[TruthTalk] Indicatives and Imparatives

[Wm. Taylor]

Now that we're back on the narrow a little, I was wondering if any of you read this and if you had taken the challenge. How's it going how are the imperatives lining up with the indicatives.   ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Sunday, March 28, 2004 1:11 PM Subject: Indicatives and Imparatives Terry set out a challenge for us to take into our considerations over the next week. It was a good challenge; the kind that is already bearing fruit as we read of God's splendor in people's lives. I will be taking his challenge with me this week.   I read this discussion between jt and js (see below, waaay below), and my heart becomes heavy. Rather than saying why that is at this time, I would like to put forth another challenge for the week ahead. In our quiet time, when we're just reading the Bible because we love God's word, why don't we pay attention to the relationship between the indicatives of grace and how they stand in comparison to the imperatives of obedience? There's much to be learned here and appreciated if we will but try to do it.      If you are unfamiliar with my terms, please allow me to explain them a little further. Indicatives are verbs that indicate the status of relationship between the subject and the object of a sentence. Indicatives do not expect or request things of the object; they simply indicate and declare; e.g., in Jesus' prayer of John 17, look at the nature of the subject-object relationships in verse 19 -- "For their sakes I sanctify myself that they also might be sanctified through truth." Jesus is the subject throughout this statement. The verb "sanctify" is indicative. Jesus sanctifies himself that the objects of his act, the their and theys, might also be sanctified through truth. The verb indicates his heart for them; it indicates his desire for them; it indicates his intention for them; it indicates his willingness to suffer on their behalf, it indicates how he loves them, all very relational stuff. The "indicatives of grace" are those verbs that indicate the status of our relationship with the Father, through the Son, in the Holy Spirit. What is the status of that relationship? That is the question.   Imperatives, on the other hand, are verbs which do make requests and carry expectations. Often times in statements where the verb is an imperative, the speaker, the one making the request, is not explicitly identified in the statement itself. We have to look for the speaker elsewhere in the context of the passage to determine his identity. By nature then imperatives are less relational than indicatives in terms of closeness between the subject and objects involved. This is not to say that imperatives are non-relational verbs -- quite the opposite. It simply means that the subject-object relationship of imperatives is dependent upon the closeness supplied by the indicatives of their relationship. In other words, relational proximity is established by indicatives and not imperatives. Let me say this differently.   Let's look at Matthew 28.18-20; there's all kind of indicatives and imperatives in this passage. Let's look at how they relate. When Jesus says, "... Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, ..." the words "go" and "make" are imperatives. They are commands. The subject of this statement itself is "you." You go and you make disciples. Now, the question is, is Jesus heaping the whole weight of disciple making upon the backs of his disciples? This statement, by itself (and without support from a greater context!), sounds as though he is. It doesn't sound like he is close to them; it sounds like he's abandoning them! Is that the case? No! Of course not But we can only know that if we go looking for the proximity of the speaker, the first subject of the statement, in relationship to the recipients of his command (This is so important, because sometimes the indicatives of the Speaker-recipient relationship are several verses removed from the imperatives of his request, sometimes they even show up after the imperatives have been stated. BECAUSE sometimes the commandments will make us feel very isolated and over weighted, AND SO we need know how to find something to indicate the nature of our relationship to the speaker).   Where is Jesus going to be while his disciples are making disciples? What is his role in all of this? Where is he speaking from? To answer those questions we have to look for something which indicates the status of Jesus' relationship to his disciples. In this instance we do not have to look very far: "And Jesus came and spoke unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. ... and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." The verbs "came" and "spoke" are indicatives. The verb "is given" is indicative. The verb "am," in I am with you always, is indicative. What is the relational status between Jesus and his disciples in the commandment to "go" and "make"? It is very close and tight, Jesus empowering his disciples. We know this because of the indicatives supplied by the greater context. Disciples go and make new disciples through his authority and power, baptizing them in his name (the name of our God) and teaching them to obey, and we do this knowing that he is close and that he is with us always. Oh those wonderful indicatives of Grace!   The challenge for us is to search out those indicatives of grace every time we come across an imperative of obedience. Where is the speaker? Who is the speaker, really? What do His indicatives indicate about the status of our relationship with Him? What does being obedient to what he commands indicate about our relationship to Him?   I think if we will take this challenge and place it alongside Terry's, we'll find that we have all kinds of things to be thankful for, and we won't be bored or running out of things to do -- everything to the glory of this wonderful Savior.   Thanks,     Bill Taylor ----- Original Message ----- From: Judy Taylor To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, March 28, 2004 4:27 AM Subject: [TruthTalk] Walking after the Spirit From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] judyt writes:   Do you understand the new covenant promise in Jeremiah 31:34 (and other places) that becomes activated by faith in Christ? john: No.   What "activated" the New Covenant was the blood of Christ.     jt: Are you saying that the blood of Christ is like an amulet or magic and that the God who said "I am the Lord I change not" has changed his mind about sin?   john: Perhaps you should read Jeremiah 31:31-34.   The New is totally different from the Old.   Sins will not be a part of God's consideration.  God will be known in a personal and individual way, not through the art form of preaching.   jt: I read it just yesterday and it said the same as it always has.  The New is different in that it is of the Spirit and sin is still just as big a part of God's consideration as it ever was. Note who is outside the gate in Rev 22:15.   john: Preaching can only tell you ABOUT God.  With he new covenant, God is experiencially known.   jt: Preaching is what God has chosen to reveal himself. Empowered by the anointing of His Spirit people should be convicted of sin and aware of their separation from God and their own personal need for a Redeemer. Lots of ppl are under the illusion that they know God. M. Scott Peck is one.   john: The law will become an inward passion (faith) as opposed to the Old and overt system of commands. That is what this Jeremiah passasges says.  This passage is absolutely the most important Old Covenant scripture regarding the New Covenant.  We should all read it, memorize it, and study the new scriptures in the context of this passage.  The following is quoted from the New Living Bible, a translation of the Billy Graham people (and others).      " The day will come, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and Judah.  This covenant will not be like the one I made wih their ancestors when I took them by the hand and brought them out of the land of Egypt.   They broke that covenant, though I loved them as a husband loves his wife, says the Lord. But this is the new covenant I will make with the people of Israel on that day, says the Lord.   I will put my laws in their minds, and I will write them on their hearts.   I will be their God and they will be my people   And they will not need to teach their neighbors, nor will they need to each their family saying  "You should know the Lord,"  for everyone, from he least to the greatest, will already know me, says the Lord.  And I will forgive their wickedness and will never again remember their sins.   jt: We need to remember that this is a paraphrase rather than a literal translation and the prophet is not saying here that God overlooks or is blind to sin.   john: How in the world do you explain "salvation by faith apart from works?" I asked this question in the previous email.    You did not deal with it at all.      jt: You asked me not to reference James so I didn't; he wrote that faith aside from corresponding actions is dead.  If there is spiritual life in a person the fruit of it will be obvious in their life. I don't believe one can be right with God through brownie points, neither do I believe a carnal fleshly person who just talks a good game will get into His presence. john: And why is it necessary for God to continue accepting our faith IN THE PLACE OF righteousness?    jt: It's not "in the place of" If it is the God kind of faith it is "reckoned" as righteousness because then there are the God kind of fruit in the life.   ATST it is still true that the soul that sinneth shall die so we must continue to deal with sin. The biblical reference is Romans 4:5:  But to one who without works trusts him who justifies the ungodly, such faith is reckoned as righteousness.   (Nestle/Aland  English translation).  Another question you decided to ignore.     jt: I didn't ignore anything Romans 4 is not the start of a new doctrine John.  Read Vs.19-22. Abraham who was 100yrs old and Sarah 90, didn't consider his own body or stagger in unbelief at the promise of God but was strong in faith giving God glory and was fully persuaded that what God had promised he was able to perform; and therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness. I wrote: You must be reading the non-inspired version (NIV); the second part of that verse is also important. "there is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." john: Here, you completely misuse the reference.     jt: How? All I did was quote it.   john: But, first, your characterization of the NIV  --  actually you are right.    It is uninspired as are all the other translation.   Back Romans 8:1.   Lets start with "therefore" shall we?   That word means "in view of what I have just said."   And what was that  --  that we are involved in a war between good and evil.      For a Christian, we serve the law of sin in our flesh and the law of God (faith) in our minds  (Ro 7:25).  All of this is present tense.      jt: Yes...   john: Verse 25 is a problem, because death is the deserved consequence, so Paul solves the problem in 8:1 by saying "there is no problem (condemnation),"    but this promise is offered to those who walk in the spirit, as you so aptly point out.       And what is walking in the spirit?  Your teaching would have us believe that "walking in the spirit" is a contradiction to the words of 7:25  --  that it is doing the right thing.   jt: Not my teaching - the teaching of scripture says it. What is the fruit in our lives?  for the carnal and fleshly it will be the fruit of the flesh Gal 5:19; when we walk after the Spirit and do not fulfill the lust of the flesh it will be the fruit of the Spirit Gal 5:23.  I know Paul didn't write all this just so they could make plaques for Christian Bookstores.   john: Simply an impossible conclusion in view of the fact that Paul has JUST concluded that this warfare, the doing of sin, continues for all Christians.      jt: Paul also said "Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? God forbid, may it never be"   john: So what is "walking in the spirit?"     Well, just read 8:5. Walking in the flesh is having YOUR MIND SET ON THINGS OF THE FLESH and walking in the spirit is    HAVING YOUR MIND SET ON THINGS OF THE SPIRIT.    jt: This is not a "mind science" John.  It is a walk of obedience to the voice of the Chief Shepherd. When he appears we are to be like Him.   john: Notice how this ties in with Jere 31 "I will put it in their minds and write it on their hearts."   Ro 8:5 defines flesh and spirit in terms of a state of mind as opposed to an act of righteousness (or right living).     jt: It is a renewed mind, a circumcised heart, and walking in love toward God, ourselves, and others.   judyt