Category: Bible

Meditating on Mediator-Types

~ Bob Hayton

Last week, our pastor taught on Noah and the Flood. As we read Gen. 8:20-22, I started thinking about Noah as a type of Christ. This got me thinking and I came up with the beginning of a list of Mediator-Types in Scripture.

The following pattern merits further mediation and study.

God’s punishment and/or wrath for sin > a Mediator > a burnt offering for sin and/or prayer > God stops his judgment and blesses mankind

Flood destroys the earth > Noah > burnt offering Gen. 8:20-22 > a new covenant and pledge to preserve earth

Sodom & Gomorrah’s judgment > Abraham > prayer Gen. 19:27-29 > rescue of Lot

Death of firstborn > Moses > Passover lamb, blood applied to doorposts Exod. 12 > Destroyer passes over

Angel of the Lord destroys 70,000 > David > burnt offerings on the threshing floor of Ornan
1 Chron. 21:14-17, 26-27 > Angel sheathes his sword

Any other examples come to mind? I realize this is just a bare sketch, but it the Mediator theme in the Old Testament is a great study.

Defining KJV-Onlyism

~ Bob Hayton ~ 12 Comments

This post is from is from my newly redesigned, group KJV Only Debate blog.

KJV Onlyism is hard to define. And like any grass roots movement, there are many competing manifestations of it. As a former, self-dubbed “KJV-onlyist” I will try to carefully put forth a definition. I know I’m going to say something wrong here and won’t please everyone, but I hope the end result is helpful for those new to the debate.

Simple Definition

The KJV-only position holds that the only Bible an English speaking Christian should use is the King James Bible. While some KJV-only proponents bristle at the label viewing it as a derogatory term, most don’t hesitate to affirm it. In KJV-only circles, you cannot disavow the label. Rather, you qualify it.

Now, for study, some KJV-onlyists may allow the use of other translations. But for memorization, church preaching and teaching, and general reading, the KJV should be the only version of the Bible one uses.

Why the King James Bible?

Different KJV-onlyists will offer different answers to this question. These are some of the common arguments used by most KJV-onlyists.

The Better Text Argument — The KJV is the only widely used Bible exclusively based on the Textus Receptus Greek & Masoretic Hebrew Texts.

The Better Doctrine Argument — The differences between the KJV and other Bible versions are examined and the KJV’s readings preserve a superior doctrine and more of Jesus Christ’s divine titles.

The Conspiratorial Argument — The manuscripts that support the newer Greek text were only found recently and were found in areas like Egypt where false doctrine was prevalent.

The Historical Argument — The Reformers and Puritans used the KJV and it launched worldwide missions and the Great Awakenings.

The Better Manuscripts Argument — The manuscripts that support the text behind the KJV agree with one another closely, don’t show signs of textual corruption and represent the vast numerical superiority – 90% of the manuscripts.

The Better Translation Argument — The KJV translators were masters of English and knew Greek and Hebrew and multiple other languages far better than translators today, plus they used a literal translation technique instead of the dynamic or loose method in vogue today.

Groupings of KJV-Onlyists

I mentioned before that there are numerous manifestations of KJV-onlyism. Sometimes the different groups are treated like one entity. I want to be careful to distinguish terms and not broad-brush the entire movement by the crazy antics of Peter Ruckman or Gail Riplinger, for example.

Generic KJV Only Position — Most KJV Onlyists find themselves here. They haven’t thought out a more specific position, or just believe the KJV is the only Bible that should be used and leave it at that.

English is Inspired View — This view takes issue with anyone correcting the KJV English. Since the Bible seems to show translations of the OT as being treated like they were inspired, the English is treated like it is inspired. Some versions are more strict than others, but all bow to the KJV as the final authority before they would trust a lexicon or dictionary.

Double-Inspiration View — This view goes further and says the English corrects the Greek. In some sense the KJV was inspired directly by God. People with this view (and some of those in the previous view) would hold that translations of the Bible into other languages must be guided by the English of the KJV.

Pure Seed View — This idea comes from 1 Pet. 1:23-25 and basically claims that the use of the KJV is essential for people to be saved. No one can be saved from an impure seed (the NIV, for instance). Any of the first three positions above could hold to this view as well, but no one in the next three camps would.

TR Only View — This view holds the Greek and Hebrew as superior to the Greek, but also holds that they were word-perfectly preserved. The text behind the KJV usually is the text held to be the word-perfect copy of the original text. The word of God is “intact” in English, and while they would correct the sense of the KJV through scholarship and original language study, they still would not see this as any kind of overt error in the KJV. Few if any, TR-onlyists use the NKJV however.

Ecclesiastical Text — This view places greater stress on church confessions and the historic use of the Textus Receptus by the church of the Reformation period and afterward. Some in this view would hold to errors in either the TR or the KJV, and some would use the NKJV or 21st Century KJV.

Majority Text — This view should be distinguished from the previous views. Proponents of the Greek Majority Text may or may not use the KJV or NKJV. They hold to a textual theory of the superiority of the Byzantine view, but they acknowledge the merits of careful, believing scholarship and textual criticism. As the Majority Text as such didn’t exist prior to 1980, they don’t see adherence to that text as a binding matter of faith for all Christians.

King James Preferred — This view is held by some who see some weaknesses with the King James Only position, but still believe the TR is the best text we have or else use the King James primarily for traditional or other reasons.

Debating Calvinism

~ Bob Hayton ~ 118 Comments

Over the years, I’ve hosted some serious debates on many of the issues relating to Fundamentalism. I’ve had debates on various aspects of Calvinism too.

Recently in an old post on my blog, buried where few can see it, have been some comments by Greg and Don wanting to debate me on Calvinism. The insinuation was recently left that I don’t want to debate that topic or that I won’t allow a debate on it. To make such an enterprise simpler, I had asked that Greg read my explanation of the 5 points of Calvinism.

He’s done that, but I keep missing his comments because on very old posts on my blog the comment notifier doesn’t work for me (since I ported those posts over to my blog from my free wordpress.com blog). So I’m going to move that debate to this post.

In the comments, you can expect to see some interchange on that topic, and I’ll copy Greg’s most recent comment over and give my reply. We’ll see where that goes.

Rules for this comment thread are you must 1) read my explanation of the 5 points of Calvinism, and 2) try to stick to the Calvinism debate and 3) debate charitably following the spirit of my commenting policy. If you’re up to the challenge dive in. Know that I’ve been under the weather lately and have some catch up to do at work so I may not be interacting over here as regularly or quickly as I would like. But I will see all the comments and be sure to respond.

Mark — Good News of Jesus, the Suffering Savior (part 2)

~ Bob Hayton

Introduction – Mark 1:1

–continued from part 1

3. Theme Verse — Mark 1:1

A. Gospel — (Evangel / Good News, from euangelizomai – to evangelize)
1) The “Gospel” is connected by the “as” in vs. 2 to the quotation in vs. 2-3. The intimation there as well as in 1:14-15 is that the “Gospel” is a fulfillment of something foretold in the Old Testament. — The “Gospel” is connected by the “as” in vs. 2 to the quotation in vs. 2-3. The intimation there as well as in 1:14-15 is that the “Gospel” is a fulfillment of something foretold in the Old Testament. [See also, Rom. 1:1-4, 1 Cor. 15:1-4, Gal. 3:8, 1 Pt. 1:25 and Ps. 40:9, 68:11, 96:2, Is. 40:9, 41:27, 52:7, 61:1]

B. The Identity of Jesus — Christ, the Son of God
1) Christ = Messiah = Anointed One
A messianic expectation was already present in Jesus day (Luke 1). An expectation of deliverance from enemies and the Messiah as King-Deliverer was current.
2) Son of God, this title has OT precedence. Psalm 2 & 2 Sam. 7 join the title Son and Christ together as we see here in Mark 1. Son was a title given to David’s heir, it was also used of Israel, as being God’s Son (Hos. 11:1). But Mark shows that for Jesus, this means even more than the idea of Messianic Ruler.

DISCUSSION: How was Jesus less and more than what the Jews of His day were expecting in a Messiah? How might Mark 1:2-3 help us see what aspect of the Messiah’s ministry that Jesus was going to focus on in his first advent? Jot down your observations.

Less = Not the physical deliverer (that is the second advent). Not concerned with Jewish state and Jews alone.
More = Suffering Servant (hinted at from Mark 1:2-3’s focus on Isaiah 40), Son of God, a spiritual Savior.

3) The identity of Jesus certainly is key to what makes the Gospel good. And the identity of Jesus is a key theme of Mark.

The words Christ and Son (of God, or of the Highest), as a title for Jesus, appear in a uniquely important way in Mark. Jesus rarely calls himself these titles, preferring instead Son of Man which appears 14 times at least of Jesus in Mark.

  Christ / Son of David / King of Jews     Son of God / Son of the Highest  
1:1 (by Mark) 1:1 (by Mark)
8:29 (by Peter) 1:11 (by God the Father)
10:47-48 (by a blind man) 3:11 (by a demon)
14:61 (by the high priest) 5:7 (by demons)
15:2 (by Pilate) 9:7 (by God the Father)
15:32 (in derision at the cross) 14:61 (by the high priest)
  15:39 (by the centurion)

DISCUSSION: What can we see from this arrangement? What stands out?

After declaring Jesus is Christ and the Son of God, Mark proceeds to keep this quiet and show how people are not understanding His identity. Jesus never declares himself to be the Messiah directly. He distances Himself form some of the wrong ideas of a physical overthrow of governments as a result of his first coming. The climactic mid-point of the book is Peter’s recognition of Jesus as the Messiah (8:29). The title Son of God is only at the end of the book used of Jesus by a person, and it is a Roman Centurion at the climax of Jesus’ suffering on the cross. In contrast before his end while on the cross, the Jews derided him challenging his claim to be Messiah.

4. Key Themes in Mark

A. Identity of Jesus
1) See questions about Jesus: 1:27, 2:7, 4:41, 6:2-3, 8:29, 10:18, 14:61.
2) See also statements of amazement about Jesus: 1:27-28, 2:12, 4:41, 5:42, 6:2-3, 6:14, 7:37, 10:24-26, 10:32, 12:17.
3) Notice the bewilderment and lack of understanding displayed by the disciples throughout the book 6:52, 7:18, 8:17-18, 8:21, 9:10, 9:32, 10:24-26.
4) Finally see how Jesus continually asks people to keep quiet about who He is: 1:34, 1:43-45, 3:10-12, 5:43, 7:24, 7:36-37, 8:26, 8:30, 9:9.

B. Mission of Jesus 1:38, 2:17, 10:45.

C. Importance of Faith: 1:15, 2:5, 4:40, 5:34, 5:36, 9:24, 9:42, 10:52, 11:22-24, 11:31, 13:13, 15:32.

D. Inevitability of Persecution 1:12-13, 3:21, 3:31-35, 8:34-38, 10:30-34, 10:45, 13:8-13.

Download this study in PDF ~ See all posts in this series.

The posts in this series include notes from a Men’s Bible Study I’m teaching on the Gospel of Mark every other Saturday morning. I am sharing them so they might possibly be a blessing to others. Feel free to download the lesson sheets and use them for your own purposes.

Mark — Good News of Jesus, the Suffering Savior (part 1)

~ Bob Hayton ~ 1 Comment

Introduction – Mark 1:1

1. “Gospel” — A New Kind of Book

A. Mark’s opening verse gave a title to a new kind of book — a Gospel.
B. The non-inspired titles: “The Gospel According to Mark, Matthew, Luke, John” likely derive from Mark 1:1.
C. A Gospel is not an objective, historically focused biography.
D. They are similar to other “lives” of philosophers and political leaders in ancient times — they are crafted to tell a story with a goal in mind for the reader.
E. They are different in that they focus on Jesus Christ in a unique way — they unpack the theological significance of Jesus Christ and give us the true Good News.
F. They don’t simply give us what happened, they tell us what to believe about what happened. They are in essence, preaching materials. They tell the story of God’s saving actions in Christ Jesus.
G. The Synoptic Gospels are Matthew, Mark, and Luke and it is believed that Matthew & Luke made use of Mark in the writing of their Gospels. They certainly followed his pattern. Each of the four authors had particular emphases in his writing.

DISCUSSION: What are some benefits to the four-fold Gospel that we have in the New Testament? Why four books instead of one? Why are the books similar and different. What can we learn from that? Record your thoughts.

2. Mark — The First Gospel

A. Author
The Book is anonymous, but from early on it has been attributed to Mark — the John Mark of Acts 12:12, 12:25, 13:5, 15:36-39, Col. 4:10, Philemon 24, 1 Pet. 5:13, 2 Tim. 4:11.

Here’s the earliest attribution of the book to Mark, by Papias in AD 140 (but known to us through Eusebius’ quote in roughly AD 320):

The Elder (likely John) said this also: Mark, who became Peter’s interpreter, wrote accurately, though not in order, all that he remembered of the things said or done by the Lord. For he had neither heard the Lord nor been one of his followers, but afterwards, as I said, he had followed Peter, who used to compose his discourses with a view to the needs of his hearers, but not as though he were drawing up a connected account of the Lord’s sayings. So Mark made no mistake in thus recording some things just as he remembered them. For he was careful of this one thing, to omit none of the things he had heard and to make no untrue statements therein.

Another early tradition (AD 160-180) reads: “Mark declared, who is called ‘stump-fingered’ because he had short fingers in comparison with the size of the rest of his body. He was Peter’s interpreter. After the death of Peter himself he wrote down this same gospel in the regions of Italy.”

Interestingly, Mark received relatively little attention in the preserved writings of the church, up until around the 1800s for the most part. There are aspects of Mark which make it difficult, and Augustine assumed Mark just offered up an abbreviated version of Matthew which was certainly larger, and which Augustine thought was written first. (However, often in the sections Mark shares with Matthew, Mark’s account is more detailed and longer than Matthew’s.)

B. Date
Most put this after the death of Peter in AD 64 and before the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70. This is our best guess.

This becomes important when we remember the intense persecution of the Christians at the hands of Nero in this time, Paul was martyred in AD 67 near the end of the persecution period. (see 1:12-14, 8:34-38, 10:30-34, 10: 45, 13:9-13)

C. Destination and Place of Writing
Both are likely Rome. Mark is first quoted in 1 Clement & the Shepherd of Hermas, both associated with Rome. Church tradition is almost united in having Mark writing to the Romans from Rome, and Mark is associated with Peter who almost certainly spent the last few years of his life in Rome where he was martyred. Clues in the letter point to a Gentile audience and possibly even a Latin / Roman audience. Grammatical points as well as many explanations of Jewish customs and translations of Aramaic into Greek given in Mark.

D. Purpose
We can only sketch ideas on this and as we study Mark we’ll learn if we are right or not in our ideas here.
1) To make the Gospel accessible to Gentiles (a missiological aim)
2) To encourage those facing persecutions, particularly the beleaguered Christians in Rome.
3) To explain and defend the faith — particularly the nature of Christ being fully man and fully divine (as well as how Jesus fulfilled and superseded the Messianic expectation of the Jews)
4) To explain the significance of the cross (almost half the book is devoted to the last week of Christ’s life– the passion week), and Christ’s death is foretold in 3:6.

DISCUSSION: What other thoughts come to mind when you think of characteristics or traits of Mark. Are there other themes which come to mind?

3. Theme Verse — Mark 1:1

A. Gospel — (Evangel / Good News, from euangelizomai – to evangelize)
1) The “Gospel” is connected by the “as” in vs. 2 to the quotation in vs. 2-3. The intimation there as well as in 1:14-15 is that the “Gospel” is a fulfillment of something foretold in the Old Testament.

DISCUSSION: Can you think of other places where the “Gospel” is rooted in the Old Testament? Is “the Gospel” really in the Old Testament? Jot down your observations and thoughts.

Rom. 1:1-4 & 1 Cor. 15:1-4 root the Gospel in the OT Scriptures. Initial Gospel sermons stemmed from OT texts (Acts 2:16-36, 13:16-41). Gal. 3:8, Abraham had the gospel preached to him beforehand. 1 Pet. 1:25 ties the word of Isaiah 40 to the gospel preached in the NT era (as does Mk. 1:1 with 1:2-3 – Is. 40 again is quoted) [cf. 1 Pet. 1:10-12]. OT “Gospel” texts are Ps. 40:9, 68:11, 96:2, Is. 40:9, 41:27, 52:7, 61:1). The Good News of God’s saving reign, and the ushering in of an era of righteousness is foretold in Isaiah. Mark connects Jesus’ ministry with the beginning of that fulfillment. “The beginning of the Gospel…” (Already / Not Yet fulfillment)

Download this study in PDF ~ See all posts in this series.

The posts in this series include notes from a Men’s Bible Study I’m teaching on the Gospel of Mark every other Saturday morning. I am sharing them so they might possibly be a blessing to others. Feel free to download the lesson sheets and use them for your own purposes.