"BPC, BPC, Satan has asked to sift you as wheat"

Luke 22:31 (SBLGNT)

Σίμων Σίμων, ἰδοὺ ὁ Σατανᾶς ἐξῃτήσατο ὑμᾶς τοῦ σινιάσαι ὡς τὸν σῖτον· 

King James Version

And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: 

Believers Should Remember That God Providentially Uses Satan for Disciplining. 

We wrestle not with flesh and blood, but with spiritual armies, (Eph. 6:12.) 

"Simon, Simon, Satan has asked to sift you as wheat."

Satan asks that he may test and try the apostles. 

"BPC, BPC, Satan has asked to sift you as wheat",‘to put-to-the-test you, as a woman sifts kernels of corn’

Context

The third part of Jesus’ farewell discourse begins with his statement that Satan, whose activity has intensified since 22:3, had sought to separate the disciples (the “you” in 22:31 is plural) from Jesus.

Satan has asked to sift you as wheat. The meaning of this verse is uncertain. Its interpretation is further complicated by the fact that the word translated “asked” (NIV) or “demanded” (RSV) is found nowhere else in the NT or LXX. The nearest analogy is found in Job 1–2, where Satan is permitted to test Job. This and the vocabulary in Amos 9:9 suggests the following interpretation: “Satan is seeking [a dramatic aorist] to shake you disciples violently as one sifts wheat and to cause you to fall.” The metaphor of sifting wheat should not be pressed in order to determine what is “wheat” and what is “chaff,” for this contrast is not mentioned. The use of this metaphor is simply intended to indicate the coming time of testing (cf. Luke 3:17; Amos 9:9). One should not interpret this as God’s granting a request by Satan for permission to test the disciples as in Job 1–2. The saying speaks primarily of Satan’s trying to unsettle the disciples and cause them to become unfaithful. Although Luke tended to avoid emphasizing the disciples’ failures (note his omission of Mark 8:32–33; 14:27–28, 50), he was aware of their faults and was not averse to mentioning them. The “you” here (hymas) is plural and refers to Peter and the other disciples (not Peter and Judas). By mentioning the role of Satan in Peter’s denial, Luke may have been seeking to increase his readers’ empathy toward the apostle.[1]

Sifting was a process of (1) shaking grain through a strainer to remove dirt and small stones and other impurities before preparing it to eat or (2) separating the grain from the chaff by winnowing. Here it is metaphorical of a time of testing.[2] 

σινιάζω (siniazō) sift

The kernels of wheat, still lodged in the heads and attached to the straw, would be beaten on the threshing floor and tossed in the air so the wind could blow away the chaff, leaving the wheat. Satan planned to shake Peter’s life and separate him from his faith.[3] Even to shake all the ministers in BPC!

...for we know that Satan desires our destruction, and with great skill and assiduity seizes on every method of injuring us. And when we come to the conflict, let us know that all temptations, from whatever quarter they come, were forged in the workshop of that enemy.[4] Many staff workers in BPC have been injured! Satan is like a roaring lion ‘seeking whom he may devour’ (1 Peter 5:8). Insinuating as “the accuser of the brethren” (Rev 12:10)

Satan received permission to put all of the disciples to the test in order to separate the good (or faithful) from the bad (or unfaithful), to test all of you, to separate the good from the bad, as a farmer separates the wheat from the chaff’[5] (Many unfaithful BPC members were tested and some had fallen away! They were treated like strawy stuff, burned by FEBC and BPC!) Though there may be many failings in the faith of true believers, yet there shall not be a total and final failure of their faith.

The idiom “sift (someone) like wheat” is similar to the English idiom “to pick (someone) apart.”[6] (Verbal Plenary Preservation VPP has split BPC in divisions)

The possibilities of evil and of ruin are manifold. We may fall by error and unbelief, by pride, by selfishness, by worldliness and vanity, by intemperance or impurity, by departure in spirit from the fear and love of God. There is room, there is reason, for vigilance on the part of him who believes himself well on the way toward or even nearing the gates of the celestial city.[7]

What need have we to be ever on our guard!

Perhaps at this moment Satan may be desiring to sift us. And what if God should give us up into his hands? If suffered to exert his strength, he could soon dissipate whatever is good in us; nor should our past zeal in God’s service remove our apprehensions; that would rather provoke Satan to more activity against us. Let us then “not be high-minded, but fear.” Let us follow the salutary advice which our Lord has given usd Let us plead with fervour those important petitionse—At the same time let us “put on the whole armour of God,” and prepare, as God has taught us, for the assaults of our enemyf.[8]

Some suggest that Satan demanded leave to sift them as their punishment for striving who should be greatest, in which contest Peter perhaps was very warm: “Leave them to me, to sift them for it.” [9] Jeffrey and Charles, who is greater?

Which is worse: to drop three cups while carrying them to the kitchen to be washed, or to get mad and throw a cup and break it?To stumble and bump into a brother or sister and hurt them, or to hit them on purpose and hurt them? [10] FEBC and BPC they are biting one another!

Peter’s self-confident boasting is a warning to us that none of us really knows his own heart (Jer. 17:9) and that we can fail in the point of our greatest strength. Abraham’s greatest strength was his faith, and yet his faith failed him when he went down to Egypt and lied about Sarah (Gen. 12:10–13:4). Moses’ strength was in his meekness (Num. 12:3), yet he lost his temper, spoke rashly with his lips, and was not allowed to enter Canaan (Num. 20). Peter was a brave man, but his courage failed him and he denied his Lord three times. “Therefore let him who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall” (1 Cor. 10:12, NKJV).[11] Are you over confident with your personal view of the Bible?

You can see by the case of Judas how low a man can fall who despises warnings and resists the inspirations of grace. By degrees he becomes so hardened and indifferent, that he is capable of any sin. Examine yourself! Do you take good advice to heart, and act on it? or do you prefer listening to the suggestions of bad companions rather than to the inspirations of the Holy Ghost, and the advice of those set over you? Do not harden your heart and follow the example of Judas![12]

What happened to St. Peter ought to make you guard very carefully against over-confidence in yourself, and make you pray fervently: “Lead us not into temptation!”

Let us look into BPC closely:

B-P Constitution. Article 6 – Principle and Practice of Biblical Separation

   6.1 The doctrine of separation from sin unto God is a fundamental principle of the Bible, one grievously ignored in the church today. Are FEBC and BPC both sinning against the Lord in the lawsuit?

Timothy Tow gave his warning: "Beware young leaders of the B-P Church. Your zeal for some minor point of doctrine can cause sad divisions between members unlimited." [13] Beware! Young leaders like Jeffrey, Suan Yew, Koshy, Charles, Collin...Beware!

Verbal Plenary Preservation is a minor point of doctrine!

Footnotes:

[1] Robert H. Stein, Luke, vol. 24, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992), 552.

[2] Robert James Utley, The Gospel according to Luke, vol. Volume 3A, Study Guide Commentary Series (Marshall, TX: Bible Lessons International, 2004), Lk 22:31.

[3] Ken Heer, Luke: A Commentary for Bible Students (Indianapolis, IN: Wesleyan Publishing House, 2007), 288.

[4]  John Calvin and William Pringle, Commentary on a Harmony of the Evangelists Matthew, Mark, and Luke, vol. 3, 217.

[5]  Richard C. Blight, An Exegetical Summary of Luke 12–24, 2nd ed. (Dallas, TX: SIL International, 2008), 435.

[6] Biblical Studies Press, The NET Bible First Edition Notes (Biblical Studies Press, 2006), Lk 22:31.

[7] H. D. M. Spence-Jones, ed., St Luke, vol. 2, The Pulpit Commentary (London; New York: Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1909), 220.

[8]  Charles Simeon, Horae Homileticae: Luke XVII to John XII, vol. 13 (London: Holdsworth and Ball, 1833), 105.

[9]  Matthew Henry, Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible: Complete and Unabridged in One Volume (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1994), 1903.

[10] Larry Richards and Lawrence O. Richards, The Teacher’s Commentary (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1987), 697.

[11]  Warren W. Wiersbe, The Bible Exposition Commentary, vol. 1 (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1996), 267.

[12]  Frederick Justus Knecht, A Practical Commentary on Holy Scripture (London; St. Louis, MO: B. Herder, 1910), 640.

[13]  Timothy Tow, BP Faith, 107