panic and look for alternative means. As they speak to Aaron, they share their concern is that they have no idea what happened to Moses.

Make us a god. Since Moses has disappeared, the people call for Aaron to make them a god. Just the idea of "making" a god sounds foolish to us, for wouldn't he who crafted the object have dominion over that which he crafted? The people have credited Moses with leading them out of Egypt and now they appear stranded alone in the desert. Could Aaron make a god to go before them?

v2
Tear off the gold rings... Aaron agrees, but it is going to cost the Israelites something. The material for the idol will come from those who want it.

(Yes, wives, sons and daughters all had earrings. This was probably a sign of their former slave status in Egypt, though it may have simply been a fashion decision.--Exodus 21:6)

v3
Then all the people tore off the gold rings... This sounded like a reasonable proposal from Aaron and the people obliged.

v4
Fashioned it with a graving tool. Aaron melts down the gold and begins to fashion it into an idol. Though he claims, I threw it into the fire, and out came this calf," clearly he was more involved in the process.

Molten calf. Why a cow? Though the Israelites were traditionally shepherds, the Egyptians highly esteemed tending to livestock. In fact, Egyptians considered shepherds loathsome (see: Genesis 46:34). Perhaps the calf represented status? Perhaps it represented Egypt (either negatively or positively)? Perhaps it was just an adaptation of the sacrifical system?

This is your god, O Israel, who brought you up from the land of Egypt. At this point, it becomes very difficult to connect with the people of Israel. Not only does Aaron call this idol, whom he has crafted with material the Israelites provided, but now he is crediting it with delivering them from Egypt. It seems difficult for us to understand. How could the Israelites, who were removed from Egypt "B.C." ("Before Calf") now credit the calf for delivering them? Not only are they foolishly calling an object made by a man with their earrings a god, but now they credit it with bringing them to the wilderness even though it was crafted in the wilderness. This is very difficult for us to grasp.

v5
Tomorrow shall be a feast to the LORD. This phrase helps us peer into their motive. Aaron builds the altar before the calf. Clearly their worship is directed toward it. He has called a god (twice) and now he attributes the name "LORD." LORD (in all caps) is the way most English translations depict "Yahweh" or "Jehovah," the personal name for God. This is the name God revealed to Moses and the Israelites (Exodus 6:3). Why would they attribute the name of their God to a calf? They really couldn't think of an original name?

v6
Offered burnt offerings and brought peace offerings. Not only have the Israelites given the idol Jehovah's name, but they also begin to worship the idol in ways appointed only for God. This is probably not a display of the lack of their creativity, but rather, evidence of their motive. All of these features presented together suggests that the Israelites were not looking to replace God with a calf, but looking at replacing their means of worship (as prescribed through Moses).

Exposition

The author of Hebrews offers some interesting insight into the life and role of Moses:

Now if He were on earth, He would not be a priest at all, since there are those who offer the gifts according to the Law; who serve a copy and shadow of the heavenly things, just as Moses was warned by God when he was about to erect the tabernacle; for, "SEE," He says, "THAT YOU MAKE all things ACCORDING TO THE PATTERN WHICH WAS SHOWN YOU ON THE MOUNTAIN." But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, by as much as He is also the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted on better promises.Hebrews 8:4-6

First, and most important, God intended for Moses to play a mediatorial role that "typed" Christ. Moses was not merely a good leader or a quality man that God used to get His people out of an oppressive land. Moses, and his function was to be an imperfect preview of the Ultimate Mediator who would initiate the Greater Covenant.

Therefore, secondarily, God cares very much about the detail. The Hebrews were to pay close attention to the pattern they were shown, for this pattern should lead them to seeing Christ. God was not simply interested in Who they worship, but also how they worship. In fact, how they worship directly tied to Who they worshipped.

Israel's first sin was that they neglected the role of Moses. They actually thought they could worship Yahweh without Moses...and they could have, had God desired to point to Christ in another way. However, the LORD chose to work through Moses to point people to Jesus. In fact, at they time they are carving up a calf, God was giving Moses the Law that would point people to Christ (Galatians 3:24)! Israel naively thought that details didn't matter. They would still give credit to God (naming the calf after Him) and would still practice forms of sacrificial worship. (Though Moses is concurrently receiving the written details for sacrificial worship, Genesis 4 reminds us that sacrificial worship already existed, and was acceptable to God.) They still wanted the same end (worship of God) but determined a different means. A new mediator would serve them just fine.

God, however, did not share their perspective. To ignore His mediator was to ignore His means. It is incredibly hard to worship Him as LORD when you will not obey how He says to do it.

Conclusion

Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son. Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father; the one who confesses the Son has the Father also.--1 John 2:22-23

Ultimately, it is impossible to worship God the Father without acknowledging the divinity of His Son. For all religious systems who redefine Christ's divinity or humanity are of the Antichrist. They may claim to worship God (and even use the name Jehovah), but their is not middle ground. You are either worshipping God through His Mediator, or you are not.

But we can also be tempted to worship a god in our own making. As Calvin said, "Our hearts are an idol factory." This means we are not capable of discovering God on our own, or knowing Christ simply by our own musings. We must be firmly committed to the Word, to see how God has defined Himself and worship Him accordingly. Details do matter, for details point us toward His Beloved Son.

It is rare today that a Christian will intentionally replace Jesus Christ with something else. However, when we choose to serve ourself, or when we choose to define Jesus according to our own terms, and not the Word, this is exactly what we are doing. Just like the Hebrews believed they were worshipping Yahweh by using His name and performing the sacrifices, when the messed with the Mediator, they ceased to truly worship God. In the same way, when we worship a Messiah who does not match the Biblical picture, we do not simply find ourselves mistaken, we find ourselves worshipping an idol.

Genesis 19:1-11

This one came in as an alien, and already he is acting like a judge; now we will treat you worse than them.--Genesis 19:9

Many advisors suggest that pastors emulate the qualities of other careers. Successful pastoring is found by becoming more of a CEO...motivational speaker...counselor...coach...cheerleader...manager...the list could go on and on.

However, there is one he is to avoid at all costs.

Judge

I was told once by a man, "I don't mind if you say the church disagrees with another religion. I don't even mind you saying that you believe the church is right. I just don't think you should say the church believes others are wrong." This kind of statement reveals the tone of today. It's ok if a preacher proclaims truth, but he should do it in a say that doesn't violate another person's opinion. Stacks of books today claim the non-christian is avoiding the church because it is far too judgmental. After all, the central verse in Scripture is Matthew 7:1, right?

How dare you, Lot!

Lot draws the ire of the men from Sodom. This man, an outsider, had the audacity to treat them like they were doing wrong. The men of Sodom were offended, and were prepared to treat Lot worse than his visitors. Who did Lot think he was?

Lot, the outsider.--When Abraham and Lot split up, Lot settled in the cities of the valley, and moved his tents as far as Sodom (13:12). The immediate context (13:13) tells us that Sodom was already "exceedingly wicked and sinning against the Lord." Despite the climate of the city, we are told that Lot eventually moved into Sodom (14:12). But how long had Lot lived in Sodom before the city was destroyed?

We can work backwards a little to see for sure. Just before Sodom is destroyed, Abraham is informed that his wife will have Isaac in a year (18:10). This would place Abraham at 99 years old (21:5). Abram had Ismael at age 86 (16:16). Abram lived in Canaan for 10 years before Hagar conceived Ishmael (16:3). By the battle against Chedorlaomer (more below), Lot is living in Sodom and it appears Abram is still childless. Therefore, depending on when you place the reference to living in Canaan (12:5 or 13:12), Lot has at least lived in Sodom for 13 years and could possibly have lived there up to 23 years. Had he just arrived and immediately started preaching?

Not only were the people of Sodom wicked and sinning against the Lord, their rebellion also spread to government. When the people rebelled against Chedorlaomer and his allies, Sodom started a fight they could not finish. As the kings routed Sodom, they took all their goods and food supply (14:11). Lot was helpless to stop the fight, as he and his possessions were carried away as well. At this point, Sodom could have simply been left devastated except that Abram came to the defense of his nephew. As Abram and his 318 men defeated the kings, he returned Lot, the goods, the supplies and captives. Then, when the king of Sodom offered for Abram to keep the supplies for returning the people, Abram refused. He did not want the king of Sodom to believe he contributed to Abram's wealth (14:23). Therefore, through Lot's relation to Abram, Sodom received their people and supplies back freely. Had he been a total freeloader, not benefiting their society?

Lot the influence. When Abraham pleads for the righteous citizens of Sodom, he "works" God down to the number of ten. For merely ten righteous persons, the Lord was willing to spare the entire community (18:32). Certainly, Lot qualifies as one of the righteous (2 Peter 2:7). Therefore, the city only needed nine other righteous persons to be spared. Lot had a wife, two daughters and two son-in-laws-to-be. Therefore, if he had persuaded his own family to righteousness, only four other righteous people would have been needed. Of course, his son-in-laws were certainly not righteous (19:14), nor was his wife (19:26) and his daughters actions suggest question (19:32). While Lot may have been oppressed and tormented by the sin in Sodom (2 Peter 2:7-8), relief certainly did not come through bringing others to righteousness.

Of course, results are not up to Lot. Perhaps he did preach and seek to influence others. Perhaps he regularly called people to consider the Lord's righteousness. We do not find evidence that he did, however a lack of converts does not mean a lack of his preaching. However, we can at least see that the antagonism Paul faced for changing Ephesus (Acts 19:26-27), would not be due Lot. Had he "ruined" their city, creating lots of changes?

All of these things factor into Lot's "history" with the people of Sodom. Gaining that context, let's consider his actions that created the great offense:

His hospitality--Approaching these men, he urged them strongly to stay the night in his place. He took them in, washed their feet, prepared a feast and provided them lodging. While Lot may have just been showing hospitality, he certainly was aware of the evil that could befall these angels. However, in his plea we do not see him describe the wickedness of Sodom or speak ill of the people. If anything, it appears Lot is quick moving, attempting to keep the guests from even seeing the depravity of the city. He did not present the people in a bad light.

His refusal--Perhaps this was for discretion (to keep from pleading with the citizens before his guests) or perhaps it was to protect his guests, but Lot slips out the door and shuts it behind him. As he speaks to the citizens, he certainly does not consider himself a superior. "Please" can be rendered, "I beg you," placing himself in a subordinate position. He even seeks commonality, calling them "brothers." He begs them to reconsider their evil intentions. Certainly, the term "wicked" may have been the offense. Lot did the unthinkable by suggesting that the rape of male guests by the male citizens of Sodom would be a wicked thing.

His proposal--It really is unfathomable. Perhaps Lot panicked. Perhaps the word "wicked" just hung out there for a second and he could see the disapproval from the men of Sodom. Whatever the reason, Lot next suggests a "compromise." To prevent the men from acting wickedly against his guests, he was willing to offer up his daughters. The statement, "do whatever you like" makes one sick to the stomach. (By the way, where is the protest from the son-in-laws-to-be at this point?) Understanding that some may consider his plea too judgmental, Lot offers a repulsive compromise to the men. He does not call for them to repent of their sexual urges, he simply asks them to redirect them. In fact, by offering his daughters, he seems to tolerate fornication, and by reasoning that he wants to be a good host, he even avoids condemning their homosexuality.

In the end, it certainly appears that Lot has not treated the citizens in a judgmental way.

Their response

(Warning: Understatement Ahead) The people were not pleased. They claim offense at Lot's stance. Has this outsider (resident for over a decade, whose uncle rescued the town) positioned himself as judge? Though vague in his warning, the men still take it as Lot thinking he is better than them. Though offered a compromise, they are not interested in directing their lusts elsewhere, but instead decide to abuse the guests and Lot. Even when the angels rescue Lot and blind the men, they do not turn away, but continue to grope around blindly for the door. In fact, they wear themselves out trying to get in!

So how do we escape being seen as judgmental?

Bottom line: We don't. It's amazing how people have developed techniques over the years which they believe will keep people from being offended...

Don't preach right away. Take your time and get to know a person first. You must first develop a relationship before people will care to listen. (Didn't seem to help Lot.)

Before you preach, you must first meet a person's needs. Whether food, water, shelter, or even cheaper gas, you must first create advantage for them so that they will listen. (Didn't seem to help Lot's case.)

Don't speak with imperatives, simply suggest. (Image their rage if Lot hadn't said please!)

Speak as one of the people. (With "brothers" like Sodom's citizens, who needs enemies?)

Don't speak directly to a sin, but keep it vague. (Again, didn't seem to help.)

Offer incremental, attainable goals. (Imagine Lot's first conversation with his daughters after they found out they were the "alternative.")

Perception is not reality

Certainly, a pastor should not be judgmental. A proper understanding of Scripture attributes all righteousness to Christ (2 Corinthians 5:21). That righteousness is only credited to us through faith (Romans 4:5). And even that faith is actually a gift from God (Ephesians 2:8-9). We are not superior. We have nothing to boast in but Christ!

But this does not mean a preacher will be immune to the accusation. If one is faithful with the gospel, the message will offend. And if the message offends, people will take it out on the messenger. Certainly, we do not want to act in a way that makes us the offense, but if a person find the message judgmental, there is very little we can do about it.

Lot didn't try a tactic or two to avoid offense, he tried all of them. The message wasn't more palatable. The results weren't greater. It made a mess of his family. And he was still accused of being judgmental.

Genesis 11:10-32*

(Click on image to see larger or print)

So often, we can read genealogy as a deck of cards in our hand. We look at one, study it, and then pass on to the next. Though we know it is not true, we almost imagine the 950 full years of Noah's life, before we move on to consider Shem's. However, examining genealogy is more like placing all the cards on the table, looking at them together and considering how they interact. The above chart is my attempt to "put all the cards on the table."

Some interesting notes to point:

Abraham was 58 years old when Noah died.

The earth was divided in Peleg's day (Genesis 10:25), resulting in a sudden decline in life span.

Since Noah outlived Peleg (by 10 years), Noah not only witnessed the flood, but also when the earth was divided.

Since Abraham lived during part of Peleg's life, he may have been alive when the earth was divided.

Jacob was 15 years old when Abraham died.

______________________________________
*Technically, the chart goes beyond Genesis 11:32, identifying through Jacob's life.

Genesis 5:1-32

(Click on image to see larger or print.)

So often, we can read genealogy as a deck of cards in our hand. We look at one, study it, and then pass on to the next. Though we know it is not true, we almost imagine the 930 full years of Adam's life, before we move on to consider Seth's. However, examining genealogy is more like placing all the cards on the table, looking at them together and considering how they interact. The above chart is my attempt to "put all the cards on the table."

Some interesting points to note:

Adam, Seth and Enoch all saw the life of everyone listed in Genesis 5 except Noah. (Adam missed by 126 years. Enoch missed by 69 years. Seth missed by 14 years.)

Clearly all deaths are not recorded here (consider Adam outliving Abel), but of the men listed in chapter 5, Methuselah is the first case of a father seeing his son's death.

Methuselah died the year of the flood.

1 John 5:16-18

Introduction

As this is arguably the most difficult chapter to interpret in 1 John, these verses are possibly the most difficult in the chapter. Much attention is given to "the sin to death" and its ambiguity, while other words/phrases can cause equal confusion.

Again, it is critical for us to remember the problem is not in the Scriptures, nor was John's text less inspired than other texts. The problem is our sin nature, which taints our submission to what the text says.

Keeping in mind that the previous passage (13-15) directly speaks to the believers' ministry in prayer (We can know we are His. By being His child, we know He hears our prayers. Because He hears our prayers, He will fulfill His will...conforming us to the image of His Son.), John now speaks to the specific prayer ministry from believer to believer.

Commentary

v 16
Sees--John is not saying you have to directly witness your brother's sin. While the word here can (and often does) mean to "see with the eyes," the word can also mean "to know or perceive." Therefore, just as witnesses in the church discipline process (Matthew 18:15-20) are not necessarily observers of the particular sin offense, but there to oversee the interaction and the brother's attitude, John is not requiring that only eyewitness observations of sin may be prayed for.

However, it should be equally stated that John did not choose to use the word "hear." John is not encouraging the believer to participate in rumor or gossip, assuming their brother has sinned simply because of an alleged tale. John is encouraging the person who has perceived that a brother has sinned to make a request.

his brother--While John regularly uses the term "brother" to refer to fellow believers, this does not have to be the case. In fact, as John has been trying to help the church see the distinction between genuine brothers and those who merely profess to be their brother, he often simply uses the term "brother" for each. Evidence of this can be seen in 2:11, 3:10, 3:15, 3:17, and 4:20. Therefore, it is not necessary for us to deal with the "sin to death" as something a believer must be capable of committing.

a sin not to death--This is the literal rendering, though "a sin leading to death" can accurately convey John's intent, I believe the word "leading" can cause people to think this is speaking of physical death. I do not believe that is John's intent, but a discussion on what "a sin not to death" means will be explained when we look at "a sin to death" below.

he shall ask and God will for him give life to those who commit sin not to death.--Even in the Greek, this is a bit awkward and clunky. Literally, it should read: "he shall ask and he will for him give life, those who commit sin not to death." For sake of interpretation, many translations change the underlined pronoun to "God" for they believe this is what John intended. However, this is not an syntactical (based upon language) decision, but a doctrinal one. It seems inconsistent to with Scripture to credit a believer with giving life, instead of directing that gift to God. However, the Scriptures have before made such a suggestion:

My brethren, if any among you strays from the truth and one turns him back, let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins.--James 5:19-20

But you, beloved, ought to remember the words that were spoken beforehand by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ, that they were saying to you, "In the last time there will be mockers, following after their own ungodly lusts." These are the ones who cause divisions, worldly-minded, devoid of the Spirit. But you, beloved, building yourselves up on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Spirit, keep yourselves in the love of God, waiting anxiously for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to eternal life. And have mercy on some, who are doubting; save others, snatching them out of the fire; and on some have mercy with fear, hating even the garment polluted by the flesh.--Jude 17-23

Therefore, I do not believe it is necessary to change the pronoun to a reference to God (which is grammatically difficult to justify). John can speak here as a brother's prayer being a secondary agent without neglecting that it is clearly God's work to give life. Simply the action of asking/requesting shows the brother does not consider himself personally capable of effecting this change. He is calling upon God to give life to his brother, understanding God is the primary agent.

a sin to death--What is the "sin to death." There are differing opinions:

1. Physical death. Clearly, there are sins that can lead to physical death. Not only can some ravage our bodies and cause us to physically break down, Paul even tells us that some believers are killed by God due to their sinful attitude (1 Corinthians 11:30). However, John's emphasis does not appear to be on the physical. He states that "he will to him give life" and every time 1 John uses life the author is speaking toward eternal life. (The same argument could be made toward 1 John's usage of death.)

2. Loss of salvation. Not only is this problematic with other passages in Scripture (Ephesians 1:13-14, Romans 8:31-39, and John 10...just to name three texts), it is also problematic for this passage. In verse 18, John clearly says that the one who is born of God cannot be touched by the evil one. Therefore, John affirms the eternal security of the beleiver in this very passage.

3. Apostasy. Understanding that "brother" does not have to mean a believer (see above), John appears to be speaking of the person who turns from God, though at one time professed to be a part of the community. This would be consistent with the unpardonable sin as blasphemy of the Spirit. This would be the person which 1 John 2:18-19 calls the antichrist. This person has professed to be a believer (for they professed to be of us), but showed they were not by leaving. Hebrews 6:1-8 also seems to shed light upon this.

Since we cannot see the heart (1 Samuel 16:7), members of a church are left to assess confessions and fruit. A person may claim to be a believer, may participate in ordinances, may show and obedience that appears to be fruit and may even instruct others accurately in the faith, but this does not mean for sure that they are a believer. John has already explained to us (2:19) that if the person were to depart either in faith or in practice, that would be the sign that they were not truly of us.

So why wouldn't John simply say this? Well, apostasy, by definition, is difficult to classify. A bold non-believer (either antagonistic or simply apathetic toward the message) is not an apostate, they are simply just an unbeliever. Even one who claims to be a Christian but clearly rejects (either in ignorance or rebellion) the gospel is not an apostate, they too are simply a non-believer. To "qualify" as an apostate...the person once looked like a believer (including professing Christ) but later abandons. It can often look confusing in Scripture, because it almost looks like a person lost their salvation, for similar to John calling them "brother" (see above) it could cause some to read the text and think the person really was saved.

It appears that A rebellion against Christ and His gospel, from a person who once professed Him, is the sin to death.

So is it wrong to pray for an apostate? Some people wonder if it wrong to pray for an apostate person. Without committing too much time to that issue right now, I do think it is important to notice that is not the direct point of John's statement. He is not writing to dissuade a person from praying for an apostate person, he is writing to encourage the person to pray for their brother committing the sin not leading to death.

v 17
All unrighteousness is sin. This may seem like "well duh" redundancy until we look at it closer. What we translate as "unrighteousness" is actually the word for righteousness with an "a" preceding it. Just like atheism means one who is not a theist and atypical means not typical. Similarly, John is saying "all that is not righteous is sin." John is reminding us that all sin causes us to fall short of the glory of God. We may be tempted to think that since all sin does not lead to death, sin is not a problem. However, any act, thought or word which is not righteous is sin.

v 18
Is Born of God. In the 6 verses using "born" from 1 John, John clearly refers to believers. This language clearly points a person back to John 3:1-21...that the Spirit does the work of causing a person to be born again, trust in Jesus Christ for salvation. The person here is clearly one who is in a right relationship with God through the work of Jesus Christ.

No one who is born of God sins. John has already clearly spoken against "sinless perfection" (1 John 1:5-10). Similar to the language in 3:7-10, John is speaking against perpetual, unrepentant sin. A genuine believer will not spiral into the sin leading to death, for he is protected by...

He who was born of God. In 5:1, John has already spoken of the believer and of Jesus being born of God. The contrast between "is" and "was" helps us see the shift in his focus. A believer does not need to fear the evil one because he is protected by Jesus Christ Himself. He (a believer) will not commit the sin to death because He (the Savior) will not allow it!

the evil one does not touch him. Satan may rule this world right now, but it is not a sovereign rule. He is not free to act and will however he pleases. Even his rebellion is submitted to the permission of the Father. Therefore, with Christ guarding the life of the believer, He does not need to worry about the attack of Satan, for Christ is protecting him. (Conversely, this also means the Christian practice of blaming our sin upon Satan is not good theology. If he cannot touch us, then we cannot blame our actions on him. See James 1:12-18 for a better explanation regarding sin.)

Exposition

As said earlier, the Scriptures teach that a believer cannot lose their salvation. The classic fear generated which resists this view claims that all motivation to serve God is gone. If a person is saved, and they cannot lose their salvation, what is the purpose of pursuing Christ...does it really matter? However, this passage encourages us to pray for our brother (or sister) who is sinning. While John concludes the message reminding us that Satan cannot touch us, he begins the passage by sharing one way God protects the believer.

The church is a necessary component of the process. God will use the prayers of fellow believers to help call a child from their sin. Your prayers can be instrumental in calling a brother away from their sin. Of course, to do so, you must be involved closely in one another's lives.

God saves His children and causes them to be born again. He also keeps them and prevents them from falling away. He guards them so that the evil one cannot even touch them. However, He does not do this in completely inexplicable ways. In His great grace, He has given us one another, to hold each other accountable, to know each other, to pray for one another and even confront one another. He is the One who makes His bride spotless and will present her to Himself, but He even uses members of the bride to help one other become more radiant.

Conclusion

This kind of love for one another, and these kind of prayers for one another's lives surely cannot come from isolated contact. The church cannot be the kind of place where a person sneaks in the back, sits and slips out the door when it is over. A person causes the body to suffer (and their own walk) when they neglect the public assembly (Hebrews 10:19-25. It is foolish for a person to say that they do not need the church for they know they are a believer and God will keep them from swaying. They are turning from one of the very means God has provided to keep them from perpetual sin.

If people do not know you well enough to know how to pray for you when you sin, then you need to get involved with others so that they can. If you are not getting involved in others lives, so that you can pray for them when they sin, you are neglecting your responsibility to others. If your walk is aloof and detached from others, you are not living God's righteous desire.

And as John has just reminded us, if it isn't righteous, it is sin.

___________________________________________
Small groups questions and sermon audio for this passage can be found in the Greenville Grace resources section.

1 John 2:1-2

Introduction

In the previous passage, John presents that our fellowship with God can only come through the blood of Jesus. He has worked through the details that fellowship with God is not possible while we walk in darkness. But to truly walk in the Light means we have to confess our sins, receiving the purification from Jesus Christ.

But is it really that easy? Can confession of sin provide freedom from sin and fellowship with God? And if so, is there any incentive to not sin? Won't the gospel message simply encourage continual sin?

Commentary

v 1
It's important to realize John is not scolding. Even when he says his strongest statements, the disciple whom Jesus loved articulates his love. This is his first of seven times that he calls his readers "little children." It is not a condescending term, but one of endearment. At the time of his writing, John is probably older than all of his readers. He also can refer to them as children since he is assuming a role of spiritual guidance. When he calls them his children, he is expressing his love, concern and responsibility for them.

What are "these things?" I believe the letter shows a pattern to help us understand. Throughout the letter, John uses the term "I write" to speak of the words he just penned, while "I have written" speaks to the whole work of the letter. Therefore, as John says "I am writing" these things, John is referring to the words he just penned. How interesting that John has just laid out the gospel message and now says he wrote it so we would not sin.

John is not worried that knowledge of the gospel will lead to further sin. He does not fear that the message of grace will result in its abuse. No, John has just instructed that fellowship with God can only come from a sinlessness which Jesus alone can provide. And when we see the fellowship that He offers, it should motivate us to not sin.

But John is a realist. He then offers what should be considered if on sins. It is important to note that John does not say when you sin. He is not releasing his audience to simply accept that they will sin again. For, though we are aware of our sin nature, the Scriptures clearly state we are not left helpless to it:

No temptation has overtaken you but such as is common to man; and God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will provide the way of escape also, so that you will be able to endure it.--1 Corinthians 10:13

John speaks of a very present reality for us, but not as a defeatist.

But even as we are aware of our sin, confess it to God, and then fall short once again, we are reminded of the beauty of the gospel. We, as believers, we do sin again, we are reminded that we have an Advocate. This term is used four other times (in the gospel of John), each time referring to the Holy Spirit. It is a legal term, to speak of one who intercedes. Revelation 12:5-12 presents Christ in this office:

And she gave birth to a son, a male child, who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron; and her child was caught up to God and to His throne. Then the woman fled into the wilderness where she had a place prepared by God, so that there she would be nourished for one thousand two hundred and sixty days. And there was war in heaven, Michael and his angels waging war with the dragon. The dragon and his angels waged war, and they were not strong enough, and there was no longer a place found for them in heaven. And the great dragon was thrown down, the serpent of old who is called the devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him. Then I heard a loud voice in heaven, saying, "Now the salvation, and the power, and the kingdom of our God and the authority of His Christ have come, for the accuser of our brethren has been thrown down, he who accuses them before our God day and night. And they overcame him because of the blood of the Lamb and because of the word of their testimony, and they did not love their life even when faced with death. For this reason, rejoice, O heavens and you who dwell in them. Woe to the earth and the sea, because the devil has come down to you, having great wrath, knowing that he has only a short time."

Jesus Christ serves us as an Advocate to the Father, turning away all accusations against us.

But John wants our attention to be on the Advocate. He does not say, consider that One is advocating for you. He does not speak of the advocation that happens on our behalf. He speaks of the Advocate. Jesus Christ the Righteous. We should fix our eyes on Jesus Christ. When we sin, we should fix our eyes on Him. To keep from sinning, we also keep our eyes fixed on Him. Our answer is not a "what." Our answer is a "He."

v 2
To again keep the focus on Jesus, he mentions that He Himself is our propitiation. We are not directed to the act of propitiation but to the person of propitiation.

At this point, some may ask the wisdom of a word like "propitiation." What exactly is propitiation? Consider the following passages:

Therefore, He had to be made like His brethren in all things, that He might become a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people.--Hebrews 2:17

"But the tax-gatherer, standing some distance away, was even unwilling to lift up his eyes to heaven, but was beating his breast, saying, 'God, be merciful to me, the sinner!'--Luke 18:13

Whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed;Romans 3:25

At times, a Biblical term can seem obscure. Yet, when a term finds the majority of its use in biblical scholarship, it is typical that the term can keep its purity. When speaking of propitiation, the author of Hebrews gives this glimpse:

And above it were the cherubim of glory overshadowing the mercy seat; but of these things we cannot now speak in detail.--Hebrews 9:5

Rather than avoid Biblical language, we should instruct people so they can see the beauty in it. While we search for a more relevant word, we may find ourselves falling short of the full definition. When we understand John to say Jesus is our propitiation, he is saying Jesus is our atoning sacrifice, our mercy, our intermediary between God and man. He is the only reason God can show any mercy for our sins.

But John says he is not only our propitiation, he is also the propitiation for the sins of the whole world. By this, John could mean:

1. Every person--John could mean, quite simply, the sins of the whole world. Benefit: This is a simple reading of the verse. A quick glance seems to say that Jesus Christ has provided the mercy from the penalty of sin for the whole world. Detriment: This message contradicts with numerous passages of Scripture and should lead one to a universalist perspective. For if Jesus Christ provides the mercy for the whole world, then hell and suffering become obsolete...as does much of Jesus' teaching.

2. Sufficiency--Sensing the conflict with Scripture, many want to make a statement of balance. John is stating that Jesus Christ's payment in sufficient to pay the penalty for all sins. Benefit: It is true. Jesus Christ, as a Divine Member of the God-head, pays an infinite price in His death. Surely the number of sins He pays for cannot be exhausted. Sufficiency accents this point, but avoid universalism by saying nothing of application. Sure He can pay for the whole world's sins, but it doesn't mean He does pay. Therefore, only those who receive His payment by faith find His propitiation applicable. Detriment: First, there is nothing errant about the "sufficiency doctrine." Certainly, Jesus' sacrifice could pay for every single sin that could ever be committed. This does not mean that every sin has been paid for, since faith is still necessary for it to be efficient. But it does not appear to be what John says. The doctrine can be affirmed, just not from this text. John makes no statement of sufficiency being his intent. He does not say it was capable of being the propitiation for the sins of the world. In fact, we must compare his statement for the world with his statement toward the church. If he meant that His death is simply sufficient for the world's sins, then we must only see his statement for us as one of sufficiency. Frankly, I want His death to do more than possibly pay for my sins, I want it to completely pay for them.

All Nations--Perhaps John intends all nations to express the whole world. He could intend for "whole world" to mean every possible ethnicity, race and people but it wouldn't require every single person. Benefit: John often uses "world" to be synonymous with all nations. This does seem to be a "permissible" interpretation. Detriment: There is virtually no mention of ethnicity in John's epistle. Unlike Paul's letter to the Galatians, or the opening chapters of Romans, John doesn't juxtapose ethnicities. Likewise, his letter is not written to a particular race (like Hebrews or James). Multiple nations does not appear to be a discussion otherwise on John's "radar."

All Mercy--Who has not experienced the mercy of Christ? The only way that God can allow the sun to rise on the righteous and the unrighteous and still be just (and thus allow us to be dead in our sins before He regenerates us) is if the blood of Christ has worked an element of mercy for all men. This does not mean all men have or will experience ultimate mercy from God, but it does mean that every man experiences an element of God's mercy. Benefit: It seems to be consistent with the direction of the passage. Jesus Christ's mercy allows the convert to come to Christ and the believer to remain in Christ. Detriment: Our mercy does not appear to be contrasted with the propitiation for the world. Therefore, one could argue that if John intended a different "level" of propitiation for the world, he should have stated it.

When examining the options, it appears that a combination of point three and point four would make the most consistent argument. John is stating that Christ's propitiation is universally available and that it is even felt to a certain degree.

Exposition

It's amazing how many people claim the message of Biblical grace will lead to antinomianism. Though Paul has dismissed this argument (Romans 6:1-2), many continue to claim that forgiveness through confession will simply lead to more sin, not to a life of holiness. However, a close watch of the text shows this is exactly the opposite point that John wishes to make.

John states that he writes these things so that we will not sin. When we understand the linguistics of 1 John, it appears he is saying the words just written are the words of reference. Therefore, John is saying that the message that sinners can fellowship with God through the blood of Jesus Christ by confessing their sins is a message John sees as discouraging sin. When one is driven to a close and honest examination of the gospel, he does not see it as his license to indulge the flesh. Instead, the gospel message has a purifying effect.

However, if a person takes his eyes off of Christ and sins, what remedy remains? Here John shows the exact same solution. He does not quickly point to Jesus and then mention he advocates and propitiates. The emphasis is not on the verbs or the function. John states that Jesus is the Advocate, and He is the Propitiation. John is intentionally pointing the reader back to Jesus. If you fail and sin, the answer is to turn your eyes right back to Jesus.

Conclusion

John began his letter by addressing Jesus Christ. He was manifested before the apostles and they have recorded what they saw and heard. He then works through the forgiveness that is offered through Jesus Christ. And in this passage, he shows how Jesus is also the answer for sanctification. The believer is called to keep his eye on Jesus Christ to keep from sinning. And even in the times we do sin, we should refocus on Christ, who is our Advocate and Propitiation.

1 John 4:1-3

Introduction

It has been said that the most quoted verse in Scripture today is "Do not judge so that you will not be judged (Matthew 7:1). Our society is willing to tolerate all things, except a person it deems intolerant. Therefore, the person who attempts to be discerning can be labeled narrow-minded, judgmental and mean. Yet, John tells us to test the spirits.

So we know that John commands we test the spirits, but if our society does not encourage it, how do we do it? Fortunately, John not only tells us to test the spirits, he also tells us how.

Commentary

v 1
It is not commendable for the beloved to be naive. We should not simply accept every spirit that comes along. This is not cynicism, assuming yourself to be superior or above others. This is discernment; testing the spirit to see if it is from God.

John says the location of the spirit is critical. Did it find its source in God? For if it did not, then the spirit either proceeded directly from Satan or through the agency of sin-cursed man. Either way, the truth will be distorted (if even present) and will not be beneficial. No, when we consider a message, we should only trust it if it originates from God.

The location of the messenger cannot be the issue of consideration. Neither can the past messages from the messenger. For John reminds us that many false prophets have gone out into the world. When he says the have gone out, this should immediately remind us of his earlier statement:

They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be shown that they all are not of us.--1 John 2:19

These men used to appear orthodox. In the past, we would have been deceived into believing they are one of us, for their message would have seemed consistent with the Biblical message. However, now there teaching reveals they never really of us. Therefore, I cannot simply receive the message of a person based upon the past reliability of their message. No, we must test each message, daily assessing if it is consistent with the Scriptures.

We likewise cannot trust them based upon their location. Just because a person is teaching/preaching from a respectable church does not ensure their message is proper. Paul reminded the Ephesian elders that savage wolves will come in among you (Acts 20:29). He says it will happen. Therefore, the elders are commissioned to be on the alert--and the church body should join them. It is critical that we test these spirits to discern if they truly originate from God.

v 2
If location of the preacher, nor his reputation, give us assurance as to the origin of the message, how does one discern if the message is from God? John gives us the parameters. It must confess the following:

Jesus
The earthly name given by Joseph in obedience to the angelic vision. His name literally declares "Jehovah Saves!" First criteria is to understand a message to originates from God is going to proclaim Jesus. The other elements of the confession simply describe Who this Jesus is.

Christ
Christ is the greek rendering of Messiah. It is a statement that Jesus is the Anointed One. The Chosen One Whom all the Scriptures speak. Though second temple period understanding of the Messiah may be clouded, the Scriptures clearly enforce that a proper understanding of the Christ, is to understand His Sonship. (Cruise through these 488 mentions of Christ in the New Testament and notice how many are directly related to Jesus being the Son of God.)

Has Come
But in case a person continues to deny the emphasis on on Jesus' eternality, John provides this glimpse. We simply do not speak this way of others. When we assess the life of all great leaders in history, we speak of two factors, their date of death and their date of birth. We speak of the day they were born, but we do not state it as the day they "have come in the flesh." John is making it clear to his readers that our understanding is that Jesus always existed eternally, yet at a determined point He clothed Himself with flesh. To say He has come is to say He was somewhere else before arriving on earth.

In the flesh
Though uncommon today, there still remain some who deny that Jesus literally came as man. This became pervasive in the gnostic teachings, which were just beginning to develop at the time of John's writing. In the early church period, some would actually claim that Jesus appeared to have come, but had not literally done so. Or, they claimed that His divine nature hovered over an earthly body, but was never truly united.

While this sort of teaching is not very popular today (It appears often today that the opposite is the attack. Acknowledging that Jesus came in the flesh but denying His divinity. Again, however, John addresses this matter earlier in Jesus' description.), some of its outworking remains. The reason people were tempted to deny the literal flesh of Jesus was that they believed all that was material was evil. Therefore, our calling to escape from the material issues of this world is seen as a form of sanctification. People are told that the physical world around them is either illusion or evil. Therefore our liberation from sin is found in escape from the material world. This, however, is a false hope. For the Word of God says will will one day receive literal, physical (though incorruptible) bodies. Jesus Christ came not to eliminate the physical world, but to restore it to its proper order.

But John also reminds us how this message must be transferred. It must be confessed. John has used this word before, and we are reminded that it literally means "one word." We are coming to agreement with the already stated fact. When we confess our sin, we are stated what God has already said about our sin. When we confess Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, we are not the originator of this message, but are simply joining in the declaration which has already been made. We need to look for the confession of this message. This should remind us of a few things.

Confession is not denial. When we are told a spirit must confess Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, we can easily spot a denial. If a person were to deny any element of the message (regardless of their location or reputation) we know that message is not from God. For if their message denies these truths about Jesus, their message is inconsistent with the Scriptures and God is not double-minded. A denial is usually pretty easy to spot.

Confession is not silence. But John does not tell us to listen closely for a denial. He calls us to listen closely to for a confession. Therefore, if a person is silent regarding the message that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, it is not a message from God. God is not pleased simply with a message that avoids error, but God is glorified by a message that exalts His Son. Any message (whether written or spoken, art or argument) that does not confess Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not consistent with God's desire to bring glory to Himself through His Son. God will seek every opportunity to lift up Jesus Christ, therefore, if the message does not confess Christ, the message is not from God.

Confessing is not the same as admitting. Because silence is usually the most prevalent form of false messages, many listeners are inclined to ask the speaker/author/singer if they will affirm that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh. Back into a corner and asked the right questions, the person responds with an affirmation that "Yes, I will agree that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh." Does this constitute a confession?

Consider an example from parenting. If I walk through the house and notice magic marker on the wall around the front door, I immediately go on a hunt to find the guilty party. As I turn the corner and enter the hallway, I immediately see my son standing near the bathroom, shirt and hands covered with the the stains of magic marker with the graffiti device laying at his feet. My question, "Did you mark the wall?" becomes almost rhetorical. He is caught red handed (quite literally). If he has any brains about him, he knows he is caught and his only hope of pardon is to admit to his sin. Tears may even come, but what do they indicate? Is he repentant? Does he see his error? Is he simply upset that his fun is being cut short? Is he afraid of the discipline to come? I have not indication of the purpose of his admittance.

However, if you have had the privilege of receiving a confession from your child, you know it is an entirely different experience. When the child believes their sin is hidden and yet they come and confess their sin to you, you know repentance has happened. The child is simply coming to desire forgiveness and restoration. The parent doesn't have to question if genuine repentance is necessary, nor do you have to wonder if the child sees his error. He has taken the initiative and it generates a confidence in the child's authenticity.

In the same way, when a teacher confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, you have a greater confidence in his belief of that message than if he simply answers in the affirmative to a few follow up questions. God has not called us to assume the message in others nor are we to veil it. God has called us to confess it.

v 3
Yet, we could diminish the error from neglect of confession. We could simply chalk it up to human error, time constraints, or again, the assumption of the messenger that all listeners already accept this message. However, John reminds where a message void of this confession finds its origin.

First, he states it is not from God. This is simply the inverse of his statement before. A message from God confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh. Therefore, a spirit that does not confess this message is not from God.

And if not from God, John tells us it is the spirit of the Antichrist. John has already spoken of the Antichrist (1 John 2:22). In both places, he affirms that their is a specific man, The Antichrist, who is coming, but also affirms the spirit, or message of the Antichrist is already present. In fact, many operate as antichrists, to foreshadow the Antichrist who is to come. Though he will possess powers and authority unseen by present false teachers, their message will be the same--a calling to turn away from the glory of Jesus Christ.

It is important to note, John does not call the false prophets who are present The Antichrist, though one may be. He simply says they are of the same spirit as the Antichrist. His agenda will be to turn people away from Jesus Christ and to Himself. Likewise, these false prophets desire to turn people away from the message of Jesus Christ, otherwise, they would confess Him.

Exposition

Especially in America, the Christian message has become quite faded and blurred. Your average retail store will sell Bibles and supposedly Christian books. Most music stores have entire sections devoted to christian albums. Politicians, athletes and celebrities will all thank Jesus Christ and speak of their faith. Television, radio, books, cd's and advice columns are all filled with people claiming to speak a christian message. How do we discern if they are accurate?

We should not consider any message to be truly Christian unless it is truly of Christ. Therefore, any message, regardless of Scripture quotations or moralistic advice is not truly a message commissioned by God unless it also proclaims that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh. The gospel message (for declaring Jesus has come will invariably lead to announcing why He has come) is that message which gives life to the nonbeliever (in conversion) and the believer (in sanctification) alike. Therefore, we should sharpen our ears and test each spirit. I should not merely listen for denials, nor should I ignore silence. I should not be comforted by an attached admission that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh. I should look for the confession! This means the gospel will not simply be attached to a statement, like an appendix in a book. This means the gospel will be the point of the message, working through the implications of this message in the application.

Certainly, the Scriptures give us the keys to a better marriage, parenting advice, how to handle our finances and learning to forgive (among countless others). However, if this "advice" is simply given, apart from the confession that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, the message may be borrowed from God (in a limited fashion) but is not of God.

Conclusion

So how do we test the spirits?

1. Filter all that you take in. Assess whether it confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh. Be careful of the books you read, the music you listen to, and the sermons you watch. Know that not all media from Christian organizations are naturally christian messages. Guard your heart, and your family, carefully. Checking to see if the message is truly of Christ. Know that this standard means the majority of the information you receive in a day will not be from a God-centered origin, and receive the information with this understanding. Test the spirits according to God's filter.

2. Hold the pulpit accountable. Check with your pastor to see if this is his understanding. If not, leave the church, for you are not hearing the spirit of God. If it is his desire, understand that at times he may not be as clear or give adequate attention to this confession. In those times when he falters (and he will), lovingly come alongside him and encourage him to keep this message clear and bold. Help your pastor minister to you by sharpening his ability to confess this message.

3. Consider yourself. Do you find yourself to be of the spirit of the antichrist? Can your conversations about God usually remain vague and universalistic? Do you take the conversation to the point of confessing that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh? Understand that anything short of this is not genuine evangelism. God's desire is for Jesus Christ to be exalted. Does that happen in your everyday speech? If not, confess this to God and ask Him to grant to you opportunities to confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh. (He won't let you down!)

In short, hunger for the confession that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh from those you listen to. And when people are listening to you, make sure this is the confession that they hear.

You do want to speak from the spirit of God, don't you?

1 John 1:5-10

Introduction:

Fellowship can be difficult to describe. John has written his letter so that we can know fellowship with God the Father and Christ the Son--as well as with other believers--but our fellowship often feels severed. Sin greatly effects the quality of this fellowship. So how are we to evaluate our current condition? Is fellowship with God such a reality that we must conclude we have no sin? If sin gets in the way of our fellowship, can we claim to have fellowship with God while sinning? And if sin severs our fellowship, can I have fellowship with God once I've sinned? John immediately addresses these questions for the reader.

Commentary

v 5
John's testimony is clear. He saw, heard, felt and witnessed the works of Christ. He can give us an eyewitness account of this. However, John has also said their is a message he wishes to proclaim. As mentioned earlier, a proclamation is a message from someone else. John is now going to present this message.

The message can be trusted.
John is not presenting rumor or inference. He is presenting a message that can be relied upon. This "message" (ἀγγελία) is an announcement or promise, as if from an angel himself. His message can be trusted for it comes from an eyewitness, who heard the message directly from Christ. He is going to directly convey the message he heard. Like a herald making an announcement for the king, John is prepared to relay (without distortion) the message to his readers.

The message is about God.
John's message begins theo-centric. He does not begin with man or his condition, but with God and His condition. John begins his message by stating that God is Light. This should remind us of John 1:4-8:

In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it. There came a man sent from God, whose name was John. He came as a witness, to testify about the Light, so that all might believe through him. He was not the Light, but he came to testify about the Light.

Just as John affirmed that Jesus is divine, in John 1, he makes the same claim here in his letter. In John 1, he showed that the Word was God, affirming that Jesus is God and then called Jesus the Light. Now, in his letter, he calls God the Light, a description he has attributed to Christ.

But what does John mean when he says God is Light? Previously, John has intended a moral purpose. Consider John 3:19-21:

This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil. For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God.

John uses the Light to describe Christ and contrasts Him with the world. The world loves darkness rather than the Light because the world loves evil. Therefore, when John states here that God is Light, we can understand that he is speaking to the moral perfection of God and Jesus Christ. John's first message is that God is perfectly righteous.

Certainly, any illustration falls somewhat short in describing God. John is not speaking of muted light, filled with shadows and distortions. John is speaking of perfect light, not tainted by a single shadow. To make sure John is understood, he further describes the Light. Literally, he states, "And in Him there is no darkness...none at all!"

The Light which is God is a perfect light without any darkness or flaw. There is not corner shadow in God's character. There is no area which can be unmasked that shows moral decay. He is perfectly enlightened as well, having no area outside of His knowledge.

John begins his message to us with the declaration that God is perfectly holy and all knowing.

v 6
After presenting objective truth about God, John then moves this message to our own application. John now turns the attention to our fellowship with God, for that is his goal in writing. God is holy and perfect and we desire to have fellowship with him. He is Light without any darkness, but are we?

John presents the obstacle to our fellowship with God. God does not love us more than His own character, therefore He cannot violate Himself for our sake. If God is perfect light with no darkness, how can we claim to fellowship with Him if we walk in the darkness?

Yet, there are some who make this claim. They say they already have fellowship with God, though they walk in the darkness. While being active in evil and seeking fellowship with God, there are only two options. 1) Either God fellowships with us in the midst of our darkness and violates His character, or 2) We are not accurate when we say we have fellowship.

Certainly, God character is not compromised, so we must be the ones mistaken. In fact, John says we speak falsely when we claim to have fellowship while walking in sin. We are not proclaiming the message we have heard and are certainly not proclaiming truth, but instead are making a false statement. When we such fellowship, yet retain our evil deeds, we present a message that God tolerates sin, and thus contains shadowy areas. Such a statement is false to make. But the error is not only in statement, but our life is a lie as well. We not only send a false statement about God, but we ourselves practice that which is false. We are not living in truth.

v 7
Left with verse six, we could conclude that fellowship with God is not possible. However, John lets us know it is conditionally possible. However, we must read the verse carefully to catch the condition...

No, not here... If we walk in the Light is not the conditional statement to fellowship with God. John is not telling us that our works are necessary to obtain salvation, though our works will be an evidence of salvation. Therefore, his is exposing to us that we need to pursue righteousness and to be morally pure. This standard should be none other than that of Christ. Walking in the Light must not simply mean "walking with less darkness" but our standard is to be blameless.

Still not here... We have fellowship with one another. Again, this is not the condition for our fellowship with God, but is the result of walking in the Light. John conclusion should not surprise us. If we walk in the Light, we will not be sinning against one another, therefore there will be no offense between relationships. If one man sins against another their fellowship is strained. If two men sin against one another, fellowship is about impossible. If both men pursue righteousness, there is not point of stumbling between them. Again, John is not stating that fellowship with other men will earn you favor with God, but that walking in the Light, which will come after finding favor with God, will enhance our fellowship with other brothers.

Here... and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all unrighteousness. If we must walk in the Light to the standard of Jesus, we will never see fellowship with God, for we cannot attain Jesus' perfection. Walking in the Light is only possible if we have entered into fellowship with Christ through His blood. And as John has already established, fellowship with one another starts in fellowship with God the Father and Jesus His Son. Sin must be dealt with for fellowship to occur and sin must be dealt with through the cleansing blood of Jesus His Son.

v 8
If sin severs fellowship with Christ, then there are four options: 1) Ignore the need for fellowship with God. 2) Claim that our fellowship remains despite our sin. 3) Have our sin cleansed by Jesus' blood, thus making fellowship possible. 4) Deny the need for the blood of Jesus by claiming to be sin free.

John has already dealt with the other arguments and now turns to our current condition. For the person who claims to have fellowship with God because they are sin free, John comes out with pretty strong words. It is interesting to note that John does not first turn to the past, but instead looks at the present. If, right now, you look at your life and believe you are sin free, you are deceiving yourself and the truth is not in you. In essence, you are deceived because you have bought a lie.

But how can this be? Isn't it possible to be without sin for at least a moment? What if I'm in a church service, encouraged to confess my sin, which I do and am cleansed, and spend the next 15 minutes in whole-hearted praise and worship? Could I at that point say I am sin free? Only if John's words could be considered false. So, how does this work? Consider words from John Piper:

The reason people are not stunned by the grace of God and their own salvation is because they have never felt how inveterately sinful they are everyday because they have not been taught well what sin is. They've grown up in Christian homes, they've never committed adultery. They've never stolen anything, they've never killed anybody. They're scratching their head, saying, "When have I sinned last? I can't remember when I sinned last."

We've all been there. We've all been there. Everybody says, "Let's have a five or ten minute time here of confession." And you're thinking, "Uh, let's see..."

Listen, if you catch on to what I've said...3 seconds ago you were sinning. Did you love Him, did you prefer Him in proportion to His worth? His infinite worth?--The Nature of Our Depravity

If we think that sin is only an action of commission (or even a moment of omission) then we neglect much of the offense of sin. Our sin is not just and action, but the action is a display of our condition. If you think you've reached a point of sinless perfection, you are deceiving yourself as to the definition of sin, and the condition of your heart.

v 9
Our sin separates us from God. If we have sin, we cannot have fellowship. Yet, John wrote this letter so that we could have fellowship with God. So how can these truths be reconciled?

Confession (ὁμολογῶμεν) literally means "same word." To confess our sin means to come to the same word as God about sin. It means to admit we have sin. It means we admit that our sin separates us from God. It means that we admit that our sin is deserving of eternal torment. It means that we realize our condition of sin is completely irreversible apart from the work of Christ. No more denying. No more justifying. No more minimizing. We, by faith come to complete agreement with the Word of God regarding our sin.

He is faithful and just. Since the truth about sin is not exclusively the bad news, but also includes the news that Jesus can pay the penalty for our sin, when we confess these truths God will be faithful to His word. John has already reminded us that the message he received is that God is Light. The beauty and glory of the gospel must reside within the truth of God's character, not ours. Therefore, if God has promised salvation, he cannot change the conditions or deny a repentant person. He must remain true to His Word and to His Son. His righteousness demands that He cannot punish both me and His Son for my sin. He cannot require double payment. Therefore, the security of our forgiveness does not rest in our works, or even our confession. The security of our forgiveness rests in the faithfulness and justice of God.

Forgiveness and cleansing. Since Christ is our payment once for all (Hebrews 10:10), our forgiveness if promised for past, present and future sins. Therefore, God not only forgives our sins we have committed, He cleanses us from the sin we bear. The righteousness of Christ becomes imputed to us and we are clean before God.

v 10
The person may protest, "Well sure, if you've sinned before, there is no way to remove the stain. But I've never sinned before." John has a word for that claim.

John explains that the stakes are even greater if we claim to never have sinned. Not only do we deceive ourselves, we deny what the Word of God clearly says. We say that Christ has lied and has not told the truth. He has said that every man stands condemned before God by default and must obtain forgiveness through Him (John 3:18). If we claim we have not sinned, we are saying we are not condemned and therefore assert that He is a liar.

Obviously, if our claim makes Christ a liar, then we cannot say we are saying the same word (confessing). Therefore, the word is not within us.

Exposition

This passage could be summarized by six statements, three true and three false:

God is Light. (He is perfect and pure.)

We cannot walk in darkness and claim fellowship with the Light.

If we walk in the Light we can have fellowship with Him.

If we claim we are sinless, we deceive ourselves.

It is possible to be cleansed of our sin through the blood of Christ.

If we claim we have never sinned, we say that He has lied.

Verse Nine is often used in evangelism...and rightly so. It clearly communicates that Christ blood can cover our sins when we confess our need for His payment. However, we make a mistake when we think it is only an evangelism verse.

John is writing this passage for all of us. Certainly, the nonbeliever needs to confess his/her sins immediately and call upon the grace of God for salvation. He/She needs to see their sins, and the need for Christ's atonement. Equally, the believer must keep these things in mind. We must continually confess our sins to God. We must be mindful that we have sinned and also that we have sin within us. We must be careful not to claim we have fellowship with God when we are not walking in the Light.

Conclusion

Every personal relationship has experienced the pain of sin. When two people interact, sin will inevitably show up. When it does, it always creates disharmony. The more you are around the person, the more obvious the tension becomes. Since we don't see God physically, we may be tempted to ignore the condition of the relationship. Like Adam and Eve, when we consider the relationship, our best option seems to be hiding our sin and denying there is a problem. However, this simply causes more tension, deception and blame-shifting. The quickest way (and only way) to restoration is not found in coving up our sin, but confessing our sin and asking Christ to cover it with His blood.