Bible Teachers. Please. Read This.

Here is a great list of fallacies that can sneak into a word study.

The Root Word Fallacy
The Origin Fallacy
The “Everything” Fallacy
The Lexical Fallacy
The Word-Argument Fallacy
The Authorless Fallacy
The “Webster’s Dictionary” fallacy

Find out the details here

Notes on The Ascension of Isaiah

The Ascension of Isaiah was most likely written from the late 1st century AD to the second half of the 2nd century AD. It is believed almost universally to be a compilation of several texts completed by an unknown Christian scribe. Most of the text is about Isaiah traveling through seven heavens and then watching Christ descend through all seven heavens, disguising himself as he goes as an angel so that the other angels don't recognize him. He is then born as the baby Jesus. You can read the whole text here if you'd like and I've made some notes below:

Beliar (apparently the same as Belial?) is mentioned as the ruler of this world:

2:4 -
And Manasseh turned aside his heart to serve Beliar; for the angel of lawlessness, who is the ruler of this world, is Beliar, whose name is Mantanbuchus. and he delighted in Jerusalem because of Manasseh, and he made him strong in apostatizing (Israel) and in the lawlessness which were spread abroad in Jerusalem.

4:2 -
After it is consummated, Beliar the great ruler, the king of this world, will descend, who hath ruled it since it came into being; yea, he will descent from his firmament in the likeness of a man, a lawless king, the slayer of his mother: who himself (even) this king.

This of course sounds similar to John 12:31:

Now is the judgment of this world; now will the ruler of this world be cast out.

The Ascension of Isaiah also mentions Jesus' descent in to Hades (Sheol in the Hebrew):

4:21 -
And the descent of the Beloved into Sheol, behold, it is written in the section, where the Lord says: "Behold my Son will understand." And all these things, behold they are written [in the Psalms] in the parables of David, the son of Jesse, and in the Proverbs of Solomon his son, and in the words of Korah, and Ethan the Israelite, and in the words of Asaph, and in the rest of the Psalms also which the angel of the Spirit inspired.

4:21 -
And the descent of the Beloved into Sheol, behold, it is written in the section, where the Lord says: "Behold my Son will understand." And all these things, behold they are written [in the Psalms] in the parables of David, the son of Jesse, and in the Proverbs of Solomon his son, and in the words of Korah, and Ethan the Israelite, and in the words of Asaph, and in the rest of the Psalms also which the angel of the Spirit inspired.

10:7-8 -
And I heard the voice of the Most High, the Father of my Lord, saying to my Lord Christ who will be called Jesus: "Go forth and descent through all the heavens, and thou wilt descent to the firmament and that world: to the angel in Sheol thou wilt descend, but to Haguel thou wilt not go.

"Haguel" is the bad part of Sheol.

11:19 -
And after this the adversary envied Him and roused the children of Israel against Him, not knowing who He was, and they delivered Him to the king, and crucified Him, and He descended to the angel (of Sheol).

Those passages are along the same lines as some New Testament passages:

1 Peter 3:18-20 -
For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, in order that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit; in which also He went and made proclamation to the spirits now in prison, who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water.

Acts 2:27 -
For you will not abandon my soul to Hades, or let your Holy One see corruption.

The Ascension of Isaiah also talks about the third heaven:

7:24-27 -
And he raise me to the third heaven, and in like manner I saw those upon the right and upon the left, and there was a throne there in the midst; but the memorial of this world is there unheard of.

And I said to the angel who was with me; for the glory of my appearance was undergoing transformation as I ascended to each heaven in turn: "Nothing of the vanity of that world is here named."

And he answered me, and said unto me: "Nothing is named on account of its weakness, and nothing is hidden there of what is done."

And I wished to learn how it is know, and he answered me saying: "When I have raised thee to the seventh heaven whence I was sent, to that which is above these, then thou shalt know that there is nothing hidden from the thrones and from those who dwell in the heavens and from the angels. And the praise wherewith they praised and glory of him who sat on the throne was great, and the glory of the angels on the right hand and on the left was beyond that of the heaven which was below them.

I mention this because Paul mentions the third heaven but I'm not sure how or if it's relevant to the quote above:

2 Corinthians 12:2 -
I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven. Whether it was in the body or out of the body I do not know--God knows.

Some of the passages in The Ascension of Isaiah could be taken as anti-Samaritan, which would be at odds with much of the message of the New Testament:

3:1 -
And Belchira recognized and saw the place of Isaiah and the prophets who were with him; for he dwelt in the region of Bethlehem, and was an adherent of Manasseh. And he prophesied falsely in Jerusalem, and many belonging to Jerusalem were confederate with him, and he was a Samaritan.

Beliar/Belial, and Sammuel/Satan are two separate individuals:

1:8 -
And Sammael Malchira will serve Manasseh, and execute all his desire, and he will become a follower of Beliar rather than of me

3:13 -
For Beliar was in great wrath against Isaiah by reason of the vision, and because of the exposure wherewith he had exposed Sammael, and because through him the going forth of the Beloved from the seventh heaven had been made known, and His transformation and His descent and the likeness into which He should be transformed (that is) the likeness of man, and the persecution wherewith he should be persecuted, and the torturers wherewith the children of Israel should torture Him, and the coming of His twelve disciples, and the teaching, and that He should before the sabbath be crucified upon the tree, and should be crucified together with wicked men, and that He should be buried in the sepulchre,

5:15 -
This, Beliar did to Isaiah through Belchira and Manasseh; for Sammael was very wrathful against Isaiah from the days of Hezekiah, king of Judah, on account of the things which he had seen regarding the Beloved.

Sammel is "a" Satan:

7:9 -
And we ascended to the firmament, I and he, and there I saw Sammael and his hosts, and there was great fighting therein and the angels of Satan were envying one another.

11:41 -
On account of these visions and prophecies Sammael Satan sawed in sunder Isaiah the son of Amoz, the prophet, by the hand of Manasseh.

The terms "Satans"(plural) is used, implying there are multiple Satans:

11:23 -
And I saw Him, and He was in the firmament, but He had not changed Himself into their form, and all the angels of the firmament and the Satans saw Him and they worshipped.

Well Played, Mary, Well Played

What's going on in John 2:4

And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there: And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage. And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine. Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come. His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it.
- John 2:1-5

Jesus then goes on to turn water into wine. The conversation between Jesus and his mother, Mary, seems odd, even hostile. It seems that Jesus says no to Mary's request, and then Mary acts like he said yes. However, a look closer will show how the conversation makes more sense. Let's start with the term "woman". Bill Munce writes:

Jesus heals a crippled woman, and says to her, “Woman, you are freed from your disability” (Luke 13:12; ESV). There is no getting around that the fact that the use of “woman” sounds pejorative to our ears, and yet there is nothing pejorative at all in the Greek γύναι. After all, this is what Jesus calls his mother (John 2:4; 19:26). It is the term Jesus uses to address the weeping Mary at the tomb (John 20:15).

Some translations just say “woman” and leave it up to your study to figure out what it really means (NASB, ESV, NIV, HCSB, NRSV, KJV, NET, TEV, NJB). I applaud the NLT for apparently being the only translation that tries to do something about this in their translation, “Dear woman.”

Munce goes on to talk about the difficulty of translating the Greek word into English but that the term was definitely one of endearment.

Next, let's look at the phrase "what have I to do with thee?" Michael Hieser explains the phrase in his blog post:

There is no reason to see John’s use of this idiomatic expression as indicative of irritation, or that his mother had become insufferable to Jesus. When Jesus says to Mary, “What to me to you?”, he isn’t saying “What is it now, lady?” He’s basically asking his mother, who brings a concern to him, “What can I do for you?”

Next, let's look at the phrase "mine hour is not yet come". In the gospels, Jesus heals people but tells them not to tell anyone (Matt. 8:4, Matt. 9:30, Matt. 12:16) and when someone figures out that he is the Christ, he forbids them from telling anyone (Matt. 16:20, Mark 8:30, Luk. 9:21, Matt. 17:9). This is because Jesus didn't want to be glorified publicly until after his Resurrection. So when Jesus tells his mother that his hour had not come, she understands that Jesus cannot do a miracle if it would publicly glorify him. So she thinks of a way for him to do it so that he would not be publicly exposed: through the servants. And it works:

When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew not whence it was: (but the servants which drew the water knew;) the governor of the feast called the bridegroom,
-John 2:9

Well played, Mary, well played.

Paula White vs Shai Linne

Christian rap artist Shai Linne recently released a track called Fal$e Teacher$ and he lists Paula White as a false teacher.  Have a listen:


Brad Knight, Paula White's son, responded with an open letter to Shai Linne, which you can read here.  Shai Linne responded with his own open letter, which you can read here.  Both letters were cordial and it was encouraging to see these two parties dialoging.  I hope that Brad will continue the conversation.

The point of this post is not so much to defend Paula White (Being a charismatic, I have had some exposure to her but know little about her teachings), but to critique Shai Linne's arguments. I have posted some excerpts from Linne's letter and made comments below them:

Before I directly address the substance of your open letter, I first want to commend you for a few things that encouraged me as I read it.

1. I was encouraged to read your confession of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. I loved hearing you affirm the blessed Trinity, the deity of Christ, His atoning sacrifice and salvation by grace through faith in Christ. I can’t even type that last sentence without it affecting me. Beautiful truths, indeed! Those truths are the foundation of my hope and joy. My soul leaps when I hear someone affirm these things as you did. Amen and amen.

2. I was encouraged to read of your obvious love for your mother. What son couldn’t relate to the passion behind what you wrote? If someone said anything that I perceived as negative or untrue about my mom, I would be the first to defend her. As a son who dearly loves his own mom, I could identify with you. Thank you for setting a good example for sons out there in stepping up to defend your mother.

3. I was encouraged to hear of your mother praying for your salvation, as well as teaching you the faith. Again, I can relate. I myself am the result of a praying mother. In fact, I once told my mom that I would never become a Christian. Even as I entered adulthood while continuing in rebellion against God, she never stopped praying for me. I am eternally grateful to her for crying out to God on my behalf when I was dead in my sins! So I was glad to hear you mention what you did about your mother. It’s a good model for other mothers to emulate.

I commend Linne for starting out on a positive note and setting a nice tone for his letter.

With that said, Brad, I don’t think your letter actually addresses the real issue. My song was not about you, your financial status, the genuineness of your faith, your mother’s prayers for you or the good things that Paula White Ministries does. The song was about the false doctrine that Paula White and others have publicly taught for many years and continue to teach.

I think it's true that Brad gets off topic but at the same time, there wasn't much substance in Linne's lyrics to respond to, certainly nothing like the precise points he raises in his open letter.

Speaking of public teaching, you mentioned Matthew 18:15-17 to support the idea that I should have contacted you privately first. The irony, of course, is that you made this claim in a letter that is open for the public to read without contacting me privately first. Why did you choose to go about things in this way? Is it because I came out and said something about Paula White publicly and therefore you felt it deserved a public response? If that’s how you thought about it, you would be right. And that’s exactly why I addressed Paula White’s public teachings publicly. Here is a helpful article by noted New Testament scholar D.A. Carson on why Matthew 18 doesn’t apply in situations like this.

Linne makes a great point there and the article by D.A. Carson he points to is excellent.

Paula White did a series called 8 Promises of the Atonement, that at the time of my writing this, is currently featured on your ministry website. In it, she states that physical healing and financial abundance in this life are provided for in the atonement of Christ.

I would have liked to have seen Linne point out White's scriptural basis for that claim and then counter with his own scriptural argument but he gets side tracked by another issue:

She ends this section by boldly declaring around 29:40:

“You are not going to die of sickness. When you go, it’s going to be because of your appointed time of old age and full of life”

For Paula White to say this to a large crowd of people is both false and irresponsible. She has no idea how those people are going to die.

White was not prophesying, but making a declarative statement of faith. It is a different issue and Linne confuses the two.

The truth is that Christians do get sick. Many godly believers die at young ages from sickness and it is not due to their lack of faith or because they haven’t embraced what’s theirs through the atonement. It’s because God is sovereign.

As He says in Deut. 32:39, “‘See now that I, even I, am He, and there is no god beside me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand.”

Psalm 139:14 says “All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be”.

God sovereignly determines when we live and when we die. And if He appoints or allows a sickness to take our lives, it is because His infinite wisdom determined that it be so.

Linne takes two verses that deal with particular points and uses them to make a universal point. In Deut. 32:39, God is not saying that He kills everyone. He is showing that He not only has the ability to kill but to give life as well. This ties into the God of Chaos/God of Order issue that Old Testament writers were concerned with. In Psalm 139:39, David is referring to himself and not to everyone in existence. I would have liked to have seen Linne use better verses to show that God is completely sovereign over everything.

Jesus commends the church in Smyrna when He says:

“‘I know your tribulation and your poverty (but you are rich) and the slander of those who say that they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan” - Rev. 2:9

In His kindness and care, the risen Savior tells the church in Smyrna that He is aware of their poverty. What does He say after that? Does He tell them that they’re poor because they haven’t fully embraced the promise of His atonement? Does He say they’re poor because of a generational curse, as Paula White teaches at 13:20 in this video? No.

Jesus doesn't tell the church in Smyrna how to defend themselves against slander either, but does that mean that defending yourself against slander is wrong? No. Jesus talks about poverty because the false teachers at the time were saying that those who were poor would have a lesser standing in the Kingdom of God. For Jesus to talk about poverty in any other way within that context would be unusual.

Around 2:10 she says, “God is speaking to many”. She then tells them what God is supposedly saying, “Give a $126 dollar offering. For some it may be $1,260, for some it may be $12,600”.

Now if I’m sitting in that audience that day and Paula White says, “God is saying give $126 or $1,260 or $12,600”, what am I supposed to do? If God is saying it and I don’t do it, I’m being disobedient.

White doesn't say that God said for everyone to give those amounts. She said "many". Also, “God is speaking to many” may have meant she simply knew that God was saying it to many, as opposed to saying it to them for God. In that case, those who didn't hear God say it, wouldn't be required to give it.

As I’m sure you know, Brad, God takes speaking in His name very seriously. To say that God said something that He didn’t say is to lie on God. God takes this sin so seriously that in the Old Testament, the person found guilty of this was to be executed. Check out Deuteronomy 18:20:

“But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name that I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.’”

The verses following that one give the litmus test for how we can determine whether or not someone is speaking for God:

“And if you say in your heart, ‘How may we know the word that the Lord has not spoken?’—when a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the Lord has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously.” (Deut. 18:21-22)

Now Linne expands the argument beyond White and encompasses charismatic Christianity on this point. I personally think that Deuteronomy 18:22 is the most difficult verse for charismatic Christians to have to deal will. I don't believe "prophesying in part" is a valid excuse, but at the same time, think Deuteronomy 18:22 is difficult to apply to the gift of prophecy.

Top 5 Bible Teachers

Here are my top five Bible teachers. They're listed in no particular order. I couldn't do a Top 10, because there aren't that many that I really like.

Michael Hieser

He's probably best know for his teachings on the Nephilim but his teachings on The Divine Counsel are really great. He knows the ancient near east languages and cultures and his Naked Bible website is a treasure trove of good info:

The Naked Bible

Craig Keener

I like Craig, not just because his academic work is excellent and his research is top notch but because he is also a charismatic and explores the issues related to the supernatural.

His Bible Background website
Here are some videos of Craig talking about miracles
He's also featured often in the 7 Minute Seminary videos

Walt Russell

Walt teaches at Biola and is well known for his teachings on how "flesh" does not refer to "sinful nature" and how Paul's words in Romans 7 refer to when he did not have Christ. Walt is good at understanding the contexts of Scripture. I would also consider him a charismatic and he has written a book called Playing With Fire.

Here are a number of videos with Walt

D.A. Carson

Don Carson is pretty well known in Evangelical circles. He has a number of books and video you can find online and he contributes regularly to The Gospel Coalition.

The Gospel Coalition

Matt Williams

Matt was one of my professors while at Trinity International University. He's great at explaining Old Testament ties to the New Testament as well as the cultural context of the Bible.

He sometimes blogs here
Video - Do You Remember Who You Are?

He's featured in the Deeper Connection DVD Series:
The Forgiveness of Jesus
The Last Days of Jesus

What does it mean that God owns cattle on a thousand hills?

Craig Keener shows how Psalm 50:10 has more to do with sacrifices than with wealth

Most ancient near Eastern peoples believed that their gods depended on them for sacrifices, and if their gods were overpowered, their nation would be overpowered as well. The God of Israel reminds them that He is not like the pagan gods around them.

Read the rest here

Will gifts like prophecy and tongues pass away?

Yes and No...and not in the same way that Craig Keener thinks

I have a great respect for Craig Keener. He is one of my favorite Bible teachers, but I have to disagree with his explanation of prophecy and tongues passing away - but not his conclusion. I agree with Craig, that those gifts are still operative in the Church today but the reason for it has nothing to do with the fact that Christ has not returned yet.

Paul says that spiritual gifts like prophecy, tongues and knowledge will pass away when we no longer need them (1 Cor. 13:8-10). Some Christians read this passage as if it said, “Spiritual gifts like prophecy, tongues, and knowledge passed away when the last book of the New Testament was written.” This interpretation of 1 Corinthians 13 ignores the entire context of 1 Corinthians, however: it is a letter to the Corinthians in the middle of the first century, and they had never yet heard of a New Testament in the middle of the first century. Had Paul meant the completion of the New Testament, he would have had to have made this point much more clearly–starting by explaining what a New Testament addition to their Bible was.

So far, so good. I can agree with Craig that "passing away" has nothing to do with the completion of the New Testament.

In the context we find instead that Paul means that spiritual gifts will pass away when we know God as He knows us, when we see Him face to face (13:12; when we no longer see as through a mirror as in the present—cf. 2 Cor 3:18, the only other place where Paul uses the term). In other words, spiritual gifts must continue until our Lord Jesus returns at the end of the age.

Here is where we disagree. It is true that the context does not talk about the completion of the New Testament but it also does not talk about the return of Christ. The text doesn't say, "when we see Him face to face". It simply says, "but then face to face". It is here that I believe Paul is talking about relationship with each other in the Church and not with God. The context supports this view, because Paul writes about how the Corinthian church was acting as "parts". Paul is talking about the gifts temporally ceasing so that the Church can operate in greater unity and love. For more details, please read my post on "Why does Paul say that prophecies, tongues, and knowledge will cease?"

Who is the thief who comes to steal and destroy? Not the devil.

Craig Keener on John 10:10

Many people assume that the thief in John 10:10 is the devil, but they assume this because they have heard this view many times, not because they examined the text carefully in context. Of course, the devil does come to steal, to kill, and to destroy; but we often quote the verse this way and miss the text’s direct applications because we have not stopped to read the verse in context.

When Jesus speaks of “the thief,” he speaks from a larger context of thieves, robbers, wolves, and strangers who come to harm the sheep (10:1, 5, 8, 10, 12). In this context, those who came before Jesus, claiming his authority, were thieves and robbers (10:8); these tried to approach the sheep without going through the shepherd (10:1). This was because they wanted to exploit the sheep, whereas Jesus was prepared to die defending his sheep from these thieves, robbers, and wolves.

I must admit that I too thought the "thief" was the devil and I appreciate Craig showing the context for a better understanding. You can read the rest here.

God is a God of Order AND Chaos

Old Testament authors defend both.

Most Christians today probably have a hard time thinking of God as a God of Chaos but during Old Testament times, the problem was the opposite - people had a hard time thinking of God as a God of Order. Why would they think that?

Gods of Chaos

Several Ancient Near East cultures had "gods of chaos". Let's take a look at one of them. The Egyptian god called Set was a god of the desert, storms, warfare and foreigners in ancient Egyptian religion and in later myths he is also the god of darkness and chaos.

So God takes a group of foreigners (the Israelites), takes them into the desert where they wander for 40 years, conquers the land of Canaan through warfare, and makes his people kingless. Not only that but:

He made darkness his covering, his canopy around him-- the dark rain clouds of the sky.
- Psalm 18:11

Can you see why some people thought God was a god of chaos? Maybe they even thought specifically He was the Egyptian god because His people came out of Egypt.

Old Testament authors strike back by showing that God controls both chaos and order.

I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the LORD, do all these things.
- Isaiah 45:7

Cosmic Order

The Old Testament makes it a point to show that God created and maintains order at the cosmic level. Many Ancient Near East cultures tell how the world was created out of chaos. The Old Testament is no different and shows that God is the one who conquers chaos to create the world. In Yahweh, Creation, and the Cosmic Battle, Peter Enns writes:

One of the ways the Old Testament describes creation is through a conflict between Yahweh and the sea (or “waters” or one of the sea monsters, Leviathan or Rahab). Sea is a symbol of chaos, and so Yahweh’s victory in the conflict establishes order. He is the creator, the supreme power. Israel’s proper response is awe and praise.

Light and Darkness

Genesis describes God creating light:

And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness.
- Genesis 1:3-4

Exodus explains why God dwells in darkness when visiting earth:

But," he said, "you cannot see my face, for no one may see me and live."
- Exodus 33:20

Societal Order

The Old Testament explains that the Israelites were not kingless, but that God himself was their king:

And the Lord told him: “Listen to all that the people are saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected me as their king.
- 1 Samuel 8:7

God also establishes His Law among Him people to establish order. If they followed the Law, prosperity would come, if not, destruction would come:

See, I set before you today life and prosperity, death and destruction. For I command you today to love the Lord your God, to walk in obedience to him, and to keep his commands, decrees and laws; then you will live and increase, and the Lord your God will bless you in the land you are entering to possess.
- Deuteronomy 30:15-16

Fertility and Warfare

The reason that the Israelites wandered in the desert was because of their lack of faith (Numbers 14). God was not just God of the desert but God of fertile land too. Deuteronomy makes it clear that when the Israelites followed the Law, their crops would be blessed.

Then the Lord your God will make you most prosperous in all the work of your hands and in the fruit of your womb, the young of your livestock and the crops of your land. The Lord will again delight in you and make you prosperous, just as he delighted in your ancestors
- Deuteronomy 30:9

This "god of chaos"/'god of order" issue is closely related to the "god of war"/"god of fertility" issue, which you can read about in my analysis of Psalm 68:18.