Original subtitles

Thanks for watching.

Well, we are beginning our 20 of Learn the Bible in 24 Hours.

And in this hour, we're going to focus on what are called the Hebrew Christian Epistles

or putting it another way. If you take the 13 Paul wrote, the ones that are left up to

the book of Revelation are the ones we're now going to focus on. And they include the

the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Epistle of James 1st, Peter 1st, 3rd, John and Jude.

And now the Hebrew Christian Epistles are distinctive in that not one of them is addressed

to a church. Interestingly enough. And what's also disturbing to many is that some of the

warnings we find in these Epistles seem to be in contrast to some of the assurances that

we received in the church epistles. You look at Romans 8 and you compare that with Hebrew

6 and 10 that can raise some questions. You take Ephesians 2 and Philippians 1 and compare

that with 2 Peter 1 and it raises questions. So those are great discussion opportunities.

But do understand that there really is no conflict between them. It may just seem that

we're on the surface. And whenever you think you found a contradiction or conflict, praise

God. Because God will always reward the diligent. You get in behind that and you'll come out

much better, understand. But some of these are widely misunderstood. But there's not

a retrograde here. Some people say, well, you know, James was a rebuttal to Paul. No,

James before Paul was and it's not at all. It just, it reaches beyond. It goes in a different

direction. So let's take with it. Let's start with Epistles of the Hebrews. This is one

of the two greatest theological treatises in the New Testament. The first one being

Romans which we spent an entire hour on. We won't do that here with Hebrews but we will

focus on its distinctives, some of its distinctives. One thing you need to realize, Israel is

not a subset of the nations but a contrast and a focus. If you think of Israel and then

all the nations as too imbalance, you're closer to the perspective here. The epistle to the

Hebrews stands as sort of the Leviticus of the New Testament. Basically it's going to

argue that Christ supersedes and fulfills all the elements of the Aaronic priesthood,

the priesthood under Moses and so forth. Something else you need to understand when

you're reading the book of Hebrews, you need to visualize yourself as a Jewish Christian

that had come to Christ during the first 70 years of this time. In other words, the temple

is still standing. Try to understand the peculiar predicament of a Jewish believer while the

temple was still operating. You see, if you were at Medusa for Jew that has accepted Christ

but you now realize that you've previously been in a divinely appointed religion with

divinely appointed priests officiating in a divinely appointed temple, accomplishing a

divinely ordered service that had been ennobled through centuries. That's what you've given

up. And you have to ask yourself, how could believing priests and Pharisees remain zealous

of the law? You see, it was the Jewish religious world that crucified Christ and was presently

repudiating him. Understand the strange predicament. Realize that the persecutions during that first

century didn't come from the Romans. It came from the Jewish leadership. So understand that.

The church in Jerusalem had already lost Stephen. He was stoned, probably illegally obviously,

but he's still stoned. James, the leader of the church, had been killed in 62 A.D., executed.

And of course there are many others. The churches in Galatia, all up north, all through the Galatia,

were in the same turmoil being attacked by the local Jewish authorities. So as a result,

many of these believers, Jewish believers, were tempted to go back temporarily to Judaism to

avoid persecution. Under the mindset, I'll stick with this so I don't get persecuted. And at the

last minute I'll turn. You get the idea. The author of the book of Hebrews. Now I happen to

believe it was Paul, so I may misspeak. I'm going to try not to do that because that's

prejudicial. There are some good scholars that think it was somebody other than Paul. I have my

reasons and I think majority of them think that Paul wrote it, but I'll try to refer to the author

rather than Paul. But in any case, he's trying to combat possible apostasy by these believers. He

wants to encourage them rather than to go back to Judaism to press on to spiritual maturity. He

wants to comfort them in their persecutions, of course. And his method is to emphasize the

superiority of the Messiah specifically against the three pillars of Judaism, which were the angels.

That's a big deal in Judaism. The whole role of Moses and of course the Levitical priesthood under

Aaron. These are three places that he specifically points out that the Messiah eclipses all of these.

And he builds very, you also have to understand if it was Paul, he wouldn't sign it because he

doesn't want to make that the issue. He doesn't set himself up as an apostle. He's simply arguing

from the Jewish scriptures the way a rabbi would. This thing stands or falls on its rabbinical logic.

He's going to deviate from his logical discussions on five occasions to issue special warnings.

But once you recognize those warnings you're there, the rest follows very, very logically.

He first of all points out that Jesus is a new and better deliverer. But God man is better than

the angels. Angels are still just angels. And he's an apostle better than Moses. Even as

highly-evigorated Moses was, the Messiah is higher. He's a leader better than Joshua. In fact,

he's the one that fought the battle of Jericho if you read the last verse of Joshua 5 carefully.

And Jesus is a priest better than Aaron. He's going to explain why in great detail. He talks about

Calvary as being a better and newer covenant. It offers better promises, offers it has a better

sanctuary. It's sealed by a better sacrifice and achieves far better results. He hits each one of

these in a rabbinical style. And so our faith should be a true and better response. Then he has

parting words to the whole thing. See, the son of God is the final revealer. He's the heir of

all things himself through the son where all the ages made. He's the brightness of God's glory.

This is in some respects similar to Colossians. He got here. He's not arguing to a gentleman.

He's arguing in Jewish terms. He is the brightness of God's glory. He's the image of the Father. He

opposed all things by his power. He made a purification of sin. He didn't just cover it for a while,

like the Old Testament sacrifice did. He made purification for it. And he finally sits down

on Majesty on High. So in each dimension here, it is as good as it gets. The son has

appeared to the angels. How? By virtue of his deity. First of all, he created them in the first place.

By virtue of his humanity. Now let me surprise you. But you see, the earth was given to Adam.

So in that sense, Adam was even though the Lord of the angels was superior to the angels,

but he forfeited it to Satan. But Christ is getting that back on our behalf.

It had to be a kinsman of man to take over the earth. That's why Jesus called the kinsman

to niema. Just being God wasn't enough. He had to be a kinsman of Adam to fulfill the situation.

So humanity is crucial here. By virtue of salvation, he provided.

None other provides salvation the way Jesus Christ is. No angel can provide salvation.

The son is separated by virtue of his deity. His position is unique. He's the head of the

Davidic covenant. Angels worship the son. He's the son. According to, you know, that's a quote from

Psalm 97. Angels serve the son according to Psalm 104. The son is to rule the kingdom in Psalm 45.

So it's interesting how often he draws upon the Psalms, not just as a hymnal, but as authority.

And that's again something a Jew would accept. And of course, the son is the creator according

to Psalm 102. These are quotes from Psalms, not from the Torah. And the son is enthroned to the

right hand of God according to Psalm 110. And so with the exception of the Davidic covenant in the

second list here, all of these are quotes from Psalms. Son's superior, his humanity makes that

point. See, he has sovereignty over the earth was promised to man up the angels. God gave man

dominion over the earth and a man rules it. Satan does now, but a man will.

Man lost it through sin to Satan as angels. The Messiah regained dominion for man.

And man will be associated with him, the Messiah, in ruling it. And of course,

his superior salvation. Why? That manifest divine grace. And he quotes Psalm 22 and Isaiah 8,

the overcome the prince of death to free the believer from the fear of death and to help man.

The son is greater than Moses, of course. But you have to understand the logic. You have to

understand how a Jew viewed Moses. The son is greater because of his person's work, his position,

and then he interts it, warning against disobedience. And he points out how they failed at Kadesh

Marnia. Remember, they didn't, they didn't, God had given them the land. They failed to take it,

they had to wander in the wilderness for 40 years. The very people God rescued from Egypt blew it

because they didn't enter into that which God had provided. And he's drawing a parallel here.

That's exactly the mistake we're making in the book of Hebrews, is that they have been saved,

but they're not entering into the benefit of their salvation.

He points out that Jesus is a priest, but not after Aaron, which was temporary. He's after a

permit priesthood. He's got a better position. It's heavenly rather than earthly. He's a better

priest because he's divinely appointed. And so again, he puts a warning there, progress to maturity.

And returning to Judaism is not an option. That's an option denied. We're going to see,

he says, there's a need for progression. You need to advance, you guys, beyond first principles.

Repentance from dead works, commitment to the misyaship, resurrection of the dead,

and eternal judgment in the great right throne. These are issues that far transcend anything

Judaism can offer. These people need to be settled in their hearts once and for all

to advance to maturity. See, they're saved, but they're not progressing. They're dealing with milk,

not the meat, so to speak. There is an option that is denied them. See, understand, first of all,

I believe they were saved believers. Some people don't argue, well, because some other problems,

they say, these guys really weren't saved. No, they were once enlightened. They tasted of the

heavenly gift. They were partakers of the Holy Spirit. They tasted the good word of God. They

tasted the powers of the age to come. These are the right quotes. No, these were saved,

but they were considering apostatizing. The option they do not have is to temporarily give up their

salvation, go back to Judaism until the persecution is massaged, and then be saved later. Okay?

There are many people with that mentality even today in a different sense. See, there are only

two options available. Either go back to Judaism confirming their immaturity and be subject to

the judgment of 70 AD, physical death now and loss of rewards later, whatever, or make their clean

break from Judaism once and for all and press on to maturity. And then today, it does not mean

they have to give up observing the feasts and so forth, but they don't do it under the law. They

do it as a celebration. The same way that you and I might choose to observe the Sabbath, the Shabbat.

Not into the law, but just to celebrate it and to clean its benefits.

The responsibility of a believer to produce works which accompany salvation. You're not saved by

works, but you have an obligation to have works that demonstrate, manifest your salvation.

And it takes examples from nature. Rain falls upon all the earth. Some produce fruit, some does not,

just like believers. Fruitless will be rewarded. Fruitlessness will be judged.

Thorns and thistles are burned, but the land isn't, is the point he's making. In 1 Corinthians 3 and

elsewhere. And so it was a similar to 3 and so forth. He talks a lot, chapter 7, about the priesthood

of this strange character called Melchizedek that we were introduced in Genesis 14. Melchizedek,

that we count that was a priest and a king. That's different than the Mosaic world.

Under Moses, the Levites were priests. Under Judah was the royal. They never mixed.

And also Melchizedek received tithes from Abraham. And here the writer makes a very strange kind of

logic. You need to follow his logic. Levi had not been born yet, but he regards Levi since he was

in the loins of Abraham as giving tithes also to Melchizedek. Since Abraham gave tithes about

Chizadec, that Melchizedek was higher than Abraham. Levi hadn't been born yet, so even more junior.

The point he's making is that it was as if Levi is subordinate to Melchizedek because his

great-great-great-grandfather gave tithes to Melchizedek. He's creating a hierarchy here.

Also Melchizedek has no genealogy. It doesn't mean he was, it didn't have a birth in death. It

just means it's not recorded. His position was independent of any genealogy. And he was timeless.

He had no beginning or end recording. That's the point they're making in terms of being a priest

after the order of Melchizedek. And of course Melchizedek was all-inclusive. He wasn't a

priest just to the Jews. He's a priest and king, period. And so it's a much broader concept.

And so Melchizedek, in a sense, is a type or a foreshadowing of the Son of God.

Now he's only a type. Some people say he was Shem, but that's not true because we know genealogies

of Shem's genealogy. Some people feel it was an Old Testament appearance of Christ himself. No,

it says in the Scripture he was a man. And this is pre-incarnation, so for what it's worth.

Now those are just interesting side issues. The main point is that Melchizedek in priesthood

will replace the priesthood of Aaron. The Levitical priesthood could never achieve perfection.

It was given for a purpose, but it could never achieve perfection. Another order

would occur that David predicted in Psalm 110, another order, which is non-Levitical.

He's pointing out that Melchizedek is a higher order than Levi. The Levitical priesthood that

the Jews are committed to was temporary. And it was weak. It could not impart strength to

fulfill its demands, and it could not bring perfection. It could offer remedies for having

failed the law, but it couldn't give you the power to overcome, to keep the law. So we've got a

better covenant. The Mosaic covenant was destined to be replaced by Superior One according to Jeremiah

31. And the New Covenant has better promises, better priesthood, better sanctuary, better sacrifice.

Now that's really, we really have the Old Covenant, what we call the Old Testament.

The word Testament in covenant is a little misleading, because we think of Testament differently,

but it's like Old Covenant, New Covenant. The New Testament is really the New Covenant, if you will.

A better sanctuary. See, the limitation of the Old Sanctuary, which was restricted and

representative copy, was contrasted with the heavy and the actual. He points out it was just

a model that was given to Moses as a temporary thing. Only one man out of one tribe, out of one

nation and one race could enter, and only on one day in the year and not without blood.

So the access there was a very, very restrictive one. Okay? It was temporary. It was limited.

It was inadequate. And the Mosaic was inadequate, required repetition, animal blood, since we're

not, since we're covered, not removed. That was, it was a temporary measure pointing to

Calvary. Only obedience brings perfection, according to Psalm 40. And only the Messiah

can impart the perfection. Mosaic sacrifices were never intended to be permanent.

So there's a lot of contrast here between the Levitical priests of the Mosiah.

Levitical had many priests. The Mosiah is one. The Levitical priests were always standing.

There were no chairs inside the tabernacle. The Mosiah is sitting. He's finished. The

Levitical priests ministered daily. The Mosiah administered on one specific day.

Levitical priests had to repeat it all. Christ did it once and for all, once and for all, to tell

us die. It is finished. Levitical priests had many sacrifices. The Mosiah did just one himself.

Levitical priests were temporary. The Mosiah is permanent. So those are the contrast that the

writer establishes in his letter. One covered the sins. The other actually took the sins away,

but an end of sins. Then he gets into in chapter 10, the danger of willful sin.

See if they now apostatize from the faith, and once and for all returned to Judaism,

there remains no more sacrifice for their sin. That's a heavy argument that's made in Hebrews 10.

Why? Because it's a rejection of the work of the Trinity. Not just the Holy Spirit, all three of them.

God will judge his people. It's a fearful thing to fall in the hands of a living God.

Then he emphasizes. Well, having gone through all that in chapter 10, we now get to this incredible

chapter of the Hall of Faith. You remember Romans chapter 8, what a high point that was?

The equivalent in Hebrews is chapter 11, called the Hall of Faith, where it speaks about Abel,

whose blood, you know, he gave an offering with blood, which is the only way offering it was

acceptable. Then we have Enoch who had faith through fellowship. He had since fellowship was

so close he didn't die. God took him. And then we had Noah, who was obedient and thus saved his

family. Every one of us are descendants. We all have a common ancestor. It's not Adam, it's Noah.

And then of course Abraham. And he departed from his home ground before him. And he

has a miraculous birth of Isaac and it's his belief in the resurrection of Isaac that saves him.

And his willingness to sacrifice that he convinced God that he was. Then of course we had Sarah,

and Isaac, and all the prophecies, and Jacob, and then we have Joseph and his two sons.

It goes through these great, we call it the Hall of Faith, all the way through here. And then of

course Moses, who was hidden from the laws of Pharaoh and refused to be called the son of

Pharaoh's daughter and so forth. And they kept the first pass over into the story in Exodus.

And we go through Joshua and Rahab and Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jeff, David, Samuel, and all the

prophets. It goes through this whole lineup. But let's just, we get to about verse 33, just give

you a flavor of it. He stops dealing with them individually, starts dealing with them, who through

faith subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lion.

Who's he talking about? Daniel, you betcha. Quench the violence of fire, escape the edge of the

sword, out of weakness that were made strong, waxed, valiant, and fight turned to flight the

armies of the aliens. Women received their dead, raised to life again. And others were tortured,

not accepting deliverance, that they might obtain a better resurrection. Others had trial of cruel

makings and scourging, gee, moreover, bonds and imprisonment. They were stoned. They were sawn

asunder. It's understood that Isaiah was sawn on half by Manasseh with a wooden saw.

They were tempted. They were slain with a sword. They wandered about in sheep skins and goatskins,

being destitute, afflicted, tormented, of whom the world was not worthy. They wandered in deserts

and in mountains and in dens and caves of the earth. And all these, and these all, having obtained a

good report through faith, received not the promise, God having provided some better thing

for us that without us, excuse me, that they without us should not be made perfect. What a

climax. See, all after all that, they received not the promise. God having provided something,

some better thing for us that they without us should not be made complete, or perfect in the

sense of being completed. So having said that, after a big sweep of Romans 11, I mean, Hebrews 11,

we now get to Hebrews 12. Wherefore seeing we also are encompassed about with so great a cloud of

witnesses, let us lay aside every weight and the sin which does so easily beset us. Let us run with

patience, the race that is set before us, looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith,

who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down

at the right hand of the throne of God. So we have five warnings in this

pistol, danger of drifting disobedience, not progressing towards maturity, willful sin,

and they don't want any against indifference. And okay, so remember I said there were three

pistols that amplify Habakkuk 2.4. Romans is, explains who the, the Roman, Habakkuk 2.4 saying

the just shall live by faith. The just is defined by Romans. How shall they live? That's

Galatians by faith, the book of Hebrews. That verse is quoted in the cornerstone of all three

of those epistles, so it's kind of interesting, I think. So, all right. Now we get to the

epistle that's Yakov's letter to the 12 tribes. And maybe I say, what on earth are you talking

about, Chuck? See, you don't know them by the name of Yakov. The Hebrew Yakov, which is the Greek

Akabas, English, Jacob, or sometimes James. You know it is the epistle of James, but he,

it was his name was Yakov. He was one of, he was a half brother of Jesus Christ.

And, and by the way, we know that a lot about him, he was half brother Jesus. He, he was married,

I'll come back to that. He was an unbeliever during the lifetime of Jesus. He became a believer

after the resurrection, according to 1 Corinthians 15. He was married. In 1 Corinthians 9,

Paul is arguing that it's okay to be married, James was, and Peter was, okay?

It's interesting, there are people who try to say Jesus was married and they just don't know

their Bible, because for a lot of reasons that doesn't make sense, but not the least of which,

if he was married, Paul would have made that argument in 1 Corinthians 9. But in any case,

I won't go down that path here. That's another whole other discussion, but

he, what, Yakov or James was the leader of the church in Jerusalem. And

it's interesting when Peter was released from prison, he instructed them to tell James. That

was his main concern. James was the one that issued the verdict of the Jerusalem Council.

He also, he gave the proclamation that authorized Gentile Christianity, so to speak.

Paul reported to him when he arrived in Jerusalem. His name was used without permission by the

Judaizers that has taken fast conglations to. He was finally executed in 62 AD, which is interesting

that that is not mentioned by any of the other epistles that it should have been, which means

that they were all written before 62 AD. It's a very interesting argument for the early authorship

of those letters. There's also documentation and technology that supports an even earlier

dating, but let's go on here. So the epistle of Jacob, and it's written to the 12 tribes of the

dispersion, which is interesting. There are not 10 lost tribes. That's a myth. There are people

that build castles on that house of cards. They argue that the Northern Kingdom was taken captive

by Assyria. Well, that's, they haven't read 2 Chronicles 11 very carefully, but the point is

in the south, you had Simeon, Benjamin and Judah, and the Levites moved to the south when the Civil

War took place. So you now got four of the 12 in the south anyway. So if there's any lost tribes,

it would be eight, not 10, but that's misunderstanding the whole passage. So both Jacob and Second Peter,

or first Peter, addressed themselves to the 12 tribes. And the epistle of James focused on conduct,

not creed, behavior, not belief, deeds, not doctrine. So it's not against Paul. It's just

focusing on a different approach. It's not creed, belief, or doctrine. It's conduct, behavior,

and deeds. That's his emphasis. And so he says that faith should be manifested by

outward signs. And there's tests for the Genuous Faith. The response to the Word of God,

responds to social distinctions, production of good works, the exercise of self-control,

the reaction to worldliness, the resort to prayer in all circumstances. If you have faith,

it will manifest itself in these external signs. You don't do the external signs. In lieu of faith,

they should be a result of your faith. In the summary of the whole epistle, James 2, it says,

Yay, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works. Show me thy faith without thy works,

and I will show thee my faith by my works. Thou believe us, there's one God. Thou doest

well the devils also believe in tremble. Think, believe is a big deal? The devils believe. Where

are they set? But Wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

I have to tell you, I'm amused by Rich Mullins' song. He says,

faith without works is as useless as a screen door on a submarine.

By the way, you know where the headlight is on a submarine? Anyone know?

Well, come on, it's in the head, right? Oh, sorry, I had pulled out everybody. Okay.

Let's go to the first epistle of Peter. This is also written to the sojourners of the dispersion,

to the Jews that are dispersed, the 12 tribes. And it focuses on the status of the believer,

the fact that there was by the foreknowledge of God, it's under obedience of faith,

that we are a living stone. And this whole idea of a stock of a stone of stumbling,

a rock of a fence. It's interesting that these idioms are used throughout the Scripture with

consistently. We call that the law of expositional constancy. That's just a fancy word for saying

that these idioms are used by the Holy Spirit, whether it's by Moses or in the Psalms or in the

New Testament, you know, to discover there's a consistency of idiomatic usage that is a testimony

to its source, if you will. And Paul points out in the first Corinthians 10, the rock that

followed him in the wilderness was Christ. He's speaking idiomatically, of course.

But anyway, Peter talks about the pilgrim life that we are a citizen, servants, and he speaks of

marriage and all of that. And the fiery trial that's coming at the end he deals with in his final

farewells. One of the things about this epistle, it was written from Babylon. Now, there are many

people, I have a lot of guys written books, they assume Babylon was a codename for Rome. That's

nonsense. You may recall that when the Jews were released from Babylon, only 50,000 went under

Ezra to rebuild the temple and so forth. Most of them stayed there, they were comfortable. In Babylon

was the highest concentration of Jews outside the land of Israel when the temple fell down.

Well, it came down. And so it was the center of Judaism outside the land that was appropriate for

Peter who was the apostle to the Jews to make that his base. He wrote from there. And there are

a number of people that have an equity in trying to make Peter the first pope and all that. I won't

go down that path. Clearly, he wrote from Babylon. And the Babylonian Talmud several centuries later

was developed there in Babylon. And so Peter, the apostle of the circumcision, would naturally

be based there. He realized Paul was designated the apostle to the Gentiles. Peter was the principal

apostle to the Jews. And let's get to the second letter. He emphasized the need to grow in virtue,

knowledge, self-control, patience, godliness, kindness, and love. And that's he also uses more

sure word of prophecy that we dealt with in the earlier hour, how sure are we and so forth.

But he also focuses on false teachers that will infect and slander and produce immorality.

And God will deliver them to or from judgment. And he uses interesting examples, the fallen angels

versus knowing his family from Genesis 6 and Sodom and Gomorrah and Lot in his family. These two

idioms Peter will use and they're also the two idioms that Jude will use when we get to his

epistle shortly. But one of the things about the second epistle, Peter, he also talks about

the second coming, how the belief in the second coming will be disparaged in the end times. And

boy, do we see that today. And he says in 2 Peter chapter 3 verses 3 and 4, knowing this first that

there shall come in the last days scuffers walking after their own lusts and saying,

where is the promise of his coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they

were from the beginning of the creation. You know how interesting it is that today

so many churches fail to really focus on the second coming of Christ. And they were, they

seem to disparage the study of prophecy. I have found through the 50 years of study and experience

that a focus on prophecy invariably ends up galvanizing people to take things seriously.

Yes, there are abuses. Prophecy suffers from its enthusiasts as well as its detractors. However,

the promise of his coming is our blessed hope. But Peter in verse 4 here adds something that's

kind of a surprise. He links the concept of second coming with the idea that the creation

continues as always had. And see, both ideas imply of God intervening in man's world. And

many people are uncomfortable with that. So that's interesting. It's not obvious until you think

it through that the innocent prophecy is linked to the interest of the creation and the refutation

of evolution and so forth. But he goes on and says, looking for and hasting unto the coming of the

day of God wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved and the elements shall melt

with a fervent heat. So he's talking about the end times. However, the word unto is not

implied in the original Greek. The word hasting is the word that is not hasting unto,

hasting the coming of the day of the day of the day of the day. In fact, in the NIV it says,

speed is coming and the NAS, New American Standard, it says, hasting the coming. And I was looking for

and hasting the coming, speeding up the coming. Really? Did you know you can speed up the coming

of Jesus Christ? That's what it says. How do you do that? Well, by longing for his appearing,

according to 2 Timothy 4, 8, by praying for his appearing, Revelation 22, 8, and by seeking

to win souls in Romans 11, 25. That's our mission. That's our job. As if we survey the

landscape of the coming year and realize it's likely to be very turbulentlier, let's remember

that God is still in control. His church is still precious and we still have the same mission

and we should keep at it. We should keep at it because victory is assured to us. That's really

what it's all about. Well, then we get to the first epistle of John. It's called his first epistle.

There are many scholars think it's more a set of sermon notes than an actual letter, although it

was a letter, of course. And John very typically is full of sevens, seven contrasts, truth versus

error, light versus darkness, father versus the world, Christ versus the Antichrist, good works

versus evil works, the Holy Spirit versus error, love versus pious pretense, God-born versus others.

So this is John whether it's his gospel or whether it's his letters or whether it's a book of

Revelation. He's a, you always see the heptatic structure, the sevenfold structure. There are

seven tests, a profession, desire, doctrine, conduct, discernment, mode of a new birth in the

first epistle of John. It has seven traits of being born again. It has seven reasons why this

epistle was written. It has seven tests of the Christian geniuses, seven tests of honesty and

reality. There are also six liars embraced in that, interestingly enough, one less than seven.

And so the structure is there, whether it's the Holy Spirit or John's style, I'll leave it up to

you to sort that through. There's sevens everywhere. The spiritual fundamentals, they're all inclusive

commandments. We believe on Jesus Christ, and that's why we love one another. That's John's emphasis.

That's the ultimate test of your maternity in Christ is do you love one another.

You have a profession for others. Father-sacrificing Son was loved last word, the perfect love cast

without fear and so forth. Well, it's a great letter. It's really the letter you want to study

carefully, but I'll leave that to you. Let's go to a second letter, which is widely, in my opinion,

misunderstood. I'm going to share some things with you that I cannot find anybody that agrees with me.

The second epistle of John was written to someone called the elect lady, the elder to the elect

lady and her children, whom I love in the truth and not only, but also, but all they that have

known the truth for the truth's sake, which dwelt in us and shall be with us forever. And he goes on.

The question is, who is the elect lady? If you search the libraries, whether it's back to Jerome

in the past, or as recently as, say, J. Vernon McGee or some of the current writers, they all will

say, all of them, I've said checked, say essentially the same thing. This is either an

idiot, the elect lady represents the church. It's an idiom for the church, it's commonly taught,

or it's some prominent person in the church of Ephesus that will never know who it is.

And that's what Jerome thought. Now Jerome was from the medieval church, the predecessor of the

Catholic situation. So for him to consider this an idiom, the church is maybe comfortable for him,

but not for us. We are not children of the church. And unto the elect lady and her children,

we're not children of the church. I don't buy that. It's inconsistent with the rest of the Scripture.

The alternative is that it's some prominent person we can never know. Well, when I read the first

verse, it tells me who she is, and I'm astonished that nobody else seems to see that. So I'm warning,

what I'm about to show you, I want to be candid with you. I have so far, I've not found any

classical commentators that agree with me. But I have found people when I show this to them,

they agree with me when I show them. Look what it says. The elder, that's John, of course,

unto the elect lady, who is the most elect person on the planet earth?

Huh? Who? Mary, absolutely. The dream of every woman, every Jewish woman, was to be the mother of

the Messiah. She's the most elect lady of the planet earth. And unto the elect lady and her children,

did she have children? Absolutely. And by the way, the last verse of this letter will say,

the children of your sister greet you. Did she have a sister? Yes, her sister was with her at the foot

of the cross according to John 19. We'll come to that in a minute. Read, just read the first sentence.

The elder unto the elect lady and her children, whom I love in the truth, but not I only,

but also all they that have known the truth. You notice what that's saying? Everybody that has

known the truth loves her. How could they? They don't know her. But if she's married,

everybody would feel they do. You follow me? I'm saying, see. And that he's using the truth here,

by the way, it'll become clear as you read the next verse. He's using the truth as a title of

Jesus Christ, by the way. But you don't have to hang on that. The elder of the elect lady or

children whom I love in the truth, and not I only, but all they that have known the truth love her.

So that transcends centuries. That transcends the geography. For the truth's sake, which

dwelleth in us, see, it's Christ, and she'll be with us forever, amen. The elect lady. And so

all they that have known the truth have known her. In fact, love her. You see, we have a problem.

The Roman Catholic Church has gone so far the other way to deify her, and as Protestant,

we tend to go the other way. We tend to ignore it completely. The truth is obviously somewhere

in between. Obviously, she's elect, but if I understand this correctly, this letter gives us

a lot of insights. Who is the most elect lady a woman would marry? To whom did Jesus consign

the care of his mother, John? It's amazing. He didn't consign her to his other sons. She had

other sons. James and Jude and others. There are apparently four guys and several sisters.

He didn't, Jesus did not consign Mary to any of his half brothers. She consigned to the apostle John.

Interesting. And whom I love the truth, also they haven't known the truth.

That which we had from the beginning, he says, so that people who had loved her, loved her from

the beginning, and she did have a sister according to John 19, 25. Now, if this is true, let's

not notice some things. Mary was frustrated with Jesus when he was 12 years old. Remember,

she kept those things in her heart. Remember, Jesus gave us sort of a dismissive illusion

at Kana. A woman, what do I have to do with you? That was her last recorded words, by the way,

was there. In Mark, she thought Jesus needed care. And of course, consigned to John. By the way,

John also had a pushy mother according to Matthew 20, incidentally. So Mary too also needed the

Holy Spirit according to Acts 1. So here's a woman that we may venerate very highly because

the mother of Jesus Christ, but she needed encouragement and she needed an exhortation,

both. And that's both in this letter. This alters the tone of the whole epistle,

because it's written to Mary, not just to any of us. And there's a divine insistence on love and

the human expression of love, but also a watch against error. There's a warning against false

teaching. We are told by Paul to open our homes to hospitality as a way of reaching the gospel.

She's told not to. Why? Because if she brings a false teacher under her roof, she's condoning,

she's a thinner. She implicitly authorizing that teaching. She's in a different

situation. So anyway, there's warnings in the parting comments and so on. So I'll let you read

the letter. The third epistle of John is a very short little letter to Gaius, service and truth

and love, and the octrophes, which had a pride problem and some strife, but he commands

Demetrius, it's a very short little note, just personal note, but it's been kept. The last epistle

is the epistle of Jude. This little epistle we could spend weeks on because it's not because of

theological depth so much, as it makes illusions that just drive us up a tree. He eludes to things

that he assumes his readers know that we don't know. But his main thrust is he tells us why we need to

contend against the apostates. He points out their perversions are subtle, they're destined for a

certain doom. They have impious ways and they're utter false. So his re is the whole thrust of the

letter's goal is to nail apostasy. But then he tells us how in the last part of the letter

to contend, what are the resources? Why to contend is the first half dozen letters versus,

and then just a little letter. He points out that apostasy has been foretold and he tells us

four things due to build, pray, keep and watch and then support those who contend for the faith.

But in this letter are some illusions that are just a kick. In Jude verses six and seven,

there's only one chapter in the whole book, verse six and seven says, and the angels which kept

not their first estate but left their own habitation, he had to reserve and everlasting change under

darkness unto the judgment of the great day. So he's making an illusion here, very similar to the one

that Peter does in his second letter. He talks about the strange goings on in Genesis chapter six

before the flood of Noah. The angels which kept not their first estate but left their own habitation.

The word habitation is ochitarian. The body they disrobe from is the body we aspire to in a

resurrection body. The same word ochitarian one cursed twice in the New Testament. Here,

in terms of what the angels disrobe from and in the second Corinthians 5 to the body that we

aspire to. In any case, Jude says he has reserved in everlasting change under darkness unto the

judgment of the great day. So these particular fallen angels that engage in the mischief as

Genesis 6 are here alluded to. And it goes on, even as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities about

them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication and going after strange flesh,

are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire and it goes on.

Second Peter has a passage just like this. He even ties it to the days of Noah, interestingly

enough. So here we have things are always confirmed by two or three witnesses. So we have

Jude verse six and seven and we have second Peter two verse four and there's another passage in

Peter that support the whole view that we expressed in Genesis chapter six. I don't think that's a

fringe issue. I think it's very fundamental to understand or you won't understand a great deal

of what's going on in the Old Testament or prophetically. So I'll leave that with you.

But Jude also quotes a prophecy that's rather astonishing. We don't know where this came from.

Jude may have, yeah, he had access obviously to sources we don't. But in verse 14 he says,

and Enoch also the seventh from Adam prophesied of these saying, behold, the Lord cometh with

ten thousands of his saints. Enoch here is prophesying before the flood of Noah

of the second coming of Christ. It's astonishing to realize. In fact, it's apparently the oldest

prophecy uttered by a prophet. And it's of the second coming. Behold, the Lord cometh with

ten thousands of his saints to execute judgment upon all and to convince all that are ungodly

among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed and of all their hard

speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against them. It seems to have a vocabulary problem

there. Ungodly and godly is about four times. But in any case it's interesting to realize a

prophecy uttered by a prophet before the flood of Noah of the second coming of Jesus Christ. Try to

be a, that's I think kind of interesting. But Jude throws us another curve. What he's basically

going to be, what he's arguing here is that we should not behave like these filthy false teachers.

And one of the things that we should not do that they're encouraging us to do is we are not to

speak evil of dignitaries. Even if they're our adversaries, you don't speak evil of dignities.

That's what is the point he's trying to make. Now likewise these filthy dreamers defile the flesh,

they despise dominion and speak evil of dignities. They despise them and he wants order. Even if

they're our enemies, we don't speak evil of dignities. Okay, so far we can, we can relate to that, right?

Except Jude picks what has to be the most bizarre example to make us point.

Because he gives an example here that happens to allude to something we don't know anything about,

but that's not the real problem. He says, yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil,

he disputed about the body of Moses. In a go on and on. But first of all, when did Michael

dispute with Satan over the body? Have no idea. Have no idea. He's making an illusion here that his

readers apparently knew about that we've lost somehow and there are some that speculate that

this might be an allusion to an apocryphal book called the Assumption of Moses, but that's not

necessarily true. But the main point he's making here, Michael, when he's in this dispute with Satan,

he says, Ders not bring against him a railing accusation but said the Lord rebuked thee.

What he's saying here is Michael was in some kind of tension with Satan and even Michael,

the archangel, didn't speak evil of Satan. He said the Lord rebuked you. And the real point that

Jude is making is we're not supposed to speak evil of dignitaries, but the dignitary he picks

as an example has got to be the weirdest one of all. Satan, you're not to speak evil of Satan.

You speak honestly about him, he is what he is. But you don't, you know, I tell you, you're

something on the 10th church and they have these songs they sing. You know, I'm so glad Satan's

so mad. You know, there's a number of these songs that are disparaging of Satan's authority.

And we shouldn't be intimidated by it. We shouldn't be disparaging it. Jesus Christ is in control.

But when we encounter a situation, we let the Lord deal with it. We deal with it through the

Lord. Very, very important fundamental point here. But the book of Jude, the strange book.

Well, we've gone through in this survey, if I can call it that,

the Pauline Epistles in the previous session, Romans, the session before that was the

definitive doctrines of the church. First, second Corinthians dealt with order in the church in

broad terms. Galatians was law versus grace, the flesh versus spirit and all that. Ephesians was

the manifestation of the mystery of the church, very pivotal epistle in the area of ecclesiology.

We really need to understand the uniqueness of the church even among believers. It's not all

believers are in the church. And we'll talk more about that in the next session as we do a review

of eschatology. But you'll discover many of the problems in eschatology are not eschatological

problems or ecclesiology problems. And that was the epistle of the Philippians, basically our

resources and suffering, which has of course this incredible passage about the mind of Christ

and so on. Then Colossians. Colossians is one of those incredible peaks that it's fun to be on

the top of. Christ's preeminence. Colossians is an incredible epistle if you're interested in

cosmology or ontology or any of these high ground. It's incredible. Thessalonians will take on

next time. We didn't get into that much because I've reserved it to be analyzed very carefully

when we go through the eschatology. The first eschatological epistle are probably two of the most

important eschatological epistles in the New Testament. First and second Timothy and Titus

are basically advised to pastors, but there's not only good practical advice there, there's many

insights that are there. And there's a little piece of art called Philemon. You need to really

say a little brief study, but it's a delightful study about Onesimus and what intercession is

really all about. Well, and then in this session, that was the previous session, this session we

went through the Hebrew Christian Epistles. Hebrews was really the express document for what we would

call the New Covenant. That's what Jeremiah called it. And that's amply dealt with, I believe,

for a number of reasons. It was penned by Paul who made anonymous so that he would broaden his

readership, but there are good scholars that have slightly different views. And Jacob or James,

demonstrating your faith through works. You don't get saved by works, but if you have real faith,

it will show up in works. And first Peter's reading the persecuted church and second Peter,

the coming apostasy is his emphasis. And John's epistle, first John deserves, if there's any place

that we sort of shortchanged you, there's one place we really should have spent more time on John,

but you can do that on your own. Just take that little epistle and dissect it, analyze it, outline it,

just immerse in it. And second John I think has a whole different complexion if you understand

who it was written to, but in any case it deals with false teachers and their threat. Third John

is just the preparation of helpers, a little one. And Jude is on apostasy, but has many other little

nuggets in it as we've come from. So it's interesting of the Hebrew Christian Epistles,

three of them deal with apostasy or false teachers. Second Peter, second John, and Jude.

Big issue and certainly clear today, we have prominent Christian people turning apostate.

Fortunately, one of the major ones that's been particularly concerned to us is being pulled off

the air by a number of stations because as one wag put it, he's come out of his eschatological

closet. Someone that's a very prominent beaker has become announced that he's

predorous, that all prophecies fulfilled. There really is no such thing as Armageddon.

These stories aren't really true, they're just lessons and just has just totally

discredited himself in the eyes of anyone that takes the Bible seriously. And I frankly,

I pray for them, but at the same time I applaud the clarity because there's many people that

didn't realize where some of this is going for. You need to understand that just because they're

prominent and well-known people does not make them correct. You need to remember Acts 17, 11,

which is our trademark. You receive the Word of God with all openness of mind, but then you

search the Scriptures day to prove where those things be so. And that's where Luke tells you,

don't believe anything Chuck, Mr. tells you, check it out for yourself. And so

the seven most important epistles we haven't talked about yet. That'll come in the time

after next. There are seven epistles that were written by Jesus Christ himself.

There's a second letter to Ephesus and it's going to be very important that we understand the first

letter in order to really understand the second letter, the letter written by Jesus. He wrote a

letter to Smyrna, which has some similarities to Philippians, interesting enough. He's written

a letter to Pergamos, which has some similarities to Corinthians. A letter to Phyotaira, a letter

to Sardis, a letter to Thessin Lyca, and a letter to Laodicea. These seven letters by Jesus Christ

that constitute Revelation chapter two and three are the most important chapters in the book of

Revelation. They're the ones that are most important to you and me. From chapter four on is yet future

and we'll watch that from the mezzanine, what's critical for you and I is to really understand

these seven letters and there's far more tucked away in their structure than most people have any

idea. We'll try to give you a glimpse of that when we get to the time afternaste.

But the four that when you study those four encourage you to read the Revelation two and three

several times between now and the time we meet on it. But I want you to notice that the first three

and the last four are distinctively different in a couple of aspects and let you search for that

and see if you can find it before we get there. That'll be your little anticipatory project.

But next time be prepared with a notebook because we're going to try to go through

a review of eschatology, study of last things. Why do some people hold to a pre-millennial position

in some Amal? Most churches are Amalennial and that's a very dangerous view because it makes

God a liar. We need to understand what's that all about. And given that you're pre-millennial,

okay great, when does the rapture occur? Is it pre-trib, post-trib, mid-trib, whenever?

Why do certain people have different views? We won't keep our view a secret, we'll let you know

how we feel, but we'll try to do it in a way that you'll be able to map different views as to

how they stand on different issues. And then of course that'll be a prelude before jumping in

to the climax of the whole thing. Everything will start in Genesis as climax and revelation

and we will then go there. But the next session is review eschatology, study of last things.

And we'll try to take in what is this rapture? What's that about? Is that a nonsense? Is that

something recent? Is that or is that serious? It's obviously the most preposterous view in Christianity,

but is it true? And if that is true, does the church go through the tribulation? That's probably

in certain practical senses of one of the most burning issues today among Christians that are

take the Bible seriously. And so we'll deal with all of that fairly directly in the next session.

Let's stand for a closing word of prayer.

Well Father, we thank you for your word. We thank you for this brief opportunity to

surface it, to get our arms around it, to review it. We pray Father that you would just

increase in each of us a hunger, appetite. We pray Father too, you would lead us.

So where we should go next? Where we should probe more deeply. But in all these things Father,

we just pray that you would open our hearts and lives to your word, that we might be more

fruitful stewards of these gifts you've given us. We pray Father that we might be

growing and graced the knowledge of Lord and Savior and that we would be more pleasing in your sight.

As we go forth and just commit ourselves without any reservation

into your hands in the name of Yeshua, our Lord and Savior. Jesus Christ, amen.