John 3 – The New Birth Defined by Heaven

John 3 – The New Birth Defined by Heaven

Man has many ideas about salvation, but in John 3 Jesus removes all uncertainty and defines it Himself. He does this early in his ministry, defining what it truly means to believe, and what He truly requires.

John 3 answers one of the most important questions a man can ask: How do you enter the kingdom of God? Jesus makes it clear that it is not by man’s will or understanding, but by being born again through submission to what comes from heaven, being born of water and the Spirit.

When Nicodemus came to Jesus by night, he came as a man with knowledge, position, and sincere curiosity. He recognized that Jesus was a teacher sent from God, but like many, he did not yet understand the nature of the kingdom or how one enters it. Jesus does not begin with small corrections or gradual instruction. He goes directly to the central issue:

“Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” (John 3:3, KJV)

This statement establishes a universal and absolute requirement. No one enters the kingdom of God apart from this new birth. Nicodemus immediately misunderstands, thinking in physical terms, asking if a man can return to his mother’s womb and be born a second time. This misunderstanding provides the setting for Jesus to define what He means.

Jesus clarifies in unmistakable language:

“Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” (John 3:5, KJV)

Here, Jesus gives the only explanation in the passage of what it means to be “born again.” The new birth consists of two inseparable elements: water and Spirit. Both are included in the condition, and both are required. The phrase is tied to an absolute statement, “he cannot enter”, leaving no room for alternative definitions or optional components.

Some attempt to interpret “water” as natural birth, referring to the fluid of the womb. However, this interpretation does not hold under the weight of the text. Nicodemus had already raised the question of physical birth in verse 4, and Jesus is not affirming that misunderstanding, He is correcting it. Furthermore, if “water” refers to natural birth, then Jesus would be stating that one must be physically born in order to enter the kingdom, which is already true of every person. This would reduce His statement to a meaningless condition.

The immediate context provides clarity. Following this conversation, the narrative moves directly into a discussion of baptism (John 3:22-26; 4:1-2). Water, in this setting, is already associated with baptism and purification. This is consistent with the broader teaching of the New Testament, where baptism is connected with the remission of sins (Acts 2:38), the washing away of sins (Acts 22:16), newness of life (Romans 6:3-4), and salvation itself (1 Peter 3:21). The conclusion is unavoidable: “born of water” refers to baptism.

The second element, “born of the Spirit”, requires equally careful consideration. Jesus immediately expands on this in the next verse:

“That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.” (John 3:6, KJV)

This contrast is often misunderstood as merely distinguishing between the physical and the immaterial. However, the context points to something deeper: a contrast of source or origin. “Flesh” represents what comes from man: human thinking, human systems, and human attempts to define or achieve salvation (Romans 9:31-32). “Spirit,” on the other hand, represents what comes from God. This is confirmed elsewhere in John’s Gospel:

“Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.” (John 1:13, KJV)

The new birth, then, is not determined by human will or human invention. It originates entirely from God. To be “born of the Spirit” is to be brought forth by what God has revealed, not by what man has devised. It is the obedience of faith spoken of in Romans 1:5, 16:25-27.

Jesus continues in verse 8 with the illustration of the wind:

“The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.” (John 3:8, KJV)

This statement is often taken to suggest a mysterious or unpredictable internal experience. However, the emphasis of the illustration is not randomness, but source. The wind’s origin is not controlled by man, and its movement is not directed by human will, yet its effects are real and observable. In the same way, the new birth originates with God, not man. It is not something man creates or controls. It is something man must receive.

Nicodemus responds with a question that reveals the heart of the issue:

“How can these things be?” (John 3:9)

Jesus’ answer shifts the discussion to authority and revelation:

“We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.” (John 3:11, KJV)

“No man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.” (John 3:13, KJV)

The point is clear: man does not possess heavenly knowledge. He cannot discover or define the way of salvation through his own reasoning. Only the One who has come from heaven can reveal it. Therefore, the new birth must be understood not as a human concept, but as a divine revelation.

This leads directly to the response required. Jesus declares:

“That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.” (John 3:15, KJV)

This theme is expanded in the well-known statement of verse 16, but its meaning is clarified later in the chapter:

“He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.” (John 3:36, KJV)

In comparing translations, it becomes evident that “believeth not” carries the idea of refusal or disobedience. This reveals that biblical belief is not mere acknowledgment. It is a response of trust that submits to what has been revealed. This distinction is reinforced by James:

“The devils also believe, and tremble.” (James 2:19, KJV)

Demons acknowledge the truth, but they do not submit to it. Therefore, the belief that leads to eternal life is a living, obedient faith.

At this point, the entire chapter comes together. Jesus has established that a man must be born of water and the Spirit to enter the kingdom. The Spirit represents what comes from God (His revealed will) while water represents the commanded response included in that will. Christ, having come from heaven, reveals this truth, and man is required to receive it. That reception is defined as belief, and belief is shown to be submission.

Thus, the new birth is not a mystical or undefined experience. It is a clearly defined response to divine revelation. It occurs when a person submits to the testimony of Christ, being baptized in water and brought forth by the Spirit through that revealed word.

This also explains why Jesus explicitly mentions water. If He had spoken only of the Spirit, the new birth could easily be redefined as a subjective experience – something internal, personal, and unmeasurable. By including water, Jesus anchors the new birth in a specific, observable act of obedience. The Spirit defines what must be done; water demonstrates that it has been done. Without the Spirit, water would be an empty ritual. Without water, the Spirit could be reduced to a matter of personal interpretation. Together, they form a complete, God-defined response.

The closing section of the chapter (John 3:31-36) reinforces these same truths. Jesus is described as the One who comes from above, in contrast to those who are of the earth. Once again, the issue is source: heaven versus man. The problem is not lack of information, but refusal to receive the testimony given. Those who receive it affirm that God is true; those who reject it remain under wrath following their own designs and preferences. The same conclusion is reached: eternal life is given to those who believe, and belief is inseparable from submission.

John 3 does not present multiple interpretations or competing paths. It presents one unified teaching. The new birth is defined by God, revealed from heaven, and received through obedient submission.

To be born of the Spirit is not a mysterious internal event. It is to be brought forth by what comes from heaven, through receiving and submitting to the Spirit given testimony of Christ, being baptized in water and all other requirements for salvation as God has commanded, rather than following what originates from man.

Common Objections to John 3 Answered

Whenever John 3 is studied carefully, objections often arise. Not because the text is unclear, but because its clarity challenges commonly held assumptions about salvation. Jesus speaks with authority and precision, defining the new birth in a way that leaves little room for reinterpretation. As a result, several alternative explanations are frequently offered. Each of these must be tested, not by tradition or preference, but by the text itself.

Is “Born of Water” Natural Birth?

One of the most common claims is that “born of water” refers to physical birth, the fluid of the womb. However, this interpretation fails. Nicodemus’ question in John 3:4 reflects misunderstanding, not truth. Jesus corrects him rather than agreeing. If water meant natural birth, Jesus would be stating something already true of all people, making His condition meaningless.

The context clarifies the meaning. Immediately following this discussion is baptism (John 3:22–26; 4:1–2). Throughout the New Testament, water is consistently tied to baptism and cleansing (Acts 2:38; Acts 22:16; Romans 6:3–4; 1 Peter 3:21). Therefore, “water” refers to baptism.

Is the New Birth a Direct Operation of the Spirit?

Some claim the new birth is a direct internal act of the Spirit apart from human response. However, John 3 emphasizes response: receiving testimony (3:11, 33), believing (3:15–16), doing truth (3:21), and obeying (3:36). These are not passive experiences.

The Spirit is tied to revelation (John 3:34). Thus, to be born of the Spirit is to be brought forth by what the Spirit reveals (God’s Word), which must be received and obeyed.

Does John 3:16 Teach “Belief Only”?

John 3:36 clarifies belief by contrasting it with disobedience. Belief is not mere acknowledgment but submission. James 2:19 shows that even demons believe without obedience. Therefore, saving belief is obedient faith.

Is Baptism Optional?

Jesus states plainly in John 3:5 that one cannot enter the kingdom without being born of water and Spirit. This is a condition of necessity. The broader New Testament confirms baptism’s role in salvation (Acts 2:38; Acts 22:16; Romans 6:3–4; 1 Peter 3:21). Removing baptism contradicts the text.

Are “Water” and “Spirit” Two Separate Births?

Jesus describes one unified birth. “Born of water and Spirit” explains “born again” (John 3:3). Dividing them disrupts the passage and ignores its structure.

Is “Spirit” Referring to Man’s Spirit?

Another interpretation suggests that “born of the Spirit” refers to the human spirit. However, John 3:6 shows a contrast of origin, not parts of man. “Flesh” is from man; “Spirit” is from God.

Jesus emphasizes that truth comes from heaven (John 3:13), not from man. The parallel in John 3:31 reinforces this: what is from above is from God, what is earthly is from man.

The Spirit is tied to God’s revealed word (John 3:34). Therefore, the new birth does not originate within man but comes from God and must be received.

Who Has the Right to Define Salvation?

Man does not possess heavenly knowledge (John 3:13). Only Christ reveals it. The issue is whether His testimony is received or rejected (John 3:11, 33).

Conclusion

Every objection attempts to redefine or remove part of Jesus’ teaching. But the text stands firm. The new birth is defined by God, revealed from heaven, and received through obedient submission in being born of water and the Spirit.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in Travis Main | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on John 3 – The New Birth Defined by Heaven

Children’s Church Bible Hour

Children’s Church

An innovation increasingly found within congregations is “Children’s Church”. In some places it is called, “Youth worship”, “ Bible Hour ”, “Youth Ministry” or some other child focused monicker. It is characterized by a time during a regular congregational assembly in which some adults and some children leave and break off into one or more other groups. When did this practice start? What caused this practice to start? What functions occur during the group break off? Are these divisions authorized in scripture?

childrens church bible hour is found in what scripture

Children’s Church Bible Hour is found in what scripture?

The teaching of Word of God to children extends back at minimum to the Law of Moses (Deuteronomy 4,6). This practice continues today under the Covenant of Christ (Ephesians 6, I Thessalonians 2). In modern times we see the first “Sunday School Classes” developing in late 18th century England (19th century America) as an opportunity to educate children. These were not during the congregational assembly. The Children’s Church as we study at the moment, did not begin until the latter half of the twentieth century and came about as part of a larger youth centered focus by protestant congregations as a whole (Youth Ministry / Youth Ministers). An integral part of these actions was the belief that a larger focus on pleasing and socialization of youth would create church growth and increase youth retention. While it is absolutely true that families are attracted to congregations with larger numbers of youth, studies have shown that youth retention has declined with the youth movement. Families are finding the socialization they were looking to find, but the development of spiritual minds for a lifetime is not occurring. Some Denominations are already moving away from the youth minister practice and looking back to families to provide youth development and socialization.

Unlike “Sunday School”, Children’s Church takes place during the time of the Sunday congregational assembly wherein we see the worship of prayer, giving, teaching, singing, and the Lord’s Supper by the Church. In some places, Children’s Church extends the entire period of this worship, in others only during the teaching segment. Predominantly, it is characterized by youth’s from birth to age seven. However, in some congregations and denominations this time involves teenagers as well. As Sunday School evolved from a teaching time to a blurred focus of child teaching / socialization / fellowship, the innovation of Children’s Church began with a blurred focus. It was created to provide a number of perceived benefits: 1. An atmosphere where children could have teaching at their level. 2. An atmosphere where children could be free to run about instead of needing to sit. 3. An atmosphere where they could socialize with children their age. 4. A time where adults could focus on teaching which was free of the distraction of their children and others.

The activities of children’s Church in some areas involve a mock adult service right down to a pretend Lord’s Supper. However, most are characterized by youth play time and activities like coloring in conjunction with short simple lessons and snacks. Essentially, the group of children which has spurred off from the main assembly requires a number of adults or even teens which acts as baby sitters / monitors / teachers. Of course, with an increase in the age of the group, the amount of teaching / biblical discussion typically increases.

Is the practice of Children’s Church authorized in scripture? There is not a single example of this in the Word of God. We do see the church coming together in Acts 20, I Corinthians 11, and 14 and worshipping as they are assembled together. However, we do not see any authorized division (as created today in many places) such as the innovation of Children’s Church.   Hebrews 10:25 specifically warns against separating from the assembly. Children’s Church pulls not only children, but adults away from the assembly of the saints, the Church of God. How can all we do in word or deed be in the name of Christ (His authority – Colossians 3) if the Church is practicing something Christ never initiated? How can we be following an unauthorized practice in direct violation of scripture which we know was invented long after the time of Christ?

Children’s Church has become a popular youth ministry, it’s just not from God. Our children would be greatly aided by learning to sit quietly and in reverence of God with the assembly of saints. They would be deeply benefited by seeing adults, Bible’s in hand, turning to read the Word of God with hunger for growth. Our children could grow from observing adults actively taking notes. Our God would be pleased with children sitting next to their parents singing boldly as they praised God and edified the Church. Children and adults missing from a commanded assembly of the saints is sinful. Elderships have the authority to shepherd their flocks and provide differing teaching settings for all ages (Acts 20), however, no man has the authority to be in opposition to God’s Word when He has directed a full assembly of worship. Let us be more concerned with proper teaching and examples for our children (Proverbs 22:6), rather than leaving them with the idea that the Church of our Lord is a country club focused on socialization where they can do things according to their own will and desire.

Posted in Travis Main | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Children’s Church Bible Hour

Wash Yourselves: Plead for the Widow (6 of 6)

Wash Yourselves: Plead for the Widow (6 of 6)

“Plead for the widow”!  Isaiah directs the people of Judah to vigorously defend these women.  As with the orphan or fatherless, the leader of their family no longer exists.  However, their defense differs.  Unlike the fatherless, the widow typically does not need to be trained and guided to know how to follow the laws of God.  Without dismissing the need for the spiritual, the more immediate concern for widows centers on provision of their material needs and protection from those would take advantage of them (Isaiah 10:1-3).  Sadly, neglected widows existed before the time of Isaiah and continue to exist today.

The country a widow lives in can greatly affect her treatment.  In the country of India, tens of millions of widows exist.  Socially and economically, the widows endure rejection.  They experience neglect and suffer hardship. (1)  In Mali, a woman widow often loses her right to the land upon which she lived. (2)  Reports of Muslim widows in Bangladesh list the frequent experience of violence, robbery, and eviction.  Pakistani widows may suffer imprisonment or death based on whether they receive accusation of shaming their family.  The sex trade often forces itself upon Cambodian widows.  The world over, widowed women often suffer from poverty, malnutrition, failing health, no inheritance rights, and the list goes on.  Even though national or international laws exist, corruption and inaction often prevail. (3)   During the time of Judah, judicial neglect ruled (Isaiah 1:23).

When Jesus walked upon the earth, He made comment about the Pharisees treatment of the widows of Jerusalem (Matthew 12:40).  According to the writings of commentator Albert Barnes, the Pharisees would take advantage of the widows by encouraging them to hand over management of their property or by causing them to give large sums for “religious purposes”. (4)  How could those wonderfully pious Pharisees with their heartfelt prayers to God act in such a manner?  Jesus called them hypocrites (Matthew 15:8-9).  In reality, Pharisees deceived these women in the name of God.  The Pharisees aware of God’s Old Law instruction from ages before (Deuteronomy 27:19) chose to rebelliously take advantage of the widows.  They did not make a plea for the widows and their welfare.

Evil takes many forms.  Sometimes, no criminal intent exists, but it develops out of partiality as with the widows of Acts 6:1-4.  In that situation, the apostles addressed the disciples in regard to Grecian widows not receiving the proper daily aid scheduled for the Christian widows at that time.  The text infers the Hebrews saw to their widows, but overlooked the Greeks.  This harkens back to the physical Israel seeing themselves as the only people of God.  This barrier came down in Christ (Galatians 3:28).  Caring for widows greatly concerns the teachings of the New Testament.  The Apostles made a plea on their behalf based on the Word of God.  Christ did not teach partiality.  Paul makes this clear when he talks to the Ephesian Elders in Acts 20:35 reminding them of his teaching: care for the weak and focus on giving rather than receiving.

The Words imparted by Christ through the Holy Spirit to the Apostles established a pattern for the care of widows.  James 1:27 states the following:

 “Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.”

 The term “visit” in this passage does not mean to drop by, say “Hi!  Be warmed and filled!”, and then after doing nothing go on down the road (James 2:15-17).  It means to inspect or examine with the intention of relieving.  This command points to every individual.  This passage speaks to physical, spiritual, financial, judicial, and any other needs regarding the widow.

Responsibility for widows first comes from their families (I Timothy 5:8).  However, in the case of widows sixty years or older, righteous and active for God, with no one to care for them, God commanded the Church to take special care for them (I Timothy 5:3-16).  The action of a Church does not remove the responsibility of mankind to watch over and care for widows.  The Church’s responsibility only reaffirms God’s love for His faithful.  The letter to Timothy states clearly what God desires of the family, Christian, Church, and widow.

Some believe the Church should go beyond God’s direction and hand out food, finances, clothing, and more, not only to God’s faithful, but to all mankind.  This role of the Church cannot be found in scripture.  The Church’s predominant role in scripture reflects the dissemination of the Word of God for the teaching, reproving, correction, and instruction of man.  Benevolence beyond the individual and family comes only after one last entity performs its role.  The government performs a role as an agent of good on behalf of the people it oversees (Romans 13:4).  When the individual and family  performs its role properly, the government if acting according to the plan of God (which sadly it rarely does, either going behind or ignoring God’s Word) makes the occurrence of the Church having to “wait tables” for the truly needy a rare occurrence.  When the government receives the call to take up the plea of the widow, God expects justice.

One final and important aspect of taking up the plea of the widow shows God didn’t build a hedge around the sinful in the first century or in the time of Isaiah.  The following passage shows this:

 Isaiah 9:17 – Therefore the Lord will not rejoice over their young men, neither will he have compassion on their fatherless and widows; for every one is profane and an evil-doer, and every mouth speaketh folly. For all this his anger is not turned away, but his hand is stretched out still.

 God never provides aid for the need of those practicing sin and keeping their back to Him, even if they are fatherless or widowed.  He does not expect the government to take care of the lazy or those with access to care for themselves.  He doesn’t expect the government to enable those who would take advantage of the widow or anyone else, but rather to punish them.  He does not see the Church as a financial institution set up to provide gas bill money and soup for the public.  Even with the widow, one of the weakest members of society, God requires a lifetime of faithfulness with absence of other means of care before the Church is to play the role of provider.  Saints who can care for themselves are to do so (2 Thessalonians 3:10-12).  When saints work as commanded, they can better fulfill their duties to plea for the widow and do good.  In doing so the saints will more readily possess the means to aid others (Ephesians 4:28).  God’s plan for mankind and his needy faithful represents perfection and useless hardship occurs only when man steps away from God’s plan.  Unfortunately, such hardship became commonplace in Judah and commonplace today because man closes his ears to God.

This concludes this series examining Isaiah’s instruction for Judah to cease to do evil, learn to do good, seek justice, reprove the ruthless, defend the orphan, and plead for the widow.  If heeded by any person, these six examinations result in righteousness.  The individual and society strengthen exponentially when they listen to God.  The encouragement of the oppressor fails and the oppressed enjoy the comfort of a caring society.  Such lessons do not target any particular region or timeframe, but apply universally to the entire generation of men.  In not heeding the warnings, only ruin and destruction result.  As seen by the history of Judah and other sinful people, God blesses based upon obedience to these principles and punishes when they are not observed.

Footnote:

(1)  Jill McGivering, BBC News; “India’s Neglected Widows”; 2002

(2)  Dominique van De Walle, World Bank; “Neglected and poor widows in Mali”; 2011

(3)  United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affiars.  Women 2000: “Widowhood: Invisible Women, secluded or excluded”

(4)  Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible;  Albert Barnes (1798-1870)

Posted in Travis Main | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Wash Yourselves: Plead for the Widow (6 of 6)

Wash Yourselves: Defend the Orphan (5 of 6)

Wash Yourselves: Defend the Orphan (5 of 6)

Defend!  When this word is yelled out, the defense mechanism of every male should flash to consciousness.  What female does not feel their emotions rise when they feel their child must be defended?  Defense is needed because there is or will be an attack.  Without a proper defense, the resulting effect is destruction, ruin, and devastation.  The word “defend” should create a tremor within the soul that creates action directing self and others toward deliverance from the foe.  Defense at its core, is a wise realization that despite having strengths, advantages, or any number of assets at hand, there is weakness which could put that which has value in jeopardy.

Humans are of great value to God, but they are not impervious to harm.  Heat, cold, a minor blow, a fall, a lack of oxygen, any number of things can bring an end to their life.  A man is typically built so that his frame, muscles, and skin can endure more than a woman, but by way of lifestyle, he is often more subject to bodily damage.  A woman may be kept out of the way of environmental harm more than a man, but she has other risk factors which she must be protected against.  Yet, even more crucial, beyond the physical, all humans are under constant attack from the devices of Satan and sin (I Peter 5:8, Romans 3:23).  This type of attack is spiritual and its greatest damage is inflicted upon the spirit and soul of man.  This kind of attack was a concern of the apostle Paul.  He prayed not only that the body of the Thessalonians be protected, but their spirit and soul as well (I Thessalonians 5:23).  Psalm 7:10 proclaims: “My defence is of God, which saveth the upright in the heart”.  There is no greater spiritual or physical defense than God that anyone can have.  His Word can raise the dead, forgive sins, and perfect mankind.  James declared that it is the Word of God which saves souls (James 1:21); additionally, by that Word an individual and those interacting with him can have a defensive impact upon a soul in danger (I Peter 1:9, James 5:20).  This has a direct bearing on the understanding of the Words of Isaiah “defend the orphan” (Isaiah 1:16-17).

Presented below is a quote from fathers.com which can be seen as a quick summary of the reams of data available in regard to the fatherless:

 “children from fatherless homes are more likely to be poor, become involved
in drug and alcohol abuse, drop out of school, and suffer from health and emotional problems. Boys are more likely to become involved in crime, and girls are more likely to become pregnant as teens.”

 While no man is free from hardship and poor decision making based on the environment they grew up in, the odds for harmful physical and spiritual effects happening to an individual go up drastically without a father.  Their innocence is often shattered, their childhood jaded, and their ability to stay away from sin diminished.  A mother is a blessing, but she is still not a substitute for a father (especially a godly one).  God’s desire and individual direction to man was that he join together with a woman and have a family devoted to good (Genesis 1:28, 2:24, Ecclesiastes 12:13).  When the family unit is broken the Lord does not turn his back on the orphan, but champions him (Deuteronomy 10:17-18, Psalm 68:5, Zechariah 7:9-10).  Therefore, God gave an example to mankind by putting commands in place for Israel to make physical provision for the orphan (Deuteromony 24:19-21, Deuteronomy 26:12-13).  Not only did God give direction in regard to the physical needs of the orphan, He gave warning to those who would try to take advantage of the leaderless in their weakened state (Exodus 22:22-24, Malachi 3:5, Deuteronomy 27:19).

The inherent reality of Isaiah’s instruction to the people of Judah to defend should have been a realization that there was vulnerability in regard to their orphans.  The question at hand should have been what was the vulnerability and how could they be strengthened.  To better understand the word used in the ASV translated “defend” (H8199) closer examination is needed.  In regard to this term, the most applicable understanding seems to be from the Brown Driver Briggs Hebrew Definition: “to act as law-giver or judge or governor”.  Extrapolating from this definition, it seems the need of the orphaned in Isaiah’s time has the potential of being twofold:  First, there was a need for godly litigation to be enacted defending the rights/needs of the orphan.  Second, was a need to guide the orphan in regard to the laws of God, thus defending his soul.  Both of these areas are a necessity for all men, but there is a particularly area of want concerning the orphan which makes them subject to the need of protection – they have no earthly father to lead and defend them in any manner (see footnote 1).

In regard to the litigation understanding of “Defend the orphan”, the people of Judah who had the authority, knowledge, or means should have acted to defend those unable to do so.  The leading men of Isaiah and Jeremiah’s age failed in this regard (Jeremiah 22:1-3).  Their interests were for their own gain.  In a way, the government should have served as a father.  It should have provided leadership, kindness, and proper judicial examples.  However, the corrupted leadership became worse than not having a father because rather than leadership there was a stumbling block and evil influence.  The wickedness simply encouraged the breakdown of societal function based on selfishness and abuse.  Judah saw they could take advantage of the fatherless, coerce them when they were vulnerable, and utilize them as pawns for their own gain.  Rather than looking out for the orphan, the citizenry followed the lead of the government and sought its own desires.  Thus, the orphan was oppressed and did not find justice.  They did not have an earthly father to stand for them literally or figuratively.  The same judicial responsibility that rested with the people of Judah also existed for the people of Jesus’ time and even today (Romans 13:1-10, I Timothy 1:8-10).

Spiritually, “Defend the orphan” is an opportunity for the godly man to guide the orphan in the path of God rather than the orphan faltering on his own path (Proverbs 14:12). It is a blessing to fill a void in the lives of the fatherless.  When the godly man shares their knowledge of God’s truths and His creation, the orphan can find strength for all of his needs (2 Peter 1:2-3).  Men with the wisdom given by God can give direction and demonstrate the laws of God which have worked blessing in their lives.  They can provide encouragement and hope, having likely experienced loss or despair themselves, but knowing how to move forward in Christ.  To defend a soul is to fulfill the divine purpose of human existence (Ephesians 2:10).  Isaiah called upon Judah to act in such a manner.  However, they would not listen.  Judah had previously been chosen to be God’s children.  They were defended by Him until they refused Him.  In doing so, they had no true defense at all. They would be subject to destruction as strangers to Him.

Thus far Isaiah’s words have been examined in regard to the responsibility of the government and individuals of Judah with application to men of today.  Whether by means of litigation or spiritual direction, godly leadership is needed.  However, one other application needs to be made.

Today as a chosen people of God, Christians should heed the plight of the fatherless.  Anyone would be hard pressed to find a Christian who would argue against this fact.  However, what about Christians who want a Church without a father?   Like an individual without a father, a church without the leadership of authorized men (elders) is an entity operating like a fatherless family.  The ordained leadership of God is absent.  Yet, it is not a rare thing to hear members of such a body state: “Why do we need elders, everyone here is working together just fine.”  It is a surety that dysfunctional behavior will result as time goes by and the believers attempt to do what is “right in their own eyes”.

There are many reasons people flock to congregations without elderships.  Most go out of ignorance, not understanding the importance of God’s leadership design for the body of His spiritual children (Acts 14:23, Acts 20:28, I Timothy 3:5, Titus 1:5, Hebrews 13:17).  Some attend because it is the only or closest Church to which they can travel.  Some attend due to unrest or unhappiness at their previous congregation.  A number of others may head to these congregations so they can follow teachings they like (2 Timothy 4:3) or so they may avoid receiving the discipline of an eldership for actions they have chosen to do.  Whatever the reason, the odds are great that the leaderless body of believers will become rebellious children making more foolish and ignorant decisions.  There are an increasing number of these “fatherless” churches across the land.  As they spread, so does the lack of leadership and authorized activity in the Church.

“Defend the Orphan!”  Men teach your boys to desire to be elders.  Have them follow the Old paths where they should walk (Jeremiah 6:16).  Yet, like Judah, so many now refuse to do so, not understanding the great loss to which they have come.  They now call it good rather than evil to reject an eldership which is their figurative father (Isaiah 5:20).  Becoming orphans themselves, they worsen the plight of other orphans by steering them away from ordained fathers.  In doing so, they mistreat one another and ignore the needs of the weak who need the leadership and strength of an eldership.

Elders lead your Church Family, the flock of God, and prepare many to serve as elders some day.  Stress the importance of the leadership of a father.  Make certain it is taught from the pulpit that Christians have a duty to aid those individuals who do not have fathers.  Maker certain it is taught there is a spiritual and physical responsibility that should be driven by duty and love.  Do not fail in your duty as ravenous wolves come in tearing away disciples and creating orphaned Churches (Acts 20:28-29).  Christians obey and submit to your spiritual fathers, for they are assigned to watch over your souls.  Heed the words of Isaiah, so that the plight of destruction by the hand of God does not visit you.

Footnote

(1)  The ASV term H3490 rendered “orphan” appears forty-two times in the KJV Old Testament.  However, in that translation it appears as the term “fatherless”.  Closer examination does not shed any light upon which term is preferred.  However, someone who is fatherless is not necessarily the same as one who is an orphan.  An orphan is not only without his father, but he is without his mother.  Still, there is a commonality for both the usages “orphan” and “fatherless”:  The God ordained leader of the family is missing.  This article will approach the words of Isaiah as if in reference to those who no longer have a father present in their lives, thus including both the fatherless and orphan.

Posted in Travis Main | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Wash Yourselves: Defend the Orphan (5 of 6)

Wash Yourselves: Reprove the Ruthless (4 of 6)

Wash Yourselves: Reprove the Ruthless (4 of 6)

Why “reprove the ruthless”?  God’s inspired words to Isaiah in Isaiah 1:16-17 are words that are part of patterns of direction to correct the behavior of wicked Judah.  There are many scriptural examples devoted to enabling the ruthless to repent.  The patterns and examples of God’s Word are needed to strengthen the community of men in a walk of godliness.

Jesus is queried by a Pharisee lawyer in Matthew 22:34-39:

“Teacher which is the great commandment in the law.” Jesus replies: “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.  This is the great and first commandment.   And a second like unto it is this, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.  On these two commandments the whole law hangeth, and the prophets.” 

 When Jesus references the commandments, he looks back to the Mosaic Law, specifically the Ten Commandments.  When those commandments are examined (Exodus 20), it can be seen that the first four commandments focus on man’s relationship with God.  The remaining commandments focus on man’s relationship with mankind.  Both are critical in man’s everyday service, but service to God is the highest priority.  This relationship was not changed by Jesus, but reinforced.

The pattern shared by Jesus and that of the Old law, putting God first, then mankind, is present in the words of Isaiah as he speaks to Judah.  “Cease to do evil, learn to do good, seek justice” – These three commands have a vertical focus of being God directed.  Man ceases to do evil, so he can approach God.  He learns to do good so he can please God.  Each man seeks justice that he might exact his behavior and grow toward the holiness of God.  The second three components of development Isaiah spoke to Judah were:  “Reprove the ruthless, defend the orphan, plead for the widow”.  These three items, while they glorify God, are items which represent the duty of man in the horizontal relationship to his community.

There is also a second pattern arising in Isaiah’s words.  In the God centered commands,he mentions correction (cease) and then strengthening (learn, seek).  This same pattern is seen in his man directed commands:  correction (reprove) and strengthen (defend, plead).  The mentioning of these patterns is not a necessity to understand the statement “reprove the ruthless”, but it does clarify its purpose as being corrective action for the development of mankind.

Translations of the words “reprove the ruthless” [KJV] have taken different forms: “rebuke the oppressor” [NKJV], “correct oppression” [ESV], and “relieve the oppressed” [ASV].  As these translations are considered, confusion can arise.  Is the one causing problems to be rebuked or are the ones being oppressed to be helped?  Though both would have Biblical precedent, this article will take the approach that “reprove the ruthless” and “rebuke the oppressor” are proper translations based on the meanings of the Hebrew words involved (see footnote 1 for more details).  The oppressor or ruthless individual is one who does violence against the word of God.  In other words, those who disobey God are to be lead to a change in their actions.

It was shown in the last article (Wash Yourselves: Seek Justice) that man should seek the instruction/discipline of God for it will strengthen them.  God used the tool of the Chaldeans to bring about justice on Judah (Habakkuk 1:6), thereby providing the remnant and future generations of mankind a strong example of consequences based on behavior.  God used his creation as a tool in the days of Noah to bring about justice, flooding the world, and removing evil (Genesis 7).  Someday, God’s Son, Jesus Christ will return and bring about justice for mankind (Matthew 24:44-51).  Instead of Deity always acting directly and/or with destruction to bring justice to mankind, God has ordained three other entities to do so preemptively:  Secular Leaders (government), spiritual leaders (elders), and the individual faithful.  This is their duty!  However, their authority to act and bring a reproving of disobedience must always be according to God’s Will (Acts 5:29).

With few exceptions, the leaders of the government of the people of Judah failed in their obligation to reprove the people for their wicked ways.  Hezekiah (2 Chronicles 29:1-2) and Josiah (2 Kings 22:1-2) represent kings who were different and did not endorse evil behaviors.  Both sought out the will of God as a direction for not only their own behavior, but that of the people of Judah.  When governments fail to make God their priority they fail to serve their function as proper shepherds of the people.  Romans 13:1-7 properly establishes the actions of government are to be for the good of the citizenship.  Consider also:

 1 Peter 2:13-17 – Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.  For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men:  As free, and not using your liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, but as the servants of God. Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the king.

 Jesus, properly put in perspective the role of those with the power of government to reprove and punish when he told Governor Pilate the following in John 19:10-11:

 “Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above:…”

 Isaiah was a prophet and spiritual leader (2 Kings 19:5).  In the book of Isaiah, he openly reproved the actions of Judah.  He set straight the quality of actions they should have been following.  He was not the only spiritual leader of the people to address governments or peoples of the nations.  Jonah, Obadiah, Jeremiah, Micaiah, and John the immerser are a few other such men.  Jesus personally called to himself men who would be chosen to direct men in the truths of God and call them to repent.  Those men, apostles, were leaders of the first century Church and fulfilled their horizontal duty to mankind.  Their message to mankind was instruction and reproval:

 Acts 2:38 – “Then Peter said unto them, Repent…”

 Acts 3:19 – “Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;”

 Acts 8:22 – “Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee.”

 Acts 17:30 – “And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:”

 Today, there are no apostles.  The scriptures are the authority for the actions of man toward their God.

 2 Timothy 3:16-17 – “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.”

 The spiritual leaders ordained to enforce the paths of scripture are called elders.  Their specific duty is to lead and reprove the Church following the examples of past spiritual leaders.

 Acts 20:28-29 – “Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock.”

 Titus 1:7-9 – “For an overseer, as God’s steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain, but hospitable, a lover of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined. He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.”  [ESV]

 Regardless of the activity of the governmental leaders of Judah and in addition to the reproof of the spiritual leaders, the people themselves should have been calling upon their fellow citizens to return to following God.  However, they only followed their own desires which were contrary to the actions of God.  They did not concern themselves with the welfare of others as they should have.  King Solomon wrote of their duty to their neighbor:

 Proverbs 12:26 – “One who is righteous is a guide to his neighbor, but the way of the wicked leads them astray.”

 Proverbs 9:8 – “Reprove not a scorner, lest he hate thee: rebuke a wise man, and he will love thee.”

 Christians as individuals are also directed to their corrective duties regarding their fellow man:

 Ephesians 5:11 – “And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.”

 2 Timothy 4:2 – “Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.”

 It is seen that governments, spiritual leaders, and individuals are called upon to provide corrective action for the benefit of others.  Yet, despite the authority of the scriptures behind these actions, it never fails that someone will quote the following words:

 Matthew 7:4 – Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? [ESV]

 Upon quoting such they will claim that man is not supposed to judge.  It is true that no man is the final judge of another’s salvation – It is the Words of God that will judge in the final day (John 12:48).  It is also true that man must first examine himself to see if he is in the truth before fulfilling their duty to others:

 Matthew 7:5 – 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.

 2 Corinthians 13:5 – Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?

 However, to claim that a man does not have a duty to instruct in the Word of God is pure ignorance as has been seen from the verses presented thus far.  Once again consider the duty of man to his fellows:

 Matthew 28:19-20 – Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

 Isaiah set for the command of “reprove the ruthless”, meaning they were to direct those in sin to the paths of God.  His instructions though focused on Judah, are a pattern for how man should behave in all ages.  Whether the entity be a government, spiritual leader, or individual, there is a horizontal duty to call those in error to return to a proper vertical relationship with God.  Calling men to corrective action has a wide number of scriptural examples and mandates.  Such action has the authority of God behind it.  If they recipient is seeking justice, it will go well with them.  However, men may choose to ignore the admonition.  Men may choose to claim such reproof has no authority.  If such is the case, they do so at their own peril.

 Jeremiah 2:19 – Thine own wickedness shall correct thee, and thy backslidings shall reprove thee: know therefore and see that it is an evil thing and a bitter, that thou hast forsaken Jehovah thy God, and that my fear is not in thee, saith the Lord, Jehovah of hosts.

Footnote:

(1)  The phrase “reprove the ruthless” is made up of the Hebrew words (aw-shar’, aw-share’ – Strong’s number H833) and (khaw-motse’ – Strong’s number H2541).  H833 is used 15 times in the Old Testament and it means “to make straight, lead, advance, set right, or make happy”.  In the English usage of this word, it has most often been used as blessed, though far from exclusive.  H251 is used only once in the Old Testament.  According to Brown Driver Briggs Hebrew Definitions it means “oppressor” or “ruthless”.  According to Strong’s Hebrew Dictionary it means “violent” or “robber”.  As a third definition Strong’s throws out the word “oppressor” which is seemingly in direct conflict with its other two definitions and BDB.  For the article above, the interpretation being used is “reprove the ruthless” based on “making straight, leading, advancing, or setting right” the “ruthless, violent”.

Posted in Travis Main | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Wash Yourselves: Reprove the Ruthless (4 of 6)