Category Archives: Introduction

Paul’s Religious Mind Revisited, Part 1

Posted on by

I want to compare and contrast Paul’s teaching in his letter to the Corinthians to Jesus’ letter To the angel of the church in Thyatira[1] under the rubrics: “Paul’s Regime” and “Jesus’ Regime.”

Paul’s Regime

Jesus’ Regime
It is actually reported that sexual immorality (πορνεία) exists among you (ὑμῖν; plural), the kind of immorality (πορνεία) that is not permitted even among the Gentiles, so that someone is cohabiting with (ἔχειν, a form of ἔχω) his father’s wife.

1 Corinthians 5:1 (NET)

 But I have (ἔχω) this against you (σοῦ, a form of σύ; singular): You tolerate (ἀφεῖς, a form of ἀφίημι) that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, and by her teaching deceives my servants to commit sexual immorality (πορνεῦσαι, a form of πορνεύω) and to eat food sacrificed to idols (εἰδωλόθυτα, a form of εἰδωλόθυτον).

Revelation 2:20 (NET)
I have given her time to repent, but she is not willing to repent of her sexual immorality (πορνείας, a form of πορνεία).

Revelation 2:21 (NET)

Experiencing these as two distinct regimes is new for me.  As long as I assumed that Jesus’ spoke to the second person plural the two passages seemed virtually identical.  And without doubt I love and respect Paul.  He led me to Jesus, helped me to see Him in a different light.  Apart from Paul’s writing in the New Testament I may never have learned to trust Jesus.  I’ve tried to imagine that the man Paul wrote about had kidnapped his father’s wife, kept her against her will, raped her repeatedly and refused to release her.  But that’s as much, or more, to ask of ἔχειν than the idea that he was pimping her for cultic purposes.

The man who had his father’s wife compares to Jezebel, who by her teaching deceives [Jesus’] servants to commit sexual immorality, as a man who walks into a congregation with a loaded gun compares to an active shooter.  Jesus gave Jezebel time to repent.  Paul didn’t say anything about time to repent, though I’m hard-pressed to determine what form the man’s repentance might have taken.

When I believed that πορνεία meant pre-marital sex[2] repentance seemed fairly straightforward: The man should dump the woman, go to college, get a high-paying job, return home, settle down and marry a nice girl—one who wouldn’t cohabit with her husband’s son.  That changed as I began to take the law (Exodus 22:16, 17, Deuteronomy 22:28-30) more seriously,[3] as a way to know the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom [He] sent.[4]  Of course, the woman in this case was or had been married to the man’s father.  By law both should have been condemned to death (Leviticus 20:10, 11).

Paul’s Regime

Jesus’ Regime
And you (ὑμεῖς, a form of ὑμείς) are proud (πεφυσιωμένοι, a form of φυσιόω)!  Shouldn’t you have been deeply sorrowful instead and removed (ἀρθῇ, a form of αἴρω) the one who did this from among you (ὑμῶν)?

1 Corinthians 5:2 (NET) Table

 Look!  I am throwing her onto a bed of violent illness, and those who commit adultery (μοιχεύοντας, a form of μοιχεύω) with her into terrible suffering, unless they repent of her deeds.

Revelation 2:22 (NET)

Paul addressed everyone (ὑμεῖς is second person plural) in the church at Corinth except the man who had his father’s wife, accusing them of being proud.  Of the seven occurrences of forms of φυσιόω in the New Testament, six are found in Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians.  (It is at least his second letter.)  Pride or arrogance was a consistent theme in his mind as he wrote.

Paul claimed I became your father (ἐγέννησα, a form of γεννάω) in Christ Jesus through the gospel.[5]  Actually he wrote, For though you may have ten thousand guardians in Christ, you do not have many fathers (πατέρας, a form of πατήρ) ἐν γὰρ Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ διὰ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου ἐγὼ ὑμᾶς ἐγέννησα (literally, “for in Christ Jesus through the Gospel I gave birth to [KJV: have begotten] you”).  The NET translators shaded the arrogance of that statement a bit.  But you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ for you have one Teacher and you are all brothers, Jesus taught his disciples.  And call no one your ‘father’ (πατέρα, another form of πατήρ) on earth, for you have one Father (πατὴρ, another form of πατήρ), who is in heaven.  Nor are you to be called ‘teacher,’ for you have one teacher, the Christ.[6]

The grandiose claim that the Corinthian believers were born of Paul (John 1:13 NIV ἐγεννήθησαν is another form of γεννάω) was out of character with Paul’s own teaching earlier in the same letter (1 Corinthians 3:6, 7 NET):

I planted, Apollos watered, but God caused it to grow.  So neither the one who plants counts for anything, nor the one who waters, but God who causes the growth.

I have applied these things to myself and Apollos, Paul wrote, because of you, brothers and sisters, so that through us you may learn “not to go beyond what is written,” so that none of you will be puffed up (φυσιοῦσθε, another form of φυσιόω) in favor of the one against the other.  For who concedes you any superiority?  What do you have that you did not receive?  And if you received it, why do you boast (καυχᾶσαι, a form of καυχάομαι) as though you did not?[7]  Of course, then he wrote (1 Corinthians 4:18-20 NET):

Some have become arrogant (ἐφυσιώθησαν, another form of φυσιόω), as if I were not coming to you.  But I will come to you soon, if the Lord is willing, and I will find out not only the talk of these arrogant (πεφυσιωμένων, another form of φυσιόω) people, but also their power.  For the kingdom of God is demonstrated not in idle talk but with power.

Though God’s power (δυνάμει, a form of δύναμις) would clearly be the truth of his final declaration, in context it doesn’t seem to be the power Paul had in mind.  What do you want? he continued as if the following choice would be made by the Corinthians rather than by Paul himself.  Shall I come to you with a rod of discipline (ράβδῳ, a form of ῥάβδος) or with love (ἀγάπῃ) and a spirit of gentleness (πραΰτητος, a form of πραΰτης)?[8]  (While I assume that Paul’s threat to return to Corinth to beat the arrogant with a stick was bluster, it is heartwarming to find such punishment distinguished from love in the New Testament.)  In the very same letter Paul wrote (1 Corinthians 8:1b-3 NET):

Knowledge puffs up (φυσιοῖ, another form of φυσιόω), but love (ἀγάπη) builds up.  If someone thinks he knows something, he does not yet know to the degree that he needs to know.  But if someone loves (ἀγαπᾷ, a form of ἀγαπάω) God, he is known (ἔγνωσται, a form of γινώσκω) by God.

And (1 Corinthians 13:4-13 NET):

Love is patient, love is kind, it is not envious.  Love does not brag, it is not puffed up (φυσιοῦται, another form of φυσιόω).  It is not rude, it is not self-serving, it is not easily angered or resentful.  It is not glad about injustice, but rejoices in the truth.  It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

Love never ends.  But if there are prophecies, they will be set aside; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be set aside.  For we know in part, and we prophesy in part, but when what is perfect comes, the partial will be set aside.  When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child.  But when I became an adult, I set aside childish ways.  For now we see in a mirror indirectly, but then we will see face to face.  Now I know in part, but then I will know fully, just as I have been fully known.  And now these three remain: faith, hope, and love.  But the greatest of these is love.

Paul formed his conclusion that the Corinthians were proud (πεφυσιωμένοι, a form of φυσιόω), not by direct observation and interaction with them but, by hearsay[9] and by the fact that they had not removed the one who did this from among [them].  Paul had asked rhetorically, Shouldn’t you have been deeply sorrowful instead and removed the one who did this from among you?  The Greek word translated deeply sorrowful is ἐπενθήσατε (a form of πενθέω).

I am afraid, Paul wrote, that when I come again, my God may humiliate me before you, and I will grieve (πενθήσω, another form of πενθέω) for many of those who previously sinned and have not repented of the impurity, sexual immorality (πορνείᾳ), and licentiousness that they have practiced.[10]  Truly, love is not glad about injustice;[11] it does not rejoice in iniquity.[12]  Grieve, mourn (πενθήσατε, another form of πενθέω), and weep, James wrote.  Turn your laughter into mourning (πένθος) and your joy into despair.  Humble yourselves before the Lord and he will exalt you.[13]  But I can’t help wondering if this mourning wasn’t more cultural than divinely inspired.

Granted, Jesus said: Woe to you who laugh now, for you will mourn (πενθήσετε, another form of πενθέω) and weep;[14] and, The wedding guests cannot mourn (πενθεῖν, another form of πενθέω) while the bridegroom is with them, can they?[15]  He also said, Blessed are those who mourn (πενθοῦντες, another form of πενθέω), for they will be comforted.[16]  But I still remember the contrast between Ezra and Malachi:

Ezra

Malachi
While Ezra was praying and confessing, weeping and throwing himself to the ground before the temple of God, a very large crowd of Israelites – men, women, and children alike – gathered around him.  The people wept loudly [Table].  Then Shecaniah son of Jehiel, from the descendants of Elam, addressed Ezra: “We have been unfaithful to our God by marrying foreign women from the local peoples.  Nonetheless, there is still hope for Israel in this regard [Table].  Therefore let us enact a covenant with our God to send away all these women and their offspring, in keeping with your counsel, my lord, and that of those who respect the commandments of our God.  And let it be done according to the law [Table].”

Ezra 10:1-3 (NET)

 You also do this: You cover the altar of the Lord with tears as you weep and groan, because he no longer pays any attention to the offering nor accepts it favorably from you [Table].  Yet you ask, “Why?”  The Lord is testifying against you on behalf of the wife you married when you were young, to whom you have become unfaithful even though she is your companion and wife by law [Table].  No one who has even a small portion of the Spirit in him does this.  What did our ancestor do when seeking a child from God?  Be attentive, then, to your own spirit, for one should not be disloyal to the wife he took in his youth [Table].  “I hate divorce,” says the Lord God of Israel, “and the one who is guilty of violence,” says the Lord who rules over all.  “Pay attention to your conscience, and do not be unfaithful” [Table].

Malachi 2:13-16 (NET)

As Jesus’ disciples mourned his death (or perhaps their own loss) they didn’t believe his comfort when it came to them in the form of a woman: Early on the first day of the week, after he arose, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, from whom he had driven out seven demons.  She went out and told those who were with him, while they were mourning (πενθοῦσι, another form of πενθέω) and weeping.  And when they heard that he was alive and had been seen by her, they did not believe.[17]  So to the first part of Paul’s rhetorical question I can only give a qualified yes.

The Greek word translated removed in the second part of Paul’s rhetorical question was ἀρθῇ (a form of αἴρω).  “Take this man away (αἶρε, another form of αἴρω)!  Release Barabbas for us!”[18] an angry mob before Pilate rejected Jesus.  “Away (αἶρε, another form of αἴρω) with him!”[19] a mob in Jerusalem rejected Paul.  A crowd listening patiently to Paul’s defense turned ugly when he said that the Lord said to him, Go, because I will send you far away to the Gentiles.[20]  Then they raised their voices and shouted, “Away (αἶρε, another form of αἴρω) with this man from the earth!  For he should not be allowed to live!”[21]

Here again I can’t help wondering if Paul’s reaction wasn’t more cultural than divinely inspired.  But calling it cultural isn’t entirely accurate.  Paul’s reaction was precisely correct for a time under law when yehôvâh was present among his people in a way unknown since the garden of Eden, before He gave his life as an atonement for sin.  Consider Achan (Joshua 7) as a case in point.

Exile for the man who had his father’s wife (and the woman along with him, presumably) would be considered more merciful than death, but Jesus’ parable persuades me to reject the second part of Paul’s rhetorical question—Shouldn’t you have…removed the one who did this from among you?  When Jesus’ slaves asked if they should uproot the weeds planted by the enemy He said, No, since in gathering the weeds you may uproot the wheat with them.  Let both grow together until the harvest.[22]  This is not to say that I know whether the man who had his father’s wife was a weed planted by the enemy or a sinning saint.  It is to say, if this is Jesus’ attitude toward uprooting weeds planted by the enemy I dare not risk uprooting a sinning saint.

Let’s say for the sake of argument that I’m reading too much into Jesus’ parable.  Let’s say that I’m wrong about the angel of the church in Thyatira, that he was a human being rather than a higher order being.  Let’s grant, for the sake of argument, that Paul as an apostle had the authority and God-given wisdom to recognize a weed and uproot it.  Did he have the authority to turn the church of Jesus Christ in Corinth (and any who hear him today) from the love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control of the Holy Spirit, and transform them into a paranoid police force?  Rather than knowing no law against loving our neighbor as well as our enemies, does every infraction of any law call us to dam up the fruit of the Holy Spirit?  Must we judge one another constantly lest we be proud for loving one another excessively?  I admit I sat silently through a sermon declaring that, Do not judge so that you will not be judged,[23] meant that we should judge and be judged.[24]

Hear Jesus’ regime by contrast: Look!  I am throwing her onto a bed of violent illness.  That is Jezebel, the one who by her teaching deceives my servants to commit sexual immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols.[25]  Secondly, He is throwing those who commit adultery with her into terrible suffering, unless they repent of her deeds.  But there is not one word to the rest of the church in Thyatira about being proud because they had not removed Jezebel and her followers from their midst.  The criticism—But I have this against you—was laid directly on the angel of the church in Thyatira, whether human or a higher order being. Yes, the letter to the angel of the church in Thyatira was to be read by all the churches, but its content was directed with surgical precision.

To be fair the only reason I have the audacity to make this kind of critique of Paul’s writing in 1 Corinthians 5 is Paul’s extended treatise on love in his later writing to believers in Rome.  Therefore we must not pass judgment (κρίνωμεν, a form of κρίνω) on one another, but rather determine (κρίνατε, another form of κρίνω) never to place an obstacle or a trap before a brother or sister.[26]  Actually, Paul described love this way: Μηκέτι οὖν ἀλλήλους κρίνωμεν[27] (literally, “no longer then one another judge”).

[1] Revelation 2:18a (NET)

[2] An article by Bromleigh McCleneghan, “Sex and the single Christian: Why celibacy isn’t the only option,” was interesting bait for an unsuspecting moralist.  Obviously single people can have sex.  That’s how they become married people in God’s sight.  The rest is ceremony, celebration and government paperwork.  If anyone actually believed that religious leaders knew magical rites that could transmogrify illicit sex into holy matrimony those religious leaders would be compelled by law to perform those rites equally for all in a pluralistic society.  The only thing single people cannot do is fool God into thinking they are not guilty of adultery if they have sex with somebody different tomorrow night, simply because they have not signed government paperwork or had a ceremony or celebrated.

[3] Condemnation or Judgment? – Part 12, Ezra and Divorce

[4] John 17:3b (NET)

[5] 1 Corinthians 4:15b (NET)

[6] Matthew 23:8-10 (NET)

[7] 1 Corinthians 4:6, 7 (NET)

[8] 1 Corinthians 4:21 (NET)

[9] My brothers and sisters, some from Chloe’s household have informed me that there are quarrels among you. (1 Corinthians 1:11 NIV)

[10] 2 Corinthians 12:21 (NET)

[11] 1 Corinthians 13:6a (NET)

[12] 1 Corinthians 13:6a (NKJV)

[13] James 4:9, 10 (NET)

[14] Luke 6:25b (NET)

[15] Mathew 9:15a (NET)

[16] Matthew 5:4 (NET)

[17] Mark 16:9-11 (NET)

[18] Luke 23:18b (NET)

[19] Acts 21:36b (NET)

[20] Acts 22:21b (NET)

[21] Acts 22:22b (NET)

[22] Matthew 13:29, 30a (NET)

[23] Matthew 7:1 (NET)

[24] This point of view is surprisingly common.   I found the following paraphrase online: “If you don’t want your life to be scrutinized, then don’t judge others.  If you can stand the scrutiny then go ahead.”  I will freely admit to needing as much grace as possible.  There are other voices online.

[25] Revelation 2:20b (NET)

[26] Romans 14:13 (NET)

[27] Romans 14:13a

The Angels Will Gather

Posted on by

But I have a few things against you,[1] Jesus told John to write to the angel of the church in Pergamum.[2]  The word translated angel is ἀγγέλῳ (a form of ἄγγελος).  Below is a table of its forms and occurrences.

Form of ἄγγελος

 Total Occurrences Revelation Occurrences

URL
ἀγγέλῳ 9 8 http://biblehub.com/greek/angelo__32.htm
ἀγγέλων 31 7 http://biblehub.com/greek/angelo_n_32.htm
ἄγγελοι 23 8 http://biblehub.com/greek/angeloi_32.htm
ἀγγέλοις 9 3 http://biblehub.com/greek/angelois_32.htm
ἄγγελόν 22 11 http://biblehub.com/greek/angelon_32.htm
ἄγγελος 48 17 http://biblehub.com/greek/angelos_32.htm
ἀγγέλου 14 8 http://biblehub.com/greek/angelou_32.htm
ἀγγέλους 20 5 http://biblehub.com/greek/angelous_32.htm
Total 176 67

It means messenger and was translated messenger when the translators were reasonably sure the messenger was a human being (ἀγγέλων – Luke 7:24; ἄγγελον – Matthew 11:10, Mark 1:2, Luke 7:27; ἀγγέλους – Luke 9:52).  Paul euphemistically called a thorn in the flesh…a messenger (ἄγγελος – 2 Corinthians 12:7) of Satan.

To this list I would add: 1) Before God and Christ Jesus and the elect angels (ἀγγέλων – 1 Timothy 5:21) because of its association with the word translated elect (ἐκλεκτῶν, a form of ἐκλεκτός); 2) seen by angels (ἀγγέλοις – 1 Timothy 3:16 because human messengers proclaimed [Jesus] among Gentiles; 3) you welcomed me as though I were an angel of God (ἄγγελον – Galatians 4:14) because Paul referred to himself, a human being, as a messenger of God; and 4) I, Jesus, have sent my angel to testify to you (ἄγγελον – Revelation 22:16) because the word translated you (ὑμῖν) is plural ἄγγελον meant John as opposed to the angel who spoke to John.

There are seven more occurrences of forms of ἄγγελος that seem equivocal to me.  Three of them are further confounded by two occurrences in Stephen’s defense (Acts 7:35, 38 NET):

This same Moses they had rejected, saying, ‘Who made you a ruler and judge?’  God sent as both ruler and deliverer through the hand of the angel (ἀγγέλου) who appeared to him in the bush.

This is the man who was in the congregation in the wilderness with the angel (ἀγγέλου) who spoke to him at Mount Sinai, and with our ancestors, and he received living oracles to give to you.

The angel (Septuagint: ἄγγελος) of the Lord (yehôvâh, יהוה) appeared to [Moses] in a flame of fire from within a bush.[3]  When the Lord (yehôvâh, יהוה) saw that he had turned aside to look, God (ʼĕlôhı̂ym, אלהים) called to him from within the bush and said…[4]  “I am the God (ʼĕlôhı̂ym, אלהי) of your father, the God (ʼĕlôhı̂ym, אלהי) of Abraham, the God (ʼĕlôhı̂ym, אלהי) of Isaac, and the God (ʼĕlôhı̂ym, אלהי) of Jacob.”  Then Moses hid his face, because he was afraid to look at God (ʼĕlôhı̂ym).[5]  “Go and bring together the elders of Israel and tell them, ‘The Lord (yehôvâh, יהוה), the God (ʼĕlôhı̂ym, אלהי) of your fathers, appeared to me…”[6]

God (ʼĕlôhı̂ym, אלהים) spoke all these words: “I, the Lord (yehôvâh, יהוה), am your God (ʼĕlôhı̂ym, אלהיך), who brought you from the land of Egypt, from the house of slavery” [Table].[7]  “Moses alone may come near the Lord (yehôvâh, יהוה), but the others must not come near, nor may the people go up with him.”[8]  The Lord (yehôvâh, יהוה) spoke to Moses: “Go quickly, descend, because your people, whom you brought up from the land of Egypt, have acted corruptly [Table].  They have quickly turned aside from the way that I commanded them – they have made for themselves a molten calf and have bowed down to it and sacrificed to it and said, ‘These are your gods (ʼĕlôhı̂ym, אלהיך), O Israel, which brought you up from the land of Egypt’” [Table].[9]  Clearly, the messenger of yehôvâh in the burning bush and on Mount Sinai was yehôvâh Himself, though first century Jews may have been reluctant to acknowledge it.[10]

So when Stephen said—You received the law by decrees given by angels (ἀγγέλων), but you did not obey it[11]—was it a pious fiction for Jewish sensibilities or a prophetic revelation?  What about when the Holy Spirit included Stephen’s statement in the New Testament?  Why then was the law given? Paul asked rhetorically.  It was added because of transgressions, until the arrival of the descendant to whom the promise had been made.  It was administered (διαταγεὶς, a form of διατάσσω) through angels (ἀγγέλων) by an intermediary.[12]  For if the message spoken through angels (ἀγγέλων) proved to be so firm that every violation or disobedience received its just penalty, how will we escape if we neglect such a great salvation?  It was first communicated through the Lord and was confirmed to us by those who heard him, while God confirmed their witness with signs and wonders and various miracles and gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will.[13]

Are these human messengers—prophets and priests—oblique references to yehôvâh Himself or beings of another order of creation—angels?

Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire that has been prepared for the devil and his angels (ἀγγέλοις)![14]  All who were sitting in the council looked intently at Stephen and saw his face was like the face of an angel (ἀγγέλου).[15]  For man did not come from woman, but woman from man.  Neither was man created for the sake of woman, but woman for man.  For this reason a woman should have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels (ἀγγέλους).[16]  Do not neglect hospitality, because through it some have entertained angels (ἀγγέλους) without knowing it.[17]  Though I categorize these as equivocal I’m certainly leaning toward a higher order of being.  There are seven more occurrences I would have listed as equivocal and probably would have considered them more likely to be human until I began this study.

But I have a few things against you,[18] Jesus told John to write to the angel of the church in Pergamum.[19]  The Greek word translated you is σοῦ (a form of σύ), the second person singular as is the verb translated have (ἔχεις, a form of ἔχω) in the next sentence: You have some people there who follow the teaching of Balaam, who instructed Balak to put a stumbling block before the people of Israel so they would eat (φαγεῖν, a form of φάγω) food sacrificed to idols (εἰδωλόθυτα, a form of εἰδωλόθυτον) and commit sexual immorality (πορνεῦσαι, a form of πορνεύω).[20]

Jesus continued with his message to the angel of the church in Pergamum: Therefore, repent[21] (μετανόησον, a form of μετανοέω)!  Once again the verb μετανόησον is second person singular.  If not, I will come against you (σοι, another form of σύ) quickly and make war against those people with the sword of my mouth.[22]

But I have this against you,[23] Jesus told John to write to the angel of the church in Thyatira.[24]  The Greek word translated you is σοῦ (a form of σύ), the second person singular as is the verb translated tolerate (ἀφεῖς, a form of ἀφίημι) in the next sentence: You tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, and by her teaching deceives my servants to commit sexual immorality (πορνεῦσαι, a form of πορνεύω) and to eat (φαγεῖν, a form of φάγω) food sacrificed to idols (εἰδωλόθυτα, a form of εἰδωλόθυτον).[25]

The criticism was directed at the angels; the threat to make war against those who followed the teaching of Balaam with his words, the censure of illness toward those who committed adultery with Jezebel, and death to those who followed her teaching: Look!  I am throwing her onto a bed of violent illness, and those who commit adultery (μοιχεύοντας, a form of μοιχεύω) with her into terrible suffering, unless they repent of her deeds.  Furthermore, I will strike her followers with a deadly disease, and then all the churches will know that I am the one who searches minds and hearts.[26]  And this, after He had given her time to repent, but she [was] not willing to repent of her sexual immorality (πορνείας, a form of πορνεία).[27]

I will repay (δώσω, a form of δίδωμι) each one of you (ὑμῖν) what your (ὑμῶν) deeds deserve.[28]  Here the words translated you and your are plural.  But to the rest of you (ὑμῖν) in Thyatira, all who do not hold to this teaching (who have not learned the so-called “deep secrets of Satan”), to you I say: I do not put any additional burden on you (ὑμᾶς; plural).  However, hold on to what you have until I come.[29]

Do not accept an accusation against an elder, Paul wrote Timothy, unless it can be confirmed by two or three witnesses.  Those guilty of sin must be rebuked before all, as a warning to the rest.[30]  Not rebuking Jezebel publicly (before other elders) seems like the most obvious[31] failure if Jesus criticized an authoritarian human messenger for tolerating Jezebel (literally, “left” her to do what she did: Matthew 13:36; Matthew 26:44; Mark 8:13; Mark 13:34).  But since Jesus’ prescription—I am throwing her onto a bed of violent illness—is somewhat beyond the purview of a human messenger, I consider an angelic being here and make the connection to Jesus’ parable (Matthew 13:24-30 NET).

“The kingdom of heaven is like a person who sowed good seed in his field.  But while everyone was sleeping, an enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat and went away.  When the plants sprouted and bore grain, then the weeds also appeared.  So the slaves (δοῦλοι, a form of δοῦλος) of the owner came and said to him, ‘Sir, didn’t you sow good seed in your field?  Then where did the weeds come from?’  He said, ‘An enemy has done this.’  So the slaves replied,[32] ‘Do you want us to go and gather them?’ [Table]  But he said, ‘No, since in gathering the weeds you may uproot the wheat with them.  Let both grow together until the harvest.  At harvest time I will tell the reapers, “First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned, but then gather the wheat into my barn.”’”

Jesus explained the parable to his disciples (Matthew 13:37-39 NET):

“The one who sowed the good seed is the Son of Man.  The field is the world and the good seed are the people of the kingdom.  The weeds are the people of the evil one, and the enemy who sows them is the devil.  The harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are angels (ἄγγελοι).”

Here the ἄγγελοι are distinguished from the human δοῦλοι as higher beings capable of making distinctions that human messengers could not, and should not, make—No, since in gathering the weeds you may uproot the wheat with them.  The Son of Man will send his angels (ἀγγέλους), and they will gather from his kingdom everything that causes sin as well as all lawbreakers.[33]  This sounds precisely like the function Jesus criticized the angel (ἀγγέλῳ) of the church in Thyatira for not fulfilling sooner regarding Jezebel and her followers.  It prompts me to reconsider whether all seven of these angels are higher order beings—angels.

[1] Revelation 2:14a (NET)

[2] Revelation 2:12a (NET)

[3] Exodus 3:2a (NET)

[4] Exodus 3:4a (NET)

[5] Exodus 3:6 (NET) Table

[6] Exodus 3:16a (NET)

[7] Exodus 20:1, 2 (NET)

[8] Exodus 24:2 (NET)

[9] Exodus 32:7, 8 (NET)

[10] NET note 97

[11] Acts 7:53 (NET)

[12] Galatians 3:19 (NET)

[13] Hebrews 2:2-4 (NET)

[14] Matthew 25:41b (NET)

[15] Acts 6:15 (NET)

[16] 1 Corinthians 11:8-10 (NET)

[17] Hebrews 13:2 (NET)

[18] Revelation 2:14a (NET)

[19] Revelation 2:12a (NET)

[20] Revelation 2:14b (NET)  I have written about what was written to the angel of the church in Ephesus as if the Greek words translated you and their verbs were plural.  They are also singular.  I may have a lot of rethinking to do.

[21] Revelation 2:16a (NET)

[22] Revelation 2:16b (NET)

[23] Revelation 2:20a (NET)

[24] Revelation 2:18a (NET)

[25] Revelation 2:20b (NET)

[26] Revelation 2:22, 23a (NET)

[27] Revelation 2:21 (NET)

[28] Revelation 2:23b (NET)

[29] Revelation 2:24, 25 (NET)

[30] 1 Timothy 5:19, 20 (NET)

[31] Paul’s own actions described in 1 Corinthians 5:1-5 are more obvious perhaps, but I’ll consider that in its own essay.

[32] The NET parallel Greek text and NA28 had λέγουσιν here, where the Stephanus Textus Receptus and Byzantine Majority Text had ειπον (KJV: said).

[33] Matthew 13:41 (NET)

Romans, Part 82

Posted on by

I took a tangent from Paul’s teaching in the previous essay—I know and am convinced in the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean in itself[1]—to convince myself it was in line with Jesus’ teaching in Mark 7 since his criticism rang in my ears.  In Revelation Jesus criticized the angel of the church in Pergamum[2] and the angel of the church in Thyatira[3] because certain people under their authority were eating εἰδωλόθυτα (a form of εἰδωλόθυτον; translated, food sacrificed to idols) and for πορνεῦσαι (a form of πορνεύω; translated, commit sexual immorality).

Here, too, teaching against πορνείᾳ (the offense of the πορνεύων, another form of πορνεύω) Paul agreed with Jesus (1 Corinthians 6:12-20; 10:7, 8 NET):

“All things are lawful for me” – but not everything is beneficial.  “All things are lawful for me” – but I will not be controlled by anything.  “Food is for the stomach and the stomach is for food, but God will do away with both.”  The body is not for sexual immorality (πορνείᾳ), but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body.  Now God indeed raised the Lord and he will raise us by his power.  Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ?  Should I take the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute (πόρνης, a form of πόρνη)?  Never!  Or do you not know that anyone who is united with a prostitute (πόρνῃ) is one body with her?  For it is said, “The two will become one flesh.”  But the one united with the Lord is one spirit with him.  Flee sexual immorality (πορνείαν, another form of πορνεία)!  “Every sin a person commits is outside of the body” – but the immoral person (πορνεύων, another form of πορνεύω) sins against his own body.  Or do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own?  For you were bought at a price.  Therefore glorify God with your body [Table].

So do not be idolaters (εἰδωλολάτραι, a form of εἰδωλολάτρης), as some of them were.  As it is written, “The people sat down to eat and drink and rose up to play.”[4]  And let us not be immoral (πορνεύωμεν, another form of πορνεύω), as some of them were (ἐπόρνευσαν, another form of πορνεύω), and twenty-three thousand died in a single day.[5]

In an article on a different but related topic Robert A. J. Gagnon wrote of Romans 1:

If the wrath of God manifested in this age involves, in part, God permitting people to engage in such self-dishonoring, shameful behavior, with death resulting, then the saving righteousness of God must mean not merely forgiveness of sins but empowerment, through the Spirit, to be delivered from the primary control of such shameful impulses. 

Accordingly, “sin shall not be lord over you, for you are not under the law but under grace” (6:14). To be “under the law” is to be dominated by sinful passions that “bear fruit for death” (7:5). To be “under grace” is to be Spirit-controlled and thus bearing fruit for life (7:6).

While that was exciting to me, he then paraphrased Romans 8:12-14 as follows: “In other words, a profession of faith void of a transformed life is worthless and will not save a person from divine wrath.”  And he turned to John Calvin to further emphasize his point: “Those in whom the Spirit does not reign do not belong to Christ; therefore those who serve the flesh are not Christians…”  This kind of fear always led me back to myself, trusting my own works at reform, rather than trusting Christ and the Holy Spirit’s transforming power.  Masters, treat your slaves the same way, Paul wrote believers in Ephesus, giving up the use of threats (ἀπειλήν, a form of ἀπειλή), because you know that both you and they have the same master in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him.[6]  Surely we could practice this among the slaves of Christ.

There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus,[7] Paul wrote.  If we must threaten, the legitimate threats are sickness and death: Look!  I am throwing [Jezebel] onto a bed of violent illness, and those who commit adultery with her into terrible suffering, unless they repent of her deeds.  Furthermore, I will strike her followers with a deadly disease, and then all the churches will know that I am the one who searches minds and hearts.  I will repay each one of you what your deeds deserve.[8]  So if Jesus doesn’t sicken or kill enough church-folk to suit me, I’m the one with the problem.  (That is not to say that my health or my life is proof of my righteousness.  Even Jezebel was given time to repent.)

Therefore we must not pass judgment on one another, Paul continued his discourse on love, 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.  For if your brother or sister is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer walking in love.  Do not destroy by your food someone for whom Christ died.  Therefore do not let what you consider good be spoken of as evil (βλασφημείσθω, a form of βλασφημέω).[9]

Several American college campuses “fume with righteousness” these days; students, faculty, administration and benefactors silence anyone who disagrees with them.  I sincerely doubt that is what Paul meant by μὴ βλασφημείσθω οὖν ὑμῶν τὸ ἀγαθόν (translated, Therefore do not let what you consider good be spoken of as evil).  In fact, Paul was much more explicit about his meaning in his letter to the Corinthians (1 Corinthians 10:23-11:1 NET):

“Everything is lawful,” but not everything is beneficial. “Everything is lawful,” but not everything builds others up.  Do not seek your own good, but the good of the other person.  Eat anything that is sold in the marketplace without questions of conscience, for the earth and its abundance are the Lord’s.  If an unbeliever invites you to dinner and you want to go, eat whatever is served without asking questions of conscience.  But if someone says to you, “This is from a sacrifice,” do not eat, because of the one who told you and because of conscience – I do not mean yours but the other person’s.  For why is my freedom being judged by another’s conscience?  If I partake with thankfulness, why am I blamed (βλασφημοῦμαι, another form of βλασφημέω) for the food that I give thanks for?  So whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do everything for the glory of God.  Do not give offense to Jews or Greeks or to the church of God, just as I also try to please everyone in all things.  I do not seek my own benefit, but the benefit of many, so that they may be saved.  Be imitators of me, just as I also am of Christ.

For the kingdom of God does not consist of food and drink, Paul continued his discourse on love, but righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit.  For the one who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and approved by people.  So then, let us pursue what makes for peace and for building up one another.  Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food.  For although all things are clean, it is wrong to cause anyone to stumble by what you eat.[10]

The Greek word translated wrong is κακὸν (a form of κακός).  Love does no wrong (κακὸν, a form of κακός) to a neighbor.  Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.[11]  But I think it worth noting that κακὸν might have been translated evil in both instances.  There will be affliction and distress on everyone who does evil[12] (κακόν).  Do not repay anyone evil (κακὸν) for evil; consider what is good before all people.[13]  Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil (κακόν) with good.[14]

It is good not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything that causes your brother to stumble, Paul continued.  The faith you have, keep to yourself before God.  Blessed is the one who does not judge (κρίνων, a form of κρίνω) himself by what he approves.[15]  I would read this last statement as “in” (ἐν) what he approves.  He does not judge himself by not despising the faith-weak by not placing an obstacle or a trap before a brother or sister.[16]  And so I read the final verse—But the man who doubts is condemned if he eats, because he does not do so from faith, and whatever is not from faith is sin[17]—differently.

The Greek word translated doubts is διακρινόμενος (a form of διακρίνω) rather than a form of διστάζω.[18]  But Michael the archangel, when he disputed (διακρινόμενος; NET: debating) with the devil and argued about the body of Moses…[19]  I think all of the English translations of διακρινόμενος could be improved by some form of dispute.  But get up, go down, and accompany them without[20] dispute (διακρινόμενος; NET: hesitation), the Spirit said to Peter.  To dispute was exactly what Peter began to do in the vision of an object something like a large sheet filled with all kinds of four-footed animals and reptiles of the earth and wild birds.[21]  Certainly not, Lord, he disputed the command to slaughter and eat, for I have never eaten anything defiled and ritually unclean![22]

But if anyone is deficient in wisdom, he should ask God, who gives to all generously and without reprimand, and it will be given to him.  But he must ask in faith without disputing (διακρινόμενος; NET: doubting), for the one who disputes (διακρινόμενος; NET: doubts) is like a wave of the sea, blown and tossed around by the wind.[23]  If James meant to say that God’s generous wisdom without reprimand is given only after I achieve a faith of some measure of purity—without doubting—he was wrong.  But if he meant that the wisdom given would be of no value to me if I disputed it, he was absolutely correct.  For although wisdom was given by the generosity of God it will not be received by the one who disputes it.  For that person must not suppose that he will receive (λήμψεται, a form of λαμβάνω) anything from the Lord, since he is a double-minded (δίψυχος) individual, unstable in all his ways.[24]  I’ve spent years being double-minded, asking for wisdom and disputing his answers, and He has been nothing but patient throughout: If we are unfaithful, he remains faithful, since he cannot deny himself.[25]

And so I think—But the man who disputes (διακρινόμενος, a form of διακρίνω; NET: doubts) is condemned if he eats—refers back to one who abstains [who] must not judge (κρινέτω, another form of κρίνω) the one who eats everything.[26]  This is the one who will be condemned by his own conscience if he eats, because he does not do so from faith, but by provocation, and whatever is not from faith is sin.[27]  So love will not goad the faith-weak by flagrant displays of knowledge.  But we who are strong (δυνατοὶ, a form of δυνατός) ought to bear with the failings (ἀσθενήματα, a form of ἀσθένημα) of the weak (ἀδυνάτων, a form of ἀδύνατος), Paul continued, and not just please ourselves.[28]

Paul inhabited a world where God has placed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, gifts of healing, helps, gifts of leadership, different kinds of tongues.[29]  He could write about the δυνατοὶ.  I grew up in a world where men who hadn’t taken one step on water criticized one who had for his lack of faith, and this before the Holy Spirit was even given, before Peter received his daily ration of faithfulness.  That’s why the one man who noticed that Jesus had the faith to stand on the water and hold Peter up as well was such a God-send.  So I’ll continue to write about the less faith-weak rather than the strong.

Rulers (ἄρχοντες, a form of ἄρχων) are God’s servant (διάκονος) for your good and God’s servant (διάκονος) to administer retribution on the wrongdoer.[30]  They utilize external controls, laws and punishments for infractions, “sin” taxes, tax breaks, etc.  What is Apollos, really?  Or what is Paul?  Servants (διάκονοι, a form of διάκονος) through whom you came to believe, and each of us in the ministry the Lord gave us.  I planted, Apollos watered, but God caused it to grow.  So neither the one who plants counts for anything, nor the one who waters, but God who causes the growth.[31]  The love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control of the Holy Spirit are God’s internal controls.  What we believe, what we teach, determines whether we are just another layer of government, another layer of external controls, or followers of Jesus, sometimes stumbling and falling but, living an eternal life led by his Holy Spirit.

[1] Romans 14:14a (NET)

[2] Revelation 2:12a (NET)

[3] Revelation 2:18a (NET)

[4] Exodus 32 (NET); NET note (4): “The term ‘play’ may refer to idolatrous, sexual play here, although that is determined by the context rather than the meaning of the word itself (cf. BDAG 750 s.v. παίζω).”

[5] Numbers 25 (NET) I’m not ignoring the discrepancy (23 or 24 thousand) here but will take it up in another essay.

[6] Ephesians 6:9 (NET)

[7] Romans 8:1 (NET) I still “want to call this the absolute baseline of faith in Jesus Christ.”  See the NET note (1) about the addition to the text: “who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit” (Romans 8:1 KJV).

[8] Revelation 2:22, 23 (NET)

[9] Romans 14:13-16 (NET)

[10] Romans 14:17-20 (NET)

[11] Romans 13:10 (NET)

[12] Romans 2:9a (NET)

[13] Romans 12:17 (NET)

[14] Romans 12:21 (NET)

[15] Romans 14:21, 22 (NET)

[16] Romans 14:13b (NET)

[17] Romans 14:23 (NET)

[18] http://biblehub.com/greek/1365.htm

[19] Jude 1:9a (NASB)

[20] Acts 10:20a (NET) Table

[21] Acts 10:11, 12 (NET) Table

[22] Acts 10:14 (NET) Table

[23] James 1:5, 6 (NET)

[24] James 1:7, 8 (NET)

[25] 2 Timothy 2:13 (NET)

[26] Romans 14:3 (NET)

[27] Romans 14:23b

[28] Romans 15:1 (NET)

[29] 1 Corinthians 12:28 (NET)

[30] Romans 13:4 (NET)

[31] 1 Corinthians 3:5-7 (NET)

Romans, Part 81

Posted on by

As I worked on this essay I read an article by Jeffrey Fleishman, How an angry national mood is reflected in pop culture.  Two sentences really resonated: 1) “Our screens and phones fume with righteousness;” and 2) “Our shared humanity has been demarcated on smaller and smaller screens that often brim more with quicksilver judgment than open-mindedness.”  It struck me as a sort of default position that I quote here as contrast to the righteousness of love Paul described.

One person regards one day holier than other days, and another regards them all alike,[1] Paul continued his discussion of love.  No form of ἅγιος occurs in the text.  The concept holier is derived from κρίνει (a form of κρίνω), “to distinguish, to separate, put asunder, to pick out, select, choose,” translated regards.  I don’t think there is any problem with that translation except that the second regards is also κρίνει, so another regards all days equally holy would be a more balanced translation of the second clause.  A note (3) in the NET acknowledged the literal text: “For one judges day from day, and one judges all days.”

Each must be fully convinced (πληροφορείσθω, a form of πληροφορέω) in his own mind,[2] Paul continued.  He was fully convinced (πληροφορηθεὶς, another form of πληροφορέω) that what God promised he was also able to do, Paul wrote of Abraham.  So indeed it was credited to Abraham as righteousness.[3]  But the Lord stood by me and strengthened me, so that through me the message would be fully proclaimed (πληροφορηθῇ, another form of πληροφορέω) for all the Gentiles to hear,[4] he wrote Timothy.  And, You, however, be self-controlled in all things, endure hardship, do an evangelist’s work, fulfill (πληροφόρησον, another form of πληροφορέω) your ministry.  For I am already being poured out as an offering, and the time for me to depart is at hand.[5]  Epaphras, who is one of you, Paul wrote believers in Colossae, and a slave of Christ, greets you.  He is always struggling in prayer on your behalf, so that you may stand mature and fully assured (πεπληροφορημένοι, another form of πληροφορέω) in all the will of God.[6]

This gives me a good picture of the caliber of conviction Paul addressed.  A Catholic believer may be fully convinced that Sunday, the day Jesus arose from death, is the most holy day of the week.  A Seventh Day Adventist may be fully convinced that Saturday (28 Fundamental Beliefs, The Sabbath 20), the original Sabbath yehôvâh consecrated in the law, is more holy.  And I may be fully convinced that since I began to be led by the Holy Spirit every day is most holy:  Consequently a Sabbath rest remains for the people of God.  For the one who enters God’s rest has also rested from his works, just as God did from his own works.[7]

As I rest from my own works of sin and my own righteousness (likened to used tampons) to rely instead on the righteousness that comes by way of Christ’s faithfulness – a righteousness from God that is in fact based on Christ’s faithfulness,[8] the fruit of the Spirit, I see every day as the Sabbath.  And I  understand why Jesus healed so stubbornly on the Sabbath: to demonstrate beyond the shadow of any doubt that it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath,[9] including by the way serving my employer as a slave of Christ.[10]  But love neither despises nor judges us—the Catholic, the Seventh Day Adventist or me—for our differing convictions concerning holy days.

The one who observes (φρονῶν, a form of φρονέω) the day does (φρονεῖ, another form of φρονέω) it for the Lord, Paul continued.  The one who eats, eats for the Lord because he gives thanks to God, and the one who abstains from eating abstains for the Lord, and he gives thanks to God.  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.[11]  Then Paul added a somewhat curious aside about Jesus’ rule (κυριεύσῃ, a form of κυριεύω).  For this reason Christ died and returned to life, so that he may be the Lord (κυριεύσῃ) of both the dead and the living.[12]

My religion has taught me to add “if I allow it” to an assertion such as this.  I’ve learned to assert my will over the lordship of Jesus.  But I notice now that isn’t in the text.  And certainly the assertion of my authority over his was never my elders’ intent but an unintended consequence of what I now see as a defensive posture: If I refuse or fail to believe sufficiently in Jesus in this lifetime and spend eternity in hell it was not that Christ’s death and life failed to make Him Lord of both the dead and the living, but that I didn’t allow his Lordship to be efficacious in my earthly lifetime.  It is a brilliant maneuver.  I’m not convinced it’s true, so I’ll let Paul speak for himself once again: For this reason Christ died and returned to life, so that he may be the Lord of both the dead and the living.

But you who eat vegetables only, Paul continued, why do you judge (κρίνεις, another form of κρίνω) your brother or sister?  And you who eat everything – why do you despise (ἐξουθενεῖς, a form of ἐξουθενέω) your brother or sister?  For we will all stand before the judgment seat (βήματι, a form of βῆμα) of God.  For it is written, “As I live, says the Lord, every knee will bow to me, and every tongue will give praise to God.”[13]  I’m not sure about translating ἐξομολογήσεται (a form of ἐξομολογέω) will give praise here, no matter how hopeful it sounds.

Judas agreed (ἐξωμολόγησεν, another form of ἐξομολογέω) and began looking for an opportunity to betray Jesus.[14]  Paul wrote the Philippians, that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow – in heaven and on earth and under the earth – and every tongue confess (ἐξομολογήσηται, another form of ἐξομολογέω) that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.[15]  As it is written, Paul quoted Psalm 18:49, “Because of this I will confess (ἐξομολογήσομαι, another form of ἐξομολογέω) you among the Gentiles, and I will sing praises (ψαλῶ, a form of ψάλλω) to your name.”[16]  So confess (ἐξομολογεῖσθε, another form of ἐξομολογέω) your sins to one another,[17] James wrote.  People from Jerusalem…confessed (ἐξομολογούμενοι, another form of ἐξομολογέω) their sins[18] as they were baptized.  And in Ephesus, Many of those who had believed came forward, confessing (ἐξομολογούμενοι, another form of ἐξομολογέω) and making their deeds known.[19]

Paul’s point here was, Therefore, each of us will give an account (λόγον, a form of λόγος) of himself to God.[20]  Of course, if every tongue confesses, what will the outcome be?  To be fair and complete, Jesus said, I praise (ἐξομολογοῦμαι, another form of ἐξομολογέω) you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent, and revealed them to little children.[21]  On that same occasion Jesus rejoiced in the Holy Spirit and said, “I praise (ἐξομολογοῦμαι, another form of ἐξομολογέω) you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent, and revealed them to little children.  Yes, Father, for this was your gracious will.”[22]  Perhaps this ἐξομολογέω, agreement with God, confession to God, is a form of praise after all.

Therefore we must not pass judgment on one another,[23] Paul concluded, Μηκέτι οὖν ἀλλήλους κρίνωμεν (literally, “no longer therefore one another judge” or “therefore we no longer judge one another”).  I don’t understand why the NET translators turned this simple declarative statement into a rule, beyond the social construction of our shared religious reality.  Most translations adopted some form of let us stop here. Though I remain the locus of control in both translations, one might argue that in let us stop I have repented and am heading in the right direction, not-doing as opposed to doing.  But neither translation conveys being the love with which Christ’s Spirit fills us.

Before I was focused on the fruit of the Spirit I was like a fat ugly woman–or an old poor powerless man for that matter–priding myself in my celibacy.  But seeing righteousness as love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control has put me in direct conflict with how sinful the sin in my flesh actually is.  It is utterly opposed to love or joy or peace or patience or kindness or goodness or faithfulness or gentleness or any and every form of control.  This conflict, mostly losing it, has taught me to stop trusting in myself but in God who raises the dead.

We know that our old man was crucified with him so that the body of sin would no longer dominate us, so that we would no longer (μηκέτι) be enslaved to sin.[24]  This is the same word as Μηκέτι in “therefore we no longer judge one another” above.  And [Jesus] died for all so that those who live should no longer (μηκέτι) live for themselves but for him who died for them and was raised.[25]  So we are no longer (μηκέτι) to be children, tossed back and forth by waves and carried about by every wind of teaching by the trickery of people who craftily carry out their deceitful schemes.  But practicing the truth in love, we will in all things grow up into Christ, who is the head.  From him the whole body grows, fitted and held together through every supporting ligament.  As each one does its part, the body grows in love.  So I say this, and insist in the Lord, that you no longer (μηκέτι) live as the Gentiles do, in the futility of their thinking.[26]

In other words, this κρίνωμεν (another form of κρίνω; translated pass judgment) is from the old human.  We judge no longer if we are no longer the old human, if we are led by Spirit, but rather determine (κρίνατε, another form of κρίνω) never to place an obstacle or a trap before a brother or sister, Paul continued.  I know (οἶδα, a form of εἴδω) and am convinced (πέπεισμαι, a form of πείθω) in the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean (κοινὸν, a form of κοινός) in itself,[27] the former Pharisee agreed and confessed with (and so praised?) Jesus (Mark 7:1-8 NET).

Now the Pharisees and some of the experts in the law who came from Jerusalem gathered around him.  And they saw that some of Jesus’ disciples ate their bread with unclean (κοιναῖς, another form of κοινός) hands, that is, unwashed (ἀνίπτοις, a form of ἄνιπτος).  (For the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they perform a ritual washing, holding fast to the tradition of the elders.  And when they come from the marketplace, they do not eat unless they wash.  They hold fast to many other traditions: the washing of cups, pots, kettles, and dining couches.)  The Pharisees and the experts in the law asked him, “Why do your disciples not live according to the tradition of the elders, but eat with unwashed (κοιναῖς, another form of κοινός) hands?”  He said to them, “Isaiah prophesied correctly about you hypocrites, as it is written: ‘This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.  They worship me in vain, teaching as doctrine the commandments of men.’  Having no regard for the command of God, you hold fast to human tradition.”

Born the son of a scrubby dutch mother with an obsessive personality of my own, I have a serious hand-washing fetish.  It has become apparent that applying the sterile conditions of the operating room to all of life is detrimental to human health.  At the Institute for Functional Medicine conferences I record I’m learning that our overly cleanly habits may be part of the cause of our maladaptive immune systems.  Children need dirt as much as mother’s milk to jump-start their immune and digestive systems.  Jesus said (Mark 7:14, 15 NET):

Listen to me, everyone, and understand.  There is nothing outside of a person that can defile (κοινῶσαι, a form of κοινόω) him by going into him.  Rather, it is what comes out of a person that defiles (κοινοῦντα, another form of κοινόω) him.

Jesus’ disciples were as surprised by this as we may be, so he explained (Mark 7:18-23 NET):

“Are you so foolish?  Don’t you understand that whatever goes into a person from outside cannot defile (κοινῶσαι, another form of κοινόω) him?  For it does not enter his heart but his stomach, and then goes out into the sewer.”  (This means all foods are clean.)  He said, “What comes out of a person defiles (κοινοῖ, another form of κοινόω) him.  For from within, out of the human heart, come evil ideas, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, evil (πονηρίαι, a form of πονηρία), deceit, debauchery, envy (ὀφθαλμὸς πονηρός), slander, pride, and folly.  All these evils come from within and defile (κοινοῖ, another form of κοινόω) a person.”

By the way, another tidbit I’ve gleaned from IFM conferences is that inflammation caused by stress impairs the healthy functioning of all our biological systems.  I imagine the stress of all these evils (πονηρὰ, a form of πονηρός, “hurtful, full of labours, annoyances, hardships”) and know firsthand the stress of attempting to overcome them in my own strength rather than receiving the righteousness that comes by way of Christ’s faithfulness – a righteousness from God that is in fact based on Christ’s faithfulness, the fruit of his Spirit.  I’ll pick this up again later.

Below is a comparison of Paul’s Old Testament quotations with the Septuagint, the NET and the KJV.

NET

 Parallel Greek

Septuagint
every knee will bow to me, and every tongue will give praise to God.

Romans 14:11b

 ὅτι ἐμοὶ κάμψει πᾶν γόνυ καὶ πᾶσα γλῶσσα ἐξομολογήσεται τῷ θεῷ

Romans 14:11b

 ὅτι ἐμοὶ κάμψει πᾶν γόνυ καὶ ἐξομολογήσεται πᾶσα γλῶσσα τῷ θεῷ

Isaiah 45:23b

NET

 NET

KJV
every knee will bow to me, and every tongue will give praise to God.

Romans 14:11b

 Surely every knee will bow to me, every tongue will solemnly affirm

Isaiah 45:23b

 That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear

Isaiah 45:23b
NET Parallel Greek

Septuagint
Because of this I will confess you among the Gentiles, and I will sing praises to your name.

Romans 15:9b

 διὰ τοῦτο ἐξομολογήσομαι σοι ἐν ἔθνεσιν καὶ τῷ ὀνόματι σου ψαλῶ

Romans 15:9b

 διὰ τοῦτο ἐξομολογήσομαί σοι ἐν ἔθνεσιν κύριε καὶ τῷ ὀνόματί σου ψαλῶ

Psalm 18:49

NET

 NET

KJV
Because of this I will confess you among the Gentiles, and I will sing praises to your name.

Romans 15:9b

 So I will give you thanks before the nations, O Lord!  I will sing praises to you!

Psalm 18:49

 Therefore will I give thanks unto thee, O Lord, among the heathen, and sing praises unto thy name.

Psalm 18:49

Romans, Part 82

[1] Romans 14:5a (NET)

[2] Romans 14:5b (NET)

[3] Romans 4:21, 22 (NET)

[4] 2 Timothy 4:17a (NET)

[5] 2 Timothy 4:5, 6 (NET)

[6] Colossians 4:12 (NET)

[7] Hebrews 4:9, 10 (NET)

[8] Philippians 3:9b (NET)

[9] Matthew 12:12b (NET)

[10] Ephesians 6:5-8 (NET)  I certainly relate to having difficulty with this passage.  If you find it impossible to serve your employer as a slave of Christ, perhaps you are not being led by the Holy Spirit or perhaps you need to seek a new job, assuming you are free to do so.

[11] Romans 14:6-8 (NET)

[12] Romans 14:9 (NET)

[13] Romans 14:10, 11 (NET)

[14] Luke 22:6 (NET)

[15] Philippians 2:10, 11 (NET)

[16] Romans 15:9b (NET)

[17] James 5:16a (NET)

[18] Matthew 3:5, 6 (NET); Mark 1:5 (NET)

[19] Acts 19:18 (NET)

[20] Romans 14:12 (NET) Table

[21] Matthew 11:25 (NET)

[22] Luke 10:21 (NET)

[23] Romans 14:13a (NET)

[24] Romans 6:6 (NET)

[25] 2 Corinthians 5:15 (NET)

[26] Ephesians 4:14-17 (NET) Table

[27] Romans 14:13b, 14a (NET)

Romans, Part 80

Posted on by

JudgmentalPerhaps every old human (παλαιὸν ἄνθρωπον, translated old man) should come with this warning label, but love says: Now receive the one who is weak in the faith, and do not have disputes over differing opinions.[1]  Paul continued his discussion of love with a then current example (Romans 14:2, 3a NET):

One person believes in eating everything, but the weak (ἀσθενῶν, a form of ἀσθενέω) person eats only vegetables.  The one who eats everything must not despise (ἐξουθενείτω, a form of ἐξουθενέω) the one who does not…

Luke introduced Jesus’ parable contrasting religious and righteous prayer this way: Jesus also told this parable to some who were confident that they were righteous and looked down on everyone else.[2]  The Greek word translated looked down is ἐξουθενοῦντας (another form of ἐξουθενέω) like ἐξουθενείτω, translated despise in Romans 14:3.  Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, replied, “Rulers of the people and elders[3]….This Jesus is the stone that was rejected (ἐξουθενηθεὶς, another form of ἐξουθενέω) by you, the builders, that has become the cornerstone.”[4]  Paul wrote believers in Corinth (1 Corinthians 1:26-31 NET Table):

Think about the circumstances of your call, brothers and sisters.  Not many were wise by human standards, not many were powerful, not many were born to a privileged position.  But God chose what the world thinks foolish to shame the wise, and God chose what the world thinks weak (ἀσθενῆ, a form of ἀσθενής) to shame the strong.  God chose what is low and despised (ἐξουθενημένα, another form of ἐξουθενέω) in the world, what is regarded as nothing, to set aside what is regarded as something, so that no one can boast in his presence.  He is the reason you have a relationship with Christ Jesus, who became for us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification and redemption, so that, as it is written, “Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.”

Love doesn’t despise the faith-weak the way the world despises all believers.  And love doesn’t judge those who do not adhere to the rules the faith-weak live by.  Paul continued (Romans 14:3b NET):

…and the one who abstains must not judge (κρινέτω, a form of κρίνω) the one who eats everything, for God has accepted (προσελάβετο, a form of προσλαμβάνω) him.

Therefore do not let anyone judge (κρινέτω, a form of κρίνω) you with respect to food or drink, Paul wrote believers in Colossae, or in the matter of a feast, new moon, or Sabbath days – these are only the shadow of the things to come, but the reality is Christ![5]  Yet of love Paul wrote (1 Corinthians 8):

With regard to food sacrificed to idols, we know that “we all have knowledge.”  Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up.  If someone thinks he knows something, he does not yet know to the degree that he needs to know.  But if someone loves God, he is known by God.

With regard then to eating food sacrificed to idols, we know that “an idol in this world is nothing,” and that “there is no God but one.”  If after all there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as there are many gods and many lords), yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we live, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we live.

But this knowledge is not shared by all.  And some, by being accustomed to idols in former times, eat this food as an idol sacrifice, and their conscience, because it is weak (ἀσθενὴς, another form of ἀσθενής), is defiled.  Now food will not bring us close to God.  We are no worse if we do not eat and no better if we do.  But be careful that this liberty of yours does not become a hindrance to the weak (ἀσθενέσιν, another form of ἀσθενής).  For if someone weak (ἀσθενοῦς, another form of ἀσθενής) sees you who possess knowledge dining in an idol’s temple, will not his conscience be “strengthened” to eat food offered to idols?  So by your knowledge the weak (ἀσθενῶν, a form of ἀσθενέω) brother or sister, for whom Christ died, is destroyed.  If you sin against your brothers or sisters in this way and wound their weak (ἀσθενοῦσαν, another form of ἀσθενέω) conscience, you sin against Christ.  For this reason, if food causes my brother or sister to sin, I will never eat meat again, so that I may not cause one of them to sin.

Paul continued for believers in Rome (Romans 14:4a NET):

Who are you to pass judgment (κρίνων, another form of κρίνω) on another’s servant?  Before his own master he stands or falls.

Jesus said, there is One who seeks and judges[6] (ἔστιν ὁ ζητῶν καὶ κρίνων).  I quoted the NAS because the NET translation reads, There is one who demands it, and he also judges.  This leaves me with the impression that Jesus told the Ἰουδαῖοι (Judeans, NET; Jews, NAS) that his Father demanded glory for Jesus from them and would judge them for failing to deliver it.  The latter is simply false, the Father does not judge (κρίνει, another form of κρίνω) anyone, but has assigned all judgment (κρίσιν, a form of κρίσις) to the Son…[7]  What the Father seeks (ζητῶν, a form of ζητέω) was specified earlier in John’s Gospel: But a time is coming – and now is here – when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father seeks (ζητεῖ, another form of ζητέω) such people to be his worshipers.[8]

I think Jesus meant what He said: I am not trying to get (ζητῶ, another form of ζητέω) praise (δόξαν, a form of δόξα) for myself.[9]  The person who speaks on his own authority desires (ζητεῖ, a form of ζητέω) to receive honor (δόξαν, a form of δόξα) for himself; the one who desires (ζητῶν, a form of ζητέω) the honor (δόξαν, a form of δόξα) of the one who sent him is a man of integrity (ἀληθής), and there is no unrighteousness in him.[10]  Clearly, the translators of the NET thought of δόξαν as honor, also translated praise, something originating with people.  The Father has assigned all judgment to the Son, so that all people will honor (τιμῶσι, a form of τιμάω) the Son just as they honor (τιμῶσι, a form of τιμάω) the Father.[11]

In that light then since the Father seeks true worshipers who worship…in spirit and truth, then He might also seek honor from those worshippers for his Son.  The one who does not honor (τιμῶν, another form of τιμάω) the Son does not honor (τιμᾷ, another form of τιμάω) the Father who sent him.[12]  And granted, Jesus prefaced his remarks with, I honor (τιμῶ, another form of τιμάω) my Father – and yet you dishonor (ἀτιμάζετε, a form of ἀτιμάζω) me.[13]  But I’m still not convinced that made δόξαν a synonym for τιμάω.

I think Jesus meant glory from or of God, his Father.  “If I glorify (δοξάσω, a form of δοξάζω) myself, my glory (δόξα) is worthless.  The one who glorifies (δοξάζων, another form of δοξάζω) me is my Father, about whom you people say, ‘He is our God.’”[14]  I glorified (ἐδόξασα, another form of δοξάζω) you on earth, Jesus prayed to his Father, by completing the work you gave me to do.[15]  And I think Jesus was focused on that work, both to seek the Father’s true worshiper’s—For whatever the Father does, the Son does likewise[16]—and to do it in a way that satisfied the Father’s judgment (of Him as opposed to others).  I think Jesus expressed a relationship to his Father very similar to the relationship Paul expressed to Jesus (1 Corinthians 4:3, 4 NET):

So for me, it is a minor matter that I am judged (ἀνακριθῶ, a form of ἀνακρίνω) by you or by any human court.  In fact, I do not even judge (ἀνακρίνω) myself.  For I am not aware of anything against myself, but I am not acquitted because of this.  The one who judges (ἀνακρίνων) me is the Lord.

And that relationship answers why He was so impressed with the faith of the centurion: “just say the word and my servant will be healed.  For I too am a man under authority, with soldiers under me.  I say to this one, ‘Go’ and he goes, and to another ‘Come’ and he comes, and to my slave ‘Do this’ and he does it.”[17]  The servant and the slave honored the centurion but Caesar glorified him.

I consider when Jesus sought his own glory and what He did with it: “Father, the time has come.  Glorify (δόξασον, another form of δοξάζω) your Son, so that your Son may glorify (δοξάσῃ, another form of δοξάζω) you…[18]  Now, Father, glorify (δόξασον, another form of δοξάζω) Me together with Yourself, with the glory (δόξῃ, another form of δόξα) which I had with You before the world was.”[19]  Then He took that glory and nailed it naked, bruised and bleeding to a cross; Jesus said (John 10:17, 18; Matthew 26:53, 54 NET):

This is why the Father loves me – because I lay down my life, so that I may take it back again.  No one takes it away from me, but I lay it down of my own free will.  I have the authority to lay it down, and I have the authority to take it back again.  This commandment I received from my Father.

Or do you think that I cannot call on my Father, and that he would send me more than twelve legions of angels right now? [Table]  How then would the scriptures that say it must happen this way be fulfilled?

The prophet Isaiah described it this way (Isaiah 53 NET):

Who would have believed what we just heard?  When was the Lord’s (yehôvâh, יהוה) power revealed through him?

He sprouted up like a twig before God, like a root out of parched soil; he had no stately form or majesty that might catch our attention, no special appearance that we should want to follow him.

He was despised and rejected by people, one who experienced pain and was acquainted with illness; people hid their faces from him; he was despised, and we considered him insignificant.

But he lifted up our illnesses, he carried our pain; even though we thought he was being punished, attacked by God (ʼĕlôhı̂ym, אלהים), and afflicted for something he had done.

He was wounded because of our rebellious deeds, crushed because of our sins; he endured punishment that made us well; because of his wounds we have been healed.

All of us had wandered off like sheep; each of us had strayed off on his own path, but the Lord (yehôvâh, ויהוה) caused the sin of all of us to attack him.

He was treated harshly and afflicted, but he did not even open his mouth.  Like a lamb led to the slaughtering block, like a sheep silent before her shearers, he did not even open his mouth.

He was led away after an unjust trial – but who even cared?  Indeed, he was cut off from the land of the living; because of the rebellion of his own people he was wounded.

They intended to bury him with criminals, but he ended up in a rich man’s tomb, because he had committed no violent deeds, nor had he spoken deceitfully.

Though the Lord (yehôvâh, ויהוה) desired to crush him and make him ill, once restitution is made, he will see descendants and enjoy long life, and the Lord’s (yehôvâh, יהוה) purpose will be accomplished through him.

Having suffered, he will reflect on his work, he will be satisfied when he understands what he has done.

“My servant will acquit many, for he carried their sins.  So I will assign him a portion with the multitudes, he will divide the spoils of victory with the powerful, because he willingly submitted to death and was numbered with the rebels, when he lifted up the sin of many and intervened on behalf of the rebels.”

Paul described it this way for believers in Rome, For God achieved what the law could not do because it was weakened (ἠσθένει, another form of ἀσθενέω) through the flesh.  By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and concerning sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, so that the righteous requirement of the law may be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.[20]  And he described it this way for believers in Corinth: God made the one who did not know sin to be sin for us, so that in him we would become the righteousness of God.[21]

Who are you to pass judgment on another’s servant? Paul wrote.  Before his own master he stands or falls.  And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.[22]  Though it may seem at first that this latter applies only to the less faith-weak, I don’t think that is the case.  I as a believer stand not because I have my own righteousness derived from the law, but because I have the righteousness that comes by way of Christ’s faithfulness – a righteousness from God that is in fact based on Christ’s faithfulness.[23]  And this confidence in Christ’s faithfulness may be the ultimate meaning of thinking of one another.

[1] Romans 14:1 (NET)

[2] Luke 18:9 (NET)

[3] Acts 4:8 (NET)

[4] Acts 4:11 (NET)

[5] Colossians 2:16, 17 (NET)

[6] John 8:50b (NAS)

[7] John 5:22 (NET)

[8] John 4:23 (NET)

[9] John 8:50a (NET)

[10] John 7:18 (NET)

[11] John 5:22b, 23a (NET)

[12] John 5:23b (NET)

[13] John 8:49b (NET)

[14] John 8:54 (NET)

[15] John 17:4 (NET)

[16] John 5:19b (NET)

[17] Matthew 8:8b, 9 (NET) Table

[18] John 17:1b (NET)

[19] John 17:5 (NAS)

[20] Romans 8:3, 4 (NET)

[21] 2 Corinthians 5:21 (NET)

[22] Romans 14:4 (NET) Table

[23] Philippians 3:9 (NET)

Romans, Part 79

Posted on by

Now receive the one who is weak in the faith,[1] Paul wrote, still describing love for believers in Rome.  The Greek word translated weak is ἀσθενοῦντα (a form of ἀσθενέω).  The righteous will ask the Son of Man, When did we see you sick (ἀσθενοῦντα, a form of ἀσθενέω) or in prison and visit you?[2]  For the Son of Man had said to them (Matthew 25:34b-36 NET):

Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.  For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I was naked and you gave me clothing, I was sick (ἠσθένησα, another form of ἀσθενέω) and you took care of me, I was in prison and you visited me.

Love will receive the ἀσθενοῦντα τῇ πίστει (the faith-sick or faith-weak[3]).  The word translated receive is προσλαμβάνεσθε (a form of προσλαμβάνω).  Receive (προσλαμβάνεσθε, a form of προσλαμβάνω) one another, then, just as Christ also received (προσελάβετο, another form of προσλαμβάνω) you, to God’s glory.[4]  After we had safely reached shore, Luke wrote about a shipwreck, we learned that the island was called Malta.  The local inhabitants showed us extraordinary kindness,[5] for they built a fire and welcomed (προσελάβοντο, another form of προσλαμβάνω) all because (διὰ) it had started to rain and was cold.[6]  All included Roman soldiers, sailors and their prisoners.  But the meaning of προσλαμβάνω doesn’t end there (Acts 18:24-26 NET):

Now a Jew named Apollos, a native of Alexandria, arrived in Ephesus.  He was an eloquent speaker, well-versed in the scriptures.  He had been instructed in the way of the Lord, and with great enthusiasm he spoke and taught accurately the facts about Jesus (KJV: the Lord), although he knew only the baptism of John [Table].  He began to speak out fearlessly in the synagogue, but when Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him aside (προσελάβοντο, another form of προσλαμβάνω) and explained the way of God to him more accurately.

This calls for some humility and patience with every new encounter, at least until one determines who is the least faith-sick or faith-weak (Matthew 16:21-23 NET):

From that time on Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, chief priests, and experts in the law, and be killed, and on the third day be raised.  So Peter took him aside (προσλαβόμενος, another form of προσλαμβάνω) and began to rebuke him: “God forbid, Lord!  This must not happen to you!”  But he turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan!  You are a stumbling block to me, because you are not setting your mind on God’s interests, but on man’s.”

Granted, Jesus was very direct before Peter had received the Holy Spirit.  I think the rest of us, if we discern that we are the least faith-sick or faith-weak in a particular encounter, will need even more humility and patience if our goal is to win a brother rather than an argument.  Peter might have benefited from Paul’s teaching on this receiving love.

Now receive the one who is weak in the faith, and do not have disputes over differing opinions.[7]  The word translated disputes is διακρίσεις (a form of διάκρισις).  The goal is that we all become the mature, whose perceptions are trained (γεγυμνασμένα, a form of γυμνάζω; that naked exercise with the Holy Spirit) by practice to discern (διάκρισιν, another form of διάκρισις) both good and evil.[8]  And the διακρίσεις πνευμάτων (discernment of spirits) is a manifestation of the Spirit.  But the way of love does not receive, welcome or take one aside to dispute over differing opinions.  Or as the NAS rendered it: Now accept the one who is weak in faith, but not for the purpose of passing judgment on his opinions.[9]

The Greek word translated differing opinions is διαλογισμῶν (a form of διαλογισμός).  James wrote about κριταὶ διαλογισμῶν πονηρῶν (judges with evil motives).  It’s an interesting translation of διαλογισμῶν because my motives were the instant object of concern when I discussed my ideas with my elders.  Simeon prophesied over Jesus as a baby, as a result of him the thoughts (διαλογισμοί, another form of διαλογισμός) of many hearts will be revealed[10] (ἀποκαλυφθῶσιν, a form of ἀποκαλύπτω).  For out of the heart come evil ideas (διαλογισμοὶ, another form of διαλογισμός), Jesus said, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander.  These are the things that defile a person…[11]  The words translated evil ideas in Mark’s Gospel are οἱ διαλογισμοὶ οἱ κακοὶ, and here in Matthew’s διαλογισμοὶ πονηροί.

I grasped κακοὶ (a form of κακός) immediately.  My idea that group sex was the way of peace was truly οἱ διαλογισμοὶ οἱ κακοὶ.  But understanding πονηροί (a form of πονηρός) has taken me the better part of a lifetime.  My idea that I could become righteous by turning Paul’s definition of love into rules I obeyed in my own strength, no matter how well-intentioned, was also one of my evil ideas, διαλογισμοὶ πονηροί.  Matthew recorded what happened when some people brought…a paralytic lying on a stretcher[12] to Jesus (Matthew 9:2b-5 NET).

When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, “Have courage, son!  Your sins are forgiven.”  Then some of the experts in the law said to themselves, “This man is blaspheming!”  When Jesus saw their reaction (ἐνθυμήσεις, a form of ἐνθύμησις) he said, “Why do you respond with evil in your hearts?  Which is easier, to say, ‘Your sins are forgiven’ or to say, ‘Stand up and walk’?

The Greek word translated evil above is πονηρὰ (another form of πονηρός; hurtful, full of labours, annoyances, hardships) contrasted immediately with easier (εὐκοπώτερον, a form of εὐκοπώτερος; better for toil, more facile, with easy labour, easy).  By the way the word translated respond above is ἐνθυμεῖσθε (a form of ἐνθυμέομαι); to be inspirited, ponder, to bring to mind, revolve in mind, to think, to deliberate).  I note that Paul did not choose a form of ἐνθυμέομαι or ἐνθύμησις (deliberation, thinking, consideration, thoughts) in Romans 14:1.  But Luke, narrating the same story, called the law experts’ reaction διαλογισμοὺς (another form of διαλογισμός), translated hostile thoughts (Luke 5:21, 22 NET):

Then the experts in the law and the Pharisees began to think (διαλογίζεσθαι, a form of διαλογίζομαι) to themselves, “Who is this man who is uttering blasphemies?  Who can forgive sins but God alone?”  When Jesus perceived their hostile thoughts, he said to them, “Why are you raising objections (διαλογίζεσθε, another form of διαλογίζομαι) within yourselves?”

When Peter falsely assumed he was the least faith-sick and took Jesus aside and explained the way of God to him more accurately, Jesus smacked him fairly hard with his words.  When the experts in the law (and, in Luke’s Gospel narrative, the Pharisees) questioned—Who can forgive sins but God alone—Jesus answered with deeds more than words (Luke 5:23-25 NET):

“Which is easier, to say, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Stand up and walk’?  But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” – he said to the paralyzed man – “I tell you, stand up, take your stretcher and go home.”  Immediately he stood up before them, picked up the stretcher he had been lying on, and went home, glorifying God.

Another example follows (Luke 6:6-11 NET):

On another Sabbath, Jesus entered the synagogue and was teaching.  Now a man was there whose right hand was withered.  The experts in the law and the Pharisees watched Jesus closely to see if he would heal on the Sabbath, so that they could find a reason to accuse him.  But he knew their thoughts (διαλογισμοὺς, another form of διαλογισμός), and said to the man who had the withered hand, “Get up and stand here.”  So he rose and stood there.  Then Jesus said to them, “I ask you, is it lawful to do good (ἀγαθοποιῆσαι, a form of ἀγαθοποιέω) on the Sabbath or to do evil (κακοποιῆσαι, a form of κακοποιέω), to save a life or to destroy it?”  After looking around at them all, he said to the man, “Stretch out your hand.”  The man did so, and his hand was restored.  But they were filled with mindless rage (ἀνοίας, a form of ἄνοια) and began debating (διελάλουν, a form of διαλαλέω) with one another what they would do to Jesus.

It is easy to criticize the experts in the law and the Pharisees.  But I am fairly certain if an apostle walked into my childhood church, preached a sermon that questioned the force or validity of any of our cherished religious beliefs and healed the sickest most beloved person in the congregation to make his point, we would have called it a lying wonder.  I’ve had my own issues with Jesus and the Sabbath.[13]

In the Gospel harmony below Jesus demonstrated this receiving, welcoming and taking aside love with his disciples without disputing their opinions; in fact He didn’t even confront them directly with their opinions:

Matthew 18:1-5 (NET)

 Mark 9:33-37 (NET)

Luke 9:46-48 (NET)
Now an argument (διαλογισμὸς, another form of διαλογισμός) started among the disciples as to which of them might be the greatest.
Then they came to Capernaum.  After Jesus was inside the house he asked them, “What were you discussing (διελογίζεσθε, another form of διαλογίζομαι) on the way?”  But they were silent, for on the way they had argued (διελέχθησαν, a form of διαλέγομαι) with one another about who was the greatest.
At that time the disciples came to Jesus saying, “Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?”
After he sat down, he called the twelve and said to them, “If anyone wants to be first, he must be last of all and servant of all.”
But when Jesus discerned their innermost thoughts (διαλογισμὸν, another form of διαλογισμός)…
He called a child, had him stand among them [Table]… He took a little child and had him stand among them. …he took a child, had him stand by his side…
…and said, “I tell you the truth, unless you turn around and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven!  Whoever then humbles himself like this little child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven [Table].
Taking him in his arms, he said to them… …and said to them…
And whoever welcomes (δέξηται, a form of δέχομαι) a child like this in my name welcomes (δέχεται, another form of δέχομαι) me. “Whoever welcomes (δέξηται, a form of δέχομαι) one of these little children in my name welcomes (δέχεται, another form of δέχομαι) me, and whoever welcomes me (δέχηται, another form of δέχομαι) does not welcome me (δέχεται, another form of δέχομαι) but the one who sent me.” “Whoever welcomes (δέξηται, a form of δέχομαι) this child in my name welcomes (δέχεται, another form of δέχομαι) me, and whoever welcomes (δέξηται, a form of δέχομαι) me welcomes (δέχεται, another form of δέχομαι) the one who sent me, for the one who is least among you all is the one who is great.”

Luke recorded yet another example how Jesus handled his disciples διαλογισμοὶ.  Cleopas and another disciple had heard the rumor—a vision of angels, who said he was alive[14]—but left Jerusalem for Emmaus anyway.  The resurrected Jesus walked with them, inquired about and listened to their discussion.  Then beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them the things written about himself in all the scriptures.[15]  But their religion and unbelief blinded them.  They didn’t recognize Him until he had taken his place at the table with them, he took the bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to them.[16]  Then he vanished out of their sight.[17]  The story continued (Luke 24:33-43 NET):

So they got up that very hour and returned to Jerusalem.  They found the eleven and those with them gathered together and saying, “The Lord has really risen, and has appeared to Simon!”  Then they told what had happened on the road, and how they recognized him when he broke the bread.  While they were saying these things, Jesus himself stood among them and said to them, “Peace be with you.”  But they were startled and terrified, thinking they saw a ghost.  Then he said to them, “Why are you frightened, and why do doubts (διαλογισμοὶ, another form of διαλογισμός) arise in your hearts?  Look at my hands and my feet; it’s me!  Touch me and see; a ghost does not have flesh and bones like you see I have.”  When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his feet.  And while they still could not believe it (because of their joy) and were amazed, he said to them, “Do you have anything here to eat?”  So they gave him a piece of broiled fish, and he took it and ate it in front of them.

The only way I know to show his resurrection rather than tell it is to be led by his Spirit, to demonstrate his love, his joy, his peace, his patience, his kindness, his goodness, his faithfulness, his gentleness and his self-control.  And yet, the reasoning, differing opinions, debates and nagging doubts of my heart, which make me feel like one of the foolish people…slow of heart to believe,[18] is that I love too much.

Romans, Part 80

[1] Romans 14:1a (NET)

[2] Matthew 25:39 (NET)

[3] I think “in the faith” would probably take the form of ἐν τῇ ἀνατολῇ (in the East), ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ (in the wilderness), ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ (in the house), ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ (in the kingdom), ἐν τῇ πρύμνῃ (in the stern), ἐν τῇ συναγωγῇ (in the synagogue), ἐν τῇ κρίσει (in the judgment) or ἐν τῇ πίστει (in the faith).

[4] Romans 15:7 (NET)

[5] τὴν τυχοῦσαν φιλανθρωπίαν

[6] Acts 28:1, 2 (NET)

[7] Romans 14:1 (NET)

[8] Hebrews 5:14b (NET)

[9] Romans 14:1 (NAS)

[10] Luke 2:35a (NET)

[11] Matthew 15:19, 20a (NET)  Also Mark 7:21-23

[12] Matthew 9:2a (NET)

[13] Romans, Part 11; Romans, Part 12; Romans, Part 26; Justice and Mercy; Romans, Part 54; My Reasons and My Reason, Part 6; Romans, Part 70

[14] Luke 24:23b (NET)

[15] Luke 24:27 (NET)

[16] Luke 24:30 (NET)

[17] Luke 24:31b (NET)

[18] Luke 24:25a (NET)

Condemnation or Judgment? – Part 16

Posted on by

Paul wrote believers in Colossae (Colossians 3:1-6 NET):

Therefore, if you have been raised with Christ, keep seeking the things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God.  Keep thinking about things above, not things on the earth, for you have died and your life is hidden with Christ in God.  When Christ (who is your life) appears, then you too will be revealed in glory with him.  So put to death whatever in your nature belongs to the earth: sexual immorality, impurity, shameful passion, evil desire, and greed which is idolatry.  Because of these things the wrath of God is coming on the sons of disobedience.

A note (4) at the end of this passage in the NET reads:

The words ἐπὶ τοὺς υἱοὺς τῆς ἀπειθείας (…“on the sons of disobedience”) are lacking in Ì46 [correct symbol won’t display] B b sa, but are found in א A C D F G H I Ψ 075 0278 33 1739 1881 Ï lat sy bo. The words are omitted by several English translations (NASB, NIV, ESV, TNIV). This textual problem is quite difficult to resolve. On the one hand, the parallel account in Eph 5:6 has these words, thus providing scribes a motive for adding them here. On the other hand, the reading without the words may be too hard: The ἐν οἷς (en hois) of v. 7 seems to have no antecedent without υἱούς already in the text, although it could possibly be construed as neuter referring to the vice list in v. 5. Further, although the witness of B is especially important, there are other places in which B and Ì46 [ditto above] share errant readings of omission. Nevertheless, the strength of the internal evidence against the longer reading is at least sufficient to cause doubt here. The decision to retain the words in the text is less than certain.

Whether the words sons of disobedience were original or not is immaterial to me.  I’m more concerned with δι᾿ ἃ ἔρχεται ἡ ὀργὴ τοῦ θεοῦ (“Because of these things the wrath of God is coming”).  First, ἔρχεται (a form of ἔρχομαι) is present tense; appears or shows itself might be a better translation.  Though because is a possible translation of δι᾿[1] (a form of διά), through would be more common (verse 17) and more in line with Paul’s teaching in the opening of Romans, the wrath of God…revealed from heaven.  So I would translate it, “through these (e.g., sexual immorality, impurity, shameful passion, evil desire, and greed which is idolatry) the wrath of God appears” or “shows itself.”  In other words, these are the evidence or symptoms of the depraved, unapproved, reprobate or debased mind to which God gave those over who did not like to retain God in their knowledge.[2]

God’s wrath was to give them over to a depraved mind, to do what should not be done.[3]  Paul enumerated what should not be done for believers in Rome (Romans 1:29-32 NET):

They are filled with every kind of unrighteousness, wickedness, covetousness, malice.  They are rife with envy, murder, strife, deceit, hostility.  They are gossips [Table], slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, contrivers of all sorts of evil, disobedient to parents, senseless, covenant-breakers, heartless, ruthless [Table].  Although they fully know God’s righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but also approve of those who practice them.

A young mother put it this way on Facebook:

Parent shaming.  Judging.  Close mindedness.  Mass murders.  Hate on Nationalities.  Hate on skin colors.  Hate on LGBT’s.  Hate on parenting.  Hate.  I can honestly say I’m worried to bring my children up in the type of society we’ve become.  What will it take to change?  Will it get better before it gets worse?  I have to believe there’s more love in this world than hate.  Incredibly saddening that my happy, loving boys will one day learn the world is so ugly and destructive.

Even if sons of disobedience wasn’t original I don’t see why ἐν οἷς or ἐν τούτοις are “too hard” of a reading.  Paul’s contrast was to the lives the Colossians lived before they died and [their] life [was] hidden with Christ in God, not to some mysterious others called the sons of disobedience.  Even Ephesians reads διὰ ταῦτα γὰρ ἔρχεται ἡ ὀργὴ τοῦ θεοῦ ἐπὶ τοὺς υἱοὺς τῆς ἀπειθείας (for because of these things God’s wrath comes on the sons of disobedience[4]).  But again διὰ could be through, ταῦτα refers back to the person who is immoral, impure, or greedy[5] (probably immorality, impurity or greed) and ἔρχεται is present tense, appears or shows itself.

So I would understand it more like, “For through these [immoral, impure or greedy persons, or immorality, impurity or greed] the wrath of God shows itself upon the sons of disobedience.”  The sons of disobedience are no longer a mystery.  The Greek word translated disobedience is ἀπειθείας (a form of ἀπείθεια).  God has consigned all people to disobedience (ἀπείθειαν, another form of ἀπείθεια) so that he may show mercy to them all.  The sons of disobedience are old humans, they have not been born from above: Therefore do not be partakers with them, for you were at one time darkness, but now you are light in the Lord.  Walk as children of the light…[6]  Paul made this same contrast between the old human (παλαιὸν ἄνθρωπον) and the new (νέον, a form of νέος) for the Colossians (3:7-11 NET):

You also lived your lives in this way at one time, when you used to live among them (ἐν τούτοις; literally “in these”).  But now, put off all such things as anger, rage, malice, slander, abusive language from your mouth.  Do not lie to one another since you have put off the old (παλαιὸν, a form of παλαιός) man (ἄνθρωπον, a form of ἄνθρωπος) with its practices and have been clothed with the new man that is being renewed in knowledge according to the image of the one who created it.  Here there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcised or uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave or free, but Christ is all and in all.

I think the Bible has been translated by those who expect most people to spend eternity in the lake of fire.  I don’t intend to dispute that view.  On the contrary, the idea I’m experimenting with here is that all old humans are condemned to spend eternity in the lake of fire.  How many new humans spend eternity with Jesus and his Father?  That depends on God’s mercy—I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion[7]—up to and including all—For God has consigned all people to disobedience so that he may show mercy to them all.[8]

I’m a long way, however, from accepting Universalism, demanding that He save all.  Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners,[9] was a perfect opportunity to specify few, many or all.  Neither Paul nor the Holy Spirit chose to do so.  Enter through the narrow gate, Jesus said, because the gate is wide and the way is spacious that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it.  But the gate is narrow and the way is difficult (τεθλιμμένη, a form of θλίβω) that leads to life, and there are few who find it.[10]  In the past I took this to mean that ultimately relatively few will be saved.  Now I think differently.

Since yehôvâh informed Cain, you must subdue [sin],[11] and Moses commanded Israel to choose life,[12] salvation was determined by the desire, or willingness, of human beings, whosoever will.  The result, there are few who find it, is what Jesus became human to change.  Someone asked Him directly, “Lord, will only a few be saved?”  Speaking in real time before his crucifixion and resurrection, He said, “Exert every effort to enter through the narrow door, because many, I tell you, will try to enter and will not be able (ἰσχύσουσιν, a form of ἰσχύω) to.  Once the head of the house gets up and shuts the door, then you will stand outside and start to knock on the door and beg him, ‘Lord, let us in!’  But he will answer you, ‘I don’t know where you come from.’” [13]  I tell you the solemn truth, Jesus also said, I am the door for the sheep.[14]  As I considered both of these together I wondered what door the head of the house gets up and shuts.

Surely, it was not Jesus but whosoever will.  The most immediate reason why the many could not enter was the shut door, but a survey of the word ἰσχύω suggests they were not good enough,[15] not strong enough,[16] not healthy enough,[17] not vigilant enough[18] and they would not endure long enough[19] in their own strength.  And so Jesus became the door.  No one can come to me, He said, unless the Father who sent me draws him…[20]  And I, Jesus promised, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.[21]

I’ve written elsewhere what I think about the Greek words translated draws and draw relative to “Softly and tenderly Jesus is calling.”  And I don’t think much of the old human’s free will in any sense beyond contingent choices.   I certainly don’t think it is sacrosanct to God.  It wasn’t sacrosanct when He gave old humans over in the desires of their hearts to impurity,[22] to dishonorable passions,[23] and to a depraved mind.[24]  Why should it be sacrosanct when one is born from above, not born by human parents or by human desire or a husband’s decision, but by God?[25]

Nor can I embrace patristic universalism.  I can’t believe in a purgatorial hell.  In fact, I think the Old Testament narrates how God has gone out of his way to demonstrate over and over again that the best that is ever achieved by punishment, or by the fear of punishment, is hypocrisy.  Jesus said (John 3:5-7, 10 NET):

I tell you the solemn truth, unless a person is born of water and spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.  What is born of the flesh is flesh, and what is born of the Spirit is spirit.  Do not be amazed that I said to you, ‘You must all be born from above.’…Are you the teacher of Israel and yet you don’t understand these things?

J.W. Hanson painted the early universalist church fathers as elitists in his book Universalism, the Prevailing Doctrine of the Christian Church During Its First Five Hundred Years (p. 56):

Some of the fathers who had achieved a faith in Universalism, were influenced by the mischievous notion that it was to be held esoterically, cherished in secret, or only communicated to the chosen few,–withheld from the multitude, who would not appreciate it, and even that the opposite error would, with some sinners, be more beneficial than the truth….Origen said that “all that might be said on this theme is not expedient to explain now, or to all.  For the mass need no further teaching on account of those who hardly through the fear of aeonian punishment restrain their recklessness.”

I’m not oblivious to Origen’s concern, though it seems to me that someone who would return to sin because God is merciful really hasn’t finished with sin yet.  And I consider myself the rankest of the rank and file.  On the other hand Mr. Hanson characterized many of the patristic fathers as liars whenever they taught endless punishment (p. 59):

There can be no doubt that many of the fathers threatened severer penalties than they believed would be visited on sinners, impelled to utter them because they considered them to be more salutary with the masses than the truth itself. So that we may believe that some of the patristic writers who seem to teach endless punishment did not believe it. Others, we know, who accepted universal restoration employed, for the sake of deterring sinners, threats that are inconsistent, literally interpreted, with that doctrine.

I began this second round considering condemnation or judgment after I read John F. Walvoord’s commentary on Revelation 20 online (Revelation 20:11, 12 NET).

Then I saw a large white throne and the one who was seated on it; the earth and the heaven fled from his presence, and no place was found for them.  And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne.  Then books were opened, and another book was opened – the book of life.  So the dead were judged (ἐκρίθησαν, a form of κρίνω) by what was written in the books, according to their deeds.

I’m not aware of ἐκρίθησαν translated condemned in any English Bible, but that is what Mr. Walvoord took it to mean: “Their standing posture means that they are now about to be sentenced.”  John’s vision continued (Revelation 20:13-15 NET):

The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and Death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each one was judged (ἐκρίθησαν, a form of κρίνω) according to his deeds.  Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire.  This is the second death – the lake of fire.  If anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, that person was thrown into the lake of fire.

Mr. Walvoord wrote, “The summary judgment is pronounced in verse 14 that ‘death and hell were cast into the lake of fire.’  In a word, this means that all who died physically and were in Hades, the intermediate state, are here found unworthy and cast into the lake of fire.”

I was shocked that the doctrine I’ve heard my whole life was based on a rationalist assumption that death and hell, or Death and Hades, were not entities that might be thrown into the lake of fire but merely euphemisms for “all who died physically and were in Hades.”  And this in an essay where literal was used 35 times, literally 12 times and literalness twice, mostly relative to the thousand years, but it was a consistent theme of Mr. Walvoord’s argument.  He wrote for example:

[Barnes] further holds that Revelation 20 should not be taken literally, and interposes the words “as if” before the judgment and resurrection of 20:4 as well as with the binding of Satan. This would seem to be adding to the book, so strongly forbidden in 22:18.

But Mr. Walvoord’s understanding of Revelation 20:13-15 presents us with the following rewrite:

Revelation 20:14, 15 NET

Revelation 20:14, 15 John F. Walvoord
Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire.  This is the second death – the lake of fire.  If anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, that person was thrown into the lake of fire. Then the dead that were in Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire.  This is the second death – the lake of fire.  No one’s name was found written in the book of life, so they were all thrown into the lake of fire.

Mr Walvoord concluded, without a Scripture quotation or any fear of contradiction:

If the point of view be adopted that the book of life was originally the book of all living from which have been expunged the names of those who departed from life on earth without salvation, it presents a sad picture of a blank space where their names could have been written for all eternity as the objects of divine grace. Though they are judged by their works, it is evident that their destiny is determined primarily by their lack of spiritual life. When the fact is contemplated that Jesus Christ in His death reconciled the world to Himself (2 Cor. 5:19) and that He died for the reprobate as well as for the elect, it is all the more poignant that these now raised from the dead are cast into the lake of fire. Their ultimate destiny of eternal punishment is not, in the last analysis, because God wished it but because they would not come to God for the grace which He freely offered.

What about the dead in the sea?  I think we can accept that the sea is not an entity that might be thrown into the lake of fire.  I would assume that the names of some, up to and including all, were written in the book of life.  Mr. Walvoord changed the subject:

A special problem is introduced by the resurrection of those who were cast into the sea with the presumption that their bodies have disintegrated and have been scattered over a wide area geographically. The special mention of the sea is occasioned by the fact that resurrection usually implies resurrection from the grave. The resurrection of the dead from the sea merely reaffirms that all the dead will be raised regardless of the condition of their bodies.

I would assume though Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire, the names of some of their dead, up to and including all, were written in the book of life.  The idea I’m experimenting with is that the new humans born of God are spared while the old humans, in a one for one correspondence, are judged according to their deeds and thrown into the lake of fire.  And this, because the names in the book of life are not written there by some who came “to God for the grace which He freely offered” but by the mercy of God (Romans 9:15, 16 NET):

I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.  So then, it does not depend on human desire or exertion [e.g., “whosoever will”], but on God who shows mercy.

 

[1] Enter through (διὰ) the narrow gate, because the gate is wide and the way is spacious that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through (δι᾿, another form of διὰ) it  (Matthew 7:13 NET).

[2] Romans 1:28 (NKJV)

[3] Romans 1:28b (NET)

[4] Ephesians 5:6b (NET)

[5] Ephesians 5:5b (NET)

[6] Ephesians 5:7, 8 (NET)

[7] Romans 9:15 (NET)

[8] Romans 11:32 (NET)

[9] 1 Timothy 1:15b (NET)

[10] Matthew 7:13, 14 (NET)

[11] Genesis 4:7b (NET)

[12] Deuteronomy 30:19 (NET)

[13] Luke 13:23-25 (NET)

[14] John 10:7 (NET)

[15] It is no longer good (ἰσχύει, another form of ἰσχύω) for anything except to be thrown out and trampled on by people (Matthew 5:13b NET).

[16] No one was strong enough (ἴσχυεν, another form of ἰσχύω) to subdue him (Mark 5:4b NET).

[17] Those who are healthy (ἰσχύοντες, another form of ἰσχύω) don’t need a physician… (Matthew 9:12b NET)

[18] Couldn’t (ἴσχυσας, another form of ἰσχύω) you stay awake for one hour? (Mark 14:37b NET)

[19] I am able (ἰσχύω) to do all things through the one who strengthens me (Philippians 4:13 NET).

[20] John 6:44a (NET)

[21] John 12:32 (NET)

[22] Romans 1:24 (NET) Table

[23] Romans 1:26 (NET)

[24] Romans 1:28 (NET)

[25] John 1:13 (NET)

Romans, Part 78

Posted on by

And do this because we know the time…[1]  The words because we know are a way the NET translators translated the Greek word εἰδότες (a form of εἴδω; also, 2 Corinthians 5:11).  They translated it because you…know (Matthew 22:29; Mark 12:24; 1 Peter 5:9), when you did…know (Galatians 4:8), and we know (1 Thessalonians 1:4).  More often than not εἰδότες occurs in the New Testament as εἰδότες ὅτι; because is a legitimate translation of ὅτι.

Greek

 NET

References
εἰδότες ὅτι because they knew that Luke 8:53
εἰδότες ὅτι because they knew John 21:12
εἰδότες ὅτι knowing that Romans 5:3; 1 Corinthians 15:58
εἰδότες ὅτι we know that Romans 6:9; 2 Corinthians 5:6; Galatians 2:16
εἰδότες ὅτι because we know that 2 Corinthians 1:7
εἰδότες ὅτι because we know 2 Corinthians 4:14
εἰδότες ὅτι because you know that Ephesians 6:8; Ephesians 6:9; Colossians 3:24; Colossians 4:1; James 3:1
εἰδότες ὅτι because they know that Philippians 1:16
εἰδότες ὅτι you know that 1 Peter 1:18

So I question the wisdom of translating εἰδότες “as a causal adverbial participle” (NET note 11), adding because when ὅτι is not present.  But I question even more the wisdom of translating nothing, no Greek word at all, as do (NET note 10).  That one word shifts the focus of the text from the phenomenal revelation that love is the fulfillment of the law[2] to a list of works that I must do.  The verse continues, [because (ὅτι)] it is already the hour for us to awake from sleep.[3]

The word translated us is ὑμᾶς —you.  So Paul was very direct:  And this, he wrote highlighting and accentuating that love is the fulfillment of the law, knowing the time, because it is already the hour for you to awake from sleep… and one extraneous word turned my attention from God reconciling the world to himself in Christ, from the power of his resurrection, from the fruit of his Holy Spirit to my own puny efforts to do rules, to love like God in my own strength.

I’m not angry with the NET translators, I’m grateful.  Their footnotes, revealing their thought processes, have disabused me of my notion that Bible translators are something more than human beings doing the best they can—given their beliefs.  I didn’t even read the NET back when I had most of my difficulties.  I read the NASB and then the NIV.

NASB

NIV
Do this, knowing the time, that it is already the hour for you to awaken from sleep; for now [a] salvation is nearer to us than when we believed.

Romans 13:11

 And do this, understanding the present time: The hour has already come for you to wake up from your slumber, because our salvation is nearer now than when we first believed.

Romans 13:11

The NIV has no footnote here.  My NASB fell apart years ago, but it has the telltale italics.  Do in italics didn’t alert my Bible-believing heart to dig deeper, not like a footnote did (10): “Grk ‘and this,’ probably referring to the command to love (13:8-10); hence, ‘do’ is implied from the previous verses.”  Unless, of course, one believes that Paul and the Holy Spirit intended to accentuate the fulfillment of Jesus’ promise, as it pertains to the law, through faith rather than works (Matthew 5:17-20 NET):

Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets.  I have not come to abolish these things but to fulfill them.  I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth pass away not the smallest letter or stroke of a letter will pass from the law until everything takes place.  So anyone who breaks one of the least of these commands and teaches others to do so will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever obeys them and teaches others to do so will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.  For I tell you, unless your righteousness goes beyond that of the experts in the law and the Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

The hour has already come for you to wake up from your slumber, Paul wrote believers in Rome, because our salvation is nearer now than when we first believed.  The night has advanced toward dawn; the day is near.  So then we must lay aside the works of darkness, and put on the weapons of light.  Let us live decently as in the daytime, not in carousing and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and sensuality, not in discord and jealousy.[4]

The Greek word translated darkness is σκότους (a form of σκότος).  Paul wrote believers in Ephesus, for you were at one time darkness (σκότος), but now you are light in the Lord.  Walk as children of the light – for the fruit (καρπὸς) of the light consists in all goodness, righteousness, and truth – trying to learn what is pleasing to the Lord.  Do not participate in the unfruitful (ἀκάρποις, a form of ἄκαρπος) deeds of darkness (σκότους, a form of σκότος), but rather expose them.  For the things they do in secret are shameful even to mention.  But all things being exposed by the light are made evident.  For everything made evident is light, and for this reason it says: “Awake, O sleeper!  Rise from the dead, and Christ will shine on you!”[5]

To the Romans Paul stressed carousing and drunkenness…sexual immorality and sensuality…discord and jealousy as works of darkness.  The list stressed in Ephesians included sexual immorality, impurity of any kind, or greed…vulgar speech, foolish talk, or coarse jesting.[6]  But I don’t think I’m stretching his words at all to include 1) attempts to be righteous by obeying rules in one’s own strength, or 2) attempts to share credit for the fruit of the Spirit, among the unfruitful deeds of darkness.  For ignoring the righteousness that comes from God, and seeking instead to establish their own righteousness, they did not submit to God’s righteousness,[7] Paul summed up the righteousness of the Pharisees.  He wrote believers in Philippi, that I may gain Christ, and be found in him, not because I have my own righteousness derived from the law, but because I have the righteousness that comes by way of Christ’s faithfulness – a righteousness from God that is in fact based on Christ’s faithfulness.[8]

The Greek work translated light in the phrase weapons of light is φωτός (a form of φῶς).  Jesus is the light (John 1:6-9 NET):

A man came, sent from God, whose name was John.  He came as a witness to testify about the light (φωτός, a form of φῶς), so that everyone might believe through him.  He himself was not the light (φῶς), but he came to testify about the light (φωτός, a form of φῶς).  The true light (φῶς), who gives light (φωτίζει, a form of φωτίζω) to everyone, was coming into the world.

Instead, put on (ἐνδύσασθε, a form of ἐνδύω) the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh to arouse its desires,[9] Paul concluded.  Here the new human is none other than the Lord Jesus Christ (Galatians 2:20, 21 NET):

I have been crucified with Christ, and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me.  So the life I now live in the body, I live because of the faithfulness of the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.  I do not set aside God’s grace, because if righteousness could come through the law, then Christ died for nothing!

I’ll conclude this essay by quoting from four commentaries.  My purpose is to show the decline in enthusiasm for the power of God’s love as a function of time.  First, Matthew Henry (1662-1714):

Love intends and designs no ill to any body, is utterly against the doing of that which may turn to the prejudice, offence, or grief of any. It worketh no ill that is, it prohibits the working of any ill: more is implied than is expressed it not only worketh no ill, but it worketh all the good that may be, deviseth liberal things. For it is a sin not only to devise evil against thy neighbour, but to withhold good from those to whom it is due both are forbidden together, Proverbs 3:27-29. This proves that love is the fulfilling of the law, answers all the end of it for what else is that but to restrain us from evil-doing, and to constrain us to well-doing? Love is a living active principle of obedience to the whole law. The whole law is written in the heart, if the law of love be there.

Second, John Gill (1697-1771):

therefore love is the fulfilling of the law: so far as a man loves his neighbour, he acts agreeably to the law, and the particular precepts of it above mentioned: what the apostle says of love to the neighbour, the Jews frequently say of love to God; “he that loveth God (they sayF4) מקיים עשר אמירן, “hath fulfilled the decalogue”, both above and below.  And againF5, “there is no service like the love of God, R. Abba saith it is כללא דאורייתא, “the sum of the law”; for the ten words of the law הכא אתכלילו, “are herein comprehended”, or “fulfilled”:’ and elsewhereF6 they observe, “that כל התורה כלולה באהבה, “the whole law is comprehended”, or fulfilled “in love”.’

Third, Albert Barnes (1798-1870):

Therefore … – “Because” love does no harm to another, it is “therefore” the fulfilling of the Law, implying that all that the Law requires is to “love” others.

Is the fulfilling – Is the “completion,” or meets the requirements of the Law. The Law of God on this “head,” or in regard to our duty to our neighbor, requires us to do justice toward him, to observe truth, etc. “All” this will be met by “love;” and if people truly “loved” others, all the demands of the Law would be satisfied.

Of the law – Of the Law of Moses, but particularly the Ten Commandments.

Fourth, the Pulpit Commentary (1884):

From specific admonitions on this subject, the apostle passes naturally to the principle which, in these regards as well as others, should inspire all our dealings with our fellow-men. Owe no man anything, but to love one another: for he that loveth another (literally, the other, meaning the same as his neighbour) hath fulfilled law. νόμον here is anarthrous, denoting law in general, not the Mosaic Law in particular, though the instances of transgression that follow are from the Decalogue. The idea of the passage is but a carrying out of our Lord’s saying, Matthew 22:39, Matthew 22:40. We find it also in Galatians 5:14 more shortly expressed. For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended (or, summed up) in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. Love worketh no ill to his neighbour; therefore love is the fulfilling of law.

No one mentioned the fruit of the Spirit directly, that this is God’s love rather than ours.  But from Matthew Henry’s “more is implied than is expressed [love] not only worketh no ill, but it worketh all the good that may be” to the Pulpit Commentary’s assessment that love is a “principle which…should inspire all our dealings with our fellow-men,” confidence in the love that God has in us took a nose dive in about two centuries.  Listen to John (1 John 4:16, 17 NET):

And we have come to know and to believe the love that God has in (ἐν) us.  God is love, and the one who resides in love resides in God, and God resides in him [Table].  By this [e.g., God’s residence, his possession of us through the Holy Spirit] love is perfected with us, so that we may have confidence in the day of judgment, because just as Jesus is, so also are we in this world.

Romans, Part 79

[1] Romans 13:11a (NET)

[2] Romans 13:10 (NET)

[3] Romans 13:11b (NET)

[4] Romans 13:11b-13 (NIV)

[5] Ephesians 5:8-14 (NET)

[6] Ephesians 5:3, 4 (NET)

[7] Romans 10:3 (NET)

[8] Philippians 3:8b, 9 (NET)

[9] Romans 13:14 (NET)

Romans, Part 77

Posted on by

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities.[1]  Even the King James translators rendered it, Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers.[2]  This has never quite meant what kings hoped, nor was it a call to political revolution.  The Greek word translated governing or higher is ὑπερεχούσαις (a form of ὑπερέχω).  More than that, I now regard all things as liabilities compared to the far greater value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord,[3] Paul wrote believers in Philippi.  The phrase the far greater value is ὑπερέχον (another form of ὑπερέχω) in Greek.  Instead of being motivated by selfish ambition or vanity, each of you should, in humility, be moved to treat one another as more important than yourself.[4]  Here as more important is ὑπερέχοντας (another form of ὑπερέχω).  And the peace of God that surpasses all understanding will guard your hearts and minds in Christ Jesus.[5]  Here that surpasses is ὑπερέχουσα (another form of ὑπερέχω).

Be subject to every human institution for the Lord’s sake, Peter wrote, whether to a king as supreme (ὑπερέχοντι, another form of ὑπερέχω) or to governors as those he commissions to punish wrongdoers and praise those who do good.[6]  Peter’s writing was not as nuanced as Paul’s.  In my opinion the translators don’t help Peter here: for the Lord’s sake is διὰ τὸν κύριον.  The more literal translation is “through the Lord.”  Peter, through the Lord, led by the Holy Spirit did not behave as he wrote.  He behaved more like Paul wrote (Acts 5:27-29 NET):

When they had brought [Peter and the apostles], they stood them before the council, and the high priest questioned them, saying, “We gave you strict orders not to teach in this name.  Look, you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching, and you intend to bring this man’s blood on us!”  But Peter and the apostles replied, “We must obey God rather than people…

At the same time, however, Peter and the apostles did not think their loyalty to God exempted them from the wrath of the human authorities (Acts 5:40-42 NET):

…they [the human authorities] summoned the apostles and had them beaten.  Then they ordered them not to speak in the name of Jesus and released them.  So they [Peter and the apostles] left the council rejoicing because they had been considered worthy to suffer dishonor for the sake of the name [Table].  And every day both in the temple courts and from house to house, they [Peter and the apostles] did not stop teaching and proclaiming the good news that Jesus was the Christ.

For there is no authority except by God’s appointment, Paul continued, and the authorities that exist have been instituted by God.[7]  I would think—οὐ γὰρ ἔστιν ἐξουσία εἰ μὴ ὑπὸ θεοῦ—is something more like, “for no authority exists if not under God,” and—αἱ δὲ οὖσαι ὑπὸ θεοῦ τεταγμέναι εἰσίν—“these moreover exist under God’s active ordering.”  This may seem difficult to believe at times but God is always doing more than we see.  Paul wrote believers in Ephesus (Ephesians 3:7-12 NET):

I became a servant of this gospel according to the gift of God’s grace that was given to me by the exercise of his power.  To me – less than the least of all the saints – this grace was given, to proclaim to the Gentiles the unfathomable riches of Christ and to enlighten everyone about God’s secret plan – a secret that has been hidden for ages in God who has created all things.  The purpose of this enlightenment is that through the church the multifaceted wisdom of God should now be disclosed to the rulers and the authorities (ἐξουσίαις, a form of ἐξουσία) in the heavenly realms (ἐπουρανίοις).  This was according to the eternal purpose that he accomplished in Christ Jesus our Lord, in whom we have boldness and confident access to God because of Christ’s faithfulness.

I think this is a continuation of Paul’s treatise on Love…without hypocrisy because only the Holy Spirit can lead us here.  No rule-based belief system can tell anyone authoritatively in real time when to submit to the commands of human authorities and when to reverently decline, fully accepting the consequences imposed by the human authorities that have been instituted by God.  So the person who resists such authority, Paul continued, resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will incur judgment…[8]  Though the human authorities of the moment are instituted and ordained by God I don’t think one can infer their goodness in any objective sense (Acts 1:6-8 NET):

So when they had gathered together, they began to ask him, “Lord, is this the time when you are restoring the kingdom to Israel?” [Table]  He told them, “You are not permitted to know the times or periods that the Father has set by his own authority (ἐξουσίᾳ, another form of ἐξουσία).  But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the farthest parts of the earth” [Table].

Paul wrote specifically about the Roman government.  Most in Israel who hoped for the Messiah hoped He would overthrow Roman rule, but Jesus said, My kingdom is not from this world.[9]  And before the Holy Spirit was given He said to the crowds and to his disciples, “The experts in the law and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat.  Therefore pay attention to what they tell you and do it.  But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they teach.  They tie up heavy loads, hard to carry, and put them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing even to lift a finger to move them.”[10]  Those called to resist specific commands of human authorities know what it means to be considered as sheep to be slaughtered (Romans 8:35-37 NET):

Who will separate us from the love of Christ?  Will trouble, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword?  As it is written, “For your sake we encounter death all day long; we were considered as sheep to be slaughtered.”  No, in all these things we have complete victory through him who loved us!

They also experience that complete victory through him who loved us.  But none of us is called to pugnacity.  Paul continued, (for rulers cause no fear for good conduct but for bad).  Do you desire not to fear authority?  Do good and you will receive its commendation, for it is God’s servant for your good.[11]  The good we are to do is good relative to the human authorities understanding of good (when it does not conflict with God’s).  Paul specified: pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants devoted to governing.  Pay everyone what is owed: taxes to whom taxes are due, revenue to whom revenue is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due.[12]  And the good the authorities do for us is a peaceful and quiet life (1 Timothy 2:1-4 NET):

First of all, then, I urge that requests, prayers, intercessions, and thanks be offered on behalf of all people, even for kings and all who are in authority (ὑπεροχῇ, a form of ὑπεροχή), that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life in all godliness and dignity.  Such prayer for all is good and welcomed before God our Savior, since he wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth.

But if you do wrong, Paul continued, be in fear, for it does not bear the sword in vain.  It is God’s servant to administer retribution on the wrongdoer.[13]  Again, I think this wrong is wrong as the human authorities perceive it.  I do not believe that God expects, or relies on, Gentile human authorities to punish all sins against his law.  Paul continued (Romans 13:5-10 NET):

Therefore it is necessary to be in subjection, not only because of the wrath of the authorities but also because of your conscience.  For this reason you also pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants devoted to governing.  Pay everyone what is owed: taxes to whom taxes are due, revenue to whom revenue is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due.  Owe no one anything, except to love one another, for the one who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law.  For the commandments, “Do not commit adultery, do not murder, do not steal, do not covet,” (and if there is any other commandment) are summed up in this, “Love your neighbor as yourself.”  Love does no wrong to a neighbor.  Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.

So I have bookends distinguishing the beginning—Love…without hypocrisy—and the ending—love is the fulfillment of the law—of Paul’s definition, amplification or explanation of love in his letter to believers in Rome.  And this love is an aspect of the fruit of the Spirit.  I turn now to be subject (ὑποτασσέσθω, a form of ὑποτάσσω) and subjection (ὑποτάσσεσθαι, another form of ὑποτάσσω).

We are given one glimpse into Jesus as a child.  By age twelve he was a precocious spiritual prodigy. But when He realized how upset his parents were he went down with them and came to Nazareth, and was obedient (ὑποτασσόμενος, another form of ὑποτάσσω) to them.[14]  This behavior is not natural to the old human, because the outlook of the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit (ὑποτάσσεται, another form of ὑποτάσσω) to the law of God, nor is it able to do so.[15]  For the creation was subjected (ὑπετάγη, another form of ὑποτάσσω) to futility – not willingly but because of God who subjected (ὑποτάξαντα, another form of ὑποτάσσω) 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.[16]  For ignoring the righteousness that comes from God, and seeking instead to establish their own righteousness, they did not submit (ὑπετάγησαν, another form of ὑποτάσσω) to God’s righteousness.[17]

Jesus did not ignore the righteousness that comes from God.  He is the first new human (1 Corinthians 15:20-28 NET):

But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep.  For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead also came through a man.  For just as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive.  But each in his own order: Christ, the firstfruits; then when Christ comes, those who belong to him.  Then comes the end, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father, when he has brought to an end all rule and all authority and power.  For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.  The last enemy to be eliminated is death.  For he has put everything in subjection (ὑπέταξεν, another form of ὑποτάσσω) under his feet.  But when it says “everything” has been put in subjection (ὑποτέτακται, another form of ὑποτάσσω), it is clear that this does not include the one who put everything in subjection (ὑποτάξαντος, another form of ὑποτάσσω) to him.  And when all things are subjected (ὑποταγῇ, another form of ὑποτάσσω) to him, then the Son himself will be subjected (ὑποταγήσεται, another form of ὑποτάσσω) to the one who subjected (ὑποτάξαντι, another form of ὑποτάσσω) everything to him, so that God may be all in all.

Paul encouraged us to submit (ὑποτάσσησθε, another form of ὑποτάσσω) to people like the household of Stephanus, that as the first converts of Achaia…devoted themselves to ministry for the saints, and to everyone who cooperates in the work and labors hard.[18]  He encouraged believers in Ephesus to be filled by the Spirit, speaking to one another in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, singing and making music in your hearts to the Lord, always giving thanks to God the Father for each other in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and submitting (Υποτασσόμενοι, another form of ὑποτάσσω) to one another out of reverence for Christ.[19]

Slaves are to be subject (ὑποτάσσεσθαι, another form of ὑποτάσσω) to their own masters in everything, Paul wrote Titus, to do what is wanted and not talk back, not pilfering, but showing all good faith, in order to bring credit to the teaching of God our Savior in everything.[20]  I benefited greatly from this encouragement during my most recent job change.  My employer subcontracted my work to another company and I was sent to that company also.  I was so grateful to have a job I failed to fully appreciate how I was foisted on the owner of the subcontracting company.  But over time my new employer’s attitude has moderated and he seems happy to have me as an employee.  I work hard when I am working.  I study the Bible when I am off.  And I am paid every two weeks regardless.

Married women are called to submit to one other human authority.  Paul wrote Titus to have older women teach younger women to love their husbands, to love their children, to be self-controlled, pure, fulfilling their duties at home, kind, being subject (ὑποτασσομένας, another form of ὑποτάσσω) to their own husbands, so that the message of God may not be discredited.[21]  When men attempt to teach this it sounds like man-made rules for women to obey.  But this is not law.  Rather it is part of the loving, joyful, peaceful, patient, kind, good, faithful, gentle, Holy-Spirit-controlled righteousness of God through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ produced in believing wives by the Holy Spirit.

Preach the Gospel
Peter wrote, wives, be subject (ὑποτασσόμεναι, another form of ὑποτάσσω) to your own husbands.  Then, even if some are disobedient to the word, they will be won over without a word by the way you live, when they see your pure and reverent conduct.[22]  This is an example to us all.  We have convinced a world of sinners that we want to impose arcane and archaic rules on them while the truth is: sinners have no share in our righteousness.  It is the gift of God by the faithfulness of Jesus Christ to all who believe.

A youth group in the Austin-Bergstrom International Airport wore these shirts.  I asked one of their leaders to pose for this photograph.

[1] Romans 13:1a (NET)

[2] Romans 13:1a (KJV)

[3] Philippians 3:8a (NET)

[4] Philippians 2:3 (NET)

[5] Philippians 4:7 (NET)

[6] 1 Peter 2:13, 14 (NET)

[7] Romans 13:1b (NET)

[8] Romans 13:2 (NET)

[9] John 18:36a (NET)

[10] Matthew 23:1-4 (NET)

[11] Romans 13:3, 4a (NET)

[12] Romans 13:6, 7 (NET)

[13] Romans 13:4b (NET)

[14] Luke 2:51a (NET)

[15] Romans 8:7 (NET)

[16] Romans 8:20, 21 (NET)

[17] Romans 10:3 (NET)

[18] From 1 Corinthians 16:15, 16 (NET)

[19] Ephesians 5:18b-21 (NET)

[20] Titus 2:9, 10 (NET)

[21] Titus 2:4, 5 (NET)

[22] 1 Peter 3:1, 2 (NET)

Condemnation or Judgment? – Part 15

Posted on by

Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a net that was cast into the sea that caught all kinds of fish.  When it was full, they pulled it ashore, sat down, and put the good (καλὰ, a form of καλός) fish into containers and threw the bad (σαπρὰ, a form of σαπρός) away.  It will be this way at the end of the age.  Angels will come and separate the evil (πονηροὺς, a form of πονηρός) from the righteous (δικαίων, a form of δίκαιος) and throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.[1]  This parable about the kingdom of heaven focused commentators’ attentions on the church as opposed to the world at large.

“In the visible church,” Matthew Henry (1662-1714) wrote, “there is a deal of trash and rubbish, dirt and weeds and vermin, as well as fish….Hypocrites and true Christians shall be parted.”[2]  John Gill (1697-1771) added, “as many as [the angels] find to have a good work of grace wrought and finished in their souls, they will gather into Christ’s barn, into the everlasting habitations, the mansions in Christ’s Father’s house, he is gone to prepare: but as for the bad, who shall appear to be destitute of the grace of God, and righteousness of Christ, notwithstanding their profession of religion, they shall be rejected, as good for nothing, and shall be cast into the lake which burns with fire and brimstone.”[3]

“Our Saviour never fails to keep before our minds the great truth that there is to be a day of judgment,” wrote Albert Barnes (1798-1870), “and that there will be a separation of the good and the evil.  He came to preach salvation; and it is a remarkable fact, also, that the most fearful accounts of hell and of the sufferings of the damned, in the Scriptures, are from his lips.  How does this agree with the representations of those who say that all will be saved?”[4]

On the meaning of σαπρὰ (a form of σαπρός) the Pulpit Commentary (1884) reads: [5]

Not to be pressed to mean “corrupt, dead fish, in a state of rottenness” (Goebel), for surely fishermen seldom get many of these, but simply the worthless, the unfit for use.  This would include the legally unclean.  Tristram writes,” The greater number of the species taken on the lake are rejected by the fishermen, and I have sat with them on the gunwale while they went through their net, and threw out into the sea those that were too small for the market or were considered unclean” (‘Nat. Hist. of Bible,’ p. 291, edit. 1889)

Watch out for false prophets, Jesus said, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are voracious wolves.  You will recognize them by their fruit (καρπῶν, a form of καρπός).[6]  I can be fairly specific here: Does the would-be prophet demonstrate love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control,[7] the fruit (καρπὸς) of the Spirit?  Or does the would-be prophet practice (πράσσοντες, a form of πράσσω) sexual immorality (πορνεία), impurity, depravity, idolatry, sorcery, hostilities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, selfish rivalries, dissensions, factions, envying, murder, drunkenness, carousing,[8] the works (ἔργα, a form of ἔργον) of the flesh?

Jesus continued, Grapes are not gathered from thorns or figs from thistles, are they?  In the same way, every good (ἀγαθὸν, a form of ἀγαθός) tree bears good (καλοὺς, another form of καλός) fruit, but the bad (σαπρὸν, another form of σαπρός) tree bears bad (πονηροὺς, a form of πονηρός) fruit.[9]  I think it worth mentioning that the word translated bears is ποιεῖ (a form of ποιέω) in both occurrences.  A good (ἀγαθὸν, a form of ἀγαθός) tree is not able to bear bad (πονηροὺς, a form of πονηρός) fruit, Jesus continued, nor a bad (σαπρὸν, another form of σαπρός) tree to bear good (καλοὺς, another form of καλός) fruit.[10]

Make a tree good (καλὸν, another form of καλός) and its fruit will be good (καλὸν, another form of καλός), Jesus said to religious people, or make a tree bad (σαπρὸν, another form of σαπρός) and its fruit will be bad (σαπρὸν, another form of σαπρός), for a tree is known by its fruit.[11]  I’ve written elsewhere how the religious mind reverses this teaching.  Every tree that does not bear good (καλὸν, another form of καλός) fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire, Jesus continued his warning about false prophets.  So then, you will recognize them by their fruit.[12]

This leads me inevitably to the old and new human (ἄνθρωπον, a form of ἄνθρωπος in Greek; I see no reason to specify gender).  You were taught with reference to your former way of life to lay aside the old man who is being corrupted in accordance with deceitful desires, to be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and to put on (ἐνδύσασθαι, a form of ἐνδύω) the new man who has been created in God’s image – in righteousness and holiness that comes from truth.[13]  The word ἐνδύσασθαι means to sink into.  In movies the femme fatale slips into something more comfortable.  To put on the new human is considerably more macho.

I am working class all the way, rarely wear a suit.  If I do, it is to fit in, to impress or to intimidate.  It is a put-on in every sense of the word.  “Fake it until you make it” works in those situations when “you can fool all of the people some of the time.”  It doesn’t work with the new human because no creature is hidden from God, but everything is naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must render an account.[14]  To put on the new human I must believe that God has prepared it beforehand, ready and able to respond as He would have me respond.

This new human is the one who has been fathered by God: We know that everyone fathered by God does not sin, but God protects the one he has fathered, and the evil one cannot touch him.[15]  Everyone who has been fathered by God does not practice sin, because God’s seed resides in him, and thus he is not able to sin, because he has been fathered by God.[16]  This new human is the one who is led by the Spirit: For all who are led by the Spirit of God are the sons of God.[17]  The old human is being corrupted in accordance with deceitful desires.  It gets progressively worse, never better.

This was vividly portrayed for me—in me—the Saturday before Mother’s day.  I had a rare opportunity to be home.  My eighty-four-year-old mother asked me to finish trimming her bushes.  Now, of course, she had a particular way it needed to be done.  As I untangled the long extension cord that powered the trimmer I recalled that handling that cord caused her fall last summer.  She broke her hip and lay on the driveway for ten hours, parched and burnt in the sun and then shivering in the rain, until my sister found her.  But the whole time I trimmed those bushes the old human did nothing but bitch, moan and complain about her.

It didn’t affect my behavior.  (I trimmed her bushes to the best of my ability.  No, it wasn’t topiary by any stretch of the imagination.)  The old human didn’t affect my attitude toward her.  (I called and asked her to make sure.)  But I can hardly wait to be rid of the foul thing!  So when I hear—Angels will come and separate the evil from [ἐκ μέσου; literally “out from the midst of”] the righteous and throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth—I wonder if that describes my release from this sin condemned in my flesh.  And I’m confounded that so many pastors thought instead of members of their congregations.  Why?

Do we differ in our understanding of the fruit of the Spirit?

“And here we may observe that as sin is called the work of the flesh,” Matthew Henry wrote, “because the flesh, or corrupt nature, is the principle that moves and excites men to it, so grace is said to be the fruit of the Spirit, because it wholly proceeds from the Spirit, as the fruit does from the root…”  John Gill was a bit more equivocal:  “Not of nature or man’s free will, as corrupted by sin, for no good fruit springs from thence; but either of the internal principle of grace, called the Spirit, Galatians 5:17 or rather of the Holy Spirit, as the Ethiopic version reads it; the graces of which are called ‘fruit’, and not ‘works’, as the actions of the flesh are; because they are owing to divine influence, efficacy, and bounty…”

Albert Barnes was explicit: “That which the Holy Spirit produces…Paul does not trace them to our own hearts, even when renewed.  He says that they are to be regarded as the proper result of the Spirit‘s operations on the soul.”  In the Pulpit Commentary the fruit of the Spirit was rationalized as “dispositions and states of mind,” and demeaned somewhat as “states of mind or habits of feeling [rather] than concrete actions,” but are still acknowledged as produced by the Holy Spirit: “[Paul] reckons up the dispositions and states of mind which it was the office of the Holy Spirit to produce in them.”

Do we differ in our understanding of the necessity and efficacy of God’s mercy?

“It is not of him that willeth….Applying this general rule to the particular case that Paul has before him,” wrote Matthew Henry, “the reason why the unworthy, undeserving, ill-deserving Gentiles are called, and grafted into the church, while the greatest part of the Jews are left to perish in unbelief, is not because those Gentiles were better deserving or better disposed for such a favour, but because of God’s free grace that made that difference.  The Gentiles did neither will it, nor run for it, for they sat in darkness, Matthew 4:16.  In darkness, therefore not willing what they knew not sitting in darkness, a contented posture, therefore not running to meet it, but anticipated with these invaluable blessings of goodness.  Such is the method of God’s grace towards all that partake of it, for he is found of those that sought him not (Isaiah 65:1) in this preventing, effectual, distinguishing grace, he acts as a benefactor, whose grace is his own.  Our eye therefore must not be evil because his is good…”

John Gill wrote: “but of God that sheweth mercy; in a free sovereign way and manner, which he is not obliged to by anything the creature wills or works; he is at full liberty, notwithstanding whatever they will or do, to give his grace and mercy, when, where, and to whom he pleases; and therefore to give it to some, and deny it to others, can never be accounted an act of injustice, since he is not bound to give it to any.”

Albert Barnes wrote: “But of God that showeth mercy – Salvation in its beginning, its progress, and its close, is of him.  He has a right, therefore, to bestow it when and where he pleases.  All our mercies flow from his mere love and compassion, and not from our deserts.  The essential idea here is, that God is the original fountain of all the blessings of salvation.”  The Pulpit Commentary doesn’t comment on Romans 9:16 directly but reads: “The argument (thus introduced by γὰρ) requires two understood premisses—that God cannot possibly be unrighteous, and that what he himself said to Moses must be true.”

Do we differ on who may be shown mercy?

Matthew Henry didn’t comment directly on Romans 11:32: “He shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob.  Christ’s errand into the world was to turn away ungodliness, to turn away the guilt by the purchase of pardoning mercy, and to turn away the power by the pouring out of renewing grace, to save his people from their sins (Matthew 1:21), to separate between us and our sins, that iniquity might not be our ruin, and that it might not be our ruler.  Especially to turn it away from Jacob, which is that for the sake of which he quotes the text, as a proof of the great kindness God intended for the seed of Jacob.”

So far so good.  Mr. Henry quoted Paul quoting Isaiah:

NET

 Parallel Greek

Septuagint
The Deliverer will come out of Zion; he will remove ungodliness from Jacob.

Romans 11:26b

 ἥξει ἐκ Σιὼν ὁ ρυόμενος,

ἀποστρέψει ἀσεβείας ἀπὸ Ἰακώβ.

Romans 11:26b

 καὶ  ἥξει ἕνεκεν Σιων ὁ ῥυόμενος καὶ ἀποστρέψει ἀσεβείας ἀπὸ Ιακωβ

Isaiah 59:20

Then Mr. Henry quoted the same verse in Isaiah from the Masoretic text: “In Isaiah it is, The Redeemer shall come to Zion, and unto those that turn from transgression in Jacob, which shown who in Zion were to have a share in and to reap benefit by the deliverance promised, those and those only that leave their sins and turn to God to them Christ comes as a Redeemer, but as an avenger to those that persist in impenitence.”  Then he proposed an unbelievable solution: “Putting both these readings together, we learn that none have an interest in Christ but those that turn from their sins, nor can any turn from their sins but by the strength of the grace of Christ.”

In other words, no one can be saved since God will only show mercy to those who turn from their sins and none can turn from their sins apart from God’s mercy.  With a Gospel message like that we need not wonder at the “deal of trash and rubbish, dirt and weeds and vermin” in his church.  That’s not quite fair.  Mr. Henry didn’t specify whether the “deal of trash and rubbish, dirt and weeds and vermin” were members of his own congregation or another.  According to an online bio “he began his regular ministry as non-conformist pastor of a Presbyterian congregation…”  Perhaps he wrote thus of Anglicans or Catholics.  But I think I understand why he had no comment to make on Paul’s declaration: For God has consigned all people to disobedience so that he may show mercy to them all.[18]

“Jews, though for the present unbelievers,” John Gill wrote, “yet it may be thought, that through the mercy the Gentiles had received, they would some time or other be provoked to seek for, and so obtain the same mercy, Romans 11:31, and the rather this may be given into and received, not only because they both have been in a state of unbelief, but the end and design of God in concluding them in it, were to have mercy on each of them, Romans 11:32…” I may be mistaken but I take Mr. Gill to mean that God will have mercy on some Jews and Gentiles (those who turn from their sins perhaps?).  Mr. Gill continued, “which dispensation of God both to one and to the other by turns, in different ways, was so amazing and unaccountable to the apostle, that he breaks out into admiration at the wisdom and knowledge of God…”

“Mercy is favor shown to the undeserving,” wrote Albert Barnes.  “It could not have been shown to the Jews and the Gentiles unless it was before proved that they were guilty.  For this purpose proof was furnished that they were all in unbelief….Thus, all people were on a level; and thus all might be admitted to heaven without any invidious distinctions, or any dealings that were not in accordance with mercy and love….It does not prove that all people will be saved; but that those who are saved shall be alike saved by the mercy of God; and that He intends to confer salvation on Jews and Gentiles on the same terms.”  I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.  So then, it does not depend on human desire or exertion, but on God who shows mercy. [19]

“Thus the latter expression [e.g., Romans 11:32] is not in itself adducible in support of the doctrine of universalism,” the Pulpit Commentary reads.  “Certainly the prospect of a universal triumph of the gospel before the end rises here before the apostle in prophetic vision; and it may be that it carries with it to his mind further glories of eternal salvation for all, casting their rays backward over all past ages, so as to inspire an unbounded hope.  Such a hope, which seems elsewhere intimated (cf. 1 Corinthians 15:24-29; Ephesians 1:9, Ephesians 1:10, Ephesians 1:20-23; Colossians 1:15-20) would justify the glowing rhapsody of admiration and thanksgiving that follows more fully than if we supposed the apostle to contemplate still the eternal perdition of the multitudes who in all the ages have not on earth found mercy.”

Here the Pulpit Commentary referred to Romans 11:32-36 (NET):

For God has consigned all people to disobedience so that he may show mercy to them all.  Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God!  How unsearchable are his judgments and how fathomless his ways!  For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has been his counselor?  Or who has first given to God, that God needs to repay him?  For from him and through him and to him are all things.  To him be glory forever!  Amen.

I’ll pick this up again later.

[1] Matthew 13:47-50 (NET)

[2] Matthew Henry’s Concise Commentary

[3] John Gill’s Exposition of the Whole Bible

[4] Albert Barnes Notes on the Bible

[5] Pulpit Commentary

[6] Matthew 7:15, 16a (NET)

[7] Galatians 5:22, 23a (NET)

[8] Galatians 5:19-21a (NET)

[9] Matthew 7:16b, 17(NET)

[10] Matthew 7:18 (NET)

[11] Matthew 12:33 (NET)

[12] Matthew 7:19, 20 (NET)

[13] Ephesians 4:22-24 (NET)

[14] Hebrews 4:13 (NET)

[15] 1 John 5:18 (NET) Table

[16] 1 John 3:9 (NET)

[17] Romans 8:14 (NET)

[18] Romans 11:32 (NET)

[19] Romans 9:15b, 16 (NET)