The Prophet Like Moses ~ Savior

As we go through Acts 7, I am emphasizing parts of Stephen’s address before the Sanhedrin, hoping to show how the young Messianic leader put forth not only his defense but that of the Gospel as well. Throughout Stephen’s address he points to Israel’s history—a solidified revelation of how God has interpreted himself and his relationship with mankind in such a manner that God’s people’s eyes were always directed toward the future. It was a history of faith and expectation. The problem in Stephen’s day was the Jewish authorities wrongly defined their present service to God with the past.

 

The Union of Jews and Gentiles

Once you get the Jews and the Gentiles in the Church together, how does that work? Under what conditions is this possible, and who gets to say? God’s plan has always been not only to sum up everything in heaven and earth in Christ, but to bring together the whole human race in him as a sign to the principalities and powers (Ephesians 3:10). Caesar and world powers today would have loved to unite the world in this way, but they cannot. Only God is able to cross national and traditional boundaries with all the differences this implies, and cross gender lines, social class, and levels of authority and unite all in one body under the Lordship of Jesus.

 

Blood Ransom

The teaching of man’s depravity is one that is perfectly Biblical. The doctrine of Original Sin was developed by Augustine, and those who hold to a low opinion of Jesus, that is, those who believe Jesus was only a man, often repudiate Augustine for his understanding. Many even imply that his insight comes not from the word of God but from the pagan philosopher, Plato. I do not wish to defend Augustine per se or bring us into a study of Plato’s dualism. Nevertheless I do believe the Bible supports the doctrine of man’s depravity due to Adam’s rebellion and his need of a Savior.

 

Am I Good Enough for Heaven?

Jesus has given us a good look at our own self-righteousness in the parable about the Pharisee and the Publican in Luke18:10-14. For the purpose of not bringing into this story some preconceived notions, I would like to set aside the title of Pharisee and publican and give these two individuals names. I’ll call the Pharisee Eddie and the publican Boomer.

Two men went up to the Temple of God to pray. The first man’s name was Eddie, and he prayed like this: “Oh God, thank you for your input in my life. I am so glad that I am not as some men that I see in this world. I have seen men who have destroyed their lives and families and brought great dishonor to their parents, because they had no character or self-discipline.

 

Who is God Able to Save?

Now I must ask a question that is at the heart of the controversy that comes out of the cross. This question has bothered me, since I was a little boy, when my parents first told me about God, heaven and hell. If God loves everyone, and if God is all powerful, how can he, who loves all and is able to do all things, allow anyone to get to the point where God will forever condemn him in his sins?

 

The Grace of God

When Jesus heard Lazarus, his friend, had become seriously ill (John 11:1-3) and was near death he waited in Bethabara, beyond Jordan (John 10:40; cp. John 1:28) until Lazarus had died. He had retreated there to avoid the leaders at Jerusalem who sought his life (John 10:31, 39). Then, after Lazarus had died, he made his journey toward Jerusalem and Bethany.

 

Did God’s Original Plan Fail?

Have you ever heard the argument that either God wanted Adam to fail or God gave him an impossible task to perform? Some would claim God foreknew Adam’s failure, so Adam had to fail, because, if God foreknows anything, what he foreknows must come to pass. Some have even gone so far as to say eating of the forbidden fruit was a good thing! They argue that God concluded it was a natural progression of man to desire to know for himself—to experiment, if you will, and decide what is or is not good for him. Is any of this true?

 

Jesus Before Pilate

Given that the religious leaders of the day found Jesus guilty of blasphemy, this was nothing to Pilate. So, we must ask: for what charge was Jesus crucified? What did the Jewish authorities say to the Roman governor? First of all, they were vague. They wanted Pilate to kill Jesus just because they found him guilty in the Sanhedrin. They desired the Roman governor to rubber stamp their decision (John 18:29-30), but this didn’t work. Pilate told them to punish him themselves, but they wanted the death penalty, which only Pilate had authority to administer (John 18:31-32). But, before Pilate could leave they began shouting accusations of insurrection. Notice:

 

The Gethsemane

If Jesus was troubled with the apparent break in fellowship between him and his Father, how could the angel strengthen him?

I will offer a crude, but, I believe, a fairly accurate example of how Jesus could have been strengthened by the presence of the angel in Gethsemane. I believe I understand Jesus’ plight, at least in part, because of what occurred between my own father and me. I am the eldest of eight children. When I was in my twenties, my dad did something that hurt our relationship. In fact, I withheld my love for him. He hurt me, though he did not intend to do so, but I wanted to hurt him. This went on for about two years, before we were reconciled on his death bed. I tried even then to hold back the love I had for him, but I broke down and wept into his lap. Through my sobs, I could hear him say, as his hand stroked my head, “I knew he still loved me.” Up until then, my dad would not speak of his dying. Afterward, he did. I believe that our reconciliation strengthened him. He never wanted to appear weak. After we were reconciled, I believe he was able both to face death and speak about it without breaking down.

 

Bearing Away Our Sins

As Jesus prayed on the Mount of Olives in the garden called Gethsemane, his Father sent an angel to him to strengthen him (see “Praying Through Gethsemane“). What could the angel possibly do for Jesus? How can an angel strengthen God who became a man? There is an interesting account of an angel strengthening Daniel in Daniel chapter ten. Here the prophet was praying and fasting for three weeks (Daniel 10:1-3), when he saw a vision (Daniel 10:5-6). Daniel lost all his strength, and he fell prostrate with his face toward the ground (Daniel 10:8-9). The angel had to strengthen him so he could stand (Daniel 10:10-11). The prophet was unable to speak, and with each command, the angel had to strengthen him more and more (Daniel 10:15-19). Daniel experienced a similar situation during another vision (Daniel 8:1, 17-18, 26) when the angel had to physically strengthen the fear stricken prophet.

 

Clean and Unclean

The dialogue between Pilate and the priests in the Gospel accounts at the time of Jesus’ trial reveal a tense and contemptuous relationship between them, not unlike what is often the case today between church and state! The priests considered Pilate unclean and his questions insulting. They refused to go in and meet with him, so he was obliged to come out to them (John 18:28-30). Power plays between church and state still exist today, each one jealous of the authority the other has over the people, each one suspicious of the other, and as we shall see, each one seeks to take the position of temporary power over the other.

 

Were We Purchased with God’s Blood?

Some modern critics take issue with how the King James Version translates Acts 20:28. The idea that seems to bother them is that God purchased us “with his own blood.” Several groups would rather see the phrase translated, “the blood of his own (Son).” Notice the Scripture in both the Contemporary English Version and the King James Version:

Acts 20:28 CEV Look after yourselves and everyone the Holy Spirit has placed in your care. Be like shepherds to God’s church. It is the flock that he bought with the blood of his own Son .”— (emphasis mine)

Acts 20:28 KJV “Take heed, therefore, unto yourselves and to all the flock, over which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to feed the Church of God which he has purchased with his own blood.”— (emphasis mine)

Which translation is correct? How should we understand this Scripture? Did God purchase us with his own blood as the King James Version declares, or should we understand that God (the Father) purchased us with the blood of his own Son (i.e. with Jesus’ blood)? If this Scripture should be translated into “with his own blood,” then Acts 20:28 makes an emphatic statement that Jesus is God, and, since the article is present before the word God, this is a very important declaration. It would virtually end any controversy anyone had with John 1:1. Concerning this point, the translators of the New English Translation say of Acts 20:28,

The genitive construction could be taken in two ways: (1) as an attributive genitive (second attributive position) meaning “his own blood”; or (2) as a possessive genitive, “with the blood of his own.” In this case the referent is the Son, and the referent has been specified in the translation for clarity. See further C. F. DeVine, “The Blood of God,” CBQ 9 (1947): 381-408.[marginal notes in the NET Bible]

The controversy, therefore, is not the grammatical content of the verse, because everyone seems to agree that the phrase could be translated either way and still be accurate. The controversy in Acts 20:28 evolves out of the liberty taken by adding the word Son to the translation. How can we know for certain how to translate this Scripture?

While grammatical content of a Scripture is important in understanding what is being said, context is just as important and more so where grammar fails to be specific enough. In Acts 20 Paul spoke of his faithfulness in preaching the whole word of God (verse 27) and he commanded the elders at Ephesus to be faithful as well (verse 28). The reason given is that the Church of God was bought with the most precious price of all. In verse 29 Paul warned the elders that, after he left men, even of their own number, would come in and not spare the flock. What Paul said here could be compared with 1Corinthians 11:17-29. There, Paul wrote in his letter that he sent to the Corinthians concerning heresy. There, some had entered the Church of God at Corinth and had not spared the flock (1Corinthians 11:17-19; cp. Acts 20:29), seeking to divide the Church and gain followers after themselves.

In 1Corinthians 11 Paul spoke in allegory. In essence what Paul said was that when we come together, it is to partake of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. We do this through worship (hymns and spiritual songs), listening to the whole word of God as given in a sermon by our pastor, and through prayer. In this way our spirits are fed (John 6:53). This is the Lord’s Supper (of which the bread and the wine are symbols). When we meet together to hear the word of God preached, we are showing the world that we are trusting in the Lord’s death (1Corinthians 11:23-26).

Heresy divides the Church of God. The point of heresy is never one of truth or error. The point of heresy is always one of ownership of the flock. Heretics come into the Body of Christ in order to rob a portion of God’s heritage (the Church) for themselves. Once I begin to teach what I have studied in the Scriptures in an effort to win a following after myself (1Corinthians 11:17-19), I am seeking to take the eyes of my brothers and sisters off Jesus and cause them to look to me as their teacher. It is a matter of spiritual food, and from where one’s meal comes. In the end it is a question of ownership, whose I am. In other words, if I could obtain a following out of the Church of God for myself, I would be feeding upon those who follow me, and I would be using Jesus’ death as a platform to further my ends. Moreover, if members of the Body of Christ trusted in me, as the Corinthian church was trusting in certain teachers in the first century (1Corinthians 1:12; 3:4; 11:17-19), they would be spiritually feeding upon me instead of Christ. We would be partakers one of another. Therefore, we would be unable to be partakers of the Lord’s Supper, because none of us would be feeding upon Christ (John 6:53-57).

Paul continued his argument in 1Corinthians 12. We are all gifted differently and exercise our gifts in different ministries. We cause those ministries to function out of different organizations (works). Nevertheless, we are all of one Spirit, one Lord and one God (1Corinthians 12:4-6). We function collectively as the Body of Christ. We are his. Yet, of necessity, we must partake of one another to work effectively. Notice

1Corinthians 10:15-18 KJV I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say. 16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? 17 For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread. 18 Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar? (emphasis mine)

With this in mind and comparing it to what Paul said in 1Corinthians 11:23-26, we see that in a very real sense the Church of God is compared with the body and blood of Christ. Paul said that he was faithful and delivered all that was given to him from the Lord to the Church of God (1Corinthians 11:23; cp. Acts 20:27). God gives teachers to the Body of Christ (1Corinthians 12:28; Ephesians 4:11) to build up the Church of God in Christ. However, if I exalt one teacher over another or if I teach others in order to have someone agree with me, I am partaking of the spiritual body and blood of Christ in an unworthy manner (1Corinthians 11:27-29; cp. Acts 20:26-27 & 29-30).

Paul said that he was innocent of any man’s blood, because he declared to everyone the whole council of God (Acts 20:26-27). On the other hand, those who emphasize only part of the truth and get a following after themselves (heresy) are guilty of the body and blood of the Lord (1Corinthians 11:19-20, 27-29). We are, after all, Christ’s and not a man’s (viz. Lutherans, Wesleyans, Catholics, Baptists, Jehovah’s Witnesses etc.).

Considering all this and applying it to Acts 20:28 we see that Paul is speaking of the exceedingly precious price that was paid for the Church of God. It is the responsibility of all who participate in each and every function of that church to be faithful, because we are not our own, but are bought with an exceedingly precious price (1Corinthians 6:19-20). If I differentiate between Father and Son in Acts 20:28, I am in reality saying that the essence of one is more precious than the essence of the other. The whole point of this verse, however, is to show the exceedingly precious price that was paid for our salvation. If the most precious price was not paid, then Paul’s argument falls short of being the very best.

Leviticus 17:11 says, “the life of the flesh is in the blood…” What kind of life was in Jesus? Was he merely a descendant of Adam? Is this the most precious life he was able to offer at Calvary? Are we then to understand that the life of God was not in Christ when he hung on the cross (cp. 2Corinthians 5:19)? I am not speaking of God spiritually being in Christ as he is in all of us. I am speaking of the literal life of Christ. Was his literal life that of God? Grammatical content may permit me to play games with the meaning of this Scripture, but context demands that Acts 20:28 be translated that God paid for our salvation with the most precious price of all, “with his own blood.” If I add the word Son to this verse, I demean the work and the character of God.

God is love and when he acts, he does so out of the character of love (1John 4:8, 16). If I apply this to the work of God in our salvation, what can I say about Jesus? If Jesus’ death was indeed an act of love, wouldn’t he have had to have the freedom to choose to live or die? Liberty is an inalienable right possessed by love. Jesus had to have both possession of his own life and the liberty to lay it down or not (John 10:17-18). In other words, our salvation had to have been his choice. Otherwise, if our heavenly Father owned Jesus and purchased our salvation with Jesus’ blood, what would it have cost our Father to sacrifice the life’s blood of a slave? If this were the case, our Father could not have acted out of love, because there was no real sacrifice on his part. How can Jesus offer himself as a free-will offering, if he is the property of someone else? If Jesus were his Father’s property, what cause would there be to believe Jesus loves us or even that our heavenly Father loves us? (Since I cannot purchase anything unless I own what I offer as payment, how could our heavenly Father pay for our salvation with Jesus’ blood unless Jesus was his property? It is odd to my own ear to phrase this idea in this fashion, since I believe that God is One. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit purchased my salvation together, not as individuals. However, the differentiation is made by certain groups and modern critics, so I must speak using their terminology. Jesus said in John 15:13, “Greater love has no man than this: that he should lay down his life for his friends” (KJV). For this Scripture to be true, Christ had to be free to offer himself or to decline. An act of love is not an act of love, if there is no freedom to refuse to do the act. If Christ was a slave to our Father, then he did only that which he was commanded to do and is (to use his own judgment) unprofitable (Luke 17:10 KJV). Therefore, the Scripture must read, “…to feed the church of God, which he purchased with his own blood.”

Below are a collection of Scriptures that should convey the proposition that Acts 20:28 must be translated to show Jesus purchased our salvation with his own, i.e., God’s blood, or if you prefer, “the blood of his own (body)”. I say Jesus purchased our salvation, but he made manifest what was in the Father’s heart through his work as man. God – Father, Son and Holy Spirit – is our Savior, and he purchased our salvation with his own blood from his own human body.

John 10:11 – Christ is the Good Shepherd who gives his life for his sheep.
John 10:17 – Father loves Jesus because he (Jesus) lays down his life that he might take it up again.
John 10:18 – No man is able to take Jesus’ life; he laid it down of his own free will. He had power to lay it down and to take it up again.
Hebrews 1:3 – By himself, Christ purged our sins!
Hebrews 7:27 – Christ satisfied the Law’s demands when he once and for all time offered himself. No one offered him, he offered himself!
Hebrews 9:14 – Christ offered himself without spot, through the eternal Spirit to God.
Hebrews 9:26 – Christ put away sin by the sacrifice of himself!

In summary, just because a Scripture presents a difficult thought or might be troublesome in the Greek, as some modern critics suppose, or does not fit into one’s theology is not grounds for changing the Scripture. I have found that if I lift up Christ and place him in the highest place (Psalm 97:9; Ephesians 1:20-21), I have no trouble submitting to him and caring properly for the Church of God. That is, as a Sunday school teacher (replace this gift with any other spiritual gift) I have respect for Christ as the Master of his house. I do not wish to intrude into his supervision as the Teacher of all. Moreover, I must have respect for my brothers and sisters when we differ in understanding the word of God. The LORD may require me to present the truth as he revealed it to me, but by no means has he demanded me to see to it that everyone tow the line and submit to what I say. The moment I allow myself to demand of my brethren that they believe me, I have already removed Christ from the highest place in my heart and mind. Once I do this, I begin to judge the Church of God, and split Christ’s Church into the faithful and the faithless. I would find myself judging those brethren in Christ who do not believe as I do. In other words, I would be “guilty of the Lord’s body and blood” (1Corinthians 11:27)! May God forgive us for dividing his flock and enable us to partake only of the Lord’s Supper.

 

God Almighty in Revelation Chapter 4!

In Revelation 4 John is taken up in the Spirit to see the throne of God. Hebrews 1:3, 8:1; 10:12 and 12:2 all say that Jesus is seated on the throne of God, at the right hand of the Father (or in the executive position). In other words, it is Jesus who carries out the determinant will of God. All that God chooses to do is done through his Son, Jesus.

 

Almighty God – Jesus!

I have been told by those who hold a low view of Jesus that he is never once called Almighty God or God Almighty in the Bible. One may search the Bible from cover to cover and never once find the words, “Jesus is Almighty God.” While this is true, neither will one find the words,“The Father is Almighty God.” One can search the Scriptures from cover to cover and the words just aren’t there. Why is this so? I believe that the Lord wishes us to search for him. Proverbs 25:2 says, “It is God’s glory to conceal things.” he hides things about himself within his word. The same verse continues, “It is the glory of kings to search things out.” That is, God created us to enjoy uncovering the unknown or to solve a mystery. It is our honor to search the Scriptures and find what God has hidden about himself. I like the way the Message paraphrases this,

 

The Rock of Israel

While trying to get the Corinthian Church to see their sins and the jeopardy in which they placed themselves, Paul began to compare their experience with that of ancient Israel coming out of Egypt. In doing so, Paul wrote in 1Corinthians 10:4 of the Rock that Moses struck and gushed with water for Israel to drink. Paul said that Rock was Christ. Paul went on to say that the Rock followed them throughout Israel’s forty-year journey in the wilderness. Notice: