Month: July 2012

Ephesians 2:11-22, The “Circumcision” and the “Uncircumcision”

/ William F. Leonhart III / Leave a comment

Check out the introduction to this series here. For more exegetical treatments, follow this page.

“Therefore…” in verse eleven points the reader to Paul’s message immediately prior in the text. Paul sets the scene for Ephesians 2:11-22 in the first ten verses of the same chapter. After expounding on the unity believers have in Christ in chapter one, he reminds the Gentiles that they were once dead in their trespasses and sins (vs. 1) in accordance with the world and its ruler (vs. 2). From there, he demonstrates how all men, Jews and Gentiles, participated in the same damnable life of sin and rebellion incurring the wrath of the Lord upon themselves (vs. 3). However, due to God’s great love (vs. 4) and Christ’s subsequent death on the cross, those who believe are made alive with Christ (vs. 5), raised up with Him, and seated with Him in heavenly places (vs. 6), so that He might show His all surpassing grace through those who are in Him (vs. 7). This grace is all of God, not of man (vs. 8), or of the works of man, lest any would boast (vs. 9). Rather, the Christian is the workmanship of Christ, created for good works that have been predestined for them (vs. 10). In remembrance of their former state: that they were once dead in their trespasses and sins and that they were saved solely by the work of Christ, Paul’s Gentile readers have a context for what they are about to read.

The “Circumcision” and the “Uncircumcision”

In verse eleven, Paul sheds light on an issue that was becoming all too common in the early church. A situation had arisen in which the Jews and Gentiles found themselves at odds with one another. The enmity was between the Jews who called themselves the “Circumcision” and the Gentiles who were slanderously regarded as the “Uncircumcision.” These designations, as Paul points out, are fleshly and say nothing about the heart condition of those who partake in them. In other words, the Jews were causing division within the church over whether or not men ought to be circumcised in the flesh.

In stark contrast to the racial bigotry of the Jews of Paul’s day, the circumcision that God is concerned with is the circumcision of the heart (Deut. 10:16; 30:6; Jer. 4:4). In fact, the sign of circumcision was really nothing more than that: a sign (Rom. 4:11). When a Jewish person was circumcised in the flesh, it was an outward sign of what their parents hoped would become an inward reality. Though the sign was performed outwardly, the reality was manifested inwardly. This is why Paul is able to say, in Romans 2:28-29 (NASB), “For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God.” Hence, no one can claim a more favorable status in the eyes of God due to any sign made in the flesh, but rather the reality that is manifested in the heart.

Furthermore, those who would hope, by their circumcised flesh, to call themselves by the title “circumcision” are without warrant unless they are truly circumcised of the heart. There is nothing efficacious about the outward symbol in and of itself. To this end, Paul warns the church at Philippi, “Beware of the dogs, beware of the evil workers, beware of the false circumcision; for we are the true circumcision, who worship in the Spirit of God and glory in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh.” (Phil 3:2-3; NASB) Now, in case anyone would read this and assume that Paul is merely speaking of Jewish believers, his words to the Romans ought to guard against such an interpretation: “So if the uncircumcised man keeps the requirements of the Law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision?” (Rom. 2:26; NASB)

The enmity that existed between the Jews and the Gentiles was so profound that the gospel was often hindered from reaching the Gentiles abroad. Paul’s message is primarily about the gospel and how Christ broke through those barriers to reach the Gentiles. He explains these truths by way of a certain set of realities. The gospel, after all, consists of laying out a series of realities. The typical order of expounding on these realities usually follows like so: this was your status before God, God intervened, and this is your new status before God. This, of course, is the case if Christians are discussing the gospel with a believer, or simply meditating on their salvation experience for their own edification. The sharing of the gospel with unbelievers, however, typically looks different, because reality for the unbeliever is different. The unbeliever is still in that former state before God. Thus, the future status of the unbeliever is to be understood and explained as a possible reality.

Ephesians 2:11-22, Introduction

/ William F. Leonhart III / Leave a comment

The Apostle Paul suffered from many things in his lifetime. One thing from which he never suffered was a shortage of provocative ways to speak of the gospel or of his ministry, in which the gospel was central. This is certainly the case in Romans 11 where Paul proclaims, “Now I am speaking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry in order somehow to make my fellow Jews jealous, and thus save some of them.” (Rom 11:13-14; ESV)[1] He demonstrated his zeal for reaching the Gentiles not only in his speech toward the Gentiles, but also in his speech toward the Jews. In Acts 13:46, Paul and Barnabas tell a crowd of Jews, “It was necessary that the word of God be spoken first to you. Since you thrust it aside and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we are turning to the Gentiles.” This declaration was no small matter to the first century Jews who believed themselves to be sole heirs to the promises given to Abraham (Matt. 3:7-10). At the same time, Gentile converts to Christianity were not blind to the hostility that existed between them and some Jewish converts. It was not uncommon for some Jewish Christians to attempt to impose Jewish customs on their Gentile brothers (Gal 5:1-15). In Ephesians 2:11-22, Paul continues his ministry to the Gentiles by assuring them that they have unity with all believers in Christ Jesus who has torn down the dividing wall between the Gentiles and God establishing a new temple through the apostles, of which He is the cornerstone.

Introduction

Authorship

The Pauline authorship of Ephesians has been contested by liberal scholars of late. Writing in the 1930s, E.J. Goodspeed said that Ephesians is “like a commentary on the Pauline letters.”[2] Just a page prior in the same work, he also refers to it as “a mosaic of Pauline materials.”[3] This assumption is largely a result of the fact that Paul explores many of the same topics in Ephesians that he explores in his other letters. Perhaps, no scholar is better equipped to answer Goodspeed in his assertion than F.F. Bruce, and he certainly answers him properly: “A mosaic made up of fragments of an author’s writings is not best calculated to provide a commentary on them. But, if not a commentary, it is indeed an exposition of the Pauline mission.”[4] Bruce, then, would contend that the mosaic aspect of the letter to the Ephesians points to Paul as its author rather than away from him.

Without a doubt, the similarities between Paul’s letter to the Ephesians and his letters to the other churches are striking. Consistent in Paul’s letters to the churches is the theme of unity “in Christ” (Rom 6:11, 23; 8:1, 10, 39; 12:5; 1Cor 1:2, 4, 30; 4:15, 17; 2Cor 1:21; Gal 1:22; 2:4; 3:14, 26-29; 5:6; Phil 1:1; 4:7, 19, 21; Col 1:2, 27-28; 2:6; 1Thes 1:1, 3; 2:14). Paul was certainly concerned that the church would understand that she is built on the foundation of Christ and that true fellowship and unity are found in Him. This theme Paul reiterates in his letter to the Ephesians (Eph 1:1, 3, 5, 9, 12; 2:5-7, 10, 13; 3:6; 4:15, 32).

Likewise, Paul returns to his message of the inclusion of the Gentiles into spiritual Israel. In Romans 9-11, Paul speaks of this concept in terms of God grafting the Gentiles like a branch into the tree of Israel with the purpose of causing jealousy and, Paul had hoped, the return of ethnic Israel to their Lord. In Galatians 3, Paul speaks of this mystery in terms of the mode of salvation. He demonstrates how Abraham was saved by faith in the Lord, considered righteous, and promised a Seed. He then goes on to demonstrate how that Seed is the Lord Jesus Christ, in whom Christians place their faith and are counted righteous, just as Abraham was counted righteous. It is in this context that he proclaims, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Gal 3:28) Paul returns to this theme in his letter to the Ephesians (Eph 2:11-3:13) for the purpose of continuing his argument for unity “in Christ” and showing how this unity extends even to Gentile believers.

Location

The Ephesians were largely made up of Gentiles. They were located near the Lycus Valley in Asia Minor and were within a few short miles of the Phrygian townships of Colossae, Laodicea, and Hierapolis. According to William Hendriksen, it is proper to view the three townships “in relation to the entire region and particularly to Ephesus which was Paul’s center of missionary activity for this part of the third missionary journey during which the three churches, and probably others, must have been established (Acts 19:10; Rev 1:11).”[5] It is for this reason that Paul is seen sending circular letters to the churches of Colossae and Laodicea (Col 4:16), though the letter to the Laodiceans has not survived to this day. In fact, it is not clear whether Paul ever visited Colossae. The contention of most scholars is that Colossae was evangelized and the church was started by Epaphras (Col 1:6-8; 4:12), a Gentile convert of Paul’s from his time in Ephesus.[6] [7]

Audience

Some question has been raised as to whether Paul knows his audience at Ephesus. According to D.A. Carson, “The tone of the letter is impersonal, and some parts of it seem to indicate that the writer did not know the readers. . .”[8] As evidence for this claim, Carson cites Ephesians 1:15; 3:2; and 4:21. These verses can be quite striking when first discovered. However, as churches evolve it is expected that new members would join and old members would move on, especially in Asia Minor where new churches were being planted in nearby cities by this church in Ephesus. Thus, it is likely that Paul was assuming that he did not know all of his audience, though there may be some familiar faces among the crowd. This sentiment is shared by Carson as he continues, “But Paul had evangelized the Ephesians and had spent quite a long time among them (Acts 19:8, 10; 20:31).”[9] Therefore, though Paul may not have known each individual, he at least knew the founding members as well as the shared customs and concerns of the people in Ephesus.

Date

The dating of Paul’s letter to the Ephesians is rarely contested by scholars who actually affirm its Pauline authorship. According to the ESV Study Bible, “Because Paul mentions his imprisonment (3:1; 4:1; 6:20), this letter should be dated to c. a.d. 62 when Paul was held in Rome (Acts 28). Critics who date Ephesians later in the first century do so from doubts about Paul’s authorship rather than from strong evidence against the earlier date.”[10] With no “strong evidence” given for a later dating, one must venture beyond sound reason to assert that the date of Ephesians would be decades later than c. AD 60.

Occasion

There is no specific occasion given for the writing of Paul’s letter to the Ephesians. Given the tone and message of the letter, one may logically conclude that Paul was merely writing to encourage and exhort the brethren at his highly missions-minded church plant. Considering the fact that the Ephesians were predominantly Gentile (Eph 2:11; 3:1), Paul spoke much on the Gentile inclusion and the glory that was to be given to Christ for their redemption. This was likely due to some misunderstandings that he had encountered at other churches into which he did not want to see his beloved Ephesians fall prey. Given his love for the church at Ephesus and the mighty things that he had seen the Lord do through them, it is likely that he wanted to prevent them from going the route of the Galatian churches and, like the Galatians, provoke his rebuke.

Message

Though Paul takes six chapters to unfold the message of Ephesians, it is nonetheless quite simple. The first three chapters of Ephesians deal with the unity of the church body in Christ. He focuses mainly on what this unity means for the Gentiles who are in Christ, specifically drawing attention to the breaking down of the dividing wall which allows for the salvation of both Jew and Gentile in the economy of Christ’s salvation. In the second half of Ephesians, Paul puts his theology to practical use explaining what Christians ought to do as a result of the mystery that has been revealed by God through Paul’s ministry.

[1]All Scripture references are taken from the English Standard Version (ESV) of the Bible, unless otherwise noted.

[2]E.J Goodspeed, The Meaning of Ephesians (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1933), 9.

[3]Ibid., 8

[4]F.F Bruce, The Epistles to the Colossians, to Philemon, and to the Ephesians (New International Commentary on the New Testament) (New York: William B. Eerdman’s Publishing Company, 1984), 230.

[5]William Hendriksen, New Testament Commentary: Colossians (Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1964), 6.

[6]Ibid., 15

[7]J.B Lightfoot, The Crossway Classic Commentaries: Colossians and Philemon (Wheaton: Crossway Books, 1973), 27-28.

[8]D.A. Carson and Douglas J. Moo, Introduction to the New Testament, 2nd ed (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005), 488.

[9]Ibid.

[10]Baugh, S.M, The ESV Study Bible, ed. Lane T. Dennis, J.I. Packer, and Wayne Grudem (Wheaton: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 2257.

Senior Thesis

/ William F. Leonhart III / Leave a comment

This series breaks up my senior thesis Pragmatic Churches and Pastoral Ministry Students into smaller, easy-to-read articles.

Pragmatic Churches and Pastoral Ministry Students

Part One: Pragmatism and the Church

Part Two: The Church and the Pastoral Ministry Student

Pragmatic Churches and Pastoral Ministry Students, Conclusion

/ William F. Leonhart III / Leave a comment

For context, be sure and read the first nine articles listed here.

The evangelical church in the West may have lost its mind, but there is no reason to believe that it is a permanent loss. Pragmatism has certainly gotten a foothold in the church for now. However, there is hope. If the church once again begins to take seriously its role in the life of the pastoral ministry student, the next generation of leaders might just prove to be the generation that restores the Christian mind to the church in the West. This upward cycle, however, must start somewhere. These articles have contended that the place where such a revolution must begin is in the life of the local church. The church has been complacent for far too long. It is time that the world sees what she can do when she begins to shed this plague of pragmatism.

Pragmatic Churches and Pastoral Ministry Students, The Duties of the Elders

/ William F. Leonhart III / Leave a comment

For context, be sure and read the first eight articles listed here.

The tests mandated in Scripture are to be conducted in one particular setting: the local church. Elders are expected to have a good reputation with those outside the local body (1Tim 3:7). Nonetheless, the local body, by the leading of the word and the Spirit, has the ultimate duty of testing and approving a candidate for ministry (John 10:1-3, 16, 26-27; 1Jn 4:1-6).

Duties, unlike responsibilities, cannot be delegated. An example of this concept can be seen in the structuring of the United States military. Leaders in the military are duty bound to ensure that certain tasks and policies are upheld. They cannot abdicate or delegate these duties, but must personally fulfill them. They may, however, delegate certain responsibilities to their subordinates to ensure that the unit’s mission is accomplished in a safe and efficient manner.[1] A church might delegate some responsibilities to para-church institutions like Bible colleges and seminaries, but the moment that it abdicates its duties as they regard the ministry student, it has ceased to function in one of the most vital roles it has been given. This article will focus specifically on the duties of the elders to test and disciple elder candidates.

Discipleship of the pastoral ministry student. According to Scripture, the elders and the congregation have each been given unique gifts for this task of testing the ministerial student. Elders are uniquely qualified, if for no other reason, because they have experience in the office to which the student aspires. This is not to say that future pastors can learn nothing from mature members of the congregations, but the elders will have specific knowledge and experience of the traps of the world, the flesh, and the enemy that are unique to the office of the elder. A godly pastor, after having been faced with such pitfalls, will have already consulted Scripture and found the answers necessary for perseverance in faith, hope, and love.

As a result, it is particularly necessary for elders to have close, personal, relationships with pastoral ministry students. History abounds with examples of this type of discipleship. The Lord himself set such an example, travelling and teaching his disciples for three years before commissioning them to carry the message of the gospel to the ends of the earth. The apostle John recalled his intimate relationship with the Lord by referring to himself as “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (John 13:23; 19:26; 20:2; 21:7, 20). Paul was close enough with Timothy and Titus to refer to them as his sons in the faith (1Tim 1:2; 2Tim 1:2; Tit 1:4).

Even the pagans in the ancient world understood the value of having and keeping close relations with their students. The teacher / student lineage from Socrates to Plato to Aristotle to Alexander is well documented. In fact, Plato was so fond of Socrates, his mentor, that he used him as a character in most of his books in order to convey his interpretation of the master’s teaching. Also of note is Cicero’s fondness of his son. Cicero’s concern for his son’s education was so important to him that he wrote his philosophical and political treatise On Duties particularly for his benefit.

Continuing in the footsteps of the Greeks and of Christ and His apostles, Athanasius and Augustine each wrote books to disciples whom they loved dearly. Athanasius wrote On the Incarnation to his protégé, Marcarius,[2] and Augustine wrote the rather lengthy tome City of God to his disciple, Marcellinus.[3] In the address line of a letter Augustine wrote to Marcellinus on another occasion, Augustine, like Paul before him, refers to his disciple as his “very dear son.”[4] Such endearments and personally addressed treatises could not have been the result of trivial, Sunday afternoon relationships. They were the result of committed relationships that resulted in an invested desire for the other party’s well-being, success, and returned affection.

In like manner, Martin Luther conducted sessions with the pastors he was in the habit of grooming called Tabletalk. He also sought to reform education in Germany so that the average person could read the Bible he had labored so rigorously to translate into the language of the people.[5] Ulrich Zwingli, the Swiss Reformer, was well known for having started a Bible study that ultimately splintered off and became the seed of the Anabaptist movement. Early on, however, Zwingli included his students in every aspect of his sermon preparation, demonstrating for them how to rightly handle the word of God. Charles Spurgeon was well known for taking a personal interest in investigating the ministry qualifications of every student at the Pastors’ College and requiring that they be actively involved in ministry while they were studying there.[6] Discipleship has always been a key duty of any pastor, but particularly as it regards those who are being raised up for ministry.

Spheres of discipleship. Recognition must now be given to the biblical concept of ministerial spheres. Pastors have certain spheres of duty to which they ought to give well reasoned attention. For instance, the Bible mandates that an elder “must be one who manages his own household well” (1Tim 3:4). Thus, if he is not discipling his own family, a man should not be expected to properly disciple God’s family. From there the question must be asked of whom within the church he must take a personal interest. The question is necessary if for no other reason because, if a pastor is spread too thin, he is of no good to himself, his own family, or anyone else in the church. So, pastors would be wise to take advantage of the spheres of responsibility God has already put into place.

God has given headship in the family to the husband (1Cor 11:3).[7] Thus, if there are twenty families in a church, the elders can eliminate much busy work by specifically singling out the twenty heads of households for discipleship. They can charge those men to disciple their own families and check in on them from time to time to assess their progress.

The second group to consider for this specific attention are the older ladies in the church. In Titus 2:3-5, Paul charges Titus to have the older women teach and disciple the younger women on how to lead godly lives. William Mounce suggests that Paul might be giving this instruction to Titus (Tit 2:4) in order to ensure that Titus will be able to more surely obey the command to treat “younger women as sisters in all purity” (1Tim 5:2b).[8]

All of this discipleship is for naught if pastors neglect the discipleship of the church’s next generation of leaders. It is not enough for pastors to say that they do not have time to disciple future leaders. If a pastor does not have time to disciple future leaders, with whom does he hope to share the ever-growing responsibility of discipling the rest of his flock? If a pastor does not make time to disciple leaders early on, he will eventually find that he has no time to properly disciple anyone, because he has raised up no one with whom he might share this responsibility.

The creedal test. Elders are responsible to disciple pastoral ministry students, but they are also meant to lead the congregation in their testing. Elders, due to their unique vocation, ought to have more time and more resources at their disposal for honing their theology and rooting it in a rich, historical tradition. Their libraries alone should give them a considerable advantage over the average congregant in the pursuit of acquiring sound doctrine. The elder’s special circumstance comes with a distinct obligation to ensure the theological specificity of the local church in general and future pastors in particular. The primary way in which this obligation is fulfilled is through expository preaching.

Many pastors do not even know how great a disservice they do to their flocks by neglecting their duty to preach the word. In seeking to preach all application, they inflate their congregation with baseless morality which can only ever lead to a damnable legalism or an enduring hopelessness. In seeking to preach all doctrine, they puff up their congregation with a dead orthodoxy that will often lead to an arrogant self-centeredness or to certain forms of antinomianism. The only way to avoid such extremes is to preach the word. Preach expositionally and preach theologically, for “true biblical preaching is both expository and theological in substance.”[9] By preaching the word, the people will be grounded in the theological roots of their faith and begin to manifest the practical fruits that spring from it.

As they study for such preaching, pastors will also be able to put the time-tested creeds, confessions, and catechisms of the faith to the test of Scripture. They will have the privilege of seeing for themselves whether those documents hold up against the critique of the Bible. As they prayerfully embark on this journey, with the aid of the Holy Spirit, pastors will assuredly come to a greater understanding of Christian orthodoxy, and have a more robust faith to pass on to the next generation of pastors.

Also beneficial to the cause of testing the confession of prospective pastors is the delegation of certain teaching and preaching responsibilities in the church. As the candidate studies to teach in Sunday school, to teach a Bible study, or to fill the pulpit on occasion, he will be forced to groom his theology and improve it. Often, the best way for one to learn something is to commit oneself to teaching it to others.[10] Through this process, elders also have the opportunity to observe and examine prospective elders’ exegesis, conclusions, connections, and applications of the text. Also in this process, elders will be granting congregations more opportunities to test the ministry student on the creedal front.

The character test. In regard to testing the character of the prospective elder, elders must intentionally assert themselves into his life. If the apostle Paul did not think himself to have obtained a perfect Christian maturity (Phil 3:12), how much less should elders assume the maturity of their students. Rather, if the church is expected to confess their sins to one another (Jas 5:16; 1Jn 1:8-9), all the more the elders ought to lead by example, confessing their sins to one another, and exhorting their students to confess their sins.

The implication, then, is that the elder will be working out his own salvation, mortifying his own sins, so that he is not ashamed or hypocritical when he seeks to help his student work out his salvation and mortify his own sin. Perhaps the most salient thing a pastor can do in his testing of a pastoral student’s character is to model for him the character he is to have (Phil 3:17; 2Thess 3:7, 9; 1Tim 4:12; Tit 2:7; 1Pt 5:3). Of course, no one ever set an example for someone in their absence. Therefore, it is necessary that pastors both exemplify the character they expect out of their students and be in their lives enough that they can see it.

The aptitude test. If anyone is equipped to both recognize true giftedness for the ministry and have empathy for a pastoral candidate in the early years of his formative education, it is his elders. Undoubtedly, both of these elements are necessary for the process of examination and confirmation. Pastors should know, both scripturally and experientially, what is necessary for carrying out the duties of the office and what difficulties arise in the process of carrying them out. Thus, they are uniquely qualified to spot the gifting of a particular candidate for ministry when it surfaces.

The term gifted is an intentional term that should not be brushed over. The pastoral candidate does not have innate skills endowed upon him by nature, nor does he have acquired skills mined from personal determination. Rather, his skills ought to be recognized as just what they are: gifts from God. Granted, God may instill certain gifts in men from birth, or He may cause them to undergo a series of challenges whereby they acquire these gifts, but they are nevertheless gifts that He has given. It is Christ Himself who “distributes gifts from the fullness that he himself possesses, because he has triumphed and fills all things.”[11] The moment the elder candidate begins to assume personal ownership of these gifts he runs the risk of falling prey to either pride or self-reliance or both.

Too often pastors use their skills for personal gain to the detriment of the church and the name of Christ. The elders’ goal ought to be to safeguard the church against such men. The gifts given to pastors are mighty weapons that can be used for either great good or great harm. The elders’ duties then are to aid the prospective elder in acquiring, sharpening, and properly respecting the gifts he has been given by God. As such, his gifts will be weapons used safely, honorably, and with precision to accomplish the tasks predestined for the pastoral candidate to accomplish.

[1]http://www.armystudyguide.com, “Duties, Responsibilities, And Authority Explained,” Army Study Guide, April 03, 2006, http://www.armystudyguide.com/content/army_board_study_guide_topics/duties-responsibilities-of-nco.shtml/ (accessed December 4, 2011).

[2]Athanasius, On the Incarnation, trans. A Religious of C.S.M.V (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982), 25.

[3]Augustine, City of God, trans. Henry Bettenson (London: Penguin Books, 1972), 5.

[4]Augustine, Saint Augustine Letters – Volume III: 131-164, trans. Wilfrid Parsons (New York: Fathers of the Church, Inc, 1953), 6.

[5]William F. Leonhart, “Luther’s Vision of Free Education for Family and Church” (thesis, The College at Southwestern, Fort Worth, TX, 2011), 2-3.

[6]William F. Leonhart, “Spurgeon, Education, and the Local Church” (thesis, The College at Southwestern, Fort Worth, TX, 2011), 8-9.

[7]Paige Patterson, The Troubled Triumphant Church (Eugene: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1983), 178-179.

[8]William D. Mounce, Word Biblical Commentary, ed. Bruce M. Metzger, David A. Hubbard, and Glenn W. Barker, Pastoral Epistles (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2000), 270.

[9]Joel Breidenbaugh, Preaching for Bodybuilding (Bloomington: CrossBooks, 2010), 16.

[10]From the popular saying, “The best way to learn is to teach,” often attributed to Frank Oppenheimer.

[11]Vern S. Poythress, “Modern Spiritual Gifts as Analogous to Apostolic Gifts: Affirming Extraordinary Works of the Spirit within Cessationist Theology,” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 39, no. 1 (1996): 71.