Gooding, David: 1 - How the NT Uses The OT

This evening I would like to begin to talk with you about the many different ways in which the New Testament makes use of the old. I do so in part because in recent years, in some quarters, there has been a very distinct move against the use of typology in the Old Testament. That has been in part occasioned by excessive fanciful typology applied in the Old Testament. It has led to a reaction that in some quarters, students have been taught in their Bible colleges and elsewhere that you mustn't say that anything in the Old Testament is a type unless the New Testament explicitly says it is a type. There we are, we're told, on safe ground because the apostles had authority to tell us that certain things in the Old Testament were types, but we mustn't take it on ourselves to decide that some things in the Old Testament are types, so we mustn't say that anything is a type at all, unless the New Testament says it is. I understand how that emphasis arose. In some places it is, uh, uh, you, uh, uh, spoken of as though it were a golden rule of interpretation. That among, uh, evangelical students at least, uh, or put, let me put it this way, that that used to be an idea in the academic world, when a liberal scholar himself showed it was quite wrong, and that typology is a valid means of exposition of the Old Testament. So there has been led in academic circles a softening of that extreme idea that you mustn't say that anything is a type unless the Old Testament says it is. I would like tonight to suggest that when we come to the New Testament's use of the O, it isn't a question of either you take it literally or you take it typologically. There are many different devices that the New Testament uses in, uh, uh, mining and applying the wealth of the Old Testament. So let me, uh, list just a few of them with some illustrations. Of course, the New Testament, uh, constantly cites the Old Testament, literally word for word. Honor thy father and mother, says the Old Testament. Honor thy father and mother, says the New, you see. So, literal quotations. Then you might consider the way the New Testament uses the Old, by use of simile, explicit simile. For instance, our Lord, in talking to Nipo- Nicodemus, used the well-known simile now. As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have everlasting life. That's a deliberate simile, an extended simile indeed, as in the Old Testament, so this in the New. It is to be noticed, moreover, in pa- in passing, that when our Lord used that simile, he filled in the details on one side of the simile, but not on the other. As Moses lifted up the serpent, that's the one side of the simile, and there he left it. On the other side of the simile, even so, he filled in the details. Must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish but have everlasting life. Of course, all sensible people are under obligation to work out the details on the first side of the simile, aren't they? Our Lord was not just saying there is this contrast, this similarity, you know, in the Old Testament Moses lifted up a servant on a pole, in the New Testament the Son of Man shall be lifted up on a cross, and that's all there is to it. Well, of course not. What's the point of the simile? Why our Lord didn't, uh, uh, fill in the details on the first side of the simile, as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness? He was talking to a professor of Old Testament, that's why. Who needn't have been told the details. Would have known the details off by heart. Our Lord therefore didn't need to cite it, all the details. But you notice how helpful the simile is when you work out the details. Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness because the people were dying, bitten by the snakes under the judgment of God. Our Lord didn't go in, excuse the term, brutally, and tell the learned professor of theology, my man, you are a sinner and you're doomed to hell, and hell you'll go and that. Oh, no, no, no, no. He was talking to the rabbi, the teacher of Israel, and our Lord, ever gracious and tactful, but made the point. Moses lifted up and certain in the wilderness because the Israelites were sinners. The rabbi would have known it. And they were perishing, and the rabbi would have known it. What Moses said, therefore, to the people, that our Lord doesn't quote, but that's in the story, whosoever looked to the serpent on the pole should live. It is, therefore, a very helpful simile, because on the other side of the simile, the similarity is this: Even so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish. What does it mean to believe? You can see at once how the simile from the Old Testament helps us to grasp what is one aspect of believing. In the desert it was, whoever looks to the serpent, as many as a preacher has said, they looked in their desperation. That's all they could do. Turn their heads, burning with fever as they were, looked to, as God said, and looked to the serpent. That was their only hope. And believing in that sense is a case of looking to God's provision and making that your only hope. And God said to Moses that whoever looks shall live. And the equivalent on the other side is that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life. I'm tempted to tell my Calvinist friends and their dear and beloved brethren in the Lord what the order was on both sides of the simile. It wasn't that whosoever lived would then be able to look to the serpent because God had given them life. It's the other way around, the looking had to come before the living. So it is, so it is in the other side of the simile, the believing has to come before the living, that whosoever believeth in him shall have eternal life. Not the other way around, please. Not to whomsoever God gives life, they will be able to believe. But that's, by the way, here's the use of a synonym. Then we can move on to metaphor. Metaphor is when you describe one thing in terms of another. And there is a famous one, and you'll all know it, and I needn't spend long on it, just to you mention it as an example of the use of metaphor. This is one Peter, chapter one, And he says in verse thirteen, that is, he says it in the King James Version, wherefore, girding up the loins of your mind, be sober and set your hope perfectly on the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus. Well, as anybody can see, that's a metaphor, because minds don't have loins. So this is the use of a term appropriate in one s- situation to a completely different situation. In England, people don't have loins these days for some reason. The word isn't known except when you're discussing a part of a beast in the butcher shop. And why you should gird up loins, that doesn't make sense to the average Englishman, poor dear soul. And so translators have thought it better to eliminate the, the, the metaphor and give us the plain straightforward meaning of w- w- of the meaning that the metaphor was te- intended to convey. Now that is a very sensible way of dealing, I suppose. I, for the wickedness that was in me, had to teach uh students to write Latin phrases, you see, and translate English into Latin. I used to work with them, of course, to help them. And being fierce, absolute fierce, terrible, I would give them the expression in English, Mrs. Smith loved the limelight. And I asked them to put it, put it into, uh, Latin, you see, that gave them various stages of headache. Because the poor dears didn't know what limelight was anymore. Modern students, you see. I shan't ask you whether you know or not. There's no hope of putting that into Latin, of course. They didn't even have limelight, let alone know what it was. So in order to translate that into Latin, you've got to decode the metaphor into its literal meaning, and then translate the literal meaning into Latin. To decode the metaphor, Mrs. Smith likes the limelight. Don't tell her that, but she does. Uh, uh, that is meaning that on the old stage they used to have a tremendously vivid light brought about by lime or something, I don't understand myself. Uh, but it had a very big focused light, you see, and the central character would come and stand on the stage right in that light. It became a metaphor, therefore, and in my youth was very common, that people loved the limelight, that is, they love to be the center of the stage, love to be the central character in everything that's going on. Well, if that's what the metaphor means, then you have to translate that meaning into Latin, and it can be done, of course. So when translators of modern versions of the New Testament have come to one Peter chapter one and found this metaphor in the Greek, if you please still, gird up the loins of your mind. They have despaired of any modern Englishman understanding it. So they have decoded the metaphor into its, what they feel is its basic meaning. Okay? I don't know what your versions say, if you have a modern one. Some of them say prepare your minds to do some serious thinking or something to that effect. Anybody got a brilliant translation of it to, to that effect? No, no, no, no. Or modern or anything at all. Prepare your minds for action. Oh, prepare your minds for action. And be sober-minded, yes. Well, that'll do very well. And the dear soul who knows no Greek or Hebrew has got the basic meaning. But to be helpful, the modern translation ought to have a footnote. Because the metaphor, gird up the loins of your mind, is not only taken from the ancient world at large, it's taken from the Passover ceremony. And you see that Peter in this chapter is concerned to evoke, by his language, the background of the Passover. So he says in a later verse, knowing that you were redeemed not with corruptible things, but with precious blood. And that would have sufficed, that would make sense, you were redeemed by precious blood, but he adds a simile, with precious blood as of a lamb. Why does the man add a simile? Because he's evoking Passover language. Israel in Egypt was redeemed by the blood of a lamb, was he not? So Peter is, by that simile, evoking the atmosphere, and as you see from the early part, early part of his chapter, he talks to them about elect according to the foreknowledge of God, elect strangers and sojourners, in sanctification of the spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ. Language drawn from Exodus, of course. When Israel were redeemed out of Egypt with the blood of a lamb, they eventually came to Sinai. And there, when God proposed the terms of the old covenant, Israel said that they would do it and be obedient, and they were sprinkled by Moses with the blood of the covenant. Peter is evoking in his language, particularly for his Jewish readers, the background of Old Testament, as now he is talking to the new. Not to, not because he's playing games with the, uh, word of God. He's evoking it because it becomes a marvelous help for Jewish people, at any rate, to begin to visualize what this Christian doctrine means. And when he says, therefore, you are redeemed, now gird up the loins of your mind and be sober and set your hope fully and maturely on the grace to be brought to you. He is similarly using a metaphor drawn from Passover, isn't he? And a very helpful metaphor it is. Because if you wish to eat the, eat the, eat the Passover, then you couldn't eat it just anyhow. You had to eat it, your staff in your hand, your sandals on your feet, and your loins girded. Why so? Well, because when you were going on a journey, you need a staff and you need sandals, and on a serious journey, you would then gird up the loins of your mu- of your body and probably tuck in your big skirts, as they wore those days, in the belt so as to free yourself to walk. Eating the Passover, that's all. There was no gospel in those days that, look here, gentlemen, the main thing is to get out of Egypt and escape the wrath of God. Now that is the really main thing, and you can do that by sheltering under the blood of the Lamb, you see. Once you've done that, well, you're safe, of course. Then there is a second course, it's optional, but for those that want to take things on more deeply, and that would be to walk across the desert and go into the, into the promised land. But if you don't want to do that, never mind. That's only for the really keen ones. And so long as you are safe from judgment, that's it. You needn't bother about anything else. But you do. There was no such gospel. Being redeemed by the blood of the Lamb meant you started walking. And what did that mean for the Christian? Well, you must gird up the loins of your mind and start thinking, of course, what your Christian hope involves, so that you may set your hope perfectly, that's fully worked out on what that hope is, and that hope is of an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled. And how do you propose to get there? We shall have to start the journey, thitherward, can't we? As we are saved by the blood of the Lamb. Yeah? And if you had been around in Egypt, uh, 4 or five months after Moses left, and you'd found a Jew of your acquaintance coming around a pyramid, and you say, hello, Eliezer. Surprised to find you here, old boy. Eh, what are you doing in Egypt? Well, I like the place. Yeah, I know that, but I, I thought you believed in, in, in that inheritance business, you know. Uh, uh, why aren't you along with Moses and, um, the rest of them walking to the inheritance? Oh, well, he says, you see, that's for the keen ones. Um, I don't go for a lot of walking myself, uh, do you see? And I like it here in Egypt anyway. And you say, well, how do you suppose you're going to get into the inheritance then? Well, I don't think about that, he says. I... Oh, you better start thinking, old boy. And you believe you're redeemed by the blood of the lamb, and you will have an inheritance to go to. You better start thinking, says Peter, about the implications of your hope. And in the metaphorical sense, to start walking. And I mentioned that, yeah, when you know all these things, of course, you know them, have known them from your youth. Uh, preach your metaphors, gentlemen. The metaphors you find in the New Testament are the Holy Spirit's choice. Preach them. They make excellent, uh, substance for illustrating the doctrine. But the New Testament not only uses similes and, uh, uh, metaphors. It, of course, quotes the Old Testament in places as legal precedent, what in English we call case law. How are we justified? We're justified by faith. How can you prove that, Paul? If you ask Paul how you prove that, he'll cite you an actual example from the Old Testament, namely Moses believed and it was counted to him for righteousness. And, uh, sorry, Abraham believed and it was counted to him for righteousness. And Abraham's case wasn't a type of us. It was an actual case of a literal man walking on two legs on this earth, and he literally got justified. On what terms did he get justified? They are spelled out. Abram believed God, and it was counted to him for righteousness. It sets the precedent legally. Anybody that hereafter wants to get justified can be and must be justified on that same legal principle. It's another way in which the New Testament cites the old. And notice we've gone a long way without any typology yet. Isn't the question of either literal or typology? Many different ways of citing the Old Testament. I shall not bore you by s- by so- by going all through all the ways it do- uses, I I leave that to you. Well, I come now to the question of allusions. Allusions, not illusions, please. Allusions. When the New Testament alludes to certain things in the Old Testament. So in Jude, for instance, talking of the false teachers in the church, Jude says, woe unto them, they went in the way of Cain and ran riotously in the error of Balaam for hire and perished in the gainsaying, this is Old English, in the gainsaying of Korah. Three men from the Old Testament. But as you can see, he's using these terms as an illusion. Like you might be inclined to suggest that some modern politician in some country is a Hitler. Everybody would know what you mean by calling him a Hitler. Not that he's literally Hitler, but he shows the same features as Hitler did. The question, therefore, rises when Jude refers to people in the church, the false teachers in the church, as having gone in the way of Cain and ran riotously in the error of Balaam and perished in the gainsaying of Korah. What does that mean? It is an explicit allusion, isn't it? How would you interpret it? There's only one way of doing that properly, isn't it? Is it to turn to the Old Testament, where these characters are delineated. And then we must trust the New Testament that knows what it's talking about, that it is talking exactly. You notice it says they have gone in the way of Cain? What way did Cain go? Ah, that's a point, isn't it? Because it is explicitly mentioned in the book of Genesis and chapter four. Cain went out on the presence of the Lord. So what was the significance of that? To see the significance of the story. It is commonplace of interpretation, isn't it, that you must read the story in its context. And the Cain story is part of the second creation story. There are, gentlemen, three stories of creation in Genesis, not just one. And they are written to stand distinctly. They don't contradict each other, any more than the four gospels contradict each other. There are four gospels, four accounts of the life of our Lord. They don't contradict each other, but each looks at our Lord's life from a different point of view, of course. So there are three creation stories. They look at the question of creation from three different points of view. And you see that how they are immediately discernible. The first creation story is a succession of days from day one to day seven, comes to its climax, and that is the first creation story completed. The second creation story begins in chapter two verse four, and it proceeds through the rest of chapter two, through the rest of chapter three, um and to the whole of chapter three, four. You say, how do you make that? Well, listen to the central point of each of those chapters. In Chapter two, it is this, that God made man of the dust of the ground and put man in the garden to till the ground. Do you see? So the story goes. It is telling you the purpose for which man was made, the original purpose. Hitherto there was not ma- a man to till the ground, but God made a man, and he made him of the ground, and he made him to till the ground. It gets into our head if we're careful, as part of the central message of the first bit of the second story. Now come to what, uh, chapter three. This is the continuation of the story. Man was made to till the ground. But because of man's disobedience and rebellion against God, now something happens. And among the pronouncements of God's judgment is this to Adam. Now, sir, when you till the ground now, thorns and thistles it shall produce unto you. He was made out of the ground, do remember that. He was made to till the ground, and now the curse is pronounced in those same terms. Now, when you till the ground, it will not yield to ye her strength. By the sweat of your brow you shall eat breath until you return to the ground. For from the ground you were taken, and to the ground you shall return. You couldn't miss it, not if you were trying to miss it, could you? But there's a connection between chapter three and chapter two. Therefore, the Lord God turned him out of the garden so he couldn't eat of the tree of life until he should return to the ground. And then comes the next story. It's the story of Cain, isn't it? And when he murdered his brother and refused to come God's way and defied God, God pronounced a curse in his case as well. Do you remember the terms of the curse? Of course you do. Now it is not cursed is the ground for your sake, but cursed art thou from the ground. When you till it, it won't bring forth thorns and thistles to you, like it did to your dad. It won't bring forth its fruit at all, Cain. Curse it art thou from the ground. It won't yield her strength to you. Cain at once realized the implication. Man was made to till the ground. That was the purpose for which he made in the context of these stories, and Cain is being turned out of his job. The very purpose for which he's made, he now can't fulfill. And Cain went out from the presence of the Lord. A wanderer and a vagabond shall I be in the earth, says he. Cain said, my punishment is greater than I can bear. Anybody that finds me will want to kill me. No, they won't, says God. I shall put a mark on you. Because, gentlemen, there are some things worse than death. Worse than death is this, to be made by God for a certain purpose, and for all eternity, never to be able to reason re- realize the purpose for which you were made. That is hell begun. Cain, therefore, and the New Testament is citing it precisely. Cain went out, it's the way of Cain. He went out from the presence of the Lord, having reni- refused and denied God's way of redemption. That's Cain. Well, old Balaam, we know what he got up to. He was in the prophetic business for what he made out of it. So we can leave him. But Korah? What the, uh, apostle alludes to there is Korah's gain saying, which is Old English for rebellion. It means speaking against, you see. It is referring to, uh, Korah's rebellion, who rebelled against Moses and Aaron, the apostle and high priest of his confession. And God opened the earth and swallowed him up. That was his rebellion. The Book of Numbers, from chapter eleven onwards, records four different rebellions. And if you want to know precisely what was involved in Korah's rebellion, it could engage you of a wet Thursday afternoon, maybe, if you had the time. Considering the rebellions in Numbers. I'm asking now, but they all have in common that they're rebellions, ah, that's obvious. But if you had a series one eve- one week, I don't know if anybody would come to it. The rebellions in Numbers. You had a rebellion each night, what would you say? Tonight, brothers, we see how the believers rebelled the Lord. Now, don't you d- rebel against the Lord. You do everything that he commands. And now shall we sing our final hymn? And the next night, uh, tonight we are going to be warned that these people rebelled against the Lord. Now, my brethren, don't you rebel against the Lord. Doesn't matter what, what you, you know, whatever it is, so long as it's a rebellion. Don't do that. Well, that would be a little bit shallow, wouldn't it? What are these different rebellions about? And how do they differ? Most of them, of course, are cited in the New Testament, so you can't, in the end, avoid considering them and how they differ. What the medics call differential Diagnosis. diagnosis. But there's, while there are explicit allusions to the Old Testament in the New Testament, there are places, of course, where the New Testament writers allude to the Old Testament, but if you happen not to know your Old Testament, you won't see the illusion. Which is unfortunate. Recited one the other day, I don't know what, in answer to a question, I think. Oh yes, where paradise was or something. Says our Lord in Revelation chapter two to the church of Ephesus. To him that overcomes, will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the paradise of God. Okay. The paradise of God, you'll find it in the last chapters of the Revelation. That tree of life, it is in the eternal city. If you should happen to know that Paradisos is the Greek translation of the Garden of Eden. Now that could be helpful, couldn't it? Remember whence thou art fallen. And when man rebelled, he was turned out of the garden. Remember whence I have fallen, for if you don't repent, I shall remove your lampstand out of its place. Yes? Interesting. But as I say, if you didn't happen to know that paradisos in the New Testament, paradisos, the word, is the translation of the Garden of Eden in the Septuagint version, you will miss that reference. You'll still understand some of it anyway, and go to heaven very happy for not having, not having known it, you see. But it would be useful to know it. Adds a certain depth, doesn't it? You are, of course, long since aware that the Gospel of John has a whole, uh, array of allusions to the Old Testament. Though most of them are implicit allusions and not explicit allusions. So allow me just to refresh your memory. You know them very well. I'm saying nothing new here. This is, uh, God talking to Moses, and in Moses' day, the prince of Of Egypt. Egypt was, of course, Pharaoh. And he held the people in bondage, you see, in his country that was Egypt. And they were in bondage, and Moses had fled, and God appeared to him in the, uh, burning bush and said, come now, Moses, I'm going to send you. So Moses was sent. First to the Israelites in Egypt and then to Pharaoh. Said Moses, excuse me, Lord, but when I come to my people and I say the God of your fathers has sent me, they will say, well, we can leave it just that as that for the moment, I am. I am that I am. I am has sent me. Yes, says Moses, but if I go, you see, they won't believe these folks, and Pharaoh won't particularly. So God says, all right, give you some signs to do. Enough for the moment. Come to the Gospel of John. Forget all this. The Gospel of John is the one gospel that towards its end speaks of the prince of this world. And the gospel uses, and our Lord in particular, the concept world. You have to raise all sorts of questions. When the New Testament speaks of the world, what does it mean? You say it has a whole range of meanings, of course it does. It's a world that God loved to start with. But then, don't be surprised if the world hates you, says Christ, it hated me before it hated you. What world is that? And of course, in John's later writings, he will tell us, love not the world. What does that mean? And what, incidentally, do you mean, gen- gentlemen, when you tell your young, uh, Christian believers not to be worldly? What do you mean by worldly? How would you interpret it? That's another story. Uh-huh. And our Lord in John, oh, how many times did he refer to himself as the sent one? Say of him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world. Yes. And then in that famous prayer, John chapter seventeen, he talks about he must leave now the world. I'm no longer in the world, I come to thee and keep the disciples, says he. Says, I have declared thy name unto the men thou has given me. Declared the name. Until the name now has given me out of the world. And I will declare it. The declaration of the name of God by our blessed Lord. Sign, yeah. Signs. Whole array of them, given him by God to do that people might believe that he is the Christ, the Son of God. And of course, Moses kept the Passover. And And no bone was to be broken. That is, no bone of the Passover lamb was to be broken. That the writing might be filled, no bone of him should be broken. Then you can add some explicit allusions, if you like, about the tabernacle and such like things, and the manna from heaven, which the Jews raised to him, the question of the manna in John chapter six. A lot of these then are implicit allusions. When John lists these things, he doesn't tell you I'm s- I'm alluding to Egypt and the Exodus. If you don't happen to see it, you don't see it, do you? Well, it makes sense anyway, so don't get discouraged. But this is the artistry of scripture. It's not only art. You see, take this concept, prince of this world. What do you mean by world? Now here comes a very important and very useful thing. If you will study this situation, you will be given a thought model to use in your investigation of the meaning of the theological term world. When scientists want to investigate what's inside an atom, they construct models, don't they, to think with. I mean, thought models. And the Old Testament often serves the New Testament writers as thought models to investigate the theological meaning of some of the terms that the New Testament uses. So, uh, Moses went to Pharaoh. He was the sent of God. He went to Pharaoh. He said, the God of my fathers, um, sent me to tell you to let these people go. That's interesting, Moses said to her. Very interesting. You've gone religious, I think, a little bit, uh, Moses. Um, uh, tell me, this is your God, you said to her. What's his name? It's Jehovah, sir. The I am. Oh, I see. Well, I don't recognize him anyway. So that's that, you see. Have some more olives, Moses. No, I'm telling you, uh, uh, you are to let him go. What do you mean? Well, the God of our fathers, you see. Before we came into Egypt, God had made promises to our fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. And God said we were going to come into this country, and then afterwards he's going to leave us out, and God's got a beautiful inheritance away there out in the blue for us, you see, Pharaoh. And, uh, you've got to let us go. Now, come, Morfydd, Pharaoh said, uh, Moses said, Pharaoh. Oh, what you say? Uh, these stories, your fathers or something, and God made them a promise. Look here, Moses, grow up, my boy. That's all poppycock and legend. We don't, I don't believe in it, you know. And as to, what do you say, you've got an inheritance out there somewhere? Don't talk nonsense and drivel. I'm telling you now, says Pharaoh, your people, as far as I'm concerned and as far as they're concerned, Egypt is all they will ever know, and I'm telling you that now, Moses. And now you try to interfere, I shall make it even more so. Life is going to be for them work, eating, of course, drinking, working, sleeping, eating, working, sleeping, game of football now and again, but otherwise that's all it is. All it ever will be, you can give up these ideas of a past you've had somewhere and a, a future as God has arranged. World. That's one of its manifestations, isn't it? Listen to your atheist. This world is all there is. There is no God behind your birth, your coming into this world. And there's no heaven beyond it. This world is all there is. It has no ultimate meaning because there was no meaning and purpose before it. It'll come to its end. So what? Well, so nothing. Because there's no future beyond it. That's worldliness. This worldliness. Governed by the prince of this world. One of the last things our Lord said to his apostles before he suffered, he said, do you now believe? They said, yes, Lord, now we believe. Ah, well, he says, the time's coming you'll leave me alone, but never mind for now, but get hold of this. I came out from the Father into the world. Now I leave the world and go back to the Father. Summing up the very heart of the Gospel of John, this world is not all there is. There is another world. He came from it, has gone back to it. One day he will come to take us there. This world. That's right, oh, that's a, you can't wait. Nor can I. That's one aspect of the world, which Exodus helps us to take in, of course, and helps us to act, acts as a thought model to begin to understand some of the implications of the theological term world, when it is used in John's writings. So, just so to this evening, we've had various ways the New Testament uses the old, straight quotations, similes, metaphors, case law, that is precedent. I haven't quoted to legal paradigm, though it has had that category, legal paradigm. Allusions. Explicit Explicit delusions, allusions. Implicit implicit delusions, allusions. and a lot of other things as well. But we haven't time for that, and it's now eight o'clock. So let me come back with a very simple thing. How else could it be, but simple? Sounds like a good topic for a book. Oh, I'm delighted to hear you have that in mind. I was thinking of something for you to write. Oh, really? Yes. Well, well, perhaps so one of these days. We talked in the earlier sessions afternoon about structure and pattern, and technically pattern being a different thing from structure. But sometimes structure and pattern coincide, don't they? And because we've been thinking about John's gospel, let's think about his epistle. Mm. John's first epistle. And this, what I'm about to do, is very simplistic, so forgive me if you will. And we'll go through it and mark just one or two, uh, uh, i- ideas that can we come across, and that will be very arbitrary. Forgive me for that. Look at, uh, verse two. And the life was manifested. Manifestation of lo- that life that was with the Father and was manifested to us. And then the conditions are laid out upon which we may share that life of God. That's what eternal life is, isn't it? That we might have fellowship with the Father and with his Son. Now, in English, when you talk about having fellowship with somebody, you can simply mean we got together and we nattered a long while, and we had good, as the Irish say, good crack, uh, do you see, uh, we talked and so on, a certain flow of feeling between us. But, uh, in Greek, you can also use it in another sense, like it is used of Peter and John and James. They were partners in a fishing business. To have fellowship means that A partakes in something or other that B partakes in. They both partake in the same thing. You claim to have eternal life, gentlemen, as you know, you're claim- claiming something enormous. Is that life that was with the Father and was manifest. The purpose of the manifestation, that we might share that life with God. Surely our fellowship is with the Father. What do we share with him? That eternal life that was with the Father and was manifested to us. That's some colossal great concept that is. And the conditions are laid down upon which we can share that life. But now coming to practical things, John mentions the world. This is chapter two, doesn't he? Uh, there in chapter two verse fifteen onwards. And then, from chapter eight from verse eighteen of chapter two to the end, he warns them against antichrist, false Christs. And when he's finished with that, he comes to chapter three. Now the children of God are manifested. It's not yet made manifested what we shall be. We know that when he shall be manifested, we shall be like him. We shall see him as he is. And this he says in verse ten, uh, uh, do say, uh, the, uh, children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil. Say, yes. For this cause was the Son of God manifest. Verse eight: to this end was the Son of God manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. Us children of God will be manifested eventually, and in some spec- respects are already manifested. And having talked about that, he comes in verse thirteen following to talk Talk about about. Mm-hmm. Well... And then he comes to chapter four, the first six verses, and warns us, believe not every spirit, but proves the spirit whether they are of God. The warning against... After that, in chapter four, he comes to verse nine. Herein was the love of God manifested. And having talked about that at great length, he comes in chapter five to talk about... And then finally, at the end of chapter five, he comes to warning us. Verse twenty: we know the Son of God has come and given us an understanding that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life. My little children, guard yourself from idols, and idols, gentlemen, are false gods. That is a very simple analysis, isn't it? And of course, other folks have proposed other analysis, and they are equally valid and perhaps more valid than this one. This one is a bit arbitrary, isn't it? But you know what? I haven't written anything on the board that isn't in the book. I didn't make this bit up. But of course, it sets us a question, doesn't it? What's the purpose of doing it? Gentlemen, let me say it very strongly as I can. The purpose of Bible study is not to find patterns in it, and think when you've found a pattern, now you've discovered everything about the Bible. That is, soon bleeds out into barrenness indeed. The only purpose of pattern is to convey truth. It's only a means to convey the message. And to see the pattern and don't see the message is a very, uh, uh, uh, uh, poverty-stricken thing. Remember it, because if you're preaching, you don't always have to point out pattern. There's Mrs. Doolittle there, and she's eighty-five. Don't talk to her about patterns and structures. You say to her, now, last week we were thinking about, uh, that, uh, man who, uh, had a servant and he was, uh, dying. He asked the Lord to come and give him life, and, uh, the Lord gave him life. Simple that, isn't it? Do you know the man's friend said to the Lord he ought to give him life because he deserved it, because of his works, and the man said, no, that's not true. I didn't deserve it, you see. Uh, uh, my works didn't deserve it. Uh, just speak the word, and the Lord said his faith was marvelous. And we see that, don't we, uh, my dear, that uh, new life, eternal life is a gift from God. It doesn't have to be merited. It's by simple, by faith, not according to your works. That's what we were talking about last week. Do you know we have another story this week? This is about a woman, and she got forgiveness, and that was free and for nothing as well, you see. Isn't it marvelous? Is it tremendous, marvelous? Do you know what the Lord said about her? He said about her that when you've got forgiveness, when people have got forgiveness, they love the one who's forgiven them. You don't have to bother the dear lady about structure. Of course, if you're talking to bright university students, you might, but, uh, no, you don't have to talk about it, but you can get the point across, can't you? And you see, Mrs. Doolittle, my dear sister, you see, uh, that is the fact. We don't earn new life and eternal life by, uh, works. But when we have been forgiven, it leads to love for the Savior, you know. And we ought to show the evidence that we have been forgiven by the way we love the Lord. We haven't bothered her, dear soul, about structure and pattern and things. You needed to know it yourself to get the doctrine balanced anyway. And all the rest of the lovely things. Oh, but if your congregations can take it, well, well, show them pattern. But here's a very simple answer because you know the, uh, thing already, you see. Three sections on the world. They have that in common, don't they? But when you get a series of things that are the similar in common, then the much more important thing is where they differ. Anybody hazard a guess about how these differ? What different aspects of the world are referred to? Hello, you're going to say something. No, you weren't. Thought you were. I chose the chap at the back. Just an observation. In uh, chapter 2 of this verse 15, we're told to not love the world. Don't love it, yes. In chapter 3 and verse 13, we're told that the world hates us. Ah. And then in chapter 5 and verse 4, we're told that the one who has overcome the world, verse 4 and 5, victory that overcomes the world, even our faith. Yeah. It's obvious it stands on the page. I'm not insulting your t- uh, your intelligence by pointing it out. I'll use it as an illustration of what happens in many parts of scripture. Where you have a series of similar things, and what the medics call differential diagnosis is a very necessary procedure. Now, how do they differ? And why do they differ? And why does this aspect of the world come in here, and how is that related to what went before, and how is it related to what follows after, if it's related at all? This world is don't, this one is don't love the world, for all that is in the world and the things that are quoted are very attractive. Then is its danger, for the prince of this world uses not always the nasty things, he uses the delightful things to steal people's hearts away from the creator who made the lovely thing. He did it in the Garden of Eden, didn't he? With a beautiful tree, it was good to look at, good for food, desirable to make you wise. To take their hearts away from the creator himself. There'll be more people in hell through the lovely things of life than through the bad things, you know. I have a good example, Christmas. You have a good example, Christmas. Yes. Because the everwood center changes so much energy in the world because I can see Of Christmas. That's right, you see. All the lovely things that take the heart away from Christ, you see. That can, can happen, you see. And uh, uh, uh, so here, this is the opposite face of the world. Don't be surprised if the world hates you. It hated me, it'll hate you because it hated me. Yes? And again, it questions, how does that fit its context, if it fits it at all? Here it is overcoming the world. Well, the world here is not so much the love of it, nor its hatred, but the world forms a very heavy weight. It is not geared to help believers. The very way it's run some- sometimes makes it very difficult for believers to keep the commandments of God. Not that the world is being antagonistic, this is simply the way it's run. And therefore, to keep the commandments of God in a world like that could be very burdensome. And John explains how it needn't be burdensome at all, because his command- God's commandments are not grievous, and for this reason too, everyone that believes that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, overcomes the world. Uh, that needs a lot of explanation, isn't it? How do you mean, what do you mean by overcoming the world? We notice at last, uh, at length, of course, that the secret of overcoming the world, whatever that means, is not that I believe that Jesus Christ is my savior and he can keep me. I did perfectly sure. It's not what John says. He doesn't say, who is he that overcomes the world, save he that believes that he has eternal life, or save he that believes he's been forgiven, does he? The secret of overcoming the world is a real vigorous faith that Jesus is the Son of God. And why that is relevant is this. If Jesus Christ isn't the Son of God, you haven't got forgiveness anyway. Didn't bother about it. And you haven't got eternal life anyhow. It is the fact that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, on which all the other things depend. If for the sake of Christ, in this world, because of the way the world is arranged, you've got to make sacrifice and you suffer loss. But if Jesus Christ is the Son of God, what does it matter in the end? In him you have everything. But if Jesus Christ isn't the Son of God, you'd be a fool to suffer the loss of anything for his sake. And therefore, the secret of overcoming the world is belief that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. I think I said it the other night, let me repeat it now. Since I saw that, I've been try- I've been trying to s- tuck up under my cap and to remember all the evidences I can possibly can that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. We need to get it across to our young folks, don't we? Jesus is not just nice Jesus, meek and mild, who come alongside and befriends us, and isn't he nice? Question of is he really the Son of God? What is the evidence for it? It's not a question of believing in the dark, gentlemen. John's gospel we were considering earlier this afternoon offers us evidence from God. These signs are written that you might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. And evidence galore in other forms there is. We need to get it across, particularly to our younger folks, the actual evidence of the deity of Christ. It is absolutely foundational, fundamental importance to the matter of overcoming the world. I've said enough, I've said too much. Thank you very much for your encouragement and your brotherly love, and above all for your patience and powers of endurance. They have been constantly impressing me. The Lord bless you for it.