Tag Archives: Matthew 3:7

Who Am I? Part 4

Posted on by

I spend a large portion of my Christmas holiday with three post-Christian women I’ll call Grandmother, Mother and Daughter because of their relationship to one another.  I call them post-Christian because they were all professing Christians at one time.  Grandmother still calls herself a Christian.  She means a non-Buddhist, non-Hindu, non-Jew, non-Muslim who believes in Jesus.  Her ex-husband was a Baptist Sunday school teacher who abused her, and Mother as a child.  Daughter is the most non-Christian, vocally pagan of the three with Mother falling somewhere between.  Their transformation began with a desire for a more feminine God.  I regret now not taking Mother’s question more seriously.  I didn’t understand at the time that this desire would lead through Mother Earth to a Mother Goddess and on to full-fledged paganism.

I pointed out that yehôvâh (יהוה) created male and female: God (ʼĕlôhı̂ym, אלהים) created humankind in his own image, in the image of God (ʼĕlôhı̂ym, אלהים) he created them, male and female he created them.[1]  I talked about the meaning of El Shaddai (ʼêl, אל; shadday, שדי) and a few other references to God as feminine.  But I emphasized that the general understanding of God as masculine was due primarily to the fact that we are all feminine in relation to the operation of his grace through Jesus Christ.

I am accepted among them as the kindly, odd, somewhat benighted, old man who studies the Bible in his spare time, so ordinary conversation—what’ve you been up to?—offers many opportunities.  A recent conversation with Grandmother and Daughter turned naturally to Jesus’ dying thoughts on the cross.  I read Psalm 22 aloud.  Daughter was visibly, tearfully moved and vocally overwhelmed that David could write such exact knowledge so many centuries before Jesus was born.

I spoke of God having mercy on whoever he chooses to have mercy and hardening whoever he chooses to harden.  I said I had been considering how, and told them the story of two prophets, Nathan and John the Baptist.  When Pharisees and Sadduccees, religious leaders, came to be baptized for repentance (Matthew 3:11, 12; Mark 1:4-8; Luke 3:15-17) John said, You offspring of vipers!  Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath?[2]  And he challenged them to put their works religion to the test: Therefore produce fruit that proves your repentance…[3]

What I didn’t say but will record here for my own memory’s sake, whether these particular Pharisees and Sadduccees were directly responsible or not, John’s words were not secret and would have tended to harden the resolve of the religious elite to kill Jesus: the Lord (yehôvâh, ויהוה) desired to crush him (e.g., Jesus).  On the other hand yehôvâh desired David’s repentance and sent Nathan to that effect.

He was sent after King David had committed adultery with Bathsheba and then had her husband killed to cover it up.  Nathan told David a story (2 Samuel 12:1-6) about a rich man who had entertained a traveler with a meal.  The rich man hadn’t served up any of his own sheep or cattle, but the one ewe lamb he took from a poor man.  Then David became very angry at this man.[4]  You are that man![5] Nathan said to him.

“Did he kill him?” Daughter asked.  I was actually surprised that she had forgotten the story.

No, I answered, I have sinned against the Lord![6] David said and then he wrote the 51st Psalm.  I got to read Psalm 51 aloud to them.  When I finished Grandmother responded to a look on Daughter’s face at the line—Look, I was guilty of sin from birth, a sinner the moment my mother conceived me.[7]

“I don’t believe that either,” Grandmother said.

This is a point to concede by the way.  If it offends or hurts your feelings, welcome to the human race.  Being guilty of sin from birth, a sinner the moment my mother conceived me is equivalent to being born of the flesh of Adam (Romans 5:12-21; 1 Corinthians 15:42-58).  You do not want a relentless God who will pursue you with goodness and mercy all the days of your life to spend that time convincing you the hard way that you are a sinner instead (John 16:7-11).

Goodness and mercy, by the way is the NKJV translation of Psalm 23:6a.  In the NET it was translated goodness and faithfulness (chêsêd , וחסד).

chêsêd Hebrew KJV NET Tanakh Septuagint
Psalm 23:6a וחסד mercy faithfulness mercy ἔλεός[8]


Daughter informed me that my religion has a lot of guilt in it as she praised me for my adherence to it, and insisted that we, she and her pagan friends, desperately need a canon (i.e., of written scripture).

On Yule I learned that Mother had been taking drugs.  I wasn’t personally that aware of the winter solstice.  Daughter and Mother wished one another happy Yule in the car as I drove them to rehab.  It’s probably the only reason I knew anything at all.

I hadn’t known the night before that Mother had informed Daughter she was abusing drugs.  Daughter called me the next morning when Mother hesitated to actually commit herself to rehab.  In the car on the way Daughter was jubilant and excited that Mother was doing the right thing.  Yes, rehab is better than sitting home alone shooting dope, but I was much more somber and subdued.

At her home I had sat with her, held her and listened to her enough to convince myself that Mother had no interest in repentance.  Daughter was right.  My presence alone persuaded Mother to shower, dress and leave with us for the rehab facility.  But in the car I felt like I was delivering her up for more hardening.  In my admittedly limited experience I know no one who has returned to faith in Christ from the higher power mysticism of a twelve-step program.  I watched sadly the full realization of incarceration creep across her face as she was taken from us.  No matter what I say or how much I protest, Mother and Daughter believe I live a life of rules, while they are free.

I gave them My statutes, yehôvâh explained in the philosopher’s dream chapter of Ezekiel the prophet, and informed them of My ordinances, by which, if a man observes them, he will live.[9] I call it the philosopher’s dream chapter because yehôvâh explained so much of his own understanding of Israel’s history there.  Then the twelve-year-old Jesus had this chapter at his disposal to renew and refresh his now human mind.

The Hebrew word translated My statutes was chûqqâh (חקותי).  It was translated προστάγματά in the Septuagint.  The Hebrew word translated My ordinances was mishpâṭ (משפטי), and δικαιώματά, a form of δικαίωμα, in the Septuagint.  This was translated the righteous requirements in: Therefore if the uncircumcised man obeys the righteous requirements (δικαιώματα, a form of δικαίωμα) of the law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision?[10]

In the same chapter yehôvâh explained: I also gave them statutes that were not good and ordinances by which they could not live.[11]  Here the Hebrew word translated statutes was chôq (חקים); chûqqâh is the feminine of chôq according to Strong’s Concordance.  It was still translated προστάγματα in the Septuagint.  And again, the word translated ordinances was mishpâṭ (ומשפטים) in Hebrew and δικαιώματα in the Septuagint.  I don’t think these are different statutes or different ordinances.

The commandment…was intended to bring life.[12]  The law is holy, and the commandment is holy, righteous, and good.[13]  But if a law had been given that was able to give life, then righteousness would certainly have come by the law.[14]  God achieved what the law could not do because it was weakened through the flesh.[15]  For sin, seizing the opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it I died.[16]  For we know that the law is spiritual – but I am unspiritual, sold into slavery to sin.  For I don’t understand what I am doing.  For I do not do what I want – instead, I do what I hate.[17]

Also I gave them My Sabbaths, yehôvâh said in the philosopher’s dream chapter, to be a sign between Me and them, that they might know that I am the Lord (yehôvâh, יהוה) who sanctifies them.[18]

In practice many professing faith in Jesus do not believe that yehôvâh/Jesus sanctifies[19] them.  We trust Him for justification only, primarily forgiveness.  We believe our sanctification is a measure of our own good works, obedience accomplished in our own strength for our own glory.  We do not believe that here and now 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.[20]  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.[21]  Thus we must make every effort to enter that rest, so that no one may fall by following the same pattern of disobedience[22] (ἀπειθείας, a form of ἀπείθεια; literally, disbelief)  Do we then nullify the law through faith?  Absolutely not!  Instead we uphold the law.[23]

I want to consider the movie The Host as a Holy Spirit metaphor for one who does not yet experience Him.  There are many spoilers here and as a metaphor the film is fatally flawed.  But in the hope of communicating some small portion of the Ineffable, here goes.

“The earth is at peace,” a resistance leader named Jebediah (William Hurt) narrates the beginning of the film.  “There is no hunger.  There is no violence.  The environment is healed.  Honesty, courtesy and kindness are practiced by all.  Our world has never been more perfect.  Only it is no longer our world.  We’ve been invaded by an alien race.  They occupy the bodies of almost all human beings on the planet.  The few humans who have survived are on the run.”

Then we are introduced to Melanie (Saoirse Ronan) fleeing her enemies: honesty, courtesy and kindness.  Following her earthly father’s example, she attempts suicide but lives, despite her best efforts, only to be possessed by Wanderer (also Saoirse Ronan).  Melanie’s old human survives to fight Wanderer for control of their body.

The Seeker (Diane Kruger) interviews Wanderer to glean Melanie’s memories for knowledge of other old humans in the resistance underground.  When she decides that Melanie’s old human is too strong for Wanderer, she plans to put Wanderer in a more compliant host, search Melanie’s memories herself and then let Melanie die the death she wanted.  But Wanderer has begun to love Melanie.  They flee The Seeker together.

Melanie tricks Wanderer into the desert and leads her to Uncle Jebediah and the underground resistance.  Uncle Jeb uses all of his authority as a leader to keep others in the resistance from killing the obviously possessed Melanie/Wanderer.  Even Melanie’s lover Jared (Max Irons) has no sympathy for her at first.  In a get-to-know-you walk-and-talk Uncle Jeb shortens Wanderer’s name to Wanda.

Melanie begins to love Wanda as she witnesses Wanda’s concern for the people Melanie loves, even some she hates or is indifferent toward.  The metaphor breaks down, of course.  The holy spirits, called souls in the film, are many and varied, and some or not as holy as Wanda.  The Seeker ironically becomes almost human in her fears that she personally is losing control to her host Lacey (also Diane Kruger) and that the holy spirits may ultimately lose their possession of the humans.  In the end The Host becomes Satan’s wet dream as The Seeker’s fears become flesh: holy spirits collaborate with the resistance to rid humans of the holy spirits.

 

Mother is on the verge of bankruptcy.  I helped her in a similar position nearly twenty years ago.  She called me before I left for Christmas.  I offered to help again.  She accepted.  As I drove the hundred miles or so to my own mother’s house the evening after Mother committed herself to rehab I understood why we hadn’t met to review her finances yet.  I recalled the things I’ve said and done with Grandmother, Mother and Daughter, fretted over some things I hadn’t said or done and heard Darth Vader echoing in my head, saying, “Now his failure is complete.”

As far as I know I am the believer of record in their lives.  I will give an account of this stewardship before Jesus.  As the enormity of my failure to live a life that commends others to Jesus inundated me in crushing waves, the image of my mother scrubbing the basement floor on her hands and knees popped into my mind.  Of all the things she had said or done, of all the things I might have complained that she hadn’t said or done, this simple image stuck with me.

I had overdosed on some hallucinogen.  I had thrown up all night long on her basement floor.  My mother cleaning up after me became a living metaphor of my life.  I had returned to drugs because a simple taste a few days earlier brought back the feeling I had lost since my early days of trusting Jesus again.  I made many more bad decisions along the way.  But my mother never gave up on me.

As I drove through the dark hills thinking perhaps I had been spared from helping Mother again financially, the admonition of my penny-pinching father came to mind:

If you can bear to hear the truth you’ve spoken

Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,

Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,

And stoop and build ’em up with worn-out tools:

 

If you can make one heap of all your winnings

And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss,

And lose, and start again at your beginnings

And never breathe a word about your loss;

If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew

To serve your turn long after they are gone,

And so hold on when there is nothing in you

Except the Will which says to them: ‘Hold on!’

The words weren’t his but Rudyard Kipling’s.[24]  A man like me would be a fool to attempt Kipling’s vision of manhood apart from the Holy Spirit.  But the image of my mother’s loving persistence and my father’s words of counsel gave me some hope that I was there, the right person at the right place and time.  And that image and those words carried me through that dark night until the continuous infusion of the Holy Spirit’s love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and control took over again the next morning.

[1] Genesis 1:27 (NET)

[2] Matthew 3:7 (NET)

[3] Matthew 3:8 (NET)

[4] 2 Samuel 12:5a (NET) Table

[5] 2 Samuel 12:7a (NET) Table

[6] 2 Samuel 12:13a (NET) Table

[7] Psalm 51:5 (NET) Table

[8] In the Septuagint both chêsêd (וחסד) and ṭôb (טוב) were translated by the one Greek word ἔλεός.

[9] Ezekiel 20:11 (NASB)

[10] Romans 2:26 (NET) Table

[11] Ezekiel 20:25 (NASB)

[12] Romans 7:10 (NET)

[13] Romans 7:12 (NET)

[14] Galatians 3:21b (NET)

[15] Romans 8:3a (NET)

[16] Romans 7:11 (NET)

[17] Romans 7:14, 15 (NET)

[18] Ezekiel 20:12 (NASB)

[19] When I struggled the most with this concept my Pastor was from the Christian and Missionary Alliance.  Today, as I scanned their webpage titled “Sanctification,” nothing jumps out at me as problematic except my own spiritual tic.  My flesh and my religious mind hear obedience in step 3 “to A Spirit-Filled Life”—“We maintain a continuous relationship with Jesus through obedience to His Word”—as a trigger word, calling me back to a DIY works religion.  But now I just translate obedience back into Greek, ὑπακοή, attentive hearkening, and the trigger obey disappears.  I remain (μείνατε, a form of μένω) in Jesus through faith instead (which is the actual word used in John 15:1-11 the Scriptural source of step 3).

[Addendum 1/26/2017] I’m not so sure Paul would agree that 1 Corinthians 3:1-4 “clearly teaches that there are two kinds of Christians.”

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

[21] Galatians 2:20 (NET)

[22] Hebrews 4:11 (NET)

[23] Romans 3:31 (NET)

[24] If, by Rudyard Kipling

Condemnation or Judgment? – Part 2

Posted on by

I am no more accustomed to taking Jesus’ criteria of judgment between the sheep and the goats in Matthew 25 ‎literally than anyone else socialized into my religion.  My first doubt appeared in the form of a “rational” conclusion: “Then it would make more sense to pursue the lesser path—to give food, drink and clothing to Jesus’ brothers and sisters, to show them hospitality, visit them when sick or in prison—rather than the greater path—to hear Jesus’ message and believe the One who sent Him.”[1]  The unstated assumption of that conclusion is that my goal is to escape[2] an eternity in hell rather than to know[3] God and glorify Him.

Of course, who is to say that the person who believed Jesus’ teaching enough today to start giving food, drink and clothing to his brothers and sisters, to show them hospitality, or visit them when sick or in prison, wouldn’t begin to hear his message and believe the One who sent Him tomorrow?  A question followed:  If I take the criteria of judgment between the sheep and the goats in Matthew 25 literally, what is all the hell talk in the Bible about?  I don’t know the answer to that but it’s something I can study along with the other instances of κρίσεως.

“Do not go to Gentile regions and do not enter any Samaritan town,” Jesus told Simon (called Peter), and Andrew his brother; James son of Zebedee and John his brother; Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus; Simon the Zealot and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him.[4]  “Go instead to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.  As you go, preach this message: ‘The kingdom of heaven is near!’  Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse lepers, cast out demons.  Freely you received, freely give.”[5]

And if anyone will not welcome you or listen to your message, Jesus continued, shake the dust off your feet as you leave that house or that town.  I tell you the truth, it will be more bearable for the region of Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment (ἐν[6] ἡμέρᾳ[7] κρίσεως[8]) than for that town![9]

When I thought of justice as essentially the equitable distribution of punishment for sin I assumed that more bearable meant less condemned, a more bearable place in hell, less heat, less torture or something.  Romans 11 and Ezekiel 16[10] have given me cause to consider that God’s sense of justice goes well beyond the equitable distribution of punishment for sin (Matthew 10:40-42 NET).

Whoever receives you receives me, and whoever receives me receives the one who sent me.  Whoever receives a prophet in the name of a prophet will receive a prophet’s reward (μισθὸν, a form of μισθός).[11] Whoever receives a righteous person in the name of a righteous person will receive a righteous person’s reward (μισθὸν, a form of μισθός).  And whoever gives only a cup of cold water to one of these little ones in the name of a disciple, I tell you the truth, he will never lose his reward (μισθὸν, a form of μισθός).

I’m not sure what a prophet’s or a righteous person’s reward is.  The same word is used in Revelation, the time has come to give to your servants, the prophets, their reward (μισθὸν, a form of μισθός), as well as to the saints and to those who revere your name, both small and great…[12]  Can this μισθὸν (a form of μισθός) be received by those who receive a prophet in the name of a prophet, or those who receive a righteous person in the name of a righteous person, or those who give a cup of cold water to one of these little ones in the name of a disciple, in hell?  I don’t know.

The first mention of hell in the New Testament came not from the mouth of Jesus but from his cousin John the Baptist, when he saw many Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his baptism, he said to them, “You offspring of vipers!  Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath?[13]  I imagine this manner of address shocked men who liked walking around in long robes and elaborate greetings in the marketplaces, and the best seats in the synagogues and the places of honor at banquets.[14]

I didn’t understand this anger at Jewish religious leaders as a special circumstance.  I thought Jesus changed the rules on them, tightened up adultery and divorce, and loosened restrictions on ham and shellfish.  Yes, they were slow to adopt the new rules.  But I related to his anger in the sense that Peter expressed:  For it is time for judgment to begin, starting with the house of God.  And if it starts with us, what will be the fate of those who are disobedient to the gospel of God?  And if the righteous are barely saved, what will become of the ungodly and sinners?[15]

I assumed that if God had been angry like this with, and abusive to, Jewish religious leaders He was only that much more angry with me, though the abusive part didn’t always work out in practice, which was confusing.  But I knew even from English classes in public school that we were all “Sinner’s in the Hands of an Angry God,”[16] (if one were to believe in that sort of thing).  It is a terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God,[17] the writer of Hebrews agreed.

Therefore produce fruit that proves your repentance, John the Baptist continued, and don’t think you can say to yourselves, “We have Abraham as our father.”  For I tell you that God can raise up children for Abraham from these stones![18]

I saw the relationship between Israel descended from Abraham and believers “born again” of Jesus Christ.  I made the connection between producing fruit and the fruit of the Spirit.  I had no intention of saying to myself, I have Jesus Christ for my father.  I knew God could raise up children for Jesus from stones.  I was ready to prove what I could do for God, first by keeping the law and later by producing the fruit of the Spirit.

I didn’t understand for many years that the fruit of the Spirit belonged to the Spirit, part of the glory of God.  I thought the “fruits” of the Spirit were things I did that the Spirit of God would approve of, or be pleased with.  For all practical purposes I became one of the Pharisees, not that I was ever any good at it.  I was never blameless according to the righteousness stipulated in the law. [19]

Even now the ax is laid at the root of the trees, John warned, and every tree that does not produce good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire. [20]

For years I prayed in Sunday worship services, For Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever,[21] while I worked to rob God of his glory, striving (and failing) to achieve the fruit of his Spirit as if it were my own religious works.  And for years He worked to dissuade me of this error, while I persistently refused to believe Him.  Or I simply walked away in frustration, persuaded that “this whole religious thing was” futile (though I used a more scatological adjective than futile).  The primary reason I know that Love is patient and that love is kind, [22] is not Paul’s written words, but the way they resonated with the Lord’s patient labor to get through to me, and his kind persistence calling me back from my frustration.

I baptize you with water, for repentance, John the Baptist continued, but the one coming after me is more powerful than I am – I am not worthy to carry his sandals.  He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.[23]

Everything about my religion says to me that He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit or fire.  “Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ or burn in hell for all eternity.”  Yet I’ve heard no one with the courage to change or retranslate this particular conjunction καὶ.[24]  John the Baptist continued (Matthew 3:12 NET):

His winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clean out his threshing floor and will gather his wheat into the storehouse, but the chaff he will burn up with inextinguishable fire.

Part of the original question read: “I don’t really like these verses because it’s like the verses about the sheep and the goats and the wheat and the tares.  It makes it seem like some people are going to be saved and others aren’t.  HOWEVER, couple it with Romans 7:14-20 and it seems to mean something else.  In Romans 7:20 ‘Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.’  Now that verse seems like a real cop out!  I’ve never understood it very well.  But it seems to be saying that that part of the person doing ‘evil’ is separate from the person himself or herself (maybe as far as east is from the west??).  So maybe John 5:28 and 29 can be talking about all us dead being raised and our ‘old selves’ get condemned and our ‘new selves’ live eternally with the Lord.”

I don’t know that I see that in John 5:28 and 29, but here in Matthew 3:11 and 12 it sounds more plausible.  What is the chaff after all but the body that housed the kernel of grain until it matured?  I’m not sure that it proves that Jesus will baptize [us] with the Holy Spirit and[25] fire but I will certainly remember it as an interesting interpretive theory.

“‘Tis everlasting wrath,” Jonathan Edwards wrote in his sermon, “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God.”[26]

It would be dreadful to suffer this fierceness and wrath of Almighty God one moment; but you must suffer it to all eternity: there will be no end to this exquisite horrible misery: When you look forward, you shall see a long forever, a boundless duration before you, which will swallow up your thoughts, and amaze your soul; and you will absolutely despair of ever having any deliverance, any end, any mitigation, any rest at all; you will know certainly that you must wear out long ages, millions of millions of ages, in wrestling and conflicting with this almighty merciless vengeance; and then when you have so done, when so many ages have actually been spent by you in this manner, you will know that all is but a point to what remains. So that your punishment will indeed be infinite.

Is this knowledge of God?  Or is it human conjecture?

“If it were only the wrath of man, tho’ it were of the most potent prince, it would be comparatively little to be regarded,” reads one of Edward’s arguments.  “The wrath of kings is very much dreaded, especially of absolute monarchs, that have the possessions and lives of their subjects wholly in their power, to be disposed of at their meer will….The subject that very much enrages an arbitrary prince, is liable to suffer the most extreme torments, that human art can invent or human power can inflict.  But the greatest earthly potentates, in their greatest majesty and strength, and when clothed in their greatest terrors, are but feeble despicable worms of the dust, in comparison of the great and almighty creator and king of heaven and earth…”

In other words, if an absolute monarch or arbitrary prince became a great torturer of the subjects who angered him, imagine how much greater God must be at devising and inflicting torture.  He quoted Jesus to bolster this argument: “And I say unto you my friends, be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do: But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear; fear him, which after he hath killed, hath power to cast into hell; yea I say unto you, fear him.”

It seems fairly obvious to me, however, that Jesus’ point was not that God (or Jesus Himself[27]) is the superlative torturer, but that those friends who believed Him and lived and spoke in his name should not be afraid of the beatings, imprisonments and deaths they would face at the hands of earthly potentates, absolute monarchs or arbitrary princes (Luke 12:4-7 NET):

I tell you, my friends, do not be afraid (φοβηθῆτε, a form of φοβέω)[28] of those who kill the body, and after that have nothing more they can do.  But I will warn you whom you should fear (φοβηθῆτε, a form of φοβέω): Fear (φοβήθητε, another form of φοβέω) the one who, after the killing, has authority to throw you into hell.  Yes, I tell you, fear (φοβήθητε, another form of φοβέω) him!  Aren’t five sparrows sold for two pennies?  Yet not one of them is forgotten before God.  In fact, even the hairs on your head are all numbered.  Do not be afraid (φοβεῖσθε, another form of φοβέω); you are more valuable than many sparrows.

It is as if He said, take all your fear of man, compare it to your fear of God’s wrath and see that it is nothing, then do not be afraid because God cares for you: you are more valuable than many sparrows.  To Jonathan Edwards argument I contrast the knowledge of God revealed in Jesus’ command (Matthew 5:43-48 NET):

You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor’ and ‘hate your enemy.’  But I say to you, love your enemy and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be like your Father in heaven, since he causes the sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.  For if you love those who love you, what reward (μισθὸν, a form of μισθός) do you have?  Even the tax collectors do the same, don’t they?  And if you only greet your brothers, what more do you do?  Even the Gentiles do the same, don’t they?  So then, be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect [loving his enemies].

“God is a great deal more angry with great numbers that are now on earth, yea doubtless with many that are now in this congregation…than he is with many of those that are now in the flames of hell,” Jonathan Edward’s told religious-minded folk trusting in their own religion and good works.  But Jesus’ attitude was a bit different toward the same sort of people (Matthew 11:27-30 NET):

All things have been handed over to me by my Father.  No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son decides to reveal him.  Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest.  Take my yoke on you and learn from me, because I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.  For my yoke is easy to bear, and my load is not hard to carry.

As a matter of thoroughness I want to include a comparison of Peter’s quotation from Proverbs 11:31 with the Septuagint.  The translation from contemporary Hebrew reads: If the righteous are recompensed on earth, how much more the wicked sinner![29]

Peter Blue Letter Bible (Septuagint) NET Bible (Greek parallel text)
if the righteous are barely saved, what will become of the ungodly and sinners?

1 Peter 4:18 (NET)

 εἰ ὁ μὲν[30] δίκαιος μόλις σῴζεται ὁ ἀσεβὴς καὶ ἁμαρτωλὸς ποῦ φανεῖται

Proverbs 11:31

 εἰ ὁ δίκαιος μόλις σῴζεται, ὁ ἀσεβὴς καὶ ἁμαρτωλὸς ποῦ φανεῖται

1 Peter 4:18

 

Addendum (7/19/2015): Jim Searcy has published that the Septuagint is a hoax written by Origen and Eusebius 200 hundred years after Christ.  “In fact, the Septuagint ‘quotes’ from the New Testament and not vice versa…”  His contention is that the “King James Version is the infallible Word of God.”  So, I’ll re-examine the quotations above with the KJV.

Peter KJV NET Bible (Greek parallel text)
And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?

1 Peter 4:18 (KJV)

 Behold, the righteous shall be recompensed in the earth: much more the wicked and the sinner.

Proverbs 11:31

 εἰ ὁ δίκαιος μόλις σῴζεται, ὁ ἀσεβὴς καὶ ἁμαρτωλὸς ποῦ φανεῖται

1 Peter 4:18

If the “King James Version is the infallible Word of God,” Peter interjected the idea of salvation (σῴζεται, a form of σώζω) into the Old Testament idea of earthly recompense.

[1] John 5:24 (NET)

[2] https://religiousmind.net/2013/02/09/you-must-be-gentle-part-3/

[3] https://religiousmind.net/2012/06/23/who-am-i-part-3/

[4] Matthew 10:2-4 (NET)

[5] Matthew 10:5-8 (NET)

[9] Matthew 10:14, 15 (NET)

[10] https://religiousmind.net/2013/05/02/romans-part-43/

[12] Revelation 11:18 (NET)

[13] Matthew 3:7 (NET)

[14] Mark 12:38b, 39 (NET)

[15] 1 Peter 4:17, 18 (NET)

[16] Jonathan Edwards, July 8, 1741  http://voicesofdemocracy.umd.edu/edwards-sinners-in-the-hands-speech-text/

[17] Hebrews 10:31 (NET)

[18] Matthew 3:8, 9 (NET)

[19] Philippians 3:6b (NET)

[20] Matthew 3:10 (NET)

[21] Matthew 6:13b (NKJV)  This has been removed from the NET: “Most mss (L W Θ 0233 Ë13 33 Ï sy sa Didache) read (though some with slight variation) ὅτι σοῦ ἐστιν ἡ βασιλεία καὶ ἡ δύναμις καὶ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας, ἀμήν (‘for yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever, amen’) here. The reading without this sentence, though, is attested by generally better witnesses (א B D Z 0170 Ë1 pc lat mae Or). The phrase was probably composed for the liturgy of the early church and most likely was based on 1 Chr 29:11-13; a scribe probably added the phrase at this point in the text for use in public scripture reading (see TCGNT 13-14). Both external and internal evidence argue for the shorter reading.”

[22] 1 Corinthians 13:4a (NET)

[23] Matthew 3:11 (NET)

[25] NET note: “With the Holy Spirit and fire. There are differing interpretations for this phrase regarding the number of baptisms and their nature. (1) Some see one baptism here, and this can be divided further into two options. (a) The baptism of the Holy Spirit and fire could refer to the cleansing, purifying work of the Spirit in the individual believer through salvation and sanctification, or (b) it could refer to two different results of Christ’s ministry: Some accept Christ and are baptized with the Holy Spirit, but some reject him and receive judgment. (2) Other interpreters see two baptisms here: The baptism of the Holy Spirit refers to the salvation Jesus brings at his first advent, in which believers receive the Holy Spirit, and the baptism of fire refers to the judgment Jesus will bring upon the world at his second coming. One must take into account both the image of fire and whether individual or corporate baptism is in view. A decision is not easy on either issue. The image of fire is used to refer to both eternal judgment (e.g., Matt 25:41) and the power of the Lord’s presence to purge and cleanse his people (e.g., Isa 4:4-5). The pouring out of the Spirit at Pentecost, a fulfillment of this prophecy no matter which interpretation is taken, had both individual and corporate dimensions. It is possible that since Holy Spirit and fire are governed by a single preposition in Greek, the one-baptism view may be more likely, but this is not certain. Simply put, there is no consensus view in scholarship at this time on the best interpretation of this passage.”

[26] http://voicesofdemocracy.umd.edu/edwards-sinners-in-the-hands-speech-text/

[27] Furthermore, the Father does not judge anyone, but has assigned all judgment to the Son, so that all people will honor the Son just as they honor the Father.  The one who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him (John 5:22, 23 NET).

[29] Proverbs 11:31 (NET)

Romans, Part 47

Posted on by

If [the gift] is contributing (μεταδιδοὺς, a form of μεταδίδωμι),[1] Paul continued to list the different gifts (χαρίσματα, a form of χάρισμα) we have according to the grace given to us,[2] he must do so with sincerity (ἁπλότητι, a form of ἁπλότης).[3]  In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar,[4] Luke recounted in his Gospel narrative, the word of God came to John the son of Zechariah in the wilderness.  He went into all the region around the Jordan River, preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.[5]  He included what seems like a sample of John’s preaching to the crowds that came out to be baptized by him[6] (Luke 3:7-9 NET):

“You offspring of vipers!  Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath?  Therefore produce fruit that proves your repentance, and don’t begin to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’  For I tell you that God can raise up children for Abraham from these stones!  Even now the ax is laid at the root of the trees, and every tree that does not produce good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire.”

In Mathew’s Gospel account however this tirade was ignited when John saw many Pharisees[7] and Sadducees[8] coming to his baptism,[9] the religious and political leaders at the time Jesus began his earthly ministry.  For I can testify that they are zealous for God, Paul wrote of at least his fellow Pharisees, but their zeal is not in line with the truth.  For ignoring the righteousness that comes from God, and seeking instead to establish their own righteousness, they did not submit to God’s righteousness.  For Christ is the end of the law, with the result that there is righteousness for everyone who believes.[10]

So the crowds were asking, Luke’s Gospel narrative continued, “What then should we do?”  John answered them, “The person who has two tunics must share (μεταδότω, another form of μεταδίδωμι) with the person who has none, and the person who has food must do likewise.”[11]  It is a beautiful contrast.  Those who ignored the righteousness that comes from God and sought instead to establish their own righteousness were given a rule and an ultimatum, “Share or be cut down and thrown into the fire!”  Those who receive the Lord Jesus, the righteousness that comes from God, are given a gift of contributing, to make Israel jealous.[12]

The one who steals must steal no longer, Paul wrote the church at Ephesus, rather he must labor, doing good with his own hands, so that he may have something to share (μεταδιδόναι, another form of μεταδίδωμι) with the one who has need.[13]  There is an implicit assumption here that the believing thief in Ephesus would have the gift of contributing, and that he should acquire something to satisfy that God-given desire to share by doing good with his own hands rather than stealing from others.  That this gift of contributing comes from God was very important to Paul (1 Thessalonians 2:3-5 NET).

For the appeal (παράκλησις)[14] we make does not come from error or impurity or with deceit, but just as we have been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel, so we declare it, not to please people but God, who examines our hearts.  For we never appeared with flattering speech, as you know, nor with a pretext for greed – God is our witness…

This appeal Paul mentioned (literally, exhortation) is nothing less than the ministry of reconciliation: all these things are from God, Paul wrote the Corinthians, who reconciled us to himself through Christ, and who has given us the ministry of reconciliation.  In other words, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting people’s trespasses against them, and he has given us the message of reconciliation.  Therefore we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were making His plea through us.  We plead with you on Christ’s behalf, “Be reconciled to God!”[15]

For Paul to accept financial support (even food and shelter) from anyone, he needed to know that that gift came from God through the gift of contributing.  There could be no suspicion that the giver was attempting to pay, or felt obligated to pay, Paul for salvation, reconciliation to God through Christ.  This idea of a man standing before a congregation saying, “Give money to me and God will give money to you,” is a pyramid scam, a crime and a lie that has no place in the ministry of reconciliation, all “success stories” notwithstanding.  In fact, the “success stories” shill for the scam artist not for God, and bring equal shame to the ministry.  But I suspect that those who fall for such things also care more for money than they do for reconciliation with God.

Jesus said, “don’t worry saying, ‘What will we eat?’ or ‘What will we drink?’ or ‘What will we wear?’  For the unconverted pursue these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them.  But above all pursue his kingdom and righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well.”[16]  I notice that Jesus did not say above all pursue his kingdom and righteousness and give money to a religious scam artist and all these things will be given to you as well.  So I trust Jesus rather than religious scam artists.

My point is certainly not that all clergy are scam artists or that all giving is a religious work to be assiduously avoided.  So it’s probably only fair to comment how I decide to give.  How do I distinguish between a desire to pay, or payback, and the gift of contributing?  First, I pay for many things.  That is much more on the path of righteousness than stealing them, for instance.  And I pay back many things.  If a coworker takes me to lunch I pick up the check next time.  But I don’t consider these activities as giving or contributing.  I don’t even consider giving to causes or ministries contributing in this sense.  I care about certain things, I give money to those things I care about.  It is a matter of self-interest.  The real issue for me was alms-giving.

I travel quite a bit into urban areas where there are many people seeking alms.  (I’m using this archaic term deliberately because beggar has such a nasty derogatory connotation.)  Actually, the problem became more acute when I moved into an urban area.  I carry cash for tips when I travel but generally do not at home.  I quickly learned to carry some but often faced the very same people on the same corner of the street.

Give to the one who asks you, and do not reject the one who wants to borrow from you,[17] Jesus said.  Given all we’d been through together, I didn’t want to turn that into a law I obeyed without thought or spiritual input.  But neither did I want to become one of the judges with evil motives[18] James warned about.  Paul’s attitude helped me out here.  The gift of contributing is apparently not limited to financial giving.  Like a nursing mother caring for her own children, with such affection for you we were happy to share (μεταδοῦναι, another form of μεταδίδωμι) with you not only the gospel of God but also our own lives, because you had become dear to us.[19]

Though here Paul was happy to share…the gospel of God with the Thessalonians, I was familiar with a different take on this subject that I related to the gift of contributing:  For if I preach the gospel, I have no reason for boasting, because I am compelled to do this.[20]  So, if I can walk by someone on the street without giving alms, I do so.  If I can’t, I give.  If I have a moment’s doubt about it, I err on the side of giving.  Maybe I just bought someone more drugs or alcohol, but if I passed by without contributing I might have deprived someone (or their child) of a meal.  And more often than not the recipient—no matter how shabbily dressed, dirty or smelly—has prayed aloud that God would bless me for the relative pittance I handed him or her.

For I long to see you, Paul wrote the Romans before he had been to Rome, so that I may impart (μεταδῶ, another form of μεταδίδωμι) to you some spiritual gift (χάρισμα) to strengthen you…[21] I included this because it shocked me at first, as if Paul were claiming authority to give χάρισμα to people.  But he went on to explain, that is, that we may be mutually comforted (συμπαρακληθῆναι, a form of συμπαρακαλέω)[22] by one another’s faith, both yours and mine.[23]  So I saw it as a further expansion of the meaning of the gift of contributing.  Even that desire to be with others of faith, to encourage them and be encouraged by them, comes from God’s χάρισμα.

Through the evidence of this service (διακονίας, a form of διακονία),[24] Paul wrote the Corinthians, they will glorify God because of your obedience to your confession in the gospel of Christ and the generosity (ἁπλότητι, a form of ἁπλότης) of your sharing with them and with everyone.[25]  I included this to begin to look at ἁπλότητι, translated sincerity in—if [the gift] is contributing, he must do so with sincerity[26]—and generosity here.  At first I wondered why ἁπλότητι wasn’t translated generosity in Romans, but as I studied the ninth chapter of 2 Corinthians that question reversed.

For it is not necessary for me to write you about this service (διακονίας, another form of διακονία) to the saints,[27] Paul began this portion of his letter to the Corinthians.  And, the service (διακονία) of this ministry (λειτουργίας, a form of λειτουργία,[28] literally “a public office which a citizen undertakes to administer at his own expense”) is not only providing for the needs of the saints but is also overflowing with many thanks to God.[29]  Three times (in 2 Corinthians 9:1, 12, 13 NET) he described the gift of contributing as a ministry not unlike the ministry (διακονίαν, another form of διακονία) of reconciliation.[30]  In other words, it should be taken seriously.

I know your eagerness to help (προθυμίαν, a form of προθυμία),[31] he wrote again about that inner compulsion from God.  Paul had boasted about them to the Macedonians, and your zeal to participate (ζῆλος)[32] has stirred up most of them.[33]  But he was concerned if some from Macedonia accompanied him to Corinth whether the boast would prove to be true.  Therefore I thought it necessary to urge these brothers to go to you in advance and to arrange ahead of time the generous contribution (εὐλογίαν, a form of εὐλογία)[34] you had promised, so this may be ready as a generous gift (εὐλογίαν, a form of εὐλογία) and not as something you feel forced to do (πλεονεξίαν, a form of πλεονεξία).[35]

The Greek word εὐλογίαν was translated generous contribution and generous gift.  Paul was surely talking about the money the Corinthians were gathering, or wanted to gather, to contribute to others.   But he used a word that meant praise, commendation or adoration.  It is the root of our word eulogy.  He said this because his eye was fixed on the thanksgiving to God (v. 11) resulting from their promised gift, which was overflowing with many thanks to God (v. 12), and through which they will glorify God because of your obedience to your confession in the gospel of Christ (v. 13).  Even with that in view, especially with that in view, he desired that their giving flowed out from God’s gift of contributing rather than a sense of greediness (πλεονεξίαν, a form of πλεονεξία), not the greediness of others nor their own.

My point is this, Paul continued, The person who sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and the person who sows generously (εὐλογίαις, another form of εὐλογία) will also reap generously (εὐλογίαις, another form of εὐλογία).[36]  In other words, one who sows with a view toward the praise, commendation or adoration of God will reap the same from God.  Each one of you should give just as he has decided in his heart [as compelled by the gift of contributing], not reluctantly (λύπης, a form of λύπη)[37] or under compulsion (ἀνάγκης, a form of ἀναγκή),[38] because God loves a cheerful giver.  And God is able to make all grace overflow to you so that because you have enough of everything in every way at all times, you will overflow in every good work.[39]

So giving out of that inner compulsion from the Holy Spirit, the gift of contributing, is good.  But giving out of the compulsion of “1) necessity, imposed either by the circumstances, or by law of duty regarding to one’s advantage, custom, argument 2) calamity, distress, straits” with “sorrow, pain, grief, or annoyance” was not what Paul was seeking from the Corinthians.  The latter would be merely money.  Perhaps it would provide for some of the needs of the saints, but it would never be the obedience to your confession in the gospel of Christ and the generosity (ἁπλότητι, a form of ἁπλότης) of your sharing with them and with everyone that would glorify God.  So, I now think sincerity would have been a better translation here as well.  For it is that sincerity of giving out of God’s gift of contributing that secures the promise (2 Corinthians 9:10 NET):

Now God who provides seed for the sower and bread for food will provide and multiply your supply of seed and will cause the harvest of your righteousness to grow.

[2] Romans 12:6 (NET)

[3] Romans 12:8 (NET)

[4] Luke 3:1 (NET)

[5] Luke 3:2, 3 (NET)

[6] Luke 3:7 (NET)

[7] NET note 10: “Pharisees were members of one of the most important and influential religious and political parties of Judaism in the time of Jesus. There were more Pharisees than Sadducees (according to Josephus, Ant. 17.2.4 [17.42] there were more than 6,000 Pharisees at about this time). Pharisees differed with Sadducees on certain doctrines and patterns of behavior. The Pharisees were strict and zealous adherents to the laws of the OT and to numerous additional traditions such as angels and bodily resurrection.”

[8] NET note 11: “The Sadducees controlled the official political structures of Judaism at this time, being the majority members of the Sanhedrin. They were known as extremely strict on law and order issues (Josephus, J. W. 2.8.2 [2.119], 2.8.14 [2.164-166]; Ant. 13.5.9 [13.171-173], 13.10.6 [13.293-298], 18.1.2 [18.11], 18.1.4 [18.16-17], 20.9.1 [20.199]; Life 2 [10-11]). See also Matt 16:1-12; 22:23-34; Mark 12:18-27; Luke 20:27-38; Acts 5:17; 23:6-8.”

[9] Matthew 3:7 (NET)

[10] Romans 10:2-4 (NET)

[11] Luke 3:10, 11 (NET)

[13] Ephesians 4:28 (NET)

[15] 2 Corinthians 5:18-20 (NET)

[16] Matthew 6:31-33 (NET)

[17] Matthew 5:42 (NET) Table

[19] 1 Thessalonians 2:7b, 8 (NET)

[20] 1 Corinthians 9:16a (NET)

[21] Romans 1:11 (NET)

[23] Romans 1:12 (NET)

[25] 2 Corinthians 9:13 (NET)

[26] Romans 12:8 (NET)

[27] 2 Corinthians 9:1 (NET)

[29] 2 Corinthians 9:12 (NET)

[30] 2 Corinthians 5:18 (NET)

[31] 2 Corinthians 9:2a (NET)

[33] 2 Corinthians 9:2b (NET)

[35] 2 Corinthians 9:5 (NET)

[36] 2 Corinthians 9:6 (NET)

[39] 2 Corinthians 9:7, 8 (NET)