Timothy & Countering The Culture (part 27)

Bringing honor back into focus, and remembering that the activity of the church is designed to ultimately increase Jesus’ honor in the court of public opinion (honoring the man that suffered what was then known as the greatest shame, which is a truly radical notion), Paul can now be heard to say “Elders who provide effective leadership must be counted worthy of double honor, especially those who work hard in speaking and teaching.  For the Scripture says, ‘Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain,’ and ‘The worker deserves his pay.’” (1 Timothy 5:17-18) 

It does not seem unreasonable to propose that Paul has himself in view here in this section of the letter.  One could surmise that Paul is answering accusations that have been leveled against him, as self-defense is a semi-regular feature of the Pauline library.  Most assuredly, the quotation from the twenty-fifth chapter of Deuteronomy, in regards to the ox, is not Paul finding a proof-text in regards to being paid for his teaching, with pay becoming equivalent to “double honor,” nor should it be construed as such.  Rather, the entire section from Deuteronomy must be considered, and the context on offer is that of adjudication. 

There one reads “If controversy arises between people, they should go to court for judgment.  When the judges hear the case, they shall exonerate the innocent but condemn the guilty.  Then, if the guilty person is sentenced to be a beating, the judge shall force him to lie down and be beaten in his presence with the number of blows his wicked behavior deserves.  The judge may sentence him to forty blows, but no more.  If he is struck with more than these, you might view your fellow Israelite with contempt.  You must not muzzle your ox when it is treading grain” (Deuteronomy 25:1-4).  So the statement about the ox is connected to controversy, judgment, exoneration, sentencing, and the carrying out of a sentence.  If Paul is indeed referencing himself as the elder who provides effective leadership, then he is also demanding the double honor of just treatment.  Why should he receive anything less?  Though he is willing to suffer for his children, he will not be subject to unfounded accusations. 

At the same time, it should be well understood that Paul does not demand honor for himself, especially considering the fact that he writes things like “I was formerly a blasphemer and a persecutor, and an arrogant man” (1:13a), while also referring to himself as the worst of sinners (1:15,16).  He is happy to shame himself, with this self-shaming serving as a functional groundwork for what is to come, but he is not about to put up with slander and attacks, which, if Paul is to be viewed as the elder, seems to be implied. 

Perfectly in line with the Deuteronomy reference, and in another Deuteronomy quotation, Paul goes on to write “Do not accept an accusation against an elder unless it can be confirmed by two or three witnesses” (5:19).   Of course, the possibility continues to exist that the elder is not, in fact, Paul referring to himself in the abstract, and that there is another problem in the church, which also runs back to the idea that this is not to be viewed firstly as words that establish church doctrine, but as words to be understood inside a historical and cultural situation that can, after appropriate processing, be applied as an operative principle for the church at large.    

Love On John's Terms (part 3)

Combined, the remainder of the New Testament letters make mention of “love” in some variation an additional seventy-four times.  This means that, outside of the Johannine texts (this excludes Revelation, which appears to have a different author than the Johannine works), there are one hundred fifty eight words variously translated as “love,” “loved,” or “loving” (133, 22, 3).  Added to the seventy-two instances to be found in the Gospel and Epistles of John, “love” appears in the New Testament texts two hundred thirty times.  Nearly a third of the total number of uses are located in the Johannine texts.  While it should be noted that not all of the uses of “love” are presented in a positive sense, there is little reason to wonder at the reason that the doctrine of love became foundational for the life of the Christian community.

One can observe the development of the doctrine as it take center-stage for the followers of Jesus.  Over time, and as the writings of the New Testament era are generated, love begins to define the life of the community, as Christians attempted to put into practice what they believed was implied by the Resurrection and the inauguration of the Creator God’s kingdom on earth.  Putting aside the letters, the majority of which pre-date the written forms of the Gospels, it is worthwhile to make note of the use of “love” in the earliest Gospel, which was that of Mark.  Mark makes use of “love” only three times.  Matthew and Luke, both of which rely heavily upon the Markan narrative while also drawing on other sources (both oral and written), expand the usage of “love,” with Matthew offering up ten instances of the term, and Luke employing the vocabulary of love on twelve occasions.   

By the time that the Gospel of John is composed (by the “disciple whom Jesus loved”), with the letters bearing the name of “John” most likely being roughly contemporary with the Gospel, it is love that has taken the field as the driving force that underlies the living out of the life of allegiance to the claims of Jesus and the response to His Resurrection and His kingdom.  That is evidenced by the narrative of the life of Jesus, who is recognized from the beginning of the Gospel as the embodiment of the Creator God, that has been constructed by the author of the Gospel of John.  It is reinforced by the sensibilities of the Johannine-related community which are revealed by the Johannine letters. 

It is patently obvious that the controlling ethic of love has taken center-stage for the Christian community to which the John writings are directed (and perhaps for the wider Christian community as well), and this is reflected by the narrative of the global Christian community that has been passed down through the centuries.  It is also possible that the author wanted to push the community in the direction of love, but with the growing presence of “love” in the synoptic Gospels as they are developed, it seems more likely that John’s structure is a response to a direction that has been previously taken.     

At the time of the writing of John, it seems clear that the high Christology of the Creator God in the person of the Christ has been worked out quite fully.  This would be, in no small part, due to the efforts of men such as the Apostle Paul, whose preaching, teaching, and letters had been a major influence in the development of what could be referred to as Christian orthodoxy.  It was the love of the Creator God, demonstrated by His grace and mercy while being firmly rooted in His faithfulness to His covenant and His creation, with all of this happening in and through Jesus, that best explained the whole of the Christ-event (incarnation, ministry, death, Resurrection, ascension).   

Jew, Gentile & Justification (part 3 of 3)

Having grasped this, being conscientious of the Jew/Gentile issue that is in view, and being cognizant that there is no distinction in the eyes of God between Jew and Gentile, we are now more well-equipped than ever to hear the famous words of verse twenty-three, which are “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (3:23).  It is helpful, of course, to bear in mind that sin, as Paul has essentially defined it in this letter (allowing the narrative and its context to dictate the way that words are heard and concepts are treated), is the failure to rightly bear the divine image, and consequently to fail to reflect God’s glory into the world (emphasized in the latter half of chapter one).  This had been the original charge given to Adam (commonly conceived of as the son of God), which had subsequently been passed along to Israel (also referred to as the son of God).  Both had failed.  Jesus, unlike Adam and Israel, had not failed in this regard. 

As we consider the import of this verse, generally focusing on sin, falling short, and glory, we need to, once again, cast our attention on an equally important word for the Apostle, which is “all.”  Because Paul is consistently concerned with bridging the gap and eliminating the wall that has been created by adherence to and insistence upon the outward covenant markers of Israel, we must be consistently aware of that which receives Paul’s attention. 

Also, lest we lose sight of where we began and where we are going, this ongoing awareness of what Paul is doing will very much come into play when it comes to comprehending our title text, which is “Everyone who believes in Him will not be put to shame” (10:11).  Quite simply, it is impossible to understand that at which Paul is driving in this letter, and especially these words from the third chapter that are definitive and that have been generally and unfortunately lifted from their context as the means of creating an artificial and unrecognizable (for Jesus and Paul) juxtaposition and dichotomy between “salvation by works” and “salvation by faith through grace.” 

Living in a post-Reformation world, we are trained to focus our attention on this particular aspect of Romans and of Pauline doctrine.  However, once we understand what is meant by “works of the law,” as denoting the covenant markers that identified one as a member of God’s elect and covenant people (as an acknowledging response to God’s grace towards Israel), and then place that alongside a proper understanding of the grace of God as relating to the fact that covenant membership (and its associated promises, blessings, and responsibilities) is being freely extended to Gentiles, with their covenant marker (the new covenant marker for all peoples) being a trusting loyalty in Jesus and to the Gospel claim that He is Lord of all, then we can take in the wider view of that which is being addressed. 

That wider view allows us to take notice of that which seems to be just as important, to Paul, as what is generally looked upon as the stand-alone issue of justification and how one is justified (usually defined as “saved” and therefore able to go to heaven when one dies), which is that of the inclusion of Gentiles as part of God’s elect people.  This explains Paul’s repeated emphasis on the “all.”  Briefly backtracking then, we see this in verse nine of the chapter, and “for we have already charged that Jews and Greeks alike are ALL under sin” (3:9b).  This “all” leads into the “no one” of verses ten, eleven, twelve, and twenty, the “all” that is also to be found in verses twelve and twenty-three, the “every mouth” and “whole world” of verse nineteen, and the “all who believe” of verse twenty-two (with its attendant “no distinction”). 

As we can see, justification is completely, one hundred percent inseparable from covenant and from Gentile inclusion.  Paul was obviously consumed by what God was doing for the world, and was not terribly concerned with creating, adopting, or propagating an “us versus them” mentality.  On the contrary, recognizing the grand scope of what God had done, was doing, and would be doing through the message of the Christ, the cross, and the Resurrection, Paul advocates a “them becoming us” frame of mind, desiring that all people everywhere experience, in this life, adoption into God’s covenant family, without hindrance, so that they might participate in His kingdom on earth both now and forever.