Truth Magazine

By Wayne Walker

One of the Bible doctrines most frequently attacked by modern liberal theologians and religious “scholars” is the deity of Christ. The Bible expressly teaches the Godhood and unique Sonship of Jesus (see John 1:1-2; Col. 2:9). Peter made the confession, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matt. 16:18). Later, this same apostle told a group of Jews, “That God hath made that same Jesus whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ” (Acts 2:36). For the Bible believer and the one who impartially reads the gospel record, there can be no other conclusion. However, men who are enslaved by their own biased opinions have conceived several other explanations of Jesus’ existence. Everyone, even the modernist, must admit that a man named Jesus lived in first-century Palestine and had such an effect on the world that we number years by His earthly incarnation.

The most common explanation of Christ is that He was a great moralist, philosopher, and teacher, but not a divine being. Those who try to uphold His ethical teaching but deny His divinity say that He really never claimed to be divine, that these claims were made for Him after His death by His followers. However, a quick glance at the first four New Testament books will destroy this idea. When asked by the high priest if He were the Christ, the Son of the Blessed, He replied, “I am” (Mark 14:61-66). At least the Jews so claimed in John 10:30,36. If this were not His claim, He could have saved Himself a lot of trouble by saying so! In addition, when Peter made his confession, Jesus said nothing to the contrary (John 6:68). Now a “great moralist” certainly would not have allowed His followers to believe a lie, would He?

So Jesus indisputably claimed to be the Son of God. If that claim be not true, then we are left with two other alternatives. The first is that He claimed to be God, but was not; rather, He was a charlatan, a trickster, a fraud. However, this is incongruous with the fact that He placed a great deal of emphasis on the truth: “And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free” (John 8:32). Are these the words of an imposter? Hear again: “If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself” (John 7:17). Would a conscious deceiver continually speak about truth and open Himself to complete investigation? Finally, in John 8:46, Jesus asked if anyone could convict Him of sin. One should think if Jesus were a cheat that someone, somewhere could have laid a finger of blame on Him-but no one did. This man not only claimed to be the Son of God; He lived the part. Certainly such a one was not an intentional liar.

This leaves us with the theory that He thought He was actually the Son of God, but was mistaken. This world make Him a lunatic, a nut. A preacher once said that if Jesus were a mere man claiming to be divine, it would be just as reasonable for someone to claim to be a poached egg. (They have places for people like that!) Even a casual survey of the account of Jesus’ life refutes any such motion. The character of Christ is not that of an insane man. He was completely rational; witness the logic of His answer to the Saducees’ question of the resurrection (Matt. 22:23-34). Also notice that every situation was firmly within His control. When, He was asked trick questions, as in Matt. 22:34-40, never did He lose His composure or temper; nor was He ever at a loss for words. See also the effect of His reasoning on His listeners (Matt. 22:15-22); they marveled at His sensibility. Surely, no unbalanced person ever behaved in this manner.

We have now exhausted our options. The only other estimate of Jesus, and the one which best fits the facts, is that He is exactly who He claimed to be-the divine Son of God and Savior of the world. Thomas was there, he saw, he knew what he was talking about when he said, “My Lord and my God.” We have not been permitted to examine the evidence firsthand as was he, but we have the word of those who did (John 17:20); and Jesus’ response to Thomas was, “Blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed” (John 20:2829). John concludes this scene is verses 30-31 by adding, “And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: but these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.” The purpose of the scripture and of all true gospel preaching is to cause men to say with Martha, “Yea, Lord: I believe that thou art the Christ, the Son of God, which should come into the world” (John 11:27). Thus may we live eternally with Him, “For if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins” (John 8:24).

Truth Magazine XXII: 25, p. 402
June 22, 1978

By Roland Worth, Jr.

The Catholic Church is quite proud of its “unity.” In contrast, they point to the immense division among those who claim the Bible as their ultimate authority. This indicates, so their argument goes, that the Bible is an unreliable final standard and that by submitting to the bishop of Rome schism can be avoided. How does this claim stack up against actual history? Poorly! To be quite blunt, the Catholic Church will find its claim believed only in proportion to the ignorance of its audience. For proof of this, let us examine the record of division in the early post-apostolic centuries. (It should be kept in mind that we do not know the exact year in which Catholicism came into existence. Many of the following events occurred in that period of transition between Christianity and Catholicism.) As our authority we will present quotations from the well known and respected French Catholic historian, H. Daniel-Rops in his volume, Church of Apostles and Martyrs (E. P. Dutton & Company, New York: 1960; reprinted 1963).

Heresies of the Second Century

“Heresies and schisms can be found as far back as one can go in Christian history. Whether it was a question of erroneous interpretation of dogmas or of the fact of Revelation, of aberrant moral tendencies or of secessions provoked by powerful individuals led astray by personal pride, these frictions and divisions had been very numerous: several had left livid scars on the body of the Bride of Christ. Thus in the second century we have observed the fanatical Montanus leading his followers into practices where faith and violence mingled in an apocalyptic exaltation. In the East particularly we have witnessed a proliferation of theories which by eviscerating Christian dogmas and history of their content, while preserving their vocabulary, had run the risk of burying the sound and healthy realism of the Gospel under sterile masses of speculation. Examples of these can be seen in Gnosticism and its countless variants. Thus again we have seen Marcion deriving some of his elements from Gnosticism and others from the ancient strata of Persian dualism, evolving a doctrine that enjoyed great influence on account of his own strong personality and which was an ancient expression of a kind of dualist Protestantism. There was not one of these tendencies which had not left its mark on some part of the Christian world” (p. 453).

Heresies of the Third Century

“Of course there were doctrinal difficulties too, of the kind we have seen springing up since the earliest years of Christianity. Heresy must indeed be regarded as an aspect of human intelligence defaced by sin, for it spread so prolifically. The old heresies of the second century were still alive: Montanism, to which Tertullian now brought his own alarming support, and Gnosticism, which was in the midst of disintegration but which swarmed everywhere in sectarian communities. Other heresies, of a rather different character, now arose; for instead of leaving the Church and establishing their own sects, the third-century heretics clung to a self-styled loyalty, claiming that they were still orthodox, even while they modified official dogmas to suit themselves. We shall see various bishops and not a few theologians straying along some very strange paths in this way, and it was not always easy either to bring them back to the fold or to expel them. These heresies were very numerous, varying in their terms of expression, but all connected with the fundamental problem of the Three Divine Persons and their relations with one another, and often including errors on the very reality of Christ. It is hardly possible to list them all. Modalism maintained that God existed only in one Person and not Three a Person who was successively called Father, Son and Holy Spirit according to the ‘modes’ of His action. According to the time, place, individuals and circumstances concerned, this theory was to exist under the separate names of Monarchianism, Patripassianism, and Sabellianism. Adoptianism, which was developed by a humble Byzantine leather-worker, Theodotus, alleged that Jesus was but a man who had been adopted by God. Subordinationism, a heretical trend, whose seeds can already be discerned in Origen, which his imprudent disciples were to carry to extremes, and which was to find its way into the heart of Arianism, tended to place Christ below the Father, in a second-class position” (p. 354).

Heresies of the Fourth Century

“The period that began with Constantine and lasted for rather more than one hundred years-witnessed the unfolding of ten or so heresies at least, with the most varied bearings on points of dogma. Several of these dated from the third century but they were to undergo considerable development during the fourth. Their names evoke scarcely an echo in Christian memories today. Very few of us have even heard, for instance, of the ‘Pneumatomachians,’ who denied the divinity of the Holy Spirit, or of the ‘Apollinarists,’ who believed in a tripartite division of human nature and maintained that Christ was human in His body and animal senses, but God through the Spirit alone. However, on points of theology which we cannot exactly understand, conflicts arose into which men hurled themselves with an impetuosity and a heroism which enabled them to embrace death itself and which are evidence of an ardent faith. Three of these deviations were to be of capital importance in the history of Christianity: Donatism, Arianism and the insidious current of Manichaeism” (p. 454).

Conclusion

These facts play havoc with the Catholic argument from “unity.” It is like a beautiful diamond that sparkles in our hand but which, when we look at it under a magnifying glass, turns out to be a fake.

Truth Magazine XXII: 24, p. 397
June 15, 1978

By Robert E. Waldron

After Jesus’ baptism He was led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil. The account of the temptation of Jesus offers some of the richest lessons in scripture. In studying the temptation many have sought to explain why Jesus did not follow Satan’s suggestions by various, sometimes ingenious, ideas. These ideas may be true and are definitely worthy of thought. Jesus, however, knew best of all why He could not do the things Satan wished Him to do. We shall be guided in this study, therefore, solely by the replies Jesus Himself made.

The First Temptation

Jesus was in the wilderness for forty days during which time He fasted. Both Matthew and Luke indicate that Jesus felt no hunger until after the forty days. “And when He had fasted forty days and forty nights, He afterward hungered” (Mt. 4:2). “And He did eat nothing in those days: and when they were completed, He hungered” (Lk. 4:2). Hunger fell upon Jesus more as a blow than as something to which He had slowly grown accustomed. Mark shows that Satan hack been tempting Jesus already. “And He was in the wilderness forty days tempted of Satan” (Mk. 1:12). Now Satan comes again.

“If thou are the Son of God, command that these stones become bread” (Mt. 4:3). Now we know Jesus had the power ‘to change one substance into another (see Jn. 2 where Jesus changed water to wine). We also know that several times Jesus used His power to provide food (Mt. 14; 15; Jn. 21); why not this time? Satan seemed to be tempting Jesus to prove His Sonship, but Jesus’ reply was not, “Satan, I do not have to prove my Sonship. Both you and I know who I am.” The temptation was more subtle than that. Jesus said, “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God,” (Mt. 4:4). If we are to understand what Satan’s temptation was we will do so only by understanding Jesus’ reply.

When Israel was encamped in the plains of Moab, poised to invade Canaan, Moses preached to them. He said, “All the commandment which I command thee this day shall ye observe to do, that ye may live, and multiply, and go in and possess the land which Jehovah swear unto your fathers. And thou shalt remember all the way which Jehovah thy God hath led thee these forty years in the wilderness, that he might humble thee, to prove thee, to know what was in thy heart, whether thou wouldest keep his commandments, or not. And He humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that He might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by everything that proceedeth out of the mouth of Jehovah doth man live” (Deut. 8:1-3). If the Israelites had been asked to list their necessities they would have said: food and water. We cannot be critical of them without some self-examination. If someone were chosen at random and asked to list the necessities of life today, he would list food, water, and shelter. The Israelites needed to learn that their first necessity was to obey the words that ‘proceed out of the mouth of Jehovah. Oh how we today need to learn to include that necessity at the top of our list!

How, though, does this point tie in with Jesus’ refusal to turn stones into bread? Satan was telling Jesus to use the power He had for His sole benefit. It was not the Father’s will that Jesus’ power be used in that manner. Though Jesus knew He needed food He also knew one thing He needed more-to do the Father’s will. God did not give Jesus His great power so that if He had a headache He could merely wish it away, or if He became thirsty He could cause a glass of water to appear in His hand. He always used His power for the sake of others to produce faith in them. Thus it would have been contrary to the “word that proceeded out of the mouth of God” for Jesus to use His power for His benefit. Therefore He would not and told Satan why. “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.”

The Second Temptation

“Then the devil taketh Him into the holy city; and he set Him on the pinnacle of the temple” (Mt. 4:5). If this pinnacle were the southern wall of the temple enclosure, then, according to Josephus, the wall was “vastly high” while ‘the valley immediately below was “very deep, and its bottom could not be seen.” The exact location of the pinnacle is not important. A fall from such a height would be fatal. Imagine Jesus standing there looking down into the depths of the valley below. Satan says, “If thou art the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, ‘He shall give His angels charge concerning thee’: and, ‘On their hands they shall bear thee up, lest haply thou dash thy foot against a stone’ ” (Mt. 4:6). Is the true basis of the temptation here the Sonship of Jesus? What does Jesus reply? “Again it is written, ‘Thou shalt not make trial of the Lord thy God’ ” (Mt. 4:7). Jesus knew what Satan was tempting Him to do. Satan was trying to make Jesus show a lack of confidence in God.

Jesus again quotes from Deuteronomy. “Ye shall not tempt Jehovah your God, as ye tempted Him in Massah” (Deut. 6:16). Obviously Moses was reminding the Israelites of a former occasion when they had tried God. The time to which he referred happened within the first few weeks after the Israelites left Egypt. The people were thirsty and murmured. God told Moses to smite the rock, and he did so, and water came forth. “And he called the name of the place Massah, and Meribah, because of the striving of the children of Israel, and because they tempted Jehovah, saying, ‘Is Jehovah among us, or not?’ ” (Exod. 17:7). The Israelites saw the plagues God brought upon Egypt. They saw God divide the waters of the Red Sea while His pillar of fire stood between them and the Egyptians. He had enabled Moses to sweeten the waters of Marah and had fed the children of Israel with manna, but these were not sufficient grounds for faith for the Israelites. God must needs continually prove Himself. This attitude is one of perpetual doubt. This is the attitude we see in people when they can look upon the handiwork of God, behold His providential works, have an abundance of material things, a family, health, and then say, “You know, sometimes I wonder whether there is a God or not.” Tempting God in this manner is caused by a blindness which refuses to accept the evidence God has given to support faith and which continually asks for proof. A mind like this is in a spiritual vacuum.

Satan was really attempting to get Jesus to express doubt by trying God out. “You say you are the Son of God. Well God said He would give His angels charge to guard you and to keep you from dashing your foot against a stone. Why not test God and see if He will?” Jesus, however, saw the trap and replied, “Thou shalt not make trial of the Lord thy God.” If Jesus had done as Satan suggested,, He would have manifested a lack of confidence in God. If He, the Son of God, had manifested a lack of confidence in God, any grounds for our faith would have been utterly destroyed.

We need to draw a practical lesson for ourselves. Let us not say, “I wish God would do something; now to show that He really is.” How can we stand on the peak of God’s revelation, see the path of redemption from the Garden of Eden until now, observe the daily operation of God’s creation, and say, “Do something, God, so I will know you are there”? “Thou shalt not make trial of the Lord thy God.”

The Third Temptation

In the third temptation of Jesus, recorded in Matthew 4, ‘The devil taketh Him unto an exceeding high mountain, and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them; and he said unto Him, `All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me’ ” (Mt. 4:8,9). Satan sought to get Jesus to worship him. If ever the bald-faced audacity of Satan was ever manifested, it was then. The very idea of supreme Deity worshipping Satan is mind-boggling.

If Jesus had seen fit to fall down and worship Satan, then surely we who are far less in power could do no less than to follow His example. As I said, the consequences of such an action would have shaken the foundations of reason itself.

What was the appeal of this temptation? God had promised Jesus the “obedience of the peoples” (Gen. 49:10); “the nations for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession” (Ps. 2:8). For Jesus to follow God’s way to the throne on the “holy hill of Zion” led Him to the cross. It was the hard way, the sacrificial way. Satan’s way was easy. All Jesus had to do was to fall down and worship him. If He had done that, being who He was, Deity would have been divided. Deity would have submitted to an inferior being’s power. The scheme of redemption would have been completely thwarted.

Jesus answered Satan, “Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, ‘Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve’ ” (Mt. 4:10). For the third time Jesus quoted from Deuteronomy. Moses warned the people that when they went into the land, they were not to follow after the idols. One may make a god out of anything. Satan wanted to exchange himself for God and let Jesus worship him, but Jesus refused. “Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and Him only shalt thou serve.”

It will be profitable to look at a few reasons why Jesus was perfect. They are exemplified in the temptation account. We blame sin on our human bodies, but Jesus had a human body and did not sin. Sin comes from the heart. It is the heart which allows the desires of the body to become lust. Surely the divine nature of Jesus is the ultimate explanation for His complete, lifelong perfection. There are, however, two things which we may study with great benefit. One reason why Jesus never sinned is that He was not ignorant. He knew everything that was right. Many times we sin because we do not know. We have not studied and learned. The more we know of God’s way the better we will be able to walk in it. Another reason why Jesus never sinned is that He always did what He knew was right. How often do we get to the end of a day and say, “I should have done this or that,” and did not do it? We can improve our service to God without learning anything else if we will immediately begin to do more of what we already know we should do. We can then further improve by studying the scriptures more diligently. Let us be imitators of Christ and “resist the devil and he will flee from you” (Jas. 4:7).

Truth Magazine XXII: 24, pp. 395-396
June 15, 1978

By Bruce James

Jesus claimed to be a physician Himself when He was in the house of Matthew eating a meal. Matthew being a tax collector, evidently had invited some of his fellow outcasts to eat with them. The Pharisees and scribes were shocked that Jesus would eat a meal with such people. But Jesus told them, “Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick . . . I came not to call the righteous, but sinners” (Matt. 9:913; Mk. 2:14-17; Lk. 5:27-32). Jesus’ claim here is that He is a physician to cure the ills of mankind.

This was a common picture to the Jew. Jeremiah asked: “Is there no balm in Gilead? Is there no physician there?” (Jer. 8:22). The world needed someone who could heal the sickness of the soul. And, in reality, the physician in Jesus’ day had at least two things going against him: (1) to all Jews, dead bodies were unclean and to touch one was to become unclean yourself. Therefore, Jewish doctors knew very little of anatomy. There is a story that is told of how these doctors would boil the body of a criminal until the flesh came away from the bones, so the bones could be examined and counted. But to go into detail would be too gross to say the least; (2) the Jews also believed that all suffering was due to sin, and to the personal sin of the sufferer. Therefore, when a physician tried to heal someone it was said that he was interfering with the action and decree of God. This was a definite hindrance to the doctor in Jesus’ day, and it is for these two reasons that physicians then were more like witch doctors than anything else.

Let us ask what the picture of Jesus as a physician reveals’ about Himself. Well, what are the characteristics of a doctor?

1. The word physician comes from the Greek word phusikos which is connected with phusis which means nature., A physician is a man whose study is nature, the essence and basis of life. He sees man not as a prince or pauper, a laborer or stockbroker, but as a human being in need of healing. He sees men as they are-and so does Jesus Christ.

2. The physician is trained to diagnose ailments. He sees those things which you and I cannot see. Unless he finds the cause of the trouble then he cannot find the cure. Jesus can diagnose the sickness of sin, and can reveal, exactly where that sickness attacks each individual life.

3. The physician, knowing what is wrong, then wants to help-to heal. You or I might regard the illness as repulsive or ugly and, therefore, shun the sufferer, but not the doctor. Jesus never turns from the sinner but is always willing to apply the healing balm to whosoever will.

4. The physician is a man who will risk his own life to save the one who is ill. Think of all the infectious diseases that man has had to deal with in the past and how many doctors died trying to find a cure! Jesus did not hesitate to die to find a cure for men.

Most certainly, Jesus proved that he has the ability to miraculously heal any physical ailment infecting mankind. This He did while He was here on earth. And He can heal the spiritual ailments too. But we must obey the Divine Physician’s instructions–yes, take the prescription for the cure. We must believe and obey the gospel if we are to ever be saved (Heb. 5:8, 9). There is no other balm in Gilead, nor any other physician there.

Truth Magazine XXII: 24, pp. 394-395
June 15, 1978