Last night I watched a presidential debate for the first time this year. And I was reminded with shocking clarity that even the best form of government is terribly broken, and even the best major political party is unreliable.

For a nominally-informed civilian like myself, I find it overwhelming at times to evaluate all the different policies on immigration, budget reform, and international relations (for example) and conclude which one is the best — the candidates each present their positions quite convincingly and in some cases tear down the others. And when the debate does degenerate into raw (and at times juvenile or even vulgar) argument, it makes the whole process even more distasteful.

Additionally, there is the unknown of whether these candidates could even fulfill their promises if given the chance. I have more confidence in some than others, but all of them face an America divided at the deepest of levels. Then there are all the stories posted to Facebook that accuse this candidate and then another of indecent, deceptive, and immoral campaigning techniques. And to make it worse, an unfortunate common sense analysis of these stories is that it is what it is — it's politics.

The vainglorious attitude of some of the candidates, the necessary self-elevation of the others, the increasing division within both major political parties (no longer liberalism vs. conservatism, but now liberalism vs. socialism vs. populism vs. conservatism), and the significance of the stakes this time regarding abortion, marriage, national security, judicial practice, religious freedom, and national debt further complicate this presidential race.

Now, I happen to believe that a Democratic Republic is the best form of modern government, and I also believe that America has represented the best model of that. Furthermore, by biblical conviction, I hold to a similar worldview as many conservatives in the Republican Party, and I believe there are some candidates who are valid and promising, and one of them will have my vote.

However, I'm convinced that what we need is not the continuation of a Democratic Republic or the election of a conservative Republican candidate (although I hope both happen). Neither that system nor any of those candidates can be the kind of savior we desperately require.

We need an omniscient, omnipotent, gracious King. We need one Leader who knows all things absolutely and has all power unquestionably, but who is loving and merciful unwaveringly. We need Him to rule over all, for all eternity. Nothing less than that will do. That is not just America's hope; that is the only hope for our entire planet.

And that is the very hope that is at the center of what we Christians believe. We believe that the King came to earth once before, not to establish an earthly kingdom, but to deliver us from our spiritual tyrant (Hebrews 2:14-18). And having died on a cross for the sin of the world and having been raised from the dead to prove His victory, we are persuaded that He is awaiting the set time to reclaim Earth as His rightful domain (Ephesians 1:20-23). And He will come, and He will reign in power and excellence, in goodness and grace, in righteousness and truth, in joy and glory forever and ever. Our only hope is You, King Jesus!

So, what a blessed foretaste to turn off the debate, get into bed, wake up the next morning ... and gather with the body of Christ on the Lord's Day! "Some trust in chariots and some in horses, but we trust in the name of the LORD our God" (Psalm 20:7). I hope my candidate wins the White House, but I know my King will win the world! That confidence is a needed anchor as the political climate changes and as the global storm clouds gather.

QUESTION #2

What is the meaning of 1 Peter 3:19-20 regarding Christ preaching to spirits in prison?

RESPONSE

Principles — (1) God’s word is inerrant and does not contradict. So, apparent contradictions can be explained, and God’s Spirit will be our teacher. (2) Always move from clearer passages to less clear in your Bible interpretation; let the clear passages be your foundation and help you interpret the less clear passages. (3) Beware of building a theological dogma on an unclear passage.  (4) Use the context to help you understand the unique nuance the author is seeking to convey.

Option #1 — (1) Rather than suggesting Purgatory, this text must be interpreted in light of clearer biblical teaching, like Luke 16:26 and Hebrews 9:27 which teach that there are no second chances to respond to the gospel after death. Furthermore, the word for preach is not “preach the gospel” (euangelizo), but “preach” or “proclaim” (kerusso), so the idea of those who die having a second chance to hear and respond to the gospel is not substantiated by this text.

(2) Jesus preached to these “spirits in prison” “in [the Spirit]”—that becomes quite helpful. It was not, then, a physical preaching in which His presence was materially present.

(3) Who are these “spirits in prison”? I believe that the grammar, context, and purpose of the passage strongly indicates that they are those who didn’t obey Noah’s preaching during the time of God’s patience when the ark was being prepared for judgment (v. 20).

• Grammatically, the pronoun “they” in verse 20 refers back to the antecedent (“spirits in prison”) in verse 19 and describes those spirits as “they…[who] did not obey…in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared.” Additionally, while the ESV begins verse 20 with “because,” the Greek word pote is an indication of time and is better translated “when” or “once/formerly” (i.e., the ESV acknowledges this in its note).
• Contextually, 1 Peter 1:10-11 records that the Spirit of Christ was the One speaking through the Old Testament prophets in their messages of salvation and grace, and 2 Peter 2:5 uses the same word for “preach” here (kerusso), when it refers to Noah as a “preacher of righteousness.”
• Concerning the purpose, the NET Bible notes, “These verses encourage Christians [a minority, like in Noah’s day] to stand for righteousness and try to influence their contemporaries for the gospel in spite of the suffering that may come to them. All who identify with them and their Savior will be saved from the coming judgment, just as in Noah’s day.”[i]
  

So, because of the grammar, context, and purpose of this passage, I believe these are the unbelievers who used to be alive in Noah’s day, and after they died, having rejected his preaching, they were imprisoned in eternal condemnation (i.e., they are “the spirits now in prison who once were disobedient…in the days of Noah,” NASB). Both the NET and NASB translations favor this interpretation.

John Piper explains it this way, “I think it refers to the time when people in Noah’s day were disobedient, mocking him as a righteous man obeying God (like the situation in the lives of Peter's readers), and that Jesus, in the spirit, was sent by God in those days to preach to those people through Noah. Just like in [1 Peter] 1:11 the Spirit of Jesus was in the Old Testament prophets predicting his coming, so the Spirit of Jesus was in Noah preaching to the disobedient people of Noah’s day. They are NOW in prison—that is, in a place of torment awaiting the final judgment (Luke 16:24).”[ii]

Option #2 — While the NET Bible argues for this interpretation, it also suggests a viable alternative: "Christ’s announcement of his victory [cf. v. 18] over evil to the fallen angels who await judgment for their role in leading the Noahic generation into sin [cf. Colossians 2:14-15; 2 Peter 2:4-5; Jude 6-7; Genesis 6:1-8];[iii] this proclamation occurred sometime between Christ’s death and ascension”[iv] (cf. MacArthur Study Bible).

The Point — (1) God the Son has always been concerned with the salvation of sinners, even in His pre-incarnate state. (2) The ark is a prophetic event, a shadow of the gospel, pointing forward to the gracious provision of God through the substitutionary Atonement on a wooden cross. God provides a way of salvation from His wrath on our sin, and we must take our refuge in Him in order to be rescued! Just as Noah and his family were only saved by being “in the ark” which bore the brunt of God’s punishing waves, so we are only saved by being “in Christ” who bore the wrath of God for us.

QUESTION #3

What is the meaning of 1 Peter 3:21 regarding baptism? It seems like it is saying that baptism is necessary for salvation.

RESPONSE

Starting with the clearer truth, we know from Scripture that baptism does not save a person. So, we have to figure out what this passage means, when it appears on a surface level reading to contradict that clearer truth.

It is helpful for us to observe that Peter writes that baptism “corresponds” (i.e., “like figure whereunto,” KJV; “antitype,” NKJV; “symbolizes,” NIV; “prefigured,” NET; BDAG: a representation, copy, corresponding situation) to the ark.

• See, the ark didn't save Noah, but was the means of His salvation…God saved Noah!
• “Corresponding to that,” baptism doesn’t actually save…Jesus does according to verse 18! Even verse 21 says that “baptism saves...through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.”
• So, like the ark, baptism is the means of salvation in as far as it is an expression of faith. Being an expression of faith is an important and clear interpretation, and is evident by the qualifier, “not as a removal of dirt from the body [which is all that water baptism can do] but as an appeal to God for a good conscience [which only He can give].” It is possible, then, that he isn’t even referring to water baptism, but spiritual baptism (cf. Romans 6:1-4).
• Piper puts it this way, “Baptism is a way of saying to God: ‘I trust you to apply the death of Jesus to me for my sins and to bring me through death and judgment into new and everlasting life through the resurrection of Jesus.’”[v]
  

ENDNOTES

[i] Biblical Studies Press, The NET Bible First Edition; Bible. English. NET Bible.; The NET Bible (Biblical Studies Press, 2006).
[ii] http://www.desiringgod.org/sermons/strengthened-to-suffer-christ-noah-and-baptism
[iii] Noting that the word for “preaching” or “proclaimed” here is not the Greek word euangelizomai, but kerusso, Gleason Archer suggests a slight variation to this option: “the proclamation made by the crucified Christ in Hades to all the souls of the dead may have been to the effect that the price had now been paid for sin, and all those who died in the faith were to get ready for their departure to heaven—shortly to occur on Easter Sunday [cf. Ephesians 4:8]” (Bible Difficulties [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1982]).
[iv] The NET Bible First Edition.
[v] http://www.desiringgod.org/sermons/strengthened-to-suffer-christ-noah-and-baptism

QUESTION #1

Matthew 12:40 says, “For just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.” Also, Matthew 28:1 describes how Jesus rose to life on Sunday, the first day of the week. I have always heard that Jesus was crucified on Friday. But if you take Matthew 12:40 literally, does that mean Jesus was crucified on Thursday?

RESPONSE

Background — Jesus died at 3:00 PM (the “ninth hour” of the day was in reference to the start of the Jewish day at 6:00 a.m.; Matthew 27:45, 50; Mark 15:33-34, 37; Luke 23:44-46) and was interred around 6:00 p.m. (cf. Luke 23:54) on the same day (Matthew 27:57; Mark 15:42), which is called “the day of Preparation, that is, the day before the Sabbath [Saturday]” (Mark 15:42; cf. Matthew 27:62; Luke 23:54; John 19:31 [Deuteronomy 21:22-23], 38, 42). He was clearly resurrected around dawn on the day after the Sabbath, the first day of the week, Sunday (Matthew 28:1-7; Mark 16:1-7; Luke 23:56-24:9; John 20:1-19).

Option #1 — Jesus died on Wednesday or Thursday and was raised on Sunday.

Option #2 — Jesus died on Friday and was raised on Sunday.

• “three days and three nights” = In Jewish usage, this and other similar phrases were used for emphasis, not for literal time-keeping. So, it could simply mean a period of time that includes parts of three days (cf. 1 Samuel 30:12-13; 2 Chronicles 10:5, 12; Esther 4:16; 5:1; Luke 13:32 for a similar phrase employed non-literally). “As we count time, three days and three nights points inexorably to three periods of twenty-four hours each; we thus have a problem with the use of this expression for the time between Jesus’ death and resurrection: the period from toward the middle of the day on Friday (when he was crucified) to early on Sunday morning (when he was seen alive) comes short of what we understand by three days and three nights. But the Jews did not reckon as we do: they counted the day on which any period began as one day, and they did the same with the day on which the period ended. Thus we have Friday, Saturday, Sunday, three days; it does not matter that neither the Friday nor the Sunday was complete [fn: The rabbis said, “A day and a night make an ‘Onah and a part of an ‘Onah is as the whole”; and again, “The part of a day is as the whole day” (SBk, I, p. 649).]. According to the method of counting in use at the time, this is the period during which Jesus would be in the heart of the earth.”[i]

• Support = (1) The biblical timeline, as harmoniously recorded in all four gospels, strongly suggests a Friday death/burial and Sunday resurrection. (2) Paul affirms in 1 Corinthians 15:4 that Jesus “was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures” (cf. Matthew’s use of this phrase and alteration of it in Matthew 16:21; 27:63). (3) A Thursday evening crucifixion would not solve the problem, for it would still not allow for three 24-hour periods.

[i] Leon Morris, The Gospel according to Matthew, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI; Leicester, England: W.B. Eerdmans; Inter-Varsity Press, 1992), pp. 325-326.

This was originally shared during Midweek Connection on October 22.

THE SETTING
Jesus returns to Capernaum (probably to Peter’s home—cf. Matthew 4:13 and Mark 1:21, 29; important to note that this would have been a relatively small and simple home made with stones with a flat roof that would be frequently used for relaxation, oftentimes with an exterior staircase providing access), and the people discover that He’s back. They gather at the house to hear Jesus teach the Scriptures. The crowd of listeners was so large that people were crammed outside against the house.

THE PROBLEM
A group of men carrying their crippled friend arrive on the scene, trying to get to Jesus. They were unable to, because of the great crowd.

THE INCITING MOMENT
The friends, insistent on getting their needy comrade to Jesus, are not ready to give up. They climb up the stairs to the roof, and begin tearing up the clay roof above where Jesus was teaching. When they had created a large enough opening, they lowered their friend down into the house near where Jesus was.

This was pretty bizarre considering that this wasn’t their house and considering that teaching below would have been interrupted as debris began falling upon those inside. This would have created quite the scene…embarrassment and social awkwardness.

THE RISING ACTION
When Jesus saw the faith of these friends (and apparently of the paralytic himself) so clearly demonstrated in their aggression, persistence, and boldness (they weren’t embarrassed) in getting their needy companion to Jesus, He responded by performing an invisible, and yet most important, miracle (more important, in fact, than the physical healing of this man, which was, of course, what these men had desired in brining their fellow to Jesus)—the salvation of his soul. Jesus would later actually respond to his initial request and heal him physically, too.

THE CONFLICT
When the religious leaders heard Jesus forgive this man’s sins, they were troubled. Their doctrine correctly taught them that only God could forgive sins, but their evaluation of Jesus incorrectly led them to conclude that He was blaspheming. The other valid option—that Jesus was God—was never even considered.

I’m not sure that my conclusion would have been any different, especially since I’ve been trained as a good Bible student to live by the book. Yes, a logical conclusion was that this man Jesus was God, even the Messiah, but there was so much practical and convention wisdom that went against that idea. It “made more sense” to be doctrinal and conclude that He was a heretic. Any good pastor would have concluded the same; so, I’m not going to fault the scribes here in verse 7.

Jesus, knowing this internal conflict within the scribes, begins to help them understand that the option they so readily dismissed (i.e., He is God) was the truth. He asks them whether it is easier to say, “Your sins are forgiven,” or “Get up, pick up your pallet and walk.” Obviously, it is easier to say the first because it is invisible and cannot be visibly proved. The latter can be verified immediately through physical and visible evidence. So, Jesus now determines to effectively say the latter in order to prove that He had effectively said the former.

THE CLIMAX: THE MIRACLE
The man “immediately” got up and walked “in the sight of everyone.”

THE RESPONSE
The people were “amazed” and “glorified God.” They also continued to come and listen to Jesus.

At this point, however, I believe that a reproof again the scribes is in order. Jesus had sought to correct their legitimate, but incorrect, conclusion—the physical healing proved the veracity of His claim and power to forgive sins, and should have caused the Scribes to change their conclusion and submit to Him as their God. We know, however, that this was not their response.

PRINCIPLE 1 — Jesus knows and can meet our greatest (and perhaps unknown) needs when we have faith in Him.

This man had faith in Jesus’ ability…this was more than knowledge about Jesus, belief in Jesus’ existence. I believe that this man sincerely and earnestly believed (as revealed in tearing the roof up) that Jesus could meet his needs and fix his problems. However, I don’t think that his faith was fully mature, correctly focused, or fully taught. His faith in Jesus is unquestioned, but it seems that he’s overlooking some things that we would consider integral, like Jesus’ purpose to save people from their sin. However, when he came in confident expectation to Christ to fix the problem, Jesus in His omniscience and grace honored his unwavering faith, by meeting his greatest need.

The content of saving faith has changed throughout the ages (e.g., “Abraham believed God and it was counted to him for righteousness”), but saving faith is always rooted in the ability and promises of God. Today, saving faith is a confident belief in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ and in His ability to completely fulfill His promise to save to the uttermost those that come unto God by Him.

This man demonstrated saving faith by unwaveringly and desperately clinging to the truth that if he just got to Jesus, Jesus would know what to do. He didn’t have all his theology worked out; He hadn’t thought through all the details of who Jesus was…but He confidently believed in Jesus’ ability to meet his need. And he discovered that faith in Jesus gets all of Him—Jesus met his physical and spiritual needs.

This is grace – He didn’t give them only what they asked for. Faith in Jesus, even though not fully mature (i.e., they believed in His ability to physically heal, but perhaps they hadn’t considered His ability to spiritually heal), was what pleased Jesus and caused Him to respond by meeting the need, not just the request.

PRINCIPLE 2 — Christ honors our faith when we bring other people to Him.  And, considering that He alone really knows the true needs, He may do more than we ever expected.

Had they allowed the circumstances to deter their perseverance to get their friend to the only One who they believed could help him (e.g., embarrassment from the situation), their friend would not only have never walked, but he also would have never experienced salvation. Their faith was in some way catalytic to the spiritual healing of their friend.

This would have been one of those sobering “wow” moments, in which they would have been very thankful for God’s grace in overlooking their limited faith and using it to draw this man (and perhaps themselves) to Himself. From the paralytic’s perspective, he had done nothing (except believe).  His friends had been tools. God had orchestrated everything (i.e., He had given the crippled man these friends and stirred within them this faith in Jesus’ physical-healing ability). Jesus saw and met the true need though these friends.

Comparing Scripture with Scripture, this passage cannot be teaching that a man can be saved by someone else’s faith. However, the passage is emphasizing how influential your faith can be in the salvation of someone else.

Application: How can we demonstrate faith by bringing people to Jesus?  Not bringing people to Jesus reveals a lack of faith.

1. Bringing the unsaved to Jesus:

• Inviting to church events
  
• Witnessing
  
• Giving out tracts
  

2. Bringing the saved to Jesus—“fellowship”:

• Giving a word of encouragement
  
• Advising someone
  
• Prayer
  

PRINCIPLE 3 — I don’t need any other proof from Jesus; I just need to trust Him.

I was reading this tract this morning, and I was overwhelmed again by Jesus’ substitutionary atonement.

Jesus was “crushed for my sins” (Isaiah 53:5). It’s easy to allow familiarity with the crucifixion to lessen its impact. We think so much of the physical pain and only occasionally of the spiritual pain. Even Jesus’ phrase “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?!” doesn’t strike us as being the horrific expression of real experience that it was.

Don’t miss it though – we’ll never fully understand the weight of the punishment that Christ took…that’s the point of the GOSPEL! We’ll never know it…NEVER! Even when we read and meditate on the crucifixion, and try to put ourselves in Christ’s place, and seek to logically understand what happened in that moment of substitution – we’ll never fully get it. Because Christ paid it ALL! He took ALL that wrath…wrath reserved for me! Jesus was CRUSHED for me, so that I would never know what that was like, even when I read about it in the Bible.

Praise be unto our Jesus Christ – our propitiation and substitution!

(For more artwork that powerfully illustrates the Gospel, click here. I’m thankful for Full of Eyes ministry for using their free artwork to the glory of Jesus Christ.)