Lesson 9
We’re going to be in 1 John. If you have the
handout from last week, it’s the same one.
We’ve been working with 1 John and on the outline you
have…1:5 to 2:11 this is next chunk. Remember we’re following a format,
which is called a rhetorical format because scholarship has worked on this book
trying to find how John has organized his thoughts. It appears that this
rhetorical approach fits best – the text. So we’ve had the prologue; and
now we’re on the preamble. In literature that was written to be read
– it apparently was customary in the first century in this time to have a
preamble where you established your readers before you got to the real
issue. So this is a set up that John’s doing here. As we go through
1:5 to 2:11 you’ll see he moves through the trinity. In the section that
we’re on from 1:5, that’s where that begins with the idea that “this is the
message which we have heard of Him and declare to you” all the way down to 2:2.
It has primarily focusing us on the Father. Remember when we went through
the trinity I used the tri-unity of the human being as an analogy. There we had
the nature, the person and the personality. Remember behind the person is
what we see. We don’t see personality. We experience the
personality. That’s the effect a person has on us and on
others. The person - we look at the person we can see a nature behind the
person. So it’s a finite analogue to the trinity here.
So when we’re looking at the Father we’re looking at
His essence as His nature. That’s why we said in verse 5 – you
follow in the text now. There is an emphasis in this sentence.
NKJ 1 John 1:5 This is the message which we have heard from Him and declare to you,
that God is light and in Him is no darkness at all.
So that’s a little emphatic construction in that
sentence. That alerts us that John is making a point here.
Evidently this is going to play a role (and we know it does) later in his
epistle. But he’s making a point absolutely righteous. There
is no darkness. This is in total collision with this culture because in
the culture all paganism mixes the evil and the good. It’s not clearly
separated. We think it’s clear because we’ve been exposed to
Christianity. But if we had grown up in a totally pagan society (which
our children are) in that kind of a situation good and evil are mixed. So
that’s why I had this chart and again... of the problem of what happens when
you try to build ethics on nothing. That’s what’s happening today.
If you listen to the culture around us, it is filled with moralistic
rhetoric. Those of you who are old enough to remember the arguments over
the Vietnam War will recall how we had all of this rhetorical stuff from the war
protestors - that the war was illegitimate.
“We are so concerned for the Vietnamese people that
are being so abused by our invasion of Vietnam.”
That was really a fig leaf for their ethical
nakedness. There was no question about the morality of the Vietnam War.
Ho Chi Minn had killed 100,000 Vietnamese before the whole thing ever
started. It was in a cold war with communists who were trying to take
over the world. These people who professed (Jane Fonda and the rest of
them) that they were so concerned and all the moral rhetoric about their
concern that this moral feeling about the poor Vietnamese people. Funny
after the troops left and there was no danger of these spoiled brats being
drafted, then all of a sudden their concern morally for the Vietnamese people
evaporated; so when millions of them were drowning in the South China Sea the
moral rhetoric disappeared showing that it was a phony from the start. So
the same thing goes today. We have all kinds of schemes being promulgated
for political reasons. There’s nothing to do with morality. It is
dressed up in moralistic rhetoric to sell. But underneath, there
isn’t.
The latest thing is that we’re so concerned for our
children’s education in this country that we now have common core which every
teacher who has any experience in the classroom knows is not going to work
because it’s cookie cutter education. In a class of 20 students you have
20 different individual students with individual learning styles with
individual rates of learning. You can’t cookie cutter their education,
especially if you live15 levels up in the ozone level of management. This
is what’s going on. But listen, it’s being sold so if you object to it;
you don’t have concern for the children. Now the problem with this whole thing
is is that in John 1:5 this is the only moral authority that is in the real
world. That is God’s character.
The problem again…
…how shall we say is an autobiographical
expression. It has nothing to do with a moral standard other than a
private opinion.
…this can be lived out consistently.
(Transmission problems)
Resulting anarchy leads to totalitarianism because any
society - and this is the way ours is going. This is the way our culture is
going. It has to go this way people. This is the way. There is a
design in this. You can’t violate God’s design without
consequences. If you’re not going to hold to a transcendental standard
over all society to which we all agree, then you’re going to have morally
disagreeable conflicts. That leads to anarchy. Society can never
tolerate an anarchy. So the answer to anarchy is totalitarianism - very
simple. It’s going to happen. It has to happen. Either you have God
as a standard over all and His character being the standard or you have
millions and millions of standards. You can’t have millions and millions
of standards so to reconcile it; you’re going to have to have a standard
imposed upon everyone by whoever holds political power. That’s what’s
going on today. It’s due to the fact that the Bible story of God being
the standard has been violated. The reason there are consequences in real life
from this violation is because what we’re seeing in the Scriptures is
reality. This is reality; not the fantasyland that we’re living in today.
So that starts off verse 5.
Now let’s think about – let’s go to the next
slide. We’ve already talked about the fall. This is the depiction of the
difference - understand the difference that’s going on here. There is a
difference between how the Bible presents good and evil and how outside of the
Bible in the pagan culture of good and evil is conceived. Only in the
Bible do you ever have evil starting at a point and ending at a point. Evil is
bracketed in Scripture. It is bracketed nowhere else in the world.
There is no other philosophy, no other religion that does this. Only the
Bible does this.
Okay, now that has consequences because now we go to
verses 6 and 7. In verses 6 and 7, we have the way John writes, his
antithetical style. We pointed this out. If you read John, in this
epistle particularly, almost every other verse switches. One is positive;
the other is negative. One is positive; the other is negative.
Let’s look at this. Just test it.
NKJ 1 John 1:6 If we say that
we have fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice
the truth.
So there’s the negative.
NKJ 1 John 1:7 But if we walk
in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and
the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin.
Positive
NKJ 1 John 1:8 If we say that
we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
Negative
NKJ 1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to
forgive us our sins and to cleanse us
from all unrighteousness.
Positive
NKJ 1 John 1:10 If we say that
we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us.
Negative
So that’s the way John writes. That’s his
style. It’s not Paul’s style. It’s John’s style. So we want to now
look at this flow from verse 6 down to verse 10. In verses 6 and 7-
because verses 6 and 7 are one whole sentence. In the Greek this is one
whole sentence.
It starts off:
NKJ 1 John 1:6 If we say that
we have fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice
the truth.
We said that when we get into this we’re seeing how
John contrasts word and deed. For him the deed is important because he’s
looking at how we observe. John is observing. Notice the first
verse of the epistle. Remember back in the first verse. Look at the
verbs that John uses. Those are verbs that are not just hearing.
There is one verb, to hear.
But then it says, “We have seen Him with our eyes.”
Then it says, “We gazed upon Him.”
Then, “We handled Him.”
That’s sight, thoughtful sight, and
touching. Only one verb deals with hearing. So John’s
emphasis is on the empirical; and it reflects in all his writing. In
verse 6 he talks about:
NKJ 1 John 1:6 If we say that
we have fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice
the truth.
We’re not actually out there doing the truth. He
includes himself in this. Remember it’s a plural, first person plural,
not singular - plural. It’s not third person either.
NKJ 1 John 1:6 If we say that
we have fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness,
He’s going to deal with the walking in darkness more;
but obviously you can tell walking in darkness is getting involved in some sort
of sin. Fellowship requires us walking in the light.
So that comes to verse 7. The connective there -
I think in some of the translations the translators have divided verses 6 and
7, made it into different sentences; but it’s really not. It’s a
continuous one.
NKJ 1 John 1:7 But if we walk
in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and
the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin.
There is a lot in this thing because when he says, “We
walk in the light,” John uses that light over and over and over. Here’s a
way to think about that to kind of capture what he’s doing. Those of you
who have studied in history courses and so on, what is the age that starts in
16th century called? The Age of Enlightenment Now why do
you suppose it’s called the Age of Enlightenment? This is
interesting. This is the kind of indoctrination that goes on in these
courses and if you are a perceptive student you want to think about this.
Why do you suppose scholars created that term for what happened in the 16th
century? Exactly! They assumed the age before the 16th
century was dark. We call the medieval period the Dark Ages. Does
anybody detect a bias against Christianity? Here’s an example of our
college education, the university level, and in the media that is programming
us to think certain ways by attaching labels. To the secular mind,
enlightenment is the use of reason. That was the Age of Reason, the idea
that the individual is going to conquer the world with reason. The
problem with that is - what’s the justification for the validity of reason? Do
evolving apes have brains sufficient to create thinking that matches
reality? There is no basis for reason on a secular basis.
Nevertheless we’re sold on the Age of Enlightenment. Ironically today we
live in a postmodern culture that has turned its back on reason, which was the
whole motive of the Age of Enlightenment. All that to say that for John -
if John were here today, if John were studying on the college campus; he would
say the Age of Enlightenment has already started. It didn’t start in the
16th century. What did it start with? Jesus
Christ. So the Age of Enlightenment is here now.
With all that background let’s reread verse 7.
NKJ 1 John 1:7 But if we walk
in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another,
Let’s just stop there. If we walk in the
light, if we are enlightened and the enlightenment is not what comes out of
human reason; the enlightenment he’s talking about comes from the character of
God. God is righteous. God is holy. If we walk in light – in
that light - because you notice how he qualifies it.
NKJ 1 John 1:7 But if we walk
in the light
Then he puts a phrase in there. What does he put
in there?
as He is in the light
...just so we don’t misunderstand. We’re not
talking about some human enlightenment. We walk in the light that is His
light - that holiness, that standard.
“If we walk in that standard,” John says, “then we
have fellowship with one another.”
He’s going to develop the fellowship as he goes
on. But anticipating what he’s going to do here, he talks about having
fellowship. He’s talking about sharing the life of Christ that is true of
every born and that life comes from Him. I’m not talking about sharing
our flesh, our sin natures. What we share is the righteousness that comes
from Him and that eternal life is a shared thing. We can’t share
that if we’re walking in darkness. So it behooves to have fellowship one
with another we have to be walking to the same sheet of music. The same
sheet of music is God’s character. That’s what unites. He is
talking about unity here. What unites is the character of God.
NKJ 1 John 1:7 But if we walk
in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another
Then he goes on. Look at the next clause
and the blood of Jesus Christ His
Son cleanses us from all sin.
The moment he does this, he has removed the
conversation from something that could be misunderstood as just
psychology. If we stopped before this we could say, “Well, what John
really means is that we are all walking to the same tune; and we all share the
same values.” That’s true; but if we’re thinking of values as those which
come out of human society, the latest Gallup Poll for example; we miss the
point completely.
What verse 7 is saying is if we walk in the light,
God’s light, God’s standard, if we walk in that light we have fellowship one
with another. Then he adds there is something going on. This is
just an illustration not literal; but what he’s saying here is there is a 5th
dimension to life. There are 3 dimensions in space, one dimension in
time. That’s four dimensions. What he’s saying is reality has 5
dimensions. There’s the unseen world. There are things that are
going on that we can’t observe. They ‘e beyond our powers of
observation. We only know what is going on in the unseen world because
God in Scripture have communicated what is going on – some of what is
going on in that unseen world. So the last part of this is:
and the blood of Jesus Christ His
Son cleanses us from all sin.
Before he ends this section he is going to deal more
with this invisible stuff going on. So this takes it out of the realm of
human psychology. We’re not just dealing with human psychology
here. We’re dealing with something that reaches into the heights of
heaven. The blood of Jesus Christ cleanses us from all sin. That’s
needful. Notice it says:
It cleanses us from all sin.
If we walk in the light we’re going to be sensitive to
the Holy Spirit’s conviction for our sin through the Word; and then we will do
something about it, which he is going to get to.
So now he starts in verse 8. Remember we’ve gone
negative – positive. Now we’re on the negative.
NKJ 1 John 1:8 If we say that
we have no sin… the truth is not in us.
Next slide. There are going to be 3 responses
now to the light. Verse 8 is the first response; verse 9 is the second
response; and verse 10 is the third response. The first response in verse
8 is – oh and by the way before we even get to the first response,
something else is going on here too. That is to remember - this is so
hard to remember particularly if we are discouraged and if we have some sort of
besetting sin and addiction. It is very, very hard for someone fighting
those kinds of things to think that they have the freedom to choose. It’s
like they’re imprisoned with a drug.
“Well, that’s nice; but I just can’t do that.”
John says, “Yes, you can.”
He’s going to deal with volition and human responses
here. It’s not like you’re trapped into something. Yes, there are
besetting sins. Yes, there are addictive things that are terrible that
take years to deal with. We’re not denying that. But the Scriptures
insist we have personal responsibility. We always have some zone of
personal responsibility. If we don’t, verses 6 and 7 are an atrocious
lie. We have a choice of walking in the light or we have a choice of walking in
the darkness. That’s a choice. That’s not determined by the
government. That’s not determined by our psychology. That’s not
determined by some sort of illness. We have human
responsibility. This is good news.
People sometimes think of it as bad news because it’s
sin; but actually there was a (?) group of counselors back in the – I
think it was the late ’60’s. There was a gentleman by the name of Jay
Adams who wrote a book. It was a bombshell in evangelical circles.
It was called Incompetent to Counsel.
I can remember because I was studying in seminary when this happened. He
was about as welcome as Henry Morris was with The Genesis Flood. Evangelicals ridiculed him.
Particularly offended were the psychiatric communities and the psychology
communities because Jay Adams argued that if we really as Christians believed
the Scriptures were sufficient unto every good work, they must be sufficient
for counseling. He didn’t dismiss the fact that if somebody parted your
hair with a baseball bat that you would have a brain injury. If somebody
has a chemical problem, that’s a medical problem. It’s not a
psychological problem. It may cause psychological problems; but the heart of
the problem if it’s a chemical imbalance, that’s a medical problem. MD’s
should be addressing that, not a psychologist. So dismissing that segment
of problems, the genuine medical problems, then everything else falls into the
biblical place here of volition and responsibility. So that’s the battle.
Well, Adams argued and he gave a very interesting
illustration. He had gotten his doctorate at the University of Illinois
under O. Hobart Mauer. O. Hobart Mauer was a secular psychologist; but
Adams narrates the following episode that happened when he was doing his
clinical.
They were walking through the community there and they
ran across a so-called schizophrenic and O. Hobart Mauer walked up to that
schizophrenic man and he said, “I can have you out of here in 3 weeks if you’ll
admit the fact that you’re a cheater of federal government and I know that you
cheated. You know that you cheated. All this schizophrenia stuff is a
bunch of bull that you’ve created to cover up your guilt. So admit it,
and you can be out of here in 3 weeks.”
Well, this was an eye opener to Jay Adams to see O.
Hobart Mauer treat these people who he had these supposedly incurable problems
by addressing their personal responsibility. That’s why later he began to
read the Scriptures and began to see that the Scripture’s imperative verbs are
command verbs, are they not? Every imperative mood is addressing
volition. Well if the Scriptures are full of imperative verbs, what does
that say about volition and responsibility? It must exist. If it
doesn’t exist there shouldn’t be any imperative verbs, right? So when we see a
simple command like verses 6 and 7, there’s a choice here. The choice is
totally different than what you often get in therapies that deal with
addictions. Everyone can walk in the light. Everyone can walk in
darkness. It’s our responsibility.
So now he’s going to deal with the responses to the
light. So here we are fallen beings. God is a God of light.
Now how do we respond to His nature because we’re dealing with God’s nature
here?
So verse 8 is the first response.
NKJ 1 John 1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is
not in us.
This is again something we have to be careful
of. I know often times people come to this and they say that verse 8 is
referring to the sin nature. Well, that’s a truth; but here we have to be
careful. Hamartia - this word
that John uses here for sin, he uses differently. If you want to see how
John uses the word sin here so we see that there’s something different than
just saying we have a sin nature.
Let’s hold the place and turn to John 9:41.
Here’s an example of how he uses it in his gospel. This is that passage
by the way where Jesus gets up and says, “I am the light of the world.”
In verse 41 the last verse of chapter 9 in the Gospel of John:
NKJ John 9:41 Jesus said to them, "If you were blind, you would have no sin; but
now you say, 'We see.' Therefore your sin remains.
That’s how John uses the word sin here. It’s a
response to the light; and it’s responsibility. So verse 8 is dealing
with our human responsibility.
NKJ 1 John 1:8 If we say that we have no sin,
That is we’re not responsible. We excuse
everything. Then John says:
NKJ 1 John 1:8 … and the truth is not in us.
You are living in fantasyland. Verse 8 is
addressed to that area. It’s very, very relevant to the whole issue of
counseling and psychology today. John would argue that behind what we
call schizophrenia, Bipolar disorders unless they are chemically caused -
these kinds of things signature here. We have different bodies. Our
chemistry works differently. We manifest choices differently. They
can medically affect us. Doctors can detect differences but a lot of it
is due simply to sin. It is a result of our trying to cope with
guilt. So John says:
NKJ 1 John 1:8 If we say that we have no sin,
We can’t be Christians and not be constantly aware
that we have sin, that we can sin, that we have these guilt situations.
NKJ 1 John 1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves. The truth is
not in us.
Now the second response is the response is to confess
- 1 John 1:9, one of the most famous verses in all Scripture. Here it
says:
NKJ 1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins,
So that’s a response when God brings it to our
awareness conscience.
He is faithful and just to forgive
us our sins and to cleanse us from
all unrighteousness.
So here we have a theological statement. It’s
not just mouthing the words, “I’m sorry, I have sinned.” It’s not just mouthing
that word. If God wasn’t there, if the universe wasn’t designed the
way the Bible says it’s designed, that would be just a psychological exercise -
just to make you feel good because you’re saying something. What John
says is, “No, it’s more than just saying it. If we confess our sins,
something is happening in the unseen realm.” In other words God
Himself is interacting with this. We can’t smell it; we can’t touch it;
we can’t see it. But John says this is what happens.
NKJ 1 John 1:9 …He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and
Furthermore he says:
to cleanse us from all
unrighteousness.
Which apparently may be the motives and of all the
implications that got involved with that particular sin. So He cleanses
us.
He also says:
NKJ 1 John 1:9 …He is faithful and just
So now we have two attributes of God going on
here. See how theologically deep this is. This is not just a
psychological thing going on here. This is not therapy. This is an
act of confession and it involves God Himself. It says He is first of all
faithful meaning that He responds to this – that God has responded to
this down through the corridors of time. He has responded to millions and
millions of people. He responds to you. He responds to me the same
way. He is faithful to the way He responds.
NKJ 1 John 1:9 … and just
Which introduces another thing. This is a
tremendous point theologically.
Old fashioned liberals used to make fun of gospel
preachers back in the 20’s. One of the things they would yell at Billy
Sunday and these old guys was that they believed in slaughterhouse
religion. Do you think you know what they meant when they said, “You
fundies, you believe in slaughterhouse religion?” What do you think the
liberals were getting at? The blood of Christ, the idea that in order to
have forgiveness you had to have a slaughter – Old Testament. What
happened when you sinned? What did they do? They slaughtered animals.
What happened in the Garden of Eden? God slaughtered. With all due
apologies to Peter the first death of an animal God Himself caused. So
why is it necessary to have slaughterhouse religion? Because God has to be
propitiated. God is a holy God; and there is no other way - period.
Now here’s the problem though. If you don’t have
slaughterhouse religion, if you don’t have bloody mess - those of you want to
see what cruelty existed in the first century read O’Reilly’s book The Killing of Jesus. He goes on
and gives a tremendous cultural - I differ theologically with a lot of it but
culturally that is a tremendous work that shows you the absolute cruelty that
went on in that day and that age. Then you realize our Savior was exposed
to that kind of life. All the early Christians exposed to that kind of
life. Every one of the Apostles was killed except John. That’s the
life those guys lived in a very pagan society. We have it easy compared
to what they had to go through.
The idea here is there had to be justice. This
is another one of this moralistic rhetoric going on. How many times have
you heard, “I believe in social injustice.” No, you don’t. If you
haven’t read the book of Deuteronomy you don’t know what social justice
is. So let’s cut out that stuff. That’s just a fig leaf for moral
justice. The idea here is that justice – justice is an absolute rooted in
the God who is Light, in who there is no darkness at all. Now how are you going
to have a just God forgive sin without slaughterhouse religion?
This is the dilemma Islamic theologians have.
One of the problems in Moslem theology and it’s a very deep problem and it has
manifestations all across the board. I have read Moslem theologians who
have argued that Allah can forgive or not. He can do evil or he can do
good, that is his choice. In other words they hold to the sovereignty of
god so powerfully we call it blonterism (?) - that god can choose to do evil
and god can choose to do good - period. That is Islamic theology.
What is also true is that Allah can forgive without
blood atonement. Now if a god can forgive without blood atonement, what
does that do to his standard? If you forgive somebody are accepting their
sin, are you not? Well, if you accept their sin what happens to your
holiness? It’s inconsistent. So in answer to the old liberal and in
answer to the modern liberal, we argue that unless you have a blood sacrificial
atonement, you cannot have a justice that forgives. This is why in Romans
3 there’s that magnificent passage in Paul where God can be just and the
justifier. He can be both but only because of the atonement.
Now he develops this. Look at verse 10. The
third response is that when we’re convicted of sin we deny it. John says:
NKJ 1 John 1:10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar,
and His word is not in us.
See the sensitivity here to conscience? Very
strong and it’s fed not as a psychological thing; it’s fed as a theological
thing with the character of God.
Now in 2:1-2 this is what’s going on topside.
This is what takes this passage out of the area of psychology and puts it into
area of reality that there is a God there, our Creator and Savior God.
Our sin down here is affecting things up there. Up there there’s all
kinds of things going on. So John lets us see the stuff that’s going on
up there in the 5th dimension that we can’t smell, taste, see or
hear. Here’s what’s going on. He says:
NKJ 1 John 2:1 My little children, these things I write to you, so
that you may not sin.
That verse is addressed to the fact that people say,
“Ah well, I’ve got John 1:9. That’s a license to sin.”
No, that’s not why John’s doing this.
He says, “I ‘m writing this so you won’t sin because I
want to make you aware of who God is and the lengths to which He goes to
forgive our sin. It is nontrivial for God to forgive sin. Here’s
why.”
He says:
NKJ 1 John 2:1 …And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ
the righteous.
NKJ 1 John 2:2 And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only
but also for the whole world.
Now the idea of an advocate - before you get to that -
well maybe we’ll go with the advocate first. That’s the same word that
Jesus used in the Upper Room Discourse for the Holy Spirit, which is
interesting. It is also an example of what Jesus does now. A
passage that kind of gives us a little video of what it looks like when Jesus
acts as an advocate.
Hold the place and turn to Luke 22. Here’s an
example of His advocacy. After reading passages like this, I hope we all
appreciate the fact that human actions down here involve a whole lot more than
what we learn in a psychology course. This is way, way beyond any human
psychology therapy. Luke 22, look at verse 31.
The Lord while on earth somehow knew what was going on
topside and He knew specific things that were going on before the throne of God
while he was down here. So he’s talking to Peter. Here’s what he
says:
NKJ Luke 22:31 And the Lord said, "Simon, Simon! Indeed, Satan has asked for you…
How do you think Jesus knew that? Think of all
the millions of people that existed at this time. Jesus is cognizant of
the fellow that He’s right next to.
He says, “Peter, I know that Satan has just asked to
have you.”
Think of the communication involved here that Jesus
knew this.
NKJ Luke 22:31 And the Lord said, "Simon, Simon! Indeed, Satan has asked for you,
that he may sift you as wheat.
Look at this. Here’s the advocacy.
NKJ Luke 22:32 "But I have prayed for you, that your faith should not fail; and
when you have returned to Me, strengthen
your brethren."
So here our Intercessor, our Advocate hears the
attack. Remember there is a judicial fight going on. This is by the
way in a dimension of theology that traditional Protestant reform theology does
not deal with. But, I believe that a literal dispensational approach does
deal with. That is the doxological issue. The universe is beyond just
redemption. There are doxological things going on that have nothing to do
– well, redemption has a role but angels are not redeemed. There is a
battle on in the throne room of God over the issue of God’s essence. Is God
just or is He unjust? You get that in the book of Job. Here
again it comes up. Satan is probably saying to God what he said to God
about Job. Now he’s going after Peter because he wants to show that
somehow God’s work with us violates God’s character because Satan wasn’t given
redemption. The angels that fell with Satan are not ever going to be
saved. Therefore there’s some sort of courtroom argument that’s been
going on for centuries about why God redeems us; but He doesn’t redeem
them. Satan is like a prosecutor. He wants to go after it and after
it and after it.
Yes.
(Question)
The question Jesus in kenosis (true biblical kenosis)
gave up the independent use of His attributes. But obviously God the
Father allowed Him to do this. So we just say that Jesus knew this
because God allowed Jesus to know this. Jesus is omniscient. He
exercises it. He could exercise any one of His attributes anytime He felt
the Father allowed Him to do it.
For example He comes to Mark.
(Question)
The Father probably gave Him permission to use His
omniscience when He was dealing with His disciples in this situation.
Yes.
(Question)
This is the whole. We are coming to grips
with kenosis, which is a Christological doctrine that has to do with the fact
that Jesus didn’t short circuit God’s protocols for living His life. If
He did, He wouldn’t be the model for us.
Yes.
(Question)
How does this apply to us?
Oh, I see what you are saying – is He acting as
a human being knowing the Scripture. I would say probably not in this
case because He has specific insight into a conversation that has just taken
place in heaven. This is…
Here He says, “Peter I prayed for you.” …at that
point made a difference for Peter. So it’s interesting had Jesus not
heard or had He heard and not cared, Peter might have had a problem. It
was precisely because Jesus did hear and He acted as the intercessor. He
acted as an advocate and Peter survived and Peter could come out of his spiral;
but that was only because Jesus heard and He advocated. So when we think
we’re so hotshot and that we’re having victory in the Christian life; it may
very well be just because someone is praying for us that we did not know and we
better be a little more humble about some of our achievements.
Finally it says:
NKJ 1 John 2:1 … Jesus Christ the righteous.
Notice John. Here he goes again – God’s
nature, God’s holiness, God’s righteousness, justice. See how often he talks
about that. There is no compromise in John with light.
KJ 1 John 1:5 …and in Him is no darkness
Jesus in order to be the Advocate must be
righteous.
Then he goes on and finishes in verse 2.
NKJ 1 John 2:2 And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and
not for ours only but also for the whole world.
Propitiation is a theological word that means to
satisfy God’s holy demands. That is what propitiation means. So He
is the propitiation of our sins and also for the sins of the whole world.
Our time unfortunately is up but we are finished with this chunk. So next
week we’ll move on. Now the focus changes to Jesus, the Righteous
One. Now you’ll see there’s a tone of difference. We focused on
God’s nature and that’s how we work with the Father. Now what about our
relationship with the Son? That is the next passage.
(Closing prayer)