Author: resolvedtowitness

  • Mark Series: Part 1 – Background

    Mark Series: Part 1 – Background

  • Ten Tenets of Covenantal Apologetics

    Ten Tenets of Covenantal Apologetics

    Note To Reader: These are notes and excerpts from Covenantal Apologetics by K. Scott Oliphint.

    Presuppositional Apologetics is the system and even art of defending our faith. Covenantal Apologetics by K. Scott Oliphint was the first book on theology I had ever read. When I first read the book, I didn’t quite grasp all of the concepts. But I knew that it was rich value to me. Earlier this year, I reread this book with a stronger understanding of apologetics and the biblical worldview and was pleasantly surprised to find that it was still edifying for me ten years later.

    If you are new to apologetics, read these 10 tenets and take them to heart. If you have a background in this area, I hope this is still enriching for you.

  • Verse by Verse: Matthew’s Genealogy of Jesus Explained

    Verse by Verse: Matthew’s Genealogy of Jesus Explained

    Background

    Matthew, also known as Levi and the son of Alphaeus, was a tax collector in Capernaum, Galilee, during the first century AD. Being a tax collector was a profession that was highly despised in ancient Judaism due to its association with Roman rule and corruption. Matthew is considered the second oldest account of the gospel of Jesus Christ but is placed first in the traditional order of the new testament canon. This tradition dates very far back as early Christian writers of approx. 2nd-3rd century.

    Matthew’s purpose was writing to the Jewish community to demonstrate Jesus as the Jewish messiah of the prophecies of the Old Testament. That being his goal, we can observe Matthew often references old testament prophecy, Jewish customs, and even leaves some Aramaic words untranslated. If you don’t know, Aramaic is a Semitic language similar to Hebrew, which would be difficult for the Roman reader to understand, demonstrating Matthew’s intended audience being the Jewish reader.

    The Genealogy Discrepancy:

    There is a discussion that has been resolved long before this study was done but will be restated to clear any confusion. When reading Jesus’ genealogy in the gospels according to Matthew and Luke, one can run into the fact that they are not the same list.

    This discrepancy can make studying this genealogy difficult for some. But when studying a text, one has to ask what the purpose is for the author’s writing. We have already established that Matthew is seeking to prove that Jesus is the Jewish Messiah, and so accordingly he writes his genealogy, not exhaustively but to highlight key figures to prove his point (From what I have read was a common practice of the time).

    It is observed that Matthew reports the paternal lineage of descent from after Solomon to Joseph, where Luke reported the material line through Solomon’s brother, Nathan to Mary. The two lines converse with the intermarriage of Shealtiel and Zerubbabel, Rhesa and Abiud, and finally Joseph and Mary.

    This study looks at unpacking Matthew’s account with verse by verse examination from the Greek text.

    Ultimately, the intended message to be communicated here is Jesus’ legal right to the throne of David via blood lineage.

    The Genealogy of Jesus Christ According to Matthew

    Verse 1 – The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of 

    (Biblos)     (genesis) (iēsou) (christos) (huios) (dabid) (huios)

    Abraham.

    (abraam)

    • Term breakdown –
      • Biblos (The inner bark of the papyrus plant, implying a sheet or scroll of writing.) 
      • genesis (following the origin, implying lineage) 
      • iēsous (Jesus or Joshua in greek, meaning “The Lord is Salvation”) 
      • christos (Christ, Anointed, an epithet of the messiah) 
      • huios (a son, contextually used as son of a male figure or meaning son of man)
    • Explanation – According to the study material, the opening can can literally be translated as “record of genealogy” or  “record of the origins”. This text is the opening to Matthew’s account of the gospel, opening with fulfillment of messianic prophecy in being the descendent of David and Abraham. (2Sa 7:13, 2Sa7:16, PSa89:36, Psa 132:11, Isa 9:6,7; Isa 11:1; Jer 23:5; Jer 33:15-17,26; Amo 9:11; Zec 12:8; Gen 12:3; Gen 22:18; Gen 26:3-5; Gen 28:13,14). Biblos here refers to a scroll or the paper that this was written upon as a book or “codex”, while adopted by christians very early, was not adopted in the early first century.

    Verse 2 Abraham was the father of Isaac, and Isaac the father of Jacob, and Jacob 

    (Abraam) (gennaō) (ho) (isaak)        (isaak) (de) (gennaō) (ho) (iakōb) (iakōb)

    the father of Judah and his brothers, 

    (de)(gennaō)(ho)(ioudas)(kai)(ho)(adelphos)(autos)

    Verse 3 and Judah the father of Perez and Zerah by Tamar, and Perez the father of 

    (ioudas) (gennaō) (phares)(kai)(zara)(ek)(thamar)  (phares) (gennaō)

    Hezron, and Hezron the father of Ram,

    (hesrōm) (de) (hesrōm) (gennaō) (aram)

    • Term Breakdown
      • Gennaō ( A man who fathered, begat, bring forth, or to be born, or begotten/woman giving birth to children)
      • Autos (personal possession – his/her, reflexive pronoun – self)
      • Adelphos (Brother, sharing a single parent or both parents)
    • Explanation
      • This lineage is used as prophetic proof of Jesus being the jewish messiah, demonstrating that Jesus is the descendent of Abraham, (Gen. 12:3), the first “jew who fathered Isaac and grandfathered the sons that give the tribes their namesake  (Gen. 26:3,4; 35:11,12) Followed by the fulfillment of messianic prophecy via descending from the tribe of Judah (Gen. 49:10)

    Verse 4 and Ram the father of Amminadab, and Amminadab the father of Nahshon, 

    (aram) (gennaō) (aminadab) (aminadab)       (gennaō) (naassōn)

    and Nahshon the father of Salmon, 

    (de) (naassōn) (gennaō) (salmōn)

    Verse 5 and Salmon the father of Boaz by Rahab, and Boaz the father of Obed by 

    (salmōn) (gennaō) (boes) (ek) (rachab) (boes) (gennaō) (iōbēd) (ek) 

    Ruth, and Obed the father of Jesse, 

    (routh) (de) (iōbēd) (gennaō) (iessai) 

    Verse 6 and Jesse the father of David the king. And David was the father of Solomon 

    (iessai) (gennaō) (dabid)(ho)(basileus)(dabid) (gennaō)(solomōn) 

    by the wife of Uriah. 

    (ek) (ho) (ourias)

    • Explanation –  “By the wife of Uriah”, this is Bathsheba, who is excluded by name, possibly due to the sins surrounding the joining of David and Bathsheba.

    Verse 7 and Solomon the father of Rehoboam, and Rehoboam the father of Abijah, 

    (solomōn) (gennaō) (roboam) (roboam) (gennaō) (abia)

    and Abijah the father of Asaph, 

    (de) (abia)   (gennaō) (asa)

    • Term breakdown
      • Basileus (king)
    • Explanation – This is yet another example of Jesus fulfilling the messianic prophecies descending through Jesse (Isaiah 11) and line of Dave(2 Sam. 7:12). But also other key biblical figures as other proofs for consistency throughout the kingly lineage of David. Beyond understanding this as a kingly lineage of Israel, to understand this greater would require one to read through the OT historical books such as 1 & 2 Sam, 1 & 2 Kings, and 1 & 2 Chronicles to understand the nuances of the stories of each king and their standing with God. 

    Verse 8 and Asaph the father of Jehoshaphat, and Jehoshaphat the father of Joram,

    (Asa) (gennaō) (iōsaphat) (iōsaphat) (gennaō) (iōram)

    and Joram the father of Uzziah,

    (de) (iōram) (gennaō) (ozias)

    • “Joram begot Uzziah.” This is an example of Matthew skipping some generations. There were three kings between these two, but Matthew specifically chose to introduce these two. Perhaps because of Uzziah’s stature of being one of the good kings of Israel who did not lead their nation into sin.

    Verse 9 and Uzziah the father of Jotham, and Jotham the father of Ahaz, and Ahaz

    (ozias)     (gennaō) (iōatham) (iōatham) (gennaō)(achaz)(de)(achaz)

    the father of Hezekiah, 

    (gennaō) (hezekias )

    Verse 10 and Hezekiah the father of Manasseh, and Manasseh the father of Amos, 

    (Hezekias) (gennaō) (manassēs) (manassēs) (gennaō) (amōs) 

    and Amos the father of Josiah, 

     (de) (amōs) (gennaō) (iōsias)

    Verse 11 and Josiah the father of Jechoniah and his brothers, at the time of the

    (iōsias)      (gennaō) (iechonias) (kai)(autos)(adelphos)(epi) (ho)

    deportation to Babylon.

      (metoikesia) (babylōn)

    Verse 12 And after the deportation to Babylon: Jechoniah was the father of Shealtiel,

    (meta)(ho)(metoikesia) (babylōn) (iechonias) (gennaō)(salathiēl)

     and Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel, 

    (de) (salathiēl) (gennaō) (zorobabel) 

    • Jehoakim, son of Josiah is notably and controversially excluded from the genealogy. The easy is that he was an evil king with his deeds recorded in 2 chronicles. However in that verse there is a curse against him and his offspring sitting on the throne. Jeconiah, son of Jehoakim sat on the throne, however only for three months. However, this would potentially pose a problem for the messianic inheritance of David’s throne. However, this is interestingly resolved through the virgin birth. Joseph, not Mary, was descended from Jehoakim. So while legally Jesus was Joseph’s son, he was not his son by blood, thereby side-stepping the curse while also fulfilling the davidic covenant.

    Verse 13 and Zerubbabel the father of Abiud, and Abiud the father of Eliakim, and 

    (zorobabel) (gennaō) (abioud) (abioud)(gennaō)(eliakeim)(de) 

    Eliakim the father of Azor, 

    (eliakeim) (gennaō) (azōr) 

    Verse 14 and Azor the father of Zadok, and Zadok the father of Achim, and Achim

    (Azōr) (gennaō) (sadōk) (sadōk) (gennaō) (Acheim) (de) (Acheim)

     the father of Eliud, 

    (gennaō)(elioud)

    Verse 15 and Eliud the father of Eleazar, and Eleazar the father of Matthan, and 

    (Elioud)   (gennaō) (eleazar) (eleazar) (gennaō)  (matthan) (de)

    Matthan the father of Jacob, 

    (Matthan) (gennaō) (iakōb)

    • Term Breakdown
      • Metoikesia (deportation – to remove from one abode to another)

    Verse 16 and Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was 

    (iakōb) (gennaō) (iōsēph) (ho) (anēr) (maria) (ek) (hos) (iēsous) 

    born, who is called Christ.

    (gennaō)(ho)(legō)(christos)

    • Term Breakdown
      • Legō (is called, or to call by name)
    • Explanation – Matthew is careful to say that Joseph is the “Husband of Mary” rather than Father to Jesus. This points to Jesus’ legal ancestry rather than physical descent. Gennaō is used here to say “Jesus was born of Mary” rather than “Joseph was the father of” like in the earlier verses.

    Verse 17 So all the generations from Abraham to David were fourteen 

    (oun)(pas)(ho)(genea) (apo)(abraam)(heōs)(dabid)(dekatessares)

    generations, and from David to the deportation to Babylon fourteen generations, 

    (Genea) (apo) (dabid) (heōs) (ho) (metoikesia) (babylōn) (dekatessares) (genea)

    and from the deportation to Babylon to the Christ fourteen generations.

    (Kai)(apo)(ho)(metoikesia) (babylōn)(heōs)(ho)(christos)(dekatessares)(genea)

    • Term breakdown
      • Genea (Generation – ranks of descent, members of a genealogy/family, or an age a space of 30-33 years)
    • Explanation
      • Some observe that some generations were skipped which was not uncommon in the jewish world of genealogies. 
  • Apostolic Ministry From The Protestant Perspective

    Apostolic Ministry From The Protestant Perspective

    Introduction

    You are not an apostle and you do not know a living apostle.

    From the protestant perspective, the early church was not interested in staking a claim in apostolic succession in the way that we think about it today. Our first thought on this topic is often to think about the Roman Catholic Church or the Orthodox Church, however, there were many smaller groups that also did this. The claim was to have “X Apostle Christianity”, whether Peter, Andrew, Thomas, or another, so that they were more influential. The gnostics in the ancient era utilized this idea to push their mystical theology.

    This is also how the later developed pseudepigraphal writings influenced some groups (such as the gospel of Thomas, which is a known forgery). Because it was beneficial for these movements to have a supposed original manuscript from their apostle for their influence. So in order to differentiate themselves from these splinter groups, the church leaders labeled themselves: Catholic, as in “of the whole”. Of course, the Catholic Church we all know today now pronounces themselves to follow Peter. But that is church history for you.

    For now, this particular article is not focused directly on the Roman Catholics or Eastern Orthodox churches but actually looking at protestant groups that utilize the title of apostle for a claim of legitimacy despite clearly unbiblical.

    (Ex. New Apostolic Reformation, Apostolic/Oneness Pentecostals).

    What is an Apostle?

    So who is an apostle and how does one become an apostle? Well this is where most get lost and it’s completely understandable at times. Apostle comes from the Greek word: “Apostolos”

    • Apostolos – A delegate, messenger, one sent forth with orders

    This wasn’t just a title invented to give to the twelve. This is an actual word that actually means something to the people who wrote it and to the intended audience in koine Greek. So this issue is that an “apostle” is both what Jesus referred to his core disciples as, and it also means to be a messenger.

    This means that if you take two verses such as these:

    • Eph. 1:1 “Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, To the saints who are in Ephesus, and are faithful in Christ Jesus:”
    • Hebr. 3:1 “Therefore, holy brothers, you who share in a heavenly calling, consider Jesus, the apostle and high priest of our confession,. . .”

    You can clearly see that it makes no sense to make “apostle” mean the same thing in both contexts, if you make it mean “chief authority, disciple to Jesus, or church planter”. Is Jesus merely an apostle? Of course not. But if you replace it with, “messenger”, suddenly it makes sense.

    The Argument

    Critics raise up multiple counterpoints to the conclusion above. It usually stems from misunderstanding text such as Romans 16:7.

    • “Greet Andronicus and Junia, my fellow Jews, who were in prison with me. They are highly respected among the apostles and became followers of Christ before I did.” (NLT)

    Did you know that this can also be rendered like this:

    • “Greet Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen and my fellow prisoners. They are well known to the apostles, and they were in Christ before me.” (ESV)
    • “Greet Andronicus and Junia, my kinsfolk and my fellow prisoners, who are outstanding in the view of the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.” (NASB)

    All of these are in a sense “correct” when it comes to word-for-word rendering of the text. The first question is, “Is Junia in this group of Apostles?” and the second is, “Is this group of apostles the twelve or a group of messengers?”. The key phrase is “ἐπίσημοι ἐν τοῖς ἀποστόλοις” (outstanding among or well known to).

    To answer the first question of whether Junia is in this group is to answer whether that phrase “ἐπίσημοι ἐν” is referring back to Junia. 

    My Greek is still limited, so I won’t embarrass myself by trying to explain the full details, but the point is this: The ending of Greek words are changed to determine sentence structure and help convey the message. To fully understand this, we would have to fully unpack terms such as cases, declensions, and Greek syntax. But the short version of it is that the grammar used for our key phrase can produce the meaning that Junia is involved in this group but is unlikely given data provided throughout other writings. This is the consensus among scholarship actually interacting with this text in an honest manner. 

    Here is a link to an academic paper that covers this subject in greater detail:

    https://www.academia.edu/78539121/Was_Junia_Really_an_Apostle_A_Re_examination_of_Rom_16_7?sm=b

    • Please note that this is the only paper that I have read by this author. I believe that he and his co-author cover this subject well, however, I do not know their positions well enough to fully endorse them as teachers.

    So, you can see that trying to equate words by lexicon and ignoring all contextual data causes you commit an etymological fallacy. This is not solely a problem with the word, “Apostolos”. This also occurs with, “Angelos”

    • Angelos – a messenger, envoy, one who is sent, an angel, a messenger from God

    It is much more similar than the average English reader would imagine. I’ve actually read someone claim that Paul had a demon in 2 Corinthians 12:7

    • So to keep me from becoming conceited because of the surpassing greatness of the revelations, a thorn was given me in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to harass me, to keep me from becoming conceited.

    Their claim is that because the messenger is, “angelos of Satan”, in this verse, that must mean that Paul had a demon.

    So, that argument must mean that Paul, apostle of Jesus, who healed, resurrected people, cast out demons, demons know his name, that Paul; He had a demon. I hope you can see that is absolutely ludicrous. The obvious answer is that angelos is carrying the meaning of messenger rather than spiritual being in this verse. It is proved by the surrounding text that Paul is talking about his weakness as a man.

    What is The Point?

    While interesting, what I am telling you has no practical impact on the majority of protestant Christians. But there is a small subsect that builds their identities around this subject. However, if you ask someone from this field to define apostle or defend their position with a strong biblical background, you will find that the answers vary widely. Locking down a single definition with these groups as to what exactly an apostle is, you won’t find a good answer. That is because it is used to create an infallible position of authority within the church that has an entirely subjective and fluid definition behind it.

    Biblical Church Leadership

    There are however two biblical positions provided for churches that are clearly outlined:

    Qualification for an elder

    • 1 Tim 3:1“The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task.”
    • Titus 1:7“For an overseer, as God’s steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain,. . .”
    • episkopos – overseership, office, charge, the office of an elder
      • A man charged with the duty of seeing that things to be done by others are done rightly, any curator, guardian or superintendent

    Qualifications for a deacon

    • 1 Tim 3:8 “Deacons likewise must be dignified, not double-tongued,[fn] not addicted to much wine, not greedy for dishonest gain.”
    • Diakonos – One who executes the commands of another, esp. of a master, a servant, attendant, minister

    Now we have the role of overseer outlined here, but we don’t call our leaders “overseer”. We call them, “elder, pastor, bishop, or presbyter”. These are often terms used in conjunction with each other when speaking about the same general role of overseer.

    • Acts 20:28“Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers (episkopos), to shepherd (poimainō) the church of God…”
      • Many translations simply translate shepherd as “to care”.
    • Acts 20:17 – Paul sent to Ephesus and called the elders (presbyterous) of the church.
      • Presbyter is usually used in place of “older man” or “elder” or “overseer”

    We even have modern conventions that do the same thing. Sometimes our pastors are called “Reverend” or “Chaplain”.

    If the position of apostle were something that was to be established in our modern church, you would expect there to be this level of commentary available for that position. But you don’t see that. There isn’t any indication in the bible or in church history. 

    In fact, the only verse I’ve ever really heard used in defense of the modern-apostle position is Eph 4:11-12:

    • “And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds  and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ,. . . “

    However, there is no indication of ecclesiology here. There are no qualifications. There are no established roles or definitions. The clear reading appears to be that the apostles here are either talking about disciples of Christ or the messengers who brought the gospel to the corners of the earth.

    So what exactly is apostolic ministry for protestants? Following the teachings of the apostles appointed by Jesus.

    When I read Eph. 4: 11-12, I do not see a command for churches to implement new apostles as an office. The better application of this text would be to see Paul reminding us of an important truth. This truth is that each of these roles were given by God to believers throughout time; And despite generations between the prophets and the apostles to each other, each was relevant to the church. Now, despite the time passed since the apostles, their teachings are still just as relevant today.

    The conclusion

    I won’t pretend to know the motivations for why someone would claim to be an apostle today. However, it wasn’t a deep search in the bible. The structure that God has plainly given us should be taken as a gift and held onto tightly. This isn’t what some would call “boring, dry, doctrine”. In fact, it is the word of God. And that should be good enough.