Sermon Tone Analysis

*The Testimony of the Apostles*

/2nd Peter 1:16-18/

               

 

September 16, 2007

Sun Oak Baptist Church

 

 

*Introduction*

 

          A.

Please turn with me in your Bibles to 2nd Peter 1:16-18.

I also encourage you to take out your sermon notes.

B.

This morning we’re going to be dealing with verses 16-18 and in order to help us unpack and apply the truths in these verses I want us to pretend that our church is a kind of courtroom.

Peter and the other apostles are on this side of the room and on this side of the room are false teachers and scoffers.

Look at verse 16.  *Read 1:16-18.*

The “we” here refers to Peter and the other apostles and notice their testimony:  they claim to be eyewitnesses of Jesus Christ.

That’s the testimony on this side of the room.

Now flip over to 3:3.

On one side we have Peter and the other apostles and now on this side we have scoffers questioning the apostles’ doctrine – what they are teaching about the Second Coming.

*Read 3:3-4.*

Now flip back to 1:16.

In verse 16 Peter is referring to Christ’s Second Coming and this morning we will be examining the apostles’ defense of this doctrine – and by extension, everything else they teach.

After all – if they’re wrong about the Second Coming then why trust anything else they taught?

C.

Verses 12-15 tell us Peter intends this letter to serve as a reminder of certain things and we’ve seen these things are three (3) critically important matters in the Christian life:  first, in verses 1-11 the reminder is to be certain we are truly saved; in chapter 2 it’s being certain false teachers will be in the church – *read 2:1*; and finally, chapter three (3) is a reminder to be certain that Jesus is coming again.

So verses 16-21 sit right between the reason Peter gives for writing this letter and what he has to say about the threat of false teachers.

So these verses are transitional, and not only are they a defense of the doctrine of the Second Coming, they also prepare us for what Peter has to say about false teachers in chapter two (2).

One commentator I studied called verses 16-18 “Peter’s apologetic” – his defense, because in effect, what he does in verses 16-21 is stand in the witness box with his left hand on the Bible and with his right hand raised and swears to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth so help him God.

So want I’m going to do is put verses 16-21 in their context so we can settle in our minds what Peter is saying here and also see how these verses all fit together.

*Read 1:10-2:2 and pray.*

D.

In verses 16-21 Peter testifies about the authority, the basis, or the grounds for which we can trust what he and the other apostles taught about the Second Coming of Christ – they establish the integrity and validity of the doctrine of the Second Coming.

1.

Peter stands on this side of the courtroom and says we can be certain of Christ’s Second Coming – but on the other side of the room there are scoffers in the churches Peter was writing to that were asking:  “where’s the promise of His coming?

OK Peter – you’ve taught us about the Second Coming but what guarantee do we have that what you are saying is true?

We have believed what you and the other apostles have said; we have accepted it; some of us have even suffered for that belief – but how can we know for certain that these things are really true?”

 

                   2.       Verses 16-21 are a divinely inspired defense that succinctly answers questions like these and the foundation for Peter’s defense is the question of authority – authority.

Peter is ultimately answering the question:  as a Christian, why do we believe what we believe?

3.

Now think about this for a moment.

If we were on Peter’s side of the room how would we answer the scoffers on this side of the room?

If they were to ask:  why do you believe what you believe?

On what grounds do you believe it?

On what grounds, on what basis, do you or any other Christian share the Gospel with unbelievers?

E.

Now hold that thought for a second:  Christianity claims to have a unique message.

It tells the world that the Gospel is the only true solution to man’s problems, and that this solution is that God has done something once and for all in the Person of Jesus Christ.

But a fair question that an unbeliever could ask is this:  “On what authority do you make this kind of claim?”

Are we ready with an answer to a question like this?

 

                    1.

In verses 16-21 Peter gives us an answer and in fact, he gives us two (2) of them:  in verses 16-18 he tells us that we can be certain of what we believe because of the integrity and validity of the testimony of the apostles, and second, in verses 19-21, he tells us that we can be certain of what we believe because of the integrity and validity of Scripture.

2.

All we’ll have time for this morning is verses 16-18.

How does Peter present his case?

* *

* *

*I.

First of all, he establishes what the testimony of the apostles /isn’t./*

See 1:16a.

Now I know this isn’t the best grammar, but this is where Peter begins presenting his case:  he begins by telling us what the testimony of the apostles isn’t.

*Read 1:16a.*

A.

The “we” here refers to Peter and the other apostles and notice they did not, did not, base the doctrine of the Second Coming on cunningly devised fables.

1.

The word “fables” here is very significant to Peter’s case.

It’s found five (5) times in the NT and refers to a “myth or an inventive story” like Aesop’s Fables or The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.

By the time Jesus came on the scene in the 1st century Jewish people had developed a tendency to embrace fables and stories about God and even had elevated them to the same level of authority as God’s Word.

And this bent was fueled and influenced by the Greeks because they also embraced myths and fables about various “gods” (little “g”) that had assumed human form and had all kinds of strange and wonderful experiences.

So by the time Jesus came on the scene and, at the time Peter was writing his letter, many fables in the Jewish culture had the same level of authority as the Word of God.

 

                              a.

Now understand this tendency is not new – we see it today.

We constantly hear about all kinds of “fables and stories” regarding Jesus Christ.

For example, there are apocryphal gospels which are stories that claim to record extra-biblical details of the life and doings of Jesus Christ.

There’s The Gospel of Thomas; The Gospel of Judas; there’s an ancient scroll that claims Jesus went to India when He was a teenager – and we could go on and on with examples of extra-Biblical stories, or fables, like these and people actually believe them and put them on the same level of authority as the Bible.

b.

And here’s the significance of the word “fable” here:  the majority of the believers Peter was writing to were Jewish Christians and would have been influenced by pagan, Jewish and Christian fables that would have raised doubts in their minds about the validity of Peter’s words.

They would have been susceptible to questions posed by scoffers and false teachers.

They might even have been saying something like:  “Peter:  how can we know that what you are saying to us about Christ’s Second Coming is not also a cunningly devised fable like all the others that we hear?” 

 

                   2.       Now let’s apply this:  if someone were to ask us why we believe what we believe about the Gospel how would we answer them?

Some people’s answer might be that the reason they believe the Gospel is because it is based on wonderful and noble teaching.

Maybe you’ve met a Christian that has said something like this:  “I’ve read other ideas; I’ve studied other religions – and I haven’t come across anything as wonderful and exalted as the Christian message.

Look at the kind of ethic that it calls people to.

No other religion I have ever studied had anything more wonderful to say about love than I found in 1st Cor.

13” – and we can go on and on.

3.

But exalted teaching in the form of fables isn’t Peter’s testimony; it isn’t the basis of any other apostles’ line of argument; and it isn’t the argument of the NT and for good reason:  if we base our confidence in the Gospel solely on the nature of its teaching and turn it into a “fable” by glorifying the teaching itself, then we’re left in a position where we can’t argue against people that believe other forms of teaching.

Christianity doesn’t have a corner on the market when it comes to good teaching.

Millions of people regard Buddhism as having certain aspects of high and noble teaching.

Millions of Muslims say the same thing about Islam with its strict morality, certain elements of high ethics, and the challenge to live a disciplined life.

4.

So when it comes to answering the scoffers on this side of the room, when it comes to answering the question of “why we believe what we believe” the validity and authenticity of the apostles’ testimony is not based on cunningly devised fables.

B.

And secondly, when it comes to what the testimony of the apostles isn’t, notice that they don’t base their testimony on experiences.

1.       Look at verses 16-18 – notice Peter doesn’t say:  “I was once a fisherman, a man who lived a sinful life.

But since I’ve become a Christian I’ve had some amazing experiences.”

His testimony regarding the doctrine of the Second Coming isn’t based on experiences he’s had.

2.       Now let’s apply this one:  if we base the certainty with which we believe in the Gospel on something as subjective as “experiences” what would we to say to the cults?

The primary validation for believing the false doctrine of one of the fastest growing cults in the America is a “burning in the bosom” experience.

They say:  “read this book (not the Bible by the way) and pray that the Holy Spirit will reveal to you whether or not what the book teaches is true and the Spirit will give you a burning in your chest that will validate the truth of what this book teaches.”

Never mind that not one single historical claim made in the book is verifiable.

Pentecostal and Charismatic Christians base the integrity, reality and validity of speaking in unknown tongues on the experience – even though that experience is in direct and clear violation of clear Biblical teaching against the validity of that experience.

Think of it this way:  experience, in and of itself, is just another “fable.”

3.       Cults, psychology, yoga, transcendental meditation, and other philosophies can give people very definite experiences – they can turn drunkards into sober people; dishonest people into honest people; and so on.

So let me encourage us this morning – don’t hug a tree instead hug this:  if we base what we believe on experience what would be the difference between Christianity, the cults, or philosophies of life that claim to have THE solution to life’s problems?

C.

So first of all, Peter doesn’t answer the sneering scoffers on this side of the room with fables exalting the lofty nature of Christian teaching; he doesn’t answer them with stories about his experiences; or any other cunningly devised fables.

And by the way:  this approach also isn’t found in Paul’s writings or in John’s writings.

*II.

Next, Peter establishes what the testimony of the apostles /is./*

See 1:16b-18.

How does Peter present his case?

First he testifies to what the testimony of the apostles isn’t – now he tells us what it is.