Romans: Justification, Faith, and Imputed Righteousness: Sola Fide And Justification

How to Study and Learn Biblical Truths - Part 6

Transcript: AI Transcript

Professor: John Weaver

Subject: New Testament Studies

Genre: Sermon

Dictation Name:

Date: 2022-04-17

Synopsis: In this sixth message on studying biblical truth, John Weaver emphasizes the necessity of diligent study and outlines five principles for rightly considering Scripture: linguistically, historically, judicially/legally, experientially, and expositionally/contextually. He warns against the widespread lack of study among pastors and Christians, and demonstrates how misapplying these principles leads to doctrinal error, using examples such as the Pharisees' misuse of 'eye for eye' and the misinterpretation of Luke 15. The message underscores that proper interpretation requires understanding the original intent, legal concepts like justification, experiential sanctification, and always reading verses in context.

[John Weaver] All right, let's open our Bibles in again to Second Timothy, chapter two. And again, we're going to read verse seven and then we're going to read verse 15 as well. So this is in the series on how to study and learn biblical truth. This is a sixth message. Notice, if you would please, in verse seven, the Apostle Paul tells Timothy, consider what I say. And the Lord give thee understanding in all things. And then skipping down to verse 15. Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. One of the problems that has really emerged over the last number of years is there has been actually a lack of study of the Word of God. The lack of study is even true among pastors. While not excusing the lack of study, which, by the way, is a sin, the truth is that most pastors and most preachers have allowed things to slip in that would steal their time of study. And many pastors oftentimes visit In fact, visit beyond what they actually need to.

[John Weaver] They fellowship. They go to ministerial meetings. Some coach ball. Some teach and perform other hosts of duties that actually could be laid aside. And it should be emphasized as well that if the original deacons were selected by the people and presented to the apostles to do one thing, and that was to relieve the apostles so that they could attend to the Word of God. If you would look in your Bibles very quickly to the book of Acts chapter six and notice the first four verses, Acts chapter six, beginning there with verse one. And I want you to know why these deacons were chosen originally. And it's very plain in this passage.

[John Weaver] The Bible says in those days when the number of the disciples was multiplied and there arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration, that is, they were not getting the food that they were supposed to be getting. Then the twelve called the multitude of the disciples unto them and said, It is not reason that we should leave the word of God and serve tables. Wherefore, brethren, look you out among you seven men full of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost, and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business. But we will give ourselves continually to prayer and the ministry of the word. So the apostle said, it's not me that we should leave the word of God and serve tables.

[John Weaver] In other words, there's nothing wrong with serving tables, but obviously you could not take care of all of those duties and do the studying and praying that needed to be done. So they originally were chosen to relieve the pastors of extraneous duties. so that they may give themselves actually the prayer and the ministry of the words. So I believe this. If deacons today were biblical and they fulfill their official function and duties as they should, it would certainly give the pastor the needed and necessary time to study. And I might point out deacons are not to run the church. They are servants. They're not to run the pastor. They are servants.

[John Weaver] And the word deacon is transliterated from the Greek. That is, it's brought down letter for letter, deacon and to deacon. But the word translated actually means servant. So obviously they were to serve not only the people, but they were to serve the pastor as well. Arguably, when you have Christians and when you have pastors who are working anywhere from 40 to 60 hours a week, that also cuts into your study time as well. And that's true not only concerning the pastors, that's true concerning the Christians.

[John Weaver] So the second problem, I think, is this. It's not just simply that there is a lack of study. It is the fact that most pastors and most Christians have never been taught to study, they do not know how to study, and if you do not know how to study, then you obviously cannot study. And the truth of the matter is no pastor and no teacher should be struggling just to find something to preach or to teach. I mean, there's so much in the word of God, and yet I have seen and I have known pastors. I know one particularly I observed personally. It was midnight on Saturday night and he was just trying to find something to preach on Sunday morning. To me, that's just absolutely insane, I mean.

[John Weaver] He should have been studying. No teacher, no preacher should ever run out of material. The Bible is just simply full of material. So what I'm trying to say is this. If you really want to learn how to study, that's what I'm trying to teach. If you do not really want to learn how to study, then just don't pay attention and you really will not and you'll end up paying the price later on, especially the judgment seat of Christ.

[John Weaver] So last week when I began, giving you these 13 principles that you need to use when you're considering truth. The first one I gave you was linguistics. That is, you must understand what the word actually means. And you cannot come and superimpose upon that word your definition or what you think the word means. You need to find out exactly what that word means, since words have meaning and you need to know what the meaning is from the one in Scripture.

[John Weaver] Now, to begin today, I want to give you the second thing that we need to consider when we're looking at a text or a passage or a chapter or even a book. So we not only need to consider it linguistically, but secondly, we need to consider it historically. The Bible was not written in a vacuum. In fact, the truth of the matter is each book of the Bible is written for some reason, for some purpose and to some people, especially the epistles. So you need to be asking these questions like, to whom was this book written? Why was this book written? When was this book written? What was the author's need or what was the author's person or purpose in writing? And how was this epistle or how was this book to be applied when the people to whom it was written received it? So our first goal then when we look at Scripture is not only consider things linguistically, but also to consider the original intent and the original purpose and the original meaning of the passage.

[John Weaver] In other words, what was the author's meaning when he wrote that book or that passage? So, again, this principle recognizes that the Bible was not written in a vacuum. It was written in history to a specific people or person and for a specific reason. So once we understand the specific purpose or reason, then we need to understand also how it applies to us today. So when you look at Scripture, there are several things that you need to understand when it comes to this. First of all, observation. What does the Bible say? Secondly, interpretation. What does the Bible mean? Thirdly, what did this passage mean or this chapter or this book mean to those persons to whom it was written? And then number four, how is this passage applied to us today?

[John Weaver] I'm going to get into this more next time, but the truth of the matter is we need to ask those questions. And each and every book in the Bible should be considered historically.

[John Weaver] Now, if you do not have the time, if you do not have the knowledge, if you do not have the know-how to look up the history of each book, its date, its purpose, its time, its writing, its theme, There is a wonderful help. I purchased the book many, many years ago. It's a book written by J. Sidlow Baxter. It is entitled Explore the Book. It is a book about three or four inches thick, and it gives you the historical background on every book in the Bible. And it gives you a lot of different information as well. So if you don't have that, explore the book by J. Sidlow Baxter, I would encourage you to get that book because that way you could read even concerning the book before you begin to go through the book in the Bible. And you'd already basically have the history laid out for you.

[John Weaver] So we need to consider truth not only linguistically, we need to consider truth historically. Now, here's the third one today. We need to consider truth judicially or legally. The Bible is a book of law. It is the revelation of God's law. And therefore, there are many judicial or legal principles in the Bible. Without me going into depth on many of these, I want you to just stop and think with me just for a moment of all the laws that are there in the Bible. There are the laws of sacrifice. There's the laws of cleansing. There's the law of the leper. There's the law of the leverite. There's the law of the kinsman-redeemer. I mean, there are many, many passages that you cannot even understand unless you begin to grasp the fact that here is a legal or a judicial principle. Now, let me just show you how many times the Pharisees perverted this truth. So let me show you. I want you to turn in your Bibles, if you would, first of all, to Deuteronomy chapter 19.

[John Weaver] We're going to look at several passages. And I want to point something out, and then we're going to go to the book of Matthew when we get through with the Old Testament. So look, if you would, in Deuteronomy, chapter 19, and let's begin reading there with verse 16. I want you to see this in the context because, again, this is a legal or judicial principle. So Deuteronomy, chapter 19, verse 60, God says, If a false witness rise up against any man to testify against him that which is wrong, then both the men between whom the controversy is shall stand before the Lord, before the priest, now look, and the judges which shall be in those days. And the judges shall make diligent inquisition. And behold, if the witness be a false witness, and hath testified falsely against his brother, Then shall you do unto him as he thought to have done unto his brother.

[John Weaver] So shalt thou put the evil away from among you, and those which remain shall hear and fear, and shall henceforth commit no more any such evil among you. And thine eye shall not pity, but life shall go for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot." So here is my question. To whom was this passage written? It is a legal, judicial principle, and it was written for those who stood before the judges and the priests, and consequently the Lord whom the judges and the priests represented.

[John Weaver] Now, look back in your Bibles to the book of Exodus chapter 21. Exodus 21, and let's begin reading there with verse 22. Exodus 21 verse 22, the Bible says, if men strive and hurt a woman with child so that her fruit depart from her and yet no mischief follow, he shall be surely punished according as the woman's husband will lay upon him and he shall pay as the judges determine. And if any mischief follow, Then shalt thou give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, and stripe for stripe. But note, if you would, in the context, it is to the judges. One more now. Look in Leviticus chapter 24, and let's begin reading there with verse 19. Leviticus 24 and verse 19. Here it is.

[John Weaver] And if a man cause a blemish in his neighbor, as he hath done, so shall it be done to him. Breach for breach, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, as he hath caused a blemish in a man, so shall it be done to him again. And he that killeth a beast, he shall restore it, and he that killeth a man, he shall be put to death.

[John Weaver] Now watch, you shall have one manner of law. as well for the stranger, and as for your own country, for I am the Lord your God."

[John Weaver] Now, note if you would please, in all these other passages, it was before the judges. Now he's saying this is to be a matter of law.

[John Weaver] Now, if you will turn in your Bibles to the book of Matthew chapter 5, I want you to note what the Pharisees had done with this legal judicial principle. In Matthew chapter 5, beginning there with verse 38, look what our Lord says. Matthew 5, verse 38. Our Lord said, You have heard that it has been said, an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.

[John Weaver] But I say unto you that you resist not evil. But whoso shall smite thee on the right cheek, turn him the other also. And then he goes on. What is he talking about? You've heard that it had been said, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. What our Lord is doing in Matthew chapter five is this. He is correcting the misinterpretation of the law by the Pharisees. He's also correcting the misapplication of the law by the Pharisees. So what the Pharisees had done They had taken this legal judicial principle, a principle of the law, a principle that was given to the judges where they were to make the punishment fit the crime, an eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, life for life, foot for foot, hand for hand, burning for burning, strike for strike.

[John Weaver] And what they had done, they had turned it to mean and to teach personal vindictiveness and personal vengeance. That's what he's correcting right here. Because they were saying, well, if Steve hit me, I can hit him back. If he cursed me, I can curse him back. If he slapped me, I can slap him back.

[John Weaver] Now, I want you to look at what he said in verse 39. But I say unto you that ye resist not evil, but whosoever shall smite thee on the right cheek, turn him the other also.

[John Weaver] Now, this is not a self-defense situation. So, if Gary and I are facing each other, And I take my fist and I ball it up. And I swing at him and I hit him as hard as I could hit him. Which cheek would my fist land on if he's facing me? His left. Not his right. So if I smite him on the right cheek, that means this. It's a back fist. It's a slap. It's an insult. It's kind of like back in 1700s, when these Frenchmen would take their glove and say, I challenge you to a duel and just slap him on the cheek.

[John Weaver] It was not, it was not anything that was hurtful. It was just an insult. And actually what our Lord is doing in this passage is teaching how to deal with these pity annoyances of life. So he said, if somebody smites you on the right cheek, that is he insults you. Turned him to the left cheek. And then he goes on to say, if a man sue thee at law for your coat, give him your cloak also.

[John Weaver] Then he says, if someone compels you to go a mile, go with him plain. Because any Roman soldier could compel a citizen to carry his armor and his equipment for a mile. And if you and I were in a hurry to go do something, and here's a soldier And He compels us to take His armor a mile out of the way. It's an anointment. So, our Lord is just teaching us here.

[John Weaver] But what these Pharisees had done, they had taken a legal judicial principle, and they then turned around and made it a personal vendetta, when it was not applied to them at all in that matter. Now, I want you to go back in your Bibles to the book of Deuteronomy, chapter 25. But let me show you another thing. You see, you have to understand that the Bible is full of legal and judicial terminology as well as principles. So when you look at Deuteronomy, chapter 25 and verse one, and I'll show you some other passages. You must understand that the doctrine of justification is indeed a legal, judicial, not only term, but concept. So in Deuteronomy 25 verse 1, if there be a controversy between men and they come unto judgment, that the judges may judge them, then they shall justify the righteous and condemn the wicked. So notice if you would, again, the judges are to justify the righteous and they're to condemn the wicked. Now, both Justification and condemnation are legal concepts. Justification is a declaration before the law that a man is righteous and innocent.

[John Weaver] Condemnation is a declaration before the law that the man is guilty and has violated the law. Now, I want you to turn to Proverbs chapter 17. You see, the Roman Catholic Church teaches The justification is an infusement of righteousness, which is not true. The justification is a declaration of righteousness from the judge. So if you look in Proverbs chapter 17 and verse 15, look what the Bible says.

[John Weaver] He that justified the wicked and he that condemned the just, even they both are an abomination to the Lord. Now, if justification is an infusement of righteousness into someone, how could justifying the wicked be an abomination to God? Because you'd be making the wicked righteous. But no, justification is a declaration. So here the judge then is declaring the wicked just or righteous when he is not. And then he's declaring the just condemned and wicked when he is not. So both of these, he says, are an abomination to the Lord to justify a wicked man or condemn a just man.

[John Weaver] Now, turn in your Bibles to the book of Luke chapter 7. Luke chapter 7. And look, if you would please, at verse 29. Luke 7, verse 29. Here's a very revealing verse.

[John Weaver] Luke 7 verse 29. And all the people that heard him, that is John the Baptist, and all the people that heard him and the publicans justified God being baptized with the baptism of John.

[John Weaver] Now, if you try to tell me that justification is an infusing of righteousness, how do you make God righteous? How do you make him more righteous? It's impossible because he is perfectly righteous. He cannot be made more righteous. He cannot be made less righteous. Well, how in the world did the people justify God? Remember, justification is a legal, it is a judicial declaration. And Lord, here's what they were saying. God is right. I am wrong. God is holy. I'm unholy. God is just. I'm a sinner. So they were justifying God by saying that the sentence that had been declared against them was right.

[John Weaver] Now look at the next verse. But the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves being not baptized of him. So what the Pharisees were doing were justifying themselves. They were not justifying God. They were not pronouncing God righteous. They were pronouncing themselves righteous. So if you look in Luke 16 and verse 15, here's what our Lord said concerning these Pharisees. Luke 16 and verse 15. He said, You are they which justify yourselves before men, but God knoweth your hearts, for that which is highly esteemed among men is the abomination in the sight of God. So the Pharisees were justifying themselves.

[John Weaver] They were saying, we're not that kind of sinner. We're not wicked. We're not vile. We're not condemned. They were justifying themselves. Where the public as a sinner said, yes, Lord, you're right. We're wicked. We're wrong. We deserve punishment. So you have to understand that justification is actually the antithesis or the opposite of condemnation. And so just like hot is the opposite of cold and big is the opposite of small and Justification, therefore, is the opposite of condemnation. So you're either justified or you're condemned.

[John Weaver] If you look in your Bibles to the book of Romans, chapter eight, Romans, chapter eight. And look, if you would, beginning there with verse thirty three. Romans eight and verse thirty three, look what the scripture says. O who shall lay anything to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth, who is he that condemneth. It is Christ that died, yea, rather, that is risen again, who is he that is at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us. So it is God who justifies and it is God who condemns. And if you'll go back up to verse 1, look what he says. There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

[John Weaver] So, you're either justified or you are condemned. So, to justify means that you are pronounced righteous in light of the law. Condemnation means that you are pronounced guilty in light of the law. Justification and condemnation are legal forensic terms and acts. Justification is the passing of a sentence in favor of a person, while condemnation is passing a sentence against the person. It was Herman Witsius who said this, we thus define the gospel justification of a sinner.

[John Weaver] It is a judicial but gracious act of God, whereby the elect and believing sinner is absolved from all the guilt of his sins, and hath a right to eternal life, a judge to him on account of the obedience of Christ received by faith." One more quote, Jonathan Edwards said it like this, a person is said to be justified when he's approved of God as free from the guilt of sin and is deserved punishment and as having that righteousness belong in him that entitles him to the reward of life. So when you think about justification, That grand and glorious doctrine is indeed a judicial doctrine. It is a legal doctrine.

[John Weaver] And so, therefore, you have to look at Scripture not only linguistically, not only historically, but you also have to look at Scripture judicially and legally. Now, let me give you number four today. You must also consider Scripture experientially. Now, what do I mean by experientially? We must ask ourselves when we look at a passage of Scripture, is there something in this passage that I must experience in my life?

[John Weaver] Now, there is a vast difference between something that is judicial and something that is experiential. When something is judicial, it is something that is done for you. When something that is done experientially, it is something that is done in you. So, let me just try to show you this concept when you consider justification and when you consider sanctification. Justification deals with the guilt of sin. Sanctification deals with the pollution of sin. Justification is a legal, judicial act which is done for you. Sanctification is experiential and internal, which is done in you. Now, let me just try to show you some distinctions between justification and sanctification. Remember, justification is judicial. Sanctification is experiential. Now, let me make a statement before I show you these differences. Actually, when you consider sanctification, there are two concepts that you must consider. There is indeed what you and I would call a positional sanctification, which you and I have in Jesus Christ. That positional sanctification is absolutely perfect. But I'm not talking about positional sanctification. Today, I'm talking about what you and I would call a practical sanctification.

[John Weaver] Our practical sanctification is what we are in this life. So, sanctification is something that is moral and experiential. Justification is legal and judicial. Sanctification results from the operation of the Holy Spirit in us. Justification is based upon what Jesus Christ has done for us. Let me go further. Sanctification, which is practical I'm talking about, practical sanctification is gradual and progressive. Justification is instantaneous and immutable. So when I say that sanctification admits degrees. And that is gradual and progressive.

[John Weaver] It means that we should actually be going, as the Bible says, from strength to strength, we should be gaining in holiness every day. But when you stop and think about the fact that justification is instantaneous and immutable. That will bring me to this sanctification admits degrees, but justification does not. So let me try to explain it like this. When it comes to justification, even the Apostle Paul.

[John Weaver] Is not any more justified than I am. The Apostle Peter is not any more justified than Steve. Justification is perfect. It is instantaneous. It is immutable. But when you talk about sanctification. You remember, our Lord said some fell on good ground. And some brought forth 30 fold, some 60 fold and some 100 fold. In other words, there are. There are degrees in sanctification. That's why some men are more holy than others. Some women are more holy than others. Some are less holy than others. That's why we are to go from strength to strength. We are to be progressing in our sanctification. Sanctification. Here's another difference. Sanctification deals with the state of the sinner. Justification deals with the standing of the sinner. We're justified as we stand before God. That's our standing in Jesus Christ. But our sanctification is our state before God.

[John Weaver] And I don't think anyone in this room would say that you're as holy as you should be or would want to be in this life. So sanctification is always experiential. So let me put it to you like this. While there are differences between justification and sanctification. There is no such thing as a justified unsanctified person. Whomever God justifies, He sanctifies. The word sanctify means to be set apart for a holy use.

[John Weaver] You may not be bringing forth but 30 fold while some are bringing forth 60 and some are bringing forth 80 and 90 and some 100. But the truth is, if you've been justified, you will be sanctified. You will be set apart. And so for these individuals who tell me that, yeah, I was saved when I was seven years old. I've just lived for the devil the last 50 years, but I'm saved. No, no, no.

[John Weaver] The Bible said they went out from us, that it might be made manifest that they were not of us, for had they been of us, no doubt they would have continued with us. 1 John 2, verse 19. So the proof that we have ever been justified by faith is that we're being sanctified in our lives. You cannot confuse the doctrine of justification and the doctrine of sanctification without perverting the gospel. and without confounding the saints.

[John Weaver] So we have to consider truth linguistically, yes. Historically, yes. We must consider it judicially, legally, and we must consider it experientially.

[John Weaver] Now, I'm going to tell you this. I'm going to repeat it probably again today. I'll repeat it in the next message. Just have to remember this. Not all the Bible was written to you. Not all the Bible is written about you, but all the Bible is written for you. So you need to ask, is there something in this passage that I am to experience in my life? OK, number five, and this is probably as far as we will get today.

[John Weaver] We must consider truth expositionally or contextually. Every passage. Every verse has to be taken in its context. You can prove anything that you want to prove if you take a verse out of context. For instance, I could prove from the Bible that thieves prosper. That it pays to be a thief. He said, where would you find something like that? Well, I'll show you. Look in your Bibles to the book of Job, chapter 12, right before the book of Psalms. Look in Job, chapter 12. Job is speaking. And look what he says in verse 6. Watch this. Look in Job, chapter 12 and verse 6. Here's what he said. Watch carefully. The tabernacles of robbers prosper, and they that provoke God are secure into whose hand God bringeth abundantly. Why? It pays to be a thief, if you take that verse like that. But when you take it in the context, you will have to know that Job In this chapter is answering and refuting Zophar's argument in chapter 11. Look, if you would, verse one, and Job answered and said, no doubt, but you are the people and wisdom shall die with you.

[John Weaver] But I have understanding as well as you. I'm not inferior to you. Yet who knoweth such things as these? I'm as one mocked of his neighbor. Who calleth upon God, and he answereth him? And the just and upright man is left to scorn." That's Job. He that is ready to slip with his feet is as the left despised in the thought of him that is at ease. That's Job.

[John Weaver] Then he says, the tabernacle of rapture. What's he talking about? Well, remember, he had these three friends. He had Eliphaz and Bildad and Zophar. When you get to Eliphaz, Eliphaz was a man who based all of his arguments on tradition. Bildad versed his own experience. Zophar was a dogmatist. And if you read Job chapter 11, he just simply says this, Job, you're a sinner. You've sinned against God. If you'd repent of your sins, God would bless you and God would give you all this money and God would give you all this prosperity. And what Job is saying is, look, you're not helping me. Do you understand that God oftentimes curses the enemies with riches? Yes, the tabernacles of Robert prosper temporarily until God judges them. This is what he's saying. And you're trying to tell me that I'm a great sinner and I just need to repent. So the point I'm trying to make is when you take this in context, then you see very clearly that, you know, They do not prosper. Job is just answering Zophar's dogmatism back in Job chapter 11.

[John Weaver] Now, so you have to take things in context. So I want you to do this. I want you to turn in your Bibles, if you would, to Luke chapter 15. And I want you to bear with me just for a minute. Everyone knows the content of Luke chapter 15. Or at least I sure hope you do. Because in Luke chapter 15. You read about the lost sheep. You read about the lost coin. And you read about the prodigal son.

[John Weaver] I wish I had time. To read this whole chapter to you. Well, let me read just a little bit of it. Look in verse one. Then drew near unto him the publicans and sinners, for to hear him. And the Pharisees and scribes murmured, saying, This man receiveth sinners, and eateth with them. They spake this parable unto them, saying, What man of you, having a hundred sheep, if he lose one of them, doth not leave the nine and nine in the wilderness, and go after that which is lost, until he find it?

[John Weaver] And when he had found it, he laid it on his shoulders, rejoicing. And when he cometh home, he calleth together his friends and neighbors, saying unto them, Rejoice with me, for I found my sheep which was lost. I say unto you that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repented more than over ninety-nine just persons which need no repentance. Either what woman having ten pieces of silver, if she lose one piece, doth not light a candle, and sweep the house, and seek diligently till she find it. And when she found it, she called her friends and her neighbors together, saying, Rejoice with me, for I found the peace which I had lost. Likewise, I send to you there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repented."

[John Weaver] And then he goes on and he said, A certain man had two sons. I'm not going to read it all. You know it. And the younger of them said to his father, Father, give me the portion of goods that falleth unto me. And he divided unto them his living. Not many days after the younger son took all together and took his journey into a far country where he wasted his substance and righteous living. Now, you know the rest of the story. So let me try to ask you some questions since I read this to you. Number one. How many parables are there in Luke chapter 15? Anybody answer, give me an answer.

[John Weaver] Well, the average Christian and the average preacher says they're three. Well, that's not true. Although you read the lost sheep, the lost coin, and the lost son, if you will go back to verse 3, and he spake this parable unto them. One parable. There's only one. But this one parable is divided into three parts. So the lost sheep demonstrates the work of the Savior. He came to seek and save the lost. The lost coin illustrates the work of the Holy Spirit. And the prodigal son returning to the father Pictures, the result of the son seeking and the spirit working and the sinner therefore comes back to the father. OK, so the prodigal is the law sheep that the son sought and the woman illuminated the picture of the Holy Spirit.

[John Weaver] Now, so let me ask you this question. So we know there's one parable in Luke 15. To whom was this parable spoken? There were two groups. So you have to deduce that there's got to be something in this parable for both groups, so if you look back at verse one, then drew near unto him the publicans and the sinners to hear him. So there are publicans, tax collectors, sinners. Verse 2,"...and the Pharisees and the scribes murmured, saying, This man receiveth sinners, and each of them." So you've got publicans and sinners, and you've got the scribes and the Pharisees on this hand. So, you've got to look in this parable now and find that there is something for each of these groups. So let's see.

[John Weaver] In the first part of this parable, the shepherd goes looking for the lost sheep. Hmm. Let's see. Would someone answer this question? Where were the 99 sheep left? In the wilderness. What is the wilderness a picture of? It's a picture of sin, rebellion. Where was the lost sheep taken? Oh, look at it. Verse 5. Well, let's read verse 4. What man of you having a hundred sheep, if he lose one of them, doth not leave the ninety-nine in the wilderness, and go after it, that which is lost, until he find it?

[John Weaver] And when he found it, he layeth it on his shoulders rejoicing. And when he cometh home, he calls together his friends and neighbors, saying unto them, Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep that was lost. And then look at this amazing statement. I say unto you, that likewise your shall be in heaven over one sinner that repented, more than over 99 just persons who need no repentance.

[John Weaver] Where were the 99 in the wilderness? Who were the 99 scribes and Pharisees? They didn't think they needed to be saved. They didn't think they were lost. And so, very clearly, the 99 then speak of those Pharisees, while the one speaks of the publican and the sinners. When you get to the last section of this parable, the prodigal son, the prodigal son comes home. But is there another brother? Yeah, he's the older brother. I've got a message I preach years ago, I just entitled it The Other Brother, The Other Brother. When he heard the rejoicing, he didn't know what was going on. And he hadn't asked one of the servants. Well, what is this? Well, your brother who's lost is now back home, and your father's slain the fatted calf, and we're having a party. And what does the other brother do? He gets angry. He gets upset. He said, all these years have I served thee, and I haven't done what this boy has done, and you've never given me a fatted calf. There's the 99 just persons who need no repentance.

[John Weaver] So the point I'm trying to make is very clear. This parable is a picture of what transpired in Luke, chapter eight. Verses nine through 14. When the Pharisee and the publican went up to the temple to pray, and the Pharisee said, I thank thee, Lord, that I'm not as other men, I'm not even as this publican over here, I fast twice in the week, I pay tithes of all that I own, and I do this and I do that. And the old publican would not even lift his eyes toward heaven, just smote himself on the breast and said, God, be merciful to me, a sinner. And our Lord said, Verily, that man, the publican, went down to his house justified rather than the other. So our Lord takes us one parable and shows us the work of the Son, the work of the Spirit, and the work of the Father. Because the Son sought the lost sheep. The woman with the candle sweeping indicated the work of the Holy Spirit in conviction, and then you see that prodigal son running to the Father, and the Father receiving him and giving him the ring of sonship and putting the best coat on him as could be possibly made.

[John Weaver] Let me read to you very quickly just a comment by Arthur W. Pink. He said this, The parable recorded in Luke chapter 15 cannot possibly be interpreted right if its context is ignored. What needless perplexity has been occasioned and diversity among commentators concerning the identity of the ninety-nine sheep left in the wilderness, defined as just persons who need no repentance, and the elder son who complained of the generous treatment accorded to his brother, through failure to use the key to observe, this one parable in

[John Weaver] three parts was not spoken by Christ to the disciples, but addressed to his enemies. It was given in reply to the Pharisees and the scribes who had murmured because our Lord received sinners and ate with them. His design was to expose the condition of their hearts and to vindicate his own gracious actions. He did so by portraying the lost condition of his carping critics and by making known the ground on which he received sinners into fellowship with himself.

[John Weaver] and revealing the divine operations which issue in that blessed result. Once these broad facts be apprehended, there is no difficulty in understanding the details of the two distinct and sharply contrasted classes that are set forth to us in Luke 15, 1 and 2. The despised publicans and sinners who, from a deep sense of need, were attracted to Christ and the proud and self-satisfied Pharisees and scribes, And each of the three parts of this parable, the same two classes are in viewed and in that order. Wow.

[John Weaver] There are so many comments that I have. Where this parable is actually broken down, but let me just read one quick one from Matthew Henry, he said this. Here is a great deal of care and pains taken in quest of it. The woman lights a candle to look behind the door under the table and in every corner of the house, sweeps the house and seeks diligently till she finds it.

[John Weaver] This represents the various means and methods God uses to bring to us, to bring lost souls home to himself. He has lighted the candle of the gospel not to show himself the way to us, But to show us the way to him, to discover ourselves, he has swept the house by the convictions of the word he seeks diligently. His heart is upon it to bring lost souls to himself. So. When you look at Luke chapter 15, if you do not take this expositionally, if you do not take it contextually, There's no way in the world that it can be properly interpreted. There's no way that it could be properly understood.

[John Weaver] So let me make some applications today. I'll finish this next time, Lord willing. But in order to interpret a passage, we must only have the tools. We must only have the spiritual necessities that I've already dealt with. But when it comes to the consideration of a passage, we need to look at that passage linguistically. We need to look at it historically. We need to look at it legally and judicially. We need to look at it experientially. We also need to look at it contextually and expositionally. So when you begin to analyze the passage in these ways, all of a sudden the passage begins to come out and you see exactly what is taught in scripture. You see, Paul did indeed command Timothy, consider what I say, and the Lord give the understanding in all things. So there's not going to be any understanding given unless we actually begin to consider. And so without real studious consideration, no understanding is going to be given.

[John Weaver] That means this, it doesn't matter if you've got two hours of study. Or 15 minutes of study. Whatever verse you're looking at or whatever passage you're looking at, you need to say, how am I to consider this passage and you begin to look at The passage and so forth, the way that I've described, and you'll be absolutely astounded at the truths that you will see as God gives you understanding. You always have to consider truth in these ways that have given you so far. And Lord willing, next time I will finish up to number 13 and let you see what it means to consider things in the 13 ways that God gives us to consider Scripture. Well, let's pray.

[John Weaver] Father, we ask in the name of Jesus Christ for Your grace and for Your mercy, for Your goodness and kindness. Help us, Lord, to love Thee, to live for Thee, to honor Thee, to consider Your Word. Lord, consider it linguistically. To consider it, Lord, historically. To consider it legally and judicially. Consider it experientially. to consider it, Lord, contextually. Our Lord, we ask that You would indeed teach us and build us up in the most holy faith. In Thy name we pray, Amen.

How to Study and Learn Biblical Truths - Part 6

John Weaver | SermonAudio

Lecture Metadata	Details
Speaker	John Weaver
Source	SermonAudio
Media ID	41922194321141
Subject	New Testament Studies
Course	Romans: Justification, Faith, and Imputed Righteousness: Sola Fide And Justification
Genre	Sermon
Date	2022-04-17
Dictation Name
Book	Book 065: Three Reasons We Need To Consider Truth And Interpret Scripture — Chapter 6
Source Timed Segments	68

Formatted Transcript

Introduction and the Problem of Lack of Study

Weaver introduces the series and reads 2 Timothy 2:7,15, lamenting the lack of study among pastors and Christians, often due to misplaced priorities.

All right, let's open our Bibles again to 2 Timothy, chapter 2. And again, we're going to read verse 7 and then we're going to read verse 15 as well. So this is in the series on how to study and learn biblical truth. This is the sixth message. Notice, if you would please, in verse 7, the Apostle Paul tells Timothy,

Scripture Reading — 2 Timothy 2:7

"Consider what I say. And the Lord give thee understanding in all things."

And then skipping down to verse 15, "Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." One of the problems that has really emerged over the last number of years is there has been actually a lack of study of the Word of God. The lack of study is even true among pastors. While not excusing the lack of study, which, by the way, is a sin, the truth is that most pastors and most preachers have allowed things to slip in that would steal their time of study. And many pastors oftentimes visit—in fact, visit beyond what they actually need to.

The Biblical Role of Deacons in Freeing Pastors for Study

Using Acts 6:1-4, Weaver argues that deacons were originally chosen to relieve apostles for prayer and the ministry of the Word, a principle applicable today.

They fellowship. They go to ministerial meetings. Some coach ball. Some teach and perform other hosts of duties that actually could be laid aside. And it should be emphasized as well that if the original deacons were selected by the people and presented to the apostles to do one thing, and that was to relieve the apostles so that they could attend to the Word of God. If you would look in your Bibles very quickly to the book of Acts, chapter 6, and notice the first four verses, Acts chapter 6, beginning there with verse 1. And I want you to know why these deacons were chosen originally. And it's very plain in this passage.

The Bible says, "In those days when the number of the disciples was multiplied, and there arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration," that is, they were not getting the food that they were supposed to be getting. "Then the twelve called the multitude of the disciples unto them and said, It is not reason that we should leave the word of God and serve tables. Wherefore, brethren, look you out among you seven men full of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost, and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business. But we will give ourselves continually to prayer and the ministry of the word." So the apostle said, "It is not reason that we should leave the word of God and serve tables."

In other words, there's nothing wrong with serving tables, but obviously you could not take care of all of those duties and do the studying and praying that needed to be done. So they originally were chosen to relieve the pastors of extraneous duties so that they may give themselves actually to prayer and the ministry of the word. So I believe this: if deacons today were biblical and they fulfill their official function and duties as they should, it would certainly give the pastor the needed and necessary time to study. And I might point out, deacons are not to run the church. They are servants. They're not to run the pastor. They are servants.

And the word "deacon" is transliterated from the Greek. That is, it's brought down letter for letter, "deacon" and "to deacon." But the word translated actually means "servant." So obviously they were to serve not only the people, but they were to serve the pastor as well. Arguably, when you have Christians and when you have pastors who are working anywhere from 40 to 60 hours a week, that also cuts into your study time as well. And that's true not only concerning the pastors, that's true concerning the Christians.

The Need to Be Taught How to Study

Many pastors and Christians have never been taught to study, leading to a struggle for material despite the Bible's richness.

So the second problem, I think, is this. It's not just simply that there is a lack of study. It is the fact that most pastors and most Christians have never been taught to study. They do not know how to study, and if you do not know how to study, then you obviously cannot study. And the truth of the matter is, no pastor and no teacher should be struggling just to find something to preach or to teach. I mean, there's so much in the Word of God, and yet I have seen and I have known pastors. I know one particularly I observed personally. It was midnight on Saturday night and he was just trying to find something to preach on Sunday morning. To me, that's just absolutely insane, I mean.

He should have been studying. No teacher, no preacher should ever run out of material. The Bible is just simply full of material. So what I'm trying to say is this: if you really want to learn how to study, that's what I'm trying to teach. If you do not really want to learn how to study, then just don't pay attention and you really will not, and you'll end up paying the price later on, especially at the judgment seat of Christ.

So last week when I began giving you these 13 principles that you need to use when you're considering truth, the first one I gave you was linguistics. That is, you must understand what the word actually means. And you cannot come and superimpose upon that word your definition or what you think the word means. You need to find out exactly what that word means, since words have meaning and you need to know what the meaning is from the one in Scripture.

Principle 2: Consider Truth Historically

Scripture was written to specific people for specific reasons; we must ask about original intent, purpose, and meaning before applying it today.

Now, to begin today, I want to give you the second thing that we need to consider when we're looking at a text or a passage or a chapter or even a book. So we not only need to consider it linguistically, but secondly, we need to consider it historically. The Bible was not written in a vacuum. In fact, the truth of the matter is each book of the Bible is written for some reason, for some purpose, and to some people, especially the epistles. So you need to be asking these questions like, "To whom was this book written? Why was this book written? When was this book written? What was the author's need or what was the author's person or purpose in writing? And how was this epistle or how was this book to be applied when the people to whom it was written received it?" So our first goal then when we look at Scripture is not only to consider things linguistically, but also to consider the original intent and the original purpose and the original meaning of the passage.

In other words, what was the author's meaning when he wrote that book or that passage? So, again, this principle recognizes that the Bible was not written in a vacuum. It was written in history to a specific people or person and for a specific reason. So once we understand the specific purpose or reason, then we need to understand also how it applies to us today. So when you look at Scripture, there are several things that you need to understand when it comes to this. First of all, observation: What does the Bible say? Secondly, interpretation: What does the Bible mean? Thirdly, what did this passage mean or this chapter or this book mean to those persons to whom it was written? And then number four, how is this passage applied to us today?

I'm going to get into this more next time, but the truth of the matter is we need to ask those questions. And each and every book in the Bible should be considered historically. Now, if you do not have the time, if you do not have the knowledge, if you do not have the know-how to look up the history of each book, its date, its purpose, its time, its writing, its theme, there is a wonderful help. I purchased the book many, many years ago. It's a book written by J. Sidlow Baxter. It is entitled "Explore the Book." It is a book about three or four inches thick, and it gives you the historical background on every book in the Bible. And it gives you a lot of different information as well. So if you don't have that, "Explore the Book" by J. Sidlow Baxter, I would encourage you to get that book because that way you could read even concerning the book before you begin to go through the book in the Bible. And you'd already basically have the history laid out for you.

Principle 3: Consider Truth Judicially or Legally

The Bible contains many legal principles; misunderstanding them leads to error, as when Pharisees turned the judicial 'eye for eye' into personal vengeance.

So we need to consider truth not only linguistically, we need to consider truth historically. Now, here's the third one today. We need to consider truth judicially or legally. The Bible is a book of law. It is the revelation of God's law. And therefore, there are many judicial or legal principles in the Bible. Without me going into depth on many of these, I want you to just stop and think with me just for a moment of all the laws that are there in the Bible. There are the laws of sacrifice. There's the laws of cleansing. There's the law of the leper. There's the law of the levirate. There's the law of the kinsman-redeemer. I mean, there are many, many passages that you cannot even understand unless you begin to grasp the fact that here is a legal or a judicial principle. Now, let me just show you how many times the Pharisees perverted this truth. So let me show you. I want you to turn in your Bibles, if you would, first of all, to Deuteronomy chapter 19.

We're going to look at several passages. And I want to point something out, and then we're going to go to the book of Matthew when we get through with the Old Testament. So look, if you would, in Deuteronomy, chapter 19, and let's begin reading there with verse 16. I want you to see this in the context because, again, this is a legal or judicial principle. So Deuteronomy, chapter 19, verse 16, God says,

Scripture Reading — Deuteronomy 19:16-21

"If a false witness rise up against any man to testify against him that which is wrong, then both the men between whom the controversy is shall stand before the Lord, before the priest, and the judges which shall be in those days. And the judges shall make diligent inquisition. And behold, if the witness be a false witness, and hath testified falsely against his brother, then shall you do unto him as he thought to have done unto his brother."

"So shalt thou put the evil away from among you, and those which remain shall hear and fear, and shall henceforth commit no more any such evil among you. And thine eye shall not pity, but life shall go for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot." So here is my question. To whom was this passage written? It is a legal, judicial principle, and it was written for those who stood before the judges and the priests, and consequently the Lord whom the judges and the priests represented.

Now, look back in your Bibles to the book of Exodus chapter 21. Exodus 21, and let's begin reading there with verse 22. Exodus 21 verse 22, the Bible says,

Scripture Reading — Exodus 21:22-25

"If men strive and hurt a woman with child so that her fruit depart from her and yet no mischief follow, he shall be surely punished according as the woman's husband will lay upon him and he shall pay as the judges determine. And if any mischief follow, then shalt thou give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, and stripe for stripe."

But note, if you would, in the context, it is to the judges. One more now. Look in Leviticus chapter 24, and let's begin reading there with verse 19. Leviticus 24 and verse 19. Here it is.

"And if a man cause a blemish in his neighbor, as he hath done, so shall it be done to him. Breach for breach, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, as he hath caused a blemish in a man, so shall it be done to him again. And he that killeth a beast, he shall restore it, and he that killeth a man, he shall be put to death." Now watch, "You shall have one manner of law, as well for the stranger, as for your own country, for I am the Lord your God."

Now, note if you would please, in all these other passages, it was before the judges. Now he's saying this is to be a matter of law. Now, if you will turn in your Bibles to the book of Matthew chapter 5, I want you to note what the Pharisees had done with this legal judicial principle. In Matthew chapter 5, beginning there with verse 38, look what our Lord says. Matthew 5, verse 38. Our Lord said,

Scripture Reading — Matthew 5:38-39

"You have heard that it has been said, an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth." "But I say unto you that you resist not evil. But whoso shall smite thee on the right cheek, turn him the other also."

And then he goes on. What is he talking about?

Scripture Reading — Matthew 5:38-39

"You've heard that it had been said, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth."

What our Lord is doing in Matthew chapter 5 is this: He is correcting the misinterpretation of the law by the Pharisees. He's also correcting the misapplication of the law by the Pharisees. So what the Pharisees had done, they had taken this legal judicial principle, a principle of the law, a principle that was given to the judges where they were to make the punishment fit the crime, an eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, life for life, foot for foot, hand for hand, burning for burning, stripe for stripe.

And what they had done, they had turned it to mean and to teach personal vindictiveness and personal vengeance. That's what he's correcting right here. Because they were saying, "Well, if Steve hit me, I can hit him back. If he cursed me, I can curse him back. If he slapped me, I can slap him back."

Now, I want you to look at what he said in verse 39. "But I say unto you that ye resist not evil, but whosoever shall smite thee on the right cheek, turn him the other also." Now, this is not a self-defense situation. So, if Gary and I are facing each other, and I take my fist and I ball it up, and I swing at him and I hit him as hard as I could hit him, which cheek would my fist land on if he's facing me? His left. Not his right. So if I smite him on the right cheek, that means this: it's a back fist. It's a slap. It's an insult. It's kind of like back in the 1700s, when these Frenchmen would take their glove and say, "I challenge you to a duel" and just slap him on the cheek.

It was not anything that was hurtful. It was just an insult. And actually what our Lord is doing in this passage is teaching how to deal with these petty annoyances of life. So he said, "If somebody smites you on the right cheek," that is, he insults you, "turn him the left cheek." And then he goes on to say, "If a man sue thee at law for your coat, give him your cloak also."

Justification as a Legal Declaration

Justification is a judicial declaration of righteousness, not an infusion; this is contrasted with condemnation, using Deuteronomy 25:1, Proverbs 17:15, and Luke 7:29.

Then he says, "If someone compels you to go a mile, go with him twain." Because any Roman soldier could compel a citizen to carry his armor and his equipment for a mile. And if you and I were in a hurry to go do something, and here's a soldier and he compels us to take his armor a mile out of the way, it's an annoyance. So, our Lord is just teaching us here. But what these Pharisees had done, they had taken a legal judicial principle, and they then turned around and made it a personal vendetta, when it was not applied to them at all in that matter. Now, I want you to go back in your Bibles to the book of Deuteronomy, chapter 25. But let me show you another thing. You see, you have to understand that the Bible is full of legal and judicial terminology as well as principles. So when you look at Deuteronomy, chapter 25 and verse 1, and I'll show you some other passages, you must understand that the doctrine of justification is indeed a legal, judicial, not only term, but concept. So in Deuteronomy 25 verse 1,

Scripture Reading — Deuteronomy 25:1

"If there be a controversy between men and they come unto judgment, that the judges may judge them, then they shall justify the righteous and condemn the wicked."

So notice if you would, again, the judges are to justify the righteous and they're to condemn the wicked. Now, both justification and condemnation are legal concepts. Justification is a declaration before the law that a man is righteous and innocent.

Condemnation is a declaration before the law that the man is guilty and has violated the law. Now, I want you to turn to Proverbs chapter 17. You see, the Roman Catholic Church teaches that justification is an infusion of righteousness, which is not true. Justification is a declaration of righteousness from the judge. So if you look in Proverbs chapter 17 and verse 15, look what the Bible says.

Scripture Reading — Proverbs 17:15

"He that justifieth the wicked and he that condemneth the just, even they both are an abomination to the Lord."

Now, if justification is an infusion of righteousness into someone, how could justifying the wicked be an abomination to God? Because you'd be making the wicked righteous. But no, justification is a declaration. So here the judge then is declaring the wicked just or righteous when he is not. And then he's declaring the just condemned and wicked when he is not. So both of these, he says, are an abomination to the Lord: to justify a wicked man or condemn a just man.

Now, turn in your Bibles to the book of Luke chapter 7. Luke chapter 7. And look, if you would please, at verse 29. Luke 7, verse 29. Here's a very revealing verse.

Luke 7 verse 29:

Scripture Reading — Luke 7:29

"And all the people that heard him,"

that is John the Baptist,

Scripture Reading — Luke 7:29

"and all the people that heard him and the publicans justified God, being baptized with the baptism of John."

Now, if you try to tell me that justification is an infusing of righteousness, how do you make God righteous? How do you make him more righteous? It's impossible because he is perfectly righteous. He cannot be made more righteous. He cannot be made less righteous. Well, how in the world did the people justify God? Remember, justification is a legal, it is a judicial declaration. And Lord, here's what they were saying: "God is right. I am wrong. God is holy. I'm unholy. God is just. I'm a sinner." So they were justifying God by saying that the sentence that had been declared against them was right.

Now look at the next verse: "But the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized of him." So what the Pharisees were doing were justifying themselves. They were not justifying God. They were not pronouncing God righteous. They were pronouncing themselves righteous. So if you look in Luke 16 and verse 15, here's what our Lord said concerning these Pharisees. Luke 16 and verse 15:

Scripture Reading — Luke 16:15

"He said, 'You are they which justify yourselves before men, but God knoweth your hearts, for that which is highly esteemed among men is the abomination in the sight of God.'"

So the Pharisees were justifying themselves. They were saying, "We're not that kind of sinner. We're not wicked. We're not vile. We're not condemned." They were justifying themselves. Where the publican as a sinner said, "Yes, Lord, you're right. We're wicked. We're wrong. We deserve punishment." So you have to understand that justification is actually the antithesis or the opposite of condemnation. And so just like hot is the opposite of cold and big is the opposite of small, justification, therefore, is the opposite of condemnation. So you're either justified or you're condemned.

If you look in your Bibles to the book of Romans, chapter 8, Romans, chapter 8. And look, if you would, beginning there with verse 33. Romans 8 and verse 33, look what the Scripture says:

Scripture Reading — Romans 8:33-34

"Who shall lay anything to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth, who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea, rather, that is risen again, who is he that is at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us."

So it is God who justifies and it is God who condemns. And if you'll go back up to verse 1, look what he says: "There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit."

So, you're either justified or you are condemned. So, to justify means that you are pronounced righteous in light of the law. Condemnation means that you are pronounced guilty in light of the law. Justification and condemnation are legal forensic terms and acts. Justification is the passing of a sentence in favor of a person, while condemnation is passing a sentence against the person. It was Herman Witsius who said this: "We thus define the gospel justification of a sinner. It is a judicial but gracious act of God, whereby the elect and believing sinner is absolved from all the guilt of his sins, and hath a right to eternal life, adjudged to him on account of the obedience of Christ received by faith." One more quote, Jonathan Edwards said it like this: "A person is said to be justified when he's approved of God as free from the guilt of sin and its deserved punishment and as having that righteousness belonging to him that entitles him to the reward of life." So when you think about justification, that grand and glorious doctrine is indeed a judicial doctrine. It is a legal doctrine.

And so, therefore, you have to look at Scripture not only linguistically, not only historically, but you also have to look at Scripture judicially and legally. Now, let me give you number four today. You must also consider Scripture experientially. Now, what do I mean by experientially? We must ask ourselves when we look at a passage of Scripture, "Is there something in this passage that I must experience in my life?"

Principle 4: Consider Truth Experientially

We must ask what we are to experience; justification is judicial (done for us), while sanctification is experiential (done in us), gradual, and admits degrees.

Now, there is a vast difference between something that is judicial and something that is experiential. When something is judicial, it is something that is done for you. When something is done experientially, it is something that is done in you. So, let me just try to show you this concept when you consider justification and when you consider sanctification. Justification deals with the guilt of sin. Sanctification deals with the pollution of sin. Justification is a legal, judicial act which is done for you. Sanctification is experiential and internal, which is done in you. Now, let me just try to show you some distinctions between justification and sanctification. Remember, justification is judicial. Sanctification is experiential. Now, let me make a statement before I show you these differences. Actually, when you consider sanctification, there are two concepts that you must consider. There is indeed what you and I would call a positional sanctification, which you and I have in Jesus Christ. That positional sanctification is absolutely perfect. But I'm not talking about positional sanctification today. I'm talking about what you and I would call a practical sanctification.

Our practical sanctification is what we are in this life. So, sanctification is something that is moral and experiential. Justification is legal and judicial. Sanctification results from the operation of the Holy Spirit in us. Justification is based upon what Jesus Christ has done for us. Let me go further. Sanctification, which is practical—I'm talking about practical sanctification—is gradual and progressive. Justification is instantaneous and immutable. So when I say that sanctification admits degrees, and that it is gradual and progressive,

it means that we should actually be going, as the Bible says, from strength to strength, we should be gaining in holiness every day. But when you stop and think about the fact that justification is instantaneous and immutable, that will bring me to this: sanctification admits degrees, but justification does not. So let me try to explain it like this. When it comes to justification, even the Apostle Paul is not any more justified than I am. The Apostle Peter is not any more justified than Steve. Justification is perfect. It is instantaneous. It is immutable. But when you talk about sanctification, you remember, our Lord said some fell on good ground. And some brought forth thirtyfold, some sixtyfold, and some a hundredfold. In other words, there are degrees in sanctification. That's why some men are more holy than others. Some women are more holy than others. Some are less holy than others. That's why we are to go from strength to strength. We are to be progressing in our sanctification. Sanctification—here's another difference. Sanctification deals with the state of the sinner. Justification deals with the standing of the sinner. We're justified as we stand before God. That's our standing in Jesus Christ. But our sanctification is our state before God.

And I don't think anyone in this room would say that you're as holy as you should be or would want to be in this life. So sanctification is always experiential. So let me put it to you like this: while there are differences between justification and sanctification, there is no such thing as a justified unsanctified person. Whomever God justifies, He sanctifies. The word "sanctify" means to be set apart for a holy use. You may not be bringing forth but thirtyfold while some are bringing forth sixty and some are bringing forth eighty and ninety and some a hundred. But the truth is, if you've been justified, you will be sanctified. You will be set apart. And so for these individuals who tell me that, "Yeah, I was saved when I was seven years old. I've just lived for the devil the last fifty years, but I'm saved." No, no, no.

The Bible said,

Scripture Reading — 1 John 2:19

"They went out from us, that it might be made manifest that they were not of us, for had they been of us, no doubt they would have continued with us."

1 John 2, verse 19. So the proof that we have ever been justified by faith is that we're being sanctified in our lives. You cannot confuse the doctrine of justification and the doctrine of sanctification without perverting the gospel and without confounding the saints. So we have to consider truth linguistically, yes. Historically, yes. We must consider it judicially, legally, and we must consider it experientially.

Principle 5: Consider Truth Expositionally or Contextually

Every verse must be taken in context; using Job 12:6 and Luke 15, Weaver shows how ignoring context leads to misinterpretation.

We must consider truth expositionally or contextually. Every passage, every verse has to be taken in its context. You can prove anything that you want to prove if you take a verse out of context. For instance, I could prove from the Bible that thieves prosper. That it pays to be a thief. He said, "Where would you find something like that?" Well, I'll show you. Look in your Bibles to the book of Job, chapter 12, right before the book of Psalms. Look in Job, chapter 12. Job is speaking. And look what he says in verse 6. Watch this. Look in Job, chapter 12 and verse 6. Here's what he said. Watch carefully.

Scripture Reading — Job 12:6

"The tabernacles of robbers prosper, and they that provoke God are secure into whose hand God bringeth abundantly."

Why? It pays to be a thief, if you take that verse like that. But when you take it in the context, you will have to know that Job in this chapter is answering and refuting Zophar's argument in chapter 11. Look, if you would, verse 1, "And Job answered and said, 'No doubt, but you are the people and wisdom shall die with you.'"

"But I have understanding as well as you. I'm not inferior to you. Yet who knoweth such things as these? I'm as one mocked of his neighbor. Who calleth upon God, and he answereth him? And the just and upright man is left to scorn." That's Job. "He that is ready to slip with his feet is as the left despised in the thought of him that is at ease." That's Job.

Then he says, "The tabernacle of robbers." What's he talking about? Well, remember, he had these three friends. He had Eliphaz and Bildad and Zophar. When you get to Eliphaz, Eliphaz was a man who based all of his arguments on tradition. Bildad versed his own experience. Zophar was a dogmatist. And if you read Job chapter 11, he just simply says this: "Job, you're a sinner. You've sinned against God. If you'd repent of your sins, God would bless you and God would give you all this money and God would give you all this prosperity." And what Job is saying is, "Look, you're not helping me. Do you understand that God oftentimes curses the enemies with riches? Yes, the tabernacles of robbers prosper temporarily until God judges them." This is what he's saying. And you're trying to tell me that I'm a great sinner and I just need to repent. So the point I'm trying to make is when you take this in context, then you see very clearly that, you know, they do not prosper. Job is just answering Zophar's dogmatism back in Job chapter 11.

Now, so you have to take things in context. So I want you to do this. I want you to turn in your Bibles, if you would, to Luke chapter 15. And I want you to bear with me just for a minute. Everyone knows the content of Luke chapter 15. Or at least I sure hope you do. Because in Luke chapter 15, you read about the lost sheep. You read about the lost coin. And you read about the prodigal son.

I wish I had time to read this whole chapter to you. Well, let me read just a little bit of it. Look in verse 1: "Then drew near unto him the publicans and sinners, for to hear him. And the Pharisees and scribes murmured, saying, 'This man receiveth sinners, and eateth with them.' And he spake this parable unto them, saying, 'What man of you, having a hundred sheep, if he lose one of them, doth not leave the ninety and nine in the wilderness, and go after that which is lost, until he find it?'" "And when he had found it, he laid it on his shoulders, rejoicing. And when he cometh home, he calleth together his friends and neighbors, saying unto them, 'Rejoice with me, for I found my sheep which was lost.' I say unto you that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth more than over ninety-nine just persons which need no repentance. Either what woman having ten pieces of silver, if she lose one piece, doth not light a candle, and sweep the house, and seek diligently till she find it? And when she found it, she called her friends and her neighbors together, saying, 'Rejoice with me, for I found the piece which I had lost.' Likewise, I say unto you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth."

And then he goes on and he said, "A certain man had two sons." I'm not going to read it all. You know it. "And the younger of them said to his father, 'Father, give me the portion of goods that falleth unto me.' And he divided unto them his living. Not many days after the younger son took all together and took his journey into a far country where he wasted his substance with riotous living." Now, you know the rest of the story. So let me try to ask you some questions since I read this to you. Number one: How many parables are there in Luke chapter 15? Anybody answer, give me an answer.

Well, the average Christian and the average preacher says there are three. Well, that's not true. Although you read the lost sheep, the lost coin, and the lost son, if you will go back to verse 3, "And he spake this parable unto them." One parable. There's only one. But this one parable is divided into three parts. So the lost sheep demonstrates the work of the Savior. He came to seek and save the lost. The lost coin illustrates the work of the Holy Spirit. And the prodigal son returning to the father pictures the result of the Son seeking and the Spirit working and the sinner therefore comes back to the Father. OK, so the prodigal is the lost sheep that the Son sought and the woman illuminated the picture of the Holy Spirit.

Now, so let me ask you this question. So we know there's one parable in Luke 15. To whom was this parable spoken? There were two groups. So you have to deduce that there's got to be something in this parable for both groups. So if you look back at verse 1,

Scripture Reading — Luke 15:1-32

"Then drew near unto him the publicans and the sinners to hear him."

So there are publicans, tax collectors, sinners. Verse 2,

Scripture Reading — Luke 15:1-32

"...and the Pharisees and the scribes murmured, saying, 'This man receiveth sinners, and eateth with them.'"

So you've got publicans and sinners, and you've got the scribes and the Pharisees on this hand. So, you've got to look in this parable now and find that there is something for each of these groups. So let's see.

In the first part of this parable, the shepherd goes looking for the lost sheep. Hmm. Let's see. Would someone answer this question? Where were the 99 sheep left? In the wilderness. What is the wilderness a picture of? It's a picture of sin, rebellion. Where was the lost sheep taken? Oh, look at it. Verse 5. Well, let's read verse 4: "What man of you having a hundred sheep, if he lose one of them, doth not leave the ninety-nine in the wilderness, and go after that which is lost, until he find it?"

"And when he found it, he layeth it on his shoulders rejoicing. And when he cometh home, he calls together his friends and neighbors, saying unto them, 'Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep that was lost.' And then look at this amazing statement: 'I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety-nine just persons who need no repentance.'" Where were the 99? In the wilderness. Who were the 99? Scribes and Pharisees. They didn't think they needed to be saved. They didn't think they were lost. And so, very clearly, the 99 then speak of those Pharisees, while the one speaks of the publican and the sinners. When you get to the last section of this parable, the prodigal son, the prodigal son comes home. But is there another brother? Yeah, he's the older brother. I've got a message I preached years ago, I just entitled it "The Other Brother." The Other Brother. When he heard the rejoicing, he didn't know what was going on. And he asked one of the servants, "Well, what is this?" "Well, your brother who's lost is now back home, and your father's slain the fatted calf, and we're having a party." And what does the other brother do? He gets angry. He gets upset. He said, "All these years have I served thee, and I haven't done what this boy has done, and you've never given me a fatted calf." There's the 99 just persons who need no repentance.

So the point I'm trying to make is very clear. This parable is a picture of what transpired in Luke, chapter 18, verses 9 through 14. When the Pharisee and the publican went up to the temple to pray, and the Pharisee said, "I thank thee, Lord, that I'm not as other men, I'm not even as this publican over here, I fast twice in the week, I pay tithes of all that I own, and I do this and I do that." And the old publican would not even lift his eyes toward heaven, just smote himself on the breast and said, "God, be merciful to me, a sinner." And our Lord said, "Verily, that man, the publican, went down to his house justified rather than the other." So our Lord takes us one parable and shows us the work of the Son, the work of the Spirit, and the work of the Father. Because the Son sought the lost sheep. The woman with the candle sweeping indicated the work of the Holy Spirit in conviction, and then you see that prodigal son running to the Father, and the Father receiving him and giving him the ring of sonship and putting the best coat on him as could be possibly made.

Let me read to you very quickly just a comment by Arthur W. Pink. He said this: "The parable recorded in Luke chapter 15 cannot possibly be interpreted right if its context is ignored. What needless perplexity has been occasioned and diversity among commentators concerning the identity of the ninety-nine sheep left in the wilderness, defined as just persons who need no repentance, and the elder son who complained of the generous treatment accorded to his brother, through failure to use the key to observe, this one parable in three parts was not spoken by Christ to the disciples, but addressed to his enemies. It was given in reply to the Pharisees and the scribes who had murmured because our Lord received sinners and ate with them. His design was to expose the condition of their hearts and to vindicate his own gracious actions. He did so by portraying the lost condition of his carping critics and by making known the ground on which he received sinners into fellowship with himself.

and revealing the divine operations which issue in that blessed result. Once these broad facts be apprehended, there is no difficulty in understanding the details of the two distinct and sharply contrasted classes that are set forth to us in Luke 15, 1 and 2. The despised publicans and sinners who, from a deep sense of need, were attracted to Christ and the proud and self-satisfied Pharisees and scribes, and each of the three parts of this parable, the same two classes are in view and in that order. Wow.

There are so many comments that I have where this parable is actually broken down, but let me just read one quick one from Matthew Henry. He said this: "Here is a great deal of care and pains taken in quest of it. The woman lights a candle to look behind the door, under the table, and in every corner of the house, sweeps the house, and seeks diligently till she finds it." "This represents the various means and methods God uses to bring lost souls home to himself. He has lighted the candle of the gospel not to show himself the way to us, but to show us the way to him, to discover ourselves. He has swept the house by the convictions of the word. He seeks diligently. His heart is upon it to bring lost souls to himself." So, when you look at Luke chapter 15, if you do not take this expositionally, if you do not take it contextually, there's no way in the world that it can be properly interpreted. There's no way that it could be properly understood.

Application and Conclusion

Weaver urges applying these five principles in study, promising that God will give understanding as we diligently consider His Word.

So let me make some applications today. I'll finish this next time, Lord willing. But in order to interpret a passage, we must only have the tools. We must only have the spiritual necessities that I've already dealt with. But when it comes to the consideration of a passage, we need to look at that passage linguistically. We need to look at it historically. We need to look at it legally and judicially. We need to look at it experientially. We also need to look at it contextually and expositionally. So when you begin to analyze the passage in these ways, all of a sudden the passage begins to come out and you see exactly what is taught in Scripture. You see, Paul did indeed command Timothy, "Consider what I say, and the Lord give thee understanding in all things." So there's not going to be any understanding given unless we actually begin to consider. And so without real studious consideration, no understanding is going to be given.

That means this: it doesn't matter if you've got two hours of study or 15 minutes of study. Whatever verse you're looking at or whatever passage you're looking at, you need to say, "How am I to consider this passage?" and you begin to look at the passage and so forth, the way that I've described, and you'll be absolutely astounded at the truths that you will see as God gives you understanding. You always have to consider truth in these ways that I've given you so far. And Lord willing, next time I will finish up to number 13 and let you see what it means to consider things in the 13 ways that God gives us to consider Scripture. Well, let's pray. Father, we ask in the name of Jesus Christ for Your grace and for Your mercy, for Your goodness and kindness. Help us, Lord, to love Thee, to live for Thee, to honor Thee, to consider Your Word. Lord, consider it linguistically. To consider it, Lord, historically. To consider it legally and judicially. Consider it experientially. To consider it, Lord, contextually. Our Lord, we ask that You would indeed teach us and build us up in the most holy faith. In Thy name we pray, Amen.

Study Guide

Major Themes

The Necessity of Diligent Bible Study

Summary: A lack of study is a sin; pastors and Christians must prioritize time in the Word, and deacons should relieve pastors of extraneous duties to enable study.

Evidence: Weaver states, 'the lack of study... is a sin' and cites Acts 6 to show deacons were chosen so apostles could give themselves to prayer and the Word.

Historical Context in Interpretation

Summary: The Bible was written to specific people for specific reasons; understanding the original intent is essential before applying it today.

Evidence: Weaver says, 'The Bible was not written in a vacuum... you need to be asking... To whom was this book written? Why was this book written?'

Judicial/Legal Nature of Scripture

Summary: Many biblical concepts are legal; justification is a forensic declaration, not an infusion, and misapplying legal principles leads to error.

Evidence: Weaver explains, 'Justification is a declaration before the law that a man is righteous and innocent,' contrasting it with Roman Catholic teaching.

Experiential vs. Judicial Truth

Summary: Justification is a legal act done for us; sanctification is an experiential work done in us, gradual and progressive, with degrees of holiness.

Evidence: Weaver says, 'When something is judicial, it is something that is done for you. When something is done experientially, it is something that is done in you.'

Contextual Interpretation

Summary: Verses must be taken in context; ignoring context leads to false doctrine, as seen in Job 12:6 and the single parable of Luke 15.

Evidence: Weaver demonstrates, 'You can prove anything that you want to prove if you take a verse out of context,' using Job 12:6 and Luke 15.

Key Arguments

Deacons should free pastors for study

Summary: Based on Acts 6, deacons were chosen to handle practical matters so apostles could focus on prayer and the Word; modern deacons should do the same.

Evidence: Weaver reads Acts 6:2-4 and says, 'if deacons today were biblical... it would certainly give the pastor the needed and necessary time to study.'

Pharisees perverted the judicial principle of 'eye for eye'

Summary: The 'eye for eye' law was given to judges for proportionate punishment, but Pharisees turned it into a license for personal vengeance, which Jesus corrected.

Evidence: Weaver says, 'what the Pharisees had done, they had taken this legal judicial principle... and turned it to mean and to teach personal vindictiveness.'

Justification is a legal declaration, not an infusion

Summary: Using Deuteronomy 25:1, Proverbs 17:15, and Luke 7:29, Weaver argues justification is a forensic act of declaring righteous, not making righteous.

Evidence: Weaver states, 'Justification is a declaration before the law that a man is righteous and innocent... the Roman Catholic Church teaches that justification is an infusion of righteousness, which is not true.'

Sanctification is experiential and admits degrees

Summary: Unlike justification, practical sanctification is gradual, progressive, and varies among believers, as illustrated by the parable of the sower's thirty, sixty, and hundredfold.

Evidence: Weaver says, 'Sanctification admits degrees... some men are more holy than others... That's why we are to go from strength to strength.'

Luke 15 is one parable with three parts, not three parables

Summary: The chapter contains one parable spoken to Pharisees and sinners, with the lost sheep, coin, and son representing the work of the Son, Spirit, and Father.

Evidence: Weaver notes, 'And he spake this parable unto them. One parable. There's only one. But this one parable is divided into three parts.'

Scripture References

2 Timothy 2:7

Context: Paul's command to Timothy to consider what he says, with the promise that the Lord will give understanding.

2 Timothy 2:15

Context: The charge to study to show oneself approved, rightly dividing the word of truth.

Acts 6:1-4

Context: The selection of deacons to serve tables so the apostles could devote themselves to prayer and the ministry of the Word.

Deuteronomy 19:16-21

Context: The law concerning false witnesses and the judicial principle of 'eye for eye, tooth for tooth' given to judges.

Exodus 21:22-25

Context: The law of retaliation ('eye for eye') in the context of judges determining punishment.

Leviticus 24:19-22

Context: The command for one manner of law, including 'breach for breach, eye for eye,' as a matter of law.

Matthew 5:38-39

Context: Jesus correcting the Pharisees' misinterpretation of 'eye for eye' as personal vengeance rather than a judicial principle.

Deuteronomy 25:1

Context: The judges are to justify the righteous and condemn the wicked, showing justification and condemnation as legal concepts.

Proverbs 17:15

Context: Justifying the wicked and condemning the just are both an abomination to the Lord, proving justification is a declaration.

Luke 7:29

Context: The people and publicans justified God, meaning they declared Him righteous, not infused righteousness into Him.

Luke 16:15

Context: Jesus rebukes the Pharisees for justifying themselves before men.

Romans 8:33-34

Context: It is God who justifies; who is he that condemns? Christ died and intercedes.

Romans 8:1

Context: There is no condemnation to those in Christ Jesus.

1 John 2:19

Context: Those who went out from us were not of us; true believers continue, proving sanctification follows justification.

Job 12:6

Context: Job says the tabernacles of robbers prosper, but in context he is refuting Zophar's dogmatic argument, not endorsing theft.

Luke 15:1-32

Context: The one parable of the lost sheep, coin, and son, spoken to Pharisees and sinners, illustrating the work of the Son, Spirit, and Father.

Luke 18:9-14

Context: The parable of the Pharisee and the publican, where the publican went home justified rather than the Pharisee.

Historical References

J. Sidlow Baxter, 'Explore the Book'

Context: Weaver recommends this book as a resource for historical background on every book of the Bible.

Herman Witsius

Context: Quoted defining gospel justification as a judicial but gracious act of God.

Jonathan Edwards

Context: Quoted defining justification as being approved of God as free from guilt and having a right to the reward of life.

Arthur W. Pink

Context: Quoted on the importance of context in interpreting Luke 15, noting the parable was addressed to Christ's enemies.

Matthew Henry

Context: Quoted on the lost coin parable, representing God's means and methods to bring lost souls home.

Important Quotes

Consider what I say. And the Lord give thee understanding in all things.

Significance: The foundational verse for the series, emphasizing the need for careful consideration to receive understanding.

Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

Significance: The call to diligent study and accurate handling of Scripture.

It is not reason that we should leave the word of God and serve tables.

Significance: The apostles' priority on the Word over practical duties, used to argue for deacons freeing pastors.

The Bible was not written in a vacuum.

Significance: Key principle for historical interpretation; Scripture was written to specific people for specific reasons.

Justification is a declaration before the law that a man is righteous and innocent.

Significance: Clear definition of justification as forensic, countering the Roman Catholic view of infusion.

When something is judicial, it is something that is done for you. When something is done experientially, it is something that is done in you.

Significance: Distinction between justification (judicial) and sanctification (experiential).

You can prove anything that you want to prove if you take a verse out of context.

Significance: Warning about the danger of ignoring context, illustrated with Job 12:6.

And he spake this parable unto them. One parable. There's only one. But this one parable is divided into three parts.

Significance: Key insight into Luke 15, showing the unity of the chapter and its intended audience.

Discussion Questions

What are some practical ways deacons today can relieve pastors of extraneous duties to allow more time for study and prayer?

Context: Weaver argues from Acts 6 that deacons were chosen to serve so apostles could focus on the Word.

How does understanding the original historical context of a biblical book change the way you apply its teachings today?

Context: Weaver emphasizes asking to whom, why, and when a book was written.

Why is it important to distinguish between judicial principles given to judges and personal commands for believers, as seen in the 'eye for eye' passages?

Context: Weaver shows how the Pharisees misapplied a legal principle to personal vengeance.

How does viewing justification as a legal declaration rather than an infusion of righteousness affect your assurance of salvation?

Context: Weaver contrasts the biblical view with Roman Catholic teaching, using Proverbs 17:15 and Luke 7:29.

In what ways should the experiential nature of sanctification motivate a believer to pursue holiness?

Context: Weaver explains that sanctification is gradual, progressive, and admits degrees.

How does recognizing Luke 15 as one parable with three parts change your understanding of the chapter's message?

Context: Weaver argues the parable was spoken to Pharisees and sinners, with each part addressing both groups.

What steps can you take to ensure you are considering Scripture contextually rather than isolating verses?

Context: Weaver warns that taking verses out of context can prove anything, using Job 12:6 as an example.

Applications

Prioritize study of the Word

Summary: Pastors and Christians must guard their study time and not let other duties crowd out the necessary consideration of Scripture.

Evidence: Weaver says, 'the lack of study... is a sin' and urges deacons to relieve pastors for study.

Use historical background in study

Summary: Before studying a book, learn its historical context—author, audience, purpose—to rightly interpret it.

Evidence: Weaver recommends 'Explore the Book' by J. Sidlow Baxter and says to ask, 'To whom was this book written? Why?'

Distinguish judicial from personal commands

Summary: Recognize when a passage is a legal principle for judges versus a personal moral command, to avoid misapplication.

Evidence: Weaver shows how the Pharisees misapplied 'eye for eye' to personal vengeance, which Jesus corrected.

Rest in justification as a finished legal act

Summary: Understand that justification is a once-for-all declaration of righteousness, not a process, giving assurance.

Evidence: Weaver says justification is 'instantaneous and immutable' and quotes Romans 8:1.

Pursue practical sanctification

Summary: Since sanctification is experiential and progressive, believers should actively grow in holiness.

Evidence: Weaver says, 'we should actually be going... from strength to strength, we should be gaining in holiness every day.'

Always read verses in context

Summary: Never isolate a verse; consider the surrounding passage, chapter, and book to avoid false interpretations.

Evidence: Weaver demonstrates with Job 12:6 and Luke 15 that context is essential for correct meaning.

deepseek | deepseek-v4-pro | clean_readable_transcript | 2026-06-05T12:55:48Z

deepseek | deepseek-v4-pro | weaver_study | 2026-06-05T23:21:46Z

Clean Transcript

How to Study and Learn Biblical Truths - Part 6

Clean readable transcript. This view follows the Commentary.net cleaned segment text while preserving timestamps for audio follow-along.

All right, let's open our Bibles again to 2 Timothy, chapter 2. And again, we're going to read verse 7 and then we're going to read verse 15 as well. So this is in the series on how to study and learn biblical truth. This is the sixth message. Notice, if you would please, in verse 7, the Apostle Paul tells Timothy, "Consider what I say. And the Lord give thee understanding in all things." And then skipping down to verse 15, "Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." One of the problems that has really emerged over the last number of years is there has been actually a lack of study of the Word of God. The lack of study is even true among pastors. While not excusing the lack of study, which, by the way, is a sin, the truth is that most pastors and most preachers have allowed things to slip in that would steal their time of study. And many pastors oftentimes visit—in fact, visit beyond what they actually need to.
#1 | 0:00 to 1:16 | cleaned
They fellowship. They go to ministerial meetings. Some coach ball. Some teach and perform other hosts of duties that actually could be laid aside. And it should be emphasized as well that if the original deacons were selected by the people and presented to the apostles to do one thing, and that was to relieve the apostles so that they could attend to the Word of God. If you would look in your Bibles very quickly to the book of Acts, chapter 6, and notice the first four verses, Acts chapter 6, beginning there with verse 1. And I want you to know why these deacons were chosen originally. And it's very plain in this passage.
#2 | 1:17 to 2:07 | cleaned
The Bible says, "In those days when the number of the disciples was multiplied, and there arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration," that is, they were not getting the food that they were supposed to be getting. "Then the twelve called the multitude of the disciples unto them and said, It is not reason that we should leave the word of God and serve tables. Wherefore, brethren, look you out among you seven men full of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost, and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business. But we will give ourselves continually to prayer and the ministry of the word." So the apostle said, "It is not reason that we should leave the word of God and serve tables."
#3 | 2:07 to 2:52 | cleaned
In other words, there's nothing wrong with serving tables, but obviously you could not take care of all of those duties and do the studying and praying that needed to be done. So they originally were chosen to relieve the pastors of extraneous duties so that they may give themselves actually to prayer and the ministry of the word. So I believe this: if deacons today were biblical and they fulfill their official function and duties as they should, it would certainly give the pastor the needed and necessary time to study. And I might point out, deacons are not to run the church. They are servants. They're not to run the pastor. They are servants.
#4 | 2:52 to 3:33 | cleaned
And the word "deacon" is transliterated from the Greek. That is, it's brought down letter for letter, "deacon" and "to deacon." But the word translated actually means "servant." So obviously they were to serve not only the people, but they were to serve the pastor as well. Arguably, when you have Christians and when you have pastors who are working anywhere from 40 to 60 hours a week, that also cuts into your study time as well. And that's true not only concerning the pastors, that's true concerning the Christians.
#5 | 3:34 to 4:06 | cleaned
So the second problem, I think, is this. It's not just simply that there is a lack of study. It is the fact that most pastors and most Christians have never been taught to study. They do not know how to study, and if you do not know how to study, then you obviously cannot study. And the truth of the matter is, no pastor and no teacher should be struggling just to find something to preach or to teach. I mean, there's so much in the Word of God, and yet I have seen and I have known pastors. I know one particularly I observed personally. It was midnight on Saturday night and he was just trying to find something to preach on Sunday morning. To me, that's just absolutely insane, I mean.
#6 | 4:07 to 4:57 | cleaned
He should have been studying. No teacher, no preacher should ever run out of material. The Bible is just simply full of material. So what I'm trying to say is this: if you really want to learn how to study, that's what I'm trying to teach. If you do not really want to learn how to study, then just don't pay attention and you really will not, and you'll end up paying the price later on, especially at the judgment seat of Christ.
#7 | 4:58 to 5:25 | cleaned
So last week when I began giving you these 13 principles that you need to use when you're considering truth, the first one I gave you was linguistics. That is, you must understand what the word actually means. And you cannot come and superimpose upon that word your definition or what you think the word means. You need to find out exactly what that word means, since words have meaning and you need to know what the meaning is from the one in Scripture.
#8 | 5:25 to 5:57 | cleaned
Now, to begin today, I want to give you the second thing that we need to consider when we're looking at a text or a passage or a chapter or even a book. So we not only need to consider it linguistically, but secondly, we need to consider it historically. The Bible was not written in a vacuum. In fact, the truth of the matter is each book of the Bible is written for some reason, for some purpose, and to some people, especially the epistles. So you need to be asking these questions like, "To whom was this book written? Why was this book written? When was this book written? What was the author's need or what was the author's person or purpose in writing? And how was this epistle or how was this book to be applied when the people to whom it was written received it?" So our first goal then when we look at Scripture is not only to consider things linguistically, but also to consider the original intent and the original purpose and the original meaning of the passage.
#9 | 5:58 to 7:02 | cleaned
In other words, what was the author's meaning when he wrote that book or that passage? So, again, this principle recognizes that the Bible was not written in a vacuum. It was written in history to a specific people or person and for a specific reason. So once we understand the specific purpose or reason, then we need to understand also how it applies to us today. So when you look at Scripture, there are several things that you need to understand when it comes to this. First of all, observation: What does the Bible say? Secondly, interpretation: What does the Bible mean? Thirdly, what did this passage mean or this chapter or this book mean to those persons to whom it was written? And then number four, how is this passage applied to us today?
#10 | 7:02 to 8:00 | cleaned
I'm going to get into this more next time, but the truth of the matter is we need to ask those questions. And each and every book in the Bible should be considered historically.
#11 | 8:00 to 8:12 | cleaned
Now, if you do not have the time, if you do not have the knowledge, if you do not have the know-how to look up the history of each book, its date, its purpose, its time, its writing, its theme, there is a wonderful help. I purchased the book many, many years ago. It's a book written by J. Sidlow Baxter. It is entitled "Explore the Book." It is a book about three or four inches thick, and it gives you the historical background on every book in the Bible. And it gives you a lot of different information as well. So if you don't have that, "Explore the Book" by J. Sidlow Baxter, I would encourage you to get that book because that way you could read even concerning the book before you begin to go through the book in the Bible. And you'd already basically have the history laid out for you.
#12 | 8:12 to 9:15 | cleaned
So we need to consider truth not only linguistically, we need to consider truth historically. Now, here's the third one today. We need to consider truth judicially or legally. The Bible is a book of law. It is the revelation of God's law. And therefore, there are many judicial or legal principles in the Bible. Without me going into depth on many of these, I want you to just stop and think with me just for a moment of all the laws that are there in the Bible. There are the laws of sacrifice. There's the laws of cleansing. There's the law of the leper. There's the law of the levirate. There's the law of the kinsman-redeemer. I mean, there are many, many passages that you cannot even understand unless you begin to grasp the fact that here is a legal or a judicial principle. Now, let me just show you how many times the Pharisees perverted this truth. So let me show you. I want you to turn in your Bibles, if you would, first of all, to Deuteronomy chapter 19.
#13 | 9:15 to 10:26 | cleaned
We're going to look at several passages. And I want to point something out, and then we're going to go to the book of Matthew when we get through with the Old Testament. So look, if you would, in Deuteronomy, chapter 19, and let's begin reading there with verse 16. I want you to see this in the context because, again, this is a legal or judicial principle. So Deuteronomy, chapter 19, verse 16, God says, "If a false witness rise up against any man to testify against him that which is wrong, then both the men between whom the controversy is shall stand before the Lord, before the priest, and the judges which shall be in those days. And the judges shall make diligent inquisition. And behold, if the witness be a false witness, and hath testified falsely against his brother, then shall you do unto him as he thought to have done unto his brother."
#14 | 10:26 to 11:29 | cleaned
"So shalt thou put the evil away from among you, and those which remain shall hear and fear, and shall henceforth commit no more any such evil among you. And thine eye shall not pity, but life shall go for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot." So here is my question. To whom was this passage written? It is a legal, judicial principle, and it was written for those who stood before the judges and the priests, and consequently the Lord whom the judges and the priests represented.
#15 | 11:30 to 12:06 | cleaned
Now, look back in your Bibles to the book of Exodus chapter 21. Exodus 21, and let's begin reading there with verse 22. Exodus 21 verse 22, the Bible says, "If men strive and hurt a woman with child so that her fruit depart from her and yet no mischief follow, he shall be surely punished according as the woman's husband will lay upon him and he shall pay as the judges determine. And if any mischief follow, then shalt thou give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, and stripe for stripe." But note, if you would, in the context, it is to the judges. One more now. Look in Leviticus chapter 24, and let's begin reading there with verse 19. Leviticus 24 and verse 19. Here it is.
#16 | 12:07 to 13:05 | cleaned
"And if a man cause a blemish in his neighbor, as he hath done, so shall it be done to him. Breach for breach, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, as he hath caused a blemish in a man, so shall it be done to him again. And he that killeth a beast, he shall restore it, and he that killeth a man, he shall be put to death."
#17 | 13:14 to 13:35 | cleaned
Now watch, "You shall have one manner of law, as well for the stranger, as for your own country, for I am the Lord your God."
#18 | 13:35 to 13:46 | cleaned
Now, note if you would please, in all these other passages, it was before the judges. Now he's saying this is to be a matter of law.
#19 | 13:46 to 13:56 | cleaned
Now, if you will turn in your Bibles to the book of Matthew chapter 5, I want you to note what the Pharisees had done with this legal judicial principle. In Matthew chapter 5, beginning there with verse 38, look what our Lord says. Matthew 5, verse 38. Our Lord said, "You have heard that it has been said, an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth."
#20 | 13:57 to 14:24 | cleaned
"But I say unto you that you resist not evil. But whoso shall smite thee on the right cheek, turn him the other also." And then he goes on. What is he talking about? "You've heard that it had been said, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth." What our Lord is doing in Matthew chapter 5 is this: He is correcting the misinterpretation of the law by the Pharisees. He's also correcting the misapplication of the law by the Pharisees. So what the Pharisees had done, they had taken this legal judicial principle, a principle of the law, a principle that was given to the judges where they were to make the punishment fit the crime, an eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, life for life, foot for foot, hand for hand, burning for burning, stripe for stripe.
#21 | 14:25 to 15:16 | cleaned
And what they had done, they had turned it to mean and to teach personal vindictiveness and personal vengeance. That's what he's correcting right here. Because they were saying, "Well, if Steve hit me, I can hit him back. If he cursed me, I can curse him back. If he slapped me, I can slap him back."
#22 | 15:17 to 15:37 | cleaned
Now, I want you to look at what he said in verse 39. "But I say unto you that ye resist not evil, but whosoever shall smite thee on the right cheek, turn him the other also."
#23 | 15:37 to 15:46 | cleaned
Now, this is not a self-defense situation. So, if Gary and I are facing each other, and I take my fist and I ball it up, and I swing at him and I hit him as hard as I could hit him, which cheek would my fist land on if he's facing me? His left. Not his right. So if I smite him on the right cheek, that means this: it's a back fist. It's a slap. It's an insult. It's kind of like back in the 1700s, when these Frenchmen would take their glove and say, "I challenge you to a duel" and just slap him on the cheek.
#24 | 15:47 to 16:31 | cleaned
It was not anything that was hurtful. It was just an insult. And actually what our Lord is doing in this passage is teaching how to deal with these petty annoyances of life. So he said, "If somebody smites you on the right cheek," that is, he insults you, "turn him the left cheek." And then he goes on to say, "If a man sue thee at law for your coat, give him your cloak also."
#25 | 16:31 to 16:58 | cleaned
Then he says, "If someone compels you to go a mile, go with him twain." Because any Roman soldier could compel a citizen to carry his armor and his equipment for a mile. And if you and I were in a hurry to go do something, and here's a soldier and he compels us to take his armor a mile out of the way, it's an annoyance. So, our Lord is just teaching us here.
#26 | 16:58 to 17:25 | cleaned
But what these Pharisees had done, they had taken a legal judicial principle, and they then turned around and made it a personal vendetta, when it was not applied to them at all in that matter. Now, I want you to go back in your Bibles to the book of Deuteronomy, chapter 25. But let me show you another thing. You see, you have to understand that the Bible is full of legal and judicial terminology as well as principles. So when you look at Deuteronomy, chapter 25 and verse 1, and I'll show you some other passages, you must understand that the doctrine of justification is indeed a legal, judicial, not only term, but concept. So in Deuteronomy 25 verse 1, "If there be a controversy between men and they come unto judgment, that the judges may judge them, then they shall justify the righteous and condemn the wicked." So notice if you would, again, the judges are to justify the righteous and they're to condemn the wicked. Now, both justification and condemnation are legal concepts. Justification is a declaration before the law that a man is righteous and innocent.
#27 | 17:25 to 18:57 | cleaned
Condemnation is a declaration before the law that the man is guilty and has violated the law. Now, I want you to turn to Proverbs chapter 17. You see, the Roman Catholic Church teaches that justification is an infusion of righteousness, which is not true. Justification is a declaration of righteousness from the judge. So if you look in Proverbs chapter 17 and verse 15, look what the Bible says.
#28 | 18:58 to 19:34 | cleaned
"He that justifieth the wicked and he that condemneth the just, even they both are an abomination to the Lord." Now, if justification is an infusion of righteousness into someone, how could justifying the wicked be an abomination to God? Because you'd be making the wicked righteous. But no, justification is a declaration. So here the judge then is declaring the wicked just or righteous when he is not. And then he's declaring the just condemned and wicked when he is not. So both of these, he says, are an abomination to the Lord: to justify a wicked man or condemn a just man.
#29 | 19:35 to 20:20 | cleaned
Now, turn in your Bibles to the book of Luke chapter 7. Luke chapter 7. And look, if you would please, at verse 29. Luke 7, verse 29. Here's a very revealing verse.
#30 | 20:20 to 20:32 | cleaned
Luke 7 verse 29: "And all the people that heard him," that is John the Baptist, "and all the people that heard him and the publicans justified God, being baptized with the baptism of John."
#31 | 20:41 to 20:58 | cleaned
Now, if you try to tell me that justification is an infusing of righteousness, how do you make God righteous? How do you make him more righteous? It's impossible because he is perfectly righteous. He cannot be made more righteous. He cannot be made less righteous. Well, how in the world did the people justify God? Remember, justification is a legal, it is a judicial declaration. And Lord, here's what they were saying: "God is right. I am wrong. God is holy. I'm unholy. God is just. I'm a sinner." So they were justifying God by saying that the sentence that had been declared against them was right.
#32 | 20:59 to 21:41 | cleaned
Now look at the next verse: "But the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized of him." So what the Pharisees were doing were justifying themselves. They were not justifying God. They were not pronouncing God righteous. They were pronouncing themselves righteous. So if you look in Luke 16 and verse 15, here's what our Lord said concerning these Pharisees. Luke 16 and verse 15: "He said, 'You are they which justify yourselves before men, but God knoweth your hearts, for that which is highly esteemed among men is the abomination in the sight of God.'" So the Pharisees were justifying themselves.
#33 | 21:42 to 22:32 | cleaned
They were saying, "We're not that kind of sinner. We're not wicked. We're not vile. We're not condemned." They were justifying themselves. Where the publican as a sinner said, "Yes, Lord, you're right. We're wicked. We're wrong. We deserve punishment." So you have to understand that justification is actually the antithesis or the opposite of condemnation. And so just like hot is the opposite of cold and big is the opposite of small, justification, therefore, is the opposite of condemnation. So you're either justified or you're condemned.
#34 | 22:32 to 23:07 | cleaned
If you look in your Bibles to the book of Romans, chapter 8, Romans, chapter 8. And look, if you would, beginning there with verse 33. Romans 8 and verse 33, look what the Scripture says: "Who shall lay anything to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth, who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea, rather, that is risen again, who is he that is at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us." So it is God who justifies and it is God who condemns. And if you'll go back up to verse 1, look what he says: "There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit."
#35 | 23:07 to 24:00 | cleaned
So, you're either justified or you are condemned. So, to justify means that you are pronounced righteous in light of the law. Condemnation means that you are pronounced guilty in light of the law. Justification and condemnation are legal forensic terms and acts. Justification is the passing of a sentence in favor of a person, while condemnation is passing a sentence against the person. It was Herman Witsius who said this: "We thus define the gospel justification of a sinner.
#36 | 24:00 to 24:46 | cleaned
It is a judicial but gracious act of God, whereby the elect and believing sinner is absolved from all the guilt of his sins, and hath a right to eternal life, adjudged to him on account of the obedience of Christ received by faith." One more quote, Jonathan Edwards said it like this: "A person is said to be justified when he's approved of God as free from the guilt of sin and its deserved punishment and as having that righteousness belonging to him that entitles him to the reward of life." So when you think about justification, that grand and glorious doctrine is indeed a judicial doctrine. It is a legal doctrine.
#37 | 24:47 to 25:33 | cleaned
And so, therefore, you have to look at Scripture not only linguistically, not only historically, but you also have to look at Scripture judicially and legally. Now, let me give you number four today. You must also consider Scripture experientially. Now, what do I mean by experientially? We must ask ourselves when we look at a passage of Scripture, "Is there something in this passage that I must experience in my life?"
#38 | 25:34 to 26:07 | cleaned
Now, there is a vast difference between something that is judicial and something that is experiential. When something is judicial, it is something that is done for you. When something is done experientially, it is something that is done in you. So, let me just try to show you this concept when you consider justification and when you consider sanctification. Justification deals with the guilt of sin. Sanctification deals with the pollution of sin. Justification is a legal, judicial act which is done for you. Sanctification is experiential and internal, which is done in you. Now, let me just try to show you some distinctions between justification and sanctification. Remember, justification is judicial. Sanctification is experiential. Now, let me make a statement before I show you these differences. Actually, when you consider sanctification, there are two concepts that you must consider. There is indeed what you and I would call a positional sanctification, which you and I have in Jesus Christ. That positional sanctification is absolutely perfect. But I'm not talking about positional sanctification today. I'm talking about what you and I would call a practical sanctification.
#39 | 26:08 to 27:54 | cleaned
Our practical sanctification is what we are in this life. So, sanctification is something that is moral and experiential. Justification is legal and judicial. Sanctification results from the operation of the Holy Spirit in us. Justification is based upon what Jesus Christ has done for us. Let me go further. Sanctification, which is practical—I'm talking about practical sanctification—is gradual and progressive. Justification is instantaneous and immutable. So when I say that sanctification admits degrees, and that it is gradual and progressive,
#40 | 27:55 to 29:01 | cleaned
it means that we should actually be going, as the Bible says, from strength to strength, we should be gaining in holiness every day. But when you stop and think about the fact that justification is instantaneous and immutable, that will bring me to this: sanctification admits degrees, but justification does not. So let me try to explain it like this. When it comes to justification, even the Apostle Paul
#41 | 29:03 to 29:36 | cleaned
is not any more justified than I am. The Apostle Peter is not any more justified than Steve. Justification is perfect. It is instantaneous. It is immutable. But when you talk about sanctification, you remember, our Lord said some fell on good ground. And some brought forth thirtyfold, some sixtyfold, and some a hundredfold. In other words, there are degrees in sanctification. That's why some men are more holy than others. Some women are more holy than others. Some are less holy than others. That's why we are to go from strength to strength. We are to be progressing in our sanctification. Sanctification—here's another difference. Sanctification deals with the state of the sinner. Justification deals with the standing of the sinner. We're justified as we stand before God. That's our standing in Jesus Christ. But our sanctification is our state before God.
#42 | 29:37 to 30:52 | cleaned
And I don't think anyone in this room would say that you're as holy as you should be or would want to be in this life. So sanctification is always experiential. So let me put it to you like this: while there are differences between justification and sanctification, there is no such thing as a justified unsanctified person. Whomever God justifies, He sanctifies. The word "sanctify" means to be set apart for a holy use.
#43 | 30:52 to 31:32 | cleaned
You may not be bringing forth but thirtyfold while some are bringing forth sixty and some are bringing forth eighty and ninety and some a hundred. But the truth is, if you've been justified, you will be sanctified. You will be set apart. And so for these individuals who tell me that, "Yeah, I was saved when I was seven years old. I've just lived for the devil the last fifty years, but I'm saved." No, no, no.
#44 | 31:33 to 31:56 | cleaned
The Bible said, "They went out from us, that it might be made manifest that they were not of us, for had they been of us, no doubt they would have continued with us." 1 John 2, verse 19. So the proof that we have ever been justified by faith is that we're being sanctified in our lives. You cannot confuse the doctrine of justification and the doctrine of sanctification without perverting the gospel and without confounding the saints.
#45 | 31:57 to 32:28 | cleaned
So we have to consider truth linguistically, yes. Historically, yes. We must consider it judicially, legally, and we must consider it experientially.
#46 | 32:29 to 32:40 | cleaned
Now, I'm going to tell you this. I'm going to repeat it probably again today. I'll repeat it in the next message. Just have to remember this: not all the Bible was written to you. Not all the Bible is written about you, but all the Bible is written for you. So you need to ask, "Is there something in this passage that I am to experience in my life?" OK, number five, and this is probably as far as we will get today.
#47 | 32:40 to 33:11 | cleaned
We must consider truth expositionally or contextually. Every passage, every verse has to be taken in its context. You can prove anything that you want to prove if you take a verse out of context. For instance, I could prove from the Bible that thieves prosper. That it pays to be a thief. He said, "Where would you find something like that?" Well, I'll show you. Look in your Bibles to the book of Job, chapter 12, right before the book of Psalms. Look in Job, chapter 12. Job is speaking. And look what he says in verse 6. Watch this. Look in Job, chapter 12 and verse 6. Here's what he said. Watch carefully. "The tabernacles of robbers prosper, and they that provoke God are secure into whose hand God bringeth abundantly." Why? It pays to be a thief, if you take that verse like that. But when you take it in the context, you will have to know that Job in this chapter is answering and refuting Zophar's argument in chapter 11. Look, if you would, verse 1, "And Job answered and said, 'No doubt, but you are the people and wisdom shall die with you.'"
#48 | 33:13 to 35:05 | cleaned
"But I have understanding as well as you. I'm not inferior to you. Yet who knoweth such things as these? I'm as one mocked of his neighbor. Who calleth upon God, and he answereth him? And the just and upright man is left to scorn." That's Job. "He that is ready to slip with his feet is as the left despised in the thought of him that is at ease." That's Job.
#49 | 35:06 to 35:30 | cleaned
Then he says, "The tabernacle of robbers." What's he talking about? Well, remember, he had these three friends. He had Eliphaz and Bildad and Zophar. When you get to Eliphaz, Eliphaz was a man who based all of his arguments on tradition. Bildad versed his own experience. Zophar was a dogmatist. And if you read Job chapter 11, he just simply says this: "Job, you're a sinner. You've sinned against God. If you'd repent of your sins, God would bless you and God would give you all this money and God would give you all this prosperity." And what Job is saying is, "Look, you're not helping me. Do you understand that God oftentimes curses the enemies with riches? Yes, the tabernacles of robbers prosper temporarily until God judges them." This is what he's saying. And you're trying to tell me that I'm a great sinner and I just need to repent. So the point I'm trying to make is when you take this in context, then you see very clearly that, you know, they do not prosper. Job is just answering Zophar's dogmatism back in Job chapter 11.
#50 | 35:31 to 36:53 | cleaned
Now, so you have to take things in context. So I want you to do this. I want you to turn in your Bibles, if you would, to Luke chapter 15. And I want you to bear with me just for a minute. Everyone knows the content of Luke chapter 15. Or at least I sure hope you do. Because in Luke chapter 15, you read about the lost sheep. You read about the lost coin. And you read about the prodigal son.
#51 | 36:53 to 37:31 | cleaned
I wish I had time to read this whole chapter to you. Well, let me read just a little bit of it. Look in verse 1: "Then drew near unto him the publicans and sinners, for to hear him. And the Pharisees and scribes murmured, saying, 'This man receiveth sinners, and eateth with them.' And he spake this parable unto them, saying, 'What man of you, having a hundred sheep, if he lose one of them, doth not leave the ninety and nine in the wilderness, and go after that which is lost, until he find it?'"
#52 | 37:35 to 38:03 | cleaned
"And when he had found it, he laid it on his shoulders, rejoicing. And when he cometh home, he calleth together his friends and neighbors, saying unto them, 'Rejoice with me, for I found my sheep which was lost.' I say unto you that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth more than over ninety-nine just persons which need no repentance. Either what woman having ten pieces of silver, if she lose one piece, doth not light a candle, and sweep the house, and seek diligently till she find it? And when she found it, she called her friends and her neighbors together, saying, 'Rejoice with me, for I found the piece which I had lost.' Likewise, I say unto you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth."
#53 | 38:04 to 38:51 | cleaned
And then he goes on and he said, "A certain man had two sons." I'm not going to read it all. You know it. "And the younger of them said to his father, 'Father, give me the portion of goods that falleth unto me.' And he divided unto them his living. Not many days after the younger son took all together and took his journey into a far country where he wasted his substance with riotous living." Now, you know the rest of the story. So let me try to ask you some questions since I read this to you. Number one: How many parables are there in Luke chapter 15? Anybody answer, give me an answer.
#54 | 38:52 to 39:33 | cleaned
Well, the average Christian and the average preacher says there are three. Well, that's not true. Although you read the lost sheep, the lost coin, and the lost son, if you will go back to verse 3, "And he spake this parable unto them." One parable. There's only one. But this one parable is divided into three parts. So the lost sheep demonstrates the work of the Savior. He came to seek and save the lost. The lost coin illustrates the work of the Holy Spirit. And the prodigal son returning to the father pictures the result of the Son seeking and the Spirit working and the sinner therefore comes back to the Father. OK, so the prodigal is the lost sheep that the Son sought and the woman illuminated the picture of the Holy Spirit.
#55 | 39:37 to 40:54 | cleaned
Now, so let me ask you this question. So we know there's one parable in Luke 15. To whom was this parable spoken? There were two groups. So you have to deduce that there's got to be something in this parable for both groups. So if you look back at verse 1, "Then drew near unto him the publicans and the sinners to hear him." So there are publicans, tax collectors, sinners. Verse 2, "...and the Pharisees and the scribes murmured, saying, 'This man receiveth sinners, and eateth with them.'" So you've got publicans and sinners, and you've got the scribes and the Pharisees on this hand. So, you've got to look in this parable now and find that there is something for each of these groups. So let's see.
#56 | 40:54 to 41:53 | cleaned
In the first part of this parable, the shepherd goes looking for the lost sheep. Hmm. Let's see. Would someone answer this question? Where were the 99 sheep left? In the wilderness. What is the wilderness a picture of? It's a picture of sin, rebellion. Where was the lost sheep taken? Oh, look at it. Verse 5. Well, let's read verse 4: "What man of you having a hundred sheep, if he lose one of them, doth not leave the ninety-nine in the wilderness, and go after that which is lost, until he find it?"
#57 | 41:55 to 42:44 | cleaned
"And when he found it, he layeth it on his shoulders rejoicing. And when he cometh home, he calls together his friends and neighbors, saying unto them, 'Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep that was lost.' And then look at this amazing statement: 'I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety-nine just persons who need no repentance.'"
#58 | 42:44 to 43:09 | cleaned
Where were the 99? In the wilderness. Who were the 99? Scribes and Pharisees. They didn't think they needed to be saved. They didn't think they were lost. And so, very clearly, the 99 then speak of those Pharisees, while the one speaks of the publican and the sinners. When you get to the last section of this parable, the prodigal son, the prodigal son comes home. But is there another brother? Yeah, he's the older brother. I've got a message I preached years ago, I just entitled it "The Other Brother." The Other Brother. When he heard the rejoicing, he didn't know what was going on. And he asked one of the servants, "Well, what is this?" "Well, your brother who's lost is now back home, and your father's slain the fatted calf, and we're having a party." And what does the other brother do? He gets angry. He gets upset. He said, "All these years have I served thee, and I haven't done what this boy has done, and you've never given me a fatted calf." There's the 99 just persons who need no repentance.
#59 | 43:11 to 44:36 | cleaned
So the point I'm trying to make is very clear. This parable is a picture of what transpired in Luke, chapter 18, verses 9 through 14. When the Pharisee and the publican went up to the temple to pray, and the Pharisee said, "I thank thee, Lord, that I'm not as other men, I'm not even as this publican over here, I fast twice in the week, I pay tithes of all that I own, and I do this and I do that." And the old publican would not even lift his eyes toward heaven, just smote himself on the breast and said, "God, be merciful to me, a sinner." And our Lord said, "Verily, that man, the publican, went down to his house justified rather than the other." So our Lord takes us one parable and shows us the work of the Son, the work of the Spirit, and the work of the Father. Because the Son sought the lost sheep. The woman with the candle sweeping indicated the work of the Holy Spirit in conviction, and then you see that prodigal son running to the Father, and the Father receiving him and giving him the ring of sonship and putting the best coat on him as could be possibly made.
#60 | 44:40 to 46:04 | cleaned
Let me read to you very quickly just a comment by Arthur W. Pink. He said this: "The parable recorded in Luke chapter 15 cannot possibly be interpreted right if its context is ignored. What needless perplexity has been occasioned and diversity among commentators concerning the identity of the ninety-nine sheep left in the wilderness, defined as just persons who need no repentance, and the elder son who complained of the generous treatment accorded to his brother, through failure to use the key to observe, this one parable in
#61 | 46:04 to 46:44 | cleaned
three parts was not spoken by Christ to the disciples, but addressed to his enemies. It was given in reply to the Pharisees and the scribes who had murmured because our Lord received sinners and ate with them. His design was to expose the condition of their hearts and to vindicate his own gracious actions. He did so by portraying the lost condition of his carping critics and by making known the ground on which he received sinners into fellowship with himself.
#62 | 46:44 to 47:15 | cleaned
and revealing the divine operations which issue in that blessed result. Once these broad facts be apprehended, there is no difficulty in understanding the details of the two distinct and sharply contrasted classes that are set forth to us in Luke 15, 1 and 2. The despised publicans and sinners who, from a deep sense of need, were attracted to Christ and the proud and self-satisfied Pharisees and scribes, and each of the three parts of this parable, the same two classes are in view and in that order. Wow.
#63 | 47:15 to 47:55 | cleaned
There are so many comments that I have where this parable is actually broken down, but let me just read one quick one from Matthew Henry. He said this: "Here is a great deal of care and pains taken in quest of it. The woman lights a candle to look behind the door, under the table, and in every corner of the house, sweeps the house, and seeks diligently till she finds it."
#64 | 47:57 to 48:26 | cleaned
"This represents the various means and methods God uses to bring lost souls home to himself. He has lighted the candle of the gospel not to show himself the way to us, but to show us the way to him, to discover ourselves. He has swept the house by the convictions of the word. He seeks diligently. His heart is upon it to bring lost souls to himself." So, when you look at Luke chapter 15, if you do not take this expositionally, if you do not take it contextually, there's no way in the world that it can be properly interpreted. There's no way that it could be properly understood.
#65 | 48:27 to 49:12 | cleaned
So let me make some applications today. I'll finish this next time, Lord willing. But in order to interpret a passage, we must only have the tools. We must only have the spiritual necessities that I've already dealt with. But when it comes to the consideration of a passage, we need to look at that passage linguistically. We need to look at it historically. We need to look at it legally and judicially. We need to look at it experientially. We also need to look at it contextually and expositionally. So when you begin to analyze the passage in these ways, all of a sudden the passage begins to come out and you see exactly what is taught in Scripture. You see, Paul did indeed command Timothy, "Consider what I say, and the Lord give thee understanding in all things." So there's not going to be any understanding given unless we actually begin to consider. And so without real studious consideration, no understanding is going to be given.
#66 | 49:13 to 50:21 | cleaned
That means this: it doesn't matter if you've got two hours of study or 15 minutes of study. Whatever verse you're looking at or whatever passage you're looking at, you need to say, "How am I to consider this passage?" and you begin to look at the passage and so forth, the way that I've described, and you'll be absolutely astounded at the truths that you will see as God gives you understanding. You always have to consider truth in these ways that I've given you so far. And Lord willing, next time I will finish up to number 13 and let you see what it means to consider things in the 13 ways that God gives us to consider Scripture. Well, let's pray.
#67 | 50:24 to 51:14 | cleaned
Father, we ask in the name of Jesus Christ for Your grace and for Your mercy, for Your goodness and kindness. Help us, Lord, to love Thee, to live for Thee, to honor Thee, to consider Your Word. Lord, consider it linguistically. To consider it, Lord, historically. To consider it legally and judicially. Consider it experientially. To consider it, Lord, contextually. Our Lord, we ask that You would indeed teach us and build us up in the most holy faith. In Thy name we pray, Amen.
#68 | 51:14 to 51:53 | cleaned

deepseek | deepseek-v4-pro | clean_readable_transcript | 2026-06-05T12:55:48Z

How to Study and Learn Biblical Truths - Part 6

John Weaver | Freedom Ministries

In this sixth message on studying biblical truth, John Weaver emphasizes the necessity of diligent study and outlines five principles for rightly considering Scripture: linguistically, historically, judicially/legally, experientially, and expositionally/contextually. He warns against the widespread lack of study among pastors and Christians, and demonstrates how misapplying these principles leads to doctrinal error, using examples such as the Pharisees' misuse of 'eye for eye' and the misinterpretation of Luke 15. The message underscores that proper interpretation requires understanding the original intent, legal concepts like justification, experiential sanctification, and always reading verses in context.

Introduction and the Problem of Lack of Study

Weaver introduces the series and reads 2 Timothy 2:7,15, lamenting the lack of study among pastors and Christians, often due to misplaced priorities.

Scripture Reading — 2 Timothy 2:7

"Consider what I say. And the Lord give thee understanding in all things."

The Biblical Role of Deacons in Freeing Pastors for Study

Using Acts 6:1-4, Weaver argues that deacons were originally chosen to relieve apostles for prayer and the ministry of the Word, a principle applicable today.

The Need to Be Taught How to Study

Many pastors and Christians have never been taught to study, leading to a struggle for material despite the Bible's richness.

Principle 2: Consider Truth Historically

Scripture was written to specific people for specific reasons; we must ask about original intent, purpose, and meaning before applying it today.

Principle 3: Consider Truth Judicially or Legally

The Bible contains many legal principles; misunderstanding them leads to error, as when Pharisees turned the judicial 'eye for eye' into personal vengeance.

Scripture Reading — Deuteronomy 19:16-21

"If a false witness rise up against any man to testify against him that which is wrong, then both the men between whom the controversy is shall stand before the Lord, before the priest, and the judges which shall be in those days. And the judges shall make diligent inquisition. And behold, if the witness be a false witness, and hath testified falsely against his brother, then shall you do unto him as he thought to have done unto his brother."

Now, look back in your Bibles to the book of Exodus chapter 21. Exodus 21, and let's begin reading there with verse 22. Exodus 21 verse 22, the Bible says,

Scripture Reading — Exodus 21:22-25

"If men strive and hurt a woman with child so that her fruit depart from her and yet no mischief follow, he shall be surely punished according as the woman's husband will lay upon him and he shall pay as the judges determine. And if any mischief follow, then shalt thou give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, and stripe for stripe."

But note, if you would, in the context, it is to the judges. One more now. Look in Leviticus chapter 24, and let's begin reading there with verse 19. Leviticus 24 and verse 19. Here it is.

Scripture Reading — Matthew 5:38-39

"You have heard that it has been said, an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth." "But I say unto you that you resist not evil. But whoso shall smite thee on the right cheek, turn him the other also."

And then he goes on. What is he talking about?

Scripture Reading — Matthew 5:38-39

"You've heard that it had been said, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth."

Justification as a Legal Declaration

Justification is a judicial declaration of righteousness, not an infusion; this is contrasted with condemnation, using Deuteronomy 25:1, Proverbs 17:15, and Luke 7:29.

Scripture Reading — Deuteronomy 25:1

"If there be a controversy between men and they come unto judgment, that the judges may judge them, then they shall justify the righteous and condemn the wicked."

Scripture Reading — Proverbs 17:15

"He that justifieth the wicked and he that condemneth the just, even they both are an abomination to the Lord."

Now, turn in your Bibles to the book of Luke chapter 7. Luke chapter 7. And look, if you would please, at verse 29. Luke 7, verse 29. Here's a very revealing verse.

Luke 7 verse 29:

Scripture Reading — Luke 7:29

"And all the people that heard him,"

that is John the Baptist,

Scripture Reading — Luke 7:29

"and all the people that heard him and the publicans justified God, being baptized with the baptism of John."

Scripture Reading — Luke 16:15

"He said, 'You are they which justify yourselves before men, but God knoweth your hearts, for that which is highly esteemed among men is the abomination in the sight of God.'"

If you look in your Bibles to the book of Romans, chapter 8, Romans, chapter 8. And look, if you would, beginning there with verse 33. Romans 8 and verse 33, look what the Scripture says:

Scripture Reading — Romans 8:33-34

"Who shall lay anything to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth, who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea, rather, that is risen again, who is he that is at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us."

Principle 4: Consider Truth Experientially

We must ask what we are to experience; justification is judicial (done for us), while sanctification is experiential (done in us), gradual, and admits degrees.

The Bible said,

Scripture Reading — 1 John 2:19

"They went out from us, that it might be made manifest that they were not of us, for had they been of us, no doubt they would have continued with us."

Principle 5: Consider Truth Expositionally or Contextually

Every verse must be taken in context; using Job 12:6 and Luke 15, Weaver shows how ignoring context leads to misinterpretation.

Scripture Reading — Job 12:6

"The tabernacles of robbers prosper, and they that provoke God are secure into whose hand God bringeth abundantly."

Scripture Reading — Luke 15:1-32

"Then drew near unto him the publicans and the sinners to hear him."

So there are publicans, tax collectors, sinners. Verse 2,

Scripture Reading — Luke 15:1-32

"...and the Pharisees and the scribes murmured, saying, 'This man receiveth sinners, and eateth with them.'"

Application and Conclusion

Weaver urges applying these five principles in study, promising that God will give understanding as we diligently consider His Word.

How to Study and Learn Biblical Truths - Part 6

John Weaver | SermonAudio

Lecture Metadata	Details
Speaker	John Weaver
Source	SermonAudio
Media ID	41922194321141
Subject	New Testament Studies
Course	Romans: Justification, Faith, and Imputed Righteousness: Sola Fide And Justification
Genre	Sermon
Date	2022-04-17
Dictation Name
Book	Book 065: Three Reasons We Need To Consider Truth And Interpret Scripture — Chapter 6
Source Timed Segments	68

Lecture Guide

Outline

Introduction and the Problem of Lack of Study: Weaver introduces the series and reads 2 Timothy 2:7,15, lamenting the lack of study among pastors and Christians, often due to misplaced priorities.
The Biblical Role of Deacons in Freeing Pastors for Study: Using Acts 6:1-4, Weaver argues that deacons were originally chosen to relieve apostles for prayer and the ministry of the Word, a principle applicable today.
The Need to Be Taught How to Study: Many pastors and Christians have never been taught to study, leading to a struggle for material despite the Bible's richness.
Principle 2: Consider Truth Historically: Scripture was written to specific people for specific reasons; we must ask about original intent, purpose, and meaning before applying it today.
Principle 3: Consider Truth Judicially or Legally: The Bible contains many legal principles; misunderstanding them leads to error, as when Pharisees turned the judicial 'eye for eye' into personal vengeance.
Justification as a Legal Declaration: Justification is a judicial declaration of righteousness, not an infusion; this is contrasted with condemnation, using Deuteronomy 25:1, Proverbs 17:15, and Luke 7:29.
Principle 4: Consider Truth Experientially: We must ask what we are to experience; justification is judicial (done for us), while sanctification is experiential (done in us), gradual, and admits degrees.
Principle 5: Consider Truth Expositionally or Contextually: Every verse must be taken in context; using Job 12:6 and Luke 15, Weaver shows how ignoring context leads to misinterpretation.
Application and Conclusion: Weaver urges applying these five principles in study, promising that God will give understanding as we diligently consider His Word.

Major Themes

Key Arguments

Deacons should free pastors for study

Based on Acts 6, deacons were chosen to handle practical matters so apostles could focus on prayer and the Word; modern deacons should do the same.

Weaver reads Acts 6:2-4 and says, 'if deacons today were biblical... it would certainly give the pastor the needed and necessary time to study.'

Pharisees perverted the judicial principle of 'eye for eye'

The 'eye for eye' law was given to judges for proportionate punishment, but Pharisees turned it into a license for personal vengeance, which Jesus corrected.

Weaver says, 'what the Pharisees had done, they had taken this legal judicial principle... and turned it to mean and to teach personal vindictiveness.'

Justification is a legal declaration, not an infusion

Using Deuteronomy 25:1, Proverbs 17:15, and Luke 7:29, Weaver argues justification is a forensic act of declaring righteous, not making righteous.

Weaver states, 'Justification is a declaration before the law that a man is righteous and innocent... the Roman Catholic Church teaches that justification is an infusion of righteousness, which is not true.'

Sanctification is experiential and admits degrees

Unlike justification, practical sanctification is gradual, progressive, and varies among believers, as illustrated by the parable of the sower's thirty, sixty, and hundredfold.

Weaver says, 'Sanctification admits degrees... some men are more holy than others... That's why we are to go from strength to strength.'

Luke 15 is one parable with three parts, not three parables

The chapter contains one parable spoken to Pharisees and sinners, with the lost sheep, coin, and son representing the work of the Son, Spirit, and Father.

Weaver notes, 'And he spake this parable unto them. One parable. There's only one. But this one parable is divided into three parts.'

Scripture References

2 Timothy 2:7: Paul's command to Timothy to consider what he says, with the promise that the Lord will give understanding.
2 Timothy 2:15: The charge to study to show oneself approved, rightly dividing the word of truth.
Acts 6:1-4: The selection of deacons to serve tables so the apostles could devote themselves to prayer and the ministry of the Word.
Deuteronomy 19:16-21: The law concerning false witnesses and the judicial principle of 'eye for eye, tooth for tooth' given to judges.
Exodus 21:22-25: The law of retaliation ('eye for eye') in the context of judges determining punishment.
Leviticus 24:19-22: The command for one manner of law, including 'breach for breach, eye for eye,' as a matter of law.
Matthew 5:38-39: Jesus correcting the Pharisees' misinterpretation of 'eye for eye' as personal vengeance rather than a judicial principle.
Deuteronomy 25:1: The judges are to justify the righteous and condemn the wicked, showing justification and condemnation as legal concepts.
Proverbs 17:15: Justifying the wicked and condemning the just are both an abomination to the Lord, proving justification is a declaration.
Luke 7:29: The people and publicans justified God, meaning they declared Him righteous, not infused righteousness into Him.
Luke 16:15: Jesus rebukes the Pharisees for justifying themselves before men.
Romans 8:33-34: It is God who justifies; who is he that condemns? Christ died and intercedes.
Romans 8:1: There is no condemnation to those in Christ Jesus.
1 John 2:19: Those who went out from us were not of us; true believers continue, proving sanctification follows justification.
Job 12:6: Job says the tabernacles of robbers prosper, but in context he is refuting Zophar's dogmatic argument, not endorsing theft.
Luke 15:1-32: The one parable of the lost sheep, coin, and son, spoken to Pharisees and sinners, illustrating the work of the Son, Spirit, and Father.
Luke 18:9-14: The parable of the Pharisee and the publican, where the publican went home justified rather than the Pharisee.

Historical References

J. Sidlow Baxter, 'Explore the Book': Weaver recommends this book as a resource for historical background on every book of the Bible.
Herman Witsius: Quoted defining gospel justification as a judicial but gracious act of God.
Jonathan Edwards: Quoted defining justification as being approved of God as free from guilt and having a right to the reward of life.
Arthur W. Pink: Quoted on the importance of context in interpreting Luke 15, noting the parable was addressed to Christ's enemies.
Matthew Henry: Quoted on the lost coin parable, representing God's means and methods to bring lost souls home.

Important Quotes

Consider what I say. And the Lord give thee understanding in all things.

The foundational verse for the series, emphasizing the need for careful consideration to receive understanding.

Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

The call to diligent study and accurate handling of Scripture.

It is not reason that we should leave the word of God and serve tables.

The apostles' priority on the Word over practical duties, used to argue for deacons freeing pastors.

The Bible was not written in a vacuum.

Key principle for historical interpretation; Scripture was written to specific people for specific reasons.

Justification is a declaration before the law that a man is righteous and innocent.

Clear definition of justification as forensic, countering the Roman Catholic view of infusion.

When something is judicial, it is something that is done for you. When something is done experientially, it is something that is done in you.

Distinction between justification (judicial) and sanctification (experiential).

You can prove anything that you want to prove if you take a verse out of context.

Warning about the danger of ignoring context, illustrated with Job 12:6.

And he spake this parable unto them. One parable. There's only one. But this one parable is divided into three parts.

Key insight into Luke 15, showing the unity of the chapter and its intended audience.

Discussion Questions

[Question]

What are some practical ways deacons today can relieve pastors of extraneous duties to allow more time for study and prayer?

[Context]

Weaver argues from Acts 6 that deacons were chosen to serve so apostles could focus on the Word.

[Question]

How does understanding the original historical context of a biblical book change the way you apply its teachings today?

[Context]

Weaver emphasizes asking to whom, why, and when a book was written.

[Question]

Why is it important to distinguish between judicial principles given to judges and personal commands for believers, as seen in the 'eye for eye' passages?

[Context]

Weaver shows how the Pharisees misapplied a legal principle to personal vengeance.

[Question]

How does viewing justification as a legal declaration rather than an infusion of righteousness affect your assurance of salvation?

[Context]

Weaver contrasts the biblical view with Roman Catholic teaching, using Proverbs 17:15 and Luke 7:29.

[Question]

In what ways should the experiential nature of sanctification motivate a believer to pursue holiness?

[Context]

Weaver explains that sanctification is gradual, progressive, and admits degrees.

[Question]

How does recognizing Luke 15 as one parable with three parts change your understanding of the chapter's message?

[Context]

Weaver argues the parable was spoken to Pharisees and sinners, with each part addressing both groups.

[Question]

What steps can you take to ensure you are considering Scripture contextually rather than isolating verses?

[Context]

Weaver warns that taking verses out of context can prove anything, using Job 12:6 as an example.

Applications

Format deepseek deepseek-v4-pro structured study JSON | Source Commentary.net transcript enrichment

deepseek | deepseek-v4-pro | weaver_study | 2026-06-05T23:21:46Z