Old Testament Reading: Psalm 110

“A PSALM OF DAVID. The LORD says to my Lord: ‘Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.’ The LORD sends forth from Zion your mighty scepter. Rule in the midst of your enemies! Your people will offer themselves freely on the day of your power, in holy garments; from the womb of the morning, the dew of your youth will be yours. The LORD has sworn and will not change his mind, ‘You are a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.’ The Lord is at your right hand; he will shatter kings on the day of his wrath. He will execute judgment among the nations, filling them with corpses; he will shatter chiefs over the wide earth. He will drink from the brook by the way; therefore he will lift up his head.” (Psalm 110, ESV)

New Testament Reading: Luke 20:41-44

“But he said to them, ‘How can they say that the Christ is David’s son? For David himself says in the Book of Psalms, ‘The Lord said to my Lord, ‘Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.’’ David thus calls him Lord, so how is he his son?” (Luke 20:41–44, ESV)

*****

Please excuse any typos and misspellings within this manuscript. It has been published online for the benefit of the saints of Emmaus Reformed Baptist Church, but without the benefit of proofreading.

Introduction

The passage open before us today is small but weighty. 

To help us feel the weight of it, I think it is important to see this passage as the conclusion to the series of questions that the religious elite within Israel asked Jesus, beginning at Luke 20:1. Those questions, remember, all had to do with authority. Jesus claimed to have authority as the King of God’s eternal kingdom, and the religious elite questioned it so as to undermine it, because they were threatened by it.

Do not forget that Jesus had entered Jerusalem triumphantly. He entered riding on a colt, the foal of a donkey. This was to fulfill the prophecy of Zechariah 9:9, which says, “Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion! Shout aloud, O daughter of Jerusalem! Behold, your king is coming to you; righteous and having salvation is he, humble and mounted on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey.” You and I live in a representative democracy or republic, not a kingdom, so we might fail to appreciate the great power and authority that Kings have. Kingly authority is supreme. Kingly authority is unchecked. Do not forget that when Jesus entered Jerusalem, he was received as a King. 

Luke tells us that “As [Jesus] was drawing near to [Jerusalem]… the whole multitude of his disciples began to rejoice and praise God with a loud voice for all the mighty works that they had seen, saying, ‘Blessed is the King who comes in the name of the Lord! Peace in heaven and glory in the highest!’” (Luke 19:37–38, ESV). Clearly, the disciples of Jesus regarded him to be the promised King of God’s kingdom. When his disciples shouted,  “Blessed is the King who comes in the name of the Lord!”, the Pharisees in the crowd were greatly troubled by this. “Teacher, rebuke your disciples”, they said (Luke 19:39, ESV). But Jesus would not rebuke them. He answered the Pharisees, saying, “I tell you, if these were silent, the very stones would cry out” (Luke 19:40, ESV). The point is this: when Jesus entered Jerusalem, he entered with the authority of a King. 

Furthermore, when Jesus drew near to the city of Jerusalem, he wept over it and, with the authority of a prophet, declared that it would soon be destroyed, saying, “For the days will come upon you, when your enemies will set up a barricade around you and surround you and hem you in on every side and tear you down to the ground, you and your children within you. And they will not leave one stone upon another in you, because you did not know the time of your visitation” (Luke 19:43–44, ESV).

Finally, after Jesus entered Jerusalem, he came to the temple and cleansed it. He cleansed it, as if he owned the place. He cleansed it with priestly authority as he drove out those who sold within its courts. After this, Jesus began to teach authoritatively within the temple. 

We should not be surprised, therefore, that those with authority within Old Covenant Israel felt threatened by Jesus and came against him in an attempt to undermine his authority. First, “the chief priests and the scribes with the elders came up and said to him, ‘Tell us by what authority you do these things, or who it is that gave you this authority” (Luke 20:1–2, ESV). After this, “they watched him and sent spies, who pretended to be sincere, that they might catch him in something he said, so as to deliver him up to the authority and jurisdiction of the governor” (Luke 20:20, ESV). These spies attempted to pit Jesus against the Roman authorities by asking him, “Is it lawful for us to give tribute to Caesar, or not?” (Luke 20:22, ESV). Finally, some from among the Sadducees attempted to gain an upper hand over Jesus by pitting him against the authority of Moses and the Holy Scriptures. If the resurrection is true, then how do you explain this text? This was their tactic. None of it worked as Jesus replied to their questions truthfully and winsomely. In Luke 20:39-40, we read, “Then some of the scribes answered, ‘Teacher, you have spoken well.’ For they no longer dared to ask him any question” (Luke 20:39–40, ESV).

Here in the text that is open before us today, it is finally Jesus who asks the questions. And as I have said before, I do believe it is important to see that Jesus’ questions have very much to do with the questions that were previously asked of him. In brief, those who came against Jesus questioned, One, the source of his authority. Two, they attempted to pit Jesus’ claimed authority against the governing authorities of this world to bring him into disfavor with them? Three, they attempted to pit Jesus’ claimed authority against the authority of Holy Scripture. Now, here in Luke 20:41-44, Jesus asks his opponents a question. And if they could only answer this one question correctly, then they would have the answer to all of the questions they had previously asked. I think you will see what I mean as we consider this small but mighty text together today.

Jesus’ Question

Let us now consider Jesus’ question. Really, he asks only one question, but it comes to us in three parts.  

Our text begins with the words, “But he said to them…” 

“Them” must refer to the scribes who were mentioned in verse 39, who will be mentioned again in verse 46. The scribes were considered expert interpreters of the Old Testament Scriptures. Now, when I say that Jesus spoke to the scribes, I do not mean to suggest that they were the only group present. I do believe that a great multitude stood around Jesus, including many of those who had questioned him previously. Jesus directed this question to the scribes in particular because they were regarded as expert interpreters of the Scriptures, and the question Jesus asks has to do with the interpretation of a very important text of Scripture, as we will soon see. So Jesus put this question to the scribes, but many others were there to witness this exchange and to be instructed by it.  

The first part of Jesus’ question is this: “How can they say that the Christ is David’s son” 

This was a commonly held view amongst the Jews in Jesus’ day. Most were looking forward to the arrival of the Christ, that is to say, the Messiah. “Christ” is the Greek translation of the Hebrew word “Messiah”, which means “one who is anointed” (see John 1:41; 4:25). The Old Testament Scriptures are very clear. They revealed that one day, an anointed King would come who would bring salvation to God’s people. And the Old Testament Scriptures are clear that this Anointed King would be a descendant of King David. This is spoken of in multiple passages in the Old Testament, but the central passage is 2 Samuel 7. There, we are told about the covenant God made with King David. Among other things, God gave this promise to King David: “When your days are fulfilled and you lie down with your fathers, I will raise up your offspring after you, who shall come from your body, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever” (2 Samuel 7:12–13, ESV). When this text is considered carefully, it is clear that this promise was not fulfilled in David’s son, Solomon, but would be fulfilled by another, greater son, namely, the Messiah. And so the people knew that when the Christ or Messiah finally arrived, he would have to be a descendant of King David.

It should be clear to all that when Jesus asked the question, “How can they say that the Christ is David’s son?, he was not disagreeing with this idea. No doubt, Jesus agreed that the Messiah would be David’s son. He begins his question like this, not because he disagrees, but because he is about to demonstrate that there is more to the Messiah than mere fleshly descent from King David. Would the Messiah be David’s? Yes, of course! But Jesus is about to demonstrate that there is more to say about the Messiah.  

He demonstrates that there is more to the Messiah than fleshly descent from David by pointing to Psalm 110. Brothers and sisters, you should know that Psalm 110 is quoted or alluded to in the New Testament more than any other Old Testament text. That should tell you something about its importance. Psalm 110 is a very, very important passage as it pertains to the identity of the Messiah. 

Jesus introduces his question with the words,  “How can they say that the Christ is David’s son?”, but he did not end there. In the second portion of his question, he quotes Psalm 110 verse 1, saying, “For David himself says in the Book of Psalms, ‘The Lord said to my Lord, ‘Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool’” (Luke 20:42–43, ESV). 

I want you to notice a few things about Psalm 110:1 and what Jesus has to say about it. 

First of all, this Psalm was written by King David. It’s original and inspired title is, A PSALM OF DAVID. And Jesus clearly believed that this Psalm was written by David, for he says in our text, “For David himself says in the Book of Psalms, ‘The Lord said to my Lord, ‘Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool’” (Luke 20:42–43, ESV). 

Secondly, notice that King David mentions two “Lords” in this Psalm. The first “LORD” has the Hebrew word YHWH behind it. There is no mystery here. This is an obvious reference to the one true God—the God who created the heavens and the earth, who redeemed Isarel from Egyptian bondage and entered into covenant with Isarel in the days of Moses. The identity of the second “Lord” was a bit more mysterious. It has the Hebrew word Adonai behind it. This word is often used as a title for God, but it can be used to refer to human lords as well. The question was, who is this second  “Lord” (Adonai) of King David to whom the LORD (YHWH) speaks in this Psalm? Granted, this is no longer a mystery to us, for the proper interpretation of this Old Testament text has been clearly revealed by Christ and his Apostles and is now found in the New Testament. But it must have been a bit of a mystery to those who lived before the coming of the Christ. Who is this second Lord of King David to whom YHWH speaks? That is the question.

When I say that the meaning of this verse was a mystery before the arrival of the Christ, I do not mean to suggest that the true meaning was unknowable, for there are clues to its true meaning that could be easily observed even before Christ and his Apostles clarified the meaning of this text. .

For one, given that this Psalm was written by King David, the highest authority in Israel, it is clear that the second Lord (Adonai) of whom David speaks cannot refer to a human living during his reign. David the King would not have referred to anyone as Lord except for God and Christ, and that is the point, as we will soon see. Who had more authority than David? No one, except God and the Christ who would one day descend from him.  

Two, Psalm 110 must be interpreted in light of the covenant that YHWH made with David beforehand. In that covenant, God made a promise to David that he would have a son who would be greater than him, whose kingdom would have no end. This covenant promise should have been in the minds of all who read Psalm 110 even before Jesus was born. Those who wished to know the true meaning of Psalm 110 should have said, I wonder if this second Lord of David is in fact the greater son who was promised to him in 2 Samuel 7. In other words, I wonder if this is a reference to the  Messiah who is to come! In fact, if you were to read Jewish commentaries, some ancient and some modern, you would find that some Rabbis did interpret Psalm 110:1 as being about the Messiah. For those who are curious about this, John Gill quotes some of these Rabbis in his commentary on Matthew 22:44, which is a parallel passage to our text here in Luke 20:41-44. The point is this: This Psalm 110—this Psalm of David—must be interpreted with the promises that God made to David concerning a son who would have an everlasting kingdom in mind.  

Three, when you read the rest of Psalm 110, you see that this second Lord of King David—the Lord to whom YHWH speaks— is a great King who will one day rule and judge the nations.  We will look at Psalm 110 more closely in just a moment. For now, I am simply observing that interpreting Psalm 110 verse 1 as if it is about YHWH speaking to the Messiah, who is simultaneously the son and Lord of King David, is not at all a stretch. In fact, this interpretation is most reasonable and natural.  

The third thing to notice about Psalm 110 verse 1 and Jesus’ remarks about it is that, whatever others thought about the meaning of this verse, Jesus clearly thought and taught that it is about the Messiah. Listen to the words of Jesus again: “But he said to them, ‘How can they say that the Christ is David’s son? For David himself says in the Book of Psalms, ‘The Lord said to my Lord, ‘Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.’” Jesus then brings his question to a conclusion by saying, “David thus calls him Lord, so how is he his son?” (Luke 20:41–44, ESV). The words “him” and “he” in Luke 20:44 must refer back to “the Christ” mentioned in verse 41. So in brief, the question Jesus asked is this: In Psalm 110:1, King David calls the Christ or Messiah “Lord”, how then is the Christ his son? 

This is a very important question. I hope you understand the significance and weight of it. 

Do fathers typically call their sons “Lord”? No! A son may call his father Lord, but fathers do not refer to their sons as Lord, for fathers have authority over their sons. This is true of every father-son relationship, but it is especially true when the father is a King, as David was. So you can see that there is something unusual and even shocking going on here in Psalm 110:1, and Jesus drew attention to it. Again, the question is simply this: If it is true that the Messiah, the Anointed King of God’s Kingdom who was to come, would be the son of King David, why did King David call his son Lord?

The Implied Answer

Notice that Jesus did not provide an answer to the question. He asked the question and then he left it alone. The answer is implied, though, and it is not difficult to see. In brief, David called his son “Lord” because his son would be greater than him. The authority his son would possess would be much greater than his.  And so it was right for King David, the greatest of the Kings of Israel, and the King from whom all of the other Kings of Israel would descend, to call this Son, Lord. 

When Jesus drew attention to verse 1 of Psalm 110 and to the unusual features of this Messianic text, he was inviting the scribes, and all who listened in on his conversation with them, to go to Psalm 110 and to consider that weighty text anew and afresh. Who would the Messiah be, and what authority would he possess? And of course, everyone knew that Jesus was claiming to be the Messiah, the Son of David, who is also David’s Lord.    

The Answer To This Question Answers Other Questions

In the introduction to this sermon, I suggested that the answer to the question that Jesus asked the scribes would answer other questions, too, specifically, the questions that were previously put to him. Stated differently, I do believe that a proper interpretation of Psalm 110 functions like a key that unlocks many mysteries and answers many questions about the identity and authority of the Messiah. 

“The chief priests and the scribes with the elders came up and said to [Jesus], ‘Tell us by what authority you do these things, or who it is that gave you this authority” (Luke 20:1–2, ESV). Psalm 110 answers this question. If Jesus is the Messiah, who is David’s son and David’s Lord, then Psalm 110 reveals that his authority is from YHWH.  For it was YHWH who had spoken to him in the eternal Covenant of Redemption and at his assension, saying, “Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool” (Psalm 110:1, ESV). It was YHWH who has sent “forth from Zion [his] mighty scepter.” And has decreed that he ”rule in the midst of [his] enemies!” (Psalm 110:2, ESV). By what authority did Jesus do these things? It was by God’s authority, for it was God the Father who, in eternity, decreed that the eternally begotten Son would become incarnate. Being born into the world as a son of Abraham and David, he would live a sinless life and die the death of a sinner for us and for our salvation. On the third day, he would rise. And after 40 days, he would ascend to heaven and, as the God man, he would sit down upon his throne at the Father’s right hand. By what authority did Christ do these things? It was by God’s authority, for it was God the Father who sent him, and he is the Son of God incarnate, the one who is anointed by God the Holy Spirit to do his work.  

A proper interpretation of Psalm 110 also helps to explain the answer Jesus gave to the spies who attempted to pit Jesus against the Roman authorities by asking, “Is it lawful for us to give tribute to Caesar, or not?” (Luke 20:22, ESV). What did Jesus say? “He said to them… ‘render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s” (Luke 20:25, ESV). In other words, for now, those in the kingdom of Christ will have to tolerate those who have worldly authority and give them their due, taxes to whom taxes are due, and respect to whom respect is due.  Psalm 110 reveals why this is so, for it teaches that the kingdom of Christ would come progressively. “The LORD says to my Lord: ‘Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool’” (Psalm 110:1, ESV). So then, the Christ would first be seated on his heavenly throne, and after that his enemies would progressively be subdued. 

Paul speaks of this progression in 1 Corinthians 15:24-26, saying, “Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death.” (1 Corinthians 15:24–26, ESV)

Psalm 110 reveals even more about this progression when it says that the Christ will, for a time, “Rule in the midst of [his] enemies!” (Psalm 110:2, ESV). Is that not what he is currently doing? He rules and reigns now, but his enemies are not yet fully and finally judged. And it is during this time—the time wherein the kingdom of the Messiah is inaugurated but not yet consummated— his “people… offer themselves freely on the day of [his] power, in holy garments…” (Psalm 110:3, ESV). Christ has enemies now, but he also has his people. They are those who have freely bowed the knee to him to confess him as Lord. They are those who trust in him and obey him. Christ the King does not force or coerce his people to “offer themselves” up to him. No, he makes the able and willing to come to him by his grace and by the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit as the word of Christ is preached. 

Psalm 110 also reveals that Christ is not only the King of God’s kingdom, but he is also the High Priest, for “The LORD has sworn [to him] and will not change his mind, [saying] “You are a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek” (Psalm 110:4, ESV). No wonder Christ cleansed the temple and taught within its courts. He is the priest of God’s end times temple—a temple, not made of stone, but of living stones built upon the foundation of Christ, the Apostles, and Prophets. 

When will it be that God’s people will no longer have to “render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s”? When Christ returns to judge and to consummate his kingdom. It will be then that his enemies will be made his footstool (Psalm 110:1). It will be then that “he will shatter kings on the day of his wrath. He will execute judgment among the nations, filling them with corpses; he will shatter chiefs over the wide earth” (Psalm 110:5–6, ESV). 

Finally, some from among the Sadducees attempted to gain an upper hand over Jesus by pitting him against the authority of the Holy Scriptures. By pointing to this key text and raising questions about it, Jesus implied that, far from being at odds with the Scriptures, he was the fulfillment of them, being the very Christ and Lord of whom they spoke. 

Conclusion

As I have said, this passage is all about authority, authority, authority—the supreme authority of Christ the King. 

Is he your Lord and King? That is the question. 

To have him as Savior, you must have him as Lord and King, and Kings are to be obeyed. 

And what a marvelous King Jesus is. He is the King of kings and Lord of lords. All authority in heaven and earth has been given to him. Other kings may sit on earthly thrones, but he, having accomplished our redemption, is seated at the Father’s right hand in heaven, “far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come” (Ephesians 1:21, ESV).  There he will rule and reign until all his enemies are subdued under his feet. Then, he will judge the nations with a rod of iron. But to his people whom he has redeemed by his shed blood, he is gentle, kind, and compassionate. He provides for his people and protects them as he leads them into their eternal home—a home that he has prepared for them.

Dear friends, you must learn to think of Jesus as the greatest of all kings and as the King of the greatest of all kingdoms, for his power is supreme and his rule and reign will have no end. If you have not yet renounced your allegiance to sin, Satan, and his kingdom of darkness and bowed the knee to King Jesus instead, today is the day to do it. And if you have already pledged your allegiance to King Jesus, I urge, brothers and sisters, surrender to him more and more. Offer yourself freely to him in holy garments” (Psalm 110:3, ESV). Do this to the glory of Christ and for your good. 

Posted in Sermons
Comments Off on Sermon: The Messiah: David’s Son, And David’s Lord, Luke 20:41-44 Posted by Joe

Baptist Catechism 75-77

Q. 75. Which is the seventh commandment?

A. The seventh commandment is, “Thou shalt not commit adultery.” (Exodus 20:14)

Q. 76. What is required in the seventh commandment?

A. The seventh commandment requireth the preservation of our own and our neighbor’s chastity, in heart, speech, and behavior. (1 Cor. 6:18; 7:2; 2 Tim. 2:22; Matt. 5:28; 1 Peter 3:2)

Q. 77. What is forbidden in the seventh commandment?

A. The seventh commandment forbideth all unchaste thoughts, words, and actions. (Matt. 5:28-32; Job 31:1; Eph. 5:3,4; Rom. 13:13; Col. 4:6)

Scripture Reading: 1 Corinthians 6:18–7:5

“Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body. Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body. Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: ‘It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.’ But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. Do not deprive one another, except perhaps by agreement for a limited time, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.” (1 Corinthians 6:18–7:5, ESV)

*****

Please excuse any typos and misspellings within this manuscript. It has been published online for the benefit of the saints of Emmaus Reformed Baptist Church but without the benefit of proofreading.

*****

Before we can understand what the sin of adultery is, we must first understand God’s design for sexual relations. In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. And the pinnacle of God’s earthly creation was man made in his image. As Genesis 1:27 says, “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them” (Genesis 1:27, ESV). And in the beginning, God also instituted marriage. As Genesis 2:24 says, “Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh” (Genesis 2:24, ESV). This one-flesh union is covenantal and spiritual. In the marriage covenant, two lives become one. But it is also physical. The sexual union consummates the covenantal marriage bond after it has been made. 

And this is where we must begin if we are to understand the seventh commandment, which is “Thou shalt not commit adultery.” God created sex, so it must be considered good. But like many other things, it is only good when enjoyed in a particular context. Wine is good, but it may be misused. Men and women do sin when they drink wine to the point of drunkenness. Money is good. But the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. And so too, sex is good. But it may be misused, abused, and badly distorted. It is good when it is enjoyed by a man and woman bound together as one flesh in the covenant of marriage. 

When two who are unmarried engage in sexual relations, that is called fornication. Deuteronomy 22:28ff. speaks to the sin of fornication when it says, “If a man meets a virgin who is not betrothed, and seizes her and lies with her, and they are found, then the man who lay with her shall give to the father of the young woman fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife, because he has violated her. He may not divorce her all his days” (Deuteronomy 22:28–29, ESV). Now, we are not under the law of Moses as a civil law code, but we may learn from this law even still. It is fornication that is described here, and not adultery, for neither the man nor the woman was betrothed or married. And the penalty, you will notice, was not death but a fine. 

The sin of fornication is serious. Sexual relations are to be reserved for marriage. But a more serious sin is the sin of adultery, wherein one who is married lies with someone who is not their spouse. That adultery is a more serious sin is made clear from the punishment prescribed under the law of Moses. Again, we are not under the law of Moses as a civil law code, but we may learn something about the seriousness of the sin of adultery from what it says—the adulterer and the adulteress were to be put to death. Deuteronomy 22:22 says, “If a man is found lying with the wife of another man, both of them shall die, the man who lay with the woman, and the woman. So you shall purge the evil from Israel” (Deuteronomy 22:22, ESV). Don’t mess with the sin of adultery, brothers and sisters. It is so very destructive. 

And if we were to go even further to discuss greater acts of sexual perversion, we would have to talk about the sins of homosexuality and bestiality. Concerning the sin of homosexuality, Leviticus 18:22 says, “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination” (Leviticus 18:22, ESV). 

And the New Testament scriptures also speak against these sexual sins. Take, for example, 1 Corinthians 6:9, which says, “Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God” (1 Corinthians 6:9–11, ESV).

As I have said, to understand the seventh commandment and the sin of adultery, we must first understand God’s design for sexual relations. God created sex to be enjoyed by a man and a woman bound together for life in the covenant of marriage. All other sexual relations are a perversion of God’s design. Sexual immorality of all kinds is to be avoided, especially the sin of adultery, for when the sin of adultery is committed, the marriage covenant, which is a very sacred thing, is broken. 

Can the adulterer be forgiven? Yes, of course. And so too can the homosexual and the fornicator. Did you hear what Paul said to the Corinthians? After speaking of the sins of sexual immorality, adultery, and homosexuality (among other things), he said, “And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God” (1 Corinthians 6:11, ESV). “Such were some of you”, Paul said. And by this, he indicates that the Christians in Corinth were no longer these things, for they had turned from their sin and to Christ—they were washed, sanctified, and justified, through faith in Jesus Christ. 

You know, it is common for homosexuals and other sexually perverse people today to say, This is who I am. And there may be some truth to that. But look at what the Scriptures say. Who you are needs to change! God is calling you to turn from your sin and to Christ, for in Christ, there is cleansing, renewal, and the forgiveness of sins. Who would allow the liar, the thief, or the adulterer to excuse their sin by saying, This is who I am? Though I do not doubt that people have propensities towards these sins. And though it may be true that their deepest desires lead them in this sinful direction. And perhaps this is their way of life to the point that they can hardly distinguish between the sinful act and their very being. Even still, God calls sinners to turn from their sin and to believe upon Christ for the forgiveness of sin and for renewal, so that it may be said of them, “and such were… you… but you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God” (1 Corinthians 6:9–11, ESV).

The sin that is expressly forbidden in the seventh commandment is adultery. And adultery is forbidden because it is particularly damaging. Not only is it a perversion of God’s design for sexual relations, but it is also the breaking of the covenant of marriage. I do not need to describe to you the damage that the sin of adultery does to individual lives, families, and society. 

But as usual, our catechism helps us to see that the commandment is to be interpreted and applied broadly. Not only does the seventh commandment forbid the sin of adultery, it also requires “the preservation of our own and our neighbor’s chastity, in heart, speech, and behavior”, while forbidding “all unchaste thoughts, words, and actions.” The rest of the scriptures make it very clear that this is the proper interpretation and application of God’s moral law, “Thou shalt not commit adultery.”

*****

Baptist Catechism 76 and 77

Not only does the seventh commandment forbid you from committing adultery, it requires that you seek to preserve your own and your neighbor’s chastity. Now there is an old-fashioned word — chastity. It should not be old-fashioned. It ought to still be on our minds and lips. To be chaste is to abstain from extramarital or premarital intercourse. The seventh commandment requires us to preserve our own chastity and also our neighbors. 

This means that men and women should be careful not to bring temptation to those around them. Being mindful of this will affect the way that you dress and the way that you talk.

This also means that husbands and wives should be generous with one another as it pertains to conjugal rights, for this does help to guard against temptation. You may read 1 Corinthians 6:18-7:5 again to see what I mean. Husbands and wives are to serve one another in this way. 

And notice also how our catechism applies the seventh commandment to the heart, and not merely to our words and actions, saying, “The seventh commandment requireth the preservation of our own and our neighbor’s chastity, in heart, speech, and behavior”, and again, “The seventh commandment forbideth all unchaste thoughts, words, and actions.”

God’s commands are always to be applied to the heart, friends. You should know this by now. And this is why Jesus said, “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart.”

Jesus was not saying something new here. Instead, he was giving the proper interpretation of the seventh commandment. God’s law was always meant to be applied to the heart. Remember the summary of the law is to love God with all our being and to love our neighbor as ourselves. Here, Christ is simply saying that the seventh commandment is to be kept from the heart. This was always the intent. 

And please don’t misunderstand his words. He is not saying that lust and adultery are the same thing. They are not. Adultery is worse because it is the sin of lust full-grown. Jesus is simply teaching that lust is adultery in the heart. Lust is adultery in seed form. Root it out, brothers and sisters, for lust is a sin. And root out the sin of lust, before it is fully grown, leading to the act of sexual immorality and even adultery. 

*****

Conclusion 

“Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body. Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.” (1 Corinthians 6:18–20, ESV)

Posted in Sermons
Comments Off on Catechetical Sermon: What Is The Seventh Commandment? What Does It Require And Forbid?, Baptist Catechism 75-77 Posted by Joe

1. What is the seventh commandment?
2. What is God’s design for sex?  
3. What is adultery?
4. Does the seventh commandment only forbid adultery? What else does it require and forbid as we work out its implications?
5. Why is it important to keep the seventh commandment in the heart and mind?

Posted in Study Guides Joe Anady
Comments Off on Discussion Questions: Baptist Catechism 75-77 Posted by Joe

1. What does the title “Christ” mean? 
2. Why were people in Jesus’ day expecting a Messiah?
3. Why is Psalm 110 such an important text as it pertains to the identity of the Messiah? Nearly everyone knew that he would be David’s son. What else does Psalm 110 reveal? 
4. How does Psalm 110 also answer the questions that were put to Jesus beginning at Luke 20:1?
5. Authority, authority, authority. Why is it important to think of Jesus and his work in terms of authority? What does he have authority over? Who gave Jesus this authority? How does his authority relate to the governing authorities of this world presently? How will his authority relate to the governing authorities of this world in the end? How does Jesus relate to the authority of Holy Scripture? What authority does Jesus have over you today? Is he your Lord, or is he not (Romans 10:9)?

Posted in Study Guides
Comments Off on Discussion Questions: Luke 20:41-44 Posted by Joe

Old Testament Reading: Exodus 3

“Now Moses was keeping the flock of his father-in-law, Jethro, the priest of Midian, and he led his flock to the west side of the wilderness and came to Horeb, the mountain of God. And the angel of the LORD appeared to him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush. He looked, and behold, the bush was burning, yet it was not consumed. And Moses said, ‘I will turn aside to see this great sight, why the bush is not burned.’ When the LORD saw that he turned aside to see, God called to him out of the bush, ‘Moses, Moses!’ And he said, ‘Here I am.’ Then he said, ‘Do not come near; take your sandals off your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy ground.’ And he said, ‘I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.’ And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look at God. Then the LORD said, ‘I have surely seen the affliction of my people who are in Egypt and have heard their cry because of their taskmasters. I know their sufferings, and I have come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians and to bring them up out of that land to a good and broad land, a land flowing with milk and honey, to the place of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites. And now, behold, the cry of the people of Israel has come to me, and I have also seen the oppression with which the Egyptians oppress them. Come, I will send you to Pharaoh that you may bring my people, the children of Israel, out of Egypt.’ But Moses said to God, ‘Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh and bring the children of Israel out of Egypt?’ He said, ‘But I will be with you, and this shall be the sign for you, that I have sent you: when you have brought the people out of Egypt, you shall serve God on this mountain.’ Then Moses said to God, “If I come to the people of Israel and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ what shall I say to them?’ God said to Moses, ‘I AM WHO I AM.’ And he said, ‘Say this to the people of Israel: ‘I AM has sent me to you.’’ God also said to Moses, ‘Say this to the people of Israel: ‘The LORD, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.’ This is my name forever, and thus I am to be remembered throughout all generations. Go and gather the elders of Israel together and say to them, ‘The LORD, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, has appeared to me, saying, ‘I have observed you and what has been done to you in Egypt, and I promise that I will bring you up out of the affliction of Egypt to the land of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites, a land flowing with milk and honey.’’ And they will listen to your voice, and you and the elders of Israel shall go to the king of Egypt and say to him, ‘The LORD, the God of the Hebrews, has met with us; and now, please let us go a three days’ journey into the wilderness, that we may sacrifice to the LORD our God.’ But I know that the king of Egypt will not let you go unless compelled by a mighty hand. So I will stretch out my hand and strike Egypt with all the wonders that I will do in it; after that he will let you go. And I will give this people favor in the sight of the Egyptians; and when you go, you shall not go empty, but each woman shall ask of her neighbor, and any woman who lives in her house, for silver and gold jewelry, and for clothing. You shall put them on your sons and on your daughters. So you shall plunder the Egyptians.’” (Exodus 3, ESV)

New Testament Reading: Luke 20:27-40

“There came to him some Sadducees, those who deny that there is a resurrection, and they asked him a question, saying, ‘Teacher, Moses wrote for us that if a man’s brother dies, having a wife but no children, the man must take the widow and raise up offspring for his brother. Now there were seven brothers. The first took a wife, and died without children. And the second and the third took her, and likewise all seven left no children and died. Afterward the woman also died. In the resurrection, therefore, whose wife will the woman be? For the seven had her as wife.’ And Jesus said to them, ‘The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage, but those who are considered worthy to attain to that age and to the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage, for they cannot die anymore, because they are equal to angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection. But that the dead are raised, even Moses showed, in the passage about the bush, where he calls the Lord the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob. Now he is not God of the dead, but of the living, for all live to him.’ Then some of the scribes answered, ‘Teacher, you have spoken well.’ For they no longer dared to ask him any question.” (Luke 20:27–40, ESV)

*****

Please excuse any typos and misspellings within this manuscript. It has been published online for the benefit of the saints of Emmaus Reformed Baptist Church, but without the benefit of proofreading.

Introduction

When Jesus entered Jerusalem with his band of disciples and the great multitude that followed after him and proceeded to pronounce judgment upon Jerusalem, cleanse the temple, and teach within it, it was as if he had kicked a hornet’s nest. Clearly, the religious establishment viewed him as a great threat, and they wasted no time in coming against him in an attempt to drive him away or to do away with him altogether. Jesus was of some concern to them when he ministered in the less populated regions of the country and away from their center of power. But when Jesus entered Jerusalem and came into the temple, the concern of the religious elite grew very great, and so they swarmed around Jesus and attempted to sting him. 

First, the chief priests, scribes, and elders approached him while in the temple to question his authority. “Tell us by what authority you do these things, or who it is that gave you this authority”, they said (Luke 20:1–3, ESV). When this direct attack proved ineffective, “they watched him and sent spies, who pretended to be sincere, that they might catch him in something he said, so as to deliver him up to the authority and jurisdiction of the governor” (Luke 20:20, ESV). These infiltrators approached Jesus and attempted to put him at odds, either with the multitudes that followed him or with the Roman authorities, saying, “Is it lawful for us to give tribute to Caesar, or not?” (Luke 20:22, ESV). Jesus escaped their trap by speaking the truth: “render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s” (Luke 20:25, ESV), he said. 

Luke tells us of a third attack in the text that is open before us today. In Luke 20:27, we read, “There came to him some Sadducees… and they asked him a question… (Luke 20:27–28, ESV). We will soon consider their question and Jesus’ wise reply. For now, it must be recognized that this was yet another attempt by the religious elite within Israel to undermine Jesus’ authority. This time they would attempt to pit Jesus, not against the Roman authorities, but against the authority of Moses. 

As was said in the previous sermon, what we are witnessing here is best described as a great power struggle. The King of God’s eternal Kingdom had come. Would these men bow the knee to him and confess him as Lord or not? That is the question.   

The Sadducees

The previous attacks are said to have come from the chief priests, scribes, and elders of Israel. This attack is said to have come specifically from the Sadducees. This is, in fact, the first time the Sadducees are mentioned in Luke’s gospel. The question we must ask is, Who were they? And what did they believe?

The information we have about them is quite limited. We do not have any writings from the Sadducees. What we know of them must be pieced together from what others say. They are mentioned fourteen times in the New Testament. In addition to this, the first-century Jewish historian, Josephus, mentions the Sadducees and tells us a little about what they believed. Some wonder if Josephus was biased against the Sadducees, for he claimed to be a Pharisee, and the two groups were often at odds with each other. Nevertheless, Josephus does provide us with some insight into the Sadducees, who they were, and what they believed. 

When all is considered, here is what we know about them:

Firstly, the Sadducees were one of three major schools of thought existing amongst the Jews in the days of Jesus. There were the Pharisees, whom you have heard of, the Essenes (a community “that regarded themselves as the faithful remnant of the true Israel and the core of God’s eschatological community, the purity of which they sought to preserve by forming an isolated society devoted to strict observation of the pentateuchal regulations), and the Sadducees.

Secondly, Josephus suggests that Sadduceeism was especially popular amongst the elites of Israel, including the priestly class. In one place, Josephus says, “the Sadducees are able to persuade none but the rich, and have not the populace [submissive] to them, but the Pharisees have the multitude on their side…” It is interesting to note that Josephus says the high priest named Annas, who is mentioned in Luke 3:2 and Acts 4:6 alongside his son-in-law Caiaphas, was a Sadducee. So then, when Luke tells us that Sadducees approached Jesus to question him, we should see this as being connected to the broader attack that began with the events described in Luke 20:1-3.

Thirdly, as it pertains to the beliefs of the Sadducees, Josephus reports that they rejected the many traditions that the “Pharisees [had] delivered to the people”, that is to say, they rejected the “great many observances by succession from their fathers, which are not written in the law of Moses.” According to Josephus, “the Sadducees reject them,  and say that we are to esteem those observances to be obligatory which are in the written word, but are not to observe what are derived from the tradition of our forefathers…” I’ve heard some say the Sadducees only accepted the law of Moses, the first five books of the Hebrew Old Testament, as authoritivae, but I don’t think that’s true. It seems they accepted all of the Old Testament Scriptures. What they rejected was the manmade traditions of the Pharisees. Perhaps it can be said that they viewed the writings of Moses to be of particular importance, which is, in a sense, true. The first five books of the Bible, written by Moses, are indeed foundational. The rest of the Old Testament builds on them. But we confess that the whole Old Testament is inspired by God. It seems to me that the Sadducees would say the same thing.

Fourthly—and this is the belief they are most well known for—the Sadducees denied that there is a resurrection. This is the doctrine of the Sadducees that the Scriptures frequently mention—”they say there is no resurrection” (see Matthew 22:23; Mark 12:18; Acts 4:1-2; Acts 23:6, 8). Here in the text open before us today, Luke says, “There came to him some Sadducees, those who deny that there is a resurrection…’” It is interesting to note how Josephus puts it: “But the doctrine of the Sadducees is this: That souls die with the bodies.”  Listen also to Acts 23:6-8: “Now when Paul perceived that one part were Sadducees and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, ‘Brothers, I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees. It is with respect to the hope and the resurrection of the dead that I am on trial.” And when he had said this, a dissension arose between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, and the assembly was divided. For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, nor angel, nor spirit, but the Pharisees acknowledge them all” (Acts 23:6–8, ESV). It would seem, then, that the Sadducees not only denied that there would be a bodily resurrection in the future, but also taught that the soul or spirit of a man dies when his body dies—no life after death—that seems to have been their view. 

This insight into the Sadducees’ beliefs will help us understand the question they brought to Jesus and Jesus’ response. [But before we move on in text, I would ask you to imagine what it would be like to not believe in the resurrection of the body or the immortality of the soul. Imagine what it would be like to live in this world and believe that when the body dies, the soul dies too. Many live with this view. They think that after death, there is… nothing. Many imagine that the soul does not live apart from the body, and that the body will never be raised. Those who think this way must also deny the final judgment and the hope of future reward. Think of what it would be like to live with such a view. When I think of this, I’m struck with feelings of emptiness and purposelessness. It also occurs to me that such a view would remove nearly all motivation to pursue holiness in this life and to live a selfless life for the good of others. In fact, I would not be surprised if a person who denies the resurrection in the way the Sadducees did, concluded that the best way to live is to experience as much pleasure in the here and now as possible, no matter the harm it brings to others, for, in their view, the here and now is all there is. Friends, I trust you can see that theology matters. Beliefs have consequences. And it is hard to imagine a more impactful question than this: Does God exist and, if so, will we stand before him either to be rewarded or judged in the life to come? The Sadducees believed God exists, but they denied the resurrection of the body and the existence of the soul apart from it (see Acts 23:8). This must have impacted their way of life. And for the Sadducees who were involved in the trial and crucifixion of Jesus, this must have impacted how they treated Jesus when he was on trial and when they saw to his crucifixion. What mattered to them most was not justice or truth, but holding on to their worldly power and authority and the wealth and pleasure that accompanied it. Theology matters, friends. When men behave very badly and do not seem to care, and it puzzles you, consider what they believe. And conversely, consider how belief in the existence of God, the immortality of the soul, the resurrection of the body, and the final judgement ought to motivate us to be found united to Christ by faith, cleansed by his blood, clothed in his righteousness, pursuing holiness and good works so as to store up treasures, not here on earth, but “in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal” (Matthew 6:20, ESV).]

The Question

Quoting Josephus again, “the doctrine of the Sadducees is this: That souls die with the bodies.” It is not surprising that they attempted to trap Jesus and to pit him against the authority of Scripture by presenting him with this conundrum. 

Look at verse 28: “and [the Sadducees] asked [Jesus] a question, saying, “Teacher, Moses wrote for us that if a man’s brother dies, having a wife but no children, the man must take the widow and raise up offspring for his brother. Now there were seven brothers. The first took a wife, and died without children. And the second and the third took her, and likewise all seven left no children and died. Afterward the woman also died. In the resurrection, therefore, whose wife will the woman be? For the seven had her as wife” (Luke 20:28–33, ESV).

Notice a few things about this question: 

First of all, the question was asked by these Sadducees in an attempt to prove Jesus wrong about the resurrection. Clearly, Jesus believed in the resurrection. In Luke 14:13-14, he says, “But when you give a feast, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind, and you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you. For you will be repaid at the resurrection of the just” (Luke 14:13–14, ESV). And in Luke 9:22, Christ spoke of himself, saying, “The Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised” (Luke 9:22, ESV). The Sadducees knew that Jesus believed in and taught about the resurrection of the body and the immortality of the soul, and so they questioned and challenged him on this point.

Secondly, the Sadducees questioned Jesus using the Old Testament Scriptures, particularly the writings of Moses. Verse 26: “Teacher, Moses wrote for us that if a man’s brother dies, having a wife but no children, the man must take the widow and raise up offspring for his brother.” This is a reference to the laws concerning Levirate marriage found in Deuteronomy 25:5–10, which says, “If brothers dwell together, and one of them dies and has no son, the wife of the dead man shall not be married outside the family to a stranger. Her husband’s brother shall go in to her and take her as his wife and perform the duty of a husband’s brother to her. And the first son whom she bears shall succeed to the name of his dead brother, that his name may not be blotted out of Israel. And if the man does not wish to take his brother’s wife, then his brother’s wife shall go up to the gate to the elders and say, ‘My husband’s brother refuses to perpetuate his brother’s name in Israel; he will not perform the duty of a husband’s brother to me.’ Then the elders of his city shall call him and speak to him, and if he persists, saying, ‘I do not wish to take her,’ then his brother’s wife shall go up to him in the presence of the elders and pull his sandal off his foot and spit in his face. And she shall answer and say, ‘So shall it be done to the man who does not build up his brother’s house.’ And the name of his house shall be called in Israel, ‘The house of him who had his sandal pulled off’” (Deuteronomy 25:5–10, ESV). No doubt, this custom sounds very strange to you. As an aside, I do wonder what the Theonomists say about this text. Is this law still binding on the Christian today? We say no. If consistent, I suppose the Theonomist would have to say yes. But that is besides the point. This law was certainly binding under the Old Covenant. 

Thirdly, notice how the Sadducees attempted to use this passage to disprove the resurrection. They pointed to it and claimed that if there was life after death this law of Moses would create a very confusing situation in the afterlife if obeyed. The Sadducees presented Jesus with a rather extreme hypothetical situation. “Now there were seven brothers. The first took a wife, and died without children. And the second and the third took her, and likewise all seven left no children and died. Afterward, the woman also died. In the resurrection, therefore, whose wife will the woman be? For the seven had her as wife.” As you can see, these Sadducees attempted to set Jesus on the horns of a dilemma by pitting him against Moses and the authority of the Holy Scriptures. They must have been very proud of themselves when they presented Jesus with this unsolvable riddle.

Jesus’s Answer

As with the answers that Jesus gave to the last two groups who attempted to trap him, the answer he gave to the Sadducees was very wise. His answer consists of three parts: 

Firstly, Jesus teaches that the institution of marriage belongs to this age only. Verse 34: “And Jesus said to them, ‘The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage…’” (Luke 20:34, ESV). Marriage was instituted at the time of creation, and it will continue as an institution until Christ returns to rescue his people, raise the dead, judge, and usher in his consummated kingdom.  

Secondly, Jesus teaches that in the age to come, that is to say, when the kingdom of heaven is consummated after the resurrection in the new heavens and earth, the institution of marriage will be no more. Verse 35: “but those who are considered worthy to attain to that age and to the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage…” (Luke 20:35, ESV). 

[Those with happy marriages might be tempted to feel saddened by this. If that is the case with you, may I suggest that your thoughts of life in the new heavens and earth are too small? What we experience there, namely, unbroken and uninterrupted fellowship with God and Christ and with one another in the Lord, will far exceed anything that we experience in this age, so that we will not feel as if we have lost anything, but only gained. I have no doubt that in the age to come, we will remember the special relationships we enjoyed in this present evil age. In the age to come, the relationships we enjoy with one another in Christ Jesus will be more sweet, not less, for the sinful corruptions that remain even in the best of Christians will then be removed.]     

After Jesus teaches that there will be no marriage in the age to come, he tells us why. Verse 36: “for they cannot die anymore, because they are equal to [or like the] angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection” (Luke 20:36, ESV). 

Why did Jesus mention angels? Two reasons: One, the Sadducees not only denied the resurrection and the life of the soul apart from the body, but they also denied the existence of angels. Christ set them straight about this as well. Two, Christ teaches that in the age to come, we will be like the angels in some respects. In this age, people come into the world through birth, and depart from this world through death. But in the age to come, there will be no birth or death. The population of the new heavens and earth will be fixed. Once it is established, none will enter and none will depart. And those who are granted entrance will live forever and ever. When Christ said, “​​because they are equal to [or like the] angels”, he did not mean we will be like the angels in every respect, for angels are ministering spirits. They do not have bodies like we do. Human beings will have resurrected physical bodies in the age to come. What Christ meant is that, in the age to come, we will be like the angels as it pertains to their unending life and no marriage or procreation. Just as the number of angels is fixed because they neither procreate nor die, so will it be for those who enter the new heavens and earth at the resurrection. Because there will be no procreation, neither will there be marriage, and this agrees with the Biblical teaching that one of the primary purposes of marriage is procreation. It is within the covenant of marriage that children are to be brought into the world, and it is within the covenant of marriage that children are to be raised, disciplined, and nurtured to maturity. But these activities are a part of this age, not the age to come. In the age to come, there will be no genealogical descent so that so-and-so is regarded as the son or daughter of so-and-so, but all will be “sons of God, being sons of the resurrection” (Luke 20:36, ESV). 

When Jesus corrected the Sadducees concerning their misunderstanding regarding marriage in the age to come, he effectively escaped their trap, but he had more to say.  Not only does the doctrine of the resurrection not contradict the Scriptures written by Moses, but the doctrine is found there!

That brings us to the third part of Jesus’ reply, wherein he shows that the doctrine of the resurrection is found even in the Pentateuch. Look at verse 37. There Christ says, “But that the dead are raised, even Moses showed, in the passage about the bush, where he calls the Lord the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob. Now he is not God of the dead, but of the living, for all live to him” (Luke 20:37–38, ESV).

The passage that Jesus refers to is found in Exodus 3. Notice, this passage is about the calling of Moses, whom the Sadducees claimed to revere. In that text, Moses saw a bush in the wilderness that was burning yet not consumed. When he drew near to investigate, “God called to him out of the bush, ‘Moses, Moses!’ And he said, ‘Here I am.’ Then he said, ‘Do not come near; take your sandals off your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy ground.’ And he said, ‘I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.’ And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look at God” (Exodus 3:4–6, ESV). According to Jesus, this passage proves that the soul of man goes on living after the body dies, and that there is the hope of the resurrection of the body, for though Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had long before this, God claimed to be their God presently. Though Exodus 3 does not teach about the resurrection in a direct way, it teaches the resurrection through necessary consequence. If it is true that God was the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob when he spoke to Moses from the bush many years after these men had died, then it must mean that they still existed and had God as their God and as their hope. 

[By the way, we learn something very important about Biblical interpretation from this saying of Jesus. Here, our Lord and Savior shows us that we are not only bound to believe what the Scriptures directly and explicitly say, but also what they necessarily imply.  If we wish to faithfully interpret the Scriptures, we must follow the example of Christ and his Apostles and interpret them in the same way they interpreted them. Indeed, we confess that “The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man’s salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down or necessarily contained in the Holy Scripture…” (Second London Confession, 1.6).] 

Though the doctrine of the resurrection is not expressly set down in Exodus 3, Christ taught that it is necessarily contained there, and in this way, he proved the Sadducees wrong. They claimed that the resurrection is nowhere found in the writings of Moses. Christ demonstrated that they were badly mistaken. Not only is it found in Moses, it is found in the most foundational of texts, that is to say, in the one wherein Moses is called to be God’s prophet and deliverer, wherein God reveals himself to Moses as YHWH, the great I AM. And by mentioning Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, God and Christ remind us that Moses, as great as he was, came in fulfilment to promises previously made, and those promises have everything to do with an unending life in the news heavens and earth through faith in the Messiah, the son promised to Abraham, and the Son of God.

Conclusion

I imagine the countenance of the Sadducees changed. They came against Jesus, prideful and arrogant. They assumed he would be stumped by their riddle. But Luke tells us that “some of the scribes [who were regarded as experts in the law]  answered, ‘Teacher, you have spoken well.’ For they no longer dared to ask him any question” (Luke 20:39–40, ESV). In the next passage, we will see that Jesus had something to say to the scribes as well, but that will need to wait until next Sunday.

I’ll conclude with one point of application. In fact, it is a restatement of something that has already been said. Brothers and sisters, please meditate on the doctrine of the resurrection. Christ died in the place of sinners. His body was laid in a grave, and his soul descended to Sheol, not to suffer, but to proclaim victory and to set captives free. On the third day, his body was raised and was reunited with his soul, and it is in this resurrection body that Christ lives forevermore. 

Christ rose from the dead, and it is because of his resurrection that all will be raised bodily at his return. 

We confess that: “The bodies of men after death return to dust, and see corruption; but their souls, which neither die nor sleep, having an immortal subsistence, immediately return to God who gave them. The souls of the righteous being then made perfect in holiness, are received into paradise, where they are with Christ, and behold the face of God in light and glory, waiting for the full redemption of their bodies; and the souls of the wicked are cast into hell; where they remain in torment and utter darkness, reserved to the judgment of the great day; besides these two places, for souls separated from their bodies, the Scripture acknowledgeth none.” (Second London Confession, 31.1)

We confess that, “At the last day, such of the saints as are found alive, shall not sleep, but be changed; and all the dead shall be raised up with the selfsame bodies, and none other; although with different qualities, which shall be united again to their souls forever.” (Second London Confession Chapter, 31.2)

We confess that, “The bodies of the unjust shall, by the power of Christ, be raised to dishonor; the bodies of the just, by his Spirit, unto honor, and be made conformable to his own glorious body.” (Second London Confession Chapter, 31.3)

Do you believe in the resurrection, friends? Do you believe that Christ was raised bodily, and that you will be raised bodily too? I hope and pray that you for, for the Scriptures teach it. And I hope and pray that you live every day of your life here in this age in light of the resurrection, the judgment, and the life in the age to come. 

You must be found trusting in Christ if you hope to pass through the judgment and into life everlasting unscathed. And wise are you if you “Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal, but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal” (Matthew 6:19–20, ESV).

Posted in Sermons Joe Anady Luke 20:27-40
Comments Off on Sermon: There Is A Resurrection, Luke 20:27-40 Posted by Joe

1. What were some of the distinguishing beliefs of the Sadducees?
2. How did the Sadducees argue against the resurrection?
3. How did Jesus counter their argument? Where does the Old Testament teach that there is life after death and a resurrection?
4. How should belief in life after death, the bodily resurrection, and the judgment change the way a person lives in the here and now?

Posted in Study Guides
Comments Off on Discussion Questions: Luke 20:27-40 Posted by Joe

Baptist Catechism 72 & 73

Q. 72. What is the sixth commandment?

A. The sixth commandment is, “Thou shalt not kill.” (Exodus 20:13)

Q. 73. What is required in the sixth commandment?

A. The sixth commandment requires all lawful endeavors to preserve our own life and the life of others. (Eph. 5:29,30; Ps. 82:3,4; Prov. 24:11,12; Acts 16:28)

Q. 74. What is forbidden in the sixth commandment?

A. The sixth commandment absolutely forbideth the taking away of our own life, or the life of our neighbor unjustly, or whatsoever tendeth thereunto. (Gen. 4:10,11; 9:6; Matt. 5:21-26)

Scripture Reading: Acts 16:25–34

“About midnight Paul and Silas were praying and singing hymns to God, and the prisoners were listening to them, and suddenly there was a great earthquake, so that the foundations of the prison were shaken. And immediately all the doors were opened, and everyone’s bonds were unfastened. When the jailer woke and saw that the prison doors were open, he drew his sword and was about to kill himself, supposing that the prisoners had escaped. But Paul cried with a loud voice, “Do not harm yourself, for we are all here.” And the jailer called for lights and rushed in, and trembling with fear he fell down before Paul and Silas. Then he brought them out and said, ‘Sirs, what must I do to be saved?’ And they said, ‘Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.’ And they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all who were in his house. And he took them the same hour of the night and washed their wounds; and he was baptized at once, he and all his family. Then he brought them up into his house and set food before them. And he rejoiced along with his entire household that he had believed in God.” (Acts 16:25–34, ESV)

*****

Please excuse any typos and misspellings within this manuscript. It has been published online for the benefit of the saints of Emmaus Reformed Baptist Church, but without the benefit of proofreading.

*****

Baptist Catechism 72

Our catechism says that the sixth commandment is, “thou shalt not kill”, and that is indeed the way the King James Version translates the sixth commandment as found in Exodus 20:13: “Thou shalt not kill.” But more modern Bible translations have preferred the word “murder” instead of “kill”. “You shall not murder” is what the ESV says. Really, either term will do. In fact, both are prone to misunderstanding and must be explained.

“Thou shalt not kill” may be taken to mean that humans should never kill anything. Animals should not be killed for food, therefore. But we know this is not the meaning, for animals were rightly killed for food and sacrifice in the days of Moses and long before that. And “thou shalt not kill” may also be taken to mean that a human must never take the life of another human. And that is not true either. The rest of the law of Moses teaches that men may kill in self-defense, in righteous war, and as agents of the state to uphold justice. For example, Genesis 9:6, says, “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image.” (Genesis 9:6, ESV). This principle of retributive justice runs through the law of Moses and is even found in the New Testament (see Romans 13). So, if you memorize the sixth commandment as “Thou shalt not kill”, you must keep in mind that it does not mean thou shalt not kill anything or under any and all circumstances. No, you do not break the sixth commandment if a violent intruder breaks into your home and threatens your family, and you take his life. 

The translation, “You shall not murder”, can be misunderstood in other ways. It is a better translation, I think, for it clarifies that it is the unjust taking of a human life is forbidden. But the word “murder” may be interpreted too narrowly. Not only does the sixth commandment forbid murder, or perhaps we might say, murder in the first or second degree. It also forbids carelessness, which leads to the death of another human being. We might refer to this as murder in the third degree or manslaughter.  

So take your pick. When reciting the sixth commandment, you may say “Thou shalt not kill”, following the KJV, or “You shall not murder”, following the ESV. Whichever translation you choose, the important thing is that you understand what the commandment means. 

*****

Baptist Catechism 73 -74

Our catechism is very helpful. Today, we will ask, what is required in the sixth commandment?

And the answer given by our catechism is, “The sixth commandment requires all lawful endeavors to preserve our own life and the life of others.” This is what is required. I’ll leave it to you to reflect on question 74, which asks, What is forbidden in the sixth commandment? It teaches us that “The sixth commandment absolutely forbideth the taking away of our own life, or the life of our neighbor unjustly, or whatsoever tendeth thereunto.”

Before we consider the answer to question 73 piece by piece, I should say a word about the basis for the sixth commandment. I will do this by asking, Why are humans permitted to kill animals for food, but forbidden from taking the life of another human without just cause? I should also say, I do not believe that humans are permitted to kill animals indiscriminately — that is to say, randomly, recklessly, and carelessly. No, humans are to be good stewards of the created world, and they are not to be brutal, not even with animals. 

But with that said, the question remains. Why do the scriptures forbid the taking of human life without just cause? And the answer is that man is made in God’s image. There is something particularly dignified about human life. Human life is to be highly respected because the human being is the pinnacle of God’s creation. The human is made in God’s image, and this cannot be said of anything else in all of God’s creation, not even the angels. I have already quoted from Genesis 9:6, but hear it again. “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image” (Genesis 9:6, ESV). It is because man is an image-bearer of God that murder is to be punished with death. 

Think of how perverse our society is. In our society, murders are often permitted to die of old age, whereas the lives of millions of unborn children are snuffed out in the wombs of their mothers each and every year. This perversion is rooted in the fact that our society has forgotten that man is made in God’s image. If we were to remember this, then human life would be treated with dignity at every stage. Murders would get their just reward, and the lives of the innocent would be protected.

 So, what is the basis for the sixth commandment? Man is made in the image of God. And what does this commandment require? “All lawful endeavors to preserve our own life and the life of others.” 

What does the word lawful mean? It means that we are to preserve life so long as it does not require us to violate God’s moral law. This can get a little tricky. Is it ever right to tell a lie to preserve life? In general, no. But what about those who hid the Jews from Hitler’s troops during WWII? Did they do wrong when they deceived Natzis? I think not. I pray that we will never be faced with such difficult choices. But in general, the principle stands. The sixth commandment requires “all lawful endeavors to preserve our own life and the life of others.”

I do appreciate that our catechism draws attention to the obligation we have to preserve our own life. Human beings are made in God’s image. And this means that you are made in God’s image. Not only do you have the responsibility, therefore, to preserve the lives of other image-bearers. You also have the responsibility to preserve your own life! 

Christians should not live recklessly, therefore. This, too, can get a little tricky when it comes to application. Just how cautious should we be? You will notice that our catechism does not provide us with a detailed application, but only with the principle. And I am glad about that! The Christian should not be reckless. G.I. Williamson in his commentary of the Westminster Larger Catechism (by the way, both of these resources — the Westminster Larger Catechism, and Williamson’s commentary on it — are very useful tools for the study of the Baptist Catechism, which very similar to the Westminster Shorter Catechism)… back to my point: G.I. Williamson in his commentary of the Westminster Larger Catechism lists “dueling, bullfighting [and] shooting the rapids of the Niagara River in a barrel” as a clear violation of the sixth commandment, but he admits that attempting to cross the Atlantic in a small sailboat may not be a violation. I think it is right that we are confronted with the principle that the sixth commandment requires “all lawful endeavors to preserve our own life”, and then, in general, to leave it to each person to work out the specifics. 

Does this mean that we should watch what we eat? Probably. But I’ll refrain from telling you what you can and cannot eat. Does this mean that you should exercise? Probably. But again, I’ll leave it to you to work out the details. Does this mean that you should avoid toxic pharmaceuticals as much as possible? I think so. But this, too, is a matter of Christian liberty. But if I heard that you were drag racing your car on Domenigoni Parkway, I’d surely rebuke you. I’d rebuke you for a number of reasons. You’d be breaking a civil law— a civil law rooted in the sixth commandment, by the way. And you would be in clear violation of God’s moral law, given that you would be recklessly endangering your own life and the lives of others. 

Some live recklessly and deserve to be rebuked. But some do also live fearfully. And perhaps this is more of an issue in our day. There is a delicate balance that we all must strike, therefore. We must not be reckless with our lives, but neither can we be driven by fear. No, we must live our lives to the fullest. This means that we must live courageously and with wisdom to the glory of God. We cannot allow fear of sickness or death to hinder us from loving, serving, and worshipping God, nor can we allow fear to hinder us from loving one another. We must live courageously and with wisdom to the glory of God. I suppose this will always require us to assess risk and reward. 

Not only does the sixth commandment require us to endeavor “to preserve our own life,” it also requires us to endeavor to preserve the lives of others. This means we are to seek our neigbors’ good and prosperity, live careful lives, and defend the weak and vulnerable, so far as we are able. I suppose if we were to push this principle of the preservation of life too far, we would never leave our homes. Certainly, we would never assemble. When we leave our homes, we take risks. We might get into a car accident and be killed, or kill another. And many in our day are concerned about the spread of diseases and the warming of the planet, etc. Brothers and sisters, I hope you can see that as true as it is that we have a moral obligation to preserve our own life and the lives of others, this principle, if pushed to far,  can be misused by those with civil authority to take away freedoms. In fact, this truth can be misapplied and used as a weapon against God’s people to keep them from doing what God has called them to do, namely, assemble together on the Lord’s Day in Jesus’ name. Think of how the world, and even the church, were locked down a number of years ago. And what were we told? It is for the common good. It is for the health of the public. I suspect that this is not the last time well will see this wonderful and sacred truth twisted and misapplied. 

*****

Conclusion 

Q. 73. What is required in the sixth commandment?

A. The sixth commandment requires all lawful endeavors to preserve our own life and the life of others.

Posted in Sermons Joe Anady
Comments Off on Catechetical Sermon: What Is The Sixth Commandment, And What Does It Require And Forbid?, Baptist Catechism 72 – 74, Acts 16:25–34 Posted by Joe

1. What is the sixth commandment?
2. Some English translations say “kill” while others say “murder”. How can each of these words be misunderstood?
3. What is it about human nature that makes the unjust taking of human life so wrong? 
4. What does the sixth commandment require and forbid?
5. What does it mean to seek to preserve your own life?
6. What does it mean to seek to preserve the life of others?
7. How can both of these principles be misused and abused by individuals and even governments?
8. How does the sixth commandment apply to the issue of abortion?
9. What do we need if we are to apply this law in a way that truly honors God and man? I’m thinking of a word that starts with a “W”.

Posted in Study Guides Joe Anady
Comments Off on Discussion Questions: Baptist Catechism 72-74 Posted by Joe