Will the Real Jesus Stand Up? A Debate Between William Lane Craig and John Dominic Crossan

edited by
Paul Copan

Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1998, 179 pages.

This book captures a debate between Craig, an evangelical and defender of orthodox Christianity, and Crossan, a former co-chair of the Jesus Seminar. The Jesus Seminar consisted of a well-publicized series of meetings of New Testament scholars (almost exclusively liberal or radical ) whose purpose was to determine which of the statements and teachings attributed to Jesus in the Bible, were actually spoken by Him and which were the creation of the early church.

The debate was held in 1994 at Moody Memorial Church, and was moderated by William F. Buckley, Jr. (whose sympathies he freely acknowledged lay with Craig rather than Crossan). Then two evangelicals (Craig Blomberg and Ben Witherington III) and two participants in the Jesus Seminar (Robert Miller and Marcus Borg) were asked to respond to the debate, and their responses are also included in this book.

Craig opened the debate by announcing that he was going to defend two main contentions:

(1) The real Jesus rose from the dead in confirmation of his radical personal claims to divinity.

(2) If contention 1 is false—that is, if Jesus did not rise—then Christianity is a fairy tale which no rationale person should believe (page 25).

His contentions are based on four facts (which he characterizes as being supported by “the consensus of scholarship today” (page 26): 1. The burial by Joseph of Arimathea, 2. The empty tomb, 3. The resurrection appearances, and 4. The origin of the disciples’ belief in the resurrection.

Crossan on the other hand, makes a distinction between the “Christ of faith” and the “Jesus of history.” To determine the Jesus of history, he relies upon certain historical presuppositions, and accepts the Biblical record only in so far as it is deemed historically verifiable or at least historically likely. For example, for Crossan, the resurrection was not bodily or physical, but rather a means of speaking of Jesus’ continuing “presence” with his followers in some ephemeral way. Crossan closes his opening address by saying:

When I look a Buddhist friend in the face, I cannot say with integrity, “Our story about Jesus’ virginal birth is true and factual. Your story that when the Buddha came out of his mother’s womb, he was walking, talking, teaching and preaching (which I must admit is even better than our story)---that’s a myth. We have the truth; you have a lie.” I don’t think that can be said any longer, for our insistence that our faith is a fact and that others’ faith is a lie is, I think, a cancer that eats at the heart of Christianity (page 39).

Anyway, after the opening addresses, each of the participants has a rebuttal, and then chapter 5 in the book is a dialogue between Craig, Crossan, and Buckley, followed by closing statements from the two participants. Then the second section of book follows, with responses from the four individuals mentioned earlier, and a final chapter on the later reflections on the debate, by Craig and Crossan.

So, if you are interested in hearing a debate on the issues concerning the historicity of Christ and the resurrection, this would be a good book to consult. It was interesting, but at the same time sad, to hear someone who considers himself a “Christian” scholar, but has so watered down his faith that you want to ask him, why bother at all? As Craig says in his closing reflections:

What this exchange revealed is that on a factual level Dr. Crossan’s view is, as I suspected, atheism. “God” is just an interpretive construct which human beings put on the universe in the same way that (to Crossan) “Christ” is an interpretive construct which Christian believers put on the purely human Jesus. In this light, it is no surprise at all that Dr. Crossan believes neither in miracles nor in the resurrection of Jesus as events in history…Crossan is thus a good example of contemporary theologians who have accepted the modernist critique of religion but who cannot bring themselves, in Don Cupitt’s phrase, to “take leave of God” (page 174).

A Hill On Which To Die: One Southern Baptist’s Journey

by
Judge Paul Pressler

Nashville: Broadman and Holman, 1999, 355 pages.

This is an excellent book about a subject that has been close to my heart for many years. Pressler, along with Paige Patterson, was one of the chief architects of the conservative resurgence in the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC), whereby the seminaries and key agencies of the Convention were taken out of the hands of theological liberals, and placed under the oversight of evangelical conservatives. Thereby, the liberal tide within the SBC was turned. Because of the efforts of these two men, along with many of like-mind within the denomination, today seminaries like Southern (Louisville, Ky.) and Southeastern have conservative evangelicals like Al Mohler and Paige Patterson, respectively, as presidents. In fact, evangelicals are presidents of all six SBC seminaries.

A few biographical notes on Pressler himself: he was elected to the Texas Legislature in 1957. He practiced law with the firm of Vinson and Elkins before becoming a judge of the 133^rd district court in 1970. Pressler served as Justice for the 14^th Court of Appeals until his retirement in 1993. His family’s roots in the Baptist faith go back many generations.

As I said, this has been a subject dear to me for a long time. Although I am not now a Baptist, I grew up in a Baptist church and went to Baylor University (graduating in 1968). It was not until later that I had a theological “awakening” and became attuned to the issues involved in the debates about the inerrancy of Scripture, and the dangers of theological liberalism. I read the 1976 book, which brought all of this into the national spotlight: The Battle for the Bible, by Harold Lindsell. Therefore, when Pressler, Patterson, and others began the battle to retake the SBC in 1979, though I was no longer a Baptist, I was very interested in the developments within the SBC. I started cutting clippings relating to the battle in the SBC from the newspaper, and compiled quite a file. In Texas, the Baptists receive a lot of news coverage, even though mostly biased in a liberal direction. Each year, I eagerly anticipated the annual Convention, which included the election (or reelection) of a SBC President, and rejoiced as the conservatives began piling up consecutive victories in electing presidents: Adrian Rogers in 1979, Bailey Smith in 1980 and 1981, Jimmy Draper in 1982 and 1983, Charles Stanley in 1984 and 1985, etc. By the mid to late 1980s, the battle was pretty much won.

The significance of the election of a conservative SBC president rests in the fact that the president appoints key offices, such as the trustees of the Baptist seminaries and the heads of the various agencies, such as those involved in interface with the government and public affairs, missions activities, and the publication of literature used in Sunday schools. (Actually, it’s a little more complicated than that, as the SBC president, with his one power, appoints the Committee on Committees, which in turn nominates members of the Committee on Nominations, and this committee nominates members of the governing boards of all SBC agencies and institutions). Realizing the implications of this fact, Pressler saw that by electing conservative SBC presidents, the key areas of liberal influence could be reclaimed, and the liberal direction in which they were going could be reversed, particularly in the Baptist seminaries. As trustee seats came up for reappointment, conservative SBC presidents could in only a few years, cause a complete change in the makeup of those institutions, as conservative trustees could in turn appoint conservative presidents of their respective seminaries, and ultimately conservative professors. Professors whose teachings were out of line with the doctrinal statements of the seminaries and historic Baptist positions, could be dismissed. And so, this was the plan that was adopted and ultimately consummated.

One thing that needs to be made clear is that this was not a struggle over just raw power. Pressler and other conservatives had long heard the stories of how Baptist institutions had diluted or corrupted the faith of countless students by teaching liberal theories about the nature of Scripture. Students who took issue with their professors’ liberal views were mocked in class by the professors themselves. The liberals were in power, and the concerns of the conservatives were ignored. It was to reverse this situation that Pressler and his allies sought power, not for its own sake, but to prevent the Baptists from going the way of the other mainline denominations, which have been weakened as they increasingly abandoned traditional Christian teachings regarding the authority of Scripture, the necessity of the atonement, eternal judgement, etc.

Another thing that needs to be made clear is that this was not a battle over the interpretation of Scripture, but rather over the nature of Scripture. The liberals were very effective in convincing the media that this was a battle over how to interpret Scripture, and they never tired of accusing the conservatives of wanting to enforce conformity of interpretation. But the real issue was the nature of Scripture: is it the Word of God to man, or the word of man about God? If it is the former, it is authoritative, trustworthy and unchanging. If the latter, it may contain errors and is subject to being “modified” in the light of current sociological, scientific, or psychological knowledge. However, since the liberals controlled the Baptist press, and had sympathizers in the secular news media, they were very effective in convincing both the public and many conservative Baptists, that this was a power struggle by “fundamentalists” to force their particular interpretations upon all Baptists. I know many Baptists who hold to the inerrancy of Scripture and the historic doctrines of the faith, but who had been swayed by their “dear pastor” and the press (Baptist and secular) into believing the power-struggle and forced-interpretation ploys of the liberals. So the struggle by the conservatives was made doubly difficult by the fact that the liberals did not want to discuss the actual issues, because they knew they were out of step with the Baptists in the pew, and their hope for victory lay with hiding the true nature of the conflict. And they were very successful at this. As Pressler says:

The conservative movement was not motivated by a desire for power or the promotion of the conservative leaders’ personalities. Many people in the liberal movement tried to make that an issue . They did everything they could to divert the issue from that of theology to trying to make conservatives look as bad as possible. Some liberals charged that we were in the conservative movement for personal greed and personal power…The issue was not the autonomy of the local congregation…(nor the) priesthood of the believer…(nor) the promotion of a conservative political agenda…(nor the) interpretation of Scripture… The issue was and is the complete, absolute, total accuracy and integrity of the revelation that God has given us in His Book—the Bible. This is the hill on which to die!” (pages 153, 155, 157-160).

So the conservative versus liberal distinction has to do with their views of the nature of Scripture, and of course a low view of Scripture ultimately leads to a weakening or even repudiation of the key doctrines of the faith as well. Another category important to this story is that of the moderates. Moderates are generally conservative in their views and understanding of Scripture and the doctrines of the faith, but as Pressler put it, they are not likely to want to oppose the liberals. They are more accommodating of variant views. Or a moderate may be a liberal who prefers to call himself moderate, because few want to be perceived as a “liberal” in the conservative Southern Baptist denomination. The term “moderate” just has a more gentle, soothing, reasonable sound to it.

In reading the book, one thing that comes out very clearly is Pressler’s love for the Lord. From his early years, wherever he was, whether at prep school in New Hampshire, college at Princeton, or law school at UT, he always quick to unite with a church and become actively involved, and to institute Bible studies among his schoolmates. He had a fervent love for the lost, and actively supported missions. One time he and his wife even smuggled Russian-language Bibles into Russia when on a trip there. Having spent a lot of time in the north, he had witnessed how years of liberal domination had weakened the church’s witness, and he did not want to see that happen to his beloved SBC. Pressler says: “When we started, those of us in the conservative movement did not realize the sociological ramifications of what would occur. We were interested in winning souls for Christ. We were motivated to direct our own institutions so that we would not finance the destruction by our employees (i.e. seminary and college faculties) of those principles in which we believed” (page 245).

Well, you might say: “why should I be interested in this story? I’m not a Baptist.” Well, neither was Dr. Francis Schaeffer, and listen to his interest in the happenings in the SBC, as Pressler relates a conversation a friend of his had with Schaeffer not long before Schaeffer’s death:

They were talking together at the Christian Booksellers Convention in Dallas. Dr. Schaeffer asked Jess about the conservative movement in the SBC…(Jess) stated that he did know me (Pressler). Dr. Schaeffer told him to tell me that he prayed for me and the others in the conservative movement every day because the future of evangelical Christianity in America depended on what happened in the SBC. He said it was the only group that had the numbers and resources to influence American society for good and win a large segment of the American population to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. Learning about this comment gave me an awesome sense of responsibility (page 263).

Or perhaps you think the problems in the seminaries and colleges were overstated. If so, let me direct you to Appendix B of the book, titled “A Delineation of Possible Problems” (pages 323-351). It consists of a report prepared by Pressler in 1985 after a Baptist executive had requested that he set forth some examples of possible areas of theological problems in SBC institutions. Included is enough documentation to make any evangelical’s skin crawl.

One of the most appalling examples is a study of “Changing Views of Southern Seminary Students” which constituted a master’s thesis by a Southern Baptist Seminary student in 1976; the paper was approved by three professors at the seminary (each of whom later became vocal opponents of the conservative movement). The paper interviewed Southern students at four levels to see how theological views changed as they progressed through the program, beginning with diploma students, then to first-year students, next to final year students, and finally to PhD-ThM students. If you look at the chart on page 346, you will see that certainty about the existence of God went from 100% (of diploma students) to 63% (of PhD-ThM students). Belief in the divinity of Christ went from 100% to 63%; belief in Biblical miracles from 96% to 37%; belief in Jesus’ virgin birth from 96% to 32%; and belief in the absolute necessity of Jesus Christ as Savior from 100% to 59%. In other words, the longer a student studied at Southern, the less orthodox and evangelical he became in his theological beliefs. And the three faculty members who oversaw the thesis must not have found fault with the student’s methods or results, as the paper was approved by them.

An item of particular personal interest is found in chapter 30, titled “My Heroes of the Resurgence.” In this chapter, Pressler highlights specific individuals who deserve special attention for their part in the resurgence, and one familiar name jumps out:

Marty Angell. The youngest person on this list, he was a student at Baylor University during many of the hectic days of the conservative resurgence. He fearlessly stated his position in classes and as a result spent a great deal of his time defending his position before deans and the president of the university. His graduation was at times in doubt. As a college student and thereafter, Marty made a tremendous contribution (page 278).

Marty was a member of my church (an independent Bible church), and went before our assembly several times during that trying period to inform us of what was happening at Baylor, and to seek the support of our prayers. I am glad to say that he did graduate, so that aspect ended happily. However, as a Baylor alumnus, I am greatly saddened to be reminded of the part Baylor played in active and hostile opposition to the conservative resurgence in the SBC (since Baylor’s trustees were appointed by the Texas Baptist Convention, rather than the SBC, the conservative victory did not favorably impact Baylor).

Pressler and the conservatives did win the battle, but not without cost. The costs to Pressler included his health, reputation, and financial well being. In addition, during the period of the controversy, he also had to deal with his son, who had a severe health problem from which he has still not recovered. However, as he said:

Many other people suffered far more than I. Some lost their churches because of the intervention of denominational leaders. Others have had their reputations blackened because they had the temerity to stand against those who had been running the convention. All I can say is, “Praise God.” The convention has been returned to its biblical base and those who perpetuated such things have been repudiated. The liberals have now started building their own organizations and I think they will get out of the SBC if and when they can find the support to do so. Originally I wanted to hold everything together and be conciliatory. Now I believe we should bid them farewell, if that is what they want to do. I have lost my desire to work with those who fought the battle in the manner of some of them.

Pressler concludes his book with the following:

The SBC controversy was a hill on which to die. Many did die—if not physically, in other ways. It was a hill that had to be won, and won it was. I am grateful for the many, many young people who will not be damaged in our Southern Baptist institutions by liberal teachers but instead will go forth with hearts aflame for God. I am grateful for the increased mission activity. I praise God, for only He could have brought about the present result. I am delighted to put my involvement behind me and to leave the hill which has now been recovered from others who had captured it (page 306).

I strongly recommend this book, and am glad the story is being fully told. There are portions that contain considerable details about Baptist organizations and personalities. However, skim through those portions if you must, but you will be richly rewarded from reading this first-hand account of the conservative resurgence in the SBC. As Tim LaHaye said in comments on the book jacket: “This book reveals many inside details of the most important religious event of the 20^th century…Anyone concerned about the work of God in our generation should read this book.”

Related Topics: Bibliology (The Written Word)

Romans—To God’s Glory: Exposition of Chapter 11

by
D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones

Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1998.

Portuguese

This is the latest volume in the publication of Martyn Lloyd-Jones’ (MLJ) masterful expositions on Romans which he preached between 1955-1968, and which have been published one volume at a time since 1970. This latest volume, which contains sermons preached in 1964-65, did not disappoint, but continued the uniform excellence of the series. Like the rest of the volumes in the series, this one contains several fine summaries of both the entire epistle up to this point (Romans 1-11, pages 257-258) and of the section in which we find the chapter which is the subject of this volume (Romans 9-11, pages 3-5, and again on pages 224-227). So if you haven’t read the preceding volumes, you can easily get your bearings with those summaries.

In chapter 8 of Romans, Paul had set forth the assurance that God will bring all of His people safely to salvation, and that nothing could stand in the way. “I am persuaded, that neither death nor life, nor angels, nor principalities….shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord” (8:38-39). But an objector might say: what about the Jews? Doesn’t the fact that Israel rejected its Messiah mean that God’s plan for the Jews has failed? Not at all, says Paul. First, he himself is a Jew. Then there is the principle seen throughout the history of Israel, that God never intended to save every single Jew. Rather there is the principle seen in a key verse, 9:6: “For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel.” The remnant principle shows that there has always been a body of elect individuals within Israel which God would bring safely to salvation, a spiritual Israel within the natural or national Israel. And in chapter 10, he shows how disbelieving Israel was responsible for their own condemnation, because they rejected the righteousness by faith which God offered, but instead sought to establish their own righteousness (10:3). He begins chapter 11 by saying: “Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham…God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew” (11:1-2). So God’s promises to Israel are still being fulfilled to the remnant, for Paul says: “ Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.” (11:5).

But then Paul advances the argument as he reveals a “mystery”:

“For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery…that blindness in part has happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. And so all Israel shall be saved” (11: 25-26).

With a background in dispensational teaching, I was particularly interested to see how MLJ would handle verse 26, and the concept of whether Israel has a part in God’s plans for the future.

So MLJ says:

My contention is that the Apostle raises this whole matter because he has been dealing with the glorious doctrine of assurance at the end of chapter 8. He has been glorying in the certainty and triumph of the purposes of God. But, with regard to the nation of Israel they seem to be contradicted and to have gone entirely astray if the gospel is true and if the church is the people of God …And the first part of the Apostle’s reply is that there is another Israel, a ‘spiritual Israel,’ within the natural Israel…that there has always been a remnant according to the election of grace (pages 225-226).

But you see that is not the whole story…in 11:25 he says, ‘I am going to let you into the secret. I have received a revelation. I am speaking as a prophet. I am not arguing any longer.’ He had been arguing in terms of the Old Testament. He says this is no argument, I give you a revelation. The mystery which he is revealing is, as we have seen, that Israel as a whole is going to be brought in. Now my contention is that there is no contradiction at all between what he says at the beginning of chapter 9 and what he says here in chapter 11 and especially towards the end. It is not a contradiction, it is an addition…There is no reason whatsoever for saying that the true Israel must always be a remnant. All Paul is saying is this, that this has often been the case. It was the case when he was writing, it would continue to be the case ‘until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in ‘ (verse 25). Then it would not merely be a remnant that would believe, it would be the whole of Israel. ‘All Israel shall be saved’ (verse 26) (pages 226-227).

So MLJ believes that God still has unfulfilled plans for national Israel. At some time in the future, before the second coming of Christ, the bulk of the nation of Israel--Israel was a whole, not just a small remnant within it—will be brought to saving faith through God’s sovereign grace. God is not through dealing with the nation of Israel, with the Jews, with the physical heirs of Abraham.

As a sidenote, MLJ contrasts his view with dispensationalism as follows:

What Paul is concerned about is the salvation of ‘all Israel.’ He does not say anything about the future of the Jewish nation from any kind of governmental point of view, nor even in terms of the land of Palestine. That is not what he is talking about. He is talking about its salvation and Jews are going to be saved in exactly the same way as everybody else…They will come into the church in exactly the same way as every one of us has come in—namely by repentance toward God and by faith in Jesus Christ (pages 186-187)

And then, in contemplation of this plan of God and of His grace, Paul closes chapter 11 with a wonderful doxology to the “depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God” (verses 33-36).

There were several subjects dealt with in the book which I would like to point out as worthy of particular notice:

1. The doctrine of judicial blindness, dealt with in chapter 5 (pages 35 ff.).

2. The imprecatory Psalms, dealt with in chapter 6 (pages 45 ff.).

3. Principle: the warning passages of scripture are the way God actually secures the perseverance of His saints (page 145).

4. The difference between history and prophecy, according to Charles Hodge: History gives the details of what happened; but in prophecy, great events are foretold, but the mode of their occurrence, their details, and their consequences can only be learned by the event (i.e., when they happen, or following their happening) (page 228).

5. Three principles in interpreting prophecy (pages 227-229).

This is a great book, like its predecessors in the Romans series. So, check it out!

Four Views on Revelation

edited by
C. Marvin Pate

Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998, 232 pages. Part of Zondervan’s “Counterpoint” series.

This book allows proponents of each of the four major interpretive views on Revelation to present an overview from their perspective. The four views and their proponents are 1) the preterist view, by Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., 2) the idealist view, by Sam Hamstra, Jr., 3) the progressive dispensationalist view, by C. Marvin Pate, and 4) the classical dispensationalist view, by Robert L. Thomas

The preterist view believes that the bulk of Revelation was fulfilled in 70AD, when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem. The idealist holds that Revelation teaches in symbolic form spiritual principles and truths that recur throughout history as God works out His plan for human history in the face of opposing spiritual enemies. Both the progressive and classical dispensationalists are in the futurist camp, believing that most of Revelation, especially from chapter 4 forward, will yet be fulfilled in the future.

I won’t attempt to summarize the views here. I think that these “four views” formats are very helpful, and it would be well worth your time to read them. I found particularly interesting the differences between the two dispensational camps. The progressive camp tends to make use of the already/not yet tension in its hermeneutic. For example, Pate says:

The classical dispensationalist relegates the events of Revelation 4-5 to the distant future. The progressive dispensationalist, however, perceives the overlapping of the two ages to be operative in John’s vision of the exaltation of Christ to the throne of God. On the one hand, the age to come has dawned in heaven. This is nothing less than the beginning of the fulfillment of the reign of the Davidic Messiah…On the other hand, Christ’s David-like kingdom has not yet fully descended to the earth. Chapters 6-19 detail the process by which that messianic kingdom will manifest itself on earth. Thus at the time of the events of Revelation 4-5, the age to come had not yet been completed (page 144).

In other words, this approach interprets chapters 6-19 through the lens of the already/not yet tension. In what follows, we divide this hermeneutic into its two constituent parts: (1) the already aspect—the fulfillment of the prophecies of Revelation 6-19 in John’s day; (2) the not yet aspect—the final accomplishment of those prophecies in the period immediately prior to the Parousia (page 146).

Pate sees a parallel structure between the first half of Jesus’ Olivet Discourse (Matt 24) and the seal judgments of Revelation 6. Thus the fall of Jerusalem “is part of the ‘already’ aspect of the age to come, while the return of Christ constitutes its ‘not yet’ aspect…(and while) the signs of the times began with Jesus and his generation, especially the fall of Jerusalem, (they) will not be complete until the return of Christ” (page 148). So you see some overlap with the preterist view.

In response, Thomas states that progressive dispensationalism “represents a significant change in principles of interpretation , so that the name ‘dispensationalism’ does not apply to that system” (page 180). So there appears to be a very sharp division between the two dispensationalist camps.

I was also very impressed by the preterist case. Until recently, I would have considered the preterist view to be an oddity, surely the least likely to be true. It was only after reading R.C. Sproul’s recent book, The Last Days According to Jesus, that I came, not to a conversion to the preterist position, but to an appreciation of the strength of their case.

Anyway, I think Christians of all prophetic stripes would profit from spending some time with this book. It may not change your opinion on prophetic issues, but it will give you a greater appreciation of the other fellow’s views.

Related Topics: Eschatology (Things to Come)

The Teaching of Proverbs on Work

Related Media

Introduction

There are not as many verses in the book of proverbs dealing directly with work as I expected. Topics searched included: work, labor, toil, diligent, job, industry, gather (and the various inflections of these terms). In total there appears to be about 15 verses bearing directly on the subject.

A List of Relevant Scriptures

10:5; 12:11,14, 24; 13:11; 14:23; 16:6; 18:9; 21:25; 22:29; 24:27; 28:19; 31:13, 17, 31.

Principles from Proverbs

A Presupposition

The consistent presupposition of the Proverbs on this subject is that the person being addressed by these pithy sayings is indeed able to work. This would include most of us by far, but there are certain people who are unable to work (for whatever reason), and should not feel guilty for not being able to perform the duty described in the proverb. For them God has another word of wisdom (cf. Proverbs 3:5, 6).

Principles

1. Working is essential to living and obtaining the essentials for life.

2. Food is essential to life (12:11a; 16:26; 28:19a).

3. Food in these verses can really be amplified to include any basic necessity of life (clothing, money, etc.).

Lessons

Lesson 1: Accept work as God's divine design for you (cf. Genesis 2:15; 2 Thess. 3:10)!

Therefore, it can be said that: (1) People who refuse to work reveal a lack of common sense in their judgment. (2) Sometimes people refuse to do the job that they have because they're always looking for a better one (12:11b). (3) Refusing to work can lead to death (21:25).

Lesson 2: Be careful for the "grass is greener on the other side of the fence" syndrome.

But, just determining to see the logic in working and then setting out to work is not enough. It is obviously the place to start, but one must also. . . Prioritize his work. Do the primary things first; the things upon which all else depends.

After determining which things are primary and which are secondary, and depend on the former, determine also, the proper order of the primary and secondary things (10:5).

Lesson 3: Do first things first, according to a plan.

Then, once a person has determined to prioritize their work by planning carefully, a person should work hard because. . . Working hard is better than working in a lazy manner.

Hard work brings a profit (14:23a).
Work done in a slack manner is as good as a piece of work which is later destroyed. Both are valueless (18:9).¹
Slack work leads to poverty (14:23b).
Diligent work leads to control of one's situation (12:24).²

Lesson 4: If you're going to work, you might as well work hard. . .there are many benefits. In the end, after a person has worked wisely and hard, he will often times find that his. . .

Work can be very rewarding (12:14).
We get encouraged when we say nice things to others.
There is, likewise, a deep sense of pleasure as we reflect upon a job well done.

Lesson 5: Enjoy your work--it's God's plan!

As time passes, a person who has worked wisely and diligently will find themselves rewarded by their labor as well as skilled at what they do with the result that. . . People who are skilled at their work are sought out by people (22:29).

Skilled people do not only serve before obscure people.
Skilled people will eventually be called upon to demonstrate their skill be people in positions of authority (including public arenas).

Lesson 6: If you are good at what you do, do not be surprised when others want to see you in action.

The ideal wife works so well that she should be honored for her work.

She has skill and ability at what she does (31:13).
She has an obvious plan (15a)
She works vigorously (31:17).
She should be honored by her community (31:31).

Lesson 7: Extol your wife and women in general for their fine work.

Summary

Work is God's idea and therefore excellent for man. Any attempt to circumvent this process only reveals an inability to perceive the obvious. However, for those committed to working, they need to know that there are ways to go about it that lead to enjoyment and reward. And those who are very skilled at their work often times get opportunities to demonstrate that skill before the public. Finally, when it comes to work, no price can be paid for the ideal wife who commits herself so wisely and thoroughly to her tasks that she merits public recognition for her abilities.

1 cf. BKC, 945. The interpretation of this proverb is difficult. It seems that the destruction must be similar to the idea of work done in a slack manner, i.e. a half-hearted job. Therefore, since a half-hearted job is seldom good enough to be profitable, it's about as good as a piece of work that has been destroyed.

2 Another viable option in interpreting this verse seems to be that those who work hard will eventually govern (lvm) those who are lazy. However, the verb lvm usually takes a preposition when so used (i.e. with a direct object; cf. BDB, 605). On the other hand, the parallelism in the verse may convey the idea that the diligent will govern the lazy. Cf. also Buzzell in BKC (932) who says that some have understood the verse to mean that diligent people will someday govern, i.e. as political officials. Such is not an uncommon use of lvm. In the end, however, Buzzell thinks that the idea is that a diligent worker will be in charge of the various situations in life in which he finds himself. This is a nice antithetical parallel to the lazy person, who being out of control ends up with another needing to control him.

The Proverbs and the Idea of “Money”

Related Media

Introduction

The Proverbs have a great deal to say about money and related topics such as giving, poverty, righteousness and wisdom. The purpose of this study is to narrowly focus upon the issue of money and wealth in order to draw out, from the vast material in Proverbs, principles to help us in maintaining a Biblical lifestyle in relation to money.

A Representative List of Verses

3:9, 10; 8:18-21; 10:4,15, 16, 22; 11:4, 24-26, 28; 13:7, 8, 11, 21, 22; 14:20, 23, 24; 15:6,16, 27; 16:8; 17:6; 18:11, 23; 19:4, 7; 21:5, 17; 22:1, 2, 4, 7, 9, 16; 23:4, 5; 27:24; 28:6, 8, 11, 22, 25; 30:8; 31:18.

Principles From
the Proverbs on Money

Honor God with your wealth.

Prioritize your giving; give to Him first (3:9).
God will often bless people materially who give first to him (3:10; 13:21).

Lesson 1: When it comes to money, put God first (Matt. 6:24).

Remember that wisdom is more important than money.

Wisdom often brings enduring wealth (8:18, 21).
Wisdom yields better fruit than money (8:20).
Wisdom enables one to rightly use money (17:16).
Wisdom gives one proper restraint in the pursuit of money (23:4).

Lesson 2: Ask God for wisdom in dealing with money (cf. James 1:5).

Remember that righteousness is more important than money.

Righteous people can have great riches that involve no trouble (15:6).
A poor, but blameless man (i.e. one who is righteous) is better off (i.e. before God) than a rich, but perverse man (28:6).
God often rewards the righteous with money (13:21).
It is better to have a little money with righteousness than much with injustice (16:8).

Lesson 3: Seek uprightness in money matters (cf. 2 Cor. 8:21).

Remember that fearing God is more important than money.

Fearing God is better than a lot of money (15:16)
Humility and the fear of God often leads to the acquisition of money (22:4).

Lesson 4: Remember to whom we must give an account (Rom. 14:10)!

People, diligent at what they do, often acquire much wealth.

Diligent people, in contrast to lazy people, often have more money (10:4).
All hard work brings a profit whereas mere talk accomplishes nothing (14:23).
Acquiring wealth takes diligent planning; anything less may end up in ruin (21:5).
People who cannot control their spending habits end up with nothing (21:17).

Lesson 5: Plan for your financial future as far as it depends upon you.

Recognize the limitations of money.

Money can do nothing to deliver someone from the wrath of God (11:4).
Money is very temporal and lasts but a short time (23:5; 27:24).
Money cannot be trusted in for it will lead to one's downfall (11:28). Trust, instead, in God (28:25).

Lesson 6: Be sober about money; keep it in perspective (1 Tim. 6:6-10)!

Recognize the potential for good that money properly used can have.

Money can provide protection from certain problems and alleviate certain stresses (10: 15).
Money can be left as an inheritance to help one's descendants in this life (13:22).
An industrious wife can make sufficient money to help he family (31:18).

Lesson 7: Be prepared to use your money to good ends (cf. Phil. 4:14).

Recognize and avoid the evil that money can cause in relationships.

Rich people tend to receive more attention from others than poor people do. There is often favoritism (14:20; cf. James 2:11ff).
If you are rich, be careful of people who desire your friendship (19:4a).
If you are poor, do not be surprised if people abandon you for a rich friend (19:4b; cf. 19:7).
Those with money often become the target of thieves et al. (13:8).
The poor person can often see through the facade of the rich person who thinks he knows it all (28:11).
A good reputation with people is better than much money (22:1).
Because of money people often try to pretend to be something they're not; they live a lie (13:7).
Rich people often "lord it over" poor people (22:7).

Lesson 8: The rich and the poor must remember that God made them both (22:2); humility is the order of the day.

Giving generously often leads to acquiring further wealth and spiritual benefits, but poverty awaits the stingy.

Generosity, not stinginess often leads to having more money (11:24).
Generosity often leads to the giver being spiritually refreshed (11:25).
Those who are stingy often end up with nothing (11:24b;11:26b; 28:22).

Lesson 9: Give generously (2 Cor. 9:6, 7).

Money gained by unjust means leads to naught, whereas the monetary blessing of God brings no trouble.

Money gained by dishonest means dwindles away fast (13:11).
People who oppress others for money can come to poverty because of it (22:16a).

Lesson 10: Earn your money honestly (cf. Acts 24:16; 2 Thes. 3:7-9).

Be careful for greed.

Greed for money can lead to family problems (15:27).
Do not charge exorbitant interest; justice will prevail (28:8).
Ask God for the proper amount of money (30:8).

Lesson 11: Search your heart before God that you might be aware of any greed (cf. Ephesians 5:3).

Summary

Remember that a biblical view of money begins by a commitment to honoring God first with our money (I). Then we must keep in mind that wisdom, righteousness and the fear of God are more important than money (II-IV) and will enable us to perform the first principle more adequately, as well as the others (V-XI).

The Theology of Ecclesiastes

Related Media

Since man is not able to discover the key to life by exploration, Qoheleth counsels him rather to enjoy life as a gift, in fear of the good and sovereign God.

Part 1:
The lbh (Hebel) World

“. . . Qoheleth deliberately chose a word with a calculated ambiguity; he skillfully employed it in a variety of contexts so that several associated meanings could be communicated without the use of synonyms. . . It must be emphasized that Qoheleth nowhere uses hebel pejoratively or with morally negative connotations. For Qoheleth hebel is a neutral term expressing brilliantly in its figurative nuances, the limitations of human activity and human wisdom” (R. Cover, “Hebel in Ecclesiastes,” Th.M thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1978, p.76.)

The Meaning of Hebel

Qoheleth consistently uses hebel with the nuance of “transient” of “fleeting” when he uses the term to describe man’s life (11:10; 6:12; 7:12; 9:9; 3:19).

Qoheleth uses hebel with the nuance of “perplexing” or “enigmatic” if occurrences upon earth which contradict the established moral order (6:2; 8:10; 8:14).

Qoheleth employs hebel often with the nuance of “futile,” “fruitless,” “unbeneficial.”

With reference to pleasure and wisdom, Qoheleth employs the hebel with the nuance of “profitless” (2:1; 2:15)

With reference to events under the sun generally, to the laughter of fools and to bequesting one’s estate to an heir, Qoheleth employs hebel with the nuance of “profitless/futile” (1:2; 12:8; 2:19, 21, 23, 7:6).
With reference to a stillborn child and to death, Qoheleth employs hebel in the sense of obscure or “unknown” (6:14; 11:8)

Qoheleth employs hebel in conjunction with re’uth ruach or ra’ayon ruach to denote a futile effort [(cf. Jn 3:8) 1:14; 2:11,17,26; 4:4, 16; 6:9]

. . . Here is the connection of hebel with Qoheleth’s characteristic formula re’uth ruach or ra’ayon ruach (1:14), which is to be rendered “feeding on wind” (Heb.) or “striving after wind” (Aram.). For in this combination hebel has its basic figurative meaning in the central passages, as in the royal statement of 1:12ff., with which the book originally opened. Prominence is thus given to the more intensive thought of breathing or striving for air, which symbolically undergirds statements about “vanity” (TDOT v3, p. 310).

Qoheleth employs hebel in contradistinction to yithron (profit) and tobh (good) and other terms which heighten the vividness of hebel.

The absence of yithron for activity is “profitless.”
The lack of tobh in activity is “unbeneficial.”

Related Topics: Introductions, Arguments, Outlines

Addendum to Colossians

Seven Figures of Christ and the Church

I. The Last Adam (Christ) and the New Creation (the Church)

A. Key Scriptures: 1 Cor. 15:45; Col. 1:15-20; Rom. 5:12f; 2 Cor. 5:14-19

B. Key Emphases and Application:

1. Separation from the old—separated, distinct life

2. Newness of life—transformed behavior

3. The Church is a work, a thing created by Christ—He is its sovereign head and preeminent Lord

II. The Shepherd (Christ) and the Sheep (the Church)

A. Key Scriptures: Psalm 23; John 10:1ff; 21:15-17; Heb. 13:20-21; 1 Pet. 2:25; 5:3-4

B. Key Emphases and Application:

1. The Good Shepherd—gave His life for His sheep

2. The Great Shepherd—leadership, care and provision for the sheep

3. The Chief Shepherd—rewards the sheep

4. The Sheep—submission, following the Great Shepherd

III. The Head (Christ) and the Body (the Church)

A. Key Scriptures: Rom. 12:4-8; I Cor. 12:12-27; Eph. 1:22-23; 4:15-16; Col. 1:18, 24; 2:19; 1 Pet. 4:10-11

B. Key Emphases and Application:

1. Leadership, authority and preeminence of Christ as the head of the body.

2. Unity—one body of mutually adapted parts working together as a team, as one.

3. Diversity—a diversity of abilities and gifts varying in function, in strength, and in honor, yet all vital to the body.

4. Mutuality—each member is dependent on one another as are the members of our body. No man is an island.

3. Necessity — the growth, care, and function of each member of the body.

IV. The Bridegroom (Christ) and the Bride (the Church)

A. Key Scriptures: Eph. 5:22-23; 2 Cor. 11:2; Rev. 19:7-9; 21:2, 9

B. Key Emphasis and Application:

1. Eternal and sacrificial love

2. Submission to Christ as the head of the bride

3. Purity—a chaste bride

4. Preparation of the bride for eternity

5. Exaltation with Christ in the millennium and in eternity.

V. The Foundation and Chief Cornerstone (Christ) and the Stones (the Church)

A. Key Scriptures: Eph. 2:19-22; I Pet. 2:4-7; 1 Cor. 3:11-15.

B. Key Emphases and Application:

1. We must build carefully upon the foundation.

2. We must get our direction from Christ, the chief cornerstone.

3. We must also build on the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets. Their gifts were temporary and foundational.

4. Believers are living stones responsible to Him and making up a spiritual house in which God lives.

VI. The High Priest (Christ) and the Royal Priesthood (the Church)

A. Key Scriptures: 1 Pet. 2:5-9; Hebrews (whole book)

B. Key Emphases and Application

1. As to Christ, He is our High Priest: Means our access, acceptance, advocate, intercessor, and help.

2. As to the Church, it is a Royal Priesthood. Means a ministry of representation and service of every believer. All are clergy, the called of God, and all are laity, the people of God.

3. Areas of Our Priestly Ministry:

a. Sacrifice of self

b. Sacrifice of praise

c. Sacrifice of giving

d. Sacrifice and service of evangelism, declaring the excellencies God.

f. Sacrifice of intercessory prayer.

VII. The Vine (Christ) and the Branches (the Church)

A. Key Scriptures: John 15:1-8; Psalm 80:8-9; Isaiah 5:1-7; Jeremiah 2:21; 12:10; Hosea 10:12

B. Key Emphases and Application:

1. Union with Christ—eternal position.

2. Communion with Christ—fellowship and fruitfulness.

3. Unity in Christ—all one laboring together.

Related Topics: Christology, Ecclesiology (The Church)

The Church and the Last Things

by
Martyn Lloyd-Jones

Wheaton: Crossway, 1998, 248 pages, which is the third volume of a series entitled “Great Doctrines of the Bible.”

As the title indicates, this volume (which actually consists of a sermon series) concerns two doctrines, the doctrine of the church and the doctrine of the last things. Regarding the subject of Biblical teaching about the last things (or eschatology), Martyn Lloyd-Jones (MLJ) said:

Start with the Scriptures. Then go to those books that will help you. And above all, read both-or all- sides of the matter, for there are many sides. Do not be content with reading one side only. I find it tragic that people should read one side only. Often they have never heard of another side, or if they have, they are not prepared to even consider it (page 88).

And he warns:

But may I add this word of warning: this lecture is largely introductory, but I regard it as (highly) important. Beware of losing your balance with respect to the doctrine. Beware of becoming an exclusivist. There are some people who take it up as a study and it almost becomes an obsession to them so that they see nothing else in the Scriptures (page 88).

Both of these quotes contain very good advice. We here in Dallas are very well instructed in the dispensational, premillennial understanding of eschatology and Biblical prophecy, due to the influence of Dallas Theological Seminary. However, it’s very easy to become “unbalanced,” as MLJ warned, and to reject out of hand other viewpoints that are equally based on a belief in the authority and inerrancy of holy Scripture.

As if happens, this is one of several good books recently published which can help us to gain or retain a good balance and appreciation of other views, even if after careful consideration, we still retain our own. The first five chapters deal with the church (including chapters on baptism and the Lord’s Supper), while the final 18 chapters deal with eschatology. Chapters 6 through 13 include individual chapters on such topics as death and immortality, the second coming, the time of His coming, God’s plan for the Jews, the antichrist, and two chapters on Daniel 9. In the chapter on the time of His coming, MLJ deals with the Olivet Discourse in Matthew 24. He begins by reminding us that whenever the doctrine of the second coming is introduced in the Scriptures, it is always as part of an appeal to holiness.

These chapters are followed by eight chapters (14-20) on the book of Revelation. In chapter 14, he gives a general introduction, and then in chapter 15, sets forth two of the major schools of interpretation: 1) the preterist view, which says that everything in Revelation has already happened; in particular, describing everything that was going to happen to the church until Constantine became a Christian and Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire; and 2) the futurist view, which teaches that everything after Revelation 4 is yet to happen. He subdivides the futurist view into those who believe in a preliminary rapture of the saints before the end-time events (tribulation) begin, and those who believe that Christians will have to go through the tribulation and the events described in the subsequent chapters of Revelation.

Then in chapter 16, MLJ sets forth the third major view: 3) the historicist view, which can be subdivided into three schools. First is the church historicist view which says that Revelation is nothing but a kind of prcis (or concise summary) of church history; this view was held by most of the Protestant reformers. It says that Revelation is not a detailed history but a kind of prcis of the phases of church history between our Lord’s first and second comings. Second, there is the continuous historicist view, which says that the things recorded here, the visions, symbolize things that would actually happen, following each other in chronological order until the end. It is a prophecy of the detailed history of the Christian Church. This view claims to be able to identify all of the symbols in Revelation with particular events.

Finally, in the third subdivision, MLJ sets forth the view he holds: the spiritual historicist view which says that Revelation is not meant to teach us some detailed continuous historical process, nor a detailed map of future end-time events, but rather is an account of the principles which govern the life and history of the Church between the two advents. It is an unfolding of the history of the kingdom of God to its ultimate climax. It presents the spiritual principles concerning the life and conflict and final triumph of the Church of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. It is not so much a description of particular things that have happened, or will happen, as a picture of the forces and powers that oppose the kingdom, and are fighting against it. For example, the beast in Revelation is not to be identified with any particular government or country. Rather, it stands for the principle. Revelation sets forth principles, preparing us for whatever may be actually happening, enabling us to understand and to be comforted and encouraged.

Then, in successive chapters, MLJ goes through Revelation with individual chapters on the suffering and safety of the redeemed (Rev 1-7), the trumpets (Rev 8-11), the final judgment (Rev 12-19), the premillenial view (Rev 20), and the postmillennial and the spiritual views (Rev 20). Therefore, the subject of the millennium (Rev 20) occupies two chapters, with MLJ describing the pre-mill and post-mill views, setting forth the arguments pro and con, and giving the reasons for the spiritual view which he holds.

The final two chapters of MLJ’s book deal with bodily resurrection and the final destiny. I would highly recommend this book for anyone seeking a balanced understanding of the various approaches to last times and Biblical prophecy, and the book of Revelation.

The Last Days According to Jesus

by
R.C. Sproul

Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1998, 250 pages.

This book deals with the Olivet Discourse of Jesus, recorded in its most complete form in Matthew 24-25, and in more abbreviated form in Mark 13 and Luke 21. The stated purpose of the book is “to evaluate moderate preterism and its view of eschatology” (page 24). In general, preterism believes that the kingdom is a present reality, in contrast to dispensationalism, which Sproul says “regards the kingdom as yet future” which “will not come until the parousia” (the second coming of Christ) (pages 23-24). But Sproul distinguishes between two distinct forms of preterism: 1) radical preterism, which holds that all future prophecies in the New Testament have already been fulfilled (including the parousia), and 2) moderate preterism, which holds that while many prophecies in the New Testament have already been fulfilled, some crucial prophecies have not yet been fulfilled. The principal concern of the book is to evaluate preterism, and in particular these two forms of preterism, in regard to the interpretation of such verses in the Olivet Discourse as Matthew 24: 34 (“Verily I say unto you, this generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled”), as well as other verses in the NT with specific time-frame references with respect to the coming of Christ, such as Matthew 10:23 (“Verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come”).

Throughout his book, Sproul interacts with a book first published in 1887: The Parousia: A Critical Inquiry into the New Testament Doctrine of Our Lord’s Second Coming, by J. Stuart Russell. Sproul regards Russell as “perhaps the most important scholar of the preterist school” (page 24), whose “chief concern was the time-frame references of NT eschatology, particularly with respect to Jesus’ utterances concerning the coming of the kingdom and to Jesus’ Olivet Discourse” (page 24). Sproul says that “the central thesis of Russell and indeed all preterists is that the NT’s time-frame references with respect to the parousia point to a fulfillment within the lifetime of at least some of Jesus’ disciples,” with some preterists holding to a “primary fulfillment in AD 70 (the destruction of Jerusalem) and a final fulfillment in the yet-unknown future” (page 25).

Sproul says that “whatever else may be said of preterism, it has achieved at least two things: (1) it has focused attention on the time-frame references of NT eschatology, and (2) it has highlighted the significance of Jerusalem’s destruction in redemptive history.” (page 25). In regard to the first of those achievements, Sproul feels that the failure of evangelical scholars to deal adequately with the time-frame references in NT prophecy has resulted in a wholesale attack on the trustworthiness of Scripture by radical critical scholars. The main problem is that Jesus’ predictions in the Olivet discourse “include not only predictions regarding Jerusalem and the temple, which did come to pass with astonishing accuracy, but also predictions of his own coming in glory, or his parousia.” The response to the predictions regarding the parousia on the part of radical critics is to say that Jesus was wrong, that His predictions did not come to pass. Futurist scholars, on the other hand, have, according to Sproul, gone through exegetical gymnastics to interpret the time-references in a manner that allows for an extended time period before their fulfillment. Preterists, however, take the time-references at face value and say that Christ’s parousia has occurred, in the short time frame predicted by Christ. They say that His prophesied parousia was fulfilled in a coming in judgment on Jerusalem in AD 70. This takes into account the heavily symbolic nature of apocalyptic language used in prophetic passages in the Bible, and shows how similar language in the OT was used to prophesy of other judgements on Israel which by common agreement had historical fulfillment (such as the Babylonian conquest of Judah in 586 BC). It also entails a close examination of other (non-Biblical) historical accounts of the details of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 (such as by Josephus).

It is here that the differences between radical or full preterism, and moderate or partial preterism, come into play. The full-preterist view is that all specific eschatological events predicted in the New Testament, such as the second advent, the resurrection of the dead, the rapture, and the last judgment have already taken place. In contrast, the partial-preterist view is explained by Sproul when he says: “I am convinced that the substance of the Olivet Discourse was fulfilled in AD 70 and that the bulk of Revelation was likewise fulfilled in that time period “ (page 158)—but this does not exhaust all specific NT prophecies. Therefore, the central issue between full and partial preterists is: “What events prophesied in the Bible are as yet unfulfilled” (page 158). Sproul would then look to other NT passages, rather than to the Olivet Discourse, for those events which are yet to be fulfilled. Partial preterists then would acknowledge that in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, there was “a” parousia or coming of Christ, but it was not “the” parousia. As Sproul says: “The coming of Christ in AD 70 was a coming in judgment on the Jewish nation, indicating the end of the Jewish age and the fulfillment of a day of the Lord. Jesus really did come in judgment at that time, fulfilling His prophecy in the Olivet Discourse. But this was not the final or ultimate coming of Christ” (page 158). Thus Sproul distinguishes between the end of the Jewish age, and the end of human history.

The partial-preterist view is summarized in a chart on page 170:

AD 70	Still Future
A coming (parousia) of Christ	The coming (parousia) of Christ
A day of the Lord	The day of the Lord
	The resurrection of the dead
	The rapture of the living
A judgment	The (final) judgment
The end of the Jewish age	The end of history

While futurist scholars would see part of the Olivet Discourse as having been fulfilled in AD 70, they would say that the remainder of the Discourse is yet to be fulfilled. In other words, they would say that Jesus began by speaking of events that would be fulfilled in AD 70, but then looked ahead to events that would not be fulfilled until the far-away future, at the end of human history. Preterist scholars would see substantially all of the Olivet Discourse as having been fulfilled in AD 70, but with partial preterist scholars recognizing other NT prophecies (outside the Olivet Discourse) as yet to be fulfilled.

To conclude, The Last Days According to Jesus is an intriguing book, which presents a different perspective on the interpretation of NT prophecies regarding Jesus’ second coming and eschatology in general. It is not “light” reading, but is yet very readable considering the complexity of the topic. It is written in Sproul’s lucid style, and is also enhanced by numerous charts and summaries. Regardless of your viewpoint toward these prophecy issues, you can profit from a reading of this book.

I would like to add that I (and others I have talked to) had always assumed that Sproul was amillennial in his understanding of Bible prophecy, although he has not been specific on the issue in the books I had read. Therefore, I was surprised to learn that he (at least now) is postmillennial. This was confirmed in the January 1999 issue of Tabletalk, the monthly magazine published by Sproul’s Ligonier Ministries. That issue is titled “Some of You Will Not Sleep,” and the theme is NT prophecy regarding the last days, and in particular the preterist view. In the opening article, Sproul says that in his eschatological pilgrimmage, he has fluctuated, at times being drawn to the amillennial position and at other times, the historic premillennial view (though he states he “has never been enticed by dispensational eschatology, despite its being the contemporary majority report among evangelicals”—page 6). However, despite having given little credence to postmillennialism in the past, he says: “Yet to my surprise, I have found myself more and more attracted to an orthodox post-mill position with its moderate preterist perspective” (page 6). So it would appear that the post-mill and preterist perspectives are ones that we will hear more about in upcoming days.

Related Topics: Christology, Eschatology (Things to Come)

You are here

Will the Real Jesus Stand Up? A Debate Between William Lane Craig and John Dominic Crossan

A Hill On Which To Die: One Southern Baptist’s Journey

Romans—To God’s Glory: Exposition of Chapter 11

Four Views on Revelation

The Teaching of Proverbs on Work

Introduction

A List of Relevant Scriptures

Principles from Proverbs

A Presupposition

Principles

Lessons

Summary

The Proverbs and the Idea of “Money”

Introduction

A Representative List of Verses

Principles From the Proverbs on Money

Honor God with your wealth.

Remember that wisdom is more important than money.

Remember that righteousness is more important than money.

Remember that fearing God is more important than money.

People, diligent at what they do, often acquire much wealth.

Recognize the limitations of money.

Recognize the potential for good that money properly used can have.

Recognize and avoid the evil that money can cause in relationships.

Giving generously often leads to acquiring further wealth and spiritual benefits, but poverty awaits the stingy.

Money gained by unjust means leads to naught, whereas the monetary blessing of God brings no trouble.

Be careful for greed.

Summary

The Theology of Ecclesiastes

Part 1: The lbh (Hebel) World

The Meaning of Hebel

Part II: A Good and Sovereign God

The Name of God

Elohim

YHWH

The Attributes of God

The Works of God

God is seen by Qoheleth at work in creation

He speaks of man as being made of dust (Ecc.3:20, cf. Gen. 3:19).

God’s continuing work in the world is seen in providence

God is seen at work in the world in judgment

Part III: Man Under the Sun

The terms for man

The nature of man

The material aspect of man is termed basar (flesh).

The immaterial aspect of man is referred to as “spirit,” “soul” and “heart.”

The condition of man “under the sun”

Man’s destiny

Man’s responsibility

Summary

From the series: Paul's Letter to the Colossians: An Exegetical and Devotional Commentary PREVIOUS PAGE

Addendum to Colossians

Seven Figures of Christ and the Church

From the series: Paul's Letter to the Colossians: An Exegetical and Devotional Commentary PREVIOUS PAGE

The Church and the Last Things

The Last Days According to Jesus

Pages

Principles From
the Proverbs on Money

Part 1:
The lbh (Hebel) World

Part II:
A Good and Sovereign God

Part III:
Man Under the Sun