Having just finished 29 years on the pastoral staff at Calvary Chapel Costa Mesa and having 19 years of senior pastoral experience before coming here, I think I have some perspective about what is going on. My observations are based on what I actually see and hear, and not on rumor and gossip. This does not mean I am right.

I am hearing rumors about Brian Brodersen. Though they may be rumors, people are forming their opinions of Brian based on them. I hear these accusations.

Accusation:

Brian is depreciating Bible exposition.

What is happening:

Brian is now doing 50-60 minutes of Bible exposition on Sunday mornings (currently Galatians). I like that he sticks to teaching the text. He restructured the times of the morning services to allow for more time, so he could do this. Chuck spoke about 30 minutes in more of a textual message. Brian has moved the Thru-the-Bible to Wednesday nights, where he has started over in Genesis. He has changed the Sunday evening to a prayer and worship format. This is to make way for our new home fellowships, which will be discussing the Scriptures that Brian has been teaching. I don’t think lecture is the only form of communicating Bible truth.

Accusation:

Brian is depreciating eschatology.

What is happening:

Brian just concluded an extensive series (Sunday mornings and Wednesday evenings Chuck-style) on the book of Revelation. When he was gone to Europe for several weeks, he had Don Stewart do a series on prophecy.

Accusation:

Brian is promoting women preachers.

What is happening:

I have heard that there was a church in England who had ordained one of our women missionaries, and that Brian was to be held accountable for that. This is a false rumor. She is not ordained or pastoring. Rather she has been given opportunities to share in churches and places that need the gospel and the love of Jesus. Brian is not promoting women ministers, but definitely is encouraging missionary work.

I remember when I had a woman who wanted to teach on missionary geography in our Tuesday school. Pastor Chuck’s response was “Sure. She can teach on anything.” I went back to him repeatedly on this subject, because I wanted to be sure we were on the same page. The courses were only six weeks, and he said that would be O.K. because the women were not functioning as pastor-teachers. So I had women teaching Bible and on the Christian life, because that is what I felt he wanted me to do. He always carefully scrutinized each teacher and what that teacher was teaching.

There may be others. I am just not aware of them.

From my viewpoint on site at CCCM, I see no substance to these charges. So my conclusion is that it must be an issue of power and control.

I have been saying for years that the demographic of the Calvary Chapel movement has been the Baby Boomer culture. The Baby Boomers are now past 50. The Calvary Chapels are greying. If we don’t adapt our style to minister to the new generation, while holding strongly to our values, we will die; and our values will not be perpetuated. Brian is to be commended because he has a vision for this. We have had controversy here at CCCM, because some of the older generation felt we should stick with their preferences. My feeling is that my generation should be mature enough to recognize that our responsibility is to pass our values on to the next generation.

We should be pursuing love and unity, and not the works of the flesh.

An important term for the Christian is “faith.” But what are we talking about when we speak of faith? So often our thinking gets cloudy as we focus on faith.

While faith may be directed toward man, or things, or ideas, in this writing, we are looking at a biblical faith that is directed towards God.

God requires faith for a relationship with Himself. “But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him” (Hebrews 11:6). So, we need to understand faith.

What Faith Is Not

Let’s start by looking at some of the false concepts of faith.

Faith is not an Aladdin’s Lamp: An old legend tells how a young man got hold of a magic lantern, one of those looking like a gravy boat. Out of smoke coming from the oil wick appeared a genie who said, “Your wish is my command.” Some say that since we are the King’s kids, we should get whatever we want. But with God, the requests granted are those conforming to God’s will, not our will.

Faith is not hoping really hard: Sometimes Christians feel that by exuding hope vibes from deep within them that God will tune in to fulfill their human desires. You may have the fans of two football teams sitting on the opposite side of the stadium, each hoping and praying that their team will win. Does God give victory to the fans who pray and hope the hardest?

Faith is not positive thinking: Sometimes positive thinking substitutes for faith. While a positive, mental attitude certainly beats a negative, mental attitude, we can’t name it faith. Positive thinking ultimately depends on man with his self-effort bringing glory to himself. Faith centers in God, depends upon Him and brings glory to Him.

Faith is not intellectual assent: Mental assent may begin faith, but it does not go far enough. While we may agree that something is true, we find that faith involves response as well as mental agreement.

We have two basic translations of the Greek word pistis into English. One group comes from the Old French – faith. The other comes from the Anglo-Saxon/Old English – belief. Since both words translate the same Greek word, they must mean exactly the same thing. The verb form of belief is “believe.” Believe requires a “whom” or “what” after it. It necessitates a response.

That brings us to the other side to faith to complete our definition.

What Faith Is

So then, what is a biblical, God-focused faith?

Try this definition on for size:

Faith is hearing God speak and responding to Him with attitudes of dependence upon Him and actions of obedience to Him.

In this definition we find two sides – God’s side and man’s side. God initiates and then man responds.

F.F. Bruce put it well, “Faith consists simply in taking God at His Word and directing life accordingly.”

Faith’s origin: Faith begins with a God who speaks. “So then faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God” (Romans 10:17). Faith does not originate in our feelings or desires, but rather in what God has to say.

Paul speaks of the “hearing of faith” (Galatians 3:2, 5). Faith fails when God is silent.

Faith’s receiver: The heart responds to the voice of God. The heart of man does not function as the seat of feelings, but rather, it is the control center of the inner man connecting with the mind and the will. “For with the heart one believes to righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made to salvation” (Romans 10:10).

Now we see two ways in which a response activates the message given by God. If the hearer stops in this place, he has given mental assent, which doesn’t count as real faith. Faith obeys what God has directed and trusts Him for the ability to do it.

Faith’s dependence: One way is to depend totally on God for what He promises or asks us to do. God-dependence begins when self-dependence ends. Sometimes self-dependence comes when we suffer and see the effects of this fallen world crushing our human resources.

Faith’s obedience: The essential response of faith is to do what God tells us to do. Sometimes that is simply to believe Him. We find ourselves in difficult circumstances, and what He wants is to trust Him totally. But at other times He gives us a task or manifests an attitude that could even be difficult from the human perspective.

Faith Illustrated

Faith is illustrated in the great faith chapter in Hebrews 11. Here we have those who pleased God by walking in faith. In each case we find an individual who heard God speak and responded with attitudes of dependence on Him and actions of obedience to Him.

It is insightful to look at each of the characters and ask four questions. It might take a little imagination to do so.

• What did God say?
• How might the person have prayed?
• What attitudes toward God did the person have?
• What did the person do?

We note that faith is not something that was accomplished overnight but took time to come to fruition. Faith and patience function as power twins. “Imitate those who through faith and patience inherit the promises” (Hebrews 6:12). “For you have need of endurance, so that after you have done the will of God, you may receive the promise” (Hebrews 10:36).

We wait on the Lord like a servant with an ear tuned towards the master’s desire, however it is expressed.

The Greek word pistis most frequently is translated as “faith” or “belief.” But it is also translated in another way depending on the context. We can in places translate it “faithful.” And who is the one who is faithful? The faithful person is the one who hears God’s voice and responds obediently depending on the Lord to do the work.

“And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth…For the law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came through Jesus Christ” (John 1:14,17).

In the Old Testament, the manifestation of the glory of God filled people with fear. But when God took upon Himself human flesh, people had the opportunity to view the glory of God in a new way. The opportunity was given not just to view the glory of God from a trembling distance, but also to draw near and to observe it closely. And today, as we observe Jesus, two characteristics of His glory that stand out are grace and truth.

Jesus Demonstrated Grace and Truth

Jesus took on human form. We call this the incarnation. The Greek term for word is logos. We can illustrate logos by two-way communication. In communication, you have a sender and a receiver. Communication links these two…Logos equals communication. God communicated to man by sending Jesus as the Logos communication.

In this human form, Jesus chose to tabernacle with us. The Greek word for tabernacling, skenoo, literally means, “to pitch a tent.” For a season, Jesus pitched his tent among us that we might understand what God is like.

This revelation of God gave us a glimpse of the glory of God. “We beheld His glory.” “Glory,” when applied to God, represents all of God’s attributes — love, omnipotence, holiness, immutability, goodness, wisdom and so many more.

Two attributes are highlighted in John 1:14, 17, to show all that God is. In contrast to the Law of Moses, which gave a limited perspective of God, Jesus Christ came to manifest “grace and truth.”

The grace factor: Grace gives us what we don’t deserve. It can be called “favor.” If we work, we earn a wage. If we win in sports, we get a prize. If we achieve academically, we get an award. But grace is like none of these. Grace demonstrates unconditional love. Grace does not require good behavior in order to show love. Grace is the work of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer. “‘Not by might nor by power, but by My Spirit,’ says the Lord of hosts”(Zechariah 4:6). This grace work contrasts with legal striving. Grace is the opposite of the law. Law is performance-based. Its basic message is “You don’t measure up.” Grace represents acceptance.

The truth factor: Pilate asked the eternal question, “What is truth?” Truth means nothing can be hidden; everything is disclosed. Everything stands fully in the light. Truth is absolute and can be illustrated by the 2+2=4 in math. It always is the same. The sign for truth in sign language is the hand making a straight line. A straight line is always the shortest distance between two points. Curved lines take many forms. Truth is integrity. It can be counted on. It is a constant. Falsehood reveals deceit and dishonesty. When truth is missing, trust also does not exist. Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life” (John 14:6). We can trust Him, because He is the truth.

We Reflect Grace and Truth

The moon has no light of its own, but it reflects the light of the sun. The incarnate Jesus showed us what God is really like. As the followers of Jesus, we must reflect Him to the world around us, demonstrating the character of Jesus full of grace and truth.

Reflecting grace: Grace grants favor to the undeserving. We are all prodigals from God, but just as the father in the parable of the prodigal son received his son with open arms, so God receives people even though all have wandered.

Grace gives freedom. This can be reflected in marriage. How much control should a man have over his wife? He should have as much control as Christ exercises over the church. Christ frees up the church to make choices. Many husbands act like the law, conveying the message, “You fall short. You don’t measure up.” We can best start a grace life by doing it in the home. By showing grace, we communicate that the relationship is more important than our personal preferences.

By showing grace to others, we communicate acceptance rather than rejection. We show grace, because Christ has shown grace to us. “So accept each other (show grace) just as Christ has accepted you; then God will be glorified” (Romans 15:7).

Reflecting truth: Truth may be described as total integrity. In our relationships, nothing should be in darkness, but all should be exposed to the light. We must be honest with ourselves, honest with others and honest with God. We reflect truth when we are true to our word. We don’t bend the truth or make promises that we don’t keep. This means we are true to our covenants, those formal promises we make, such as in marriage.

Reflecting truth means that we are consistent to what is right, even when we are alone and no one is watching. It also means that our private life is consistent with our public life. This means that our behavior with our family in the car, going to church, is the same as our behavior when we get to church and are with the church family. We may say it is not a matter of knowing the truth, or speaking of things that are true, but rather that we are being the truth.

So how do we do it? The old saying is that we become like what we look upon with approval. We need to keep our eyes on the Son of God as revealed in Scripture, so that we reflect Him and His grace and truth to others.

The Trials

When we think of spiritual warfare, we think of trials. But getting rid of trials is not the victory. The true victory consists of how we respond to the trials. The warfare plays out in the battlefield of the mind. Trials confront us in many forms. They include health issues, financial issues, relationship issues and many others.

In 2 Corinthians 10, Paul faced the stress of attacks when his opponents slandered him. These attacks affected Paul emotionally.

Paul also endured physical attacks. He carried the scars of persecution in his body. These included the 40 stripes minus one that he had received, the marks of three times being beaten by rods and stoning (2 Corinthians 11:24,25). These scars were physical. His trials were both emotional and physical. The trial that Paul experienced with his enemies becomes representative of the various trials that we experience. The victory he achieved in spiritual warfare instructs us in the way we can achieve victory in the trials we endure.

The Testing of Trial

Two Greek verbs, dokimadzo and peiradzo, can be translated by such words as “try,” “tempt” and “test.” The common denominator between these two words is the concept of testing. It is like the Lexus manufacturer putting a newly manufactured car on the racetrack to see what it will do. He is not expecting it to fail. The difficult happenings in life are testings. They demonstrate what is in us. We basically can respond either in faith or in the flesh.

The Response

Paul responded to his trial with the fruit of the spirit, pleading with his detractors by the meekness and gentleness of Christ. In doing so, Paul demonstrated that he won in spiritual warfare. “Now I, Paul, myself am pleading with you by the meekness and gentleness of Christ—who in presence am lowly among you, but being absent am bold toward you” (2 Corinthians 10:1). If they did not respond to his soft approach, he would come at them in a hard way, disciplining his enemies for their disobedience. “…And being ready to punish all disobedience when your obedience is fulfilled” (2 Corinthians 10:6).

The Victory

Victory in spiritual warfare is not achieved by getting rid of the trial. So often as we approach spiritual warfare, we feel that we become champions when God removes the trial from our lives. We believe that, to be victorious, the illness must be replaced with health, the relationship restored, the enemy quit saying bad things about us, our ship arriving with a lot of money to pay our bills. But that is in the realm of the physical.

The Nature of Fighting

The fighting is not physical, but spiritual. Our circumstances may be of a physical nature, but the spiritual world for us is in the mind; and our minds connect the intellect with the spiritual. Paul says that we “walk in the flesh.” This means that we try to seek victory by operating on our own resources, utilizing our mental and physical abilities. But to be successful in the spiritual realm, it means we do not rely on our own strength; and on what we can do.

“But I beg you that when I am present I may not be bold with that confidence by which I intend to be bold against some, who think of us as if we walked according to the flesh” (2 Corinthians 10:2). “For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war according to the flesh” (2 Corinthians 10:3).

Our Kind of Weapon

When we say “spiritual warfare,” the emphasis is on the word “spiritual.” This is in contrast to our human abilities. “For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God” (2 Corinthians 10:4).

Our weapons are not our human resources. Paul describes our resources as “carnal.” What is the difference between “carnal” in verse four and “flesh” in verse three? None. They both translate the Greek word sarks. I once had a professor who said you can remember “carnal” by chili-con-carne, which is “chili with flesh.” “Carnal” comes from the French-Latin, “fleshly” from the Old-English-Germanic, but they mean the same thing.

The weapons to achieve spiritual victory must be spiritual. They are mighty in God. God is the source in contrast to our human ability. “Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord and in the power of His might” (Eph. 6:10).

The Battlefield

The battlefield of our fight is not in our circumstances. The fight takes place in the mind. The mind is perhaps where the intellect interfaces with the spiritual. Sometimes Satan is directly involved in our conflict. Some biblical incidents reflect that. For example, Satan put the betrayal of Jesus into the mind of Judas (John 13:2).

The Fight in the Mind

“For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds, casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ…” (2 Corinthians 10:4-5).

The strategy is to tear down strongholds of our minds by God’s might.

The strongholds the Greeks knew were fortresses within Greek cities that were impossible for the enemy to penetrate. In Athens, the stronghold was the Acropolis where the Parthenon stood on the highest point in the city. In the city of Corinth, it was the Acrocorinth, high on the bluff overlooking the city. Acro in both names means “high place.” It was the place that was the most difficult to defeat.

The spiritual high places consist of thinking manifesting arrogance against godly values. One place where this takes place is when the minds of Christian students in secular universities are changed as they become brainwashed with ideas that are completely opposed to biblical values. Some professors ridicule any student who speaks of biblical absolutes.

Another place high things arrogantly go against godly truth and wisdom is television, particularly soup operas and sitcoms that scoff at godly sexual values. Christians laugh and absorb perspectives into their minds that should not be a part of their lives. The same could be said of the Internet. Even the news, with its politically correct thinking, can implant views that are contrary to God’s way of thinking. Victory comes as we assault our thoughts that are contrary to godly thinking. In this passage, the winning in spiritual warfare is not by shouting, “I rebuke you Satan,” but by using God’s strength to cancel our thinking that is contrary to His thinking.

While God may make our trials go away, true spiritual victory comes as we have a godly perspective on what is happening to us, whether the trial goes away or not. The true solution is to reprogram our thinking with a renewed mind, thinking God’s thoughts after Him.

When looking for a New Testament model for church leadership in the early church, we find a plurality of elders. Nowhere in the New Testament do we find a board of elders.

All believers in a city were called “the church.”

The believers in each city were called the church of that city.
• The church in Jerusalem (Acts 8:1)
• The church in Corinth (I Cor. 1:2)
• The church of the Thessalonians (I Thess. 1:1)
• The church in Corinth (1 Cor. 1:2)
• The churches of Revelation (Rev. 2,3)

A Plurality of Elders Oversaw the Church in Each City

A plurality of elders (also known as overseers/bishops or pastors – Acts 20:17-28), led each church.
• In Acts 20:16-17, Paul called the elders (plural) of the church (singular) of the Ephesians.
• In Titus 1:5, Paul instructed Titus to appoint elders (plural) in every city (singular) of Crete.
• In 1 Timothy 5:17, Paul referred to “the elders (plural) who rule well” at the church (singular) at Ephesus.

The Early Church Met in Small House Groups

The church did not assemble all together in a building. We find them
meeting in house churches.
• Fellowships met in the houses of Aquila and Priscilla in both Corinth (I Cor. 16:19) and Rome (Rom. 16:3,5).
• In Rome, an assembly also met at the house of Gaius (Rom 16:23).
• The households of Aristobulus (Rom. 16:10) and Narcissus (Rom. 16:11) as well as the two groups mentioned in Romans 16:14,15 were also probably house churches.
• The church in Laodicea met in the house of Nymphas (Col. 4:15).
• A church met in the house of Philemon (Philemon 1:2).
• The meeting at Lydia’s house probably indicated it was a place of fellowship (Acts 16:40).
The term “church” designated not only the whole network of assemblies in a community, but also each house church in that network was called “church.”

Each House Church Had an Elder

• Each of these house fellowships had a leader who was designated the elder. In secular literature, the term “overseer/bishop” (episkopos) always designated an administrator, who had his own area of administration. These overseers did not make group decisions.
• In listing qualifications of leadership, Paul uses the singular word “overseer” (episkopos, 1 Tim. 3:2) but the plural word “deacons” (diakonoi, 1 Tim. 3:8).
• When Peter asked the elders to “be shepherds of God’s flock that is under your care, serving as overseers” (1 Pet. 5:2), he spoke to a culture that knew how shepherds functioned. Each night, the shepherds would bring the flocks together into the night enclosure. During the day, each shepherd took his personal flock out to pasture.

The Elders Did Ministry Together

• Elders prayed for healing (James 5).
• They laid hands on men for service (Acts 15:22; 1 Tim. 4:14).
• They worked together to “refute” those who opposed sound doctrine (Titus 1:9; Acts 20:30-31).
While we have no record of elders coming together to talk and make decisions about ministry, they did cooperate to do ministry.
But what about the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15? In Acts 15, we find apostles and elders functioning as a large council (not a church board). This council was under the strong leadership of James. When the decision was made, James said, “Wherefore I decide,” (dio ego krino ) with an emphasis on the “I.” Though he had consulted with the council, his decision became the decision of the group (Acts 15:19).

The Overseer of Elders

From the earliest days of the church, one elder was recognized as having authority over a network of churches in a given place. He was the overseer of the other elders. Each of these overseers had only one geographical church under his authority — not a group of churches. These included:
• Clement of Rome ( -99 AD) was seen as the bishop overseeing the house churches in Rome.
• Ignatious (ca. 35/50 – ca. 110 AD) had oversight over the Christians in Antioch.
• Polycarp (69-155 AD) oversaw the church at Smyrna.
• Timothy (ca.19 – ca. 97 AD) became the overseer of the church of Ephesus. At some point, John the Elder (probably the apostle) assumed that duty.
Ignatious and Polycarp overlapped the apostolic age and made it clear that their doctrine and practice were in line with the apostles. They were never accused in their days of introducing new practices that led the church away from apostolic order.

Origin of the Board Form of Eldership

Can anyone give evidence that elders ever functioned as a decision-making board before John Calvin? John Knox studied under Calvin and carried the eldership concept back to Scotland in 1559. The Scotts were rebelling against all things monarchial English. This new approach to church government fit in with their desire to get away from the hierarchy of the English church.

Some observations about the plurality of eldership:
• If we seek to reduplicate the exact form of church government of the early church, we need to go back to house churches, each with an overseer.

• Throughout Scripture, God exercised leadership through an anointed man. In the Old Testament, God raised up man after man, beginning with Moses and then with the judges and kings. Later, the apostles each had their own place of influence.

• The board form of church government is not strictly a group of equals each carrying the same weight. One or two of the members will usually dominate the group, and the others will more or less go along with him/them. So, you come back to a single leader, but rather than God’s anointing, it will be by force of personality.

• For good growth in a board-led church, the pastor needs credibility, so that the board let’s him lead rather than making him follow.

Eldership Today

The culture of the early church was that of intense persecution. That led to the house churches. We are not under the same persecution, so do we need to retain a church structure for persecution survival? Nothing in Scripture mandates that we follow that pattern for church government.

Our congregations are larger than house churches. So do we base our government on individual house churches as a model? Or do we look at the citywide network of house churches as the model?

Either way, it appears that the house church had a single leader, and the network of churches had a leader.

Many find it confusing that in some places the Quran encourages peace, and in others it says to “kill the infidels.”

The Quran was not written in chronological order. It takes some sorting out, but when a particular surah was written is important. Mohammed wrote the Quran in two phases:

THE MECCA PHASE 609-622 AD

The period when Mohammed’s followers were in the minority and had to ingratiate themselves with Christians and Jews.

THE MEDINA PHASE 622- 632 AD

The period when Mohammed’s followers were gaining complete control over the lands where they lived. This period divides into an earlier and a later phase. The first part is transitional and the later phase is when Jihadism comes into play.

ABROGATION

Mohammed declared that his later (Medina) writings nullified his early writings (Mecca) when they were contradictory. Suras 2:106, 16:101, 13:39, 17:86.

A good website on abrogation in Islam is https://www.meforum.org

We may say that true Islam is not represented by Mecca Moslems, but rather by the (later) Medina Moslems. In America our contact with Islam would be with Mecca Moslems. However, we need to see what Islam does when it dominates. For example, what freedom does Saudi Arabia allow Christians and Jews in practicing their faiths? Some say Moslem extremists are aberrant, not the real Moslem. But these fundamentalist Moslems take Mohammed literally. They may be the truest Moslems.

Christians are challenged to love all Moslems, but that does not mean that we ignore their motivations.

Premillennialism teaches that Jesus will physically return to the earth where He will reign for a literal one thousand year period. The major contrasting view is called amillennialism, which holds the view that the church itself fulfills all the Old Testament promises about a future age of peace. “Millennial” comes from the Latin meaning one thousand. The prefix “pre” means “before” and the prefix “a” means “no.”

This paper looks at three of several lines of support for a millennial rule in which Christ reigns over the empire of this world from David’s throne in Jerusalem.

• A literal interpretation of Revelation 20:1-10 demands a one thousand year period in which Satan is bound and Christ rules the Messianic Kingdom and.

Even though this is the only chapter in the Bible that mentions one thousand years, the term is referred to six times here. The book of the Revelation uses many symbols, but time designations are never used symbolically.

Rev. 20 is important because it shows the length of time of the Messianic Kingdom. But premillennialism is not a one text doctrine. Other passages describe it as well.

PSALM 72 describes Messiah ruling over the earth.

ZECHARIAH 14 tells us that the Lord will be “King over all the earth” from the time His feet stand on the Mount of Olives.

ISAIAH 65 speaks of extremely long life, such as we don’t experience today.

ACTS 1:6 speaks of a furture restoration of the kingdom to Israel.

REV. 5:10 predicts that twenty-four elders will be in some way kings and priests of our God, reigning on earth.

ISA. 24:21-23 predicts that the kings of the earth will be punished when the Lord of hosts reigns in Jerusalem.

Other passages speak of this time period as well. This time, which we call the millennium, is different from this present age and different from the eternal state.

• The biblical covenants support the premillennial view.

God makes a series of covenants with His people. A covenant is a contract or an agreement. It may be two-sided (conditional) or one-sided (unconditional). Two of God’s unconditional covenants deal with the subject of premillennialism.

THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT

God covenanted a land and a seed to Abraham. The covenant is called “eternal” (Gen. 17:13; Gen. 17:19; 1 Chron. 16:16,17; Psa. 105:9,10). Part of the Abrahamic covenant states that the land would continue as Abraham’s descendants eternal possession (Gen. 17:8). The Lord acted out a one sided ritual to inaugurate the covenant, indicating that He would carry out the responsibility for its fulfilment, independent of man’s doings.

The covenant is repeated to Abraham, even after seasons of disobedience on Abraham’s part.

– Abraham forsook the promised land to go to Egypt, where he put the mother of the promised seed in jeopardy to the Pharoah (Gen. 12). Nevertheless, God confirmed the covenant to Abraham (Gen. 15).

– Abraham faltered in his faith and produced a son by Hagar, once again ignoring the role that Sarah was to play (Gen. 16). Again God reaffirmed His covenant (Gen. 17).

– Abraham erred again with Abimelech of Gerar (near the Gaza strip today). He repeated a similar action regarding Sarah, as he had with Pharoah (Gen 20). Nevertheless, God restated His covenant (Gen. 22).

THE DAVIDIC COVENANT

The promises of the Davidic Covenant support the premillennial view. God had promised that his house and his kingdom would be established forever (2 Sam. 7:12-16). Gabriel announced to Mary that her child would fulill the promise to David, that He would rule David’s kingdom forever.

The Messiah will reign over Israel from His capital in Jerusalem. His rule will reach from from the river of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates—(Gen. 15:18).

Israel will reign over a worldwide empire. We know how various empires have ruled over other nations, such as Egypt, Babylon, Persia, Greece, or Rome. Christ’s kingdom will be a world-wide empire, but He will have no fear of rebellion, as occurred with the other empires.

Some have attempted to see Solomon as the fulfillment of this promise. But Solomon had no permanent possession of the land. He collected tribute only; he had a temporary lordship. He never reallly reigned from the river of Egypt to the Euphrates. Hundreds of years after Solomon’s time, Scriptures abound in promises of israel’s future possession of land.

• Romans 11 indicates that God has yet a purpose for His people.

Paul raises the question, “Has God cast away His people?” i.e. the Jews.
His emphatic answer is “Certainly not.(Romans 11:1)” He argues that in every age God has had a loyal remnant. In this age the church has been grafted into Israel. But this does not mean that God is finished with Israel as a national entity. Contrary to the view that the church has replaced Israel because of its unbelief, God declares He has a plan for His people.

As Paul draws that core section of Romans in chapters 9-11 to a conclusion, he states of Israel, “Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers (Romans 11:28).” Though presently in a state of alienation from God, the Jewish people are in a covenant relation with God because of the Fathers. The Fathers were Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. God made promises to them that He must fulfill.

When the Deliverer comes out of Zion, all Israel will be saved (Rom. 11:26).

The gifts and the calling of God are without repentance; therefore, they are sure and irrevocable Romans 11:29). They will come to pass.

Revelation 20 speaks of a specific one thousand years for the Messianic Kingdom. Jesus Christ’s coming will establish this kingdom. The Abrahamic Covenant anticipates a land for Israel and a seed. The Davidic Covenant tells us that the seed is the Messiah. Romans 11 tells us emphatically that God will fullfill His covenant promises to Israel.

The day is coming when the Messiah will reign from Mt. Zion in Jerusalem (Psalm 2:6-9) over the nations of the earth (Psa. 22:27-31). Jerusalem will be the hub of the earth and wars will have ceased. The world will recognize The King.

In 1 Corinthians 15:12-20 Paul states this truth in a way that shows what our lives would be if Jesus Christ had not risen from the dead.

The pagans had contaminated the Corinthians with their belief that there was no resurrection of the dead. Paul sees Christ’s resurrection as a guarantee that believers would experience life after death. He approaches the issue negatively by showing that they would miss so much, if the resurrection were not true.

However, let us take a look at this scripture by restating Paul’s argument from the positive point of view. The message of the resurrection states that because Jesus Christ lives, we too shall live.

1. The resurrection gives significance to our preaching.

Preaching provides the means for us to become Christians. “And if Christ is not risen, then our preaching is empty” (1 Cor. 15:14). The essence of this message is that Jesus Christ died, was buried and rose again. In this proclamation, the resurrection validates Christ‘s death on the cross as sufficient to make the Gospel the Gospel. We do not have a puny Gospel, shriveled up because it has no reality. Rather, our Gospel is robust and full of substance.

2. The resurrection gives substance to our faith.

Our faith is a response to what God says and does. Our faith is not some subjective vibration that we exude towards God to get what we want. Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God. The resurrection is the basis of faith. This faith centers on the person of Jesus Christ. Not only did He come as a real man, but also the resurrection proclaims Him to be God the Son with power. He was “declared to be the Son of God with power according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead” (Rom. 1:4).

3. The resurrection gives confidence to its proclaimers that their message is true.

“Yes, and we are found false witnesses of God, because we have testified of God that He raised up Christ, whom He did not raise up—if in fact the dead do not rise. For if the dead do not rise, then Christ is not risen” (vv. 15-16).

Jesus boldly predicted that after He was killed that in three days He would rise again (Matt. 17:22; Mark 8:32; Matt. 17:22; Luke 9:22; John 2:18-22).

After the resurrection His followers affirmed that it had happened just as He had said it would. The life we experience with Jesus in our human existence brings rich rewards, but the best is yet to come.

For the believer the blessed hope is that we are going to be with Him, exalting Him as our Savior and doing that in His presence. We anticipate the time when we will know a deeper relationship with Him. We will give praise to the One who loved us and died for us. His resurrection guarantees that we will be with Him forever enjoying Him.

The great word is that Jesus Christ has risen from the dead and because One has risen from the dead, others, too, can experience resurrection. The resurrection of Jesus proves the reality of the resurrection of all believers. God submits the resurrection as evidence that He really intervenes on behalf of mankind and that his messengers relay what is true.

4. The resurrection makes possible a real life apart from sin.

In contrast to our faith being empty, as indicated in verse 14, we have here a different word in verse 17 that emphasizes a lack of results. “And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile…” Yet we see a faith that has paid the penalty that we deserved for our sins. Resurrection focuses on life, in contrast to the separation of death that comes from our sins. The finished work of the Lord Jesus on the cross brings a right relationship with God, but it is the resurrection that has the positive effect of identifying us with the life of the Savior. “For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life (Rom. 5:10).

5. The resurrection gives hope that we will see again loved ones who have died.

“Then also those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished” (v.18).
The believer is not like the cynic who says that the cycle of life ends in death. In the face of human death the believer anticipates with hope that once again he will enjoy interaction with those he has loved on earth. Jesus’ contacts with His disciples and others after His resurrection provide the model for believers experiencing reunion after death.

6. The resurrection gives hope that we will see Christ again.

If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men the most pitiable. But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. But each one in his own order: Christ the first fruits, afterward those who are Christ’s at His coming (vv.19-23).

The life we experience with Jesus in our human existence brings rich rewards, but the best is yet to come. For the believer the blessed hope is that we are going to be with Him, exalting Him as our Savior and doing so in His presence.

We anticipate the time when we will have a deeper relationship with Him. We will give praise to the One who loved us and died for us. His resurrection guarantees that we will be with Him forever enjoying Him.

The great truth is that Jesus Christ has risen from the dead and because One has risen from the dead, others, can also experience resurrection.

If there were no resurrection the believer would be such a complete loser; yet the believer is a victor! Jesus Christ did come back conquering death and the grave, promising us resurrection as well.

Mary spoke these words, perplexed by the news the angel gave her, “How can this be, since I do not know not a man?”

People have uttered these words throughout history. “How can this be?” That is why the doctrine of the virgin birth is integral to the Christian faith. Men need to know that this is true. Jesus was a great man with god-like characteristics. He could do marvelous works: He could heal the sick. He could control the weather. He could even bring the dead back to life. But Scripture says He was more than a great man – Jesus Christ was Immanuel – God with us. In order for Him to be God incarnate, Jesus would have had to have a supernatural birth.

One reason why the virgin birth is important is that it provides the basis for the doctrine of the deity of Jesus Christ. The ordinary procreative process brings about the beginning of a new personality. If Jesus did not have a virgin birth His birth would be purely human, He would not be God. But Jesus did not get His personality through birth. The conception of Jesus occurred through a work of the Holy Spirit. In response to Mary’s question, “How will this be, since I am a virgin?” (Luke 1:34 ESV), Gabriel declares, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy—the Son of God” (Luke 1:35 ESV). The angel encourages Joseph to not fear marrying his betrothed: “that which is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 1:20 ESV). Matthew declares that the virgin “was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 1:18 ESV).

These Scriptures indicate that Mary was chosen and the Holy Spirit in a unique way created the miracle of the birth of Christ. Mary provided the human side, while the Holy Spirit in some way provided the divine side. Jesus Christ did not begin with His earthly birth. His divine side existed from all eternity. In John 1:1 we read, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” At the beginning of time, Jesus was already there. Paul adds that he had the form of God but chose to come in the likeness of men (Philippians 2:6,7). Unlike all other men, Jesus Christ had an eternal preexistence. If His conception had been like that of all other people, no provision would have been made for Him to be God, as well as man. The virgin birth was the means whereby the divine nature could be wedded to the human nature so that truly Jesus Christ could be the God-man.

Another reason why the virgin birth is essential to Christianity is that it made it possible for the Christ to be the sinless Savior. If Christ had a normal purely human birth, then he would have been a natural-born sinner like all the others and deserving of the condemnation of God. All other men are under the condemnation of death. One of the most important theological verses of the Scripture is Romans 5:12. It states “Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned”. Jesus Christ comes in contrast to the one man, Adam, who provided the genetic fatherhood that caused all men to be sinners. The Christ had a divine side that enabled Him to identify with man, but to yet be totally separate from men.

The law did not have power to save men from the death penalty. Only one who was fully God, and had a unique conception that set Him apart from all other men could do what was needed to rescue men from sin. Romans 8:3 says, “For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh,” He was like men. He looked like a man, talked like a man, had the feelings of a man. But He was different. Sin was not in any way a part of His life. He did not sin. Jesus had a human nature, but it was a human nature that was impacted by his deity, making him the sinless One. If He had sin in Him, He would have to have His sins atoned for in some way and could never be the sinner’s substitute.

Finally, the third reason the virgin birth is essential is that the very trustworthiness of the Bible depends upon it. The Gospel writers believed that Jesus Christ was born of a virgin. Matthew writes that Joseph had a dream where an angel said to him, “the virgin shall be with child and bear a Son” (Matt. 1:23). Luke says that the angel Gabriel encountered “a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph and her name was Mary. He announced to her that she would have a son. She responded, “How can this be, since I do not know a man?” She was amazed that she could be pregnant when she was still a virgin.

So both Matthew and Luke treat the virgin birth of Jesus as fact. Could it be that these writers had fallen victims to deceit? Perhaps Joseph lied when he told about his dream that an angel had spoken to him. Had Mary also lied in her report? Or it could be that the writers themselves were deliberately lying? If the account did not occur exactly as stated, it is not to be trusted. If we cannot trust what Matthew and Luke wrote, the Scriptures, the foundation on which we rest our faith, is undermined.

No other person ever lived on earth like Him. His unique birth was evidence that He was truly God in human form. Jesus had a fully divine nature that made it possible for Him to be our Savior. To save sinners was His mission in coming to earth. Through His birth we maintain the integrity of the Scriptures, because they declare Him to be virgin-born. The virgin birth is essential to our faith.

Coming from a strong cessationist background, I assumed that the sign gifts in the early church had died out soon after the apostolic age. But in my college years I had some occasions where I observed a vitality of faith in those claiming to have a charismatic experience. Their lives showed that Jesus Christ was very real to them. I began to be troubled with 1 Corinthians 14:39, “Therefore, brothers, desire earnestly to prophesy, and do not forbid to speak with tongues.” A straightforward, literal interpretation of the verse would indicate that even today we should not discourage people from using the gift of tongues.

The Perfect Text

The controversy regarding tongues involves the interpretation of the word “perfect” in 1Cor. 13: 10, “but when that which is perfect has come, then that which is in part will be done away.” There are several interpretations of this term. One of the main views is eschatological, a view that sees the “perfect” as referring to the second coming of Jesus Christ or to His Kingdom. Another view states that the word “perfect” refers to the completion of the biblical canon. The first view is held by many, if not most, cessationists as well as continuationists. The completed canon view is very recent and seems to be held exclusively by cessationists. The earliest source I could find advocating this view was W.E. Vine in 1951. (W.E. Vine, 1 Corinthians [London: Oliphants, 1951], 184)”

A Case for Continuationism

Though many arguments support the term “perfect” as referring to the revelation of Jesus Christ at the end of the age or to His Kingdom, the brevity of this article causes me to limit it to a few of the considerations that could receive more attention in this debate.

One consideration is the idea that miracles do not run uniformly through all of Scripture. While we find occasional miracles, such as the great fish with Jonah and the angel with Sennacherib’s troops, most miracles occur in three separate time periods. The first is the period of Moses and Aaron; the second is with Elijah and Elisha, and the final period is that of Christ and the apostles. Each wave of miracles denoted a major turning point in biblical history. The signs of Moses and Aaron marked the time of the transition from the pre-Law era to the time of the Law. The signs of Elijah and Elisha perhaps designated the time when God was going to leave Israel to face judgment. The signs of Christ and the apostles signify the turning point from the time of the Mosaic law to the time of the church. (We might note that those who most strongly resisted Christ’s miracles were the Pharisees, the most ardent students of the Old Testament.)

We have intimations that with the second coming of Christ we will have a new season of miraculous signs. This will include the raising of the two witnesses from the dead in the book of Revelation and the resurgence of prophecy according to Joel 2:28-32.. Therefore, it should not be surprising to discover a new round of signs anticipating Christ’s return. Many use an historical argument that sign gifts died out at the end of the apostolic era, but the fading away would be consistent with the way miracles have come and gone in the rest of the Bible.

Another consideration is the order of the three gifts mentioned in verse 10: prophecy, tongues and knowledge. The text states that prophecy and knowledge will be brought to an end and tongues will cease for themselves. Since the gift of tongues comes between prophecy and knowledge, it would seem that these three gifts all end at the same time. If the cessation of the gift of tongues occurred before the others, then it should be first. The change in wording seems to be purely stylistic.

A third consideration is the idea that the function of prophecy and knowledge, as well as tongues, seems to be different from that of canonical Scripture. The Bible was given as truth to benefit the entire body of Christ. Since the close of the canon, we have no normative material essential for every one. The prophetic and the knowledge gifts seem to be designed to minster to individuals and to groups, but not the whole church. They encourage, rebuke and give specific guidance, while never contradicting the standard of the Word. We find God speaking all the way through the Scripture.

Tongues serve a different purpose. They do not communicate to man. Paul specifically says that they are addressed to God. “For he who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God…” (I Cor. 14:2). “For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prays, but my understanding is unfruitful” (1 Cor. 14:14). The reason that tongues is assigned a lesser role to knowledge and prophecy may be that the knowledge and prophecy gifts are communications from God to man, whereas tongues are a Spirit-prompted response from man in worship and praise to God.

Just reading Bible will not fulfill the specific functions of prophecy, knowledge and tongues. If God has become mute since the Scripture is complete, then all we have is a recording. It is the difference between getting a letter and talking with someone face to face. When Christ returns, we will have direct access to Him and the intermediary gifts will not be needed. The function of the spiritual gifts is only temporary and partial compared to what it will be to have that full experience of being in the presence of God. This is expressed in the phrase “face-to-face” in 1 Cor. 13:12. “For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face.” This verse uses the explanatory sense of “for” to link the “then” back to the term “perfect.” This “then” anticipates something much more than the imperfect knowledge in the “now.” Our communion with God lacks completeness until we are in His presence, when the Perfect comes.

A godly Lutheran lady ran a retreat center in the community where I pastored. On different occasions when she hosted charismatic groups, she would say, “There is something about their experience that makes Jesus so real.” We may know about Him, but it is another thing to know Him in His dynamic power working in our lives.