To Sanctify in Truth

Dr. Couch, what did Christ mean when He said "For the sake of [the disciples] I sanctified Myself, that they themselves also may be sanctified in truth" (John 17:19).

ANSWER: "To sanctify" means "to make holy, special, unique." By presenting Himself as sanctified, He is making them sanctified "in truth." By making Himself special He is then sanctifying them in truth. One's witness about oneself in court is valid as a testimony. Christ is speaking for Himself in order to set Himself out as one who is to be heard.

All believers are tied together, believers of all generations. We are tied to those who came before us. This is what is said in the following verses. Christ had concern for those who came along after the disciples, "through their word." Someone told us what they had said, etc., etc. "that they all may be one; even as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You, that they may be one, just as We are one" (vv. 20-21).


Thanks for asking,
-- Dr. Mal Couch (5/11)

Hidden Bible Codes

Dr. Couch, I know of some Bible teachers who believe in what they call the "hidden Bible codes." Is this heresy?

ANSWER: I know some of these brothers personally and I think it is unfortunate that they take this view. The problem is God has revealed to us His revelations in full without any hidden messages or methods needed to find out what the truth is. This means that some people are "in" on secret truth and some are "out" in knowing what God has revealed. This makes them special and gives them an "up" on the rest of us.

If God is giving us His truth why would He then give a secret code in order to unlock what He has to say? It does not make sense! The book of Acts says the Bereans searched the Scriptures daily in order to confirm the truth of the gospel (Acts 17:11). They used inductive reasoning and searching and did not employ some secret key to try to understand the Word of God. Paul says the Thessalonians "received from us the word of God's message, you accepted it not as the word of men, but for what it really is, the word of God" (1 Thess. 2:13). Again, no secret code was needed.

Some people like to be sensationalists and mystics in interpreting the Bible. Don't fall for it. God spoke to us in plain language!

Is the "code" view heresy? No, maybe not, but it is certainly wrong and terribly misleading!

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch
#296

Essential Doctrines

Dr. Couch, does Scripture help us to determine what the essential doctrines are for fellowship and for joint ministry with another church?

ANSWER: I believe the many verses that discuss heresy and error could be put together to form a guide to whom one should fellowship with. I think there are several layers of relationships to take note of that come from Scripture. (1) I can be glad for any true believer who is my brother in Christ. (2) While any true believer may be my spiritual brother, still, he may be destroying a large part of the Bible by his denial of certain doctrines. This would include those in the Reformed faith who deny the proven doctrines of the apostasy, the rapture of the church, the seven year tribulation period, and the bodily return of Jesus the Messiah who will reign on the throne of David for 1000 years in Jerusalem. (3) And then there are the believers who may outright hold to way, way out beliefs.

I could not see my church having joint ministries with any who deny the fundamentals of the Word of God. I may have a certain kind of accepting fellowship with them on a personal level but I could not share ministries with them. However, no one has ever called me an isolationist or legalist when it comes to these issues. I may write in very strong words against those who continue to give false interpretations against clear doctrinal issues but I do not have a fighting fundy mentality.

I believe a church should adopt a strong biblical doctrinal statement such as we have with Scofield Ministries. I wrote that some years ago and it has stood the test of time for a long while. Anyone reading it may feel free to use it however they wish.

A few years ago I got involved with a man who had come out of the Funda____ Bap_____ group. I thought I had him pegged right, and I thought he had disavowed some of the attitudes of that group, but when we began to do ministry together his narrowness and legalism came through. When he left our group, sure enough, he went right back to that persuasion. He lied about the fact that that had been his orientation. In fact, I caught him in over five lies on various issues. I find it interesting that he virtually claimed to walk sinless in his Christian life but he could tell fibs at the drop of a hat!

The Christian life is tricky in that groups and individuals can be deceptive and can look at the Bible in such a restrictive way. If they become embedded within a church they will set about to destroy that assembly or certainly try to take it over. They may doctrinally be in agreement but their attitude and their legalism can take a church down! Such folks I would avoid when it comes to sharing ministry.

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch
#291

Ephesians 4

Dr. Couch, what is going on in Ephesians 4:7-on? And especially with verse 8 about Christ ascending and giving gifts to the captives? ANSWER: The apostle Paul reaches back to Psalm 68:18 and brings a verse forward that illustrates a victorious general who sets the captives free after a battle and then bestows upon them gifts. Ephesians 4:8 (quoting Psa. 68:18) reads: "When He ascended on high, He led captive a host of captives, and He gave gifts to men." The apostle then writes that Christ came to earth (He descended into the lower parts of the earth) and then returned far above into the heavens, "that He might fill [or be in charge] of all things." A.T. Robertson argues that Christ's Descending refers to His Incarnation when He came down "to the earth." This is a genitive of Apposition: Or, "He came down in reference to the earth." He then bestowed gifts to those in the church. Verse 7 better reads: "To each one of us (in the church) 'was gifted' according to the measure of Christ's gifts." I wrote in my nationally published commentary on Galatians-Ephesians (AMG) that "The apostle Paul is arguing in the strongest manner for the deity, sovereignty, and preeminence of Christ as God the Son. No one can look carefully at these verses and deny this fact." Christ then gave gifts to the spiritual body of believers. He gave four offices to the church, not five as the ignorant Charismatics often argue. To the church He gave (1) apostles, (2) prophets (not telling the future but as teachers), (3) evangelists, (4) and pastors INDEED, THAT IS teachers. The "and" (kai) is making these two positions relating. These gifted individuals are to build up the body of Christ: "Until all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God" (v. 13). Psalm 68:18 is a hymn of victory in which God is praised for victory and deliverance. It is freely adapted by Paul, who regards its substance rather than its letter, and uses it as an expression of the divine triumph as fulfilled in Christ's victory over death and sin.—Vincent We cannot do Bible study without knowledge of the Greek text or without good commentary material to help those who are deficient be able to see what is happening in the text. Thanks for asking. Dr. Mal Couch (10/10)

Pharisees and Sadducees in Unity

Dr. Couch, how did the Pharisees and the Sadducees work together to get rid of Christ? They were at such opposite ends of the doctrinal spectrum, what brought them together? ANSWER:  The Sadducees were the liberal party among the Jews. They had control of the "theology" of the temple area. They did not believe in inspiration of Scripture, hell, miracles, angels, etc. The Pharisees were the conservatives who held to the orthodox doctrines of the Word of God. However, their problem was they were legalistic and self-righteous, and they believed in salvation by works.    John 11:45-53 gives us a lot of insight as to how and why both parties came together in regard to Jesus.    The Pharisees and the chief priests called a council together. I would take it that this was an illegal council to discuss how to get rid of Christ. This council included Sadducees. They asked themselves "What are we doing?" (v. 47). Or, why are we just going about passive and doing nothing in regard to Jesus! They then agreed that He was performing miracles or signs (v. 47b). They did not deny what He was doing, and they realized that His works were drawing off the people to follow Him.    Verse 48 is important. They said, "If we let Him go on like this, all men will believe in Him, and the Romans will come and take away both our place and our nation." They realized that they would lose their authority and that the Romans would come and take over and depose them from their positions of leadership.    But the high priest Caiaphas comes to a right understanding that what was happening was from God. He said "Do you not know that it is expedient that one would die for the people, and that the whole nation should not perish." He is referring to the prophecy about the Messiah, the Suffering Servant, predicted in Isaiah 53:8. The Messiah would be a Substitute for sinners! (v. 51). And, he is implying that Christ appears to be that one!    Christ would die not only for the Jews living in the Holy Land but for others living everywhere—"scattered abroad" (v. 52). John the apostle add "So from that day on they planned together to kill Him" (v. 53).     Here are some key verses about the coming together of the Pharisees (P) and the Sadducees (S): "They came together to the baptism of John the Baptist" (Matt. 3:7). "The P and the S came up, and testing Him ..." (16:1). Christ said, "Watch out for the leaven of the P and the S" (v. 6). "Beware of the teaching of the P and the S" (v. 12).    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch (Mar., 10)

Unity of Christ and the Father while on the Cross

Dr. Couch, it seems the unity or immutability of God is destroyed by the so-called separation of Christ from the Father when He was on the cross. Most Bible teachers seem to just give the usual standard answer and do not work the biblical text on giving the right answer. I know you work the languages, so I'm asking you what the passage (Matt. 27:46) is really saying from the Hebrew and Greek languages. What do you think? ANSWER:  The passage reads, "My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?" Christ is quoting Psalm 22:1. The Hebrew word for "forsaken" in Psalm 22:1 is A'Zav with the meaning of "to abandon, to take away one's favor," with the idea: "To come up to someone, see a need, and walk away from that need." In Greek the word "forsake" is egkataleipo. It is in an Aorist form and carries the idea "to desert," to "leave one in straits, to leave one helpless, to leave one behind."    The persons in the Trinity did not cut ties when Christ died, and took upon Himself our sins, but the heavenly Father left the Son to face the pain of crucifixion, left Him in the circumstances of the death He was facing. The Father and Son were not breaking their Trinity relationship. They, along with the Holy Spirit, remained as joined as the three persons in the Godhead: Father, Son, and Spirit. They have an eternal relationship that cannot be broken.    The incarnation of Christ is a mystery and it is difficult to understand what happened in Christ's death on the cross. It cannot be said that God died, so His death is indeed difficult to explain! Some argue that only the physical of the Lord actually died. And even with that, we know that Christ did not undergo decay in His body. This is made clear from Psalm 22:10: "Neither will You allow Your Holy One to undergo decay." As deity the Lord did not "disappear." For He said prophetically "My flesh also will dwell securely. For You will not abandon My soul to Sheol [to the grave]" (vv. 9b-10a).    Psalm 22:11 seems to say that Christ, in His death, remained conscience just as we will when we pass. "In Your presence is fullness of joy; in Your right hand there are pleasures forever." In other words, the Lord remained in His relationship, with joy and comfort, with the heavenly Father when He physically died! A lot of this is a mystery but what I've written seems to make sense biblically.    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch

Kindred Spirit

Dr. Couch, what does "kindred spirit" mean? ANSWER:  The expression is found in Philippians 2:20 where Paul says about Timothy, "For I have no one else of kindred spirit who will genuinely be concerned for the welfare [of the Philippian assembly except Timothy]." This is a powerful thought in the Greek text. It actually is translated "iso psuche," or "like soul (or spirit)." Paul then adds, "For they all seek after their own interests, not those of Christ Jesus" (v. 21). All of those Paul was working with had no interest in the problems or issues of the Philippian church. They were selfish and cared little of the needs of that congregation.    Gromacki says "The term literally means "equal soul." Just as Jesus Christ was equal to the Father in deity (2:6), so Timothy was equal to Paul in the characteristics of unity, humility, and concern for others. ... Paul and Timothy shared the mind of Christ, thought the same things, and had the same spiritual goals."    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch (1-10)

Manhattan Declaration

Dr. Couch, what do you think about the Manhattan Declaration and the statement put together by the leadership of Chuck Colson? ANSWER:  A few months back I wrote online about the fact that Christians need to stand together on immoral issues being imposed upon us by the culture and by our government. Colson has put together a consortium of leaders from the Protestant churches, Catholic and Greek orthodox assemblies. The three issues focused on are:    (1) homosexuality, (2) marriage is the union of one man and one woman, and (3) the issue of abortion.    Some ask, "Should we join hands even with different Christian groups that are so doctrinally diverse?" Because of the urgency of the times, I'm rethinking some of the positions we all have taken in the past.    For example, if I joined and came aboard with the Manhattan Declaration, would I have to compromise my doctrinal beliefs and distinctions? Would I still be free to share the gospel as I understand it from Scripture? And as far as I can tell, those coming on board do not have to compromise such distinctions and beliefs. If that is the case, maybe it is time for us to join forces in order to present a united front. Compromising doctrinal issues is not part of the requirement. I can still believe what I wish to believe and witness to the Scriptures as I see fit.    One of the things that Colson is pushing for is that those who buy into the Manhattan Declaration will stand firm even if it means losing tax-exemption for ministries, and even facing arrest by being accused of promoting "hate crimes." I think many believers in Christ are reaching the point where "enough is enough"! We have taken it long enough, and, it is only getting worse!    Someone has rightly said that none of us makes a firm stand on issues until our own interests are at stake; until what we believe becomes threatened, then we move! And maybe we have arrived where our own circle is threatened.    I would like for those reading this to send me an email on your opinion on what I have just written, and on your opinion on the Manhattan Declaration. We will use your name, or not, whatever you desire. Please let me have your thoughts quickly!    Dr. Mal Couch (Nov., 09)

What About Local Church Associations?

Dr. Couch, our church belongs to the Association Of Churches in our town. They are holding a Day of Prayer, with all the churches, that sounds very liberal. Do you know about this? 

 

    As a pastor I would never join the local Church Associations! They are downright stupid, and at the most, only accomplish some limited charitable fund raisers. While this may not be bad in itself, I would rather our church do its own charity work and not associate with churches that are liberal, self-serving, ecumenical, feministic, shallow, etc. 

    To show how sick all of this can be, for the event you are talking about, the churches are getting involved in A World Day Of Prayer. The theme is “Uniting Under God’s Tent,” whatever that means! The purpose this year is to call to action the churches to pray “for a fulfilled life for all people” of the world! This is purely socio-economic and has nothing to do with spiritual truth coming from the Word of God! From the Scriptures, what in the world does this mean? 

    It is a bunch of swell. This year’s theme was proposed by the women of Paraguay. The observance will feature a “rustic cross, a symbolic tent, and a large nanduti, which is a handcraft and a woven floral pattern with “single thread, as a symbol of unity within diversity.” 

    This is a false attempt to unit people, blur national and biblical distinctions, and have unity just for the sake of unity! Christ and the Bible have nothing to do with anything! This is pure warmed over liberalism that has come back to life from the 1920s. Churches and pastors who know better should avoid such ecumenical dribble! 

    Thanks for asking.

    Dr.  Mal Couch