The Missing Hebrew New Testament

Last night while waiting between scenes at our local Easter pageant practice, I had an interesting conversation with a friend about the origins of the New Testament. He explained to me that he was reading a book about how the New Testament was possibly written in Hebrew. Now I must admit I have not heard the position that the entire New Testament was written in Hebrew, but I am aware of some who claim that Matthew was written in Hebrew along with the first several chapters of Acts. In light of the recent debate between James White and Bart Ehrman on the topic "Does the Bible Misquote Jesus", I gave him a couple of responses.

First, after doing a little searching, I did find a site that believes the entire NT was originally written in Hebrew. Although I am not certain they would be orthodox, an initial survey through their site did not preclude their orthodoxy. I was just not able to ascertain their full understanding of the person of Jesus as being both fully God and fully man.

I did read at one point that the website would be using the King James version of the Bible. Yet while reading their commentary of Revelation, the very first verse is cited as

A revelation of Messiah Yeshua, that God gave to him, to show to his servants what things it must soon come to pass quickly; and he did signify [it], having sent through his messenger to his servant John

Last I checked, the text does not say "Messiah Yeshua". Although this really isn't a big deal, it is the assumption that I find interesting. This page states this very clearly.

Another contributing factor to misinterpretation is that the books of the "New Testament" are "Greek documents." The fact that the "New Testament" texts we have are in Greek, makes them no more "Greek documents" than the Septuagint (Greek) version of the Old Testament, which the rabbis wrote into Greek 200 years before Yeshua. The rabbis did this (as did someone at some point with the "New Testament" letters), for the benefit of the non-Jewish world so that they could also learn of the God and faith of Israel.

There you have it. We know that the New Testament was originally written in Hebrew just as the Septuagint was originally written in Hebrew. How do we know this? Well if you read on at the above link, it basically argues that it just had to be because Hebrew was not a dead language and the Apostles would have not written the originals apart from a proper Hebrew understanding of the Torah.

Now again, how does this prove anything? Obviously it doesn't. But again, notice the underlying assumption. The original New Testament had to be Hebrew for right doctrine. So just as in the verse cited above (Revelation 1:1), the original text must have said Messiah Yeshua. But this is simply working backwards based upon assumptions that may be false. It is also assuming doctrines and then forcing our doctrines in an imaginary original text.

A second and related problem is the problem of inspiration and inerrancy. Let's face it. If we do not have the original Hebrew texts, and we don't, then (1) we may either make up our own original text or (2) we do not have the original inspired text preserved anywhere or (3) we may do as the King James people do and move the locus of inspiration to translators in order to have an inspired copy of a copy or an inspired translation of the original.

Of course, this again leads to theological problems. We may easily dismiss sound doctrine simply because we think original manuscripts are lost, whatever we might think they originally have been like. Remember the author wrote

Another contributing factor to misinterpretation is that the books of the "New Testament" are "Greek documents."

This thinking only leads to a text that is untrustworthy and a God who is not able to preserve His Word. And we may literally make the Bible say whatever we want.

Coal Will Kill You...After You Live Longer Than Any Previous Generation

A few months ago I was again invited to be one of many judges in our local high school forensic debate competition. The hot topic this year was on energy. What amazed me is the false presupposition that we are subtly teaching out kids. In every single debate, the assumption was that the almighty government was the solution. No one ever challenged the idea that government might actually be the problem.

Be that as it may, there was one argument used by a couple of teams I thought was simply nonsense. An EPA study on air pollution was cited against coal fired plants. This study supposedly demonstrated that fine particles were a cause for cancer and therefore the cause for higher medical bills and, of course, more deaths. This article states something similar to what I heard in the debate.

The risk is from what scientists call combustion-related fine particulate matter - soot emitted by cars and trucks, coal-fired power plants and factories.

The researchers took into account other risk factors for heart and lung disease such as cigarettes, diet, weight and occupation.

Lung cancer death rates were compared with average pollution levels, as measured in micrograms per cubic meter of air. The researchers found that the number of lung cancer deaths increased 8 percent for every increase of 10 micrograms. Other heart- and lung-related causes of death increased 6 percent for every 10-microgram increase.

The last line of this quote simply amazed me. The idea that we may be dying due to coal dust is just silly. This is a great example of how we are able to lie to ourselves simply because we hate Capitalism, freedom and liberty.

The evidence is literally all over the place that even if we grant that coal pollution is bad for us, that coal fire plants actually help in our living longer lives. Americans are living longer lives today than any generation ever! Yet we are actually presenting evidence such as coal pollution to be shortening our lives. Live Science reported in 2005,

The average life expectancy for Americans is 77.6 years, a record high according to the latest statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

The CDC released the numbers Monday. Life expectancy is calculated based on mortality in 2003, the most recent year for which substantially complete data is available.

The figure is up from 77.3 in 2002 and comes in spite of a decades-long rise in obesity reported by the agency in October.

According to this article,

Cleaner air over the past two decades has added nearly five months to average life expectancy in the United States, according to a federally funded study.

Wow, five months have been added to our lives. Yet clean water and technology (technology such as burning coal!) has increased our life spans much more. The evidence is overwhelming. Yet the Political Left hates our way of life. It should be obvious that man has a great ability to lie to himself.

Why are Politically Left leaning groups self-deceived? There are all kinds of reasons why people do what they do. Overall, I think the reason is simple. It is the same reason dictators and thugs take over countries. Power.

Let's keep our freedom and liberty. I say bring on the smoke stacks baby!

Keeping the Sabbath Holy

I keep forgetting to mention that my pastor preached an excellent sermon on the Sabbath (click here to listen). If you are a confessional Baptist, you may be blessed and troubled at how we have broken it. If you are a Dispensational Baptist that uses the New Hampshire Confession, then you might find this sermon a little troubling.

Definition of Sanctification by Owen

Kudos to Paul for this great definition of Sanctification cited from John Owen's work The Holy Spirit, His Gifts and Power:

“Sanctification is an immediate work of the Spirit of God on the souls of believer, purifying their natures from the pollution and uncleanness of sin, renewing in them the image of God and thereby enabling them, from a spiritual and habitual principle of grace, to yield obedience to God, according to the tenor of the new covenant, by virture of the life and death of Jesus Christ. Or more briefly, it is the universal renovation of our natures by the Holy Spirit, into the image of God, through Jesus Christ.” P 257

It's Even Worse Than I Thought

Update on yesterday's post. Apparently my little poking fun at the Rick Warren having baptized 800 marathon while talking about small groups really missed the mark. It is much worse than that! There was an actual attempt to reproduce the day of Pentecost with 3,000 baptisms. Here is the announcement.

Two thousand years ago - the Day of Pentecost was the first day of the Christian Church. Acts 2:41 tells us, "About 3,000 people were baptized and joined the church that day." If you'll join us this weekend, history could be repeated at Saddleback! Want to make history?

Which of these requirements do you need to complete this Saturday?

1. Open your heart to Jesus Christ. Click here to learn more.
2. Attend Class 101: Discovering Your Church Family. Sign up.
3. Sign our membership covenant (explained in class).
4. Be baptized the way Jesus commanded and modeled for us.
(Many of us were baptized as kids on our parent's faith. Jesus modeled believer's baptism at age 30 when he was baptized in the Jordan River) It would be my privilege to baptize you after Class 101.

YOU CAN FINISH ALL 4 REQUIREMENTS IN ONE DAY - THIS SATURDAY!

EIGHT REASONS TO JOIN THIS SATURDAY & NOT PROCRASTINATE:

1. I'm personally teaching Class 101 for the first time in ten years.

2. I'm personally baptizing after Class and you'll receive a photo & baptism certificate.

3. You'll get a free one year subscription to Purpose Driven Connection magazine. (Never offered before)

4. You'll get free copy of The Purpose Driven Church book.

5. Your name will be included in the historical list of Saddleback Pioneer Members who joined in our first 30 years. (This Easter is our 30th Easter and I want you included in this list.)

6. The class is 1 hour shorter than normal. You can watch session 3 here online now.

7. You'll be a part of making Christian history! The largest membership class ever!

8. We love you & want you in our family. There is no good reason to procrastinate.

I was asked, "Rick, If you could wish for anything to celebrate your 30 years of service at Saddleback, what would you dream of?" I said, "To experience a repeat of Pentecost - and see 3,000 people affirm their faith and join our church family on a single day." Will you be a part of making this a reality?

And here is the ending,

This is going to be fun. You're the greatest. See you Saturday!

Rick Warren
Saddleback Church
Purpose Driven Network
P.E.A.C.E. Coalition

I guess the necessity of preaching that actually brings about conviction of sin and true conversion of the soul is simply out of touch with reality. Well, at least it will be fun.

Small Groups

I thought these two statements from this BP News story were kind of funny.

"It's good to see God at work in so many people's lives," said Steven Tang, the small group leader. "This is what the small group community is about and what Pastor Rick is always talking about. It's amazing to be able to live and participate in the reality of it."

Saddleback Church baptized 800 people in a marathon three and a half hour ceremony March 28, after nearly 2,400 people attended a four-hour class for people interested in becoming members of the church.

Perhaps I am the only one with a strange sense of humor.

Obama Mania Will Pass

I think these people just sit around and lie to themselves. This story from Yahoo News about the Obama Mania press conference is a great example of the nonsense coming from the Drive-bys. One article states,

The buzziest moment came about 35 minutes into the press conference when Ed Henry of CNN asked the President why he didn't spew outrage as soon as he learned about the AIG bonuses. Why, Mr. Henry asked, did the president wait several days before speaking out? The president, with an icy stare, responded that he "likes to know what he's talking about" before he speaks. It was a pretty testy exchange that brought about nervous laughter from the other reporters and snarky responses from Twitterers. Boom! Next question.

Snarky responses? Nervous laughter? This is news? Is the media trying to show how tough they are? Is the media trying to show we have a tough President? I have no idea what this story is trying to say. Why should the Media be nervous? Is the messiah going to strike them down to purgatory?

The Reporter's question of why did the President wait before he targeted AiG is silly. Never mind the fact that President and congress had written the bonuses into the law. The questions really ought to be, "Why is Obama overthrowing the Constitution?" and "Why is the government targeting private citizens?" and "Why is the government creating mob rule?"

Perhaps the bigger question is "Where are the Republicans?" Why are they sitting idly by or aiding and abetting the Left while Democrats destroy liberty and freedom? Notice this statement,

The president responded that he expects Americans to do what they've always done "which is working hard, looking after their families, making sure that, despite the economic hard times, that they're still contributing to their community..."

Why do we allow these Drive-bys and the Left to determine false premises? Why should the President expect anything from us? Why should the question even be asked? Who is the President to tell the American people that HE expects us to do anything? We don't work for the government. This is just sick. I used to live in the United States. I am not certain where I am at the moment. Perhaps I am on my way to the gulag?

Obama Mania will end, though. I was reminded by my 13 year-old son about American history from his history class yesterday. Not only did this country survive the Civil War, but Roosevelt did very similar things during the Great Depression to prolong the Depression and institute permanent Democrat power. We eventually not only survived those times, but managed to even prosper after them. Even if we do not, as a Christian I am reminded the tastes of freedom in this age may be fleeting. Those shadows of freedom will only be fully realized in the age to come, when the true Messiah comes and destroys the wicked and the "meek shall inherit the earth".

Note: the image comes from a wrestling forums website.

Thumbing Collective Nose?

I thought this CitizenLink was interesting. The brief article sounds as if all of Rome is upset.

There’s a clear contradiction between his policies and that which a Catholic institution is presumably bound to promote.'

President Barack Obama will be the principal speaker and the recipient of an honorary doctor of laws degree at the University of Notre Dame’s commencement May 17.

Longtime Notre Dame philosophy professor Ralph McInerny called it "a deliberate thumbing of the collective nose at the Roman Catholic Church to which Notre Dame purports to be faithful."

Yet I have to ask, "What is the big deal?" I don't see Rome excommunicating church members such Nancy Pelosi. She has actual political power. Notre Dame is a school, not a church or government institution. Perhaps Rome will act in an appropriate manner towards Notre Dame. I highly doubt it though. These guys may speak tough all they want. Until Rome does something about it, nothing is going to change.

In my opinion, Rome is hardly getting snubbed.

Jacob Reads

Jacob has taught himself to read.



Well, ok...we have been reading more. He loves reading Stop That Ball! and Green Eggs and Ham.

Working Together

A good friend of mine sent me a quick note concerned about my post on evangelism methods. I basically stated that Calvinists may not use the method of walking up to complete strangers and unbelievers and say "Christ died for you". This has become a test of faith for many Southern Baptists. Yet I think this point of contention may easily divide unnecessarily. So I thought I'd take another post to explain a situation that has arisen among Southern Baptists.

1) First, I think for many, the phrase "Jesus died for you" is inconsistently being used by the non-Calvinist. However, I don't think there is real detrimental harm in its usage depending on how it is defined. For instance, even Calvinists such as John Piper will use this phrase when witnessing to the lost. But as in his conversation with Bruce Ware on Limited Atonement makes obvious, Piper is careful as to what he means by this phrase. The average Christian probably is not.

The average non-Calvinist when using the phrase "Jesus died for you" most likely means what the Calvinist means when he says, "Christ's death is able to save all those who will trust in His finished work on the cross." This is a point of agreement and something we should all work together in advancing the Kingdom of Christ. We all want the same thing. We want all men everywhere to be reconciled to God through the atoning work of Christ.

2) Second, simply because the Calvinist may not want to go to unbelievers and say "Jesus died for you", does not mean he is not willing to evangelize. The non-Calvinist must keep in mind that the Calvinist desires to be Biblical in his method of evangelization. The Calvinist does not believe that God has been silent on the issue and also believes God has ordained certain means to accomplish the salvation of the lost.

A side point must be made. Hyper-Calvinists may strongly disagree with this side point. For they not only seek doctrinal perfection. They see doctrinal perfection a must in order for anyone to be saved. This the Calvinist does not believe. Many people are saved through poor or inconsistent presentations of the Gospel. For years, I believed certain beliefs that are either inconsistent with the Bible or just plain wrong. I have used poor theology and means of evangelization. I am glad that God uses weak vessels to save the lost.

Nevertheless, the non-Calvinist must grasp this side point to understand that the average Calvinist desires to be consistent in his theology. If you are a non-Calvinist please grasp this next point. If you do, much heart-ache may be alleviated.

For the Calvinist, the phrase "Jesus died for you" is defined to mean that Jesus actually takes away the sins for those whom He died. In other words, this phrase must be understood in the context of the doctrine of Vicarious Substitutionary Atonement. Calvinists believe that on the cross, the union of the elect in Christ have their sins dealt with. That Jesus actually satisfies the wrath of God in the place for whom He died. This is not a hypothetical idea where Jesus makes men saveable, but actually accomplishes the work of redemption as a perfect substitute.

Therefore, for the Calvinist to say to an unbeliever that "Jesus died for you" is to say "Jesus took away your sins, you are already forgiven, now believe and get to heaven."

This simply makes no sense and is completely inconsistent with the doctrine of Substitutionary Atonement. The Calvinist is simply seeking consistency in how he evangelizes. If this is going to be something which Paige Patterson and others seek absolute unity, then they will drive a wedge between believers that neither Scripture nor our Confessions require.

3) I realize this post is getting long, but I believe I need to make one last point about the non-Calvinist's use of the phrase "Jesus died for you." Since it is often used inconsistently, this statement may lead to Universalism or some bizarre form of Universalism. I once asked Dr. Tom Nettles of Southern baptist Theological Seminary why some pastors will say "Your sins are already forgiven now believe and get to heaven" based upon verses such as 1 John 2:2. His response was interesting.

What happens is that certain pastors see some Biblical texts and see Jesus dying as a perfect substitute. They also see texts such as 1 John 2:2 and incorrectly interpret these texts as being universal. On the other hand, they see other texts that speak of men going to hell. Since they start with an incorrect interpretation of certain texts, they still try to be consistent with what they understand. Therefore they attempt to reconcile these two beliefs (universal atonement and men going to hell). Therefore the conclude falsely that men, who go to hell, have their sins forgiven, but they just did not believe to get to heaven.

Although there are other false presuppositions that go into this view, this view simply doesn't work with other texts such as Revelation 20 and John 5 and Mathew 28. Jesus speaks of men being judged and their works play a major role in their judgment. Therefore this view should be rejected by all Christians, while recognizing good Christian men have erroneously held this position.

In conclusion, Baptists and other Christians can and should work together in the proclamation of the Good News of Christ. We should not let the phrase "Jesus died for you" divide when quite often we may very well mean the same thing. Although theology matters and we should seek to be consistent with our theology (even my son has said to me, "What you save them with is what you save them to"), God is able to take a sinner like me with imperfect theology and use me to His own glory. This I believe is true for all Christians.