Question of the Week: What is the proper interpretation of Jesus’ statement in Luke 9:27?

But I tell you truly, there are some standing here who shall not taste death till they see the kingdom of God.”
Luke 9:27 (NKJV)

There are three conclusions people have come to concerning this statement by Jesus. All of which stem from their understanding of the kingdom of God.

1. The Kingdom of God refers to the establishment of a political system on the earth.
2. The Kingdom of God refers to the End Times.
3. The Kingdom of God refers to Jesus revealed in His glory.

The first interpretation isn’t a conclusion people make in ignorance. Their scriptural basis for concluding that the kingdom of God is referring to God ruling as king on the earth comes from Psalm 103:19. In the broadest possible terms, it is taken very plainly from this passage to refer to a literal kingdom literally ruled by God. While this is a possible handling of the term “kingdom of God” in scripture, there are several problems with the conclusion in this particular text. The first and most significant problem is history. If this was what Jesus meant, it simply didn’t happen. All of those who were physically with Jesus when He spoke those words have not only tasted death, but have remained dead for almost two thousand years. We would be unfair in insisting on an interpretation that makes Jesus out to be a liar when other valid interpretations are available to us. Therefore, it is appropriate to consider other options before believing this is the proper interpretation and by extension a failed prophecy that destroys Jesus’ credibility in His claims to be God.

The second interpretation is also a reasonable conclusion people come to. In Revelation 11:15, the kingdoms of the world will be announced as the kingdoms of our Lord and His Christ when the 7th Trumpet is sounded. These trumpet judgments will take place during the Great Tribulation during the End Times. Thus, this requires Jesus’ statement to be referring to the Great Tribulation and therefore conclude that Jesus is predicting the End Times will not only take place, but the full repercussions will take place before those who heard Jesus say these words would taste death. The greatest reinforcement to this conclusion is found in the verse immediately prior to His statement. Luke 9:26 references the time of judgment that leads up to His statement. Like the previous point, the biggest problem with this interpretation is that it did not happen. The End Times remains in the future, and we who are observing that reality are not those who heard Jesus speak these words. They have all tasted death. There is a view of the End Times known as Preterism which denies a literal interpretation of prophetic events. They would conclude that Jesus’ statement here is referring to the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem. However, the restoration of Israel in 1948 literally fulfilling Ezekiel 37 has challenged this viewpoint along with many others. The majority of adherents to this handling of scripture are content with this approach and are focusing on other topics. We can be gracious and at least allow this as a possible conclusion, given that it does fit the criteria held to the previous point. There were those who heard Jesus say these words that didn’t taste death before 70AD.

The final interpretation and the position we believe is the most consistent is that Jesus was referring to Himself. The scriptural justification for this conclusion is in the very next verses.

But I tell you truly, there are some standing here who shall not taste death till they see the kingdom of God.” Now it came to pass, about eight days after these sayings, that He took Peter, John, and James and went up on the mountain to pray. As He prayed, the appearance of His face was altered, and His robe became white and glistening. And behold, two men talked with Him, who were Moses and Elijah, who appeared in glory and spoke of His decease which He was about to accomplish at Jerusalem. But Peter and those with him were heavy with sleep; and when they were fully awake, they saw His glory and the two men who stood with Him.
Luke 29:27-32 (NKJV)

The other passages that would refer to the kingdom of God as a relationship with Jesus Christ are the following;
John 3:5-7 includes Jesus referring to those who are born again as able to inherit the Kingdom of God.
Luke 17:20 includes Jesus answering the Pharisees about this very topic, clarifying it wouldn’t be something that took place in an observable way.
Romans 14:17 describes the Kingdom of God as a right relationship with God.

Given that we don’t need to leave the chapter in order to come to the final conclusion, we believe that it is most appropriate interpretation is made. As is the case with any piece of literature; If the plain sense makes sense, seek no other sense lest you believe in nonsense. If the Kingdom of God in a plain sense makes nonsense of this passage, then we should look for other interpretations. Given that the application of the Kingdom of God refers to the person of Jesus in more plain statements made in scripture, we conclude it is the most appropriate.

A Reason For Hope is a ministry of Calvary Christian Fellowship of Tucson

Listen: Monday – Friday 5-6pm, on 106.3FM Reach Radio

Email your questions:

[email protected]

Follow on CCF Facebook: facebook.com/ccftucson
Watch our Frequently Asked Questions on YouTube.

A Reason For Hope Question of the Week – July 2nd, 2021

‘Whoever kills any man shall surely be put to death. Whoever kills an animal shall make it good, animal for animal. ‘If a man causes disfigurement of his neighbor, as he has done, so shall it be done to him—fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth; as he has caused disfigurement of a man, so shall it be done to him. And whoever kills an animal shall restore it; but whoever kills a man shall be put to death. You shall have the same law for the stranger and for one from your own country; for I am the Lord your God.’ ”
Leviticus 24:17-22 (NKJV)

The question, “What is meant by” has meaning. Usually, it is asking how this command is applied practically in the Christian life today. Sometimes it’s asking for clarification of how it was applied in general. Those who are objectively coming to the text are asking something much simpler. What is being communicated in this passage? In order to clarify all three ways this question could be asked, we will first start with the title.

Leviticus means “pertaining to the Levites.” The Levites were the descendants of the 3rd son of Israel Levi, who were given no specific territory in Israel. Instead, they were to be spread out throughout the land of Israel to serve as their equivalent of government representatives. Those who would enforce the law as a police force apart from the military were Levites. Those who would establish the right to a fair trial in Cities of Refuge were Levites. Those who would enact the penalties of the law were Levites. Those who would perform religious ceremonies and sacrifices were Levites. This was their calling from God as the head of state. There were also serious penalties for those who tried to take the responsibilities of Levites on themselves. Examples of this were the kings Saul and Uzziah in the context of offering sacrifices. The former of which was removed from the throne, and the latter struck with leprosy.

At that time the Lord separated the tribe of Levi to bear the ark of the covenant of the Lord, to stand before the Lord to minister to Him and to bless in His name, to this day. Therefore Levi has no portion nor inheritance with his brethren; the Lord is his inheritance, just as the Lord your God promised him.)
Deuteronomy 10:8-9 (NKJV)

As God’s ministers, or servants, this gives us the audience this legal penalty was spoken to. It is also worth noting that distinctions are made between those who take the life of another human being and those who take the life of an animal. Animals lives were to be financially compensated for. Human lives were to be met with a capital penalty. Who would be enforcing this penalty? Look no farther than the title of the book. Pertaining to the Levites.

Now for the statement itself, an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. If the statement is being spoken to those meeting out legal penalties, the application would be exactly that. What is the legal penalty for, quote, disfigurement. The meeting out of justice for the loss of an eye or tooth was limited to the harm done to the individual. Instead of a perpetuation of violence as it’s often presented to mean, it was actually a limiter to the kind of consequences that would be meeted out on the offender. It wouldn’t be two eyes for one eye. It could only match the harm done in the context of violence.

This then brings us to the practical aspect of the question. How does this apply to us today? Since we aren’t under the legal authority of the Levites, the legal penalties given out to them aren’t how the law is enforced in our own lands. Followers of Christ are commanded to submit to governing authorities as God’s ministers for the same reasons that Israel was to submit to the authority of the Levites. Even though their penalties and legal codes may not entirely line up with one another, we acknowledge that authority as from God. The instructions for this are given to us in Romans 12-13. And from these sections of scripture, Paul the Apostle uses his extensive knowledge of the Old Testament to apply the Law to those living outside of Israel’s covenant. (The whole world today) Just like the citizens of Israel were not to avenge themselves, but allow God and His representatives to do their job, so are we called to do the same.

If it is possible, as much as depends on you, live peaceably with all men. Beloved, do not avenge yourselves, but rather give place to wrath; for it is written, “Vengeance is Mine, I will repay,” says the Lord. Therefore “If your enemy is hungry, feed him; If he is thirsty, give him a drink; For in so doing you will heap coals of fire on his head.” Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.
Romans 12:18-21 (NKJV)

A Reason For Hope is a ministry of Calvary Christian Fellowship of Tucson

Listen: Monday – Friday 5-6pm, on 106.3FM Reach Radio

Email your questions:

[email protected]

Follow on CCF Facebook: facebook.com/ccftucson
Watch our Frequently Asked Questions on YouTube.

Question of the Week: What is the Biblical stance towards Critical Race Theory?

Critical Race Theory in a word is rooted in Marxism (Karl Marx was a 19^th century German economist and communist) which replaces money with skin color. The beliefs of Karl Marx were that  there are only two states that a person could find themselves in; Oppressor and Oppressed. His belief then was that in order to resolve this, the oppressed must rise against those in power. To what end is anyone’s guess. Many have promised utopia to only deliver the end of society with nothing but more oppression. This is the playbook of Critical Race Theory. The philosophical underpinning of C.R.T. in combating oppression in a society, in the form of racism instead of poverty, carries with it three assumptions that need to be at play.

1.  Selective Existentialism: What you are comes before who you are, unless your emotions tell you otherwise.

2.  Selective Subjective Morality: What personally appeals to you emotionally is the standard for right and wrong.

3.  The Absolute Assumption of Mankind’s Corruption: The problem with people is what they are by nature.

It would help to understand some tenets of Critical Race Theory. They are:

    I.        “Individual identity cannot be separated from our group identity (We are either oppressed or oppressor). Move away from seeing yourself as an individual. You are a part of a group that is allocated by skin color, sex, gender, religion, politics, and health.

  II.        Hegemonic power – The ability of a group to have power over another. Oppression is imposing a “norm” on society. (i.e., Having a hetero sexual family is a norm that would be seen as oppressive because it is the norm in society.)

III.        Diversity means the elimination of all forms of oppression (the hegemonic power). Liberating people from all normal cultures.
(i.e. the 10 Commandments is a list of moral and ethical norms that are binding on all people. Because of this, God would be seen as an oppressor in Social Justice Theory).

IV.        Lived experience is more important than objective evidence in understanding oppression. Facts, Data, Reason are less important than narratives, stories of the oppressed. Oppressive groups hide their oppression through objectivity, evidence, reason and logic.

  V.        Intersectionality – Experiences are unique to oppressed groups. There are different levels of oppression depending on your intersectionality (i.e., how many oppressed groups you identify with; black, woman, transgender, disabled, Muslim.)

Using their own dictionary and standard for ethics, there are naturally many problems with this belief system on a philosophical, historical, and even conceptual basis given its inspiration from Marxism. The goal (on paper) isn’t the liberation of the oppressed, but the transference of oppression from one group to the other. Many brighter minds can deal with the political, historical, and philosophical problems with this mindset. The question we need to be asking is what the Biblical response is to this modern movement.

Response #1: We do not disagree that mankind is fallen. Without a fundamental change of our nature, we will always find a way to oppress each other.

And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins, in which you once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience, among whom also we all once conducted ourselves in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, just as the others.
Ephesians 2:1-3 (NKJV)

I find then a law, that evil is present with me, the one who wills to do good. For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man. But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death?
Romans 7:21-24 (NKJV)

When finding common ground (in a discussion) there doesn’t need to be further clarification! In order to respond effectively to someone’s position, it is always going to be most productive when we start with where we agree. So we can agree with C.R.T. that all people are fallen.

Response #2: We agree that society’s impositions do not establish how society ought to morally function. All societies before us have fallen short of a just society in some way. The question is where the standard for a just society comes from? Our purpose isn’t determined by the societal norms of the current day any more than the passionate theories proposed to oppose them as oppressive. If the destination (our purpose in life) isn’t objective, then there is no solution. We don’t necessarily move to a better society by tearing down where we are now. Our response is that the standard for a better society comes from the one who it originally came from. The Creator has the sole right to explain how something was intended to function because it was their intention that made it in the first place. Those who believe in C.R.T. and Christianity both don’t believe that society (in concept or idea) is the problem. Only the way it’s currently functioning. Where the Christian and the C.R.T. supporter differ is whether we should go back to the beginning (God’s intent), or move on to something different in the present. Jesus made this point when addressing a flaw that had taken place in another institution He created known as marriage. Instead of doing away with or reinventing it, He pointed back to how it functioned in the beginning, with Him as the standard. His followers then applied it to their lives in full understanding of what marriage objectively is accordingly.

And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.”
Matthew 19:4-6 (NKJV)

Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body. Therefore, just as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her, that He might sanctify and cleanse her with the washing of water by the word, that He might present her to Himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that she should be holy and without blemish. So husbands ought to love their own wives as their own bodies; he who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as the Lord does the church. For we are members of His body, of His flesh and of His bones. “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church.
Ephesians 5:22-32 (NKJV)

So, we disagree with C.R.T. on who is to be the authority on how society should function. The Christian holds to an objective truth that is to be adhered to (God/Jesus), while C.R.T. holds to the subjective opinions of C.R. Theorist.

Response #3: Where is the Gospel? The Gospel, or good news, is what separates the Christian from the supporter of Critical Race Theory. C.R.T. offers no solution to our nature or an opportunity to be redeemed again for the sins of their skin color. Those of the oppressed didn’t ransom the oppressor from their status of having white skin or being a part of the norm. There is no redeemer in C.R.T. In contrast, through Jesus Christ, we are shown the problem and freely given the solution (Mark 10:45). In C.R.T., the person who is identified as the problem is given no solution. Only perpetual shame and torment for what they are. The admission of your ethnic guilt could suffice, but maybe not! You still are in your skin, so to speak.

There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh, that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.
Romans 8:1-4 (NKJV)

So, Christianity would disagree with C.R.T. as to what the best solution is to free humans for oppressing other humans. Christianity teaches the Gospel message, while C.R.T. has no solutions to the problem of skin color.

A Reason For Hope is a ministry of Calvary Christian Fellowship of Tucson

Listen: Monday – Friday 5-6pm, on 106.3FM Reach Radio

Email your questions:

[email protected] on CCF Facebook: facebook.com/ccftucson
Watch our Frequently Asked Questions on YouTube.

Question of the Week: Why does the Apostle Peter mention Tartarus from Greek Mythology?

He doesn’t. At least he doesn’t mention Tartarus as it was understood in Greek Mythology. The word Tartarus is a Greek word. And like most words in spoken or written language, those words have meaning. When the Apostle Peter wrote to the church about false teachers in the early church, he makes a point comparing them to demons. The argument is fairly simple. If God didn’t let the angels get away with deception, then He won’t let humans get away with it either. The passage in question is in his second and final epistle discussing this very issue.

For if God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment;
2 Peter 2:4 (NKJV)

The point continues down to 2 Peter 2:9, but the focus of the question is on the word “hell.” In Greek, Tartarus means “sunless abyss” or “bottomless pit.” The Apostle Peter is speaking to a primarily Greek speaking audience, therefore it would be appropriate for him to use Greek words. However, it would be inappropriate to conclude that if Greek Pagans used this word to refer to the lowest section of the Underworld where Zeus imprisoned the Titans, that is and could only be what the word could mean. Peter’s audience needs to be kept in mind as well. The existence of Zeus, Titans, the Underworld, and many other aspects of Tartarus as the pagans defined it are antithetical to Christianity and Judaism. There are no gods besides YHVH (Isaiah 44:6). There are no such thing as a species that predated the gods known as titans (Isaiah 43:10). The pagan descriptions of the Underworld describe the final resting place of the dead to all be in the same place. The Biblical definitions of Heaven and Hell describe whether you’re or separated from God or not. No Hebrew or Christian would claim that the grave or Sheol is the final place of the dead according to Christian doctrine. All of these things and more can be discussed in more detail. However, the most productive information we should have at our disposal is the ability to think critically about the context of Peter’s statement. If Peter is a Jew, speaking to people who believe the Old Testament and the Jewish Messiah, then his terms should be read in light of the audience and speaker just as much as the language he’s speaking in.

Would it be appropriate to conclude that Peter is referring to Tartarus as the Greek Pagans understood it, or the Hebrew Prophets understood it? Obviously the latter. The question that follows is if Tartarus is a Greek term, how would the term have been used if Peter was speaking in Hebrew? Sheol. Sheol is referred to as the holding place of the dead and translated into the Greek language in a variety of ways. Hades, The Grave, and most appropriate for our question this week, The Abyss. Jesus described it as a place where the righteous awaited Him and the wicked awaited Judgment. We read this in the account of the Rich Man and Lazarus.

“There was a certain rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and fared sumptuously every day. But there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, full of sores, who was laid at his gate, desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man’s table. Moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. So it was that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels to Abraham’s bosom. The rich man also died and was buried. And being in torments in Hades, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. “Then he cried and said, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.’ But Abraham said, ‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things; but now he is comforted and you are tormented. And besides all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed, so that those who want to pass from here to you cannot, nor can those from there pass to us.’ “Then he said, ‘I beg you therefore, father, that you would send him to my father’s house, for I have five brothers, that he may testify to them, lest they also come to this place of torment.’ Abraham said to him, ‘They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.’ And he said, ‘No, father Abraham; but if one goes to them from the dead, they will repent.’ But he said to him, ‘If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead.’ ”
Luke 16:19-31 (NKJV)

There are those who would argue this was a parable and not an actual description of the afterlife before Jesus’ completed work on the cross. However, notice that Jesus doesn’t introduce this as a parable. He uses proper names like Abraham and Lazarus. He emphasizes terms and makes points unique from any other “parable” He spoke. And likewise, even those who argue this is a parable aren’t discounting that the places and circumstances He’s illustrating His point through aren’t real things. Otherwise they’d have to argue that seeds and fields don’t actually exist given the fact they’re used in a parable by Jesus in Matthew 13:3-9. Or they’d have to argue that there are no such thing as vineyards and wine vats given the fact that Jesus used them in a parable in Mark 12:1-8. It’s not something you can be consistent with. Given that Jesus has the right to tell us what the afterlife is and isn’t, how does He describe it? Not in any way comparable to the writings of Hesiod and the Theogony. This is what will ultimately drive this point home.

Hesiod’s Theogony is the earliest written source we have from Greek culture that defines Tartarus in the way that paganism explains it to be. There are other and more extensive reports that were written later on. However, this is the first time in history that the word Tartarus was used to describe the dwelling place of the Titans. False teachers who would attempt to claim the Titans were real and actually understood to be angels are just trying to sell books. An actual prophet of God by the name of David (Acts 2:29-31) used the term hell, Sheol or abyss, in the Psalms.

Where can I go from Your Spirit? Or where can I flee from Your presence? If I ascend into heaven, You are there; If I make my bed in hell, behold, You are there.
Psalm 139:7-8 (NKJV)

The earliest date ever attributed to Hesiod’s Theogony is between the 7th and 8th century BC. David lived and wrote these words in the 10th century BC. Jewish culture was using this term a very long time before the Greeks were. And given the fact that Peter was Jewish, it is far more reasonable to conclude that he was using the term as the Bible described it. Not how the pagan religions that Christianity disproves describe it.

A Reason For Hope is a ministry of Calvary Christian Fellowship of Tucson

Listen: Monday – Friday 5-6pm, on 106.3FM Reach Radio

Email your questions:

[email protected]

Follow on CCF Facebook: facebook.com/ccftucson
Watch our Frequently Asked Questions on YouTube.

Question of the Week: How could Jesus have been tempted in Matthew 4:1 when James 1:13 says that God is not tempted?

These kind of questions and others are extremely crucial for us in understanding exactly what we mean when we claim Jesus is God. When we see God behave as only God should, we expect that of Him. When Jesus behaves as only God should, we come to conclusions about Him. The tricky part is when we see Jesus as God behaving in ways only man should. Examples of this are hunger, fatigue, and in this case temptation. God doesn’t hunger, sleep, or experience temptation by definition of what He is. Man does experience these things. The question is how were these both taking place at the same time when God became a Man? Cult groups will claim it has to be one or the other. Novices in this field will dismiss the matter and leave it for the professionals to sort out. We don’t want to be in either of those categories. In order to fully reconcile this paradox of Jesus being God and Man, we must first clarify how Jesus could be either of those things. Let alone both at the same time. Once we understand the concept of what scholars call the “Hypostatic Union” we will be able to reconcile all of scripture with the nature of our Lord.

Fact #1: Jesus is fully God.
Fact #2: Jesus became fully man at a moment of human history.
Fact #3: Jesus continues to function as a man.
Fact #4: Jesus remains God.
Conclusion: Jesus is a unique being in Creation. The God-Man.

Now let’s prove these facts with scripture.

Jesus is God:
+There are things that only God can truthfully claim about Himself and Jesus claimed those things about Himself:
1. God created the Heavens and the Earth:

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
Genesis 1:1 (NKJV)

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.
John 1:1-3 (NKJV)

2. God is the Giver of Life:

And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.
Genesis 2:7 (NKJV)

For as the Father raises the dead and gives life to them, even so the Son gives life to whom He will.
John 5:21 (NKJV)

3. God has existed Eternally:

Before the mountains were brought forth, Or ever You had formed the earth and the world, Even from everlasting to everlasting, You are God.
Psalm 90:2 (NKJV)

“But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, Though you are little among the thousands of Judah, Yet out of you shall come forth to Me The One to be Ruler in Israel, Whose goings forth are from of old, From everlasting.”
Micah 5:2 (NKJV)

Jesus became fully man in a moment of human history:

And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.
John 1:14 (NKJV)

Now as they said these things, Jesus Himself stood in the midst of them, and said to them, “Peace to you.” But they were terrified and frightened, and supposed they had seen a spirit. And He said to them, “Why are you troubled? And why do doubts arise in your hearts? Behold My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself. Handle Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see I have.”
Luke 24:36-39 (NKJV)

That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, concerning the Word of life—the life was manifested, and we have seen, and bear witness, and declare to you that eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested to us—that which we have seen and heard we declare to you, that you also may have fellowship with us; and truly our fellowship is with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ.
1 John 1:1-3 (NKJV)

Jesus continues to function as a man:

This is now the third time Jesus showed Himself to His disciples after He was raised from the dead. So when they had eaten breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me more than these?” He said to Him, “Yes, Lord; You know that I love You.” He said to him, “Feed My lambs.”
John 21:14-15 (NKJV)

“I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you these things in the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, the Bright and Morning Star.”
Revelation 22:16 (NKJV)

Jesus remains God:

“Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel, And his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts: ‘I am the First and I am the Last; Besides Me there is no God.
Isaiah 44:6 (NKJV)

And when I saw Him, I fell at His feet as dead. But He laid His right hand on me, saying to me, “Do not be afraid; I am the First and the Last. I am He who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore. Amen. And I have the keys of Hades and of Death
Revelation 1:17-18 (NKJV)

Conclusion: Jesus is a unique being in Creation. The God-Man.

To recap; God is identified as the one who created the heavens and the earth, and the Word that became flesh in John 1 is also given credit for creation. God is the one who gave life to man in the Garden of Eden, and Jesus claims that is an ability that He shares with the Father. David identifies God as the one who has existed eternally, and the prophet Micah claims the one to be born in Bethlehem actually existed before that point from beyond eternity. This is a small handful of passages used as evidence to conclude that Jesus is God. He says and does the sort of things only God can do. At the same time, Jesus was a being who was able to eat, be seen, touched, and even clarified as having flesh and bones. This is something that was true of Jesus even after His resurrection. He even goes so far as to refer to Himself both as the root and offspring of David. King David’s offspring is also the root or source of His family line. Two unique things are happening at the same time when referring to Jesus. He didn’t cease to be God when He became a man, or He wouldn’t have been able to rightfully refer to Himself in the ways only God can. Likewise, Jesus remains a man following His resurrection given the eyewitness testimonies of His disciples still interacting with Him as a being with flesh and bones. He continues to refer to Himself as the exclusive title of “The First and the Last” even after becoming a man when He appeared to John on Patmos. The First and the Last clarifies that He was dead, but now is alive forevermore. The one speaking to Isaiah is the same one speaking to John and they both speak of themselves the same way, despite Isaiah seeing Jesus before He became a man. These are the facts that we reconcile in order to come to conclusions about Jesus. No one can rightly claim to be the sort of things God is unless they are God. Jesus, or God the Son, referred to Himself as such and functioned in the ways that only God could before and after His resurrection.

This then brings us back to the question. God isn’t tempted, but Man is. Jesus as God isn’t tempted by nature, but adopted human nature in a moment of history. This unique nature as the God-Man could be tempted but remained perfect by nature at the same time. It didn’t lighten the severity of the temptation. Jesus in the wilderness, garden, and throughout His life was exposed to the full human experience. While He was certainly tempted in things that wouldn’t apply to us as men, as a man He experienced temptation. As God, He endured temptation to a degree higher than anything we could imagine.

Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil.
Matthew 4:1 (NKJV)

And being in agony, He prayed more earnestly. Then His sweat became like great drops of blood falling down to the ground. When He rose up from prayer, and had come to His disciples, He found them sleeping from sorrow. Then He said to them, “Why do you sleep? Rise and pray, lest you enter into temptation.”
Luke 22:44-46 (NKJV)

Seeing then that we have a great High Priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin.
Hebrews 4:14-15 (NKJV)

“No man knows how bad he is till he has tried very hard to be good. A silly idea is current that good people do not know what temptation means. This is an obvious lie. Only those who try to resist temptation know how strong it is. After all, you find out the strength of the German army by fighting against it, not by giving in. You find out the strength of a wind by trying to walk against it, not by lying down. A man who gives in to temptation after five minutes simply does not know what it would have been like an hour later. That is why bad people, in one sense, know very little about badness — they have lived a sheltered life by always giving in. We never find out the strength of the evil impulse inside us until we try to fight it: and Christ, because He was the only man who never yielded to temptation, is also the only man who knows to the full what temptation means — the only complete realist.” -C.S. Lewis

A Reason For Hope is a ministry of Calvary Christian Fellowship of Tucson

Listen: Monday – Friday 5-6pm, on 106.3FM Reach Radio

Email your questions:

[email protected]

Follow on CCF Facebook: facebook.com/ccftucson
Watch our Frequently Asked Questions on YouTube.