Biblical Blueprints exists to fight the bad presuppositions that "set themselves up against the knowledge of God" (2 Cor. 10:5), the glasses that keep ordinary Christians and theologians alike from seeing how "the key of knowledge," the whole Bible — and every word of it — applies to the whole person and all of life. Biblical Blueprints wants to equip ordinary men and women to use the key of knowledge themselves — to equip a generation of radical Reformers who don't just consume theology-already-done-for-you, but rather continue to mine and apply Scripture's axioms for all of life.
Hi, I'm Phil Kayser. And so far I've given four podcasts on the subject of hermeneutics - a word that refers to the rules involved in properly interpreting the Bible. And we saw previously that we don't impose our own rules on the Bible. We have been imitating Christ, the apostles, and the prophets in their interpretation of earlier Scriptures. And so far we have looked at 8 rules of interpretation that they have modeled for us. In our podcasts I won't cover absolutely every rule that the Bible outlines because that would take a whole extended course. But hopefully I will be covering enough that people can see that the Bible's rules are easy to comprehend and are repeatedly used by the authors of the Bible themselves.
But let me contrast that with a couple of rules that were sent to me recently. Just like the last two objections, these have arisen from an objection to using Luke 22 in support of ownership of weapons for self-defense. We saw previously that Christ had commanded his disciples as a permanent principle after He left the earth,
> But now, he who has a money bag, let him take it, and likewise a knapsack; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one.
In my book I said
> The right of self-defense is essential to life. When that right
is removed by authorities, citizens may resist. Jesus Himself commanded civil disobedience to weapons-control mandates when he commanded His disciples, “He who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one” (Luke 22:36). It was illegal for private citizens to possess swords in Israel, so He was urging the purchase and carrying of illegal concealed military weapons. Two of Jesus’ disciples—Peter and another (perhaps Simon the Zealot—cf. Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13)—were already conceal-carrying short swords. When they whipped their swords out, Jesus said they were enough.
And that's the end of the quote from *my* book.
So far I have dealt with three objections to that interpretion. But here is one more that I received. It is a more extended objection and I will read it in full to you. This person says,
> Objection: Jesus was God, he could do things we can't. (You can't use Jesus' actions as a basis for doctrine or ethics, only his teaching)
> Related Question: Jesus was God, so how do I know whether I should imitate him or not?
> [For example] Jesus drove people out with whips, calling out the Pharisees, had people worship Him, talked with demons, and a lot more, how can I know what I should do from Jesus' life and what belonged to him alone?
> Jesus' motives were always pure and he never went too far, so how can I do what he did when I don't have that going for me.
There are multiple threads of thought that are involved in this objection, so let's tease them apart one by one.
First, let's deal with the issue of whether Jesus is ever an example to follow. This writer said, "You can't use Jesus' actions as a basis for doctrine or ethics, only his teaching." My first response is this: where in the Bible did you get that rule of interpretation? And it *is* a rule of interpretation; it is stated as an imperative. Let me read that again: the writer said, "You can't use Jesus' actions as a basis for doctrine or ethics, only his teaching."
But is that rule true? I don't think so. Let's look at a couple of apostles and see what they say. Dealing with what some people think is a rather obscure doctrine in 1 Corinthians 11 (the doctrine of hair and head coverings) Paul said, "Imitate me, just as I also imitate Christ." He was following Christ's example on this, and wanted the apostles to follow his example. So Paul was getting doctrine from Christ's actions. What about ethics? In 1 John 2:6 the apostle John says, "He who says he abides in Him ought himself also to walk just as He walked." He is commanding us to imitate not just Christ's teaching, but also His walk. And he explicitly says we are to walk in exactly the same way that He walked. What about the apostle Peter? 1 Peter 2:21 says, "For to this you were called, because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that you should follow His steps."
So that part of the objection is obviously wrong. But the question is, "Why is it wrong?" On the surface the objection seems reasonable. After all, Jesus is God. Or as the objector stated it, "Jesus was God, he could do things we can't." Obviously as God Jesus created the universe and we can't. As God He received worship, but we can't.
But here's the thing: we are not imitating Christ as God; we are imitating Christ as Man, and in the Incarnation, Jesus chose to do through His manhood not what He could have done as the Son of God, but to mostly do what He did by the power of the Holy Spirit working through Him. He did this because He was modeling how believers should live. Where the first Adam failed, the Second Adam succeeded. He didn't cheat as the Second Adam by using powers that were not at the first Adam's disposal. He could have, but He didn't. Luke 4:14 says, "Then Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit to Galilee, and news of Him went out through all the surrounding region." In Luke 10:21 the Holy Spirit caused Him to rejoice. Matthew 4:1 says, "Jesus was led up by the Spirit." In Matthew 12:28 Jesus said, "if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, surely the kingdom of God has come upon you." Isaiah 61:1-3 predicted that Christ's entire ministry would be empowered and done by the Holy Spirit. Putting words prophetically into Christ's mouth it says,
> Is. 61:1 “The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon Me, Because the LORD has anointed Me To preach good tidings to the poor; He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted, To proclaim liberty to the captives, And the opening of the prison to those who are bound;
> 2 To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, And the day of vengeance of our God; To comfort all who mourn,
> 3 To console those who mourn in Zion, To give them beauty for ashes, The oil of joy for mourning, The garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness; That they may be called trees of righteousness, The planting of the LORD, that He may be glorified.”
And the rest of the chapter shows how Christ's followers would minister in Christ's name with the same power. Jesus was the model of perfect manhood, and if we fail to learn from His examples and imitate His examples, we not only disobey the direct commands of Paul, John, and Peter (all of whom commanded us to conform our behavior to His behavior), but we are also missing the whole point of His incarnation as the Second Adam. He had to do as Man what the first Man failed to do - to operate 100% by the power of the Holy Spirit.
But just as a side note: I fail to see how this supposed rule would have even undermined my interpretation of Luke 22. Jesus taught His disciples to carry swords. It wasn't simply a situation of watching Jesus have a sword and imitating Him. He commanded *them* to get swords and to carry money pouches and to not presume upon God's providence. Jesus would never command a sinful action and when He said, "It is enough," he was satisfied that two swords between them was enough. And that they were real swords can be seen by the fact that Peter cut off the ear of Malchus. Jesus at that point told him to put away his sword because Peter was *now* unlawfully using the sword against a civil magistrate - a form of revolution, and the Bible does not authorize revolution. It authorizes owning weapons for self-defense even without government permission, but it does not authorize using them against the government as a private individual.
The next question is a helpful one. The objector said, "Jesus was God, so how do I know whether I should imitate him or not?" Well, don't imitate Him on the things that only God is allowed to do - such as receive worship. Don't imitate Him on teaching unless you are called by God to be a teacher. Don't imitate Jesus on things that only a male should do, such as teaching in a worship service. Don't imitate Jesus by getting crucified because that is not your calling. The point of Paul, Peter, and John in their admonitions to walk as Christ walked is that we ought to obey the moral law just as Jesus did. But again, I fail to see how this part of the objection overturns our interpretation of Luke 22. Jesus is commanding real humans to do something, so we are obeying Jesus just like they obeyed Jesus.
But I can hear an objection already - don't Christ's miracles prove that He was God? No. If they prove that He was God, then the miracles of the apostles prove that they were God. Obviously not. Jesus walking on the water does not prove He was God any more than it proved that Peter was God. Jesus always operated by the power of the Holy Spirit, and the apostles commanded us to imitate Jesus.
The next part of the objection states, "Jesus drove people out with whips, calling out the Pharisees, had people worship Him, talked with demons, and a lot more, how can I know what I should do from Jesus' life and what belonged to him alone?"
It's a good question. I would say to most people, don't drive anyone out of the church with whips. Jesus was in His Father's house and zeal for His father's house was eating Him up. He did have an office that you may not have. But can you imitate Christ's zeal to purify the church within the calling that God has given to you? Yes. We should all hate the compromises that have crept into the church. We should seek the purity of the church where God's law authorizes us to do so.
He called out Pharisees, and so should church officers today.
He talked to demons and modeled to us how to cast out demons. And the reason I know that is that He gave authority to do what He did not just to the apostles, but also to the 70 in Luke 10 and also to ordinary believers in Mark 14.
So how do we know what to follow and what not to follow?
First, if He is doing things we are commanded to do, then we imitate Him in *how* He did them. Keep in mind that we already saw in a previous episode that every ethical principle we need to follow is already laid out in the Old Testament, which 1 Timothy 3:16-17 said is sufficient to thoroughly equip us for every good work - no exceptions. So it's not as if we are getting something new by imitating Christ. He kept the law and we keep the law with the first human example of perfection that has ever existed. He's the best model of what law-keeping looked like.
Second, we should notice to see if He expected others to do things. In the Luke 22 passage that was definitely the case.
Third, we see if the actions were unique to His station in life. Pastors might imitate things that He did as a pastor. Children might imitate the submission He exemplified as a youth. Citizens might follow the lead of how He responded to civil laws - if He paid a tax He didn't owe, then we can assume we are not in sin by paying a tax that we don't owe. If He drank wine, we can assume that it is not sinful to drink wine.
The last part of the objection was, " Jesus' motives were always pure and he never went too far, so how can I do what he did when I don't have that going for me." I'm assuming that this objection still relates to having swords. Well, even there Jesus modeled what is going too far. Revolutionary use of the sword against the civil magistrate was rebuked by Jesus. That is going too far. He is the perfect model of how far we can go in resisting tyranny. In the Old Testament David was a pretty good model. Both models simply lived out what the law said about weapons ownership.
If you click on the QR code on the back of the cover of the Divine Right of Resistance, you will discover tons of information that shows Biblical guidelines to keep you from going too far. So my answer is the same as Christ's - He pointed to the Old Testament and said that man should not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God. But the bottom line is that we *should* follow His example. He is the perfect example.