Well, we are beginning Hour 20 of Learn the
Bible in 24 Hours. And in this hour we are going to focus on
what are called the Hebrew Christian Epistles. Or, putting it another way, if you take the
13 Paul wrote, the ones that are left up to the Book of Revelation, are the ones we're
now going to focus on. And they include the Epistle to the Hebrews,
Epistle of James, 1 and 2 Peter, 1 and 2 third John and Jude. The Hebrew Christian Epistles are distinctive
in that not one of them is addressed to a church, interestingly enough. And what's also disturbing to many is that
some of the warnings we find in these Epistles seem to be in contrast to some of the assurances
that we received in the Church Epistles. You look at Romans 8 and you compare that
with Hebrew 6 and 10 and that can raise some questions. You take Ephesians 2 and Philippians 1 and
compare that with 2 Peter 1 and it raises questions. So those are great discussion opportunities. But do understand that there really is no
conflict between them. It may just seem that way on the surface. And whenever you think you found a contradiction
or conflict, praise God. Because God will always reward the diligent. You get in behind that and you'll come out
much better understood. Some of these are widely misunderstood, but
there's not a retrograde here. Some people say, well, you know, that James
was a rebuttal to Paul. No, James was written before Paul was and it's not at all. It's ... it reaches beyond. It goes in a different direction. So let's start with the Epistle to the Hebrews. This is one of the two greatest theological
treatises in the New Testament. The first one being Romans, which we spent
an entire hour on. We won't do that here with Hebrews, but we
will focus on its distinctives. Some of its distinctives. One thing you need to realize is Israel is
not a subset of the nations, but a contrast and a focus. If you think of Israel and then all the nations
as two in balance, you're closer to the perspective here. The Epistle to the Hebrews stands as sort
of the Leviticus of the New Testament. Basically it's going to argue that Christ
supercedes and fulfills all the elements of the Aaronic Priesthood. The priesthood under Moses, under ... and so forth. Something else you need to understand when
you're reading the Book of Hebrews. You need to visualize yourself as a Jewish
Christian that had come to Christ during the first 70 years of this time. In other words, the temple is still standing. Try to understand the peculiar predicament
of a Jewish believer while the temple was still operating. You see, if you ... imagine yourself a Jew
that has accepted Christ but you now realize that you've previously been in a divinely
appointed religion, with divinely appointed priests officiating in a divinely appointed
temple, accomplishing a divinely ordered service that had been ennobled through centuries. That's what you've given up. And you have to ask yourself, how could believing
priests and pharisees remain zealous of the law? You see it was the Jewish religious world
that crucified Christ and was presently repudiating Him. Understand the strange predicament. Realize that the persecutions during that
first century, didn't come from the Romans, it came from the Jewish leadership. So understand that. The Church in Jerusalem had already lost Stephen.
He was stoned, probably illegally, obviously, but he's still stoned. James, the leader of the Church, had been
killed in 62AD, executed. And, of course, there are many others. The churches in Galatia, all up north, all
through Galatia, were in the same turmoil being attacked by the local Jewish authorities. So as a result, many of these believers, Jewish
believers, were tempted to go back temporarily to Judaism to avoid persecution under the
mindset that, "Gee, I'll stick with this so I don't get persecuted and then at the last
minute I'll turn." That's sort of ... you get the idea. The author of the Book of Hebrews ... now
I happen to believe it was Paul so I may misspeak. I'm going to try not to do that, because
that's prejudicial. There's some good scholars that think it was
somebody other than Paul. I have my reasons and I think the majority
of them think that Paul wrote it, but I'll try to refer to the author rather than Paul. But in any case, he's trying to combat possible
apostasy by these believers. He wants to encourage them rather than to
go back to Judaism to press on to spiritual maturity. He wants to comfort them in their persecutions,
of course, and his method is to emphasize the superiority of the Messiah, specifically
against the three pillars of Judaism, which were the angels, that's a big deal in Judaism,
the whole roll of Moses, and, of course, the Levitical Priesthood under Aaron. These are three places that he specifically
points out the Messiah eclipses all of these. He builds very, very ... you also have to
understand, if it was Paul he wouldn't sign it because he doesn't want to make that the
issue. He doesn't set himself up as an apostle. He's
simply arguing from the Jewish Scriptures the way a rabbi would. This thing stands or falls on its rabbinical
logic. He's going to deviate from his logical discussions
on five occasions to issue special warnings. But once you recognize those warnings are there, the
rest follows very, very logically. He first of all points out that Jesus is a
new and better deliverer. The God-man is better than the angels. Angels are still just angels. And He's an apostle better than Moses. Even as highly venerated as Moses was, the
Messiah is higher. He's a leader better than Joshua. In fact, He's the one that fought the Battle
of Jericho. If you read the last few verses of Joshua 5 carefully. And Jesus is a Priest better than Aaron. He is going to explain why in great detail. He talks about Calvary being a better and
newer covenant. It offers better promises, has a better sanctuary,
it's sealed by a better sacrifice and achieves far better results. He hits each one of these in a rabbinical
style. And so our faith should be a true and better
response, then he has parting words through the whole thing. The Son of God is the final revealer. He's the Heir of all things Himself. Through
the Son were all the ages made. He's the brightness of God's glory. This is in some respects similar to Colossians
except here he is not arguing to a Gentile, he's arguing in Jewish terms. He is the brightness of God's glory. He's the image of the Father. He upholds all things by His power. He made purification of sin. He didn't just cover it for a while like the
Old Testament sacrifice did. He made purification for it. And He finally sits down on majesty on high. So this is ... in other words, in each dimension
here, it is as good as it gets. The Son is superior to the angels. How? By virtue of His Deity, first of all, He created
them in the first place. By virtue of His humanity. Now that may surprise you. But you see the earth was given to Adam. So in that sense, Adam was even though lower
than the angels, superior to the angels, but he forfeited it to Satan. But Christ is getting that back on our behalf. It had to be a kinsman of man to take over
the earth. That's why Jesus is called the Kinsman Redeemer. Just being God wasn't enough, He had to be
a Kinsmen of Adam to fulfill the situation. So His humanity is crucial here by virtue of salvation
He provided. None other provides salvation the way Jesus
Christ does. No angel can provide salvation. The Son is superior by virtue of His Deity. His position is unique. He's the head of the Davidic Covenant. Angels worship the Son. A quote from Psalms 97. Angels serve the Son according to Psalm 104. The Son is to rule the kingdom in Psalm 45. It's interesting how often he draws upon the
Psalms, not just as a hymnal, but as authority. And that's again something a Jew would accept. Of course, the Son is the Creator according
to Psalm 102. These are quotes from Psalms, not from the Torah. And the Son is enthroned at the right hand
of God according to Psalm 110. And so with the exception of the Davidic Covenant
and the second list here, all of these are quotes from Psalms. So it's superior, His humanity he makes that
point. See He has sovereignty over the earth was
promised to man not the angels. God gave man dominion over the earth and a
man rules it. Satan does now, but a man will. Man lost it through sin to Satan and his angels. The Messiah regained dominion for man. And man will be associated with Him, the Messiah,
in ruling it. And, of course, this superiority over salvation. Why? To manifest divine grace and he quotes
Psalms 22 and Isaiah 8. To overcome the Prince of Death, to free the believer
from the fear of death, and to help man. The Son is greater than Moses, of course. You have to understand ... to understand the
logic you have to understand how a Jew viewed Moses. The Son is greater because of His person and
work, His position, and then he inserts a warning against disobedience and he points
out how they fail at Kadesh Barnea, remember they didn't ... God had given them the land,
they failed to take it and had to wonder in the wilderness for 40 years. The very people God rescued from Egypt, blew
it because they didn't enter into that which God had provided. And he's drawing a parallel here. That's exactly the mistake their making in
the Book of Hebrews is that they have been saved, but they're not entering into the benefit
of their salvation. He points out that Jesus is a Priest but not
after Aaron, which was temporary. He's after a permanent priesthood. He's got a better position. It's heavenly rather than earthly. He's a better priest because he's divinely
appointed. And again, he puts a warning there, progress
to maturity. Returning to Judaism is not an option. That's an option denied. We're going to see ... he said there's a need
for progression. You need to advance you guys beyond first principles:
Repentance from dead works, Commitment to Messiahship, Resurrection of the Dead, and
Eternal Judgment - the Great White Throne. These are issues that far transcend anything
Judaism can offer. These people need to be settled in their hearts
once and for all to advance to maturity. They're saved but they're not progressing. They're dealing with milk, not the meat so
to speak. There is an option that is denied them. See, understand first of all I believe they
were saved believers. Some people try to argue, well, because of some other problems they say
these guys really weren't saved. No, they were once enlightened, they tasted
of the heavenly gift, they're partakers of the Holy Spirit, they tasted the good word
of God, they tasted the powers of the age to come. These are direct quotes. No, these were saved, but they were considering
apostatizing. The option they do not have is to a temporarily
give up the salvation, go back to Judaism until the persecution subsides, and then be
saved later. Okay. There are many people with that mentality
even today in a different sense. See there are only two options available. Either go go back to Judaism, confirming their
immaturity and be subject to the judgment of 70 A.D., physical death now and loss of
rewards later. Whatever. Or make their clean break from Judaism once and
for all and press on to maturity. And incidently, this does not mean they have to give up
observing the feasts and so forth, but they don't do it under the law they do it as a
celebration. The same way that you and I might choose to observe the Sabbath the shabbat. Not under the law, but just to celebrate it and to glean its benefits. Responsibly of the believer - to produce works which accompany salvation. You're not saved by works, but you have an
obligation to have works that demonstrate, manifest your salvation. And he takes examples from nature. Rain falls upon all the earth. Some produce
fruit some does not, just like believers. Fruitfullness will be rewarded, fruitlessness
will be judged. Thorns and thistles are burned, but the land
isn't is the point he's making in 1 Corinthians 3 and elsewhere and so ... and similar to 3 and so forth. He talks a lot in chapter 7 about the priesthood
of this strange character called Melchizedek that we were introduced to Genesis 14. Melchizedek was a priest and the
King, that's different than the Mosaic world. Under Moses the Levites were priests, under
Judah was the royal. They never mixed. Also Melchizedek received tithes from Abraham. And here the writer makes a very strange kind
of logic. You need to follows his logic. Levi had not been born yet, but he regards
Levi since he was in the loins of Abraham as getting tithes also to Melchizedek. Since Abraham gave tithes to Melchizedek,
that meant Melchizedek was higher than Abraham. Levi hadn't been born yet, so he was even more junior. The point is making is that it was as if Levi
is subordinate to Melchizedek because his great, great, great grandfather gave tithes
to Melchizedek. If he is ... he's creating a hierarchy here. Also Melchizedek has no genealogy. Doesn't mean he was ... didn't have a birth
and death, it just means it's not recorded, means his position was independent of any genealogy. And he is timeless, he had no beginning or
end recording. That's the point their making in terms of
that being a priest after the order of Melchizedek. And, of course, Melchizedek was all-inclusive. He wasn't a Jew ... he wasn't a priest just
to the Jews, he's a priest and king, period. And so it's a much broader concept. So he, Melchizedek, in a sense is a type or
a foreshadowing of the Son of God. Now he is only a type. Some people say he was Shem but that's not
true because we know genealogy, Shem's genealogy. Some people feel that was an Old Testament
appearance of Christ Himself. No, it says in Scripture he was a man and
this is pre-incarnation, so. So for what it's worth, those are just interesting
side issues. The main point is that Melchizedekian priesthood
will replace the priesthood of Aaron. The Levitical priesthood could never achieve
perfection. It was given for a purpose but it could never
achieve perfection. Another order would occur that ... David
predicted in Psalm 110, another order which is non-Levitical. He's pointing out that Melchizedek is a higher
order than Levi. Levitical priesthood that the Jews are committed
to was temporary. It was weak. It could not impart strength to fulfill its demands. And
it could not bring perfection. It could offer remedies for having failed
the law, but it couldn't give you the power to overcome ... to keep the law. So we've got a better covenant. The Mosaic Covenant was destined to be replaced
by a superior one, according Jeremiah 31 and the New Covenant has better promises, better
priesthood, better sanctuary, better sacrifice. Now that's really ... we really have the old
covenant, what we call the Old Testament. The word testament and covenant is a little
misleading because we think of testament a little bit differently. But it's like old covenant, new covenant. The New Testament is really the new covenant,
if you will. A better sanctuary. See the limitations of the old sanctuary,
which was restricted and representative copy was contrasted with having the actual. He points out it was just a model that was
given to Moses as a temporary thing. Only one man out of one tribe out of one nation
and one race could enter and only on one day in the year and not without blood. So the access there was a very, very restrictive
one. Okay. It was temporary. It was limited. It was inadequate. And the Mosaic was inadequate; required repetition. Animal blood. Sins were covered, not removed. That was a temporary measure pointing to Calvary. Only obedience brings perfection according
Psalm 40. And only the Messiah can impart the perfection. Mosaic sacrifices were never intended to be
permanent. So there is lot of contrast here between the
Levitical priests and the Messiah. Levitical had many priests. The Messiah has One. Levitical priests were always standing, there
were no chairs inside the tabernacle. The Messiah is sitting. He's finished. The Levitical priests minister daily. The Messiah ministered on one specific day. The Levitical priests had to repeat it all,
Christ did it once and for all tetelestai. it is finished. The Levitical priests had many sacrifices,
the Messiah did just one Himself. The Levitical priests were temporary, the
Messiah is permanent. So those are the contrast that the writer
establishes in his letter. One covered the sins, the other actually took
the sins away. Put an end to sins. Then he gets into in chapter 10 the danger
of willful sin. See, if they now apostatize from the faith
and once and for all return to Judaism, there remains no more sacrifice for their
sin. That's a heavy argument that's made in Hebrews
10. Why? Because it's a rejection of the work of the
Trinity, not just the Holy Spirit, all three of them. God will judge His people. It's a fearful thing
to fall into the hands of the living God. That he emphasizes. Well, having gone through all that in chapter
10, we now get to this incredible chapter, the hall of faith. You remember Romans chapter 8, what a high
point that was? The equivalent in Hebrews is chapter 11, called
the Hall of Faith, where it speaks about Abel, whose blood ... he gave an offering with blood
which is the only way offering was acceptable. Then we have Enoch who had faith through fellowship. He didn't get ... his fellowship was so close
he didn't die. God took him. And then we had Noah who was obedient and
thus saved his family. Every one of us are descendants. We all have a common ancestor. It's not Adam, it's Noah. And then, of course, Abraham. He departed from his home ground a foreigner.
He has a miraculous birth of Isaac and it's his belief in the resurrection of Isaac that saves him.
And his willingness to sacrifice Isaac convinced God that he was... Then, of course, we had Sarah and Isaac and
all the prophecies and Jacob. And then we have Joseph and his two sons. It goes through these great ... we call it
the Hall of Faith all the way through here. And then, of course, Moses who was hidden from
the laws of Pharaoh and refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter and so forth. And he kept the first Passover. You know the story in Exodus. And we go through Joshua and Rahab and Gideon,
Barak, Sampson, Jeshua, David, Samuel and all the prophets. It goes through this whole line up, but let's
just ... it gets to around verse 33 just to give you a flavor of it as he stops to deal with them
individually ... "who through faith subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promises,
stopped the mouths of lions," Who's he talking about? Daniel. You betcha. Quenched the violence
of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, out of weakness were made strong, waxed valiant in fight,
turned to flight the armies of the aliens. Women received their dead raised to life again:
and others were tortured, not accepting deliverance; that they might obtain a better resurrection: Others had trial of cruel mockings and scourgings, yea,
moreover of bonds and imprisonment: They were stoned, they were sawn asunder," It's understood that Isaiah was sawn in half by Manasseh with wooden saw, "They were tempted, they were slain with the sword: They wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins; being destitute, afflicted, tormented;
(Of whom the world was not worthy:) they wandered in deserts, and in mountains, and in dens and caves
of the earth, and these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise: God having provided some better thing
for us, that they without us should not be made perfect." What a climax. See after all that
"they received not the promise: God having provided some better thing for us, that they
without us should not be made complete" or perfect in the sense of being completed. So having said that the big sweep of Romans 11, I mean of Hebrews 11, we now get to Hebrews 12, "Wherefore seeing we also are compassed
about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin, which
doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us, looking unto
Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured
the cross, despising the shame, and is set down the right hand of the throne of God." So we have five warnings in this epistle - the danger of
drifting, disobedience, not progressing towards maturity, Willful sin, and then a warning against indifference.
Remember, I said there were three epistles that amplify Habakkuk 2:4? Romans explains who ... Habakkuk 2:4 saying "the just shall live by faith". The just is defined by Romans. How shall he live that's Galations. By faith, the book of Hebrews. That verse is quoted as
the cornerstone of all three of those epistles so it's kind of interesting I think. So alright. Now we get to the epistle that is Yakov's letter to the 12 tribes. And people say, "what on earth are you talking about, Chuck?" You see, you don't know him by the name of Yakov, the Hebrew Yakov, which is the
Greek Iakobos, English Jacob or sometimes James. You know it is the epistle of James,
but his name was Yakov. He was ... a half-brother of Jesus
Christ, and, by the way, we know a lot about him. He was the half-brother of Jesus. He was married. I'll come back to that. He was an unbeliever during the lifetime of Jesus. He became a believer after the resurrection
according to 1 Corinthians 15. He was married. In 1st Corinthians 9 Paul is arguing that it's
okay to be married. James was. Peter was. Okay. It's interesting
there are people who try to say Jesus was married and they don't know the Bible. Cause for a lot of
reasons that doesn't make sense. But not the least of which, if he was married Paul would have
made that argument in 1st Corithinans 9. But in any case, I won't go down that path here that's a whole nother discussion. But Yakov or James was the leader of the church in Jerusalem. It's interesting, when Peter was released from prison, he instructed them to tell James. That was his big concern. James was the one that issued the verdict of the Jerusalem Council. He also gave the proclamation that authorized Gentile Christianity, so to speak. Paul reported to him when he arrived in Jerusalem. His name was used without permission by the Judaizers. That is taken to task in Galatians 2. He was finally
executed 62AD, which is interesting that that is not mentioned by any of the other epistles and it should have been. Which means that they were all written before 62 AD. It's a very interesting argument
for the early authorship of those letters. There's also documentation technology that supports
an even earlier dating, but let's go on here. So the Epistle of Jacob. It's written to the 12 tribes
of the dispersion, which is interesting. There are not 10 lost Tribes. That's a myth.
There are people that build castles on that house of cards. They argue that the northern kingdom
was taken captive by Assyria. Well, that's ... they haven't read 2nd Chronicles 11 very carefully,
but the point is, in the south you had Simeon, Benjamin, Judah and the Levites moved to the
south when the Civil War took place. So you now have four of the 12 in the South anyway. So if there's any lost Tribes, it would be
8 not 10, but that's misunderstanding the whole passage. So both Jacob and 2nd Peter ... 1st Peter
address themselves to the 12 tribes. And the Epistle of James focus's on conduct
not creed. Behavior not belief. Deeds not doctrines. So it's not against Paul, it's just focusing in a different
approach. It's not creed, belief, or doctrine, it's conduct, behavior and deeds. That's his emphasis. He
says that faith should be manifested by outward signs. And there's tests for the
genuous faith. The response to the word of God, response to social distinctions, production of
good works, the exercise of self-control, the reaction to worldliness, resort to prayer
in all circumstances. If you have faith, it will manifest itself in these external signs.
You don't do the external signs in lieu of faith. They should be the result of your faith. The summary
of the whole epistle is in James 2. It says, "Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: show me
thy faith without thy works, and I will show thee my faith by my works. Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils
also believe, and tremble." Think believing is a big deal? The devils believe. Where do they sit? "But
wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?" I have to tell you, I'm amused by Rich Mullan's song He says, "faith without works is as useless as a screendoor on a submarine." [laughter] By the way, do you know where the headlight is on a submarine? Anyone know? Oh, come on, it's in the head, right? Sorry, I had to tell that. Let's go to the 1st Epistle of Peter. This
is also written to the sojourners of the dispersion to the Jews that are dispersed, the 12 tribes. And it focuses on the status of the believer. The fact that ... by the foreknowledge of God, unto obedience of faith, that we are a living stone. And this
whole idea of a stone of stumbling, a rock of offense. It's interesting that these
idioms are used throughout the Scripture with great consistency. We call that the
law of expositional constancy, that's just a fancy word for saying that these idioms are used
by the Holy Spirit, whether it's by Moses or in the Psalms, or New Testament you'll discover
there's a consistency of idiomatic usage that is a testimony to its source, if you will.
Paul points out in 1st Corinthians 10 the Rock that followed them in the wilderness was Christ.
He's speaking idiomatically, of course, but anyway, Peter talks about the Pilgrim life, that we are
citizens, servants. And he speaks of marriage and all of that. The fiery trial that's coming at the end
he deals with, and his final farewells. One of the things about this epistle, it was written from
Babylon. Now there are many people ... there's a lot of guys that have written books ... they assume Babylon was a code name for Rome. That's nonsense. You may recall that when the Jews are released from Babylon only 50,000 went under Ezra to rebuild the Temple and so forth. Most of them stayed there. They were comfortable. In Babylon was the highest concentration of Jews outside the land of Israel when the Temple fell ... came down. So it was the center of Judaism outside the land. It was appropriate for Peter who was the apostle
to the Jews to make that his base. He wrote from there. There are number people that have an equity in trying to make Peter the first pope and all that. I won't go down that path. Clearly he wrote from Babylon. The Babylonian Talmud several centuries later was developed there
in Babylon. So Peter, the Apostle of the Circumcision would naturally base there. Realize Paul was
designated the Apostle to the Gentiles, Peter was a principal apostle to the Jews. And let's get to the
2nd letter. He emphasized the need to grow in virtue, knowledge, self-control, patience,
Godliness, kindness, and love. And that's ... he also uses "more sure word of prophecy" that
we dealt with in the earlier hour. How sure are we and so forth. But he also focuses
on false teachers that will infect and slander and produce immorality. And God will deliver
them to or from judgment and uses interesting examples - the fallen Angels versus Noah and his family from Genesis 6. And Sodom and Gomorrah and Lot and his family.
These two idioms Peter will use and they're also ... they're also the two idioms that Jude will use when we get to his epistle shortly. But one of the things about the 2nd epistle of Peter, he also
talks about the Second Coming. How the belief in the Second Coming will be disparaged in
the End Times, and boy, do we see that today. He says in 2nd Peter chapter
3 verses 3 and 4 "Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking
after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers fell asleep,
all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation." How interesting it is, that
today so many churches fail to really focus on the Second Coming of Christ. They seem to disparage the study of prophecy. I have found through the 50 years of study
and experience that a focus on prophecy invariably ends up galvanizing people to take
things seriously. Yes, there are abuses. Prophecy suffers from
its enthusiasts as well as its detractors, however the promise of His Coming - it's our Blessed Hope.
But Peter in this ... in verse 4 here adds something that's kind of a surprise. He links the concept of Second
Coming with the idea that the creation continues as it always had. See, both ideas imply ... God intervening in man's world. Many people aren't comfortable with that, so it's interesting, it's not obvious until you think it through. That an interest prophecy is linked to the interest in the creation
and the refutation of evolution and so forth. But he goes on and says "Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with a fervent heat?" So he's talking about the end times. However, the word unto is not implied in the original Greek. The word hasting is the word that is not hasting unto, hastening the
coming of the day of God. In fact, in the NIV it says "speed its coming". In the NAS New American Standard
it says "hastening the coming." In other words, looking for and hastening the coming. Speeding up the
coming. Really, did you know you can speed up the coming of Jesus Christ? That's what it says. How
do you do that? Well, by longing for His appearing according to 2nd Timothy 4:8. By praying
for His appearing Revelation 22:8 and by seeking to win souls in Romans 11:25. That's
our mission. That's our job. As we survey the landscape of the coming year and realize it's
likely to be a very turbulent year, let's remember that God is still in control. His church is
still precious, and we still have the same mission and ... we should keep at it. We should keep at it cause victory is assured to us. That's really what it's all about. Well, then we get to the 1st Epistle
of John. It's called his first epistle. There are many scholars that think it's more a set of
sermon notes than an actual letter, although was a letter, of course. And John very typically,
is full of sevens. Seven contrasts. Truth versus error. Light versus darkness. Father versus
the world. Christ versus the anti-christ. Good works versus evil works. The Holy Spirit versus error.
Love versus pious pretense. God born versus other. So this ... John whether it's his gospel or whether it's his letters or whether it's the Book of Revelation, he's a ... you always see the
hepatic structure, the seven fold structure. There are seven tests of profession, desire,
doctrine, conduct, discernment, motive, and new birth in the first epistle of John. It has seven traits of being born again. It has seven reasons why this epistle was written. It has seven tests of the Christian genuinenesss. Seven tests of honesty and reality. There are
also six liars embraced in that, interestingly enough. One less than seven. And so the structure is
there whether it was the Holy Spirit or John's style, I leave it up to you to sort that through. Sevens
everywhere. The spiritual fundamentals. They're all-inclusive commandments. We believe on Jesus Christ. That's why we love one another. That's John's emphasis. That's the ultimate test of
your maturity in Christ is do you love one another? Should have a profession of love for others. Fathers sacrificing the Son was love's last word. Perfect love casteth out fear and so forth. It's a great letter. It's really the letter you want to study carefully but I'll leave that to you. Let's go to his second letter
which is widely, in my opinion, misunderstood. I'm going to share some things with you that I cannot
find anybody that agrees with me. The second epistle of John was written to someone called the elect lady, "The elder to the elect lady and her children, whom I love in the truth; and not I only, but also all they that have known the truth; for the truth's sake, which dwelleth in us, and shall be with
us forever." And he goes on. The question is who is the elect lady? If you search the librarys -
whether it's back to Jerome in the past, or as recently as say J. Vernon McGee or some of the
current writers, they all will say, all of them I've checked, say essentially the same
thing. This is either an idiom - the elect lady represents the church. It's an idiom for the church is commonly
taught, or it's some prominent person in the church of Ephesus that we'll never know who it is. And
that's what Jerome thought. Now Jerome was from medieval church, the predecessor to the Catholic situation, so for him to consider this an idiom of the church may be comfortable for him, but not for us. We are not children of the church. "Onto the
elect lady and her children." We're not children of the church ... I don't buy that. This is
inconsistent with the rest of Scripture. The alternative is that it's some prominent person
we can never know. Well, when I read the first verse it tells me who she is, and I'm astonished
that nobody else seems to see that. So I'm warning what I'm about to show you I
want to be candid with you, I can't, ... I have so far not found any classical commentators that agree with me. But I have found people when I show this to them, that agree with me when I show them. Look what it says, "The elder," that's John, of course, "unto the elect lady." Who is the most elect person on the planet Earth? Huh? Who? Mary. Absolutely. The dream of every woman. Every Jewish woman was to be the mother of the
Messiah. She's the most elect lady of the planet Earth. "unto the elect lady and her children." Did
she have children? Absolutely. And, by the way, the last verse of this letter will say the
sister of yours, ... the children of your sister greet you. Did she have a sister? Yes,
her sister was with her at the foot of the cross according to John 19. We'll come to that in a minute. Just read the first sentence. "The elder unto the elect lady
and her children, whom I love in the truth; but not I only, but also all they that have
known the truth;" Do you realize what that's saying? Everybody that has known the truth loves her. How could they, they don't know her? But if she's Mary, everybody would feel they do. You follow what I'm saying? And he's using the truth here, by the way, it'll become clear as you read the next few verses, he's using the truth as the title of Jesus Christ, by the way, but you don't have to hang on that. "The elder unto the elect lady and her children, whom I love in the truth; and not I only, but all they that have known the truth;" love her.
That transcends centuries, that transcends the geography. "for the truth's sake, which dwelleth in us" see, that's Christ, "and shall be with us forever, amen." The elect lady. All they that have known the
truth have known her. In fact, love her. You see, we have a problem. The Roman Catholic Church has gone so far the other way to deify her. And as protestants we tend to go the other way we tend to ignore her completely. The truth is, obviously, somewhere in between. Obviously she's elect. If I understand this correctly, this letter gives us a lot of insights. Who is most elect lady of womanhood? Mary. To whom did Jesus consign the care of his mother? John. It's amazing He didn't consign her to His other ... she
had other sons. James and Jude and others. There are you know. There apparently are four guys and several sisters. Jesus did
not consign Mary to any of his half-brothers He consigned her to the apostle John. Interesting. "whom I love in the truth, but also they that have known the truth" "that which we had from the beginning," he says. So the people who ... love her, loved
her from the beginning. And she did have a sister according to John 19:25. Now, if this is true, let's notice some things. Mary was frustrated with Jesus when he was 12 years old. Remember she kept
those things in her heart. Remember Jesus gave sort of a dismissive allusion at Cana. "Woman, what do I have to do with you?" That was her last recorded words, by the way, was there. In Mark she thought
Jesus needed care. And, of course, consigned to John. By the way, John also had a pushy mother.
According to Matthew 20, incidently. So Mary, too, also needed the Holy Spirit according to Acts 1. So here's a woman that we may venerate very highly because the mother of Jesus Christ, but she needed encouragement and she needed exhortation. Both. And that's both in this letter. This alters the tone of the whole epistle.
Cause it's written to Mary not just to any of us. There's a Divine insistence on love and the human expression of love. But also a watch against error. There's a warning against false teaching. We are told by Paul to open our homes to hospitality as a way of preaching the gospel. She's told not to. Why? Because if she brings a false teacher under her roof she's condoning, she's implicitly authorizing the teaching. She's in a different situation. So anyway, there's warnings and parting comments and so forth. So I'll let you read the letter. The third episode of John
is a very short little letter to Gaias. Service in truth and love. And Diotrephes which had
a pride problem and some strife, but he commends Demetrius. There's a very short little note, just personal
note, but it's been kept. The last epistle is the epistle of Jude. This little epistle we could spend weeks on. Because, not just because of its theological depths so much, as it makes allusions that just drive us up a tree. He alludes to things that he assumes his readers know that we don't know. But his main thrust is he tells us why we need to contend against the apostates. He points out there their perversions are subtle. They're destined for a certain doom. They have impious ways. And their utter falsity. So he's really ... the whole thrust of the letter's goal is to nail apostasy. But then he tells us how in the last part of the letter to contend. What are the resources? Why to contend is the first half-dozen ... verses and then ... just a little letter. He points out that apostasy has been foretold and he tells us 4 things to do. To Build, Pray, Keep, and Watch, and then support those who contend for the faith. But in this letter are some allusions that are
just a kick. In Jude verses 6 and 7, there's only one chapter in the whole book, verse 6 and 7 says "and the Angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath
reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day." So he's
making an allusion here very similar to the one that Peter does in his second letter. He
talks about the strange goings-on in Genesis chapter 6, before the flood of Noah. "The Angels
which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation." The word habitation is oiketerion. The body they disrobed from is the body we
aspire to in our resurrection body. The same word oiketerion only occurs twice in the New Testament. Here, in terms of what the angels disrobe from, and in 2nd Corinthians 5:2 the body that we aspire to. In any case, Jude says, "He hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment
of the great day." So these particular fallen Angels that engage in the mischief of Genesis 6 are here alluded to. "And was not even Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like
manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire" and he goes on. 2nd Peter has a passage just like
this but he even ties to the days of Noah, interestingly enough. So here we have ... things are always confirmed by two or three witnesses, so we have Jude verse 6 and 7 and we have 2nd Peter
2 verse 4 and there's another passage in Peter that support the whole view that we expressed
in Genesis chapter 6. I don't think that's a fringe issue. I think it's very fundamental to understand or you won't understand a great deal of what's going on in the Old Testament or prophetically. So I leave
that with you. But Jude also quotes a prophecy that is rather astonishing. We ... don't
know where this came from, Jude may have ... he had access, obviously, to sources we don't. But in verse 14 he says, "and Enoch also, the seventh
from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with 10,000s of his saints," He's
probably ... Enoch here is prophesying before the flood of Noah of the Second Coming of
Christ. It's astonishing to realize, in fact it's apparently the oldest prophecy uttered
by prophet and it's of the Second Coming. "Behold, the Lord cometh with 10,000s of his saints,
to execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their
ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly
sinners have spoken against him." Seemed to have a vocabulary problem there. Ungodly, ungodly is what? Four times, but in any case, it's interesting to realize a prophecy uttered
by a prophet before the flood of Noah of the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. Try to ... that's ... I think kind of interesting. But Jude throws us another curve. What he's basically going to ... what he's arguing here is that we should not behave like these filthy false
teachers. And one of the things that we should not do that they're encouraging us to do, is
we are not to speak evil of dignitaries. Even if they're our adversaries, you don't speak evil of dignities, is the point he's trying to make. "Likewise these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities." They despised them and he wants order. Even if they're our enemies we don't speak evil of dignities. Okay. So far we can relate to that, right? Except
Jude picks what has to be the most bizarre example to make this point, because he gives
an example here that happens to allude to something we don't know anything about. But that's not the real problem. He says, "Yet Michael the archangel. when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses," It'll go on in a minute, but first of all when did Michael dispute with Satan over the body of Moses? I have no idea. Have no idea. He's making an allusion here that his readers apparently knew about that we've lost somehow,
and ... there's some that speculate this might be an allusion to an apocryphal book
called the Assumption of Moses, but that's not necessarily true. But the main point he's making here, Michael, when he's in this dispute with Satan, he says, "Durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, the Lord rebuke thee." What he's saying here is Michael was in some kind of tension with Satan, and even Michael the Archangel didn't speak evil of Satan. He said, "the Lord rebuke you." The real point that Jude is making is we're
not supposed to speak evil of dignitaries, but the dignitary he picks as an example has got to
be the weirdest one of all. Satan. You're not to speak evil of Satan. You speak honestly about him.
He is what he is. But you don't ... you know, I tell you, sometimes I attend a church and they have these songs they sing. You know, "I'm so glad. Satan's so mad." There's a number of these songs that are disparaging of Satan's authority. We shouldn't
be intimidated by it. We shouldn't be disparaging it. Jesus Christ is in control. But when we
encounter a situation, we let the Lord deal with it. We deal with it through the Lord. Very,
very important fundamental point here. But the book of Jude. Strange book. Well, we've gone through in this survey, if I can call it that, the Pauline epistles in the previous session. Romans ... the session before that was
the definitive doctrines of the church. 1st and 2nd Corinthians dealt with order in the church
in broad terms. Galatians was law versus grace, the flesh versus Spirit and all that. Ephesians was
the manifestation of the mystery of the church. Very pivotal epistle in the area of ecclesiology. We really need to understand the uniqueness
of the church even among believers. Not all believers are in the church. We'll talk
more about that in the next session as we do our review of eschatology, but you'll discover
many of the problems in eschatology are not eschatological problems they're ecclesiology problems. And then there's the epistle to the Philippians. Basically our resources in suffering. Which has, of course.
this incredible passage about the mind of Christ and so on. Then Colossians. Colossians is one of
those incredible peaks that it's fun to be on ... at the top of. Christ's preeminence.
Colossians is an incredible epistle if you're interested in cosmology or ontology or any of these
high ... the high ground. It's incredible. Thessalonians we'll take on next time. We didn't get into that much because I reserved it to be analyzed very carefully when we go through the review ... eschatology. 1&2 Thessalonians are probably
two of the most important eschatological epistles in the New Testament. First and second
Timothy and Titus are basically advice to pastors, but there's much ... not only good practical advice there, there's many insights that are there. And his little piece of art called Philemon you need to really ... little brief study. but it's a delightful study about Onesimus and what intercession's really all about. Well, and then in this session that was the previous session, this session we went through the Hebrew Christian epistles. Hebrews was really the express document for
we would call the New Covenant. That's what Jeremiah called it. That's amply dealt with. I believe, for a number of reasons it was penned by Paul who remained anonymous so that he would broaden his readership.
But there are good scholars that have slightly different views. Jacob or James demonstrating
your faith through works. You don't get saved by works, but you're ... if you have real faith, it will
show up in works. In 1st Peter it's really the Persecuted Church and 2nd Peter the Coming Apostasy
is its emphasis. And John's epistle 1st John deserves ... if there's any place that we've sort of shortchanged you, there's one place we really should have spent ... more time on John. But you can do that on your own. Just take that little epistle and dissect it. Analyze it. Outline it. Just to immerse in it. And 2nd John, I think, has a whole different complexion if you understand who it was written to, but in any case, it deals with false teachers and their threat. 3rd John is just the preparation of helpers a little one. And Jude is on Apostacy, but has many other little nuggets in it, as we've come from. So, it's interesting, of the Hebrew Christian epistles
3 of them deal with apostasy or false teachers. 2nd Peter, 2nd John, and Jude. Big issue
and certainly clear today. We have prominent Christian people turning apostate. We need to understand that just because they're prominent and well-known people does not make them correct. You need to remember Acts 17:11. It's our trademark verse "to receive the word
of God with all openness of mind, but then you search the Scriptures daily to prove whether
those things be so." And that's where Luke tells you don't believe anything Chuck Missler tells you. Check it out for yourself. The 7 most important
epistles we haven't talked about yet. That'll come in the time after next. There are 7
epistles that were written by Jesus Christ Himself. There's a second letter to Ephesus. And
it's going to be very important that we understand the first letter in order really understand
the second letter. The letter written by Jesus. He wrote a letter to Smyrna, which has some similarities to Philippians interestingly enough. He's written a letter to Pergamus which has some similarities to Corinthians. Letter to Thyatira, letter to Sardis, letter to Thessalonica, and a letter to Laodicia. These 7 letters by Jesus
Christ that constitute Revelation chapters 2 and 3 are the most important chapters
in the book of Revelation. They're the ones that are most important to you and me. From chapter
4 on is yet future. We'll watch that from the mezzanine. What's critical for you and I is to really
understand these 7 letters. And there's far more tucked away in their structure than most people
have any idea. And we'll try to give you a glimpse of that when we get the time after next. But the
4 ... that when you study those 4, I encourage you to read Revelation 2 and 3 several
times between now and the time we meet on it. But I want you notice that The first 3 and the last 4 are distinctively
different in a couple of aspects. And let you search for that. And see if you can find it before we
get there. That'll be your little anticipatory project, but next time be prepared with a notebook. Cause we're going to try to go through a review of eschatology. Study of the last things. Why do some people hold
to a pre-Trib, Pre-millenial position, some Amillennial? Most churches are Amillenial and that's a very dangerous view because it makes God a liar. We need to understand what's that all about. And given that you're
Pre-millenial. Okay. Great. When does the Rapture occur? Is it Pre-trib? Post-Trib? Mid-Trib? Whenever.
Why do certain people have different views? We won't keep our view a secret. We'll let you know
how we feel, but we'll try to do it in a way that you'll be able to map different views as
to how they stand on different issues. And then, of course, that'll be a prelude before jumping in to the
climax of the whole thing. Everything that was started in Genesis is climaxed in Revelation. We will then go
there. But the next session is a review of eschatology. The study of the last things. And we'll try to take in ...
what is this Rapture? What's the Harpazo? Is that something recent? Or is that
serious. It's obviously the most preposterous view in Christianity, but is it true? And if that is
true, does the church go through the tribulation? That's probably, in a certain practical sense, it's
one of the most burning issues today among Christians that are ... take the Bible seriously. And so we'll
... deal with all of that fairly directly in the next session. Let's stand for a closing word of prayer. Father we thank You for Your word. We thank
You for this brief opportunity to surface it. To get our arms around it. To review it. We
pray Father that You would just increase in each of us a hunger, an appetite. We pray Father that, too, You would lead us to where we should go next, where we should probe more deeply. But in all these things
Father we just pray that You would open our hearts and lives to Your word that we might
be more fruitful stewards of these gifts You've given us. We pray Father that we might be growing
in the grace and knowledge of Lord and Savior ... and that we would be more pleasing
Your site as we go forth and just commit ourselves without any reservation into Your hands in the name of Yeshua, our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Amen.
