Tag Archives: Revelation 2:26-29

My Deeds, Part 2

Posted on by

This is the table representing my unstudied view of the relationship of the clauses of Revelation 2:26-29.

Revelation 2:26-29 (NET)

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.

I’m considering who continues in my deeds until the end, because it tugs the hardest at me to return to my own works.  As the title of this essay suggests my goal is to understand what Jesus meant by τὰ ἔργα μου, translated my deeds.  I’ve begun with τηρῶν (a form of τηρέω), translated who continues.  The most basic understanding of τηρῶν is: Blessed is the one who stays alert and does not lose (τηρῶν, a form of τηρέω) his clothes so that he will not have to walk around naked…[1]  It means to keep, not to lose or discard.

In this essay I’ll begin with, The one who says “I have come to know God” and yet does not keep (τηρῶν, a form of τηρέω) his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in such a person.[2]  This occurs in a particular context which I’ll begin for the sake of argument with John’s contrast of light and darkness (1 John 1:5 (NET):

Now this is the gospel message we have heard from him and announce to you: God is light (φῶς), and in him there is no darkness (σκοτία) at all.

This hearkens back to John’s description of Jesus as the Word (λόγος): In him was life, and the life was the light (φῶς) of mankind.  And the light (φῶς) shines on in the darkness (σκοτίᾳ), but the darkness (σκοτία) has not mastered it.[3]  And it mirrors Jesus’ description of Himself: I am the light (φῶς) of the world.  The one who follows me will never walk (περιπατήσῃ, a form of περιπατέω) in darkness (σκοτίᾳ), but will have the light (φῶς) of life.[4]  John continued his letter (1 John 1:6, 7 NET):

If we say we have fellowship with him and yet keep on walking (περιπατῶμεν, another form of περιπατέω) in the darkness (σκότει, a form of σκότος), we are lying and not practicing the truth.  But if we walk (περιπατῶμεν, another form of περιπατέω) in the light (φωτὶ, another form of φῶς) as he himself is in the light (φωτί, another form of φῶς) we have fellowship with one another and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin (ἁμαρτίας, a form of ἁμαρτία).

This brings me back to Jesus’ words to Nicodemus, the light (φῶς) has come into the world and people loved the darkness (σκότος) rather than the light (φῶς), because their deeds were evil.  For everyone who does evil deeds hates the light (φῶς) and does not come to the light (φῶς), so that their deeds will not be exposed.  But the one who practices the truth comes to the light (φῶς), so that it may be plainly evident that his deeds have been done in God.[5]

I admit I had hoped this would be plainly evident to others but apparently my deeds having been done in God is only plainly evident to me.  Most people who know me assume I obey, more or less, a stringent set of rules that I have proven over and over again (to myself) to be incapable of obeying.

If I hadn’t already considered, and before I had considered, πονηρὰ (a form of πονηρός; translated, evil) and φαῦλα (a form of φαῦλος; evil deeds) I would have assumed that walking in darkness was equivalent to walking in sin and walking in the light therefore would mean not sinning.  But as John continued in his letter I gain another line of argument that πονηρὰ and φαῦλα are not equivalent to ἁμαρτίας, at least as far as they relate to Jesus’/John’s concept of walking in darkness or light.  John continued (1 John 1:8-10 NET):

If we say we do not bear the guilt of sin (ἁμαρτίαν, another form of ἁμαρτία), we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us.  But if we confess our sins (ἁμαρτίας, a form of ἁμαρτία), he is faithful and righteous, forgiving us our sins (ἁμαρτίας, a form of ἁμαρτία) and cleansing us from all unrighteousness (ἀδικίας, a form of ἀδικία).  If we say we have not sinned (ἡμαρτήκαμεν, a form of ἁμαρτάνω), we make him a liar and his word (λόγος) is not in us.

Walking in the light and being cleansed of sin by the blood of Jesus are associated with acknowledging and confessing one’s own sin, while walking in darkness is associated with saying one does not bear the guilt of sin or has not sinned.  Here is the same information in tabular form.

Reference

Light (φῶς)

Darkness (σκοτία)
1 John 1:5 God is light, and in him there is no darkness at all.
1 John 1:6 If we say we have fellowship with him and yet keep on walking in the darkness, we are lying and not practicing the truth.
1 John 1:7, 8 But if we walk in the light as he himself is in the light, we have fellowship with one another and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin. If we say we do not bear the guilt of sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us.
1 John 1:9, 10 But if we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous, forgiving us our sins and cleansing us from all unrighteousness. If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar and his word is not in us.

The one who practices the truth comes to the light (φῶς), so that it may be plainly evident that his deeds (ἔργα, a form of ἔργον) have been done in God as opposed to those who love the darkness and hate the light so that their deeds (ἔργα, a form of ἔργον) [e.g., their deeds of righteousness] will not be exposed as πονηρὰ and φαῦλα.  And we have a hint here that τὰ ἔργα μου, translated my deeds, are deeds done in God as opposed to those done in one’s own strength.  John continued (1 John 2:1, 2 NET):

(My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin [ἁμάρτητε, another form of ἁμαρτάνω].)  But if anyone does sin (ἁμάρτῃ, another form of ἁμαρτάνω), we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous One, and he himself is the atoning sacrifice for our sins (ἁμαρτιῶν, another form of ἁμαρτία), and not only for our sins (ἡμετέρων, a form of ἡμέτερος) but also for the whole world.

While the goal remains to cease from sin, the question that has plagued me is how?  Jesus’ attitude toward forgiveness was fairly clear when Peter asked how many times must I forgive my brother?[6]  Jesus said to him, “Not seven times, I tell you, but seventy-seven times!”[7]  The note (33) in the NET reads: “Or ‘seventy times seven,’ i.e., an unlimited number of times.”  But long before I have returned to Jesus even seventy-seven times confessing the same sin in the same day I have reworked the commandment in my mind to assuage my own embarrassment.  And so through pride and unbelief I have effectively “lost” or “discarded” the commandment.  John continued (I John 2:3, 4 NET):

Now by this we know that we have come to know God: if we keep (τηρῶμεν, another form of τηρέω) his commandments.  The one who says “I have come to know God” and yet does not keep (τηρῶν, a form of τηρέω) his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in such a person.

Jesus’ patience has taught me (through many a trial and error) that disobeying a commandment and confessing my sin seventy-seven, or seventy times seven, times a day is keeping that commandment.  Rewriting the commandment and denying my sin makes me a liar, and the truth is not in me.  Still, I would prefer not to sin in the first place.  John continued (1 John 2:5, 6 NET):

But whoever obeys (τηρῇ, another form of τηρέω) his word, truly in this person the love (Romans 13:8-10) of God has been perfected.  By this we know that we are in him.  The one who says he resides in God ought himself to walk just as Jesus walked.

While it was virtually impossible to translate forms of τηρέω obey or obeys when confession of sin was the topic of discussion, here the NET translators reverted to obeys.  I assume it is because they did the same to Jesus’ teaching (John 14:23-26 NET):

If anyone loves me, he will obey (τηρήσει, another form of τηρέω) my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and take up residence with him.  The person who does not love me does not obey (τηρεῖ, another form of τηρέω) my words.  And the word you hear is not mine, but the Father’s who sent me.  I have spoken these things while staying with you.  But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you everything, and will cause you to remember everything I said to you.

The NET translators believed: The person who has my commandments and obeys (τηρῶν, a form of τηρέω) them is the one who loves me.[8]  Jesus believed: Therefore I tell you, her sins (ἁμαρτίαι, another form of ἁμαρτία), which were many, are forgiven, thus she loved much; but the one who is forgiven little loves little.[9]  Still, both Jesus’ teaching and John’s teaching point one to the same fulfillment of a desire for obedience.  Jesus said, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you everything, and will cause you to remember everything I said to you.  John wrote, The one who says he resides in God ought himself to walk just as Jesus walked.

How did Jesus walk (περιεπάτησεν, another form of περιπατέω)?  He was led (ἀνήχθη, a form of ἀνάγω[10]; ἤγετο, a form of ἄγω[11]) by the Spirit that descended and remained on him.  Mark wrote: The Spirit immediately drove (ἐκβάλλει, a form of ἐκβάλλω[12]) him into the wilderness.[13]  Oh, to let go of fear and be ἀνήχθη, ἤγετο and ἐκβάλλει by the Spirit of God.

And the person who keeps (τηρῶν, a form of τηρέω) his commandments, John concluded, resides in God, and God in him.  Now by this we know that God resides in us: by the Spirit he has given us.[14]  A comparison of these verses in the KJV and NET follows.

Reference

KJV

NET
1 John 1:5 This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. Now this is the gospel message we have heard from him and announce to you: God is light, and in him there is no darkness at all.
1 John 1:6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth: If we say we have fellowship with him and yet keep on walking in the darkness, we are lying and not practicing the truth.
1 John 1:7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. But if we walk in the light as he himself is in the light, we have fellowship with one another and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin.
1 John 1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we say we do not bear the guilt of sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us.
1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. But if we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous, forgiving us our sins and cleansing us from all unrighteousness.
1 John 1:10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us. If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar and his word is not in us.
1 John 2:1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not.  And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: (My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin.)  But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous One,
1 John 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world. and he himself is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for our sins but also for the whole world.
1 John 2:3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. Now by this we know that we have come to know God (αὐτόν, a form of αὐτός): if we keep his commandments.
1 John 2:4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. The one who says “I have come to know God (αὐτόν, a form of αὐτός)” and yet does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in such a person.
1 John 2:5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him. But whoever obeys his word, truly in this person the love of God has been perfected.  By this we know that we are in him.
1 John 2:6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked. The one who says he resides in God (αὐτῷ, another form of αὐτός) ought himself to walk just as Jesus (ἐκεῖνος) walked.
1 John 3:24 And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him.  And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us. And the person who keeps his commandments resides in God (αὐτῷ, another form of αὐτός), and God (αὐτὸς) in him.  Now by this we know that God resides (μένει, a form of μένω; literally, he resides) in us: by the Spirit he has given us.

[1] Revelation 16:15b (NET)

[2] 1 John 2:4 (NET)

[3] John 1:4, 5 (NET)

[4] John 8:12 (NET)

[5] John 3:19b-21 (NET)

[6] Matthew 18:21a (NET)

[7] Matthew 18:22 (NET)

[8] John 14:21a (NET)

[9] Luke 7:47 (NET)

[10] http://biblehub.com/greek/321.htm

[11] http://biblehub.com/greek/71.htm

[12] http://biblehub.com/greek/1544.htm

[13] Mark 1:12 (NET)

[14] 1 John 3:24 (NET)

My Deeds, Part 1

Posted on by

In another essay I contrasted 1 Corinthians 5:9-13 and Revelation 2:26-29.  I’ve wanted to return to the latter for a while.  Here is a table representing my unstudied view of the relationship of its clauses in English.

Revelation 2:26-29 (NET)
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.

To begin I’ll consider who continues in my deeds until the end, because it tugs the hardest at me to return to my own works.  As the title of this essay suggests my goal is to understand what Jesus meant by τὰ ἔργα μου, translated my deeds.  But first I’ll look into τηρῶν (a form of τηρέω), translated who continues.

The most basic understanding of τηρῶν is: Blessed is the one who stays alert and does not lose (τηρῶν, a form of τηρέω) his clothes so that he will not have to walk around naked and his shameful condition be seen.[1]  It means to keep, not to lose or discard.  He who has My commandments and keeps (τηρῶν, a form of τηρέω) them, Jesus said, is the one who loves Me.[2]

In another essay I described shacking-up “with my girlfriend du jour” as a time when “I began to walk in the grace of Christ’s salvation.”  Of course, I shacked up with my girlfriend because I was trying to believe that Christ put an “end” to the law and all things were “lawful” for me.  In other words, I was attempting to lose or discard Jesus’ commandments (ignoring for the moment that the main “commandment” at issue in my mind was the suspect “sin of premarital sex”).

Jesus wasn’t perplexed by my conundrum.  Suddenly I was filled with desire to write a rock opera about Him.  I became immersed in the words of the four Gospel narratives.  Among those words was: He who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me.  Though I read the word keeps, I heard the word obeys.  I thought keeps meant obeys at that time: The person who has my commandments and obeys (τηρῶν, a form of τηρέω) them is the one who loves me.[3]

So when I married my roommate, though I had certainly fallen away from grace since I was trying to be declared righteous by the law,[4] I was done for the moment with my attempt to lose or discard Jesus’ commandments.  I can’t say I was obeying them.  Obedience apart from grace is hypocrisy, an actor playing at righteousness.

The Circle in the movie of the same name is a religious cult/high-tech company.  There are many spoilers here.  During a weekly worship service called Dream Friday tech evangelist Eamon Bailey (Tom Hanks), one of the founders, introduces a new low-cost, wireless, internet-enabled camera to the faithful, called Circlers.  These cameras, connected to The Circle, are being placed all over the world.  “There needs to be accountability,” Eamon preaches.  “Tyrants and terrorists can no longer hide.  We will see them.  We will hear them.  We will hear and see everything.  If it happens, we’ll know.  We’re calling it SeeChange.”

A new employee Mae Holland (Emma Watson) sits in the congregation drinking the Kool-Aid (as she admits to another Circler later in the film).  “We will see it all because knowing is good,” Eamon proclaims, “but knowing everything is better.”

“We need accountability.  We need openness,” Tom Stenton (Patton Oswalt), COO of The Circle, concurs as he introduces Congresswoman Olivia Santos (Judy Reyes) at another worship service.  “I intend to show exactly how democracy can and should be,” Congresswoman Santos thrills Tom’s congregation.  “Starting today, my every meeting, my every phone call and email will be accessible to my constituents and to the world in real time.”

“Hello, democracy!  Open and accountable!” Tom seals the deal.

One night SeaChange cameras and monitoring help save Mae’s life after a misguided kayaking accident.  Tom and Eamon counsel her after the incident.  “I am a believer in the perfectibility of human beings,” Eamon admits.  “When we are our best selves, the possibilities are endless.  There isn’t a problem that we cannot solve.  We can cure any disease, and we can end hunger.”  Mae is a repentant convert.  “Without secrets,” Eamon concludes, “without the hoarding of knowledge and information, we can finally realize our potential.”

“I committed a crime” Mae confesses before the Circlers.  “I borrowed a kayak without the owner’s knowledge, paddled out to the middle of the bay and I wasn’t wearing a life jacket.”

“So, Mae,” Eamon asks, “do you think you behave better or worse when you are being watched?”

“Better.  Without a doubt.”

“What happens when you’re alone and unobserved?”

“Well, for starters, I steal kayaks.  Seriously, I do things I don’t wanna do.  I lie…secrets are lies.  Secrets are what make crimes possible.  We behave worse when we’re not accountable.  I was my worst self because I didn’t think anyone was watching.  I thought that I was alone…Knowledge is a basic human right.  Access to all possible human experience is a basic human right…From now on I’ll be wearing a modified SeeChange camera at all times.  I’m going fully transparent.”

My personal logline for The Circle is “Cyber-bullying with a great warm smile.”  But the attempt to drive a preachy plot with a series of worship services didn’t fare any better for a mainstream movie than it does for a Christian film.  And when Tom and Eamon bully Mae in front of the congregation into becoming complicit in her friend’s accidental death, she doesn’t rise up and race against the clock and certain death to consume The Circle in slow-motion fireballs.  The Circle is not presented as evil through Mae’s eyes but as a necessary good.

From the beginning she believed that the needs of society and the needs of the individual are the same.  “When someone dies in a plane crash,” she explains to her disbelieving parents, clinging desperately to their sick old ideas of personal privacy, “you don’t abandon planes.  You make them safer.”  And with the self-assurance that “I’m the only one who can do this,” Mae flips the script on Eamon and Tom, becomes high priestess of the cult and leads the Circlers into the light.

Still, I enjoyed the film’s depiction of the religious mind in a non-theistic context.  And it was a welcome reminder that forced righteousness under an ever-watchful eye is not the righteousness of God through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ for all who believe.[5]  The table below contrasts the NASB and NET translations of John 14:21.

NASB

NET
He who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me; and he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and will disclose Myself to him. The person who has my commandments and obeys them is the one who loves me.  The one who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and will reveal myself to him.

Though keeps may be a lower standard than obeys, the flow here is still fairly clear and appears that there is something one must do before Jesus will disclose or will reveal Himself to that person, not to mention love.  I looked into ἐμφανίσω (a form of ἐμφανίζω) the Greek word translated will disclose and will reveal.  It only occurred this once, so I made a table of all the forms of ἐμφανίζω.

Form of ἐμφανίζω Reference KJV

NET
ἐμφανίσατε Acts 23:15 …ye with the council signify to the chief captain… …you and the council request the commanding officer…
ἐμφανίσω John 14:21 …I will love him, and will manifest myself to him… …I will love him and will reveal myself to him.
ἐμφανισθῆναι Hebrews 9:24 …to appear in the presence of God for us… …and he appears now in God’s presence for us.
ἐμφανίζειν John 14:22 …thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world? …you are going to reveal yourself to us and not to the world?
ἐμφανίζουσιν Hebrews 11:14 …they that say such things declare plainly… …those who speak in such a way make it clear…
ἐνεφάνισαν Acts 24:1 …who informed the governor against Paul. …they brought formal charges against Paul to the governor.
Acts 25:2 Then the high priest and the chief of the Jews informed him against Paul, and besought him… So the chief priests and the most prominent men of the Jews brought formal charges against Paul to him.
Acts 25:15 …the chief priests and the elders of the Jews informed me… …the chief priests and the elders of the Jews informed me about him…
ἐνεφάνισας Acts 23:22 See thou tell no man that thou hast showed these things to me. Tell no one that you have reported these things to me.
ἐνεφανίσθησαν Matthew 27:53 …and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many. …and went into the holy city and appeared to many people.

The most basic meaning is to appear in person (Hebrews 9:24; Matthew 27:53).  And that sense was certainly true in John 14:21 and 22:  After his resurrection Jesus appeared (ἐφανερώθη, a form of φανερόω) in a different form to two of them while they were on their way to the country.[6]  Then he appeared (ἐφανερώθη, a form of φανερόω) to the eleven themselves, while they were eating…[7]  After this Jesus revealed (ἐφανέρωσεν, another form of φανερόω) himself again to the disciples by the Sea of Tiberias.[8]  This was now the third time Jesus was revealed (ἐφανερώθη, a form of φανερόω) to the disciples after he was raised from the dead.[9]  But not once did He reveal Himself in person to Ananias, Caiaphas, the Pharisees (other than Saul) or the experts in the law after his resurrection.

“Lord, what then has happened” Judas (not Iscariot) asked, “that You are going to disclose (ἐμφανίζειν, another form of ἐμφανίζω) Yourself to us and not to the world?”  Jesus answered and said to him, “If anyone loves Me [e.g., if anyone has My commandments and keeps them], he will keep (τηρήσει, another form of τηρέω) My word (λόγον, a form of λόγος); and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our abode with him.  He who does not love Me [e.g., does not have or keep My commandments] does not keep (τηρεῖ, another form of τηρέω) My words (λόγους, another form of λόγος); and the word (λόγος) which you hear is not Mine, but the Father’s who sent Me.[10]

I know that you are Abraham’s descendants, Jesus said.  But you want to kill me, because my teaching (λόγος) makes no progress among you[11] (NASB: My word has no place in you).  And, Having no regard for the command of God, you hold fast to human tradition…Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down.[12]  In other words, they did not keep his word or his commandments and He did not disclose or reveal Himself to them by a personal appearance after his resurrection.

There are five other occurrences (Acts 23:15, 22; 24:1; 25:2, 15) of forms of ἐμφανίζω which included personal appearance but the communication of certain information was also of key importance.  I’ll highlight two of them because they remind me of my own experience studying the Bible.

The chief priests and the most prominent men of the Jews brought formal charges (ἐνεφάνισαν, another form of ἐμφανίζω) against Paul to[13] Festus, the Roman governor.  Describing those charges Festus said (Acts 25:15-19 NET):

When I was in Jerusalem, the chief priests and the elders of the Jews informed (ἐνεφάνισαν, another form of ἐμφανίζω) me about [Paul], asking for a sentence of condemnation against him.  I answered them that it was not the custom of the Romans to hand over anyone before the accused had met his accusers face to face and had been given an opportunity to make a defense against the accusation.  So after they came back here with me, I did not postpone the case, but the next day I sat on the judgment seat and ordered the man to be brought.  When his accusers stood up, they did not charge him with any of the evil deeds (πονηρῶν, a form of πονηρός) I had suspected.  Rather they had several points of disagreement with him about their own religion (δεισιδαιμονίας, a form of δεισιδαιμονία) and about a man named Jesus who was dead, whom Paul claimed to be alive.

In Jerusalem the information Festus received from the chief priests and the elders of the Jews formed an image in his mind based largely on his own knowledge and experience—the evil deeds I had suspected.  On further examination at trial in Caesarea Festus’ erroneous ideas were corrected—they had several points of disagreement with him about their own religion and about a man named Jesus who was dead, whom Paul claimed to be alive.  Though Festus received more information and even some more clarity about Paul’s situation, he acknowledged: I was at a loss how I could investigate these matters…[14]  My point here is that the information, and understanding the information presented, had taken precedence over the personal appearance aspects of ἐμφανίζω.

Finally, one occurrence of a form of ἐμφανίζω referenced people of the past, known only through Scripture: These all died in faith without receiving the things promised, but they saw them in the distance and welcomed them and acknowledged that they were strangers and foreigners on the earth.  For those who speak [e.g., through words recorded in the Bible] in such a way make it clear (ἐμφανίζουσιν, another form of ἐμφανίζω) that they are seeking a homeland.[15]  And it is in this way that I think Jesus’ words have meaning for me here and now.  He will disclose or will reveal Himself to me through Scripture if I love Him, which means if I have his commandments and keep them.

So why was I filled with desire to write a rock opera about Jesus even as I attempted to lose or discard his commandments?  Why wasn’t I filled with desire to write a rock opera about Aleister Crowley?  I certainly knew of him.  No one gets very deep into rock music without hearing about its patron saint. “Harm None, Do as You Will” was much closer to my mantra at that moment than anything Jesus had said.

Before Jesus said—He who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me—He said—If you love Me, you will keep (τηρήσετε, another form of τηρέω) My commandments.[16]  Then[17] he introduced the Holy Spirit (John 14:16, 17 NASB).

I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever; that is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him or know Him, but you know Him because He abides with you and will be in you.

If I remember that the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control,[18] then what Jesus said logically was:

  1. If you love Me, you will keep My commandments.
  2. You will love Me (e.g., the fruit of the Spirit).
  3. Therefore, you will keep My commandments.

The simple answer to my question then is that I was filled with desire to write a rock opera about Jesus because his Holy Spirit is alive and well.  Aleister Crowley is dead.  (I’ll ignore for the moment that spirits which may or may not have influenced him are alive still.  They obviously had little or no influence on me.)  But what do I make of Jesus’ other statement?  He who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me; and he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and will disclose Myself to him.

The implication here is that if I do not have and keep his commandments He will not disclose Himself to me.  But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, He also said, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you.[19]  How do I reconcile these two?

Do not extinguish the Spirit,[20] Paul wrote the Thessalonians without any explanation.  I think I’ve found here one way to extinguish the Spirit (in me, not in anyone else); namely, to lose or discard Jesus’ commandments, whether deliberately by conscious rejection or holding fast instead to the traditions of human religion so that his teaching (λόγος) makes no progress in me.  But if I were to teach others the traditions of human religion that nullify the word of God, though my power would be less than absolute, I might become instrumental in extinguishing the Spirit in them as well. 

I’ll pick this up in another essay.

[1] Revelation 16:15b (NET)

[2] John 14:21a (NASB)

[3] John 14:21a (NET)

[4] Galatians 5:4 (NET) Table

[5] Romans 3:22a (NET)

[6] Mark 16:12 (NET)

[7] Mark 16:14 (NET)

[8] John 21:1a (NET)

[9] John 21:14 (NET)

[10] John 14:22-24 (NASB)

[11] John 8:37 (NET)

[12] Mark 7:8, 13a (NET)

[13] Acts 25:2 (NET)

[14] Acts 25:20a (NET)

[15] Hebrews 11:13, 14 (NET)

[16] John 14:15 (NASB)

[17] By adding then to the text the NET translators have made it seem as if Jesus said, If you love me and you keep my commandments then I will ask the Father…   This then however does not make the second clause logically dependent on the first two.  It is simply an irregular translation of (καγὼ, a form of κἀγώ) and means no more than Jesus said this then He said that as they acknowledge in a footnote 36.

[18] Galatians 5:23, 24a (NET)

[19] John 14:26 (NASB)

[20] 1 Thessalonians 5:19 (NET)

Paul’s Religious Mind Revisited, Part 4

Posted on by

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 am…sold 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] not…associate 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 God…is 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 throwing…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 (τέκνα, a form of τέκνον; literally, children) with a deadly disease (θανάτῳ, a form of θάνατος; literally, death)…[23]

Jesus’ distinction between his deceived servants—terrible suffering (θλῖψιν μεγάλην)—and Jezebel’s followers—deadly 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)