Training children against KJV-Onlyism

We are helping children develop a healthy, informed understanding of Bible translations—which is foundational to resisting exclusivist translation doctrines.

Building Translation Literacy

Begin by reading favorite passages together from multiple translations, including the King James Version. While acknowledging the beauty of its Elizabethan language, ask your child to identify differences and discuss how translation choices affect meaning.[1] This develops critical thinking about translation rather than reverence for a single version.

Help children understand that different translations serve different purposes—the NLT reads at a sixth-grade level, the NIV and HCSB at seventh-grade, the ESV at eighth-grade, and the KJV at twelfth-grade.[2] This demonstrates that translation choices reflect the original languages’ complexity, not divine preference for one English rendering.

Understanding Translation Reality

Critically, it’s impossible to be consistently literal in translation. You cannot translate every Greek word identically without producing nonsensical English, maintain original word order without creating unnatural sentences, or preserve all grammatical categories without sacrificing clarity.[3] Teaching this principle directly undermines KJV-Onlyism’s core claim that one translation uniquely preserves God’s Word.

Rather than pursuing perfect literalism, the KJV itself represents a “pleasing-but-not-perfect blend” of formal and functional translation that consciously refuses the ideal of perfect consistency.[3] This historical fact—that even the KJV’s own translators rejected absolute literalism—provides powerful evidence against the doctrine.

Equip your children with the knowledge that faithful translation requires judgment calls, that all English Bibles involve human interpretation, and that God’s Word transcends any single translation.

[1] Rebecca Kirkpatrick, 100 Things For Your Child To Know Before Confirmation: Growing Faith Together (London, United Kingdom: SPCK Publishing, 2015). [See here.]
[2] Danika Cooley, Help Your Kids Learn and Love the Bible (Bethany House, 2021), 29.
[3] Mark Ward, “Word Nerd: Language and the Bible,” Bible Study Magazine (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press; Faithlife, 2021), 14:1:64.

False teachers infiltrating the church

The Bible provides extensive warnings about false teachers infiltrating the church and prescribes specific responses believers should adopt when encountering them.

Recognition and Detection

False teachers “come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves,” (Matt 7:15–20) making them deceptively difficult to identify. After church leaders depart, savage wolves will infiltrate the flock, and even from within the congregation, individuals will distort truth to draw disciples after themselves. (Acts 20:28–31) They secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them. (2 Pet 2:1–3) However, Jesus provides a diagnostic tool: “By their fruit you will recognize them.” (Matt 7:15–20) Believers should “test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.” (1 John 4:1)

Characteristics of False Teachers

In the final times, people will reject sound doctrine and gather teachers who affirm their desires rather than truth. (2 Tim 4:3–4) In their greed, these teachers exploit believers with fabricated stories. (2 Pet 2:1–3) They display a form of godliness while denying its power, worming their way into homes to gain control over vulnerable individuals. (2 Tim 3:1–9) False apostles masquerade as servants of righteousness, mirroring Satan’s own deception as an angel of light. (2 Cor 11:13–15)

How Believers Should Respond

Church leaders must remain on guard, remembering that faithful shepherds warn their flocks persistently. (Acts 20:28–31) Believers are urged to contend for the faith entrusted to God’s people. (Jude 3–4) Recognize those causing divisions contrary to sound teaching and keep away from them. (Rom 16:17–18) Warn divisive individuals once, then a second time; afterward, have nothing to do with them. (Titus 3:10–11) Do not welcome those who reject Christ’s teaching into your home, as welcoming them shares in their wicked work. (2 John 9–11) Believers must not associate with those claiming Christian identity while living immorally, and the church should expel the wicked person from among you. (1 Cor 5:11–13)

Church leaders bear particular responsibility to call out false teachers by name, identifying their errors publicly, instructing God’s people about destructive teachings spreading in their midst.[1] Many false prophets will appear and deceive many, yet those who stand firm to the end will be saved. (Matt 24:11–13)

[1] Jeremy A. Rogers et al., The Ministry We Need: Paul’s Ancient Farewell—The Pastor’s Present Calling (Acts 20: 17–38) (Eugene, Oregon: Resource Publications, 2022). [See here, here.]

The seven churches

The seven churches addressed in Revelation are Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea. (Rev 1:11) Each congregation embodies spiritual conditions relevant to believers navigating the end times.

Ephesus represents a church that has lost its foundational passion. Despite demonstrating hard work, perseverance, and doctrinal vigilance against false teachers, Ephesus faces Christ’s rebuke for abandoning its first love. (Rev 2:1–3:22) This warns contemporary believers against becoming spiritually mechanical—maintaining correct doctrine while losing genuine devotion.

Smyrna exemplifies faithful endurance under persecution. Though materially poor yet spiritually rich, Smyrna faces imprisonment and suffering, yet receives encouragement to remain faithful even unto death. (Rev 2:1–3:22) This speaks directly to end-times believers who may encounter increasing hostility for their faith.

Pergamum struggles with doctrinal compromise in a hostile environment. Living where Satan has his throne, Pergamum accommodates false teachings. (Rev 2:1–3:22) This reflects the end-times challenge of maintaining biblical truth amid cultural pressure.

The remaining churches—Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea—address similar themes: spiritual decline, false teaching, and lukewarmness that characterize the final age.

These letters function as warnings and encouragement. These events were recorded as examples and warnings for believers living when the culmination of the ages has come. (1 Cor 10:11) The one who stands firm to the end will be saved, (Matt 24:13) making perseverance central to end-times discipleship. Believers must encourage one another daily and hold their original conviction firmly to the very end. (Heb 3:12–14) The seven churches collectively illustrate that spiritual vigilance, doctrinal faithfulness, and enduring love remain essential as believers anticipate Christ’s return.

Christian understanding of end-times doctrine

Christian understanding of end-times doctrine has evolved significantly across four major historical periods: the Patristic age (100–500), Medieval period (500–1500), Protestant era (1500–1700), and the Modern period (1700–present)[1].

Early Christians expected Christ’s imminent return, with persecution and martyrdom interpreted as harbingers of the end and the Antichrist’s arrival[1]. However, when persecution ceased in 313, premillennialism declined while amillennialism gained prominence, and the focus shifted from external threats to concerns about divine judgment in the afterlife[1].

The Medieval period witnessed the development of Catholic purgatory doctrine and heightened anxiety about the Antichrist following Islam’s rise in the 7th century[1]. Widespread disease, warfare, and heresy convinced many believers they were already living in the final age[1].

During the Protestant Reformation, reformers identified the Pope as the Antichrist and the Roman Church as his anti-Christian kingdom, while maintaining Augustine’s amillennial framework[1]. The Modern period saw liberal theologians rejecting classical end-times doctrines entirely, though New England Puritans advocated postmillennialism and premillennial theology resurged among mainline theologians, culminating in the rise of dispensational premillennialism between 1850–1900[1].

Theologically, the New Testament presents two frameworks for understanding when the end-times begin: the messianic age initiated by Christ’s first coming constitutes the beginning of the last days, making the messianic age equivalent to the end-times[2]. This period combines great salvation with mounting evil—including antichrists, false teachers, and ungodliness—signaling the final hour[2]. Yet despite the end being near, it has not arrived, nor has the tumultuous period preceding it[2].

[1] Nathan D. Holsteen and Michael J. Svigel, Essentials of Christian Theology: Foundations of the Christian Faith (Bethany House, 2025), 283–284.
[2] H. Douglas Buckwalter, “Time,” in Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology, Baker Reference Library (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1996), 775.

End time

Biblical prophecy identifies Iran by its ancient names—Persia or Elam[1]—and assigns each of these three powers distinct roles in end-times events.

Persia (Iran) emerges as a military ally in the prophesied invasion of Israel. Iran will participate in the battle of Gog and Magog, likely occurring during the first half of the tribulation, specifically as an ally of Magog/Russia[1]. Sudan, Turkey, Libya, and other nations will join this coalition[1] to assault Israel. However, God intervenes supernaturally, and Gog’s forces face complete destruction[1]. Iran will also participate in the final battle of Armageddon at the end of the tribulation period[2], when all nations gather against God’s people.

Babylon occupies a different position in prophetic literature. While Babylon’s historical fall does not coincide with the end of the age, Ezekiel’s prophecy concerning Gog extends far beyond Babylon’s destruction, describing a future invasion involving nations from both Asia and Africa against the Holy Land[3]. In Revelation, Babylon appears symbolically as “the mother of prostitutes and of the abominations of the earth,” (Rev 17–18) representing a spiritual system opposing God rather than a literal political power in the final conflict.

Magog functions as the primary military aggressor. Gog, from the land of Magog, serves as the chief prince (Ezek 38:2) orchestrating the invasion. The prophetic vision extends to the utmost limits of heathendom, impressing that before the end arrives, all remaining world powers will attempt to resist God’s kingdom[3].

After the thousand-year reign, Satan will be released and deceive the nations—Gog and Magog—gathering them for battle like sand on the seashore, but fire from heaven will consume them (Rev 20:7–10).

[1] Got Questions Ministries, Got Questions? Bible Questions Answered (Bellingham, WA: Faithlife, 2014–2021). [See here, here, here, here.]
[2] Alex McFarland and Bert Harper, 100 Bible Questions and Answers on Prophecy and the End Times (BroadStreet Publishing Group, LLC, 2025), 34.
[3] Gustav Friedrich Oehler and George E. Day, Theology of the Old Testament (New York; London: Funk & Wagnalls, 1883), 502.

Faith originates as God’s gift

Faith originates as God’s gift, given to those chosen by Him for its reception[1], yet believers simultaneously exercise varying degrees of it. This explains both why faith is divinely given and why some Christians display what appears to be weak or inactive faith.

Faith can exist as either potential capacity or as an actual, lived condition—depending on the believer’s own will and choices[2]. The difference between “small faith” and robust faith lies not in whether God gave it, but in how actively a person develops and expresses it. A believer’s works externalize and embody their hidden, latent faith through voluntary activation in cooperation with the Spirit’s work[2]. Someone with underdeveloped faith has simply not yet activated what God planted within them.

Regarding faith without works: faith without works is dead, as are works without faith[2]. This isn’t describing two separate categories but rather an impossible condition—true faith must produce works. Without the Spirit’s activities as “eyes,” faith remains blind and inoperative[2]. The problem isn’t that faith exists without works, but that what appears to be faith without works isn’t genuine faith at all.

“Dead faith” or “blind faith” refers to intellectual assent divorced from trust and action. Even demons believe in God’s existence, yet their belief produces no righteousness (James 2:14–26). True faith involves both trust (fiducia)—supremely personal confidence in Christ’s work—alongside knowledge and assent[3]. When these elements separate, faith becomes spiritually inert.

Biblical passages on faith’s nature: Salvation comes through faith as God’s gift, not from human effort (Eph 2:8–10), yet believers are created to perform good works God prepared beforehand (Eph 2:8–10). The only thing that truly matters is faith expressing itself through love (Gal 5:6).

[1] Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield, “FAITH,” in A Dictionary of the Bible: Dealing with Its Language, Literature, and Contents Including the Biblical Theology, ed. James Hastings et al. (New York; Edinburgh: Charles Scribner’s Sons; T. & T. Clark, 1911–1912), 1:837.
[2] Adam G. Cooper, The Body in St Maximus the Confessor: Holy Flesh, Wholly Deified, Oxford Early Christian Studies (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2005), 232–233.
[3] F. L. Cross and Elizabeth A. Livingstone, eds., in The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2005), 599.

Job's perspective on God's Word

Job 1:21

English Standard Version

And he said, “Naked I came from my mother's womb, and naked shall I return. The Lord gave, and the Lord has taken away; blessed be the name of the Lord.”

The biblical principle underlying Job’s statement illuminates how we should approach Scripture across different versions.

The Principle of Divine Ownership

Job declares that he came into the world with nothing and will leave with nothing, recognizing that “the LORD gave and the LORD has taken away.” (Job 1:21) This radical acknowledgment of God’s sovereignty extends to all things—including the words God has given us. We don’t ultimately possess Scripture; we steward it. This posture of humility before God’s Word should shape how we engage with different Bible translations.

God’s Word Transcends Its Vessels

We emphasize that God’s word is eternal and stands firm in the heavens (Ps 119:89), and heaven and earth will pass away, but Christ’s words will never pass away. (Matt 24:35) This permanence applies to the message and truth of Scripture, not necessarily to any single translation. Different versions—whether the King James, NIV, ESV, or others—are human attempts to convey God’s unchanging word in different languages and cultural contexts. The eternal word exists beyond any particular translation.

Practical Application

Like Job, we should hold Bible versions with open hands. No single translation is perfect or final. Rather than insisting one version is superior, we can benefit from comparing translations to understand nuances in the original languages. The substance of God’s truth—that he gives, sustains, and ultimately judges—remains constant across faithful translations. Our task is to receive what God has given us through whatever version we use, recognizing that the authority belongs to God’s word itself, not to our preferred rendering of it.

Why Denominations Exist?

The tension between Christ’s prayer for unity and Christianity’s visible divisions reflects a gap between theological ideal and human reality—not a failure of Scripture itself, but of those who follow it.

The Historical Development

Jesus prayed that his followers “may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you.”[1] Yet the church remained largely unified for its first thousand years until 1054, when the Eastern church separated from the Western church over the pope’s addition of a phrase to the Nicene Creed.[1] The Western church then split during the sixteenth-century Reformation into Roman Catholic and various Protestant groups, with most divisions stemming from disagreements over which doctrines to emphasize and where doctrinal authority was located.[1] The Protestant Reformation, led by Martin Luther, resulted in churches independent of Rome based on Scripture and salvation by faith alone, including Lutherans, Presbyterians influenced by John Calvin, and Anabaptists focused on believer’s baptism.[2]

Why Denominations Exist

Denominations form for mixed reasons. Often they began as renewal movements—the Reformed movements of the sixteenth century arose to restore teachings about justification by faith and God’s sovereignty that had been eclipsed in the church.[3] Positive reasons include starting new churches in growing areas and denominations formed when churches separated from groups with unbiblical theology.[2] However, negative reasons include splits based on leaders with integrity issues and divisions over theological decline, such as rejecting biblical inspiration.[2]

Is Any Denomination Perfect?

No. Denominational divisions actually prove what the Bible teaches—that Christian people have remaining corruption. If the church were perfect and enjoyed complete harmony, the Bible would be proved wrong, as Scripture everywhere teaches that Christians fall short of Christ’s character.[4] Since Christians are not perfectly sanctified, they see some things differently and act accordingly—differences are to be expected among God’s children, and the Bible’s theology is essentially the theology of denominations.[4]

Rather than seeking a perfect denomination, evaluate each independent congregation, as the local church usually operates best at the local level, offering hope to those in its community.[2] The goal must be working together with other believers on the foundations of God’s Word to make disciples of all nations.[2]

[1] Rick Cornish, 5 Minute Theologian: Maximum Truth in Minimum Time (Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress, 2004), 283–284.
[2] Alex McFarland and Bert Harper, 100 Bible Questions and Answers: Inspiring Truths, Historical Facts, Practical Insights (BroadStreet Publishing Group, LLC, 2021), 184–186.
[3] Charles Draper, “Why So Many Denominations?,” in The Apologetics Study Bible: Real Questions, Straight Answers, Stronger Faith, ed. Ted Cabal et al. (Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers, 2007), 1709.
[4] John H. Gerstner, Reasons for Faith (Orlando, FL: Reformation Trust Publishing, 2014), 219–220.

Paul Speaks to the Ephesian elders, bishops, and pastors

Acts 20:17-28

17 Now from Miletus he sent to Ephesus and called the elders of the church to come to him. 18 And when they came to him, he said to them:

“You yourselves know how I lived among you the whole time from the first day that I set foot in Asia, 19 serving the Lord with all humility and with tears and with trials that happened to me through the plots of the Jews; 20 how I did not shrink from declaring to you anything that was profitable, and teaching you in public and from house to house, 21 testifying both to Jews and to Greeks of repentance toward God and of faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. 22 And now, behold, I am going to Jerusalem, constrained by the Spirit, not knowing what will happen to me there, 23 except that the Holy Spirit testifies to me in every city that imprisonment and afflictions await me. 24 But I do not account my life of any value nor as precious to myself, if only I may finish my course and the ministry that I received from the Lord Jesus, to testify to the gospel of the grace of God. 25 And now, behold, I know that none of you among whom I have gone about proclaiming the kingdom will see my face again. 26 Therefore I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all, 27 for I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole counsel of God. 28 Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers (bishops), to care for the church of God (pastors), which he obtained with his own blood.

These three titles—elders, bishops, and pastors—describe the same office from different angles, each emphasizing a distinct dimension of leadership responsibility.

The Same Office, Multiple Perspectives

Paul summoned the elders of the church at Ephesus (Acts 20:17–28), yet the passage reveals that these individuals held multiple titles reflecting their role. The terms aren’t describing different positions but rather different functions of one leadership role. An elder emphasizes maturity and wisdom; a bishop (or overseer) highlights the supervisory responsibility; a pastor underscores the shepherding care. Together, they paint a complete picture of what church leadership entails.

Guardians of the Flock

The Holy Spirit appointed these leaders as overseers (bishops), and they were to shepherd the church of God, which he purchased with his own blood. (Acts 20:17–28) This language transforms the role from administrative position into sacred trust. A shepherd doesn’t merely manage sheep from a distance—he knows them, protects them, feeds them, and sometimes risks his own safety for their welfare. The church isn’t a business to be run but a flock to be cared for with personal investment.

Doctrinal Guardianship

Paul’s example illuminates what this guardianship demands. He had taught publicly and from house to house (Acts 20:17–28), and he had not hesitated to proclaim the whole will of God. (Acts 20:17–28) Elders, bishops, and pastors must be willing to speak difficult truths, not merely comfortable ones. They bear responsibility for protecting the flock from false teaching and ensuring sound doctrine permeates the community.

Personal Integrity as Foundation

Notably, Paul grounded his exhortation in his own character. He reminded them how he had lived among them from the beginning, serving with humility, tears, and faithfulness despite opposition. (Acts 20:17–28) Church leaders cannot demand what they don’t model. Their authority flows not from position alone but from demonstrated integrity—a life that validates the message they proclaim and the standards they uphold.

Our relationship to God’s word

Our relationship to God’s word should be characterized by diligent, skillful engagement aimed at personal integrity and accurate representation.

Paul’s instruction to Timothy establishes three interconnected dimensions of how we should relate to Scripture. First, there’s the posture of earnest effort—we must “do your best” in our approach to God’s word. This isn’t passive consumption but active striving to present ourselves to God as approved workers. (2 Tim 2:15) The word “approved” suggests someone who has been tested and found reliable—someone whose character and competence have been verified through genuine effort.

Second, there’s the matter of personal shame. A worker who “does not need to be ashamed” (2 Tim 2:15) is someone whose handling of Scripture reflects integrity rather than carelessness or distortion. This implies accountability—not just to ourselves, but to God. When we engage God’s word carelessly, we risk misrepresenting it, misleading others, and standing ashamed before God. The stakes are personal and relational.

Third, and most crucially, there’s the skill of accurate interpretation. We must “correctly handle the word of truth.” (2 Tim 2:15) This isn’t about casual reading or surface-level familiarity. The Greek term suggests cutting straight, dividing properly—like a craftsman who knows how to work with precision. It demands that we understand context, distinguish between different types of biblical literature, recognize what passages actually teach versus what we assume they teach, and apply them appropriately.

Practically, this means studying Scripture seriously—not just devotionally, though devotion matters. It means wrestling with difficult passages, consulting faithful interpreters, and allowing the text to challenge our assumptions rather than bending it to fit our preferences. Our relationship to God’s word should mirror a craftsperson’s relationship to their tools: respectful, skilled, and marked by the kind of diligence that produces work worth presenting to God without shame.

“The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart” (Deut. 30:14, Rom. 10:8)

Deuteronomy 30:14

But the word is very near you. It is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can do it.

Romans 10:8

But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart” (that is, the word of faith that we proclaim);

God made his word accessible to Israel through radical proximity and simplicity, removing every excuse for distance or inaccessibility.

The command Moses delivers isn’t something requiring extraordinary effort or special access (Deut 30:11–14). Instead of placing divine instruction in distant, unreachable locations, God explicitly rejects the notion that his word exists in heaven requiring someone to ascend and retrieve it, or beyond the sea requiring someone to cross and bring it back (Deut 30:11–14). These rhetorical questions eliminate the most common human excuses: “It’s too far,” “It’s too complicated,” “I need a specialist to get it for me.”

The revolutionary claim is one of intimacy and immediacy. God’s word stands “very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart” (Deut 30:11–14)—not as distant doctrine but as internalized reality. This means the word wasn’t locked away in a temple or reserved for priests alone. It was available for ordinary people to speak, remember, and live out. The accessibility wasn’t theoretical; it was practical and personal.

What made this possible was God’s choice to communicate through covenant rather than mystery. He didn’t hide his will behind complexity or require intermediaries for every person. Instead, he placed his instruction within reach of human understanding and human speech. When Israel heard God’s law read publicly, when families discussed it at home, when individuals rehearsed it in their hearts—the word became theirs to possess and obey.

Paul later applies this same principle to the gospel itself, describing “the message concerning faith that we proclaim” as something near—“in your mouth and in your heart” (Rom 10:6–8). The pattern remains consistent: God’s redemptive word doesn’t require heroic quests or impossible conditions. It requires only that people receive it, speak it, and believe it. Accessibility was never God’s limitation; it was always his design.

The Enduring Word

Scholars generally agree the Bible was written over a span of about twelve-hundred years. We do not have a single book in the handwriting of the original author, but only copies of copies of copies. This by no means lessens its authenticity; it testifies to its indestructibility.

G. Curtis Jones, 1000 Illustrations for Preaching and Teaching (Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1986), 29.

When pastors teach false doctrines on the pulpits

The church should respond to false teaching from a pastor through a graduated, redemptive approach that balances doctrinal integrity with pastoral care.

Initial Response: Direct Confrontation

The first step involves direct encounters where leaders should gently instruct and command false teachers to stop[1]. This reflects the biblical pattern of addressing sin privately first, attempting resolution between the parties involved (Matt 18:15–17). While protecting the church from heretical influence, this multifaceted approach maintains a redemptive goal for the teachers themselves[1].

Escalation if Necessary

If initial warnings prove ineffective, a divisive person should be warned twice, then disassociated from entirely (Titus 3:10–11). When intentional encounters fail, leaders should make a definitive break from continued relationships with the false teacher[1]. Continued debate over doctrine should be avoided, as it benefits no one and only damages those who listen[1].

Strengthening the Congregation

Beyond addressing the pastor, capable leaders with high qualifications can respond to and prevent false teaching[1]. Leaders should devote themselves to public Scripture reading, preaching, and teaching sound doctrine, which enables individuals to distinguish between God’s truth and human beliefs[1]. The congregation should test all teaching and hold to what is good while rejecting evil (1 Thess 5:21–22).

The Pastor’s Responsibility

A pastor serves as an appointed watchman over doctrine and, like a shepherd, must feed the flock while warding off wolves[2]. When a pastor becomes the source of false doctrine, church leadership must act decisively—not from malice, but from the conviction that even the smallest doctrinal error spreads like cancer and permeates all teaching[2].

Additional biblical passages reinforce this responsibility: Church overseers must watch over the flock, knowing that false teachers will arise from within and distort truth to draw followers away (Acts 20:28–31). Believers are urged to contend for the faith once delivered to God’s people (Jude 3–4).

[1] Kristen Bennett Marble and Jared Willemin, “Addressing False Teaching and Heresy: Paul as Guardian of the Gospel (1-2 Timothy and Titus),” in Conflict Management and the Apostle Paul, ed. Scot McKnight and Greg Mamula (Eugene, OR: Cascade Books, 2018), 161–163.
[2] J. F. Koestering, “Preface,” in The Emigration of the Saxon Lutherans in the Year 1838 and Their Settlement in Perry County, Missouri, Concordia Historical Institute Monograph Series (St. Louis, MO: Concordia Publishing House, 2022), 7–8.

Jesus Christ, Holy Spirit and God's Word

Believing in Jesus Christ opens access to eternal life and restored relationship with God. Through faith in Christ, you receive the gift of eternal life rather than perishing (John 3:16), and Jesus identifies himself as the way, the truth, and the life—the sole path to the Father (John 14:6). Acknowledging Jesus as Lord and trusting in his resurrection brings salvation (Rom 10:9–10), while those who receive him gain the right to become God’s children (John 1:12).

The Holy Spirit’s presence transforms your spiritual existence. When you repent and trust in Christ, the Spirit indwells you from the beginning, though deeper experiences of the Spirit’s work continue throughout your life[1]. Jesus promised an advocate—the Spirit of truth—who lives with believers and dwells within them (John 14:16–17). The Spirit guides you into all truth (John 16:13), while the Spirit empowers you to witness about Christ to the world (Acts 1:8). The Spirit indwells believers and empowers them for faith and practice, dwelling within to transform their lives toward Christ’s image[2].

God’s Word provides essential spiritual nourishment and direction. Scripture is God-breathed and equips you for every good work through teaching, correction, and training in righteousness (2 Tim 3:16–17). God’s Word is alive and active, penetrating to judge your thoughts and attitudes (Heb 4:12). Scripture functions as a lamp guiding your path (Ps 119:105), while spiritual sustenance comes not from physical bread alone but from every word from God’s mouth (Matt 4:4). Those who embrace God’s Word and live it out experience blessing (James 1:22–25).

To enter God’s kingdom, you must be born again through water and the Spirit (John 3:3–5). This transformation—rooted in Christ’s redemptive work, sustained by the Spirit’s presence, and nourished by God’s Word—constitutes the foundation of authentic Christian faith and practice.

[1] Tony Merida, Exalting Jesus in Romans, ed. David Platt, Daniel L. Akin, and Tony Merida, Christ-Centered Exposition Commentary (Nashville, TN: Holman Reference, 2021), 125.
[2] M. X. Seaman, Illumination and Interpretation: The Holy Spirit’s Role in Hermeneutics (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2013), 11.

The Spirit of God takes the Word of God and creates the child of God

Being born again involves an inseparable partnership between the Holy Spirit’s work and God’s Word. The Holy Spirit applies Christ’s salvation to an individual’s heart by convicting of sin and producing faith in Christ’s atoning sacrifice.[1] However, this spiritual transformation doesn’t occur in isolation. Faith doesn’t exist in a vacuum but arises through the Word of God, since faith comes from hearing Scripture.[1]

The relationship between these three elements—Spirit, Word, and new birth—forms a unified process. The Holy Spirit both recorded Scripture’s message of salvation and witnesses to its truth, convincing people not merely of Scripture’s general reliability but of its personally transformative power.[1] When God’s Word operates, the Holy Spirit operates; when the Spirit accomplishes His work, He does so through and by means of God’s Word.[2] This explains why Scripture describes rebirth using both formulations: being “born of the Spirit” and being “born again through the living and enduring word of God.”[1]

From God’s perspective, the process is straightforward—the Spirit of God takes the Word of God and creates the child of God, with the Holy Spirit employing the divinely inspired Word as His instrument.[3] The faith that the Spirit produces connects inseparably to God’s promises of grace throughout the Bible.[1] The Spirit and the Word are both essential; the Spirit applies the Word to the heart to bring repentance and faith, resulting in spiritual life.[1] This integration ensures that rebirth is neither a purely mystical experience divorced from Scripture nor merely intellectual assent to biblical truths, but rather the Spirit’s living transformation of the heart through engagement with God’s revealed Word.

[1] John R. Higgins, “God’s Inspired Word,” in Systematic Theology: Revised Edition, ed. Stanley M. Horton (Springfield, MO: Logion Press, 2007), 110–111.
[2] Jonathan Master, You Must Be Born Again (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2024), 44.

[3] Billy Graham, The Holy Spirit: Activating God’s Power in Your Life (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1988), 58.

1 Timothy 5:17-25

How to Apply 1 Timothy 5:17-25 to our Church and Life Today

Support Your Leaders Financially

Pastors and teachers who lead well deserve solid financial support (1 Tim 5:17–25). This isn’t optional—it’s biblical. If your church has the resources, make sure your pastor isn’t stressed about paying rent while serving you spiritually. Those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel (1 Cor 9:7–14). When leaders can focus on ministry instead of working three jobs, everyone benefits.

Respect and Honor Your Leaders

Acknowledge those who work hard caring for you spiritually and hold them in highest regard in love (1 Thess 5:12–13). This means listening to sermons with respect, following their teaching, and praying for them. But it also means—and this is important—not treating them like perfect robots. They’re human.

Handle Accusations Carefully and Fairly

Here’s where we need to pay attention: don’t believe accusations against a leader unless two or three witnesses bring them (1 Tim 5:17–25). This protects both leaders and our church from gossip and lies. Before you spread a rumor about your pastor, ask yourself: Do I have solid proof? Have multiple people witnessed this? If not, stay quiet. Keep these instructions without partiality and without favoritism (1 Tim 5:17–25)—meaning don’t protect leaders just because you like them, and don’t attack them just because you disagree with their sermon.

When Leaders Actually Sin

If a leader genuinely sins (not just makes a mistake or preaches something you disagree with), those elders who are sinning should be corrected before everyone, so that others may take warning (1 Tim 5:17–25). This isn’t about public shaming—it’s about accountability. If someone is caught in sin, restore that person gently (Gal 6:1), but don’t hide serious problems.

Be Careful Who You Promote

Don’t be hasty in laying on of hands (1 Tim 5:17–25)—meaning don’t rush to put someone in leadership. They must first be tested; and then if there is nothing against them, let them serve (1 Tim 3:10). If your church asks you to lead, take time to grow spiritually first. Don’t jump into leadership too quickly.

Take Care of Your Health

Finally, stop drinking only water, and use a little wine because of your stomach and your frequent illnesses (1 Tim 5:17–25). Paul’s point? Physical health matters. Don’t ignore your body thinking that’s “unspiritual.” Rest when you’re tired. Eat well. Exercise. See a doctor. Your body is part of your faith journey.

Do not ordain elder hastily

Paul’s instruction to Timothy reflects deep pastoral concern about the consequences of hasty leadership appointments. The command not to be hasty in laying on of hands pertains to the ordination of church officers[1], and this caution stems from interconnected theological and practical dangers.

The primary risk involves moral complicity. A chief pastor who ordains someone hastily could be held responsible if that person later becomes a source of scandal[2]. By moving too quickly, Timothy would essentially share responsibility for whatever misconduct the hastily-appointed elder might commit. Paul warned Timothy of the danger of making hasty appointments to Christian offices, hinting that one who participates in such an appointment shares in the sinful results that can easily follow[3].

Beyond this moral entanglement, Paul recognizes that character assessment requires time. Some people’s sins are immediately apparent, while others only surface later[3]. An elder should not be a new convert, deacons must first be tested, and Timothy is instructed not to be hasty in laying on of hands[1]—these requirements work together to ensure that candidates have demonstrated sustained faithfulness. Certain vices—pride, strife, and materialism[3]—may take considerable time to reveal themselves.

Finally, the Christian leader who judges and punishes others must keep himself unstained, with his own life absolutely above reproach[2]. Paul’s instruction protects both the church’s integrity and Timothy’s personal spiritual standing. Deliberate, measured discernment in selecting leaders becomes an expression of pastoral faithfulness rather than mere procedural caution.

[1] Daniel Akin et al., Perspectives on Church Government: Five Views of Church Polity (Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 130.
[2] J. N. D. Kelly, The Pastoral Epistles, Black’s New Testament Commentary (London: Continuum, 1963), 128.
[3] Thomas D. Lea and Hayne P. Griffin, 1, 2 Timothy, Titus, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992), 34:157–158.

1 Timothy 5:20-21

"But those elders who are sinning you are to reprove before everyone, so that the others may take warning. I charge you, in the sight of God and Christ Jesus and the elect angels, to keep these instructions without partiality, and to do nothing out of favoritism."

The passage establishes a graduated approach to addressing pastoral misconduct, not a blanket call for immediate public rebuke. The principle distinguishes between protecting leaders from false accusations and confronting those who genuinely persist in sin.

Before any disciplinary action, accusations against elders require corroboration from two or three witnesses (1 Tim 5:19–21)—a safeguard against rumor and malice. This protection was particularly relevant given false teachers in the early church, some of whom held leadership positions, making it essential to guard innocent leaders against unfounded charges[1].

However, when elders are genuinely guilty—establishing a pattern of sin rather than isolated lapses—they should be publicly rebuked[1]. The public dimension serves a deterrent function: the reproof occurs “before everyone” so that others will fear similar consequences[1]. For false teachers specifically, the rebuke is reserved for those who “persist in sin,” contradict sound doctrine, or deceive entire families through deception[2].

Critically, church discipline aims at restoration through public rebuke—calling the person to repentance and bringing them back into fellowship, not necessarily toward excommunication[2]. This aligns with the broader biblical pattern: private correction precedes public intervention, with escalation only if the person refuses to listen at each stage (Matt 18:15–17).

So yes, openly addressing false teachers and wayward pastors is biblical—but only after establishing genuine wrongdoing and attempting private correction. The goal remains redemptive, not punitive. Criticism should aim at correction and encouragement, making the person a better Christian, not punishment alone[3].

[1] Candi Finch, ed., “1 Timothy,” in The Study Bible for Women, Holman Christian Standard Bible (Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers, 2014). [See here, here, here.]
[2] Gregory J. Stiekes, “Liturgy in the Pastoral Epistles,” Artistic Theologian (2013), 2:42–43.
[3] Ron Teed, The Book of First Timothy, Teed Commentary (Wheaton, IL: Ron and Betty Teed, 2010), 283–284.

Variants between Matthew, Luke and Mark

The variants fall into several patterns. Matthew and Luke frequently agree against Mark in word choice across numerous passages, from Matt 4:1//Mark 1:13//Luke 4:2 through Matt 27:59//Mark 15:46//Luke 23:53[1]. More significant differences occur where Matthew and Luke use different word forms than Mark, including passages like Matt 9:17//Mark 2:22//Luke 5:37 and Matt 26:14//Mark 14:10//Luke 22:3[1].

Matthew and Luke also rearrange material from Mark, creating transpositional minor agreements[1]. A striking example involves Jesus’ language about “this generation.” Both Matthew and Luke removed Mark’s phrase “in this adulterous and sinful generation” from Mark 8:38, altered the wording—Matthew to “an evil and adulterous generation” and Luke to “an evil generation”—and then conflated it with Mark 8:12, where Mark has “this generation” without those descriptors[1].

Gospel manuscripts contain numerous harmonizations where scribes altered parallel passages in Mark, Matthew, and Luke to match one another, with the Western and Byzantine textual traditions especially prone to this practice[2]. For instance, in Matthew 9:11, some manuscripts add “and drink” after “eat” to conform to Luke 5:30, while in Mark 2:16 the majority of later manuscripts add “and drink,” yet Luke 5:30 appears in only one manuscript without these words[2].

[1] Ward B. Powers, The Progressive Publication of Matthew (Nashville, TN: B&H Academic, 2010). [See here, here, here, here.]

[2] J. Ed Komoszewski, M. James Sawyer, and Daniel B. Wallace, Reinventing Jesus: How Contemporary Skeptics Miss the Real Jesus and Mislead Popular Culture (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 2006), 59–60.

The Synoptic Problem (2)

The Synoptic Problem concerns the literary relationships among Matthew, Mark, and Luke, which share substantial subject matter and wording patterns yet display significant variations.[1] While shared oral traditions might explain some similarities, the close parallels in Greek suggest direct literary dependence.[1]

The dominant scholarly solution for over a century has been the Two-Source Theory. This approach proposes that Matthew and Luke independently used Mark’s Gospel, while also drawing on a lost document scholars call ‘Q’ to explain passages where Matthew and Luke agree but Mark does not.[2] The term ‘Q’ derives from the German word Quelle, meaning “source.”[2] Mark’s priority fits well with his comparative brevity, vivid narrative style, unpolished language, and the fact that Marcan material appears in substantially the same order in Matthew and Luke.[1]

However, the scholarly consensus has fractured in recent decades. The existence and nature of ‘Q’ has incurred sustained criticism in the 21st century from scholars including Mark Goodacre and Francis Watson.[1] An increasingly popular alternative, pioneered by Austin Farrer, proposes that Matthew used Mark while Luke used both Mark and Matthew, restructuring the latter to suit his preferred sequential arrangement.[1] This approach’s appeal lies in its simplicity—it eliminates the need for the unattested hypothetical source ‘Q’ and the requirement that neither Luke nor Matthew knew the other.[1]

The debate today is more open and diverse than throughout much of the 20th century, with many scholars accepting that no single ‘solution’ may account neatly for a composition history involving hybrid written and oral traditions.[1]

[1] Markus Bockmuehl, “Synoptic Problem,” in The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, ed. Andrew Louth (Oxford, United Kingdom; New York: Oxford University Press, 2022), 1877–1878.
[2] Mark Goodacre, The Synoptic Problem: A Way through the Maze (London: T&T Clark, 2005), 20–21.