{"id":3618,"date":"2016-08-16T10:07:39","date_gmt":"2016-08-16T10:07:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/christian-gospel.info\/?p=3618"},"modified":"2016-08-16T10:07:39","modified_gmt":"2016-08-16T10:07:39","slug":"the-transmission-of-divine-truth","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/christiangospel.online\/?p=3618","title":{"rendered":"The transmission of Divine truth"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n
\n

THE TRANSMISSION OF DIVINE TRUTH<\/span><\/p>\n

The Lord Jesus believed that the Scriptures were inspired,<\/em> for He thought of them as words that proceed out of the mouth of God, Matthew 4:4.\u00a0 He believed they had authority,<\/em> for He taught that those who sat in the teacher’s seat in the synagogue and expounded the Old Testament were to be obeyed, even though their personal conduct was not right, Matthew 23:2,3.\u00a0 And since He used the scriptures as His weapon when tempted by the Devil, He must have believed in their sufficiency.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

This is decisive for the believer, so that we believe the Scriptures because He who cannot be deceived, and who knows all things, and who withholds nothing that will profit us, believed them and acted upon them.<\/span>
\nWe now look at various Scriptures that bear upon this subject, under the following headings:<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Part 1\u00a0<\/span><\/td>\nThe promise of the Spirit of Truth.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Part 2\u00a0<\/span><\/td>\nThe process of imparting the truth- the Divine side.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Part 3<\/span><\/td>\nThe process of imparting the truth- the human side.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Part 4<\/span><\/td>\nThe purpose for imparting the truth.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Part 5<\/span><\/td>\nThe pointing out of imparted truth.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Part 6<\/span><\/td>\nThe protection of imparted truth.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Having looked at these things, we shall then consider THE TRANSLATION OF DIVINE TRUTH.\u00a0 This will be in the form of a timeline of events from the days of the apostles up to the modern times.<\/span><\/p>\n

Part 1\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The promise of the Spirit of Truth.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

We begin with the words of the Lord Jesus Himself, as recorded in John chapters 14 and 16, as He prepared His apostles for the fact that He was leaving them, and would no longer be present bodily to teach them.<\/span><\/p>\n

John 14:15\u00a0 If ye love Me, keep my commandments.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

If ye love Me-<\/span><\/strong> The Lord assumes that they would be different to Judas, who had left the Upper Room to betray the Lord Jesus with a kiss.\u00a0 The token and expression of love is used by Judas as a sign.\u00a0 Did he really think that the Lord, who knows men’s hearts, would be deceived?\u00a0 The apostles, on the other hand, would be loyal and true to Him because they loved Him.\u00a0 Because they were born of God, and God is love, 1 John 4:16, then love to Christ is the expression of the life they had received.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nKeep my commandments-<\/span> <\/strong>their love is to be put to the test, for they are the nucleus of the church, and have special responsibility in it, as apostles.\u00a0 They are to set the tone for the church age, and be examples to the rest of the believers.\u00a0 One of His commandments would be very specific to them, and involved them remaining in Jerusalem until the Spirit came.\u00a0 Indeed, these words almost seem to make the coming of the Spirit dependent on their obedience.\u00a0 If the Spirit comes to Jerusalem and they are in Galilee, what then?\u00a0 The Feast of Pentecost must be celebrated in Jerusalem, and they show their love to the Lord by being there.\u00a0 So it was the Luke records that “they were all of one accord in one place”, Acts 2:1, and the conditions were met, and the Spirit came.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nWhilst this exhortation is special to the apostles, we should not lose sight of its general application, and remember that obedience to His commands is expected of those who claim to love Him.<\/span><\/p>\n

14:16\u00a0 And I will pray the Father, and He shall give you another Comforter, that He may abide with you for ever;<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

And I will pray the Father-<\/span><\/strong> the promise to those who love and obey Him will result in the provision of the Holy Spirit.\u00a0 He, one of the persons of the Godhead, will come in full harmony with the mind of God.\u00a0 The Son will pray, (and the word for pray is the prayer of an equal, not an inferior), and the Father will send, and the Spirit will come.\u00a0 Thus the whole Godhead will be active in this matter, such is the importance of the event.\u00a0 Of course, no one person of the Godhead is active without the consent or agreement of the others, but this is specially marked here.\u00a0 The age when the Son was on earth is going to be followed by the age when another Divine person is active in the earth.<\/span>
\nAnd He shall give you another Comforter-<\/span><\/strong> the word another is that one which means “another of the same sort”, not “another of a different sort”.\u00a0 This affirms the equality of the Spirit with the Father and the Son in the Godhead.\u00a0 It also indicates that the Son was the comforter of His own, and this will be continued by the Spirit.\u00a0 He will point us to those features that were found in Christ, the account of which by His agency will have been recorded in the Four Gospels, so that we may have Christ ministered to our hearts even though He is not present on the earth.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nThat He may abide with you for ever-<\/span><\/strong> the express purpose of the Spirit’s coming is here said to be so that He may abide, and not go away, as Christ was about to do.\u00a0 This is testimony to the eternal security of the true believer, for the Spirit indwells the believer in this age, so that wherever the believer is, the Spirit is.\u00a0 The true believer, therefore, cannot be lost.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

14:17\u00a0 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth Him not, neither knoweth Him: but ye know Him; for He dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Even the Spirit of truth-<\/span><\/strong> the Lord now defines who this other Comforter is.\u00a0 He is not a person in the flesh, but is the Spirit of God. And because the promise is in the context of the greater works of setting forth Divine truth, He is aptly called the Spirit of truth.\u00a0 He will disclose the truth to all believers as they make Christ known in\u00a0 the various ways open to them, and will support and strengthen them as they set it forth. <\/span>
\nNote that the Lord is careful when He mentions this Comforter to define who He is, for He knew Islam would rise up 700 years later and claim that their prophet was the comforter.\u00a0 The history of that religion down the centuries shows plainly that as they worked out the teachings of their prophet it certainly did not bring comfort to men.\u00a0 Violence and murder were in abundance, but comfort was in very short supply.\u00a0 And the same applies today.<\/span>
\nWhom the world cannot receive, because it seeth Him not, neither knoweth Him-<\/span><\/strong> notice the clear line of distinction drawn here between believers and the world.\u00a0 And the difference highlighted here is that the world is unable to do two things.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nFirst, it cannot see the Holy Spirit.\u00a0 We might think that this is no different to believers, for they cannot see the Spirit either.\u00a0 The point is that the world can only appreciate things that are accessible to the natural senses.\u00a0 The spiritual ability to appreciate the things of the Spirit, and therefore the Spirit Himself, is totally lacking in their case, as 1 Corinthians 2:14 explains, “But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, for they are spiritually discerned”.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nSecond, the world cannot know the Spirit, or in other words, cannot have any meaningful relationship with the Spirit, for He will not link Himself with that which is of Adam.\u00a0 Israel were expressly told not to pour the anointing oil on anyone other than priests, “for on man’s flesh shall it not be poured”, Exodus 30:32, where the word for man is “adam”.<\/span>
\nBut ye know Him; for He dwelleth with you, and shall be in you-<\/span><\/strong> the disciples already had experience of the working and presence of the Spirit as Christ did miracles in His power.\u00a0 As He said, “If I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, then is the kingdom of God come unto you”, Matthew 12:28.\u00a0 So to have Christ by their side was to have the Spirit with them, for He could say, “The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me”, Luke 4:18.\u00a0 But there was a new experience in store for them, for they would have the Spirit within them.\u00a0 But the word “dwelleth” is in the present tense, and indicates that the Spirit would continue to abide or remain with them, even after He had come within them.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nSo it was that the Spirit filled every one of the believers on the Day of Pentecost, Acts 2:4, and that happens every time a person believes the gospel, for the apostle Paul states very clearly, “Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His”, Romans 8:9.\u00a0 (Every believer is filled with the Spirit all the time.\u00a0 When the apostle exhorts us to “be filled with the Spirit” he is not saying we need a further supply of the Spirit because for some reason we have become less than full.\u00a0 He means that we should “be” what we “are”, that is, filled with the Spirit.\u00a0 We are to live in the light of the fact that we are filled with the Spirit, and allow Him to control us).<\/span>
\nIn verse 16, the Lord prophesied that the Spirit would dwell or abide with them.\u00a0 Here, He speaks of the Spirit abiding or dwelling with, and also actually being within.\u00a0 In verse 16, “with” is “meta”, with the genitive.\u00a0 In verse 17, the word “with” is “para”, with the dative.\u00a0 These distinctions would have been appreciated by the Greek-speakers who first read them.\u00a0 Both “meta” and “para” mean “with”.\u00a0 But “meta” is “in connection with”, “in company with”, or “among, in the midst of”.\u00a0 Christ companied with men, and with His disciples; He was in their midst, and among them, but He was about to leave them, and leave the world, so they would not have His company in that sense any more.<\/span>
\nThe word “para”, however, involves a closer relationship, meaning “by the side of”.\u00a0 In fact, the word for Comforter is “para-clete”, one who draws alongside to help.\u00a0 So we have three ideas.\u00a0 The Spirit is among the people of God for ever, verse 16; He is alongside them to help, verse 17; He is within to empower, verse 17.<\/span>
\nIn verses 18-24 the Lord explains some of the benefits of the Spirit coming, in terms of knowing the love of the Father and the Son.\u00a0 In verse 25 He tells them more of what the Spirit will do after He has come at Pentecost.<\/span><\/p>\n

John 14:25,26.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

14:25\u00a0 These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you.\u00a0<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you-<\/span><\/strong> this is another gentle indication that He is leaving them.\u00a0 He had told them about Judas so that they would not be overwhelmed, and also so that they would maintain confidence in Him when He was arrested and crucified, seeing He, knowing beforehand what was to happen, had forewarned them, 13:18-20.\u00a0 This short-term prophecy would also give them confidence in His more long-term prophecies. This is important, because a man whose prophecies did not come to pass was to be stoned as an imposter, Deuteronomy 18:20-22.<\/span>
\nHe had also warned them in the words, “Little children, yet a little while I am with you”, 13:33.\u00a0 Something of His pity for them is expressed in the words “little children”.\u00a0 Jehovah pitied His people in Psalm 103:13 “as a father pitieth his children”, and now God manifest in flesh is expressing this.\u00a0 Peter is obviously taken aback by this statement, so much so that he ignores the following words about love, and concentrates on the idea of the Lord going away.\u00a0 This going away, however, is so that He may prepare a place for them and return to escort them to heaven.\u00a0 So these indications of His departure are followed by words of encouragement.\u00a0 The same is true in our verse, for the mention of not being with them is followed by the assurance that the Spirit would come as a comforter.<\/span><\/p>\n

14:26\u00a0 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in My name, He shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost-<\/span><\/strong> the word “but” emphasizes the changed conditions that are about to prevail, yet also serves to introduce the compensating benefit.\u00a0 The Lord is careful to define who the comforter is, lest they think He is a man.\u00a0 After all, the Lord has already described Him as “another”, meaning “another of the same sort”, so they could be forgiven for this mistake, seeing Christ was a man.\u00a0 So “Comforter\u2026Holy Spirit” rids of that notion, as it does in verses 16,17, and 16:7,13.\u00a0 But even though He is spirit and not flesh and blood, the fact that He is of the same sort as Christ assures us of His Deity.<\/span>
\nThis careful defining of the Comforter is necessary for its own sake, but also because the Lord well knew that Mahomet would come on the scene in the 7th Century and claim to be the promised comforter.\u00a0 His claim is forestalled by these words, for how can a man be described as a holy spirit?<\/span>
\nThe title of Consolation of Israel had been given to the Lord Jesus by Simeon, in Luke 2:25, and it is interesting to notice that when the child Jesus was presented to the Lord in the temple at the age of forty days, Mary offered to God either two turtle doves or two pigeons, (we are not told which).\u00a0 But the Holy Spirit is seen to come down on Christ at His baptism as a dove, and Luke tells us He came in bodily form, Luke 3:2.\u00a0 Thus these things give incidental testimony to the unity of Divine persons, for the dove represents the Spirit, but He came in bodily form because the Son was now in the body.<\/span>
\nWhom the Father will send in My name-<\/span><\/strong> this indicates that the Father sends the Spirit in response to all He sees in His Son.\u00a0 Whatever He discerns in His Son’s character gives meaning to His sending of the Spirit. We may be assured, then, that there will be no discrepancy between the Son’s attitude to things, and the Spirit’s.\u00a0 And because the Son’s attitude to things was that of His Father, then the Godhead is, as always, acting manifestly in harmony.\u00a0 The coming of the Spirit is here the act of the Father, whereas in Acts 2:33 it was the Lord Jesus who shed forth the Spirit, as John the Baptist had predicted in the words, “The same is He which baptizeth with the Holy Spirit”, John 1:33.\u00a0 Again, the Persons of the Godhead are seen to be in harmony.<\/span>
\nHe shall teach you all things-<\/span><\/strong> the word “He” is emphatic here, which does not make it mean, “He, the Spirit, shall teach you as I did not”, but rather, “He, this same one, difficult as it is for you to take in, shall teach you”.\u00a0 They had been used to listening to men teaching, whether the Rabbis, or John the Baptist, or Christ, but now it was a Spirit teaching, and they were possibly perplexed.\u00a0 The solution to their puzzlement is two-fold.\u00a0 First there is the idea of truth being brought to remembrance so that it could be written down.\u00a0 The Spirit and the Word would be vitally linked.\u00a0 Second, it is seen in the fact that the apostles, men in flesh and blood, would be the Spirit’s teaching agencies.\u00a0 So much so that it becomes their word, John 17:20; Acts 2:16.<\/span>
\nNote it is the Spirit who will teach, not the church, as the Roman Catholic system claims.\u00a0 As soon as men start to claim to originate ideas, there is confusion, as the history of the last two thousand years shows.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nBy “all things” is meant, “all things that remain to be taught”.\u00a0 It is not that the Spirit will start afresh, or else they would not need past things brought to their memory.\u00a0 There were further truths to be brought to light after the Spirit had come at Pentecost, as 16:12,13 explains.<\/span>
\nAnd bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you-<\/span><\/strong> nothing of what Christ had said was going to be lost, but the Spirit of God would gather it up and enable the apostles to remember what He had said.\u00a0 When they came to write it down, and when they preached it, they were able to give a true account of the Lord’s teaching.\u00a0 We may be confident that what we read in the Scriptures is a true account.\u00a0 Luke tells us that many had set themselves the task of writing down the details of the Lord’s life. He does not condemn them for doing this, but the fact that Luke’s gospel gained the approval of the apostles, shows Luke’s gospel is authoritative.\u00a0 And it is this because the Spirit of truth inspired it, which could not be said of other attempts at writing a gospel.<\/span>
\nBecause the apostles were thus guided of the Spirit, that which they preached before the New Testament was written can be relied upon. They were not using their imagination.\u00a0 So it is that Peter can assure us “we have not followed cunningly devised fables”, 2 Peter 1:16.<\/span><\/p>\n

John 16:12-16<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

16:12\u00a0 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

I have yet many things to say unto you-<\/span><\/strong> the teaching of the Lord Jesus when here on earth did not exhaust the store of wisdom that was available.\u00a0 Luke hints at this when he writes at the beginning of the Acts, “all that Jesus began to do and teach”, Acts 1:1, which implies that the Book of Acts would record the way in which He continued to do and teach through the preaching of the apostles.\u00a0 He “came and preached peace to them who were afar off, and them that were near”, Ephesians 2:17.\u00a0 The apostles “preached everywhere, the Lord working with them”, Mark 16:20.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nBut ye cannot bear them now-<\/span><\/strong> so it was not that the Lord did not finish His teaching ministry in time.\u00a0 That could never be, for God is never late, nor does He fail.\u00a0 The word “bear” has to do with carrying a burden, and the weight of truth that was to be unfolded to these men was more than they could carry in their current state.\u00a0 The Levites in the time of the Tabernacle had a heavy task, for they were responsible for moving the tabernacle.\u00a0 In the case of the Gershonites and Merarites, this involved the lifting of heavy materials onto wagons for transportation; in the case of the Kohathites they were required to bear the heavy tabernacle furniture on their shoulders.\u00a0 They would certainly feel the weight of their burdens.\u00a0 The apostles would also have a burden, that of the weighty truths concerning Christ and the church they would be entrusted with making known.<\/span>
\nThere were at least five reasons why they were not able to bear such a burden at that point is five-fold, as follows:<\/span>
\nFirst,<\/em> they were in a distressed state because of His statement that He was leaving them.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nSecond,<\/em> they were about to forsake Him and flee, so the boldness needed to set out new truth was not in their hearts as yet.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nThird,<\/em> they did not have the Spirit indwelling them, so the power to preach New Testament truth was lacking.\u00a0 Their preaching for the previous three years or so had been evangelistic, and consisted of the repetition of what they had heard Him say.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nFourth,<\/em> they were still not clear about God’s programme in relation to Israel, as is seen by their question in Acts 1:6.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nFifth,<\/em> there were mysteries yet to be revealed, but that would be done through the apostle Paul, who at this point was not a believer.<\/span><\/p>\n

16:13\u00a0 Howbeit when He, the Spirit of truth, is come, He will guide you into all truth: for He shall not speak of Himself; but whatsoever He shall hear, that shall He speak: and He will show you things to come.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Howbeit when He, the Spirit of truth, is come-<\/span><\/strong> the word “howbeit” signals a change.\u00a0 Something is going to happen to enable them to bear the weight of the truth that is about to be revealed.\u00a0 Their lack of readiness to bear the truth would be remedied.\u00a0 Since the burden they will bear is truth, it is appropriate that the Spirit, when He came upon them at Pentecost, should come in character as Spirit of truth.\u00a0 He is the Spirit who is intimately associated with the truth, and necessarily so, because God is the God of truth, and the Spirit is God.\u00a0 It is not that He would then become the Spirit of truth, for He had associated Himself with the truth Christ had made known during His earthly ministry.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nThe word from heaven when Christ was on the Mount of Transfiguration was “Hear ye Him”, Matthew 17:5.\u00a0 If God had some misgiving about the ministry of Christ, that exhortation would not have come from heaven.\u00a0 In fact, just previously the Lord Jesus had deliberately set His saying alongside the word of the Father.\u00a0 Peter had learnt something from the Father, and then the Lord adds, “And I say also unto thee”, 16:18.\u00a0 If that had been presumption, the word “Hear ye Him” would not have been uttered.<\/span>
\nThe word “come” is in that tense which signifies a decisive event, not a prolonged process.\u00a0 One moment they would not have the Spirit, the next moment they would.\u00a0 And immediately they would be able to preach, as we see from a reading of the account of the events on the Day of Pentecost, in Acts 2.\u00a0 Note that the Lord is confident that the Holy Spirit will come, which shows He is sure that the Father will respond to His request to send Him, 14:16; Acts 2:33.<\/span>
\nHe will guide you into all truth-<\/span><\/strong> like an expert tour guide, who is able to show tourists who have never visited a place before, the interesting features of a particular region, so the Holy Spirit, fully acquainted with the truth, is able to guide the apostles into that truth.\u00a0 Since the Spirit came because Jesus was glorified, John 7:39, then a vast area of truth opens up before the minds of the apostles, and we find this truth in their writings in the New Testament.\u00a0 Needless to say, this truth is spiritual; it is not truth about the physical world, as if the apostles became brilliant scientists in a moment. The fact that the Lord promises this, (and all His promises are honoured), shows that it will come to pass.\u00a0 So when the apostle Paul spoke of his ministry as fulfilling the word of God, Colossians 1:25; or when he wrote about a time when it could be said, “that which is perfect is come”, 1 Corinthians 13:10; or when Jude writes about “the faith once delivered unto the saints”, by which he means “once for all” delivered, Jude 3; and when the Lord warns in the last chapter of the New Testament against adding to the words of the book, Revelation 22:18,19, we know that God’s revelation of truth is complete. <\/span>
\nIf we do not know what it is that should not be taken from or added to, how can we avoid the judgement which comes to those who do take away or add?\u00a0 <\/span>
\nFor He shall not speak of Himself-<\/span><\/strong> this does not mean that the New Testament epistles will contain no information about the Holy Spirit, for that is clearly not true.\u00a0 What it does mean is that the Spirit will not speak independently of the Father and the Son.\u00a0 The fact that He guides into all Divine truth shows that He is familiar with it all, hence the word “for” at the beginning of this phrase.\u00a0 We are being led on gradually here as we listen to the Lord teaching His own.\u00a0 We learn the Spirit will guide into all truth “for” He does not speak of Himself, “but” whatsoever He shall hear, that shall He speak.\u00a0 The Lord goes on to explain this in the next statements. <\/span>
\nBut whatsoever He shall hear, that shall He speak-<\/span><\/strong> the Lord Jesus said of Himself, “My doctrine is not Mine, but His that sent Me”, John 7:16; “I speak to the world those things I have heard of Him”, John 8:26, (the “Him” referring to the Father); “and the word which ye hear is not Mine, but the Father’s which sent me, John 14:24; “all things that I have heard of My Father I have made known unto you”, John 15:15.\u00a0 These quotations show His complete insight into the mind and will of His Father.\u00a0 He was privy to the counsels of the Godhead.\u00a0 His coming into manhood had not altered that intimacy.\u00a0 The prophet spoke beforehand of this in the words, “He wakeneth morning by morning, He wakeneth Mine ear to hear as the learned”, Isaiah 51:4.\u00a0 He did not hear as the ignorant, but as the learned or instructed one.\u00a0 Learned persons converse with those of equal standing with themselves in matters familiar to them.\u00a0 They go over well-trodden territory as they discuss their particular field of knowledge and expertise.\u00a0 They do not hear one another to learn, but to rehearse what they know.\u00a0 So it is with the Lord Jesus.\u00a0 He awoke each morning to learn what part of the Divine Counsels was relevant to Him for that day.\u00a0 He did not awake to learn what the counsels were, but what bearing they had on the day that was before Him.<\/span>
\nWe are used to the idea that in the Book of Genesis God is heard communing with Himself.\u00a0 For example, “Let Us make man in Our image, after Our likeness”, Genesis 1:26; “And the Lord God said, the man is become as one of Us”, 3:22; “Go to, let Us go down, and there confound their language”, 11:7.\u00a0 But in the passages from the New Testament from John chapters 7,8,14 and 15 quoted above we learn that the Persons of the Godhead still commune with One Another.\u00a0 So to be able to hear the Father is to claim Deity.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nWhat is true of the Son is now said to be true of the Holy Spirit, for if the Son hears the Father, then so does the Spirit; He too is privy to Divine counsels and conversation.\u00a0 What He hears He transmits to the apostles, so they have the truth as the Godhead knows it.\u00a0 The apostle Paul could write, “we have the mind of Christ”, 1 Corinthians 2:16.\u00a0 The “we” in this context meaning the apostles.\u00a0 This gives their writings a very special character, and as such should be received and believed.\u00a0 Note that is “whatsoever” He hears, so the Spirit is not selective in His transmission of Divine truth.<\/span>
\nAnd He will show you things to come-<\/span><\/strong> that is, “the things coming He will announce to you”.\u00a0 It is not a question of showing as by visions, but making truth known so that it can be taken in by the apostles and transmitted into inspired preaching and writing.\u00a0 This is not a specific reference to the Book of the Revelation and other prophetic parts of the New Testament, for all the truth that was to be disclosed by the Spirit after Christ had gone back to heaven could be described as “things to come”.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nThe word “show” is literally “to bring back tidings”, so the idea is of the Spirit having direct access to heavenly counsels, but also bringing back tidings from those counsels to apostles on the earth.\u00a0 Caleb and Joshua brought back tidings about Canaan, (the place that contained “things to come” for Israel), after they had explored that land; in the same way the Holy Spirit is able to tell of heavenly things from first-hand knowledge of the mind of God.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

16:14\u00a0 He shall glorify Me: for He shall receive of Mine, and shall show it unto you.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

He shall glorify Me-<\/span><\/strong> this expression does not begin with the word “and”, so is not a further work that the Spirit will do.\u00a0 Rather, it is the result of the work that has just been detailed.\u00a0 By the speaking and announcing of Divine truth, the Spirit will glorify Christ.\u00a0 This means that various aspects of the glory of Christ will be presented to our minds, and as a result we shall have an enhanced appreciation of His excellencies, and He will be magnified in our hearts.\u00a0 A magnifying glass does not make an object physically bigger, but it makes it bigger in our eyes, and enables us to appreciate its features in more detail.\u00a0 So Christ cannot be more glorious that He is, but He can be magnified in our eyes as the Spirit points out His virtues.<\/span>
\nWhen Moses asked to see God’s glory, God granted him his request, and displayed that glory not only by allowing a glimpse of His glory to be seen, but also by speaking, Exodus 33:18-23; 34:6-8.\u00a0 So now, the glory of God is seen in the face of Jesus Christ, and those glories are told out in the words of Scripture, coming as they do from the Holy Spirit whose ministry it is to glorify Christ.<\/span>
\nSince the Holy Spirit indwells the gathered companies of God’s people as they meet in assembly fellowship, then the end result of each meeting should be that Christ is magnified.\u00a0 Paul calls this coming together for the better, in 1 Corinthians 11:17.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nFor He shall receive of Mine, and shall show it unto you-<\/span><\/strong> this is the process by which Christ is glorified.\u00a0 The Spirit not only hears truth, but receives it from the Godhead to infallibly impart it to the apostles, and through their writings to us.\u00a0 In particular what He receives is that which Christ describes as “Mine”.\u00a0 Since when this is transmitted to believers it glorifies Christ, then we may say that the truth that the Spirit is said to receive here is especially about Christ.\u00a0 No doubt the major part of this has to do with the mysteries that are unfolded in the New Testament epistles, which bring out truth that was even hidden from the Old Testament prophets.\u00a0 Such themes as the principles at work in His death; the consequences of His resurrection; the implications of His ascension; His headship of the church; His priesthood; the fact that He will head up all things, whether in heaven or earth; that He is the Last Adam; that believers shall be conformed to His image even as to the body; that He will have the church as His bride, and other things besides.\u00a0 Perhaps all these things are summed up in the phrase “the mystery of Christ”, Colossians 4:3.<\/span><\/p>\n

16:15\u00a0 All things that the Father hath are Mine: therefore said I, that He shall take of Mine, and shall show it unto you.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

All things that the Father hath are mine-<\/span><\/strong> there is a common possession of truth in the Godhead.\u00a0 One does not withhold from another, for they are one.\u00a0 Indeed, persons of the Godhead cannot, by their very nature, do anything independently of one another, or else they would not be One God.\u00a0 This is why the Lord Jesus said “The Son can do nothing of Himself”, John 5:19.\u00a0 He was not indicating that in some way He was powerless to act. (After all, it is as Son that He describes Himself thus, so the fact that He shares the nature and essence of God is in view).\u00a0 Rather, He was claiming Deity, in that Divine persons cannot do anything independently of one another.\u00a0 A man may do things independently of another man, and also independently of God, because men are individual units.\u00a0 But the persons of the Godhead are one in essence, and cannot act contrary to one another.<\/span>
\nTherefore said I, that He shall take of Mine, and shall show it unto you-<\/span><\/strong> the word “therefore” has the sense of “because of this”.\u00a0 The Lord Jesus claims here to have just reason to use the words “take of Mine”.\u00a0 Because the word “take” implies that the Father is handing things to Christ, and since all the things the Father has the Son has as well, then the Lord is perfectly justified in saying “shall take of Mine”, and not “shall take of the Father’s”.\u00a0 The three Persons of the Godhead are interacting in this matter as the Spirit takes from the Father the things of the Son.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Part 2\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The process of imparting the truth- the Divine side.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The process by which Divine truth was imparted to inspired persons is further spoken of in 1 Corinthians 2.\u00a0 In verses 1-5 the wisdom of the world is disowned by Paul in his preaching.\u00a0 He has affirmed in chapter 1 that the cross of Christ has cancelled the world’s wisdom, for the world had thousands of years to bring forth an effective means of knowing God, but miserably failed.\u00a0 It stands condemned as ineffective, and powerless to save.\u00a0 This being the case, the apostle saw that the use of worldly-wise methods in the presentation of truth was pointless.\u00a0 He assures us, however, that Divine wisdom can be imparted, and proceeds to show how this happens.<\/span><\/p>\n

1 Corinthians 2:6\u00a0 Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought:<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect-<\/span><\/strong> the foregoing does not mean that Paul, by turning from worldly wisdom, taught that which had no wisdom attached to it.\u00a0 Far from it, as he now tells us.\u00a0 There were two sides to the system of pagan religion prevailing at the time.\u00a0 There was the external worship of an idol, and its associated vice and corruption.\u00a0 Then there was what Revelation 2:24 calls “the depths of Satan”, the evil doctrines that only the initiated knew about.\u00a0 These were they who had been introduced into the hidden secrets behind the pagan system by a person known as a hierophant, or temple teacher.\u00a0 Such persons, once they had advanced in the mysteries of the religion, were called the perfected ones, and were allowed into the presence of the god.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nThe Holy Spirit lifts the word “perfected” out of this pagan setting, and sanctifies it to express the position of those who have been taught by God’s teachers, and who can therefore be described as perfect.\u00a0 Not perfect in the sense that they have no sin, but in the sense that the whole range of Divine Truth has been unfolded to them.\u00a0 But instead of this position being reserved just for the few, as with the pagan system, every Christian is perfected in this sense, having committed himself to the doctrine of the apostles, or, as Romans 6:17 puts it, has “obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine that was delivered you”.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nYet not the wisdom of this world-<\/span> <\/strong>the insight into the true nature of things that Paul was enabled to impart owed nothing to the wisdom of this age, (which is the word for “world” used here), for the present time is marked by the fact that it follows the violent rejection of God’s Son.\u00a0 How can any good come from a world like that?<\/span>
\nNor of the princes of this world, that come to nought-<\/span><\/strong> it did not owe anything to the princes of this world either.\u00a0 These would be those versed in the opinions and philosophies of the world, the nobles mentioned in chapter 1.\u00a0 Their supposed wisdom did not stop them perishing, as 1:18 has already said, so they came to nought.\u00a0 It is no good listening to perishing men.\u00a0 So the believers come to perfection, whilst the princes come to nought.<\/span><\/p>\n

2:7\u00a0 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery-<\/span><\/strong> God has His mysteries, too, yet He introduces the secrets of His heart into the minds of all His people through the teachings of the apostles.\u00a0 He does not limit His disclosures to a favoured few.\u00a0 It is not that the apostle spoke in such a way that things were still mysterious after he had set them out.\u00a0 Rather, he defines the wisdom he unfolds as being part of that body of truth which God had withheld up to that point in time, but which it was His will to disclose through the New Testament apostles and prophets.\u00a0 So it is “the wisdom of God in a mystery”, and not “we speak in a mystery the wisdom of God”.<\/span>
\nEven the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world-<\/span><\/strong> much of what is unfolded in the New Testament was unknown to the saints of the Old Testament.\u00a0 It was hidden in God’s heart, as Ephesians 3:9 also testifies.\u00a0 God created all things by Jesus Christ, (including the ages of time, Hebrews 1:2), so He is in total control.\u00a0 He could have arranged for these things to be unfolded sooner if it had been His mind to do so.\u00a0 He chose not to, mainly because it needed the coming of the Spirit of God for believers to be able to take in the full truth He had in mind to tell.\u00a0 As the Lord Jesus said, “I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.\u00a0 Howbeit when He, the Spirit of truth is come, He will guide you into all truth”, John 16:12,13.<\/span>
\nUnto our glory-<\/span><\/strong> the matters set out in the apostles’ doctrine have to do with the position of privilege to which believers are brought in Christ.<\/span><\/p>\n

2:8\u00a0 Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Which none of the princes of this world knew-<\/span><\/strong> those versed in this world’s wisdom had no idea as to who Christ really was.\u00a0 They are the mighty, noble and rich people of chapter 1, who gloried in their natural abilities, but had no grasp of spiritual and Divine realities.\u00a0 Their thinking was governed by a world-view that dismissed the truth of God, and therefore it is no surprise they were ignorant.\u00a0 This applied even to the chief priests and rulers of Israel, for they are described as ignorant by the apostle Peter in Acts 3:17.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nFor had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory-<\/span><\/strong> they really believed they were crucifying a blasphemous carpenter from Nazareth.\u00a0 They refused to believe that He was the Son of God, despite the infallible proofs of this He gave them.\u00a0 This is a sure indication that they were governed by natural thinking, despite their religion.\u00a0 It is not simply that they crucified Him because they were unbelievers, but rather, because they were convinced they were right, they thought there would be no repercussions from crucifying Him.\u00a0 Hence their fear when they were told He was risen from the dead.\u00a0 His resurrection is a sure indicator that He will judge men, Acts 17:31.\u00a0 They could have just let Him live and die in the ordinary course of events.\u00a0 Because they sought to hasten His death, they showed themselves ignorant of the true nature of things.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nNot only is Jesus Christ the Lord of glory as to His personal worth, but also as the one who brings His people into a position of glory, as the previous verse has indicated.<\/span><\/p>\n

2:9\u00a0 But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

But as it is written-<\/span><\/strong> the apostle now appeals to the Old Testament scriptures to prove his point, and makes a quotation from Isaiah 64:4.<\/span>
\n“Eye hath not seen-<\/span><\/strong> mention had been made of the wise men, scribes and disputers of this world in 1:20.\u00a0 They have been confounded by the wisdom and power of God demonstrated at Calvary.\u00a0 But what of the scribes in Israel, have they been any more successful in penetrating the depths of the mind of God?\u00a0 Says Isaiah, in effect, they have not written it down so that our eyes can run along the lines and learn what God has in store, for it was kept even from the inspired writers of the Old Testament.<\/span>
\nNor ear heard-<\/span><\/strong> what of those who debated the things of God in Israel, can they tell us?<\/span>
\nNeither have entered into the heart of man-<\/span><\/strong> can it be said of the wise men in Israel that the mysteries of God ever entered into their hearts as they sought to know God better?<\/span>
\nThe things which God hath prepared for them that love Him”-<\/span><\/strong> the things were prepared, so New Testament truth is not an afterthought with God.\u00a0 The things taught by the apostles were planned in eternity, and disclosed when it was appropriate to do so.\u00a0 Isaiah wrote “him that waiteth for Him”, whereas Paul by the same Spirit writes, “them that love Him”.\u00a0 We learn by this that those who wait for God to reveal His truth do so because they love Him; love for the truth is love for the God of truth.\u00a0 The Lord Jesus linked love of the truth with love of the Father and Himself in the upper room ministry.\u00a0 His words were, “He that hath My commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth Me: and he that loveth Me shall be loved of My Father, and I will love him, and will manifest Myself to him.\u00a0 Judas saith unto Him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that Thou wilt manifest Thyself unto us, and not unto the world?\u00a0 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love Me, he will keep My words: and My Father will love him, and We will come unto him, and make Our abode with him.\u00a0 He that loveth Me not keepeth not My sayings: and the word which ye hear is not Mine, but the Father’s which sent Me”, John 14:21-24.<\/span><\/p>\n

2:10\u00a0 But God hath revealed them unto us by His Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

But God hath revealed them unto us by His Spirit-<\/span><\/strong> in the first instance this refers to the inspired teachers of the New Testament era, and secondarily, to those who receive their teaching.\u00a0 As we have already noticed, the Lord Jesus said that “the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He shall teach you all things”, John 14:26.\u00a0 And again, “I have many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.\u00a0 Howbeit, when He, the Spirit of truth is come, He will guide you into all truth”, John 16:13.\u00a0 So there is to be further truth, after the Spirit has come at Pentecost; full truth, for the Spirit will guide into all truth; and final truth, for He will teach all things, and after that there will be nothing else to say.<\/span>
\nFor the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God-<\/span><\/strong> the whole range of Divine truth is open to the Spirit, since He is a Divine person.\u00a0 He is able to guide us if we have an interest in exploring the breadth of the truth of God.\u00a0 But we should also explore the depth of it too, for the Spirit can reach deep down into the mind of God and reveal truth to us that they natural mind could never discover.\u00a0 David said of God, “Thy thoughts are very deep”, Psalm 92;5, and he was, of course, right.\u00a0 But what is well beyond the reach of the wise men of the world is discoverable by the interested believer.\u00a0 Such a believer is described in verse 15 as “he that is spiritual”.<\/span><\/p>\n

2:11\u00a0 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him?\u00a0<\/span><\/strong> The apostle uses an illustration we can readily understand, to bring out two points.\u00a0 The first is that the things that are being thought in a man’s spirit, in the inner recesses of his being, can only be known by that man.\u00a0 Of course God knows, but that is not the point here; it is “what man knoweth”.\u00a0 Another man cannot know the secrets of a man’s spirit.<\/span>
\nEven so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God-<\/span><\/strong> the second point is that if a natural man cannot know what the mind of a fellow-man is, it stands to reason that he cannot understand the mind of a Divine person.\u00a0 But the Spirit of God stands in the same relation to the Godhead as a man’s spirit stands in relation to himself.\u00a0 Just as man is a tripartite being, consisting of spirit, soul, and body, so God is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.\u00a0 And just as having three parts to our being does not make us three beings, so having three persons in the Godhead does not make the Godhead three gods.\u00a0 This is an incidental testimony to the Deity of the Holy Spirit.\u00a0 The apostle is driving home the lesson that if we are to know Divine wisdom, and gain insight into the true nature of things, then we can only do so through the Holy Spirit.\u00a0 It is only as we accept what the Spirit says in the Scriptures that we can understand what is in the mind of God.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

2:12\u00a0 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Now we have received, not the spirit of the world-<\/span><\/strong> with the word “now” the apostle begins to bring out the implications of what he has said just before.\u00a0 The spirit of the world is that sum total of thoughts, opinions, viewpoints and reasonings of the men of the world which combine together to govern its attitudes and actions.\u00a0 If the apostles were governed by the world’s thinking, (as, alas, some of the Corinthian believers were), then they would not be able to discern the truth of God.<\/span>
\nBut the Spirit which is of God-<\/span><\/strong> instead of receiving the sum total of the world’s thinking, he has received the Spirit of God, who is able to disclose the sum total of Divine thoughts, insofar as it is God’s mind for us to know them at this time.\u00a0 This Spirit is “of God”, the preposition being “apo”, meaning “away from”.\u00a0 The thought is that the Spirit has been sent away from God into our hearts, for we come into the good of Pentecost when we believe.\u00a0 The word of the Lord Jesus has come to pass, for the Holy Spirit has been sent in His name, as He promised, John 14:26.<\/span>
\nThat we might know the things that are freely given to us of God-<\/span><\/strong> God not only gives His wisdom to His people, but gives His Spirit to them so that they may know and understand it.\u00a0 God has freely given these things, yet too often we are not much interested in Divine things; this is to our loss, and disappoints God.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

2:13\u00a0 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Spirit teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Which things also we speak-<\/span><\/strong> as they heard inspired men expound Divine truth, the believers at Corinth could hear the things of God.\u00a0 They could no longer say, “Ear hath not heard”.<\/span>
\nNot in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth-<\/span><\/strong> not only were the thoughts from God, but the very words used to convey the words were of God too.\u00a0 The intellectuals of the world would speak in far different terms to the apostles, but they were not conveying Divine truth.\u00a0 This is not to say, of course, that the apostles spoke in a language that was not used on earth.\u00a0 They used ordinary words, but not in the way the wise of the world would use them as they engaged in their philosophical debates.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nBut which the Holy Ghost teacheth-<\/span><\/strong> as inspired men, the apostles were guided by the Holy Spirit as they spoke and wrote.\u00a0 The apostle Peter likened the prophets of the Old Testament era to ships which were carried along by the wind in their sails, 2 Peter 1:21.\u00a0 So the Spirit moved men along as they convey Divine truth.\u00a0 They are thereby taught by the Spirit what to say, and what words to use.<\/span>
\nComparing spiritual things with spiritual-<\/span><\/strong> by the Spirit of God certain thoughts entered the minds of inspired men.\u00a0 Because they came from the Spirit, the things communicated were spiritual things.\u00a0 But it was men who were responsible for speaking those things, and writing them down.\u00a0 They were still themselves as they did so, and their own character came through as they spoke, but they were Spirit-filled men, and the Spirit of God was totally in control, even though He was using human agents.\u00a0 So as spiritual truths were instilled into the minds of inspired men by the direct action of the Holy Spirit, they were matched, in their minds, by the appropriate words to convey those truths.\u00a0 The whole process was superintended by the Holy Spirit, but without at any time over-riding the personality of the speakers.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nWe see this process referred to by the Lord Jesus in connection with David and his writings in the Psalms.\u00a0 In relation to the words of Psalm 110, the Lord asked, “How then doth David in Spirit call Him Lord?” Matthew 22:43.\u00a0 In Mark 12:36 it is, “For David himself said by the Holy Spirit”.\u00a0 In Luke 20:42 it is “And David himself saith in the book of Psalms”.\u00a0 So David himself was speaking and writing, (Luke); he was doing so by the power of the Spirit, (Mark); he was in a spiritual state as he did so, (Matthew).\u00a0 So also did the inspired men of this age speak.<\/span>
\nNotice that even though he is referring to the Book of Psalms, the Lord indicates that David “saith”.\u00a0 The very words of David are preserved in his writings.\u00a0 And moreover, it is as if David is speaking in the present, for it is not “David said”, but, “David saith”.\u00a0 The word of God is as up-to-date and relevant now as the day it was given.\u00a0 Paul could speak of “the voices of the prophets which are read every sabbath day”, Acts 13:27.\u00a0 So the prophets are still speaking.<\/span>
\nThe apostle makes no reference to writings in this passage, for two reasons.\u00a0 The first is the one just cited, that the written word is one with the spoken word, for what David wrote is what David is still saying, by the power of the Spirit of God.\u00a0 We have the inspired record of what inspired men said as they preached.\u00a0 The second reason is that inspired men spoke words to their amanuensis or scribe the words the Holy Spirit instructed them to speak.\u00a0 We see this in the case of Jeremiah and Baruch his scribe:\u00a0 <\/span>
\n“Then Jeremiah called Baruch the son of Neriah: and Baruch wrote from the mouth of Jeremiah all the words of the Lord, which He had spoken unto him, upon a roll of a book.”\u00a0 Jeremiah 36:4.\u00a0 So the words were spoken and then written, but what was written still retained its character as a Spirit-given word.\u00a0 So it is that we often come across the phrase, “as the scripture saith”, or, “what saith the Scripture?”\u00a0\u00a0 And the very fact that is “saith” in the present, and not “said” in the past, reminds us that the Word of God “liveth and abideth for ever”, 1 Peter 1:23.\u00a0 They are ever present in their relevance and power.<\/span>
\nSo we no longer have to say “ear has not heard”, for we hear inspired men in their writings; nor say “eye hath not seen”, for we have the writings before us; nor say “things have not entered into the heart of man”, for they have, as the Spirit taught them, and they in turn have taught us, so that we may have Divine truth in our hearts.<\/span><\/p>\n

We learn more of this process of inspiration from 2 Peter 1:20,21.<\/span><\/p>\n

2 Peter 1:20\u00a0 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Knowing this first-<\/span><\/strong> this is the first principle of Bible interpretation.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nThat n<\/span><\/strong>o prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation-<\/span><\/strong> The word “is” here is part of the verb to become, and is used with the genitive.\u00a0 So the idea is of becoming the property of anyone.\u00a0 We cannot make the prophecy our own property, as if we have exclusive rights to the correct interpretation of it.\u00a0 All believers share the truth.\u00a0 The faith is delivered to the saints, Jude 3.\u00a0 Only false prophets would claim to alone know the truth. A private interpretation is an interpretation which one thinks out for oneself, (as the false prophets did), unaided by the Spirit of God.<\/span><\/p>\n

1:21\u00a0 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

For-<\/span><\/strong> the reason why verse 20 is true. <\/span>
\nThe prophecy came-<\/span><\/strong> the idea is that the prophecy was borne, the same word as “came” in verse 17, referring to the voice that came to Christ from the Father.\u00a0 So the same mouth that spoke to the prophets, spoke on the mount of transfiguration. <\/span>
\nNot in old time by the will of man-<\/span><\/strong> it was not their private invention, any more than we may have a private interpretation. <\/span>
\nBut holy men of God-<\/span><\/strong> those whose will was surrendered to God, and who rejected human wisdom. <\/span>
\nSpake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit-<\/span><\/strong> the word “moved” was used of a ship when it was carried along as the wind fills its sails.\u00a0 So if that is the way the prophecy came, by the Spirit, then that is the way the prophecy must be interpreted, by the Spirit.\u00a0 All this prepares the way for chapters 2 and 3 where false and unholy prophets were attempting to lead the people of God astray.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Part 3\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The process of imparting the truth- the human side.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

A description of the way Scripture was written is given to us by Luke, who was responsible for two of the books of the Bible, Luke’s Gospel and The Acts of the Apostles.\u00a0 That means he was responsible for some 25% of the New Testament.\u00a0 His testimony will be valuable even for that reason alone.<\/span>
\nAs he began his gospel, Luke wrote as follows:<\/span><\/p>\n

1:1\u00a0 “Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us, <\/span><\/strong>
\n 1:2\u00a0 even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word; <\/span><\/strong>
\n 1:3\u00a0 it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus, <\/span><\/strong>
\n 1:4\u00a0 that thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed” Luke 1:1-4.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Luke 1:1\u00a0 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Forasmuch-<\/span><\/strong> Luke is giving to us the reasoning behind the writing of his gospel.\u00a0 He does not parade inspiration as a forger would try to do.\u00a0 He does not strain to impress us with his credentials, but simply states what moved him to write.\u00a0 The best proof that Luke wrote by inspiration is that his works passed the test of apostolic scrutiny, and were accepted wholeheartedly as being inspired Scripture.<\/span>
\nAs many have taken in hand-<\/span><\/strong> this means “to make the attempt”.\u00a0 Even though many others had written accounts of the Lord’s life, his was different.\u00a0 He does not criticise the “many” who did this, but he will imply a difference between himself and them.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nNotice the four parties involved in these four verses:<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Verse 1<\/span><\/td>\n“many”<\/span><\/td>\nwho wrote down what they heard preached.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Verse 2<\/span><\/td>\n“they”<\/span><\/td>\neye-witnesses and ministers, who did the preaching.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Verse 3<\/span><\/td>\n“me”<\/span><\/td>\nLuke himself<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Verse 4<\/span><\/td>\n“Theophilus”<\/span><\/td>\nthe original recipient of Luke’s gospel.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

This is the order in which Luke puts these things, but the order of events was as follows:<\/span>
\nVerse 2:\u00a0 Men who were eye-witnesses of the life of Christ, ministered the word by setting out what they had seen and heard.<\/span>
\nVerse 1:\u00a0 Some of those who heard them preach put on record what they heard.<\/span>
\nVerse 3:\u00a0\u00a0 Luke resolved to do the same, but in a more thorough way.<\/span>
\nVerse 4:\u00a0 Theophilus is sent the finished gospel, so that his faith may be strengthened.<\/span><\/p>\n

To set forth in order a declaration-<\/span><\/strong> to go over again in order, in the form of a narrative.\u00a0 So Luke is not referring here to odd jottings, but systematic writings.\u00a0 He is obviously impressed with the orderly way in which they went about their self-imposed task.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nOf those things which are most surely believed among us-<\/span><\/strong> otherwise known as “the faith once delivered to the saints”, Jude 3, or “that form of doctrine that was delivered unto you”, Romans 6:17.\u00a0 Luke joins with these narrative-writers to state his firm belief in the things about which they wrote.\u00a0 So Luke is not referring to those who wrote heretical gospels, for these did not write things that Christians believed.\u00a0 In any case, they did not produce their works until the apostles were gone, for they knew they would condemn them.<\/span><\/p>\n

1:2\u00a0 even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Even as they delivered them unto us-<\/span><\/strong> the “they” does not refer to the people of verse 1, but the ones described in the second half of this verse as eye-witnesses and ministers.\u00a0 So both Luke, and the “many” of verse 1, heard the ministry of the eye-witnesses to the life of Christ.\u00a0 And it is from these latter that Luke learnt about the things Christians surely believe.<\/span>
\nWhich from the beginning were eyewitnesses-<\/span><\/strong> there is no reason to think that the “beginning” referred to here is any different to the beginning that John refers to in his first epistle, where he describes the display of eternal life being “from the beginning”.\u00a0 Or different from the beginning the Lord Himself spoke of when He described the disciples as having been with Him from the beginning, John 15:27.\u00a0 Or again, the beginning referred to by Peter when he defined an apostle as one who must have been with the Lord Jesus from the beginning, this being the start of His public ministry, Acts 1:21.\u00a0 They were eye-witnesses, so they actually saw things happen; they did not rely on the testimony of others.<\/span>
\nAnd ministers of the word-<\/span><\/strong> not only were these people eye-witnesses of the Lord’s life, they were also, after Pentecost, those who taught the people of God as ministers of the word.\u00a0 The word being the truth about Christ to which they were able to bear witness.<\/span><\/p>\n

1:3\u00a0 it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

It seemed good to me also-<\/span><\/strong> so Luke had the strong desire to record the life of Christ.\u00a0 The Holy Spirit used his good intention, even though he did not use the good intention of the men of verse 1.\u00a0 That Luke’s Gospel is different is seen in the fact that it has survived the scrutiny of the apostles, and was accepted by them as authentic.<\/span>
\nHaving had perfect understanding of all things from the very first-<\/span><\/strong> Luke very gently and politely asserts his superior claim over the others that had the desire to write.\u00a0 His understanding was perfect, or accurate, and it was thorough, for he had understanding of all things, and it was extensive, being from the very first.\u00a0 He does not say that he had to rely on the ministers of the word, even though they were eye-witnesses; on the other hand, he does not say he ignored what they taught.<\/span>
\nThis statement does not mean that Luke had knowledge of Christian things as soon as Christ began His ministry.\u00a0 It means that his understanding of things as he wrote his account reached back to the very first things that took place.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nTo write unto thee in order-<\/span><\/strong> this is a further feature of Luke’s writings, that they are orderly.\u00a0 Whilst his gospel is in general terms in chronological order, nonetheless Luke is the one of the four gospel writers who departs from literal order the most, so as to give the moral order of the things he records.\u00a0 For instance, he records the imprisonment of John the Baptist before he records the baptism of Christ by John the Baptist.\u00a0 He is departing from chronological order in order to make a moral point, namely, that the Lord Jesus was fully aware of the consequences of committing Himself to Calvary by being baptised.\u00a0 Thos who are consecrated to God will always be persecuted by the world, whether it be Christ when He was here, or John the Baptist, or believers today.<\/span>
\nMost excellent Theophilus-<\/span><\/strong> the title Luke uses for Theophilus is also used for Felix and Festus in the Book of the Acts.\u00a0 This suggests he was a high-ranking official, and Luke is careful to give honour to whom honour is due, as exhorted in Romans 13:7.\u00a0 Luke is not ashamed to write to this most excellent person about a carpenter, because Luke knows that, however excellent and noble Theophilus is, the One of who he writes is much more noble than he.\u00a0 He writes a dignified opening to his gospel to a dignified personage, about the most dignified and noble man that has ever lived.<\/span><\/p>\n

1:4\u00a0 that thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

That thou mightest know the certainty of those things-<\/span><\/strong> “certainty” comes from a word which means “not tripped up”.\u00a0 Luke is ensuring that nothing stumbles Theophilus as he walks the Christian pathway.\u00a0 It might be that at some time he might think that to believe in a Galilean peasant is a strange thing to do.\u00a0 Luke, however, is able to confirm Theophilus in the faith, and show him that all such misgivings are unwarranted.\u00a0 One way he does this is by listing an array of notables who held power when John the Baptist was about to start preaching, Luke 3:1,2.\u00a0 Yet notwithstanding their greatness and prestige, “the Word of God came to John in the wilderness”.\u00a0 Passing by the princes of this world, God revealed His will to John, not in a palace but in a desert.<\/span>
\nWherein thou hast been instructed-<\/span> <\/strong>this tells us that Theophilus had been instructed orally in the truths of the Christian faith, but now something even better was to be passed on to him, an inspired account of the life of Christ that would surpass anything he had heard up to that point.\u00a0 And what Theophilus received, we receive too, for the gospel has been preserved for our encouragement even in the 21st century.<\/span><\/p>\n

Part 4\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The purpose for imparting the truth.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

We turn now to the words of the apostle Paul as he wrote to Timothy in 2 Timothy 3.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nVerses 1-9 are an exposure of corrupt men, who have a form of godliness, but who deny the power thereof.\u00a0 The apostle cites the two magicians who withstood Moses in Pharoah’s palace, Exodus 7:10-12, as examples of those whose religious beliefs and teachings were opposed to the truth of God.\u00a0\u00a0 Such men resist the truth, having corrupt minds, and who are reprobate concerning the faith, which is a term meaning the sum total of Christian doctrine.\u00a0 When tested by the standard of the faith, they are disqualified, despite their form of godliness. They deny the power that enables a godly life to be lived, namely the power of the Holy Spirit.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Verses 10-13 give an example of a godly man, the apostle Paul himself, the direct contrast to the evil men just mentioned.\u00a0 A man whose doctrine, manner of life, and willingness to suffer for what he believed, were the result of a settled faith in the Scriptures.<\/span><\/p>\n

In verses 14-17 there is an exhortation to a young man, for the apostle exhorts Timothy to be the same as he was, by continuing in what he had learned from the scriptures, encouraged by the example of those from whom he learned it.\u00a0 As a young man he had not outgrown the scriptures, nor could he, or anyone else, do so.<\/span><\/p>\n

The apostle now speaks about the Holy Scriptures:<\/span><\/p>\n

3:15\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 From a child thou hast known the holy scriptures-<\/span><\/strong> Timothy was Jewish on his mother’s side, and his mother and grandmother had believed the gospel.\u00a0 They had been faithful in exposing him to the reading of the Scriptures in the synagogue, where there would be copies of what was carefully preserved in the Temple.\u00a0 (See Luke 4:16,17, where there is handed to the Lord Jesus “the book of the prophet Esaias”, and when He had finished reading from it, He described it as “scripture”, Luke 4:17,21).\u00a0 Moses had been instructed to write in a book the words of the law, and deposit it in the side of the ark in the tabernacle, Deuteronomy 31:24-27.\u00a0 And this book was transferred to the temple, for many centuries later we read that in the house of the Lord “Hilkiah the priest found a book of the law of the Lord given by Moses.\u00a0 And Hilkiah answered and said to Shaphan the scribe, ‘I have found the book of the law in the house of the Lord'”, 2 Chronicles 34:14,15.\u00a0 This is why the apostle is able to call the writings Timothy heard, “The Holy Scriptures”, for they were holy and different, not only by association with the Temple, but also because they were separate from other writings, even those of godly men.\u00a0 Ultimately, however, their holiness lay in the fact that they came from God, and this was why they were separate from the writings of men. <\/span>
\nWhich are able to make thee wise unto salvation-<\/span><\/strong> of course it is true that unbelievers can be made wise unto salvation through the Holy Scriptures, but that is not the point here.\u00a0 Paul has been warning Timothy of men who would lead him into error if they could.\u00a0 What can save him from that error?\u00a0 The Scriptures.\u00a0 So even as a believer Timothy needed the wisdom of the scriptures to save him from life’s spiritual perils.\u00a0 James exhorts us to “receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls”, James 1:21.\u00a0 There are those who make shipwreck of the faith because they do not hold faith and a good conscience, 1 Timothy 1:19.<\/span>
\nThrough faith which is in Christ Jesus-<\/span><\/strong> even when we reverence the scriptures as being holy, we must only seek to practice them in dependence upon the Lord; they are not designed to make us self-sufficient.\u00a0 The Son of God was marked by dependence upon His Father, for He said, “As the living Father hath sent Me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth Me, even he shall live by Me”, John 6:57.\u00a0 To live by Him is to take in the truths about Himself that are able to nourish our souls.\u00a0 So the word must be mixed with faith.<\/span>
\nAll scripture-<\/span><\/strong> the use of the singular here indicates Scripture in its entirety, with emphasis on the words used, whereas in verse 15 the idea was that of the collected writings of the Old Testament canon, with the emphasis on the writing done.\u00a0 The Lord Jesus affirmed that “the Scripture cannot be broken”, John 10:35.\u00a0 Scripture contains the words of evil men and of the Devil himself; they are not inspired when they speak, but those who wrote what they said were inspired as they did so, with the result that we sometimes have the inspired record of what uninspired men said. <\/span>
\nIs given by inspiration of God-<\/span><\/strong> this is one word in the original, meaning God-breathed.\u00a0 God breathed out His word by the Spirit, (who is the breath of His mouth, 2 Thessalonians 2:8; Isaiah 4:11), and breathed it into His servants.\u00a0 They in their turn wrote it down, as we see in the case of the prophet Jeremiah:<\/span>
\n“And it came to pass in the fourth year of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah king of Judah, that this word came unto Jeremiah from the Lord, saying, ‘Take thee a roll of a book, and write therein all the words that I have spoken unto thee against Israel, and against Judah, and against all the nations, from the day I spake unto thee, from the days of Josiah, even unto this day\u2026Then Jeremiah called Baruch the son of Neriah: and Baruch wrote from the mouth of Jeremiah all the words of the Lord, which He had spoken unto him, upon a roll of a book…And they asked Baruch, saying, Tell us now, How didst thou write all these words at his mouth?\u00a0 Then Baruch answered them, ‘He pronounced all these words unto me with his mouth, and I wrote them with ink in the book’\u2026And it came to pass, that when Jehudi had read three or four leaves, he cut it with the penknife, and cast it into the fire that was on the hearth, until all the roll was consumed in the fire that was on the hearth\u2026Then took Jeremiah another roll, and gave it to Baruch the scribe, the son of Neriah; who wrote therein from the mouth of Jeremiah all the words of the book which Jehoiakim king of Judah had burned in the fire: and there were added besides unto them many like words”.\u00a0 Jeremiah 36:1,2, 4,17,18, 23, 32.<\/span><\/p>\n

So in some mysterious way God breathed into the minds of His prophets the truth they were to write, but he did not over-ride their own personality, as we see when we compare the different books of the Bible.\u00a0 They each have their own style, but God used it to further His purpose, as He carried them along by His Spirit.\u00a0 The Lord Jesus depended on “every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God” Matthew 4:4, so He believed that the Old Testament Scriptures to which He was referring were what God had said.\u00a0 He did not believe that they were the product of the prophet’s own thinking.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nWe should not speak of one book of the Bible being more inspired than another.\u00a0 The word inspired is used in a diluted sense nowadays, such as “an inspiring poem”; “he inspired me with his enthusiasm”, but this is not its meaning in Scripture. <\/span>
\nStrictly speaking, inspiration is the process by which the Scripture-content was communicated to those commissioned to write.\u00a0 It was not so much that the men were inspired, but that the process was inspiration.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nAnd are profitable-<\/span> <\/strong>that is, they are useful. The Scriptures are for daily use, not occasional academic interest. <\/span>
\nFor teaching-<\/span><\/strong> the act of teaching the faith is to be based on the Scriptures.\u00a0 Note this destroys the idea of the church having the final authority. <\/span>
\nReproof-<\/span><\/strong> when the teaching or doctrine is given, then shortcomings are revealed, and we are convicted of wrong behaviour.\u00a0 One of the proofs of the integrity of the Scriptures is the spiritual results it produces, see verses 10,11.<\/span>
\nFor correction-<\/span><\/strong> which is restoration to a right state.\u00a0 Having been exposed to the doctrine, and convicted as to deviations from it, there comes from the same scriptures the correcting doctrine, positively showing the right way. <\/span>
\nFor instruction in righteousness-<\/span><\/strong> having brought us back to the right path, we are instructed how to walk along it, “the paths of righteousness for His name’s sake”, Psalm 23:3. “This is the way, walk ye in it”, Isaiah 30:21.<\/span><\/p>\n

3:17\u00a0 That the man of God- <\/span><\/strong>o<\/span><\/span>ne who desires to be mature in the things of God, and therefore Christ-like.<\/span><\/span>
\nMay be perfect-<\/span><\/strong> given special aptitude for spiritual uses.\u00a0 The mature believer will have the required aptitude to fulfil the work allotted to him by the Lord.\u00a0 The grace that accompanies gift will enable the believer to accept the teaching of Scripture relevant to the use of the gift.<\/span>
\nThroughly furnished unto all good works-<\/span><\/strong> fitted for the task.\u00a0 Here the emphasis is on the thoroughness with which the Word of God fits us.\u00a0 We cannot do anything for the Lord without knowing the doctrines of Scripture, for they are the working principles of spiritual action.<\/span><\/p>\n

Part 5\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The pointing out of imparted truth.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Having been inspired of God, how are the Scriptures to be authenticated, so that we know what writings are from God and what are not?\u00a0 To gain light on this, we turn now to the end of John’s gospel, and the last few verses, which read as follows:
\n21:18\u00a0 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdest thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not.<\/span><\/strong>
\n21:19\u00a0 This spake He, signifying by what death he should glorify God.\u00a0 And when He had spoken this, He saith unto him, Follow me.<\/span><\/strong>
\n21:20\u00a0 Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on His breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth Thee?<\/span><\/strong>
\n21:21\u00a0 Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do?<\/span><\/strong>
\n21:22\u00a0 Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?\u00a0 follow thou Me.<\/span><\/strong>
\n21:23\u00a0 Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die: yet Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die; but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?<\/span><\/strong>
\n21:24\u00a0 This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his testimony is true.<\/span><\/strong>
\n21:25\u00a0 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

These verses follow the incident in which Peter was publicly re-instated amongst the apostles after his sad and three-fold denial of the Lord.\u00a0 He has already had a private interview with Christ, Mark 16:7; 1 Corinthians 15:5, but this is public.\u00a0 He is tested with regard to his love for the Lord, and affirms that he does love Him, despite his denials.\u00a0 As a result, he is entrusted with the task of shepherding amongst the flock of God.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nThe reason why Peter had to be reinstated publicly amongst the apostles was because he had said in their hearing that he was prepared to go into death for Him.\u00a0 He had said this, moreover, in the context of the Lord commanding them to love one another, John 13:34-38.\u00a0 In Mark’s account, we learn that Peter also said, “Although all shall be offended, yet will not I”, Mark 14:29.\u00a0 To assert that he would outdo the other apostles was not a very loving thing to do, because it suggested that their love was of a lesser quality to his.\u00a0 He has come to realise that his love was not as strong as he thought, and he had denied his Lord, a thing which the other ten apostles had not done.<\/span><\/p>\n

21:18\u00a0 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdest thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Verily, verily, I say unto thee-<\/span><\/strong> we might be startled by the occurrence of these words in this connection.\u00a0 They always introduce doctrine of prime importance in John’s gospel, so we are prepared by the use of this expression for some fresh revelation.\u00a0 Coming as they do before a prophecy about the manner of Peter’s death, and the long life of John, they suggest to us that there is important truth about to be imparted. <\/span>
\nWhen thou wast young, thou girdest thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest-<\/span><\/strong> Peter is thought of first as having been young, and then in the next statement as going to be old, suggesting he was middle-aged at the time of this incident.\u00a0 He was marked by self-sufficiency, (girdest thyself), and determination, (where thou wouldest), in his youth, evidently.\u00a0 Even the word “girdest” would suggest energy and activity, for in the East a man girded up his loins for strenuous activity, tying up his flowing robes so that he could move freely.\u00a0 That energy and determination shows itself in Peter in the gospel records, and is one reason why he denied his Lord, for he was relying on his own strength to serve the Lord, which is always a disaster.\u00a0 The fact that the Lord knew this is a token of His omniscience, for it showed that He knew about Peter long before he was called to be an apostle.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nBut when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not-<\/span><\/strong> not only is the Lord omniscient about his past private life, but about the future, too, for He knows what will happen to Peter when he has grown old.\u00a0 He knows also the way in which he will die.\u00a0 He would do three things, stretch forth his hands, be girded by another, (in contrast to girding himself in his youth), and be taken where he did not wish to go, (in contrast to going where he wished to go).\u00a0 We are told the meaning of these words in the next verse.<\/span><\/p>\n

21:19\u00a0 This spake He, signifying by what death he should glorify God. And when He had spoken this, He saith unto him, Follow me.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

This spake He, signifying by what death he should glorify God-<\/span><\/strong> in the Upper Room Peter said, “Lord, why cannot I follow Thee now?\u00a0 I will lay down my life for thy sake”, John 13:37.\u00a0 Peter here learns that his words are going to be fulfilled in a way he did not anticipate.\u00a0 Peter was thinking of the time then present; indeed, the very night he spoke the words.\u00a0 The Lord here informs him that he will be given the opportunity of making good his word, but not for many years.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nIf Peter had died trying to defend the Lord from His arrest, trial and crucifixion, that would not have been a death to the glory of God, but rather would have been to the glory of Peter, for men would have admired his heroism.\u00a0 He is going to die by crucifixion, as is indicated by the Lord’s words here.\u00a0 Tradition says that this indeed took place, with Peter insisting on being crucified upside down, so that there would be no comparison with the death of His Saviour, even in the physical sense.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nBut where did Peter get this idea?\u00a0 Was it from the order of the Lord’s words of verse 18?\u00a0 The victim of crucifixion is first taken to the place of execution, then has his hands stretched out on a cross, and then he is bound to the cross.\u00a0 But the prophecy of Christ about Peter gives the order almost in reverse, the stretching forth of the hands and the girding, and then the carrying where he was unwilling to go.\u00a0 There is to be no mistaking Peter’s crucifixion for Christ’s; in all things He must be distinct and superior.\u00a0 There is no mention of being nailed to a cross either, in the case of Peter.\u00a0 There is only one pierced victim to whom men should look, John 19:37.<\/span>
\nSo the girding is by another, and for another purpose, even to fasten him to a cross.\u00a0 (The word gird does not mean to dress, but is derived from the word “belt”).\u00a0 And instead of walking where he wished, Peter is going to be carried by another to a place he would not wish to go naturally, even to the place of execution.<\/span>
\nAnd when He had spoken this, He saith unto him, Follow Me-<\/span><\/strong> how significant this is!\u00a0 It was by the Sea of Galilee that Peter had first heard the Lord’s call to follow Him, Matthew 4:18-22.\u00a0 He had done so for three and a half years, and when the Lord Jesus foretold His death, Peter still wanted to follow Him.\u00a0 We read, “Simon Peter said unto Him, ‘Lord, whither goest Thou?’\u00a0 Jesus answered him, ‘Whither I go, thou canst not follow me now: but thou shalt follow Me afterwards’.\u00a0 Peter said unto Him ‘Lord, why cannot I follow Thee now?\u00a0 I will lay down my life for Thy sake’.\u00a0 Jesus answered him, ‘Wilt thou lay down thy life for My sake?\u00a0 Verily, verily I say unto thee, The cock shall not crow, till thou hast denied Me thrice'”, John 13:36-38.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nPeter learns from these words that the death of the Lord Jesus is unique, for there is that about it that cannot be imitated by another.\u00a0 But on the other hand, in a lesser sense it that can be imitated in its martyr-character, and Peter is going to follow the Lord to death in that way.\u00a0 But he is in no fit state spiritually to do that yet.\u00a0 He must learn his own weakness by denying His Lord.\u00a0 He vowed to follow here; he denied his Lord with oaths before the night was out.\u00a0 So by bidding him to follow Him here in John 21, he is reminding him of his former promise, and encouraging him to make good that promise.\u00a0 Peter had not only promised to follow his Lord, but also to go into prison and death for Him.\u00a0 He is being exhorted to follow that pathway now, and re-dedicate himself to the Lord, even to that extent.<\/span><\/p>\n

21:20\u00a0 Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on His breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth Thee?<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following-<\/span> <\/strong>this is the final reference in the gospel to “the disciple whom Jesus loved”, another name for John the apostle.\u00a0 He had a very real sense of the love of the Lord Jesus.\u00a0 It was not that the Lord did not love the others, for we read He said, “as My Father hath loved Me, so have I loved you: continue ye in My love”, John 15:9.\u00a0 So He loved them all, but there were degrees to which each one continued in that love, enjoying it and returning it.\u00a0 John was one of those who appreciated the love of the Lord for him, and was confident that Jesus loved Him.\u00a0 It is not surprising then to note that John is said to be following; he does not need to be exhorted to follow Christ, as Peter does.<\/span>
\nWhich also leaned on His breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth Thee?\u00a0<\/span><\/strong> The second feature that describes John is that he was the one that Peter had asked to enquire of the Lord about the betrayer.\u00a0 Significantly, he is said here to have been on the breast of Jesus at the Passover Supper.\u00a0 As far as position at the table was concerned, he was leaning on the bosom of Christ.\u00a0 In other words, as they reclined on the floor surrounding the meal-table with their legs stretched out behind them, it was John who was next to Christ, leaning back towards Him.\u00a0 But in order to ask the Lord about the betrayer, he then leaned back further onto Christ, close to His heart, so to speak.\u00a0 So it is not his position at the table that describes him here, but the way in which he was able to ask a question of Him.\u00a0 These two features of John are very significant in this context, and are connected.\u00a0 Love to the Lord will be concerned about anything and anyone that betrays Him, for love and loyalty go together, and betrayal is the opposite of loyalty.\u00a0 This sets the scene for the conversation that follows here.<\/span><\/p>\n

21:21\u00a0 Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do?<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do?<\/span><\/strong>\u00a0 We should not think of this as Peter being a busy-body, and making sure everyone is doing something.\u00a0 Rather, it is a concern lest the death which has just been predicted for Peter is the same as John shall suffer.\u00a0 This gives the Lord the opportunity to foretell the personal future of John.\u00a0 This is the last of seven mentions of Christ as Lord in this chapter.\u00a0 John wrote twenty-one chapters to show us that Jesus, the historical man of the gospel records, is the Christ, the predicted Messiah of the Old Testament records, and also the Son of God, John 20:31.\u00a0 In chapter twenty-one he writes to show that this same one is also Lord.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

21:22\u00a0 Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?\u00a0 follow thou Me.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?\u00a0<\/span> <\/strong>Peter is gently told here that the one he has called Lord is indeed in control of all things.\u00a0 In this context He is in control of the length of life of His saints.\u00a0 The Lord does not say that John will survive until the rapture, and so be one of those that shall be “alive and remain”, 1 Thessalonians 4:17 at that moment.\u00a0 But He does propose it as a possibility.\u00a0 Whatever actually happens, this does not affect Peter’s personal position.\u00a0 That will not be altered by what happens to John.\u00a0 It is the extent of the life of John that is in view here.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nFollow thou Me-<\/span><\/strong> far from being preoccupied, however sincerely, with John’s prospects, Peter should concentrate on doing as exhorted, follow the Lord, even though that means going to martyr’s death.<\/span><\/p>\n

21:23\u00a0 Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die: yet Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die; but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die-<\/span><\/strong> a misunderstanding arose from the Lord’s word, “If I will that he tarry till I come”.\u00a0 It is simply a statement of possibility, not a prophecy of what will definitely happen.\u00a0 We should beware of jumping to conclusions in any circumstance, most of all in connection with the statements of Scripture.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nYet Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die; but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?\u00a0<\/span><\/strong> John repeats the words so that we may see that it was not the Lord’s statement was unclear, but that He was misunderstood.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nIt is true, however, that the possibility that the brethren turned into a certainty was indeed a possibility.\u00a0 If it had been the will of Christ, John could have survived until the Lord’s coming, if that coming had been within the span of a long lifetime.\u00a0 Now Peter is going to live until he is old, and then die, so John must surely be going to live until he is old also.\u00a0 But what purpose is to be swerved by this?<\/span>
\nWe noticed that the events we have looked at began with the words “Verily, verily”, and we have noted that these words always introduce important doctrine in John’s gospel.\u00a0 Doctrine, moreover, that is fresh and new.\u00a0 So what are the new truths that are being presented to us in these incidents, the first involving Peter, and then John?\u00a0 Remember that John’s gospel has as its theme the gift of eternal life.\u00a0 We learn here, however, that those who have eternal life may still die.\u00a0 Of course, in relation to that life they never die, as the Lord stated in John 8:52, “If a man keep My saying, he shall never see death”.\u00a0 Physical death to such an one is totally different, for the possession of eternal life over-rides all other considerations, almost making death an irrelevance.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nWhat do we learn from the word to John?\u00a0 Firstly that there is the possibility for all of us that we may not physically die, for the Lord Jesus is coming not only for “the dead in Christ”, but those who are “alive and remain at His coming”, 1 Thessalonians 4:16,17. <\/span>
\nSecondly we learn that as far as John personally was concerned, he was to be granted a long life.\u00a0 Now why should this be?\u00a0 For a very good reason.\u00a0 John lived on and on so that three things might happen.\u00a0 First, that errors about the person of Christ might arise, so that he might deal with them in his writings.\u00a0 Second, and connected with this, that John might condemn as heretical the writings of unbelieving men.\u00a0 Third, that he might be on hand to give his approval to inspired writings as they were produced and circulated. <\/span>
\nThis is a very valuable, ministry, and merits the “Verily, verily” that introduces it.\u00a0 We may be sure that all that we receive as being the Word of God is indeed that, and does not contain anything that is spurious, for John was at hand to give it his approval.\u00a0 Furthermore anything that is produced after his death may be safely put to one side as being uninspired, whether written by unbeliever or believer.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Part 6\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The protection of imparted truth.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

In his capacity as the last remaining apostle, John records the warning of the Lord Jesus Himself against adding or taking away from the Word of God, Revelation 22:18,19.\u00a0 But if there was no settled Word of God, how would we know what to not take from or add to?<\/span><\/p>\n

His words are as follows:<\/span><\/p>\n

Revelation 22:18\u00a0 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: <\/span><\/strong>
\n 22:19\u00a0 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

This is a most solemn warning, expressing in the most severe terms God’s displeasure with any who tamper with this closing book.\u00a0 The reason is not difficult to see.\u00a0 It is a revelation of His Son, and He is jealous of His honour.\u00a0 Besides this, it is a serious thing to seek to diminish the severity of God’s judgement of the earth, described in the book.\u00a0 In 1:3 there is a blessing promised to those who keep the book, whereas here a curse is pronounced on those who seek to destroy it.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

This destruction can take place in two ways.\u00a0 Either by adding, or by taking away.\u00a0 If words are added, they are man’s words, for there are no inspired persons now.\u00a0 John was most probably the last of the inspired writers of the New Testament.\u00a0 To add to this book is to deny that the Spirit has guided the writers into all truth, and since this was promised by the Lord Jesus Himself, John 16:12,13, and effected by the Spirit, to add to them is profane.<\/span>
\nIf words are taken away, then man’s judgement must be operating, deciding what is suitable and what is not.\u00a0 This is arrogance to the extreme, and it is no wonder that a curse is pronounced by God on those who do this.\u00a0 Of course, this adding and taking away does not have to be the physical exclusion of the words, or the inclusion of others.\u00a0 Preachers also, by what they say, may take and add also, and by so doing modify the truth of God.<\/span><\/p>\n

Another issue is raised by this warning.\u00a0 If it is to have any meaning, we must be able to know what the word of God is.\u00a0 If we do not, we shall not know whether we are adding to it or taking away from it.\u00a0 This means that there must be a document that can be called “the Word of God”.\u00a0 It cannot be that God waited until the Revised Version was produced before He gave His people His word.\u00a0 And since all the versions of the scripture since the Revised Version are simply more of the same, then they all come into the same category.\u00a0 The truth is that the text of the Authorised Version is the only credible text, having a pedigree stretching back to the originals.\u00a0 Any attempt, therefore, to tamper with this, is liable to meet with God’s disapproval. <\/span>
\nIt might be asked where the Bible was before the Authorised Version came along?\u00a0 To answer this question we must notice the differences between the Old Testament era and the present age.\u00a0 In the Old Testament times, there was one book in one place.\u00a0 We read of Moses just before he died, that “he made an end of writing this law in a book”, and that he instructed the Levites, saying, “Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the Lord your God”, and this is what they did, Deuteronomy 31:24,26.\u00a0 The law required that the king should “write him a copy of this law in a book out of that which is before the priests and the Levites”, Deuteronomy 17:18.\u00a0 In Josiah’s day that book, deposited in the temple was rediscovered, 2 Kings 22:8.\u00a0 This book was still available after the seventy years in Babylon and the return, for we read that Ezra “read in the book of the law of God”, Nehemiah 8:18.\u00a0 So there was a standard copy from the outset, and additions were made to it as time went by.\u00a0 Furthermore, the nation of Israel was the custodian of this book, for “unto them were committed the oracles of God”, Romans 3:2.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nIn New Testament times things were different, and a different approach was needed in order to preserve God’s written word.\u00a0 If before there was one book in one place, cared for by one nation, in this present age there have been many manuscripts, scattered throughout the Roman world.\u00a0 There was wisdom in this, for often the believers were persecuted, and their Scriptures were seized and burnt.\u00a0 How important that there should be other copies elsewhere, so that when the persecution died down, they could be replaced.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nSo if there were many manuscripts in many places, where was the Word of God?\u00a0 The answer is that it was found in the consensus of the manuscripts that were faithful to the originals, and from which the Authorised Version was produced.\u00a0 But how is it that it was only in 1611 that God ordained that one version should dominate?\u00a0 The answer must be that freedom from the domination from Rome had been achieved.\u00a0 The Reformation had taken place during the 16th Century, and the grip of Rome over the souls of men was broken.\u00a0 If it had been produced when Rome held sway, then it would have been in danger, for the Papal system hates the Word of God, since it exposes its errors and wickedness.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nIn Psalm 12:6-8 the psalmist writes, “The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.\u00a0 Thou shalt keep them, O Lord: Thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.\u00a0 The wicked walk on every side, when the vilest men are exalted”.<\/span>
\nWe are told at least two things here.\u00a0 First, that the words of the Lord are pure. Second, that He will preserve them, watching over them.\u00a0 This supposes that God’s Word will have its enemies, hence the next verse declares that “the wicked walk on every side”, and “the vilest men are exalted”. He will preserve them from the generation that seeks to undermine them.\u00a0 That undertaking applies to every generation.\u00a0 So during the centuries where Roman Catholicism dominated affairs in the world, the Word of God was kept by God. But when the time was right, He ordained that it should be concentrated in one translation. In this way, God has preserved His Word from the harm His enemies would do to it if they could.\u00a0 Satan began his temptation of Eve with the words, “Hath God said”, and he has continued as he began, seeking to cast doubt on the Word of God.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

In view of the foregoing, the following is a summary of the events leading up to, and following, the publishing of the Authorised Version of the Scriptures.<\/span><\/p>\n

AD 29<\/strong>\u00a0 <\/span>
\nThe Lord Jesus promises His apostles that the Spirit will come on the Day of Pentecost, and He will teach them, bring to their remembrance all things that He had said unto them, and guide them into all truth.<\/span><\/p>\n

29-100<\/span><\/strong>
\nApostle John lives be an old man, so that he may approve the inspired Scriptures of the New Testament, and reject spurious writings.\u00a0 Once the last epistle has been written, “that which is perfect is come”, 1 Corinthians 13:10.\u00a0 The faith is now once (that is, once for all) delivered to the saints in written form, Jude 3.<\/span>
\nA fragment of Mark’s Gospel was found in Cave 7 at Qumran, the settlement of the Essenes.\u00a0 This settlement was destroyed by the Romans in AD 70, so the Dead Sea Scrolls were all pre-AD 70.\u00a0 Different hand-writing styles are distinguishable by experts, enabling manuscripts to be dated, and this portion of Mark’s Gospel is in the handwriting style of the decade 50-59 AD.<\/span><\/p>\n

The apostles warned against false teachers in Acts 20:29; Galatians 1:8,9; 2 Peter 2:1, so the believers were put on their guard.\u00a0 And Peter speaks of those who twist Paul’s words, and so warns believers to be watchful, 2 Peter 3:15-18.\u00a0 Coupled with this, Rev 22:18,19 gives a solemn warning, as we have already seen, to those who add or take away from the scriptures.\u00a0 If it is not known what the scriptures really are, how can this warning have any meaning?\u00a0 No-one would know what it is that must not be added to or taken from.<\/span>
\nThe faithful recognised the authority of New Testament writings from the start, or they would have rejected the authority of the apostles and not been believers.<\/span><\/p>\n

150 (approx.)<\/span><\/strong>
\nThe Greek New Testament was translated into Syrian, and was known as the Peshitto, meaning the “correct”, or “simple”.\u00a0 This was used throughout Asia for centuries.<\/span><\/p>\n

157 (approx.)<\/span><\/strong>
\nThe Greek New Testament was translated into Latin.\u00a0 This became known as the Old Latin, and was used throughout Europe by the Waldenses, the Donatists, the Irish in Ireland, Gauls, Celts, Albigenses and many other orthodox believers for 900 years, as long as Latin was a spoken language.\u00a0 This is not to be confused with the Latin Vulgate, which came later.<\/span><\/p>\n

200<\/span><\/strong>
\nTertullian, who lived around the year AD 200 could write, “I hold sure title deeds from the original owners themselves”.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nIrenaus, could write, “the doctrine of the apostles has been handed down by the succession of bishops, being guarded and preserved without any forging of the Scriptures, allowing neither addition nor curtailment, involving public reading without falsification”. Irenaus took great care to ensure faithful transmission of his own writings, how much more the Holy Scriptures.\u00a0 So in the year 200 the original wording is available.<\/span>
\nGaius, an orthodox father at the end of the 2nd century spoke of four heretics who had disciples multiplying copies of the changed text.\u00a0 They could not deny their guilt because they could not produce the originals from which they made their copies.\u00a0 If Gaius could not either, his charges would be meaningless.<\/span><\/p>\n

The fathers wrote extensively against heretics who had produced many copies of the New Testament incorporating their alterations.\u00a0 There was a strong feeling against heretics, indicated by such words as, “whoever perverts the sayings of the Lord, that one is the firstborn of Satan”.\u00a0 “The wicked demons have also put forward Marcion of Pontus “<\/span>
\nThe fact that heretics taught error “causes us to be more faithful and steadfast.”\u00a0 Most damage was done by 200 AD.<\/span>
\nIranaeus warns those who made the change of a single figure in the number 666, “there shall be no light punishment upon him who either adds or subtracts anything from the scripture”.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nOrigen sought to modify Mathew 19:19, but despite being the most influential commentator in the ancient church at that time, seems to have influenced only one manuscript of a local version of the New Testament, and the Greek tradition was unaffected.<\/span>
\nTatian was the last author to make deliberate changes to the text, but between Origen and Tatian Christian opinion had so changed, that it was no longer possible to make changes in the text whether they were harmless or not, and not be discounted as a heretic.<\/span><\/p>\n

312<\/strong> <\/span>
\nWhen Constantine wanted to make Christianity the religion of the Roman Empire, he commissioned Eusebius, an admirer of Origen, to produce a New Testament.\u00a0 During this period between the death of the Apostle John and Constantine, two corrupt versions of the Majority Greek New Testament was produced, one in Alexandria, and another in Palestine.\u00a0 This latter was probably the work of Origen, an influential “church father”.\u00a0 Origen taught that Christ was a created being, and said that “The Scriptures are of little value to those who understand them as they are written”.\u00a0 He believed that the Old Testament was to be thought of as allegory, and not literal.<\/span>
\nIt was probably this latter was chosen by Constantine, since it was the one favoured by Eusebius an admirer of Origen, and Eusebius was commissioned with the task of producing the translation.\u00a0 Fifty copies were made, on expensive vellum.\u00a0 Many experts believe that it is very probable that the manuscripts known as Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, (of which more later), are two of these fifty.\u00a0 It is these two manuscripts that are the basis of modern translations of the Scriptures from the Revised Version onwards.\u00a0 They are favoured because they are old.\u00a0 But the reason they are still with us is that they were not worn out by use.\u00a0 The authentic manuscripts were copied when they began to be worn, so that good copies were always available.\u00a0 When the copy had been made, and everyone was satisfied that it corresponded exactly to the one being copied, that older copy was destroyed.\u00a0 This is why there are no ancient manuscripts of authentic scripture.\u00a0 So the notion adopted by modern translators that “older is better”, is spurious reasoning.<\/span><\/p>\n

380 <\/span><\/strong>
\nThe Roman Catholic church produced a Latin Version, translated by Jerome, using corrupt manuscripts of the type now known as the Vaticanus and Sianiticus, which were the product of heretics of the 3rd and 4th centuries.\u00a0 Because the Old Latin had become so well-used, it had become known as the Vulgate, meaning “in common use”.\u00a0 So the Pope named Jerome’s version the Latin Vulgate, to try to give the impression that it was in common use.\u00a0 But orthodox Christians were not deceived, ignored Jerome’s Vulgate for 900 years, and continued to use the Old Latin.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

1535<\/strong> <\/span>
\nErasmus, a Roman Catholic, but one who opposed and wrote against many of the excesses of the Papal System, was “the most learned man of the sixteenth century”.\u00a0 He set about to produce a translation that could be used by the common people.\u00a0 He sifted through the many manuscripts, lectionaries, (manuscripts based on Scripture adapted to be read in church), and commentaries of the church fathers, that were available at the time.\u00a0 (It is said that it is possible to reconstruct the New Testament from quotations from the Church Fathers).\u00a0 He soon saw a pattern emerging, that there were a small number of manuscripts that not only differed from the majority, but differed amongst themselves.\u00a0 He rejected these, including Jerome’s Vulgate, (because it was based on the Vaticanus), and in 1535 published his final edition, a year before his death.<\/span><\/p>\n

1517<\/span><\/strong>
\nLuther uses Erasmus’ New Testament for his translation into German.\u00a0 He nails his protests on the door of Wittenburg Cathedral, and the reformation had begun, spreading throughout Europe.\u00a0 The watchword of the Reformation was, “Faith alone, grace alone, Scripture alone”.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

We must be aware of the fact that Satan hates the Word of God, not only because he hates the truth, (especially as it pertains to the glory of God and His Son), but also because it pronounces his sure doom.\u00a0 He will stop at nothing to prevent the pure Word of God, and therefore the pure truth of God, from reaching the minds of the people.\u00a0 In past times he instigated the burning of Bibles in open opposition to the truth.\u00a0 He used as his agents in this the Roman Catholic system, (it does not deserve the title “church”), and they did all they could to stop the free spread of the Bible.\u00a0 They did not stop at burning Bibles, however, but went on to burn those who printed and propagated, read, and believed them.\u00a0 The Papal System thrives on ignorance, and resists the idea that any believer may have an understanding of the will of God through the Bible.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nTo say that Jesus Christ is the one mediator, is to dispense with the Pope.\u00a0 To say that faith in Christ saves, is to do away with the works that the Pope says must be done to gain salvation.\u00a0 To say that a believer in Christ is eternally secure is to reject the notion of Purgatory and prayers for the dead.\u00a0 To own the Lordship of Christ is to reject the proud claims of the Pope.\u00a0 Boniface VIII, who was Pontiff in 1303, said, “It is necessary to salvation that every man should submit to the Pope”.<\/span><\/p>\n

As a result of the Reformation, the Catholic system was losing its power and influence, (together with its riches and easy life-style), so it resolved to try to counter the effect of the free spread of the Scriptures and the preaching of the gospel of the grace of God.\u00a0 There were just too many who were being delivered from the bondage and misery in which they had been held by Rome for it to be indifferent.<\/span><\/p>\n

Within thirty five years of Luther posting his ninety-five charges against the papacy on the door of Wittenburg Cathedral, thus signalling the start of the Reformation, two-thirds of Europe was Protestant.\u00a0 England, Germany, the Scandinavian countries, Holland and Switzerland had abandoned Rome, and France, Poland, Bavaria, Austria and Belgium were on the brink of doing so.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

1534<\/span><\/strong>
\nThe Pope was alarmed at the spread of true Christianity, and to counter this trend the Society of Jesus, (otherwise simply known as the Jesuits), was formed under Ignatius Loyala in 1534.\u00a0 Under his leadership the colleges and universities of Europe were to be infiltrated by those bound by solemn oath to undermine the Scriptures, and return men to obedience to the Pope.\u00a0 Loyala instructed the Jesuits, “We must see black as white if the church says so”.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nSo it was that soon 287 colleges and universities in Europe were dominated by the Jesuits, producing generations of clergy taught by them, and who would be sympathetic to Satan’s attack on the Scriptures.\u00a0 These clergy would not be confined to the Catholic congregations, but would creep in unawares into Protestant seats of learning too, as we shall see.\u00a0 They were taught that since the apostle Paul became a Jew to gain and win the Jews, 1 Corinthians 9:20, it was permitted for Catholics to become, (or appear to become) Protestants, in order to undermine the Protestant cause, and above all, undermine the Protestant Bible.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

They will seek to achieve this by fair means or foul, for the General of the Jesuits, (known as the Black Pope), “absolves the irregularity issuing from bigamy, injuries done to others, murder, assassination\u2026as long as these wicked deeds were not publicly known and thus cause of a scandal”, Edmond Paris, “The Secret History of the Jesuits”, The Protestant Truth Society, London, 1975.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

1536<\/span><\/strong>
\nTyndale was burnt at the stake in Belgium for translating the Bible into English and distributing copies.<\/span><\/p>\n

1545-1563<\/span><\/strong>
\nAt the Catholic Council of Trent, held from 1545-1563, the first four matters that were discussed, and which they agreed to condemn were these:<\/span>
\n1.\u00a0 They condemned those who said “That the Holy Scriptures contained all things necessary for salvation, and that it was impious to place traditional on a level with Scripture”.\u00a0 (So things other than the truths of the Bible were necessary for salvation.\u00a0 What those things are we next learn).<\/span>
\n2.\u00a0 They condemned those who said “That certain books accepted as canonical in the Vulgate were apocryphal and not canonical”.\u00a0 (So we are to accept non-inspired writings as being of equal authority to the Scriptures.\u00a0 The Papacy includes the Apocrypha in its bible because, amongst other things, it supports prayers for the dead, a lucrative source of income from grieving relatives anxious about the fate of their loved ones).<\/span>
\n3. They condemned those who said “That Scripture must be studied in the original languages, and that there were errors in the Vulgate”.\u00a0 (The Papacy feared those who were competent to read Scripture in Greek.\u00a0 They also wanted to withhold the Bible from the general public who could not read the Latin of the Vulgate, the Catholic version of the Scriptures.\u00a0 Power must be left in the hands of the priesthood, and the masses kept ignorant).<\/span>
\n4. They condemned those who said “That the meaning of Scripture is plain, and that it can be understood without commentary by the help of God’s Spirit”.\u00a0 (Again, the object is to hinder the reading of Scripture other than by (Jesuit-trained) priests, who can hold the congregation in their power, and ensure they only do what the Pope decrees).<\/span><\/p>\n

Notice that these are the things uppermost in the minds of those gathered at the Council, and are directed against the teachings of Luther.\u00a0 They see that, above all else, the Protestant Scriptures, widely circulated and placed in the hands of the ordinary person in their own language, will be the death-blow to Catholicism, which thrives on ignorance and fear.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

1603<\/span><\/strong>
\nJames VI of Scotland united Scotland and England under himself, and took the title James 1 in 1603.\u00a0 Even though his mother was a Catholic, he was a fervent and devout Protestant, and saw the need for a Bible in English, so that the ordinary citizens of the country could have free access to it.\u00a0 Accordingly, in 1604 he initiated the process of translating the Bible into English using the Majority Text, and ignoring the corrupt Text used by Jerome for the Catholic Bible, the Vulgate.<\/span><\/p>\n

This was too much for the Jesuits, so they plotted to kill the King, abduct his children, put Princess Elizabeth on the throne, and marry her to a Catholic.\u00a0 By this they hoped to thwart the thing they dreaded, a Protestant Bible in English.\u00a0 So it was that the Gunpowder Plot was hatched, and the attempt was made to blow up Parliament with the King present, and thus precipitate change.\u00a0 As everyone knows, this plot was foiled, and the traitor Guy Fawkes, (who had access to the King of Spain), together with his other Catholic accomplices, were hanged.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

1611<\/span><\/strong>
\nThe Authorised Version published.\u00a0 This was the work of 47 men, (originally 54, but some withdrew or died before the process was finished), divided into six companies, two meeting in Cambridge, two in Westminster, and two in\u00a0 Oxford.\u00a0 These companies consisted of highly learned and pious men, whose knowledge of the languages involved was unsurpassed.\u00a0 They could also call on experts in other fields to advise on technical points.<\/span>
\nEach member of the committee made a translation before they came together. Then they met to compare each other’s work, and agree a draft form.\u00a0 Then the draft was circulated amongst the other five committees for their consideration.\u00a0 When a near-final form was approved by all, it was submitted to a select committee for examination, and then two members went through the whole translation again for final checking.<\/span><\/p>\n

They used very few manuscripts as they did their work, for they knew that the vast majority of the manuscripts available agreed with one another.\u00a0 They were easily able to detect the spurious manuscripts like the Vaticanus, (which had been discovered in the Vatican Library in 14xxx), because they not only contained readings that were at variance with the majority, and even disagreed with manuscripts of like sort, but omitted large portions of Scripture.\u00a0 So Genesis 1-26; Psalms 103-138; Matthew 16??; Romans 16:24; the Pasoral Epistles; and Hebrews 9:14-end of the epistle are nowhere to be found.<\/span>
\nThe Vaticanus was very carelessly copied, so that in the Gospels alone words or clauses are left out in 1491 places.\u00a0 On many occasions 10,20, 30, or even 40 words are left out through sheer carelessness.\u00a0 Letter and words, and even whole sentences are frequently written twice over, or begun and then cancelled.\u00a0 115 times clauses were omitted because they finished like the previous clause.\u00a0 The list of omitted words and phrases is as follows: Matthew 330; Mark 365; Luke 439; John 357; Acts 384; Epistles 681.<\/span>
\nWhat does this tell us about the reliability of this manuscript?\u00a0 What does it tell us of the men who transcribed it?\u00a0 Where is the sanctified care with which the Holy Scriptures should be transmitted?\u00a0 Where is the diligence which destroys a whole sheet if a single mistake is found?\u00a0 One of Origen’s remarks comes to mind: “The Scriptures are of little value to those who understand them as they are written”.\u00a0 Such a low view of the actual words of Scripture is reflected in the casual, and indeed criminal way in which Vaticanus comes down to us.\u00a0 Clearly the threat of Divine judgement on those who take away from, or add to the Scriptures has very little impact on those involved in the production and transmission of such a manuscript.\u00a0 It is no surprise that those who translated the Authorised Version had no place for such a monstrous imposture.<\/span><\/p>\n

There are two main ways in which a translation may be carried out.\u00a0 It may be on the principle of literal equivalence, or the principle of dynamic equivalence.\u00a0 Literal equivalence sets out to faithfully transmit from one language to another the actual words used in the first language.\u00a0 Nothing will be ignored, nothing will be added.\u00a0 The sense of the words used will, as far as possible, be reproduced in the second language.\u00a0 Sometimes, of course, this cannot be done in a literal way, because, for instance, the first language may have a peculiar way of expressing a thought, and the second language does not have that facility.\u00a0 Then careful attention will have to be given to the way in which the thought is expressed.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

With dynamic equivalence, it is not so much the words that are translated, but the thoughts.\u00a0 Now this, of course, puts the reader of the resulting translation at the mercy of the translator.\u00a0 His ideas on a passage are now incorporated into the translation.\u00a0 The door is open for any and every evil to intrude.\u00a0 Even if this does not happen, it is still true that the principle is wrong.\u00a0 It is far better to translate literally, (as well as intelligibly), and leave passages slightly obscure, than to impose the ideas of the translator on the text.<\/span><\/p>\n

Another factor with dynamic equivalence is that the translator does not feel obliged to translate every word, as long as, in his opinion, that word is in some way represented in the translation.\u00a0 The New International Version is well-known for its constant omission of words in this way.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

The Authorised Version preserves reverent address to God.\u00a0 As we see from Acts 4:24-30, the early believers, when assembled together for prayer, prefaced their petitions with quotation from Scripture, and then proceeded to appeal to God on that basis as well.\u00a0 This is the only recorded assembly prayer in the Scriptures, so establishes important precedents.\u00a0 Now if we are going to copy their good example, we shall quote Scripture too.\u00a0 But what if we wish to preserve in our speech that reverence for God that the use of “Thee” and Thou” represents, and the translation we use and memorise lowers the standard, and descends to the “You and yours” level?\u00a0 There will be a conflict in our minds.\u00a0 Far better to be thought of as old-fashioned, and give God His right and separate place, than to be thought of as modern and up-to-date, yet lower the level at which we speak to our Holy God.\u00a0 Holy and reverend is His name, Psalm 111:9, and our address to Him should reflect that.\u00a0 If there are those who find it difficult to master that way of speaking, the solution is simple.\u00a0 The reading, constantly and regularly, of the Authorised Version will train the mind, so that its way of addressing God becomes our way.\u00a0 We learnt to speak by imitating the speech of our parents; why can we not learn to address God by learning the speech of the Authorised Version?<\/span><\/p>\n

One objection that some use against the Authorised Version is that it uses “Old English” language.\u00a0 This is not the case. The English language has gone through three phases.\u00a0 From 449 AD, when the Angles, Saxons and Jutes invaded England, until approximately 1100AD, Old English was spoken, and as the illustration above shows, would not be recognisable to us today.<\/span>
\nThen from 1100AD, soon after the Norman’s invaded, French was mixed with English to produce a version of English which also we would not understand today.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nModern English came into existence about 1450AD, and was settled by the end of the 16th century.\u00a0 So it was that the English language was at its purest and best at the time of the Authorised Version.\u00a0 The fact that it seems a little out-of-date at times to us is because the English language has degenerated.<\/span><\/p>\n

The following is in Old English: <\/span>
\n“F\u00e6der ure \u00feu \u00fee eart on heofonum, Si \u00fein nama gehalgod. to becume \u00fein rice, gewur\u00fee \u00f0in willa, on eor\u00f0an swa swa on heofonum. urne ged\u00e6ghwamlican hlaf syle us tod\u00e6g, and forgyf us ure gyltas, swa swa we forgyfa\u00f0 urum gyltendum. and ne gel\u00e6d \u00feu us on costnunge, ac alys us of yfele”.<\/span>
\nIt is very evident that this is not the language of the Authorised Version.<\/span>
\nThe same verses in Modern English are as follows:<\/span>
\n“Our Father which art in heaven, hallowed be Thy name.\u00a0 Thy kingdom come.\u00a0 Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.\u00a0 Give us this day our daily bread.\u00a0 And forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive our debtors.\u00a0 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil”, Matthew 6:9-13.<\/span>
\nThere is nothing in that paragraph that a modern Englishman could not understand, as far as the words are concerned, yet that was a quotation form the Authorised Version of 1611.<\/span><\/p>\n

The following is John 3:16 as found in Wyclif’s translation, made in 1380 AD,\u00a0 and therefore in Middle English:<\/span>
\n“For God louede so the world, that he yaf his `oon bigetun sone, that ech man that bileueth in him perische not, but haue euerlastynge lijf.”<\/span>
\nWhilst some of these words are recognisable, especially as the verse is so well-known, in no sense is this Modern English.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

With the success of the Authorised Version, the Papacy had to adopt different tactics as it carried out the Devil’s work for him.\u00a0 The apostle Peter spoke of Satan as a roaring lion, 1 Peter 5:8, but the apostle Paul warned of Satan’s ability to transform himself into an angel of light, and also his ministers, human agents who are the front for his underhanded and sinister schemes, 2 Corinthians 11:14,15.\u00a0 His “roaring lion” tactics having miserably failed, and the spread of the Authorised Bible forging ahead, he turned himself into an angel of light.<\/span><\/p>\n

If a version has been produced which exposes the errors of the Catholic System, then it must at all costs be undermined.\u00a0 Accordingly, the plan was to infiltrate the Universities of England, so that those in places of influence in the Church of England would be prepared to accept a different sort of Bible.\u00a0 The Pope did not mind how long that took, as long as it was achieved, and Christians were deprived of the Book that exposed the Catholic System for what it was, an imposture.\u00a0 <\/span>
\nSo it was that the Jesuits set about their task, and by 1800 those in places of religious influence were ready to have foisted on them Satan’s counterfeit bible.\u00a0 At the same time, there were those who started to criticise the Bible, a thing unheard of before, except in the case of rank infidels.\u00a0 There was a French priest by the name of Richard Simon; a French Catholic named Jean Astruc; a German, Eichhorn; a Catholic priest in Scotland, Alexander Geddes; and the Catholic Bishop of Philadelphia, Dr Kenrich.\u00a0 All these engaged in the “science” of Bible Criticism, subjecting the Word of God to the reasonings of men.<\/span><\/p>\n

One man who was prominent in preparing the way for the acceptance of an alternative bible, was Cardinal Wiseman.\u00a0 He was born in England, but went to study in Rome.\u00a0 Whilst there, he had several prominent visitors.\u00a0 One was Archbishop Trench, who came back to England to promote a revision of the Authorised Bible.\u00a0 Then there was John Henry Newman, who visited Wiseman in 1833, and who came back to England saying, “I have a work to do in England”.\u00a0 He began what came to be known as the “Oxford Movement”, he being the leader of Oxford University.\u00a0 He, and those allied with him, continued preaching publicly Protestant doctrines from the pulpit, but advance Catholic doctrines privately and secretly.\u00a0 The “Oxford Movement” was exposed in 1841 after Newman wrote a tract which suggested that the 39 Articles of the Church of England were not contrary to Catholic teachings.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

The “Movement” came to an end openly, but the principles that lay behind it continued.\u00a0 Newman left the Church of England and became a Catholic, taking 150 Anglican clergymen with him.\u00a0 But the Jesuits were still present, concealed amongst the Anglican clergy, ready to influence the minds of those under their control.\u00a0 So it was that in xxx the Convocation of the Church of England called for a revision of the Authorised Version.\u00a0 Work began in 1871, and the New Testament was finished in 1881, the Old Testament in 1884.<\/span>
\nThere were two men who dominated the proceedings of the committee.\u00a0 One was B.W. Westcott, and the other F.J.A. Hort, who had been one of Westcott’s private pupils.\u00a0 These two men were totally opposed to the Authorised Version and the manuscripts that supported it.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

They were rank liberals, Hort not believing in Creation; the Fall of man; a personal Devil, a literal Hell; atonement by blood; or the infallibility of Scripture.\u00a0 What he did believe in was Darwin’s theory of evolution; purgatory; baptismal regeneration; <\/span>
\nAs for Westcott, he did not believe in creation either; thought Moses and David were poetical characters that Christ referred to because the people thought they were real; did not believe in the miracles in the Bible, (although he did believe that miracles happened at Lourdes!); that the fall of Jerusalem was the second coming of Christ; that heaven was not a literal place, writing, “We may reasonably hope, by patient, resolute, faithful, united endeavour to find heaven about us here, the glory of our earthly life”.\u00a0 He was also greatly attracted to the worship of Mary.<\/span><\/p>\n

Hort wrote on one occasion of “that vile Textus Receptus”, that being the name given to the underlying text of the Authorised Version.\u00a0 They constantly advanced readings that were based on the Vaticanus, and the recently discovered manuscript the Sinaiticus, which was of the same sort.<\/span><\/p>\n

These two manuscripts, whilst they disagreed with one another in numerous places, were clearly of a type produced in Egypt by those who were hostile to the apostolic faith.\u00a0 And they were at variance with the overwhelming majority of the manuscripts, which supported the Authorised Version.\u00a0 They suited the purpose of those who wished to attack the Authorised Version, however, and so were promoted strongly in the Revision committees.\u00a0 Only Scrivener stood out against this trend, but he was heavily outnumbered, and his arguments, even though devastating, were dismissed.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

For twenty years Westcott and Hort had worked secretly on a text of the New Testament based on the manuscripts produced in Alexandria, and did not reveal it, (except to a few close and trusted allies, such as Ellicott and Lightfoot), until the work of Revision was begun, and even then only piece by piece.\u00a0 They claimed that the manuscripts used to translate the Authorised Version were the result of a revision of the true text in the 4th Century.\u00a0 So subtle were their methods that the Revisers do not seem to have realised that they had so altered the Bible that it was fashioned after the likeness of the Catholic Vulgate, based as it was on spurious Egyptian manuscripts.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Of course, we would not expect the Devil to introduce all his errors at once.\u00a0 But one important error was introduced with the Revised Version, and it is the idea that not all Scripture is inspired.\u00a0 In 2 Timothy 3:16 we read, “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness”.\u00a0 This was altered in the Revised Version to “”Every Scripture inspired of God is also profitable for doctrine\u2026”.\u00a0 This immediately opens the door to the idea that some Scripture, (and what is in view is “the holy Scriptures”, verse 15, that Timothy had known from childhood from his Jewish mother and grandmother), is not inspired of God.\u00a0 We are back to the idea that passages of the Bible, (such as the early chapters of Genesis), can be dispensed with if we feel they are not inspired.\u00a0 Instead of being confident that the whole Bible comes from God, we are left with doubt about some of it.\u00a0 Even if this was the only change, it would have been enough to undermine confidence in the Bible.<\/span>
\nIt is not as if this change has any support from any manuscripts.\u00a0 It does not.\u00a0 There are seven other places in the New Testament where the same grammatical construction is used, and in these places the Revised Version agrees with the Authorised.\u00a0 It is only at this significant point that it differs, with disastrous results.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Gradually, starting with the Revised Version, there has been a succession of translations, all claiming to be an improvement on the previous one.\u00a0 But there is one thing that is common to all the new translations produced since the Revised Version, (including that of J.N. Darby), and it is that they all give weight to the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, even though the text these two manuscripts represent were firmly rejected by the men of the Authorised Version.\u00a0 This being the case, they have nothing to offer us.\u00a0 We have the Word of God in the Authorised Version, and need no other.\u00a0 <\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

THE TRANSMISSION OF DIVINE TRUTH The Lord Jesus believed that the Scriptures were inspired, for He thought of them as words that proceed out of the mouth of God, Matthew 4:4.\u00a0 He believed they had authority, for He taught that those who sat in the teacher’s seat in the synagogue and expounded the Old Testament […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"iawp_total_views":2,"footnotes":""},"categories":[260],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3618","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-the-transmission-of-divine-truth"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/christiangospel.online\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3618","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/christiangospel.online\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/christiangospel.online\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/christiangospel.online\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/christiangospel.online\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=3618"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/christiangospel.online\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3618\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/christiangospel.online\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=3618"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/christiangospel.online\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=3618"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/christiangospel.online\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=3618"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}