2tim2v15

FREE PRESBYTERIAN ISSUES -- GOSPEL ISSUES -- PROTESTANT ISSUES -- EVANGELISM ISSUES -- CALVINISM ISSUES -- C.H. SPURGEON INDEX -- SERMON NOTES -- MAIN

2 TIMOTHY 2:1-15 TEXT: v15 [Series #10]

This exhortation for Timothy to rightly divide word/truth has a precedent a parable which Jesus told
Let’s read the relevant part of the parable:

And the Lord said, Who then is that faithful and wise steward, whom his lord shall make ruler over his household, to give them their portion of meat in due season? Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing. Of a truth I say unto you, that he will make him ruler over all that he hath. (Luke 12:42-44)

The Saviour suggests here by picture book what Paul exhorts in clearer words/text
Timothy (as pastor) was to give the due portion of meat to his household i.e. he was feed his congregation with the word of God

This cannot be done wily-nily without hardly a thought
Must be done properly – the word/truth is to be rightly divided

Not enough to merely open the Bible
Rome does that – the JW’s and the Mormons etc.,
(Not that we deny that the Bible is sole rule of faith/practice)
But it is to be expounded to the people properly
We cannot do any better in this regard than Nehemiah
So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading. (8:8)

There was here a right dividing of the word/truth

How can we tell when this is being done?
A question for the pew as well as for the pulpit
ILLUSTRATION: We live in a day when people are more educated re: healthy eating etc.,
We certainly know better than to let our eating habits be driven by the supermarkets and their thirst for profits
We know what to eat and when and why
As in the material – so in the spiritual
Let us ensure that we are getting the correct spiritual food i.e. that the word/truth is being rightly divided to us

How do we know that this is the case?
How do we rightly divide the word of truth?
When you are reading the Bible for yourself – do you rightly divide the word/truth?
You need to – and here is how it is done

1) WE DO NOT PIT ONE PORTION OF SCRIPTURE AGAINST THE OTHER:

A/ If we do – then we are not breaking the bread aright
We are distorting the truth (if not altogether denying it)
Bible, when correctly interpreted, cannot contradict itself

This verse calls it the Word/Truth and it must be true:
[i] To itself
[ii] To the known facts [not necessarily mere theories] of life

B/ My experience that the sceptics find supposed faults with the Bible for several reasons:

[i] They want to find fault
The same way a criminal lawyer finds fault with the law
So that his crime loving client is free to murder etc., again

[ii] They fail (deliberately or otherwise) to see that it is a Eastern Book and they interpret it in a western fashion
Forget simple things that one man may have two names
They fail to grasp the various methods of teaching
Literalize where the Bible uses poetic license etc.,

[iii] Take some statements as absolute when a correct interpretation demands that they be viewed relatively
Example: Bible says: we are not to be righteous overmuch (Ecclesiastes 7:16) – Does this room for a man to be sinful?
How can you be righteous over much?
Answer: When you go beyond that which is written
When you think and act as if you were holier than God
The Pharisees were righteous overmuch
They didn’t think that God had enough rules
So they invented a whole lot more
Their over righteousness was in name only
It was not in reality – they were greater sinners for it

C/ Again, when we think about God, we are not to put all the emphasis on His love but ignore His holiness
Or all on His holiness as if He had no compassion at all

God’s love is not at the expense of His holiness
All His attributes work in perfect harmony one with another
Our Lord Jesus was equally full of grace and truth
And we should interpret the Bible in that way

D/ Luther gets into awful bother because he wanted to banish the Book of James from the Bible
Of course, he was wrong in that regard
But at least, his motive was pure
He thought (wrongly) that James was contradicting Paul
And he knew that this could never be
The true God cannot contradict himself

And so, alas! Luther thought that James should be banished
Rightly dividing the word/truth would have ensured that Luther interpreted James’ justification differently from Paul’s
Paul’s justification was before God – faith alone
Jame’s justification was before men – faith plus works

E/ It is not compromising the Bible to use a good, Evangelical commentary (-aries) to help you interpret it alright
Of course, we must subject the commentaries to the verdict of Scripture – but they are helpful so that we can do so
Evangelical commentators do not preach themselves
Their desire is to let God speak through His own word

2) WE EQUALLY EMPHASISE BOTH GOD’S SOVEREIGNTY AND MAN’S RESPONSIBILITY:

A/ Similar to the previous point – just a wee bit more particular
Seems to me that there are two extremes to be avoided:
Hyper Calvinism and Arminianism
Neither of these folk rightly divide the word/truth
Of course, they might do so in fundamental truths which they share with other Christians – but not in their peculiar tenets

B/ The Hyper Calvinist puts too much weight on divine sovereignty
Can God be too sovereign?
Obviously not – but our views/His sovereignty might be too much
Hyper Calvinist has an awful tendency to sit back and let God do everything as if man was a block of wood with no requirements

It affects the way the Hyper Calvinist preaches the gospel
Indeed, we are left wondering does he even preach the gospel?
Seems to think that man can have no feelings unless he is elect
God’s love for the world and His heart for sinners is denied
Why did Jesus weep for stubborn and indiscriminate Jerusalem?
It can never be (according to the Hyper) because He never has any displeasure in the death of the stubborn wicked
Hyper believes that God created the wicked solely to damn them
Deny that God has any love for the non elect because such love (according to them) suggests that He is not sovereign
And this aspect of sovereignty must colour every other doctrine

Evidently (according to the Hyper Calvinist) God cannot work His own purposes in His own way as He sees fit
Road cannot twist/turn – it must be a straight through and mechanical in order to be true – and this is very imbalanced

Such has a chilling effect on the work/life of the church
It kills off evangelistic zeal and outreach
It deadens concern for lost souls
It introduces a fatalistic chill into the church
It is a bit like a man collapsing at last in deep snow
He lies down and he closes his eyes and he drifts off into the welcoming hands of death – frozen to death

C/ The Arminian goes to the other extreme
He sees the width of the gospel (good!) but he cannot allow that God is absolutely sovereign in its application
He sees that if man is responsible (he is) then he must be able
He fails to realise fully the impact of sin upon the sinner
He elevates (unwittingly) the sinner to the driving seat
God has done everything possible to save – now it is up to you!
God is left straining at the bit while sovereign man swaggers about the place, deciding when he would be saved

According to Arminians: Two parties share the throne:
Sovereign God and Sovereign Man
This too effects the life of the church
Especially evangelism as seen in the modern church
The preacher (antique term!) is no longer the postman i.e. bringing the message from God but the salesman
The modern church gives him the liberty to use every physiological trick in the book to lure men into salvation
“Salvation” itself has been cheapened to mean other than what is written in the Bible
Certainly isn’t salvation from the curse/chains of sin

D/ The true Calvinist rightly divides the word/truth
He sees God as sovereign and man as responsible
Sin cannot rob the sinner from the responsibility of doing what God demands of him
Sin (freely chosen/sinners) can and does rob Him of its power
This further accentuates his guilt

Wise preacher, rightly dividing etc., will use these twin truths to summons and invite the sinner to Christ
We both command and entreat

Do sinners see they are caught between a rock and a hard place?
Rightly dividing word/truth will bring them to this truth
Let not the Hyper deny that they are under the law of God
Let not the Arminian encourage him to think he is in full control

Let the sinner so realising his predicament cry for mercy
And he will surely find it at the feet of a sovereign God

3) WE RIGHTLY DIVIDE ETC., WHEN WE EMPHASISE THE CHRISTIAN’S PRIVILEGE AND THE CORRESPONDING DUTY:

A/ Again, rightly dividing is a matter of balance
Where one teaching is emphasised at the expense of others, then the food is not wholesome food

Think of the food pyramid – so much meat/carbohydrates etc.
Likewise in spiritual things – a good all round diet is essential

B/ If we do not emphasise to Christians what they have in Christ – then they will get very discouraged and will lack lustre
The Devil with all his cunning will avail against them
They will listen to his lies and swap what they have (and yet are largely ignorant of) for what he offers

Let a Christian however know that all his sins are forgiven
Every last one without any exceptions
Let him know that he is freely and forever justified by grace
That he is adopted into the family/God and can never be lost
That he has a right to all the privileges of the sons/God
That the Holy Spirit lives within his heart and empowers him to live holily and serve God with godly fear
That there is a home/Glory for him when he dies
Bible abounds with many sure/precious promises for the saint

We need constantly to be reminded of them
Maybe if we slowed down and mediated upon them, then we would get a fresh sense of the wonder of it all

C/ But there are many Christians who know all about the privileges, but far short on the responsibilities/accompany them
Spend all their time in the early parts/epistles but practically ignore the last parts where Paul gives us clear commands

Think that being required to live out salvation means live for salvation and they shout “Legalism!” at the top/their voices
This ought not to be
Yes – Legalism can be a problem in the church
But obeying God as He intended can never be branded Legalism
Not obeying God as He intended is rank disobedience
It is grieving to and can lead to a quenching of the Holy Spirit

If we read the Bible and only see the promises, then we are starving our souls of needed vitamins
Serving Christians are strong Christians
Many of the promises are given to obedient Christians

4) WHEN WE GIVE TRUTH AS IT IS ABLE TO BE BORNE:

A/ Bible itself makes use of the analogy of feeding adults and feeding little children - don’t give new born babes red meat
Some truths – all good stuff - cannot be easily borne by new converts to the Christian faith

B/ Doctrine of election is perhaps one of the best examples
It takes us into the very deep waters of the decree of God
People have got into difficulties swimming there
Why? Because they went beyond what has actually been revealed in the word/God and brought in their own fancies
You just can’t do that

Wise saying of John Bradford (Reformers) that we are better going first to the grammar school of faith and repentance before we go to the university of election
It’s not that we deny election or think it dangerous – but we do recognise the propensity of even Christians to get entangled in it

C/ Therefore, with this (and other truths) we divide the word right by taking it what we can safely bear

We should never choke on the good word/God
Take it in slowly and profit thereby rather than rush to take it all in at once and overload the system

Let’s bear these things in mind as we study/Bible for ourselves

THE END

FREE PRESBYTERIAN ISSUES -- GOSPEL ISSUES -- PROTESTANT ISSUES -- EVANGELISM ISSUES -- CALVINISM ISSUES -- C.H. SPURGEON INDEX -- SERMON NOTES -- MAIN PAGE