--------------------
Ms. Kespert has always distinguished herself by avoiding the bomb throwing so prevalent among the group of Christians we have deemed the "Doctrinal Police." For this we commend her.
That doesn't mean she gets it right all the time, however. She is a Calvinist and a John MacArthur devotee, which means she has experienced some bad teaching.
This past month I’ve been reading 2 Peter, an epistle known for its teaching on handling false teachers (Chapter 2) and unbelieving scoffers (Chapter 3). Over the past few days, Chapter 1 has caught my attention, as Peter lays a foundation for the bulk of his epistle by encouraging his readers toward God’s Word as the source for knowing God. (We have read the first chapter of 2 Peter many times. We are unable to locate the verses in this chapter that says what Ms. Kespert asserts about the word.)
Interestingly, during this week’s Bible Study reviewing Colossians at our church, my pastor emphasized that Paul’s approach to refuting false teachers hinged on teaching right doctrine. The best way to spot false doctrine, he said, is to saturate oneself in true doctrine. Between 2 Peter and my pastor, I learned that the most effective approach to dealing with false teachers comes from knowing God through His Word.
Peter begins his second epistle with one of my favorite passages.
Peter begins his second epistle with one of my favorite passages.
2 Grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord; 3 seeing that His divine power has granted to us everything pertaining to life and godliness, through the true knowledge of Him who called us by His own glory and excellence. 4 For by these He has granted to us His precious and magnificent promises, so that by them you may become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world by lust. ~~2 Peter 1:2-4 (NASB95)The knowledge of God, of course, comes through His promises, which in turn we find in Scripture. (Such a thing may indeed be true, but this passage does not teach it.
Peter first tells us that "His divine power" gives us what we need for life and godliness, and this came from knowledge of Him.
Second, it is by His glory and excellence he made wonderful promises to us, through which we become partakers of the divine nature.
This means that the source of these promises is His nature and power, not Scripture. Such things may be communicated in Scripture, but this passage does not tell us this. In fact, there is no mention of His word or Scripture in this passage at all.
"Knowledge," used twice in 2 Peter chapter 1, in verse 2 and verse 3, is
precise and correct knowledge; used in the N. T. of the knowledge of things ethical and divine: ...with the genitive of the thing known, Colossians 1:9; Colossians 2:2; Philemon 1:6; τῆς ἀληθείας, 1 Timothy 2:4; 2 Timothy 2:25; 2 Timothy 3:7; Titus 1:1; Hebrews 10:26; τῆς ἁμαρτίας, Romans 3:20; with the genitive of the person known; — of God, especially the knowledge of his holy will and of the blessings which he has bestowed and constantly bestows on men through Christ: Ephesians 1:17; Colossians 1:10; 2 Peter 1:2...
Both occurrences refer to knowing the things of God's character and/or his will. This knowledge is not an accumulation of facts coming from study, it is an experiential knowing.
This is what we mean by Ms. Kespert receiving bad teaching. Her statements come as a result of something she was taught, and they are incorrect.)
Sadly, this truth is a hard sell these days. Present-day evangelicals often believe that knowing God is more about personal experience of Him. (Ironically, the passage she just presented more closely aligns with the personal experience of knowing Him.)
This misunderstanding has its roots in Pentecostal and Charismatic theology. (Since she believes this is based on a misunderstanding, we hope she will explain the correct view.)
Since the 1990s, however, it has spread to almost all denominations that call themselves Christian. Despite the popularity of the idea that we know God through personal experience, Peter — who experienced nothing less than the Transfiguration — shoots down that possibility later in this chapter (2 Peter 1:16-21). (This is an astonishing statement. We shall quote the passage:
2Pe. 1:16-21 We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eye-witnesses of his majesty. 17 For he received honor and glory from God the Father when the voice came to him from the Majestic Glory, saying, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.”
18 We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with him on the sacred mountain. 19 And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.
20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. 21 For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.
Peter starts by saying he did not make it up when he appealed to what he eye-witnessed [vs. 16]. He saw and heard what happened on the Mount of Transfiguration. His first-hand eyewitness experience is his primary evidence [vs. 18].
From this statement comes his conclusion. This amazing event he personally witnessed made ...the word of the prophets made more certain... [Literally, ...and we have more certain the prophetic word..., vs. 19] Peter tells us the OT messianic prophecies are made more certain because of what he saw.
Interestingly, Paul tells us this very thing about the prophets:
Ro. 3:21 But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify.
This prophetic testimony does not point to the Bible, but rather, it is righteousness through faith in Jesus.
Ms. Kespert is incorrect.
We discuss this passage in more depth here.)
Experiences may or may not be real, but even the real ones are subordinate to Scripture. (This is quite true, but 2Pe. 1:16-21 does not mention Scripture.)
Therefore knowing God depends solely on acquainting ourselves with His Word. (2Pe. 1:16-21 does not teach this. There is no Scripture that teaches this. In fact, Scripture contradicts it:
Ep. 3:16-18 I pray that out of his glorious riches he may strengthen you with power through his Spirit in your inner being, 17 so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith. And I pray that you, being rooted and established in love, 18 may have power, together with all the saints, to grasp how wide and long and high and deep is the love of Christ, 19 and to know this love that surpasses knowledge...Ph. 3:10-11 I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death, 11 and so, somehow, to attain to the resurrection from the dead.Col. 1:9 For this reason, since the day we heard about you, we have not stopped praying for you and asking God to fill you with the knowledge of his will through all spiritual wisdom and understanding.
This is not to say that we shouldn't study the Bible. The Bible is the very word of God, flawless and complete, containing the great message of salvation only through Jesus Christ and by no other name.
But it is simply wrong to suggest that knowing God depends SOLELY on what's in the Bible.)
(...)
No comments:
Post a Comment