The Passion Week: Good Friday

This Easter season, I’ve made a series of posts addressing skeptics’ criticism surrounding the Resurrection.  As we close in on Easter, I want to do a day-by-day detail discussing the events happening during the Passion Week. 

Please keep checking back!

Good Friday

So many things happen on this day that it’s impossible to fit a thorough discussion of them into a single post.  The most important event - by far, of course - is the Crucifixion.  Yet, what do I do about the other events?  Though they may be overshadowed by the Cross, should I omit them when there is still so much to learn from them?  Of all the days of the Passion Week I’ve covered before now, I knew this day would be the most difficult to address adequately.  I just pray in advance that God will guide my thoughts and forgive my clumsy words.

In my western way of thinking, it’s hard to draw a defining line between the events of Thursday and the events on Friday.  The Jewish day begins at sundown, while in the west, the next day starts at midnight.  So in this case, Friday technically began on what some (including me) would call Thursday.  Since I ended my last post with the arrest of Jesus, I will consider the events that followed His arrest to be happening on Friday.  I know it’s complicated, but realize that the events are historical regardless of the day to which we assign them.

The flight of the disciples and Peter’s denial

Jesus had warned His disciples earlier that they would soon fall away, citing Zechariah 13:7.  I will remind you of that conversation:

Matthew 26:31-33, Then saith Jesus unto them, All ye shall be offended because of me this night: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be scattered abroad. But after I am risen again, I will go before you into Galilee. Peter answered and said unto him, Though all men shall be offended because of thee, yet will I never be offended.

I’m amused at the pride of Peter who seemed more upset that his loyalty would be questioned rather than amazed at Jesus saying He would rise again!  It’s as though Peter was so offended, that he completely missed the remark.  Of course, Jesus was correct and, just as He had also prophesied, Peter would later deny even knowing Him.

I think we sometimes judge people of the Bible too harshly.  We have the entire revelation of Scripture so, in a sense, we know more than they.  They were living in the times the Bible was being written and probably struggled to understand what was happening.  

In my life of comfort, it’s easy for me to look down on Peter and boast that I would have never denied knowing Him.  I like to think that I would stand fast if I had to face real threats of harm on account of my faith.  But I know that I’ll probably never be in that situation.  In the meanwhile, I know there are some Christians who wouldn’t take their Bibles to work because they’re afraid of what their coworkers might say.  Knowing what I know now, if I were to ever deny knowing Jesus, that would make me 100 times more a coward than Peter!

The trials of Jesus

The Bible tells us that Jesus was taken in front of multiple authorities to face the accusations being made against Him: Annas (John 18:13), Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin (Matthew 26:57-68), Pilate (Luke 23:2-5), and Herod (Luke 23:6-12).  

When Jesus stood before the Jewish authorities, He spoke nothing in His own defense just as was prophesied in Isaiah 53:7, “He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.”

The accusation against Him was made by 2 false witnesses who said He had said He would tear down the Temple and rebuild it in 3 days (Matthew 26:59-61).  Yet even when faced with the lies spoken against Him, Jesus remained silent until the Chief Priest asked, “I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God” (Matthew 26:63).  In response, Jesus made His only confession, (v. 64) “Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.”

I see in this scene a picture of Christ as the Lamb of God.  He was examined by the Jewish priests and shown to be without blemish - worthy of being a sacrifice that would atone for sin.  In this case, it was the sin of the whole world! Praise Him!!

John 19 tells us about Jesus before Pilate.  V. 13 says, “When Pilate therefore heard that saying, he brought Jesus forth, and sat down in the judgment seat in a place that is called the Pavement, but in the Hebrew, Gabbatha.”  The word translated as “judgment seat” here is the Greek word Bema (béma, βῆμα, Strong’s word 968).  It’s the same word used in 2 Corinthians 5:10 where the works of Christians are judged by fire.  

I thought it was interesting that Jesus Himself was once judged before the Bema seat. We know the outcome, of course; He was ultimately sentenced to be crucified. However, note carefully what Pilate said about Him. He said that Jesus was a “just person” who had done no evil. It's significant that Jesus was found to be without guilt. The Bible says the wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23). If Jesus had been guilty of any sin, He would have been deserving of death. If He had been deserving of death, He could not have given His life as the payment for our sins since He would have had to die for His own sins. But He was innocent.  Before we stand before the Judgment Seat, it was necessary for Him to stand before the judgment seat. It is by His obedience that we are made righteous (Romans 5:19).

Jesus or Barabbas?

While Pilate was trying to find a way to release an innocent man without raising the ire of religious leaders, he resorted to the Roman custom of freeing a condemned man on the Passover (John 18:39-40).  He offered the people a choice: Jesus, the King of the Jews or Barabbas (a murderer).  To his surprise, the people chose Barabbas.

There’s something very interesting about the name, “Barabbas.”  Bar (bar, בַּר, Strong’s word 1247) is an Aramaic word that means “son of.”  It’s used in a few other places in the Bible such as Matthew 16:17 where Jesus refers to Simon as “Simon Barjona” (Simon, son of Jonah). Many people already know that abba (ab, אָב, Strong’s word 1) means “father.”  Barabba, then, means “Son of Abba” or “Son of a father.”  

Wow.  I happen to be the son of a father.  When you think about it, everyone is the child of a father, so Barabbas could have been anyone.  That could have been my name written there!  This paints a wonderful picture of the substitutionary death of Jesus. Each one of us is a Barabbas: all guilty of many sins and all sentenced to die. But we don’t have to die. Jesus – the innocent man who knew no sin – has died in our place. He went to the cross and we were set free.

Jesus on the Cross

There is more that could be said about Good Friday: the scourging, the mocking, the purple robe of Herod, the crown of thorns, the road to Golgatha, the two thieves, the accusation posted over His head, His clothes being divided, and so much else.  However, time and space does not allow them all to be examined.  

Concerning Jesus on the cross, let us examine this passage given in John’s gospel:

John 19:30-35, When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost. The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away. Then came the soldiers, and brake the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with him. But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs: But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water. And he that saw it bare record, and his record is true: and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe.

The last words of Jesus recorded by John were, “It is finished.”  The ultimate goal of Jesus’ incarnation had been accomplished.  The penalty for sin had been paid.  The wrath of the Father had been satisfied.  Our debt has been settled and there is no more need for a sacrifice.  God and sinners are reconciled.  

John tells us that he saw the event with his own eyes and wrote it down for our benefit.  In his own words,  And he that saw it bare record, and his record is true: and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe.  

Let John’s desire be our desire: that we tell others about Jesus so they, too, might believe!

Misquoted Bible verses

I may be dating myself but I remember the 2000 Presidential debates, where Vice President Al Gore made the following statement:

"And I'm a grandfather now. I want to be able to tell my grandson, when I'm in my later years, that I didn't turn away from the evidence that showed that we were doing some serious harm. In my faith tradition, it is written in the book of Matthew, 'Where your heart is, there's your treasure also.' And I believe that we ought to recognize the value to our children and grandchildren of taking steps that preserve the environment in a way that's good for them."

The fact of the matter is that Mr. Gore quoted the verse backwards. The passage from Matthew 6:21 actually says: “For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.”  In the context of the passage, Jesus points out that we tend to be concerned about our treasure; Jesus was saying we should be concerned about our eternal treasure in heaven rather than the temporary treasures of earth. In Mr. Gore’s misquote, he gave the impression that Jesus was telling us we should invest our treasure in the things our hearts desire.  But Mr. Gore is not alone in misquoting the Bible. I’ve noticed there are many misunderstood verses that have made their way into common vernacular. 

Instead of just citing many commonly misquoted verses, I’m going to divide this into three different sections: misquoted verses, out-of-context verses, and things believed to be in the Bible that aren’t really there.  Let’s get started:

MISQUOTED VERSES

“Money is the root of all evil.”

People who say this are usually trying to disparage anyone who happens to be rich.  It’s as though the money itself is evil and, so, simply being rich is a sin.  The passage from 1 Timothy 6:10 actually says, For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.

We see clearly that it’s the love of money that is a sin.  Some people have made money into their idol and err in their faith while pursuing riches but money, by itself, isn’t the root of evil.

"Pride goeth before a fall."

Younger people might not hear this so much anymore but it was a commonly used saying back in my day.  I suppose it’s not a terrible misquote but the actual verse in Proverbs 16:18 says, Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.

“The lion shall lay down with the lamb.”

I don’t know if I should call this a misquote or something else.  These words don’t appear in the Bible.  Seriously!  People are often shocked when I tell them this and furiously flip through their Bible to prove me wrong but I’m not.  You can search for yourself and you’ll see it’s not found anywhere.  

I’m not exactly sure why this misquote has become so widely believed and has been so enduring.  There are two verses that may have given rise to the misquote:

Isaiah 11:6,The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them.

Isaiah 65:25, The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, and the lion shall eat straw like the bullock: and dust shall be the serpent's meat. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain, saith the Lord.

Both of these verses mention a lamb and a lion but neither says they lay down together.  Of course, Jesus is referred to as both the Lion and the Lamb so maybe people lump them together.  

Whatever the source of the confusion, the commonly used phrase is a misquote of the Bible.

“Spare the rod and spoil the child.”

I believe this isn’t intended to be a quote from the Bible but is meant as a paraphrase of a biblical principle.  Proverbs 13:24 says, He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes.

I suppose the paraphrase isn’t terrible but it seems to change the meaning slightly.  The Bible tells us that loving parents will discipline their children when it’s necessary.  The paraphrase almost makes it sound as though we should raise our kids by beating them.

OUT OF CONTEXT VERSES

Sometimes people will correctly quote a verse from the Bible, but will ignore the context and attempt to use the verse to mean something other than the intended meaning.

Matthew 7:1, Judge not, that ye be not judged.

People who cite this verse want us to believe that the Bible forbids us from judging anyone.  From the context, however, we can see that Jesus is clearly talking about being a hypocrite.  Read the entire context of verses 1-5:

Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

You can see that the passage condemns judging somebody for something while, at the same time, you’re doing the same things or even worse.  Put simply, you are drawing attention to a speck in a brother’s eye while ignoring the beam in your own eye.  

Matthew 7:12, Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.

Many times, people who quote this verse are trying to justify treating someone poorly because the other person has already treated them poorly.  In other words, they want to make the verse mean, “Do unto others as they do unto you.” 

Sometimes, this verse is interpreted in a way that is closer to the intended meaning but still misses the mark.  It’s as though the command is to not do anything bad to someone because we wouldn’t want them to do something bad to us.  They make the verse mean something like, “Don’t do anything to others that you wouldn’t want done to you.”

The Bible sets a higher standard for Christians.  We are expected to treat people in the way we would like to be treated, without regard to how they might actually treat us.  We are commanded to show kindness, grace, mercy, and forgiveness even to those who hate us.  We should never be vengeful nor indifferent.

Matthew 18:20, For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

Be honest with yourself.  Every time you’ve heard this verse, you envision a Bible study or prayer meeting with a handful of people confident that the Lord is with them in spite of their small number.  Am I right?  Certainly, Jesus promised us that He would be with us always, even to the end of the world (Matthew 28:20) but Matthew 18:20 isn’t referring to that.  

Here is the context of the verse: Matthew 18:15-20, Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican. Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven. For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

The passage needs little explanation.  It’s talking about church discipline and confronting sin in the church.  It’s hardly appropriate to use it as a description of a Bible fellowship!

THINGS NOT IN THE BIBLE

There are some things people are certain are in the Bible but they aren't.  Here are a few examples:

Adam ate an apple.  

Some commentators say the fruit Adam ate was never identified but I disagree.  The Bible says Adam and Eve were judged for eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Nowhere does the Bible say it was an apple.

There were three Wise Men

The Bible only says that wise men came from the east to worship Jesus.  It doesn’t say how many.  Perhaps three is assumed because they gave gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh.  I believe the Bible merely describes what kinds of gifts were given but many men could have given the same gifts.  For example, two men could have given Christ gold, two given frankincense, and two given myrrh.

This too shall pass

This is a proverb believed to have come from ancient Persia but many people think it’s a verse from the Bible.  It’s not.  We do have an assurance from the Bible that Christ has delivered us from death and can trust that He will always deliver us (2 Corinthians 1:10).

The Lord helps those that help themselves

While many adages are meant to convey biblical principles, some are closer to Scripture than others.  This is one of those “others” that really has no basis in Scripture.  In John 15:5, Jesus said, “I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.”  To believe that we can work in the flesh and God will bless us, is to commit the sin of pride.  To think that we can do anything is to rob God of His glory!

The Lord works in mysterious ways

People say this about God but it’s not a verse found anywhere in the Bible.  It’s most likely a paraphrase from a 1774 hymn by William Cowper:

God moves in a mysterious way

His wonders to perform;

He plants His footsteps in the sea

and rides upon the storm.

CONCLUSION

There are more things I could include but this post has gone on long enough.  Maybe I’ll do a ‘part 2’ sometime but hopefully these examples are enough to demonstrate the ignorance many people have about the Bible - even many professing Christians.  2 Timothy 2:15 commands us to, “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.”  If we have to study to show ourselves approved to God, what does it mean if we don’t study?  I guess it would mean God doesn’t approve, we should be ashamed, and we can’t rightly divide the word of truth!  

So the next time you’re in a conversation with someone who quotes a favorite verse to you, I suggest you not simply take his word for it.  Go to the Bible and read the passage for yourself.  The Truth might surprise you!

Some comments on the creation week: Day 2

A while back, I taught a short series on creation for my Sunday school class. It was supposed to last for the summer and I had planned on covering several topics like the role of creation in evangelism, various ways some Christians reinterpret Genesis in order to fit it with popular scientific theories, and how to answer some of the more common objections people raise against creation. One lesson I had planned was to cover the days of the creation week, giving a short description on what happened each day. However, there were so many questions asked and such interest shown that the single lesson I had planned ended up being stretched over 5 lessons.

It was during that time that I realized that, even though the language of Genesis 1 is straightforward and easy to read, many Christians don't stop to consider the full impact of what is happening on each day – not so much from a spiritual perspective but rather from a physical one. To that end, I thought it would be worthwhile to have a short series of posts, each covering one day of the creation week. This isn't meant to be a treaty on the subject. Instead, I hope to simply open a few eyes to the realization that what is being described were real events that literally shaped the world. Even so, the posts will be a little longer than usual.  I apologize in advance and only say that I will do my best to make them worth the while to read.

In this post, we’ll be looking at the events of Day 2.

Genesis 1:6-8, And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

Surprisingly little details are given for the events of Day 2. Since the details surrounding these events are so scant, we can only speculate about what these creative acts might have included. However, we must be careful to not hold out our speculation as doctrine. Some things that have been theorized seem reasonable. Some are musings. We can employ science here but we are limited since we are dealing with a unique event that wasn't observed. We can trust the clear text of the Bible but our scientific theories are suspect.

As was my practice in my day 1 post, I’m going to break this passage down verse by verse.

v. 6, And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. 

There seems to be 2 things being discussed here.  First, God says there will be a firmament in the midst of the waters.  Other translations describe this as an expanse.  The second thing we see is that this firmament divided the waters from the waters.  I point this out here because I want to be clear that the firmament seems to be distinct from the waters above and below it.  We will discuss this more after we look at verse 7

v. 7, And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

We can see, then, that there is the firmament, and that there are waters above and below it.  With that in mind, let’s consider what is meant by these two things.

We know that God will soon be creating living things on the earth so it would not be unreasonable to suppose that He is preparing the planet to support them.  The “expanse” or “firmament” seems to be the space occupied by plants and terrestrial creatures (including us). Therefore, God possibly created the atmosphere here with its composite of various gasses.

We are certain that water existed on the first day. Since water is hydrogen and oxygen (H2O), then we can say those elements were created on Day 1. If God is creating breathable air on Day 2, it is likely similar to the air we breathe now. Besides oxygen, the air would have contained nitrogen, argon, carbon (as in CO2), neon, etc. So the elements of the periodic table are being created ex nihilo in the order that God has chosen to introduce them in the creation and not necessarily in the order of simple to complex as predicted by the Big Bang. More will be introduced as God creates the dry land and living creatures.

The firmament is also where weather occurs. In Genesis 2:5, we are told that it did not rain on the earth during the creation week but perhaps here God is creating clouds (we'll talk in a moment about the waters above the firmament). At the very least, God likely created the mechanisms that would govern weather in the future – things like air pressure (a necessary consequence of having created air), evaporation, etc.

“The waters below” the firmament, I assume, are the seas.  Perhaps I’m wrong but it seems fairly obvious.  The biggest controversy surrounding Day 2 is over what is meant by the “the waters above” the firmament. There are at least 3 mainstream theories:

The Mundane Explanation

The waters above could simply be clouds and the firmament is the expanse between the earth and the clouds. Such a reading fits the text well and needs little additional explanation.  It should be noted that such a belief would imply that the Bible accurately described clouds as being made of water.

The Canopy Theory

Some creationists believe the waters above represent a type of canopy, either of dense clouds or ice. By the way, I've often heard the canopy itself referred to as the “firmament” but the text is clear that the firmament is the expanse between the waters. Proponents of this theory believe the canopy collapsed at the time of Noah and was the source of much of the Flood waters.

This interpretation of the text carries a few difficulties. Such a canopy, for example, would obstruct our view of the stars described on Day 4. Of course, some old earth creationists suggest the sun and stars were created earlier and could not be seen. The sun could only be perceived as diffused light (described on Day 1) and it was not until Day 4 that the clouds were cleared and the sun, moon, and stars could be seen clearly.

There are also some scientific difficulties with a canopy. Of course, I never let prevailing scientific opinion trump the clear meaning of the words of the Bible. The Bible does not explicitly state there was a canopy and there is no other reference to it later in the Bible. I haven't seen a compelling argument for the existence of such a thing. I don't endorse this interpretation but I can't entirely reject it either. Perhaps clouds were more dense prior to the Flood – though not necessarily a solid dome of ice.

While most creationists do reject this idea, there are a few staunch proponents of this theory and have built elaborate models around it. Perhaps the most notable proponent is Carl Baugh who has made some dubious, scientific claims about the effects of such a canopy – things like how it was the canopy that allowed antediluvian people to live for hundreds of years.

Humphreys' Model

In his “white hole cosmology,” Russell Humphreys has proposed that, when God divided the waters, He used the “waters above” as the raw material to create the rest of the universe. This position would mean that the initial earth was huge and most of it was stripped away to form everything else. Again, the Bible doesn't explicitly say this happened so I cannot say dogmatically his view is correct. It could fit the text, though, and Humphreys has made several successful predictions with this model.

Of course, it's possible for a little of each of these theories to be true or that none of them are true. The “waters above” must mean something and since we cannot determine a precise meaning from the text, we should be careful not to wed ourselves to any particular theory as though it were scripture.

v. 8a, And God called the firmament Heaven.

The Bible seems to use the word ‘heaven’ in three different ways.  It sometimes means the near-earth atmosphere, where the birds fly.  We sometimes call this the sky.  

Heaven can also mean outer space, where the sun, moon, and stars are.  Unfortunately, we sometimes call this the sky also.  I might say something like, “Look at all the stars in the sky.”  I say unfortunately because, when we use the same word to describe inner and outer space, it allows critics to make straw man caricatures of our beliefs. We'll discuss this more when we discuss Day 4.

Finally, the Bible also calls the abode of God, heaven.  In 2 Corinthians 12:2, for example, Paul makes a reference to the third heaven.  

In this passage, I believe it’s the first meaning of heaven that is being used.  

v. 8b, And the evening and the morning were the second day.

The passage ends with the usual demarcation; it was evening and morning. All the things done by God in this passage, whatever they may include, were all accomplished in a single, ordinary day.