Lesson 11 “The
Good Confession” 1 Timothy 6:11-21
ID:
Inductive Questions (Asking the text questions like who, what, where, when,
why, & how?”)
CR: Cross
References (Comparing Scripture to Scripture, understanding the vague by the
clear.)
WS: Word
Study (Understanding definition, theological meaning, and usages in other
passages.)
The WORD: What does the Bible say?
Context: Read 1
Timothy 6:1-21 and the account of Christ’s confession before
Pilate in John
18:36-37 to help understand the context.
Then read 1 Timothy
6:11-21 in a more literal
or more dynamic
translation than you usually use. What
does “these things” refer to?
1. ID/WS: (6:11-12a) What do each of this first set of commands
teach us about the Christian life?
2. ID/CR: (6:13) What was Christ’s “good confession” before
Pilate? How does it relate here? (John
18:29-38)
3. ID: (6:12b-14) What do these verses teach about eternal
life? About witnessing a good confession? How do they relate to the exhortation to lay
hold on eternal life?
4. ID: (6:14-15a) What is “our Lord Jesus Christ’s appearing?” When will it be manifest?
5. ID: (6:15b-16) How
does this doxology especially relate to the surrounding verses?
6. ID: (6:17-18) What
commands were given to the rich? What
reasons were given for them? (How are you doing with them?)
7. ID: (6:20-21) What was committed to Timothy’s trust? What was he to avoid? Why?
The WALK: What should I do?
1. Verse seventeen speaks of being rich in “this age.” What does it mean to be rich in the “time to
come?” How do you do that?
2. How should Christ’s appearing motivate believers? What are some practical ways we can be more
mindful of Christ’s return?
3. Do you consider yourself to be rich? Why or why not? How does your income compare to others in the
world? In the US? Why does wealth tend to make us haughty,
self-confident, and selfish?
4. What are some clues that we are trusting our riches
(I.e. paychecks, retirement accounts, etc.)
5. CSBI: What effect could the argument that truly human
authors cannot help but error have on the doctrine of Christ’s sinless
humanity? What effect would it have on
the Bible’s reliability?
Going Beyond: 1. What areas of theology are touched on
in this passage?
The Bible (Bibliology) God
(Theology Proper) The Father (Paterology) The
Lord Jesus Christ (Christology) The Holy Spirit (Pneumatology) Man
(Anthropology) Salvation (Soteriology) The
Church (Ecclesiology) Angels & Satan (Angelology)
Future Things (eschatology)
THE WORD OF GOD AND INERRANCY
Articles IX through XII deal with the matter of
greatest present concern: inerrancy.
They seek to define terms and answer the chief questions that have been
raised: If the Bible has come to us
through human authors, which the earlier articles acknowledge, and if it is
natural for human beings to err, which all confess, isn’t the Bible necessarily
errant? Doesn’t it cease to be authentically human if
it does not have errors? Again, if
inerrancy applies properly only to the original manuscript, called autographs,
and if we do not possess these, as we do not, isn’t the argument for inerrancy
meaningless? Or doesn’t it stand only by
appealing to documents that do not exist and whose inerrant state cannot be
verified? Why can’t inerrancy be applied
to those parts of the Bible that deal with salvation and not to those parts
that deal with history, science and other “unimportant” and “non-essential”
matters?
ARTICLE
IX: INERRANCY
We affirm that
inspiration, though not conferring omniscience, guaranteed true and trustworthy
utterance on all matters of which the biblical authors were moved to speak and
write.
We deny that the finitude or fallenness of these
writers, by necessity or otherwise, introduced distortion or falsehood into
God’s Word.
The
affirmation of Article IX indicates that inspiration guarantees that the
writings of Scripture are true and trustworthy. That is, they are not false, deceptive, or fraudulent
in what they communicate. As we dealt
with the problem of the limitations of human language in Article IV, so we face
now the difficulty of the speaking of truth by creatures who are not
omniscient. It is one thing for God to
confer infallibility to the writings and quite another to confer omniscience to
the writers. Omniscience and
infallibility must be carefully distinguished. Although in God they are cojoined, for man it
is different. Omniscience refers to the
scope of one’s knowledge and infallibility, not to the reliability of his
pronouncements. One who knows better can
make a false statement if his intentions are to deceive. And, vice versa, a person with limited
knowledge can make infallible statements if they can be guaranteed to be completely
reliable. Thus we say that though the
biblical writings are inspired, this does not imply thereby that the writers
knew everything there was to be known or that they were infallible of
themselves. The knowledge that they
communicate is not comprehensive, but it is true and trustworthy as far as it
goes.
The
denial of Article IX has to do with man’s propensity as a finite and fallen
creature to introduce distortion or falsehood into God’s Word. This was covered from another angle in Article
IV. But what is in view here is the
recurring charge that verbal inspiration or a confession of the inerrancy of
Scripture carries with it a docetic view of
Scripture. Docetism applies to a
particular distortion of the biblical view of Jesus. In the earliest days of the Christian church
there were those, usually associated with the school
of gnosticism,
who believed that not really have a human nature or a human body. They argued that he only seemed or appeared to
have a human body. This heresy was
called docetism from the Greek word dokeo which means to seem, to think or
to appear. Those who denied the reality
of the incarnation and maintained that Jesus had but a phantom body were
accused of this heresy. In a more
refined and sophisticated sense docetism
has come to apply to any failure to take seriously the real limitations of the
human nature of Jesus. The charge of
biblical docetism has been leveled
against advocates of inerrancy, most notably by Karl Barth. He accuses us of holding a view of inspiration
in which the true humanity of the biblical writers is canceled out by the
intrusion of the divine characteristics of infallibility. For Barth it is fundamental to our humanity
that we are liable to error. If the
classic statement is errare est humanum,
to err is human, we reply that though it is true that a common characteristic
of mankind is to err, it does not follow that men always err or that error is
necessary for humanity. If such were to
be the case, then it would be necessary for us to assert that Adam, before he
fell, had to err or that he was not human. And we must also assert that in heaven, in a
state of glorification and perfected sanctification, we must continue
to err if we are to continue to be human. Not only must we ascribe such error to Adam
before the fall and to glorified Christians, we would also have to apply it to
the incarnate Christ. Error would be
intrinsic to his humanity, and it would have been necessary for Jesus to
distort the truth in order to be fully human. Let us never engage in such blasphemy even
though we confess the depth to which we have fallen and the high degree of the
propensity that we do have to err. Even
apart from inspiration, it is not necessary for a human being to err in order
to be human. So if it is possible for an uninspired person to speak the truth
without error, how much more will it be the case for one who is under the
influence of inspiration?
Finitude implies a necessary limitation of knowledge but not necessarily
a distortion of knowledge. The trustworthy character of the biblical text
should not be denied on the ground of man’s finitude
Leader Notes:
WORD:
1. Another thing to think about here is how
these particular commands are opposites of the love of money.
2. Take time to look at the passage in
Gospels. Help your men make the
connection between principles articulated in Christ’s confession and this 1
Timothy passage.
3. Do you notice the way the work of God and
response of man work together?
4. It seems we tend to over look Christ’s return
more than we should. Use this questions
to promote and eagerness for Christ to return and desire to “be ready.” (1 John 3:2)
5. If you
have time, take a few minutes for the men to pray and praise God for these.
6. We should probably
be a little uncomfortable discussing this question. I have a theory that our culture is soooo
materialistic that most of us are blind (to some extent) to our short comings
in this area.
WALK:
These
questions aim at two themes. 1. Are you looking
and preparing for Christ’s appearing? 2.
Why did God give us so much money and what is it doing to our hearts?
No comments:
Post a Comment