Sunday, 10:50, March 23, 2008
RESURRECTION POWER CLOSE TO HOME
Preach it!
Many of us have already spent some time this morning thinking together about the resurrection of our Lord. That is no small subject. Think of me lying here lifeless. But how do you know I’m really dead? Poke me. But maybe I am in some kind of coma. It just seems like I don’t have a pulse. So don’t put me in the hospital. Just let me lie here for a spell. Just leaving me alone for a while might help to prove I am really dead. But still, how can you be sure I’m dead?
But now put me in a casket and take me down to the cemetery. Bury that casket in the ground and leave it for three days. Now do you believe I am dead?
JESUS WAS REALLY DEAD. Let’s read from I Cor. 15:1-4…
Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; 2. By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. 3. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4. And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:
Isn’t it interesting that the burial is included. Why? Is it not to confirm that Jesus was really dead?
Now suppose someone says, “Let’s go down to the grave and bring Ron back to life.” What do you think? Whoever said it is a nut, a fruitcake; he’s not hitting on all cylinders. You get the picture. This isn’t going to be one of those near-death experiences. The man has been in the grave for three days. No one comes out of the grave alive.
Surely that is what they thought 2,000 years ago. They were no different than we are. Sometimes we get the idea, “It was no big deal to them, because they lived in Bible times.” They lived in a world that is just like ours. Dead men did not come to life.
Isn’t it amazing that Jesus had told them repeatedly that He was going to rise from the dead, but they didn’t get it. Let’s go to the Gospel of Mark of read it…
Mark 8:31-32 "And he began to teach them, that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders, and of the chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again. 32. And he spake that saying openly. And Peter took him, and began to rebuke him."
Mark 9:30-32 "And they departed thence, and passed through Galilee; and he would not that any man should know it. 31. For he taught his disciples, and said unto them, The Son of man is delivered into the hands of men, and they shall kill him; and after that he is killed, he shall rise the third day. 32. But they understood not that saying, and were afraid to ask him."
Mark 10:32-34 "And they were in the way going up to Jerusalem; and Jesus went before them: and they were amazed; and as they followed, they were afraid. And he took again the twelve, and began to tell them what things should happen unto him, 33. Saying, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be delivered unto the chief priests, and unto the scribes; and they shall condemn him to death, and shall deliver him to the Gentiles: 34. And they shall mock him, and shall scourge him, and shall spit upon him, and shall kill him: and the third day he shall rise again."
They just didn’t get it. Jesus could not convince them. Why not? Because dead men don’t come back to life. It seems best to place the raising of Lazarus from the dead (recorded in John 11) between Jesus’ prediction in Mark 9 and the one in Mark 10. Even though they had seen Jesus raise this man who had been dead for four days, they still didn’t get it. So after Jesus had told them at least times that He would rise from the dead, and even though they had watched Him raise Lazarus, they were still shocked when their Lord came back from the grave.
What does it take to raise a man from the dead? It takes the power of God. But when we look at it like that, it isn’t so impossible. God created the universe in all its splendor. God designed the human body, which no human has been able to totally understand, despite the study that has been devoted to it. Surely God the Creator can raise a body that He Himself made. Indeed He can, and indeed He did!
Let’s read that passage we have read many times before – Eph. 1:15-23…
Wherefore I also, after I heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus, and love unto all the saints, 16. Cease not to give thanks for you, making mention of you in my prayers; 17. That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him: 18. The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints, 19. And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power, 20. Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, 21. Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come: 22. And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, 23. Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.
What tremendous power was required to raise Jesus from the dead, but as we have talked about many times before, that same power is available to us. So this morning, the bulk of the sermon you must preach. Don’t worry; you are not going to be put up in front of the congregation. You must preach the sermon to yourself right where you sit. The title of your message is this: “Resurrection Power Close to Home.”
I’ll give you the introduction to get you started. It goes something like this…
We are great at talking about resurrection power. We know that the concept comes from the scripture, as we read earlier from Ephesians 1. The same power that raised Jesus from the dead is available to those who believe. The children of God have this mighty dynamite resurrection power available to them. Praise God!
Here’s the problem. Even when we believe this power is real, we keep it at arm’s length. We apply to situations that are not our own. What could this power do? It could raise a person from the grave. But you aren’t in the grave. It could put an end to all war. But we don’t know that it is the will of God to end all war right now. This resurrection power could rescue some wayward young man from drug addiction. But you aren’t addicted to drugs.
Here’s the great question: What can this resurrection power do in my life?
That’s where you take over. What can this resurrection power do in your life? Why don’t you preach yourself a three-point sermon. Ask the Lord to reveal three areas where He wants to apply His resurrection power in your life. Why don’t you write down a “1” and a “2” and a “3.”
As they begin working on their assignment, let me say a few words to those of you who are not believers, who are not yet the children of God. Let me give you a different assignment. Your assignment is to contemplate this one question, to think about this one thing…
“Can God’s resurrection power raise me from death?” Remember that you are dead in your trespasses and sins. That’s right – dead. This is not some make-believe death. Your spiritual death is every bit as real as any physical death. You can never do anything to make yourself alive. You are absolutely and totally helpless. If God’s resurrection power doesn’t raise you to life, you will spend a lifetime as the enemy of God and spend eternity paying for your sins in hell, totally separated from God. So here is your assignment, should you be willing to accept it. “Cry out to God, saying, ‘O God, can you raise me up from this death?’” Spend all your time this morning pondering that one question. Don’t be sidetracked by asking other questions: “God, can you help me to control my tongue? God, can you help me to treat other people better?” Those things are not the issue. The issue is your spiritual death and the need for spiritual life.
Now back to you believers who are working on your three-point sermon, focusing on three areas where you desperately need the working of this resurrection power. Now if the Lord stops you on the first point, and tells you that this is the one you are to focus on, I’ll yield to His wisdom.
Just in case any of you are having trouble, let me give you just a few examples…
Do you need God’s resurrection power to restore the joy of His salvation?
David prayed, “Restore unto me the joy of thy salvation.” Remember that his prayer was not to restore the joy of “my” salvation, but the joy of “your” salvation, the Lord’s salvation. We are commanded, “Rejoice in the Lord always, and again I say rejoice.” Do you need the resurrection power of God to restore that joy to your life?
Do you need God’s resurrection power to give you “patience and longsuffering”?
We often think of this resurrection power enabling us to go out and perform some great miracle. Wouldn’t it be a mighty miracle, if you faithfully endured the circumstances in which God has placed you? Col. 1:9-11, "For this cause we also, since the day we heard it, do not cease to pray for you, and to desire that ye might be filled with the knowledge of his will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding; 10. That ye might walk worthy of the Lord unto all pleasing, being fruitful in every good work, and increasing in the knowledge of God; 11. Strengthened with all might, according to his glorious power, unto all patience and longsuffering with joyfulness;"
That word “patience” might be translated “patient endurance.” It is that word which speaks of remaining under the load. In the midst of turmoil, do you remain patient by thanking God for your circumstances? Or, do you pray that God would remove the situation? Can you pray that God would use all of it to make you like Jesus? Is this where you need resurrection power?
And what about the longsuffering? The patient endurance deals with circumstances and situations, the longsuffering deals with people. Though you try not to, do you find yourself wanting to get back at the person who hurts you? Or do you find yourself overflowing with the spirit of Jesus, saying, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do”? Maybe you need God’s resurrection power in this area.
Do you need God’s resurrection power to tame a gossiping tongue?
Do you find yourself justifying gossip by saying, “Well, it’s true”? Do you find that you delight in passing along some information that other people don’t already know? Could well be that you need the resurrection power of Jesus to work in your life.
How are you doing on your assignment? I won’t force anyone to share his or her work, but I will give you that opportunity. Would you like to share with us where you need that resurrection power and give us the opportunity to pray that God would apply it to your life? The opportunity is yours…
Sunday, March 23, 2008
Low in the Grave He Lay -- 3/23/08 (Sunrise)
Sunday, March 23, 2008 SUNRISE SERVICE
LOW IN THE GRAVE HE LAY
Ps. 30:5, “Weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning.”
Earlier this morning we sang…
Low in the grave He lay, Jesus my Savior;
Waiting the coming day, Jesus my Lord.
I don’t know all the hymn writer had in mind, when he used the word “low.” He could have simply written, “There in the grave He lay, Jesus my Savior.” Instead, he wrote, “Low in the grave He lay.” Surely it was no accident that he used that word “low.”
I like that because it captures a great truth. When Jesus was laid in that grave, He was as low as He could get. You can’t get any lower than Jesus was. Think about it with me…
… He was crucified as a common criminal. We read from Luke 23:32-33, "And there were also two other, malefactors, led with him to be put to death. 33. And when they were come to the place, which is called Calvary, there they crucified him, and the malefactors, one on the right hand, and the other on the left." The word “malefactor” simply means criminal. In the eyes of the world, Jesus was one of three criminals crucified that day. Yes, low in the grave He lay.
… He was despised by Herod. You will remember that Governor Pilate tried to pass the buck by having Jesus sent to Herod. We read from Luke 23:7-11…
And as soon as he knew that he belonged unto Herod's jurisdiction, he sent him to Herod, who himself also was at Jerusalem at that time. 8. And when Herod saw Jesus, he was exceeding glad: for he was desirous to see him of a long season, because he had heard many things of him; and he hoped to have seen some miracle done by him. 9. Then he questioned with him in many words; but he answered him nothing. 10. And the chief priests and scribes stood and vehemently accused him. 11. And Herod with his men of war set him at nought, and mocked him, and arrayed him in a gorgeous robe, and sent him again to Pilate." Jesus’ very life lay in the balance, and all selfish Herod cared about was seeing some miracle. Despised by Herod, low in the grave He lay.
… He was refused by Pilate. Pilate knew Jesus wasn’t guilty of anything worthy of death. The more Pilate dealt with Jesus, the more he was impressed with Him. No less than four times did Pilate say about Jesus, “I find no fault in him” (Luke 23:4,14; Jn. 19:4,6). Nevertheless, he delivered Jesus over to be crucified. Low in the grave He lay.
… He was ridiculed by the Jewish leaders. We read in Luke 23:35, "And the people stood beholding. And the rulers also with them derided him, saying, He saved others; let him save himself, if he be Christ, the chosen of God." Most translations render the “derided” of the KJV as “sneered at him.” Amplified has in parenthesis, “turned up their noses at him.” They had nothing but contempt for Jesus. Low in the grave He lay.
… He was mocked by the soldiers. Luke 23:36-37, "And the soldiers also mocked him, coming to him, and offering him vinegar, 37. And saying, If thou be the king of the Jews, save thyself." For sport, they gambled for His clothing. Low in the grave He lay.
… Rejected by the people. You will recall that there was a custom on the occasion of the Passover Pilate would release a Jewish criminal, showing his kindness to them. When Pilate asked them if he should release Jesus, they said, “No, but release Barabbas.” When Pilate then asked what should be done with Jesus, they cried out, “Crucify Him. Crucify Him.” Low in the grave He lay.
… He was left alone by His own apostles. We know, of course, that Peter denied Jesus three times. But it wasn’t just Peter. Mark 14:50, “And they all forsook him, and fled.” These were the men into whom He had poured His life for three years. Nevertheless, they left Him to face His trials alone. Low in the grave He lay.
… He was betrayed by one of His own. Yes, Judas sold Him out for 30 pieces of silver. Low in the grave He lay.
… He was forsaken by His Father. Understand that this is not on a par with the other things I have mentioned. Nothing is parallel to the fact that Jesus was forsaken by God the Father. Nevertheless, we read the words which Jesus cried out from the cross: “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” For all eternity the Father and the Son had enjoyed perfect fellowship. They gloried in one another. But now, having cried out, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me,” Jesus died and was buried. Low in the grave He lay.
What about you? Have you experienced it? Low in the grave you lay…
… sinfilled and hopeless
… dead in your trespasses and sins
… no life whatsoever
… having no hope and without God in the world
… Even your deeds of “righteousness” were as filthy rags.
… You were as an unclean thing, fit for nothing but the hell God prepared for the devil and his angels.
Someone could have said of you, “Let God deliver him, if He will have him” (see Matt. 27:43). But why would God have you? What does life have to do with death, the King of glory with the chief of sinners?
But then we sang… UP FROM THE GRAVE HE AROSE
“Weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning.” Weeping may endure for a night, or for two or three nights, but joy comes in the morning. Don’t you know that all heaven stood to its feet when Jesus broke forth from that tomb! And it wouldn’t be long until His own people would raise a shout from the earth as well. And we’re still rejoicing today, this very morning.
The greater appreciation we have for the darkness of the night, the greater our joy in the morning. The more we realize our hopelessness before coming to Jesus, the greater our rejoicing in Him, who rose for us!
Low in the grave we lay, Hopeless and sin-stained,
Waiting a better day, Should such be gained.
Chorus: Up from the grave He arose,
With a mighty triumph o’er His foes;
He arose a victor from the dark domain,
And He lives forever with His saints to reign.
He arose! He arose! Hallelujah! Christ arose!
Vainly they watch us now, We who in Christ do rest,
Spellbound thy wonder how, We are so blessed.
Chorus
Death now has lost its sting, Conquered by Jesus’ cross;
His praises we now sing, And count all but loss.
Chorus
Though sorrow we still feel, While trusting in His Word;
But now His presence real, Jesus our Lord!
Chorus
Are you low today? Do you feel like you have to pretend to rejoice in Christ’s resurrection? Are you filled with doubts and fears? Does it seem like the Lord has forgotten you? Do you feel powerless to stand against the wiles of the devil? Are you disgusted with yourself, wondering how you can become so cold and hard? Does the Lord’s presence seem far away?
Listen to me. If you belong to the God of glory, the God who raised Jesus from the dead, you can never be as low as you were then, before you passed from death unto life (Jn. 5:24). You were blind, but now you see. You could only see hopelessness, but now we look for that blessed hope and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ (Tit. 2:13). “For our citizenship is in heaven, from whence also we look for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body…” (Phil. 3:20-21).
Are you low this morning? Remember the Word of our God: “Weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning.” Praise God for the good news in Jesus Christ, who rose from the dead. Paul talks about that good news, as he recounts how he was separated unto the gospel. Rom. 1:1-4…
Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God, 2. (Which he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures,) 3. Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; 4. And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:
Rom. 8:32-39…
He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things? 33. Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth. 34. Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us. 35. Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? 36. As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter. 37. Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us. 38. For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, 39. Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
LOW IN THE GRAVE HE LAY
Ps. 30:5, “Weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning.”
Earlier this morning we sang…
Low in the grave He lay, Jesus my Savior;
Waiting the coming day, Jesus my Lord.
I don’t know all the hymn writer had in mind, when he used the word “low.” He could have simply written, “There in the grave He lay, Jesus my Savior.” Instead, he wrote, “Low in the grave He lay.” Surely it was no accident that he used that word “low.”
I like that because it captures a great truth. When Jesus was laid in that grave, He was as low as He could get. You can’t get any lower than Jesus was. Think about it with me…
… He was crucified as a common criminal. We read from Luke 23:32-33, "And there were also two other, malefactors, led with him to be put to death. 33. And when they were come to the place, which is called Calvary, there they crucified him, and the malefactors, one on the right hand, and the other on the left." The word “malefactor” simply means criminal. In the eyes of the world, Jesus was one of three criminals crucified that day. Yes, low in the grave He lay.
… He was despised by Herod. You will remember that Governor Pilate tried to pass the buck by having Jesus sent to Herod. We read from Luke 23:7-11…
And as soon as he knew that he belonged unto Herod's jurisdiction, he sent him to Herod, who himself also was at Jerusalem at that time. 8. And when Herod saw Jesus, he was exceeding glad: for he was desirous to see him of a long season, because he had heard many things of him; and he hoped to have seen some miracle done by him. 9. Then he questioned with him in many words; but he answered him nothing. 10. And the chief priests and scribes stood and vehemently accused him. 11. And Herod with his men of war set him at nought, and mocked him, and arrayed him in a gorgeous robe, and sent him again to Pilate." Jesus’ very life lay in the balance, and all selfish Herod cared about was seeing some miracle. Despised by Herod, low in the grave He lay.
… He was refused by Pilate. Pilate knew Jesus wasn’t guilty of anything worthy of death. The more Pilate dealt with Jesus, the more he was impressed with Him. No less than four times did Pilate say about Jesus, “I find no fault in him” (Luke 23:4,14; Jn. 19:4,6). Nevertheless, he delivered Jesus over to be crucified. Low in the grave He lay.
… He was ridiculed by the Jewish leaders. We read in Luke 23:35, "And the people stood beholding. And the rulers also with them derided him, saying, He saved others; let him save himself, if he be Christ, the chosen of God." Most translations render the “derided” of the KJV as “sneered at him.” Amplified has in parenthesis, “turned up their noses at him.” They had nothing but contempt for Jesus. Low in the grave He lay.
… He was mocked by the soldiers. Luke 23:36-37, "And the soldiers also mocked him, coming to him, and offering him vinegar, 37. And saying, If thou be the king of the Jews, save thyself." For sport, they gambled for His clothing. Low in the grave He lay.
… Rejected by the people. You will recall that there was a custom on the occasion of the Passover Pilate would release a Jewish criminal, showing his kindness to them. When Pilate asked them if he should release Jesus, they said, “No, but release Barabbas.” When Pilate then asked what should be done with Jesus, they cried out, “Crucify Him. Crucify Him.” Low in the grave He lay.
… He was left alone by His own apostles. We know, of course, that Peter denied Jesus three times. But it wasn’t just Peter. Mark 14:50, “And they all forsook him, and fled.” These were the men into whom He had poured His life for three years. Nevertheless, they left Him to face His trials alone. Low in the grave He lay.
… He was betrayed by one of His own. Yes, Judas sold Him out for 30 pieces of silver. Low in the grave He lay.
… He was forsaken by His Father. Understand that this is not on a par with the other things I have mentioned. Nothing is parallel to the fact that Jesus was forsaken by God the Father. Nevertheless, we read the words which Jesus cried out from the cross: “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” For all eternity the Father and the Son had enjoyed perfect fellowship. They gloried in one another. But now, having cried out, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me,” Jesus died and was buried. Low in the grave He lay.
What about you? Have you experienced it? Low in the grave you lay…
… sinfilled and hopeless
… dead in your trespasses and sins
… no life whatsoever
… having no hope and without God in the world
… Even your deeds of “righteousness” were as filthy rags.
… You were as an unclean thing, fit for nothing but the hell God prepared for the devil and his angels.
Someone could have said of you, “Let God deliver him, if He will have him” (see Matt. 27:43). But why would God have you? What does life have to do with death, the King of glory with the chief of sinners?
But then we sang… UP FROM THE GRAVE HE AROSE
“Weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning.” Weeping may endure for a night, or for two or three nights, but joy comes in the morning. Don’t you know that all heaven stood to its feet when Jesus broke forth from that tomb! And it wouldn’t be long until His own people would raise a shout from the earth as well. And we’re still rejoicing today, this very morning.
The greater appreciation we have for the darkness of the night, the greater our joy in the morning. The more we realize our hopelessness before coming to Jesus, the greater our rejoicing in Him, who rose for us!
Low in the grave we lay, Hopeless and sin-stained,
Waiting a better day, Should such be gained.
Chorus: Up from the grave He arose,
With a mighty triumph o’er His foes;
He arose a victor from the dark domain,
And He lives forever with His saints to reign.
He arose! He arose! Hallelujah! Christ arose!
Vainly they watch us now, We who in Christ do rest,
Spellbound thy wonder how, We are so blessed.
Chorus
Death now has lost its sting, Conquered by Jesus’ cross;
His praises we now sing, And count all but loss.
Chorus
Though sorrow we still feel, While trusting in His Word;
But now His presence real, Jesus our Lord!
Chorus
Are you low today? Do you feel like you have to pretend to rejoice in Christ’s resurrection? Are you filled with doubts and fears? Does it seem like the Lord has forgotten you? Do you feel powerless to stand against the wiles of the devil? Are you disgusted with yourself, wondering how you can become so cold and hard? Does the Lord’s presence seem far away?
Listen to me. If you belong to the God of glory, the God who raised Jesus from the dead, you can never be as low as you were then, before you passed from death unto life (Jn. 5:24). You were blind, but now you see. You could only see hopelessness, but now we look for that blessed hope and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ (Tit. 2:13). “For our citizenship is in heaven, from whence also we look for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body…” (Phil. 3:20-21).
Are you low this morning? Remember the Word of our God: “Weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning.” Praise God for the good news in Jesus Christ, who rose from the dead. Paul talks about that good news, as he recounts how he was separated unto the gospel. Rom. 1:1-4…
Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God, 2. (Which he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures,) 3. Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; 4. And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:
Rom. 8:32-39…
He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things? 33. Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth. 34. Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us. 35. Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? 36. As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter. 37. Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us. 38. For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, 39. Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Monday, March 17, 2008
Created in God's Image -- 3/16/08
Sunday, March 16, 2008
CREATED IN GOD’S IMAGE
Gen. 1:26-27
Surely we have established that creation, though marred by the sin of mankind, is a marvelous thing. And why is creation so marvelous and in places absolutely breathtaking? Because behind creation stands a wonderfully creative Creator. He is none other than the holy and righteous God revealed in the Bible. “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” It is no wonder we read again and again, “And God saw that it was good” (Gen. 1:4,10,12,18,21,25). But then we read these words in Gen. 1:31, “And God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very good.”
Think about that – very good. Of each successive part of creation, God saw that it was good, but after He had finished it all, it was very good. After verse 25, we still read that it was good, but in 31 we read that it was very good. What was the difference? What was created between verse 25 and verse 31? Check it out. The only thing left to create after verse 25 was man. After the creation of man and woman, God saw that it was very good.
This morning we are going to consider man, the crown of creation. Now when I say “man,” I am referring to mankind, for God created them male and female. We often speak of saving the best for last. That’s what God did; He saved the best for last. All of creation was good, but after the creation of mankind, God said that it was very good. Someone may say, “It wasn’t because of the creation of man; it was because everything had been finished. It was the cumulative effect that caused God to say it was very good.” Perhaps there is some truth in that, but it is no accident that mankind was created last. The creation of the first five and a half days set the stage for the last element, the creation of man. The creation could never be complete until God set man upon the earth.
Even in the narration of these events, there is some fundamentally different about the creation of man. Notice the statement “Let there be…” You can find it in verses 3,6, and 14. Twice we read “Let the earth bring forth” (11,24) and once “Let the waters bring forth” (20). But when it comes to the creation of man, the language is suddenly different. Verse 26, “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.” Now the language is personal. It is no longer, “Let there be,” but “Let us make…” We are being prepared to understand that there is something special about this last part of creation.
Let’s look at four aspects of the creation of man. This is not original with me. I got the basic idea from John MacArthur. These four aspects of man’s creation set man apart from the rest of creation. I will try to set these forth in a way that we can remember them easily. We will not give equal attention to these four, as the first is in my opinion the most important. And for that reason, we will devote our time this morning to the first of these ideas, that man is created in the image of God.
Let’s begin by reading our text carefully. Read Gen. 1:25-31
And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 26. And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 27. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. 28. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. 29. And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. 30. And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so. 31. And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
The first thing that confronts us about the creation of man is that he is to be in the image of God. “Let us make man in our image… So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them” (Gen. 1:26-27). Of which animal, fish, or bird did God say, “Let us make it in our image”? None. Only with respect to man did God speak of His image.
I. Exploring the Image of God in Man
But what is meant by being created in God’s image? Look again at verse 26, “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness…” The Lord is not saying two separate things – Let us make him in our image and in our likeness. Rather, the second phrase gives definition to the first. “Image” and “likeness” refer to the same thing, as is often the case in Hebrew parallelism. To be created in God’s image is to be like Him. The question becomes: So how is man like God? And since no other part of creation was made in God’s image, we can sharpen our question, “How is man like God in a way that no other creature is like God?”
First of all, we can rule out the idea that man was made to look like God. What does God look like? There is a sense in which we can say, “No one knows, for no one has ever seen God.” On the other hand, some might conclude that we do look like God, for we read in the scriptures about God’s hands, face, eyes, ears, nose, tongue, neck, arms, finger, heart, etc. [see page 158 in Grudem]. But as Lee explained three weeks ago, this is an example of anthropomorphic language in the Bible. In other words, the Bible gives us these explanations as a way of helping us to understand God, but the writers do not mean to say that God actually has a nose, tongue, and ears. If we were to press such language, we would have to conclude that God also has feathers and wings. In fact, Jesus tells us in no uncertain terms that “God is [a] Spirit; and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth” (Jn. 4:24).
But wait a minute. What about that conversation between Jesus and Philip in John 14? Let’s read it again. Jn. 14:7-9…
If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him. 8. Philip saith unto him, Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us. 9. Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Show us the Father?
Jesus simply said that when they saw Him, they saw the Father. So if to see Jesus is to see the Father and since Jesus had a physical body, doesn’t that mean that God the Father has a physical body too? Doesn’t this mean to be created in the image of God is to have a physical body like Him? What we must remember is why Jesus has a physical body? This is not part of His likeness to the Father. Let’s go back and read John 1:1-3,14…
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2. The same was in the beginning with God. 3. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made… 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.
The Son of God, the living Word, was not always in a physical body. In the beginning when the Father was creating all things through Him, He had no physical body. "But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, 5. To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons" (Gal. 4:4-5). The reason for Jesus taking on a physical body is more fully explained in Heb. 2:14-17…
Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; 15. And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage. 16. For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham. 17. Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
So if the image of God is not speaking of a physical body, then to what does it refer? If God has no physical body, then how are we like God? How do we differ from the rest of creation? Remember that only man is created in the image of God. John Cross, in his book Stranger on the Road to Emmaus, points to the fact that man, like God, has mind, emotions, and a will. That is, man can think. And man’s ability to think is sometimes staggering. Like God, man also has feelings. No one can deny that fact. And finally, like God, man has a will. Does he ever! Perhaps some of us could be termed “strong-willed adults.” So John Cross finds these three elements as the keys to understanding man being created in the image of God.
I agree that these factors are involved in the image of God. However, all three of these elements are also found in animals, especially the higher animals. Of course, in humans they are present in a much greater degree. Obviously, man has more brain power than a dog. His feelings run deeper than those of the family pet. And his will is stronger than that of an animal, though in some cases that might be questionable. Nevertheless, I emphasize that the difference is only in degree. After all, chimpanzees and dolphins are pretty smart.
II. Coming to the Heart of the Issue
Is there something about man that is totally different from the rest of creation? Is there some difference that is more than a matter of degree. Yes, there certainly is. While we may not find it spelled out in Genesis 1, the rest of the Bible makes it absolutely clear. Here it is: God created man to relate. Man is a relational being. And our text does begin to bring this out, for we are told that God created them male and female.
You may say, “So what? God created all the animals male and female.” While that is true, the first mention of male and female is here in verse 27, “male and female created he them.” While animals are composed of males and females, there is a relational aspect that is not present in animals. While animals can reproduce, they do not relate in the way that human beings do.
So again, is this not just a matter of degree? No, it is more than that. As some have put it, human beings are self-conscious. Animals differ from trees in that they have consciousness. Perhaps that is why the Bible never refers to plants as living. As you go back through chapter 1, you will find that there is no reference to the plants as living. The first mention of life is in verse 20, “Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life…” And again in verse 24, “Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping things, and beast of the earth after his kind…” Unlike plants, animals have consciousness. But unlike the animals, humans are self-conscious. While animals are conscious and can react to their environment, they don’t know who they are. Human beings not only react to their environment, but they are self-conscious. We know who we are (at least, most of us do!).
But let’s go beyond this difference and come to right to the heart of the matter. Not only is man a relational being, but man has the capacity for a relationship with God. This is where the difference is not a matter of degree. Man has what no other creature has – the capacity to relate to God in a meaningful way. Surely this is the key element concerning the image of God.
So man is a relational being. Cut a man off from all relations to other people, and he will not thrive. Man was made to relate to other people and especially to God, for God created man in His own image. God Himself is a relational being and has always been a relational being. We find this truth in the text itself. Though the details are not spelled out, the truth is here. Verse 26, “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.” We have talked about this before. It is no accident that we find the words “us” and “our” in this text.
Consider the word “God” itself. In the Hebrew it is “elohim.” I know very little about the Hebrew language, but I do know that “-im” is the plural ending. The same word is often translated “gods” in the Old Testament, meaning the pagan gods of the nation. The context determines to what it refers. Here’s the point: the Hebrew word for “God” (or “gods”) is plural. We read in Deut. 6:4, “Hear, O Israel; the LORD our God is one LORD.” It’s kind of ironic – “Our gods is one.” His name is plural, and yet He is one.
We have talked about this before. Because we know the clear teaching of the New Testament, we can see the Trinity in Genesis 1. “In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth.” Then at the end of verse 2, “And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.” Now in 1:26, “And God said, Let us make man in our image…” We see the Father, the Spirit, and the Son right here in Genesis 1.
I repeat – God is a relational being. God has always been in relationship. It didn’t begin with the creation of the universe. No, before He created anything, there was God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. And within the godhead we see relationship. The first place we see it is right here in 1:26, “Let us make man in our image.” In Ps. 2:7, we find God the Father saying to the Son, “Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee. Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession. Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel.” Or consider the words of David in Ps. 110:1, “The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.” When Peter preached on the day of Pentecost, he confirmed that this was indeed God the Father speaking to the Son (see Acts 2:33-35).
Again, we can see this relationship in the creation. Who created the universe? God the Father, for we read, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” But don’t forget that it was the Spirit of God that moved upon the face of the waters. But what about the Son? We read it earlier in John 1:1-3, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2. The same was in the beginning with God. 3. All things were made by [literally “through”] him; and without him was not any thing made that was made." Jesus was the agent of all creation. The Father did it, but He did it through the Son. We can find the same thing in Colossians 1. Let’s begin in verse 14 to make sure we understand that Paul is talking about Jesus, the Son of God. Col. 1:14-17…
In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: 15. Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 16. For by him [or “in him”] were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 17. And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
Do you see? There was relationship in the godhead before the creation of the world. Who was it that decided the Son would be made flesh and dwell among us? Surely it was decided in the council of the Trinity. As Jesus was praying to the Father that last night, He spoke these words: “Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee: 2. As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him" (Jn. 17:1a-2). And when did the Father give these to Jesus? Paul tells us that we who are the children of God were chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world. We could go on and on, but the simple point is that there has always been relationship in the godhead. God, who is trinity, is a relational being. And when He created man in His own image, He created him as a relational being. We see it all around us, as human beings relate to one another. But we see it even more in man’s capacity to relate to God Himself.
Now the most marvelous and intimate of all human relationships is that found in marriage. While it is true that all males and females do not marry, it seems clear that the creation of mankind as male and female is the foundation for marriage. When Jesus was confronted by the Pharisees concerning the issue of marriage and divorce, Jesus responded by quoting from the scripture: “Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female…?” (Matt. 19:4). As we know from Paul’s letter to the Ephesians, the male-female relationship in marriage is a picture of Christ and His church. The creation of mankind as male and female is all about relationship, because we are created in the image of a relational God.
III. Is Man the Crown of Creation?
We obviously aren’t going to deal with the four aspects of man’s creation; we have only dealt with the first. We could go on, but I want us to linger on this idea that God made man in His image, that God made man to relate. Let’s also go back to what I said at the beginning about man being the pinnacle of God’s creation. God saved the best for last. Yes, man is the crown of God’s creation.
Would it be proper to say that everything else set the stage for the creation of man? What do you think? It sounds good, but maybe there is a problem there. It could sound like I am saying that man is the measure of all things, that everything in the universe revolves around man. You probably know me well enough to know that I wouldn’t want to say that, for I believe one of the greatest problems in our world is man-centeredness. Nevertheless, it is difficult to escape the idea that God did indeed save the best for last, that everything else prepared the stage for the creation of mankind. After all, who was it that named the animals? Who was it that would rule over the animals?
Before we go any further, we have to come back to that question that we talk about from time to time: Why did God create man in the first place? Some say that God created man so that He would have someone to fellowship with. The idea is that God was lonely and needed someone to whom He could relate. That is heresy. While it is true that God is a relational being, as we have seen, we must never think of God as needing anything or anyone outside Himself. God didn’t need anyone to whom He could relate, because He had Himself in His trinitarian form. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit related to one another and they were perfectly content to do so. Go back to Jesus’ prayer in John 17. Let’s read Jn. 17:4-5, “I have glorified You on the earth. I have finished the work which You have given Me to do. And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was” (NKJV). Now does it sound like Jesus was lonely before He came to this earth?
If God didn’t create man because He needed someone, then why did He create him? Again, let’s be clear that man is indeed the pinnacle of all creation. Man is not on a par with animals. Let's illustrate it. I need three volunteers...
[Have the three volunteers come to the front and explain as you go. On one side have the person hold up his fist, representing a one-celled organism. In the middle, have another volunteer represent a chimpanzee. Tell him to look like one! Then on the opposite side have the third volunteer represent a human being.]
Now let me ask you this question: Is there a greater difference between the one-celled organism and the chimpanzee or between the chimpanzee and the human being? (Give some time to think). Yes, the greater difference is between the chimpanzee and the human being. The difference between a one-celled organism and the chimpanzee is nothing compared with the difference between that chimpanzee and the human being. We live in a society that is increasingly accepting the concept that the life of an animal is almost as sacred as the life of a man or woman. That is one of the consequences of evolutionary thought. That kind of thinking makes man little more than an animal. No, that is wrong; man and man alone is created in the image of God.
BUT, and let emphasize that “but”… But, though man is at the top of God’s creation, let us not misunderstand the purposes of God. Why did God create man? Let me put it in terms of Genesis 24. Does Genesis 24 ring any bells for you? Abraham had a very precious son whose name was Isaac. Isaac had the love of his father. Materially, he had everything anyone could want, because his father was very rich. Nevertheless, Abraham loved his son Isaac and wanted him to be blessed with a wife. Not just any wife would do. Abraham would not take a bride for his son from among the surrounding Canaanites. No, he would send his servant back to his own people. That servant would travel over 500 miles (maybe a good bit farther) to find a bride for Isaac.
And who would that bride be? Yes, Rebekah. Rebekah was minding her own business when a man from afar comes and tells her and her family that she is the one for his master’s son Isaac. Was Rebekah blessed? Indeed she was. Though she would have to leave her family and everything she had known, she would be the wife of one of the great patriarchs. She would give birth to Jacob, who would become Israel. All the riches of Abraham and Isaac would be hers. Now let me ask you a question: Was Abraham acting primarily on behalf of Rebekah? NO. He was acting on behalf of the son whom he loved so dearly.
Are you following me? I am using Genesis 24 as a picture of something far greater. In the same way that Abraham desired and sought a bride for his son, so God the Father desires and is providing a bride for His Son Jesus. Ultimately, this is why He created man. Does He love the people who will make up the bride? Absolutely. Nevertheless, His primary motive is to honor and bless His Son. I am suggesting to you that when God said, “Let us make man in our image,” He was already thinking of a bride for His Son.
And what evidence do we have for such thinking? How can we have any inkling about God’s plan before the creation of mankind? Because of the Word of God. 1 Pet. 1:18-2…
Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; 19. But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: 20. Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,
Jesus Christ was foreordained before the foundation of the world. Foreordained to what? Rev. 13:8 speaks of “the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.” Before creation, God had already planned the crucifixion of His Son. Let’s read II Tim. 1:8-10…
Be not thou therefore ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me his prisoner: but be thou partaker of the afflictions of the gospel according to the power of God; 9. Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began, 10. But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel:
Paul says that God’s own purpose and grace was given to us in Christ Jesus before the world began. No wonder Paul writes these words to the Ephesians in Eph. 1:3-6…
Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ: 4. According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: 5. Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, 6. To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.
We who are God’s children were chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world. Brothers and sisters, I am simply saying that God already knew what He was going to do before He created mankind, and the plan was centered in Jesus Christ.
You may say, “That makes it seem that man is only a means to an end, that man was created only to bring honor and glory to the Son.” That is exactly what I’m saying. But isn’t that degrading to man? Let me answer that in two ways. First of all, go back to Isaac and Rebekah. Was it degrading for Rebekah to leave her home and family and become the wife of a man who was one of the great names of the Old Testament, to leave paganism and come to a place where she could know the true God? And now for a more direct answer, come back to Eph. 1:3, “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in the heavenly places in Christ.” Blessed be God, but also blessed be us who are His children, for we have been given every spiritual blessing in Christ.
Salvation is a wonderful thing. There is no glory greater than being a Son of God, but it’s all a part of the bigger picture. Our glory and blessing is in Christ. As those who have been espoused to Christ, our glory is in the preparation to be His bride for all eternity. Our focus is not upon ourselves, but upon Him who gave Himself for us.
“But I thought God loved us.” God does indeed love us. He loves us enough to strip our self-focus and self-glorification and set our minds on Him who is worthy of all glory, the Lord Jesus Christ. And this fits in perfectly with the concept of the image of God. Man has marred that image, primarily by focusing on self, by looking in the mirror. But praise God that He has undertaken to restore His image in man. But how can He do that? 2 Cor. 3:18, "But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord." As we behold the glory of our Lord, we are changed into His image from one degree of glory to another. God began His work in man at the creation in Gen. 1. He continued the work when He made us a new creation, as Paul spoke of in Eph. 2:10. He continues to restore the image in us and will finally complete the work when we are glorified with Him. 1 John 3:2, "Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is."
Yes, God loves us enough to turn our world upside down, so that we understand that man is not the center of the universe. When Paul tells us to stop being conformed to this world, surely one of the central aspects of the world's thinking is the concept that everything must revolve around man. God loves us enough to open our eyes and see that in reality everything revolves around His glory.
Conclusion
Yes, man is the crown of God’s creation, but it isn’t because of anything we have done or would do. Man is the crown of God’s creation because out of man God will take a bride for His Son. And that was His plan from before the foundation of the world. God has given man an elevated place in the creation, as we will discuss later. But over all of it is the Creator. We give all reverence and glory to Him, who is revealed to us as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
CREATED IN GOD’S IMAGE
Gen. 1:26-27
Surely we have established that creation, though marred by the sin of mankind, is a marvelous thing. And why is creation so marvelous and in places absolutely breathtaking? Because behind creation stands a wonderfully creative Creator. He is none other than the holy and righteous God revealed in the Bible. “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” It is no wonder we read again and again, “And God saw that it was good” (Gen. 1:4,10,12,18,21,25). But then we read these words in Gen. 1:31, “And God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very good.”
Think about that – very good. Of each successive part of creation, God saw that it was good, but after He had finished it all, it was very good. After verse 25, we still read that it was good, but in 31 we read that it was very good. What was the difference? What was created between verse 25 and verse 31? Check it out. The only thing left to create after verse 25 was man. After the creation of man and woman, God saw that it was very good.
This morning we are going to consider man, the crown of creation. Now when I say “man,” I am referring to mankind, for God created them male and female. We often speak of saving the best for last. That’s what God did; He saved the best for last. All of creation was good, but after the creation of mankind, God said that it was very good. Someone may say, “It wasn’t because of the creation of man; it was because everything had been finished. It was the cumulative effect that caused God to say it was very good.” Perhaps there is some truth in that, but it is no accident that mankind was created last. The creation of the first five and a half days set the stage for the last element, the creation of man. The creation could never be complete until God set man upon the earth.
Even in the narration of these events, there is some fundamentally different about the creation of man. Notice the statement “Let there be…” You can find it in verses 3,6, and 14. Twice we read “Let the earth bring forth” (11,24) and once “Let the waters bring forth” (20). But when it comes to the creation of man, the language is suddenly different. Verse 26, “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.” Now the language is personal. It is no longer, “Let there be,” but “Let us make…” We are being prepared to understand that there is something special about this last part of creation.
Let’s look at four aspects of the creation of man. This is not original with me. I got the basic idea from John MacArthur. These four aspects of man’s creation set man apart from the rest of creation. I will try to set these forth in a way that we can remember them easily. We will not give equal attention to these four, as the first is in my opinion the most important. And for that reason, we will devote our time this morning to the first of these ideas, that man is created in the image of God.
Let’s begin by reading our text carefully. Read Gen. 1:25-31
And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 26. And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 27. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. 28. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. 29. And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. 30. And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so. 31. And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
The first thing that confronts us about the creation of man is that he is to be in the image of God. “Let us make man in our image… So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them” (Gen. 1:26-27). Of which animal, fish, or bird did God say, “Let us make it in our image”? None. Only with respect to man did God speak of His image.
I. Exploring the Image of God in Man
But what is meant by being created in God’s image? Look again at verse 26, “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness…” The Lord is not saying two separate things – Let us make him in our image and in our likeness. Rather, the second phrase gives definition to the first. “Image” and “likeness” refer to the same thing, as is often the case in Hebrew parallelism. To be created in God’s image is to be like Him. The question becomes: So how is man like God? And since no other part of creation was made in God’s image, we can sharpen our question, “How is man like God in a way that no other creature is like God?”
First of all, we can rule out the idea that man was made to look like God. What does God look like? There is a sense in which we can say, “No one knows, for no one has ever seen God.” On the other hand, some might conclude that we do look like God, for we read in the scriptures about God’s hands, face, eyes, ears, nose, tongue, neck, arms, finger, heart, etc. [see page 158 in Grudem]. But as Lee explained three weeks ago, this is an example of anthropomorphic language in the Bible. In other words, the Bible gives us these explanations as a way of helping us to understand God, but the writers do not mean to say that God actually has a nose, tongue, and ears. If we were to press such language, we would have to conclude that God also has feathers and wings. In fact, Jesus tells us in no uncertain terms that “God is [a] Spirit; and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth” (Jn. 4:24).
But wait a minute. What about that conversation between Jesus and Philip in John 14? Let’s read it again. Jn. 14:7-9…
If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him. 8. Philip saith unto him, Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us. 9. Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Show us the Father?
Jesus simply said that when they saw Him, they saw the Father. So if to see Jesus is to see the Father and since Jesus had a physical body, doesn’t that mean that God the Father has a physical body too? Doesn’t this mean to be created in the image of God is to have a physical body like Him? What we must remember is why Jesus has a physical body? This is not part of His likeness to the Father. Let’s go back and read John 1:1-3,14…
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2. The same was in the beginning with God. 3. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made… 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.
The Son of God, the living Word, was not always in a physical body. In the beginning when the Father was creating all things through Him, He had no physical body. "But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, 5. To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons" (Gal. 4:4-5). The reason for Jesus taking on a physical body is more fully explained in Heb. 2:14-17…
Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; 15. And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage. 16. For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham. 17. Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
So if the image of God is not speaking of a physical body, then to what does it refer? If God has no physical body, then how are we like God? How do we differ from the rest of creation? Remember that only man is created in the image of God. John Cross, in his book Stranger on the Road to Emmaus, points to the fact that man, like God, has mind, emotions, and a will. That is, man can think. And man’s ability to think is sometimes staggering. Like God, man also has feelings. No one can deny that fact. And finally, like God, man has a will. Does he ever! Perhaps some of us could be termed “strong-willed adults.” So John Cross finds these three elements as the keys to understanding man being created in the image of God.
I agree that these factors are involved in the image of God. However, all three of these elements are also found in animals, especially the higher animals. Of course, in humans they are present in a much greater degree. Obviously, man has more brain power than a dog. His feelings run deeper than those of the family pet. And his will is stronger than that of an animal, though in some cases that might be questionable. Nevertheless, I emphasize that the difference is only in degree. After all, chimpanzees and dolphins are pretty smart.
II. Coming to the Heart of the Issue
Is there something about man that is totally different from the rest of creation? Is there some difference that is more than a matter of degree. Yes, there certainly is. While we may not find it spelled out in Genesis 1, the rest of the Bible makes it absolutely clear. Here it is: God created man to relate. Man is a relational being. And our text does begin to bring this out, for we are told that God created them male and female.
You may say, “So what? God created all the animals male and female.” While that is true, the first mention of male and female is here in verse 27, “male and female created he them.” While animals are composed of males and females, there is a relational aspect that is not present in animals. While animals can reproduce, they do not relate in the way that human beings do.
So again, is this not just a matter of degree? No, it is more than that. As some have put it, human beings are self-conscious. Animals differ from trees in that they have consciousness. Perhaps that is why the Bible never refers to plants as living. As you go back through chapter 1, you will find that there is no reference to the plants as living. The first mention of life is in verse 20, “Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life…” And again in verse 24, “Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping things, and beast of the earth after his kind…” Unlike plants, animals have consciousness. But unlike the animals, humans are self-conscious. While animals are conscious and can react to their environment, they don’t know who they are. Human beings not only react to their environment, but they are self-conscious. We know who we are (at least, most of us do!).
But let’s go beyond this difference and come to right to the heart of the matter. Not only is man a relational being, but man has the capacity for a relationship with God. This is where the difference is not a matter of degree. Man has what no other creature has – the capacity to relate to God in a meaningful way. Surely this is the key element concerning the image of God.
So man is a relational being. Cut a man off from all relations to other people, and he will not thrive. Man was made to relate to other people and especially to God, for God created man in His own image. God Himself is a relational being and has always been a relational being. We find this truth in the text itself. Though the details are not spelled out, the truth is here. Verse 26, “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.” We have talked about this before. It is no accident that we find the words “us” and “our” in this text.
Consider the word “God” itself. In the Hebrew it is “elohim.” I know very little about the Hebrew language, but I do know that “-im” is the plural ending. The same word is often translated “gods” in the Old Testament, meaning the pagan gods of the nation. The context determines to what it refers. Here’s the point: the Hebrew word for “God” (or “gods”) is plural. We read in Deut. 6:4, “Hear, O Israel; the LORD our God is one LORD.” It’s kind of ironic – “Our gods is one.” His name is plural, and yet He is one.
We have talked about this before. Because we know the clear teaching of the New Testament, we can see the Trinity in Genesis 1. “In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth.” Then at the end of verse 2, “And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.” Now in 1:26, “And God said, Let us make man in our image…” We see the Father, the Spirit, and the Son right here in Genesis 1.
I repeat – God is a relational being. God has always been in relationship. It didn’t begin with the creation of the universe. No, before He created anything, there was God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. And within the godhead we see relationship. The first place we see it is right here in 1:26, “Let us make man in our image.” In Ps. 2:7, we find God the Father saying to the Son, “Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee. Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession. Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel.” Or consider the words of David in Ps. 110:1, “The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.” When Peter preached on the day of Pentecost, he confirmed that this was indeed God the Father speaking to the Son (see Acts 2:33-35).
Again, we can see this relationship in the creation. Who created the universe? God the Father, for we read, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” But don’t forget that it was the Spirit of God that moved upon the face of the waters. But what about the Son? We read it earlier in John 1:1-3, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2. The same was in the beginning with God. 3. All things were made by [literally “through”] him; and without him was not any thing made that was made." Jesus was the agent of all creation. The Father did it, but He did it through the Son. We can find the same thing in Colossians 1. Let’s begin in verse 14 to make sure we understand that Paul is talking about Jesus, the Son of God. Col. 1:14-17…
In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: 15. Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 16. For by him [or “in him”] were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 17. And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
Do you see? There was relationship in the godhead before the creation of the world. Who was it that decided the Son would be made flesh and dwell among us? Surely it was decided in the council of the Trinity. As Jesus was praying to the Father that last night, He spoke these words: “Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee: 2. As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him" (Jn. 17:1a-2). And when did the Father give these to Jesus? Paul tells us that we who are the children of God were chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world. We could go on and on, but the simple point is that there has always been relationship in the godhead. God, who is trinity, is a relational being. And when He created man in His own image, He created him as a relational being. We see it all around us, as human beings relate to one another. But we see it even more in man’s capacity to relate to God Himself.
Now the most marvelous and intimate of all human relationships is that found in marriage. While it is true that all males and females do not marry, it seems clear that the creation of mankind as male and female is the foundation for marriage. When Jesus was confronted by the Pharisees concerning the issue of marriage and divorce, Jesus responded by quoting from the scripture: “Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female…?” (Matt. 19:4). As we know from Paul’s letter to the Ephesians, the male-female relationship in marriage is a picture of Christ and His church. The creation of mankind as male and female is all about relationship, because we are created in the image of a relational God.
III. Is Man the Crown of Creation?
We obviously aren’t going to deal with the four aspects of man’s creation; we have only dealt with the first. We could go on, but I want us to linger on this idea that God made man in His image, that God made man to relate. Let’s also go back to what I said at the beginning about man being the pinnacle of God’s creation. God saved the best for last. Yes, man is the crown of God’s creation.
Would it be proper to say that everything else set the stage for the creation of man? What do you think? It sounds good, but maybe there is a problem there. It could sound like I am saying that man is the measure of all things, that everything in the universe revolves around man. You probably know me well enough to know that I wouldn’t want to say that, for I believe one of the greatest problems in our world is man-centeredness. Nevertheless, it is difficult to escape the idea that God did indeed save the best for last, that everything else prepared the stage for the creation of mankind. After all, who was it that named the animals? Who was it that would rule over the animals?
Before we go any further, we have to come back to that question that we talk about from time to time: Why did God create man in the first place? Some say that God created man so that He would have someone to fellowship with. The idea is that God was lonely and needed someone to whom He could relate. That is heresy. While it is true that God is a relational being, as we have seen, we must never think of God as needing anything or anyone outside Himself. God didn’t need anyone to whom He could relate, because He had Himself in His trinitarian form. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit related to one another and they were perfectly content to do so. Go back to Jesus’ prayer in John 17. Let’s read Jn. 17:4-5, “I have glorified You on the earth. I have finished the work which You have given Me to do. And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was” (NKJV). Now does it sound like Jesus was lonely before He came to this earth?
If God didn’t create man because He needed someone, then why did He create him? Again, let’s be clear that man is indeed the pinnacle of all creation. Man is not on a par with animals. Let's illustrate it. I need three volunteers...
[Have the three volunteers come to the front and explain as you go. On one side have the person hold up his fist, representing a one-celled organism. In the middle, have another volunteer represent a chimpanzee. Tell him to look like one! Then on the opposite side have the third volunteer represent a human being.]
Now let me ask you this question: Is there a greater difference between the one-celled organism and the chimpanzee or between the chimpanzee and the human being? (Give some time to think). Yes, the greater difference is between the chimpanzee and the human being. The difference between a one-celled organism and the chimpanzee is nothing compared with the difference between that chimpanzee and the human being. We live in a society that is increasingly accepting the concept that the life of an animal is almost as sacred as the life of a man or woman. That is one of the consequences of evolutionary thought. That kind of thinking makes man little more than an animal. No, that is wrong; man and man alone is created in the image of God.
BUT, and let emphasize that “but”… But, though man is at the top of God’s creation, let us not misunderstand the purposes of God. Why did God create man? Let me put it in terms of Genesis 24. Does Genesis 24 ring any bells for you? Abraham had a very precious son whose name was Isaac. Isaac had the love of his father. Materially, he had everything anyone could want, because his father was very rich. Nevertheless, Abraham loved his son Isaac and wanted him to be blessed with a wife. Not just any wife would do. Abraham would not take a bride for his son from among the surrounding Canaanites. No, he would send his servant back to his own people. That servant would travel over 500 miles (maybe a good bit farther) to find a bride for Isaac.
And who would that bride be? Yes, Rebekah. Rebekah was minding her own business when a man from afar comes and tells her and her family that she is the one for his master’s son Isaac. Was Rebekah blessed? Indeed she was. Though she would have to leave her family and everything she had known, she would be the wife of one of the great patriarchs. She would give birth to Jacob, who would become Israel. All the riches of Abraham and Isaac would be hers. Now let me ask you a question: Was Abraham acting primarily on behalf of Rebekah? NO. He was acting on behalf of the son whom he loved so dearly.
Are you following me? I am using Genesis 24 as a picture of something far greater. In the same way that Abraham desired and sought a bride for his son, so God the Father desires and is providing a bride for His Son Jesus. Ultimately, this is why He created man. Does He love the people who will make up the bride? Absolutely. Nevertheless, His primary motive is to honor and bless His Son. I am suggesting to you that when God said, “Let us make man in our image,” He was already thinking of a bride for His Son.
And what evidence do we have for such thinking? How can we have any inkling about God’s plan before the creation of mankind? Because of the Word of God. 1 Pet. 1:18-2…
Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; 19. But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: 20. Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,
Jesus Christ was foreordained before the foundation of the world. Foreordained to what? Rev. 13:8 speaks of “the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.” Before creation, God had already planned the crucifixion of His Son. Let’s read II Tim. 1:8-10…
Be not thou therefore ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me his prisoner: but be thou partaker of the afflictions of the gospel according to the power of God; 9. Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began, 10. But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel:
Paul says that God’s own purpose and grace was given to us in Christ Jesus before the world began. No wonder Paul writes these words to the Ephesians in Eph. 1:3-6…
Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ: 4. According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: 5. Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, 6. To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.
We who are God’s children were chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world. Brothers and sisters, I am simply saying that God already knew what He was going to do before He created mankind, and the plan was centered in Jesus Christ.
You may say, “That makes it seem that man is only a means to an end, that man was created only to bring honor and glory to the Son.” That is exactly what I’m saying. But isn’t that degrading to man? Let me answer that in two ways. First of all, go back to Isaac and Rebekah. Was it degrading for Rebekah to leave her home and family and become the wife of a man who was one of the great names of the Old Testament, to leave paganism and come to a place where she could know the true God? And now for a more direct answer, come back to Eph. 1:3, “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in the heavenly places in Christ.” Blessed be God, but also blessed be us who are His children, for we have been given every spiritual blessing in Christ.
Salvation is a wonderful thing. There is no glory greater than being a Son of God, but it’s all a part of the bigger picture. Our glory and blessing is in Christ. As those who have been espoused to Christ, our glory is in the preparation to be His bride for all eternity. Our focus is not upon ourselves, but upon Him who gave Himself for us.
“But I thought God loved us.” God does indeed love us. He loves us enough to strip our self-focus and self-glorification and set our minds on Him who is worthy of all glory, the Lord Jesus Christ. And this fits in perfectly with the concept of the image of God. Man has marred that image, primarily by focusing on self, by looking in the mirror. But praise God that He has undertaken to restore His image in man. But how can He do that? 2 Cor. 3:18, "But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord." As we behold the glory of our Lord, we are changed into His image from one degree of glory to another. God began His work in man at the creation in Gen. 1. He continued the work when He made us a new creation, as Paul spoke of in Eph. 2:10. He continues to restore the image in us and will finally complete the work when we are glorified with Him. 1 John 3:2, "Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is."
Yes, God loves us enough to turn our world upside down, so that we understand that man is not the center of the universe. When Paul tells us to stop being conformed to this world, surely one of the central aspects of the world's thinking is the concept that everything must revolve around man. God loves us enough to open our eyes and see that in reality everything revolves around His glory.
Conclusion
Yes, man is the crown of God’s creation, but it isn’t because of anything we have done or would do. Man is the crown of God’s creation because out of man God will take a bride for His Son. And that was His plan from before the foundation of the world. God has given man an elevated place in the creation, as we will discuss later. But over all of it is the Creator. We give all reverence and glory to Him, who is revealed to us as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Sunday, March 9, 2008
God's Love through Discipline -- 3/9/08
Sunday, March 9, 2008
GOD’S LOVE THROUGH DISCIPLINE
Matt. 16:13-19; 18:15-20
Do we have a loving God? That is not a trick question, though I hope that we have learned that we must define our terms. I’m not talking about a Santa Claus God. I’m not talking about a God who will overlook sin and pretend it doesn’t exist. I’m talking about the loving God who is described in I John 4:8-10…
He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love. 9. In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him. 10. Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.
Is that the God we serve, the God who loved us enough to send His Son to take the divine wrath upon Himself, to be the substitute for us? Yes, we serve a loving God, for God is love!
Those of us who know this God through faith in Jesus Christ will spend eternity exploring the depths of His love. But in the present, what do you appreciate about His love? Have you ever thought about that? It might be a great question to meditate on, don’t you think? What do you appreciate about God’s love?
I. God Demonstrates His Love through Discipline
This morning I want to explore one way in which our God demonstrates His love. Yes, He sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins, but His love didn’t stop there? As Paul puts it in Rom. 5:10, "For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life." It’s even clearer in Rom. 8:32, "He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?" How great is His love to those who are now His sons and daughters?
Did you grow up with loving parents? I did. When I say that I had loving parents, I could tell you about all the ways my parents loved me. So what will I tell you? Will I tell you that they bought me more presents than the parents of other kids? Will I tell you that we lived in the finest house in the neighborhood? Or that we drove the most expensive car on the block? Will I tell you that my parents allowed me to go wherever I wanted? No, I wouldn’t tell you any of those things, because that wouldn’t be true. I suppose the first thing I would tell you is that my parents loved me enough to discipline me. And I must tell you that this is a very biblical answer, for we read in Prov. 13:24, "He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes." Translators differ on the way they render the word translated “betimes” by the King James…
… Amplified: “punishes him early”
… NASV: “disciplines him diligently”
… NIV: “is careful to discipline him”
… NKJV: “disciplines him promptly”
My parents must have read it, “whips him early and often.” I don’t know where they got the concept, but they must have received a heavy dose of teaching along these lines.
Don’t feel sorry for me. My parents proved their love for me by disciplining me. They not only gave me the positive discipline of teaching, but they blessed me with corrective discipline. We read in Prov 23:13-14, "Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die. 14. Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell." I don’t know that my dad knew that scripture, but he certainly understood the concept, and he did indeed prepare me for heaven!
Now you understand that I am being a bit facetious. On the other hand, I am speaking with a certain seriousness. It is certainly true that we need to understand that the rod of the Proverbs is a tool that must be used wisely and skillfully. The Proverbs do not excuse a parent who inflicts physical injury upon his child. Such a practice is wicked and is not endorsed by the scripture. Nevertheless, a lack of true discipline in the home indicates a lack of love. Though my parents weren’t perfect in their practice of discipline, they were effective in that their discipline proved to me that they loved me.
Now with that in mind let me read you one of the greatest love passages in all the Bible. It is found in Heb. 12:5-11…
And ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh unto you as unto children, My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him: 6. For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. 7. If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? 8. But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons. 9. Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live? 10. For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness. 11. Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby.
Many of you will recognize that the writer of Hebrews quotes from that same book of Proverbs. Let’s read it in Prov. 3:11-12, "My son, despise not the chastening of the LORD; neither be weary of his correction: 12. For whom the LORD loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth." Isn’t that beautiful? If that is true of an earthly father who always falls short in his administration of discipline, how much more can we see the love of our Heavenly Father, who disciplines us for our profit and for His glory! On the other hand, if you are not disciplined/corrected/chastened by God, you can rest assured that you are not His child.
II. Jesus, Peter, and the Keys to the Kingdom
Now let’s change gears and read from Matt. 16:13-19…
When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? 14. And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. 15. He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? 16. And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. 17. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. 18. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
Focus on verses 18-19, “And I say unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” Notice that Jesus told Peter He would give unto him the keys of the kingdom of heaven. That sounds like a very significant promise, and indeed it is. But what does it mean? A key opens the door. It unlocks something so that we may enter in. So what was it that Peter would be able to unlock?
Let’s turn to Luke 11 and notice one specific way that Jesus speaks of a key. This is one of those times when Jesus was pronouncing a series of “woes” upon the scribes and Pharisees (vss. 42-47, 53). Then in verse 52 (as in 46) Jesus refers to them as lawyers. He is calling attention to the fact that they were the recognized experts in understanding, interpreting, and teaching the law of God. Listen to what He says to them in verse 52, "Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered." Jesus accused them of taking away the key of knowledge. Through the knowledge of the scriptures, they should have entered into God’s truth and ultimately into His kingdom. But because of their impure motives and misinterpretation of God’s Word, not only were they not entering into truth and into the kingdom, but they were also hindering others. They had taken away the key of understanding. They had clouded the truth of God’s Word, and that was a serious thing.
Now come back to what Jesus said to Peter: “I will give unto you the keys of the kingdom of heaven.” Peter would not be like those law experts who took away the key of knowledge. Rather, because Jesus had opened the scriptures to Peter and would empower Him with the Holy Spirit, Peter would use the key of knowledge to open the door to the kingdom. We see the fulfillment of this promise especially in Acts 2, when Peter stood before thousands and proclaimed the good news of the kingdom. As a result of Peter’s preaching, we read in Acts 2:41, "Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls." Yes, Peter faithfully used the key that Jesus gave to him.
But come back again to Matt. 16:19 and notice that Jesus didn’t promise to give Peter the key to the kingdom of heaven, but the “keys.” It is plural. Jesus speaks of more than one key. In order to explore this more fully, let’s ask this question: “Is there any other place where Jesus speaks of giving the keys of the kingdom?” Not specifically, though Jesus does say in Rev. 1:18 that He has the keys of hell and death. But notice again the context in Matt. 16:19, "And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." Jesus associates the giving of the keys very closely with this binding loosing. While in no other place does Jesus say, “I will give you the keys of the kingdom,” He does speak of this same binding and loosing in Matthew 18. Let’s read it in Matt. 18:18, "Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
So we see that Jesus repeats these words. Here is the question: In chapter 18, to whom is Jesus speaking? This is where the old English of the King James is very helpful. In 16:19, it is “I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom, and whatsoever thou shalt bind…” But in 18:18, it is “Verily, I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind…” In chapter 16, Jesus is speaking to one individual, and that individual is Peter, but here in chapter 18 Jesus is speaking to a group of individuals, as He uses the plural. A look at the context makes it clear that Jesus is now speaking to His disciples (it would seem to the Twelve). So what Jesus said to Peter about binding and loosing He now says to His disciples, to the Twelve. And while He does not repeat the words about giving the keys, I want to suggest to you that the keys and the binding and loosing are tied closely together.
III. The Disciplinary Process of Matthew 18
In order to get an idea of what Jesus is here saying to His apostles, we need to go back to verse 15. Let’s read Matt. 18:15-20…
Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. 16. But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. 17. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a publican. 18. Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. 19. Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven. 20. For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.
If your brother (or sister) sins against you, here is what you are to do. You must go and speak to him privately, even as we are told in Prov. 25:9, “Debate thy cause with thy neighbor himself; and discover not a secret to another.” Of course, we have to be careful that we not wear our feelings on our sleeve and begin to think that we are constantly being sinned against, for we read in Ps. 119:165, “Great peace have they that love thy law, and nothing shall offend them.” If you discover that you are easily offended, get in the Word of God and stay there. But if there is genuine offense, if someone does wrong you and you can’t get by it, then go to him and speak to him privately about the matter. Notice that we are not told to discuss it with someone else, not even with a pastor. Jesus does not say, “Just give it some time and you will get over it.” He says to go directly to the brother or sister and deal with it privately. If we took this more seriously, not only would we avoid many misunderstandings, but we would find our relationships strengthened.
If your brother refuses to hear you, if you don’t get anywhere, then take one or two people with you to talk to this one who has sinned against you. Since you and this Christian brother or sister cannot solve things by yourself, get another person or two to help you out. And if the process has to be taken further, they will serve as witnesses. Again, this concept comes straight out of the Old Testament, for we read in Deut. 19:15, "One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established" (also in Dt. 17:6).
If the offender still can’t be swayed and the differences can’t be resolved, then tell it to the church. We will talk more about the details of this at a later time, but make no mistake that Jesus says we are to tell it to the church. If it is found that this offending brother is indeed in the wrong and he will not listen, then the church is to treat him as a heathen and a tax collector. He is not to be included in the fellowship of the church until the time when he is willing to repent.
Much more could be said about these verses, but this is enough to set the context for verse 18. It is after these instructions that Jesus now says, “Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” What is Jesus saying here? Has He suddenly switched to a different subject? No, He certainly has not. Verse 18 is tied closely to what He has just said about dealing lovingly but firmly with the stubborn brother who refuses to repent.
Think about it for a moment. This stubborn brother has been warned by the church, but he refuses to hear. So the church, under the direction of its spiritual leaders, has expelled him from the fellowship (see I Cor. 5 for a concrete example). This is a very serious thing. How could a church ever do such a thing? Did Jesus not say, “Judge not, that ye be not judged?” We have been over that text a number of times and we won’t go back there this morning, but I will remind you of what Paul said when he was dealing with a concrete case. 1 Cor. 5:12-13, "For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within? 13. But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person." But still, this is strong medicine. How can we take upon ourselves this kind of responsibility and authority? Jesus gives us the answer here in verse 18, “Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”
In order to explain how these words were intended to be encouragement, I must first deal with the terms “binding” and “loosing.” I hear people talk about binding Satan. You might get that from other passages, but certainly not from this passage. That is not what Jesus is talking about. These were common terms used by the rabbis of that day. To bind something was to forbid it; to loose something was to allow it. To bind was to restrict; to loose was to permit. Here Jesus applies these terms to binding the unrepentant brother. They were to bind him in that they were not to allow him to be a part of the fellowship. If he were loosed, he would be allowed to participate. And that was the goal, that he might ultimately be restored to fellowship, at which time he would be “loosed” to participate fully.
The next thing we have to deal with in verse 18 is the translation of the verb tenses. The King James and most of your translations will read something like this: “And whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven.” It is sometimes difficult to know if the English of today and the English of 1611 say the same thing. For example, the KJV says in John 14:2, “In my Father’s house are many mansions…” Jesus was not talking about a huge, sprawling house with 42 rooms, but that’s what we think about today. The problem is not that the King James translators missed Jesus’ meaning; the problem is that “mansion” doesn’t mean the same thing today as it did in 1611. That may be the case with our current text. The force of the Greek text (over which there is absolutely no dispute) is best brought out by the New American Standard Version: “Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.” In other words, the action taken in heaven comes before the action taken on earth. By the way, the translation is 16:19 is exactly the same, with the action in heaven coming first.
So now let’s come back to our context again. How can the church even think of treating one of its own as a pagan and a tax collector? Surely that is a heavy responsibility. Is that not why Jesus gives us the words of verse 18? Let me paraphrase the idea something like this: “Though this is a heavy responsibility, and granted that it is not a light thing to exclude someone from the fellowship of the church, rest assured that the decision you render has already been made in heaven. You are simply agreeing with the Father.”
Let’s look at it practically. From the outside, the situation appears like this. Don did not like the fact that the church appointed Lester to a certain position. Don had wanted that position for years. He expressed his displeasure by spreading rumors about Lester. When Lester became aware of it, he wasn’t sure what to do. He prayed about it. If rumors were being spread by an outsider who didn’t know Christ, he felt he should do nothing, but this was a brother. So Lester went to Don and talked to him privately. At least, he tried to talk to him, but Don wasn’t in the mood to talk. Don simply said to Lester, “I don’t want to hear anything you have to say.” In obedience to the scripture, Don asked another brother to go with him to talk to Don. The two of them received the same response. A short time later, they tried again, but nothing changed. Lester and this other brother then approached the elders of the church. The elders investigated the matter carefully and found that Don was indeed spreading rumors about Lester. When they approached Don about the matter, he said something like this: “I am a member of the church. I do my part. I attend and I support the church financially, but what I do in my private life is my own business.” Finally, after exhausting all other avenues, the elders scheduled an official meeting of the church , inviting Don to come and speak on his own behalf. When Don didn’t come, the elders explained the situation and recommended that he be expelled from the fellowship.
Who cut off Don from the fellowship? Was it Lester, the one who started the whole thing? Or was it the brother who went with Lester? Or, was it the elders? After all, they could have shut the whole process down? Or, was it the church? None of the above; it was Don. When he hardened his heart and began to deliberately spread rumors about Lester, he cut himself off from fellowship with Christ. And when man doesn’t have fellowship with Christ, he can’t have true fellowship with the body of Christ. As Lester and the church acted in obedience to the commands of Jesus, they simply acknowledged what Don had already done. Heaven had already determined that Don was out of fellowship with the body of Christ. The church simply agreed with the decree of the Lord Himself.
But what if the church doesn’t make the right decision? What if the church becomes vindictive and removes one of its members for non-biblical reasons? Surely heaven hasn’t bound that, hasn’t made that decree. That question brings us to verses 19-20…
Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven. 20. For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.
We take these words of Jesus and apply them to all kinds of situations. While there may not be anything wrong with that, the context of His words is this situation that deals with church discipline. When the church is dealing with such difficult issues, rest assured that as its people come together in Jesus’ name, seeking His glory and honor, Jesus is right there in the midst of them. Even if it is only two (Lester and the brother who go to talk to Don), they can trust that the Father will honor their desire to honor Him. These wonderful promises are made for us to claim in these very difficult circumstances.
Conclusion
Now let’s come back to where we started. Do we have a loving God? Indeed, we do, for whom the Lord loves He corrects. And that correction extends even into the life of the church. This is one of the ways that the Lord chooses to exercise His discipline. As the Lord brings correction to children through their parents, so He brings discipline to His own spiritual children through the church. That is His design. Church discipline is a powerful expression of God’s love. If we aren’t able to see that, it is likely because we have taken our cues from experience rather than from the Word of God.
Now comes the big question: Where is the church today with regard to church discipline? In 21st century America church discipline is almost non-existent. It is considered outdated and ineffective. Some would even say that is barbaric. Over 20 years ago I heard a group of seasoned pastors say that a person should never be expelled from a church. Many would say that church discipline was practiced by a generation that had not been enlightened. That is not what the Word of God says.
And now the bigger question: Where is this church with regard to church discipline? Let me answer concisely and bluntly. Most of us believe in it, but we have not practiced it consistently through the years. We have made some faltering attempts, but for the most part, we have not been true to the Lord in this area. And as a result, we have failed to demonstrate the love of God in and through His church.
You ask, “So why is that, Ron?” It is primarily because your pastor of 27 ½ years has not led you to consistently practice church discipline. Over 20 years ago I preached a message on this very passage, emphasizing the importance of church discipline. Somewhere along the way, I forgot. I didn’t practice what I preached. As a result of my failure, we have not been the loving church that God would have us be.
In the last couple of years the Lord has convicted us of the importance of proclaiming the gospel, even as Peter did on the day of Pentecost. May He continue to do so. But that is only one of the keys given to the church through Peter and the apostles. The other key is the binding and loosing Jesus spoke of in Matthew 18, the corrective church disciple we have talked about this morning. The Lord’s church must make use of both keys.
As your pastor for all these years, I ask you to forgive me. There are some of you here this morning that should have received the loving discipline of the church, but you did not. I take the responsibility for that failure. I have repented before the Lord, and now I ask your forgiveness. I praise God that there is forgiveness with Him. I can’t go back and change the past, but now I, working together with my brother Norman, desire to lead this church to take the steps necessary to implement loving church discipline. Just as parents lay a foundation for corrective discipline through careful instruction, so we must lay a foundation through scriptural teaching and practice. That is the desire of my heart.
GOD’S LOVE THROUGH DISCIPLINE
Matt. 16:13-19; 18:15-20
Do we have a loving God? That is not a trick question, though I hope that we have learned that we must define our terms. I’m not talking about a Santa Claus God. I’m not talking about a God who will overlook sin and pretend it doesn’t exist. I’m talking about the loving God who is described in I John 4:8-10…
He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love. 9. In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him. 10. Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.
Is that the God we serve, the God who loved us enough to send His Son to take the divine wrath upon Himself, to be the substitute for us? Yes, we serve a loving God, for God is love!
Those of us who know this God through faith in Jesus Christ will spend eternity exploring the depths of His love. But in the present, what do you appreciate about His love? Have you ever thought about that? It might be a great question to meditate on, don’t you think? What do you appreciate about God’s love?
I. God Demonstrates His Love through Discipline
This morning I want to explore one way in which our God demonstrates His love. Yes, He sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins, but His love didn’t stop there? As Paul puts it in Rom. 5:10, "For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life." It’s even clearer in Rom. 8:32, "He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?" How great is His love to those who are now His sons and daughters?
Did you grow up with loving parents? I did. When I say that I had loving parents, I could tell you about all the ways my parents loved me. So what will I tell you? Will I tell you that they bought me more presents than the parents of other kids? Will I tell you that we lived in the finest house in the neighborhood? Or that we drove the most expensive car on the block? Will I tell you that my parents allowed me to go wherever I wanted? No, I wouldn’t tell you any of those things, because that wouldn’t be true. I suppose the first thing I would tell you is that my parents loved me enough to discipline me. And I must tell you that this is a very biblical answer, for we read in Prov. 13:24, "He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes." Translators differ on the way they render the word translated “betimes” by the King James…
… Amplified: “punishes him early”
… NASV: “disciplines him diligently”
… NIV: “is careful to discipline him”
… NKJV: “disciplines him promptly”
My parents must have read it, “whips him early and often.” I don’t know where they got the concept, but they must have received a heavy dose of teaching along these lines.
Don’t feel sorry for me. My parents proved their love for me by disciplining me. They not only gave me the positive discipline of teaching, but they blessed me with corrective discipline. We read in Prov 23:13-14, "Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die. 14. Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell." I don’t know that my dad knew that scripture, but he certainly understood the concept, and he did indeed prepare me for heaven!
Now you understand that I am being a bit facetious. On the other hand, I am speaking with a certain seriousness. It is certainly true that we need to understand that the rod of the Proverbs is a tool that must be used wisely and skillfully. The Proverbs do not excuse a parent who inflicts physical injury upon his child. Such a practice is wicked and is not endorsed by the scripture. Nevertheless, a lack of true discipline in the home indicates a lack of love. Though my parents weren’t perfect in their practice of discipline, they were effective in that their discipline proved to me that they loved me.
Now with that in mind let me read you one of the greatest love passages in all the Bible. It is found in Heb. 12:5-11…
And ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh unto you as unto children, My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him: 6. For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. 7. If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? 8. But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons. 9. Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live? 10. For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness. 11. Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby.
Many of you will recognize that the writer of Hebrews quotes from that same book of Proverbs. Let’s read it in Prov. 3:11-12, "My son, despise not the chastening of the LORD; neither be weary of his correction: 12. For whom the LORD loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth." Isn’t that beautiful? If that is true of an earthly father who always falls short in his administration of discipline, how much more can we see the love of our Heavenly Father, who disciplines us for our profit and for His glory! On the other hand, if you are not disciplined/corrected/chastened by God, you can rest assured that you are not His child.
II. Jesus, Peter, and the Keys to the Kingdom
Now let’s change gears and read from Matt. 16:13-19…
When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? 14. And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. 15. He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? 16. And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. 17. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. 18. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
Focus on verses 18-19, “And I say unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” Notice that Jesus told Peter He would give unto him the keys of the kingdom of heaven. That sounds like a very significant promise, and indeed it is. But what does it mean? A key opens the door. It unlocks something so that we may enter in. So what was it that Peter would be able to unlock?
Let’s turn to Luke 11 and notice one specific way that Jesus speaks of a key. This is one of those times when Jesus was pronouncing a series of “woes” upon the scribes and Pharisees (vss. 42-47, 53). Then in verse 52 (as in 46) Jesus refers to them as lawyers. He is calling attention to the fact that they were the recognized experts in understanding, interpreting, and teaching the law of God. Listen to what He says to them in verse 52, "Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered." Jesus accused them of taking away the key of knowledge. Through the knowledge of the scriptures, they should have entered into God’s truth and ultimately into His kingdom. But because of their impure motives and misinterpretation of God’s Word, not only were they not entering into truth and into the kingdom, but they were also hindering others. They had taken away the key of understanding. They had clouded the truth of God’s Word, and that was a serious thing.
Now come back to what Jesus said to Peter: “I will give unto you the keys of the kingdom of heaven.” Peter would not be like those law experts who took away the key of knowledge. Rather, because Jesus had opened the scriptures to Peter and would empower Him with the Holy Spirit, Peter would use the key of knowledge to open the door to the kingdom. We see the fulfillment of this promise especially in Acts 2, when Peter stood before thousands and proclaimed the good news of the kingdom. As a result of Peter’s preaching, we read in Acts 2:41, "Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls." Yes, Peter faithfully used the key that Jesus gave to him.
But come back again to Matt. 16:19 and notice that Jesus didn’t promise to give Peter the key to the kingdom of heaven, but the “keys.” It is plural. Jesus speaks of more than one key. In order to explore this more fully, let’s ask this question: “Is there any other place where Jesus speaks of giving the keys of the kingdom?” Not specifically, though Jesus does say in Rev. 1:18 that He has the keys of hell and death. But notice again the context in Matt. 16:19, "And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." Jesus associates the giving of the keys very closely with this binding loosing. While in no other place does Jesus say, “I will give you the keys of the kingdom,” He does speak of this same binding and loosing in Matthew 18. Let’s read it in Matt. 18:18, "Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
So we see that Jesus repeats these words. Here is the question: In chapter 18, to whom is Jesus speaking? This is where the old English of the King James is very helpful. In 16:19, it is “I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom, and whatsoever thou shalt bind…” But in 18:18, it is “Verily, I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind…” In chapter 16, Jesus is speaking to one individual, and that individual is Peter, but here in chapter 18 Jesus is speaking to a group of individuals, as He uses the plural. A look at the context makes it clear that Jesus is now speaking to His disciples (it would seem to the Twelve). So what Jesus said to Peter about binding and loosing He now says to His disciples, to the Twelve. And while He does not repeat the words about giving the keys, I want to suggest to you that the keys and the binding and loosing are tied closely together.
III. The Disciplinary Process of Matthew 18
In order to get an idea of what Jesus is here saying to His apostles, we need to go back to verse 15. Let’s read Matt. 18:15-20…
Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. 16. But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. 17. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a publican. 18. Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. 19. Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven. 20. For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.
If your brother (or sister) sins against you, here is what you are to do. You must go and speak to him privately, even as we are told in Prov. 25:9, “Debate thy cause with thy neighbor himself; and discover not a secret to another.” Of course, we have to be careful that we not wear our feelings on our sleeve and begin to think that we are constantly being sinned against, for we read in Ps. 119:165, “Great peace have they that love thy law, and nothing shall offend them.” If you discover that you are easily offended, get in the Word of God and stay there. But if there is genuine offense, if someone does wrong you and you can’t get by it, then go to him and speak to him privately about the matter. Notice that we are not told to discuss it with someone else, not even with a pastor. Jesus does not say, “Just give it some time and you will get over it.” He says to go directly to the brother or sister and deal with it privately. If we took this more seriously, not only would we avoid many misunderstandings, but we would find our relationships strengthened.
If your brother refuses to hear you, if you don’t get anywhere, then take one or two people with you to talk to this one who has sinned against you. Since you and this Christian brother or sister cannot solve things by yourself, get another person or two to help you out. And if the process has to be taken further, they will serve as witnesses. Again, this concept comes straight out of the Old Testament, for we read in Deut. 19:15, "One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established" (also in Dt. 17:6).
If the offender still can’t be swayed and the differences can’t be resolved, then tell it to the church. We will talk more about the details of this at a later time, but make no mistake that Jesus says we are to tell it to the church. If it is found that this offending brother is indeed in the wrong and he will not listen, then the church is to treat him as a heathen and a tax collector. He is not to be included in the fellowship of the church until the time when he is willing to repent.
Much more could be said about these verses, but this is enough to set the context for verse 18. It is after these instructions that Jesus now says, “Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” What is Jesus saying here? Has He suddenly switched to a different subject? No, He certainly has not. Verse 18 is tied closely to what He has just said about dealing lovingly but firmly with the stubborn brother who refuses to repent.
Think about it for a moment. This stubborn brother has been warned by the church, but he refuses to hear. So the church, under the direction of its spiritual leaders, has expelled him from the fellowship (see I Cor. 5 for a concrete example). This is a very serious thing. How could a church ever do such a thing? Did Jesus not say, “Judge not, that ye be not judged?” We have been over that text a number of times and we won’t go back there this morning, but I will remind you of what Paul said when he was dealing with a concrete case. 1 Cor. 5:12-13, "For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within? 13. But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person." But still, this is strong medicine. How can we take upon ourselves this kind of responsibility and authority? Jesus gives us the answer here in verse 18, “Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”
In order to explain how these words were intended to be encouragement, I must first deal with the terms “binding” and “loosing.” I hear people talk about binding Satan. You might get that from other passages, but certainly not from this passage. That is not what Jesus is talking about. These were common terms used by the rabbis of that day. To bind something was to forbid it; to loose something was to allow it. To bind was to restrict; to loose was to permit. Here Jesus applies these terms to binding the unrepentant brother. They were to bind him in that they were not to allow him to be a part of the fellowship. If he were loosed, he would be allowed to participate. And that was the goal, that he might ultimately be restored to fellowship, at which time he would be “loosed” to participate fully.
The next thing we have to deal with in verse 18 is the translation of the verb tenses. The King James and most of your translations will read something like this: “And whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven.” It is sometimes difficult to know if the English of today and the English of 1611 say the same thing. For example, the KJV says in John 14:2, “In my Father’s house are many mansions…” Jesus was not talking about a huge, sprawling house with 42 rooms, but that’s what we think about today. The problem is not that the King James translators missed Jesus’ meaning; the problem is that “mansion” doesn’t mean the same thing today as it did in 1611. That may be the case with our current text. The force of the Greek text (over which there is absolutely no dispute) is best brought out by the New American Standard Version: “Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.” In other words, the action taken in heaven comes before the action taken on earth. By the way, the translation is 16:19 is exactly the same, with the action in heaven coming first.
So now let’s come back to our context again. How can the church even think of treating one of its own as a pagan and a tax collector? Surely that is a heavy responsibility. Is that not why Jesus gives us the words of verse 18? Let me paraphrase the idea something like this: “Though this is a heavy responsibility, and granted that it is not a light thing to exclude someone from the fellowship of the church, rest assured that the decision you render has already been made in heaven. You are simply agreeing with the Father.”
Let’s look at it practically. From the outside, the situation appears like this. Don did not like the fact that the church appointed Lester to a certain position. Don had wanted that position for years. He expressed his displeasure by spreading rumors about Lester. When Lester became aware of it, he wasn’t sure what to do. He prayed about it. If rumors were being spread by an outsider who didn’t know Christ, he felt he should do nothing, but this was a brother. So Lester went to Don and talked to him privately. At least, he tried to talk to him, but Don wasn’t in the mood to talk. Don simply said to Lester, “I don’t want to hear anything you have to say.” In obedience to the scripture, Don asked another brother to go with him to talk to Don. The two of them received the same response. A short time later, they tried again, but nothing changed. Lester and this other brother then approached the elders of the church. The elders investigated the matter carefully and found that Don was indeed spreading rumors about Lester. When they approached Don about the matter, he said something like this: “I am a member of the church. I do my part. I attend and I support the church financially, but what I do in my private life is my own business.” Finally, after exhausting all other avenues, the elders scheduled an official meeting of the church , inviting Don to come and speak on his own behalf. When Don didn’t come, the elders explained the situation and recommended that he be expelled from the fellowship.
Who cut off Don from the fellowship? Was it Lester, the one who started the whole thing? Or was it the brother who went with Lester? Or, was it the elders? After all, they could have shut the whole process down? Or, was it the church? None of the above; it was Don. When he hardened his heart and began to deliberately spread rumors about Lester, he cut himself off from fellowship with Christ. And when man doesn’t have fellowship with Christ, he can’t have true fellowship with the body of Christ. As Lester and the church acted in obedience to the commands of Jesus, they simply acknowledged what Don had already done. Heaven had already determined that Don was out of fellowship with the body of Christ. The church simply agreed with the decree of the Lord Himself.
But what if the church doesn’t make the right decision? What if the church becomes vindictive and removes one of its members for non-biblical reasons? Surely heaven hasn’t bound that, hasn’t made that decree. That question brings us to verses 19-20…
Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven. 20. For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.
We take these words of Jesus and apply them to all kinds of situations. While there may not be anything wrong with that, the context of His words is this situation that deals with church discipline. When the church is dealing with such difficult issues, rest assured that as its people come together in Jesus’ name, seeking His glory and honor, Jesus is right there in the midst of them. Even if it is only two (Lester and the brother who go to talk to Don), they can trust that the Father will honor their desire to honor Him. These wonderful promises are made for us to claim in these very difficult circumstances.
Conclusion
Now let’s come back to where we started. Do we have a loving God? Indeed, we do, for whom the Lord loves He corrects. And that correction extends even into the life of the church. This is one of the ways that the Lord chooses to exercise His discipline. As the Lord brings correction to children through their parents, so He brings discipline to His own spiritual children through the church. That is His design. Church discipline is a powerful expression of God’s love. If we aren’t able to see that, it is likely because we have taken our cues from experience rather than from the Word of God.
Now comes the big question: Where is the church today with regard to church discipline? In 21st century America church discipline is almost non-existent. It is considered outdated and ineffective. Some would even say that is barbaric. Over 20 years ago I heard a group of seasoned pastors say that a person should never be expelled from a church. Many would say that church discipline was practiced by a generation that had not been enlightened. That is not what the Word of God says.
And now the bigger question: Where is this church with regard to church discipline? Let me answer concisely and bluntly. Most of us believe in it, but we have not practiced it consistently through the years. We have made some faltering attempts, but for the most part, we have not been true to the Lord in this area. And as a result, we have failed to demonstrate the love of God in and through His church.
You ask, “So why is that, Ron?” It is primarily because your pastor of 27 ½ years has not led you to consistently practice church discipline. Over 20 years ago I preached a message on this very passage, emphasizing the importance of church discipline. Somewhere along the way, I forgot. I didn’t practice what I preached. As a result of my failure, we have not been the loving church that God would have us be.
In the last couple of years the Lord has convicted us of the importance of proclaiming the gospel, even as Peter did on the day of Pentecost. May He continue to do so. But that is only one of the keys given to the church through Peter and the apostles. The other key is the binding and loosing Jesus spoke of in Matthew 18, the corrective church disciple we have talked about this morning. The Lord’s church must make use of both keys.
As your pastor for all these years, I ask you to forgive me. There are some of you here this morning that should have received the loving discipline of the church, but you did not. I take the responsibility for that failure. I have repented before the Lord, and now I ask your forgiveness. I praise God that there is forgiveness with Him. I can’t go back and change the past, but now I, working together with my brother Norman, desire to lead this church to take the steps necessary to implement loving church discipline. Just as parents lay a foundation for corrective discipline through careful instruction, so we must lay a foundation through scriptural teaching and practice. That is the desire of my heart.
Sunday, March 2, 2008
Creation and Evolution -- 3/2/08
Sunday, February 17, 2008
CREATION AND EVOLUTION
People have been asking me all morning about this tower (pointing to tower sitting on the platform). What’s the big deal? People want to know how it got there. I keep saying that it was there when I came over this morning. Maybe you are wondering about it too. It was there when I came over, but you want to know how it got there. I think I know the answer. There were these 64 blocks lying here, and during the long hours of the night they assembled themselves into this tower. It seems obvious that this is what happened. Of course, you can see the logic of my thinking.
What do you think? I can see great skepticism written all over you. Is there a single person here who believes my story, who can accept the idea that these blocks organized themselves into a tower over night? Not one. Surely the fallacy of my thinking is that the hours of the night provide too short a time period for the forming of this tower. What if we were to leave the blocks here for a year? Or, let’s do better than that – let’s give them a hundred years. What do you think are the chances of coming in here after a hundred years and finding these blocks in the form of a tower?
Most of you can see where this is headed. Let’s move from the concept of these blocks forming a tower to the presence of the universe. We accept the concept that we are living on the planet called earth, which is part of an immense universe. We can see thousands of stars and with a telescope we can see millions. When a person takes time to think, sooner or later this question has to present itself: “Where did it all come from? How did it get here?” If these blocks couldn’t form themselves into a tower, then could the universe have organized itself? I have a friend who thinks so. When I presented him with the analogy of the blocks and the tower, he told me in no uncertain terms that I didn’t have a clue about what can happen if given enough time and chance. He firmly believes that given billions of years, anything can happen by chance, even the formation of the universe and everything in it.
element of chance + billions of years = universe and everything in it
Let’s come again to Genesis 1. Let’s read it together… Gen. 1:1-31…
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 2. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. 3. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. 5. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. 6. And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. 7. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. 8. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day. 9. And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. 10. And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good. 11. And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. 12. And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 13. And the evening and the morning were the third day. 14. And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: 15. And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. 16. And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. 17. And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, 18. And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. 19. And the evening and the morning were the fourth day. 20. And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. 21. And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 22. And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. 23. And the evening and the morning were the fifth day. 24. And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. 25. And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 26. And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 27. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. 28. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. 29. And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. 30. And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so. 31. And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
I. The Strong Influence of Evolution
Most of us grew up with some knowledge of Genesis 1. For quite a few people of my
generation, it was pretty common knowledge that God made the universe and everything in it. For most of us, those concepts were not difficult to accept. We certainly didn’t have perfect understanding, but we simply believed what the Bible said.
However, when we went to school, we were exposed to some other concepts. We had science classes. As I progressed from grade to grade, I received more than a little bit of evolutionary indoctrination. When I was a freshman in high school, I took my first biology class. I respected my teacher and he respected me. I remember on one occasion asking him if he knew the Lord. He responded like this: “Ron, you remind me of myself when I was your age. But then I went to college. Because of the things I learned there, I could no longer believe in God.” I believe my teacher thought the same would happen to me when I went to college. He is the friend who insists that anything can happen, given chance and enough time.
Though I was a trusting person, I wasn’t buying evolution. I could not accept what I believed to contradict the Word of God. In that biology class, I had opportunity to write a research paper concerning why I believed the Bible’s account of creation. My teacher gave me an A, along with the comment: “Keep an open mind.”
When Darwin introduced his theory of evolution in his book The Origin of Species (1859), one might have wondered if anyone would believe it. It seemed rather farfetched. A century later great inroads had been made. Today most people in this country accept it as fact. Darwin’s philosophy has become deeply ingrained in our educational system. At the heart of his teaching is the conclusion that there is no need for a Creator. As Lee Strobel puts it, acceptance of Darwin’s evolutionary theory puts God out of a job (in The Case for a Creator, p. 19).
Now it is true that there are those who maintain that Darwin’s theory is not in conflict with the Bible. A Cornell professor and evolutionist and atheist, wrote this: “A widespread theological view now exists saying that God started off the world, props it up and works through laws of nature, very subtly, so subtly that its action is undetectable. But that kind of God is effectively no different to my mind than atheism” (quoted in The Case for a Creator, p. 22). Phillip Johnson says that “the whole point of Darwinism is to show that there is no need for a supernatural creator, because nature can do the creating by itself” (The Case for a Creator, p. 23).
One well-known evangelical pastor says… (John MacArthur, “The How, When of Creation – Part 2”)
And I think it's safe to say that the lie that the universe as we know it today evolved is the most sophisticated, complex and highly educated lie in existence. It has, for all intents and purposes, captivated the entire world. It is believed by the greatest mass of humanity, at least in the western world. And even though it is impossible and irrational, it is nonetheless perpetuated with great force and with great academic effort. Modern evolutionary theory has demanded and received almost universal acceptance in the world. The theory that no one created the universe as it is, but that it came into being by chance and it progresses through constant changes, mutations and transitions upwardly from simplicity to complexity completely through a random process basically rules human thought.
Because we live in La Luz, New Mexico, we might be inclined to question such a conclusion. It seems that a number of people around us would argue with the conclusions of evolution. But go to New York City or London and I suspect you will find it that way. And there are many more people in New York City than in La Luz, or in all of New Mexico. Evolution has taken the western world by storm. And that is why we are taking a bit of time this morning to deal with this issue. Every Christian will be confronted by the philosophy of evolution. And though we don’t have time to explore it this morning, understand that evolution is more than a biological theory; it is a philosophy that permeates all of western society.
II. Major Problems with Evolution
So what is the problem with the theory of evolution? We’re not talking about microevolution, the concept that small-scale changes take place in a population over a few generations. For example, through much care a new breed of cow can appear. But that is much different than macroevolution, which is the concept that through mutations and natural selection an entire new species or kind can evolve. In other words, macroevolution leaves room for a reptile to evolve into a fish and an ape into a man. Darwin’s theory clearly teaches macroevolution, confidently asserting that all living creatures evolved from the same ancestor. So what is the problem with that concept?
There are two immediate problems. We can’t find anything like that in the Bible, not even in the creation story of Genesis 1 and 2. We will talk more about this in a minute. Secondly, it is being recognized by more and more scientists that macroevolution is a theory that is not supported by true science. Let me mention just a few of the problems with evolution from a scientific viewpoint.
First of all, evolution theorizes that all forms of life come from one common ancestor. Life began as a one-celled organism and from that one organism has come plants, animals, and even human beings. This theory relies heavily on mutations and natural selection. The random genetic changes occur, and those that benefit the species are preserved through survival of the fittest. Through this process, life has evolved over time, even into the sophisticated human body of today.
This concept clearly teaches that life mutates upward. In other words, everything moves from the simple to the complex – from disorganized matter, to a living cell, to living organisms, to far more complex organisms, even the human body. But is that what we find? In fact, do we not find exactly the opposite? John Cross makes this observation: “Everything runs down, breaks down or wears out” (The Stranger on the Road to Emmaus, p. 47). Though some might consider Cross’ little statement an oversimplication, we find our own experience and the record of history confirming that contention. We are told that from the time of birth, the human body is wearing out.
Let’s go back to our tower. If we lay these blocks randomly on the stage, leave them for a week, what will we find when we come back? Provided no human or animal has come in, I predict that we will find them just as we left them. But what if we leave them for a year? I predict the exact same result. But what about a thousand years? By then, this building will be gone. And what about these blocks? What do you predict? Does anyone think they will be in the shape of this tower or any other organized structure? Everything we know tells us that the longer you leave them, the more disorganized they will become. Evolution stands on its insistence that time can account for about anything. The famous Harvard professor George Wald wrote these words…
The important point is that since the origin of life belongs in the category of at-least-once phenomena, time is on its side. However improbable we regard this event. . . given enough time it will almost certainly happen at least once. . . . Time is in fact the hero of the plot. . . . Given so much time, the "impossible" becomes possible, the possible probable, and the probable virtually certain. One has only to wait; time itself performs miracles. (Wald, George. "The Origin of Life." The Physics and Chemistry of Life, by the editors of Scientific American [New York: Simon and Schuster, 1955]: 3-26).
But as our little illustration demonstrates, time does not favor the evolutionary concepts.
Here is another problem with evolution. Today many scientists are coming to believe that life is too complex to arise by chance. Many emphasize the fact that information plays a key part in cell formation, etc. Even if all the physical elements required for life are present, that isn’t enough. And that information is found in DNA. But how is the DNA formed? Where does the required information come from before the formation of DNA? Many scientists are coming to the belief that intelligence was a basic requirement for the creation of life.
Add to those problems this perplexing question: Where did the raw materials for life come from? Even if we were to concede that given chance and enough time, these blocks would form a tower, where do we get the blocks? Where did we get the raw materials for life? Life requires oxygen. But where did the oxygen come from? This is a very tough question for evolutionists to answer.
Another problem with evolution is the lack of transitional forms in the fossil record. In other words, if it is true that dinosaurs evolved into birds, then where are the fossilized remains of the forms between dinosaurs and birds? A few years ago some were convinced that such a fossil had been found in Arizona. Referred to as “Archaeopteryx,” it was believed to be a dinosaur with feathers. However, a few weeks later National Geographic printed a retraction, saying that Archaeopteryx had been proven to be a hoax. In other words, fossils from more than one creature had been put together. Later, other authorities proved it was not a fake. It seems that the final conclusion was this: Archaeoperyx was a bird, not a dinosaur with feathers. It was a large perching bird, the oldest fossilized bird known.
Of course, evolutionists contend that other transitional forms between dinosaurs and birds have been found. The problem is that their own dating methods show Archaopteryx to be millions of years older than these transitional forms. That does pose a problem.
Finally, there is the problem with lack of integrity. Of course, this has been a problem with both evolutionists and creationists. Let me mention one example. The name of this German biologist is Ernst Haeckel. He was once proclaimed to be “Darwin’s Bulldog on the Continent.” Darwin and others reasoned that similarities in embryonic development would point to a common ancestry. Haeckal produced a series of drawings which demonstrated this. For example, he compared the earliest embryonic stages of a dog and a human, showing the similarities. The problem lies in the fact that the photographs he used for his drawings bear almost no resemblance to the drawings he made. Add to that the fact that Haeckal did not use the early stages of embryo development, as he said he did. Rather, he carefully selected the stages where the similarities were greatest.
We might excuse this incident as an example of a man who believed so strongly in evolution that he became overzealous in his cause. However, that is not the end of the story. The pictures of Haeckel’s embryos can still be found in biology textbooks, even graduate level textbooks. Though these drawings were proven to be fraudulent and misleading in 1874, shortly after they were published, they are still being used almost a century and a half later.
III. Does It Really Matter? Relevance and Accommodating Theories
It is easy to see that the debate between evolutionists and creationists is a very intense one. Perhaps we should ask the question: “Does it really matter?” If part of Darwin’s goal was to show that there is no need for a Creator, then certainly it does matter. However, this is where we must ask another question: “Is it possible that God used evolution as His tool for creating the universe and everything in it?” This idea is basically referred to as “theistic evolution,” which simply means “God-directed evolution.” Many evangelical Christians down through the years have held to this view.
Behind that question is another question: “Why have many evangelical Christians accepted the idea that God used evolution as His means of creation?” The answer is fairly simple. On the one hand, the Bible says clearly that God created the heavens and the earth. Surely a Christian will not side with Darwin and say that there is no need for a Creator. No, the Christian will contend that it was God who created the universe and everything in it. On the other hand, that same Christian has studied science all his life, because it is a part of the educational process. Beginning with Darwin and others in the mid 1800’s, science began to teach the theory of evolution. It began slowly, but by the time of the Scopes Trials in 1925, its influence had spread dramatically. During the last 75 years the dissemination of this theory through the public school system has made it widely acceptable.
Many Christians grew up trusting their teachers and other authorities. If science says that the earth is millions (now billions) of years old and that man evolved from lower forms of life, then it must be true. So how do we harmonize the truth of the Bible with the teachings of science? Of course, the assumption is that the assertions of evolution are true.
While I would not accept these claims from an atheist biology teacher, I received them from the professors at a Christian college. They emphasized the fact that the Bible will never contradict science. Therefore, we must not be afraid to look for biblical interpretations that will be in harmony with science. What I failed to recognize was the assumption that everything that claims to be science is true science. While it is true that science (a word which means “knowledge”) will not contradict the Bible, it is also true that not everything that claims to be science is science.
The rise of evolution found Christians revising their interpretation of the first two chapters of Genesis, because they assumed that evolutionary theory must be correct. Because they were certain that the Bible is God’s Word, they had to find a way to harmonize these two “truths.” Theistic evolutionists teach that God is indeed the Creator, but He uses evolution as His means of creation. In other words, God was the superintendent of evolution, so that things turned out exactly as He had intended. The theistic evolutionist tries to maintain belief in an all-powerful God and belief in evolution. Most theistic evolutionists would say that God intervened in the process at some crucial points (as in the creation of matter, the formation of the first life, and the creation of man).
So is there any problem with theistic evolution? The biggest problem I have with theistic evolution concerns the purposes of God. According to the testimony of scripture, God always acts with purpose. That was the case in creation. I cannot harmonize such purpose with the theory of evolution, because evolution makes much of things happening randomly, or by chance. In other words, the first life came about by chance. Certain elements just happened to get together and organize themselves into a life form. Higher forms of life developed through random mutations.
Again, theistic evolutionists may say, “But we believe God intervened at certain times.” But if that is the case, why appeal to evolution in the first place? True evolution does not allow for the intervention of a Creator. Rather than having God guide evolution and intervene at critical points, why not just believe that God created everything directly, as a simple reading of Genesis 1 and 2 would dictate?
Theistic evolution tries to harmonize two systems that are basically incompatible. While those who believe in God the Creator want to befriend evolution to explain origins, rest assured that true evolutionists do not want to include God in their explanation of origins. Theologian Louis Berkhof once said: “Theistic evolution is really a child of embarrassment, which calls God in at periodic intervals to help nature over the chasms that yawn at her feet. It is neither the biblical doctrine of creation, nor a consistent theory of evolution” (Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology, pp. 139-40; as quoted from Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology, p. 279). As I see it, that is the bottom line.
Another phenomenon that muddies the water is the claims of geology. When man studies origins, I suppose it is very natural for him to want to find out how old everything is. When we think about origins and age, certain questions arise? How long ago was it that the universe was formed? Depending upon a person’s beliefs, he may then ask when man first appeared on the scene? Does the Bible have any answers to these questions? Do the answers of the Bible need to be consistent with the answers of geologists?
For the most part, until a couple of hundred years ago, Christians believed that mankind was a few thousands of years old. Most believed about 6,000 years, based on the genealogies in the Bible. Most Christians also believed that the universe was the same age, concluding that God created everything in six days. Ex. 20:11, "For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it."
But close to 300 years ago geologists began to report that the earth was millions of years old. The age has grown, until now most estimates are around 4.5 billion years for the age of the earth. There is a great difference between about 6,000 years and about 4.5 billion years. Surely either the Bible or geology is wrong. Facing such a radical difference, Bible believers found a theory that they believed could accommodate both. The primary founder of this concept was Thomas Chalmers in 1814, although some contend that it was much older. At any rate, it was Chalmers and a man named William Pember about 50 years later who popularized it. It is the “Ruin Reconstruction” model and is commonly referred to as the Gap theory. It received its greatest popularity through its inclusion in the Schofield Reference Bible in 1917.
The Gap theory teaches that there is a great gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. It’s defenders note that it is possible to translate Gen. 1:2, “And the earth became without form and void…” (This is true, although this translation must be demanded by the context). According to this view, God’s creation is seen in verse 1 and His destructive judgment in verse 2. In between are billions of years, during which the bulk of the fossils were laid down. Then beginning with the end of verse 2, “And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters,” we read of the 6-day creation. While there are other reasons some Christians hold to the gap theory (such as finding a time for the creation and fall of Satan), the primary reason is to accommodate the biblical record to fit the geologic timetable. Christians who hold this view generally believe in a young man but an old earth.
Others have found other ways to deal with the billions of years. This has stirred decades of debate over the meaning of the word “day” in the Genesis account. While it is true that the Hebrew word “yom” can have a variety of meanings, it is equally true that it can mean a literal 24-hour day. The driving force behind the reinterpretation of “day” in Genesis 1 is the geologists’ belief that the earth is billions of years old. For that reason some have attempted to make each day of Genesis 1 represent very long periods of time.
So what about it? Ken Ham, a strong advocate of a literal 6-day creation, tells the story of a young college student who confronted one of his professors (I believe it was in a Christian college). The professor was expounding on the fact that the Hebrew word “yom” (day) can have a variety of meanings. The student began to question him like this: “Could it mean a thousand years?” “Oh yes.” “Could it mean a million years?” “Certainly.” “Even a billion years?” “Definitely.” “Could it mean a 24-hour period?” “Absolutely not!”
I don’t claim to be an expert in these matters, but it appears to me that a person has to stretch and twist the meaning of the scriptures to accommodate it to the scientific theory that the earth is billions of years old. Again, Exodus 20:11 says, "For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it." We know that the Sabbath day refers to a 24-hour period. To take the “six days” as something different will call for a very compelling reason. I don’t believe the theories of geology are compelling. Dating methods and conclusions are constantly changing. Authors give examples of geologic dating methods concluding that living mollusks are up to 2,300 years old (Keith, M.S. and Anderson, G.M. 1963. Science, August 16) and that rocks formed less than 200 years ago are somewhere between 160 million and 3 billion years old (Funkhouser, John G. and Naughton, John J. 1968. Journal of Geophysical Research, July 15). While there are scientists who contend that undeniable evidence indicates the earth is billions of years old, other scientists (some who are not Christian) deny that “undeniable evidence.
Now listen to me carefully. The point I want to make is this: We must be very careful about interpreting the Bible in light of man’s science, whether it be biological science, sociological science, or psychological science. Let me give you an example. In response to a question about what is the greatest commandment, Jesus said: “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself” (Matt. 22:37-39). Perhaps you have heard of the story of the student who wrote himself a reminder: J-O-Y. When asked what it meant, he explained it: Jesus first, others second, yourself last. That kind of thinking was pretty well accepted among Christians, until it was challenged by the psychology of the last couple centuries. I was a senior in college when a senior psychology major came in as a substitute for our speech teacher. I don’t remember how it came up, but we all became involved in a discussion about that second greatest commandment, “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” With absolute confidence, she informed all of us young preacher boys that we could never love our neighbor until we love ourselves. Therefore, our first need is to learn how to love ourselves. Understand that she learned that interpretation of scripture from those who are steeped in the psychological concepts of unbelievers like Freud. Man’s so-called science has shaped (misshaped) the clear meaning of scripture for many.
Do we not find the same thing with regard to Genesis 1-2? But if evolution is indeed true, then we must rethink what the Bible says in these early chapters. Here’s the problem: During the past 150 years, Christians have been quick to rethink the Bible rather than to demand that theorists rethink their theories. Who says that evolution is true? Who says that the earth is billions of years old? When I was younger, the scientific rage was carbon dating. We could say with authority that the earth was millions or billions of years old because the carbon dating method said so. But one method of dating is quickly replaced with another, and rarely do they agree.
Conclusion
I realize that we have spent a great deal of time discussing evolution this morning. In general, I do not feel comfortable spending so much time on the theories of man, but in this case it seems necessary because of the tremendous influence of evolutionary thought on western culture. I also am very aware that we haven’t even scratched the surface.
The one point I want to emphasize this morning is simply this: Don’t interpret the Bible in light of what science says. Scientific theories come and go, but the Word of God shall stand forever (Is. 40:8). Of course, we must acknowledge that there are areas where science has been right and man’s interpretation of the Bible has been wrong. The Bible wasn’t wrong, but man’s interpretation was. That is why we need to study the Word diligently and rely upon the Spirit to guide us.
So might the same be true in the area of creation? While that is a possibility, we must remember the presuppositions of evolution. Evolutionary theory did not come about as a simple search for truth. It was saturated with an anti-God bias. Let me read you a quote from an evolutionist named Richard Lewontin, a geneticist from Harvard…
Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism… It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated.
Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.
(“Billions and Billions of Demons,” The New York Review of Books, Jan. 9, 1997, p. 31.)
The language is rather lofty, but he is saying that we must accept scientific claims even when they don’t make sense. Why is that? Because we are absolutely committed to a no-God materialism. The one thing we can never admit is that there might be a God. It kind of sounds like the kind of attitude that Christians are accused of having.
Always remember the simplicity of the Christian position. We don’t have all the answers, but we do have an advantage over all others when it comes to the subject of origins. While it is true that none of us where there when the universe was created, we have the only record which claims to be the report of an eyewitness, even God the Creator. He has given us His testimony, and we can trust that testimony.
Read Psalm 8
CREATION AND EVOLUTION
People have been asking me all morning about this tower (pointing to tower sitting on the platform). What’s the big deal? People want to know how it got there. I keep saying that it was there when I came over this morning. Maybe you are wondering about it too. It was there when I came over, but you want to know how it got there. I think I know the answer. There were these 64 blocks lying here, and during the long hours of the night they assembled themselves into this tower. It seems obvious that this is what happened. Of course, you can see the logic of my thinking.
What do you think? I can see great skepticism written all over you. Is there a single person here who believes my story, who can accept the idea that these blocks organized themselves into a tower over night? Not one. Surely the fallacy of my thinking is that the hours of the night provide too short a time period for the forming of this tower. What if we were to leave the blocks here for a year? Or, let’s do better than that – let’s give them a hundred years. What do you think are the chances of coming in here after a hundred years and finding these blocks in the form of a tower?
Most of you can see where this is headed. Let’s move from the concept of these blocks forming a tower to the presence of the universe. We accept the concept that we are living on the planet called earth, which is part of an immense universe. We can see thousands of stars and with a telescope we can see millions. When a person takes time to think, sooner or later this question has to present itself: “Where did it all come from? How did it get here?” If these blocks couldn’t form themselves into a tower, then could the universe have organized itself? I have a friend who thinks so. When I presented him with the analogy of the blocks and the tower, he told me in no uncertain terms that I didn’t have a clue about what can happen if given enough time and chance. He firmly believes that given billions of years, anything can happen by chance, even the formation of the universe and everything in it.
element of chance + billions of years = universe and everything in it
Let’s come again to Genesis 1. Let’s read it together… Gen. 1:1-31…
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 2. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. 3. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. 5. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. 6. And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. 7. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. 8. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day. 9. And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. 10. And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good. 11. And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. 12. And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 13. And the evening and the morning were the third day. 14. And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: 15. And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. 16. And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. 17. And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, 18. And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. 19. And the evening and the morning were the fourth day. 20. And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. 21. And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 22. And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. 23. And the evening and the morning were the fifth day. 24. And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. 25. And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 26. And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 27. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. 28. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. 29. And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. 30. And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so. 31. And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
I. The Strong Influence of Evolution
Most of us grew up with some knowledge of Genesis 1. For quite a few people of my
generation, it was pretty common knowledge that God made the universe and everything in it. For most of us, those concepts were not difficult to accept. We certainly didn’t have perfect understanding, but we simply believed what the Bible said.
However, when we went to school, we were exposed to some other concepts. We had science classes. As I progressed from grade to grade, I received more than a little bit of evolutionary indoctrination. When I was a freshman in high school, I took my first biology class. I respected my teacher and he respected me. I remember on one occasion asking him if he knew the Lord. He responded like this: “Ron, you remind me of myself when I was your age. But then I went to college. Because of the things I learned there, I could no longer believe in God.” I believe my teacher thought the same would happen to me when I went to college. He is the friend who insists that anything can happen, given chance and enough time.
Though I was a trusting person, I wasn’t buying evolution. I could not accept what I believed to contradict the Word of God. In that biology class, I had opportunity to write a research paper concerning why I believed the Bible’s account of creation. My teacher gave me an A, along with the comment: “Keep an open mind.”
When Darwin introduced his theory of evolution in his book The Origin of Species (1859), one might have wondered if anyone would believe it. It seemed rather farfetched. A century later great inroads had been made. Today most people in this country accept it as fact. Darwin’s philosophy has become deeply ingrained in our educational system. At the heart of his teaching is the conclusion that there is no need for a Creator. As Lee Strobel puts it, acceptance of Darwin’s evolutionary theory puts God out of a job (in The Case for a Creator, p. 19).
Now it is true that there are those who maintain that Darwin’s theory is not in conflict with the Bible. A Cornell professor and evolutionist and atheist, wrote this: “A widespread theological view now exists saying that God started off the world, props it up and works through laws of nature, very subtly, so subtly that its action is undetectable. But that kind of God is effectively no different to my mind than atheism” (quoted in The Case for a Creator, p. 22). Phillip Johnson says that “the whole point of Darwinism is to show that there is no need for a supernatural creator, because nature can do the creating by itself” (The Case for a Creator, p. 23).
One well-known evangelical pastor says… (John MacArthur, “The How, When of Creation – Part 2”)
And I think it's safe to say that the lie that the universe as we know it today evolved is the most sophisticated, complex and highly educated lie in existence. It has, for all intents and purposes, captivated the entire world. It is believed by the greatest mass of humanity, at least in the western world. And even though it is impossible and irrational, it is nonetheless perpetuated with great force and with great academic effort. Modern evolutionary theory has demanded and received almost universal acceptance in the world. The theory that no one created the universe as it is, but that it came into being by chance and it progresses through constant changes, mutations and transitions upwardly from simplicity to complexity completely through a random process basically rules human thought.
Because we live in La Luz, New Mexico, we might be inclined to question such a conclusion. It seems that a number of people around us would argue with the conclusions of evolution. But go to New York City or London and I suspect you will find it that way. And there are many more people in New York City than in La Luz, or in all of New Mexico. Evolution has taken the western world by storm. And that is why we are taking a bit of time this morning to deal with this issue. Every Christian will be confronted by the philosophy of evolution. And though we don’t have time to explore it this morning, understand that evolution is more than a biological theory; it is a philosophy that permeates all of western society.
II. Major Problems with Evolution
So what is the problem with the theory of evolution? We’re not talking about microevolution, the concept that small-scale changes take place in a population over a few generations. For example, through much care a new breed of cow can appear. But that is much different than macroevolution, which is the concept that through mutations and natural selection an entire new species or kind can evolve. In other words, macroevolution leaves room for a reptile to evolve into a fish and an ape into a man. Darwin’s theory clearly teaches macroevolution, confidently asserting that all living creatures evolved from the same ancestor. So what is the problem with that concept?
There are two immediate problems. We can’t find anything like that in the Bible, not even in the creation story of Genesis 1 and 2. We will talk more about this in a minute. Secondly, it is being recognized by more and more scientists that macroevolution is a theory that is not supported by true science. Let me mention just a few of the problems with evolution from a scientific viewpoint.
First of all, evolution theorizes that all forms of life come from one common ancestor. Life began as a one-celled organism and from that one organism has come plants, animals, and even human beings. This theory relies heavily on mutations and natural selection. The random genetic changes occur, and those that benefit the species are preserved through survival of the fittest. Through this process, life has evolved over time, even into the sophisticated human body of today.
This concept clearly teaches that life mutates upward. In other words, everything moves from the simple to the complex – from disorganized matter, to a living cell, to living organisms, to far more complex organisms, even the human body. But is that what we find? In fact, do we not find exactly the opposite? John Cross makes this observation: “Everything runs down, breaks down or wears out” (The Stranger on the Road to Emmaus, p. 47). Though some might consider Cross’ little statement an oversimplication, we find our own experience and the record of history confirming that contention. We are told that from the time of birth, the human body is wearing out.
Let’s go back to our tower. If we lay these blocks randomly on the stage, leave them for a week, what will we find when we come back? Provided no human or animal has come in, I predict that we will find them just as we left them. But what if we leave them for a year? I predict the exact same result. But what about a thousand years? By then, this building will be gone. And what about these blocks? What do you predict? Does anyone think they will be in the shape of this tower or any other organized structure? Everything we know tells us that the longer you leave them, the more disorganized they will become. Evolution stands on its insistence that time can account for about anything. The famous Harvard professor George Wald wrote these words…
The important point is that since the origin of life belongs in the category of at-least-once phenomena, time is on its side. However improbable we regard this event. . . given enough time it will almost certainly happen at least once. . . . Time is in fact the hero of the plot. . . . Given so much time, the "impossible" becomes possible, the possible probable, and the probable virtually certain. One has only to wait; time itself performs miracles. (Wald, George. "The Origin of Life." The Physics and Chemistry of Life, by the editors of Scientific American [New York: Simon and Schuster, 1955]: 3-26).
But as our little illustration demonstrates, time does not favor the evolutionary concepts.
Here is another problem with evolution. Today many scientists are coming to believe that life is too complex to arise by chance. Many emphasize the fact that information plays a key part in cell formation, etc. Even if all the physical elements required for life are present, that isn’t enough. And that information is found in DNA. But how is the DNA formed? Where does the required information come from before the formation of DNA? Many scientists are coming to the belief that intelligence was a basic requirement for the creation of life.
Add to those problems this perplexing question: Where did the raw materials for life come from? Even if we were to concede that given chance and enough time, these blocks would form a tower, where do we get the blocks? Where did we get the raw materials for life? Life requires oxygen. But where did the oxygen come from? This is a very tough question for evolutionists to answer.
Another problem with evolution is the lack of transitional forms in the fossil record. In other words, if it is true that dinosaurs evolved into birds, then where are the fossilized remains of the forms between dinosaurs and birds? A few years ago some were convinced that such a fossil had been found in Arizona. Referred to as “Archaeopteryx,” it was believed to be a dinosaur with feathers. However, a few weeks later National Geographic printed a retraction, saying that Archaeopteryx had been proven to be a hoax. In other words, fossils from more than one creature had been put together. Later, other authorities proved it was not a fake. It seems that the final conclusion was this: Archaeoperyx was a bird, not a dinosaur with feathers. It was a large perching bird, the oldest fossilized bird known.
Of course, evolutionists contend that other transitional forms between dinosaurs and birds have been found. The problem is that their own dating methods show Archaopteryx to be millions of years older than these transitional forms. That does pose a problem.
Finally, there is the problem with lack of integrity. Of course, this has been a problem with both evolutionists and creationists. Let me mention one example. The name of this German biologist is Ernst Haeckel. He was once proclaimed to be “Darwin’s Bulldog on the Continent.” Darwin and others reasoned that similarities in embryonic development would point to a common ancestry. Haeckal produced a series of drawings which demonstrated this. For example, he compared the earliest embryonic stages of a dog and a human, showing the similarities. The problem lies in the fact that the photographs he used for his drawings bear almost no resemblance to the drawings he made. Add to that the fact that Haeckal did not use the early stages of embryo development, as he said he did. Rather, he carefully selected the stages where the similarities were greatest.
We might excuse this incident as an example of a man who believed so strongly in evolution that he became overzealous in his cause. However, that is not the end of the story. The pictures of Haeckel’s embryos can still be found in biology textbooks, even graduate level textbooks. Though these drawings were proven to be fraudulent and misleading in 1874, shortly after they were published, they are still being used almost a century and a half later.
III. Does It Really Matter? Relevance and Accommodating Theories
It is easy to see that the debate between evolutionists and creationists is a very intense one. Perhaps we should ask the question: “Does it really matter?” If part of Darwin’s goal was to show that there is no need for a Creator, then certainly it does matter. However, this is where we must ask another question: “Is it possible that God used evolution as His tool for creating the universe and everything in it?” This idea is basically referred to as “theistic evolution,” which simply means “God-directed evolution.” Many evangelical Christians down through the years have held to this view.
Behind that question is another question: “Why have many evangelical Christians accepted the idea that God used evolution as His means of creation?” The answer is fairly simple. On the one hand, the Bible says clearly that God created the heavens and the earth. Surely a Christian will not side with Darwin and say that there is no need for a Creator. No, the Christian will contend that it was God who created the universe and everything in it. On the other hand, that same Christian has studied science all his life, because it is a part of the educational process. Beginning with Darwin and others in the mid 1800’s, science began to teach the theory of evolution. It began slowly, but by the time of the Scopes Trials in 1925, its influence had spread dramatically. During the last 75 years the dissemination of this theory through the public school system has made it widely acceptable.
Many Christians grew up trusting their teachers and other authorities. If science says that the earth is millions (now billions) of years old and that man evolved from lower forms of life, then it must be true. So how do we harmonize the truth of the Bible with the teachings of science? Of course, the assumption is that the assertions of evolution are true.
While I would not accept these claims from an atheist biology teacher, I received them from the professors at a Christian college. They emphasized the fact that the Bible will never contradict science. Therefore, we must not be afraid to look for biblical interpretations that will be in harmony with science. What I failed to recognize was the assumption that everything that claims to be science is true science. While it is true that science (a word which means “knowledge”) will not contradict the Bible, it is also true that not everything that claims to be science is science.
The rise of evolution found Christians revising their interpretation of the first two chapters of Genesis, because they assumed that evolutionary theory must be correct. Because they were certain that the Bible is God’s Word, they had to find a way to harmonize these two “truths.” Theistic evolutionists teach that God is indeed the Creator, but He uses evolution as His means of creation. In other words, God was the superintendent of evolution, so that things turned out exactly as He had intended. The theistic evolutionist tries to maintain belief in an all-powerful God and belief in evolution. Most theistic evolutionists would say that God intervened in the process at some crucial points (as in the creation of matter, the formation of the first life, and the creation of man).
So is there any problem with theistic evolution? The biggest problem I have with theistic evolution concerns the purposes of God. According to the testimony of scripture, God always acts with purpose. That was the case in creation. I cannot harmonize such purpose with the theory of evolution, because evolution makes much of things happening randomly, or by chance. In other words, the first life came about by chance. Certain elements just happened to get together and organize themselves into a life form. Higher forms of life developed through random mutations.
Again, theistic evolutionists may say, “But we believe God intervened at certain times.” But if that is the case, why appeal to evolution in the first place? True evolution does not allow for the intervention of a Creator. Rather than having God guide evolution and intervene at critical points, why not just believe that God created everything directly, as a simple reading of Genesis 1 and 2 would dictate?
Theistic evolution tries to harmonize two systems that are basically incompatible. While those who believe in God the Creator want to befriend evolution to explain origins, rest assured that true evolutionists do not want to include God in their explanation of origins. Theologian Louis Berkhof once said: “Theistic evolution is really a child of embarrassment, which calls God in at periodic intervals to help nature over the chasms that yawn at her feet. It is neither the biblical doctrine of creation, nor a consistent theory of evolution” (Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology, pp. 139-40; as quoted from Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology, p. 279). As I see it, that is the bottom line.
Another phenomenon that muddies the water is the claims of geology. When man studies origins, I suppose it is very natural for him to want to find out how old everything is. When we think about origins and age, certain questions arise? How long ago was it that the universe was formed? Depending upon a person’s beliefs, he may then ask when man first appeared on the scene? Does the Bible have any answers to these questions? Do the answers of the Bible need to be consistent with the answers of geologists?
For the most part, until a couple of hundred years ago, Christians believed that mankind was a few thousands of years old. Most believed about 6,000 years, based on the genealogies in the Bible. Most Christians also believed that the universe was the same age, concluding that God created everything in six days. Ex. 20:11, "For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it."
But close to 300 years ago geologists began to report that the earth was millions of years old. The age has grown, until now most estimates are around 4.5 billion years for the age of the earth. There is a great difference between about 6,000 years and about 4.5 billion years. Surely either the Bible or geology is wrong. Facing such a radical difference, Bible believers found a theory that they believed could accommodate both. The primary founder of this concept was Thomas Chalmers in 1814, although some contend that it was much older. At any rate, it was Chalmers and a man named William Pember about 50 years later who popularized it. It is the “Ruin Reconstruction” model and is commonly referred to as the Gap theory. It received its greatest popularity through its inclusion in the Schofield Reference Bible in 1917.
The Gap theory teaches that there is a great gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. It’s defenders note that it is possible to translate Gen. 1:2, “And the earth became without form and void…” (This is true, although this translation must be demanded by the context). According to this view, God’s creation is seen in verse 1 and His destructive judgment in verse 2. In between are billions of years, during which the bulk of the fossils were laid down. Then beginning with the end of verse 2, “And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters,” we read of the 6-day creation. While there are other reasons some Christians hold to the gap theory (such as finding a time for the creation and fall of Satan), the primary reason is to accommodate the biblical record to fit the geologic timetable. Christians who hold this view generally believe in a young man but an old earth.
Others have found other ways to deal with the billions of years. This has stirred decades of debate over the meaning of the word “day” in the Genesis account. While it is true that the Hebrew word “yom” can have a variety of meanings, it is equally true that it can mean a literal 24-hour day. The driving force behind the reinterpretation of “day” in Genesis 1 is the geologists’ belief that the earth is billions of years old. For that reason some have attempted to make each day of Genesis 1 represent very long periods of time.
So what about it? Ken Ham, a strong advocate of a literal 6-day creation, tells the story of a young college student who confronted one of his professors (I believe it was in a Christian college). The professor was expounding on the fact that the Hebrew word “yom” (day) can have a variety of meanings. The student began to question him like this: “Could it mean a thousand years?” “Oh yes.” “Could it mean a million years?” “Certainly.” “Even a billion years?” “Definitely.” “Could it mean a 24-hour period?” “Absolutely not!”
I don’t claim to be an expert in these matters, but it appears to me that a person has to stretch and twist the meaning of the scriptures to accommodate it to the scientific theory that the earth is billions of years old. Again, Exodus 20:11 says, "For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it." We know that the Sabbath day refers to a 24-hour period. To take the “six days” as something different will call for a very compelling reason. I don’t believe the theories of geology are compelling. Dating methods and conclusions are constantly changing. Authors give examples of geologic dating methods concluding that living mollusks are up to 2,300 years old (Keith, M.S. and Anderson, G.M. 1963. Science, August 16) and that rocks formed less than 200 years ago are somewhere between 160 million and 3 billion years old (Funkhouser, John G. and Naughton, John J. 1968. Journal of Geophysical Research, July 15). While there are scientists who contend that undeniable evidence indicates the earth is billions of years old, other scientists (some who are not Christian) deny that “undeniable evidence.
Now listen to me carefully. The point I want to make is this: We must be very careful about interpreting the Bible in light of man’s science, whether it be biological science, sociological science, or psychological science. Let me give you an example. In response to a question about what is the greatest commandment, Jesus said: “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself” (Matt. 22:37-39). Perhaps you have heard of the story of the student who wrote himself a reminder: J-O-Y. When asked what it meant, he explained it: Jesus first, others second, yourself last. That kind of thinking was pretty well accepted among Christians, until it was challenged by the psychology of the last couple centuries. I was a senior in college when a senior psychology major came in as a substitute for our speech teacher. I don’t remember how it came up, but we all became involved in a discussion about that second greatest commandment, “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” With absolute confidence, she informed all of us young preacher boys that we could never love our neighbor until we love ourselves. Therefore, our first need is to learn how to love ourselves. Understand that she learned that interpretation of scripture from those who are steeped in the psychological concepts of unbelievers like Freud. Man’s so-called science has shaped (misshaped) the clear meaning of scripture for many.
Do we not find the same thing with regard to Genesis 1-2? But if evolution is indeed true, then we must rethink what the Bible says in these early chapters. Here’s the problem: During the past 150 years, Christians have been quick to rethink the Bible rather than to demand that theorists rethink their theories. Who says that evolution is true? Who says that the earth is billions of years old? When I was younger, the scientific rage was carbon dating. We could say with authority that the earth was millions or billions of years old because the carbon dating method said so. But one method of dating is quickly replaced with another, and rarely do they agree.
Conclusion
I realize that we have spent a great deal of time discussing evolution this morning. In general, I do not feel comfortable spending so much time on the theories of man, but in this case it seems necessary because of the tremendous influence of evolutionary thought on western culture. I also am very aware that we haven’t even scratched the surface.
The one point I want to emphasize this morning is simply this: Don’t interpret the Bible in light of what science says. Scientific theories come and go, but the Word of God shall stand forever (Is. 40:8). Of course, we must acknowledge that there are areas where science has been right and man’s interpretation of the Bible has been wrong. The Bible wasn’t wrong, but man’s interpretation was. That is why we need to study the Word diligently and rely upon the Spirit to guide us.
So might the same be true in the area of creation? While that is a possibility, we must remember the presuppositions of evolution. Evolutionary theory did not come about as a simple search for truth. It was saturated with an anti-God bias. Let me read you a quote from an evolutionist named Richard Lewontin, a geneticist from Harvard…
Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism… It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated.
Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.
(“Billions and Billions of Demons,” The New York Review of Books, Jan. 9, 1997, p. 31.)
The language is rather lofty, but he is saying that we must accept scientific claims even when they don’t make sense. Why is that? Because we are absolutely committed to a no-God materialism. The one thing we can never admit is that there might be a God. It kind of sounds like the kind of attitude that Christians are accused of having.
Always remember the simplicity of the Christian position. We don’t have all the answers, but we do have an advantage over all others when it comes to the subject of origins. While it is true that none of us where there when the universe was created, we have the only record which claims to be the report of an eyewitness, even God the Creator. He has given us His testimony, and we can trust that testimony.
Read Psalm 8
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)