All The Saints (part 13)

Observing a brief (or not so brief) reminder in continuing this examination of this passage from Acts, it should be remembered that this study has returned again to this book (Acts), and to this section of the book, because of its usefulness in demonstrating the attitude taken towards Gentiles and the Temple.  

In co-ordination with Paul’s demonstrably sustained focus on Jew and Gentile relations in the early church, the associated controversies concerning covenant markers and covenant inclusion (justification), the repetitive use of highly inclusive language in the first chapter of Colossians, the incredible significance of the sweeping expansion of the covenant peoples to include Gentiles as Gentiles through confession of Jesus as Lord and Messiah (rather than Gentiles as Gentiles-converted-to-Judaism through the adoption of covenant markers that are generally referred to as “works of the law”), a side-by-side reading of Ephesians two with Colossians one (with expansions and abbreviations noted), this study has contended that the statement of the twenty-second verse of Colossians one, “but now He has reconciled you by His physical body through death to present you holy, without blemish, and blameless before Him,” is Temple language that echoes the Levitical code and its provisions for service in the Temple. 

Furthermore, it is proposed that this short statement stands in for the longer statement of Ephesians two, which speaks explicitly about the Temple and the unquestionable qualification of Gentiles to not only serve the Temple, but to actually be components of the Temple (the place of the Creator God’s dwelling and the ultimate symbol of this God’s covenant with humanity and with His creation).  What will be seen in what comes next in Acts twenty-one serves to demonstrate just how revolutionary this thinking was.

As Paul is conducting his business in the Temple, something goes horribly wrong.  Contrary to what was insisted would be the result of Paul’s activity in the Temple, which was that “everyone will know there is nothing in what they have been told about you, but that you yourself live in conformity with the law” (Acts 21:24b), Luke writes that “When the seven days were almost over, the Jews from the province of Asia who had seen him,” that being Paul, “in the Temple area stirred up the whole crowd and seized him, shouting ‘Men of Israel, help!  This is the man who teaches everyone everywhere against our people, our law, and this sanctuary!’” (21:27-28a)  So much for expectations.  Instead, a near-riot ensues.  Of course, what is here mentioned is only half of that which is causing people to take issue with Paul. 

Reading further, one finds a revelation of the generalized attitude towards Gentiles, proving just how deep these long-cherished notions ran, when reading “Furthermore he has brought Greeks into the inner court of the Temple and made this holy place ritually unclean!” (21:28b)  This, of course, was patently untrue, as Luke parenthetically inserts “For they had seen Trophimus the Ephesian in the city with him previously, and they assumed Paul had brought him into the inner Temple courts” (21:29).  The inner Temple courts were strictly off-limits to Gentiles. 

The words of the crowd, as reported by Luke, are thoroughly informative, as the insistence in regards to Gentiles in the Temple and subsequent ritual uncleanness dovetails well with Paul’s insistence that Gentiles (at the point in Colossians that stands in for the Temple-specific language in Ephesians) are in fact able to be presented before Israel’s God (the one whose dwelling place was the Temple), based on their trust in Jesus as the Messiah and as the one mediator between the Creator God of Israel and all men, as holy, without blemish, and blameless.  This naturally stands in contrast to their being ritually unclean and their being able to confer ritual uncleanness upon the Temple itself. 

Galatians & Giving (part 2)

The setting into which Paul wrote, and in which his letter would be read aloud to the assembled congregation, would most likely be that of a meal.  Paul makes clear the primacy of the meal table in his dealings with the Galatian church, utilizing the example of his negative and somewhat definitive experience in Antioch because it would most likely resound with them.  Hearing Paul’s letter read to them while they were at their standard gathering around the meal table would heighten the sensitivity to the issues that he is addressing in this church---with their giving practices being ancillary to the larger issues at hand.  Surely, one cannot imagine Paul employing an example that had no bearing on the issue with which he deals in this letter to the church of Galatia. 

In the second chapter, Paul writes “when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he had clearly done wrong.  Until certain people came from James, he had been eating with the Gentiles.  But when they arrived, he stopped doing this and separated himself because he was afraid of those who were pro-circumcision” (2:11-12).  As was the case at Antioch, this church must have been failing to come together at an undivided meal table, as they continued to recognize the distinctions between Jew and Gentile, and therefore allowed for the upholding of the covenantal markers of Judaism (dietary laws denoting clean and unclean, circumcision, and Sabbath-keeping).  Paul saw this as highly problematic and will use the dichotomy to make his points concerning what is meant by justification.  More on this anon. 

It is necessary to spend a bit more time recognizing the structure of the church’s gathering.  In their adherence to the Jesus tradition, and very much in tune with prevailing custom and culture, the earliest Christian assemblies were centered on the meal table.  In this respect, they would have looked very much like the familiar associations of the day.  The major difference for the Christians would have been (or ideally should have been) the fact that the meal table of Jesus believers would not have been stratified according to the social order of honor and shame. 

There was to be no distinction between Jew or Gentile, slave or free, male or female, rich or poor, but all were to share equally in status at the table and in the food and wine that was available for consumption.  Paul called the Corinthian church to account for their failure to live out the model of the meal demonstrated by Jesus, pointing out their failure to have all at the table share in the same food and drink, in both quantity and quality.  It is not unreasonable to insist that such was on his mind in this setting as well. 

This shared meal would consist of two parts, the first of which was the deipnon, the second part of which was the symposium.  The deipnon is where the meal would be shared and where bread would be broken.  At the close of the deipnon, a libation would be presented in honor of the god of the association.  For the Christians, who were those who looked to Jesus as King rather than Caesar (the Caesareans), the libation would be presented, poured out, or consumed in honor of Jesus (think of Jesus and His taking of the cup “after supper”).  With this portion of the meal complete, they would move on to the symposium.  The symposium was the part of the event of the meal in which discussions were to be had, songs would be sung, people would speak in tongues (an ancient religious custom the records of which predates Pentecost by hundreds of year), messages could be delivered, etc…  Noting that this would have been customary and traditional, Paul also spoke to this situation in the first letter to Corinth. 

Justified By Faithfulness (part 9 of 9)

Later and finally, in summing up his message, Paul would write, “I do not set aside God’s grace, because if righteousness could come through the law, then Christ died for nothing!” (2:21)  In Paul’s estimation, and quite rightly it would seem, the grace of the Creator God was paramount in the justification transaction.  From first to last, when it came to covenant, to blessing and cursing, and to resurrection and newness of life, all would be rooted in the grace of the God of Israel.  This grace was extended because of His faithfulness to His plans for this world and His creation. 

The works of the law, as Paul would apparently come to realize and understand, were just far too man-centered.  When they were considered against the backdrop of the all-powerful Creator God, these covenant markers were terribly insufficient to carry out and communicate the weight of His glory and of His intentions for His image-bearers and the creation.  Beyond that, Paul would seem to conclude, if righteousness (justification and the completion of the Creator God’s covenant faithfulness) could come through human effort to hold to a few meager works of the law, then truly, the Christ did not need to die. 

Paul would find it impossible to brook an agreement with this position.  He would encourage people, when it came to these issues, to hold to that to wish they wished to hold, while also insisting that it was presumptuous, and perhaps even a denial of the grace of the covenant God, upon which the covenant people relied, to impose these standards on others.  In the face of the obvious and overwhelming power of the God that was put on display through the Resurrection, as that event served to show forth Jesus as the Messiah---therefore demonstrating that the God of the covenant had indeed faithfully poured out His promised blessings on all those that wished to enter in to those blessings through a belief in Jesus as Messiah in a way that would bring glory to God---it had come to be the case that the works of the law (covenant markers) were no longer needed or useful in identifying the people of the sovereign God of the cosmos. 

Belief in Jesus, and in His faithfulness to His covenant obligations, was now the order of the day, just as belief in the faithfulness of the Creator God had always been necessary, with that faith-based belief always demonstrated by a covenant marker.  The covenant marker, since the time of Moses, had been the works of the law (though morphed over time).  Now though, the covenant marker, as has been said, was belief in Jesus.  This belief, as one is obliged to never forget, is set forth as being a gift of faith---a faith that somehow comes from a faithful God. 

A faithful, outworking believing in Jesus, and in the covenant God that was at work in and through Jesus to reveal Himself and His nature, is now all that mattered.  This had become the basis for all service.  This was the basis for worship.  This was the basis for giving.  Yes, Paul would say, that belief in the covenant God is what would and did deliver from cursing.  That is what would bring exile to an end.  That is what brought blessing.  In the Christ, the Creator God had entered into history and produced its climactic event.  He had indeed been faithful.  Because of the faithful service of a faithful Man, justification (entrance upon the covenant so as to secure its blessings, escaping exile, and experiencing salvation) for all was now available.  This justification was not to be found in a man’s faithfulness to  a specific set of covenant markers and that which divided man from man, but it was to be found in the Creator God’s faithfulness to His work, and that which united a globally sourced people to Him.            

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. 

Justified By Faithfulness (part 5)

For the Jews in Jesus’ day, and quite obviously on in to Paul’s day since it was something with which he was still dealing as evidenced by the subject matter of his letters, maintaining these marks of covenant status was important.  For a large number, these marks are what made them their God’s covenant people.  It was what demonstrated their righteousness, or their justification, or their right standing before their God, as people of His covenant.  Though justification was a crucial matter, Paul makes it clear, apparently following from what he knew of the words of Jesus in which He made belief in Himself as Messiah (Lord/King) the basis for justification, that even though “we are Jews by birth… we know that no one is justified by the works of the law” (Galatians 2:15a,16a).   

Bearing in mind what was being referenced when Paul writes about the works of the law, “No one,” the Apostle effectively says, “not even the people to whom God gave strict covenant requirements at Sinai through Moses, has a positive covenant standing conferred upon them by being circumcised, keeping kosher laws, purity laws, and keeping Sabbath.”  When it came to the issue of right covenant standing (justification), these were no longer relevant factors.  Paul himself would claim to have kept these things perfectly, but in futility in relation to the obligations of covenant, as he would come to realize that these things did nothing to secure justification. 

Was covenant now irrelevant?  Were covenant markers now of no value?  Absolutely not!  As has already been said, if one is justified, or is going to experience justification, then one must be adhering to the marks and requirements of the covenant that have been put in place by the Creator God Himself.  The issue at hand, for Paul, as he addressed both his countrymen and his Gentile brothers in Christ, was that, just as had been done before, the God of covenant had shifted the terms of His covenant.  The new and final covenant marker had been put in place, though belief in the power of God, through belief in Jesus as His representative, and His faithfulness to fulfill the promises of the covenant were still going to be paramount. 

Now, unlike before, when the Levitical requirements concerning idolatry, sanctuary, and Sabbath did serve as the mark of belief in the Creator God and His covenant, and adherence did secure the promised blessings (with disobedience bringing cursing), “no one is justified by the works of the law but by the faithfulness of Jesus Christ” (2:16a).  This faithfulness of Jesus Christ, it would seem, is the power of the Creator God, represented in Jesus the Christ.

It must be understood that the performance of the works of the law are actually set at a great distance from the idea of doing good works as a means of achieving the Creator God’s saving justification and thereby earning a place in heaven upon death.  For the Jews of that era (and any era), as has come to be learned, that simply was not an issue, and is actually foreign to the Jewish way of thinking.  Good works were the manifestation of the Creator God’s blessing.  Good works were what would naturally flow from positive covenant status. 

Keeping the law would not have been considered to be good works.  Good works would have been the response to the realization of being a member of the covenant people of the Creator God, which was achieved by adhering to the works of the law.  In addition to that, heaven, as it is routinely imagined as a place of unending bliss, and achieving heaven, was not the ultimate goal of the Jew.  These realizations are terribly significant, because Jesus, Paul, and all of the disciples and so many of the earliest believers in Jesus as Messiah were first century Jews, living in the midst of second temple Judaism, under Roman domination, and therefore, still under their God’s cursing, according to the law. 

Justified By Faithfulness (part 4)

While it is true that Jacob’s descendants (Israel) were given a set of covenant requirements to go along with the covenant mark of circumcision that had been established with Abraham, and that the overall history of those descendants that is presented in the Scriptures is one in which the predominant theme is a violation of those requirements, it can surely be said that their covenant was also based on a trusting belief in the faithfulness of the Creator God.  Regardless of the fact that there were required actions associated with receiving the blessings of the covenant, their performance of those actions, or avoidance of those actions, would still be based on a belief in their God, in His power, and in His faithfulness to carry out the associated promises. 

Ultimately, their justification (righteousness) was going to be based upon a belief in their God’s righteousness (His covenant faithfulness).  What can be seen in the Scriptures is that Israel ultimately did not believe in their God or His promises.  In the end, the historical narrative suggests that, by and large, there was no faith.  Ultimately, this would result in the division of Israel into northern and southern kingdoms (Israel and Judah), the destruction and captivity and dispersion of the northern kingdom (Israel) by Assyria, the destruction and captivity of the southern kingdom (Judah) by Babylon, and the ongoing subjugation of the land of promise to numerous world powers through the time of Roman domination that would be experienced by Jesus and the church. 

When the people of the southern kingdom, under the rule of Persia and under the leadership of Ezra, returned to the land of Judah (remembering that it was only a portion of the people that were deported, and only a portion of the deported that returned), they would do so with the clear understanding that the destruction, deportation, and subjugation that had come upon them was the fulfillment of their God’s promised curses for disobedience to His law.  Scripture provides an indication that the covenant people no longer needed to be convinced of their God’s power and righteousness.  They no longer lacked understanding of what it would take for them to be justified.  From that point, with direction from both Ezra and Nehemiah, there would be what seems like an enthusiastic effort to uphold the covenantal requirements, so that their God would provide His people with His blessings, and that they might become a blessing to the nations. 

This sense of responsibility to the covenant, with knowledge of their ongoing subjugation to foreign powers and ongoing exile from the full covenant blessings of their God hanging thickly in the air, continued on in to Jesus’ day, with the Pharisees acting as the upholders and enforcers of the terms of the covenant.  By then, the three basic covenant requirements of avoiding idolatry, keeping the Sabbaths, and reverencing the sanctuary, together with circumcision---with idolatry seeming to have been effectively dealt with and now practically non-existent among the Jews---had morphed into the keeping of kosher laws, purity laws, and the keeping of Sabbath.   

These were the things that were then looked to as the marks of their God’s covenant, and these were the things that were held to so as to effectively delineate the Creator God’s covenant people.  It could be insisted upon that, almost without a doubt, these things were being held to because of a belief in the power and promises of their God, as many desperately hoped to achieve their God’s promised blessings, according to the covenant that provided the collective and defining history of their people.  Taken together, these covenantal standards came to be known in popular parlance as the “works of the law.”

Justified By Faithfulness (part 3)

In turn, the people of the Creator God would point to their covenant-making-and-keeping God as the source of all blessing, bringing Him glory through reflecting His glory into the world, and causing all peoples and all of creation to desire the blessings of His covenant as well.  It would be communicated and understood that these blessings could be had by submitting to the requirements of the covenant and thereby joining with the covenant people.  This submission to and adherence to the requirements of covenant would confer a positive covenant status.  Therefore, a person would be justified.  That person would be looked upon, by the Creator God, as being righteous.  That person would have received his or her justification.  

What were the additional requirements that were put upon the Creator God’s covenant people in association with the law that was delivered to them with a charge to keep?  The requirements are summed up quite nicely and succinctly in the twenty-sixth chapter of Leviticus.  There the covenant God says, “You must not make for yourselves idols, so you must not set up for yourselves a carved image or a pillar, and you must not place a sculpted stone in your land to bow down before it, for I am the Lord your God.  You must keep My Sabbaths and reverence My sanctuary.  I am the Lord” (26:1-2). 

So to break it down to basics, and realizing that the requirements of the law were expected to be kept (and probably could be met), the covenant people of the Creator God (reiterating here) are instructed to avoid idolatry, to keep the Sabbaths (feasts/set times), and to reverence His sanctuary (tabernacle and temple).  Following that, for the remainder of the same chapter, their God outlines curses and blessings to be experienced for either obedience or disobedience to these basic principles.  This can be observed again in the later chapters of Deuteronomy.  This repetition is far more extensive, though it comes without a repetition of the three fundamental issues that prefaced the Levitical presentation.  There, the Creator God simply speaks of following His commandments that He had delivered to those that had been charged to carry out His will in and for the world.             

It must be said that, in each instance, the covenant that is set forth by the Creator God is based upon a belief in that God, in His power to perform, and in His faithfulness to carry out these covenants.  This belief, naturally, is set within a trust in that God.  Adam is presented as one that did not believe.  He is shown to be one that was faithless in regards to the first covenant.  With the Scriptural record as it is, one is left only to wonder at Adam’s response to the second covenant.  However, as Adam would begin to experience the corruption of his physical body as it moved towards the inevitable and promised death, along with the labor and toil with which he had to deal throughout his life because of the curse that was said to be placed upon the ground, it can be imagined that he was moved to a position of trusting belief in the God of covenants. 

Noah, in contrast to Adam, is said to have been righteous, somehow believing in the word of the Creator God before the promised flood would come, so it is reasonable to presume that he believed his God and took Him at His word, with this being especially so after the promise had come to pass.  It is said that Abraham believed God, and that this was counted for him as “righteousness” or “justification.”  As it would ultimately be the case for Israel and renewed Israel post-Christ, it was his belief that brought Abraham into a positive covenant standing, as this was the mark of the Creator God’s covenant with Him (though circumcision would be added).  This can basically be said to be true of Isaac and Jacob as well. 

Justified By Faithfulness (part 1)

Yet we know that no one is justified by the works of the law but by the faithfulness of Jesus Christ. – Galatians 2:16a  (NET)

This phrase is proceeded by an important one that assists in the creation of context and understanding of the terms that Paul is going to be employing in what is to follow from this statement.  Paul had written, “We are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners” (2:15).  When examining this issue, it is paramount to bear in mind that Paul prefaces talk of being justified by speaking of Jews and Gentiles.

This issue of justification is terribly significant and important.  It was important before Jesus and is important after Jesus.  Yes, though it seems to come to the fore after Jesus, it must be said that it was important for Jews before the Christ-event, and was and is important for all people (both Jews and Gentiles) after the Christ-event.  As Paul’s letters are read, it is incumbent upon the reader to remember that he was writing after the Resurrection, in the early years of Christ’s church, and that the terms that he employs carry a specific meaning and connotation for the time period in which they were written. 

Understanding the relevance of time-specific meanings is equally important for all of Scripture.  If one holds to that as a standard, then greater comprehension should be able to be achieved.  Ironically, it is this time specific relevance that provides the Scriptures with their element of timelessness and their universal application, as examining the Word of God in this way will make personal applications far more appropriate, effective, interesting, and exciting.

Defining terms then, it is proper to begin with justification, or being “justified” as Paul writes.  Justification, as Paul, his fellow countrymen, and the earliest members of the Christ community would understand, specifically had to do with being in a positive covenant standing before God, or with having a positive covenant status.  Because the Creator God’s “righteousness” (which is spoken of so often) can perhaps be best defined as His “covenant faithfulness,” righteousness is intimately connected with covenant.  Thus, “justified” can also be presented as being “righteous.”  Therefore, if one is justified, or is going to experience justification, then one must be adhering to the marks and requirements of the covenant that have been put in place by the covenant God Himself. 

This issue of covenant status can be quickly traced through the Hebrew Scriptures.  Though the term is not used, one can find the first covenant with Adam in the garden.  The Creator God is said to have told Adam, essentially, “If you do this, then this is what will happen.”  That is a covenant.  Of course, Scripture records how that went for Adam, for all of creation, and for every divine-image-bearing creation that would follow in Adam’s wake.  The Creator God’s righteousness (His faithfulness to His covenant and its mutual demands) was put on display as a result of Adam’s actions. 

He was faithful to the covenant that He made with Adam.  Immediately following what has come to be known as “the fall,” the Creator God spoke of another covenant concerning the serpent and the seed of the woman.  The earliest of those that came to believe in Jesus as the Christ, came to recognize that their God was faithful to fulfill this particular covenant as well, doing so through Jesus, and thereby came to connect this covenant that is connected with justification for His people (making them righteous).      

What Would God Have Me Do? (part 2 of 3)

It is possible then to see a picture of that God, entering into the pantheon of gods that are worshiped by the nations surrounding His people, all of which would, at some time, be worshiped by His people.  He stands in the midst of representations of these gods, looks around, holds out His arms and says, “How long will you continue showing favoritism to what is wicked?  How long will you worship these gods?” 

To the leaders of His people, the Creator God of Israel can be heard saying, “How long will you attempt to live and rule based on the subjective whims presented in the stories of these fickle and always changing gods?  If you are attempting to honor these gods, and to live and rule and judge by precepts that you believe will be pleasing to them, rather than based on the firm foundations of the covenant God that does not change, then you will forever be making legal decisions that are not just, but rather, unjust and capricious.  Because these gods represent wickedness, with stories of their rule full of pragmatism and a self-serving ethic, then your decisions will favor that which is wicked, because you are doing nothing more than following in the patterns of the myths of man-created gods, who have sprung from the imaginations of men that have been corrupted by evil.”  Clearly, this will not do for the people of the covenant God.  That God demands that His people act in justice. 

So much time and energy in wasted in the quest for an answer as to how the covenant God expects His people to live, when that God provides a straightforward response and merciful direction for the people that He chooses to carry out His plans and purpose for the creation.  After doing away with that which is purely pragmatic and self-serving, and by rendering His clear judgment on the gods that have been providing a faulty foundation for His people’s ongoing justification for not carrying out His purposes for them, Israel’s God sets forth His plan. 

Quite simply, He says, “Defend the cause of the poor and the fatherless!” (Psalm 82:3a)  Defend the cause of the poor and the fatherless.  Though poor is a highly fluid and relative term that is dependent on a number of subjective factors (though access to basic life necessities would be largely determinative of status in this area), “fatherless” is easily understood.  The Creator God expects His people to be an advocate for the orphaned and abandoned.  Orphans are extraordinarily close to the heart of the Creator God, an assertion which is borne out by the repetition of Scripture concerning the fatherless, and of the God of Scripture being their supporter through His people. 

This can be taken a step beyond the understanding of “fatherless” as referring to those that are orphans because they do not have an earthly father, with this conception carried into the spiritual realm as well.  Because Israel (and renewed Israel through the covenant of belief in Jesus) can look to and speak to the Creator God as their Father, those who stand outside of the covenant could be considered to be “fatherless.” 

How do the Creator God’s people defend the cause of and support and show concern for such fatherless ones?  They do so, naturally, both then and now, through the preaching the Gospel (Jesus is Lord) in both word and deed.  Prior to Jesus, Israel preached the Gospel (their God is Lord) by avoiding idolatry, reverencing their God’s sanctuary, and by keeping their God’s Sabbaths as they eventually came to look forward to a messiah through whom their God would put down evil and restore His creation.  In doing this, they were a light to all peoples for their God’s glory, and were blessed by their God in a way that was designed to draw people to Israel and to their God. 

Reign Of Life (part 1 of 3)

For if, because of one man’s trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ. – Romans 5:17  (ESV)

Paul writes that because of one man’s trespass, death reigned.  This death is very much present.  It’s presence is felt and seen and experienced on a daily basis.  It is inescapable.  It is real.  It is here.  We do not speak of it in lofty, supra-existential terms.  As Paul says, death does indeed reign.  Paul however, continues on with the words of hope, saying that those who receive an abundance of grace in the “free gift” that “brought justification” (5:16), who were “saved by His life” (5:10), who “have now received reconciliation” (5:11) because “while we were still weak…Christ died for the ungodly” (5:6), have been “saved by Him from the wrath of God” (5:9). 

This escape from the wrath of God appears to be wrapped up with an escape from death.  That seems to be a reasonable conclusion, as Paul writes that the free gift of God’s righteousness, that is, the free gift that stems from the execution of God’s covenant faithfulness as dramatically evidenced by and through the crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus, is life.  Not only is it life, but Paul informs us that the reigning in life, the reigning of life, the reigning that takes place because of the Resurrection, is to be understood akin to the way in which death reigned.  How does death reign?  As has already been said, death’s reign is present, felt, seen, experienced, inescapable, and very much real.  Yes, through one man’s trespass death reigned.  This was not the Creator God’s intention for this world that He is said to have brought into existence and ordered as recorded in Genesis, and over which He set a being created in His own image to have dominion and to represent Him.  Therefore, this skewed situation was set right by one man’s “act of righteousness (covenant faithfulness)” (5:18). 

If it has been set right, then the reign of life, eternal life, which is concomitant with the resurrected life of Jesus, must also be spoken of as being very much present and felt and seen and experienced on a daily basis.  It must also be understood to be inescapable and real and here.  Paul does not present this reigning of life as being something solely on the other side of the termination of mortal existence.  No, he sets it alongside the reign of death, which occurs in this present world, saying that the reign of life replaces it when one confesses Jesus as Lord, and so shares in the life of the age to come, bringing the kingdom of heaven to bear in the world.  Paul is not pointing to an other-worldly existence in which to enjoy the reigning of life that is associated with God’s faithfulness to His covenant, which is evidenced through Jesus, but says that that life is to be understood as having dominion in this world, in the exact same way in which we speak of death. 

If there must be a wait until an earthly existence has ceased in order to enjoy eternal life in and with Christ, then a true deliverance from death is something of which we cannot rightly speak.  If we do not speak of the reign of death in spiritual, other-worldly terms, but employ understandable and sensible earthly terms when speaking of death as Paul does here, then why must we constantly couch our speaking of the gift of eternal life in covenant participation in such ethereal terms, rather than in the present, earthly terms in which Paul is clearly presenting them?  Why must we constantly engage in pushing our hope away from us?  Is God’s arm shortened?  Is His power to save only limited to the after-life?  Is the power that raised up Christ from the dead actually insufficient to quicken our mortal bodies?

Conduct In Step With The Gospel (part 1 of 3)

But when He Who had set me apart before I was born, and Who called me by His grace, was pleased to reveal His Son to me in order that I might preach Him among the Gentiles… - Galatians 1:15-16a  (ESV)

The Apostle Paul knew that He had been called to preach the Gospel of the kingdom of God and Jesus as its Lord to all nations, without restriction.  It is in the midst of this knowledge, for which he labored and suffered, that he encounters what he saw as an unthinkable situation in Antioch.  He recounts a story about Peter in Antioch, saying that “before certain men came from James, he was eating with the Gentiles” (2:12a).  Why wouldn’t he?  This table fellowship was reminiscent of what Christ Himself had done throughout the course of His ministry.  This was the picture of the Gospel in action.  This was the picture of God extending His covenant of salvation and restoration, indeed His peace and life, and doing so to all men. 

However, Paul sadly reports that “when they came he (Peter) drew back and separated himself, fearing the circumcision party” (2:12b).  As we might imagine, with this example being provided by them to one who had an extraordinarily close relationship with the One Whom they were all now claiming as their Lord, “the rest of the Jews acted hypocritically along with him” (2:13a), also drawing back and separating themselves from the Gentiles, re-drawing the old lines of exclusion and isolation that had done so much to bring judgment upon Israel, and which had been strenuously condemned by Christ, in word and deed.  Paul responded by opposing Peter’s actions, flatly rebuking him and declaring to him that his “conduct was not in step with the truth of the Gospel” (2:14a).  In this rebuke, we can hear Paul reminding Peter that the Gospel and its announcement of the kingdom of God made the proclamation that in Christ, “there is not Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave, free: but Christ is all, and in all” (Colossians 3:11). 

Continuing on in the letter to the Galatians, Paul adds to his argument and writes that “we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ” (2:16a).  In the context of this setting up of exclusionary table fellowship, Paul warned his hearers and his subsequent readers that withdrawing into their national boundaries is not what will show them to be righteous.  Circumcision was no longer the mark of God’s covenant, and the evidence of a man’s faithfulness to the covenant (righteousness/justification), but rather, the confession of Jesus as Lord.  God’s covenant people would be identified by the declaration of a gifted faith of belief in the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  Reinforcing his point, and almost the entirety of his message, Paul writes “so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law” (2:16b).  Why does he say that?  “Because by works of the law no one will be justified” (2:16c).  Moving forward in the advance of Christ’s kingdom, the fleshly marks of a non-held-to covenant must be understood to be irrelevant in God’s plan for righteousness.  

Again, God’s people were not going to be counted righteous, justified, by the outward mark of a supposed faithfulness to a covenant and its requirements (honoring the Sabbaths, reverencing the sanctuary, keeping from idolatry) that Israel had never been able to keep.  Justification, that is, being counted righteous (or faithful to the covenant) would come through the faith gifted by the Holy Spirit, as that faith brings one into union with Christ for the purpose of believing that He is Lord and acting in accordance with the promises (salvation, redemption, eternal life, restoration, renewal, resurrection) associated with that belief.  Naturally, this would also include the proclamation and propagation of this belief (preaching and making disciples), for the purpose of the spreading of the gift of faith (Romans 10:17), so that others might experience this justification as well.        

As all of this is considered, one does not have to stretch his mind very far to come to terms with the idea that circumcision, which was being used as a dividing line for the separation of true believers and the ongoing identification of those who were truly God’s covenant people going forward, is here being seen by Paul as little more than idolatry.  In doing this, they are simply rebuilding what it was that Christ tore down”(2:18a), offering proof of Israel’s ongoing transgression of not being a light to the world, which justified God’s judgment against them, showing that Christ had to come to set things right, and that God Himself had to enter into history in order to do what His people had failed to do and to be what His people had failed to be, inaugurating His kingdom in the process.  Along with that, it could probably be said that anything that we presumptuously hold up as marks of identification that somehow mark us out from others of God’s chosen people as somehow special and distinct, this must surely appear as the building of barriers and as idols in the eyes of our Lord and God.         

Rome, Corinth & The Liberation Of Creation (part 1 of 3)

Just as we cannot approach Paul’s presentations of “justification” in the isolation of individual verse, but must look to Galatians, Philippians, and Ephesians in order to ascertain the all-peoples-inclusive language that is the bedrock of justification, while also looking to the stories in Acts to aid us in coming to terms with the development of Paul’s theological, soteriological, ecclesiastical, and eschatological positions, so also we do not consider what can be discovered in the eighth chapter of Romans, as it is a vital interpretation of the work of God in Christ and the ongoing story of Israel, in isolation as if it is an isolated occurrence.  In that spirit, we cast a net upon the waters of Paul’s letters that we might be able to see that Paul’s position on display in the eighth chapter of Romans, with its connection to the broader narrative of Israel’s history and its being foundational for the call and purpose of the church to live as the community of Resurrection, is most assuredly not isolated. 

Where might we look to find an echo of the prominent themes of the latter half of chapter eight of Romans (glory, renewal/redemption, groaning, and the affirmation of the goodness of God’s physical creation)?  Though these themes can be found littered throughout the Pauline literature, we find them rather tightly packed in the second letter to the Corinthians.  Now, while it is quite possible that what we have in the New Testament as the second Corinthian letter is actually a conglomeration of multiple letters, there can be little doubt that the section at which we will be looking, which comes to us as the end of chapter four and the beginning of chapter five (according to the chapter divisions introduced into the text in the thirteenth century) is from the same letter. 

We read: “But since we have the same spirit of faith as that shown in what has been written, ‘I believed, therefore I spoke,’” as Paul includes (adopts?) the Gentile Corinthians as recipients of and participants in Israel’s Scripture and its story, “we also believe, therefore we also speak.  We do so because we know that the one who raised up Jesus will also raise us up with Jesus and will bring us with you into His presence” (4:13-14).  This fits nicely alongside “And if children, then heirs (namely heirs of God and also fellow heirs with Christ)---if indeed we suffer with him so we may also be glorified with Him” (8:17). 

Of course, this also causes us to back up just a bit so as to incorporate some very Israel’s-exodus-story-like-but-now-transformed-by-Jesus-Gentile-believer-inclusive language of suffering and glorification that is found in “We are experiencing trouble on every side, but are not crushed; we are perplexed but not driven to despair; we are persecuted, but not abandoned; we are knocked down, but not destroyed, always carrying around in our body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be made visible in our body” (4:8-10), which, for Paul, is the body of believers as a microcosm of the whole of the covenant people of God, just as Israel, both the people and the land, were a microcosm of the redeemed covenant people of all nations and the redeemed creation. 

Continuing with that thought: “For we who are alive are constantly being handed over to death for Jesus’ sake, so that the life of Jesus may also be made visible in our mortal body.  As a result, death is at work in us, but life is at work in you” (4:11-12).  Returning then to Romans in our comparison, we read “For I consider that our present sufferings cannot even be compared to the glory that will be revealed to us” (8:18).  Back to Corinthians: “For all these things are for your sake, so that the grace that is including more and more people may cause thanksgiving to increase to the glory of God” (4:15).  To Romans: “For the creation eagerly waits for the revelation of the sons of God.  For the creation was subjected to futility---not willingly but because of God who subjected it---in hope that the creation itself will also be set free from the bondage of decay into the glorious freedom of God’s children” (8:19-21).  To Corinth: “Therefore we do not despair, but even if our physical body is wearing away, or inner person is being renewed day by day.  For our momentary light suffering is producing for us an eternal weight of glory far beyond all comparison” (4:16-17). 

Law & The Turn Of The Ages (part 3 of 3)

Lest we surmise that a revival of talk of justification and its requisite accompaniment of the family of God is not applicable to this portion of Paul’s letter, we need only skip down to verse twelve, where we hear “So then, brothers and sisters, we are under obligation” (8:12a).  To whom or to what?  “Not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh” (8:12a), for that is the old age of division and a fractured humanity.  Emphasizing the seriousness of the new obligation of the new covenant, Paul expands upon and punctuates that statement with “(for if you live according to the flesh, you will die)” (8:13a).  Further elaboration has Paul offering the contrasting position: “but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body you will live” (8:13b).  This business of God’s kingdom come to earth is a matter of life and death. 

Without getting sidetracked into an examination of what Paul may mean with verse thirteen, we find him quickly returning to the familial theme with verse fourteen and “For all who are led by the Spirit of God are the sons of God” (8:14).  What is the evidence of being led by the Spirit?  It is belief in Jesus as Lord (the mark of justification/participation in the Creator God’s covenant people), and the resultant participation in His kingdom purposes (with its promises, cross-shaped responsibilities, and blessings).  Further extending the family metaphor, and perhaps offering a suggestion as to the nature of the composition of the congregation of believers to which he writes, Paul goes on to adapt the language of, and rely upon familiarity with, the practices surrounding the act of adoption in that day, writing “For you did not receive the spirit of slavery leading again to fear, but you received the Spirit of adoption, by whom we cry, ‘Abba, Father.’” (8:15) 

Though there are numerous ways to hear these words, and while it certainly is suggestive of the type of relationship that can be individually enjoyed with the Creator God, it is important to keep this in line with what we have learned to this point in the letter, and to assert that this ability to cry out to God is about Paul’s continued insistence that all peoples can now rightly cry out to the God of Israel as their Father.  Before now, in their role as the covenant people, which we realize had degenerated into a defensive, protective, and excluding stance, it was only Israel that could rightly and justly cry out to their Father God and expect to be heard.  This is no longer the case.  Paul declares that “The Spirit Himself bears witness to our spirit that we are God’s children.  And if children, then heirs (namely, heirs of God and also fellow heirs with Christ)---if indeed we suffer with Him so we may also be glorified with Him” (8:16-17). 

Talk of heirs reaches back to what was suggested in the fourth chapter, being firmly ensconced within the world of the Abrahamic covenant and the inheritance to be had by all those that are his children, by a faith like that which he exercised.  Here, Paul reaches out to the four corners of the world, suggesting a united, renewed humanity under the new covenant and in the new age that has dawned in the Resurrection, with that humanity joined together with the Christ, and called to a kingdom-oriented life that takes its cues from the suffering and shame of the cross.  This suffering, which we can certainly equate with conceptions of honor and shame as the implications of a willful journey to the cross are explored and embraced, is efficacious as the means by which Jesus’ Lordship is proclaimed and by which the kingdom of God is advanced. 

Because every act that would, in that day and age, bring shame upon the believer (at least as understood by the world and the court of public opinion), was an embracing of the cross and of the tenets of a Lord and a kingdom that is manifest in such ways, and because every shame-embracing act is performed because of the hope of resurrection and the renewal of creation, Paul cannot help but say “For I consider that our present sufferings cannot even be compared to the glory that will be revealed to us” (8:18).  For those that believe in Jesus, behind every kingdom-directed thought and every kingdom-inspired action lies the idea that just as Jesus was raised from the dead into a glorious existence of a glorified body here in a creation that has begun to experience its renewal through the resurrecting power of the Spirit, so too shall all those that believe in Him (with that belief the evidence of the Spirit’s present work and evidence that the power of the new creation is at work) experience the same.  

Law & The Turn Of The Ages (part 2 of 3)

Continuing in his train of thought, and highlighting the struggle of the old age, Paul writes “For I don’t understand what I am doing.  For I do not do what I want---instead, I do what I hate.  But if I do what I don’t want, I agree that the law is good.  But now it is no longer me doing it, but sin that lives in me.  For I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my flesh.  For I want to do the good, but I cannot do it.  For I do not do the good I want, but I do the very evil I do not want.  Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer me doing it but sin that lives in me” (7:15-20). 

We must resist the temptation to reductionism, hearing this as Paul’s personal, spiritual experience.  Instead, because Paul operates within a story that shapes his theology, his soteriology, his ecclesiology, his sociology, his politics, his economics, his psychology, his philosophy, and his missiology (though we don’t pretend that these are necessarily separate categories for Paul), we must hear Paul echoing the plaintive cry of all those, prior to the cross and against the powers at work in the old age, that have been called to carry the covenant and to reflect God’s glory into the world. 

Understanding the voice by which he cries, we hear him continue on to say “So, I find the law that when I want to do good, evil is present with me.  For I delight in the law of God in my inner being.  But I see a different law in my members waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that is in my members.  Wretched man that I am!  Who will rescue me from this body of death?” (7:21-24)  The answer, not just for Paul as an individual, but for all that have been called to bear the divine image and to carry the covenant banner, comes with the Christ and the cross, as Paul (as we are continually mindful of who it was that carried the title of Lord, along with the city to which Paul sends this letter) exclaims: “Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord!  So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin” (7:25). 

The true self, which is the true human being of a renewed humanity animated by the Spirit of God, has come to life with Christ in the new age of the Spirit, in which the true law of God (love and sacrifice as manifested by Jesus) is served.  The flesh of the old age died with Christ on the cross.  This epic struggle, though it may not always appear to be the case, has now been set right in the new age of life in the Spirit, which, among other things, does away with the law and its covenant boundaries and creates a united humanity as a new family of God, capable of rightly bearing the divine image and of reflecting the glory of God into the world.  As we attempt to understand the various components of Paul’s thinking, picking apart various statements so as to gain an appreciation of Paul’s insights into what is accomplished by the work of God in Christ, we do not lose sight of the bigger picture that is being conveyed to the body of believers, which is the wholesale unity of those believers under one Lord as they serve as ambassadors of the kingdom of God.

This brief foray into the seventh chapter, as we have continued to find Paul encouraging a unified family of God, facilitates a more nuanced (and perhaps better appreciated) understanding of what can be found in the eighth chapter.  While we consider the over-riding corporate (people of God) application as opposed to the individual (person of God) application of Paul’s communication, along with Paul’s giving voice to the failed covenant bearers from the beginning, the contrasting presentation of the ways of the old age versus that of the new age allows us to make eminently more sense of “For those who live according to the flesh have their outlook shaped by the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit have their outlook shaped by the things of the Spirit.  For the outlook of the flesh is death, but the outlook of the Spirit is life and peace, because the outlook of the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to the law of God, nor is it able to do so.  Those who are in the flesh cannot please God” (8:5-8). 

With this being said and now better understood, we again hear Paul addressing the congregation, saying “You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you” (8:9a).  What will be the evidence that the Spirit of God is living in them corporately?  One such piece of evidence will be the lack of any division between Jew and Gentile.  Those who want to continue to maintain these divisions, continuing to insist on adherence to certain traditional provisions as marks of justification (covenant participation), rather than recognizing belief in Jesus as the sole necessity for covenant participation (justification), and thus perpetuate a divided humanity (and ultimately a fractured messianic banqueting table) are those that maintain the outlook of the flesh.  Those that rightly embrace the sole covenant provision that brings and indicates justification, are those that have the outlook of the Spirit, and are participants in the kingdom of God (life and peace).  Consequently, “if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, this person does not belong to Him” (8:9b).  Those that want to hold to old covenant markers (old age/flesh/death) do not participate in the kingdom whose head is Christ the Lord.   

Humanity (part 2 of 2)

From the record of the Gospels, it is the opinion of Jesus that those who are the primarily self-appointed arbiters of covenant in His day have gone horribly astray, are missing the mark, and are presenting a picture of the covenant and Creator God that was set at quite a distance from the God that revealed Himself through Adam, Abraham, Moses, and the prophets.  It is from these people that Jesus seizes the role of arbitrator, taking it upon Himself to demonstrate God’s intentions in regards to His covenant with His creation and His image-bearers, doing much to bear this out with His meal practice. 

By doing this, Jesus actually represents the final step in this long-running narrowing process.  While this means that the covenant has finally moved from the whole of humanity (Adam) to “one man,” Jesus’ re-shaping of the covenant, and His re-structuring of the covenant around Himself, restarts the process.  Jesus is the second Adam (or the last Adam), and God’s covenant is now thrown open “to the many,”  to all of humanity, as had been the case with Adam.  There is, of course, a major difference, in that “the gift is not like the one who sinned,” Adam, “For judgment, resulting from the one transgression, led to condemnation, but the gracious gift from the many failures,” that line of Adam, Abraham, Jacob, Israel, Judah, and the Pharisees, “led to justification” (5:16). 

Summing up this section then, and doing so with the entire scope of covenant and salvation history in mind, Paul writes “For if, by the transgression of the one man, death reigned through the one, how much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one, Jesus Christ!” (5:17)  Jesus marks the transition of the ages.  Whereas death reigned because of the covenant transgression of the first Adam, that age has been brought to an end.  Life now reigns through the covenant faithfulness of the second Adam.  In Him, a new creation has begun.  A new humanity has been brought into existence, and this humanity, through the grace of God, shares in the gift of righteousness (they are justified, experiencing God’s covenant faithfulness by participating in the new covenant for the new age) by believing in Jesus and His Gospel. 

Paul’s “all peoples” focus, which has seen him sharing the history of Israel with Gentiles and in which the covenant moves outward from Israel to take in the whole of creation and all of its peoples, which has been resonant from the beginning of his communication and stands in contrast to any notion that Gentiles needed to move towards Israel so as to participate in the covenant (by adopting its covenant markers), rings out as he moves to the close of the fifth chapter.  He writes “Consequently, just as condemnation for all people came through one transgression, so too through the one righteous act came righteousness for all people” (5:18). 

Covenant participation is for all people, and it comes through belief in Jesus, graciously and faithfully orchestrated by the Creator God.  There is not a limited group of covenant participants.  God’s redemptive purposes and plans extend to “all,” which he also refers to as the “many,” as opposed to “the few.”  Consequently, and we almost find Paul repeating himself as he explores the angles of his thinking and stresses the significance and scope of God’s cosmic plans and the dramatic re-write (according to then-current thinking) that is taking place in Jesus, we read “For just as through the disobedience of the one man many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of one man many will be made righteous” (5:19).     

Justification, The Spirit & The Family Of God (part 2 of 3)

If the people of God were in exile, it was well understood that they were not in covenant (not in right standing, not righteous).  A people in exile, or a people experiencing the Levitical/Deuteronomic curses that accompanied exile, were understood to be experiencing God’s wrath.  When a time of exile was brought to an end and the people were restored to their right standing according to God’s covenant with them, they were then thought to have escaped (having endured) God’s wrath.  It was also understood that God Himself would intervene to end the exile of His people, and this was very much the hope of Israel in the days of Jesus (though they were in their land, they were under the heel of Rome).  However, the oppression went much further than that of Rome. 

Owing to the understanding of the world’s oppressive powers/kingdoms that was provided by the visions of the book of Daniel (a popular book in the days of Jesus, and a book on which Jesus relied quite heavily, as evidenced by His employment of the title and imagery of the Son of Man), the people of God were under the impression (quite rightly it seems) that the true oppressor was not the kingdom of man that happened to be the prevailing world power under which they labored and to whom they paid tribute, but was actually the power of death that stood behind and animated those kingdoms.  Post-cross, towards the end of the first century, and drawing heavily from the imagery on display in Daniel and the popular prophetic genre of apocalyptic, this understanding of the nature of power in the world is given voice by the book of Revelation. 

What has this to do with what Paul writes in Romans?  Well, it goes hand in hand with the drawing together of all peoples, as they share in Israel’s covenant and Israel’s history.  In this sense then, all peoples, being ungodly and sinners, are in exile, rightly experiencing God’s wrath.  It is belief in Jesus, which provides justification and therefore induces right standing with God, that delivers all people from their long-standing exile, and so saves (justifies) from God’s wrath.  God’s wrath, of course, is generally reserved for His people that are failing to live up to their covenant responsibilities.  By extending this to all peoples, Paul makes the point that it has always been God’s intention to encompass all peoples within His covenant family, doing so on the basis of belief in Him that produces an unswerving loyalty to Him and His ways.  Therefore, this saving from God’s wrath informs the reader/hearer that God does indeed view all of humanity as being His covenant people.  This goes a long way in informing believers that God intends His redemption to be cosmically holistic.     

We can hear the language of an internationally inclusive redemption from exile flowing heavily from Paul: “For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, how much more, since we have been reconciled, will we be saved by His life?” (5:10)  Reconciliation and salvation, from out of exile, are components of the language of justification, and Paul continues to apply it liberally to all peoples, as he also continues his self-identification with Gentiles.  As always, he re-centers his thoughts on Jesus and the belief in Him that provides said justification, writing “Not only this, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ,” another thumb in the eye to “lord” Caesar as he writes to this assembly of believing kingdom representatives in Rome, “through whom we have now received the reconciliation” (5:11).  Yes, it is through the instrumentality of the cross of Christ, and the belief in Jesus that centers on that event that did so very much to reveal God and His radical kingdom principles to the world, that God grants the exodus from out of exile that seemed to have been specifically and previously reserved to the designated covenant people that had begun with Abraham. 

Table Of The Justified (part 6 of 6)

Importantly, we and the body of believers in Rome are reminded of the purpose of the words of the fourteenth chapter, and of much of the letter itself, by the words of the fifth verse of chapter fifteen: “Now may the God of endurance and comfort give you unity with one another in accordance with Christ Jesus” (15:5).  Unity, especially at the table of fellowship, was to be a hallmark of the church of Christ that lived out the kingdom of God as exampled by the life and ministry of Jesus.  Why was unity, across both the social spectrum and the long-term ethnic (Jew & Gentile) divide so crucial, “so that together you may with one voice glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” (15:6).  Obviously, this “voice” was both verbal and non-verbal; and the unity that was productive of this voice would run back to its basis, which was the belief in Jesus and the Gospel of the kingdom that provided justification for all. 

Is there really a place here to consider justification, with its production of a kingdom of Jesus believing Jew and Gentile children of Abraham?  From the beginning of chapter fourteen, we can look at the meal table through the lens of Jewish and Gentile sensibilities, and Paul is sure to bring this back squarely into focus when he instructs this body of Jesus believers to “Receive one another, then, just as Christ also received you, to God’s glory” (15:7).  This “receiving” probably carries with it an element of election, and is directed to both Jew and Gentile, who stand in equality before God, doing so on the basis of their belief in Jesus and their unswerving loyalty to Him. 

However, one might be tempted to ask if the Jew/Gentile issue is really here in sight.  The answer would come back that it most assuredly is, as Paul unleashes a veritable flood of Scripture, reminding us that the all-inclusive kingdom of God and the Scriptural narrative of His reconciling interaction with the world is always top of mind for him, and writing “For I tell you that Christ has become a servant of the circumcised on behalf of God’s truth to confirm the promises made to the fathers, and thus the Gentiles glorify God for His mercy.  As it is written, ‘Because of this I will confess you among the Gentiles, and I will sing praises to Your name.’  And again it says: ‘Rejoice, O Gentiles, with His people.’  And again, ‘Praise the Lord all your Gentiles, and let all the peoples praise Him.’  And again Isaiah says, ‘The root of Jesse will come, and the one who rises to rule over the Gentiles, in Him will the Gentiles hope.’” (15:8-12) 

As we are well aware, this rule over the Gentiles is not a domineering rule, but is something more along the lines of a surprise, as the Gentile nations are compassionately encompassed within God’s merciful rule, just as God did with Abraham.  Thus, the Gentiles, rather than being subsumed under the previously elected covenant people, with Israel exalted over the nations, praise God that they, through the instrument of the Messiah Jesus, have been made to stand alongside Israel, justified as full and equal participants in the kingdom of God.  Quite rightly then, Paul closes out this section of the letter, encouraging his hearers with “Now may the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace as you believe in Him, so that you may abound in hope by the power of the Holy Spirit” (15:13).  As always, belief is in the foreground.  By that belief, Gentiles are able to join in the hope of Israel, which is the hope of resurrection and new creation, doing so via the power of the Holy Spirit that has been poured out on all (5:5). 

Table Of The Justified (part 3)

Resuming with the fifth verse of the fourteenth chapter of Romans, we read “One person regards one day holier than other days, and another regards them all alike.  Each must be fully convinced in his own mind” (14:5).  Paul does indeed value the role of conscience, for it is individual believers, be they Jew or Gentile (all are justified---participate in the covenant people---on the same basis), acting in love and compassion, that compose the communities that are to be the signposts of the kingdom of God.  Thus, “The one who observes the day does it for the Lord.  The one who eats, eats for the Lord because he gives thanks to God, and the one abstains from eating abstains for the Lord, and he gives thanks to God” (14:6). 

Here, giving thanks to God is the abiding concern, rather than “opinions” or “abstaining.”  We should not be surprised to learn that Paul, the apostolic advocate for the kingdom of God and Gentile participation in that kingdom project on an equal basis with Jews, wants the focus when it comes to the activity of the citizens of that kingdom to fall upon God.  Paul reasons “For none of us lives for himself and none dies for himself.  If we live, we live for the Lord; if we die, we die for the Lord.  Therefore, whether we live or die, we are the Lord’s.  For this reason Christ died and returned to life, so that He may be the Lord of both the dead and the living” (14:8-9).  With this, we are reminded that the list of thoughts/ideals that should linger in the background as we hear the words of this chapter should include the fact that calling Jesus “Lord,” especially in connection with talk of living or dying, is a subversive claim against the one who bore that title---Caesar.  Claiming allegiance to another Lord and another kingdom, and doing so in Rome of all places (not to mention that the one being looked to as Lord was executed as a state criminal), could most certainly get one killed.

Returning our focus to food and to all of the issues attendant to that (Gentile justification, the unity of the church, the family of God composed of all peoples, the importance of the church’s meal table, the value and place of traditional covenant markers, costly acts of sacrificial love performed by those that claim allegiance to Jesus as Lord, and the role of faith), we read “But you who eat vegetables only---why do you judge your brother or sister?  And you who eat everything---why do you despise your brother or sister?  For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God” (14:10).  Judging and despising clearly stand counter to the ethic of love and compassion, while the fact that “we will all stand” for God’s judgment again emphasizes the unity and equality of all believers, regardless of national origin or ethnicity identifiers, as the family of God. 

Emphasizing that point, Paul employs the services of Isaiah, communicating “For it is written, ‘As I live, says the Lord, every knee will bow to Me, and every tongue will give praise to God.’  Therefore, each of us will give an account of himself to God” (14:11-12).  The quotation from the forty-fifth chapter of Isaiah calls to mind the God that vindicates and delivers, with that vindication extending to “the earth’s remote regions” (Isaiah 45:22b).  There, the prophet writes that “All the descendants of Israel will be vindicated by the Lord and will boast in Him” (45:25).  Of course, we know that Paul is of the opinion (a most valuable opinion) that all those that believe in Jesus as the crucified and resurrected Messiah of Israel and Lord of all compose the Israel of God, and that said belief (with the accompanying transformation of heart and mind by which the belief is accompanied) is all that is required for one to participate in the family of God that is now composed of all nations.  Such considerations cannot be divorced from our consumption of these words. 

Consequently, “we must not pass judgment on one another, but rather determine never to place an obstacle or a trap before a brother or sister.  I know and am convinced in the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean in itself; still, it is unclean to the one who considers it unclean” (14:13-14).  Not only is this the place where love and a self-denying and compassionate understanding become operable, but this is also the place where Paul, clearly relying on his awareness of the Jesus tradition as embodied by Mark seven, points out that uncleanness is not an intrinsic quality of a certain item of food.  Indeed, like Jesus, Paul makes the point that if there is uncleanness, it is extrinsic and linked to the person there dealing with the food.  Coming to terms with this is of great import for the church’s wall-removing, undivided meal table.  To this point, Paul adds “For if your brother or sister is distressed because of what you eat” (14:15a), that is, if the food on the table is creating stress and friction for a part of the body of believers, and you know it (regardless of the reason or the source, be it Jewish or Gentile sensibilities), “you are no longer walking in love.  Do not destroy by your food someone for whom Christ died” (14:15b).  Yes, Jesus died for all, Jew and Gentile, and food should not be an issue that causes one to withdraw from the family of the kingdom of God. 

Table Of The Justified (part 1)

Paul’s experiences, as would only be right and proper, play an obvious role in his soteriology and his ecclesiology.  It is not in the least bit difficult to discern that, along with his knowledge of early church traditions, along with what he has experiences as recorded in the fifteenth chapter of Acts has a heavy influence on portions of his letters.  While others are concerned about maintaining a certain understanding of propriety concerning food that would allow for Jews and Gentiles to join each other at a meal table, Luke’s presentation has Paul appearing to want to allow love to have its say, tempered with compassion, mercy, patience, and understanding.  For Paul, it is the expansion of the kingdom of God that is the abiding concern, rather than the ability for some to maintain their dietary provisions (identifying features) in such a way that may limit the impact of that kingdom and of the new creation it portends. 

It is useful, of course, to hear the letter from Jerusalem.  This letter places us in the enviable position of knowing the precise situation that stood behind the production of the letter (the events of the fourteenth chapter), which cannot be said of Paul’s letters.  When placed side by side with Paul’s letters, and especially with those that focus on the unity of believers under covenant, the difference in tone and spirit is marked.  So we read: “From the apostles and elders, your brothers, to the Gentile brothers and sisters in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia, greetings!  Since we have heard that some have gone out from among us with no orders from us and have confused you, upsetting your minds by what they said, we have unanimously decided to choose men to send to you along with our dear friends Barnabas and Paul, who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.  Therefore we are sending Judas and Silas who will tell you these things themselves in person.  For it seemed best to the Holy Spirit and to us no to place any greater burden on you than these necessary rules: that you abstain from meat that has been sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what has been strangled and from sexual immorality.  If you keep yourselves from doing these things, you will do well.  Farewell” (15:23b-29).

This letter from Jerusalem could be construed in such a way that may cause some to think that Jewish dietary sensibilities are more important than the unity of believers.  As can be seen, the instructions contained in the letter are quite clear.  The implications of the instructions are that Gentiles must do certain things that will allow for them to join with Jewish believers (or that will allow for Jewish believers to join them) at the church’s society-altering meal table.  Understandably then, since Paul was concerned with the positioning of Gentiles in relation to the covenant, and was quite insistent that the basis for entrance upon the covenant (justification) was the same for all people (belief in Jesus), with Abraham as the model, anything that could conceivably stand in the way of full unity and full equality under that covenant was problematic.  Interestingly, Luke never gives us a report of Paul’s response to the debate in Jerusalem or his opinion concerning the letter.  One could say that the silence is deafening. 

The tripartite directive to the Gentile believers concerning the food that could be placed upon and consumed at the meal table of the believing assembly could easily be utilized as a means of creating a second-class of kingdom citizens, as it was the dietary restrictions of the Jewish believers, and the attendant and implied morality of those restrictions, that could be seen to have trumped the apparently lax morality of the Gentile believers (as indicated by their lack of concern with the history of their food, its association with idolatry and sexual immorality, and its lack of proper preparation).  Now, this is not to say that Paul did not value the dietary restrictions or that he believed that the Jewish believers should abandon the law-based restrictions that they observed.  He never insists that Jewish believers violate their conscience, but he does insist that it is, in fact, a matter of conscience, and that the presence of certain foods, if they are not eaten, should not be an issue for the Jewish believer. 

Jerusalem & The Justification Of Gentiles (part 2 of 2)

After Peter spoke, “The whole group kept quiet and listened to Barnabas and Paul while they explained all the miraculous signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them” (15:12).  So here we have the repetitive theme of the power and presence of the Holy Spirit, and therefore confirmation of Gentile justification (covenant inclusion) as indicated by the reporting of miraculous signs and wonders.  Consequently we find that, “After they stopped speaking, James replied, ‘Brothers, listen to me.  Simeon has explained how God first concerned Himself to select from among the Gentiles a people for His name” (15:13-14) and “Therefore I conclude that we should not cause extra difficulty for those among the Gentiles who are turning to God” (15:19). 

With this James stands in solidarity with Paul.  All that is necessary for Gentiles is that they believe the Gospel and so participate in the covenant in equal standing with those who are members of Israel (as indicated by their own covenant markers).  This belief in the Gospel corresponds with the story of Abraham, so all is well.  Unfortunately, he could not leave well-enough alone.  Apparently, the idea of Gentile inclusiveness apart from some form of outward covenant marker was untenable to James and the others in Jerusalem.

Part of Paul’s indictment of Peter in the letter to the Galatians makes mention of James, as it was “Until certain people came from James, he had been eating with the Gentiles” (2:12).  Luke softens this in Acts to “some men came down from Judea” (15:1a).  When we consider that the issue of table fellowship was prominent in Antioch, there is little wonder that James adds “we should write them a letter telling them to abstain from things defiled by idols and from sexual immorality and from what has been strangled and from blood” (15:20).  We should take notice that all of this has to do with food.  We know this because the issue at Antioch sprang from the withdrawal of Jewish believers from table fellowship, with circumcision as a natural follow-on issue, though it was secondary. 

There are not three separate issues here, with two having to do with moral behavior and one having to do with food.  Thinking along such lines pulls us away from the appropriate context and the issues at hand amongst the believers.  The table was where the believing congregation gathered, and because the meal table was of paramount importance for the shaping of societies and communities in the day in which the church first came into existence, so also the church’s meal table was of paramount importance.  We must understand that.  Once we comprehend the community-shaping-and-identifying power of the meal in the Greco-Roman world, we can comfortably come to terms with Paul’s being quite exercised at the way that it being misused in Corinth, and why it is foundational for Paul’s challenge to Peter in Galatians, which sets him off on the path of writing about the nature of justification in that letter.

James is not suggesting that they “abstain from things defiled by idols” and to “abstain from sexual immorality” out of a concern that the believers be circumspect about the moral and spiritual condition of those with whom they are dining.  If that was the case, the addition of “abstain from what has been strangled and from blood” would seem wholly out of place.  Instead, we must hear this as a single directive, all of it having to do with food and the meal table.  James apparently does want the Jews and Gentiles to be able to share the same table (the divisions and problems at Antioch began at the meal table), so these particular directives are what will allow the Jewish believers to join the Gentile believers at the same table.  James wants the Gentile believers to abstain from food that has been defiled by idols, food that has been defiled by sexual immorality, food that has been defiled by strangling, and food that is defiled by the presence of the blood.  If they do this, then they will be able to join the Jewish believers (the true people of the covenant?) at their meal table.  Failing this, in his estimation, table division should not continue.

Paul, and apparently Peter before the men arrived from James arrived in Antioch, did not find it necessary to hold out such restrictions.  For Paul, and apparently Peter (the Cornelius story of the tenth chapter of Acts playing a role in this), the only thing that mattered was the belief in Jesus as Lord, with that functioning as the basis for open table fellowship between Jew and Gentile.  Paul would not insist that Jewish Christ-believers eat food that they would consider to be defiled, but he would insist that such food not be the basis for the failure for all to come together at the same table, or be the justification for separate meal tables in the church.  At the same, as evidenced by what James wants to write, there does appear to be unanimous agreement that if the meal table was divided, so too would the church be divided.  Hierarchies and divisions would develop and be exacerbated, and this would ultimately be destructive to the church and deleterious to the message of the Gospel.  James wants to put the onus on the Gentiles, insisting that they conform to Jewish custom in this matter.  Paul, on the other hand, wants love to rule the day.