1Corinthians 15:35-50 comments: a spiritual body

    15:35 ¶  But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come? 36  Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die: 37  And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other grain: 38  But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body. 39  All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds. 40  There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another. 41  There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory. 42  So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption: 43  It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power: 44  It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. 45  And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. 46  Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. 47  The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven. 48  As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly. 49  And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly. 50  Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

In this passage Paul begins to give us some detail of the nature of our resurrection body, a spiritual body, which is not just some incorporeal ghost drifting about on a cloud. A spiritual body is a body only of a fundamentally different nature than a physical body of flesh and it cannot die. He finishes by explaining that flesh and blood as we know it cannot inherit in eternity. We must be changed in order to live in eternity with God.

Looking at some of the hints the Bible gives us about the nature of a spiritual body we can see some interesting characteristics.

In the flesh as we know it but powered by the Holy Spirit of God Elijah outran a chariot.

1Kings 18:44  And it came to pass at the seventh time, that he said, Behold, there ariseth a little cloud out of the sea, like a man’s hand. And he said, Go up, say unto Ahab, Prepare thy chariot, and get thee down, that the rain stop thee not. 45  And it came to pass in the mean while, that the heaven was black with clouds and wind, and there was a great rain. And Ahab rode, and went to Jezreel. 46  And the hand of the LORD was on Elijah; and he girded up his loins, and ran before Ahab to the entrance of Jezreel.

Under the power of God Samson, still in the flesh, performed incredible feats of strength.

Judges 14:5  Then went Samson down, and his father and his mother, to Timnath, and came to the vineyards of Timnath: and, behold, a young lion roared against him. 6  And the Spirit of the LORD came mightily upon him, and he rent him as he would have rent a kid, and he had nothing in his hand: but he told not his father or his mother what he had done.

And Jesus, after His resurrection and ascension, with a heavenly, spiritual body could pass through walls and yet still have a body that could be touched.

John 20:26 ¶  And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you. 27  Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.

Note the phrase image of the heavenly as a reference to a spiritual, heavenly body so fundamentally different from our bodies now as to be inexplainable. Image is often misused by preachers as referring to character traits as in the image of God meaning our ability to discern good from evil. However, image refers to physical appearance. It means that man looks like God, with Adam indistinguishable from Christ Himself.

Genesis 1:26  And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Deuteronomy 4:16  Lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of male or female,

But, then with Adam’s fall each generation bore the degeneration of sin’s downward fall.

Genesis 5:3  And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:

In fact, this devolution has gotten so bad that scientists have commented on it with one even pleading for government action, believe it or not. With each cell division and in each generation mankind passes on more and more deleterious mutations, so much so that some researchers into genetics have been alarmed at the accumulated damage and amazed that human beings have not become extinct because of it. So much for Darwin’s onward and upward evolution, huh. (5)

So, we await that time when our bodies will be transformed, changed into something that will live in eternity.

Romans 8:23  And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.

(5)Alexey S. Kondrashov, “Contamination of the Genome by Very Slightly Deleterious Mutations: Why Have We Not Died 100 Times Over?” Journal of Theoretical Biology, (1995) vol. 175, pp. 583-594.  James F. Crow, “The High Spontaneous Mutation Rate: Is it a Health Risk?” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, (Aug 1997) vol. 94, pp. 8380-8386.

1Corinthians 15:20-34 comments: every man in his order

15:20 ¶  But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. 21  For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. 22  For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 23  But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming. 24  Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. 25  For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. 26  The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. 27  For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. 28  And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all. 29  Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead? 30  And why stand we in jeopardy every hour? 31  I protest by your rejoicing which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord, I die daily. 32  If after the manner of men I have fought with beasts at Ephesus, what advantageth it me, if the dead rise not? let us eat and drink; for to morrow we die. 33  Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners. 34  Awake to righteousness, and sin not; for some have not the knowledge of God: I speak this to your shame.

Paul affirms that Christ rose from the dead and is the firstfruits, the first of the harvest of those that have died to be reborn, never to die again. Sleep is a euphemism for death. See here how Jesus used it.

John 11:11  These things said he: and after that he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep. 12  Then said his disciples, Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well. 13  Howbeit Jesus spake of his death: but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep. 14  Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead.

Others in the Bible who were raised from the dead would die again. But, Jesus represents our resurrection to eternal life. In another place Paul refers to Him as the firstborn from the dead.

Colossians 1:18  And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

Verse 21 shows the logic of God coming as a man to earth. By a man was death and by a man was death defeated. We know who had power over death, who the killer is.

Hebrews 2:14  Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

But, we have the victory in Christ. We die in Adam but live in Christ. There is an order to the resurrection. First, there was Christ, to be resurrected from the dead never to die again. Then, those that are His when He returns to rule the earth physically from Jerusalem. Then, comes eternity, history’s end.

Something is going on in verse 28. There is something about eternity and God’s nature that escapes us and we are clearly not told the whole story for a reason. Christ’s role as the mediator between God and man and as head over the church will no longer be necessary, or so Matthew Henry seems to say, and although the Bible talks about Him reigning forever and ever and of His kingdom having no end that specific role of mediator will be surrendered.

Verse 29 is peculiar. Who are the they? Is Paul justifying the ritual of being baptized for the dead as I have heard the Mormons do? It must have been some custom of some early groups of Christians, perhaps, to be baptized for the martyred dead who believed but had no opportunity to experience baptism. But, he does not say we but they so we should keep that in mind.

Paul goes on to ask why do Christians, himself included, in a reference to persecution where Christians were thrown to be torn apart by animals for the amusement of the pagan Romans and Greeks, endanger their lives constantly if there is no resurrection?

Verse 33 has a well-known quote by the pagan playwright Menander, evil communications corrupt good manners, or for our purposes in context, bad teaching can hurt the church. Anyone who denies the resurrection is poisoning the soup, so to speak. It is the foundation of our Christian belief. Paul uses commonly known pagan quotes because the people would have understood them like when we say a phrase that is common in our culture today like a movie quote that most people have heard. You might jokingly say, “go ahead, make my day,” quoting Clint Eastwood’s Dirty Harry, for instance. He did this quoting Aratus in Acts 17 and Epimenides in Titus.

He ends this passage by shaming those who deny the resurrection.

1Corinthians 15:12-19 comments: the necessity of the resurrection

    15:12 ¶  Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13  But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen: 14  And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. 15  Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not. 16  For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised: 17  And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. 18  Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished. 19  If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.

If you remember the Sadducees sect of Judaism did not believe in the world of the spirit or in the resurrection of the dead.

Acts 23:8  For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit: but the Pharisees confess both.

For a Christian not to believe in a physical resurrection was an absurdity. Without the risen Christ there could be no promise of the resurrection for us all. The Cross where the man who was also fully God offered Himself up as a sacrifice for our sins against God and a propitiation to Himself as God the Father to satisfy His own wrath for those sins would have lacked any meaning if death was the end for mankind. The empty tomb, not a philosophy of doing good, is the foundation on which Christianity rests. Those who call themselves Christians merely because they believe that Christ was a great teacher and the Golden Rule is a great thing to live by are not really Christians, but simply follow a philosophy for living that justifies their behavior in their own minds.

In addition, a key element of the Christian faith is a belief in a physical, not merely a spiritual, resurrection. If Christ did not rise from the dead then our faith is in vain and we are all lost forever.

Are You a Rebel or a Remnant? - sermon notes - part three

From 1967 until 2002 one of the prominent editors of the United Bible Societies translating committee was Jesuit Cardinal Carlo Martini. Think about that for just a minute. Let it soak in. An important member of the organization that creates 80% of the world’s Bibles was a Jesuit priest, once even thought of as a candidate for pope. The United Bible Societies includes the American Bible Society, best known for The Good News translation and the Contemporary English Version. Without accusation, just asking, do you believe that there is no Roman Catholic influence in modern Protestant Bibles? The online catechism of the Catholic Church uses quotations from the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible. The Revised Standard Version was a revision of the American Standard Version from a translating committee led by Philip Schaff, mentioned previously. His version was the American version of Westcott and Hort’s Revised Version, beloved by the fundamentalists of the era of the publication of The Fundamentals and applauded in those essays as the most accurate Bible.

            Without being as bold as Ruckman and leaving out a lot of other evidence what do you think is most likely? Many of you will say, “what difference does it make?” As I quoted previously the Bible is the foundation to Protestant belief, and the Bible only. The Roman Catholic Church places the opinions of its men of letters, the “Doctors of the Church,” Popes, and tradition on an equal par with the Bible or even higher. That puts an important division between myself and them regarding the question we are pursuing here regarding the Bible. I cannot regard Augustine or Pope John Paul II on an equal par with Jeremiah or Paul. But, let’s move on.

            Modern evangelical scholar Eugene Nida, of the American Bible Society, classified translating types. The King James Bible is considered as translated using “Formal Equivalence” or word-for-word translating trying to maintain not only what the words actually mean but even the grammar and syntax of the original languages. Modern Bibles are translated using “Dynamic Equivalence,” a sense-for-sense translation using the translators’ opinions, world-view, biases, and prejudices to render what they think or want you to think is what the text actually means rather than what it actually says. Think about that for a few minutes. Just wrap your mind around it.

            The King James translators were the finest minds of their time and secular scholars like Olga Opfell and Adam Nicolson in books like The King James Bible Translators and God’s Secretaries have affirmed this was so and that the King James Bible was produced at a unique point in history and was a project that could not have been made, in their estimations, at any other time. Secular scholars who contributed to the Harvard Literary Guide to the Bible expressed how faithful it was to the grammar and syntax of the manuscripts from which it was translated. Many others have confirmed how important that Bible was to the development of the English language.

            The way it is designed and constructed is incredible and I would say beyond human planning. For instance, in most cases if you look at words connected by the word and you will typically find their meaning in synonyms. By looking at this verse can you tell me what a cumbrance is?

Deuteronomy 1:12  How can I myself alone bear your cumbrance, and your burden, and your strife?

It is a burden, a hindrance, and an impediment, a burdensome strife. On rare occasions and does not contact words with synonymous meanings in context but links opposites, antonyms, as in the following.

Philppians 4:12  I know both how to be abased, and I know how to abound: every where and in all things I am instructed both to be full and to be hungry, both to abound and to suffer need.

At other times, words that might be difficult for us today are defined by looking at the words surrounding them in other passages nearby. In this example I want to point out that the word eschew is not that uncommon today as I even read it in a sports article online not long ago. Its just that we don’t normally use it in everyday speech.

1Peter 3:10  For he that will love life, and see good days, let him refrain his tongue from evil, and his lips that they speak no guile: 11  Let him eschew evil, and do good; let him seek peace, and ensue it.

So, you see eschew means in this context to refrain one’s tongue from evil

There are italicized words that denote the editors filling in a word that is not found in one language but is clearly meant to be there by comparison to a Bible quote from another language although that’s not the only usage of italicized words. Here, I italicize Bible verses I’m using anyway so you will need to look at a King James Bible to see this.

Deuteronomy 8:3  And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live.

In this verse word is italicized, meaning that it is not literally in the Hebrew text but is implied. How can you know they understood at the time of Jesus that word should be in that verse? Well, because it is provided in the Greek text from which the New Testament came.

Matthew 4:4  But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

Italicized words are important. To include them is honest and to exclude them is deceitful.

Sometimes the Bible defines words by word substitution. This provides us the meaning the Holy Spirit wanted from the context. In the following Jesus is quoting from the prophet Isaiah. When you compare the two verses you can see by word substitution that, in the contexts, gospel means good tidings or good news, the poor are the meek, along with other concepts that require a study of their own to understand.

Luke 4:18  The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, 19  To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.

Isaiah 61: 1 ¶  The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;2  To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn;

But, besides the mechanics, the way it is constructed for our learning, our edification, reading and believing the Bible can keep us from sin.

Psalm 119:11  Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against thee.

The Bible says in Philippians 2:10, 11;

10  That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; 11  And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

But, yet, God’s words have been placed above God’s name.

Psalm 138:2  I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.

Jesus said that God’s word was truth itself by which we are sanctified or set apart for

 God’s purpose.

John 17:17  Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

So, tell me, if you believe this is so, when a modern critic picks up this Bible that was translated the most faithfully from the manuscripts and early versions of the Bible most prevalent in the first fifteen centuries of the faith and says, “a better rendering of this word would be,” how can you trust him when these critics also say about their own translating efforts and the lexicons, or Greek dictionaries, which they use to get their definitions in the book, Biblical Greek Language and Lexicography;

“The fact is that opinions will very often differ over the precise wording of lexical definitions even - or perhaps, especially - after careful consideration of a proposed definition.”

“…there is the fact that even the latest lexicons derive their material from their predecessors, and a great deal of it has been passed on uncritically over the course of centuries.”

“…we cannot know for certain that what we find in front of us when we look up a word is sound.”

“…all the existing lexical entries in all our dictionaries are now obsolete and await reassessment in the light of the full evidence, or at least checking to see if there is further evidence to be added.”

“Lexicons are regarded by their users as authoritative, and they put their trust in them. Lexicons are reference books presenting a compressed, seemingly final statement of fact, with an almost legal weight. The mere fact that something is printed in a book gives it authority, as far as most people are concerned. And understandably: if one does not know the meaning of a word, one is predisposed to trust the only means of rescue from ignorance. Yet this trust is misplaced.”

Bernard A. Taylor, John A. L. Lee, Peter R. Burton &Richard E. Whitaker, Biblical Greek Language and Lexicography: Essays in Honor of Frederick W. Danker

And I’m supposed to pick up a modern Bible version that provides me with nuggets of “truth” like 1982’s the New King James Version, which is neither new nor is it King James.

Matthew 11:3 and said to Him, “Are You the Coming One, or do we look for another?”

The Coming One, capitalized, is a title given to a new-age messiah to come by the Satanist, Alice Bailey in the 1940s. What does the King James Version say, translated faithfully from its foundational documents?

Matthew 11:3  And said unto him, Art thou he that should come, or do we look for another?

There is a huge difference between asking if Jesus was the predicted Jewish messiah to come and asking if He was a new-age, Satanic avatar, no different than Buddha or Mohammed, sent to enlighten mankind and urge him a little further on the way to enlightenment. Maybe the New King James Version translators weren’t aware of this connection. Well, if I’m aware of it and I’m not an expert in anything, I’m pretty sure they were.

How can I trust modern versions translated based on dynamic equivalence, telling me what I should think rather than just laying it out for me truthfully, when the Holman Christian Standard Bible deletes the majority of a very important verse in 1John 5:7 which reads in the KJV like this?

1John 5:7  For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

And by the way, author Michael Maynard in his A History of the Debate Over 1John 5:7-8 pointed out very carefully how this verse was either quoted or alluded to in every century of Christianity. Where is it in your Bible?

How can I take your modern version like 1978’s New International Version seriously when at Mark 16:9-20 you have this note, “[The earliest manuscripts and some other ancient witnesses do not have verses 9–20.]” Really? I’ve read that of the 620 capital letter manuscripts call uncials that have this part of Mark in them 618 have the last twelve verses of Mark. 618 out of 620. Scholars like John Burgon even wrote a book entitled The Last Twelve Verses of Mark proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that the traditional ending is the right one. Only the darlings of the modernists, the Codices Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, whose phoniness would take an entire sermon to discuss, don’t have them. So, I’m supposed to believe you when you rip out of the Bible;

Mark 16:9 ¶  Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils. 10  And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept. 11  And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not. 12  After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country. 13  And they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them.

    14 ¶  Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen. 15  And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. 16  He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. 17  And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; 18  They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

    19 ¶  So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God. 20  And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.

So, when Philip is talking to the Ethiopian eunuch and the court official asks him if there is a reason why he shouldn’t be baptized the following takes place.

Acts 8:36  And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? 37  And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.   

So, why does your New American Standard Bible have a footnote saying, “Acts 8:37 Early mss do not contain this verse” when it is found in the earliest complete Bible, the Old Latin, from the second century, and quoted by church “fathers” like Irenaeus in the same century, and others later like, Cyprian, Ambrose, and Augustine. Should two manuscripts of disputed credibility, Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, and the modern scholars who love them, be allowed in your head, saying, “Yea, hath God said?” (See Genesis 3). What’s going on here really?

What about the Old Testament? The King James Old Testament, representing the Second Great Rabbinic Bible compiled many Old Testament manuscripts, versus the modern Old Testament text complied by Rudolf Kittel, father of Nazi apologist Gerhard Kittel, found in many fundamentalist pastors’ libraries.

The Old Testament text was settled before the King James translators began their work based on many, many manuscripts while modern translations give credence to Kittel’s work, based primarily on one manuscript, the Leningrad Codex.

Are you seeing a pattern here? The common usage of the Bible for two thousand years, thousands of manuscripts, writings of the early church fathers, and ancient versions on one hand, The King James Bible; and on the other hand, three questionable manuscripts; Codices Vaticanus, Sinaiticus, and Leningrad. Based on the latter you want me to give up my Bible. Right.

Now, let me tell you something. I’m on my 63^rd reading of the KJV. It compels you to read it over and over again, maybe not as obsessively as me, but you should have read it for at least as many times as the years you’ve been a Christian if you believe it is God’s book. I ask you how many times you’ve read or listened to your NKJV, NIV, HCSB, or NASB? Maybe you have gone through them cover to cover but most people I talk to haven’t even read the Bible through from cover to cover one time. I guess it tough when some verses are just missing.

This Bible changed my life. It reproved me of sin, comforted me, exhorted me, and edified me. It made me a different person than who I was before I believed that it was what God wanted us to have. I’ve only given you one or two examples of dozens so as not to get bogged down in why I believe modern translating attitudes and modern methods, lexicons, etc. are wrong in their attack on the Bible I use and that, more importantly, uses me.

I am not a scholar. I oversimplified things because they are very simple. We have a Bible that has come down to us from our spiritual ancestors as the authoritative, definitive word of God. We have modernists who want to make us question its truthfulness and even abandon it. What I’m telling you is they ‘got no game.’ Their arguments are the empty and vain ramblings of men and women, mostly men, who want to place the thought in your head, mimicking Satan’s own words.

Yea, hath God said?

The modern, particularly, evangelical scholar sets up two competing authorities; your Bible and his. Then, he encourages you to settle the issue with his opinion, which, as I said, isn’t worth much. I’m just a regular person but if you are going to convince me that the Bible that put me here right here writing every day about God’s word, exploring it, studying it, loving it, is wrong then you’re going to have to do better than you’ve done.

The King James translators wrote a letter to the reader which is no longer published in most KJVs, which is unfortunate. In it they praise the power of the Bible. Here is a short excerpt of what was written;

 But now what piety without truth? what truth (what saving truth) without the word of God? What word of God (whereof we may be sure) without the Scripture? The Scriptures we are commanded to search. John 5:39. Isa 8:20. They are commended that searched and studied them. Acts 17:11 and 8:28,29. They are reproved that were unskilful in them, or slow to believe them. Matt 22:29. Luke 24:25. They can make us wise unto salvation. 2 Tim 3:15. If we be ignorant, they will instruct us; if out of the way, they will bring us home; if out of order, they will reform us; if in heaviness, comfort us; if dull, quicken us; if cold, inflame us.

They hammered out and revised and worked for long years to produce the greatest Bible the world has ever known using the Greek texts used by the majority of Christians for over a thousand years compiled by scholars from hundreds of manuscripts. This Traditional Text or Majority Text became known after the KJV was published as the Textus Receptus, Latin for the ‘text we have received’. This Received Text agrees with the earliest Bible versions like the Syriac Peshitta, the old Latin Vulgate, and the Italic Bible from the second century. They compared their work with the work of other translators, the Traditional Text compiled by Erasmus and others, Bibles in other European languages and ancient languages, and they revised and studied and revised and studied their own work. Some commentators, studying the method that the KJV translators used have said that each verse in that Bible was reviewed 14 times.

Modern Bibles are different because they are translated from different manuscripts, called the Minority Text. Supposedly, they say, it is the true text rediscovered by the Westcott-Hort committee. So, what they are telling us that the Bible was lost from 500AD to 1880. Do you really believe that? Or is something else going on?

I want to close with something I said earlier, This Bible changed my life. It reproved me of sin, comforted me, exhorted me, and edified me. It made me a different person than who I was before I believed that it was what God wanted us to have. I will continue to trust it and to believe it is God’s word for us, providentially preserved. I hope you will consider what I’ve said spoken and written from the point of view, not of a scholar or even particularly bright person, but from someone who stands on a rock and will not be removed from it.

1Corinthians 15:1-11 comments: the gospel

15:1 ¶  Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; 2  By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. 3  For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4  And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: 5  And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: 6  After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. 7  After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. 8  And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time. 9  For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 10  But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me. 11  Therefore whether it were I or they, so we preach, and so ye believed.

Here is the essence of the gospel, what you must believe to have eternal life.

Romans 10:4  For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth. 5  For Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law, That the man which doeth those things shall live by them. 6  But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above:) 7  Or, Who shall descend into the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead.) 8  But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; 9  That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. 10  For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. 11  For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

    12 ¶  For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. 13  For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

A “Christian” who does not believe in Christ’s physical resurrection is nothing more than a philosopher. A “Christian” who is not counting on Christ’s physical, bodily resurrection as what he or she can expect if they trust Christ is merely wasting their time. They may be very nice people, responsible and kind, but they are as lost as a goose in a horse race as the American Southerner saying goes.

Verse 5 uses Simon Peter’s other name as Paul has done three times previously in this letter and will do once in Galatians.

John 1:40  One of the two which heard John speak, and followed him, was Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother. 41  He first findeth his own brother Simon, and saith unto him, We have found the Messias, which is, being interpreted, the Christ. 42  And he brought him to Jesus. And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, A stone.

Verse 9 gives us the word meet which means worthy. Notice the word substitution between these two passages following that gives us that definition.

Matthew 3:7 ¶  But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come? 8  Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:

Luke 3:7  Then said he to the multitude that came forth to be baptized of him, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come? 8  Bring forth therefore fruits worthy of repentance, and begin not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, That God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.

This will help you understand what is meant in the following verses.

Genesis 2:18  And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him…20  And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

Which is, of course, easier to understand than that nonsensical compound word, ‘helpmeet.’

Paul declares that there were more than five hundred witnesses to the resurrected Christ. To my knowledge there are no records of anyone of these denying under torture that they saw the risen Christ. Just think of how the testimony of one man, lawyer John Dean, helped bring down the Nixon Whitehouse in the Watergate Scandal. This is why conspiracies requiring large numbers of people to hold to a false story usually don’t work unless those people can be coerced or bribed into holding to their lie. But here, common, ordinary people, not government employees, witnessed something profound and amazing and there is no historical evidence that even one of them came forward crying foul. Not that Christians need that kind of testimony but it just goes to show that if there were any questions about Christ’s resurrection they would have been brought up by Jewish or Roman authorities and presented to the world as proof the gospel wasn’t true.

Pagan writers of first and second century Rome like Cornelius Tacitus, Lucian of Samosata, Suteonius, Pliny the Younger mentioned at the beginning of this commentary, and Mara Bar-Serapion refer to Christ and Christians either indifferently, mockingly, or in a hostile tone. The turncoat Jewish general of the 70AD revolt against Rome that left Jerusalem in shambles, Josephus, also refers to the resurrection. None of these writers would be able to say anything other than that they did not believe. We have the written testimony of Paul, the confirmation of the early church, and the inspiration of the Holy Spirit to affirm in our hearts that the gospel is true. By this we are saved from mankind’s natural destination, a burning Hell.

Showing that God can use anyone, Paul persecuted Christians before he became one.

Acts 26:8  Why should it be thought a thing incredible with you, that God should raise the dead? 9  I verily thought with myself, that I ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth.10  Which thing I also did in Jerusalem: and many of the saints did I shut up in prison, having received authority from the chief priests; and when they were put to death, I gave my voice against them.11  And I punished them oft in every synagogue, and compelled them to blaspheme; and being exceedingly mad against them, I persecuted them even unto strange cities.

  

But, it was God’s grace that mattered and God’s plan that bore fruit and now Paul was instrumental in the faith of many whom he would have driven to their deaths before he met Christ on the road to Damascus.

1Corinthians 14:26-40 comments: a call for order in church meetings

14:26 ¶  How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying. 27  If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret. 28  But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God. 29  Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge. 30  If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace. 31  For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted. 32  And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. 33  For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

    14:34 ¶  Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. 35  And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

    14:36 ¶  What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only? 37  If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord. 38  But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant. 39  Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues. 40  Let all things be done decently and in order.

Here is a description of how the early church functioned. It was apparently participatory with everyone getting involved. Paul’s emphasis is on order in verse 33 and in 40. Paul reinforces his preference for preaching over speaking in other languages except with interpreters around who understood those languages. Keep in mind the passage about tongues in Acts, chapter 2, I quoted earlier.

In 28 there is a command for men to be silent in regard to tongues if there is no interpreter who knows the language they are speaking and in 34 women are commanded to be silent, but both in connection with tongues. The silence here for women is not absolute. As an example, most conservative churches today which would not permit a woman to preach or teach a class full of men would not be opposed to a woman giving a testimony, asking a question in a Bible class, teaching young people or other women, or singing a solo. The commands here for men and women with regard to tongues, if not taken in context, will cause confusion and violate the very order that Paul warns about.

As with table manners during the meal Paul mentioned earlier we must not read back modern sensibilities into the Bible. A meeting of the church without direction and guidance by the bishop, what we would call today a pastor, could be quite a chaotic event. People whose culture and ancestry comes from Northern Europe where long ages of cultural change have favored orderliness, self-denial, and structure find other cultures without that past to be strange. Where we might line up at a bank in other places people might not be so willing to wait their turn. In a political meeting in some places a fist-fight or wrestling match is likely to break out from a spirited debate. People shouting questions or talking over other people in a meeting is not as uncommon in other cultural contexts.

Paul is warning about disorder and confusion here.

An example of his warning coming to pass in reality was the heresy of Montanism. In the first half of the second century, Montanus, a priest of Cybele, declared himself a prophet and said that the Holy Spirit spoke through him. He had two female priestesses, Priscilla and Maximilla, who were even more popular than him. They claimed ecstatic visions and displayed other signs that they insisted were gifts of the apostles, declaring a line of authority back to Philip the Evangelist’s four daughters from Acts 21:9. So, there was a real danger here of things getting out of order quickly.