“Christ-Centered Biblical Theology: Hermeneutical Foundations and Principles” by Graeme Goldsworthy

Book Details:
  • Author: Graeme Goldsworthy
  • Category: Biblical Theology
  • Publisher: IVP (2012)
  • Format: softcover
  • Page Count: 240
  • ISBN#: 0830839690
  • List Price: $20.00
  • Rating: Must Read

Review:
In recent years biblical theology has enjoyed something of a comeback. A robust, Christ-centered, confessional variety of biblical theology is becoming more and more widespread and influential. And if we wanted to find someone to thank for this development, Graeme Goldsworthy’s name would come up on anyone’s short-list. His books Gospel and Kingdom, The Gospel in Revelation, and Gospel and Wisdom touched a nerve in the 1980s [get all three in one volume from Amazon]. And his later book Preaching the Whole Bible as Christian Scripture was picked up by many a Gospel preacher. Some have bristled at what they think is his wild approach to typology. And indeed, for many who pay attention to this theologian from down under, his approach to the Bible is nothing short of revolutionary. His redemptive-historical approach to the Bible has made the Old Testament come alive to thousands of rank-and-file Christians the world over.

Christ-Centered Biblical Theology: Hermeneutical Foundations and Principles is Goldsworthy’s latest book, and in it he traces some of the influences to his thought. Along the way he gives a history of evangelical biblical theology and weighs the relative merits of competing approaches. He details the tripartite division of redemptive history that he inherited from his mentor, Donald Robinson. And by the end of this book, he has demonstrated just how careful and faithful his approach to Scripture really is.

Goldsworthy begins by explaining the problem. Biblical theology opens the way to a “big picture,” grand view of all of Scripture. Yet too many view it as a “lame duck” and a distraction. Goldsworthy’s faith in the potential of biblical theology stems from his simple faith in the entire Bible being “the one word of the one God about the one way of salvation through the one savior, Jesus Christ” (pg. 19). Drawing from his mentor, Donald Robinson (also a professor at Moore Theological College in Sydney) Goldsworthy sees a threefold structure to Scripture:

  1. Creation to Solomon’s Temple (The Kingdom of God revealed in OT history)
  2. Solomon’s Decline to the end of the OT era (The Kingdom revealed by the prophets in a future, glorified, Israelite form)
  3. The New Testament inauguration of the Kingdom (The Kingdom revealed in Christ)

He develops this further:

The Old Testament… can be represented as a manifestation of promise and blessing reaching a high point in David’s Jerusalem as the focal point of the land of inheritance, in Solomon as David’s heir, and in the temple representing the presence of God to dwell among and bless his people. After Solomon’s apostasy it is history primarily as a manifestation of judgment… overlaid with the prophetic promises that the Day of the Lord will come and bring ultimate blessing and judgment… It takes the person of Jesus, his teaching and the proclamation of his apostles to restore hope in the original promise of God. (pg. 25)

Goldsworthy addresses some of the objections to his approach as he traces out its foundation throughout the book. But at the onset he points out his pastoral concern in this whole debate. He is concerned with the simplistic way that so many Christians handle the Bible.

Many have learned one particular way of dealing with the Bible and have not been exposed to a comprehensive biblical theology as an alternative. Some acknowledge that the Bible is a unity and that the heart of it is the gospel of Christ. But they have never been shown, or have tried to work out for themselves, the way the various parts of the Bible fit together. Reading the Bible then easily becomes the search for today’s personal word from God, which is often far from what the text, within its context, is really saying…. Too many Christians go through life with a theoretically unified canon of Scripture and a practical canon consisting of favourite and familiar snippets and extracts removed from their real canonical context. (pg. 29, 37)

The heart of the book is Goldsworthy’s romp through Scripture looking at its structure and storyline. He is convinced that the New Testament provides a model for how to interpret the Old Testament faithfully, but he focuses on the Old Testament’s own use of earlier Old Testament themes and writings. The Old Testament creates the typological categories that the NT authors pick up. I found this point most intriguing, and cannot help but reproduce Goldsworthy’s quotation from Donald Robinson to this regard.

The blessings of God’s End-time are described in the Old Testament for the most part in terms drawn from Israel’s past history. The day of the Lord would be Israel’s history all over again, but new with the newness of God. There would be a new Exodus, a new redemption from slavery and a new entry into the land of promise (Jer. 16:14, 15); a new covenant and a new law (Jer. 31:31-34). No foe would invade the promised inheritance, “but they shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig tree; and none shall make them afraid” (Micah 4:4). There would be a new Jerusalem (Isa. 26:1, Ez. 40) and a new David to be God’s shepherd over Israel (Jer. 23:5, Ez. 34:23,24) and a new Temple where perfect worship would be offered and from which a perfect law would go forth (Isa. 2:2-4, Ez. 40-46). It would not be too much to say that Israel’s history, imperfectly experienced in the past, would find its perfect fulfilment “in that day.” Indeed, nothing less than a new creation, a new heaven and a new earth, could contain all that God has in store for the End (Isa. 65:17) (pg. 173 -174 [quote is from Donald W. B. Robinson, The Hope of Christ’s Coming (Beecroft, New South Wales: Evangelical Tracts and Publications, 1958), pg. 13]).

When Goldsworthy looks at typology, he takes great care not to endorse a “no-holds barred” approach. While he advocates a macro-typology recognizing that “there is no aspect of reality that is not involved in the person and work of Christ.” On the same hand, he argues that seeing “the pomegranates on the robes of the Israelite priest” as “types of the fruits of the Spirit;” or even “the redness of Rahab’s cord” as a “type of Jesus’ blood,” is to pursue “fanciful, non-contextual associations that avoid the real theology behind these things” (pg. 186-187).

Throughout his book, Goldsworthy compares and contrasts his approach to biblical theology with several other evangelicals of note: Geerhardus Vos, Edmund Clowney and Dennis Johnson, Willem VanGemeren, William Dumbrell, Sidney Greidanus and others. He also details Donald Robinson’s approach and legacy. In his assessment of differing approaches, he doesn’t portray his view as the only faithful one, but as one faithful approach among many.

He doesn’t provide a biblical theology in this book, but sketches the background for how to pursue a biblical theology. He does address a few issues more directly, since they focus on Robinson’s legacy. One of these is an interesting discussion of the continuing distinction between Israel and the Church in the New Testament. He explores Robinson’s contention that there remains a distinction between new Israel and the Church. The Gentiles get the blessings promised to Gentiles in the OT, while the blessings promised to Israel are experienced by the believing Jews in the NT era. Both groups of people are then subsumed in the new revelation of God’s intent to make a new man, a new people for himself (cf. Eph. 2).

Christ-Centered Biblical Theology manages to keep from being merely a last word from an old theologian. There are memoirs and reflections, to be sure. But the over-all thrust of the book is to equip the reader to pick up the torch and take biblical theology into the new millennium. Numerous charts and diagrams help communicate the concepts of the book, and Goldsworthy ends with a litany of possibilities for furthering the discipline of biblical theology.

This book will kindle a fire in many hearts for biblical theology. And for those who are familiar already with this important discipline, it will stimulate further reflection on the structure of Scripture and the centrality of the Gospel. I hope it will find a broad audience, and that a new generation will carry on Goldsworthy’s work.

Author Info:
Graeme Goldsworthy was formerly lecturer in Old Testament, biblical theology and hermeneutics at Moore Theological College, Sydney, where he still teaches part time. His other books include Gospel-Centered Hermeneutics, According to Plan, Preaching the Whole Bible as Christian Scripture, Prayer and the Knowledge of God, and three books on biblical studies collected as The Goldsworthy Trilogy.

Where to Buy:
  • Westminster Bookstore
  • Christianbook.com
  • Amazon
  • direct from IVP

Disclaimer:
This book was provided by Inter-Varsity Press for review. I was under no obligation to offer a favorable review.

Free eBook: Christ-Centered Bible Study from Armchair-Theology.net

Check out the promotional video for what looks to be an incredibly helpful little book designed for anyone who wants to read the Bible more effectively. The booklet, Christ-Centered Bible Study, is written by Dave Moser of Armchair-Theology.net and freely available as a .pdf download.

Learn more about the book, and download your free copy here.

Good Friday: The Day the Moon Turned to Blood

Today is Good Friday. We celebrate the death of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ today. When we think back to all that happened on Good Friday, we of course focus on Jesus’ becoming the “propitiation for our sins” (1 John 2:2).

But I want you to also think about all the signs and wonders which were on display that day. The sky turned dark, there was an earthquake and many who were dead came back to life. The veil of the Temple ripped from the top down. And on top of all of this, the weeks leading up to Jesus’ death were filled with all the talk of his many miracles including the raising of Lazarus from the dead.

Peter’s Sermon at Pentectost

Keep these signs and wonders in view as you look at Acts 2 with me, as Peter tries to explain another miraculous event – the mighty, rushing wind, tongues of fire, and the miraculous speech that enabled the 120 who were gathered in the upper room to tell the Good News to people of a multitude of languages, who all heard the Gospel in their native tongue.

For these people are not drunk, as you suppose, since it is only the third hour of the day. But this is what was uttered through the prophet Joel:

“And in the last days it shall be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams; even on my male servants and female servants in those days I will pour out my Spirit, and they shall prophesy. And I will show wonders in the heavens above and signs on the earth below, blood, and fire, and vapor of smoke; the sun shall be turned to darkness and the moon to blood, before the day of the Lord comes, the great and magnificent day. And it shall come to pass that everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.” [quoted from Joel 2:28-32]

Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs that God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves know—this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men. God raised him up, loosing the pangs of death, because it was not possible for him to be held by it….

This Jesus God raised up, and of that we all are witnesses. Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this that you yourselves are seeing and hearing. (Acts 2:15-24, 32-33)

Put in this light, you can see what Peter is doing. He’s comparing both the signs and wonders that were seen on Pentecost with the larger story of all that was seen surrounding Jesus – and all of this is the fulfillment of Joel’s prophesy, which Peter quotes. We have the men and women speaking in tongues (the first part of Joel’s prophecy), and we have a darkened sky and other wonders (the second part). Peter is making a point that the “last days” have now come. He adds the words “last days” to Joel’s prophecy for this very reason (Joel has “and afterward”). The “signs of the times” as it were, were already being seen – and Peter felt like he was living with the “day of the Lord” in the near future.

Some object to this view of Peter’s sermon in Acts 2. They claim that Peter was just making an anlogy with Joel 2 to the current situation. Others claim that just the first part was being fulfilled, not the heavenly signs – which would obviously be in the future tribulation period. I won’t delve into all the arguments, but suffice it to say that the view that the New Testament authors understood the “last days” to have begun is quite strong and is attested to throughout the New Testament (see 1 Cor. 10:11, Heb. 1:2, 1 Pet. 1:20, 1 John 2:18).

Going back to Acts 2 now, let me quote from a book I’ve been reading: 40 Questions About the End Times by Eckhard Schnabel (Kregel, 2012):

The connections of the “wonders” and “signs” of Joel’s prophecy with Jesus’ ministry and death provide the basis for Peter’s subsequent arguments concerning the status and the significance of Jesus. The reference to the “last days” establishes how Peter reads the prophets: God has begun to fulfill his promises; the last days have arrived with Jesus’ ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension, and his bestowal of the Spirit. (pg. 21-22)

I agree with Schnabel’s conclusion, but I was especially intrigued with another point he made, almost in passing, in this chapter.

The Moon Turned to Blood

The suggestion that Acts 2:19 refers to a lunar eclipse during which the moon assumes a dull, red color, which was visible in Jerusalem at Passover in A.D. 33, is intriguing; however, it requires a later date for Jesus’ crucifixion, which is more plausibly dated in the year A.D. 30. (pg. 20)

Ever since I read Harold Hoehner’s Chronological Aspects of the Life of Christ (Zondervan, 1978), I have held to a Friday crucifixion and to April 3, A.D. 33 as the most likely date for Jesus’ death. I am not alone in considering A.D. 33 to be the most likely date for Christ’s death and resurrection. If you click this link, you should be able to read the relevant section from IVP’s Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, edited by Joel Green, which concludes as I do. So I was not put off by Schnabel’s preference for A.D. 30. Instead I was very much intrigued by his reference to the moon turning to blood being explained by a lunar eclipse.

I must be honest in admitting that while I have understood Peter to be saying Joel 2 is fulfilled, I was thinking the literal fulfillment focused on the Pentecost event not on the darkening of the sun at Christ’s death. Or at least I hadn’t thought very much about this. So I was eager to read the paper that Schnabel cited which dealt with this lunar eclipse. I was happy to find that the paper is freely available online. It is titled, “The Jewish Calendar, a Lunar Eclipse and the Date of Christ’s Crucifixion” by Colin J. Humphreys and W. Graeme Waddington (Tyndale Bulletin 43, 1992).

I encourage you to read the entire paper (available here), but for my purposes I will excerpt the chief evidence presented for understanding a lunar eclipse to be in view with the prophecy that the moon would turn to blood.

Evidence from Early Christian Writings

In addition to quoting from the apocryphal “Report of Pilate”, the authors of the paper cite Cyril of Alexandria (A.D. 412) as evidence:

The so-called ‘Report of Pilate’, a New Testament apocryphal fragment states, ‘Jesus was delivered to him by Herod, Archelaus, Philip, Annas, Caiphas, and all the people. At his Crucifixion the sun was darkened; the stars appeared and in all the world people lighted lamps from the sixth hour till evening; the moon appeared like blood’. [No matter the authenticity of this later document,] there must have been a tradition that at the Crucifixion the moon appeared like blood….

Further evidence is provided by Cyril of Alexandria, the orthodox Patriarch of Alexandria in AD 412. After stating that there was darkness at the Crucifixion he adds, ‘Something unusual occurred about the circular rotation of the moon so that it even seemed to be turned into blood’, and notes that the prophet Joel foretold such signs. (pg. 342)

The Technical Nature of the Phrase “Moon Turned to Blood”:

The moon turning to blood is a graphic description of a lunar eclipse. The reason an eclipsed moon appears blood-red is well known and the effect has been well documented. Even though during an eclipse the moon is geometrically in the earth’s shadow, some sunlight still reaches it by the refraction of light passing through the earth’s atmosphere. The light reaching the moon is red since scattering by air molecules and very small particles along its long path through the atmosphere preferentially removes the blue end of the spectrum. The phrase ‘moon turned to blood’ has been used by writers and historians to describe lunar eclipses for many centuries, and the expression dates back to at least 300 BC….

In the medieval European annals compiled by G.H. Pertz there are so many lunar eclipses described by ‘the moon turned to blood’ that the phrase appears to be used as a standard description. (pg. 343-344)

For additional corroboration, see the picture at the top of this post (taken from this article about a lunar eclipse in Brooklyn from 12/21/10). In that article, the moon is described as going “dark red” — very similar to the “blood red” description of the medieval era.

Conclusion

On this point, the authors put forth the following conclusion:

There is therefore strong evidence that when Peter, the ‘Report of Pilate’, and Cyril of Alexandria refer to the moon turning to blood on the evening of the Crucifixion, they were describing a lunar eclipse. It is surprising that this deduction does not appear to have been made before, although F.F. Bruce almost reaches this conclusion. He states, with reference to Peter’s Pentecost speech, ‘It was little more than seven weeks since the people in Jerusalem had indeed seen the sun turned into darkness, during the early afternoon of the day of our Lord’s Crucifixion. And on the same afternoon the paschal full moon may well have appeared blood-red in the sky in consequence of that preternatural gloom’. Presumably Bruce and other commentators have not been aware that a blood-red moon is a well-documented description of a lunar eclipse. (pg. 344)

The paper goes on to document how there was only one lunar eclipse that would have been visible from Jerusalem during the Passover in any of the years that are possible dates for his death. That eclipse is dated to Friday, April 3, A.D. 33 – the most likely date of the crucifixion.

This study has forced me to see the Crucifixion anew — to realize what a world-shattering event it really was! The death of Christ and His resurrection marked the end of the old age and the beginning of a new one. And miraculous signs in the heavens and on earth all attest to the prophetic undertones of what is happening. This also should serve to wake us up to the importance of the Cross of Christ and the Empty Tomb. The Gospel of Christ really is world-shattering. The realities we are sharing through the indwelling Spirit and our present realization of the blessings of the Gospel are all a brand new experience which is a foretaste of even greater things to come!

We are living in the last days and Jesus’ return draws near. May we live soberly and righteously in light of all that Christ has done for us. And may we not forget that the power of His resurrection has been given to us — we can live lives that testify to the glory of the age to come.

UPDATE: You can read my review of 40 Questions About the End Times here.

Revisiting Wine and Gladness

It’s been six years since I posted my thoughts on wine, in one of my most read posts. In “Wine to Gladden the Heart of Man”: Thoughts on God’s Good Gift of Wine I traced out the connection that I believe the Old Testament makes between wine and joy, and why I think that indicates that enjoying a glass of wine is permissible (and even recommended) for a Christian.

Over the years since, I’ve further developed and fine-tuned my position on this controversial topic. And I’ve appreciated anew the position of many that drinking wine should be avoided for various wisdom issues related to interacting with our culture. But my basic position still stands. I believe that Scripture praises wine, with it’s joy-producing qualities (a relaxed, calmed mind and uplifted heart) as a good gift from God for mankind. God gave us this for our good, but like many of God’s other gifts (food, sex, etc.) we abuse it and suffer the consequences. We can enjoy the gift of wine without sinfully abusing it and becoming intoxicated (or drunk). Drunkenness is sin, not a disease; but Christians can responsibly enjoy wine without getting drunk (which is sinful and wrong). I have never come close to being drunk, but I have learned to appreciate the gift of wine.

I bring this up because over at Sharper Iron last week, Aaron Blumer posted a response to my article. His post is titled “The True Gladness of Wine,” and takes dead aim right at my central thesis. I respect his careful argumentation and clear position. He is gracious and fair, and he agrees with the majority of scholarship in holding that the vast majority of the instances where the word wine is used in Scripture is referring to alcoholic wine. But I don’t believe he successfully undercuts my primary thesis which I will summarize below. I’m only now responding on my blog, but I have participated in the comments on his post. You can read the 100+ comments over there and follow the whole exchange (which has been more charitable and instructive compared to other such comment threads). Before I proceed with the rest of this post, however, I want to stress that in over 1,000 published posts here at Fundamentally Reformed, this will be only the 10th post devoted to the topic. This isn’t the most important topic facing the church at large and I refuse to make it my hobby horse of choice. Still, from time to time I do discuss the issue because it is important. And everyone should take time to think through their position on this matter.

Rather than rehashing the back and forth from Sharper Iron, or summarizing and then critiquing Aaron’s post, I thought I would just detail here the connection between wine and joy, and why I think that the joy produced by wine is related to the alcoholic properties of wine. My primary point is that God teaches us that the alcoholic properties of wine were intended to be a blessing (which can be abused in violation of God’s will for us).

Wine and Joy

Before I begin, I want to stress that the evils of drunkenness are too large and real to be ignored and I agree that abstinence is one very reasonable way of dealing with that. But for me, it was Scripture’s teaching on wine which compelled me to pick up a glass and experience the joy of wine first hand. I felt like I was denigrating a God-created substance through my views on it and my cultural taboo that I held about it–I was placing reason and experience above Scripture. Everyone needs to think through this for themselves, and my liberty should not require others to partake of wine. But let me try to show why I think the teaching of Scripture on wine and gladness is so persuasive an argument for drinking wine in moderation.

Consider the following verses:

Wine and Gladness

But the vine said to them, ‘Shall I leave my wine that cheers God and men and go hold sway over the trees?’ (Judges 9:13)

You cause the grass to grow for the livestock and plants for man to cultivate, that he may bring forth food from the earth and wine to gladden the heart of man, oil to make his face shine and bread to strengthen man’s heart. (Ps. 104:14-15)

Go, eat your bread with joy, and drink your wine with a merry heart, for God has already approved what you do. (Eccl. 9:7)

Bread is made for laughter, and wine gladdens life, and money answers everything. (Eccl. 10:19)

The wine mourns, the vine languishes, all the merry-hearted sigh. (Isaiah 24:7, see also vs. 8-11 and Is. 16:10)

Then Ephraim shall become like a mighty warrior, and their hearts shall be glad as with wine. Their children shall see it and be glad; their hearts shall rejoice in the LORD. (Zechariah 10:7)

Drunkenness and a Merry Heart

And when their hearts were merry, they said, “Call Samson, that he may entertain us.” So they called Samson out of the prison, and he entertained them. They made him stand between the pillars. (Judges 16:25)

And Abigail came to Nabal, and behold, he was holding a feast in his house, like the feast of a king. And Nabal’s heart was merry within him, for he was very drunk. So she told him nothing at all until the morning light. In the morning, when the wine had gone out of Nabal, his wife told him these things, and his heart died within him, and he became as a stone. (1 Sam. 25:36)

Then Absalom commanded his servants, “Mark when Amnon’s heart is merry with wine, and when I say to you, ‘Strike Amnon,’ then kill him. Do not fear; have I not commanded you? Be courageous and be valiant.” (2 Samuel 13:28 )

On the seventh day, when the heart of the king was merry with wine, he commanded Mehuman, Biztha, Harbona, Bigtha and Abagtha, Zethar and Carkas, the seven eunuchs who served in the presence of King Ahasuerus, (Esther 1:10)

While they are inflamed I will prepare them a feast and make them drunk, that they may become merry, then sleep a perpetual sleep and not wake, declares the Lord. (Jeremiah 51:39)

There are a host of additional passages and verses that establish a connection between wine and joy, and loss of wine and loss of joy. My original post details those. What the second set of verses above establish, however, is that a merry heart is specifically connected with drunkenness. There is a specific kind of joy or merriness that is organically caused by wine. So wine and joy don’t just go together like peas in a pod (in that culture without lots of healthy beverage choices), instead there is a causal connection between wine and joy. The wine is causing people to have a merry heart in a particular sort of way.

1 Sam. 25:36 and Jeremiah 51:39 are most clear in establishing this connection. But I argue that a full-blown merry heart (complete with drunken stupor) does not have to result from “drink[ing] your wine with a merry heart.” In fact, Ps. 104:15 again takes center stage in this. God gave wine specifically to “gladden” our hearts. It causes merriment to happen. A relaxed and uplifted spirit, which is the experience of drinking wine after just a few sips, certainly is a joyous thing. And this is why wine is connected with feasting in Scripture and in so many other medieval (and older) cultures. Festal joy and festal drink go hand in hand. Yes there is joy that isn’t caused by the wine, but the wine adds its own joy. This is why (I believe) the joys of harvest and good food go together with wine often in some of the joy passages. But more than merely joy at the harvest or joy from the food is in view. The wine gives a joy of its own which enhances the entire experience.

So I posit a causal role for wine. Wine causes merriness (the sort that is displayed by drunken people, as well as other sorts of merriness). And this very merriment-inducing quality is what God praises. It is in this light that we should read the passages in the first list, like Judges 9:13 and Ps. 104:15.

Wine in Bible times

My thesis is aided by the general consensus that fermented wine was definitely being partaken of in the Bible times. In the OT, we don’t see evidence of wine being diluted (see Is. 1:22), that came about only later. Later, Greek and Roman cultures praised diluted wine and Jewish culture eventually followed suit. Yet even with diluted wine, the average ratio would put the alcoholic content at around 2.5 or 3.5% (by comparison the average beer sold has between 3.2 and 4% alcoholic content). But with all the passages above, my point here is that fermented drink was definitely in view. For more on this point, see my post “Isaiah 16:10 and the Two-Wine Theory.”

Additional Points

Before I conclude, consider three final points.

First, there are a few passages which speak clearly of alcoholic wine in one verse, and a few verses later wine is referred to in a positive light. Nothing indicates we should assume that the wine was different in the case of the alcoholic variety and the variety which is praised. In 1 Sam. 1:14, Eli tells Hannah to “put your wine away from [her]“. But in vs. 24, Hannah brings wine with her on her trip back to Shiloh. Nothing indicates that the wine Hannah brought would be different than the wine Eli thought she was drinking earlier. In 1 Sam. 25:18, Abigail serves wine for David and his men, then later in verses 36-37 Nabal is drunk with wine. Nothing in the context would lead us to think the drink David and his men received was different from that which made Nabal drunk. The difference of course is Nabal immoderately drank the wine, whereas David and his men didn’t. Joel 1:5, 10 is another similar passage.

Second, Scripture clearly praises alcoholic wine. Isaiah 25:6 is definitely referring to alcoholic wine when it indicates that such wine will characterize the blessings of Christ’s future kingdom: “And in this mountain the LORD of hosts will make for all people a feast of choice pieces, a feast of wines on the lees, of fat things full of marrow, of well-refined wines on the lees. (NKJV) “. “Wines on the lees” is translated in most modern versions as “well-aged wine”.

Third, Nehemiah when describing what supplies were given to him as Judean governor, mentions all kinds of wines. Nothing indicates that he did not partake of them. And the context is one of approval, as he is writing inspired Scripture. Here is the passage: “Now what was prepared at my expense for each day was one ox and six choice sheep and birds, and every ten days all kinds of wine in abundance. Yet for all this I did not demand the food allowance of the governor, because the service was too heavy on this people.” (Neh. 5:18 ) So if there is two kinds of wine, this passage indicates Nehemiah partook of both.

I think the preponderance of evidence is in favor of my conclusion – which the majority of the church down through the ages has also held to. I conclude that the moderate enjoyment of alcoholic drinks is something God has intended for our good. God gave wine to man for our good and for the temporary relief of stress and other health benefits that it brings – and to give us the joy that we have when we drink good wine with good friends and people. This festal joy was God’s gift to man and God designed all of this when he created the natural fermentation process and the gift of wine.

If you want to read more on this topic, I’d encourage you to peruse my other posts on wine. And if you’re brave, you can dig through all the comments (there’s quite a few debates preserved there).

One Another Ministry

Yesterday I used the following list as a handout for an adult SS class I was teaching.  Over the years this concept of “one another” ministry has really been a blessing and a burden for me.  It has the potential of revolutionizing how we view the Christian life.  Spiritual growth is a community project.  Not serving others in the ways the list below indicates has a negative impact on the church as a whole and on other believers.  And pushing yourself away from the church and away from fellowship with other believers can result in you missing out on receiving many of the things below.

We need each other.  We need “one another ministry”.  Are you looking for a ministry or job title at your current church?  Take this and pin it to your wall.  This is your job description as a Christian.  May the list below (which is incomplete) be a blessing to many as they rethink the idea of church.  It’s about being “God’s people” together, worshiping Him together, and growing in the Christian life and in the Faith together.

ONE ANOTHER MINISTRY

  1. LOVE one another — Rom. 12:10, Gal. 5:13, 1 Pet. 1:22, 1 John 3:11
  2. ENCOURAGE one another — Rom. 1:12, 1 Thess. 4:18, 5:11, Heb. 10:25
  3. INSTRUCT / TEACH / ADMONISH one another — Rom. 15:14, Col. 3:16
  4. CARE FOR / SERVE one another — 1 Cor. 12:25, 1 Pet. 4:8-11
  5. SERVE one another — Rom. 12:10, Gal. 5:13, 1 Pet. 1:22, 1 John 3:11
  6. COMFORT one another — 2 Cor. 13:11
  7. FORGIVE one another — Eph. 4:32
  8. EXHORT one another — Heb. 3:12-13
  9. STIR UP one another TO LOVE + GOOD WORKS — Heb. 10:24-25
  10. PRAY FOR one another — James 5:16
  11. CONFESS SINS one to another — James 5:16
  12. BEAR With / BEAR the burdens of one another — Rom. 15:1, Gal. 6: 2, Eph. 4:2
  13. BUILD UP one another — Rom. 15:2
  14. LIVE IN HARMONY WITH / WELCOME one another — Rom. 15:5-7
  15. MINISTER TO one another — 1 Thess. 5:12-14
  16. WORSHIP GOD together — Rom. 15:6, Heb. 2:12, 13:13-15

On a few of the above verses, it may help to use the English Standard Version, where the phrase “one another” is usually found. For another look at this ministry, look at an earlier post “1 Thessalonians and the Church’s Greatest Need“.

For convenience, I have this available as a free .pdf download.