Bumby Bible Questions 3

Introduction

Good morning. Morning. We are working on our PowerPoint here. Hang on.

As you can see, this is, as Jim indicated, our question and answer period at nine o’clock hour. Greg and I want to start by first expressing our appreciation on two levels. Number one is for the many good questions we’ve got. I don’t think we’ve got any bad questions yet. But we appreciate the many, many good questions that we’re receiving. You are just responding so uh positively uh in that regard. And then secondly, for the positive feedback that we’ve got about this format of uh question and answer. Anytime you try to change something, uh, even in a slight way, you’re a little nervous about how it’s going to be received, is it going to work? And uh we appreciate so much of the compliments and the encouragements and the positive feedbacks uh that we’ve gotten about the question and answer uh session.

1. What Does Should Not Mean in John 3:16?

Uh and we plan on continuing it for the foreseeable future at least. Well, I thank Cody also for picking songs. Uh you may not think about this, but trying to pick songs for four random questions or so is a pretty difficult theming task. So as you think about this, make sure to give a lot of appreciation to the song leaders who when they ask for something like the cross or compassion or love, and we say QA, random questions in Habakkuk. It’s a little bit harder to theme around, so thank you, Cody, and thank you to all the song leaders who work hard on that. Go ahead and get started here. The first question, what does the phrase should not mean in John 3.16? And how should I I reply to somebody who quotes that verse to me?

So the question really is based on the phrase should not. Sometimes there’s a teaching out there that says, well, um, should not means some sort of loophole that Jesus is allowing. We’re going to examine that text to see is that what Jesus meant or not. Okay, in the off chance that there’s anybody out there that doesn’t know what John 3.16 says, we’ll we’ll quote that or read that to you. It says, of course, for God so loved the world that he gave his only son, that whoever believes in him should not perish, but have eternal life. And of course, the question centered around those two words, should not perish. And so the the question would be while we’re still looking at the verse here, is it that whoever believes in Jesus should not, as in most likely will not, or if they believe right, they will not perish.

That’s not necessarily the idea. That’s an idea that’s floated out there. We’re gonna see what does the what do those words actually mean here if we’ll kind of see the the Greek for this is pretty clear, actually. The word should or shall is actually supplied in English. Alright, so if you’re actually looking at the Greek, in addition to being confused either by the letters or confused by if you were to take it from Greek to English immediately, really the phrase that’s found there on the next little hit there is no perish or not perish. So if you were looking at the Greek, it’s not just that those who believe in Jesus should not perish, but no or not perish. Right? So that idea is pretty clear.

And what that’s saying then is when Jesus says, those who believe in me will not perish or shall not perish, but have everlasting life, he’s saying, if you do believe in me, with all that that means, you will have life. You will avoid death, you will be forgiven. All that’s packed into that phrase. So again, the word is not just shall not. The English word we’re putting in there to make the verse understandable and to make it flow better. It just means no perish or not perishing. And of course, if that kind of rubs the wrong way, you can kind of think, well, if that just means anyone who believes will not perish, then is Jesus saying that all you have to do is believe. Well, even if John 3.16 was not used in that way, throughout the New Testament, both the New Testament writers and Jesus himself use that idea commonly that if you believe, you will have life.

If you believe, you will not be condemned. So this passage would not be the only one of its kind anyway. And so this understanding, based on the Greek and based on just reading the verse through, understanding the word shall was put in by our translators, then it helps us understand this is exactly what Jesus meant, and it’s exactly what he said. The million-dollar question now, though, is what do you do with that kind of verse? What does that mean for how you properly believe and have everlasting life? And that’s what we’re going to talk about a little bit now. So if the passage says, believe and you won’t perish, then what is being taught here in John chapter 3? And so let’s look, if you have your Bibles, if you haven’t already turned there, do so to John chapter 3.

And let’s look just a little bit at the context. Now, as we’re turning over there, you understand that that is vastly important anytime you’re studying any Bible verse, is to consider the context. The context answers so many questions. Number one, who is speaking? To whom are they speaking? And what do they mean when they say those particular words or phrases? And of course, in John chapter 3, and in verse 16, in John chapter 3, Jesus is speaking to Nicodemus, who had come to him at night. And Jesus said unto him, beginning in verse 3, most assuredly I say to you, again, this is Jesus speaking to Nicodemus. Most assuredly I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. And so Jesus immediately says, here is a requirement to see the kingdom of God.

See doesn’t mean just to observe it as a distance. That’s a phrase, figure of speech that means to experience it, to be a part of the kingdom of God, that one has to experience this new birth. And so whatever Jesus says later in verse 16, except you believe.

You’re talking about. I don’t think Nicodemus really thought Jesus was talking about an adult man being born again through physical birth. I think he’s just simply saying, I don’t know what you’re talking about. This is birth that I’m talking about. How can this be? What are you talking about? What is this new birth? And Jesus explains in verse 5, most assuredly I say to you, unless one is born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. And so entering the kingdom of God is equivalent to seeing the kingdom of God and this new birth, which he says is a birth of water and the spirit. Now, some want to try to eliminate baptism as a possibility of this birth process, the birth in water, by saying, Well, the birth of water is the physical birth, and the birth of the spirit is the spiritual birth.

And so Jesus is talking about two separate births there in verse 5. The first birth is the physical birth, being born as a baby. That’s the born in water, and the second one is born of the spirit. Couple problems with that is that Jesus is not speaking of the requirement of physical birth to enter the kingdom of God. And when Jesus talks about physical birth, he does not refer to it as being born of the water. In verse 6, he says, that which is born of flesh is flesh. When he describes the physical birth process, he uses this phrase, born of the flesh. If in verse 5 he was using born of the water to refer to physical birth, why wouldn’t he in the very next verse say, whoever is born of water is of the flesh?

And so he’s not talking about the physical birth process there in verse 5 as he would in verse 6. He’s talking about being born of the water and of the Spirit. Not two separate births, but one spiritual birth that involves water. Jesus will later, and his apostles will certainly clarify what that birth process is and that physical birth. And so John 3.16, rather than eliminating any kind of obedience or certainly eliminating baptism, the context certainly includes it. In fact, he will go on to say, skip down in John chapter 3, in verse 20 and 21, he says, For everyone practicing evil, hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. But he who does the truth, he who does the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be clearly seen, that they have been done in God.

To make an argument that John 3.16 says believe. So that’s all you have to do is to engage in some kind of mental exercise that says, I believe in God, to say that that would eliminate any kind of obedience or any kind of action, just really avoids the context of a new birth is required, and Jesus later talking about deeds that must be done in truth or in obedience to the gospel. And in addition to violating the context of early John 3 and late John 3, certainly violates the rest of the New Testament context. I often teach people at Bible studies both privately and kind of more public settings. When you see two passages, many of you probably, when we talked about John 3.16, thought of Mark 16, 16 or Acts 2.38.

When there’s two passages that seem like they’re contradicting, John 3.16, Jesus says, whoever believes will have everlasting life. Acts 2.38, Peter says, repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. Then we think about those, and there’s really only four things you can do with them. This is just plain logically true. That you can either take one and ignore the other one. You can take the second one and ignore the first one. You can throw them both out, close the Bible and say the Bible’s a hoax, it’s man made, it’s flawed. Or you can say, number four, and most importantly, how does it harmonize? How does the Word of God work together? How are we to understand John 3 16 in light of what Jesus says in Mark 16 16?

Whoever believes and is baptized shall be saved, and whoever does not believe will be condemned. Well, it’s pretty easy to see how Jesus would link those because he does it for us in Mark 16, 16. Whoever believes, yes, and is baptized, yes, will be saved. Of course, also in John chapter 12, it’s important to understand, when we think about John 3.16, and we think about whoever believes will have everlasting life. If you look at John 12, verse 42 and 43, you’ll see an instance of the word belief used by the inspired writer here. But also note the people doing it and where their faith was, what type of belief they had, and what God’s response is to it. John 12, verse 42 and 43. Nevertheless, many even of the authorities believed in him.

But for fear of the Pharisees, they did not confess it, so that they would not be put out of the synagogue. For they love the glory that comes from man more than the glory that comes from God. It’s interesting here that the authorities, who were the main thorns in Jesus’ side, it says in verse 42 very clearly, the authorities believed in Jesus. But they wouldn’t confess him. Why? They love the glory that comes from man more than God. They love their standing. They didn’t want to be kicked out of the synagogue. Does God view that type of belief favorably? Well, of course not. So how do we understand those two passages, John 12, 41 and through 43 and John 3.16? That the belief Jesus is talking about, accompanying that new birth and going with those good works that are found in the light, is the type of belief that is pleasing to God.

Or as I believe Bob Harkrider was fond of saying, a faith that saves is a faith that obeys. Well, how do we reach that conclusion? Not just by when somebody says, Well, what about John 3.16, as somebody really did in Bible study with me? Somebody said, Well, what about John 3.16, Greg? And somebody before I could breathe said, Well, Acts 2.38. I appreciate that, and we understand those thoughts. We have to make them work together in harmony, but we have to understand the context of each verse individually, so that we can then understand them together. What we’re looking for is to please God in harmony with the word he’s revealed us with to, revealed us, uh, revealed for us, I should say, and to understand the Greek, understand the context of the chapter, and certainly of all the inspired New Testament passages.

2. What Does God Came From Temon Mean?

Okay. Again, a good question. And hopefully we’ve shed some light on not just the should not of John 3 16, but it in its greater context of man’s salvation. And that brings us to question number two. So if you have your Old Testament, it’s maybe on a head there while I’m reading it. What is the meaning of Habakkuk 3 3, where it says God came from Temon? What is the meaning of Habakkuk 3-3 where it says God came from Temon? So, as you’re turning there, just a quick little thing about Habakkuk, not many of us just kind of walk around ready to have a discussion of Habakkuk. He’s a good book. In chapter 1, he basically says, God, what’s going on? Why aren’t you punishing us for doing wrong?

And then God says, I am going to punish you for doing wrong. Babylon’s going to come for you. And then he says, Well, God, why are you letting Babylon come for us? They’re guilty too. And God begins to answer him, and that’s what you’re seeing throughout chapters 2 and 3 here as we get to this question. In chapter 3, we get to a prayer of Habakkuk about this judgment that is coming. And he expresses this statement in Habakkuk 3, verse 3. God came from Temon, and the Holy One from Mount Peran. His splendor covered the heavens, and the earth was full of his praise. And again, the phrase we’re zeroing in on in this question is, God came from Temon. What does that mean? And whatever it means, we’re going to see is also found another place in the Old Testament, in fact, in the book of Deuteronomy.

Yeah, in Deuteronomy chapter 33, you can turn back there or just listen to quoting it. Moses talking about the presence of God among his people, says of Jehovah of God, the Lord came from Sinai. Of course, we know Mount Sinai to be that mountain where God gave them the law, the Ten Commandments, His presence was made known to them through the shaking of that mountain, the thunder, the lightnings, all of those great manifestations. And of that, Moses said, God came from Sinai. And so that’s a familiar phrase or type of phrase that’s found, particularly in the Old Testament, about the idea of God coming from even a specific geographical location. So I guess the question is, Greg, what does that mean? Well, and just like with the John 3.16 discussion, whatever it means in one place, there generally has to be a harmony in the other place.

It can’t just be God only shows himself one place, unless the scripture were to make that the point, but that doesn’t seem to be. The phrasing is the same. So what makes sense in Deuteronomy 33, I think does actually follow in Habakkuk 3 as well. If you’ll go back to Habakkuk 3, though, and note the second part of that phrase. Habakkuk 3, the very first part of verse 3 does have our question. God came from Temen, but notice the second phrase.

Rays flashed from his hand, and there he veiled his power. Well, there might be some things we could point to to say, well, this is somewhat literally true. The idea is simply what? God shows his power. He shows his presence. He shows his leadership and might to the people.

It’s what God deserves. And his creation that Josh prayed for this morning, we see God. And we see his handiwork. We see his wisdom. We see his all-knowing and all-powerful nature. And God was specifically showing the Israelites at both Sinai and here at Temon His glory, His power, His splendor and leadership. And so God came from Temon then. We if you were kind of put this in a summary form, you’d see that God is showing his glory and saying, This is me and this is my people. I am here with them. So, of course, and you know, the idea of that would be that God is in control, God is leading his people, and from henceforth they should know what? That God is their God, that they are uniquely called to be his people, and God will be with them.

That fits both the context of Deuteronomy 33, uh, with the Mount Sinai reference, God from came from down from Sinai, and also here in Habakkuk 3:3, that God came from Temon. I think another good point to make is it’ll sometimes if you watch television shows that deal with biblical phenomenon and miracles, it many times they’ll explain it away. For instance, what happened at Sinai, the shaking of the mountain, that was just an earthquake. It just so happened that the people were there at the time of an earthquake. It just so happened that God was giving the Ten Commandments when an earthquake happened, which the text in Deuteronomy says, no, that was God. God came from Sinai. And in Habakkuk, when this is going to happen, this is God.

This isn’t just a nation overtaking another nation in the normal course of events. This is God coming from Temon. This isn’t the Babylonian army, this isn’t an earthquake, this is God. And it’s that God points out his manifestations, again, as Greg said, showing his power and that he’s in control and leading his people. So this is an important claim, by the way. You talked about kind of debunking what God has done. The Bible reveals God did miraculously. If you kind of want to laugh or an interesting study, look at how people try to explain the ten plagues that happened in Egypt. And when the Bible says God came from Sinai, God came from Temon, God worked these plagues, the Bible gives a much more reasonable answer to these world historical events than man tries to kind of make up as we go.

3. Was Jesus Influenced by Buddhism?

We try to go back and say, well, maybe the water would turn red if this, this, and this happened in this sequence. There’s power in this phrase, and it would have meant a lot to both the Israelites and it should mean a lot to us today. True. See those powerful manifestations of God. Alright, question number three is was Jesus influenced by Buddhism, since a lot of his teachings parallel the beliefs of Buddhists. Now, if you weren’t prepared to talk about Habakkuk, I’m sure you weren’t prepared to talk about Buddha. And so let’s spend just a little bit of time of reminding you who Buddha is and some of his teachings. We won’t spend a whole lot of time, but just to give you a kind of a background, we’re not really sure.

It happened so long ago that there’s dispute among historians and scholars exactly when Buddha was born and lived, but sometime between the sixth and the fourth century BC. Now, to the premise of the question, that obviously puts him before the birth of Christ. 600 BC, even 300 BC would be 300 years before the birth of Christ. And so Buddha and his initial teachings would have predated Jesus and his teachings here upon the earth. If you can see on the map here, uh Buddha was born, oh, my highlighter’s not working, but kind of on the border of Nepal and India. That’s where Buddha was born. He was born a prince. But like many young men, he kind of left home and wanted to find himself and went on a spiritual journey.

And he met these in this part of the world. Meditation was already a big concept. And he met many of these meditators and learned from them, and kind of, his followers would say, took it to the next level and found this inner peace through meditation, the focus upon self and the inner self and the mind, that you could find this state of pure enlightenment by just meditating and kind of getting within yourself and focusing on the mind. Buddhism is still a very, very popular religion throughout the world, particularly throughout the Asian world. I use this occasion to show you some of my vacation photos. Took some preaching trips to Sri Lanka, which is an island just off the coast of India. Sri Lanka is predominantly Buddhist.

There are some Hindus there, but mostly about 70% Buddhist. This is a picture of a Buddhist temple in Matara, where I held a gospel meeting on the island of Sri Lanka. This is a Buddhist temple that is there. There’s various representations of Buddha. Many times he’s shown to be as this kind of a short, fat, rounded belly man, but sometimes he looks uh a little bit more spelt and and uh in shape uh in temples such as this. Uh this is a Buddhist temple in the Indian Ocean. Uh took this picture uh really from the hotel we were staying in uh when I was preaching in Matra, it’s a temple that’s on an island out in the Indian Ocean. Now there’s a bridge that you can walk across.

Uh the the natives tell me that before the bridge was built, uh, that the Buddhist priest would ride elephants out to uh this Buddhist temple. Uh and and so Buddhism has been around a long time, predated, of course, Christ and the teachings of Christ. But let’s look at some of the similarities in these teachings that that really prompted this question. And we have to understand as we look at these, this is still very common throughout the world, especially in Asian portions of the world, but even 15 minutes from here is a Buddhist temple. Oh. I’ve never had one in my in the backyard of my hotel, but I have had to vote in one just 15 minutes up the road, there is a Buddhist temple. So this is even here in Orlando.

So some of these similarities that we kind of pulled just to give a concept or a little taste here. Buddha would say perishable is a city built on sand, and of course, Jesus taught a foolish man who built his house on the sand. Um that whole parable in Matthew 7. Of course, the second uh example, confess before the world the sins you have committed, and Jesus, or at least James, inspired by God in the same New Testament. Therefore, confess your sins to one another and pray for one another that you may be healed. And of course, even a third example: consider others as yourself, and Jesus, as we know, the golden rule, due to others as you would have them do to you. These are some of the similarities that that were found in the teachings of Buddha and the teachings of Jesus, who would have historically or chronologically at least followed Buddha.

The question is, did Jesus copy from Buddha? And so let’s look at some of the possibilities. First of all, we have to admit, as we look at those three sets of quotes, that there are similarities in their teachings. I don’t know that that’s necessarily alarming. I did not find in my research any direct quotes where Jesus just plagiarized Buddha and took a direct quote from him. But there’s some similarities in those phrases, phrases, but that’s not to be unexpected, not surprising, because like all major religions, they teach some of the same tenets. Both Buddha and Jesus would have taught be nice to other people. And there’s only so many ways you can word be nice to other people. And so there’s going to be some similarities.

We could do that with again any of, or not meaning, most of the major world religions, we could find some similar phrases on similar topics because they may teach many of the same things. Well, and even the house on the sand, I mean, that concept certainly is still true today. You can build your house in more precarious positions than others. If your foundation isn’t in a safe, sturdy place, that’s more foolish than wise, you know, depending on your risk tolerance. So some New Testament examples of Jesus using different sources. First of all, one the perhaps the most important part in tracking did Jesus get his information from Buddha or kind of individually or from God or however you want to process that. Keep in mind, what also predated Jesus by centuries and more centuries than Buddha was the Old Testament law.

And so when Jesus is citing law and saying, you have heard that it was said to you, but I now say the command is now more fully revealed and presented in such a way as Jesus says in the book of Matthew, for example, what is he citing? Is he citing Buddha? Well, no, he’s citing the law of Moses. And if we’re going to play the game of, well, if it came first, that it came from that individual, law of Moses came well before Buddha did, even at his earliest dating. And of course, throughout the New Testament, Paul makes reference to many different types of books. If you look in Acts 17, he’s dealing with the Athenians at the Areopagus, and he he finds the statutes of the unknown God, and he cites and says, even some of your own poets have said.

So just citing something, even if there is a similarity, or purposely like Paul citing something, wouldn’t even mean that you are basing your religion around their thought, but rather it is a shared idea or tenet that is good. And who’s to say that being kind is not good? I mean, plenty of religious groups have gotten that concept. But also, again, chronologically speaking, who did Jesus cite from the most? The law and the prophets. And we’re always citing that. Jesus cites even Old Testament stories like Adam and Eve and Jonah to be real, and that strengthens the integrity as we understand the Old and New Testament. But it certainly strengthens our integrity looking at Jesus and where did his teaching come from? Just sharing ideas doesn’t mean that he stole them, vandalized them, or made up his own little packaging.

And so there are some, not surprising, some similarities in the teachings of the Old Covenant, Buddha, and Jesus. But if, as the premise of this question is asking, if Jesus just copied Buddha, built his teaching, his doctrine on the teachings of Buddha, I think Greg and I would both agree that Jesus was a bad copier. He was a bad student, because although there are some similarities that we cited, there are also some very major differences between the doctrine of Buddhism and the doctrine of Christianity. One of them, of course, that screams to mind that there’s an irreconcilable difference, if you will, is life after death. The concept Jesus says we were all going to face judgment. That this life is all there is. Whereas Buddhist teachings, which might vary, of course, depending on who you follow, but largely follow some sort of reincarnation cycle, which would be common in the part of the world in which it originated.

The idea that you could have this internal nirvana or peace through a life or multiple lifetimes where Jesus says, no, you have one life and you live it and you answer to God. And of course, that becomes a major tenet as well. The idea of a belief in God. Is there a higher power controlling things? Is there one unique person? Well, Jesus often said, I and the Father are one, and he would submit his will to the fathers. Whereas Buddha’s path for peace and this internal struggle is predicated upon emptying self and filling it just kind of with more peace, right? Or emptying yourself of any needs in this world, kind of an asceticism idea, rather than trusting in God’s ways for peace, following Jesus to be the way.

Another major difference between the teachings of Buddha and the teachings of Jesus, or the teaching of the Old Testament and the New Testament, is what’s the source of the answer? Buddha believed that the answer was within, that it was the mind, that if you could just get in touch with your own mind through this deep meditation, that there’s the source of enlightenment. That’s the complete opposite of what the Bible teaches. The Old Testament says the way of man’s not in himself. It was actually saying you can’t figure it out yourself. No matter how many spiritual journeys, no matter how deep the meditation, you’re not the answer. And that’s just plainly what the Bible says. You are not the answer. If anything, you, and including us, we’re the problem, not the solution.

Jesus, as Greg alluded to, Jesus said, I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father but by me. And so to the Buddhist, the answer is internal. To the Christian, the answer is external. There has to be some force outside of me to save me. There has to be some way outside of myself, and that, of course, that answer is Jesus and God. And so we see the similarities, but we see some major, major, as Greg said, irreconcilable differences between Buddhism and Christianity. And so it would seem to me that the answer would be that are there some similarities? Yes. Did Jesus get them from Buddha? Well, then maybe the question is, did Buddha get them from the Old Testament?

Conclusion

But it’s obvious to any, I think, honest observer that Jesus’ doctrine is so vastly different than Buddhism that he didn’t copy. That’s Jesus’ doctrine came from God as was rooted in the Old Testament scriptures. Alright, Greg, I think the clock says I think we’re pretty much done. We’re out of time. Again, thanks for your questions. Thanks for the positive feedback that we’re getting on these questions. And keep them coming, and we look forward to next month. Let’s dismiss in a word of prayer. Our dear God and most gracious and loving Heavenly Father, we’re so thankful to you for blessing us with your word. We pray that we never neglect it or forget or don’t put the right emphasis on understanding that you who created the world with just your voice, who are the God of all people and all of your creation, that you revealed words for us to not only learn from and to read, but to benefit from, to find true lasting peace, to find the source to the most difficult question we could have in this life.

How can we be forgiven? How can we be saved? How can we have eternal life and live eternally with you? Thank you so much for being our God, for looking upon us with such favor, for sending Jesus to die on the cross for our sins. We pray that as we examine your word, that we always do so, rightly dividing it, that as we go out into the world, we’re lights in the world, and we recognize that while there’s many good teachers, that good is defined by you, and that we need to seek you for every answer, every difficulty and every problem. Thank you for all the prophets who lived before, who stood up for your word. Help us to have their courage and conviction, like even that of the apostles in the first century church, that even when it’s not easy, that we will submit to you, we will stand up boldly for what’s right, and not allow this world to tear us away from you.

Thank you for sending Jesus. Thank you for allowing us to read and believe the words of John 3:16. Help us to not have fear, but rather conviction. Help us to be bold and courageous in a world that wants us to sit down, helping us to stand up and fight instead. Thank you for being our God. We thank you for allowing us to be your people. It’s in his name we pray. Amen. We’re now dismissed to our Bible classes.