Timothy & Countering The Culture (part 18)

As Paul would give his instructions concerning deacons, he would be unable to escape the weighty and terrible fact that he had been involved in the death that had come to the martyr Stephen.  How ironic that believers (at least in terms of the order of the books of the New Testament) are introduced to Paul at the death of the first person to be mentioned as a deacon of the church, and then here he is, years later, instructing Timothy in regards to the qualifications and conduct of deacons. 

Re-reading the words concerning deacons that are on offer here in this letter, along with an underlying contemplation of the culture into which this position was introduced and against which it gravitated and stood as a counter-cultural witness in its revelation of the functioning of the kingdom of the Creator God, should be done with Stephen in mind.  To that end, one hears that “Deacons likewise must be dignified, not two-faced, not given to excessive drinking, not greedy for gain, holding to the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience” (1 Timothy 3:8-9). 

Truly, Stephen went to his death with great dignity, expressing a desire, like Jesus, that those taking His life be forgiven.  Not being given to excessive drinking would serve him well in his service of others.  Not being greedy for gain, which is fundamentally an honor proposition, would enable him to conscientiously take the lowest place.  His holding to the mystery of the faith, part of which was a reversal of the social order, in which the last become first and the first become last as a significant component of Jesus’ kingdom teaching, is demonstrated by willful service to those considered last, treating both first and last as equal in the eyes of the covenant God as they participate in their God’s kingdom come to earth.  In a world defined by honor competition, these can be difficult propositions, which is why, with Timothy and the first set of deacons in mind, one can go on to read “And these also must be tested first and then let them serve as deacons if they are found blameless” (3:10). 

Why must they be tested?  Because in the kingdom of the Christ it is servants that were to be honored, rather than those that are being served.  Therefore, if this is rightly grasped by a congregation, there would be a significant temptation to give undue honor to those that serve, elevating the individual that serves rather than elevating the position of servant and ideal of service.  Accordingly then, a deacon would have to be willing to relegate the position if it became vested with honor, distancing himself from the undue honor that might be heading his way, and allowing another to take up the role.  In a way then, divesting oneself of the position of servant is a way of embracing shame.  This elevation of service as conducive to honor, as opposed to public speech acts such as speaking in tongues or words of wisdom and knowledge, could only take place in a community transformed by the re-shaping message of the Gospel (Jesus is Lord---and all honor is due to Him). 

Going further, it is said “Likewise also their wives must be dignified, not slanderous, temperate, faithful in every respect.  Deacons must be husbands of one wife and good managers of their children and their own households” (3:11-12).  As was seen with similar words said concerning overseers, this may very well be a way to specifically identify certain men that should not be considered for this position.  Why provide such limitation?  Would not the service serve to bring about what may be much-needed humility and change to such a person and to their family?  Though this may be a position held by an on-looker from outside the congregation, who sees the role of servant in opposition to the accrual of honor, this would not be so inside the church, as the taking of the role of servant at the table becomes that by which honor can be accrued. 

A person that is not “full of faith and of the Holy Spirit” may take advantage of this reversed situation, using it for their own advantage.  So in rounding out the treatment concerning deacons, with all of these thoughts in mind, Paul writes “For those who have served well as deacons,” with service being the crux of the matter, “gain a good standing for themselves and a great boldness in the faith that is in Christ Jesus” (3:13).  Truly then, honor and standing in the church come from service, though it is not an honor or a standing that should cause one believer to be set over another believer in an intra-chuch honor competition.  The boldness comes from taking the role of servant, living out the principles of the kingdom, and even experiencing, to an extent, as the surrounding community viewed a person of honor taking the role of a lowly servant, a portion of the shame that came the way of their Lord.    

Speaking In Tongues (part 29)

Fifteen thousand words of foundational material in this study allow for what comes next from Paul to be quite readily consumed, grasped, and comprehended, with proper conclusions readily drawn.  So moving along then, Paul writes “What should you do then, brothers and sisters?  When you come together, each one has a song, has a lesson, has a revelation, has a tongue, has an interpretation” (1 Corinthians 14:26a). 

Here, Paul again deploys “brothers and sisters,” which feels like a way for him, as this is discerned from the contextual and textual flow of the entire letter, to produce unity of mind and of purpose within the congregation gathered at their standard assembly to hear this letter read in its entirety and as a group.  With this, one cannot escape the fact any more than the divided and possibly stratified Corinthian believers could escape the fact, that Paul emphasizes and expects an equal participation by all in the events of the assembly. 

One must not take it lightly when Paul says that “each one” should have a song, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation.  This does not mean that each should have the ability to demonstrate all of these things, though this would not be problematic and could certainly be encouraged as long as it did not result in an unwarranted accrual of honor to anybody but the Creator God and His Christ, but that each one is encouraged to participate at some level, doing so, at least initially one would expect, in one of the ways that is being recognized as being influenced and directed by the covenant God through the Holy Spirit. 

Of course, the rest of verse twenty-six falls directly in line with all that Paul has said concerning tongues to this point, which is “Let all these things be done for the strengthening of the church” (14:26b).  This is always the crux of the matter for Paul in his letter to Corinth.  The strengthening of the church is the matter at hand in this letter.  What they have been doing, which is what Paul is criticizing on multiple levels, apparently exacerbated with the elevation of the speech act of glossolalia, has led to, in his opinion, the weakening of the church.  One is then able to come to the conclusion that Paul sees a weakened and discouraged church through his constant exhortation that expresses the need for strengthening and encouraging. 

If the church is weakened, then by definition the kingdom of the Creator God (the bringing of heaven to earth---causing the overlap of God’s realm of existence with man’s realm of existence, manifested whenever selfless and sacrificial love that reveals the character of God that is also to be the calling card of those that are His image-bearers is being put on display) is damaged, as it is the church that functions as the ambassadorial arm of that kingdom. 

It is with such thoughts (including in these thoughts that there were problems, including the bestowal of honor in competition with other spiritual gifts or other factions within the church, being created and exacerbated through the displays of speaking in tongues) under consideration that one then goes on to hear “If someone speaks in a tongue, it should be two, or at the most three, one after the other, and someone must interpret” (14:27).  

No One Knows The Hour (part 33)

Yes, the early church clearly understood that Jesus was the true Temple.  He was the house of God.  He was the place where heaven and earth came together.  Naturally, if talk about the church as the Temple of the Holy Spirit is taken seriously (as Paul indicates), in both a communal sense and in accord with the responsibility of the individuals members that compose the body of Christ, this informs the Christian as to his or her responsibilities in association with a life lived in response to the Gospel claim that Jesus is Lord.  The Christian is to be the place where and heaven earth come together---bringing heaven to earth as a singular purpose. 

Getting back to the course of thought that Isaiah suggests, Jesus can be heard doing the same thing, though omitting the explicit reference to the earth and its foundations.  Naturally, given the nature of allusion, as Jesus intends to call to mind the broad picture being painted by Isaiah, a reference to the earth and dramatic happenings in relation to the earth to go along with the happenings with the sun, moon, stars, and the power of heaven, is implied.  Again, all of this is offered by Jesus in the context of His discourse about the Temple. 

Returning then to second Peter, one is able to read and hear him from a more enlightened perspective.  This can be done while keeping clearly in view Jesus prediction about the fall of the Temple, along with the need, amongst the followers of Jesus in the years after His death, Resurrection, and ascension, for this prediction to come true.  Having laid the groundwork the author writes “Now, dear friends, do not let this one thing escape your notice, that a single day is like a thousand years with the Lord and a thousand years are like a single day.  The Lord is not slow concerning His promise, as some regard slowness, but is being patient toward you, because He does not wish for any to perish but for all to come to repentance” (3:8-9).  By way of reminder, this study is insisting that the promise is the judgment prophesied against the Temple, and that this will coincide with the coming of the Son of Man to the Ancient of Days, which will signal the fact of Christ’s reign. 

Continuing on then: “But the day of the Lord will come like a thief; when it comes, the heavens will disappear with a horrific noise, and the celestial bodies will melt away in a blaze, and the earth and every deed done on it will be laid bare” (3:10).  There’s that heaven and earth language again, and it leads into “Since all these things are to melt away in this manner, what sort of people must we be, conducting our lives in holiness and godliness, while waiting for and hastening the coming of the day of God?”  (3:11-12a)  Does one not recognize the Daniel seven reference, which then also is a reference to the oral traditions (if indeed this is written in the sixties of the first century) concerning Jesus’ speech about the Temple, to the coming of the Son of Man?  The thought is rounded out with “Because of this day, the heavens will be burned up and dissolve, and the celestial bodies will melt away in a blaze!  But, according to His promise, we are waiting for new heavens and a new earth, in which righteousness truly resides” (3:12b-13). 

Indeed, they were waiting for it to be made clear to all that Jesus was the true Temple, which would be demonstrated when the Temple in Jerusalem was taken out of the way just as Jesus had said would happen.  Jesus was to be recognized, by all, as the new heavens and the new earth---the place of the coming together of heaven and earth, which is part and parcel of the meaning behind His ascension.  When it comes to being the place where righteousness dwells, when righteousness is understood as the Creator God’s covenant faithfulness, which is that which was represented by the Temple, then when it is Jesus that is left standing, resurrected following His crucifixion by Rome, whereas the Temple was destroyed by Rome never to rise again, then yes, Jesus is that which represents the covenant God’s covenant faithfulness to His people and to His creation.

Water Into Wine (part 4)

With his actions, Jesus has created a problematic situation for all involved.  This should not be overlooked.  There is a tendency to romanticize the words of Scripture, looking at them through goggles that distort the image that would have been easily seen and obvious to the first century author, reader, and hearer.  That distorted image can cause a distant or detached observer to hear the head steward going to the bridegroom and offering him a compliment in regards to his generosity and his unexpected grace, which has been put on display by lavishing the best wine upon his guests at the end of his party, clearly sparing no expense in so doing. 

From that distorted image, commentators often take it upon themselves to make an analogy about the grace of the Creator God as shown through Jesus, and perhaps even toss around a couple of ideas about the law as good wine, gifted by God, whereas the Gospel is an even better wine that has been saved for the end.  Consequently, Jesus is placed in the role of head steward, God the Father as presented as the obviously generous bridegroom, the servants that filled the purification jars (now obviously representing the strictures of the law---with an associated new wine versus old wineskin paradigm) representing the church, and the historical Jesus that speaks to the servants now functioning as more of a Holy Spirit figure, commanding the eager servants (the church). 

This popular mode of comprehension of the story of the wedding feast at Cana sets off something of a spiritualized, proof-texting binge in which this miracle is taken and folded in with other miracle reports in the Gospels as little more than evidences of the divinity of Jesus---as if the Gospels were merely meant to function in such a way.  In an even more entertaining venture, some attempt to use this event as Jesus’ own approbation of drinking alcoholic beverages, as if this occurrence was the Creator God’s way, through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit on the writers of Scripture, of legitimating what some consider to be a questionable activity. 

Amazingly and in the same vein, some individuals with equally narrow fields of vision as those who actually want to use this event as a sanction for the drinking of wine, endeavor to employ the miracle at this wedding feast as a polemic against the drinking of alcohol.  As surprising and antithetical as that may sound, the claim is made with the argument running along the lines of “because the wine was new, it had not had time to ferment and was therefore non-alcoholic.  This therefore means that the newly made wine was nothing more than grape juice, which is Jesus’ (and therefore the Creator God’s) way of informing the world that since this ‘wine’ (though it’s really just grape juice) is clearly recognized as being better than what had gotten everybody drunk to that point, then this is what the Creator God would prefer His people imbibe from this point.”  Both positions, of course, are equally ridiculous.  Any attempts to draw inferences for Christian practice in the area of beverage consumption from this miraculous intervention by Jesus and its presentation by the author of John, is an exercise in woefully missing the point.

Now, all of this is not to say that the world does not have a lavishly generous and unexpectedly gracious Creator God.  It is not to say that implausible or inappropriate to draw inferences from the events in the life of Jesus that will assist believers in their spirit-animated journey of faith as functionaries in this world on behalf of their God’s kingdom.  It is to say, however, that if one is not attuned to the real world importance of the life of Jesus, and if these stories are not properly shared and heard from within their historical, cultural, and social contexts, with every effort made to first understand them on their own terms as they would be understood by those who experienced them first-hand, then it is highly likely that the observer is going to miss out on the true theological richness that lies ready at hand, as Jesus does go about revealing the Creator God.  The fact must not be overlooked that this is, first and foremost, a real-world event happening to and with real-world people with real-world customs and concerns.

Den Of Lions (part 1)

It seemed like a good idea to Darius to appoint over the kingdom one hundred twenty satraps who would be in charge of the entire kingdom.  Over them would be three supervisors, one of whom was Daniel. – Daniel 6:1-2a  (NET)

With this, Daniel appears to have been provided with a tremendous responsibility for a member of the covenant people of the Creator God.  It is written that “These satraps were accountable to them,” meaning the three supervisors, “so that the king’s interests might not incur damage” (6:2b).  These words, as the Hebrew Scriptures, post-Resurrection, ask believers to view them through the lens of the Christ event, allow an observer to make a consideration of the role of Jesus.  That role was to see that His (God’s) interests, that being the salvation of a people and the restoration of His creation, might not incur damage.  Others had been sent into the world for this very purpose.  In fact, if one was inclined to press the analogy, it could be said that Jesus was essentially the third of three “supervisors” that had been appointed to this purpose, with the first being Adam, and the second being Israel. 

As one makes this analogous comparison between Daniel, doing so in association with the story of Daniel and the lion’s den, while taking the extremely wide, cosmic view entailed by connecting the two men together, it is possible to go on to think of the aforementioned one hundred twenty satraps (which is a technical term for an official in charge of a region of the empire) as the steady stream of patriarchs, judges, kings, and prophets that had been either chosen or raised up by the Creator God to be partially responsible for protecting that King’s interests from incurring damage. 

With regard to Daniel, one can go on to read that he “was distinguishing himself above the other supervisors and satraps, for he had an extraordinary spirit” (6:3).  Again, it is not difficult to transfer and make the application of these words to Jesus, recalling the event of His baptism, when “a voice came from heaven” saying “You are My one dear Son; in you I take great delight” (Mark 1:11).  To this utterance, Matthew would add that the Spirit of the Creator God descended upon Jesus and came upon Him (Matthew 3:16).  It could certainly be said that, owing to this descent of the Holy Spirit, Jesus possessed an extraordinary spirit that would enable Him to distinguish Himself above Adam and Israel and all of the prophets and holy men of the Creator that had come before Him---thus preserving the King’s interests. 

Of Daniel, it is said that “in fact, the king intended to appoint him over the entire kingdom” (6:3b).  This would be no less true of Jesus, as His God’s apparent intention was to appoint His Messiah, that being Jesus, over the entirety of the kingdom that He Himself was establishing on the earth, as He (Israel’s God) personally embodied the Messiah so as to act in history to inaugurate this kingdom. 

It seems clear that Daniel had great favor with the king, as did Jesus.  As a result, “the supervisors and satraps were trying to find some pretext against Daniel in connection with administrative matters” (6:4a).  On the local (not cosmic) level, because Daniel’s position of authority along with the will of the king is being challenged, it becomes possible to view these supervisors and satraps as the chief priests, elders, scribes, and rulers with whom Jesus, according to the Gospel accounts, almost incessantly finds himself in conflict.  Just as there was a movement against Daniel in the area of “administrative matters,” so too was there a movement against Jesus.  Here, without taking the time and space to go into specifics, one can call to mind the numerous attempts that were made to challenge Jesus and His teaching (in the common battle for honor), along with the questioning of His authority to do and say the things that He was doing and saying. 

Joshua's Battles (part 4)

In the end though, because Jesus is reigning and because He has a people in covenant with Him through their confession of Him as Lord of all, in spite of the evil that can be seen, each and every time a true divine image-bearer (Jesus believer) is successfully able to gain a victory over the powers that attempt to compel a joining in the evil---each time a covenant member engages in an act of sacrifice and love that benefits only the recipient---then and there is one able to overcome the self-idolatry that was the primary reason for mankind’s initial rebellion against the responsibility given by the Creator God.

It is in this way that the covenant people, with a nod to ancient Israel in purpose if not methods, consistently attempts to annihilate the obstinate enemy.  They do so, thankfully, in an exercise of mercy, knowing that before Jesus accepted them into His kingdom by an act of mercy, they stood in the same position as these kings and enemies of Israel, in need of that mercy but deserving of none.  In such engagements, as believers are able to overcome, they begin to rightly bear that long-lost divine image, and in doing so, are able to embody and manifest Jesus’ ultimate victory over evil. 

With each act of mercy and self-sacrificial love, believers point to the fact that Jesus does indeed reign, and that through the mysterious activity of the Holy Spirit and the proclamation of the Gospel (Jesus is Lord) in both word and deed, the power of transformation and renewal and restoration and reconciliation is at work in this world.  Not only is it proven to be at work, but all of these things are reminders that it has been at work ever since the tomb was split open and Resurrection power flooded into this world. 

The Creator God enables His people to harness that flood of power and to carry it into the world through the preaching of the Gospel of Jesus---again, in word and in deed.  The doing takes an equal place alongside the teaching (as indicated by the opening of the book of Acts), for why would there be any need to teach if it was not for the purpose of doing that which embodies and furthers the reach of the kingdom of heaven on earth (rather than teaching strictly for the purpose of training people to refrain from doing that which is labeled as “sin”). 

In all of the doing and teaching, as the Resurrection is proclaimed and embraced and brought to bear in the world, there is no denial that evil is pervasive.  Indeed, Israel could not deny that they had to go to battle to gain victories over that which their God pointed to as the embodiment of evil in the land of His promise, so even though it is in a world that has been and is being re-shaped by the message and power of the crucifixion and the Resurrection, why should it be any different for renewed Israel? 

One is also able to read that “Joshua conquered the whole land, just as the Lord had promised” (11:23a).  So too did Jesus, with his conquering also occurring according to what He (and those that believe in Him) believed to be His God’s promise to Him.  The words that follow in Joshua point to the final outcome of Jesus’ conquering, in that the tribes of Israel were assigned the portions of the land for which they were responsible, which they were to rule and steward along with Joshua, with it being said that “the land was free of war” (11:23c).  It seems that Israel was charged with a responsibility to react and respond to evil, in full knowledge of their God’s promise of a victory already won. 

Because the Creator God is the same yesterday, today, and forever, and because He does not change, in this day, the renewed Israel that is the covenant people via believing union with the Christ must do the same as their forbears in covenant, reacting and responding to evil in full knowledge of their God’s promise of a victory already won.  In both instances, the fact that there was a foregone conclusion in place did not remove the responsibility to work according to the Creator God’s plan that His covenant-bearers be His lights in the world, reflect His glory to and upon His creation, doing so according to His intentions, plans, and purposes.  That, it could be said, is the essence of the life of faith. 

In My Father's House (part 2)

Returning to the review of the birth narrative, following Gabriel’s visit to Mary, the reader of the Gospel learns about Mary’s visit to Elizabeth, Mary’s hymn of praise to the Lord after the blessing from Elizabeth that was said to be inspired by the Holy Spirit, the birth of John, the restoration of Zechariah’s ability to speak along with his subsequent prophecy, the birth of Jesus, the visit of the shepherds, Jesus’ presentation at the Temple, the prophecy of Simeon, and the words of the prophetess Anna. 

Near the end of the birth narrative, the aforementioned Simeon shares some potentially troubling words.  He says, “Listen carefully: This child is destined to be the cause of the falling and rising of many in Israel and to be a sign that will be rejected.  Indeed, as a result of Him the thoughts of many hearts will be revealed---and a sword will pierce your own soul as well!” (2:34b-35)  A sword will pierce her soul “as well”?  Based on her reported experience with the angelic messenger of the Creator God, Mary is said to have known that the Messiah that has been born to her was destined for glory and ultimately redemption for Israel.  So one could imagine her thinking something along the lines of “what’s the deal with all of this talk of swords and pierced souls?”  Of course, as Theophilus reads this narrative that has been compiled for him, he is in the position of being well aware that Luke is referring to the crucifixion to come, as Luke skillfully weaves this into his text. 

With this, the reader reaches the previously referenced chronological leap.  Luke, who treats Jesus’ youth in the same way as the rest of the Biblical authors (as seemingly irrelevant), quickly jumps ahead twelve years to present the story of Jesus in the Temple.  He does this before skipping over another eighteen years or so, which then marks the beginning of what has come to be called the third chapter and the longer narrative of the ministry of Jesus. 

Why the chronological divisions?  To answer that it is necessary to return to the purpose of Luke’s writing and the fact that he is always keeping the crucifixion and the Resurrection in view.  Apparently it is his desire and purpose to tell stories about Jesus that draws the attention of his reader to the event that would be referred to by the author of Hebrews as “the consummation of the ages” (9:26).  To that end, Luke has already successfully brought the mind of his reader (if that reader is aware of that consummating event) into a contemplation of the crucifixion with his birth narrative, and now, he will attempt to accomplish the same, with an inclusion of the Resurrection and Jesus’ Lordship, with the story of Jesus in the Temple. 

Thus the story of Jesus in the Temple is introduced with Luke informing his audience that “Jesus’ parents went to Jerusalem every year for the feast of the Passover” (2:41).  From this it can be reasonably (though not concretely) extrapolated that this is not the first time that Jesus has gone to Jerusalem with his parents for the celebration of the Passover.  Now, is it really reasonable to think that a “carpenter,” which is the title given to Joseph, made this journey ever year?  Well, one would do well to remember that Jesus’ father, Joseph, though a member of the artisan class and therefore not a peasant, is not necessarily a “nobody” in Israel.  He is of “the house and family line of David” (2:4b).  This is not insignificant.  Therefore, one could surmise that it would not be an unusual thing for him to make the trek to Jerusalem each year.  So it could be asserted (again, with reservation) that this is not Jesus’ first trip to Jerusalem.  Yet for some reason, Luke seizes on this particular journey and the story of this journey, telling the reader that “When He (Jesus) was twelve years old, they went up according to custom” (2:42). 

Make Your Tent Larger (part 2 of 2)

This was not simply the inclusion of Gentiles, but in the biggest sense of the picture, it was the growth of Israel---the people that were said to be “God-governed.”  The new family members were not to be looked upon as outsiders, but rather as an extension of Israel, and it is in this way that Isaiah can be heard saying, “For you will spread out to the right and to the left” (54:3a).  Furthermore, Israel is informed that their “children will conquer nations and will resettle desolate cities” (54:3b).  This conquering of nations would seem to fit well with Isaiah’s previous insistence that Israel’s servant would startle nations and shock kings with his exaltation (52:15).  Though Isaiah is understood to have written his prophecy in the wake of conquest, while also experiencing attempts at conquest and looking forward to expected conquest, there was always the hope of restoration involved. 

Within the hope engendered by Isaiah’s presentation, Israel fully expected to be set above all nations through the conquering activity of their God through their messiah, so hearing that their children would conquer nations and that they would be able to forget the shameful experiences and abandonment about which Isaiah prophesied (54:4) was probably not surprising.  What would have been surprising was the apparent inclusion of Gentile peoples, for whom they were being told to expand the size of their covenant tent. 

Post-Christ-event believers can look back on this text while also looking forward, as people that have been brought into that expanded tent of covenant blessings, seizing on the claim that the Creator God’s people will be responsible for and experience the figurative resettling of desolate cities (experiencing exodus to conclude their exile).  The Gospel (Jesus is Lord) with its message of power, has already conquered nations by making all kings and authorities subservient to its claims (whether they know it or will admit to it or not), but with this issue of the desolate cities, believers are able to obtain a glimpse of their vocation, as the Israel of God (true humanity, divine image-bearers) in the world.

As the Israel of God, those that believe in the claims of the Gospel are to be the agents and the instruments by which the Creator God brings the life and light and immortality of the mysterious power of the Resurrection into an often desolate world.  This occurs as they become the righteousness of God---embodying His covenant faithfulness by the working of the Holy Spirit through them in the form of self-sacrificial love, putting the Creator God’s saving (redeeming, restoring, recreating) power to work within this creation through the convincingly spoken and compassionately lived out message of the crucified and resurrected King Who is Lord of all. 

When believers speak of Jesus (and do more than speak), the suffering servant that is set paradoxically set on high, they are to spare no effort in setting their God’s power to work; and like the Israel to whom Isaiah was speaking, they continue to make larger the tent of their God’s kingdom, stretching out its curtains and pounding its stakes deep.  Though the cry of “foolishness” from those that refuse to submit to the Gospel’s claims will be long and loud, they are called to speak of the resurrected Lord without intimidation, without humiliation, and without shame (54:4).  In this, they speak of the Creator, the commander of armies, their Protector, and the “God of the entire earth” (54:5).                  

Repudiating Its Power (part 1 of 2)

They will maintain the outward appearance of religion but will have repudiated its power.  So avoid people like these. – 2 Timothy 3:5  (NET)

Consider Paul’s use of the term “power.”  This terms makes frequent appearances in his writings.  To take just a couple of examples that set out Paul’s opinion concerning power, one can look to the first chapter of Romans.  There, Paul refers to Jesus as the Son-of-God-in-power (1:4).  He then goes on to declare that the Gospel “is God’s power for salvation to everyone who believes” (1:16b).  Here, Paul equates the Gospel of Jesus, which is the message that Jesus is the crucified and resurrected Lord of all, with power.  That is what produces salvation---bringing a person into the ranks of the covenant people. 

For Paul, it seems that the very declaration of the fact of the Gospel of Jesus the Christ, which for him is somehow brought about through the prompting of the Holy Spirit (for Paul insists that one only calls Jesus Lord---confesses a trusting allegiance in the Gospel---by the movement of the Holy Spirit – 1 Corinthians 12:3), is what releases the inherent transformative power of the Resurrection into the world. 

Returning then to the second letter of Timothy, one finds Paul writing that it is through “our Savior Christ Jesus,” that the Creator God has “broken the power of death and brought life and immortality to light through the Gospel” (1:10).  The fact that Jesus is Lord, and ones belief in such, is paramount.  It is what brings heaven to earth and ushers in the new age.  Paul here informs his audience that the power of the Gospel (Jesus is Lord) is such that it breaks the power of death.  Since the Gospel includes the message of One that was raised from the dead, such an insistence is a necessary corollary.  It goes beyond the breaking of death’s power, as the Gospel brings life and immortality. 

To see this life and immortality, Paul has only to reflect on what he takes to be the fact that the risen Jesus is alive and ruling the kingdom of God that has been inaugurated, in a world that is now subject to two forces (death and Resurrection), and in which one of those forces (death) has already been defeated, while all creation, together with the people of God, await the consummation of that kingdom and the installation of the force of Resurrection as the animating principle of the Creator God’s kingdom in a restored and renewed creation.  In this way of thinking, Paul, in hope, awaits the life and immortality to be shared by the Creator God’s people, through their believing union with the Christ, in the Resurrection of the righteous that is to come. 

Having spoken in this way, Paul goes on to insist, “For this Gospel I was appointed a preacher and apostle and teacher” (1:11), with a clear echo (along with his talk of power) of the opening of Romans, as he refers to himself as “a slave of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle, set apart for the Gospel of God” (Romans 1:1).  To Timothy he continues on to write: “Because of this, in fact, I suffer as I do.  But I am not ashamed, because I know the One in Whom my faith is set” (1:12a).  Paul’s use of “not ashamed” is not only significant in that it reminds the reader of the fact that he lives in an honor and shame culture in which casting one’s lot with a crucified man was a shameful thing, immediately evokes thoughts of Romans 1:16 again, where he announces the power of the message of the crucified yet risen Lord, prefacing it with the words “I am not ashamed.” 

Marring Of A Servant (part 4 of 4)

Continuing on, and interpreting Isaiah according to the Christ-event, one finds that the shock of these kings will come about because “they will witness something unannounced to them, and they will understand something they had not heard about” (52:15d).  How will they witness something unannounced and understand something that they had not heard?  This will occur through the preaching of the Gospel of Jesus (He is Lord of all).  The shock will come when they hear that they are now subservient to One that they had shamed and crucified.  The fact of their subjection to this King, Jesus (the one now understood as the marred and suffering servant of Isaiah), was certainly not something that had been announced to them beforehand.  Indeed, a suffering messiah was not even expected by His own people  Nevertheless, the fact, at least as interpreted by the followers of Jesus after His death and Resurrection, was inescapable. 

In addition to the shock of the announcement about subservience to a crucified man, no one had ever heard of one rising physically from the dead in the way that Jesus was said to have risen from the dead.  As a matter of fact, the very idea was ludicrous.  Men did not come back from the dead---not in their physical bodies.  Ghosts and spirits?  Yes, this was understood and even expected.  There was language for such things.  A man coming back from the grave and being exalted as the Lord of all people, nations, and things---who would ever have spoken of such a thing?  Little wonder then that the earliest believers in Jesus looked at the words of Isaiah and envisioned him looking forward (while also looking backwards and folding in Israel’s story and purposes according to what he would have understood to be the purpose of the Creator God for His world) and putting pen to paper for precisely this reason and writing “Who would have believed what we just heard?” (53:1a) 

In some sense, it is reasonable to presume that Isaiah had an idea that what he was writing was completely incredulous.  How could this servant (Adam, humanity, Israel, the messiah), disfigured so that he no longer looked like a man, and marred so that he no longer looked human, startle nations, shock kings, and be lifted high, elevated, and greatly exalted?  This question could not only be asked of the suffering servant of Isaiah, but of his God’s servant that was Israel, and His first servant, that being man. 

The answer would lie in the Resurrection of the righteous dead and the restoration and recreation of the world attendant to that as the Creator God would come to live with man (heaven come to earth) and rule all things, which was long held as a hope of Israel, and ultimately for those that would be witnesses of the resurrected One and attempt to put it into words, its power that is mysteriously transmitted and infused into this world through the preaching of the Gospel in both word and deed.  The servant would be resurrected.  Israel would be resurrected.  Humanity would be resurrected.  The previously marred would be restored, according to the power and promise of the Creator God. 

The Resurrection is put forth as the answer to the question, but is that when this would happen?  Isaiah seems to ask the same question as he writes, “When was the Lord’s power revealed through Him?” (53:1b)  The answer has already been heard, but it is returned to now, declaring again that the Creator God’s power to do all that He planned to do, for and through His covenant people throughout all of time, was made manifest when Jesus “was appointed the Son-of-God-in-power according to the Holy Spirit by the Resurrection from the dead,” which made Him “Jesus Christ our Lord” (Romans 1:4). 

As the Lord Jesus is elevated and lifted high through proclamation of His Lordship in word and in deed, nations continue to be startled and kings are still driven to shock.  As the Gospel proclamation is live, the Lord’s power is continually revealed through those that have cast their allegiance with Him, and the powerful and faithful Creator God continues to re-shape, re-make, re-new, and re-store His people and His world through them, reversing the marring of the fall of the creatures that had been created as His image, and making them into those that truly bear His image and reflect His glory into the world.     

Raising Lazarus For Glory (part 11 of 12)

That crowning and culminating and climactic event of all of history, of course, would be the crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth.  Lazarus’ raising, which Jesus indicated would reveal the glory of the Creator God, is the seminal event that stirs the pot, roils the people, irritates the Jewish leaders, creates the tension, causes issues that had been seething under the service to boil over, and drives Jesus’ pre-Resurrection life and mission towards its grand conclusion. 

Based on Jesus’ ongoing responses to that which He knew awaited Him, together with the glory-related narrative that has been constructed in the Johannine narrative and that to which the narrative drives, it can most assuredly be said that raising Lazarus was for the purpose of glory.  So how did Jesus feel about what was coming?  How did He respond to the events as they took place? 

Continuing that narrative of the coming glory, at the “last supper” one finds that “When Judas had gone out,” for the purpose of completing his promised handing-over of Jesus to the authorities, “Jesus said, ‘Now the Son of Man is glorified, and God is glorified in Him.  If God is glorified in Him, God will also glorify Him in Himself, and He will glorify Him right away’.” (John 13:31-32)  Here Jesus is found to be speaking of His death in terms of God’s glory. 

As Jesus goes on to speak to His disciples in the dramatic moments that follow, he can be heard to say “And I will do whatever you ask in My Name, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son” (14:13).  He seems to speak of His ongoing presence with and through His disciples---it what appears to be an obvious speaking of the strengthening, performing work of “the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, Whom the Father will send in My Name” (14:26a)---in terms of the glory of Israel’s Creator God. 

The record of Jesus’ “farewell discourse” to His disciples is quite lengthy, spanning three chapters in John’s Gospel.  Upon its conclusion, Jesus “looked upward to heaven and said, ‘Father, the time has come.  Glorify Your Son, so that Your Son may glorify You’.” (17:1b)  There’s that expectation of glory again, which has appeared to hinge upon Lazarus’ raising.  He looked to His pending death, while appearing to faithfully look forward to His deliverance from the coming grave, seemingly speaking of the Resurrection and its power that was going to be unleashed into the world in order to accomplish His God’s purposes and plans for His fallen creation, and spoke of it in terms of His God’s glory. 

In what appears to be His full expectation of the life to come through His Resurrection, where He will be shown forth as the Son of God in power (Romans 1:4) for all the world to see, Jesus continues speaking to the Father, saying, “just as You have given Him authority over all humanity, so that He may give eternal life to everyone You have given Him.  Now this is eternal life---that they know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, Whom you sent” (17:2-3). 

It is this knowing of God---and knowing of God in and through the Christ---which will happen through the work of the Spirit that will be sent into the world, that is the manifestation of eternal life.  Eternal life, it should be said, is not simply a life lived in heaven for all eternity.  Rather, and as understood by His hearers and those that would first receive this Gospel story, eternal life was the life of the age to come---the messianic age of the renewed creation---breaking into the world, being the overlap of heaven and earth wherever it is shown forth in word and deed that the Creator God rules on earth, with this accomplished through the Christ and His Lordship. 

This eternal life is not static, but is shared with and through the knower so that it may flow with and through the knower into the world, so that the Creator God’s faithfulness might be known and shown, with this ultimately said to take place through the Christ.  This eternal life that is the sharing of the power of the Resurrection with all who believe, is the power of the Creator God that operates in the world through the preaching of the Gospel of Jesus the Christ, to redeem and deliver a cursed and exiled humanity, along with a creation that was cursed through humanity’s fall. 

Justified By Faithfulness (part 8 of 9)

This belief, of course, in a crucified and resurrected messiah, here in the middle of history, was contrary to any and all expectations of the day.  Not only was the crucifixion of the messiah a completely unexpected development, as such would be evidence that said person was in fact not the messiah, but the idea that somebody would be physically raised from the dead was completely ludicrous.  Quite simply, people did not come back from the dead.  This was common knowledge and well understood.  However, the weight of evidence that this is exactly what had occurred (including the language that was used---of a person coming back to life, rather than being a phantom or a ghost, as language was available to describe such things), and that it had happened to an individual that had lived and been looked to as a potential messiah for Israel, stirred a convicting belief that that is exactly what had taken place. 

Because of that conviction concerning the Resurrection, this belief, as Paul would routinely point out, could only be brought about by a faith that was granted by the Creator God---a faith somehow and mysteriously implanted and made operational by the Holy Spirit through the gracious activity of the covenant God, with this conveyed primarily through the medium of the preaching of the Gospel (Jesus is Lord), the hearing of that preaching of the message of Jesus as Lord (the Gospel), and the actively living out of that message in one’s daily life.

Repeating himself, because of the supreme importance of this principle, and because this examination of works and justification and faith, as presented in the letter to the church of Galatia, is made possible by a recounting of Peter’s retreat into the old covenant markers in Antioch, Paul goes on to write, “because by the works of the law no one will be justified” (2:16c).  Again, the old basis for the understood covenant blessings has been replaced. 

The markers that had previously been used to identify a member of the covenant family, and which had largely been used to wall off the covenant blessings from the world (non-Jews and those that did not adopt the covenant markers) had been set aside.  Now, belief in Jesus is what would matter.  Holding to the works of the law (covenant markers), and the exclusivity and isolation that came to be associated with it, now stood contrary to what it was that the Creator God had done and was doing through Jesus.  Unfortunately, as Paul would make clear, the works of the law would now serve as a reminder of Israel’s failure and cursing. 

The faithfulness of the Creator God, as manifested in the person and actions of the Christ, would stand as a witness to the victory over death, through the Resurrection, that the God of Israel had wrought for His people.  Just as Abraham had been justified by believing in the power and promise of that God, prior to anything that could be pointed to or understood as a work of the law, so now would those that would come to be identified as Abraham’s descendants also be justified (made righteous, saved, covenant-ed) by believing in the power and promise of that same God.  The setting aside of the Jewish covenant markers signaled, among other things, the extension of His blessings of justification, as it can now be seen that the Creator God had always intended, with this evidenced by the covenant with Abraham, to and for all peoples. 

Veil Of The Temple (part 8 of 9)

Until Jesus’ Resurrection took place, and the power of the Resurrection that came to be understood as the point at which the Creator God had begun to renew and restore a corrupted creation was unleashed into the world, those that had been raised in their tombs at the time of Jesus’ death were not yet allowed to enter into the world in which the Christ was going to become King and in which the creation was going to be renewed. 

This has a number of implications.  Those that have been crucified with Christ, who are those that go down into the curse of death with Him as their representative by casting their allegiance with Him and confessing Him as King, and who were born into a world in which death is understood to have reigned victorious because of the contra-covenant actions of their first representative Adam, have also been raised with the Christ. 

Believing in Jesus, which, because of the crucifixion and the claim to Resurrection, is so improbable that it is generally acknowledged that such belief must come as a gift of God that is made operable by the Holy Spirit, makes the believers alive but waiting in their tombs, ready to enter into His new creation when the final Resurrection takes place and to assist in that project in an effort to show that the kingdom of the Creator God, through Christ, has been established on earth, making those efforts at bringing heaven to earth in conjunction with the ongoing hope for the final and ultimate consummation of the Christ’s kingdom on earth.

Now, one might wonder why it was that only “many saints who had died were raised.”  If the power of Christ’s death truly had the effect of shredding the veil of separation and moving the cherubim aside, signifying that the curse was broken and Eden was once again accessible to man as part of the Creator God’s plan, why only “many”?  Why not all?  This probably has to do with what was then-current burial practice, in which the dead were laid in a tomb until the flesh decomposed from the body. 

Once that decomposition had occurred, the bones of the deceased were then placed in an ossuary (a bone box).  What Matthew may desire to communicate, as He communicates the significance of Jesus’ death and the significance of the Resurrection that those that are familiar with the story know is coming, is that those that were raised at the death of Jesus, which coincided with the rending of the veil, were most likely those that had recently died, but had not decomposed.  They were not given a renewed body suitable for the new creation, as Jesus would receive.  They were not given a Resurrection body, but had been raised in much the same way that Lazarus had been raised, with a body still subject to death and corruption, in the midst of a creation that was still subject to death and corruption. 

So it is for believers in this day.  In another implication, believers can understand that even though they have been raised with Christ, and that they take part in the kingdom of heaven as they call Jesus Lord and King, believing in His Gospel, they are very much subject to death and corruption, still living in a world that is subject to the same, though this world is constantly being re-shaped by the power of the Creator God as He works through His covenant  people to accomplish His good.  They await their new bodies, their glorified bodies, which they hope to receive when Jesus returns, when death is given its final defeat, and when the curse of death is finally and completely removed from this world, which is that for which the entire creation groans.  They experience new life and fellowship with the Creator God through union with His Christ (belief in the Gospel that Jesus is Lord), with the curse broken.  

Change Your Ways (part 3 of 3)

Therefore, do Christians, recognizing that they are living in a world in which the Creator God’s kingdom on earth has been inaugurated and where Jesus reigns as King over all of this creation that began to be renewed and re-made and set to rights with His Resurrection, oppress foreigners who live in their land?  It may seem like a strange question, because so many Christians are so accustomed to speaking and thinking in terms of being persecuted for faith or hated by the world.  One has to remember that in Judah (and all Israel), foreigners in their land would have been those that were not members of the Creator God’s covenant people.  Likewise, let us consider that believers, before being brought to the place of belief through the activity of the Holy Spirit as exercised through the power of the proclaimed Gospel of Jesus, could certainly be looked upon as foreigners in the midst of the Creator God’s kingdom on earth.       

If that is understood, then the believer must also consider how they find themselves treating those that currently stand outside of the Creator God’s covenant that is marked by belief in Jesus as the Messiah and Ruler of all things?  Are they oppressed?  How are they oppressed?  Is it not the case that believers are the ones that are oppressed?  In a sense, yes, but in the end, believers stand with and serve the One that is King of all, with all rulers subjected to Him.  So rather than being the oppressed ones, believers actually find themselves, like Israel, in the place in which they can become the oppressor, inviting judgment. 

So again, how can believers oppress foreigners---those outside the covenant.  Well, are they shunned?  Does the believers think him or herself better than those that are not inside the covenant through belief in Jesus?  Do believers isolate themselves from non-believers?  Do they separate themselves from who and what they speak of as “the world,” and by doing so, think that they are living holy and righteous lives that are pleasing to God?  Do they merely shine as lights for each other, while leaving the “foreigners” groping about in an oppressive and chaotic darkness?  Do they judge and condemn them for engaging in those things that are subjectively labeled as “sin,” and “preach” against “sin” rather than being the lights of God’s intention by preaching in word and in deed the message of the Gospel (Jesus is Lord), and so find themselves possibly engaging in what it is that their God finds far more heinous and deserving of His curse? 

In addition, the covenant God says to stop oppressing “children who have lost their fathers, and women who have lost their husbands” (7:6b).  The covenant God’s people had an obligation to orphans and widows.  Not caring for them was the same as oppressing them.  In the midst of all of the worthwhile endeavors in ministry as the renewed Israel in Christ, that is, the Creator God’s re-constituted covenant people, it’s worth asking how believers are doing in this regard?  Along with the directive concerning the oppression of foreigners, orphans, and widows, the Creator God says, “Stop killing innocent people in this land.  Stop paying allegiance to other gods” (7:6c).  The Creator God says that all of these things “will only bring about your ruin” (7:6d). 

Believers are always quick to emphasize the idolatry of the covenant God’s people that brought judgment to Israel and Judah, but it comes last in this listing of offenses against their God that will bring ruin and exile.  Idolatry would naturally grow out of the oppressions here recounted and the killing of innocent people, because forsaking that which was their God’s purpose for them, that God’s people would be determined to find a god in whose image they could actually believe themselves to have been made, and who would sanction their oppression. 

The Creator God’s message to His people is “If you stop doing these things, I will allow you to continue to live in this land which I gave to your ancestors as a lasting possession” (7:7).  If Jesus-followers, as people under the covenant of belief in the Gospel (Jesus, the crucified and resurrected man from Nazareth is Israel’s Messiah and Lord of all creation) desire to have a continued place in God’s kingdom on earth---in the land that He has given to His image-bearers and wise stewards as a lasting possession---then this passage from Jeremiah should serve as a clarion call to the duties of their vocation.  Is there a need to change some ways and to start doing what is right?         

Treaty Dissolved (part 2 of 2)

In essence then, as the words from Isaiah are heard against the backdrop of Israel’s story, it could be proffered that Adam willfully entered into a treaty with death, in that it was because of his actions that death was allowed to make an entrance into God’s good creation.  It could also be said that Adam (and Eve) made a lie his refuge, and that he hid himself in a deceitful word, as the serpent in the garden was believed when it said, “Surely you will not die, for God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will open and you will be like divine beings who know good and evil” (Genesis 3:4b-5).  Ironically, it was in this rebellion, when death entered, that the divine image in which man had been created, was marred.

Drawing the complete circle then, so as to make the broad application, when God’s Messiah went to the cross, He underwent God’s “overwhelming judgment,” as the wrath of God was poured out upon Him.  The experience of this wrath was not arbitrary, and He specifically underwent the cursing that was the lot of God’s covenant people, doing so because He represented all of God’s people (then and now) as their King.  By taking the curses upon Himself as He represented Israel, they were, in essence, exhausted.  The judgment was first one of condemnation, as it sent Jesus into the grave.  Secondly, though, the judgment was one of liberation, as death and the grave could not hold Him, and He went forth for the inauguration of a new creation and a new humanity, with Resurrection power. 

Isaiah wrote that “the Lord will rise up, as He did at Mount Perazim, He will rouse Himself, as He did in the valley of Gibeon” (28:21a).  Now, this “rising up” is not necessarily correlated to the Resurrection of Jesus, but as one thinks about the cornerstone, the dissolution of the treaty with death, and the breaking of the agreement with Sheol in connection with overwhelming judgment, it is appropriate to look ahead to the next part of the verse which informs the reader/hearer that the Lord rises up on behalf of His people “to accomplish His work” (28:21b). 

What work was to be accomplished?  The work, of course, was the restoration of that Lord’s people and His creation, delivering them from exile and bondage to corruption, and reversing the agreement of faithlessness that brought death into this world.  This work that was to be accomplished is said to be “His peculiar work” (28:21c).  It is said that God would rise up “to perform His task” (28:21d), and that task is referred to as “His strange task” (28:21e). 

Quite honestly, it is more than possible to look upon the Christ-event, that being the crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus, and honestly assess it as being a peculiar work and a strange task.  The Creator God’s people were not expecting the Messiah to go to a cross, as a crucified messiah was pure folly, nor were they expecting a single resurrection of a single man in the middle of history to mark the ushering in of the kingdom of God on earth.  So peculiar and strange was this work that the Apostle Paul indeed spoke of the folly of the cross and its preaching.  Nevertheless, it is as one believes in this work and the One in Whom, by Whom, and through Whom it was accomplished, as He underwent that overwhelming judgment and emerged victorious on the other side, that the ultimate power of death has been broken, and that in union with Christ, that believer is “overrun” (28:18) by the eternal life that comes by the faith that is gifted by God’s Holy Spirit.    

Regarded As Nothing (part 2 of 2)

There were those in the synagogue in Ephesus who, as usual, rejected Paul’s preaching of “the Way” (19:9), so eventually Paul left the synagogue and took up his teaching “every day in the lecture hall of Tyrannus.  This went on for two years, so that all who lived in the province of Asia, both Jews and Greeks, heard the Word of the Lord” (19:9b-10).  Again, this Word of the Lord, as can be construed from the record of Paul’s preaching (as provided by Acts) and from his writing, would have been that Jesus is Lord.  That was the message of the Gospel, and that alone, as it seems according to Paul’s thinking, represents the message that would grow in power and prevail.  If one desires consistency with the text of the New Testament, there would need to be some level of agreement that there is no other message that could be described in such a way.    

Due to the apparent effectiveness of the preaching of the message of the Gospel, as it grew in power and prevailed, the previously mentioned Demetrius’ business was most likely suffering.  So he called a meeting of the craftsmen, “along with the workmen in similar trades, and said, ‘Men, you know that our prosperity comes from this business.  And you see and hear that this Paul has persuaded and turned away a large crowd, not only in Ephesus but in practically all of the province of Asia, by saying that gods made by hands are not gods at all” (19:25b-26).  This is where one comes upon his statement that “There is danger not only that this business of ours will come into disrepute, but also that the temple of the great goddess Artemis will be regarded as nothing” (19:27a).  He concludes his statement with “and she whom all the province of Asia and the world worship will suffer the loss of her greatness” (19:27b).

In that day, this temple, which was considered to be one of the wonders of the ancient world, had been in place for over five-hundred years.  As a significant place of worship, it drew thousands of pilgrims from all over the world.  It seems that the devotees of Artemis, as the goddess of Ephesus (whose temple was the source of much wealth and influence), could quickly fill a fifty-thousand seat theater, and when prodded, gladly shout “Great is Artemis of the Ephesians!” (19:34b) for two solid hours.  Nevertheless, the tireless preaching of the Gospel, of the foolish and confounding message of a crucified man that had been raised from the dead by the Creator God of Israel, was believed to be a threat to the temple and its goddess, with that threat thought to be able to reach the point that both would be “regarded as nothing,” and that the world would suffer the loss of her (Artemis) greatness. 

Surely, that speaks directly to the inherent, transformative, and world-shaping power of the preaching of the message of Jesus.  There is no message besides the message of Jesus Christ crucified and raised that has such power.  It is this message that goes forth by the Holy Spirit and transforms hearts and minds.  It is the message that Paul preached.  It was the message that Jesus’ disciples took into the world.  It is the message, supreme above anything else that could ever be preached or taught, that the devotees of the Jesus cult should be carrying into this world on a daily basis.  All other messages are secondary, and if the secondary message is not rooted in the Gospel proclamation (Jesus is Lord of all) and appended with the message of the cross and an empty tomb, then, at least according to the example of the Apostle, it may be considered to be rather frivolous.        

Paul's Customary Preaching

Paul went to the Jews in the synagogue, as he customarily did, and on three Sabbath days he addressed them from the Scriptures, explaining and demonstrating that the Christ had to suffer and to rise from the dead, saying, “This Jesus I am proclaiming to you is the Christ.” – Acts 17:2-3  (NET)

As the preaching of the Apostle Paul is examined, as it is presented by the book of Acts, it becomes fairly clear that his preaching of the crucifixion and Resurrection was the most important aspect of his message.  In this verse referenced above, the word “customarily” is used.  It probably has a four-fold application, in that it was Paul’s custom to go to the synagogue, as he did here in Thessalonica; that he addressed them from the Scriptures; that the purpose of his addressing them from the Scriptures was to explain and demonstrate that the Christ had to suffer and also rise from the dead; and that Jesus of Nazareth, the Man whose death had been ordered by Pilate, was the Christ. 

Paul preached the Gospel (Jesus is Lord).  It is the witness of the New Testament that it is the preaching of this message that changes hearts and minds.  The writings of the earliest believers and followers of Jesus seem to make it clear that in the preaching of the message that Jesus is the crucified and resurrected Messiah of Israel and Lord of all, the power of the Creator God goes forth for salvation (deliverance, forgiveness of sin, exodus, new creation, etc…).  It is insisted that it is in the preaching of this message that faith (allegiance to Jesus) is stirred and belief is established.  That is why the specific message of the Gospel is foundational.  That is why, echoing the statement from Acts, this message can be seen to be the single most important theme in all of Paul’s writing (the written version of his preaching), and why it ultimately forms the basis for one’s ability to understand the message of the entire Bible. 

For some reason (Paul insists that it is the power of God), preaching Christ crucified and resurrected, regardless of how ridiculous this may seem, is the message that persuades people.  This can be seen when one goes on to read that, following Paul’s proclamations concerning the Christ, “Some of them were persuaded and joined Paul and Silas, along with a large group of God-fearing Greeks and quite a few prominent women” (17:4).  This, of course, is deemed to be the work of the Holy Spirit, as it is the Holy Spirit that moves one to a confession of Jesus as Lord (which is part of what the declaration of Him as Messiah entailed), as well as to a place of believing something so absurdly foolish (especially for the Greeks) as a man rising from the dead after being subjected to a Roman crucifixion.  Nevertheless, the believer is forced to realize that it is the preaching of this Gospel message, owing to the power  that lies trangely therein, that persuades and inspires this cherished, all-important belief.

Naturally, not all were persuaded, as one immediately discovers that “the Jews became jealous…and set the city in an uproar” (17:5).  After the meeting in the synagogue had disbanded, because of their purported jealousy, they went looking for Paul and Silas, but were unable to find them.  Not being able to locate those dangerous preachers, the mob instead dragged Paul and Silas’ host (a man named Jason) “before the city officials, screaming, ‘These people who have stirred up trouble throughout the world have come here too…  They are all acting against Caesar’s decrees, saying there is another king names Jesus!’” (17:6b-7) 

This serves well to point out the nature of the message of Jesus as Messiah.  This was not just a spiritual proclamation in which Jesus reigns in heaven and in somebody’s heart.  This message of Jesus as the Christ included the proclamation that Jesus was indeed King --- the King of Kings.  The Jews said this to the city officials, not because they believed that Jesus was the Messiah, but because they were well aware of everything that was implied by the title of Messiah, which included his being the ruler of all the earth.  Those that preached Jesus as King were presenting Him as the King of God’s kingdom that had been ushered into existence at the Resurrection, with that kingdom composed of all those that believed the message of Jesus.  Furthermore, the message was not that there was “another king,” but that Jesus was “the King,” and that all kings were now subject to Him.

Because of the uproar, and quite understandably, “The brothers sent Paul and Silas off to Berea at once, during the night” (17:10a).  Not surprisingly, “When they arrived, they went to the Jewish synagogue” (17:10b), as that was Paul’s custom.  What did he do at the synagogue?  It is most likely, again because this was his custom and his call, “he addressed them from the Scriptures, explaining and demonstrating that the Christ had to suffer and to rise from the dead, saying, ‘This Jesus I am proclaiming to you is the Christ’.” (17:2b-3)  We are told that “These Jews were more open-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they eagerly received the message, examining the Scriptures every day to see if these things were so” (17:11). 

This hearkens back to the foundational message, demonstrating the supreme importance of the preaching and understanding of the pure Gospel message of Jesus crucified and resurrected and shown forth to be the Son of God (a kingly term, then applied to the Caesar) in power.  The Bereans are said to have searched the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said about the Christ, and therefore about Jesus, was true.  It appears that nothing was more important than understanding Who Jesus was, along with the fact of, and what was implied by His being raised from the dead.  Together with this, one must be sure to note the power of God that is once again on display through the singular preaching of this message, together with the searching of Scripture, as it is said that “many of them believed, along with quite a few prominent Greek women and men” (17:12).          

Demonstration Of The Spirit & Of Power

My conversation and my preaching were not with persuasive words of wisdom, but with a demonstration of the Spirit and of power, so that your faith would not be based on human wisdom but on the power of God. – 1 Corinthians 2:4-5  (NET)

When the Apostle Paul writes these words, is he denouncing or decrying the diligent pursuit of wisdom and knowledge through intensive study?  Is he indicating that his preaching itself is somehow a demonstration of the Spirit and of power?  Is he claiming that the preaching itself, rather than being based on investigation and research and a searching out of truth through all available means, is based exclusively on a delivery of knowledge by the Holy Spirit?  Contrary to how this passage is often widely understood, the answer to the questions just posed is “absolutely not!”  Unfortunately, there is sometimes a tendency to over-spiritualize things, which usually occurs through a willful lifting of words from their context, thereby creating a paucity of meaning.  It is up to those in a position to do so, to set about in correction of the error.   

The context for the text is to be found in the first chapter of this letter to the church at Corinth.  In the eighteenth verse Paul writes, “For the message about the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God” (1:18).  That actually lines up quite nicely with the last part of the fifth verse of the second chapter, where we see Paul sharing about “the power of God.”  In 1:18, Paul says that the message of the cross is the power of God for those who are being saved.  This idea echoes well with Romans 1:16, in which we find that the “Gospel…is God’s power for salvation.”  The message of the Gospel, that Jesus, the crucified and resurrected Messiah, is Lord of all, naturally carries with it the message of the cross, thus making it possible for these verses to be linked.

Returning to the first chapter of the Corinthian letter, we find that “Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks ask for wisdom” (1:22).  Paul’s response to that is to say “but we preach about a crucified Christ” (1:23a), which of course includes the message of the cross---part of the Christ-event, all of which is intended to speak to the power of the Creator God.  Paul adds that this preaching about the cross is “a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles” (1:23b).  Going further, in the face of all evidence to the contrary, Paul says the “Christ,” that being Jesus, the man that was ignominiously crucified and put to a horrible, cursed death on a Roman cross, “is the power of God and the wisdom of God” (1:24), as well as the One “Who became for us wisdom from God” (1:30b).  Without getting into what precisely is meant or implied by the use of “wisdom” here, we see that throughout this section of the first chapter, Paul sets up the clear contrast between God’s wisdom and human wisdom.  In God’s wisdom, as Paul has come to understand it, Jesus went to the cross.  This defied all human wisdom (as Paul has also apparently come to understand it), as in the eyes and hearts and minds of most observers, and on the surface, nothing good or positive could come from such a thing. 

Having prepared his readers, Paul goes on to say, “I did not come with superior eloquence or wisdom as I proclaimed the testimony of God” (2:1b).  Because of what the cross represented (cursing, shame, and the end of a movement in the case of the now failed revolutionary leader), there was no human wisdom in what he preached, which we saw in the first chapter.  However, Paul insists that the testimony of God that he brought was “Jesus Christ, and Him crucified” (2:2b).  Indeed, to this he shortly adds that his conversation and his preaching “were not with persuasive words of wisdom,” which is obviously the case, as he has already declared that the message of the cross, of Jesus Christ and Him crucified, which Paul said was the only thing with which he was going to concern himself (2:2a), was foolishness.  He agreed that it was the antithesis of human wisdom, and he well understood this, so Paul has created the very construct of comprehension in which his preaching the message of the cross could not have been conducted in persuasive words of human wisdom.

His preaching of the cross was the “demonstration of the Spirit and of power.”  As was said earlier, it was not the act of preaching that was the demonstration.  Paul was not necessarily declaring himself to be “under the anointing” of the Spirit and in the power of God, at least in the way that many in our own time hear and define such a thing, with this then being subsequently demonstrated in his preaching.  Far from it.  In fact, Paul would say that any proclamation of Jesus as Lord (the Gospel) was made under the Spirit’s power.  It was the facts that he preached, that of the cross, the death, and the subsequent Resurrection of Christ from the grave, that was what he understood to be God’s demonstration of the Spirit and of power.  His message, which spoke of the work of the Spirit and God’s power over death, was not going to be understood in the normal way, as the crowning of the world’s King, most definitely, had not taken place in the normal or expected way. 

Yes, Paul determined to preach Jesus, and to preach Him crucified, so as to be able to preach Him raised up from the dead, in an impressive display of the power of God.  That is most certainly the non-human-wisdom message that Paul preached.   It was that message---the content rather than the manner of preaching---the bringing and hearing of which Paul believes to be the source of faith (Romans 10:17), that would enable the one that comes to be a believer, by the same Spirit that raised Christ Jesus from the dead, to bypass the inherent and underlying foolishness of the message (and the method), so as to be brought to the place of belief in the content of the message, and to an understanding of the salvific power of God. 

Preparing For The King (part 1)

For he will be great before the Lord.  And he must not drink wine or strong drink, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother’s womb. – Luke 1:15  (ESV)

This verse, which of course must be heard within and according to the entire narrative and purpose of the author’s work, which is the presentation of a true global ruler, speaks of the man that we know as John the Baptist.  Immediately after declaring that “the Baptizer” will be filled with the Holy Spirit from his mother’s womb, the writer goes on to say that “he will turn many of the children of Israel to the Lord their God” (1:16).  Because of what is said by this early Jesus-believer in the course of his writing, reflecting the belief of the early church when it comes to the role of the Holy Spirit in the world, we can quickly make the connection that it is not strictly John the Baptist that will be doing this turning through his ministry, as important and crucial for laying the groundwork for Jesus (and most likely influencing Jesus) that his ministry would be. 

What is not to be missed is that, though he will be the vessel that the Creator God of Israel uses of course, it would be that God, through the Holy Spirit, turning many to Himself, the Lord their God.  We go on to read that “he will go before Him in the spirit and power of Elijah” (1:17a), and that he will also serve to “turn the hearts of the fathers to the children” (1:17b).  Most importantly, however, we find it said that he will be turning, through the Holy Spirit at work in him to bring this about, “the disobedient to the wisdom of the just” (1:17c).

We can find this to be a most compelling statement, especially as we reflect on those words “wisdom” and “just”.  Here, one can’t help taking the liberty of doing a bit of justifiable though relatively free word substitution, and re-reading that phrase to find John turning “the disobedient to the Christ of God the Father.”  That is a safe substitution, in light of the fact that we know that our God is indeed just, and that the Apostle Paul refers to Jesus the Christ as the wisdom of God (1 Corinthians 1:24). 

Now, do we make these substitutions for no reason?  Of course not.  We do so in order for the purpose of better understanding what is being communicated through the Scripture.  Here, we are simply pointing out that part of John the Baptist’s ministry was to prepare a people currently in a state of the curse of exile (though in their land, they were ruled by a foreign power), and who would have thus, according to their self-understanding and the narrative by which they defined themselves, understood themselves to be a disobedient people.  John was preparing a people to be turned to Jesus and to His message about Himself.  That’s not much of a stretch of logic, as we find John offering up his purpose statement throughout the Gospels, saying that he was there to “Prepare the way of the Lord,” and to “make His paths straight” (Luke 3:4). 

These things that were being said about John here in the first chapter of Luke were being said by Gabriel, an angel of the Lord.  When John says that he was preparing the way of the Lord, he is hearkening back to what the readers (hearer) is informed was told to his father, Zechariah, by Gabriel.  Undoubtedly, the reader is to presume that these words had been passed on to John as a young man, and that John would naturally have reflected on them throughout his life.  So when John speaks about his ministry of preparation, he is referring to the fact that it was said by the angel that he would be used “to make ready for the Lord a people prepared” (1:17d).  This begs the question as to what the people were being prepared to do.  The answer is that they were being prepared to receive their king.  With that, we have to understand that God’s people were in constant expectation of their messiah, their king in the line of David, though there was certainly internal disagreement as to the type of messiah they were expecting.  It is along these lines that we think of the turning of “the disobedient to the Christ (the Messiah-anointed one) of God the Father.” 

Moses & Jesus (part 3 of 3)

Now, because we see this situation around us each day, how are we supposed to see a connection between Moses and Jesus?  The most obvious is that Jesus came to reconcile.  He came to reconcile by showing that He was the Messiah that allowed God’s people to live both within and beyond the yoke of human rulers, through the Kingdom of God that He was establishing.  He reconciled religious factions and showed them that their petty differences were swallowed up by the scope of His Salvation mission. 

He provided reconciliation by becoming the end of the law for those who believe, and that their wrangling over that which brought them under a curse was useless and un-necessary, as the basis for blessing and cursing was now to be found in relation to Him and whether or not one believed upon His Name.  He reconciled by bringing the Kingdom of Heaven in amongst men and setting it up above all rulers and authorities, showing His brethren that they did not have to live separate from the world, but that through Him, and through His working through them, by faith, in the power of the Holy Spirit, that He would bring renewal and restoration and reconciliation to God’s chosen, elected, covenant people throughout the world, and to the world itself.

Beyond that, and in thinking about a specific application of this scene from Moses’ life to that of Jesus, we have to look at the question that came to Moses, which was “Who made you a ruler and a judge over us?”  In chapter twelve of Luke, we find that “Someone in the crowd said to Him,” Him being Jesus, “Teacher, tell my brother to divide the inheritance with me” (12:13).  How did Jesus reply?  He said, “Man, who made Me a judge or arbitrator over you?” (12:14)   Moses was challenged as to who gave him the right to rule and judge.  Later on, upon God’s authority, he did become that very ruler and judge. 

Jesus, on the other hand, had every right to rule and judge and arbitrate, but did not do so.  Had He done so, this could have been seen as Jesus taking steps to set Himself up as an earthly authority, which would then have given the Roman government just cause to prosecute and probably execute Him for seditious behavior.  Moses had initially been rejected as a ruler and judge, while Jesus rejected the opportunity to take that role.  As was said, Moses would later become that very thing, as would Jesus, after being unlawfully put to death as a revolutionary leader, but then rising from the dead, as “the One appointed by God to be the judge of the living and the dead” (Acts 10:42b). 

Continuing on, Stephen says, “This Moses, whom they rejected, saying, ‘Who made you a ruler and a judge?’---this man God sent as both ruler and redeemer by the hand of the angel who appeared to him in the bush” (7:35).  Here, Stephen refers to the incident of Moses and the burning bush, where he heard a voice that said, “I am the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham and of Isaac and of Jacob” (7:32a).  This would have been a reminder, to Moses, and to Stephen’s hearers, of God’s covenantal promises toward His people.  As Moses was looked to as a ruler and redeemer, so too was the Messiah, Who was to be the embodiment and fulfiller of all of God’s promises of covenant.  Additionally, the reference of “the angel who appeared to him” must surely put us in mind of the fact that Jesus’ birth, the birth of the Ruler and Redeemer, was announced by angels both before and after its occurrence.

Of both Moses and Jesus it can be said, “This man led them out, performing signs and wonders” (7:36a).  Of both Moses and Jesus it can be said, “He received living oracles to give to us” (7:38b).  Unfortunately, of both Moses and Jesus, it can be said, “Our fathers refused to obey him, but thrust him aside, and in their hearts turned…saying…’Make us gods who will go before us’.” (7:39-40a)