Author Archives: John Samson

Psalm 22: The Psalm of the Cross

Posted on by
Reply

Psalm 22: Dr. James Montgomery Boice (original source here)

Theme: Prophesying the Crucifixion

In this week’s lessons we look at how this psalm, written hundreds of years before Christ, describes the details of Jesus’ suffering and death by crucifixion.

Scripture: Psalm 22:1-21

The Lord Jesus Christ is described as his people’s shepherd in three ways. In John 10:11 and 14 he is “the good shepherd,” who gives his life for his sheep. In Hebrews 13:20 he is “that great shepherd,” who has risen from the dead and lives now to direct his people in every good work.

In 1 Peter 5:4 he is “the Chief shepherd,” who has ascended into heaven from whence he will one day return to reward the under shepherds of the church who have been faithful.

It has been pointed out that Psalms 22, 23 and 24 are like that.

Psalm 22 is the song of the dying shepherd, crying out to the Father.

Psalm 23 is the song of the risen shepherd, guiding his sheep through life’s dark wilderness.

Psalm 24 is the song of the ascended shepherd who will reward those who have served faithfully.

It is possible that some may find this pattern a bit forced, particularly in regard to the last two psalms. But there can be no doubt that it applies strikingly to Psalm 22. For this psalm is the “Psalm of the Cross,” the best description in all the Bible of Jesus Christ’s crucifixion.

Most modern writers on the psalms try to find a setting for them either in the life of David, if they believe David was their author, or in the experience of some later writer or group of persons. But it is impossible to do this with this psalm. Some psalms are written out of illness.

But Psalm 22 is not a description of an illness. It is a description of an execution, particularly a crucifixion.

Crucifixion was not practiced in the time of David or for many long centuries afterward. So this is not an account of any suffering endured by any ancient person but a prophetic picture of the suffering to be endured by Jesus when he died to pay the penalty for our sins. In other words, it is prophetic and entirely messianic.

Derek Kidner, who is usually very cautious in such matters, nevertheless writes rightly, “No incident recorded of David can begin to account for this…The language of the psalm defies a naturalistic explanation; the best account is in the terms used by Peter concerning another psalm of David: ‘Being therefore a prophet…he foresaw and spoke of…the Christ’ (Acts 2:30f.).”1

But it is not only that David, being a prophet, foresaw and spoke in this psalm of Jesus’ sufferings. This is also the psalm upon which Jesus himself meditated as he hung on the cross.

We can profit best if we have the main events in mind. Jesus had been arrested the previous night and kept under guard in the house of the High Priest in order to be tried formally by the Sanhedrin in the morning. When day dawned he was quickly tried, convicted of blasphemy and then taken to Pilate’s Jerusalem residence for sentencing, since the Jewish court was unable to carry out the death penalty while Rome ruled Palestine. There were unexpected delays with Pilate. But at last his judgment was secured and Jesus was led through the streets of the city to Golgotha bearing his cross. Continue reading →

Eat My Flesh, Drink My Blood – What Does This Mean?

Posted on by
Reply

Article: “I Am the Bread of Life” by Cameron Buettel (original source here)

Christ’s preaching has a tendency to shock our sensibilities. One of His most vexing statements occurs in the gospel of John: “He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life” (John 6:54).

All sorts of theories and theological mischief have been concocted around those words. They were simply too disturbing for most of Jesus’ disciples who subsequently abandoned Him (John 6:66). Early on in church history that statement was the cause of pagan rumors that Christians practiced cannibalism. And Roman Catholics now use John 6:54 as justification for their belief that the elements of the Lord’s Table—the bread and the wine—are literally Christ’s flesh and blood.

Like most troubling theological issues, biblical context is critical if we are to come to a right understanding of Christ’s words in John 6:54. And John MacArthur does just that in his sermon, “I Am the Bread of Life.” In it he walks us through John 6:32–59 to bring clarity concerning Jesus’ discourse on Himself as the true eternal food all men need.

Hunger is a natural part of the human experience. We were created by God with a built-in desire for sustenance when our body lacks what it needs. But spiritual hunger is far more elusive to those who are spiritually destitute.

John 6 signifies the high-water mark of Christ’s ministry by every external metric of human success. His popularity had peaked as crowds thronged around Him. Stories of His miracles were spreading far and wide. And His expertise in all matters threatened the influence of every other established religious leader.

But Jesus wasn’t swayed by the veneer of a growing kingdom. Miraculously feeding thousands of hungry people in the desert (John 6:1–14) only inflamed their desires for more temporal satisfaction. They wanted more, but their hunger didn’t extend beyond their empty bellies.

John MacArthur’s message, “I Am the Bread of Life” digs right into the discussion between Christ and His legions of followers. He explains what really transpired and why Christ continually referred to Himself as “the bread of life” in contrast to the perishable bread the crowds longed for. And he reveals how God is the author of spiritual hunger as well as physical hunger. Ultimately, Pastor John answers two fundamental questions: Where do we find the bread of life, and how do we eat the bread of life?

Those questions form the dividing line between those who are Christ’s true disciples and those who are false disciples destined for apostasy. Answering them explains how we are to eat Christ’s flesh and drink His blood and inherit eternal life.

Click here to watch or listen to “I Am the Bread of Life.”

Touch Not the Lord’s Anointed? What Does it Mean?

Posted on by
Reply

Article: Frequently Abused Verses: Did God Forbid us to Critique or Criticize Church Leaders? (Psalm 105:15; 1 Samuel 24:10) by Cameron Buettel (original source here)

False teaching thrives in environments where it is unlikely to be questioned. Charlatans and heretics prey on uncritical minds, and work tirelessly to protect and preserve that gullibility. Their success depends on dismantling every challenge to their authority and accuracy.

John MacArthur describes why that problem is rampant in the modern church:

In a time like this of tolerance, listen, false teaching will always cry intolerance; it will always say you’re being divisive, you’re being unloving, you’re being ungracious, because it can only survive when it doesn’t get scrutinized. And so it cries against any intolerance. It cries against any examination, any scrutiny.

In recent decades, some of the most notorious charismatic church leaders have been doing just that. They continually warn their critics to back off or face the imminent danger of divine judgment. Claiming God’s stamp of approval, they wield Psalm 105:15 like a loaded gun: “Touch not [the Lord’s] anointed” (KJV).

And lest you think such a description to be hyperbole, the following clip from Benny Hinn is a spectacular example.

Hinn’s handling of Psalm 105:15, as well as the story of Saul and David, is hopelessly wrong on too many levels to address in one blog post.

For example we could discuss how Hinn utterly fails to understand Judas’s role in God’s sovereign plan for the crucifixion, while woefully underestimating the deity of Christ. We could invalidate Hinn’s warnings against criticism by pointing out the time Paul rebuked Peter—or when Hinn has publicly rebuked Joel Osteen, among others. Then there’s the problem of Hinn basing his threats upon the extra-biblical revelation of another false teacher (Kenneth Copeland).

What does it mean to “touch”?

But there is one simple, glaring error that explains all the other problems and exposes Hinn as the incompetent and unqualified Bible teacher that he is. When David says, “I will not stretch out my hand against [Saul], for he is the Lord’s anointed” (1 Samuel 24:10), he is explaining why he didn’t kill Saul, not why he didn’t criticize Saul. In fact, David was openly critical of Saul on numerous occasions. Moreover, 1 Samuel 24:10 is part of a larger discourse where David rebukes Saul face-to-face over his murderous scheming: “I have not sinned against you, though you are lying in wait for my life to take it. May the Lord judge between you and me, and may the Lord avenge me on you; but my hand shall not be against you” (1 Samuel 24:11–13). Even if Benny Hinn was “the Lord’s anointed”—he’s not—none of his critics are attempting to “touch” him in the sense described in 1 Samuel 24:10 (or Psalm 105:15; or 1 Chronicles 16:22).

Who are the anointed?

There is another fatal flaw in Hinn’s interpretation. He—and all those who follow this teaching—assume that only certain persons are “anointed.” They claim that pastors and self-appointed prophets and apostles have a unique anointing from God that immunizes them from criticism. But such a concept is foreign to Scripture. In short, the Bible teaches that all believers have an anointing from God.

In his first epistle, the apostle John explained what it means to be anointed as a New Testament believer. After warning his readers about antichrists who were coming to deceive them, John reminded them of their security because of Christ’s anointing:

These things I have written to you concerning those who are trying to deceive you. As for you, the anointing which you received from Him abides in you, and you have no need for anyone to teach you; but as His anointing teaches you about all things, and is true and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, you abide in Him. (1 John 2:26–27)

The anointing John refers to is the indwelling of the Holy Spirit—a reality for all true Christians. John MacArthur explains the context and meaning of “anointing” as it appears in 1 John:

The false teachers who threatened John’s readers employed the terms for knowledge and anointing to describe their religious experience. They arrogantly saw themselves as possessing an elevated and esoteric form of divine knowledge, and as the recipients of a special, secret, transcendent anointing. That led them to believe they were privy to truth that the uninitiated lacked. John’s response, which was both a rebuttal to the antichrists and a reassurance to the believers, was to assert that, in reality, all true Christians have an anointing from the Holy One.

Because believers have received that anointing, they have the true understanding of God that comes exclusively through Jesus Christ (2 Corinthians 4:6), “in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” (Colossians 2:3). They do not need any secret, special, or transcendent understanding or esoteric insight. Anointing (chrisma) literally means “ointment” or “oil” (cf. Hebrews 1:9). In this text it refers figuratively to the Holy Spirit (cf. 2 Corinthians 1:21–22), who has taken up residency in believers at the behest of Jesus Christ, the Holy One (cf. Luke 4:34; Acts 3:14), and reveals through Scripture all they need to know (John 14:26; 16:13; 1 Corinthians 2:9–10). (John MacArthur, The MacArthur New Testament Commentary: 1–3 John (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 2007), 102.)

The anointing we have as believers reveals the truth and therefore exposes the lies of false teachers. How ironic that the “anointing” Benny Hinn evokes to extort and manipulate churchgoers is actually our warning system to expose the self-serving deception of wolves like him.