Pastor David B. Curtis
Pastor David B. Curtis
| Media #1,208 |  |
 |
Good morning, Bereans! We began a study last week of 1 Peter. And in that message, we looked at authorship and said the evidence is very strong that Peter was the author. We also looked at Peter's life throughout the New Testament. He was quite a powerful figure.
In this epistle Peter is seeking to encourage Christians who are being mistreated and persecuted for their faith. They are scattered among five Roman provinces in modern-day Turkey—probably seeking to hide for safety from Nero who is burning Christians at the stake and having their lands confiscated.
Peter, an apostle of Yeshua the Christ, to those who are elect exiles of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, 1 Peter 1:1 ESV
There is much controversy over the issue of who are the RECIPIENTS of this letter? Typical of first-century letters, the recipients are noted as, "Those who are elect exiles of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia." These Roman provinces are located in northern modern Turkey. Possibly these churches originated from Jewish converts who returned home after Pentecost (Acts 2:9-11).
The controversy comes over the phrase, "exiles of the Dispersion." Who exactly are these exiles? Is this referring to Jews or Gentiles?
One writer contends that although these churches may have originally been started by Jewish believers at the time of Peter's writing, they were mostly Gentile. As proof of this he asserts that they were formerly ignorant of God (1:14) and that Peter states they were "ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your forefathers" (1 Peter 1:18). He also provides a list of Gentile vices (1 Peter 4:3-4).
Commentators often stress that it's hard to see the Jewish Apostle Peter referring to his Jewish heritage as "former ignorance" (1:14) and an "empty way of life inherited from [the] fathers" (1:18).
Another writer claims that these were mixed communities of Jews and Gentiles but perhaps with a larger Gentile presence as suggested by Peter's comments in 1 Peter 1:14, 18; 2:9-10, and 4:3-4.
It is true that Peter was called specifically to minister to Jews.
(for he who worked through Peter for his apostolic ministry to the circumcised worked also through me for mine to the Gentiles), Galatians 2:8 ESV
But he, like Paul, worked with both Jews and Gentiles (cf. Acts 10). Cornelius' conversion showed Peter the radical inclusiveness of the gospel!
Others say, judging from the many Old Testament references in this epistle, that there must have been many Jewish believers in these churches.
Carson and Moo write, "Probably no other letter in the New Testament is said to rely so much on traditional material as is 1 Peter. … Scholars estimate that no other book in the New Testament, with the exception of Hebrews and Revelation, depends so heavily on the Old Testament." D.A Carson, and Douglas Moo, "An Introduction to the New Testament" - p. 640.
Some will say that Peter's use of Old Covenant prophetic imagery points to a Jewish audience. Peter alludes to prophecies from Hosea 1-2 to describe his readers in 2:10. Clearly, that Old Covenant text refers to the Israelites.
In 2:25, Peter says that his readers are returning to the Shepherd and Overseer of their souls. If Gentiles were in view, we might expect him to say they were turning to God for the first time or were returning to their Creator. But the "God as Shepherd" imagery makes better sense if referring to the covenant relationship of God to the Jewish people, since the Hebrew prophets frequently use that metaphor (e.g., Psa. 80:1; Eze. 34:13-16; Hos. 4:16; Zech. 11:7).
Peter explicitly distinguishes his readers from "the Gentiles" (2:12; 4:3-4). At various points in the letter, Peter's readers are exhorted to live holy lives in the sight of the "Gentiles" they live among.
Why does it matter whether 1 Peter was written primarily to Jewish or Gentile followers of Christ? What difference does it make for interpretation?
If we take 1 Peter as addressing a Gentile audience, then the epistle becomes one of the strongest supports for the theological idea that the church has replaced Israel as the people of God. This concept is also referred to as "replacement theology" or "supersessionism" (i.e. the church supersedes Israel).
In 1 Peter 2:9, the readers are said to be "a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his possession." These phrases are pulled right out of the Hebrew Scriptures as descriptors of the nation of Israel. If Peter is applying this imagery to Gentiles, then as Scot McKnight claims, "There is no passage in the New Testament that more explicitly associates the Old Testament terms for Israel with the New Testament church than this one."
But if the original readers of 1 Peter were themselves ethnically Jewish, then Peter's language is not surprising at all, and it would undercut the use of 1 Peter as a proof-text in support of supersessionism. This is why it's a big deal. It's theological positioning in which both sides want to use 1 Peter to support their views.
Let's dig into the text itself and see what we can figure out. "To those who are elect exiles of the Dispersion." I think that when people hear the terms "Exiles" and "the Dispersion" that they think of Jews who are not living in Jerusalem. The dispersion sometimes refers to the Jews who were scattered among the nations when they went into captivity (see Deuteronomy 28:25; Jeremiah 34:17). So, some believe that Peter wrote to Jewish Christians.
Exiles is from the Greek parepidemos and dispersion is from diaspora. Parepidēmos means an alien alongside, that is, a resident foreigner. It is properly one who comes from a foreign country into a city or land to reside there by the side of the natives; hence, a stranger or sojourning in a strange place—a foreigner. This word is used 3 times in New Testament (twice in 1 Peter, here, and in 2:11). Let's look at 2:11.
Beloved, I urge you as sojourners and exiles to abstain from the passions of the flesh, which wage war against your soul. 1 Peter 2:11 ESV
The word "sojourners" here is from parepidemos which is translated as "exiles" in 1 Peter 1:1. What is interesting is that the word "exiles" here is from the Greek paroikos which is also used in Ephesians 2. Let's look at that.
and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility. And he came and preached peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near. For through him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father. So, then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, Ephesians 2:16-19 ESV
Here we see two groups: the near and the far away. Both have been given access to the Father through Yeshua. Who are these two groups? Look at:
Therefore, remember that at one time you Gentiles in the flesh, called "the uncircumcision" by what is called the circumcision, which is made in the flesh by hands—Ephesians 2:11 ESV
Paul is making a comparison here between Jews (the circumcised) and Gentiles (the uncircumcised).
The word "aliens" in Ephesians 2:19 is our word paroikos.
So, then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, Ephesians 2:19 ESV
The "you" here refers to Gentiles. Gentiles are no longer paroikos. So, our word parepidēmos used in 1 Peter 1:1 and in 2:11 refers to Gentiles.
Beloved, I urge you as sojourners and exiles to abstain from the passions of the flesh, which wage war against your soul. 1 Peter 2:11 ESV
And our word "exiles" is used here and in Ephesians 2:19 for Gentiles.
Our word parepidēmos used in 1 Peter 1:1 is also used in Hebrews.
These all died in faith, not having received the things promised, but having seen them and greeted them from afar, and having acknowledged that they were strangers and exiles on the earth. Hebrews 11:13 ESV
The word "exiles" here is also parepidēmos. Did Abraham view himself an exile from the land of Cannan? No, Abraham saw himself as an exile on this earth, a stranger in this world. Abraham's hope was not upon the land of promise but upon the eternal city of God. Do you see that?
When God established the covenant with Abraham in Genesis 12 and then expanded upon it in Genesis 15 and 17, what was Abraham thinking? What did he understand? What sort of fulfillment was Abraham looking forward to when he was given the word of promise concerning the land? What did he expect? Did he look for an earthly fulfillment? Not according to this passage which clearly states that he was looking for a heavenly city and country.
But as it is, they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore, God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared for them a city. Hebrews 11:16 ESV
By faith he dwelt in the land of promise. By faith in God's promise of a heavenly city he lived as an exile on the earth. He knew the earth wasn't his home, so he never tried to make it his home. Abraham's desire was heaven, but he was an exile on the earth. I think this is how Peter uses the word "exiles." Believers are exiles on the earth.
Do you see yourself as an exile in this world? Do you live as in a foreign country? It takes faith to live in this world as an exile because we all tend to want to settle down and get comfortable. But as Christians, we're only exiles here. We're on a journey to a spiritual home in the heavens. Faith is the conviction of things not seen. We're very much like Abraham. God has called us out of the world and told us He has something better for us—Heaven. But we're still waiting for it. And as we wait, we must live by faith as exiles.
Paul said of believers:
But our citizenship is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Yeshua the Christ, Philippians 3:20 ESV
"Our" is speaking of Paul and the Philippian believers and, in fact, of all believers. For all of us who have been born again, our citizenship is in heaven. "Citizenship" is from the Greek word politeuma. It is only used here in the New Testament, but it is related to the verb politeuomai used in Philippians 1:27 to denote "the Philippian Christians' 'way of life,'" with special reference to their responsibility as members of a community.
Paul told the Philippians, "Our citizenship is in heaven"—The word "is" is the Greek word huparcho which expresses the continued state of a thing. It is unalterable and unchangeable. It speaks of a fixedness. Our citizenship is fixed in heaven; it is unalterable and unchangeable.
As Christians, our citizenship is in heaven. We are in heaven in a positional sense now, and when our soul leaves this realm at physical death, it will go to that realm in a locational sense. When we die physically, we will dwell in heaven, the spiritual realm where God dwells.
The verse goes on to say, "and from it we await a Savior." This does not apply to us. The transition saints awaited their Savior, but we do not because he came in AD 70. But like them, our citizenship is in heaven.
Abraham is a good picture of the Christian. We are exiles on this earth, we're aliens, foreigners. As such, we shouldn't invest too much here.
I think that Peter uses "exiles" as the writer of Hebrews did, demonstrating that we are exiles on the earth because our home is heaven. I believe he uses the term parepidēmos in a spiritual sense to people to whom Heaven is their real country and they sojourn on earth. They are not exiles because of language or skin color but because of their Christian faith. Peter says that the exiles are in fact God's "chosen" ones. As such, they are rejected by society but chosen by God.
So, the idea behind the word "exiles" is of someone who lives as a temporary resident in a foreign land. Exiles also means that we are temporary residents. We're not to be settlers, but pilgrims, looking for our real home in heaven.
The early Christian writing, The Epistle to Diognetus gives, the idea of what a parepidēmos is. "They inhabit the lands of their birth, but as temporary residents of it; they take their share of all responsibilities as citizens, and endure all disabilities as aliens. Every foreign land is their native land, and every native land a foreign land… they pass their days upon earth, but their citizenship is in heaven." (Cited in Barclay)
So, "exile" is used in a spiritual sense of exiles of heaven. Peter calls them "exiles off the Dispersion."
Peter, an apostle of Yeshu the Christ, to those who are elect exiles of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, 1 Peter 1:1 ESV
The word "dispersion" is from diaspora. Diaspora was the term that described the Jews who had scattered from Palestine and were living elsewhere in the world. Diaspora is also used 3 times in the New Testament. It is used in John 7:35 and James 1:1 where it is used of Jews who had scattered from Palestine and were living elsewhere in the world.
So, I see "exiles" as referring to Gentiles and "dispersion" as referring to Jews. Peter is using these words to refer to BOTH Jews and Gentiles. I see Peter using both these words "Exiles of the Dispersion" in reference to Christians (Jew and Gentile) who are in exile on the earth. The New Testament writers constantly used terms that were used of Israel in the Tanakh of all believers in the New Testament. Let's look at the following:
For I do not want you to be unaware, brothers, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, 1 Corinthians 10:1 ESV
Now notice carefully what Paul says to these mostly Gentile Corinthians: "Our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea." In spite of the fact that most of the Corinthian Christians were Gentiles, Paul considers the Israelites as their fathers. "Our fathers"—is a clear reference to the Jewish people in the Old Covenant.
It should be eye opening that Paul could include Gentiles in this crucial identifying phrase, yet it is appropriate because they are the spiritual descendants of Israel. Thus, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are our fathers as Christians, though genetically we Gentiles share nothing in common with them.
Paul calls them "Brothers." Those who hold to the Israel Only doctrine (IO) would say that Paul is here referring only to Israelites. The are those who are brothers in the flesh. But this shows their biblical ignorance. When Paul uses the term "brothers," he is referring to all believers. The one time he uses "brothers" of his racial brothers, he qualifies it as in Romans 9.
For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, my kinsmen according to the flesh. Romans 9:3 ESV
This is the only time Paul uses this term of the Jews. He generally uses it of Christians. He qualifies it for us by saying "my kinsmen according to the flesh" which in Greek is "suggenēs kata sarx." He is speaking of the physical descendants of Abraham.
Paul makes it clear when he says "our fathers" that the Christians in Corinth belong to spiritual Israel. The Bible is clear that all believers are the spiritual descendants of Israel. Paul makes this really clear in his letter to the Galatians.
Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, "And to offsprings," referring to many, but referring to one, "And to your offspring," who is Christ. Galatians 3:16 ESV
Paul proclaims that "God specified in His will that the beneficiaries were to be Abraham and his offspring." Paul calls particular attention to the word "offspring" and, thereby, distinguishes from "offsprings." God has a singular offspring in Christ. This does not include all of the blood descendants of Abraham.
Let me first give you my interpretation of this verse and then I will try to explain why I hold it. Paul is saying that the primary recipients of the Abrahamic covenant were Abraham and Christ. This, of course, would include all who are in Christ (i.e., believers). This promise is not realized in the Jews who were merely the physical offspring of Abraham. It is only realized in Christians, the spiritual offspring of Abraham. Apart from Paul's divinely inspired commentary, how many of us would have understood that Abraham's offspring was Christ? Please listen: When the New Testament authors comment on a passage from the Tanakh, they do not give merely AN interpretation. They give THE interpretation. The New Testament interprets the Old. The Old Covenant was a veiled representation of the New Covenant.
It is in the New Testament that we learn that the material things of the Old Covenant were types and shadows of spiritual counterparts found in the New Covenant. We are to interpret the Tanakh through the lens of the New Testament. We must understand that the last 27 books are a divinely inspired commentary on the first 39 books.
When we see these terms that were used of national Israel used for the church it is because the church is the true Israel. National, ethnic Israel was a type. Understanding this is crucial. Dispensationalism misses this very important point and thus tries to keep separate the type and anti-type. The people of Israel themselves were a type. The nation itself, as God's special people, was typical of the true people of God. It was "physical Israel," but Paul describes Christian believers as "spiritual Israel." National Israel was divinely ordained to resemble spiritual Israel. The physical seed of Abraham typified the spiritual seed of Abraham. And as Paul teaches in Romans 4, some of the promises made to his seed were not fulfilled at all to his physical seed but only to his spiritual children. Physical Israel as a type of spiritual Israel is constantly set forth by Paul in the Roman and Galatian letters.
By understanding that the nation of Israel was a type, we won't be surprised to find that Israel's sacrifices, priesthood, temple, and land also had typical significance.
Dispensationalism puts great emphasis on a rebuilt temple and restored priesthood because it fails to see these as types. Physical Israel was a type and so was the tabernacle.
They serve a copy and shadow of the heavenly things. For when Moses was about to erect the tent, he was instructed by God, saying, "See that you make everything according to the pattern that was shown you on the mountain." Hebrews 8:5 ESV
The tabernacle was a type. What is the anti-type? Yeshua is the anti-type:
Yeshua answered them, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." John 2:19 ESV
Yeshua replaces the temple itself. Yeshua is the anti-type of the temple. The temple represented the presence of God among His children in the early days. Notice how Christ is described in John 1:14.
And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. John 1:14 ESV
The word "dwelt" here is skenoo, which means "a tent." Yeshua came and pitched His tent or tabernacled among us.
Back to 1 Peter. So, did Peter write to Jews or Gentiles? Yes, Peter is writing this letter to both Jewish and Gentile Christians ("to those who are elect exiles"). Peter called his readers exiles in order to emphasize that Christians are really citizens of heaven and that their sojourn here on earth is only temporary. Peter applies the term "dispersion" to Christians in general, just as he applied other designations to the church that were formerly applied to the nation of Israel (cf. 2:9-10). Peter's initial audience were Christian "exiles" (cf. 2:11).
Carson, Moo, and Morris write: "It seems that the writer is concerned neither with Jews nor Gentiles as such, but with those who in Christ have become the people of God. We need not doubt that most who came from the provinces named were Gentiles, although there would have been some Jewish converts. But the emphasis is on what they have become, not on what they were originally."
Is Peter's main audience Jew or Gentile? Either way this epistle is written to believers and what it says about believers applies to ALL believers.
What is the Purpose for this epistle? The major issue discussed is suffering and persecution. First Peter reflects persecution of the Christians throughout northern Asia Minor. This condition prevailed after Nero blamed the Christians for burning Rome in July of A.D. 64.
Peter stated that his reason for writing was to encourage his readers, who were facing persecution for their faith, to stand firm (5:12).
By Silvanus, a faithful brother as I regard him, I have written briefly to you, exhorting and declaring that this is the true grace of God. Stand firm in it. 1 Peter 5:12 ESV
Peter encourages endurance and holiness in times of suffering and persecution. In light of the suffering and persecutions so common in the early years of Christianity, it is not surprising how often the Second Coming is mentioned. This book, like most New Testament writings, is thoroughly eschatological.
Where is this letter written from? Peter said that he was in Babylon (5:13).
She who is at Babylon, who is likewise chosen, sends you greetings, and so does Mark, my son. 1 Peter 5:13 ESV
This could be the literal city of Babylon on the Euphrates River. But some say it figuratively represents Rome. Rome was the capital of the world at this time (like Babylon had been in the past). Peter might have referred to it figuratively knowing Christians would understand but other readers might not (thereby avoiding persecution). But there is no evidence anywhere else in the Scriptures that Peter was ever in Rome.
Peter could be using Babylon as a code word for Jerusalem. Barnes, Lightfoot, and JFB (Jaimeson, Faussett, Brown) argue that literal Babylon is meant. It is my opinion that by Babylon he means Jerusalem. I am content to say the epistle was written from Babylon and you have to decide what that means.
When did Peter write this? What is the DATE of the writing? A. T. Robertson believes Peter died in AD 67-68 and wrote 1 Peter in AD 65-66. The letter was written at the beginning of organized Christian persecution by the Romans that began in AD 64, prior to Peter's martyr's death in AD 67.
1 Peter was a Cyclical letter. In other words, it was not written to any one congregation but intentionally to all Christians in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia. Epistles like this are referred to as "general epistles." The geographical areas named are all regions in Asia Minor.
First Peter functions as a cyclical letter to churches which Peter did not personally start, much like Paul's letter to the Colossians which was also sent to Colossae, Laodicea, and Hierapolis, (cf. Col. 4:13). It was a general encouragement to believers to watch out for coming problems, much like Paul's Galatian and Ephesian letters.
This cyclical genre explains the lack of a personal opening and closing to the letter. It also explains the lack of specific examples of persecution. This letter was written to the Church universal.
Peter is writing this letter to the churches in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia in around AD 65. He is not writing it to us twenty-first century American Christians. In reality, we are reading someone else's mail. So, how do we know what applies to us and what does not? In the New Testament, "church" can be used to describe all Christians everywhere (the universal church) or a local congregation that is usually designated by the city in which the believers live. Every believer is part of the church universal. Therefore, when reading a letter to a local church, we need to seek to understand what part of it is specifically to the local assembly and what is applicable to the church universal. For example, look with me at Philippians 2.
I hope in the Lord Yeshua to send Timothy to you soon, so that I too may be cheered by news of you. Philippians 2:19 ESV
Is this specific to the local assembly or is it applicable to the universal church? Timothy is not coming to us shortly because he is dead. It has been two thousand years since Paul wrote this. The time indicator "soon" tells us that it doesn't apply to us.
Consider also these words of Paul to the Philippians.
I entreat Euodia and I entreat Syntyche to agree in the Lord. Yes, I ask you also, true companion, help these women, who have labored side by side with me in the gospel together with Clement and the rest of my fellow workers, whose names are in the book of life. Philippians 4:2-3 ESV
Is this to us? No, Euodia and Syntyche are dead—as is Clement. This was very specific to the local situation. What we might apply from this text is the principle that Yahweh wants unity in the church. We see that throughout the New Testament. But what about Philippians 4:13?
I can do all things through him who strengthens me. Philippians 4:13 ESV
Does this apply to us? It can. The principle also applies to us if we are abiding in Christ. Most of the teaching that we find in the New Testament is directed to the Church and applies to all Christians in all times. This verse is usually removed from its context. Can we really do ALL things through Christ? Leap tall buildings at a single bound? Run faster that a bullet? Notice the context.
Not that I am speaking of being in need, for I have learned in whatever situation I am to be content. I know how to be brought low, and I know how to abound. In any and every circumstance, I have learned the secret of facing plenty and hunger, abundance and need. Philippians 4:11-12 ESV
Does this apply to us? Can we also deal with any circumstance if we are living in dependence on Christ? Yes, we can. This is a spiritual truth that applies to all believers who live in dependence upon Christ. But believers, although we can apply the spiritual truths that are given to the church to ourselves, the time and audience-specific events are not for us.
Let me just add here that there are some full preterists who push the "audience relevance" principle (it was "written to them and not to us") to a hyper-application. In other words, they present the Bible as being merely history so that it lacks any present-day application to the believer.
Let me be clear that this full Preterist does not believe that the Bible is just history and lacks present-day application. I surely would not be constantly encouraging you to read it if it were not relevant to us. But I do believe the Bible was written to a certain audience. We are not that audience. We must first seek to understand what it meant to them so that we can then see if what is being taught also applies to us.
From my perspective, unless I have strong reasons not to, I apply the principles of the New Testament to believers today. For example, I think that we twenty-first century American Christians are to walk worthy. I think that we are to be humble, that we are to love one another, and that we are to put others before ourselves. To me these things apply to the Church universal and are therefore timeless. But there is much in the New Testament that does not apply to us because we do not live in the Transition Period.
"Peter, an apostle of Yeshua the Christ"—the noun "apostle" literally means "sent out one" or "one sent out authoritatively." In some passages of the NT, "Apostle" is used in a general sense of a person who is sent someplace. But in its technical sense, it refers to those we know as "the apostles"—particularly the 12 and Paul. These were men selected by God to have a unique ministry in establishing the Church. They were men who had to have seen Yeshua after His resurrection from the dead (Acts 1:21-22).
Notice what Paul says in defense of his apostleship.
Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Yeshua our Lord? Are not you my workmanship in the Lord? 1 Corinthians 9:1 ESV
One had to have seen Yeshua after His resurrection so that he could be an eyewitness. Paul is the last of the apostles. First Corinthians, chapter 15, opens with Paul's recounting the post-resurrection appearances of Christ. Then Paul concludes that list by saying:
Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me. 1 Corinthians 15:8 ESV
"I'm a unique case," Paul said. "I'm the last of the apostles. But He did appear to me, and that happened on the road to Damascus." People, there are no apostles today. An apostle had to be an eyewitness of Christ after His resurrection so that he could testify that he had personally seen Yeshua alive after He had died. The apostles had been chosen personally by Yeshua to serve as witnesses of His work. Since no men today can have these qualifications, we can have no apostles in the church today.
The apostles also had the ability to perform miracles.
The signs of a true apostle were performed among you with utmost patience, with signs and wonders and mighty works. 2 Corinthians 12:12 ESV
It was necessary that the apostles could do signs, wonders, and miracles because they also were the recipients of new revelations from God.
When Peter says that he is an apostle of Yeshua the Christ, he is one who represents Yeshua the Christ. He is in a unique position. It is a position of authority. He is sent from God to speak for God. You understand that he is not just going to give one opinion among many opinions. He is going to render God's verdict on the issues at hand, because he is an apostle. He has that position. Grudem writes,
"The supreme importance of the apostles is suggested by the fact that the phrase of Jesus Christ is attached to no other New Testament office: we do not read of teachers of Jesus Christ or prophets of Jesus Christ or evangelists of Jesus Christ, only of apostles of Jesus Christ." (Grudem)
"Yeshua"—the Hebrew name meant "YHWH saves" or "YHWH brings salvation." This name was revealed to his parents by an angel (cf. Matthew 1:21).
"Christ"—this is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew term messiah, which meant "an anointed one." It implies "one called and equipped by God for a specific task." In the Tanakh, three groups of leaders were anointed: priests, kings, and prophets. Yeshua fulfills all three of these anointed offices.
I skipped over the word "elect." We'll deal with that next week. Arminians beware!
| Continue the Series |