Promises of a Divine Messiah
Romans 9: 3-5, Isaiah 9:6, Micah 5:2, John 1:1-5,
Colossians 1:15-17, Hebrews 1:3
Open your
Bibles to John, chapter 1. WeÕve been studying in Romans 9:5, which says,
ÒWhose are the fathers [patriarchs] and from whom is the Christ according to
the flesh, who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen.Ó I would move the
appositional phrase, Òwho is over allÓ after Christ. By putting it in its
correct location, it clarifies the fact that this is one of the most profound
statements in the New Testament on the deity of the Messiah. He doesnÕt say
Jesus, which is His human name. Jesus is emphasized when weÕre talking about
His role as Savior or about His humanity.
When christos is used, Christ, which is the
Greek translation from the Hebrew Messiah, it should be understood that way.
PaulÕs talking from his Jewish background and he is saying the Messiah was the
eternally blessed God. HeÕs making a profound claim that the Messiah was to be
deity. WeÕve been looking at these passages in the last couple of weeks. WeÕve
looked at Isaiah 7:14 and Isaiah 9:6. Now I want to go back to a couple of the
passages I briefly touched on because they point out major themes on the
Messiah passages in the Old Testament.
In Isaiah 8:21
and 22, talking about the judgment God was going to bring on Israel and Judah
because of their disobedience to God, he expresses in verse 22, ÒThen they will
look to the earth and behold, distress and darkness, the gloom of anguish, and
they will be driven away into darkness.Ó Darkness is a depiction of the harsh
judgment of God and removal from the land that God had promised to Abraham,
Isaac, and Jacob and removal from that ongoing revelation that God provided via
His presence in the temple.
In Isaiah 9:1 a promise is given, ÒBut
there will be no more gloom for her who was in anguish.Ó This gloom and
darkness was not permanent. It was temporary and would be replaced by seeing a
Ògreat lightÓ in verse 2 and being restored to a position and blessing and
recipients of the divine revelation and the divine presence. ThereÕs a contrast
here in verse 1 between being in gloom and then God making the land glorious.Ó
Verse 2, ÒThe people who walk in darkness [spiritual darkness at the time of
the arrival of Jesus] have seen a great light.Ó This verse is quoted in
Matthew. ÒThose who live in a dark land, the light will shine on them.Ó So this
is a theme that weÕre going to pick up in the New Testament in these three
passages that we talked about last time.
You canÕt fully
comprehend everything going on in the New Testament unless you know the Old
Testament. Not that you canÕt understand a certain amount. But when you get
into John 1, Colossians 1, and Hebrews 1 theyÕre borrowing imagery,
specifically imagery of light and darkness, and it comes right out of the Old
Testament. You have to connect the dots. When we get into studying the Bible we
remember the four basic principles: Observation: what does the text say?
Interpretation: what does the text mean? Correlation: How does this fit with
other passages of Scripture by comparing Scripture with Scripture or what some
call the analogy of Scripture. Application: What does this mean to me?
What we see is
that the context of John 1:1-5 which is where weÕll begin tonight, is John
1:1-18. ThatÕs the prologue to the gospel of John. The context of John 1:1-18
is the gospel as a whole. The gospel of John is in the context of four gospels.
It fits a particular picture of the Lord Jesus Christ, which is somewhat
distinct from that of the other three. The four gospels are in a broader
context of the New Testament. The New Testament is in the context of the whole
Bible.
The New
Testament is a continuing revelation from the Old Testament after a period of
approximately 400 years when there was no new revelation. And so, when talking
about context we donÕt just talk about the narrow, immediate context but we
broaden out until it relates to the whole Bible. Once we do that then things
that are said in a particular verse or passage gains a certain greater level of
significance because weÕre tying it to the whole of Scripture. God didnÕt just
give us isolated verses. Now Proverbs is that way but the rest of the Bible is
not. TheyÕre not just isolated verses or clauses or paragraphs. They fit within
a structure of thought.
So we have this
light and darkness idea depicted in Isaiah as well as the other prophets in the
Old Testament. As I said last time there are three passages central to
understanding the deity of Christ in the New Testament. John1:1-5 and 14,
Colossians 1:15-17, and Hebrews 1:3. Now there are many other passages that
emphasize the deity of Christ but if you can remember those three, then if
youÕre talking to someone and they raise this question, then you can go to this
passage. Write these down in your margins so you can go to them quite easily.
Now John 1:1,
ÒIn the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
He was in the beginning with God and all things came into being through Him, and
apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.Ó Notice, in
light of the emphasis on the Creator-creature distinction in PaulÕs
presentation of the gospel in Acts 17, John begins with creation... Most people
will tell you that if youÕre going to have one book in the Bible that will
clarify the gospel, it ought to be John. John says in John 20:31, ÒThese things
are written that you might believe Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and by
believing you may have life in His name.Ó
Well, look
where John starts. He starts with creation. Creation isnÕt some ancillary,
secondary doctrine of Scripture. I have heard people say sadly, ÒWhy get into
any discussion on creation when youÕre trying to witness to someone? ItÕs a
distraction.Ó Maybe the Apostle Paul should have been told that. Maybe John
should have been told that. Maybe the Holy Spirit should have been told that.
Oh, wait. TheyÕre writing under the inspiration of Scripture.
Verses 3-5
continue, ÒAll things came into being through Him, and apart from Him, nothing
came into being that has come into being. In Him was life and the life was the
Light of the men. The Light shines in the darkness and the darkness does not
comprehend it.Ó Where do you think John got the idea of light shining in
darkness? He got it because he knew the Hebrew Old Testament. HeÕs writing this
under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit but heÕs not inventing it. HeÕs not
just a mindless robot with a tube going through his mind and the Holy Spirit
pours the words and they go through his mind without being by his own
knowledge, his own frame of reference, his own personality, his own background.
John is writing this.
ItÕs just that
the Holy Spirit is the hidden quality control agent thatÕs going to make sure
that what John writes is without errors. ÒIn Him was life, and the life was the
Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not
comprehend it.Ó Connect that back to what we read in Isaiah 8. So letÕs look at
what he says here. This is one of the most profound passages in Scripture. ItÕs
sort of a truism in Greek studies, that the simplest Greek is the Greek of the
Apostle John. It may be simple, basic vocabulary, it may be simple sentence
structure, but it is some of the most profound, erudite reasoning and thought
thatÕs ever been put to paper. It may not be difficult to translate it but it
is certainly something that is challenging to fully comprehend and understand,
especially when you get into the epistles of John. He has such an economy of
language. Every phrase, every word counts. ItÕs simple but itÕs profound.
ÒIn the beginningÓ is the first
statement. This starts off with the Greek preposition en plus the word for beginning, which is arche. What we see in John 1, this
phrase right here, en arche. It
has the preposition en but it has
no article. ThatÕs important to understand but itÕs correctly translated as a
definite noun Òin the beginningÓ Now
IÕll show you why with this particular screen. I ran a search on the word arche, which is a way to do a word
study. I have a list of all 55 times that the noun arche is used in the New Testament.
In a grammar study what weÕre looking
for is whether thereÕs some significance to the fact that thereÕs not an
article there. Is it Òin a beginning or Òin the beginningÓ? Now there are some
words like God that are inherently definite. There are also many other words in
English that are definite and do not carry the definite article in English
because we know English and we know that when that word is used, itÕs a
definite noun. In British English, itÕs more common for them to talk about
going to ÒhospitalÓ, Òwhen I was in ÒvillageÓ the other dayÓ. They tend to
leave out the definite article because itÕs understood that certain nouns are
inherently definite and the article does not need to be there. This is the same
for Greek. We see that arche is
always translated definite even if an article is not there.
The best place
to see this is Mark 1:1, which says, ÒIn the beginning of the gospel of Jesus ChristÉÓ
Now we wouldnÕt translate that as Òa beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ.Ó
That would not make sense at all. The word arche
is inherently definite and should always be translated, unless the context
demands otherwise, as Òthe
beginningÓ.
Another sort of
idiosyncrasy related to Greek is that when you have an article and a noun, if
youÕre going to put a preposition in front of that noun, it replaces the
article. There are some exceptions to that. If you go through all of the uses
of the word arche in the New
Testament, there is no place where whenever you have arche used as ÒbeginningÓ it never has an article. So it
shouldnÕt be translated as Òa beginningÓ at all. It should be translated Òthe
beginningÓ just as it in the Hebrew of Genesis 1:1, re shyith. The article is replaced by the preposition. This is what
is known also as a Semitism and John, being a native Israelite, understands
exactly what he is doing when he says, en
arche he means Òin the beginningÓ. It is a specific point in time. In fact,
the Greek text makes it very clear in the dictionary, that the word arche is inherently definite but that it
refers to a point in time before which nothing had occurred. ItÕs talking about
the beginning of time, the beginning of successive events, and the beginning of
any kind of creation.
So we say, ÒAt
the point at which creation beganÓ. At the point when we went from nothing to
something. At the point of ex nihilo
which is a Latin phrase for Òout of nothingÓ. If youÕre taking an observation
of this particular passage, just paying attention to whatÕs there, you notice
that three times we have the English word ÒwasÓ. It is a translation of the
Greek word eimi, which is an
imperfect active indicative. Now you often hear me talk about these parts of
speech. Sometimes itÕs not as significant in a passage as other times so I
donÕt always make a point of it. But many times it is significant to understand
each element in the parsing of a verb, especially. An imperfect tense is one of
the forms of the past tense. The imperfect tense looks at past action as being
continuous, continually going on. Sometimes it can be a short time frame;
sometimes itÕs a long time frame; but itÕs not looking at it as just a
snapshot. ItÕs looking at it more like a movie. For those of you who are very
young, itÕs like looking at an AVI file or a .mod
file or a YouTube video. ItÕs action in progress, whereas the aorist tense is
like looking at a snapshot. Now that snapshot is just summarizing something
that happened without saying anything about the length or duration of the
action. ItÕs very important that this is an imperfect tense because itÕs
talking about a point in time when time began and when that point in time
occurred, the Word was continuously already in existence. Okay? So there was an
existence before the beginning.
What existed
continuously before that point in time of a beginning was something referred to
here in the text as the logos.
This term here can be and is translated a wide variety of ways depending on the
context. We translate it Òthe wordÓ because word has to do with revelation.
Word has to do with communication of content. It has to do with that
communication of God to man and this fits the context where we look down in
John 1:18 where we read, ÒNo one has seen God at any time; the only begotten
God who is in the bosom of the Father. He has explained [declared] Him.Ó
The Greek word
for declared in that verse is exegeomai.
Sound familiar? Like exegesis? ThatÕs where we get our word to unpack
something, like you unpack your suitcase after a trip. ThatÕs the idea of exegeomai. Jesus Christ has unpacked for
us who the Father is. So that has to do with revelation. When you have a word
here that can mean a number of different things, how do we know whatÕs in the context?
Well, you have to read and understand the context.
The idea that
ÒwordÓ as communication or revelation is important. Another idea in logos is reason. We use words like
biology, zoology, the study of life. We have a word in Greek logizomai, which weÕve studied a lot. logos is the root of it as a noun. As a
verb it means to give an account for something. ItÕs an accounting term, to add
something up to reckon it, or in some cases, to make an imputation of
something. logos can refer to
word, matter, or a thing. It can refer to something that is spoken. So in this
verse, John 1:1 we see that in the beginning something was already in existence
before that point in time and the Word continuously was existing with God and
the Word was continuously God.
We have this
second preposition in the text pros
which indicates a relationship, a close proximity. Sometimes thatÕs been
translated Òface-to-faceÓ but itÕs not just face-to-face like two stones
statues standing nose-to-nose, chest-to-chest, and eyeball-to-eyeball. It
emphasizes a relationship. It emphasizes fellowship -a husband being with his
wife, a father being with his children. It indicates that kind of relationship
between persons. So itÕs emphasizing that the logos
is a person and that God is a person. So thatÕs one of the implications here
with that particular preposition, ÒThe word was with [in relationship or
proximity or fellowship] with God and the Word was God.Ó
Now this last
phrase has brought up quite a bit of discussion in the sense of how in the
world are we to understand this? In the Greek the word has the article as it
does in the English, then you have the verb, then you have the word God without
the article. At this point you have some people in history, called Arians, back
in the early 4th century who didnÕt believe that Jesus was eternal.
They believed there was a point in time in eternity past when the second person
of the Trinity was created. Today theyÕre known as JehovahÕs Witnesses. If they
ever knock on your door and they present their little New World translation to
have you read from it. It will read, ÒAnd the Word was a god.Ó The claim is
that the Word just had deity but there is a Greek word that is perfectly good
to use if youÕre just going to simply express that idea that the Word was
divine. That would be the Green word theos.
ThatÕs not the word that is used here.
So we have some
really profound things going on in John 1:1 ÒIn the beginning was the Word, the
logos.Ó This was a key term for
both Greeks and Jews. In rabbinical thought by this time—the saying of
God in the Old Testament, amar is the
Hebrew word for "God said"—they used a participial form of that,
which was memra. So memra would also be translated as logos. So if you were Jewish and you
were reading this you would be thinking in terms of the memra of God but John isnÕt really writing this to a Jewish
audience. It is known there are Jews around where John is writing. By the time
he wrote the gospel of John, he was living in /Ephesus. He was far from the
land of Israel. ItÕs late in his life. ThereÕs debate even among conservatives
over the timing of the writing of the gospel of John in relationship to the
writing of Revelation. Some people think that Revelation was written last.
Other people think the Gospel of John was written last. IÕm not sure how to
solve that or if we can solve that debate. We know, though, that this is late,
after the fall of Jerusalem. The Apostle John is living as a pastor in Ephesus
and so he is communicating to a Greek mind. Also, we know from our study in
Acts, that there are a number of Jewish-background Christians who were present.
This is one of one of those words that is a double or triple entendre that has
a loaded sense to it. For Jews it would remind them of the memra of God, the revelation of God, from the Old Testament.
To Greeks it
would speak of communication. It had a rich history with them, the
philosophical tradition. On Tuesday nights in our Acts study weÕve been looking
at PaulÕs presentation to the philosophers at the Aeropagus. This is composed
of two different groups: the Stoics and the Epicureans. The Stoics believed in logos. For them it was a rational first
principle by which everything existed. When they heard the word logos theyÕre thinking of it as
something in the creation, not something distinct from creation. They violated
that Creator/creature distinction. Stoics understood logos to be this principle of reason by which everything
existed and which the essence of the rational, human soul is. So every human
being participates in this logos.
On Tuesday
night I started getting into this abstract doctrine a lot of people havenÕt
heard before. If you listen to Charlie CloughÕs framework series, he talks about
it and few others have talked about it but itÕs really not talked about much.
We have to understand that itÕs that thing called the Chain of Being.
Everything participates in logos,
in reason, as the first principle according to Stoicism. Further down that
chain you go where thereÕs less and less sentient life the less it participates
in logos. logos is like that divine spark in modern thought that
everybody has in them. So this is where these kinds of ideas come from.
Philo was a Jew
who lived at that same time and he talked about the logos of God but he had a totally different meaning for it.
For him the logos of God is almost
like the Biblical idea of the image of God but not really. HeÕs using it to
refer to the ideal man or the primal man. For him logos has no personhood or personality and canÕt become
incarnate. So this word logos took
on different senses with different philosophical systems.
John gives it a
whole new sense the way he uses it in the gospel of John. It describes a person
as weÕre going to see who is in close fellowship with God. HeÕs with God and He
was God. In verse 2 we read, ÒAnd He was in the beginning with God.Ó So at that
point in time when time begins, when creation begins, when we move from
nothingness and the only thing that exists is God, the Word is present with
God. Then in verse 3 we have a creation statement. Verses one and two clearly
talk about a state prior to creation. Verse 3 talks about the act of creation.
ÒAll things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into
being that has come into being.Ó Notice the emphasis on the word ÒbeingÓ.
Tuesday night,
what have we been talking about? WeÕre talking about that Chain of Being, the
chain of existence, the same word. Here what we see is that Jesus and the
Father are completely separate and distinct from being. Being is something they
create. There is a wall between God and his creation, that Creator-creature distinction. This is a clear statement of deity
because only God can create out of nothing.
Then the next
two verses, ÒIn Him was life and the life was the Light of men. The Light
shines in the darkness and the darkness did not comprehend it.Ó Not only was He
the source of all creation but also HeÕs the source of life and His life is
what illuminates mankind. I want you to notice something else. Look at verse 6.
Here we shift. We saw act one, scene one in verses 1-5, now we see act one,
scene two, in verses 6-13.
We have a new
character on the stage and this is a man named John. In English we read, ÒThere
came a man sent from God, whose name was John.Ó In the English translation, the
second word was is in italics in the New King James. The American Standard
didnÕt italicize it but itÕs italicized because itÕs not in the original Greek.
ÒThere was a manÉÓ See you have the word was and you have it all the way through
verses 1 through 5. This sort of reminds you of whatever the meaning of ÒisÓ
is. "Was" here in verse 6 isnÕt the same was as you have in verses
1-5. That was the verb eimi in the
imperfect tense. Now we have a different Greek word, ginomai. There are three words in Greek where you want to
talk about something existing, something is. ItÕs called the existential verb.
Something comes into existence. So is means is; the past tense is was. ginomai is the word to come into
existence.
And so the
contrast is that in the beginning the Word always existed but in contrast to
what always existed or continuously existed in the past, there was a man named
John who came into existence. Throughout this chapter thereÕs this contrast
between the logos who continually
exists, which means HeÕs God, and the human, John the Baptist. This passage
goes on to talk about the role of John the Baptist as a witness in verse 7 and
heÕs there to bear witness of the Light. Notice that imagery for the purpose
that all through him, John the Baptist, all might believe.
This is our
first usage of 95 uses of belief in the gospel of John. Not believe and repent.
Repent was his message but the issue was belief. Verse 8 says, He was not the
Light but he came to testify about the Light.Ó Then verse 9, ÒThere was the
true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man.Ó What do you
think weÕre talking about? Light, Light, Light—this light coming in from
darkness. Verse 11 says, ÒHe came to His own, and those who were His own did
not receive Him. But as many as did receive Him, to them He gave the right to
become children of God even to those who believe in His name who were born, not
of blood nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.Ó
We believe God
regenerates. We cannot regenerate ourselves. We can only believe but God is the
One who regenerates us. Now verses 14 and 18 really tie it together for us.
ÒAnd the Word became fleshÉÓ ThatÕs ginomai.
The word eimi indicates
continuously existing and that indicates His deity. But when it says the Word
became flesh, thatÕs the same word that was used of John in verse 6. ÒAnd the
Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the
only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.Ó
Often when the
word glory is used in the New Testament it has that idea of the radiance of
GodÕs essence, so often the word stands for the essence of God. So when it says
we beheld His glory, itÕs not talking about the shekinah glory, the brilliant light;
that was only seen one time during the incarnation, during the Mount of Transfiguration—only
by John and James; it wasnÕt seen by everybody. So John isnÕt talking about
that glory, heÕs talking about the essence of God as revealed through the Son.
ThatÕs that light shining in darkness.
In verse 15 we
shift back to John, ÒJohn testified about Him and cried out saying, ÒThis was
He of whom I said, He who comes after me has a higher rank than I, for He
existed before me.Ó In verse 18 we read, ÒNo one has seen God at any time, the
only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.Ó So
the Word becomes flesh, thatÕs the incarnation. His pre-existence was the deity
of Christ. HeÕs not just human; He is divine. He is one, therefore, who can
explain God because He is one with God. So John 1 emphasizes the deity of
Christ first, and then itÕs joined with the humanity of Christ.
So to summarize
it, number one, it teaches that Christ as the logos
already was, continued existence in past time, in the beginning at that point
of creation, emphasizing His pre-existence, His eternal pre-existence. Second,
we saw that it states that He was with God, personal fellowship. ItÕs a
distinct person but theyÕre having personal fellowship with one another, so God
is personal, the logos is
personal. ItÕs not an impersonal principle of reason, which is how the Greeks
understood it. Third, the text says that He was God, meaning that He is fully
divine, which means HeÕs eternal. It doesnÕt mean He came into existence
sometime in eternity past and HeÕll live forever but that He has always been
and always will be.
Fourth, we learn from this that HeÕs the
ultimate revelation of God to man. Nothing can surpass Him. Fifth, He became
flesh so that He is the God-Man. This fits with everything we saw in the Old
Testament. In Isaiah 7:14, Isaiah 9:6 and Micah 5:2, that the Messiah would be
fully human and fully divine. Sixth, we see also in this passage that He is the
Creator of all things; therefore He is God. In verse 18, HeÕs called the only
begotten Son. The word begotten is from monogenes
which really means unique or one of a kind. It doesnÕt emphasize birth or being
born. It emphasizes uniqueness: mono
meaning one, genes meaning genus
or species. That word genes is a
category or a type. So itÕs a one of a kind, the unique Son of God.
A couple of
other passages just so you can relate to them: The first is John 8:58 when
Jesus was challenged by the Pharisees. He has been talking about Abraham
looking forward to seeing His day, and they said to him, ÒWell Abraham has been
in his grave. How can you talk about what Abraham wants?Ó He replied by saying,
ÒBefore Abraham was [thereÕs that past tense again], I am [present tense].Ó So
the present tense there is emphasizing His continuous existence. Abraham had a
temporary existence in the past.
The second
verse is in John 12. WeÕre coming to the conclusion of the first main part of
the gospel of John. The gospel of John was written why? To show the signs that
Jesus gave of His messiah ship. In John 20:31 it says, ÒThese were writtenÉÓ
What are the ÒtheseÓ? Well you have to go back to the verse before. This is
when Thomas doubted whether or not Jesus had been raised from the dead and he
doesnÕt really believe it. He says he wants to put his hand on the nail prints
in His hand and he wanted to feel the wound in His side and only then would he
believe. Then suddenly Jesus appeared in the upper room there and Thomas fell
down and said, ÒMy Lord and my God.Ó John then says that this was a sign of His
resurrection. ThatÕs the eighth sign in the gospel of John. So in John 20:31 it
says, ÒSo these are writtenÉÓ These refer back to the signs of the verse
before. ÒThese signs are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the
Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.Ó
Seven of those signs were performed between
chapter one and chapter twelve. ThereÕs a clear break there before we get into
the last sign, which is the resurrection, so John 13 begins with the upper room
discourse, the night before He goes to the cross, the crucifixion, and the
resurrection. Now as John concludes this first section of the book he says that
Jesus had done so many signs before. It wasnÕt just the eight signs. He did
many, many other signs but these eight are the ones that John emphasizes but
the great one is the resurrection. In John 12:37, John points out, ÒBut though
He had performed so many signs before them, yet they were not believing in Him.
This was to fulfill the word of Isaiah the prophet, which he spoke: ÒLord who
has believed our report? And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?Ó
For this reason they could not believe for Isaiah said again, ÒHe has blinded
their eyes and He hardened their heartÉÓ Now thatÕs not saying that God just
reached down and turned their volition to negative. See, theyÕve already gone negative.
God is just allowing them and strengthening the choice theyÕve already made.
ÒÉlest they should see with their eyes and perceive with their heart and be
converted so that I should heal them. These things Isaiah said because he saw
His glory and spoke of Him.Ó
Now when did
Isaiah see the glory of Jesus? In Isaiah chapter 6 he is before the Throne of God
and saw the glory of God; he saw the seraphim singing, ÒHoly, holy, holyÓ
before the Lord. There is the fullness of God: all three members of the Trinity
are there so these things Isaiah said when he saw His glory. So again,
emphasizing the eternality, the glory, and the essence of Jesus as fully God.
John1:1 is our first New Testament passage emphasizing the deity
of Christ; the second is a relatively short one in Colossians, chapter 1,
verses 15-18. Verse 15 is the key verse, ÒHe is the image of the invisible God,
the firstborn of all creation.Ó The first thing Paul says about Christ in this
passage is that first HeÕs the image of God, and then He created everything. Oh
yeah, creation isnÕt important. ThatÕs just a distraction; it gets people all
caught up in the wrong idea, so letÕs just not worry about creation and
evolution. LetÕs just concede ground here. Really?
I was really
saddened recently because I read a book review on my recent trip on vacation.
It was a book review written by the Institute of Biblical Research. It doesnÕt
matter the name of the book or the authors but one of the authors was a man IÕd
almost done my pastoral internship under in 1979 but he decided to resign from
his church here in Houston at that time. He went on to be the president of
Columbia Bible College. Later he came back to that church for a while. I had first
met him and gotten to know him when he spoke several times at Camp Peniel. He
had written an excellent little pamphlet on creation. He was a Òyoung earthÓ
creationist. Now heÕs become an Òold earthÓ creationist. He made a shift about
fifteen years ago. About twenty years ago he also went sort of
semi-charismatic. It just breaks my heart as I watch individual after
individual begin to compromise with the thinking of the world. IÕve seen this
with people in the pew. IÕve seen this with pastors in the pulpit and with
theologians in the seminary and they just compromise the truth. I look back at
the men who were the most instrumental in teaching me the truth of GodÕs word
when I was a young man, both before I went to college as a teen-ager and later,
and there were some from a certain generation who held their ground but many
younger ones who came up after them in that intervening generation started off
right and have shifted over the years.
This is one of
the reason we see the visible church today in the mess thatÕs it in. These men
have compromised their spiritual integrity with the thinking of the world. They
no longer believe the things that I heard them teach me when I was a young man
in my twenties. Creation is important! ÒFor by Him all things were created both
in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible whether thrones or dominions
or rulers or authorities—all things hold together.Ó These are referring
to different divisions of angels. Jesus Christ is the Creator. Again and again
we hear this clear statement of his full deity. He is before all things.
Through Him all things consist.
In verse 18,
ÒHe is also head of the body, the church, and He is the beginning, the
firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in
everything.Ó So we see these phrases, ÒHe is the image of the invisible God.Ó
This is the word ikon. He is a
representation of the invisible God. WeÕre going to see this same idea in
Hebrews 1:3. He is the flashing forth, the express image or radiance, effulgence
of the essence of God. This is expressed in His glory. Notice 2 Corinthians 4:4
which says ÒIn whose case [unbelievers] the god of this world [Satan] has
blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of
the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.Ó See, this isnÕt
just something that Paul throws in as a nice idea. ItÕs foundational to
everything he says about Christ and about the Christian life and about
salvation. ItÕs not secondary.
In John 17:5
Jesus prayed, ÒNow Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory
which I had with You before the world was.Ó This is the same glory that Jesus
expresses to people in His ministry. ÒHe is the image of the invisible God.Ó
God the Father is unseen. No one has seen Him at any time. John 1:18 said, ÒNo
one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the
Father. He has explained [declared] Him.Ó Then heÕs called the firstborn. This
is a term that can mean first in time but it is also used many times to refer
to somebody who is first in rank, the preeminent one. ThatÕs how itÕs used here
to describe Jesus. HeÕs not the first of those who were born but He is the
preeminent One; He is the exalted One. He is the One who is set over everything
else.
This comes
again out of an Old Testament context. Psalm 89:26-27 uses this term firstborn
in relationship to the Messiah. This is a meditation on the Davidic covenant.
In this Psalm written by David as heÕs reflecting upon what God has done in giving
this promise to him that one of his descendants would be eternally on his
throne, he says in the words of God, the Father, ÒYou will cry to Me, ÔYou are
My Father, My God, and the rock of my salvation. I also shall make him My
firstborn, the highest of the kings of the earth.Ó So this is talking about His
position, part of which is His ranking because of His exaltation at the
Ascension that He is set over all humanity as the One who is elevated to the
right hand of God the Father.
Then it is
explained further in Colossians that He is the One by whom all things were
created, and for Him. So He is the One who will be the ruler of all things. IÕm
going to stop here because weÕre about to run out of time, looking at verses 16
and 17 next time and then Hebrews 1:3 before we go back into our passage in
Romans 9 and begin to deal with this. It just struck me as weÕre looking at
Romans 9:5 that Paul is talking about the significance of the Jews and the
Jewish people and GodÕs continuous love for them even though theyÕre in
rebellion and right there at the beginning he makes a non-compromising
affirmation on the full deity of the Messiah. He never backs down on these
important principles and neither should we.