The Conduct of False Teachers Part 1

We're going to look at 10 through 12 today, so I'm going to turn to a different slide here that is going to allow me to go scroll down the verses from actually verse 4 that Andrew taught last week down through 12 today. And we're going to be continuing this study next week as we look at the following verses that deal with God's dealing with false prophets, part two.

So verse 4, For if God did not spare the angels his sin, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness to be reserved for judgment, and did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly, and turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes, condemned them to destruction, making them an example to those who afterwards would live ungodly. and delivered righteous Lot who was oppressed by the filthy conduct of the wicked.

For that righteous man dwelling among them tormented his righteous soul from day to day by seeing and hearing their lawless deeds. Then the Lord knows how to deliver the godly out of temptations and to reserve the unjust as a punishment for the day of judgment.

And especially those who walk according to the flesh and the lust of uncleanness and despise authority They are presumptuous, self-willed, and they are not afraid to speak evil of dignitaries, whereas angels, who are greater in power and might, do not bring a reviling accusation against them before the Lord. But these, like natural brute beasts, made to be caught and destroyed, speak evil of the things they do not understand, and they will utterly perish in their own corruption. All right, let's return to the verse of the day. and especially those who walk according to the flesh in the lust of uncleanness and despise authority. They're presumptuous, self-willed, and not afraid to speak evil of dignitaries. So without just turning to verses 4 through 12, which we did today, let's go back and see where this all topic of false prophets originated.

So, let's go down and look at 1 Peter 1.21 and chapter 2 verse 1. For prophecy never came by the will of God, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.

But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them and bring on themselves swift destruction. So here's the introduction of really the second chapter of 2 Peter, the epistle he's written for us today and for them at the time of the New Church Age. So I find it kind of interesting looking back at this, and I taught this weeks ago, but the idea that false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, remember false teachers is used infrequently in scripture, but false prophets is used much more frequently. But the interesting thing that I find here is that ultimately false teachers are what we're exposed to today.

The prophets are no longer, right? The last prophecy has been given. We are no longer being exposed to people who scripturally are called false prophets, but the false teachers are those that are among us today, and that's to whom we speak right now.

Now, verse 10, and who are those who walk according to the flesh and lust of uncleanness and despise authority? Are these members of the body of Christ or not? Question to the class. Mine says especially those who walk after the flesh and despising lordship.

Okay. Well no one else is offering a response to the question so let's look at their characteristics and see if we can decide this together. They lust after uncleanness are presumptuous, self-willed, despise authority, and are not afraid to speak evil of dignitaries. Let's kind of drill down on each of these attributes of these individuals to whom we speak.

Walk here is the Greek term, poromai, which means to proceed along a road of journey. And this is kind of like a road that you're going down that ultimately you know, is headed to a destination and you're seeking an outcome that really is expected based on the road you've chosen. And I'm going to ask the question to the group, is this like our walk in faith?

Different Greek word in Galatians 5.16, so walk in the spirit and you shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh. How do we distinguish these two walks? For the believer, it could possibly be his walk in the flesh would be the world. This is what it produces. Worldly, the first Adam. But when we walk in the spirit, it's the believer seated in heavenlies. Alright, and what's the other option in verse 16? Galatians 5, 16. If we walk in the Spirit, what's the alternative? Fulfilling the lust of the flesh, is it not?

So in a sense, the walk in the Spirit is led by the Spirit, that enables the condition to be consistent with the position we have in the risen Lord Jesus Christ. The term used here in verse 10 of walking is again a different Greek term which really means a journey towards an outcome. So we have the options as believers to walk in the Spirit or not walk in the Spirit and that's by faith and actually inactivated by the Spirit within us. So, we're talking about a path here that is unchanging in terms of these false prophets that we're talking about here in verse 10.

Other thoughts about this? Alright, we've got a quiet group here today. Some are in the sanctuary, I think, Roger, so make sure people can raise their hands and ask a question or ultimately provide us with an answer if they can. Okay, that's good. Okay, authority here. Remember, they're despising authority.

Authority here really relates to the Lord. It's the authority of God Almighty. And this is the so-called Lordship of Christ. Now, I put Lordship of Christ in quotations because Lordship theology is not what we're kind of about in the church these days, I think, in correct interpretation of the Word of God. But nevertheless, the authority here for these unbelievers is anything but the Lord God. So that's, I think, it's the ultimate authority here. It's not just like who your classroom teachers are or who your boss is in the employment kind of atmosphere that we all live in. Okay, any additional thoughts about that?

All right, what does it mean to be presumptuous? This is the only use of this term in the Bible. And is it different from being self-willed? And that's used only one other time in Titus 1-7. Let's discuss the differences or similarities between being presumptuous and being self-willed.

I'm sorry? And while I have the word daring in my translation, daring, the translation is kind of varied. Part of what I notice between the New American Standard and King James. Yeah, this is the new King James version I always use. So it's kind of hard to track some of that. But the first word I have is daring, self-will, and so on. So daring sounds like... Well audacious is what I put in the handout but daring I think is a good translation but describe what someone might act like if they were presumptuous. Assuming something incorrectly. OK, well, it may not be incorrectly, but their attitude is one that they've made a conclusion of something yet that is unclear or we're not certain of.

Would you agree that presumptuous on another time? I think the Broncos are going to win today, for instance. I don't actually. But all that aside, I mean, that that's presumptuous. I don't know. But that's what I say is going to happen. This is Las Vegas played out day in and day out. Anyway, we won't go there. But ultimately, presumptuous, I think, is trying to reach a conclusion without sufficient data.

And self-will, what's self-will? That's pretty self-explanatory, isn't it? I hate to use the same term. So I think they are different terms. I think scripture has them listed as different. attributes of this kind of individual. So they're going to believe something's true when it's not proven to be true. And secondly, it's all self-serving. It's really what they want selfishly in terms of interpretation. All right, let's go ahead. They're not afraid to speak evil. Actually, the Greek term is blasphemy, means blaspheme, which is, you know, we know what that means. That's why Christ was crucified, because he was considered a blaspheme, the religious faith, the Jewish faith of the day.

And these dignitaries, actually, the Greek term is doxa. And these typically are majestic beings or glories, which sometimes refers to angels, that's what Strong would suggest, who are higher in stature, in verse 11, than these false teachers. Now it's interesting, we'll come back to this a little bit, but the use of the term angels in verse 11 is really not the same term as used here. So doxa could also apply to other dignitaries, not simply angels, who are considered to be clearly a higher power than these individuals that we're speaking about here. All right. And again, as alluded to, angels are also mentioned in verses four, which is what Andrew taught last week, and verse 11, which we'll get to in a few minutes. But the term there is angulus, which refers to an envoy or messenger of God.

And we're going to look at Jude 1.8 a little bit later, so we're not going to turn to there right now. But nevertheless, I think we've got to carefully dissect the word of God that relates to the Greek origin of these words. You know, I remember when I was first saved, I was going to a church, a covenant theology kind of atmosphere that ultimately said they don't need the Greek because if we can't read the English and understand the Word of God adequately, why turn to the Greek? Well, in a sense, this is a good example of that, where doxa refers to angels utilizing a different term than angelus, which basically speaks directly to an envoy or messenger of God.

All right. If these false teachers are a particular segment, and by the way, especially of the unsaved, and so let's go back and answer this question. These are unsaved individuals. These are not part of the body of Christ. I mean, we can be deceived internally within the body, but I think the false teachers, as pointed to here, really implies eternal punishment of some degree. So these false teachers are a particular segment, especially of the unsaved, as the verse would say. Remember, we go back to the verse, and especially those who walk according to the flesh and the lust of uncleanness.

All right. So we're going to highlight especially. Does this imply that there are degrees of punishment? What are your thoughts about this? Do the unsaved have different degrees of Earthly punishment, I think there's no question, because the consequences of falling short of God's glory in the day-to-day existence in which we all ensue really is, you know, of different degrees. Consequences of sin are different based on the nature of the sin. But in terms of eternal punishment, this is debated extensively by many commentators in the literature. I'm going to turn to a couple of verses in Hebrews that just makes us reflect on this a little bit different. I tend to interpret this that especially relates to a particular degree of punishment, but I have really not much to back that up, but we could have a class on some topic to really address this more certainly.

Anyone who has rejected Moses's law dies without mercy in the testimony of two or three witnesses. Of how much worse punishment do you suppose will he be, thought worthy, who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace?

Just a thought, something for us to ponder a little bit. This is not of our concern. This is entirely up to the Lord. But nevertheless, it does raise interesting questions. I think as we study the Word of God, don't we often have questions that are not entirely clear? And many of them don't need to be perfectly clear to us, do they? We need to live by the faith that we have based on what God has revealed. So let's go ahead. Any other thoughts here?

Well, these false teachers are preaching to the unsaved that if they give money, they'll get what they want, I guess. Health and wealth ministry that we see all over the place right now. I agree with you, Mike. You really wonder Those are definitely false teachers, you know? Right, but they're also persuading the same, too. That's correct. Yeah. But I think some of that teaching can occur within the body, could it not?

Well, we don't know anyone's heart. It's hard to know sometimes, these false teachers. They're so pervasive within the body. So, I don't know. gold toilet seats and stuff. Alright, well I just think we have to always weigh what someone says against the word of God but again my conclusion of this section of scripture is that really we're talking about people that lived in Noah's time or in Lot's time and other examples of God's judgment on human lack of faith and belief. And false teachers can occur within the body. We certainly need to really carefully consider everything that's being taught. But to a large extent, if not entirely, I think this is really a group of unsaved who have found themselves in the presence of the new church. And Peter is warning us against them.

Second Peter 2.11, whereas angels who are greater in power and might do not bring a reviling accusation against them before the Lord. Now this is really an interesting verse and let's see why as we proceed.

Angels again are a different Greek term other than doxa. Doxa has a broader interpretation where angels really are messengers from God. That's what's used here. And these angels are greater in power, that means in terms of indwelling strength, and might, which is a different Greek term, dunamis.

And the commentators really differ here a lot, but I think these terms seem similar to me. They're greater in power and might. I mean, you know, basically, isn't that a bit redundant? But according to what I've been best able to dissect out of the commentators and looking at the Greek text, is greater power is intrinsic to indwelling strength, which presumably is more applied, but Dunamis' power which is not necessarily manifest. You know, this is pretty redundant in my opinion, but the Lord has it there for a reason in the early, you know, Greek interpretations may have been much clearer to those who spoke the Greek language. Other thoughts about this?

Power and might. Well, it says, who are greater in might and power do not bring against them before the Lord an injurious charge. So, it's the angels not judging, but rather we'll judge them, you know, someday. But they're looking in to see this great grace that's happening, possibly.

Alright, but I think we'll get to the second part of this first, wherein they're not bringing a reviling accusation against them before the Lord, meaning against these teachers or prophets. But the distinction between power and might here is a subtle one, I think, and we don't really need to be an additional reductionist in terms of understanding the differences in these terms. It just shows that these angels are above those to whom they are judging in terms of their behavior. So here we are, Mike, they don't bring, which is present active indicative, that means at the time, a reviling or blasphemous accusation against them before the Lord. So we're going to build on this a little bit. I think these angels clearly recognize the authority of the Godhead because they're sent by God, okay? So that's a fact. And it's also factual that they don't bring an accusation against these false teachers and false prophets.

Jude 1.8, likewise, also these dreamers who have visions contrary to the reality, this is kind of a subtle interpretation of dreamers, defile the flesh, reject authority, and speak evil of dignitaries. And we'll come back to this a little bit. You know, Macaulay teaches both 2 Peter this section of 2 Peter 2 with Jude, and I think there's a lot of reasons for that, and I'm going to kind of make some additional comments of that in the near future. But anyway, this verse is very, very repetitive and similar to what verse 11 is in 2 Peter 2.

Hey, honey, could this be talking about angels who are the fallen angels? I mean, why wouldn't the angels be accusing these people before the Lord if in fact they were, you know, still on the Lord's side? I don't understand why the angels would not be bringing accusation.

Well, you need to wait. We're going to get to this. Oh, okay. And moreover, remember the term Angelos is determined to be a messenger sent from God. These are not fallen angels. These are angels that are about us even today, which I don't think we understand very well, but nevertheless, these are God's messengers.

So, what is the reality to which Jude is speaking? Well, I think he's thinking about, you know, this whole concept of who's going to rebuke these false prophets? If the angels are not there to take it to the Lord, who in fact is in control? And in verse 9 in Jude it says, Yet Michael the archangel, and contending with the devil, when he disputed about the body of Moses, dared not bring against him a reviling accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke you. Now we're going to get to the application of this to us today in a minute, but the idea here is ultimately that the Lord himself knows all and is in a position to ultimately cast appropriate judgment for this type of behavior.

Thoughts, anyone? So, does this go back to what you were talking about before about different kinds of punishment? Well, it could refer back to that, yes. I mean, again, eternal punishment in terms of degrees of that punishment for the unsaved you know, is up to the Lord. I don't know that we can make a strong statement on that. Maybe others in the class can. I sense there may be degrees of punishment, but yet, again, this is controversial, and I don't know that we have an answer to that, but it could relate to this for sure.

So, the question for the class is, if these angels don't take the messages of the false prophets before the Lord, but depend only on the Lord, is criticism or anger for us ever appropriate? Well, we're going to try to answer this, and let's go through this stepwise to follow. Jameson, Fawcett, and Brown feel that if superior angels dare not, as being in the presence of God the judge, speak evil even of the bad angels, again the fallen angels, how awful the presumption of those who speak evil blasphemously of good dignities or dignitaries. We'll leave that statement, maybe return to it in a second.

I'm going to go to scripture here a little bit to maybe try to see if this helps a little bit. 1 Corinthians 4, 4 and 5, For I know of nothing against myself, yet I am not justified by this, but he who judges me is the Lord. Therefore, judge nothing before the time until the Lord comes, who will both bring to light the hidden things of darkness and reveal the counsels of the heart. then each one's praise will come from God. And another section of Scripture, 2 Thessalonians 1, 6 and 7, since it is a righteous thing with God to repay with tribulation those who trouble you and to give you who are troubled rest with us when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels. And of course that goes on to really, you know, further that continual theme of 2 Thessalonians.

So back to the question. So if these angels don't take the messages of false prophets before the Lord, but depend only on the Lord, is criticism or anger on our part ever appropriate? What are your thoughts about that? Well, let's turn to someone who has thought a lot about this. And I listened to Macaulay yesterday in preparation for this. Macaulay says yes.

But is our criticism based on our position? And his example here is that, you know, Many of us have been parents and have raised children, and we've seen other parents' children behave. Ultimately, the position we have to be constructively critical of our children's behavior is up to us as parents. Our position as parents is appropriate to ultimately be concerned or be righteously angry or criticize our children in a constructive manner rather than someone else's.

So what Macaulay points out, and I'm paraphrasing this and kind of summarizing what he said, the issue is the fact, not the individual. And it relates to the circumstances we find ourselves in. I mean, to think that we just are a bunch of robots down here and say, well, God's going to take care of this one day, I think is a bit short-sighted in terms of our day-to-day existence. So, and I'm going to say in conclusion, isn't this difficult for us? Wouldn't you say if we judge ourselves, we wouldn't be judged with the world?

Well, that's scriptural. But, you know, the judgment of ourselves comes from the leading of the Holy Spirit, does it not, Mike? Yeah. I'm coming to know that. Correct. And also what our position is, if we're looking at things through another set of glasses, because our position really should determine how we're viewing other things.

And if we understand the grace that we've been given, I guess a lot of times we need to have a little grace. Well, we have a lot of grace all the time. It's not spoon-fed, it's infinite. But we need to have grace when we look at others as well. Well, that's true.

But that doesn't mean we don't stand on the principles of doctrine that the Lord has given us. I mean, there is right and wrong, and we realize that each one of us needs to view ourselves as the greatest among sinners, as Paul did. So ultimately, there's an understanding of where the world system is at and how they behave. That doesn't mean we are not concerned about that, but the issue is what's true and what's not true, but the ultimate judgment will be in the Lord's hands.

Not simple at times, but certainly I think what scripture would reveal. Maybe we're going a little too far in terms of applying this and how it relates to the angel's position, but clearly these righteous angels really did not pass judgment, but left it to the Lord to follow. So, anyway.

Alright, let's go to the third verse for this morning, and that's 2 Peter 2.12. But these, like natural brute beasts, made to be caught and destroyed, speak evil of the things they do not understand, and will utterly perish in their own corruption. Again, These are strong terms and really, I think, cement the concept that these are clearly unsaved individuals.

But, what's the but there for? Well, it's in contrast to the angels, those who are messengers of God. But these, unlike the angels, like natural brute beasts, etc., or even you could say but, like us, who are part of the body of Christ. Why the analogy to brute?

And by the way, the Greek term is a Logos. You know, Logos, we think of many interpretations. It's the written word, it's the living word, and it's the printed word. I mean, but scripturally, we look at Logos as identifying with the truth of the Lord Jesus Christ and everything that's revealed by him and in scripture. But here, Elok Logos is destitute to reason, meaning unaccepting of anything that's reasonable, which would be God-based reason, based on scripture.

Beasts made to be caught and destroyed. Like animals, these individuals are governed by nature with no sense of the moral aspects of life. Let's think about that a little bit. Mind says, but these as natural animals without reason. So, they can't reason. Like animals, they don't have a spirit, just a soulical existence. Yeah, Mike, I think it's important to conclude that these are not our words. These are the words of Peter as he was scribing this second epistle to the body. So he's equating this behavior and these individuals to animals.

And in a sense, what's missing in the world increasingly as we live in it here today? And I think I've tried to reflect that some in this verse. It's the lack of sense of the moral aspects of life. I mean, we're hearing this preached from Mike and Roger in the main service about, I mean, most recently fornication and ultimately, you know, those kinds of issues. I think we're going to hear more about this today.

But, you know, like animals, to think that these people are equated scripturally like animals and governed by just no moral aspects of life, and that relates to a lot of different types of behavior, not simply the teaching. Boy, that's really a strong, strong statement, isn't it? Now we, as walking in human flesh, cannot really view our unsaved individuals who are preaching worldly truths as animals.

I mean, nevertheless, This is scripture, and I think the analogy here can't be denied in terms of how strongly the Lord feels about false teaching, particularly when it relates to the body being exposed. Psalm 4920, man that is in honor and understands not is like the beasts that perish. It's kind of fun at times to see how Old Testament scripture just kind of gets re-enumerated in the New Testament.

I think this is a perfect example of Psalm 49.20 in relationship to this 1 and 2 Peter.

And they speak evil of the things they do not understand. Can somebody give me a couple of worldly examples of this? It's actually too many to enumerate, actually. I see people talking constantly about things they don't understand. It seems like, I mean, that's what I see today. It's incredible. I know we can talk about, I mean, how about the pandemic? There are more experts on the pandemic than there are on solutions. I mean, everybody's an expert. That's just one opinion.

Well, Roger, don't you think that this also relates to the truth of the Word of God? And they speak evil of that. I mean, how often have we, as an unbeliever before age 30, where the Lord's great grace prevailed on me as I needed needed to be saved. I mean, I used to say people pick the verse out of the Bible to make any case they wanted to make, right? Isn't that kind of saying the Bible's worthless? Because, look, if I take this verse, I can, you know, cast, you know, someone into the fire, or fire your flames, or I don't know, you know, I'm just throwing that out. I didn't think through this carefully in terms of how people speak evil of Scripture. But, in fact, blaspheming the Lord reflects the inadequate use of Scripture by the unsaved.

But just think of the moral tone. Think of abortion. And as believers, do we ever fall into this trap? And I think sometimes we do that. You know, in terms of the facts of the world, we need to, I think, be careful there in terms of knowing enough to make a statement. We can't support everything we believe in, and that's a bit of this, you know, pretentiousness or, you know, ultimately this audacious behavior. But this is not what we're talking about here, the believer who falls short occasionally in terms of not interpreting.

We all do that, fall a little short of scriptural truth. But nevertheless, we're talking about people who continue to profess things that are not of the Word of God. But it says here that they're going to utterly perish in their own corruption. So this is kind of an intended act on the part of the false prophets and false teachers. Now, Vincent says, shall in their destroying surely be destroyed. I think that's a nice paraphrase of this verse.

And Jude, by the way, and here's the point I want to make a little bit earlier. Jude, the epistle written by Jude was written in about 75 AD. Whereas this epistle on 2 Peter is somewhere between 65 and 68, and that's the sources that I was able to gather here. So was Jude actually copying what Peter had already written, or were these guys hanging out together?

I don't know. But that's what Macaulay just said, I teach this chapter with Jude just for the purpose because there's so much redundancy. about this, and that must make it very, very important to the Lord and to the church here today. So, think about that a little bit. I find that kind of interesting.

Jude 1.10. Look at this verse. But these speak evil of whatever they do not know, and whatever they know naturally, like brute beasts, in these things they corrupt themselves. I mean, isn't that the same verse in a slightly different grammatical sense? Anyway.

So let's conclude now, and I'm going to conclude with a statement by F.B. Meyer, somebody I don't read much, but I turned to this here, and I thought it was fairly accurate. I quote him, many instances are quoted from the past to prove the fearful judgments which must overtake such false teachers. The angels who placed their self-will in antagonism to their maker were cast down to Tartarus, a Greek word used only here in the New Testament. The people who lived previous to the flood and they who afterward at Sodom disregarded the laws of purity and self-restraint, dictated alike by nature and conscience, were overwhelmed in destruction. But even amid such judgments, all these actually Andrew talked about last week, God discriminates his Noah's and his Lot's, preserves and delivers them, and numbers them among his jewels.

Malachi 3.17 is an example. God has his eye on you and me, by the way, and will succor you. So despite all the false teaching we're exposed to, the great grace and by our response by faith, we carry on trusting him to know what's happening and ultimately the ultimate outcome.

Any closing thoughts before we close today? All right, Roger, would you close in prayer for us, please? Heavenly Father, we thank you for our time today, Lord. We thank you for the blessings we have in our Savior. We thank you for the truth. And we pray that we can stay close to you and to your word, Father. And we pray that you will be done in our lives and in our bodies. In the holy name of Christ, amen. Amen. Amen. Amen.