The Top 10 Reasons Not to Discuss Jack Schaap on JackHammer September 30, 2007
Posted by Jack Hammer in : Jack Hammer, Jack Schaap , 19 comments
Print This Post
Email This Post
- People are dying and going to Hell and all we can talk about is Schaap?
- We don’t know Jack.
- Don’t we have anything better to do than to GOSSIP about great men of God?
- Two words: Tom Neal.
- Because we haven’t baptized 13,000 souls in our lifetime, let alone in the last two weeks like they did.
- For the sake of Jose Vargas, who currently holds the record of 364 consecutive weeks getting baptized, dating back to just after his fifth birthday. We probably haven’t baptized 364 different people, let alone the same person 364 weeks in a row.
- Because Jack Schaap has a bigger church then we do. Way bigger. He’s probably preached to more people in one week than we will in our lifetime. Which is why the Pope is such a good man.
- JACK HYLES IS THE GREATEST PREACHER THE WORLD HAS EVER KNOWN AND HE’S MY PREACHER AND ALL THE REST OF YOU ARE NOTHING BUT USELESS PRETENDERS AND YE ARE OF YOUR FATHER THE DEVIL AND I LOVE HAC AND YOU JUST NEED TO SHUT UP AND START WEARING THE BRITCHES AND LEAVE THE MAN-O-GAWD ALONE. COME ON NOW! SOMEBODY SAY AMEN!
- Because there are so many bigger fish to fry. Why fish for minnows?
- Shouldn’t we be out Soulwinning?
Logos is Power September 28, 2007
Posted by Dave Mallinak in : The Word , 7 comments Print This Post
Email This Post
Words are powerful. Make no mistake about that. Our words have the power to invoke tremendous responses from the hearer. In the darkest hour, a word of encouragement has the power to turn the night to daylight (Proverbs 25:25
; 15:30). On the other hand, an ill word can destroy in a moment what has taken a lifetime to build. The tongue, James tells us, is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison. The poison? Words. Words can build and words can destroy.
Which helps us understand precisely why it is of utmost importance that we use our words to the glory of God. Otherwise we encourage what should be discouraged. We praise what should be censured. We call evil good and good evil. And our words end up opposing and resisting the Words of our Lord.
Words have a power all their own. A word represents a thought and expresses it, however inadequately. Words convey meaning. Effective words effectively convey meaning. Through the use of words, a man expresses his love to his wife, and his wife understands. A father speaks a word, and instructs his children. A pastor speaks a word, and instructs his congregation. A friend speaks a word, and encourages his friend.
Words invoke powerful emotions. Read Jonathan Edward’s magnificent message, Sinners in the hands of an angry God, and even to this day you will understand why the hearers were made anxious, even fearful for the condition of their soul. Read Shakespeare’s Henry V, and you will wish that you could have joined him on St. Crispin’s day. Read Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, and when you have read Mark Antony’s oration, you too will be crying for the blood of Brutus and Cassius. What man has read a story and not been moved to tears by it? What man has not received a warm note from his wife and not been overwhelmed with love by it? Words are powerful.
Yet more than occasionally, we find our words inadequate to express what we really feel. We struggle to find the right words, and wish that our tongue could be unhinged and loosened, that our words could effectively say what we intend. Those who are the best at expressing their thoughts do the most productive speaking and writing. Yet, what man is sufficient? What word is sufficient to express the depth of love a man feels for his wife? Who can speak without being misunderstood? Who can communicate without miscommunication? Who can fully expound even his own thoughts?
Yes, our words are powerful, but not of their own power. We find that our ability to express thoughts in the form of words is a gift. The power comes from somewhere else. This is the nature of logos. Logos is a gift. It is given.
Of course, the reader will recognize immediately from whence logos comes. For there is One Who is Logos, the Living Word. If words have power at all, it is by the power of the Logos. At His Word, kings reign and princes decree justice. At His Word, kingdoms rise and fall. At His Word, mountains tower above the valleys. At His Word, those same mountains are leveled and made low. At His Word, the sick are healed, the blind see, the deaf hear, the lame walk. At His Word, mighty armies are defeated, and the weakest of nations triumph.
And if that were not enough, we are reminded that He upholds all things by the word of his power. The Galileans noted that Christ did not speak as the scribes, whose opinions required proof from some other authority. The Galileans recognized that Christ spoke with authority and with power. They were astonished at his doctrine, because his word was with power. We know this, because we have seen that the Word of God is quick and powerful and sharper than any two-edged sword.
That the Word of God is powerful we are well aware. When there was nothing, no matter, no raw material from which to form a thing, there was logos. God did not fashion material and from that material create a world. God made trees out of logos. God made birds out of logos. God made the sun and the moon out of logos. God made dirt out of logos. Logos was the raw material God used to form all things.
Except man. Man was different, and God made it so. First, out of a word God made dirt. Then, out of dirt, God made man. But the distinction was not complete yet. When God created man, He breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul. God breathed logos into man and made man the image-bearer of God. Logos is the image of God, for in the beginning was the Logos, and the Logos was with God, and the Logos was God. Logos breathed himself into man.
We are not the express image of God. Only One is that. We bear the stamp of His image, and we are changed and being changed into His image from glory to glory. As such, the power of logos comes to us as a gift. As we live in the logos, the gift becomes more useful to us, and we become more fluent in logos. His Logos is our logos. His Word our word.
We should not expect to be ourselves empowered by the Spirit of God until we are filled with the Word of God. Unfortunately, most who agree with that statement will think that it is a call for more Bible memory. Certainly Bible memory plays a part, but it is not the whole. We must be filled with the Word. I have known many young people who memorized massive amounts of the Word, and live like they have no part with it. Filled with the Word requires memorization, meditation, devotion, submission, dedication, and sanctification (John 17:17).
But this is the point. We do not merely say that Logos is “powerful.â€Â Though it certainly is. We say that Logos IS power. And that means something. Do we want the power of God in our lives? The power of God rests in and on His Word. For many years (partly because of the teaching I received as a young child) I struggled with understanding what it meant to be “filled with the Spirit.â€Â As a pastor, I want to preach “Spirit-filled†messages. But what does that mean? The Spirit of God works through the Word of God. If I would be Spirit-filled, then I must be filled with the Word. A man who claims to have a Spirit-filled ministry, but whose ministry is void of the Word, is a man whose “filling†is of his own flesh. Truly Spirit-filled preaching is truly filled with the Word. Not with a quote thrown in here or there, or a text turned to but never expounded. Spirit-filled preaching is full of Logos. And if we would be filled with the Spirit, we too must be filled with the Logos (Isaiah 40:6-8; I Peter 1:23-25).
How Does the Power Work through the Words? September 26, 2007
Posted by Kent Brandenburg in : Preaching, The Word , 2 comments Print This Post
Email This Post
Some of the strongest defenders of the King James Version, perhaps even a majority of them, often use the Bible like the Words themselves, nearly independent of any meaning, have magical properties that can ward away evil spirits. This is not to say that there are not more that do the same with their modern translations (I believe there are). As long as those Words are employed even pieced together like a newsprint mosaic of a kidnapper’s ransom note, something powerful will happen. If we’re so glad that we have all the Words, then we should rightly divide them.  We don’t show more respect for them by ripping them from their context or getting a unique message from them that God “spoke,” often stated as: “God spoke to me through this passage,” or “God gave me this message.” Guess what? God gave everybody the same message, so if the one you got is different than that one, the one and only God of Heaven didn’t give it to you.
There’s only one interpretation. This is one reason why we need convictions not only about the preservation of the Words of God but also the teachings of God. We ought to pass down to the next generation the right understanding of those Words. If the right Words are assigned the wrong meaning, they are absent a kind of preservation—preservation of the teaching. Preaching the wrong meaning to right Words still results in error.
Several of these same KJV advocates might ridicule exposition by scoffing that this exegesis stuff approaches Scripture like a “math book.” Math wasn’t one of my better subjects, so I hope not, but no one should demean labor over the meaning of a passage.  Some of these very church leaders seem to judge success of a sermon by the kind of emotional impact it had. “Were they excited and how many people came forward?” Or, “I think they really liked it.” Or even, “Were they fired up?” Positive outcome to these questions gets interpreted as “God used me” or “You could feel the power of God in that place.”
The Word of God derives its power from God. Ephesians 6:17 says that the Holy Spirit uses God’s Word. God will not work in the life-changing kind of power (dunamis) from preaching in error. I’m not saying that something won’t happen, but the Spirit of God is the Spirit of Truth, so if a life changes through error, that wasn’t because of the Holy Spirit.
Through the centuries, many men have used great speaking abilities to move crowds. Their ability should not be confused with the power of God. “A” god, yes, but “the” God, no. This is not an argument for monotone with few hand gestures. This is to say that judging something to be full of power from God because of a feeling people got from it is merely existentialism, a form of humanism. A person’s feeling becomes the determining factor and arbitrates the value of the message. Change isn’t rooted in objective meaning but in the effect the sermon brings to the individual. When the mortar is thin, you must fling it hard. Such force brings impressive results, but not in the way of real wall building.
Gyrations and gesticulation become the standard of good preaching, conditioning wide mouths, protruding blood vessels, uvulas flapping like a boxer’s speed bag, decibels rising to the level of a jet airplane taking off. The speaker whips up such a frenzy with his voice, often circumventing human reason, that perhaps at the least, he could scare away any demon present.
When a man knows what the Bible says, he can practice it. He can obey God.  At a bare minimum, the audience of preaching needs to understand what the passage is saying in order to believe and do what the Lord says. A preacher who at least explains the passage evidences a desire for men to hear from God. In the end then, God can get the glory and His Word will be respected. The truths of these Words set people free.  The Holy Spirit’s illumination brings conviction. The Word will be the Word of truth, which stabilizes and perfects, throughly furnishing the man of God unto every good work.
The Spoken Word September 24, 2007
Posted by Jeff Voegtlin in : The Word , 19 comments Print This Post
Email This Post
I want to write on a technicality that has significance to me on the issue of inspiration and preservation. In many discussions about inspiration, the word autographa is used. This is the idea of “the original autographs.” It seems to me that there is some mystical, super-spiritual significance given to the writing materials that were used to record the words of God. I am not promoting behavior that desecrates or destroys Scripture, but we should remember that God’s Words are spoken words. There are very few places in Scripture where God wrote His words for His people. Do this simple search with your Bible concordance: word AND Lord AND saying. You will find that God gave His Word to His men by speaking to them. When you speak, you are breathing. This is the mechanism of inspiration — God-breathed Words.Â
And it came to pass in the fourth year of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah king of Judah, that this word came unto Jeremiah from the LORD, saying, Take thee a roll of a book, and write therein all the words that I have spoken unto thee against Israel, and against Judah, and against all the nations, from the day I spoke unto thee, from the days of Josiah, even unto this day. It may be that the house of Judah will hear all the evil which I purpose to do unto them; that they may return every man from his evil way; that I may forgive their iniquity and their sin. (Jeremiah 36:1-3
God’s men then copied God’s Words down for God’s people to read.
And they asked Baruch, saying, Tell us now, How didst thou write all these words at his mouth? Then Baruch answered them, He pronounced all these words unto me with his mouth, and I wrote them with ink in the book. (Jeremiah 36:17-18
It is a God-spoken Word. The first copy is not any more inspired than the next copy.
Then the word of the LORD came to Jeremiah, after that the king had burned the roll, and the words which Baruch wrote at the mouth of Jeremiah, saying, Take thee again another roll, and write in it all the former words that were in the first roll, which Jehoiakim the king of Judah hath burned. (Jeremiah 36:27-28
The words are what is important not the paper and ink. It did not matter whether the original autographs were extant or not. What mattered was that the Words of God were available to His people.
THE WORD IS THE WORDS: DISHONESTY ABOUT PRESERVATION September 19, 2007
Posted by Kent Brandenburg in : The Word , 8 comments Print This Post
Email This Post
In 1957, R. Laird Harris, wrote Inspiration and Canonicity of the Bible in which he said (p. 46):
Thus in Matthew 5:18
I read that quote in God’s Word in Our Hands, and the use of those words by Harris would seem to indicate that the authors believed that Jesus didn’t just have God’s Word in His hands that day in c. AD 29, but every letter of the Old Testament. Notice this line from the quote: “He says very positively that this Book is perfect to the smallest detail.” Not was perfect, as when it was inspired, but is perfect, as in over two thousand years after it was inspired by God where Jesus was at that moment in time. I’m happy to report that the authors of God’s Word in Our Hands later wrote this concerning that same text (pp. 105, 106):Â
It can scarcely be conceived how our Lord could have guaranteed preservation of the written words of the law any more specifically or dogmatically. . . . If He had not affirmed the permanency of even the smallest letters and the smallest distinguishing strokes between those letters, they would have concluded that their suspicions were right after all. . . . [T]hink of the smallest strokes of the law. They seem so fragile. So vulneralbe to omission or substitution. But they will not pass away. They will remain throughout all history. . . until (emphasis his) all of heaven and all of earth and all that in them is (sic) passes out of existence.
I rejoice in that honesty that they have shown in the text. They weren’t as thorough or complete as I would have been, but the words they write refresh my spirit. I would be even happier if they meant them. Here is the thesis for their book. You will know it because they have it plastered alone on its own page (iii) in addition to having a whole chapter (xxi-xxiii) explaining each of the words.
We believe that the Bible teaches that God has providentially preserved His written Word. This preservation exists in the totality of the ancient language manuscripts of that revelation. We are therefore certain that we possess the very Word of God.
Anyone who knows a little of the authors will know that this statement is wrought purposefully with a tremendous amount of ambiguity. At face value, it sounds like something that should pass along certainty to the reader. The language is loaded with uncertainty. They have a specific meaning of providentially (they don’t like “supernaturally;” “providential” means “errors” to them). They use the two words “ancient language” to give a broad range of possibilities. They say that we possess the “Word” of God, not the “Words” of God. They don’t believe that we possess the Words of God.  God’s Word in Our Hands represents the position of one very large crowd on the preservation and translation issue. They play games with words to allow for a great deal of latitude for their “scholarship.” They seem to hope that you won’t know what they mean.
You would find the book confusing. The authors seem like they would like to believe what the Bible says about preservation, but they can’t. They would like their application to line up with interpretation, but they can’t. As a result, they contradict themselves. They know they are contradicting themselves. I know because I have spoken to some of the authors. They knew that they had varying positions on preservation, yet all agreed on one standard written position that they could support. A big problem is that the book itself doesn’t support their position.
You read their thesis statement above. Consider this sentence (p. 96):
It must be remembered that even those passages that do support our doctrine of preservation apply only to the Sacred Writings as originally given, not to the words of a particular translation.
I agree with preservation applying to the Sacred Writings as originally given. Not like they do, but I believe that part of that statement. However, they don’t believe their own statement.
Pastor Michael Harding, whom I respect in numerous ways for various stands, as well as several of the other authors of this book, puts these two sentences in bold print in his chapter (p. 343, so I’ll bolden them here too):
The original text, including its message, has been preserved in the totality of the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek manuscripts. No particular translation . . . can scripturally claim exclusive rights to the teaching of providential preservation via secondary causation.
Pastor Harding footnotes his first statement. If you go there, you’ll find that he doesn’t believe what he just wrote. In his footnotes (p. 361) he says:
I believe the original Hebrew text (of 1 Samuel 13:1
So much for all that “jot and tittle” stuff. So much for their “Sacred Writings” jive. They don’t even believe that the Words are in the totality of the manuscripts. So why say it? Why say it if you don’t believe it? What is someone doing when they say something that they don’t believe is true? Does that seem dishonest to you?
Later Randolph Shaylor comments on Mike Harding’s admission:
He points out how the Septuagint (a translation) can help in harmonizing a seeming discrepancy in Scripture. His conclusion recognizes a problem but expresses the faith of one who believes that God has preserved His Word in the totality of ancient MSS. . . . Perhaps in God’s own time we will be allowed to discover that manuscript. Our confidence in the perfection of the autographa is not shaken by incomplete understanding of how and where its wording is preserved.
Shaylor paints Harding as a hero for contradicting himself and the rest of the book, including their own thesis. He won’t say there’s a discrepancy, only “seeming,” because there is so much unsurety about the text. He praises the “faith” of Harding, faith that is not based on any tangible evidence. He may wish now that he could leave “faith” out of the equation. You see, with these guys, certain types of fideism are acceptable. Harding has “faith” that some manuscript exists somewhere buried somewhere that has never been found. We have faith that God has preserved every Word and that every one is available. Ours is based upon Scripture. His view is based upon the perfection of the doctrines of Scripture. Ours is based upon the perfection of the Words of Scripture. Did God inspire doctrines or Words? What is our position on that? Where should our faith lie? Did God promise to preserve “the Word,” “the truth,” “doctrines,” or “Words”? We know don’t we. Our position is the faith position; not Harding’s or that of the rest of the authors of God’s Word in Our Hands.
These authors of God’s Word in Our Hands have never seen a copy of the autographa and yet they believe it is perfect. Still, they cannot suspend their disbelief to accept that God fulfilled His promises to preserve every Word for believers to have and use. They say they believe in preservation. They say that they believe all the Words were preserved in the totality of the manuscripts. They don’t believe even that.
Preach the Word! September 17, 2007
Posted by Jeff Voegtlin in : Preaching, The Word , 3 comments Print This Post
Email This Post
Second Timothy 4:2 tells us to “Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season…”
What word is it that we are to preach? It would be the Word referred to in the previous verses. The Word given by inspiration of God and profitable. How do you read this verse? Is it like this:
…and is profitable for DOCTRINE, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.
or like this:
…and is profitable for doctrine, for REPROOF, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.
how about like this:
…and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for CORRECTION, for instruction in righteousness.
maybe this way:
…and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for INSTRUCTION in righteousness.
I think I’ve heard preaching of each of these kinds. But my contention is that all preaching should have all of these in it. Not just teaching, or just reproving, or just correcting, or just telling how to. Real preaching or real pastoring has a balance of all of these. Don’t call yourself a preacher of the word if you can’t or don’t do all of these.
Preach the Word.
Logos is Life September 14, 2007
Posted by Dave Mallinak in : The Word , add a comment Print This Post
Email This Post
And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
At Creation, God set man apart from all the other creatures of earth. Breathing into his nostrils the breath of life, man became a living soul, distinct from the other creatures. This distinction takes shape on several levels. Man is a spiritual being. Man is a rational being. Man will continue forever, either enjoying God or banished from his presence. The breath of God imparted unique gifts to man.
Perhaps the one unique gift that distinguishes man from all others is the gift of speech — logos. Logos is the distinctive characteristic of mankind. Because God breathed into man’s nostrils the breath of life, because man became a living soul, because of the gift of logos, man has the ability to speak, to express thought, to communicate, to fellowship.
Grasping this, our understanding of logos begins to take shape. Logos in its simplest form means “speech, word, saying.†Of the three hundred sixteen times we find logos in the New Testament, the King James Version translates it as “word†two hundred eighteen of those times. Another fifty times, logos is “saying,†and eight times it is “speech.†At its most basic level, logos refers to word.
But this meaning by no means expresses the full or complete significance of the logos. Logos represents not merely what is said, but also what is said about a thing or person. In other words, logos includes not only one’s words, but also one’s identity… what is said to a person, what is said about a person. Luke 5:15 translates logos as “fameâ€. So, logos includes a persons reputation, his name, his history, and everything that could be said about him (1).
We see then that logos includes what we say and what is said about us. Logos is identity. From the Word of God, we know that not only does logos mean identity, but Logos also has an identity.
In the beginning was the Logos, and the Logos was with God, and the Logos was God. The same was in the beginning with God.
And we are told that in him was life; and the life was the light of men. In the Logos was life. And this Logos later tells us that He is the life (John 14:6). In hopes of further enrichment of our understanding of logos, we pursue this thought of “Logos as Life.â€
We find our life connected to His, and made abundant in His. He is our life, and we present our bodies as living sacrifices to Him. Outside of Him, all is death and decay. But in Him is life. As we consider the Logos as life, we see the Logos as our identity, as our energy, and as the vitality of our life. We will begin first with the Logos as identity.
OUR IDENTITY IN LOGOS
What is said of us? A guest in our church recently asked a question (one you’ve probably heard before). If we were arrested and charged with being a Christian, would there be enough evidence to convict us? At salvation, we are given a new name, representing a new identity. That new name, which we bear for the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, is “Christian.†That is our identity. We take the name of Christ. Our identity is in Him. As many as received the Logos, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name.
Identity with the Logos means identity with the Word. As was said in an earlier post, we are people of the Word. We identify with it. But being people of the Word means more than simply identifying with it. The Word is our identity. We are marked by it, set apart by it, separated and distinguished from the world by it (John 17:17). For us, every question goes back to the Word. The Word forms the basis, the foundation, the ultimate standard for all our thinking. We strive to cast down every imagination that exalts itself against it. We are bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of it.
If logos means “speech,†if it includes “words,†then logos must also include “thoughts.†Words, as we know, do not come from the void. Thoughts cause words. Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. As Christians, our thoughts must submit to the thoughts of Scripture, so that we learn to “think God’s thoughts after him.†Put another way, our logos must become His Logos. His Logos must dictate our thoughts. Our minds must always be reflecting the truth of God’s Word.
Identity with the Logos means identity with His righteousness.
Philippians 3:9
Identity with the Logos calls for holiness and sanctification. Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity. The Logos is light. Darkness cannot share any identity with light. In him is no darkness at all.
Identity with the Logos means identity with His reproach. John chapter 1 takes great pains to emphasize that the world would not receive Christ (vv. 5, 10-11). He is despised and rejected of men. If men hated Christ (and they do), they will hate us. If men hate God’s Word, they will hate all who are identified with it. If men hate the Logos, they will hate the men of the Logos. Let us go forth therefore unto him without the camp, bearing his reproach. Our identity is not truly with Christ until we bear His reproach (Romans 10:11). Until we count His reproach as Moses did, as greater riches than the treasures in Egypt, we cannot claim our identity with him.
Identity with the Logos means identity with His life. The Christ-life. The life he came to give, and give abundantly. Our life must be His life. Our life must be in Him. We present our bodies as living sacrifices. We live for Him. We abide in Him, and He in us. Our life is hid with Christ in God. We are crucified with Him, nevertheless we live. Yet not us, but Christ liveth in us. And the life that we now live in the flesh we live by the faith of the Son of God. This is our identity. Christ increasing; we ourselves decreasing.
Identity with the Logos means identity with His person. Paul spoke of the Greeks feeling after God, perhaps finding him, though he be not far from every one of us. I don’t know this to be the case, but perhaps Paul alluded to the fact that the Greek philosophers, in their blindness, came very close to stumbling into the One True and Living God. Greek philosophers understood that speech was impossible without the help of rational intelligence. In their gropings in the dark, they comprehended the fact that reason itself required some force, some power enabling man to think and know and organize his thoughts in sensible ways. Like John’s gospel, the Greeks spoke of logos as that force. The philosophers beginning with the Stoics believed that all powers proceed from the logos (2). Later philosophers connected logos with deity. The Greek god Hermes, considered the messenger of the gods, was considered to be logos, and as a special gift from Zeus, enabled fellowship between Zeus and mankind.
Lest the reader be tempted to think that maybe the Greeks really were worshipping God, we should be clear on a few points. First, Hermes, acting as interpreter for Zeus, made a joke of mixing messages and skewing interpretations. Hermes (from which we get our word hermeneutic), perverter of messages, twister of truth, actually represented Greek deity well. For Zeus at best was a cad and a scoundrel.
The point is not to pique our interest in the Greek gods, but rather to understand the word logos, and the way a Greek philosopher would have used it. While we find ourselves interested, perhaps mildly amused at the near miss of the philosophers, we also find in this a shade of the truth. Logos is more than a mere inanimate “force.†Logos is a person.
The Greeks had the wrong person. John’s Gospel set the record straight. The Logos is a person. They were right about that. In fact, Logos is a man. And God. Fully God, and fully man. The man Christ Jesus. God with us. The one man that God accepts on His own merits. The Word made flesh. The Logos.
And our identity is wrapped up in that person. We would be like Jesus. There is much that could be said on this point. We observe how he walked, for we would walk that way. Was he a servant of all? We would be too. Was he a friend to the poor and miserable? To sinners and publicans? We would be too. Did he love the little children? We do too. Did he spend his life being interrupted? We would too. We identify with the man Christ Jesus. We identify with His person as substitute, as intercessor, as Lord, as very God of very God.
Could we find any greater identity outside and apart from Christ? At the tower of Babel, man said, “Let us make us a name.†We would glorify His name. We would remain unnamed, only to name the name of Christ. We have no greater identity than in Jesus Christ, the Logos. He must increase, we must decrease.
OUR ENERGY IN LOGOS
All things were made by Logos. We find that this truth extends to our very spiritual lives. We who were dead in trespasses and sins have been quickened (John 11:25). And we are reminded that this quickening work cannot be a work of our flesh, for it is the spirit that quickeneth. The words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life (John 6:63). We recognize that the Logos gives us faith (Romans 10:17), otherwise faith is a work of man (Ephesians 2:8-9). Jesus Christ, the Logos, is also the author of our faith. Logos brings to life.
What constitutes life? What makes a thing to be alive? When we ask this question annually in our Logic class, the students inevitably cite the definition of “life†given in science class. In the interest of precision (and true logos), we point out that the five characteristics of life are really by-products of life. They do not make a thing to be living. They are so because a thing is living. Over the course of three class periods, we watch our student’s thought processes grow from a scientific understanding of life as it can be observed to a spiritual understanding of life as it is fundamentally. In the end, our young people come to the understanding that “life†is a thing that God possesses, and that when God created, He was giving Himself to the world. When God breathed into man’s nostrils the breath of life, God breathed Himself into man. The Logos animates, energizes, enlivens man.
Logos keeps alive. The Logos invigorates, stimulates, arouses, inspires, activates. And, Logos enlightens, which further energizes the Christian (John 1:4, 9). Though it may begin as but a spark, Logos sets a light to the candle. Though it be ever so small and feeble a flame, the Logos fans it, encourages it, sees to it that the flickering flame is not put out. When the Logos lights a man, a flame is kindled that can never be put out. For that feeble flame is not fueled by any effort of man. The Logos fuels that flame until it glows forever. Nor can any work, when once begun by the Lord, fail or fall incomplete.
How often do we find our eyes enlightened, our ears opened by the wonders of the Word? How often do the Scriptures breath new life into our tired souls? How often are we refreshed and revived by the Logos? Do we not find that, as we take up the Logos, our inward man is renewed day by day? The abundant life comes by the Logos.
Not only is our energy in Logos, but we also find…
OUR VITALITY IN LOGOS
Logos is vital for life. For what would our life be without the Logos of God? Without the Logos, there can be no fellowship. There can be no reconciliation. There can be no justification. There can be no substitution. Intercession cannot happen. We have no mediator. We have no propitiation, no adoption, no redemption. Without Logos we have no life.
In John 1, the Apostle presents to our view the essential Logos. We cannot make sense of logos without The Logos. Without The Logos, logos is impossible. Light is impossible. Darkness prevails, even as it cannot. For who can make sense of such a thing as darkness when there is no light. Without The Logos, life means nothing. For that matter, life makes no sense. Reason? Who could speak of such a thing? How could we interpret reason apart from The Logos? If these things are mere chance and circumstance, then reason is subjective. If reason is subjective, then it is meaningless, for what my “rational†mind tells me would operate entirely separately and independently from what your “rational†mind tells you. Logos is vital for life and meaning.
The Logos is the vital life. Thus, we must eat Christ’s flesh and drink His blood (John 6:33-35, 48-56). We cannot survive without it. and if we believe this, if we come to him and drink, then our life will be vital to others (John 7:38). The Logos adds vitality to our life, and that is how Logos spreads to others. Scripture is clear on this. The Logos intends to spread Himself through the preaching of the Logos, by those filled with the Logos.
May we be a fountain of life through the Logos.
Footnotes:
(1) For a discussion of language and logos, particularly of logos as identity, see Crowley, Sharon. Ancient Rhetorics for Contemporary Students. New York: Macmillan College Publishing Company, 1994.
(2) For a thorough discussion of the Greek idea of logos, see the Theological dictionary of the New Testament. 1964-c1976. Vols. 5-9 edited by Gerhard Friedrich. Vol. 10 compiled by Ronald Pitkin. (G. Kittel, G. W. Bromiley & G. Friedrich, Ed.) (electronic ed.) . Eerdmans: Grand Rapids, MI
THE WORD IS THE WORDS: HONESTY ABOUT PRESERVATION September 12, 2007
Posted by Kent Brandenburg in : The Word , 2 comments Print This Post
Email This Post
I read these quotes in a booklet about the book of Jeremiah.
Inspiration ensures the preservation of God’s words regardless of the destruction of individual texts by wicked men (v. 32).
Wow! That is my exact position. Individual texts were destroyed for sure. Satan wants to eliminate God’s Words. The copies are not all the same because of his nefarious activity. But the preservation of the Words themselves continues—inspiration ensures that (so says this author). And he makes this doctrinal point exegetically from Jeremiah 36:32.  The author had started (in 1984) the whole article with this statement:
Jeremiah 36
You can see how he takes notice of ”words,” not just “word.” It isn’t just the “word of God,” but the “words of God,” and God makes special emphasis of that bibliological point. Later the author continues:
Isaiah 40:8
So the author concludes that the promises of God in His Word concerning preservation are enough of a basis to believe that we still have His Words (and letters). The preservation of those Words was a witness against Jehoiakim. Outstanding! How could we continue to have them? He says:
God’s Word is fixed in Heaven, an inviolable, unchangeable, everlasting standard. Some day we will face its perfection and account for our responses to it. God has sent it to us in letters and words on a merciful mission. He has verified it in ten thousand different ways . . . . [W]e must respond properly to God’s Word.
We can still have all the Words on earth because of God. God knows them, preserves them in Heaven. God the Holy Spirit ensures that believers will have on earth the Words in heaven (John 16:13). The necessity of response requires availability of the Words (Matthew 4:4). When the author writes that we must respond properly to God’s Word, it is plain from the article that he means respond to all the Words. God makes sure that we on earth have His Words on earth, so that we will be prepared when He judges us based on those very Words in heaven. The Words that were in heaven, God sent on a merciful mission. Dr. Mark Minnick writes, and I agree, that we must respond on earth in the present to those Words that are in heaven. They are preserved for us today!
What is my “take” on Mark Minnick writing this in 1984? This wasn’t a prominent and political issue in 1984. He gives an honest exposition of a text in Jeremiah 36. He sees preservation there, so he teaches it. The book of Jeremiah still teaches that position. Believers for centuries have understood, taught, and written about the same viewpoint as Mark Minnick declared in the Biblical Viewpoint in November of 1984. This hasn’t been some conspiracy from a group especially influenced by a movement or a few 20th century books. The average “Joe” in the pew thinks his Bible has no errors. He got that position from reading His Bible. The same “Joes” see all those texts that teach preservation, just like Dr. Minnick did in 1984. Their faith in God affects their view of history.
Mark Minnick wasn’t there in 580 in Egypt with Jeremiah. He wasn’t there 150 years later with Ezra. He wasn’t there with the Sopherim whom God used to preserve and copy the Scriptures. Yet, he believes they did that. Why? God would have followed through with what He said He would do. I believe that too.
Logos is Word September 7, 2007
Posted by Dave Mallinak in : The Word , 3 comments Print This Post
Email This Post
Words usually mean more than first appears. Consider the word read for a moment. The readers of this blog certainly understand this word on more than a theoretical level. To them, reading represents a practical and useful activity. Years have passed since the skill of reading was mastered, so that the processes are nearly forgotten. Yet, the word read means more than a mere process by which letters convey meaning through words and sentences and paragraphs. To read is to participate in communication, where thoughts are communicated from author to reader through the medium of written words and phrases and clauses. Yet, more is being communicated when I read. Often, I read more than the words on the page. I read the tone and demeanor of the writer, I read into his words searching for his intentions, gazing into his soul as much as he permits. I read meaning into what was said and how it was said. We find then that the word read is rich with meaning, as are all words.
Word may be God’s greatest gift to man. Certainly, the Lord God did not share this gift with any other creature besides man, though other creatures can communicate. But this communication depends on a vocabulary of guttural sounds and grunts and pitches. It remains to be seen whether a dictionary could be written to catalogue the dolphin’s whistle, the dog’s bark and whine and growl, or the chimp’s howl. The vibrations that come from these creatures mean something, but no baboon will be writing about it. Man has yet to discover a dolphin library. Words belong to man alone.
Only man can think about the meaning of a word, understand it, use that word in a sentence of his own, and enrich his vocabulary with it. Only man can use that word to reason, to explain, to communicate.
Think of the miracle of Word. In fashioning this article (or post, if you will), I thought about what I would like to write. I worked to organize my thoughts into a coherent presentation. Then somehow, magically I think, I touched my fingers to my keyboard, and my thoughts appeared on my computer screen. When finished, I pasted those thoughts into the writing section of our esteemed blog, where they eventually appeared for your consumption. Now you read what I have written. And somehow, magically I think, my thoughts begin to take shape in your head. To the degree that I have skill at expressing my thoughts, to that degree you are able to think my thoughts after me.
This may illustrate the wonder of Word. Word is a glorious thing, a beautiful thing, a practical thing, a living thing. Word is our life. Logos is our life. We encounter this thought in John 1. Consider the Logos:
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
In him was life; and the life was the light of men. And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
Remembering that the Word of John 1 comes from the Greek word logos, we consider the Logos as presented in this passage. We see that Logos is Word. What do we learn about the Word here?
THE WORD WRITTEN
First, we find that God has granted us a written word. Unlike the spoken word, the written word blesses us in many ways. Written words enable us to return to the same thought repeatedly, and each time in returning, we find new meaning, and gain new shades of understanding. The written word will outlast the spoken word. The written word can be grasped in ways that the spoken word cannot be.
As we consider this, we find that God has given us a written word.
It is written…
Even as we find that our word Word is full of meaning for us, so we find that The Word also gives us much that is meaningful. Among the many meanings, we find meaning in the fact that the Word is written. For us, this indicates the grace and mercy of God, who loves us and gives Himself to us. He has determined that we should know Him. He has designed that we should know Him. He has decreed that we would know Him through His Word.
The fact that the Word is written indicates that it is lasting. Most of the great stories began as oral traditions. They were written and recorded that they might not be lost, yet many stories have been lost. None can erase, none can alter the Word of God. We have His promise on this. Not even the destructive tendencies of man can turn one jot or tittle of God’s Word (Jeremiah 36). Long before it was written in earth, God’s Word was written in heaven, and it is forever settled there. We have God’s Word in our hands, and we have His assurance that it is for everlasting.
The fact that the Word is written indicates that it is cognizable. Christ tells us that we shall know the truth, and the truth shall make us free (John 8:32). And a few chapters later, we are told that God’s Word is truth (John 17:17). That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life… That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you. We can know the truth, can examine it, can assimilate it, can interpret it, can understand it. Having a written Word enables this.
Because it is written, we can know its author, and thus better understand His Word. Written words give insight into the mind of the author. And we are told that we have the mind of Christ (I Corinthians 2:16). Lest there should be any question, lest there should be any dispute, God gave us His thoughts, and put them in a permanent format. Through His written revelation, we can know Him (John 14:17; I John 2:3-4; 5:20).
Since the Word is written, we know that it is recognizable. We make an important distinction here. Cognition enables us to know, to perceive, to see, to understand, to apprehend. Recognition allows us to re-examine, to re-think, to re-view, to re-produce the truth in our own mind. Cognizance is knowing. Recognizance is acknowledging. Because the Word is written, we can repeatedly go back and view again and again the truth of God. When a man enters a friend’s parlor for the very first time, he sees the furniture and layout of the room, but upon leaving he soon forgets. Yet, with each subsequent visit, he begins to see the room in greater detail. Perhaps a better example would be that of a man learning to know his future wife, or perhaps his bride. With each fresh view, he sees something new that delights him, something that he did not recognize before. Similarly, every fresh visit to the written Word will bring out some feature, some idea that was there all the time, and yet was not noticed before. The written Word lets us mine out the hidden gems, lets us delight in the details of the passage, opens the Word to us in new and delightful ways.
A written Word is also timeless… though we could hardly say this universally of the written word. There is plenty of rubbish pawned off in books and periodicals that will never stand the test of the hour, let alone the test of time. Harry Potter comes to mind, as does much of the recent work of Tim LaHaye and the Purpose Driven Fluffiness (not to mention His Silliness, Jack Schaap, particularly in Marriage, Divine Intimacy). Heaven and earth shall pass away, but God’s Words will not. John 1:14 tells us that Jesus Christ is the living embodiment of the Word. As Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever, so we find that the Word of God will never lose its relevance, its meaning, or its power. Amen and Amen.
The written Word is God’s gift to man. But we find the Word in more than written form. Consider…
THE WORD SPOKEN
Rhetoricians have noted the distinction between written words and spoken words. That difference could be illustrated summarily in the difference between the way we read and the way we listen. What makes us listen when a person speaks? What keeps us listening? What motivates us to turn them off? Then, what compels us to read a particular piece of writing? What keeps us reading? What makes us want to read more?
The written word has an ethos of its own. As does the spoken word. The two are distinct in their power, in their usefulness, in their manners and methods for presenting truth. The Logos referenced in John 1 is now written for us. But not first. Before John took up his quill to record the Word, the Word was. God breathed it. We consider the spoken word.
We are told that the Word was in the beginning, was with God, and was God. So, in other words, Word is. Word has no beginning, but was with God in the beginning. And before time, there was Word. Not only does this reiterate the timeless nature of the Word, but it teaches something else as well. The Logos was God. Thus, the Word was God. We cannot separate God from His speech, for He has magnified His word above all His name (Psalm 13:2). This reminds us that the “thus saith the Lord’s†of Scripture do not merely represent words that came from God. Rather, God Himself is in those Words, and inseparable from them. The same could be said for every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
Of all the great orators, none excel the Lord God. Contrary to our modern understanding, Rhetoric did not begin with Aristotle, nor is it some kind of imitative substitute for substantive discourse. Despite the many abuses Rhetoric suffers at the hands of moderns, Rhetoric’s beginnings were not so spurious as we might think. In the beginning, before God created time, before the world was without form and void, the Godhead met in counsel and, in a rhetorical sense, decreed all that should come to pass (Eph 1:11-12). Then, God proceeded to create a world, not with the craft of the engraver, nor with the skill of the manufacturer, but with the power of Word. Logos created the world. God used rhetoric in the beginning. God spoke and it was so.
We see then the power of the spoken Word. God spoke, and it was so. And as God had decreed before in eternity past, so God granted man the gift of speech, so that we, like our Creator, could also use speech creatively. And when God made Eve out of Man’s rib, Adam spoke of her rhetorically, saying, this is now bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh… We believers are no strangers to the power of the spoken word. How often, through the foolishness of preaching, does God stir us to decisions and to actions? Was it not through the preaching of the Logos that we came to faith in Jesus Christ? Did not our faith come by hearing? Do we not see, even in this, the Creative power of Logos? Was it not the Word that created faith in you?
We see the perpetuity of the spoken Word… for long before there was a written word, there was a spoken word. And long after the last word has been spoken here, the Word will be settled and spoken there. What God has said will never fail. His Word will never return void. His voice will not be silenced. Words, by design, are powerful this way. Which is why we must set a watch before our lips. How often (and often painfully) we have learned that our words are bigger than we think. In a fit of anger or in a careless instant, our tongue can spark a fire that will not be put out. This is a design feature of words. God designed it that words should last. Make sure that, like God’s Words, your words count.
We also see the beauty of the spoken word. How beautiful we find “thus saith the Lord†to be. Every word of God is pure. They are to us as golden apples engraved in silver images. Could we find a word more pleasant than the Logos? Could we find any language lovelier than the language of love spoken by our Lord? Could we find any speech more poetic, more tuneful than the poetry that proceedeth from the mouth of God? When we hear his words, they are as music in our ears. We find ourselves stammering with Moses, O my Lord, I am not eloquent… but I am slow of speech, and of a slow tongue. As we handle the magnificent truths of the Logos, we find ourselves entirely inadequate to present them in any sort of meaningful way. O that God would loosen our tongues so that we might proclaim His glory in a worthy way.
Yet we are not without hope.
Who hath made man’s mouth? Or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? …Now therefore go, and Jehovah will be with thy mouth, and teach thee what thou shalt say.
There remain a few more considerations. The Logos is both written and spoken. But whenever there are words, there will be speakers and listeners, writers and readers. Thus, we have next…
THE WORD RECEIVED
Here, we see that the Logos is a Divine Communication. In the Word, God communicates Himself to us. In receiving the Word, we comprehend (John 1:5, 11-13). God makes Himself known to us, and we are informed. He announces Himself, we hear His announcement. He declares, we believe. He proclaims, we submit. In receiving the Word, we receive God, who is the Word.
This calls for a Submission to the Logos. When I was a boy, I learned a little “confession†of sorts, that my father taught me. Some might recognize where it came from. The Bible is the Word of God and the final authority in my life. I remember quoting that little saying every day for a certain amount of time. Only later did I grasp the truth of it, that I held the Bible, not in autonomy, but in humble submission.
Submission requires Faith. We do not submit to that which we do not believe. Only when the Word is received by faith will we truly submit to it. This brings up the inescapable quandary of those who believed of their own will, who neutrally examined the claims on both sides and chose for themselves which was right. In their mind, whether knowingly or ignorantly, they hold the truth of God’s Word on their own authority. Theirs is a presumptuous faith. Submission will be difficult when you determined your own destiny by “choosing the right path.â€
Faith requires Light. In the Logos was life, and the life was the light of men. This light must shine in darkness. And, comprehension must be granted. We receive the Word as a dark room receives light. The light shines, chasing away the darkness.
Light requires Power (John 1:12). Light is Power. And the preaching of the Logos is the power of God unto salvation. We would not seek for some sort of generic “higher power.†For there is no power but of God. We would seek the power of the Logos. May His power find us.
Words, written or spoken, must be received. The Word, written and spoken, must be received. For the Word is not mere words floating in time and space. Logos is so much more than words. The Logos, and thus the Word, is a Person. Consider then…
THE WORD MADE FLESH
Jesus Christ embodies the Word of God. He is the essential Word. As we carry our Bibles, we carry God’s revelation to us. A fuller revelation we will not find, save in the person of Jesus Christ. And this means something to us. First, that the Word of God is not dead words. God’s Word is alive. As surely as our Lord Jesus Christ sits even now at the right hand of God the Father, even so we know that the very Words of God are alive. They are alive, they are life, and they are life-giving. The words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
And this Logos, this Word of God, which is living and is life, this Word became flesh and dwelt (tabernacled) among us. And as the Tabernacle of the Old Testament was glorious, so this tabernacle is the fullness of glory, is more glorious and excellent than the mountains of prey. For this Logos is full of grace and truth. And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace. For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.
What kind of people should we then be? Logos is Word. Should we not be people of the Word? And as such, should we not then be people of words?
Is Our Practice to Be Regulated by Scriptural Example? September 5, 2007
Posted by Kent Brandenburg in : Methodology, The Word , comments here Print This Post
Email This Post
Any one of you read Of Domestical Duties? William Gouge wrote it in 1622. I was looking for a very old book for our church to use in family devotions and I found his book. I’m guessing that when Gouge was done, others didn’t think it necessary to write much else on this subject. We are going over his chapter called “Duties for Children.” Some of his points I have not read anywhere else, although they are thoughts that parents contemplate in child-rearing. Maybe no big surprise, but Gouge doesn’t shoot from the hip. He takes his points from exegesis of Scripture, mainly using examples in the Old Testament.
For instance, Gouge uses examples as authority for the practice of parental consent.  He says that children should never get a job that will take them away from home without the parent’s consent. They shouldn’t marry without parental permission and no minister should perform the marriage without the expressed authority of the parents.  He breaks all of these down with supporting references and explanations. In this realm of parental consent, he ends with: “Children’s forbearing to dispose any of their parents’ goods without consent.” Here is his evidence:
In that Isaac was pleased to send Jacob to Padan Aram without any great provision, it seemeth that Jacob made conscience of taking any thing privily, but went as his father sent him with his staff (Gen 32:10
Gouge makes his case using examples from the Bible. Historically, the doctrine and practice of churches and Christians have been regulated by Scriptural examples. To them, this was normal. Are examples somehow less authoritative today? Are they less imposing as Biblical commands?
In 1 Corinthians 11:1, the Apostle Paul said, “Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.” Peter had the same idea in 1 Peter 2:21, when he wrote, “For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps.” The Lord Jesus Christ wasn’t physically around for Paul or Peter to follow, so how were they able to follow Jesus? They used his example. That example today must be read from the Bible. Paul especially had to rely on the reports of what Jesus did to understand how to follow Him. You won’t find it in the Mega-church Seminar for Church Growth.  Instead you’ll have to dig into Scripture and rely on how it says that Jesus and His apostles practiced.
Does it matter if we pattern our churches after the examples in the Gospels and Acts? Does it make any difference if we don’t imitate what we read that Jesus did in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John? Or are these examples actually to regulate what we do as churches and Christians? A big part of the practice of many churches are methods not found in the examples of the New Testament. Are churches that do not regulate their operation by the pattern revealed by God in Scripture in reality acting in disobedience to God’s Word?
A Scriptural means of church growth is crucial. Jesus said, “I will build my church.” 1 Corinthians 3 says that the church is grown by means of eternal materials that stand the test of God’s judgment. Jesus said in the Sermon on the Mount that everything must be built upon the rock, something lasting in contrast to the sand. We do war spiritually, not carnally (2 Corinthians 10:3-5). How we do it matters. Silence doesn’t mean permission. He gave us the example in the Gospels, Acts, and the Epistles to follow. When we don’t follow His example, it is akin to us building it and not Him.
John wrote in 1 John 2:6, “He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.” How He walked is recorded in the New Testament via examples. If we abide in Him, we will follow His example. When is it that we do not follow His example?
- In any area, when we practice differently than how He did.
- When put in the same situation as He was in, we act or respond differently than what He did.
- We do everything His way, but occasionally we add our way to His.
- We leave out some of what He did.
William Gouge looked all over the Bible to study its examples. From those, He learned the duties of the children, the father, the mother, a husband, and a wife. He didn’t limit his doctrine and practice to declarative statements or commands. He knew, as should we, that the examples of Scripture along with all the rest of the Bible can and will equip a man unto every good work.
