The Riddleblog

Some Thoughts on the Dating of The Book of Revelation (Part Three)

Arguments in Favor of a Post-A.D. 70 Dating

1). The most important reason for dating The Book of Revelation after A.D. 70 is evidence of the presence of emperor worship and the imperial cult underlying much of what takes place throughout John’s vision.

A number of texts such as Revelation 13:4-8, 15-16; 14:9-11; 15:2; 16:2; 19:20; 20:4, all indicate that Christians were being forced to participate in the emperor cult in ways which violated their consciences. As Moffat once put it, whether persecution of Christians had already become widespread or not, “the few cases of repressive interference and of martyrdom in Asia Minor (and elsewhere) were enough to warn [John] of the storm rolling up on the horizon, though as yet only one or two drops had actually fallen.”[1] While the persecution of Christians in Rome was already beginning during the reign of Nero, it was not widespread until the time of Domitian (A.D. 81-96) or even later. As several recent studies of Nero have demonstrated, the evidence shows that persecution of Christians in Rome (and not in Asia Minor, where John was) began under Nero because he used them as scapegoats for the great fire which destroyed much of Rome, not because they refused to worship him.[2]

Important studies of the historical background of Asia Minor during this time, such as those by Price, Rituals and Power: The Roman Imperial Cult in Asia Minor (1984), and Thompson, The Book of Revelation: Apocalypse and Empire, (1990), indicate that by the time of Domitian’s reign the imperial cult and emperor worship was in full-flower.[3] Although Thompson admits that Roman sources depict Domitian as an evil tyrant without exception,[4] nevertheless he proceeds to argue that persecution of Christians under Domitian’s reign was actually quite isolated and Domitian may not be the monster Roman historians made him out to be. Yet, as Thompson goes on to state, if the imperial cult preceded Domitian by “many reigns” it also continued long after Domitian was gone.[5]

To read the rest, follow the link below

Some Thoughts on the Dating of the Book of Revelation (Part Two)

Arguments for a Pre-A.D. 70 Date of Authorship and Responses

(1). In Revelation 11:1-12, John, supposedly, mentions the Jerusalem temple as though it were currently standing when he was given his vision.[1]

If the temple was still standing when John recorded his vision, then the Book of Revelation must have been written before the temple’s destruction at the hands of the Romans in A.D. 70. The passage (Revelation 11:1-2), reads as follows; “I was given a reed like a measuring rod and was told, `Go and measure the temple of God and the altar, and count the worshipers there. But exclude the outer court; do not measure it, because it has been given to the Gentiles. They will trample on the holy city for 42 months.” If John is speaking of the temple in Jerusalem, and it was still standing when John was given this vision, this demands a date of composition before the temple was destroyed.[2]

Response:

The post-A.D. 70 response to the prior interpretation is to notice the highly symbolic language throughout the passage which points the reader in a direction away from that of the physical temple in Jerusalem. As G. B. Caird points out, “in a book in which all things are expressed in symbols, the very last things the temple and the holy city could mean would be the physical temple and earthly Jerusalem.”[3]

Caird goes on to note that if John is referring to the Jerusalem temple, then a rather remarkable thing is said to occur. The Gentiles, which according to the pre-A.D. 70 dating, would mean the armies of Titus (cf. Luke 21:24) occupy the outer court for three and a half years, but leave the inner court (the altar) undefiled. This, of course, did not happen when the temple was destroyed. If true, it would make much of the passage unintelligible because it lacks any historical connection to the actual events of A.D. 70. This also ignores John’s use of the symbolism of the outer court and the inner sanctuary as a reference to the church.

To read the rest, follow the link below

Some Thoughts on the Dating of the Book of Revelation (Part One)

Introduction

Preterism — Pre-A.D. 70 Dating:

A theological position is only as strong as its weakest point. The preterist interpretation of John’s figures of antichrist and the beast (i.e., Revelation 13) is based upon the assumption that John (the presumed author of Revelation) was given his apocalyptic vision before the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. A pre-A.D. 70 date allows preterists to identify the beast of the Book of Revelation with Nero, thereby limiting antichrist to the series of heretics mentioned in John’s epistles who will plague Christ’s church until the Lord’s return (1 John 2:18-22; 1 John 4:3; 2 John 1:7). According to preterists, the visions given to John recorded in Revelation 13-18 lay in the past and were fulfilled before A.D. 70. There will be no future manifestation of a Nero-like beast or a personal Antichrist who will persecute the church immediately before our Lord’s return at the end of the age.

If it can be shown that the Book of Revelation was written after A.D. 70, the preterist interpretation of the beast as entirely a figure of the past becomes untenable. While the case for a future antichrist and manifestation of the beast is surely strengthened by a post-A.D. 70 dating of Revelation (through the elimination of a competing view), the case for non-preterist varieties of amillennialism (such as my own) are not dependent upon the date when the Book of Revelation was written.

To read the rest, follow the link below

Put Not Your Trust in Princes -- An Exposition of Psalm 146

Background to the 146th Psalm

My guess is that almost everyone reading this can recite the 23rd Psalm from memory. Yet can you recite Psalm 146 from memory? Probably not. Although not as well known as the 23rd Psalm, Psalm 146 is certainly worthy of our time and study. Consider the fact that Christians frequently use expressions like “praise the Lord,” and “hallelujah.” Where do these expressions come from and why are they used? These expressions come from biblical passages like Psalm 146. Like many other Americans, Christians are prone to place their trust in great men (politicians, military heroes, people of fame, wealth, and power), because such people can exercise influence upon over lives and our ways of thinking. But in Psalm 146, we are reminded not to place our trust in anyone or anything other than God, who is the creator and sustainer of all things. And then it is our Lord Jesus who alludes to this Psalm when beginning his messianic mission. So there is much here for us to consider in the 146th Psalm.

Psalm 146 is representative of an important group of five Psalms at the end of the Psalter, the so-called Hallel Psalms (146-150). As we will see, Psalm 146 is a joyful Psalm of praise. Together with Psalms 147-150, these five Psalms bring the fifth Book of the Psalms (Psalms 107-150), as well as the entire Psalter, to a close. The five Hallel Psalms are classified as “Psalms of praise,” and are used as daily prayers in most synagogues. Collectively these Hallel Psalms reflect a sense of joy and delight and although not as well-known as other Psalms (such as Psalm 23) this group of Psalms does include Psalm 149 (in which we are urged to “sing a new song”) and Psalm 150 (with its famous refrain, “let everything that has breath praise the Lord”).

Psalms of Praise

There are Psalms written by David, Moses, and the sons of Korah. Psalms are used in the temple (for worship), royal Psalms (with messianic implications), wisdom Psalms, and a Psalm such as the well-known 23rd Psalm, often classified as a “Psalm of trust.” Here, we consider another genre (or form) of Psalms–a Psalm of Praise. This Psalm has been used as the text for several German hymns, and Isaac Watts’ hymn “I’ll Praise My Maker While I’ve Breath” is also based upon this Psalm. The 146th Psalm is a Psalm which directs us to offer praise to the Lord, as well as to exercise great care in choosing in whom we place our trust.

To read the rest of this exposition, follow the link below

“Jesus — The Lord of the New Year” Paul on the Course and Purpose of History in Ephesians 1:3-14

New Year — A Time to Reflect Upon the Past

In the minds of most Americans, New Year’s Day is a day for parades and college football. But the coming of the new year is also considered a time of new beginning–coming as it does a week after the busy Christmas holiday. This time of year, people are often in the mood to stop and reflect upon all the significant events of the past year.

The various news outlets and social media venues will spend much time this week recounting the names and faces of those influential figures and celebrities who have died in the past year. I am always amazed at how many of these people are already largely forgotten within a year of their death. Life is fleeting. News programming will broadcast a number of video montages of the significant events of the past year–from the Russian invasion of the Ukraine, the threat of nuclear war, the huge cultural shifts and tribal political warfare now under way, the on-going effects of Covid-19 and lockdowns, to a host of other human tragedies and poignant moments. A great deal has happened the past year.

But that is not all we associate with the New Year. As is the custom, we are all supposed to make a series of New Year’s resolutions about what we will do better next year, or not do, as the case may be. If we break our resolutions within moments after making them, it really does not matter, it is the making of them that counts.

The combination of all these things makes the coming new year a great time to stop and reflect upon the events of the recent past, as well as our hope for the future. Such a time of reflection has been the historic practice of Reformed churches. Article 37 of the URCNA church order lists New Year’s Day (along with New Year’s Eve, Christmas, Good Friday, Easter, Pentecost and Ascension Day) as occasions when the consistory may call the congregation together for worship, although, to my knowledge, New Year’s day services are not widely held in our churches except perhaps when New Year’s Day falls on a Sunday.

Henry Ford on History as “Bunk”

As with most things, the Christian take on the events of the past and our expectations for the future stands in sharp contrast to the non-Christians around us. One place where the antithesis (i.e., the stark contrast) between Christian and non-Christian thinking is most striking is in how we as Christians view the past and ground our hope for the future. Most Americans, I think, would agree with Henry Ford (the founder of the automotive company which still bears his name) who is widely quoted to have said, “History is more or less bunk. It’s tradition. We don’t want tradition. We want to live in the present and the only history that is worth a tinker’s damn is the history we make today.”

To read the rest, follow the link below

Biblical Events, Biblical Theology, Riddleblog PublicationKim RiddlebargerDecember 26, 2022The new year, Ephesians 1:3-14Comment

"An Established Fact . . ." Herman Bavinck on the True Humanity of Christ in the Incarnation

Promised under the Old Testament as the Messiah who is to come as a descendant of a woman of Abraham, Judah, and David, [Jesus] is conceived in the fullness of time by the Holy Spirit in Mary (Matt. 1:20) and born of her, of a woman (Gal. 4:4). He is her son (Luke 2:7), the fruit of her womb (Luke 1:42), a descendant of David and Israel according to the flesh (Acts 2:30; Rom. 1:3; 9:5), sharing in our flesh and blood, like us in all things, sin excepted (Heb. 2:14, 17–18; 4:15; 5:1); a true human, the Son of Man (Rom. 5:15; 1 Cor. 15:21; 1 Tim. 2:5), growing up as an infant (Luke 2:40, 52), experiencing hunger (Matt. 4:2), thirst (John 19:28), weeping (Luke 19:41; John 11:35), being moved (John 12:27), feeling grief (Matt. 26:38), being furious (John 2:17), suffering, dying. For Scripture it is so much an established fact that Christ came in the flesh that it calls the denial of it anti-Christian (1 John 2:22). And it teaches that Christ assumed not only a true but also a complete human nature.

To read the rest, follow the link below

Biblical Events, Biblical Theology, Reformed ResourcesKim RiddlebargerDecember 22, 2022Bavinck on the IncarnationComment

"Why the Incarnation?" Calvin's Explanation

The situation would surely have been hopeless had the very majesty of God not descended to us, since it was not in our power to ascend to him. Hence, it was necessary for the Son of God to become for us “Immanuel, that is, God with us” [Isa. 7:14; Matt. 1:23], and in such a way that his divinity and our human nature might by mutual connection grow together. Otherwise the nearness would not have been near enough, nor the affinity sufficiently firm, for us to hope that God might dwell with us. So great was the disagreement between our uncleanness and God’s perfect purity! Even if man had remained free from all stain, his condition would have been too lowly for him to reach God without a Mediator. What, then, of man: plunged by his mortal ruin into death and hell, defiled with so many spots, befouled with his own corruption, and overwhelmed with every curse? In undertaking to describe the Mediator, Paul then, with good reason, distinctly reminds us that He is man: “One mediator between God and men, the man Jesus Christ” [1 Tim. 2:5].

To read the rest, follow the link below

Biblical Theology, Biblical Events, Reformed ResourcesKim RiddlebargerDecember 21, 2022Christ's IncarnationComment

The Name That Is Above Every Name -- An Exposition of Philippians 2:1-11

“The Name That Is Above Every Name”

One of the most famous and well-known passages in all the Bible is the famous hymn to Christ (the Carmen Christi) of verses 6-11 of Philippians 2. Martin Luther writes in his famous essay The Freedom of the Christian, that this passage is a prescribed rule of life which is set forth by the Apostle Paul, who exhorts us to devote our good works to the welfare of our neighbor out of the abundant riches of faith. John Calvin tells us that anyone who reads this passage but fails to see the deity of Jesus and the majesty of God as seen in his saving works, is blind to the things of God.[1] The passage contains a very rich Christology, but is included in this letter not to settle any debate over the person and work of Jesus, but rather, to instruct Christians how to imitate Jesus in a profound and significant way. The Carmen Christi also speaks directly to modern Americans by reminding us that the self-centered narcism of American culture is not a virtue, but runs completely contrary to the example set for us to follow by Jesus in his incarnation.

To read the rest, follow the link below

Biblical Theology, Biblical EventsKim RiddlebargerDecember 14, 2022Philippians 2:1-11, The carmen ChristiComment

The Psalm of Moses -- "YHWH, Our Dwelling Place" An Exposition of Psalm 90

Life in a Fallen Word Is Nasty, Brutish, and Short

Life is fleeting. The average life span of an American is 78.2 years (75.6 for men, 80.8 for women). That seems like a long time until we consider that the last veteran of World War One (1914-1918) is long since dead and World War 2 ended seventy plus years ago. My high school class is holding its fiftieth reunion this year. 9-1-1 occurred more than two decades ago. When viewed in that light, an average life span of nearly 80 years is not all that long. Yet, time keeps marching on. As each and every day goes by we struggle with our sins, we face suffering and calamity, we wonder what tomorrow holds (given the mysterious providence of God), and we worry about facing the wrath of God when we die. In Psalm 90, Moses speaks to this struggle of daily life as he exhorts us to number our days and to live this life in light of eternity.

When you study the Psalter, you find select Psalms associated with various authors (David, the sons of Korah, etc.) and Psalms with different content and purposes (royal Psalms, wisdom Psalms, Psalms used in worship in the Jerusalem temple), and so on. In this exposition, we will look at the historical background to the composition of Psalm 90, then we will work our way though the text of the Psalm, and finally, we will look at the application of this Psalm to the Christian life.

The Only Psalm Written By Moses

Psalm 90 is the only Psalm written by Moses, which likely makes Psalm 90 the oldest Psalm in the Psalter. As for the historical background to this Psalm, recall that Moses lived about 1500 BC, and David about 1000 BC., so the origin of this Psalm goes back to that time described in the closing chapters of the Book of Deuteronomy when the people of Israel arrived on the plains of Moab, just across the Jordan River from the promised land of Canaan before they crossed the Jordan and conquered Jericho. This puts the composition of Psalm 90 about 500 years before the temple was built in Jerusalem, and well before Israel’s kingdom extended all the way from Damascus to Egypt (under David and Solomon). This is why Psalm 90 has such a different feel than the other Psalms.

Psalm 90 is the first Psalm in Book Four of the Psalter (i.e., Psalms 90-106). Most of the Psalms in Book Four are anonymous (the so-called “orphan Psalms”), except Psalm 90 which was written by Moses, and several Psalms which are attributed to David. The Psalms in Book Four tend to deal with difficult questions about human frailty and the meaning of life, the nature of justice and God’s faithfulness, and the difficult question of why it is that God does not immediately punish the wicked. These difficult questions about life in a fallen world were raised in Psalm 89 (which closes out Book Three of the Psalter, and which is a Psalm of lament because of Israel’s sin). These questions are addressed, in part, throughout the various Psalms found in Book Four.[1]

To read the rest, follow the link below

The Jews Back in their Ancient Land? That Isn’t Gonna Happen! Sometimes Our Best Guys Get It Wrong

Every eschatological position has sharp edges which don’t seem to fit neatly within the system. I am of the conviction that Reformed amillennialism (AKA the “Dutch school”) has the fewest and least consequential of these “sharp edges.” One of these sharp edges associated with amillennialism is the binding of Satan—how can you claim Satan is bound when there is so much evil in the world? This can be readily explained—see my essay, The Binding of Satan.

But the presence of Israel as a nation living back in their ancient homeland is always the pink elephant in the room whenever amillennarians discuss eschatology with dispensationalists. This is a sharp edge for amillennialism for several reasons. One is that the Reformed are not in full agreement among themselves about the role and place of national Israel in the new covenant era, especially in the days before the Lord’s return. Another reason is that the hermeneutic (the operating assumptions) underlying the various millennial positions assigns widely varying roles to a future nation of Israel in redemptive history. Dispensationalists assert that Israel’s return to the land of Palestine in 1947 is the fulfillment of the land promise of the Abrahamic covenant (Genesis 13:14-17; 15:1-21; 17:1-8), and is therefore thought to be a fatal weakness of amilliennialism.

I recall receiving an email claiming that Reformed amillennarians get the question of a future for Israel terribly wrong—embarrassingly so. In fact, two of our stalwart theologians both dismissed premillennialism largely on the grounds of the expectation of a return of the Jews to Palestine. The author of the email cited two well-known Reformed theologians, Herman Bavinck and Louis Berkhof, both of whom did dismiss the very possibility of such a thing, yet such a thing did happen. Oops . . . On the basis of UN Resolution 181, Israel became a nation in 1947, Jews returned to their ancient homeland, survived three major wars, which in anyone’s estimation is a monumental event that dispensationalists have always expected, and which they say commences the events associated with the time of the end.

To read the rest, follow the link below

Jesus, the Greater Melchizedek

Abraham Encounters Melchizadek

In Genesis 17, Abraham is returning from battle with local tribes when the man of faith encounters the mysterious king of Salem (Jerusalem) named Melchizadek. According to verses 18-20, “Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine. (He was priest of God Most High.) And he blessed [Abram] and said, `Blessed be Abram by God Most High, Possessor of heaven and earth; and blessed be God Most High, who has delivered your enemies into your hand!’ And Abram gave him a tenth of everything.” Who is this mysterious Melchizadek, and why would Abraham pay tithes to him?

In Psalm 110:4 (which is one of the most often-cited Old Testament passages in the New Testament), the Psalmist speaks of Melchizadek as follows. “The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind, `You are a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.’” Given the fact that Jesus quotes this same passage while debating with the Pharisees about whether or not he is the true “son of David” (Matthew 22:44), it is clear that the passage has strong messianic implications–as a prophecy (Psalm 110:4) fulfilled by Jesus–the one of whom the Psalmist had been speaking.

To read the rest, follow the link below

Biblical EventsKim RiddlebargerNovember 3, 2022Melchizadek Comments

The Great Tribulation -- When and How Long?

I am often asked whether or not the “tribulation” is a seven year period which immediately precedes the second coming of Jesus Christ, or is it the entire period of time between Christ’s first and second advent, the so-called “great tribulation?”

This is an important question for several reasons. First, when most people think of the “tribulation,” they are thinking of the popular dispensational notion that at (or about) the time of the Rapture, the world enters a seven-year period— “the tribulation”—in which the Antichrist comes to power after the unexpected and instantaneous removal of all believers. The Antichrist then makes a seven-year peace treaty with Israel, only to turn upon the nation after three and a half years, plunging the entire world into the final geopolitical crisis which ends with the battle of Armageddon. Dispensationalists believe the seven year tribulation is a time of horrific cruelty and persecution for those who are “left behind,” and that the only way to be saved during this period is to refuse to take the mark of the beast, and not worship the beast or his image, which will likely result in martyrdom. The critical flaw with the dispensational doctrine of a future seven-year tribulation is that it is nowhere found in Scripture—although dispensationalists make appeal to Daniel 9:24-27 (more on this below).

A second reason why this question is important has to do with the rise of various forms of preterism. Full-preterism is properly considered a heresy. But so-called “partial” preterism is not. Preterists (I am speaking here of the orthodox, “partial” variety) contend that Jesus Christ returned in the clouds in A.D. 70 to execute judgment upon apostate Israel, the city of Jerusalem, and the Jewish temple, and its sacrificial system. Those who hold to the various orthodox forms of preterism believe that the great tribulation spoken of by Jesus in Matthew 24:21, has come and gone with the events associated with the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple by the Romans. All that remains is the Lord’s return.

To read the rest, follow the link below:

My Tabletalk Essay on "Man as a Body-Soul Composite"

The good folks at Tabletalk have been keeping me busy. Here’s my essay from the September 2022 issue.

Tabletalk -- "Man as a Body-Soul Composite"

Biblical Events, Biblical Theology, Reformed ResourcesKim RiddlebargerSeptember 1, 2022Trichotomy, Body-Soul CompositeComment

"Luther's Psalm" -- A Look at the 46th Psalm

Luther’s Interest in Psalm 46

Most people cannot recite Psalm 46 from memory. But many are so familiar with the words to Martin Luther’s famous hymn “A Mighty Fortress Is Our God” that they can sing it without looking at the hymnal. “Ein Feste Burg ist unser Gott” is actually Luther’s paraphrase of Psalm 46. This Psalm has several very familiar lines, has been cited by American presidents (most recently by Barak Obama), and portions of it appear in well-known Jewish prayers. Found in Book Two of the Psalter and attributed to the Sons of Korah, it is classified as a “Psalm of Zion.” It contains loud echoes from Psalm 2, where that divine protection promised to the king, is extended to include his capital city (Jerusalem). Charles Spurgeon aptly speaks of the 46th Psalm as “the song of faith in troubled times.”[1] Martin Luther thought this Psalm of such comfort, he put it to verse.

It is important to reflect upon Psalm 46, because we sing this particular Psalm as often as any other–often in the form of Luther’s famous paraphrase. Before we take up the text of the Psalm–where we will find much deep and rich biblical theology–I think it appropriate to consider Luther’s use of this Psalm, then debunk one of the persistent myths surrounding the version of the Psalm which appears in the KJV, and then look at the context in which the Psalm was originally composed. Then, we will look at the text of the Psalm while making various points of application as we go.

As for Luther and “A Mighty Fortress,” although there are many theories about when it was written and for what occasion, Luther’s hymn first appears in a 1531 hymnal which would indicate that Luther wrote it several years earlier, likely in 1527-29. This was ten years or so after his 95 theses were circulated throughout Europe, igniting the theological fire which became the Protestant Reformation. The black plague was especially virulent throughout much of Europe in the winter of 1527, nearly killing Luther’s son. Luther was also a physical wreck during this time (from exhaustion). He began spending much time reading and reflecting upon Psalm 46, especially its promise that God is the bulwark (fortress) who never fails. From Luther’s reflection on that word of comfort, the famous hymn was born.

To read the rest, follow the link below

"Faith Apart from Works Is Dead" -- James 2:14-26 (Part Two)

“Faith Apart from Works Is Dead” — James 2:14-26 (Part Two)

From a sermon series on the Book of James, preached at Christ Reformed Church in 2007 and edited for the Riddleblog

_______________________________________________

Part Two

With this important background in mind, we turn to specifics of the text, James 2:14-26.

In this section of chapter 2, James makes a general appeal to his readers that when someone claims to have faith, and there are no accompanying good works, their so-called “faith” can be called into question. James moves on to give an illustration in verses 15-16 drawn from the earlier discussion in chapter 2 about discriminating against the poor and favoring the rich. In verse 17 he offers up the conclusion that faith without works is dead. Then, in verses 18-19 James connects faith and works, as cause and effect–faith produces works. James then appeals to the examples of Abraham and Rahab, sandwiched around his main premise in verse 24–“You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.” In this section, James makes his main point three different ways. Faith, if not accompanied by works is dead (v. 17). Faith without works is useless (v. 20). Faith without works is not a living (or justifying) faith (v. 26).[1] James’ primary point is simply this–genuine faith leads to the performance of good works. To put it another way, a person who claims to be a Christian (and professes faith in the Lord of glory) will demonstrate that faith to be genuine through the performance of good works.

To read the rest, follow the link below

“Faith Apart from Works Is Dead” -- James 2:14-26 (Part One)

“Faith Apart from Works Is Dead” — James 2:14-26 (Part One)

From a sermon series on the Book of James, preached at Christ Reformed Church in 2007 and edited for the Riddleblog

_______________________________________________

It would be hard to find a passage of Scripture which is more controversial than James 2:14-26.

The reason for the controversy is James’ assertion in verse 24 of chapter two of his epistle that “a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.” On its face, this seems to fly in the face of a number of passages in Paul’s letters where Paul appears to be saying the exact opposite thing. Take, for example, Galatians 2:16. “Yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.” Are James and Paul on the same page? Yes, they are as I intend to demonstrate.

Those who believe that the justification of sinners is a process which is not complete until death (Rome), view James’ assertion here as a classic proof-text which supports this view. But those who see justification as an instantaneous declaration made about the sinner because the merits of Christ are imputed to them through the means of faith, seem to stumble all over James’ declaration that works are somehow tied to justification, and that we are not justified by faith alone. But as we will see, James and Paul do not contradict each other. In fact, when James’ assertion is put in its proper context, there is nothing whatsoever in James 2 which conflicts with the doctrine of justification sola fide.

To read the rest, follow the link below

In Galatians 2:11-14, Paul Confronts Peter in Antioch--Why It Matters to Us

From the Blessed Hope Podcast (Episode Four, Galatians 2:11-21)

The Success of the Gentile Mission Raised Questions

As new churches were established in Gentile areas north of Palestine, one pressing question needed to be addressed. How were Jews and Gentiles to get along with one another in these new churches? This was especially the case in Asia Minor where Jews lived in many cities among large Gentile populations. Jewish Christians remained steeped in Jewish life and culture. No doubt, they struggled with the fact that recent Gentile converts had different sexual mores, ate things Jews did not, and who, when pressed about matters of the law may have asked, “who is this Moses fellow you keep talking about?” How would close fellowship between Jewish believers and “unclean” Gentiles in Galatia and Antioch be seen back in Jerusalem? The dicey relationship between Jew and Gentile meant that a collision between the weak-willed Peter and the iron-willed Paul was at some point inevitable. In verses 11-14, Paul demonstrates that even apostles must have their doctrine and conduct checked in the light of Scripture, specifically the revelation of Jesus about the gospel.

Moving on from recounting his second post-conversion visit to Jerusalem, Paul tells the Galatians how he was forced to confront Peter to his face when the latter had caved in to pressure from messengers from James possibly claiming they were sent by the Jerusalem church. This confrontation likely occurred not long after Paul and Barnabas returned to Antioch after their prior visit to Jerusalem. As N. T. Wright points out, it is easy to overlook the fact that the reason why this seems so vivid in Paul’s account is because these events had taken place quite recently [1].

There is a noticeable progression in Paul’s recounting of his relationship with Peter, especially in light of the burgeoning Gentile mission undertaken by Paul, Barnabas, and others. Paul describes being Peter’s guest for fifteen days during his first trip to Jerusalem post-conversion (Galatians 1:18-20). Then, he speaks of Peter as a fellow apostle when recounting his second trip to Jerusalem (Galatians 2:1-10), before, finally, describing a confrontation with Peter when the latter falls into serious doctrinal error (Galatians 2:11-14).[2] While it is difficult to know how much of this is a word for word account of what Paul said to Peter and how much is a summation, what follows amounts to a major confrontation between the two men over the ground and meaning of the doctrine of justification.

To read the rest, follow the Link Below

The Binding of Satan

The Binding of Satan — Background and Introduction to the Controversy

In Revelation 20:1-3, John is given a remarkable vision:

“Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, holding in his hand the key to the bottomless pit and a great chain. 2 And he seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years, 3 and threw him into the pit, and shut it and sealed it over him, so that he might not deceive the nations any longer, until the thousand years were ended. After that he must be released for a little while.” In verse 7, John adds, “and when the thousand years are ended, Satan will be released from his prison.”

The binding of Satan as depicted in this passage raises several obvious questions, especially in light of the on-going debate between amillennarians and premillennarians about the timing and character of the millennial age. This is the only biblical text which specifically mentions a thousand year period of time in which Satan’s power and activity are curtailed (the millennial age). The two most obvious questions raised by John’s vision are, “what does it mean for Satan to be bound in such a manner?” and “are the thousand years a present or a future period of time?” Amillennarians and premillennarians take quite different approaches to this passage and offer conflicting answers to these questions.

To read the rest, follow the link below

Speaking of Paul, What Did He Look Like?

Of course, we have no idea what Paul looked like—the varied paintings and historic mosaics bear this out. The Bible is not concerned with such things, and there is no known description of Paul from his lifetime.

But there is one physical description of Paul, written about 160 A.D. It is found in an apocryphal writing, known as the Acts of Paul. Its veracity is a matter of some debate. Often, there is just enough truth in such accounts that they gain acceptance. Here is what we have:

And he (Onesiphorus) proceed along the royal highway to Lystra and stood expecting him, and according to the information of Titus, he inspected them that came. And he saw Paul coming, a man small in stature, bald-headed, crooked in legs, healthy, with eyebrows joining, nose rather long [lit. somewhat hooked], full of grace; for sometimes he appeared like a man, but sometimes he had the face of an angel.

To read the rest, follow the link below

Did Paul Ever See Jesus During Our Lord's Earthly Ministry?

Although most New Testament scholars simply assume that Paul had never seen Jesus prior to Paul’s Damascus Road experience, Stanley Porter raises the fascinating possibility that Paul and Jesus had indeed crossed paths before Paul’s conversion. The argument can be found in summary form in: Stanley E. Porter, The Apostle Paul: His Life, Thought and Letters (Eerdmans, 2016), 33-38. A more extensive (and expensive) version can be found here: When Paul Met Jesus: How an Idea Got Lost in History (Cambridge University Press, 2016).

Porter’s case is based upon several lines of evidence.

First, Jesus spent much of his time in Galilee, but went to Jerusalem on several occasions. Jesus also spent the last part of his messianic mission in the city. Given the fact that Paul too spent significant time in Jerusalem as a teen studying under Gamaliel, and that Jesus was a very well-known and controversial figure within Pharisaical circles, Paul likely knew of Jesus’ presence in Jerusalem, even if he had not seen him personally. But given Jesus’ controversial ministry among Jews in the city, a zealous young rabbinical student like Paul very likely would have been quite interested in evaluating Jesus for himself, possibly on one or more occasions. Paul and Jesus were in the same place at the same time so it is very plausible that Paul would have been curious enough to go and see Jesus for himself.

To read the rest, follow the link below