January 2004, Volume IX, Issue 21
Scripture Twisting (2)
II Peter 3:16 speaks of "unlearned and
unstable" people who "wrest" the Scriptures "unto their own
destruction." The man who wrests Scripture is not neutral; he comes with a
preconceived false view. He does not want God’s Word to condemn him and/or
others, so he twists it. He wants Scripture to support his views, so he twists
it.
The Greek word used here means to torture.
Scripture is tortured, like a man put on the rack, in order to force it to say
what the torturers want it to say. Picture a cruel tormentor in a torture
chamber: "If you do not say what I want you to say, I will tighten the
thumbscrew or suspend you from the rafters." The Scripture twister—the
spiritual equivalent of the Grand Inquisitor—likewise tortures the Word of God
in order to extort a confession from it. By misquoting a text or ignoring vital
words, by disregarding the context or the analogy of faith or the clearer
passages which speak on the same subject, the Scripture twister perverts the
Word of God. Violence is done to the divine oracles out of hatred for the truth
in order to serve the lie.
The Scripture twisters of II Peter 3 twisted
God’s Word in its doctrine of the last things: Christ’s second coming, the
final judgment and the renewal of heaven and earth. In denying the Christian
hope, the Scripture twisters destroy the incentive to godliness provided by
Christ’s return (11-14). Thus their false doctrine serves their sinful
"lusts" (3)—always an attraction of heresy. These false teachers
hold the wicked world-view of the ungodly world that "all things continue
as they were from the beginning" (4). They oppose the worldwide flood and
find it hard to believe that Christ will return on the clouds of heaven to purge
the world with fire (7, 10-12). Moreover, the godly lifestyle required of Christ’s
followers is too cramped for their fleshly desires.
Thus these heretics resort to Scripture
twisting. They dismiss the gospel accounts of Christ’s power and glory at His
transfiguration as "cunningly devised fables" (1:16), for the
transfiguration points to His glorious coming (1:16-18). They twist Paul’s
letters and the "other scriptures" of OT and NT (3:15-16), especially
those parts which speak of the end of the world. The narrative of the flood is
"willingly" ignored (5). The final "judgment and perdition of
ungodly men" (7) is an unpalatable truth, as is the doctrine that "the
earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up" (10).
"What about our beloved sins!" their flesh cries out. Thus, not
content to have any part of God’s Word oppose them, they twist OT and NT—gospel,
epistle and prophecy—to fit their sinful views and their carnal lifestyles.
Many today do likewise. Next time (DV), we will consider the ways in which they
twist the Scriptures. Rev. Stewart

Unfulfilled Prophecies (1)
But the prophet, which shall presume to speak
a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak
in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. And if thou say in thine
heart, How shall we know the word which the Lord hath not spoken? When a prophet
speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass,
that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it
presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him (Deut.
18:20-22).
The reader who sent in this passage for
discussion remarked that there are at least two instances in Scripture which
tell us of a true prophet whose prophecy did not, in fact, take place. First, in
Jeremiah 18:7-10, God is said to repent of a determination to destroy a nation
that was evil. The Lord follows this with a warning that he will once again
"repent" from doing good to that nation, if the nation which was
spared forsakes God’s ways and turns again to evil. The key issue is the
meaning of God’s repentance.
The second instance which seems to contradict
the statement in Deuteronomy 18 is a concrete example of Jeremiah 18. It is the
instance of God’s "change of mind" after Nineveh repented at the
preaching of Jonah. Jonah had preached, "Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall
be overthrown" (Jon. 3:4). But Nineveh repented at the preaching of Jonah,
and God spared the city (10). It seems from this that the prophesy of Jonah was
not, in fact, fulfilled—in contradiction of God’s Word in Deuteronomy 18.
This is another example of God’s "repentance."
The Scriptures frequently speak of God’s
repentance: Gen. 6:6-7; Ex. 32:14; Judg. 2:18; I Sam. 15:11, 35; II Sam. 24:16;
and often in the prophets. (However, between I Samuel 15:11 and 35, which speak
of the Lord’s repentance that He had made Saul king, verse 29 declares,
"the Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent: for he is not a man, that
he should repent.")
All these examples, while not in every case
connected with specific prophecies, nevertheless demonstrate that Scripture
frequently speaks of God’s repentance, also in connection with His Word
through His prophets. One can say, therefore, that the rule of Deuteronomy 18
holds true for all prophecies, except those which are not fulfilled because God
repents of what He did or said He would do.
Stating this, however, is not a sufficient
answer to the question. What about Deuteronomy 18? We must ask the question:
What does it mean when Scripture tells us that God repents?—especially when in
other places Scripture most emphatically tells us that God does not repent.
Moreover, God is immutable or unchangeable: "I am the Lord, I change not;
therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed" (Mal. 3:6).
The repentance of God is usually said to be a
figure of speech called an anthropomorphism. This huge word means that God is
frequently pictured in Scripture in such a way that human body parts, human
activities, and human emotions are ascribed to Him. He is said to have eyes and
ears, to see and hear, to have a right hand, to walk through the earth and even
to sleep. Repentance is one of these anthropomorphisms.
Anthropomorphisms are not always the kind of
figure of speech we may think. For example, Scripture speaks of God’s right
hand, to which position Christ is exalted. But we must not think of our right
hands as being the real right hands, and God’s right hand as the
figure. It is the other way around. God’s right hand is the real right
hand, and our right hands are only figures. The same is true of every
anthropomorphism. God’s eyes are the real eyes; our eyes are the figures. We
are created in the image of God. In a certain sense, our whole creation was in
the image of God.
Now, when we apply the idea of
anthropomorphisms to God’s repentance, then we must remember that repentance
in God is quite different than it is in us. In us, repentance involves a change
of mind. We decide to go to someone who has offended us in order to speak harsh
and bitter words to that individual. But, on further reflection, we decide not
to do this after all. We repent of our plan. Or we give some money to someone
who seems to be in need, but, when that person simply squanders what we give,
then we repent of having given that person money. This too involves a change of
mind. But in God this is not so. He never changes or alters His plans. He never
does something which He later regrets. He never has "second thoughts"
about a course of conduct upon which He has decided. Nor does He threaten
someone and then change His mind.
What repentance actually is in God is
difficult for us to understand, for God is so high above us that we cannot
fathom His ways. We are slaves of change; God never changes. Nevertheless, there
is something we can say about this. When God determines in His eternal and
unchangeable counsel on a course of action, He decrees the entire sequence of
events in all their details.
Let us use the illustration of Hezekiah.
Through Isaiah the prophet, God revealed to Hezekiah that he would die. Hezekiah
prayed earnestly that his life would be spared. God seemed to change His mind
and extended Hezekiah’s life by 15 years (Isa. 38:5). God determined the first
word to Hezekiah, but He also determined Hezekiah’s prayer, and He even
determined the extension of Hezekiah’s life in answer to the king’s prayer.
Why was all this necessary? Hezekiah had no
son— probably because he had not married. (See II Kings 21:1, where we are
told that Manasseh, Hezekiah’s son, took the throne at the early age of 12).
God was saying to Hezekiah: You have neglected your covenantal responsibilities
in not marrying and producing a son to continue the royal line of David—which
would end in Christ. What would happen if you die? Prof. H. Hanko

The Lukewarm Church (1)
A reader asks for an explanation of Revelation
3:20—"Behold, I stand at the door and knock ..."—a text often
cited in support of free will and resistible grace. This is part of God’s word
to the church of Laodicea (Rev. 3:14-22) which we shall examine first.
Christ describes the Laodiceans as neither
cold nor hot but lukewarm (15-16). At first reading we might think that this
church could have been better ("hot") and could have been worse
("cold"). However, the Lord says, "I would thou wert cold or
hot" (15). Thus it is worse to be lukewarm than to be cold. How could this
be if it is simply speaking of a church’s "spiritual temperature?"
The church here is described not simply with regard to its temperature but with
regard to its temperature as a drink. A hot cup of tea or coffee
is refreshing as is a cold glass of lemonade or milk, but a swig of
lukewarm tea or milk is repulsive. We spit it out. Christ said of the Laodiceans,
"because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out
of my mouth" (16).
But what did He find so disgusting and
offensive about the Laodiceans? "Because thou sayest, I am rich, and
increased with goods, and have need of nothing" (17). Laodicea was a market
town at the confluence of two rivers and at the intersection of three important
roads. It was the site of a civil court and a famous medical school, and was
"noted for its banking and for its manufacture of clothing from the local
black wool" (Leon Morris). Whether because of the church’s (presumed)
material wealth or the flattering preaching of its minister(s) or something
else, the church wrongly evaluated her spiritual condition. She thought she was
"rich" and therefore had "need of nothing" (17). Christ
found her pride highly repulsive and threatened to spew her out of his mouth as
one would a lukewarm drink.
He tells the church her real condition:
"thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked"
(17). As "the wretched one" she is in need of mercy
("miserable") for she lacks spiritual wealth ("poor"),
understanding ("blind") and clothing ("naked"). Of course,
this describes all Christians according to their old sinful nature, but the
Laodiceans did not see and confess this. Instead, the church said that she was
"rich ... and had need of nothing" and thus she "[knew] not"
her misery (17).
Throughout the NT age, congregations in
various lands are well characterised by the strengths and weaknesses of the
seven churches in, what is now, western Turkey (Rev. 2-3). Does a church
faithfully, fearlessly and consistently teach the total depravity of man
including the utter wretchedness of the believer according to his old man (Rom.
7:24)? Do the members truly believe in total depravity so that they confess it
in their prayers, worship and evangelism? Or do the members think that they are
good people, certainly no worse than, and probably a lot better than, their
neighbours? "We are very comfortable and God must be pleased with us."
But they are utter strangers to heartfelt confession of their wicked thoughts
and nature. This is a lukewarm, "Laodicean" church, the sort of church
Christ spews out of His mouth. Rev. Stewart

If you
would like to receive the Covenant Reformed News free by e-mail
each month (and/or by post, if you are in the UK), please contact Rev.
Stewart (pastor@cprc.co.uk)
and we will gladly send it to you.