Monday, June 02, 2008

Sermon 6/1/08 Back to the Basics: Part One "

“How Words about the Word, Became the Word of God”

2 Peter 1:16-21

Some time ago, a popular book was written called The Da Vinci Code. It makes several claims about how the Bible came to be. It claims:

1. The people who were in power in the 4th century decided which books to canonize based on a political agenda. In the process, they excluded the books that depicted the truth about Jesus.
2. The books that we commonly call Gnostic Gospels are the books that were excluded, but they are the ones that contain the truth.

The reason I reference this book and movie is because it seems to contain a lot of the misnomers going around about how the Bible came to be. What I want to do today is help you understand how the Bible ACTUALLY came to be and what the Bible says about itself. I want to begin by sharing with you a passage of Scripture from 2 Peter 1:16-21.

For we did not follow cleverly devised stories when we told you about the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ in power, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. He received honor and glory from God the Father when the voice came to him from the Majestic Glory, saying, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased." We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with him on the sacred mountain.


We also have the prophetic message as something completely reliable, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation of things. For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.


Peter begins by reminding his readers that the stories and things he and the other apostle’s share with the believers are not just made up, but they were eye witness accounts of Jesus. In the same way, Paul believes the words he speaks to be the words of God as well. For example, he shares in 2 Thessalonians 2:13 that he is thankful for them because they accepted his words as the words of God and not as something that was devised by human hands. It is important to understand that first and foremost, the testimony passed down from the apostles was considered to be scripture or the Word of God.

Peter then goes on to say that they also have the prophetic message, which is completely reliable. He goes as far as to say that no single prophecy of Scripture was just that person’s interpretation of things, but it has it’s origins in God as the Holy Spirit carries them along. The prophetic message is what we have contained in the Old Testament. Generally speaking, the Old Testament was available to the early Christians in most the same form it is today. Peter speaks about the Old Testament the way we generally talk about the Bible today.

In Peter’s second letter, Peter goes on to include Paul’s writing as Scripture. His point in doing so is that apparently people have misunderstood Paul’s writings or they have twisted them. Peter says they are doing this just like the do “other scripture.” The picture we have forming is that by the end of the first century, we already have a group of texts and teaching that are being circulated around to the churches that are being called “Scripture.” We have the oral teachings of Jesus, which were soon written down and circulated, the Old Testament, and the writings of Paul. By the mid second Century the four gospels were already recognized as Scripture. Before the third century Acts, 1 and 2 John, Jude and Revelation were already recognized as Scripture.

Eusebius, who is was one of the early church theologians who wrote in the late 3rd and early fourth centuries gave a threefold criteria for inclusion in the Bible.

1. Usefulness to the church
2. Apostolic origins
3. Theological consistency with books that is clearly apostolic.

As you can clearly see from Scripture’s own testimony, the books of the Bible were pretty close to being finalized before the 300’s when The Da Vinci Code claimed the books of the Bible were selected. There was no political agenda or a random selection. The books which were “canonized” as official were the ones primarily being used in the first place.

The Gnostic Gospels tend to be written well after the four gospels we find in the New Testament. It is suspected that the earliest Gospel is Mark, written near 70A.D. It is believed that Matthew and Luke were written sometime after this and that they both used a copy of Mark and a document called Q which is a set of sayings that are found in Matthew and Luck, but not in Mark. Then, the gospel of John was written in the 90’s. The earliest Gnostic Gospel written was the Gospel of Thomas, which was not composed until the mid to late 100’s. This means that if one were to weigh the historical evidence, the Gnostic Gospels would be less reliable than the four accounts we have in the New Testament.

The Gnostic Gospels themselves contain material that is directly opposed to the larger teachings on the New Testament. This means that the material that most of the church used to construct its belief about God and Jesus did not match up with the teachings of the Gnostics. For example, Gnostics teach that certain people receive “special revelation” and that this is the correct knowledge. This revelation remains secrete to the world at large. The New Testament teaches the opposite. It teaches that the church is to be a light to the world and the Jesus love the whole world and revealed himself the world he loved. Gnostics also believed that the body was completely evil and spirit is completely good. The New Testament teaches that all creation is good, including the body and that God wants to redeem all of creation and restore it to its original goodness.



The Different Translations




After the Bible was officially put together, it has been translated many times and in many languages. Often when we go to the book store we look through so many different kinds of Bibles and we can easily be confused about which translation to pick. I am going to do my best to help you this morning, because my goal in this sermon is to help motivate you to go out and read your Bible or if you do not have one, for you to go out and bye one and read it.

There are essentially three types of bible translations.

1. Word for Word- NASB
2. Thought for Thought TNIV, NIV, NRSV, NLT,
3. Paraphrase- The Message, The Living Bible

The type of Bible you will need will depend on your purpose for using it. If you want a Bible that is the closest to the original wording for doing in-depth study, then a word for word transition may be best. If you want a translation that conveys the overall thought of the bible, but you can still use for a study bible, then a thought for thought translation will be good. If you want something to help you get the gist of something or help you understand the passage, then a paraphrase would be good.

Here are some warnings though: (1) I would never use a paraphrase as my study bible. I would use one as a supplemental reading to my study though. (2) Group translations are always better than single person translations because you get more than one person’s opinion on a text. (3) The study notes at the bottom of your Bible are not the bible itself and it is good to know that it may not always be correct. Here is how I use Bible translations. I use the NASB for serious bible studies. I preach from the TNIV because it is a good translation and it reads well. I use the Message sometimes as a way to give me some thoughts about how these verses could be read.



What Makes the Word, the Word?




I want to end this discussion by talking about what makes your bible the word of God. Each of the books of the Bible was written by human beings in Greek, Hebrew, or sometimes Aramaic. The books have been translated in many languages. The Bibles in front of us have been translated from Greek, Hebrew, or Aramaic into English. There are so many cultural differences between the 21st century and the world the Bible was written in. What still makes them “The Word of God?”

I believe it is the same thing that Peter and Paul discovered as the taught and shared about Jesus. The story of how God brought salvation to this world through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus is contained in the pages of this great book. For that reason, this book will never cease to be “The Word of God” and it will never stop convicting human hearts and offering grace to a broken world. As John Wesley once said,

“I want to know one thing,” —the way to heaven: how to land safe on that happy shore. God himself has condescended to teach the way. He hath written it down in a book. O give me that book! At any price, give me the book of God! I have it: here is knowledge enough for me. Let me be a man of one book.”

Sermon 6/1/08 Back to the Basics: Part One "How Words About the Word Became the Word of God

“How Words about the Word, Became the Word of God”

2 Peter 1:16-21

Some time ago, a popular book was written called The Da Vinci Code. It makes several claims about how the Bible came to be. It claims:

1. The people who were in power in the 4th century decided which books to canonize based on a political agenda. In the process, they excluded the books that depicted the truth about Jesus.
2. The books that we commonly call Gnostic Gospels are the books that were excluded, but they are the ones that contain the truth.

The reason I reference this book and movie is because it seems to contain a lot of the misnomers going around about how the Bible came to be. What I want to do today is help you understand how the Bible ACTUALLY came to be and what the Bible says about itself. I want to begin by sharing with you a passage of Scripture from 2 Peter 1:16-21.

For we did not follow cleverly devised stories when we told you about the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ in power, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. He received honor and glory from God the Father when the voice came to him from the Majestic Glory, saying, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased." We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with him on the sacred mountain.

We also have the prophetic message as something completely reliable, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation of things. For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

Peter begins by reminding his readers that the stories and things he and the other apostle’s share with the believers are not just made up, but they were eye witness accounts of Jesus. In the same way, Paul believes the words he speaks to be the words of God as well. For example, he shares in 2 Thessalonians 2:13 that he is thankful for them because they accepted his words as the words of God and not as something that was devised by human hands. It is important to understand that first and foremost, the testimony passed down from the apostles was considered to be scripture or the Word of God.

Peter then goes on to say that they also have the prophetic message, which is completely reliable. He goes as far as to say that no single prophecy of Scripture was just that person’s interpretation of things, but it has it’s origins in God as the Holy Spirit carries them along. The prophetic message is what we have contained in the Old Testament. Generally speaking, the Old Testament was available to the early Christians in most the same form it is today. Peter speaks about the Old Testament the way we generally talk about the Bible today.

In Peter’s second letter, Peter goes on to include Paul’s writing as Scripture. His point in doing so is that apparently people have misunderstood Paul’s writings or they have twisted them. Peter says they are doing this just like the do “other scripture.” The picture we have forming is that by the end of the first century, we already have a group of texts and teaching that are being circulated around to the churches that are being called “Scripture.” We have the oral teachings of Jesus, which were soon written down and circulated, the Old Testament, and the writings of Paul. By the mid second Century the four gospels were already recognized as Scripture. Before the third century Acts, 1 and 2 John, Jude and Revelation were already recognized as Scripture.

Eusebius, who is was one of the early church theologians who wrote in the late 3rd and early fourth centuries gave a threefold criteria for inclusion in the Bible.

1. Usefulness to the church
2. Apostolic origins
3. Theological consistency with books that is clearly apostolic.

As you can clearly see from Scripture’s own testimony, the books of the Bible were pretty close to being finalized before the 300’s when The Da Vinci Code claimed the books of the Bible were selected. There was no political agenda or a random selection. The books which were “canonized” as official were the ones primarily being used in the first place.

The Gnostic Gospels tend to be written well after the four gospels we find in the New Testament. It is suspected that the earliest Gospel is Mark, written near 70A.D. It is believed that Matthew and Luke were written sometime after this and that they both used a copy of Mark and a document called Q which is a set of sayings that are found in Matthew and Luck, but not in Mark. Then, the gospel of John was written in the 90’s. The earliest Gnostic Gospel written was the Gospel of Thomas, which was not composed until the mid to late 100’s. This means that if one were to weigh the historical evidence, the Gnostic Gospels would be less reliable than the four accounts we have in the New Testament.

The Gnostic Gospels themselves contain material that is directly opposed to the larger teachings on the New Testament. This means that the material that most of the church used to construct its belief about God and Jesus did not match up with the teachings of the Gnostics. For example, Gnostics teach that certain people receive “special revelation” and that this is the correct knowledge. This revelation remains secrete to the world at large. The New Testament teaches the opposite. It teaches that the church is to be a light to the world and the Jesus love the whole world and revealed himself the world he loved. Gnostics also believed that the body was completely evil and spirit is completely good. The New Testament teaches that all creation is good, including the body and that God wants to redeem all of creation and restore it to its original goodness.


The Different Translations


After the Bible was officially put together, it has been translated many times and in many languages. Often when we go to the book store we look through so many different kinds of Bibles and we can easily be confused about which translation to pick. I am going to do my best to help you this morning, because my goal in this sermon is to help motivate you to go out and read your Bible or if you do not have one, for you to go out and bye one and read it.

There are essentially three types of bible translations.

1. Word for Word- NASB
2. Thought for Thought TNIV, NIV, NRSV, NLT,
3. Paraphrase- The Message, The Living Bible

The type of Bible you will need will depend on your purpose for using it. If you want a Bible that is the closest to the original wording for doing in-depth study, then a word for word transition may be best. If you want a translation that conveys the overall thought of the bible, but you can still use for a study bible, then a thought for thought translation will be good. If you want something to help you get the gist of something or help you understand the passage, then a paraphrase would be good.

Here are some warnings though: (1) I would never use a paraphrase as my study bible. I would use one as a supplemental reading to my study though. (2) Group translations are always better than single person translations because you get more than one person’s opinion on a text. (3) The study notes at the bottom of your Bible are not the bible itself and it is good to know that it may not always be correct. Here is how I use Bible translations. I use the NASB for serious bible studies. I preach from the TNIV because it is a good translation and it reads well. I use the Message sometimes as a way to give me some thoughts about how these verses could be read.


What Makes the Word, the Word?



I want to end this discussion by talking about what makes your bible the word of God. Each of the books of the Bible was written by human beings in Greek, Hebrew, or sometimes Aramaic. The books have been translated in many languages. The Bibles in front of us have been translated from Greek, Hebrew, or Aramaic into English. There are so many cultural differences between the 21st century and the world the Bible was written in. What still makes them “The Word of God?”

I believe it is the same thing that Peter and Paul discovered as the taught and shared about Jesus. The story of how God brought salvation to this world through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus is contained in the pages of this great book. For that reason, this book will never cease to be “The Word of God” and it will never stop convicting human hearts and offering grace to a broken world. As John Wesley once said,

“I want to know one thing,” —the way to heaven: how to land safe on that happy shore. God himself has condescended to teach the way. He hath written it down in a book. O give me that book! At any price, give me the book of God! I have it: here is knowledge enough for me. Let me be a man of one book.”

Sermon 5/25/08 "Seeing the Lion with Eyes Wide Open in Prince Caspian"

“Seeing the Lion with Eyes Wide Open in Prince Caspian”
Mark 8: 22-26

As many of you know, the move Prince Caspian was released last weekend. This is the second movie in The Chronicle of Narnia series, the first being The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. The Chronicle of Narnia was written by C.S. Lewis in the 1950’s. There are seven books in the series. C.S. Lewis is largely know in the secular world for having written The Chronicle of Narnia, but in the church he is also known for writing some of the greatest Christian classics of all time. He is the author of Mere Christianity for example, which is read world wide.

The Chronicle of Narnia is often read in two different orders. The movies are being released in the order in which the books were published making Prince Caspian the second book in the series. In chronological order, Prince Caspian is actually the fourth book in the series. Often the Chronicles of Narnia are read as Christian Analogies, but Lewis actually preferred them to read as stories first. This being said, he did base the Narnia stories on the Jesus event by imagining a world that was in need of redemption and using this as a model for how that would look. Then, he adds that by seeing all seven books, you get a picture of redemption.

1. The Magician’s Nephew – creation and evil entering Narnia
2. The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe- Passion and Resurrection
3. Prince Caspian- Restoration of the true religion after corruption
4. The Horse and His Boy- The calling and conversion of a non-believer.
5. The Voyage of the Dawn Treader- The Spiritual Life Lamb.
6. The Silver Chair- Continue war against the power of darkness and rasing of an old king from the dead with Alsan’s blood.
7. The Last Battle- The coming of the Anti-Christ. The end of the world and the last judgment.

Prince Caspian picks up the story where The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe leave off. In LWW, you may remember Lucy; the youngest of the four children (Peter, Susan, Edmund, and Lucy) discovers a new land hidden in the wardrobe of the professor’s house. Eventually the other children discover Narnia as well and they learn that the White Witch has been making it “Always Winter, Never Christmas.” She is also trying to capture the four children because there has been a prophecy that four humans would bring peace to Narnia. Aslan, who represents the Jesus figure in the book, is killed by the White Witch when he dies in place of Edmund who is a traitor. Alsan is resurrected because when an innocent person dies for someone else, death is turned backwards. Aslan and the children free Narnia and become kings and queens.

Prince Caspian takes place after the children have been back in England for one year and they are on their way to boarding school when suddenly they find themselves in Narnia again. This time, hundreds of years have past by and Narnia is not the same place where they ruled as kings and queens. The evil King Miraz is now ruling because he killed the rightful kings and queens. He has raised his nephew Prince Caspian, who is the rightful king. King Miraz has tried to rid Narnia of all memory of Aslan and the old days of Narnia, but Prince Caspian’s tutor has told him all the stories.

This book primarily is about people in Narnia seeing Aslan even when he does not appear to be present. In the Bible, there is a similar theme about seeing God even in the midst of misunderstanding.


In Mark 8: 22-26 we read of a story about Jesus healing a blind man,
They came to Bethsaida, and some people brought a blind man and begged Jesus to touch him. He took the blind man by the hand and led him outside the village. When he had spit on the man's eyes and put his hands on him, Jesus asked, "Do you see anything?"

He looked up and said, "I see people; they look like trees walking around."
Once more Jesus put his hands on the man's eyes. Then his eyes were opened, his sight was restored, and he saw everything clearly. Jesus sent him home, saying, "Don't even go into the village."


As you think about this story, keep in mind that the disciples just saw Jesus feed 4000 people with 7 loaves of bread and they were worried about getting food for themselves because they forgot to bring it on the boat. Jesus says, “why are you so worried about having food… you have eyes but did not see and ears you did not hear.”

In this context, being blind means more than just not having sight, it means not having understanding. Then Mark tells the story of a blind man coming to Jesus to be healed. When Jesus spits on his eyes, the man says that he sees people, but they look like trees walking around. Jesus repeats this again causing his sight to be restored.

The passage causes me to wonder, “Why did it take Jesus two attempts to heal this man’s blindness?” This question is particularly important when you read on in Mark and see Jesus in the same position heal a blind man with one attempt. I believe when we compare this story to the disciples lack of understanding, Jesus is trying to make a point. The blind man is being compared to the disciples. Jesus could have healed him, but wanted to prove a point that the disciples understood what Jesus was saying just like this blind man could see the first time. They were only seeing partially.

In Prince Caspian, Lewis gives us a great analogy about the stages of seeing God. Trumpkin, a dwarf, has been rescued by four children and told them of the dangers against Prince Caspian, the true king of Narnia and the five of them are on their way to meet up with Prince Caspian. Narnia is unfamiliar to them now and they get lost. At a pivotal moment, when they have to make a choice to either walk along the high gorge or to go down towards the water in hopes of finding a crossing, Lucy thinks she sees Aslan and she believes Aslan is leading her to follow him among the high cliffs. The problem is that none of the other four see Aslan so they do not really believe she has seem him. Peter even asks Lucy, “Why would Aslan be invisible to us?”

We often ask similar questions of God. We wonder why some people seem to have a better understanding of God than we do. We often believe that if we can’t see or understand something then it must not really be true.

Lewis gives us some insight into why the four could not see Aslan while Lucy does. First, Edmund is the only one of the four who agrees to follow Lucy. He does this not because he knows Lucy has seen Aslan, but because he has failed to trust Lucy in the past and regretted his decision. The reason Edmond cannot see Aslan is that he simply has a lack of understanding.

Peter cannot see Aslan because of his own pride. He believes that if Aslan is really there, he ought to be the one that sees him. If he cannot see Aslan, then he must not really be there. Susan on the other hand, denies Aslan being there for connivance sake. She even confesses in the book by saying,

I really believed it was him when he warned us not to go down to the fir wood. And I really believed it was him tonight, when you woke us up. I mean, deep down inside. Or I could have, if I’d let myself. But I just wanted to get out of the woods.

Trumpkin, the dwarf did not see the Aslan because he only believes in things he can see. He does not believe in the old stories or magic. The reason we have a hard time seeing God clearly, I think, revolves around the same reasons.

1- Lack of understanding ( Edmund)
2- Pride (Peter)
3- Inconvenience (Susan)
4- Only believe what you can see (Trumpkin)

The disciples could not understand the things Jesus was telling them and doing in their midst for these same reasons.

Fortunately, both the Mark passages and Prince Caspian show that God can help us take our spiritual blindness and bring understanding. Each of the four people who originally cannot see Aslan at the beginning, eventually see him as they blindly follow him. I believe the Gospel of Mark tells us that while the disciples may not have seen fully at the beginning, they begin to see clearly as the follow Jesus, especially after the resurrection. Seeing God’s truth is gradual if you choose to grow by following Jesus.

Lewis writes in his essay called “On Obstinacy of Belief”

[A]mbiguity is not something that conflicts with faith so much as a condition which makes faith possible. When you are asked to trust you may give it or withhold it; it is senseless to say you will trust if you are given demonstrative certainty…. When demonstration is given what will be left will be simply the sort of relation which results from having trusted, or not having trusted, before it was given.

In other words, Lewis is saying that not knowing all the facts does not conflict with having faith, it makes faith possible. God will not give you the facts because those are only given as a result of how you have trusted. This is the truth told in Prince Caspian. They never see Aslan until the trust to follow him. We never see God until we begin to trust and follow him.

I want to end this message by looking closer at Lucy’s actual encounter with Aslan after she has seen him, but could not convince the others to follow him. Here is the dialogue.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3LuS3armAc

The book makes it a little clearer that Lucy should have followed Aslan regardless of what the others did. She was given sight to see him and she should have not given it to the others. Instead she should have been the leader.

Often times I see this played out in our own lives. We have been given the greatest gift, the gospel of Jesus, yet so often we allow others to lead us away from God rather than using the gift we have to lead people to Jesus. Being able to see and understand comes with a great responsibility. In the book, Lucy has to wake up the others and get them to follow her as she follows Aslan. Our call is to help others follow us as we follow Jesus.