Sexual Immorality Revisited, Part 3

Though I’m eager to dive into the word study, I’m compelled to spend some time keeping my promise to reveal my own position and velocity.  It will make this essay considerably, but necessarily, longer than I like.

The Greek words translated sexual immorality in the NET were translated fornication in the KJV.  I thought fornication meant premarital sex.  I didn’t know anything about the ritual sex of pagan worship until about thirty-five years ago (though I felt the sensual pull of Egyptian art since childhood).  But I didn’t immediately question the meaning of sexual immorality or fornication.  I remember wondering if the prostitutes in Jerusalem that Solomon feared so for his sons had been imported along with his wives’ religions (1 Kings 11:1-8).

Now I’m thinking that “the sin of premarital sex” is a way we have nullified the word of God by our traditions.  Upwardly-mobile young men can “repent” of their “sins of premarital sex” and head off to college or a new career unencumbered by any of their responsibilities as husbands.  “If a man is shacking up with a woman,” Denny wrote in his blog post THE PROGRESSIVE SANCTIFICATION HERESY, “simply saying, ‘I’m sorry God,’ just won’t do.  It requires that you get out of that sinful situation.”

He might have meant “give the woman a ring and social status as a legal wife,” hearkening back to an older time when church folk believed, What therefore God hath joined together [Deuteronomy 22:28, 29; Exodus 22:16, 17][1], let not man [except for the young woman’s father] put asunder.[2]  It would demonstrate a humility reminiscent of the proverb of the wisest king of Israel (or perhaps, the wisest man ever): There are three things that are too wonderful for me, Solomon wrote, four that I do not understand: the way of an eagle in the sky, the way of a snake on a rock, the way of a ship in the sea, and the way of a man with a woman[3] (Septuagint: “and the ways of a man in his youth”).

But I imagine Denny as a contemporary co-religionist, hailing from a prouder more macho tradition where “holiness” is measured by how harshly it savages human emotions.  The two “shacking up” together, no matter how desperately they love one another (the more the better), must part, separate, send away, divorce, put asunder because they have committed the “unpardonable sin” of enjoying sex before a church official pronounced them lawful to do so.  To paraphrase Friedrich Nietzsche’s Antichrist: What is good?  All that heightens the feeling of church power.

Any man of Israel who refused to attend Ezra’s assembly and divorce his foreign wife would forfeit all his property.  The list of men who had taken foreign wives at the end of the book (Ezra 10:18-44) persuades me that Ezra believed the proceedings to send foreign wives and their children away had transpired according to the Lord’s will.  And so did I, until I heard yehôvâh’s response through the prophet Malachi (2:13-16 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 [e.g., Genesis 15:6]?  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].

The intimate absolute rejection of divorce was yehôvâh’s will for no one.  But I’ve stacked the deck here as if I believe that staying together and formalizing the relationship is necessarily the “right” decision.  In my case it was not so.

My contract with God had broken down.  I had heard enough religion to know that some believed Christ put an “end” to the law and all things were “lawful” for me.  So I did what I wanted.  I shacked up with my girlfriend du jour.  Unbeknownst to me at the time, with my sexual desires more or less satisfied for the first time in a long time, I began to walk in the grace of Christ’s salvation as I began to set the words of the Gospel to music.

Too many years of hallucinogenic drugs had made me functionally illiterate.  At least I thought that term described me accurately the first time I heard it.  (As it turned out functionally illiterate is just a redundancy for illiterate.)  If I had read aloud one would have assumed I understood what I read.  I read easily, fluently and coherently with an actor’s flair for inflection.  My problem was a lack of faith.  I had no confidence that strings of words meant anything beyond the beauty of their sounds, except in the most mundane cases: I’m hungry, I’m horny, I have to pee.  And so with a young man’s needs met, a job and a woman, I set out to make art.

The one who hated the Bible as a child knew he wasn’t smart enough to choose which Gospel was the “right” one for his libretto, so he spent countless hours creating a harmony of the four Gospel narratives, and untold hours more with those words rolling over and over in his mind to set them to music.  It was a long and laborious task because he was not a very good composer, at least he wasn’t quick about it.

When he played and sang John 17:1-11 for another composer friend, his friend commended his work: “You know, the first time you played this for me I thought it was just a throw-away.  Now I think it may be the best piece you’ve ever written.”  He, being a highly literate fellow, also commented on the meaning of the text: “And that’s the most interesting definition of eternal life I’ve ever heard.”

The functionally illiterate composer of the best piece he had ever written nodded appreciatively but hadn’t realized that the words—This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent[4]—constituted a definition of eternal life.  But he planned to take the words—This is and whatever words followed—a bit more seriously in the future.  When he decided to formally marry his roommate the functionally illiterate composer had fallen away from grace, though he would not have understood that if someone had told him.

In fact, I wonder if I was capable of understanding it apart from actively becoming one who was trying to be declared righteous by the law.  I began to study the Bible in earnest.  Though I had been warned that the meaning of eternal life was to know the only true God and Jesus Christ whom He had sent I didn’t study to know the only true God and Jesus Christ whom He had sent to live that eternal life.  I searched the Bible for rules to obey—or disobey as it turned out.

So what do I currently think is the “right” decision when one is conscience-stricken over “shacking up” together?  I return to Ezra (Ezra 9:15 NET):

O Lord God of Israel, you are righteous, for we are left as a remnant this day.  Indeed, we stand before you in our guilt.  However, because of this guilt no one can really stand before you.

And then wait—acknowledging that you are caught in a tender trap (Hosea 11:4) and that there is no way for you to cleanse yourself of sin by your deeds.  And while you’re waiting, study the Bible to know the only true God and Jesus Christ whom He has sent to live his eternal life.  This essay will become a tale of three women (four women, though one was actually a symbol for a city), more importantly it will focus on Jesus’ response to those women.

Go call your husband and come back here,[5] Jesus said to a Samaritan woman at a well.  The woman replied, “I have no husband.”[6]  Jesus already knew her past: you have had five husbands, and the man you are living with now is not your husband.[7]  He did not command her to leave the man she had now (νῦν ὃν ἔχεις), nor did He command her to go to a priest and get married; the man was apparently already married to another woman.  Jesus commended her for her truthfulness: καλῶς εἶπας ὅτι ἄνδρα οὐκ ἔχω is literally “beautifully you poured forth that husband you have not.”  And he told her that in her truthfulness she was exactly the kind of person his Father was seeking for his kingdom (John 4:23, 24 NET):

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 such people to be his worshipers.  God is spirit, and the people who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.

The second woman was from Thyatira: But I have this against you, Jesus addressed the singular angel of the church in Thyatira, You tolerate that woman Jezebel[8]  The Greek word translated You tolerate was ἀφεῖς (a form of ἀφίημι).  Here is a table of all the occurrences of ἀφεῖς and its translation.

Form of ἀφίημι Reference KJV

NET

ἀφεὶς Matthew 13:36 Then Jesus sent the multitude away Then he left the crowds…
Matthew 26:44 And he left them… So leaving them again…
Mark 8:13 And he left them… Then he left them…
Mark 13:34 who left his house… He left his house…
Mark 15:37 And Jesus cried with a loud voice… But Jesus cried out with a loud voice…[9]
ἀφεῖς Revelation 2:20 thou sufferest that woman Jezebel… You tolerate that woman Jezebel…

Mark’s word picture, that Jesus left his body and its loud voice echoed on afterward, is stunning.  In Revelation, You [left] that woman Jezebel hints that the angel of the church of Thyatira was a kind of ἐπίσκοπος on a visitation circuit inspecting (ἐπισκέπτομαι) churches.  He saw what Jezebel was doing but did nothing.  It doesn’t answer the question whether the angel was a human being or not but serves as prima facie evidence that he was not a local pastor.

Jesus described Jezebel as one who calls herself a prophetess, and by her teaching deceives my servants[10]  The Greek word translated by her teaching was διδάσκει (a form of διδάσκω).  Here is a table of all the occurrences of διδάσκει and its translation.

Form of διδάσκω Reference KJV

NET

διδάσκει 1 Corinthians 11:14 Doth not even nature itself teach you… Does not nature itself teach you…
1 John 2:27 …the same anointing teacheth you of all… …his anointing teaches you about all things…
Revelation 2:20 to teach and to seduce my servants… …and by her teaching deceives my servants…

Though I have assumed that the fact that Jezebel taught indicated that she held a formal teaching position, neither nature nor Christ’s (or, God’s) anointing hold official teaching positions in the church.  The Greek word translated deceives was πλανᾷ (a form of πλανάω).  A table of the occurrences and translations of πλανᾷ follows.

Form of πλανᾷ

Reference KJV

NET

πλανᾷ John 7:12 …but he deceiveth the people… He deceives the common people.
Revelation 2:20 …to teach and to seduce my servants… …and by her teaching deceives my servants…
Revelation 13:14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth… he deceived those who live on the earth.

Then I saw another beast coming up from the earth, John reported (Revelation 13:11-14a NET):

He had two horns like a lamb, but was speaking like a dragon.  He exercised all the ruling authority of the first beast on his behalf, and made the earth and those who inhabit it worship the first beast, the one whose lethal wound had been healed.  He performed momentous signs, even making fire come down from heaven in front of people and, by the signs he was permitted to perform on behalf of the beast, he deceived those who live on the earth.

This prophecy of an ostensibly Christian leader (He had two horns like a lamb) preaching Satan (speaking like a dragon) and deceiving people by momentous signs might explain to some extent why folks from my religious background fear the leading of the Holy Spirit.  For false messiahs and false prophets will appear, Jesus warned, and perform great signs and wonders to deceive (πλανῆσαι, another form of πλανάω), if possible, even the elect.[11]  But to turn the fruit of the Spirit into one’s own works or qualities turns the salvation of Jesus Christ into just another works religion.

One of the momentous signs this beast will perform is to make fire come down from heaven in front of people.  This is what James and John—before they received the Holy Spirit—wanted to do to Samaritans who refused to welcome Jesus (Luke 9:51-56).  On the other hand some of the Ἰουδαῖοι (a form of Ἰουδαῖος) accused Jesus, He deceives (πλανᾷ, a form of πλανάω) the common people, because their leaders had recognized that He was performing many miraculous signs and they feared that everyone would believe in him, and the Romans will come and take away our sanctuary and our nation (John 11:45-53).  Knowing Jesus intimately through his Spirit is essential to faith.

Jezebel by her teaching deceived Jesus’ servants to commit sexual immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols.[12]  The Greek word translated to commit sexual immorality was πορνεῦσαι (a form of πορνεύω).  A table of the occurrences and translations of πορνεῦσαι follows.

Form of πορνεύω Reference KJV

NET

πορνεῦσαι Revelation 2:14 …to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication. …eat food sacrificed to idols and commit sexual immorality.
Revelation 2:20 to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols. to commit sexual immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols.

These two occurrences seem to be obvious references to sexualized pagan worship.  Though I had no conscious alliance with any pagan deities I’m willing to consider my desire for group sex πορνεῦσαι for two reasons: 1) I thought group sex was the way of peace, distinct from, more real and effective than, any aspect of the fruit of the Spirit.  My naiveté was deliberate.  I was forbidden from reading or viewing stories about the treachery and violence of adultery.  And I had discounted my parents’ example, assuming they were so hung up about the morality of sexuality they didn’t do it right.

The one story I had seen about adultery, on the sly as it were once I could drive and date, seemed like a subtle promo.  I watched Hawkeye (Donald Sutherland) talk Lt. Dish (Jo Ann Pflug) into mercy sex with Painless (John Schuck) the night before she was scheduled to return home to her husband.  I was desperate to find some meaning after the main character Frank Burns (Robert Duvall), the only character with anything like a storyline, had been written out of the movie MASH.  I could see the guilt of Dish’s adultery on her face, particularly in her eyes—until she smiled.  It’s been forty-seven years and I still remember her smile.

2) God stopped me from following through on my desire for group sex—twice.  The second time was considerably more embarrassing and I may or may not reveal it.  Jesus went on to describe πορνεῦσαι as πορνείας (a form of πορνεία), translated sexual immorality: I have given her time to repent, but she is not willing to repent of her sexual immorality.[13]  Here is a table of the occurrences and translations of πορνείας.  I’ll consider each in turn.

Form of πορνεία Reference KJV

NET

πορνείας Matthew 5:32 … whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication …everyone who divorces his wife, except for immorality
John 8:41 We be not born of fornication[14] We were not born as a result of immorality!
Acts 15:20 …abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication …to abstain from things defiled by idols and from sexual immorality
Acts 15:29 …and from things strangled, and from fornication …from what has been strangled and from sexual immorality.
1 Corinthians 7:2 …to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife… …because of immoralities, each man should have relations with his own wife…
1 Thessalonians 4:3 …that ye should abstain from fornication …that you keep away from sexual immorality
Revelation 2:21 …to repent of her fornication …to repent of her sexual immorality.
Revelation 9:21 …nor of their fornication …of their sexual immorality
Revelation 14:8 …she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication. She made all the nations drink of the wine of her immoral passion.
Revelation 17:2 …of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication. …the earth’s inhabitants got drunk with the wine of her immorality.
Revelation 17:4 …and filthiness of her fornication… …unclean things from her sexual immorality.
Revelation 18:3 …wine of the wrath of her fornication …from the wine of her immoral passion…

It was said, Jesus taught, “Whoever divorces his wife must give her a legal document.”  But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for immorality, makes her commit adultery (μοιχευθῆναι, a form of μοιχεύω), and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery (μοιχᾶται, a form of μοιχάω).[15]  Limiting πορνείας (translated, immorality) to the ritual sex of pagan worship here would correspond better to yehôvâh’s word through Malachi—I hate divorce—and Jesus’ negative answer (Matthew 19:4-6) to the Pharisees’ question: Is it lawful to divorce a wife for any cause?[16]

I’m not entirely sure what the Ἰουδαίους (another form of Ἰουδαῖος) meant when they said: We were not born as a result of immorality!  We have only one Father, God himself.[17]  But I take it as mostly irrelevant to understanding what Jesus meant when He used πορνείας.  Assuming that James used πορνείας to mean the ritual sex of pagan worship when he suggested writing a letter to Gentiles, telling them to abstain from things defiled by idols and from sexual immorality and from what has been strangled and from blood,[18] is the most charitable understanding of his abbreviation of the law.

If Paul had the lure of ritual sex in view it would account for his prescription of marriage though he considered it a distraction from devotion to Christ (1 Corinthians 7:32-35) and it would account for his description of Corinthian marriage as mutual sexual slavery[19] (1 Corinthians 7:3-5).  But as I’ve written before I find it very difficult to believe that Paul had ritual sex in mind in 1 Thessalonians 4:1-8.

Still, in Revelation ritual sex seems to be the meaning of πορνείας as its resurgence with pagan worship is a portent of the end times:  The rest of humanity, those who survived the onslaught of an army numbering two hundred million, who had not been killed by these plagues, did not repent of the works of their hands, so that they did not stop worshiping demons and idols made of gold, silver, bronze, stone, and wood – idols that cannot see or hear or walk about.  Furthermore, they did not repent of their murders, of their magic spells, of their sexual immorality, or of their stealing.[20]

Then I saw another angel flying directly overhead, John continued his vision, and he had an eternal gospel to proclaim to those who live on the earth – to every nation, tribe, language, and people.  He declared in a loud voice: “Fear God and give him glory, because the hour of his judgment has arrived, and worship the one who made heaven and earth, the sea and the springs of water!”

A second angel followed the first, declaring: “Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great city!  She made all the nations drink of the wine of her immoral passion.”[21]

The Greek word translated passion was θυμοῦ (a form of θυμός).  Here is a table of the occurrences and translations of θυμοῦ.

Form of θυμός Reference KJV

NET

θυμοῦ Luke 4:28 …these things, were filled with wrath …in the synagogue were filled with rage.
Acts 19:28 …these sayings, they were full of wrath When they heard this they became enraged
Revelation 14:8 …wine of the wrath of her fornication… …drink of the wine of her immoral passion.
Revelation 14:10 …shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God… …also drink of the wine of God’s anger
Revelation 14:19 …the great winepress of the wrath of God. …the great winepress of the wrath of God.
Revelation 15:7 …golden vials full of the wrath of God… …golden bowls filled with the wrath of God…
Revelation 16:1 …the vials of the wrath of God… …the seven bowls containing God’s wrath.
Revelation 16:19 …the wine of the fierceness of his wrath. …the wine made of God’s furious wrath.
Revelation 18:3 …the wine of the wrath of her fornication… …the wine of her immoral passion
Revelation 19:15 …he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. …he stomps the winepress of the furious wrath of God…

In the NET translation Babylon made all the nations (or, all the Gentiles: πάντα τὰ ἔθνη) drink of her immoral passion, which I understand as idolatrous worship including ritual sex.  In the KJV translation Babylon made all the nations (or, all the Gentiles) drink of the wrath directed at her fornication, whether all the individual nations or all of the individual Gentiles engaged directly in idolatrous worship including ritual sex or not.  Though I prefer the NET translation as a matter of justice I can’t verify it independently.  Here are the footnotes which attempt to explain it.

24 Grk “of the wine of the passion of the sexual immorality of her.” Here τῆς πορνείας…has been translated as an attributive genitive. In an ironic twist of fate, God will make Babylon drink her own mixture, but it will become the wine of his wrath in retribution for her immoral deeds (see the note on the word “wrath” in 16:19).

65 Following BDAG 461 s.v. θυμός 2, the combination of the genitives of θυμός…and ὀργή…in Rev 16:19 and 19:15 are taken to be a strengthening of the thought as in the OT and Qumran literature (Exod 32:12; Jer 32:37; Lam 2:3; CD 10:9). Thus in Rev 14:8 (to which the present passage alludes) and 18:3 there is irony: The wine of immoral behavior with which Babylon makes the nations drunk becomes the wine of God’s wrath for her. 

In a later passage however it is clear that the earth’s inhabitants got drunk with the wine of her immorality (Revelation 17:1, 2 NET):

Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and spoke to me.  “Come,” he said, “I will show you the condemnation and punishment of the great prostitute (πόρνης, a form of πόρνη) who sits on many waters, with whom the kings of the earth committed sexual immorality (ἐπόρνευσαν, another form of πορνεύω) and the earth’s inhabitants got drunk with the wine of her immorality.”

Now the woman was dressed in purple and scarlet clothing, John’s vision continued, and adorned with gold, precious stones, and pearls.  She held in her hand a golden cup filled with detestable things and unclean things from her sexual immorality.  On her forehead was written a name, a mystery: “Babylon the Great, the Mother of prostitutes (πορνῶν, another form of πόρνη) and of the detestable things of the earth.”[22]  As for the woman you saw, the angel explained, she is the great city that has sovereignty over the kings of the earth.[23]  I’m not sure if the angel meant a city at the time John saw the vision or at the time of the prophecy’s fulfillment.  If pressed I would assume the latter since no single city has had sovereignty over the kings of the earth since the tower of Babel (Genesis 11:1-9).

After these things I saw another angel, John continued (Revelation 18:1-3 NET):

who possessed great authority, coming down out of heaven, and the earth was lit up by his radiance.  He shouted with a powerful voice: “Fallen, fallen, is Babylon the great!  She has become a lair for demons, a haunt for every unclean spirit, a haunt for every unclean bird, a haunt for every unclean and detested beast.  For all the nations have fallen from the wine of her immoral passion, and the kings of the earth have committed sexual immorality (ἐπόρνευσαν, another form of πορνεύω) with her, and the merchants of the earth have gotten rich from the power of her sensual behavior (στρήνους, a form of στρῆνος).”

Here, after the other verses I’ve quoted I’m much more comfortable with the NET translation (her immoral passion) of τοῦ θυμοῦ τῆς πορνείας αὐτῆς than the KJV translation (the wrath of her fornication).

Jesus described Jezebel’s followers with the Greek word μοιχεύοντας (another form of μοιχεύω), translated those who commit adultery.  Though μοιχεύοντας only occurred this once in the New Testament it is fairly clear that in Jesus’ mind the verb πορνεῦσαι and the noun πορνείας described a special form of adultery.  Consider his words to the third woman.

She had been caught (κατειλημμένην, a form of καταλαμβάνω) committing adultery (μοιχείᾳ, a form of μοιχεία).[24]  Teacher, this woman was caught (κατείληπται, another form of καταλαμβάνω) in the very act (αὐτοφώρῳ, a form of ἐπαυτοφώρῳ) of adultery (μοιχευομένη, another form of μοιχεύω),[25] her accusers said to Jesus.  When none of her accusers considered himself guiltless (ἀναμάρτητος) they left Jesus alone with the woman.  He asked her, “Woman, where are they?  Did no one condemn you?”  She replied, “No one, Lord.”  And Jesus said, “I do not condemn you either.  Go, and from now on do not sin any more.”[26]

But of the woman who was guilty of that special form of μοιχεία designated by the verb πορνεῦσαι and the noun πορνείας, He said: I am throwing her onto a bed of violent illness, and those who commit adultery with her into terrible suffering, unless they repent of her deeds.[27]  This was not written in the past age under the law, but in the present after Jesus’ death, resurrection and ascension into heaven.  Since I don’t believe that human bishops or circuit riders are enjoined or authorized by this Scripture to infect church members guilty of idolatrous worship and ritual sex with disease, Jesus’ condemnation indicates to me that the angel of the church of Thyatira, criticized for having left Jezebel unattended, was not human.


[1] Does Deuteronomy 22:28-29 command a rape victim to marry her rapist?

[2] Mark 10:9 (KJV)

[3] Proverbs 30:18, 19 (NET)

[4] John 17:3 (NASB)

[5] John 4:16b (NET)

[6] John 4:17a (NET)

[7] John 4:18a (NET)

[8] Revelation 2:20a (NET)

[9] See: Mark 15:34 The Greek word translated cried out was ἐβόησεν (a form of βοάω).

[10] Revelation 2:20b (NET)

[11] Matthew 24:24 (NET)

[12] Revelation 2:20c (NET)

[13] Revelation 2:21 (NET)

[14] Peter J. Leithart, “Born in Fornication,” First Things

[15] Matthew 5:31, 32 (NET) Table

[16] Matthew 19:3b (NET) Table

[17] John 8:41b (NET)

[18] Acts 15:20b (NET) Table

[19] Romans, Part 30 ; Paul’s Religious Mind Revisited, Part 4

[20] Revelation 9:20, 21 (NET)

[21] Revelation 14:6-8 (NET)

[22] Revelation 17:4, 5 (NET)

[23] Revelation 17:18 (NET)

[24] John 8:3a (NET)

[25] John 8:4 (NET)

[26] John 8:10b, 11 (NET)

[27] Revelation 2:22 (NET)

Paul’s Religious Mind Revisited, Part 4

Here are two different descriptions Paul wrote of himself, separated by an affliction.

Before the Affliction

The Affliction

After the Affliction

“All things are lawful for me” – but I will not be controlled by anything.

1 Corinthians 6:12b (NET)

For we do not want you to be unaware, brothers and sisters, regarding the affliction that happened to us in the province of Asia, that we were burdened excessively, beyond our strength, so that we despaired even of living.  Indeed we felt as if the sentence of death had been passed against us, so that we would not trust in ourselves but in God who raises the dead.  He delivered us from so great a risk of death, and he will deliver us.

2 Corinthians 1:8-10a (NET)

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.  But if I do what I don’t want, I agree that the law is good.  But now it is no longer me doing it, but sin that lives in me.  For I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my flesh.  For I want to do the good, but I cannot do it.  For I do not do the good I want, but I do the very evil I do not want!  Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer me doing it but sin that lives in me.

Romans 7:14-20 (NET)

I’ve listed these passages as “Before…” and “After the Affliction” because Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.[1]  I actually think that all of 1 Corinthians may have been written from somewhere deep within that affliction.  Paul’s pride—I will not be controlled by anything—was relative—I amsold into slavery to sin.  I don’t believe it was pride in his own strength.  The sense of invincibility that comes with the Holy Spirit’s ἐγκράτεια is all too familiar (and I don’t do miracles or see visions or write Scripture).  The Greek word translated controlled is ἐξουσιασθήσομαι (a form of ἐξουσιάζω).  When Jesus’ disciples debated which of them was to be regarded as the greatest[2] (μείζων, a form of μέγας), He said (Luke 22:25-27 NET):

The kings of the Gentiles lord it over (κυριεύουσιν, a form of κυριεύω) them, and those in authority over (ἐξουσιάζοντες, another form of ἐξουσιάζω) them are called ‘benefactors.’  Not so with you; instead the one who is greatest (μείζων, a form of μέγας) among you must become like the youngest, and the leader (ἡγούμενος, a form of ἡγέομαι) like the one who serves (διακονῶν, a form of διακονέω).  For who is greater (μείζων, a form of μέγας), the one who is seated at the table, or the one who serves (διακονῶν, a form of διακονέω)?  Is it not the one who is seated at the table?  But I am among you as one who serves (διακονῶν, a form of διακονέω).

The other occurrences of forms of ἐξουσιάζω refer to control over a husband’s or wife’s body because of πορνείας (a form of πορνεία) in Corinth.  It is not the wife who has the rights (ἐξουσιάζει, another form of ἐξουσιάζω) to her own body, but the husband.  In the same way, it is not the husband who has the rights (ἐξουσιάζει, another form of ἐξουσιάζω) to his own body, but the wife.[3]  The NKJV reads: The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does.  And likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does.[4]  The negation οὐκ ἐξουσιάζει is absolute.  I don’t believe such slavery is to be exercised apart from mutual consent on a moment by moment basis.  To force my wife to have sex with me by the strength of my arm or a “law of Paul” is not love.

The Greek word translated sold into slavery is πεπραμένος (a form of πιπράσκω).  Because he was not able to repay it, Jesus told a parable about the kingdom of heaven, the lord ordered him to be sold (πραθῆναι, another form of πιπράσκω), along with his wife, children, and whatever he possessed, and repayment to be made.[5]  The slave (δοῦλος) asked his lord for mercy.  The lord had compassion on that slave (δούλου, another form of δοῦλος) and released him, and forgave him the debt[6] until that slave would not forgive a fellow slave.

I’ve referred to Romans 7 often (in Romans, Part 28 most fully) as a description of a “house divided, one born of the flesh and of the Spirit”: 1) our old man (παλαιὸς ἡμῶν ἄνθρωπος; literally, “our old human”) was crucified with [Jesus] so that the body of sin would no longer dominate us, so that we would no longer be enslaved (δουλεύειν, a form of δουλεύω) to sin;[7] and 2) the new man (τὸν καινὸν ἄνθρωπον; literally, “the new human”) who has been created in God’s image – in righteousness and holiness that comes from truth.[8]  The one thing I would correct here is: “I believe, however, that through faith I, the new man or woman, lay claim to more and more of my mind and my members.”

I want to correct what I was apparently thinking more than what I actually wrote.  I assumed without grounds that the maturity of the new human through faith led to more independence.  I’ve tripped over this assumption often without ever acknowledging it.  The sentence of death has been passed against us who believe: Or do you not know that as many as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?  Therefore we have been buried with him through baptism into death, in order that just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too may live a new life.[9]  Identifying with the new me cannot mean simply transferring allegiance from the old me to the new me who has been created in God’s image.

The new me is spirit, born of the Spirit; it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me.  Maturity of the new human leads to more and more dependence upon his Holy Spirit.  As 1 Corinthians 13 is a practical description of love, Romans 7:14-20 is a practical description of humbling oneself before God because it accurately describes the human condition vis-à-vis God the Father.  We tear down arguments and every arrogant obstacle that is raised up against the knowledge of God, Paul wrote believers in Corinth, and we take every thought captive to make it obey (ὑπακοὴν, a form of ὑπακοή) Christ.[10]

The verb obey would have been a form of ὑπακούω, “to hear under (as a subordinate), that is, to listen attentively.”  The clause καὶ αἰχμαλωτίζοντες πᾶν νόημα εἰς τὴν ὑπακοὴν τοῦ Χριστοῦ reads “and we lead away captive each thought into the attentive hearkening of Christ.”  I’m not even depending on my attentive hearkening or obedience as a new human, but on Christ’s attentive hearkening or obedience through his Spirit, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father.  With this in mind I’ll continue to look at “Paul’s Regime” and “Jesus’ Regime.”

Paul’s Regime

Jesus’ Regime

I wrote you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people.  In no way did I mean the immoral people of this world, or the greedy and swindlers and idolaters, since you would then have to go out of the world.  But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who calls himself a Christian who is sexually immoral, or greedy, or an idolater, or verbally abusive, or a drunkard, or a swindler.  Do not even eat with such a person.  For what do I have to do with judging those outside?  Are you not to judge those inside?  But God will judge those outside.  Remove the evil person from among you.

1 Corinthians 5:9-13 (NET) Table1 Table2

And to the one who conquers and who continues in my deeds until the end, I will give him authority over the nations – he will rule them with an iron rod and like clay jars he will break them to pieces, just as I have received the right to rule from my Father – and I will give him the morning star.  The one who has an ear had better hear what the Spirit says to the churches.

Revelation 2:26-29 (NET)

 

Here Paul gave a fragment of the letter that preceded 1 Corinthians: [Do] notassociate with sexually immoral people (πόρνοις, a form of πόρνος).  He didn’t mean the πόρνοις of this world, but didn’t make that clear apparently.  In other words, what was written in the prior letter was the teaching (yeast, Matthew 16:5-12) of the Pharisees: Now when the Pharisee who had invited [Jesus] saw this, he said to himself, “If this man were a prophet, he would know who and what kind of woman this is who is touching him, that she is a sinner.”[11]  Now all the tax collectors and sinners were coming to hear [Jesus].  But the Pharisees and the experts in the law were complaining, “This man welcomes sinners and eats with them.”[12]

The teaching of the Pharisees also helps explain why Paul used ζύμη in such a peculiar way, the yeast (ζύμῃ) of vice and evil.  For Jesus, The kingdom of heaven is like yeast (ζύμῃ), and, the kingdom of Godis like yeast (ζύμῃ).  He warned his disciples, Be on your guard against the [teaching] (ζύμης, another form of ζύμη) of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy (ὑπόκρισις).[13]

Israel was instructed to eat the Passover dressed to travel, your sandals on your feet, and your staff in your hand.  You are to eat it in haste.[14]  The meaning of unleavened bread, bread without yeast, in the Passover meal was that the swiftness of Israel’s liberation from Egyptian captivity would not allow time for their bread to rise.  It is stated clearly in Exodus 12:33, 34 (NET):

The Egyptians were urging the people on, in order to send them out of the land quickly, for they were saying, “We are all dead!”  So the people took their dough before the yeast was added, with their kneading troughs bound up in their clothing on their shoulders.

While it is understandable that after centuries of eating unleavened bread at a holy festival, “In later times, ‘leaven’ and ‘corruption’ were regarded as synonymous terms,”[15] it is also fairly clearly the thought of religious minds.  It was not ignorance: “During the festival of Maẓẓot [Passover] it was strictly forbidden to eat anything leavened…The reason for this prohibition is given in Ex. xii. 34-39…”[16]  It was an active preference for the teaching of revered religious leaders or other human authorities, the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees and Herod.

To believers in Galatia Paul wrote about the teaching of the one who is confusing (ταράσσων, a form of ταράσσω) you,[17] that Gentile believers in Galatia should be circumcised, and called it ζύμη: A little yeast (ζύμη) makes the whole batch of dough rise![18]  Though he was confident in the Lord the Galatians would reject that teaching in favor of his own, the former Pharisee did not yet call his ζύμη.

But now I am writing to you, Paul continued to believers in Corinth, not to associate with anyone who calls himself a Christian (ἀδελφὸς) who is sexually immoral (πόρνος), or greedy, or an idolater (εἰδωλολάτρης), or verbally abusive, or a drunkard, or a swindler.  Do not even eat with such a person.[19]  The Greek word translated to associate with is συναναμίγνυσθαι (a form of συναναμίγνυμι).  The same word was translated do [not] associate closely in a letter to believers in Thessalonica: But if anyone does not obey our message through this letter, take note of him and do not associate closely (συναναμίγνυσθαι, a form of συναναμίγνυμι) with him, so that he may be ashamed.  Yet do not regard him as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother (ἀδελφόν, another form of ἀδελφός).[20]  Paul used μὴ the qualified negation in both instances.

The former sounds like excommunication while the latter sounds like some kind of in-house suspension.  But I can’t blame the translators.  To the Corinthians Paul wrote, Remove the evil person from among you.[21]  To the Thessalonians he wrote, do not regard him as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother.  To the Corinthians he wrote of πόρνος and εἰδωλολάτρης.  Jesus had John write to the angel of the church in Thyatira about a woman who by her teaching deceives my servants (δούλους, another form of δοῦλος) to commit sexual immorality (πορνεῦσαι, a form of πορνεύω) and to eat food sacrificed to idols (εἰδωλόθυτα, a form of εἰδωλόθυτον).[22]  I am throwingthose 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 (τέκνα, a form of τέκνον; literally, children) with a deadly disease (θανάτῳ, a form of θάνατος; literally, death)…[23]

Jesus’ distinction between his deceived servantsterrible suffering (θλῖψιν μεγάλην)—and Jezebel’s followersdeadly disease (θανάτῳ, death)—was part of what caught my attention and encouraged me to compare and contrast Jesus’ and Paul’s regimes.  Who but Jesus could make this judgment?  Outwardly both groups were committing adultery with (μετ᾿, a form of μετά) her, possibly but not necessarily as her partner, inspired by her teaching, probably within a group she led.  What I didn’t fully appreciate until doing this study was how fluid and continuous these groups were over time.  Individuals in either group may have repented and Jesus’ deceived servants may have continued in Jezebel’s teaching and become her followers.  Paul’s fear that false teaching might also function as yeast is not completely unfounded.  The human preference for human teachers as opposed to being led (John 16:12-16) by the Holy Spirit is not something I can wish away.

I’ll pick this up in another essay.


[1] Proverbs 16:18 (NET) Table

[2] Luke 22:24b (NET)

[3] 1 Corinthians 7:4 (NET)

[4] 1 Corinthians 7:4 (NKJV)

[5] Matthew 18:25 (NET) Table

[6] Matthew 18:27 (NET)

[7] Romans 6:6 (NET)

[8] Ephesians 4:24 (NET)

[9] Romans 6:3, 4 (NET)

[10] 2 Corinthians 10:4b, 5 (NET)  Both noun and verb are found in Romans 6:16 – ὑπακοήν and ὑπακοῆς (forms of ὑπακοή), ὑπακούετε (a form of ὑπακούω). Also Hebrews 5:8, 9 – ὑπακοήν (a form of ὑπακοή), ὑπακούουσιν (a form of ὑπακούω).

[11] Luke 7:39 (NET)

[12] Luke 15:1, 2 (NET)

[13] Luke 12:1 (NET)  The actual word order is: “the yeast which is hypocrisy of the Pharisees.”  The argument could be made that yeast means hypocrisy in this case.  I’m sticking with teaching on the assumption that Jesus would have said simply hypocrisy if that’s all He meant to say.

[14] Exodus 12:11 (NET)

[15] http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/9694-leaven

[16] http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/9694-leaven

[17] Galatians 5:10b (NET)

[18] Galatians 5:9 (NET)

[19] 1 Corinthians 5:11 (NET) Table

[20] 2 Thessalonians 3:14, 15 (NET)

[21] 1 Corinthians 5:13b (NET) Table

[22] Revelation 2:20 (NET)

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

Sexual Immorality Revisited, Part 2

The exercise of revisiting Paul’s Religious Mind and the meaning of Sexual Immorality has clarified a few things that were right in front of me all along.  I considered again the list of sins that described the former lives of some who were called to faith in Corinth:

1 Corinthians 6:9b, 10 (NET) Table

Parallel Greek

The sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, passive homosexual partners, practicing homosexuals, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, the verbally abusive, and swindlers will not inherit the kingdom of God. οὔτε πόρνοι (another form of πόρνος) οὔτε εἰδωλολάτραι οὔτε μοιχοὶ οὔτε μαλακοὶ οὔτε ἀρσενοκοῖται οὔτε κλέπται οὔτε πλεονέκται, οὐ μέθυσοι, οὐ λοίδοροι, οὐχ ἅρπαγες βασιλείαν θεοῦ κληρονομήσουσιν

Each word preceded by οὔτε, οὐ or οὐχ (a form of οὐ) gives a strong indication that Paul did not consider πόρνοι the one word that included all of the others.  In other words the list is not to be understood as, The πόρνοι: idolaters, adulterers, passive homosexual partners, practicing homosexuals, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, the verbally abusive, and swindlers.  I’ve considered this option, by the way, given the shorter list in Ephesians.

Ephesians 5:5 (NET)

Parallel Greek

For you can be confident of this one thing: that no person who is immoral, impure, or greedy (such a person is an idolater) has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. τοῦτο γὰρ ἴστε γινώσκοντες, ὅτι πᾶς πόρνος ἢ ἀκάθαρτος ἢ πλεονέκτης οὐκ ἔχει κληρονομίαν ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ τοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ θεοῦ

So I began a subtractive process, trying to determine what πόρνοι did not mean.  As I studied ἀρσενοκοῖται (a form of ἀρσενοκοίτης; translated, practicing homosexuals) the obvious became more clear.  The Greek word ἀρσενοκοίτης is a compound of two words: 1) αρσην, male, and 2) κοίτη, couch, bed.

Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator made them male (ἄρσεν, a form of αρσην) and female,[1] Jesus answered the Pharisees who asked Him about divorce.  The men (ἄρσενες, another form of αρσην) also abandoned natural relations with women, Paul wrote the Roman believers, and were inflamed in their passions for one another.  Men (ἄρσενες, another form of αρσην) committed shameless acts with men (ἄρσεσιν, another form of αρσην) and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.[2]  The Greek is a bit more graphic: ἄρσενες ἐν ἄρσεσιν τὴν ἀσχημοσύνην κατεργαζόμενοι (literally, “male in male this unseemliness performing”).  The writer of Hebrews penned: Marriage must be honored among all and the marriage bed (κοίτη) kept undefiled, for God will judge sexually immoral people (πόρνους, another form of πόρνος) and adulterers (μοιχοὺς, a form of μοιχός).[3]  I can’t imagine one word better than ἀρσενοκοίτης (male marriage bed) to describe You must not have sexual intercourse with a male as one has sexual intercourse with a woman.[4]

I combined this with the fact that Paul’s particular usage of πορνεία in 1 Corinthians 5:1 is a fairly clear reference to You must not have sexual intercourse with your father’s wife; she is your father’s nakedness.[5]  And I came to one inescapable conclusion irrespective of whether Paul used πορνεία because he thought it meant anything and everything that was not sex between one man and one woman or because it was the only word he had had to use when he arrived in Corinth, constrained by his reliance on James’ abbreviated version of the law:

James’ abbreviated version of the law

…to abstain from things defiled by idols and from sexual immorality and from what has been strangled and from blood…

Acts 15:20 (NET) Table

ἀπέχεσθαι τῶν ἀλισγημάτων τῶν εἰδώλων καὶ τῆς πορνείας (a form of πορνεία) καὶ |τοῦ| πνικτοῦ καὶ τοῦ αἵματος
…that you abstain from meat that has been sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what has been strangled and from sexual immorality…

Acts 15:29a (NET) Table

ἀπέχεσθαι εἰδωλοθύτων καὶ αἵματος καὶ πνικτῶν καὶ πορνείας (a form of πορνεία)

The inescapable conclusion is: in the letter called 1 Corinthians Paul taught Levitical law (as knowledge of sin not as a path of salvation) to Gentiles (1 Timothy 1:8-10 NET).

But we know that the law is good if someone uses it legitimately, realizing that law is not intended for a righteous person, but for lawless and rebellious people, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, sexually immoral people (πόρνοις, another form of πόρνος), practicing homosexuals (ἀρσενοκοίταις, another form of ἀρσενοκοίτης), kidnappers, liars, perjurers – in fact, for any who live contrary to sound teaching.

Gone was any pretense to be concerned about nothing among [them] except Jesus Christ, and him crucified.[6]  More importantly, perhaps, the pretense of not placing on the neck of the [Gentile] disciples a yoke that neither [Peter’s] ancestors nor [his contemporaries had] been able to bear[7] was utterly gone from Paul’s thinking.  That yoke would not be borne by the works of the flesh.  That is true.  But it would not be shirked either.  The yoke would be borne by the righteousness of God through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ for all who believe,[8] the fruit of the Spirit, the love [that] is the fulfillment of the law.[9]  Jesus said (Matthew 11:28-30; 5:17-20 NET):

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.

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.

Do we then nullify the law through faith? Paul asked rhetorically.  Absolutely not!  Instead we uphold the law.[10]  Have I just made the case for πορνεία as a violation of Leviticus 18 or 20?  But I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful [πορνείας, a form of πορνεία]) causes her to commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.[11]  I don’t think so.

I might have made that case.  I have a philosophical bent to my mind; I am a legalist in theory and in practice.  Why not see Matthew 5:32 as Jesus’ instruction to governor-priests and as vindication or exoneration of Ezra the priest?  Ancient Roman legislators had articulated concepts of lawful connubium.  The priests and bishops Constantine left to govern Rome when he abandoned it for Byzantium heard Jesus’ words as Roman law.  Wouldn’t Jesus follow Roman law?  It’s certainly more in line with the way my mind works.  Until, that is, I heard yehôvâh in the prophet Malachi (2:14b, 15a, 16 NET):

The Lord (yehôvâh, יהוה) 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 [Table]

“I hate divorce,” says the Lord (yehôvâh, יהוה) God (ʼĕlôhı̂ym, אלהי) of Israel, “and the one who is guilty of violence,” says the Lord (yehôvâh, יהוה) who rules over all. “Pay attention to your conscience, and do not be unfaithful” [Table].

This is the intellectual and spiritual equivalent of a ratchet, and I cannot go back.  Now I hear, For God has consigned (συνέκλεισεν, a form of συγκλείω) all people to disobedience (ἀπείθειαν, a form of ἀπείθεια; literally, disbelief) so that he may show mercy to them all.[12]  We are all like fish caught in a net of disobedience.  Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under (ἐν; literally, in) the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world may be held accountable (ὑπόδικος; literally, under sentence, under judgment) to God.[13]

Ezra was exactly where yehôvâh wanted him to be when he said: O Lord (yehôvâh, יהוה) God of Israel, you are righteous, for we are left as a remnant this day.  Indeed, we stand before you in our guilt.  However, because of this guilt no one can really stand before you.[14]  Who knows what would have happened if Ezra had stayed there, waiting on yehôvâh, instead of chasing after Shecaniah’s get-righteous-quick scheme (Ezra 10:2-4 NET).

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].  Get up, for this matter concerns you.  We are with you, so be strong and act decisively [Table]!”

I want to make this as clear as I possibly can.  If a man has married the wrong sort of woman he cannot redeem himself in God’s eyes, he cannot make himself righteous again, by divorcing her and sending their children away.  The religious mind encourages us to change our own behavior, to conform us to some image of righteousness derived from the law (or some lesser doctrine) by that religious mind.  The mind of Christ speaks to the wriggling soul caught in a net of disbelief, saying, Stop your striving (râphâh, הרפו) and recognize (yâdaʽ, ודעו) that I am God!  I will be exalted over the nations!  I will be exalted over the earth![15]  Do not be amazed that I said to you, ‘You must all be born from above.’[16]

I don’t live in Rome in the first half of the fourth century.  I don’t hear Jesus speaking to Roman legislators about external controls.  I hear Him speaking to the ἐκκλησία, those called by God the Father through Jesus Christ to be led by his Holy Spirit.  For all who are led by the Spirit of God are the sons of God.[17]  For this and other reasons I still hear Jesus’ use of πορνείας (a form of πορνεία) in Matthew 5:32 and πορνείᾳ in Matthew 19:9 as a reference to the same πορνεῦσαι (a form of πορνεύω, e.g., sexualized worship) He condemned in Revelation 2:20 (NET):

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

Such sexualized worship was the bane of Israel’s descendents from the beginning of their existence as a nation: 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.”  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.[18]  Rather than thinking of it as an abbreviated version of the law it would be far more charitable to assume that sexualized worship was what James had in mind at the Jerusalem Council:

Jesus (NET)

Parallel Greek James (NET)

Parallel Greek

…to commit sexual immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols…

Revelation 2:20b

πορνεῦσαι καὶ φαγεῖν εἰδωλόθυτα …to abstain from things defiled by idols and from sexual immorality and from what has been strangled and from blood…

Acts 15:20 Table

ἀπέχεσθαι τῶν ἀλισγημάτων τῶν εἰδώλων καὶ τῆς πορνείας (a form of πορνεία) καὶ |τοῦ| πνικτοῦ καὶ τοῦ αἵματος
…that you abstain from meat that has been sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what has been strangled and from sexual immorality…

Acts 15:29a

ἀπέχεσθαι εἰδωλοθύτων (another form of εἰδωλόθυτον) καὶ αἵματος καὶ πνικτῶν καὶ πορνείας (a form of πορνεία)

I want to substitute a more literal understanding of ὁμολογεῖ (a form of ὁμολογέω) translated confesses and confess respectively in 1 John 4:1-3 (NET):

Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to determine if they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.  By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that [speaks the same as] Jesus as the Christ who has come in the flesh is from God, but every spirit that does not [speak the same as] Jesus is not from God, and this is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming, and now is already in the world.

To that extent that the religious mind encourages us to reform our own behavior rather than to rely on the fruit of the Holy Spirit, it is the spirit of antichrist no matter how well-intentioned the mouthpiece. Suspicious of the Gospel I tried to be good first to prove that I was, failing that, I tried because “God will get you if you don’t watch out.”  My fear was flight from rather than toward God.  And yet, in that dark foreboding I became most aware of His forgiveness and patience.  Paul put it this way for Timothy (1 Timothy 1:15, 16 NET):

This saying is trustworthy and deserves full acceptance: “Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners” – and I am the worst of them!  But here is why I was treated with mercy: so that in me as the worst, Christ Jesus could demonstrate his utmost patience, as an example for those who are going to believe in him for eternal life [Table].

Amanda Bynes delivers one of the funniest and most poignant lines in the movie Easy A: “Jesus tells us to love everyone.  I mean, even the whores and the homosexuals, but it’s just so hard.  It’s so hard because they keep doing it over and over again.”  An attitude of forgiveness toward others flows from the love that comes from the Holy Spirit.  Still, Jesus said, the one who is forgiven little loves little.[19] One who is forgiven much is forgiven often for the same offense, sometimes many more than seven times a day.  And that experience is far more persuasive than any threat (Matthew 18:34, 35 NET):

And in anger his lord turned him over to the prison guards to torture [the unforgiving slave] until he repaid all he owed.  So also my heavenly Father will do to you, if each of you does not forgive your brother from your heart.

In that sacred space of loving forgiveness the truth began to dawn on me that not only the desire and effort were God’s but the fulfillment of his desire and his effort was his as well, the kingdom, the power and the glory.  I’ll substitute the same literal understanding I used above for ὁμολογήσῃς (another form of ὁμολογέω) translated confess, and ὁμολογεῖται (another form of ὁμολογέω) translated confesses in Romans 10:9, 10 (NET):

…if you [speak the same as Jesus] with your mouth that Jesus is Lord[20] [e.g., yehôvâh as opposed to a Lord or Sir] and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.  For with the heart one believes and thus has righteousness [πιστεύεται εἰς δικαιοσύνην; literally, “believes unto righteousness”] and with the mouth one [speaks the same as Jesus] and thus has salvation [ὁμολογεῖται εἰς σωτηρίαν; literally, “speaks the same as Jesus unto salvation”].

 


[1] Matthew 19:4 (NET) Table

[2] Romans 1:27 (NET) Table

[3] Hebrews 13:4 (NET)

[4] Leviticus 18:22a (NET) Table

[5] Leviticus 18:8 (NET) Table

[6] 1 Corinthians 2:2 (NET) Table

[7] Acts 15:10 (NET)

[8] Romans 3:22 (NET)

[9] Romans 13:10b (NET)

[10] Romans 3:31 (NET)

[11] Matthew 5:32b (NAB) Table

[12] Romans 11:32 (NET)

[13] Romans 3:19 (NET)

[14] Ezra 9:15 (NET)

[15] Psalm 46:10 (NET)

[16] John 3:7 (NET)

[17] Romans 8:14 (NET)

[18] 1 Corinthians 10:7, 8 (NET)

[19] Luke 7:47b (NET)

[20] NET note 10: Or “the Lord.” The Greek construction, along with the quotation from Joel 2:32 in v. 13 (in which the same “Lord” seems to be in view) suggests that κύριον (kurion) is to be taken as “the Lord,” that is, Yahweh. Cf. D. B. Wallace, “The Semantics and Exegetical Significance of the Object-Complement Construction in the New Testament,” GTJ 6 (1985): 91-112.

Paul’s Religious Mind Revisited, Part 1

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 criticismBut 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

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 flesha 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 themThe 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)