Jump to content
Online Baptist

Pastor Scott Markle

Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • Content count

    2,165
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    114

Pastor Scott Markle last won the day on June 14

Pastor Scott Markle had the most liked content!

About Pastor Scott Markle

  • Rank
    Abiding in Christ
  • Birthday 08/13/1971

Profile Information

Recent Profile Visitors

11,462 profile views
  1. Pastor Scott Markle

    Saved in 3 tenses?

    Sister Rose, I certainly agree that we should read and study God's Word in a straight forward manner. However, a straight forward reading of this parable about the two olive trees in Romans 11:16-24 leaves us with one very significant question unanswered. That question is this -- What does the root/trunk of the good olive tree represent? The passage seems to define what the branches of the good olive tree represent., and it seems to define what the branches of the wild olive tree represent. On the other hand, while the passage references the root/trunk of the good olive tree four times (and by referencing the tree itself, infers the root/trunk a few additional times), the passage itself does NOT seem to define specifically what the root/trunk of the good olive might be. Yet defining this representation is QUITE significant for your question. Certainly, the parable and passage DOES communicate that there is something which might be possessed, but which then might also be lost. Whatever this something is, it is represented by the root/trunk of the good olive tree. It is the root/trunk of the good olive tree that the Israelites possess by nature. It is the root/trunk of the good olive tree from which the Israelites were cut off because of their unbelief (thus a possession lost). It is the root/trunk of the good olive tree into which we Gentiles might be grafted through faith. It is the root/trunk of the good olive tree about which the warning is given that we Gentiles might also be cut off after being grafted in (thus the possibility of a possession lost). It is the root/trunk of the good olive tree into which the Israelites who were cut off might be grafted back in. Even so, by a straight forward reading of the parable and passage, the "something" that might be either possessed or lost IS the root/trunk of the good olive tree. So then, we must ask -- What does the root/trunk of the good olive tree represent? Yet as we read through the passage, it does NOT define this representation for us, which "complicates" our understanding of the passage and parable. Now above you said -- Most certainly, you should read God's Word in a literary manner, like you would any other book. However, when a given passage itself does not provide the specific information to answer a specific question that we have, further and deeper interpreting is required. What does the parable and passage reveal straightforwardly -- 1. The root/trunk of the tree (whatever it represents) is holy by character, and thus so are the branches that it contains. (Romans 11:16) 2. Some of the natural branches (Israelites, as per the immediate context) of the good olive tree were broken off from the root/trunk of the good olive tree. (Romans 11:17) 3. We Gentiles were grafted into the root/trunk of the good olive tree, and thus partake of the "root and fatness" of that tree along with the natural branches. (Romans 11:17) 4. Because of this, we Gentiles should not boast against the natural branches (Israelites) because we do not bear the root/trunk of the tree, but it bears us. (Romans 11:18) 5. The natural branches (Israelites) of the good olive tree were broken off because of unbelief. (Romans 11:20) 6. We Gentiles were grafted into the root/trunk of the good olive tree through faith. (Romans 11:20) 7. We Gentiles should take warning that if God did not spare the natural branches (Israelites) of the good olive tree, then he might also not spare us Gentiles. (Romans 11:21) 8. This all reveals the "goodness and severity of God," on the Israelites His severity, on us Gentiles His goodness -- if we Gentiles continue in His goodness. (Romans 11:22) 9. However, if we Gentiles do not continue in God's goodness toward us, then we also might be cut off from the root/trunk of the good olive tree. (Romans 11:22) 10. The natural branches (Israelites) who were cut off from the root/trunk of the good olive tree might be grafted back in if they remain not in unbelief, but come to faith. (Romans 11:23) 11. Indeed, if us Gentiles as the branches of a wild olive tree could be "grafted contrary to nature" into the root/trunk of the good olive tree, then "how much more" might "the natural branches" of that good olive tree be grafted back into "their own olive tree?" Now, throughout this entire matter the root/trunk of the good olive tree plays a significant part. What then does the root/trunk of the good olive tree represent? While the passage does provide us with elements of information about the root/trunk of the good olive tree, it never actually specifies what the root/trunk of the good olive tree represents. Thus ANY answer that we develop for our understanding of the parable and passage requires some level of conjecture or assumption. For example, I believe that within your own struggle in relation to the passage, you have made an assumption concerning the representation for the root/trunk of the good olive tree, as follows -- That portion in your above statement which I have emphasized appears to reveal your (assumed) understanding concerning that which the root/trunk of the good olive tree represents. The parable and passage speaks about branches being cut off from the root/trunk (and fatness) of the good olive tree. Above you speak about being "cut off" from God's saving grace. Thus you appear to be equating God's saving grace with the root/trunk of the good olive tree. I myself do not agree with this understanding for the representation of the root/trunk of the good olive tree for the following conjectured (deeper) reasonings -- 1. Whatever the root/trunk of the good olive tree might be, it is the possession of the Israelites naturally, such that they all were attached to it at the first (before they were cut off from it through unbelief). Yet to me it does not appear Biblically correct to say that God's saving grace is NATURALLY possessed by the all Israelites, but that they might be cut off from that saving grace through unbelief. Now, I might be able to accept the argument, not that the root/trunk of the good olive tree represents God's saving grace itself, but that it represents the OPPORTUNITY to receive to God's saving grace. Then the passage would be indicating that the OPPORTUNITY and PRIVELEGE to receive God's saving grace (not the saving grace itself) is the possession of His chosen people NATURALLY, but that they spiritually fell from that greater OPPORTUNITY and PRIVELEGE to receive God's saving grace through their unbelief as a people, such that as a people they are now bound under a heavy cloud of spiritual blindness. Even so, then the passage would also be indicating concerning the grafting in of us Gentiles, not that we now possess God's saving grace itself, but that we now possess a more ready OPPORTUNITY and PRIVELEGE to receive God's saving grace. This more ready OPPORTUNITY and PRIVELEGE to receive God's saving grace would be God's goodness toward us Gentiles as a people. Yet that goodness only continues toward us as a people if we continue in it. However, if we Gentiles persist in unbelief against God's saving grace, that more ready OPPORTUNITY and PRIVELEGE to receive God's saving grace could be cut off from us also, such that we Gentiles also as a people (or some particular societal structure among us Gentiles) might be bound under the heavy cloud of spiritual blindness as the Israelites. 2. As per the immediate context in Romans 11:5-6, God's saving grace comes specifically through His GRACE, such that it includes NO requirement of works whatsoever at all. Yet if we claim (from Romans 11:20-22) that God's saving grace is indeed received initially through faith, but that we must continue in His goodness in order to remain therein without losing it, then we have added some level of "working faithfulness" to the means of God's saving grace. Then we have -- God's saving grace is received through faith and retained through (working) faithfulness. Yet Romans 11:6 clearly indicates that if it be at all of works, "then is it no more grace." Now we have a contradiction within the immediate context of Romans 11. Yet no such contradiction in God's Word can possibly be, especially within the same immediate context. An apparent contradiction only reveals that we are in some manner not understanding something correctly. 3. The primary principle for the parable of the two olive trees is NOT about the matter of eternal security (security established by God's promise) versus faithfulness security (security retained through our faithfulness). Rather, the primary principle for the parable is a warning that we Gentiles (especially Gentile believers) should not develop a wrong attitude against unbelieving Israelites. We should not become boastful against them. We should not become high-minded against them. We should not become wise in our own conceits against them. Rather, we should ever walk in the fear of the Lord our God, and should ever retain a spirit of gracious humility in relation to the Israelites as the NATURAL branches of the good olive tree, into which God graciously grafted us within His goodness against our nature. 4. Romans 11:28-32 provides the conclusion to the matter. Therefore, its references to the gospel, the gifts and calling of God, and the mercy of God must all fit with unity in relation to our understanding of the parable in Romans 11:16-24. 5. At least one other interpretive question requires consideration. Throughout the parable of Romans 11:16-24, plural pronouns are employed for Israelite "branches" that were cut off from the good olive tree, whereas singular pronouns are employed for the Gentile representation in the parable. So then, do these singular pronouns for the Gentile representation encompass the whole of Gentiles as a singular group; or do these singular pronouns for the Gentile representation reference just a single Gentile individual (possibly, a single Gentile believer). It also worthy of notice that throughout the rest of the chapter's context, the Gentiles are considered from the plural perspective, just as the Israelites. Now, above you ask the question -- Truly, the answer to your question is founded directly upon a correct understanding for what the root/trunk of the good olive tree represents. In my previous postings, I have contended that the root/trunk of the good olive tree represents the covenants of promise that the Lord God originally gave unto the Israelites.
  2. Pastor Scott Markle

    Saved in 3 tenses?

    Sister Rose, In answer to your question above, Yes and No. If the root of the good olive tree does indeed represent the covenants of promise, then inclusion therein is about opportunity and privilege. Let us consider a few different scenarios in relation to this matter. First, let us consider those Israelites who were the first generation in the Lord’s redemption from the bondage of Egypt. Indeed, they all experienced that divine redemption through their faith in the blood of the Passover lamb, as they all sprinkled its blood upon the door post and lintel. There is no indication that the death angel entered into any Israelite home that night. Even so, in 1 Corinthians 10:1-4 God’s Word gives the report concerning that very generation of Israelites, “Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; and were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; and did all eat the same spiritual meat; and did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.” They were all believers in God’s redemption through the blood of the lamb. They were all under the cloud of God’s glorious presence. They were all baptized unto Moses through the crossing of the Red Sea. They all partook of the same spiritual meat and drink, such that they all partook of Christ Himself. As such, the Lord God entered into the covenants of promise with all of them at Mount Sinai; and those covenants of promise included the “fatness” of the Promised Land. However, because of their unbelief and disobedience at Kadesh, they were not permitted to enter into the Promised Land and to experience its “fatness.” Rather, they were required to wander in the wilderness until that generation passed away. Thus in 1 Corinthians 10:5-6 God’s Word gives further report, “But with many of them God was not well pleased: for they were overthrown in the wilderness. Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted.” Yet even throughout their wandering in the wilderness, they still had the Lord’s presence with them, the Lord’s provision for them, and the Lord’s protection over them. Did they have part in the covenants of promise as their root possession? Did they enjoy the fullness of those promises? No, they did not, because of their unbelief and disobedience. (See Hebrews 3:7-11) Yet did they experience some aspects of those promises? Yes, they did, even throughout their wanderings in the wilderness. However, the scribes and Pharisees in the time of the Lord Jesus Christ’s earthly ministry present a different case. Although they were very religious, having “a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge.” (See Romans 10:2) “For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness,” through their religious works of the law, did not “submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.” (See Romans 10:3) Although they were very religious, they were never believers. Thus our Lord Jesus Christ pronounced that they were not spiritually the children of God, but that they were of their spiritual father, the devil. (See John 8:42-44) So then, did they have part in the covenants of promise as their root possession? Yes, as Israelites they did indeed. On the other hand, did they experience and enjoy the fullness of those promises? No, actually because of their rejection of the Lord Jesus Christ, they spiritually fell and were cut off from their covenants of promise as a people (although not completely or permanently). In fact, the Lord God has now judged them as a people with spiritual blindness “in part.” (See Romans 11:7-11, 25) This is the “severity of God” toward the Israelites unto which Romans 11:22 makes reference. Now, the spiritual fall and cutting off of the Israelites as a people has opened a spiritual door for us Gentiles as a people. Whereas the spiritual opportunities of the Israelites as a people have become quite restricted through the spiritual blindness that the Lord God has place upon them, the spiritual opportunities of the Gentiles has become significantly more readily available. Now, while the access of the Israelites as people unto their covenants of promise has been significantly restricted, the access of us Gentiles as a people unto those covenants of promise has been offered more freely. Indeed, we of the wild olive tree have an open opportunity to be grafted into the Israelites’ natural root possession, their covenants of promise. Yet our part in those covenants of promise does not include the “fatness” of the Promised Land. Rather, our part in those covenants of promise includes the “fatness” of a promised spiritual LIFE, even as our Lord Jesus Christ revealed in John 10:10, “I am come that they might have LIFE, and that they might have it more ABUNDANTLY.” Even so, this time of the New Testament church is that time wherein every believer receives the indwelling of God the Holy Spirit from the very moment of faith in Christ for salvation, such that the indwelling Holy Spirit might enable our abundant spiritual living as we submit unto His filling influence and direction. This is the “goodness” of God toward the Gentiles unto which Romans 11:22 makes reference. So then, what about us Gentiles who might not believe in the Lord Jesus Christ? By the record of the New Testament, it seems apparent that a great majority of the Gentiles as a people will indeed reject the Lord Jesus Christ as Savior. Even so, because of their unbelief and rejection they also may be cut off from access unto the covenants of promise. In fact, after some point of rejection and rebellion against the gospel, the Lord God may cut off any given Gentile from an opportunity to come unto Christ through faith for salvation. This is one aspect of the “severity of God” toward the Gentiles about which Romans 11:22 warns. On the other hand, by the record of the New Testament, it also seems apparent that many of us Gentiles will indeed receive the Lord Jesus Christ through faith as eternal Savior. As such, we receive full access unto the “fatness” of the promised life that is found within the new covenant of promise. Yet our experience of that “fatness” is still determined by our faithfulness unto the Lord and by our submission unto the filling influence of the indwelling Holy Spirit throughout our daily walk. If we do not walk in faithfulness and the filling of the Holy Spirit, we will not be cut off from our place in eternal life, but we will be cut off from the “fatness” of the abundant life. This also is an aspect of the “severity of God” toward the Gentiles, although less severe, about which Romans 11:22 warns.
  3. Pastor Scott Markle

    Saved in 3 tenses?

    Sister Rose, I desire that my following comment will be taken somewhat seriously, but with a little bit of humor as well; yet I most definitely do not wish to cause any offense. Now the comment - While I am not clinically diagnosed with OCD, I am an individual who Obsessively Cares about Details, especially in Bible study. Such is the reason for my lengthy, detailed, thorough, extensive answers to questions. I simply pray that it is all good to the use of edifying and that it ministers God's grace unto others.
  4. Pastor Scott Markle

    Saved in 3 tenses?

    First, let us consider the context of the whole chapter wherein Romans 11:20-22 is found. 1. The Concern The primary them of Romans 11 concerns the relationship of the Israelites as a people with the Lord their God. This is revealed through the opening question of Romans 11:1, “I say then, Hath God cast away his people?” This question engages two progressive thoughts. In the first place, we encounter the recognition that the Israelites were indeed the chosen people of God throughout the time of the Old Testament. In the second place, we encounter the concern whether God has now cast aside the Israelites completely and permanently as His chose people. Yet the emphatic answer to this concern rings back, “God forbid!” 2. The Evidences The apostle Paul provides two evidences for his emphatic answer that God has definitely not cast aside the Israelites completely and permanently as His chose people. In the closing portion of Romans 11:1, he presents his own salvation as the first evidence. Then in Romans 11:2-6 he presents the reality of a remnant, “a remnant according to the election of grace,” as the second evidence. 3. The Problem In Romans 11:7-10 the apostle reveals that the Lord God has indeed judged the Israelites as a people with spiritual blindness. This spiritual blindness does not prevent all of them from coming unto a knowledge of the truth, for there is indeed “a remnant according to the election of grace” who come unto faith in Christ for eternal salvation. Yet this spiritual blindness means that the majority of the Israelites will not understand the way of God’s grace for eternal salvation through Christ; but “being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness [by the works of the law],” they will not “submit themselves unto the righteousness of God” through faith alone in Christ. (See Romans 10:2-4) 4. The Result In Romans 11:11 the apostle reveals that the spiritual fall of the Israelites has opened the door of God’s gracious salvation unto the Gentiles as a people group. Yet this spiritual fall and spiritual blindness of the Israelites is not a final fall and permanent casting away. Indeed, God’s Word declares, “God forbid!” Rather, this spiritual fall of the Israelites and opened door of grace for the Gentiles is intended to provoke the Israelites unto spiritual jealousy and repentance. 5. The Relationship In Romans 11:12-15 the apostle proposes the truth that if the spiritual fall and diminishing of the Israelites be unto the spiritual reconciliation and riches of the world and of the Gentiles, then how much greater riches would the spiritual restoration and fullness of the Israelites be for the sake of the Gentile world. 6. The Warning Then in Romans 11:16-24 the apostle presents the parable of the good olive tree and the wild olive tree. Even so, the primary intention for this parable is to warn us Gentiles that we should not boast ourselves against the spiritually fallen Israelites. It is to warn us that we should not be wise in our own conceits and should not be sinfully high-minded against them. Rather, it is to warn us that we should simply and continually walk in the fear of the Lord our God and Savior. 7. The Promise Having relayed his warning through illustration in Romans 11:16-24, the apostle proclaims in Romans 11:25-27 God’s promise of spiritual restoration for the Israelites. As per the revelation of other Scriptural prophecy, we understand that this restoration shall occur at the Second Coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. 8. The Conclusion In Romans 11:28-32 draws the entire discussion to its conclusion – that the gospel of God’s merciful salvation is unto all, both Israelite and Gentile, through faith. 9. The Praise Finally, in Romans 11:33-36 the apostle expresses the heights of praise for the wisdom and glory of the Lord our God in creating such a plan of merciful salvation through grace unto all who believe. Second, let us consider the meaning of the parable concerning the two olive trees. 1. Before we begin to consider the details of the parable itself, it is important for us to recognize that we should not get our doctrinal understanding primarily from a parable. Certainly, Biblical parables do illustrate doctrinal principles. Yet parables remain illustrations for these principles, but not declarations of the principles themselves. 2. As we consider the details of this parable, it is important for us to recognize the primary point and principle of the parable. Every Biblical parable, while including various details of truth, contains a primary principle of truth. Even so, the primary principle of truth for the parable of the two olive trees in Romans 11:16-24 is a warning unto us Gentiles not to be high-minded or boastful against the spiritually fallen Israelites, but ever to walk in the fear of the Lord our God and Savior. 3. Considering the details of this parable, we find that some of these details are more easily discernible than others. The illustration of the parable presents us with a picture of two olive trees, a good (groomed) olive tree and a wild olive tree. Other details in the illustration of the parable include the root of the good (groomed) olive tree, the branches of the good (groomed) olive tree, and the branches of the wild olive tree. Specifically, the illustration of the parable speaks about some of the natural branches from the good olive tree being cut off, some of the branches from the wild olive tree being grafted into the good olive tree, and the possibility for some of the natural branches that were cut off being grafted back into the good olive tree. So then, what do these details represent? It seems clear that the natural branches of the good olive tree represent the Israelites as a people, and that the branches of the wild olive tree represent the Gentiles as a people. Furthermore, It seems clear that those natural branches of the good olive tree which are cut off represent Israelites who do not receive God’s righteousness (justification and salvation) through faith in Christ, and that those wild branches which are grafted into the good olive tree represent Gentiles who do receive God’s righteousness through faith in Christ. Finally, it seems clear that the natural branches of the good olive which were cut off, but might be grafted in again, represent Israelites who might yet receive God’s righteousness through faith in Christ. Yet there is one detail in the parable that is more difficult to discern. What does the root (and trunk) of the good olive tree represent? In the immediate context itself, we do not find a specific definition for this representation. Yet understanding this representation is significant for your question, because it is out of this root (and trunk) that the natural branches grow, because it from this root (and trunk) that the natural branches are cut off, because it is into this root (and trunk) that the wild branches might be grafted, because it is from this root (and trunk) that the grafted branches might possibly be cut off, and because it is into this root (and trunk) that the natural branches which have been cut off might be grafted again. However, the passage does provide us with some information concerning this root (and trunk) of the good olive tree. It is holy in character. (See Romans 11:16) It bears the branches; the branches do not bear it. (See Romans 11:18) It provides “fatness” to the branches. (See Romans 11:17) It is naturally the root of the Israelites as a people, naturally possessed by them as such. (See Romans 11:24) It is not naturally the root of the Gentiles as a people, but only graciously possessed by them as such. (See Romans 11:22, 24) Some might define this root as eternal salvation and/or eternal life. Yet to me these things appear to be “fatness” blessings, rather than the foundational root itself. In addition, although these blessings were certainly available to every Israelite throughout the time of the Old Testament, it does not appear to me that they were naturally the possession of all Israelites as a people. Some might define this root as the Lord Jesus Christ. Certainly, I would acknowledge that Christ is the foundational root (see John 15:1-6) for all believers. Yet I still question whether Christ Himself was naturally the root possession of all Israelites as a people. For my own case, I believe it best to view this root as representing something that was a root possession of all Israelites as a people throughout the time of the Old Testament. Remaining within the context of the epistle to the Romans itself, and even within the context of Romans 9-11, I find an answer in Romans 9:4, wherein we learn that unto the Israelites “pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises. From this I learn that the covenants of promise (see also Ephesians 2:12) are a foundational root for the Israelites as the people of God and that those covenants of promise are naturally a root possession of all Israelites throughout the time of the Old Testament. Certainly, in this time of New Testament, we Gentiles may take some part in these covenants of promise. However, we take part therein, not by natural possession as do the Israelites, but by gracious possession. In addition, because of their unbelief and rejection toward the Lord Jesus Christ, the majority of Israelites have indeed been cut off for a time from these covenants of promise, and shall continue to be “until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.” (See Romans 11:25) So then, how does this relate unto your question? 1. The covenants of promise are the foundational root for the Israelites as a people, which is their root possession naturally. 2. Because of their unbelief in and rejection of Christ, the Israelites as a people have spiritually fallen and been cut off from their own covenants of promise. 3. Through faith in Christ, we Gentiles may be grafted into the Israelites’ covenants of promise, such that we may somewhat experience the “fatness” of those covenants. 4. Through rebellion against God, we Gentiles may also be cut off from some of the “fatness” and privileges of the covenants of promise into which we have been grafted. 5. Through faith in Christ, individual Israelites may be grafted back into the covenants of promise from which they have been cut off. 6. At the Second Coming of Christ, the Israelites as a people will be restored unto the fullness and “fatness” of their covenants of promise.
  5. Pastor Scott Markle

    How to sharpen an axe

    The illustration of a "face like flint" does not communicate the idea of sharpness, but the idea of hardness. Ezekiel 3:9 -- "As an adamant harder than flint have made thy forehead: fear them not, neither be dismayed at their looks, though they be a rebellious house." Furthermore, in the cases of Isaiah 50:7 and Ezekiel 3:9, the other individuals were NOT in the relationship of friends. Isaiah 50:6-9 -- "I gave my back to the smiters, and my cheeks to them that plucked off the hair: I hid not my face from shame and spitting. For the Lord GOD will help me; therefore shall I not be confounded: therefore have I set my face like a flint, and I know that I shall not be ashamed. He is near that justifieth me; who will contend with me? Let us stand together: who is mine adversary? Let him come near to me. Behold, the Lord GOD will help me; who is he that shall condemn me? Lo, they all shall wax old as a garment; the moth shall eat them up." In the case of Isaiah 50:6-9, the "audience" is presented as smiters, contenders, adversaries, condemners, not in any fashion as friends. Ezekiel 3:7-9 -- "But the house of Israel will not hearken unto thee; for they will not hearken unto me: for all the house of Israel are impudent and hardhearted. Behold, I have made thy face strong against their faces, and thy forehead strong against their foreheads. As an adamant harder than flint have I made thy forehead: fear them not, neither be dismayed at their looks, though they be a rebellious house." In the case of Ezekiel 3:7-9, the "audience" is presented as those who will not listen unto God's Word, impudent, hardhearted, rebellious, not in any fashion as friends. Therefore, I would contend that there is no relationship between the principle of Proverbs 27:17 and the above passages.
  6. Pastor Scott Markle

    How to sharpen an axe

    The Book of the Proverbs, wherein our verse is found, employs the word "countenance" in the following manner: Proverbs 15:13 -- "A merry heart maketh a cheerful countenance: but by sorrow of the heart the spirit is broken." Proverbs 16:15 -- "In the light of the king’s countenance is life; and his favour is as a cloud of the latter rain." Proverbs 25:23 -- "The north wind driveth away rain: so doth an angry countenance a backbiting tongue." Proverbs 27:17 -- "Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend." In each of these cases, attitude appears to be the intention of the word, not doctrinal positioning.
  7. Pastor Scott Markle

    How to sharpen an axe

    Sister Ronda, I appreciate the righteous humility in your above posting, and do grant forgiveness unto you for any sinful offense that you committed against me in our past engagements. I also desire to pursue righteous reconciliation in our future relationship upon the forum as our Lord will permit.
  8. Pastor Scott Markle

    How to sharpen an axe

    Brother Donald, I do not express dispute necessarily with your understanding concerning how iron sharpens iron. However, I do wish to express somewhat of a dispute with your application for the Biblical application of that illustration -- "So a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend." Above your application appears primarily to be about engaging with doctrinal OPPONENTS, such that a man might be doctrinally sharpened by engaging with his doctrinal OPPONENTS. However, the verse itself does NOT indicate any such thing. First, the verse does not speak about sharpening one's doctrine, but about sharpening one's COUNTENANCE (a figure of speech that represents the spirit of one's ATTITUDE). Second, the verse does not speak about being sharpened by one's OPPONENT, but about sharpening the countenance of one's FRIEND. As such, if the relationship of Biblical friendship does not actually exist between two individuals, then the principle of this verse does not actually apply in that case. Furthermore, God's Holy Word does present doctrinal principles concerning the matter of righteous friendship, such that we are to pursue after certain types of individuals as our friends and to separate from certain other types of individuals as our friends. Indeed, I consider certain individuals on this forum as Biblical friends. Even so, it would be possible, according to the principle of Proverbs 27:17, for me to sharpen their countenance and for them to sharpen my countenance. However, in the past I was a member of a forum wherein I was in a doctrinal minority on various significant doctrines. On that forum I had very few actual friends. The rest were simply doctrinal opponents. Although my doctrinal positioning was certainly "sharpened" through my "battles" on that sight, my COUNTENANCE most certainly was NOT sharpened, especially not by my doctrinal opponents.
  9. Pastor Scott Markle

    The Morality Behind Christian Women Wearing Pants

    Brother Wayne, The best answer that I can give is that which I provided earlier to Brother Carl -- If the translators had translated the verse with the word "armor," then many would likely conclude that since men no longer wear armor, the verse has no application for us today. However, by translating the verse with the phrase that they did, they allowed the PRINCIPLE of the verse to be communicated across times and cultures. Furthermore, since the Hebrew word itself does NOT strictly mean "armor," but actually means "that which is manufactured (from natural substances)," they were quite accurate in their translational choice. It is through a diligent Hebrew word study throughout the entire Old Testament that the Bible student is able to discern the Biblical reality that the Hebrew word is never even once used for "that which is made of clothe, clothing," but is used a number of times for the attire of armor and of jewelry.
  10. Pastor Scott Markle

    The Morality Behind Christian Women Wearing Pants

    Indeed, Brother "1Timothy115," Even for myself, who is somewhat driven by personality and ability to study diligently, I find that the battle against true Bible study rages daily; and I must confess that I fail therein all too often, and thereby commit sin against my precious Lord and Savior.
  11. Pastor Scott Markle

    The Morality Behind Christian Women Wearing Pants

    Indeed, I did take notice of both of those matters also. The first of those is really not a moral matter, but an interesting cultural matter in relation to the Egyptian culture. On the second of those, I had to correct my son just the other day on that very point; for he just assumed that an "abomination" offense was equivalent to a stoning judgment.
  12. Pastor Scott Markle

    The Morality Behind Christian Women Wearing Pants

    Sad to say, but that one statement is a GRIEVOUS truth.
  13. Pastor Scott Markle

    The Morality Behind Christian Women Wearing Pants

    Brother Wayne, I mentioned earlier my desire to post a commendation and thanks unto you for a previous posting that you had made. The previous posting for which I commend and thank you is that which I have quoted above. In that posting you pointed out the grammatical distinction between the "abomination unto you" statement in Leviticus 11:10 and the "abomination unto the Lord thy God" statement in Deuteronomy 22:5. Your posting thereof compelled me to do a full Biblical study on all of the "abomination" passages in Scripture. Being an individual who ever presses (hard) the importance of grammatical precision, I found through my study that Leviticus 11 is the only "abomination" passage wherein the grammatical "unto you" reference is made. I found that the other "abomination" passages speak concerning abomination in general or concerning abomination unto the Lord in specific. I myself found this to be instructive. Thus I commend and thank you for posting the above. Furthermore, I believe that sometime in the not too distant future, I shall be preaching a series of message on the "abomination" passages of Scripture. Although you and I have not stood in full agreement concerning the primary discussion of this thread, I still wish to thank you for being used of the Lord unto my edification in this regard.
  14. Pastor Scott Markle

    Does 1 Corinthians 13:8-12 teach the sign gifts have ceased?

    Brother Kurecki, These are certainly valid questions for consideration. Therefore, let us examine the Biblical revelation more thoroughly concerning the purpose for the sign gifts in general and for the gift of tongue-speaking in specific. 1. The gift of tongue speaking should be viewed in the category of sign gifts. Mark 16:17–18 — "And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover." 1 Corinthians 14:22 -- "Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe." 2. The sign gifts are/were intended to confirm the word of the gospel. Mark 16:15 -- "And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature." Mark 16:20 -- "And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen." Hebrews 2:2-4 -- "For if the word spoken by angels was stedfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompence of reward; how shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him; god also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will?" Acts 4:29-30 -- "And now, Lord, behold their threatenings: and grant unto thy servants, that with all boldness they may speak thy word, by stretching forth thine hand to heal; and that signs and wonders may be done by the name of thy holy child Jesus." Acts 6:8 -- "And Stephen, full of faith and power, did great wonders and miracles among the people." Acts 8:5-6 -- "Then Philip went down to the city of Samaria, and preached Christ unto them. And the people with one accord gave heed unto those things which Philip spake, hearing and seeing the miracles which he did." Acts 14:3 -- "Long time therefore abode they speaking boldly in the Lord, which gave testimony unto the word of his grace, and granted signs and wonders to be done by their hands." Romans 15:19-20 -- "Through mighty signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God; so that from Jerusalem, and round about unto Illyricum, I have fully preached the gospel of Christ. Yea, so have I strived to preach the gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build upon another man’s foundation." 3. The sign gifts are/were intended to confirm primarily the preaching and authority of the apostles. 2 Corinthians 12:12 -- "Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds." Acts 2:43 -- "And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles." Acts 5:12 -- "And by the hands of the apostles were many signs and wonders wrought among the people; (and they were all with one accord in Solomon’s porch." Acts 14:3 -- "Long time therefore abode they speaking boldly in the Lord, which gave testimony unto the word of his grace, and granted signs and wonders to be done by their hands." Acts 15:12 -- "Then all the multitude kept silence, and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul, declaring what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them." Acts 19:11-12 -- "And God wrought special miracles by the hands of Paul: so that from his body were brought unto the sick handkerchiefs or aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the evil spirits went out of them." Romans 15:19-20 -- "Through mighty signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God; so that from Jerusalem, and round about unto Illyricum, I have fully preached the gospel of Christ. Yea, so have I strived to preach the gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build upon another man’s foundation." 4. The gift of tongue-speaking was/is intended as a sign unto unbelievers. 1 Corinthians 14:21-22 -- "In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord. Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe." 5. The gift of tongue-speaking was/is intended primarily as a sing unto unbelieving Jews. 1 Corinthians 14:21-22 -- "In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord. Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe." 1 Corinthians 1:22 -- "For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom." 6. The gift of tongue-speaking was intended as a confirmation for the initial giving of the indwelling Holy Spirit. A. Unto the Jews. Acts 2:1-4 -- "And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. vAnd there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance." Acts 2:14-18 -- "But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words: for these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day. But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: and on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy." (Note: NOT every time after this wherein these individual were filled with the Spirit did they speak in tongues, but only on this initial giving of the indwelling Holy Spirit.) B. Unto the Gentiles. Acts 10:44-47 -- "While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter, Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?" Acts 11:15-17 -- "And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning. Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost. Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?" C. Unto the Disciples of John, upon their actual faith in Jesus as the Christ. Acts 19:1-7 -- "And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples, He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost. And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John’s baptism. Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus. When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied. And all the men were about twelve." So then, now we must ask the question -- Does the Biblically revealed purpose for the sign gifts in general and for the gift of tongue-speaking in specific grant the need of its continuing usage for the sake of any and all people groups who have not previously heard the gospel message? In addition, I would add another question for consideration -- Which has more power to draw the hearts of lost sinners unto faith in Christ for eternal salvation, the gospel message itself from God's Word or the working of signs and miraculous wonders?
  15. Pastor Scott Markle

    The Morality Behind Christian Women Wearing Pants

    Brother Wayne, From the word study, it is the only piece of attire that I am able to conclude from Scriptural revelation itself. If there was anything else, I have not yet found any Scriptural indication for it. Now, I would certainly acknowledge that there were probably pieces of attire that communicated KINGSHIP authority (such as a crown or scepter) or that communicated HIGH PRIESTHOOD authority (such as the High Priest's various accessories); but I am not aware that Scripture reveals anything else concerning general MALE authority.
×